Titans are in Town
Page 18
However, in a given context even the word “religion” can have a blasphemous effect, even if not intended. The word “religion” derives from the Latin word “religare,” which means to bind together or to tie together. Thus many of us use the expression the “religion of the Holocaust” without necessarily assigning to the noun “religion” any pejorative or abusive meaning. However, the expression “the religion of the Holocaust” will definitely raise some eyebrows among the scribes of the System given that the Holocaust officially does not enter the realm of religious or mythical transcendence, let alone an ahistorical story-telling. Instead, the Holocaust remembrance, in the modern liberal vernacular, represents today an important portion of factual historiography.
However, the memory of the Holocaust has by now attained quasi-transcendental features going well beyond a simple historical narrative. It claims to have a didactic message stretching well beyond a given historical time period, thus escaping any time frame and any scientific measurement. Therefore, the Holocaust qualifies just as well as a religion, regardless whether a person espouses this religion or not. Just like any other religion the Holocaust is designated to bind together lots of people, if not the whole of mankind. This is quite typical of all monotheistic religions which are hardly in need of historical proof, let alone of forensic or material documentation in order to assert themselves as universally credible beliefs. Our ancestors, the old Greeks, were never tempted to export their Gods abroad to distant foreign lands. By contrast, Judeo-Christianity, or Islam have a universal message, just like their secular modalities liberalism and communism. Failure to accept either those old beliefs or modern universal monotheistic religions and myths may result in a heretic’s persecution or banishment.
There is, however, a difference between “myth” and “religion” although often these words coincide and are used synonymously. Religion is history bound; it has its historical beginning and it projects its goals into the distant future. After all we measure our time since the real or the alleged birth of Jesus Christ and we are now well into the celebration of the 2014th anniversary of his birthday. We no longer measure our time flow since the fall of Troy, or ab urbem condita, as our ancestors the ancient Romans did. The same Jesus-Christ bound timeframe of measurement is true not just for the Catholic Vatican, or the European Union, but also for atheist North Korea. Muslims also count their time differently, since Hegira (i.e. the flight of Muhammad from Mecca), and they seem to still dwell now in the fifteenth century. We can observe that all religions, unlike myths, are located in history, with well-marked beginnings and with projections of historical end times. For contemporary dedicated liberals, freedom and modernity started in 1776, with the day of the American Declaration of Independence, whereas for the Bolsheviks real history started in 1917. For all of them, all historical events prior to those fateful years are “the Dark Ages.”
Religions are much closer to utopianism than myths are. A myth can always sneak out of the time flow. There is no ageing in myths; there is no death that cannot be repaired even for those dwelling in the underworld. Myths mean the eternal return.
What myth and religion do have in common is that they both rest on powerful symbolism, on allegories, on proverbs, on rituals, on initiating labors, such as the ones Hercules endured, or the riddles Jason had to solve with his Argonauts in his search for the Golden Fleece. Likewise the modern ideology of liberalism, being also a secular religion, consists of a whole set and subsets of myths. Undoubtedly modern liberals reject the expression “the liberal myth,” or “the liberal cult.” Instead they gleefully use the expression “the fascist myth” or “the communist myth,” but they never refer to their own beliefs as myths. As with the religion of the Holocaust, the religion of liberalism possesses its own canons, its own sets of rituals and incantations that need to be observed by the believers, particularly when it comes to using an appropriate verbiage.
Myths are generally thought to be able to thrive only in primitive society, but we have seen, based on the above, that this is not true. Ancient Greece had a fully enveloped language of mythology, yet on the spiritual level, but also on the scientific level it was a highly advanced society. The ancient Greek mythology has nothing in common with the mythology of today’s Polynesia whose inhabitants also cherish their own myths, but whose level of philosophical or scientific inquiry is not on par with that of our ancient Greek ancestors. Did Socrates or Plato or Aristotle believe in the existence of harpies, Cyclops, giants or Titans? This is hard to say, but we can say with certainty that the symbolism of the myths in ancient Greece had an entirely different significance for ancient Greeks than it has for ourselves. The main reason lies in our desperate effort to rationally explain away the mythical world of our ancestors. This ultrarational drive for the comprehension of the unknown is largely due to our monolinear, monotheist mindset inherited from Judaism and from its offshoot, Christianity. In the same vein our belief in the myth of progress, as Georges Sorel wrote long ago, is just a secular transposition of the Biblical paradise, accompanied by our abandonment of the sense of the tragic: “The theory of progress was adopted as a dogma at the time when the bourgeoisie was the conquering class; thus one must see it as a bourgeois doctrine.” (Les Illusions du progrès, pp. 5–6.)
Some very intelligent people in the West sincerely believe in the myth of perpetual progress, or to put it crudely, they believe that their purchasing power must grow indefinitely. They are wrong. Such a Bible-inspired linear mindset prevents us from gaining insight into the mental world of our ancestors and robs us of the ability to conceive of possible other versions of ourselves. Undoubtedly, we have been deeply contaminated by Judaism and its offshoot, Christianity, to the extent that we can hardly comprehend other truths and other levels of knowledge.
The Titans and the Tragic
We must turn to the tragic, a unique character trait of our White heritage, but which obviously, due to the onslaught of the modern myth of progress, has fallen into oblivion, or is viewed as a social aberration among individuals professing skepticism about the future. In fact all of our ancient myths have a component of the tragic. Nothing remains static in the notion of the tragic. The sheer delight of a hero can lead a minute later to his demise. The tragic is best visible in the Sophocles tragedy Oedipus Rex where Oedipus knows he is doomed for having unknowingly killed his father and for unknowingly having an incestuous relationship with his mother. Yet he struggles to the very end to escape his destiny. But to no avail.
There are thousands of other examples of the tragic. One very explicit case is the refrain from the chorus from Sophocles’ Oedipus at Colonus:
Not to be born is, beyond all estimation, best; but when a man has seen the light of day, this is next best by far, that with utmost speed he should go back from where he came. [1225]
The tragic person knows that the cosmic odds are never in his favor. Yet he continues to fight although he knows that he is doomed. In a way we can use this tragic rule in our own fight. Our chances of success in turning back the liberal end times are slim, yet we must continue to fight. Our struggle, as of now a cultural one, gives us at least some chance of success and a slim opportunity that the odds may turn to our advantage.
Without poets there are no myths, just like without the Titans there are no Gods. And without the Titans there is no tragic. It was the twelve Titans who gave birth to the Gods and not the other way around. It was Cronus who gave birth to Zeus, and then, after being dethroned by his son Zeus he must dwell with his fellow Titans in the underworld. But we cannot rule out that the resurrection of the head Titan Cronus, along with other Titans, may occur one day, perhaps in an upcoming eon, and their takeover of the world can start again. After all Prometheus was himself a Titan, although as a dissident Titan, he had sided up with the Gods and helped them win the cosmic battle against his fellow Titans. As Friedrich George Jünger, the brother of Ernst Jünger wrote in his book The Titans and the Gods: “Water, Earth and Heavens
have been penetrated by their energy, not only during the Grecian times but today too, and for centuries and centuries to come.”
Nothing remains new for the imprisoned Titans: they know everything. They are the central feature in the cosmic eternal return. The Titans are not the creators of Chaos, although they dwell much closer to Chaos than Gods. At this stage they can be called telluric deities and it remains to be seen whether they will this time around side up with other chthonic monsters such as those described by H. P. Lovecraft in his The Thing on the Doorstep. The Titans are the necessary element in the cosmic balance. The Titans who are now imprisoned in Tartarus are the mirror image of the Olympian Gods. They are the center of the will to power and each of us who demonstrates this will has a good ingredient of the Titanic spirit. Today, in our disenchanted world from which Gods have departed, the Titans remain for all of us an option in our struggle. Titans and Titanic individuals are known to be outspoken about their supreme independence, their aversion to cutting deals, their uncompromising attitude, and their lack of repentance.
The Titans were defeated, but they could not be annihilated. They are immortal just like Gods. They could not be brainwashed into political correctness. They wait for their times. And the times will soon come when the Titans will be back in town.
Chapter X: The Balkanization of the System: Ernst Jünger and the End Times
It seems that the prognoses about the imminent death of the West were not just a favorite topic of the German philosopher of history Oswald Spengler, the author of the much acclaimed The Decline of the West. In times of great geopolitical disruptions and social polarizations, such as those sweeping now over Europe and the USA, predictions about a pending catastrophe seem to be a cherished subject among countless intellectuals, especially those who portray themselves as traditionalists or nationalists, or even worse, those who are portrayed by their detractors as White racists or radical right-wingers. In a flurry of philosophical prose dealing with the purported balkanization of the West, and announcing the apocalyptic end times, one could single out the name of Ernst Jünger, a late German essayist and novelist, whose name was once associated with the so-called conservative intellectual revolution in Weimar Germany, and who is today eulogized by all sorts of White nationalists and traditionalists as a leading figure in understanding the end times of the West.
A subject that also needs some clarification is the word “balkanization,” a word whose lexical and conceptual connotations over the last decades has come to be associated not just with state fragmentation, but also with ethnic and racial turmoil. How could Ernst Jünger and some of his types of “dissenting sovereign individuals” be relevant in understanding and combating unparalleled racial changes that have occurred in Europe and America over the last three decades? As a man of considerable foresight, but also of insight, Jünger contemplated different types of non-conformist individuals — people that stood up to the System at different historical times and in different political environments. However, nowhere in his voluminous work did Jünger envision the racial turmoil which is soon likely to bring Europe and America into a real cycle of chaos.
Hopefully, some of Jünger’s works and some of his types — his Gestalt of “sovereign individuals” — can be useful in understanding postmodern times and what role those individuals should play in the System. The ongoing multiracial balkanization of the liberal experiment in Western Europe and America may soon yield far more catastrophic results than the former communist end times in Eastern Europe in the aftermath of WWII.
The notion of end times is not new. It is reminiscent of the biblical prophecies of the Apocalypse and the descent of the new Heaven upon Earth. Thus, in the Book of Revelation there are warnings, but also upbeat signs:
Then I saw ‘a new heaven and a new earth,’ for the first heaven and the first earth had passed away, and there was no longer any sea. I saw the Holy City, the new Jerusalem, coming down out of heaven from God, prepared as a bride beautifully dressed for her husband.
In its secular version, however, this biblical notion of end times can be observed among many modern intellectuals who display a strong monotheist and Judeo-Christian mindset. Such a do-good divinatory and eschatological mindset surfaces quite often among secular scribes of the modern System, particularly in their advocacy of Communism, Liberalism, multiculturalism, and their latest avatar, the so–called ideology of human rights. Such utopian, optimistic systems of beliefs offer, as a rule, the formula for the glorious unfolding of the future.
However, in the process of the voyage to the final destination of multiracial embrace, real, but more often surreally evil creatures need to be doctored up to make their entrance onto the world scene — if for no other reason than to give further legitimacy to the prevailing founding myths of the System. Accordingly, the System must squash those wicked figures, usually viewed as symbols of absolute evil. Thus, on the one hand, System world-improvers must ceaselessly dispense flowery formulas about the birth of the paradise on Earth; yet, on the other, they must never tire from raising the specter of the absolute evil lurking in the guise of a “neo-Nazi,” a looming “Islamo-fascist, an “anti-Semite,” “a religious fundamentalist,” “a Holocaust denier,” a “right-wing extremist,” “or a “White supremacist” — all of whom dwell on the invisible horizon, all of whom are geared up to bring about the Undemocratic Judgment Day. Should a freedom-loving free spirit — a non-conformist individual — ever question such interim scenarios of the System, he is condemned to silence; or worse, he will be tracked down by the System Thought Police. In the realm of combating absolute, existential evil, facts and empirical data are quite irrelevant.
One encounters the notion of end times in the old European sagas and myths as well, although ancient Europeans had a cyclical view of the flow of time. Well, after all, after each storm, clear weather must show up on the horizon. Ernst Jünger must be credited for making a sharp distinction between the traditional European times of destiny, i.e. the cyclical times and the modern liberal, linear and measurable times of today’s System.
“Destiny can be anticipated, it may be felt, it can be dreaded, but it must never be known. Should that occur, man would live a life of a prisoner who knows the hour of his execution.” (An der Zeitmauer, 1959, p. 25.)
One may tentatively surmise that in order to set up a rock-solid future, the System must demand that its constituents behave like docile inmates on the death row.
In its desire to arrest the flow of time and bestow upon the mankind ready-made salvation formulas, the System cannot allow any criticism of its founding myths. The scenario of a possible undemocratic end times makes the System nervous and therefore irrational; it prompts its servants to be constantly on the alert and to consider it their sacred duty to resort to the criminalization of those viewed as icons of the absolute evil. Thus, a non-conformist man designated as an evil man is no longer considered a human, but a dangerous animal. Hence, like a dangerous animal, he has no right to enjoy the protection of the law. He must be killed and removed for good.
The Nonconformist in the Balkanized End Times
Once upon a time for many people in Europe, especially those in Eastern Europe, Communism was the symbol of the end times. The course of the communist era following the end of the World War II seemed to have been set in stone. Indeed, after the disaster of 1945, there were many intelligent Europeans who seriously thought that Communism was not only the end of their world, it was the end of the world altogether. Today, for postmodern White Europeans and Americans, the same question is resurfacing. Is the balkanized West, or whatever the word West may mean today, moving to even more dreadful end times? Or are the current times of the System only a passing cosmic yawn that will soon go away? Perhaps, future historians will give the appropriate name for the current System only when, as is so intensely desired by their many enemies, there are no majority-White nations or, better yet, when White people physically disappear.
Thinking of time as cyclical, especially in the case of war and social chaos, has historically been well appreciated by all White peoples. Today the notion of the recurrence of upheavals is much weaker, which is largely due to the forceful imposition of the multiracial and ecumenical mindset, promising that each tomorrow will be better than today. However, with the significant shifts in the racial profiles of Europe and America, followed by terrifying global financial turmoils, the possibility of the end times of the West is no longer a working hypothesis.
The concept of balkanization does not only imply geopolitical dislocations or ethnic and racial disruptions — a process traditionally and often pejoratively ascribed to the peoples of the Balkan Peninsula. Balkanization also means a poor sense of self-worth, a sensation of fleeting or passing identities that are continually replaced by new contradictory identities. This is today visible in the ongoing changes in the racial profile of the multiracial System whereby a host of divergent racial identities collide with each other, each trying to portray itself as the victim of the other identity.