Were the Huns really White people? Propaganda distorts reality. Such as that the “Huns” weren’t Mongol hordes from inner Asia, but rather an East-Germanic tribe from Southern Russia—and another tribe by the same name from South-Eastern the Netherlands.

The monk Bede attested to this in Historia ecclesiastica (Vol. 9) when he wrote that the Angles and Saxons are descendants of these “Huns”, grouping them with Frisians, Rugians, Danes, and Old Saxons. It means they were not Mongolic Asians but White Germanics.

These “Huns” are also attested in the Old English and Old Norse heroic poetry (such as Widsith, the Eddic poems, the Nibelungenlied tradition, and Þiðreks saga). And in these poems, the Huns cannot be placed as coming from inner Asia either. They were continental Germanics.

So why did we start saying the Huns were Mongols? Because of Catholic propaganda that needed to rally new Crusades against Eastern Europe (the Northern Crusades, 1198-1442 AD). The Huns were then rewritten into dog-faced Asiatics as a scare-tactic.

Modern scholars agree, such as in Otto J. Maenchen-Helfen’s The World of the Huns (1973), clarifying that these Huns were Southern-Russian Germanics already living there before the 4th century AD. He attests to the large share of Germanic names among the “Attillanic” elite. The name Attilla means “little father” in Old Germanic.

A 2016 German volume by the Dietrich von Bern-Forum likewise concludes there was even a conflation of two groups of Huns: “Hunnen” and “Hunen”. The one was an Eastern-European group (East Germanic), and the other a Westphalian group related to the West-Germanic tribe of the Chattuarii.

And finally, genetic research proved that this Eastern, Carpathian-Basin population of people was predominantly of European ancestry with only a small East-Asian component. I.e., they weren’t Mongols. The Eastern Huns were mostly White people, and the Western Huns were White Germanics.

Our race’s survival will not be decided at the ballot box. The time to start seceding from democratic governance, which hands hostile urban-diverse majorities full control over our future, is now. We are being held hostage, not merely by an elderly majority who vote in their self-interest, but by a global supply of infinite foreigners who’s interests are opposite ours.

Imagine you’re a 16-year-old White kid living in the USA or Germany today. For at least the next 34 years, until the year 2060, people over the age of 50 are projected to remain the electoral majorities. But by the time you turn 50, you likely won’t own a house, you’re still 20 to 25 years away from retirement, and as a White person you’ll be a member of a less-than-30% minority in the country your ancestors built, less than 10% in most of the big cities.

Read more

Are black people today truly affected by the consequences of a mythical systemic racism? No. If anything, they are the beneficiaries of expensive government programs to help them advance. When provocateurs say that we should hand Africans all our wealth—plus more—as reparations for slavery and colonialism, our response shall be simple: We’re not going to do that.

We don’t owe anyone anything. Europeans and their descendants have spend many centuries working long hours for 40 or more weeks a year, at least since the Industrial Age. Most other races at the time were living a life of subsistence farming. Or they hunted for a meal and spent the rest of the day with friends talking about their dreams.

Read more

When I posted on X that only males such as Zeus or Odin become truly powerful because they renunciate love, half the internet pummeled over me with community notes saying I was wrong. I conclude that the majority of the critical commenters were men who are deeply in love with their mothers, and they cannot imagine being powerless because of it.

But they are. To soothe themselves, the intellectual babies counter-argumented that Odin was married to Frigg and he made love to Jord to create Siegfried, or that Zeus slept around with tons of females, even raping them. It's as though my detractors thought renunciating love meant for a man to become a sterile homo uninterested in women.

Read more

Yes, I too, was once a follower of Saint Jordan Peterson, the Canadian mystic. I initially fell for his message that people should be “radical individuals pursuing their rational self-interest”, which he sometimes also called the idea of the sovereign individual [source]. And then I got disgusted with it.

Some people don’t even believe that radical indiv…

Read more

One ancient Roman historian noted a case of a wild Germanic warrior who, frothing form his mouth, plunged alone into a Roman formation and was promptly slashed in the throat by several short swords. The anecdote served as a warning t…

Read more

The nationalists of the 19th century believed the Battle had taken place near Detmold, Germany, where they erected their memorial, the Hermanndenkmal. ‘Hermann’ is the modern German name for Arminius, the Cherusker tribe chieftain who united several Germanic tribes against Rome.

But the Detmold claim was controversial, as was the statue itself, showing t…

Read more

Over 2,000 years ago, a girl from the forests of North-Western Germany was arranged to be married to an ugly, fat, 50-year-old man from Syria.

He was general Varus, previously stationed in Syria, now commanding three Roman legions in Germany. The girl’s father, Segestes, wanted to forge a deal between the Germans and the Romans. And so, he handed off his daughter in exchange for a house in Gaul.

She was just 16-years-old, forced to live at the Romans’ encampment as a tribute. Her name was Thusnelda, as reported by the Greek historian Strabo, though he must have misunderstood her Germanic name, which was undoubtedly “Thuruzhilda”, or Thor’s battle maid.

She must have been seething with rage, as the Norse goddess Freya in the Lay of Thrym, whose angry neck burst her necklace, but who would save her?

A 23-year-old man named Arminius also lived at this Roman camp, his name referring to his fiery blue eyes. He was Germanic, like her, and had risen through the Romans’ ranks as a mercenary after his father’s death. Velleius Paterculus attests Arminis was with the Romans fighting Rome’s enemies in Pannonia.

However, upon learning of the Roman plan to subdue his sacred Germania, he devised a plot to thwart the Roman advance.

Under these circumstances, Arminius and Thusnelda fell in love. Just two years later, Arminius won the general’s trust and convinced Varus to quell an uprising in the territories of the Marsi and Tencteri tribes.

But it was a trick. And Varus took the bait. On that fated day, a long-winding colon of legionnaires could be seen marching through the Teutoburg forest. The soldiers took a detour from their planned route back to their summer camp along the well-known Helweg.

And then, for four consecutive days, the Germans ambushed the Romans, slaughtering not only the ~14,000 soldiers, but also their ~7,000-strong support staff, leaving not a single survivor.

At age 25, Thusnelda gave birth to Arminius’ only son, Thumelicus, before she was kidnapped and dragged off to Ravenna in Italy, after having been paraded through the city of Rome as a captive of war.

Separated, Arminius was eventually assassinated at age 37. But the couple’s lives had already changed the course of history.

These two, Arminius and Thusnelda, are why Germans today are still speaking German instead of vulgar Latin. Without them, the Reformation of 1517 would never have happened, and Protestant Germanics would never have left Europe to found the United States.

American commentator Ben Shapiro of the failing Daily Wire famously stated in 2017, “I don’t give a damn about the ‘browning of America.’ Color doesn’t matter. Ideology does.” But living as disembodied spirits that reject their bodies lies at the heart of modern despair. Besides, spirits are racial.

In fact, we would never have experienced diversity, multiculturalism, or equality if we hadn’t first undergone the surgical split devised by René Descartes, the French philosopher who posited that minds and bodies were separate from one another. And ever since, the West collectively dived into the madness of pure rational existence disconnected from physical experience.

Read more

“Maybe the Europeans should have thought about all that back when they were colonizing Africa in the 19th century." That’s what “British-American” broadcaster Mehdi Hasan responded when a random X user complained about the flood of black players competing for European soccer teams at the World Cup.

Hasan is of Muslim Indian heritage whose ancestors hail from the region of Hyderabad, a region that was conquered, colonized, and Islamized by Islamic forces during the 16th century and during the Deccan Sultanates centuries before. I.e., Hasan is himself a product of Islamic colonialism. Yet, he has a mouth full of European colonialism, aggressively claiming Europeans “should have thought about all that” (meaning, black mass migration to Europe).

Mehdi Hasan also posted on Jan 8th this year, “Make American Planes Crash Again”, referring to 9/11. He also called the British grooming gangs “unproven” just before it was proven that 250,000 White girls had been raped by mostly Muslim Pakistani child rape squads. Hasan is also known for repeatedly calling replacement immigration into Europe a “Neo-Nazi conspiracy theory”.

Read more

The case of Henry Nowak, the young man who was stabbed to death by a Sikh murderer, uncovered that British police officers hold strong prejudices against White people. It is no different in any other Western or formerly majority-White nation.

Where there’s smoke, there’s fire. A single accusation of racism lodged against our people by a malafide actor convinces the general public that something must be wrong with us. If this is the new reality, then how do we start defending ourselves when government, media, academia and education, police forces, and even archaeology and medicine have turned against our people’s survival?

It’s time to start pooling our time, effort, and money toward a globally operating pro-White organization that can move policy.

Legal Assistance in Hate Speech Cases

When Shiloh Hendrix caught a feral man preying on her child at a children’s playground, she came to her child’s rescue and called the man a Nigger. Being recorded, soon her “racist video” went viral for all to see, except for the part where her children were being harrassed.

Last month, a US court denied a motion to dismiss charges against ‘Rochester woman’ Hendrix. And the ADL, the Jewish Anti-Defamation League, warns of “White Supremacists” who helped raise funds to support the case against Hendrix. Some have even called for Hendrix’ children to be removed by child protection services.

As in the other case with Karmelo Anthony, it is blatantly obvious that a large group of people living in the West easily confuse reality with their desired version of it.

Some want White people to be the only problem in their lives, rather than the kind stewards of civilization we generally are. Cornered by diversity and mass migration, White people all too often find themselves with their backs against the wall, while those who depend on us for their survival threaten to overthrow us, against their better judgment.

Enough is enough. If we cannot speak out about both our experienced reality outside of the house, or about our interests at home, then we cannot defend ourselves. Defending our freedom to speak, then, becomes the main objective of any pro-White movement, even before we acquire land or political influence.

To secure a future for our people, we must offer them legal assistance. The idea is to organize the Reaction initially as an insurance association for members. In case a member comes under attack from the authorities due to speech transgressions, the organization should be able to provide support:

1. By paying for a lawyer, or perhaps by supporting a lawyer associated with the Reaction;

2. By running crowdfunds and use the Reaction’s (and members’) social media channels to draw attention to the case, and ask the general public for donations that may be used toward the defense case;

3. By influencing the media through interviews and debates;

4. By prosecuting those who attack White people and White interests, ‘ADL style’.

Effectively, we will do what so many ethnocentric associations out there are currently doing, namely defend our own, and prosecute the enemy.

If Shiloh Hendrix stands to lose her children due to the utterance of a single word, then, henceforth, anyone using the word ‘cracker’ in an anti-White context should stand to lose everything they own as well. We’ll be playing a game of tit for tat.

A Global Membership Association

Alongside the above developments, the Reaction strives to become a global membership association. Initially, as it is today, the Reaction will be a Substack platform where people can subscribe to a monthly payment. These subscribers will eventually be converted into founding members of the future membership association.

Now, our goal is not to establish physical clubhouses that are expensive real-estate to rent, and that require staff to clean toilets and lock doors. Instead, the association will cut such physical costs by remaining as virtual as possible, barring the need for office space in case employees need to be hired to run operations (such as membership subscriptions, or a members’ magazine).

As a mostly virtual yet global association, the Reaction can then operate globally with ease. We can then use the collected membership fees toward operations in Europe, the USA, Australia, South Africa, New Zealand or wherever there is a need for pro-White backing.

Branching Out into Politics and Physical Protection

The best way to deal with an attacker is to physically stop him. This is now an almost overlooked element of ‘real’ leadership, the kind that moves physical problems out of the way. In today’s world, too much of what is called political leadership revolves around changing words and definitions in order to deceive ourselves that a problem has been taken care of. For example, when we call migrant knife murders ‘youth crime’.

After establishing the Reaction as a pro-White legal defense and prosecution system, operating globally, our logical next step will be to support outspoken members’ bid for politics, and also to put our members high up in the hierarchies of militaries, police, and other ‘physical’ organizations. It’s important that we gain control of the systems now working against us.

Aside from that, a good portion of our activities shall involve the study of guerilla warfare and the training of modern urban and rural (drone) warfare tactics, so that we regain or maintain the upper hand over our enemies’ control of the globalist infrastructure.

I’ve spoken about the Germanic man’s honor, but then there’s also his loyalty. The purity of a man’s heart reveals itself best in his loyalty. But this loyalty is contrasted by the Germanic people’s notorious unreliability, as many foreigners including Julius Caesar were known to complain about.

When for example the Vikings accepted a treaty with Frankish king Carloman II, the Frankish people were deeply upset when, upon their king’s death in the year 884 AD, the Vikings resumed their raids into Frankish territory.

Why didn’t the Vikings respect the legal treaty anymore? From the Viking point of view, they had fulfilled their duties. They had, indeed, resisted plundering West Francia during the reign of King Carloman. But once he died, their oath was voided.

So this is how the riddle of Germanic unreliability is solved: Germanic legal loyalty is tied to living people, but not to dead treaties. When the British ultimately invented the Magna Carta and the rule of law that transcends people, mainland Germanics still believed in Herrschaft, or rather the rule of a Lord over his people.

When in the year 1066 AD the Norwegian King Harald, nicknamed the Hard One, died at the Battle of Stamford Bridge, the Danish King Sveinn instantly declared that peace between Norway and Denmark was now over, since the Norwegian King had died, and, therefore, Danish loyalty to maintain peace with the Norwegians had now ended.

Among our Germanic peoples, a caste of chosen warriors had to protect its honor with weapons.

This post is part of series drawing from the wisdom of Jan de Vries’ book “Die geistige Welt der Germanen”, or the spiritual world of the Germanic peoples.

This principle took a special place in Germanic society. The courage these men praised was that of the combative man, his fearlessness when faced with death, his defiant attitude toward fate.

But this didn’t mean they thought life was cheap. One can only give up life lightheartedly, with a lighthearted joke on one’s lips, when one has accepted death as one’s fate, and one has thus renounced life.

Courage grows to its highest perfection precisely in the face of death. This personal courage in that moment of highest danger was common to both men and women.

During the age of migrations, men moved their tribes around with women and children in tow, but when confronted by a superior opponent, the women defended themselves as much as the men did.

Tacitus, the Roman historian, wrote about how women would help men back on their feet who had fallen to the ground in battle, sometimes flashing their naked bosom to remind these men they should keep fighting to prevent their women from being captured by an enemy.

At the defeat of the Cimbri tribe in the year 101 BC, the women defended their wagon fort to the last drop of blood. When their men tried fleeing the enemy, as ranks broke down, they would beat their men, commanding them to return to the battlefield, and when all hope was lost, the women strangled their children and strung themselves up, because Germanic women knew it was better to be dead than a slave.

Now remind yourselves of today’s situation with the quarter million girls raped in the United Kingdom. With the mass invasion into our European lands. You all know where it stands.

Never lose your smile.

What are the highest virtues of the Germanic man? The answer is: Courage, loyalty, and honor. Of course, courage comes first. One must always be ready to secure life by fighting, spear and shield in hand.

This post is part of series drawing from the wisdom of Jan de Vries’ book “Die geistige Welt der Germanen”, or the spiritual world of the Germanic peoples.

Among the Germanic peoples, there is no distinction between civilian and warrior. In the old time, every man was expected to fight for his right. Even for the poet, wounded in battle, there was no greater end than to praise his King one last time.

Germanic song lauds the courageous test in battle, not the untiring work of the farmer. What counts are powerful blows, not the laborer’s diligent work.

Though slaves (thralls) were described as having a swarthy appearance, dirty black nails and bent backs from doing hard work, the free man was educated in the trades of a warrior.

As it was sung in the Rígsthula, or the Song of the Old, Wise, Mighty, and Strong:

There at home
Jarl grew up,
learned the shield to shake,
to fix the string,
the bow to bend,
arrows to shaft,
javelins to hurl,
spears to brandish,
horses to ride,
dogs to let slip,
swords to draw,
swimming to practice.

Free men are expected to develop their bodies for combat, and to never shy away from an opportunity to make use of their fighting will. The slave bows to his conqueror, whereas the warrior secures his freedom.

The old German writer, philosopher, and World War I veteran Ernst Jünger has become a household name among the online right, especially in Germany itself.

Jünger is read by young people who reject modernity, especially because of his earlier writings on aristocratic masculinity, as in his book In Stahlgewittern (Storm of Steel), and because of his call to a guerrilla-style rebellion against democratic society such as in Der Waldgang (The Forest Passage).

But though Jünger’s call for a new aristocracy might sound archaic and romantic, his idea was actually ahead of his time, for he didn’t believe in a fixed hereditary aristocracy of long lineages of firstborn sons, but rather of an aristocracy in principle open to all and based only on one’s willingness and ability to offer protection to one’s people.

Today, indeed, such an elite willing and able to protect one’s own people is effectively non-existent. European nobility has traded away its duties for the spoils of globalist exploitation. The American corporate rich never had a reason to protect anything.

Whatever the present globalist elite thinks they are doing, they are effectively genociding native Europeans for the fictional belief in some kind of worldwide integration of all races and religions into one giant bureaucracy.

Now, I don’t know if we should call upon the living descendants of the German Emperor such as Paul Herzog von Oldenburg or the House of Hohenzollern. What matters at this point is that our peoples are in need of protection, so that we may together resist the excesses of globalism.

In my view, the Germanic world of Europe should find a way to break free entirely from globalism and become global integrations’ antipode. We should become a race of rural resisters, if you will, a people who start shunning big city life in favor of life in small towns.

A return to tradition, indeed, but under the leadership of an elite who remember the words noblesse oblige, and who are motivated by winning victories greater than any bank account can contain, namely to rekindle our people’s innate vigor and to redraw the map of the world to our benefit.

German philosopher of history Oswald Spengler believed Western civilization was driven by the prime symbol of boundless space, a ‘Faustian culture characterized by a strong feeling for the infinite and a tragic striving for the unattainable’. That is why we explored the seas, the continents, the bottoms of the oceans, and outer space. But we have let small minds dictate our modern future in the form of the vague, senseless ideals of the United Nations’ Sustainable Development Goals. What we need is a return to the sort of Herculean works that favor Western people’s nature again. In order to achieve that, we need to become masters of space and time.

According to research by professor Philip Zimbardo, in his book The Time Paradox, Jews and Protestant Whites are the most future-oriented people in the world. It is no surprise, then, that White Protestant civilization captured the world, and that Jews are mightily successful within it. However, in recent times, globalist institutions such as the United Nations, the World Economic Forum, or the European Union have begun to steer our race’s destiny toward an intensely unwanted future. To prevent catastrophe, we shall have to seize the helm of this lost ship. And that means envisioning a better future.

Unattainable Goals

Other psychological research says that people will follow any leader who offers them any kind of vision, no matter how crooked. So, when you present people with a vision of gender confusion and teen euthanasia, many will blindly follow. Why does the European Union, for example, feel the need to aggressively crack down on the small nation of Hungary, a nation of barely 10 million, and with a seething hatred seek to acquaint Hungarian children with the gay and trans spectrum when hardly a child born in good health to supportive parents will naturally care for such perversities?

The great ideologues of our time have come to believe that their own perverse projections can be made into absolute reality, and must be enforced absolutely to impose them onto innocent, unsuspecting people. We see a similar rabid fervor among those who believe in the United Nations’ “SDG” or Sustainable Development Goals. Those goals are incredibly vague and subjective, open to interpretation and abuse, and could either be declared achieved today or not in a million years.

Take for example the UN goal to end poverty. One should be poor today without being able to afford a cell phone, but one should have been rich in the past if one had received an extra handful of grapes. Who decides what baseline of wealth is above the level of abject poverty? If the measure is material, then no one will ever have enough. If the measure is spiritual, then it is the populations of the West who are poor.

Moreover, the UN seems to think wealth is a sort of constant, when in reality, wealth fluctuates over time by nature: rural Norwegians of the 1960s were still starving in their valleys each year as the snow shut off road access to the outside towns. Norway was considered part of the Third World back then, though it is now, per capita, among the top wealthiest nations in the world. Yet, Norwegian wealth today cannot be compared to the situation in Africa, where men can roam free in light clothes every night of the year, whereas Norwegians stay indoors due to the cold at least 8 out of 12 months.

And this doesn’t mean that Norwegians will stay rich. Rather, we should understand wealth as a temporary benefit that needs to be put to use wisely for a harsher future coming our way. So, the Norwegian bet nearly all of their newfound oil wealth on the US economy by investing in American corporations—which I think is an incredibly stupid thing to do. Now, Norway will stand or fall along with whatever the Americans end up doing, and it might, in fact, be China that takes over the status of global superpower soon.

More problematically, in order to achieve the next goal of zero hunger, the United Nations apparently thinks it’s best to force all of humanity to eat vegan food. Bureaucrats want to deny all human beings the healthiest and most nutritious food, namely fresh cuts of fatty red meat. Starving people of animal fats and animal proteins is not the way to solve the problem of hunger, but it is a way of declaring the problem “solved”. Even so, as long as humanity continues having high birth rates in some parts of the world, those parts shall remain hungry. Logistics dictates that some regions will always remain poorly served. Will that require constant mass migrations from underserved to overserved regions?

My point is: the lofty UN goals cannot be solved practically because the problems themselves are subjective ideas untested with physical reality, logistics, and energy or materials constraints. They are the product of aloof minds.

The UN also wants to reduce inequalities within and among countries. How are we supposed to reduce inequalities within Western countries if we keep importing the poorest people from around the world, people who arrived without any savings and without any commercially viable skills? And even if the West were to import the best and most skilled foreigners, wouldn’t that drain their home countries of skill, so that those lands will stay poor and underdeveloped? Either way, by either robbing the labor or the brains of foreign nations, that can never solve inter-national inequality. It can only worsen it, widen the gap.

Also, will solving this problem of inequality perhaps require the total racial miscegenation of all people with all people, namely to redistribute potentially superior genes from one population to the world? Even so, this will not affect the many different terrains people have chosen to live in. What good, exactly, are genes that combat the cold when injected into a desert environment? Or are we going to practice climate Marxism, too, and turn the deserts and the arctic ice sheets into Nordic birch tree forests?

Or what is the purpose of Asian genes for digesting grains injected into people who cannot grow grain crops in areas with unpredictable waterflow? Indeed, pastoralists arose in those areas where it made sense to herd cows and sheep around from one pasture to another, chasing the sun and the rain. No amount of planning from whatever global government is ever going to solve inequality between nations. It’s not going to happen, because the inequality serve human survival.

The 17 Social Development Goals are the goals of naive people who have codified their feelings into policy without testing reality. None of the goals will ever be fully achieved, and most won’t be achieved at all, simply because the goals cannot be achieved due to logistical, material, human, and energy constraints. To think these goals were supposed to be achieved by the year 2030 signifies both a ridiculous amount of hubris among our globalist leaders, but also warns of a dangerous disillusionment that must be gripping the global elites when they find out that banning pastoralism means mass starvation for certain people, and that forcing everyone to eat grains will only introduce new logistical challenges.

I speak of danger, because how will the progressive-delusional complex respond when their goals cannot be achieved, not even remotely? We can predict their responses by reading about the history of the Soviet Union: people of the Free World will experience harsher repression, greater government control, and perverse erosions of personal freedoms. Until even those responses ultimately prove to be fruitless. And then what? Collapse. The collapse of the European Union is inevitable, as is the collapse of the United Nations, and of the globalized world. People will look back on globalism’s brief history as a time of delusion promoted by a deranged leadership.

Herculean Works

Instead of vague goals, we need Herculean works. We need concrete targets for practical men of action. Years ago, I did a brainstorm and came up with the idea for an Age of Herculean Works, but some of my ideas, though concrete, were floating on the wings of science fiction. I imagined racing solar-powered space-sailships on a mission to trapping planet Venus’s surface heat. Perhaps, someday, we will terraform Venus and Mars, but none of this will happen without a solid foundation for life on Earth.

Our reasoning should not begin with an outer space that our ancestors believed wasn’t a physical space, but a place for our souls to gather in after death. When we realize that we, and the majority of our race, are going to be living in Europe and North-Western Eurasia, then we know we will have to build functioning societies there. This implies we will need to conquer a fertile territory to defend, and that requires building defenses.

Reasoning from this angle, our concrete goals become clear:

1. We must reconquer Europe politically and oust the far-left neo-Bolsheviks presently in charge who are murdering our nations with mass Islamic immigration.

2. We may not be able to win this power back through elections, as though we might vote ourselves out of troubles we never voted ourselves into. And so, we shall have to build guerilla armies and wider support networks, to gradually grind the New Bolshevik machinery to a halt.

3. Living in Europe, we are stuck with the geopolitical threats posed by aspirations for a Russian Empire and by Ottoman dreams of White subjugation, if not also North-African attempts ate conquering Southern Europe. To pre-empt such threats, a German-led European unity might have to install its own leadership in both Russia and Turkey, either overtly or covertly.

4. The German and Germanic lands appear instantly as the center of White survivaldom, on the condition that we aggressively begin promoting White family formation and the mass remigration of unwanted people. To take back what is ours, at least during a brief period of time, our peoples shall have to take in interest in producing large families.

5. We shall have to drag the criminals who put us in this dire situation before tribunals, for their punishments should be so harsh that history will remember what they have done, for at least centuries to come.

6. For example, the industrial-scale attempt at making children gender-neutral by cutting of their genitals and feeding them hormone blockers must be punished as though it were a Gender Holocaust. Every doctor, physician, psychologist, politician, journalist, or related support staff member involved in administering genital mutilation or “gender-affirmative care” must be imprisoned for life, and we must investigate whether death penalties are more appropriate.

7. For the takeover to succeed, we must be ruthless. And in order to be ruthless, we must have trained men. In fact, we need men who are not only well-trained, but who are also capable of thinking independently of higher authorities, so that, in the case of ambushes or a breakdown of command, the lower-ranking outfits can still achieve local victories. We are no longer interested in dumb men following orders. We are interested in creating wolf packs that can defend their own survival independently of other packs.

Mastering Time and Space

Envisioning such concrete Herculean works (as mentioned above, along with many other goals) will not in and of itself mean that we are prepared to achieve them. This preparation begins by hardening the souls and the minds of men for the battles that may not be lost. And that requires a change of attitude toward the world. In fact, it requires that we, men of the West—White men—must adopt a much more independent relation toward the rest of the world.

Since the world wars, and especially due to decisions made by Winston Churchill (who made the British armies dependent on Arab oil), the West has become so dependent on foreign energy that, by default, we have succumbed to the demands of that foreign world, too. To secure our need for foreign oil and gas, without which Hitler (who needed the oil fields of Baku in Azerbaijan, and the oil deliveries from Iraq) was condemned to lose his, we have begun bowing our heads to the demands of the Third World. And what they demanded was “equality”, or rather: for them to turn themselves into us by erasing us from existence and from history.

We need a change of attitude. We need to find a way of removing ourselves from global supply lines while managing to thrive without having access to them. If that were not a possibility at all, then there is always the ultimate possibility of sabotaging the global supply system by attacking its chokepoints. Oar end game is to free ourselves from globalist constraint. Our mission, in this scenario, were not to conquer and control the Strait of Hormuz or the South Chinese Sea, but rather to make global trade impossible by other means, forcing the powers of the world to return to regional governance.

There are many ways to achieve the end of globalism. But there is only one way to inspire the men of our race to join in the tasks required. And that is: to instill a new faith in the hearts of our men, a faith that carries forth the strengths of our ancestors. When we begin seeing time not merely as a present moment but as a whole emerging from the past and flowing toward a future of our own choosing, then we can root ourselves confidently in such timelessness, and, without any doubting, expand the space that we inherited from our forebears.

Let us master time and space. Let us work to leave behind a world that both our ancestors and our future progeny can reflect upon with great pride.

Once upon a time, I attended an event with the British historian Tom Holland at De Balie in Amsterdam. I had taken an interest in the historian because of his Channel 4 documentary, Islam: The Untold Story, in which he questioned the traditional account of the Prophet Mohammed’s life and suggested that much of the Islamic origin story had never happened. However, I was unprepared for Mr. Holland’s apparent preoccupation with certain disturbed sexual themes.

During the talk, Holland appeared, in my view, to praise—indeed, to gloat over—the fact that Roman males engaged in intercourse with boys, emphasizing that it was a truly masculine act. He inserted these remarks into the middle section of his otherwise impressive and engaging hour-long discussion of how Christianity supplanted the Roman Empire.

Just recently, Holland made similar comments at another event:

“For the Romans, the [sex] binary was between the male Roman citizen and everybody else, and the male Roman citizen could do what he liked to everybody else. So you know you're a Roman slave owner, you can do what you like to your slaves sexually, any it doesn't matter what the gender of the slave is.”

Holland, of course, confuses legal permission with actual practice or widespread desire. Even if slave-owning Romans were legally permitted to act as they wished toward their slaves, that does not mean ordinary Roman males were commonly attracted to other males. Or is Holland subtly suggesting that homosexuality was the pagan norm, and that Christianity—now portrayed as ‘dark and evil’—wrongly suppressed a rainbow-sexual spectrum?

Oh, and then he added, “It doesn't matter what the age is.”

Tom Holland functions as a pedophilia apologist. Perhaps he himself harbors such desires—I cannot prove that—but he appears to leverage his extensive historical knowledge to normalize perverted inclinations by misrepresenting the moral norms of the past. Based on his public statements, I can only describe the historian as a sexually perverted man who seeks to persuade others that male sexual relations with boys and men are somehow “masculine.” In essence, he acts as a globohomo puppet master attempting to falsify European moral traditions.

We know, as a matter of biological reality, that men do not desire sex with other men or boys merely because of some pre-Christian moral hegemony. Christianity did not need to teach men to “act straight.” The majority of mammalian males do not engage in homosexual behavior. Apparent “humping” among wolves and lions typically serves to establish dominance hierarchies rather than sexual gratification; such acts generally involve no penetration or orgasm.

It’s the same with the bonobo, once hailed as the LGBT version of their more warlike chimpanzees’ cousins. But, as usual, scientists were only projecting their own perversions onto a race of animals they didn’t care to study well enough. Scientific observations indicate that bonobos do not primarily resolve conflicts through sex, nor do males routinely engage in homosexual intercourse. Adolescent males may engage in non-penetrative mounting as practice for heterosexual mating, not as an expression of same-sex orientation.

Thus, Tom Holland is not merely a pedophilia apologist; he is also advancing falsehoods. There was never a time in Roman history when males engaged in same-sex activity at scale. While a perverted element certainly existed within the Roman elite—including certain emperors—many lurid stories may have been exaggerated or fabricated by later writers to discredit unfit rulers, such as the story of the odd emperor who went out to “eat snail” by emasculating boys, eating theirs, and then raping them.

We, too, have a perverted elite today. Consider the “Pink Mafia” associated with figures such as Peter Thiel, or the Epstein network, which implicated individuals including Donald Trump and Bill Gates. Yet none of these behaviors reflect the broader sexual norms of our society. The notion that capitalist or Christian forces sexually repress the modern population is ludicrous. Never before have people faced such intense propaganda encouraging same-sex experimentation or surgical alteration of the body—and yet, participation remains minimal.

It’s as if people are naturally straight!

Even left-leaning women express shock upon learning of cases in which a baby cries for his mother while his two gay male guardians mock him for lacking one. A cited Biden-era survey suggested that thirty-odd percent of teenagers now self-identify as LGBT. In reality, such figures are inflated; many adolescents answer insincerely when asked provocative sexual questions, viewing them as “government crap.” Others who claim a gay identity may never act on it. Notably, self-identified lesbian girls in the West are disproportionately likely to become pregnant by men.

Historian Holland went on to say, “You can just treat [the slaves] as you want, and of course Christianity radically, radically changes that.”

No, Christianity did not radically overhaul human morality by converting innate pedophilic or homosexual tendencies into repressed heterosexual domesticity. It did not need to, because the majority of Roman males never exhibited sexual interest in other males or boys. Moreover, the slave-owning merchant class in the broader Mediterranean world included significant Semitic (Phoenician/Carthaginian) elements whose cultural practices differed from those of native European populations.

If anything, morality carries a racial dimension. Europeans may be slow to recognize this, but their adversaries understand it well. That is why mass migration of Semitic, Arab, and sub-Saharan African populations into Europe is pursued—so that “diversity” can erase the healthy, historically superior European moral framework by replacing the underlying people. Morality cannot simply be imposed through cultural hegemony, as Antonio Gramsci imagined. When Bud Light attempted this with Dylan Mulvaney, its core rural, straight, white male customer base rejected the campaign outright. It didn’t make anyone gay or trans-accepting.

Polygamy, for instance, remains widespread in North Africa, where married men often have three or four wives on average. This leaves a surplus of unmarried men whose sexual energies may turn inward toward other males and boys at home, or outward toward the women and children of host populations abroad. Videos on platforms such as TikTok frequently depict Muslim men and boys in cross-dressed performances suggestive of such dynamics.

That may very well be their racial morality, but it is not ours and it was not abolished by Christianity, only reaffirmed.

What figures like Tom Holland appear to advance is the imposition of a North African-style morality onto the West, allowing personal perversions to blend into the resulting cultural mixture. Transgenderism, overt homosexuality, and fixation on boys all reflect, in this view, elements of Semitic and Middle Eastern matriarchal influences rather than European patriarchal traditions.

It is time for the remnants of the European patriarchate to unite in moral outrage, regain motivation, and fight for what is right. It is time to end the imposition of these perversions. We have been humiliated long enough.

The idea that state actors have made guerrilla warriors obsolete because of drones is false. Rather, guerrilla warfare will co-opt drone warfare to create new opportunities. And it’s not about having access to the latest tech. It’s about mimicry, deception, and winning psychological battles.

How would it work, hypothetically, for a non-state actor (such as the infamous IRA) to take on a state military’s drone army? Though the presence of state drones in urban settings greatly diminishes guerrilla operations, it isn’t necessary to head-on confront the state’s drone operators. Rather, guerrillas can use the idea of drone warfare against the state.

Strategically, guerrilla actors best stay out of surveillance drones’ reach and simply remain unseen. Facial detection systems may be implemented by the state, so that once-exposed guerrillas can be targeted in a crowd. To avoid this, guerrillas will learn never to expose themselves as guerrillas in urban/civilian settings.

In recent years, former guerrilla snipers have become drone operators themselves, using commercially available "Temu" drones fitted with lethal explosives. Cheap drones have leveled the playing field. Yemen’s Houthi rebels (likely working under Iranian or Chinese command) have successfully used their much cheaper equipment against very expensive US-Israeli rockets.

Guerrilla drones, then, may be used in several ways:

• Cheap solution to the enemy’s expensive defenses.

• Precisely to keep guerrillas away from surveillance, by using drones to pester the state enemy.

• By repaying drone surveillance with guerrilla drone surveillance in order to scope out what the state actors are doing.

• By disguising deadly drones as commercial toy-drones, such as the ones commonly operated by kids, causing confusion in certain situations.

• By producing large numbers of ‘fake’ (flimsy, non-lethal) drones that look the part. Only including a small number of ‘deadlies’ among them, so that state actors are again confused.

• Imagine a drone swarm of 100 flimsy fakes, but there is 1 deadly, thus causing psychological problems for state actors dealing with the fakes (depleting their defenses while missing the deadly one).

• By making guerrilla drones look and sound just like the state’s drones, thus terrorizing the local population and blaming the state for these rogue drones.

• Using very small surveillance drones to find state drone operators, and attack operators using conventional (cheap) ambush or sniper methods.

• Using drones that only produce disorienting sounds effects, such as grenade explosions or gunfire to rattle state actors.

• Booby-trapped drones that look like state drones. When moved, they go off.

This is not an exhaustive list of ideas, but it is clear that urban guerrilla warriors can use drones for effective and affordable psychological warfare against a state actor in the region. If done well, the origin of the guerrilla drones should be kept unknown/secret, so that drone operators cannot be traced (no face ID).

Guerrilla drone warfare can work well in any settings, since the aims are the same as former sniper warfare: to cause psychological fear & debilitate the enemy's organization, for example by keeping the enemy indoors. Since drones can be operated relatively autonomously or even perfectly anonymously, guerrillas can blame the state for drone attacks, or at least convince the public thereof using media propaganda.

Keeping costs low may be the bottleneck for non-state actors. However, since the goal is to instill fear, you can imagine a cheap drone carrying the 3D-printed frame of an expensive professional drone. A fly pretending to be a hawk. Think of a fake flimsy drone that only looks and sounds dangerous. Just once in a while, you slip in a real dangerous drone to cause psychological damage. So out of 100 cheap fakes, only 1 is real and deadly.

On occasion, you could direct a cheap swarm of 100s of fakes, but only a handful are deadlies, used for targeting high-profile targets. This would destroy the state actors' morale.

Catholic primary school taught me about the Dark Ages, but little did I know that our Dutch Calvinist curriculum was peddling anti-Catholic propaganda. Did Europe really fall under the “night of superstition” during the 5th through 15th centuries AD until the Protestant Reformation came and paved the way for the Enlightenment?

Not every country teaches kids about any Dark Ages. Italians call it La Decadenza, and it refers to the decadence of the late-stage Roman Empire before the fall. But the image of Europeans groveling like animals in a hellish darkness cast upon the earth by a Satanic papacy—well, that’s Protestant propaganda. It never happened.

According to the Google Ngram Viewer, occurrences of the phrase “Dark Ages” didn’t become popular until around the mid-18th century, and its popularity dropped starkly after the 1830s. From 1740–1780 AD, the British evangelical Methodists established themselves and began exporting their new brand of Christian faith to the USA as well. Indeed, it was this evangelical movement that first popularized the idea of the European “Dark Ages.”

The evangelicals juxtaposed these Dark Ages with the “light” of the Reformation. They spoke frequently of “popish darkness.” This makes perfect sense geopolitically, for the Anglo colonization of the Americas gave Protestants (the Atlantic nations of Britain and the USA) the power to push back against the Catholic Holy Roman Empire.

Talk of the Dark Ages dissipated after the 1830s—because that’s when the last Holy Roman Emperor, Francis II, died, after having abdicated in 1806. With the emperor gone and without a continuation, Catholic power diminished, and Europe was blinded by the Reformation’s light.

In a livestream episode (The Great Johannes stream #64), I explored at length the unintended consequences of the Reformation. According to author Brad S. Gregory in The Unintended Reformation, religious fragmentation turned our societies into the woke dystopia. Individualism, consumerism, moral and cultural relativism, the excesses of capitalism, pluralism, diversity and tolerance, and scientific atheism all emerged as consequences of the Protestant Reformation.

Johannes MK's Newsletter

The Unintended Reformation [stream #64]

Watch on YouTube »…

Listen now

a year ago · 1 like · Johannes M. Koenraadt

The Protestant propaganda stuck because Europeans, having a guilt-based morality, need to have something to feel bad about in order to feel good. We need to paint the past as backward so that we may cast the present as having progressed toward something better. If the past hadn’t been exactly dark and gloomy, then we can’t really claim to be progressing. And so, Catholicism was now evil and the Enlightenment’s science was now good.

Dig deeper and you’ll find that these Dark Ages never happened. Enter the Phantom Time Hypothesis by German author Heribert Illig. He claims that about three centuries (297 years to be exact) were inserted into the Western timeline—namely the height of the “Dark Ages” from 614–911 AD—for political reasons: to place the reign of Holy Roman Emperor Otto III in the year 1000 AD.

That year, Otto III, supported by Pope Sylvester II, made a pilgrimage from Rome to Aachen (Charlemagne’s alleged birthplace). The idea was to revive the Catholic Christian “Holy Roman Empire,” i.e., to sell it to a larger audience. The Pope, the Emperor, and their intellectual henchmen were able to pull off this time heist because the people of Europe were largely illiterate and mostly didn’t know what year it was.

Archaeology backs it up: We find few to no artifacts from the alleged Dark Ages. Illig points out that we also found almost no corpses from that period. Another pointer is that there is no discontinuity in German poetry from the 6th to the 10th century AD, as though there was no stylistic break.

In conclusion, the Dark Ages weren’t dark—the Dark Ages never happened. The phrase “Dark Ages” says more about Protestant Enlightenment propaganda than it does about history. It served to help transfer religious power away from Catholic Europe to the new Protestant transatlantic realm.

And that process is something The Reaction intends to reverse. With the decline of globalism, the Anglo-American Empire is expected to wane, and with it, the ideals of the Enlightenment (individualism, materialism, robots, AI) shall disappear.

The light from the shadow shall renew Europe’s soul!

Join the Reaction!

This limited edition reprint was produced and shipped in 2009. It comes with the original shipping container, including the Danish postage stamps, with the reprint still curled up inside. It has never been put on display in a frame. The reprint has been stored inside the original shipping container since it arrived.

Starting bid: €15,000 (to make a meaningful contribution to The Reaction)

• The reprint (#212/1,000) curled up inside the container

• The original shipping container with postage stamps etc.

Inquiries: mail@thereaction.org