Thursday, May 22, 2008

Gregorius Nekschot and the Dutch Political Situation

Concerning cartoonist Gregorius Nekschot’s upcoming hearing in the Dutch Parliament, our expatriate Dutch correspondent H. Numan had this to say:

Solidarity with Gregorius NekschotRegrettably, this hearing won’t change anything. That is the benefit of having a solid position in parliament.

You are familiar with the political situation in Holland? Almost every cabinet is formed with the cooperation of the CDA. Without them almost no government can be formed.

The current coalition is CDA, PvdA and CU, in that order. The PvdA is polled at an absolute low right now: 18 seats. They simply cannot afford to blow up the cabinet. CU is there just to make up for the required majority. Not that they have a big problem with this heavy-handed action.

The CDA got two slaps in the face: Hirsh Balin, the Justice minister got his proposal to strengthen the blasphemy laws returned by parliament, and later also by the government itself.

Even if a motion of rejection would be accepted by the house, what then? Hirsh Balin would have to submit his resignation. Likely, so will his fellow CDA ministers, thus collapsing the government.

And then? We will have elections. Almost certainly the PvdA would be sent to the opposition, and not even as leader. The CDA would return to govern again. Also almost certain and inevitable.
- - - - - - - - -
ToN is, as I see it, a fake party, set up to draw voters away from the evil PVV. However, if the government falls, they aren’t ready. They haven’t a program, and I assume they’re working desperately to get at least something going. But ToN has no position on immigrants (read Muslims and East Europeans) which is something that their constituents find highly important. ToN actually supports a Turkish EU membership, completely opposite to what their constituents want.

One can never forecast the outcome of elections, and least of all now. I expect a massive win for the PVV, but even if they go from 9 to 25 seats (which I doubt), will it be enough to break the cordon sanitaire?

There isn’t much choice, though. CDA will win at least 25 seats. PvdA looses massively (they’re out), but it all depends on the voters. Will they switch to the communist party, renamed the Socialist Party? D’66 is a bit of a misfit. Neither outright socialist nor liberal. But they are polled for a come back. The VVD is also loosing massively.

So, to cut a long story short, Hirsh Balin basically says: “Okay. Go ahead. Make my day. I dare you to blow up the government.” Knowing full well the last thing the PvdA wants is an election. The CDA will loose, certainly, but it won’t keep them out in the next round.

Thus, expect the usual waffle and nothing more. But if the government has to resign (stranger things have happened), we are in for a stormy election.

Our Amsterdam correspondent Sagunto weighed in with this:

There’s a special situation at work in the Netherlands that needs a reminder, contributing to the reason many people still voted for the Christian Democrats (our prime Dhimmister JPB) in the elections of 2007, and that is the shock and aftermath of the murder of Pim Fortuyn. People were accustomed to the complacent “post-politics” of the nineties; that situation was completely shattered by the analysis of Fortuyn and his success; then his violent death followed and people fled in fear and disgust to the party that seemed to promise “peace and quiet”.

Jan Peter BalkenendeBalkenende was the right man for the occasion: look at that face. Never not a dull moment with JPB. That, together with the growing support for Wilders and Verdonk, is also changing fast. The peace and quiet attraction is beginning to wear off and the stifling of free speech when Islam is concerned is only creating more resentment among the general populace. Just to get back to the Fortuyn murder: had it been a Muslim who killed him, civil war would have been an almost certain fact, even in 2002.

The difference with Theo Van Gogh in 2004 was of course that Fortuyn was a political focal point for people to rally around and act. Theo van Gogh was an individual filmmaker without a voting-base or organization of some sort. That’s where the simple problem lies: many people — especially in large cities — are not an active member of any (political) group whatsoever and the level of fragmentation is high.

I don’t want to call it “individualization”, because traditionally people in Holland have always had a distinct tendency to mind their own business to the extreme (as opposed to Swedes for instance, who — generally speaking — have a more genuine “egalitarian” sense of community. Which many of the Dutch wouldn’t like at all, myself included). What appears to outsiders as a manifestation of some egalitarian sentiments in Holland is actually quite the opposite: Dutch people on the whole are hyper-individualists in the old sense and “equality” means that no one should get the idea — including the government — that he can meddle into the affairs of his neighbour.

That’s why sometimes the Dutch can really work together, just to make sure their own individual interests are protected. That’s why I keep repeating that for many Dutch, the idea of “the grand Nation of the Netherlands” is still somewhat embarrassing and even laughable. And I know it may sound strange, but that’s the way it should be, because it’s part of Dutch tradition. Just look at the European Championships this summer: you’ll see an army of orange. Not because the Dutch are nationalists but precisely because they know how ridiculous that notion is and how silly they look (they even wore German war-helmets in orange when the World Championships were held in Germany).

That’s also why you’ll never hear too many people shout in a martial fashion at a threat, but make no mistake, the anger will build to a point that the simplest incident can suddenly become the focal point for massive retaliation. That’s also why I’m a bit reluctant to go along with the “conventional war” speech. That doesn’t even apply to the struggle of governments against global Islamic terror, and it sure as hell doesn’t describe what will become reality in a few years: civil war (mainly civilians + avant gardists versus the State, the police-force and the multicultists’ main clients, i.e. Muslims)

The “peace and quit” doctrine of Balkenende will backfire more and more; Wilders and Verdonk will gain support, which will itself lower the threshold for counterjihad initiatives by ordinary people; the elites of the political parties now in charge, will fight to hold on to power, presumably by invoking EU pressure; that will only breed more resentment, and one day an incident on one of our beaches (think of the Australian situation not so long ago) will be the spark that fully ignites the civil war.

All that’s needed are some political focal points, and we have them in place. Now we wait, and I know some will be confused by the relative silence, like the commenter who thought there must be little or no awareness among the people. I know that you know better, and that’s the great value of having international contacts.

So that’s the situation in the Netherlands from the Dutch perspective. If anyone else wants to add his or her two cents’ worth, feel free to include it in a comment.

51 comments:

randian said...

Is the Netherlands at the point yet where Muslims can vote enough Islamist MPs into office to affect parliamentary coalitions?

PatrickHenry said...

Baron, when the day comes that a civil war actually begins over your muslim problem, which way will the military's guns be pointed? At the Dutch citizens, or at the politicians that have created your muslim problem? I hope it's the latter.

Are the Dutch populace sufficiently armed to take on the military? If the Brits ever want to start a civil war I don't think they even have BB guns, do they? I guess they could use spit balls!

I wish you all luck! Many of you were very nice to us when we vacationed in Amsterdam before you were overrun by the muslims. Holland is a fabulous country, or, IT WAS. I sincerely hope it will be once again!

thll said...

My wife and I visited Holland and Amsterdam 15 years ago when she was pregnant with our first child. I noticed then the number of non-Dutch people and I remember speaking to a man working on a flower stall at a market somewhere near the centre of Amsterdam who told me how much crime had increased with immigration.

More recently my wife took one of our daughters to Holland to play in a football tournament (soccer to you Americans) but naturally I advised her to give Amsterdam a miss this time.

Henrik R Clausen said...

Fortunately, this is a big thing in the Danish press. Here's an editorial from Jyllands-Posten.

Related, our minister of culture, Brian Mikkelsen, has a great OpEd here: We must not let fear win. It is written on the occasion of Trykkefrihedsselskabet awarding Kurt Westergaard (of Motoon fame) a prize for his courage.

Further, we're badding those cursed headscarves from our courtrooms: Danish headscarf ban (this article is in English).

Looks like we Danes are doing well, again :)

Baron Bodissey said...

PatrickHenry --

Either you're new here, or you don't read this blog very carefully.

I'm not Dutch. I'm not even European.

I'm an American who, for some strange reason, has taken a strong interest in European affairs.

Afonso Henriques said...

Well. This may become a long comment but I have some worms in my head I would like to kill.

First of all, let me say that I liked really much the insight over the situation in the Netherlands.
I apreciated even more how the author described the people of the Netherlands, their mentality, and how he (Sagunto, I think) clearly showed that there is no European Nation, that Europe is just a Civilisation and how the various European Nations are so different, even in the people's mentality.
Look to Germans, French and Brittish in the 40s.

Nationalism pops in ususally. Many Americans fear a new Hitler when they hear the word. There will always be the schock between Americans and Europeans over ethnicity. Now, even some Europeans debate who is and is not part of the Nation. And that is something I would prefer not to mention now.

My problem is another one. Is Nationalim per se. Sagunto said:

"That’s why I keep repeating that for many Dutch, the idea of “the grand Nation of the Netherlands” is still somewhat embarrassing and even laughable. And I know it may sound strange, but that’s the way it should be, because it’s part of Dutch tradition. Just look at the European Championships this summer: you’ll see an army of orange. Not because the Dutch are nationalists but precisely because they know how ridiculous that notion is and how silly they look (they even wore German war-helmets in orange when the World Championships were held in Germany)."

Ok. So, no Nationalistic.

Please, people watch this short video:
Nationalism?

For me, this is Nationalism in its most pure form. This was when the football (soccer) National team left Algarve to come to Lisbon. This was not organised. Nobody got paid for being there. Planes, choppers and boats that showed up were not there for money. People lost money for that. It was a popular movement (like the 2005 riots in Paris). All people there decided to go there by themselves or as a group just to support the National team.
Highways were shut down due to excess of people there. It was a trip of 300Km crossing Alentejo in the summer, and all the way it was like this. The temperature in that day was more than 33ºCelsius, I can not translate it to Fahrenheit, it’s like Texas. Seriously, watch the video.

In my view, this is the core of Nationalism (And believe me, if there was no multiculturalism in the team, popular support would be much higher. The Brazilian coach made many players naturalise and play for Portugal. 80% of the Portuguese were against. Many people are always stressing the fact that many Portuguese players stay out due to multiculturalism. The 100% Italian team said to the 10% French team: “This is a victory of our National Identity” when they won the World Cup in 2006. You can imagine the reaction of joy of the Italians). Related persons united to create something better, able to sacrifice themselves for something greater but without the lowering or the oppression needed when the “something greater” is artificial, like in Communism. That was how Nations were born. This is the same with a family. The members sacrifice themselves for the well being of the whole, isn’t it? At least, it should be, or shouldn’t it?
This kind of sacrifice is only possible when the greater value is not something artificial.

See this other video:
National Anthem

Look at it. Did you feel that?
Have you understand what Nationalism really is?

Politically, it is stop playing politics; unite all the people to protect our people, our fatherland, our culture, our Past and Future, our family.
Imagine this people united to build their country with the same will they support the National Team.
This is Nationalism in its purest form. Is this evil?

It may be. In the anthem the last verses (the more felt by the people) were:
To Arms! To Arms!
For our Fatherland (Nation),
We shall fight!
Against the cannons (we’ll)
Keep marching,
Keep marching!

So, Sagunto, is something like this non existent in the Netherlands?

Afonso Henriques said...

Continuing my assertions over Nationalism I have something to show to you.
Here nobody plays rugby. Nobody but a dozen of great men. The Portuguese National Team of Rugby is 100% Portuguese. There is no multiculturalism. Well, there is one Argentinian (That's the multiculturalism I aproove). They are mostly man and many work in the military or in the police forces and there are also some lawyers. They are really Nationalists though they are apolitical.
This group of brave men is known as "Os Lobos", meaning The Wolves. They were heros for a month.
See this short video:

Apolitical Nationalism

They are singing the National Anthem and they are feeling every word they scream. They are representing not "portugal" but Portugal, the Nation in its various aspects. They are not being paid. Actually, the State does not contribute at all to people who play rugby. Notewithstanding, being left down by their own State/Government that made them pay everything for their own pocket (and they are not rich), they were eager to represent the Nation and make the government/state proud of them.

And then, compare them to the football players who have great statal support and earn millions.

The differences?
First, no multiculturalism and a group of men with the same views, traditions, culture and a strong sense of it, of true brotherhood in a way (Nationalism).
Second, the fight for reaching beyonde, for making the people proud instead of just earn some money (Nationalism. Sacrifice for the good will of the people).

Now imagine transform this strenght in political practices. That is Nationalism.

You can see The Wolves singing the National Anthem when they already knew they were eliminated
here

Magnus Zinnen said...

@afonso henriques

The cheering crowds notwithstanding, I'm afraid I can't get my hopes up that this means many of these people would be willing to actually do anything to roll back the tide of Muslim immigration in Europe. In my experience, cheering for the national team, particularly the national football team, is the one acceptable way for people to show national pride in Europe. My experience was mainly in Germany, and perhaps things are radically different in Portugal, but I just don't see a bit of flag-waving in the run-up to the European Championship or the World Cup as being indicative of much of anything. Supporting the national team when they are winning requires no sacrifice at all, and when they are losing, people either don't support them, or their "sacrifice" is simply a bit of heartache and 90 minutes wasted watching a loss. I don't think that can compare with the fortitude necessary to stand up to what is now an entrenched system of political and cultural appeasement, especially considering that dissenters are publicly castigated and humiliated for their "incorrect" way of thinking. Not to mention the very real threat of violence from the adherents of a certain religion of peace that inevitably follow. National sports teams might draw forth a river of patriotism from those who love their country, but that river empties into the vast sea of apathy that is the rest of the population.

As an aside, regarding the victory of the "Italian national identity", like many others in the football-watching world, I regard the football identity of the Italian national team to be the identity of cheating, diving, match-fixing mob wh*res, half of whom were under investigation for manipulating results in their domestic league, and should never have been allowed to play in the World Cup.

Armance said...

"I regard the football identity of the Italian national team to be the identity of cheating, diving, match-fixing mob wh*res, half of whom were under investigation for manipulating results in their domestic league, and should never have been allowed to play in the World Cup."


Actually I prefer a team of 100% Italian mafiosi from a mafioso national league representing Italy to a honest team of Africans and Maghrebis representing France (supposing it is honest).
Every time I watch the French national football team I'm frightened. It looks like the Tower of Babel, the very image of the post-national, post-white, post-European future which is waiting for all of us. Compared to it, a group of football club owners manipulating results and sharing the money in the Mafia style looks almost romantic. At least it's something which I understand.

Sagunto said...

@patrickhenry,

Chances are, that you're the very first one to finally expose the Baron for what he really is: a crypto-Dutchy, specialized in posing as an American patriot. Rumour has it that sometimes this sleeper mole from Holland can't keep up appearances. That's when he is spotted wearing his secret pair of Dutch woodies, searching for the nxt best windmill for a secret Dutch gathering, to engage with fellow expat-Lowlanders in subversive Dutch bonding ;-)

About the football thing and national sentiments. I should have known better than to mention the subject somewhat jokingly, now that the European Championships are close at hand.

Kind regs from Amsterdam,
Sag.

Ladywolfnl said...

Baron,

My husband IS Dutch & I am an American. I did live there (Den Hout) for 4 years. We finally made the very difficult decision to leave due to all the Intergration. My husband was disgusted by the peoples choice of it's Weak Government. I personally was threatened since I was an American. I had to attend mandatory Dutch Lessons required by all Immigrants. The day after 9/11 to be precise.
The school was more concerned with knowing how I liked my Dutch Instructor than if they could guarantee my safety.
On a daily basis in The Telegraaf or De Stem are articles of how art can no longer be displayed because it "Offends" Muslims or Construction workers are asked to dress more modestly because once again it "Offends" Muslims..On & On....
I am not condoning segregation but when will Dutch people ALL stand up & demand from their Government that Immigrants must assimilate to Dutch society as opposed to the Dutch people re-learning how to live in their own country.

Afonso Henriques said...

To Magnus Zinnen:

"I'm afraid I can't get my hopes up that this means many of these people would be willing to actually do anything to roll back the tide of Muslim immigration in Europe."

Of course not. Yet... I am not saying that this people will save us. The majority do not care at all.
What I was doing was to explain what motivates the people doing that. It is Nationalism.
And Nationalism, politically speaking, should gather all that and make it to work on behalf of the country. This "little pieces" of Nationalism are what may save us in the future. Otherwise, we are doomed.

"cheering for the national team, particularly the national football team, is the one acceptable way for people to show national pride in Europe."
Yes, and when in a forum about the National Team, there is one person protesting about Multiculturalism (which occurs very often here) and the lack of "patriotism" (Nationalism) of some players, that person is seen as a crazy dangerous man. Not by the masses, but by the "people controling the forum".
I've seen a poll realized here asking if the people wanted naturalized players (Deco) to play in the National team (Deco said: If I can not make it to the Brazilian team I may go play for the Portuguese one.). The result was 80% no. The journalist said it was xenophobic.
I agree with you. But, in what other situaton should we show our National Pride? That is the only evident situation.

"perhaps things are radically different in Portugal, but I just don't see a bit of flag-waving in the run-up to the European Championship or the World Cup as being indicative of much of anything."

It was an enormous support. Almost every house (and I mean, literally) in Portugal had a flag waving. The people went to the streets in the hundreds of thousands, etc. But I agree it is not "much of anything". But in Portugal things are indeed a bit different. A recent European poll revealed that 80% of the Portuguese have already cried while seeing a football game with the National Team. Concerning that some 10% are "ethnics" I may be part of the tenth that did not cried...
But my assertion is, this is Nationalism, it is not bad, it would be a wonderfull thing if we could unite to create a better future instead of playing politics and importing immigrants. I was trying to show that everybody would be better with Nationalism in an almost utopical way.

"Supporting the national team when they are winning requires no sacrifice at all, and when they are losing"

Well, I've been so fed up with the Team that I have already tried to support the adversary. Yes, it is a sacrifice.

"I don't think that can compare with the fortitude necessary to stand up to what is now an entrenched system of political and cultural appeasement, especially considering that dissenters are publicly castigated and humiliated for their "incorrect" way of thinking."

Now I agree. I am just thinking of the future. But the rugby team has already showed that fortitude.
You can read this comment and click on Apolitical Nationalism.

"is simply a bit of heartache and 90 minutes wasted watching a loss."

I know a person who has passed away when is local club won the Cup of Portugal. Some elders would die if Portugal were to win a World Cup or so.
Here, the game is much more than that. We really feel it diferently, I think that if you don't like football you can not understand it. And here we are the craziest ones in which concerns suffering. We have even invented a word "saudade" to express the feeling of "sadness and emptyness for missing someone or something as if a part of us was taken away". No other language in the world has an equivalent to that. Only Galician, but that is virtually the same as Portuguese. Our language was Galician-Portuguese untill the Middle Ages when we became politically seperated but that is another History...

"National sports teams might draw forth a river of patriotism from those who love their country, but that river empties into the vast sea of apathy that is the rest of the population."

Maybe Portugal is really diferent because here, "the rest of the population" is some 5% to 15% percent.

Concerning your last paragraph, I can make mine the words of Armance and I would even say that I was a fan of Multicultural French team when it had the muslim Zinedine Zidane. Now, I want them to loose every match.
I do like Italian football. And I am ashamed that my National team may be some 30 to 50% "ethnic" despite I admire two or three players. One is gypsie and as gypsies do not have a state... is wellcome to play here, Ricardo Quaresma.

"now that the European Championships are close at hand."
Sagunto,
seriously, I just wanted to make a point! No rivalry, if Holland meets us again, it will be a delightfull game, like that in the World Cup.
I think it was the best game of the World Cup (and boy... how much I suffered that day...). Portugal vs Netherlans is always a great much, isn't it?

Too much Multiculturalism on both teams, though, despite the fact that Davi(d)s was supperb.

Conservative Swede said...

Armance,

Every time I watch the French national football team I'm frightened. It looks like the Tower of Babel...

Yeah, that's really the Biblical story we are living, isn't it? We explored and conquered the whole planet, solved the many mysteries of science, sent a man to the moon, and this displeased Jehovah. Now he's confusing our languages and scattering the peoples throughout the earth.

Surely makes one wonder whose side this vain and vengeful God is really on. One thing that is abundantly clear though is how this God with his small-minded and even ugly personality, couldn't possibly be the only God of this world. This world is just too wonderful and beautiful for that even to be considered to be possible. But in spite of the striking impossibility of it, billions of people have fallen for this anti-theistic lie by Jehovah, this hyper-Nietzschean lie that all other Gods are dead. How vain, spiteful and megalomaniac isn't that? The most God-hating and anti-theistic force that ever was. And all his priests speak like leftists.

The problem with Jehovah is that people pay too much attention to him, and that we have turned away from our original Gods.

Afonso Henriques said...

"The problem with Jehovah is that people pay too much attention to him, and that we have turned away from our original Gods."

Wow... Conservative Swede is turning Pagan...

I think that our Christian Churches have been de-virilised and that we need indeed a more Pagan carachter, Christian priests able to realise Cruzades, fight for its people and support our culture.

Homophobic Horse said...

Freespeech in Britain: mentioning the very existence of heterosexuality now deemed "homophobic".

Conservative Swede said...

Afonso,

Wow... Conservative Swede is turning Pagan...

I've always been Pagan.

I think that our Christian Churches have been de-virilised and that we need indeed a more Pagan carachter, Christian priests able to realise Cruzades, fight for its people and support our culture.

Christian Churches, Christian priests, Cruzades (Cruz = cross), etc.

You didn't fully got what I said, did you? Just more of the same. Stuck in the mindset... would explain those eruptions of leftist harangues from you... you learned it from your priests.

Christianity is the greatest anti-religious and God-hating movement that ever was (only Islam can compare). Jehovah is the God of atheism. Importation and adaption of Jehovah can only lead to godlessness and atheism. By importing and adapting a foreign God--presented as the universal God of goodness--the process might take some centuries, but the result is that the traditional religious content of the culture is hollowed out, and the only thing left is a distant abstract universalist God of leftist goodness and totalitarianism. Once the goal has been achieved--by eradicating our Roman heritage etc.--this distant abstract alien God fades away. He's not needed anymore. What is left is the universalism of leftist goodness and totalitarianism. There's no surprise in how the serial God-killer religion Christianity, will ultimately kill its own God. It's simply in its nature to do so. And it paves the way for Islam like nothing else.

Conservative Swede said...

A clarification:
While both Christianity and Islam are universalist/expansionist, and as parasites sucks out the original ethnic content of their hosts, the likeness ends just there. While Islam definitely has an ethnic content, and turn its subjects into Arabs, Christianity turns its subjects into universalist nobodys.

Conservative Swede said...

...and that is why it's the Christian God that is the God of atheism (while Allah clearly isn't).

And this illustrates why we need real religions to oppose Islam, and not anti-religions such as Christianity. We need real ethnic Gods that are our Gods. Not the distant abstract God of goodness, with the pretension of perfection. This is a concept for failure, and will only lead to the never-ending questions/doubts of "Is God really good/perfect enough?". "Does he really exist?". Doubts eating this anti-religion up from within.

With a proper ethnic/national God, such as Odin or Jupiter, he's simply our guy. No pretension of perfected goodness. No pretension of being the ultimate source of everything. Why would that even be needed: they are our guys! Simple as that. So the above questions/doubts do not even apply. They are simply our guys, and doubting their existence in on par with doubting the existence of our own ethnic group (and only a suicidally inclined group would do that, and those wouldn't survive anyway; it's simply not in the human nature to be suicidal in this sort of way).

Homophobic Horse said...

You must keep rejecting this presumptuous man-made universalism, you must never inwardly accept it. The moment universalism raises its fist is the moment it is defeated.

How the hell can these values be universal if they legitimise tyranny - delusions and lies.

In the Gorgias, Socrates states what appears to Polus and the other participants in the dialogue to be an absurdity.

"A man who does evil does not what he truly wills. For a man can truly will only what is good; if he commits evil acts in the mistaken belief that they serve his interest, he reveals thereby that he is powerless to do what he truly wills. Hence the tyrant is powerless."

When Polus hears this, he can't restrain himself. He starts sneering at Socrates.

"As if you, Socrates, don't wish you had the power to do whatever you'd like to do; as if you aren't jealous when you see someone killing or plundering or jailing people at his pleasure!"

Polus sneers at Socrates because he considers his personal vileness to be the measure of human success and decency. Polus believes that he knows what he wants and that he has the power to do what's best for himself. Like all persons corrupted and debased by the world of untruth, Polus projects his own baseness onto others. He can't believe that every person wouldn't indulge in vile acts if he had the chance to get away with them. This is why later in the Gorgias, Socrates will present the myth of the people who are invisible--and can get away with anything.

What appear to Polus and Callicles to be Socrates' absurd beliefs about humans only willing what they consider good, is actually Socrates' refusal to accede to the view of humankind perpetrated by the world of untruth--that all men are totally self-centered, know what is good for them, and can best live in a dog-eat-dog universe or fabricate new values for a new-age. Socrates is saying: "No, the higher reality of a human is his soul--not his undisciplined sensual desires and behaviours. A person truly wills--in his essence--what is good for him, and if he commits evil acts, thinking they serve his best interest, he has become deranged."

Of course, the problem comes when someone claims to have divined the essence of the higher reality of the soul - the universal:

In a speech made by Gordon Brown:

"Rather like the recent speech given by his immediate predecessor Mr Blair (in Westminster Cathedral), who also spoke of his desire to 'awaken the conscience of the world', there were no references to Jesus, no mention of God, and scant references to Scripture."

This wasn't a Christian speech at all. Gordon Brown, by seeking to divine the shared ethical core of "all religions" believes he has created a fairly plain and innocuous moral prescription that, crucially, can no more be rejected then you could reject your own religion. Therein lies what I cal the 'annexation' of the soul.

This is an imperial creed that says it is the culmination of all world religions and cannot be authentically rejected. Don't you think that's a bit strange? It puts itself higher then Christianity, higher then all religions..

Didn't Gordon Brown ban his cabinet from saying things like "Islamofascism"?

Such is a hint of the violence that awaits those who reject, or in anyway call into the question the truth of these "Shared Values". And therein lies the falseness.

Only the gentle and forgiving Lamb of God is universal, all the other gods (like Odin or Krishna) are fallen angels, and can be good and bad. Indeed, these 'devils' are the most recognisably human.

Revelation 13:11

And I beheld another beast coming up out of the earth; and he had two horns like a lamb, and he spake as a dragon.

Sagunto said...

So the topic starts with a Dutch cartoonist, arrested for well.. doing his job, and now it's on to football and some non-descript conservative pagan gods defeated by the leftist christian god of atheïsm.

This is getting better & better.

Take a sample from a stimulating argument, or perhaps better leave it at "opinion" for the moment:

[quote=CS]
"..the only thing left is a distant abstract universalist God of leftist goodness and totalitarianism. Once the goal has been achieved--by eradicating our Roman heritage etc.."

Et cetera indeed..
Perhaps the sources you might care to provide, would also be as bold as to argue that the (gods of the) Roman Empire invented free market capitalism?
That would crown them with great honour and I'd drink a sturdy Dutch brew to their health. There's only one tiny problem: it's not true. Quite the contrary. There's even a well documented example of a full-blown "socialist" emperor named Diocletian. Roman economy in large part was driven by slave labour, conquest and subsequent extortion of wealth by a predatory system of taxation. No free markets, very little trade, no capitalism.
Economic scholars agree that capitalism was an invention of the medieval monasteries (e.g. Cluny). Medieval scholars such as Nicolas Oresme (1325-1382) are called "the founding fathers of monetary economics." They were of the traditional faith parly a continuation of Roman civilization, the catholics of course, Roman catholics if that's any solace, considering the Roman heritage ;-)

Probably CS, you also gave all those scholars a pass, who have consistently pointed at the Irish and continental monasteries where large parts of the Classical heritage were multiplied and preserved, while under heavy attacks by ehm.. "Swedes"? (not the conservative ones I reckon).

This idealization of some sort of paganry, does it have any root in reality? 'Cause I'm all ears for a more grounded argument on behalf of your (not "our") take on paganism. Maybe spend a topic on it?

Kind regs from Amsterdam,
Sag.

Conservative Swede said...

Sagunto,

Perhaps the sources you might care to provide, would also be as bold as to argue that the (gods of the) Roman Empire invented free market capitalism?

You are looking at things from an very narrow present-time perspective, through the prism as it is presented by our culturally leftist elites. A shadow theater in which e.g. the United States is presented as right-wing. Such a ludicrous idea.

I use the concept leftism in it's cultural and absolute sense. I.e. all the junk that came from the French revolution. But its roots go way farther back, and this is precisely my point. Equality-dogmatism and freedom-dogmatism (such as Mike18xx's) are just two different twists to the "Liberté, égalité, fraternité" slogan. It's because you lack historical perspective that you cannot see how very similar they are (quite as collectivism and individualism are just two sides of the very same thing). Which is also underlined by how you cannot even imagine an alternative to leftism unless free market capitalism is first invented. And then you hold on to an alternative that, in its ideological form, is culturally identical to leftism.

Q.E.D.

This idealization of some sort of paganry, does it have any root in reality?

You are fantasizing. I have scarcely said anything about paganism at all. I have just presented a deductive argument, based on the inner nature of things, for how Christianity is destructive and therefore immoral.

Compare it to how I'm supporting Hillary Clinton in the US election. It's because of the deep and inherent failure and destructiveness of Obama and McCain. You do not seriously claim that I'm idealizing Hillary, are you?

Armance said...

What I wonder is: if Christianity is indeed universalist, why is it so divisive? Perhaps there is no other religion so divided into churches, sects, groups, opinions etc. Internal fights over the "true" dogmatic principles have been characteristic to Christianity since the beginning. Maybe because we cannot internalize, naturalize and digest this exotic Jehovah?

I remember that I read once a comparative study regarding the religious views of the Indo-Europeans and the Semites. For the Indo-Europeans, the universe had a cyclic life. In this respect, the Hindus and the ancient Greeks had similar views, both belonging to the Indo-European group. For the Semites, the universe and consequently the history is a continuum since the first day of Creation. Through Christianity, the Indo-Europeans adopted a Semitic God and a foreign perception of the Universe. It seems that after 2.000 years, the prevailing secularization in Europe is a proof that this adoption has failed.

Henrik R Clausen said...

Christianity isn't more divisive than Islam. It just happens not to cut off the heads of those it disagrees with, at least as frequently as Islam does. Wahhabi wars, for example, were pretty mean. Thus, disagreements within Christianity thrive more openly than in Islam, as sticking your neck out in Islam might have some very nasty consequences...

It's a sign of health, actually :)

Conservative Swede said...

Henrik,

Christianity isn't more divisive than Islam.

I beg to disagree. Shias and Sunnis, and other Muslim factions, can, and most probably will, fight each other to the death when there is no one else around. But if a common enemy appears, Islam is priority one, and if they do not join forces they'll act in a way maximizing the success of Islam.

Christians, on the other hand, really hate their fellow Christians. Like the Rangers and Celtics fans in Glasgow hate each other, and want them to lose if they meet any other team, e.g. a foreign team in a UEFA game. Christians often joined with Muslim forces against other Christians. And the only lasting effect of the crusades is how it paved the way for the Turks. In the fourth crusade Constantinople was sacked, captured and a Latin Kingdom established there. Thereby weakening it, and paving the way for the Turks. The crusades had no other lasting results. And we see it today in how Americans attack Serbs, favouring the Muslims.

The secular post-Christians are Christians in all these aspects. In fact they are the most zealous ones, and best described as hyper-Christians.

For Christianity the real enemy is always among us, i.e. those not holding the correct version of the doctrines, the heretics. While the Other holds a protected position in this religion of leftist goodness (inversion of values). The Other is seen as poor and inferior, lost creatures in need of education and conversion (today into liberalism and democracy), but they are never seen as the main enemy. The main enemy is always, and has always been, another Christian (the animosity between classic Christians and secular post-Christians is just one of the many examples of this)

Truth is more important than victory for Christians, while it is the other way around for Muslims. In fact victory is truth for Muslims. While we hear Christians (and secular hyper-Christians) always say how they are not going to fight for and support their country/civilization if it's not according to the morally correct doctrines/principles (liberalism, democracy, anti-fascism, whatever). Victory as such is not seen as desirable by Christians. This makes it likely to leave Christians scattered in small enclaves under Islamic rule righteously holding on to their hundred or so different versions of the truth (so far this is the record in Northern Africa and the Middle East).

I looked at Sagunto's answer again, and I must say that he missed the discussion entirely. I think that the only word I wrote that he understood was 'leftism', so he clinged to that, and in his mind 'leftism' translates into opposition to free market capitalism. This is the delusion of the modern mind, that the cultural aspect does not exist in politics (since its all agreed upon and everybody have identical views), and that it's all about economics. However, what I wrote was 'leftist goodness', which refers to the inversion of values that has been part of Christianity since day one. This means that all moral values are turned upside down--the very foundation and essence of leftism. Strong is bad/evil, weak is good, and the Other protected, etc. Socialism, libertarianism and other egalitarian doctrines were not brought to us by extra-terrestrials, they are just age-old Christian doctrines in new garb.

Limpet said...

CS: "the serial God-killer religion Christianity, will ultimately kill its own God"

It reminds me of a "poem" by Armand Robin
(although it may be off topic)

THE PROGRAM
IN A FEW CENTURIES

We will suppress Faith
In the name of Light
Then we will suppress light.

We will suppress Soul
In the name of Reason
Then we will suppress reason.

...
the rest of the poem

Afonso Henriques said...

Conservative Swede,

"Cruz = cross"

You have learnt Portuguese well. It is literally like that. And more, in "Cruzada" (from Cruzade), "ada" can be seen as a sufix for "fight with a" or "slap with a".

So, Cruzade or Cruzada is very explicit (at least in this language).

"would explain those eruptions of leftist harangues from you... you learned it from your priests."

Come on, Conservative Swede! I've never went to a Church in years, I've never went regularly to a church.

I also don't understand what you mean with "leftist harangues" but that is another History.
You can't say I got that from a priest, you may say that I got that (did I?) from my "Church going grandparents" as the National Anthem says.

Concerning your last paragraph, I wholeheartedly agree with you.
But I think there is a great cultural barrier seperating us. You are a (cultural) Protesant and I am a Catholic. And historically speaking, Protestantism has been much more left wing than Catholicism.

(Well, maybe I am a leftist because I think that the Catholic Church should treat the poors instead of the State. I think that it would be better for everybody if we let the Catholic Church do its Historic part in taking care of the ones who need the most.)

Here, many members of the Catholic Church suppoted the Nationalist Dictatorship of Salazar. (Ex. Three weaks ago the Father (Priest) de Melo died. I think that during the revolution he has killed someone who was part of the extreme left but besides he had always been a great man. When he died, there was a bill in parliament to honour his life. The Communists and the Anarchists and part of the Socialists left the parliament.);

Our existance as a country is due to the strenght of Catholicism fighting the moors. That was what made the Reconquista aceptable in Europe. We couldn't have made it without the Catholic-fundamentalist Templaires.

But, the Templaires themselves were much Pagan.

The Catholic Church has had many Pagan elements and "ethic" untill the Council Vatican II.

That church was a "Pagan/Christian" Church to some extent.

Afonso Henriques said...

Just wanted to state the following:

"in his mind 'leftism' translates into opposition to free market capitalism."

There was a time when the Nobility considered the "free market" and stuff, the burgoise to be left wing.

The Right wing today completley lacks that "paganism" Con Swede reclaims, it lacks any high moral Traditional vallues. It is a world of economicism for the right today.

And as Armance spoke abut Indo-Europeans vs Semites, I'll say the following:
All across the Indo-European world (From Celts in the West to Hindus in the East) ther was the belief that the world would pass for four cycles:
1- The Noblest, that of priests, of spiritual knowledge;
2-That of brute power, strenght, nobility, warriors and chiefs;
3- A Decadent world of burgois, where the money rulled and the vallue of people (spiritual or phisical) was not important;
4- The lowest of all. The rule of the scum, where nothing had vallue, no spirituality, no phisical vallue, not even money. The world was to be leveled by the lower.
The lower would be "cool".
Communism and Multiculturalism (with the goal of driving Europeans towards extintion) come to mind.

Also, it is outstanding how the Indo-Europeans were found on notions of Universal Human rights instead of Human duties.

Just look to Cyrus from Persia, to Akosha in India and to todays West.
Crazy about imposing vallues on others.
Every human group has its own view on right or wrong but Europeans try to make their vision Universal and they (we) are concentrated in the "rights".

Semites, on the other hand, are obssessed with duties. Look at Islam, look to Jews and what Christianity has done.

And you know what? Semites are ahead of us in this.

You can create a society more simpler if you tell them what they have to do than if you tell them what they can do (which generally is just a fantasy).

And it comes to my mind again.

I agree with Conservative Swede about the "paganism".
But it is a fantasy. You can not, and you will not, convert Europeans to worship Odin, Jupiter, Zeus, Endovélico or Lugh. It will not happen and as so there's no point on advocating "paganism" per se.

What we have to do is to turn Christianity in "Paganism" (again but stronger).

Sagunto said...

@afonso,

"..No rivalry, if Holland meets us again, it will be a delightfull game, like that in the World Cup.
I think it was the best game of the World Cup (and boy... how much I suffered that day...). Portugal vs Netherlans is always a great much, isn't it?.."


Agreed. Looking forward to that match :)

This one though, remains one of my favorite matches of all: World Cup '98, quarter-final Holland vs. Argentina. The Dutch squad had the magnificent
Dennis Bergkamp (and Jonk, Kluivert, Davids, Cocu, de Boer twins). The Argent's had Veron, Simeone, and Batistuta. Great game.

Sag.

Conservative Swede said...

Limpet,

Wow! Such a powerful poem. I'd like to augment the end of it:

IN THE NAME OF NOTHING WE WILL SUPPRESS MAN
WE WILL SUPPRESS MAN’S NAME
THERE WILL BE NO MORE NAME
HERE WE ARE


WE ARE THE ONES WE HAVE BEEN WAITING FOR

Conservative Swede said...

Afonso,

You have learnt Portuguese well.

Gracias, pero lo que he aprendido es español. Pero claro que son idiomas con mucho en comun. Puedo entender mucho portuges quando leyendo.

Conservative Swede said...

Afonso,

But I think there is a great cultural barrier seperating us. You are a (cultural) Protesant and I am a Catholic. And historically speaking, Protestantism has been much more left wing than Catholicism.

You need to read my series of articles on Catholicism, that I wrote last year:

Catholicism--Vatican II embracing Islam
Catholicism--the open borders lobby
Catholicism--birth control and birth rates (part I)
Catholicism--birth control and birth rates (part II)
Catholicism--anecdotal conservatism

The Catholic Church is by far the biggest and most influetial NGO pushing for open borders, leftist cultural destruction and suicide of the West. Quite as the UN it's an organisation of mainly Third Worlders pushing for the Third Worldization of the West. It was the avant guard of the close embrace of Islam, open borders and cultural suicide even before the leftist and liberals had got started, even before the U.S. Immigration Act of 1965 and the French plans for Eurabia. Vatican II was the kiss of death.

Armance said...

I think the Universal Declaration on Human Rights is a purely Christian/Semitic idea, not an Indo-European one, whose starting point was the concept that all human lives are equally important in the eyes of God. I remember somebody who said: "The modern world is filled with Christian ideas who went astray". Universal Human Rights is one of them. The Greeks and the Romans had a culture of duty too, this is not typically Semitic.

Armance said...

Yet I agree with Afonso that Christianity is good as long as it is an accessory to nationalism and strengthens a group identity, like in Portugal. Or see the example of Israel. Actually when the lefties target Christianity, it is precisely the type of Christianity associated with nationalism and race. When it is deprived of ethnic or racial content, they have nothing against it.

Conservative Swede said...

Afonso,

Our existance as a country is due to the strenght of Catholicism fighting the moors. That was what made the Reconquista aceptable in Europe. We couldn't have made it without the Catholic-fundamentalist Templaires.

But, the Templaires themselves were much Pagan.

The Catholic Church has had many Pagan elements and "ethic" untill the Council Vatican II.


Also regarding Islam we are able to refer to things working fine in earlier stages (the "Golden Age"), before Islam had sucked out every original cultural trait of their conquered lands. Just the same it has taken some time for Jehovah, the God of atheism, to suck out all the blood of European civilization.

I just suggest that we get rid of the vampire.

You and I wholeheartedly agree that we need to restore our traditional culture. But my point is that it doesn't make sense then to have the vampire staying around, embraced by us. He will just suck out our blood once again. That's what vampires do.

Armance said...

BTW and back to football, have you seen this?

http://www.brusselsjournal.com/node/3284

Conservative Swede said...

Afonso,

I agree with Conservative Swede about the "paganism".
But it is a fantasy. You can not, and you will not, convert Europeans to worship Odin, Jupiter, Zeus, Endovélico or Lugh. It will not happen and as so there's no point on advocating "paganism" per se.


It's all a matter of leadership.

Let me paraphrase the poem of Armand Robin:

We will suppress Paganism
In the name of the Christian God
Then we will suppress the Christian God
...


Are you seriously suggesting restoring Paganism in the name of the Christian God, Afonso? If anything is impossible, that surely is it. It's all a matter of leadership. To the degree that we rid ourselves of the Vampire God, Paganism is able to flourish and evolve. Religious myths are something that evolve as an expression of our values, identity and life form. The old Gods and ceremonies surely can be used to animate Paganism in people, since they are there and already known. But what Gods that will be closest and dearest to people in the future is an open question. What we need to do is to create a vital garden with the best of soil. Then we will know that there will be a strong and lively flora, even if we cannot say already now what the plants will look like. We could plant the sprouts of Odin, Jupiter, Zeus, Endovélico and Lugh, and then let the garden grow. While carefully weeding the flowerbeds and setting up scarecrows with garlic necklaces.

Conservative Swede said...

The secular liberals, the atheists, are the ones that the Vampire God has sucked out all the blood from; they are vampires too. They need no God/vampire any more. They are gods/vampires themselves.

The believing Christians are the ones that still has some blood and life left in them. They are completely under the spell of the Vampire God, they are his cattle, and it's just a matter of time until he sucks the last drop of blood out of them too, and turns them into vampires.

This explains the relation between and nature of the two Christianities (the believers and the atheists), and their respective relation to the Christian God. It also explains why the Christian Right (vampire food) is always so fatally weak against the secular left (vampires), and always lose every battle against them (the best the political right has ever been able to do is to stall for some years, before ultimately losing).

Armance said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
Armance said...

S,

when I read what you are writing I feel like a Pagan myself. My Indo-European part (because my soul is divided) is revolting against the foreign, vengeful God. Very powerful. Especially this idea of the two Christianities and the only vivid remnants, the believing Christians, losing in the end is completely in accordance to what I see around me, in reality.

Why don't you write an essay about it? It is inspiring.

Afonso Henriques said...

"This one though, remains one of my favorite matches of all: World Cup '98, quarter-final Holland vs. Argentina."

I remember that game! It was in the quarter finals, if I can recall. Yes indeed, great squad you had. It was the first World Cup I watched and I was supporting Zidane's France since the beggining. Too bad Portugal could not qualify. Those filthy Germans must have played the referee to expell our best player (better than Figo), Rui Costa, when he was walking to be substituted. Shame.

"Looking forward to that match :)"

Yes indeed. I hope it to be in the final though (I think Portugal will not even qualify the first round).

And you know what? Do you remember the Euro 2000 in the Netherlands?
The final should have been Portugal vs The Netherlands. It was those two teams who have played the best football in the competition. In that game Portugal had a great squad (Victor Baía as a goalkeeper, defenders: Jorge Costa e Fernando Couto; Luís Figo, Rui Costa, Paulo Sousa, João Pinto and even Nuno Gomes. All of them Portuguese!) and a great Sir as a coach, the Portuguese Humberto Coelho. That was a great man!

And now that we are at it, do you remember that one of the favourites to win the Euro 2000 was the then all mighty England?
And the first game was Portugal vs England? Do you remember that game?
Man, I'll never forget it. Wonderfull!
The best players scored: Figo and João Pinto with awsome goals. And then, even Nuno Gomes. And the man who passed them the ball was alwyas the same: Rui Costa.
It was one of the best games I ever saw. I will never forget it. I had my heart in my mouth.

Afonso Henriques said...

Armance,
"I think the Universal Declaration on Human Rights is a purely Christian/Semitic idea, not an Indo-European one"

Yes, it is too Christian. At the first sight.
Look at Cyrus and Akosha. Auto proclaimed "Aryan"/Noble (Indo-European?) Kings of Persia and India. They offered "rights" to their people. Look at the History of Europe and you will rapidly understand that European peoples have always had more "rights" than Asiatic peoples. And the History of Europe itself has walking the path to provid more and more "rights" to the people.

The three most important contribitions of the Semitic world to the modern world were: Judaism, Islam and Christianity.

Judaism. We all know (more or less) what the Old Testament is about. We all know the "imposition" of the ten comandments to create a stable society. There were no "rights" granted, there were only "not to do(s)".
Islamism. Islamism is, in my view, the purest Semitic religion. Submission to a God and an unquestionable Mohamed. It is imposition, imposition and imposition with no "rights" granted.

I will not comment Christianity because much of it is inspired on the Indo-European Zoroastrianism but, what "rights" did Jesus grant to the people?
The church has for sure made some "impositions".

"The Greeks and the Romans had a culture of duty too, this is not typically Semitic."

Maybe its the definition of "duty" that is not ideal.

This is not duty. You may see it as the Christian thing to do but the men there did it out of loyalty, bravery, courage and honour. Not because it is written in the book or because God ordered them to do so. It's pretty "Indo-European".

The Romans (Greeks I am not too familiar with) had a culture of honour and loyalty. Discipline, like the Prussians but freedom above all.
The Spartans (Greeks) had that militiraism, that pride, that sense of honour, that Nationalism and camradage between their equals, and freedom to continue their Tradition.

This, - and you can see it trough the muslims actions - what is the driving force behinde it?
Submission to a God. And it is a Semitic God. The Hebrews? The same. The Christians? Sort of.

That's what I meant by "duty". It is establish the rules like in the Old Testament and make people follow them because it is written above all.
The laws in the Indo-European world are made by men, in the Semitic world, are made by God.
I hope I make my point understandable.

You don't find that Submission in the Indo-European world. In the Indo-European tradition, the "people", Our People, is more important than our God. The Indo-Europeans are not the "choosen" of the Gods, they/we are the "children" of the Gods and as so, the Indo-European Gods are not imortal, they live in the people spirit. The Semitic God...
I really hope you can understand what I am saying.

"I agree with Afonso that Christianity is good as long as it is an accessory to nationalism and strengthens a group identity, (...) see the example of Israel."

But Israelis are Jews! But that is exactly the problem, the good Christianity has done to Portugal is already in the past. There are no "profits" visible in the future. Maybe the Ortodhox Church still has a bit of what it takes. I agree with you on this.

I am now used to see Christianity not as a great social good (Traditional Catholicism), but only as a personal confort (Protestantism here in Portugal like Jeova's witnesses, Baptists, Mormons, Brazilian sects...), to give confort to individuals or groups of persons.

Honestly, the only "Indo-European" carachter in the church I see nowadays - and by Indo-European I mean a more elevated and transcendental reality, related with race/ethnicity and the land but more than that, real honour/pride, elitism and conservadorism - lies on the Opus Dei. Now fashionable among the elites. It looks loke there is a fight between Opus Dei and The Masonry (Free Masons) but the Masons are still ahead (sadly).

"BTW and back to football, have you seen this?"

Yes I have.
Also, the last time I saw a football match in the stadium, I had a small problem with some "ethnics". Here it happens a lot though it is more football motivated but the victims are still "racially profiled". In Spain, there was a white Real Madrid's support group that loved to attack Basques and non European ethnics. In my view, here football is just a pretext to attack people in the mind of some "ethnics". But rarely people got killed.

Afonso Henriques said...

Conservative Swede,
"The Catholic Church is by far the biggest and most influetial NGO pushing for open borders, leftist cultural destruction and suicide of the West."

No discussion over that. Agreed 100%. But as you say, it was not always like that.
"Vatican II was the kiss of death."

All the good of the church was it "Europeanity". It being the inheriter of the Roman Tradition.
You may find something inspiring in the words of Jesus but not that much inspiring so that we can replace "all we are" with His words.

"I just suggest that we get rid of the vampire."

Well, I liked your analogy with vampires concerning the church, the Christian religion, right and left. But I don't think "it's all a matter of leadership."

"Are you seriously suggesting restoring Paganism in the name of the Christian God, Afonso?"

It's the only thing available. We have three Christian traditions:
Catholic, Orthodox and Protestant.
They differ in their "Paganity".
Celtic-Roman; Greek-(East)Slavic; Germanic.

The church has evolved that way. All we can hope is for the restoration of an European church based in Rome, with the power of the Catholic Church (maybe with the same "style") but dominated by the "Indo-European" soul.

"We can tolerate Jesus, what we can not tolerate is the Jew".
(I think Nietzsche said something like that.)

Imagine a "cleaned" Catholic Church, without the Universality and the "Semitic" carachter.
Because with the current trends, Catholicism may as well change its base from Rome to Mexico because if things continue this way, there will be no Catholics in Europe.

Basicly, the church (mainly the Catholic Church) will have to choose between Europe and the rest of the world. I can't believe they will leave Europe for the colonised...
It would be a smart move for the church to become "Indo-Europeanised" once again.

Much more than this. Many that we believe to be purely Christian, is in fact more Indo European.
The Christian Church was heavily blended with the Indo European traditions.

I remember seeing a great film about the Christianisation of Brittain and the film supported the "poor Celts" vision.

In the end, they got Christianised. The priests wanted them to stop worship the Godess and in the end, the main female Celtic priest/magician appears in a beautifull church praying to Mary, the mother of Christ and thinking:

"Despite all the distruction, nothing important perished. Things are not perennial, things are dynamic and things change. We may not have out temples but we still have our soul/spirit"
(if not this, something of the sort) giving the idea that that Celtic (Indo-European) Christianised people were worshiping Mary as if it was their own Celtic Godess.

Another example, maybe you are familiar with the events of 1917 in Cova da Iria, Portugal.

Many people still go there on 13th May, many of whom, foreigners. People do have faith in that.

But is it simply Catholic?
According to some schoolars, the muslims thought the place was haunted and feared that place.
According to some schoolars, there was a relativeley important Celtic temple that was preserved by the Romans but destroyed by the Germanic peoples.
So it is a Christian manifestation with pré Christian, Indo-European roots.

Sintra, is another place too metaphysical. Once you're there at night, especially when the moon is full and big behinde the mountains, you will for sure feel overwhelmed. The Celts, the Romans adored the place (The Romans called it "Mount of the Moon") and the muslims did not liked much the place but had a beautifull castle built there. Christians constructed great architecture in the region.

Notre Dâme is another example of a great Christian Cathedral built by a Indo-European people over a very important Celtic temple.
I heard that in that island, there were many "occultist" practices even at the beggining of the construction of the Cathedral.

Despite all the different influences, we have this Tradition in Northern Portugal and Galiza and you have this tradition in Ireland. There is no (recent) contact between the two traditions as you can see by the differing names. (The word cocconut derives from something of the sort.)
So our base is all the same. It is Indo-European, the base of the church is the European people, and as so, the base of the Church is Indo-European and the more Semitic it is, the more it will repel its European base.

A great part of "our Christian religion" is not "Semitic" at all so, I have this (stupid) hope that we may be able to take controle of the church and make it really Indo-European.

If not, the Church may be faced with the extintion of Christianity among European peoples. At least in the West.

I think (though I don't know much) that the Orthodox Church has a more "Indo-European" caracther than this Catholic Church.

I hope you can understand what I am trying to say. Sorry for my English though.

Only in Gates of Vienna we can have such debates comming from the situation in Holland, through Football and Nationalism and end in Religion, Paganism and the European conection to the Transcendent.
I love this damned blog!

Conservative Swede said...

Armance,

Especially this idea of the two Christianities and the only vivid remnants, the believing Christians, losing in the end is completely in accordance to what I see around me, in reality.

Yes, I think I managed to find an image, a perspective, that concentrates truth.

Why don't you write an essay about it? It is inspiring.

My deepest thanks for your warming words.


Afonso,

the good Christianity has done to Portugal is already in the past. There are no "profits" visible in the future.

Precisely my point. But the dimwitted replies I get to this is by listing ways in which Christianity was good for us in the past. As if they hadn't heard my argument at all. Sigh...

So Christianity is part of our past, and in this respect of who we are. So we should keep it around for nostalgic and ornamental reasons.

All the good of the church was it "Europeanity". It being the inheriter of the Roman Tradition.

Yes indeed. But this is all perverted beyond recognition by Vatican II. And Benedictus is just the same as the rest. Quite as the other Gramsciists they keep the Potemkin facades in place so the gullible masses won't suspect anything.

You may find something inspiring in the words of Jesus but not that much inspiring so that we can replace "all we are" with His words.

Jesus is one of the greatest men that ever walked this Earth. He was not involved whatsoever in this Vampire religion. He was not a promoter of imposing a foreign God upon other nations. Jehovah was just a constant in his cultural context; he chose to challange other things. Jesus was, in my view, one of the greatest sages of the human race. And the fact that he wasn't the son of God is, in my view, what makes him truly divine. Had he been the son of a powerful God, it would just have been sooo easy to be perfect. It's easy to win the race if you are doped on steroids. Being able to comfortable cruise around like a spoiled brat, being perfect. No way! He was a normal man. That's what makes him superhuman (as opposed to a doped God-son).

By all means, I implore everyone to read the five gospels and be inspired by this great man. I'm amazed by his great rhetoric and the way he tackles difficult situations. Since we just like him are in a societal context of a perverted morality, where a degenerate purity code is reigning, we can learn a lot from him.

But remember that as the very name Christianity (referring to the death on the cross) implies: Jesus and Christianity are separated from each other. Where Jesus ends, Christianity starts. Where there is Christianity there is no Jesus and vice versa.

To summarize: keep Jesus, but scrap Jehovah!

"Are you seriously suggesting restoring Paganism in the name of the Christian God, Afonso?"

It's the only thing available.


You are thinking way too small. And yes, it's a matter of leadership. How do you think Moses did it?

Scrap Christianity, but keep Moses and Jesus as examples for us. We should try to be like them, like great leaders and great rhetoricians (I also consider Jesus the first Jewish stand-up comedian. It's funny to read the mind games he was playing with people. He had a great sense of humour actually.)

But more important than throwing Jehovah out of the window is to wake our other Gods from their Rosaspina sleep. This is the one thing that will suck the power out of Jehovah the vampire, and make him powerless against us. I see in a vision how the spirit of the Greek princess Europa travels through the heavenly dimensions and kiss all the ancient Gods of the European continent one by one, Saturn, Mars, Thor, Freya,... -- and they are all alive again!

All our ancient Gods are alive again! And I'm Bizarro Nietzsche.

Our Gods are alive! That's a great title for a book. OK, they might not be fully alive yet. But they are definitely waking up, and that's amazing only that. I have always claimed that magic really works (it has to do with the constitution of the human mind). I should look into the matter and see what could be really done about this. Magic will be needed in the process. And hmm, a movie with the Gods waking up, that would be great. Movies are great tools of magic.

Conservative Swede said...

And yes I know, I have my own blog and that's where I should write all this stuff really...

Sagunto said...

@CS,

Of the many, many posts you decided to leave in this thread, your last one finally makes sense ;-)

But let me get back to your answer that was to be expected when I asked you to provide some sources to substantiate your opinion.

I asked:
"..Perhaps the sources you might care to provide, would also be as bold as to argue that the (gods of the) Roman Empire invented free market capitalism?.."

[your answer]
"..You are looking at things from an very narrow present-time perspective, through the prism as it is presented by our culturally leftist elites. A shadow theater in which e.g. the United States is presented as right-wing. Such a ludicrous idea.."

No need to provide my old school conservative and free market credentials, 'cause first of all, your evasive response didn't provide any sources for your opinion. I'll be more explicit this time and say that I really like to learn on whose writings you base the point you've been making over & over again. So no need to repeat that in another barrage of postings, just the sources will do. Thnx.

Sag.

Conservative Swede said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
Afonso Henriques said...

Conservative Swede,

I have read your blog's article and what you wrote here at GoV and I must say that there is no room for a discussion due to the fact that I agree with 99% of what you are saying.

Conservative Swede said...

Sagunto,

your evasive response didn't provide any sources for your opinion

I wrote about how Christianity is a God-slaying religion.

This triggered you to ask me for sources about how the Roman Empire invented free market capitalism. You might as well have asked me for sources about how the moon is made of cheese.

No need to provide my old school conservative and free market credentials

Thus speaks a true liberal.

Conservative Swede said...

Afonso,

I have read your blog's article and what you wrote here at GoV and I must say that there is no room for a discussion due to the fact that I agree with 99% of what you are saying.

Nice! So far everyone who understood my argument has agreed with me. So where do we go from here? I know I ought to get my blog up and running again, but...

And Afonso, I'm amazed by the wisdom and knowledge you possess considering your young age. I didn't have that strong connection to history when I was at your age.

Sagunto said...

"..Thus speaks a true liberal.."

Classical liberal if you please, ConSwede. Just read Hayek's "Constitution of Liberty" if you haven't already (something tells me you indeed haven't), and you'll understand.

But okay, CS have it your way and denounce me for all I care, 'cause in the end it doesn't really matter when all must fight Islam, regardless of the gods we choose to invoke or reject. All I ask is simply for some reasonable underpinnings of your paganistic creed and subsequent indictment of Christianity. I ask for sources to understand your point, no more.

Since you have decided not to provide any, and seem to care zealously about your own deities, which is fair enough, perhaps you'd care to mention a few of them, or perhaps your own all-time favorite among the many gods who - with some impressive force of magic no doubt - will come to our rescue against the global Islamic threat. Perhaps it's ULL? Also known as OLLER, ULLER, VALDER, or VULDR, the Scandinist god of Frost Glitter and Skiing. He is also suspected of having invented yodelling as well. Anyhew, thank you holy Ull for getting that particular ball rolling..

So CS, you weave a string off-topics into this thread, meant as a topic on the Dutch political situation concerning Islamization, and then in the end you come up with a statement that in retrospect warrants a drastically reduced input, when you give an amusing synopsis of your view:

"..So far everyone who understood my argument has agreed with me.."

That's so magically funny. You should try the same thing with Islamists; perhaps you'll succeed at making those guys laugh themselves to death, although a sense of humour is a rare commodity among the Allah-Jugend. The Magical weapon of voodoo-counterjihadism under the auspices of - as you describe them - pagan placebo-gods. Bring it on! ;-)

Kind regards from Amsterdam,
Sag.

Conservative Swede said...

Sagunto,

Your way of pressing me for sources about how the Roman Empire invented free market capitalism is simply ridiculous. Nobody can take you seriously. Everything you write reveals how hopelessly permeated by bloodless universalism you are. So since this makes you unable to understand what I write, I not holding my breath in wait for a real dialog here.

Classical liberal if you please,...Hayek...

The fact that you think that this makes any difference speaks volumes about you. You seriously called yourself an "old school conservative". You truly are utterly clueless of worldviews different from the one of your narrow, shrinking glass bubble. And you beat your breast over how you are "fiscally conservative", just like Andrew Sullivan.

Libertarian, communist, classical liberal, neo-conservative, social democrat, you are all the same. All sharing identical views on the cultural aspects of politics. You all belong to an historical parenthesis that will come to an abrupt end in this century, and your glass bubble will crack apart.