Vanguard News Network
VNN Media
VNN Digital Library
VNN Reader Mail
VNN Broadcasts

Old October 4th, 2012 #21
Jim Harting
Senior Member
 
Jim Harting's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2011
Posts: 1,285
Default

Anent the so-called Bormann-Vermerke:

Anti-Hitler mainstream historian Sir Ian Kershaw investigated their authenticity. In volume II of his biography of Hitler (Hitler 1936-45: Nemesis), he devotes over a page in miniscule type as an endnote (no. 121, pp 1,024-1,025) to discussing their origin.

His conclusion is that they are fraudulent as published, although some notes of the conversations they purportedly represent may have existed at one point.

Hadding is essentially correct.

As to National-Socialism being "transferable" -- certainly the Jews want you to believe that it is not, and I am sure that they have our best interests at heart!
__________________
NEW ORDER Website: http://theneworder.org
NEW ORDER on GAB: https://gab.ai/NEW_ORDER
NS Publications: http://nspublications.com
VNN National Socialist Union: https://vnnforum.com/group.php?groupid=58
 
Old December 7th, 2012 #22
Sturmmann Batbaianov
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2012
Posts: 6
Default

Mr Hadding, you blog seems to be the best blog on national-socialism that I've seen that far. Keep the great work.


And of course national-socialism is applicable in all white countries, to the least. Haven't heard that democracy is only for the greeks, communism only for jews but we keep hearing from our enemies who don't understand nothing about national-socialism that national-socialism is purely german and it would be a joke for somebody to think to try it elsewhere. Some people are even that dumb that think that I am german nationalist (I'm from Bulgaria) and that I am looking for the prosperity of the german people because I declare myself a national-socialist.
 
Old May 19th, 2015 #23
Tiwaz
Senior Member
 
Tiwaz's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2013
Location: Europa, Serbia
Posts: 778
Default National Socialist true revolution

The true significance of National Socialism as a revolutionary idea, as well as an historical phenomenon of fundamental importance, has too often been overlooked or forgotten by its adherents. On occasion, its outlook and objectives have been confused with those of the reactionary right, while at other times they have been mistaken for those of the Marxist left.

To dispel such erroneous misconceptions, it is useful not only to re-examine the role of National Socialism against a backdrop of historical conditions, but also to re-evaluate its unique underlying values. Only when the implications of that role and those values are more clearly understood and appreciated can each individual adherent achieve that level of commitment necessary to enable the National Socialist movement to fulfill its historic mission.

THE DECLINE

When Oswald Spengler spoke of the "decline of the West," he was describing an awesome historical process which today has reached its final stages. And even at this late date, there are very few who possess the moral and intellectual fortitude to recognize the full extent of that decline. What we are confronted with is not simply a political structure which has become decadent and corrupt. Every facet of civilization as we know it today — an entire cultural system — has degenerated. Decay has infected every institution of society: social, economic, religious, moral and cultural, as well as political.

Not since the declining days of Rome has the Earth been witness to a similar phenomenon. Here we find the businessman, witch God is Profit; the politician, who prostitutes himself in parliamentary brothels; the preacher, who admonishes his flock to worship Jews, while proclaiming the evils of Race; the teacher, who advocates feminism and homosexuality as an "alternative" lifestyle; the military officer, who is more concerned about his promotions and retirement benefits than his honor as a soldier — as well as the ordinary citizen who, sated with beer and TV, accepts it all with hardly a peep of protest. All of these are symptomatic of a disease, a cancer, a terminal illness, which has condemned existing civilization to death.

The condition is terminal. According to the great cyclic law governing the progression of cultures, Western civilization, as an organic entity, is finished. No recovery is possible. There is no hope of saving it — nor should one attempt to do so. What has become decadent should not be preserved artificially; it should be eliminated.

Modern Western civilization constitutes a grotesque parody of true culture. It represents an Old Order, whose values are false, alien, anti-natural, anti-Life and anti-Race. What we are now witnessing is the final phase of an organic deterioration, which will run its course, culminating in death and chaos. Nothing can halt this process.

Confronted with this somber prospect, how does one respond? How should one face the impending death of a civilization, of an entire culture of which one has been an integral part? How is one to cope with the trauma of that experience? Does one turn to self-indulgence and hedonistic excess or to self-destructive nihilism? Does one surrender one's rationality and embrace the otherworldly assurances of whatever shaman or religious cult? Or does one simply ignore reality altogether and nostalgically insist upon the restoration of that which is irretrievably lost?

But we must pose an overriding question: Does the death of a culture mean the end of everything? Does it mean that there is no longer a purpose for existence?

For National Socialists, there can be but one course: action based upon a clear-cut perception of reality — bold, resolute action, to bring order once more out of chaos.

And here, the first important consideration is that the National Socialist world view has never seen culture as determinative. Rather, it upholds the primacy of Race, and recognizes in the racial principle the potential for all higher culture. The immediate corollary of this outlook, of course, is that the death of a civilization is not of the same order as the death of a race.

In his book, Adolf Hitler once declared:

"Every defeat can become the father of a subsequent victory, every lost war the cause of a later resurgence, every hardship the fertilization of human energy, and from every oppression the forces for a new spiritual rebirth can come — as long as the blood is kept pure."

What applies to lesser tragedies is of greatest significance in this instance. Here, the question of the preservation of a racial nucleus assumes paramount importance. Who will survive the coming collapse? What will emerge in place of Western culture? These are fundamental questions. They are not posed lightly.

A disengagement of our race from the general decadence of Western civilization is fraught with danger. For over a millennium, the destiny of Aryan man has been linked inseparably with the history of the West. Whether he can survive the shock of cultural disengagement is problematical. Yet, the great undertaking must be attempted, for there is no other way.

Unless our race — or at least a viable segment of it — can manage. through conscious effort, to separate itself from the disintegrating cultural mass, it will be hopelessly swamped; because only in the creation of a New Order, with its own distinctive values and ideas, and arising defiantly out of the ruins of the Old, can there be any future worthy of the name for Aryan man.

What is crucial is not whether a decadent civilization survives, but rather a race capable of culture. For what is at stake is not the life of a culture or a civilization as such, but the eternal life of a race capable of the highest culture. That is the real issue of our time.

As long as Aryan man exists, he will bear within him the Promethean spark, which cataclysmic tragedy can only serve to fan into a bright new flame of creative expression. And just as Western culture freely adapted elements of the preceding Classical period into its historic fabric, so will it be with the post-Western culture of the New Order, as it appropriates as a timeless legacy those features of the West which have remained worthy and underfiled.

TRUE REVOLUTION

A proper appreciation of National Socialism as a revolutionary phenomenon presupposes an accurate definition of terms, as well as an understanding of its role within a larger historical context. To regard revolution as synonymous with nihilism or bolshevism is puerile. True revolution is hardly the same as nihilism, which involves nothing more than destruction for destruction's sake, without an accompanying set of values. It is not bolshevism; in an age of degeneracy, upholding decency becomes a revolutionary act. It is more than rhetoric; any confidence man or opportunist can utter words. It is more than violent action, although such a development may attend the revolutionary process. It is more than a mere change of political regime by unconstitutional means. All of this is superficial.

By the term "revolutionary" we understand a commitment to radical change involving the introduction of a fundamentally different set of values.

During the course of Western history, there have been several notable events which have been described as revolutions. England experienced a violent change of regimes in 1649, when Cromwell and his Roundheads succeeded in toppling Charles I and establishing a Puritan Commonwealth, the primary legacy of which has been a tradition of moralistic hypocrisy in Anglo-Saxon political affairs.

The next great European upheaval occurred in France in 1789 under the Jacobin banner of Liberté, Égalité, Fraternité — an event which signaled the triumph of the mob and mediocrity.





In many ways similar to the so-called French Revolution was the Bolshevik outbreak in Russia in 1917 — the monstrous culmination of a leveling process already manifested in the two earlier upheavals.*

Apart from a common pattern of regicide and general savagery, all of these European "revolutions" were similar to one another in that they sprang from the same spiritual subsoil and partook of the same material values already present to some degree in the ongoing Western devolution: concern for numbers, mass and material wealth, creature comfort, happiness, anomic freedom, privileges and rights — all of it a pandering to human selfishness! One might say, in fact, that each succeeding revolution was but a more pronounced manifestation of a progressive deterioration.

The American Revolution of 1776, while assuming some of the features of a genuine national rising, was unfortunately infected with the materialistic rationalism of the 18th century. After the Civil War had destroyed whatever possibility existed for the United States to develop into true nationhood, what remained were nothing but the seeds of the most poisonous egalitarianism and spiritual bolshevism, the full flower of which we are witnessing today. Whatever it may have meant originally, the American Dream of "life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness" has become a cheap pretext for the most vulgar aggrandizement and selfishness, just as what is known as "Americanism" has become a universal symbol for the most appalling decadence and lack of culture.

* * *

In contrast to the previous "revolutions," the German Revolution of 1933 represents a totally new phenomenon. Not only was it virtually bloodless but, more importantly, it involved a mighty spiritual transformation. Growing out of a distinctive Teutonic-Prussian tradition of duty, service and discipline and inspired by the singular leadership of Adolf Hitler, it reflected the political maturity of the German people as the first Aryan nation to rise consciously against the decadence of the West. It brought into play a whole new value system fundamentally opposed to that of the Old Order.

It is perhaps not entirely without significance that it was precisely those other nations, whose historical experience involved a commitment to human decadence, which found themselves in mortal opposition to National Socialist Germany during the Second World War. And although this unique creation was tragically shortlived in a narrower sense, in a wider sense it must be seen not only as the first real rising of Aryan man as a conscious racial entity, but also as the first true revolution in two thousand years. Whereas all previous upheavals were to a greater or lesser extent part of a process of dissolution under an existing system, the National Socialist revolution in Germany represented a radical revolt against that system itself, resulting in the introduction of an entirely new set of values.

What is remarkable about the National Socialist value system is that in contrast to the anti-naturalism of the Old Order, it consciously sought to apply the immutable laws of Nature to human affairs. Proceeding from an open recognition of the principle of universal inequality, it posited the values of Blood and Race as the cornerstone of its ideology and all its application. For it, the concept of equality could never be an end in itself, but always simply a means to permit the enhancement of human genius. Against the malignant sickness of our time, it stood for health. Against decadence, it proposed regeneration. Against weakness, strength. Against falsehood, truth. Against death, life.

It is in this sense that the German Revolution must be understood as the one true revolution of the past two millenia, a singular event of transcendent importance for Aryan man. And so it is to this mighty source of inspiration that we National Socialists now turn, and it is by its values that we proceed to stake our claim as true revolutionaries of this age.

DICHOTOMY OF VALUES

Ever since Marxist propaganda invented the notion that National Socialism (as some ill-defined form of "fascism") represents nothing but the "last, dying gasp of the Capitalist system," there has existed a certain amount of confusion concerning our creed and its proper position among world ideologies. Not only has this patent absurdity been generally accepted by the political left, but it has also been believed by some marginal elements on the right.

The truth is that National Socialism is neither Capitalist nor Communist. It is neither of the right nor of the left. It is not a part of the interplay of forces under the existing order. The National Socialist perception of political and social reality rejects as meaningless any such dichotomy, which it sees as merely an artificial outgrowth of those class contradictions which have arisen out of the Industrial Revolution during the past two centuries. It is of no relevance to modern racial requirements.

Despite superficial differences, Capitalism and Communism — right and left — represent nothing more than the two secular aspects of the Old Order. They are generically similar, with a common worldview based on economic materialism, according to which they both view the world in terms of money and mass. Like rival gangs, their quarrel is not over basic values, but over the application of those values, viz., the distribution wealth and attendant political considerations. That life on this Earth might involve a higher purpose is a concept alien to both.

In contrast to the materialistic ideologies of the Old Order, National Socialist postulates a philosophy of racial idealism, involving individual sacrifice and service on behalf of the organic whole, which it sees as not only the premise for all true culture, but also the basis for a meaningful existence for the individual, as well.

* * *

Adolf Hitler described the idealistic attitude in this manner:

"But, since true idealism is nothing but the subordination of the interests and life of the individual to the community, and this in turn is the precondition for the creation of organizational forms of all kinds, it corresponds in its innermost depths to the ultimate will of Nature. It alone leads men to a voluntary recognition of the privilege of force and strength, and thus makes them particles of that order which shapes and forms the whole universe."

Explaining the significance of such idealism, he continued:

"How necessary it is to keep realizing that idealism does not represent a superfluous expression of emotion, but that in truth it has been, is, and always will be, the premise for what we designate as human culture, yes, that it alone created the concept of 'man'! It is to this inner attitude that the Aryan owes his position in the world, and to it the world owes man; for it alone formed from pure spirit the creative force which, by a unique pairing of the brutal fist and intellectual genius, created the monuments of human culture."

In light of this materialistic/idealistic contrast, it becomes apparent that the real alignment of systems is not between National Socialism and a reactionary right on the one hand and a so-called revolutionary left on the other, but rather between both the right and left wings of the Old Order against a nascent New Order, politically represented by National Socialism.

The basic dichotomy of value systems was dramatically demonstrated during the Second World War, when the supposedly contradictory forces of international finance Capitalism and international Communism joined together in an unconditional struggle against the one force which was perceived as a mortal threat by both. As National Socialist legions were besieging the citadel of Marxism, the world was witness for all time to the spectacle of Communists eagerly embracing their Capitalist counterparts in a desperate crusade to defeat a common enemy and to preserve the Old Order.

ALLEGIANCES

Having examined the historical condition of the West and considered a resolution of the crisis posed by decline through a revolution based upon the radical values of National Socialism, we turn now to the relationship of the individual National Socialist to this historical process — to those moral responsibilities concomitant with his practical participation, as well as to certain objective realities, whose implications must govern his inner attitude and personal allegiances.

The first obligation of a revolutionary is to establish is position upon a solid foundation of philosophical and moral integrity. This means, above all, that he must be willing to accept and uphold the truth — radical truth, unpopular truth, difficult truth — according to the timeless adage of Adolf Hitler: "The prerequisite for action is the will and courage to be truthful."

For the political activist, it is always easier to conform to current public preferences and prejudices than to take an unpopular stand. The Leader recognized this tendency when he cautioned the National Socialist movement as follows:

"We National Socialists know that with this conception we stand as revolutionaries in the world today and are also branded as such. But our thoughts and actions must in no way be determined by the approval or disapproval of our time, but by the binding obligation to a truth which we have recognized."

A true revolutionary can never compromise his ultimate goals. Otherwise, he ceases to be a revolutionary but becomes instead just another political opportunist. In these words, the uncompromising attitude of Adolf Hitler towards such opportunism is clearly expressed, just as it is in the following passage from his work:

" ... A movement that wants to renew the world must serve not the moment, but the future."

Once his moral premise is firmly established, the next obligation of a revolutionary is to achieve inner segregation from the decadence of the present order, and to re-examine his basic loyalties with respect to the various institutions of society as well as to the state structure, as such. For there can be no such thing as National Socialist allegiance to any state formation which seeks to undermine or destroy the racial integrity of a people. Such monstrosities exist only to be overthrown.

"If, by the instrument of governmental power, a people is being led toward its destruction, then rebellion is not only the right of every member of such a people — it is his duty." 

So spoke Adolf Hitler concerning the legitimacy of state authority, noting that:

"The State is a means to an end. Its end lies in the preservation and advancement of a community of physically and spiritually homogeneous creatures."

Perhaps nowhere is the general disintegration of Western civilization more apparent than in North America, where the special problem of unformed nationhood presents itself. Whereas in Europe the respective state configurations have, for the most part, tended — at least until quite recently — to conform to distinct ethnic types, in America there exists no true Volk. Here, so-called nationality represents nothing more than a convenient label for all those who happen to share the common fate of living on the same piece of Equal Opportunity real estate — hardly a proper basis for genuine nationhood. Perhaps as a result, one encounters the peculiar American penchant for equating country with government in a pathetic parody of real patriotism.

Whatever the United States may have been at one time, today it represents nothing more than a rootless, multiracial hodgepodge without any real character or common purpose. As such, it can only be held together in the long run by the prevalence of universal prosperity and/or by force. In the absence of these two factors, the entire structure can only become very tenuous, as the various centrifugal forces — social, regional, ethnic but especially racial — are set in motion, something which must inevitably occur under the stress of modern conditions.

Under such circumstances, not only is it absurd, but it becomes downright disastrous for National Socialists to identify themselves with traditional appeals to patriotism. "My country, right or wrong." But what if one no longer has a country? Can it honestly be said that the Aryan of North America possesses a land over which he exercises sovereign control and jurisdiction? Or might it not be more accurate to say that the American white man lives in a colony, whose administrative center lies in Washington, but whose real capital is Jerusalem?

And when millions of nonwhites are permitted to pour — legally or illegally — into the United States, where they can become instant and equal members of a great big Konsumgesellschaft, then it is no longer possible to regard its borders as something sacred or the status of being an American as possessing any special quality worth mentioning. Then, all talk about having a constitution, a government or a free society becomes positively ludicrous and obscene, because these are then nothing more than mere catchwords for our enslavement and extinction. Then, the existing regime must be viewed not as something to which one owes loyalty and allegiance, but as an instrument of tyranny and oppression — an enemy — to be completely and totally destroyed. Then, "law and order" must be seen as the worst possible catastrophe for our race, and the centrifugal action of internal contradictions as the greatest blessing in dissolving the bonds of an unnatural and unholy union. For National Socialists to attempt a necessary liberation struggle with any other attitude would be tantamount to forfeiting in advance all chance of success.

* * *
It was precisely this hard-line, revolutionary attitude which Adolf Hitler took, when he refused to pledge his allegiance to the old, moribund Habsburg state, whose demise he clearly foresaw, due to its lack of ethnic cohesion. The remarkable parallel between that obsolescent structure before its collapse and the condition of the present multiracial state in North America is something for every National Socialist to ponder. Above all, one would do well to remember the admonition from Mein Kampf: "We National Socialists must never, under any circumstances, join in the usual hurrah patriotism of our present bourgeois world."

It is typical of bourgeois reactionaries to prefer tilting at targets a safe distance from their borders, rather than embarking on the more difficult and hazardous enterprise of overthrowing an enemy closer to home. It is no accident that U.S. conservatives, for example, have always been in the forefront of those urging military adventures abroad — from Pearl Harbor and Suez to Vietnam and— Iran — all the while remaining conspicuously unconcerned about Zionist control of the United States itself.

One can only smile at the hypothetical spectacle of a V.I. Lenin behaving in a similar, reactionary, bourgeois manner. Suppose, for instance, that after the outbreak of hostilities in 1914, he had announced that although he did have certain differences with the Tsar, he nevertheless recognized that his patriotic duty lay in coming to the defense of Mother Russia in her moment of crisis, while at the same time suspending opposition to "his" government for the duration of the conflict.

Any rational person, Communist or non-Communist, would have to regard such behavior as stupid and naïve in the extreme, if not positively insane. In any event, never would Lenin have achieved political success, nor would his cause now* pose the world threat that it does. Yet there are comrades who fail to understand the real reasons for Marxist success and who have yet to resolve the question of state loyalty as unambiguously as did William Joyce in 1939 when, as a National Socialist, he made the conscious decision to leave a Jewish-dominated England, in order to fight in defense of the Aryan revolution in Germany — because he recognized that the citizenship of blood was more important than mere state citizenship.

* * *

Today there are two equally dangerous ideological forces rampant in the world. One is represented by the leveling doctrine of Marxism-Leninism, or Communism. The other is international Zionism, the insidious doctrine of Jewish supremacy over all non-Jews. Whereas in the East, Communism is the dominant reality, in the West it is Zionism — aligned with monopoly capital and politically represented by liberalism/conservatism — which exercises effective control and dominance. Consequently, the destabilization and demolition of the Zionist power structure must be the primary concern of National Socialists in the Western countries. Only after that abomination has been eliminated can the Movement begin to turn its attention effectively to other tasks.

As National Socialists and revolutionaries, our first task, therefore, is to challenge the immediate status quo. If we are unable or unwilling to recognize the enemy in our midst as the first enemy to be fought and overcome, then we are no revolutionaries or true National Socialists, and never will we be able to defeat any other enemies.

Under no circumstances should National Socialists allow themselves to be placed in a position of defending the existing System or helping to resolve any of its dilemmas, whether in the field of domestic or foreign policy. Any such act runs counter to the revolutionary process and can only serve to perpetuate the present condition. Instead, we must be prepared to welcome very situation, every event, and every action which tends to destabilize and dissolve the existing order.

At this late date, nothing can be restored. Therefore, our task does not consist in going back to anything or in bringing back another age. It does not lie in resuscitating a decadent and dying civilization, or preserving a corrupt system, or in changing or modifying it. All of that is irrelevant now.

Our historic task as National Socialists is, quite simply to start all over again — tabula Rasa — with a new vision and a new outlook and a new will, to create upon this Earth a new order and a new culture, as a wonderful, new testament to immortal Aryan genius. That is our mission, and nothing else.
 
Old May 19th, 2015 #24
Hadding
Senior Member
 
Hadding's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Florida
Posts: 3,247
Default

There is no "great cyclic law governing the progression of cultures" such as Spengler presented. At least, it is not an inevitable cycle.

The same rise and decay can be seen in Brooks Adams' The Law of Civilization and Decay, except that Adams makes it obvious what the central cause is: plutocracy, coupled with usury.

A culture can remain vital if it checks the tendency toward plutocracy, which is what National-Socialist Germany was doing. The USA currently is committing suicide by doing the opposite.

Last edited by Hadding; May 19th, 2015 at 06:06 PM.
 
Old May 19th, 2015 #25
Samuel Toothgold
Charachature incarnate
 
Samuel Toothgold's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2014
Location: Already in accordance with the future Repulsive Tapir Avatar Mandate
Posts: 4,068
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Sturmmann Batbaianov View Post
...national-socialism is purely german and it would be a joke for somebody to think to try it elsewhere...
The only thing "German" about it was the political phase played out by the Third Reich. The nationbal socialist economic/demographic form can be used by anyone capable of organizing it which would limit its application to only a minority.
__________________
youtube.com/watch?v=-EDJRcwQvN4 youtube.com/watch?v=S0lxK5Ot5HA
youtube.com/watch?v=HFv92Lc8FXg
 
Old May 19th, 2015 #26
Jim Harting
Senior Member
 
Jim Harting's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2011
Posts: 1,285
Default

Thank you for posting Matt Koehl's important essay, "The Revolutionary Nature of National Socialism."

For those who are interested, here its source (including the preliminary remarks and endnotes not reproduced above):
THE REVOLUTIONARY NATURE OF NATIONAL SOCIALISM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tiwaz View Post
The true significance of National Socialism as a revolutionary idea, as well as an historical phenomenon of fundamental importance, has too often been overlooked or forgotten by its adherents. On occasion, its outlook and objectives have been confused with those of the reactionary right, while at other times they have been mistaken for those of the Marxist left.

To dispel such erroneous misconceptions, it is useful not only to re-examine the role of National Socialism against a backdrop of historical conditions, but also to re-evaluate its unique underlying values. Only when the implications of that role and those values are more clearly understood and appreciated can each individual adherent achieve that level of commitment necessary to enable the National Socialist movement to fulfill its historic mission.

THE DECLINE

When Oswald Spengler spoke of the "decline of the West," he was describing an awesome historical process which today has reached its final stages. And even at this late date, there are very few who possess the moral and intellectual fortitude to recognize the full extent of that decline. What we are confronted with is not simply a political structure which has become decadent and corrupt. Every facet of civilization as we know it today — an entire cultural system — has degenerated. Decay has infected every institution of society: social, economic, religious, moral and cultural, as well as political.

Not since the declining days of Rome has the Earth been witness to a similar phenomenon. Here we find the businessman, witch God is Profit; the politician, who prostitutes himself in parliamentary brothels; the preacher, who admonishes his flock to worship Jews, while proclaiming the evils of Race; the teacher, who advocates feminism and homosexuality as an "alternative" lifestyle; the military officer, who is more concerned about his promotions and retirement benefits than his honor as a soldier — as well as the ordinary citizen who, sated with beer and TV, accepts it all with hardly a peep of protest. All of these are symptomatic of a disease, a cancer, a terminal illness, which has condemned existing civilization to death.

The condition is terminal. According to the great cyclic law governing the progression of cultures, Western civilization, as an organic entity, is finished. No recovery is possible. There is no hope of saving it — nor should one attempt to do so. What has become decadent should not be preserved artificially; it should be eliminated.

Modern Western civilization constitutes a grotesque parody of true culture. It represents an Old Order, whose values are false, alien, anti-natural, anti-Life and anti-Race. What we are now witnessing is the final phase of an organic deterioration, which will run its course, culminating in death and chaos. Nothing can halt this process.

Confronted with this somber prospect, how does one respond? How should one face the impending death of a civilization, of an entire culture of which one has been an integral part? How is one to cope with the trauma of that experience? Does one turn to self-indulgence and hedonistic excess or to self-destructive nihilism? Does one surrender one's rationality and embrace the otherworldly assurances of whatever shaman or religious cult? Or does one simply ignore reality altogether and nostalgically insist upon the restoration of that which is irretrievably lost?

But we must pose an overriding question: Does the death of a culture mean the end of everything? Does it mean that there is no longer a purpose for existence?

For National Socialists, there can be but one course: action based upon a clear-cut perception of reality — bold, resolute action, to bring order once more out of chaos.

And here, the first important consideration is that the National Socialist world view has never seen culture as determinative. Rather, it upholds the primacy of Race, and recognizes in the racial principle the potential for all higher culture. The immediate corollary of this outlook, of course, is that the death of a civilization is not of the same order as the death of a race.

In his book, Adolf Hitler once declared:

"Every defeat can become the father of a subsequent victory, every lost war the cause of a later resurgence, every hardship the fertilization of human energy, and from every oppression the forces for a new spiritual rebirth can come — as long as the blood is kept pure."

What applies to lesser tragedies is of greatest significance in this instance. Here, the question of the preservation of a racial nucleus assumes paramount importance. Who will survive the coming collapse? What will emerge in place of Western culture? These are fundamental questions. They are not posed lightly.

A disengagement of our race from the general decadence of Western civilization is fraught with danger. For over a millennium, the destiny of Aryan man has been linked inseparably with the history of the West. Whether he can survive the shock of cultural disengagement is problematical. Yet, the great undertaking must be attempted, for there is no other way.

Unless our race — or at least a viable segment of it — can manage. through conscious effort, to separate itself from the disintegrating cultural mass, it will be hopelessly swamped; because only in the creation of a New Order, with its own distinctive values and ideas, and arising defiantly out of the ruins of the Old, can there be any future worthy of the name for Aryan man.

What is crucial is not whether a decadent civilization survives, but rather a race capable of culture. For what is at stake is not the life of a culture or a civilization as such, but the eternal life of a race capable of the highest culture. That is the real issue of our time.

As long as Aryan man exists, he will bear within him the Promethean spark, which cataclysmic tragedy can only serve to fan into a bright new flame of creative expression. And just as Western culture freely adapted elements of the preceding Classical period into its historic fabric, so will it be with the post-Western culture of the New Order, as it appropriates as a timeless legacy those features of the West which have remained worthy and underfiled.

TRUE REVOLUTION

A proper appreciation of National Socialism as a revolutionary phenomenon presupposes an accurate definition of terms, as well as an understanding of its role within a larger historical context. To regard revolution as synonymous with nihilism or bolshevism is puerile. True revolution is hardly the same as nihilism, which involves nothing more than destruction for destruction's sake, without an accompanying set of values. It is not bolshevism; in an age of degeneracy, upholding decency becomes a revolutionary act. It is more than rhetoric; any confidence man or opportunist can utter words. It is more than violent action, although such a development may attend the revolutionary process. It is more than a mere change of political regime by unconstitutional means. All of this is superficial.

By the term "revolutionary" we understand a commitment to radical change involving the introduction of a fundamentally different set of values.

During the course of Western history, there have been several notable events which have been described as revolutions. England experienced a violent change of regimes in 1649, when Cromwell and his Roundheads succeeded in toppling Charles I and establishing a Puritan Commonwealth, the primary legacy of which has been a tradition of moralistic hypocrisy in Anglo-Saxon political affairs.

The next great European upheaval occurred in France in 1789 under the Jacobin banner of Liberté, Égalité, Fraternité — an event which signaled the triumph of the mob and mediocrity.





In many ways similar to the so-called French Revolution was the Bolshevik outbreak in Russia in 1917 — the monstrous culmination of a leveling process already manifested in the two earlier upheavals.*

Apart from a common pattern of regicide and general savagery, all of these European "revolutions" were similar to one another in that they sprang from the same spiritual subsoil and partook of the same material values already present to some degree in the ongoing Western devolution: concern for numbers, mass and material wealth, creature comfort, happiness, anomic freedom, privileges and rights — all of it a pandering to human selfishness! One might say, in fact, that each succeeding revolution was but a more pronounced manifestation of a progressive deterioration.

The American Revolution of 1776, while assuming some of the features of a genuine national rising, was unfortunately infected with the materialistic rationalism of the 18th century. After the Civil War had destroyed whatever possibility existed for the United States to develop into true nationhood, what remained were nothing but the seeds of the most poisonous egalitarianism and spiritual bolshevism, the full flower of which we are witnessing today. Whatever it may have meant originally, the American Dream of "life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness" has become a cheap pretext for the most vulgar aggrandizement and selfishness, just as what is known as "Americanism" has become a universal symbol for the most appalling decadence and lack of culture.

* * *

In contrast to the previous "revolutions," the German Revolution of 1933 represents a totally new phenomenon. Not only was it virtually bloodless but, more importantly, it involved a mighty spiritual transformation. Growing out of a distinctive Teutonic-Prussian tradition of duty, service and discipline and inspired by the singular leadership of Adolf Hitler, it reflected the political maturity of the German people as the first Aryan nation to rise consciously against the decadence of the West. It brought into play a whole new value system fundamentally opposed to that of the Old Order.

It is perhaps not entirely without significance that it was precisely those other nations, whose historical experience involved a commitment to human decadence, which found themselves in mortal opposition to National Socialist Germany during the Second World War. And although this unique creation was tragically shortlived in a narrower sense, in a wider sense it must be seen not only as the first real rising of Aryan man as a conscious racial entity, but also as the first true revolution in two thousand years. Whereas all previous upheavals were to a greater or lesser extent part of a process of dissolution under an existing system, the National Socialist revolution in Germany represented a radical revolt against that system itself, resulting in the introduction of an entirely new set of values.

What is remarkable about the National Socialist value system is that in contrast to the anti-naturalism of the Old Order, it consciously sought to apply the immutable laws of Nature to human affairs. Proceeding from an open recognition of the principle of universal inequality, it posited the values of Blood and Race as the cornerstone of its ideology and all its application. For it, the concept of equality could never be an end in itself, but always simply a means to permit the enhancement of human genius. Against the malignant sickness of our time, it stood for health. Against decadence, it proposed regeneration. Against weakness, strength. Against falsehood, truth. Against death, life.

It is in this sense that the German Revolution must be understood as the one true revolution of the past two millenia, a singular event of transcendent importance for Aryan man. And so it is to this mighty source of inspiration that we National Socialists now turn, and it is by its values that we proceed to stake our claim as true revolutionaries of this age.

DICHOTOMY OF VALUES

Ever since Marxist propaganda invented the notion that National Socialism (as some ill-defined form of "fascism") represents nothing but the "last, dying gasp of the Capitalist system," there has existed a certain amount of confusion concerning our creed and its proper position among world ideologies. Not only has this patent absurdity been generally accepted by the political left, but it has also been believed by some marginal elements on the right.

The truth is that National Socialism is neither Capitalist nor Communist. It is neither of the right nor of the left. It is not a part of the interplay of forces under the existing order. The National Socialist perception of political and social reality rejects as meaningless any such dichotomy, which it sees as merely an artificial outgrowth of those class contradictions which have arisen out of the Industrial Revolution during the past two centuries. It is of no relevance to modern racial requirements.

Despite superficial differences, Capitalism and Communism — right and left — represent nothing more than the two secular aspects of the Old Order. They are generically similar, with a common worldview based on economic materialism, according to which they both view the world in terms of money and mass. Like rival gangs, their quarrel is not over basic values, but over the application of those values, viz., the distribution wealth and attendant political considerations. That life on this Earth might involve a higher purpose is a concept alien to both.

In contrast to the materialistic ideologies of the Old Order, National Socialist postulates a philosophy of racial idealism, involving individual sacrifice and service on behalf of the organic whole, which it sees as not only the premise for all true culture, but also the basis for a meaningful existence for the individual, as well.

* * *

Adolf Hitler described the idealistic attitude in this manner:

"But, since true idealism is nothing but the subordination of the interests and life of the individual to the community, and this in turn is the precondition for the creation of organizational forms of all kinds, it corresponds in its innermost depths to the ultimate will of Nature. It alone leads men to a voluntary recognition of the privilege of force and strength, and thus makes them particles of that order which shapes and forms the whole universe."

Explaining the significance of such idealism, he continued:

"How necessary it is to keep realizing that idealism does not represent a superfluous expression of emotion, but that in truth it has been, is, and always will be, the premise for what we designate as human culture, yes, that it alone created the concept of 'man'! It is to this inner attitude that the Aryan owes his position in the world, and to it the world owes man; for it alone formed from pure spirit the creative force which, by a unique pairing of the brutal fist and intellectual genius, created the monuments of human culture."

In light of this materialistic/idealistic contrast, it becomes apparent that the real alignment of systems is not between National Socialism and a reactionary right on the one hand and a so-called revolutionary left on the other, but rather between both the right and left wings of the Old Order against a nascent New Order, politically represented by National Socialism.

The basic dichotomy of value systems was dramatically demonstrated during the Second World War, when the supposedly contradictory forces of international finance Capitalism and international Communism joined together in an unconditional struggle against the one force which was perceived as a mortal threat by both. As National Socialist legions were besieging the citadel of Marxism, the world was witness for all time to the spectacle of Communists eagerly embracing their Capitalist counterparts in a desperate crusade to defeat a common enemy and to preserve the Old Order.

ALLEGIANCES

Having examined the historical condition of the West and considered a resolution of the crisis posed by decline through a revolution based upon the radical values of National Socialism, we turn now to the relationship of the individual National Socialist to this historical process — to those moral responsibilities concomitant with his practical participation, as well as to certain objective realities, whose implications must govern his inner attitude and personal allegiances.

The first obligation of a revolutionary is to establish is position upon a solid foundation of philosophical and moral integrity. This means, above all, that he must be willing to accept and uphold the truth — radical truth, unpopular truth, difficult truth — according to the timeless adage of Adolf Hitler: "The prerequisite for action is the will and courage to be truthful."

For the political activist, it is always easier to conform to current public preferences and prejudices than to take an unpopular stand. The Leader recognized this tendency when he cautioned the National Socialist movement as follows:

"We National Socialists know that with this conception we stand as revolutionaries in the world today and are also branded as such. But our thoughts and actions must in no way be determined by the approval or disapproval of our time, but by the binding obligation to a truth which we have recognized."

A true revolutionary can never compromise his ultimate goals. Otherwise, he ceases to be a revolutionary but becomes instead just another political opportunist. In these words, the uncompromising attitude of Adolf Hitler towards such opportunism is clearly expressed, just as it is in the following passage from his work:

" ... A movement that wants to renew the world must serve not the moment, but the future."

Once his moral premise is firmly established, the next obligation of a revolutionary is to achieve inner segregation from the decadence of the present order, and to re-examine his basic loyalties with respect to the various institutions of society as well as to the state structure, as such. For there can be no such thing as National Socialist allegiance to any state formation which seeks to undermine or destroy the racial integrity of a people. Such monstrosities exist only to be overthrown.

"If, by the instrument of governmental power, a people is being led toward its destruction, then rebellion is not only the right of every member of such a people — it is his duty." 

So spoke Adolf Hitler concerning the legitimacy of state authority, noting that:

"The State is a means to an end. Its end lies in the preservation and advancement of a community of physically and spiritually homogeneous creatures."

Perhaps nowhere is the general disintegration of Western civilization more apparent than in North America, where the special problem of unformed nationhood presents itself. Whereas in Europe the respective state configurations have, for the most part, tended — at least until quite recently — to conform to distinct ethnic types, in America there exists no true Volk. Here, so-called nationality represents nothing more than a convenient label for all those who happen to share the common fate of living on the same piece of Equal Opportunity real estate — hardly a proper basis for genuine nationhood. Perhaps as a result, one encounters the peculiar American penchant for equating country with government in a pathetic parody of real patriotism.

Whatever the United States may have been at one time, today it represents nothing more than a rootless, multiracial hodgepodge without any real character or common purpose. As such, it can only be held together in the long run by the prevalence of universal prosperity and/or by force. In the absence of these two factors, the entire structure can only become very tenuous, as the various centrifugal forces — social, regional, ethnic but especially racial — are set in motion, something which must inevitably occur under the stress of modern conditions.

Under such circumstances, not only is it absurd, but it becomes downright disastrous for National Socialists to identify themselves with traditional appeals to patriotism. "My country, right or wrong." But what if one no longer has a country? Can it honestly be said that the Aryan of North America possesses a land over which he exercises sovereign control and jurisdiction? Or might it not be more accurate to say that the American white man lives in a colony, whose administrative center lies in Washington, but whose real capital is Jerusalem?

And when millions of nonwhites are permitted to pour — legally or illegally — into the United States, where they can become instant and equal members of a great big Konsumgesellschaft, then it is no longer possible to regard its borders as something sacred or the status of being an American as possessing any special quality worth mentioning. Then, all talk about having a constitution, a government or a free society becomes positively ludicrous and obscene, because these are then nothing more than mere catchwords for our enslavement and extinction. Then, the existing regime must be viewed not as something to which one owes loyalty and allegiance, but as an instrument of tyranny and oppression — an enemy — to be completely and totally destroyed. Then, "law and order" must be seen as the worst possible catastrophe for our race, and the centrifugal action of internal contradictions as the greatest blessing in dissolving the bonds of an unnatural and unholy union. For National Socialists to attempt a necessary liberation struggle with any other attitude would be tantamount to forfeiting in advance all chance of success.

* * *
It was precisely this hard-line, revolutionary attitude which Adolf Hitler took, when he refused to pledge his allegiance to the old, moribund Habsburg state, whose demise he clearly foresaw, due to its lack of ethnic cohesion. The remarkable parallel between that obsolescent structure before its collapse and the condition of the present multiracial state in North America is something for every National Socialist to ponder. Above all, one would do well to remember the admonition from Mein Kampf: "We National Socialists must never, under any circumstances, join in the usual hurrah patriotism of our present bourgeois world."

It is typical of bourgeois reactionaries to prefer tilting at targets a safe distance from their borders, rather than embarking on the more difficult and hazardous enterprise of overthrowing an enemy closer to home. It is no accident that U.S. conservatives, for example, have always been in the forefront of those urging military adventures abroad — from Pearl Harbor and Suez to Vietnam and— Iran — all the while remaining conspicuously unconcerned about Zionist control of the United States itself.

One can only smile at the hypothetical spectacle of a V.I. Lenin behaving in a similar, reactionary, bourgeois manner. Suppose, for instance, that after the outbreak of hostilities in 1914, he had announced that although he did have certain differences with the Tsar, he nevertheless recognized that his patriotic duty lay in coming to the defense of Mother Russia in her moment of crisis, while at the same time suspending opposition to "his" government for the duration of the conflict.

Any rational person, Communist or non-Communist, would have to regard such behavior as stupid and naïve in the extreme, if not positively insane. In any event, never would Lenin have achieved political success, nor would his cause now* pose the world threat that it does. Yet there are comrades who fail to understand the real reasons for Marxist success and who have yet to resolve the question of state loyalty as unambiguously as did William Joyce in 1939 when, as a National Socialist, he made the conscious decision to leave a Jewish-dominated England, in order to fight in defense of the Aryan revolution in Germany — because he recognized that the citizenship of blood was more important than mere state citizenship.

* * *

Today there are two equally dangerous ideological forces rampant in the world. One is represented by the leveling doctrine of Marxism-Leninism, or Communism. The other is international Zionism, the insidious doctrine of Jewish supremacy over all non-Jews. Whereas in the East, Communism is the dominant reality, in the West it is Zionism — aligned with monopoly capital and politically represented by liberalism/conservatism — which exercises effective control and dominance. Consequently, the destabilization and demolition of the Zionist power structure must be the primary concern of National Socialists in the Western countries. Only after that abomination has been eliminated can the Movement begin to turn its attention effectively to other tasks.

As National Socialists and revolutionaries, our first task, therefore, is to challenge the immediate status quo. If we are unable or unwilling to recognize the enemy in our midst as the first enemy to be fought and overcome, then we are no revolutionaries or true National Socialists, and never will we be able to defeat any other enemies.

Under no circumstances should National Socialists allow themselves to be placed in a position of defending the existing System or helping to resolve any of its dilemmas, whether in the field of domestic or foreign policy. Any such act runs counter to the revolutionary process and can only serve to perpetuate the present condition. Instead, we must be prepared to welcome very situation, every event, and every action which tends to destabilize and dissolve the existing order.

At this late date, nothing can be restored. Therefore, our task does not consist in going back to anything or in bringing back another age. It does not lie in resuscitating a decadent and dying civilization, or preserving a corrupt system, or in changing or modifying it. All of that is irrelevant now.

Our historic task as National Socialists is, quite simply to start all over again — tabula Rasa — with a new vision and a new outlook and a new will, to create upon this Earth a new order and a new culture, as a wonderful, new testament to immortal Aryan genius. That is our mission, and nothing else.
__________________
NEW ORDER Website: http://theneworder.org
NEW ORDER on GAB: https://gab.ai/NEW_ORDER
NS Publications: http://nspublications.com
VNN National Socialist Union: https://vnnforum.com/group.php?groupid=58

Last edited by Jim Harting; May 19th, 2015 at 12:48 PM.
 
Old May 19th, 2015 #27
George Witzgall
Senior Member
 
George Witzgall's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Posts: 8,645
Default

Currently in the trans-national west the individual has to negotiate the extent to which he subordinates his interests and life to his family (nuclear and extended and close friends), and "everyone else"; generally there is very little or no subordination to "everyone else", and in fact the individual often tries to see how much he can get away with in exploiting "everyone else" to his benefit.

Increasingly there has also been less subordination to family as individuals don't see what's in it for them, and have become increasingly isolated and alienated, only worried about fulfilling their own goals and dreams; or sometimes losing motivation entirely and living only for hedonistic or materialistic pleasure.

Nationalism tells the individual that he has a purpose beyond himself; that he and his family are a link in a great chain, a nation, that will live on long after he dies, and through which he can have a meaningful impact for all time. But it makes the question of the degree to which the individual subordinates his interests and life to family and nation much more complicated.

The reason the concept of a nation is so powerful is because a nation is almost like the individual's extended family, since the blood of his ancestors also flows in their veins, and his descendants will procreate with their descendants.

So what does he owe this "extended family"? And what does he owe people who are not part of his nation? Obviously the answers will vary according to the particular nation and circumstances, but it is maybe helpful to use the analogy of mother and child as a touchstone to think about these issues. A mother would do anything for her child, but there are some things she wouldn't do. This is the sort of paradox we're up against here, and sorta defines a sense of right and wrong, a worldview, which is imbued in all of us (partly genetic, partly a result of our upbringing).

The individual recognizes that without his nation, his life would significantly lose rootedness and identity and purpose, so he owes it to his nation to sacrifice on behalf of it.

Note also that a nation must be just (or be perceived to be just) in its dealings with other nations, or they will attack it. If a nation's people view themselves as superior to others, well, they had better damn well be superior in terms of being able to defend themselves because they're going to find themselves under attack by the other nations of the world.

It's hard to say what nations will survive far into the future. And beyond survive, be glorious. I guess only time will tell for sure.
__________________
Blood & Soul Aryan

Last edited by George Witzgall; May 19th, 2015 at 08:51 PM.
 
Old May 21st, 2015 #28
Tiwaz
Senior Member
 
Tiwaz's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2013
Location: Europa, Serbia
Posts: 778
Default National-Socialism has evolved

Yes, of course that National-Socialism is transferable! National-Socialism or N.S. has been evolved, this is one of theories of N.S. we can't compare 1930s and 2015, of course N.S. has been changed, but doctrine still SAME!!!

Now enemy is much stronger, we, our brains are washed up, but we still have peoples who are National And Social conscious, so we must start in every European and other White countries new, National-Socialism, N.S. so they can't call us ''oh, those nazis'' we are not Nazis, we are NATIONAL-SOCIALISTS, BIG DIFFERENCE, I WROTE IN ONE OF MY TEXTS!
If nothing, we can start Racial Defend Front, our Race has been attacked since long time ago and White Man don't do anything!

Start to defend your Race, your girls, your Identity, your Blood and you will see how National-Socialism can be transferable!
National-Socialism is not just hate to other Races, NO, N.S. is entire cosmos of projects, N.S. protect Nature, Animals, N.S. is everything in one, but only good for White Nation, so it is very simple, but same time very difficult to explain, No multiRace and Multiculturalism, no agony, National-Socialism would come by self in this case!
What is more important, we must fight on N.S. way, start fight for higher aim and you will be National-Socialist conscious, be aware of enemy and who are enemy and you all will see that we all must be National-Socialists if we want to survive!

Yes, we are in very difficult situation, most because brainwashed White Aryan peoples, but there is some hope, there is National-Socialist conscious people who can direct you on right way, just think with your brain, don't listen TV and median just one weak and you will see that National-Socialism is only way out from this multi ethnic and multicultural hell!
White Race must realise what is main problem, this is concern financial problems too! White man don't have job because niggers work for food and White man work for middle class, this is why Zionists want niggers for workers rather than quality White Man!
So, we must take back factories and everything what belong to us, to White Man!
If you cut off head to the enemy, it is easy to get rider of body, I mean on their infiltrated colored friends who are here to contaminate our Blood and to destroy our Identity!
Sorry, I must write what I mean, this is only what I left, of course, I can do something else with my mans, but this is so small in compare what we can together!!!
I am sick of small actions, all stay same in generally! We must go on next level, Racial demonstrations, if niggers can, why we can't? We are those who are killed in our lands, we are banned from our homes, we are with out jobs in our countries, SO, WHAT ARE WE WAITING FOR, WE HAVE MORE THAN ONE REASON TO PROTEST!!!
 
Old November 16th, 2015 #29
Trainbike
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2015
Posts: 3
Default

Another good argument for today's National Socialists worldwide is to mention the existence of the World Union of National Socialists which was established by George Lincoln Rockwell.
 
Old November 10th, 2019 #30
Gerry Fable
'God Belief, German Piety'
 
Gerry Fable's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2011
Posts: 3,910
Default Socialist People's Community: Volksgemeinschaft



The German National-Socialist concept of the nation state was that of a People's Community (Volksgemeinschaft.) The national community was seen primarily as an organic whole and class conflict was discouraged in place of ‘class cooperation’.

The socialist Volksgemeinshaft was a utopian vision of what Germany could evolve into. A society where class divisions would no longer be an issue, but instead the recognition that each German, regardless of their station in life, be that he/she is a rocket scientist or a simple waiter, that each member of that people’s community had an important and altruistic obligation to think of the welfare of their Volk before self-interest. Only then could a new golden age arrive of a higher form of civilisation where hereditary illnesses, poverty and crime would become almost non-existent.


Quote:
“The fundamental principle is that the State is not an end in itself but the means to an end. It is the preliminary condition under which alone a higher form of human civilization can be developed, but it is not the source of such a development. This is to be sought exclusively in the actual existence of a race which is endowed with the gift of cultural creativeness.”-Mein Kampf




Quote:
"The programme was nothing other than the programme for the establishment of the new German Volkreichs. It were the theses of the national uprising and the basic insight that lay in these theses was that of the two most elementary forces of the time, nationalism and socialism, had to be subjected to a new definition and that from this definition the two theses had to be merged into a unified one. The two thoughts had to be transformed into a single idea and could then be carriers of a new force. A force that could one day make the Reich great, free and powerful again."
Adolf Hitler speech





Why the Name “National Socialists”?

Hitler says:

“You cannot be a true nationalist without also being a socialist; you others cannot be true socialists without also being nationalists.

To be a nationalist means loving ones own people more than all others, and worker to be sure that it can hold its own among them. If this people to hold its own against the rest of the world, I must wish and work for the health of each member, to see that things go as well as possible for each individual, and therefore the whole. But then I am a socialist!

And I cannot be a socialist without working to be sure that my people can defend itself from attacks by other peoples, and to secure its foundations for life, without working for the greatness of my people, thereby also being a nationalist. The strength and significance of my people is the foundation for the prosperity of the individual.

Therefore, you are National Socialists.”




Quote:
Addressing his own party, the NSDAP, in Munich in August 1920, he pledged his faith in socialist-racialism: "If we are socialists, then we must definitely be anti-semites - and the opposite, in that case, is Materialism and Mammonism, which we seek to oppose." There was loud applause. Hitler went on: "How, as a socialist, can you not be an anti-semite?"
Hitler and the socialist dream

“I met Hitler not in his headquarters, the Brown House in Munich, but in a private home - the dwelling of a former admiral of the German Navy. We discussed the fate of Germany over teacups.

"Why," I asked Hitler, "do you call yourself a National Socialist, since your party programme is the very antithesis of that commonly accredited to socialism?"

"Socialism," he retorted, putting down his cup of tea, pugnaciously, "is the science of dealing with the common weal. Communism is not Socialism. Marxism is not Socialism. The Marxians have stolen the term and confused its meaning. I shall take Socialism away from the Socialists.

"Socialism is an ancient Aryan, Germanic institution. Our German ancestors held certain lands in common. They cultivated the idea of the common weal. Marxism has no right to disguise itself as socialism. Socialism, unlike Marxism, does not repudiate private property. Unlike Marxism, it involves no negation of personality, and unlike Marxism, it is patriotic.

"We might have called ourselves the Liberal Party. We chose to call ourselves the National Socialists. We are not internationalists. Our socialism is national. We demand the fulfilment of the just claims of the productive classes by the state on the basis of race solidarity. To us state and race are one." [Meaning the state belongs to the people/volk, the state works for the people, it does not rule over them in the sense of being subjects]

G. S. Viereck's 1923 interview with Adolf Hitler




Centre Radical

Many historians make the error of closely comparing National-Socialism to Communism in terms of economical policy, when in fact the two stand wide apart from each other. It is also interesting to note that the Communists claim National-Socialism was not socialism at all, and was in fact the purest form of Capitalism. The Soviet communists however created a false dichotomy for propagandistic reasons for the Soviet masses, and the claim that National-Socialism was the 'last bastion of Capitalism' has no basis in fact. In reality, National-Socialism was neither Capitalist nor Communist, but took natural and healthy elements from each one to form a more "centrist" style of government. The National-Socialist state allowed capitalistic principles, but not at the expense of the Volk. Businesses were allowed to make profits but those profits were capped. People were allowed to own their own homes. But they were encouraged not to own more than one property.





The Individual And The Collective

Man is neither hermit nor herd animal, but a little of both, because these traits are not mutually exclusive. He has individualistic traits, but he also has socialistic traits. He is both himself and part of a group. Only National-Socialism recognized this fact, whereas the capitalists would like us to believe that we are only individuals, and the communists are telling us we are only part of a greater collective. According to the ideology of National-Socialism individuality must be limited at the point where it is a detriment to the social good, and that collectivism must be limited where it begins to suffocate the creativity of the individual.

National-Socialism recognized the fact that men are born neither isolated individuals nor members of an ant colony.




Meritocratic

According to the doctrine of Marxism everyone is equal in worth, and each person has the innate ability to be whatever they desire to be. Be that a brain surgeon, rocket scientist, musical composer, philosopher etc. This ideal is known as egalitarianism. The doctrine that all people are equal and deserve equal rights and opportunities.

While all people most certainly do deserve equal rights and opportunities to better themselves. People are not equal in ability. Some people are destined to be artists or entertainers. While others are more suited to physical work. Some people are born leaders while others are incapable of leadership. But in the Communist system, those with natural talent are hamstrung by those of mediocre ability because of the false doctrine of egalitarianism.

In the National-Socialist system of government the best man, or indeed woman, for the job is the person who is the most able and gifted for that particular task.





Class Cooperation Not Class War


To promote better understanding between workers and employers, all labour unions were nationalised into one monolithic body, which in Germany was known as the Deutsche Arbeitsfront (DAF). This organisation was headed by one individual known as the Arbeitsführer (Work Leader) who is, in turn, was responsible to the Führer. Any conflicts or disputes that arose between employers and workers were resolved through mediation between representatives of the DAF and the employer, by an organization set up for that purpose.

When the National-Socialists came to power the Trade Unions were infested with Bolshevik revolutionaries and the regime also wanted to promote class cooperation and not class war and therefore amalgamated all Trade Unions into one.





Folk-Democracy [Ennobled Democracy]

The nation and the government in Germany are one thing. The will of the people is the will of the government and vice versa.

The modern structure of the German State is a higher form of democracy [ennobled democracy]in which, by virtue of the people’s mandate, the government is exercised authoritatively while there is no possibility for parliamentary interference, to obliterate and render ineffective the execution of the nation’s will.

“On National-Socialist Germany And Her Contribution Towards Peace.” Speech to the representatives of the international press at Geneva on September 28. 1933. German League of Nations Union News Service, PRO, FO 371/16728




“We have modernized and ennobled the concept of democracy. With us it means definitely the rule of the people, in accordance with its origin.”


On National-Socialism, Bolshevism & Democracy (September 10, 1938)


Adolf Hitler Explains Plutocratic Democracy


The NS Volksgemeinschaft was an organic system of top-down government, where advice travelled upward, and decisions travelled downward. Leaders were chosen on individual merit alone, and not because of their status, their family background, or how much money the individual had. Ordinary people showing potential for leadership were educated at special Adolf Hitler schools. The government of National-Socialist Germany brought in many thousands of ordinary people into positions of government. Ultimately the folk in NS Germany commanded the state and not the other way around. The state was simply a means to an end and not an end in itself.

This system of government is called folk-democracy and is a true form of meritocracy. Not dictatorship or tyranny. Elections were occasionally held in the form of plebiscites for all key laws in the Reich, the states and provinces.



1935 Saarland Plebiscite Returns Region to Germany





Hitler wanted to create a socialism of nations with National-Socialist Germany as the sole protector and guarantor of free and independent socialist nations in the world.

The Socialism of nations could only have come about two ways:


1. All nations voluntarily submit and join the socialism of nations through internal National-Socialist revolution in each nation.

2. A war of liberation against Capitalism and Communism by a National-Socialist nation in order to bring into existence, guarantee and then secure the socialism of all free and independent nations.

Socialism of the Nations:

“There also exists a constructive international socialist idea. But it is altogether different. For, look here, once nations have begun to carry out a socialist and socio-economic reorganization within their own borders, the time is ripe for the totality of nations — that is, all the peoples and states — to give up fighting each other for power and supremacy, enslavement and exploitation, according to liberal principles — that is, acting according to imperialist principles. Then, even among them the time has come for giving consideration to pride of place, communal spirit, even ‘socialism.’ What first occurred on a small scale within the individual nations will then take place among the worldwide community of nations. Even the smallest of them will enjoy equal rights… That is socialism of the nations! But it is quite different from the international socialism of a Marx or a Lenin!”





“If, for example, acting out of a higher discernment, industrial plants decide not to compete with each other, establishing instead a community of interests, each enterprise remains independent in itself. The only change is that each will be integrated into the totality according to a higher plan, taking into account considerations of production and market conditions and according to principles of reason and profitability. So each must give up something of its sovereignty, in the interest of the whole — but consequently also in its own best interest. It is equally true within a nation that each individual citizen must surrender something of his own sovereignty — what is colloquially spoken of as ‘personal liberty’ –to the organization of self-administration, the state. All rights originate primarily with the people… The Volk, each separate person, however, yields as much as necessary — but not more than necessary — to the state it has created or the government it has established according to its constitution.

“The same thing will happen with the socialism of nations. Each nation remains independent. It yields to the community, to the organization of self-administration, to the world state only as much of its sovereignty as is necessary to enable the execution of the tasks that are in the interest of all and each separately.”

https://gnatsandcamels.wordpress.com...-otto-wagener/
__________________
"Man is not God. But he is God's birthplace. God exists and grows in man. If God does not come in man, He never comes~ Hence the German religion is the religion of high faith in man."-Alfred Rosenberg

Last edited by Gerry Fable; November 17th, 2019 at 06:29 AM.
 
Old August 29th, 2023 #31
Tiwaz
Senior Member
 
Tiwaz's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2013
Location: Europa, Serbia
Posts: 778
Default WAGNER Army is composed from national-socialists in the hearth of Russia


Dmitry Utkin left and Evgeny Prigozin right!
National-socialism is extremly transferable! If Wagner group could work in hearth of Russia, Moscow, Kremlin than those few commanders where geniuses! So, they showed to be best fighters on the front and all army of ministry of defence depended on them! Than Wagner went on Moscow with best attentions, to change, take off entire Russian Ministry of Defence and establish a new people as a head of a state as well to establish new order in Russian federation! Quickly KGB react and take advantage on Wagner command honest love to own people, nation and they pulled off just because they didn't want brotherhood blood on the streets of Moscow!
Hm, what that new order would be like...I bet it would be transferable NS!
GLORY TO PRIGOZIN, UTKIN AND ALL WAGNER!
 
Reply

Share


Thread
Display Modes


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 12:14 PM.
Page generated in 0.69604 seconds.