web analytics
Categories
PDF backup

WDH – pdf 434

This is the penultimate PDF I’m posting that reproduces ten entries from the old incarnation of The West’s Darkest Hour, and the first one I’m posting after what happened on June 8th.

Fortunately, I had made this PDF before the axe fell on us.

Categories
Free speech / Free press

New incarnation of WDH

Firstly, I must thank my visitors for the moral and financial support I have received after WordPress axed The West’s Darkest Hour: a platform I had been using since 2011. Others who want to support us financially can do so here.

As this new incarnation of The West’s Darkest Hour lacks a handsome sidebar like the old incarnation (which can still be viewed as PDFs), I will have to present the point of view of this site to new visitors via this sticky post.

To understand this site in a nutshell, just look at the image at the top of this page and remember David Lane’s words about why we must secure the existence of our people and a future for white children: Because the beauty of the White Aryan woman must not perish from the Earth.

Regarding the demoralizing word ‘racism’ with which the System controls whites, click here. Once the basics are understood, the first in-depth reading I recommend is a book review of Tom Goodrich’s Hellstorm: The Death of Nazi Germany. If you’ve already read that review, you’ll understand the final essay in one of our books. The title of this article is ‘The Iron Throne’.

If these articles have piqued your interest, you can start doing some serious research by reading some of our books:

The Fair Race’s Darkest Hour is the first book we published for this site. If you don’t want to read this volume, at least read its master essay, ‘Rome against Judea; Judea against Rome’.

Another of our books, Daybreak contains an essay critical of Kevin MacDonald’s position on Christianity. White nationalist visitors must read it, for, in our view, the Christian problem is more serious than the Jewish problem.

Understanding women, and our sexual impulses, is more than fundamental to saving the Aryan race from extinction. I suggest that he who has already familiarised himself with the above books read the collection of essays in On Beth’s Cute Tits.

The above books contain essays by various authors, including some of my own. If the visitor wants to read a book in English of which I am the sole author, he or she can read Day of Wrath about the mental disorders caused by child abuse. (My books in Spanish can be requested here; for some English-German translations of important articles on this site, see here.)

The mature visitor who has left Christian ethics behind might read On Exterminationism.

Lulu, Inc. doesn’t allow our English books from that platform. Once we get another print-on-demand service, we will publish, in addition to the PDFs linked above, two more books: one by Savitri Devi, the priestess of the sacred words, and a new compilation of the best articles from The West’s Darkest Hour.

Regarding external links unrelated to my work, I suggest watching this lecture by Richard Carrier on his research that led him to conclude that Jesus did not exist. This purely literary figure is a myth created by St Paul and the evangelist Mark.

By now, after having assimilated the above-linked texts, an SS pamphlet explaining National Socialism will fall like a bed of roses on your mind.

As to who I am, a visitor wrote this article about me on the German Metapedia.

The constant censorship of the System will not silence us. As Nietzsche said, what does not kill us makes us stronger.

Categories
Free speech / Free press

2nd post since yesterday’s censorship

My appeal was apparently unsuccessful; which means that this site, in its original WordPress version with the theme called ‘Quentin’ (that reddish background I liked so much), will no longer be viewable at the previous address of The West’s Darkest Hour:

https://westsdarkesthour.com

I’ve contacted some page designers to ask them if they could modify this incarnation of the site to make The West’s Darkest Hour look more or less like it did in its previous incarnation. Hopefully I can afford it… For the moment all I can do is thank R.W. for the financial support he has just given me.

To new visitors who would like to get an idea of the point of view of this site, I would suggest they read the post that ends the book On Beth’s Cute Tits, ‘The Iron Throne’. The problem, of course, is that almost all the links in that article are now broken, except the master essay ‘Rome v Judea’ which was linked to another of my blogs. If I can afford the team of experts who will be reviewing the visual and operational needs of this new incarnation of The West’s Darkest Hour, the links will be active once again.

In the next few days I will upload, here, the last five entries that can no longer be seen at the old address of this site. The posts prior to those five can be viewed thanks to the 433 PDFs below this post (each PDF contains a screenshot of ten posts).

In one of the five missing posts, I talked about a wonderful documentary of June 1st debunking the mad gender ideology, a documentary produced by Matt Walsh. Although Walsh is not one of us, he says we can win this battle as long as we are not censored. See his very recent lecture at the Western Conservative Summit:

Categories
Free speech / Free press

Taken down!

My site ‘The West’s Darkest Hour’ which was hosted by WordPress has been axed a few moments ago.

Although I will be appealing the decision, I believe I will be posting articles here from this accident onwards.

If you want to donate in these dark times, please do it…

Categories
Currency crash Justice / revenge

The end of the American Century

Editor’s note: Since 2011 we have been predicting on this blog that the dollar is going to collapse. Ten years ago, as far as I remember, only another racialist blog used to mention the subject regularly (Mindweapons in Ragnarok). Now we see it everywhere, even on racialist forums where semi-normies comment. In the closing paragraphs of ‘The War in Ukraine Marks the End of the American Century’ published in The Unz Review, Mike Whitney tells us the following:

______ 卐 ______

 
Did you catch that part about ‘Russia winning the economic war’? What do you think that means in practical terms?

Does it mean that Washington’s failed attempt to maintain its global hegemony by ‘weakening’ Russia is actually putting enormous strains on the Transatlantic Alliance and NATO that will trigger a re-calibration of relations leading to a defiant rejection of the ‘rules-based system’?

Is that what it means? Is Europe going to split with Washington and leave America to sink beneath its $30 trillion ocean of red ink?

Yes, that’s exactly what it means.

Uncle Sam’s 30 Year Bender.

Proponents of Washington’s proxy-war have no idea of the magnitude of their mistake or how much damage they are inflicting on their own country. The Ukraine debacle is the culmination of 30 years of bloody interventions that have brought us to a tipping point where the nation’s fortunes are about to take a dramatic turn-for-the-worse. As the dollar-zone shrinks, standards of living will plunge, unemployment will soar, and the economy will go into a downward-death spiral.

Washington has greatly underestimated its vulnerability to catastrophic geopolitical blowback that is about to bring the New American Century to a swift and excruciating end.

Categories
Jesus Richard Carrier

‘You’re almost there!’

As the fourth chapter of Richard Weikart’s book made clear, Hitler was aware of the theme that Nietzsche (before Hitler) and Evropa Soberana (after Hitler) called Rome against Judea; Judea against Rome: a subject so important that we have called the masthead of this site.

Hitler had all the right instincts to understand the subject. Nevertheless, his view of Jesus, as it appears in that Weikart chapter, evokes Christian Identity: people incapable of breaking away altogether from the old paradigm, to the extent of producing naïve pseudo-history (or naïve pseudo-biography, in the case of Jesus).

Hitler’s apostasy from Christianity was almost absolute, in that not only the dogmatic part of Christianity was rejected, but the axiological part as well. He was almost there. But his apostasy wasn’t absolute. As Savitri said, it is necessary for the Avenger to come, who, I would add, will no longer harbour in his mind residues of Judeo-Christian introjects, but will see things even more clearly thanks to the heart tree that allows him to see the past, to the extent of realising that Jesus never existed.

If we compare all the quotes about Jesus from Hitler’s mouth that we read in Weikart’s book, we will see that Hitler’s imaginary Jesus was, from the point of view of Aryan interests, inferior to the Jesus of Evropa Soberana: who depicts Jesus simply as a zealot executed by the Romans. (Interestingly, that Jesus resembles the Jesus of the first modern exegete, Reimarus, whom we have discussed on this site.)

But we can use Carrier’s non-existent Jesus as a final step in our crossing of the psychological Rubicon. As I said to a disciple of that author, Carrier is not a full apostate in that axiologically he is still Christian (love thy neighbour even if he is black, Jewish or Chinese, etc.). Only by intellectually assimilating Carrier’s legacy of the non-historical Jesus, but unlike him transvaluing Christian ethics, will we have reached dry land, the other side of the river.

Categories
Albert Speer Alfred Rosenberg Ancient Greece Ancient Rome Catholic Church Constantine Destruction of Greco-Roman world Emperor Julian Heinrich Himmler Hitler's Religion (book) Jesus Joseph Goebbels Michelangelo Old Testament Protestantism Richard Weikart Schutzstaffel (SS) St Paul

Hitler’s Religion: Chapter 4

(excerpts)

by Richard Weikart

Many Christian leaders in the 1930s and 1940s, both within and outside Germany, recognized Hitler was no friend to their religion. In 1936, Karl Spiecker, a German Catholic living in exile in France, detailed the Nazi fight against Christianity in his book Hitler gegen Christus (Hitler against Christ). The Swedish Lutheran bishop Nathan Soderblom, a leading figure in the early twentieth-century ecumenical movement, was not so ecumenical that he included Hitler in the ranks of Christianity. After meeting with Hitler sometime in the mid-1930s, he stated, “As far as Christianity is concerned, this man is chemically pure from it.”

Many Germans, however, had quite a different image of their Führer. Aside from those who saw him as a Messiah worthy of veneration and maybe even worship, many regarded him as a faithful Christian. Rumors circulated widely in Nazi Germany that Hitler carried a New Testament in his vest pocket, or that he read daily a Protestant devotional booklet. Though these rumors were false, at the time many Germans believed them…

Most historians today agree that Hitler was not a Christian in any meaningful sense. Neil Gregor, for instance, warns that Hitler’s “superficial deployment of elements of Christian discourse” should not mislead people to think that Hitler shared the views of “established religion.” Michael Burleigh argues that Nazism was anticlerical and despised Christianity. He recognizes that Hitler was not an atheist, but “Hitler’s God was not the Christian God, as conventionally understood.” In his withering but sober analysis of the complicity of the Christian churches in Nazi Germany, Robert Ericksen depicts Hitler as duplicitous when he presented himself publicly as a Christian…

However, when we turn to Hitler’s view of Jesus, we find a remarkable consistency from his earliest speeches to his latest Table Talks. He expressed admiration for Jesus publicly and privately, without once directly criticizing Him. But his vision of Jesus was radically different from the teachings of the Catholic Church he grew up in. For him, Jesus was not a Jew, but a fellow Aryan. He only rarely stated this explicitly, though he frequently implied it by portraying Jesus as an anti-Semite. However, in April 1921, he told a crowd in Rosenheim that he could not imagine Christ as anything other than blond-haired and blue-eyed, making clear that he considered Jesus an Aryan. In an interview with a journalist in November 1922, he actually claimed Jesus was Germanic…

While Hitler appreciated Jesus because he considered him a valiant anti-materialistic anti-Semite, I have never found any evidence that Hitler believed in the deity of Jesus. Richard Steigmann-Gall bases his mistaken claim that Hitler believed in Jesus as God on a mistranslation of Hitler’s April 22, 1922 speech (some of which we discussed earlier in this chapter). According to the Norman Baynes’ edition of The Speeches of Adolf Hitler, during that speech Hitler stated about Jesus, “It points me to the man who once in loneliness, surrounded only by a few followers, recognized these Jews for what they were and summoned men to the fight against them and who, God’s truth! was greatest not as sufferer but as fighter.” The term that is translated “God’s truth!” is wahrhaftiger Gott, a common German interjection that is rendered in some German-English dictionaries as “good God!” or “good heavens!” In the original German edition, wahrhaftiger Gott is set off in commas, indicating that it is indeed an interjection… Steigmann-Gall uses this mistranslation to argue that Hitler believed in the deity of Jesus. Apparently, he did not understand the colloquial expression used…

While Hitler’s positive attitude toward Jesus—at least the Jesus of his imagination—did not seem to change over his career, his position vis-a-vis Christianity is much more complex. Many scholars doubt that as an adult he was ever personally committed to any form of Christianity. They interpret his pro-Christian utterances as nothing more than the cynical ploy of a crafty politician. Almost all historians, including Steigmann-Gall, admit that Hitler was anti-Christian in the last several years of his life…

Even when he publicly announced his Christian faith in 1922 or at other times, Hitler never professed commitment to Catholicism. Further, despite his public stance upholding Christianity before 1924, he provided a clue in one of his earliest speeches that he was already antagonistic toward Christianity. In August 1920, Hitler viciously attacked the Jews in his speech, “Why Are We Anti-Semites?” One accusation he leveled was that the Jews had used Christianity to destroy the Roman Empire. He then claimed Christianity was spread primarily by Jews. Since Hitler was a radical anti-Semite, his characterization of Christianity as a Jewish plot was about as harsh an indictment as he could bring against Christianity. Hitler was also a great admirer of the ancient Greeks and Romans, whom he considered fellow Aryans. Blaming Christianity for ruining the Roman Empire thus expressed considerable anti-Christian animus. Hitler often discussed both themes—Christianity as Jewish, and Christianity as the cause of Rome’s downfall—later in life.

Hitler’s anti-Christian outlook remained largely submerged before 1924, because—as Hitler himself explained in Mein Kampf—he did not want to offend possible supporters…

But by the time Hitler wrote Mein Kampf in 1924-25, he was walking a tightrope. His political ally, General Ludendorff, was increasingly hostile to the Catholic Church, as were many on the radical Right in Weimar Germany. Hitler did not want to follow them into political oblivion—and indeed Ludendorff did end up politically isolated, perhaps in part because of his antireligious crusade. But Hitler was also sensitive to the anticlerical thrust within and outside his party. Thus, after warning his followers in the first volume of Mein Kampf against offending people’s religious tastes, he threw caution to the wind in the second volume by sharply criticizing Christianity. In one passage, he complained that both Christian churches in Germany were contributing to the decline of the German people, because they supported a system that allowed those with hereditary diseases to procreate. The problem, he thought, was that the churches focused on the spirit and neglected the physical basis of a healthy life. Hitler immediately followed up this critique by blasting the churches for carrying out mission work among black Africans, who are “healthy, though primitive and inferior, human beings,” whom the missionaries turn into “a rotten brood of bastards.” In this passage, Hitler harshly castigated Christianity for not supporting his eugenics and racial ideology.

Worse yet, he actually threatened to obliterate Christianity later in the second volume. After calling Christianity fanatically intolerant for destroying other religions, Hitler explained that Nazism would have to be just as intolerant to supplant Christianity:

A philosophy filled with infernal intolerance will only be broken by a new idea, driven forward by the same spirit, championed by the same mighty will, and at the same time pure and absolutely genuine in itself. The individual may establish with pain today that with the appearance of Christianity the first spiritual terror entered in to the far freer ancient world, but he will not be able to contest the fact that since then the world has been afflicted and dominated by this coercion, and that coercion is broken only by coercion, and terror only by terror. Only then can a new state of affairs be constructively created.

Hitler’s anti-Christian sentiment shines through clearly here, as he called Christianity a “spiritual terror” that has “afflicted” the world. Earlier in the passage, he also argued Christian intolerance was a manifestation of a Jewish mentality, once again connecting Christianity with the people he most hated. Even more ominously, he called his fellow Nazis to embrace an intolerant worldview so they could throw off the shackles of Christianity. He literally promised to visit terror on Christianity. Even though several times later in life, especially before 1934, Hitler would try to portray himself as a pious Christian, he had already blown his cover.

Hitler’s tirade against Christianity in Mein Kampf, including the threat to demolish it, diverged remarkably from his normal public persona… In January 1937, Goebbels was with Hitler during an internecine debate on religion and reported, “The Führer thinks Christianity is ripe for destruction. That may still take a long time, but it is coming.”

In reading through Goebbels’ Diaries, Hitler’s monologues, and Rosenberg’s Diaries, it is rather amazing how often Hitler discussed religion with his entourage, especially during World War II. He was clearly obsessed with the topic. On December 13, 1941, for example, just two days after declaring war on the United States, he told his Gauleiter (district leaders) that he was going to annihilate the Jews, but he was postponing his campaign against the church until after the war, when he would deal with them. According to Rosenberg, both on that day and the following, Hitler’s monologues were primarily about the “problem of Christianity.” In a letter to a friend in July 1941, Hitler’s secretary Christa Schroeder claimed that in Hitler’s evening discussions at the headquarters, “the church plays a large role.” She added that she found Hitler’s religious comments very illuminating, as he exposed the deception and hypocrisy of Christianity. Hitler’s own monologues confirm Schroeder’s impression…

When Hitler told his Gauleiter in December 1941 that the regime would wait until after the war to solve the church problem, he was probably trying to restrain some of the hotheads in his party. But he also promised the day of reckoning would eventually come. He told them, “There is an insoluble contradiction between the Christian and a Germanic-heroic worldview. However, this contradiction cannot be resolved during the war, but after the war we must step up to solve this contradiction. I see a possible solution only in the further consolidation of the National Socialist worldview”…

At a cabinet meeting in 1937, Hitler commented, “I know that my un-Christian Germanic SS units with their general non-denominational belief in God can grasp their duty for their people (Volk) more clearly than those other soldiers who have been made stupid through the catechism.” Hitler’s contempt for Christianity could hardly have been more palpable.

Hitler’s press chief, Otto Dietrich, confirmed Frank’s impression. In private, according to Dietrich, Hitler was uniformly antagonistic to Christianity. Dietrich wrote in his memoirs:

…Primitive Christianity, he declared, was the “first Jewish-Communistic cell”…

Dietrich stated, “Hitler was convinced that Christianity was outmoded and dying. He thought he could speed its death by systematic education of German youth. Christianity would be replaced, he thought, by a new heroic, racial ideal of God.” This confirms the point Goebbels made in his diary—that Hitler hoped ultimately to replace Christianity with a Germanic worldview through indoctrination of children…

[Albert] Speer recalled a conversation in which Hitler was told that if Muslims had won the Battle of Tours, Germans would be Muslim. Hitler responded by lamenting Germany’s fate to have become Christian: “You see, it’s been our misfortune to have the wrong religion. Why didn’t we have the religion of the Japanese, who regard sacrifice for the Fatherland as the highest good? The Mohammedan religion too would have been much more compatible to us than Christianity. Why did it have to be Christianity with its meekness and flabbiness?” As this conversation reveals, Hitler saw religion not as an expression of truth, but rather as a means or tool to achieve other ends—namely, the preservation and advancement of the German people or Nordic race. In April 1942, Hitler again compared Christianity unfavorably with Islam and Japanese religion. In the case of Japan, their religion had protected them from the “poison of Christianity,” he opined…

In fact, Hitler contemptuously called Christianity a poison and a bacillus and openly mocked its teachings… After scoffing at doctrines such as the Fall, the Virgin Birth, and redemption through the death of Jesus, Hitler stated, “Christianity is the most insane thing that a human brain in its delusion has ever brought forth, a mockery of everything divine.” He followed this up with a hard right jab to any believing Catholic, claiming that a “Negro with his fetish” is far superior to someone who believes in transubstantiation. Hitler… believed black Africans were subhumans intellectually closer to apes than to Europeans, so to him, this was a spectacular insult to Catholics… Then, according to Hitler, when others did not accept these strange teachings, the church tortured them into submission…

Another theme that surfaced frequently in Hitler’s monologues of 1941-42 was that the sneaky first-century rabbi Paul was responsible for repackaging the Jewish worldview in the guise of Christianity, thereby causing the downfall of the Roman Empire. In December 1941, Hitler stated that although Christ was an Aryan, “Paul used his teachings to mobilize the underworld and organize a proto-Bolshevism. With its emergence the beautiful clarity of the ancient world was lost.” In fact, since Christianity was tainted from the very start, Hitler sometimes referred to it as “Jew-Christianity”… He denigrated the “Jew-Christians” of the fourth century for destroying Roman temples and even called the destruction of the Alexandrian library a “Jewish-Christian deed.” Hitler thus construed the contest between Christianity and the ancient pagan world as part of the racial struggle between Jews and Aryans.

In November 1944, Hitler described in greater detail how Paul had corrupted the teachings of Jesus…

Hitler’s preference for the allegedly Aryan Greco-Roman world over the Christian epoch shines through clearly in Goebbels’s diary entry for April 8, 1941… “The Führer is a person entirely oriented toward antiquity. He hates Christianity, because it has deformed all noble humanity.” Goebbels even noted that Hitler preferred the “wise smiling Zeus to a pain-contorted crucified Christ,” and believed “the ancient people’s view of God is more noble and humane than the Christian view.” Rosenberg recorded the same conversation, adding that Hitler considered classical antiquity more free and cheerful than Christianity with its Inquisition and burning of witches and heretics. He loved the monumental architecture of the Romans, but hated Gothic architecture. The Age of Augustus was, for Hitler, “the highpoint of history.”

From Hitler’s perspective, Christianity had ruined a good thing. In July 1941 he stated, “The greatest blow to strike humanity is Christianity,” which is “a monstrosity of the Jews. Through Christianity the conscious lie has come into the world in questions of religion.” Six months later, he blamed Christianity for bringing about the collapse of Rome. He then contrasted two fourth-century Roman emperors: Constantine, also known as Constantine the Great, and Julian, nicknamed Julian the Apostate by subsequent Christian writers because he fought against Christianity and tried to return Rome to its pre-Christian pagan worship. Hitler thought the monikers should be reversed, since in his view Constantine was a traitor and Julian’s writings were “pure wisdom.” Hitler also expressed his appreciation for Julian the Apostate in October 1941 after reading Der Scheiterhaufen: Worte grosser Ketzer (Burned at the Stake: Words of Great Heretics) by SS officer Kurt Egger. This book contained anti-Christian sayings by prominent anticlerical writers, including Julian, Frederick the Great, Nietzsche, Schopenhauer, Goethe, Lagarde, and others. It was a shame, Hitler said, that after so many clear-sighted “heretics,” Germany was not further along in its religious development… A few days later, Hitler recommended that Eggers’s book should be distributed to millions because it showed the good judgment that the ancient world (meaning Julian) and the eighteenth century (i.e., Enlightenment thinkers) had about the church.

This notion that Christianity was a Jewish plot to destroy the Roman world was a theme Hitler touched on throughout his career, from his 1920 speech “Why Are We Anti-Semites?” to the end of his life. It made a brief appearance in his major speech to the Nuremberg Party Rally in 1929, and reappeared in a February 1933 speech to military leaders. In a small private meeting with his highest military leaders and his Foreign Minister in November 1937, Hitler told them that Rome fell because of “the disintegrating effect of Christianity.” From the way that Hitler bashed a generic “Christianity” as a Jewish-Bolshevik scheme, it seems clear that he was targeting all existing forms of Christianity…

During a monologue on December 14, 1941, Hitler divulged a decisive distaste for Protestantism. That day, Hitler learned Hanns Kerrl, a Protestant who was his minister for church affairs, had passed away. Hitler remarked, “With the best intentions Minister Kerrl wanted to produce a synthesis of National Socialism and Christianity. I do not believe that is possible.” Hitler explained that the form of Christianity with which he most sympathized was that which prevailed during the times of papal decay. Regardless of whether the pope was a criminal, if he produced beauty, he is “more sympathetic to me than a Protestant pastor, who returns to the primitive condition of Christianity,” Hitler declared. “Pure Christianity, the so-called primitive Christianity… leads to the destruction of humanity; it is unadulterated Bolshevism in a metaphysical framework.” In other words, Hitler preferred Leo X, the great Renaissance patron of the arts who excommunicated Luther, to the Wittenberg monk who called the church back to primitive, Pauline Christianity. According to Rosenberg’s account of this same conversation, Hitler specifically mentioned the corrupt Renaissance Pope Julius II, Leo X’s predecessor, as being “less dangerous than primitive Christianity”…


(Note of the Editor: Left, The monument of Julius II, with Michelangelo’s statues of Moses, with Rachel and Leah). Many anti-Semites in early twentieth-century Germany despised the Old Testament as the product of the Jewish spirit, and Hitler was no exception. He saw the Old Testament as the antithesis of everything he stood for. In his view, it taught materialism, greed, and deception. Further, it promoted racial purity for the Jews, since it taught them to avoid mingling with other races…

Moreover, Hitler lamented that the Bible had been translated into German, because this made Jewish doctrines readily available to the German people. It would have been better, he stated, if the Bible had remained only in Latin, rather than causing mental disorders and delusions…

Many SS members followed Himmler’s example and encouragement to withdraw from the churches, and Hitler lauded them for their anti-church attitude. Hitler once advised Mussolini to try to wean the Italian people away from the Catholic Church, lest he encounter problems in the future. When Mussolini asked how to do this, Hitler turned to his military adjutant and asked him how many men in Hitler’s entourage attended church. The adjutant replied, “None”…

In the end… he [Hitler] had utter contempt for the Jesus who told His followers to love their enemies and turn the other cheek. He also did not believe that Jesus’s death had any significance other than showing the perfidy of the Jews, nor did he believe in Jesus’s resurrection.

Categories
Americanism Savitri Devi Souvenirs et réflexions d'une aryenne (book)

On ‘the pursuit of happiness’

Life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness: these are among the unalienable rights of all people, according the American Declaration of Independence. This historic document goes on to state, that to ensure these rights, governments are instituted among men. In the Americanised West, this sacred ‘pursuit of happiness’ has been pretty much left to the economic marketplace.

On Sundays I will be going through revising the syntax of the translation of some chapters of Savitri Devi’s book for the print version, and today I came across this passage in the first one:

Any society, any ‘civilisation’ that proceeds from the same aspiration for human well-being above all else, for ‘happiness’ at any price, is marked by the seal of the Powers Below, enemies of the cosmic order in the endless play of forces. It is a civilisation of the Dark Age. If you are obliged to suffer it, suffer it by unceasingly opposing it, denouncing it, and combating it every minute of your life. Make it your glory in hastening its end—at least to cooperate with all your might in the natural action of the forces leading to its end. For it is accursed. It is organised ugliness and meanness.

Pace Richard Spencer, America delenda est.

Categories
Sexual degeneracy

What is a Woman?

Update of June 7th: Because you have to pay to watch this documentary and the link I posted wasn’t payable, Odysee removed it but I suggest people watch it on Daily Wire.

 

______ 卐 ______

 
Christian Matt Walsh isn’t one of us, but his June 1st documentary is amazing!

Incidentally, mass formation, or more precisely mass psychosis about sex, ‘didn’t start with Kinsey. It started in Weimar Germany. The books that were burned by national socialists were gender theory transgender clinic materials’.

Categories
Monologe im Führerhauptquartier

Monologe im Führerhauptquartier, 19

Führerhauptquartier
mittags, abends und in der
Nacht zum 9. 1941

Entschlußkraft haben heißt nicht, immer etwas tun um jeden Preis. Entschlußkraft ist: nicht zögern in der Verwirklichung dessen, das innerer Erkenntnis nach nun einmal getan werden muß.

Die größte Kraft gehörte dazu, im vergangenen Jahr den Entschluß zum Angriff auf den Bolschewismus zu fassen. Ich mußte damit rechnen, daß im Laufe dieses Jahres Stalin zum Angriff übergeht; es galt, so früh als irgend möglich anzutreten; als frühester Termin ergab sich der Juni 1941. Auch zum Kriegführen braucht man Glück. Wenn ich jetzt daran denke, was haben wir für Glück gehabt!

Ich konnte die Umstellung nicht propagandistisch vorbereiten. Ungezählten wurde das Leben erhalten dadurch, daß kein Artikel je ein Wort enthielt, das auf das Geplante schließen ließ. Ich habe mit der Möglichkeit gerechnet, daß der eine oder der andere in den Reihen der Wehrmacht noch mit einem Komplex Kommunismus behaftet ist! Die jetzt dabei waren, haben bestimmt alle umgelernt; aber vordem hat niemand gewußt, wie es wirklich drüben aussieht, und wie viele mochten sich sagen: Wir haben doch den Freundschaftspakt mit ihnen!

Der deutsche Soldat hat sich wiederum als der beste der Welt erwiesen; er war es zur Zeit Friedrichs des Großen und er war es von Anbeginn. Wenn es darauf ankommt standzuhalten, dann zeigt sich seine ganze Kraft. Der Unteroffizier hat seine Gruppe beisammen, der Zugführer seinen Zug. Noch am Ende des Westfeldzuges hat man sagen hören, die Härte des Infanteristen aus dem Weltkrieg habe der heutige Soldat doch nicht. Hier im Osten hat es sich erwiesen, daß er sie besitzt.

Während wir diesmal im Westen einen waffenmäßig überlegenen Gegner nicht gehabt haben, muß die russische Kriegsvorbereitung als phantastisch bezeichnet werden. Unsere Wehrmacht von heute ist besser als die Wehrmacht von 1914/18. Der Weltkriegssoldat hatte die gleich großartige innere Haltung. Aber die Angriffstaktik von damals war etwas ungemein Rückständiges, und die Armee war mit schwerer Artillerie nur unzulänglich ausgerüstet. Trotzdem würden wir 1918 noch den Sieg errungen haben, hätten wir damals den rechten Flügel um drei Korps verstärken können;[1] das würde schon damit erreicht worden sein, daß man aus Heeresgruppen, deren Aufgabe lediglich die Verteidigung war, entbehrliche Einheiten herausnahm. Aber das Verbot sich aus der Rücksicht auf Anciennität und Rangansprüche der fürstlichen Heerführer.

Man hat im Weltkrieg den Kampfwert der Einzelperson nicht gekannt: Nicht nur im Bewegungskrieg – 1914 – sind die Einheiten geschlossen vorgegangen, auch im Graben waren die Posten viel zu dicht beisammen. Ein Fehler war es andererseits, daß man 40-50 jährige Männer zu Kompanieführern hatte. Sich bewegen können, laufen, auf, nieder, ist für die Infanterie alles; dazu braucht man jugendliche Kompanieführer.

Der halbe Erfolg liegt in der Überraschung. Deshalb darf man eine Operation, mit der man Erfolg gehabt hat, nicht einfach wiederholen.

Antonescu[2] bedient sich vor Odessa der Weltkriegs-Taktik: Er rückt jeden Tag einige Kilometer vor, nachdem er, was in dem Raum war, mit Artillerie – er ist dem Gegner darin mächtig überlegen – dem Erdboden gleichgemacht hat. Unter den da gegebenen Umständen kann man schließlich auch so verfahren.

Die Operation, die jetzt im Werk ist – eine Einkesselung mit einer Tangente von zunächst mehr als 1000 Kilometern -, ist von manchen für unmöglich gehalten worden; ich mußte schon meine ganze Autorität aufbieten, sie durchzusetzen,[3] wie überhaupt ein gut Teil unserer Erfolge nur dem zuzuschreiben ist, daß wir den Mut zu »Fehlern« gehabt haben.

Der Kampf um die Hegemonie in der Welt wird für Europa durch den Besitz des russischen Raumes entschieden; er macht Europa zum blockadefestesten Ort der Welt. Es sind das wirtschaftliche Perspektiven, die den liberalsten westlichen Demokraten der neuen Ordnung geneigt machen werden. Jetzt müssen wir es durchbeißen. Das übrige ist eine Frage der Organisation.

Man braucht diese Urwelt lediglich zu sehen und weiß, daß hier nichts geschieht, wenn man den Menschen die Arbeit nicht zumißt. Der Slawe ist eine geborene Sklaven-Masse, die nach dem Herrn schreit; es fragt sich nur, wer der Herr ist. Der Bolschewismus hat uns da einen großen Dienst erwiesen. Er hatte zunächst das Land an die Bauern aufgeteilt. Die Folge war ungeheuere Hungersnot; es blieb nichts übrig, als in der Form der Staatsdomänen die Grundherrschaft wieder einzuführen, nur, daß der frühere Herr etwas von der Landwirtschaft verstanden hatte, während dem politischen Kommissar das Wissen darum fehlte; eben erst war man im Begriff, durch Landwirtschaftsschulen die kommende Generation von Kommissaren in dem zu unterweisen, worauf es ankommt.

Wenn die Engländer aus Indien hinausgetrieben würden, so würde Indien verkommen. Das ist hier genauso. Der Nationalsozialismus könnte nicht einmal nach Ungarn exportiert werden. In der breiten Masse ist der Ungar so faul wie der Russe; er ist der geborene Steppenreiter. Insoweit hat Horthy[4] recht, wenn er sagt: »Bei mir sinken die Bodenerträge, wenn ich den Großgrundbesitz aufgebe.« In Spanien ist es dasselbe; Spanien würde verhungern, wenn der Großgrundbesitz verschwände.

Der deutsche Bauer hat den Trieb weiterzukommen, er denkt an seine Kinder; ein ukrainischer Bauer aber wird nicht nach dem Imperativ der Pflicht handeln. Bedingt gibt es ein Bauerntum unseres Stiles noch in Frankreich, sehr stark in Holland und in Italien, wo jeder Quadratmeter in einem wahren Bienenfleiß ausgenutzt wird.

Der russische Raum ist unser Indien, und wie die Engländer es mit einer Handvoll Menschen beherrschen, so werden wir diesen unseren Kolonialraum regieren. Es wäre verfehlt, den Eingeborenen erziehen zu wollen. Was wir erreichen würden, ist ein Halbwissen, das zur Revolution führt. Es ist kein Zufall, daß der Erfinder des Anarchismus ein Russe war.[5] Wäre die russische Menschheit nicht durch andere, angefangen von den Warägern, zum Staat organisiert worden, so wären sie Kaninchen geblieben. Man kann Kaninchen nicht zum Leben der Bienen oder Ameisen erziehen. Diese haben die Fähigkeit, Staaten zu bilden, Hasen haben sie nicht. Sich selbst überlassen, würde der Slawe nie über den engsten Familienkreis hinausgekommen sein.

Die nordisch-germanische Rasse hat den Staatsgedanken geboren und dadurch verwirklicht, daß sie dem einzelnen Zwang antut, sich in ein Ganzes zu fügen. Die Volkskraft, die im Blut unserer Menschen schlummert, zu wecken, ist die Aufgabe, die wir uns zu stellen haben.

Die slawischen Völker hingegen sind zu einem eigenen Leben nicht bestimmt. Das wissen sie, und wir dürfen ihnen nicht einreden, sie könnten das auch. Wir haben 1918 die baltischen Länder und die Ukraine geschaffen.[6] Wir haben aber heute kein Interesse an dem Fortbestand der ostbaltischen Staaten und an einer freien Ukraine. Rechristianisierung wäre der größte Fehler, denn das wäre Wiederorganisierung. Ich bin auch nicht für eine Universität in Kiew. Wir bringen ihnen das Lesen besser nicht bei. Sie lieben uns gar nicht, wenn wir sie mit Schulen quälen; es wäre schon falsch, sie auch nur auf eine Lokomotive zu stellen. Wir haben auch keinen Grund, mit einer Neuverteilung des Bodens anzufangen. Die Eingeborenen werden künftig aber weit besser leben als jetzt. Wir finden in ihnen die Menschen zur Bearbeitung des Bodens, der uns heute abgeht.

Wir werden ein Getreide-Exportland sein für alle in Europa, die auf Getreide angewiesen sind. In der Krim haben wir Südfrüchte, Gummipflanzen (mit 40 000 ha machen wir uns unabhängig), Baum-wolle. Die Pripjet-Sümpfe geben uns Schilf. Den Ukrainern liefern wir Kopftücher, Glasketten als Schmuck und was sonst Kolonialvölkern gefällt. Unsere Deutschen – das ist die Hauptsache – müssen eine festungsartig in sich geschlossene Gemeinschaft bilden, – der letzte Pferdebursche muß höher stehen als einer der Eingeborenen außerhalb dieser Zentren.

Für die deutsche Jugend wird das ein Gebiet sein, wo sie sich Vorarbeiten kann. Dänen, Holländer, Norweger, Schweden nehmen wir mit herein. Für den deutschen Soldaten haben wir die Übungsplätze, für die Luftwaffe die von ihr benötigten Räume. Wir dürfen es nicht so machen wie vor dem Krieg in den Kolonien, wo neben der deutschen Kolonial-Gesellschaft eigentlich nur kapitalistische Interessen am Werk waren. Der Deutsche soll das Gefühl für weite Räume bekommen. Wir müssen ihn in die Krim bringen und in den Kaukasus. Es ist ein Unterschied, ob man das auf der Landkarte sieht oder ob man einmal da gewesen ist. Die Bahn hat dabei die Funktion des Frachtverkehrsmittels, das Land wird uns durch die Straße erschlossen.

Die Leute träumen heute von einer großen Weltfriedenskonferenz. Lieber führe ich zehn Jahre Krieg, als daß ich mir den Sieg auf solche Weise wegstehlen lasse. Ich habe ja keine unmäßigen Ziele; im Grunde sind es lauter Gebiete, in denen einmal schon Germanen gesessen haben. Das deutsche Volk soll in diesen Raum hineinwachsen.

________

[1] Zu Beginn des Ersten Weltkriegs mißlang die Umfassung der französischen Armeen. Der deutsche Vormarsch mußte 1914 infolge fehlender Kräfte und einer Krise am gefährdeten rechten Flügel an der Marne eingestellt werden. Am 9. September 1914 traten die deutschen Armeen den Rückzug an.

[2] Ion Antonescu, 1882-1946, 1937-1938 rumänischer Kriegsminister, vom 6. 9. 1940 – 23. 8. 1944 Staatsführer. Seit 1941 Marshall von Rumänien.

[3] Die Schlacht bei Kiew vom 21. 8.-27. 9. 1941, bei der laut Wehrmachtsbericht 665 000 Gefangene gemacht, 884 Panzerkampfwagen, 3718 Geschütze und sonstiges Kriegsgerät zerstört oder erbeutet wurden.

[4] Nikolaus Horthy von Nagybänya, 1868-1957, Flügeladjutant Kaiser Franz Josephs, im Ersten Weltkrieg Konteradmiral und letzter Oberbefehlshaber der österreichisch-ungarischen Flotte, 1. 3. 1920 – 15. 10. 1944 Reichsverweser des Königreichs Ungarn. Wurde von Hitler zur Abdankung gezwungen und in Bayern interniert.

[5] Michael Bakunin, 1814-1876, stammte aus einer adligen russischen Familie, kam in Paris mit Marx und Proudhon in Verbindung, beteiligte sich 1848 an der Revolution in Deutschland. Mitbegründer der 1. Internationale, überwarf sich aber mit Marx und wurde 1872 wegen anarchistischer Tendenzen ausgeschlossen.

[6] Über die Friedensverhandlungen mit Rußland in Brest-Litowsk, deren Scheitern, den deutschen Vormarsch und die Errichtung von Deutschland abhängiger Staaten im Baltikum und in der Ukraine vgl. Winfried Baumgart, Deutsche Ostpolitik 1918, Wien und München 1966.