Therefore you do not read Gogol as a man who allowed himself to love whom he desired and hate who he hated but only as a mere satirist against authority, which you always imagine as the amount of power when it can also be a collection of kin, a fact you are now too scared to utter. The other culture of Slavs, Poland, considered all of its liberty not in the questions of law, not of what or who but from whom. And so to liberate is to not cohabitate but today I guess this too would be racism, this too would be bigotry, and the Soviet Union which those nations so tragically escaped should be rebuilt because anything else is racial bigotry. So when I hear an Englishman complaining about the amount of Poles, and Africans, and Arabs, I cannot pretend to be morally outraged since my race is a slave race, a renegade race, and always its liberation was racial liberation, ethnic desire for a homeland where we did not have to cohabitate with those we despised or even merely disliked. To claim otherwise would be to spit on the very blood my ancestors spilt over centuries of Turkish and German domination, and we fought not for freedom, if freedom is mere voting, but for freedom to coalesce how we and ONLY WE want to. For anything else would be but slavery even if it comes from the best and most humane desires for brotherhood. And so we desired no brotherhood and certainly no equality with a race that has conquered us but their submission, subjugation or banishment and if this is sinful, then it is a sin all bear, but I will be damned if I utter a complaint for tomorrow an Asian might start invading Africa and the African will have to cohabitate and lose his land because not to cohabitate—is the greatest sin. Therefore, in this we see that even liberation and freedom carries a little bit of bigotry and prejudice in this time or that, and in the past it was precisely claimed that cohabitation is wonderful—except it was Westerners imposing their cohabitation with everyone else. And we call such cohabitation—invasion. And the word for such a person is—invader. And if a nation wishes to define an entire race, like Slavs for instance, as possible invaders, to refuse it is to refuse oneself the same right when one’s nation is under threat.

The French, also sensing this dissolution of intent, have understood the keenest of difference between the words traitor and ally—and are now banning many of the theories coming from United States, theories which will certainly bring it to the brink of civil war one day. For if a man of my own blood is to go to England, and there make a mockery of the law, and prosecuted is the man who insults him, then the law itself is mocked and insulted. And furthermore, of uplifting of a barbarian into manhood after such laws become common there can be no discussion. Certainly, the secular priests are always dabbling in things that amount to strange outcomes so in order to shield minorities they pervert the very meaning of the law, of mens rea itself until it turns out that a minority can’t have criminal intent. It is the fault of society, we hear. But England’s suspicion of my blood is not the suspicion of the world on England itself—and certainly not its abolishment as if not judging me would make it more English and judging me on a bigoted basis would make it less of an England. For that is the true meaning of the Nomocanon which is legal intent in affairs of Spirit—and if this is too distant from secularism for you, then at least comprehend that matters of Spirit require matters of Spiritual authority—of Universities, of art, of culture, of religion and of thymos, of might, the desire of spiritual recognition. And no spiritual recognition can be ever gained from constant shielding of my spirit from the weight of existence the world throws at me. But your Nomocanon is of prelates who themselves are Spiritedless and cowards when it comes to their own pride, but greatest of heroes when it comes to allowing everything to their enemies, even the most shameful of practices. So a Slav walks the streets of England like a thug while being polite in his own land knowing there shall be no excuse for a petty Spirit. But give it enough time and every man not held to demands must fall downwards—my accusation is not against equality to which I am indifferent, but to perjury, perjury against my own kin, which you reduce when you don’t punish, into mere cretins. And if you don’t punish them as your own it is but a silent acknowledgment you too believe we will never be brothers and are but traitors waiting to overcome the natives. And if you do punish us, your prelates rise up in our defense like we are dealing with children, and they are our parents whom they shield because the child is too weak to respond. However I openly tell you that no foreigner can walk the streets in the East with blatant disrespect, and of those that attempt, like the migrants attempting sometimes, between bigotry and dignity we choose bigotry. And Arabs too have self-respect so we respect them. Because bigotry in this case is dignity not to be abused, and “dignity” required is to be subjugated to abuse, to be “dignified” even while abused.

I release you fully from all of those crimes—of prejudice, of bigotry, of racism—if my own kin is known only for harsh crimes. As such our lands are calm while yours are not. In our lands, mockery can be called such even if the man is from the smallest tribe in the world—but his mockery is his sin, not yours, no matter how he wriggles. For not to judge a man as capable of crime is to reduce him to a barbarian only capable of a crime no matter how your prelates spin it otherwise—if poor nations only produce villains, then the fault is not poverty but villainess of a world without a Nomocanon, that is, for you, it might even be ethics. And now you don’t even dare to have ethics, but to have anathemas which you don’t how to use properly.

And thus you have the inventors of common civilization themselves reduced to tyrants in your own land, as it will certainly happen around the world. We have not such memory of tyranny, and we know well of tyrannies, and even from gulags, labor camps and ideological destruction we could escape, but of such a sinister inquisition which would force a man to spit on his very ancestors if they don’t amount to a wish of a small sect of prelates can be no escape. And as the sensitivity of yours grows, so too will the anathemas, and as they grow so you will discover you are not growing more open but closed, not forgiving but vicious. The capability to endure an unjust pain and still remain standing is the mark of a strong spirit. The incapability to reduce oneself is the mark of a petty tyrant. So in England, which is free, freedom is getting lost not because the English are less free, but because they are less cruel. And certainly, the incapability to endure petty human stupidity is the mark of an absolute fool—there shall never come a day of absolute brotherhood. And if it comes it will be far too different than we could ever comprehend, so different it might terrify us. A certain capability to endure pain, to tolerate, to be humbled even by injustices, is required. How many marriages even are broken today over mere disputes our tougher ancestors would laugh at while the children lose their family?

And as English, as foreigners, you by destroying yourself in order to uplift me are being cunning and devious. You have proclaimed equality when I desire greatness—you have proclaimed brotherhood when I desire self-mastery. For your brotherhood must always imply we are on an equal footing when we are not, and must also assume that all the problems have been solved when for us they have barely been asked? So, your prelates, your activists, your moral judges, are the most cunning of foxes, since it means not opening these questions must imply their tradition is therefore most proper. And so—liberalism. And so—democracy. And so—never an achievement for us we fought for.

And this is what your prelates are teaching my prelates so for any kind of crime or scheme they found a solution in your very thoughts: so even if we desire democracy we can’t have it since we can’t judge even our blood, since it is poor, and whatever is poor is always righter than whatever is rich. We also can’t learn anything from you since how can anything be learned from a wicked source of sin? As such, when England is mentioned, our prelates—who often are bearing flags of the nation—wriggle their way out of decency by blaming England. As if England is an influence on a drunk or a hooligan, as if England, “The West,” “liberalism” can be an excuse to bash someone’s head with a pipe. But certainly they have learned your lessons well, and it is only thank to old memories of Nomocanon’s that we are still barely civilized.

That this was not your intention I will believe, as certainly even those believing to protect minorities did not account for man’s cunning and all the sinister intent it is now carrying that a modern fellow will use the good intent of others to behave in an irresponsible manner. Even liberals did not account for this strange outcome and are frustrated by the fact that the more they defend minorities the more they must spit on the majority, going so far as to humiliate the majority in many affairs, from art, culture, poetry, to open mockery, to eventual treason which is masked as progress. As such, in England, an Englishman must suffer the pressure of many while he himself is held the only one responsible—this is the complete misrepresentation of the Nomocanon which is above all communal, shared law as opposed to the secular, political law of the protection of minorities. For even if minorities are to be protected by the law, the law is to protect the majority as well, while both the majority and minority are to protect themselves from dissolution into a vagabond mass of nothing, and that is the meaning of the Nomocanon. And their way of protection is not by these prelates first, but by invoking communal responsibility through obligations of shared society. As such, if it comes out that a certain community is engaged in crime, if the Romanians are going around stealing, while the Serbs are smuggling, it is a bigger crime to silence the critics than to punish the wrongdoers. For to punish the wrongdoer is to reintroduce a lesser flock, a smaller community, back into society. Ultimately, the small community must become tyrannical itself while the liberal defending them must become a censor of his own majority. This will have precisely the opposite outcome of any brotherhood and any sane Englishman would loathe them while fearful of being heard. And the longer this lasts, the harder it shall become to reconcile what is clearly a predator and prey. But these matters must invoke the entirety of judgment and not its pieces.

And perhaps it is this political drift that is now carrying you away from comprehensible politics and introducing doubt in all your institutions and I can honestly claim that while you have a greater tradition than mine, and certainly more rights on paper, I have more to claim openly while you have less.

For people and nations are as meats and viands are: some of good, some of evil substance. And to judge one as to judge all is to judge none, that is, if one English bigot is enough to a liberal to prove the world is fallen and needs his guidance I will respond by claiming his salvation is bigotry of his own, namely, that I need his salvation in the first place. And if he censors his own people, because the world is much more communal than it appears, it echoes all the way here, in books, speeches and writing, in polemical discussion, that I can sense what many wish to say openly but are too afraid to do so. Therefore, how can you be freer than I who can proclaim whatever I want no matter how evil, while you can proclaim nothing but goodness, goodness which is reducing you into slaves? And if everyone had to conform to everyone else’s opinion, and everyone to love everyone, we would not get freedom, but a permanent mark, of a man not daring to rebel, since rebelling is immoral.

Then such morality must be the morality of a censor.

And even the Bible openly exclaims in Ezekiel 18:20:

Yet you may ask, ‘Why shouldn’t the son bear the iniquity of his father?’ Since the son has done what is just and right, carefully observing all My statutes, he will surely live. The soul who sins is the one who will die. A son will not bear the iniquity of his father, and a father will not bear the iniquity of his son. The righteousness of the righteous man will fall upon him, and the wickedness of the wicked man will fall upon him.

Is this not the foundation of all law? That a man can be judged only for a crime he committed? Then is it not strange that as the world is becoming more atheistic, and we are led to believe more rational the precise opposite happens, namely that the son does inherit the sins of his father? Are we then not back to spiritual enslavement, this time of a far more dangerous substance, since such demonic manifestation of human evil can never be expunged? As your world is without God, you have not managed to build yourself a Confucius, even a Lycurgus, for Confucius invoked Harmony, while Solon invoked the Oracle. But your Harmony is chaotic, while your oracle is blood-libel, so that you have turned yourself into a kind of a parody of libel levied on the Jews over centuries that the blood of Christ can not be washed away. But I have not nor has any of my kin asked for this, nor any foreigner and those that invoke it, the need to make amends, to humiliate oneself, to mock, to spit, to curse, they are but sinister priests of the inquisition. And if this is the equality I want none of it, give me bigotry since at least the other side can fight, can respond – but there can be no response to SPIRITUAL SERFDOM of a kind unseen since ancient times. Physical enslavement, physical torture, gulags and barracks, those are nothing, my people pass through them and remain resolutely cheerful and eager to live life. But this spiritual torture would have to reduce the most decent man to a kind of a tribal fetishist of foreigners, then a moral lunatic, then an absolute heretic. And so those who call for this dissolution of law, common English and Slavic, even Byzantine, even Islamic, even African, even Roman, are the traitors of the highest kind, the traitors of all philosophy. For they have betrayed the very notion of Logos—for if the Logos is inherited through the sins of the father, then indeed it is righteous to kill your enemy until the end of time, even if the enemy is a descendant ten centuries after.  Therefore this is absolute nihilism, of such a rank it would plunge entire scientific fields into ruin. It would destroy psychology, since man is mere inherited affections we have no control about and can’t manage so any therapy is pointless. It would destroy sociology and already is starting, since Equity can turn over time into nothing more than a debtor and a leaser who between nations would mean the higher likelihood of war if the poorer nation can’t afford it or the richer nation accept it. As for the laws against prejudice, against bigotry, against racism, it would amount to mere bureaucracy whose intent is noble but results are disastrous producing people paranoid they are hated when it could be a miscommunication, too soft to endure the struggles of life but also not active enough to combat it without assistance. So the activists in such society would naturally become a de-facto junta, they would influence the courts, the press, the army, the arts, the freedoms. The courts would be overflowed with petty complaints the opposite of the common sense, of de minimis non curat lex—the law, the judge, does not concern itself with trifles. And they are precisely being flooded, and everyone is of thought that the most decent thing is to profess a kind of pathetic exultation of one’s own suffering, as if the person that suffers more is therefore automatically more righteous, yet I have not heard of a nation that makes blind men into kings, and excuses tyrants who as Plato showed often suffer the most, since their natures are the most unbalanced.


For all installments of “Nomocanon of Mephistopheles,” click here.

Previous installments:

  1. Part 1