Race or Mongrel, by Alfred P. Schultz

That's French for "the ancient system," as in the ancient system of feudal privileges and the exercise of autocratic power over the peasants. The ancien regime never goes away, like vampires and dinosaur bones they are always hidden in the earth, exercising a mysterious influence. It is not paranoia to believe that the elites scheme against the common man. Inform yourself about their schemes here.

Re: Race or Mongrel, by Alfred P. Schultz

Postby admin » Fri Apr 09, 2021 6:12 am


The Hindoos were one of the Aryan races. That is, they belonged to the people that called themselves "Aryans" (the noble, the honourable). When they came to India, they found there a mass of yellow-black-white mongrels, and recognized that the absorption of this mass was impossible. They also recognized that crossing with these people would destroy the Hindoos quickly.

The Hindoos were fanatical Aryans, and among the yellow-black-white mongrels, they developed an intense exclusiveness. They described the old inhabitants of the country as Dasyus, Rakshasas, fiendish creatures and monsters. When allied to them, they speak of their allies as monkeys and of their king as the king of monkeys.

In the Veda we find these sentiments:

"Indra hurl thy shaft against the Dasyu, and increase the might and glory of the Arya."

"Distinguish Indra the Arya and those who are Dasyu."

"Indra having killed the Dasyu, protected the Aryan colour."

"I do not give over the Aryan name to the Dasyu."

"Indra, increase the Aryan power."

"Indra, the companion of the Arya."

"Indra uncovered the light for the Arya. The Dasyus was left on the left hand."

"I gave the earth to the Arya and rain to the liberal mortals."

"The gods spread all over the earth the Aryan laws."

Arya was considered a name of honour. Darius calls himself Ariya and Ariya kitra, an Aryan and of Aryan descent. The same element enters into many Persian names, Ariaramnes, Ariobazanes, Atrabages, Artaxerxes.

The Hindoos recognized that, unless they took vigorous precautions, the Aryans would soon be lost in the mongrel herd. To protect themselves they invented the caste system, one of the greatest inventions of the human mind. The Aryans were the three upper castes, viz., the Brahmanas, Cshatriyas, and Vaisyas. The classes they called varna, which meant colour, and has since come to mean caste. The priests, who, among primitive people, are the observers, scientists, artists, and poets, constituted themselves the first caste, the caste of the Brahmins. They were of the purest Aryan blood. The Aryans of warlike tendencies were constituted as the Cshatriya caste, and the rest of the Hindoos were constituted as the Vaisya caste, the householders, the merchants, and the cultivators of the soil.

The importance of the Vaisya caste was recognized by the Hindoos. The Manava-Dharma-Sastra says: "The means of subsistence peculiar to Vaisya are merchandise, attending on cattle and agriculture; but with a view to the next life; . . . with vigilant care should the king exert himself in compelling merchants and mechanics to perform their respective duties; for when such men swerve from their duty, they throw this world into confusion."

The rights of each caste were rendered hereditary and inalienable. The king himself could not abrogate the rights of caste. Outside of these three castes there were no Aryans, no twice born men. The natives were constituted as a fourth caste, the Sudra. Their monopoly was the laborious and humble work, and their condition was better than that of the helots or serfs elsewhere; for it was strictly enjoined upon the three upper castes to treat the Sudra well. The Hindoos considered it just that intelligence should rule, and that muscle should work. Their assumption, which underlies the caste system, that intelligence and the better qualities were characteristics of the Aryan and not of the Sudra, their history of five thousand years verified.

The Hindoos were never more than a small minority of the people of India; and of the people of India, the Hindoos alone produced art, science, literature, civilization.

As the Vaisyas were not as pure Aryans as the Cshatriyas, and the Cshatriyas not as pure as the Brahmins, it was ordained that the different castes should not intermarry. Manava-Dharma-Sastra says: In all classes they, and they only, who are born in a direct line of wives equal in class and virgins at the time of marriage are to be considered as the same class with their fathers. ... A woman of the servile classes is not mentioned, even in the recital of any ancient story, as the wife of a Brahmin, or of a Cshatriya, though in the greatest difficulty to find a suitable match."

The intermarriage of the members of one caste with members of another caste was strictly prohibited. The Madana-Ratna-Pradipa says: "The marriage of twice born men with damsels not of the same class . . . these parts of ancient law were abrogated by wise legislators."

"From a Cshatriya with a wife of the Sudra class springs a creature called Ugra, with a nature partly warlike, and partly servile, ferocious in his manners, cruel in his acts. . . . Him who was born of a sinful mother, and consequently in a low class, but is not openly known, who, though worthless in truth, bears the semblance of a worthy man, let people discover by his acts. Want of virtuous dignity, harshness of speech, cruelty and habitual neglect of prescribed duties betray in this world the son of a criminal mother."

There were in India savage tribes unable to perform the duties of the Sudra class. These miserable tribes the Hindoos called Mlekha. They were also gained over to the Brahminical system. The Brahmins went as hermits into the settlements of the Mlekha, and preached their system of metempsychosis, and were cut down. Other Brahmins came to take their places. They again were killed. Still others came, and the cheerfulness with which these men went to suffering and death struck terror into the souls of the natives, who began to question, "Who are these men?"

And this answer was returned, "We are the most exalted of men, kings bow down before us. We have reached this station not without desert, and in the next' life we shall become one with Brahma, the God of gods, a unit in the divine essence. In previous lives we were as miserable as you are. Believe us, be virtuous and dutiful and you will become exalted. The virtuous Mlekha is reborn as a Sudra, the virtuous Sudra as a Vaisya, the virtuous Vaisya as a Cshatriya, the virtuous Cshatriya as a Brahmin, and the virtuous Brahmin as one with the divinity. On the other hand, the Brahmin who neglects his duties will be punished in hell and be reborn as a Sudra, a Mlekha, or lower even in the scale of life." The Hindoos had no eternal hell. As the son of a Sudra may thus attain the rank of a Brahmin, and as the son of a Brahmin may sink to the level with Sudras, even so must it be with him who springs from a Cshatriya; even so with him who was born of a Vaisya. (v. Manava-Dharma-Sastra.)

The conviction of the Brahmins convinced the Mlekha, and they were ready to become the lowest order of the Brahminical system.

There were Hindoos in India who disregarded the caste system, and a half-breed population began to spring up. The Hindoos, intent on keeping their race pure, sought to remedy the evil. It was not always possible to strike at the parents, and so they struck at the offspring. They declared the half-breed population Chandalas. They were considered the most contemptible of the base born; their touch was polluting, a pollution of which the Cshatriya could purify himself by cutting the Chandala down. The brook that they had taken water from was cursed. Their places of refuge were to be destroyed. They were refused admission into villages and cities. That was the law. Its enforcement was prevented by the gentleness of the Hindoo character. The Chandala was despised, but he lived; lived in villages, that the Hindoo had the right to burn down. The contempt in which the Chandala was held had this good effect: it prevented the mongrelization of the Hindoos for several thousand years. History attests that the Chandala fully deserved the contempt which the Hindoos entertained for him.

About 500 B.C. Gautama Sacyamuni taught Buddhism. Brahmanism demanded active virtues, Buddhism was content with passive, cloistered virtues. Brahmanism demanded self-sacrifice and work; Buddhism was satisfied with the admission of sin, and established the confession. The sinner confessed to the priest that he was a scoundrel, and he promptly became a saint. Brahmanism taught purification by faith and virtue and final union with God (eternal life). Buddhism taught the confession and eternal death. Virtue in the Brahminical sense meant the performance of duty, faith, self-abnegation, work. Contemplation and confession satisfied the Buddhists. It was but natural that this religion of ease soon found many followers; being the religion of a yellow, it appealed to the race instincts of the yellows.

Nothing demonstrates the superiority of the whites over the yellows better than the fact that for a thousand years Buddhism existed in India, without being able to change the Brahminical order in the least. About 500 A.D. Buddhism considered itself strong enough to supplant Brahmanism. The result was war, which finally ended in the complete expulsion of Buddhism from India. This success the Brahminical order achieved, notwithstanding the fact that it was continuously at war with foreign enemies.

After the time of the Sultan of Ghasna, the Brahminical society did not have a moment's peace. After Mahmud's Persians came the Turks, the Mongols, the Afghanists, the Persians of Nadir Shah, the Portuguese, the French, and the English. None of them was able to break the Brahminical system.

Buddhism had this baneful effect upon India, that, by disregarding the caste system, the Buddhists increased the Chandala class enormously. The time came when there was no family without mongrel members; the meaning of varna was forgotten. It came to mean work, occupation; and the mongrel was no longer held in contempt, but the workman. The caste system, that wonderful invention which for millenniums enabled the Hindoos to remain true to themselves, to produce art, science, a great religion, civilization, has become a curse and a folly. Why should there be a caste system where all are Chandalas? The white-yellow-black mongrel is worthless. As far as the progress of civilization, the progress of man is concerned, three hundred million rats might as well be fed as three hundred million mongrels. The caste system has no power to demongrelize vitiated blood.

In the last centuries Brahmanism has degenerated rapidly, and it is now fast crumbling to pieces; not because the English are in India, but because the impetus which the Hindoos, before they became extinct, gave to it is expending itself. In a like manner the Roman system outlived the death of the last Roman by several centuries. The English rule India to-day; and that foreigners, Aryans, should rule the degenerate offspring of the Hindoos is not only just, but in accordance with the Hindoo Scriptures: "Indra is the companion of the Arya and increases the Aryan power, Indra gives the earth to the Arya and spreads all over the earth the Aryan laws." The literature of the Hindoos is the only one in India deserving of the name. Sanscrit is the only language of poetry, drama, law, philosophy. The deterioration of the Hindoos can be traced through the centuries, in their art, their science, their literature, and their religion.

Many surgical operations, which we consider triumphs of modern surgery, were invented by the Hindoos. They were skilled in performing amputations, lithotomy, abdominal and uterine operations; they operated for hernia, fistula, piles; they set broken bones and had specialists in rhinoplasty or operations for restoring lost ears and noses, operations which modern surgeons have borrowed from them. To-day the medical and surgical knowledge of the mongrel calling himself Hindoo is nil.

The Hindoos invented the so-called Arabic notation of numbers, and algebra; to-day they have no mathematical science deserving of the name.

The later epics of the Hindoos are of an artificial character. The ancient epics are great works, which abound in passages of high poetic beauty. Plays written later than the eleventh century belong to the period of decline. One of them, the Anargha-Raghava, a drama full of obscurities and of commonplace sentiments, enjoys a higher reputation with the mongrels of the present age than the masterpieces of Kalidasa. Many of these later dramas are incomplete in their dialogue.

The absurdities of modern Brahmanism are known. The great Brahmins of the Saras vati would regard it as defiled by association with the Dasyu.

The study of the literature of the Hindoos taught us that the vicious practices which prevail in India are late innovations; that is, inventions of the post-Hindoo mongrels. Thus the rite of suttee (cremation of the widow) sprang up as a local habit, and on becoming more prevalent received the sanction of the Brahminical mongrels. The English stamped out the atrocious custom, and the depraved instinct of the mongrels invented the " cold suttee." The Hindoo Scriptures do not authorize the cremation of the widow, but bid her return to her home and resume her duties. The cow has always been held in India in high esteem. She was not, however, the " Saint Cow " that she now is. To-day the eating of a beef steak in India is a cardinal sin, while in Hindoo times beef was an ordinary article of food.

The position of women in India to-day is degraded. The Maha-bharata tells us of the esteem in which women were held in Maha-bharata times:

"A wife is half the man, his truest friend,
A loving wife is a perpetual spring
Of virtue, pleasure, wealth; a faithful wife
Is his best aid in seeking heavenly bliss;
A sweetly speaking wife is a companion
In solitude; a father in advice;
A mother in all seasons of distress;
A rest in passing through life's wilderness."

In order to clearly demonstrate the height from which the Hindoos have fallen, it will be best to quote from their ancient writings; and it will be noticed that many of the Brahminical sentiments are identical with Christian sentiments as we find them in the Gospels, an identity due to the fact that both are religions by Aryans for Aryans. The ancient Hindoos had a simple theistic creed, now innumerable gods crowd the Pantheon, appealing to the instincts of the mongrels. The post-Hindoo is ripe for Buddhism, for Christianity, the vegetable pantheon of the Egyptians, or any other creed that may be preached him. The mongrel, being destitute of character, can accept and adopt anything. I quote from the Bhagavad-Gita:

"Many are my births that are passed, many are thine too, Arjuna; I know them all, but thou knowest them not." (Cf. John viii. 14.)

"For the establishment of righteousness am I from time to time born." (Cf. John xviii. 37, John hi. 3.)

"I am dearer to the wise than all possessions, and he is dear to me."

"The unbeliever, the ignorant, and he of a doubting mind perish utterly." (Cf. Mark xvi. 16.)

"In him are all beings, by him this universe was spread out." (Cf. Acts xvii. 28.)

"Deluded men despise me when I have taken human form." (Cf. John i. 10.)

"In all the Vedas I am to be known." (Cf. John v. 39.)

Read Chapter XI, called "The Vision" (Krishna and Arjuna).

In Panini, the Hindoos have produced the greatest grammarian that ever lived, whose grammar is the great standard of Sanscrit. It is one of the most remarkable literary works that the world has ever seen, and no other country produced a grammatical system at all comparable to it, either for originality of plan or for analytical subtlety. Panini's grammar was criticized by the celebrated Katyayana. His great rival was Patanjali.

We know from the Rig-veda that the movements of the moon and its use as the time measurer were studied by the Hindoos as early as 500 B.C. Aryabata knew the causes of solar and lunar eclipses, and noticed the motion of the solstitial and equinoctial points. He taught that the earth is a sphere and revolves on its own axis. To the Hindoos is due the invention of algebra and its application to astronomy and geometry. They were acquainted with the properties of the magnet.

From Yajnavalkya's law book I quote:

"Some expect the whole result from destiny or from the inherent nature of things; some expect it from the lapse of time, and some from man's own effort. Other persons, of wiser judgment, expect it from a combination of all these."

"When a Brahmin is a thief, he must be marked with a hot iron and banished from the country."

"Whoever falsifies scales, and edicts, measures or coins, or does business with them so falsified, should be made to pay the highest fine."

"Any one who adulterates medicine, or oil, or salt, or perfume, or corn, or sugar, or other commodities, should be made to pay sixteen Panas."

"The highest fine should be imposed on those who, knowing the rise or fall in prices, combine to make a price of their own to the detriment of workmen and artisans."

Of the ancient Hindoo epics, Monier Williams says: "Notwithstanding the wilderness of exaggeration and hyperbole through which the reader of the Indian epics has occasionally to wander, there are in the whole range of the world's literature few more charming poems than the Ramayana. The classical purity, clearness, and simplicity of its style, the exquisite touches of true poetic feeling with which it abounds, its graphic descriptions of heroic incidents and nature's grandest scenes, the deep acquaintance it displays with the conflicting workings and most refined emotions of the human heart, all entitle it to rank among the most beautiful compositions that have appeared at any time or in any country. It is like a spacious and delightful garden, — here and there allowed to run wild, but teeming with fruits and flowers, watered by perennial streams, and even its most tangled thickets intersected with delightful pathways."

The following sentiments are found in the Ramayana and in the Maha-Bharata:

"Even to foes who visit us as guests
Due hospitality should be displayed;
The tree screens with its leaves the man, who fells it.

"This is the sum of all true righteousness.
Treat others, as thou wouldst thyself be treated.
Do nothing to thy neighbour, which hereafter
Thou wouldst not have thy neighbour do to thee.
In causing pleasure, or in giving pain,
In doing good, or injury to others,
In granting or refusing a request,
A man obtains a proper rule of action
By looking on his neighbour as himself.

"No being perishes before his time,
Though by a hundred arrows pierced; but when
His destined moment comes, though barely pricked
By a sharp point of grass, he surely dies.

"He by whose hands the swans were painted white,
And parrots green, and peacocks many hued,
Will make provisions for thy maintenance.
"Strive not too anxiously for a subsistence,
Thy maker will provide thee sustenance,
No sooner is a human being born,
Than milk for his support streams from the breast."

-- Hitopadesa, Monier Williams.

Of Hindoo dramatists, Kalidasa and Bhavabhuti are superior to most of the Western poets. Kalidasa's "Sakuntala" drew unqualified praise from Gothe, in the following words:

"Wouldst thou the young year's blossoms and the fruit of its decline,
And all by which the soul is charmed, enraptured, feasted, fed?
Wouldst thou the earth and heaven itself in one sole name combine?
I name thee, Sakuntala, and all at once is said."

-- Monier Williams.

The Hindoos were a great race. Their death was a loss to the world, a loss that it is impossible to over-estimate. Men who call themselves Hindoos still exist, Sanscrit derivatives are still spoken, the Hindoo spirit, however, is dead; the noble blood has been lost in the Indian quagmire, in the yellow-black-white swamp.

It would seem that nothing in this world could bring about the deterioration and degradation of as great a race as the Hindoo race; but bastardization, mongrelization, continued throughout many centuries, has done it.

The history of the Hindoos, like that of the Jews, proves that race is more important than home, country, flag, and everything else put together.

Great was the Hindoo; worthless is the mongrel.

Read "Indian Wisdom," by Monier Williams; "The Inequality of the Human Races," by A. Conte de Gobineau; "Volkstum und Weltmacht in der Geschichte," by Albrecht Wirth.

Note. The translations are from Monier Williams's "Indian Wisdom."  
Site Admin
Posts: 32961
Joined: Thu Aug 01, 2013 5:21 am

Re: Race or Mongrel, by Alfred P. Schultz

Postby admin » Mon Apr 12, 2021 3:40 am


The Hellenes were an Aryan race. They tell us that before they came to Greece the country was inhabited by the Pelasgians. These were not felt to be alien from them (Thucydides, Homer), and we now know that the Pelasgians were the ancestors of the Hellenes. Philologists tell us that "Pelasgian" means "the emigrant" and was the name given by the Hellenes to their kinsmen who first emigrated to Greece.

The early history of Greece is the first chapter in the history of Europe. From the very first we recognize the great qualities of the race which later produced a culture which, in its uninterrupted development and in the grandeur of the works produced, is unique. The old legends of European Greece; tell us of elements in their civilization which came from the East. Be it remembered that the East was not an Oriental East, but a Hellenic East. At that time the coast of Asia Minor was Hellenic.

As early as 1000 B.C. the Greeks had attained to a high degree of culture. The centre of Hellenic life then was Mycenae. It was the Greece of Homer. The government was a limited monarchy. Like all races of the Aryan world, they recognized the principle that no rule should be absolute. The king was bound by the traditions of his people, and guided by a council of elders. All matters of importance were brought before the assembly. The Achaeans distributed the spoil, not Agamemnon. There was no priest rule. The judicial function rested with the elders.

The influence of Egypt and Phoenicia on early Greek art was not great; everything that the Greeks borrowed, they assimilated. They changed it, not only in degree but in kind, by impressing their genius upon it. K. O. Muller says that the organic development of Greek culture was like the organic development of a plant. He denies altogether a foreign influence.

Mycenae was one of the oldest of Greek towns. Its walls furnish an example of the skill of the ancient Greeks. The masonry of the "treasure houses" shows remarkable skill. In the Mycenaic period buildings, built of polygonal blocks, of great size and completion existed. The column was known. Their fortifications, their palaces, their tombs, and their fountains excited the admiration of antiquity. Their skill in working in metals was great. They made well-shaped vessels of gold, silver, and other metals, bracelets, rings, belts, and other ornaments.

The art of pottery was known. They were carvers in wood and ivory. Sculpture in low flat relief was practised; weaving and embroidery were done by the women. It was once supposed that the many ornaments found were imported from Egypt and Assyria, but we know now that not only the architecture, the plastic works, and the mural paintings were home products, but also the metal ornaments and the cut stones. Foreign elements are not absent, but they are not at all numerous. The beauty and completion of some of the works of art of Mycenae are the works of the Hellenic genius. It is this early Hellenic culture in praise of which Homer sings his mighty song.  

The Iliad and the Odyssey represent the highest development of epic poetry. They are revelations of the Greek genius. Homer was more to the Greeks than the Bible ever was to Christians. "As soon as a child is able to learn anything at all," says a Greek writer, "Homer gives him the first lessons; the young soul is nourished with his heroic songs, as the most wholesome milk. Homer remains the companion of adult life, the friend of old age."

Homer's influence on Alexander the Great was commented upon by the ancients; and we know that he carried with him everywhere a copy of Homer's Iliad and that his proud motto was the word of Peleus to his heroic son, "Be ever the first and strive to do better than others."

Sophocles was called the Homer of tragedy, on account of the sweetness and harmony of his language. Aeschylus speaks of his tragedies as "crumbs from the rich banquet of Homer." The wonderful statues of Hellas, breathing eternal youth, are the reflections of the Homeric sun. We are told that a few verses of Homer inspired Pheidias to the creation of his Zeus.

The episode which Homer chose for his song is the "anger of Achilles." The Iliad is historical in character. The interest is purely dramatic. Homer's power of characterization is as great as Shakespeare's. Every actor he introduces is an individual: Agamemnon, irritable and easily discouraged; Achilles, the embodiment of chivalric nobility; Aias, valiant and proud and haughty; Diomedes, modest and loyal; Nestor, the wise counsellor; the laconic Menelaos; and all the others down to the misshapen Thersites. In the Trojan camp the hoary Priam; Hector, the noble and unfortunate opponent of Achilles (his farewell to Andromache depicts the tender love of the strong man for wife and child); Andromache, Helen, and Hecuba, all reveal a wonderful power of characterization.

It is due to Homer, to his similes and figurative expressions, that we know the life of Greece of the Mycenaic period as well as we know that of Athens in the time of Pericles. We see the moon and the stars shine on the lonely shepherd. The infinite ocean stretches before us, the storm rises, and powerless does man view the raging of the elements. We observe the animals in the woods, the soaring of the swans and cranes; we see the men at work, the carpenter, the potter, the smith in his workshop, the reaper on the field, the hunter following the chase, the wood-cutter in the forest, the shepherd and his flock, the women spinning and weaving. We see the life of the soldier and of the sailor.

Family life is patriarchal and is eminently humane. Polygamy is unknown, the position of women is high. Many of the pictures of life presented breathe a noble simplicity of character. Lord and serf share troubles and enjoyments, and even the vagrant beggar is under the protection of Zeus.

Truly sublime is the Homeric frankness. "Hateful as the portals of Hades is he who conceals in his heart other thoughts than he utters," is as true of Homer as of Achilles. Homer's scenes are as effective and as dramatic as the best of Shakespeare. The way in which he makes the characters reveal themselves, his sincerity and conscientiousness, are truly Shakespearian. Characters are sketched in a single scene.

Shelley says: "As a poet Homer must be acknowledged to excel Shakespeare in the truth, the harmony, the satisfying completeness, the sustained grandeur of his images;" and Matthew Arnold says: "The translator of Homer should above all be penetrated by a sense of four qualities of his author : that he is eminently rapid; that he is eminently plain and direct both in the evolution of his thought and in the expression of it; that he is eminently plain and direct in the substance of his thought; and, finally, that he is eminently noble."

In Homer the interest centres in the characters he depicts, and any adventure happening to them is interesting. The interest is dramatic, lying wholly in the feelings and actions of the characters. There are but very few poems in the world's literature that rank with the Iliad, and every one of these is the work of the Teutonic genius. The Niblung or Volsungen Saga belongs to all Teutonic peoples, and is in substance, though not in workmanship, as noble a work as the Iliad. Shakespeare's Hamlet and Gothe's Faust are as epics not inferior to the Iliad, and the dramatic vigour of the Iliad is surpassed not even in Shakespeare or Gothe.

With the migration of the Dorians commenced the development of an independent style of architecture. The acquisitions of the Mycenaic period continued to be practised, and the wooden column continued to be used. In the main, however, new styles had to be created. The Mycenaic architects had built castles, palaces, spacious houses for the living and for the dead; now the Greeks desired to build temples for their gods. The massiveness and extent of the Assyrian and Egyptian temples appealed not to the Greeks, who developed a style in which they built, at a later period, temples that were never surpassed in the spiritualization of all forms and ornaments, in their perfect harmony and simplicity and their exquisite beauty. The conception of beauty in architecture as created by the Greeks has become the common possession of all peoples. As beautiful as the style of architecture, are the ornaments that the Greeks employed. There is not a single form, not a single ornament, which has not permeated the art of later times.

First in importance in Grecian architecture is the use of the columns. The three orders are the Doric, the Ionian, and the Corinthian. A perfectly cylindrical column would in the atmosphere of Greece appear constricted, and to counteract that effect, the Greeks had the columns swell a little toward the middle. It is a swelling of the most delicate curvature, and is an aesthetic effect counteracting an optical illusion. It is due to the same peculiarity of the atmosphere that in strong light columns appear flat, not round. The Greeks, therefore, furrowed the columns; and, as each of the furrows is again a cylindrical figure, it adds to the appearance of rotundity.

The Ionic order was first employed in Asia Minor. The shaft of the column is more slender than the shaft of the column of the Doric order, and it has a base and a capital with volutes. Vitruvius says: "In the Doric order the Greeks imitated the naked simplicity and dignity of man; in the Ionic order the delicate beauty and the ornaments of women. They put a base to the column, like the sandals of a woman, and formed the capital with volutes, like the hair which hangs on both sides of her face." Columns with foliated capitals (Corinthian order) were not used in a single Greek temple. In the Caryatic order the Greeks employed statues of women instead of the regular columns. The mouldings of the Greek temples are remarkable for grace and beauty.

The oldest Greek statue of a woman is the Nikandre of Delos, which belongs to the seventh century B.C. It is a very rough figure. Another early statue is that of Hera of Samos. It is as wooden as the Nikandre. As early as 600 b. a, a school of architecture existed in Chios. Archermos, a member of this school, is said to have made the first figure of a flying goddess of Victory. This marks a very great improvement over the earlier figures. The goddess is, however, not at all beautiful ; the face is without expression, and she swings her arms and legs awkwardly in the air. The Apollo by Canachus is a great advance, for it is less pervaded by rigidity than the earlier works. The name of Calamis is associated with the rendering of expression in the female face. His female figures have a soul, and are related to the maidens that, beauty clad, walk on the frieze of the Parthenon.

In the domain of literature this period produced Anacreon, Alcaeos, Simonides, and Sappho, the greatest of female poets. Her one ode to Aphrodite contains more poetry than all the novels and poems written by all the other female writers of all ages.

We come to the time of the Persian wars. Never have men been greater than Leonidas and his companions "when they combed their long hair in the golden sun, awaiting certain death in obedience to the law." Never have men shown a moral fibre superior to that of the Athenians when they twice forsook their city, and left it to the Persians, declaring that the sun would leave its course before they would accept the Persian offer that would make Athens the ruler of Hellas. The battles of Thermopylae, Salamis, Plataea, and Mycale proved the heroic stuff that the Greeks were made of. Another evidence of their strength and of the national enthusiasm that stormed through the Hellenic world, is the fact that at the time when the Greeks defeated the Persians, the Greeks of Sicily repulsed the Carthaginians.

After the Persian wars Greek culture reached its highest development. The barbarians had demolished the temples. The Hellenes were eager to rebuild them. They had broken the statues. The Hellenes were eager to erect others. The works produced in this period are masterpieces. The first great sculptor is Myron. We have only few copies of his statues. He seized for his representation the moment of most rapid action, indicated by his discobolus and his Marsyas. The anatomy of the body is faultless. The face of Marsyas exhibits fear and covetousness. Myron's figures had an ethical substance. He created not only muscular athletes but youths of strong will, transfigured by enthusiastic zeal.

The works produced in the time of Pericles were famous for their beauty throughout the world at the time of their creation, and they are sublime to-day. Eternal youth hovers about them. The chief artist of the period is Pheidias, the greatest sculptor that the world has produced. His fame rests chiefly on the colossal statues of Athene and Zeus. These statues were in gold and ivory. The head of Zeus was so singularly powerful, and at the same time so mild and benevolent, that an early Christian artist copied it for a type of Christ. The opinion has been advanced that the Olympic Zeus of Pheidias is the original of the well-known type of Christ with the beard. In the sculptures of the Parthenon we have works which were modelled by Pheidias, some finished by his own hands, others executed under his care and supervision.

The Parthenon is a masterpiece of architecture. It is a temple of the Doric order, and was erected by the architects Ictinos and Kallicrates. It was built entirely of white marble. In its exquisite beauty of form and proportion, its perfect harmony and simplicity, it produces the highest effects that architecture is capable of producing. The decorations of the building are the works of Pheidias. They consist of sculptures in the round on the pediments, the metopes in high relief, and the frieze in low relief. The metopes were ninety-two in number. Scenes of combat were the subjects which filled the metopes ; in the east the gods fought with the Titans, in the west the Athenians with the Amazones, in the north and south the Centaurs with the Lapithae.

Along the top of the wall of the temple, on the outside, ran a frieze, on which were sculptured figures representing the Pan-Athenian procession. The beauty of this frieze is marvellous, though the ancients attributed to it a merely decorative importance. The procession wends its way from the west toward the eastern entrance. Every variety of movement is introduced. We see priests, elders, singers, musicians with their instruments, Athenians on prancing coursers (215 horses are in the procession), youths and maidens, chariots, and lambs and oxen for sacrifice. On the east side the gods are sitting, reviewing the procession. The glories of the Parthenon were the sculptures of the two pediments. On the eastern pediment was represented the birth of Athena, and on the western the contest between Athena and Poseidon for the possession of Athens. But a few of these statues remain, and not one of them is in perfect condition. The few that have come down to us, however, are the most powerful that plastic art has ever produced.

Among the many glories of the Acropolis, the Propylaea, the Erechtheion, and the temple of the Goddess of Victory are magnificent. The six statues of women, that are used in the Erechtheion in place of columns, and some of the figures of the Nike temple are almost as perfect as the sculptures of the Parthenon.

Nearly as famous as Pheidias was Polyclitus. He delighted most in producing the forms of ideal athletes. The statue representing the Goddess of Peace, the figure of mother and child by Kephisodotos, is of remarkable beauty. Greater than he was Praxiteles. His Aphrodite is the most beautiful woman that ever lived in stone. The face of his God of Love, "Eros," indicates by its expression of reverie and sadness that the god suffers the pangs of love.

The Greeks coupled the name of Skopos with that of Praxiteles. Not one of his statues has come down to us. Another famous sculptor of this time was Leochares. The Apollo of Belvedere and the Diana of Versailles are said to be his works. Other famous works of art of this time are the groups representing the slaughter of the children of Niobe, and Menelaos with the body of Patroclus. The last great master, the one that stands between the great Hellenic time and the little Hellenistic time, was Lysippus. He was as famous for his figures of deities and ideal athletes as for his portrait statues.

When the conquest of Alexander spread a crust of Greek culture over the East it had the more important result of destroying the Greek race. With the corruption of the Hellenic blood, the Hellenic genius declined, and little is produced, after the time of Alexander, worthy of the Hellenic name. The sculptors no longer created ideal types of gods and men, but made portraits. For a time portraiture inclined to idealism. The idealism soon evaporated and the sculptors were no longer artists but artisans. They were content to copy the types of the old masters.

In architecture the same phenomenon is observed. Greek architecture ceased almost immediately after the beginning of the corruption of blood that depended on Alexander's conquest. The architects adhered closely to the old models — mere imitators. Many centuries elapsed before in the domain of architecture works of art were produced that were equal to the works of the great Greek masters; and these works were the creations of the Teutonic genius — the Gothic churches. Gothic architecture has produced in France, in England, and in Germany monuments second to none in the world. Be it remembered that the Gothic is, in these countries, essentially national in its complete development and character.

There is no art that is not based on race and nationality. There is no international art. That art has the greatest influence on the art of every country which is the most national.

In the domain of architecture, we have deteriorated to that international level, lauded by the friends of eternal peace and of universal uniformity, with the result that we have no architecture. Architecture without art is building, constructing, but not architecture. If the modern buildings of Washington, London, Paris, or Berlin were transferred from any one of these cities to any other city, they would be as much in place there and as much out of place there as everywhere else. They have no character. Internationality means imitation. We erect fine buildings, such as the capitol at Washington; but these buildings are imitations, not art, and it takes greater men than imitators to produce art.

Where there is no national style, nothing great is produced. This is as true of literature, of music, of painting, of every effort, as it is of architecture. Internationally, cosmopolitanism, eternal peace, universal uniformity! It is difficult to say which of these is the greatest evil, the meanest folly, the vilest curse. In Greek literature Pindar stands alone. He is the greatest of Greek lyric poets. An important part of Greek life lives before us, when we witness with him the Olympic games. His works abound in deep thoughts. "Become (develop into) the man, that you are," "Time is the best deliverer of the just," etc.

"Both tragedy and comedy," says Aristotle, "originated in an unpremeditated manner, — the first from the leaders of the dithyramb and the second from those who led off the phallic songs." That is, both originated in the usages of religious worship.

The three great masters of Greek tragedy are Aeschylus, Sophocles, and Euripides. Aeschylus took his plots from the epic poems. A few of Homer's verses contained for him a whole tragedy. The diction of his poetry, his dramatic imagination, are sublime. A titanic spirit breathes in his works. In his Clytaemnestra, Aeschylus has created a character which is not surpassed in the world's literature. Clytaemnestra has killed Agamemnon; and, in a terrible speech she describes and justifies the murder. Her personality attracts and repels us. She is another Lady Macbeth.

Sophocles gave to Greek tragedy the highest degree of ideal beauty. His power of characterization, the harmony of his language, made him the greatest of Greek dramatists, the Homer of tragedy. Two thousand years elapsed before another play was written equal to the Oedipus Tyrannus. In Shelley's opinion King Lear is its modern equivalent. With Euripides Attic tragedy loses its highest beauty. In Medea and Hippolytos he created characters that will last to the end of time. Most of his heroes, however, are sophists, and some of his plays are spectacular plays (Hecuba). In untying complications he was not very skilful and so he introduced the Deus ex machina.

Down to the time of Alexander the Great, Athens remained the home of tragedy. After his time, theatres existed everywhere, but nothing was written for them that was worth anything. Alexandria was for a long time the literary centre, but Greek comedy, as Greek tragedy, ceased to be productive. Of the "new comedy" it was said, "They enjoy the follies of men in our rotten state as flies enjoy fruit in its decay." In the year 217 A.D. the worthless Caracalla abolished the worthless performances in the worthless Alexandria. In the Hellenistic world, the world of the tri-continental mongrel, the externals of Greek culture existed, Greek was the language in general use, the columns, the temples, the statues were there, but the genius which had given life to all these things was dead.

In the domain of the natural sciences and of the speculative sciences, the Greeks were as great as in the domain of art and literature. It was Hippocrates who first delivered medicine from superstition and sophistry. He first recognized that disease was due to natural causes, and that nature cures, not the physician. "The physician is but her servant." He used many of the drugs which we use. He used water in the treatment of disease, and knew more of hydrotherapy than the medical profession after him until the time of Wimternitz. He was father of surgery as well as of medicine. He insisted on the coaptation of fractured bones, performed tapping, trephining, resected bones, opened the chest and the abdomen, and explored the bladder for stones by sounds. He used a raw tar water (a crude carbolic acid, in fact) in the treatment of wounds. His advice to physicians was "do good or at least do no harm." His many discoveries were forgotten by the post-Hellenic mongrels and had to be rediscovered by the Western races.

With Thales of Miletus begins the science of astronomy. He taught that the earth was a sphere, and that the moon receives its light from the sun. He observed eclipses and determined the position of the stars which form the Lesser Bear by which the Phoenicians guided themselves in their voyages. Anaximender invented geographical charts. Pythagoras taught the obliquity of the ecliptic, and recognized that the sun is a fixed star, and that the earth is a planet revolving round it. (This system was revived by Copernicus.) He taught the diurnal motion of the earth about its axis.

It is remarkable that the mystic Pythagoras taught the heliocentric system, that the idealist Plato recognized the same truth, had just notions of the causes of eclipses, and taught that gravity compelled the celestial bodies to move in curves; while the realist Aristotle taught these Pythagorean and Platonic observations to be speculative nonsense. Aristarchus measured the relative distances of sun and moon. Hipparchus found the length of the tropical year to be 365 days, 5 hours, and 49 minutes, which is only twelve seconds greater than the truth. He discovered the eccentricity of the solar orbit, and the precession of the equinoxes. He determined the eccentricity of the solar and of the lunar orbits. He first undertook the formation of a catalogue of the heavenly bodies. Hipparchus was the last great astronomer that the Hellenic race produced.

The post-Hellenic tri-continental mongrel was incapable of continuing the work. Ptolemy was not a great astronomer. His chief work was the collection and arrangement of the ancient observations. His observations are computed from the table of Hipparchus. Long before the time of Ptolemy, the creative power of the Hellenic race had perished in the post-Hellenic mixture.

Men of the Teutonic stock continued the work, — in the fourteenth century George Beurbach, John Muller, of Konigsberg, John Werner, Copernicus (knowing the Poles and their history, we are justified in assuming that Copernicus was not a Pole, and recent investigations have established the fact that he was a German, not a Pole), Tycho Brahe, Kepler, Galileo, Beyer, Newton, Huygens, Halley, and others. In later times men not of the Teutonic stock contributed to our knowledge of astronomy. These depended on the Teutonic thinkers as the Arabs depended on the Greek scientists.

In the domain of philosophy the greatest before Socrates was Heraclitus. In his work "About Nature," he foreshadows more than one modern theory. He holds that all life is the perpetual struggle between contrary forces, and there is no death. Death is birth into a new form, and birth is the death of a previous form.

Pythagoras founded a brotherhood, a monastic com- munity, with aims that were religious, philosophical, and political. He taught monotheism, immortality, and the transmigration of the soul; that there is one God, eternal, unchangeable, ruling and upholding all things. Empedocles knew that blood was sacred. Anaxagoras taught that there was no other change except change of place and grouping. "The notion of change of essence is a contradiction."

Democritus is the founder of the materialistic school. He taught the atomic theory, on which much of our science is based. Socrates taught that the first step to knowledge is the consciousness of ignorance. The next step is to get clear notions. Truth and right are the same for all. Right action is reasonable action. No action is virtuous that is not based on self-knowledge. There is one supreme God; the soul is immortal, and has in it divine elements, the inward monitor, Socrates' daimonion. There is one thing that man can know, and that is man. We can know what we ought to be, and what the aim of our life is. Moral ideas are fundamental to humanity. Education creates nothing. It merely develops the inherent capacity for knowledge.

The sophists had dissolved the union of philosophy of mind and philosophy of nature. Plato reestablished it. He says: "The ends of ethics are the ends of ontology, their ultimate notions are identical." Plato uses the word idea in the sense of species, type, race. The highest idea is the idea of good. It is identical with God. The perfect man looks for reality in the intelligible world, not in the world of the senses. The idea, the type, the race is eternal and persists; the copy, the individual perishes. The idea (the race) is neither a mere notion, nor purely individual knowledge, but an eternal reality. We can know ourselves, and can attain to the knowledge of the highest good through an infallible inner sense.

"This inner sense," Socrates said, "is the moral conscience." Socrates was a skeptic as far as natural philosophy was concerned. Plato was not. According to Plato, this infallible inner sense is not only moral conscience, but also reason; and is capable of revealing to us the absolute, the necessary essence of things. The idea is the universal, the spaceless, and timeless archetype of the individual. The ideas, the types, the races are eternal. It is because the soul is already familiar with the archetype (by heredity, by race) that it is capable of being reminded of it when it sees its shadow in the phenomenal existence. All learning is reminiscence, and can be traced back to the intuitive consciousness of the soul (race, heredity).

The highest idea, the idea of good (God), comprehends, contains, summarizes them all. God is the absolute idea, the One. He exceeds being and essence in dignity and power. He is the universal author of all things, parent of light, source of truth and reason, the supreme wisdom, the supreme justice, lawgiver, and highest law, who rules the beginning, the end, and the middle of things.

The ideas are endowments of the mind, they form its very essence (heredity). They are at first latent in the mind and we are not conscious of them. The senses show us their external copies and remind us of the original existing in us. Sensation (education) provokes ideas, but it does not produce them. Absolute truth is in God alone. God has absolute truth, because he is absolute truth. The immortal part of man, the reason, is of like substance with the soul and essence of the world. God is perfect goodness and righteousness, and he of us who is most righteous is most like him. Virtue should be desired for itself. To do injustice is worse than to suffer injustice. The highest mission of the state is the developing of virtuous and noble citizens. The highest good is being made like to God, and this is effected by that yearning after the ideal which we know by the name of Love.

Plato-Socrates says: "Those of us who think that death is an evil are in error. There is great reason to hope that death is a good. For either death is a state of nothingness, or there is a migration of the soul from this world to another. Now if there is no consciousness, but a sleep undisturbed by dreams, death will be a gain, for eternity is then but a single night. But if death is the journey to another place, and if there all the dead are, what good, my friends, can be greater than this, to converse with Homer, Hesiod, and others? Above all, I shall then be able to continue my search after knowledge. . . . Therefore, be of good cheer about death, and know of a certainty that no evil can happen to a good man either in life or in death. To be released is better for me. I am not angry with my accusers. They have done me no harm, although they did not intend to do me any good, and for this I may gently blame them." When drinking the hemlock: "The hour of departure has arrived and we go our ways, I to die and you to live. Which is better, God only knows." One of his disciples asked him how he would like to be buried, and he answered, they might bury him any way they pleased if they could catch him; he did not expect to be there.

This religion of Pythagoras, Socrates, and Plato is the essence of all religion. It is a Christianity without a dogma.

Aristotle's writings deal with all the sciences known to the ancient world, mathematics, physics, meteorology, logic, zoology, philosophy, ethics, theology, psychology, politics, and sociology. In his philosophy, matter has no reality apart from form. Reality is a concrete thing, consisting of constitutive elements, which reason distinguishes.

The most important of these elements is the idea, which is to Aristotle identical with essence or soul. Matter is its indispensable support. The idea is essential and the cause proper; matter is of secondary importance and a mere condition. Matter and form are eternal; they presuppose and supplement each other. Evolution mediates between them and transforms the former into the latter.

The Supreme Being is the first cause and the final goal of things. God is both the law and the lawgiver, the imminent essence of things and transcendent. Everything is organized, ordered, and harmonized by him.

Aristotle recognized that man was a political being, a social animal. He saw that there were men who were slaves by nature and others who were free men by nature.

In his principles of ethics Aristotle diverges little from Plato. As regards the theory of human good, the aim of life, and the highest good of the soul, Aristotle's agreement with Plato is almost complete. "Nor, again, is Aristotle's divergence from the Socratic principle, that all virtue is knowledge, substantially greater than Plato's. Both accept the paradox in the qualified sense: that perfect virtue is inseparably bound up with perfect wisdom or moral insight. Both, however, see that this moral insight is not to be imparted by mere teaching, but depends rather on careful training in good habits applied to minds of good natural disposition (heredity, race).

Pleasure in Aristotle's view is not the essence of well-being but rather an inseparable accident of it. Human well-being is essentially well-doing, excellent activity of some kind, whether its aim and end be abstract truth or noble conduct; but all activities are attended and in a manner perfected by pleasure, which is better and more desirable in proportion to the excellence of the activity. In general they agree in their ethics, and the doctrine that vicious pleasures are not true or real pleasures is so characteristically Platonic that we are almost surprised to find it in Aristotle." ("Ethics," Encyclop. Br.)

Plato and Aristotle represent the climax of Greek thought. In the depth of his genius, the power of his intuition, the brilliancy of his observations (v. Astronomy), Plato is the greatest master that Hellas produced.

After Aristotle, Hellas produced no great philosopher. The post-Hellenic mongrels were as incapable of producing philosophy and science as they were incapable of producing literature and art. Writers of moral platitudes were considered philosophers, and the time came when Greece was unable to produce writers of platitudes. What Nietzsche says of contemporary university philosophy, may with much greater truth be said of the post-Hellenic philosophers and scientists:

"It is really an inferior race that at present lords it . . . and if Schopenhauer had now to write his treatise on ' University Philosophy ' he would no longer require the club, but would conquer with a bulrush. . . . They look sufficiently like sucklings and dwarfs to remind us of the Indian proverb, 'According to their deeds men are born stupid, dumb, deaf, and misshapen.' Those fathers deserved such posterity. . . . They know little, and are never at a loss for a mystifying phrase to deceive us with regard to their ignorance. They always find reasons why it is more philosophical to know nothing than to learn something. Their secret impulse is to flee from the sciences and establish a gloomy kingdom in one of their gaps and obscurities."

After the time of Pericles and Alexander, that is, after the complete corruption of the Hellenic blood, the history of the Greek cities is very similar to the history of the South American republics. The military prestige of Sparta declined. Sparta itself was changed. Political confusion prevailed. The history of Athens during this time is an inglorious history. At length, in 146 B.C., Greece became a Roman province and the Greek cities succumbed to the Roman yoke.

The next chapter discusses more fully the corruption of the Hellenic blood, on account of which the Hellenes deteriorated into Graeculi, and the Graeculi into the Greeks of modern Greece.
Site Admin
Posts: 32961
Joined: Thu Aug 01, 2013 5:21 am

Re: Race or Mongrel, by Alfred P. Schultz

Postby admin » Mon Apr 12, 2021 4:22 am


As the Greek cities increased in wealth, the number of immigrants became very large, and the number of slaves enormous. " With the industrial growth of the commonwealth, the resident aliens, or, as they were termed, metoeci, grew in number and consideration. They were more numerous in Athens than in any other state" (McCullagh).

When the Macedonians became rulers of Greece, Athens had twenty-one thousand citizens, ten thousand resident aliens, and four hundred thousand slaves. The change that the population underwent is evident from the following: In the battle of Platea, Sparta had fifty thousand combatants, among them five thousand Spartan citizens. In the battle of Leuctra, Sparta could place in the field only one thousand citizens. Sparta had to fight her battles with freed helots. In 370 B.C. Sparta had to liberate six thousand helots in order to be able to defend herself. In 270 B.C. only seven hundred Spartan families were counted in Sparta, one hundred of which owned land; the others were ruined.

A new citizenship was formed by creating Perioecs resident aliens, and helots Spartan citizens. At Sellasia these new citizens were destroyed by Antigonas and the Achteans. Two hundred men only escaped. Mechanidas and Nabis created new citizens by again elevating Perioecs, helots, and resident aliens to that rank. The resident aliens were mainly Aryan-Hamitic-Semitic-Egyptian-Negroid mongrels. The rulers of the Greek cities could give to these men the rights of citizens; they could not give to them the Greek race, not the character, the genius of that race. Gradually the Greeks of the Greek cities were replaced by the Greek-speaking mongrels. The number of foreigners that had drifted into Greece before the time of Pericles, increased by the very great number that came during the time of Pericles, was greater than could be absorbed. Mongrelization was inevitable.

The vitiation of the Hellenic blood caused the rapid decline of the Greek cities. There was but one part of Greece that was still Greek, Macedonia. For Macedonia it would still have been possible to re-Hellenize Greece.

Alexander was not content with ruling Greece; his aim was the conquest of the Eastern world, and he succeeded. If Darius could have placed Medes and Persians in the field against Alexander, history would have a different story to tell; but the mongrel herd at the command of Darius was no match for Alexander's Macedonians. Alexander planned to fuse the Greeks and the people of Asia Minor by intermarriage, and founded many cities in Asia Minor and settled Greek colonists there. In short, he did everything to mongrelize the Greek race. We are told that, as the con- sequence of Alexander's conquest, the East became Hellenized. The truth is that a Hellenic varnish was given to the East, and that Hellas became Asianized, the Greek race thoroughly mongrelized and completely destroyed. The mongrelization of Hellas put an end to the true Hellenic spirit, to its productive genius, its literary and artistic abilities.

It is true that the same kind of civilization prevailed in Asia Minor, Egypt, Greece, and the Greek communities; that Greek had become the world language, and was spoken in the lands stretching from the Indus to the Pillars of Hercules. It is not less true, however, that that vast herd of men speaking Greek was not able to produce anything at all comparable to the works produced by the Greeks, by the Egyptians, or by the Persians. The whole was smaller than any of its parts had been. The Greek-speaking mongrel said very little that was worth reiterating, nothing that was comparable to the utterances of the Greek genius.

In the course of time the Hellenic blood was corrupted to a still greater extent. In 146 B.C. the Romans conquered Greece, and many Greeks perished in the war. When Mummius took Corinth, he ordered the city sacked and burned to the ground. All the men were killed, the women and children sold into slavery. Later the Goths invaded Greece. In 434 Attila became the leader of the Huns. Under him they made savage incursions into Greece, laid waste the land, and expelled or exterminated the inhabitants. After his death, some of the old inhabitants returned, and with them came Herulians, Gepidae, and Sarmatic Slavs into the devastated land. In the North Huns and Alanes remained. In the civil war between Zeno and Basilicus both called the Ostro-Goths for help. These came and brought new settlers with them. Most of these, however, a few years later, went to Italy.

Shortly after their departure, the Bulgarians, with Huns and Slavs, invaded the country, laid waste Thrace, and exterminated most of the inhabitants before they retired. In these invasions the inhabitants who still had some Hellenic blood in their veins were exterminated. Justinus I settled many Illyrians in Greece. In his reign the invasions of the Slavosinians commenced. In the year 539 Greece was again invaded by Huns, Bulgarians, Slavs, Antes, and Gepidae. This time the defence of Thermopylae was inadequate to protect the country. Thebes, Athens, and Corinth alone resisted. The land between Thermopylae and the Gulf of Corinth was changed into a desert. Procopius states that in his time the Slavs had extended their dominions to the boundaries of Hellas. Diocletianopolis had, in an attack by the Slavs, lost all its inhabitants and was in ruins.

Men and the elements seem to have conspired to wipe out every trace of Hellenic blood that still existed. In 531 the plague visited Greece, and its ravages lasted fifty years. At the same time, earthquakes devastated Greece; many cities were destroyed and buried. In Petras alone, four thousand inhabitants were killed by falling houses. Procopius states that, during the reign of Justinian, wars, famines, earthquakes, and the plague killed one hundred million people in the countries of the Mediterranean basin.

About this time the Avares came from Asia to Europe. Bajan-Chan, their leader, incited the Slavs to invade Greece in 578. They crossed the Danube, a hundred thousand men strong, invaded Greece, and extended their incursions as far as the Peloponnesus. Menander states that Hellas was torn to pieces by the Slavs. A few years later Bajan-Chan was at war with the emperor, and at his instigation other hordes of Slavs with Avares poured into Greece. Evagrius writes that in 587 and in 593 the Avares conquered all of Greece and devastated it with fire and sword. After these invasions the Slavs and Avares did not again leave Greece. They remained as the lords of the land, with them Huns and Bulgarians.

When peaceful conditions were again established, a great number of the inhabitants were Slavs, who retained their customs, religion, and language for a long time. Cities, villages, brooks, mountains now have Slavic names. Marathon is Vrana; Salamis, Kiluri; Plataea, Kochla; Olympia, Miraka; Delphi, Kastri; and other places are named Goritza, Vostiza, Caminitza, Pirnatsha, Chlumutzi, Slavitza. Names similar to these are found in Galicia, Poland, and other Slavic countries. Hellenic they are not. During the reign of Empress Irene, Greece became again a part of the Byzantine empire, and the Greek language was gradually adopted by the inhabitants of Greece. As far as language was concerned, Greece was again Hellenized. This was not brought about, however, by Hellenes, but by the Greek-speaking tri-continental mongrel of Constantinople.

In 1204 Venice, having a German-Frankish army at her command, declared war on the Eastern empire and took Constantinople. A Frankish army was landed at Patras (Morea), and many of the knights received latifundia in the Peloponnesus and subsequently remained in Greece. In the fourteenth century the Albanians invaded Greece, and settled there. The influx of Albanians continued for a considerable time. In 1407, we are told, Theodor Paleologus settled ten thousand Albanians, with their wives and children, in the Peloponnesus. Mazari, writing in 1446, states that the Greeks of his time were not a race, but a mixture of the debris of other races. He mentions Tshacones, Italians, Peloponnesians, Slavonians, Illyrians, Egyptians, and Jews. Not even the Jews escaped Mongrelization; many of them intermarried with the inhabitants and became as corrupt as they were.

"These nations of different descent have crossed to the extent that in baseness and wickedness they have become a homogeneous mass. They enjoy quarrel, strife, riot, and the shedding of blood; they are mendacious, cunning, and deceitful; they are as stupid as they are proud, perjured, and faithless, without morals and without virtue" (Mazari).  

The Italoi of Mazari are the descendants of the people who immigrated during the feudal rule, most of them from Naples, Sicily, and Spain; that is, from the most mongrelized parts of Europe. Later, Arabic blood was infused into the mongrel mass.

Sultan Mohammed II settled Turks in the Peloponnesus. In the seventeenth century Venice succeeded in freeing the Peloponnesus from the Turkish rule. According to the Venetian officials, the character of the inhabitants was very bad. They found the character of the inhabitants to be as Mazari had found them two centuries before. When the Turks began the reconquest of Greece, the "Greeks" betrayed the Christians with the same stolidity as the Turks. Later, Wallachians settled in Greece.

From the foregoing it is evident that but very little Hellenic blood is left in Greece, and that little is so thoroughly vitiated that its disappearance is but a question of time. No race inhabits Greece. The " Greeks " are the descendants of races so different that their crossing can never produce anything else than human mongrels. Their ancestors were Greeks, Hellenized Asiatics and Byzantine Greeks (i. e. Hamitic-Semitic-Greek-Egyptian-Negroid mongrels), Slavs, Sicilians, Spaniards, Huns, Bulgarians, Walloons, Franks, and Albanians. The blood of these races could have no other effect than that of increasing the race confusion.

The only difference between the modern Greeks and the other Balcanaks lies in the fact that the environment of the modern Greeks is the environment of the Hellenes. The environment, however, has no power whatsoever to change the mongrel into a race, and the Greeks have not been changed by it. We are told that the Hellenes owed their greatness largely to the country it was their fortune to dwell in. To that same country, with the same wonderful coastline and harbours, mountains and brooks, and the same sun of Homer, the modern Greeks probably owe their nothingness.

In the war for independence the effective work was done by the people of Suli, Hydra, and Poros, that is, by people of pure Albanian blood. Foreigners incited the revolution, not Greek love for freedom and independence. The Greeks, as the other Balcanaks, have not yet proved that they deserve a national independent life; intellectually, mentally, they are dead. After the Batavian revolution, after the American revolution, the people of these countries proceeded on the path of progress. Greece is, after many years of independence, miserable and degraded. The methods of cultivating the soil are primitive. Fields are cropped till they are exhausted and then left fallow. The farmers have no idea of manure. Their houses are sheds of wood or huts of mud, without windows.

Modern Greece produces bankers, brokers, politicians, liars in abundance, but has not produced a single great man. Not a single Greek name can be mentioned that surpasses mediocrity; hardly one that approaches mediocrity. It is blood that tells.

Ribot says: "From the Greeks the Byzantine derived, besides language and literary traditions, a subtlety which, for want of mental force to strengthen it, degenerated into low cunning. The love of the Greek for rhetoric and brilliant conversation became the braggart self-assertion of the Byzantine, the subtle sophistry of the philosophers degenerated into the empty scholasticism of the theologians, and the versatility of the Graeculus into the perfidious diplomacy of the emperors.

"Historians usually explain the decline of nations by their manners, institutions, and character, and in a certain sense the explanation is correct. These reasons, however, are rather vague, and, as we see, there exists a more profound, an ultimate cause, an organic cause, which can act only through heredity, but which is altogether overlooked. These organic causes will probably be ignored for some time to come, but our ignoring them will not do away with them. As for ourselves, who have for purposes of our own attempted to study the decay of the lower empire, — the most amazing instance of decay presented by history, — tracing step by step this degeneration through a thousand years, seeing in their works of art the plastic talents of the Greeks fade away by degrees, and result in the stiff drawings of the Paleologi; seeing the imagination of the Greeks wither up and become reduced to a few platitudes of description; seeing their lively wit change to empty babbling; seeing all the characters of mind so disappear that the great men of their latter period would elsewhere pass only for mediocrities, ... it appears to us that beneath these visible, palpable facts, the only facts on which historians dwell, we discern the slow, blind, unconscious working of nature in the millions of human beings who were decayed, though they knew it not, and who transmitted to their descendants a germ of death, each generation adding to it somewhat of its own.

"Thus in every people, whether it be rising or falling, there exists always as the groundwork of every change a secret working of the mind and consequently of a part of the organism, and this of necessity comes under the law of heredity."

Gibbon writes: "I should have abandoned without regret the Greek slaves and their servile historians, had I not reflected that the fate of the Byzantine monarchy is passively connected with the most splendid and important revolutions which changed the state of the world."

Jacob P. Fallmerayer closes his history of Morea with these words: "After studying the history of mediaeval Greece, is there any one still willing to maintain that the character of the Greeks declined and degenerated to the present level during the Turkish administration? Is there any form of villainy and baseness of which the Greeks were not past-masters before the time of the Turks? Has anywhere an administration been more corrupt, judiciary more venal, magistrates more thievish, archontes more contemptible, public and private morals more depraved, than in mediaeval Greece? In what way or manner could a Turkish government be worse? The Osmanli are better than their government; their morals are simple and severe, they hate lie, deceit, and thievishness; they are honest in their dealings; in short, superior to the Greeks in every respect."

There is no truth whatsoever in the statement that the Turks are responsible for the degeneration of the Balcanaks and of the Greeks. It is as false as the assertion that Catholicity caused the degeneration of Spain and of the South American countries. Promiscuous crossing, mongrelization, is the cause of their degeneration.

The mongrel is worthless everywhere, and the Greek mongrel is no exception.

Read "Morea," by Jacob P. Fallmerayer; "Die Grundlagen des Neunzehnten Jahrhunderts," by Houston S. Chamberlain; "The Inequalities of the Human Races," by A. de Gobineau; "Heredity," by Th. Ribot.
Site Admin
Posts: 32961
Joined: Thu Aug 01, 2013 5:21 am

Re: Race or Mongrel, by Alfred P. Schultz

Postby admin » Mon Apr 12, 2021 4:35 am


"Cloaca Gentium."
[Google translate: "Sewer Gathering"]

-- H. S. Chamberlain.

"Aetas parentum pejor avis tulit
Nos nequiores mox daturos
Progeniem vitiosiorem."
[Google translate: "Our parents took greater grandparents Soon to give us less Progeny wicked."]

-- Horace.

The Roman race developed from a fusion of Sabines, Umbrians, Sicilians, and other Latins. The crossing of these related races was followed by a very close inbreeding for several hundred years. It was 403 years after the founding of the city that Southern Etruria was annexed. The absorption of the not closely related Etruscans proceeded very slowly. There is no evidence that any of the communities which combined to form Rome was Etruscan. There was no Etruscan trace in the Roman blood. The Etruscans were slowly absorbed; the internal selection had time to expel everything Etruscan that was out of harmony with the Roman race.

Slowly, very slowly did Rome expand and absorb the other closely related inhabitants of Italy, and the "right of connubium" was not extended to every Italian community. How long the inbreeding following the crossing lasted is clearly shown by the fact that, at the outbreak of the first Punic war, in the 489th year after the founding of Rome, although Rome had become the undisputed mistress of Italy, she had expanded not even sufficiently to embrace Central Italy. This slow expansion made the development of the strong Roman race possible.

After the Punic wars, paranoia took possession of Rome. She wanted to grow and become enormous. Numbers were more important than race, and the vagrants of the whole world were invited to share the greatness of Rome. The spirit of moderation had left the Romans. After the Hannibalic war, Cisalpine Gaul was rapidly Romanized, and the rapid so-called Romanization of the world had commenced. Magna Graeca, Sicily, and Spain became Roman provinces. Iberians, Gauls, Greek mongrels, and the Hamitic-Semitic-Negroid mongrels of Carthage flocked to Rome. In the years 553-556 Greece was brought under the Roman sway. In 564 the settlement of Western Asia was commenced. In eleven years, 554-565 after the founding of the city, Rome established her protectorate throughout the Eastern Mediterranean.

A protectorate did not suffice her, and she commenced the policy of annexation in the East. In 146 B.C. (608 years after the founding of Rome), Macedonia became a Roman province. A few years later, all of Greece was put under the control of the Roman governor of Macedonia. Rhodes and Pergamum fared no better. In Syria, Rome intervened, on the death of Antiochus Epiphanes, and placed her creature Antiochus Eupator on the throne. In 168 Egypt formally acknowledged the suzerainty of Rome. The West had fallen to Rome as the prize of victory over Carthage and, the Carthaginian power having been broken, there was no hindrance to the establishment of Roman rule in Sicily, Sardinia, Spain, and finally in Africa. In little more than a hundred years Rome had become the supreme power in the civilized world. "By all men," says Polybius, "it was taken for granted that nothing remained but to obey the commands of the Romans."

The Romans outlived adversity, their success destroyed them. The immigration to Rome had been considerable before its expansion; now it was enormous. This could not but change essentially the Roman race. As the immigration was very much greater than could be absorbed, and consisted of races not closely related, the crossing following the immigration not only changed the Roman race, but destroyed it. Rome was henceforth inhabited not by a race, but by a mongrel herd. Rome had become the "cloaca gentium."

The Roman constitution, being the product of the Roman genius, was in harmony with the instincts of the Roman race. It did not and could not be made to rule the mongrel herd. In a mongrel herd there is no race harmony, therefore two forms of government alone are possible, anarchy or despotism. After Sulla's time, Rome was flooded by foreign races. Oriental and African blood, injected into the Pan-European mongrels, bastardized the Romans to a still greater extent. The deterioration was as rapid as it was complete. Syrians, Cappadocians, and negro slaves inundated Southern Italy and Sicily (v. Sicily)

When Rome was Roman, the form of the constitution was that of a democracy, and no order of nobility was recognized. The offices of state were open to all and the will of the people was supreme. Now in practice the government had become an oligarchy. The Senate ruled Rome, and the Senate was in the hands of a class which constituted itself a nobility. This was the first change. It is easier to run down than to walk down an inclined plane. Rome plunged into revolution and anarchy. The period of revolution lasted from 146 B.C. to 49 B.C., in which year Caesar made himself dictator. Rome had changed into an absolute monarchy, limited solely by the good will or the caprice of the despot. The old constitution was not formally abrogated. Caesar professed to hold his authority by the will of the people. The Senate continued its existence; the assembly met; there were still consuls, praetors, aediles, and tribunes. But Senate, assembly, and public officials had to obey the command of the dictator.

All authority concentrated in Caesar's hands. Augustus and Tiberius elevated the Senate to a place beside themselves in the government, but it never again directed the policy of Rome. The comitia retained no other prerogative than that of formally confirming the emperor in the possession of his authority. Men of judgment soon recognized the deterioration of the Romans, that the mongrel was destitute of character, that his oath was worth as little as his word, and that valour and courage had fled with his character. German soldiers formed the body-guard of Caesar. Germans decided the battle of Pharsalus. Teutons formed the body-guard of the emperors of the Eastern as well as of the Western empire. A thousand years after Caesar, Normans protected the Byzantine emperors.

Germans fought the Allemanni, Germans fought the Parthians, Germans broke the power of the Ostro-Goths in Italy. Belisarius was a Goth, and Totila was killed in the battle at Gualdo Tadino by Asbad, a German. The Lombards sent auxiliary troops to Belisarius and Narses. In spite of these facts, Procopius, writing of the Gothic war, speaks of Roman victories. In the Flavian war, Antonius treated the praetorians with contempt, and reminded them of the fact that they were only Italians, while the soldiers of the legions were Germans and Gauls. The time came when Romans and Italians were no longer suffered to bear arms, and the praetorians were superseded by soldiers from the North.

It was dimly recognized that Romans had ceased to exist, and a new word, Romanitas, was coined for the post-Roman herd in contradistinction to Barbaria, which word was applied to all who lived outside of the mongrel Roman herd. The southern provinces brought Syrians, Cappadocians, Egyptians, Arabians, Numidians, Thessalians, Lydians, and others to Rome, who vitiated the mongrels' blood to a still greater extent. When fusion was complete, when all were equally mongrelized and consequently degraded, it was but just that the citizenship should be extended to all. Cara- calla, the pseudo-punic beast, bestowed the citizenship upon them all. There was no reason why a Roman should be the emperor of that non-Roman, post-Roman herd. The words senatus populusque romanus ceased to have any meaning. The legions elected the emperors. The Flavians were the last Italian family to wear the purple.

After the Flavians came Spaniards, after the Spaniards came Africans, after the Africans Syrians, again Africans; then an Arabian, whom a Pannonian dethroned. After him men from everywhere wore the imperial purple, but never again a Roman. There was no reason why Rome should remain the capital of the empire. Rome was everywhere; that is, it was nowhere. Diocletian removed the capital to Sirmium, Constantine to Byzantium. Later, Ravenna, Milan, Paris, Aachen (Aix la Chapelle) and Vienna were capitals of the empire; Rome no more.

The sterility of Rome is remarkable. Virgil, Horace, Titus Livius, Ovid, Vitruvius, Cornelius Nepos, Catull, Valerius Flaccus, Plinius, Seneca, Statorius Victor, Martial, Luca, were not Romans. The mongrelization of Rome was so very rapid and complete because the foreign blood came from everywhere, and came as an inundation with the force of a cataract. The degeneration and depravity of the mongrels was so great that they deified the emperors. And many of the emperors were of a character so vile that their deification proves the post-Roman mongrel's soul to have been more depraved than that of the Egyptian mongrel, who deified nothing lower than dogs, cats, crocodiles, bugs, and vegetables.

The praetorian band scarcely numbered fifteen thousand men, and yet populous Rome could not defend herself against them. The praetorians killed off emperors that did not suit them, elected others, whom the Senate obediently confirmed, killed them off again, and, eventually, after they had murdered Pertinax, proclaimed that the Roman world was to be disposed of to the highest bidder by public auction. And why not? Does a herd of cattle not exhibit more reason and more dignity than the post-Roman herd? Are herds of cattle not sold? Why not the post-Roman herd?

Julian purchased it. The Senate meekly acknowledged him. Septimius Severus dethroned him, and was acknowledged by the Senate. Severus filled the Senate with polished and eloquent slaves from the Eastern provinces. They differed from the Roman Senatorial slaves in that they were polished and eloquent. Severus was followed by his two sons, Caracalla and Geta. Caracalla murdered Geta. His cruelty was that of a monster. He feared the friends of Geta and every one who had maintained the smallest correspondence with Geta, who lamented his death, or who even mentioned his name, he ordered executed. Twenty thousand persons of both sexes suffered death. In the midst of peace he issued his commands at Alexandria for a general massacre. From a secure palace he directed the slaughter of many thousand citizens.

Caracalla was killed by Martialis, a desperate soldier, who had been refused the rank of centurion. The Senate granted this beast, Caracalla, a place among the gods. Macrinus succeeded Caracalla. Elagabalus succeeded Macrinus. Both were murdered. Alexander succeeded the infamous Elagabalus. He was murdered and succeeded by Maximin, who was also murdered. The history of mongrelized Rome is similar to the history of the South American herds. Usurpation followed usurpation.

"There was a rapid and perpetual transition from the cottage to the throne, and from the throne to the grave" (Gibbon). There was no other way of disposing of the Roman emperors. In South America it usually suffices to send the President into oblivion.

The people demanded bread and the public shows only. Vices of the most unnatural kind flourished. The arts, science, and letters declined as the post-Roman herd declined. The philosophers were men, who wore a beard and a Greek cloak; the latter was essential. One day they declared there was no god, and the next day they were priests in a temple of Mithra, Isis, or some other Asiatic deity.

The poets and writers were imitators, and the voice of poetry was silent. Words strung together in the form of a vase or the form of a lyre were poems. The theatres had been closed a long time. Gladiatorial shows, cock-fights, and chariot-races had taken their places. The Greek works of art were no longer valued. A sculptor was a man who removed the head of a statue, and put another head, frequently the removed head of another statue, in its place. The ruins of Spalatro are expressive of the decline of architecture in the time of Diocletian. All religions flourished in Rome, especially the Asiatic cults, which were associated with wild, unnatural orgies.

Courage, bravery, virtue, family life, everything that was good and sacred, had vanished from Rome. The body was as degenerate as the soul. Gibbon tells us: "This diminutive stature of mankind was daily sinking below the old standard, and the Roman world was in- deed peopled by a race of pygmies when the fierce giants of the North broke in and mended the puny breed. They restored a manly spirit of freedom, and after the revolutions of ten centuries, freedom became the happy parent of taste and science."

This was the Rome that the Northern tribes destroyed. Had Romans still existed, there would be a different story to tell. Who, however, was the Roman of this time? A puny mongrel of weak constitution and a feeble mind, a coward in whose veins flowed the blood of many races; in his own opinion the lord of the universe, the most exalted of men, in proof of which he was brazen, ignorant, cunning, thievish, vulgar, servile, depraved, ready to sell to the highest bidder his wife, his mother, his daughter, his sister, his friends, his country. Withal he had an almost unnatural fear of work, trouble, poverty, suffering, and death.

Who, on the other hand, were the Germans? Men tall of stature, broad of shoulder, with blond hair and white skin; of strong constitution, powerful as the bears of their native forests, daring, brave, virtuous, chaste. Men who feared nothing in the world, and death less than anything else. Men with minds as strong as their bodies. Is it not remarkable that these so-called barbarians valued the works of the Greek genius? Theodoric and the Goths appreciated Greek art, and sought to protect it. They had contempt for the post-Roman and his pseudo-art. The barbarian existed, but not under the white skin of the German.

The depraved Roman world recognized that foreigners alone could prolong its life. The post-Romans continued to revile and imprecate the German barbarians, and at the same time suffered them to fill all the offices through which the Roman world was ruled. Germans were the soul of the legions, and filled the highest military positions. Germans had become the nerve, the vigour, the arm of Rome, long before the first German tribe came in a body to take possession of Roman territory.

Many Germans had been emperors of Rome before this time. When the Germans demanded Roman territory, they demanded that to which they had a right; for Germans had defended that territory for centuries. Rome could not but grant their request. Teutons were settled at Chartres, Batavians at Bayeux, Suevians at Coutances, Le Mans, and Clermont, Alanes at Auttun and Poitiers, and Franks at Rennes. The Goths were the first who came in a body to demand Roman lands. The request was not granted. The Goths cared little, but took the lands they coveted, leaving it to the Romans to drive them out if they dared. Franks and Burgundians did as the Goths did. Angles, Saxons, and Jutes took possession of the British Isles, the Lombards of Northern Italy.

Wherever these tribes went, a new civilization soon came into being. Their history is the history of a new race with different instincts, greater abilities and higher virtues than those of any other race. The influence of the post-Roman herd on some of these tribes was pernicious in that it mongrelized them and consequently degraded them. This was the fate of the Goths and of the Lombards.

In the lands that the German tribes had taken possession of, they were the lords, not the Romans. It was evident that henceforth Germans only, not Romans, or Germans disguised as Romans, could be rulers of Rome; but the mutual jealousies of the German tribes prevented any one of them for a long time from gaining the ascendency, and from reserving the imperial purple for itself. This ascendency was gained in the next centuries by the Franks, and Karl the Great became the first emperor of the "Roman empire of the German nation."

"Ex septentrione lux."
[Google translate: "The northern light."]

Read "Die Grundlagen des Neunzehnten Jahrhunderts," by Houston Stewart Chamberlain; "The Inequality of the Human Races," by A. Conte de Gobineau; "The Decline and Fall," by Gibbon.
Site Admin
Posts: 32961
Joined: Thu Aug 01, 2013 5:21 am

Re: Race or Mongrel, by Alfred P. Schultz

Postby admin » Mon Apr 12, 2021 4:38 am


What is said of Rome applies to Southern Italy and Sicily as well. Race decomposition was complete. It was even more thorough than in the North. Syrians, Cappadocians and negro slaves had inundated Sicily and Naples. Moreover, no race ever came to Southern Italy in sufficient numbers to maintain itself for any length of time. The number of Normans and Suabians in the South was very much smaller than the number of Lombards in the North. Their mongrelization, consequently, was very rapid.

The Lombards in the North maintained their race for a sufficiently long time to produce a great civilization, the so-called "Italian Renaissance." Even to this day the difference that exists between the Southern Italian and the much less mongrelized Lombard of the North is apparent to every one. The quantity of Teutonic blood in Northern Italy is not sufficient to absorb, to demongrelize, the Southerners, and the mongrelization of the Northerners is gradually progressing. The history of Rome is repeating itself, and the Northerner is gradually deteriorating to the level of the Southerner.

It seems that even in the time when the Roman race was still in existence, Sicily was mongrelized. Sicily had been settled by races not of the same stock; by races so different that their fusion could not produce a harmonious personality. Sikels, Greeks, and Phoenicians settled in Sicily. The Greeks, that came later, carried to Sicily the blood of various Asiatic races or debris of races, and the Carthaginians brought negro blood with them. Had Rome at the end of the Punic wars contented herself with absorbing Lower Italy and Sicily, it might still have been possible for Rome to absorb these mongrels, and, by inbreeding, create a harmonious Roman race. This Rome did not do. She conquered the world and destroyed herself. Asiatics and Africans poured into Southern Italy, and slaves of all nationalities filled Sicily and increased the race confusion.

In the ninth, tenth, and eleventh centuries, Saracens settled in Sicily, a race belonging to the Semitic stock. As these disappeared in the Sicilian mass, race confusion was increased to an almost incredible extent. Normans came, and Frenchmen and Latins, During the rule of the Normans, each race kept its own laws and language. This enabled the handful of Normans to escape mongrelization for a short time. They were the creators of the short-lived brilliancy of Sicily. The Suabians, that came with the Hohenstaufens, prolonged this period of progress for a short time. As fusion proceeded, the Normans and the Suabians became mongrelized, and Sicily fell into decay.

In 1461, 1532, and 1744 Albanians immigrated to Sicily and Calabria. More races, more confusion. The modern Sicilian who is known the world over is the product of this race confusion.

The mongrel is worthless everywhere.
Site Admin
Posts: 32961
Joined: Thu Aug 01, 2013 5:21 am

Re: Race or Mongrel, by Alfred P. Schultz

Postby admin » Mon Apr 12, 2021 4:47 am


Tacitus describes the Longobardi as a tribe which, though few in numbers, more than held their own among the numerous powerful neighbours, by their daring and love for war. In the year 568 A.D., following the line of movement of the Goths, they invaded Italy. They created a kingdom, which retained its independence for more than two hundred years. In 774 it was incorporated with the empire of Charles the Great, and Charles assumed the title of King of the Franks and Lombards. Their nationality survived the loss of independence.

When the Lombards took possession of Italy, little resistance was offered. The post-Roman mongrel was subtle and cunning and weak, exhausted, dispirited, and unwarlike, while the Lombards were cruel, like the Franks and the Anglo-Saxons. After they had occupied Upper Italy, they still continued to send forth bands to plunder and destroy, thus making room for people of their own race. The greater part of the mongrel mass that still called itself Roman fled, and many were killed. Those that remained were brought into a state of servitude, or reduced to a class of half-free aldii. The civil rights of the "Romans" were greatly restricted. The Lombards were rough and harsh, and the Italiots never ceased to hate them, never ceased to fear them. The Lombards, on the other hand, had the most profound contempt for the mongrels. As long as the Lombard kingdom lasted, there was no fusion of Lombards and "Romans," and for several centuries after the incorporation of Lombardy into the empire the Lombards were conscious and proud of their Teutonic nationality.

In the tenth century Liutprand was sent in an official capacity to Constantinople, and he states in his report that Emperor Nicephorus reproached him with the fact that he was a Lombard and not a Roman. Liutprand answered: "We Lombards, Saxons, Franks, Lotharingians, Bavarians, Suabians, and Burgundians despise the Romans to the extent that we apply the term 'Roman' to the enemy that we hold most in contempt. This term 'Roman' embraces baseness, cowardice, mendacity, and every depravity in existence."

Although the Lombards lost their Teutonic speech early, it is evident that with sentiments such as these there was no amalgamation of Lombards and mongrels. The Lombards retained their own legal code until the early part of the sixteenth century. The Goths had been mongrelized quickly, for the reason that they were few in numbers (modern investigators say not more than one hundred thousand), and that they did not expel and exterminate as well as the Lombards did. In Toscana, however, they held their own for a long time, and the Gothic code existed until the eleventh century. The little Gothic blood that still existed was absorbed by the closely related Lombards. The Lombards, for a long time, were Latinized externally only. Owing to the fact that for a long time there was no amalgamation of Lombards and mongrels, the Lombards were able to produce the civilization which is known as the "Italian Renaissance." It was no renaissance, it was a new creation by a new race.

Houston Stewart Chamberlain writes: "Without exaggeration it can be said that the less Teutonic a country is, the less is it civilized. Whoever travels from London or Berlin to Rome steps from high culture into semibarbarism, into filth, coarseness, ignorance, perfidy, lie, and misery. Italy flourished as long as it contained, although externally Latinized, pure Teutonic elements. For several centuries the country that, during the empire, had already declined to absolute sterility, possessed a reservoir of pure Teutonic blood. Lombards, Franks, Goths, and Normans had inundated the whole country, and for a long time they remained unmixed, especially in the North.

This was due partly to the fact that, having come as warriors, they formed a caste, and partly to the fact that they had their own legal system. These two causes prevented fusion for a long time. Here, where the uncultivated German came in contact with a higher civilization, he awoke to the consciousness of his own worth, and here many of the causes by which the world was remade had their origin: erudition and industry, the obstinate upholding of civil rights, and the first blossom of Teutonic art.

Northern Italy, from Verona to Sienna, resembled in its particularistic development a Germany whose emperor lived north of the Alps. Everywhere German counts took the place of the Romans as heads of provinces. Thus the tendency common to all Teutonic tribes to create free, independent towns developed early in Italy, and became the ruling power in the country. This development commenced in the extreme north, and ever memorable cities, the birthplaces of Dante, Petrarca, Correggio, Leonardo, Galileo, and other immortals, arose.

Florence, especially, became the home of anti-Roman individualism, the city of Dante, Donatello, Leonardo, and Michelangelo. Now impotent Rome was able to adore herself. The industry and the spirit of enterprise of the Northerners procured vast sums for the papal chair, and at the same time their genius awoke. The Rome that, during a history of two thousand years, had not brought forth one artistic thought, this same Rome suddenly had at her disposal many men of creative genius. All arts and industries flourished. Genius soared to amazing heights, but more quickly than it flared up was it extinguished. This sudden decline was owing to two causes, the fusion of the Teutonic people with the post-Romans, and the extermination of the Teutons in the civil wars, in the wars between the cities, and in personal feuds."

Milan was a city of importance during Lombard rule. As early as 739 it had magnificent walls and towers, beautiful palaces and edifices. Genoa was successively a city of the Goths, Lombards, and Franks. Its commerce was very extensive. The Teutonic character of the city is proved by the year-books of the chancellors Cafarus, Obertus, and Ottobonus. Pisa and Florence were likewise Teutonic towns. The families that in the thirteenth and fourteenth centuries were of importance in Florence were Teutonic families. In the thirteenth century, after a period of quiet development, it began to take the lead in Italian intellectual life; that is, after Teutonic knights, artisans, and peasants had displaced the Romans.

It was fortunate that in the North the Teutonic element was not only a ruling caste, as in the South, but that the whole society was Teutonic. In some of the districts fifty per cent, of the population was Teutonic. The Teutonic race brought Teutonic ideals with it. The Teutonic invaders brought with them the sentiments of honour and freedom, the dignity of man and respect for women. They held Roman depravity in contempt. Morals became purer.

The term "Barbarian" became a term of reproach after the newcomers had lost the consciousness that they were Teutonic, believed themselves to belong to the Latin stock, and began to hold the Germans responsible for the destruction of the Roman empire and of antique art. The barbarian invaders, on the contrary, protected the ancient works of art. Theodoric the Great was the first to appoint officials to collect and preserve the Greek works of art against the destructive instinct of the mongrel herd.

Theodoric also encouraged the production of art. "He loved to build cities and to beautify them," says Valesianus. He built castles, palaces, and churches; in Pavia, palaces, baths, amphitheatres, and new city walls; in Ravenna, Verona, and Spoleto, magnificent edifices. Goths were the builders, and we are told that they had their own peculiar style. (The writers speak of a "manu gotica") As early as 530 A.D., three Teutonic architects are named, Oelinth, Bulius, and Aldo. There were Teutonic goldsmiths and armourers.

The art ideal became Teutonic. About the same time that the Germanic type began to prevail in painting, it also became the ideal of poetry, first in the Minnesang of the Trovatori. The "biondo capelli" and the "biondi treccie," with the snow-white skin, was the ideal of female beauty of the poets from Jacobo de Lentino to Dante, Petrarca, Ariosto, and Tasso.

When Lombardy was an independent kingdom, art began to flourish in the courts of the princes of Benevento, Spoleto, Friaul, and Pavia. In course of time the Lombards lost their language and the consciousness of their descent, but their race, and the capacities and abilities of that race, they retained for a considerable time. For a long time they spoke both their language and Latin. They did not, moreover, accept the Latin language as they found it. They accepted the Latin vocabulary and impressed their grammar on it, influenced the structure of words, their inflection, etymology, and pronunciation, and helped to create the Italian language. From this race issued the industry and the genius that made Italy famous. L. Passerini, in "Genealogia e storia della famiglia Corsini," states: "The noble families of Florence are all of feudal origin; a few claim to be of Roman descent, but all those whose descent can be proved by documentary evidences spring from the Northern barbarians. All those that were of importance in history were of Teutonic origin. Woltman, in "Die Germanen und die Renaissance in Italien," Pompeo Litta, in "Famiglie celebri d'Italia," Passerini and Giulini, in "Sommario delle 125 famiglie celebri Toscane," and Passerini's monographs prove that nearly all men and families of importance in the political and intellectual life of Italy were Teutons.

Lombard goldsmiths were famous in the sixth century. In the ninth century Wolvinus, a Lombard, erected the altar of San Ambroglio in Milan. The following Italian sculptors and architects are of Teutonic origin: Willigem, Nicolaus, Wiligelmus, Regerius Anselm of Milan, Niccolo Pisano, Andrea Pisano, Ghiberti, Brunellesco, Donatello and Alberti, Michelozzo Michelozzo, Leon Battista Alberti, Donato Bramanti, Michelangelo Buanorotti, Antonio da Sangallo, Benvenuto Cellini, and others.

Of painters Italy has a very great number, and again the great majority are of Teutonic blood. Among these are Auripert, the first Lombard painter mentioned, Fra Giovanni da Fiesole, Filippo Lippi, Giovanni Bellini, Andrea Mantegna, Giovanni Cimabue, Giotto di Bondono, Allesandro Botticelli, Pietro Perugino, Leonardo da Vinci, Tiziano Vecellio, Giorgio Barbarelli, Mercantonio Raimundi, Raffael Santi, and Andrea del Sarto.

Many of the saints and the most prominent theologians were Lombards. Thomas of Aquinas was of a Lombard family which held the principalities of Salerno and Capua. His grandfather Thomas was married to a sister of Emperor Barbarossa, and his mother Theata was of a Norman family entitled to royal rank.

In poetry the Teutonic influence was even greater than in the domains of sculpture and painting. In the earliest middle ages the Goth Helpidius and the Lombard Paul Warnefrid are named as poets. In the eleventh century Alphanus and Gaiferus wrote Latin poems. The songs of the troubadours inspired the Lombard nobles to write similar poems, and the most famous of these Italian troubadours were Manfred II, Lancia, Alberto Malaspina, Rambertino Buvaletto, Lanfranco Cigala, Jocobo Grillo, and Sordello of Mantua.

The Sicilian troubadours were mainly Suabians and Normans. Among them were Emperor Frederick II, his son Enzio, Mazzo, Ricco Rinaldo d'Aquino, Rugieri Apugliese, Ranieri of Palermo, and Guido delle Colonne. The greatest of Italian poets is Dante Alighieri, of pure Teutonic descent in both the male and the female line. He was born in Florence, the Teutonic character of which has been pointed out before. Other Italian poets of Teutonic blood are Petrarca, Boccaccio, Luigi Pulci, Ariosto, Matteo Bandello, and Francesco Tassoni.

The Normans and Suabians held a position in Southern Italy, especially in Sicily, similar to that held by the Lombards in the North. The Normans carried their style of architecture to Sicily and Southern Italy, and it flourished there. The best known of these South Italian Norman architects are Mainhard of Ariano, Oderismus of Rome, Savolus, Raymundus de Podio, Leonardus of Atri, Petrus, Cataldus Fusco of Ravello, Robert of Calabria, Wilhelm de Gifono, and Landulf. The two families that were of importance in the development of architecture in Sicily were the Chiaramonti and the Sclafani, both of Teutonic stock. Not a single building of later times can be named equal to those built in Hohenstaufen times by the Normans and Suabians, as, for instance, those of Bari and Bitonto. The Normans and Suabians never formed more than a small minority of the population, and their importance in the political and intellectual history is out of all proportion to their small number. They were strong supporters of the papacy, and Thomas of Aquinas, Telesius, and Filangieri were of Norman-Suabian blood. When the Suabian-Hohenstaufen rule came to an end, the influx of Teutonic blood ceased. The small number of Normans and Suabians rendered their fate inevitable, and they disappeared in the mongrel mass that infested the land.

It has been said that the papacy and the power of the papacy was a creation of the post-Roman Italiots. Nothing is more false. The papacy itself is the continuation of the office of the Roman pontifex, an institution founded by the Romans, not by the mongrels that lived in Italy after the time of Augustus. The elevation of the papacy to a world-power was likewise not the work of the post-Romans. It was the work of the Teutonic race. When the different German tribes fought for the mastery of Italy, they contended for the papal crown, and it became theirs as the imperial crown became theirs.

This is demonstrated clearly by the list of popes. Not less than forty Germanic popes are mentioned as rulers between the years 700 and 1150. It is proved by the list of cardinals and bishops that the Church was Germanized to a remarkable extent. The struggle between emperor and pope, that lasted for centuries, was one not between German and Roman, but between Teuton on the one side and disguised Teuton on the other. Thomas of Aquinas, who furnished the Church its logical weapons, was of a Lombard family. Not the papacy, not the elevation of the papacy to a world-power, was the work of the Italiots.

In the foregoing pages it has been shown that in the Italian Renaissance it was the wonderful Teutonic genius that soared to amazing heights. Ludwig Woltman, in "Die Germanen und die Renaissance in Italien," gives the history, genealogy, and anthropological characteristics of two hundred famous Italians, and finds that one hundred and eighty of these, that is, ninety per cent., are of Teutonic blood. The researches of Italian scholars, as those of Pompeo Litta, "Famiglia celebri d'Italia," Passerini and Giulini, "Somario delle 125 famiglie celebri Toscane," and Passerini, in his monographs, establish the same truth. The "Italian Renaissance" was the work of a foreign race, and it is for this reason that it had so very little influence in shaping the Italian character.

In the course of centuries the Lombards became mongrelized. Had the Lombards been allowed to continue their work, had Karl the Great not interfered, they would probably have continued to expel and kill a great many of the worthless post-Romans, and would have absorbed the rest. They would have created another Germany, another England, where now there is only an Italy. In the course of time their cruelties would have proved less cruel than the humanity of Charles.

In the mingling of races the cruel fact of numbers counts for more than all the other factors combined. In the south of Italy and in Sicily the Suabian and Norman element was quickly swallowed up by the mongrel mass. In the north of Italy, mongrelization was slower, for the number of Lombards there was much greater than the number of Lombards in the south. In a few districts the Lombards formed fifty per cent, and more of the population. This, however, was true of very few districts only, and the total number of Italiots was much greater than that of the Lombards.

Mongrelization was inevitable, and is now going on. The Italians of the North are still far superior to the Italians of the South, so much so that they seem to be a different people. Their superiority to-day, however, is not by far as great as it was a century ago. This change is due not to any improvement of the Sicilians, but to the fact that the Italians of the South were for many centuries so thoroughly mongrelized and degenerate that they could not very well become more degraded, while in the North there was great scope for degeneration. It is well known that the Teutonic type is not yet extinct in Northern Italy, but it is not less well known that it is rapidly disappearing. Mongrelization is doing its work; degeneration and degradation are progressing in direct proportion to the fusion taking place there.

Abstract ideas have no power to improve vitiated blood, neither have laws, declarations, constitutions, or other papers with ink on them.

Read "Die Germanen und die Renaissance in Italien," by Dr. L. Woltman; "Die Grundlagen des Neunzehnten Jahrhunderts," by Houston S. Chamberlain; "The Inequality of the Human Races," by A. Conte de Gobineau.
Site Admin
Posts: 32961
Joined: Thu Aug 01, 2013 5:21 am

Re: Race or Mongrel, by Alfred P. Schultz

Postby admin » Mon Apr 12, 2021 4:55 am


That children resemble their parents is an every-day observation. The hereditary influence manifests itself in the limbs, head, trunk, colour of the skin, shape and size of the body, nails, hair, gait, countenance, and expression.

Obesity is frequently the result of heredity, and it is not uncommon for it to appear at a certain age in hard-working men, who are suffering want. The osseous system is under the control of heredity. Anomalies of the osseous system are frequently hereditary. There are families in which for many generations members are born with six toes and six fingers. The characters of the digestive, circulatory, and muscular systems likewise are transmitted. There are families of bleeders, in whom a slight wound causes death from loss of blood. The bleeding cannot be checked. There are families in which the heart and blood-vessels are very large; others again in which the heart and blood-vessels are very small.

The character of the nervous system likewise is inherited. Idiosyncrasies are hereditary. There are families who enjoy immunity from infectious diseases, others who inherit a disposition to these diseases. There are families in which the hair falls out early; others in which the hair turns gray in early youth. Weakness of the inguinal ring, which leads to hernia, is hereditary. Harelip is hereditary. Colour-blindness is hereditary. Excess of pigmentation or deficiency of pigmentation (Albinism) is hereditary. Often there is a great re- semblance between the handwriting of a father and a son. Everybody has seen peculiarities of the parents reappear in the children, though these may have never known their parents. The instincts are hereditary; a fish does not come to life with the instincts of a bird, nor the eaglet with the instincts of the dove. No St. Bernard is born with the instincts of the pug, and no Anglo-Saxon with the instincts of the Hottentot.

The talents for music and painting are very often transmitted. Now and then they persist through four or five generations. The history of art thus shows that creative imagination is transmissible by heredity. We often find families of painters, poets, musicians. Poets rarely leave a family. And yet Ribot, in examining the familys of fifty-one poets (from which list no poet of eminence is omitted), finds twenty-one who had distinguished relatives.

Gothe, the brilliant genius in science as well as in poetry, recognized the importance of heredity. He says of himself:

"Vom Vater hab ich die Statur,
Des Lebens ernstes Fuhren,
Vom Miitterchen die Frohnatur,
Die Lust zu fabulieren.

"Urahnherr war der Schonsten hold,
Das spuckt so hin und wieder;
Urahnfrau liebte Schmuck und Gold,
Das zuckt wohl durch die Glieder.

"Sind nun die Elemente nicht
Aus dem Komplex zu trennen,
Was ist denn an dem ganzen Wicht
Original zu nennen?

"Und endlich wird ihm offenbar,
Er sei nur was ein andrer war."

[Google translate: "From my father I have the stature
Life's serious driving,
From the little girl the cheerful nature,
The desire to tell stories.

"The progenitor was the most beautiful,
It spits like this every now and then;
Ancestress loved jewelry and gold,
That probably twitches through the limbs.

"Now the elements are not
Separate from the complex
What's the matter with the whole thing
To call original?

"And finally it becomes clear to him
He was just what someone else was. "

Man is his ancestors. Families of painters are not rare. Every one has heard of the Landseers, Bonheurs, Bellinis, Caraccios, Teniers, Van Ostades, Van der Veldes, and Mieris. In a list of forty-two painters, — Italian, Spanish and Flemish, — held to be of the highest rank, Galton found twenty-one who had illustrious relatives. Heredity appears plainly in the art of music. The Bach family produced in less than two hundred years one hundred and twenty musicians of merit, many of them of the first rank. Families eminent in science are not rare. Many scientific men take after their fathers. The mothers of numerous men of science were remarkable women.

"The best that we have is not of our own creation; our reason, our abilities, the form in which we think, feel, and act are transmitted to us" (Herder).

Depraved mentality likewise is transmitted. Sufferers from alcoholism leave children who are physically, morally, and intellectually degenerate. Dipsomania is hereditary. In the descendants it is often represented by neurasthenia, hysteria, epilepsy, idiocy, insanity. Mental maladies are transmissible; hallucination, paranoia, dementia, epilepsy, idiocy reappear in the same family again and again (v. Ribot).

Professors tell us that language is not hereditary; they tell us that if a child of a highly civilized race were exposed in a forest, and brought up there in isolation (brought up presumably by gorillas or by professors), that child would not speak the language of his ancestors. This is logic produced by a wonderful cerebration. These same professors tell us that the musical abilities of Bach and of Mozart were inherited. Probably they assume that these were born with pianos dangling about their necks, and singing at birth Schubert's songs instead of the usual baby singsong. The professors probably are willing to admit that, if these men, who inherited their musical genius, had been brought up in isolation under the tender care of gorillas or professors, they would never have become the masters they developed into. Even the professors admit that education did not give them their genius. If at birth the leg of a child be flexed on the thigh and the foot on the leg, and the whole leg from the hip to the toes be tightly bandaged and left in that condition for twenty years, the child will not be able to walk; the leg will be so thoroughly crippled that the tortured human being will never be able to use that leg.

Such crippling of the leg is in every way analogous to the crippling of the brain, on which as a premise the professor bases his conclusion. Not the speech itself is inherited, but the ability to acquire that speech. Education cannot create something out of nothing. It cannot do more than develop that which is in us. If the germ of language is not in us, not a hundred thousand professors, not all the education in the world, will make us able to use language.

The importance of education is immensely overestimated. Almost any living creature can be trained to the mechanical trick of reading and writing, a trick that most coolies are up to. Dogs are trained to perform more wonderful tricks than that, as may be seen at any circus. Education produces nothing; it creates neither thinking power nor originality nor genius; but frequently  it stamps these out by its levelling tendency. The lives of the great generals, poets, artists, and thinkers prove that the influence of education on them was insignificant.

To a large part of those who read, reading is an anodyne, a narcotic, a substitute for opium, cocaine, alcohol; more detrimental, possibly, than these poisons. Libraries, public schools, novel and newspaper reading have educated the public to such an extent that it believes anything that is in print; for instance, the wildest patent medicine advertisement. Even the quack who sells rings for the cure of diseases finds his dupes among the reading public: "Rheumatism now relieved by science. The relief is obtained by the elimination of uric acid. It is done by wearing a ring on the ringer. A trial convinces the most skeptical. One ring, $2. Beware of imitations!" Reading frequently obliterates the native wit.

"The power of instruction is seldom of much efficacy, except in those happy dispositions where it is almost superfluous" (Gibbon, "Decline and Fall of Rome.")

When the Greeks began establishing vast libraries, they had long been a mongrelized, rotting race. It is said that the Goths, when they had captured Athens, were preparing to burn the splendid libraries which adorned the city, but a Gothic soldier dissuaded them from it by telling his countrymen that it was better that the Athenians should continue to waste their time in their halls and porticos over their books than that they should occupy themselves with manly exercises. Gibbon thinks that the Goth reasoned like an ignorant barbarian. George Finlay thinks that the barbarian reasoned like an able politician. Education, let it again be said, produces nothing. The power to use language is an inherited ability. More than that, a great language is the greatest production of a great race. It has been developed not by one generation, but by a thousand generations, nay, by thousands of generations. More powerfully than any other factor, probably more powerfully than all the other factors combined, has it helped to shape the brain, the mind, the soul of that race. A great language is a sacred heirloom. It is inseparably united with the soul of the people. Separate the two, and the soul withers. If there is any truth in heredity at all, if it is true that children resemble their parents (and if they do not, they are certainly monsters), then it is also true that the ability to feel and think most clearly and most thoroughly is greatest in the mother tongue, and is hereditary.

When Greek was spoken by the Greeks only, works were produced which are even now the wonder of the world. When Greek had become the world language and was spoken from the Euphrates to the Pillars of Hercules, nothing was produced in that language. The speaking of the same tongue leads to promiscuous crossing, which soon stamps out all race characteristics, and all greatness with them. The history of the Latin language illustrates the same truth. After the time of Augustus, Rome accomplished nothing that was great. Justinian's collection of laws was a compilation in which the now fossilized Roman law continued to petrify. It was after new races had developed and created languages of their own that creative power reappeared in Spain, Gaul, and Italy.

It can be proved that this condition exists in the United States, (v. Chapter XXVI.)

A people that adopts another tongue can do so without degenerating only if it becomes a people capable of using both languages for generations. When many Huguenots went to settle in Berlin they were exempted from taxation for a considerable time, and the Germans paid for the schools in which French was the language of instruction. For a long time they spoke French as well as German. The Germans recognized that speaking the German tongue and shouting the praise of the Elector was not sufficient to make them Germans. A slow, long-continued process of absorption was necessary for that and the Huguenots have become absorbed and Germanized to the marrow of their backbones.

In regard to the Poles, the Germans pursue the same policy of slow and thorough absorption. The number of Poles that was incorporated with Prussia one hundred and thirty-five years ago was less than one million; the receiving population of Germany was more than twenty million. The Germans gave the Poles public schools in which Polish was the language of instruction, and German was taught as a foreign tongue. Very gradually German was made the language of instruction in different subjects, and this year they began to use German as the language of instruction in all subjects. The Germans have civilized and Germanized the Poles. The German Poles differ from the Austrian Poles and Russian Poles as much as the Italians of the North differ from the Italians of the South.

One hundred and fifty years ago the Poles of Prussia were German-Slavic mongrels, and their worthlessness is proved by every page of their history. The Germans are not anxious to replace the Polish-speaking mongrel by a German-speaking mongrel. They want Germans there. And they are succeeding. There are to-day in the Eastern provinces of Germany 7,808,808 Germans and 3,081,832 Poles. They do not wish to absorb the Poles quickly. They are content if the number of Poles they absorb, plus those that emigrate, is a little greater than the birth-rate. "Throughout nature noble growths are slow."

As Germany prospers it is in need of workmen. Slavs from Russia and Austria are permitted to come to Germany and earn money, but they are not permitted to settle in Germany. Russian and Austrian Poles are compelled to leave Germany every year for a number of months. When times become less prosperous, Germany expels all foreign workmen. Millionaires and landowners  exclaim against this restriction policy and brand it inhuman, illiberal, cruel, not in accordance with the spirit of the time, and what not. The people of Germany, however, will allow their race to deteriorate neither for the sake of French phrases nor for the sake of landholders and millionaires.

The Germans know that the importance of language is second to that of blood only.

The Jews also know it. They do not readily yield the language which their ancestors have spoken for centuries. Spain has not treated her Jews well, and yet the Spanish Jews hold tenaciously to the Spanish tongue. They know that by rapidly forgetting their ancestors' tongue, they become less able than they were before. The German Jews do not forget the German language; they acquire rapidly the tongue of the people among whom they live. They are as good citizens as the men of other races, but they know that the language that has been spoken for centuries impresses itself on the brain, and that if they neglect that language they will become less able men, less worthy citizens.

It seems that a language spoken for a long time creates its own physiological brain-centre. It is known that in the third left frontal convolution a centre exists which controls the capacity for language. Upon the integrity of this centre the ability to use language depends. The ability to read and to write depends upon a brain-centre.

Cases of aphasia have been reported which seem to indicate the probability that each language creates its own subordinate brain-centre. The following case was recorded in New York. Man, sixty years old, born in Alsace before that province was ceded by France to Germany. French and German were spoken in the family for at least a hundred years. Spoke English fluently. Affected with aphasia. He first lost the ability to understand spoken German and spoken English. As the aphasia progressed, he lost the ability to understand spoken French and the ability to speak and write English. Then he lost the ability to speak and read German. Finally he was able to read a sentence written in English, and to write an answer to it in German. He had lost all other capacity for language.

Similar cases have been reported. Patients suffering from aphasia have lost the ability to use one language, and retained their ability to use another for a considerable time. These cases suggest the probability at least that the disease attacked at first the location where the centre for the one language was situated, and later extended to include the centre of the other language. The same holds good for the writing and for the reading centres. The importance of language is second to that of blood only.

The brain-centre which has been active for generations is hereditary, and cannot be replaced in a few generations by another centre. Conscious thought grows out of the subconscious mind; it is its flower, as it were, its least important part. The subconscious mind is the repository of the thought and experience of many generations. The language of the race forms the connecting link between these generations. Man as he comes into this world is not dead matter at the mercy of his environment. Many generations have contributed to make him as he is. He comes into this world with a nervous system, with brain-centres, with a soul, which predispose him to think, to feel, to act, to speak as his ancestors have thought, felt, acted, and spoken.

Very slowly can one race absorb another; the attempt to do so quickly leads to the degeneration of both. Very slowly can one language be substituted for another. If it be done quickly, nothing will be said in the acquired tongue that is worth hearing, (v. The Greek language, the German-Americans.)

Read "Heredity," by Th. Ribot.
Site Admin
Posts: 32961
Joined: Thu Aug 01, 2013 5:21 am

Re: Race or Mongrel, by Alfred P. Schultz

Postby admin » Mon Apr 12, 2021 5:23 am



-- Homer.

Political boundaries shift. The term Germany in this chapter stands not for the German empire only, but for the German lands of Europe. Only sixty-five per cent, of the Germans live in the empire. Germany extends from Riga in the east to Holland and Flanders in the west, and includes those countries; it extends from the North Sea, Denmark, and the Baltic Sea in the north to the Adriatic Sea and the Carpathian Mountains in the south and southeast. The countries included in that territory that do not belong to the empire are separated from the empire politically only. Intellectually, morally, racially they always have been and never ceased to be German provinces; as German as Bavaria, Prussia, Saxony, or any of the other German states. Politically these countries have been parts of Germany for centuries, even until comparatively recent times. Probably in a short time they will again be united to the German empire.

The Austrians in 1866 did not secede, but were forced out of the German Union. They have never ceased in their efforts at getting back. The Swiss in 1499 did not secede from Germany, but threw off the tyranny of the Habsburgs. Political relationship continued to exist between Switzerland and the other German states until very recent times. Economically Switzerland has become a German province within the last twenty years. Without the German trade Switzerland would be very poor indeed. Moreover, of what does the independence of Switzerland consist? Of nothing but a coloured patch on the map. In reality those small German countries, that are fractions and not units, are dependent. When they were surrounded by other fractions of the same unit, they were of some importance, but today they depend entirely on the good-will of their neighbours.

The character of the people begins to reflect the real dependence of the country. Formerly Switzerland was a country of stalwart mountaineers. To-day it is a country of hotel-keepers, waiters, barkeepers, and servants. And not only of servants, but of serviles. The Bavarians, Saxons, and others, who have exchanged the independence of the coloured patch on the map for real independence in union with their brethren, are becoming freer, prouder, and more independent every day. This development is but natural, for the loss of a finger cripples a man, but does not destroy him. The severed finger, however, can never be the man. The Netherlands have been separated from Germany politically since 1648. In every other way the relation between the two has always been very intimate.

All of Prussia was originally a Low-German (Dutch and Flemish) colony. The inhabitants of Holland are about five million Low-Germans. The total number of Low-Germans is about twenty-five million. Most of the Low-Germans consider themselves Germans also in their political relationship. The people of Flanders (Vlamens, Flemings) are Low-Germans like the Dutch, and the chief difference between the two consists in a line on the map. There are about four million Vlamens in Belgium, about nine million Low Germans in the two Netherlands. The Dutch and Flemish languages are so much alike that after some differences in spelling have been eliminated, the two become one dialect.

This change has lately been agreed upon by the Low-German language conference. Dutch, on the other hand, is a Platt-Dutch, that has developed but little apart from other Platt-Deutsch dialects. Dutch differs but very little from the Platt-Dutch dialects spoken in the northwestern part of Germany. German poets have written works in Flemish, which can be read and understood by every intelligent German, as he can understand the works of Reuter. Dutch is a Platt-Dutch dialect that has adopted local colours, as every one of the Platt-Deutsch dialects spoken in Germany has. German historians always regarded the Dutch as Germans, and always considered the history of the Netherlands as a part of the history of Germany. A history of Germany without the history of the Netherlands is incomplete.

Germany and the Netherlands stand and fall together. The conditions which enforce a union are: unity of race, of spirit, of language, of economic interests, and the distress of the Netherlands. They have an enormous trade, which they cannot protect; they have colonies which are at the mercy of any country that cares to take them; they have a large population which they cannot feed. Politically their independence, like that of Switzerland, consists in the different colour on the map. To-day they are the valet of one nation, to-morrow of another. The Netherlands can regain their former importance, independence, activity, and honour only in close union with their brethren.

Economically the Netherlands are German provinces. Their trade is enormous, out of all proportion to the size of the country. It is this enormous trade alone which enables them to support more than three hundred inhabitants to the square mile. And this trade comes from Germany. It is Germany that gives food and shelter to at least half the population of the Netherlands. If the low countries were inhabited by Slavs or Latins, the Germans would have built a Rhine canal many years ago, and would have thereby diverted their trade from Dutchland to Deutschland. The Dutch, however, are Germans, and the hundreds of millions of dollars that the Dutch gain are not considered lost.

The Germans do not wish to annex the Netherlands. It is their custom to do their work slowly and thoroughly. Slowly, silently, steadily do German ideas and ideals become Dutch ideas and ideals, and Dutch ideas abd ideals German ideas and ideals. Deutschland began the conquest of Dutchland long ago by awakening and developing race consciousness; by allowing German trade to drift freely into these lands, bringing it home to the Dutch that the two countries belong to each other, and that it is the smaller brother who gains the most by clasping hands with the stronger brother. Moreover, Germany is a federal country, like the United States, and state rights are held more sacred in Germany than anywhere else. As one of the kingdoms of the German empire, the Dutch and Flemish lands would retain complete local autonomy. The Germans will not annex the Netherlands; they will wait until these German lands will join the German federation. And the sentiment "One with Germany" is becoming more powerful every day. The Flemish movement in Belgium is very strong and is increasing in vigour and intensity. A large part of the work is being done by the "Society for the Unification of Germany, the German Culture Society" (Alldeutscher Verband).

Many of the best men of Germany, Holland, Austria, and Flanders are among its most active members. Their work is a slow work, consisting mainly in creating and strengthening the desire for the completion of German unity. As far as the Netherlands are concerned, the Boer War helped them considerably. The Dutch consider the Boers fellow Dutchmen, and the war an outrage against themselves, who suffered many outrages at the hands of England and France; because the Netherlands were small, not a nation, but the small fragment of a nation. The Boer War brought it back to them that it was England that took from them New Amsterdam; that it was France and England that deprived them of Brazil; that it was England that took from them Cape Colony, Demerara, Essequibo, and other colonies; that it was England that destroyed their commerce; that it was France that deprived Holland of all her ancient privileges and her local autonomy and made her a department ruled from Paris.

Other races besides the German live in the German lands of Central Europe. In the northeast are Livonians and Lithuanians. In the east, Poles; in Belgium, Walloons; in the north, Danes; in Switzerland, Frenchmen and Italians; in Austria — Slovenians in Styria and Carinthia, Czechs in Bohemia, Italians in Tyrol, Magyars, Slowacks, Roumanians and Servians in Hungary, Poles and Ruthenians in Galicia.

What do the Germans intend to do with these peoples? Are they eager to Germanize them? By no means. France is to have the French parts of Switzerland and Belgium. Italy the Italian canton. Germany, France, and Italy are the three magnets that attract the German, French, and Italian splinters in Switzerland. The Danes in the North are becoming Germanized rapidly. They are of a race very closely related to the German. Intermarriage of German and Dane is no crossing. The Germans absorb the Poles in the eastern provinces. Many of these Poles are Germans who during the reign of Catherine settled in Poland, and who were forced to accept the Polish language.

The re-Germanization of these does not deteriorate the German race. For one hundred and fifty years the Germans have been absorbing Poles slowly in order to prevent a great influx of Polish blood into German veins. They gave the Poles schools in which the Polish language was used as the language of instruction, and very gradually German was substituted. The Germans are well satisfied if the number of Poles they absorb plus the number of those that emigrate is a little greater than the birth-rate. Emigration of the Poles is encouraged.

Poles from Austria and Russia are not allowed to settle in Germany, in obedience to the physiological law that crossing must be followed by inbreeding if it is not to lead to the deterioration of the race. Lithuanians and Livonians are not absorbed. They differ from the Germans considerably, and the number of Germans in that territory is small. The Germans are content if Germans remain the upper caste they have formed for seven hundred years. As the number of Slovenians is small, the rapid absorption of them does not endanger the German race. The Germans, however, prefer to go slowly. They do not wish to absorb any race quickly.

In 1846 there were 640,300 Germans and 364,700 Slovenians in Styria; in 1900 these numbers had changed to 902,300 for the Germans and 409,000 for the Slovenians, so that the percentage of Slovenians has fallen from thirty-six to thirty. As Germanization proceeds, the process becomes quicker and in the years 1890 to 1900 the relative gain of the Germans and the loss of the Slovenians was annually eighty-eight per thousand. Carinthia shows the same development. In Bohemia the Czechs are endeavouring by all means, fair and foul, to repress the Germans, but in vain. The spreading of the Germans seems to be as irresistible as fate. The census reports indicate a German gain of one per cent, for every ten years. Not that they will never absorb the Czechs is a cause of anxiety to the Germans, but that they are absorbing them too rapidly.

The Germans are not sorry that German scholars studied the half-forgotten Czechs' tongue and revived that language for them. Promiscuous crossing vitiates the blood, and the future of Germany lies in the blood. A Germany inhabited by a German-speaking mongrel is worthless, no matter how rich it may be; race is more important than riches. Not the greatest happiness of the greatest number, but the greatest efficiency of the greatest number, is the German ideal. The thoroughbred alone is efficient. The Germans recognize that the Anglo-Saxons in America have overestimated their absorbent capacity immensely. The Germans make it difficult for people not of the German race to settle in Germany.

"Was Euch nicht angehort,
Miisset Ihr meiden;
Was Euch das Inn're stort
Durft Ihr nicht leiden,"

[google translate: What is not yours
You should avoid;
What is bothering you inside  
You must not suffer]

admonishes Gothe his fellow citizens.

Promiscuous crossing destroys the harmony of the soul.

The number of Slowacks who emigrate to the United States is greater than the birth-rate. They are, in fact, becoming transplanted to the United States, and the Germans are well satisfied with the transplanting.

Germany must expand or it will suffocate, and it is no nation's duty to commit suicide. Austro-Hungary, Germans "demand, must again become a German colony. Southeastern Europe is the German colony of the future. The German and Austrian demands are:

Austro-Hungary must be maintained at all costs, by war, if necessary. The two countries form an indissoluble union each guaranteeing to the other the maintenance and independence of its territory. Both adopt the same system of taxation, railway-tariff, postal-telegraph and telephone systems; the same economic laws for the protection of workmen, women, widows, children, and orphans; the same insurance laws against sickness, accident, and invalidity. Germans are allowed to move freely from the one country to the other. Each of the two countries reserves the right to make more difficult or to prohibit the immigration of other races.

German is the language of both armies. Every officer must prove his ability to speak German fluently. German recruits only are drafted for the artillery, engineer, telegraph, telephone, railway, and aeronaut regiments.

Citizens of the one country may become citizens of the other country without losing their citizenship in the former. Citizens of both countries may serve in the army of either country. German is the language of the army and of the navy, and of the postal, telegraph, telephone, railway, police, and customs services.

No attempt must be made to absorb Czechs, Roumanians, South Slavs, and Magyars. That the Hunnic-Slavic-Wallachian mongrel calling himself Magyar is worthless, every page of his history attests. Civilization does not owe one thought, not one suggestion (unless it be that of goulach) to the Magyars. Petofi was a Slav, and Maurus Jokai a Jew.

In order to prevent the rapid absorption of these peoples, the following languages are recognized in Austro-Hungary:

German alone in Upper Austria, Lower Austria, German Bohemia, German Moravia, German Silesia, North Tyrol, Vorarlberg, Styria, Carinthia; German and Czech in parts of Bohemia, Moravia, and. Silesia; German and Magyar in Hungary, with the exception of Transylvania, Slavonia, and Croatia; German and Roumanian in Transylvania; German, Roumanian, and Ruthenian in Bucovina; Polish and Ruthenian in Galicia; South-Slavic in Croatia, Slavonia, Dalmatia, and Bosnia; German, Italian, and South-Slavic in Triest and Istria.

The language of the public schools is the mother tongue of the pupils.

Every official and government employee must be able to speak, besides German, another of the recognized languages of Austro-Hungary. In every part of Austro-Hungary where German is not a recognized language, the Germans pay for their own schools and are exempt from the school tax.

By these means the Germans will effectually prevent a rapid absorption of non-German races. German emigration will again be diverted into Austro-Hungary. All of Central Europe will eventually become Germanized, if they go about it as slowly as they have heretofore; if they do not begin to suffer from paranoia, and to think that they can absorb several millions of people and their descendants in a century. They can mongrelize them, degrade them and themselves, but absorb and Germanize them in a century they cannot.

The Germans, however, recognize that promiscuous crossing destroys the race, and that even moderate crossing must be followed by inbreeding, or the crossing will be detrimental. Their recognition of this law and their obedience to this law will make them the strongest of races, the most powerful nation that has ever come into being. The future of Germany is in the blood. In life the straight line is not always the shortest distance between two points.

Promiscuous crossing does not produce a new race, but stamps out all race characteristics and all greatness.

"Crossing obliterates character"

-- Darwin.

"So viel ist wohl mit Wahrscheinlichkeit zu urteilen, dass die Vermischung der Stamme, welche nach und nach die Charactere ausloscht, dem Menschengeschlecht, alles vorgeblichen Philanthropismus ungeachtet, nicht zutraglich ist"

[Google translate: That much is likely to be judged that the mixing of the tribes, which after and after the characters are extinguished, the human race, all alleged philanthropism notwithstanding, no is beneficial]

-- Immanuel Kant.

"Tied down by Race and creed and land and station,
Go learn to find thy strength in limitation."

Read "Deutsche Politik," by Ernst Hasse; "Die Zukunft des Deutschen Volkes," by Karl Jentsch; "Die alldeutsche Bewegung und die Niederlande," by Fritz Bley; "Die Schweitz," by Prof. Hunziker; "Die Ostmarken," by Ch. Petzet; "Steiermark, Krain, und Kustenland," by Dr. P. Hofman von Wellenhof; "Bohmen und Schlesien," by Karl Turk; "Tyrol," by H. Nabert; "Ungarns Tausendjahrung," by Heinrich Wastian; "Deutschtum und Magyarisirung," by Dr. Fr. Guntram Schultheiss; "Alldeutsche Blatter," "Der Hammer."
Site Admin
Posts: 32961
Joined: Thu Aug 01, 2013 5:21 am

Re: Race or Mongrel, by Alfred P. Schultz

Postby admin » Mon Apr 12, 2021 5:46 am


It has been said that the degeneration of Spain is due to the fact that Spain is Catholic, a statement in which there is as much truth as in the statement that the deterioration of Egypt was caused by the Egyptian priests. When Spain was Gothic it was great and it was Catholic. The Northern races were great before they were Protestant, when they were Catholic, and great before they were Christian. Christianity sends many to heaven, many more to the other place, but regenerate a race it cannot. It cannot change the blood that rolls in the veins.

Race impresses its characteristics on the religion that a people profess. The Catholicity of Gothic Spain was not the Catholicity of modern Spain. With the post-Gothic Spaniard, the Iberian-Gothic-Moorish-African mongrel, Catholicity degenerated into the crass fetishism which is the religion of modern Spain. The Catholicity of Southern Italy is likewise a fetishism in accord with the African blood that flows in the veins of the Southern Italian. The Iberian fetishism became degraded to a still greater extent in South America, in consonance with the progressive degradation of the American mongrel, the American Spaniel, and Portugack. The Catholicity of the Irish or of the French is essentially different from that of the Iberians. The Catholicity of the South German is love for art, colour, music, life. Gothe, although a Protestant, preferred in life and in art the warm glow of the Catholic Church.

Religion does not cause the degeneration of a race, it degenerates with the race. The Spaniard who, in comparing Germany and Spain, thinks that the difference is due to the university system of Germany, that German patriotism and superiority, that the greatness of the empire, is created by schools and universities, is overestimating the importance of universities immensely. German universities accomplish so much, because the German race is a great race. A thousand German universities in Spain could do nothing for Spain. In a short time they would deteriorate to the Spanish level. Great races have great schools, but schools never make a race great. It all depends upon the blood.

As long as Gothic blood prevailed in Spain, Spain was great. After the Moorish wars were over, the Spaniards and the Portuguese fused with the Moors that remained. The Moors introduced Arabian and negro blood. In the fifteenth century the Portuguese acquired African possessions, and, carrying negro blood in their veins, elective affinity caused them to cross freely with the negroes. At first the negro blood came to Portugal in droplets; later it became a flood. It flooded Spain as well as Portugal.

These Iberian-Gothic-Arabian-negro mongrels colonized South America, Mexico, Central America, and the West Indies. What have they accomplished? Is it not true that Iberia laid rotten eggs in South America, and that the United States acted as their incubator and brooder? Let us examine the facts.

After the Cuban war we were told that the Cubans were freedom-loving, independent, and able; in short, that they were supra-Americans. To-day we know that the Spanish-negro mongrel is worthless, incapable of appreciating, incapable of maintaining self-government, and that Cuba is a bigger Santo Domingo. We have them on our hands, and do not know what to do with them. Annex them, and have a flood of negro blood injected surreptitiously by the quasi-whites of Cuba? Self-government has been tried in Cuba; it has failed. There always is one general "Idiotes," who is not elected, and he takes to the brush as heretofore.

Rottenness will continue to prevail. Autonomy may be tried again, the Cubans will fail again. Fail, because the people of Cuba are worthless. Weyler's reconcentrado system is the only one that will make these bush- rangers work. They are rotten to the core. And that degraded humanity we want to absorb? Self-degradation is the only possible consequence.

The fusion of whites and Indians produces mestizos, the fusion of negroes and Indians produces Zambos. Both mongrels are vastly inferior to the pure Indian. It has been said that it is physiologically inexplicable why only the bad qualities of the whites and of the negro are transmitted to the mongrel offspring and never the good qualities of the Indian. All laws of nature are inexplicable; we recognize them, but we cannot explain them.

That the mongrel is worthless is a law of nature. Every animal breeder knows that the canine mongrel is inferior to the parent races. There is no reason whatsoever for the opinion that man is exempt from the penalties which are the consequences of violating nature's laws.

Mexico is a country inhabited by whites, Indians, and white-India mongrels. The latter class comprises four-fifths of the population. In the brief life of Mexican national existence are recorded no less than three hundred revolutions. We are told that, since Diaz has been President (dictator), the Mexicans have kept the peace, that they are progressive and prosperous. This means that absolutism is the only possible form of government for the mongrel. It is more than probable that the death of Diaz will precipitate a revolution. It is very improbable that another dictator of Diaz's calibre will be found. Probably one general "Idiotes" after the other will usurp the government; and the chaos, which for the time being is more or less concealed, will again become evident.

The prosperity of Mexico, its progress, are due entirely to the foreigners, Americans, Germans, and English. Where these are not, there is not a sign of progress. Of natives there are practically two classes in Mexico; those of Spanish origin, narrow-chested, and lacking in physical vigour as well as in character and mental strength, men of whom the white race has no reason to be proud; far superior, however, to the other four-fifths. Excluding the government lands, the 767,000 square miles of Mexico's territory are in possession of six thousand persons belonging to this upper fifth. The other four-fifths are slow-witted, stupid, without individuality. They are animals, and their only human qualities are their superhuman mendacity and their ability to consume pulque.

Engineers have seen the peon, instead of trundling wheelbarrows along planks laid down for that purpose, take up the planks and carry the wheelbarrows ^bodily up the embankment, each wheelbarrow on the shoulders of two men. That Diaz forced his subjects to keep the peace, speaks well for Diaz, but says nothing for the Mexicans. Guzman Blanco forced the Venezuelans to keep the peace for twenty years, but improve them he could not, and they remained as degraded as they were before Blanco's time. The despots Lopez I and Lopez II, who ruled Paraguay for many years, forced their mongrel subjects to submit to their absolute rule, and Paraguay reached a comparatively high degree of wealth and material well-being, but they could not regenerate the people.

The Mexicans are as degraded to-day as they were before Diaz's peace era. These people we want to absorb! It has been said that the day is not far off when we will have absorbed Mexico. That absorption cannot but cause the degeneration of the people of the United States. Our expansion costs more than it is worth. When A. von Humboldt was consulted as to the future of Mexico, he said: "The United States will absorb it, and then crumble to pieces." With the degradation incident to the absorption of the Mexicans his gloomy prophecy would soon be realized.

In Central America we have whites, negroes, Indians, and the great mass of mixed breeds, the Ladinos. The small upper class is arrogant, stupid, lazy, mendacious. The others are like the peons of Mexico. These are countries belonging to the richest, most fertile, most blessed regions of the globe. A race that is worth something could change them into a paradise. We prefer to support these so-called republics, and to prevent decent Europeans from establishing flourishing Switzerlands, spreading civilization. We support communities that reek with rottenness, degradation, and disease.

Travelling statesmen tell us that we should extend the respect toward the South Americans which they so well merit; that they are honourable men. To mention Venezuela is disproving the statement. The English language has not adjectives sufficiently strong to even suggest the rottenness, the concupiscence, the mendacity, and the cowardice of that Spanish-Indian-negro mongrel.  

Of the Brazilians Mr. Biggs Wither says: "They might live like princes with such wealth of nature around them; but in the great majority of instances they certainly seem to prefer to live like pigs." Ex-Consul C. C. Andrews writes: "The condition of primary instruction is deplorable. Pernambuco still shows some traces of a quarter of a century of Dutch government and especially of the administration of that able statesman, Prince Maurice of Nassau. The Dutch occupied an important part of Brazil, including Pernambuco, thirty-seven years, from 1624-1661, and then, through the influence of England and France, were made to yield it up to Portugal. It would have been better for the rest of Brazil if so thrifty a nationality had remained a near neighbour." (From "Brazil," by C. C. Andrews).* [Courtesy of D. Appleton & Co.]

France and England wanted vermin and nothing but vermin in South America then; we want vermin and nothing but vermin in South America now. "The half-breeds are a lazy and troublesome class, much inferior to the original stock." Mr. Andrews continues:

"Alfred Wallace says of the Amazon valley: 'In the districts we passed through, cotton, rice, coffee might be grown in any quantity and of the finest quality. ... A man can work as well here as in the hot months in England, and if he will work only three hours in the morning and three hours in the evening he will produce more of the necessaries and comforts of life than by twelve hours' daily labour at home. . . . It is a vulgar error, copied and repeated from one book to another, that in the tropics the luxuriance of the vegetation overpowers the efforts of man. . . . The primeval forest can be converted into rich pasture and meadowland, cultivated fields and gardens, with half the labour and in less than half the time required at home. . . . In the whole Amazon valley no such thing as neatness has ever been tried.'" He recommends the Rio Negro country for settlement and cultivation.

Professor Agassiz says: "Two things are strongly impressed on the mind of the traveller in the upper Amazon valley, — the necessity of a larger population, and of a better class of whites, before any fair beginning can be made in developing the resources of the country." Not only is the white population too small for the task before it, but it is no less poor in quality than meagre in numbers. It presents the singular spectacle of a higher race receiving the impress of a lower one, of an educated class adopting the habits and sinking to the level of the savage. It is a mistake to suppose that this valley is abundantly supplied with subsistence.

"In the midst of a country which should be overflowing with agricultural products," Mr. Agassiz states, "neither milk nor butter nor cheese nor vegetables are to be had. You constantly hear the people complaining of the difficulty of procuring even the commonest articles of domestic consumption, when, in fact, they ought to be produced by every landowner. In the Upper Amazon valley, a well-stocked turtle tank is to be found in almost every yard, as the people depend largely upon turtles for their food." With reference to the mixture of races, Professor Agassiz records the following opinion: "Let any one who doubts the evil of this mixture of races, and is inclined from mistaken philanthropy to break down all barriers between them, come to Brazil. He cannot deny the deterioration consequent upon the amalgamation of races, more wide-spread here than in any country in the world, and which is rapidly effacing the best qualities of the white man, the negro, and the Indian, leaving a mongrel, nondescript type, deficient in physical and mental energy" (From "Brazil," by C. C. Andrews).

The Portuguese, carrying the blood of coloured races in their veins, readily crossed with the Indians when they came to South America. They degraded themselves to the social level of the Indians. Mr. Bigg Wither says: "In the great majority of cases they certainly prefer to live like pigs." In the streets of Rio, Sao Paulo, and other cities, silk chimney-pot hats and Prince Albert coats, Parisian gowns and hats, are more common than on Fifth Avenue in New York; in every other way they "prefer to live like pigs." Filth and impurity, physical and moral, characterize Brazil. In Sao Paulo sexual perversion is more than common. The population is depraved to an incredible extent. It is considered indecent for a man to own a mare. On many haciendas she-goats are not kept, for the same reason. And they are all honourable men!

Concerning the Germans in South Brazil they are decent and worth something only as long as they remain German. The Brazilianized descendants of Germans in Sao Paulo are more degraded, if possible, than the natives. It is deplorable that the Germans there, becoming Brazilians, serve only the purpose of injecting activity into a lazy, vicious, filthy mass. The mongrelization of the Germans of Rio Grande do Sul is a question of time only; their number is too small to prevent it. At present there are towns in Southern Brazil that are German in every way, inhabited by clean men, clean women, and clean children, but their degeneration is inevitable. The German immigration to Brazil is very small; in every way possible Germany discourages emigration to South America. Germany wants no colony there, for she is collecting her forces to colonize semi-Asia, i.e. Southeastern Europe.

Decency is to have no home in South America. Ex-Consul C. C. Andrews says: "On the whole, I should not advise any of our Americans to emigrate to Brazil; we have much better openings at home for our people. . . . Since the Civil War probably four thousand Americans emigrated from the Southern States to Brazil, of whom many were experienced agriculturists and possessed means; but four-fifths of these have returned to the United States, and many look forward to doing the same. . . . There are a number of our people in the Amazon valley, engaged in agriculture, who bitterly regret having come to this country, and who are only struggling to make a little money to allow them to return" (From "Brazil," by C. C. Andrews). Decency is to have no home in South America. It will have no home there until better races take possession of and rule these countries.

Peru is the country of complete moral, intellectual, and material bankruptcy. The degeneration there is even greater and has been more rapid than in the other South American countries, and the cause is the infusion of Chinese blood into the veins of the white-negro-Indian compound. There are scarcely any Indo-Europeans of pure blood in Peru, for with the exception of pure Indians in the interior, the population consists of mestizos, Zambos, mulattoes, terceroones, quadroons, cholos, musties, fusties, and dusties; crosses between Spaniards and Indians, Spaniards and negroes, Spaniards and yellows; crosses between these people and the cholos, musties, and dusties; crosses between mongrels of one kind and mongrels of the other kinds. All kinds of crossbreeds infest the land. The result is incredible rottenness. The so-called whites are narrow-chested, anaemic, lacking in physical vigour and in character. The men stand on the corners talking scandal, and utter obscenities whenever a woman passes. The streets of the cities swarm with beggars.

Peru abounds in natural resources, — and its mountains are full of coal, petroleum, gold, silver, copper, platinum, tin, and other metals. Owing to differences of elevation, it includes regions with every variety of climate. Where is the race that will settle there and utilize these riches? It cannot come as long as the United States is the protector and therefore the disseminator of rottenness and depravity in South America.

Paraguay and Uruguay are as fertile as Central Europe, and the climate is delightful. If Paraguay and Uruguay were as thickly inhabited as Central Europe, they would contain a population of forty-five millions and more. These figures show that the Monroe Doctrine, which prevents honest people from taking possession of these lands and creating flourishing countries there, is the greatest crime,, the most abominable atrocity, that was ever perpetrated by white people against the white races.

The Paraguayans, the Uruguayans, like the Peruvians, Brazilians, Chilians, and the other mongrels, are useless for progress. They are worthless. They are as lazy as they are incapable and depraved. Work they will not. The men do nothing; they make the women do the little work that is to be done, beat their wives, and get drunk. The Paraguayan has mandioca and oranges; why should he work? In order to make the Paraguayans work, the destruction of the orange-groves has been recommended. One of the despots of Costa Rica had many of the bananiers destroyed in order to make his mongrel subjects work. The mongrels, however, did not work. Nature soon supplied them with bananas again. Why should they work? The destruction of the orange-groves in Paraguay would have no different effect than the destruction of the bananiers had in Costa Rica. Some little progress has been accomplished, but it has been accomplished by gringos, foreigners, Germans, and English; not with the help of, but in spite of, the Paraguayans and Uruguayans.

Lack of character, coarse, brutal materialism, is as characteristic of the Argentinian as of the other South Americans. Prince Albert coats and Parisian gowns are common in Buenos Ayres, but they cannot conceal the inner barbarity. The men are effeminate, brutal, coarse, obscene, and without respect for women. They stand around the streets and insult the women who pass; and the women are insipid and brainless. Their only ideal is to resemble the fashion-plates. There is character nowhere. The traveller in Argentina is struck by the utter absence of moral restraint, by the brutal materialism of the people. Never in the vilest slums of Europe and North America, they tell us, have they seen more complete moral destitution and more abominable and stupid brutishness than in Buenos Ayres itself.

In the rural districts the Argentinian is worse, if possible. Countries ruled by vermin attract as settlers vermin only, and it is the scum of the scum of Europe that has been deposited in Argentina. For the Argentinian, the traveller cannot but entertain contempt. In the rural districts, in the Pampas where these colonists settle, his contempt becomes disgust and loathing. The descendants of the immigrants assimilate the worst qualities of the natives, their immorality, their vices, and their unscrupulousness, readily. Many of them are worse than brutes; they have not the cleanly instincts of the four-legged beast. It is disgusting, it is vile, it is rank.

Let us turn to the "Yankees" of South America. Chili is the best of the South American countries, which is very far from meaning good. Chili was settled by people from the north of Spain, that is, by the least mongrelized Spaniards, many of whom did not cross with the coloured races. Still, between twenty and thirty per cent, of the Creoles are of relatively pure blood, and furnish the oligarchy which rules Chili. The fact that these rulers of Chili are the least mongrelized people of South America has conduced to make Chili the most progressive country of the continent. More important is the fact that all the industries of Chili are in the hands of Germans and Englishmen. Take the English and the Germans away from Chili, and Chili will cease to differ from the other countries of South America. The peons, semi-Indians, much inferior to the Araucanian Indians, the mass of the population, live like pigs. Their life passes in getting drunk and multiplying. Fortunately the death-rate is very high. Children die like flies. Their death causes no grief. They become angelitos, and what better excuse for interrupting work and getting drunk could there be found? No European labourer can compete with the peons, who sleep on the bare ground, and live on beans and water. Drunkenness is their only pleasure and comfort.

Chili prospers commercially; this, however, is due to the English and Germans, not due to the Chilians. Wherever Chilians are left to themselves, there are indolence, incapacity, and slovenliness. They are no better than Peruvians, Brazilians, Argentinians, and the other South Americans. Commercially Chili is an English-German province. Valparaiso is an English town. Valdivia is a German town, like Joinville and Blumenau in South Brazil. It is the most flourishing and charming colony in Chili. It is so because it is German, not Chilian. The inhabitants, the language, the stores, the tanneries, and other industries are German. Take away the Germans, take away the English from Chili, and the real rottenness of the country, the incapacity and depravity of the mongrel of Chili, will at once become apparent. He is no better than the mongrel of Argentina, Peru, Paraguay, Brazil, and the other countries of South America. The prosperity of Chili is due to the foreigners to those that do not become Chilians.

The foreigners who settle in Chili are, like the Germans of Brazil, in danger of mongrelization. Chilianized Germans, Chilianized Englishmen, soon become as degraded as the native Chilians. The number of these settlers is not sufficient to absorb the Chilians, and their absorption by the Chilians can have no other effect than that of increasing the race confusion and degradation. With the exception of a few Creole families, who refused to degrade themselves and to cross with the coloured races, the mass of the Chilians is fully as degraded, as venal, as foul-mouthed, as mendacious and immoral as the Spanish-Indian-negro mongrel in every one of the South American oligarchies.

Why are the South Americans not better than they are? There are writers who tell us that in parts of South America the soil is not fertile; others tell us that in South America nature is so full of exuberant strength that she becomes the enemy instead of the friend of man. She overpowers his efforts. One place has too much water, another has not sufficient water. Many similar reasons are alleged. All these explanations or excuses are insipid. The cause of the bad condition of these countries is the people that infest these countries. A better class of whites is what South America needs in order to turn it into a number of happy, rich, and flourishing countries. Let no good Europeans, however, settle there as long as the mongrel controls these lands. The lot of the immigrants is miserable. The government of these countries, as, for instance, that of Chili, induces them to come to Chili under false pretences. In Chili they are maltreated by the officials; and the existence of the gringos is lamentable indeed.

It would have taken an impossible degree of stupidity, an impossible degree of dementedness, to accomplish less in South America than has been accomplished. It is a continent reeking with rottenness, degradation, and disease. The pressure of the outside world alone enforces some appearance of civilization. None of these countries deserve to exist, and only pressure of the outside world enables them to exist. By supporting them, we abstract light, air, and food from millions of good men and women. We are casting pearls to swine. The obstacle to the development of South America is the South Americans. They are worthless, useless for progress.

Why are the South Americans so utterly degraded? It is their nature to be so. The mongrels of Mexico, Cuba, Central America, and South America are the children of most unnatural lewdness, bastards of incompatible races, the descendants of two, three, and more cultures that have nothing in common, of races that belong to different periods of development, or, rather, to developments essentially different in source, character, and tendency. That the fate of mongrels so compounded cannot be anything but degeneration is evident. The animal was given instinct and it shuns crossing. Man's instinct also abhors crossing; but man was given reason in addition to instinct, and he uses it frequently to be more a beast than any other beast.

The mongrel is worthless, and the pan-world mongrel is the most worthless of all mongrels.

Read "Brazil," by C. C. Andrews; "Spanish-American Republics," by Theodor Child; "Die Grundlagen des Neunzehnten Jahrhunderts," by Houston Stewart Chamberlain.  
Site Admin
Posts: 32961
Joined: Thu Aug 01, 2013 5:21 am

Re: Race or Mongrel, by Alfred P. Schultz

Postby admin » Mon Apr 12, 2021 5:51 am


What does it do for South America?

It has the tendency to change the whole continent into an enormous Santo Domingo or Cuba, by handing it over to a worthless herd. It is a bar to civilization. It prevents decent people from colonizing South America. Only the scum of humanity is willing to degenerate into Brazilians, Argentinians, Peruvians. It gives an artificial life, or, rather, galvanizes into the appearance of life the South American despotisms; countries that are cadavers, reeking with rottenness and degradation, crying out for decent burial. The Monroe Doctrine prevents their interment. It insists on the deterioration of Englishmen, Germans, Frenchmen, and other people that live in South America, forcing them to become like the native vermin.

It prevents Switzerlands from developing for the sake of Uruguay, Paraguay, and the other collections of worthless herds. It protects vice, ignorance, concupiscence, lewdness, and bestiality, handing over a whole continent to these abominations.

What does it do for the United States?

It makes the United States the ally, friend, cause, and disseminator of utter rottenness and depravity. It tends to mongrelize the United States, both by directing the course of immigration to the United States, and by forcing the United States to take control of these countries in order to check the rottenness.

Our trade with Canada is the most important on the whole Western Hemisphere; in many important articles it is more valuable than our trade with the whole of South America combined with that of Mexico and with that of the West Indies. Our trade with Germany, our trade with England, is enormous. If a country of these races existed in South America, our trade with it would be as great as our trade with Canada, Germany, or England now is. The Monroe Doctrine is therefore a bar to the growth of our trade.

It depresses wages, or prevents them from rising, because it acts as a bar to our trade, and because it directs the course of immigration to the United States.

That the Monroe Doctrine must be maintained for our own repose, is the statement of cowardice, concealed by the spread-eagle attitude.

We do not want the European system in America. And why not? Is it not true that, with the help of that system, the races living between the Firth of Forth and the Aegaean Sea, the Loire and the Vistula, accomplished more and produced more greatness than all the other races combined?

What does the Monroe Doctrine do for Europe?

It keeps Europe overpopulated. Many Europeans, and among them the best that Europe has, remain in Europe because they prefer poverty and their nationality to material prosperity. Least of all are they anxious to disappear in the South American quagmire.

As it keeps Europe overpopulated, it keeps wages down, which in its turn has the tendency to keep wages down in America, or to prevent them from rising.

As it increases poverty in Europe it causes more misery, destroys more happiness, cripples more homes, and prematurely fills more graves; in short, is more fatal to the white races than the ferocity of Turk or Mongol has been.

It is the duty of no race to commit suicide; increasing overpopulation is suicidal. Expansion alone can prevent it. Expansion in Europe means war. Every war that is necessary is just. There is no reason whatsoever for the assumption that the next European war will last but a few months. The fact that the last European wars lasted only a short time is without significance for the future. The temple of Janus was closed for two hundred years; for the future that meant nothing.

German generals ("Das Volk in Waffen," von der Goltz) are of the opinion that the next European war is more likely to last seven years than seven months. A war between England, Germany, and France means for humanity, no matter which is victor, the destruction of the best for the survival of the worst, — in South America.

Judging the Monroe Doctrine fairly, it must be considered the most abominable atrocity that was ever committed by white men against the white races. Great American statesman, who eject humanity phrases in support of the absurd doctrine, put your phrases in your pipe and smoke them, and find out that they are worth not even a paper of tobacco.
Site Admin
Posts: 32961
Joined: Thu Aug 01, 2013 5:21 am


Return to Ancien Regime

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 3 guests