The noblest American ever was assassinated on 25 August 1967. I was nine-years-old when it happened. Those visitors unfamiliar with the life and death of George Lincoln Rockwell should read this article by William Pierce.
Categories
Category: George Lincoln Rockwell
Categories
Siege, 11
Our reasons for being NSLF
One incontrovertible fact is that the NSLF remains to date the only new development within the Movement in America since Rockwell began it in 1958. It was Joseph Tommasi’s work of the most incredible genius, the POLITICAL TERROR leaflet, that he designed in 1974 and which reached my hands at that time, that provided for those true revolutionaries in the NS Movement what we had been groping towards for years. It was original and unique and Tommasi had DONE IT!
NSLF is not an order of monks sequestered away studying religious tracts and further separating ourselves from reality. We do not wish to get the tiniest handful thinking differently nor do we imagine we can do the same with the masses. We do wish to give the answers to the people that are as plain as the noses on their faces. We preach revolution while the rest preach reaction. We do not wish to rock the boat, we intend to SINK IT!
If anyone can claim to be the “legitimate successor” to George Lincoln Rockwell’s American Nazi Party it is NSLF and no other! NSLF is the true, logical extension of everything Rockwell believed in and fought for. Petty legalisms and political chicanery aside, were Rockwell alive today, he would not be retrogressing holed up with sterile bureaucrats. He would be found FIGHTING IN THE STREET! His call would still be TO ACTION and not inaction on the part of eccentrics and fakers who studiously claim to have the “right way”.
Of all those who have come along since the death of Rockwell with pretensions of being an NS leader, all but one have been totally lost within themselves and their fantasy world of “Fuhrer-dom” and many have shown themselves to be downright crooked and incapable of dealing as men and as National Socialists. One has turned out to be a racial alien and a sexual pervert and currently is serving a prison term for the latter [Mason here is referring to Frank Collin, the Chicago Nazi leader in the 1970’s who is mainly infamous for his plan to demonstrate in Skokie, IL].
It remains today that the measure of a group is the measure of the man who founded or who leads that group. Joseph Tommasi, as founder of the NSLF, was the first of a new breed. A hero and a martyr to the Cause. What he wanted most was to provide the Movement with its much overdue HIT TEAM and not to set himself up as some sort of cheap, tin horn demigod like the rest. Tommasi personified the kind of man we MUST have: those desiring to serve the Movement with great facility, and not pose around in gaudy uniforms as “Hollywood Nazis”.
NSLF is not taken lightly by the Reds, the Blacks, or the System. We are not laughed at. We have taken the already-formidable reputation of the ANP—built up by Rockwell at monumental human cost—and ENHANCED IT by removing all pretenses of conservatism and legalism while the rest have made laughing stocks of themselves and their sphere of the Movement. A White Man can take pride in being part of the NSLF. It is the ONLY place for a White Revolutionary to be found!
In terms of longevity and resiliency, we have more than pulled even with the closest runner-up to the old Party, which had been the NSPA [National Socialist Party of America, headquartered in Chicago]. The death of our founder and the most severe tribulations still see us today in the best shape we have ever been.
Finally, we are NSLF because we want no part of cut- and-dried, hard-and-fast, locked-in bureaucracy like the others. We see the need for absolute flexibility as we struggle towards revolution in America. We recognize the need for a certain formality of concept and effort but until we have the pool of human resources large enough to draw selectively from, we REJECT any “rules and regulations” that would keep us from that pool.
The rest will tell you that they are “It”; we tell you that we are the only ones with the potential—with your help—of BECOMING “It”. We are not among the “Great Pretenders”. We are not part of the System or the Establishment in any way, shape, or form, as most of the others are with their charters, corporations, legalisms, etc.
We are REVOLUTIONARY!
Vol. XI, #5 – May, 1982
Order a copy of Siege (here)
Categories
Siege, 7
Something that will work
This would almost call for a “mass” movement but here again we must carefully watch our definitions and understanding. By “masses” we need at most only a few hundred thousand more-or-less hardcore people committed to revolution and, to get and keep this discussion down-to-earth, we have been on the verge of going after these few hundred thousand twice before in the history of the Movement in the United States. Not only in theory but in actuality as newspaper headlines and membership rosters showed. First in 1966 and again in 1973.
As strange as it may sound, the opportunities of 1966 were lost well before Commander Rockwell was assassinated. And certainly there was no such single incident in 1973 [comparable to assassination of the leader] that could be easily blamed for the downward trend that next set in. In both instances the revolutionary political groundwork had not been tended to in advance of the laborious and painstaking street work which was eventually—and all too fleetingly—crowned with the reward of some significant numerical clout.
I’m sure also that had the pitfalls of having no solid chain-of-command reinforced and ready for the sudden challenge of hard success somehow been accidentally avoided, then still the moment would have been lost due to a lack of greater direction—a revolutionary plan—when suddenly called for.
And such a thing can rarely be supplied by accident. Getting into the rut of rolling with the blows is dangerous because it gets habit-forming and it numbs the senses and imagination. We have to know exactly what we’d do with a real political machine if we had one right now, for if we were handed one—or the means of getting one and did not know precisely what to do with it, we’d quickly blow it.
In 1966 Commander Rockwell was unable to EXPLOIT the God-given opportunity that presented itself in Chicago that summer and fall. He always considered and referred to himself as being the spearhead of the Right Wing and when the historic moment arrived during the time of the Black riots in major cities, when Commander Rockwell was doing his best spearheading activities, he was LET DOWN AND BETRAYED by his own side.
They failed to act in support even when, as the Commander himself pointed out, they stood to gain more from his efforts than he did because in the main, those people recruited by an intensive, unified Right Wing drive would naturally gravitate toward the “softer”, “easier” names and approaches like the NSRP [National States’ Rights Party] and various Mans. The Commander said all along that he only wanted and would only get what any true spearhead outfit must have: FIGHTING MEN! The apex moment of the 1960’s was thus lost.
In 1973, through constant activity nationwide and through some admirable policies of professionalism, the Movement stood ready to break into what Commander Rockwell would have called “Phase Three”, or the phase of mass action. We then had more leaders than had been on the scene in 1966. Rather than wait for a moment to come, we made our own. Not only that but we also chose the place: Cleveland. Over one hundred uniformed, helmeted Troopers marched down the middle of Euclid Avenue that Labor Day and formed-up in a public square for a rally.
And though the opposition was there—from the System and from the Reds—we were too strong. Had that sort of show of strength and discipline been maintained and repeated in various other cities it most likely would have, first, broken the “spell” of thousands who were hovering on the brink of committing openly and, second, prompted panic reactions on the part of every aspect of our racial Enemy thus providing obvious and inescapable openings for further and greater EXPLOTATION.
What set in next, both in 1966 and 1973, is what we must now learn to recognize and make our new effort far less vulnerable—if not altogether immune—to. There seemed to be no absolute commitment to REVOLUTION. No one seemed to know what the goal really was. The prevailing leadership at both times used the term “White Revolution” copiously in their propaganda but they thought only in terms of a revolutionary ideal or of a revolutionary social change far down the road somewhere.
They did not fully subscribe to TOTAL REVOLUTION NOW! And not only the men at the very top. The one-man show has proved it can’t get to first base. To be legitimate, a revolutionary political movement must have at least about a dozen or more leading, prominent figures. No one among the cadres being built at those times (with the single outstanding exception of Joseph Tommasi) was thinking purely revolutionary.
Everyone had their own ideas, and were bent on doing their own trip. When the “fun” stopped, when the “thrill” wore off, when the self-gratification halted, they split. Also because they had their own conceptions, most of the rules of good common sense got walked all over—primarily during and after 1973—resulting in petty bureaucracy followed closely by alienation and the effective destruction of the one party.
Had everyone concerned been completely committed to REVOLUTION OVER THE SYSTEM then it would have been a much easier task to sublimate the personal feelings and weaknesses which destroyed their efforts ultimately. The most incompatible of personalities can work together effectively for revolution but hardly for a damned thing else.
The most limited and klutzy individual can understand the common sacred drive to SMASH THE SYSTEM. Everyone can find his or her proper place in the WAR AGAINST THE ESTABLISHMENT. The Communists have proven this in a dozen historic cases, all of them recent. Once we get our fallible and undependable selves sublimated to REVOLUTION then the rest should come easy when compared to the endless, nowhere drag of past years.
Once accomplished, then all the “right” and the high ideals will have some meaning and can be put to some use. Instead of the current hindrance, they will have become the “end” that justifies whatever “means” may be necessary.
Vol. XI #1 – January, 1982
Order a copy of Siege (here)
After 1945
In April 1966, Alex Haley interviewed American Nazi Party founder George Lincoln Rockwell for Playboy. Rockwell justified his belief that blacks were inferior to whites by citing a study by G.O. Ferguson showing that the intellectual performance of black students was correlated with their percentage of white ancestry, stating “pure negroes, negroes three-fourths, mulattoes and quadroons have, roughly, 60, 70, 80 and 90 percent, respectively, of white intellectual efficiency.” Playboy published the interview but botched it with a pseudoscientific editorial note. The next year Rockwell was assassinated.
Today, the term “scientific racism” is used to refer to Raciology: research seeming to scientifically justify racist ideology. The accusation of scientific racism often is cast upon the raciologists that discovered quantifiable differences in intelligence among the races, especially if said differences are partly genetic in origin.
Post WW2 researchers include Arthur Jensen (1923-2012), Philippe Rushton (1943-2012), Chris Brand (1943-2017), Richard Lynn (1930-); and also Charles Alan Murray (1943-) and Richard Herrnstein (1930-1994), the authors of The Bell Curve, among others. These authors, while seeing their work as scientific, may dispute the term “racism” and may prefer terms such as “race realism” or “racialism”.
Presently Jared Taylor’s American Renaissance is internet’s premier race-realist site.
Above a whisper
My own formal initiation into the ranks of the “hard-core” took place in the barracks and the ward rooms of the American Nazi Party headquarters in Arlington, Virginia, during the latter half of the 1960’s. There, amidst the off-hours high jinks, the “smokin’ ‘n’ jokin” typical of the paramilitary style of the day, would come forth expressions of unsanctioned, forbidden ideas of violence and revolution more closely resembling those of the Enemy we were regularly fighting in the streets of Washington, D.C., as the Vietnam War raged ten thousand miles away. We believed in what we were doing but most of us felt uncomfortable, left wanting with the current program and strategy. We wanted to attack the real Enemy, and, furthermore, we were more than tired of knocking down Enemy minions only to have them get back up later.
We openly confided among ourselves—the duty officers, the pressmen, the clerks, shippers, the rank-and-file troopers—that what was required was a gaping hole knocked in the System order-of-things so that blood could be splashed from one end of the country to the other. None of the officers ever voiced these same opinions and, to be sure, they never inquired of ours. Nothing was open for discussion between these two sharply distinct levels.
It was Right Wingism at its darkest. It was never spoken, never printed and was, in fact, taboo in official Party dealings. In those days we were still wasting our time—and our blood—defending the honor of an all-but-dead Republic against a mob of vile Jews, Liberals, Blacks, etc., demonstrating for its final demise and, in our printed propaganda, taking a futile and sado-masochistic trip by dredging up the most recent outrages committed by Blacks in the streets and Jews and traitors in the government.
The loss of Commander Rockwell was so recent and his memory so fresh then that we carried on in his absence as though we expected his eventual return. As it turned out, no one had the vaguest idea of what to do or how to do it. The prevailing school of thought was that of “Professionalism & Orthodoxy”, in other words, to continue the “1933 approach”. I recall one heated occasion when I crossed ideological and strategic swords with one junior officer at the headquarters building. I was talking then a very adolescent version of what I’m talking now and his response was that I would one day have to be “restrained”… by the Party. He hasn’t been active now in many years.
But just as vividly I recall the first snapping of the ice in the earliest springtime of our Movement as we have it today. The refreshing and invigorating changes were first provided by Dr. William Pierce, as our propaganda chief then, in his hugely effective and widely listened to “White Power Messages” that thousands of people across the country would call in to hear. He had recorded a message in reference to a certain clique of Senators and Congressmen who were busy selling-out the soldiers in Vietnam.
He concluded that one doesn’t talk against people like these, one doesn’t vote against them in the next election, one kills them. About that same time, during one of his addresses to the First Party Congress in 1969, after he had invited questions from the floor and one naive delegate asked what we should do with the White race traitors, he spoke not a word but, gesturing with thumb and index finger forming the barrel and hammer of a pistol being fired, brought the entire assembly to its feet in the loudest outburst of cheering and applause heard during that three-day gathering.
So it was out, above a whisper, and, more than that, it was official. In less than one year. Dr. Pierce was out of the Party and on his own with the endeavor he still currently heads. Through a number of cosmetic and tactical changes in style and technique, he has never in thirteen years compromised his stand as being among the foremost of the Hard Core Idealists. And whose name and organization carries more weight in Movement circles today than Dr. William Pierce and the National Alliance?
Vol. XII, #8 – August, 1983
A passage from This Time the World
by George Lincoln Rockwell
But then, in 1939, I sat in “Sociology I” class and tried my best to make some sense out of it all. I had been happy at the chance to study sociology, as it appeared to me logical that there must be some fundamental principles of the development of the social relationships of life, as I had discovered simple basic principles of other affairs I had looked into. I was most eager to learn these basic principles of the operation of human society so that I could understand the events around me and perhaps even predict sociological occurrences in accordance with the principles I would be taught.
But it would be many, many years before I would fight my way into the intellectual sunshine of such simple, fundamental and logical presentations of the facts of social life. In Professor Bucklin’s classroom on society, all was the most depressing darkness and confusion. It all sounded most enlightening, of course. There were lots of brave new words, ethnic groups, etc., but try as I might, I could not get to the bottom of it all to find any idea or principle I could get hold of. Everything was “by and large” and “in most cases” and “on the other hand” and “So-and-so says, but Dr. So-and-so says absolutely not.” Muddiness of mind was not deplored, but glorified. I buried myself in my sociology books, absolutely determined to find out why I was missing the kernel of the thing.
The best I could come up with was that human beings are all helpless tools of the environment; that we are all born as rigidly equal lumps and that the disparity of our achievements and stations was entirely the result of the forces of environment—that everybody, therefore, could theoretically be masters, geniuses and kings if only we could sufficiently improve everybody’s environment. I was bold enough to ask Professor Bucklin if this were the idea and he turned red with anger. I was told it was “impossible” to make any generalizations, although all I was asking was for the fundamental idea, if any, of sociology.
I began to see that sociology was different from any other course I had ever taken. Certain ideas produced apoplexy in the teacher, particularly the suggestion that perhaps some people were no good biological slobs from the day they were born. Certain other ideas, although they were never formulated nor stated frankly, were fostered and encouraged—these were always ideas revolving around the total power of the environment.
Slowly, I got the idea. At first, I just used it to get better grades. When I wrote my essay answers in examinations, I poured it on heavily that all hands in the civilization in question were potential Leonardo da Vincis, no matter how black they were, nor how they ate their best friends for thousands of years; and that with a quick change in environment, these cannibals too would be writing arias, building Parthenons and painting masterpieces.
But then I began to wonder “how come”? Certainly, environment was important. Anybody could see that. But it was obviously negative. You can make a helpless boob out of a born genius by bringing him up in a dark closet, but you can’t make a genius out of a drooling idiot, even by sending him to Brown [University]. Was it just old man Bucklin who was insane with environment? Or was it the whole subject? I went to the library and read more sociology books. They were universally pushing the same idea.
I began to make fun of sociology in the college paper in my column and got into more trouble. Some of the columns were “killed” before seeing the light. I was still too ignorant to know that I was fighting Lysenko and Marx and the whole Soviet theory of environmentalism—which has captured and hypnotized or terrorized all our intellectuals—and I imagined I was battling just one foolish college course!
During my second year at Brown, my picture of the world darkened as I discovered more and more intellectual dishonesty in this university which had first seemed almost heaven itself to me. I still knew little or nothing about Communism or its pimping little sister, “liberalism”, but I could not avoid the steady pressure, everywhere in the university, to accept the idea of massive human equality and the supremacy of environment. In every course, I was repelled by the intellectual cowardice of the faculty in failing to stand up for any doctrine whatsoever.
I majored in philosophy and, while I admired the intellectual brilliance of my professors, particularly Professor Ducasse, I was hugely disappointed in the headlong retreat of all the faculty whenever they were asked their own opinions as to the objective truth in any matter. I was told that “eternal seeking” is the way to knowledge and there is no denying that, but lively discussion is also vital to any advance of knowledge and you cannot have any lively discussion where the opposition either doesn’t exist or melts away like a wraith when you seek to take hold of it.
I was running into the disease of our modern life: cowardice and pathological fear of a strong personality or strong ideas. Dale Carnegie has codified and commercialized this creeping disease as “how to win friends and influence people”, which boils down to the essential principle of having no personality or strong feelings or ideas and becoming passive and empty so that “the other fellow” can display his ideas and personality. But he, too, is trying to become popular by being passive and dispassionate, so that the result is like connecting two dead batteries: no current. Such human robots are suited to enslavement by a 1984-type society, but not to life in a bold, free society of men. This is the way women should be, perhaps, but not our men and especially not our leaders.
I found the same feeble feminine approach in every subject except in the sciences, and for these last, I was very grateful. In geology and psychology I could find a few principles and laws which stayed there when I reached out to grasp them, and so I reveled in these subjects and rebelled to the limit of my capacity in the others. In sociology I went so far as to write an insolent examination paper which almost got me thrown out of Brown.
A passage from This Time the World
by George Lincoln Rockwell
I read and reread the Bible, as I had not done before, from beginning to end. I was appalled at the demand by God for human sacrifice, for the eating of human body waste by the Lord, for the horrible cruelties and atrocities demanded by the Lord, according to the Old Testament…
Most of all, I wondered at the idea that if there were a few simple ideas and facts to be understood to enjoy eternal life and happiness, here and later on, and God were all-powerful, He had made it impossible for me to believe those ideas and facts because of the very mind which he gave me! And then I am to be threatened with eternal damnation for not believing that which I cannot believe! My first reaction was atheism.
I did something I deeply regret and shall never do again. I had begun to discover my own power of persuasion and, in the eternal bull sessions of a boys’ school, religion is not exempt as a topic. I was genuinely sorry I had lost my belief in Christianity, for it has truly marvelous power to sustain and help one in times of tribulation. I began to discuss the matter with a devout Catholic boy who tried with all his heart and might to make me see my error. We skied five miles over to his church to see a priest he said could straighten me out and I was truly anxious to be shown my error, if error it was.
But the matter turned out differently. Coldly and scientifically I argued with the priest, refusing to let him lead me into the inevitable non sequiturs, redundancies, etc. and brutally holding to logic. He was reduced, eventually, to exclaiming, “You just must believe. You have to believe!” I told him I could not believe and asked him if he were not able to help me do what he said I must. He shook his head sadly, no doubt convinced that I was determined not to understand.
The effect on my friend was something I had not counted on. All the way back to the school we skied in silence. When we got back, he said not a word and for days avoided me. I felt a secret shame for which I could see no reason. Eventually, he told me that he had been forced to agree with me and had lost his faith. That he was no happier about it than I, with my own loss of faith, was obvious. In fact, he was even more stricken. The result was to set me thinking on what I had done and whether it was right.
I saw then what I believe all great religious teachers knew, but could not and did not say. The ordinary man is too weak and too helpless in the whirling vortex of life to sustain himself on his naked human will and his cold human reason. Only with some kind of deep belief in an all-powerful magical being of some kind can the masses of humanity maintain social and reasonably worthwhile lives. Without such a belief, they can see no reason for not immediately indulging themselves in their most animal and immediate desires and they despair in the face of death unless they can imagine something further.
As long as men are thus ignorant and weak-minded, they must have some such spiritual crutches. So religion, far from being an “opiate”, is truly the sustainer of the masses of people. He who destroys religion before humanity has progressed far beyond its present primitive intellectual state is helping to destroy civilization.
I am an agnostic, which means that to all proposals and explanations of the mysteries of life and eternity, I say, “I do not know and I don’t believe you or any other human does either.”
At the same time, I stand firmly for positive, ethical religions, whatever they may be and believe they must be protected and given the greatest freedom to do what they can to lessen the awesome burden of human misery on this tiny planet. I know there will be many intellectuals who will reply that religion has caused untold torture and suffering to stamp out “heresy”, but in view of man’s need for emotional catharsis in today’s immensely frustrating world, and in view of Pavlov’s experiments, I believe that religion is the poor man’s “psychiatry”, his only “escape” from intolerable pressures of society.
Since that ski-trip to the priest up in Maine, I have never tried to argue anybody out of his religion and have given strict orders in the American Nazi Party that religion is simply not permitted as a subject of discussion for anybody. We have Protestants, Catholics, atheists and agnostics among our membership and all of them are equally welcome and valuable.
Categories
What is NS?
“National Socialism is nothing more
or less than NATURAL ORDER.”
—George Lincoln Rockwell
In my previous post I wrote: “Crossing the river from liberalism to the other side involves several stepping stones: Donald Trump’s Alt Light, the Alt-Right (not yet a direct approach to the Jewish question), white nationalism (or southern nationalism), neonazism… and reaching the other side, National Socialism.”
Yesterday, after being questioned in the edifice of the execrable Jew York Times at NY, Donald Trump condemned Richard Spencer’s sieg heil Alt-Right meeting.
In my view, this represents a huge opportunity for those of us who have already crossed the river. As long as Trump disavows the Alt-Right we can remove our masks of Alt Lite, Alt-Right and even white nationalism. How to do it? After Trump swears on the Bible the next January the time has come for us to march—in full Nazi uniform.
Imagine the media hysteria that we would be able to generate by going to the Federal Reserve with pickets telling that the Jewish Janet Yellen’s monetary policies will lead, this decade, to the fall of the dollar.
My dream is to even burn Yellen in effigy with a Star of David patched to her effigy in one of these marches. Although we will carry banners saying truths like that the Allies committed a greater genocide than that attributed to Hitler, the emphasis of our speeches in front of the Fed will be the policy of Yellen and her predecessor, the also Jewish Ben Bernanke. Both have taken the dollar to the edge of a precipice from where it will fall under the watch of Trump.
To carry out this idea I would have to travel to the United States to speak personally with Andrew Anglin to see if, through the very popular The Daily Stormer, he is willing to call for volunteers for the march. We would need funds not only to transport our boys and pay their buses and hotels, but to make the uniforms.
It does not matter that the media, and even the white nationalist forums, call us clowns. Forget also what President Trump will think a few blocks from our flashy and “fashy” marches and protests. Just imagine what the average Joe who had seen us ridiculed in the Jew media will say after the collapse of the dollar actually occurs: “The Nazis were right!” They will really pronounce these words, especially after blacks chimp out in America’s big cities.
And so it begins…
Remember, remember that Hitler became so popular precisely because the Deutsche Mark had crashed.
Please make this post go viral. It is time to leave the confinement in our houses. True, we need plenty of funds to revive the political actions of George Lincoln Rockwell. But where there is a will there is a way!
Henry Wallis: The Death of Thomas Chatterton. The subject of
the painting was the poet who died after he poisoned himself.
______ 卐 ______
“Even the pro-white ‘movement’ seems beholden to this irresistible death-wish.”
The revelation has come to me that liberals, conservatives and white nationalists are, ultimately, on the same fucking page. The only behavioral difference between them is speed.
Gentile liberals, led by the Jews, are driving the train on the road to white extinction on high speed. Non-Jew conservatives are merely trying to lower the speed by softly hitting the break here and there to slightly hinder the liberals’ ways. White nationalists, already outside the train, are heading exactly toward the same direction but at a much slower, walking pace.
Let us compare the values of the self-styled White Nationalists with the real defenders of the Aryan race, the National Socialists:
• Hitler and the NS men organized themselves in a political party—the very first, elemental step to make a difference in the real world. The WN cyber-based “movement” on the other hand refuses to leave the homely comfort zone. Nationalists who are doing this: Every single “neonazi,” white nationalist, southern nationalist or conservative racialist today, including old internet sites such as Stormfront, American Renaissance, VDARE and Majority Rights. None of them has dared to form a racist party. (In the case of Greece’s Golden Dawn, they are not Aryans.)
• The NS men clearly defined their race as Germanic (which includes Austria, the Scandinavian countries, the Netherlands, Switzerland and even some parts of the old Soviet Union; furthermore, Hitler dreamt to share the world with the Anglo-Saxons, especially with the English Empire). Those who advocate WN on the other hand are predominately anti-nordicists, and anti-eugenicists to the core. Like the American “conservatives” of the Republican Party who treat mestizos as equals, in order not to offend Mediterranean sensibilities they refuse to acknowledge that the standard for whiteness is the Nordic type. Many have no objection to grant amnesty to the off-white population in Europe, even if that means the eventual mongrelization of the real whites. Nationalists who are doing this: Most bloggers and commenters over the boards, especially at the WN webzine Counter-Currents Publishing.
• Hitler and the inner NS party abandoned Christianity, a Levantine-inspired religion which only enfeebles the Germanic peoples. Many WNsts, incapable of radical departures from our parents’ religion, unabashedly proclaim their Christianity and have blinded themselves about the toxicity of the Galilean cult. Nationalists who are doing this: Stormfront, the Traditionalist Youth Network led by the two Matts, James Edwards of The Political Cesspool, Occidental Dissent, the neonazi Daily Stormer and even Metapedia.
• The NS men, even the Catholics and Protestants, gave up Christian axiology and became pragmatic Nietzscheans. On the other hand Christian and secular WNsts subscribe it: both groups strive to appear as the proverbial “good Christians.” The neonazi Carolyn Yeager and the historian Arthur Kemp even have tried to rationalize away the Germans’ legit will to conquer those Slavs who had delivered their nation to the Bolshevik Jews. (Clarification: George Lincoln Rockwell and William L. Pierce flourished before the term “white nationalist” became fashionable. They were not WNsts but rather followed the spirit of Hitlerian National Socialism. Neither subscribed the Christian scruples regarding our interaction with the radical Other.) White Nationalists who still subscribe Christian axiology: With the exception of VNN Forum virtually all of them. Moreover, like Hunter Wallace of Occidental Dissent and many commenters in those forums, racialists freak out piously when a lone wolf makes a scene leaving some enemy casualties behind. Even Irmin Vinson, who wrote an apologetic book about Hitler, did this.
• Hitler and the NS men took for granted sexual polarity. Like all militaristic Western cultures they subscribed patriarchy—no woman was allowed in the leadership class. WN males on the other hand have become feminized beyond recognition. Most of them have no problem at all with the feminism that has been wreaking havoc in the fair race and the morals of the fair sex since the 1960s. The NS men had an absolute will to biological fertility. Feminized WNsts have no problem allowing career women in their conferences or practicing ethnosuicidal birth control. Nationalists who are doing this: With the exception of Andrew Anglin all notable WN websites and conferences, including the London Forum which admits women speakers, and even “revolutionary” or eccentric groups like those of Harold Covington and Sebastian Ronin.
• Ethos. The German National Socialists simply and straightforwardly pursued the fulfillment of their duty to the point of dying heroically for the fate of their race. Like the Republican Romans their ethos was severe, Stoic and brutal. Feminized WNsts on the other hand still live under the illusion of the American dream, or the infantile pursuit of universal happiness. Like the late imperial Romans they are hedonists. They lack the Teutonic spirit of tribal sacrifice and the saying, “We don’t stand a chance unless our men become killing machines and our women birthing machines” sounds like antimusic to their ears. Nationalists unwilling to sacrifice themselves for the 14/88 words: All of them! Who lusts to become a bloodthirsty soldier or literally force our spoiled women to become birthing machines? With the exception of the late David Lane, Who treasures in his heart the history of the rape of the Sabine women which gave birth to the virile Republican Rome?
• Enemy #1: materialism / consumerism. Hitler and the NS men pursued collectivism, honor, structure, order and militarism always in harmony with the aesthetic drive of the Aryan soul. In Uncle Adolf’s table talks for example the subjects of the most beautiful Western architecture, painting and classical music are omnipresent as the blueprints of what the Reich would be after the consolidation of his conquests. On the other hand, even those WNsts who think like real men and advocate a final solution to the non-Gentile problem pursue the freedom of the civilian societies and, to boot, the cult of the atomized individual: libertarianism. In WN forums you don’t see much criticism of larger factors of white decline than the Jewish problem such as the mercantile societies that degenerated in capitalism and, presently, full-blown hedonistic materialism: the uttermost corruptor of the Aryan soul for any honest reader of the History of the white race. Nationalists who have not assimilated the wisdom behind the saying “The Cathedrals were built to the glory of God; New York was built to the glory of Mammon”: countless, including Alex Linder of Vanguard News Network.
• The NS men aimed for war and conquest. Adolf Hitler said: “Any other course that does not lead to the strongest race ruling mankind, means mankind has passed the peak of its development and the end will not be the reign of any supreme moral idea, but degeneration into barbarism and eventually chaos.” Feminized WNsts on the other hand cherish democracy, pacifism and even the secularists make the sign of the holy cross when sighting true Aryan militarism. Compare the Führer’s words with a statement of Kevin MacDonald during an interview by a Jew (!) about the differences between WN and NS: “The white advocacy movement, as I see it, is not exterminating anybody. It is simply going to assert our interests within the democratic form of government that we have… It doesn’t advocate conquering Mexico, you know—anything like that. There are lots of differences.” White nationalists who think like the professor and his Occidental Observer: All Christian nationalists; the (European) New Right and the American New Right—which are not Christian—, the poseurs of Alternative Right (and Richard Spencer’s Radix). In his videos David Duke even shares the Christian sense of compassion for the colored races.
• Finally, Hitler and the NS men recognized the problem of cultural degeneracy in general and degenerate music in particular. Hans Severus Ziegler opened the exhibition “Degenerate music” in 1937 in Düsseldorf. Later, it was presented in Weimar, Munich and Vienna. The hedonist WNsts on the other hand enjoy themselves with the American-Negro phenomenon of rock antimusic. They are basically wiggers. The commenter whose words I quoted in the epigraph has also said: “Degenerate music leads to the extinction of the White race. It is racially suicidal.” Here is a good quote from Encyclopedia Dramatica:
Whereas the original Nazis actually maintained their German culture, celebrating, appreciating and reveling in German art, literature and music, modern-day Nazis get their culture by listening to a lot of White Power Rock’n’Roll. Never mind the fact that rock’n’roll is essentially African-American folk music borrowed by the White Man, and that “borrowing” something from another culture is the definition of multiculturalism and that Hitler devoted an entire chapter of Mein Kampf describing how the degradation of Aryan culture would lead to the extinction of the white man.
Nationalists who have promoted degenerate music: countless since the old podcasts by Kevin Strom, and more recently Alex Kurtagić, Greg Johnson and many, many more. Virtually all male hosts, guest speakers and listeners of WN radio podcasts love simian music, including some internet shows hosted by one of our best European minds, Tomislav Sunić. In a nutshell, presently all white racists, even the sophisticate, are inadvertently committing racial suicide.
My priesthood
From this post henceforth I’ll add further entries only if I see big events in the news (more spectacular events than the Jihad attacks in Paris and San Bernardino last year). The inescapable fact is that in WN there is no actual resistance against the genocidal mass immigration of non-whites and forced fraternisation with them. Apparently George L. Rockwell was the last National Socialist of the West. Being a true Nazi involves forming a fascist party in Europe, or much more difficult, in North America—something that contemporary racists not dare do.
Trying to summon or discipline bourgeois racists that don’t leave the internet destroys the morale of the true fanatic: the priest of the 14 words. Unless these cowards become brave, unlikely in a race that is presumed dead, I must do something else. Pity!: with no Aryan men offering real resistance to the System I have no choice but to try to fulfill my priesthood alone.
Here’s my plan as a hermit. My books on childrearing [1] could help the future ethnostate, which capital should already be in Berlin had it not been for the Anglo-Saxons. But this State would only be reborn if this race repents from its unforgivable sin—if that is possible.
[1] I refer not only to Hojas Susurrantes but to two more series of several books each: Extermination and From St Francis to Himmler.
My working hypothesis is that non-abusive childrearing will prevent both mental disorders and even treason in the Aryan ethnostate.
September update
Michael Bell has recently authored “The caste system of the Alt Right” that shows an image of the Egyptian pyramids at the top. Instead, the editor should have chosen the symbol of the truncated square pyramid, so common in the architecture of the Mesoamerican civilizations.
In his flawed caste system Bell places white nationalists at the top of the pyramid, but they in fact belong to a lower caste, as explained above (see also the recent interview of me by Jake that has been published at The Right Stuff).
It is the National Socialists and a couple of American fighters, Rockwell and Pierce, who were at the top of the complete square pyramid. Bell also omitted Linder who, as an exterminationist (and an anti-Christian) could share a place at the top.
This said, after Hillary Clinton’s blunder in delivering an anti-Altright speech, it has been mainstreamed. Bell’s article may still be useful. Newcomers can now map the Altright thanks to that article, especially the castes at the very bottom of the pyramid.