Skeletons of over 500 children who died during the Great Hunger were found seven years ago buried in a mass grave within what was once the Kilkenny Union Workhouse. With over three years of research on their bones, bio-archaeologists have been able to uncover the children's harrowing stories and medical secrets.
The new study, funded by the Irish Research Council, is based upon the “skeletal manifestation of stress in child victims of the Great Hunger.” Although it is known that more than half of those who died in the Great Hunger were children, little research has so far been focused on their experiences before death.
545 children were buried within the grounds of the Kilkenny Union Workhouse between 1847 and 1851, almost two thirds of whom were under age six when they died.
-From Irish Central on Christian-era workhouses.
Recently we discussed, in Rapespawn Kult, the idea that post-Christianization Europeans' recurring obsessions with stylized pre-Christianized Europeans drew upon evolutionary and historical understandings derived from inter-species and/or intra-species conflict. These trends occur with far greater frequency in European thought patterns than in those of other modern Terran peoples. The lusty hero from simple beginnings, yet endowed with great powers from the gods of old, who travels the world fighting battles and eventually acquiring quality reproduction, is strongly differentiated from areas lacking in Indo-Aryan influence. The reasons for this are many: the inability of many other species and sub-species to build, store, or develop written language of course stands foremost; also, the disinclination of other types of peoples to historically rationalize desired behavior, rather than to merely entertain or titillate, through narrative; the few-thousand-years' permissible showcasing of post-Christian history in which we comment. Yet the worldwide interest in wise, beautiful ancient peoples echoes the specifically European one, even when the trend is matched in few other, or no other, cultural aspects. This suggests that the commonalities between the different races' historical self-images allude to real shared experiences, rather than to independently-developed organic illusions.
Consider, for example, the pastoral roots of European heroes. The modern Europeoid has a historical sense of self that often transcends location, whereby the desire to conjure a personal pastoral backstory, and to explore the wilds in search of exotic sexual liaison, remains as compelling in Australia as in America, Asia, or Europe itself. The narrative trope goes thusly: young hero, potentially an orphan, is either a farmboy or the child of a minor line; he discovers inherent mystical powers and sets off on a quest whereby he meets a sexy wife (in Tolkien's case, Samwise serves for the pastorally-sheltered protagonist in possession of lost elven magic, but most other pop fantasy, including Tolkien's own partial inspiration The Well at the World's End, remains of strictly heterosexual inclination). Slightly differentiated is the Japanese, where the young pastoral trope learns an inherently racial, not individual, mystical power, from a wise elder, then sets off on a similar quest whereby he meets a sexy wife. The Chinese becomes more communal, or obligation-related, rather than individually heroic, and other less-Indo-Aryanized groups correspondingly less so, ascribing the protagonists' heroism to godly castes or the fulfillment of express commands rather than filial legacies which must be sussed out by more independent heroes.
-Taran Wanderer is a simple assistant pig-keeper, who...
...works on a moisture farm on backwater Tatooine, having no knowledge of his genetic talent for using the force which he inherited from an ancient line, and...
...slept in a humble cupboard under the stairs, before...
...setting out from the peaceful shire, after which he...
...meets Eilonwy, a mysterious slender blonde with ancient magical powers, who desperately wants him to...
...become the High King of all Prydain.
Excuse me; that was Charlemagne and the Pope celebrating the diversifying of the then-latest hundred thousand German wombs. Let's try again...
Dammit; Aragorn. But seriously, Taran becomes the High King of all Prydain...
...after which the Celt prize with rare magical blood can at last bear his offspring:
To recognize these similarities is not to speak pejoratively about Lloyd Alexander or Tolkien, but to note how the new Europeoid is overpoweringly drawn to the idealized recreation of what he wants to see as his legacy. By contrast, the completely un-Indo-Aryanized sub-Saharan Africans take an entirely different turn. Africans, too, offer tales that culminate with triumph in war and mating, but their victories are not justified as having been achieved through ritualistic training, piety, or communal learning; rather, the protagonists' distinguishing powers appear stochastically, without need of any particular crusader's purpose. The southern African also does not flatter himself with the notion that he bred a woman because she wanted it, but because he was strong enough to take her. It is only in Europeoid-derived work where we see this defensive, highly-suggestive implication.
(African narrative honesty, as it were, has been recently corrupted by centuries of Christian benevolence, which has encouraged dutiful story-farming by Roots-esque imitation of western plot structure. Earlier, more independent ["traditional"] sub-Saharan African ["SSA"] tales do not attempt to meet the requirements of Christian plot structure. Saul of Tarsus' marketing work in this regard is thoroughly indicative of the plot structure still demanded by Euros today: vague birth; pastoral childhood showing only hints of promise; suggestions of ancient nobility in the bloodline that are not present in the hero's guardians; absorbing abuse; then, finally returning to solve the mysteries and really kick some ass. So much of western work isn't a copy of Christianity, per se, but merely of the plot structure which Euro-marketed Yahweh-worship helped to impose.)
None of these observations mean that this type of story arc is inherently bad or unusable; rather, it is the strength of the call which it exerts upon current European peoples which is indicative of the power of its imposition; and, it is the overwhelming desire for this basic plot that is bad, inasmuch as it causes the rejection of narratives, and thereof of ways of thinking, which~
~do not fit this model. The extermination of not only countless pagans, but of Arians, Gnostics, Zoroastrians, and many other Christian-like (but not so race-traitorous as the proto-EU imperials) peoples, left an indelible impression on those who remained. The millennia of entertainment marked by association with post-Christianized Europe may be, in twenty thousand years, looked back upon as an unfortunate repetitive burp in the manner in which today's moderns may retroactively scorn a decades-old trend in fashion, fitness, or music.
The "from rags to riches" European tale echoes the Indo-Aryan interest in agriculture, and the western employment of crops that can be well grown by a small family (wheat, barley, et cetera) versus the predominance of crops in East Asia that often require communal hydration and pest planning (rice), may explain the development of different story arcs among differently evolved groups. Similarly, the cousin-marrying traveling raiders of the blended Semitic populations may explain the comparatively more salacious, yet Greek-influenced, Persian (or "Arabian") tales. What all of these cultural narratives include, from the Han to the Magian to the Apollonian, are the remembrance of the extinct spirit girl. European memories are more wistful, lamenting the emptiness of the forests, where Semitic memories are more lasciviously disappointed; Euros blame themselves for the loss of beautiful people who had to leave because Europeans weren't "natural enough" or "didn't tend the forest well," while Semites blame the absence on semi-divine evil spirits with harems in reserve.
(The ways in which Judaic Semites have used later goy-focused versions of the Torah to manipulate Arab Semites into blowing themselves up in order to at last obtain seventy or so of these vanished spirit-virgins should be quite well known now in the West.)
No such myths present among SSA or deep southern South Americans with little to no Europeoid admixture. The reason that SWPL exist--the reason white people fawn over domestic pets, national parks, non-car transportation, and the like--is likely due in part to prior genetic competition. As SSAs are the only planetary group with no neanderthal admixture, one can conceptualize of a telecultural catastrophe pertaining to the extermination of the neanderthal as being a common link between the pseudo-medieval-fantasizing peoples and the SSAs, who had, prior to European colonization, undergone much less genetic assimilating and adjusting than other human groups. The neanderthal, and its extermination at the hands of all non-SSA groups, is easy to discuss now in 2017, because it has been somewhat discovered and possesses a generally-accepted existence among the exterminating groups. Whether or not any other somewhat-hominid lifeforms were eliminated or raped into today's mixed "Europeans" is a questionable subject for Terra's primitive diggers and mythmakers, but to avoid offending them, we need not insist upon the occurrence of feyicide, for we have at least the more easily accepted neanderthal correlation. Ergo it is acceptable formal science to postulate the existence of cultural extermination guilt arising out of Euro experience with neanderthals, whether or not one is willing to consider the existence of other types of more intelligent, better-designed "humanoids" than our forebears were willing to preserve.
-Even Central Intelligence Press acknowledges neanderthals! Another quirky situation where the Bank's attempt to make Europe accept caliphate control, "because you did it to the neanderthals," permits snippets of incomplete history to be permissible discourse. Later, the official story may be changed to "Allah sent a comet to darken the sky and destroy the
SWPLs desperately trying to spend thousands of dollars on fiberglass kayaks to go on "catch and release" fishing trips in an abysmally phony "nature sanctuary" are often called, now, "virtue signaling," in an attempt to explain contra-genetic behavior by claiming it raises group status. This begs the question, though, because an increase in an individual's group status based on wasteful principles that run contrary to the struggle to survive has no evolutionary explanation. Even if it improves an individual's mating chances to faux-humanely catch-and-release uneaten fish in a show of virtue, the act does not assist the group's survival, ergo the group will be disfavored by evolution. Yet modern Europe has ever been the land of vulgar displays of unnatural charity, just as it has been the strongest situs for fantasizing about desirous females of extinct species. The correlation explains itself in the most Occam-approved, intuitive, rational way: namely, that the ancient European peoples, who became called the Indo-Aryan peoples during the period of Africanized archaeologicism, had the most contact with the species and sub-species that were eliminated. (Again, if you're intellectually embarrassed to consider the existence of any other population groups, you can focus on neanderthals alone. To evaluate the theory, there is no need to try to remember any crimes more shameful.)
Even more particularly Nu-European involves the lusty hero whose journey involves discovering "who he really is." Peoples with less Europeoid admixture, such as east Asians, have heroes who set out on journeys to learn objective (duplicable or somewhat-duplicable) skills, complete objective tasks, bring honor to their origins or tribes, and so forth. More heavily Indo-Aryan peoples, though, tend to produce narratives where actions have to mean something subjective, applicable only to the hero. The monster the hero defeats is an allusion to or a metaphor for his troubled relationship with his god(s), father, or life itself. We see this even in western movies today, wherein a family's visit to a national park is not considered a "complete plot" unless the squabble with the park ranger helps them understand why Grandfather never called back his dying nemesis from high school; why the kerfluffle while purchasing the fishing gear represents Father's fright over the children growing older and making their own decisions; why the rainstorm that upsets the tent and ruins all of Mother's careful packing and decorating and cooking plans is a sign that you have to stop trying to micromanage life; and, in the end, why everyone is able to accept themselves for "who they are." Without that hint of Fated "meaning," the self-obsessed Europeoid is unable to enjoy a narrative about solving external problems that are not conjoined to his internal problems. Western cinematic heroes and heroines have saved the world countless times not for the world's sake, nor for their own sake, but to rediscover meaning in their personal lives. Go to Vegas to become a better husband; visit a dude ranch to become a better employee; kill a terrorist to come to terms with aging; become poor to discover the value of small things; destroy the aliens to learn that you really were a decent person on the inside. Western stories attempt to mimic corporate "team building" retreats, wherein fabulous adventures are really about feeling better in the breakroom.
The young Japanese budoka pursuing mastery of the sword did none of this crap. He wished to honor his family and prove his strength, but not in order to eliminate nagging self-doubt about whether his existence meant anything. By contrast, the existential angst of the crusader grappling with the strength and genuinity of his personal relationship with Jesus Christ, and how much or little he is driven to sin or not sin, overcomes the crusade itself. Indeed, if a boulder had accidentally crushed the evil fakir before the final sword duel, the crusader would never have had a chance to become a true Christian, even though Jerusalem would've been saved. Only superficially, myopically, and in desperate want of believing everyone else is as neurotic as the preferred Talmudic heroes of the occupied west, are cataloguers of "myth" able to mash together disparate pieces into an imaginary panorama, where a Korean who pursues the man who wronged his family is "Hamlet" or "Oedipus."
The Nu Euro is obsessed with finding himself, discovering his legacy, and other vicarious orphan-tales, because his legacy is not actually his legacy, but something lingering in a small percentage of absorbed genes. More Euro tales than those of others start off with orphans because, similar to mulattos being called black by some and white by others, and being excluded from certain identities, the rapespawned memories of not fitting in persist. The Nu Euro loves stories where someone wise and old comes by to tell him that he really does have some of the blood of the vanished peoples.
Farmboy Rand al'Thor is worried and excited when wise
...Yes! Luckily, Rand discovers that he is the reincarnated descendant of an ancient people and can wield the One Power and speak the Old Tongue by blood right...
...although the crimes of his past self, who slew all of his own kin, hang over him, and the Dark One constantly reminds him of his weakness and his sins...
...because maybe he, too, will be corrupted by power, and maybe he really is as weak as Isildur...oops, scratch that one...continuing on, Rand is eventually pleased to discover that...
...besides his two other wives, he's entitled to own and impregnate one of the primitive but magical Aiel peoples who had long ago fled to the east to escape civilization.
Again: fine enough tale, no inherent nor fundamental problems with any of the components, but highly indicative of Nu Euro preference, and complementary toward the group's recurring aspects of character. Although Rand al'Thor is never himself bad, and is of mixed "new" (mundane, continental, European) and "old" (ancient, magical, vanishing, "Aiel") blood, he is troubled by the legacy of his sins from a prior life, where he went mad and killed his family and was part of the "breaking of the world," having potentially served the Dark One in infinite multiverses. His prior self bears the indicative nickname "the Kinslayer." And of course, his current self is an orphan, and he is descended from, on his father's side, a European noble, and on his mother's side, by a magic-using Aiel who so badly wanted his father that she left her people and traveled into foreign lands in order to give birth and die. The desire to identify with vanished-female magical parentage, to later seek out and mate with trace elements of maybe-remaining magical females, and to grapple with personal anguish over past sins against a greater world, is particularly well expressed in the narrative. (The "Age of Legends" in Rand's tale is of course long over by the time Rand leaves the pasture; like other Nu Euro fables, from the Babylonian myths forward, it involved lots of big trees, ecologically sound industry, superior scholarship and culture that was destroyed by idiots/looters after the interference of the Dark One, significantly longer lifespans, beautiful disease-free predecessor peoples, free women without feminism, et cetera.)
The new western plot demands the external provision of meaning, or else everything isn't "wrapped up." Humorously, this has led to many western conclusions where the narrative pretext is abandoned entirely. In place of a conclusion of events that have been unfolding, a movie may instead show someone starting out in the morning with a soft rock song in the background. She's clearly feeling better about herself; he's clearly going to start sending out resumes, asking out girls, or going back to school: all is right with her/his mindset, and that's all we really wanted to see anyway. Whatever problems or mysteries were supposed to tantalize us earlier are irrelevant, so long as the characters are shown to have "developed" in some way.
As always, western cultural predominance over the past millennia, particularly the past century, has helped establish western-style expectations in other venues. We now accordingly see Indian, Japanese, and Korean films attempting to mimic or reach the American market by carefully budgeting minutes into efficient tapestries where every line leads toward the resolution, and the details of the journey are only incidental to whether or not the friends keep their friendship together.
This type of narrative, again, is not intrinsically bad, anymore than wanting to pet a friendly dog is bad. At a certain saturation point of attention, however, it indicates not a quirk but a problem, and at a point beyond that, a serious problem. The dominance of Europeoid expectation is such that many Nu Euros are unable to care about events, fictional or real, without metaphorizing those events to a person, fictional or real. This translates horribly into news-reaction. Say, "30,000 women were raped," and no one will care ("tweet," maybe, but not care). Run a cover story about one of those women, with lots of pictures of her and her family and her attacker and his reasons, and everyone desperately cares. The intellectual ability to empathize rationally is stripped away by the narrative structure we use. This phenomenon is "natural bias" only as self-reported by the inmates. We consider it normal because we're sick; today's "Europeans" accept it because, on an instinctual level, they can feel what they did to get here. And the ghosts in a small percentage of their genes want to be heard. "I just had to, like, find myself, you know?"
(Lacking discernment in such a fashion puts today's Euro at an extreme disadvantage to other population groups. Not only are they unable to empathize in a proper and logical manner with their own kind--which shows how stunted is their ability to perceive souls behind numbers--they are unable to act without individualized leader-figures to "exemplify" what they think they believe in. Jews are far superior at this in a material way, able to respond to challenges understood via spreadsheet alone. Euros, though, have to find someone charismatic to lead them to finding thems-elves ["become who we are!"], ergo they're sustainably puppetable more than any other group.)
This problem is created, mandated, and helped along by the forcibly, unnaturally, subsidized mythmaking entity that took Europe. That's why movies about natural disasters, terrorist attacks, or alien invasions spend so much time on the personal life or lives of one or a tiny subset of the characters involved: what matters most isn't the entire species or the entire planet, but how the submarine voyage to Ganymede's core can repair the relationship between the captain, her husband, and the upstart young chemical tech with the highest scores in his class but adjudged too psychologically unprepared for this mission before the accident that killed Greg's team and left them with no one else to save things for the Jovians.
Thus do we find ourselves in occupied Ireland, contemplating an earlier phase of this next extermination. The primitive iPhone factories in which the Merovingian, Carolingian et al. rapespawn forced Gauls, Celts et al. to slave, were cruel in the most literal of ways. Beating, raping, lasciviously mutilating, and starving infants and young children is a pattern we see repeated wherever the Torah and its ideatically-crypsising manifestations have traveled. NATO soldiers in the 21st century cooperating with nominally anti-Taliban Afghan warlords to permit a culturally respectful trade in prepubescent boys are little different from the Romans who partnered with the Byzantine Turks in 300 A.D. to trade white flesh for gold.
The abuse of the Scots and Irish has been better remembered by the world due to the deconstructive criticism leveled at ex-global-hegemon Great Britain, wherein for a brief time it became permissible to detail the victims of some of these tyrannies. Yet the horrors visited upon Irish children were duplicated by the early Christians and their successors all across the continent. We do not remember the butchery done to the Huns, the Goths, the Saxons, the Britons, the Angles, and so forth--we remember, instead, the conquests of rapespawn derived from those groups, generations later, when they had been assimilated by the Christian armies and marched further north.
These rapespawn, and their fawning Brangelina-esque admirers, comprise most of the canon of what we now call "western history." As Africans are now granted permission to be Thor and Hamilton, the ancestors of today's Europeans were once flattered to be given looted pieces of what their victims had dropped when they fell. Recasting various local historical figures as "saints" and other demigods permitted the Semitic-controlled globalist antifa armies to impose Catholicism on many regions, and lured many pitiable generations of Euro survivors into believing that their history did in fact belong to Yahweh. Will the next millennia's Africans believe that Alexander Hamilton, a despicable central banker and plausibly-deniable funder of slave traders, was one of their own? It may well be. Even if so, how much time will those black youths spend reading the Federalist Papers? And, perhaps more importantly, of what claims will the Federalist Papers then consist? It is not a long step from a mulatto Hamlet to a mulatto Shakespeare. The tenuous grip today's Euro has on "his" history may prove as fungible as that he had on his money and his women.
Just like Jesus!
A terribly intriguing similarity presents itself in this slightly revised invasion of Europe: that of the uncaring victims. Posit a European man who forgives the rapists who fucked, beat, then killed his pregnant wife. (Southern Baptist meets Methodist?) Or, less personally but more socially, posit a dead little girl on a French street, run down by a gleeful Arab who got many more with the same vehicle, which killings prompt an immediate condemnation of anti-Arab remarks, but not of running-over-children actions. (Muslim meets Catholics?) Neither scenario is particularly rare; only the details regarding the era's relevant weaponry.
Many Europeans have exhibited seemingly senseless behaviors in response to these situations. Call them "liberals" to help translate into the modern parlance. These "liberals" see the actions of brutality and, in true good-goy Christian fashion, think about turning the other cheek to invite more blows.
Many other Europeans, though, have exhibited behavior that is highly critical of the forgiving, self-immolating liberals. Call them "alt-right." The alt-right Europeans insult the liberal Europeans' idiocy in forgiving, permitting, importing, and even paying for these occurrences. And this is perfectly understandable--the furor of anti-racism tweets and legislation, while completely ignoring the lives ruined and to-be-ruined by Judaism 3.0's invaders, appears insane. More importantly, it demonstrates a willingness to destroy lives and peoples on behalf of a universally-materialistic belief system that could legitimately be called Judaism 4.0.
Will Muslims impose Shari'a on Europe? Or, will they eventually join Nu Europeans as Nu Europeans, and settle into a nihilistic sloth, relying upon marches, tweets, and conferences to urge their bank's legislators and police to eventually do what's right? The end of anyone new to Judaize, a.k.a. "the end of the frontier," broke the Nu Euro. What chance will Muslims have once they've expanded, and brought their own revised Yahweh as far as their handlers intend? After a hundred years of watching al'Kim Karbagshian do six-ways for Brazzers, all the jihadists might well end up on the couch.
"Conservative" disgust with liberals' acceptance of the destruction of Europeans (or "whites" or whatever else you prefer) is perfectly understandable, and in a way, perfectly reasonable and rational. There is, though, a recurring nightmare perceivable in this 21st century argument. Specifically, the alt-right, nationalist, conservative, fascist reaction to this latest invasion of Europe is nearly a duplicate of the liberal reaction.
Most of today's European nationalists take their pride and inspiration from events occurring or originating in Europe from the beginning of the physical, boots-on-the-ground phase of the Jenomic invasion. The destruction of older history, and the construction of cathedrals honoring the desert rabbe; the sculptures and oils of Yahweh and his Abramic paladins; the celebration of the orderly massacring of countless European peoples by armies of publicly schooled normies operating under the direction of international bankers and their prominently-displayed cuckold puppets. European Nationalists since the physical invasion began have honored primarily those who worked with the invaders to cause the invasion to happen at a more sustainable speed. They call themselves "nationalists" in the way that tomorrow's Muslim may seek to defend the Arab character of Europe. Expert theologians (rabbis) needed to be brought from Nicea to bring the good news to Brussels, and it was vital to the defense of the continent that young white boys were shipped to the Middle East for "anti-terror training" (crypsis-assistance) and so forth.
These behaviors, some of which we've discussed before, are so interesting now in comparison to the "liberal" behaviors in celebration of their Muslim conquerors. And that is where the millions of ghosts of Europe, and the few tidbits of the Scots-Irish that haven't already been lost to history, come into play: today's nationalist insanely forgives, hypocritically ignores, or stupidly celebrates the behaviors that he complains about from the liberal. The dead blonde girl that one of Abraham's truck-driving cowards left on the streets of Nice has been duplicated millions of times over, and the nationalist in 2017 thinks that's fine. He and the liberal Muslim-coddler are, in essence, the same: the liberal too stupid/evil to have pity for the girl who died yesterday, and what that means for the future of her people, and the conservative too stupid/evil to have pity for the girl who died a thousand years ago, and what that has already meant for the life of her people--a far more profound meaning, now that we're living in the result of her death. Constantine sent many a Byzantine pederast to "groom" the children of Germany, and Charlemagne sent many a disguised refugee to brawl and bribe and rape and lie and demoralize the cities he intended to conquer. Islam means peace much as Christianity did, e.g., peace when everyone has become Yahweh's slave--whether Yahweh is calling himself Yahweh, Christ, Allah, Berkeley, or Anti Defamation League.
The dissimulating nationalist attempts to conceal his liberal-cuck behavior by celebrating the supposed heroes of Christianity, because said heroes, in their own histories, report that they fought Muslims. This is irrelevant, in part because said heroes murdered more of their own people in service of rabbe-worship than they killed Muslims, and in part because offering a little token resistance to Muslims, in a perpetually failing centurial-fallback that is still ongoing, is not only worthless but a poor excuse for just behavior. When today's nationalist celebrates Charles Martel, he is celebrating the equivalent of a Tony Blair or a George W. Bush, both of whom led their people in a great war against Islam in which their countries were triumphant. In 2003, or perhaps 2017, we could have seen that this was all just a show, ultimately meant to kill more young white people, anger Muslims, weaken nonsectarian Arab leaders, and further integrate Europe and the Middle East. Today's European liberal, who cannot see the dead French children of today, can see the evil stupidity of Blair and Bush. But today's European conservative, by and large, cannot see how the Blairs and Dubyas of centuries past were utterly ineffectual, destroying their societies from within while occasionally ordering a token expedition against the "bad hombres" among the Muslims, and by these false shows of resistance, accustoming their people to lose, over the long term, a "clash of civilizations." Or, more accurately, to embrace an infection that has proved resistant to earlier defenses.
The European "liberal" embrace of universalist relativism, currently embodied through acceptance of Islam, echoes the earlier European liberal (now called "conservative") embrace of universalist relativism, then embodied through acceptance of Christianity. It is equal parts hilarious and extremely sad to see today's conservatives look to Yahweh and/or Yahweh's Son to save them from Allah and/or Allah's Prophet. It is as suicidal, yet as intrinsically Nu European, as the notion that embracing rapists and bombers will cause them to embrace race-blind LGBTQ tolerance.
These matching trends among Europeans of all so-called political stripes are best attributed to the mass sclerotic disruptions caused by today's Europeoids being the mixed descendants of invaders past. Justin Trudeau (2017 Terran-Canadian executive figurehead) would be ashamed to protect his people's children after inheriting a legacy based on the same; European feminists defend Muslim rapists for the same reason, because of their own ancestral guilt over being extant due to having been born by a system which replaced a people via rapefugration. Similarly, on a slightly larger (but still embarrassingly stupid) scale of time, the liberal cuckolds and shabbos goys who feel that Rabbi Jesus will save them are able to dismiss the sundry genocides committed by Yahweh's earlier jihadists. Ergo yesteryear's dead little blonde girl is, to the conservative Nu Euro, as irrelevant as yesterday's dead little blonde girl is to the liberal Nu Euro.
If today's scientist can now admit that human remains found in Europe date from dozens of thousands of years ago, how does the "demographics is destiny" collective rationalize some 45,000 years of Europeans having had neither written language nor architecture? How plausible is it that Terrans of similar (and demonstrably far greater, even by covetous modern standards of bioarchaeological concession) cranial capacity failed to work stone or record thoughts for ten times longer than it took barely-agricultural peoples to develop cuneiform? It is far more likely that, like a leftist webzine memory-holing a badly-worded article, earlier civilizations were burned and salted in spiteful envy, eaten up and picked dry like so many Venezuelan grocery stores, and then dissembled, chip by chip, by people who did not understand nor remember what they were doing. This process, and our current perspective on its absence, are similar to how future archaeologists and historians may portray white racist voters and city officials as being responsible for falling property value in Detroit, and for poisoning Flint's water supply and misdirecting cleanliness funds to white preachers.
How sure we are in our worldviews. Our records are immemorial, lending us justified confidence in our sense of how the past few thousand years have gone. Our 0 A.D. and 2,000 B.C. predecessors, by contrast (or any 40,000 B.C. populations) were far too primitive to have such records, nor to believe that they had an understanding of how the past few thousand years had gone before their own lives.
Even in the very short term--two millennia of somewhat-contiguous written records and extant building and bodily remains--the crimes of the last invasion are apparent. How dearly bought was, if nothing else, Ireland! The mutilated children of the bulk of the continent are so far forgotten that no one will ever knowingly dig up the ashes of their bones. As with Iraq to Columbia, though, evidence from Ireland provides sufficient justification to strip all assets from the whole of Europe's toxic banking and peerage ranks, and return every last little Macron and "of Wales" floater to the care of their southern owners.
This one operates under no illusions that today's Terran can consider seriously, let alone remember, let alone acknowledge, prior peoples or cultures. We reserve some of our greatest contempt for the notion that we are not the masters of our own historical understanding. It is in these times of change, though, where one illusion replaces another, that there is some small hope for seeing past more layers of deception than one is ordinarily permitted. This ongoing transition from "Europeans are a 100% bad majority built on repression of the intelligent, humane, inventive colored" to "Europeans must have global minority advocacy to recognize their shared interests, since they're being taken over by stupid muds" permits us greater clarity in understanding the ways that the cycle has been laid out. As with all false dichotomies, something is being hidden. Tories fight Labour over the Falklands in part to distract from the politely-named "banking interests" that have already made the relevant decisions and managed reactions. In the case of race versus race, part of what is being concealed is the status of all current Europeans as merely the last age's Muslims.
The perfect conquest would be one in which the conquered believe they are the conquerors. Almost all Europeans now believe this. The phenomena are similar to that evoked by "the perfect spy is the man who doesn't know he's a spy," or by the implication that men who work a career as prison guards are more prisoners than those who serve 6 months for shoplifting. Euros' too-fragile psyches need to believe that they are free-thinkers responsible for their own destiny. Freely choosing to revere Yahweh; freely choosing to kill those who refused; freely choosing to embrace Somali rapists; freely choosing to pay $16,000 for insured medical treatments after waiting three hours in the lobby until all of the uninsured Guatemalan mothers have been served. "Our decisions are ours to make." Attempting to claim right or responsibility, by whatever means, is a validation of a Euro's self-image.
The leftist European and the rightist European each believe that their people conquered the world through brutality and trickery. One is ashamed, the other proud. One wants to share the spoils, the other to protect the spoils. The leftist wants to play conqueror; to bask in the ecstasy of tears of self-recrimination, whereby sacrificing one's civilization is proof of a more important component of their viewed consciousness than mere physical existence, namely the belief that they are and have always been conquerors. The rightist plays similarly, believing that, on the whole, his legacy is one of self-generated greatness. Unlike the leftist, he can perceive some elements of having been preyed upon by other groups, and so considers himself a realist. Yet the repeated utter destruction and reshaping of "his" societies by outside forces is beyond his purview; like the leftist, he too desperately needs to believe that he controls his own destiny to be capable of perceiving how even his purported greatest triumphs were not his.
Leftists want to see European history as a class struggle of too-powerful Europeans abusing women and the poor, and rightists want to see European history as powerful Europeans establishing modern civilization, when in fact the brief European historiography we possess shows quite the opposite of either fantasy. In truth, "western civilization" as we know it now is not the story with which we like to flatter ourselves.
Consider the mainstays of our reassuring bedtime stories: heroic Greeks invent enlightened democracy, which rightists view as white male landholding patriarchs establishing civilization, and which leftists view as "steps toward the universal franchise." Greeks then supposedly save themselves from armies of invading North Africans, though despite these triumphs, somehow inexplicably go into "decline," their culture effectively vanishing until it is rediscovered by a heavily North-African-influenced military colony based in Rome. Leftists prefer to view this as evil white patriarchs punishing persons-of-color, while yet maintaining salacious glimpses of future democratic enlightenment; rightists also prefer to view this as lusty white patriarchs punishing persons-of-color, while yet maintaining corrupting hints of future democratic globalism.
All of the purported heroism of these Greco-Roman entities are presented as a march of civilization, whether as a crumbling good ("right") or an evolving potential good ("left"). Yet in the whites' imaginations, the well-chronicled collapse of one after another of their civilizations is perceived as a series of successes. It is ludicrous how simplistically the fall of various northering North African military bases has been presented, for hundreds of years, as evidence of the ongoing success of western civilization. Even now, as nationalist stirrings in Europe have permitted formal archaeological reference to everyone in the world not having originated in Africa, the "classics" control white interpretation of their history. And well they should, for Europe's earlier destruction came from the imposters who truly controlled those cities, making of them the situs of fiscally beneficial incursions that central and northern Europeans of the time would never have wanted.
The proudly blameless Nu Euro nationalists, and their proudly blameful globalist counterparts, have long embraced what was done. Even the very recent sins are sufficient to damn them, let alone those committed during the millennia they have taken such pains to forget. If they could give up their precious lying Freudian patriarchs, and their Kinsey-god of child mutilation and child sacrifice, they might have grounds from which to claim inheritance rights by minuscule residual blood quantum. Even then, like a 2700 15% Danish 85% Arab ex-Muslim begging forgiveness from the shadows in his mind, it would be a steep path to walk.