web analytics
Who We Are (book)

Phony nazis

Keyword: Christian Identity (CI)
“I think the men’s movement will eventually go completely Nazi. Just a matter of time” wrote Andrew Anglin recently. But it’s becoming increasingly clear that, like Harold Covington who admits women in his inner party—a feminist!—, Anglin and the commenters at The Daily Stormer are phony nazis as well. This Easter Anglin posted this Frankenstein entry trying to mix the unmixable, which I quote below:

Today is the holiest day on the Christian calendar, and it is important to remember why.

What is important to remember this Easter is that the Christian problem encompasses the Jewish problem, and that Frankensteinian CI neonazis have fallen into monocausalism precisely because they are unwilling to see what the real nazis saw.

Christ was an example, both in deed and in metaphor. The metaphor of the crucifixion and resurrection is the metaphor for all of life. Life is suffering, but it is through that suffering that we become something more. We must die in order to be born again. This is where the meaning is. In the fight. Victory is inevitable and absolute. But it is the struggle, this is where the transformation takes place.

Finally it’s all too clear to me why many white nationalists don’t treasure Pierce’s Who We Are. If Moses replaced Hermann (Arminius) and Christ replaced Vercingetorix in the white psyche, it’s precisely because “the gradual replacement of White tradition, legend, and imagery by that of the Jews. Instead of specifically Celtic or German or Slavic heroes, the Church’s saints, many of them Levantines, were held up to the young for emulation; instead of the feats of Hermann or Vercingetorix, children were taught of the doings of Moses and David.” Anglin and all people in CI are simply incapable to see the level of alienation that resulted from bringing into our Aryan citadel a Trojan horse: none other than the god of the Jews! Once I finish quoting from Hitler’s table talks by the end of the year, I will be translating more articles of Manu Rodríguez, who explains beautifully why Zeus must replace Yahweh in order to save the race.

Jesus fought the Jew, and when it seemed as though the Jew had won, killing him, he rose from the grave. So too are we dead, and so too shall we rise from the grave. Just so, each of us as individuals must suffer in order to truly become what we are meant to be.

With these nazis who needs the Jews? A couple of days ago I told a CI commenter at The Daily Stormer that throughout the Old Testament the Hebrews teach ethno-centricity for the Hebrew people, but in the New Testament the Jew Paul teaches universalism for us gentiles! I confess I’m so upset with this nonsense in Murka’s neonazi blogosphere that I will skip Hitler’s table talk this day and post instead something about Easter; not sure if I’ll take the trouble to type an in-depth article on the Resurrection. What is sure is that I’ll now remove The Daily Stormer from my blogroll list.

When we lost WWII, we died. We are now in Hell. But the dawn is about to break, and we shall rise from the grave, living flesh, moving toward Heaven. Hail Victory.

What Anglin and the CI Christians at The Daily Stormer ignore is that it was precisely because of Christianity that we lost World War Two! Read Tom Sunic’s “A war crime of the Bible” in his book Homo Americanus.

Why I claim that Christianity is incompatible with National Socialism and that any attempt to merge the two is like Shelley’s novel about a student creating a grotesque but sentient creature? Simple. Just see what Hitler and Himmler said about our parents’ religion here and here. The first links to a table talk that should be read instead of the missing “Uncle Adolf’s table talk” entry today.

23 replies on “Phony nazis”

Well, I don’t. Yesterday I received this email:

Hi Cesar,

I am happy to see that you have taken an intolerant stance against the Christian idiocy that is The Daily Stormer, besides that I wish to point out that it is filled with anti-nordicism. Maybe it will be a good idea in this regard to cite Uncle Adolf’s words from his diner from the 12th of may 1942: “I shall have no peace of mind until I have succeeded in planting a seed of Nordic blood wherever the population stands in need of regeneration.”

I found it already that while reading, “Why I am not a Neo-Nazi” your description of Neo-Nazis as “WN plus Nazi paraphernalia” immediately made me think of the average Stormer type. (Keep also in mind that the original Der Sturmer from Streicher was banned from East Prussia by Hermann Goring and from the Hitler Jugend by Baldur von Schirach.)

Have a fine day.


P.S. I hope you won’t mind if I send comments through E-Mail, I have kind of an allergy for commenting on internet forums and blogs.

Lol, in response to that emailer, how does posting one radio show that makes a point about Nordics which has been completely taken out of context by people who probably didn’t even listen to the show equate to DS being “filled with anti-Nordicism”?

I was the one who posted that show there, and while I didn’t find anything that was said in it particularly brilliant, I can assure you I wouldn’t have posted it if it was “anti-Nordic.”

Wolf Wall Street’s point was that Nordic Swedes were sacrificing their nation on the altar of political correctness virtually without a fight.

That’s no more anti-Nordic than it is anti-White to point out that the White race is not superior in terms of the only thing that matters in this life: survival. It’s just making a point.

If I knew the title of the show alone would’ve caused such an emotional reaction among hyper-sensitive WNs I wouldn’t have even bothered.

I didn’t make up the email; it was a genuine email that I received. However, I remember well another DS thread where Anglin sided the anti-nordicists. I even left a rather late comment in that thread but I won’t do any digging now.

Hello cesartort,

hmm, how can you claim that Christianity is incompatible with National Socialism when the National Socialists and Hitler were defending it. Very odd.This cleary sounds like a jewish opinion for me.

Free Book: Positive Christianity in the Third Reich, by Professor Cajus Fabricius

And please read point 24 of the NS program again.

We demand liberty for all religious denominations in the State, so far as they are not a danger to it and do not militate against the morality and moral sense of the German race. The Party as such, stands for positive Christianity but does not bind itself in the matter of creed to any particular confession. It combats the Jewish-materialist spirit within and without us, and is convinced that our nation can achieve permanent health from within only on the principle: The Common Interest Before Self-Interest.

It seems that you want to reinvent NS and that reminds me to some phony pseudo christians who wants to become more jewish than the jews themselves.One of the main reason why Hitler fought against jewish bolshevism was because it denies God and soul in an absolute manner.You never can reunite the people without a spiritual foundation.And you never will fulfil that with germanic neopaganism.

The National Socialist Stand on Christianity

I am not saying that Hitler is comparable to Jesus Christ that would make him a God, but according to Jesus that some Men would do even greater things that he does(John 14:12).I want to recomend that reading.

We do not understand, why “religious Judaism” [1] hates Jesus Christ as much as Adolf Hitler. The Redeemer of Christianity, if one looks upon it more exactly, is hated even more than Adolf Hitler. Jesus Christ, not Hitler, according to Talmudic curses (which often are taken, mistakenly, as religious prayers), is boiling in Hell in a vat of excrement. Other Talmud passages are urging all “pious Jews”, to curse the mothers of the dead in Christian cemeteries.

Best Rehards from Germany
Happy Easter.
Christ is risen!

how can you claim that Christianity is incompatible with National Socialism when the National Socialists and Hitler were defending it?

They were not. See the links to Hitler’s table talk and Himmler’s speech by the end of the entry. Also, pay attention to my mention of Mark 4:11 in my reply to the other Christian who commented below.

Sorry but you say “phony nazis” and bring up the phony table talks?
Are you here to unite the people,as Hitler did, or are you here to divide the people,what the jews do all the time?

“Hitler’s Table Talk

Those who deny Hitler as a Christian will invariably find the recorded table talk conversations of Hitler from 1941 to 1944 as incontrovertible evidence that he could not have been a Christian. The source usually comes from the English translation (from a French translation) edition by Norman Cameron and R. H. Stevens, with an introduction by H.R. Trevor-Roper.

The table-talk has Hitler saying such things such as: “I shall never come to terms with the Christian lie. . .”, “Our epoch will certainly see the end of the disease of Christianity”.

The problem with these anti-Christian quotes is that the German text of the table-talk does not include them, they were made up by François Genoud, the translator of the French version, the very version that English translations rely on! (More on this below).

Even if you believed the table-talk included the anti-Christian quotes, nowhere in the talk does Hitler speak against Jesus or his own brand of Christianity. On the contrary, the table-talk has Hitler speaking admirably about Jesus. Hitler did, of course criticize organized religion in a political sense (as do many Christians today), but never in a religious sense. But the problems with using Hitler’s table talk conversations as evidence for Hitler’s apostasy are manyfold:

1) The reliability of the source (hearsay and editing by the anti-Catholic, Bormann)

2) The reliability of multiple translations, from German to French to English.

3) The bias of the translators (especially Genoud).

4) The table-talk reflects thoughts that do not occur in Hitler’s other private or public conversations.

5) Nowhere does Hitler denounce Jesus or his own brand of Christianity.

6) The “anti-Christian” portions of Table-Talk does not concur with Hitler’s actions for “positive” Christianity.”

“The reliability of the source

Not one of Hitler’s table talk conversations were recorded or captured by audio, film, or broadcast on radio. According to H.R. Trevor-Roper, Hitler refused to admit any mechanical recorder into his room. Hitler reluctantly allowed Martin Bormann to pick stenographers (Heim, Piker) to record the conversations. It was Bormann’s idea to record Hitler’s thoughts in the first place. In a facsimile written after the last of Hitler’s recorded table talk, Bormann wrote a directive that stated:

“Please keep these notes most carefully, as they will be of very great value in the future. I have now got Heim to make comprehensive notes as a basis for these minutes. Any transcript which is not quite apposite will be re-checked by me.” [Trevor-Roper, inset] (bold characters, mine)

“Apposite” means, fitting; suitable; appropriate. Exactly what Bormann means by “re-checked” can only be speculated upon. However, it bears importance here that neither Heim nor Bormann could hardly be in a position to determine what deems apposite, considering Bormann’s biased views against Catholicism. Should we take it as simply coincidence that the church denouncements by Hitler in the Table-Talk parallel the anti-church sentiments of Martin Bormann, but nowhere else?

Martin Bormann served as the instigator, fuel, and reason for the perception of many Christians that Nazism was against Christianity. Many times, quotes attributed to Hitler are actually Bormann’s. It is well known that Bormann secretly worked against the Catholic religion behind Hitler’s back and without his permission. It has been pointed out that “the fight against the church organizations” were Bormann’s pet project. In spite of Bormann’s repeated attempts to persuade Hitler to act against the Churches, Hitler insisted that “There has been no official Party announcement, nor will there be one.” [VonLang, p.191]

How can any honest seeker of truth rely on Hitler’s table talk when the entire transcript was edited and kept by the anti-Catholic Bormann?

Two scribes recorded Hitler’s conversations at the appointment of Martin Bormann. One was recorded by a civil servant in the Reich Ministry of Justice, Heinrich Heim from 5th July 1941 to 20th March 1942. Later, from 21st March 1942 until 31st July 1942, it was taken by Dr. Henry Piker. The record, whether taken by Heim or Picker, was passed to Bormann. Bormann made two copies of his record. One of these was kept in the Fuhererbau in Munich and was burnt at the end of the war; the other was sent to the Berghof at Berchtesgaden and came ultimately into the hands of Genoud. It is this second copy of which the volume of Hitler’s table talk was translated. [Trevor-Roper, p.viii]

Moreover, Dr. Picker regarded his own recording as authentic and insisted that “no confidence can be placed in Bormann’s editing of it.” Indeed, he writes, rather testily, of “Bormann’s alterations, not authorised by me.” [Trevor-Roper, p.viii]. Unfortunately, we do not have the unaltered version of Dr. Picker’s or Heim’s recordings.

In other words, there are no originals and the copies were filtered and edited by Bormann. The table talk cannot be considered a first-hand recording of Hitler’s words. On this fact alone, I cannot with integrity or certainty use them as a source for Hitler’s voice, especially in regards to religion which could very well reflect the anti-Catholic biased Bormann.

Although nowhere does Trevor-Roper argue against Hitler’s Christianity, he does provide us with a rather dubious reason for accepting Hitler’s table talk:

“We must go direct to Hitler’s personal utterances: not indeed to his letters and speeches– these, though valuable, are too public, too formalised for such purposes– but to his private conversations, his Table-Talk. Table-Talk, like notebooks, reveal the mind of a man far more completely, more intimately, than any formal utterance.” [Trevor-Roper, p.xiv]

Unfortunately, Trevor-Roper fails to give us a reason why the Table-Talk supposedly gives a more intimate look at a person. On the contrary, I would find it far more revealing to hear a reasoned and thought out response as this would more likely provide an accurate account of one’s actual thinking. (I would shudder to think how one would misinterpret my personal feelings from my utterances during lighthearted dialog.)

But more damaging to Trevor-Roper’s reasoning is that the Table-Talks were not private! Hitler knew all along that the scribes were there to give an account of him for future posterity. These were as public as any of Hitler’s letters and pre-written speeches. So in what sense could these ‘loose’ conversations reveal more than letters and speeches? Trevor-Roper nor anyone else gives us a good answer.”

I don’t use the Trevor-Ropper edition; I hate it actually. I use the Ostara Publications edition. And my source that the talks are genuine is none other than David Irving:


And please don’t post entire articles in a comment. Just add a link as I am adding it right now.

But now that you are doing long comments, why not repost a comment that a Swede posted in this blog three years ago? He wrote:


Anybody intelligent enough can determine by himself if a document looks like a forgery or not. And I’m sorry, but there are simply too much coherence, truths and verifiable anecdotes in Table Talk to simply put a chaste veil on it and pretend it was that damn Bormann who invented it all.

I’m just going to give one example. At one moment, Hitler says, “The best attitude to adopt towards Christianity is to let it die from natural death and the progress of science”.

Strange! The very same words that Leon Degrelle (before Table Talk was published) reported he heard personally from the Fuhrer in 1944. Degrelle was a rare phenomenon of Christian Nazi who had absolutely no interest in making his protégé Hitler look like a heathen.

I always try to shorten my messages, but there is so much more that could be said on the subject of this book. Every single notable story and anecdote is notably verifiable, if you are sufficiently cultivated and curious to do it.

People who brand Table Talk as a forgery are always Christian traditionalists and white nationalists. They are butt-hurt that Hitler may not have been the anti-communist Christian messiah they had hoped, but rather a pagan, Nietzschean and Mendelian revolutionary. So they accuse Bormann of being a traitor or a forger, just like they accuse Darwin of being the spawn of Satan and the Jews of being the sole party responsible for the death of Christianity in the West. You can’t reason with adepts of the Abrahamic religions. You should ban them from true White political movements like you should ban Jews and Mestizos. Everything in their body and attitude exhales Semitism.

It just takes courage to do it, to tell Christians to go f*** themselves. It’s not like they’re going to help us retake America anyway. Everything in conservatism and Christian Identity smells like defeat and weakness.

/end Quote

National Socialism incompatible with Christianity? Back in 1939 there was a census in National Socialist Germany. 99% of the German population in 1939 declared themselves to be either Protestant Christian or Catholic Christian. Vast majority of the officers and generals of the German Wehrmacht also declared in public that they were Christians.

There’s a passage in the gospel of Mark, “He did not tell them anything without using a parable… But when he was alone with his own disciples, he explained everything.”

The same with the Führer and his outer / inner circle. Obviously he needed a Joseph Goebbels and PR for the masses, where they had to pretend be friends of religion, but in the privacy of the Führerbunker or the cozy house for his table talks, he explained everything.

So if that’s your theory.. why do you want to act differently than him on the matter? Do you perhaps think you know better than he did?

PS. You were not there “in the privacy of the Führerbunker or the cozy house”.. so it’s pure speculation. As I said, if the “table talks” are real, and that’s a big if, then they do not contain any important parts of NS ideology. If they had – Hitler would have made sure that such was made public.

Hitler was a Christian, Hitler was NOT a Christian, Hitler was a Christian, Hitler was NOT a Christian. It never ends, it just goes around in circles. If Hitler was as forth-right and as honest as so many say, one would think Hitler would have made it very clear if he was a Christian or not. The fact that this aspect of Hitler is so up to debate and so up to questioning means Hitler was not as forth right as the gung-ho Hitlerites say. If Hitler was so honest and forth right and so straight-forward, why is Hitler’s religious beliefs so murky and so up to debate ; How come no one knows for sure, if Hitler was so forth right and so honest.

Because if you are a politician you cannot be transparent to the masses of Germans who are still Lutherans and Catholics. Did you miss my (humorous) quote of Mark 4:11 in two comments above? Only philosophers and Old Testament prophets, you know the kind that told the king the hateful truth and lived poorly in the desert, can have the luxury of being so forthright.

The odds are overwhelmingly against any American becoming a real National Socialist. He must avoid numerous debilitating vices beginning in early childhood(!) to achieve some measure of well-being. He must navigate an entire system dedicated to his spiritual ruination in early adulthood. His own history is filtered through an alien lens. Then when he reaches the “movement” he’s surrounded by men terrified of the rope crossing the abyss. They whisper to him that the precipice is practical and secure.

The faith of National Socialism requires such cultivated, rarified, and visionary men that it will never be a mass movement. An exoteric creed must be crafted for our partially awakened bretheren. Something simple that affirms patriarchy, martial virtues, sound economics, JQ awarness, and racial hygeine. An elite esoteric order can know the whole Truth and man the wheel.

I can only hope that Mr. Anglin is deliberately crafting a crude but effective exoteric message for our people…

I didn’t mention Linder’s VNN in the other thread on Lane’s letter because he’s honest enough to admit he’s not a nazi. But I have a problem with those who claim knighthood of the 14 words and clearly are not.

The WN sites I mentioned in the other thread are handicapped in one way or the other—not only AmRen on the J question but the other sites on the homo question, the Christian question, the One Ring question, the degenerate music question, the feminist question, the anti-nordicist question, spending hundreds of hours in 9/11 theories instead of reading white history, the mangina question, etc, etc.

On Facebook Ronin commented recently about the Lane thread: “The very last thing to be anticipated is the attempt to fuse Germanic National Socialism with the twisted Murkan psyche”. But you have a point: the exoteric side of WN / pseudo-nazism is doing well enough for Murka’s decadent standards.

My prediction is that if energy devolution becomes as apocalyptic as I imagine, after the first billion of casualties in, say, 2050 to 2070, the white psyche in the US will, at last, start to change.

The hakenkreuz is just a gang sign for these WNs. Which is utter stupidity given that there is no White gang! I hesitate to apply the National Socialist label to myself because (despite my admiration for them and a congruence of belief) they were different people born on different soil living in the shadow of a different war. A wide gulf lies between their suffering and our struggle. Hopefully we live long enough to see our people earn the right to fly the Symbol of Our Sun again.

Revilo Oliver said that his generation needed to suffer at least thirty years to become noble again. They’ll get about century but Pierce went further:

“Nor will anyone evade the suffering ahead, neither those who perish by it nor those who survive it, neither the grasshoppers nor the ants. It is said that suffering is good for the soul; if this is true, Westerners can look forward to a great deal of spiritual improvement. But whether the maxim is true or not, the suffering is necessary. As long as he is moderately comfortable, the average man will not change his ways. Only when existence becomes utterly intolerable and there is no alternative can he be persuaded to do what he should have done from foresight and through self-discipline at the beginning.”

While Christianity dilutes pure Nazism, most members of the Nazi party still did consider themselves Christians. It’s unwise to abandon a spiritual tradition unless you have a clear picture of how things should actually be, and Hitler had quite a bit of practical patience with the Christians for that reason.

On the other hand, Christianity is a rapidly dying faith. Whether it constitutes a “natural death” is questionable, but try even getting a Christian to say that Jews aren’t going to heaven in public. No chance, they don’t give a fuck what their bible says. They’ll pick the TV every time.

Deep down in my heart, I believe in Jesus Christ exactly as much as I believe in Odin. Neither one is a living tradition any more, not in my culture. So I don’t have a reason to make compromises.

No on the contrary it is the other way around. Criminal Judaism hiding behind a religion will fall big time not Christianity! The true revolution must and will be raise against the parasite of the world. The jews and judaism! (YouTube link)

Another email from Juliën:

Hi Cesar

In light of the “Hitler and Christianity” debate I recently read the memoirs of Alfred Rosenberg. From page 106:

What his own beliefs were he never told me in so many words. Once, at table, he said a high-placed Italian had asked him point-blank what his religious beliefs were. He had begged permission not to answer that question.


As for the Christian concept of God, Hitler definitely rejected it in private conversations

Also on another subject this document proved valuable to me, within the context that I encountered some people (on the internet) that tend to claim that National Socialism is pro-homosexual and that Himmler was an isolated case, well geuss what…

Hitler himself spoke with distaste of Röhm’s notorious perversion (p. 93)

That dubious claim was mainly being made by these types who say that “Communism and Fascism are the same” and “National Socialism is an offshoot of Marxism” (and accordingly divide the Rightwing-Leftwing spectrum based upon the level of state centralisation instead of upon their respective views upon the moral good of equality or the lack theirof).

For the rest I can only say this is an interesting but not mindblowing document and I find Rosenberg’s rant’s on Himmler rather childish and his proposal for a democatic-NS state laughable.

Link to the pdf (from NationalVanguard.org)

I hope this information proves valuable to you in case of dicussions with Christian-Identity types and other fools.


Comments are closed.