National-Socialist Worldview

Welcome to the Banana Republic

2012-02-16T22:19:00.004-05:00

It is confirmed that vote tallies unfavorable to Mitt Romney were nullified in Maine's Republican primary. Similar fraud was reported in several other states.

The legitimacy of the Government of the United States rests on the honesty of the electoral process. The Republican Party is one of the two gatekeepers to power on the national level; its corruption is not a private concern. If this corruption is not punished then the Federal Government will have lost its legitimacy.

Ron Paul's campaign calls itself "the Ron Paul Revolution." In some ways it really does represent a revolution, a complete change of direction, especially in foreign policy, and the Israel-First establishment is hellbent on preventing that. I will not go so far as President John F. Kennedy, who said, "Those who make peaceful revolution impossible will make violent revolution inevitable," since the military power of the government is so great that any civilian would be a fool to challenge it in that manner, but I do expect that there will be a stark decline in respect, not only for the government itself but for the rule of law, if these electoral frauds are not vigorously prosecuted.

There is a pattern often seen in banana republics, for example in Guatemala in March 1982, when a presidential election was universally denounced as fraudulent -- the latest in a series of fraudulent elections -- with the result that the sham democracy was overthrown and replaced by a military junta led by Efraín Ríos-Montt. We may see that pattern repeated in the United States during our lifetimes.

If these frauds had been committed to keep a Black from being elected, we would surely see prosecutions.

A Struggle of Worldwide Importance

2012-01-12T02:43:00.031-05:00

Already in the early 1920s, Alfred Rosenberg complains that various political persuasions accused National-Socialism of being the extreme antithesis of whatever they themselves happened to be: capitalist according communists, communist according to capitalists. We still see this today. This kind of distortion has the convenient feature that it avoids the recognition that there could be such thing as serious political thinking not rooted in the Enlightenment.

Rosenberg's claim that the National-Socialist struggle has become a worldwide struggle may be an allusion to Mussolini, who had come to power about three months prior to this essay. The Beer-Hall Putsch (8-9 November 1923), an imitation of the March on Rome, was attempted slightly more than a year after Mussolini's takeover and about nine months after this essay, but the attempt to duplicate the Fascists' rise through force and intimidation failed. Rosenberg thus turns out to have been completely correct when he said in this essay that the strength of National-Socialism was in the idea itself.

Despite what Rosenberg wrote at the time, it seems that Italian Fascism was influencing the course of the German struggle during 1923 much more than the reverse. This influence was of course curtailed after it produced a disastrous result: thereafter the NSDAP would use only lawful methods to come to power.

In 1934 and 1935, with the NSDAP in power, it would become necessary to play down the worldwide influence of National-Socialism that Rosenberg emphasized in 1923.

National-Socialism in the Global Struggle

Alfred Rosenberg

Völkischer Beobachter, 27 January 1923

(Translation by Hadding Scott, 2012)

The same has happened to National-Socialism as to every great new thought: unnoticed at first, then combated by all powers of a dissolute age with defamation, scorn, and violence, it nonetheless grew into an avalanche. Enraged, all the parties and personages that have lived on the deception of the German people look on and see themselves more and more unmasked. Clueless and terrified the charred shapes of the old national life stand there and fail to comprehend the new spirit of the German future. Calcified in heart and brain, they are completely unprepared to think the thought: that all must somehow be at fault for Germany's misfortune; that one must sense that, today, the impossible can, must, and will be possible, and the irreconcilable be reconciled.

And thus all that is awakening supports the new popular uprising, the existence of which already proves today that the hour of German freedom someday will strike. For, in it, life has become what alone is able to beget life: faith, spirit of sacrifice [Opfersinn], and unlimited will to struggle for a great idea.

This unerring energy has in the course of years yielded its fruits. The opponents of the new people's movement had to argue against it in spite of themselves [wider Willen]; the scales fell from the eyes of many questioners from all camps, and the struggle of global powers and worldviews suddenly appeared to them in a completely different light than previously. Ever more thorough essays appeared in the various newspapers that attempted an analysis of the growing giant. At the same time however came the defamation-campaign. One side called National-Socialism big-capitalist, monarchist, and reactionary; another saw in it a variety of Communism; the third designated it as Bavarian separatism; the fourth as an extreme unitarist movement. Meanwhile National-Socialism had answered only one question: what is of use to the entire productive German people, and what accords with its nature? – without regard for top and bottom, right and left.

If old forms shatter and the times become ripe for a rebirth of the soul [seelische Neugeburt], then all lying and defamation, indeed even all honest and sincere opposition, is in vain. The new form [Gestalt] grows and pushes aside or crushes whatever stands in its way.

Many in Germany struggle against us; many get excited about “putsches” or “planned assassinations” etc. But only very few know that National-Socialism for today's world is much more dangerous than a putsch. It is the herald of a new age for all Europe, for the White Race everywhere.

The German struggle in turn has become a global struggle, even if nothing broader guides the German National-Socialists than unlimited love for the German people.

Thus we gather during one of the most difficult hours of the German people, in order to testify to our invincible faith in this people and to vow to apply all our strength for its resurrection from shame and humiliation.

The final victory is certainly ours.

Our Weapon, The Truth

2011-12-02T14:26:00.006-05:00

I wrote an essay that has now been published by The Occidental Observer. The outline is as follows:

Some White racialists seem to regard honesty as an impediment. This is a wrong attitude.
While propaganda such as the system uses is beyond our means, counter-propaganda, the disputation of the system's propaganda, is within our means.
By appealing to reason, we cannot win over the masses, but we can win over the rational minority that does not follow the crowd.
Our appeal will be smaller when we progress beyond counter-propaganda to the presentation of a new worldview. This means that our cause is destined to have an inner circle of completely enlightened people, and an outer circle of people that reject the system's propaganda but have not accomplished a revolution in thinking.
Radical social change is accomplished by militant minorities. The majority merely waits to see what happens. We can form our own militant minority by convincing thinking and idealistic people that our way of thinking is correct.
In order to cultivate this elite, we have to be careful in our rhetoric.

You can read the whole essay on The Occidental Observer.

Radio Enoch: A British Nationalist Clandestine Broadcaster of the 1970s

2011-12-01T01:45:00.054-05:00

This unlicensed "right-wing wireless" station broadcast in 1978-1979, and even attracted the attention of newspapers.

A front-page article from The Observer, 18 March 1979

Click here to listen.

Like The Voice of Tomorrow in the USA, Radio Enoch's programs were very well done, passable as professional broadcasting, except that the speakers on Radio Enoch all spoke in a West-Midlands accent rather than what used to be the standard BBC pronunciation.

The station of course was named after Enoch Powell, a conservative politician from the West Midlands best known for his Rivers of Blood speech in opposition to continued non-White immigration.

The broadcast includes discussion of the following:

1. Immigration of Hindus and Muslims creates problems with food in public schools.

2. Rhodesia: the situation is unstable because of conflict among "tribes," among whom the White Man had been the source of order and stability.

3. The need to curb the power of trade unions (discussion followed by anti-union song).

4. Praise of anti-Communist dictator Augusto Pinochet.

5. Complaint about opposition to nuclear power by ecologists, merging into a counter-accusation about overpopulation: "People are the pollutants."

I love the quality of the broadcast, and the material is interesting, better than anything that we get from "conservative" media today -- but that isn't saying much. The ideology presented by Radio Enoch is quite flawed.

Critique

Radio Enoch on Race

Radio Enoch and The Voice of Tomorrow are both explicitly concerned with race, but while The Voice of Tomorrow focuses entirely on race, Radio Enoch calls itself "right-wing" and puts race on the same footing as some other issues. Radio Enoch seems to have been perhaps even more concerned about labor unions than about race.

Also, the way Radio Enoch discusses race is not as direct as the discussion on The Voice of Tomorrow. Radio Enoch doesn't confront the listener with the worst aspects of multiracialism and ask, "Whatcha gonna do, Whitey?" (Which was more or less Enoch Powell's approach in the powerful Rivers of Blood speech.) Instead they have a woman bemoaning the complications of arranging school-lunches for Hindus and Muslims. Between these two clandestine political broadcasters you can discern the difference between conservative racism (such as it was in the 1970s) and race-radicalism.

Radio Enoch on Jews

The most telling moment comes in the interview with "a well known personality from southeast Africa" when the personality says that we need "to understand who our real enemies are." In other words, we have apparent enemies, and real enemies, somebody pulling the strings behind them.

The interviewer asks, "Whom do you believe them to be?"

The well-known personality responds: "Well they could be a conglomerate of the Marxists, Internationalists, and people who seek to govern through the medium of greed and power."

That is not a straight answer. A real, straightforward answer from a man that knows "who our real enemies are" does not begin with "Well they could be." Apparently the listeners are supposed to decipher his circumlocution to figure out that he means Jews. Our real enemies are, you know -- nudge nudge, wink wink -- reptilians perhaps. It's questionable how many people are really getting the point there.

Radio Enoch on Labor-Unions

The hostility of "true conservatism" toward organized labor was, I think, probably self-defeating.

Unionized British laborers mass-demonstrated in support of Enoch Powell.

Right-wing anti-unionism may have harmed the anti-immigration cause in Britain, since much of the groundswell of support for Enoch Powell's anti-immigration stance came from unionized White laborers, e.g. dockers and meat-porters. This kind of internal contradiction is the weakness of national-liberalism, in contrast to national-socialism.

The Slide into Kosher Conservatism

When the Jewish problem is never stated clearly, and when multiracialism is presented in terms of difficulties of implementation rather than as something unwanted in itself, and when it's all mixed with anti-Marxism and anti-unionism, the possibility of gradually pushing racial concerns out of conservative discourse entirely is obvious. With Jews gaining a foothold in "conservative" media during and since the 197os (and being all-too-eagerly received), that is what has happened. We have reached the point now that so-called conservatives will even accuse someone of being un-conservative if he tries to raise one of these neglected topics.

The Voice of Tomorrow: a White-Racialist Clandestine Broadcaster of a Quarter-Century Ago

2011-11-29T23:28:00.032-05:00

The Voice of Tomorrow was an unlicensed mediumwave and shortwave station of the late 1970s and 80s that achieved a certain notoriety with occasional* broadcasts. This particular recording was made by a listener to a broadcast on 1616kHz AM on 10 March 1985.

Click here to listen.**

The risks involved in do-it-yourself radio broadcasting were, potentially, a $10,000 fine and a year in prison, although in practice the penalty tended to be a fine of less than $1000, and confiscation of equipment.

This is the kind of extreme to which people were driven to try to get out a message of truth prior to the proliferation of Internet and podcasts, since it was very difficult to find a licensed station that would air pro-White programming, and in any case expensive -- not like Internet podcasting now, whereby anyone can reach thousands of people at very little cost.

Even though such erratic broadcasts were heard by relatively few people, it was inspiring to hear, or read in Popular Communications, that somebody was doing such a thing.

Who did this?

There has been speculation that Kevin Strom, a former broadcast engineer for The Voice of America who later created the American Dissident Voices radio program, may have been behind Voice of Tomorrow. The Wikipedia article about Strom even affirms this, alleging his insane first wife as the source. When I asked Strom about it in 1993, however, he denied any connection, and I have to say that the voices in the recording sound not a bit like him.

The self-identification, "White American Resistance Information Network," indicates that Voice of Tomorrow was put on not by Kevin Strom but by somebody associated with Tom Metzger, since White American Resistance is a name that Metzger used, later changed to White Aryan Resistance.

The quality of the production, judging by this small sample, seems to have been quite good. It might be worthwhile if the possessor of the original studio recordings would digitize them and make them available on Internet.

____________________________
* It is impossible to maintain a consistent broadcast schedule on "AM" or shortwave at any significant wattage without attracting a visit from the Federal Communications Commission. Unlicensed broadcasting on FM was always much safer than on medium and shortwave. The FCC has always paid much less attention to FM pirates, probably because the signal at those frequencies generally crosses no state-boundary (and thus is arguably not under Federal jurisdiction), and certainly has no effect on international broadcast agreements. With the Reagan Administration's cuts to the FCC's budget, flagrant regular unlicensed FM broadcasting grew in the 1980s, and again in the 1990s. The prevalent theory about prosecution of unlicensed broadcasters on FM is that it is a very low priority for the FCC and only gains priority if the FCC receives complaints: of course a broadcaster with a racial message is very likely to become the target of complaints.

** The recording comes from "Mike Brooker's DX Dharma."

Paul de Lagarde: Banking should be a Government Enterprise

2011-11-27T20:07:00.021-05:00

Paul de Lagarde (1827 - 1891) was a professor at the University of Göttingen and highly respected in the field of ancient Near-Eastern languages. He was chiefly concerned with elucidation of the Bible, but also wrote books about the ancient Persians and Armenians, among others. He urged that Christianity be purged of Semitic elements.

He was a member of the Conservative Party, and the original proponent (in 1885) of the mass-deportation of Jews from Europe to Madagascar.

Paul de Lagarde and the Banks

Alfred Rosenberg

Völkischer Beobachter, 8 May 1921

Not infrequently have nationalist leaders had to struggle with the reproach: “Why do you people come forth with your demands only now? Why didn’t you tell us this before?” And always the response then must be that almost all the demands were already made decades ago, but nobody paid attention to those lone strugglers, since the entire world was intoxicated with cheap slogans and liberal mantras.

Even nationalization, which means governmental control of the entire banking structure as the fundamental prerequisite for a national economy that would be independent from Jewish speculators, is an old demand. It is also an honor-bound duty to remember in this context the man who was one of the most determined and righteous Germans that the 19^th century gave us: Paul de Lagarde.

According to Lagarde, the Reich had to secure for itself, in addition to all other monopolies, the monopoly of money and credit:

This corresponds to tithing for a mass,* first in regard to the fact that the money and the credit valued equally as money [are] used by all the world, so that what is meant to serve all according to their share in the economic life of the state is likewise soaked up proportionally....

The postal service, telegraph, railroad, are all completely in the hands of the Reich. The transactions of people with each other and the movement of wares has grown into such a big thing that there is nobody that does not take part in it. Everything however that concerns all of us is the prerogative of the state. Therefore, just like the three modes of transaction, so should money and credit be under the administration of the government.^[1]

How to implement the necessary arrangements is easy to discover:

If the the so-called Reichsbank – a private institution strongly entangled with Jewry – has main and branch-offices throughout the entire Reich, so too can a genuine, completely judain-free Reichsbank – a state institution – have main and branch offices throughout the entire Reich. If there are post-office savings-banks, so can there also be Reich savings-banks.^[2]

Furthermore, the monopoly on credit will bring in more money for the government, while cutting out the noxious intermediary Jews:

What the Reich gains, the Jews of course will not gain.^[3]

A further advantage of the monopoly on credit would be the limitation of financial trading. Many shady stockmarket-players would refrain from their unclean business if Reich officials had the right to investigate their arbitrages [Differenzgeschäfte].

The need of creditworthy borrowers for money would be satisfied by impartial officials of the Reich, not by bloodsuckers of foreign nationality, whereas loans would be denied to unreliable and weak hands, and through the latter, only seemingly harsh measures, would that misery be averted which the Jewish money-man so often calls forth now because he lends to rash youth in the expectation of eventually forcing the borrower's honorable but poor family to cover his ill-considered debts to preserve their reputation....^[4]

Compensation would not be granted to the owners of currently outstanding debts. The sponge has soaked up entirely enough so as no longer to be in need of water. Whomever anger about our injustice would drive from our borders, yes indeed he should go; he does us a favor by his absence.^[5]

As one sees, Lagarde discerned long ago the point where the lever should be placed so as to move the German people to recovery. With only a few others he stood alone; the octopus of the banks however embraced the folk with tentacles becoming ever tighter. And thus the German people entered the war in 1914 and – something that worried the cadre of resistance against a world of enemies – was handed over to the Jews’ banks. The Ballin-Rathenau System subjected Germany to usury and undermined the foundation of the German house. Discontent grew. This discontent was in turn stoked by Jews and, with the help of all the Jew media, urged onto the wrong track. As Rathenau later cynically stated: world history would have lost its meaning if Germany had won!^[6] These words no German should forget.

About Ballin-Rathenau I refer to the disturbing book by D. Arnim: Die Juden in den Kriegsgesellschaften. What is to be noted concerning the banks, is that 280 Jewish bank and exchange houses constitute the basis of Berlin’s entire monetary system, among them the firms Warschauer, Mendelsohn, Bleichröder, Oppenheim, Heinemann, and Goldschmidt. The 100 banks of Frankfurt are almost all Jewish. Hamburg has around 40, Hannover 30, Munich 20, Leipzig 12, Nuremberg 25 Jew banks. Besides those, another 400 of Germany’s banks are found in the hands of the Chosen People. The situation is exactly the same in all other countries.

The government takeover of the banks – provided that German men comprise the government – is the first nationalist demand after the dismissal of all Jewish civil servants.

Among the most courageous pioneers of this national-socialist idea should be counted, even ahead of others, Paul de Lagarde. German posterity will erect a monument to him.

____________________________

1. Deutsche Schriften, p. 378.

2. Ibid., p. 497. Judainfrei seems to be a word that Lagarde invented. Since Judain would mean some distilled Jewish essence, Lagarde's word judainfrei means free of Jewish poison. That word appears in the essay, "Die nächsten Pflichten deutscher Politik" (1885). Friedrich Nietzsche was probably in some way imitating Lagarde when he coined the word moralinfrei (free of moral poison), which appears in Der Antichrist (1888).

3. Ibid., p. 498.

4. Ibid., p. 498.

5. Ibid., p. 499.

6. Ibid., p. 499. What Rathenau said in the fall of 1914 was: “The moment will never come when the Kaiser and his Paladins on their white chargers ride victorious through the Brandenburg Gate. On that day world history would have lost all meaning.” Ludendorff understood this as an expression of defeatism, but Rathenau’s defenders have claimed that it only indicated his disapproval of the Kaiser. It seems to show a lack of enthusiasm for the German cause in any case.

* It says, Dies entspricht den an eine fließende Quelle für das Ordinarium zu stellenden Anforderungen. This apparent reference to Christian church-customs was rather mysterious for me. If you have a better translation than my rendering please suggest it.

Was Hitler Responsible for World War II?

2011-10-22T14:54:00.044-04:00

Recently I heard Jamie Kelso blaming Adolf Hitler for World War II. Hitler invaded Poland: therefore Hitler was responsible for World War II. So simple! Well, it's not so simple. I was kind of flabbergasted that somebody supposedly a White Nationalist and even a leading figure for that cause had never taken the trouble to get his history straight.

Just in broad outline, this is why, in my view, Adolf Hitler was not responsible for World War II:

1. The Treaty of Versailles gave Germany an indefensible eastern border.

2. Germany had to be concerned about the military threat posed by its eastern neighbors, especially the Soviet Union.

3. Germany's efforts to reach an accommodation with Poland, so that the indefensible border would no longer be a problem, were thwarted, largely as a result of British meddling.

4. Worse than that, there were some positively jingoistic Poles. It seems to have fallen down the memory-hole that Poland occupied part of Czechoslovakia simultaneously as Germany occupied the western part. And indeed there were some atrocities against ethnic Germans in Poland.

5. While Germany's effort to make a defensive arrangement with Poland had been foiled, Britain began sabre-rattling over the German occupation of western Czechoslovakia* (but not over the Polish occupation of another part of Czechoslovakia).

6. Under the circumstances, with the looming threat of a war in the west, it made very good geopolitical sense for Germany to cultivate good relations with the USSR and to partition Poland with the USSR so as to create a short and defensible eastern frontier far from Berlin, while eliminating Britain's ally from Germany's rear.

7. The cross-border Polish attacks on German radio stations, which constituted the immediate provocation for the German invasion of Poland, were probably not an elaborate hoax as alleged at Nuremberg. There were cross-border attacks at many locations, and the only evidence that any of them was fraudulently staged was the Nuremberg testimony of one man, the mysterious Alfred Naujocks.

"Powers behind Roosevelt"

8. It was crazy for Britain and France to declare war on Germany because of Poland. Neville Chamberlain complained to Joseph Kennedy that he had been pushed into it by the USA and the International Jews. (This was then related by Kennedy to Admiral James Forrestal, who wrote it in his diary.) Additional information about how the Roosevelt Administration pushed for another European war (primarily through financial pressure on Britain) can be read in FDR:The Other Side of the Coin, by Congressman Hamilton Fish.

The continuation of the war by Britain after the fall of France, which facilitated the European war's development into another World War with American involvement, was even more crazy.

Historian Stephen Ambrose said: "The British had as many problems, if not more, in recovering from victory, as the Germans did in recovering from defeat. What did Britain get out of the war? Not very much. Not very much. She lost a very great deal. I suppose that if you want to look at it positively, she got a moral claim on the world as the nation that had stood against Hitler alone for a year."

That "moral claim" for Britain's policy in World War II of course only holds water if one accepts the demonization of Adolf Hitler and the Third Reich, including the proposition that it was worthwhile for Britain to sacrifice her blood and treasure so that Poland and the rest of Eastern Europe could be under Soviet rather than German hegemony.

In summation, Hitler's actions were all reasoned responses to dangers and provocations. It was Britain that behaved unreasonably, at Jewish and American instigation. Without that unreason in British foreign policy, there would have been no Second World War.
________________________
* Chamberlain had conceded at Munich in 1938 that Germany should be allowed to annex the Sudetenland, the mountainous western fringe of Czechoslovakia that was inhabited mainly by ethnic Germans. Hitler may have made in perfectly good faith the agreement which Chamberlain took back to Britain and waved around declaring, "Peace in our time!" But then, after Germany occupied the ethnic-German areas, the Czechoslovakian government collapsed. At that point Germany occupied Bohemia and Moravia (the Czech area), while Hungary and Poland occupied Slovakia. It would not have been prudent for Germany to refrain from occupying Bohemia and Moravia, because in that power-vacuum, some power, perhaps even the Soviet Union, was likely to move in. This response to an emergency, however, only a very short time after Hitler had told Chamberlain that Germany had no further territorial ambitions in Europe, was easily misrepresented as deliberate mockery of the agreement with Chamberlain, and it was used to humiliate Chamberlain and goad him into an aggressive posture. Incidentally, Bohemia and Moravia were never annexed into the Third Reich: they remained a "protectorate." Czechs also were treated very well by the Germans, at least until the British instigated the assassination of Reinhard Heydrich by some Czechs: that made the relationship more difficult.

Finance-Capitalism vs. Honor and Folk

2011-10-15T23:43:00.068-04:00

Introduction

The focus here is not on Jews or Marxism or the Underman, although all are mentioned. Rosenberg here is focused on the fact that Capitalism is destructive to the national ethos. This seems to be a more fundamental problem than Jews, Marxists, and the ascent of the Underman. This essay is about how the Germans must straighten out their own ethos.

Rosenberg says that the Germans must get back their sense of honor, if they are to survive as a people. The honor to which Rosenberg refers includes unwillingness to suffer grievous insults and unjust treatment of one's folk. Where Rosenberg uses the term German-consciousness (Deutschbewußtsein) it amounts to a synonym for honor.

When pursuit of money becomes the highest value, it undermine the sense of nationality and the sense of honor. Rosenberg sees Capitalism as thus preparing the way for the rule of the Underman. Furthermore, he sees the Social-Democrats as deliberately using Capitalism for that purpose.

With a quote from Frederick the Great, Rosenberg implies that the corrosion of national honor under Capitalism was what had induced Germany to accept a highly unfavorable armistice in 1918. After that, the attack on national honor was continued with more direct means, such as inflicting guilt for alleged war-crimes, and presentation of entertainment that humiliates the nation.

There is a significant parallel here with what has happened since the United States' ignominious retreat from Vietnam. We too need to change our way of thinking.

Hadding Scott, 2011

Paragraphs 1-5: On the symbiosis of Marxism and Finance that brought Germany to ruin, and the mendacity of newspapers.

Paragraphs 6-11: The rule of the Underman in Germany.

Paragraphs 12-20: The origin of the national-socialist worldview.

Germany's Future:

The National-Socialist Movement
Alfred Rosenberg

Völkischer Beobachter, 26-27 February 1928

Translation by Hadding Scott, 2011

We are all more or less enthusiastic readers of the Münchener Neuesten Nachrichten (Munich's Latest News). We know that this international newspaper has established correspondents in all states; therefore we were quite astonished a few days ago to read in it that only now was it learned that any relationship existed between Marxism and World Capitalism. It says that the world was advised of that only after the announcement appeared in the current issue of the Süddeutsche Monatshefte^[1] three weeks ago!

One can perhaps accept such admissions with some humor. Nevertheless we must state that it is an insolence beyond compare that in a city where this problem was fought and battled eight years ago^[2] under the eyes of the editorial staffs of the biggest newspapers, only today is it announced in this newspaper that something of that sort occurred. This is only one example among thousands of how the so-called national upper class of the folk and the so-called "major media" behave toward vital questions, and how they try to silence every new rising power as soon as it touches a problem that hitherto was considered off-limits. Here in Munich hundreds upon hundreds of gatherings have taken place; every day our newspaper struggles to enlighten the public about questions that here in the Münchener Neueste Nachrichten are supposedly being revealed now for the first time.^[3]

Moltke the Elder

In this regard we must declare that even we, who struggle as a people's movement for this enlightenment, are not the first to illuminate this relationship between Marxism and Capitalism. We know thanks to those Germans of the past who already indicated these things with a prophetic eye: there was the great Moltke, who, seeing the dress-rehearsal for the Bolshevik Revolution, the Paris Commune, declared openly in the Reichstag that the Paris Communards had stormed the small businesses while the palaces of the Rothschilds were protected by special garrisons; meanwhile Eugen Duehring and Paul de Lagarde were lonely prophets who did not reach the mass of the people. Only now our age is called to bring their names again to honor. But even the leaders of the Social-Democracy have known very clearly not only today but since decades ago what a close relationship their movement had to those powers that today rule the entire world. In the year 1903 the big capitalist and Social-Democrat Paul Singer^[4] proclaimed in the Reichstag with open cynicism that the Social-Democratic Party would protect the stock-exchange in order thereby to hasten the social revolution. Marx declared that he supported free trade because it would cause the social revolution to erupt^[5].

The leaders knew very clearly that the stock market and its capital represented a subversive element in national and economic life. On 9 November 1918 came the test of whether these arrangements had been understood merely as ways to undermine the old system. The Social-Democratic leaders did not impose a heavy tax on the stock market, which they knew to be subversive; rather they proclaimed brotherhood with it before the entire people. The Berliner Tageblatt^[6] today can dare before the eyes of millions of workers to call Herr Scheidemann^[7] a friend and comrade in the common struggle. In fall 1924 the Vorwärts^[8] ventured, as the abhorrent Dictate of Versailles was hung over Germany on behalf of stock-finance, to present the rising sun^[9] and the dollar-sign together, and proudly to proclaim that this development lay in the evolution of Social-Democratic politics. Since that day German workers and the German people have labored and paid eight million goldmarks per day for the satisfaction of these brothers and friends of Social-Democracy.

If earlier some great men had indicated the danger of the undermining of German-consciousness, they nonetheless did not reach the people with it. After 9 November 1918, in the midst of the deepest catastrophe of the German people, arose the uneasy question of how this collapse was possible, and which powers had had a part in it. The feeling was in the air even in small and middle-sized cities at that time, but nowhere more clearly and consciously than in Munich, that this collapse could not have been an accident, not a military failure, but was the consequence of a movement consciously directed, determined by instinct, and pushed for decades.

If today we look back on our eight years of struggle, we are entitled to say that eventually it will be designated a political miracle that, in the midst of the deepest catastrophe of a people, its most conscious element picks itself up undiscouraged so as to go about constructing a new state based on a new theory of government [Staatsgedanken]. Everybody sensed at the time that we were living in one of those periods when the old [order] was shattered, the old society reduced to rubble, and old traditions had to give way to new ideas of life, and we have sensed looking back that, while such epochs of revaluation have often occurred in our contemporary history, like deep chasms separating different ways of life, nonetheless an essential difference exists between the past and the present.

Today we stand before the fact that all powers of the Underman have been set free so as to destroy [vernichten] the last substance, in moral and racial regards, of Germandom. The 9th of November 1918 signified the rising of the yeast, the ferment of the scum that is present in every people, which through envy and high treason seizes power, and today this less-valuable Underman rules over the valuable forces of the German people.

In what manner all racial and moral values of the German nation today are being deliberately buried, we can observe daily in the Berlin press, in Berlin's weekly newspapers and monthly magazines, whose assault is directed no longer as previously against certain externalities; instead, at stake are the deepest and greatest values that in general have sustained the German people. We can see that in the Jewish-run "international newspapers" the German officer corps is depicted as a cesspool of the nation, and that it is very often said: beat the German officer corps to death; only then is room created for a German culture. In the Jewish Weltbühne (World Stage) Ignaz Wrobel^[10] calls German soldiers "patriotic asses, brutal death-officers, and progeny of a Ludendorff ... beastly soldiers, bulldogs and sergeants of the Kaiser's army." By no German court has this man been brought to account; he was the Paris correspondent of the Vossische Zeitung^[11].

Notorious traitors to our country sit on kangaroo committees of inquiry and judge whether German soldiers in dire straits had shot spies before the court could get involved. We witness the remarkable fact that in all these "kangaroo murders" it is not investigated whether the one shot really was a spy or not. We see it as a deliberate trampling of the national sense of honor when men who have bled from sixty-four wounds are later locked up as "kangaroo murderers" in cells where previously a sex-killer sat.

Those are the signs that consciously and deliberately, day by day, something of the core of the nation is being eroded in order to destroy it so that in the future resistance will be no longer possible. A former president of the Senate, Baumbach, says that today justice has become the maidservant of politics. This statement is consistent with the brutal frankness of the National-Socialists. And if we ask ourselves, how is it possible that today all German values are thus trampled underfoot, we must answer: Because we have forgotten that without the idea of honor no folk can exist.

Today we stand before the fact that the highest values of Germandom are no longer present in the life of the state and in the administration of justice. The Germanic legal system developed from self-help to the honor of the clan and to the honor of the tribe, and then the defense of honor was taken over by the state, which bears legitimacy to the degree that it is able to defend the honor of a totality. We can see that an insult to Germandom could be prosecuted by a government attorney. We can also see that the Weltbühne is able to speak of a "Whore Germania" without anyone lifting a finger to seize this lad by the collar. That is the deepest calamity that a people can experience.

Nevertheless on 9 November 1918 in thousands of Germans something new came to life, and the highest value arose, which should bind us all together today. Here for the first time was born that which appears to us today as the highest and holiest: a racial and type-based folkdom.

This worldview led us not only to contemplate today's situation under a new illumination, but also to view history in a different light. Thus we see that the frequently mentioned Light from the East has faded, that all culture-creating deeds have progressed from West to East, and it is certain that before the Germanic peoples founded all the states of Europe, quite long before that, Nordic waves went over the Alps to Rome, Greece, Persia, and India,^[12] where racially characteristic cultures and racially characteristic art arose, and that only the Germanic Eveningland ever created similar values again, although in new forms.

For the National-Socialist movement two fundamental demands derive from that: the unconditional vigorous defense of the race and the unconditional defense of national honor. The former is the physical substance, the latter the innermost value. What economic program and political possibilities will result later, no man can know. Ultimately it is not programs that we want to cultivate. At the beginning and end of the National-Socialist movement stands the Germanic person, outwardly healthy and inwardly valuable. From this fundamental awareness again two other demands result: active nationalism, which means the securing of the entire territory against hostile neighbors, the protection of seventy-million Germans amid the various races and peoples of Europe, and in another direction, a just-as-active socialism, which means securing the individual against any exploitation by private powers.

Nationalism pertains mainly to foreign policy while socialism is domestic fulfillment [Ergänzung]. Corresponding manifestations are the army and the police. We want to bring together the two currents that splash around the middle, the strongly nationalist movement and the strongly socialist movement purged of Marxism. Therefore National-Socialism distinguishes itself from the religion of the Second Reich -- from National-Liberalism -- which is distinguished on the one side by unlimited exploitation, on the other by charity. On one side the ladle of finance scoops away small savings; on the other side nursing homes and hospitals appear. This is most evident today in America, where exploitation has already become a condition that is encouraged. The stock-jobber who has robbed a people for 60 years, in the 65th year builds a hospital for his victims.

Against this age led today by Marxism we have declared a struggle to the end. National-Socialism clearly distinguishes itself in terms of worldview, and cultivates personality in the knowledge that it is soil-bound and race-bound, and that its ultimate goal is service to the organism of the folk [Volksorganismus]. If somebody declares to us that the German should sacrifice himself for the great European Idea, we declare that all Europe could go to ruin if the German folk must suffer harm.

Anti-White Propaganda

Whenever such thoughts are pronounced, then come the Men of Darkness [Dunkelmänner] from all camps and say, That is idolatry of the nation. They, who today have only one idol, their party and their moneybag, who look on daily as all German values are trampled in the mud, dare to proclaim that. Indeed while the film about Luther was banned, the same ministry declared that it found no reason to ban the Negro opera Jonny Spielt Auf (Jonny Strikes Up). This disgraceful Black piece is being presented at sixty German opera-houses. It culminates in the glorification of the Negro atop the globe carrying the stolen violin of a German, and at his side an Aryan girl that has been raped [ein vergewaltigtes arisches Mädchen].


Luther (1928) with Eugen Klöpfer, was banned by the Weimar Republic.

Several weeks ago a wonderful book appeared, the Briefe (Letters) of Houston Stewart Chamberlain, that great man, to whom we owe a fine interpretation [Weltbild] of our history, and who at the end of his life strongly supported Adolf Hitler. We see that this tireless fighter for Germany's honor and greatness knew precisely the weakness up in the diplomatic classes, and with a bleeding heart how he complained that, while strong personalities were creatively active in all fields, nonetheless in the upper classes a decadence prevailed that could result in catastrophe. "The day is approaching," he wrote, "when that society will be swept away. By what method this will happen, I know not, but it must be and it will therefore be."

The National-Socialist movement will always acknowledge that the point of origin already contained within it all possibilities for the future. It cannot be otherwise. If one pursues a definite direction from the start and beholds the vision of a new state, one will be able to find many fine things along the way. But fulfillment remains already determined in the point of origin, in the preservation of the type-based folk, in the preservation of those character-values that for millennia have been fruitful everywhere that Germanic life determined them. If all great men of the German past -- Bismarck, Freiherr vom Stein, Lagarde -- could look down on this honorable, character-filled struggle that our movement has been conducting for eight years, they would bless this movement. Frederick the Great, in the greatest need after a lost battle, once wrote the following words:

"Never will I experience the moment that would compel me to conclude a disadvantageous peace. No speech, however clever, will bring me to the point of undersigning my disgrace. I will either have myself buried among the drummers of my fatherland, or, if Destiny, which persecutes me, begrudges me even this consolation, I myself will make an end to my misfortune, if it will be no longer possible for me to endure it."

And true to the legacy of the greatest German king, we National-Socialists say: Never will come the time when we would make a shameful peace with the honorless worldview of Democracy and of Marxism. Better to pack up the whole movement than to submit. If today one speaks of a German united front, we recognize that it means the National-Socialist German Workers' Party.
______________________
1. The Süddeutsche Monatshefte (South-German Monthly) was a monarchist periodical that was unfriendly toward the NSDAP but shared with the NSDAP the views that Germany had not been guilty for the war and had lost due to a "stab in the back."

2. Rosenberg here refers to the short-lived "Bavarian Soviet Republic" (April-May 1919) which was quashed by the Freikorps and still-loyal elements of the German Army.

3. The dominant political party in 1920s Bavaria, the Bayerische Volkspartei (Bavarian People's Party) represented views similar to those of the Süddeutsche Monatshefte. The editors of the Münchener Neuesten Nachrichten may have suddenly realized in 1928 that it behooved them to treat those views with some respect. The fact that the ban on Adolf Hitler's participation in politics had ended the previous year may or may not be relevant.

4. Paul Singer (1844-1911) was a Jew prominent in the Sozialdemokratische Partei Deutschlands in the late 19th century, even during the period when it was banned.

5. "But, in general, the protective system of our day is conservative, while the free trade system is destructive. It breaks up old nationalities and pushes the antagonism of the proletariat and the bourgeoisie to the extreme point. In a word, the free trade system hastens the social revolution. It is in this revolutionary sense alone, gentlemen, that I vote in favor of free trade." (Karl Marx, Discours sur la Question du Libre Échange, Brussels, February 1848; this passage is found in Florence Wischnewetzky's1888 English translation on page 42. )

6. The Berliner Tageblatt (Berlin Daily Paper) (1872-1939) was primarily a newspaper catering to business.

7. Philipp Scheidemann (1865– 1939) was a prominent Social-Democrat who proclaimed what came to be known as the Weimar Republic on 9 November 1918, following the abdication of Kaiser Wilhelm II, which had been expected to lead to the accession to the throne of one of his grandsons. The declaration of the republic was Scheidemann's own unilateral decision. When the NSDAP came to power in 1933, Scheidemann left Germany.

8. The Vorwärts (Forward) was the official newspaper of the Social-Democratic Party.

9. The rising sun was a symbol used by the Social-Democratic Party. The NSDAP did not fail to subsume this poweful symbol into its own propaganda, placing a swastika on the sun.

10. Ignaz Wrobel was a pseudonym of Jewish journalist Kurt Tucholsky.

11. The Vossische Zeitung (Voss Times) (1721–1934) was a previously venerable Berlin newspaper of the liberal bourgeoisie that was perceived after the First World War as not very patriotic.

12. To say that Aryan man passed "over the Alps to Rome, Greece, Persia, and India" is a bit different from the late twentieth century's mainstream scholarly view of where the original Aryan homeland was and the routes that the Aryans took on their way to creating those cultures. There is however some evidence that the Aryans could have originated in Northern Europe. The greatest concentration of blonds in the world is in Sweden and Finland, and the modern language that most resembles the theorized original Aryan language is only a short distance away, in Lithuania. Only the route to Rome is likely to have involved crossing the Alps.

Brain and Politics

2011-09-27T00:55:00.006-04:00

What happens when the abnormal brain becomes common? Does it form its own political party?

This study of the relationship between political orientation and brain-form, based on questionnaires and MRI scans of the brains of 90 students, was conducted by Professor Geraint Rees of University College, London.

The results showed a strong correlation between between political belief and two specific regions of the brain. The grey matter of the anterior cingulate was significantly thicker amongst those who described themselves as liberal, or left wing, while the amygdala - an area associated with emotional processing - was larger in those who regarded themselves as conservative or right wing.

"It's a remarkable finding" says professor Rees. "We were very surprised to find two areas of the brain from which we could predict political attitudes." [Tom Feilden, BBC Radio 4, 28 December 2020]

Some Noteworthy Physical Characteristics of the Negro (and their relevance for self-defense)

2011-09-15T01:46:00.019-04:00

The ninth edition of the Encyclopaedia Britannica lists some key physical characteristics of the Negro; of particular interest to us are points 3, 8, and 9:

(1) the abnormal length of the arm, which in the erect position sometimes reaches the knee-pan, and which on an average exceeds that of the Caucasian by about 2 inches; (2) prognathism, or projection of the jaws (index number of facial angle about 70, as compared with the Caucasian 82); (3) weight of brain, as indicating cranial capacity, 35 ounces (highest gorilla 20. average European 45); (4) full black eye, with black iris and yellowish sclerotic coat, a very marked feature; (5) short flat snub nose, deeply depressed at the base or frontal suture, broad at extremity, with dilated nostrils and concave ridge; (6) thick protruding lips, plainly showing the inner red surface; (7) very large zygomatic arches—high and prominent cheek bones; (8) exceedingly thick cranium, enabling the Negro to butt with the head and resist blows which would inevitably break any ordinary European's skull; (9) correspondingly weak lower limbs, terminating in a broad flat foot with low instep, divergent and somewhat prehensile great toe, and heel projecting backwards ("lark heel"); (10) complexion deep brown or blackish, and in some cases even distinctly black, due not to any special pigment, as is often supposed, but merely to the greater abundance of the coloring matter in the Malpighian mucous membrane between the inner or true skin and the epidermis or scarf skin; (11) short, black hair, eccentrically elliptical or almost flat in section, and distinctly woolly, not merely frizzly, as Prichard supposed on insufficient evidence;' (12) thick epidermis, cool, soft, and velvety to the touch, mostly hairless, and emitting a peculiar rancid odor, compared by Pruner Bey to that of the buck goat; (13) frame of medium height, thrown somewhat out of the perpendicular by the shape of the pelvis, the spine, the backward projection of the head, and the whole anatomical structure; (14) the cranial sutures, which close much earlier in the Negro than in other races.

The Negro has a small brain (77% of the European average, by weight) encased in an "exceedingly thick cranium." This has implications. Aside from the obvious fact that less brain-matter implies less-profound brain-processes, it means that the Negro has a distinct advantage so far as receiving blows to the head is concerned. His skull is able to "resist blows which would inevitably break any ordinary European's skull." Marquess of Queensberry rules therefore place any White person at a serious disadvantage when engaged in a violent struggle with a Negro. Striking the head is not the way to defend oneself against a Negro attacker.

Fortunately, Encyclopaedia Britannica also tells us that however strong the Negro's skull may be, his lower limbs are "correspondingly weak." He has "weak lower limbs" (in terms of bone-structure) and "a broad flat foot." So, if you must defend yourself against a Negro attacker, the method of self-defense is clear and race-specific: attack the lower legs and feet. That was advice that my father, at one time a bus-driver in a majority-Negro city, often imparted to me: "Kick 'em in the shins! Stamp on their feet!"

Recently my father's advice was famously validated by a pregnant White woman in Philadelphia.

This woman broke a Negro criminal's lower leg with a side-kick (following up with the less obvious technique of twisting his foot to aggravate the existing fracture). She happens to have been trained in kickboxing so that her kick was perfectly delivered, but the main basis of her success is that she attacked the Negro where he was vulnerable. It does not take formal training or advanced technique to learn to kick lower legs and stamp feet so as to inflict serious pain. If you must send your children to school where there are many Blacks, you might want to instruct them in appropriate self-defense.

Here is a demonstration of some self-defense techniques that exploit the weaknesses of a Negro's lower-legs and feet.

Blacks will always be dangerous because of their impulsiveness, but let's not live in excessive fear of these people. Let's not have them walk all over us or our children because of the false impression that they are invincible in a fight. They have the advantage only if we give it to them.

Enoch Powell's Rivers of Blood Speech

2011-08-20T22:56:00.011-04:00

Lord Lester QC, who says that he "contributed to" Roy Jenkins' speech setting Britain onto the path of multiculturalism rather than assimilation, is a Jew. (The Jewish stake in such a policy is clear enough.)

Eric Clapton on Enoch Powell and Immigration (1976).

"Ethnic Minorities, it has to be said"

2011-08-09T08:23:00.002-04:00

"Ethnic minorities" is a bit of a euphemism. The arson and looting in the Britain are being perpetrated primarily by members of non-White immigrant populations that have been encouraged to immigrate to Britain since World War II, not European ethnic minorities..

We can hope that Britain's Black and Brown immigrant populations will continue to make their presence intolerable until the logical result occurs.

"The Political Testament of Adolf Hitler," a.k.a. "The Hitler-Bormann Documents": a well known Fraud

2011-07-30T05:33:00.010-04:00

I am posting this in response to a well known blogger, a Philosophiae Doctor, who has undertaken, in response to one section of Anders Breivik's "Manifesto," to write an apologia for Adolf Hitler. In so doing he has ventured into a field that seems to be my focus much more than his. He seems to be unaware of the minefield of questionable sources in this subject-area and has unfortunately stepped onto one of them, the so-called Hitler-Bormann Documents.

This information comes from David Irving and is dated 2 December 1983:

As for the JC's own helpful postscript quoting from "Testament of Adolf Hitler - Hitler--Bormann Documents (February - April 1945)" published in 1962 with an introduction from Hugh Trevor Roper, may I warn modern historians against this source? These "bunker conversations" alleged to be by Martin Bormann are as spurious as the Hitler Diaries*.

Several years ago their Swiss owner [the late François Genoud] gave me a complete copy and they turned out to be largely in his handwriting, amplifying, he told me, the rather thin typescript which existed only in French!

Bormann's own diary published by the Soviet author Lev Bezymenski establishes that he was not even present on some of the evenings concerned.

Hardly a serious source for historians.

This "political testament," a collection of fictitious conversations, is not to be confused with Hitler's last will and testament, dictated to Traudl Junge on 29 April 1945.

The forger of the Hitler-Bormann Documents, François Genoud, was also the promulgator of Hitler's Table Talk (Hitlers Tischgespräche), which seems to be genuine, although I understand that there are some distortions in the French and English translations, particularly where Hitler expresses views on Christianity.**

____________________

* David Irving's most famous exploit was the debunking of an alleged set of diaries written by Adolf Hitler.

** If anybody would be so generous as to supply me with a German edition of Hitlers Tischgespräche, it would be most helpful!

A Few Words about Cajun Music

2011-07-12T20:25:00.019-04:00

As of 2003, the last time I was in southwesten Louisiana -- Breaux Bridge, Lafayette, Opelousas, St. Martinsville, Eunice -- I found that it was unusual to see anybody not White in a Cajun music club. While the streets outside might be teeming with Blacks, you would find few to none inside where Cajun music was being played. Cajun music is the music of the Cajuns, who are French-descended White people of southern Louisiana.

The French-speaking Blacks of Louisiana, who are not in any sense Cajuns, have their own music with different origins, called Zydeco.

I have read that the "Swamp Cajuns" of southeastern Louisiana are a bit mixed, but I have no firsthand knowledge of this and I am told by a friend from that region that it is not true. I can attest that in south-central and southwestern Louisiana, the people called Prairie Cajuns are very White.

The Cajuns today are not only of French but of German and to a smaller degree, Spanish ancestry, since Spain owned Louisiana 1764-1803. The first Germans in Louisiana were Swabian farmers invited by the Spanish monarchy to settle and farm near New Orleans so that the city would have a convenient food-supply. German names acquired a new French spelling that approximated the German pronunciation; for example Buchwald became Boucvalt.

There was a substantial German immigration to Louisiana in the 19th century. The Germans who immigrated to mostly French-speaking areas learned French and became "Cajuns." They also brought with them the diatonic accordion, which became the signature instrument of Cajun music.

It is not hard to find faces that look like French, German, and Spanish ethnic types at a genuine Cajun music event that is staged and attended by real Cajun people. But even as of recently, you will see few to no Blacks. I have a certain affection for the Cajun people and their culture, because they are one of the few remaining pockets of some semblance of a White Volksgemeinschaft in the United States.

That is why I found this to be particularly offensive:

It is a CD cover showing Cléoma Breaux, a prominent Cajenne performer of the 1920s and 30s, seated very close to a Negro, as if they would perform together and were in some kind of partnership. The cover is enough not only to keep me from buying that CD, but to make me have a bad opinion of Cléoma Breaux-- if this CD cover were my only source of information about her. I would be squinting at the image to try to discern if maybe she was a mulatta.

Cléoma Breaux

Miss Breaux does not appear to be of mixed race.

In fact the CD cover is an altered image. Here is the original image of Cléoma Breaux, seated next to her future husband Joe Falcon. Both of them are Prairie Cajuns.

Whoever created that image of a White Cajun woman seated close to that Negro has no respect for the Cajuns, and has used the packaging of a CD as an opportunity to create the illusion of a race-mixing past that never was. Had this been done during Cléoma Breaux's lifetime I have a feeling that she and her family would have complained bitterly. The product bearing that image would have been unmarketable probably in most of the United States, and certainly in Louisiana.

Obviously you cannot believe everything that you hear or read, and not even what you see anymore, so ardent are the enemies of our race to falsify history.

The first Cajun music ever recorded was Allons à Lafayette ("Let's Go to Lafayette") recorded by Cléoma Breaux and Joe Falcon in 1928. Lafayette of course is a metropolis of the Prairie-Cajun region of Louisiana.

Dr. Goebbels prescribes the Proper Attitude toward Jews

2011-06-18T02:31:00.033-04:00

I notice that Calvin College also offers a translation of this essay, but their translation is rather loose. For example, Kabalistik is translated as simply "abilities." Jewish trickery is more like it.

Most of Dr. Goebbels' advice could be summarized as, Don't argue with the Jews. Don't worry about what they might say about you. Don't be distracted by them. Stay on the attack. Perhaps this was why Dr. Goebbels called his newspaper Der Angriff (Attack).

An effective form of attack, according to Dr. Goebbels, is to expose malefactors in national life as Jews. Dr. William Pierce, whose first tabloid Attack! even imitated the logo of Dr. Goebbels' newspaper, put this advice into practice by compiling Who Rules America?, which documented that the people controlling the mass-media of news and entertainment (the real seat of power) in the United States were almost all Jews.

In the United States, probably moreso than in Germany, this simple exposition is followed by an uphill battle to explain why the wielding of power by Jews is a bad thing, since Americans unlike Europeans do not automatically see Jews as outsiders but regard them as "Americans like everybody else" -- if not as God's Chosen (a superstition that hardly exists in Europe).

A point of particular importance for Americans is no. 6, that Jewish power can only be broken "politically," in other words, through the use of governmental power. It is easy to see the promotion of "anti-statism" among patriotic factions in the United States as an attempt by Jews to forestall application of this insight.

They should not lie! -- Dr. Goebbels, 10 February 1933.

The Jew

by Joseph Goebbels
Der Angriff, 21 January 1929

(translation by Hadding Scott, 2011)

There is open discussion about all questions in Germany, and every German claims the right to decide this way or that on all issues. One is Catholic, another Protestant; one is a job-seeker, another an employer; the capitalist, the socialist; the democrat, the aristocrat. A commitment to this side or that has nothing inherently dishonorable for the man of our era. It happens in all openness, and where the opposites still appear unclear and muddled, one clarifies them through discussions into argument and counter-argument. Only one issue is barred from public consideration, and it is provocative even to say it: the Jewish Question. It is taboo in the Republic.

Against all insults the Jew is immunized: words like rogue, parasite, deceiver, profiteer [Schieber], affect him like water on a duck's back. Call him Jew, and you will ascertain with astonishment how he is startled, how he is struck, how he suddenly shrinks into himself completely small: "I am recognized."

It is pointless to defend oneself against the Jew. He will proceed lightning-fast from his assuredness to the attack and with his cabalistics [mit seiner Kabalistik] will crush all means of defense in his opponent.

Quickly he makes his opponent into what the opponent wanted to attack in him: the liar, the dusturber of the peace, the terrorist. Nothing would be more wrong than to try to defend oneself against that. Indeed the Jew would like that. Then he invents new lies daily, against which his opponent must constantly be on the defensive, and the result is that in the midst of loudly defending himself he never gets around to what the Jew really fears: to attack him. The accused has now become the accuser, and with a great shriek he forces the accuser into the dock. Thus it always went until now, whenever a man or a movement saw the need to combat the Jew. So also would it go for us, if we were not familiar with his nature to the last detail, and if we did not have the courage to derive our radical conclusions from this awareness. And they are:

1. One cannot combat the Jew positively. He is a negative, and this negative must be erased from the German equation, or it will always spoil the equation.

2. One cannot discuss the Jewish Question with the Jew. Indeed one cannot prove to anybody that one has the right and the duty to render him harmless.

3. One ought not to afford to the Jew in the struggle the means that one affords to every honest opponent; for he is not an honest opponent; he will merely exploit magnanimity and chivalry to place his enemy at a disadvantage.

4. The Jew has no say in German questions. He is a foreigner, an alien to our folk, who enjoys only the right of a guest, and indeed without exception abuses that.

5. The so-called religious morality of the Jew is not a morality but a guide to deception. Therefore it has no claim to the defense and protection of the law.

6. The Jew is not more intelligent than we, but only more sophisticated and cunning. His system cannot be broken economically -- for indeed he fights economically under completely different moral laws than we -- but only politically.

7. A Jew cannot attack the reputation of a German. Jewish smears are only badges of honor for a German who opposes the Jews.

8. The value of a German man or of a German movement rises with the opposition of the Jew. If anyone is fought by the Jew, it absolutely vouches for him. Whoever is not persecuted by the Jew or indeed is praised by him is useless and harmful.

9. The Jew assesses German issues always from the Jewish perspective. Usually therefore the opposite of whatever he says is correct.

10. One must say yes or no to anti-Semitism. Whoever aids the Jew sins against his own people. One can be either a servant of the Jew or an opponent of the Jew. Opposition to the Jew is a matter of personal cleanliness.

With these principles the movement to oppose the Jew has a prospect of success. And therefore such a movement for the first time is taken seriously and feared by the Jew.

That he makes a lot of noise and objects to it, is only a proof that it is correct. We are happy to find the appropriate certification immediately in these lines in the Jewish gazettes. Let them scream terror there. To that we answer with the famous utterance of Mussolini: "Terror? Never! It is social hygiene. We are taking these individuals out of circulation, as a physician takes a bacillus out of the body's circulation."

Goodbye to the War of All against All

2011-06-14T16:09:00.004-04:00

Accusation

"National Socialism is just racist Marxism. People want to live in a non-competitive world and be valued for their race, rather than for their own personal accomplishments or character. Blaming Jews is just a cop out."

Hadding Responds

The essence of Marxism is the class-struggle leading to the leveling of society. National-Socialism is about class-reconciliation. National-Socialism pulls the rug out from under Marxism. National-Socialism replaces cutthroat capitalism with an economic order that is tolerable and viable without leveling society.

I won't say that there is no competition under National-Socialism, since all are not made equal; there is higher and lower status, and people will compete for that. But getting the most money is no longer the meaning of life in such a system.

Why should economic competition be the meaning of life and the criterion by which every man is judged?

A relatively non-competitive society in which people are valued for who they are is actually not so unusual. I think that's a pretty good description of Mediaeval Europe, where everybody was expected to do his job of course, but not strive to change his status within society.

A reduction of economic competition is appropriate under the global conditions that have prevailed for the past century. Unrestrained economic competition leads to massive unemployment such as we are seeing, and which would be much worse if the country were not currently involved in several wars which act as a government jobs program.

Ultimately the USA will have to move to some kind of more regulated economy, at least as much as it had from FDR until Ronald Reagan. That will be an economy in which competition is muted. The only question after that is whether that change will be accompanied by national-socialistic measures to maintain discipline and prevent the biological decay of the population. Most likely the USA will not do that, but other countries will.

Whether we like it or not, social order in some form is on its way back and the war of all against all is on its way out. Continuing on the present course would produce a kind of Mad Max world. Since very few people will want that, I don't believe it's going to happen. Adjustments and accommodations will be made.

Jews are in the way. You cannot have a cohesive and harmonious society where Jews have any significant power, because the Jews are all about maintaining their collective distinctness without having to risk being either subsumed or expelled from the society. The Jew depends on social conflict. He has to keep a society disunited and weak for his parasitism to continue. That's why the class-struggle and racial strife and large-scale non-White immigration all are pushed by the Jew.

Adolf Hitler's View of the Jewish Problem in 1919

2011-06-08T21:46:00.002-04:00

Source: Eberhard Jäckel (ed.), Hitler. Sämtliche Aufzeichnungen 1905-1924 (Stuttgart, 1980), pp. 88-90. Translated by Richard S. Levy.

[September 16, 1919]

Dear Herr Gemlich,

The danger posed by Jewry for our people today finds expression in the undeniable aversion of wide sections of our people. The cause of this aversion is not to be found in a clear recognition of the consciously or unconsciously systematic and pernicious effect of the Jews as a totality upon our nation. Rather, it arises mostly from personal contact and from the personal impression which the individual Jew leaves--almost always an unfavorable one. For this reason, antisemitism is too easily characterized as a mere emotional phenomenon.

And yet this is incorrect. Antisemitism as a political movement may not and cannot be defined by emotional impulses, but by recognition of the facts. The facts are these: First, Jewry is absolutely a race and not a religious association. Even the Jews never designate themselves as Jewish Germans, Jewish Poles, or Jewish Americans but always as German, Polish, or American Jews. Jews have never yet adopted much more than the language of the foreign nations among whom they live. A German who is forced to make use of the French language in France, Italian in Italy, Chinese in China does not thereby become a Frenchman, Italian, or Chinaman. It's the same with the Jew who lives among us and is forced to make use of the German language. He does not thereby become a German. Neither does the Mosaic faith, so important for the survival of this race, settle the question of whether someone is a Jew or non-Jew. There is scarcely a race whose members belong exclusively to just one definite religion.

Through thousands of years of the closest kind of inbreeding, Jews in general have maintained their race and their peculiarities far more distinctly than many of the peoples among whom they have lived. And thus comes the fact that there lives amongst us a non-German, alien race which neither wishes nor is able to sacrifice its racial character or to deny its feeling, thinking, and striving. Nevertheless, it possesses all the political rights we do. If the ethos of the Jews is revealed in the purely material realm, it is even clearer in their thinking and striving. Their dance around the golden calf is becoming a merciless struggle for all those possessions we prize most highly on earth.

The value of the individual is no longer decided by his character or by the significance of his achievements for the totality but exclusively by the size of his fortune, by his money.

The loftiness of a nation is no longer to be measured by the sum of its moral and spiritual powers, but rather by the wealth of its material possessions.

This thinking and striving after money and power, and the feelings that go along with it, serve the purposes of the Jew who is unscrupulous in the choice of methods and pitiless in their employment. In autocratically ruled states he whines for the favor of "His Majesty" and misuses it like a leech fastened upon the nations. In democracies he vies for the favor of the masses, cringes before the "majesty of the people," and recognizes only the majesty of money.

He destroys the character of princes with byzantine flattery, national pride (the strength of a people), with ridicule and shameless breeding to depravity. His method of battle is that public opinion which is never expressed in the press but which is nonetheless managed and falsified by it. His power is the power of money, which multiplies in his hands effortlessly and endlessly through interest, and which forces peoples under the most dangerous of yokes. Its golden glitter, so attractive in the beginning, conceals the ultimately tragic consequences. Everything men strive after as a higher goal, be it religion, socialism, democracy, is to the Jew only means to an end, the way to satisfy his lust for gold and domination.

In his effects and consequences he is like a racial tuberculosis of the nations.

The deduction from all this is the following: an antisemitism based on purely emotional grounds will find its ultimate expression in the form of the pogrom.[1] An antisemitism based on reason, however, must lead to systematic legal combatting and elimination of the privileges of the Jews, that which distinguishes the Jews from the other aliens who live among us (an Aliens Law). The ultimate objective [of such legislation] must, however, be the irrevocable removal of the Jews in general.

For both these ends a government of national strength, not of national weakness, is necessary.

The Republic in Germany owes its birth not to the uniform national will of our people but the sly exploitation of a series of circumstances which found general expression in a deep, universal dissatisfaction. These circumstances however were independent of the form of the state and are still operative today. Indeed, more so now than before. Thus, a great portion of our people recognizes that a changed state-form cannot in itself change our situation. For that it will take a rebirth of the moral and spiritual powers of the nation.

And this rebirth cannot be initiated by a state leadership of irresponsible majorities, influenced by certain party dogmas, an irresponsible press, or internationalist phrases and slogans. [It requires] instead the ruthless installation of nationally minded leadership personalities with an inner sense of responsibility.

But these facts deny to the Republic the essential inner support of the nation's spiritual forces. And thus today's state leaders are compelled to seek support among those who draw the exclusive benefits of the new formation of German conditions, and who for this reason were the driving force behind the revolution--the Jews. Even though (as various statements of the leading personalities reveal) today's leaders fully realized the danger of Jewry, they (seeking their own advantage) accepted the readily proffered support of the Jews and also returned the favor. And this pay-off consisted not only in every possible favoring of Jewry, but above all in the hindrance of the struggle of the betrayed people against its defrauders, that is in the repression of the antisemitic movement.

Respectfully,
Adolf Hitler

National-Socialist vs. Soviet Propaganda Posters

2011-06-02T14:56:00.016-04:00

Some silly documentary arguing that National-Socialism and Bolshevism are essentially the same uses a comparison of National-Socialist and Soviet propaganda posters to support the claim. At first glance there are some striking graphic similarities, but the posters are only on the screen for a very brief time, so that they cannot really be scrutinized by the viewer, and of course since most viewers do not know German, they are really taking the narrator's word that these posters support the narrator's point.

I want to make it a little easier to see why these superficial similarities do not demonstrate the narrator's point.

The poster on the right is some Soviet poster with a slogan in Russian, obviously depicting a manual laborer. The man carrying a heavy tool on his shoulder always represents manual labor.

The German poster on the left has a manual laborer, but also another man standing very close to him. Who is that other man?

The caption says, "WORKERS of the FOREHEAD, of the FIST, vote for the front-soldier HITLER!" "Workers of the fist" (Arbeiter der Faust) is a German expression meaning manual laborers. "Workers of the forehead" (Arbeiter der Stirn) means men whose work consists largely of thinking and planning. The reference to Hitler as "the front-soldier" (den Frontsoldaten) is a note of nationalism. This electoral campaign poster urges the unity of Germans as Germans, in spite of class differences, in voting for the German nationalist Hitler.

I am told that the caption on the Russian poster says something to the effect of, Be on the lookout at work.

Although, yes, the Soviet and NSDAP posters both portray a man carrying tools, the messages are certainly different. The NSDAP's campaign poster represents class-reconciliation, the exact antithesis of Marxist class-warfare and "dictatorship of the proletariat," as well as implicit rejection of internationalism.

These posters are also superficially similar, but if you see them for more than a second or two, you can't help but notice differences. These both seem to be urging a yes-vote for something. The most significant difference reflecting the different attitudes of National-Socialism and Bolshevism is that in the Bolshevik poster there is not just one but a whole mob of hands voting the same way. The Bolshevik poster is evoking groupthink, while the National-Socialist poster represents an individual, rational choice.

Superficial resemblances in the visual composition of propaganda posters do not signify that the ideas conveyed or promoted are the same. The Soviet Union under Stalin was notorious for copying Western models. They didn't just copy from the Germans, either. In particular there was a French World War II propaganda poster with the caption On les aura! that was shamelessly plagiarized. There was no reason not to do that, since people in the Soviet Union had no way of knowing.

Ayn Rand and the "Californian Ideology" as Proximate Causes of U.S. Economic Decline

2011-05-30T13:23:00.011-04:00

Adam Curtis' documentary,All Watched Over by Machines of Loving Grace (2011).

Overview

Ayn Rand, a Jewess born in Russia, got into Hollywood screenwriting through Jewish connections. After being required to write a screenplay for a story in which she hated all the characters, she wrote her novel The Fountainhead, which was on a similar theme as the screenplay but espoused pursuit of self-interest. It became a bestseller.

In her next novel, Atlas Shrugged, Ayn Rand attacked altruism. The talented and creative people go on strike and the USA collapses. After the collapse the creative people return to build a society based on “the virtue of selfishness.”

The extreme individualist ideology that she espoused directly conflicted with mainstream social thinking since the Great Depression, which was based on the (true) understanding that uninhibited pursuit of self-interest had been an underlying cause of the Depression. Rand was propagandizing for that piece of acquired wisdom to be discarded.

Ayn Rand’s circle considered themselves to be promoting a revolution toward “a totally free society.”

Enter the idolators of technology. Silicon Valley entrepreneurs of the 1980s were heavily influenced by Ayn Rand. The Californian Ideology said that computers would enable everyone to become a Randian hero. Computers would allow the world to become more free, ordered through individual choices, with less need of government to maintain order, including less need of economic regulation. Extreme individualism and antipathy toward government translate into globalism and free trade.

Allan Greenspan was a member of Ayn Rand’s circle. An economic boom started during the Clinton administration, after Allan Greenspan persuaded Clinton to cut taxes. It was believed that the boom could go on forever because of the controlling factor of computers, keeping everybody well informed and preventing anything from going too far as had occurred prior to the Great Depression. This was called “the new economy.”

Greenspan worried, however, because he noticed that profits were increasing while there was no increase in productivity. He warned in 1996 that the market was overvalued, but then changed his mind under pressure, deciding that computers were somehow contributing to productivity in ways that he could not detect.

The documentary points out Ayn Rand’s inability to live in a purely rational manner, while convincing herself that everything that she did was rational. Similarly, despite the pervasive implementation of new technology, human nature remained the same.

By 1997 the U.S. Government was dominated by global free-trade thinkers. Southeast Asian nations were pressured to open their economies to foreign investment. Joseph Stiglitz of the Council of Economic Advisors was worried about this. He says that it was only in the interest of a very small group of people to do this. Secretary of the Treasury Robert Rubin blocked the CEA’s attempt to warn the president. Stiglitz believed that Rubin was working for the finance markets.

Overly optimistic investment in Thailand and South Korea led to economic crisis in those countries. The IMF offered loans to stabilize their economies, under the condition that the governments eliminate economic barriers in those countries. Indonesia also was pressured to make this agreement in 1998. What happened was that the IMF bailout money was used to allow Western investors to withdraw their investments: then the economies collapsed. Then U.S. taxpayers had to bail out the IMF.

Robert Rubin was making these decisions while Bill Clinton was tied up with the Monica Lewinsky scandal. Power over U.S. foreign policy had been transferred in effect from the elected President of the United States to financiers. (This could last so long as the president is merely an idiotic or corrupt frontman willing to acquiesce in plutocratic predations.)

The attack on the World Trade Center was an attack on a symbol of the Ayn Rand ideology. This economic shock exposed weaknesses in the economy: many companies like Enron had been falsifying profits and concealing debts. (Result of deregulation.)

Stability of the U.S. economy after the World Trade Center attacks was maintained by the Chinese Politburo. China sold cheap goods to the USA and used the profits to buy US Treasury Bonds, which in turn funded lending to bad credit risks. In 2008, when this orgy of bad lending came to a crashing end, the United States taxpayer was required to save the bankers from the consequences of their bad lending decisions just as had occurred in 1998.

U.S. society is now stuck in a way of looking at the world that is false and produces bad results. The rule of unregulated self-interest turns out to be the rule of a few super-wealthy financiers, without accountability.

National-Socialism Not for Export?

2011-05-17T00:03:00.030-04:00

Sir Oswald Mosley, leader of the British Union of Fascists, as of 1938 was referring to his worldview as national-socialism.

Occasionally some sophomore, somebody hostile to national-socialist ideology, usually somebody wedded to liberal notions (by which I mean a so-called conservative), will argue that national-socialist ideas have no application outside of Germany, adducing as evidence some statement attributed to Adolf Hitler: "National-Socialism is not for export." Ipse dixit!

Isn't it interesting how these people who are basically hostile to our worldview, suddenly, when it suits them, treat Adolf Hitler as a man whose every casual word must be taken as an inviolable commandment? The assumption seems to be that there is no general idea, no substance in national-socialism, except to copy Adolf Hitler on every point.

Let us examine, however, what this statement, in its original context, must have meant.

In 1934 and 1935 Dr. Joseph Goebbels declared that National-Socialism was not for export, as part of an attempt to maintain positive relations with foreign governments, including that of the United States, that were concerned about the influence of National-Socialist Germany on their ethnic-German populations. The dictum, "National-Socialism is not for export," was in the first place simply a piece of diplomacy to avoid conflict with foreign governments.

In 1942 when Hitler himself made essentially the same statement in the context of a private conversation, he gave an additional motive behind the position that would have been impolitic to state publicly:

I am firmly opposed to any attempt to export National-Socialism. If other countries are determined to preserve their democratic systems and thus rush to their ruin, so much the better for us. And all the more so, because during this same period, thanks to National Socialism, we shall be transforming ourselves, slowly but surely, into the most solid popular community that it is possible to imagine. [Hitler's Table Talk, entry for 20 May 1942]

Hitler was not saying that other nations could not apply national-socialism: on the contrary, the assumption was that neighboring European states, having adopted national-socialism, would become strong. Hitler was saying that it was simply not in Germany's interest to encourage nations that might eventually come into conflict with her to adopt national-socialism.

At the same time, however, Hitler did not say that Germany should attempt to stifle the development of national-socialism anywhere, only that Germany should not exert herself to bring about such a development. Let the other nations keep their liberal system if that's what they want.

As with many things, Hitler had not been entirely consistent in the application of this principle.

Where it was a question of a nation's becoming strong and nationalist or aligning with Germany's enemies, as in the case of Spain in the 1930s, Hitler provided the necessary assistance for the ideologically kindred forces to prevail.

Also, for a few years Hitler subsidized Sir Oswald Mosley, who as of 1938 was referring to his political creed as national-socialism. At that time Hitler was hoping to avoid conflict and even to have harmonious future relations with Britain as described in Mein Kampf, with Britain ruling the seas and retaining its empire while leaving hegemony on the European continent to Germany. When the war broke out, a plan to have Mosley broadcast to Britain from a transmitter on German soil had to be scrapped.

Ultimately, whether or not to attempt to export national-socialism seems to have been determined in each case based on whether it appeared likely to help or hurt Germany's security.

The statements of Adolf Hitler and Joseph Goebbels about national-socialism being "not for export" did not mean that other nations could not apply national-socialism, only that Germany would not attempt to make the world National-Socialist the way the Soviet Union worked at making the world Communist.

Alfred Rosenberg explains National-Socialism

2011-04-29T13:51:00.047-04:00

Overview of Alfred Rosenberg's Essay, Nationalsozialismus
by Hadding Scott

The German people in the past had folkish (i.e. national) community. The folkish community has become divided as a consequence of the growth of an industrial proletariat in the age of the machine. National-Socialism is about the restoration of the folkish community.

The problems between the classes have been exacerbated by Marxism, a Jewish instrument of subversion.The German intelligentsia, lacking the healthy instinct of Fichte and Arndt a century earlier, has aided Marxism.

The German upper classes are also at fault for neglecting German workers and driving them to the Marxists, and for being insufficiently nationalist themselves, for example marrying Jewish bankers’ daughters.

National-Socialism is a new movement that advocates the unity of all Germans. Like the bold fortress built by a mediaeval knight and his servants, the NSDAP will be the force around which the German people will rally.

While the main focus is a vertical unification of the German people, healing class divisions to restore a harmonious order within the nation, at the end Rosenberg drops the word Großdeutschland, Great Germany, which means the unification of Germany with Austria.

National-Socialism

by Alfred Rosenberg

Völkischer Beobachter, 28 July 1921

(translated by Hadding Scott, 2011)

Upon a mountain, a knight with his servants constructed a proud fortress. All around this fortress gathered settlers seeking protection; houses were built, ramparts and walls erected, trenches dug. A community existed between knights and citizens: individuality and polity [Gemeinwesen].

From the jumble of little houses the cathedral stretches upward toward Heaven. A great artist has designed it. Thousands have hewn the stones, hundreds of thousands have sacrificed things of value for it, and then in this house they performed this prayer: personality and folk-soul.

The sense or recognition of the economic and spiritual community of the whole of a people, [combined with] the acknowledgment of the role of the individual within the community, is today called National-Socialism.

There have been class-struggles as far back in history as we can trace. Many a people has already perished from them. There have been class-struggles even in the German past, and neither will they disappear in the future. The existence of struggle everywhere is no misfortune. But in the consideration of one of life’s phenomena our spiritual attitude matters. If we recognize a folk as a kind of body [etwas Körperhaftes], we will try, not to bolster artificially the natural struggle of a particular part of it, but to give forms to it that more highly cultivate [züchten] and toughen [stählen] each of the parts. If I aim only at the immediate goals of one of the struggling parts, sooner rather than later a sickening of the whole must occur, which weakens the body, indeed can bring about its death.

The age of the machine brought conditions of life that created the soil for a doctrine that with consistent implementation signifies the ruin of entire peoples: Marxism. No peoples, no states, only classes: a worldview that stands far below that of a Zulu, but for the victim of the machine, the industrial laborer, nonetheless signified an idea, even if muddled. The traditionless proletarian, torn from his soil, alienated from nature, entered into world-history. The subjection to a brutal power, which he understandably saw embodied in the entrepreneur – indeed he could not observe the banker standing behind this man -- prevented instinct from perceiving that this man was a folk-comrade. It is not the laborer’s fault if he succumbed to the seductive temptations of subversive Jewry! It is the fault of the German intelligentsia!

The Fichtes and Arndts^[1] appear to have died out. Intellectual scholars alienated from nature, with blue pencils in their hands, studied the fat books of Marx and his comrades, drew analogies from their foggy verbiage to Kant, Goethe, and Indian philosophy, drew off the stale Jewish spirit into bottles, and made Marxism socially acceptable [gesellschaftsfähig]. Other professors, and not infrequently Lutheran ministers, were masters of the chair^[2] and spoke in secret lodges about “humanity,” and about “liberty, equality, and fraternity.” Large parts of the German people that must have recognized what was developing [das Wuchshafte] nonetheless let themselves be embittered by the gigantic Marxist propaganda and strengthened their class-identity. Thus was the German folk split asunder. The year 1914 showed however, that in all Germans a spark was still alive that must have slumbered longingly in each one, so as to be able to blaze up into such a holy flame. But the decades had not been without effect. The misleaders of the people, having fallen silent for a short time, soon started in anew, and again the spirit was turned in a direction that finally precipitated the collapse of 9 November 1918. Faith to fight for a good cause was taken from the German and in him was cultivated a faith in slogans and ideas that were nothing but weapons of the trickery of our enemies. Never should the German people forget the names of the men that talked to them, amid the struggle over their destiny, about “international solidarity of the proletariat,” “League of Nations,” “conscience of the world,” etc!

The misfortune came, and bitter disappointment therewith.

Nothing is more unjustified at present than the satisfaction of the German-Nationals^[3] that the workers had perceived the stupidity of internationalism and were ultimately halfway “sensible.” These gentlemen should rather beat themselves on the breast and ask themselves what they did to strengthen the national feeling for the German worker! Did they go to him, Did they give him spiritual nourishment, enlightenment, or did they hand him over to outright troublemakers and Jewish deceivers? Have they regarded the worker as a folk-comrade of equal value, or have they not valued him all too often as a human being of the second or third rank? Have they at least within their class itself advocated the worthiness of their folk, or have they not married Jewish bankers’ daughters and contaminated the German people?

The recognition of their guilt in regard to the German folk has dawned upon many individuals among the conservatives, but certainly still not in the “nationalist parties.” They designate themselves even today as “bourgeois” in opposition to the “socialistic,” and the attempts of the German-Nationals to win the workers through a few old master bakers is a hopeless undertaking. As long as German conservatism does not openly and honestly swear a confession of guilt and vigorously take up the struggle against the Jewish and judaized parasitism outside and inside its ranks, and the struggle for German essence and interest in an all-encompassing sense, so long will it attract no manual laborer into its ranks. Like the Social-Democrats, the Conservatives are burdened with a heavy chain of class-tradition. They have forfeited the entitlement to be leaders; they must first win that for themselves.

Therefore a new movement is needed, which treats the whole German folk as an indissoluble unity, which accepts no class-antagonisms within the folk, for which the starting-point and final goal is what pertains to the folk, and which strives for a natural economic order instead of the current parasitic foreign bloodsucking. The unification of all genuinely productive persons of German blood and spirit, whether laborer, student, officer, civil servant, artist, or scholar, the gathering of all strugglers acting without regret for one Great Germany out of all strata of the German people: today that is called National-Socialism.

It will become the proud fortress, around which other Germans can build their houses. That is the way of the future!
_______________
1. Johann Gottlieb Fichte (1762 – 1814) was an early German idealist philosopher and a founder of German nationalism. He became extraordinary professor of philosophy at the University of Jena. In his Addresses to the German Nation (1808) he urged the Germans to have national pride, and warned against giving citizenship to Jews. Ernst Moritz Arndt (1769 – 1860) was a German nationalist author and poet, and extraordinary professor at the University of Greifswald. Arndt became chairman of the history department in 1806 but had to flee to Sweden later that year for writing Geist der Zeit, which urged Germans to rebel against Napoleon. Arndt also agitated for the abolition of serfdom, and was noted for some strong anti-Jewish statements. These are the kinds of scholars that Rosenberg says in 1921 seem to have died out.

2. Stuhlmeister is a Freemasonic title equivalent to worshipful master, designating the president of a lodge.

3. German-Nationals refers to members of the Deutschnationale Volkspartei, or DNVP, a nationalist and monarchist party favored by landowners and industrialists. Eventually, because of inadequate public support for this party of the nationalist rich, the DNVP aligned itself with the NSDAP.

Alfred Rosenberg's Critique of Oswald Spengler

2011-04-25T01:45:00.021-04:00

Oswald Spengler, author of Decline of the West

Oswald Spengler

by Alfred Rosenberg

originally published in Der Weltkampf, May 1925.

(English translation by Hadding Scott, 2011.)

The personality of Oswald Spengler has stood for years, since the appearance of his chief work The Decline of the West [in 1918], at the center of public interest. Without question this famous work is riddled with many flaws. There is no question that next to fascinating ideas, often platitudes are found. Without a doubt there is something embarrassing about receiving many views of other people served up ostensibly as Spengler’s intellectual property. In spite of everything however, the attack on our school wisdom has had a refreshing effect and set in motion many agreeing and opposing forces, thus begetting life. And in the spiritual quagmire of the present, that is in any case to be welcomed.

I do not want to discuss the Spenglerian worldview in general here. Let only one question be selected: Spengler is supposedly an irrationalist (i.e. he is averse to purely rational judgment). He seeks soul and form, but in the course of his work turns into a purely naturalistic dogmatist who arrives at his finding of the inner and outer decline of our culture on the basis of more or less bald, rational observations, and therein overlooks precisely the form and soul of the Eveningland.

Spengler regards the rise and fall of cultures as an occurrence similar to the life and death of a plant, but forgets in the adducement of this richly superficial comparison that races of plants as such do not die out if they are not destroyed, crippled, mixed with inimical types. The "race" of the fir tree persists although the single fir dies. The "race" of the linden tree is still the same as many thousands of years ago. And the races of men as such could remain just as eternally young, if hostile blood is not mixed with them, if unassimilable spiritual opposites do not clash and mix with them, without being able to be blended.

Thus Spengler’s treatment of history remains stuck in a somewhat exalted environmental theory; his doctrine of the cultural group [Kulturkreislehre] lacks the essential thing: the organic-racial prerequisites, and, bound with them, the embodiment of the spiritual forces that created this cultural group.

It is significant above all that Spengler vigorously combats the folkish idea, dismisses anti-Semitism, and yet, despite all these protests ... succumbs, and truly in such a scope that he makes almost all folkish political positions into his own, without however admitting this, even with a single word.

In the first place Spengler is united with us in the rejection of the spiritual and political orientation of our political parties collectively. Democracy is also for him inwardly dead; Parliamentarism is damned for all eternity; Marxism has decayed into the Mark, hostile to life. Only an unscrupulous mob of parties has remained, for the assessment of which Spengler finds only words like cowardice [Feigheit], vulgarity [Gemeinheit], villainy [Schurkerei], etc. About the German republic born on 9 November 1918 he says in his book Reconstruction of the German Reich:

“From fear about the share of loot arose upon the velvet grand-ducal thrones and in the bar-rooms of Weimar the German Republic, not a form of government but a business.”

“They (the parties) had made the constitution for themselves and their constituency, not for the nation, and they began to conduct a disgraceful commerce in everything from which it was possible to derive advantage, in the ruins of the state, in the remnants of our economy, in our honor, our soul, our will-power.”

“From now on there was no longer any law that the authors themselves would not have trampled underfoot, like the one about presidential elections; there was no filth, no cowardice, no lie, that would not have become an everyday occurrence. And as the indignation, the derision in the land conjured the fear that someday we might no longer contain ourselves, they created the Protection Law [Schutzgesetz], the law for the protection of this business.”

Spengler continues then and also attacks the nationalist side, and indeed at a vulnerable point. He says that “ethos” and experience in governing are there, but also a deficiency of intelligence, of understanding of the world [Welteinschaetzung], of breadth of vision. Both the landed nobility and the representatives of industry had begotten no talent whatsoever for the art of politics; the strength of the nationalist parties would remain a mere episode.

And then Spengler embarks upon a criticism of the folkish parties.

He begins with a parallel from the French Revolution, in which between 1794 and 1799 a regression into a bloody, frightening age occurred, when the awakening "Jeunesse dorée" (Gilded Youth) wanted to make policy with fists and cudgels – and wrought destruction. The same role, according to Spengler, is played by today’s folkish, who through “sincerity and small-mindedness” would bring disaster, would [inadvertently] labor for France.

“Childish opinions,” says Spengler, “sever the folkish movement and therewith the mighty striking-power [gewaltige Stoßkraft] residing in it so completely from everything that is to be taken seriously politically and economically by talent, experience, power, and connections [Beziehungen]” that a dangerous countercurrent must take place. It is wrong, he says, to wish to build realpolitik upon racial feeling [Rassegefühl] and not to wish to treat existing financial powers as powers. Politics are not made from long skulls but from what is retained in them. Not through drummers and pipers can one rule nations. Parades and spectacles are not the way; rather the avoidance of them, since even Bismarck functioned only in the most solitary seclusion, says Spengler.

While Spengler leans toward the Action Française and Fascism as the new style of politics, he ridicules the same will in his own folk. Spengler does not grasp what Hitler has done! This man recognized that he must position himself in the midst of the people; he must create a people’s movement, give the disillusioned a new faith, set a new goal. Supported by this people’s movement as a force, he could gain political influence that otherwise never would have been possible. How a foreign policy in the possession of this force would have been conducted, has been understandably not much discussed; that it would have had to be very cautious in accord with the situation, would not need to be stressed. It is certain however that in domestic policy other principles would have been established than rule today.

Already in this question Spengler shows that characteristic shape-shifting of thought-processes that begin with one assertion and end in a completely different one. For, after rejecting the Jeunesse dorée, after agreeing with the Fascist principle, he praises the “astute youths” among us as “our future,” as “youngest Germany” etc. And now Spengler should ask himself after all in which camp these “astute youths” already stand today!

On the question of race, Spengler is just as ambiguous. For, no sooner has he refused with marked derision to acknowledge racial instincts as determining factors, than he speaks of “Germanic world-feeling,” refers to a quantity of “magnificent men of race” among us, speaks of a right that is “born from blood,” and declares that the “Nordic life-feeling” of the Goths, Franks, and Saxons has created the type of the present nations. Justice was supposedly born from “Germanic fundamental feeling,” fed from a spring that does not derive purely from purposeful contemplations. Indeed, Spengler gets carried away to the point of exclaiming that the so-called “youngest Germany” has awakened as the best heir [Erbe] from the years of the rise of the Reich.

In addition, he has also contradicted himself here, explicitly even, when he designates British politics as an effluence of the Norman essence, and at the same time praises the English instinct that put the Jew Disraeli-Beaconsfield in charge. That this man himself admitted that he was conducting Jewish racial politics in combination with English power, Spengler seems to be unaware. The connection of high finance with the London stock exchange has been tightly bound since this time.

That Spengler is in many respects unfortunately correct with his assertion that sincerity is paired with small-mindedness in the folkish camp, comes primarily from the fact that the infinitely clever ones only stand on the sidelines for years, because, although they quite gladly distill an idea from butcheries of past centuries while sitting at a desk, in the present struggle they only wait nobly to see what ultimately will become of “childish opinions.” Once it has “become something,” then the learned scholar will prove with hairsplitting precision that it could only have turned out thus and not otherwise. Only a few of those men so rich in “talent and experience” have let their instinct speak and joined the fermenting movement, and struggled for its means of fulfillment. But soon that will change, and even Spengler will not be able to escape the organic power, and then of course he will proclaim that we have fulfilled his ideas.

Why the "Northwest Republic" Idea belongs to the 1980s

2011-04-14T13:35:00.024-04:00

Greg Johnson, who was fired as editor of The Occidental Quarterly last year for giving publicity to Harold Covington, now has his own blog where he has recently resumed giving publicity to Harold Covington. (We thought Greg might have learned something but apparently not.)

Johnson's blog has a discussion going on right now about the "Northwest Imperative" that is advocated in Covington's fantasy novels. A big part of Covington's argument for the Pacific Northwest as a breakaway all-White republic is the fact that it has been, relatively speaking, a hotbed of White racial separatism. The inland Pacific Northwest has had somewhat more than its share of famous White Separatists, most prominently Robert Mathews, whose group of several dozen revolutionaries known as "The Order" made news for a year or so in the 1980s before being crushed.

I just relistened to Robert Mathews' speech that he gave at a National Alliance function in 1983. Mathews explained that the Pacific Northwest had many distressed farmers that were receptive to radical ideas because of the farm-mortgage crisis that was going on at the time. If you do a Google News search on farm mortgage foreclosure you find a peak of stories containing those terms in the early 1980s. The only other comparable peak is around 1930, and it's twice as high.

So this Northwest Republic idea is in a way a kind of nostalgia for an effect of the early 80s farm crisis, combined with the wish that it had been a lot more significant than it was. There has been an increase in stories about farm foreclosures in the past few years but not on the magnitude of the early 80s. Farmers are actually doing pretty well these days even while the economy in general is very sick. I think if Bob Mathews were alive today and trying to recruit a revolutionary cadre he would be more likely to find them among the unemployed and grossly underemployed men of the deindustrialized regions of the country, than in the Pacific Northwest.

I sent this to Tom Metzger, who was among the original advocates of a Northwest homeland. His response appears below.

Tom Metzger Comments

Bob Mathews gravitated toward the plight of White family farmers early on, back in the eighties, and this happened to dovetail with right wing conservative lip service of that era. After Mathews was murdered, Louis Beam continued the fight, and began promoting the 'leaderless resistance' strategy.

Boots on the ground White leaders then were Bob Miles, Richard Butler, Tom Metzger and a few others. They fought for the best interests of ALL White working class folks... including the farmers. Unfortunately, they had little chance of success, primarily because the Racial right fought them tooth & nail! Most Racial right leaders are not populist, socialist or working class oriented people. They cling to failed Republican-type upper middle class fantasies, and they willfully throw White working class folks under the bus, rather than ally with us 'Racists'. There is a history of this going back to at least the early thirties.

AWOL Racial right leaders -- made worse by the northern invasion of non-Whites and vast numbers of California social Marxists, plus their rich degenerate camp followers -- turned the Northwest Republic idea into nothing more than the fading hope of dreamers, or worse. That's when the three of us agreed: "It's too late for the Northwest idea!" -- working class young White people should hunker down in those areas they know best, maintaining their social and economic networks in place.

The entire subject was moot until Harold Covington, on the run, fled northwest to avoid paying a slander case judgment to Will Williams. 'Rabbi' Covington, close enough to beleaguered remnants of Aryan Nations (and anyone else he could suck in), then started his current good ship lolly pop scam. Had he not been on the lam, and apparently safe from the judgment, his Northwest scheme would never have occurred to him. He would have remained back east where the pickings were easier. Now, rather than living in some backwoods log cabin among the folks who fly his Northwest Scam flag high, Covington is comfortably ensconced in urban headquarters, near non-whites who reside around there wall to wall.

If Harold Covington could force march to the city limits from his hideout, without sustaining a heart attack, I would be greatly surprised.

Tom Metzger

Jew Suspected of Bombing near Synagogue

2011-04-09T18:05:00.010-04:00

Ron Hirsch frequents synagogues.

The synagogue in question is located in Los Angeles and belongs to the bizarre Chabad sect of Judaism, which even other Jews find embarrassing.

The explosion occurred only near, not in or adjacent to the synagogue. The synagogue was not damaged. Since it was Thursday, of course the congregation was not in the synagogue at the time, so that no Jews were likely to be killed. Police initially did not even perceive the explosion as a deliberate attack on anyone or anything but suspected some kind of freak mechanical malfunction.

On its face, this only makes sense as an attempt to create a little drama to validate the Jewish persecution myth, an event of some frequent occurrence since the victim-pose has afforded Jews a considerable immunity to criticism. Predictably, the ADL is telling area Jews to hunker down in persecution mode.

Meanwhile, "the 300-pound projectile went shooting into the sky, bounced off the wall of the Jewish center, tore a hole into the roof of a neighboring home and narrowly missed an 11-year-old girl inside."(Darsha Philips, KABC TV)

The suspect is a man who had "frequented" this synagogue and some others. His name is Ron Hirsch, but he also calls himself Israel Fisher. Every indication is that "Ron Hirsch" or "Israel Fisher" (both typically Jewish names) who frequents synagogues would be a Jew.

The identity of the suspect merely confirms what should be evident on its face, that this incident resulted from a Jew's attempt to create some drama.

National-Socialist Worldview predicts that if Ron Hirsch a.k.a. Israel Fisher is found to have been responsible for the crime, he as one of the Chosen will receive extremely lenient treatment, even though his bomb nearly killed an 11-year-old girl.

Whites Have Greater Lung Capacity than Chinese

2011-03-22T15:32:00.004-04:00

In a previous post I presented the fact that Whites have greater lung-capacity than Negroes, which, along with dense skeletons, explains why Negroes do not swim well. It turns out that Chinese also have smaller lungs than Whites, and "weaker inspiratory muscles."

Actually this piece of Chinese medical research proves something that is almost self-evident: when did you ever see a broad-shouldered, barrel-chested Chinaman? Could you even imagine such a person?

Eur Respir J. 1995 Mar;8(3):446-9.

Lung elastic recoil in normal young adult Chinese compared with Caucasians.

Chan CC, Cheong TH, Poh SC, Wang YT.

Dept of Respiratory Medicine, Tan Tock Seng Hospital, Singapore.

Abstract

Chinese people have smaller total lung capacity (TLC) compared with Caucasians of similar age, sex and height. One possible reason would be a higher lung elastic recoil in Chinese. Most published values for lung elastic recoil viz static lung compliance (CLst), shape constant K, and maximal static transpulmonary pressure (PLmax) have been from Caucasian subjects. The aim of our study was to obtain values for lung elastic recoil in normal young adult Chinese subjects. Static expiratory pressure-volume (P-V) curves were studied in 22 healthy Chinese subjects (12 males and 10 females). The P-V curve was fitted using an iterative least mean squares regression on a computer, according to an exponential equation: V = A-Be-KP, where V is lung volume, P is transpulmonary pressure, and A, B and K are constants. Mean values +/- SD for K, CLst and PLmax were 0.12 +/- 0.04, 230 +/- 103 ml.cmH2O-1 and 27.5 +/- 7.5 cmH2O, respectively. The values of CLst and K were similar to that of normal Caucasian subjects, whereas values of PLmax were lower. We attributed the lower PLmax partly to weaker inspiratory muscles in Chinese compared with Caucasians. We conclude that lung elastic recoil in normal young adult Chinese is similar to that of healthy young adult Caucasians. Hence, lung elasticity is unlikely to explain the racial differences in static lung volumes.

PMID: 7789492 [PubMed - indexed for MEDLINE]Free Article

William L. Pierce defends National-Socialism against Americanist Qualms

2011-03-22T00:41:00.025-04:00

I knew Dr. William Pierce, and I had a great respect for him, but at times I found myself disagreeing with him. Regarding National-Socialism as formerly practiced in Germany, I find that Dr. Pierce's view is in some ways correct, but in some ways deficient.

A letter-writer objects to whatever "socialist" aspect there is in National-Socialism. The word socialism of course has never made a good impression in the United States -- nor was Dr. Pierce favorable to it -- but in 1920s Germany it was an asset, insofar as the NSDAP managed to recruit many supporters away from the Marxist parties. Hitler himself had been drawn to the Social Democrats before he understood that they were hostile to German ethnic loyalty. While National-Socialism under Hitler does not entirely fit the textbook definition of socialism (involving government ownership of enterprises), National-Socialist Germany did conduct social programs and economic regulation on a colossal scale. But like George Lincoln Rockwell, Dr. Pierce seems rather uninterested in National-Socialist economics.

Dr. Pierce's statement of the probable impact of a German victory on World Jewry is entirely excessive. It would not have been "the beginning of the end for the Jews everywhere" since Hitler's intention all along was simply resettlement of Europe's Jews, preferably far away on the island of Madagascar, which under the peace treaty with France would have been a German protectorate, or, failing that, in some eastern territory carved out of the Soviet Union. At worst the Jews would have had to adopt a way of life different from that to which they were accustomed as a minority living among other peoples.

Deprived of its economic component, National-Socialism is reduced to a very common American way of thinking, one that had great influence in the first half of the 20th century, when interracial marriage was illegal and persons of substandard intelligence were subject to forced sterilization in many states. Forced resettlement of an entire population as a way to solve a social problem is also an idea that is not alien to the United States.

It was an effect of war-propaganda that the racial idea, which is native to the United States, became primarily associated with Germany, and the subsequent caricaturing of that idea with some alleged intention of killing every Jew is of course a result of propaganda.

Dr. Pierce is completely correct in stating the centrality of the principle of putting the common interest of our people ahead of individual interest, but effective support of that ethos involves economic modifications that require some rethinking of American assumptions.

From "Letters to Editor," National Vanguard No. 103, Jan.-Feb. 1985:

“No” to Socialism

I read the article in Issue No. 102 by William Simpson twice. I’ve read all of his articles very carefully since you first began printing them, and I am greatly impressed by his conclusions.

I was raised in a Christian home. Both my parents were very religious, and I started reading the Bible, at my mother’s urging, when I was 12 years old. From the beginning I had some doubts about both the Old Testament and the New Testament, and ever since then I’ve had struggles with myself about the Bible’s teachings.

After reading William Simpson’s articles in NATIONAL VANGUARD I have come to agree with him that Christianity is not a suitable religion for the Germanic peoples. It is leading our nation to destruction. Our civilization is being wrecked by Biblical doctrines and the fuzzy thinking of church leaders. Their acceptance of all the inferior races into America has convinced me of this. Jesus’s own teachings are partly responsible.

What I cannot accept in NATIONAL VANGUARD, however, is your affinity for Hitler and his National Socialism. I detest any socialism, national or otherwise. I do not believe that it is necessary to establish a socialistic government in Washington in order to break the Zionist hold over our politicians and rid ourselves of the international pests. Do you agree?

C.L.C.

Van Buren, AR

—

Editor’s Reply:

The Second World War was the great watershed in the collapse of the West. Had any major Western nation — in particular, Britain, France, or America — had the integrity to resist the Jews and avoid being drawn into their worldwide conspiracy against Germany, there would have been no world war, but only a war between National Socialist Germany and the Marxist Soviet Union. Germany would have won, Marxism would have been eradicated, and it would have been the beginning of the end for the Jews everywhere.

Instead, Western men were persuaded by their bought politicians, their Judeo-Christian priests, and the Jewish manipulators of public opinion in their midst to take up arms against their German brothers in an unholy crusade to eradicate National Socialism, so that the Jews and the Marxist cancer they had unleashed on the world could survive. Before the Second World War the West was still viable; afterward it was not.

The catastrophe of 1945, with the triumph of the Jew and his allies, made inevitable the opening up of the immigration floodgates for non-Whites into Britain and the United States; the destruction of American White public schools; the enactment of laws curtailing White freedom of association and the rights of White employers and renters (and with them the rights of White employees and tenants); the rise of feminism, homosexuality, and drug use; the breakdown of the traditional family structure; a soaring miscegenation rate; and the displacement of healthy White art, music, literature and drama by a Judeo-democratic-Hollywood ’schlock’ culture. It also led to the metastasis of the Marxist cancer throughout huge areas of Europe and the rise of malignant Zionist power in Palestine — a power which surely would be the instigator of the Third World War.

It behooves those of us who still hope that enough healthy genes for a new beginning can be salvaged from the coming chaos, therefore, to understand everything we can about the Second World War; about its preeminent personality, Adolf Hitler; and about his ideology, National Socialism, from the eradication of which logically followed the evils briefly accounted above. That’s why NATIONAL VANGUARD often has articles on these subjects and will do so in the future.

As for the “socialism” in National Socialism, don’t let yourself be deceived by its enemies, among whom are the adherents of the Judeo-capitalists New Right; it certainly has nothing to do with the Semitic socialism Marx and his kinsmen peddled. The first slogan of Hitler’s National Socialists was: “The common interest before self-interest!” They believed that every German, whether a factory owner or a janitor, should put the interests of his nation and his race ahead of his personal interests. That was really what they meant by the “socialism” in National Socialism.

They also believed that it was the responsibility of the nation’s leaders to concern themselves with the physical health of every member of the nation — not to cater to special-interest groups or to win popularity contests with the fickle and easily swayed masses.

These beliefs determined the racial, economic, and educational policies of Hitler’s government. That government was “socialist,” in that it devoted much of its efforts to improving the economic welfare of working-class and middle-class Germans, as well as the racial quality and racial consciousness of the whole nation. But it did not attempt to enforce any sort of artificial “equality” on its citizens, either of status or income. And it did not discourage the entrepreneurial activities of individual Germans, so long as those activities were not harmful to national interests. Private property not only remained sacrosanct in National Socialist Germany, but the government instituted new policies to enable small farmers to avoid losing their land to moneylenders.

Whether that is “socialism,” or not, NATIONAL VANGUARD certainly is not against it. To go further: We will not break the Zionist hold on America until White Americans have made a conscious decision to put their common racial interests ahead of their private interests.—

The Fraud of Marxism

2011-03-12T19:22:00.046-05:00

”Death of the lie”--
Marxism and High Finance are different aspects of the same animal.

Ch. 10 of Politische Fibel by Hansjoerg Maennel, 16th (1940) edition. Translated by Hadding Scott, 2011.

Marxism or Nationalism

Marxism stands for Democracy, the International, Pacifism, and the Class Struggle with the goal of the abolition of private ownership. The founder of this doctrine was Karl Marx (real name Mardochei*; 1818—1883). Marx was a Jew; this fact in itself explains the entire manner and thrust of his thinking. He was no "proletarian," but came from bourgeois Jewish circumstances. Marx was also no workers’ leader [Arbeiterfuehrer] but a typical literatus. He drew not from life, but from books. The liberal-capitalist writings of the English national economists [Volkswirtschaftler] strongly influenced him. His chief work is Das Kapital. It is teeming with unusual foreign words; a factory worker for example cannot understand it at all. There are no greater opposites than Karl Marx and Adolf Hitler.

Marxism embodies all the fallacies of the 19th Century that plunged our folk into misery, in their acutest form. The Marxists proclaim the International, they deny the value of folkdom, and want to replace it with "international solidarity." The Marxists were pacifists; they have always appealed to cowardice and conducted or glorified treason. Marxism openly called for the class struggle. The Marxists advocated democracy and parliamentarism; their biggest party called itself "Social-Democratic."

We have dealt with these views already. We have recognized that these principles are completely to be rejected, because they consistently bring about the collapse of a nation.

From the spirit of this pernicious fallacy Karl Marx constructed an economic theory. It would be amiss if we critically examined all the elements of Marxism. With that one could at best awaken the memory of this destructive way of thinking. In a few years the Marxist poison instead should be completely extirpated, so that no German knows at all anymore what Marxism is. Therefore only the crucial point of Marxism should be extracted here.

Marx asserts: every entrepreneur always exploits his workers; no employer ever pays out the full earning. Consequently businesses grow at an ever-increasing rate. Big business absorbs small business. In a necessary process of development it finally reaches the point, according to Marx, that there are only a few big capitalists, who on the other hand are faced with an enormous army of proletarians.

On the basis of this prospect Marx does not, however, call for an economic policy that would prevent such a development. Rather he explains with quintessentially Jewish skill at distortion [Verdrehungskraft] that this development in the economy is to be welcomed: it is good that big capital constantly increases; it is good that there are ever more powerful, and accordingly fewer capitalists. That is, according to Marx, a necessary development, which one cannot and should not prevent but only promote. Then, according to Marxist prophecy, comes the blink of an eye in which the few capitalists are dispossessed ("expropriation of the expropriators"(!), in other words dispossession of the dispossessors) by the teeming masses.

The proletariat is to wait patiently for this moment.

This doctrine of the Jew Karl Marx shows the whole fraud of Marxism. Here we discern that the goal of Marxism itself is like that of Capitalism: the dominion of World Jewry. We see the same thing when we consider the attitude toward private ownership. Marxism calls for dispossession, for the abolition of private ownership. Everything is to belong to the state. The result is a reward for the stupid and lazy along with a punishment for the efficient, who have achieved something and are now dispossessed, and with that comes a paralysis of productivity, an education for laziness and parasitism.

Capitalism on the other hand stands for the inviolability, the "sanctity" of private ownership. It is irrelevant how the capital was derived and how it is utilized. The result is the exploitation of the productive.

National-Socialism stands fundamentally on the side of private ownership. What each one creates through honest labor should belong to him. But the state has the right to dispossess when ownership is not used for the wellbeing of the folk or is not honestly gained.

Effect of Marxism: everything belongs to one entity, the state, i.e. the Marxist leaders, thus to Jewry.
Effect of Capitalism: everything belongs to one entity, the big capitalists, thus also to Jewry.
Effect of National-Socialism: to each what is appropriate [jedem das Seine]; evaluation according to achievement.

Because of Adolf Hitler, the workers have been brought into the folk community, rooted in the soil, and de-proletarianized.

Marxism and Capitalism take ownership. National-Socialism makes ownership.

Both Marxism and Capitalism have the same Jewish goal and the same Jewish effect. In both, everything belongs to international high finance; all other human beings are propertyless: "proletarians."

The practice of Marxism has exposed the entire fraud for the German Worker. The ostensible concern for the proletarian was merely a dramatic performance [Spiegelfechterei] made to fool a great many workers and to rope them into the Jewish-led organizations. Marxism has always taken care that the middle classes and the entire bourgeoisie be ruined [vernichtet] and proletarianized. Thereby the Marxist parties also hoped to gain better prospects for agitation and thus better election results.

Social-Democracy and Communism both had the same final aim: they differed only in externals, because of different tactics. Communism is the consistent path of Marxist insanity. Especially in the KPD Lower Humanity organized for the murder of respectable [anstaendigen] Germandom, which joined the SA against the destruction and for the defense of all worthy things.

Adolf Hitler: "Everything from robberies, arsons, railroad attacks, assassination attempts, and so on, receives moral sanction in the Communist Idea. The method of individual mass terror alone has, in the course of a few years, cost the National-Socialist movement over 300 dead and ten-thousand injured.

In Communist Soviet Russia all foundations of folkdom are being systematically destroyed. Here there is no freedom for the worker or the farmer, no marriage and family, no religion, and no honor anymore. Here Asiatics and Jews are triumphant. Whoever opposes this slavery is crushed with bloody terror.

Before the National-Socialist Revolution the Marxist Terror in Germany was manifesting itself ever more clearly. Adolf Hitler had perceived that one could overcome the terror of Marxism not through bourgeois propriety and cowardice, but only through bitter opposition. To this end he founded the SA. The SA has shattered the Marxist Terror. They have accomplished their mission under the heaviest losses.

Marxism and Liberalism both have the same root. They are different varieties of the same Jewish Materialistic worldview. Marxism is a Liberalism with reversed early symptoms. Liberalism is the avarice of the "propertied class"; Marxism is the envy of the "unpropertied class." But National-Socialism is the sacrifice of one nation for the nation.

Marxism and Capitalism are both instruments of Jewry for the enslavement of peoples. Adolf Hitler recognized that one could break Jewish power only when one had led the German Worker out of the Marxist organizations.

The enormous propaganda campaign of the NSDAP had the goal of enlightening the German people about the deceit of Jewry. Whenever the bourgeois Capitalist parties turned against Marxism, they turned against the working class. But they represented essentially the same materialistic worldview as Marxism itself, only in another variation. Therefore the bourgeoisie was unable to defeat Marxism. No party of class, only a national movement, could accomplish this task.

The struggle of National-Socialism against Marxism was never a struggle against the worker, but always about the worker and for the worker. Therefore our leader fought above all against the Marxist plague. This struggle has ended victoriously. The National-Socialist Revolution destroyed Marxism. At the onslaught of the SA this rotten doctrine collapsed like a house of cards.

Our leader has, with the destruction and eradication of Marxism, created the prerequisite for the reascent of Germany .

Joseph Goebbels: "We do not want to abolish ownership; rather we want to generalize ownership."

Adolf Hitler: "On the day when Marxism is smashed in Germany, its fetters are in truth broken forever. For never in our history have we been conquered because of the strength of our opponents, but always only because of our own vices and because of the enemies in our own camp."

Adolf Hitler: "The highest aim of the folkish state is thus the maintenance of those fundamental racial elements which, as imparters of culture, bring the beauty and dignity of a higher humanity."

Further Reading

See inter alia: Adolf Hitler, Mein Kampf, especially vol. I, chapters 5 and 10; vol. II, chapters 2, 3, 4, & 1o. Otto Bangert, German Revolution. Joseph Goebbels , Revolution of the Germans ; Revolution of the Spirit.

____________________
Karl Marx’s father, son of a rabbi, had changed the family name from Mordechai to Marx. The spelling Mardochei appears in a few sources, but Mordechai seems much more common, appearing for example in John Spargo’s Karl Marx: His Life and Work (1910).

African Governments Commemorate the Role of Jews in Subverting White Rule

2011-03-04T23:10:00.012-05:00

The text below is reproduced verbatim from a website advertising postage stamps, released in collaboration by the governments of Liberia, Gambia, and Sierra Leone, that commemorate the role of Jews in subverting White rule in South Africa. Each stamp bears a Jewish star on the lower right.

The claim "that Jews were over represented by 2,500 percent in their proportion to the governing population" is on the original site, which you can view here.

I have removed only the "read more" links, since it appears to me that what is stated on the front page more than makes the point.

Legendary Heroes of Africa

In the anti Apartheid South African Liberation struggle, it was estimated that Jews were over represented by 2,500 percent in their proportion to the governing population. This stamp issue acknowledges the extraordinary sacrifices made by Jews to the liberation of their African brethren, and these stamps recognize some of the most significant contributors to global humanity in the 20th Century.

LIBERIA

Helen Suzman

Helen Suzman (née Gavronsky) was born in the South African mining town of Germiston on 7 November 1917 to Samuel and Frieda Gavronsky, both immigrants from Lithuania who had come to South Africa to escape the restrictions imposed on Jews.

Eli Weinberg

Eli Weinberg was born in 1908 in the port of Libau, in Latvia on the Baltic Sea. He experienced the First World War and the October Revolution of 1917 as a child, and this led to his socialist political development. During World War I, he was separated from his family.

Esther Barsel

Esther Barsel (born October 17, 1924, in Raguva, Lithuania; died October 6, 2008, in Johannesburg) was a South African politician and long-standing member of the South African Communist Party (SACP). She was a member of both her local African National Congress branch and the SACP's Johannesburg Central Branch..

Hymie Barsel

Hymie Barsel was born on September 11, 1920 in Fordsburg, Johannesburg, South Africa to Faiga and Moishe Barsel, both of Litvak heritage. He was raised in a Zionist oriented home. He suffered from epilepsy which was ill understood at that time, eventually receiving treatment from Dr. Max Joffe, also a Zionist.

SIERRA LEONE

Yetta Barenblatt

Yetta Barenblatt was born on 24 September 1913, in Dublin, Ireland, to Basna and Solomon Malamed of Lithuanian origin. In 1925, a friend encouraged her to come to South Africa with the promise of employment. However, due to her circumstances, further education was not possible and Barenblatt was forced to seek employment at a retail store.

Ray Alexander Simons

Ray Alexander Simons née Alexandrowich was born on 12 January 1913 in Latvia. While at school, she displayed little fear in challenging authorities. Her independent thinking suggested she pursue a career in medicine but she soon took up politics. When she was about 13, she became active in the underground Latvian Communist Party.

Baruch Hirson

Baruch Hirson, named after his late grandfather, was born on 10 December 1921 at Doomfontein near Johannesburg in the Transvaal. His father was an electrician. His parents, Joseph and Lily Hirson, were Jews who had immigrated to South Africa to evade the pogroms, persecution and discrimination Jews were subjected to in the old Romanov Empire.

Norma Kitson

Norma Kitson was one of a generation of Jewish activists, who committed themselves to the struggle against racial tyranny in South Africa. The drive of these South African Jews was to give witness against racism and social injustice, even at great personal cost. Norma Kitson's autobiography, Where Sixpence Lives (1986), uniquely fuses the personal and the political.

GAMBIA

Ruth First

Ruth First was born on May 4, 1925 to Jewish immigrants Julius and Matilda First. Julius, a furniture manufacturer, was born in Latvia and came to South Africa in 1906. He and his wife were founder members of the Communist Party of South Africa (CPSA) or South African Communist Party (SACP) in 1921. Ruth and her brother, Ronald, grew up in a household in which intense political debate between people of all races and classes was always present.

Hilda Bernstein

Hilda Bernstein was born in London in 1915. Her father was Simeon Schwartz from Odessa, Ukraine. He relocated to England in 1901 where he became a Bolshevik and represented the new USSR in UK for a short while in 1920's. He returned to the USSR when recalled in 1925, and died in the 1930's without ever having returned to the UK.

Lionel "Rusty" Bernstein

Lionel “Rusty” Bernstein was born in Durban, in 1920; the youngest of four children of European émigrés. Orphaned at eight years old, he was raised by relatives. These early disruptions to his family life were compounded when he was sent to finish his education at a boys’ boarding school. Hilton College, a private school, that was the South African equivalent of Eton or Harrow.

Ronald Segal

At an early age, Ronald Segal proclaimed himself a Socialist, saying he did not want to be a millionaire. But he had no choice. His father was a co-owner of Ackerman's, a giant cheap clothing chain in South Africa. At their home on the slopes of Cape Town's Lion's Head, his Zionist parents entertained visiting dignitaries. At age eight, Ronald read “Gone With the Wind” and a biography of Disraeli.

Does Norman Finkelstein Embellish His Family's History of Suffering?

2011-03-01T16:08:00.020-05:00

Generally when I hear some Jew say that he lost some huge number of relatives in the Holocaust, of course I am skeptical, because we know that there were no homicidal gas-chambers, which are supposed to have been responsible for the vast majority of such deaths, and because from time to time it is reported that some person "lost in the Holocaust" turns out to be still alive and was merely separated from the rest of his family in the chaos following the war. Usually, however, it is not practical to investigate a person's specific claim about his family.

Usually the most you can do is ask the Jew making the claim to explain how he could know what he is claiming, and also have him give some details so as to determine whether his story is consistent with known facts.

Norman Finkelstein is a Jew with academic credentials who has criticized the uses of the Holocaust, and policies of the State of Israel. He does not, however, suggest that the Holocaust may not have occurred (despite abundant evidence that should raise that question in the mind of any thoughtful person examining the matter). He even goes so far as to call the people who do ask these questions "crackpots."

In a presentation at Waterloo University (Canada), Dr. Finkelstein, facing a difficult audience, decides, as he calls it, "to play the Holocaust card." Finkelstein says that both of his parents were in the Warsaw Ghetto Uprising, and that (subsequently) his father was in Auschwitz and his mother was in Majdanek. All of his mother's relatives and all of his father's relatives, he says, were "exterminated."

There is a problem here. The overwhelming majority (more than 300,000) of Jews in the Warsaw Ghetto were sent before the uprising to Treblinka (a work camp according to revisionists, but a killing center according to Holocaustians), so that about 70,000 were left at the time of the uprising . After the uprising, a relatively small number were sent to Majdanek, but according to the United States Holocaust Memorial Museum none were sent to Auschwitz.

The USHMM gives the following approximate figures for Jews deported from Warsaw after the Warsaw Ghetto Uprising of April-May 1943:

7,000 to Treblinka
18,000 to Majdanek
16,000 to Poniatowa forced-labor camp
6,000 to Trawniki forced-labor camp
2,000 to smaller forced-labor camps such as Budzyn and Krasnik

None of the named camps is anywhere near Auschwitz, where Finkelstein has alleged that his father was sent.

It seems likely that Finkelstein was exaggerating for rhetorical effect, playing "the Holocaust card" indeed. It is my view that this is generally what is happening when somebody makes such extreme claims in this matter.

Mosley Set to Music

2011-02-27T14:19:00.016-05:00

Sir Oswald Mosley (1896 -1980) was the leader of the British Union of Fascists, and a friend of National-Socialist Germany. (He was also an hereditary baronet and fourth cousin of the mother of Queen Elizabeth II.)

The Westminster Gazette in the 1920s called Mosley "the most polished literary speaker in the Commons, words flow from him in graceful epigrammatic phrases that have a sting in them for the government and the conservatives. To listen to him is an education in the English language, also in the art of delicate but deadly repartee. He has human sympathies, courage and brains."

The original message was recorded by Mosley (without musical backing) in 1938. The original text appears below. Notably omitted from the musical adaptation is Mosley's reference to the national-socialist and also every specific reference to Britain.

Comrades in Struggle

Sir Oswald Mosley

(June 1938)

Brother Blackshirts, my comrades in the struggle:

Our fight is for the soul of Britain, and in that battle we go forward together till victory be won. Our struggle is hard, because we are fighting for something great, and great things are not lightly or easily gained. We are fighting for nothing less than a revolution in the spirit of our people. We must be worthy of our mission, for blackshirts are those who are summoned to lead the people to a new and a higher civilization.

The Blackshirt is a revolutionary dedicated to the service of our country. We must always possess the character of the true revolutionary. It is not the character that you observe in the little men of the old parties, blown hither and thither by every gust of transient opinion, elated by a little success, downcast by a little failure, gossiping and chattering about the prospects of the next five minutes, jostling for place, but not so forward in service, without loyalty, endurance, or staying power, Such a character is the hallmark of financial democratic politics. It is the opposite of the national-socialist.

In the true revolutionary, the first quality is the power to endure. Constancy, loyalty to cause and comrades, manhood, and stability of nature. These are the qualities of the true Briton, and the true revolutionary. In our movement that great character of the British has been reborn. And for that reason we carry within us the destiny of Britain. We care not whether we win tomorrow morning or at the end of a lifetime of labour and of struggle. For to us the little calculations of the little men mean nothing. All we care is that win we will because Britain demands it and no power on earth can hold down the will within us.

Struggles we have had and will have. Blows we have taken and will again. Victories we have had and will have again, yes greater victories than even Britons have ever known. Through good and ill we march on, till victory be won, for this is the character of the true revolutionary. In the great moments of supreme struggle and decision it is easy to hold that character, even in supreme sacrifice. It is not so easy in the hard daily task. It is then even more than in the great fights we have together that I would like to be the companion of every one of you. I would like to be with every action team that carries the message of our new faith to new streets. I would like to be with every man or woman doing the hard but vital job of giving leadership to the people in the block of houses for which they are responsible.

For these are the jobs that count. By the dedication of thousands to that mission of leading the people in their own homes and streets, revolution is won. In that task I cannot in body be with everyone of you every day. But in spirit I am with you alway*, because this work of the dedicated Blackshirt will win the Britain for which my whole spirit is given. Together in Britain we have lit a flame that the ages shall not extinguish. Guard that sacred flame my brother Blackshirts until it illumines Britain and lights again the path of mankind.
_______________________
* "... and lo, I am with you alway, even unto the end of the world." Matthew 28:20, King James Bible.

When White Men Heed Their Souls: The Battle of Rorke's Drift (1879)

2011-02-20T13:09:00.035-05:00

In our undisciplined, democratic age, we tend to be overly impressed with sheer numbers and with the amount of noise that some group of people can make. I recall that, at the time of the chaos in south-central Los Angeles following the verdict in the Rodney King police-brutality case, I commented to a radio talkshow host, who is not very manly but ostensibly conservative, that one man with a shotgun could stop the advance of the rioting and looting mob. His reaction seemed to be a mixture of horror at the suggestion of using firearms, pre-existing fear of Blacks, and the cowardly certainty that resistance against such overwhelming numbers would be futile.

The Zulu are reputedly one of the most disciplined groups of Negroes in Africa, perhaps several cuts above the Blacks that had been enslaved and sold by other Blacks and were brought to North America. Yet four thousand Zulus were held off by about 150 British soldiers and auxiliaries, with only about 11% fatality on the British side. How much easier, then, to deter a disorganized and opportunistic mob of such Blacks as exist in the USA.

When we White men comport ourselves as White men, and use our gifts of self-control, planning, and ingenuity, even greatly superior numbers of Blacks have no chance against us. The main element in the Blacks' favor, as the film Zulu does portray accurately, is a lot of noise and intimidation.

The actual fighting at Rorke’s Drift lasted perhaps nine hours, and the numerical disproportion portrayed in the film-clip is only a hint of how badly outnumbered the White men really were. The Zulus also had firearms, but they did not use them very effectively.

It could be said that the Blacks generally contributed to their own defeat in the Zulu War by failing to make good use of the advantages that they had. They never made haste to exploit opportune moments for attack (which gave the White men a chance to fortify their positions) and they never learned from their mistakes. In attack, they continued to concentrate their warriors in a double-column formation called the bull’s horns (not portrayed in Zulu), which perhaps had a symbolic meaning for them, even though it maximized the European soldiers’ ability to mow them down with a hail of bullets. Failure to take account of circumstances and think ahead seems to be the weakness of Negroes everywhere.

From Famous Battles of the Nineteenth Century, Volume II (1905):

Rorke's Drift

By C. STEIN

At the end of 1878 there stood upon a rocky terrace on the Natal side of the Buffalo River two stone buildings with thatched roofs, which had formed a Swedish mission station, one of them having been used as a church and the other having been the dwelling of the missionary. These two humble edifices were destined to be, on the 22d January, 1879, the scene of the most brilliant feat of arms performed during the whole Zulu War — a defence by a small determined force against the attack of vastly superior numbers, an exploit whose luster, relieving a period of disaster, maintained the prestige of British arms, and whose success, there can be little doubt, rescued Natal from invasion when failure would have laid the colony open to the advance of a savage enemy. So perfect was the conduct of the officers and men concerned in the episode, and so well conceived and executed were the measures adopted, that even foreign military books quote the exploit as an example of the value of improvised fortifications when they are held by brave men.

When war was declared by Sir Bartle Frere, the High Commissioner for South Africa, against Cetewayo, the Zulu king, the conduct of operations was placed in the hands of Lieutenant-General Lord Chelmsford, K.C.B., as Commander-in-Chief. It was determined to invade Zululand, and all the forces available for this purpose were moved to the frontier. They were divided into five columns, of which three were to advance into the enemy's country from different points, with the intention of finally concentrating at Ulundi, the Zulu capital, while the other two were in the first instance to guard the frontier against possible Zulu raids. The third column, under the command of Colonel Glyn, C.B., the center of the three columns of invasion, was to assemble near Rorke's Drift and cross the Buffalo River at that spot, within a mile of the old Swedish mission station.

The river at Rorke's Drift was, like most African streams, an impassable torrent after rain, but the flood quickly ran off, and a passage could then be effected by the "drift," or ford. There had also been established two ponts, or big, flat-bottomed ferry-boats, each of which could transport an African wagon or a company of infantry.

Colonel Glyn's column crossed the river on the llth of January, 1879, and from that time was engaged in operations in Zululand. Its line of communications with Pietermaritzburg, the chief city of Natal, was through Rorke's Drift to Helpmakaar, and thence by Ladysmith and Estcourt, or by the shorter, though more difficult, route through Greytown. Rorke's Drift, as the actual starting point of invasion, was formed into a depot of stores and a hospital. The deserted mission-station buildings were utilized for this purpose, the old church being converted into a storehouse and the missionary's dwelling forming the hospital. As a garrison for the important post and to secure the passage across the river, Colonel Glyn left B Company of the second battalion of the Twenty-fourth Regiment, under command of Lieutenant Gonville Bromhead. With him were also Major Spalding, who was in general charge of the line of communications, Lieutenant Chard, Royal Engineers, Surgeon Reynolds, Army Medical Department, and other officers. This garrison was encamped near the store and hospital.

For some days after the departure of the third column, which was also accompanied by Lord Chelmsford and the Headquarter Staff, the quiet routine of duty was pursued. Letters were passed to and from the front, necessary stores and supplies were sent on, and the men wounded in the first engagements were received into the hospital. Among these last was one of the enemy, who had been shot through the thigh at Sirayo's kraal, and who was treated and nursed with the same care and attention as the Englishmen against whom he had fought.

On the 20th of January, however, a large portion of the second column, under Colonel Durnford, Royal Engineers, arrived at Rorke's Drift and encamped. Their stay was brief, for they were summoned to the fatal camp of Insandhlwana on the morning of the 22d, Colonel Durnford leaving a company of the Natal Native Contingent, under Captain Stephenson, to strengthen the little post. It became evident from various circumstances that Colonel Glyn's column was encountering a stronger resistance than had been anticipated, and that, as the enemy were in force within a few miles, they might make a rapid descent upon the weakly guarded line of communications.

It was known that two companies of the first battalion of the Twenty-fourth were at Helpmakaar, ten miles distant, and Major Spalding resolved to go there at once in order to bring them up as a reinforcement to Lieutenant Bromhead's force. In his absence, Lieutenant Chard became senior officer at Rorke's Drift, and responsible for its well-being.

Preparation for the Impending Attack

Although on the 22d of January there was thus a feeling of uneasiness at the river post, nothing had occurred till some hours after midday to cause any special alarm to its garrison. We may believe that a general plan of action had been considered if an attack should be made upon it, but in the meantime all the officers and men were engaged in their usual employments. Lieutenant Chard was at the ponts, and Lieutenant Bromhead was in his little camp hard by the store and hospital. Shortly after three P.m. two mounted men were seen galloping at headlong speed towards the ferry from Zululand. There is little difficulty in recognizing messengers of disaster, the men who ride with the avenger of blood close on their horses' track, and Chard, who met them, knew that something terrible had happened. His worst anticipations were more than realized when the two fugitives — Lieutenant Adendorff, of the Native Contingent, and a Natal volunteer — told their story: the camp at Insandhlwana had been attacked and taken by the enemy, of whom a large force was now advancing on Rorke's Drift.

The Natal volunteer hurried on to give the alarm at Helpmakaar; but one man was enough for this service, and Adendorff — gallant fellow! — said that he would remain at Rorke's Drift, where every additional European would be a valuable reinforcement, and cast in his lot with its defenders. Chard at once gave orders to the guard at the ponts to strike their tents, put all stores on the spot into the wagon, and withdraw to the main body of the post.

Now occurred the first incident which testified to the spirit which animated the small force on the banks of the Buffalo. The ferryman — Daniells —and Sergeant Milne, of the Third Buffs (who was doing duty with the Twenty-fourth), proposed that they should be allowed to moor the two ponts in the middle of the river, and offered, with the ferry-guard of six men, to defend them against attack — a brave thought, indeed, but it was put aside. Chard was too good a soldier to divide his few men in any way. He saw at once that the commissariat stores and hospital would require every available rifle for their defence, and that the safety of every other place was comparatively a very minor consideration.

While he was giving his orders an urgent message came from Bromhead asking him to join him at once. To Bromhead also had come several mounted men fleeing from Insandhlwana, bearing the same dread intelligence which Adendorff had brought to the ferry, and the trained officer of engineers was required to concert and decide upon measures of defence. But when the engineer joined the infantry subaltern he found that the latter, aided by Assistant-Commissary Dunne, had already begun the necessary work, and that there was nothing to change, if much was still left to complete.

The three officers held a hurried consultation, and prompt use was made of all ordinary expedients of war, while materials never before employed in fortification were pressed into service. The store and hospital were loop-holed and barricaded, the windows and doors blocked with mattresses; but it was necessary to connect the defence of the two buildings by a parapet. There were no stones at hand with which to build a wall, and if there had been, there was no time to make use of them; the hard, rocky soil could not be dug and formed into ditch and breastwork; but there was a great store of bags of mealies, or the grain of Indian corn, which had been collected as horse provender for the army. Assistant-Commissary Dunne suggested that these should be used in the fashion of sand-bags for the construction of the required parapet.

Everybody labored with the energy of men who know that their safety depends on their exertions. Chard and Bromhead, Surgeon Reynolds and Dunne not merely directed, but engaged most energetically in the work of preparation.

When the alarm was first given it was intended to remove the worst cases from the hospital to a place of safety, and two wagons were prepared for the purpose; but it was found that the attempt to move the patients at the slow pace of ox-teams when the Zulus were so close at hand would only result in offering them as easy victims to the murderous assegai. The two wagons were therefore used as part of the defences, and mealie bags were piled underneath and upon them, so that each formed a strong post of vantage.

The ferry-guard had joined the rest of the force at 3.30 P.m., and a few minutes later an officer of Durnford's Natal Native Horse, with a hundred of his men who had been heavily engaged at Insandhlwana, rode up and asked for orders. Chard directed him to watch for the approach of the enemy, sending out vedettes, and when he was pressed, to fall back and assist in the defence of the post. So far it seemed certain that when the threatened Zulu attack developed itself against the Rorke's Drift fortifications they would be found, though hurriedly devised and executed, to be adequately defended by the company of the Twenty-fourth, Captain Stephenson's company of the Native Contingent, and about a hundred Basutos of the Natal Native Horse.

But if the gallant English officers who had striven so hard and with so much military genius to make their position tenable looked forward to this amount of support, they were destined to grievous disappointment and mortification. At 4.15 P.m. the sound of firing was heard behind a hill towards the south, and told that the vedettes of the Native Horse were engaged with the enemy. Their officer returned, reporting that the Zulus were close at hand, and that his men would not obey orders. Chard and his comrades had the sore trial of seeing them all moving off towards Helpmakaar, leaving the garrison to its fate.

Nor was this all. The evil example was only too soon followed. Captain Stephenson's company of the Native Contingent also felt their hearts fail, and, accompanied by their commander, also fled from the post of duty.

[...] As in all other occasions of the war where Natal Kaffirs were employed, they gave way in time of stress, and the greatest shame of the matter was that their colonial European officer now shared their misconduct.

The garrison at Rorke's Drift was now reduced to Bromhead's company of the Twentyfourth — about eighty strong — and some men of other corps, the total number within the post being one hundred thirty-nine, of whom thirty-five were sick or wounded men in hospital. The original scheme of defence had provided for a much larger force, and Chard recognized that it would now be impossible long to occupy effectively the range of parapets and loopholes which had been prepared. There was nothing for it but to form an inner line of defence, to which the garrison might fall back when the outer line became untenable. He decided that, if necessary, the hospital must be abandoned, and that the defence must be restricted to the store and the space in front of it, including a well-built stone kraal or enclosure which abutted on it to the eastward. To carry out this plan he commenced an inner retrenchment, forming a parapet of biscuit-boxes across the larger enclosure. This was only about two boxes high when the expected flood of attack hurled its first waves against the frail solitary bulwark which stood between Natal and savage invasion.

The Attack Commences

About 4.30 P.m. five or six hundred of the enemy appeared, sweeping round the rocky hill to the south of the post, and advancing at the swift pace characteristic of the Zulu warriors against the south wall which connected the store and hospital. But they had to deal with stern men who were braced up for the encounter by feelings of duty, patriotism, and the long habit of regimental discipline and comradeship which makes each feel assured and confident that all are striving shoulder to shoulder, and that none will blench from his appointed place. From the parapet of mealie bags and from the hospital poured forth a heavy and well-sustained fire, which was crossed by a flanking discharge from the store. No man wasted a shot, and the aim was cool and deliberate.

Even Zulu valor and determination could not face the deadly leaden hail, and the onslaught weakened and broke within fifty yards of the British rifles. Some of the assailants swerved to their left, and passed round to the west of the hospital; some sought cover where they could, and occupied banks, ditches, bushes, and the cooking place of the garrison.

But this first attack was only the effort of the enemy's advanced guard. Masses of warriors followed and flowed over the elevated southward ledge of rocks overlooking the buildings. Every cave and crevice was quickly filled, and from these sheltered and commanding positions they opened a heavy and continuous fire. It was fortunate that the spoil in rifles and ammunition taken at Insandhlwana was not yet available for use against the English, as at Kambula and later engagements, but the enemy's firearms were still the old muskets and rifles of which they had long been in possession. Even so, at the short range these were sufficiently effective, and, in the hands of better marksmen than Zulus usually are, might have inflicted crushing losses.

The first attack repulsed, a second desperate effort was made by the enemy against the northwest wall just below the hospital; but here again the defenders were ready to meet it, and again the assailing torrent broke and fell back. Such of the sick and wounded in the hospitals as were able to rouse themselves from their beds of pain had by this time seized rifle and bayonet and joined their comrades; but though every man was now mustered, the total number was all too small for the grim task before them.

The misfortune of the extreme hurry in the preparations for defence was now painfully apparent. In strengthening any position for defensive occupation one of the first measures taken by a commander is to clear as large an open space as possible round the parapet or fortifications which he proposes to hold. All ditches and hollows should be filled up; all buildings, walls, and heaps of refuse should be pulled down and scattered; all trees, shrubs, and thick herbage should be cut and removed; so that no attack can be made under cover, no safe place may be found from which deliberate fire may be delivered, or any movement can be made by an enemy unseen, and therefore unanticipated.

At Rorke's Drift, not only were the buildings and parapets overlooked and commanded to the southward by a rocky hill full of caves and lurking-places, but there was a garden to the north, a thick patch of bush which was close to the parapet, a square Kaffir house and large brick oven and cooking trenches, besides numerous banks, walls, and ditches, all of which offered a shelter to the enemy, which they were not slow to profit by. The post was encircled by a dense ring of the foe, and from every side came the whistle of their bullets.

Up till this time, though several men had been wounded, no one had been struck dead. Suddenly a whisper passed round among the Twentyfourth, "Poor old King Cole is killed." Private Cole, who was known by this affectionate barrack-room nickname, was at the parapet when a bullet passed through his head, and he fell doing his duty — a noble end.

If the Zulu fire was telling, however, the steady marksmanship of the English officers and men was still more effective. Private Dunbar, of the Twenty-fourth, laid low a mounted chief who was conspicuous in directing the enemy, and immediately afterwards shot eight warriors in as many successive shots. Everywhere the officers were present with words of encouragement, exposing themselves fearlessly and showing that iron coolness and self-possession which rouses such confidence and emulation in soldiery on a day of battle.

Assistant-Commissary Dunne — a man of great stature and physique, with a long, flowing beard — was continually going along the parapet, cheering the men and using the rifle with deadly effect. There was a rush of Zulus against the spot where he was, led by a huge man, whose leopard-skin kaross marked the chief. Dunne called out "Pot that fellow!" and himself aimed over the parapet at another, when his rifle dropped from his hand, and he spun round with suddenly pallid face, shot through the right shoulder. Surgeon Reynolds was by his side at once, and bound up the wound.

Unable any longer to use his rifle, he handed it to storekeeper Byrne, but continued unmoved to superintend the men near to him and to direct their fire. Byrne took his place at the parapet, and his bullets were not wasted. In a few minutes Corporal Scammel, Natal Native Contingent, who was next to him, was shot through the shoulder and back. He fell, and crawling to Chard, who was fighting side by side with the men, handed him the remainder of his cartridges. In his agony he asked for a drink of water. Byrne at once fetched it for him, and whilst handing it to the suffering soldier was himself shot through the head, and fell prone, a dead man.

While fighting was thus going on all round the post, a series of specially determined attacks was made against the northern side. Here the Zulus were able to collect under cover of the garden and patch of bush, and from that shelter were able to rush untouched close up to the parapet. Soon they were on one side of the barricade, while the defenders held the other, and across it there was a hand-to-hand struggle of the bayonet against the broad-bladed bangwan, the stabbing assegai. So close were the combatants that the Zulus seized the English bayonets, and in two instances even succeeded in wrenching them from the rifles, though in each case the breechloader took a stern vengeance.

The muzzles of the opposing firearms were almost touching each other, and the discharge of a musket blew the broad "dopper" hat from the head of Corporal Schiess, of the Natal Native Contingent. This man (a Swiss by birth), who had been a patient in hospital, leaped on to the parapet and bayoneted the man who fired, regained his place, and shot another; then, repeating his former exploit, again leaped on the top of the mealie bags and bayoneted a third. Early in the fight he had been struck by a bullet in the instep, but, though suffering acute pain, he left not his post, and was only maddened to perform deeds of heroic daring.

The struggle here was too severe and unequal to be long continued. Besides the ceaseless attacks of their enemy in front, the defenders of the parapet were exposed to the fire which took them in reverse from the high hill to the south. Five soldiers had been thus shot dead in a short space of time. At six P.m. the order was given to retire behind the retrenchment of biscuitboxes. When the defence of the parapet was thus removed, the dark crowd of Zulus surged over the mealie bags to attack the hospital; but such a heavy fire was sent from the line of the retrenchment that nearly every man who leaped into the enclosure perished in the effort. Again and again they charged forward, shouting their war-cry "Usutu! Usutu!" and ever the deathdealing volleys smote them to the ground.

Forced Retreat from the Hospital

The story has now been told of the struggle during the first hour and a half about the storehouse and large enclosure, till the moment came when it was no longer possible to hold the whole of the defences as they were at first organized, and Chard was constrained to withdraw behind the biscuit-box retrenchment which his foresight had provided. All this time the enemy had been making fierce and constantly reiterated attempts to force their way into the hospital, which was at the west end of the enclosure. Here Bromhead personally superintended the resistance, and here deeds of military prowess, cool presence of mind, and glorious self-devotion were performed to be proud of.

It has been said that the building had a thatched roof, and the Zulus not only strove to force an ingress, but used every expedient to set the thatch on fire, and thus to destroy the poor stronghold which so long mocked at their attempts to take it. While many of the patients whose ailments were comparatively slight had risen from their pallets and taken an active part in the defence, there were several poor fellows, utterly helpless, distributed among the different wards; and it is difficult to conceive a situation more trying than theirs must have been, listening to the demoniac yells of the savages, only separated from them by a thin wall, thirsting for their blood. At every window were one or two comrades, firing till the rifles were heated to scorching by the unceasing discharge. Bullets splashed upon the walls, and the air reeked with dense, sulphurous smoke. The combatants may have been excited and carried away by the mad fury of battle; but to men depressed by disease, weakened and racked with pain, truly the minutes must have been long and terrible in their mental and physical suffering.

Shortly after five o'clock the Zulus had been able so far to break down the entrance to the room at the extreme end of the hospital that they were able to charge at the opening; but Bromhead was there, and drove them back time after time with the bayonet. As long as the enclosure was held, they failed in every fierce attempt.

Private Joseph Williams was firing from a small window hard by, and on the next morning fourteen warriors were found dead beneath it, besides others along his line of fire. When his ammunition was expended, he joined his brother, Private John Williams, and two of the patients who also had fired their last cartridge, and with them guarded the door with their bayonets. No longer able to keep their opponents at a distance, the four stood grimly resolute, waiting till the door was battered in and they stood face to face with the foe.

Then followed a death struggle. The English bayonet crossed the broad-bladed bangwan, the stalwart Warwickshire lads met the lithe and muscular tribesmen of Cetewayo, and the weapons glinted thirsty for blood. In the melee poor Joseph Williams was grappled with by two Zulus, his hands were seized, and, dragged out from among his comrades, he was killed before their eyes.

But now it was known that the hospital must be abandoned, and as the usual path was occupied by the enemy, a way had to be made through the partition walls. John Williams and the two patients succeeded in making a passage with an axe into the adjoining room, where they were joined by Private Henry Hook. John Williams and Hook then took it in turn to guard the hole through which the little party had come, with the bayonet, and keep the foe at bay, while the others worked at cutting a further passage. In this retreat from room to room, another brave soldier, Private Jenkins, met the same fate as did Joseph Williams, and was dragged to his death by the pursuers. The others at last arrived at a window looking into the enclosure towards the storehouse, and, leaping from it, ran the gauntlet of the enemy's fire till they reached their comrades behind the biscuit-box retrenchment. To the devoted bravery and cool resource of Private John Williams and Hook, eight patients, who had been in the several wards which they had traversed, owed their lives. If it had not been for the assistance of these two gallant men, all the eight would have perished where they lay. These, however, were only some of the hairbreadth escapes from the hospital, and only some of the deeds of stubborn hardihood performed in it.

A few of the sick men were half carried, half led, by chivalrous comrades across the enclosure to the retrenchment, but many had to make their own way over the space now swept by the Zulu bullets, and that that space was clear was due to the steady fire maintained by Chard, which prevented the Zulus themselves from leaving the spots where they were under cover. Trooper Hunter, Natal Mounted Police, a very tall young man, who had been a patient, essayed the rush to safety, but he was hit and fell before he reached his goal. Corporal Mayer, Natal Native Contingent, who had been wounded in the knee by an assegai-thrust in one of the early engagements of the campaign, Bombardier Lewis, Royal Artillery, whose leg and thigh were swollen and disabled from a wagon accident, and Trooper Green, Natal Police, also a nearly helpless invalid, all got out of a little window looking into the enclosure. The window was at some distance from the ground, and each man fell in escaping from it. All had to crawl (for none of them could walk) through the enemy's fire, and all passed scatheless into the retrenchment except Green, who was struck on the thigh. In one of the wards facing the hill on the south side of the hospital, Privates William Jones and Robert Jones had been posted. There were seven patients in the ward, and these two men defended their post till six of the seven patients had been removed. The seventh was Sergeant Maxfield, who, delirious with fever, resisted all attempts to move him. Robert Jones, with rare courage and devotion, went back a second time to try to carry him out, but found the ward already full of Zulus, and the poor sergeant stabbed to death on his bed.

It has been mentioned that a wounded prisoner was being treated in the hospital. So much had he been impressed by the kindness which he had received, that he was anxious to assist in the defence. He said "he was not afraid of the Zulus, but he wanted a gun." His new-born goodwill was not, however, tested. When the ward in which he lay was forced, Private Hook, who was assisting the Englishmen in the next room, heard the Zulus talking to him. The next day his charred remains were found in the ashes of the building.

That communication was kept up with the hospital at all, and that it was possible to effect the removal of so many patients, was due in great part to the conduct of Corporal Allen and Private Hitch. These two soldiers together, in defiance of danger, held a most exposed position, raked in reverse by the fire from the hill, till both were severely wounded. Their determined bravery had its result in the safety of their comrades. Even after they were incapacitated from further fighting, they never ceased, when their wounds had been dressed, to serve out ammunition from the reserve throughout the rest of the combat.

When the defence of the hospital was relaxed, it had been easy for the enemy to carry out their plan of setting fire to the thatched roof, and now the whole was in a blaze, the flames rising high and casting a lurid glare over the scene of conflict. The last men who effected their retreat from the building had as much to dread from the spreading conflagration as from the Zulu assegais.

We have seen that, from the want of interior communication, it had been necessary for those who did escape to cut their way from room to room. Alas! to some of the patients, it had been impossible for the anxious leader and his stanch, willing followers to penetrate. Defeated by the flames and by the numbers of their opponents, Chard records in his official despatch, "With the most heartfelt sorrow, I regret we could not save these poor fellows from their terrible fate."

While in the hospital the last struggle was going on, Chard's unfailing resource had provided another element of strength to his now restricted line of defence, and had formed a place of comparative security for the reception of his wounded men. In the small yard by the storehouse were two large piles of mealie bags. These, with the assistance of two or three men and Dunne, who, severely wounded as he was, continued working with unabated energy and determination, he formed into an oblong and sufficiently high redoubt. In the hollow space in its center were laid the sick and wounded, while its crest gave a second line of fire, which swept much of the ground that could not be seen by the occupiers of the lower parapets. As the intrepid men were making this redoubt, their object was quickly detected by the enemy, who poured upon them a rain of bullets; but fortunately unhurt, they completed their work.

The Battle's End

The night had fallen, and the light from the burning hospital was now of the greatest service to the defender, as it illumined every spot for hundreds of yards round, and gave every advantage to the trained riflemen of the Twenty-fourth.

The Zulu losses had been tremendously heavy; but still they pressed their unremitting attack. Rush after rush was made right up to the parapets so strenuously held, and their musketry fire never slackened.- The outer wall of the stone kraal on the east of the store had to be abandoned, and finally the garrison was confined to the commissariat store, the enclosure just in front of it, the inner wall of the kraal, and the redoubt of mealie bags.

But the steadfastness of the defenders was never impaired. Still every man fired with the greatest coolness. Not a shot was wasted, and Rorke's Drift Station remained still proudly impregnable. At 10 P.m. the hospital fire had burnt itself out, and darkness settled over defence and attack. It was not till midnight, however, that the Zulus began to lose heart, and give to the garrison some breathing space and repose. Desultory firing still continued from the hill to the southward, and from the bush and garden in front; but there were no more attacks in force, and the stress of siege was practically over.

The dark hours were full of anxiety, and even the stout hearts which had not quailed during the long period of trial that was past must have had some feeling of disquietude for the morrow, lest wearied, reduced in numbers, and with slender supply of water, they should be called upon to meet renewed efforts made by a reenforced foe.

The dawn came at last, and the eyes of all were gladdened by seeing the rear of the Zulu masses retiring round the shoulder of the hill from which their first attack had been made. The supreme tension of mind and body was over, and if the struggle had been long and stern the victory was for the time complete. How bitterly it had been fought out was shown by the piles of the enemy's dead lying around, and by the silence of familiar voices when the roll was called. There was yet no rest. The enemy might take heart and return, for, though many of their warriors had seen their last fight, their numbers were so overwhelming, and they must have known so well how close had been the pressure of their attack, that they might well think that, with renewed efforts, success was more than possible.

Patrols were sent out to collect the arms left lying on the field. The defences were strengthened, and, mindful of the fate of the hospital, a working party was ordered to remove the thatch from the roof of the store. The men who were not employed otherwise were kept manning the parapets, and all were ready at once to snatch up their rifles and again to hold the post which they had guarded so long. A friendly Kaffir was sent to Helpmakaar, saying that they were still safe, and asking for assistance.

About seven A.m. a mass of the enemy was seen on the hills to the southwest, and it seemed as if another onslaught was threatened. They were advancing slowly when the remains of the third column appeared in the distance, coming from Insandhlwana, and, as the English approached, the threatening mass retired, and finally disappeared.

Lord Chelmsford, Colonel Glyn, and that part of their force which, having been engaged elsewhere, had not been in the Insandhlwana camp when it was attacked and taken, had passed the night in sad and anxious bivouac among the dead bodies of their comrades and the debris of a most melancholy disaster. Full of disquietude about the fate of the post at Rorke's Drift, and the line of communications, they had pushed on with earliest dawn. Their advanced guard of mounted men strained eager eyes towards Rorke's Drift. The British flag still waved over the storehouse, and figures in red coats could be seen moving about the place. But smoke was rising where the hospital had stood, and, remembering that the victorious Zulus at Insandhlwana had clad themselves in the uniforms of the dead, there was a moment of dread uncertainty to the officer who was leading the way. But surely that was a faint British cheer rising from the post! A few hundred yards more of advance, and it was known that here at least no mistake had been made; here courage and determination had not been shown in vain; and that here something had been done to restore the confidence in British prowess which had just received so rude a shock elsewhere.

What a sight was the spot in the bright morning sunlight! There lay hundreds of Zulus either dead or gasping out the last remains of life; there was the grim and gray old warrior lying side by side with the young man who had come "to wash his assegai"; there a convulsive movement of arm or leg, the rolling of a slowly glazing eye, or the heaving of a bulletpierced chest showed that life was not quite extinct; and there were the defenders, wan, battlestained, and weary, but with the proud light of triumph in their glance, standing by the fortifications which they had so stoutly held — fortifications so small, so frail, that it seemed marvelous how they had been made to serve their purpose. The skeleton of the hospital still was there, but its roof and woodwork had fallen in, and in the still smoking pile men were searching for the remains of lost comrades. And there, in the corner of the enclosure, reverently covered and guarded, were the bodies of the dead who had given their lives for England and sealed their devotion to duty with their blood. Well might Lord Chelmsford congratulate the defenders of Rorke's Drift on the brilliant stand that they had made, and well might the colony of Natal look upon them as saviours from cruel invasion.

In telling the story of the events of the 22d, it has been said that Major Spalding left Rorke's Drift to seek reinforcements at Helpmakaar. There he found two companies of the Twentyfourth, under Major Upcher, and with them he at once commenced to march to the river post. On their way they met several fugitives who asserted that the place had fallen, and when they arrived within three miles of their destination, a large body of Zulus was found barring the way, while the flames of the burning hospital could be seen rising from the river valley. It was only too probable that if they went on they would merely sacrifice to no purpose the only regular troops remaining between the frontier and Pietermaritzburg. Helpmakaar was the principal store depot for the center column, full of ammunition and supplies, and it seemed best that its safety should, at any rate, be provided for as far as possible. The two companies were therefore ordered to return, and preparations for the defence of the stores were commenced.

According to the closest estimate, the number of Zulus who attacked Rorke's Drift was about four thousand, composed of Cetewayo's Undi and Udkloko regiments, and about four hundred dead bodies were buried near the post after the attack. The wounded were all carried away from the field. The loss of the garrison was fifteen killed and twelve wounded, of whom two died almost immediately.

What Christian Zionists Support

2011-02-07T17:56:00.047-05:00

This BBC program presents the conditions under which some Jewish settlers illegally occupy territory that has been designated by the UN as not belonging to them.

The political vanguard of the State of Israel consists of the craziest fringe of the Jews, who take their Jewish Book of Legends as fact. They regard themselves as authorized to defy all earthly authorities, including the Israeli government whenever it fails to take the most extreme position.

At 43:50 "the ovens of Auschwitz" are invoked to justify what the Jews are doing on the West Bank as "a war of survival for the Jewish People." Ultimately the Holocaust, and in general the idea that the rest of the world wants to kill all the Jews, justifies and excuses anything that Jews might want to do.

This paranoia also cements their group-solidarity. They are so insular that when the interviewer asks his Jewish guide Daniel Luria if he thinks he might be a religious extremist he cites the example of millions of other Jews in the State of Israel as proof that it can't be so. These Jews have their own little world, a self-imposed ghetto where the majority will confirm whatever they want to believe.

Whatever facts don't fit, they falsify. Time and again the host, Theroux, asks Luria to respond to the accusations of an Arab who complains loudly that Jews have stolen his real estate and are trespassing. The explanations that the Jew gives do not seem very credible.

At 35:00 we are introduced to some Christian Zionists from the United States who have traveled to the Middle East to assist Jews illegally colonizing the West Bank. The psychopathology of these people is of particular interest, because unconditional U.S. support for Israel depends on them. These people are the Zionist Jews' fellow travelers, who form a cohesive and fanatical faction in the Republican Party. Their support ensured the nomination of George W. Bush in 2000 and has disposed the United States to undertake unnecessary Middle-East wars.

As believers in an heretical strain of Christianity called Premillennialism, which became widespread in the 19th century and includes those Protestant sects that regard the Book of Revelations as predicting events yet to come, these people get a special feeling of "being part of prophecy" from serving the Jews. In defiance of what is clearly stated in the Christian Gospels, they regard the Jewish folk as still bearing the mantle of God's Chosen.

The establishment of a Jewish state on the sparsely populated island of Madagascar, as provided in the Third Reich's proposed peace-treaty with France, would have been infinitely more reasonable than supporting some Jews in their effort to carve out part of the densely populated Fertile Crescent, but Biblical superstition has overpowered reason in this matter.*
_____________________

* This blog has other entries about the Madagascar Plan and how Chaim Weizmann, the leader of the World Jewish Congress, insisted on Palestine regardless of cost or consequences. To get a general idea of how ridiculous the Old Testament's representation of ancient Jewish history is, read Voltaire on the History of the Jews.

The Life of George Lincoln Rockwell

2011-01-29T22:34:00.012-05:00

A well done presentation of Rockwell's life.

To learn about Rockwell's death, please visit my other blog.

Rockwell was a man of great courage and ability, who spoke some important truths, but it remains an open question with me, to what extent Rockwell really was a national-socialist. Clearly he had an essentially biological view of man (despite nominal Christianity) and was thoroughly anti-Communist, and he was aware of Jews as a subversive element, but these tendencies were strong in the USA prior to World War II, and not especially linked to national-socialism until war-propaganda made them so.

Rockwell was certainly a nationalist. It is on the second half of the "national-socialist" label that Rockwell seems open to question.* I have noticed that some of the people (William Pierce, Kurt Saxon) that joined Rockwell leaned toward a traditional American "rugged individualism" and seemed to take little interest in the NSDAP's economic policies; they seemed to be hostile toward the basic idea of social-welfare programs, which were crucial to the National-Socialist project in Germany.

________________________________
* According to today's standard textbook definitions, abundant social programs and central economic planning do not qualify a society as socialist without government-ownership of enterprises. This technicality gives Marxists the pleasure of declaring that national-socialism even as it was practiced in Germany is not really socialism. But my question is whether even the aspects of socialism that the NSDAP practiced are supported by or consistent with Rockwell's statements and writings.

Hitler’s Peace Offers 1933-1939

2011-01-25T20:10:00.005-05:00

This pamphlet bears no date but was evidently composed and published in the months between the conquest of Poland and the commencement of hostilities between France, Britain, and Germany. A French-language edition also exists.

The author, Dr. Friedrich Stieve, was a much-published German author long before the ascent of National-Socialism in Germany. Before the First World War Stieve wrote a book of poems (1908) and a biography of the mediaeval Italian prince Ezzelino da Romano (1909); Stieve apparently began writing history in 1916 with Die Politischen Probleme Des Weltkrieges; in 1920 Gedanken über Deutschland was published, apparently a book reflective of Germany’s unfortunate position at the time. Thereafter Stieve continued to write about the causes of the First World War, especially the role of Russia, including Isvolsky and the World War. During the National-Socialist period Stieve produced several books on German history, including Die außenpolitische Lage Deutschlands von Bismarck bis Hitler.

Among the interesting points made here is that Hitler had offered a non-aggression pact to France three years before he offered it to the Soviet Union. There were only two ways to make Germany secure from military encirclement and the threat of a two-front war: a pact with France or with the U.S.S.R. French intransigence forced Hitler to take the latter option.

What the World Rejected: Hitler's Peace Offers 1933-1939

by Friedrich Stieve

Germany's enemies maintain today that Adolf Hitler is the greatest disturber of peace known to history, that he threatens every nation with sudden attack and oppression, that he has created a terrible war machine in order to cause trouble and devastation all around him. At the same time they intentionally conceal an all-important fact: they themselves drove the Leader of the German people finally to draw the sword. They themselves compelled him to seek to obtain at last by the use of force that which he had been striving to gain by persuasion from the beginning: the security of his country. They did this not only by declaring war on him on September 3, 1939, but also by blocking step by step for seven years the path to any peaceful discussion.

The attempts repeatedly made by Adolf Hitler to induce the governments of other states to collaborate with him in a reconstruction of Europe represent an ever-recurring pattern in his conduct since the commencement of his labors for the German Reich. But these attempts were wrecked every time by reason of the fact that nowhere was there any willingness to give them due consideration, because the evil spirit of the Great War still prevailed everywhere, because in London and Paris and in the capitals of the Western Powers' vassal states there was only one fixed intention: to perpetuate the power of Versailles.

A rapid glance at the most important events will furnish incontrovertible proof for this statement.

When Adolf Hitler came to the fore, Germany was as gagged and as helpless as the victors of 1918 wanted her to be. Completely disarmed, with an army of only 100,000 men intended solely for police duties within the country, she found herself within a tightly closed ring of neighbors all armed to the teeth and leagued together. To the old enemies in the West, Britain, Belgium, and France, new ones were artificially created and added in the East and the South: above all Poland and Czechoslovakia. A quarter of the population of Germany was forcibly torn away from their mother country and handed over to foreign powers. The Reich, mutilated on all sides and robbed of every means of defense, at any moment could become the helpless victim of some rapacious neighbor.

Then it was that Adolf Hitler for the first time made his appeal to the common sense of the other powers. On May 17, 1933, a few months after his appointment to the office of Reichskanzler, he delivered a speech in the German Reichstag, from which we extract the following passages:

" . . . Germany will be perfectly ready to disband her entire military establishment and destroy the small amount of arms remaining to her, if the neighboring countries will do the same thing with equal thoroughness.

“. . . Germany is entirely ready to renounce aggressive weapons of every sort if the armed nations, on their part, will destroy their aggressive weapons within a specified period, and if their use is forbidden by an international convention.

“. . . Germany is at all times prepared to renounce aggressive weapons if the rest of the world does the same. Germany is prepared to agree to any solemn pact of non-aggression because she does not think of attacking anybody but only of acquiring security.”

No answer was received. Without paying any heed the others continued to fill their arsenals with weapons, to pile up their stores of explosives, to increase the numbers of their troops. At the same time the League of Nations, the instrument of the victorious powers, declared that Germany must first pass through a period of "probation" before it would be possible to discuss with her the question of the other countries. On October 14, 1933, Hitler broke away from this League of Nations with which it was impossible to come to any agreement. Shortly afterwards, however, he came forward with a new proposal for the improvement of international relations. This proposal included the following six points:

1. Germany receives full equality of rights.

2. The fully armed States undertake amongst themselves not to increase their armaments beyond their present level.

3. Germany adheres to this agreement, freely undertaking to make only so much actual moderate use of the equality of rights granted to her as will not present a threat to the security of any other European power.

4. All States recognize certain obligations in regard to conducting war on humane principles, or to the elimination of certain weapons for use against the civilian population.

5. All States accept a uniform general control which will watch over and ensure the observance of these obligations.

6. The European nations guarantee one another the unconditional maintenance of peace by the conclusion of non-aggression pacts, to be renewed after ten years.

Following upon this a proposal was made to increase the strength of the German army to 300,000 men, corresponding to the strength required by Germany "having regard to the length of her frontiers and the size of the armies of her neighbors," in order to protect her threatened territory against attacks. The defender of the principle of peaceable agreement was thus trying to accommodate himself to the unwillingness of the others to disarm by expressing a desire for a limited increase of armaments for his own country. An exchange of notes, starting from this and continuing for years, finally came to a sudden end with an unequivocal "no" from France. This "no" was moreover accompanied by tremendous increases in the armed forces of France, Britain, and Russia.

In this way Germany's position became still worse than before. The danger to the Reich was so great that Adolf Hitler felt himself compelled to act. On March 16, 1935, he reintroduced conscription. But in direct connection with this measure he once more announced an offer of agreements of an extensive nature, the purpose of which was to ensure that any future war would be conducted on humane principles, in fact to make such a war practically impossible by eliminating destructive armaments. In his speech of May 21, 1935, he declared:

"The German Government is ready to take an active part in all efforts which may lead to a practical limitation of armaments. It regards a return to the former idea of the Geneva Red Cross Convention as the only possible way to achieve this. It believes that at first there will be only the possibility of a gradual abolition and outlawry of weapons and methods of warfare which are essentially contrary to the Geneva Red Cross Convention which is still valid.

“Just as the use of dumdum bullets was once forbidden and, on the whole, thereby prevented in practice, so the use of other definite arms should be forbidden and prevented. Here the German Government has in mind all those arms which bring death and destruction not so much to the fighting soldiers as to non-combatant women and children.

“The German Government considers as erroneous and ineffective the idea to do away with aeroplanes while leaving the question of bombing open. But it believes it possible to proscribe the use of certain arms as contrary to international law and to excommunicate those nations which still use them from the community of mankind—its rights and its laws.

“It also believes that gradual progress is the best way to success. For example, there might be prohibition of the dropping of gas, incendiary and explosive bombs outside the real battle zone. This limitation could then be extended to complete international outlawry of all bombing. But so long as bombing as such is permitted, any limitation of the number of bombing planes is questionable in view of the possibility of rapid substitution.

“Should bombing as such be branded as a barbarity contrary to international law, the construction of bombing aeroplanes will soon be abandoned as superfluous and of no purpose. If, through the Geneva Red Cross Convention, it turned out possible as a matter of fact to prevent the killing of a defenseless wounded man or prisoner, it ought to be equally possible to forbid, by an analogous convention, and finally to stop, the bombing of equally defenseless civilian populations.

“In such a fundamental way of dealing with the problem, Germany sees a greater reassurance and security for the nations than in all pacts of assistance and military conventions.

“The German Government is ready to agree to any limitation which leads to abolition of the heaviest arms, especially suited for aggression. Such are, first, the heaviest artillery, and secondly, the heaviest tanks. In view of the enormous fortifications on the French frontier such an international abolition of the heaviest weapons of attack would ipso facto give France 100 percent security.

“Germany declares herself ready to agree to any limitation whatsoever of the caliber-strength of artillery, battleships, cruisers, and torpedo boats. In like manner the German Government is ready to accept any international limitation of the size of warships. And finally it is ready to agree to limitation of tonnage for submarines, or to their complete abolition in case of international agreement.

“And it gives further assurance that it will agree to any international limitations or abolition of arms whatsoever for a uniform space of time."

This time again Hitler's declarations did not find the slightest response. On the contrary, France made an alliance with Russia in order to increase her preponderating influence on the Continent still further, and to augment to a gigantic degree the pressure on Germany from the East. In view of the evident destructive intentions of his opponents, Adolf Hitler was therefore obliged to take new measures to ensure the safety of the German Reich. On March 3, 1936, he occupied the Rhineland, which had been without military protection since Versailles, and thus closed the wide gate through which the Western neighbor could carry out an invasion. Once again he followed the defensive step which he had been obliged to take with a liberal appeal for general reconciliation and for the settlement of all differences. On March 31, 1936, he formulated the following peace plan:

1. In order to give to future agreements securing the peace of Europe the character of inviolable treaties, those nations participating in the negotiations do so only on an entirely equal footing and as equally esteemed members. The sole compelling reason for signing these treaties can only lie in the generally recognized and obvious practicability of these agreements for the peace of Europe, and thus for the social happiness and economic prosperity of the nations.

2. In order to shorten in the economic interest of the European nations the period of uncertainty, the German Government proposes a limit of four months for the first period up to to the signing of the pacts of non-aggression guaranteeing the peace of Europe.

3. The German Government gives the assurance not to add any reinforcements whatsoever to the troops in the Rhineland during this period, always provided that the Belgian and French Governments act in the same way.

4. The German Government gives the assurance not to move during this period closer to the Belgian and French frontiers the troops at present stationed in the Rhineland.

5. The German Government proposes the setting up of a commission composed of the two guarantor Powers, Britain and Italy, and a disinterested third neutral power, to guarantee this assurance to be given by both parties.

6. Germany, Belgium, and France are each entitled to send a representative to this Commission. If Germany, France, or Belgium think that for any particular reason they can point to a change in the military situation having taken place within this period of four months, they have the right to inform the Guarantee Commission of their observations.

7. Germany, Belgium, and France declare their willingness in such a case to permit this Commission to make the necessary investigations through the British and Italian military attaches, and to report thereon to the Powers participating.

8. Germany, Belgium and France give the assurance that they will bestow the fullest consideration to the objections arising therefrom.

9. Moreover the German Government is willing on a basis of complete reciprocity with Germany's two western neighbors to agree to any military limitations on the German western frontier.

10. Germany, Belgium, and France and the two guarantor Powers agree to enter into negotiations under the leadership of the British Government at once or, at the latest, after the French elections, for the conclusion of a 25-years non-aggression or security pact between France and Belgium on the one hand, and Germany on the other.

11. Germany agrees that Britain and Italy shall sign this security pact as guarantor Powers once more.

12. Should special engagements to render military assistance arise as a result of these security agreements, Germany on her part declares her willingness to enter into such engagements.

13. The German Government hereby repeats its proposal for the conclusion of an air-pact to supplement and consolidate these security agreements.

14. The German Government repeats that should the Netherlands so desire it is willing to include that country too in this West-European security agreement.

15. In order to stamp this peace-pact, voluntarily entered into between Germany and France, as the reconciliatory conclusion of a centuries-old dispute, Germany and France pledge themselves to take steps to see that in the education of the young, as well as in the press and publications of both nations, everything shall be avoided which might be calculated to poison the relationship between the two peoples, whether it be a derogatory or contemptuous attitude, or improper interference in the internal affairs of the other country. They agree to set up at the headquarters of the League of Nations at Geneva, a joint commission whose function it shall be to lay all complaints received before the two governments for information and investigation.

16. In pursuance of their intention to give this agreement the character of a sacred pledge, Germany and France undertake to ratify it by means of a plebiscite if the two nations.

17. Germany expresses her willingness, on her part, to establish contact with the states on her south-eastern and north-eastern frontiers, in order to invite them directly to conclude the pacts of non-aggression already proposed.

18. Germany expresses her willingness to re-enter the League of Nations, either at once, or after the conclusion of these agreements.

At the same time, the German Government again expresses as its expectation that, after a reasonable time and by the method of friendly negotiations, the question of colonial equality of rights and that of the separation of the Covenant of the League of Nations from its foundations in the Versailles Treaty will be cleared up.

19. Germany proposes the setting up of an International Court of Arbitration, which shall be responsible for the observance of the various agreements and whose decisions shall be binding on all parties.

After the conclusion of this great work of securing European peace, the German Government considers it urgently to endeavor by practical measures to put a stop to the unlimited competition in armaments. In her opinion this would mean not merely an improvement in the financial and economic positions of the nations, but above all a diminution of the psychological tension.

The German Government, however, has no faith in the attempt to bring about universal settlements, as this would be doomed to failure from the outset, and can therefore be proposed only by those who have no interest in achieving practical results. On the other hand it is of the opinion that the negotiations held and the results achieved in limiting naval armaments should have an instructive and stimulating effect.

The German Government therefore proposes that future conferences shall have one clearly defined objective.

For the present, it believes the most important task is to bring aerial warfare into the moral and humane atmosphere of the protection afforded to non-combatants or the wounded by the Geneva Convention. Just as the killing of defenseless wounded, or prisoners, or the use of dumdum bullets, or the waging of submarine warfare without warning, have been either forbidden or regulated by international conventions, so it must be possible for civilized humanity to prevent the senseless abuse of any new type of weapon, without running counter to the object of warfare.

The German Government therefore puts forward the proposal that the immediate practical tasks of this conference shall be:

1. Prohibition of dropping gas, poison, or incendiary bombs.

2. Prohibition of dropping bombs of any kind whatsoever on open towns and villages outside the range of the medium-heavy artillery of the fighting fronts.

3. Prohibition of the bombarding with long-range guns of towns more than 20 km. distant from the battle zone.

4. Abolition and prohibition of the construction of tanks of the heaviest type.

5. Abolition and prohibition of artillery of the heaviest calibre.

As soon as possibilities for further limitation of armaments emerge from such discussions and agreements, they should be utilized.

The German Government hereby declares itself prepared to join in every such settlement, in so far as it is valid internationally.

The German Government believes that if even a first step is made on the road to disarmament, this will be of enormous importance to the relationship between the nations, and to the recovery of confidence, trade, and prosperity.

In accordance with the general desire for the restoration of favorable economic conditions, the German Government is prepared immediately after the conclusion of the political treaties to enter into an exchange of opinions on economic problems with the other nations concerned, in the spirit of the proposals made, and to do all that lies in its power to improve the economic situation in Europe, and the world economic situation which is closely bound up with it.

The German Government believes that with the peace plan proposed above it has made its contribution to the reconstruction of a new Europe on the basis of reciprocal respect and confidence between sovereign states. Many opportunities for such a pacification of Europe, for which Germany has so often in the last few years made her proposals, have been neglected. May this attempt to achieve European understanding succeed at last!

The German Government confidently believes that it has opened the way in this direction by submitting the above peace plan.

Anyone who today reads this comprehensive peace plan will realize in what direction the development of Europe, according to the wishes of Adolf Hitler, should really have proceeded. Here was the possibility of truly constructive work, this could have been a real turning-point for the welfare of all nations. But once more he who alone called for peace was not heard. Only Britain replied with a rather scornful questionnaire which avoided any serious consideration of the essential points involved. Incidentally, however, she disclosed her actual intentions by setting herself up as the protector of France and by instituting and commencing regular military staff conversations with the French Republic just as in the period before the Great War.

There could no longer be any doubt now that the Western Powers were following the old path towards an armed conflict and were steadily preparing a new blow against Germany, although Adolf Hitler's whole thoughts and endeavors were directed towards proving to them that he wanted to remain on the best possible terms with them. In the course of the years he had undertaken numerous steps in this direction, of which a few more shall be referred to here. He negotiated the Naval Agreement of June 18, 1935, with Great Britain, which provided that the German Navy should have a strength of 35% of that of the British Navy. By this he wanted to demonstrate that the Reich, to use his own words, had "neither the intention nor the means, nor was it necessary" to enter into any rivalry as regards naval power, such as had had so fateful an influence on its relations to Great Britain in the well-remembered days before the Great War.

He assured France on every possible occasion of his desire to live at peace with her. He repeatedly renounced in plain terms any claim to Alsace-Lorraine. On the return to the Reich of the Saar territory as the result of the plebiscite, he declared on March 1, 1935:

"It is our hope that through this act of just compensation, in which we see a return to natural reason, relations between Germany and France have permanently improved. Therefore as we desire peace, we must hope that our great neighbor is ready and willing to seek peace with us. It must be possible for two great peoples to join together and collaborate in opposing the difficulties which threaten to overwhelm Europe."

He even endeavored to arrive at a better understanding with Poland, the eastern ally of the Western Powers, although this country had unlawfully incorporated millions of Germans in 1919 and had subjected them to the worst oppression ever since. On January 26, 1934, he concluded a non-aggression pact with her in which the two Governments agreed "to settle directly all questions of whatever sort which concern their mutual relations."

Thus on all sides he opposed to the enemy plans his determination to preserve peace and strove to protect Germany in this way. When however he saw that London and Paris were arming for an attack, he was once more obliged to undertake fresh measures of defense. The enemy camp, as we have seen above, had been enormously extended through the alliance between France and Russia. In addition to this the two powers had secured a line of communication to the south of the Reich through Czechoslovakia having concluded a treaty with Russia which put her in the position of a bridge between east and west. Czechoslovakia, however, was in control of the high-lying country of Bohemia and Moravia, which Bismarck had called the citadel of Europe, and this citadel projected far into German territory. The threat to Germany thus assumed truly overpowering proportions.

The genius of Adolf Hitler found a way of meeting this danger. The conditions in German Austria, which under the terror of the Schuschnigg Government were tending towards civil war, offered him the opportunity of stepping in to save the situation, and to lead back into the Reich the sister nation to the south-east that had been sentenced by the victorious powers to lead the life of a hopelessly decaying "Free State." After he had thus established himself near the line of communication between France and Russia mentioned above, a process of disollution set in in the mixed state of Czechoslovakia, which had been artificially put together from the most diverse national elements, until after the liberation of the Sudetenland and the secession of Slovakia, the Czechs themselves asked for the protection of the German Reich. With this the enemy's bridge came into Adolf Hitler's possession; and at the same time direct connection was made possible with Italy, whose friendship had been secured some time previously.

While he was gaining this strategic success for the security of his country, Adolf Hitler was again endeavoring with great eagerness to reach a peaceable understanding with the Western Powers. In Munich directly after liberation of the Sudeten Germans, approved by Britain, France, and Italy, he made an agreement with the British Prime Minister, Neville Chamberlain, the text of which was as follows:

We have had a further meeting today and have agreed in recognizing that the question of Anglo-German relations is of the first importance for the two countries and for Europe.

We regard the agreement signed last night and the Anglo-German Naval Agreement as symbolic of the desire of our two peoples never to go to war with one another again.

We are resolved that the method of consultation shall be the method adopted to deal with any other questions that may concern our two countries, and we are determined to continue our efforts to remove possible sources of difference and thus to contribute to assure the peace of Europe.

September 30, 1938

Adolf Hitler, Neville Chamberlain.

Two months later, on Hitler's instructions, the German Foreign Minister, von Ribbentrop, made the following agreement with France:

Herr Joachim von Ribbentrop, Reich Minister for Foreign Affairs, and M. Georges Bonnet, French Minister of Foreign Affairs, acting in the name and by the order of their Governments, are, at their meeting in Paris, on December 6, 1938, agreed as follows:

1. The German Government and the French Government fully share the conviction that peaceful and good-neighborly relations between Germany and France constitute one of the most essential elements for the consolidation of the situation in Europe and the maintenance of general peace. The two Governments will in consequence use all their efforts to ensure the development of the relations between their countries in this direction.

2. The two Governments recognize that between the two countries there is no territorial question outstanding, and they solemnly recognize as final the frontiers between their countries as they now exist.

3. The two Governments are resolved, while leaving unaffected their particular relations with other Powers, to remain in contact with regard to all questions concerning their two countries, and mutually to consult should the later evolution of those qualities lead to international difficulties.

In token whereof the representatives of the two Governments have signed the present Declaration, which comes into immediate effect. Done in two original Documents in the French and German language respectively, in Paris, December 6, 1938.

Joachim von Ribbentrop Georges Bonnet
Reich Minister for Foreign Affairs Minister for Foreign Affairs

According to all calculations one should have been able to assume that the way was clear for collaborative reconstruction in which all leading powers would participate, and that the Fuehrer's endeavors to secure peace would at last meet with success. But the contrary was true. Scarcely had Chamberlain reached home when he called for rearmament on a considerable scale and laid plans for a new and tremendous encirclement of Germany. Britain now took over from France the leadership of this further encirclement of the Reich, in order to obtain a substitute for the lost Czechoslovakia many times its value. She opened negotiations with Russia, granted Poland a guarantee, and also Rumania, Greece, and Turkey. These were alarm signals of the greatest urgency.

Just at this time Adolf Hitler was occupied with the task of finally eliminating sources of friction with Poland. For this purpose he had made an uncommonly generous proposal by which the purely German Free City of Danzig would return to the Reich, and a narrow passage through the Polish Corridor, which since 1919 had torn asunder the north-eastern part of Germany to an unbearable extent, would provide communication with the separated area. This proposal, which moreover afforded Poland the prospect of a 25-year non-aggression pact and other advantages, was nevertheless rejected in Warsaw, because there it was believed, conscious as the authorities were of forming one of the principal members of the common front set up by London against Germany, that any concession. However minor, could be refused. This was not all! With the same consciousness Poland then started to be aggressive, threatened Danzig, and prepared to take up arms against Germany.

Thus the moment was close at hand for the attack on the Reich by the countries which had been brought together for the purpose. Adolf Hitler, making a final extreme effort in the interests of peace, saved what he could. On August 23rd, Ribbentrop succeeded in reaching an agreement in Moscow for a non-aggression pact with Russia. Two days later the German Fuehrer himself made a final and truly remarkable offer to Britain, declaring himself ready "to enter into agreements with Great Britain," "which . . . would not only, on the German side, in any case safeguard the existence of the British Empire, but if necessary would guarantee German assistance for the British Empire, irrespective of where such assistance might be required."

At the same time he was prepared "to accept a reasonable limitation of armaments, in accordance with the new political situation and economic requirements."

The reply to this was a pact of assistance signed the same day between Britain and Poland, which rendered the outbreak of war inevitable. Then a decision was made in Warsaw to mobilize at once against Germany, and the Poles began with violent attacks not only on the Germans in Poland, who for some time had been the victims of frightful massacres, but on Germans in German territory.

But even when Britain and France had already declared war, as they intended, and Germany had overcome the Polish danger in the east by a glorious campaign without a parallel, even then Adolf Hitler raised his voice once more in the name of peace. He did so although his hands were now free to act against the enemy in the west. He did so, although the fight against him personally was proclaimed in London and Paris, in immeasurable hate, as a crusade. At this moment he possessed the supreme self-control to proclaim in his speech of October 6, 1939, a new plan for the pacification of Europe to public opinion throughout the world. This plan was as follows:

By far the most important task, in my opinion, is the creation of not only a belief in, but also a sense of, European security.

1.

For this it is necessary that the aims of the foreign policy of each European State should be made perfectly clear. As far as Germany is concerned, the Reich Government is ready to give a thorough and exhaustive exposition of the aims of its foreign policy. In so doing, it begins by stating that the Treaty of Versailles is now regarded by it as obsolete, in other words, that the Government of the German Reich and with it the whole German people no longer see cause or reason for any further revision of the Treaty, apart from the demand for adequate colonial possessions justly due to the Reich, involving in the first place a return of the German colonies.

This demand for colonies is based not only on Germany's historical claim to her colonies, but above all on her elementary right to a share of the world's resources of raw materials. This demand does not take the form of an ultimatum, nor is it a demand which is backed by force, but a demand based on political justice and sane economic principles.

2.

The demand for a real revival of international economic life coupled with an extension of trade and commerce presupposes a reorganization of the international economic system, in other words, of production in the individual states. In order to facilitate the exchange of the goods thus produced, however, a new system of markets must be found and a final settlement of currencies arrived at, so that the obstacles in the way of unrestricted trade can be gradually removed.

3.

The most important condition, however, for a real revival of economic life in and outside of Europe is the establishment of an unconditionally guaranteed peace and of a sense of security on the part of individual nations. This security will not only be rendered possible by the final sanctioning of the European status, but above all by the reduction of armaments to a reasonable and economically tolerable level. An essential part of this necessary sense of security, however, is a clear definition of the legitimate use and application of certain modern armaments which can at any given moment strike straight at the heart of every nation and hence create a permanent sense of insecurity. In my previous speeches in the Reichstag I made proposals with this end in view. At that time they were rejected—presumably for the simple reason that they were made by me. I believe, however, that a sense of national security will not return to Europe until clear and binding international agreements have provided a comprehensive definition of the extent to which the use of certain weapons is permitted or forbidden.

The Geneva Convention once succeeded in prohibiting, in civilized countries at least, the killing of wounded, the ill-treatment of prisoners, war against non-combatants etc., and just as it was possible gradually to achieve the universal observance of this statute, a way ought surely to be found to regulate aerial warfare, the use of poison gas, of submarines, etc., and also so to define contraband that the war will lose its terrible character of a conflict waged against women and children and against non-combatants in general. The growing horror of certain methods of modern warfare will of its own accord lead to their abolition, and thus they will become obsolete. In the war with Poland, I endeavored to restrict aerial warfare to objectives of military importance, or only to employ it to combat resistance at a given point. But it must surely be possible to emulate the Red Cross in drawing up some universally valid international regulation. It is only when this is achieved that peace can reign, particularly on our densely populated continent—a peace which, uncontaminated by suspicion and fear, will provide the only possible condition for real economic prosperity. I do not believe that there is any responsible statesman in Europe who does not in his heart desire prosperity for his people. But such a desire can only be realized if all the nations inhabiting this continent decide to work together. To assist in ensuring this co-operation must be the aim of every man who is sincerely struggling for the future of his own people.

To achieve this great end, the leading nations on this continent will one day have to come together in order to draw up, accept, and guarantee a statute on a comprehensive basis which will ensure for them a sense of security, of calm,—in short, of peace. Such a conference could not possibly be held without the most thorough preparation, i.e. without exact elucidation of every point at issue. It is equally impossible that such a conference, which would determine the fate of this continent for many years to come, could carry on its deliberations while cannons are thundering, or mobilized armies bringing pressure to bear upon it. Since, however, these problems must be solved sooner or later, it would surely be more sensible to tackle the solution before millions of men are first uselessly sent to their death, and billions of dollars� worth of property destroyed. The continuation of the present state of affairs in the west is unthinkable. Each day will soon demand increasing sacrifices. Perhaps the day will come when France will begin to bombard and demolish Saarbr�cken. The German artillery will in turn M�lhausen in ruins. France will retaliate by bombarding Karlsruhe, and Germany in her turn shell Strasburg. Then the French artillery will fire at Freiburg, and the Germans at Kolmar or Schlettstadt. Long-range artillery will then be set up, and from both sides destruction will strike deeper and deeper, and whatever cannot be reached by the long-range artillery will be destroyed from the air. And that will be very interesting for certain international journalists, and very profitable for the aeroplane, arms, and munition manufacturers, etc., but appalling for the victims. And this battle of destruction will not be confined to the land. No, it will reach far out over the sea. To-day there are no longer any islands.

And the national wealth of Europe will be scattered in the form of shells, and the vigor of every nation will be sapped on the battlefields. One day, however, there will again be a frontier between Germany and France, but instead of flourishing towns there will be ruins and endless graveyards.

The fate of this plan was the same as that of all the previous appeals made by Adolf Hitler in the name of reason, in the interests of a true renascence of Europe. His enemies paid him no heed. On this occasion also no response was forthcoming from them. They rigidly adhered to the attitude which they had taken up in the beginning.

In the face of this series of historical facts is there any need for further details as to the question of why they did so? They had created Versailles, and when Versailles threatened to collapse they wanted the war, in order to follow it with an even worse Versailles. The reproaches which they make today to Adolf Hitler and Germany, recoil one and all on those who make them, and characterize their actions. They are the disturbers of peace, they are the ones who meditate the forcible oppression of other peoples and seek to plunge Europe in devastation and disaster. If it were not so, they would long ago have taken the hand that was stretched out to them or at least have made a gesture of honestly wishing to cooperate in a new order, and thus spare the nations "blood, tears, and sweat" in excess. World history is the world court; and in this case as always when it reaches its decision it will pronounce a just verdict.

Gandhi Be Racist.

2011-01-23T17:02:00.000-05:00

"I'm a tell you why."

A Jewish Attempt at Damage Control

2011-01-13T19:59:00.027-05:00

Mother Jones' reporter Nick Baumann, responding to the urgings of a "noted Jewish roots columnist and researcher" (so called by the Jewish Telegraph Agency) has posted this footnote to his report about Jared Lee Loughner, the shooter who killed six people and shot a Jewish congresswoman in the head several days ago:

Tierney says Loughner's mom is Jewish. But a columnist who researched the subject doesn't think that holds up. Tierney also said that Loughner himself was definitely not religious.

While Baumann seems a bit circumspect about the finding of the Jewish "columnist and researcher," the Jewish Telegraph Agency spreads the word without reservation:

Nate Bloom, the noted Jewish roots columnist and researcher, has done the legwork -- and pretty much buries this notion.

We can expect that from now on every apologist for all things Jewish, whenever the name Jared Lee Loughner arises, will immediately, in programmed cult-like fashion, loudly proclaim, Loughner's mom was not Jewish! That's an anti-Semitic canard! It's been disproven!

At that point you are supposed to be intimidated into silence because you are not really sure of the facts. But he doesn't really have any facts either.

It should take some strong evidence to refute the word of Loughner's friend, who has known him since middle school and was close enough to merit a "final goodbye" voicemail the night before the shooting. What Nate Bloom offers, however, is largely a matter of guesswork, some of it clearly biased.

Bloom's argument against the possibility that Loughner's mother could be a Jew (contradicting the testimony of somebody who has known Loughner perhaps ten years) is full of holes. It neglects possibilities like Jews adopting the religion of a non-Jewish spouse or otherwise converting to Christianity,¹ which was very common during the big Jewish influx 100-130 years ago. It neglects the real possibility that a Jew might identify his ethnicity as something other than "Jewish" on a census form.² It also neglects that a lot of Jewish immigrants to the United States took non-Jewish names. There is a lot of uncertainty about identifying ethnic Jews based on census information -- and that is supposed to trump the word of a close acquaintance?

Loughner's mother's maiden name is Amy Totman, which seems Jewish enough. Her mother's name apparently was Lois May Bleifuss.³ For me, the funniest part of Bloom's attempt at obfuscation was when he announced that the best known bearer of the surname Bleifuss, journalist and editor Joel Bleifuss, is not Jewish. Here is a nice little photo of the "not Jewish" Joel Bleifuss:

Bloom is thus proud to conclude, "It is exceedingly unlikely that Amy Loughner has any Jewish ancestry."

Others will conclude differently.
_______________________________
1. Further confusion results from Jews who attend Christian church services without ever giving up their Jewish ethnic identity, which is more common than one might suspect. The fact that some person had a Christian funeral is no proof of the absence of Jewish ethnicity as Bloom assumes.

2. There are two factors in this. One is the fact that, since the Enlightenment, Jews have customarily represented themselves as "Frenchmen" or "Germans," etc. "of Jewish faith," in other words pretending that there is no such thing as Jewish ethnicity. Another factor is the common Jewish penchant for dissimulation. If you have much experience with Jews you will notice that many of them will change their whole story about their heritage according to circumstances. I've had a Jew that I'd known a number of years claim that he was Scottish, even though both his parents were Jews. Another claimed that he was Norwegian, which, if you could have seen him, you would have recognized as a completely ridiculous claim.

3. Bloom never says "Lois May Bleifuss" in his article; he uses only the married name, Lois May Totman. When he mentions Anton Bleifuss and his wife Jessie Anderson Bleifuss, he does not identify them as the parents of Lois May but as the parents of her sister Helen Medernach. This is a very roundabout and unnecessarily confusing way of admitting that Jared Loughner's maternal grandmother was born with the surname Bleifuss. I suspect that Bloom's avoidance of connecting the names Lois May and Bleifuss is a matter of deliberate obfuscation. He may have hoped, probably correctly, that few people would read it that carefully and see how he had made something simple into something confusing.

Racial Solidarity is Love

2011-01-13T17:16:00.013-05:00

And discrimination is part of that.

Oxytocin is a neurotransmitter "intricately involved in social behaviors such as mother-child bonding, feelings of trust and love, and group recognition," according to Social psychologist Dr. Carsten De Dreu of the University of Amsterdam.

A study conducted by Dr. De Dreu and recently published in Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences documents a connection between Oxytocin and racial discrimination. “Under oxytocin we saw an increase of in-group favoritism, which has the downside of discrimination against people who are not part of your group,” says Dr. De Dreu.

In all of the experiments, men who snorted a dose of oxytocin showed stronger and more frequent favoritism towards their countrymen over rival groups. Men who whiffed a placebo still showed signs of favoritism, but less frequently and at weaker levels. [Dave Mosher, "'Cuddle Chemical' Also Fuels Favoritism, Bigotry," Wired, 12 January 2011]

Dr. De Dreu acknowledges the survival value of such discrimination: "We thought it was odd a neurological system that survived evolution would make people indiscriminately loving toward others.”

Crazy Jew shot Jewish Congresswoman

2011-01-10T14:23:00.020-05:00

Yes, it's a Jew.

A gunman shoots a Jewish congresswoman and immediately there is an attempt to gain political advantage by jumping to conclusions.

Some ridiculously inaccurate information supplied to Fox News by somebody in the Department of Homeland Security suggested that Jared Taylor's American Renaissance somehow might have motivated the attack on Gabrielle Giffords (which resulted in the deaths of six others), delusionally referring to Taylor's completely civil and Jew-friendly organization as "anti-government" and "anti-Semitic."

I wondered from the beginning if the shooter Jared Loughner might be a Jew, and I noticed that some other people were asking that question. It turns out he is. Mother Jones (10 January 2011) reports this:

[Shooter Jared Loughner's friend Bryce] Tierney believes that Loughner was very interested in pushing people's buttons—and that may have been why he listed Hitler's Mein Kampf as one of his favorite books on his YouTube page. (Loughner's mom is Jewish, according to Tierney.) Loughner sometimes approached strangers and would say "weird" things, Tierney recalls. "He would do it because he thought people were below him and he knew they wouldn't know what he was talking about."*

Crazy crimes like this involve Jews far out of proportion to their numbers in the general population. Jews on average are much more prone than Whites to be mentally ill and unstable.

Because of this one crazy Jew, we are seeing efforts to stigmatize criticism of the government, and there is already, on the Monday after the shooting, a move to increase restrictions on firearms ownership.
_________________________

* If you go to read Mother Jones to get the full story, please read also my response to the footnote that has been added, A Jewish Attempt at Damage Control.