THE DYING AND THE DEAD

THE DYING AND THE DEAD
If Yockey had not been hounded to death by the Jews and were alive today,
would he take again, without variation, the oath he took in 1946 when he
left Wiesbaden, where he could no longer endure the obscene spectacle of the
foul murders that the Americans were committing to please the Jews?
*I will go from one end to the other of my beloved Europe. I know well that
I shall be going only to a churchyard, but I know, too, that the churchyard
is dear, very dear, to me. Beloved dead lie buried there. Every stone over
them, every bomb-crater containing the pulverized bones of these dead, tell
me of a life once so ardently lived, so passionate a belief in its own
achievements, its own truth, its own battles, its own knowledge, that I
know, even now I know, that I shall fall down and kiss those stones, those
endless ruins, this blood-drenched, sacred earth, and weep.
But I surely also know that then, despite a convulsive rage at the
perpetrators of this crime, I will again stand erect over this European
graveyard and swear the solemn oath that to my last breath I will fight
tooth and nail against those who attempted, in vain to be sure, to destroy
the cradle of our Western Culture, with its unmatched accomplishments, with
its deeds unique in the annals of Humanity. This, I, Francis Yockey, do
solemnly swear!*
Do men die of broken hearts?
The physical scars of the Suicide of the West have been effaced. The ruins
have been replaced by restorations or new structures that often do not show
the grotesquely anti-human vulgarity of Jewish art. The intellectual and
spiritual devastation, however, not only remains but grows apace. It reminds
us of H. G. Wells’ anticipation of nuclear warfare: the atomic bombs he
imagined produced a stead chain-reaction, so that their craters constantly
grew large and spread wider, gnawing away the countryside, mile after mile.
Or perhaps a better analogy would be an endemic disease that slowly but
steadily destroys a dwindling and dying race.
Even a cursory survey of Europe today would require a volume, but we may
permit ourselves a few hurried glimpses.
In Germany, the Jews did not insist on their original plan, set forth in
Theodore Kaufman’s Germany Must Perish!, (62) that after their Huns had
overwhelmed Germany, the surviving Germans would all be surgically
sterilized to ensure the prompt extermination of a nation that had offended
the Sons of the Covenant. That Final Solution might have seemed
objectionable to “an-tie-see-mites.” So the good work was entrusted, in
Germany as in other Aryan nations, to the demoralizing and disintegrating
effects of what Yockey calls “culture-distortion”: “democracy” (i.e.,
government by organized crime), “education” (i.e., sabotage of children’s
minds), usury, financial piracy, drug-addiction, promiscuity, miscegenation,
mongrelization, promotion of superstition and irrationality, and the other
blessings Americans now enjoy. That is working very well in Germany. A
statistician has calculated that if all things continue as they now are, in
ninety years the only living Germans will be senescent and past the age of
reproduction.
(62. Newark, New Jersey, 1941; reprinted s.l.&a., and available from Liberty
Bell Publications. Kaufman’s book is an excellent and most instructive
specimen of Jewish thinking. He wrote before his tribe had invented the
Holohoax, and so he can only scream that the Germans are militaristic and
have produced such awfully wicked philosophers as Nietzsche; that makes them
“an execrable people” and they must be exterminated, one and all. He prides
himself on his tender heart, which makes him recommend that instead of
having all the Germans massacred at once, the survivors, men, women, and
children, should be herded together and sexually mutilated by surgeons (he
even computes how many will be needed for the godly work) so that they
cannot reproduce their damned species. In Schuld und Schicksal (Munich,
1962), J.G. Burg, a Jew who was born in Germany and lived throughout the war
in Germany or adjacent territories, believes that Kaufman’s book was part of
a concerted effort by the Jews’ master minds to exasperate the Germans and
thus incite pogroms to help create “world opinion” for a war against Germany
and for dispossession of the inhabitants of Palestine in favor of the Jews,
and Burg supports his conclusion with photographic reproductions of
documents in German and Yiddish. He quotes (p. 72) Chaim Weizmann as having
said in 1934, “I would much rather see the annihilation of the Jews in
Germany than failure to make Israel a land for the Jews.” Weizmann (who
became the first president of “Isra‰l” when it was finally established in
1948) in October 1934 mobilized Jewish pressure on the British government to
make Britain frustrate Hitler’s proposal that Jews who wished to leave
Germany should be permitted to go to Palestine or whithersoever they wished,
taking with them one thousand pounds sterling and goods to the value of
20,000 marks, the remainder of their holdings (if any) to be paid for in
regular installments over a period of years. Several subsequent efforts by
Hitler to help the Zionists attain their professed goal were frustrated by
Britain and her allies, obviously in obedience to Jewish commands. It was
the failure so to exasperate the Germans that they would resort to pogroms
that made it necessary to invent the “Holocaust” hoax. It is noteworthy
that, with the exception of Burg and a very few others, the Jews do not seem
to regard as immoral the efforts of Weizmann and other Elders of Jewry to
procure the “annihilation of the Jews in Germany,” who numbered about
500,000; presumably the sacrifice of those Jews would have been “good for
the Jewish people,” and that is all that matters.)
In Germany, as in other Western nations, the Jews are resorting to
pseudo-legal terrorism as well as mob violence to enforce belief in their
“Holocaust” hoax, and they are more or less committed to the slovenly
version of the tale that they used as a pretext for the obscene and savage
murders committed by the British and Americans at Nuremberg. That fiction
was an improvement on earlier versions, (63) but it relied on the perjury of
a German traitor who had been an American spy throughout the war, and was so
carelessly contrived that it could not resist critical examination. (64)
Since the exposure of the great hoax, there has been a belated attempt to
produce “witnesses,” who, I estimate, are as numerous as the individuals,
many of them Aryans, who have reported their vacations aboard “flying
saucers” or their confabulations with little green or cerise men from Mars
or elsewhere. The principal burden of the attempts to enforce belief in the
incredible, however, is the doctrine that it is an “insult to the Jewish
people” to disbelieve whatever they choose to tell the lower races.
(63. According to the Courrier du Continent, a valuable little bulletin
published at Lausanne, in its issue for May 1981, a delightful early version
of the “Holocaust” hoax was given by a Jew residing in Sweden, Dr. Stefan
Szende, in a book published at Zurich in 1944. According to this version,
hundreds of thousands of Jews were exterminated by the cruel Germans at
Belzec (a small town about twenty-eight miles south-southeast of Lublin),
where the Germans had constructed a vast underground installation, including
huge halls, built entirely of metal, with floors that could be raised or
lowered by machinery. Each floor was a triumph of engineering, so large that
several thousands of dear Jews could be packed on it, nude, at one time. The
elevator then descended until the Jews were immersed into water to their
waists, when a powerful electric current was introduced into the water,
electrocuting them instantly. Then the elevator went up to a station at
which a further application of electricity incinerated and presumably
vaporized all the thousands of corpses, and the machine was ready for a new
batch of several thousand. Presumably this version was thought too
complimentary to the Germans’ famous talent for engineering and applied
science, just as the claims that Germans had exterminated 40,000,000 or
12,000,000 Jews were considered a bit hazardous mathematically and the
figure was reduced to the 6,000,000 in the current version.)
(64. See the works cited in note 45 supra.)
We should not err, as do so many anti-Jewish writers, by interpreting this
Jewish terrorism in terms of our own mentality and so regarding it as a
consciously evil fraud. As several Jews told the National Conference of
Christians and Jews, “normal [i.e., Aryan] ethical standards” are
“irrelevant” in such matters. (65) I do not profess to understand the Jewish
mentality, but it may be that one aspect of it was revealed by Professor
Eric Goldman of Princeton University, if he was correctly quoted as
contending that history is a “weapon” to be employed for “determining people’s
ideas and attitudes,” and that a respectable historian has a
“responsiblity...for making sure that he writes history in such a way as
will bring about the kind of action that he wants.” Professor Goldman even
made the frightening claim that his equation of history with propaganda was
the view of “most historians [!].” (66) One can imagine no more total
contrast to the Aryan conception of history as an effort to recover, as
accurately as possible, the absolute truth about what actually happened: Von
Ranke’s famous standard of a perfectly objective description of the past wie
es eigentlich gewesen w„re, and James Harvey Robinson’s addendum that
history should also determine objectively, if possible, wie es eigentlich
geworden w„re. It is quite possible that to the Jewish mentality what
actually happened appears completely irrelevant, and our interest in
ascertaining historical truth may seem to be just another odd manifestation
of our mental inferiority. The only thing that matters is what you can make
your subjects believe, including, perhaps, the mass of your own race. To us,
that seems reprehensible deception, but it is quite possible that to the
Jewish mentality “truth” is whatever is good for God’s People. (67) That may
be why Jewish forgeries and hoaxes seem to us so amazingly careless, and we
wonder why their contrivers disdained the relatively small amount of work
that would have been required to make their fabrication consistent and
plausible: to them it seemed apodictic that people ought to believe what is
good for the Jewish people without thinking about it. The tales in the “Old
Testament,” for example, are attempts to simulate an historical record, but
is seems never to have occurred to the rabbis to make them internally
consistent and less absurd. (68) And the nonchalance appears today. When
Professor Butz’s masterly exposure of the Jews’ Holy Hoax about the Germans
was first published, Jews residing in the United States and holding
professorships in American universities, who must surely have learned from
observation of their goy colleagues what we consider to be the academic
standards of integrity, began at once to denounce as “an infamous lie” a
book of which they had never even seen a copy, and did so without even
taking the trouble to ascertain its title, which they gave as “*The
Fabrication of a Hoax*” or “*The Holocaust Never Happened*,” and urging that
such disgrace to the academic profession be “rooted out” and presumably
exterminated. The venomous hatred is, of course, only natural, but what is
significant is that the learned professors did not take the two minutes of
time for a phone call by which they could have learned the title of the book
they were denouncing so hysterically. To us simple-minded Aryans, that seems
amazing.
(65. Reported in The Christian News; see note 55 supra.)
(66. Goldman is quoted by Professor James J. Marin in his section of the
impressive biographical monument, Harry Elmer Barnes (Colorado Springs,
Myles, 1968), p. 241. That Goldman may be right about the majority of
persons who now call themselves historians is suggested by the fact that the
once-respected American Historical Association, which turns a penny now and
then by renting out its membership list, crawled on its yellow belly in
abasement and apology when it found it had rented the list to the Institute
for Historical Review in Torrance, California, which wickedly conducts
historical research that does not bear the Kosher seal of approval.)
(67. This attitude carries over, of course, into the Judaic religions, such
as Christianity with its ostentatious repudiation of the “wisdom of this
world” and its exaltation of the believing nitwit above the rational and
learned seekers of the truth. A good example is Augustine, who must have
known that he was lying (by “pagan” standards, at least) when he assured his
open-mouthed congregation that he, as a missionary, had saved the souls of a
whole nation of Africans, who had eyes in their chests and mouths where a
man’s neck would be but no heads, organs for which good Christians would
presumably have no use. The same spirit appears in the numerous
ecclesiastics who, during the Middle Ages, equipped a cathedral, monastery,
or church with one of the many foreskins clipped from the infant Jesus when
he was circumcized or a bottle of the Virgin Mary’s milk or another Holy
Shroud. The contriver of the imposture could tell himself, perhaps
sincerely, that he was helping save the souls of many yokels by stimulating
the tourist trade and augmenting his revenues.)
(68 It is true that when the “Old Testament” tales, in the form that they
had around the beginning of the first century B.C., were translated from
Hebrew and Aramaic into the koine dialect of Greek, thus forming the
Septuagint, the translators did make some superficial efforts to clean up
some absurdities in addition to converting the stories to monotheism. For
example, the author of the myth about Esther gave the stupid Persian king
the name of Assueras or Ahasuerus or something like that, a purely fictional
and non-Persian name. The translators make him Artaxerxes, which was safe
enough, since there were three Persian monarchs of that name, who ruled
between 484 and 337 B.C., and that sounded plausible to persons who had no
real knowledge of Persian history. In the story of God’s unsuccessful
attempt to murder Moses (*Exod.* 4.24), the translators reflected that it
was undignified for the creator of Heaven and Earth to be lurking about a
desert inn, and they accordingly made the terrorist “an agent of the Lord,”
which is certainly less grotesque. The Hebrew text underwent some censorship
after the Septuagint was made; for example, in the tale of Esther there were
several deletions, including the passage in which Esther explains to Yahweh
how repugnant to a Jewess is coitus with an uncircumcized man, although, of
course, she remains faithful to her duty to manipulate in the interests of
her race the goy whom she has attracted sexually.)
The continuous rewriting of history, so graphically described in George
Orwell’s 1984, may seem to the racial mentality of Jews no more that a
common-sense provision for ensuring “social justice” and the like. For
example, a Jew recently wrote a book to prove that no tribe of savages ever
practices anthropophagy: all storIes of cannibalism, except in a few cases
of acute hunger (e.g., the Donner Party in California), were invented by the
nasty “race prejudice” of the swinish Aryans. (69) I don’t know whether that
claim is important for Jewish purposes, but if it is, it is surely a proof
of the evils of “racism” that it isn’t feasible as yet to have all books of
history and ethnology that mention cannibals dumped down a “memory hole”
into ever-burning incinerators in all the libraries of the world. So far as
I know, this attitude toward historical facts has never been systematically
investigated, but Samuel Roth, the eminent and courageous Jew to whom we owe
so much, touches on it in his references to the “Old Testament.” (70) But, I
repeat, we must not be misled by the emotional binges of writers who hate
Jews and cannot consider the problem objectively. Whatever tampering with
facts may seem to us, we must remember that to the Jews it is simply an
expression of their righteousness, however little we may be able to
comprehend such an attitude. It is strictly comparable to the mentalities,
equally alien and mysterious to us, that Professor Haas studied in his
fundamental Destiny of the Mind. (71)
(69. Professor W. Arens, The Man-Eating Myth (Oxford University [!], 1980.)
(70. See note 29. Roth discussed the expurgations and falsifications of the
stories on pp. 25-51, 57-62 of his book. These chapters and part of a
chapter were omitted in the reprint to avoid sending Christian holy men into
fits.)
(71. See above, p. 17. n. 19.)
So much has to be said in explanation of the recent imposition of
righteousness in Germany. The puppet government in Bonn has ordered its
courts to find that it is a criminal offense to doubt even the most
impossible parts of the Holohoax, on the grounds that such doubt “denies to
every Jew the respect to which he is entitled.” (72) Men are now serving
long prison sentences for having dared to express such doubts, and recently
the Bonn government’s Thought Police raided the homes of almost 500 Germans
who were suspected of having in their possession books, pamphlets, or
leaflets of which the Master Race disapproves. It is also a criminal offense
in Germany to doubt the “authenticity” of “Anne Frank’s Diary,” a hoax
contrived with such contempt for the Aryan mind that it contains such
blatant internal contradictions that it could not impose on any reader who
has even a modicum of critical intelligence. (73) And the exercise of normal
intelligence is a criminal offense even though the Bonn government’s own
criminological laboratory reported that the manuscript was written
throughout in the hand of a single author, who made many of his revisions
with a pen that had not been manufactured before the supposed “martyrdom” of
the young Jewess who is supposed to have written it. And there are rumors
that the Jews are demanding that all mail that comes into Germany be opened
and censored, lest some vile correspondent abroad say something that might
start ratiocination in the dumm Kopf of a cringing German. Such is the
plight of Germany today.
(72. The decision of the German Supreme Court is quoted in the Jews’
“intellectual” periodical, Patterns of Prejudice, January 1980, pp. 32f. The
article goes on to demand more stringent legislation in Germany to “plug the
loopholes” in existing laws and make certain that Aryan curs do not even
think improper thoughts.)
(73. If you want to make sure that you didn’t overlook any of the ridiculous
contradictions in the yarn, see Ditlieb Felderer’s incisive booklet, Anne
Frank’s Diary (Torrance, California, Institute for Historical Review,
1979).)
The British have not yet sunk so low, but one has misgivings for the future.
They destroyed their empire, sacrificed the lives of 357,000 persons,
permanently depleting their racial vitality through the loss of much of
their best blood, and inflicted painful and often irremediable wounds on
370,000 more; they disrupted their society and demoralized their whole
population; and they impoverished themselves and their descendants, perhaps
forever. All this they did to punish the Germans for having wanted to have a
country of their own, and I wonder whether many Englishmen expected
gratitude from the Jews. If they did, what were their sentiments when they
read recently in William R. Perl’s The Four Front War that among the
dastardly persecutors of God’s Race the vile British are second only to the
vile Germans? Maurice Samuel was right: nothing that Aryans can do will ever
satisfy his insatiable race.
Americans, remembering the old British tradition of gentlemen, are wont to
assume that British politicians must be somehow morally superior to the
gangsters of the great syndicate of organized crime that rules the United
States. That is a mistake: the only difference is that the subordinate
gangs, which stage competition on the lower levels, are called
“Conservative” and “Labor,” instead of “Republican” and “Democratic.” Their
activities correspond, even in detail, to the treason and looting that James
Farrel has clearly described in his new book, The Judas Syndrome. (74)
(74. San Francisco, Fulton-Hall, 1980. The author skirts warily around the
edges of the race problem, but he does consider the sheer insanity of
importing into our overpopulated land ever growing hordes of black savages,
mestizos from Puerto Rico, Cuba, and Mexico, and Mongoloids from southeast
Asia in the guise of “refugees.” The obvious result will necessarily be a
situation like that described in Jean Raspail’s “chilling novel about the
end of the white world,” The Camp of the Saints, of which the English
translation, published by Scribner’s in 1975, had so large a sale that it is
now out-of-print in both cloth-bound and paperback editions. (Guess why!).)
The British, no less than the other Aryan nations, are driven by the
death-wish that has been so deeply and perhaps ineradicably implanted in
their subconscious minds. Not content with liquidating their empire, they
began to import into their already overcrowded and overpopulated island
hordes of anthropoid vermin from all over the world, from black savages to
turban-wearing Asiatics. Any rational man could have predicted from the very
first the inevitable consequence of the wholesale importation of racial
enemies, but now, as well-organized mobs, directed by portable radios, surge
through large quarters of British cities, burning and looting and killing,
the Anglo-Saxon and Celtic boobs are astonished and listen, open-mouthed, to
their government betrayers as they chatter about “unemployment” and, with
almost incredible effrontery, claim that there are no “racial overtones” to
race riots. The solution, of course, will be to surfeit the vermin with yet
more blood sucked from the veins of the tax-paying serfs, who do not seem
even to remember that they once had a country of their own. No one, so far
as I have heard, has even dared to suggest what should be obvious even to
schoolboys: the architects of the policy that imported the racial enemies
and the loud-mouthed holy men and “humanitarians” who approved and endorsed
that policy are either (a) conscious traitors, who intended the consequences
of their acts, or (b) so feckless and feeble-minded that they must
henceforth be excluded from influencing national policy in any way.
Traitors have imposed on the befuddled British a “Race Relations Act” to
make certain that the white population, which is being dispossessed, does
not openly resent the hordes of alien invaders. Englishmen are now in prison
for having been so bold as to assert that their race is fit to live. And
although the British, who are still a majority on what was once their
island, are harassed by economic pressures and deafened by the clamor of
their dervishes and the rest of the rabble of world-improvers, their bovine
acceptance of their degradation makes one wonder whether the imprisoned men
were not mistaken in the belief they expressed. Christians, of course, must
be expected to obey the command of the Jew they worship: “Love your enemies
and slaughter mine” (*Luke* 6.27 & 19.27). But Christians are a minority in
Britain, estimated by competent observers at less than one-fifth of the
white population. What of the other minority that should be dominant, the
intellectually superior minority that has enjoyed the incomparable
advantages of the British public schools and of Oxford or Cambridge? They
evince no more comprehension of reality than the religious. The gods first
make mad those whom they would destroy. And we can only behold with painful
catharsis the tragedy of a nation which once had an empire on which the sun
never set, and which, in Herculean madness, reduced itself to a mass of
frightened sheep, huddled together on a small island on which the sun will
someday set for the last time.
The “Race Relations Act,” to be sure, has some loopholes, and Englishmen who
hire competent solicitors expert in such matters can still make some appeal
to facts and reason without going to gaol, although, of course, they expose
themselves to surreptitious chastisement. The Jews, needless to say, are
agitating for legislation to “plug the loopholes” in the existing tyranny.
As mere specimens of the English way of life today, we may note the
following. The Jews burned the printing establishment in Uckfield, Sussex,
that had been printing magazines and books that do not bear the Kosher seal
of approval. One of the arsonists, caught by his own arrogant
overconfidence, pled the privilege of his race to destroy their enemies, but
found that arson, even with such noble motives, was still technically
illegal in Britain, and he received, from an apologetic magistrate, the
minimum sentence. He was found to be an old hand in Yahweh’s service, having
been identified as one of the burglars who, equipped with forged credentials
as telephone repairmen, “cased” the apartment of David Irving, the author of
The Destruction of Dresden, and were later caught red-handed in the
burglary, equipped with tools from the British postoffices. The daily press
in Britain suppressed mention of the deplorable arrest and trial of the
high-minded arsonist. (75)
(75. The trial was concisely reported in the local Sussex Express, 17 April
1981. The newspaper, doubtless hoping to be thrown a bone, interpolated the
remark: “To say the publications handed to the judge [to justify the
arsonist’s pious deed] were ‘vile and evil’ was a masterly understatement,”
The incident was also reported in the small weekly publication, Focal Point
(London), 30 May, which inter alia observes that since the trail and
sentencing took place hurriedly and without the knowledge of the victims of
the arson, the purported specimens of their publications that were exhibited
to the judge and newspaper may well have been forgeries. That would be only
normal! My knowledge of the incident I next mention comes from a document
prepared by the victim’s solicitor and letters from friends.)
The masters of Britain naturally have their own corps of terrorists, special
police, doubtless Englishmen willing to do anything for a small salary, paid
by the bovine taxpayers. On 16 April 1981, these goons raided the apartment
of an Anglo-Saxon in Brighton who, they said, was suspected of having in his
possession a small booklet that did not show proper reverence for God’s
Race. Since he was at his place of employment, as they doubtless knew, they
smashed open the door of his apartment and turned everything upside down,
looking vainly for the horrible booklet. Frustrated in their suspicions,
they departed with a large package that doubtless contained his expensive
camera, the money he had left in a drawer of his desk, and other fenceable
property, leaving the broken door open, so that they could claim that
someone must have entered the apartment after them. At latest information,
the victim, just an Anglo-Saxon, to be sure, has vainly petitioned for
redress.
Britain has indeed been blessed with righteousness. An Englishman’s home was
once his castle; now it is his kennel.
We must cross the Channel to la belle France for the most accurate measure
of Europe today. In the historic land of libert‚, Professor Robert Faurisson
of the University of Lyons, maintaining the now antiquated tradition of
intellectual integrity in academic circles, stated publicly that the Jews’
infamous hoax about the “six million” was a preposterous hoax. (76) Squads
of Jews attacked him on the campus and burst into his classrooms to make it
impossible for him to conduct classes, while the authorities of the
university beamed approval. He and his publishers and even newspapers that
had printed his replies to their defamation of him were prosecuted in the
French courts for “insulting” the Jewish nation by doubting one of the lies
by which it most conspicuously exhibits its racial solidarity as a
super-organism. He has been beset by multiple prosecutions in the French
courts, and he has thus far been sentenced to a public recantation of his
veracity and fines that will amount to one million francs in the new
currency (one hundred million in the old.) His total savings as a university
professor with a family amount, he says, to about two thousand francs. And
other prosecutions are still pending. The French system of justice doubtless
hopes that it can drive the Aryan dog to suicide, but if that does not work,
it will probably be wiser than the Inquisition that permitted Galileo to
survive and will have Faurisson doused with gasoline and burned in a public
square, while Jews dance merrily about the pyre.
(76. It is said that the Institute for Historical Review will publish
English translations of Professor Faurisson’s major articles in an issue of
its Journal. Presumably it will do so unless the Jews, who have made one
attempt to burn down the building in which the Institute is located succeed
in a new attempt.)
It is a nice irony that Professor Faurisson’s only support, so far as is
known, comes from a Jew, who has disobeyed his race, and a few French
“leftists.” He would doubtless have been supported by Professor Fran‡ois
Duprat, if the Jews, as they openly boast, had not preferred to punish that
man for his denial of the Holy Hoax by blowing up the automobile in which he
and his wife were riding. The “New Right” in France, of which we once
entertained some hopes, (77) has been taught a lesson by the Jews, who broke
into one of their conferences and clubbed them, permanently crippling one
man, while the French police looked on benevolently. The few French
champions of Western science and rationality now slip quietly away from
their universities or homes to meet, almost furtively, in secluded parts of
the countryside, fearing raids by the Jews or the French police; and they
are doing their best to pretend they never heard of Professor Faurisson. It’s
embarrassing, but courage, mon ami, le pauvre diable n’est pas encore mort,
mais il le sera bient”t.
It is easy to foresee the future. The simplest way out of the disconcerting
fact that so many of the “six million” whom the Germans exterminated are
alive and conspicuous in such capacities as that of the President of the
“European Parliament” will be to claim that the Germans did indeed kill
them, but they, being Yahweh’s pets, naturally arose from the dead after
three days or some other appropriate period of time.
The next step is easy. As Douglas Reed observed in The Controversy of Zion,
to the Jews “the world is still flat and Judah, its inheritant, is the
center of the universe.” (78) Surely, there can be no greater insult to the
Jewish nation that to doubt the word of its god, who made the world a flat
cake of mud and placed above it the sun and moon, balls of fire floating in
the upper atmosphere, so that he could stop them whenever he wanted to help
his Holy People massacre the inhabitants of a country they wanted to steal.
French courts of justice will surely repress the vile “racists” who cast
doubt on Yahweh’s words, and a few million-franc fines, supplemented by
burning a few incorrigibly sane Frenchmen at the stake, will establish
righteousness throughout the beautiful land o— l’oui r‚sonne.
(78. See above, note 4. The passage I have quoted occurs on p. 105 and
continues, “The ruling sect has been able, in great measure, to impose this
theory of life on the great nations of the West, as it originally inflicted
The Law on the Judahites themselves.” Reed goes on to point out that Jews’
mission in this world is based on the promise Yahweh made to Isra‰l: “I will
destroy all the people to whom thou shalt come,” (*Exod.* 23.27). Reed’s is,
on the whole, an excellent book, marred only by some charitable efforts to
temper the wind for Jesus’s lambs. Incidentally, he makes the interesting
suggestion (p. 207) that Herzl, the founder of modern Zionism (see note 51
supra) whom Samuel Roth described as “probably the first honest Jew in the
pubic life of the world in two thousand years,” may have been eliminated by
Jews who wanted to take over and pervert his Zionist movement.)
And then one more step. Yahweh told Moses, “I have made thee a god to
Pharaoh [i.e., the unnamed king of the Egyptian goyim].” Now it is only
proper that the “Sons of the Living God” should be the gods of the lower
races and be worshipped by them. It requires no great effort of the
imagination to picture thousands of French men and women assembled in Notre
Dame, in obedience to the orders of their courts and government, to worship
bare-footed rabbis seated on the alters. (79) And the choir will sing the
inspired words of the prophecy: “And Isra‰l; shall rule the world forever.”
(79. Ralph Perier in Liberty Bell, November 1980, p. 22, has called
attention to the extraordinary emotional fixation of the Jews, as shown in
passages he cites from both the “Old Testament” and the Dead Sea Scrolls,
which demands not only that other races, and especially Aryans, shall become
their abject slaves, but shall demonstrate their submission by using their
tongues to lick the dirt from the Jews’ bare feet. No other race, so far as
I know, has ever shown that bizarre lust. Perier also quotes, “Israel shall
rule the world forever,” from Gaster’s translation of the Dead Sea
Scriptures, where it is the climax of an imagined war in which the Greeks
and Romans (i.e., Aryans) are totally exterminated, but also survive to do
the desired licking.)
Fantastic? Less so than what has now actually happened in Germany, Britain,
and France would have seemed before the Suicide of Europe.
Such is a hurried bird’s-eye view of the continent that was, for Yockey,
“the sacred soil of Europe,” the homeland of our civilization. He was young
when he was hounded to death, and he did not live to see the Europe of
today. Perhaps we should say of him, as Tacitus said of Agricola, felix
opportunitate mortis.
THE EPITAPH
Yockey’s hopes and his striving seem vain and futile in the desolation of
today. He appealed to a manhood and an intelligence that had died on a
thousand battlefields and have become bodiless wraiths, drifting on the
shifting mists of time. But he will be remembered—if there are any to
remember us—as a man who sought to resurrect Europe and, in the end, gave
his life for the dead. His memory will be honored in the future—if we have a
future—as that of a man whose lucid mind enabled him to see the vapidity of
the verbiage about “world peace,” brotherhood,” “human rights,” and the rest
of the hallucinatory fictions that are used by evangelists, politicians, and
other swindlers to benumb the minds of their victims. He was a man who had
the courage to state the grim truth that a nation’s survival depends on its
spiritual cohesion and its will to power—to naked, undisguised, unmitigated
power, power over others.
A nation, a civilization, a race that has lost the will to conquer and
dominate has lost its will to live—has lost the vitality that makes it fit
to live in a world in which the inexorable laws of nature provide that only
the strong and resolute shall survive. Yockey summoned our race to put down
its opium-pipes and look outside its den of dreams to the real world, in
which it will soon have no choice but to fight belatedly or perish
ignominiously. It was not his fault that the drugged minds could not
respond, could not comprehend.
After Imperium was republished by The Truth Seeker (New York) in 1962,
Yockey’s work, which had been almost completely suppressed and was known
only to the few individuals who had the luck to find, and the means to
purchase, copies of books that had become extremely rare, became more widely
known and accessible to those who wished to know it. It inspired untrammeled
minds.
In the late 1960s, some youthful enthusiasts formed the Francis Parker
Yockey Society, and, since it was not kept secret, they, few as they were,
alarmed the boobherds of more than one local newspaper, ever on the watch
for an outbreak of common sense. It was the young men’s intention to erect a
monument to Yockey, and, after much deliberation, they decided it should
bear these words:
TO THE MEMORY OF
FRANCIS PARKER YOCKEY
AUTHOR OF IMPERIUM
WHO FOUGHT THE GOOD FIGHT TO THE BITTER END
€o sent Rodlanz que la mort l’entreprent,...
Sour l’erbe vert si s’est colchiez adenz,
Dessoz lui met s’espede e l’olifant.
The lines from the great Chanson may be translated thus:
*And then, when Roland felt death coming upon him, he
lay down on the green grass, placing his sword and his horn
beneath his body, and with his face against the earth.*
EPILOGUE, THE ERNIYES
In 1945, in the devastated and desolate land of a nation of heroes, the
American Army forced a German physician to save the life of a captive who
had tried to commit suicide. The wretched man, who had surrendered in the
mistaken belief that he was surrendering to civilized human beings, had
contrived to find a piece of wire and twist it tightly about his throat in
the hope of escaping the long, lingering, and exquisite tortures for which
the self-righteous sadists reserved him.
The German physician grimly did what he was compelled to do, but he was a
man. He looked the commanding officer in the eye and said calmly: “You
Americans have done more than violate the law of nations. You have committed
hybris. God will punish you, and if there is no god, Nature will.”
Yes, Nature will.
To Americans who do not enjoy leading a precarious and degraded existence in
the filth and stench of a multi-racial society, it will seem that Nature has
already done so. But, in the vernacular phrase, they haven’t seen anything
yet.
When the syndicate of organized crime that governs the witless and spineless
Americans began to tax the serfs for “aid” to “underdeveloped nations,”
rushing American food and medical skill to accelerate the savages’ already
prodigious rate of breeding, giving them American equipment and American
engineers to industrialize their jungles, and naturally inciting them to
rape and murder the Aryans caught in the newly independent “nations,” the
ineluctable consequences of that policy were obvious to every man who could
perform simple arithmetical calculations.
I did no more that state a patent fact, long known to thoughtful observers,
when, in an article published in 1963, (80) I wrote: “At the present rate,
the globe, sometime between A.D. 2000 and 2005--that is to say, *within
forty years*--will be infested by 5,000,000,000 anatomically human
creatures, the maximum number for which food can be supplied by even the
most intensive cultivation. And then, to keep the globe inhabitable at that
bare subsistence level, it will be necessary to kill every year more people
than now live in the United States—kill them with atomic bombs or clubs, as
may be most convenient.”
It will be less than twenty years now.
(80. American Opinion, December 1963, p. 23. The fact was obvious from the
“exponential” increase in the world’s population of non-Aryans and the
geographic determination of the amount of arable land on the planet. But the
ineluctable process of nature could have been, and was, foreseen long before
the “population explosion” actually occurred. Sixty-seven years ago, before
the First World War and while our race’s absolute superiority and dominion
over the planet seemed assured forever, the great and forgotten American
philosopher, Correa Moylan Walsh, wrote in the first volume of his Climax of
Civilization: “A return will set in of the re-active pressure of nature upon
mankind.... The struggle for existence will again become sharp and
bitter.... But woe to the people which has not men that will stand up and
fight without flinching. Those countries where the moral decay shall have
gone deepest, where the proved stock shall have died out and given way to
poor stock, where the greatest effeminization of men shall have taken place
(for the masculinization of women will be no compensation), where the strong
and the wise and the shrewd shall gain no more of wealth, power, and
influence than the weak, silly, and incompetent, all being equal,--those
will go to the wall. And when this fate shall have overtaken most of our
western white men’s countries, our cycle of civilization will be
completed.”)
Meanwhile, the Americans, eager to show they have elephant-sized hearts and
canary-sized brains, are importing into their already overpopulated and
befouled country hordes of racial enemies who quite frankly boast that they
will take over for themselves entire states and groups of states, expelling
or killing the stupid Aryans, for whose idiotic generosity they have a
supreme and justified contempt. For the details, I must again refer you to
James Farrell’s The Judas Syndrome. (81)
(81. See above, note 74. Since savages are constantly pouring into Florida
from Haiti, I cannot forebear to notice a little-known historical fact.
Abraham Lincoln, who was not a man without foresight and conscience,
although he presided over the fratricidal war of aggression that ended the
American Republic, actually began to put into practice his determination to
export all Blacks from this country. On 31 December 1862, he approved
contracts with entrepreneurs, chiefly from financial circles in New York
City, to export 5000 Negroes to Haiti and resettle them there, at a cost to
the government of fifty dollars a head. The contracts were carried out, but
many of the Blacks were subsequently brought back to this country by
“do-gooders” eager to afflict the white population.)
And now the promoters of “aid” to “underdeveloped nations” have discovered
what they knew all along, that they hastened a catastrophe from which the
opium of superstition and maudlin sentimentality will provide no refuge. The
Club of Rome, which had been busy fostering international “understanding”
and international looting, hired experts from the Massachusetts Institute of
Technology to report on “the predicament of mankind,” and published the
results in The Limits to Growth (London, 1972). What emerges from the report
is a desperate hope that catastrophe can be postponed by de-industrializing
the “emergent nations” and finding ways to kill off a large part of the
prolific anthropoids, so that global starvation will not begin in 2000.
There are many graphs to show the possible effects of miracles: if, for
example, the yield of food by arable land were doubled by some inconceivable
means, the starvation crisis could be postponed to 2024. The shock to tender
minds is cushioned by speculations about the invention of “perfect” means of
birth control, which will be made “available” to everyone—“available” being
an euphemism for making the use of such means compulsory, which, being
impossible, in turn means mandatory abortions, which are equally impossible
of application to the most prolific races—and that makes nonsense of the
bland assumption that all races are equal and are to be equally reduced.
Talk about reducing the birth rate globally is mere verbiage: everyone who
knows anything about the non-white races (except Jews) knows that the only
practical means of control requires an enormous increase in the death-rate.
The Club of Rome’s report also made projections that simply ignored the
crucial question of food, and these showed that even if manna showered from
the skies, essentially the same crisis and struggle for life would occur at
approximately the same time from the exhaustion of the natural resources of
our insanely exploited and ravaged earth, and also that if that factor be
disregarded, the planet is being so polluted by its anthropoid parasites
that, at no distant date, it will cease to sustain their life.
Some glimmering of reality penetrated even the fog in Washington and
produced the Global 2000 report which, officially endorsed by the Secretary
of State, calls for the elimination of two billion (2,000,000,000) human
beings by the year 2000 to avert the otherwise inevitable chaos. The report
is naturally evoking screams from the holy men, who like to orate about the
day when Jesus will pop out of the clouds and raise Hell, but naturally
cannot bear to think about reality, and from a wide variety of others, who
find such ideas bad for their businesses. (82) There is much that can be
criticized adversely in the report, but not the statistics, and it is the
statistics that excite hysterical denials on the grounds that they are
unpleasant. The gang in Washington is, of course, trying to use the report
for its own purposes, but that is quite another matter.
(82. A particularly odd yell of blind indignation is the booklet, Global
2000, published by the “National Democratic Policy Committee” = the “U.S.
Labor Party” = the mysteriously financed operations of one Lyndon LaRouche.
The booklet is well worth reading for its sophistries.)
One thing is quite certain: the population of the globe is going to be
drastically reduced within the next twenty years as the struggle for life
begins in earnest. Christians will, no doubt, go on bleating about “the
sanctity of human life,” especially the lowest forms of it, but they might
as well expound that silly notion, which only our race has ever taken
seriously, (83) to a typhoon or an erupting volcano. The forces of nature do
not listen to idle talk. Neither do mammals who must kill or be
killed—unless they are degenerate and have lost the will to live.
(83. The even more absolute doctrine of the “sanctity of all life” appeared
in the “Orthodox” religions of India and Buddhism while the Aryans were
still dominant. In polyphyletic India of today, individual who humanely
avoid injuring the lice they remove from their hair associate with
individuals who are votaries of Kali and believe that the highest religious
merit is obtained by treacherously murdering a man whose confidence they
have cleverly won. Such is the charming diversity of a multi-racial
society.)
The population of the globe is going to be drastically reduced, and in the
course of that reduction, it is virtually certain that the inferior races
will become extinct, as Darwin foresaw, although not in the way he
anticipated. (84) The only question is which races will not survive the
inevitable war for survival.
(84. See above, note 3.)
Every species of mammal capable of conscious thought thinks itself as in
some way superior, but a claim to racial superiority is particularly
congenial to our race, which for long had proof of it in the mastery of the
whole world which it suicidally discarded. Aryans still pride themselves on
the superiority of their civilization, and it is undoubtedly superior,
aesthetically, morally, intellectually, i.e., in terms of its own values, so
that ‘superiority’ is merely a tautology. We must face the brutal fact that
the only real superiority is biological, and is shown by a species’ ability
to survive and increase at the expense of others.
The colored races naturally multiply as do rabbits. In the coming struggle
for survival they may eat each other, if they run out of white meat, but
they will breed so rapidly that they will survive, unless a superior power
makes an intensive effort to exterminate them.
The Jews, whose racial cohesion has made them a super-organism, are
undoubtedly a superior species. Beginning as a wretched gang of marauders,
they, in only 2500 years, scattered throughout the world while retaining
with undeviating concentration the super-organic unity of their purpose, and
achieved virtual mastery of the globe. That you may disapprove of their
methods or their character is irrelevant. They have given proof of
biological superiority. One wonders whether that superiority will enable
them to consummate their total triumph or whether the super-organism is too
inflexible, its instincts too fixed and rigid to cope with an entirely novel
situation, so that the multiplex organism will perish in the chaos it has
created, exulting, perhaps, in the total destruction in which it will also
be destroyed.
So far as one can extrapolate from the present, disregarding our pathetic
hopes for a psychological and biological miracle, there is one race which,
by its own fatuity and degeneracy, seems likely to become extinct less than
a century after it was master of the world.
This article originally appeared in Liberty Bell magazine, published monthly
by George P. Dietz since September 1973. For subscription information please
write to Liberty Bell Publications, Post Office Box 21, Reedy WV 25270 USA;
or call 304-927-4486.

.