In his famous novel Nineteen Eighty-Four, George Orwell describes a world where an all-powerful state intricately controls everyone’s lives and minds. Through mass-surveillance, propaganda, behavioural manipulation and torture, the “Inner Party” can make anyone believe anything. One famous scene involves the protagonist, Winston, believing that two plus two equals five, simply because the ruling class told him so. The picture is disturbing, to say the least, but frighteningly, not that far from the truth.
People are capable of believing a great many things, no matter how absurd or contradictory. Orwell called this process “doublethink” and a great many individuals in the West today are suffering from it. From mindless slogans like “Israel is our greatest ally,” to hating white people because we are all “racist,” examples exist everywhere. The ruling class narrative relies heavily on Orwellian style mind control; it is the second most important foundation of their power, behind only money.
When it comes to mindless dogmatic adherence to ideology, few are better at it than a fully programmed Marxist. These brainwashed drones love telling everyone how much they hate capitalism, on Twitter using their brand new iPhone. They simultaneously think they are in a revolution against the establishment whilst expressing views held by the exact same establishment. Since they cannot resolve their conflicting viewpoints, calling them out most often results in rage and violence. Those who do not respond with rage are invariably sociopaths and pathological liars, capable of deceiving themselves on a whim.
The Stolen Land Fallacy
One of the most pervasive Marxist lies is the claim that colonial nations, like Australia and the USA, exist on “stolen land.” The argument is that because people existed on these lands before the “white man came,” it actually belongs to those people and not Westerners. Half-caste Aboriginal activists in Australia love to mindlessly chant “always was, always will be, Aboriginal land,” as though this magically makes it so. They always conveniently ignore the fact that most of them would not exist if not for British settlement. Nor do they see the irony of chanting such things whilst wearing clothes, and shoes, then purchasing fast food for lunch.
The truth is nobody can ever steal land; you can only ever win it or lose it. God is the true owner, and he owns it because he created it. We only own what we create or cultivate ourselves, everything else is a gift from the Lord. It is true that once a group controls a piece of land they can set rules on who has rights to specific parcels of it. However, they will lose possession of their territory if they are unable to defend it from others. This is only possible through strength of men and the blessing of our Lord; if he wants to take land from us he will.
The ancient Israelites conquered the Promised Land because God willed it and, fundamentally, there was no other reason. He protected them in Egypt, he multiplied them greatly, he helped them escape Egypt and he allowed them to steamroll the seven cursed nations. The Canaanites stood no chance in the end, and should have abandoned their cities the moment the Israelites took the East side of the Jordan. Unfortunately, for them, they did not heed the warnings and most of them ended up dead and in hell.
Once the children of Israel took possession of the land, they started the process of dividing it between the people. Each tribe, other than the Levites, was to have their own territory and each man his own possession for farming and raising a family. The Bible goes into painstaking detail as to exactly what the borders of each tribe were. It was their inheritance as the Lord promised Abraham, Isaac and Jacob; everyone received a share that was to remain in their tribe and family forever. The law dictated what land belonged to whom, within the boundaries of the territory God won for them.
Inheritance
How the Bible treats inheritance is something that very few Pastors preach about on Sunday morning. This is a great shame because it is one of the most interesting aspects of Biblical law. God specifically dictates rules around this; therefore, it must be something he considers important. He gives us an excellent guide on how we should hand down inherited titles and who should have the right to own land. He also hands us a great weapon against the puppets of Satan who rule over us through usury and lies.
“And thou shalt speak unto the children of Israel, saying, If a man die, and have no son, then ye shall cause his inheritance to pass unto his daughter.
And if he have no daughter, then ye shall give his inheritance unto his brethren.
And if he have no brethren, then ye shall give his inheritance unto his father’s brethren.
And if his father have no brethren, then ye shall give his inheritance unto his kinsman that is next to him of his family, and he shall possess it: and it shall be unto the children of Israel a statute of judgment, as the LORD commanded Moses.” – Numbers 27: 8-11
Summing up this, when a man dies, the line of inheritance is the following: sons, daughters, brothers, uncles, cousins, second cousins and so on. Whilst God does not specifically state age here, we know from other passages the default heir was always the oldest, unless otherwise specified. Such as in Genesis when Reuben, Jacob’s oldest, defiled his fathers bed and lost his birthright to Joseph’s sons. If lines of succession were this clear, should a nation decide to anoint a king, there need not ever be a war for a crown.Notwithstanding attempted usurpation of course.
Another important verse on inheritance comes nine chapters later:
“This is the thing which the LORD doth command concerning the daughters of Zelophehad, saying, Let them marry to whom they think best; only to the family of the tribe of their father shall they marry.
So shall not the inheritance of the children of Israel remove from tribe to tribe: for every one of the children of Israel shall keep himself to the inheritance of the tribe of his fathers.” – Numbers 36: 6-7
The chapter itself is about daughters of a man who had no sons (also mentioned in numbers 27), thus no male heir. A chief was concerned that if these women married someone in another tribe, their tribe would lose part of their inheritance. He was right, of course, so God commanded women in this situation to marry someone within their own tribe. That way they would not lose the possession of their fathers.
The Year of Jubilee
This might seem insignificant, but it shows us how important ancestral land rights are to the Lord. If he did not want land passing even from one tribe to another through marriage, he certainly did not want it going to strangers. God issued several commandments that are purely about ensuring his people have an ancestral homeland. One such commandment would have made ethnic replacement through mass-migration impossible, if we had implemented it: The Year of Jubilee.
“Six years thou shalt sow thy field, and six years thou shalt prune thy vineyard, and gather in the fruit thereof;
But in the seventh year shall be a sabbath of rest unto the land, a sabbath for the LORD: thou shalt neither sow thy field, nor prune thy vineyard.” – Leviticus 25: 3-4
“And thou shalt number seven sabbaths of years unto thee, seven times seven years; and the space of the seven sabbaths of years shall be unto thee forty and nine years.
Then shalt thou cause the trumpet of the jubile to sound on the tenth day of the seventh month, in the day of atonement shall ye make the trumpet sound throughout all your land.
And ye shall hallow the fiftieth year, and proclaim liberty throughout all the land unto all the inhabitants thereof: it shall be a jubile unto you; and ye shall return every man unto his possession, and ye shall return every man unto his family.” – Leviticus 25: 8-10
Every fifty years, all land previously sold was to return to whomever was entitled to it through inheritance. In other words, if you inherited a possession and sold it to your neighbour, in the year of jubilee it would return to you. Even if your neighbour sold it to someone else, it would still return to you because it was your inheritance. Thanks to this system, the land could never fall into the hands of foreigners and remained as an ancestral homeland permanently. All contingent on the nation controlling the territory of course, but the principle remains.
Given specialisation and the efficiency of modern farming practices, this would be hard to apply in the exact same manner today. Some people are simply much better at farming than others, which allows us to produce a huge excess of food. It would be silly to tell everyone they needed to feed themselves with their own land when we do not need to. If someone wanted their own possession we should try making allowance for that, but most people prefer doing something else if they are able. Division of labour means the community benefits from always having the best individual in any given role.
We own the farms
The solution, if we were to apply Biblical law to our own nations, is to make land ownership contingent on national membership. That way we ensure those who have an ancestral claim remain in possession of any territory, whilst keeping the benefits of specialisation. Coupling this with a refusal to allow any incorporated entities would mean the land stays in family hands anyway. No longer could large conglomerates use their money and market power to take advantage of individual farmers.
A fatal flaw in the globalist strategy of enforced multiculturalism is the fact that our nations still control the farmland, for the most part. There are foreign states buying up territory in many countries, but migrants themselves are limited mostly to urban areas. If, and when, social war breaks out, Western people still have the greatest advantage since we control all the food and water. Migrants can be easily controlled, and forced to leave, if they only live in large cities.
For this reason, there is currently a concerted effort, on the part of globalists, to flood regional areas in the West with foreigners. Unfortunately for them most non-white migrants prefer the cities where there is the most work and highest incomes. Since they have no ancestral connection to the land, even when governments “encourage” them to move regional, migrants usually move back to the cities. This is arguably the main reason Daniel Andrews in Victoria, Australia, pushed so hard to build a mosque in the town of Bendigo. The Great Replacement fails if foreigners are isolated to only a few small geographical areas, but we digress.
There is no reason we could not apply ethnically focused laws on land ownership to our own suburban areas as well. Under Biblical law if an individual sold a home in a walled city, and did not redeem it, they lost it permanently. Nevertheless, modern cities are no longer walled and they often become large urban sprawls covering huge areas. Each individual family could always have their own plot that is theirs into perpetuity, with new developments creating new inheritances. Provided there was always enough area dedicated to food production, this would also protect against property speculation and the creation of a parasitic landlord class.
The most important thing is that we protect the ethnic demographics of a territory. This is a big part of God’s will, yet the vast majority of Christians have no idea because they do not read their Bibles. Pastors rarely ever touch on the subject either, and often think ethnic homogeneity does not matter. Most have the misguided belief that since Christ died for us and we are now all “one blood,” that suddenly ethnicity is meaningless.
Science Hates Multiculturalism
In fact, secular science now proves, beyond doubt, that “multicultural” societies are not just bad, but dangerous. A 2020 meta-analysis of over 100 studies, the largest ever of its kind, found just this. Entitled Biological Ethnocentrism: The Negative Impact of Racial and Ethnic Diversity Upon Societies and Individuals; it stated that the following is true, “beyond all reasonable doubt”:
“Diversity is colossally detrimental to individuals and society alike, in almost every conceivable way: physical and mental health, social cohesion, violence, trust, criminality, etc. The more diverse a society is, the more pronounced and severe these negative effects are, however, even small amounts of racial or ethnic diversity are enough to cause a quantifiable negative impact. Individuals of every race fare worse within racially and ethnically heterogeneous societies, though racial heterogeneity has a greater negative impact than ethnic heterogeneity (when the ethnically heterogeneous society is mono-racial).”
The study found that ethnic diversity reduces mental health, physical health, community cohesion, societal trust, and charitable acts among other things. It also increases criminality, poverty, violence, social adversity, corruption, abandonment, adultery, psychotic experiences, instability, social isolation and ethnic hostility. Another way of looking at this is that ethnic diversity increases evil, sin, wickedness and human suffering. Essentially, it makes bad things even worse and good things less prevalent.
Diversity also lowers trust and thus weakens community. The University of Copenhagen completed a comprehensive study on the subject in 2015. Entitled Ethnic Diversity and Social Trust: Evidence from the Micro-Context; it stated the following:
“We argue that residential exposure to ethnic diversity reduces social trust… Our results show that ethnic diversity in the micro-context affects trust negatively, whereas the effect vanishes in larger contextual units. This supports the conjecture that interethnic exposure underlies the negative relationship between ethnic diversity in residential contexts and social trust.”
They completed a similar study in 2020 entitled Ethnic Diversity and Social Trust: A Narrative and Meta-Analytical Review and stated:
“We find a statistically significant negative relationship between ethnic diversity and social trust across all studies.”
Trust is arguably the most important factor in keeping a community together, and ethnic diversity always affects it negatively. High trust societies are the best societies; when people trust each other they get along and can work together easily, likewise the opposite is true. It also greatly affects economic activity, since if people do not trust each other they also will not trade with each other. Without trust, there is no public cohesion, and society becomes atomised, then falls apart.
Diversity reduces wages
Alongside dividing people, and increasing all kinds of evil, ethnic diversity though mass-immigration puts a strong downward pressure on wages. The more workers there are in a nation, the less valuable they are in an economic sense. A growing supply of anything lowers prices, and labour is no different. Some may dismiss this saying, “yeah well, you should just work harder or get more skills then,” but they miss the point. Immigrants flooding into a nation, lowering wages, decreasing trust, and making things worse for the locals are stealing from them. This is why people mostly support strong borders, and often harbour strong anti-immigrant sentiments.
Many third world foreigners are willing to live in relative squalor; hand waving their effect on our kin condemns them to lower living standards or poverty. Nor is it just a matter of hurting unskilled individuals, everyone loses out since immigrants compete for all kinds of jobs. Only large corporations are better off because they have a bigger pool of workers to choose from and pay less. Not to mention increasing congestion, degraded infrastructure and cultural displacement; when people enter a land en masse, they rarely assimilate. Instead, they create ethnic enclaves and become nations within a nation.
Homogeneity and Territorial Integrity through Biblical Law
In short, the more ethnically diverse a society becomes, the worse it gets. Given the facts, we should not be surprised that the Lord wants us to keep our lands relatively ethnically homogenous. A counter to this is that God is OK with immigration, but there is a difference between one person entering a country, and millions. We live in a time of road vehicles, trains, cruise liners and passenger aircraft; migrant invasions are now possible like never before. Strong border controls are essential to protect nations already living in a territory from all manner of evil. If an individual then tries to enter illegally, they become criminals and break God’s commandment to obey the law unless it violates his will (border controls do not).
Any Pastor worth his weight, after reading this, would immediately call for an end to all multiculturalism and demand enforced homogeneity through Biblical Law. That being, limiting land ownership to only the dominant ethnic group, and excluding foreigners from “citizenship”. Coupled with the removal of all welfare and state benefits, this would go a long way to discouraging foreigners from entering our territory. We can put in place strong border controls as well, since God only said, “Thou shalt not vex a stranger”; he never said, “Thou shalt let all strangers into your lands at all times.”
It is true that in Ezekiel (chapter 47) God allows some foreigners to take part in a new inheritance, but this is only a once off. It occurred after he exiled the Jews (Old Testament, not Synagogue of Satan) in Babylon for seventy years. These were people sojourning with them while they were out of the land, and were going to move back with them upon their return. The Lord could have felt it was a way to reward foreigners who had converted. He could have felt that the Jews’ numbers were too small to fill the land and just needed more bodies. He could even have been using it as an additional punishment because his people violated his laws. We cannot know his reasoning, but if you read the chapter, he specifically calls them “strangers,” and exceptions often prove rules.
We might all have salvation through Jesus, but that does not mean we are all supposed to live together. Think about it like this, would you be OK swapping your kids with the neighbours? Would you be OK letting your neighbours live in your home permanently? Why not? We are all one blood in Christ! There is neither Jew nor Greek, man! Stop being so selfish!
Do you see how absurd that sounds when you break down the logic? Christ died so that we could have peace with God; he never said he was here to bring peace on Earth, he actually said the exact opposite:
“Think not that I am come to send peace on earth: I came not to send peace, but a sword.” – Matthew 10: 34
“I am come to send fire on the earth; and what will I, if it be already kindled?
But I have a baptism to be baptized with; and how am I straitened till it be accomplished!
Suppose ye that I am come to give peace on earth? I tell you, Nay; but rather division:
For from henceforth there shall be five in one house divided, three against two, and two against three.
The father shall be divided against the son, and the son against the father; the mother against the daughter, and the daughter against the mother; the mother in law against her daughter in law, and the daughter in law against her mother in law.” – Luke 14: 49-53
That Biblical law protects the ethnic unity of a territory, not just with laws on national membership but with property rights, proves it is perfect. God always knows best, he understands that nations work better when they live as the dominant ethnic group in a territory. He does not want us at each other’s throats, and he only mixes a people out of existence if they violate his commandments. Contrary to Marxist doublethink, the Lord gives lands to us as a reward, and he takes it, and us, away if we anger him. We can accept this truth or we can perish; make your choice, white man.