"The race of the man who keeps his oath is better afterward."
~ Herodotus, Oracle

We have lost such a moral view of race. Today race is seen as an inheritance one is due, something one owns that nobody can take, even oneself. Far from being so deterministic, our own actions are continually destroying our races and creating new ones for better or worse. If we remain blind to its moral essence, we remain subject to the rule of one-eyed tyrants and lost to the reality of race. If we see moral race again, we will learn how to see true races wherein there was only a single color before.

Theologians may quarrel, but the mystics of the world speak the same language.

— Meister Eckhart

"He remained silent, thinking like the seed he was, thinking with the race consciousness he had first experienced as terrible purpose. ... They were all caught up in the need of their race to renew its scattered inheritance, to cross and mingle and infuse their bloodlines in a great new pooling of genes. And the race knew only one sure way for this—the ancient way, the tried and certain way that rolled over everything in its path: jihad."

- Frank Herbert, Dune

“The individual in the framework and in the service of his race, the race in the framework and in the service of God and of the laws of the divinity: those who will understand these things will win even though they are alone. Those who will not understand will be defeated.”

— Corneliu Zelea Codreanu, For My Legionaries

This is not a return to activity, merely a short polemic I thought would benefit a larger audience.

The Nationalists say that the nation is the family writ large, some talk of "the folk" as merely the utmost extent of the kin or clan community. However, as any etymologist would know, this sense is, at least in english, barely 300 years old. Prior to that point, the folk is more often than not the common mass of people, indiscriminate and general in its usage, and nearly just as often a military term of mobilization as it is a social one. It is, appropriately so in my opinion, also directly related to the Latin word "plebes".

The actual word for family in Old English is "cynn", the direct ancestor of the contemporary word "kin", which is (probably) also related (through "cyning") to the word "king". Kingdom is in this understanding quite literally "the dominion or rule of a family". Kin (compare: Genus) is also an originally discriminatory term, whereas "folk" does not have to be, the former indicating not only ones racial stock, but also ones classhood and gender (womankind, etc). It stems from the hypothetical PIE root-word for begetting and giving birth, and has a direct connection with, among others, the german word for child "Kind".

The Folk and The Kin are different species on a conceptual level. It is good to remember the original meaning of the word "tyrant", as the servants of the same can never know the difference between childrapist and childrearer. Being a Greek could not possibly ever mean more than being an Athenian or Theban, being a German could not possibly ever mean more than being a Bavarian or Saxon, or in my own case, being a Norwegian could not possibly mean more than being a Grenlander. When one looks at the Roman Familia, the Scottish Clann, etc. the absurdity of what we can call rigid nationalism in a historical time-frame stretching past the 1400s becomes clear.

Kinship and parochiality, not nationalism and imperialism.

Hyperboreans:
Celts/Germans?
Tocarians?
Paleolithic Siberian Golden Age?
Aryan wizards?
Divine archetype?
Interdimensional aliens?

https://youtu.be/JmHKjzZ9Kuc?si=WI-OYtfpvlCHn8E9

"If you had gone to Buddha and asked him: 'Are you the son of Brahma?' he would have said, 'My son, you are still in the vale of illusion.' If you had gone to Socrates and asked, 'Are you Zeus?' he would have laughed at you. If you had gone to Mohammed and asked, 'Are you Allah?' he would first have rent his clothes and then cut your head off. If you had asked Confucius, 'Are you Heaven?' I think he would have probably replied, 'Remarks which are not in accordance with nature are in bad taste.' The idea of a great moral teacher saying what Christ said is out of the question. In my opinion, the only person who can say that sort of thing is either God or a complete lunatic suffering from that form of delusion which undermines the whole mind of man."

— CS Lewis

"If the gods demand the sacrifice, if the welfare of the Greeks requires it, if its necessity has now been accepted, then, O king, steel yourself; and if your paternal heart is breaking, then—avert your eyes, cover your face; thus do you appear worthy of your status as a father and a king and a sensitive Greek and a patriotic hero."
~ Herder

23. Home did the great king [Charlemagne] come
and they were all sat in red,
he had full bags of silver and gold
and all the heathens were dead.

24. "But why do you sit there drunk
in silience and not in mirth?
have you in the house of the dead
laid out many good men?"

25. "You will not, o Queen, wonder at our conduct,
for while we have gained the victory,
the same has cost us Roland, the King's Friend
and thereto many a valiant swain."

A traditional end to the ballad of Roland and the Great King as it was recorded in the mid 1800s in the Upper Thelemark.

The physiognomy one finds in an average orchestra versus what one finds in gatherings of organic farmers is most telling as to the role one should expect the hinterlands to play in the revival of beauty.

Nietzscheans! I will not hear anymore of your "Prometheus" until you listen to this, which is to be found in Hesoid's Theogony:

"And ready-witted Prometheus he bound with inextricable bonds, cruel chains, and drove a shaft through his middle, and set on him a long-winged eagle, which used to eat his immortal liver; but by night the liver grew as much again everyway as the long-winged bird devoured in the whole day. That bird Heracles, the valiant son of shapely-ankled Alcmene, slew; and delivered the son of Iapetus from the cruel plague, and released him from his affliction -- not without the will of Olympian Zeus who reigns on high, that the glory of Heracles the Theban-born might be yet greater than it was before over the plenteous earth. This, then, he regarded, and honoured his famous son; though he was angry, he ceased from the wrath which he had before because Prometheus matched himself in wit with the almighty son of Cronos."

When our intellect speculates [on Metaphysics] it does so not insofar as it is human but insofar as it is something divine within us. So Hermes Trismegistus cleverly writes in his book on the God of gods, which he composed for his friend Asclepius, that man is the connection between God and the world, being above the world by means of his double investigation, that is natural philosophy and speculative science. By means of both of these [sciences] the power of reason in man is perfected and in this way he is rightly called the ‘ruler of the world.’ Furthermore, man is bound to God, because he beholds an immeasurable beauty that is not in this world, that is, not in succession or temporal, which he receives by means of the divine likeness that is in him in the simple light of the intellect, which he shares with the God of gods.

— St. Albert the Great, Summa Theologiae

Woe to him who denies the divine that lives within himself! To be against the Good and the True and the Beautiful is to be lost to oneself—that deepest, truest, most essential self. To be against the God of gods is suicide.

https://news.1rj.ru/str/EvolasCave/3371

Study of Evola is important to understand the nature of the fundamental moral divide between traditional and modern man. Evola describes certain symbols pointing towards Tradition better than any other.

The Solar symbol represents the transcendent and its reigning supreme over the entire world, illuminating all with its light. It is the fire that burns all impurities: falsehoods, weakness, and impiety. It is also tied to the Uranic symbol, the masculine principle which is generative or properly creative, not only physically but intellectually; at the same time it is a representation of the sheer moral force required for such metaphysical virility.

The Imperial symbol is a direct reflection of the power and glory of God. The Empire establishes an "eternal" order on Earth by conquering all its impious and uncultured barbarian enemies, bringing peace and stability to the land for generations, and lifting up even its lowliest people so they may transcend the merely earthly in their lives.

The Aryan symbol takes its name from that great culture which spread its Solar Empire across the world. The symbol stands for the archetypal features present in Aryan culture which can also be found in other great cultures at their zenith. It stands for aristocratic values of spirit that echo those of the Roman Mos Maiorum: Dignity, Virtue, Authority, among others. Within that is integration of the way of the warrior and of the priest, that is, uniting righteous action and pious contemplation in all things.

The key concept of Jünger’s theory is Gestalt; by this, he means a whole that includes something greater than the sum of its parts.

A person is greater than the sum of atoms, a family is greater than the union of a man and a woman, and a nation is greater than the sum of citizens living in the same territory.

All human history is a struggle of Gestalts. Jünger claims that ‘man, as a Gestalt, belongs to eternity’.

Joseph-Arthur de Gobineau, The Inequality of the Human Races (1853-55)