Jul 22, 2015

Huginn and Muninn, the Mind of Woden

via Aryan Myth and Metahistory

Woden's two ravens are symbolic of 'thought' (Huginn) and 'memory' (Muninn). The association of Woden with the raven is an ancient one and precedes the Viking Age with "Decorations on a helmet found in a Swedish grave of the Vendel period show Odin as a rider with a spear accompanied by two birds." (Dictionary of Northern Mythology, Rudolf Simek).

Indeed golden Migration Age bracteates also depict the same iconography. It has been suggested by some scholars that the ravens are bird-shaped valkyries and in this regard I am reminded of the Irish battle Goddess the Morrighan who was able to take the form of the crow on the field of battle and was the patron Goddess of Irish bands of warriors as was Woden of the Germanic Männerbunde.

Indeed according to J.T. Sibley (The Divine Thunderbolt. Missile of the Gods) the raven, vulture, crow or eagle are envoys of the sky/thunder God. In fact both Woden and Thunor are different aspects of the supreme Aryan sky God. Woden's spear Gungnir was according to J.T. Sibley "modeled on Tyr's spear, which in turn was derived from Zeus/Jupiter's oak-shafted spear." This is interesting as I have maintained for some time now that in order that we may understand Woden we must go beyond what is written of Odin in the Eddas which is a much later development of this divine archetype. What Jung wrote in his 1936 essay Wotan is of more relevance to us as Saxons and Anglo-Saxons. Let us not forget that this deity does not have His origin in Scandinavia but in the mountains and forests of continental Germania. He is our Woden/Wodan/Wotan.

"Wod/Wodan/Woden/Odin seems to have originally been a relatively local continental Germanic sky/storm god, possibly in Lower Saxony." (Sibley)
"The apex of Odin's victorious career is reached in the Migration Age. The story in Snorri's Hemskringla and the preface to the Edda tell us about this; they make Odin emigrate from Saxony to Scandinavia and, after various vicissitudes of warfare, force the Vanes to acknowledge him as supreme god." (Our Forefathers the Gothonic Nations. A Manual of the Ethnography of the Gothic, German, Dutch, Anglo-Saxon, Frisian and Scandinavian Peoples, Gudmund Schuette) 
"The primitive conception of Odin is the German storm giant Wode, leader of the 'wild army', O.H.G. Wuotis-her, i.e. the procession of the homeless dead through the air." (Schuette)
Woden's origins can indeed be traced back to the Germanic Bronze Age:
"Pictorial monuments: it is possible to trace depictions of Odin back to the Bronze Age if the large spear-bearing god-figures on some southern Swedish rock carvings may be interpreted as representing Odin." (Simek)

However H.R. Ellis Davidson is of a different opinion:
"In Tiwaz we have an early Germanic war god, an ancestor of Odin. He had great powers, and extensive sacrifices were made to him. He was a one-handed god, and a one-handed figure wielding a weapon is seen among Bronze Age rock-engravings in Scandinavia it has been suggested that his worship may go back to very early times in the north, and that the myth of the binding of the wolf is of great antiquity." (Gods and Myths of Northern Europe)
I tend to agree with Ellis Davidson. If the Cult of Odin is a later import from Lower Saxony to Scandinavia it unlikely in my opinion to date back to the Bronze Age but rather the Iron Age. Tiwaz is the one God who can be found in the most ancient Aryan period and was eclipsed by first Thunaraz and then Wodanaz. All three Gods Thunor, Tiw and Woden are aspects of the same deity who have developed in different ways amongst the Germanic tribes and peoples.

Going back to the issue of the two ravens Huginn and Muninn it is abundantly clear to me that in the reconstruction and evolution of our sacred Aryan Germanic religion we must bear in mind that whilst we are not imprisoned in the past as some glorified Viking re-enactment group we are nonetheless bound to root our 21st century religion on the bedrock of the past. Huginn as a concept of rationality and learning teaches us this fact. However Muninn also reminds me that our religion is not dry book study but a living and evolving dynamic spiritual path and what the Eddas, Sagas and Rune Poems do not tell us we can recover from memory, racial memory, blood memory, the Collective Racial Unconscious if you will! In Munnin there is room for inspiration and prophecy. Basically our Wodenic religion is or should be a fusion of Huginn, the rational and Muninn, the inspirational just as the human brain has two hemispheres, the left brain being objective, rational and logical whilst the right brain is subjective,reflective and intuitive. We need both sides of the brain to function in a balanced way if we are to be balanced as people. Huginn and Muninn are outward symbols of how our High Lord Woden operates in the nine realms and we as his children and servants should do likewise.

Paul Krugman on What He Perceives as the 'Glorious' Coming Demise of White Political Power

via The Occidental Observer

Antarian Jew, Paul Krugman
In this 2014 interview (beginning ~6:00) Paul Krugman, commenting on the “craziness” of American politics, says (more or less verbatim): A lot of the craziness comes from cultural/ethnic issues—rural White Americans who feel they are losing their country, and they are right. They are losing their country. In the end, the power they now have will go away, but it’s a very difficult and dangerous time until then. The future is represented by Mayor Bill DeBlasio of New York, “but Ted Cruz of Texas is still out there.”

This I think sums up elite/left opinion in America (after all, Krugman writes for the New York Times) and the West generally. The bad old days are nearly behind us with people like Bill De Blasio and his mixed-race family firmly ensconced in positions of power and presiding over super-diverse New York City. They are the wave of the future. The road ahead will be manageable, although dangerous and difficult. The key to the non-crazy future as envisioned by Krugman is to lessen White power. (Another example: Joe Klein writing in Time that it is necessary to import millions of non-Whites as a cure for “our poisonous biracial era.”)

Krugman specifically mentions rural Whites, the people who for decades have been the bogeymen of Jewish political imagination in America. This quote from Terry Cooney’s book on the New York Intellectuals (a Jewish intellectual movement) sums it up:
[The New York Intellectuals associated rural America with] nativism, anti-Semitism, nationalism, and fascism as well as with anti-intellectualism and provincialism; the urban was associated antithetically with ethnic and cultural tolerance, with internationalism, and with advanced ideas. . . . The New York Intellectuals simply began with the assumption that the rural—with which they associated much of American tradition and most of the territory beyond New York—had little to contribute to a cosmopolitan culture. . . . By interpreting cultural and political issues through the urban-rural lens, writers could even mask assertions of superiority and expressions of anti-democratic sentiments as the judgments of an objective expertise.[1]
Jewish political strategizing at least since the end of World War II has always been about overcoming the power of White America, and particularly rural White America—hence the strong support and activism on behalf of non-White immigration and support for other constituencies that have different ethnic interests than Whites (e.g., Blacks, Latinos) or Whites who have been convinced not to identify with White interests (many White feminists and White LGBT, as well as the legions of Whites who personally benefit from the anti-White revolution, and of course White victims of the constant barrage of media propaganda). The process of disempowering White America, inaugurated with the 1965 immigration law, has been in place for 5 decades and is on the verge of success.

I disagree with Krugman’s analysis somewhat. It’s not just about rural White America. It’s about disempowering non-Bill DeBlasio White America, and that’s a lot more than just rural Whites. In the 2014 elections, Whites of all social classes, all age categories, and both sexes voted Republican. These voters would be a lot more likely to vote for Ted Cruz in 2016 than they would for Hilary Clinton.

It’s interesting that Ted Cruz has been pretty much the only Republican candidate who is not attacking Donald Trump for his comments on immigration and John McCain, presumably because he sees himself as appealing to the same constituency—White voters fed up with spineless politicians who prostrate themselves before the ethnic lobbies and who champion whatever views their pollsters tell them to.

Really though, the Paul Krugmans of the world have little to fear from Cruz given his strong support for expanded legal immigration (and he’s hopeless on Israel). Their longed for demographic changes will go ahead as scheduled under a Cruz administration, maybe not quite so quickly.

But unfortunately, that may well be the case with a Trump presidency as well. On July 13, Michael Cohen, “Special Counsel to Donald Trump,” claimed in an interview with CNN that “Donald Trump is a champion for legal immigrants.” Peter Brimelow notes that at a recent speech in Phoenix Trump “hinted” at support for increased legal immigration.

So in my nightmare scenario, the Republicans nominate a populist candidate who appeals to the Republican base, and he is elected. There’s huge optimism among these (overwhelmingly White) voters that we finally have a president who will “take back the country” and actually say what these voters are thinking. They finally elected someone who will destroy the scourge of political correctness. And it all happened despite an unrelenting outpouring of hostility and predictions of an imminent fascist takeover that rained down daily from the New York Times and the rest of the mainstream media.

And then President Cruz/Trump expands legal immigration with the enthusiastic support of the Republican Congress. After all, they certainly wouldn’t want to be called racists, and besides businesses benefit from cheap labor. Plus we get a war with Iran.

Paul Krugman et al., for all their sputtering about the difficult and dangerous times ahead, have nothing to fear from Cruz/Trump. Unless, of course, like Obama on Israel, this president who won as a populist actually does the right thing after saying whatever he has to to be elected. We can hope.


[1] Terry A. Cooney, The Rise of the  New York Intellectuals: Partisan Review and Its Circle (Madison: University of Wisconsin Press, 1934–1945), 267-268.

Welcome to the World of 'Open Marriage'

via The Audacious Epigone

Instead of mere powers of prognostication, we'd prefer Heartiste be blessed with the ability to do something to help Western civilization hold itself together (though he'd argue that he provides a powerful tool that could theoretically be employed to do just that). I suppose we use the skill sets we have. Self-quote:

If the presumption is that marriage precludes extramarital sexual activity, then it seems reasonable to argue that opening it up to same-sex couples does in fact 'disrespect the idea of marriage'.

Perhaps it's time for that aspect of the definition of marriage to change as well. Expect it to be the next big Establishment objective after the shock troops are done mopping up any residual resistance to transgendering.
From New York magazine, right on cue, comes an article written by a gelded homo sapien who happens to have a Y-chromosome. The opening paragraph:
As I write this, my children are asleep in their room, Loretta Lynn is on the stereo, and my wife is out on a date with a man named Paulo. It’s her second date this week; her fourth this month so far. If it goes like the others, she’ll come home in the middle of the night, crawl into bed beside me, and tell me all about how she and Paulo had sex. I won’t explode with anger or seethe with resentment. I’ll tell her it’s a hot story and I’m glad she had fun. It’s hot because she’s excited, and I’m glad because I’m a feminist.
Outbred serial monogamy is a monumental achievement, one a civilization that has managed to make it the societal norm should be perpetually vigilant in maintaining. It goes against the natural inclination of women to a small degree and of men to a much more significant one, but the benefits in terms of social cohesion and, most crucially, widespread male societal buy-in is enormous. Things are easier to tear down than they are to put together.

Celibacy, monogamy, homosexuality, polygamy, incest, bestiality--they're simply different choices. No one approach is preferable to any other. Your job as a good, tolerant SWPL is to nod and smile and condone people for being true to themselves. That's all that matters. Concern for "societal consequences" is just thin euphemistic cover for a license to spread hate! hate! hate!

Anti-Whites Circulate Petition Demanding a 'White Privilege' Tax on all White People

via The Daily Stormer

Mark Dice could never be accused of being a particularly creative individual, but he did come up with one bit which works – the going around and asking people to sign a fake petition bit. He’s made a living from it for like ten years.

Gotta give it to him though, sometimes it is indeed very funny, and this is one of those cases. In the above video, he goes around asking colored people to sign a tax on the White man to make up for institutionalized racism, and virtually all of the coloreds he asks sign it, some incredibly excited about the prospect.

I actually wish it would have ran a bit longer, so we could see some more reactions. There was one Black lady who actually said “what are you talking about, without you we wouldn’t have any of this – you built all this!” Which warmed my heart a bit. This is, of course, the traditional view of Negroes, before the Jew revolutions turned them against us. It is almost unheard of now, however, as the collective mind of the coloreds has shifted towards viewing the people who gave them civilization as an enemy.

Would also have liked to see more White responses.

The Jews of the 'New Right'

via TradYouth

The Felicity controversy, a Jew who pretended to sympathize with the white cause, has finally been put to an end. While the anger at Matt Parrott is certainly understandable, and I myself was a fervent opponent to Felicity, the drama queens are turning this into something it is not.  As a personal friend of Parrott, I can vouch for his ideological opposition to world Jewry, and acute and sophisticated understanding of their role as Generals in the war against our race.  In fact, Parrott is by far one of the most knowledgeable and consistent opponents of Jews in the entire American political dissident movement.

Parrott’s error was not ideological, nor did it have anything to do with his Christianity. It was a sentimental error; his good nature was taken advantage of. Felicity told him an elaborate sob story about her wanting to do the right thing and fighting against the world, including her own parents, to do it. He felt she was vulnerable, had mental health issues, and needed a friend. He also saw an opportunity to expose the Jewish community from the inside by utilizing Felicity’s claim to having “stories” from her upbringing. With Felicity’s reputation in Australia, Parrott knew from the start nobody would join the “Trad Youth Australia” chapter, but felt that by having her do something productive like write articles, that it would do her good and help reconcile her emotional issues.

He offered her his helping hand, she did what Jews have done to millions of white helping hands before: she started hitting him with his own hand while saying “stop hitting yourself!”.

Matt Parrott is an invaluable asset to the white movement, as he has incredible knowledge of HTML, editing, computers, software, etc, and has written some very great thought-provoking pieces. He is a very intelligent person who learns from his mistakes, and is always willing to go the extra mile to help whites everywhere. With new infrastructure in place where I will be a voting member of the Central Committee, I can guarantee that a situation like this will never be repeated.

My problem with the people attacking Trad Youth, the most active, sophisticated, and unapologetically pro-white organization in the United States, is that they themselves are hypocrites making far worse mistakes than Parrott. The biggest critics are Australians who religiously attend the Kosher Conservative “Reclaim Australia” rallies, which Felicity also attends. While condemning Parrott for giving a Jew who claimed to dedicate her life to fighting Jews a chance, they provide their bodies to advance a purely Jewish, Zionist agenda as Goy stooges.

Some hardline critics of Parrott often “like” groups like PEGIDA,  UKIP, English Defence League, and other Jewish controlled and financed neo-conservative groups on their social media page as well. My article on these Kosher Conservative groups should quickly shut down  “White Nationalist” tabloid writers and trolls that have this affinity.

The Reclaim Australia rally is a multicultural, pro-Jewish, fake protest movement aimed at Australia’s 2% Muslim population ( a drop in the bucket amongst the far greater percentage of other non-white illegal invaders) that is more a publicity stunt in favor of Israel than anything genuinely pro-Australian.  The Australian Jewish Communal Lobby’s offer for free lawyers to get them out of jail if arrested should be all you need to know about this impotent movement.

That isn’t to say all critics are malicious or moronic hypocrites. Some of them are duly noted, and were instrumental in exposing the Jew Felicity fully.

There is a lesson here for everyone. There has been in recent years an “influx” of Jews into what some call “the New Right”–which is really just rehashed conservatism. I share the opinion of certain critics that we must challenge this tendency and block them out as a class at all cost. There are maybe 3-4 Jews who are legitimate critics, have contributed valuable work, and deserve respect, like Israel Shamir, Gilad Atzmon, etc., but aside from them, Jews as a class must be  excluded from all of our organizations and information networks.

These Jews all follow the same M.O. that Felicity privately admitted she was going to gradually go for: they make light (if any) criticism of “Jewish liberals”, but mostly try to turn our focus onto things like Islam, or place black crime in a vacuum, or claim the problem is liberalism–yet provide no substantial context as to what political and financial force enables any of these issues.

Jews exploit the Islam hysteria especially, because animosity towards the Islamic world from a pro-Jew, pro-race mixing, pro-homosexual perspective is very good for Israel and the domestic Jewish agenda.

There are Jews writing to one extent or another in most of your favorite Alt-Right or New Right publications. Most of the people getting on Parrott’s case would have no problem attending one of the many conferences groups with Jewish benefactors or Jewish writers host,  or protests directly or indirectly supported by Jewish media and power brokers that exploit the in-the-moment frenzy of unthinking reactionaries and patriotards.

Traditional Youth Network and its upcoming political party is the real deal. I know for a fact none of my articles on the Jewish question would ever get published on other “radical” or “new reaction” websites, but Matt Parrott has consistently given my work a platform and he deserves gratitude.

Parrott, in spite of his flaws, gets 4-5 hours of sleep a night doing all the coding and cyber infrastructure for not just Trad Youth’s numerous up and coming projects, but other pro-white groups as well. He goes everywhere with Heimbach, driving sometimes for 3-4 days, eating off the dollar menu, and sleeping in his car on the way to fight the Jews and their policies all over the country with the meager income he has.

This is why the Jews targeted him. He’s learned his lesson, group and self-criticism are both very important and duly necessary. But if you’re some basement dweller with a gossip blog nobody reads, it’s time to put on your grown up pants and start taking this stuff seriously.  And if you’re part of the witch-hunters that live in Australia and attend those “Reclaim Australia” rallies, you should save the outrage for the many Yids that wave the Israeli–not Australian–flag and are using you for their own purpose. That includes insolent Felicity  herself.

Heinrich Haertle's Foreword to 'Acquittal for Germany' (1965)

via National-Socialist Worldview

Gustav Stresemann (1878-1929)
Holocaustians, like for example Michael Shermer in his appearance with Bradley Smith on the Donahue show in 1994, sometimes like to assert that the Germans themselves accept all the accusations made against them regarding the Second World War and the so-called Holocaust. This is the ultimate way to make an accusation appear uncontested: the accused themselves agree.

Today it is illegal in Germany to question aspects of Allied war-propaganda. Consequently it is unfair to point to some Germans who refrain from disputing the accusations against them (like the accountant Oskar Groening, who was put on trial recently at age 95, and sentenced to 4 years in prison, simply for having been present at Auschwitz) because publicly questioning the fundamental accusations against Germany is absolutely not allowed, and these accused individuals will only make matters worse for themselves by disputing. But it was not always so.

Heinrich Haertle (1909 - 1986) was not only a German but a prominent National-Socialist imprisoned by the victorious powers until 1948, who most definitely did not accept all the accusations. In his book Freispruch für Deutschland, Haertle questioned many elements of the continuing anti-German propaganda, including the Jewish "genocide" propaganda -- which at that time, in 1965, was only beginning to seize the position of central importance in the story of the war that it holds today.

Heinrich Haertle is probably best known to anglophones because of the brief mention of him by Jewish professor Walter Kaufmann in The Portable Nietzsche, where he nitpicked Haertle for omitting the context (which did not affect the meaning) of a Nietzsche-quote about "the young stock-market Jew" (der jugendliche Börsen-Jude) in his book Nietzsche und der Nationalsozialismus (1937).



Foreword to Freispruch für Deutschland

by Heinrich Haertle


Translated by Hadding Scott, 2015



On July 27, 1946, during the greatest tribunal in world history, Sir Hartley Shawcross screamed that the German army had been commanded not by honorable soldiers but instead by “heartless murderers.”

Such and similar calumnies have poisoned the climate between Germany and the other peoples since 1945. Only Germans are to blame for the Second World War; only Germans committed war-crimes: this was said to be the finding of the greatest legal process of all times.

Against this judgment no appeal was legally possible; it was specified thus in the charter of this universal court. But why does the government of the Federal Republic of Germany not summon all political and contemporary-historical means to revise this disgraceful finding?

After 1918 too, Germany was burdened with sole guilt for the World War; by 1919 however the German government of the time was already promulgating a “German White Book on Guilt for the War” whereby the struggle against the verdict of Versaille was begun.

Yet twenty years after 1945 there is no official defense: neither against the second war-guilt lie nor against the slander of “war-crimes.” On the contrary, the Nuremberg guilty-verdict is today the psychological and political foundation for further unimaginable trials in the next 20 years.

In contrast to this irresponsible abdication by officialdom, individual publishers and authors have initiated the struggle for historical truth. But the more clearly the war-guilt dogmatists are refuted, the louder become their accusations against “war-criminals” – of course, only against German ones.

Meanwhile anti-Jewish pogroms have been pushed ever more insistently into the foreground. Thus these questions too necessarily become an important matter for historical dispute.

A critique of the Nuremberg finding must first investigate the following questions: was the war for the actualization of the German right to self-determination in 1939 in any way a crime punishable under the law of nations? How great is the German and the Allied share in the war-crimes from 1939 to 1945? Who bears responsibility for the partisan-war and terror-bombing? What kind of blame goes to atrocity-propaganda for making the war more brutal?

More and more grave, however, are the questions about the scope and causes of the secret crimes against Jews. They supply anti-German propaganda with its most dangerous arguments , and therefore demand a precise and thorough examination: were only Germans guilty of anti-Semitism? What part did Jewry have in the belligerence of Americanism and of Bolshevism? Did only Germans or, alternately, did only Jews incur guilt?

Today none of these questions can be shirked any longer. In Nuremberg they were decided only by the interest of the enemy powers.

Where is Germany's defense?

The following work undertakes the attempt to revise the judgment at Nuremberg. It can only be a beginning, because the quantity of the material is too much for just one person. The trial-transcript runs to 16,000 pages; 240 witnesses, 300,000 sworn declarations, and 5,300 documents were presented. Nonetheless, this effort must be initiated. It will take a whole generation of researchers, however, to complete such a task.

Chief Justice Jackson called the International Military Tribunal the “continuation of the Allied war-efforts.” Attorney General Dr. Bauer declared that the material from Nuremberg would be made the foundation for all further political trials. And in the Soviet government's proposed peace-treaty with Germany is required, as a preamble: “Germany acknowledges the finding of the International Military Tribunal in Nuremberg, and the findings of other courts
for which the charter of this tribunal provides, regarding crimes committed both inside and outside of Germany.”

Should we continue to submit to this judgment of guilt?

Or ought we not, rather, to take to heart Stresemann's admonition: “As long as a member of the community of nations is branded a criminal against humanity, there can be no true understanding and reconciliation of the nations.”[*]



The Author. 
_____________________________________________________
*Stresemann of course, who died in 1929, was referring to the guilt-propaganda following the First World War. By quoting Stresemann, Haertle  implies that the guilt-propaganda after both World Wars is essentially the same -- which is to say, unfounded. Weight is added to Stresemann's words by the fact that he was awarded a Nobel Peace Prize in 1926.

John McCain: The Guy Who Got Caught

via Radix

There’s always been something suspicious . . . something very feminine, as well . . . about conservatives’ gushing worship of the U.S. military and anyone who’s “served.” Should we really be grateful to the U.S. military for anything? Do we really owe our “freedom” to those Americans who murdered countless Vietnamese, Serbians, and Iraqis for justifications that few can now recall?

About the most positive emotion I can summon for U.S. soldiers is that I feel sorry for them, sorry for the fact that they’ve wasted their lives and that so many remain deluded about the true nature of the American military and the state whose interests it advances.


Donald Trump’s recent comments about John McCain and the nature of war heroism were thus revelatory, and in ways that haven’t been appreciated during the media firestorm of the past few days.

Trump is “divisive” in that he forces his opponents and rivals to take sides. In this case, he demonstrated that the other GOP candidates are interchangeable cowards and conformists. As an added bonus, he associated them all with an unpopular failed presidential candidate and immigration enthusiast. 

More important, Trump’s comments also raised the specter of whether there’s much truth to McCain’s famous “captivity narrative” at all.

Ron Unz’s has been on this trail for years. Unz is a difficult man to pin down on the Left/Right, Friend/Enemy spectrum. What’s indisputable is that he has a great analytic capacity and is willing to go where most of his contemporaries fear to tread, such as when he questioned the “meritocratic” nature of Jewish admissions in the Ivy League. And he has certainly invited controversy through his long-standing effort to get at the truth about the McCain story.

Much as Unz does, I should admit my own biases up front: I hate John McCain, for his policies, his personality, his worldview, and more. So in this sense, I want his war story to be a fraud.

That said, there’s always been something about McCain’s Vietnam tales that rang hallow. I’m reminded of McCain’s 2008 acceptance speech at the Republican National Convention, when he briefly discussed the Vietnam period and famously said, “They broke me”:
A lot of prisoners had it worse than I did. I'd been mistreated before, but not as badly as others. I always liked to strut a little after I'd been roughed up to show the other guys I was tough enough to take it. But after I turned down their offer, they worked me over harder than they ever had before. For a long time. And they broke me.
When they brought me back to my cell, I was hurt and ashamed, and I didn't know how I could face my fellow prisoners.
There’s a kind of ellipsis between these two paragraphs, as if McCain were purposely leaving out key elements of the story. Why was McCain “ashamed” after being brutalized by his captors? Why did he have difficulty facing his fellow prisoners, unless he did something that was, indeed, shameful?

We might speculate that this evocative section from the speech was a kind of preemptive deflection of potential criticisms of his Vietnam mythology. If the 2008 race had been close, Obama and his allies might have been willing to “go there” and attack McCain’s greatest strength; they could have played recordings of the propaganda broadcasts involving McCain that were made during the war and brought up the likelihood that McCain traded information for preferential to the North Vietnamese. McCain had a pre-planned response—“They broke me.”

Whatever the case, with John McCain, we should definitely stop “printing the legend” and start searching for the facts.

Sermon: The Guilt of Our Fathers

via Faith & Heritage

For those of you who weren’t able to attend last Sunday’s service at ORCNI, the full transcript of my sermon is now available online.
What these texts practically teach is that God, through lineages, appropriates sin and its effects, just like He appropriates goods and blessings through lineages in his covenant. We have now seen that this is not the same as that children are somehow guilty for the deeds of their fathers. No, the practical outworking of this doctrine is twofold: Firstly, children generally inherit the tendency to the sinfulness of their fathers through the depravity transmitted through generations. No-one is born as a clean sheet before God, but we are all born with certain natural dispositions and inclinations. What these texts mean, therefore, is that children of godless parents tend to be born with a more utterly depraved tendency to repeat the sins of their parents. This transfusion of sinful nature can be understood in a similar way that a pregnant heroine addict’s child is already born with an addiction to heroine. Unless God intervenes by his exceptional grace, sinfulness continues uninterrupted and depravity grows even stronger with each generation. Similarly, when God’s loving covenant blessings is promised to thousands of generations of those who love him, it does not mean that God merely loves and blesses someone because of their parents’ obedience, but that God, under normal circumstances has chosen to use lineage as a covenantal means to communicate his love and graces. Through covenant obedience, God blesses believing parents with believing children, who are in turn blessed for their own obedience. This is a form of sanctification through the generations.

A 'Gawker' Rocker-Socker

via Alternative Right

David Geither, Gawker-slayer
Coming off a string of bloody noses in the past year, notorious left-wing gossip rag Gawker may have burned its last witch.

Last Thursday, the site came under fire after posting an expose of Condé Nast CFO David Geithner (brother of former Treasury Secretary Timothy Geithner) and his purported attempt to hire a gay escort. Gawker pulled the article after an explosion of online rage at the site’s attempt to blackmail Geithner:


Why Geithner bailed on Ryan while on the runway in New York is open for speculation. It’s possible that his plane was indeed delayed. Or, of course, he could have gotten spooked by an escort with an agenda who had discovered exactly who he was. After all, Geithner had booked Ryan until midnight or 1 a.m.—one figures it would require an excruciating delay to get in that late. Plus, his escort, booked at a four-star hotel, probably wouldn’t have minded waiting around.
sam-biddle
Not punchable at all!

While Gawker has been the subject of rage and boycotts before—GamerGate’s crusading against the site cost Gawker Media millions of dollars in lost ad revenue, and the site’s rich boy staffer Sam Biddle was put out to pasture after being lambasted for supporting bullying—the anger unleashed by the Geithner article is the worst yet. Gawker has managed to alienate the one demographic that was backing them to the hilt: social justice warriors.
With everyone from the Washington Post to Breitbart tearing into Gawker Media and a lawsuit from Hulk Hogan threatening to bankrupt them, it looks like the jig is up. Nick Denton’s empire of evil is unlikely to last another five years. While Gawker’s brand of cultural Marxist witch-hunting once made them a force to be feared, Denton and his lackeys are now running in fear from the online lynch mobs they built their careers out of stirring up.

Yellow Journalism For The Internet Age

Gawker’s Nick Denton has amassed a fortune standing atop the burning corpses of the unwitting souls his blog empire has targeted. Gawker and its sister sites, such as Jezebeland Valleywag, rose to prominence through witch-hunts: singling out public and private figures alike for “racist,” “sexist” or “homophobic” comments, then siccing Twitter lynch mobs on them to get them fired from their jobs. Pax DickinsonJustine TunneyJustine Sacco: the list of souls that Gawker has ruined could fill a phone book.
The secret to Gawker Media’s success? Denton modeled Gawker and its satellite sites on British tabloids such as the Daily Mail. In contrast to American tabloids, which are about glad-handing and ass-kissing, British tabloids specialize in nasty, cruel attacks on public figures, whipping up a new Two Minutes Hate with each issue. Combining this business model with expert social media manipulation and SJW ideology made Gawker a force to be reckoned with in the digital age.
Unfortunately, much like McCarthyism and other witch-hunting hysterias of the past,Gawker’s brand of moral indignation has a shelf life. As Breitbart’s Milo Yiannopoulos reported several months ago, GamerGate-led boycotts of Gawker’s advertisers hit the site’s advertising revenue hard. An internal reorganization following said boycotts lead to the ouster of editorial director Joel Johnson, and as our sister site Reaxxion reported last month, Denton is seeking to eliminate the site’s need for writers altogether:
But why would Gawker writers want to unionize? Because Denton is looking to get rid of them. Johnson says Denton has spent millions of dollars over the last several years on a new kind of microblogging platform called Kinja. According to Johnson, Kinja’s motto is that “commenters are just as important as writers.” Under the Kinja model, commenters and microbloggers will provide the majority of the site’s value, with writers functioning mostly as “cocktail party hosts,” introducing topics for discussion and making sure the guests don’t get too unruly.
Furthermore, Gawker’s increasing feeling of invulnerability from crushing minor targets as Pax Dickinson has led them to pick fights with people who can actually hurt them. For example, Gawker’s publication of Hulk Hogan’s sex tape lead to a lawsuit which they stand a good chance of losing, further taxing their nearly-empty coffers and encouraging other public figures they’ve wronged to follow suit.
At every turn, Denton and company have made precisely the wrong moves, continuing to dig themselves in even deeper.

A Dangerous Precedent

Furthermore, Denton’s decision to pull the David Geithner story will further hurt the site by jeopardizing its writers’ editorial independence. One of Gawker’s strengths has been the relative freedom it affords its staffers when it comes to stirring up attention and getting clicks; indeed, the site pays its writers in part according to the popularity of their articles. By yanking the article, Gawker is showing that it will change its content according to the whims of angry mobs: several of the site’s staffers are openly revolting against Denton’s decision.

While the anger over the David Geithner article will subside, this incident is yet another nail in Gawker Media’s coffin. With even their left-wing demographic raging against them now, the number of people receptive to their brand of faux-moral snark is vanishing quickly. While it’s unlikely that the age of SJW-driven social media shaming will come to an end soon, it’s nice to see one of its biggest proponents slitting its own throat.

William Pierce: Teacher

via Kevin Alfred Strom

Listen Now

Dr. William L. Pierce
KAS Editor's Note: William Pierce . . . saw more deeply into the nature of life — and farther into the future — than any other thinker of modern times. Today’s broadcast looks at Dr. Pierce’s vision, based on his own words and on pieces written by Mr. Strom and others over the last 13 years.

*****
William Pierce changed my life. And I predict that his ideas will change the lives of millions of men and women of our race in the years to come.

It was 13 years ago this week that William Pierce left us. Today, I want to give you two things: An impression of the spirit of the man, and his own deepest thoughts as teacher and mentor and maker of the future.

A friend of mine said of Dr. Pierce:

Simply put, William Pierce was a prophet. He saw the world as it really is and saw our people’s plight in realistic terms; why our folk have become a fallen people — and who is responsible. But Dr. Pierce’s understanding of what is in danger of being lost was only part of the vision he had. Above the bleak realities of our ever-darkening world, William Pierce had a much higher vision of what our race could be. He realized that — if led by the best among us — there is no obstacle we can not overcome, no battle we cannot win, no mystery we can not solve, and no feat we cannot accomplish. With his razor sharp insight, Dr. Pierce clearly saw what a magnificent and beautiful future could be ours if we were once again free to determine our own destiny.

William Pierce was a tall, rangy, powerful man, more physically fit at nearly seventy than he had been at fifty. It was in his fifties that he took on the tasks of an almost pioneer-style existence in his mountain aerie — which we simply called The Land — the beauty of which was one of his greatest inspirations and where now, once again, an intentional White community is rising again, just as he intended.

His strength, both intellectual and physical, was impressive. But he was also a man with a sensitive appreciation for the beautiful, an artist’s appreciation. He saw beauty in the cosmos that gave us all birth, and he saw beauty in his fellow creatures — even the lowest of them. He hated those who wantonly or unthinkingly caused suffering to or destruction of those creatures. He told me that one of the best ways to judge the character of a man was by the way he treated the helpless beings which by chance or by plan came into his power.

To those with a shallow understanding of life or a stereotyped misunderstanding of what he stood for, it may seem strange to say this — but Dr. William Pierce was a truly kind man. It takes strength to be truly kind, and he had the requisite strength. To always say the soothing thing, even when it leads on to ruin, is not kindness. To never offend and always conform to what the other man — or the crowd — wants to hear is not kindness. It is the foolish indulgence of those who cannot see beyond the next moment, or it is malice and cruelty wielded by an enemy in disguise. Such are the words of “tolerance” spoken to the homosexual seducer, his misled victim, or the racemixer. Such are the pastel promises of harmonious multiracialism and “one world.” They lead to the AIDS ward and the end of the line. They lead to the pools of blood and filth and cinders that our major cities have become. They lead to the grave of extinction.

True kindness consists in using one’s brain to gain understanding, and generously spending one’s life teaching those who can be taught about the long-term consequences of our actions — or our failure to act. True kindness often requires reminders of harsh realities, and inducing painful realizations of error. True kindness sometimes requires eliciting admissions that one’s most cherished beliefs were illusions. and insisting on painful transitions to a whole new way of life. True kindness requires absolutely rational delineation of the real choices that must be made, no matter how daunting the prospect. Dr. Pierce had that sort of kindness. In his book, Who We Are, Dr. Pierce showed us clearly the perilous position of our race today:

‘To recapitulate the present situation of the White race:

• ‘White geographical expansion, which was the rule for the last four centuries, has not only been halted in the 20th century, with the end of European colonialism, but it has been reversed in the period since the Second World War, with the beginning of a massive migration of non-Whites from their overcrowded and poverty-ridden lands into the still-prosperous White areas of the northern hemisphere.
• ‘White numerical growth, which until this century was yielding a steady increase in the White to non-White ratio in the world as a whole, has been overtaken by a population explosion in non-White lands. There are now more than four non-Whites for every White living on the planet, and the ratio is shifting toward an even greater non-White preponderance at an accelerating rate.
• ‘Social mixing of Whites and non-Whites in the period since the Second World War has resulted in a catastrophic increase in miscegenation and in the consequent blending of mixed-bloods into the “White” population, both in the United States and in Europe.
• ‘The dysgenic effects of the 20th century’s wars have been augmented greatly by social-welfare programs which are hastening the general lowering of White racial quality….

‘The prognosis is grave. If the present demographic trends continue unabated for another half-century, and if no sustained effort to ensure an alternative outcome is made during that time by a determined and farsighted minority of people of European ancestry, then the race …will have reached the end of its long journey.

‘It may linger another century or more in isolated enclaves, such as Iceland, and its characteristic features or coloring will recur with diminishing frequency in individuals for the next millennium, but before the middle of the 21st century it will have reached its point of no return.

‘Then, gradually or quickly, the race which built the glory that was Greece and the grandeur that was Rome, which conquered the earth and established its dominion over every other race, which unlocked the secret of the atom and harnessed the power which lights the sun, and which freed itself from the grasp of gravity and reached out to new worlds will vanish into the eternal darkness.

‘Some of its works — its languages, its science, its social structures, its machines and weapons — will fall into the hands of a different, darker race, which will use them for a while. Eventually no trace will remain, not even a memory in the minds of a degraded humanity which will have long since abandoned the upward Quest which was the unique mission of the vanished race.

‘And the present demographic trends will continue so long as the political, religious, and social concepts and values which presently circumscribe the thinking of the Western peoples and their leaders continue to have a determining role. For at root it is a moral defect which threatens the race’s survival.

‘If the will to survive existed among the White masses — if the people as a whole in any large, predominantly White country possessed a strong sense of racial identity and a sense of responsibility to the future, and if they were willing to take the necessary measures (which would require that they act contrary to the dictates of the religion to which the majority of them pay lip service) — then the physical threat could be overcome, certainly and quickly.

‘Non-White immigration could be halted immediately, with relatively little effort. Undoing the effects of earlier non-White immigration and of miscegenation would be a much larger task… These things could be accomplished, even at this late date. And once accomplished in one major country, they could be extended worldwide, though perhaps not without another major war and its attendant risks. But, of course, they will not be accomplished, because the will to survive does not exist, and has not existed in the White population of any major power since the end of the Second World War.

‘So, much will inevitably be lost during the next few decades. The population balance everywhere will shift even more rapidly toward the non-Whites, the mongrels, and the unfit. The world will become a poorer, uglier, noisier, more crowded, and dirtier place. Superstition, degeneracy, and corruption will be pervasive, even among those Whites of sound racial stock, and much of the best stock will disappear forever through racial mixing.

‘And repression will certainly increase everywhere: those who stand for quality over quantity and for racial progress will be denied the right of dissent and the right of self-defense, in the name of “freedom” and “justice.”

‘Ultimately, however, none of these losses need be decisive or even significant, frightening though they may be to contemplate now, and terrible though they may be to experience in the dark years immediately ahead. All that is really important is that a portion of the race survive, keep itself pure physically and spiritually, continue propagating itself, and eventually prevail over those who threaten its existence, even if this take a thousand years; and to ensure this outcome is the urgent task of the racially conscious minority of our people in these perilous times.

‘The duration of the task will be decades, at the least, and perhaps centuries. History has a very great inertia; a historical process of long duration may culminate suddenly in a single, cataclysmic event, but every major development in the history of the race has had deep roots and has grown in soil thoroughly prepared for it by preceding developments. The course of history now, so far as our race is concerned, is steeply downward, and to change its direction will be no overnight matter, nor will this be accomplished by any gimcrack scheme which promises success without first building a foundation for that success, block by carefully laid block.

‘The workers at the task will be only a tiny minority of the race. Any program which envisages an “awakening of the masses” or which relies on the native wisdom of the great bulk of our people — which is to say, any populist program — is based on a false vision and a false understanding of the nature of the masses. No great, upward step in all of our long history has ever been accomplished by the bulk of any population, but always by an exceptional individual or a few exceptional individuals. The masses always take the path of least resistance: which is to say, they always follow the strongest faction. It is important to work with the masses, to inform them, to influence them, to recruit from among them; but they must not be counted on for determinative, spontaneous support until after a small minority has already, by its own efforts, built a stronger force than that of any opposing faction.

‘The task is inherently fundamental, and it will be accomplished only through a fundamental approach. That is to say, those who devote themselves to it must be pure in spirit and mind; they must understand that their goal is a society based on quite different values from those underlying the present society, and they must be committed wholeheartedly and without reservation to that goal; they must be prepared to outgrow all the baggage of superstition and convention inherent in the present society. Thus, the task is not one for conservatives or right wingers, for, “moderates” or liberals, or for any of those whose thinking is mired in the errors and in the corruption which have led us to the downward course, but it is a task for those capable of an altogether new consciousness of the world.

‘The task is a biological, cultural, and spiritual one as well as an educational and political one. Its goal has meaning only with reference to a particular type of person, and if this type cannot be preserved while the educational and political aspects of the task are being performed, then the goal cannot be achieved. If the task cannot be completed in a single generation, then there must exist, somewhere, a social milieu which reflects and embodies the cultural and spiritual values associated with the goal, and serves to pass these values from one generation to the next. …This requirement may be difficult of fulfillment, but it is essential. What should be envisaged, then, is a task with both an internal, or community-oriented aspect, and an external, or political-educational-recruiting aspect.

‘…The task set out here is a very large one, and accomplishing it will require greater will, intelligence, and selflessness than demanded from the race in any previous crisis. The danger we face now, from the enemy within our gates as well as the one still outside, is greater than the one we faced from the deracinated Romans in the first century, the Huns in the fifth century, the Moors in the eighth century, or the Mongols in the 13th century. If we do not overcome it, we will have no second chance.

‘But the task of survival has always been a demanding one, just as it is an unrelenting one. We have always met its demands in the past, or we would not be here today. There is no fundamental reason why we cannot overcome the present threat to our survival, horrendous though it be, and live to face new threats in the future.
‘What we must do, however, is understand that all our resources in the coming struggle must come from within ourselves; there will be no outside help, no miracles.’

You have been listening to the words of William L. Pierce. I believe his name will be listed prominently among the pantheon of heroes and philosophers in future centuries — centuries of our people’s civilization that he will have helped to make possible.
On Thursday, it will be thirteen years since I said goodbye to William Pierce for the last time. In that interval, his stature as a teacher has, if anything, increased. And, despite persecution and betrayal, a loyal and growing community of men and women has formed to continue his work and bring his teaching to a new generation.

Just a few days before I recorded this program, that community began the project of restoring his words — with the very latest revisions he had made just weeks before his death, dated June 2002 — and republishing a new edition of the National Alliance Membership Handbook.

(It is worthy of note that in June, 2002, Dr. Pierce had not abandoned the spiritual basis of the Alliance, as certain unworthy individuals have been claiming. His words, written in his next-to-last month on Earth, continued to emphasize the Handbook‘s definition of Christianity as an opposed ideology to that of the Alliance — quite the opposite of the impression fostered by Walker, Gliebe, and Ring, who were co-conspirators in censoring and removing those words of Dr. Pierce from the Handbook in 2005.)

William Pierce knew that we are made of the same stuff as the Earth and the stars, that we are the expanding consciousness of an evolving Universe, and that your soul is, in a very profound sense, the soul of the Universe itself. If you had to encapsulate William Pierce’s life in a single sentence, it would be: He saw that the purpose of life is the increase of consciousness; he saw that our race was the leading edge and the living agent of that increase in consciousness; and he dedicated his life to the preservation and advancement of our kind. This view of ourselves as agents of evolving Life — and Life itself as an agent of an as-yet dimly seen force immanent in the Earth and in the Cosmos itself — has been expressed by other advanced thinkers, though never so forcefully or fully as it was expressed by Dr. Pierce. One such man was the poet John Hall Wheelock, who said in his poem Earth:

For the earth that breeds the trees
Breeds cities too, and symphonies.
Equally her beauty flows
Into a saviour, or a rose…
Through Leonardo’s hand she seeks
Herself, and through Beethoven speaks….
Even as the growing grass
Up from the soil religions pass…
And all man is, or yet may be,
Is but herself in agony
Toiling up the steep ascent
Toward the complete accomplishment
When all dust shall be, the whole
Universe, one conscious soul.
Yea, the quiet and cool sod
Bears in her breast the dream of God….

Earlier in the program I called William Pierce a truly kind man. I am sure that some of you were startled when I said that. I hope that, after hearing his words, you can see that I spoke the truth. I hope you can see that Dr. Pierce’s kindness was not the type that you find expressed on a drug store greeting card. Dr. Pierce’s kindness was true kindness.

His love for his people was true, and if his words were hard it was because they needed to be hard. Your family won’t make it through the jungle by sitting down and playing cards and repeating “everything’s going to be all right.” The words you need to hear are more along the lines of “don’t take the path through the quicksand”; “fashion this weapon to defeat the predators who are massing to kill us”; and “I have scouted ahead, and here is the best way to reach the high ground we can see on the horizon.” Those are words that lead to right action; those are words that give you and yours a chance of making it when things get tough.

His words and thoughts were Dr. Pierce’s gifts of loving kindness to us. Let us hear them, act on them, and do right. They can lead us on to an unimaginably bright and beautiful world, where the highest thoughts and most intense love and most moving beauty are yet to be seen.

Mussolini & Racism, Part 3: Blood & Spirit

via Counter-Currents

Part 1
Part 2

After Mussolini considered the arguments presented in my previous articles, I told him that his approval of my formulation of racial issues would be help me in initiatives that I had already begun abroad under my own responsibility. For a long time I was in contact with certain German circles, having been invited to give lectures and presentations, and racial issues were among the topics I had discussed.

Now, my formulations had generated a particular interest and the basis of deep cooperation could be seen in the encounter between the Roman-Aryan myth and the Nordic-Aryan myth, which could have spiritually fortified the political union of the Axis. For that purpose we had discussed the creation a new Italo-Germanic journal. And this interested my German friends most of all, because while particular necessary criticism of biologistic, materialistic, and violently nationalistic racism would never be tolerated from a German, statements of an Italian author would have met with a different reception.

I had presented all of this to Mussolini and asked him if I might be allowed, on the basis of his more than flattering appreciation of my book, to develop such initiatives and present my formulations as official Fascist ones. Mussolini said yes without hesitation. Thus he gave me the right to give the German translation of my book that was in the works an official Fascist endorsement (its German title was Foundations of the Fascist Racial DoctrineGrundrisse der faschistischen Rassenlehre (Berlin: Runge Verlag) with his seal of high approval.

As for the project of a journal, which was to be called Blood and Spirit — Italo-Germanic Journal of Worldview and Race, Mussolini told me that he approved of it as well. It could be published in both languages and distributed accordingly, under the direction of both the Fascist and the National Socialist parties. However, Mussolini wanted a few fundamental programmatic points to be defined first together with the those who were to make up the staff of the journal.

And here I had begun a somewhat thankless job, as this meant gathering more or less qualified elements and then bringing them to a consensus. The head of the race office in the Ministry of Popular Culture, one Guido Landra, a racist by circumstance and opportunism, who “decamped” after June 25th [when Mussolini was deposed in a coup], was successfully replaced with a more qualified Fascist who had numerous international connections, Dr. Alberto Luchini. With his agreement a number of tiresome meetings were organized with people who, when the matter became known, immediately stepped forward from various sectors of Fascism (it would be amusing to name them, to see what became of these Fascists and racists later). In the end we defined the desired program points. I personally presented them to Mussolini. He accepted them in full, after that we talked about going to Berlin and organising analogous activities. In the German capital I reestablished my contacts with Alfred Rosenberg, Walter Groß, and other people, and we began discussing the formulated points and the journal’s direction.


But at this moment I had found out about certain steps taken by the Italian embassy that perplexed my friends so much so that nothing serious could be accomplished, and I had to return to Rome. That is how I found out about the sabotaging of my initiatives that had taken place while I was away. Firstly, the representatives of the first “Racial Manifesto” had responded to my attacks — they were afraid that the new, more organic formula would oust them from their positions. Then some Catholic machinations had occurred. Some professor found a way to meet with Mussolini on the premise of wanting to present to him some books on Christian archaeology. But in reality this meeting was used in order to express to Duce concerns in the Catholic sphere that had arisen after the approval of my initiatives. While Catholics could tolerate a biological racial doctrine, they felt threatened by the formulation of the racial problem on the spiritual plane, and by the “Aryan” revision of numerous conventional values of questionable origin, present in the religious beliefs and morality that have come to dominate the West. A closer and more official cooperation with the German team made the whole thing even more dangerous from their perspective. With Jesuitic diplomacy, this man tendentiously tried to show that aspects of the doctrine of race, with its principle of selection, of superiority and difference within a single people, were incompatible with the premises of mass nationalism. And so on in the same way. All of this had in my absence perplexed Mussolini, and what happened in Berlin was a reflection of that. I requested an explanation and further instructions, but was told to wait. Meanwhile another one of my initiatives could be given the green light via Luchini.

This was the publication of an Atlas of the Italian Race, the result of the first systematic research done in this field. Naturally the name “Italian race” is nonsense. Races are elemental realities that cannot be identified with a people. In a people, races enter various combinations, and certain elements that dominate now become subordinate to others at other times. The topic was the first study of such components. In various regions of Italy prefects had to report to us certain typical and old families, whose representatives were evaluated by a special commission. This commission was lead by Luchini. It was also made up of Dr. Rossi for the anthropological aspect (race of body), head of experimental psychology at the University of Florence, by professor L. F. Clauss (Berlin) for the “race of soul,” and finally by myself for “spiritual race.” The results were compiled in a beautiful publication, richly illustrated with vivid pictures of the most significant types encountered in our research and above all those who still retained the higher, original “Roman-Aryan” type of our people. Everything had already been prepared. Unfortunately, in the meantime crisis was approaching, and energies had to be transferred to a number of more urgent tasks, and the racist revolution, which might have had an impact on Fascism that should not be underestimated, did not continue. Still, it is good to make this known, and that is the reason for these retrospective articles.

A few more words of a personal nature. After Mussolini had spoken to me about my book [Synthesis of the Doctrine of Race] with such unexpected high praise, he told Pavolini to bring it to the attention of the press, because he wanted to see what impression it made. A directive was sent to the newspapers. But in recent times there had been many of these and they were only rarely executed; and practically all the Italian “intellectuals” had agreed to sabotage “racist” ideas no matter what — pour cause. As a result, the big newspapers published very few reviews my book.

This annoyed Mussolini, who issued a more categorical order. Naturally, a shower of articles followed which of course all praised the book highly. As a result my name gained a fame that it would perhaps never had obtained through my other books. And many came to know of me only as a “racist,” and this reputation lasts to this day. But as I said, I only delved into racism accidentally, as part of formulating a much larger ensemble of political traditional ideas, in an effort to prevent deviations that could already be seen in this field in both Italy and Germany.

Proto-English Theory: Was a Germanic Language Spoken in Britain Prior to the Anglo-Saxon Invasion?

via Aryan Myth and Metahistory

My thanks to Runebinder for posting this remarkable video on his blog along with a fascinating article by Woden's Folk that alligns fully with the theories I have been developing on these blogs.

See the relevant article here: http://volkisch-runes.blogspot.co.uk/2015/07/englands-place-is-in-germania-saxons-in.html,

and my own articles: http://celto-germanic.blogspot.co.uk/2013/04/the-belgae-and-ancient-germanic.htmlhttp://celto-germanic.blogspot.co.uk/2012/06/ancient-presence-of-germanic-peoples-in.html