Skip to content

Faustian and Apollonian Money: Rationalism, Empiricism and Our Political Situation

Race, Training, and Character Come Before Knowledge

Our civilization is collapsing and we know such collapse will come through immigration, there is no doubt about that. The globalists are already rewriting history, in a most “Orwellian” fashion. Unfortunately, the exact historical significance of such phenomena (if such exists at all) is still unknown to us [1]. Fortunately, we don’t have to know. There are so many different theories that, if we wait for the “right” one in order to act, we are going to be exterminated. For the cyclic historians alone, I can name Lamprecht, Spengler, Eduard Meyer, Meray, Friedell, Toynbee and Sorokin, so that’s about seven different theories. Egon Friedell, a follower of Spengler and author of Cultural History of the Modern Age, said that Meray, in his Weltmutation managed to explain the war and predict its consequences with total success by using his theory that cultures are living organisms, and humans its cells. But so did Spiridovich, without any metaphysical theory, by focusing only on the Jews. There is no doubt that their explanations furnish us with a great deal of material and intellectual insight, but we are only beginning to scratch the surface of the problem. We know that a society of humans is more than the individuals, but we still cannot properly identify the properties of this “whole”, this “being”, because we cannot see it [2]. That is our curse, our eyes! They are responsible for everything we know, and for everything we don’t know. As E. O. Wilson correctly pointed out, we grasp perhaps only 1% of the total stimuli of the environment. So, in order to overcome this difficulty, they recur to a language game similar to the one Eugène Marais uses in his book The Soul of the White Ant, where he argues that ant colonies have souls. They don’t. He only used this word to mask something that is incapable of sensible apprehension. Spengler does the same thing. The problem, however, is not using such language “stamps” as working hypothesis to allow us to get things done and dominate space and nature, but when the authors forget that such language stamps are language stamps in the first place, so he starts thinking there is “nothing behind” them. This is a very dangerous intellectual error that can lead straight to multiculturalism and self destruction.

Let me just give you a simple and quick example: the concept of race as Spengler treats it. He cannot see any differences under the X-ray, by using his own analogy, so he concludes there is none, and now the only difference between humans are purely psychological; from that, one can almost jump to the conclusion that, since there are no biological differences (only superficial ones, like hair, melanin, etc.), then is just a matter of education: educate someone the same way as the European is educated, put him in the same environment, and then he becomes European [3]! Nothing could be further from the truth. The differences between Europeans and Chinese are not “spiritual” or “metaphysical”, but biological realities, because every behaviour needs a biological agent to fulfill it and bring it to life. If you think I am exaggerating, I quote [4]:

After analyzing the volumes of all the 56 structures in the two groups, we found that in some regions, the Chinese and Caucasian brain were significantly different in volume. These differences included the left middle orbitofrontal gyrus, left gyrus rectus, left precuneus, left middle temporal gyrus, left parahippocampal gyrus, left cingulated gyrus, left lateral orbitofrontal gyrus, left superior parietal gyrus, left middle occipital gyrus, left inferior temporal gyrus, left insular cortex, left insular cortex, left putamen, right superior frontal gyrus, right precentral gyrus, right lateral orbitofrontal gyrus, right gyrus rectus, right postcentral gyrus, right precuneus, right superior occipital gyrus, right middle occipital gyrus, right superior temporal gyrus, right middle temporal gyrus, right inferior temporal gyrus, right parahippocampal gyrus, right insular cortex, right caudate and right putamen.

That doesn’t seem very “spiritual” to me… Race differences are biological realities. I shall say it again: we have to be very careful about our eyes. Just because we can’t immediately see something, doesn’t mean there is nothing there. Probably, the concept “organism” (meaning a whole composed of small units like the ant colony and civilizations) will be treated as an irreducible or decomposed into smaller constituents capable of sensible expression, such constituents being themselves irreducible. This is the most urgent task that will have to be solved by our Faustian sociology of the future. Without a clear picture of this phenomena, we are deemed to live in an endless cycle of behavioral sink and all the fellahom degradation that comes with it.

We must also be aware that there is a great difference between knowing and doing, and the latter is much more important, for life is an activity and not a contemplation. If one is not born with the “superior possibilities” for a great role, one cannot acquire it through learning. Some men are born a destiny, others to live such destiny. Communism is famous because it appeals to resentful mob instincts (not because of any argument), and superior men cannot remain communists even if raised as ones (there are countless examples of such cases). In light of this, we can see how extremely futile is the modern excessive bookish education, that aims at transforming everyone into “tiny Spenglers” and, as Ernst Mach once said, “tiny philologists”. It is based on the gross error that great deeds and great men are formed by knowledge, but actually they form knowledge. We already know from Le Bon how the “education” of the savages at the colonies was futile, for “education” meant the transfer of a knowledge derived from the psychological necessities of a certain race to a race NOT possessing such instincts.

But, what is education? It is a coin: on one side, life as tactics, as activity, as dominion of space, initiative, courage, learning how to deal with uncertainty, learning how to deal with risk, etc.; on the other side, life as refinement of a world picture, acquired mostly by the epoch and the intellectuals that represent it [5]. The first part is much more important, and cannot be acquired by books [6]. Such dichotomy was called by Le Bon character and intelligence, Spengler breed and training, but it matters little how one calls it.

In a letter to Hans Klöres (7.9.1915) Spengler says:

Like you I have wished often enough, instead of writing down my ideas for the future, to be able to carry them out at once, and there are long days when paper disgusts one, and I have the feeling that I must see my life spoilt because its whole reality is carried out on paper. Every really productive person must certainly have such moods, and I see in them evidence for true vocation.

Anybody who can be eternally thrilled and satisfied by purely literary activity, and does not at times find it a misery is most certainly either a dilettante or a nobody, like our typical men of letters today, whose need for writing is like that of a caterpillar for leaves… If you read the misunderstood Tasso, Goethe’s most profound drama, you will discover deep down this self contempt of the ‘mere writer’; Shakespeare had this feeling even stronger, for the caricature of the poet in Julius Caesar is self-ridicule. One will always be envious of Napoleon, who also intended to write a novel, because he always was able to realize his ideas without any opposition. I read recently the biography of the much underrated writer Klinger (Sturm und Drang is his worst piece), who also yearned for action. When he actually held his commission as officer in his hand, he threw all his MSS. and notes into the fire and later looked back to this existence with repulsion (Napoleon also in later years had a repulsion towards people who wrote books; actually he hated his own youth).

With the killing of that first and most important side of life, the academic, the rationalist, now gains ground, and mathematics becomes an obsession. There is nothing more useless for practical science than pure mathematics [7]. The mathematics that we use today is actually XIX century mathematics, with a very poor notation when it comes to the infinitesimal calculus [8], several simplifications in the theory of progressions, and deliberate errors in the theory of ratios and fields, so it can be made useful for practical purposes. It is a Frankenstein language. The most important work of modern mathematics, the Principia [9] of Russell and Whitehead, is so complicated that no practical use could come out of it. In the end, mathematicians are still living Leibniz’s dream of the Characteristica Universalis, and I must say they are failing miserably.

Principia Mathematica, Vol.3, page 412. I challenge the reader to do his groceries with it.

Experimentation over Useless Theoretical Subjects

Experiments are dirty, expensive, illogical, based most of the time on the intuition of the doer, and not able to be described systematically by a set of concepts, so they are despised. But it has got more things done than any theory. Theories and rationalism are clean and inexpensive, and they impress the mass. The academic is sterile, because his sole existence consists in performing mathematical acrobatics for his audience [10]. So, the real interest in the phenomena of nature is substituted by the scorn of snobs and their pompous world systems. Everything must become systematic and “mathematical”, otherwise is not worth it [11].

It was in opposition to such ways of feeling that Johannes Stark and Philip Lenard founded the movement Deutsche Physik, of course, completely unknown to most people. The physics of the last century, as J.Stark points out in his The Pragmatic and the Dogmatic Spirit in Physics, was basically politics in favour of scientists like Einstein: his theory was a mathematical theory, not an experimental and empirical one. In a letter to Einstein, Le Bon said “you have no proof, only mathematical formulas, and anything can be proven with mathematics”. After the empirical refutation of relativity by Reiner Ziefle, we can attest how right Le Bon was [12]!

Le Bon already complained about how the laboratories of France remained empty, while the students only cared about “theoretical” subjects and useless mathematical formulations. I can attest to this, since I grow up in a culture where every practical subject was scorned at, considered “dirty”, and everything resumed itself to sitting at a class room. The result? Students were transformed into completely useless snobs, without the ability to get anything done in practical life without a book or a manual telling them how to do so.

I understand the limitations of experimentation. Duhem and Spengler already pointed them out. Archimedes, when performing his hydrostatics experiments, would see those data as a confirmation of his particular world view, which meant the world view of his culture, which we now do not believe. This is true. But we have no other choice: experimentation is the best thing we can do to get closer to the facts, even though we are eternally condemned to distorted those facts and see them in light of our language and culture, as Müller correctly pointed out in his Science of Thought. However, for practical life, it doesn’t really matters, only children still try to “seek the truth and the mysteries of nature”, the experienced scientists understands this is not possible and uses his theory as a working hypothesis to dominate space and actually do things. Science is an activity, not a contemplation. We already know that quantum mechanics is contradictory in itself, so it cannot be a true theory, but it is being used to build amazing quantum computers.

I want to give a few examples that will not take much of the reader’s time, so I can make sure he understands exactly what I have in mind in practical terms, not just in words.

James Henry Salisbury: Practioner of Healthy Eating

Let’s start with James Henry Salisbury, a medical doctor who published what is perhaps the most important book in the history of medicine, The Relationship of Alimentation and DiseaseSalisbury was an avid practitioner who cared little for theories, and had no respect for scientific authority[13]. What he discovered was that almost all diseases considered to be genetic (consumption, asthma, etc.) are actually produced by unhealthy feeding. After analyzing the feces of his patients, he concluded that plant and grain products that we consume everyday (and that are considered by most “doctors” as healthy foods) are actually not digested by our intestines, since we don’t have the capacity to do so[14]. These products, not being able to be digested properly, remain for very long in the intestines, and if such unnatural eating habit continues, the accumulation of such products produces fermentation, and the eventual killing of the cells of the intestinal walls, together with the production of several gases that affect the lungs and heart, which affects respiration and sleep [15]. In order to confirm he was on the right track, he experimented with a thousand hogs, since their digestive organs are closely related to ours; he also conducted experiments in his own home, by hiring workers (paying them from his own pocket) and conducing feeding experiments on them, and on himself! He produced the most scaring diseases imaginable (all claimed to be genetic and/or incurable by the medical establishment), and then he would cure them by a changing in alimentation.

James Henry Salisbury. We should honour him.

Which modern doctor could have the courage or determination to produce such achievements? The mere sight of a dead pig would make modern sissy doctors (whose sole lives consists in sitting at clean offices selling sanitized pills to ignorants) faint. Since they don’t have the stomach for the real world, a modern doctor would try to revolutionize the field of biochemistry by building a “quantum theory of putrefaction”, and deriving from his axioms all the symptoms of his patients (and the cure). By the time he finished, all his patients would have died from consumption.

We can see how fundamentally important nutrition really is, it is a part of the “unpleasant” materialistic sciences, like economics (not a science, however), biology and geopolitics, sciences which are neglected and ignored as “impure”, but their importance is so great they don’t admit mistakes: one mistake is usually fatal. Nietzsche understood the importance of diet (see his Ecce Homo and Will to Power), but the modern conservative completely neglects it [16]. He considers this “futile”, he worries about “the mind”, whatever that means.

Richard Werner: Experimental Economics of Public Administration.

Another practical thinker is Richard Werner, a German economist who made a profound contribution to economics by providing the field with something economists hate: experimental verification. He solved a long debate about whether banks are mere “intermediaries” or creators of the money supply. He actually went to the banks and looked at their books in the process of account creation, etc. And, without any doubt (as Spengler and Quigley already knew), banks create the money supply. If one thinks about it carefully, it couldn’t be otherwise: for the conception of money of a people is related also to their conception of property and value, and ours is functional through and through.

Hans Albert hits the nail in the head when he says, in his Model Platonism, that economics attempts to “immunize” statements and sets of statements from experience. So, one ends up with a “rigid” system which admits no new information or evolution, which is constantly “stuck” in a certain time frame. As it stands today, economics is not a science at all, but a collection of myths and anecdotes that keep being repeated again and again for political purposes. Much like communism, an inherently false theory which is artificially kept alive by mutating it into something else, because it NEEDS to stay alive to serve as a weapon against the West. Contact with the real world and experiments don’t count. The quantity theory of money is merely the dead voice of Xenophon, Oresme and Copernicus [17]; there are several historical examples that contradict the theory, but the theory keeps living. The famous Weimar hyperinflation was actually, as admitted by Schacht himself, a speculative attack on the currency in the form of short selling [18]. When Hitler dismissed Schacht, he told him “And what you think will happen, Herr Schacht, won’t happen. There will be no inflation” [19]. And there was no inflation! As John T. Harvey points out[20]: “Friedman argued with his helicopter example. There’s a reason he used a helicopter and not a real-world central bank policy: it was the only way he could come to his preferred, but false, conclusion”. I quote [21] the incredible example of the Island of Guernsey:

While U.S. bankers were insisting that the government must borrow rather than print the money it needed, the residents of a small island state off the coast of England were quietly conducting a 200-year experiment that would show the bankers’ inflation argument to be a humbug. Guernsey is located among the British Channel Islands, about 75 miles south of Great Britain. In 1994, Dr. Bob Blain, Professor of Sociology at Southern Illinois University, wrote of this remarkable island:

In 1816 its sea walls were crumbling, its roads were muddy and only 4 1/2 feet wide. Guernsey’s debt was 19,000 pounds. The island’s annual income was 3,000 pounds of which 2,400 had to be used to pay interest on its debt. Not surprisingly, people were leaving Guernsey and there was little employment.

Then the government created and loaned new, interest-free state notes worth 6,000 pounds. Some 4,000 pounds were used to start the repairs of the sea walls. In 1820, another 4,500 pounds was issued, again interest-free. In 1821, another 10,000; 1824, 5,000; 1826, 20,000. By 1837, 50,000 pounds had been issued interest free for the primary use of projects like sea walls, roads, the marketplace, churches, and colleges. This sum more than doubled the island’s money supply during this thirteen year period, but there was no inflation. In the year 1914, as the British restricted the expansion of their money supply due to World War I, the people of Guernsey commenced to issue another 142,000 pounds over the next four years and never looked back. By 1958, over 542,000 pounds had been issued, all without inflation.

If economic theory, even by being wrong, allowed the state to get things done, acting as a working hypothesis, I would not care, but we all know that is not happening. As pointed out correctly by the Catholic Encyclopedia in its article “Poverty and Pauperism”: “Economic historians like Rogers and Gibbins declare that during the best periods of the Middle Ages there was no such grinding and hopeless poverty, no such chronic semi-starvation in any class, as exists today among large classes in the great cities”. Modern economic policy fails to deliver everything it promises.

Finally, the pure rationalist stupidity found its most glorious expression in Ludwig von Mises and in the “Austrian Economics”. This liberal school has the capacity to attract only the most mediocre of minds: anarchists completely devoid of any respect for authority, sense of duty and discipline. They hate high politics and everything it represents, because it doesn’t aim at the meaningless filling of everyone’s pockets. The mere prospect of having a leader, a great man which one can follow, and, with him, sacrifice oneself to a greater aim, causes them to feel disgusted. Someone like Alexander or Napoleon, great men who acted without the concern of making money for themselves, are despised and misunderstood [22]. They have no trace of aristocratic virtue. A petty merchant cries inside all of them! As Sombart once said in his Heroes and Traders:

Trader and hero: they constitute the two great opposites, the two poles, as it were, of all human orientation.. The trader approaches life with the question: what can you give me. The hero approaches life with the question: what can I give you? He wants to give many things away, to spend himself, to make sacrifices – without a return… The trader speaks only of his “rights”, the hero only of his duties.

To use a phrase of Spengler: those who speak too much of liberty no longer have any in them.

Coming back to money, if one does not understand the difference between Apollonian and Faustian money, one will always fall for such stupid theories. Faustian money, the money that makes things possible, is a power transfer, an almost divine gift granted by the possessor of such “powers”. Imagine an authority that transforms a nobody into a knight or a duke, that “transfers” and “grants” him powers: the monarch shakes his hand and profess some mystical words, and now the nobody is not a nobody anymore, there is something in him now that was not before. This is Faustian money: the granting of a power to acquire any such and such items in the market, formalized and “sanctified” in the form of a paper contract painted with some colour. Classical money was a physical body, and the classical bank was a place where such bodies were stored, and it was the money of the impossible, for it was entirely limited on the quantity of bodies available at a given time. Apollinian money means being limited by a quantity, Faustian money by a will. Billions of dollars (and more likely, trillions in the future) were injected into Africans, and they still cannot maintain a civilization at a high level: they just don’t have the will, the race.

The power to create the money supply is the most important question in the entire economic “science”, and most people are not even aware it exists. The government cannot create its own money without debt, no, god forbid! that would mean inflation and crime, but the private banks can do it! Give me a break. The book, A History of Central Banking and the Enslavement of Mankind, of Stephen S. Goodson, a former non-executive Director of the South African Reserve Bank, is basically a collection of how men who challenged the bankers ended up either dead or ostracized. I quote [23]:

Wright Patman proposed cleaning up the books by abolishing the Open Market Committee and nationalizing the Federal Reserve. The dollars the Fed created would then be government dollars, issued debt-free without increasing the debt burden of the country. Jerry Voorhis also advocated skipping the middleman and letting the government issue its own money. But neither proposal was passed by Congress. Rather, Patman was removed as head of the House Banking and Currency Committee, after holding that position for twelve years, and Voorhis lost the next California Congressional election to Richard Nixon, after being targeted by an aggressive smear campaign financed by the American Banker’s Association.

I am not even going to start on the Law of Demand… a “law” that was dissected and analyzed with impeccable logic by Hans Albert (in the article just mentioned): basically, it only exists in the economist’s head.

Unfortunately, people try to approach economics with the wrong expectations, so they end up getting disappointed. If the reader tries to understand economics as a science of the laws of the market, he will end up getting frustrated with a bunch of differential equations that speak of the properties of a world that only exists in the head of economics, from the real world he will learn little. The economics of our future is the economics as technics, experimental technics of public administration.

Michael Rose: Experimental Evolution and Biological Immortality

When it comes to the biology of our century, Michael R. Rose is, without any doubt, the most important figure. His work has profound political and social consequences, and I ask the reader not to be foolish and keep such important information to himself and to people he feel are worth it. Needless to say, the media is completely ignoring him, because his work contradicts their dirty interests. He is basically redefining evolutionary biology and the way we understand health and ageing. What he managed to prove was that biological immortality is a real mechanism in humans, that doesn’t obey complicated laws, and that it is deeply related to the first age of reproduction and diet[24]. Actually, immortality, as he points out, is already a reality in several organisms. This is confirmed by Metalnikov’s Immortalité et Rajeunissment. He explains that our organism ageing process is related to the Hamilton’s forces of natural selection, and that, fantastically, ageing stops! He is completely debunking the idea that we need to die at 90 years old at a hospital bed and be thankful that we lived a lot.

Michael R. Rose

When we are young, our bodies are very good at keeping us alive because Hamilton’s forces of natural selection are very strong, but as you “grow older”, the forces start to decline (specially with reproduction), so your body stops “caring” about keeping you alive, and, if the proper lifestyle and nutritional adjustments are not made, eventually we will end up dying from the food toxins before aging can stop and we can reach immortality. What is so incredible about his work is that he managed to prove experimentally in all cohorts that not only ageing stops, but also managed to increase the lifespan of the organisms in question in the first cohorts, which is what matters to us.

In a lecture in 2015 [25], he makes the other gerontologists look like children. He calls them “aristotelians” because they base their approach on false science that already reached a dead end. He is old by the way, and he doesn’t have a single white hair. Vegans and conventional “doctors” who like to give advice about how to live longer usually look like cadavers.

Basically, his recommendation is that we should follow a diet based exclusively of red meat and organ products, without any agricultural products: no carbohydrates, no plants, nothing [26]. We can see, in light of his work, how the globalist agenda of veganism is harmful for us: as we age, we are going to loose the capacity to process the plant toxins (plants don’t want to be eaten so they protect themselves by producing toxins that harm the enemy), and if we keep feeding on them, we are going to die before aging stops. So, as we age we absolutely must switch to things that are evolutionary consistent: meat diet, physical exercise [27], social interaction, etc.

His work is of utmost importance to us, we should be able to live longer, if we keep dying because we cannot control our mouths, we are going to be exterminated, there will be nothing left of the best western men to tell the story. I extremely recommend every reader to watch his youtube lectures and follow his advice closely. As much as I love European cousine, I love my race more, the West needs us alive to keep fighting on.

Politicquing for the Common Man Will Not Save Us

With these three examples, I believe the reader is already familiar with my way of thinking and prepared for future articles. However, before closing this introductory article, I wish to say a few words about our political situation, and present a suggestion about something we can do. There are no perfect solutions in an imperfect world, but, in my opinion, it is much better than our current state, where we are basically sitting at home waiting for a miracle.

We cannot rely on the common man, neither on political parties. That doesn’t mean we should exclude such possibilities, only that we cannot rely exclusively on any of them. When it comes to the common man, it must be understood that there will always be superior man and inferior man, leader and follower. Go out and talk to the common man [28], and you are going to feel like vomiting. He only cares about Netflix, the news, the thots he simps for, he is a stupid degenerate which finds pleasure in the freak show of “left party x conservative party, Trump x Biden, etc.” because it appeals to his simpleton nature. He would be unable to realize the truth even if we showed to him on video, even if it is right in front of his face (believe me, I tried!).

Yes, we are all on the same boat, but he doesn’t know that, and he doesn’t care to know. If the reader wishes to understand the common man mentality, watch modern productions like True Detective (first season, of course), Squid Game, etc. read the books of Nic Pizzolato and Chad Kultgen, etc. After doing that the reader will realize that the common man has no history, therefore no politics. Everything in them is “the now” and “the moment”, every problem is a momentary problem and a personal one, they have no concept of the political. Politics for them is entertainment, like a boxing match. Of course, the common white man is much superior to the common man of other races, but if we sit here waiting that someday he will wake up and revolt, we are going to wait for a long time. They just don’t care. Under proper leadership and on the proper traditions, the “common” man can be molded into something worth, but such leadership is not present now. As Göbbels (a man who lived politics) correctly pointed out in his Der Faschismus und seine praktischen Ergebnisse, “the politician is an artist”, because it shapes a formless mass into something with “form”. Le Bon, in his Psychologie de l’Éducation already pointed out the fundamental and important role of the officials in educating its soldiers, and everybody knows the importance of having a proper teacher in youth: all of this is lacking for the people. The raw material is there, but it is not being shaped appropriately, so we just cannot rely on it. If we don’t take this into our hands and start acting for ourselves, we are going to be exterminated.

We should also stop deluding ourselves with political parties. Nobody today is going to be able to do what Euroepan fascists did in the 1920s and 1930s, and we must start dealing with that. The political scenario was completely different from the one we have today. Rockwell tried to replicate such conditions in the United States, and he ended up being assassinated. Revilo Oliver, a great American nationalist and journalist, had the FBI on him just for his political views [29]. If there were ever to appear a political party that presented a significant threat to the establishment, and that did real politics (and not that “mob ass kissing” that is currently in fashion), we all know it would be exterminated before it grew into something more powerful. People are in an eternal rush. Is this a consequence of a “catastrophism” (the idea that things happen suddenly) in theory transferred to practice, or is it immaturity and impatience? The world communist revolution was a gradual and very slow process which took years and years of patience and planning: it is Lyell’s, and not Cuvier’s that wins in the end. Political parties and protests can actually be harmful, because anonymity is one of the greatest weapons one can have, and parties do the exact opposite: they raise a flag and tell the enemy exactly who they are, what they are doing, and what they intend to do. One can see it is not a very smart move.

The destruction of the “true right” was a great achievement for our enemies: what we call “conservatism” today is merely liberal merchant morality. People who voted for Trump are basically a modified and “softer” type of leftist. If things continue this way, in a few years Biden will be considered a white nationalists, terrorist and extremist! We are the last representatives and heirs of a great western political tradition, which was destroyed, as Spengler pointed out very correctly in his Hour of Decision, by almost years of communist cultural subversion. Let us not hold ourselves back for false humility: we are the only ones capable of fighting this fight, the only ones with the stomach for it. The average white nationalist is MUCH superior to the average voter. If white nationalists united themselves under proper leadership and a set of clear goals, we would be unstoppable. But white nationalists are depressed, anxious, unorganized and scattered. An ant cannot do much by herself, but an ant colony goes to war and destroys enemies many times their size. They have their heart in the right place, but they are not acting. The time for dialogues and conversations is over, we are in open declared war.

Parellel Economies and Healthy Diets For White Identitarians

I don’t want to leave the reader with an empty criticism. So, I want to propose the following: suppose 100 white nationalists would save $600 per month (I have seen people waste much more on thots and useless garbage like alcohol, that only serves to shorten one’s lifespan) and would invest it in sectors that relate to our Faustian technology, like 3D printing, weapon systems, etc. But for the sake of illustration, I shall only use the ETF iShares U.S Technology. The total monthly contributions is $60,000. At the end of just 20 years, using a simple Monte Carlo simulation, the total amount of money invested would be $53 million, after taxes, and $71 million pre-tax, already discounting inflation. Had we done that in the beginning of 2000, we would have by now $69 million, with just 100 people contributing… 100 people is not even 0,1% of the male population of the US. Now imagine if all white nationalists of a single country united themselves in that way? With that money, we could open a bank, and then it will be the beginning of the “game over” for the enemy, because banks are literally money making machines. We could use the bank as a central point in the acquisition of new industries, so we can start really competing with the enemy, and gradually take away its power by attacking where it hurts the most: money.

Globalist companies are rotten institutions filled with communist parasites that provide an awful service for a huge price. If we offered a better service at a better price, their clients would just abandon them. We could start breaking their monopoly, one by one, and with it their power. The owner of Gab, for example, is creating an almost parallel economy just for conservatives. When I tell this to people, they say “but we don’t have 20 years”, I am very well aware of that. Again, there are no perfect solutions, but the 20 years is going to pass anyway (and if you follow Michael Rose’s advice, you are going to be alive), it can pass with us having some power or it can pass with us having absolutely nothing, just words.

First things first, in order to survive we need food and water. When it comes to food, we should be able to get into the meat industry, we need read meat to survive. Anyone who listens to people who are actually in the industry seeing how things work [30] (instead of some stupid economist and his theories of the workings of wonderland), will see that the industry is basically a huge monopoly where 4 to 5 companies basically do whatever they want, including setting the price of meat to whatever value they want. Needless to say, the meat industry is extremely profitable, so we would make lots of money (which would allow us to gradually make our way into politics, the right way, and not deluding ourselves with “next day” revolutions), and still create value for the population. Second, we need water, and the Spanish engineer Enrique Veiga created a machine that is capable of extracting pure water from thin air. The company Aquaer Generator is currently producing his machines, and we need that water, we are drinking poisoned trash filled with fluoride and hormones. We could make a partnership with the company to start selling those machines: we all know people would buy them like there is no tomorrow, if the price was right. I believe this is a good strategy, even if we have to take some profit losses ourselves by selling the machines at a lower price (the bank profits would take care of those losses), because it means the end of their monopoly over the water supply: I would gladly sustain any profit loss just to see that happen.

Portfolio backtest at “portfoliovisualizer” of iShares U.S Technology at $60,000 per month, inflation adjusted.

This is just a few of the examples of the things we can do. Of course, we would need a proper communication system. If we ever grow to anything beyond a bunch of people complaining, we won’t stand a chance, because the enemy will hire hackers that will get as much information as they want on all of us because we are using gmail and Windows. Stop using these products, they are completely unsafe. Use Qubes OS or the laptops of Purism, ProtonMail, Signal and Ricochet are infinitely better than current messaging services. The best messaging service, in my opinion, is Ricochet, because it uses the Tor Network and doesn’t save the messages. Email companies can be forced by the government to provide user information, in Ricochet, there is no such thing, because it is not an email company. Also, we should have a bitcoin or any cryptocurrency address that allows donations to be many via cryptocurrency, so that contributors may feel safer when making a donation. Crypto has a lot of defects, and I believe it will never become a real currency, but it is the best we can do to stay anonymous for the moment.

It is a fact that we are in a very precarious situation. Out of such struggle as never seen before in history, there are only two possible results: a triumph of the best of our race with the elimination of its weaker elements by the enemy, or the total extermination of every member of the Indo-European family, the world condemned to never know such beauty and talent ever again, reduced to a degenerate mass of mongrels that bark and bite at the command of their financial masters. But even if we do perish (we wont!), we shall do so with honour, with our faces up and with a clear conscience that we have done everything possible and impossible to survive, so that in a distant future some culture may be able to look back at us and say “Here perished a great people!”.

So, I ask the reader: honour or fellahdom?


[1] The cultural suicide by means of decreasing birthrates appears to have something to do with population size. See the Mouse Utopia experiment,

[2] See Wilson’s The Superorganism. The structural (not cultural, of course) similarities between ant colonies and human nations, and between ant mega colonies and human cultures is astonishing. Ants have their own economy, architecture, technics, military strategy, farming, etc.

[3] This was the exact thinking behind the education of the indigenous people at the colonies. Needless to say, it was a complete fiasco. See Le Bon’s The Influence of Education and European Institutions on the Indigenous Populations of the Colonies.

[4] The Construction of a Chinese MRI Brain Atlas.

[5] One cannot become a Ricardo Duchesne or a Carl Schmitt by deliberate choice. One learns from them, but cannot become them, for their actions are not based on conscious choice. They live an internal necessity. People should keep this in mind and try to be more practical. Everyone today wants to be Aristotle, not because they possess such superior instincts, but from fear of reality. The result? Most “intellectual” works produced are in fact journalistic works. There is a letter from Alexander to Aristotle, where he asks him what was the best course of action; Roosevelt, when afraid of coming war in Europe, asked to have a meeting with the top french intellectuals of the time (including Le Bon) to understand the situation. When have we lost such practical skills? I believe this was one the greatest mistakes of Hitler, in the beginning he had the support of Heidegger, Sombart and Spengler, had he assembled a small council with these men, he would be much better than listening to Borman.

[6] As Le Bon once said in his Les Incertitudes: “Notre enseignement universitaire se transformera seulement quand il sera généralement admis que les livres ne suffisent pas à éduquer le caractère, la morale et l’intelligence.”

[7] Nassim Taleb is one the few modern authors with the courage of saying this. Unfortunately, Taleb wasted his life by becoming everything he despised at a latter age: an academic obsessed with masks and lockdowns. See

[8] Which is only used for its practical ability to arrive at results fast. It is so filled with errors and inaccuracies, one can wonder how such a tool could be used in practice at all. See Berkeley’s The Analyst.

[9] This work, if analyzed arrogantly as a description of the logical structure of the world (unfortunately, that was the point of view of Russell and Whitehead), would prove to be very disappointing. However, if analyzed as what it really is, the description of the thought structures of the men of a certain culture, it will reveal to be a wonderful book deserving all admiration. It gives precision and logical rigour to concepts that have been drenched in metaphysical obscurity for years. Russell says in his Principles of Mathematics that the concepts of “acceleration” and “force” are fictions devoid of any real meaning; however, he failed to realize that his own concepts of “series”, “order”, “relation” are just as meaningless, all of them demanding a certain type of men to make them real and give them meaning. His “progressions” are as psychological as the concept of “force”, although it must be admitted that the first is subject to a much higher logical rigour and objectivity. He came much closer to understanding himself and his work when he declared, after studying Chinese, that he realized his Principia was actually an Indo-European language!

[10] Just look at how embarrassing this is:

[11] The concept of “race”, for example, is one of the most simple concepts of science. Even women and animals understand it. However, although it is simple, it is hard when it comes to its systematization, therefore, it falls prey to every charlatan academic who wants to defend a globalist agenda.

[12] See also, and The Manufacture and Sale of Saint Einstein, by Christopher Bjerknes. There is a lot in this book I don’t agree with, but the author provides a good insight into the politics surrounding Einstein.

[13] His treatment of lean red meat with hot water (with bicarbonate of soda) saved my life, since I was unable to sleep and my health was getting worse everyday. Honestly, without such book, I would be a dead man by now.

[14] See

[15] That is why, when I went to the hospital complaining of not being able to breathe, those crooks who call themselves doctors would look at my throat and say there was nothing there, and would told me my lack of breathe was “psychological”. There was nothing psychological about it. I had consumption of the bowels and lungs because of years consuming carbohydrates and plants, as precisely described by Salisbury, every symptom matching exactly with my condition. Curiously, the symptoms also match exactly with the health condition of Hitler in WWII; needless to say, his doctor was unable to cure him. In the letters of Spengler, he complains about the same problem.

[16] Be prepared, because the disgusting globalists want to eliminate all meat from our diet. So, instead of becoming the high testosterone carnivore predator we are meant to be, filled with pride and honour, people are going to be reduced to depressed (the link between improper feeding and depression is very clear) fruit people, vegans, soy boys, effeminate and domesticated degenerates, struggling everyday for every piece of petty pleasure they can find, without honor, without any dignity, walking slumbers constantly doped on legalized drugs and narcotics such as nicotine, alcohol, caffeine, marijuana and the like; mental disease will skyrocket, and our health system will be more overloaded than it already is. Friedell was a heavy smoker and drinker, and committed suicide because he didn’t want to be bothered at his apartment. Spengler is another example of a man who threw his life away for small pleasures: a petty death, completely unfit for a man of his stature. See Diary of a Man in Despair, of Friedrich Percyval Reck-Malleczewen, a personal friend of Spengler who describes Spengler’s bad eating habits. One cannot produce a great man by diet alone, but one can destroy a great man by it. Napoleon, Darwin, Nietzsche, Hemingway, George III, etc. are examples of this same tragic fate. The death of Alexander the Great was basically a diet issue (he had autoimmune disease).

[17] See Lambert’s La Théorie Quantitative de la Monnaie.

[18] See Zarlenga’s Germany’s 1923 Hyperinflation: A “private” Affair.

[19] See Schacht’s Confessions of the Old Wizard, pp. 359.


[21] Ellen’s Web of Debt, pp.98.

[22] If the reader thinks I’m exaggerating, in, Huerta de Soto calls Alexander a “tyrannical, reckless despot”. In, he expresses his feelings about Bismarck.

[23] Ellen’s Web of Debt, pp. 168.

[24] Yes, the Faustian man is now conquering immortality! His work is a great glory for our race.


[26] That is why Salisbury in his book talks about a carnivore Spanish doctor who was 193 years old! When I tell this to people, they say “He was lying”. They think that just because modern people (most academics, doctors, etc.) are compulsive liars that betray their race for any amount of money whatsoever, that everybody was always like that. There were noble people in the world who did honest work and didn’t feel the need to mislead anyone.

[27] If you want to know how to exercise without wrecking your body in the process, see Body by Science by Doug McGuff.

[28] I’m not even going to comment on liberal women. They have the fantastic (almost divine) talent of breaking every record of stupidity, degeneracy and debauchery imaginable.

[29] See the FBI file on Revilo in:

[30] and

Please follow and like us: