Click to Subscribe
‘The European Age’
White Nationalist, Mescaline Franklin, Asks the Author to Define the Modern Age
This past Tuesday night, when Forever Autumn Press publisher Mescaline Franklin and I sat in the book store coffee shop selecting art work for book covers he paused, and then went off on a tangent:
“In White Nationalist circles there are various opinions on how to define the Modern Age—the critique over Modernity being such a big thing right now with people reading Spengler and Evola, and listening to Bowden’s talks. You seem more like you’re coming from an Evola perspective. You know, he spent the last half of his life in a wheelchair. He used to go out for walks during the War of Globalist Aggression and got cut down by artillery. When he went on trial for his writing he was in a wheelchair.
“A lot of people pick 1492 as the date, and I realize that is just a watermark—if not Columbus someone else would have used the available technology to get to the Western Hemisphere. Any way you cut it North America becomes an English trading post trying unsuccessfully to form a meaningful cultural identity that goes beyond materialism.
“In your mind—since you’ve read so much and you’re on the fringe of this discussion—what, in your opinion, constitutes the Modern Age, the Span of Modernity?”
What follows is a summation of my five minute answer to this fiercely inquisitive young heretic’s rather obvious but little discussed question. I see The Modern Age preceded by three causal events over 200 years, then spanning from 1648 to 1945 for a neat 300 year reign, and followed by a three stage postmodern decline of about 100 years, making The European Age almost precisely 600 years from awakening in 1453 to its eventual nadir about 2050.
1. The act that was most responsible for triggering the European drive to circumnavigate The Lands of Islam, in what was then conceived of as a worldwide religious war, was the fall of Constantinople to the Turks in 1453.
2. The act that directly enabled the European powers to acquire resources worldwide, with which to bring to bear military force against Islam from every corner of the compass, was Columbus’s discovery of the New World in 1492.
3. The Conquest of Central and South America by the Spanish and Portuguese and the Settlement of Eastern North America by the French and English, and of Southwestern North America by the Spanish, between 1517 and 1618, acquired for European Culture the resources of a third of the earth, setting the stage for a global age.
4. The date I choose to mark the inception of the Modern Age—which is one in the same as the European Age—is The Peace of Westphalia, which forever did away with feudal war-making and ushered in national military machine building on the ancient Roman model, in 1648.
5. The American and French revolutions set the stage for globalist ideological, economic and military systems between the years of 1776-1789.
6. The Russian Revolution completed the tilt from nationalist to globalist thinking in the European mind, and involved every major people on earth directly in the globalist conflicts [underway since 1914] in the year 1917.
7. The bombing of Hiroshima closed the two-generation War of European Suicide and ushered in the Postmodern Global Age proper, in 1945.
8. The European postscript began with the 911 attacks in New York and Washington D.C., awakening the bedridden American Gulliver in time to know that he was about to be drowned in the surf of the ages, in 2001.
9. I am expecting the Postmodern Global Age to pass along as a brief epilogue to the European Age with the last vestiges of European domination—the most obvious being the U.S Nuclear Aircraft Carrier fleet—in or around 2050.
What follows I shall never know:
1. A Global Islamist Age
2. A Global Chinese Age
3. A purely Global Corporate Age
4. Or some Dark Age of nationalistic rediscovery, tribalism and resurgent masculinity?
War Gaming Note
If you would like to see an illustration as to how European [and imitative Japanese] mercantile empire building came to a crescendo of third world domination, as literally every village on the planet was forwarding some material good to a European [or Japanese] economy, play the game Pax Britanica. It is an incredible—for being pro British and a politically dispassionate—simulation, of the balance of power, and the truly global nature of the world economy before mass communication or even oil exploitation.
Playing this game, designed by an Anglophile, gives the player a clue as to the inevitability of WWI. However, despite the fact that the game box art depicts a colonial British officer receiving the submission of Middle Eastern natives, it seemed astonishing to all seven of us players who engaged in this two month long game over the course of this spring, that Great Britain would come out looking like the empire with justice on its side. One of the players even brought a National Geographic issue devoted to flags of the British Empire, to which over 100 nations paid homage!
Although the Japanese and other European powers certainly conducted themselves on the global stage in a very unsavory manner, Britain comes off as the worst of a nasty imperial old boy’s club, exceeded in rampant brutality only by the Belgians—who every native to ever come under the boot heel of a Belgian mercenary was certainly hoping the Germans would eradicate in the coming industrial brawl.
prev:  Breaking the Game     ‹  gaming  ›     next:  Reign of Fire
the lesser angels of our nature
logic of steel
book of nightmares
the fighting edge
Sam J.Feb 1, 2016

I must protest. It is only with hindsight that we attribute ALL brutality to Europeans and the English. What if instead of Europeans discovering and defeating America the American Indians had defeated Europe? Temples covering the planet where every other day they ripped the hearts out of children and ate the remains.

Maybe you think the Negros could do better. Try looking at this book.

The Chinese...great leap forward, Mao's Red Guard.

The Indians in India. Well a group of people that worship Kali the God of Death can never be expected to be of much use.

The truth of the matter is we fall behind morally by our OWN standards and for most everyone else they HAVE NONE AT ALL.

We believe in the little guy and since we got so big...well we're the bad guy. This torturous self criticism has gone too far. To the extent that for some reason Muslims are invading Europe and we feel as if we deserve it. As if the Muslims ever did anything worth a damn for anyone. They should board these people up in flimsy boats made of lacquered cardboard and particle board and push them off back to the Middle East.

Want to know the future. Watch this video.

That thing at 5:42 scares the hell out of me. The Jews bought the company that makes all these. Guess why?

Dennis M. Bushnell, Future Strategic Issues/Future Warfare [Circa 2025] " he goes over the trends of technology coming up and how they may play out. His report is not some wild eyed fanaticism it's based on reasonable trends. Link.

Page 19 shows capability of the human brain and time line for human level computation.

Page 70 gives the computing power trend and around 2025 we get human level computation for $1000.

In 15-20 years they will kill every one on the planet and use these things to serve them. Then they will of course kill themselves as they are a bunch of psychopaths and can't stand to be subservient to anyone. Even themselves.

As for the Germans. I have great sympathy for them. They were born in what turned out to be a bad neighborhood for natural expansion of their great vigor. They were destroyed. Truth is though Great Britain had ALWAYS balanced powers on the continent. Hitler should have known this but he created this allusion that the British were reasonable and he didn't want to end their Empire. He was wrong. He should have never attacked Poland. The British had the right idea as they were very narrowly able to defeat Germany and only with world wide help. If that damn fool Goering running the Luftwaffe had not screwed up so bad they might have actually won.

An aside. Goering told Hitler during the battle of Stalingrad that he could deliver so many tons of supplies. He knew he couldn't. He just didn't want to fall under Hitler's wrath for saying so, so he just lied and by the time Hitler found out it was too late. Hitler was no fool and if he knew the supplies were not forthcoming could have made an orderly retreat. Stalingrad really hurt the Germans. Lot's of loss of Men and materials. Maybe they still would have lost but a little more time and they were pushing some very advanced weapons. The V rockets promised long range destruction at low cost. Their coal to oil was moving forward. Jet fighters. Not to mention the moral of the Germans and the German army. A set back is one thing with a retreat during the winter, notably one the worst winters ever in history, but a defeat is another thing. The German offices blamed all this on Hitler yet he didn't deserve it. He was mislead by his officers.

Tactically he was brilliant. It was Hitler who wanted to go after the oil fields. The officers were the ones that wanted to attack deep into Russia and play capture the King (Stalin). Hitler knew resources were the key.
responds: Feb 3, 2016

Nice piece, Sam J. I would like to post it as an article.

Brutality is just the normal human condition, in my view.

I'm chiefly talking about how certain rich or greedy business men from one country used that brutality as an industry, which I find reprehensible.
Add a new comment below: