The psychology of decadence.

The psychology of decadence talking point?


The self-hatred of so many white people today needs to be accounted for. For instance, do we have some genetic defect that leads to a bizarre death wish? Or are some manipulative and self-serving "elites" successfully perverting the intrinsic altruism that enabled us to survive in Ice-Age Eurasia, so that we now serve everyone but our own people? Or are we simply weighed down and worn out by the terrible wars of the 20th century? Or is it something else? Whatever explanation may be offered, it is remarkable that we even need to seek to understand this phenomenon. No other branch of humanity seems to contain large numbers of people who are actively working to destroy their own kind.

I think one explanation is that we are still suffering from the residual effects of Christianity, albeit in a secularised form. The extract below is from Winwood Reade's 1872 book, "The Martyrdom of Man". Back in 1872 countries like Britain and Australia were officially under firm Christian rule, so Reade analysed the psychology of Christianity in strictly Biblical terms. Yet in today's post-Christian world much of what Reade wrote still rings true in a secular way.

The "earth" that "Satan" ruled is now the Western Civilisation that White people once ruled. To our self-hating minority, the remnants of our culture must be wiped out, just as Jesus was going to "invade and subdue the earth". The Redeemer figure in Christianity is now, for many of us, the people of the Third World - as Jean Raspail depicted in "Camp of the Saints". Those of us who are the heirs of Hypatia, or Shakespeare, or Mozart, are like the Biblical character Dives. We have received our "good things", so now it's our time to be persecuted. By contrast, the detested and scab-infested Lazarus hasn't achieved much in life, so his time has now come.

To paraphrase Reade's conclusion: "Those of us who wish to live under the new dispensation must renounce all the glories of our former Western culture. We must give away our property (in the form of foreign aid, economic kow-towing to boat people, and the like) and give the proceeds to alien peoples, discard all domestic ties (by endorsing gay marriages and so on), cultivate self-abasement (through such things as Prime Ministerial 'apologies' for historical acts that occurred centuries before our own time), and do nothing which could possibly raise us in the esteem of other people (or ourselves)."

Here is the extract from Reade:

....................................
If we regard Jesus only in his relations with those whose brief and bitter lives he purified from evil and illumined with ideal joys, we might believe him to have been the perfect type of a meek and suffering saint. But his character had two sides, and we must look at both. Such is the imperfection of human nature that extreme love is counterbalanced by extreme hate; every virtue has its attendant vice, which is excited by the same stimulants, which is nourished by the same food. Martyrs and persecutors resemble one another; their minds are composed of the same materials. The man who will suffer death for his religious faith will endeavour to enforce it even unto death. In fact, if Christianity were true religious persecution would become a pious and charitable duty: if God designs to punish men for their opinions it would be an act of mercy to mankind to extinguish such opinions. By burning the bodies of those who diffuse them many souls would be saved that would otherwise be lost, and so there would be an economy of torment in the long run. It is therefore not surprising that enthusiasts should be intolerant. Jesus was not able to display the spirit of a persecutor in his deeds, but he displayed it in his words. Believing that it was in his power to condemn his fellow-creatures to eternal torture, he did so condemn by anticipation all the rich and almost all the learned men among the Jews. It was his belief that God reigned in heaven but that Satan reigned on earth. In a few years God would invade and subdue the earth. It was therefore his prayer, "Thy kingdom come; thy will be done in earth as it is in heaven." God´s will was not at that time done on earth, which was in the possession of the Prince of Darkness. It was evident, therefore, that all prosperous men were favourites of Satan, and that the unfortunate were favourites of God. Those would go with their master to eternal pain: these would be rewarded by their master with eternal joy.

He did not say that Dives was bad or that Lazarus was good, but merely that Dives had received his good things on earth and Lazarus his evil things on earth, that afterwards Lazarus was rewarded and Dives tormented. Dives might have been as virtuous as the Archbishop of Canterbury, who is also clothed in fine linen and who fares sumptuously every day; Lazarus might have been as vicious as the Lambeth pauper who prowls round the palace gates, and whose mind, like his body, is full of sores. Not only the inoffensive rich were doomed by Jesus to hell-fire, but also all those who did anything to merit the esteem of their fellow-men. Even those that were happy and enjoyed life--unless it was in his own company—were lost souls. "Woe unto you that are rich," said he, "for ye have received your consolation. Woe unto you that are full, for ye shall hunger. Woe unto you that laugh now, for ye shall mourn and weep. Woe unto you when all men shall speak well of you, for so did their fathers of the false prophets." He also pronounced eternal punishment on all those who refused to join him. "He that believeth and is baptised," said he "shall be saved. He that believeth not shall be damned."

He supposed that when the kingdom of God was established on earth he would reign over it as viceroy. Those who wished to live under him in that kingdom must renounce all the pleasures of Satan´s world. They must sell their property and give the proceeds to the poor, discard all domestic ties, cultivate self-abasement, and do nothing which could possibly raise them in the esteem of other people. For they could not serve two masters: they could not be rewarded in the kingdom of this world, which was ruled by Satan, and also in the new kingdom, which would be ruled by God. If they gave a dinner they were not to ask their rich friends lest they should be asked back to dinner, and thus lose their reward. They must ask only the poor, and for that benevolent action they would be recompensed thereafter. They were not to give alms in public or to pray in public, and when they fasted, they were to pretend to feast; for if it was perceived that they were devout men and were praised for their devotion, they would lose their reward. Robbery and violence they were not to resist. If a man smote them on one cheek they were to offer him the other also; if he took their coat they were to give him their shirt; if he forced them to go with him one mile they were to go with him two. They were to love their enemies, to do good to them that did them evil. And why? Not because it was good so to do, but that they might be paid for the same with compound interest in a future state.