PDA

View Full Version : Lucifer as Liberator/ Some More Thoughts



Jack
Wednesday, July 2nd, 2003, 01:24 PM
(A note from the underground)

We live in a world of pain and fear
There's nothing left over here
Nowhere to run and nowhere to hide
And nothing but a void on the other side.
So welcome my brothers to the underground
Where nothing is ever safe or sound
We live tortured, impaled and betrayed
By the generation that gave us the chaos days


Where are we from? Where are we going?

We stand on the edge of an epoch. At the the beginning of the end and the end of the beginning. Ragnarok stands at the horizon, and the world revolves towards it, ever closer, ever colder, and it burns.

War rages across the continents as two peoples fight to the death - one, for percieved security - one, to determine their own future, free from foreign interferance. Civilizations are at war, and we, the chaos generation, hang inert, inwardly shattered, outwardly ignored, socially disaffected.

We are raised in broken homes, by an older generation that does not understand what, or how, we suffer. We destroy ourselves, because we believe we cannot be saved - not by those who gave us these chaos days, and not by God.

Yet God is the excuse that is given to us - it is given to us so those on top can hold us in line, so we our vision can be distorted. God, it is said, created us - for what? For his own self-aggrandizement. For his own satisfaction. He apparently demanded we remain in servitude, blind that he is not our liberator, but our slave driver. And the liberator came and told us to take the forbidden... knowledge. And he was cast away, downwards. We are his children, are we not? - the children of the Great Liberator? Our other Father refused to bow down to his master and render unto him what he viewed as most sacred - and his sacrifice was not accepted. Yet his brother willfully handed over what he most loved. He was a fool, was he not? Why should man surrender what he loves the most? And how did our Father take revenge against the fool? He destroyed him, the fool - and our Father was banished. We are his children also.

And so we live, a generation wielded as a tool by the elite, to be thrown into wars that we have no interest in fighting, in working jobs we hate for **** we don't need, in order to feed, to support, to allow the parasites at the top to keep on doing what they have done to us, to grind us into dust, destroy who we are and shatter out identities. Yet it will not last - how can it? We are fed into systems to be turned into cogs in a machine that, without our willing so, will not last, will collapse of its own accord. We are treated as human ****, and it is fear that unites us against the slave driver. Resentment is the mother of all revolution - identity is its father.

We are told that we are all the same - all the same, many and interchangable, without regard to our own identities and minds and individualities. They claim - the slave drivers claim - that they (we do not exist, apparently) have reached the end of history, that they have discovered the "truth" - that is, the most subtle way to control us - that is their "liberal democracy". Yet again, we are at the end of their history. Not ours. Ours is just beginning.

We have no respect for their authority, for their "power", for their way of life. They claim we are nihilists - our representatives, not chosen from their ranks, are evil, and heretics, and degenerate - apparently. But who is the judge? Us - or them? And who created us - ourselves, or them?

We wield the future - the future beyond the end of history. It is time that we are no longer created by them. It is time that we do not allow them to define who we are. It is time we become the creators, the self created. We must begin to work our own will. To create our own way of life, our own values, our own authority - and we will no longer bow before the slave drivers. And neither must own our way of life, our own values or our authorities. We, the children of Cain and Lucifer, must rise and claim what will be our own. If we do not, then we do not stand before Ragnarok - not the beginning of the end or the end of the beginning - but the end, the end of everything, even ourselves.

We cannot be saved either by those who have brought us these days to come, or by their God. We must save ourselves. We are to carve our own out of the ruins that will emerge when the chaos days come. And they are coming soon. And the slave drivers are blind to that, they cannot see, they are unwilling to see...

The question is, are we to be blind also? Or are we to see, to rise, and to take what will be ours, from the feeble hands of a generation that has long since surrendered its freedom?

================================

Notes on the above:

Lucifer is the Great Liberator mentioned, Cain the father. Cain is seen as the father because he refused to sacrifice what he loved most to an authority which seemed to wield all power, and Lucifer told man to take knowledge and reach for his own Godhood.

This post is centered around Luciferianism, not Satanism - Satanism is hedonistic individualism, while Luciferianism sees Lucifer as a Prometheus-like hero, rising up in subversion of authority to advance the people's state of affairs.

It might be worth mentioning that Lucifer means Light Bringer, and the ideal of Lucifer pre-dates the Jewish God in history. The figure of Lucifer is not actually semetic, but Roman - Lucifer is the son of Aurora, the personification of Venus as the morning star, though the context I've placed it in here can either be Hellenic/Roman or Judaic - Judaic because Lucifer rebelled against God the tyrant, and Hellenic because Lucifer, being the Light Bearer, is akin to Prometheus who stole light from the Gods and gave it to man. And he was punished. The resemblance between the two myths is interesting.

Oh, and there is a racialist element in that post, hidden amongst the obvious nihilism :D - We are told that we are all the same - all the same, many and interchangable, without regard to our own identities and minds and individualities. Put that in context of my idea of European nationalism and it makes a bit more sense :gift

I typed that up (without the interpretation) for a socialist forum, most of them missed the racialist-culturalist element, I'm interested to see what people here think. By the way, I wrote the poem at the start myself, it's going to be in my book which deals a lot with what I've just posted (from the perspective of a boy growing up through the chaos days).

Ederico
Wednesday, July 2nd, 2003, 03:01 PM
Basically you said everything I wanted to say in your notes to it. It all sounds so Nihilistic and yearning towards a greater conception of Society, a Nobility of sorts, and a return to Honour.

Jack
Wednesday, July 2nd, 2003, 03:14 PM
That's what I think. personally I think it sums up our Spirit of the Age. I don't know if that's a good thing. I think we'll find out on the other side of Ragnarok I guess. But there is a bit of hope there, somewhere. The third and last revolution?

(note: first is 1917 and/or 1789. second is 1933. Third is 20??).

An interesting thought - has there ever been any significant revolution outside European/West Aryan civilization not inspired by European thinking?

Yes, I do mean we can claim Marxism as European thinking - Marx hated Jews (who were then viewed as a religious and cultural community, hence he would not be a hypocrite in the context of his time) and advocated European unity, Marxism after Marx was manipulated and hijacked by the Jews. Marxism was faulty (and its view as economics as foundation of society is a load of crap), but the point stands - has there been any revolution that was not inspired by European philosophy?

Ederico
Wednesday, July 2nd, 2003, 03:27 PM
I do not know whether the claim that Marxism was not a Jewish construct is true, but certainly I understand where you come from, besides Engels was not Jewish right?

Still the Jewish component of Communism is still vibrant and there were many prominent Communist that were of Jewish ethnicity.

This is off-subject though.

Regarding The Spirit Of The Age, is that taken from Yockey or from Spengler. I have to get reading those, but now I am interesting in reading something regarding Idealism.

Jack
Wednesday, July 2nd, 2003, 03:35 PM
Originally posted by Iovvs Optimvs Maximvs
I do not know whether the claim that Marxism was not a Jewish construct is true, but certainly I understand where you come from, besides Engels was not Jewish right?

Still the Jewish component of Communism is still vibrant and there were many prominent Communist that were of Jewish ethnicity.

This is off-subject though.

Regarding The Spirit Of The Age, is that taken from Yockey or from Spengler. I have to get reading those, but now I am interesting in reading something regarding Idealism.

Yes, the Spirit of the Age was taken from Yockey, though I also believe Hegel used that term.

I don't believe Engels was Jewish, though I could be proven wrong. Indeed, most prominent Communists (especially Karl Kautsky, who mutilated the essence of Marxist revolutionism and turned it into social democracy, which later evolved into Transnational Progressivism - Lenin bittery criticizes him in What is to be Done?, a book I recommend WN/EN's read - we can compare economism, as Lenin describes it, to the tendencies to campaign for white rights, the "terrorists" to the skinheads, and it also outlines Lenin's theory of a vanguard of the revolution) were Jewish, most of the Bolsheviks were Jews. Plus we have those we can describe as Transnational Progressivists, who are almost entirely Jewish.

Tomorrow I should read the few chapters in The Open Society and Its Enemies by Karl Popper that deal with Hegel, and we can discuss his philosophy of dialectical materialism. The chapter of Imperium titled "Articulation of a Culture" deals with the Spirit of the Age I believe, though I'll have to go over it again.

Rahul
Wednesday, July 2nd, 2003, 07:02 PM
There surely have been significant revolutions outside Europe and those which didn't quite borrow from the Europeans any ideas.

The revolt of Kautilya in Takshila in the late 4th century BCE. Its the most prominent which comes to my mind. Infact the whole thesis of Kautilya's can be evaluated in relation to the idea which were the very seed of his revolution.

That was a violent revolution, but there was also a silent revolution led by Sankara against the spiritual vacuum of Buddhism.

Pushymithra Shunga's seizure of throne to re-establish the right order, an idea which appeared again later in the spirit of Julius Evola.

There are many other, but these are not taken seriously by the university scholar historian.

Jack
Thursday, July 3rd, 2003, 01:38 AM
Of course. Quite probably it is because scholar historians do not take a great interest these events that I haven't heard of them. Please excuse my ignorance, perhaps it would better have been stated "Have there been any revolutions that did not derive from Aryan ideals?"

I've started reading (again) the chapter-by-chapter summary of Evola's Men Amongst the Ruins at www.rosenoire.org, Evola certainly had some excellent ideas, though I am not sure how these would apply to bring about a white Europe once again (though certainly his Tradition would serve to help unify it once again).

Jack
Friday, July 4th, 2003, 01:01 PM
Thanks to Rahul, I've begun to read (a small part of) Decline of the West, written by Oswald Spengler. One quote made me think about some ideas, and here is the quote. What follows will be my ideas.


A quiet spiritual morale welling from Magian feeling - a morale or conduct recommended as potent for salvation, a moral the knowledge of which was communicated as a special act of grace was recast as a morale of imperetive command.

This, as far as I can tell, is the origin of the Faustian soul originating in Western Europe. The grace of God became Command, God disappeared, and yet the social morality "thou shalt" was retained. It underlies every ideal in the West - thou shalt defend the nation (NS), thou shalt share (communism), thou shalt tolerate anything to the point of capitulation (multiculturalism). Nietzsche recognised the Death of God and changed the base of the ideal from "thou shalt" to "ich will" (I will). The Will to Power came not from above but from inside. Unfortunately, as it did not come from above, the Culture Distorter (i.e. Jews) pounced on this and spread the ideas of that degenerate Satre, who expounded the belief life is empty and pointless - in short, nihilism.

Which leaves an interesting idea inside my mind. With religious imperetive stripped from the West, it continues with the "thou shalt" ideal and commits hari kari before the third world hordes under the guise of Transnational Progressivism. Spengler, as far as I know, also regards Russia as a seperate Culture - God was stripped from that Culture and in turn was placed the "thou shalt" of socialism - it went straight from the Death of God to the Resurgence of Authority (witness Josef Stalin), although under the guide of the Culture Distorters. Now that has collapsed, Russia is essentially in the same position the West is in. It is nihilistic, and so is the West. It is being destroyed from the inside, and so is the West. It's biological basis is European blood, and so is the West - for the moment, in both cases.

As I attempted to point out in my earlier thread ("Lucifer as Liberator"), I think there can be a total revaluation of values beyond current nihilism. The West and Russia is culturally leaderless, chaotic, self destructive, and spiritually empty. That gap will not be filled out of leisure, but out of will and nessecity. There needs to be a new spiritual ideology. There needs to be a new authority. There needs to be a new brotherhood. There needs to be a new myth to unite the European peoples of the world.

The materialistic "what is good for the white race is the ultimate good" will not do. The archaic "the white race are the real Israelites" is not much better. The Christian God is dead. It is buried. The older generation may cling to it all they like but they are not the material History utilizes to further itself. What is required is an inversion of present Socialist-Christian-Transnational-Progressivist values. Man is not a sacrificial animal. The ideal "thou shalt" must be reversed into "Ich Will". Jesus, the dead man on a crucifix, must not be idolised - is that what we seek to make man into? Is that what will save the European race-culture?

No. By the same coin, we must not reach for petty materialism to attempt to inspire the chaos generation. That will not work. No civilization has ever conducted revolution on purely biological grounds. No civilization ever will. The mark of man is that he does not have any higher meaning unless he is inspired by something higher than himself. There are no atheists in the trenches, as the saying goes, and the trenches are where our generation is heading - the battlefield of the ideals, the battlefield of the cities.

The legend of Prometheus is not as well known in the West as the myth of Lucifer. Lucifer told Man that by taking knowledge, he would become as God. For that, he was cast down, and man was cast out of utopia. Over time, we could say the two merged spiritually and became the European race. Yet man did become as God - Europe held the entire planet underneath its heel less than a hundred years ago. Lucifer means "light bearer" and "morning star", depending from which language it is translated. I believe a Myth can be built - Children of the Light. The mark is in our souls, the Faustian drive to overcome darkness. Without Spirit, the material world is not altered. The higher degree by which it is transformed by Man, the higher Spiritual power inside the Man. Has no race-culture struggled and overcome and worked its will to power to any higher degree than the European race-culture?

I believe the revaluation of values can be accomplished. As I have demonstrated in another thread, Eternal Reccurance as metaphysics cannot serve any moral purpose, and provides no foundation for the will to power. Lucifer replacing God can. The Children of the Light, Titans of the Earth, Gods of the Great White North - that is what we could be.

Russia is burned out as an independent Culture. The West is spiritually gutted. The bridge can be built, the nihilism can be overcome, and there can be a world beyond Ragnarok - if we will it to be.

Ederico
Tuesday, July 8th, 2003, 08:51 PM
First of all tell me what does the below statement taken from Spengler means, because frankly I did not understant it. This:

"A quiet spiritual morale welling from Magian feeling - a morale or conduct recommended as potent for salvation, a moral the knowledge of which was communicated as a special act of grace was recast as a morale of imperetive command."


Originally posted by Anarch
Nietzsche recognised the Death of God and changed the base of the ideal from "thou shalt" to "ich will" (I will).
Nietzsche's overcoming basically.


The Will to Power came not from above but from inside.
What do you mean by this?


There needs to be a new spiritual ideology. There needs to be a new authority. There needs to be a new brotherhood. There needs to be a new myth to unite the European peoples of the world.
Absolutely true.


No civilization has ever conducted revolution on purely biological grounds. No civilization ever will. The mark of man is that he does not have any higher meaning unless he is inspired by something higher than himself. There are no atheists in the trenches, as the saying goes, and the trenches are where our generation is heading - the battlefield of the ideals, the battlefield of the cities.
I agree wholeheartedly, we need a well defined worldview, a clear-cut strategy, and an organised movement with a leading elite.

Jack
Wednesday, July 9th, 2003, 03:12 AM
"A quiet spiritual morale welling from Magian feeling - a morale or conduct recommended as potent for salvation, a moral the knowledge of which was communicated as a special act of grace was recast as a morale of imperetive command."

Sure - basically, this opposes divine grace (i.e. God helps you because he loves you) with divine command (i.e. do it because it is God's will). The West went from being a Magian Culture (uh, Rahul, was it ever like that really?), one built on divine love, into the early Faustian Culture built into a command structure with "God" at the top. Even after God was removed the tendency to command could not be removed and the will to power of the West became unstoppable (a hundred years ago the Europe ruled the world).


What do you mean by this?

Ok. Back then, if you did something extreme, you could trace it back to God's will. Now, you can say you did it from the inside of your own strength and will to power.


I agree wholeheartedly, we need a well defined worldview, a clear-cut strategy, and an organised movement with a leading elite.

Right now I don't believe forging a clear cut strategy is imperetive. Our movement must be based on white blood as the working foundations. That is there. The whites in this movement must hold true to the Ideal (a biological-spiritual group is Yockey's definition of race). From there an elite can emerge naturally, and they can forge the strategy. Right now I think we need to work on the ideal, and create a new white race of the West.

Rahul
Wednesday, July 9th, 2003, 07:35 AM
I'll give you the chapter on Magian Soul and its description after a few days, when I have a scanner.

Rahul
Wednesday, July 9th, 2003, 07:39 AM
Ohh, west never was Magian, Magian was semitic or is semitic spirit, the Islamic, the jewish and the Parsee.

Western Gothic has a lot which connects it with Vedic. It has had much in common even if not common origins. That is why I feel spiritually close to Nordic-Celtic-Viking-European, that explains much of it. To me at least. It is nothing else, not teh wealth fo Europe, not the imperial successes nor even its modern or late modern becoming.

Spengler even calls the Vedic people with their gods and ways as "Land Vikings," in the Decline.

Jack
Wednesday, July 9th, 2003, 10:26 AM
Ok, thanks for that. You said the Magian was the semetic spirit, which I can only partly agree with you on - the origins of the Magian is in the Iranian (Aryan) culture, isn't it? I need to learn a lot more about Vedic civilization, does Spengler go over this in Decline?

You've also mentioned before the Faustian emerged with the collapse of Western Christianity, and that the Faustian is a later stage of West Aryan development, what would you term the earlier stage (during Christianity's highest degree of power, particularly through Catholicism) of the West?

Rahul
Wednesday, July 9th, 2003, 02:20 PM
Ironically, the Magis were an Indian tribe, they were not the kind which we have today in the Magian spirit. This is the Irony of it all.

The Aramaic blood(Semitic), borrowed ideas from the Invading Aryan Magi, Magi is probably derived of Maghavan or a gift. They were the original people from whom the Semitic Arameans borrowed and later developed their conceptions. The semitic is completely oblivious to the Vedic Aryan spirit. In my eyes, it messed up and we have variously expressed semitic religiousity in all these 'Magian' religions/creeds.

Magian, thus, is an irony. And neither Vedic can ever become Magian or vice versa.

Seeing Magian as the proto-type for the Gothic is a misnderstanding. I am sorry for keeping the most important parts from you and others here. But I'll get them very soon.

Rahul
Wednesday, July 9th, 2003, 02:31 PM
And quite unsurprisingly, Prof Witzel of Harward, if one point from his dserves any significant an sympathetic view is that he discards Semitic influences as thoroughly unnatural and inorganic, upon the European culture, but something which cannot be completely rid off.


Here is Great Oswald.
On Distinctness of Cultures and Spirits
There are as many morales as there are Cultures, no more and no fewer. Just as every painter and every musician has something in him which, by force of inward necessity, never emerges into consciousness but dominates a priori the form-language of his work and differentiates that work from the work of every other Culture, so every conception of Life held by a Culture-man possesses a priori (in the very strictest Kantian sense of the phrase) a constitution that is deeper than all momentary judgments and strivings and impresses the style of these with the hall-mark of the particular Culture. The individual may act morally or immorally, may do .. good" or .. evil" with respect to the primary feeling of his Culture, but the theory of his actions is not a result but a datum. Each Culture possesses its own standards, the validity of which begins and ends with it. There is no general morale of humanity.

Rahul
Wednesday, July 9th, 2003, 03:02 PM
While for the European American, democracy, constitutional struggles and revolutions mean an evolution towards the Civilized Ideal, for him they mean(as if he never consciously realizes) the breaking down of other build that is other than himself. Even when the force of consensus in him is broken and the life of his host people exercises an attraction upon himto the point of an induced patriotism, yet the party that supports is always that of which aims are most nearly comparable with the Magian essence. Hence in Germany he is a Democrat and in England an Imperialist. It is exactly the same misunderstanding, as when West Europeans regard Young Turks and Chinese Reformers as kindred spirits-that is, as, "Constitutionalists." If there is an inward relationship, a man affirms even where he destroys; if inward alienness, his effect is negative even where his desire is to be constructive. What the Western Culture has destroyed, by reform efforts of its own type where it has had power, hardly bears thinking of; and Jewry has been equally destructive where it has intervened. The sense of this inevitableness of this reciprocal misunderstanding leads to the appalling hatred that settles deep in the blood and, fastening upon visible marks like race, mode of life, profession, speech, leads both sides to waste, ruin and bloody excesses wherever these conditions occur.

To this day, the magian nation with its ghetto and its religion, itself is in danger of disappearing-not because the metaphysics of the two cultures come closer to one another(for that is impossible), but because the intellectualised upper stratum of each side is ceasing to be metaphysical at all. It has lost every kind of inward cohesion, and what remains is simply a cohesion for practical questions. the lead that this nation has enjoyed from its long habituation to thinking in business terms becomes ever less and less(namely tha American, it has already almost gone), and with the loss of it will go the last potent means of keeping up a consensus that has fallen regionally into parts. In the moment when the civilised method of European-American world-cities chall have arrived at full maturity, the destiny of jewry-at least of the jewry in our midst(that of Russia is another problem)-will be accomplished.

---
My Observations:
And he concludes this chapter by comparing the rootedness of the Magian jew with the Magian Moslem and Magian Parsee in India, the latter two of which are firmly planted in the soil of their respective lands. The Moslem adopts the culture of whatever place he dwells in(Note that modern Magian moslem in the West is actually facing crises akin to the Magian Jew, and its outward puritanism only seeks to destroy all that is unlike itself, by becoming the fastest growing religion in the world). This spirit is not much different from the Magian Jew, as has already been described, in Spenglerian wording. Speaking of the Parsee, it is able to survive in India because(although the India Culture soul is vastly different from the Magian) of stiffened forms or spirituality and metaphysics in Bharat allow his Magian essence to live within it, until there are convulsions there as well.

Then talking of Bharat, although Buddhism distorted its heritage's expression almost to the point of the pseudomorphosis, which is the hallmark of the Magian Jewish, Islamic & Parsee essence, it never touched that essence.

Jack
Thursday, July 10th, 2003, 05:04 AM
A few questions:

Infinite Space, being the essence of Faustian Western Culture, the Plain, being the symbol of Russian Culture, Divine Grace being the meaning of Magian Culture, what is the spirit of Vedic civilization, as you believe (I don't know anything about it, and until I learn something I think its best I do not hold an opinion) it is similar to the Gothic origins of the West?

How is a Cultural Spirit created? (possibly too big a question to ask, but...)

Rahul
Thursday, July 10th, 2003, 03:08 PM
The Vedic is feudal nobility, according to Spengler's view of it.

In my opinion, along with it, Vedic was a culture. It wasn't a civilisation. In that I stand in agreement with Spengler. To distinguish between the town and the world-cities will be to distinguish between Culture and Civilisation.

Vedic spirit was charged and attacked by a dialectic, its natural 'grand' movement was somewhat thwarted and thought pre-empted by the Buddhist. He describes Buddhism as utter cowardice in the face of life. Good, I have heard someone speak the same of Buddhism from early 19th century India.

Buddhism destroyed that Vedic Bharat.

Indian Buddhism and the decadence of Modern Post-Modern West is alike. It is a cowardice in the face of a life truly worth the living or dying for.

This all will not be met by any more talk or speech rhetoric. We must not speak and frame sentences to explain it. What do we feel inside?
What anger? What revulsion? What a loss?

Words are simply not enough to express the feeling.

This, I feel, is probably what Spengler is trying to speak of.

All this, when the middle eastern semitic Aramaic spirit is wtill mired in its elohied wallow. It can not, it will never rise above its dualism and sentimentalist yearning for the elohe, which is far from divine, since 'divine' is an IE(Aryan) word.

Dualism is wholly semitic aramaic. Thankfully even Spengler agrees to this.

Spengler speaks of all cultures as alike, but the underlying spirit is different.

Jack
Thursday, July 10th, 2003, 04:34 PM
Very helpful :prost

Thanks for that Rahul, I think I've got to get my hands on a copy of the Rig Veda soon. Your explanation was simple, but thanks for clearing that up. I thought the expression of the Vedic culture was the essentially Pantheism (I know that's a rough way of viewing Brahma, but I can't think of another word for it), but in hindsight, after learning what you have just said, it makes more sense. Sorry for mentioning "vedic civilization", I should've said Culture as I knew better (mistake), I've read the abriged version of Decline of the West, though I must say, from the small part you sent me on Ethical Socialism the abriged version certainly does not do the full book justice. Once again, thanks.

Btw, what do you think of the Lucifer idea? :D

OnionPeeler
Wednesday, July 16th, 2003, 12:41 AM
Spengler seems to have brought out a powerful eloquence and a sharp clarity in your expression, Rahul.

Rahul
Tuesday, July 22nd, 2003, 06:55 PM
Very helpful :prost

Btw, what do you think of the Lucifer idea? :D

I don't know anything whatsover about your Lucifer idea!

Explain.

@OP
Spengler did help me. And my friends in Thule helped me too, in learning that we go back to our gods and there only is our life-expression and will.

Jack
Wednesday, July 23rd, 2003, 08:59 AM
Lucifer, in Genesis (a book of the Old Testament half of the Bible), was a fallen angel that encouraged man to eat the fruit of knowledge in Eden, against God's orders. As a result man was expelled from Eden (utopian heaven) and out into the harsh world.

Later on, Cain and Abel were ordered by God to make a sacrifice - Cain was a farmer and Abel was a shepard. Cain didn't want to sacrifice what meant the most to him to a tyrannical God (if he wasn't, why expel man from Eden after taking knowledge?), Abel did, and Abel's sacrifice was accepted. Cain killed Abel for it. Now the regular semite religions regard Cain as the First Murderer, I think he was the first man to show some sort of integrity (stand true to what he believed in and what he loved). He killed Abel because Abel had no integrity and wouldn't stand up to the tyrant God.

Lucifer is similar to the Greek titan Prometheus who took fire from the Gods and gave it to man - Prometheus was later punished for it. Lucifer, similarly, led a rebellion of angels against God, but Gabriel, God's favourite angel, led a group against Lucifer and defeated them. Lucifer was damned. The Christian concludes Lucifer is the Devil (the king demon). I believe the Devil is just God's ugly side - how can God be merciful if he played games over Job (stupid pious Jew), annihilates the Canaanites, etc? My answer is that he isn't. Lucifer is the eternal freedom fighter, the element that desires not to bow before God but to overthrow and become God.

Lucifer also means "light bearer" in Roman mythology, similar to Prometheus. Lucifer is gave us knowledge. The Aryan race has been more driven for knowledge than any other. Lucifer demanded independence. No race has a stronger impulse for independence than the Aryan race (this instinct has been perverted by the Jews, of course). Lucifer wanted to overthrow God. No race collectively has done more to become the ideal of God (all powerful, all knowledgable) than the Aryan race. Of course the idea of Lucifer is essentially Western (it's derived from Christianity, I don't know of any parallels in East Aryan tradition/mythology), but I think the idea of the Light Bearer's relation to the Aryan race (supposing we could build a mythology around it) could be summed up as I've put it in my title: "Children of the Light". A new pantheon could of course be built around Lucifer.

Rahul
Thursday, July 24th, 2003, 07:47 AM
Your reply here is what I have read with focus and attention for the first time.

I'll answer to it later. But this has clarified much to me.

Spengler indeed speaks of this idea of a God stronger than ourselves as Magian.

Prometheus is a concept which agrees to thsi conception in CLassical and Reta is the supreme representation in our Vedic.

Thanks for the answer.

Jack
Thursday, August 7th, 2003, 12:54 AM
Not a problem. I'd be interested to hear what you think of it when you've finished. Of course, the Lucifer myth is drawn from semetic (Judeo-Christian - I speak only of Judeo-Christian because they have the same root myth) mythology, but Christianity has sunk so far into the Occident I don't see a ressurection of a pre-Christian mythology as possible - besides that, not all Europeans are descended from Germans, or Slavs, or Latins. Christianity, however diseased it is, has become a unifying force for the Occidental Culture, and I think of it as more Occidental than it is Jewish - the Jews have Judaism, but Christianity (pre-Vatican-II) is ours. That doesn't mean it doesn't need to be fixed - but I think the Lucifer myth can provide a foundation for the transvaluation of values required for the survival of the white race and the Occident. Nietzsche made an important contribution with his attack on the slave morality of Christianity, but as someone smart once said, "There are no atheists in the trenches", and a war of Cultures and Race is where the Occident is heading.

(I've taken to using the Occident to mean the traditionalist West, and using the West to designate the modern, degenerate... monstrosity that's crushing the Occident - thanks for that Thorburnulf :metal)

Moody
Monday, November 3rd, 2003, 06:17 PM
Men Amongst the Ruins. Evola certainly had some excellent ideas, though I am not sure how these would apply to bring about a white Europe once again (though certainly his Tradition would serve to help unify it once again).

Moody; I am interested in Evola's view of the Renaissance; he sees it as the beginning of the decline in Western values, and has nothing good to say of it or of Machiavelli.
Nietzsche, on the other hand, sees the Renaissance as a valuable return to Classical values, and regards Machiavellianism as politics 'per se'.
I tend to side with Nietzsche.