Contra Christcuck Jonathan E Thomas, pro Nuclear Barbarossa, and a sneak peak into my Magnum Opus

Table of Contents:
I. Contra NewValues / AmongstTheGods (Jonathan E Thomas)
II. Is the ancient Hebrew Conquest of Canaan tale the opposite of modern Neo-Nazi Holocaust denialism?
III. Is all non-Sinospheric history a giant clash between NW Eurasians and SW Eurasians?
IV. To what extent are Russians correct in calling modern liberal America and Europe “genocidal Nazis preparing to launch Nuclear Barbarossa”?
V. A sneak peak into my Magnum Opus map

I. Contra NewValues / AmongstTheGods (Jonathan E Thomas)
© Adûnâi (2026-06-24)
https://substack.com/@adunai/note/c-281850115
https://substack.com/profile/139472871-adunai/note/c-281850115
https://amongthegods.substack.com/p/judgment-the-story-of-jewish-terrorists/comment/281850126
https://archive.vn/282wl

Thanks for bringing up this other blog of yours, subscribed! I intend to respond, but the very first point is profoundly disappointing.

> “unprovoked capture of Maduro in Venezuela and the war in Iran, it seems the modern USA is a war machine (what critics refer to as the “military industrial complex”) that has deeply internalized — rather, resigned themselves to — this philosophy of “kill or be killed””

Terrible, absolutely terrible. You’re being a deranged leftie who’s seeing the most cucked and merciful empire in the history of man, as cucked as the laws of physics allow (and long since overstepping them, hence the imminent collapse), and yet you’re calling it... murderous? Where have you seen murder? Aren’t you aware of the simple math that under the US occupation, the population of Iraq rose by 10 million, and Afghanistan - by 20 million? The Philippines, Japan - the countries America actively occupied! - all rose and prospered. This is self-hate of astronomical proportions, equal to French and Russian!

> “And the Mexican cartels are just one of many factors that reinforce US foreign policy.”

Umm, I’m sorry, what? I thought US foreign policy would be reinforced by Mexico City being settled by blond, blue-eyed angels, not swarthy orcs.

> “the complicated historical mess that led to the brutal war that Jesus of Nazareth had also predicted long ahead of time”

First of all, Jesus is a literary character, not a person. Second, the writer of the Gospels couldn’t predict the fall of the temple, instead he was writing after the war.

> “the theocracy of that day would be judged for the crimes and insincerity of all previous hypocritical religious leaders who had come before”

But there were no religions prior to Christianity. And bizarre to blame it all on hypocrisy.

> “the Sicarii would also come to the point of accepting that very bad things would need to happen in order to make things right. In absolute defiance of the advice of the man from Nazareth, these zealouts refused to look within and figure out where they had strayed spiritually. No, these zealots were hell-bent on going for the jugular.”

And they succeeded massively. Are you gonna deny the concept of creative destruction, even though it works splendidly every time?

> “exchange with the Pharisees over the question of taxation — particularly paying taxes to a blasphemous Caesar. Jesus’ response was not a treatise on taxation, but rather a message to not worry about “the Beast” that Rome would eventually become”

But... Jesus was not talking to Jews? Christianity is designed as a cultural weapon by Jews against Aryans?

> “From the perspective of the words of Jesus, this was the ultimate “I told you so”. The corrupt theocracy had deluded themselves into thinking such could never come to pass.”

What???? I’m at a loss. How are the terrorist freedom-fighters “corrupt”? Their whole point was to destroy corruption, and so they did, successfully.

> “This recent admission from the Israeli Prime Minister is a modern manifestation of the very same mindset of the zealout Jews who had originally provoked their own destruction (by provoking war with Rome) in 70AD”

Umm, hello? What destruction? Are you... are you denying reality to such an extent that you’re missing the whole point? That the Jews are alive and well, and that the Sicarii won? Ironically, in the space of the divine gods, of culture war - both to inspire their own people by their blood shed, and by humiliating the Romans by instilling the Jesus cult in Aryan lands, so the picture is a tad more complex, but they still won! Just as how the Aryan race might stand a chance now in Poland and Belarus thanks to Hitler who exterminated all the Jews living there.

© Adûnâi (2026-06-22)
https://substack.com/@adunai/note/c-280616126
https://substack.com/profile/139472871-adunai/note/c-280616126
https://newvalues.substack.com/p/through-smoke-from-creationism-to/comment/280616129
https://archive.ph/Y6wJl

> “This description of “natural selection” as the “struggle for life” and “favoured races” is a bit misleading — and it was indeed historically seized upon thereafter by nationalist (fascist) and communist (even capitalist) movements all over the world. Darwin’s new idea was co-opted and distorted (“social darwinism”) by insecure tyrants eager to make themselves and their people out to be the “fittest” over others — just one more excuse for world-wide death and destruction during the world war period that Nietzsche had predicted would follow what he called “the death of God” (the decline of the dominion of Christianity and of “religion”).”

Oh no, you’re so fun to read, but you happen to be a hardcore Christian zealot : ( So disappointing.

On a constructive note, I never understood this point. First, I disagree that “nihilism” was ever a thing, or that nihilism is possible at all - just like “irreligion” is a misnomer as any collective behaviour is inherently religious and cultural by virtue of using human language.

And second, I don’t consider the World Wars to be bloody because of a death of Christian god - especially not in America or Russia. Jesus did indeed die - in Germany, where paganism grew resurgent (not sure why), and the Anglos and Russians were mobilised into resurrecting Jesus and murdering Wotan once and for all. It was effectively a massive pagan insurrection against Christianity, which was brutally suppressed - ironically, the suppressors were massively inspired and reinvigorated precisely by this uprising. Otherwise, we would’ve seen a much longer collective suicide of the Aryan race, with eugenics, restrained immigration and national pride here and there. Whereas the NSDAP’s epic sperg out posed the question sharply - Hitler or death.

© Adûnâi (2026-06-22)
https://substack.com/@adunai/note/c-280623444
https://substack.com/profile/139472871-adunai/note/c-280623444
https://newvalues.substack.com/p/odin-with-a-jesus-mask-jung-germania/comment/280623455
https://archive.ph/C39G9

I happen not to have written any actual arguments, apologies! And could you perchance pitch your article on that blog? He might quote you extensively, who knows. Now, onto the actual points.

1, I view Generalplan Ost and the extermination of Slavs and Jews as “two birds with one stone” - practising a genuine pagan revalution of values instead of preaching with the wind of words. While true, scapegoating could have been a dangerous detour from owning one’s own mistakes (such as westsdarkesthour depicting Charlemagne in a negative light after Karlheinz Deschner’s thesis - in contrast to Hitler, although Hitler also said bad things about the battle of Tours 732), waging a war of extermination against foreigners is the essence of anti-Christian spirit of life, so not sure what’s so bad about that?

2, I disagree with your view that Jews are invincible and immortal. In fact, I would call such an idea “Christian residue”. In truth, when you kill your enemies, they die, and you win. After the Holocaust, Poland and Belarus still remain judenfrei (I could ironise that those lands might be the grounds for a future Aryan empire precisely thanks to Hitler’s legacy). It’s a profoundly pessimistic stance to ban genocide because it seems too difficult to achieve - aren’t we supposed to work towards lofty goals?

3, One area where I would call the NSDAP crypto-Christian is their messianism and, dare I say, Apocalypticism. All that rubbish about the end of the world, Götterdämmerung, epic last stands. While it’s romantic and tragic, it doesn’t strike me as inherently pagan or feminine (women are closer to paganism). Precisely the opposite - the point of life is that it is infinite, that struggle is incremental and perpetual, that battle is waged in peace time just as in war-time (or even more so!), and that Hitler’s disparaging remarks on the future generations (a real quote from 1938 or 39!) betrayed an immense lack of staying power. I love illustrating this point with actually pagan nations such as Japan and Juche Korea who work for the long haul. Know thyself, etc.

4, As to your point on the Jews - first, not sure how suicide is relevant there at all, second, I do somewhat agree that Jews hate mankind and themselves, that’s why they have such trouble killing their enemies (or maybe they have been Christianised, or they’re inherently weak by basing their power on mind-controlling their Christian slaves?), but they are still much closer to the pagan ideal than any Christian (”the eye of the Abrahamic storm”). The Jews are at least prideful and moderately hateful. Yes, moderately - what you see in Jews is but a small part of what Asians are prone to doing naturally. All this whining of the Arab schlomocost is so tiring... but even that is an unreachable pinnacle of savagery to the debauched state of the Aryan man today. All Aryans are deranged extremist leftie Christcucks at this point.

IIRC, Nietzsche wanted to use the Jews as cement for his European Imperium, from what little I’ve read. Ironically, those were the rootless cosmopolitan, anti-Zionist Jews? The kind that the Zionists wanted to breed out of themselves in order to return to being a proper Asiatic nation? But Nietzsche wanted those Jews to stop being priests, yet keep being international? Bizarre.

© Adûnâi (2026-06-24)
https://substack.com/@adunai/note/c-281863158
https://substack.com/profile/139472871-adunai/note/c-281863158
https://newvalues.substack.com/p/from-luther-to-hitler-intestinal/comment/281863171
https://archive.ph/45xcf

So far both Fuentes and Hitler have been successful in the political side of things. So not sure how you can fault them for the one thing they’ve done right. Hitler failed because he lost the war. Fuentes might fail because there is no political solution. But those things weren’t exactly their forté in the first place. Unless you mean Funetes has to drop the mask at some point? But we have Aarvoll or Devon Stack or whoever else for that.

© Adûnâi (2026-06-24)
https://substack.com/@adunai/note/c-281865437
https://substack.com/profile/139472871-adunai/note/c-281865437
https://newvalues.substack.com/p/through-smoke-from-creationism-to/comment/280904269
https://archive.ph/Y6wJl

> “to just all of a sudden drop it was dangerous for society”

Could you clarify if you mean that the modern society has dropped Christianity? Because that’s a common idea, and that’s something I vehemently disagree with, as modern soceity is all about loving the ugly, deformed, swarthy retards, women, transvestites. Under my model, the only non-Christian society in the West was during 1933-45. And sure, that was a tender and unstable attempt, but that’s to be expected, atrophied.

II. Is the ancient Hebrew Conquest of Canaan tale the opposite of modern Neo-Nazi Holocaust denialism?
© Adûnâi (2026-07-04)
https://old.reddit.com/r/WIAH/comments/1un5x05/is_the_ancient_hebrew_conquest_of_canaan_tale_the/

I’m not sure what subreddit would be correct to post this, as this concerns the battle of civilizations - something that Reddit intrinsically scoffs at. I hope this community would appreciate it because Rudyard Lynch aka WIAH has built his reputation as a master of culture critique, of reviewing civilizations, their histories and mentalities.

Now onto the topic. Modern white atheists (whom I call neo-Christians, who criticize old Christianity from a hyper-Christian moral position) tend to hate the narrative of the Conquest of Canaan in the Jewish Bible because according to their Jesus morality, murder and genocide are considered intrinsically objectively evil acts. In the same fashion, modern neo-Nazis (who assume both Hitler and Jesus to be good, thus they turn Hitler into Jesus) reject the historical reality of the Holocaust because genocide is bad according to Christian morality which opposes ethnic mentalities as opposed to the Catholic universalism, the brotherhood of man.

But! As modern Israeli research has shown, the very tale of the Conquest of Canaan has no basis in reality! It was manufactured as part of the new cultural identity assumed by the Jews - some say as late as in the Hasmonean period, although that is not relevant. What’s important is this - the Jews literally invented what might be anachronistically called a “blood libel” on themselves! Isn’t that amazing?

Can it actually be said that the pagan times were so “based” (in modern juvenile parlance) that the Jews invented an Ur-Holocaust tale perpetrated by the Jews to demonstrate the zeal and military prowess of the Jews? I have never heard anyone posit such an obvious view! Times change, now in the darkness of Christianity everyone must be: 1) denying the Holocausts they committed (Turks, Japanese, Germans, Arabs, Mongols); 2) paying penance for the holocausts they did NOT commit (like the Americans being ashamed of the Nazi war crimes even though the Anglos raped and murdered Germany and led the Führer to suicide).

III. Is all non-Sinospheric history a giant clash between NW Eurasians and SW Eurasians?
© Adûnâi (2026-07-05)
https://old.reddit.com/r/WIAH/comments/1unxef0/is_all_nonsinospheric_history_a_giant_clash/

I used to scoff at the old Nazi idea of a perennial fight between “Aryan and Jew” (whatever the fuck that means considering they barely ever equated Judaism with Christianity), but if we look strictly at the conquests of Eurasia, they might be divided into two groups:
1) north-western: cutiePIE (3k BCE), Graeco-Roman (300 BCE) and imperialist (1900 CE);
2) south-western: Zoroastrian (500 BCE), Judaeo-Christian (300 CE), Islamic (1200 CE).

The north-westerners got routinely cucked and lost vigour (outside Aryavarta), whereas the south-westerners keep chugging along - the Persians subsumed Babylonia, the Muslims subsumed Persia, eventually broke into Anatolia (1071), India (1200) and Indonesia (1500), they’re all still there. Even the steadfast Hindus have only survived by sheer numbers - and they did lose out culturally (and militarily) to Muslims in Indonesia.

If you look at it this way, the idea that Europe is oh-so inexorably dominant and West Asia is forever marred in internecine strife and zeal is missing the larger picture. While in the past the invasions might have followed one another sequentially, ever since the fall of Rome, this European domination of 1900 CE was the only outburst from the North - and yet it was nevertheless marred in the underlying Judaeo-Christian foundation which was still omnipresent. The attempt was made for a true revival of the northwestern Eurasian conquest of old under Hitler in Germany (the massive genocidal deluge of Barbarossa known in America as the Holocaust) but he failed to gain traction on the scale of civilization, and was defeated by the Christian half of the European culture in a massive reactionary civil war.

Under this view, Islam might have decayed and lost ground in 1700-2000, but it’s of little import when the Judaeo-Cheistian giant was the one which benefited. The main enemy - the “North-West” - remains dead and buried. And thus the global trajectory has stayed the same ever since Emperor Julian’s demise in 363 CE. And I’m not sure if India can truly represent this ancient NW conquest either - in fact, it used to spread its culture all over Indonesia in a diffusion of its own. The only distinct culture to itself is obviously the Sinosphere. But all to the West of the Indus is a done deal.

IV. To what extent are Russians correct in calling modern liberal America and Europe "genocidal Nazis preparing to launch Nuclear Barbarossa"?
© Adûnâi (2026-07-08)
https://old.reddit.com/r/WIAH/comments/1uqot9c/to_what_extent_are_russians_correct_in_calling/
https://old.reddit.com/user/Adunaiii/comments/1urorwn/to_what_extent_are_russians_correct_in_calling/

As you may know, since 2014 Russia and the West have ever increasingly been on a collision course to war. The modern cultural perception of the West in Russia is colored by a number of things - including old Bolshevik third-worldist propaganda about “evil White colonisers”, coupled with ancient Stalinist conflation of the Anglo-French with the German Hitlerians (Molotov-Ribbentrop apologia to prevent an Anglo-German alliance to kill all Slavs), and now with the Ukrainian ethnic cleansing (Balkan style petty ethnic nationalism against Russians in the Ukraine).

Now, what are the actual arguments, pro and con?

Pro 1 - German tanks are literally invading Russia. Anglo-French missiles are raining on Russian cities. There’s effectively been a state of war between Russia and the West for years at this point, Russia is simply too degenerate to respond. This is a huge point, culturally speaking - Germany was never forced to apologise for genociding 30 million Russians and Poles, only the 6 million Jews, Roma, homosexualists and disabled persons. So the German vehicles invading Russia are equivalent to Germany reconstituting the Auschwitz death camp and burning Jews alive in the ovens once more - with the civilised Western world turning a blind eye to it.

Pro 2 - the West is supporting the Ukrainian state which is notoriously brutal, committing many war crimes, supporting terrorism around the world (Moscow, Monaco, Mali), abducting and torturing its own citizens in broad daylight in the streets of Kiev, Odessa, Dnepropetrovsk, Kharkhov, even Lemberg - this ought to revivify the old imagery of Nazis deporting Jews to death camps, yet the Western media are totally silent on this. (Ukrainians also famously throw Hitler salutes, although not sure why as they are ruled by a Jewish president.)

Pro 3 - the West has gone on a massive rearmament campaign for its whole European part, German industry, Polish armed forces, German forces in Lithuania, nuclear sharing with Finland; the conventional supremacy of Europe over Russia alone is many times over, thus clearly noting the West’s readiness to turn this war nuclear since day 1.

Now, these are all quite obvoius and steel-manned arguments for the Russian side. Yet numerous objections exist, too. Let’s have a look.

Con 1 - Nazi Germany was an explicitly pro-White ethnostate with materialistic goals in acquiring Russian land and genociding its inhabitants; the West is the opposite - anti-White, anti-materialistic, it has no interest in settling virgin soil with sturdy peasants, it never talks about the good of its ethnic comrades, or living space, or blood and soil, absolutely nothing.

Con 2 - the West remains fanatical in its “White man’s burden” raison d’être to increasing the quality of life, bringing peace and prosperity to the whole non-Western world, unlike Hitler’s Germany which was focused on its own well-being at terrible cost to its neighbours.

Con 3 - Hitler’s Germany was a European project that explicitly banned “entartete Kunst” such as jazz music, it was anti-feminist in removing women from the places of learning, and it was pagan in valuing beautiful animals above ugly humans; the modern West is exactly the opposite - the Ukrainians uglify their own folk songs with metal rock covers, they kill their men but women walk around like queens, and animal welfare is completely outside the political/religious sphere.

Granted, Russians overall call everyone “Nazi” who’s genocidal - especially those who want to genocide Russia. So they don’t care if they are being slaughtered by LGBT rights or by Nordic supremacists, as the Russians turn into corpses all the same. But the crux of the matter is that the Westerners themselves in this cyberspace barely conceive of their empire as such - as capable of burning alive tens of millions of Russians this decade in an invasion surpassing the mythical Operation Barbarossa when Adolf Hitler launched his continental War of Extermination (Vernichtungskrieg) in 1941 CE. Just how come such a massive Baurdillard-esque parallel reality is possible? Is it because the brain-washing power of Western propaganda is so total, and the death of the anti-war pacifist movement so complete? Or are the Westerners truly “Nazi” under their veneer of civilisation, and they secretly yearn for it?

The visions of Nuclear Barbarossa fascinate my mind, with hundreds of nukes launched from the submarines onto the Russian silos and storage facilities, and thousands of Polish tanks blitzing through Belarus, precipitating Moscow’s fall... And yet nobody else in the world is gripped by it? Maybe not Nazi per se, but still the largest genocide since Tojo.

V. A sneak peak into my Magnum Opus map