White Sharia and the Confusion of the West

It has been a while, since a post went up, here; seminary studies are underway, and have left less time for writing at present.  On that topic, I ask any readers’ prayers, over the next weeks, for important decisions and events are occurring relevant to seminary studies.

I am writing now, in response to an article over at Mark Citadel’s blog, discussing the “White Sharia” meme, and quoting from Alt-Right figures here and there – from Sacco Vandal to Chuck Johnson – on the topic.  As a Catholic, who have often written on the topics of the West and of our Tradition, I wanted to weigh-in on the issue of White Sharia for a while, and Citadel’s post gave me the prompting to finally do so.

I believe it was Sacco Vandal himself, who once said, on his podcast, that the Catholic Church was wise for “not allowing the common man to self-interpret.” The White Sharia meme is a perfect example of why that is correct.

I have once made a reference to the meme, responding to John Rivers’ suggestion, on Gab, that there had to be a middle ground between “All men are rapist pigs” and “All women are stupid whores.”  Tongue in cheek, I responded that there was the middle ground of White Sharia, mentioning that traditional sex/marriage roles kept both of these base impulses of the sexes in check.  Even then, I noted my dissatisfaction with the meme; if one must joke about such a topic, call it “Extreme Canon Law” or “gynecological akrivia;” the Sharia is repugnant, and we should not want to defame our own, exacting moral code by association with it. Anybody who reads a traditional manual of Catholic moral theology will see that European tradition and Holy Tradition assumes a position of complete subjection on the part of women to the rightful dominion of their husbands and fathers; until relatively recently (1950s), women did not go out in public without an head covering (usually an hat or scarf); there is no need to LARP as a Moslem, and the accusation (made by Sacco, as quoted on Citadel’s blog) that those who wish simply to restore our own, recent observation of the moral law are somehow more LARPy than European men aping Islamic culture, is bewildering.

I go back and forth between bafflement and wry acknowledgment of man’s folly, when I consider the folk who think that mere whiteness, or existence of whites, is the goal. Bafflement, because it should be obvious that an all-white European civilization still managed to cripple itself with Liberalism when it apostatized from Holy Tradition, beginning a 500-year descent into race suicide and ideological cuckoldry that is now reaching its most acute phase. Wry acknowledgment of man’s folly, because when I was a Liberal, I inexcusably failed to notice the flatly contradictory nature of liberal dogmata – so it is no surprise to me that some men make such mistakes. It’s amazing, and all too common, that man should miss obvious lies and errors when they are right in front of his nose.

In a sense, I can understand the error, here: the existence of the white race is a necessary condition for the continued existence of our peoples’ traditions and character. Thus, many of the White Nationalist types proceed as if securing our existence and a future for our children were the only thing that mattered. But, though it is a necessary condition, it is not sufficient. Many Nationalists seem to believe that whatever is in the genes will inevitably find expression in culture; without wanting to downplay the fact that genetics will play an huge role in a people’s character, we can see how degeneracy already alters white traditions and character: from the criminal, pansexual, welfare-mooching chav to the criminal, pansexual, tax-stealing MEP, white folk already ain’t what they used to be. Genes aren’t everything – or, if they are, we should accept it as inevitable that cucking out to other races is always the inevitable cultural manifestation of white genetics, since that is what white folks’ genes are doing now.

No, sound metaphysics and good customs are also required; the break-down, here, is what has led to our current predicament.  And even amongst the nascent Alt-Right, we see that the mind and heart of European man is still too confused to reclaim his birthright.  Repentance – real repentance – is necessary; instead, we get various attempts to imagine a “new” future on the same old premises, or to simply rewind things to the Enlightenment, etc.  It is painfully embarrassing to hear pseudo-intellectual Alt-Righters speak of embracing Nihilism as a way of finding meaning for our people; it is painfully embarrassing to hear cultural Christians or semi-apostate Catholics speak of “White Sharia;” yet one can see the good intentions and the potential in many such people. In my own moments of unreflective impulsivity, I think that what is missing is the priest, hierarch, sage or saint, who can distill the Holy Tradition for the people, giving them understanding of their partially correct instincts and providing guidance to their good intentions.  That is certainly important – but, still not enough.

I can admire the heart of a rough and ready footsoldier of the Alt-Right, doing some good with a martial-themed podcast; but when I also mark them to be half-drunk and belligerent, practicing degeneracy while lamenting degeneracy, I realize that their good intentions and the martial virtues they may possess, are not likely to yield even to their own acknowledgment that the common man ought not to self-interpret.  Indeed, one suspects that this group of men, drinking and speaking grotesquely of the need to rape white thots, may inexplicably reckon themselves superior to the common man.  This is understandable in an age where Satanically unnatural acts and mores are quite common; but such men should not delude themselves – in any halfway normal epoch of European civilization, their behavior is that of the village peasantry.  I say this with no disdain, for a good-hearted, if ocassionally intemperate serf of European stock, still has much of the good and beautiful inside of him, and Christ died even for such as these – perhaps especially for them.  But they are indeed common men, and they should not feel free to interpret White/Western civilization for themselves – and in fact private interpretation is forbidden even to the clerics, even to the great men, and yes, even to the pope and to the king, for all are constrained to adhere to the Tradition.

Even more of a problem, are the would-be intellectuals. I enjoy reading many of the intelligent writers in the Alt-Right, and by most publicly measurable standards, they have done more for the cause of a return of moral, self-confident European folk than I have. But: when I read Jim running down the Church and speaking of the need to forbid the clerics to be holier than the king, speaking as though the concept of “works of supererogation” were behind the SJW holiness spiral (rather than recognizing how much truer it would be to say that it arises from the Protestant assertion that such works are still not holy enough); when I read Nick Steves speak as though it were possible to create a meaningful morality from Nihilism (even thinking that there is something intellectually or “morally” brave and bold about it); when I observe Curt Doolittle calling himself a “philosopher in the aristocratic tradition,” whilst doubling down on Liberalism and wishing to complete the “Enlightenment” (which he reckons to have brought about a “restoration of truthful literature” – !!! – ) despite the fact that the authentically aristocratic tradition of the West already issued devastating criticisms of the positivistic, agnostic, materialist grounds of this misnomered Enlightenment (yea, and despite the fact that our failure to heed this warning is central to our ongoing difficulties – I mean, if he would spend half as much time attending to prior criticism of the Enlightenment as he does to doubling down on it…); when I hear Chuck Johnson wishing for a world where white men have the honor in their own homelands of arguing over the “right to one’s own concept of reality” (despite this notion being itself foreign to white civilization); when I observe these and many other things besides, I realize that another great problem is the difficulty of the modern, Western “intellectual:” smart enough, educated enough, to be immune to deeper wisdom and to be sure of himself in his folly.

The few who are acquainted in a real way with the wisdom of our Tradition, cannot overcome the heart-strong impulsivity of the masses, or the head-strong ideology of the would-be intellectuals, despite their best intentions. I am glad to cooperate as possible with White Nationalists – whether they be good-hearted if occasionally drunken, degenerate soldiers or well-wishing but unwise, intellectual utopians – towards the important goal of at least getting foreigners and parasites out of our lands and cultures. I mean, I am a man of vices myself, and I’m sure my own folly often shows, yet I hope they can see their way clear to cooperate with me on this goal, as well! I am often even edified by their virtues – as I say, I myself am imperfect. and doubtless one could find plenty of grounds for criticism in my own case. But what is really missing, is a king and a strong core of major aristocrats. A king, endowed by grace with the judgment to know truth when he hears it (despite not having the time to exhaustively study it), and the gift of leadership, so as to inspire the allegiance of common men and to at least obtain the acquiescence or obedience of benevolent (potential or pseudo-)intellectuals, is the missing piece.

On a chessboard, nearer to the king than the rooks (the pillars of the community) and the knights (men of valor and might), are the bishops: the gentry and the aristocracy surround the king and may have an audience with him; but the spirituality should be the first at his side, at his ear. Being willing to crush the degenerates and to drive foreign interlopers from our lands, fresh from the experience of such persons’ parasitism and venality, is a good and necessary start. But unless the unadulterated Wisdom Tradition of the West can be faithfully and persuasively exposited, so as to win the ear and allegiance of the great leaders of men, the petty, ideological factions of the West are doomed to keep squabbling in ways that will simply leave us open to race suicide and foreign invasion when a generation or two has passed and the memory of our current hell is forgotten.

My personal belief is that God has fated such a king for us, soon; He shall provide the way out, for a remnant. In the meantime, we all have to do our part to prepare for such a thing, for it is by such synergy between the Divine providence and man’s assent, that God’s will is enacted upon the earth. I ask prayers for all, as I await decisions this week, which will determine whether and how I complete my seminary studies, so that, in the future, I can contribute to this work in my own way.

But, to wrap it up: White Sharia is a meme being bandied about by scrappy lads with more or less good hearts, who want to see the West succeed and so hold our weakness and indulgence in contempt; gentry, lesser aristocracy and pseudo-intellectuals will find plenty to cluck at in regards to it, either because they are open “cucks,” or because they find it uncouth, or because they are still Liberals in ways that they do not understand for themselves; men with hearts deeply immersed in the West’s authentic Tradition will recoil from the meme, too, for reasons Citadel well described – and I dislike the meme, as well. But, until a real aristocracy returns not only to exposit the Western Tradition, but also to enshrine and enact it in Law, there is probably no point in expecting our rowdy pubes Romana to discipline themselves en masse, and against the grain, towards a Tradition which the youth of ancient or medieval or early modern Rome could simply take for granted.


6 Comments Add yours

  1. Best wishes for your decision and your studies Aurelius. I offered you to the Holy Spirit and will keep praying for you.

    Liked by 1 person

    1. aureliusmoner says:

      Thank you very kindly; I very eagerly crave the prayers of others, not only at the present moment, but going forward. The world is on the brink of something immense; not even the most stalwart nature, apart from God’s grace, will be able to successfully navigate it. While praying for the errant souls of this world, we who wish to stick close to God should not omit frequent remembrances of each other to Him in prayer. Never has error been easier, or perseverance scarcer. I’m sure God still has a few friends in the world, known to Himself; those of us who want to join their number and persevere therein, need all the prayer and grace we can get.


  2. Lee says:

    Truly enlightening as always.


    1. aureliusmoner says:

      Many thanks!


  3. Corvinus says:

    “A king, endowed by grace with the judgment to know truth when he hears it (despite not having the time to exhaustively study it), and the gift of leadership, so as to inspire the allegiance of common men and to at least obtain the acquiescence or obedience of benevolent (potential or pseudo-)intellectuals, is the missing piece.”

    How do you propose to convince tens of millions of white people that they must lay down their liberties and subject themselves to a monarchy? Who fits this description currently to lead? Who are these aristocrats that you speak of? Who will be the foot soldiers to ensure that the monarchy will not be challenged? How would this new government look like?

    These simple questions by the mid-wits of this earth serve as the shiv to the Alt Right philosophers.


    1. aureliusmoner says:

      No offense, but before you speak so snarkily of “mid-wits” wielding a “shiv” against the Alt-Right, I have to ask: have you not read any history?

      How have any kings or aristocracies come to rule over others? You speak as though this were not a recurring event in history. Obviously, there will be conflict; these men – the aristocrats, the monarch, etc., will emerge from the already beginning period of conflict and instability. Millions of people have already lain down their liberties and now live as slaves to the “Democratic” state; many I know would happily crown Trump a king and take their chances that he might give them a better shot at stability and normalcy than the current “Liberal” system. So, such an eventuality is hardly impossible, nor is it even improbable.

      It should be obvious that Democracy is not a safeguard of human rights – far more likely a guard of people’s genuine liberties, is a natural hierarchy rooted in reverence for natural law. Obviously the system will not be perfect, but plenty of Medieval and early modern people dealt with far less violation of their legitimate rights, than do the modern homunculi groaning under a system that does not recognize any transcendent principle in the first place.


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s