8 Tactics Of The Occult War

In the wake of World War II, Europe found itself in ruins. The architects of modern Europe had already started to build the edifice of liberal democratic nation-states that comprise the EU today. Their goal was to form a new Europe based on Enlightenment ideals that would never again be torn apart by war.

However, not everyone was so sanguine about the new project. Italian philosopher Julius Evola believed that the war was just a symptom of the advancing decay of Europe, and that the decay was brought on by the destruction of the traditional hierarchical order by what he calls the “forces of subversion.”


Julius Evola

In his 1953 book, Men Among the Ruins, Evola lists eight tactics that are used by the forces of subversion to attack the traditional order. He calls this attack “the occult war” but he does not mean that this attack has anything do with witchcraft or magic. Rather, “occult” here only means that this war is hidden from the masses of men.

By learning these eight tactics, we’ll have a better understanding of what is behind the daily news stories. Instead of seeing random events, we can discern the direction of the attack by the enemies of masculinity and tradition, and we will be better equipped to counter that attack.

Who are the “forces of subversion”?


Delacroix – Liberty Leading the People

The forces of subversion are groups of people who oppose a hierarchically ordered traditional society. We usually deal with the late stage symptoms of the disease, such as feminism and political correctness. But Evola goes directly to the source of the sickness:

The roots, as far as the historical dimension is concerned, are to be found in the subversion introduced in Europe by the revolutions of 1789 and 1848. The disease must be recognized in all its forms and degrees; thus, the main task is to establish if there are still men willing to reject all the ideologies, political movements, and parties that, directly or indirectly, derive from those revolutionary ideas (i.e. everything ranging from liberalism to democracy to Marxism and communism).

Who are these groups that spread the subversion? For some, the answer is easy—it’s the Jews.

Evola recognized that Jewish intellectuals have indeed played a role in championing ideas that undermine Western culture. A few months back, Roosh wrote a summary of those ideas right here on ROK. But Evola believed that focusing solely on the influence of Jewish intellectuals would make us miss the bigger picture:

It is true that many Jews have been promoters of the modern disorder. This, however, should not prevent a deeper analysis, capable of exposing forces that may have employed modern Judaism as an instrument. After all, despite the fact that many Jews are among the apostles of the main ideologies… of the global subversion (i.e. liberalism, socialism, scientism, and rationalism), it is also evident that these ideas would never have arisen without historical antecedents, such as the Reformation, Humanism, the naturalism and individualism of the Renaissance, and the philosophy of Descartes. Such phenomena cannot be attributed to Judaism, but rather point to a wider web of influences.

But what group could have been active during all those centuries from the Reformation to the present day? Evola never gives a clear answer, but I suspect that he would say that the forces of subversion ultimately have a spiritual origin.

However, we don’t have to believe that the subversion has an underlying spiritual source to understand how the following tactics have been used to introduce changes to our culture.

Most of these tactics are designed to keep people asleep so that they do not recognize that they are being deceived. Consequently, the strategy of the anti-traditional forces is to keep people from asking questions. If they do start waking up, the strategy is to try to get them to be satisfied with only a portion of the truth or even with another falsehood.

1. Scientific Suggestion


Pay no attention to the man behind the curtain!

Modern men and women are conditioned to believe that history is made only by the most obvious players on the stage. Because most people hold this “scientific” view, it allows the behind the scenes actors to make their moves undetected.

For example, most people believe that the federal government operates in the fashion that they learned about in high school civics—with the three branches of government providing checks and balances on the others. What this assessment ignores is the high degree to which the US government is captured by corporate and other special interests.

2. Replacement


Ayn Rand

The tactic of replacement is the dissemination of a vain philosophical theory that will trap certain people who might otherwise be on the verge of waking up. Instead of being able to identify the source of the subversion, these individuals will waste years of their lives learning a dead end pseudo-philosophy.

Evola was writing for the educated classes in mid-twentieth century Europe where philosophy still may have been popular. Americans are of a less philosophical bent. Still, I wonder if an economic philosophy like libertarianism or a personal “philosophy” such as the one spelled out by Ayn Rand may not be serving as a replacement tactic to modern men.

While not an indictment of all libertarians, I notice that some of them are so stuck on the purity of libertarian theory that they are not able to see the obvious downsides to their policies.

3. Counterfeits


The tactic of counterfeits is the erecting of false traditional movements. As people become dissatisfied with our rotting culture, they may seek out traditional ideas like those found in neomasculinity. However, they may also end up subscribing to a counterfeit group.

Neo-paganism is a good example of such a counterfeit group. True paganism no longer exists in the Western world. Anything that purports to be pagan is merely a reconstruction based on scraps found in Christian sources. By joining a neo-pagan group, a person minimizes the effect that he would otherwise have in resisting the subversion.

4. Inversion


The tactic of inversion replaces true spirituality with psychology and good feelings. An example of this are the new age philosophies that go in and out of favor. Again, this tactic sidetracks people so that they never find the truth.

You can see the tactic of inversion at work in women who replace true spirituality with a morality-free pop spirituality like yoga. For these women, living the examined life is unspiritual, but drinking chai tea, wearing yoga pants, and chanting “om” is.

5. Ricochet


The tactic of ricochet is the divide and conquer strategy. The goal is to get traditional groups to oppose each other to render them ineffective. You can see this tactic at work when Catholics and conservative Protestants attack each other rather than uniting to fight the encroachment of subversive ideas.

6. Dilution


The tactic of dilution involves the substitution of a less offensive idea for a completely unacceptable one.

This tactic is used all the time. For example, when welfare was introduced, it was sold as a temporary help for people who had hit some hard times. Today, there are families where three generations have spent their entire lives on the dole.

7. Replacing Infiltrations


Freemasons have a reputation, deserved or undeserved, of infiltrating traditional institutions

The tactic of infiltration is used to undermine traditional institutions to subvert them from within.

Effective infiltration of an institution can only happen when that institution “forgets” or drifts away from its founding principles. We can see infiltration happening with the Catholic Church where, since the 1960s, many gay men entered the priesthood. An attorney who worked on the pedophile scandal confided to me that this infiltration played a large role in precipitating the crisis.

8. Misidentification of Principle with its Representatives


Marie Antoinette

The tactic of misidentification of the principle with its representatives is to criticize a traditional institution because of the behavior of some of its members.

Evola writes that this tactic was used to destroy the old European aristocracy. The abuses of certain aristocrats were used to paint the entire aristocracy as being corrupt, thus making them easier to topple.


We are currently in the midst of an enormous awakening. Thousands of men are realizing that they have been indoctrinated in such a way to keep them compliant with the status quo.

Some awaken only to a certain point and stop. Others will not be satisfied until they have completed the process. For these men, the ultimate goal is not just personal enlightenment but the restoration of a traditional society. Studying Evola’s analysis of the weapons of the occult war gives these men the tools necessary to recognize and put an end to the subversion.

Read More: The Disturbing Relationship Between Feminism And The Occult

170 thoughts on “8 Tactics Of The Occult War”

  1. Evola was an Indiaboo (weeaboo for India) like his homie Madame Blavatsky. I don’t think he’s a good example of a real traditionalist.
    He defines ‘traditionalism’, basically, as Joseph Campbellism – the idea that ‘all gods are one god’ or whatever. More of a new age dude. Just because he was into Hitler doesn’t mean he’s right wing.

      1. You got it. Evola, Guenon and all them cats that ‘radical traditionalists’ worship are theosophists and newagers

        1. I see them as traditionalists who because of being foreigners not brought up in the traditional Hindu culture could not fully understand or participate in it so they tried their best with their limited understanding and access. I at least give them the benefit of the doubt.

    1. I disagree with Evola on many points. He had an animus toward Catholicism that I feel caused him to embrace many nontraditional elements. Still, his analysis of how the occult war proceeds, strikes me as being largely accurate.

      1. That was my impression too, just from the parts of *Fascism viewed from the Right* I’ve read so far. I kept thinking that what he really wanted was a reformed and virile Western Christendom, but he seemed to have locked it out as an option.

      2. If he embraced Hinduism and India as Myra above claims, then he embraced the most traditional of traditionalism and the oldest living civilizations on the planet.

        1. You can’t convert to Hinduism. You have to be born into it. The best you can do is live its principles, but a tradition that you can’t actually be an initiate of, is not much of a help.
          Any way, I do not believe Evola embraced Hinduism. He seemed to be more interested in Buddhism.

        2. “You can’t convert to Hinduism. You have to be born into it. The best you
          can do is live its principles, but a tradition that you can’t actually
          be an initiate of”
          I am an initiate in an authentic Shaiva Siddhanta lineage. I don’t know who told you you can’t take diksha into a Hindu sampradaya, but they lied to you.

        3. I don’t know who told you you can’t take take diksha into a Hindu sampradaya but whoever it was, they lied to you, either purposely or out of ignorance. I am an initiate in an authentic Shaiva Siddhanta lineage myself.

        4. OK but its not the only one. I don’t know where you got the idea that non-Hindus cannot convert to Hinduism. Many non-Hindus already have converted and are accepted fully by their various sects.

    2. Please, Hinduism is not “new age” and India has the oldest still thriving cultures on the planet.

      1. But new agers are attracted to South Asian culture for some reason like weeaboos are attracted to Japanese culture.

        1. Obviously because South Asia is the land of philosophy, religion, spirituality, and metaphysics so anyone inclined to one or all of those, usually has a bout with South Asia for a while. The ones who stick it out all the way usually end up converting to a Hindu or Buddhist sect either formally, or generally practicing as they can.

    3. I know this post was a year ago, but Roosh necro’d this article and I have to counter this silly comment. I am curious what of Evola you have read, because most of your statements don’t hold.
      “Evola was an Indiaboo (weeaboo for India) like his homie Madame Blavatsky. I don’t think he’s a good example of a real traditionalist”
      The predilection for Hinduism found in Evola’s work is due to two critical factors: anthropological origin and chronology. Without going into too much detail, Evola asserts that Hinduism is a religion born from the ancient Aryan people who swept down from the Pontic Steppe into modern day India. This “race” was the vanguard of the “Solar” (as opposed to the “Lunar”) belief systems, ones that held masculinity, heroism, aristocracy, wisdom etc… in the highest regard. Hinduism is currently the OLDEST and most COMPLETE Aryan religion still in existence. He discussed Greek Stoicism as well as the Norse Edda frequently, and noted the tremendous similarities between them. Much of his research is dedicated to displaying the common heritage between these systems. So, no, he was not an “Indiaboo”, Hinduism is an ancient Aryan religion, the Aryan peoples were from modern day Ukraine.
      “He defines ‘traditionalism’, basically, as Joseph Campbellism – the idea that ‘all gods are one god’ or whatever. More of a new age dude. Just because he was into Hitler doesn’t mean he’s right wing”
      This is absolutely incorrect, see my comments above. He also wasn’t that into Hitler. Spoke for the SS once or twice, he saw Communism as a huge threat and thus supported the right in Europe at that time. He saw the SS as having some potential. He worked more closely with Mussolini. Adamantly and frequently spoke out against new age stuff. Evola has some of the most thoroughly researched and compelling arguments against new age religiosity.

      1. But mixing the Stoics, India and the Norse Edda is the very definition of Campbellian New Ageism.

        1. I must not have been clear. The idea behind this was to display that they are all in fact Aryan derived. This was contrary to the non-Aryan derived belief systems which he also details. Again, he didn’t “mix” them – he notes their similarities and concludes they must have come from a similar source. He was trying to piece together what may have been the original religion of the Aryans before they broke off and settled in various parts of the world. This is congruent with even the mainstream anthropological and even genetic evidence. He doesn’t say “all religions are one”, not at all. He says there are the Heroic, solar, masculine derived belief systems from the original Aryan source – and then most other belief systems are cucked in a variety of ways.

  2. He should have added to the list what I call “technification” which is the substitution of real visceral relationships, either individual or communal, with other human beings through the medium of pseudo technological relationships, that have no real substance or risk attached with them….facebook, twitter etc. The tendency combined an element in smart phones and e-mails for example that interrupts more durable forms of thinking and “being in the world” as a sentient human, along with the general fetishism that goes around the latest phone app (read gadget) has, I believe, reduced inexorably the quality of real relationships especially among the sexes.

    1. Excellent point. Wish I could up-vote several times.
      I was out having a beer at a small bar near campus last weekend and couldn’t help but notice a particular individual. He was sitting with three fairly attractive girls and another guy. But I observed that he was only interacting with his PHONE. I walked up and asked if I could ask him something, pulled him aside and said: “Are you living in reality?”
      I got some b.s. answer about “Oh I’m waiting for a call/text/Facebook post blah blah blah”. He eventually did agree (or pretended to) that it is rather pathetic to be out with a friend and a group of attractive women and yet be GLUED to an electronic device.
      I’ve gotten to the point where it upsets me enough that I often have to call people out (even at family gatherings, sadly) on this disturbing trend. It has become EXPONENTIALLY WORSE just in the last 10 years.

      1. Other negative implications I see about this increasing technification in human relationships are:-
        1- They desensitize and if allowed develop unchecked they eventually numb a man’s natural instincts to the point where he resembles a technocratic Zombie who’s more reactive to virtual stimuli rather than real stimuli. This in other contexts would be the hallmark for certain very serious psychotic conditions in a person as it signals a loss of the “reality principle” in life.
        2- The need to react constantly to the latest stimuli on facebook or twitter during the normal course of ones day estranges a person from the normal community of real “organic” people in your family, workplace or community. This to use Heidegger’s phrase, it’s a lapse into “in-authenticity” and a “lack of attentive concern” to actually being a human who should be trying to experience the felt reality of their own existence in this world and not constantly escaping the world by responding to the latest prompt from the simulacrum of twitter or facebook for example.
        3. It creates, especially in men, a sorrowful dependency on the need to “check in” constantly with ones significant other. I was on a commuter train the other day going home from work and there was this really high powered barrister I know sitting across from me. However, in the course of 30 minutes he rang and texted his wife about 8 times to tell her exactly where he was on the journey, and one occasion she was yelling something down the mobile at him, and it was really embarrassing to experience. Do men not realize that “smart phones” actually end up in many cases enslaving you more to total servitude on the home front?
        4. Finally, I just think the use of them among a group of people is so rude and bad-mannered. It donates or signals to others that your’re not as interesting or as important as the pseudo relationships that “exist” on facebook. Pseudo relationships on social media are risk free and ultimately anything that’s of this nature is useless because without risks, there’s no mistakes, and without mistakes you’ll never learn or gain real insights into yourself or other people.

    1. They are not “bad”. They are a very cohesive group and act in their own self interest, which unfortunately doesn’t conform with the culture of the nations they are living in. You could say they are like a parasite, slowly destroying their host. That’s why they got expelled 109 times in their history so far.
      On the other hand you could say they are bad, because they have an extreme hatred for whites and try every way they can to destroy them, mainly because of the six trillion gorillion. You see it in how they push multiculturalism, race mixing, mass immigration, feminism, degenerate porn, etc. but only for white countries. Israel does the exact opposite.

      1. “That’s why they got expelled 109 times in their
        history so far.”
        Not because rulers wanted to put their hands on Jewish property(*) instead of paying back loans to Jewish creditors?
        (*)And these facts are very well documented.

  3. I think that this article hits on a lot of good points and Evola was way ahead of his time in far sightedness.
    However the main problem I am now seeing as greater than any outside ethnic group and more dangerous than any subversive elements is simply this….
    The peculiar and suicidal trait of white pathological altruism.

    1. “The peculiar and suicidal trait of white pathological altruism.”
      It needs to be said, however, it’s far from universal among whites. In fact, those who suffer from this mental illness are a minority, although a very powerful and vocal one. They typically aggregate to government positions, academia, and the media, where they are able to force their delusions upon the masses and put the entire of the native culture in a stranglehold. See Western Europe.

      1. I have been seeing it more historically that whites developed this trait initially as a cooperation mechanic which was necessary for a people settling and living in much harsher climates.
        This trait was then exploited by subversives seeking to undermine white hegemony.
        However the trait had to exist by in large in the people for it then to be exploited.

        1. sigh… wrong! new testament AKA (non-Jewish) Christianity talks about humility and forgiveness and kindness. “whites” the world over, are for the most part Christian. The old testament (Jewish) is all about hell fire and violence etc. While the new testament tries to foster love and such. Basically very bad people are taking advantage of the moral nature of Christians.

        2. Not completely accurate… St.Paul was the author of a large portion of the New Testament, and was a very outspoken Jew, raised as a traditional scholar.
          Not that I disagree with the rest.

        3. I think whites are at the social and intellectual level where they are smart enough to actualize their compassion, but not smart enough to realize compassion isn’t the most important thing.

        4. While I don’t disagree and I think that is a major issue as well.
          White pathological altruism is observable historically in pre Christian and also pagan white rulers.
          For example Alexander the great encouraged miscegenation among his soldiers which is why the great men of Macedonia and other Greek city states soon lost their empire once Alexander was gone.
          Whites seem to be perhaps the only race of people that do not think ethnocentricly and this as I said pre dates the advent of Chrisendom.

        5. Yes. Now it is either we become racially aware and fight for the preservation of our people or we could go the way of the dodo bird this very century. We must first have compassion for ourselves and fix our own racial body before we can help anyone else.

        6. It’s weird, they are very altruistic. But that begs the question – why does everyone hate whites?

        7. I dont need a scientific examination to know that you are very right. A little life experience will show no matter how naive one may be that the white race is envied and thus have many naturall enemies.
          The rape epidemic of european women by african and muslim men for example, is it just about horniness or has it more to do with the will to power expressing itself in abusing white women.

        8. Both id venture to guess.
          White women are the most beautiful in the world with the most stunning varieties of hair and eyes.
          Every man in the world feels the immediate impact when a beautiful white woman enters a room

        9. What is it called when they call for extermination? This isn’t hatred, these so-called intellilectuals and officials are openly calling for extermination. Even quoting them is considered Anti-Semitism.
          Roosh simply mentions Israel has closed borders and the SHTF.
          The retort is “They don’t represent all Jewish people” Yeah like Dylan Roof doesn’t represent all white people.

        10. socoloco,
          The only thing that Ignatiev hates more then whites are
          He is also anti-Israel and anti-Zionist.
          You just accidentally forgot to mention it. Right?

        11. Alexander the great never took over anywhere that wasn’t white, he wasn’t promoting miscegenation. His empire collapsed because it was too big and he didn’t have any heirs, if it was maybe, half the size, or if it was conquered over a much longer period of time, it would functioned, but it just wasn’t really practical.

        12. OR the fact that the only way to get black students in underperforming school districts to do better…is to send them to better white schools….this from NPR This American Life yesterday! 9/18/16…and they call it “integration” when its really just “reversing white flight of people who want to avoid having their schools go to shit”….so the black schools STILL stay shitty, and they exploit the richer white school districts while simultanteously dragging them down in the process due to low scores….

      2. I really don’t think many people actually suffer from it at all. I’d say the vast majority just want to signal virtues. They fear that if they don’t fall in line, they will be seen as a “meany nazi”.

    2. Throw into the mix a dash of self-inflicted guilt and you have a receipe for utter self destruction

    3. I have become convinced over time that you are right – that white men have genetically elevated altruism and compassion, relative to other men, which may have served them well in the ancient arctic, but which now may lead to perverse and inevitably self-destructive results.

      1. I read a great essay by Anthony M Ludovici, don’t remember the title but he makes a great case how Puritanism is the direct cause of all the ills of modern Anglo Man. He details the rise of feminism, suffrage, every modern issue and all the pussy men stem from Puritanism.
        anthonymludovici.com Check some of his writings out, shouldn’t take you long to find the one I’m referring. I believe it was under Essays.

  4. A very noxious example of replacement and counterfeit is neoconservativism, which took over the National Review, the Heritage Foundation, and other conservative apparatus in the ’80s & ’90s.
    Americans with normal conservative instincts were diverted into a sham conservatism whose only non-negotiable principle is fanatical Zionism.

      1. Why would they ban him? Neoconservative is a good word, as I have been one since Sept 11, 2001. It must have been the Jews that crashed airplanes into the Twin Towers.

        1. The Jews did have something to do with it. The owner of the twin towers took a massive insurance policy on the buildings days before the disaster and he, his family and their corresponding Hebrew brethren were not present when said disaster occurred.

        2. Totally meaningless. Silverstein signed the lease and was obligated to get insurance. He opted for insurance that didn’t exclude terrorist. Get better tin foil and try to understand the business you are talking about.

        3. The insurance was obligatory. That he opted for insurance that didn’t exclude terrorism is obvious seeing the status of the building.

        4. Silverstein said “we had to pull it” on video and building 7 freefell in a few seconds. Implosion experts and engineers by the hundreds all say it could only be a bomb.
          Troll elsewhere

        5. Yes, your extensive knowledge of NYC real estate and construction all comes from conspiracy theory websites…i get it. Sad thing is, it is nearly impossible to teach people shit that they erroneously think they already know. Peace out dipshit. Enjoy being misinformed and having too weak of a psyche to understand truths. If effeminate men like you would all just crawl into a hole and die the world would be that much stronger.

        6. Lolknee-you are usually the voice of reason here, but even you must admit a broken clock is right twice a day. Could there be something to what bankerbacon said?

        7. AND the FACT it WAS ATTACKED back in the 90’s…I remember the power going out at Cooper Union that day. And if it was MONTHS ahead it makes the whole “a-ha! A conspiracy” thing a lot less likely….

        8. Is it possible that Larry Silverstein is part of a global jewish conspiracy and leased the world trade center in july of 2001 only to blow it up and collect insurance money? No. It is not possible. It is fucking ridiculous.
          The fact that the man purchased insurance after leasing the WTC is in no way even remotely suspicious. In fact, it would have been illegal for him NOT to. He built 7 world trade center and also holds leass on 4 and 5 WTC. He has been buying commercial real estate in new York since the 1970’s. He is incredibly wealthy and, having met him several times, seems like a genuinely likeable guy.
          He is a billionaire commercial real estate investor. He buys or builds commercial real estate in the greatest city in the world and makes a fortune doing it. He is a governor of REBNY. Born, raised and educated in New York. Charitable, intelligent and incredibly wealthy.
          His net worth is close to 4 billion dollars. The insurance pay out on WTC totaled 4.55 billion. In no way does it make any sense to anyone who is in this business in this city. It only makes sense to idiots who need to find meaning in their shitty little lives by coming up with tin foil hat ideas about the world rather than admitting that their lives suck because they are just losers.

        9. And he just acquired the lease in july and was required by law to insure his new property. It would not just have been stupid, but also illegal for him to NOT get insurance.

      2. Seems to me that the whole neocon equals Jew therefore anti-Semitism attack has lost its sting….just like racism and homophobia or sexism by the left…it’s like bacteria and antibiotics…they overused it and immunity is rising…they are gonna have a full blown “epidemic” on their hands very soon…a full fledged biofilm impervious to their attacks and conjugating with all those lonely isolated cells…passing on immunity genes.

    1. I think the replacement attack is used in politics all the time….. so even where the alternative candidate (eg. Trump) appears to win…… causing both real and manufactured outrage….. he’s actually the chosen candiate for the elites all along…… in the same way that Lenin and Trotsky were the men of the people…. when really they were the agents of the bankers who wanted control of russian resources and removal of the tsar.
      The nazis were the big bad guys…. but really just a huge distraction that allowed the communists to take control of most of europe…..
      The USA is now the big bad guy…. maybe the US will collapse….. meanwhile the communists win again…… its all a put up job.

  5. “The Jews?” That’s rather simplistic. Even if you believe all leftism came from Jews, this is clearly not the case anymore. From my perspective Whites are far guiltier than other races of disseminating equalism today.
    While Evola’s analysis of the enemy is basically correct, I am not a big fan of traditionalism. Mankind should build on traditions, changing and improving as we reach for the stars. Just because egalitarian ideas are regressive does not mean that we should reject the concept of progress itself. If one only clings on to tradition without offering new, competitive vision of progress, then the left’s childlike utopianism will fill that void, while chipping away at the traditionalist’s position. Principles and societies can, and should change. We only need to make sure it’s positive change towards greater wealth, technology, and hierarchy.

      1. That’s not proof of a conspiracy. Jews managed to get all those positions because whites do not understand nationalism as a philosophy.

        1. Not understand? They are terrified to even remotely identify with it. And why? Because of relentless jewish “white guilt” propaganda via all forms of media from WW2 up until today.

        2. If they did understand nationalism there would be no such thing as white guilt. Or even Jews living in Western countries in the first place.

        3. I mean they should have been denied entry into Europe on the grounds that they were foreign, or at least assimilated into non-existence. If you need to resort to genocide it’s already kind of too late.

        4. Did you even look at the graphic? They control the whole damn system. It’s statistically impossible for such a small minority to control so many key elements or our most important institutions without an ethnic conspiracy. Will you believe it’s a conspiracy when the entire chart is red?

        5. So what? Any group of people should try to gain as much power for their own as possible. If I was in their position I’d do exactly the same thing for my people. That’s not a conspiracy, that’s just… normal. The only oddity here is how a much larger majority allowed this to happen in the first place.

        6. I’m not saying that this is a rebuttal, but I see a few “Mc” names (Scottish) and English names as “Red”. I’m curious how they fell into that category? Obviously one can’t take first appearances at face value of course.

        7. “The only oddity here is how a much larger majority allowed this to happen in the first place.”
          You sir have good common sense. It is within your own group that is selling out your nation. Jews are merely opportunistic.

        8. The messed up thing is how many change their names. For example John Kerry is really John Cohen. There are MANY examples of this. Jesus called out all these fake “Jews” in the new testament.

        9. No. Jews have been booted out of almost every single nation they infest! It is not an issue of superiority. It is an issue of morality. Many societies get dominated by Jews because these “host societies” are generally comprised of fair, just and righteous peoples. So, often the host cultural doesn’t “fight back” because they don’t have the same depraved mind as the Jews and can’t comprehend how another group of people (the Jews) could be so predatory and unconscionable.

        10. No, John Kerry was born John Kerry, to a Catholic father and an Episcopelian mother. His paternal grandparents, only, were Hungarian Jews. His name was never Cohen.

        11. According to Kerry-Cohen, his feelings toward Israel changed ten years ago, after he found out that his family was actually Jewish.
          “It’s a connection that’s deep,” he said. “Israel itself has a special connection to me, not just because of that personal, now-known connection, but more importantly because of the amazing journey of the Jewish people. And now I’ve learned that, I have got a better sense of that.”
          Kerry claimed that he first found out about his Jewish ancestry in 2004, when he was running for president against George W. Bush.
          Both his father’s parents were born Jews and converted to Christianity because of alleged “anti-Semitism,” and they changed their name from Cohen to Kerry when they immigrated to the United States.
          His comments were echoed by his brother, Cameron Kerry-Cohen wrote publicly about the family’s Jewish roots in a column in Israel’s largest circulation daily newspaper, Yediot.
          Cameron Kerry-Cohen married a Jewish woman and he and his family are practicing Jews.
          “There is no truth and no good that can come by calling into question John Kerry’s good faith toward his own heritage,” Cameron Kerry-Cohen concluded in his column, a translation of which was posted on the U.S. Embassy’s Facebook page. “Israel and the Jewish people deserve better than that.”
          It is important to understand that the allegations against Kerry-Cohen are being made by ultra-extremist right wing Zionists, who are upset that the more “moderate” Zionist Supremacists want to slightly soften their public image.
          This policy shift is supported not because it is in anyone else’s interests, but only because they believe it best supports the racist state of Israel’s case.
          In other words, this “conflict” is only between an extreme set of people who are in dispute with an even more extreme group—while their common ideal—Jewish Supremacism—is never under question.
          This can be seen from Kerry-Cohen’s pronouncements on Israel, contained in the Israeli Channel 2 broadcast.
          During that show, he said that he sometimes spends “hours on the phone with Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and understands him.”
          “If we’ve answered all of the challenges of security for Israel, if he has secured the nation state of Israel as the home of the Jewish people, if he has secured recognition and secured the refugee issue — properly dissolved — I hope he will [agree to peace],” Kerry-Cohen said, referring to Netanyahu’s stance on peace discussions.
          Note however, that the demand for a Jews-only state is always first and foremost at the demands of both the “moderate” and “extreme” Zionist Supremacists—in other words, their core policy remains identical

        12. No the conspiracy is the debt based currency and fractional reserve banking. The slow grind to poverty.
          We should use the term Kabbalistic or Talmudic Jew. The above comments about generic usage of Jew does indeed dilute arguements and makes them more easily refuted.

        13. That info graphic is a bit inaccurate. Certainly not the majority, but a few people are assumed to be Jews when they really aren’t.

      2. That image was updated recently actually. While the current one you posted gets the point across, it’s got quite a few inaccuracies (names who are no longer in those positions, marking non-Jewish individuals as Jewish, etc).
        Also, it’s important to watch for divide & conquer and subversion here in these comments as well. I’m starting to see a lot of people who act like raving lunatics here, attacking Jews at every opportunity whether or not they’re relevant to the topic… we need to stay sane and discuss the role that particular ethnic and religious group plays rationally. Victim-mongering doesn’t do anyone any good either.

        1. EVERY chairman of the FEDERAL RESERVE (aka The Government) has been JEWISH for the last 30 years straight. My friend, I suggest you do your research. These are truths not “conspiracy theories”.

        2. I’m well aware. Just saying people need to stay calm and rational, and not necessarily bring up Jews in topics where their discussion isn’t warranted.
          Jews in general push ideologies that work against our interests as men, there are many examples of that as you just mentioned. And the Fed is just one piece of the puzzle in terms of our broken financial system, it’s not the be-all-end-all cause.

        3. I agree completely. A lot of arguments seem to be pushing an agenda other than serving the argument itself. To err on the side of racism or anti-semitism is opening yourself to all kinds of unnecessary attention. Serve the argument, not any sort of pre-aligned notion believed true because of your own neglect to research.
          . I am as white as it gets, and am just sticking up for rational argument, rather than serving the irrational rhetoric which peppers the internet. you are discrediting this very site, meant to be a platform for truth.

    1. Progress has always been with the west:
      Agreed with greater wealth technology, hierarchy although other goods like beauty,truth and justice should be included.
      Ever greater beauty and its unity with design as it is in nature would erode the eyesore urbanization has become. And greater harmony with nature and enhancement of natural beauty is also better.

    2. “The Jews?” That’s rather simplistic.”
      The Jews’ subversion and control of our Nations is complex.
      But, at the end of the day, the final analysis is simple.
      It’s the Jews.

  6. Ain’t “traditional hierarchical order” begging the question just a bit? I’d argue the burden is on the authority to prove that the authority is warranted.

    1. Well after seeing what happens when we have unmitigated hypergamy, I’d say that the authority was warranted.
      Like the EPA dude from “Ghostbusters” who insists that the containment field was doing environmental damage and insisted it be shut off…….oops.

      1. But feminism proceeds from authority. What power would they have without the State?

        1. Feminists had to first usurp the authority of their respective fathers. While that authority remained intact hypergamy and its effects on the State and Society were held in check to some degree.
          I have been musing about what failed here for a while. In certain moments I think that it was that too many gamma/omega-chumps had families and especially daughters and didn’t know how to properly bottle those djinns. Too many men were not up to the responsibility of raising proper daughters and society today is the result.

        2. I’m thinking of WWII GI’s in particular. Those guys that came home and moved into Levittown and wanted a life of domestic bliss on their return to civilization. The countrywide elation, the hero patina they wore, their desire for “normalcy” resulted in the Baby Boom. Think about the results of that.

        3. You do realize that hippies made up a small minority right? I mean, I hate whiny attitude that most baby boomers seem to have, but they didn’t really do anything wrong as a whole.

        4. Everything wrong with the baby boomers was due to their parents. However, their parents had no way of knowing what they were doing was wrong.

        5. I said the baby boom, not the baby boomers, the parents had no way of knowing about them ending up the way they did at that point. Anyways, the failure of the boomer generation is due to their upbringing, not due to some sort of generational magic that made them inherently a bunch of dumbasses.

  7. The attack on Jews is usually bred out of ignorance. What needs to be clarified is that, the group we really are rwfereibg to are the sabbatean-frankists also known as Zionists; the false Jews described in the bible or synogogue of satan. This group is a another faction of what is known as the illuminati. Also want to make it clear, in the words of the late Bill Cooper, who stated it is incorrect to assume that any one sole power/ethnic/societal group is responsible for it all. It is the combination of many.
    True Jews are red pill like true bible believing Christians. Not that churchianity bullshit

    1. Fake Jews (ashkeNAZIs) are 90% of the “Jewish” population. Some are decent people. “Jew” simply means a person from “Judea”, which could have been a Hebrew, Edomite, Cannanite, etc.

    2. I wouldn’t bother. The anti-semites here will just use the same tactics as the SJWs: use namecalling and labeling (“cuckservative”, “PC” or whatever) to shut down discussion rather than defend their positions. Note the response below, classic SJW tactic.

  8. “The tactic of dilution involves the substitution of a less offensive idea for a completely unacceptable one.”
    And this falls in line with what Sandman said – that the Western media talk about Roosh so much while keeping their mouths shut about MGTOW, so that men will find out about Neomasculinity and start marrying those Western sluts again. Now, I’m not trying to undermine Roosh’s efforts, but he had some “help”, because his ideas are better than the collapse of civilization.

    1. Video link? I find this idea compelling. Maybe MGTOW just isn’t known. PUAism is mainstream so its a given they would pick out a PUA who they think is misogynist and put him on blast, but who’s actually aware of MGTOW? Even I only came across it in the last month or so. That being said, MGTOW is the truly “subversive” concept in that if a significant amount of working, producing, tax paying men actually do go their own way, civilization could collapse.

  9. There are enough attacks on libertarianism from the Left and Establishment Right. Shouldn’t that alone instruct you on who is right and who is wrong?
    Christ almighty. As if there’s anything wrong with you and I trading beads for shells. No libertarian I know agrees with the witch hunts going on now, not one.

    1. My aversion to libertarianism comes from being closely associated with a libertarian think tank. I found that some of the men could not understand the difference between theory and the real world.
      One example is that I could not get the libertarians to see that illegal immigration is a bad thing in the real world. They were unable to see that bringing in uneducated immigrants imposed externalities on the communities where they settled (burden on schools, hospitals (illegals are usually uninsured), crime, etc). They were only able to see the good parts of it: cheaper goods and services.
      I think we agree on the concept of liberty, which I am in favor of maximizing, and of government encroachment, which I am in favor of minimizing.

      1. Amen to that. The problem with goverments (and politicians) is that they either embrace an ideal and purse it regardless of feasibility and common sense, or they just pretend to do so and actually just work to fill their pockets.

    2. I have strong libertarian leanings and agree with them a lot e.g low taxes, flat /consumption taxes, sound money ( no debt) gun ownership etc. What baffles me is the libertarian stance on immigration. Libertarians believe that countries should “allow the free movements of people ” i.e. NO BORDERS. Literally we would allow anybody and anyone to come and live in the USA. Complete open borders. I tell the libertarian types “so you think folks from Honduras are coming here with copies of Atlas Shrugged and Adam Smith?” “Should we allow people with drug resistant TB and Ebola into the US?” “You think those Somalis are down with gay and women’s rights”
      Goes to show you that all political parties have their foolish utopian elements…

    3. Once I was in a company of a few Libertarians (at this point I was already doubting this ideology) and I asked them “You believe that once government’s intervention to people’s lives removed, prosperity should follow, however in many African countries you can go long distances without seeing any State’s presence, yet they are extremely poor and backward, why’s that?”
      What I got in return was a blank stare and silence. Right there I realized they’re not race-conscious. It was my last meeting with them.

  10. “You can see this tactic at work when Catholics and conservative Protestants attack each other rather than uniting to fight the encroachment of subversive ideas.”
    Setting the record straight:
    A) There aren’t any more Protestants. Ecumenism won. All of the Harlot Daughters are now returning back to the Mother Harlot in Rome. It was called Vatican II. It’s now called Ecumenism. Look around.
    B) Roman Catholics genocided countless millions of non-Catholics for millenia, often after horrendously torturing them first. Rarely did it ever occur the other way around, and when it did, it was nowhere even close to the countless millions that Rome genocided (even after you throw in the Cromwell straw man). The Vatican has never apologized for this, never said anything about them being officially wrong in doing this, and it still reveres such teachers as Aquinas and others who taught that non-Catholics should be burned at the stake. In other words, Rome still approves of burning people alive, and if history is ANY kind of predicter of events, Rome will resume burning people alive, or mass-murdering them in other diabolical ways, just as soon as it is feasible for it to do so. So what’s to unite with? An entity that still wants to burn you alive just as soon as you’ve together suppressed some “subversive idea”??–and then tell you what books you can’t read, just as soon as its able to control that?
    No thanks.

    1. Roman Catholics genocided countless millions of non-Catholics for millennia, often after horrendously torturing them first.

      Another ignorant idiot. What else? Did Catholics burn millions of women as wells in the Middle ages? Did women were “oppressed”
      What a load of unadulterated BS.

    2. I’m Catholic. Please furnish a couple dates and places of these so-called…”genocidings”…

      1. Brandt, John L., America
        or Rome, Christ or the Pope
        Chiniquy, Charles, Fifty
        Years in the Church of Rome
        Chiniquy, Charles, The
        Priest, the Woman and the Confessional
        Close, Albert, Jesuit
        Plots from Elizabethan to Modern Times
        Cusak, M. F., Black
        Pope: A History of the Jesuits (1896)
        Daniel, John, The
        Grand Design Exposed
        D’Aubigne, Jean-Henri Merle, History of the Reformation v.1-5 (2012)
        Desanctis, Luigi, Popery,
        Pusyism, Jesuitism (1906)
        De Semlyen, Michael, The
        Foundations Under Attack
        De Semlyen, Michael, All
        Roads Lead to Rome?
        Dowling, John, The
        History of Romanism (1845)
        Farrell, Monica Ravening
        Wolves (1974)
        Fulton, Justin D. Washington in the Lap of Rome
        Harris, Thomas, Rome’s
        Responsibility for the Assassination of Abraham Lincoln
        Henderson, Jason A. (Major), The Influence of the Catholic Church on the Eisenhower Administration’s Decision to Directly Intervene in Vietnam
        Hogan, William Popery: As It Was and As It Is (1848)
        Hughes, Bill, The
        Enemy Unmasked
        Hughes, Bill, The
        Secret Terrorists
        Laurens, J. Wayne, Crisis: Or the Enemies of America Unmasked
        Lehmann, L.H., Behind
        the Dictators (1942)
        Leone, The Abbate, The
        Jesuit Conspiracy: Secret Plan of The Order (1848)
        MacPherson, Hector, The
        Jesuits in History (1914)
        Manhattan, Avro, Catholic
        Terror in Ireland
        Manhattan, Avro Murder in the Vatican
        Manhattan, Avro, The
        Vatican Billions
        Manhattan, Avro, The Vatican’s Holocaust
        Manhattan, Avro, The
        Vatican-Washington-Moscow Alliance
        Manhattan, Avro, Vietnam,
        Why Did We Go?
        Mauri, Vatican
        Ratline: The Vatican, The Nazis, and the New World Order
        McCarty, Burke, The Suppressed Truth About the
        Assassination of Abraham Lincoln
        Monk, Maria, Awful
        Disclosures of Maria Monk (1836)
        Moore, Edith, No
        Friend of Democracy (1941)
        Morse, Samuel, Foreign Conspiracy Against the Liberties of the United States (1835)
        Morse, Samuel, Imminent Dangers to the Free Institutions of the United States through
        Foreign Immigration
        Nicolini, G. B., History
        of the Jesuits: Their Origin, Progress, Doctrines, and Designs (1854)
        Paris, Edmund, The
        Secret History of the Jesuits (1983)
        Phelps, Eric Jon, Vatican
        Saussy, Tupper, Rulers of Evil
        Sellar, Robert, Tragedy of Quebec (1907)
        Sherman, Edwin, (trans.) Engineer Corps of Hell: Or Rome’s Sappers and Miners
        Shepherd, J.E.C., The
        Babington Plot
        Stuart, P.D., Codeword
        Barbelon: Danger in the Vatican: The Sons of Loyola and Their Plans for World
        Thompson, R. W., The
        Footprints of the Jesuits (1894)
        Von Zedtwitz, Baroness, The Double Doctrine of the Church of Rome (1906)
        Walsh, Walter, England’s
        Fight with the Papacy (1912)
        Walsh, Walter, The
        Jesuits in Great Britain (1903)
        Walsh, Walter, The
        Secret History of the Oxford Movement (1899)
        Whitney, Thomas, A
        Defence of the American Policy (1856)
        Wilcox, C. T., Transformation
        of the Republic
        Wylie, J. A., The History of the Waldenses (1880)
        Wylie, J.A., The Papacy is the Antichrist (1888)

  11. “While not an indictment of all libertarians, I notice that some of them are so stuck on the purity of libertarian theory that they are not able to see the obvious downsides to their policies.”
    Which policies in particular and what are the downsides?

    1. JB sounds suspiciously like MRA Janet Bloomfield. If it is, its a good thing that she’s undercover, as ROK seems to have a “no girls allowed” policy…even when said girls are agreeing with them.

  12. “You can see the tactic of inversion at work in women who replace true spirituality with a morality-free pop spirituality like yoga.” – I started doing the Bikrams Hot Yoga for a back problem what I can confirm is if you are a person who goes to classes for sole purpose of using practice keeping the body in good shape as you age – then its a good choice, BUT if you attend Yoga looking for something – which a lot of women were then you are going to leave a very disappointed person.

  13. While not an indictment of all libertarians, I notice that some of them
    are so stuck on the purity of libertarian theory that they are not able
    to see the obvious downsides to their policies.

    I love the smell of unproven assertions in the morning…

  14. I like the anti-French Revolutionary nonsense. Liberty, fraternity, stupidity. However, the Rothschild Banking Family essentially funded the British Empire’s war effort against the Revolutionary Government and Napoleon. In fact, much of Wellington’s Army in the Peninsular War in Spain and Portugal was funded by the Rothschilds.
    For a people who supported the French Revolution, Nathan Rothschild sure fronted a lot of money for taking down said revolution and restoring the Bourbon monarchy.

  15. This is a good article. I think a good example of dilusion was the TSA. The TSA came out first with the “naked” body scanners people went crazy, so they came out with the incredibly offensive pat-down and intimate body search but said you could use the naked body scanner as an alternative… then people were okay with the scans as long as they didn’t have to have some TSA agent feeling them up.

  16. White men tend to have a messianic streak (I think it’s genetic), and young white men eagerly embrace lofty revolutionary ideals of purity and reformation, even at the cost of their own lives. I see these tendencies manifested frequently here at ROK.
    There are many articles on ROK extolling the virtues of tradition – exhorting readers to participate in the restoration of traditional values, and even asserting that noble self-sacrifice is somehow “alpha,” and thus, attractive to women. It is not.
    The reality is that societies and governments are established by men for the preservation of their individual pursuit of pussy. But whenever any form of society becomes destructive to this end, it is the tendency of men to abolish it.
    As the Marquis de Sade observed, there are two kinds of men who do not benefit from participation in society, and are thus exempt from its constraints: (1) those who are so strong that they have no need of society’s protection, and (2) those who are so weak that even society’s protection can not save them from victimization and exploitation. As the Marquis also observed, every man falls into one of these two clusters.
    If you enjoy trying to change society for the better, then by all means do it, but don’t expect women (or anyone else) to appreciate your efforts. As for the rest, ask not what you can do for your civilization; ask what your civilization can do for you.

    1. Thanks for the insightful de Sade quote. But I disagree with it. No man is an island. Even the strongest depend on society. Granted, a Trump is not as dependent as someone on welfare, but he can’t do it all alone.
      I want to rebuild my civilization for my children. It doesn’t matter whether anyone appreciates it.

      1. Go ahead and rebuild. Follow your bliss. Don your shining armor and mount your noble steed, if that’s your desire. I never meant to discourage you – I simply want to assure you that no one appreciates your efforts.

        1. Do you have children or plan to have them?
          Also, one’s philosophical approach comes into play. I think that for an atheist, the attitude of “eat, drink, and be merry” is perfectly rational. It is not really an option for a believer.

        2. Well, actually, it is more of an option for a believer, because you are already saved, and you already know how history ends, but, again, do what you think best.

        3. Only some believers “know they are saved,” and such an attitude is actually heretical for most Christians.
          Are you familiar with strict Calvinism/puritanism? They didn’t believe anything they did in this world could change their eternal destiny, yet quasi-paradoxically they created one of the most frenetically energetic civilizations the world has ever known.

      2. “Granted, a Trump is not as dependent as someone on welfare, but he can’t do it all alone.” Welfare and civilization aren’t the same thing. Rich people are rich because they have poor people around them. Not to mention, humans are social creatures, they are evolved to work in groups, not alone.

    2. “exhorting readers to participate in the restoration of traditional values, and even asserting that noble self-sacrifice is somehow ‘alpha,’ and thus, attractive to women. It is not.” If you support your ideals because you believe it will get you women, then you don’t really support those ideals. A true radical/revolutionary is willing to fight for his ideals because he thinks they are true, even when that means you are going to be unpopular.
      “The reality is that societies and governments are established by men for the preservation of their individual pursuit of pussy.” What is your basis for this? It is almost universal accepted by anthropologists that civilization was developed to get more food, and government was thus made to protect civilization.
      “those who are so strong that they have no need of society’s protection” Surprise fÜckin’ surprise, these people don’t exist.
      “those who are so weak that even society’s protection can not save them from victimization and exploitation.” I have no idea what this means, but Sade must have lived in some sort of crazy dystopian-action story.
      “If you enjoy trying to change society for the better, then by all means do it, but don’t expect women (or anyone else) to appreciate your efforts.” No shit. You do realize this site isn’t only for persueing women right?
      “As for the rest, ask not what you can do for your civilization; ask what your civilization can do for you.” Well for starters, it allows you to sit down and even fucking contemplate that idea…

  17. Interesting article. This is a piece of an important topic that I think needs a lot more investigation. It is not correct to use the term conspiracy theory, as Roosh recently discussed. I think the main concern is that they operate in secret. RoK is straightforward about what we are about, but these people put on a deceitful face and coordinate in secret. People were a lot more concerned about this in the 1800s, with the story of “Faust,” a must-read. This article lists some great points about how they attack their opponents. On a more general level, they employ sophistry, appeal to science/atheism, and law-breaking. Again, we really need to separate the conspiracy theory fiction with the “occult war” reality.

  18. Good article but I would disagree slightly on one point – Judaism wasn’t used or taken over by darker forces. It’s very goal is is to spread disorder and chaos to weaken non-Jews culture, countries etc. All movements to destroy western civ – Communism, feminism, homofagism even fascism come from the Jew.

  19. I think there might be some true paganism preserved in Europe somewhere. But you conveniently skip the point that neo-paganism is a way for Euro and Anglo descended people to reconnect with their traditional, pre-Abrahamic roots. I myself converted to Hinduism, and while some Christians ignorantly and in a derogatory fashion call me a “pagan”, there are some things in common. Which brings me to your assertions about “yoga”….
    Yoga is not new. Its an ancient philosophy. And while it has been appropriated by westerners in wrong ways, we are currently seeing many of those very same appropriators take up an interest in authentic yoga as a philosophy and not just physical exercise.

  20. I honestly can’t tell from this article if you are fighting a secret war against the Jews, feminists, Liberals, or yoga pants. However, I am fairly certain your article was an accurate description of how propaganda works in Western political psychology.
    As far as the generalization of liberals, extreme right and left wing supporters equally undermine the American way of life. The right wing sacrifices liberty for the sake of democracy, and the left sacrifices democracy in the name of liberty.
    As far as the stance on Jews and “counterfeits”, I guess your “traditional beliefs” are not the same as those that established this country because they sound quite a lot like religion. Yours. Again. Morality is not ethics and neither are Christianity. It’s only the Christians who refer to themselves as the “moral conscience” or the “moral majority”.

  21. Uum as pagan is ANY religion that is not Christian, moslem or jewish I am pretty sure buddism, Hinduism, Shinto, Zoroastrianism, animism, celebrity worship and greed are all REAL paganism just to name a few.

  22. Probably should read this in conjunction with:
    A Tale of Two Conferences
    Our elites don’t feel threatened by libertarianism; Ron Paul has spent his life condemning fiat money, the income tax and central banking, yet the elites have left him alone.
    And our elites don’t feel threatened by religion, either, because they can see through it as bullshit. I don’t know why Vox Day even bothers with it. They must get a real laugh from the beliefs of crackpots like the late Tim LaHaye, with his fantasies and delusions about the rapture and the end times.
    But when the deplorables start to question why our elites enforce policies intended to dispossess white people in our own countries, they and their proxies spring into action and try to bully, shame and humiliate us. This shows what our elites really care about, what they consider the most important tool for controlling us.
    If we wind up with a President Hillary any way, and if she pushes for “hate speech” laws to shut down dissent, I can guarantee these laws will attack free expression about racial issues while ignoring criticism of the Federal Reserve System.

  23. Ayn Rand’s philosophy of Libertarianism is one of the biggest diversion tactics there is. Millions of Westerners blabber like wound-up toys about open markets, borders, limited government and so on not realizing that they are Globalists useful idiots. I myself, fell a victim to this ideology for a few years.

    1. I don’t recall any Rand types blabbering on about open borders. Must have missed that at the Objectivist meetings, wot?

  24. Its not ‘jews’, there are jews that stand for truth and freedom as well.
    Basically, the ‘they’ he is referring to are the zionists. Its a political ideology more than a religious one at this point. Jews can be zionist, muslims can be (house of Saud, ISIS). Christians can be zionist too.
    If you look at all recent subversion, all corruption in economics, spirituality, religion, gender relations etc, you can always trace it back to the zionists.
    Once you know who they are, then you will want to know what their end game…

    1. probably worth reading Rabbi Antelman for background to zionism and its antecedents. There are some very complex movements going on from the late 18th century, and in particularly from both the gentile and jewish enlightenments (the haskala). The battle for the soul of judaism though starts earlier, probably in the 16th and 17th centuries – from the time of Isaac Luria at least, from what I can tell

  25. Evola was a very dangerous men, in fact just as dangerous as the ones he “exposed”. He was, of course, a fascist, but the kind of fascism that comes from Theosophic occult doctrine and Perennial Philosophy, a gnostic Luciferian doctrine that teaches that “light” can be found at the origin of all religions.
    His desire for a return to tradition has nothing to do with real Conservatism, but is linked to occult teachings from Rné Guenon, who thought that modern civilization destroyed the ancient occult spirituality.
    This new fascist/occult conservatism is a trap that is gaining ground among silly alt-right / neoconservatives. It is a necessary step for the implementation of an authoritarian new world order.
    Watch out!

    1. interesting post. I have yet to read Evola, or situate him within the occult environment. To my mind though theosophy is progressive in character and evolutionary in its goals, even if was often characterised by spats and a lack of the ecumenical spirit if you like
      Any good works by Rene Guenon in English? I keep thinking there was someone else important who was heavily influenced by Guenon but I can’t think who it was

    2. Thanks for the heads up. I was going to buy this book to see what he’s all about; but based on the other titles in bookdepository, he has published books like “introduction to magic’ & “The Yoga of Power” – in my mind, that puts him in the quack category.

  26. Whoever wrote this is worse off than those he decries as deluded, for he will exhaust himself chasing after every ghost and figment of “subversion” like a dog chasing after a red dot from a laser pointer. He sees bogeymen and horrors everywhere, even among those whom– were he a more sober thinker– he would recognize as his allies.

  27. Remember it is all the jews. Karl Marx was actually a jewish rabbi. I forget his real name, but his family were rabbi. It is said that Communism is the Torah being enforced. Yes there is a spiritual element that has been at work for centuries against us, as the article states.
    The reality is that the jews work with this spiritual element, and both the jews and this spiritual element have been around for a long time. The jews were kicked from 190 countries for their subversion.

  28. There are corners of this world…even in Europe… where “paganism” never ceased to exist. It just hid from persecution… and hid well.
    Also, considering the massive theft of ancient festivals and traditions perpetrated by the Church, one could justly pose the question – which cults are here counterfeit? “Paganism”…or Christianity? 😉
    However, the arrogance of the article is amusing…and, admittedly, somewhat to the point.
    So, proceed. 🙂

Comments are closed.