Jew World Order

…The first came forth red-haired; and they named him Esau. Afterward his brother came forth with his hand holding on to Esau’s heel, so his name was called Jacob’. -Genesis 25:25-26

…Once when Jacob was cooking some stew, Esau came in from the open country, famished. He said to Jacob, “Quick, let me have some of that red stew! I’m famished!”

First sell me your birthright.” answered Jacob. “Look, I am about to die,” said Esau, ‘what use is to you my birth right’? But Jacob replied, “Swear to me first.” So Esau swore an oath. But instead of the promised red-stew Jacob gave to Esau some bread and lentils’. -Genesis 25:29-34-

Introduction

 While analyzing this opening quote we have to realize that there are no red-haired people among the real Semitic races. We are dealing here rather with a parable in which Esau represents White people and Jacob represents the Jew.

In the mind of the authors of the OT the Jews were born in order to parasite on Whites, as symbolized by Jacob being born ‘holding on to Esau’s heel’. The way this exploitation should take place is further explained and justified by the way Jacob takes from Esau his natural rights.

Among Indo-Germanic peoples it was the usual thing for members of the society to help each-other and ask for nothing in times of greatest need. You could lean on your people through difficulties because you knew they wouldn’t take advantage of your helplessness.

This is more evident when we see how Esau couldn’t understand why his brother wanted to take his birth-right from him. Such a thing was totally unprecedented and, for an Indo-Germanic, made no sense.

The fact that a Jew and a White are described as twin brothers in this story means that the Jew shall settle in Indo-Germanic societies and pretend to integrate, pretend to be a brother of the red-haired ones, pretend to be one of them.

Once the White Goyim believes the Jew is his brother, the Jew will abuse that trust and take away our natural rights from us.

Also, to buy or sell a birth-right is impossible in practice and we are rather dealing with a metaphor of how Jacob transformed blood relationships into a business transaction, with Esau not understanding what was going on in the process.

We learn from this story that it was the Jew who transformed natural belonging and human relationships into artificial contracts or business transactions among Indo-Germanic peoples. The Jew was also the one who destroyed trust and cooperation and replaced it with usurious Capitalism.

Creation Myths

Now, this story of Jacob and Esau can be considered as a Jewish ‘Sociogony’, a myth explaining to the Jew the origins of ‘modern’ society, but in order to understand better how we ended up in this kind of society we need to go all the way back to creation myths.

As we are going to realize, Christianity is nothing more than a reversion of Indo-Germanic mythology and values, and I’m not the first one to realize that Judaism is some sort of an anti-religion, with Christianity as its faithful follower in that tradition.

Everything that once was sacred to other peoples was degraded by this all-negating-religion, whereas defects of character like self-centeredness, cowardice or indolence toward Nature were raised to a holy altar.

A good example of this reversion of values can be shown by the deformation of our Indo-Germanic creation myth in the bible. We all know the Norse version of the giant Ymir being cut to pieces by the Germanic gods, who created our universe with his limbs.

Now, with the use of comparative mythology it is possible to reconstruct the original creation myth as known by the Indo-Germanics:

There was a primordial being
He was sacrificed and cut into pieces
From his flesh earth arose
From his bones the mountains and stones
From his (single) eye the sun
From his emotions the moon
From his mind the clouds
From his veins and blood the rivers
From his skull the heaven bowl
From his breath the wind
From his hair the trees and plants

(My own edition based on the work of Bruce Lincoln in ‘Myth, Cosmos & Society’).

Parallel to this myth there was the idea that our human bodies are the reassembling of Ymir. He was cut into pieces and became our planet, but out of this planet (Nature) humans appeared, and the parts of our bodies are analogous to the body parts of Ymir:

Our flesh is like the earth, our hair is like the trees over the earth, our emotions are connected with the moon, our vision with the sun, our head with heaven, etc. As it will become evident later, from all these analogies the most important one to keep in mind regarding the bible is the one of our flesh being analogous to the earth (but more of this later).

Besides the poetic beauty in this myth there is a very deep wisdom embedded within it. We learn from it that our planet is like a living creature, a view of earth which cannot be denied even by modern ecologists.

Who cannot amaze himself when he reflects, for example, that the flow of magma under the earth-crust or the earth’s electro-magnetic field and the interconnection of sea streams, all work like part of a living system, necessary for life to exist.

Another central point of Ymir’s myth is the early recognition of The Second Law of Thermodynamics. Matter passes from one state to the other; life and death being parts of a single flow. That’s why Ymir had to be dismembered in order to create this world, because life arises from death and death from life.

An Indo-Germanic State

Surprisingly enough this myth is related to the Indo-Germanic social order too. The Indo-Germanics had some kind of over-regional Althing in which different cantons of the same race (omnes eiusdem sanguinis populi) congregated and performed social rituals related to Ymir’s’ sacrifice.

In these rituals pieces of a sacrificed animal (representing Ymir) are divided among different leaders from different clans, symbolizing their belonging to a bigger form of state, although each canton was separate and independent.

A good remnant of this ritual is ‘the champion’s portion’ or Curadmír in Celtic legends where the heroes struggle to get the best portion of a boar, symbolizing a higher place in the hierarchy. The important aspect is that different clans congregated every year (on winter solstice?) and recalled their common ancestry and racial belonging through this ritual, before separating again into local governments.

These rituals were recorded by Roman authors concerning the Germanics (the Semnones) and the early Latins (during their Feriae Latinae), and from these reports we get and understanding of Indo-Germanic ways of creating a state.

People of the same race retained local sovereignty and lived in independent communities (composed of around 500 people, according to archaeological finds in Germany). In such small communities direct democracy was possible, but they also worked as a supra-state with other communities of the same race, in an organization resembling the early United States of America:

[Tarquin] designated the place where [the early Latins] would make the assembly: a high mountain…. And he set down laws that they would hold assemblies here each year while there would be truces among all of them […] and all would jointly perform sacrifices […]to Jupiter Latiaris.[…]. And each receives its ranked portion of the one bull that is sacrificed by all in common. (Dionysius of Halicarnassus 4.49)

---

…’At a fixed time all people of the same blood come together to perform rituals. The good fortune of the Semnones adds to their authority. One hundred cantons are inhabited by them, and this great body causes them to believe themselves to be the head of the Suebi’. (Tacitus, Germania; 39).

---

..’The Germanics celebrate in their ancient songs a god born out of Mother Earth, Tuisto [Lit. ‘twin’; same meaning as Ymir]. His son Mannus [‘human’] was the origin of their race and their founder. They assign three sons to Mannus and from their names they call those close to the ocean Ingaevones [from the god Yngvi: Freyr]; those in the middle Herminones [from the god Jormunr: a by-name of Odin]; and all the rest Istaevonones [from unknown god: *Ist]’. (Pliny NH 4.99)

We see that the Roman image of savage tribes absorbed in petty quarrels without interest for civilization has nothing to do with reality. The Roman authors (which had little to do with their Latin ancestors) were used to totalitarian forms of government typical of multiculturalism and didn’t understand that the Germanics preferred a coalition of small, independent cantons united by race as it was later the case in 19^th century Germany, modern Scandinavia, modern Switzerland or with the grounding of America.

Their natural relationship was one of cooperation and racial consciousness and we can conclude that the later conflicts among Germanic or Celtic ‘tribes’ was a later development caused by the destabilizing forces of Roman expansionism in tandem with ancient Jewish capitalism.

Nonetheless, history has demonstrated that the countries where people have more freedom today are precisely those which resemble the most an Indo-Germanic state, whereas the most despicable centers of decadence and poverty are the heirs of Greco-Roman tradition, molded after centralized, multicultural governments.

Summarizing, this Indo-Germanic form of state had a cosmic meaning as evidenced by their rituals. I believe another meaning was that different life-forms are like the independent cantons which work together, although they retain their own niche.

I as an individual can interact with this world only when my body retains its genetic integrity, when my genes are protected from the ones of viruses or other beings, and it is only through death that I renounce to that separation and become one with other beings. The same is valid for racial groups and animal species, a race is alive when it retains its racial integrity and renounces to it only through death.

In this aspect sexuality is related to death. Just as we renounce to our genetic integrity through death, we do something similar in a smaller scale when we share our genes through the sexual act, which is a form of controlled death, therefore we should be cautious with it.

A controlled amount of death is necessary to restructure the prevalent forms (to inject them some creativity). But too much death can be also destructive just as too much life.

As we see in the diagram too much death represents chaos while too much life represents static forms. Therefore Beauty and Life are the balance between chaos and static forms. Nature avoids those two extremes by regenerating itself and making sure She is neither static nor does it disintegrates into chaos.

Needless to say, when we share our genes with other races we open the door too wide for death to enter our reality, and chaos enters like a tsunami, which breaks our society apart into dissonance and formlessness. In order to realize how much death is necessary to keep a society alive, we should start to consider society as a genetically coherent organism instead of an accidental conglomeration of unrelated individuals.

Summarizing, Life is the middle point between chaos and fixed patterns. Both of these extremes are sterile but Nature has managed a balance between these forces, a ‘window of viability’, in which life and Beauty can arise. During the sexual act we apprehend some chaos in order to vitalize our fixed forms; also Nature invented racial consciousness in order to show us how big ‘the door to death’ must be in order not to disintegrate.

Reversing Values

Now let’s turn to the Semitic reworking of our creation myth. We learn from the bible that god created man out of clay. This mentioning of clay was obviously taken from pagan myths in reference to earth being analogous to our flesh, but in the bible the meaning of the metaphor was turned upside-down.

First of all, scholars have noticed that clay (instead of just earth) was used by the Semitic peoples as a denigrating word. To these people clay was a ‘base’ form of earth.

Now, this might seem strange at first sight; why would someone make value judgements from just earth? But this kind of hate against Nature is already characteristic of the Old Testament where there are ‘pure’ and ‘impure’ animals, etc.

We see that instead of earth symbolizing our freedom as legitimate part of Nature, this metaphor is twisted in the bible to describe man as a vassal of god, created independent from Nature.

Instead of Nature and ‘god’ being two manifestations of the same thing, god becomes a self-absorbed, tyrannical being who needs nothing from anyone and created Nature just as an afterthought. Instead of creation being a cyclical occurrence, this Semitic god regrets ‘his’ work and makes it linear.

It is important to realize that a cyclical view of Nature is totally INcompatible with an usurious economy, whereas the idea that creation is linear and was performed by an independent god leads unavoidably to an usurious attitude in our economic life.

This is the case because in Nature nothing lasts forever, everything must rot, decay and return to the earth (just like Ymir), therefore the idea of amassing wealth, which never decays, but rather increases the more useless it remains to society, makes no sense there.

Whenever someone has a lot of something, the best investment is to share it with his people before it decays, and your people will certainly return you later the favor with something else. It is only the belief that we as individuals were created separate from our race-mates and that life follows a linear path (doesn’t return to Nature) what morally justifies usury.

I have a real debt only with god, therefore I can feel myself safe even when my own people are economically enslaved. The laws of ‘everything returning back to Nature or society’ are not valid anymore because creation is linear and not cyclical.

That’s why we agree to a Yahweh-like kind of money, an immortal one, which doesn’t have the properties of the resources we buy with it, like decaying and the need to work for them.

In a world where things rot and are obtained only through work, there’s nothing more destructive and evil than the idea of an absolute value, independent of natural context, and this is valid for human beings too.

What are human rights if not an absolute value separated from Nature just like that of usurious money? The person in question has a dictated value independent of his Natural context (race) and that’s why this person becomes an agent of destruction in other societies, just like usurious money is an agent of destruction for the environment. Both are incompatible with Beauty and life.

A Philosophy that Regrets Life

That the Hebrew god regrets often his creation and likes destroying it is attested extensively in the OT (like in the story of Sodom and Gomorrah or in the Flood of Noah, etc.) and is later ratified by the book of revelations in the ’‘New’’ Testament. This regretting of the Beauty of life is already to be found in philosophies all around The Ancient World, whenever a society entered in economic contact with international Judaism.

Among Greek thinkers like Heraclitus nothing was more abominable than sacrifice, and because the creation of life requires sacrifice, life itself was impure in his eyes. Also in Buddhist India the goal is to reach the nothingness of Nirvana, presupposing that life itself creates Karma (sin), which is to be avoided.

Also the Zoroastrian religion introduced a similar thinking to the one of Heraclitus, in which the sacrificing of a primordial bull (Ymir?) was interpreted as the entering of evil in this world. To this dualistic religion sacrifice was likewise some kind of original sin.

Such dualistic thinking is the mark of spiritual enslavement because life without sacrifices (in every level) is a perverse, arbitrary one. I have never met a person who avoids all kinds of sacrifices and is nevertheless wise or moral in any way. I don’t see how the capriciousness and hedonism involved in that attitude can lead to spiritual progress.

This giving up of life, this spiritual laziness is to be found also in Jesus’ pacifism, when he declares the whole world as sinful, while sitting back in his self-pity and indignation. Only by getting victimized can he justify his irrational views of human nature.

These kinds of people are not satisfied until they have become martyrs, and even when society has nothing against them they will try to challenge it in every way possible, until society gives them unwillingly what they wanted: a crown of thorns, which justifies their eternal fight against all social bonds.

***

Too much life cannot be distinguished in praxis from too much death. Now, this anti-natural regretting of life finds fertile ground in multicultural societies, where people lead materialistic, isolated existences and their need for real connection with other people remains unsatisfied. They believe they can compensate that dissatisfaction with eternal life, or more often they lose the desire to live.

In order to understand what kind of people adopt these philosophies and why, we can take a look at food corporations. Their scientists brag about having created Frankenstein kinds of animals, like turkeys with such a big breast that they cannot copulate anymore or such denaturalized cocks that they don’t feel any sexual attraction to hens anymore, etc.

These Frankenstein animals were developed by a voracious market in order to maximize profits, and here we should ask ourselves: are not race-mixed people the human version of these animal breeds? Were not they bred too by the market in order to make human exploitation more efficient? Are not race-mixed people being bred too in order to have an anti-natural sexual instinct and hindered social and mental abilities?

***

Thus, a Jewish reversal of values can be detected already before the invention of Christianity and the closest example is Zoroastrianism. Zoroaster or Zarathustra never existed as a human, but rather was a religious façade for Jewish economic influence in ancient Persia.

The Jews had back then already a worldwide net of usury, and their presence in Ancient Persia is well documented by archeology and by ancient writers.

The Zoroastrian religion was so obsessed with dualisms that besides having ‘pure’ and ‘impure’ animals, it declared there to be ‘pure’ and ‘impure’ words. We are not talking here about slang or obscene words, rather the ‘impure’ words in question were pretty normal synonyms of Indo-Germanic origin used by the common people. The goal of this new anti-religion was apparently to do away once again with Indo-Germanic traditions.

A good example is the word ‘daeva’. It is an Indo-European word meaning originally ‘god’, which was reversed into meaning an evil being by this all-denying, all-rejecting ideology:

Daeva (daēuua, daāua, daēva) is an Avestan language term for a particular sort of supernatural entity with disagreeable characteristics. In the Gathas, the oldest texts of the Zoroastrian canon, the daevas are “wrong gods”, “false gods” or “gods that are (to be) rejected”.

Old Avestan daēuua or daēva derives from Old Iranian *daiva, which in turn derives from Indo-Iranian *daivá- “god”, reflecting Proto-Indo-European *deiu̯ó with the same meaning. For derivatives in a European context, see [Germanic] Tyr. (Wikipedia; Daeva: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Daeva).

Ancient Think-Tanks

And this is the point where we turn to Jewsus. As it will become clear, the passion of Christ is simply an earthly version of our Indo-Germanic creation-myth, where Jesus sacrifices himself for humanity the same that Ymir was sacrificed for the creation of Nature.

Here the meaning was inverted, of course. Whereas the sacrifice of Ymir was meant to accept death and connect us with Nature, Jesus’ sacrifice was meant to abolish Natural Selection and raise the helplessness of individualism into a way of life.

Do you remember the window of viability in which life arises between chaos and fixed forms? We see that Jesus clings to fixed forms through his individualism and his rejection of natural selection and this lies, of course, outside the window of viability. Hence a religion which over-estimates individual lives cannot be separated from a nihilistic religion that destroys life in general.

This intention of reversing Ymir’s myth is the more evident when we realize that Ymir means twin in Old Norse and he is analogous to the Germanic god Tuistos, which also means twin. Perhaps some of you already know that there is a Christian tradition which says Jesus had a twin brother (‘thoma’ as in the Apostle Thomas is the Semitic word for twin).

It seems to me that Jesus was invented by the Essenes in order to specifically infiltrate Indo-Germanic religions, just as a good parasite specializes for a specific host. Apparently the Essenes had some kind of ancient think-tank in Qumran, where they experimented with Gospels and developed a suitable story to aim at Indo-Germanic traditions.

We can even follow their process of creation when, for example, a copy of a pagan text was found together with a Christian Gospel, and the words of the pagan divinity were being copied into the mouth of Jesus using a fake context.

These Gospel-writers were fabricating Universalist contexts for pagan wisdom in order to infiltrate it and give their universalism a deeper, more familiar tone, digestible to the Goyim.

***

We could assert that for the Indo-Germanics it was Nature who created us, and our society had a sacred aspect because it was a reflection of Her.

This world owes its existence to Ymir (Nature), just as we humans owe our existence to our race as a manifestation of Nature, but Jewsus is attempting with his passion to replace that.

Jesus reversed Ymir’s sacrifice in a social level, on earth, as a way of destroying all social bonds and duties, and replacing them with Jewish Law, the same way that the creation myth in Genesis is intended to destroy our duties toward and bonds with Nature.

The circle was closed: Yahweh infiltrated Nature whereas Jewsus infiltrated our social order. Who said Jesus wanted to do away with Mosaic Law? He simply perfected and completed it.

***

For anyone who refuses to see a connection between Christianity and our economic system let me say this: I’m not claiming Christianity is an economic system, but rather like the DNA of Jewish Capitalism and multiculturalism.

When we see our DNA code it doesn’t resemble our bodies at all; the same is valid for a seed that doesn’t resemble the grown tree.

It is only when that DNA is translated into physical forms that we see what is being coded for. By the same token, our societies started to create universalist institutions and usurious economic systems as soon as they adopted Christianity.

Jesus preaches that only by practicing Christian morals on earth can we get salvation after death, and that can only lead to implementing those morals into social institutions. As logical as that. That’s why the favorite argument of most theologians, who claim Jesus never intended to create heaven on earth is preposterous. You cannot follow his morals without creating Christian institutions (we are social animals!).

In former articles I couldn’t make my mind whether Christianity was some kind of moral HIV or some kind of cancer (in the sense of an exponentially growing tumor) until I realized what both of these have in common: DNA. Yes, Christianity is the genetic code of a Capitalistic enslavement, which is working like reverse engineering in our societies.

Its genotype (DNA) is Jesus’ morals and its phenotype (bodily manifestation) is a robotic planet, devoid of life.

Archetypes

In order to analyze the repercussions of this reversal of values in the human psyche we turn now to archetypes psychology.

Archetypes psychology is the psychological movement founded by Carl Gustav Jung as an Aryan alternative to the self-hate psychology of that sexual degenerate named Sigmund Freud. As a preparation for our analysis I would like to show in rough terms what the newest archetype psychology is all about:

• There are 5 aspects of the human soul which are called archetypes.
• Each ones corresponds with a body extremity (Head, two arms and two legs).
• Surprisingly enough each archetype fits perfectly with characters of pagan mythology, for example the warrior, the king, the lover, the magician, etc.
• A healthy soul is the one which has all of his archetypes active and in balance.
• Whenever an archetype is being repressed it produces two shadows of itself, two extremes which are connected with each-other through fear.
• One of these shadows is masculine and the other feminine.

As an example, when the archetype of the lover, which represents sexuality, is being repressed, it produces two shadows:

1. A masculine shadow of sterile abstinence and a sick notion of sexual contact being sinful.
2. A feminine shadow of indiscriminate, addictive sexual practices in perverse forms.

These two extremes avoid a healthy sexuality, free of fear in which the person is satisfied. These extremes are actually two expressions of the same attitude toward sexuality, and the affected person can oscillate between the two during his lifetime. In short, these two belong to the same mentality.

We realize here that dualisms like good vs evil, heaven vs hell, love vs hate, blind-belief vs heresy, life against death, communism vs capitalism, socialism vs nationalism, individualism vs universalism, imperialism vs pacifism, etc. they all are part of a sick state of mind dominated by fear and we know Yahweh is the god of fear while Christianity was the Red Terror of Antiquity.

What these dualisms have in common is that they all avoid a holistic approach as was common among pagan religions. They are aspects of ourselves which have been isolated through fear and are being played one against the other in order to enslave us. Here a review of just a few example:

• Life vs Death: For a race which is in contact with Nature, life is not the enemy of death but rather the one should be in balance with the other.
• Good vs Evil: For our pagan ancestors Good didn’t exist as an isolated objectivity but was to be found when we have ‘good’ and ‘bad’ in an integrated proportion.
• Pacifism vs Violence: In reality, peace can only be kept by the willingness to defend it with violence and an unchallenged peace is as destructive as long-lasting war.
• Individualism vs Universalism: The ideology of being cosmopolitan (lit. ‘citizen of the universe’) arose for the first time in financially enslaved empires like the Greek and later the Roman. Only a racial identity is the healthy middle point between these destructive extremes of universalism and individualism. It is actually individualistic, divided societies which are easy prey to totalitarian enslavement.
• Belief vs Reason: Believing in a creator god makes the study of Nature superfluous, whereas considering Nature as sacred stimulates the exploration of Her laws and the development of science. This shows us that only Nature can integrate belief and reason, as opposed to the blind belief in a rationalist god which is the enemy of earthly life.
• Socialism vs Nationalism : As Hitler rightly realized, Socialism and Nationalism are powerless when they ‘march separately’, and only when they are united are they in any way useful.
• Communism vs Capitalism : As shown in my article ‘Why Communism and Capitalism are actually the same thing’, Communism and Capitalism are in practice the same nightmare because they all avoid a healthy economy, where people can cooperate and earn property without class-wars, internationalist enslavement and usury.

This last sentence explains why theologians cannot decide whether Jesus was a Communist or a Capitalist; the real question would be: Is there really a difference between the two?

Now let’s analyze all the archetypes as they are present in a healthy (pagan) soul:

• The Lover: The lover corresponds with our left hand and, as attested by our pagan ancestors, a healthy lover archetype manifests itself in a society where women have freedom to choose the best men for the next generation. There’s nothing sinful about sexuality but only self-destructive forms of it from which we should protect ourselves. A person with a healthy lover archetype is able to enjoy his sexuality and he finds satisfaction from this natural urge because it is embedded in his social relationships. He can thus move-on to other aspects of life, without getting obsessed with sex, without being absorbed or debasing himself by destructive forms of it. To such a person an obsession with sex would be as absurd as an obsession with going to the restroom. An obsession with sex represents thus an unconscious fear of it, the same fear present in the Christian ascetic, who promotes total abstinence. Under such circumstances, this repressed sexuality finds expression only in exaggerated forms of it just to retreat once again into the darkness of guilt. It is interesting to notice that the same race which run the porn industry (the Jew), invented a morality of sexuality being sinful.
• Warrior: The warrior corresponds with our right hand and in its healthy manifestation, this archetype represents self-assertion and the readiness to defend your needs and interests with force. Human relationships can only arise on the basis of cooperative self-assertion. It is the healthy ‘dance’ of forces, between my own interests and the ones of the others which produce culture and Beauty. Were someone to forget about his own needs and devote himself to the needs of others, he will stop giving feed-back to the relationship, he would stop contributing and therefore becomes more like a parasite instead of a benefactor. Only lazy people who don’t want to get personally involved with their fellows give up the dance of forces and try simply to follow the interests of others. This dance of forces is necessary too between nations and that’s why Whites are so hated by the refugees who come in, no matter how much we make the effort to please them. Whites deny the dance of forces when we deny our own interests as a race.
• Magician: According to Jungean psychologists the magician corresponds with our right foot and it represents our mental support or basis in the form of our talents and intellectual abilities. In its healthy balance a magician is able to put reason in the service of his emotions, to use his intelligence to produce Beauty and Subjectivity. When we try to mold a perfect world for other races we are following the ghost of objectivity; we start to destroy Beauty in the name of consensus between creatures that are destined to live apart. It is only when we combine intuition, reason and revelations from Nature that we become wiser and this has nothing to do with perfect morals or objectivity. Nature has already made sure that the wolf is in unison with Nature when he follows his own interest, the same way, we would be in unison with Nature when we start to build an exclusively White society and leave other races alone to do what they please.
• Midwife: she corresponds with our left foot and it manifests itself in our Celto-Germanic mythology as the mother goddess. This archetype represents our material support of basis (contact with earth) and in its healthy balance the midwife archetype is nourishing and generous towards others. We could rightly say that this archetype overlaps almost fully with our attitude toward economy. When this archetype loses its balance the person in question oscillates between insatiable greediness (just like Yahweh) and wasteful disregard for material goods and the work of others (just like Jesus).
• King: the king corresponds with our head and in its healthy balance it represents a person who can organize and integrate all archetypes. He is ready to do sacrifices for the wellbeing of the whole and can be represented at best by Adolf Hitler. He remained loyal till death to his people and was as much self-assertive against enemies, as loving toward his people and allies. When the King loses its balance it produces the feminine shadow of objectivity, like in a representative democracy, where all opinions cancel each-other, or the masculine shadow of tyranny as in a communist regime. The interesting thing is that both are the same in practice.

The Christian Ideal of Man

Here we reach the last part of this article, and summarizing what we learned, we could say that the pathologies of our modern civilization are nothing more than the desperate attempt to bring magic and Beauty back into our lives, things which were banned from our world by a rationalistic, universalistic religion 2,000 years ago.

We have seen how healthy archetypes should look like and with that knowledge the unavoidable question arises: What kind of relationship with our archetypes is being represented by Jesus? I would like to answer this question and finish this article with a single picture.