‘These facts must be made public so that the balanced moral under standing of justice—this being in a state of uncertainty and wavering within the German population from decades of rabble-rousing and lies—shall be restored to the German people’. —Erich Kern
Allied violations of international law
The first Germans who were to suffer from ‘liberation’ were the indigenous ethnic Germans (Volksdeutsche) living in Yugoslavia. In the principal areas of German settlement, that is Banat, Batschka, Baranya and Syrmia, mass executions began already in October 1944 and spread to the Lower Styria (Untersteiermark) region in May 1945.
These mass shootings and other killings were originally planned at the illegal Second Communist Convention of the so-called Anti Fascist Council of the National Liberation of Yugoslavia (AVNOJ), during the presidency of Ivan Ribar in Jajce, from 29 to 30 November 1943.
The wire-puller of these planned exterminations was the Stalinist Moshe Puade, an underground Communist who, at this conference, demanded the liquidation of all Germans.
The principal doer and the person chiefly responsible was Josip Broz, who entered the annals of terror under the name of Tito. The actual executioners of the mass shootings, in addition to partisans and private local people, were primarily the so-called Peoples’ Liberation Councils, the secret police (OZNA), the peoples’ courts and the execution units of the Aktion Intelligenzija. The aim of the torturing and the shootings, which also claimed the lives of people in the Yugoslav opposition, was to intimidate the masses through terror while destroying their leadership at the same time, thus rendering them vulnerable.
The nature and extent of the unbelievable atrocities equalled in every way those of the Polish, Czech and Soviet crimes, and in Yugoslavia the actual dirty work was often carried out by gypsies. Erich M., a former member of the Wehrmacht, tells of the first foretaste he got during the retreat from Greece through Yugoslavia in the autumn of 1944. He reported seeing
in the region of Welis and Stib, ethnic Germans (Volksdeutsche) whose tongues were nailed to the table in their homes. The eyes had been gouged out beforehand. Ethnic Germans (Volksdeutsche) at another place reported that many of their neighbours had been herded into a school. The partisans then doused the school with gasoline and set it on fire. All the peoples, who attempted to escape through the windows, were shot by the partisans. In Stib, Serbia, we found 40 murdered German soldiers in a tile-making factory, who had been stripped naked. Their eyes had been gouged out, and some of them had their genitals cut off. Nearby lay fifteen or twenty female communications personnel, whose genitals had been cut away and stuffed into their mouths.
Josef Kampf, chairman of agricultural organizations in DeutschZerne, witnessed shootings in his home village. He described these events as follows: On 24 October 1944:
Shootings were carried out in all the German settlements. We were witnesses to executions in Zeme. Sixty-eight men and women were bound with strong ropes and led to the place of execution. Behind each column came gypsy escorts armed with clubs. During the march the gypsies were allowed to attack the victims any way they wanted, and this they did beyond all measure, knocking out the eyes of the bound prisoners and smashing their noses, heads and chins, etc. In the process, the gypsies set great store by tormenting the people just at the moment when they were led past their former homes. When someone lost consciousness, he would be dragged along by the rope by the others and beaten by the gypsies, until he was on his feet again. Every so often, when someone could not go on anymore, he would be thrown onto a wagon and hauled to the execution site.
For sheer mockery, all the church bells were ringing. Mounted Serbian men and boys also rode alongside the procession, ringing cowbells in a cacophonic accompaniment. At the execution site the victims were forced to undress, and those who were unable to do so were stripped by the gypsies. Then they were lined up next to the mass grave, in groups of five or six, and shot from behind with submachine guns, but also with single shot rifles. On the meadow next to the place of torment, hundreds of Serbs gathered to watch. Each group following on had to push the previous shot victims into the hole, insofar as these had not fallen in by themselves after being shot. Many in the grave were still alive, attempting to raise themselves and turning in their death throes. This was met with laughter from the onlookers, with some of them remarking that those executed were still performing gymnastics. Two days later, there was still movement detected in the mass grave. They did not cover the bodies with earth, as there had to be space available for the next victims.
______ 卐 ______
Editor’s note: This needs to be repeated after every instalment of this book by Claus Nordbruch until it is understood: The main webzines of white nationalism are almost irrelevant because they omit a central fact of the 20th century: the German holocaust. If the story that we have been telling ourselves for the last decades is false (whites only talk about what happened with Jewry in World War II, and this has been grossly exaggerated), the result is what we see now in the West.
Without putting the above historical facts to the fore, all discourse on racialist-run American webzines becomes hot air. (Again, study the links in the sticky post to grasp what we mean.)
I use the term ‘schizophrenia’ in its popular sense of a divided mind, not in the psychiatric sense.
A week ago I honoured the retired revolutionary ideologue Michael O’Meara in the context that, unlike him, white nationalists are merely reactionaries.
Today I came up with the idea to look in the discussion threads of the webzine where O’Meara used to post his articles to see when was the last time O’Meara discussed one of his articles with the commenters. I found out it was a reply to a commenter in one of the threads from September 2012:
No offense taken. I was pleased that someone had commented on the Catholic aspect of the piece. Another take on religion is my ‘Only a God Can Save Us’, archived here at C-C.
O’Meara refers to his article on Nietzsche originally published in The Occidental Quarterly, vol. 8, no. 2 (Summer 2008), which Greg Johnson later republished in Counter-Currents on July 1, 2010. This means that O’Meara wrote his article before the Spaniard Evropa Soberana published his long essay on Judea vs. Rome, which I later translated and adopted as the masthead of this site.
O’Meara’s last comment in Johnson’s webzine reminds me that, in another of his articles, O’Meara said things about Hitler that denoted a critical spirit towards what, in my opinion, has been the apex of western history to date: the Third Reich.
Years ago I asked a question in one of the discussion threads of this site. I didn’t understand why Solzhenitsyn, who so longed for the destruction of the USSR, had not sided with the Nazis who wanted to destroy Bolshevism even after writing his two non-fiction books: The Gulag Archipelago and 200 Years Together. How was this possible, taking into account that Solzhenitsyn was a hawk during the Vietnam War (insofar as he wanted to prevent communism from spreading)? Roger, a British commenter with great sensitivity to why we should reject the degenerate music of the past decades, replied that it was due to Solzhenitsyn’s Christianity.
The Briton hit the nail. It was Solzhenitsyn’s orthodox Christianity that made him ‘schizophrenic’ in the sense of not siding with the good guys during the greatest conflagration between Good and Evil in Western history (check out my most recent sticky post).
The same with Michael O’Meara, whose parents I guess were Irish Catholics. Although O’Meara was far more courageous than today’s white nationalists in suggesting that only revolutionary thinking can save us, he fell short in not appreciating the greatest mental revolution of our day, embodied in the figure of Hitler. And since unlike Roger most American racialists are sympathetic to Christianity, they will remain as schizophrenic as Solzhenitsyn and O’Meara until they stop idealising everything related to the god of the Jews.
Michael’s ‘Only a (((God))) can save us’ is truly schizophrenic if he has in mind the god of his Catholic parents (triple parenthesis added).
– For the context of these translations click here –
Pope Gregory I (590-604)
A 1627 interpretation of Gregorio
Magno by Francisco de Zurbarán
‘Just and loving was Gregory, both with the poor and the economically weak, as with the slaves, the heretics and the Jews.’ —F.M. Stratmann, Catholic theologian
‘The history of the Church has not produced many characters who have rightfully carried the nickname of The Great’. —Heinrich Kraft
‘Nor was it the worst that he advised proceeding against the recalcitrant with whipping, torture and jail, but with naive cynicism he recommended the increase in taxes as a means of conversion: those who converted had to be relieved of the established taxes, and those who were reluctant had to be softened with tax pressure’. —Johannes Haller
The flight from the world and the desire to make a career
Of the more than 260 popes, only Leo I and St. Gregory I (590-604) are the pontiffs who, in addition to the title of Doctors of the Church, bear the appellation of ‘The Great’ (San Gregorio Magno). He came from the ‘big world’. The first monk who reached the supposed chair of Peter was of the senatorial lineage of the Anicius; that is to say, of the high and rich Roman nobility, de senatoribus primis. All ecclesiastical writers emphasise the ‘noble’ or rich origin of their heroes. Even in the purely external aspect of him it was the ‘miracle of his time’ for being a man of average height, with small, yellowish eyes, a discreet aquiline nose, and four miserable little curls, and a powerful, almost bald skull: a miracle in himself, and not only in his time. Well, that truly extraordinary head multiplied and, like a holy relic, it could be in many cities at the same time: Constance, for example, possessed the head of Gregory, as did Prague, Lisbon and Sens.
By 573 Gregory was praefectus urbis, the highest civil office in Rome. Decked out in precious stones and flanked by an armed personal guard, he resided in a sumptuous palace because, although he was ‘already driven by the yearning for heaven’, as he confesses, he was interested in beautiful appearances, in their ‘external standard of living’ and without excessive disgust he served ‘the earthly world’.
The family was wealthy with possessions in and around Rome, and especially in Sicily. He even had contacts in Constantinople, and also apparently was intensely religious. Wealth and religion are not excluded in any way. Quite the contrary: whoever God loves makes him rich, and despite the camels and the needle eyes, he gets to heaven. The powerful bloodline of Gregory had already given the world two popes: Agapetus I and Felix III, whom he himself calls his ancestor (atavus). And the Church also canonised his mother Silvia…
Already between his election and consecration on September 3, 590, Gregory, who because of his weakness almost always lay in bed, had called to fight the bubonic plague from Egypt, to which even his predecessor Pelagius II had succumbed on February 8, 590.
Of course, Gregory declared the plague as punishment from God, as revenge for the sins of the Lombards, the ‘pagans’, the ‘heretics’ and demanded their conversion ‘to the true and upright Catholic faith’ through repentance, penance, prayers and songs of Psalms for three days, ‘while it is still time for tears’.
He also set in motion among the ruins of the destroyed city a spectacular seven-round procession—with it Ferdinand Gregorovius begins History of Rome in the Middle Ages—with pitiful choral songs and tedious invocations to all possible martyrs, including those who never had existed but were invented in the bloody comedy of the doctor of the Church, St. Ambrose of Milan. The success was tremendous but an eyewitness told St. Gregory of Tours that then ‘in the space of an hour, while the people raised their voices in prayer to the Lord, eighty men collapsed and fell dead’. In any case, in Constantinople, by God’s inscrutable design, between 542 and 544 the plague had claimed the lives of 300,000 people.
Amid such gloomy feelings, visions and realities of worldly decay—not only was the plague raging: ancient temples were also being razed, and even the papal granaries and churches—, Gregory, who has been called ‘the last Roman’ and ‘the first medieval pope’, surprisingly started his career knowing exactly what he wanted…
In 590 Gregory ascended the pontifical throne despite his ailments and, naturally, supposedly against his will. This was part of the etiquette and until the 20th century it has been part of clerical hypocrisy. In his time, however, even the humblest ecclesiastical offices were so coveted that in 592 or 593 Emperor Maurice forbade soldiers from entering monasteries and civil servants from embracing the clerical state. And Gregory knew very well that ‘someone who strips off his worldly garments to immediately occupy an ecclesiastical office only changes places, but doesn’t leave the world’.
‘The brave man lives until the coward wants’.
‘The action of the victors shut out all hope for the future. Outlawed, without any rights, Germany was a colony of the Allies; the British especially treated Germans as they did formerly with the natives of their colonies’ said Rolf Koseik, in Deutschland in Geschichte und Gegenwart, 1995. Erich Hentschel, publisher of the highly recommended special edition of Heimatbrief Saazerland (letter to my Saazerland Homeland), in commenting on the thoughts in connection with the 8 May 1945, quite rightly states that this historic date and its consequences are experienced within Germany in several, quite different, ways:
In the first place there were the inmates of prisons and concentration camps, then there were prisoners of war and forced labourers, also volunteer foreign workers and, indeed, true believer fighters in resistance too, all of whom would have welcomed the end of the Third Reich as liberation, rightly so from their point of view. For the great mass of the German population, however, the end of the war is associated with humiliation, deprivation of rights and hopelessness. It meant the loss of identity and all traditional values, persecution, rape, imprisonment, torture and often also death.
The citizens in the German Eastern provinces especially had to suffer terrible persecutions. For twelve and a half million East Germans the end of the war meant flight and expulsion, confinement in refugee camps, maltreatment and rape amidst orgies of indescribable violence and murder… When, during commemorations of the war’s end, the people in the Federal Republic are persuaded by the politicians, media, bishops and various other ‘personalities’ that they should consider themselves, if you please, as having been ‘liberated’, this is sheer cynicism and utter contempt, if not to say ignorance and stupidity.
There were also a few rays of hope during the ‘liberation’. Not all members of other nations were opportunistic or showed fundamental hostility towards the Germans. Concerning the relationship between the foreign civilian population and the native German population, it must be emphasised, first and foremost, that in an almost chivalrous fashion the people of Latvia and Lithuania above all others assisted the suffering Germans, as much as they possibly could.
The Latvians’ and Lithuanians’ selfless hospitality and willingness to help are documented in many of the essays based on personal experience. Käthe Dell, who was fifteen years old at the time, still remembers with gratitude: ‘The Lithuanians always helped us, even if it meant sharing their last crust of bread’.
Martha Kurzmann, a seamstress who was driven from her home in Konigsberg, agrees wholeheartedly: ‘That country with its selfless hospitality, innate generosity and love of everything German saved the lives of countless thousands of East Prussians’, and Frau L. Freiheit takes the same line. Facing starvation, she made her way with her only surviving child to Lithuania, ‘where we were accepted everywhere with great humanity and love’.
(Left, a German family annihilated in the Allied bombing raid of Kassel, October, 1943.) Furthermore, the Lithuanians aided the starving Germans at great risk and danger to themselves: ‘The Lithuanians and Latvians helped us whenever they could. Even though it was forbidden to help us, even though the Russians threatened them with heavy fines and deportation to Siberia if they gave us food or shelter, they assisted us anyway.’
In remembrance of the countless Europeans fighting alongside Germany during the war, it must be mentioned that in almost all the European countries severe persecution was taking place, following their ‘liberation’ by Allied troops. After the ceasefire hundreds of thousands of people were hounded down, tortured, hauled before tribunals on charges of ‘collaboration’ and ‘treason’, often condemned to death, while huge numbers of women and men were murdered in the streets by mobs. Bloody retribution was meted out by self-appointed judges, jailers and executioners in Belgium, Holland, Denmark, Norway and France.
One of the most tragic events in this connection has to be the British handing over of the Cossacks and their families to the Soviets at Lienz on 1 June 1945, as well as Sweden’s handing over of German and Baltic soldiers to the Soviets in December 1945. Illegal under international law, these decisions were tantamount to a gruesome death sentence—dreadful scenes were taking place there.
‘It was as useless to fight against the interpretations of ignorance as to whip the fog’.
—George Elliot, Middlemarch
Throughout the first decades of my life I was very naive. I believed that it was possible to reason with people simply by citing facts and solid arguments based on those facts. I hadn’t realised that humanity is a failed species, and that throughout civilisations humans have believed simply what they want to believe, even if they are the most horrible and cruel religions or secular ideologies.
After reading Schopenhauer I realised that everything has to do with the will, and that it is impossible to change the worldview of an ordinary human unless one first gains his will.
When I learned in my twenties of liberal Christian criticism about the historicity of New Testament accounts, in my infinite naivety I believed that I could use that knowledge to argue with my father. For example, I once told him that Herod’s massacre of the innocents could not be historical since Flavius Josephus, the historian of the 1st century of our era, would not have overlooked it in his famous history of Jewry. But Josephus doesn’t mention it. The only thing my father did was get angry, and of course my solid argument didn’t make the slightest dent in his traditional Catholic worldview.
The same I came to observe with the people of the left whom I dealt with. As my visitors know, I grew up in a country in Latin America. In the days before the internet, my acquaintances were not interested in what could be accessed through the cultural magazines of the country, for example, the magazine Vuelta by Octavio Paz: who criticised Marxism-Leninism. The left-wing people whom I dealt with weren’t interested in Paz’s magazine, even though he was the Spanish speaker whose prose was the most lyrical in his day.
(Left, Juan del Río and his wife, who invited me to enter Eschatology in December 1978. Both have already died.) Likewise, when I began to apostatise from Eschatology, a cult of the New Age type in which I spent some years of my life (see the first of my essays in Daybreak), my teacher Juan del Río didn’t answer any of my arguments even when I sent them in writing. Juan died because eschatologists believe that all diseases have a psychosomatic aetiology, and despite having the financial means, a colon cancer that tormented him for years wasn’t properly treated. In his book-review ‘Do not rely on “mental healing”, scepticism is healthy’, the American S. Currie tells about a similar case:
My mother left leather-bound editions of The Sickle (1918) and The Sharp Sickle (1938) [the textbooks of Eschatology] to me before she passed away. She used to read to me from these books on Sundays when I was young. I believe her mother, my grandmother, originally introduced her to these books when she was a young woman. Both my mother and grandmother died of colon cancer. My father was a physician. In my mother’s case, she kept her early symptoms secret from my Dad and everyone else so that she could work on them via ‘mental healing’. When at last she did tell my Dad and she went to her doctor, it was too late. I both love these books as my mother’s close possessions, and despise them for encouraging her to ignore modern medicine. I will not leave them to my children.
Some time later, now with the advantage of the internet, I discovered the forums of white nationalists, and it happened exactly the same that had happened to me with my father, the Latin American leftists and the eschatologists: they don’t tolerate cognitive dissonance. If they tolerated it the first thing they would do would be a severe examination of conscience of how it is possible to be Jew-wise and at the same time bend the knee before the god of the Jews. It took me a few years to realise that white nationalists are as closed-minded as my father, the people of the old left that I dealt with, and the eschatologists.
For the record, I have been in this world for over sixty years, and this has been my experience with the common human. Trying to fight ignorance with all of them has been like whipping the fog: a pointless experience. I’m not referring to one hundred percent of Christians, leftists or white nationalists because it is obvious that there are exceptions. I mean the bulk of the population.
What they all lack is a little humility. I abandoned Christianity, leftist ideologies, Eschatology and White Nationalism out of humility (now I don’t consider myself a white nationalist but rather a ‘priest of the 14 words’ to distinguish myself from them): humility to face tough or ugly facts. What all these people suffer from is pride, the original sin to quote their own vocabulary.
‘Men, it has been well said, think in herds; it will be seen that they go mad in herds, while they only recover their senses slowly, one by one’. —Charles Mackay.
This quotation comes from a book first published in 1841.
The software converter could not add the image of the video within the article ‘Single-video course’, but I’ve embedded it below: