web analytics

Category: 2nd World War

Categories
2nd World War Henry Picker Richard Carrier Richard Weikart

The Führer’s monologues (i)

Editor’s note: This site has been promoting Richard Carrier’s work about the dubious historicity of Jesus. But Carrier is a typical neochristian. As Robert Morgan once said, the Christian influence on culture has been so profound that even atheists like Dawkins and Carrier accept the Christian moral framework without question. Carrier’s liberalism has gone so far that he even subscribes the psychosis en mass that a human being can choose his or her sex, disregarding biology.

Carrier also talks nonsense about Hitler, especially about the Führer’s after-dinner talks. All his rigour as a scholar of 1st-century Mediterranean religions goes out the window when he addresses Hitler’s anti-Christianity. Carrier cheats by deliberately using sloppy English translations instead of the originals (this video featuring David Irving and Richard Weikart explains it briefly).

Here is my hand holding one of the good German editions, Henry Picker’s, which, unlike the popular translations, wasn’t slightly altered. It is time to refute Carrier’s claim that Hitler wasn’t anti-Christian, although in this new translation I will be using another edition also mentioned in the above-linked video, not the book in my hand. However, the editor’s introduction is too long for a single blog post and I’ll have to divide it into parts (i, ii, iii, etc.). If you want to read it all in the original language, you can do so in the German section of this site.
 

______ 卐 ______

 

Adolf Hitler

Monologues at the Führer’s Headquarters 1941-1944

– The Records of Heinrich Heim Edited by Werner Jochmann –

 
Introduction

Shortly after the beginning of the war against the Soviet Union, Reichsleiter Martin Bormann suggested recording Hitler’s conversations during breaks in the Führer’s headquarters. He was guided by the following considerations: After years of unprecedented restlessness with travels, visits, events, intensive consultations with architects, artists, party leaders, representatives of the state, the economy and the Wehrmacht, and after the major foreign policy actions and the first campaigns of the Second World War, the Supreme Commander of the Wehrmacht was now directing operations against the Red Army with his staff from East Prussia. To preserve for posterity the ideas and conceptions he developed in this seclusion and during the most decisive phase of the war so far, Bormann, as head of the party chancellery, asked his adjutant Heinrich Heim to set them down.

On the way home from a lunch meeting with Hitler at the end of June or beginning of July 1941, Heim reports, Bormann suggested that he ‘try to write down from memory an omission we had just heard. What I submitted to the Reichsleiter seemed to him to miss what he was interested in; he therefore made a transcript himself and submitted it to me; inwardly I held fast to my idea, even if I could not reprove his’. Some of the difficulties that had been encountered in this accidental recording of Hitler’s expositions could be overcome by proceeding according to plan. From then on, Heim concentrated intensively on the course and content of the conversations at the table; as far as possible, he also unobtrusively noted down a few keywords, occasionally even the one or other striking sentence. With the help of these notes, he then immediately dictated his notes of the conversation to one of Bormann’s secretaries. During the nightly teatimes, however, to which only a small and intimate circle was invited, there was no opportunity to record even a single word. Since this intimate circle often remained gathered around Hitler until the first hours of the following day, the record of the course of conversation could only be dictated the next morning.

In his casual chats, Hitler frequently changed the subject. Initially, therefore, an attempt was made to systematically summarise remarks on certain problem areas over several days.[1] However, since this procedure lost the immediacy of the statement and it was also impossible to reconstruct the context in which the remarks were to be placed, it was quickly abandoned. The conversations were recorded in their course and in the order in which they took place. As a rule, Hitler spoke alone, usually choosing topics that moved him at the time. In many cases, however, he evaded the pressing problems by distancing himself from the work of the day, for example, in reports from his school days or the early days of the NSDAP. Not every monologue Heim recorded advances the reader’s political insight. But all of them provide an insight into the everyday life of the Führer’s headquarters and the mentality and lifestyle of Adolf Hitler.

Martin Bormann was soon very satisfied with Heim’s work. He saw a collection of material emerging to which he attached great importance. In a memo to the Party Chancellery in Munich, he wrote on 20 October 1941: ‘Please keep these – later extremely valuable – notes very well. I have finally got Heim to the point where he is taking detailed notes as a basis for these memos. Any transcript that is not quite accurate will be corrected by me once again!’ As far as can be seen, there was little cause for correction. In the record published here, the head of the Party Chancellery added only a few additions, which are marked in the text of the edition. The extent to which individual objections and remarks were already taken into account in the final transcription of the notes cannot be established with certainty. According to Heim’s statements, this was not the case, and the findings in the files also speak against it. For each talk note, an original was made, which Heim revised and corrected once more. An original with two carbon copies was made of the final version. The first, signed by Heim in each case, was taken by Bormann, the carbon copies were kept by the heads of the political and constitutional departments of the party chancellery. Some notes dictated and signed by Bormann himself were added to the collection.

Heim’s notes begin on 5 July 1941, are interrupted on 12 March 1942, then continued again from 1 August to 7 September 1942. During Heim’s absence, his deputy, Oberregierungsrat Dr Henry Picker, prepared the talk notes from 21 March to 31 July 1942. At the beginning of September 1942, a serious crisis occurred at the Führer’s headquarters. Hitler was disappointed by the lack of success of Army Group A in the Caucasus. He heaped reproaches on the Commander-in-Chief, Field Marshal List, and his generals. The Chief of the Wehrmacht Joint Staff, Colonel General Jodl, therefore flew to the Field Marshal’s headquarters to get information about the situation on the fronts of the Army Group. On his return to the Führer’s headquarters on 7 September, he recommended to Hitler a cessation of the attack and a withdrawal of the Mountain Corps, which had been particularly far advanced and weakened by the hard fighting.[2] Hitler reacted angrily and accused Field Marshal List of not following his orders and therefore being responsible for the failure. When Jodl, on the other hand, claimed that the Army Group had strictly followed his instructions and thus indicated that the criticism fell back on Hitler, the rupture was sealed.

The consequence of this serious conflict was that from then on Hitler had the briefings recorded by Reichstag stenographers; did not leave his barracks in daylight for long periods and, in particular, no longer ate with the members of the Führer’s headquarters.[3] To what extent his self-confidence received a severe blow from this event, because he realised that his goals in Russia could no longer be achieved, may remain undiscussed in this context. What is decisive is that Hitler henceforth distrusted his officers and showered them with reproaches that shocked even his closest political confidants.[4] Martin Bormann, too, registered with concern that Hitler was closing himself off more and more from those around him.[5] The transcripts end with the abolition of the common table. If there were still conversations in a relaxed atmosphere afterwards, there was hardly any opportunity to record them. The few notes made in 1943/44 by one of Bormann’s advisers, who also added them to the collection of Führer conversations, are summarised – released for publication – in the fourth part of this volume. A glance at these few documents reveals the change in atmosphere that had taken place since September 1942. Hitler no longer spoke so freely, most questions were only touched on briefly.

Martin Bormann marked his collection of ‘Führer conversations’ as ‘secret’ and sent parts of it to his wife for safekeeping. Gerda Bormann left Obersalzberg on 25 April 1945, after the property had been destroyed in a bombing raid, and took not only her husband’s letters but also the conversation notes with her to South Tyrol. She died there in a prisoner-of-war camp in Merano on 23 March 1946.[6] After the German surrender, an Italian government official in Bolzano took over the entire collection and later sold it to François Genoud in Lausanne, who still owns it. It forms the basis of the present edition.

While Henry Picker has meanwhile repeatedly published his conversation notes from the Führer’s headquarters,[7] Heim’s much more extensive notes have so far only been published in foreign languages. A French edition was produced by François Genoud[8] at the beginning of the 1950s; the English edition, by H. R. Trevor-Roper at the same time. This first English edition was followed by a second in 1973; [9] two American editions identical to the English edition had appeared before that.[10] Since these translations of such a central source are much used by international researchers, it is about time that it is finally made accessible in the original text. This is all the more urgent because specific National Socialist terms and also some of Hitler’s linguistic idiosyncrasies can only be translated imperfectly. Attempts to retranslate his remarks have inevitably led to errors that have been to the detriment of the interpretation.

__________

[1] Cf. Gespräch Nr. 28, S. 74.

[2] Colonel General Haider, Kriegstagebuch Vol. III, edited by Hans-Adolf Jacobsen. Stuttgart 1964, p. 518 f. (8. 9. 1942).

[3] Notizen des Generals Warlimont. Kriegstagebuch des OKW, Vol. 2, 1st half volume. Compiled and explained by Andreas Hillgruber. Frankfurt/Main 1963, S. 697.

[4] Heinrich Hoffmann reports on a conversation with Hitler in late summer or autumn 1942, in which Hitler called his officers ‘a pack of mutineers and cowards’. Hoffmann notes: ‘I was deeply affected by this abrupt outburst of hatred. I had never heard Hitler talk like that before’. Heinrich Hoffmann, Hitler, wie ich ihn sah. Munich-Berlin 1974, page 178.

[5] Bormann in letters to his wife Jochen von Lang, Der Sekretär. Stuttgart 1977, page 230.

[6] Death certificate of the registry office I in Berlin. Cf. Joseph Wulf, Martin Bormann. Gütersloh 1962, page 223.

[7] Henry Picker, Hitlers Tischgespräche im Führerhauptquartier 1941-42 (Hitler’s Table Talks at the Fuehrer’s Headquarters 1941-42), ed. by Gerhard Ritter, Bonn 1951. The second edition was supervised by Percy Ernst Schramm in collaboration with Andreas Hillgruber and Martin Vogt. It appeared in Stuttgart in 1963 and was followed in 1976 by a third new edition edited by Picker himself, published by Seewald-Verlag, Stuttgart. The edition edited by Ritter was published in Milan in 1952 in an Italian translation Conversazioni di Hitler a tavola 1941-1942. Andreas Hillgruber supervised the edition published by Deutscher Taschenbuch-Verlag, Munich, in 1968, and in 1979 Goldmann-Verlag in Munich published a paperback edition edited by Picker.

[8] Adolf Hitler, Libres Propos sur la Guerre et la Paix, recueillis sur l’ordre de Martin Bormann. Paris, 1952 and 1954.

[9] Hitler’s Table Talk 1941-44: His Private Conversations. London 1953 und 1973.

[10] Hitler’s Secret Conversations 1941-1944. New York 1953 and 1961.

Categories
2nd World War Autobiography Child abuse Heinrich Himmler Holocaust Joseph Goebbels Reinhard Heydrich Savitri Devi Souvenirs et réflexions d'une aryenne (book)

Reflections of an Aryan woman, 61

This seems to be all the more true since before the war, the Reichssicherheitshauptamt (RSA) Subgroup IV 134 was itself involved in close cooperation with the Haganah, the underground Zionist organisation, in sending Jews from the Reich to Palestine, which was then under the British Mandate, despite the opposition of the government in London. Thus, in 1938 and the first months of 1939, almost four hundred thousand Jews left German territory, in full agreement with the National Socialist authorities.[1] I am not talking about those who left without being forced to, from 1933 to 1938, or before 1933.

Moreover, the famous Nuremberg Laws of September 1935, which best reflect the spirit of Hitler’s revolution and the purest Aryan racism, while denying Jews (as indeed all non-Aryans) the possibility of acquiring German nationality and forbidding them ‘to fly the German colours or to hoist the national flag of the Reich’, gave them the right ‘to hoist the Jewish colours’. The exercise of this right, it was specified, was ‘placed under the protection of the State’ [2] which clearly proves that at that time, despite their historical role as ‘ferment of decomposition’, Israelites were still considered in National Socialist Germany as foreigners to be distrusted and kept at a distance, but not as ‘vermin’ to be destroyed.

Things would change in 1941 and especially in 1942 and more and more as the Second World War became more relentless, more ‘total’. And this, above all, thanks to those ‘millions of non-Jews, friends of the Jews’, of which Samuel Untermeyer had foreseen, almost ten years before, the benevolent collaboration with his brethren of race in their fight to the death against the Third Reich.

For as early as May 1940, the massive attack by the British air force, deliberately directed against the German civilian population, began. The English general Spaight boasts about it in his book Bombing Vindicated. And the deluge of phosphorus and fire only intensified after the US entered the war, turning entire German cities into infernos night after night. It is estimated that about five million German civilians, women, old men and children, died during these ferocious bombardments: crushed under the smoking rubble or burnt alive in their shelters invaded by the liquid, flaming asphalt that poured in from the molten streets.

The Führer had not, as early as 1933, the day after the ‘declaration of war’ by several of their number in the name of all of them, interned all the Jews in Germany, as he could have done then.[3]

He felt strong enough to be generous, and besides, the light side outweighed the unforgiving side in his psychology. He had let all those who wanted to go—go with their money, which they immediately used to turn world opinion against him and his country. He had done everything, tried everything, to make it easier for them to put down peaceful roots outside the Germanic living space.

But no government had agreed to welcome them en masse into its territory or its colonies. Now it was war. And it was a Jewish war, as they themselves proclaimed to anyone who would listen: a war waged by Aryans, whose (misunderstood) sense of self-interest, narrow and jealous nationalism, and above all that superstition of ‘man’ inherited from both Christianity and Descartes, had been exploited by Jewish propaganda for years, a war against the Germans as ‘enemies of humanity’ and against the National Socialist Weltanschauung as ‘the negation of man’. It was hell unleashed against Germany by the Jews in the name of ‘man’.
 

______ 卐 ______

 
Editor’s note: Hell unleashed against Germany by the Jews? It is very difficult for an autobiographer like me, who has analysed his parents for decades, to see the Second World War as a Jewish war. It is obvious that it was a war of Aryans betraying themselves.

When I was a teenager, my mother’s slander against me was horrendous (she had lost her mind). But it was my father’s folie à deux that destroyed me (see details in Letter to mom Medusa, a book whose English translation I advertise on the sidebar). My father was not a simple victim of ill advice, but an active agent in believing everything to his Medusa wife. Since he could have chosen not to let himself be stung by the snakes of her wife’s scalp, but let himself be poisoned for decades, I cannot forgive him, or say that the ‘poor’ Anglo-Americans were victims of ill advice by the Jewish slander against the Germans.

Savitri and today’s anti-Semitic racialists believe the latter in order not to see the evil of their co-ethnics, although Savitri at least blamed Christianity for our misfortune as well. The difference between me and Savitri is that I blame much more anyone who let himself be infected by the Christian ethics regarding the Jewish Holocaust than she blamed. Just remember her words above: ‘thanks to those millions of non-Jews, friends of the Jews, of which Samuel Untermeyer had foreseen…’

Obviously, I am influenced here by the immense tragedy of my life, and how Christianity played a pivotal role in the destruction of my adolescence and my twenties (cf. the fifth book). The tragedy that killed the other two victims of my family (cf. the books about the deceased Corina and Leonora in my autobiography) made me see human nature differently. And it is almost impossible for visitors to understand the point of view of this site without having read From Jesus to Hitler: a new literary genre that I have inaugurated.
 

______ 卐 ______

 
No one, of course, except those who ‘live in the eternal’, can claim to know the innermost thoughts of Adolf Hitler. However, it is logical to assume that the hardening of his attitude towards the Jews, which began in 1941 and continued later, was a violent reaction against the superstition of ‘man’ and all the morality that goes with it, in the face of the daily and ever-increasing horror of the ‘phosphorus cleansings’, as their perpetrators, the Anglo-American bombers, called them.[4] If this was the application of the man’s morality, bent on crushing National Socialism by burning alive, women and children included, the people who had acclaimed it and brought it to power, then why hesitate any longer to oppose it, to the very last consequences, the immemorial morality of the Jungle: that of the struggle to the death between incompatible species?

The Führer may not have ordered the massive suppression of Jews, without distinction of sex or age, both in the conquered areas of the East (where they were very often confused with the most dangerous snipers and saboteurs) and in the concentration camps. But he allowed his most radical collaborators to act—such as Goebbels, whom he had severely reprimanded [5] the day after the well-known night of the popular pogrom of 9-10 November 1938, known as Kristallnacht. Heinrich Himmler and Reinhardt Heydrich merely executed the suggested measures, for which the Führer accepted full responsibility.
_____________

[1] Brissaud: Hitler et l’Ordre Noir (op. cit.), page 307.

[2] Article 4 of the Third Nuremberg Law.

[3] If, by the mouth of its responsible representatives, any nation declares war on France, will not all the nationals of that nation, domiciled in France, be immediately interned?

[4] Sauvageon, a post-war author, gave this cynical title to one of his novels.

[5] Grimm: Warum? Woher? aber Wohin? (op. cit.), page 84.

Categories
2nd World War Léon Degrelle Savitri Devi Souvenirs et réflexions d'une aryenne (book) Technology

Reflections of an Aryan woman, 54

I mentioned above Adolf Hitler’s interest in modern technology—especially, and for good reason, war tec! This is not to say that the dangers of the mechanisation of life, and especially of excessive specialisation, escaped him. Even in this particular field of strategy where he, the former corporal, moved with an ease that even geniuses can hardly explain, he was sceptical of specialists and their inventions, and, in the final analysis, relied only on the supra-rational vision of the true leader without, of course, rejecting the use of any invention as it represented an effective means to victory.

‘What is’, he said to Rauschning, ‘the invention that has so far been able to revolutionise the laws of warfare in a lasting way? Each invention is itself followed, almost immediately, by another which neutralises the effects of the previous one’. And he concluded that all this conferred ‘only a momentary superiority, and the decision to go to war always depends on men’ rather than on material, however important the latter may be.[1]

It was not, therefore, the technique itself that put him off. A universal spirit, he was at ease in this field as in so many others, and he recognised its place in modern combat. What irritated him to the point of revolt was the effect that technical training and the handling of precision equipment and statistical data can have, and almost always do have, on man, even the ‘well-trained’ one who specialises in them. It is the observation that they kill, in him, the flexibility of mind, the creative imagination, the initiative, the clear vision amid a labyrinth of unforeseen difficulties; the faculty of grasping, and of grasping in time—immediately, if possible—the relationship between a new situation and the effective action which must be taken to deal with it; in a word, the exact intuition: according to him, the superior form of the intelligence. ‘It is always outside of technical circles that one meets creative genius’, he said. [2]

And he advised his collaborators—and this all the more strongly as they occupied positions of greater responsibility—to take their decisions ‘by pure intuition’ relying ‘on their instinct’, never on bookish knowledge or on a routine which, in difficult cases, often lags behind the requirements of action. He advised them to ‘simplify the problems’ as he himself simplified them; to ‘make light of everything that is complicated and doctrinaire’.[3] And he kept saying that ‘technicians never have an instinct’, entangled as they are in their theories ‘like spiders in their webs’ and ‘incapable of weaving anything else’.[4] And Hermann Rauschning himself, whose malice towards him is obvious, is forced to agree that ‘this gift of simplification was the characteristic power that ensured Adolf Hitler’s superiority over those around him’.[5]

To prove it, it would be enough to reread, in Léon Degrelle’s Hitler for a Thousand Years, the luminous pages which relate to the French and Russian campaigns, in particular to the latter, about which so many people, and not even those whose job it is to fight wars, reproach the Führer for having stubbornly refused to listen to the technicians of strategy.

The great soldier who was the leader of the Waffen S.S. Wallon Legion brilliantly shows that Adolf Hitler’s refusal to be convinced by these famous specialists who, in the winter of 1941-1942, called for a withdrawal of one or two hundred kilometres, ‘saved the army’ because ‘a general retreat through these endless white and devouring deserts would have been a suicide’.[6] ‘Against his generals, Hitler was right’, he insists, and not only during the seven months of the dreadful Russian winter of 1941-42, but also in January 1943, when he insisted that von Paulus, surrounded at Stalingrad, should try, as best he could, to throw himself towards the armoured troops of General Hoth, under Field Marshal von Manstein, whom he had sent to his rescue and who were only a few kilometres away.

According to Degrelle, von Paulus ‘could have saved his men in forty-eight hours’[7] but ‘a theoretician incapable of working in the field confused by his meticulous mania for paper-based groupings’[8] didn’t do so preferring to capitulate, even though ‘salvation was under his nose, forty-eight kilometres away’.[9] He didn’t do it because, in him, a meticulous study had taken the place of instinct; because he lacked the gift of simplifying problems and of going intuitively to the essential. It was undoubtedly his nature. But these deficiencies must have been singularly reinforced by the fact that ‘almost all his life von Paulus had spent it among the bureaucracy of the general staff’[10] in front of his maps, within the narrow confines of his speciality.

Of course, specialists are needed—in their place. Unfortunately, in certain exceptional circumstances, one is sometimes forced to call on them outside the realm of their routine, and ask them for more than they can give.

And the more life, in all its aspects, becomes mechanised thanks to the applications of science, the more there are and the more there will be from the top to the bottom of the social scale specialised technicians. And fewer and fewer of them will be those who, while having in their particular capacity the maximum of knowledge, will be able to dominate it retaining the vision and inspiration and the invaluable qualities of character, which make the superior man.

The Third Reich had such men: ‘modern’ men in material terms (military or civilian); on the other hand, equal to the greatest figures of the past, like a Guderian, a Skorzeny; a Hans-Ulrich Rudel, a Hanna Reitsch or a Doctor Todt: people strong enough to think and act big while using the machines of our time and subjecting themselves to the precise manipulations they require; the Western counterpart of those Japanese warriors of the same Second World War who combined the intelligent handling of the most modern weapons with fidelity to the code of bushido and, more often than one thinks, the practice of some immemorial spiritual discipline.

The Führer would have liked the best of his Germans to become, more or less, these new ‘masters of fire’ capable of dominating our end of the cycle where technology is, with all its drawbacks, essential to whoever wants to survive in an overpopulated world. He knew that this role could and will only ever be played by a minority. And it is this minority, tested in combat, which was to constitute the warrior aristocracy of the new world: a world against the tide of universal decadence which he dreamed of building and in which, moreover, ‘after victory’ (once the urgency of total war had disappeared) the mechanisation of life would gradually cease and in which the traditional spirit, in the esoteric sense of the word, would take root more and more.

____________

[1] Rauschning, Hitler m’a dit (op. cit.), page 21.

[2] Ibid, page 22.

[3] Ibid, page 209.

[4] Ibid, page 210.

[5] Ibid.

[6] Léon Degrelle, Hitler pour 1000 ans, published by Editions de la Table Ronde in 1969, page 129.

[7] Ibid., page 130.

[8] Ibid., page 174-175.

[10] Ibid., page 170.

Categories
2nd World War August Kubizek Kali Yuga Philosophy of history Salvador Borrego Savitri Devi Souvenirs et réflexions d'une aryenne (book)

Reflections of an Aryan woman, 51

The Tischgespräche, the Führer’s table talks with a few senior party officials, senior SS officers or foreign guests[1], are instructive in this respect. Even more instructive, perhaps, are certain reports that are hostile to Hitlerism, all the more virulent because their authors are angrier at having initially followed Adolf Hitler in the wrong direction, and at having felt themselves to be fools in retrospect—wrongly, no doubt, for it must have been very difficult to grasp the true thinking of the Master before being part of the narrow circle of people who enjoyed his confidence.

Such is, for example, the book by the former President of the Senate of the Free City of Danzig, Hermann Rauschning, Hitler Told Me which had, in its time, some notoriety since in 1939 the thirteenth French edition of it was already published: an excellent book, despite of the aggressiveness that pierces every line. The fact that Rauschning himself seems to be completely unaware of the cyclical conception of history and, in general, of the supra-human truths which are the basis of all ancient wisdom, makes the judgements he believes he is making against the Führer all the more eloquent by accusing him (without knowing it) of waging his struggle precisely in the name of these truths. Finally, nothing can shed light on certain aspects of Hitlerism like Hans Grimm’s book Warum? Woher? aber Wohin?, a work by an impartial non-Hitlerite, or the account given by Auguste Kubizek, a man with no political allegiance whatsoever, of his years of friendship with the future Führer, then aged between fifteen and nineteen, in his book Adolf Hitler, mein Jugendfreund.[2]

The first thing that strikes one on reading these various texts is Adolf Hitler’s awareness of the speed with which everything is falling apart in our time, and of the total reversal of values that the slightest recovery would mean. It is also the very clear feeling he seems to have had that his action represented the last chance of the Aryan race as well as the last (at least theoretical) possibility of recovery, before the end of the present cycle.

This sentiment was coupled with the conviction that he himself was not ‘the last’ fighter against the forces of disintegration; not the One who would usher in the glorious ‘Golden Age’ of the next cycle. Five years before the seizure of power, the Führer said in all simplicity to Hans Grimm: ‘I know that someone must appear, and face our situation. I have been looking for this man. I have not been able to find him anywhere, and that is why I have arisen, to carry out the preparatory task, only the urgent preparatory task, for I know that I am not the One who is to come. And I also know what I lack. But the Other remains absent, and no one is there, and there is no more time to waste’.[3]

There is even reason to believe that he sensed—if not knew; I will come back to this point—the inevitability of disaster and the need for him to sacrifice himself. But just as his vision was centred on the German people but went far beyond Germany, so his defeat was to be a catastrophe on a planetary scale (which it was, indeed) and his sacrifice was to take on an unsuspected significance.
 

______ 卐 ______

 

Note of the Editor: In 1955 the notable Mexican José Vasconcelos (see my 2011 article: here) wrote a preface for Salvador Borrego’s main work, Derrota Mundial [World Defeat], in which Borrego argues that the world lost with the defeat of Germany. In 2015, on Borrego’s 100th birthday, David Duke, Ernst Zündel and Mark Weber visited him in Mexico. The four of them can be seen in this photograph; Weber appears to the far left; Zündel in the middle.
 

______ 卐 ______

 
He told Hermann Rauschning: ‘If we fail to win, we will drag half the world down with us, and no one will be able to rejoice in a victory over Germany’ and: ‘He could not otherwise accomplish his mission’, notes this author, without apparently realising the significance of such an assertion.[4]

So what was this ‘mission’, so imperious although He who knew he was in charge of it could, at times, foresee its failure? It was that of all those beings, both human and more than human—in India they are called avatars or descents of the divine Spirit in the visible and tangible world—who, from age to age, have fought against the tide of Time, for the restoration of a material order in the image of the eternal Order: that of the God Krishna, that of the Prophet Mohammed, and, in Germanic legend, truer than history: that of the hero Siegfried, like them both initiate and warrior.

Such a mission always implies the destruction of the decadent world, without which the restoration of a hierarchical society according to eternal values would be unthinkable. It therefore implies the recognition of the reign of evil, of the ‘triumph of injustice’[5] that is, what is contrary to the divine Order, at the time of the combatant—and the exaltation of combat. Undoubtedly, people who militate by violence against an already bad established order, in favour of a ‘new world’ even worse from the viewpoint of natural hierarchies, are also dissatisfied people who aren’t afraid of armed struggle. But, as I have tried to show above, it is the nature of their dream, not the methods employed for its realisation, which places them exactly opposite the fighters against time.

There are reckless, irresponsible fighters—both in the direction of temporal evolution and against it. There are millions of people of ‘goodwill’—liberals, individualists, pacifists, ‘friends of man’ of all stripes—who, mostly through sheer ignorance or laziness of mind, follow the deceptive suggestions of the agents of the Dark Forces, and contribute, with the most generous intentions in the world, to accelerating the pace of universal degeneration.

There are also people perfectly unconscious of the eternal laws of the visible as well as the subtle Universe, who militate enthusiastically for selection in battle, for the segregation of races, and, in general, for an aristocratic conception of the world, by instinct—simply out of horror of the physical and moral ugliness of men, and out of hatred of the prejudices and institutions which encourage its generalisation. Many of us are among them. Nobler than the former, since they are centred on beauty which, in its essence, merges with Truth, they are, despite everything, just as unresponsible in the strong sense of the word, because they are just as attached to the realm of impression, that is to say, to the subjective.

But it is different with leaders… all the more so with the founders of new times.

The real initiator of a subversive movement in the sense I have given above, can only be a man in possession of some degree of undeniable knowledge. But he uses it in reverse: for purposes contrary to the spirit of true hierarchies, therefore contrary to those which a wise man’s action should take. On the other hand, the founder and leader of a faith ‘against Time’—as Adolf Hitler was—can only be one of those men whom I have, in another book,[6] called ‘above Time’: a sage, an initiate in union with the Divine and simultaneously a warrior—and perhaps also a ‘politician’—ready to employ, at the level of the contingencies of the visible world, all the means he knows to be effective, and judging a means only by its effectiveness.

He can only be a man both above Time, as regards his being, and against Time, as regards his action in the world; in other words, a warrior (or a politician, or both) fighting against the order, institutions and powers of his time, with whatever weapons he can muster, with a view to an (at least temporary) ‘recovery’ of society, inspired by a Golden Age ideal: a will to bring the ‘new’ order into accord with the Eternal Order.

Now, I repeat: the texts, the facts, the whole history and atmosphere of National Socialism become fully comprehensible only if, once and for all, one admits that Adolf Hitler was such a man: the most recent manifestation, among us, of the One who returns from age to age ‘for the protection of the righteous, for the destruction of those who do evil, for the firm establishment of the order according to the nature of things’.[7]

_________

[1] Translated into French under the title Libres propos sur la Guerre et la Paix, by R. d’Harcourt.

[2] A (shortened) French translation was published by Gallimard.

[3] Hans Grimm, Warum? Woher? aber Wohin? published by Klosterhaus Verlag, Lippoldsberg, in 1954; page 14.

[4] Hermann Rauschning, Hitler m’a dit, 13th French edition, 1939, pages 142 & 279.

[5] Bhagawad-Gîta, IV, verse 7.

[6] The Lightning and the Sun, written from 1948 to 1956, published in Calcutta in 1958.

[7] Bhagawad-Gîta, IV, verse 8.

Categories
2nd World War Autobiography Child abuse Hellstorm Holocaust Judeo-reductionism Racial right Thomas Goodrich

On Tom Goodrich

Source: here

The following interview, done in June 2015, is with author Thomas Goodrich. While Goodrich has written over a dozen books, his book Hellstorm has proven to be the most popular and life-changing.

Life-changing, not only for him as an author, but for anyone reading this painful and shocking book. You won’t soon forget it, and nothing you will ever read will compare to the evil and horrors contained in this book.

After reading what America and its allies—the ‘good guys’, did to the Germans during and after the end of WW2 you will surely realise the scale in which we have been lied to. As you will read in the interview, this book’s purely historical information is so feared by those in power that it got the author black-listed for writing it.

Hellstorm is a brutally honest book. It lies about, censors, or hides nothing. It is a picture of hell on earth. Of monsters hiding in human skin and their agonised victims.

When you realise the truth about what the Allies did to Germany you will certainly question everything you’ve been taught. We personally have an immense amount of respect for Thomas Goodrich for choosing truth over personal career and monetary gain. Such people are, regretfully, very rare in today’s twisted, money-worshipping world.

As Thomas says in the interview, the information was already out there. Out there, waiting for the day when people would finally be ready, or even give a shit about, the terrible truth of WW2.

It just took someone as selfless and courageous as Thomas Goodrich to bring it to the world.

 

Question: First off, could you please tell us a little about yourself; your background, education etc.?

Tom: Born in Kansas as Michael Thomas Schoenlein, I was adopted at age five. I spent my first years on my grandma’s farm in Missouri, then moved to Kansas. My biological dad was a professional musician, alcoholic and drug addict. About the age of 8-11, I was raped and sodomised on a daily basis. Other than that, I led a fairly normal childhood. After the military, I graduated from Washburn University in Kansas with a degree in history.

Question: What got you interested in the history of WW2?

Tom: TV was filled with war movies in the 1950’s and 60’s. Never really knowing why, I always sided with the Germans. Maybe it had to do with such a small nation, relatively speaking, taking on the world and almost succeeding. Or maybe it had to do with so much hate directed at Germany; that seemed suspicious, even to a kid. I remember a coach-parading-as-a-teacher once upbraiding the entire high school I attended because some bored and anonymous student had carved a swastika into a desk top. Judging by the deathly seriousness on the coach’s and other teachers’ faces as they tried to root out this closet ‘Nazi’ and this deadly challenge to American freedom and sports watching, one might have thought the devil himself had been set loose in the hallways. To even an undeveloped mind, such serious looks and words and fuss among adults at the very least created curiosity and interest, thereby having the opposite effect of that intended.

Question: Hellstorm is one of the most important books detailing the horrors the innocent German people suffered at the hands of the Allies. This topic, the mass rape, murder and starvation of the soldier and civilian population, is not popular with the mainstream media outlets. Can you tell us about any resistance or backlash you have endured because you have bravely decided to speak out?

Tom: Prior to Hellstorm, I never really had trouble finding publishers. Hellstorm ended that run. The only press that took the manuscript was the University of Kentucky Press and the director who wanted it was fired within one month. Thus, sad as it was, I put the manuscript on a shelf and there it stayed for ten years. When I did eventually find a small press to take the book, no one was willing to review the book or have me back on their radio programs. Prior to Hellstorm I had been on scores of major media outlets publicising books, including Cspan, BookTV, Book Notes, and PBS. Also, I had been a talking head on a score or more of documentaries featured on Discovery, NatGeo, and History channels. All that, of course, was now gone. But honestly, I would trade all of that for the wonderful reception I have had in the Alternative Media. These people have embraced me. The MSM uses someone like toilet paper; you are important to them only as long as you serve their purpose. Except for predictable name-calling and veiled threats from the hired Hasbara haters and other Jews, I have little fear or concern for the enemies of truth.

Question: To most Americans and citizens of Allied countries, the horrors of WW2 are squarely put on the shoulders of National Socialist Germany. We are taught that they were beyond evil and that our ‘heroic democracies’, with the assistance of communist Russia, gallantly liberated Europe from monstrous Germany. Well as lies have a way of seeping out, the truth is coming to light. Do you foresee a future that will have accepted the truth and come to terms with it?

Tom: As humans, it’s hard for us to see change when it takes place over years or decades. But if it were possible to have a time-lapse camera and watch the days, weeks and months pass and how quickly our current darkness is giving way to light, then everyone could clearly see that the truth is spreading over the globe with almost breath-taking speed. Our great techno break-through, the internet, has given us the weapon to free ourselves from slavery. Prior to the info super highway, our Jewish enemy had almost total control over communication; now, their strangle-hold is slipping rapidly away. Fewer and fewer whites get their information on the anti-white MSM; more and more turn to our Alt media. Next up: We need to develop our own WN television system that airs the truth 24/7 and that offers a gamut of thought and entertainment.

Question: Writing a book about a topic as disturbing as Hellstorm must take a toll on one’s psyche. How did it affect you? What was your defence against letting it depress you, if you had one?

Tom: By researching and writing Hellstorm, I realised that the world was a much more terrible place than even my wildest imagination could paint. Easy to say, I am not the same person after writing the book. I heard the screams of those girls butchered by those Jewish commissars at Neustettin; I heard the howls of those burning to death in Hamburg and every other German city; from my own childhood of sexual abuse, I could taste the hot, salty filth as the Germans POW’s in Eisenhower’s death camps drank their own urine to avoid death; I could vomit along with the women who were forced to kiss and make love to the rotting corpses at the Jewish torture pens in Poland. At the same time as I learned to fear much in this world, I also learned to hate from every molecule in my body. I get very little sleep now. What little I do get is interrupted frequently with long bouts of restless thought. Certainly, researching and writing a book like Hellstorm is not good for one’s physical or mental health. But it had its rewards. Now I realise that our Jewish enemy not only wants to kill we whites, but beastly, unimaginable torture is part of our future as well; Germans were just the most available and easy to destroy; now, the plan is set in motion to commit complete and utter genocide against the white race. The more one investigates, the more obvious this murderous plan becomes. I, for one, refuse to ignore this proof that is right in front of my eyes.

Question: What authors have influenced you and your work? Are there any you would recommend?

Tom: William Gayley Simpson, a good and true man, taught me to be true to myself, no matter what. William Pierce, maybe the most honest man who ever lived, in an entertaining, yet forceful way, pointed me in the right direction with an unflinching hand. Many great writers and thinkers—John Kaminski, Lasha Darkmoon, and those on Greg Johnson’s Counter Currents website, have nourished me daily. Fearless young fighters, like Henrik Palmgren of Red Ice, and Kyle Hunt of Renegade Broadcasting, are constant sources of inspiration.

Question: I have noticed that Hellstorm is widely recommended and cited online. How did you publicise it?

Tom: White Nationalism has developed a very effective network of communications. Fortunately, most of the writers, bloggers and radio hosts in the truth movement were eager to have me on to discuss the book. And, to spread the story behind Hellstorm, I was eager to be on. I have probably done over a hundred shows in the past two years, so eventually, all truth-seekers are going to hear of Hellstorm.

Question: When I read about the atrocities committed against the innocent Germans and found the vile quotes by Ilya Ehrenburg, the influential writer whom incited the Red Army soldiers, I was appalled. Quotes from him like ‘The Germans are not human beings… If you have not killed at least one German a day, you have wasted that day…’ etc. Ehrenburg was speaking about all Germans, including civilians. The Germans are still paying reparations to the victors for ‘war crimes’, yet no one even knows about the war crimes committed against the Germans. What individuals would you deem to be the worst perpetrators against the Germans? What shocked me the most was that the Americans were responsible for untold deaths of surrendered German soldiers whom they had put in death camps after the war. Some reports say millions of German soldiers died while in American custody. It’s ironic how we’ve been taught over and over how bad the Russians were in WW2 (the gulags, Russian occupation, etc.), when in fact the Americans were also incredibly evil. Another case in point is that of Rudolf Hess. Britain and America for years claimed the reason he wasn’t released was because of the Russians, but his son and other historians believe it was in fact the British and Americans who refused to release him. There is also incredible evidence that he was murdered.

Tom: Although Jews in the US, in the UK, in the USSR, and elsewhere, orchestrated the monstrous crimes against Germany, it was our fellow whites—Europeans, Americans, Canadians, etc.—who were the willing tools and who implemented these cold-blooded crimes. In some ways, it’s easier to understand the Jewish motives against Germany and Europe than it is the depravities gleefully committed by our own racial kinsmen. At some point in the very near future, there will be a much-needed ‘culling’ of the white herd. No healthy race could commit such vile atrocities against any living thing, much less against their own herd; both during and since World War Two the white race has proven to be the most unhealthy and diseased herd on the planet.

Question: How long did it take you to research and write Hellstorm? Where did you find the source material?

Tom: It took me circa three years to research and write the book. Most of my research material came from extremely rare, but published, or typed, resources, including letters, diaries and manuscripts. The material was there for any historian, academic or otherwise, to read and publish for themselves, if they so choose. But no one, of course, did so. I also did a number of live interviews with survivors.

Question: I noticed you also have a book on the American Indians. Can you tell us a little about that? What has been your favourite topic to write about?

Tom: I am a historical iconoclast. Perhaps springing from that incident I mentioned above back in high school, I have enjoyed dragging down and crushing the idols made of clay that the dim and the dull worship. There is so much propaganda parading as history out there right now—lies, exaggerations and utter nonsense easily proven wrong, that the market is bullish for anyone who wants to join me. Take the American Indian, for example. Judging by Jewish Hollywood and Jewish TV, one might imagine that the American Indian lived the life of some sort of peaceful, pastoral, philosophical early-day Hippie culture, whose entire existence was spent harmonizing with his surroundings and protecting all nature from the encroachment of evil, grasping whites. Additionally, after watching or reading any number of modern accounts of Indians at war, one might imagine that Indians went to war only reluctantly and only because they were forced into it to save their way of life. As I have described in my book, Scalp Dance, the American Indian could be just as destructive of nature and just as ruthless in exploiting it as any white man ever born. Also, the fact is that Indian tribes lived for war; it defined who they were; war was the very reason for their existence, and not just war with the white man, but war with other red men, as well.

Question: Can you tell us about your collaboration with Kyle Hunt (radio host of Solar Storm on Renegade Broadcasting) to create the Hellstorm documentary? It is very popular with over 208,000 hits on Youtube.

Tom: Kyle is young enough to be my son, and yet, there was very little generational conflict, that I am aware of, while working on the film together. Kyle is an incredible young man. Talented, creative, industrious, the single feature that distinguishes Kyle from others his age is his incredible focus. From my experience with him, nothing seems to sidetrack Kyle. His passion is also clearly demonstrated to anyone who watches his film, Hellstorm. Kyle might also be one of the most moral men I know.

Question: Can you compare the horror of Dresden’s destruction by firebombing with any other war crime? Has there been such a vicious attack in our history of the world? Why do you think the horrific firebombing attacks on civilian targets like Hamburg and Dresden have gotten so little coverage in the media and history books, while Hiroshima and Nagasaki are widely publicized? It’s interesting that more Germans died in the firebombing assaults than the atomic bombings.

Tom: Truly, the deliberate and premeditated firebombing of helpless German cities by the Allies stands as one of the most demonic and evil war crimes committed in the history of the world. And Dresden remains the apotheosis of that campaign of terror. Dresden stands as a shameful monument to the evil that was WW2. An undefended city, crowded with refugees, one of the most beautiful cities on earth, targeted by the forces of hate for the simple purpose of killing as many women and children in the most sadistic manner imaginable. Among so-called historians and so-called German leaders, there is today a deliberate attempt to lower the number of Dresden deaths from an estimated 250,000—400,000 dead to a mere 20,000-25,000. The assumption, of course, is that if the number of dead can be reduced, and accepted, then the extent of the enormous crime itself can be reduced. Unfortunately for the history distorters, the International Red Cross, with numerous reps on the scene in 1945, along with Berlin officials and city, state and national rescue workers who were doing the body count, are the sources most credible, not moderns today who have agendas and a vested interest in reducing the horrific death toll. More people died in Dresden in one night than died in the nuclear attacks on Hiroshima and Nagasaki combined.

Question: Your newest book Rape Hate is a very interesting compilation of cases of rape and murder. Not only does it involve a glimpse into the hell that German women went through during WW2 at the hands of the Allies, but also has tales of early American settlers whom were often murdered and raped by the American Indians. While I don’t want to downplay the tremendous crimes against the American Indians by the United States government, people aren’t often told about the shocking crimes against settlers by the Indians. Your thoughts?

Tom: Judging by Hollywood and modern academics, one might imagine that white women were thrilled at being taken prisoner by Indians that they might shake off the shallow and confining conventions of civilised life and begin enjoying their new natural life out-of-doors. Indeed, many portrayals of white captives convey the idea that they were transformed into something akin to Indian princesses. The reality, however, is just the opposite. Gang rape, abuse, over-work, more rape, dirt, filth, beatings, lice, fleas, more rape, prostitution, and so on were the reality of white women captured by Indians.

Question: Your compassion in writing Rape Hate is very evident. You mention that you yourself were a victim of abuse as a child, and I think that fact really helps the writing in this case. You seem very able to ‘get into the victim’s shoes’, more so than many other authors of True Crime books. Are you interested in the ‘true crime’ genre as a whole? What do you think about how the American justice system handles such monsters like serial killers? They are often allowed to drain millions of taxpayer dollars with appeals and can often drag out their sentence of death for decades. It seems to me to be a huge flaw in the legal system, especially when the person admits they are guilty. I was recently reading about a serial killer in National Socialist Germany named Paul Ogorzow. This monster would actually rape and murder women during air raid blackouts in Berlin. After Ogorzow was arrested, admitting his crimes, it only took the NS justice system thirteen days to examine his insanity claims and execute him by guillotine! In the case of such criminals the authorities would mail a bill to the heirs of the deceased. What are your thoughts?

Tom: My thoughts are your thoughts, Molly, and our thoughts are the thoughts of any healthy race of humans. Aggravated rape should be a capital offense. Rape is the crime that keeps on giving; the victim never recovers. It is much like victims of a home invasion; one replays that vile invasion virtually every hour of their life. And yes, there should be no lengthy ‘appeals’ process. Punishment should be within days of the crime, not decades. Mistakes will be made, of course, and some innocent will suffer, but the victims of these crimes and their families deserve some sympathy too. As far as the manner of punishment, the family of the victim should have a say in that. The current process is a crime in itself, and a slap in the face of every victim and their family.

Question: Are you working on a new book currently? Can you tell us anything about it?

Tom: I have two, perhaps three, books that will come out this year. The working title for all three is Rage & Revenge—Torture & Atrocities in War & Peace, Parts 1, 2, 3. Also, I will write two more scripts for films by Kyle Hunt; one on the Indian wars, and another on the treatment of the defeated Confederacy after the American Civil War. In numerous ways, what the South suffered, 1865-1866, was very similar to what Germany suffered, 1944-1947.

Question: Lastly, thanks so much for your time and thoughts Tom! And thank you so much for giving a voice to all the voiceless victims. Any words to the world?

Tom: To the White World: The time is swiftly approaching in which you must make a choice. On the one side is the rotting, diseased world of the past and the almost certain extinction of the white race; on the other side is the difficult, but necessary, road ahead which ultimately leads to a rebirth of the European spirit. While our parents and grandparents slept, and grew fat and lazy, their worst enemy slipped in and usurped our future. Now, we must fight to reclaim it. This is a fight worthy of the white race and a battle in which surrender is utterly out of the question—Hellstorm has proven that. We either win and ensure the white race will survive to realise its ordained destiny to embrace the stars, or we lose to be laughed at and scorned as a race too weak to survive. Every white man and white woman must decide their course of action.
 

______ 卐 ______

 
Editor’s note:

Tom speaks as a white nationalist, not as a 14-word priest. Note that after the question ‘What authors have influenced you and your work?’ he doesn’t mention post-1945 National Socialist thinkers like Savitri Devi (only when Rockwell was alive and published an issue of National Socialist World Pierce called himself a follower of the Führer). Tom also said above:

Although Jews in the US, in the UK, in the USSR, and elsewhere, orchestrated the monstrous crimes against Germany….

Really? What about Roosevelt, Stalin, Eisenhower and Truman? The above statement is so typical of the white nationalist!

These guys believe that Jews are behind everything. Given that today there is only one priest with an established blog, it is understandable that Tom doesn’t want to be left alone, even in the small environment of white advocates (who almost never link my work). But one need only read his book to realise that the evil came, for the most part, from gentile Americans and the Soviets. Why use the word ‘orchestrated’ referring to Jewry? Jew-wise folk know the nefarious role the Jewish press played in WW2. But the direct perpetrators, the ones who killed the most Germans, were gentiles; and the guys who orchestrated the Hellstorm Holocaust were Roosevelt, Stalin, Eisenhower and Truman.

It seems to me more than obvious that I will have to keep reproducing Savitri’s texts for a new pro-white conception to be born: a conception in which the focus is on the beam in our own eye and not on the straw in someone else’s eye. Just look at the vast majority of whites today: traitors, the worst human scum since prehistoric times (for example, those who are demonstrating tonight in various American cities over the jury verdict on Kyle Rittenhouse).

Neither Tom nor the typical white nationalist seem to grasp the wisdom of Corneliu Zelea Codreanu: If mosquitoes (kikes) have proliferated so much in the West, it’s because of the swamps of our sins that allowed them to proliferate. Writing this reminds me of the day I drove my car with Mexican plates from Houston to New Orleans through Louisiana over a huge number of bridges over swamps: I couldn’t believe the geographical extent of those swamps!

This said I still believe that, in this century, Hellstorm: The Death of Nazi Germany (1944-1947) is the most important book written in English (more about it: here). But I want to say another word about Tom’s interview:

Aggravated rape should be a capital offense. Rape is the crime that keeps on giving; the victim never recovers. It is much like victims of a home invasion; one replays that vile invasion virtually every hour of their life. And yes, there should be no lengthy ‘appeals’ process. Punishment should be within days of the crime, not decades. Mistakes will be made, of course, and some innocent will suffer, but [emphasis added] the victims of these crimes and their families deserve some sympathy too.

This, of course, is very unfair. If capital punishment is applied for male rape, capital punishment should be also applied to the woman who accuses the innocent man of rape!

Tom is a writer but not an autobiographer like me (cf. my eleven books in which I tell how my parents murdered my adolescent soul: something that keeps on giving to this day). The experience I have with survivors of parental abuse who fail to write autobiographies is that they massively project themselves onto cases outside their own, and want revenge on others; not on one’s own parent. For example, concerning rape, the punishments Tom proposes, which would sometimes blame the innocent, are excessive. Surely the Germans of the Third Reich didn’t see things that way.

In the ninth book of my autobiographical series I talk about my late first cousin, a female victim who was molested as a pubescent by an uncle. Speaking of what I said in my article yesterday, I violated my first guideline with her. It was impossible to talk about elementary human realities, such as the male sex drive. She saw everything in black and white. Sometimes survivors become intolerable. Even in a book we both read, Toxic Parents by Susan Forward, Sue puts incest as ‘the ultimate betrayal’.

For truly profound experts in child and adolescent abuse, that’s untrue. The most damaging abuse to the human soul is that which leads to what psychiatrists diagnose as ‘schizophrenia’ (hearing voices, delusions, salad language, catatonic postures, etc). In Western society ‘schizogenic’ behavior from parents is the ultimate betrayal: the kind of abuse that drives children mad, literally mad, even more serious than the gross forms of neurosis of victims of sexual assault.

Anyone who doesn’t understand the above statement should read Sue Forward’s book, a victim os sexual abuse, which I still highly recommend (although she doesn’t mention schizo clients), and compare it with the cases of ‘schizophrenia’ mentioned by Arieti (to whom I devote a few pages in my Day of Wrath).

If Tom were to write his own autobiography he would come to conclusions that would more closely resemble my own. Writing mine was probably as painful as it was for him to write Hellstorm. You suffer a lot, yes: but eventually you are liberated from neuroses and even psychoses.

Anyone who wants to know a little more about what happened to me could read my Letter of mom Medusa whose front cover appears on the sidebar. That was only the beginning of a long agony which I tell in the following volumes. Tom and I are writers but I don’t think he got to the core of his pain as I have in my books; hence he seeks to take it out on innocents (‘Mistakes will be made, of course, and some innocent will suffer, but…’).

Categories
2nd World War Quotable quotes

Honor the fallen

‘Honor those brave Aryan warriors and ancestors
who fought to keep your Blood alive’.

Categories
2nd World War Savitri Devi Souvenirs et réflexions d'une aryenne (book)

Reflections of an Aryan woman, 18

It is precisely this anthropocentrism, common to Christianity and Communism, and to all ‘humanisms’, that served as the philosophical cement for the seemingly incongruous alliance of the Western, Christian or ‘rationalist’ world, and the Soviet Union during the Second World War.
 

______ 卐 ______

 
Editor’s Note: This is vital. Both American liberalism and Soviet communism are two branches of the same trunk: the vision of the world that emerged from the French Revolution. Oswald Spengler himself wrote that ‘Christian theology is the grandmother of Bolshevism’.
 

______ 卐 ______

 
It was, in the eyes of more than one Christian, quite painful to feel the glorious ally of atheistic Communism in the struggle against us, followers of Adolf Hitler. Moreover, many westerners, Christian or not, felt more or less confused that this alliance was, politically, a mistake: that their country, whatever it was, would have had more to gain, or less to lose, as a state by giving Adolf Hitler a hand (or accepting the hand the Führer held out to them), and by fighting at his side against Bolshevism. The voice of Germany’s leader, who was calling more and more desperately for them to ‘save Europe’, sometimes troubled them.
 

______ 卐 ______

 
Editor’s Note: Being Bolshevism and American capitalism two branches of the same trunk, we can see why neo-Marxism has now conquered the US; and capitalism, China. Savitri continues:
 

______ 卐 ______

 
And yet… it was not in the ranks of the Legion of French Volunteers or any similar organisation that they were finally found, but in those of the members of some ‘Resistance’, anti-German no doubt, but also and inevitably anti-Aryan. Their subconscious had warned them that by following the wisest political course of action they would have betrayed what was more important to them than politics: their world of values. He had told them what the post-war authors of the Resistance were soon to repeat over and over again for a quarter of a century (and who knows how much longer?): namely that Hitlerism, or Aryan racism in its modern form, is, like all racism based on the idea of a natural elite (not arbitrarily chosen by some all-too-human god), the negation of man.

Consequently, that this Europe which the Führer invited them to forge with him—the one which would eventually emerge from our victory—was not the one they wanted to preserve. And the atheistic Bolshevism, or simply the Bolshevism opposed to free enterprise and honest private property (of which our propaganda tried to frighten us) seemed to them, on balance, less frightening than the spirit of our doctrine.

But there is more. Very few of those who sincerely believed themselves to be our allies, and who fought and died with our people in the struggle against anti-Aryan values, understood the true meaning of the Führer’s message; of the call of the eternal Hero ‘against Time’, who returns from age to age, when all seems lost, to reaffirm the ideal of integral perfection that the unthinkable Golden Age of our Cycle lived. Most of the combatants of the Legion of French Volunteers were Christians who believed they were fighting for the accepted values of Western Christian civilisation. Robert Brasillach was profoundly Christian, and he realised that we were—and are—‘a Church’, and that this Church can only be the rival to the one that conquered Europe from the 4th to the 12th century.

Moreover, this type of man apparently preferred Italian, and especially Spanish, Fascism to German National Socialism. It was the social side of both—the comradeship, the mutual aid, the effective solidarity between people of the same country, independently of any philosophy— that attracted him. The enthusiasm which this national fraternity inspired in him made him close his eyes to the pagan character of Hitlerism. Even among us—the Germans who had followed the swastika banner from the beginning of the Movement—very few understood what was happening, not politically, but in terms of values.
 

______ 卐 ______

 
Editor’s Note: The transvaluation of all values advocated by Nietzsche!

______ 卐 ______

 
Few realised that a spiritual revolution—a negation of the anthropocentric values that had been accepted by almost everyone without question for centuries, and a return to the natural, cosmic values of a forgotten civilisation—was taking place before their eyes.

Some of them realised this, felt cheated in their early hopes, and left the Movement, like Hermann Rauschning, or betrayed it (with the tragic consequences that we know). Others—a minority—welcomed, and still do, in this revolution in values, precisely that to which they themselves had, more or less consciously, always aspired. Those are the rock on which the Hitler Church is built.

It will last if they last, that is, if they can pass on their blood and faith to an uninterrupted succession of Aryan generations, until the end of this Cycle.

Categories
2nd World War

Today’s Germans ‘allow this effigy of national humiliation’

https://youtu.be/qQZSwPpt-Zw

The story we have heard about the Second World war is an absolute lie. What Black Pigeon Speaks says above is only a half-truth. He has yet to speak out about the Holocaust committed in Germany by the allied forces.

But he’s right about one issue: contemporary Germans suffer from a complete lack of masculinity. They don’t want to see what really happened in WW2.

Categories
2nd World War Autobiography Chess

The human side of chess, 13

Bobby Fischer had horrendous problems with his mother, who invited her Jewish friends from Brooklyn to her apartment; friends who in the eyes of the boy Fischer were but little buddies. Fischer confessed to the women who knew him intimately that, at the age of twelve, he resented the absence of his mother as a great betrayal, who had a greater preference for her little buddies than for the child Bobby. When Fischer achieved grandmaster status at sixteen, his mother left him and his sister to move with friends to Europe. The teenage Fischer never mourned for his parental losses (his father had abandoned him even earlier, since Fischer was two years old). He rather did the opposite: he threw himself on Caissa’s skirts with unequalled vehemence. Such was the vehemence with which he amalgamated his life with Caissa’s that she gave him the magnificent gift of defeating, singlehandedly, the Soviet chess school at the age of twenty-nine. But out of his early unresolved experiences, which some of us call the betrayal of love, emerged the adult Fischer’s anti-Semitism.

Fischer was never a reader of, say, a wise scholar about Jewry like Kevin MacDonald, who continues to write about the subversive way Jews have been behaving in the West. Fischer’s anti-Semitism was more rancid, and at times paranoid. Already exiled in Budapest, he told one of his interviewers: ‘Day and night the Jews persecute me’. He called Kasparov ‘the Wenstein Jew’ despite the fact that Fischer was ethnically Jewish by both parents. (As our society doesn’t allow the child to express feelings of anger towards his parents, once the child is grown these feelings are transferred.)

After conquering the sceptre Fischer fled the world, especially from the journalists who harassed him. In 1975, the year that all the fans longed to see him defend his title against Karpov, Fischer befriended Claudia Mokarow, an older woman whom he affectionately called mommy. When the journalists tracked him down Fischer ran to Claudia’s apartment yelling: ‘Mommy, mommy, they’re here! Help me mommy: they’ve found me!’ Obviously Bobby, considered by some to be the greatest player in history, needed a motherly surrogate for the mother he never had. He never grew up. Some journalists from whom Fischer fled saw symbolism in the fact that Fischer’s mother was called Regina (a Late Latin feminine name meaning ‘queen’) and that when he was a child she was treated precisely as queen by the community of Jewish buddies that Regina brought to her apartment. Fischer never opened one of his classic chess games with the move 1. d4, pawn to Queen four, as we said before the algebraic notation.

Alexander Alekhine (World
Champion from 1927 to 1946).

I had already mentioned that Alekhine took it out on his spouses. His acquaintances noted Alekhine’s strange submission to authority: the quintessential parental figure. He was married four times, always to women older than him. A writer that Reinfeld mentions comments that it seemed that Alekhine wanted to be taken care of, and Edward Lasker says that when Alekhine was twenty years old, in a club he preferred to dance with a woman twice his age and thickness even though there were fairer girls around. All of this suggests an unresolved problem with the mother, who taught the child how to move the pieces. The proof is that one of his wives was twenty years old and the other thirty! His friends teased him that she was Philidor’s wife, a mummy. The tall and handsome Alekhine, whose games, especially those of his youth, are among the most artistic in the kingdom of Caissa, needed a mother. But for being so cruel to his wives he died alone and as a refugee in Portugal, while in Europe a witch-hunt was perpetrated against those who had collaborated with the Third Reich. Reinfeld wrote: ‘My feeling is that Alekhine was an unusually timid man who was terrified all his life by a profound feeling of insecurity’. And a few pages later he adds:

From all accounts, Madame Alekhine’s affection and maternal solicitude meant a great deal to Alekhine in his later years and had a very beneficial influence on him. But what more convincing proof could there be of his timidity, his insecurity, his fear of facing the world? There may also be significance in the fact that Alekhine was taught chess by her mother; this may have created a powerful emotional bond between his need for chess and his constant need for a mother. When all these elements are added up, I think we have an irresistible weight of evidence for the view that Alekhine’s genius for chess had its origin in an unusually virulent form of insecurity.

When Alekhine took refuge in Portugal from the witch-hunt unleashed by the allied forces he was already completely alone. Two days before his death he told a Portuguese fan: ‘Lupi, this loneliness is killing me!’ Unlike the title of this book in Spanish, En Pos de un Rey Metafórico, for the English translation I chose The Human Side of Chess. And it is that the photograph of someone who had been an idol in my early teens died in a hotel in his days of maximum solitude in times when the allied forces perpetrated a true holocaust of Germans, portrays the side of the game that fans don’t dare to see.

Also the great North American champion of the 19th century had something hideous unresolved with the figure of his mother. Paul Morphy, a native of New Orleans, the city where Carlos Torre would later grow up, had a curious habit of forming women’s shoes in a semicircle ‘because he liked to look at them.’

During a period of his life he would go up to the roof of his house to declaim in French a paragraph that seems to be taken from a song, of which its last words are et le petit Roi s’en ira tout penaud: and the little king will walk away covered in shame. Morphy saw no one except his mother with whom he spent every afternoon, whom he obeyed even though he was already the best chess player in the world. Even when his mother found him dead in the bathtub, Morphy was surrounded by women’s shoes. Morphy defeated all the active grandmasters of his time, including Löwenthal, Anderssen and Paulsen; although the match I like the most was the one he beat Harrwitz in Paris, played a century before I was born. That match shows that Morphy had already found, since then, how to handle the semi-open and closed openings. But like Fischer, Morphy suffered from paranoia. He believed that his brother-in-law and his friend Binder were conspiring to poison him and destroy his clothes, and it is said that on one occasion he showed up at Binder’s office and attacked him. Let us never forget that, like Fischer, Morphy retired from chess at the height of his chess career.

Paul Morphy, who died at 47.

I have said that Fischer’s greatest pleasure was breaking the adversary’s ego. This reminds me of why I was attracted to chess as a boy. I remember a time when I told my parents that the best moment of my life was when my opponent lost his morale to my game. This memory may give me the key to penetrate Fischer’s mind. ‘Break the ego’ is an oblique resonance of how his mother broke Fischer’s ego as a child (and how my mother destroyed it through constant humiliations). When decades before I found out that Fischer had said similar things I said, I was referring to a problem not only with my mother but with my father. In sixth grade my female teacher once asked the question of what had been the happiest moment of the students. To the teacher’s fluster, I replied euphorically that the happiest moment was when I defeated my father in chess: whom I loved enormously but at the same time I had to refute. His vehement religious beliefs had hurt the sensitive child that I was, but my childish mind didn’t know how to refute them.

Some have said that chess is a game of schachmaty, of killing the father. Before I read the enlightened philosophers and freethinkers, chess was a perfect metaphorical substitute for going after the father. The same word ‘refutation’ was constantly used by the adolescent I was, although without arguments yet, when talking about what I wanted to do with my parents’ beliefs: put an end to them. But because we love our parents, the volcano of anger that many children, and adult children, feel towards them can only erupt with substitute objects: opponents whose ego we break as Fischer would say. However, such a transfer can produce a split personality, especially in those who spend their lives running away from themselves through gambling. As I said, I have heard of various fans, and other adults who have nothing to do with chess, who have been damaged by their abusive parents and have suffered psychotic breakdowns: like that funny crazy man who, according to Reuben Fine, believed that Botvinnik was the real leader of the Soviet Union. But that’s a distant case. I remember the late Ricardo Bravo, one of those who went to the park and who was known to have suffered hellish conditions at home. Ricardo crossed the line from mere psychological trauma to insanity and virtually committed suicide by abruptly crossing a busy avenue.

Categories
2nd World War Philosophy of history

The Iron Throne

‘The Iron Throne’ is the series finale of the fantasy drama television series Game of Thrones. Written and directed by D&D, it aired on HBO on May 19, 2019. The wisest words of all the Game of Thrones seasons were uttered by Tyrion in this finale: words that fans have yet to understand:

What unites people? Armies? Gold? Flags?

Stories.

There’s nothing in the world more powerful than a good story. Nothing can stop it. No enemy can defeat it.

Although D&D were advised by the author about the finale, George R.R. Martin wasn’t the first to notice this. Ivan Illich (1926-2002), a critic of the school system, had said: ‘Neither revolution nor reformation can ultimately change a society, rather you must tell a new powerful tale, one so persuasive that it sweeps away the old myths and becomes the preferred story, one so inclusive that it gathers all the bits of our past and our present into a coherent whole, one that even shines some light into the future so that we can take the next step… If you want to change a society, then you have to tell an alternative story’.

Alas, the current story that, after WW2, whites are telling themselves is astronomically toxic for their mental health. In fact, the System has lied to us over the decades about what happened in the Second World War. The great lie of our times can be summed up in these words by Irmin Vinson about WW2:

In almost any war one side can be dishonestly demonised even by a truthful enumeration of its crimes, if the crimes of its adversaries are suppressed.

Thomas Goodrich’s Hellstorm opened my eyes by collecting testimonies from the 1940s about the genocide committed on the German people during and after the war. This is the story we must be telling ourselves: the events dating from 1944 to 1947 in what was left of Germany, and up to 1956 in the Soviet Union’s death and forced labour camps where countless Germans had been deported. Of the story of the genocide of millions of defenceless Germans we don’t see any museum, memorial, film or documentary in the media, newspaper articles or magazines. Nor is it talked about in history departments or even routinely in the major racialist forums. Why?

Because what we call a nation’s history is actually a struggle over who controls the social narrative, the official ‘story’. Such control unleashes great intellectual passions: it is practically an act of war.

In this light we might dare to say that, although there has been no more fighting since 1945, the war against the Aryan continues insofar as the story of the fallen continues to be suppressed today, and suppressed overwhelmingly. In the case of Germany there is no such thing as ‘the vision of the vanquished’.

We live in a totalitarian West where the most relevant stories about the Second World War have not reached the masses, not even at the cafes where we hang out with our friends to speak out privately. Those who win the war write history, and it shouldn’t surprise us that only and exclusively the crimes attributed to the losing side have been aired from the rooftops 24/7. On the other hand, the masses know nothing about the crimes committed by the winners. Only those who know the harshest literature of the last decades intuit what really happened.

The Gulag Archipelago was published when I was a teenager. One reviewer wrote: ‘To live now and not to know this work is to be a kind of historical fool’. We could say the same of those who ignore books like Hellstorm, published in 2010 and other books like it. Currently the story of the Jewish holocaust is taught on a religious level in the West. But the planned murder of millions of defenceless German men, women, and children has been kept from us despite that

What the Allies did in peacetime (after May 1945 to 1947) was incomparably more monstrous than the crimes attributed to the Germans in wartime—precisely because it was done in peacetime.

* * *

Before the apocryphal story about WW2, the Bible was the story that whites had been telling themselves. But if the story that the Old Testament preaches to the Jews is ethnocentrism as their evolutionary survival strategy, and the story that the New Testament preaches to the gentiles is guilt and universalist love, it shouldn’t surprise us if both stories culminate today as a self-fulfilling prophecy: the apocalypse for whites.

But there’s a last-minute solution. Start telling yourselves a new story that replaces the old one through William Pierce’s history of the West and Evropa Soberana’s essay on Judea vs. Rome.

Umwertung aller Werte!