--- In evola_as_he_is@yahoogroups.com, caleb afendopoulo
<afendopoulo@...> wrote:
>
>
> It seems that you are so obessed by proving
> white-aryan superiority that in fact you must be quite
> insecure with an inferiority complex.
> You will never bring a solid proof, so why don't you
> just accept who you are.
> Caleb
What type of Talmudic-Freudian psychobabble crap are you spouting?
I could guess my half-playful investigations would elicit pharisee
moralism. Aryan or Indo-European cultural and spiritual superiority
is simply a REALITY in spite of the fact that its proponents nowadays
largely consist of unbred plebeians. Modern people in their
romanticism are not interested in reality. Recognition of reality
shocks modern effeminates. Nietzsche, no fool, considered non-whites
as monstrosities halfway between man and beast:
Fear and intelligence. - If it is true, as is now most definitely
asserted that the cause of black skin pigmentation is not to be
sought in the action of light, could it perhaps not be the ultimate
effect of frequent attacks of rage (and undercurrents of blood
beneath the skin) accumulated over thousands of years? While with the
other, more intelligent races an equally frequent terror and growing
pallid has finally resulted in white skin? - For degree of timidity
is a measure of intelligence, and frequently to give way to blind
rage a sign that animality is still quite close and would like to
take over again. (Daybreak, 241)
Nietzsche designated the Aryan race "the best endowed and most
reflective species of man" (The Will to Power, 142), contrasting the
fair-featured dominators of ancient Europe with the vastly more
numerous, dark-colored, collectivistically-inclined, non-Aryan
slavish races:
"The vulgar man can be distinguished as the dark-coloured, and and
above all as the black-haired ("hic niger est'), as the pre-Aryan
inhabitants of the Italian soil, whose complexion formed the clearest
feature of distinction from the dominant blondes, namely the Aryan
conquering race...The subject races are seen to prevail once more,
throughout almost all of Europe; in color, shortness of skull,
perhaps also in intellectual and social instincts. Who knows whether
modern democracy, the even more fashionable anarchism, and especially
that preference for the commune, the most primitive of all social
forms, which is now shared by all European socialists -- whether all
these do not represent a throwback, and whether, even
physiologically, the Aryan race of conquerors is not doomed?" (The
Genealogy of Morals, First Essay, Section 5).
Oswald Spengler, no fool, said: The Celtic-German race has the
strongest will-power the world has ever seen (Years of Decision). As
F.P. Yockey emphasized (a person Evola recognized as valuable), "the
hierarchy of races is a FACT". The spiritual will-to-powers are
vastly different.
Indo-Europeans do objectively constitute the elite of organic life on
planet earth. No honest person can deny this. Study the following
phylogenetic representation:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:Human-phylo-tree.png
Genetically speaking, white Indo-Europeans are the furthest from the
lower levels of the animal kingdom embodied in the Afro-Asians;
therefore they are the Prometheans of nature. White Indo-Europeans
simply have more of a dynamic "genius fraction" in comparison with
the other races. Have you ever wondered why Promethean genius figures
like Plato, Aristotle, Michelangelo, Da Vinci, Shakespeare, Galileo,
Kepler, Gilbert, Descartes, Fermat, Torricelli, Pascal, Harvey,
Huygens, Boyle, Wren, Hooke, Newton, Leibniz, Mendel, Bach, Mozart,
Beethoven, etc. hardly ever appeared in African, Semitic and Asiatic
history? What non-European figures are possibly comparable to the
aforesaid? Charles Murray recently put out a quite interesting tome
called Human Accomplishment: The Pursuit of Excellence in the Arts
and Sciences 800 B.C. to 1950. Notably, he states: "What the human
species is today it owes in astonishing degree to what was
accomplished in just half a dozen centuries by the peoples of one
small portion of the northwestern Eurasian land mass", etc...
What is Greco-Roman antiquity's verdict?
Aristotle has more wisdom than the Jewish egalitarian mythology and
romanticist-rationalist delusions of moderns. What does Aristotle say?
"Barbarians are by nature more slavish than Greeks and those in Asia
more than those in Europe" (Politics 125a).
In other words, barbarians and Asians are more slavish by nature than
Greeks and Europeans. What could be more racist in the modern sense?
Later in Rome, Cicero argues that bastardized Semitic types like Jews
and Syrians were "born to be slaves" (servituti nati, Cicero de prov.
5.10).
I'm sure the Judeo-Trotskyist cultural subverters of modernity
consider Aristotle, Cicero, Nietzsche, etc. as dangerous "hate
criminals".