"I have been reading your amazing blog and listening to some of your podcasts with Carolyn. Not sure how I haven't run across your work before. Amazing stuff." (reader's comment, 10 May 2016)
Come chat with us! Download and install an IRC-client -- Hexchat is recommended -- and go to the channel #National-Socialism on the Undernet server.

29 April 2011

Alfred Rosenberg explains National-Socialism

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 current 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 Germany, 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 associate 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.

25 April 2011

Alfred Rosenberg's Critique of Oswald Spengler

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.

14 April 2011

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

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

09 April 2011

Jew Suspected of Bombing near Synagogue

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."(

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.