PSA: What is Moral and Righteous and Good?

Andrew Anglin
Daily Stormer
July 24, 2017

We live in an era so degenerate that we must ask simple questions about the nature of life and existence. As difficult as it is to admit, this is largely due to the fact that our parents were either too busy or too ignorant to give us answers that made any sense.

There was a tradition which went back to the beginning of time of humans transferring fundamental concepts from one generation to the next, and the Baby Boomer generation failed to do this.

We have been left in a void, with no connection to the past.

One very basic question we have is: what is morality?

Presently, we are told that right is wrong and wrong is right.

It is on our own that we must reach a conclusion on the question of morality.

More than simply understanding what is truly moral and righteous and good, we must understand what went wrong, in order that we may set ourselves upon fixing it.

Old Christian Morality

In ages past, morality, righteousness and goodness were enshrined in religion.

There was of course religion before Christianity, but as Christianity was the most codified and thus the most advanced, not to mention the most well-documented, it is the most useful one to observe. Note that we will not be going into anything so heavy as master vs. slave morality here, but will only be dealing with the most basic concepts of right and wrong, in the simplest context of tradition vs modernity – this is to say, terms that both traditional master and traditional slave would be in full agreement on.

Under the church, there was a code of right and wrong, and though it was given divine status, the code was based on a logical system. A scientific system. A system where the consequences of actions were judged and weighed.

The effect of actions and behaviors had been tested and retested and the same results reached, and thus the authority that was the church was able to tell you, scientifically, whether something was wrong or right.

The basic scientific concept of morality is to judge the consequences of an individual’s action based on these questions:

• Is it good for the man?
• Is it good for the family?
• Is it good for the community?

And further:

• Is it good for the nation?
• Is it good for the race*?

*In the Christian age, “race” would have been referred to as “Christendom,” but it was the same thing – historical Christendom was the white race. Before the Christian age there was not enough interaction with other races to have much conception of race at all.

In nearly all cases, the answer to the first three of these questions will be the same. In many or most cases, the answer to all of these questions will be the same.

And this is very simple.

A couple quick examples.

Cheating on your wife: Bad

• Harms the wife
• Harms the children
• Harms the family of the woman you’re cheating with

Helping orphan children: Good

• Creates a community environment where people take care of one another
• Keeps people from being criminals or otherwise parasites
• Keeps the streets clean and the town comfortable

Killing someone in a dispute: Bad

• Kills a member of the community
• Ruins his family
• Creates a hostile environment in the society

Killing Homosexuals: Good

• Protects children and young men
• Keeps disease from spreading
• Creates a community environment where men can have real relationships with one another without fearing “something else” is going on

And so on.

You get the idea: understand the consequences of an action, if the consequences are negative, teach that it is morally wrong, punish it when it happens; if the consequences are positive, teach that it is positive and reward the behavior when it happens.

It’s not especially complicated, and in general, the Christian religion did a very good job with this. If you go at look at Christian morality, historically, you’re not going to find anything you disagree with.

The only things that were not objective were rites and dogma, but these are in fact objectively needed by a society – even if the rites themselves would be arbitrary in a scientific sense, the human need for them is objective. And all evidence points to this being a biological need.

Note: All other religions have the same basic moral framework. The difference is, at least with Judaism and Islam, that they explicitly apply the moral system only to their ingroup. The application of Christian morality only to Christians (who at the time were all white) was taken as a given throughout history, however the fact that it was never explicitly stated, along with the fact that the religion itself was shared with nonwhite groups during the colonial era, made the situation complicated.

Whites who had never really had much contact with other races also developed a much higher level of trust for people who were not in their immediate clan or tribal group, which allowed for the building of large civilizations. Key to this was the idea that you treated even people who spoke a different language with the same moral system you would other Christians. That is to say that if you were a Frenchman, you had no right to go to Italy and rape and rob people on the street, even if you could get away with it. At some point, this same moral courtesy was applied to racial out-groups, rather than simply ethno-linguistic out-groups.

This is also tied to our biology, as our sense of right and wrong is something that we are born with.

Pleasure vs Pain

All of our historical norms were all flushed down the toilet during the boomer age, and instead of asking “what was good for the people?” Western society asked “what will make me feel good?”

That was the road to hell.

We ended up with a hedonistic morality based on pleasure vs. pain.

“If it feels good, do it, as long as you’re not harming anyone else.”

For example:

Divorce because “you’re not happy anymore”: Good

• It makes you excited to be single again
• You are freed from responsibilities
• A (((study))) you read said kids get over it quickly, and of course it’s better for the kids if you feel happy

Shaming people who engage in lifestyles which were previously considered morally reprehensible (homosexuality, divorce, sluting, obesity, laziness, etc.): Bad

• Everyone has a right to pursue their own happiness
• They’re not hurting anyone else
• It’s none of your business (note: this is the first step towards utter alienation of all members of society)

Making material possessions the center of your life: Good

• Having nice things makes you feel happy
• The nicer the things you have, the higher people will think of you and then the happier you will feel
• Everyone deserves to be comfortable and feel good all the time, it’s the meaning of life

Letting other nations deal with their own problems: Bad

• It feels good to feel like a hero
• The whole world should feel happy and have freedoms
• Imagine it, it’s easy if you try

Morality was not really inverted, it was simply measured with a different stick.

The Boomerization and Death of Christendom

The concept of God kept Christian morality functioning, but in our modern system, “Christians” have gone along with the new feelgood morality, almost 100%, simply holding out on things that they wouldn’t do anyway, such as homosexuality (which they are now largely embracing).

Also worthy of note is that modern Christians have added on bizarre elements to the religion, such as a science fiction interpretation of the Revelation of John, at least in part simply to make the religion more entertaining and feel-goody, but also to distract from the lack of substance with filler content. The majority of boomer Christians in the United States believe in an end times prophecy where a “Space Jesus” will come down from the sky and suck them up into the sky.

Conveniently, a Jewish-funded, heavily annotated version of the Bible called the Scofield Reference Bible promoted the idea that in order for this space Jesus to come and suck people into heaven, America has to fight wars in the Middle East. So you had in the early 00s a situation where boomer Christians were literally cheering these wars, expecting that they would be able to never die because of them.

Many of these modern churches have also introduced barbaric ecstasy rituals into their services, which look like something out of African thousands of years ago.

What’s more, they have removed the concept of punishment for sin, instead embracing the idea that “all you have to do is believe,” and you will find salvation.

Talk about vapidity. Is it any wonder that millennials have abandoned this faith in such large numbers?

A 2008 study conducted in the United States found that more Christians than irreligious persons were divorced (the Christians also had a higher rate of marriage, however, so when that was factored in, the numbers came out about equal; still, a higher percentage of Christians were willing to make and break sacred vows than non-Christians).

Divorce used to be considered a mortal sin, but under feel-good morality, there are no mortal sins. Now, “I’m unhappy because he doesn’t pay enough attention to me and I’ve fallen out of love” is accepted by the evangelical church as valid grounds for divorce.

All of this is to say that the hedonistic new moral system had been embraced entirely by the boomer generation, to the point where nothing remained of the previous system. Western Christianity, it is buried, it has been eaten by worms. It is up to us, a generation of throwaways, to find the pieces of of broken glass from the shattered chandelier that was the moral code of our ancestors and put it back together.

This new pleasure-pain system of morality was in no way scientific, given that it doesn’t even attempt to consider the larger outcome on the whole of society of the actions of individuals. In fact, as we can see clearly with the divorce example, it doesn’t even consider the effects actions have on the immediate family.

The pleasure-pain system also does not consider the fact that what makes an individual feel good may not be good for their mental and physical health in the long term.

This lack of an internally consistent moral system left a vacuum to be filled by those who controlled the culture.

Moralizing and Moralism

This new age, without any defined system, brought a form of moralism; that is to say, the development of abstract moral principles, wherein the consequences are not related to anything in real life: “this is good/bad not because of the effects or potential effects of it, but because it is good/bad by nature, or because of magic or something.”

This is not scientific, nor is it useful to the individual or society to judge the goodness or badness of actions. When morals can be created arbitrarily – which the boomer concept of replacing scientific morality with abstract moralisms enables – then any given absurd, subversive idea can be elevated to the level of moral law.

“Racism” is perhaps the best example of this. There is no explanation as to why it is bad to prefer being among your own type of people. No negative thing happens to anyone if a person decides they would prefer to avoid a specific group. The members of that group are deprived of that person’s company, but I’m not sure how you could frame that as a moral evil, if you were honest enough to break it down to the level where that is the only real outcome. Especially given that it is only white people who are targeted for this particular new moral value, other races encouraged to be proud and live among their own (see: “gentrification“).

The reverse of racism of course is “tolerance.” Tolerance, we are told, is good, even though it has no perceivable positive outcome. On the societal scale, tolerance of anti-social behavior and of anti-social individuals and groups has measurable negative effects, but because of the pleasure-pain moral compass, that was no longer relevant.

This moralism has come in to fill the vacuum left by the collapse of Christian morality. People have a need for a moral system, and a (((certain group of folks))) decided to give Western society nagging moralism as a replacement for actual morality.

The Nihilism Sets In, A New Religion is Born

The lack of a scientific moral system and the social consequences of its absence created a void in our “souls.” I am keeping this scientific, so I have put “souls” in quotation marks, but there is a very real need in people – a biological need – for a system of morals, as well as religious dogma. With what we used to call “Christianity” completely dead and gone in the West, a type of nihilism came about, where people felt as though there was no meaning in anything.

Nature abhors a vacuum. It was inevitable that a new religious system would come about. A system that requires sacrifice for redemption.

The modern system is a mix of the tendency towards guilt and a need for atonement that appears to be a biological trait of white people and weird moral abstractions that have no basis in science.

The founding myth of the new religion is the Holocaust. This is a time when white people got together and were strong, and what they are said to have done is said to have been evil. Because of this, we are told that white people can never again get together and work toward their own interests, because if they do, an evil will happen.

Other historical instances of alleged evil are also included in the founding myth. Those include slavery, colonialism and the Crusades.

Given that the core ideological basis is that if whites are allowed to exist they will genocide other races as in the alleged Holocaust, I think it is fair to call it “Holocaustianity.”

And it has all of the trappings of a complete religion.

The basic concept is that we as whites were born evil, and must atone for that evil by serving nonwhites. The ultimate goal is to destroy ourselves. We are seeking a nirvana of mixed races, living in harmony together, as was most poignantly explicated in John Lennon’s “Imagine.”

As all culture is an expression of the DNA of a group, Christianity was a religion molded to our biology. So the trappings  of this new religion are very similar to that of Christianity, a sort of bizarro world version of Christianity. The difference is that, being nonscientific and created by Jews, it is designed to destroy us instead of build us up.

The concept of whiteness as original sin mirrors the Christian concept of original sin. The Christian concept was mainly tied to sexual desire, as that was an inborn drive which, if left unchecked, would lead to social stagnation and prevent the development of complex civilization. Of course now, sex is “free.” But being born white has a high cost.

The process of atoning for having been born as sexual beings, and the sins that come with it, was to seek forgiveness from God.

The process of atoning for having been born white, and the sins that come with it, is to seek forgiveness from nonwhites.

We do this in all sorts of ways. Presently, the main way we are doing it, is by letting millions upon millions of them come into our countries and take over.

Immigration we are told is good, as it enriches us, but we are also told that it is a punishment for our sins. This is very similar to the Christian concept of suffering being both a punishment and a gift from God, because while suffering hurts, it is also there to strengthen the individual. As we are being raped and murdered, we are also being blessed by creating a new utopian post-racial world.

We keep our mouths shut when our governments tell us more are coming in, because even if we don’t like it, we deserve it. The most religious of us are out there demanding more and more be brought in. Although women have little to no agency, and will go along with whatever they believe is socially good, the white men who are out there fighting to be invaded by nonwhites are religious fanatics. The antifa who go out and do battle in the streets in the name of infinite brown people coming into our countries are modern Crusaders.

Every need for religious expression is projected onto the nonwhites as a type of godly entity that is solely capable of forgiving us for our imperfect nature.

Instead of going to confession, we give them welfare.

Instead of burning candles, we give them our women.

And when the time comes, if we are asked – and we will be asked – we will let them drink our blood.

Dealing with This Hell

If you are reading this article, there is a good chance you are awake to what is happening.

But we are living in this.

We didn’t create it. When we were born, it was already here.

So we are forced to deal with it, to manage living in it, as best we are able. We don’t have any other choice.

This entire system hit me hard, as I’m sure it did the overwhelming majority of our young readers. I had a very difficult childhood. My teens up through my mid-twenties were not all that much better.

What set me free was the war. The war against this system.

The war against my ancient racial enemies. The same monsters my ancestors fought.

I took a plunge into the abyss, daring to say all that I say on this website using my real name. I have put my entire being into this war. I am ready to die on my feet.

And I love my life.

I believe that it is only through this Holy War that we will be able to create a new system. I believe the natural order itself necessitates that those who fight monsters shall become heroes. And through those that choose to fight, a new system shall rise.

So that is always my best advice: understand first that you don’t have a future. If you are in your teens, twenties or thirties right now, you are going to be buried alive with diversity. You will never find a faithful woman. You will alone die in a brown country, where you are treated as being lower than any dog.

So you can accept that, and keep your head down. Living life on your knees.

Or you can get up and fight.

Fight for your ancestors, your civilization, your blood and the salvation of your own soul.

If you don’t fight, there is a singular possible outcome: a painful, meaningless life of degradation and misery. Because even if you “win” in this system, you still lose. We’ve seen multiple high-profile celebrity suicides over the last two months. You can have all the sex and money in the world and never will you feel true happiness in this system, because happiness is derived from meaning, and there is no meaning here.

If you fight, there are two potential outcomes: death or glory.

For me, it’s an easy call to make.

But it’s a choice each of you must to make.

I pray you choose wisely.

We are the throwaway generation.

And the only thing we have in this world is each other.

Brothers.

Hail Victory.