Reading

You can already read or you would not be here. This is about how to understand what you are reading; how to make sense of it all, how to form your world view. Perhaps the major point to take on board is that some, probably most writing in the newspapers, magazines and books today is propaganda or distraction. Tom Sunić is writing for Europeans who care about their heritage and their survival in a world where they are under attack. Perhaps this sounds exaggerated. I wish it were.

It not necessary to agree with Professor Sunić. There are many paths to understanding the modern world, to knowing who the Puppet Masters are, knowing their agenda. A good starting point is Frank L Britton's book Behind Communism which covers the track record of Jews over the two thousand years up to 1952. It is not literature but it is clear in its focus. Professor Sunić choice is very wide. It is easy to get lost.

One commentator on What To Read Part 1 tells us about Wuthering Heights, the well known novel by Emily Brontë in which the son of the house is displaced by an ethnic found in the street of Liverpool. It has an uncanny resemblance to what is being done to us now by our enemies who have used the fraudulent idea of Western Guilt to infect us with Pathological Altruism. It is about allowing ourselves to be replaced by Third World parasites, about Ethnic Fouling which leads on to Genocide.

It is safe to say that the BBC has absolutely no intention of enlightening us but has a very relaxed view of Paedophile perversion. It is at the forefront of our Main Stream Media enemies. There is also mention of Cultural Pessimism, another horrible term used by Marxists.

This is about Deconstruction, a Marxist term, one they use against us.

Read for yourself. Think for yourself. Decide for yourself.

How To Read
QUOTE
It is far easier to reflect on the art of dating than on the art of reading. For a student in humanities the main concern must not be which author he needs to read and which one he needs to discard, but rather how to read and how to interpret the text. Before he flips open a book he must ask himself a question: Who will interpret this text? Over the last several decades the focus in the humanities has not been so much the substance of the author’s work, but rather the biased interpretation of his work. The egalitarian-multicultural “paradigm” in higher education still determines how an author is studied — and hence how he is being interpreted............

The Frankfurt School Program in Applied Brainwashing
For many White activists, or would-be college students in humanities, it is still hard to comprehend that since the fateful 1945 the academic program in the West has been subject to a drastic methodological overhaul, which in turn resulted in gigantic brainwashing of students. The steady removal of hundreds of politically incorrect titles from library shelves on the one hand and a radically new interpretation of the classics on the other, only added insult to injury. The notion of just vs. unjust, of beauty vs. ugliness, of crook vs. hero, of truth vs. lie, has been reversed, or rather, the meaning of those words changed in accordance with the dominant leftist-liberal aka “multicultural” teaching philosophy. Very early on, largely as a result of the Frankfurt School Program in Applied Brainwashing, the System managed to conflate the notion of academic integrity with the notion of “humanism.” Any attempt by critically minded professors to examine authors lying beyond the pale of the standard curriculum, was immediately branded as a criminal, fascist enterprise, worthy of penal sanctions, loss of tenure, and academic ostracism.

Today, the choice of appropriate literature by a humanities student, or for that matter by any White activist wishing to learn more about his cultural and racial heritage, is further aggravated by his often clumsy choice of methods. Yes, titans are in town — we know that — and there are only a few honest teachers left to teach the right ropes. Without teachers to guide them, many White nationalists are inclined to start gobbling up heavy literature on race, or they may immerse themselves in academic texts on Judaism, while neglecting the simple prose of their homegrown classics. For a young White student or an activist, the unguided plowing through difficult texts on race, without prior knowledge of some of the classics, will not produce sound results. Also, there may be a strong temptation to focus on racial differences, or even show anger at lower-IQ racial groups, or make tallies of WWII body counts. Sooner, rather than later, such an approach will get a White student into trouble.

The first step for a White student or an activist is to get acquainted with at least a few classics and chose a good roadmap when reading them. Only later on, when their message begins to sink in, will he be able to grasp the criminal motives of the main movers and shakers in the study of humanities in the university. For instance, in order to understand his instructor’s palaver about Karl Marx and his epoch, a student might be well advised to combine the instructor’s mandatory reading list with his own list of authors, such as novelists Charles Dickens or Honoré de Balzac. Both novelists lived during the same epoch as the sociologist Marx, yet both were far better in graphically describing the wretched conditions of workers in early capitalist France and England.

Naturally, Shakespeare always comes in handy, not just for those wishing to understand the timeless issue of human fickleness, treachery and vanity, but also for those wishing to get a first whiff of the world of Shylock and what Shylock thinks of himself and his chosen tribe:

Shylock: “I will buy with you, sell with you, talk with you, walk with you, and so following; but I will not eat with you,
drink with you, nor pray with you.”
(I, iii)

Shakespeare’s The Merchant of Venice is an important work of literature today for students wishing to grasp the language of modern banksters and the meanings of new financial fraud originating at Goldman Sachs, or when the Fed’s “Helicopter Ben” Bernanke preaches “quantitative easing” in order to con the masses into illusions about new job openings.  Endless promissory notes about monetary bonds between Antonio and Shylock did not work out, so Shylock demands from Antonio a pound of flesh cut out from his body. This must have been a Shakespearian form of “prime collateral.”  The same procedure is finding its mirror image today in “subprime collateral,” or in the grand total of student loan debt which has reached $1 trillion in the USA today.

Shylock:  You’ll ask me, why I rather choose to have
A weight of carrion flesh, than to receive
Three thousand ducats. I’ll not answer that. But say it is my humour. (IV,i).......

The gloire of France is passé and although there are good books published in French, especially in the field of the sociology of postmodernity, few White Americans or English nationalists will bother learning the French language. As a global lingua franca the American English has become the only and the best weapon for cultural battles on all fronts.

Dr. Tom Sunic (www.tomsunic.com) is a former professor, author and a board member of The American Third Position Party http://american3rdposition.com/.

93 Comments to "How to read"

Henry Baxley April 18, 2012 - 6:19 pm |
Fyi; You can get a far better and cheaper education by spending a few months on the street (without money)
Start out at the “Salvation Army” (Christianity 101)
While there you will become acquainted with “day labor” (economics 101)
After that you can make the rounds to the various Christian “Missions” where you will be introduced to race 101, 303, 505, and sociology 101
Finally, If your still alive, you advance to graduate school (living under bridges and beside railroad tracks to escape the black thugs) in this more relaxed academic setting you can contemplate philosophy and prepare your thesis, which will be to find a positive correlation between racism and multiculturalism/forced integration…..
The whole process shouldn’t take more than a few months and won’t cost you a dime…..No thanks necessary, glad to help
UNQUOTE
Tom overstates some points. Others are good.

 

What To Read Part 1
by
Tom Sunic
There is no such thing as rightwing vs. leftwing literature. There is only bad literature vs. good literature, with the definition of goodness vs. badness resulting from one’s own implicit cultural and racial baggage. For more than a half century, teachers and scholars have used public and academic discourse quite in line with the egalitarian White-hating dogmas, and reading lists for their students were constructed on the basis of those dogmas. Important novelists, key social scientists, and authors   suspected of writing prose that goes against the stream of dominant political ideas, have either been swept aside or removed from the reading list. Their books, if ever mentioned, receive a critical, criminalizing, downgrading, or caricatured interpretation. Worse, if some of them trespass over the historiographic lines of self-censored behavior, as is the case with historical revisionists in Europe and the USA, they may lose a job or land in prison.

1. Literature: Homer and the Tragic
One can tell the author’s identity by his style and narrative. At the beginning of his autodidactic voyage, a young student should avoid authors whose style and syntax are boring, or whose main theme is difficult to grasp. A White student in the humanities should start with easy-reading classics first, such as Homer and the equally easy texts of fairy tales. Great writers love clarity of expression and do not hide their towering egos behind dangling sentences and obscure lingo. This is unfortunately not always the case with some prominent racialist and traditionalist scholars, especially in the field of social science. Many good social scientists often do not know how to frame their important ideas into simple language. Hence, it’s necessary for a student to read the classics first.

Homer is by no means children’s literature only. Nor are the fairy tales by the Brothers Grimm, Charles Perrault or Aesop. Homer, along with other classic authors from antiquity, is crucial for understanding the essence of the White man’s being: the inborn sense of the tragic and the will to power. Nowadays these notions in academia are labeled “Cultural Pessimism” and are squarely rejected by leftist and liberal professors who view them as symbols of violence and reject them as main pillars of fascist thought. This is not surprising. Whatever does not conceptually fit into the language of liberal college professors, modern book reviewers, literary critics, or TV opinion makers, must be labeled as “fascist.”

Homer is important because his epic poems The Odyssey and The Iliad tell us about the inner world of our ancestors. Granted, not even the best modern translations of Homer can capture the meaning of the original text, let alone the significance of the allegories used by our ancestors several millennia ago. Those ancient symbols and metaphors, taking the shape of a myriad of gods, demigods, centaurs, or other funny or scary creatures, have received today a distorted interpretation. However, Homer’s description of those surreal characters gives us at least a modest whiff of what our ancestors thought of themselves and how they conceived of the world that surrounded them. Their perception of the tangible world consisted of a rhapsody of images, in which every little twig in the woods and every rock on the beach had its divine, semi-divine or chaotic form, or had its own meaning of the sacred or the unsacred.  Our ancestors’ mental focus was not the notion of “good vs. evil,” but rather the notion of chaos vs. order, and hence how to pull the world they lived in out of cosmic chaos and how to put together at least some semblance of a livable order. The primeval Indo–European notion of the dreaded chaos, a theme constantly resurfacing in Western literature, when transposed into the world of today, bears the name of decadence. Racial and social decadence have been viewed as the archenemies of the White man by all racialist-traditionalist-nationalist-conservative scholars.

It is false to assume that ancient Greeks, Romans, Germanic, Celtic, or Slavic tribes who once roamed  the woods of northern Europe or gazed at the Mediterranean sun, were stupid and superstitious folks with low IQ, who presumably had to wait a few more millennia in order to grow into learned, enlightened and liberal individuals. Considering the mountains of mendacity, dished out daily in public schools, colleges and in public fora, especially in the study of history and race, our ancestors, were they to be miraculously resurrected today, would view us as superstitious and credulous folks, or worse, as a treacherous pack of cowards who believe in abnormal myths that defy any sense of transcendence and that belie any logical, empirical or forensic proof of the laws of nature. However, if we were to accept the well-grounded hypothesis that White peoples have undergone serious racial decline over the last century, we may submit the conclusion that in terms of both intellect and character, and in view of the loss of the sense of the tragic, they are worse off than their distant ancestors. This is more or less the underlying theme of all the books by all so-called racialist-traditionalist-nationalist-conservative scholars whom we have covered to some extent in the columns of TOO. At least we agree that over the last one hundred year, the proverbial White Man has willingly accelerated the process of his own social, moral and racial demise. 

The modern concept vs. the ancient Image
Our ancestors were entirely oblivious to the notion of the concept, which has become today a mandatory methodological tool in the apprehension of the world we live in. The incessant drive to quantify everything, the obsessive search for causal relationships in every detail that surrounds us, be it sex or politics, has become our predicament. Mathematics has devoured the metaphor.

Myths and legends do not search for causal relationships. Their underlying sense of the tragic is woven into the Germanic sagas; it resurfaces all the time in ancient Greek dramas; it is a standard theme of ancient Roman thinkers. In plain English, the sense of the tragic means that even when a White man loses everything and is bound to perish, he must continue fighting to his last breath. The ancient figure of Prometheus embodies the will to power and the sense of the tragic, whose offshoots we have trailed over and over again amidst scores of European individuals who once  sailed the seven seas or trekked in their covered wagons from the East Coast to the West Coast. We find plenty of those tragic, will-to-power, Promethean characters in the novels of Jack London and the stories of Ambrose Bierce and among many, many other racialist-traditionalist-nationalist-conservative authors.  Our ancestors, with their sense of the tragic, similar to Homer’s mythical figure of Ulysses, never feared death. They never expected any gifts; neither from gods nor from men.

Homer is crucial literature for students and White activists wishing to learn not just how to put the world’s drama into a wider historical perspective, but also how to put themselves into perspective. A follow-up and a parallel reading to Homer may be JRR Tolkein. His Hobbit is just another modality of Odyssey.

The will to power is falsely interpreted today as the will to subjugate other peoples. Wrong. Will to power means primarily learning the art of surpassing oneself in one’s own intellectual, military and professional endeavor. The works by social scientists, who are awkwardly and expediently dubbed as “revolutionary conservatives,” “nationalists,” “racialists,” “traditionalists,” or even “fascists,” have been written by self-introspective individuals haunted by the image that everything had its time span and that everything had to perish. But chaos needs to be prevented at all costs.

The Frankfurt School Jewish-Austrian born American child psychoanalyst, Bruno Bettelheim in a post-WWII re-educational effort to criminalize the White Man’s heritage, made a predictable Freudo-Marxian effort at providing a new interpretation of the notion of the tragic and of European fairy tales, very much in line with the efforts of his fellow psychoanalysts in different fields of social science. His later life as a professor, charges of abuse by some of his students, and his suicide in 1990, convey a picture of man who was the opposite of the baby talk man he claimed to be in his treatment of autistic kids. This tells us once again who has been in charge of academic discourse in Western education — and of the brainwashing the Whites.  Wow, one wonders how to interpret the scenes from the Old Testament and the Deuteronomy (20:16–18)—texts replete with scenes of ancient Hebrew serial killings, which could easily qualify as hate speech today. Never, ever do we encounter such an open advocacy of such gory scenes in the Iliad and or in the European fairy tales.

The pain of reading novels may be caused by the reader’s awareness that many good novelists will never make it to the reader’s eye, nor to public eye. Thousands of good authors, from antiquity to postmodernity still remain unknown to a large audience. Likely, in some of their books there might be passages that may offer at a least a partial key to the riddle of the universe. Even if some of those authors make it eventually to the school syllabi or hit the prime time news, they run the risk of being interpreted according to the dominant egalitarian verities of our time. Even worse, when a historical and political cycle is over, with a new one beginning, some authors may end up condemned to oblivion, with some mediocre ones receiving all the glitz and glory. We have seen that after WWII, hundreds of scholars and novelists sympathetic to National Socialism (the Norwegian Knut Hamsun, the American Ezra Pound, the French Robert Brasillach, or the German Gottfried Benn), disappeared from the library shelves. Let us not forget that the Russian anticommunist novelist, Alexander Solzhenitsyn was not available for reading in Russia and in Eastern Europe until 1990. A young Russian student holding in hand a single copy of Solzhenitsyn’s “self- published” (“samizdat”) work was committing a criminal offense in the Communist System. 

2. Literature: From Homer to Harold Covington
Talking about cycles of time juxtaposed one next to the other, including the characters grappling with the meaning of the tragic, one must mention the name of Harold A. Covington, a postmodern novelist whose works represent a good Bildungsroman for any White nationalist. Over several thousand pages, Covington uses the classic approach in the description of postmodern heroes who always try to surpass themselves — in the face of cosmic vagaries. However, the plots of his best-known war novels are not situated in ancient Greece or Rome, but in a balkanized and dying America. Covington is also an author of several historical novels whose plots revolve around 15th- and 16th-century Europe. His war novels, therefore, may be the reason why his message may be closer and more comprehensible to a modern reader than Homer and the ancient classics.

April 22, 2012 - Permalink
By the way Mr Sunic, are you familiar with the most obvious reading of Wuthering Heights? I wish I could link it here but every time I try to post a comment with links at TOO it gets stuck in the filter.

So you can visit to my blog and search for the essay “The Jewish Question revisited”. Here I’ll just reproduce the opening paragraphs:

“The heaviest blow that ever struck humanity was the coming of Christianity.”
—Hitler

How would we have felt if, as children, our father returned home with a boy of an alien ethnic group and force it into our bedroom as a new “brother”? How would we have felt if, after resenting this betrayal and picking on the unfortunate intruder—as children usually do—, our father sends us, not the intruder, to a boarding school?

Forget every silly film you have seen to date: because that’s how the real Wuthering Heights novel began.

In his travels Mr. Earnshaw finds a homeless boy. Once more, forget every Hollywood image because the skin of this boy was similar to that of “a little lascar.” Mr. Earnshaw decides to adopt him and name him “Heathcliff.” Brontë describes Heathcliff as “dark-skinned gypsy in aspect.” Naturally, Mr. Earnshaw’s legitimate son, Hindley, finds himself robbed of his father’s affections and becomes bitterly jealous of the little lascar. (The poor intruder was not even a half-bro or an illegitimate child of Mr. Earnshaw with a gypsy woman.)

Every single critic of the novel, even the most conservative, seems to have missed the racial aspect of this drama. I would go so far as to suggest that, once the ethno-state is established Wuthering Heights will be one of our first classics to convey the tragedy of pushing, against the legitimate heir’s will, someone of another race that after some time hostilely takes over the entire family estate and starts to hunt down key Anglo-Saxon characters in a life dedicated to revenge (gypsies are so good at that).

Furthermore, the real Wuthering Heights is no love story at all. The 1939 adaptation with Lawrence Oliver is as detached from the original story as, say, Disney’s Pinocchio from the original, and far more sinister, Carlo Collodi tale. Catherine and the gypsy are the polar opposite of heroine and hero. The first Catherine is precisely an early embodiment of the contemporary out-group altruism that has been destroying the West since we committed the blunder of empowering women.

The drama of Wuthering Heights only ends when—after the deaths of Mr. Earnshaw, Catherine Earnshaw, Isabella Linton, Edgar Linton, Hindley Earnshaw and Linton Heathcliff, the son of the gypsy who dies as a result of the abuse perpetrated by his father—Heathcliff finally dies at the end of the novel and the second Catherine can, at last, reclaim a life together with her first cousin: the survivors.

Again, how come no one has done such obvious reading of this classic of English literature, that the tragedy only ends when the gypsy dies?

Wuthering Heights ought to be presented to European-descended peoples as the perfect metaphor of what Europeans have been self-inflicting in the last decades: importing millions of hostile “gypsies” to displace the native “Hindleys.” In fact, in the novel Mr. Earnshaw, whose Christian, altruistic fondness for the gypsy boy would cause havoc, reminds me the proverb “a dog that wags its tail for strangers and barks at its own people.”

The drama of Wuthering Heights was located, of course, in the Yorkshire manor. But what had Anglo-Saxons been doing at the other side of the Atlantic?

Chechar

April 22, 2012 - 4:36 pm | Permalink

By the way Mr Sunic, are you familiar with the most obvious reading of Wuthering Heights? I wish I could link it here but every time I try to post a comment with links at TOO it gets stuck in the filter.

So you can visit to my blog and search for the essay “The Jewish Question revisited”. Here I’ll just reproduce the opening paragraphs:

“The heaviest blow that ever struck humanity was the coming of Christianity.”
—Hitler

How would we have felt if, as children, our father returned home with a boy of an alien ethnic group and force it into our bedroom as a new “brother”? How would we have felt if, after resenting this betrayal and picking on the unfortunate intruder—as children usually do—, our father sends us, not the intruder, to a boarding school?

Forget every silly film you have seen to date: because that’s how the real Wuthering Heights novel began.

In his travels Mr. Earnshaw finds a homeless boy. Once more, forget every Hollywood image because the skin of this boy was similar to that of “a little lascar.” Mr. Earnshaw decides to adopt him and name him “Heathcliff.” Brontë describes Heathcliff as “dark-skinned gypsy in aspect.” Naturally, Mr. Earnshaw’s legitimate son, Hindley, finds himself robbed of his father’s affections and becomes bitterly jealous of the little lascar. (The poor intruder was not even a half-bro or an illegitimate child of Mr. Earnshaw with a gypsy woman.)

Every single critic of the novel, even the most conservative, seems to have missed the racial aspect of this drama. I would go so far as to suggest that, once the ethno-state is established Wuthering Heights will be one of our first classics to convey the tragedy of pushing, against the legitimate heir’s will, someone of another race that after some time hostilely takes over the entire family estate and starts to hunt down key Anglo-Saxon characters in a life dedicated to revenge (gypsies are so good at that).

Furthermore, the real Wuthering Heights is no love story at all. The 1939 adaptation with Lawrence Oliver is as detached from the original story as, say, Disney’s Pinocchio from the original, and far more sinister, Carlo Collodi tale. Catherine and the gypsy are the polar opposite of heroine and hero. The first Catherine is precisely an early embodiment of the contemporary out-group altruism that has been destroying the West since we committed the blunder of empowering women.

The drama of Wuthering Heights only ends when—after the deaths of Mr. Earnshaw, Catherine Earnshaw, Isabella Linton, Edgar Linton, Hindley Earnshaw and Linton Heathcliff, the son of the gypsy who dies as a result of the abuse perpetrated by his father—Heathcliff finally dies at the end of the novel and the second Catherine can, at last, reclaim a life together with her first cousin: the survivors.

Again, how come no one has done such obvious reading of this classic of English literature, that the tragedy only ends when the gypsy dies?

Wuthering Heights ought to be presented to European-descended peoples as the perfect metaphor of what Europeans have been self-inflicting in the last decades: importing millions of hostile “gypsies” to displace the native “Hindleys.” In fact, in the novel Mr. Earnshaw, whose Christian, altruistic fondness for the gypsy boy would cause havoc, reminds me the proverb “a dog that wags its tail for strangers and barks at its own people.”

The drama of Wuthering Heights was located, of course, in the Yorkshire manor. But what had Anglo-Saxons been doing at the other side of the Atlantic?

 

Errors & omissions, broken links, cock ups, over-emphasis, malice [ real or imaginary ] or whatever; if you find any I am open to comment.
 
Email me at Mike Emery. All financial contributions are cheerfully accepted. If you want to keep it private, use my PGP KeyHome Page

Updated on 21/01/2017 19:16