Titans are in Town

by Tomislav Sunic

  Under the credible assumption that in the very near future multicultural America and Europe will face major disruptions and face large scale foreign-inspired terrorist incursions, it would be naïve to think that Whites can be militarily defeated. Even a very small number of Whites can put up powerful resistance against a far larger military might of non-Whites. The major problem, however, resides always inside the gate and not outside the gate, as was observed time and again in European history, and as was recently illustrated by Harold Covington’s novels.15 Germanic Gepids sided in the mid-fifth century with invading Asian Huns, just as a thousand years later Muslim-Turkish incursions into the heart of Europe could not have occurred without the logistical support and diplomatic blessing of Catholic French monarchs. Stalin owed his military success in 1945 to thousands of Marxist intellectuals who had laid already the intellectual ground for the subsequent communist killing fields.

  The present times are just a low-level protraction of the ongoing civil war among Whites, pausing briefly in 1945, only to continue today with sporadic unarmed and intellectual clashes between White Antifas and White nationalists. Those who must always be watched with caution, writes the philosopher Emile Cioran, are the alleged best friends of ours:

  If our deeds are the fruits of envy we will understand why the political struggle, in its ultimate expression, boils down to calculations and intrigues that are conducive to the elimination of our rivals or enemies. … Do you need a right target? Well, start then by killing off all those who reason according to your categories and according to your prejudices, those who have travelled the same road with you and who inevitably dream how to replace you or shoot you. These are the most dangerous rivals; focus on them only, others can wait. If I were to get hold of power, my first care would be to eliminate all friends of mine.16

  Sounds shocking and surprising? Not at all. All of us, at least once in our lifetime, if not millions of times, have prayed to see our congenital rivals perish in a car accident or by having their towns firebombed. The second civil war among Whites, known as WWII, and its present sequel today, testify to that.

  Chapter VI: Hero and Heretic vs. the System — from Literature to Politics

  The nouns “hero” and “heretic” are used as frequent figures of speech in daily communication. Every day, almost every minute of our time, either consciously or subconsciously, we refer to the notion of hero and heretic, albeit by using often different words and expressions. The highly generic nouns “hero” and “heretic” lack a precise common denominator. What may be considered a heretical behavior today may be viewed as heroic behavior tomorrow. The meaning of the noun “hero” is further complicated by its semantic shifts and its awkward equivalents in other languages and cultures. Thus the German word for hero is “Held,” although this word conveys a wider meaning in Germanic languages than the English word “hero” or the French “héros,” deriving from the ancient Greek, and largely associated with political and military prowess only.

  One must also refer to some well-known authors who dealt with the study of heroes, such as Joseph Campbell and his book The Hero with a Thousand Faces, a book still serving as a primer in religious studies courses at universities in the USA, but also a book which influenced many Hollywood moguls. Although Campbell never addressed the notion of the hero from a racial perspective, the fact that he sat on the editorial board of the Mankind Quarterly and that he had once upon a distant time allegedly cracked a small joke in front of his colleagues about the Jews earned him the title of “anti-Semite,” a label not usually associated with heroism.

  Also worth mentioning is the book On Heroes, Hero-Worship, and the Heroic in History by the 19th-century Scottish author Thomas Carlyle in which he sorts out heroes according to their religious, poetic and military endowments. Carlyle’s rejection of liberal democracy and his good knowledge of German culture predictably earned him a century later, in the aftermath of World War II, the label of “an early fascist thinker.”17 Moreover, one must emphasize that historically, the notion of the hero has been differently internalized by thinkers and masses in continental Europe and differently in Great Britain or in the USA. According to the German sociologist Werner Sombart, who was often quoted in anti-liberal and later on in nationalist academic circles in Germany prior to World War II, the Germans are the “people of heroes,” as opposed to the English being the “people of merchants,” displaying “shopkeepers’ mentality”: “What is of interest here for us is not the swindling of crooked merchants who have always been popular in England, but the swindling of the merchant as such. What we really want to know is how to grasp the birth of entire England from this mercantile mindset.”18

  The word “Held” was very much in usage in Germany prior and during World War II. Sombart summarizes the notion of the classical Held — hero, as embodied in the German man, vs. his counterpart, the modern anti-hero, as represented by the capitalist Englishman: “Merchants and hero: they both make the two great opposites; two poles of all human directions on Earth. The merchant, as we saw it, approaches his day to day life with a question: what kind of a life can you offer to me? The hero enters life with a question: what can I offer to life?”19

  Death Wish

  The sense of sacrifice, the readiness to place the interests of his community above his own private and family interests, the sense of complete autonomy in carrying out his heroic deeds, have historically been the three main hallmarks of the hero. The hero may have his sidekicks, although his heroic deeds always need to rest solely within his own private and solitary domain. In the German medieval Nibelungen sagas we encounter the hero Siegfried and his challenger the hero Hagen, both acting alone with no outside help, yet both willing at a short notice to lay down their life for the benefit of their community.

  The same heroic and individualistic pattern of death-wish for the benefit of common good can be observed in Homer’s death challenger, the Greek hero Achilles who besieges the town of Troy and in the equally well death-driven hero Hector who defends his hometown Troy.

  Hector: “For me it would be a great deal better to meet Achilles man to man, kill him, and go home, or get killed before the city, dying in glory.” (Iliad, Book XXII, lines 108–110.)

  The future founder of Rome, Vergil’s mythical Aeneas during his interminable trials in the underworld, acted in a similar communal and death-braving fashion. So did his other mythical counterpart, the seafaring Homer’s Odysseus, always enwrapped in solitary musings, always having his life hovering on the brink of death.

  His eyes were perpetually wet with tears now / His life draining away in homesickness. (Odyssey, Book V, lines 156–158.)

  Thousands of similar heroic characters have become household names all over the West. Those mythical heroes stood as symbols for the survival of their tribal, racial or political community, yet strangely enough, all of them always attempted to stay above the fray, always shunning gregarious, communal and folkish behavior of their noisy kinsmen. Such a freewheeling and autonomous behavior may also help explain today the proverbial failure of modern White nationalist heroes who remain hopeful in search of a functional political or cultural movement. On the one hand all of them passionately speak about the importance of their community; yet on the other, their hyper-individualistic stance can hardly bridge the gap amidst scores of other dissenting would-be White heroes within their community.

  This peculiar individualistic trait among Whites is largely inherited from the primeval ego-archetypes, as observed in the figures of the mythical Titan Prometheus and later in the young truth-seeker Faust, respectively. If one briefly observes the character of the hero Prometheus, whom Zeus had punished for heresy by chaining him to the rock for the next 30,000 years, one can spot a creature constantly complaining, perpetually carping at other mainstream Gods, loudly cursing Zeus, and refusing to make any compromise even with his fellow Titans who had come to his rescue.

  Prometheus: “I know that Zeus is harsh and ke
eps justice in his own hands; but nevertheless one day his judgment will soften, when he has been crushed in the way that I know.” (AESCHYLUS, Prometheus Bound, lines 189–192.)

  The Titan hero Prometheus knows that the Gods’ days, like the days of the mortals, are also numbered and that some eon again the immortal Titans will again rule the universe. Such a Titanic-heroic and Promethean-inflated ego is also visible in the would-be heroic young scholar Faust, who is constantly searching for diverse identities, always craving for the transformation of his self into a myriad of other selves:

  Alas! Two souls within my breast abide / And each from the other strives to separate. (J. W. GOETHE, Faust, lines 1112–1113.)

  Conversely, we have all been witness, especially over the last two hundred years, to the well-organized and highly communal political activity of the leftists and their offshoot, the modern Antifa movements in Europe and America. Their sense of discipline is awesome; their commitment to their communal goals has helped them achieve astounding political and cultural breakthroughs over the last decades. Witness for instance the well-organized Bolshevik Revolution in early 20th-century Russia spearheaded by a handful of well-disciplined activists who had flocked to Russia from all parts of Europe and the USA — and who subsequently changed the face of the Earth. One must also emphasize the astonishing organizational skills of the modern Antifas on US campuses and their skill in lining up at a short notice a violent crowd in any European city center.

  One can tentatively substitute the word “heretic” with the word “rebel” or “dissident”. To be sure, the word “rebel” is not a synonym of the word “dissident”. There are many dissidents and many self-proclaimed rebels in the contemporary West, such as the bare-chested “Femen” women parading on the streets of Europe, or the Antifas, or Anonymous, or even some prominent intellectuals critical of the regime, such as Noam Chomsky. These groups of people and individuals can be labeled as self-serving dissidents within, but not without the System. None of them wants to challenge the supporting egalitarian dogma upholding the System. A dissident usually aims at modifying the System by relying on the support of other System-affiliated countries; he never tries to remove the root causes of the System. A rebel, by contrast, rejects all modifications of the System. Writers and thinkers, such as the American Ezra Pound and the Russian Alexander Solzhenitsyn, can be tentatively described with the triple label: heroes-rebels-heretics. They both fought the System, whether in its liberal or its communistic form. Solzhenitsyn, after having denounced Soviet communism — an act which earned him briefly a calculated praise from the US ruling class — did not hesitate to denounce in turn the so-called freedom-loving USA. He returned from America to his post-communist Russia. Similarly, Pound, after having been sequestered for several years in an American lunatic asylum for his earlier rebel Fascist stance, when returning in 1958 to Italy declared upon his arrival that he had left America because “all America is an insane asylum.”

  One must make an additional distinction, this time between the mythical heroes in Western literary heritage and the real heroes or heroes hopeful in Western political life. Thousands of mythical heroes, including Achilles or Hector, fighting alongside the walls of Troy, or better yet, the demigod heroes such as Hercules or Theseus, combating the monsters in the underworld, have had a distinct advantage so far of being exempt from modern reeducational process consisting of political criminalization and demonization. The System continues to use their names as positive role models, although, to be sure, the System thought police, with its increasing guilt-tripping process designed to alter the minds of White peoples, may someday remove these mythical heroes from the role model reading list as well. The conclusion one can therefore offer is that any would-be heroic act, any heretical or rebellious deed, regardless of its factual, fictional or factitious nature, is always subject to different reinterpretations in a different political epoch.

  The same conclusion applies to literary heroes and their hero-crafting authors such as William Shakespeare, Wolfgang Goethe, Friedrich Schiller and hundreds more, each of them having received, or still receiving, a different accolade by a different ruling class at a different historical and political time. Thus Friedrich Schiller’s poem Ode to Joy (1785) is being widely and wildly used today as a trademark of the European Union. Schiller’s stanzas are being chanted today by multicultural transgenderists, pederasts and plutocrats as a call for a mandatory multiracial embrace and as a handy alibi for the free flow of non-European migrant labor.

  Endure courageously, millions! / Endure for the better world / Above the starry canopy / A great God will reward you.

  By contrast, in National Socialist Germany the same Schiller was praised to the skies, albeit through differently worded official eulogies and different academic interpretations. In his drama The Robbers (1781), Schiller depicts an armed gang’s leader Karl Moor who is always eager to first dispense the stolen goods to the local poor, yet who by his sheer association with other violent gang members could easily pass off today as a modern terrorist — or, short of that, fall short of some folkish road warrior Mad Max. Schiller’s other medieval hero, widely praised in academic circles all over Europe and whose name is used as an official state symbol of Switzerland, is the crossbow-toting hero from the same drama, Wilhelm Tell (1804) who could also be described as a perfect role model for modern terrorists. With his sneaky, ugly and cowardly weapon, Tell assassinates (from ambush!) the Austrian-appointed governor who rules over his native borough in Switzerland. Between 1933 and 1941 Schiller’s plays were performed all over liberal-weary, communist-scared Europe and particularly in Germany.

  The next conclusion one can offer is that any White author, any poet, any writer, any White activist, regardless of his political beliefs or disbeliefs, always runs the risk of having his works or his exploits extrapolated and reinterpreted based on the prevalent political whims of the System or the conventional lies of the scribes bankrolled by the System.

  Quite different is the story when real historical and political figures, once hailed as finite destiny-ordained heroes, unexpectedly end up in the garbage can of the memory hole. A set of lucky circumstances made Thomas Jefferson and George Washington into American heroes, although, to be sure, if the English colonial troops had been somewhat more agile, Jefferson’s and Washington’s bodies would have been dangling on the gallows in the summer of 1780 in front of London’s Tower Hill and their names would grace henceforth the European school books as marginal colonial road bandits. Of course, in the contemporary U.S., Jefferson and Washington are now mainly known to schoolchildren as slave owners.

  Conversely, the famed politician Adolf Hitler was venerated as the ultimate European hero (Held) by many Europeans during his adult lifetime. Today, however, Hitler’s name or even the two syllables “hit-ler” have become a synonym and a signifier for a peculiar extraterrestrial species representing an absolute metaphysical evil, surpassing all imaginable cosmic evils. It is therefore a waste of time to talk about Hitler as a hero or anti-hero because the two syllables of his name enter into the realm of modern demonology — and not into the realm of dispassionate historiography. In modern liberal demonology, however, different rules and different value systems in regard to hero worship prevail.

  Hero’s “Weird Sisters”

  The hero is not a blank slate. He is often a self-centered and narcissistic figure who loves victimizing himself with endless neurotic self-justifying soliloquies, as seen in Shakespeare’s plays. The hero often imagines himself to be a man of destiny, although, when needed, he calls himself a man of free will. Hero faces a dilemma between these two notions. The factor of destiny carries always more weight for him when his free will is impeded or yields disastrous political results for his community. Usually, a would-be hero prefers to babble about his free will and indulge in an exercise of wishful thinking in the present or the future tense, yet he quickly reverts to the past tense when describing his bad luck and call
s it destiny. His tragic destiny is then wished away by his invocations of witches, weird sisters, Moirai, Fatae, or Germanic broom-riding Hexen. One must also note that virtually all Western mythical heroes are husky, good looking White males, with virtually no women ever assuming a role of a hero. However, during extreme emergency, or in the final death hour of the hero, it is no longer Gods or good spirits who decide — but always a death spell of a female witch.

  Third Witch: All hail, Macbeth, thou shalt be king hereafter!

  (Macbeth; Act I, Scene III.)

  There is more to that. Hero’s self-abnegation and his full-fledged idealism and commitment to superhuman goals often morph into fanaticism. Many mythical real or once-upon-a-time heroes, including the conventionally demonized and the proverbial Hitler, are depicted today in the System as certified fanatics and certainly not as heroes. In retrospect and from the modern liberal and rational point of view, the 10-year siege of mythical Troy, or thousands of real wars that have raged in European history amidst and between tribes and peoples that are virtually racially identical can be described as an exercise in White man’s savagery. From the point of view of liberals, any war-exalting hero is an irrational psychopath — other than when liberal theoreticians conduct wars in order to “make the world safe for democracy.” If we follow this liberal logic that wartime heroic dying does not make much sense, one must conclude that living does not make much sense either.

  The line of demarcation between heroism, fanaticism and idealism is very thin, as observed on countless occasions in the intellectual and military history of the West. A hero’s sacrifice for a political or religious goal often clashes with an equally heroic goal he is poised to challenge. In Pierre Corneille’s drama Polyeucte, Pauline, a pagan lady from a distant part of the Roman Empire in Armenia, is trying to dissuade her convert husband Polyeucte from sacrificing to an obscure Semitic deity known as Jesus Christ. The young nobleman Polyeucte, however, in his ecstatic fervor decides to lay down his life for his new heroic inspiration and renounce his community, his wife Pauline, and his entire family.