Sunday, September 23, 2007

Burnt Offerings

Predictably and disappointingly, the deluded Marxist multiculturalists of Act-Up Paris have been demonstrating against France's latest attempts to secure her borders. I am by no means a supporter of French President Sarkozy's NeoCon regime, but any effort, however belated, that gives France a fighting chance of still being France fifty years from now is worth commending. Not for Act-Up, however.

In his dubious polemic WITCHCRAFT AND THE GAY COUNTERCULTURE (1978), Arthur Evans states in Chapter 1: Joan of Arc: Transvestite and Heretic:

The history of the word “faggot” reveals the intimate connection between Gay [sic] men, heresy and witchcraft. Both witches and heretics were regularly burned on bundles of sticks called “faggots”. In the popular speech of the time expressions popped up like “fire and faggot” or “to fry a faggot”, suggesting that the victims themselves were called “faggots”.

The homosexuals in Act-Up cannot understand that by encouraging Third World immigration into Europe, they are exacerbating an already volatile situation. They are concurring with the combustible policy of race-and-culture replacement in Europe. They are adding more fuel, and faggots, to the fire. They are doing their best to ensure that the foundations of our civilization, and their own existence, will be incinerated. From being the victims of a medieval holocaust, homosexuals in Act-up have become gleeful participants in a future inflammation and conflagration.

During the Middle Ages it was murderous monotheists who thrust homosexuals into the heart of the inferno. Today its is Act-Up homosexuals who are busy building a new bonfire; a bonfire that will become their pyre as surely as a fairy sits atop a Christmas Tree.

By their actions, Act-Up powerfully demonstrate that they are the enemies of European peoples and cultures in general, and European homosexuals in particular.
Washington Times 20.09.07

Labels: ,

Wednesday, September 19, 2007

Euro New Right & Sexual Morality

The ENR’s “paganism” entails a naturalism towards mores and sexuality. Unlike still traditionalists, ENR members have a relatively liberated attitude towards sexuality. Thus [Alain de] Benoist had no qualms about giving an interview to Gaie France, which features homoerotic images as well as cultural commentary. ENR members have no desire to impose what they consider the patently unnatural moralism of Judeo-Christianity on sexual relations. However, while relatively more tolerant in principle, they still value strong family life, fecundity, and marriage or relations within one’s own ethnic group. (Their objection to intra-ethnic liaisons would be that the mixture of ethnic groups diminishes a sense of identity. In a world where every marriage was mixed, cultural identity would disappear). They also criticize Anglo-American moralism and its apparent hypocrisy: “ . . . a video depicting a man and woman having sexual intercourse . . . is liable to confiscation by the [British] state. One graphically depicting teenage girls being disembowelled by razor blades affixed to the fingers of a repulsive ghoul, by contrast, tops the rental figures quite lawfully across the land, goes into tour editions, each more disgusting and genuinely obscene than the last, and is not indeed the most unpleasant revelling in blood and gore to sit lawfully on the video shops’ shelves.”[The Scorpion, No. 13: Winter 1989-90, p. 52.] In this, they are closer to a worldly Europe than to a puritanical America obsessed with violence. According to the ENR: “Our ancestral Indo-European culture . . . seems to have enjoyed a healthy natural attitude to processes and parts of the body concerned with the bringing forth of new life, the celebration of pair-bonding love, and the perpetuation of the race.”[The Scorpion, No. 13: Winter 1989-90, p. 51.]

In its desire to create a balanced psychology of sexual relations, the ENR seeks to overcome the liabilities of conventional conservative thought: the perception of conservatives as joyless prudes, and the seemingly ridiculous psychology implied in conventional Christianity. It seeks to address “flesh-and-blood men and women,” not saints. Since some of the Left’s greatest gains in the last few decades have been made as a result of their championing sexual freedom and liberation, the ENR seeks to offer its own counter-ethic of sexual joy. The hope is presumably to nourish persons of the type who can, in Nietzsche’s phrase, “make love alter reading Hegel.” This is also related to the desire for the reconciliation of the intellectual and warrior in one person: the reconciliation of vita contemplative and vita activa.

This naturalism leads the ENR to re-evaluate “the feminine” and reject what it sees as Christianity’s denigration of women. The ENR has begun developing a counter-ethic of feminism which, while respecting women and “the feminine,” rejects the US ideologization of gender by politically-correct feminism. These ideas promise to overcome the poisoned atmosphere of sexual relations and the neopuritanism of radical feminism. “In pre-Christian Europe, amongst the Celts and the Norse for example, women, without in any way renouncing their femininity or seeking to be ersatz men, enjoyed essentially equal rights.”[The Scorpion, No. 13: Winter 1989-90, p. 51.]
Mark Wegiersky
http://www.new-right.org/?p=48#more-48

Labels: , ,

Wednesday, August 29, 2007

My Bonnie Lies Over the Ocean

Jack McConnell, former First Minister of Scotland, is a fine example of the lily-livered, treacherous “New Class” exposed by Michael O'Meara in NEW CULTURE, NEW RIGHT, a paragon amongst the multicultural yellow-bellies that have been chosen to lord over us but whose priorities lie elsewhere

Scotland has some of the worst child-poverty statistics in western Europe, but that won't be bothering this latter-day Mrs. Jellyby. "My two great passions are education and tackling poverty in Africa, so if there is anything I could have chosen to do then it would have been this. It's an absolute dream job." said McConnell, on taking up his new equatorial jolly. Poor Scots are right to feel abandoned by their deracinated NuLab elite.

Rolling up the sleeves

"It's now all about rolling up the sleeves and getting on with assisting us and our government partners in defining a sustainable, scalable and affordable solution to the challenges both countries [Rwanda and Malawi] face in education." said Sir Tom Hunter, McConnell's new employer, who with Bill Clinton heads the Clinton Hunter Development Initiative. If past experience is anything to go by, the only sleeve-rolling that will be taking place is in the bars and bedrooms of plush 5-star hotels in the tropics. Prime Minister Gordon Brown has already indicated that McConnell will become High Commissioner to Malawi when the post becomes vacant in 2009. According to Brown, Scotland has developed a “special relationship” with Malawi, which is probably news to the average Scotsman, or indeed the current occupant of the White House.

We don't want your sort here

Now, hilariously, it seems that McConnell is not welcome in Malawi, at least for a substantial proportion of the population. "To have a man who supports gay rights to come to Malawi is dangerous for us," said Mr Jumbe [Friday Jumbe, presidential candidate for the main opposition party, the United Democratic Front]. "He can easily use his influence as high commissioner to force legislation and that's my biggest fear.
"I don't want him and I know I am speaking for my party and many legislators that we cannot allow such a person in Malawi."

It's difficult to know where to start listing the objections to such an erroneous statement. For starters, Malawi is a sovereign nation and no foreign pink power can dictate legislation. Given McConnell's previous record of toeing the line, he's hardly likely to provoke a diplomatic incident. And finally, if by some miracle McConnell were able to single-handedly decriminalize homosexuality in Malawi, what fate would befall that far-away country? Will thousands of Malawians be rushing out to purchase imported 12” singles of Gloria Gaynor and the Weather Girls, causing a balance of payments crisis?

Countries like Malawi and Rwanda need to learn they can flourish without the likes of do-gooders such as Clinton, Turner and McConnell dishing out patronage.

Scotsman 27.08.07
Scotsman 15.08.07

Labels: ,

Sunday, July 29, 2007

Homosexual Artist Torches $60,000 Koran

Charles Merrill does his bit for global warming...

Charles Merrill, the out Palm Springs artist who recently gained notoriety for editing the Bible with a black marker and a pair of scissors, recently made a statement against Muslim homophobia by burning an antique Koran valued at $60,000. "The purpose of editing and burning Abrahamic Holy Books is to eliminate homophobic hate," Merrill stated in a press release posted online. "Both ancient books are terrorist manuals."
http://www.advocate.com/news_detail_ektid47752.asp

Labels: , ,

More on Amsterdam Queerbashings



And who's to blame? Not us! - say the Muslims.

“But Rauf Moussad then wonders why the incidence of violence against homosexuals should have increased particularly in the last few years, when Dutch society has been "diverse" for much longer. He believes it is a reaction to the anti-Islamic sentiments that have permeated the parties of the right since the rise of Ayaan Hirsi Ali. And many young Moroccans feel isolated and frustrated, says Mr Moussad.”
www.radionetherlands.nl/curretaffairs/ned070727

Labels: ,

Saturday, July 07, 2007

Queerbashing by Muslims in Amsterdam

Europe continues its violent slide into Balkanization and the maelstrom of multiculturalism. Money quote: “Moroccans in particular sometimes go deliberately looking for gays in order to attack them, according to COC chairman Frank van Dalen.”

THE HAGUE, 05/07/07 - Gay rights organisation COC wants people convicted for assaulting homosexuals banned from entering areas that are known to be frequented by gays.
The Amsterdam police said yesterday that four reports of assault had been received from homosexuals during the past week. Until then, only six reports had been received this year.
COC appealed in the past week for violent incidents to be reported to the police more often after six immigrants beat up two gay men in Amsterdam last Thursday. Five of the six suspects have meanwhile been released from pre-trial custody. They are aged between 15 and 19.
Four of the suspects are Moroccan. Moroccans in particular sometimes go deliberately looking for gays in order to attack them, according to COC chairman Frank van Dalen.
COC has asked Harm Brouwer, the chief of the Public Prosecutors' Office (OM), to ensure that convicted offenders are given court orders to stay out of certain zones such as the Reguliersdwarsstraat in Amsterdam. This is the capital's 'gay street'.
NIS News Bulletin Netherlands

Labels: ,

Saturday, April 07, 2007

Same-sexer/ homosexual versus “gay”

I'm happy to be called a homosexual man: a same-sexer. I don't like being described as “gay”. For me, “gay” means an uncritical, passive acceptance of cosmopolitan consumer capitalism, like a sheep. A silly pink sheep decorated with ribbons and bells and bows.

I prefer to think for myself.

Even worse is LGBTT&I. I don't want to be lumped together with a bunch of in-betweenies like Tinky Winky from the Teletubbies. Or some unisex freak from Dr. Dolittle such as the Pushmi-pullyu which doesn't know whether it's coming or going.

I've got far more in common with a happy straight man, even if he's not “gay”, than a man who wants to chop off his cock.

The politically-correct term “sexual orientation” is just as bad, a Cultural Marxist catch-all that can include pedophiliacs, necrophiliacs or worse (probably involving a Pushmi-pullyu). DOWN WITH “DIVERSITY”!

No wonder “gay” has become a joke; an insult.

Labels:

Tuesday, December 05, 2006

Stonewall and Free Speech

The following is an answer to Stonewall's support for the proposed “offence of incitement to hatred on grounds of sexual orientation”. Stonewall is the British equivalent of the USA's National Gay and Lesbian Task Force (NGLTF):

Does anyone else object to Stonewall's latest attempt to curb free speech?

Unless statements can be construed as DIRECT incitements to violence or murder (e.g. “see that bunch of queers over there – go and beat them up”), they should remain legal.

The great British public aren't so stupid as to believe everything they're told from the pulpit. Christians and Muslims should be allowed to spout off whatever bullshit they like...it only adds to the impression that they are foolish bigots!

As homosexuals we must be robust, and demonstrate that we are FOR free thought and free expression. We don't need to hide behind the hem of the nanny state, crying “unfair! - send for the lawyers” every time some crackpot takes a verbal pop at us. History teaches how easily similar laws can be used against us.

Stonewall are jumping onto the PC bandwagon just at the time when it's running into the ditch. People in this country are realizing that we've had enough of being gagged. All so-called Hate Laws should be scrapped.

The easiest way to level the playing pitch is by scrapping all laws which privilege certain identifiable groups (i.e. the very essence of multicultural theory): it would mean dis-establishment of the Church of England, scrapping the blasphemy laws (which favour Christians), reversing the Incitement to Religious Hatred and Race Relations Acts, abandoning talks with unrepresentative so-called “community leaders” and dropping harsher sentences for crimes deemed “racially-motivated”. Violent crime is violent crime, and should be judged by the level of injury inflicted, not by how much the thuggish perpetrator identifies (or not) with the multicultural shibboleth.

My greatest fear with what Stonewall are proposing is that it will allow Jews, Christians and Muslims to portray us homosexuals as an intolerant, unpopular minority (the opposite of the truth) determined to impose our 'degenerate' morality on the general population. In Scandinavia, bigoted vicars have already been turned into martyrs and been locked up for giving sermons.

Religious zealots will jump with joy if the legal status of certain passages in the Bible (Leviticus), Koran and Hadith become problematic. Ironically, it will provide them with the perfect opportunity for further proselytizing, and at the same time run us down.

More generally, the proposed legislation plays right into the hands of the greedy elite whose policy has always been 'divide and rule'. There is nothing they fear more than a united, clear-seeing, determined population. We must make sure that we are a part of that forward movement, and not allow ourselves to become separated out from our fellows.

Labels:

Monday, November 13, 2006

Candle in the Wind

Elton John suggests a ban of organized religion (Observer, November 12 2006 http://music.guardian.co.uk/pop/story/0,,1942541,00.html).

I'm not so sure that even banning organized religion, drastic though the consequences may be, will solve the problem of religious hatred and homophobia.

After all, Islam and to a lesser extent Christianity are notoriously DISorganized religions, to the extent that they were/ are quite happy to kill members of their own faith for “heresy”, let alone us fags. Protestants and Catholics may have declared a cease-fire in Europe, but the same cannot be said for Sunni and Shi'ite Muslims in Asia, and increasingly over here.

Our cringing, politically correct (at home, though not overseas) government is regularly criticized by Muslims for talking to “representatives” of other, “wrong” groups of Muslims. I almost pity John Reid, Ruth Kelly and the rest for trying to sort out the mess that they themselves have created, by leaving our borders open to mass third world immigration. It seems that however much they try, and talk, and bend over backwards to appease, Home Office ministers just never get it right. How can those that muddled, exasperated multiculturalists attempt to mollify be in any sense described as “organized”?

I reckon the problem (and their problem with homosexuality) goes far deeper; to the nature of Semitic monotheism itself: the willingness to accept revealed Truth, incontestable sacred scriptures and “chosen races”. These true-believers can, and do, fragment into smaller and smaller groupings – with each groupuscule claiming a monopoly on Truth – yet individually they remain as homophobic and ridiculous as ever. By abandoning reason for faith, they surrender their capacity to evolve.

Labels:

Saturday, October 07, 2006

Mind Your Language

The expression “appropriate language” is an example of the standard, thoughtless and vacuous language we have all been encouraged to speak over the past 30 years or so. It's exactly the sort of politically correct (cultural Marxist) “celebration of diversity” that makes us sound like prissy Victorian schoolmarms and which the indigenous population (young people in particular) are increasingly reacting against. For example, witness the riots this week in Windsor, or the largely unreported riots in Preston and further afield in Belgium. It is the language that forces us to describe ourselves in ugly, transitory acronyms (LGBT&T, anyone?) which are ultimately false because they lump us together with seemingly self-obsessed freaks to whom we have absolutely nothing in common.

Our country and continent are finally waking up to the unpleasant fact of how we have been betrayed by the treacherous elite who rule the West. As homosexuals we must ensure that we are not perceived as being on their loosing side; i.e. as being supporters of their multi-cultural mess, rather than a part of the solution. Especially when multi-culturalism works directly against our own best interests by pandering to such people as alien evangelical Christians and Muslims with their blood-curdling and irrational condemnations of homosexuality.

Labels:

Saturday, August 26, 2006

PARIS SHOCKWAVES

Most gay men are familiar with the hagiography surrounding the 1969 Stonewall Riots in Manhattan, and many readers of this magazine are aware of the debt owed by Stonewall and Gay Liberation to the political and cultural upheavals of the late 60s, exemplified by Paris May ’68 and the birth of the New Left. But most homosexuals, particularly in Britain and America, do not know of a group founded in Paris during this turbulent time called GRECE (Groupement de Recherche et d’Etudes pour la Civilisation Europeenne). This group is the most significant intellectual current to have sprung during the evenements of Paris 1968, and destined to have an effect more world-shattering than Revolutionary Paris 1789. It stood in opposition, not just to the liberal-capitalist establishment, but also to the old Marxist and the then-emerging New Left. In this essay, I will outline some of the unique features of GRECE and its European New Right (ENR, also known as European Identitarian) successors, particularly some of the anti-monotheistic ideology it shares with humanism. I will also explain how homosexuals were gravely mistaken in ignoring the ENR and how instead the blandishments of the Gay-Liberationist-hucksters led us away from our Western civilization, our antecedents; Plato, Hadrian, Michelangelo and Tchaikovsky, turned our folk community into strangers, and deposited us in the heart of the enemy camp.

GRECE shared some of the concerns of the New Left; the danger of mass society, consumerism and environmental degradation, but this superficial agreement hid a yawning chasm between their fundamental positions. While the New Left maintained the fiction of “abstract man” (more on this below), the ENR followed the physical anthropologist Arnold Gehlen in asserting than man is a biocultural being: although culture and biology are two different things, in man they form an indivisible unity. Further, man can never be more than an individuated expression of his native culture. A man may escape his culture physically, through exile, but never in thought or spirit.

Judeo-Christianity

As with men, so with cultures. As in postmodern theory, civilizations are seen as unique and quite literally incomparable, because there is no common frame of reference by which to compare them. But unlike postmodernists, European identitarians believe that real cultures, like real individuals, are rooted in a particular location at a particular time, from which they grow organically. As with any set of cultures growing in a laboratory, random contact is far more likely to lead to contamination than cross-fertilization, and is best avoided. This is the ENR’s first major reason for objecting to Judeo-Christianity. The second major objection is that Judeo-Christianity is the product of a civilization especially hostile to our own.

“We come from the people of the Iliad and the Edda, not the Bible.”, so says Pierre Krebs of the German Thule-Seminar ENR organization. The usurpation of native philosophy and polytheism by alien monotheism has thwarted Europe’s ability to truly be itself – a condition Martin Heidegger has called inauthenticity. Homosexuals should be familiar with the idea of inauthenticity as it describes the condition of the closet. J. Edgar Hoover and Roy Cohn just were two closet-cases famously corrupted because of their inability to truly be themselves. The spiritual inauthenticity of our continent, argue some New Rightists, has resulted in pathological continental quests. First the Crusades into the Near East, western Europe’s first overseas kingdom, then the subjection of America while Europe tore herself apart in the religious wars of the Seventeenth Century, all driven by a Messianic monotheism.

That Europe had been so heavily influenced by alien religions was serious, that they were a product of Semitic civilization was, for Europe, a disaster. This is because of a formative difference between Indo-European and Semitic civilizations. Indo-European cultures originated within a warrior class, or Mannerbund, which imparted Martial values of truth, honour and beauty in the civilizations of Greece, Rome and the nations created by the Celts, Germans and Slavs. Semitic civilization, on the other hand, came from a domestic society of patriarchal nuclear families, governed primarily by material considerations. A clash of civilizations was inevitable when Hellenism, in the person of Alexander the Great, encroached eastward. Sexuality, along with art and philosophy was a front in this cultural war; the Greeks, with a high civilization descended from the Mannerbund, had a relaxed attitude toward homosexuality. For the Jews with their close-knit families and the diktats of their all-powerful god, this was anathema and something they could define themselves against. Into this closed, paranoid atmosphere Christianity was fostered, later introducing its mean homophobia to Rome.

Imperium

Describing itself as meta-political, the ENR has a broad range of themes apart from its anti-Judeo-Christianity. Most important of these is the idea of Imperium, a united Europe, including Russia, which could stretch to the Pacific (territorial extent varies amongst different New Right groups). This Imperium will not be achieved by military conquest but by nations voluntary opting-in. Above all, it’s political and social structure will follow a traditional pattern, based on the researches of Indo-Europeanists like Carl Jung, Georges Dumezil and Stephen Flowers, with the civilization of the Imperium trisected into complimentary functions: first function, leadership; second function, power and technics; third function, production.

This political structure is integral yet flexible. For instance, my own politics derives partly from the volunteerist State described in Robert Heinlein’s STARSHIP TROOPERS, with leaders (first function) elected by citizen volunteers (second function) who have elevated themselves from the producing and consuming mass (third function).

ENR thinkers agree that the Imperium should be polytheistic, autarkic, and that subsidiarity (appropriate local control) must be a major principle. The Imperium may be declared pagan, but free-thinking and the creative imagination will be paramount. Pagans have no “sacred scriptures” or “holy books” that contain the literal word of god, and to which they must sacrifice their powers of reasoning. My own cannon of “sacred books” is drawn from three millennia of Indo-European literature, from Homer and Virgil to the Grail legends, Marlowe, Shakespeare, Hegel, Darwin and Nietzsche (all the writers sneeringly referred to in Anglo-American academia as “Dead White Males”). Philosophical non-duality is an important Indo-European worldview, expressed in Hindu Vedanta, Classical Neo-Platonism and European Nineteenth Century Romanticism, and which undermines all religious absolutism.

Economics is considered by New Rightists at a lower, more materialistic and animalistic (i.e. third function) level than Politics. Distributism is proposed as a solution to global consumer capitalism, although my own preference is for an authoritarian socialist command economy.

Abstract Man

European Identitarians are not hostile to humanists or agnostics. Atheist Vikings were known and respected as “trua a matt sinn ok megin”, which means something along the lines of sufficient unto themselves, or relying on their own power, in Old Norse. Interestingly, the German Musculinist movement (see below) was to use a similar slogan in the Nineteenth Century, derived from the Anarchism of Max Stirner, and novelist Ernst Junger explored the concept in the Twentieth. The humanism of Marsilio Ficino, Botticelli and the Florentine Renaissance originated in Neo-Platonism. It is liberal humanism, the humanism developed by John Locke when his individualistic Protestantism combined with Descarte’s materialism, that the ENR has identified as the universal solvent which dissolves all cultural bonds. Like out-of-control nanobots in a sci-fi nightmare, liberalism threatens to render Earth’s diversity into an atomized, undifferentiated gloop.

John Locke formalized the two main pillars upon which liberalism rests, the Jachin and Boaz which support the temple to capitalist freemasonic individualism, where abstract man stands resplendent. The first principle was the idea of the supremacy of the individual human over everything else in nature. The second was that each individual is, initially at least, a “tabula rasa”, each man is born equally blank and equally interchangeable, like a widget.

Locke’s second principle is scientifically-demonstrable nonsense. Modern genetics and common sense have given short shrift to any lingering belief in a “tabula rasa”. Some European New Right thinkers have gone much further, daring to speculate on the possibility of inherited thought-processes and characteristics (what Michael Moynihan has called ‘meta-genetics’), and even how this could shed new light on traditional European beliefs such as re-incarnation. Meanwhile, in Anglo-American academia, “Queer Studies” professors are paid thousands to drone on about totally scientifically-discredited ideas of “social constructionism” derived from Derrida and Foucault, who in turn got their ideas from the discredited Marxist-Freudean Frankfurt School, themselves a major source of inspiration to the “Gay Liberationists” of the early 70s. Thus another circle is added to Hell, spiralling down the pit of the Kali Yuga, while the queer studies academics continue, like medieval scholars, to count the number of fairies they can fit on the end of a dildo.

As for Locke’s first principle: I would argue if there’s one thing in nature that’s greater than the individual, then it is a collective of individuals working for a common purpose and aspiring to a higher level of existence, what in common speech is called a civilization. If it’s a contest between me and what I know and can do, and Western civilization and what it knows and can do, Western civilization wins hands down. Everything I think and know is mediated by the fact that I belong to this particular civilization at this particular point in time, as Hegel, Heidegger and Gehlen have stated. This of course is the heart of the argument between liberals and the New Right; which has more legitimacy, the individual or the civilization? Liberals cling to the belief in an abstract man – Locke’s widget – who floats naked and free in space, transcending time and civilizations, but who carries with him a folio of Universal Human Rights. From whence this miraculous folio came, no-one asks. New European Rightists would say that it was thrust into his hand (or wherever) by Moses, Jesus, Rousseau, Voltaire, Locke, Hume and Adam Smith. “Abstract man” now at least has a secular trinity to whom he can genuflect: Ghandi, Martin Luther King and Nelson Mandela, with Princess Diana and Mary Robinson taking turns to hover in the background as the Virgin Mary.

Gay perversity

After the 1967 de-criminalization in the UK, homosexuals faced a choice between re-integrating with European civilization in a way not possible for 1,500 years (i.e. since the Jewish heresy of Christianity infiltrated the Roman Empire), or siding with the Marxist, Maoist, New Left enemies of European civilization, the ones who brought “Gay Liberation” from Manhattan to London. Instead of taking up our traditional responsibility of defending and glorifying our civilization, as did so many homosexuals in the past like Frederick II and von Humboldt, we supported of those who would destroy that very same civilization.

It is poignantly ironic that gay men were tricked by multiculturalists into allowing successive waves of monotheistic, Abrahamic fundamentalism into Europe, such as African evangelist churches and Islam, just as gays were escaping from under the dead weight of the corpse of Christianity.

Marxist cultural indoctrination (ironically called “consciousness-raising”) ensured homosexuals were given a politically correct version of their history, especially in relation to the significant developments in Nineteenth Century Germany. The Masculinist movement (to which most contemporary homosexuals identified, it seems) has been air-brushed out of gay history, while their main opponent, the Jewish psychiatrist Magnus Hirschfeld with his laughably bizarre explanations for homosexuality (as a “third sex”) is honoured in sombre buildings and worthy institutes.

The slipperiness of the multicultural agenda for homosexuals – to identify ourselves as a minority in order to unite with other minorities against a supposedly hostile dominant culture – stands exposed. We were wafted by the undemanding siren-sounds of the jungle to an exotic paradise of limitless consumption, dreaming of an illusory peace and acceptance bedecked in rainbow flags which sparkle with a tinsel diversity. Beyond Sleeping Beauty’s tower, on the plains of Europe, others are building ugly stunted new towers, spires and minarets, each broadcasting a screech of homophobia that would cause even the jealous Johns, Knox and Calvin, to blanch.

Now “gay” is more a playground insult than a serious description of sexuality and the meaningless rainbow flags have since been appropriated by various anti-war groups, some of whom, if they knew the gay associations with the flag, would trample it in the dirt.

For more information
books
Against Democracy and Equality. Tomislav Sunic (Noontide Press, 2004)
New Culture, New Right. Michael O’Meara (1stBooks, Bloomington 2004)

Labels:

Monday, July 03, 2006

Serena’s Squiffy Suggestion

So Sir Ian McKellen thinks we should replace the word same-sexer (homosexual in Greek/ Latin, or “Gay” if you prefer, which I don’t) with the noun “gorgeous” to describe ourselves.

Unfortunately I had switched on C4 on Friday too early to catch The Simpsons (there are some interesting observations to be made about Monty Burns’ sidekick Weyland Smithers, homosexuality and Germanic mythology which I won’t go into here) and instead caught Sir Ian making his stupid comment on the Richard and “Flasher” Judy Show, which he repeated the next day at London EuroPride. I’ll have more to say about the major discrepancies in the audience participation figures at the end of this piece, and since I’m still on daytime TV, I hope Paul O’Grady makes a full and lasting recovery as soon as possible.

Here is a dictionary definition of “gorgeous”, which is an Old French word (as is “gorge”): splendid, richly-decorated, magnificent, ornate. All this may be perfect for a diamond-and-pearl encrusted La Patsy Bouffant and her fabulous pussies, or even yourself, but it doesn’t describe me in my white T-shirt and jeans, and neither I suspect does it describe the vast majority of readers of these boards (the Gods help us if I’m wrong!).

Not only is the word “gorgeous” bad enough (an inaccurate joke) but it shares associations with even more unsavoury characters. And I mean ideas far worse than George Galloway in a Lycra cat-suit.

1. From the Old French “gorge” meaning throat, it has gone into the language as the act of gorging, excessive consuming; gluttony. Much as a leech is engorged with blood from some poor sod who falls into the Limpopo, or a boa-constrictor is engorged after swallowing whole a baby sloth. It emphasises the worst aspects of gay consumerism.
2. From it’s meaning of “narrow passage” it brings up a bundle of obvious sexual metaphors, from sodomy (which most same-sexers never indulge in) to cock-sucking. “Engorged” is a favourite word of pornographers…we all know why.
3. Gore: Dried, dirty blood. Gouge (very nasty).

Wearily pursuing these unpleasant associations even further, I looked in
Roget’s Thesaurus, and found this:

361 (colourful).19: gorgeous, gay (well, you got that right, Sir Ian), florid, gay coloured, gaudy
902 (ostentation).20 gaudy, tawdry, gorgeous, garish, loud, blatant, glaring, flaring, screaming, obtrusive, vulgar, crude, meretricious (from Latin meaning befitting a harlot).

Well, how would you like to be associated with all that in the general public’s mind? I know it would make me very angry. Sir Ian McKellen had the luxury of waiting until his privileged middle ages before coming out, and as a Shakespearean actor you’d think he’d be a bit more sensitive to words and their associations. I think he should be forced to gorge himself on an English dictionary.

As for the Europride figures, they seemed tiny even compared with London Prides in the 80s-90s, and much smaller than the previous continental versions. Police estimated 40,000, and why would Sir Ian Blair lie? It’s not as if we’re all Islamic Jihadists whose apparent support the police would naturally want to suppress. We’re on the other side.

According to the Europride organisers’ site, 750,000 showed up on the streets. That’s almost 19 people for every one counted by the cops. Where did the rest go? Was it the Dr. Who Scribble Monster? If they’d covered the 1934 Nuremberg rally, they’d have asserted that precisely seven Nazis turned up. And two chimps in Hitler Youth uniforms, one of whome doubled up as Minister for Propaganda Goebbels!

Alisdair
Delenda est Carthago!

Labels:

Wednesday, June 21, 2006

Proud Slavs or New World Order Slaves: Update

On June 5 2006 Council of Europe Human Rights Commissioner Thomas Hammarberg said the Moscow authorities were right to break up the Moscow Gay Parade. In this he is supported by Moscow gay activist Ed Mishin.

Labels: ,

Saturday, May 20, 2006

Proud Slavs or New World Order Slaves?

“Homophobia” in eastern Europe

Much has been written recently about attacks by east European nationalists on “gays” and other minorities, exemplified by the fierce war of words over the Moscow “Gay Pride” Parade at the end of this month. As of writing, the ban decreed by Moscow Mayor Yuri Luzhkov on May 18 remains in force.

It's worth examining the issues underlying these attacks and avoid coming to the sort of glib conclusions reached by well-heeled, self-serving human rights lawyers and pompous journalists from their plush offices in London, Geneva, Vienna, Stockholm or New York.

Western plutocratic subversion

Russia has a history of being viciously targeted by the West's plutocratic elite since before the (non-Russian) Bolshevik Revolution of 1917. Winston Churchill resolved to spread the chaos by sending British troops to Russia in 1918; more recently behind-the-scenes string-pullers such as billionaire George Soros have been instrumental in the “color revolutions” of the former Soviet Republics of Georgia and Ukraine. The staged, pro-Western rainbow revolutions of these capitalist agitators hit the buffers after attempting to dislodge the popular government of Alexander Lukashenko in Belarus. The manipulators in the West know their time is running short. Theirs is the frantic writhing around of a slug in a Cellini salt cellar.

Once again the snivelling worms of the New World Order are injecting their poison into the heart of Mother Russia, only this time the pretext is “human rights” - specifically Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual and Transsexual rights. The constant hectoring from smug, grand-standing liberals in the West may well over time make the lives of ordinary homosexuals in eastern Europe worse, not better. Homosexuals are in danger of becoming wrongly perceived as a fifth column, undermining the integrity of nation and culture, when in fact and throughout history the very opposite is true.

Demographics in decline

The hypocritical promoters of human rights know that Russia and other eastern European nations are experiencing an unprecedented demographic crisis. Data from Rosstat, the state statistics service, reveals that the population of the Russian Federation has decreased by 5 million in the last ten years, and the mortality rate exceeds the birthrate by more than 50 percent. As a result, some are predicting that the population of Russia may shrink to half of what it is now by the middle of the century. More modestly, the United Nations has the population decreasing by a third by 2050.

During his important, hour-long, seventh annual state-of-the-nation address delivered a week ago (May 10 2006) in the Kremlin's Marble Hall, President Vladimir Putin stressed the importance of increasing Russia's birth-rate. In an interview published in Moscow News two days later, Aleksandr Solzhenitsyn said, “'Saving the nation' - numerically, physically, and morally - is the utmost task for the state. All measures to raise living standards - housing, diet, healthcare, education, morality, etc. - are in effect designed to save the nation. This is an overriding priority”.

In this concern for the very survival of Russia, Putin and Solzhenitsyn are merely reflecting the overwhelming concerns of ordinary Russians. “Demographics is an acute problem in Russia, and it's discussed by everybody” says a young Siberian professional interviewed by Graeme Smith for Canada's Globe and Mail (21.04.06).

Neither President Putin nor Solzhenitsyn blamed homosexuality for this catastrophic decline, but others have, including Serafim Melentyev, head of the World Development Institute, who has backed the position of the Russian Orthodox Church. "Advertising homosexuality taking into consideration the disastrous demographic situation in the country is equal to suicide, as the Patriarch said. In my opinion, this is the best wording...Today Russians are dying. And it is evident that homosexual families cannot have children." Melentyev said at a recent press conference in Moscow.

This position is echoed by Maxim Obukhov, head of the Orthodox Zhizn (Life) medical and enlightenment center, who said at the same press conference, "That is why it is unacceptable to advertise homosexuality anywhere. Because the number of people born homosexuals is quite low. A lot of people become involved through the mass media and various public organizations."

Muddled Thinking

It is this muddled thinking which needs to be challenged. Sadly, homosexual activists and their Western backers are ignoring this issue which is of such vital importance to the Russian people, and are instead concentrating on their trivial, childish demands to parade through the streets of Moscow to the beat of second-rate Pet Shop Boys-style French warbler Desireless.

Homosexuality and birth-rates

To me the notion that male homosexuality is detrimental to a nation's reproduction has always been unconvincing. A fertile woman produces one egg once a month, whereas men produce millions of sperm daily. Population is dependent on the number of fertile women who have the opportunity to conceive, not on what may or may not happen to men's excess sperm. By far the most important factor for reproduction rates is economics; whether a woman has adequate financial support during pregnancy and after. Rich industrialized countries such as Germany, France, Italy and Japan are beginning to understand this basic fact once again by increasing financial and other benefits for young mothers. The surest way to decrease population is by forcing unwilling women into the workplace just in order to survive, as happens in Britain. This is deliberate NuLab policy, and their destructive, genocidal policy needs to be exposed and reversed.

Abortion rates would drop if single mothers were guaranteed respect and a reasonably comfortable life by society. They should also have the option of handing over their new-born to be brought up with care and dignity by the state.

In contrast, the number of homosexual men in society has always been a small percentage, irrelevant to overall birth-rates. Homosexuality is not learned behaviour; like heterosexuality it is innate. How homosexuals are treated by fellow citizens is totally irrelevant to population growth or decline. But it is relevant to how far that culture may progress on a technological, political and artistic level, and how successful society is at defending itself.

Despite the arguments above, nothing is more important than the re-generation of the race, least of all homosexual self-gratification. So in the unlikely last resort that European homosexuals are called upon to “do their duty” - they must comply for their own sakes and for the sake of future generations.

Given the legitimate concerns of the Russian people, the Western emphasis on “gay rights” appears perverse and almost deliberately designed to antagonize. Russian homosexuals themselves, perhaps the majority, question the wisdom of such a parade. Activist Alexei Khordorkovsky is quoted in the liberal Moscow Times (19.05.06) as saying, “We don't have gay society in this country. It's not good timing...This will only consolidate forces against us”. What good is a bunch of self-indulgent exhibitionists flouncing through the streets of Moscow in their shocking pink feather boas and lime-green Lycra shorts – how is this meant to win over the general Russian population?

Is it any wonder that eastern European nationalists are beginning to perceive homosexuals, rightly or wrongly, as part of an “Alien Supremacist” agenda, determined to destroy their nation and culture? It is to this same alien agenda that millions of Russians and other Europeans have been forced to pay with their lives during the last century. Behind the apparently noble facade of liberal-individualist concern for humanity they see lurking the monstrous, Lovecraftian shapes of the usual suspects. Prominent amongst the inciters of gay exhibitionism are former French Culture Minister and socialist Jack Lang and Terry Davis from the pain-in-the-arse Council of Europe, whose commitment to true eastern European self-determination (or indeed true homosexual self-determination) is open to question. Russian nationalists on the other hand have no wish to see their cities mimicking the crime-ridden, riot-torn multicultural maelstroms of western Europe and north America such as London, Paris, New York or Los Angeles, with their festering pockets of impoverishment. They don't need lectures from notorious apologists for Muslim queer-bashers like the New York-based Human Rights Watch.

A Way Forward

Famous Russian homosexuals fall into the usual pattern, repeated across Europe, of excelling in the fields of either high culture (Tchaikovsky, Diaghilev, Nijinsky) or the military (Grand Duke Sergei Alexandrovich). As an explorer of Mongolia, Nikolai Przhevalsky, like Alexander von Humboldt before him, can be imagined as combining and synthesizing the best of both worlds.

Russian homosexuals must stand four-square behind Putin and others' laudable efforts to increase Russia's birth-rate, and reject pressure from pompous spokesmen in the West to conform to bankrupt liberalism, capitalism and excess individualism. Eastern European homosexuals need to forge new alliances with non-Christian, pagan nationalists and European Identitarians. If no local non-Christian nationalist, pagan or European Identitarian group exists, then it's up to homosexuals to create one. It is, after all, one of the things we're meant to be good at. We need to re-assert our true identity as defenders of and contributors to Aryan culture.

Russia – Europe's Motherland

More generally, western Europe needs to look afresh at its fraught relationship with the east. All (indigenous) Europeans are in a profound sense Russians. Southern Russia was the location of the revolution in European thought which later came to be identified with Bronze Age Aryan culture. It is where Europeans first encountered and domesticated the horse, which was to play a major role in Aryan myth, legend and culture. It is where something as basic as the wheel and wheeled transportation was invented, and modern European culture is inconceivable without Russia. Theirs is a magnificent civilization that pre-dates by centuries Christian interference. For more, see my ARYAN ORIGINS essay.

The steppes of southern Russia are the most likely location for the dawning realization of the unique Faustian spirit of European Man. It was here, after traversing the continent from the Atlantic coast at the end of the last Ice Age, where he first beheld the vista of endless steppes, endless land, stretching forth before him. The contrast between that and his previous environment of dense, dark, impenetrable (at least to stone-age axes) forests of central Europe could not have been greater. Here, in present-day Russia, a sense of limitlessness, of infinity, was actualized in the European psyche. In nobler times this consciousness of infinity was primarily a spiritual awareness, as evident in Aryan mythology. In our own age, the rusting Iron Age, this splendid vision has been corrupted into a sense of purely material limitlessness; an erroneous desire to amass as much money and as many material goods as possible, to the obvious detriment of our culture, home continent and planet.

Today, a powerful synergy exists between eastern and western Europe, with Russia providing skills and energy (Gazprom etc.) and western Europe providing wealth, technology and manpower; the fruits of centuries of living in close proximity in city and nation states. Ironically, migration within Europe today is from east to west. In time this will change. The greatest opportunities for development of raw materials, land and ultimately hope lie to the east.

Russia is a European nation. It is the only major European nation outside the European Union. This is intolerable, for cultural, geo-political and economic reasons, and Russia should be invited immediately to join and take a leading role in the European Union (and its successors). With the resurgence of Aryan spirituality across our continent, Russia will once again be at the vanguard of our European family of nations.

Labels: ,

Thursday, May 18, 2006

Chris Smith – Failure of the Test

The Rt. Hon. Chis Smith, NuLab's former Culture Minister, is the latest liberal to bemoan the decline of the West. As a gay Christian socialist he fails to understand that Europe is great DESPITE Christianity and its bastard offspring, liberal individualism. His proposed solution – yet more liberal individualism – is guaranteed to finally destroy our civilization.

Smith and Richard Koch have a new book out – SUICIDE OF THE WEST. In it they propose that the West has succeeded for 6 major reasons: Christianity, Optimism, Science, Economic Growth, Liberalism and Individualism. It's a mystery how it took two men to come up with this drivel. Richard Koch is a “management consultant” and previous author of trite self-help manuals in the tradition of Dale Carnegie's HOW TO WIN FRIENDS AND INFLUENCE PEOPLE, only not so original.

Let's see how Smith & Koch's analysis stands up to by far the greatest current threats to European cultural integrity; resurgent Islam and environmental degradation:

Christianity - How this weak religion preaching universalism, loving your enemy and turning the other cheek will save us from Islam is anyone's guess. The Christian establishment in Britain increasingly champions the 'rights' of immigrants and refugees above those of the indigenous population. Only last month, Cardinal Cormac Murphy-O'Connor held a rally for illegal immigrants in front of Westminster Cathedral where he declared, "as far as the Catholic Church is concerned, you are Londoners". Meanwhile Belgian churches provide sanctuary to illegal third world Muslim refugees (“sans papiers”) who pray to Allah in the aisles (http://www.brusselsjournal.com/node/1064), with the support of Catholic bishops.

Optimism – complacency more like! (see Economic Growth, below)

Science – Western science grew out of a pagan outlook, first in Ancient Greece, then more recently with the re-discovery of pagan thinking and knowledge during the Renaissance. Newton and Darwin may ostensibly have been Christian (at first, at least), but Newtonian physics and Darwinian evolution owe nothing to the Bible and everything to the open, progressive thinking encouraged by European paganism – the Faustean/ Promethean Spririt.

Economic Growth – The very last thing this planet needs is more “economic growth” in it's present consumer-capitalist form. Smith and Koch would have us gasping for polluted air while drowning in a rising sea of toxic filth.

Liberalism – The profound error of liberalism – the reign of quantity against quality - is too vast a subject to tackle in a couple of sentences. Either you get it, or you don't. Smith and Koch don't.

Individualism – here's the nonsensical notion of the Tabula Rasa revived. Real individuals are always the products of particular cultures and communities, and it is those cultural communities alone which can give meaning and definition to the individual. To be fully human (e.g. to speak a language, appreciate art etc.) we must be part of a culture, which always takes precedence over us as individuals.

What's so galling about all this is that Chris Smith, Baron of Finsbury, was in a position, at least for a while, to be able to do something practical. He had power as a Cabinet Minister, and he squandered it. Only now are we beginning to understand how fast the downward spiral to destruction accelerated during Blair's first Cabinet 1997-2001, during Chris Smith's watch. Smith is as much in the dark as he ever was.

Labels: ,

Tuesday, April 04, 2006

Hans Bluher and the Wandervogel

Text of HANS BLUHER AND THE WANDERVOGEL talk from sixth New Right meeting in London, February 2006.

Good afternoon comrades,

This afternoon I will be talking about the neglected figure of Hans Bluher, a little about his life, the intellectual tradition from whence he came, how he revolutionized that tradition, and finally a little on his influence and potential influence.

Hans Bluher championed the cultural significance of homosexuality and the Mannerbund. He won a widespread following, first with readers of Adolf Brand’s DER EIGENE and the nascent German youth movement, notably the Wandervogel, then later with the State.

Bluher was born in Freiburg in Schlesien in 1888. His birthday was yesterday, 17 February, when he would have been 118 years old. In 1912 he was the first man to write a history of the Wandervogel – the contemporary German youth movement. His history was published as a series of three pamphlets, the third of which was called DIE DEUTSCHE WANDERVOGELBEWEGUNG ALS EROTISCHES PHANOMEN. In 1913 he set up the Jung Wandervogel with Wilhelm Jansen, which, unlike most of the rest of the Wandervogel, was male-only. In 1917 he wrote the first volume of his most important book, outlining his masculinist theory in DIE ROLLE DER EROTIK IN DER MANNLICHEN GESELLSCHAFT: Eine Theorie der Menschlichen Staatsbildung, followed two years later with the second volume. As Bluher said at the time, “Before this book the idea of basing man's existence in the State on Eros has never been coherently pursued”. During the Nazi period he was subject to a Schreibverbot, and died peacefully in Berlin in 1955.

Bluher is generally though of as within the masculinist, or men's movement tradition of thought, but in fact he represents a major break, or development. In Germany at the turn of the last century, there were three main groupings within the men's movement:

Firstly, the intellectual tradition derived from Otto Weininger and the teaching tradition from Dr. Gustav Wyneken, which Bluher was to revolutionize.

Second, the Gemeinschaft der Eigenen (Community of the Self-Owners/ Special) founded officially by Adolf Brand in 1902 and which published its own magazine, Der Eigene, from 1899-1931. Brand and Der Eigene championed the anarchism of Max Stirner, as well as Bluher's theories about the decisive role of the Mannerbund – ancient warrior-band – in the creation of the State. Of course, no-one ever argued that these Mannerbund were exclusively homosexual, simply that homosexuality was not the moral issue it was to become with the arrival of Judeo-Christianity. Wilhelm Jansen, who co-founded the Gemeinschaft with Brand, was introduced to the Wandervogel by Bluher, where he later became an important leader.

The third part of the men's movement was grouped around the romantic poet Stefan George's Cosmic Circle in the Schwabing suburb of Munich, and included such figures as Ludwig Klages and Alfred Schuler. They idealized the Emperor Hadrian's lover Antinous and took their view of history from Johann Jakob Bachofen's Mutterrecht, espousing a prehistoric, matriarchal society. The Cosmic Circle was to have an international impact via D.H. Lawrence.

In the men's movement intellectual tradition, Otto Weininger was the first of these masculinists, whose influential book GESLECHT UND CHARACTER (SEX AND CHARACTER) was written as a reaction against Bachofen’s DAS MUTTERRECHT. Bachofen, like anthropologist Marija Gimbutas more recently, had proposed an original matriarchal pre-historic culture in Europe. Instead, Weininger ascribed gender characteristics from Absolute Manhood to Absolute Womanhood to different nations. Weininger also suggested a complimentary/ supplementary theory of desire which ultimately derived from Plato; he develops the idea of an algebra of sexual attraction. Weininger killed himself in Beethoven's house the same year that his book was published, in 1903, while his book gained in notoriety. Ford Maddox Ford remembers SEX AND CHARACTER as one of the most sensational books of the early Twentieth Century, which was still being discussed under hushed breaths in the polite salons of European capitals three years after publication. It was studied by Dietrich Eckart, ended up on Hitler's bookshelves, and Julius Evola provided an introduction to the 1956 Italian edition. A rather unusual audience for a Viennese Jew! SEX AND CHARACTER provoked Evola to write his own METAPHYSICS OF SEX two years later. Weininger’s views can be summed up in his following quote, “for true sexual union it is necessary that there come together a complete male and a complete female”.

Heinrich Schurtz, author of the best-seller ALTERKLASSEN UND
MANNERBUNDE (1902) was a major contributor to the men's movement.
In this comparative cultural study Schurtz expounded his theory of the dual primary impulses in man, the sexual and the social drive.

Weininger was followed by Benedict Friedlaender, whose most important book DIE RENAISSANCE DES EROS URANIOS (1904) condemned Plato for the separate categorizations of homosexual and heterosexual, as well as the “erotic monopoly of women and the priesthood”. Friedlaender represents the last, failed attempt to reconcile patriarchy and the bourgeois family with homo or bi-sexuality, as in the Hellenic ideal.

Bluher’s significant break with previous Masculinists and sexologists was on two major fronts, partly as a result of the men's movement's encounter with Freud, and partly a result of his re-interpretations of Heinrich Schurtz. Bluher unsurprisingly was highly critical of Freud, with whom he corresponded, and declared in answer to Freud’s theory of repression that, “The repression of sexuality does not result from culture, but the reverse, culture results from the repression of sexuality. To be human and to have culture are identical.” According to Andrew Hewitt’s POLITICAL INVERSIONS, it was this encounter with Freud, and not Bluher’s on-going involvement with political philosophy, that proved decisive.

Hans Bluher abandoned theories of sexuality based on either biology, or on complimentary or supplementry mathematics grounded in the male-female duality. Instead, Bluher went back to basics and insisted on a single unified consciousness as being the source of sexuality.

For Bluher, it is sexuality – the putative biological origin – that is an abstraction, and eros – the cultural facts of desire – that proves the sole concrete ground for analysis. Of course, this approach disarms the objection that homosexuality is “against nature.” To quote Bluher:

“It is not something that needs to be explained, but rather something that – as eros – makes explanation and meaning possible.”
“Eros is a meaningful and meaning-constitutive phenomenon that can be reduced neither to mere symptom, nor to biology.”
“Whenever sexuality makes itself noticed in man it has already been taken up into the workings of eros and thereby acquired a meaning.”
“Sexuality creates (indeed must create) two fully developed, originary and indestructible types of man; one desires men, the other, women.”
“Eros is the philosophy of the particular.”

This assertion of the supremacy of culture stresses the first major gap that had opened up between Bluher and previous Masculinists, and at the same time, brings Bluher into line with modern European New Right thinking, especially with the philosophical anthropologist Arnold Gehlen’s notion of the individual as being bio-cultural, an inseparable mix of race and culture. Bluher rejected previous biological theories from liberals like Karl Ulrichs, and Magnus Hirschfeld's Scientific Humanitarian Committee as well as Masculinists like Weininger and Friedlander

Hans Bluher versus Fred Flintstone

Bluher’s second break with previous sexologists and political philosophers was his privileging of the Mannerbund: by undermining the accepted male/ female polarity he destroyed the foundations of the liberal state, wedded as it was (and is) to domestic bourgeois respectability. For convenience, I like to refer to the liberal view of history and evolution, where the rational liberal individual springs fully-formed as if from thin air as the “Fred Flintstone” argument.
According to social contract theory, and Hanna-Barbera cartoons, individuals in the original State of Nature are rational, autonomous and self-interested. So Fred decides to form a Social Contract with his equally rational neighbours, including Barney Rubble. [The analogy isn't quite exact, in that Fred is a worker in a quarry rather than as an agrarian worker-owner, but Fred still lives in a market society much like our own.] It is this grotesque cartoon figure from the fetid imaginations of Jean-Jaques Rousseau, John Locke and Adam Smith that has been the target of successful pot-shots by anti-liberals from Charles Maurras to the New Right, but only Hans Bluher has the audacity and logic to target both Fred AND Wilma.
Bluher rejected this notion that Aryan culture was created spontaneously by domestic individuals and nuclear families like Fred and Wilma, Betty and Barney or Pebbles and Bamm-Bamm. Instead he advanced the idea of the Mannerbund – the warrior band – as the principle catalyst for the formation of societal structure and the State. Further, Bluher declared that the State was an expression of “Objective Will”. As he said, “The State is not simply the the social construction placed on nature, but rather the political phenomenon which itself defines a specifically human nature.”

However, he did accept that other, non-Aryan civilizations, notably the Semitic, may have originated from the domestic nuclear family, and have been stamped accordingly. Julius Evola was to take this idea and run with it.

For proof of his argument, Bluher cited Sparta, the sacred Seven Hundred of Thebes and chivalric knights, squires and Templars, whose echo across the centuries can be heard in Wagner's PARSIFAL. Since his time, and especially since WW2, research and information about the Mannerbund has expanded considerably. In 1934 Otto Hofler (Hoefler) published KULTISCHE GEHEIMBUNDE DER GERMANEN (Frankfurt/ Main 1934) about the Herulians and Wotan's warrior-bands, then after the War Indo-Europeanist scholars such as Georges Dumezil with his three-function-theory, Jan de Vries and Alain Danielou lifted Indo-European studies to still greater heights. More recently French historian Bernard Sergent with his books HOMOSEXUALITE INITIATIQUE DANS L'EUROPE ANCIENNE and HOMOSEXUALITY IN GREEK MYTH, Alby Stone, Kris Kershaw, Steve Pollington, and Connell O’Donovan have all shed light on the significance of the Mannerbund. I’ve written about this separately in my Mannerbund essays, save to say the evidence for the Mannerbund origins of Aryan culture is increasingly overwhelming, and makes sense logically. Bluher emphasized the Mannerheld – the male hero who holds the band together, a leader who in Max Weber's categorization exercises charismatic authority, and is represented as an archetype in such semi-divine figures as Hercules, “Through the force of his attraction, which he exerts on young and old among his warriors, he can obtain the greatest sacrifices, the most tremendous efforts, and the most splendid successes.”

Influence on Wandervogel

The first modern youth movements started before 1896 as entirely autonomous from adults, necessarily so because they were largely motivated as a reaction against the gross materialism of the Kaiserreich. Groups of youngsters would meet up at each others' houses before taking hikes into the woods or mountains, to discuss how to make Germany and Europe a better place. Only later did adults like Hans Bluher in Germany or Baden-Powell in England become involved.

The Wandervogel name, which was adopted collectively from 1896, is most likely taken from Book 17 of Walt Whitman’s LEAVES OF GRASS, titled “Birds of Passage”. This was not Whitman's only contribution to German thought at the time; Adolf Brand's men's movement was called “Gemeinschaft der Eigenen” - the Community of Self-Owners – which although taken from the philosophy of Max Stirner, has a distinctly Whitmanesque resonance. Bluher himself refers to the Wandervogel as a “confederation of friendship” - a direct quote from Whitman .

Bluher introduced Adolf Brand's colleague Wilhem Janssen (1866-1943) to the Wandervogel at the turn of the last century, and in 1910 they together formed Jung Wandervogel, which unlike most of the rest of the Wandervogel never admitted girls as members.

Carl Jung gave a vivid account of the early Wandervogel in his famous 1936 essay Wotan. Jung argued that each race had its own collective unconscious and archetypes, and for the Teutons Wotan was in charge: “We have seen Wotan come to life in the Jungendbewegung (youth movement), and the blood of several sheep was shed in the sacrifices which celebrated the very dawn of his rebirth. Armed with Rucksack and lute, blond youths, and sometimes also girls, were to be seen as restless wanderers on every road from the North Cape to Sicily, true servants of the roving god...The German youths who celebrated the solstice were not the first to hear a rustle in the primeval forest of the unconscious. They were anticipated by Nietzsche, Shuler, Stefan George, and Klages. The literary tradition of the Rhine and the country south of the Main has a classical form that cannot be easily shaken off. Every interpretation that comes from that region, therefore, is inclined to return to a classic model, to antique intoxication and exuberance, i.e. to Dionysus, the peur aeternus and the cosmogonic eros.” [NB: On the Cosmogonic Eros . Ludwig Klages 1922].

The most important event in the history of the Wandervogel was 11 October 1913 when the Jungendbewegung Free German Youth Movement was summoned to a mass-meeting on the Meissner Heights outside Kassel. A manifesto was issued, which stated in part, ”German Youth no longer intended to remain a dependency of the older generation, excluded from public life and relegated to a passive role. It seeks, independently of the commands of convention, to give shape and form to its own life. It strives after a lifestyle, corresponding to its youth, which will make it possible to take itself and its activities seriously and to integrate itself as a special factor in the general work of culture.” Ludwig Klages from the Cosmic Circle composed “Mensch und Erde” (Man and Earth) for the occasion, while others sang from Hans Breuer's youth movement songbook published the same year. What was called the “Meissner Formula” strove “to shape life through self-responsibility and wholehearted sincerity”.

After World War One the Wandervogel lost little of it's early idealism, but its cohesiveness was tested. [St. Ch.] Waldecke wrote in Der Eigene in 1925 that it had now condensed into 4 distinct streams, comprising of:
1. Free German, often Anarchist. It was this bunch that descended directly from the Meissner Heights meeting in 1913, and these were the most direct inheritors of the initial Wandervogel inspiration. This group was bolstered by an influx from Dr. Gustav Wyneken's Free School Communities. This branch of the Wandervogel was closely associated with Der Weisse Ritter house in Berlin, from 1921 publisher of The White Knight newspaper for the youth movement.
2. Proletarian-identified leftist movements, whether Anarchist, Marxist or later Stalinist, with the emphasis on class war rather than learning.
3. Christian youth movements that were more Catholic and Protestant youth social work groups than youth movements. These Christian missions were the last to be absorbed into the Hitler Youth.
4. Der Jungdeutsche Orden or Jungdo. The Young German Order was founded by Artur Mahraun at around the same time as the Kapp Putsch in May 1920. It appealed to younger elements on the right and promised to revive the pre-War Wandervogel spirit. Based in Kassel, it had expanded to 70,000 when it was banned in early 1921 whereupon it expanded to almost a third-of-a-million (300,000). It's fate, as with most of the other groups, was to be assimilated into the Hitler Youth.

Influence on State
Apart from individuals from the Wandervogel and groups such as Jungdo, the Young German Order becoming involved in nationalist politics, the movement was absorbed almost in its entirety into the Hitler Youth after 1933. Journalist Ludwig Lewisohn of the left-wing American publication NATION wrote in 1933 that the Wandervogel was “the youth movement from which thousands of storm-troopers came...The entire movement is in fact and by certain aspects of its avowed ideology drenched through with homoerotic feeling and practice”.


Alfred Baumler of the Institut fur Pedagogik at the University of Berlin from 1933 initiated some of Bluher and Wyneken's teaching techniques, and at the same time was won over from Bachofen's Mutterrecht to Bluher's Mannerbund hypothesis. After World War Two, Bluher's main theories of Eros and the Mannerbund were decisively rejected in favour of Magnus Hirschfeld's bizarre notions of intermediate sexes and minority rights.

Influence on Julius Evola
For Evola's theories of desire, Otto Weininger's complimentary mathematics is the obvious direct inspiration for the METAPHYSICS OF SEX, and not Bluher's idea of Eros creating meaning. For Evola, as for Carl Jung, the meaning of sex is the spiritual Hieros Gamos – the sacred marriage within the psyche. But in other books, notably REVOLT AGAINST THE MODERN WORLD and MEN AMONGST THE RUINS, Evola was happy to accept the broad outline of Bluher’s Mannerbund hypothesis, and indeed elaborates upon it.

Influence on Yockey
When American activist Francis Parker Yockey was arrested by the FBI in 1960 he was carrying a copy of Weininger's SEX AND CHARACTER in his suitcase. Yockey was such an admirer of Bluher that ten years earlier, in March 1950, he had translated the entire second volume of THE ROLE OF THE EROTIC IN MALE SOCIETIES. No copies remain, although the FBI did get their hands on one in 1952, but his partner of the time, Elsa Dewette, was able to record a few choice snippets:

“The LEAGUE is the proselyte for that way if life that the GREEKS called ETHOS. This word has something to do with the MAN. It gives notice that the man has already pledged his best to the man. Our most essential, super-abundant, purest, and as they say, most selfless performances are, in one way or another, born in the light of a superior man who gave the stimulus to them. Whoever is in the League cannot sink: All are sustained by this utter certainty.

Women strive constantly, WHOLLY to possess a man. That trap-door to oblivion which lies hidden in a well-guarded secret place in her being, demands a sacrifice: In this way, most men go to ruin through their wives.”

According to Dewette, Yockey then commented “I have always said this. My phrase was and remains: Nearly all women bring out the worst in men: the economical and the social.”

Bluher for the Future

Amongst Indo-European scholars, the Mannerbund is now a familiar landmark on the scene, but now is the time for the Mannerbund to emerge from the pages of history and become a vital political force once again. The so-called gay community will be first in the firing line in the coming war between Aryan ideals and those of the monotheists. Unfortunately, they have been especially weakened by cultural Marxism and multiculturalism over the past thirty years; they were targeted for propaganda earlier than the general population (I remember political correctness firmly established throughout the gay community by the very early 1980s), and since then the propaganda from the gay press, academia etc. has been overwhelming and relentless.

I also reckon there are lessons from Jung's Wotan essay. Here's another quote about Wotan, the Germanic god of battle and poetry, “Later, toward the end of the Weimar Republic, the wandering role was taken over by thousands and thousands of unemployed who were to be met everywhere on their aimless journeys. By 1933 the people no longer wandered, they marched in their hundreds of thousands. The Hitler movement brought the whole of Germany to its feet, from the five-year-olds to the veterans, and produced the spectacle of a great migration of people marking time. Wotan the wanderer was awake.”

French Post-modernist Paul Virilio has called this process “Dromology” and considered it vital to the success of the French Revolution, as well as the 1933 German Revolution. I believe our European civilization, which has been stupefied for sixty years, is about to march along that road again, and vital to those young marchers will be the organizational flair and heroic inspiration of the Mannerbund.

Labels: ,

Tuesday, March 28, 2006

Hadrian and China

In the year 124ce Hadrian’s glittering Imperial procession reached the easternmost province of the empire, Bithynia on the Black Sea. At the city of Trapezus (modern day Trabzon in Turkey, near the border with Georgia) he erected a monument to the good luck and prosperity of the town. Trapezus was a successful tunny-fishing and trading port, so Hadrian built a new harbour and surmounted his monument with a large gilded copper fish. However, if instead he had carried on building, higher and higher, he would have become cognisant of a remarkable fact.

As more and more of the Eurasian continent came into his view, spreading out for hundreds of miles below, he would have looked westward with satisfaction to the colourful patchwork of his own empire, a criss-cross of roads connecting market towns with marble citadels, walled frontier forts and shipping lanes free of pirates. But his knowledge of Alexander the Great’s expeditions and the subsequent trade in silks, incense and spices would not have prepared him for the shocking site to the east. For there, neatly balanced at the other end of the Eurasian continent to his own, was another empire which was almost a mirror- image of his own.

Hadrian’s shock would be complete were we to also equip the Emperor with a time-machine. In less than three hundred years, he would see the western half of his empire in turmoil; cities burning, forests encroaching, Saxons crossing the North Sea. Another two hundred years, and the eastern remnant of his empire is collapsing under the onslaught from Arabian desert tribes. Meanwhile, in the far east, the mirror-image oriental empire is calm, ordered and progressing, for as far and as long as he can see.

Hadrian left Trapezus with no such insight, and it is my contention that it is only very recently that historians and others have begun to understand and study the significance of the simultaneous emergence of manifest oriental and occidental civilizations. I will have more to say about this at the end of this essay. Happily, the Emperor did receive a revelation of another sort during his sojourn; it was in Bithynia that Hadrian met Antinous, his comrade, lover and life-partner.

At the time of Hadrian, the Roman and Chinese Han empires were both roughly the same size at around 4 million square kilometres each. Both were the same age, becoming recognizable empires at around the same time during the beginning of the second century bce, and both were centred on and exploited the main geographical feature of the region; for Rome the Mediterranean Sea and for the Han empire the great northern plain of China.

Most surprising of all, both empires were equivalent in population at about 60 million people each (approximately the population of the present-day United Kingdom) out of a total global population of perhaps quarter of a billion. As the Stanford ACME Project puts it, “2,000 years ago, about one-half of the human species was contained within two political systems, the Roman Empire in western Eurasia and the Han empire in eastern Eurasia. At no time since has such a large proportion of humankind been ruled by two governments.”

To understand the central conundrum, that is, why the occidental empire fell while the oriental empire continued to flourish into the present, is the task of the rest of this essay. Since both empires were the result of city states and smaller kingdoms merging mainly either through dynastic diplomacy or through military invasion, until finally being swallowed by the regional great power, it is necessary to examine the internal composition of each empire in turn.

Between 221-210bce the Qin state managed to unite the other six imperial states (Yan, Qi, Wei, Zhao, Hann and Chu), who had been fighting during the Warring States period (481-221bce), to create the Han empire. The Han empire continued to expand into it’s hinterland and lasted until 220ce, when it split into the Three Kingdoms. Previous to the Warring States period, the Spring and Autumn period (770-481bce) had witnessed the consolidation of around fifteen major feudal states into the previously mentioned seven imperial states.

What is essential about these feudal and imperial states in early China is that they were all homogenous, sharing a common origin and close racial and cultural affinities. According to Toynbee: “The fathers of the Sinic civilization do not seem to have differed in race from the peoples occupying the vast region to the south and south-west which extends from the Yellow River to the Brahmaputra and from the Tibetan Plateau to the China Sea. If certain members of that wide-spread race created a civilization while the rest remained culturally sterile, the explanation may be that a creative faculty, latent in all alike, was evoked in those particular members, and in those only, by the presentation of a challenge to which the rest did not happen to be exposed…none of the related peoples farther south, in the valley of the Yangtse, for example, where this civilization did not originate, can have had so hard a fight for life”.

The compositions and histories of the city states and kingdoms which were eventually to coalesce into the Hellenic universal state, i.e. the Roman Empire, were very different from those of China.

Prospects for a Hellenic European empire, as stable as China, started well with Aryan Greek colonization of the Aegean, Black and northern Mediterranean seas from the eighth century bce. The Battle of Chaeronea (338bce), when Alexander the Great of Macedon defeated the combined armies of Athens and Thebes, marked the most spectacular example to date of a core civilization, in this case Greece, being swallowed whole by a comparatively larger but closely-related nation on its periphery. Usually, members of the core civilization consider its bigger, more powerful neighbour to be semi-barbaric, despite sharing the same language and cultural roots. Ironically, Macedon was to suffer the same fate at the hands of Rome after the Battle of Pydna some 170 years later.
At Pydna the stakes were higher than Chaeronea because more territory was under dispute, nonetheless Rome shared the same racial and cultural origins as Macedonian Greece, in the same way that Macedonians themselves had originally shared a civilization with Athens and Thebes. So the military defeat of Macedon and the Greeks in 168bce signified not the defeat, but the consolidation of Hellenism. “Behind the greatness of Rome we can recognize forces of the heroic Aryan-Western cycle at work…While next to other peoples such as the Greeks and the Etruscans the Romans may at first have appeared as ‘barbarians’, their lack of ‘culture’ concealed (as in the case of some Germanic populations at the time of the barbarian invasions) an even older force that acted in a style compared to which all cultures of an urban type appear as decadent and disaggregative.” observes Julius Evola “Many people thought that the Roman world, in its imperial and pagan phase, signified the beginning of a new Golden Age, the king of which, Kronos, was believed to be living in a state of slumber in the Hyperborean region. During Augustus’s reign, the Sibylline prophecies announced the advent of a ‘solar’ king, a rex a coelo or ex sole missus, to which Horace seems to refer when he invokes the advent of Apollo, the Hyperborean god of the Golden Age. Virgil too seems to refer to this rex when he proclaims the imminent advent of a new Golden Age, of Apollo, and of heroes. Thus Augustus conceived his symbolic ‘filiation’ from Apollo; the phoenix, which is found in the figurations of Hadrian and of Antoninus, is in strict relation to this idea of a resurrection of the primordial age through the Roman Empire.”

The same fear of a vast, monolithic, “semi-barbaric” neighbour became evident to central Europeans from the Eighteenth Century onwards; this time the stakes could not be higher. For a while in the Twentieth Century it looked as if western Europe would be absorbed into a new Soviet imperium, and once again a core civilization would have been swallowed whole by a racially and culturally-related, but much bigger, neighbour.

Before the defeat of Macedon, five principal states struggled for supremacy in the Mediterranean: Rome, Macedon, the Seleucid empire, Carthage and Egypt. The Seleucid empire encompassed the Hellenic successor states to the Aryan Persian empire which Alexander had conquered. Carthage was the most powerful of a network of Phoenician Semitic colonies spreading along the southern Mediterranean from Palestine to Spain. It was the pinnacle of what Toynbee refers to as Syriac civilization. Egypt, well past its Golden Age by this time, was composed of a population of Semites and Africans with a recently-installed Hellenic ruling elite.

Rome triumphed, and was left with the task of managing the volatile, heterogeneous, multiracial population on all sides of the Mediterranean Sea and beyond. It was Rome’s singular misfortune, just after the official establishment of Pax Romana and the Empire, to have lost against the German chief Arminius (Hermann) of the Cherusci at the fateful Battle of Teutoburg (9ce). “Varus [the Roman commander] nearly wrecked the empire, since three legions with their general and all their officers and auxiliary forces, and the general staff, were massacred to a man. When the news reached Rome, Augustus ordered patrols of the city at night to prevent any rising” says Suetonius, before describing the devastating affect the defeat had on the emperor himself. The anguish of Augustus was understandable; had he secured the territory between the Rhine and the Elbe as was his plan prior to 9ce, a virgin vista would have offered itself up to Rome. Legionaries would have been standing at the threshold of the northern European plain, which opened up far beyond what one day would become Rus. Rome need no longer depend on essential grain from Africa if Ukraine could be brought into production. The local tribes, Scythes, Germans and Celts, and early Slavs shared a common kinship and heritage with Rome, unlike the diverse peoples on the southern and south-eastern shores of the Mediterranean, even if initially this kinship went unrecognized by either conquerors or conquered. We can be sure that, as in Italy and Gaul, a fruitful synthesis would have ensued. Rome for the first time would have been a truly European empire, not merely a Mediterranean empire, with a prospect of prosperity and security stretching far into the future.

China’s long era of unified harmonious administration came to a temporary halt at the close of the Han Dynasty and the succession of the Three Kingdoms (Wei, Shu and Wu 220-265ce). After a period of political, administrative and bureaucratic confusion the former Han empire was reconstituted during the Sui (581-618) and Tang (618-907) dynasties. Periods of strong centralized imperial dynastic rule alternated with more diffuse administrations. The only significant threat to China’s invulnerability came in 1206ce when Genghis Khan unified the Mongolian tribes into the Mongol Khanate, which allowed Kublai Khan to conquer the Chinese central plain in 1271ce. Kublai Khan went native, as is the way when pastoral nomad tribes invade and hold settled communities, so traditional life continued while the Middle Empire strengthened and expanded.

Even after multiple shocks and divisions China, because of its racial and cultural homogeneity, is able to reconstitute itself as effectively as the intelligent liquid metal which makes up the T-X Machine from Terminator III.

Rome’s initial decline can be ascribed to internal factors, weakening the borders sufficient to allowing the breach which ushered in the Age of Migrations, when once again race plays a decisive role in history. Whether Gibbon and Nietzsche are right, and the internal decline can be blamed on the introduction of Christianity, or whether more prosaic developments such as the hollowing-out of the productive classes, or economic stagnation, or the increasing laxity of stipulations required for Roman citizenship are to blame, there can be no doubt that Constantine, the first Christian emperor, dealt a decisive blow by dividing the empire in two, with a new capital city vaingloriously named after himself.

The western empire was overrun by German tribes from 410ce; Visigoths in Spain, Ostrogoths in Italy and central Europe and Franks in Gaul created enduring feudal successor states, culminating in a weak and limited restoration of empire by Charlemagne (742-814ce) on a part of Rome’s western territories. Thus the Rhineland, which in the previous (Hellenic) cycle of Aryan civilization had been a fiercely disputed frontier became the core for a new cycle of Aryan Western civilization.

The remaining eastern half of the empire with its capital at Constantinople came under increasing attack from Arab Muslim armies from the 630s ce onwards. 650ce marked the consolidation of Islam in the former Persian Sassinid empire, Arabs under Islam now controlled all the territories once claimed by Carthage, Egypt and the Seleucid empire. Of the five major powers that had been co-opted to create the Roman empire, only the two Aryan powers of Greece (once Macedon, now Byzantium) and Italy escaped Islamic hegemony. Any attempt to restore the Roman empire, with borders co-extensive to those at the time of Hadrian, was undesirable and besides impossible after 630ce with Mohammed ruling half of Arabia.

Thus the fall of Rome in 410ce proved to be permanent. Unlike China, its constituent elements were too diverse, too multiracial and multicultural to orchestrate a successful reprise. Attempts have been made with increasing frequency to unite the new Western civilization, but such a Western universal state (Imperium) remains for the future.

The Middle Kingdom or Middle Empire, along with its closely-related ancient oriental civilizations of Korea and Japan, is essentially autarkic. Historically, despite periods of exploration, China has displayed no appetite for global dominion. Napoleon is quoted as saying, “I recognize only two nations, the Occident, and the Orient” and however controversial his plans for Europe were, and continue to be, we can be sure that he had no serious plan to invade China. Even for the European most often portrayed as bent on world domination, Adolf Hitler, China was not a part of the programme. China is simply too massive, too old, too sophisticated, too culturally alien for any sensible European to even contemplate provoking. Although that has not stopped the Western plutocracies attempting in their greed-inspired stupidity to undermine Chinese sovereignty.

Comparisons between the ancient Mediterranean and China were studied and written about by Georg Hegel, Max Weber and Karl Wittfogel, and a number of specialist historical studies have appeared sporadically since the 1980s, but the subject has never received the proper attention that it deserves. According to ACME, “There is no intellectual justification for this persistent neglect…the comparative history of the largest agrarian empires of antiquity has attracted no attention at all. This deficit is only explicable with reference to academic specialization and language barriers.”

Might it be that a comparative study would reveal causes for the permanent fall of the Roman empire that the academic establishment, still wedded to discredited notions of multiculturalism and multiracism, would find too unpalatable to contemplate?

Hadrian. Stewart Perowne (Hodder & Stoughton, London 1960)
Study of History Abridgement of Volumes I-IV. Arnold J. Toynbee (Royal Institute of International Affairs/ OUP, London 1946)
Mystery of the Grail. Julius Evola (Inner Traditions, Vermont 1997)
The Twelve Caesars. Suetonius (Penguin, London 1979)
Agicola and the Germania. Tacitus (Penguin 1948)
China National Tourism Administration
www.cnta.com
Stanford Ancient Chinese and Mediterranean Empires Comparative History Project (ACME) www.stanford.edu/~scheidel/acme/htm

Labels:

MANNERBUND AND HOMOSEXUALITY

MANNERBUND
ASPECTS OF MALE MYSTERY CULTS (published in New Imperium magazine March 2006)
Alisdair_Clarke@hotmail.com

Homosexuals have a long and honourable tradition as culture-bearers, and for fighting for and defending their tribes and later, nations. Now, when the survival and evolution of Western Civilization itself is at stake, the duty of all brave, aware, truthful and well-meaning gay men is self-evident. Homosexuals must act as white blood cells, ready to attack any invasion of the Western body politic.

Theory of Mannerbund

The consequences of the Neolithic agricultural revolution at first resulted in a mean and squalid life for Europeans. Archaeological studies of skeletons show that the first farmers had more nutrition-related diseases, and died younger, than their Paleolithic hunter-gatherer ancestors. Labour was intensive, people barely scratched a subsistence livelihood form the land, in contrast to hunter-gatherers who had spent little more than an hour a day working for all their requirements. Social organization was basic; nuclear families in huts wallowing in drudgery had no time for politics and higher civilization.

As farming techniques slowly improved, groups of men were able to escape the social domesticity and relentless toil to start to build alternative social and political structures that went beyond the basic demands of the nuclear family, reproduction and subsistence farming. A new, superior and more complex human organization became possible. Defence of the tribe against other marauding MANNERBUND was the chief priority, acting as a catalyst to further refinement.

As the radical Italian traditionalist Julius Evola states, “It was this MANNERBUND, in which the qualification of “man” had simultaneously an initiatory (i.e. sacred) and a warrior meaning, that wielded the power in the social group or clan. This MANNERBUND was characterized by special tasks and responsibilities; it was different from all other societies to which members of the tribe belonged. In this primordial scheme we find the fundamental ‘categories’ differentiating the political order from the ‘social’ order. First among these is a special chrism – namely, that proper to ‘man’ in the highest sense of the word (vir was the term employed in Roman times) and not merely a generic homo: this condition is marked by a spiritual breakthrough and by detachment from the naturalistic and vegetative plane. Its integration is power, the principle of command belonging to the MANNERBUND. We could rightfully see in this one of the ‘constants’ (i.e. basic ideas) that in very different applications, formulations and derivations are uniformly found in theory or, better, in the metaphysics of the State that was professed even by the greatest civilizations of the past.” (Julius Evola, MEN AMONG THE RUINS. Inner Traditions, Rochester, Vermont, USA 2002). So, the MANNERBUND provides the very foundation for Western civilization. Evola again, “Anti-militaristic democracy is the expression of ‘society’ which, with its material ideals of peace or, at most, of wars waged to maintain peace, is opposed to the political principle that is, to the principle of the MANNERBUND, the shaping force of the State that has always depended on a warrior or military element, that cherished less material ideals, such as honour and superiority.” (MEN AMONG THE RUINS, as above).

MANNERBUND IN MYTH AND LEGENDS

The earliest Aryan myths, from India to Ireland, mention homosexual warrior bands. In the Indian Rig Veda, composed after the Aryan invasions (c1500bce) and the earliest of Hindu sacred texts, they are called gandharvas (divine youths) and maruts (storm gods, sons of Rudra the ithyphallic proto-Siva). Maruts, although they “adorned themselves like women” are essential in helping Indra to destroy the Soma-demon Vrtra, performing “joyous deeds in the ecstasy of drinking Soma”.

Centaurs and Western Philosophy

Gandharvas are a band of semi-divine men united in initiation. They are sometimes described as having horses’ heads and men’s bodies, and are educators of heroes. They are like centaurs in Greek mythology with the bodies of horses and the torsos and heads of men (the repeated reference to horses shows the importance of this animal in all Aryan cultures).

Chiron is the most famous of the centaurs, who nurtures and educates the homosexual hero Achilles using the gifts of wisdom and bone-marrow. Bone-marrow, though nutritious, is more probably a metaphor for semen: both are white and contained within the phallic bone. Chiron was also tutor to Asklepios, who is the son of Apollo and the Hellenic god of medicine. It seems more than likely that the men-only academia and symposia (originally, drinking bouts) of the Classical period, frequented by Socrates, Plato and Aristotle, were vestiges of MANNERBUND customs.

Wolf Cults

That Greece had its own man-wolf cults (witness Lycaon, Tyrant of Arcadia – whence the word lycanthropy) is well-documented, but the pre-historical Classical legend relating most closely to the MANNERBUND is that of the Luperci. These were young men who gathered around Romulus and Remus, the founders of Rome who had been brought up by a she-wolf on the banks of the Tiber.

One of early Rome’s more notorious legends concerns Romulus leading his Luperci’s to the abduction and subsequent rape of the Sabine women. The women were from a neighbouring tribe; the rapes were planned not for fun but very specifically to increase the numbers of the Roman tribe. Centuries later, during the height of the Empire, the Lupercalia was still celebrated as a fertility festival by gangs of naked young men running through the streets of Rome brandishing whips.

Those deadly enemies of the Romans, the Germanic tribes east of the Rhine, shared at least one similarity with the Imperium; their wolf-cults. Called Ulfhednar (=”wolf-skins”, because that is what they wore), they were composed of cult bands of warriors dedicated to Woden (Odin), who himself keeps two wolves, Geri and Freki (=”greedy”).

As late as 930ce King Harald I Haarfager (=Fairhair) employed Ulfhednar as his bodyguards. The Ulfhednar were not alone. Other Teutonic warrior-fraternities that we still know about include the Boar-warriors (the Sutton Hoo helmet found in East Anglia and now in the British Museum is crowned with the image of a boar), who fought in wedge-shaped formations called Svinfylking, and most famously of all the Berserkir (=”Bear-shirts”, from whom we get they expression “going beserk” – because that’s what they did in battle, usually naked).

These brutal MANNERBUND left their legacy to medieval Europe in heraldry and in the names of their chiefs, later kings of the earliest European family of nations. Bearskin hats are still worn by royal guards in Britain and Denmark.

Another lasting legacy to Europe from the MANNERBUND are the runes; runes are believed to be first spread around Europe by a group known as the Heruli, which means literally “belonging to the marauding band”. “Heri” means marauder, and it is from that word that modern English gets the verbs “to harry” and “to harass”. The Heruli were accused by the contemporary early church of practicing homosexuality, and Connell O’Donovan and Kris Kershaw have shown how their naming practices, cultic and runic practices, origin myth and the homosociality of their warrior culture strongly indicate they belong within the tradition of Aryan MANNERBUND.

Of particular relevance to Teutonic MANNERBUND generally and homosexuality are the observations of Germanic scholar Margaret C. Ross (Hildr’s Ring: A Problem in the Ragnarsdrapa, Medieval Scandinavia 6. 1973) concerning the Jardarmen ceremony, a rite of blood-brotherhood in which young male initiates were passed under three strips of turf, referred to as “earth torques”. The torque is a choker-ring, popular with Celts and Teutons, and Ross says that as the Jardarmen rite is “connected with ceremonies of fostbroedralag (foster-brotherhood), one might suggest that its significance in the initiation ceremony was anal rather than vaginal in that the boys might have participated in a rite of communal sodomy to mark their entry into adult male society”.

Legendary Celtic Mannerbund

A Celtic king whose name betrays its totem-animal-based MANNERBUND origins is that most illustrious king of all: Arthur (from Artois – bear). Arthur had his Knights of the Round Table, an idealized model of Imperial democratic governance; the full homosexuality of which is brought out in Richard Wagner’s opera Parsifal.

Finn is the leader of a similar warrior-band, this time Irish; the Fena. As Peter Lambourn Wilson writes in PLOUGHING THE CLOUDS (City Light Books, San Francisco 1999), “The Fena are not as other mortals. Like Maruts and Gandharvas, we might call them demi-gods. Their feasting, drinking, hunting, brawling and fucking represent the raison d’etre of the Indo-European MANNERBUND – but their shape-shifting, their ambiguous relations with fairyland, and their poetic frenzies mark them as ‘divine youths’”.

Foster-brothers Cu Chulainn and Ferdia are two lovers in an Irish MANNERBUND who, due to the machinations of Queen Mebd of Connacht, are forced to fight on opposing sides. As Cu Chulainn says:

fast friend, forest companions
we made one bed and slept one sleep
in foreign lands after the fray.
Scathach’s pupils, two together,
we’d set forth to comb the forest.

After the first day of battle they met and kissed, but were denied sex although “their charioteers slept by the same fire”. This pattern is repeated on the second and third day, until on the fourth day Cu Chuliann slays Ferdia, exclaiming to the companion who he cradles, “O Ferdia! Your death will hang over me like a cloud forever”. The story recalls the lament of Achilles for Patroclus at Troy.

These relationships were by no means uncommon, as the evidence surviving into non-mythological, non-legendary, historical time demonstrates.

MANNERBUND IN HISTORY

In 371bce the Sacred Band of Thebes was formed in Hellas. This military unity, consisting of 150 pairs of male couples, was based on the belief that men fighting alongside their lovers would rather die that shame one another. The Sacred Band was annihilated thirty-three years later by Philip of Macedon and his son Alexander, himself homosexual, at the Battle of Chaeronea. British historian Arnold J. Toynbee holds this defeat as responsible for the first fatal breakdown of the Hellenic civilization.

Celtic MANNERBUND made a number of successful raids into the Mediterranean world, sacking Rome in 390bce and Apollo’s Oracle at Delphi around a century later, before finally the tables were turned by Julius “Queen of Bithynia” Caesar. These raids gave Classical writers a chance to observe the behaviour of the Celts at close quarters. Aristotle wrote that, “The men are inclined to let themselves be dominated by women, this is not an unusual tendency amongst energetic warrior races. Apart, of course, from the Celts, who respect manly love quite openly, so to speak.”

Diodorus Siculus was even more explicit, describing Celtic warriors as sleeping on animal skins flanked by male lovers, “they abandon without qualm the bloom of their bodies to others [and] don’t think this is shameful”.

Norman nobles and the royal Norman court in London were regularly criticized by the Church for homosexuality, which perhaps developed from the Jardarmen rites of their not-so-distant Norse forefathers. Rufus (William II), England’s last homosexual pagan king, came in for particular opprobrium, partly because of the colourful, form-fitting clothes he favoured for himself and his butch companions.

Prince William was the nephew of Rufus: when he drowned in the White Ship disaster of 1120ce Xian zealots believed the catastrophe to be divine punishment for on-board homosexual orgies.

[Sailors, specially pirates, have often taken on the appearance of floating MANNERBUND fuelled, in the famous words of Churchill’s assistant Anthony Montague-Browne, by “rum, sodomy and the lash.” Herulians were the earliest recorded Viking pirates, conducting raids along the Atlantic coast from Portugal to Denmark even before the final collapse of the Roman empire. Their social structure is best described as an anarchic democracy. This free-booting MANNERBUND spirit was once more unleashed in the Caribbean with the discovery of the New World. Companies of ships one again formed their own tiny democracies. Science Fiction author William Burroughs imagines an alternate utopian reality developed by swashbuckling homosexual pirates in CITIES OF THE RED NIGHT.

The enduring myth of Jason and the Argonauts is the supreme example of a maritime MANNERBUND, but instead of working as a free, independent collective, the Argonauts have a very specific function to perform for their civilization. So in the figure of Jason is combined the MANNERBUND archetype and the Faustian/ Promethean archetypes of the West.]

Normans were also notorious for their savage efficiency in battle, again a likely hang-over from the brutal MANNERBUND of their Scandinavian ancestors.

Robin Hood and his merry band of outlaw men living in the greenwood forest is perhaps the furthest we can track the traditional MANNERBUND into the very early modern period. As the leading authority on this people’s hero states, “One final characteristic of the early tales smacks of the household and of service: none of the outlaws has a family. Much is a miller’s son, but there is nothing of the miller. The treacherous prioress of Kirklees, Robin’s near-of-kin or cousin, is the only relative in the whole cycle. There are no parents, no wives and no children. Apart from the prioress, women scarcely figure at all.” “There is no Maid Marian. Marian only made her way into the legends via the May Games and that not certainly until the sixteenth century. It was not simply that Robin’s devotion to the Virgin Mother left no room for other women. It saw rather that there was no place for them in the context of the tales.” (J.C. Holt, ROBIN HOOD, Thames & Hudson London 1989). Of course Will Scarlet, Much the miller’s son and Little John are in there from the start!

Mannerbund in the future

By the end of the Nineteenth century, the process of abstracting MANNERBUND from the real world to the ideal world, to the realms of European Romanticism, was completed. In the Anglo-Saxon world we have the theories of Edward Carpenter (“Towards Democracy”) and the poems of Walt Whitman, notably the Calamus cycle in The Leaves of Grass. Here, Whitman talks of an “adhesive love” between men to build an organic, non-individualistic American republic.

A brave, more practical attempt was made by Hans Bluher and Wilhelm Jansen, founders of the Wandervogel during the Kaiserreich. Bluher’s romantic idealism was to meet with great success in his homeland over the following decades, cross-fertilizing with the unbroken spirit of returning WWI troops in the Freikorps. Lord Baden Powell watered-down many of Bluher’s ideas for a tame, still sadly Xian, British Empire. He also made the error of believing that ideals of honour, bravery and adventure were for malleable youths only and not full-grown men.
Perhaps the only place in Western culture where the MANNERBUND still thrives is also the most hopeful for the future; in the stories of Robert Heinlein, William Burroughs, comics and the internet: science fiction.

Labels: