Feminisation? What Feminisation?

In many ways, our society hasn’t become “feminized”, but quite the opposite, has become far more masculine.

  For instance, there is far more brutal economic competition out there in the jungle these days. More and more people are competing for the same, if not for a reduced, amount of jobs and apartments. Some boomer’s apple pie conservatism simply cannot change the fact that it has become increasingly hard to find good employment, let alone afford a freakin’ house.

  Furthermore, while both left-wingers as well as right-wingers, both liberals as well as conservatives, accept the female politician, the female pantsuit (just consider how many alt-right-ish parties are led or co-led by women, and that in the US, Ivanka can easily be used as a tool to make her father bomb whole countries), they do not accept the feminine man. We might witness a faux masculinity that is shallow and empty, but what we do not witness is the political, social and female embracement of feminine and/or low-status men. Masculinized women have not become to embrace feminine men, but have degenerated into coarse and filthy BDSM whores who need to get tortured by sociopathic billionaires, raped by ghetto thugs and enslaved by Arab radicals in order to get off.

  One might even say that an arms race has developed, an escalation of masculinity, in which the masculinization of women has resulted in a demand for even “stronger” and more masculine men. Since men, at the same time, are getting increasingly disenfranchised, and never allowed to develop actual strength, actual dominance, and gain actual power, it is not much of a surprise that so many men these days feel cruel and yet effeminate, aggressive and yet cowardly, bossy and yet spineless, hard and yet soft. Modern man is either soft as butter or he has a heart of stone.

Posted in Feminism | Tagged , , , , , , , | 2 Comments


O gracious God and Father; thank You for giving us Your Word and thank You for giving Your Word to me. Thank You for granting me the physical capacity to read it, and the means to do so in a comfortable setting, being able to afford different editions.  Thank You for giving us so many teachers, and thank You for using so many people to help me along this pilgrimage of mine. Thank You for everyone You used to lead me back to Your Word whenever I threatened to stumble; great professors and small preachers, famous authors, obscure bloggers – sermons, books and podcasts. Friends and foes of Yours. Thank You, Father, for all these men I have “talked” with on the internet over the years. Many of them remain faceless and anonymous to me and yet I feel that I do know them by now, for at times we shared each other’s burden. This is Your doing and it is marvelous in our eyes. So keep them all safe, heavenly Father, and draw them closer to Your Son, our King Jesus Christ. Amen.

Posted in Prayer | Tagged , , | Leave a comment

Here’s to Open Borders: Heineken’s Billionaire Heiress Wants an “Open World”

Capital either wants to go to misery (“outsourcing”) or import misery (“Refugees welcome!”) or both.  It wants to maximize competition among working class folks to make them more disposable, to lower their wages and to make them more frugal. Lower wages, higher rents: this is the simple materialist reason why Capital wants free trade and open borders; this is why it has long used immigration to move different ethnic groups throughout the world like pawns on a chessboard.

   Indians were sent to Fiji to cut sugar canes while Chinese people were sent to Canada, to South Africa and the United States to work on railways. Meanwhile, Irishmen, who were already accustomed to live “in any pig-hutch, their food consisting of potatoes and potatoes only”, were gladly welcomed in England because these uppity English punks still dared to demand more than whiskey and potatoes, and someone needed to acquaint them with the minimum of the necessities of life. The Wirtschaftswunder of 1950s Germany, i.e. the era of economic growth after World War II, was first “tackled” by importing Turkish workers, and the US Immigration Act of 1965 laid the foundation for the ethnic replacement of European Americans (and, ironically, the destruction of the African-American working class. African-Americans had been developing a relatively stable working class for some years and a delicate middle class with some economic success as small business owners when the foundation for their destruction was laid during the Civil Rights Era.)

   Not even mentioning other, let alone all, waves of mass-migration (such as the swamping of Australia by Asians) now, we can sum up the whole matter by noting that “No Nations! No Borders!” is just as much a corporate slogan as it is the slogan of a spoiled and pampered ANTIFA youth, rioting to emphasize their demands for less “racism” and for more immigration. This is why it can’t be repeated enough that “whoever criticizes capitalism, while approving immigration, whose working class is its first victim, had better shut up. Whoever criticizes immigration, while remaining silent about capitalism, should do the same.” (Alain de Benoist) A “race conscious” Capitalism that takes into consideration the well-being of low-status Aryans is a pipedream or a contradiction just as the liberal idea of a “conscious Capitalism” (to be achieved once 50% of all CEOs are females) is. At least Mrs de Carvalho-Heineken, based in Switzerland and with a net worth higher than that of Donald Trump (who, compared to some other billionaires is a small fish anyway and as a building contractor even dependent on the American domestic market) apparently only cares about the color green:


Posted in Capitalism | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , , , | 4 Comments

Against Women’s Rights

1. Christina Hoff Sommers’ most famous book, written when she was a philosophy professor at Clark University, poses a question: Who Stole Feminism? And the answer to that question is, “Nobody.” Lesbianic sociopaths, radical Marxists, anti-Christian man-haters, abortion lobbyists, perverts, weirdos, freaks and wicked, evil Jews (“Christ’s most violent enemies.” – John Calvin) did not “steal” feminism; they were in control of the Women’s “Liberation” movement right from its very inception. Trying to re-define “feminism” for conservative and/or Christian purposes is both futile and dishonest. Our proper goal is to utterly oppose feminism, and to destroy it from the face of the earth as an ideology of devils.

2. Likewise, there has never been a good and an appropriate “wave” of feminism, and it is therefore pointless if not even deceitful to differ between “third-wave” and “second-wave” feminism, between “modern” and “traditional”(?) feminism, implying that previous “waves” were justified. Besides, the majority of women do not even identify as feminists, which is true for both the US as well as the UK. Most Western women are not blue-haired majors in lesbian dance therapy, and they will not speak to you directly about feminism. Rather, they will say something along the lines of, “I’m not a feminist, but…” The tirade that is then to follow involving all the common feminist believes and talking points. There are hardly any self-identified feminists outside of college campuses, while the antifeminist camp is gladly frequented by homosexual Jews and overweight atheists who put bananas in their asses. Let us hence simply identify our enemy as the false god of “equality” and as the devil of those so-called “women’s rights.” So-called “women’s rights” were a grave mistake and only time will tell if the white Western world will ever survive the mistake of granting women even the very right to vote.

3. I recognize that the Puritans don’t have the best reputation these days. As a matter of fact, one can make a movie about a Christian farmer’s family with children, goats and a dog being haunted and then murdered by Satanic forces, and people be like, “Man, these Puritans, they creep me out! They really had it coming! Thankfully, Satan murdered that girl’s whole family so she could become a rootless cosmopolitan and a feminist witch!” Still, at least in Reformed circles it shouldn’t be too controversial to encourage the prayerful study of the Puritans and the Reformers themselves. Unfortunately, the appreciation of the fathers is often narrowly limited to matters concerning prayer, spiritual crises and to rather abstract topics such as the importance of distinguishing between necessity and compulsion to understand what is implied when it is deduced that human will is “of necessity either drawn or lead into evil.” (Calvin, Institutes, II. iii. 5) But we should also consider what the fathers taught in regards to more juicy topics such as Jewry and (the monstrous regiment of) women. 

4. Listen, for example, to John ‘Decalogue’ Dod expounding the duties of a wife in his 17th century bestseller A Plaine and Familiar Exposition of the Tenne Commandements: The duty of the wife is constant obedience and subjection. As the church is in subjection to Christ, so let the wife be to her husband in all things. If she rebel against his commandment, she rebels against God. The wife must persuade herself that her husband’s charge is God’s charge, and when he speaks, God speaks by him, and that which was a thing indifferent before the husband required it, is now become a bounden duty unto her, after the husband hath once enjoined it. And therefore she must resolve to obey him in all things, (…) must obey her husband in all things cheerfully and willingly, without gainsaying.”

5.  Thankfully, men like Dalrock regularly point out how antifeminism has been hijacked or is at least often misused by what I call “man-up cuckservatives”. You know the type; the type that loves to go on about how a “real” man never touches a woman, even to brush her out of the way when she’s obstructing our Lord Jesus Christ, how “real” men actually like stronk womyn, how nothing is the fault of women themselves, nothing the fault of society as a whole but everything the fault of some individual guy who himself is just not strong enough to appreciate the strength of these stronk womyn. It’s the type of men who promote a kind of heterosexual gay marriage between masculine women and masculine men; the type who believe that there are individual solutions to structural problems: “Man up and pull yourself up by your own bootstraps.”

6. Likewise, despite their many, many flaws, some pagans such as weev over at the Daily Stormer, rightfully point out that “traditional gender roles” aren’t some sort of moderate feminism and not about “real” equality. (For instance, the right of a husband to inflict “moderate corporal punishment” on his wife was only removed in 1891 in the UK; in Germany, husbands could legally terminate their wives’ contracts with an employer and forbid them to work outside the home until 1958.) Now listen what weev has to say: “Coverture was the reality for all of European history up until the late 19th century. The basic principle of coverture is that the rights of the woman are completely subsumed into that of her husband’s. A married woman could not own property, sign legal documents or enter into a contract, obtain an education against her husband’s wishes, or keep a salary for herself. (…) Men gave women full legal independence, and then they even stopped giving them the basic boundaries of discipline. What did women do with all these new rights and comforts? Well, you see how that graph goes. They whored like never before through the sixties and seventies, and Western civilization has been rotting ever since.”

7. If you’re still fixated on Islam, still believe that the main problem with open borders is that some people might come in who don’t particularly care about sodomy, and still don’t get that the Islamization of Western Europe is merely a symptom, not the actual disease, you honestly deserve to be thrown off a roof. Islam is like the common cold, a disease you can get easily rid off. But modernism is like AIDS: weakening your immune system up to a point where even the common cold can kill you. Just because Islam is opposed to this or that element of degeneracy doesn’t mean that it stops being degenerate and wicked. Some Imam being opposed to gender equality and sodomy doesn’t mean that we should support it. “Moslems do something so we should do the total opposite of it” is like building your civilization on sand. And when you say that a husband’s right to discipline his wife is some “backward sandnigger shit”, you essentially imply that our Christian ancestors up until very recently were “backwarded sandniggers.”

8. Finally, although tradition must not rule our interpretation, it should nevertheless guide it. If, upon reading a particular passage of Sacred Scripture you come up with an interpretation that has escaped the notion of every other Christian and every other man of the Covenant for 3000 or so years, or has been championed by universally recognized heretics, chances are pretty good that you’d better abandon your interpretation. As a rule of thumb, everything that was published after 1968 is wrong. If your Biblical exegesis results in a St. Paul that could just as well join the faculty of Berkeley’s Gender Studies Department, because he’s just as concerned about equality as Hillary Clinton and has performed just as few miracles as her, you might want to rethink your theology.

Posted in Christianity, Feminism | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , | 3 Comments

Sanctified Through Thy Truth


1. “Once Orlov stuffed himself with mashed peas and died. And Krylov found out about it and then died as well. And Spiridonov died all by himself. And Spiridonov’s wife fell off the sideboard and also died. And Spiridonov’s children drowned in the pond. And then Spirodonov’s grandmother took to drink and hit the road. And Mikhailovich stopped combing his hair and caught the scabies. And Kruglov sketched a woman with a whip in her hands and went out of his mind. And Perekhrestov received four hundred roubles by wire and boasted so much that they had to fire him. All good people but just can’t keep a cool head.” Author: Daniil Kharms, arrested by the NKVD in 1942 for “spreading defeatism”, died of starvation in a Soviet prison the same year, and always a good medicine when you’re feeling down from the fact that even good people can’t keep a cool head at times.

2. Plato lets Simmias say to Socrates that one should “take the best and most irrefragable of human theories, and let this be the raft upon which he sails through life—not without risk, as I admit, if he cannot find some word [logos] of God which will more surely and safely carry him.” (Phaedo 2.65) – To which Augustine replied that the only thing that distinguishes “us” (=Christians) from the Platonists is the belief that there is indeed such a Logos that became flesh (John 1:14). What does it mean that the Logos became flesh? It means that “tout ce qui arrive est adorable.” (Léon Bloy); that “everything that happens is adorable.” What is the Logos that became flesh? It He is not merely someone who brings a truth but He is the truth (John 14:6). “Sanctify them in the truth; your word is truth” (John 17:17 ESV), your word is aletheia, ἀλήθεια, not an adjective (meaning “your word is true“) but a noun, “your word is truth.”

3. Christ’s prayer for unity (John 17:21) has often been misused as an argument for ecumenism and church unity irrespective of doctrine and practices. However, servants of the Lord Jesus Christ must seek unity only in a way that honors said prayer, “Sanctify them truth thy truth.” (KJV) There is no true unity without a common faith in the teachings of the inerrant Bible, along with a common life of holiness.

4. Since Nietzsche (or arguably since Hume), the underpinning assumptions of the old debate on the existence (or the nature) of God have dramatically changed. The classical arguments for the existence of God all attempted to show that God exists; but they all assumed that truth exists as well, and that the world is based on structures that are accessible through reason. These structures were supposed to be originated from God, but since they were immediately accessible to us, they could lead us to this origin of God Himself. “Even we knowers of today, we godless anti-metaphysicians, still take our fire, too, from the flame lit by the thousand-year-old faith, the Christian faith which was also Plato’s faith, that God is truth; that truth is divine.”, says Nietzsche. But this very idea was an illusion for Nietzsche, “truths are illusions of which one has forgotten that they are illusions“, he said, believing there is no such thing as “the truth”, but only either use- or harmful idiosyncrasies. “We should not imagine that the world turns to us a readable face”, Michel Foucault later added, and Richard Rorty then simply replaced the former quest for understanding with a quest for social hope. 

5. It simply is an intellectual declaration of bankruptcy when people with Nietzsche avatars go on about “modernism” and “Cultural Marxism”, not being aware of the fact that the very same postmodernists (like Michel Foucault, this homosexual Frenchman and staunch supporter of the Islamic Revolution in Iran, and intellectual predecessor of “Everything is just a construct”-feminists such as Judith Butler) have much better reason to see themselves in a Nietzschean tradition. The same is true for their current darling, Jordan B. Peterson, who stands in a Jungian tradition about the “collective unconsciousness”, about becoming balanced with the archetypes who don’t have to literally be truth to have a symbolic kind of truth, and are de facto simply about feeling good, it’s all just about feelings, about feelings of the self, about “self-actualization” and about “sorting yourself out.”

6. Charles Péguy once defined a “modernist” as someone who doesn’t believe what he believesIt is not only liberal mainline churches who stand accused as heretical modernists but also all these alt-right-ish people who LARP as Roman gladiators contemplating conversion to Orthodoxy. They too don’t have faith in God but faith in faith; they don’t believe in God, they believe in religion and its effects on a people’s birth rate. The only difference is that some modernist who don’t actually care about God and the Bible use religion for a “liberal”, while other modernists who don’t actually care about God and the Bible use religion for a “reactionary” agenda. A great many Christian places who profess to be an alternative to the heresies of modernism, are themselves nothing more than dens of iniquity, in which these oily manwhores commit spiritual adultery with the Romish antichrist. 

7. Or with Orthodox Patriarchs. Western OrthoLARPers (or maybe OrthoHipsters, attending churches you’ve probably never heard of) are of course the latest craze these days. Just like their yoga pants-wearing sisters they love religions their parents don’t belong to, ideally Eastern religions from Eastern countries where people have less teeth but more faith. And just like the sexual cuckold fantasizes about a man of raw masculinity coming and commanding his wife, they fantasize about a raw man coming from the wild, wild East, and conquering his church. Furthermore, just like their pansexual little brother roleplays as a Japanese girl on the internet, they LARP as deep Orthodox monks from the Russian steppe. They even have their own substitute nationalism, as can easily be seen if you dare to say something remotely critical about Russian history or Orthodoxy on some of these alt-right-ish blogs. Then, these Westerners become just as nasty as European liberals who lecture Americans about guns.

8. Andrei Sinyavsky, the great Russian dissident whose “voice from the chorus” reached the world in the 1970s from a Soviet gulag, once noted that “One should not believe out of habit, nor out of tradition, nor because one is afraid of death; not because it’s better to be safe than to be sorry, not because one is forced to believe, nor because of humanist or philosophical reasons, not even to save one’s soul and not be original and unique. One should believe in God simply because God exists.” Amen! And we should also not believe because we hope that Christianity might be a weapon against Islam or against feminism, but because it’s true and it’s truth. It feels to me as if ecumenism is not motivated by a desire for peace but driven by a disregard for God’s word. But if this wicked Argentinian Jesuit who leads this NGO that works on behalf of Islam, immigrants and Jewry, and that dares to call itself the Catholic (=universal) church were to die right now, the fire of his punishment would never cease.

9. The relativism of the Western world is not a very tolerant ideology. After all, it wants to get rid off everyone who doesn’t want to “deconstruct” all his deeply held religious beliefs. Everything is subjective and everyone who disagrees with the idea that everything is subjective is objectively evil: non-Western Christians for instance who don’t particularly care about “gay marriage.” But it weren’t the Jehovah’s Witness, going from door to door, who threatened peace; it were the Nazis who put them into concentration camps, and the liberals now who essentially work on the criminalization of Christianity, up to an absurd, Kafkaesque point where even not baking a cake is considered to be a criminal act. It is not longer enough for the citizen to simply submit – Babylon demands accomplices. 

10. We have to resist the temptation to give up religious truths for the sake of political comradery. Tolerance once implied to accept that others hold to different truths, not to give up our ideas of truth themselves. It’s very sad to see that so many Protestant Christians are unwilling to utter the least amount of criticism directed at Catholodoxy; and it’s even sadder to see that the opposite does not seem to be the case. While Russia is making it harder and harder for independent churches to survive, and the Catholodox on the internet make no secret out of the fact how much they despise the true Church, it’s mostly lukewarm cultural Protestants who immediately clutch their pearls and jump to the defense of Catholodoxy whenever someone voices his opposition towards them. We must somehow find a way to defend the concept of truth (and vice versa of heretical errors and damnable lies) against both left-wing and right-wing modernists, while simultaneously work together against feminists, neoconservatives and “globalists.” “Nam pirata non est ex perduellium numero definitus, sed communis hostis omnium.” – “For the pirate is not counted among the enemies of the state, but he is the common enemy of all.” To sum up: we should be good people and together fight against this common enemy of all, but still keep a cool head about it and neither make excuses for the first nor for the third Rome.

Posted in Christianity, False Religions, Philosophy | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , | Leave a comment

Isaiah on the Latest Terror Attack in the UK

So, as of now, 19 people are confirmed dead at what seems to be yet another Muslim terror attack. This time targeting an Ariana Grande concert in the UK. But every Brit who hasn’t at least secretly supported Nigel Farage, has blood on his hands. All these white girls who threw cuddle toys at the “refugees”, screaming “Refugees welcome!”, have blood on their hands. Maybe even their own blood, given that it’s almost exclusively women who attend Ariana Grande concerts. In the US, single white women are even more opposed to Trump’s once trademark promise, the wall, than Mexicans themselves! We all know, what will happen next: flags on twitter and facebook, some tears and some speeches and then immediately the warnings about how the white man is just as dangerous, and that it’s actually all Trump’s fault. The most important lesson, fake news and white girls will soon tell us, is that we don’t let the “right-wing populists” “exploit” this tragedy. Yes, losing your sister to some Muslim’s nail bomb is tragic, but white men “exploiting” such a terrorist attack – now THAT is the real threat!

   Always remember that Muslims are just one of the symptoms, not the actual disease. Muslims are like the common cold – something you can get easily rid off these days, but modernism is like AIDS: it destroys your immune system until even a common cold can kill you. Now listen to the Prophet Isaiah (Isaiah 1:4-7):

Ah, sinful nation, a people laden with iniquity, a seed of evildoers, children that are corrupters: they have forsaken the Lord, they have provoked the Holy One of Israel unto anger, they are gone away backward.

Why should ye be stricken any more? ye will revolt more and more: the whole head is sick, and the whole heart faint.

From the sole of the foot even unto the head there is no soundness in it; but wounds, and bruises, and putrifying sores: they have not been closed, neither bound up, neither mollified with ointment.

Your country is desolate, your cities are burned with fire: your land, strangers devour it in your presence, and it is desolate, as overthrown by strangers.


Posted in False Religions, Feminism | Tagged , , , , , , , , | Leave a comment

Tips on Reading the Bible

I have heard from so many people that they struggle with reading the Bible, let alone with reading the entire Bible from beginning to end, that I thought about saying a word or two about that. First of all, my main tip is to NOT approach the Bible like any other book you try to “finish”  in a given period of time. Rather, read a little bit every single day until you finally die. Instead of making reading it something “special” you only do once a week but then immediately for some hours straight, it should be something you do regularly for shorter periods of time. Your motto should be slow but steady.

   Personally, I use a simple Excel spreadsheet next to my calendar where I tick off all the necessary things I have already done on any given day – like daily exercising, daily reading of a little bit of theology, Bible, memorizing a Psalm, etc. etc. Right now, I read through the Gospel according to John – and whenever I approach a book, I first skim it. (Almost a bit like with Freud’s technique of free association, where you’re not supposed to focus on anything, to search for anything or to censor anything, but, rather, simply see what kind of patterns and ideas will be revealed once you begin saying whatever is coming to your mind.) Sometimes, I read along while listening to an audio book version of it. Once I’ve skimmed the book a couple of times, I more carefully read the individual passages. Then, after that, I read it with pens in my hand, like everything regarding gender stuff I mark with pink, everything regarding God’s wrath I mark with red, everything regarding faith with turquoise and so on. Finally, I might read it with a commentary or while looking at the notes of a study Bible. Obviously, this can take some time – but why would you want to rush through the Bible? It’s not a detective novel or something. Statistically, you might live until you’re 80 or something so there should be some years left where you can read a little bit of Bible every single day until you finally pass into glory.

   Also, I like to read good works of theology, ideally systematic theology, on a daily basis. Again, just a few pages every day. Not much. For instance, I can highly recommend John Calvin’s Institutes (get the two-volume set from John T. McNeill, though) which is simply perfect for daily reading since it covers so many topics, is separated into mostly short subchapters and, especially combined with the footnotes in the McNeill-set, it covers ideas from Plato, Aristotle, Cicero, and many other thinkers. Likewise, Herman Bavinck’s “Reformed Dogmatics” is as excellent as it is expansive. I guess I like these kinds of systematic theologies because, while the Bible is magical, the Bible should not be approached like magic, not like some gypsy’s crystal ball, looking for obscure numbers (fascination with numbers is always a red flag) but with sobriety – one of Calvin’s favorite words, btw.

   On the other hand, the Bible should not be approached like the academic work of some college professor, either. We must not only read through but also pray through the Bible. So my suggestion is to always say a short prayer before you do your daily Bible reading, simply asking your creator to help you understand it, apply it and forgive you, if you don’t understand something, if you’re knuckleheaded, or if it’s sin preventing you from understanding it, etc. This is one of the reasons why I think that the “Reformation Heritage KJV Study Bible” is so excellent. I obviously like it for the fact that it is strictly Reformed but also that it’s not just a study Bible for the mind, but also a study Bible for the soul, since every single chapter closes with an idea for personal or family meditation. So, the notes do give you both, say, the historical context or point out that the Greek in John 1:5 can both mean that the darkness did not “overcome” and the darkness “comprehend” the light, as well as thoughts to meditate upon. For instance, they might ask you, “Why must churches be willing to challenge men’s worldliness, even if doing so may reduce their numbers?”, or “Why is the new birth absolutely necessary for salvation? Are you born again?”, or “If God can even use a traitor to provide salvation, how are you motivated to trust Him with your trials now?”)

   So, just do it! “Ever tried. Ever failed. No matter. Try again. Fail again. Fail better.” – Samuel Beckett.

Posted in Christianity | Tagged , , | Leave a comment