The Jihad System or Is Islam Compatible with Western Civilization?

The following video is the English translation of the excerpt of a speech I made in november 2010 in Frankfurt, in which I developed some of the central ideas of my book „Das Dschihadsystem“.

As this is my first internet video, and I used only basic equipment, please don’t judge the video quality too critically. 😉

The German original video is available here:

20 Kommentare zu „The Jihad System or Is Islam Compatible with Western Civilization?“

  • Heisenberg:

    Good talk. But I do think there is something we can learn from the Muslims. Islam is a faith that combines religious, political, and cultural realms into an overarching system.

    The post-Christian West needs something similar. We need a system that integrates religion, science, philosophy, culture, and politics. The pro-Western/White/Euro-Nationalist struggle needs to offer this system as an alternative to the current global order.

    The current Anglo-American-Judeo order offers only materialism and pleasures of the flesh. We must provide an alternative to this that offers spiritual growth, heroism, community, creativity, and a positive vision of the future for the folk to strive towards.

    We must offer the folk an opportunity for an „authentic life“ as Heidegger describes.

  • Thank you, Manfred, for making this English translation of your talk. You have a nice voice and manner of speaking — a pleasure to listen.

    I agree with Heisenberg that we need a total cultural-religious-political system for White European people to stem the tide of non-white takeover. I don’t think we should consider ourselves the „post-Christian West“, however, because we have nothing viable with which to replace Christianity, which is still very strong in our people in North America, in Australia, and even in parts of Europe. What we need to get rid of is the Churchianity and it’s multicultural, multi-racial message of serving non-whites, including collaboration with Jews.

    There is a form of Christianity that combines the very important white racial identity idea with the religious, political, and cultural traditions of the West in a way that gives a convincing basis for white unity. This is Christian Identity as put forth and explained in the historical view by William Finck at I recommend taking a look at some of the offerings at his vast website.

    I realize this might strike a jarring note at first, but it has great potential to be for us what the integrated system of Islam is for Arabs and Asians. We have to be practical in our considerations.

    • Heisenberg:

      I call it the „post Christian West“ because at one time Christianity was the center of society. Even into the 20th century the church was a huge part of people’s lives. Today Christianity plays a small role and the Christianity that does play a role is Zionist Christianity.

      With that said, I do believe Christ should play a part in the new integrated system. However, unlike Christian Identity it should not be overly Bible dependent. The Bible has been greatly edited over thousands of years. Many of the stories in the Bible can be found in the Babylonian cuneiforms. There are many mythologies of the world that discuss the „Son of God“ that we should be equally interested in.

      If I were creating the spiritual component of the new integrated system I would mix Christ (or the Son of God regardless of him being called Jesus, Thor, or the Kalki), with elements of European paganism, cosmotheism, Nietzsche(Ubermensch concept), Creativity(aka WCOTC), Heidegger(Authentic life concept), meditation, and runeology.

      This could include aspects from Christian Identity but shouldn’t be just Christian Identity.

  • FYI, William Finck does a study group with Europeans on Thursdays. To participate, a software program has to be downloaded to get on his chat server; the details are spelled out at

    He says right now there are people from Bavaria, Iceland, Denmark, Ireland, and Britain. He gets over 30% of his site traffic from Europe & Canada. His monthly newsletter „Saxon Messenger“ has some foreign-language papers, mostly French. There is a Belgian that translates some of his papers.

  • @ Carolyn, Heisenberg:

    Sorry, that I couldn’t answer earlier . I am glad to hear that you like the way I speak. (To be honest, I was in doubt whether the result would be tolerable to native English speakers.)

    I couldn’t yet read through Mr. Fincks obviously very sophisticated ideas, but I want to make two major objections to any project that leads away from traditional Christianity:

    The first is that multiculturalism, liberalism and so on has nothing to do with Christianity at all. Liberals who believe this is Christian simply don’t know what Christianity means. The central – or one of the central – ideas is that the Kingdom of God is not of this world. This means that the separation of religion on the one hand, politics, science and so on on the other is a crucial idea, and that Christianity principally respects the autonomy of nonreligious spheres of life. Thus, it leaves space for freedom and creativity just because it is NOT an overarching system covering any aspect of life, as Islam is. The poor performance of the Islamic civilization (even in the Middle Ages when this civilization lived from the substance of the Roman/Greek or Persian resp. civilization it had conquered) is due to this fact. Islam, just BECAUSE it is an totally comprehensive system, does throttle freedom, responsibility, and creativity. Abusing seemingly Christian slogans for a liberal project means mixing religion and politics that have to be separate according to Christian faith. This also meant that peoples and tribes as different as Nowegians and Africans could embrace Christianity and adapt it to their own mentality and identity, whereas Islam (Islam means „submission“) subjected and, to a certain degree, violated the mentality, identity, and culture of those who submitted. (I don’t say there is no difference between Islamic nations, but the differences are less obvious than between Chrsitian nations.) From a nationalist point of view, Christianity with its tolerance for national identities is the much better religion.

    The second objection is that this is a matter of identity. America as well as Germany are nations deeply rooted in Christianity. Germany’s first state, for example, called itself the Holy Roman Empire, and anything meaningful in Germany’s culture of the last thousand years was deeply connected with Christianity and couldn’t be understood without Christian faith. „Identity“ means you cannot change it. To say „Well, our identity has some unpractical features, let’s change it“ reflects obviously an instrumental attitude to religion, and a religion that is subject to political considerations is not likely to find many followers, i.e. unable to shape national identity. You can give up Christianity, but a people doing so would split into thousand sects, or lose religious faith altogether. You may give up the traditional identity, but what you will get is not a new one, but none at all. Christianity, as the Pope has said some days ago when visiting Germany, will survive by going back to the roots, and by withdrawing from the world and de-secularizing. In this way, it will contribute to the renewing of the white nations, not by prescribing what to do or not to do in the political field, but by spreading the consciousness that human life is meaningful and going beyond individual existence. And this is the way to fight „only materialism and pleasures of the flesh“ Heisenberg has correctly pointed out to be the central challenges of our civilization.

    • What is wrong with Traditional Christianity, Manfred, is exactly what you are approving of when you say:

      This also meant that peoples and tribes as different as Nowegians and Africans could embrace Christianity and adapt it to their own mentality and identity,

      Africans cannot be Christians, and if they can, then Christianity has no meaning for European whites. This is the Identity part of CI. I am not CI, but I am getting interested in it for the very reason that Heisenberg spells out. But I would say to him that you can’t combine Christ with Kalki, and Christianity with atheism, paganism and Nietzsche. Manfred is right that you can’t just invent something to try to make everyone happy.

      I thought we were talking about White identity … real, not manufactured. Thus, nothing that we have can be shared with non-whites. In the same what that being a German cannot be shared with Turks, or even with Frenchmen or Spaniards.

  • Manfred Kleine-Hartlage: I would claim to be a torch-bearer for traditional Christianity! But I do not confuse that with Medieval Catholicism. As for the „Identity“ part, where did Germans come from? Why is it that the world’s greatest minds developed a culture in Germany so late compared to others?

    The answer is that it was not their first civilization. Please look at the historical essays at

    Thank you!

  • Africans cannot be Christians…

    Sorry, but millions of them are.

    …and if they can, then Christianity has no meaning for European whites.

    No, their Christianity may have no meaning for European whites (and vice versa), and needn’t. Christianity has some fundamentals not negotiable, but adaptable enough to fit any people’s needs.

    • Manfred,

      I will never be a part of any Christianity that accepts Africans as Christians, or Indians or Arabs … and this may very well be what is driving so many white Europeans away from it. Did Christ come for Africans? Maybe today’s churchmen say yes, but the Bible says no. Today’s Christian churches, of which you are accepting and approving, are doing the same thing Heisenberg is doing–joining together that which is too dissimilar to join.

      You know this, so you say the Africans can practice it according to their abilities and traditions, and that Christianity is flexible enough to „adapt“ to their different ways. You have taken in too many Jewish ideas, as have the Christian churches … all of them. This is exactly what the Jews and the communists want to do to Christianity, and have done. All that comes from this is that white Christians financially support black Christians, and pay for missions to run around the undeveloped world trying to convert the populations to some form of bastard Christianity.

      A new understanding of the racial teachings of Christ could go a long way in awakening the racial unity Heisenberg is looking for.

      However, not all Christian Identity pastors/teachers are equal, so choose carefully.

  • Heisenberg:

    I’ll try to synthesize the various aspects that I mentioned:

    The „Gods“ in this system are archetypes of what European man/woman should strive for. You can believe that these Gods are „magic spirit Gods“ like Christians and Muslims believe or you can believe that they are positive examples of what we should be like. I look at them as actual human-like beings that altered the DNA of existing primates on earth and created us in their image (using their DNA). If Jesus/Thor/Kalki does return (with his „angels“) I believe they will return in spacecraft. These Gods also have enemies (the serpent). One or more of these enemies live on earth today and act as „CEO“ for the forces of White Genocide and the NWO.

    The Pagan aspect relates more to the ritual and symbolic (runes) aspects of the faith. Torchlight ceremonies, runes, healthy concepts of beauty, respect for nature.

    Meditation is just good for grounding oneself and can be done so in front of a rune or cross for added effect. Besides concentrating on ones breathing you concentrate on the rune-stones during meditation.

    The Nietzsche aspect is that the individual and society should work towards building better people (mentally, physically, and spiritually). The Gods are our example of what we can become (Ubermensch).

    The Heidegger aspect relates to facing/accepting death and living authentically for the folk.

    The Cosmotheist aspect deals with the goals and direction of the society. Just as the universe creates and learns about itself, we should do the same. One of our collective goals should be to find the Gods (unless they find us first). European man should explore space and gain understanding of the universe.

    An ultimate creator also needs to play a role. You can call this „God“ or „infinite consciousness.“ I picture this as a spinning ball of fire and plasma somewhere in the universe. It is the job of European man to learn of this creator. One can prey to this creator and meditate on it. The „Gods“ that I mentioned above are obviously more knowledgeable than us so finding them will bring closer to understanding the creator and/or any possible afterlife.

    Different aspects of this faith will appeal to different people. But the highest „good“ of this faith will be the following :“What’s best for European man/woman-kind is the ultimate good…What’s bad for European man/woman-kind is the ultimate bad.“ One can believe in the „magic spirit Gods“ or be an atheist but all will agree to this.

  • I admire your creativity, but such an ambitious attempt to invent a new religion has something synthetic and rationalist. Faith, in my view, is nothing to be convinced of, but to feel, and if it is to be the fundament of a people or a civilization, it has to be collectively felt. Call it German romanticism, but I believe in the strength of the historically grown. I simply cannot imagine an identity or a faith to grow from rational, let alone political considerations.

    ”What’s best for European man/woman-kind is the ultimate good…What’s bad for European man/woman-kind is the ultimate bad.” One can believe in the “magic spirit Gods” or be an atheist but all will agree to this.

    Sorry, but they won’t – not in the sense they will believe in it in a religious meaning. Kevin MacDonald has pointed out that there are strong indications that there are genetic reasons why the White are the least racist of all human races, inclined to co-operate with anyone with whom they share the same social space. Ethnicity or racial consciousness rise, among the White, only if they are attacked, and their survival is at stake, as is currently the case. Thus, we can make the rational choice to give our national and racial survival priority over other goals, and to deny non-Whites access to our countries. It is possible, too, to expel those who have already entered. But this is something Whites will only do in case of extreme emergency, and once the danger is over and a system established that makes sure we remain masters of our own countries, racial consciousness will rapidly lose importance. It will not shape our identity (even the Nazis didn’t manage to implant a strong racial feeling in the minds of the Germans), because it is not in our nature. What we believe in must be in harmony with what we are.

  • Heisenberg:

    You bring up an important point about the lack of racial awareness in the White. In America the most racially aware Whites are those who live in closet proximity to non-whites (American South).

    This is why I see the current struggle against White genocide as a great opportunity to implement such a faith. Whites will „feel“ and forge this new faith in the fire of this struggle. The faith will then be kept in place as a final backstop against any future occurrences of what we’re experiencing today.

    While racial consciousness is not strongly in our nature, neither are many of the principles that traditional Christianity profess. Man does lust after women. Man does steal. Man does see the speck in his neighbors eyes without seeing the plank in his own. Christianity attempts to act as backstop against these natural impulses of man. The new faith will do the same for the White.

    And don’t assume the faith I describe is based totally on rationality. Perhaps „God“ (the spinning ball of plasma and fire) has told and/or inspired me to come to this website and describe this to you? Or, perhaps Freya came upon me while I was on my daily walk and ordered me to spread this new faith?


  • @ Heisenberg, Carolyn:

    Sorry, but Christianity is not negotiable to me.

    I will never be a part of any Christianity that accepts Africans as Christians, or Indians or Arabs

    Which implies that you reject Christianity altogether.

    You have taken in too many Jewish ideas.

    Well, Christianity has taken in a lot of Jewish ideas. So what?

    Did Christ come for Africans?


    Maybe today’s churchmen say yes, but the Bible says no.


    Don’t misunderstand me: You may believe in what you think is best. But I am not prepared to give up Christianity, or to distort it. So let’s agree to disagree.

    • Sure, but Christianity has already *been* distorted. White people are leaving Christian churches in droves because their religion has been handed over to blacks and other non-whites who have to be pleased with the message or they lobby to change it. We deserve a religion of our own. I don’t believe you can separate religion from nation and national identity, and say our religion is univerally available to all but our nation/state/territory is not. As we see, and have seen throughout the centuries, that doesn’t work. The latter will be available to everyone also.

      As to your last question, „Where?“ … Bible translations have continued to change the meaning of the original words. Bill Finck reads the original Greek of the scriptures and has studied the histories. You could find the answer from him.

    • Heisenberg:

      I agree to disagree.

      Basically I support whatever works in the survival of the West and its folk. While God cannot be proven, what can be proven is that Western civilization has brought humankind hope, progress, and much relief to human suffering. And whether you are an atheist, or a believer in a „magic spirit God“ is irrelevant to me as long as you support the survival and amelioration of the West and its folk.

      • Heisenberg,

        You seem to think that folks don’t need to share common beliefs to carry out a common purpose as large as the „survival of the West and its folk“ … while at the same time Jewish and other non-white folk are trying to take us over, or have already taken us over.

        You say you support whatever works. What is it that works, to your mind? You have put forth a kind of „everyone do their own thing“ approach. How is that going to work? It hasn’t worked so far. So, more exactly, what means would you use to get white people to support their own survival?

        My suggestion: It has to be a powerful, deeply-felt command. Not a matter of superficial free-choice among multi-racial belief systems. That is what the Jews have encouraged us to want.

        • Heisenberg:


          You ask „what works.“

          I suggest checking out „Bob’s Underground Graduate Seminar“ (BUGS)

          BUGS is pushing a consistent message called „the Mantra.“ All political movements must start out and maintain a consistent message.

          So I agree that „everyone doing their own thing hasn’t worked so far.“ Therefore let us stay on a consistent message together and not let religion divide us.

          • Heisenberg,

            I checked out Bob Whitaker. I wasn’t familiar with his blog, so thanks for the tip. He’s been around a long time, but seems to be basically a Jared Taylor/James Edwards type American conservative. „The Mantra“ is a message about ‚white genocide‘ that doesn’t name either it’s historic origins or it’s main instigator. But going against the anti-racists is good and necessary, so all the best to him, and to you.

            As far as German-Views goes, BUGS doesn’t have a clue about German issues and doesn’t care about them either. So I guess we should return to talking about views *from* Germany. We have gone a long way from „Is Islam Compatible with Western Civilization?“ Or have we? Not only is Islam not compatible, but non-white people themselves are not compatible. This brings up charges of racism, which must be answered.

  • Yes, we are getting off topic and are allowing religion to divide us.

    With that said, I do encourage readers of this site to check out BUGS. The proprietor (Bob Whitaker) is a former Reagen Official and Congressional aid and knows something about taking down political systems. He was part of a team that helped take down the Berlin Wall/Communism (his specialty was talking points).

    So he may have some clue about German issues.

  • I tried to find some spiritual force to unite whites, too.