New tablets of stone

First article.— Western civilisation is under the grip of an anti-white ideology that has been imposed in every white country after the traitorous Second World War.

Second article.—Aryans are being exterminated by genocidal levels of immigration: a wholesale European, North American and Australian population replacement for non-whites.

Third article.—Ergo, the 21st century will be the darkest hour of the fair race.

Fourth article.—Aryans either gain a sense of themselves or they are going extinct. Only an ethnostate will save them from extinction; that is, only complete sovereignty in a Fourth Reich, brought about by the expulsion of non-whites, including Jews, will save whites.

Fifth article.—If the ethnostate is formed, a Constitution may start with the words: We hold these truths to be self-evident: Men are created unequal. All men are unequal—nowhere in the natural world, and Man is part of Nature, is anything equal. Equality does not exist in Nature; only in the abstract world of mathematics and in the minds of delusional humans.

Sixth article.—The Priest of the Fourteen words is an anti-Judeo-Christian law-giver. The first commandment in his tablets of stone is ‘Thou shalt keep thy blood pure’. To avoid miscegenation, another commandment must dictate the necessity of not using non-whites.

Seventh article.—If we now remember Nietzsche’s Law Against Christianity, the rest follows from this…

_________

Page 517 of the forthcoming 2018 edition of The Fair Race’s Darkest Hour.

Anglin vs. Sargon

What is striking in the recent debate between Andrew Anglin and Carl Benjamin (also known by his YouTube pseudonym, Sargon of Akkad) is Benjamin’s schizoid stance that, yes, white people have the right to exist—but they don’t have the right to reverse the genocidal levels of immigration!

Reason for this schizoid disorder? This secular man subscribes Christian ethics, particularly a secularised version of the ethics of the Sermon on the Mount; Pauline universalism, and an out-group altruism that did not exist before Christianity.

Published in: on February 12, 2018 at 11:41 am  Comments (12)  
Tags:

Pseudo anti-Christians

I am presently reviewing, for the last time, Evorpa Soberana’s text and have little time to deal with Hunter Wallace’s ‘First Things: The Anti-Christian Alt-Right’.

Suffice it to say that the author he cites, Matthew Rose, is wrong to consider ‘Greg Johnson and Richard Spencer as examples of the anti-Christian wing’. I have iterated many times that Johnson has delivered pious Christian homilies at a San Francisco church (his recordings are available online) and Spencer has said in mainstream TV that he is ‘a cultural Christian’.

We have also seen on this site that Spencer and Johnson ultimately subscribe Christian ethics: they are pseudo anti-Christians.

Wallace, a Lutheran, errs when writing, ‘Christianity has long since been dethroned as the dominant culture in the United States’. He hasn’t realised that every Aryan who worships the Jewish god, like as Wallace himself, is ethnosuicidal—see the PDF of Soberana’s text that will be available soon in this blog.

Wallace also said that ‘The Alt-Right shouldn’t get hung up on being anti-Christian because Christianity is infinitely malleable’ and adds several examples of this. As I said, I have no time to rebut his examples but my forthcoming translations of Karlheinz Deschner’s books will show that this Semitic cult has always been noxious for the white race.

Faith of the Future, 5

by Matt Koehl

 

V. The Tragedy of 1945

The fall of Berlin to the Eastern hordes in 1945 represents a decisive turning point in the history of the world. Very few have yet grasped its real import, although many have argued the hypothetical possibilities of a different denouement to that fateful conflict. Unfortunately, the scenario was predetermined and involved elements which even superhuman agency could not contain or overcome.

The events of 1945 were in fact, but the concluding scene of a great tragic drama which began on April 20, 1889, when a very remarkable figure made his appearance in this world to herald the start of the second half of human history. But although the birth of this extraordinary personality signals the beginning of a new age, his earthly work was constrained by exigencies under an Old Order.

And it is here that the element of tragedy is introduced. For he came into the world during a historical cusp—during the period when one order is dying and another has yet to be born—which foredoomed all of his finest efforts and precluded the possibility of a fulfillment of his Idea during his mortal lifetime.

It is perhaps the greatest of historical ironies that it was Adolf Hitler, the father of a new age, who offered the West its last opportunity for resuscitation and renewal. By infusing new spirit into the old civilization and by defending its major institutional forms—as the Führer proposed—it is conceivable that the Old Order might have been able to protract its historical life, perhaps even for another millennium.

It was not to be, however. The decay was too advanced. In its diseased and delirious condition, the West rejected the one hand which could have rescued it from impending death.

Beyond that, however, the contradiction between the values of the Old and the New was simply too great. In the final analysis, these values were mutually exclusive. And so the Second World War was, in fact, a “war against the West,” as critics of National Socialism have charged. It represented a titanic struggle between the Old and the New. Unfortunately, the entrenched forces of the Old—even in their decadent and moribund state—proved momentarily too formidable for the incipient New.

It must be noted here—and this is not without significance—that the Third Reich, the provisional state of the New, was itself heavily and fatally infected by ideas and elements carried over from the Old. The New had not completely prevailed against the Old. For that it had hardly had time; in fact, it had barely begun. The very nature of its introduction, which was dictated by the political and social realities of contemporary Germany, involved a gradual, evolutionary transition from the Old to the New, rather than violent upheaval—something which would have been neither feasible nor justifiable under existing historical circumstances.

In consequence, however, we find that by the outbreak of war in 1939, old thinking, old attitudes, old habits and old interests continued to persist in many quarters of German society. The new ways were still far too tenuous. Not even the space of a single generation had been granted for the introduction of necessary radical change, with the result that the new thinking and new attitudes which could have produced the extra margin of revolutionary morale to effect a different sequel never had an opportunity to develop properly.

Thus, the outcome of this tragic drama could not have been other than what it was. Fate had chosen the time and the place and had set the stage, and events proceeded in their appointed manner. Yet even this cataclysmic tragedy—with the immolation of its godlike protagonist and his martyr people—was historically necessary for two reasons:

  • First, it resulted in a decisive blow to the Old Order, a mortal blow from which it can never recover and which assures its disappearance from the stage of world history; and
  • Secondly, by clearing the field, it has served to release the new Movement from any lingering constraints, inhibitions or commitments with respect to the Old—thus enabling it to acquire the necessary freedom for the fulfillment of its revolutionary mission. This is particularly important to consider, for not only was 1945 a watershed in the larger history of the world; it was a great divide in the development of the Movement as well. A phase which had been essentially political and military now became spiritual—yes, even religious.

Militarily and politically, National Socialism stood defeated in 1943—completely. Had it represented merely a political or military structure, it could not have survived the collapse. The Idea of Adolf Hitler, however, was more than just political or military. It was above all spiritual—and spiritual ideas cannot be broken by brute force or military means alone. And yet, military might and physical compulsion were the only resources at the disposal of the Old Order, morally and spiritually it was bankrupt. And so its apparent defeat of National Socialism in reality proved to be something quite different.

For in the contest, the new Idea had lost none of its integrity—its inner substance—but remained spiritually undefeated, awaiting only the proper moment to make its reappearance. Indeed, it was precisely in this vital area that it proved itself stronger than ever.

Unimpeded by expedient—i.e., political—considerations of any kind, it was now completely free and unfettered to pursue its high destiny. Out of the crucible of the most horrible suffering and hardship, a Movement had emerged—inwardly purged, perfected in its faith, fortified, steeled and infinitely more conscious of its holy mission on this earth.

As we now move further into the future, we begin to perceive the faint outline of an awesome design: Adolf Hitler and his people had to sacrifice themselves so that the wonderful, new Idea could one day be reborn in exalted form as a glorious beacon and symbol for embattled Aryan mankind everywhere.

That was the purpose and essence of their heroic, Olympian struggle. And it is now upon this sacred foundation—one forged and hallowed in the flames of monumental tragedy—that a regenerate Movement must build, and in so doing give eternal meaning to the precious blood sacrifice of those martyred millions, representing a higher humanity, who fell with the faith of a new age in their hearts.

Apocalypse for whites • XXXIX

by Evropa Soberana

 

Appendix to chapter 3:

Nietzsche on Christianity

 

On the Genealogy of Morality (1887), 1st treatise, § 8 [1]

But you fail to understand that? You have no eye for something that needed two millennia to emerge victorious…?

This Jesus of Nazareth, the personified evangelist of love, this ‘Saviour’ bringing holiness and victory to the poor, to the sick, to the sinners—was he not that very seduction in its most sinister and most irresistible form, the seduction and detour to exactly those Judaic values and innovations in ideals?

Didn’t Israel attain, precisely with the detour of this ‘Saviour’, of this apparent enemy against and dissolver of Israel, the final goal of its sublime thirst for vengeance?

Isn’t it part of the secret black art of a truly great politics of revenge, a farsighted, underground, slowly expropriating, and premeditated revenge, that Israel itself had to disown and nail to the cross, like some mortal enemy, the tool essential to its revenge before all the world, so that ‘all the world’, that is, all Israel’s enemies, could then take this particular bait without a second thought?…

At least it is certain that sub hoc signo Israel, with its vengeance and transvaluation of the worth of all other previous values, has triumphed again and again over all other ideals, over all nobler ideals.

Tommaso Laureti, The Triumph of Christianity (also called
The Triumph of the Cross, painted in 1585). The story of how
an oriental messiah, with anorexic and masochistic
air, came to replace the strong pagan gods.

 

The Anti-Christ: A Curse on Christianity (written in 1888)

§ 24

This is precisely why the Jews are the most disastrous people in world history: they have left such a falsified humanity in their wake that even today Christians can think of themselves as anti-Jewish without understanding that they are the ultimate conclusion of Judaism.
 

§ 58

The harvest is blighted overnight… That which stood there aere perennis, the imperium Romanum, the most magnificent form of organisation under difficult conditions that has ever been achieved, and compared to which everything before it and after it appears as patchwork, bungling, dilettantism—those holy anarchists made it a matter of ‘piety’ to destroy ‘the world’, which is to say, the imperium Romanum, so that in the end not a stone stood upon another.

The Christian and the anarchist: both are décadents; both are incapable of any act that is not disintegrating, poisonous, degenerating, blood-sucking; both have an instinct of mortal hatred of everything that stands up, and is great, and has durability, and promises life a future…

Christianity was the vampire of the imperium Romanum—overnight it destroyed the vast achievement of the Romans: the conquest of the soil for a great culture that could await its time. Can it be that this fact is not yet understood?

The imperium Romanum that we know, and that the history of the Roman provinces teaches us to know better and better—this most admirable of all works of art in the grand manner was merely the beginning, and the structure to follow was to prove its worth for thousands of years.

To this day, nothing on a like scale sub specie aeterni has been brought into being, or even dreamed of! This organisation was strong enough to withstand bad emperors: the accident of personality has nothing to do with such things—the first principle of all genuinely great architecture.

But it was not strong enough to stand up against the corruptest of all forms of corruption—against Christians… These stealthy worms, which under the cover of night, mist and duplicity, crept upon every individual, sucking him dry of all earnest interest in real things, of all instinct for reality—this cowardly, effeminate and sugar-coated gang gradually alienated all ‘souls’, step by step, from that colossal edifice, turning against it all the meritorious, manly and noble natures that had found in the cause of Rome their own cause, their own serious purpose, their own pride.

One has but to read Lucretius to know what Epicurus made war upon—not paganism, but ‘Christianity’, which is to say, the corruption of souls by means of the concepts of guilt, punishment and immortality. He combated the subterranean cults, the whole of latent Christianity—to deny immortality was already a form of genuine salvation. Epicurus had triumphed, and every respectable intellect in Rome was Epicurean—when Paul appeared

Paul, the Chandala hatred of Rome, of ‘the world’, in the flesh and inspired by genius—the Jew, the eternal Jew par excellence

What he saw was how, with the aid of the small sectarian Christian movement that stood apart from Judaism, a ‘world conflagration’ might be kindled; how, with the symbol of ‘God on the cross’, all secret seditions, all the fruits of anarchistic intrigues in the empire, might be amalgamated into one immense power.

‘Salvation is of the Jews’. Christianity is the formula for exceeding and summing up the subterranean cults of all varieties, that of Osiris, that of the Great Mother, that of Mithras, for instance: in his discernment of this fact the genius of Paul showed itself.

This was his revelation at Damascus: he grasped the fact that he needed the belief in immortality in order to rob ‘the world’ of its value, that the concept of ‘hell’ would master Rome—that the notion of a ‘beyond’ is the death of life… Nihilist and Christian: they rhyme in German, and they do more than rhyme…
 

§ 59

The whole labour of the ancient world gone for naught: I have no word to describe the feelings that such an enormity arouses in me!

And, considering the fact that its labour was merely preparatory, that with adamantine self-consciousness it laid only the foundations for a work to go on for thousands of years, the whole meaning of antiquity disappears…

To what end the Greeks? to what end the Romans? All the prerequisites to a learned culture, all the methods of science, were already there and had been there for two thousand years! All gone for naught! All overwhelmed in a night, but not by a convulsion of nature! But brought to shame by crafty, sneaking, invisible, anæmic vampires! Not conquered,—only sucked dry…!

Hidden vengefulness, petty envy, became master! Everything wretched, intrinsically ailing, and invaded by bad feelings, the whole ghetto-world of the soul was at once on top! One needs but read any of the Christian agitators, for example, St. Augustine, in order to realize, in order to smell, what filthy fellows came to the top.

§ 61

Here it becomes necessary to call up a memory that must be a hundred times more painful to Germans. The Germans have destroyed for Europe the last great harvest of civilisation that Europe was ever to reap—the Renaissance. Is it understood at last, will it ever be understood, what the Renaissance was? The transvaluation of Christian values: an attempt with all available means, all instincts and all the resources of genius to bring about a triumph of the opposite values, the more noble values…

To attack at the critical place, at the very seat of Christianity, and there enthrone the more noble values—that is to say, to insinuate them into the instincts, into the most fundamental needs and appetites of those sitting there…

I see before me the possibility of a perfectly heavenly enchantment and spectacle: it seems to me to scintillate with all the vibrations of a fine and delicate beauty, and within it there is an art so divine, so infernally divine, that one might search in vain for thousands of years for another such possibility; I see a spectacle so rich in significance and at the same time so wonderfully full of paradox that it should arouse all the gods on Olympus to immortal laughter: Cæsar Borgia as pope!… Am I understood?… Well then, that would have been the sort of triumph that I alone am longing for today: by it Christianity would have been swept away!

What happened? A German monk, Luther, came to Rome. This monk, with all the vengeful instincts of an unsuccessful priest in him, raised a rebellion against the Renaissance in Rome…

Instead of grasping, with profound thanksgiving, the miracle that had taken place: the conquest of Christianity at its capital—instead of this, his hatred was stimulated by the spectacle. A religious man thinks only of himself. Luther saw only the depravity of the papacy at the very moment when the opposite was becoming apparent: the old corruption, the peccatum originale, Christianity itself, no longer occupied the papal chair! Instead there was life! Instead there was the triumph of life! Instead there was a great yea to all lofty, beautiful and daring things!…

And Luther restored the church.
 

§ 62

With this I come to a conclusion and pronounce my judgment. I condemn Christianity; I bring against the Christian church the most terrible of all the accusations that an accuser has ever had in his mouth. It is, to me, the greatest of all imaginable corruptions; it seeks to work the ultimate corruption, the worst possible corruption. The Christian church has left nothing untouched by its depravity; it has turned every value into worthlessness, and every truth into a lie, and every integrity into baseness of soul.

This eternal accusation against Christianity I shall write upon all walls, wherever walls are to be found—I have letters that even the blind will be able to see… I call Christianity the one great curse, the one great intrinsic depravity, the one great instinct of revenge, for which no means are venomous enough, or secret, subterranean and small enough, —I call it the one immortal blemish upon the human race…

And mankind reckons time from the dies nefastus when this fatality befell—from the first day of Christianity!—Why not rather from its last?—From today?—

Transvaluation of all values!
 
__________________

[1] Note of the Ed.: While I follow Evropa Soberana’s quotes of On the Genealogy of Morality, in the case of The Antichrist I added other paragraphs to the author’s quotes from the last pages Nietzsche’s book (included the final page that will appear in the next entry).

Apocalypse for whites • XXV

by Evropa Soberana

 

Appendix to the second chapter:
Nietzsche on the conflict ‘Rome v. Judea’

The two opposing values ‘good and bad’ and ‘good and evil’ have fought a fearful battle on earth for thousands of years…

The symbol of this battle, written in a script which has remained legible through all human history up to the present, is called ‘Rome against Judea, Judea against Rome’. To this point there has been no greater event than this war, this posing of a question, this contradiction between deadly enemies.

Rome felt that the Jew was like something contrary to nature itself, its monstrous polar opposite, as it were. In Rome the Jew was considered ‘convicted of hatred against the entire human race’. And that view was correct, to the extent that we are right to link the health and the future of the human race to the unconditional rule of aristocratic values—to Roman values…

The Romans were indeed strong and noble men, stronger and nobler than any people who had lived on earth up until then or even than any people who had ever been dreamed up. Everything they left as remains, every inscription, is delightful, provided that we can guess what is doing the writing there.

By contrast, the Jews were par excellence that priestly people of resentment, who possessed an unparalleled genius for popular morality. Just compare people with related talents—say, the Chinese or the Germans—with the Jews, in order to understand which is ranked first and which is ranked fifth.

Which of them has proved victorious for the time being, Rome or Judea?

Surely there’s not the slightest doubt. Just think of who it is people bow down to today in Rome itself as the personification of all the highest values (and not only in Rome, but in almost half the earth, all the places where people have become merely tame or want to become tame): in front of three Jews, as we know, and one Jewess—in front of Jesus of Nazareth, the fisherman Peter, the carpet maker Paul, and the mother of the first-mentioned Jesus, named Mary.

This is very remarkable: without doubt Rome has been conquered.

(On the Genealogy of Morality, sections 1, 15 and 16.)

Greg & Styx

I am relocating this entry I had posted yesterday—:

Further to ‘Alt-Right vs. the sceptics’. I have heard part of two more audios with Greg Johnson: the one about Carl Benjamin (‘Sargon of Akkad’ in the YouTube subculture) and an exchange with a vlogger who uses the ridiculous pseudonym of Styxhexenhammer666.

Even if I could talk fluent English I’d never debate the Alt-Lite: they’re goners far from my left. I can only punch those on my immediate left (including Greg). However, those who are at my immediate left, like Richard Spencer and Johnson, may be winning the debates against those at my far left; and therefore could be considered stepping-stones towards our side.

—because exercising on my stationary bicycle this morning I listened fifteen more minutes of the Greg/Styx exchange. What is really notorious is that both, white nationalist (Greg) and civic nationalist (Styx) thoroughly subscribe Christian ethics. They’re perfect examples of what in this blog we have been calling ‘secular Christians’: both seem to be more concerned about not using violence on non-whites in the formation of the ethnostate than on the survival of their race.

This is typical of atheists, that I call secular Christians.

I also removed the link to one of my recommended articles on the sidebar (a link beside of which I had recently added Alice’s white rabbit little pic), ‘A postscript to Dies Irae’ because it is too strong meat for the newcomer. But yesterday a friend called to my attention ‘The White Man’s Destiny’ he found on /pol/ that sharply contrasts with Greg & Styx’s Neo-Christianity:
 

Extraordinary times call for extraordinary measures

This is exactly what we should be striving for. A highly militant, exclusionary, technocratic meritocracy built around the ideas of radical Traditionalism.

A society hell-bent on expansion and the preservation of one’s own kind and culture, at the detriment of all others.

This is the only natural, sane response to a world filled with sub-human filth and degenerate untermensch whose only goal in life is the extermination of everything just and pure.

We tried to give the Other its chance.

We bent over backwards accommodating them; we shared our technology, our art, our literature, our accomplishments; we educated them, fed them, allowed entire broods of them to settle in our ancestral lands; we humbled ourselves, apologizing for imaginary slights and groveling at their feet for the perceived transgression of taming this planet and bringing the torch of civilization to the world—and for what? All our efforts were rewarded with scorn, hatred, jealousy, and outright malevolence.

We need a new system—something more noble than the petty mercantile aspirations of Semites; something greater than the slave-like morality imposed upon us by alien religions.

A society built on unshakeable, indelible foundations, woven from our own racial stock and governed by the guiding light of Apotheosis: that driving, all-consuming framework of beliefs that the White Man is his own God, that he is God, the keeper of his own destiny—noble by birth, master by choice, tyrant by need, and ruler by right! We tamed this world once, and we can do it again.

But first, we must burn the heretic, kill the mutant, and purge the unclean.

And then, when we’ve freed ourselves of weakness, empathy, remorse, and guilt, when the last sub-human has been cleansed from Terra, and the last trace of their existence purged from this planet, we’ll ascend to the stars, and make them our own—and the galaxy will tremble.

This… is Our Destiny.

Published in: on January 11, 2018 at 11:07 am  Comments (5)  
Tags:

Imperium

by Juliano Correa

Let’s say we are Germanophiles. We want Nordic imperialism and we want to liquidate every other culture that is not Nordic, after all.

I believe if a person doesn’t identify this way they are not seriously pro whites. Unfortunately most of the white nationalists are Russophiles.

Other problem: most of the identitarian and European nationalists are not even racists. They just want to be separated but don’t believe in superiority and are fans of Alexander Dugin.

Published in: on November 30, 2017 at 10:49 am  Comments (23)  
Tags:

On Jared Taylor

Before I start the arid task of arranging today’s post on the Kriminalgeschichte series, I’d like to say something about this interview:

Taylor perfectly exemplifies what we call secular Christianity. Although he now holds a secular worldview, as a child his parents moved to Japan to convert the heathen. As I have experienced religious introjects coming from my parents (and written a lot about it in Spanish), I know there’s always a residual tail that cannot be erased.

Regarding Kevin MacDonald’s admitting a Jew as a contributor, in the latest podcast I told Walsh that more than an Aryan problem I see it as a Christian problem, in the sense of what we are calling ‘secular Christianity’. Like MacDonald, Taylor also seems to subscribe universal love, which includes Jews and non-whites: something absent in pre-Christian Europe.

What bothered me about the interview is that Taylor said that those at his right blame all Jews, completely ignoring William Pierce’s point that even if only ten percent of the kike forest is poisonous for us, the problem is the whole forest. Hasn’t Taylor read Pierce’s article? (Visualise it with the other Semitic tribe that’s infecting the West, Muslims, and you’ll get Pierce’s point.)

Taylor went further to say that he does not like much the term ‘white nationalism’ because it evokes the violence needed to create an ethnostate, and that he’s against any kind of violence coming from us! He added he’s prepared to admit some non-whites in the Aryan ethnostate precisely because he doesn’t want ethnic cleansing!

I didn’t listen the whole interview. But I am sure very few visitors of my site will comprehend the need of continuing the instalments of Deschner’s book for an in-depth analysis of what went wrong with the white psyche. Just think about it: big leaders of our movement hold views that would have been unthinkable for pre-Christian Europeans.

Kindergarten racists

American white advocates are now discussing what they call ‘optics’ as PR for the movement (two of the most recent pieces by Hunter Wallace and Andrew Anglin: here and here).

Incredibly, Wallace who a few years ago sided mainstreamers against Greg Johnson, is now tolerant of fashy optics in the rallies while Anglin, whose site with acid sarcasm on Jews often uses Nazi imaginary, is now claiming that the movement needs electoral politics and Americanism!

Just compare this with what James Mason said in Siege (this morning I just added one more of the chapters of Siege as a post for this site). But Mason himself has his own problems. He was stuck in the religion of our parents and abandoned revolutionary politics: a religion I’m now debunking with my translations of Deschner’s Criminal History of Christianity.

Wallace seems to have a better grasp of reality than Anglin, but generally speaking their movement is a failure. And it is a failure because all of them are unable to give up Christian ethics. Apropos of the fact that Kevin MacDonald is now accepting Jewish contributors for The Occidental Observer, I responded to Franklin Ryckaert today:

The real issue here is my claim that whites do indeed have a loose screw. Our central intellectual figure in understanding the JQ cannot fathom à la Hitler that no Jew ought to be platformed, especially in a Jew-wise forum.

You can imagine an ‘Anti-Semites Watch’ periodical run by Jews admitting a Nazi contributor! Recently someone said that many white nationalists support Israel because they believe that Jews should have a home of their own, but that Jews don’t reciprocate the favour: they don’t support a home nation for whites anywhere in the world. That was an excellent point!

Christian-problem The Aryan problem does encompass the Jewish Problem. If even secular white nationalists subscribe the Christian commandment to love our enemies, we have a huge problem at home.

I will continue to promote MacDonald’s trilogy as fundamental reading to understand the JP but not only I’ve now removed The Occidental Observer from my blogroll list: I’m more confident than ever that NS should replace WN/Alt-Right (cf. my comment on Strauss/Zweig below), and that the ongoing discussion among them on optics is for Kindergarten racists who have no clue about the history of Christianity.

I was referring to this comment on mine about Richard Strauss and Stefan Zweig in Nazi Germany.