As much Revilo P. Oliver’s work is not free from misconceptions about the nature of Aryanity, such as the rationalist belief that “The [Aryan] gods are essentially personifications of natural forces” (‘The Origins of Christianity’), the belief that Jews are “a race”, and an illuministic like overvaluation of reason, which kept us at bay from it for a certain time, as much his contributions to the clarification of the Jewish, or should we say Semitic, problem, is invaluable; ‘The Descent of Islam’ can hardly be criticised, only dug into. Very few racialists since the end of WW2 have looked on Islam from a racial standpoint, and none with such acuteness. It is true that there are very few racialists left, and that, besides, very few publishers, whether in the US or in Europe, are willing to publish as straightforward, unambiguous considerations as those that are usually to be found in Oliver’s (posthumous) books – for, oddly enough, his posthumous work is the most valuable by far (compare, for example, the almost accommodating content of ‘Christianity and the survival of the West’ (1978), available athttps://ia600503.us.archive.org/20/items/ChristianityAndTheSurvivalOfTheWest/ChristianityAndTheSurvivalOfTheWest.pdf, an excerpt from which can be fount at http://www.heretical.com/miscella/oliver1.html, with, precisely, the uncompromising spirit imparting ‘The Descent of Islam’ – 1981, made available only much later). He has not been translated into any (major) European language, except Spanish. This gap has been filled in French, into which, so far, only an excerpt from his ‘The Enemy of our Enemies’, a critique of Yockey’s ‘The Enemy of Europe’ (https://ia600301.us.archive.org/8/items/TheEnemyOfOurEnemies/EEE.pdf), was translated (in ‘Le Prophète de l’Imperium’, Avatar éditions, 2004), with the publication of a translation of a chapter of ‘The Origins of Christianity’ on Monotheism at http://elementsdeducationraciale.wordpress.com/2013/12/30/le-monotheisme/ His prose is very easy to translate, particularly passages like the following one : “Good and evil, pain and pleasure, are only in the mind, and what makes the difference is your attitude toward events: it
would be wrong as well as futile to resist the Divine Plan, no matter what it ordains for you. The only important thing is the maintenance of your moral integrity, and so long as you do that, events have no power over you. They [The Stoics] even insist that a wise man, conscious of his moral integrity, would be perfectly happy, even if he were being boiled in oil. So far as I know, this proposition was never tested empirically, although intelligent men must often have thought that it would be an interesting experiment to put Chrysippus or some other prominent Stoic in the pot to ascertain whether the boiling oil would alter his opinion.”
A “cardinal flaw” he thought he had identified in the historical theory of Yockey, as well as in that of Spengler, was their tendency “to make race more or less independent of genetics”, when he was a living proof of the fact that race is not entirely dependent on genetics. Indeed (http://www.kevinalfredstrom.com/art/d/4625-1/RPO-typewriter1.jpg), it is hard to find a face with such purity of Nordic traits almost disfigured by a nose which provides evidence of an admixture of ‘Southern’ blood, a recessive character he must have overcome to a large extent in the late 1970’s, after the publication of ‘Christianity and the survival of the West’.
More can be found about Oliver at http://www.revilo-oliver.com/news/ Most of his books are available atwww.archive.org. See, in particular: the potent, and most topical, ‘The Yellow Peril’, athttps://ia600501.us.archive.org/16/items/TheYellowPeril/TheYellowPeril.pdf. Some of his allocutions athttp://blogfiles.wfmu.org/BU/Revilo_P_Oliver_-_1_-_Liberals.mp3 andhttp://blogfiles.wfmu.org/BU/Revilo_P_Oliver_-_2_-_Degeneracy.mp3
Suumcuique
“The Jewish Strategy” is also a must-read. It is a most uncompromising book which examines the occult war which has been waged against the Aryan for centuries, if not millennia. According to Oliver, we have entered the “extermination” phase – through large-scale massacres and miscegenation – of our race a few decades ago. Although a very pessimistic book, it offers little-known pieces of information and insightful hypotheses. It is rather short but the content is profound and can be studied to a much greater length.
It is refreshing to read an American perspective on these subjects.
PS: Oliver seems to have changed his opinion on the Christians:
“For the deplorable acceptance of Christianity by the ignorant barbarians of our race, I have tried to account in my book, ‘Christianity and the Survival of the West’. I would now change noting in that discussion except to make it more emphatic, for in the years since I wrote it, I came to the conclusion that, with only numerically insignificant exceptions, the Christians are useless in any effort to preserve our race, and that our domestic enemies are, from their standpoint, well advised to subsidize, are they are now doing, the ranting of evangelical shamans and the revival of menticidal superstitions by every means (...)”
However, a few sentences later, Oliver falls into the trap of assuming that Christianity in the “Middle Ages” contained “elements of our native Aryan morality” and was thus more bearable than today's Christianity.
PS 2: many texts from him can be accessed at http://www.stormfront.org/rpo/
Name us one racially aware thinker of the XXth century who did not fall into this trap.
We have read a few chapters of ‘The Jewish Strategy’, and the bold hypotheses it contains may indeed be called “refreshing”. Our attention was drawn to one particular chapter, called ‘Conspiracy or instinct ?’, since, as you may remember, this question arises in the third part of ‘Three Aspects of The Jewish Problem’’ – whose second edition will be published as soon as the preface and the postface, in which it is discussed, is proofread. Both author reach the conclusion that the thesis of a plot of worldwide domination should be discarded, without, it should be stressed, presenting many arguments in support of their own thesis, that of the ‘blind instinct’.
In any case, these two theses should not be seen as mutually exclusive, in so far as three aspects, or elements, can be distinguished in the Jewish substance : “firstly, the more or less modernised or bourgeoisified Jew of a faceless middle-class; in the second place, there is the Jew as cultural agent, the Jew as writer, artist, ideologist, sociologist, scientist and so forth; in the third place, there is the Jew as creature of the Jewish law, and as conscious instrument of the Jewish law.” (http://thompkins_cariou.tripod.com/id16.html) Indeed, nothing prevents one from thinking that what is purely instinctive in the first and second strata may be conscious in the third stratum. This is glimpsed by the American author, when he points out that “the great mass of Jews seem to be, almost without exception, under the tight control and discipline of their fairly numerous leaders, who could, in turn, be equally subject to the orders of a supreme and secret directorate, which plans and directs a conscious strategy as set forth in the famous "Protocols.” These considerations should have been explored. And so should have been the accurate observation that ”It is a pernicious and perhaps fatal error, characteristic of our race, to assume that other races have approximately the same nature as ours”, and, for the sake of consistency, the necessary conclusions on the issue at hand drawn from this observation.
Concerning the Protocols, and, more particularly, Protocol n°14, and its rabid attack on Christianity, it is usually produced as evidence that the aims of those behind this propaganda work are intrinsically opposed to the teachings of this religion, and to its followers, and, by implication,, that, being the enemy of our enemy, this religion, at least as Catholicism, would be our friend, and, so to speak, some sort of bulwark against a threat that would be external. This evidence - accredited by the fact that the so-called ‘dechristianisation’ and the concomitant ‘Judaisation of the Church’ started just a few decades after the publication of A. Weishaupt’s apparently anti-religious (and NOT specifically anti-Christian) agenda, a great admirer of Jesus, who, like his followers, approvingly claimed that Jesus’ real aim had been “to introduce general freedom an equality among men without any violent revolution” (Anrede, 170-2) - proves, however, to be wrong, when looked at more closely. In fact, a de-Christianisation did occur, but only one of facade : Church lands were confiscated, statues, and other iconography were removed from places of worship, crosses, bells and other external signs of worship destroyed, religious festivals, private as well as public worship prohibited, priests deported or murdered, on the initiative of those who were behind the so-called French revolution, with their radical brand of Christianity: hyper-Judaism: it can be said that the Church has not been Judaised, but re-Judaised, given the Jewish character of early Christianity. Mirabeau let the cat out of the bag, when, in his final hours, he had the lucidity to make the following statement: “Vous n'arriverez à rien si vous ne déchristianisez la Révolution.” (“You won’t get things done if you do not de-Christianise the Revolution”; “If you do no dechristianise the Revolution”, and not “if you do not dechristianise France”: there is a slight difference). Thus, the so-called French revolution can be considered, as paradoxical as it might seem, as a Christian revolution, as an umpteenth Christian revolution, in a sense that, like Solon’s reform in the Antiquity, it was conducted in the name of the Goddess cult of which Christianity is a (respectable) manifestation. Thus, Boissel, a forerunner of ‘feminism’, shouted, at the tribune of the Jacobins: “The rights of citizens consist in the enjoyment and the usufruct of the goods of the earth, our common mother.” In more concrete terms, the revolutionary spirit incubated in the high clergy, as showed by the French writer Chamfort (see, at archive.org, ‘Chamfort, étude sur sa vie, son caractère et ses écrits’, a study which, despite its literary character, reveals the inner workings of the late Ancient Régime as few others do).
Meanwile, “the ignorant barbarians of our race” who had accepted Christianity, outwardly dechristianised as they were, still remained inwardly Christian ; God was dead, but ”the pure Christian morality of love, submission, humility, and mystical humanism” (‘Men among the Ruins’), and, in general, all the lower psychic and psychological elements that make up what may be called the Christian forma mentis, far from disintegrating, galvanised into an even more corrosive precipitate, on contact, a few decades later, with positivism, a renewed form of the cult of (the goddess) Reason, renamed “science”. The cult of (the goddess) Reason, as we have seen, was originally imported to ancient Greece by Semitic thinkers
To be sure, positivism undermined the Christian belief. Time had come for it to be ruined. It had carried out its task: the Christianisation to the core in psychic and psychological terms of what was left of the White man. There was no use for it anymore. Its very foundations – the Goddess cult – became more apparent, that is, to those who are not fooled by the theological hodgepodge of this essentially subversive movement. Besides, had the Christian doctrine and Christian morals not been erased from most Whites’ minds, atheists would have, if not fully realised, at least sensed that the ‘post-modern’ world is – the belief in the equality of men and women, the tyranny of self-righteousness, self-victimisation, the exaltation of everything which is shapeless, weak, inferior, the abolition of property (except theirs : the Church’s), etc. – fully Christian, and that, in following the democratic credo, they are actually Christians – in spirit., while those who fight against the modern world in the name of ‘Christian values’ show similar symptoms.
To come back to Revilo P. Oliver, a serious error he made, and J. Evola, unlike many anti-Semites, did not, was to view and portray the Jews as a race, an error which is highly detrimental to anti-Semitism.
- William G. Carr (1895 – 1956) is another North American whose writings are worth reading (especially “Pawns in the Game”, it seems). They are more or less in the same veins as those of R. P. Oliver and deal about conspiracies and the occult side of History.Carr was one of those “hardcore” Christians who are so numerous in North America. As a result, his ideas on race and his position towards Judeo-Christianity are necessarily tainted. But his reconstruction of History is much more interesting. For example, that of England is brilliant. It seems that country was actually the first to succumb, as early as the first half of the seventeenth century with the execution of the king.
- We have used the French translation of 'Pawns in the Game' in a study on Bolshevism, its roots and its developments at https://elementsdeducationraciale.wordpress.com/2012/08/30/les-racines-occultes-du-bolchevisme/
I was surprised to see that Evola came to Oliver's attention at some point.
https://www.stormfront.org/rpo/PRIMITIV.htm
evola_as_he_is@{{emailDomain}}