Archive | February, 2012

One continent: Europe’s future goes through Eurasia

This article was contributed by Thierry Vanroy. 

Recently, Russian Prime Minister Putin made some interesting comments on American geopolitical ambitions.

The U.S. “wants to control everything” and takes decisions unilaterally on key questions, Putin said on a campaign stop yesterday in the Siberian city of Tomsk, 3,100 kilometers (1,900 miles) east of Moscow. “Sometimes I get the impression the U.S. doesn’t need allies, it needs vassals.” [Source]

One can call this rhetoric or ‘electionspeak’, but at the root of things, such remarks represent the death-knell for Fukushima’s “End of History”.   Ever since everything would be “end” from 1992 onward (the ‘point of no return’ for the Soviet Union), the USA has started countless wars (with and within Europe), has blown up its financial hegemony, has delocalized its industry to China and has lost most of South America.

Twenty years later, it seems the USA has achieved history’s bane, certainly not its ‘end.’

With the knowledge that at least 6.7 billion people are not American in this world, in the light of these evolutions one can only wonder whether the Western sphere of influence isn’t pushing itself into isolation. Indeed, the supposed hegemony of the West resembles a colonial empire in decay, where a titular American ‘Emperor’ retains power through viceroys who hold zero legitimacy with the inlanders.  The main vassals the USA can still count on are the Arab League (petrodollars) and the European Union (interwoven with Wall Street and NATO), but even this is starting to fall apart.

The interests of this global empire are contrary to those of the up and coming continental powers such as China and Russia. Human capital, resources, military and financial dominance of the continental periphery are at stake and the proxy wars have been on for far too long. Zombified as the US economy may be, their interest in retaining/conquering these regions is tantamount.

With the Sino-Russian veto in the UN Security Council, we now see the official start of The Great Chessboard between the Western and the Eurasian bloc. Just like a ‘revolution’ in Syria (and by extension, Iran) offers breathing space to the debt-driven economies of the West, it is in the interest of Russia and China to have stability with these trade partners.

And whereas these continental powers remained relatively silent concerning Libya last year, they have now begun a clear strategy for the Eurasian and African continents.  Considering that three quartsers of the worldwide resources and productive factors are encompassed in this greater region, one realizes a lot is at stake.

In October, Putin finally and explicitly called into existence the ‘Eurasian Union’.  It is but a matter of time (and presidential elections) before further steps will be taken. Since 2009, Putin and his allies have already been toying with the idea of a new reserve currency to drive the USD out, for instance. In reality, this ‘Union’ is more of an ‘Eurasian Unification’ and the fundamental geopolitical laws state economic convergence comes before political union. At this rate however, it won’t take long before mutual economic interest will evolve into an open defense of ideological allies. And from that moment on, lines will be drawn and choices will have to be made.

It is no secret the ideology of the European Union is Western. However, the prerequisite of economic unification has not gone as planned. The best example of this is the critique from Brussels and Strasbourg (the EU capitals) on Hungary’s new constitution. This constitution on the one hand holds some points obviously inspired by Christianity (ideology), but it also concerns the corporatist intertwining of government and finance (economy). There is now a concentrated effort on undermining the latter through critique on the former, but this is hardly more than an admission of weakness while the EU stays fragile in both respects. To quote Putin one last time: “Let them better use their money to pay their foreign debt and stop implementing ineffective and expensive foreign policy.”

Economic stability is now upheld thanks to China and the shuffling of debt between Western banks and governments, but in the meantime Europeans are shooting themselves in the foot with ideological games. We all know Greece is dependent on Iranian oil (the loss of which is now ironically compensated by the EU), but what must the Greeks think now that their supposed ‘friends’ put their country up for foreclosure while their assigned ‘enemies’ can trade at reduced tariffs with the rest of the world?

The European basis for resources, industry and trade is continental, but Western hegemony is faltering. And no matter how nice they try to present their ideological arguments, the economic future lies elsewhere.

Thus, with the media and political manipulation in Syria and Iran, one can only pose the question: In whose interest are we shooting ourselves in our own feet?

—–

About the Author: Thierry Vanroy is a Belgian political writer, public speaker and activist.  He is also a web designer, consultant, e-marketing expert.  He is known for spreading controversial ideas which go against the Western status quo. Through current events and economic analysis, he proposes a future of Eurasian geopolitics, Traditionalist reconciliation and economic freedom to those who would otherwise remain oblivious to what can be called ‘The Empire.’

He also writes in Dutch for solidarisme.be and he manages a personal blog against islamophobia at blog.thierryvanroy.be (also in Dutch).  This is his first column at RidingTheTiger.

Posted in Economy, Politics0 Comments

An Interview With a Former Falun Gong Member

An Interview With a Former Falun Gong Member

The following is an interview with a 24-year old female student who was a member of the Falun Gong (Falun Dafa) group.  Falun Gong, which can be translated as “Law Wheel Practice”, is considered by its followers to be a spiritual discipline.  It was first introduced in China in 1992.  Western academics have described Falun Gong as both a “spiritual” movement, as well as new religious movement (NRM).  Other scholars, such as Rick Ross, have considered Falun Gong to be a cult.

For personal security reasons, the interviewee has requested to remain anonymous and that her picture not be shown.

Q: Can you tell us about your early life at home?

A: I was born in New York City, but shortly after I was born my parents moved to California and took us there.  For the first few years of my life, I was raised as a Christian. We went to church regularly and I learned the Bible every Sunday, as well as being taught by my parents. My parents were rather religious, and had always wanted to go to China as missionaries to spread Christianity. In addition to myself, my younger sister and brother also attended church with the rest of us. I generally consider my childhood to have been happy. My parents were hard-working, and I enjoyed the company of my siblings.

In 2001 my maternal grandmother came to live with us. She was a Buddhist and usually did not go to church with us, but she respected our religion and said that when it comes to religion, people should just try to be the best person they could be.

Q: How did you first learn of Falun Gong?

A: In 2004, my parents “discovered” Falun Gong after reading pamphlets in a Chinese grocery store. At this point I was also becoming more aware of my Chinese heritage, and so I thought to myself “why not?” and I also embraced Falun Gong as merely a type of exercise. I was unaware of the political situation behind Falun Gong at the time. I just wanted to learn about my roots and because they advertised this as something which as part of our Chinese culture, I decided to try and become more involved.

Q: Can you recall some early experiences that lead you to question Falun Gong?

A: To make a long story short, the first time I had questions about Falun Gong was when younger sister had the flu, and they would not allow her to

The Central book of Falun Gong, "Zhuan Falun" : A compendium of vapid mock spirituality composed of a bland pastiche of 'Eastern' occult doctrines

take medicine. She was only three years old at the time! At this point my parents and I had already read Zhuan Falun, and I was convinced that my sister’s illness was related to not being sincere enough. In fact, I had stayed home from school for days at a time to engage in what Falun Gong calls “sending forth righteous thoughts”. As a result, my grades suffered. Before, I had been an honor student and had been among the top five students in my school. After this, I fell down to being a very poor student and nearly flunked one semester. My teachers became genuinely concerned and asked me what was wrong, but at the time I didn’t tell them.

It was likely that this left a big effect on me, and I tried to focus more on my studies. However, I didn’t leave Falun Gong since I was still at my parent’s house. They were very devoted to it and I felt that they would punish me if I went back to church.

Q: So your parents didn’t go to church after getting involved with Falun Gong?

No. In fact, they told me it was not useful because Li Hongzhi had once said that all different races have different heavens. Hence, they abandoned being Christians. Some people think you can be a Falun Gong practitioner and a Christian. My own experience in my house told me that this is impossible. They try to get you “in” by telling you it’s just exercise and qigong but you don’t learn about it being a religion, and you won’t learn that “Master” Li Hongzhi is really the savior of the world until much later.

Also one very strange thing is that my parents became very paranoid of other people. The Church we had attended was mainly a Chinese-American church. Every Sunday, there were three services given by three pastors in Cantonese, Mandarin and English. My parents even tried to accuse the Mandarin-speaking pastor, who was a very good man from Taiwan, of being someone who persecutes Falun Gong and works with the Chinese government. I was truly stunned. This man was the guy who was a devout Christian, a Taiwanese-American who had never set foot in mainland China. He was the last person anybody could call a persecutor of anybody, much less some sort of agent of a communist government.

Q: Since you mentioned politics, what was your opinion of the political situation back then, and what’s your opinion of it now?

When I was still a member of this cult, I read a lot of persecution stories about the members in China. I understand now that some may have been exaggerated so that we could develop an “us-vs-them” mentality. And it was also used in some way to legitimize us. Since we were told that the Chinese government was evil, how could we, the victims be wrong? This is actually a well-developed trick. Just look at the Israelis – since the Nazis persecuted them, they tell people they can never be wrong. I think the Falun Gong’s logic was much in the same spirit, applied back to religion.

I think you might have read about Sujiatun in the papers. Well after that report came out, Harry Wu, a famous dissident felt that the evidence was insubstantial. American officials also investigated the hospital and found no evidence that it was being used for organ harvesting or detaining prisoners. Only two Canadian researchers, out of everyone in the world, found “evidence,” which was mainly gathered by people who reported to be there.

Of course there are still political problems. Although I’m not involved with Falun Gong any longer, people still have the right to practice what they wish, even if someone else views it as wrong. However I do not necessarily think that many of them are political. Even ordinary Chinese people who don’t have any affiliation to Falun Gong are sometimes imprisoned by the government.

Li Hongzhi is the omniscient and omnipotent savior of the world, according to himself and his followers

Q: You stated that you started to question Falun Gong after your schoolwork suffered. Can you say what happened after that?

A: I actually was a Falun Gong “practitioner” until I entered University. At that time I had been involved fully with a lot of its activities. I honestly thought that Falun Gong was teaching me ‘Truthfulness, Benevolence and Forbearance’. Unfortunately because I wanted to achieve “consummation” by practicing Falun Gong, I graduated from high school with only slightly-above-average marks.

The University which I attended, surprisingly, had a Falun Gong organization, and to my surprise it was mostly populated by those of Caucasian descent. There were many other religious organizations, including other religious groups.  Because of my contact with other students, I was able to talk about other religions. I remember when some Christians approached me. They were knowledgeable and respectful, but I felt angry every time they would criticize Falun Gong or the “Master”. Similarly, when a Muslim student asked me if Li Hongzhi can die, I didn’t respond directly but mocked him for being narrow-minded and obstinate. I often became angry at those who were critical of Falun Gong. I remember thinking that anyone who was against Falun Gong was evil. People at the Falun Gong organization also agreed.  One boy even went as far to call non-practitioners “filthy demons” and said that it’s okay if they are “destroyed”.  At that time, I was truly frightened and it lead to me doubting Falun Gong, but I was still afraid to leave.

Q: How long was it before you finally left?

A: I It took me many months to get the courage to leave Falun Gong.  I think the final straw was when I went home one winter for vacation, I realized my grandmother was not well, so she needed to see a doctor.  But my parents refused for her to have such treatment, since Li Hongzhi claimed that when you fell ill, neither injection nor medication was needed, you would recover simply by reading the book and doing some exercises.  Unfortunately my grandmother’s condition worsened, and although it was quite obvious that medicine was needed, my parents still adamantly refused.  From that point forward, I decided to analytically look at Falun Gong better to realize its weaknesses.

Q: What steps did you take, once you finally decided to leave?

A:  By the time I had realized Falun Gong was a cult, I felt the need to leave.  I had realized that Falun Gong misuses terminology, and creates special meanings to words in order to fool people into thinking this is some kind of spiritual practice.  So, I had already made my mind that I needed to get away somehow.  I had to seek protection from the people who remained members.  Also, although it was painful, I had to also stop communicating with my parents because they were still so fanatical about it.

Slowly, I was able to rebuild my life.  During this time, I enrolled in some religion classes, and also read about 40 books in one year on the topic of religion.  I started to learn more about various religions and investigated each one carefully by reading their books, and also third-person literature about them.

Q: How are your parents now?  Are they still with Falun Gong?

A:  Yes, they are still in the cult.  It makes me quite sad to think about it every day.  They were upset at me for leaving Falun Gong but I think that they are still good people inside.

Q: What progress have you made in spiritual or religious terms since then?

A:  I am still deciding.  I know I believe in law and order, but also in treating people with respect.  Finding your path, and becoming a better person is a process which takes time.  When you leave a cult you can’t rush into the first thing you find.  You should be perceptive and patient with yourself.

Right now, I know I believe in God.  I’m taking that as the starting point, and I pray that He will help me through these troubles.  In terms of a particular religion, I have not made up my mind.  I do have a general idea of what I want: an authentic spirituality, a connection with something greater than myself, a sense of direction and morals.  Isn’t that what real faith is about?  At this point I am leaning more towards Orthodox Christianity or Islam.  Those are the two religions most appeal to me because their message is beautiful, clear and concise.  I know it seems strange for a Chinese-American woman, raised in the United States, in this day and age to think about converting to Islam, but in fact I read a lot about Islam from both Islamic and secular sources, especially by writers like Ivan Aguéli, Réné Guénon, Hossein Nasr, Martin Lings and Titus Burckhardt, who converted to the religion.  As far as Christianity was concerned, I also read a lot of books by Christian authors, like C.S. Lewis and [G. K.] Chesterton, and Seraphim Rose.  I was actually raised as a Protestant, but after reading about Christian history and the Church Fathers, I feel that Orthodoxy is the “truer” version of Christianity.

Q: Do you have any concluding remarks?

A:  I’m thankful for this opportunity to come here and talk about my experience.  I reached a point back then, where I couldn’t bear with the torment of the mind and conscience.  I want to tell those who are involved with cults, not just Falun Gong, to try and evaluate things by themselves.  I want to encourage them to think clearly, and to have the courage to leave if they feel threatened.

Posted in Religion0 Comments

Between Technology and Traditionalism

Between Technology and Traditionalism

It is a well-known fact that a number of the problems of modernity are in part due to industrialization. These problems extend far beyond the reach of “first world” countries, and affect the planet at large, and have inflicted severe damage on the environment. In the places where technology gave rise to the reign of quantity, it has also given rise to material surplus, allowing some people in those nations to become decadent and slothful, while regarding others as little more than “cogs in the machine,” whose primary purpose is that of material production.

Living in modern times, it’s easy to envision the future as a polluted and dysgenic dystopia, and current projections might indicate that even those projections are quite optimistic.  From the traditionalist point of view, the technologically-oriented society’s primary problem is the obsession with surplus and quantity, and as such experiences a state of spiritual stagnation and degradation as a result. The cultural planes, because of the surplus, are also degraded to the level of the lowest common denominator, and the environment which they engender is in fact dysgenic as a result of individuals no longer using intelligence, but instead relying on machines. Spiritually, people in technologically-oriented societies are also regressing. Evola duly noted such trends:

[America] has introduced the religion of praxis and productivity; it has put the quest for profit, great industrial production, and mechanical, visible, and quantitative achievements over any other interest. It has generated a soulless greatness of a purely technological and collective nature, lacking any background of transcendence, inner light, and true spirituality. America has [built a society where] man becomes a mere instrument of production and material productivity within a conformist social conglomerate.

Given the links between technology and modernity, we might be prompted to ask about the role that technology plays in traditionalist-oriented societies. This is a question which must be addressed cautiously. It is all too easy to over-simplify it, or worse yet, to involve too much emotion on the issue.  Pentti Linkola, perhaps has the most radical solution: the elimination of human and technological excesses.  Linkola pessimistically said:

The most central and irrational faith among people is the faith in technology and economical growth. Its priests believe until their death that material prosperity bring enjoyment and happiness – even though all the proofs in history have shown that only lack and attempt cause a life worth living, that the material prosperity doesn’t bring anything else than despair. These priests believe in technology still when they choke in their gas masks.

Although Linkola may take a highly cautious approach, it is possible to recognize the limited benefit, and indeed some of the inevitable requirements of the techno-industrial system, while still rejecting the overall spirit of its consequences. Hideo Kishimoto, a professor of religion at Tokyo University made the following distinction:

Westernization would mean that a certain indigenous cultural element of the traditional East is replaced by the penetrating Western element, and the functional role of the former is taken over by the latter.

Modernization, on the other hand, basically means to remold a cultural system into a new mode.

Although Kishimoto’s terminology here is slightly different from our own, and he speaks from a purely technical standpoint, he is totally correct. In the case of Japan, wearing Western attire and listening to Western music, or adopting Western perspectives on philosophy and ethics would be regarded by Kishimoto as “Westernization,” while the use of introduction of telephones, TV, airplanes, mass communication, and other technology can be considered a form of modernization. For a Westerner this is no different: adopting the attitudes and behaviors of a modern person is a completely different concept from using contemporary technology such as cellular phones or the internet. In fact, a number of technologies, such as solar power, might be employed to serve some ends demanded by a Traditional society (in this case, environmental sustainability).

Environmental preservation might be one use of Traditionalist-oriented technology

We might say that the problem is not the use of technology itself, but the overarching mentality of a society. A society which is entrenched in modernist thought will continue along that path, even if they never developed metal tools or fire. On the contrary, a society which is rooted in its values and in tradition doesn’t necessarily have to forsake technology. From the economistic point of view, the problem is one of balances: finding the essential point at which it is possible to be prosperous, but not subjugate man to the material or the means of production. From the Meiji Reformation until fairly recently, the Japanese had done just this, but today the situation in Japan seems quite different, even to the casual observer.

It is sufficient to say that some technology might be required by force of necessity. For instance, it is advantageous for national military forces to possess modern weaponry, so that they can defend themselves against foreign invasions. However, the adoption of such technology should not come at the expense of the real warrior ethos. Again, an example comes from Japan: during World War Two, the Japanese kamikaze still upheld the ethical precepts of Bushido and held in high esteem a certain asceticism in which the noblest action was self-sacrifice. Other technologies, while not necessary, are not “wrong” in and of themselves. For instance, the ability to communicate quickly and efficiently over long distances can be useful in disseminating knowledge consistent with Traditionalist ideas.

Traditionalism acknowledges the timeless nature of certain eternal principles, and it is possible to use technology as a way to ensure that these principles remain dominant. However, a caveat does exist. As nearly every nation which has undergone modernization has shown, this is easier said than done. Adopting technology often carries with it the baggage of modern attitudes (the Persian writer Jalal Ahl-e-Ahmad described this in one word: ‘machinestruckness’ ). As history has shown, this ‘machinestruckness’ permeates nearly all modern societies, and it is practically inevitable that technologically advanced societies all too often begin to fall under the spell of progress.  The social implications of this are, of course disastrous from a Traditionalist point of view, because it paves the way for standardization and ultimately a regression of the castes.

In conclusion, technology in and of itself does not mean that one should ignore technology completely.  When used correctly, technology should give us more leisure time to engage in activities which are ultimately transcendent and beneficial, but used incorrectly, technology is malefic, and indeed may lead to our downfall.

Posted in Culture, Science0 Comments

Suggested Reading: February 20, 2012

Establishment Media: Critics of Obama Are Racists And Conspiracy Theorists - Saman Mohammadi confronts the pernicious lie that criticizing “Barry” is racism

Symbolism and Metaphysics - A short essay by ”Cologero” of Gornahoor.net on inner states and their representations

The New Blacklist - Patrick Buchanan talks about his recent dismissal from MSNBC

The Great Depression: Then and Now - An excellent photo-essay contrasting the Great Depression of the 1930′s with that of today.

The Sins of Dawkins - Another atheist exposed.  ”His obnoxious behavior is only the consequence of his selfish, selfish genes.”

Budapest: l’intervento fraterno dei dirittumanisti (in italiano) - Claudio Mutti, reknowned scholar criticizes “the attack by the western oligarchy against the Hungarian people”

And now, for your listening and viewing pleasure:

Posted in Other0 Comments

LETTER: Syrians must forge their own path for the future

To the Editor:

I have been a frequent reader of RidingTheTiger, and have thus far been impressed by the quality of the articles.  The authors have presented interesting facts in a clear manner, and for this I thank them.

As we watch the current situation in Syria unfold, I’d like to weigh in with some perspectives, strictly as a neutral observer in the conflict.

It might be unpolitically correct politically incorrect to say this, but I don’t see a need to take a side in the current Syrian conflict. As I see this as a fundamentally Syrian matter. Some Syrians want Assad gone whilst others want him to stay. This decision is one to be made by the Syrian people themselves, and it is not up to other countries to make the decision for them.

The common perception of the Syrian situation in the United States is that Assad is a brutal dictator killing and cracking down on innocent protesters. However, just like the rest of the propaganda that the controlled media in the United States puts out against their enemies, we should all be skeptical. After all, those of us living in the United States should remember that this was the same media that told the world that Saddam Hussein possessed weapons of mass destruction, resulting in a devastating war in Iraq. The lies went further than the media, though. The US State Department presented fraudulent evidence that Saddam had purchased yellow-cake from Niger, and that he had ties to Osama Bin Laden. Yet, here we are, years later having seemingly forgotten that the media and the government lied to justify a war in Iraq.

Then of course, we have the conflict in Libya. The liberal left in America that proudly objected and spoke out against George Bush’s invasion of Iraq seems to have proudly cheered Obama as he took action against Libya, claiming what transpired there was a “Success story”. The way the American media portrays Libya sets the stage for an invasion of Syria. Just like in Syria, Libya was portrayed as a dictatorship with the entirety of the population united against its tyrant ruler. The reason why it was so hard to dislodge Gaddafi was because he was using African mercenaries to compensate for his defecting military officers. The perception in the average American mind is that Gaddafi is out of power; Libya has regained its seat in the United Nations and the Arab League, and Libya is now becoming a democracy. It’s a shame that western media is not reporting the fighting which goes on in spite of Gaddafi’s death. In Bani Walid, A town in the Misrate district, Gaddafi loyalists retook the town and tore down the flag of the NTC, replacing it with the green flag of the Jamahiriya.

Of course, just like the propaganda in regards to Iraq, the truth was much more inconvenient for the neo-conservatives and liberals alike. A large part of the population was loyal to Gaddafi. This should come as no surprise due to the fact that Gaddafi provided the Libyans with free health care and education. He also funded public works programs that created running water, electricity, and homes for the Libyans. Moreover, every fact-finding mission that was dispatched to Libya disproved the myth of mercenaries. The so-called “African mercenaries” were simply African Migrant workers and Afro-Libyans. Even left-leaning organizations like Human Rights Watch, Amnesty International, as well as former members of Congress Cynthia McKinney and Walter Fauntroy were forced not only to admit that the mercenaries were a myth, but that there was and is still a campaign of borderline genocide carried out against the Afro-Libyans by the rebels.

With the lies fresh in our minds, why should we buy into the propaganda that is being spread about Syria? It is true that there have been protests against Assad. However it’s also true that the Syrian rebels have been engaging in attacks against civilian targets. Whenever Israel launches an attack against the Palestinians, the American and British media demand that Israel be allowed to defend itself, even if the attack was unprovoked. By this logic, shouldn’t Assad also have the right to protect his nation from armed and violent gangs?

As someone who is not Syrian, I have no right to make a decision over what path the Syrians should take. However, if I could say one thing to them, it would be not seek the help of outside nations in deciding their fate. For them to appeal to any of the nations that belong to the North Atlantic Treaty Organization would certainly be a fatal mistake. The Syrians who are calling for a no-fly zone and other forms of western intervention should take a long hard look at Nour Malaki’s brutal crackdown of the Iraqi people. They should look at the prolific amount of arms trafficked by the United States, Great Britain, and France to brutal dictators all around the globe. They should take a look at the consequences of economic “neo-liberalism” advocated by western leaders and by the IMF and the World Bank.

If perchance there are any Syrians reading this, you may think of your current situation as bleak and desperate, but consider the future.

-Alexander S.
February  17, 2012
Syracuse, NY, USA

Posted in Current Events, Letters, Middle East, Politics3 Comments

The modernist invention of “Judeo-Christianity”

Since the end of the Second World War we have been bombarded from all sides with references to the West’s “Judeo-Christian religion,” and “our Judeo-Christian heritage.” Politicians regularly invoke these principles, and even religious leaders trumpet the phrase as if it were a self-evident truth. So sacrosanct is this concept, that even secular leaders make appeals to it. In fact, in America, Judeo-Christianity is nearly secular, and almost always mentioned alongside concepts such as liberty, equality, and democracy – themselves purely concepts which are secular in nature.

In the secular realm, even liberal atheists can make appeals to “the West’s Judeo-Christian roots”.  They can never precisely name what these roots and values are, and in fact some liberals go so far as to say that things which are inherently anti-Christian are a part of that tradition based on a flawed understanding of Christian Scripture.  However, we know that truth is not relative.  It does not change depending on the speaker, and hence there must be something deeply flawed with the way that Judeo-Christianity is presented or how it is implemented by the elites.

There is no such religion as Judeo-Christianity. Judaism is a religion which is wholly independent of Christianity, and was in fact a rejection of Jesus Christ as the Messiah. The Talmud, Judaism’s second holiest book, refers to Jesus and his mother Mary in unequivocally harsh language, calling him a false teacher, and preaching hate against all Christians. Of course, in modern times, there are few Jews, and even fewer Christians who know about the Talmud, but the sentiment of Talmudism is present at the highest levels of Jewish leadership.

It is true that Judaism and Christianity share the “Old Testament”. However, the interpretations of the Old Testament differ greatly between Christians and Jews. Furthermore, according to Justin Martyr, the purpose of Christ’s ministry was to restore true religion and to denounce the hypocrisy of the Pharisees. Consequently, Judaism establishes itself, as being inimical and opposed to Christianity from the very beginning, and diverged in that direction for the subsequent two centuries.

Thomas Aquinas, writing in the 13th century, believed that the moral precepts in the Bible predate Creation, being that they are established by God. Other precepts are ceremonial and judicial, and were established in the time of Moses, for a specific people and a specific time (in this case, the Ancient Hebrews). Accordingly, upon the coming of Christ they were not binding to non-Hebrews who converted to Christianity, because the New Covenant established through Christ is the instrument through which God offers mercy and atonement to mankind.

The anti-Christian nature of modern Judaism is one which Jewish scholars themselves are in agreement on. This very prominent and defining aspect of Judaism, is in fact what defines it as a religion. But it is more than a theological disagreement which defines Judaism as separate, and Judeo-Christianity to be an ahistorical concept.  Joseph Klausner, in his book, “Jesus of Nazareth” expressed the Judaic viewpoint that Christ’s teachings were “…irreconcilable with the spirit of Judaism.” Gershon Mamlak, a Zionist intellectual once claimed that Christianity is “in direct conflict to Judaism’s role as the Chosen people.”  Jewish writer Joshua J. Adler admits that, “The differences between Christianity and Judaism are much more than merely believing in whether the messiah already appeared or is still expected.”

If one takes the view that the religions of the world are in fact separate revelations of the Divine, through which man learns of a higher reality, then it follows that the diabolical attempts to distort, revise or eliminate these unique, ancient and divinely ordained patterns would be a grave error. The constant, politically motivated ideals to the imaginary entity of “Judeo-Christianity” are fully anti-traditional, because of its ultra-modernist theology. The fact is that Judeo-Christianity, given the voluminous history of anti-Christian attitudes by Jewish leaders and lay people alike, would not be viable had it not been secular in the first place.

Since the concept of Judeo-Christianity is invalid religiously speaking, it fulfills other purposes. In a world were political allegiances have replaced confessions of faith, Judeo-Christianity precisely fills the role of a secular cult. The purpose of such a cult is in fact to de-Christianize Christians.  The people who invented the concept predicted that, after the failure of the Soviet Union to enforce atheism, forcibly removing religion would be impossible.  However, by ostensibly appealing to a number of Christian ideas, and slowly inverting them, they could achieve their goal.  The role of Judeo-Christianity as a purely secular motivator is the reflection of the fact that one may be a considered “Jew” by birth even if he is not religious. It then proceeds from this that “secularism” is not, in fact, the enemy of Judeo-Christianity, but its mirror image. After all, if Judeo-Christianity is the kernel of Western civilization, there is no way that any society in the West can properly be identified as belonging to or being governed by Christian doctrines.

For Americans and other Western Europeans, one of the roles of propping up the term “Judeo-Christianity” is to integrate Jews into mainline of society, perhaps in an attempt to mitigate accusations against them of being usurpers of Western work ethic. In some ways, history once again speaks against this. From Karl Marx and Sigmund Freud to Leon Trotsky and the neo-conservatives of today, the politico-social movements which have gnawed away at what was once a Christian Europe were, in a large part, lead and organized by people who identified as Jewish.

The Jewish “core” of “Judeo-Christianity” can be seen through the attitude of modern Protestant churches towards Israel. In return, Christianity, or its secularized, institutionalized form, has become acceptable enough for the Jews to consider Christians (once their enemies) as allies. Under “Judeo-Christian” doctrine, the Jews reclaimed their status as the “chosen people” and so-called “Christian” Zionists began to sing the praises of Israel.  It is this belief which ascribes holiness to the state Israel.  This in itself is perhaps as an outgrowth the other bizarre Judeo-Christian “belief” of Shoahism. For this reason Judeo-Christianity is all to easily used by its by the leaders of Israel, to carry out a political agenda that favours that foreign political state over and ahead of the interests of America, or their fellow Christians. AIPAC and many American businessmen have profit interests in war and campaigned for new wars as a matter of business, but it is the Judeo-Christians who have added fuel to the fire.

Ultimately, the so-called Judeo-Christian values are ultimately another manifestation of modernism and militant secularism. They are an outgrowth of a doctrine which is needed not to improve oneself through the adherence to divine guidance, but a dogma which has created the modern societies.

RidingTheTiger author Hong Kyung-Jin assisted with the writing of this article.

Posted in Religion0 Comments

Abraham Lincoln: Historiography and Reality

Abraham Lincoln: Historiography and Reality

In a little more than a week, Americans celebrate the birth of Abraham Lincoln, their 16th president as part of a federal “President’s Day” observance.

In the annals of American history, Lincoln, the sixteeth president of the United States, is accorded a special place because of his role in the Civil War.  After the Union won the war, Lincoln became known as the “Great Emancipator,” referring to his role in freeing African-American slaves from bondage.  Modern Republicans consider him the progenitor of the modern incarnation of their party, and the American people by and large portray him as a warmhearted Christian and a honest family man. Some people admire his humble upbringing on the then-frontier state of Kentucky, while others look up to his style of leadership and herald him as a military genius and master orator who helped the Union fight through the Civil War.

However, there is another side to Lincoln.  This tyrannical side is often overlooked by the victors of the Civil War, and as a consequence seldom mentioned in history books.  As American economist and historian Thomas J. DiLorenzo, and author of the book “Lincoln Unmasked” said:

The gigantic collection of myths, lies, and distortions that comprise The Legend of Abraham Lincoln is the ideological cornerstone of the American warfare/welfare state. It has been invoked for generations to make the argument that if the policies of the U.S. government are not “the will of God,” then at least they are the will of “Father Abraham.” Moreover, this legend — this false history of America — did not arise spontaneously. It was invented and nurtured by an intergenerational army of court historians who…are absolutely indispensable to any government empire.

The “real Lincoln,” is far from the benevolent and kind old man which has been taught for generations in schoolbooks and classrooms.  Lincoln’s faults, in fact were numerous, both as an individual and a politician.  Far from being the humble statesman that he is often portrayed as, he was, in fact a megalomaniacal tyrant whose influence on American politics were a death-knell for the Republic and the beginning of the American Empire.

Perhaps the most obvious were the draconian measures, that Lincoln took during the war to prevent criticism of his office and his person. Lincoln appropriated powers that no previous chief executive had thus far used. He suspended the writ of habeas corpus, and imprisoned 18,000 American citizens suspected of supporting the Confederacy without trial. Further, he jailed several thousand more citizens for attempting to vote against him, charging them with “polluting the ballot box,” and ordered purges of politicians who disagreed with him from congress in an attempt to supress anti-war sentiment within the Union. He also unconstiutionally invaded two non-seceeding states along with the Confederacy on the pretense that secession was treasonous, even though several states had attempted to seceed earlier in the 19th century and had not been found in violation of the law, and several states only signed the constitution in the first place under the assumption that secession was always an option.

Lincoln was ideologically very close to the German theoretician Karl Marx the father of communism. In his book Abraham Lincoln and the Second American Revolution, the American historian James M. McPherson writes, “Lincoln championed the leaders of the European revolutions of 1848; in turn, a man who knew something about those revolutions — Karl Marx — praised Lincoln in 1865 as ‘the single-minded son of the working class’ who had led his ‘country through the matchless struggle for the rescue of an enchained race and the reconstruction of a social world.” This is confirmed in a letter that Karl Marx himself wrote to Lincoln, in defense of his war against the Confederacy, stating: “From the commencement of the titanic American strife, the workingmen of Europe felt instinctively that the Star-Spangled Banner carried the destiny of their class.” In fact, Lincoln became such a hero to socialists and communists, that during the Spanish Civil War, the anti-Nationalist forces enlisted the help of the so-called “Abraham Lincoln Brigade,” which consisted of socialist and communist volunteers from the United States. In a nation which seems to be struck with horror at the slightest mention of Soviet or Chinese communism, it is indeed odd that Lincoln’s clearly socialist leanings are almost never referred to.

Lincoln is often referred to as the “Great Emancipator,” in reference to the Emancipation Proclamation. However, a close examination of the Proclamation reveals that it only freed slaves in states not currently occupied by the Union Army. Lincoln issued strict orders to the Union Army not to free any slaves they came across. Today, the historiographers and propagandists in America state that the War Between the States was fought to free the slaves, as evidenced by the Emancipation Proclamation. However, there were diverse issues leading to the Civil War, and the Emancipation Proclamation was only a political gesture which attempted to undermine the support that the Confederate States of America would recieve from European powers. Abraham Lincoln on many occasions claimed that African-Americans were an inferior, non-human race. He refused to align himself with abolitionists because he felt that they were too radical because of their claim that African-Americans were human beings. Finally, he wanted to forcibly deport all people of African descent back to Africa or possibly to a Caribbean nation because he believed that they were polluting the White race.

Another issue is that of Abraham Lincoln’s religious practices. Today, there are even many Christian churches which see Abraham Lincoln as a Christian. However, the truth is that despite the fact that Lincoln frequently quoted from the Bible as a political gimmick, he was never formally baptised in any church, nor did he join a church as an adult (it is possible, however, that he attended the Little Pigeon Church – the church his father attended – as a child). Historian and Christian author Dr. Mark Noll, Francis A. McAnaney Professor of History at the University of Notre Dame, states that “Lincoln never joined a church nor ever made a clear profession of standard Christian belief.” It is known that Lincoln had associations with the Freemasons, a satanic and anti-Christian cult. In 1860, while addressing the Grand Lodge of Illinois, Lincoln was recorded to have said, “Gentleman, I have always entertained a profound respect for the Masonic fraternity and have long cherished a desire to become a member.” Lincoln personally stated, “the Bible is not my book nor Christianity my profession. I could never give assent to the long, complicated statements of Christian dogma,” and was reported to have written a polemic against Christianity [1]. Lincoln was also known to have practiced witchcraft, often using ‘spirit mediums’ to contact his deceased son; Mary Todd Lincoln is said to have held séances in one of the upstairs rooms — a practice President Lincoln enthusiastically tolerated. Here, we see that history debunks yet another popular myth on a revered historical character. Far from being a Christian, Lincoln can be considered Deist at most, and atheist at worst.

Today, another American President has risen to fill Lincoln’s shoes — or so the media tells us.  For a person who supports foreign wars, eavesdropping on citizens, indefinite detention, or the right to kill citizens without due process, Obama perhaps fits the bill, although not in the way that the elites would like to admit. One can only wonder what extraordinary fabrications and tales of wonder the future court historians will invent to propagate that myth.

Posted in History1 Comment

Iranians Mark 33rd Anniversary of the Victory of the Iranian Revolution

Today, millions of Iranians staged massive rallies both at home and abroad to commemorate this fact, as well as the struggle which gave their nation a new life and marked the beginning of the end for globalist aggression against the Iranian people.

33 years ago, the Iranian people rose up against the corrupt, secular regime of the Shah and established the Islamic Republic of Iran.  The Revolution, which was at once anti-communist and populist, marked a unique moment in history.  At a time when his nation of Iran was flanked by the secularist, communist Soviet Union and the secularist, materialist United States, Ayatollah Khomeini, the leader of the Revolution, would secure his nation’s place in the world as an independent nation, with Shi’a Islam as the dominant guiding force for his people.  Today, the Islamic Republic of Iran continues on, adding to its thousands of years of culture and history, in no small part thanks to not just to Ayatollah Khomeini, but to the brave revolutionaries who risked life and limb to make a Third Position revolution possible.

Much to the surprise of the political analysts, the world’s first “anti-modern” revolution was successful, and by February 1st, 1979, when the father of the revolution, the late Ayatollah Khomeini had returned from exile, greeted by millions of supporters.  Khomeini would be the embodiment of the noble ideology and lofty ideals of the Iranian Revolution, which opposed oppressive colonialism and imperialism on one hand, while searching for identity in traditional and culturally conservative roots and denouncing the radical, atheistic left on the other.  Moreover, it had put into practice the resistance to materialism, rejecting forever the pre-eminence of the material economy.  The Iranian Revolution showed that, despite some difficulties, a true socially conservative revolution which was also anti-bourgeois and which served the needs of the masses was possible.  However, the West with its materialist and hedonistic soul has never been able or willing to understand the nature of this revolution which was in its essence, religious and spiritual.

Khomeini himself also championed this doctrine of independence and self-sufficiency, proclaiming: “We shall not allow the Superpowers to intervene in the destinies of our country, to intervene in our army, in our culture, or in our economy.”  It is a view of the world which rejects the crass materialism and despiritualization of Yankee imperialism on the one hand and the exploitative brutality and tyranny of Soviet Communism on the other.  Because the new Iran was opposed to both communism and Western interventionism, Iran soon became beset with many twists and turns set upon it by its enemies.  Ultra-leftists at once began to clamor for a Communist takeover of the country, while the Americans and their allies isolated Iran and secretly began to support liberal-bourgeois “reformists” in the Islamic Republic.

Today, Iran has become a key player in the stability of the Gulf region, and one of the few in the region not hosting American military bases.  Moreover, the Islamic Republic has become a regional leader in economic, political, social, scientific and cultural fields.  It must be said that the Iranian Revolution, as with all Revolutions, was carried out by humans.  Therefore, it had its flaws, just as all people have their own flaws.  Nevertheless, the Islamic Revolution is a happy page in the history of the world’s people, who oppose globalism, imperialism, secularism, and liberalism.

Posted in Current Events1 Comment

The Nacirema as an analogy for modern society

The Nacirema as an analogy for modern society

In 1956, the American anthropologist Horace Miner gave first shed some insight  into the nature of the Nacirema people and their customs.  It was through the landmark work, Body Ritual Among the Nacirema that the bizarre cults of these people first came to the knowledge of the American people.  Then, about thirty years ago, Neil B. Thompson continued that work by writing on the Elibomotua cult and environmental modification in the magazine “Natural History”.  In describing the fall of this mysterious culture, the latter also described the ‘ritual’ architecture of these people in the following passage:

“Trees, if in large enough numbers and size to influence the appearance of the landscape, were removed. In treeless regions, hills were leveled and large holes were dug and partially filled with water. In a few areas the Nacirema imported structural steel with which they erected tall, sculpturesque towers. Some of these towers were arranged in series, making long lines that extended beyond the horizon, and were linked by several cables running through the air. Others, particularly in the northern fringe area, were erected in no discernible geometric pattern and were connected by hollow pipes laid on the surface of the earth.”

Today, many students of anthropology have read, or at least heard of Miner’s work.  However, after reading, it is obvious that the “Nacirema,” are not an indigenous people of a distant time or place, but the Americans themselves.  While Miner’s intention might have been to satirize the language of his contemporaries, they also satirize aspects of American culture, such as medical practice and psychiatry.  Miner’s work serves as a sort of thought experiment, attempting to take a critical look at American modernity from a distant observer, rather than a person who is a part and parcel of that culture.

In some respects, Miner did not do anything new.  Johnathan Swift had satirized English society in Gulliver’s Travels.  However, by removing himself from the scene of American life, and looking inward, both Miner and Thompson essentially cast the American nation as seemingly primitive.  Because of this, while Miner may not have intended to critique modern life, the practice still recalls Evola’s notion that the American mind itself is “puerile and primitive” and an “example of regression”.  Therefore, while in technological terms, the America is “advanced” due to its technological-industrial complexes, there is a strong savage, primitive (or “telluric”) element that is prevalent within American culture.  As Evola believed that “primitiveness” did not necessarily refer to “original peoples,” but rather to the degenerating remains of more ancient races that have disappeared, this is not an unfounded comparison.  For instance, a number of aspects of modern-day American life, such as an almost fanatic dedication to secular, civic religion, are fairly reminiscent of certain primitive cults as practiced by indigenous peoples.  The main difference is that the former is purely of a chthonic and earthly nature, while the latter display some belief in a divine and other-worldly source.

The concepts of political correctness and democracy also form a sort of secular religion which creates a society without any ideals other than what its elites claim to be ideals.  A “secular religion” is essentially a set of philosophies which involve no spiritual component yet, possess qualities similar to those of a religion.  Political correctness often serves this function in modern societies, because it often serves to replace spiritual or religious values with secular ones, “counter-initiatory” values.  Another type of “secular religion,” although few might think of it as such, is ”Holocaustianity”, which is complete with a set of dogmas, commandments, high priests, sites of pilgrimages, temples, relics, miracles, and prophecies.  In this context, the mere fanaticism of liberalism is enough for it to be seen as no more than a superstitious and primitive cult.

The cultural practices of the Americans, too, could easily be mistaken for those of primitive peoples in a different context.  Many of the sporting contests resemble the regressive aspects of primitive rituals with their haphazardly violent and decadent actions.  Moreover in entertainment, we can observe young men and women gyrating their bodies to the a savage beat, as if venerating some type of ancient fertility cult!

In the material world, modern man is in a state of decline rather than progress.  For Guénon, the “Iron Age” or “Kali Yuga” has stripped man of his dignity.  Instead of elevating man to mastery over material elements, he was now controlled by the various things which were produced.  The mysticism of the soul, according to Guénon, had been replaced it with consumerism and materialism, with the most fashionable fads appealing to the wallet and the mind.  Guénon had also re-iterated that even “spirituality” appeals to the “lowest common denominator,” and at most is a distractive panacea.

Thompson’s work on environmental modification is also interesting given the nature of “modern” industrial society.  While industrialized nations allow people to live in relative comfort, those nations are also suffering from real environmental problems.  Consequently, when combined with the constant quest for quantity, this may ultimately be the downfall of civilization, as Thompson (fictitiously) suggests.  Already, alternatives to such such problems have been discussed by such “deep ecology” theorists as Pentti Linkola and others.

As the time goes on, the regression continues unabated as modernity drags us further into the path of degeneration.  Being able to recognize this problem is the first step in solving it.

Posted in Society0 Comments

American University Attacks Religious Freedom

An American university recently enacted a policy which, in practice, would force religious organizations operating on their campus to accept leaders who are not of their faith.  Of course, the policy was not worded in such a fashion.  As with all agenda-driven regulations, the policy was hidden behind a veneer of openness and tolerance: “any student may apply for leadership in any religious group”.  This might sound harmless in theory, but a shocking admission from the university’s dean did admit in a conference that the mere suspicion that members used religious criteria in voting for their leaders was grounds for investigation. Continue Reading

Posted in Culture, Current Events, Religion0 Comments


    Leave a Comment

  • Stay up to date

  • Subscribe to the RSS feed
  • Subscribe to the feed via email
  • Follow us on Twitter!

Find us on Facebook

Traditionalist Books


More books...