When Medieval writers criticized papal excesses, the Pope responded that they were attacking Christ. It was, all agreed, His Church. So any criticism of the Church was an assault on Christ.

Today any criticism of the ongoing program of genocide against whites, immigration and assimilation, is an attack on helpless minorities. The picture of a critic of Church nepotism in 1500 would be a man standing beneath the Cross and insulting Christ. The picture of a person objecting to massive immigration and demands for “assimilation,” intermarriage, in ALL white countries and ONLY in white countries is a mob mincing blacks or, above all, anaziwhowantstokillsixmillionjews.

All this is thrillingly novel to the numbskulls who excuse their idiocy by their Youth or their Idealism. But it is no different from intellectual bigotry down through the ages. The novice monk who whipped and starved himself mercilessly and said he would follow Christ’s command to do unto others as he did to himself was exactly like the self-flagellating white of today who thinks denouncing and destroying his own people is the Highest Morality.

And to top it all off, they call it Modern Thinking.

One of the themes of this blog is temporal provincialism. This is the absolute conviction by each generation that every other generation fooled itself, but this one has it right. Today everyone talks about how the religious Inquisition was obviously wrong. But everybody is convinced we cannot have anything similar today because it would be obvious to the intellectuals.

The lesson of the Inquisition is that a fundamental error only occurs when the priesthood agrees with it. At that it never occurred to the clergy that a mistake could not be systemic unless THEY allowed it to be part of the system. They assumed that what they and their colleagues greed to in their wisdom was right.

Every generation makes exactly the same assumption. And every generation is wrong.

Including this one.

There is a battle going on over free speech. Like every generation that had exactly the same debate, this one thinks it is different. So there is never any debate about whether the “bigots” might have a, any more than any other generation ever considered that the heretics of its time might have a point. The agreement was always that they were absolutely wrong and useless and the only question was whether they should be tolerated.

If you understand temporal provincialism you will see that in every generation this agreement has been the problem. Free speech has a practical value, but only because what is most absolutely agreed on in any generation not only can be wrong, but almost certainly IS wrong.

Today all authorities who are allowed to publish, much less those who are PAID to do so, agree that any discussion of racial differences is entirely evil. It’s only there to hurt minorities, right?

Logically if you look at history the way all the historians THINK they do, you would expect that the most agreed-upon assumption is where our weakness is. But due to temporal provincialism, no generation EVER looks THERE.

“Fool me once, shame on you, fool me twice, shame on me.”

The first job requirement for a respectable conservative is that he treat leftists with respect. He is talking to somebody who identifies with the position that said:

Criminals were merely innocent victims of society; that Stalin’s trials were honest; that all the thousands of Communist spies in America found in KGB files were innocent; that 83% of the time when a citizen tried to hold a gun on a criminal the criminal took the gun and shot him with it; that Castro was no Communist; that all races have equal average IQ and that to indicate otherwise was nothing but Hitlerism; that integration had nothing to do with intermarriage; that socialist economies were efficient, with statistics to prove it;

And so on, ad infinitem.

The fact is that nothing the left does ever WORKS, so every leftist program is based on misstatements.

In order to make a living as a RESPECTABLE conservative, you must treat leftists as honorable people. Each new assertion must be taken very seriously. Then you make your living pointing out that “They’re WRONG this time!!!”

In other words, you cannot be a RESPECTABLE conservative without being an absolute idiot.

Which is a little unfair to drooling idiots. By the fifth time someone tells a drooling idiot that they can put their hand in the fire without hurting it, the idiot will refuse.

As long as the money rolls in, RESPECTABLE conservatives will never refuse. And the sub-idiots who make up their following will pay them to keep it up.

Institutions have their own biology. They have a separate evolutionary process which may or may not gel with that of the people who make up the institution. People who evolve in the same areas tend to look alike. The same is true of institutions.

When people point out how similar the Great Religions are, they think they are saying that each one has the same truth. Actually the Great Religions have similarities in the same way that animals developing in similar environments have the same features.

All institutions are fundamentally anti-racist. National Socialism was fanatically anti-Jew, anti-democratic pro-militarist, nationalistic, anti-pornography, socialistic, anti-Communist and a long list of other things.

In Italy fascism was anti-racist before the rise of Hitler. As in all Latin countries, what was important was that you spoke Italian and identified yourself as Italian, regardless of the color of your skin.

One of the pleas a Nazi would use if he was up on charges was to select “race treason” in his plea bargaining, because it was a relatively minor charge.

Every institution tends to become more and like those it is competes with. National Socialism had to balance its endless list of things it was against.

Even the caste system, which is called the “color” system in Sanskrit, lost all relevance to its real purpose when it faced Buddhism and other anti-racist institutions. The Reformed Church of South Africa, which only existed because of Boer identity, sold out the white race.

Putting your identity into an institution is a great deal like Sauron putting so much of his being into the One Ring. The institution inevitably follows its own evolution and you lose your children to it.

The fought a millennium-long reconquista in the name of their royalty and their Church. Once they had established their Church, though, it became as anti-white as any institution. The bigotry of Hispanics was turned against those who were Catholic, not those who were not white.

The reconquista was a fight of Europeans to reconquer Europe. Now “Hispanic” means non-whites fighting to take what whites have. This was Sauron’s Error. They put their identity into an institution separate from their own biological identity.

In Asia, a dialogue can go like this:

“How is your lovely home?”

“That wreck is fine.”

“And how is the flower of your household?”

“That pig is well.”

So Political Correctness is not the only faith to look upon insults to oneself, one’s country and one’s family as the highest sign of civilized behavior.

Jesus reduced the Ten Commandments to two, something today’s churches do not accept. One of these commandments was “Do unto others as you would have them do unto you.” But the Trappists were proud that it would have been illegal, even in Medieval times, to treat anyone else the way they treated themselves.

Trappists have stopped that nonsense. Yes, even the most extreme portions of the Catholic Church can learn. A generation ago no one would have believed that the Trappists could outgrow their self-torture.

Dave has pointed out brilliantly how this sort of “sacrifice” is SICK. Political Correctness will have to catch up with the Trappists. Whipping yourself violates the Golden Rule. Hating and insulting your own is not immoral.