Response to Anglin

‘The sign of the times is degeneracy. This term, degeneracy, sums up all that is happening to the West’.

— Iranian for Aryans

 
I didn’t read all the article that Andrew Anglin published today, ‘When the Alt-Right Hits the Street You Wanna Be Ready’ but it’s clear for what I’ve read that we see the world in a completely different way.

In the first place, white nationalists have not realised that the main cause that there has not been a pro-white, mass movement is universal degeneration in the West. How I remember, when I was living in Marin County in California, those days when the US Senate rejected Reagan’s nomination for the Supreme Court of Robert Bork, author of Slouching to Gomorrah: Modern Liberalism and American Decline. Even Anglin himself promotes cultural degeneracy in his article with a photograph of the skinhead movement: some guys playing degenerate music. I have already said it and it is worth repeating: You cannot beat the Gomorrah that America has become with Gomorrahite art! That was the blunder not only of William Pierce as we shall see, but of John Tyndall on the other side of the Atlantic.

Today at dawn I discussed with a visitor the use of the swastika. I acknowledge that the matter is controversial and we can leave it aside. The central point is that no one in white nationalism that I know has realized that the main problem does not come from the movements since the death of Rockwell in 1967 until 2014, the date that Anglin puts in his article that marks the beginning of Alt-Right activism. The problem comes not only from the elites but the general people. Trying to save the white race is like trying to save the Romans from their degeneration in the days of Caligula or Nero. Only the conquest of the Roman Empire by a fresh breed of Northern Aryans did the trick. Alas, nowadays the worst degenerations come from hyperboreans.

If anyone understands this, it is clear that more than blaming racist organisations of the past, as Anglin does, we must blame the degenerate Zeitgeist in general: a Zeitgeist that Anglin himself, and those who comment on his blog, share with the degenerate music they listen.

True, the racist organisations of the past erred. Arthur Kemp personally told me that in a beautiful town in England a few years ago. Pierce, for example, refused to form a political party and believed that doing activism from a mountain could make a difference. In addition, and that Kemp did not tell me, the money that Pierce used to buy a degenerate music company should have been used to form a publishing house for his books—and many other radical books.

Tactical blunders have been committed in the previous organisations certainly. But not the strategic errors that Anglin and many others imagine. Due to Western degeneracy, the history of Golden Dawn, which has used neo-Nazi aesthetics, should make us see that our message can only be broadly preached—as in Greece—after an economic collapse. This is a reality that white nationalists have not studied and should do. It was the collapse of the Deutsche Mark what catapulted Hitler, and a crisis similar to that of 1929 in the United States can re-visit the US sooner than we imagine.

For new visitors unfamiliar with my criticism of white nationalism, see my article in the Addendum: here.

Those wishing to get started on the subject of those who predict another financial accident in the US as serious as that of 1929, may begin: here.

W. B. Yeats

“Puritanical anti-Europe has become exactly what it set out to become: New Zion,” wrote Sebastian Ronin a couple of years ago referring to the US. Regular visitors of this site know that from my point of view the etiology of white decline is, in order of importance: (1) materialism, (2) Christian ethics and (3) Jewish influence. These excerpts from Kerry Bolton’s essay on Yeats in his book Artists of the Right give the idea of the most harmful factor of all:

 

The rise of industrialism and capitalism during the 19th century brought with it social dislocation, the triumph of the commercial classes and interests, and the creation of an urban proletariat on the ruins of rural life. Smashed asunder were the traditional organic bonds of family and village, rootedness to the earth through generations of one’s offspring, and attunement to the cycles of nature.

With the ascendancy of materialism came the economic doctrines of Free Trade capitalism and Marxism and the new belief in rationalism and science over faith, the mysteries of the cosmos, and the traditional religions. The forces of money had defeated everything of the Spirit. As Spengler explained in his Decline of the West, Western Civilization had entered its end cycle. Such forces had been let loose as long ago as the English Revolution of Cromwell and again by the French Revolution.

There was, however, a reaction to this predicament. The old conservatives had not been up to the task. The spiritual and cultural reaction came from the artists, poets and writers who reach beyond the material and draw their inspiration from the well-springs of what C. G. Jung identified as the collective unconscious. This reaction included not only the political and the cultural but also a spiritual revival expressed in an interest in the metaphysical.

Among the artists in “revolt against the modern world” was the Irish poet William Butler Yeats (1865-1939), leader of the Irish literary renaissance and winner of the Nobel Prize for Literature in 1923. Despite his English and Protestant background, Yeats was involved in the Young Ireland movement, much of his poetry celebrating the Irish rebellion and its heroes.

Yeats had been as a youngster introduced by his father John, himself a Pre-Raphaelite artist, to the paintings of the Pre-Raphaelites, the romantic imagery of which stood then as a rebellion against the encroachments of modernism and industrialism. Having lived in England as a child twenty years before, Yeats was now struck by how much had radically changed under the impress of “progress.” The modern era had even impacted upon the aesthetic of Yeats’ own family, writing of how his father now made his living, and also alluding to the changes being wrought by modernism in art:

It was a perpetual bewilderment that my father, who had begun life as a Pre-Raphaelite painter, now painted portraits of the first comer, children selling newspapers, or a consumptive girl with a basket of fish upon her head, and that when, moved perhaps by memory of his youth, he chose some theme from poetic tradition, he would soon weary and leave it unfinished. I had seen the change coming bit by bit and its defence elaborated by young men fresh from the Paris art-schools. ‘We must paint what is in front of us,’ or ‘A man must be of his own time,’ they would say, and if I spoke of Blake or Rossetti they would point out his bad drawing and tell me to admire Carolus Duran and Bastien-Lepage. Then, too, they were very ignorant men; they read nothing, for nothing mattered but “Knowing how to paint,” being in reaction against a generation that seemed to have wasted its time upon so many things.

For Yeats the mystical was the basis of both his poetry and his political ideas. He was particularly interested in the Irish mystical tradition and folklore. He saw the peasantry and rural values as being necessary to revive against the onslaught of materialism.

Additionally, the “occult” provided a literally hidden culture that was above and beyond the crassness of democracy, of the herd, and of material existence, hence its being termed the “Royal Art,” where again, as in traditional societies over the course of millennia, a priestly caste, at the apex of a hierarchical society, served as the nexus between the terrestrial and the divine, serving as that axis around which High Culture revolves.

Yeats’ poetry was intended as an expression of these symbols of the unconscious and the archetypal. This resurgence of these age-long memories required a “revolt of soul against intellect now beginning in the world.” What is here called “intellect” was the advance of rationalism, scientism, and Enlightenment doctrines that had destroyed man’s nexus with the divine embodied in traditions and hierarchical social orders, and which has repressed man’s spiritual nature in favor of the crassly material.

Yeats, like D. H. Lawrence, Ezra Pound, et al., was particularly concerned that commercialism would mean the pushing down of cultural values in the pursuit of profit rather than artistic excellence. Hence, he called for a revival of aristocratic values. He lamented that, “the mere multitude is everywhere with its empty photographic eyes. A declaration of war on the masses by higher men is called for. Everywhere the mediocre are coming in order to make themselves master.”

His appeal was to the artist and to the individual of taste and culture for, as Nietzsche had pointed out, culture is the faculty that distinguishes the human from other organisms. In this spirit, Yeats applauded Nietzsche’s philosophy as “a counteractive to the spread of democratic vulgarity.”

Yeats’ keen sense of historical context is reflected in “The Curse of Cromwell.” Here he identifies the English Revolution as what we can see as the inauguration of the cycle of “Money over Blood,” in Spenglerian terms: the victory of the merchant class over the traditional order, which was to be re-reenacted in the French Revolution. The Bolshevik Revolution was of the same spirit of money against blood, of the materialistic against the spirit and culture.

All three revolutions were carried out in the name of “the people” against the traditional rulers, only to create a greater tyranny in the service of money. Spengler had written in The Decline of the West: “Practical communism with its ‘class war’… is nothing but the trusty henchman of big Capital, which knows perfectly well how to make use of it… in that their object is not to overcome money-values, but to possess them.”

Cromwell’s English revolution has had lasting consequences for the entire West. The cycle of Money over culture and tradition that Cromwell inaugurated has never been overcome. America was founded on the same Puritan money ethics and continues to spread that spirit over the farthest reaches of the world.

The specter of Puritanism has haunted the entire world ever since, “far and wide.” Nobility of character, regardless of “class”—itself a vulgarization of the traditional castes—was destroyed by the inauguration in the West of the reign of money by Cromwell, and one that was not overcome, but rather adopted by its supposed “enemy,” socialism, as Spengler was to point out. Yeats, as “The Curse of Cromwell” shows, has been one of the few to realize the full depth and lasting significance of Puritanism under whatever name it might appear.

No longer are there left those of noble tradition, those who served as part of a long heritage, “the tall men”; and the old gaiety of the peasant village, the squire’s hall and aristocrat’s manor have been beaten down.

All neighborly, content and easy talk are gone,
But here’s no good complaining, for money’s rant is on.

The artists, once patronized by the aristocracy, must now prostitute their art for the sake of money on the mass market, as script writers, and “public entertainers” to sell a product. All individuals are now producers and consumers, including the artist producing for a consumer market.

And we and all the Muses are things of no account.

Yeats considered himself heir to a tradition that has been repressed by democratic vulgarity, and he lived in service to that tradition, now virtually driven to the catacombs under the dead weight of “mass culture,” which is nothing more than consumerism posturing as “art,” “literature,” and “music” manufactured according to market demands. He and a few others of the same temperament lived in the service of High Culture as contemporary troubadours “against the modern world” to uplift the spirits of the remnant who have managed to maintain their nobility in the face of the crass.

One product of democracy and capitalism that Yeats feared was the proliferation of those he regarded as inferior people. Yeats advocated planned human up-breeding and joined the Eugenics Society at a time when eugenics was a widely held belief among the intelligentsia. Yeats had “On the Boiler” published the same year, where he endorsed the psychometric studies that were showing intelligence to be inherited, and expressed concern at the proliferation of the unintelligent.

The aristocracy of old, the noble lineage of blood, of familial descent, has been replaced by the new rich, the merchants, our new rulers are those who measure all things by profit. Like Spengler, Yeats saw hope in Fascist Italy: “The Ireland that reacts from the present disorder is turning its eyes towards individualist Italy.” In particular, he admired the educational reforms and cyclic historical doctrine of Italian Fascist philosopher and Minister of Education, Giovanni Gentile, stating in 1925 before the Irish Senate, of which he was a member, that Irish teachers should study the methods that Gentile had enacted in Italian schools, “so to correlate all subjects of study.”

The following year Senator Yeats stated that the Italian educational system was “adapted to an agricultural nation” which was applicable also to Ireland, “a system of education that will not turn out clerks only, but will turn out efficient men and women, who can manage to do all the work of the nation.”

With the assumption to Government of De Valera in 1932, the following year Yeats was seeking to formulate a doctrine for Ireland that would be a form of “Fascism modified by religion.” History consisted broadly of “the rule of the many followed by the rule of the few,” again reminiscent of Spengler’s idea of a “new Caesarism” that follows on the rule of plutocracy at the end cycle of a civilization.

For Yeats, the rule of the few meant a return to some form of aristocracy.

Why we are antisemites

by Adolf Hitler

Excerpted from a speech in a public meeting in the Great Hall
of the Hofbräuhaus organised by the National Socialist
German Workers Party in 15 August 1920:

 
My dear countrymen and women! We are quite used to being generally referred to as monsters. And we are considered particularly monstrous because, in a question that certain gentlemen in Germany are nervous about, we are marching at the head—namely in the question of the opposition to the Jews.

Our people understand many things but this one problem nobody wants to understand. Very few have learned to view the problem free of emotion, in its clean form.

The Aryans created all the great cultures of the ancient world. We know that Egypt was brought upon its high cultural level by Aryan immigrants. Similarly, Persia and Greece; the immigrants were blond, blue eyed Aryans. And we know that outside of these Aryan states no civilised states have been founded. There emerged mixed races between the black, dark eyed and dark coloured, southern races and the immigrants, but they failed to create any large, creative culture states.

Why is it that only Aryans possessed the ability to create states? It was due, almost exclusively, to their attitude toward work. Those races which, as the first, stopped seeing work as the result of coercion and saw it rather as a necessity born out of hundreds of thousands of years of hardship, had to become superior to other people. And, besides, it was work that made people come together and divide the work among them. We know that the moment the individual work to sustain oneself turned into work within communities, the community tended to assign a particular work to those particularly talented, and with increasing division of work it became necessary for still greater joining together into still bigger groups. So, it is work which created kinships at first, later tribes, and still later, led to the creation of states.

Let us take art—considered as an international domain—and we shall see that it is unconditionally dependent on the state. Art blossomed in those areas where the political development made it possible.

The art of Greece reached its highest level when the young state had triumphed over invading Persian armies. Construction of the Acropolis began at that time. Rome became the city of art after the end of the Punic Wars, and Germany built her cathedrals, as in Worms, Speyer and Limburg, when the German Empire under Salians had achieved its greatest triumphs.

We can follow this connection to our time. We know that art, for example the beauty of German towns, always depended on political development of these towns; that it was political considerations which moved Napoleon III to regulating of the Boulevards and Friedrich the Great to establishing Unter den Linden. Similarly in Munich where it was obvious that the city could not become an industrial centre and so art was chosen to elevate the rank of the city, which now everyone who wants to get to know Germany must visit. Similar were the origins of today’s Wien [Vienna].

The case was similar with other arts. The moment the small, powerless statelets began to unite into one state, then also one German art, proud of itself, began to grow. The works of Richard Wagner appeared in the period when shame and powerlessness were replaced by a unified, great German Reich.
 
The Jewish path of destruction

We can follow this fate of Jewry from the earliest prehistory. It is not important if there is truth in every word of the Bible. In general, it gives us at least an extract of the history of Jewry. We see how the Jews present themselves because the Jew wrote these words quite innocuously. It did not appear to him as outrageous when a race, through cunning and deceit, invaded and despoiled other races, was always finally expelled and, unoffended, sought to repeat the same elsewhere.

They pimped and haggled even when it came to their ideals, always ready to offer even their own families. We know that not long ago a gentleman was staying here, Sigmund Fraenkel, who has just written that it is quite unjust to accuse Jews of a materialistic spirit. One should only look at their sunny family life.

However, this intimate family life did not prevent Grandfather Abraham from pimping off his own wife to the Pharaoh of Egypt in order to be able to do business. [Laughter] As was the grandfather, so was the father and so were the sons who never neglected their business. And you can be sure that they are not neglecting the business even as we speak. Who among you was a soldier, he will remember Galicia or Poland: There, at the train stations, these Abrahams were everywhere. [Laughter and hand clapping]

They penetrated into other races for millennia. And we know very well that wherever they stayed long enough symptoms of decay appeared and the peoples could do nothing else than to liberate themselves from the uninvited guest or to disappear themselves. Heavy plagues came over the nations, no less then ten in Egypt—the same plague we experience today firsthand—and finally the Egyptians lost their patience.

Still later, the Jew was able to infiltrate the then soaring Roman Empire. We can still see his traces in southern Italy. Already 250 years before Christ he was there in all places, and people began to avoid them. Already, then and there, he made the most important decision and became a trader. From numerous Roman texts we know that he traded, like today, with everything from shoelaces to girls. [Hear, hear]

We know that throughout the Middle Ages the Jew infiltrated all European states, behaving like a parasite, using new principles and ways which the people did not know then. And from a nomad he became a greedy and bloodthirsty robber of our time. And he went so far that people after people rebelled and attempted to shake him off.

We know it is untrue when people say that the Jew was forced to this activity; he could easily acquire land. And he did acquire land but not to work it but in order to use it as a trade object, just as he does today.

The Jew had found another kind of work for himself where he could earn gold without practically moving a finger. He developed a principle which, throughout millennia, made it possible for him to amass fortunes without sweat and toil, unlike all other mortals, and above all—without taking risk.
 
National purity as a source of strength

The second pillar against which the Jew as a parasite turns, and must turn, is the national purity as a source of the strength of a nation. The Jew, who is himself a nationalist more than any other nation, who through millennia did not mix with any other race, uses intermingling just for others to degenerate them in the best case; this same Jew preaches every day with thousands of tongues, from 19,000 papers in Germany alone, that all nations on Earth are equal, that international solidarity should bind all the peoples, that no people can lay a claim to a special status, and, above all, that no nation has a reason to be proud of anything that is called or is national. What a nation means, he, who himself never dreams of climbing down to those to whom he preaches internationalism, knows well.

First a race must be denationalised. First it must unlearn that its power is in its blood, and when it has reached the level where it has no more pride, the result is a product, a second race, which is lower than the previous one and the Jew needs the lower one in order to organise his final world domination.

In order to build it and keep it, he lowers the racial level of the other peoples, so that only he is racially pure and able to eventually rule over all the others. That’s race degradation, the effects of which we can see today in a number of peoples of the world. We know that the Hindus in India are a mixed people, stemming from the high Aryan immigrants and from the dark aborigines. And this nation bears the consequences, for it is a slave nation of a race that may seem in many ways almost as a second Jewry.

Another problem is the problem of physical decomposition of races. The Jew is trying to eliminate all of which he knows that is somehow strengthening, muscle-steeling, and eliminate above all everything of that which he knows may keep a race so healthy.

Hand in hand with this goes a battle against the health of the people. He knows how to turn all the healthy normal manners, the obvious hygienic rules of a race on its head, from night he makes day; he creates the notorious nightlife and knows exactly that it works slowly but surely, gradually destroying the healthy strength of a race, making it soft; the one is destroyed physically, the other spiritually, and into the heart of the third it puts the hatred as he has to see the others feast.
 
The destruction of culture

Finally, he reaches for the last method: The destruction of all culture, of all that we consider as belonging in a state which we consider civilised. Here is his work perhaps most difficult to recognise, but here the actual effect is the most terrible. We are familiar with his activity in the arts, like today’s paintings which became a caricature of all that we call true inner perception. [Prolonged applause] They always explain that you don’t understand the inner experience of the artist. Don’t you think that also a Moritz Schwind and Ludwig Richter experienced internally when they created? [Stormy bravo! and applause]

Don’t you, finally, believe that, for example, Beethoven’s chords also came from inner experience and feeling and that a Beethoven symphony reflects his inner experience?

Just as he works in painting, sculpture and music, so he does in poetry and especially in literature. Here he has a great advantage. He is the editor and, above all, publisher of more than 95% of all newspapers. He uses this power, and he who has become such a brutal antisemite as myself [Laughter] smells out, even as he takes the paper in his hand, where the Jew begins. [Laughter]

For him there is no spiritual sensitivity, and just as his forefather Abraham was selling his wife, he finds nothing special about the fact that today he sells girls, and through the centuries we find him everywhere, in North America as in Germany, Austria-Hungary and all over the East, as the merchant of the human commodity and it can not be denied away; even the greatest Jew defender cannot deny that all of these girl-dealers are Hebrews. This subject is atrocious. According to Germanic sentiment there would be only one punishment for this: death.

They tell us today that all that which was known as family life is a completely outlived notion, and who only saw the play Castle Wetterstein could see how the holiest that still remained to the people was shamelessly called “brothel”. [1]
 
The “authority of the majority”

When the Jew has destroyed the state according to these three major aspects, when he has undermined the state-forming and sustaining power, the ethical conception of work, the racial purity of a people and its spiritual life, he puts to the axe the authority of reason in the state and puts in its place the so-called authority of the majority of the crowd, and he knows that this majority will dance as he whistles because he has the means to direct it: He has the Press, not perhaps for registering of public opinion, but for forgery of it, and he knows how to harness public opinion through the Press in order to dominate the state. Instead of the authority of reason, there enters the authority of the great spongy majority led by the Jew, because the Jew is always going through three periods.

And in all these things we must understand that there are no good or evil Jews. Here everyone works exactly according to the instincts of his race, because the race, or should we say, the nation and its character, as the Jew himself explains, lies in blood, and this blood is forcing everyone to act according to these principles, whether he is the leading mind in a party that calls itself democratic, or calls itself socialist, or a man of science, literature, or just an ordinary exploiter. He is a Jew; he works aglow with one thought: How do I get my people to become the Master Race.
 
The political organisation

And when we see, for example, in these Jewish magazines, that it is specified that every Jew everywhere is obligated to fight against any antisemite, wherever and whoever he is, then it follows by deduction that every German, wherever and whoever he is, will become an antisemite. [Stormy bravo! and prolonged applause] For if the Jew has a racial determination, so have we, and we are also obliged to act accordingly.

Furthermore, we realised that if this movement does not penetrate into the masses, to organise them, then everything will be in vain; then we will never be able to liberate our people and we will never be able to think of rebuilding our country. The salvation can never come from above, it can and will only come from the masses, from the bottom up. [Applause]

And as we came to this realisation and decided to form a party, a political party that wants to enter into the ruthless political struggle for the future, then we heard a voice: Do you believe that you few can do it, do you really believe that a couple of guys can do it?

And while others are working a whole generation, perhaps in order to get a small house or to have a carefree retirement, we put our lives at stake and have begun this difficult struggle. If we win, and we are convinced we will, though we may die penniless we will have helped create the biggest movement which will now extend over all Europe and the whole world. [Loud applause]

The first three principles were clear, and they are inseparable from each other. Socialism as the final concept of duty, the ethical duty of work, not just for oneself but also for one’s fellow man’s sake, and above all the principle: Common good before own good, a struggle against all parasitism and especially against easy and unearned income. And we were aware that in this fight we can rely on no one but our own people. We are convinced that socialism in the right sense will only be possible in nations and races that are Aryan, and there in the first place we hope for our own people and are convinced that socialism is inseparable from nationalism. [Loud applause]

And when today the Jew still runs into our factories and says: How can you be a socialist antisemite? Are not you ashamed? —There comes a time in which we will ask: How can you not be an antisemite, being a socialist! [Hear, hear] There comes a time when it will be obvious that socialism can only be carried out accompanied by nationalism and antisemitism. The three concepts are inseparably connected. They are the foundations of our program and therefore we call ourselves National Socialists. [Cheers]
 
How to proceed

If we wish to make these social reforms, this must go hand in hand with the fight against the enemy of every social institution: Jewry. Here too we know that scientific knowledge can only be the groundwork, but that behind this knowledge must stand an organisation which one day will be able to go over into action. And in this action we will remain adamant, which means:

Removal of Jews from amongst our people [Loud and long sustained applause and clapping], not because we begrudge them their existence—we congratulate the rest of the world on account of their visits [great hilarity]—but because we value the existence of our own people a thousand times higher than that of an alien race. [Bravo!]

And since we are convinced that this scientific antisemitism that clearly recognises the terrible danger of this race for any people can only be a guide, and the masses will always perceive them emotionally—for they know the Jew first and foremost as the man in daily life who always and everywhere sticks out—our concern must be to arouse in our people the instinct against Jewry and whip it up and stir, until they come to the decision to join the movement which is willing to take the consequences. [Bravo and applause.]

We have proclaimed as our election platform only one thing: Let the others go to the polls today, to the Reichstag, to the parliaments and loll in their club chairs; we want to climb up the beer tables and pull the masses with us. We’ve kept this promise and will keep it in the future. Tirelessly and constantly, as long as we have a spark of strength and a breath in the lungs, we will come out and call all our people; and always tell the truth until we can begin to hope that this truth will prevail. Till the day finally comes when our words fall silent and action begins. [Stormy bravo! and long-lasting applause.]
 
__________________

[1] An anti-bourgeoisie play written in 1912 by Frank Wedekind, pre-figuring the “new realism,” in which a young woman is corrupted. It was played up by the Jews and became very popular.

Ethnosuicidal nationalists

Death-Chatterton-L

Henry Wallis: The Death of Thomas Chatterton. The subject of
the painting was the poet who died after he poisoned himself.

 

______ 卐 ______

 

“‪Even the pro-white ‘movement’ seems beholden to this irresistible death-wish.‬”

—‪Joseph Walsh

The revelation has come to me that liberals, conservatives and white nationalists are, ultimately, on the same fucking page. The only behavioral difference between them is speed.

Gentile liberals, led by the Jews, are driving the train on the road to white extinction on high speed. Non-Jew conservatives are merely trying to lower the speed by softly hitting the break here and there to slightly hinder the liberals’ ways. White nationalists, already outside the train, are heading exactly toward the same direction but at a much slower, walking pace.

Let us compare the values of the self-styled White Nationalists with the real defenders of the Aryan race, the National Socialists:

• Hitler and the NS men organized themselves in a political party—the very first, elemental step to make a difference in the real world. The WN cyber-based “movement” on the other hand refuses to leave the homely comfort zone. Nationalists who are doing this: Every single “neonazi,” white nationalist, southern nationalist or conservative racialist today, including old internet sites such as Stormfront, American Renaissance, VDARE and Majority Rights. None of them has dared to form a racist party. (In the case of Greece’s Golden Dawn, they are not Aryans.)

• The NS men clearly defined their race as Germanic (which includes Austria, the Scandinavian countries, the Netherlands, Switzerland and even some parts of the old Soviet Union; furthermore, Hitler dreamt to share the world with the Anglo-Saxons, especially with the English Empire). Those who advocate WN on the other hand are predominately anti-nordicists, and anti-eugenicists to the core. Like the American “conservatives” of the Republican Party who treat mestizos as equals, in order not to offend Mediterranean sensibilities they refuse to acknowledge that the standard for whiteness is the Nordic type. Many have no objection to grant amnesty to the off-white population in Europe, even if that means the eventual mongrelization of the real whites. Nationalists who are doing this: Most bloggers and commenters over the boards, especially at the WN webzine Counter-Currents Publishing.

• Hitler and the inner NS party abandoned Christianity, a Levantine-inspired religion which only enfeebles the Germanic peoples. Many WNsts, incapable of radical departures from our parents’ religion, unabashedly proclaim their Christianity and have blinded themselves about the toxicity of the Galilean cult. Nationalists who are doing this: Stormfront, the Traditionalist Youth Network led by the two Matts, James Edwards of The Political Cesspool, Occidental Dissent, the neonazi Daily Stormer and even Metapedia.

• The NS men, even the Catholics and Protestants, gave up Christian axiology and became pragmatic Nietzscheans. On the other hand Christian and secular WNsts subscribe it: both groups strive to appear as the proverbial “good Christians.” The neonazi Carolyn Yeager and the historian Arthur Kemp even have tried to rationalize away the Germans’ legit will to conquer those Slavs who had delivered their nation to the Bolshevik Jews. (Clarification: George Lincoln Rockwell and William L. Pierce flourished before the term “white nationalist” became fashionable. They were not WNsts but rather followed the spirit of Hitlerian National Socialism. Neither subscribed the Christian scruples regarding our interaction with the radical Other.) White Nationalists who still subscribe Christian axiology: With the exception of VNN Forum virtually all of them. Moreover, like Hunter Wallace of Occidental Dissent and many commenters in those forums, racialists freak out piously when a lone wolf makes a scene leaving some enemy casualties behind. Even Irmin Vinson, who wrote an apologetic book about Hitler, did this.

• Hitler and the NS men took for granted sexual polarity. Like all militaristic Western cultures they subscribed patriarchy—no woman was allowed in the leadership class. WN males on the other hand have become feminized beyond recognition. Most of them have no problem at all with the feminism that has been wreaking havoc in the fair race and the morals of the fair sex since the 1960s. The NS men had an absolute will to biological fertility. Feminized WNsts have no problem allowing career women in their conferences or practicing ethnosuicidal birth control. Nationalists who are doing this: With the exception of Andrew Anglin all notable WN websites and conferences, including the London Forum which admits women speakers, and even “revolutionary” or eccentric groups like those of Harold Covington and Sebastian Ronin.

Ethos. The German National Socialists simply and straightforwardly pursued the fulfillment of their duty to the point of dying heroically for the fate of their race. Like the Republican Romans their ethos was severe, Stoic and brutal. Feminized WNsts on the other hand still live under the illusion of the American dream, or the infantile pursuit of universal happiness. Like the late imperial Romans they are hedonists. They lack the Teutonic spirit of tribal sacrifice and the saying, “We don’t stand a chance unless our men become killing machines and our women birthing machines” sounds like antimusic to their ears. Nationalists unwilling to sacrifice themselves for the 14/88 words: All of them! Who lusts to become a bloodthirsty soldier or literally force our spoiled women to become birthing machines? With the exception of the late David Lane, Who treasures in his heart the history of the rape of the Sabine women which gave birth to the virile Republican Rome?

Enemy #1: materialism / consumerism. Hitler and the NS men pursued collectivism, honor, structure, order and militarism always in harmony with the aesthetic drive of the Aryan soul. In Uncle Adolf’s table talks for example the subjects of the most beautiful Western architecture, painting and classical music are omnipresent as the blueprints of what the Reich would be after the consolidation of his conquests. On the other hand, even those WNsts who think like real men and advocate a final solution to the non-Gentile problem pursue the freedom of the civilian societies and, to boot, the cult of the atomized individual: libertarianism. In WN forums you don’t see much criticism of larger factors of white decline than the Jewish problem such as the mercantile societies that degenerated in capitalism and, presently, full-blown hedonistic materialism: the uttermost corruptor of the Aryan soul for any honest reader of the History of the white race. Nationalists who have not assimilated the wisdom behind the saying “The Cathedrals were built to the glory of God; New York was built to the glory of Mammon”: countless, including Alex Linder of Vanguard News Network.

• The NS men aimed for war and conquest. Adolf Hitler said: “Any other course that does not lead to the strongest race ruling mankind, means mankind has passed the peak of its development and the end will not be the reign of any supreme moral idea, but degeneration into barbarism and eventually chaos.” Feminized WNsts on the other hand cherish democracy, pacifism and even the secularists make the sign of the holy cross when sighting true Aryan militarism. Compare the Führer’s words with a statement of Kevin MacDonald during an interview by a Jew (!) about the differences between WN and NS: “The white advocacy movement, as I see it, is not exterminating anybody. It is simply going to assert our interests within the democratic form of government that we have… It doesn’t advocate conquering Mexico, you know—anything like that. There are lots of differences.” White nationalists who think like the professor and his Occidental Observer: All Christian nationalists; the (European) New Right and the American New Right—which are not Christian—, the poseurs of Alternative Right (and Richard Spencer’s Radix). In his videos David Duke even shares the Christian sense of compassion for the colored races.

• Finally, Hitler and the NS men recognized the problem of cultural degeneracy in general and degenerate music in particular. Hans Severus Ziegler opened the exhibition “Degenerate music” in 1937 in Düsseldorf. Later, it was presented in Weimar, Munich and Vienna. The hedonist WNsts on the other hand enjoy themselves with the American-Negro phenomenon of rock antimusic. They are basically wiggers. The commenter whose words I quoted in the epigraph has also said: “Degenerate music leads to the extinction of the White race. It is racially suicidal.” Here is a good quote from Encyclopedia Dramatica:

Whereas the original Nazis actually maintained their German culture, celebrating, appreciating and reveling in German art, literature and music, modern-day Nazis get their culture by listening to a lot of White Power Rock’n’Roll. Never mind the fact that rock’n’roll is essentially African-American folk music borrowed by the White Man, and that “borrowing” something from another culture is the definition of multiculturalism and that Hitler devoted an entire chapter of Mein Kampf describing how the degradation of Aryan culture would lead to the extinction of the white man.

Nationalists who have promoted degenerate music: countless since the old podcasts by Kevin Strom, and more recently Alex Kurtagić, Greg Johnson and many, many more. Virtually all male hosts, guest speakers and listeners of WN radio podcasts love simian music, including some internet shows hosted by one of our best European minds, Tomislav Sunić. In a nutshell, presently all white racists, even the sophisticate, are inadvertently committing racial suicide.

 

My priesthood

From this post henceforth I’ll add further entries only if I see big events in the news (more spectacular events than the Jihad attacks in Paris and San Bernardino last year). The inescapable fact is that in WN there is no actual resistance against the genocidal mass immigration of non-whites and forced fraternisation with them. Apparently George L. Rockwell was the last National Socialist of the West. Being a true Nazi involves forming a fascist party in Europe, or much more difficult, in North America—something that contemporary racists not dare do.

Trying to summon or discipline bourgeois racists that don’t leave the internet destroys the morale of the true fanatic: the priest of the 14 words. Unless these cowards become brave, unlikely in a race that is presumed dead, I must do something else. Pity!: with no Aryan men offering real resistance to the System I have no choice but to try to fulfill my priesthood alone.

Here’s my plan as a hermit. My books on childrearing [1] could help the future ethnostate, which capital should already be in Berlin had it not been for the Anglo-Saxons. But this State would only be reborn if this race repents from its unforgivable sin—if that is possible.

Saint Jerome Reading by Giovanni Bellini[1] I refer not only to Hojas Susurrantes but to two more series of several books each: Extermination and From St Francis to Himmler.
My working hypothesis is that non-abusive childrearing will prevent both mental disorders and even treason in the Aryan ethnostate.

 

 

September update

Michael Bell has recently authored “The caste system of the Alt Right” that shows an image of the Egyptian pyramids at the top. Instead, the editor should have chosen the symbol of the truncated square pyramid, so common in the architecture of the Mesoamerican civilizations.

In his flawed caste system Bell places white nationalists at the top of the pyramid, but they in fact belong to a lower caste, as explained above (see also the recent interview of me by Jake that has been published at The Right Stuff).

It is the National Socialists and a couple of American fighters, Rockwell and Pierce, who were at the top of the complete square pyramid. Bell also omitted Linder who, as an exterminationist (and an anti-Christian) could share a place at the top.

This said, after Hillary Clinton’s blunder in delivering an anti-Altright speech, it has been mainstreamed. Bell’s article may still be useful. Newcomers can now map the Altright thanks to that article, especially the castes at the very bottom of the pyramid.

On America

Below, a comment by Trainspotter about a January 2012 article at The Occidental Observer by Matt Parrott. Why this webzine has been deleting all threaded comments of old articles is inexplicable. The cited text is a gem I rescued:

 
 

Excellent essay by Matt.

A particular point made, which I had never thought of before, was the change in Mexican self-perception from the heirs of the great Spanish martial tradition to, well, just being Mexicans. What a let down, and the picture [see it: here] was worth a thousand words!

It is of course debatable as to whether Matt is correct about a future of soft crashes as opposed to a more defined, paradigm shifting moment. My money is on both. Yes, we have examples like Brazil in front of us, but we also have the Soviet Union.

Yet our present system is so complex and unnatural, not to mention vulnerable to systemic shock and disruption, that The Long Emergency (Kunstler’s term) could easily reach a point where things play out rapidly. In other words, where the whimper rapidly becomes a bang. To quote our esteemed former President Bush, “This sucker could go.”

And it will.

The system bleeds legitimacy by the day, and it is hard to see how it can get it back in a meaningful way. It won’t reform itself for the simple reason that it can’t. As the system weakens and decays through inevitable soft crashes, it will become ever more vulnerable to a paradigm shifting crisis that changes everything. Now, whether that change will work out in our favor is another question, but at least there will be opportunity.

In any event, again, the above is debatable.

What I hope will move beyond debate, and the sooner the better, is Matt’s conclusion about where to go from here. We are not going to recover the entire United States, as the United States. It’s simply too late, and like it or not, it’s no longer our country at a fundamental level. In truth, it hasn’t been for a long time, though it has only become materially apparent fairly recently.

This is a vital paradigm shift that we must go through, and if we can make the necessary psychological break in time, it would go a long way toward distinguishing ourselves from the trajectory of ancient India or Brazil.

Just as an aside, go through a quick mental exercise: imagine that, against all odds, we did recover the entire United States. Not just the territory, but the United States as a package. Put aside the fact that there are well over 100 million non-whites here now.

degenerate musicHow much of its history and culture would we have to disown? How much of its music would we have to repudiate? Its films? Its philosophy? Its wars?

It’s rather sobering to think about. Again, this isn’t our country anymore, and hasn’t been for a long time. All one has to do is turn on the TV or walk outside the front door for this to become readily apparent.

As Whites, we are an ancient people. As Americans, we are not. America was a vehicle created, fairly recently in historical terms, to meet the needs of our people and its posterity. Unfortunately that vehicle failed, and we were slaughtering one another, at least in part over black slaves, within a couple of generations of the founding. Then there was Reconstruction. That was bad enough. Moving forward, the record of that vehicle in the twentieth century was nothing short of disastrous for our people, both at home and abroad. In the twenty first century, these long term trends are only accelerating. All told, the vehicle known as America has allowed many whites to become materially well off, but it has been an utter disaster for the long term survival and prosperity of our people.

We were Whites before hopping into this vehicle, and we’ll still be Whites when we hop out. The wonderful things that many older readers may remember, such as close knit neighborhoods and high trust, are more a product of our racial characteristics than anything uniquely “American.” We will have those things under a new flag as well. I have a bit of a recollection of that from my childhood in the seventies. It was fading, but it was still there. Perhaps ironically, only with something new can we have that again.

This is not to say that we can’t take our heroes and icons from American history as appropriate, as that is the story of our people too. But let’s face it, many of the greatest heroes in our history on this continent were men who decided that they didn’t want to be Americans any longer, such as Robert E. Lee and Stonewall Jackson. I’ve heard that when the Confederacy was first established, there was an outcry not to replace the American flag. There is a deep and natural reluctance to make that break. But they got over it, and created flags of their own that speak to many of us even to this day. We’ll have to do the same.

We can take with us what is truly “ours,” while accepting that the vehicle known as America simply no longer belongs to us. In fact, living in that vehicle has become intolerable to us. Orwell wrote something to the effect of a boot pressing on a human neck, forever. We get the same boot, but just to pour salt in our wounds, imagine being forced to watch a black male and white female making out… forever. That’s pretty much what riding in this car called American has come to mean. Oppression combined with low rent degradation… forever.

So let it go. Perhaps one day in the distant future whites will control the entire geographical area of what is today the U.S., but if so it will be in a different political form, and under a different banner. A very different banner.

We need something that is based explicitly upon the protection and perpetuation of our own people, not just abstractions about liberty and equality, or making a buck. That’s not to say that what we come up with won’t offer liberty or the opportunity to make a good living. It can and it should. But if that’s all there is to it, then we’ll end up back in the cesspool again.

Bottom line: we need an ethnostate, a land of our own. A White Republic.

Uncle Adolf’s table talk, 57

the-real-hitler

 

Night of 23rd-24th December 1941

The Museum at Linz—Belittling of great paintings by Jewish critics—Incompetence of the bourgeois leaders— The Venus of Bordone.
 
It occurs to me that already Linz Museum can bear comparison with no-matter-which museum in New York. In the years 1890 to 1900, one could still form great collections. After that, it became practically impossible to lay one’s hand on the truly great works. The Jews mounted guard and monopolised the lot. If I’d had money sooner, I’d have been able to keep in Germany a number of works that have emigrated. It’s lucky I got there finally. Otherwise we’d have nothing left but rubbish, for the Jews do their business in works of real value.

They made use of literature to achieve this. What we should blame is, firstly, the cowardice of our bourgeoisie, and, next, the state of society (for which the bourgeoisie is equally responsible) whereby only a tiny fraction of the population is interested in art. The Jew was able to say to himself: “These Germans, who accept perverse pictures of the crucified Christ, are capable of swallowing other horrors, too, if one can persuade them that these horrors are beautiful!” The people was not concerned in such matters. It was all the affair of the so-called élite, who believed in their own competence, whereas in reality they were not capable of telling the difference between what was beautiful and what was ugly. This set-up was useful to me at the period when, although I still hadn’t much money, I began to buy.

Another thing that was useful to me, in England, was the fact that certain works, by reason of their subjects, did not fit in with the conformist morals of society. So it was that I was able to take possession of the admirable Venus by Bordone, which formerly belonged to the Duke of Kent. I’m delighted that I succeeded in obtaining in England some works of the highest level in exchange for some horrors boosted by the Jewish critics. Those are real forgers’ tactics on the Jews’ part, for they’re perfectly well aware of the worthlessness of the works they’re boosting.

They’ve used this transvaluation of values to buy, surreptitiously and at a favourable price, the masterpieces they had depreciated.

On 9/11 “truth”

part 1 of 7 – Free fall and how the towers collapsed

part 2 of 7 – Nano-thermite found in the WTC dust

part 3 of 7 – Thermate, thermite and glowing aluminium

part 4 of 7 – How did World Trade Center 7 collapse

part 5 of 7 – The BBC, Larry Silverstein and the Pentagon

part 6 of 7 – The psychology behind a 9/11 truther

part 7 of 7 – Flight 93 and my final thoughts.
 
young_sceptic

This young Briton is neither Jewish nor Jew-wise. He uses anti-music by the end of his clips, but his videos about September 11 conspiracy theories are worth watching. It’s pathetic that quite a few white nationalists swallow this utter nonsense as “truth.”

Published in: on September 11, 2015 at 12:01 am  Comments (8)  

Uncle Adolf’s table talk, 89

the-real-hitler

 

Night of 20th-2ist February 1942

The spirit in peril—The observatory at Linz—
The fight against falsehood, superstition and intolerance.

 

Christianity is the worst of the regressions that mankind can ever have undergone, and it’s the Jew who, thanks to this diabolic invention, has thrown him back fifteen centuries. The only thing that would be still worse would be victory for the Jew through Bolshevism. If Bolshevism triumphed, mankind would lose the gift of laughter and joy. It would become merely a shapeless mass, doomed to greyness and despair.

The priests of antiquity were closer to nature, and they sought modestly for the meaning of things. Instead of that, Christianity promulgates its inconsistent dogmas and imposes them by force. Such a religion carries within it intolerance and persecution. It’s the bloodiest conceivable.

In their fight against the Church, the Russians are purely negative. We, on the other hand, should practise the cult of the heroes who enabled humanity to pull itself out of the rut of error. Kepler lived at Linz, and that’s why I chose Linz as the place for our observatory. His mother was accused of witchcraft and was tortured several times by the Inquisition.

There’s no greater privilege, in my view, than to play the part of a patron of the arts or the sciences. Men would certainly have regarded it as a vast honour to be allowed to encourage the career of a man like Richard Wagner. Well, it’s already a great deal gained that people like him are no longer burned alive!

I shall not cease to think that the most precious possession a country can have is its great men. If I think of Bismarck, I realise that only those who have lived through 1918 could fully appreciate his worth. One sees by such examples how much it would mean if we could make the road smooth for men of talent.

It’s only in the realm of music that I can find no satisfaction. The same thing is happening to music as is happening to beauty in a world dominated by the shavelings—the Christian religion is an enemy to beauty. The Jew has brought off the same trick upon music. He has created a new inversion of values and replaced the loveliness of music by noises. Surely the Athenian, when he entered the Parthenon to contemplate the image of Zeus, must have had another impression than the Christian who must resign himself to contemplating the grimacing face of a man crucified.

Since my fourteenth year I have felt liberated from the superstition that the priests used to teach. Apart from a few Holy Joes, I can say that none of my comrades went on believing in the miracle of the eucharist.

The only difference between then and now is that in those days I was convinced one must blow up the whole show with dynamite.

Uncle Adolf’s table talk, 103

the-real-hitler

 

27th March 1942, midday

Jewish influence on German art
—Painting in Germany.

 

It’s striking to observe that in 1910 our artistic level was still extraordinarily high. Since that time, alas! our decadence has merely become accentuated. In the field of painting, for example, it’s enough to recall the lamentable daubs that people have tried to foist, in the name of art, on the German people.

This was quite especially the case during the Weimar Republic, and that clearly demonstrated the disastrous influence of the Jews in matters of art. The cream of the jest was the incredible impudence with which the Jew set about it! With the help of phony art critics, and with one Jew bidding against another, they finally suggested to the people—which naturally believes everything that’s printed—a conception of art according to which the worst rubbish in painting became the expression of the height of artistic accomplishment. The ten thousand of the élite themselves, despite their pretensions on the intellectual level, let themselves be diddled, and swallowed all the humbug. The culminating hoax—and we now have proof of it, thanks to the seizure of Jewish property—is that, with the money they fraudulently acquired by selling trash, the Jews were able to buy, at wretched prices, the works of value they had so cleverly depreciated. Every time an inventory catches my eye of a requisition carried out on an important Jew, I see that genuine artistic treasures are listed there. It’s a blessing of Providence that National Socialism, by seizing power in 1933, was able to put an end to this imposture.

Genuine artists develop only by contact with other artists. Like the Old Masters, they began by working in a studio. Let’s remember that men like Rembrandt, Rubens and others hired assistants to help them to complete all their commissions.

Amongst these assistants, only those reached the rank of apprentice who displayed the necessary gifts as regards technique and adroitness—and of whom it could be supposed that they would in their turn be capable of producing works of value. It’s ridiculous to claim, as it’s claimed in the academies, that right from the start the artist of genius can do what he likes. Such a man must begin, like everyone else, by learning, and it’s only by working without relaxation that he succeeds in achieving what he wants. If he doesn’t know the art of mixing colours to perfection—if he cannot set a background—if anatomy still has secrets for him—it’s certain he won’t go very far! I can imagine the number of sketches it took an artist as gifted as Menzel before he set himself to paint the Flute Concert at Sans-Souci.

Adolph_von_Menzel_-_A_Flute_Concert_of_Frederick_the_Great_at_Sanssouci

It would be good if artists to-day, like those of olden days, had the training afforded by the Masters’ studios and could thus steep themselves in the great pictorial traditions. If, when we look at the pictures of Rembrandt and Rubens, for example, it is often difficult to make out what the Master has painted himself and what is his pupils’ share, that’s due to the fact that gradually the disciples themselves became masters.

What a disaster it was, the day when the State began to interfere with the training of painters! As far as Germany is concerned, I believe that two academies would suffice: in Düsseldorf and Munich. Or perhaps three in all, if we add Vienna to the list. Obviously there’s no question, for the moment, of abolishing any of our academies. But that doesn’t prevent one from regretting that the tradition of the studios has been lost.

If, after the war, I can realise my great building programme—and I intend to devote thousands of millions to it—only genuine artists will be called on to collaborate.

Uncle Adolf’s table talk, 106

the-real-hitler

 

4th April 1942, midday

Jewish origin of religious terrorism
—Jewish influence in Britain.

 

This terrorism in religion is the product, to put it briefly, of a Jewish dogma, which Christianity has universalised and whose effect is to sow trouble and confusion in men’s minds. It’s obvious that, in the realm of belief, terrorist teachings have no other object but to distract men from their natural optimism and to develop in them the instinct of cowardice.

As far as we are concerned, we’ve succeeded in chasing the Jews from our midst and excluding Christianity from our political life. It’s therefore in England and America that one can nowadays observe the effects of such an education upon a people’s conduct.

Our measures against decadent art have enabled us to get rid of the smears of the Jews. But these daubs, which we’ve banned, are at present fetching the highest prices in England and America. And nobody amongst the bourgeois over yonder dares to protest.

One may well exclaim: “Cowardice, thy name is bourgeoisie!” Although the Jew has seized the levers of control in the Anglo-Saxon world (the press, the cinema, the radio, economic life), and although in the United States he is the entire inspiration of the populace, especially of the negroes, the bourgeois of the two countries, with the rope already round their necks, tremble at the idea of rebelling against him, even timidly.

What is happening now in the Anglo-Saxon world is absolutely identical with what we experienced here in 1918. The Jew, in his imprudence, can’t even think where he is to interfere next; the priesthood restricts itself to the shameful exploitation of the people; and, to cap it all, a king who’s an utter nitwit! The King of England is worth no more than William II, who in 1918 was trembling with fear and incapable of taking the slightest decision, his only idea being to put his flag in his pocket. Under such a monarch, the Jew can propagate and spread himself in the way he understands, and instil his poison into the mind of the bourgeois world. The cream of it is that to-day it’s exactly the same in the Anglo-Saxon world as it used to be amongst us: these idiotic petit bourgeois believe that no economic life is possible without the Jew—for, as they put it, “without the Jew, money doesn’t circulate”. As if there hadn’t been flourishing periods in our economic life before the intrusion of the Jews—in the Middle Ages, for example!

I reckon that our future élite must be given a tough upbringing, so that it may be definitely immunised against such cowardice.