It is time – high time -- to say goodbye to unearned white guilt. The day of everlasting repentance is over.
As C.S. Lewis noted, the Providential reason for true philosophy is to correct false philosophy. And true political philosophy, a philosophy of true or ordered liberty and race realism, calls for the correction of brainless liberal and wicked Marxist egalitarian mis-interpretations of history. And since social, economic, and political policy is rooted in historical understanding or misunderstanding, the future of all humanity, in a nuclear age, now hinges on such correction.
Since true freedom or liberty is a Providential reward for the moral and intellectual virtue of free men, and since slavery, in nearly every instance, is a just Providential punishment for the ignorance, sloth, and depravity of the slaves, let us put an end to all policy rooted in historical misunderstanding, and, more fundamentally, in prior failure to understand and to honestly acknowledge the fallen, sinful nature of man.
The alleged sins of the white race, and of the white man in particular -- including colonization of the New World, negro slavery, segregation, and so on -- appear very differently when viewed correctly, or through the corrective lenses of true history and of true philosophy rooted in Christian Scripture.
+ + + + + + + + + + + + + + +
About one thing let’s be clear: The Mongoloid aborigines who inhabited the land later called “America”, after the Italian explorer Amerigo Vespucci, were not “Native Americans.” America is an idea and a social-political reality created by Caucasoid peoples of Europe, and especially, of the British Isles.
After sailing west for 33 days in 1492, Christopher Columbus and company landed on an island in the Caribbean. Columbus, a master navigator and seaman, dubbed the natives he encountered there “Indians”, mistakenly underestimating the globe’s size, and thinking he had landed at some outlying part of India proper. But the name “Indian” stuck for centuries, until anti-white Marxist types began to re-write the histories. And while Marxists wrongly understand much, including the most important things, they do – as children of their father Satan, the father of all liars -- rightly understand very well that language is power, and that he who controls language and who writes the histories controls both the present and the future.
By verbal sleight-of-hand, by abracadabra magic of word replacement and word conjuring, and by deceitful acts of false philosophical and philological alchemy, traditional and cultural Marxists sinfully transform and manipulate concepts and words, crafting euphemisms and pejoratives contrary to truth, reality, and goodness, so that: sodomites become “gays”; negroes or colored people become “people of color”; illegal aliens become “migrants” or “refugees”; constitution-loving Southern Confederates become traitorous and racist “rebels”; a bloody homosexual tyrant becomes a great emancipator and savior of the Union; Trump supporters become “fascists”; and, neither last nor least, red men or Indians become “Native Americans.”
But, it was the European Columbus who, against great odds, discovered the New World (another European label) and its inhabitants, and not the other way around. It was white European spirit and know-how, forged and blessed by the Triune God of Europe’s peoples, that achieved this greatest of all discovery feats. And such intrepidity, such imagination, such organization, such courage, and such channeled intelligence – emanating from Europe – entitles the bold discoverers to affix a preferred label or name, for usage by the world at large, to their discoveries, both lands and peoples. And so, America, properly understood, did not predate the European discovery of land and people.
White men in caravels sailed west, 2700 miles in 33 days, across what red men in canoes found utterly impossible to paddle east.
+ + + + + + + + + + + + + + +
The most despicable human specimen in our day is the white liberal who is anti-white. Such race traitors merit perhaps the personal self-deletion their own wicked thoughts, words, and actions merit; but, unfortunately for the world, they insist on hanging around to conspire against and to make trouble for their racial kinsmen. Worst of all, the race traitors among us perversely blame the Lord their Creator for what they are, rather than repenting of their sin or exiting this life gracefully and expeditiously.
The origin of anti-whitism in modernity is deeply personal and moral, of course, but also philosophical.
In his great work titled Phenomenology of Spirit (1807), the German philosopher Hegel (1770-1831) noted the tendency of a maturing mind to progress from the merely subjective to truly objective and absolute truth. In his Philosophy of History (published posthumously, 1900), Hegel notes the tendency, unique to white or Germanic races, to strive for objectivity, fairness, balance, self-criticism, government by law and not men, and justice, conceived as giving to each his due. This extraordinary European and Caucasoid concern with objectivity and fairness and justice was in fact a signal moral and intellectual achievement of humanity and a milestone in Providential human history.
But, in this fallen world and in this veil of tears that is earthly life, all things save the Lord Himself are tinged with and tainted by sin, and so no good deed of humanity, it seems, goes unpunished. And so, by the construction of demonic and counterfactual narratives that appeal to the envy of untermensch and to self-doubt in Germanic folk themselves, white Marxist liberals have perversely twisted this noble penchant for objectivity and self-criticism into white-racial self-vilification and self-destruction.
From the time of Marx and Engels until now, in the span of scarcely a century and a half, the cancer of anti-whiteness has spread far and wide and now threatens to end Western Civilization itself. The carnal Jewess Susan Sontag, for example, once called white Gentiles the cancer of the human race, while the truth, as can be most amply illustrated, is the exact opposite. A card carrier herself, Ms. Sontag, flying under her Germanic father’s name for respectability’s sake, when speaking of social cancer’s root cause, was committing psychological projection on behalf of her own stiff-necked and benighted tribe.
But whatever its origin, the current overt, in-your-face, anti-whiteness of envy-ridden and ever-hustling untermensch, coupled with white liberal self-flagellation, as forms of virtue signaling, are now the fashion and rage and means of self-promotion in all public sectors of life, including government, business, and even in churches. For supposed but never proved sins of the past, like slavery, conquest, and colonialism, whites are expected to grovel – and to make monetary payment, of course, through the nose – to a remainder of humanity that is, by any objective measure – whether scientific or artistic or technological or philosophical or governmental or religious and theological – far less accomplished.
+ + + + + + + + + + + + + + +
Being fashionably anti-white is currently a means of gain in the world; a means both morally corrupt and intellectually bankrupt. And this is – and has long been -- especially true in academia. And, riding an earlier wave of such fashion in the early 1980s, before political correctness and wokeness reached their totalitarian highwater mark during the Obama years, which of course triggered Trumpian reaction in 2016, we find one James Axtell (1941-2023), a white man, and professor of history at the College of William and Mary. Axtell’s specialty was the American Indian, and he authored several works including The European and The Indian: Essays in the Ethnohistory of Colonial North America (1982).
This work of Axtell is undeniably worthwhile and stimulating, but, in the end, its author is more articulate and ardent, both in defense of the Indian and in criticism of the white, than accurate historically and insightful philosophically. In the French Enlightenment tradition of Diderot’s Bougainville and Rousseau’s widely misunderstood “noble savage”, Axtell romanticizes Indian paganism. In passing, we note how liberal romanticizing of the 1960s counter-cultural hippie was in vogue in the early 1980s, just as Axtell, at “respectable” mid-life, was romanticizing the wild and long-haired Indian.
In his work, sadly, Axtell’s analyses are fundamentally flawed because he lacked a deeper philosophical-historical understanding of both civilization and barbarism, and specifically, of Christianity and heathenism. In particular, Professor Axtell lacked a deeper understanding of fallen, sinful human nature. This becomes evident from the following pivotal passage by Axtell:
“Whenever plans were drawn for “humanizing” the American natives, the English missionaries chose a peculiar phrase that speaks volumes about their religious attitudes and cultural preconceptions. Time and again, from the sixteenth century to the American Revolution, it was said that the first goal of the English was to “reduce” the Indians from savagery to “civility.” The phrase is puzzling because we would expect a people with a superior self-image to attempt to raise their inferiors, rather than reduce them, to their level. To my knowledge, only two missionaries during the whole colonial period ever express their goal as one of elevation – both only once and both well into the eighteenth century – and even their aberrance was wholly out of character. Why did they speak as if Indian culture needed a kind of degrading before measuring down to English civility?”
Sadly, Axtell’s puzzlement about Christian reduction did not lead him to more research and deeper investigation, but ended only in ignorant assumption and assertion. And so, at the most critical juncture in his work, the liberal-secular ideological beliefs of the author trump, in his mind, the love of and search for truth.
Indeed, the Indian way of life – with its sinful, roaming liberty (at least for the men) -- appears attractive and romantic, save for its material poverty and physical hardship, to those, including many (liberal) whites, who would, as they suppose, find Christian living too confining, too strenuous, and too demanding and therefore irksome and repugnant. In truth, the Indian way of life, across all tribes and linguistic groups of the Americas, ultimately was a self-justifying “naturalistic”, hedonistic, idolatrous, and, not infrequently, barbarously cruel way of life, covered over with custom and tradition that lends a sacred aspect, for those who lacked Divine saving and sanctifying grace and a love of Truth. At a deeper level, indeed, an obvious and robust anti-Christian bias pervades Axtell’s work. Evincing unbelief himself, as well as fundamental ignorance of the nature of orthodox Christianity, Axtell was a false-philosophical neo-pagan who ended by defending, by invidious comparison to “inferior” white ways and deeds, even the most barbarous and – literally, by scalping – the most hair-raising torturing and butchering enormities endemic to traditional pagan Indian cultures.
Axtell’s most fundamental error – an error that pervades and skews and taints and truly reduces or lessens in value his entire work – is his catastrophic failure to understand the Christian-European goal of spiritually reducing the Indian. Viscerally anti-Christian, Axtell the liberal historian failed to read and to study and to learn about Christian reducing from, for example, its greatest expositor, the great theologian and metaphysician Bonaventure (1221-1274).
Bonaventure’s scholastic-metaphysical reductio is the third and final “consummation” leg or triad of his emanation, exemplarity, and consummation mystical-metaphysical journey of man to God. Thus, Christian reducing is not a lessening of value but rather its opposite, an increase in actualized value of the person, both objectively and, which is the same, in God’s eyes. Christian reduction, properly understood, is elected man being led back (Latin, ducere means “to lead” and re- means “back to”) to God. The import of this oversight by Axtell can hardly be overstated, since correction of him on this point subverts and inverts his central analyses and conclusions across the whole range of the ethno-historical issues he treats in his very articulate but – alas – fundamentally unfounded magnum opus.
White Europe’s motives for exploration and colonization were as varied morally as the Europeans themselves; and certainly, Cotton Mather (1663-1728) spoke for many when, in just racial self-criticism, he confessed that the Europeans had “very much Injured the Indians . . . by Teaching of them, Our Vice. We that should have learn’d them to Pray, have learn’d them to Sin.” And just as certainly, it Is far easier, because of man’s fallen, fractured nature, for a people to be lowered on the scale of vice than raised on the scale of virtue.
But the historian’s true aim is to fully grasp and to fully acknowledge the weaknesses and the strengths, the wickedness and the nobility, among both the conquerors and the conquered. Indeed, in history done right, it is possible to properly reckon and to hold all pluses and minuses in a scale of historical judgment, and then, in all and withal man can grasp, fathom and appreciate the Providential ascendancy of a Christian civilization over primitive tribal paganism and idolatry. And, by the by, much has been said and written, for example, about whites dispossessing the red man of his lands. What is ignored, however, is that Indian tribal land claims, in nearly every instance, went far beyond actual Indian usage.
Reeling before a conquering racial tidal wave, backfilled by consolidating and systematic white settlement, that rolled irresistibly and inexorably from the Atlantic to the Pacific over few generations, the Red Indian, in organization, technology, and energy, was ever and always far outmatched by the White European.
In 1854, the brilliant Southern social philosopher George Fitzhugh accurately and matter-of-factly declared that “half of mankind are but grown-up children, and liberty is as fatal to them as it would be to children. And being such, that half are necessarily at comparative disadvantage if forced into free competition with the other half. And where two races of men of different capacity are brought into close juxtaposition, as between white man and black man, and as between white man and red man, the Anglo-Saxon inevitably and inexorably marches to conquest.” In this way, Fitzhugh self-critically and honestly described the Anglo-Saxon race as “the wire-grass of nations”, a hardy strain of grain that inexorably and irresistibly spreads and conquers. And yet, by a Wise Providence, what softened and mitigated the hard effects of such conquest, in both cases, was the Christian-European tradition and faith, however imperfect, of the white conquerors and masters.
+ + + + + + + + + + + + + + +
For most of two millenia, Europe was the geographic seat of the Lord’s invisible Christian Church. Universities, cathedrals, learning, and true civilization without equal over the globe sprang, by God’s gracious Plan, from European soil. Around five-hundred years ago, Christopher Columbus echoed the great commission commanded by the Lord Jesus Christ, Who is God in the Person of the Son, in the four gospels and Acts, when, in writing to his sponsors, King Ferdinand and Queen Isabella, regal expellers of both the Moor and the Jew from Christian Spain. Columbus said:
“Your Highnesses, as Catholic Christians and Princes devoted to the Holy Christian faith and to the spreading of it, and as enemies of the Muslim sect and of all idolatries and heresies, ordered that I should go to the east, but not by land as is customary. I was to go by way of the west, whence until today we do not know with certainty that anyone has gone.”
Before his world-changing voyage in 1492, Columbus, to fully win over his royal sponsors, reminded them of a promise made two centuries earlier by the Church in Rome to the leader of Asiatic India, and conveyed from Europe to India by the world’s greatest land explorer, another European and Italian, Marco Polo (1254-1324). Columbus wrote before sailing:
“I informed Your Highnesses how this Great Khan [in India] and his predecessors had sent to Rome many times to beg for men learned in our Holy Faith so that his people might be instructed therein, and that the Holy Father had never furnished them, and therefore, many peoples believing in idolatries and receiving among themselves sects of perdition were lost.”
And so, It was the Asiatic Indian who asked, over seven centuries ago, for visitation and instruction in the Christian religion from white Europeans.
And in due course, Christian Europe, according to God’s great and mysterious Providence, answered the call. And by this avenue, the Christian religion would reach the Indians of North and South America who, up until then at least, were the dregs and refuse of Adam’s lost posterity, in their wild and sinful and unreduced liberty. And by this avenue, too, the seat of the Christian church would, in the wake of colonization, shift first to a new country named the United States of America, and then especially, to the American South.
Winston McCuen - South Carolina
