Might Is Right

by Ragnar Redbeard

  Hybridism, south of Mason and Dixon’s line, smoothed the way for the Lincoln invasion of ’62 and even in the Northern States (if the present olla-podrida intermixture, with inferior breeds, is not somehow put and end to) similar invasions may be confidently predicted. Our race cannot hope to maintain its predominance, if it goes on diluting its blood with Chinamen, Negros, Japanese, or debased Europeans. Panmixia means both death and slavery. Throughout South and Central America, human mongrelism is rampant: (a half-breed is president in Mexico). The Latin race is hopelessly effete in both the old world and the new. Nations, like horses, are bred to win.

  ‘Can you reverse rules that stupid farmers heed,

  And mend the higher by the coarser breed?’

  Tremendous indeed is the occult influence of sex-love upon the evolution of organic life. Love and glory, fidelity, emulation, resolution, beauty, strength, and courage are directly inspired by sex-passions. In ballad and legend they are ever inextricably intertwined. ‘None but the brave deserve the fair’ — ‘Faint heart never won fair lady’ and ‘all is fair in love and war,’ are age-worn proverbs.

  Nature is saturated through and through, with the chemic potency of strife and sexualism. All the world is male and female. The saint is the only hermaphrodite. Sexual desire inspires the male with nobility of bearing; and the female with instincts of motherhood, devotedness, and song. The roar of the lion as he tosses his tawny mane, by the forest water-hole — the neigh of the high-mettled stallion, as he rears at the halter, or leaps the slip-rail — the deep challenging bellow of the shaggy bull, as he tears up the grass with his stamping hoofs — the nightingale pouring piercingly into the azure vault, its magical thrill — man decked in his shining regimentals, marching forth to victory or death, with drum-beat and bugle-song; all bear direct testimony to the sublime, beneficent, and all pervading Mesmerism of Force.

  Military renown is now, and ever has been, the virtue of the mightiest animals. Self-abnegation is the thesis of the slave. Christlingism is functional derangement of the nerve centres — a madness — a disease.

  A national Redeemer has never been known to materialize, in the guise of a feeble mendicant — an humble petitioner: but rather in the form of a mighty man-hunter, a destroyer of tribal ravagers — a man who saith to his disciples ‘come on!’ not ‘go forth!’ The Emancipator is heard of at first, with secret delight, and some misgivings; but afterwards when better understood, he comes on a war-horse with steel by his side; amid the roll of saluting cannon, the throb of triumphal drums, the fierce blare of twisted-bugles, and the ringing huzzas of the People he has enriched by the exploitation of their foes — for all-the-world loves a fighter; especially its sisters, its cousins, and its aunts. Liberators never arrive from circumcised Jewry, wearing halos, briar crowns, uttering shrieks of agonized despair; nor do they “ride on a colt the foal of an ass,” through the streets of Zion. No! No! — that is the ideal of — dastards and dotards.

  In spite of all the century-old emasculating creeds, and debasing copy-book commercialisms; the inbred popular conception of a Mighty Man is still a Sworded Warrior — a king of men — a ruthless sweeper-away of blackmailers, usurers, priests and usurpers.

  “Who shall be nearest, noblest and dearest, named with all honor and pride evermore? He the undaunted, whose banner is planted on Power’s high ramparts, and battlements hoar. Fearless of danger, to falsehood as stranger: looking not back, when there’s danger before. He shall be nearest, he shall be dearest; he shall be first in our hearts evermore.”

  A Virginian love song expresses this grand old sentiment in its sexual form: — “Rather would I view thee dying, on the last red-field of strife; ’mid thy countries heroes dying, than become — a dastards wife.”

  John Ruskin (in an oft quoted passage) decidedly caught a passing glimpse of the surging logic that lurks in armed conflicts: — ‘War is the foundation of all the high virtues and faculties of men. It is very strange for me to discover this, but I saw it to be quite an undeniable fact. The common notion that peace and the virtues of civil life flourished together, I found to be wholly untenable. Peace and the vices of civil-life flourish together.’ Decadence and Peace are concentric.

  7

  Next to the belted sword-swinger and the sturdy well-to-do athlete, the successful money-making ‘man of affairs’ is especially attractive to the average female mind. He also (in a lesser degree) is a resolute professional fighter — a scalp-hunter — his scalps being title-deeds to land, farm-mortgages, bank credits, consols, shares and bonds. (Consols, shares, and bonds, represent sub-divided portions of the battle-booty.) He also, climbs to success over his prostrate rivals — for there is no other road. Success and money come to him only, when he has outwitted his rivals, and finally triumphed in the ruthless rough-and-tumble of daily, hourly conflict. The “Business Man” is a conqueror of the most merciless, stony-hearted, and cruel kind; but we must not blame him for that. If he displays a particle of human sympathy, with the multitudinous victims of his business methods, he is immediately out-generaled, bankrupted, ruined by rivals, with more iron in their strategy — more hardness in their hearts. A kind-hearted man is always a failure in “business,” and he is always a failure in “war.” War means thorough-going smashing-up of your opponent, so that he may be prevented from smashing you up; and it is “ditto, ditto, ditto,” in all the parallel phases of Commerce and Trade.

  With “money in his purse” the successful business man is able to support a family, and rear up his children in an environment of comparative freedom, and women are sharp to perceive this. In such matters the female mind is preternaturally acute. Except in sexual matters a women has no more brains than a cock-sparrow — but in questions of marriage and love, she is an expert. Other things being equal, women prefer a rich-man to a poor-man for a husband — and they are scientifically justified. He who is without wealth amidst unlimited quantities of it, is either a coward, a born slave or a lunatic; and no self-respecting woman should marry such an imbecile.

  The resolute and brave, never ‘hunger’ to the grave

  The gallant and the bold, never lack for — gold.

  With the possession of an “independence,” a man is free to materialize his ideals; and if he is “well born” it is impossible for his ideals to partake of the ignoble.

  Gold is a fierce resolvent. It is the sublimated extract of Victory. It is the property — the booty — of the Strong. “Whoever has sixpence (writes Carlyle) is sovereign over all men to the extent of that sixpence; commands cooks to feed him, philosophers to teach him, kings to mount guard over him — to the extent of that sixpence.” Therefore all men who would obtain freedom must obtain wealth ‘by hook or by crook,’ or as R. L. Stevenson rhymes it: — ‘You also scan your life horizon, for all that can clap your eyes on.’

  To become the child-bearer of a mere hireling, a day drudge, is the last resort of a sensible feminine.

  Dowerless women never regard a poor lover with enthusiastic favour: except in conventional romances. Without being capable of logical reasoning, yet women intuitively comprehend that “there is oft a lack of courage in the race of bondmen.” If a man possesses wealth (no matter how obtained) he can pick and choose among the most delightful darlings in the land: nay, he can even buy them (if he wants to) — by the carload. Behind all the hypocritical veneer of piety and fashion; women of all ranks are still a marketable commodity. Whenever the supply exceeds the demand, they are straightaway transmuted into magdalenes, concubines, slaves (or “new women”). When few in number (as in young colonies) they possess a certain proportion of selective influence, but when for every eligible man, there is a score of eligible women, their market value dwindles, and instead of ‘selecting,’ they become ‘the selected’ or as Darwin puts it: — ‘The sexual struggle is of two kinds. In the one it is between the individuals of the same sex, generally the males, in order to drive away or kill their rivals, the females remaining passive; while on
the other, the struggle is likewise between the individuals of the same sex, generally the females, which no longer remain passive, but select the more agreeable partners.” (Vide “Descent of Man.”)

  In a reasonably natural Society, the most vigorous males would possess Property and Power. Consequently (in accordance with the instincts of sex-attraction), they would also obtain possession and impregnate, the best and handsomest feminines; leaving the ovum-bearing residue to be fertilized by the less vigorous males. In an unnatural system of Society (such as the fiendish socialistic scheme, amidst which we now retrograde) weaklings, dotards, and semi-madmen are deliberately permitted to retain Property Privileges; that they are manifestly unable to defend if put to the test. The ‘Law’ defends the Unfit. Consequently opulent weaklings preponderate in the selection and retention of the finest females. Resultantly the children of such unnatural unions seldom reach even average perfection. More often than otherwise they are a shame and a malison to their kindred. “The sons of vicious and very corrupt men,” wrote Plutarch ages ago, “reproduce the very nature of their parents.”

  This nation literally swarms with vile semi-idiotic mannikins (leprous wretches, damned in the womb) whose presence among us, is a standing menace to all things truly Great and Noble. It is not by breeding meeklings and stunted profligates, that nobility of national character is evolved. Why should diseased and ignoble animals (rich or poor) be encouraged to populate luxurious wigwams, with fragile, anæmic, bottle-fed, scrofulous dwarfs; when nature demands their wholesale segregation — by the edge of the sword?

  Dr. Haycraft suggests that Society should socialistically segregate the Unfit, but that is manifestly out of the question, inasmuch as Society is incompetent to provide a testing standard, sufficiently absolute and accurate, to decide satisfactorily who are and are not the “Unfit.” Nature however has provided that standard, and it is unending conflict between rival interests: with women, power, and property as the contestants’ final prize. The surest, fairest, and most scientific method of re-distributing monopolized plunder, and accumulated — privilege is unlimited struggle.

  Let the Best Men win! Is that not the Logic of events of Science, of Fact and of Nature?

  Why should Anglo-Saxondom doltishly stand guard over the copulations of opulent decadents, and shoals of creeping unwarlike proletarians? “Not is anyone so careless (writes Charles Darwin) as to breed from his worst animals. Even savages, when compelled from extreme want, to kill some of their animals, would destroy the worst and preserve the best.’

  8

  The fit are not the individuals who merely inherit stolen property; or obtain peaceful possession thereof by subterraneanism; but those who deliberately, and openly proprietorise themselves. If taboos were not so insanely reverenced, proprietors who are incapables would be unceremoniously pushed aside (most probably) to make room for better men.

  If those ‘in possession’ victoriously prove their capacity, then their prerogatives cannot be abrogated or abridged; but should they fail, then their vanquishers — presumably better men — are biologically justified in dispossessing them. “Let the best man win” is an assertive, at once popular, scientific and suggestive. The mastership of the Ablest Man is exactly what science and circumstances demand. In Nature an organism’s right is commensurate with its mentality and physique. In the realm of Cosmic Law the only Statute of Limitations is superior Power.

  A-priori “rights” are as non-existent as the gods, ghosts, and moral taboos of the pontiffs and pastors. Therefore the police-officer’s club (being in harmony with the dynamic necessities of matter and motion) is part and parcel of the Divine Order. So are clubs in general. — Men shall ring around each other, in a fierce unending strife; each shall strive to ‘beat’ his brother, wile for wile, and life for life.

  If legislative injunctions, and other bogey contrivances were wholly disregarded; then the Strongest and the Boldest (therefore the Wisest) would by fertilizing the pick of the best damsels per marriage, transmit their own right-royal qualities to their immediate descendents. Upon similar principles second-rate males would of necessity pair-off with second-rate females. This by cumulative atavism, and interbreeding of underlings, would gradually tend to eliminate, subjugate, and efface the seed of the servile-minded — the superstitious and the over intellectualized.

  Hereditary virtues can only be maintained, by keeping them in constant use. Hence the biological necessity of unmerciful struggles between individuals and groups of individuals. As with muscles and organs of the body, so human aptitudes are developed by use and attenuated by non-use. Nearly all the masterful qualities, mental and physical, that have ever distinguished the elite of mankind, have originated in conflict.

  Racial rottenness (the conjoint result of holy hydrophobia and State-regulated hybridism) can only be eliminated by an intelligent application to the breeding of human beings — of the principles of natural selection, conjoined with conscious rejection, culminating from time to time in deadly conflicts. War is the most important phase of racial, sex and tribal evolution.

  One panic-stricken coward may cause the loss of a battle — and the loss of one battle may decide for ages (perhaps for ever) the fate of a Race. Hence the necessity of breeding men who are fighters — fighters in their heart. Hence also the need of training them, from boyhood up, to conquer and overthrow their oppressors and personal enemies — at any cost — at any peril. By no known alchemy can a race of warriors and freemen be evoluted out of a “flock of bleating, baaing, lapping lambs, suckled on teats of priest-rid dams.”

  ‘The qualities which have enabled the Teutonic races to play their wonderful part in the history of Europe, are well displayed in the valiant sons of Tancred, of Hautonville — William Iron Arm — Robert Guiscard — Roger, and the rest: who carved out kingdoms for themselves in Apulia and Sicily. They were a vigorous race, large of limb, stout of heart, tenacious of will; with abundant physical energy, taking their pleasures in drinking and hunting. They had broad shoulders, fair hair, blue eyes; as we see in Anna Comnenia’s portrait of the son of Robert Guiscard, Bohmend, Prince of Tarentum, who was ‘a cubit taller than the tallest man;…with blue eyes, his cheeks tinted with golden red.’ (Taylor’s Origin Aryan Race.)

  9

  All hireling labor is corroding, corrupting, degrading, devilish. Cursed is the brow that sweats — for hire, and the back that bends to a master’s burden. Calloused hands imply calloused minds. “Virtue in bondage,” what an insane paradox?

  There is something mutilated about men who exert the strength of their body or mind, for the enrichment of Taskmasters, and women are not slow to perceive it. Women are never deluded with the maniac philosophy that “Jack is as good as his master.” Indian squaws have no admiration for the “brave” who has never taken a scalp; and white women have even less for the ‘bearded man,’ who — amidst gold and silver by the ton — lives from hand to mouth, like a mangy cur.

  The bolder and more aggressive men are, the more women of all classes admire them — and vice versa. Thus the surging ebb and flow of attraction and of gravitation is ever directed towards — the impregnation of the Fair — by the Strong. How glorious beneath the sun is the union of the Beautiful and the Brave?

  Soiled hands (if soiled for market hire or the payment of tribute) imply a soiled manhood — a biological organism of ‘low degree.’ Labor performed for ones self is passable — when performed for others, it is utterly debasing — ruinous to brain and body.

  From the beginning of time, the defeated classes have ever been the laboring classes — the tenants — the vassals — the sans-cullotes: and the conquerors (their heirs or assigns) have always provided (or hired) the priests, generals, taskmasters, and rulers. This is as true of the United States (a European colony) as it was of Thebes, Troy, Babylon, Persia, Carthage, Rome.

  “Fallen from primeval innocence and ease,

  (When thornless fields employed him, but to please)

  T
he laborer toils — and from his dripping brow,

  Moistens the lengthening furrows of the plough.

  In vain he scorns and spurns his altered state,

  Tries each poor shift, and strives to cheat his fate;

  In vain new-shapes his name; to shun the ill —

  Serf, hireling, help — the curse pursues him still;

  Changeless the doom remains: the mincing phrase,

  May mock high-heaven, but not reverse its ways.”[25]

  The only apparent difference, between the bond-servant of antiquity, and the “educated” hireling of today, is — the thorough-going lunacy of the latter. The ancient Servi knew that they were held in bondage by force of arms; but modern slaves being born, maniacal degenerates, don’t know it. Indeed the free workmen of England and America, can be compared to nothing more appropriate than Ibsen’s “hero,” who fancied himself a reigning monarch (with the fate of empires in his nod) when inside a Cairo madhouse his head was ceremoniously encircled with a diadem of straw. (His brow is wet with honest sweat” is the National Anthem of the insane asylum).