Radical Transvaluation in Light of Aryan Type-Selection.

In order that a new millennium arrives to arrest the decay of man a certain groundwork absolutely must be laid. That is to say—without a total dismantling of all pasteurising impositions, alien or otherwise, there can not be any salvation for those typifiers of the Apollonian racial soul. Distractions of any kind from this single, all-consuming, responsibility are only barely more excusable than other more obvious shapes that treason may take. There is to be no tolerance whatsoever afforded to those who cling to that which the ages have proven obsolete, and by this we mean those relics of the past that would encourage a divergence from an uncompromising revolutionary and amoral race-based faith. There are none fit to carry the torch except the unscrupulous, the forward looking, and the one with unquestioned devotion to this one achievement. Whether or not one shares an acceptance of certain fundamental truths with us is irrelevant if one is not also prepared to embrace, without egotism, survival in perpetuity as the highest ethic. The danger presented by overly nostalgic factions among us is that for them there is an abundant reservoir of escapist retreats to be found in our recorded history. The “reactionary-conservative”, “radical traditionalist Christian”, “monarchist”, or fundamentalist of any kind is an intolerable presence to the man of disciplined calculation. He who jeers against action-oriented figures in favour of those effete so called “aristocrats” of the decadent monarchies, misses the total absurdity of lauding that which is defended through naked emotion! Raw emotion; The very same force that they find themselves accusing whenever hushing the great men of violent revolutionary fervour and fanaticism for not being compliant enough to the whims of the cowardly and corrupt privileged classes. Sleepy and somber church goers and loyalists have neither the disposition nor the psychic constitution necessary for the demands of the future. Ours is a cult of youth and manly vigour, we despise that tool of corrupt rulers; the sedative teachings of ascetic slave religion, opting instead for an honest affirmation of the population’s vital and energetic core. We will respect no title of class, profession, or clergy that preceded the advent of the New Order. The blame falls squarely upon the structural foundations of the old-world, yes even those scraps of our history that stand out to us as especially appealing. Even this subservience to the yields of the native land bred the race downward, yes, no exception is made for our cherished feudal history, which paid no explicit attention to racial realities, and only secured the racial types of Europe by the good fortune of accident. The church is at fault for having facilitated the breeding of an obedient labour class where the European races should have made no such allowance. No one should have been so deluded as to expect that this institutionalised white slavery would persist in perpetuity. While the cleric gradually began to accept his own pacifying lies, the nobleman too took his overly moralistic and watered-down concept of chivalry too far and pretended that there was some sort of innate goodness in the exploited human-cattle that he had raised, meanwhile he fattened himself on the produce of their labour and preferred to study those subversive teachings that would topple his throne, rather than to practice the arts of war by which his power had been secured from the very beginning. The entirety of the post-Roman, and to be frank; Christian, social model progresses logically toward the creation of a neutered bourgeois global citizen, and therefore a total stagnation of the evolutionary destiny of our Race, let no one pretend otherwise. It is binding upon the conscience of whomsoever recognises the validity of this realisation to therefore do all that is necessary to peel off the blood-sucking leeches of Christianity, Private property, and yes; the Family. Each enjoyed their respective place in the sun as a rallying point around which the so called defenders of the west would commune. We who know better must not allow such false hope any longer. Each of these mechanisms of deceit is contingent upon the existence of the others. The clan, horde, indeed— the mob is the foundation of the state, never has it been ‘the family’. This absurd institution; the family, is, as most of these artificial and inorganic fragilities, deliberately flawed by its very design. As discussed in our article “Command Economy of Sexuality”, there ought to be a unity of martially conditioned young men, this is the state in its purest genesis, as well as the necessary predication on which any notion of ownership, indeed any established rights whatsoever can be based—especially in regards to the rights over a woman! The private ownership of property including that provided by marriage, springs entirely from the bounty of the state. He who claim that the state is founded only as a necessary evil to protect his abstract rights is only as foolish as those of the less-soulless persuasion who maintain that the state is a natural flowering of the family. We can assume that none sharing in our mentality are persuaded by ridiculous notions of authority as invested within an entity that has been made subordinate to the everyman’s “liberty” and “property”. Of course, it bears repeating, both of which are clearly contingent upon the existence of the entire state apparatus, without which they are revealed to be little more than hot-air. Where we may be more likely seduced is in our unwittingly destructive romance around the natural in a world which is anything but. Those derivatives from the institution of monarchy are plainly absurd in that they assigns a kind of status of permanent existence to the family unit, taken for granted as a unit of production, a view we might share if they didn’t also insist upon granting a greater esteem to this economic mercurial construct. Without clear tribute to the supremacy of the state the monogamous marriage/nuclear family attacks at the very foundation to which they owe their all! Is it any wonder then that princely feuds and something as flabby as ‘free-love’ could shake the foundations of the old order. Our salvation is plainly in the excision of Judaic and other alien perversions of our great Roman inheritance. Certainly, even in the token of the Fascii is seen the clear principle of statecraft, incarnate in the senatorial body and the dictatorial head. Any departure from this system is incongruent with our highest responsibility; the siring of an aristocratic class of Aryans through the ancient type-forming rites of Brave Apollo!This is the ultimate purpose behind the abject rejection of all such rival idols who have been often born of our enemy and cleverly sold in order to defeat or at least wound the hated ‘blonde beast’. In spite of this total affirmation of the state, understood as a martial conglomerate of the fittest men, let us never find ourselves in the camp of socialists, ours is not a concern over whether or not the masses are dealt a fair hand. Plainly the masses have neither the courage, nor the personal integrity to take up the struggle that we all have at least dedicated our lives to. Atop the mountain is the blonde maned lion; the Aryan patrician, beneath him is our own pöbelvolk; a goatish herd, and at the depths slithers the serpent of all the racial waste of the earth. These, as pointed out by the excellent Mark Brahmin, comprise the ominous mooncalf; the Chimera. Let us at the very least herald the coming of a Bellerophon! It had been reiterated again and again that we do not seek for ourselves the creation of a mass movement based upon these immutable teachings. And of course we lament the existence of most of the rabble we call our own as a servile consumer-class, but nevertheless this can be very convincingly entertained as necessary to a functioning body politic. Where we disenfranchise the masses is in our denial of the private ownership of property. That is to say, we reject everywhere and always the notion that a man of his own accord can be said to own a given object. Plainly, the “right” to mastery is derived from struggle. To imply that an individual has sole ownership over something is to imply that he is engaged in struggle with the totality over its rights. The Organic State suffers no aggression toward it. We realise this may seem pedantic and outrageous, to a degree it is intended to be, the purpose behind expressing such sentiment is in making it unmistakably certain that there is no authority except that of violence. The state, it should become almost mantric, is an economic monopoly producing violence, it is, at its root, the assembly of the most able of men as can be gathered without too great a tension between them. One owns the honour of his name, his machismo, both are total expressions of the community-oriented responsibility of the selected individual toward the proliferation of the race, and if destined, the further speciation. We of course count women among the property of a state. This is not to suggest that we believe, as the early soviets had, in the community of women. It only logically follows, as we have said, that a man’s property can only be called his own if it is bestowed upon him by the mercy of the state in withholding from its seizure. The same law applies to the ownership of the ‘means of production’ of the race; the woman. This is the greatest security of breeding that can be provided by mortal efforts. Now one should understand why we must insist upon the removal of any concept of innate private property. The other two targets of this diatribe (otherworldly religion and conventional marriage) are remarkably unlike the first in that they act as both immobile obstacles and at the same time much more convincing snares for those who have at least begun to step in the right direction. In time it should become obvious that the family unit, itself based upon private ownership of capital, is rendered obsolete with the abolition of capitalism, and that both are solely grounded in the theological fiction of “innate rights”. On top of this, the criticism of religion, after all, is the premise of all criticism. As Hegel said, the State is God on Earth, for all intents and purposes. God as the state as the racial elite as the force of speciation, this is the deposit of faith as we have discovered it.