THE WEST'S DARKEST HOUR – Page 553 – — National Socialism after 1945

Ronin on Breivik

The best piece on the Norway event I’ve read so far: Sebastian Ernst Ronin’s “The Breivik Action: The First Archeofuturist Victory”:

As of this date, July 27, 2011, the military action carried out by Anders Behring Breivik in Norway has altered and shifted drastically the socio-political and cultural struggle of Occidental White Europids (WE™) to retake their ancestral territories, heritage and future history from Globalist-sponsored incursion, colonization and possible genocide. There will be serious setbacks. There will be serious blowback. There will also be considerable and, what was unimaginable opportunity prior to July 22, 2011, to exploit, at a sophisticated and dangerous level, for those White Ethno Nationalists with the political imagination, courage and resolve to do so.

As of this date, the initial burst of media coverage and all related conspiracy theories, second-guessing, conjecture, projection, etc. circulating in cyberspace are superfluous and, all things considered, useless. WE™ are left with an event that is now part of the political and historical fabric and discourse. The event exists only because of the action which birthed the event. Nationalists are left with fielding and dealing with the action itself, a host of both negative and positive consequences, and a flock of political Black Swans that are busy hatching as this is being read.

As was brought into public discourse by Rahm Emanuel when he was the White House Chief of Staff, the political maxim of “Never let a good crisis go to waste,” cuts both ways. For the cut to benefit the struggle of WE™ activists, this will require a certain degree of political sophistication and a clear perception of what can be done…and what cannot be done, and should not be done. The political leadership of global nationalist organizations and parties will be challenged to blunt an onslaught of institutional, media and political demonization, while at the same time probing for and implementing the opportunities that simply did not exist prior to July 22, 2011.

Much of the global nationalist political leadership, especially in NAmerika, will be severely challenged to make the shift to this next plateau. Some will not be challenged. This essay is addressed to the latter, those prepared to take the struggle of White liberation to the next level as forced by the Breivik action while simultaneously putting the goose-stepping and reactionary imposters out to pasture once and for all.

One of the first positive consequences (as opposed to the many negative consequences) that Breivik’s action will generate is that it will flush out the neo-con and Bible-thumping political illiterates and light-weights in the NAmerikan Nationalist community. This is already happening; it is to be welcomed. As pointed out by my Russian colleague, Alexander Mezentsev, “The Oslo ‘massacre’ is a harsh blow against all these malicious Trojan Horses, all these Geert Wilders.” Via their own statements to distance themselves from Breivik, this self-induced purge is already underway.

Much as with the stunted NAmerikan interpretation of European National Socialism, the NAmerikan interpretation of European New Right is a philosophical abortion. The Breivik action opens the door for all Occidental Whites to fully explore and begin to implement the political map as has been laid out by Guillaume Faye with his identification of Archeofuturism.[1]

In simplest terms, Faye believes that the future of White Europids requires a transcendence of the division between those who wish for a restoration of the traditions of the past, and those who are calling for new political, social and technological forms, creating a synthesis which will amplify the strengths and restrain the excesses of both. (Observant readers will readily recognize the notion of philosophical and political Vesica Piscis, as identified by the Renaissance Vanguard International.)

Inherent in the metapolitical and general blueprint of Archeofuturism, is the specific need to uncover/re-discover/re-identify our own archaic spiritual and psychic motivators to fight, with both mind and fist (if and when called upon to do so). As Faye states, this is of extreme importance because all of the foot soldiers of our Globalist enemies, i.e. Muslim, African, Mexican, already fight with such clarity and desperation; by never having shed these types of motivations, the Globalist foot soldiers already inhabit the Archeofuturist world! Unless Whites discover and adopt same motivators, we are at their mercy.

Within the European context, Faye states:

The problem for us Europeans is not having these values imposed upon us, on account of our cowardliness, by Islam – as is already happening – but rather of being capable of asserting these values ourselves by drawing them from our historical memory.[2]

For this reason is Breivik’s action the first Archeofuturist military engagement and victory. If one agrees or not with his identification of “Templar Knight” is beside the point. There are other pre-liberal/modernist, pagan-heathen identities to choose from. What matters is that Breivik has laid claim to an Archeofuturist identity and has attached a courageous political decision and action onto this identity. WE™ have been jolted and pulled into this Archeofuturist world and its political struggle. There is now no turning back. Breivik’s action has, kicking and screaming, pushed us across our own political Rubicon. Intended or not, this is the genius of Breivik’s action. The action is either isolated from motive or it is related to motive, this much is self-evident. But even minus a pure and honourable motive, the action itself stands. If the action was engineered by a lone wolf Breivik or by conspiratorial black operatives is secondary to the fact that it is now in the world; that is the opportunity.

WE™ find ourselves now entered onto Sun Tzu’s “Death Ground”; the cultural and political battle has been brought to us and WE™ have now only two options: succeed or perish. Rest assured, our enemies know full well what the Breivik action implies, and a nationalist political elite is about to discover the knowing of it. WE™ have been injected into a Gramscian universe of uncharted territory, remembering that the map is never the territory, not even the Archeofuturist map supplied by Faye. Rightly or wrongly, regardless of intent or non-intent, patsy or not, Mason-Zionist or not, regardless of possible hidden agendas and shady political affiliations, the Breivik action has now framed the discourse and political trajectory of the White Ethno Nationalist movement for years to come. Until proven otherwise via independent research and/or the proceedings/discoveries via his trial, the only evidence at hand are Breivik’s own manifesto, “2083 – A European Declaration of Independence” and the accompanying video “Knights Templar 2083”, both released just prior to the action.[3]

If our enemies have placed “the Breivik action” into the world, then they have made a mistake and the haunting diktat of Talleyrand rings true: “It was worse than a crime; it was a mistake.”

All nationalist armchair and keyboard revolutionaries, myself included, have been put on notice and in proper place. The performance bar has been raised. The gauntlet that has been dropped is simple: either rise to the challenge upon this Archeofuturist Death Ground, or cut bait towards reformist and feel-good twaddle that will not so much as warrant a footnote upon the writing of White Europid history.

WE™ are confronted with a swirling kaleidoscope of opinions, guesses and analyses. It is the fog of war. However, at the center of this swirling kaleidoscope, regardless of who has created it, is the bloody and archaic event itself and the published manuscript of motives and rationale for. The center of any storm is calm, still; it does not revolve in a blur of confusion.

The route from perceived catastrophic setback to actual opportunity is merely one of perception. Direct positives that the Breivik action delivers within this new political universe are as follows:

1 the mass positioning of the Islamization/colonization of “Eurabia” in the public psyche; if these notions are immediately understood and/or comprehended or not is beside the point; what matters is that, relative to the public psyche, they have now been positioned (NAmerikan legal and illegal immigration is analogous)

2 the mass positioning of multiculturalism and so-called “Cultural Marxism” as state-sponsored adjuncts to the latter colonization of the Occident by non-Occidentals in the public psyche; if these notions are immediately understood and/or comprehended or not is beside the point; what matters is that, relative to the public psyche, they have now been positioned (NAmerikan situation is analogous)

3 via the conscious target selection of “innocent” young Whites (and also the future generation of the Norwegian ruling Labour Party) by the Breivik action, the mass positioning of “betrayal from the top” in the public psyche, i.e. non-Occidental immigration and multiculturalism are tools of the Globalist economic and political elites; if this notion is immediately understood and/or comprehended or not (it will not be) is beside the point; what matters is that, relative to the public psyche, it has now been positioned (NAmerikan situation is analogous)

If the Breivik action was carried out solely by Breivik, then the action speaks for itself. If the Breivik action was some sort of false flag or black op orchestrated by forces far beyond Breivik, then the action and its benefits are maintained minus the mention of who may have engineered it. Either way, the psychological memes of the action remain the same. Either way, WE™ have been handed on a silver platter a tactical Knight Fork of opportunity to be scrutinized, analyzed and acted upon.

Over the short term, possibly for as long as several years, there will most likely be serious blowback and sacrifice for nationalist organizations and political parties. At the most these setbacks can be successfully countered, and at the least, neutralized, by a mature marshalling and coordination of the latter benefits on the new political and propaganda terrain. That there will be a media onslaught against the White Ethno Nationalist movement goes without saying. Some dominant individuals and organizations will no doubt fall; others will survive. If the movement can regroup within two to three years, it will be doing well. It may be prudent to remember that tactical and necessary concessions, sacrifices and retreat do not equal surrender.

It is anticipated that the demonization of Whites and the playing on White guilt will morph into nauseous overtures, spearheaded by all forms of corporate print and electronic media. As such campaigns proceed innocent Whites on the receiving ends may well question their cognitive dissonance to the best of their abilities and relative to the “Breivikian” memes that have been lodged in their psyches. What is this Islamization? What is this Eurabia? What is this colonization of our homelands? What is this hidden and ulterior motive/agenda of multiculturalism? Who benefits from having these strangers in our homes? Are we really at war? Nationalist political organizations and parties need be prepared to field these questions.

Lastly, and in passing, the descent towards a Post-Peak Oil world must be addressed for two reasons.

Firstly, save for a seven-word, toss-away comment on p. 1,222 of the Breivik Manifesto, there is no mention made of Peak Oil, yet this descent will run in parallel to an awakening global Ethno Nationalism and related consequences of political devolution and nation-state fracture/secession. Energy devolution, ecological tipping point, and Ethno Nationalism will be the three major socio-political drivers of the 21st Century. The economic maxim of “competition for scarce resources” is part of the racial strife that lays latent in the Occident.

Secondly, it is imperative that Peak Oilers, 95 percent of whom are White, question and preferably distance themselves from their predominantly liberal underpinnings. This is no more evident than with the false path they are being lead down by Michael C. Ruppert. Courageous street cop and brilliant investigative journalist do not necessarily translate into political wisdom for this age. Agree with it or not, like it or not, the world as identified and outlined by the Breivik action is real; it cannot be downplayed; it cannot be swept under the carpet in exchange for roasting weenies over campfires in the false nirvana of Post-Peak Oil humanitarianism and redundant equalities. This world must be accepted. A CollapseNet cash flow of $50,000 per month, no matter how many weenies it can buy, can not and will not deflect the racial/ethnic conflict (to what exact degree will be a challenge of political statesmanship) that is part-and-parcel of a Post-Peak Oil world.

In conclusion, the Breivik action has punched a hole into the public’s wall of limited perception, i.e. denial/fractured political cognitive dissonance. The White Beast may not yet be fully awake, but at the very least it finally stirs in its sleep that has been pushed from deep and unconscious to restless. There is now a breach in the wall, and even though it is as limited as it is, for White activists it signals a shift from cultural RaHoWa [Racial Holy War] to the opening skirmish of actual RaHoWa. WE™ now embark on claiming our own archaic sensibilities, an asset that up to July 22, 2011 had been the sole possession of our enemies. The accompanying political cultural landscape has experienced a significant tremor, a rip in its fabric, much to the advantage of these opening skirmishes and latent propaganda.

The Breivik action is now part of history. Oppressed, gagged and brutalized Whites worldwide, the victims and their families of the Breivik action, and the races that would challenge Whites for eventual survival during this century of pending technocratic cull and ecological purge have been sent a clear and brutal signal. It is that industrial, Globalist civilization is as fragile and as passing as the paper it is written upon. That all peoples have been carried to this new place by possibly the limited self-goal of a delusional, religious conservative is neither here nor there. History will gaze and make its judgment while his action and its consequences remain unhinged and isolated from such judgment.

The Death Ground of the opening phase of Archeofuturism has been breached; there is no turning back. The boats and the cooking utensils have been smashed. WE™ now spiritually, culturally and politically begin to feed and prosper upon the enemy or eventually perish. These are the only two options. Our genocide is simply not acceptable. RaHoWa has arrived with all the political wisdom and responsibility that come with it. The horrible incentive to see clearly becomes tantamount.

Such is now our world as of July 22, 2011. However one may understand a God(s) of their choosing, may God’s speed be with us all. WE™ shall need it.

(Note: The opinions expressed in this essay are those of Sebastian Ernst Ronin as an individual. No political opinion and/or sentiment expressed herein is related to Mr. Ronin’s position as the Chairman of the Renaissance Vanguard International.)

__________________

[1] Guillaume Faye, Archeofuturism (European Visions of the Post-Catastrophic Age), Arktos Media Ltd., 2010.

[2] Archeofuturism, p. 76: “The mindset of Muslims and immigrants from the South, as well as that of the sons of the immigrants who, in expanding and increasingly aggressive masses, are inhabiting European cities, as well as that of the leaders of the emerging Muslim and modern gloss, has remained archaic: it is based on the primacy of force, the legitimacy of conquest, exacerbated ethnic exclusivity, aggressive religiosity, tribalism, machismo, and a worship of leaders and hierarchic order.”

[3] Full disclosure requires me to relay that I was one of the 5,700 people who did receive an advance email attachment of Mr. Breivik’s manifesto.

Civil war Justice / revenge

Breivik’s spectacular message

Post author By C .T.
Post date July 26, 2011
16 Comments on Breivik’s spectacular message

Dear lefties:

Keep working for your multicult global plan. But this is our plan for YOU.

A couple of recent comments I just read at The Occidental Observer:

Wattylesrevolt said…

One way to think about what has happened is this: the revolt against race-replacement has begun… earlier than we expected.

And I’ll tell you something. On the one hand, I don’t support the shooting. But I also know that a future generation of vicious race-replacement enthusiasts, many of them Paki youth, have been put out of commission.

Beowulf said…

Anders Behring Breivik might not be fully awakened—it’s a process for most of us—, but his instincts were dead on. He struck a carefully aimed blow at his enemy, which cannot be done through talking or intellectualizing.

This is primal.

His actions—not rational—were meant to redeem the bloody sacrifices of his people to the multiculturalists. He thought about the problem, felt the impulse to act, and attempted—imperfectly—to construct a rationale and calculate the consequences as best he could.

None of us know what those will be exactly. Such is the nature of action, particularly violent action. But make no mistake: this is a war. It has come because most of the damage has already been done—it’s too late to put the genie back in the bottle.

The kingdom of heaven suffereth violence, and the violent bear it away.

I say…

Unless Breivik is emulated by other Europeans, his actions will not have any effect on the West and their elites’ multicult plan. Such actions could even turn to be counterproductive… unless many of us start reading The Brigade.

* * *

P.S. Jaego Scorzne nailed it elsewhere.

Scorzne said…

Yes, History will judge. If Europe rises up, Breivik will be seen as a Hero, a latter day Charles Martel. This is Breivik’s hope and vision. If Islam conquers, he will be just seen as a failed crusader–and forgotten since he failed and didn’t kill any Muslims anyway. If Liberals win, he will go down in history as a Criminal. But this is actually the least likely scenario long term since Liberalism is a death cult [see here]. Who cares what they think?

My point is that history is interactive. It’s not written in stone until the stones are toppled one upon another. Short term we play him down for sure, but use his trial for all it’s worth. These people may not like us but the stakes are too big to let that get in the way–way too big.

Civil war Justice / revenge

“This article was like a breath of fresh air”

Post author By C .T.
Post date July 25, 2011
9 Comments on “This article was like a breath of fresh air”

An insightful article by William Rome on the Norway incident, “Knights Templar: Honesty and Hypocrisy,” was published today at Occidental Dissent:

A lot of people are going to be infuriated by this post so I might as well get started early: I will not shed a single tear over the dead brats of Norway’s traitorous elite.

For over half a century the Evil Elites of the West have systematically brought tyranny to the people they rule over through non-white immigration, forced integration, forced busing, and Multicultural propaganda which has led to an endless maelstrom of rape, robbery, assault, and murder. To top it off these evil elites also institute Hate-Crimes legislation to silence those who speak out against their tyranny.

Are the Evil Elite and their children affected by any of this? Of course not! They’re protected and hidden away in gated communities and private schools. In other words for half a century the Evil Elites of the West have forced policies that they insulate themselves from.

The hands of this Evil Elite are dripping with the blood of their people from the assaults, rapes, and murders they have unleashed. The lives of countless families have been shattered because of the policies shoved down their people’s throats. Why should I shed one fucking tear when they finally get a taste of what they’ve unleashed? Sorry: my tears are reserved for the people whose lives have been shattered by the policies of the Evil Elite not the Evil Elite themselves. To paraphrase Marie Antoinette, “Let them eat lead.”

As Hunter has pointed out, Anders Behring Breivik didn’t simply pull off some Columbine-style massacre of teenagers for the hell of it (as much as many are making it out to be) but an attack on the next generation of traitors for Norway’s government. They weren’t attending a Salute Your Shorts Camp Anawanna but the training camp of 16-22 year olds for Norway’s ruling Multicult-loving Leftist party. In other worlds he hit them where it hurt most: the training ground for their hand-picked successors.

That is why I included the quote from Rikky-Tikky Tavi in the beginning [Chechar's note: omitted here]. Anders Behring Breivik (as all intelligent political thinkers once did) knew that eliminating the heirs was just as important as eliminating those currently in power. But many will say, “He killed kids! He’s an insane lunatic!” My question is: since when does killing kids for political reasons right away mean lunacy? Roman emperors and Norman dukes killed their rival’s families. The Bolsheviks shot the Romanov children along with the Tsar and Tsarina. We bombed Kaddafi’s children in Libya. Does this mean every Roman emperor, Norman duke, the Bolshevik shooter, and the American pilots that killed children in the name of politics were batshit crazy? And let’s not forget the murder of millions of children every year in the form of abortion which Leftist cheer as a “Human Right”. Is every white woman that gets an abortion a batshit crazy lunatic? Maybe to gain Leftist sympathy he should call himself an extremely late-term abortionist.

I’m not jumping up and down cheering what he did but let’s put the womanish sentimentalism aside. Is killing children for political reasons cold, cruel, and calculating? Absolutely. Does it mean mental illness? Absolutely not.

Even worse those knee-jerkingly calling Anders Behring Breivik a lunatic strengthen the old Marxist canard that all violence done against the Left is a sign of mental illness, while Leftist violence such as the crimes of Che and Mandela are acceptable if misguided acts of political dedication. Why is it that violent Leftists are never mentally unstable?

While I won’t be toasting his actions tonight I also won’t be shedding tears for the loss of the future traitors who would grow up to continue their parents destruction of Norway. The Evil Elite brought this backlash on themselves with the policies they forced. That’s my honestly.

Now for the hypocrisy.

The reaction by the non-mainstream Right to the events in Norway has been jaw-dropping. First off is the spectacle of those who worship Hitler denouncing Anders Behring Breivik for killing fellow whites. They scream, “How could a Nationalist kill his own people?” This from the people who worship a man who killed millions of white people (Eastern Europeans) because they were Slavs? Such hypocrisy is stunning.

The next hypocrisy is from those who are doing everything imaginable to distance themselves from Anders Behring Breivik, saying he’s not one of us. Such self-survival is understandable and justified (especially those in Europe). But this distancing is coming from the same people who are routinely denouncing mainstream conservatives for being too afraid to embrace and identify with the non-mainstream Right. They are doing the exact same thing they lambast mainstream conservatives for: being afraid to embrace their extremists like the Left does.

The third hypocrisy is from those who are saying Anders Behring Breivik should have attacked some Muslim rapists and he would have gained more sympathy. This from the same people who’ve said for years that we shouldn’t attack those the Evil Elite have invited in but the Evil Elite themselves. Anders Behring Breivik did just that and he’s being denounced by some for not doing they’ve always said not to do.

My fourth hypocrisy is one of cowardice. On this site and others there is continuous talk about the backlash and collapse of BRA [Black Run America] here in America and Eurabia in Europe. How did you think this would play out? Debates on German philosophers? Essays on political theory? As much we may like to see ourselves as contemporary Voltaires, Thomas Paines and Martin Luthers, our radical writings (like theirs) will have no teeth to them until they’re taken up with physical force. Am I calling for this physical force? Hell no! I know when it finally comes it will be violent and unpredictable. I’m not looking forward to the day it comes but I know it’s coming and I know it won’t take the form of democratic elections or academic debates. Anders Behring Breivik is just the start of the form the backlash and collapse is going to take. Muslims in Eurabia and blacks in BRA are assaulting, raping, and murdering us while they riot, bomb, and burn our cities to the ground: did you not expect a backlash just as violent?

No system falls except in blood. The Roman Republic, Vatican control over Western Europe, British control over the American Colonies and Ireland, and the French and Russian monarchies all collapsed in blood. BRA and Eurabia will be no different. So unless the armchair revolutionaries denouncing Anders Behring Breivik while publically wanting the same thing (Muslims out of Europe) are ready to accept this they need to stop reading Harold Covington, listening to IRA rebel songs, admiring the American Revolutionary Fathers, and saying we’ll never vote ourselves out of this mess because they’re no different from the hated mainstream conservatives who say this country needs a revolution while also saying we shouldn’t be too extreme.

Anders Behring Breivik walked the walk you only talk.

Selected comments from the thread

Wayne says:

Mr. Rome: I’m with you. No tears shed by me. Those were no “children”, they were young adults. It is all-tragic, but is clearly the fault of no one but the white-hating leftists who brought multi-culturalism. They deserve the blame as they were the root cause of this, as well as the rape of over 800 Norwegian women.

Denise: Did you see their pictures… no kids there. Young adults. Multi-culturalists have brought havoc on Europe and possibly America. Our children will have to fight for their lands and heritage. Thanks, multi-culturalists.

My question to all groups involved, regardless of the spectrum of rightist politics you fall into: Do you believe there is any way to regain our land, culture, heritage and protect our race without bloodshed? I sure hope so, but honestly don’t see it. It’s not our fault, it’s the multi-cultists.

Ed the Department Head says:

I agree completely with Rome’s analysis of this situation. While I don’t like any of Breivik’s neocon stances, Rome is right about this situation. Breivik is the new Pied Piper. The leftist Norwegians hate and vilify the poor Germans over the war and try to psychologically destroy them for being German. The leftist Norwegians sentence their fellow Norwegians to rape, torture, and murder by invading mud people the leftists let through the gates, all for the crime of being white.

Breivik only showed them that if Germanic people and white people are to be brutalized they should be consistent. They take innocent white people’s children and now he has taken their evil guilty leftist brats. It is well deserved!

Discard says:

Unless someone has advocated killing adolescents, they are not a hypocrite to think Breivik a madman. Bombing governments is revolutionary activity. Slaughtering your enemies’ children is simply savage.

As a civilized White man and a racist, I don’t model myself on Roman emperors, Norman dukes, or Trotsky’s death squads. By the way, since Richard III murdered the sons of Edward V, no English prince has been named “Richard”. That kind of thing hasn’t gone over well, historically. Denise is right, nobody will see anything but a pile of nice looking dead White kids. I recognize that you can’t send the tyrannical class to the gallows and let their offspring go walking down the street, but that’s what re-education camps are for, once you’ve won your revolution.

But you won’t win any revolution by shooting up youth camps, even commie youth camps. What did the PLO’s repeated bombings and shoot-ups of school buses and airliners get them but the contempt of every non-Nazi White in the world? 9-11 sure persuaded a lot of people to look into the Sand People’s grievances, didn’t it?

That said, this event is just one more in the war that the multi-cult has brought on us. This will spin out of anyone’s control. These dumbass kids will not be the last victims.

Wandrin says:

“Denise is right, nobody will see anything but a pile of nice looking dead White kids.” – Discard

I think Norway’s ruling elite will be traumatized.

Ed the Department Head says:

Wandrin said “I think Norway’s ruling elite will be traumatized.” I think you are right and I wonder if in their (deserved) grief and panic they won’t do something evil and stupid and oppressive that will, in the short term, harm the White Norwegian people, but in the long term might so injure and alienate the general population that this could eventually lead to civil conflict.

I hope so. I hope they decide after this to try to destroy the Norwegians with much more overt oppression and greater mud immigration and the people either succumb or fight back. (Obviously I want the latter.)

Wandrin says:

“I just wish that their pain had another source” – Discard

I don’t really know what I think. My gut feeling is this will have an impact in Norway itself and one that is less predictable than most people seem to believe but at the same time my kids are that age so trying to think about this event is like sandpaper in the brain.

Yggdrasil says:

Is this the very first time that a gathering of leftists in a Western Nation, post 1960, has been made to pay the ultimate price for their anti-democratic multicultural impositions? If so, then I suspect that the pictures of dead young adults will have a rather powerful deterrent effect on parents who might otherwise encourage their kids to be leftists.

It is hard to imagine a more powerful and socially compelling deterrent than to inject the sort of horrific risk that these pictures implant into the minds of multiculturally inclined parents. Viewed without emotion, this incident implies a multi-layered level of calculation that I find quite remarkable – an example not to be emulated to be sure – but remarkable nonetheless.

Thus far, Islamic terrorism has been confined to sub-way commuters in Spain, Street car commuters in Britain, and primarily, office workers in Manhattan – all nobodies that the elites could, quite frankly, care less about losing.  All that the Islamic terror attacks carried out on average working stiffs accomplished was to generate broad popular support for the war on terror and the vast increase in budgets for the security state. In short, their targeting was terrible as they never terrorized the elites responsible for their grievances. This attack was entirely different, as it appears designed to inject an element of extreme risk into volunteering to join the ranks of the multicultural political elite.

Further, the soft sort of totalitarianism of the Frankfurt School variety that is spreading throughout the West is carefully designed to avoid pushing its victims over the edged to the kind of violent reaction that occurred in Norway. Multiculturalism was supposed to be something you could impose on the proles without any cost!

This attack seems to be a rather remarkable demonstration that the velvet-glove totalitarianism that we all live under has failed in its primary mission to keep the elites safe from harm. What are they going to do? Have platoons of guards armed with automatic rifles patrolling the campus of Harvard to protect the future elites from the townies? Wouldn’t that be a bit obvious?

After Norway, hasn’t the task of obliterating the White race become a bit more “messy”?

The analogies of Hunter and others to the killings commanded by Bush and Western butchers are apt, but miss the point. This job had the kind of purposefulness that one would expect from a state planned attack, not an attack prompted by the rage of some lone nutter.

It hit the aspiring elites were it hurts, in their training camp for future leaders, and it hit the proud, self righteous multi-culti parents where it hurts as well. It revealed the soft underbelly of the multicultural regime for all to see.

On a personal level, I feel sad for the parents and relatives of these dead young adults. After all most were lured into a wildly risky scheme of Quisling oppression of their fellow countrymen thinking that the enterprise was riskless and profitable.

But putting on the cap of an intelligence analyst, I see a picture of profound significance and meaning, one sure to be a major turning point.

CBM says:

Yggdrasil, thank you for your posting. This is exactly what needs to be said rather than this mindless handwringing and conspiracy nonsense that has gone on in right wing circles since this happened. I am glad that there are people out there on the right that are actually thinking.

Kievsky says:

Old Atlantic, I agree we have a right of self defense. But if shoot people, will that be an effective defense? It shall remain to be seen if Breivik’s act reduces the mud-flood into Scandinavia. My criticism is that it is taking a gun to a MindWar.

What needs to be happening in Norway is that most Norwegians need to be fanatically opposed to open borders ideology, to scare the crap out of the leaders. The Europeans have to decide whether their native country is really their home or not, and if it is, to take to the streets like in Greece, or better, Egypt.

If ordinary natives have a blase or even positive attitude to the invasion of their own native home country, what can you do for them? Not much? I think a great slogan would be, “The immigrants have a home somewhere else; but this is the only home you have. Are you ready for your grandchildren to be refugees from their ancestral land?”

I’m kind of surprised to see this article from William Rome. Aren’t you the one who has a kind of multicultural lifestyle?

Maybe it’s because he has the same kind of cognitive dissonance as Breivik did. I think it must be horrible to be a “Cultural Conservative” while partly or wholly denying the significance of race.

I’m glad it wasn’t a WN or Neo-Nazi though. The kosher conservatives are like the nerd boys who play by the rules and still get bullied and mistreated, and then go postal.

We WN’s are like the kids wearing hoodies smoking pot and cigs in the woods across the street from the school — we say “fuck your rules” right from the get go. And so we have less cognitive dissonance about the whole thing. We are able to keep our cool better.

The Systematic global displacement and genocide through mixing and attrition program against Whites is a MindWar, not a hot lead and cold steel war.

If you treat it like a hot lead and cold steel war, the neutral Whites who might have been on our side will end up shooting us on behalf of the Leftists. This is the mistake Germany made — they relied on too much hot lead and cold steel, and not enough on diplomatic savvy. The Jews ran circles around them diplomatically speaking — they had the US and the USSR sewn up, they encircled them, and the Germans thought they could just shoot their way to victory, all the while refusing to develop the atom bomb. Just like Knights in Shining Armor going against Mongols with compound bows on ponies. Beautiful defeat, rather than dirty victory.

The shooting spree is a sort of romantic expression of hopelessness — “we are defeated, so I will go down with guns blazing” statement.

The MindWar is where it’s at. I wrote a post about how hate is like gasoline, and you can burn yourself, or you can fill a tank and start a useful engine with it. Breivik is an example of someone who burned himself (and others). One of the kids at that youth camp may have been a future nationalist leader. Maybe one of the survivors is. Who knows how this will shake out. It could end up changing some minds in our direction. Violence is certainly part of the European soul.

And some things should be hated.

Old Atlantic says:

Kievsky, I agree with your strategy. This view, which I find much to agree with, could be stated as:

1. With the support of the people, the violence is not needed.

2. Without the support of the people, the violence is useless and even counter-productive.

Rollory says:

Thank you. This is an excellent piece. Says everything I would have.

Excellent, excellent piece.

“Your Anders hero just screwed White Nationalism forever.” - Denise

This is a comment I posted at Mangan’s but I suspect isn’t going to be approved:

I was not specifically expecting an event like this but I don’t find it at all unbelievable or nonsensical. It fits into the overall pattern.

Tom Baugh’s black hats/white hats dichotomy comes into play here. This guy was a black hat. GoV and Auster and Mangan are white hats. It would be better if the white hats could win on their own civilized terms, but I see no reason to expect that to actually happen. The Left simply does not believe that consequences for their actions are possible, therefore they will continue to act in defiance of the facts that imply those consequences and civilized behavior predicated on those consequences; therefore those consequences will become more extreme. There will be more black hats, lots more. That is simply the nature of the situation we are in. Calling it ugly won’t make it go away.

“There is no substitute for victory.” – Douglas MacArthur

Jeffrey Heavin says:

The events in Oslo are part of a beginning. Revolutions are bloody, ugly events without glamour. The glamour comes only later when stories are told to grandchildren. Any real White Nationalist understands what Mr. Rome understands, and that is that “history rhymes” — there is precedent upon precedent of violent events that make a revolution. Lawyers and other such hustlers have not only failed us but have become impotent and quite ridiculous.

To expect such change as is needed to occur without violence is like expecting a pork chop without killing a pig.

Spooky says:

God forbid that we feel anything but horrendous guilt that a group of Marxists took it in the groin for the first time in 70 years. Yes, we’re only supposed jump for joy when our Apache helicopters strafe a few brown journalists in Iraq. Otherwise we’re “showing our negro.”

Wandrin says:

“How would you like it if an anti-racist leftist killed your kids because of what you believe?” - Lew

See here: “Thus far, Americans have proven to be more tolerant of the ethnic vibrancy in their midst, despite the Sept. 11 attacks and 4,380 annual murders by immigrants.” They are doing it already. They’ve been doing it for decades.

I agree that going after their kids is too much but the political elite have been doing this for years to everyone who can’t afford to get away from diversity murder.

“Don’t have the stomach for this small event” - WR

It’s not a small event. I have relatives who infiltrated terrorist organisations as part of the security services. None of the people in those organizations would have dreamt of going after the kids of their enemies. The mafia doesn’t do this. It’s a big fucking deal to specifically go after the kids of the political elite rather then the elite itself.

Given the specific nature of the crimes of the political elite and given that it is other people’s children who have been the majority of victims of forced integration, mass immigration and murder by diversity I can see the logic of what he did but morally it is a big fucking deal. Don’t pretend it’s not.

Spooky says:

Not that I’m jumping for joy, mind you. Nor am I weeping in my yard.

Denise says:

Oh…but….Muslims were not persecuting Jews when Israel was created…..it bagan after Jews started attacking Muslims….but who cares? As long as the Aryan Hero is killing lefties! Woo HOO!!!!! tha’t ALL that matters! Lefties! YEE HA!!! NO dead Muzzies or anything. Labour’s still in power. Woo HOO! He killed Lefty Teens! WOW!!!! This is just like Poitiers! Just like the Seige of Malta! The 300! Woo HOO!

Spooky says:

Fair enough.  

But do you honestly still believe we will beat this thing with nothing but breeding and talk? You agree they have us totally surrounded electronically. So very few voices are actually going to get out, regardless of wealth or looks. In the meantime millions of voices are raised to the contrary, educated to the contrary, and prepared to act contrary to our message.

Kievsky says:

Your Anders hero just screwed White Nationalism forever. - Denise

Denise, I don’t think that the people we are trying to reach have such weak stomachs as to forever swear off White nationalism just because a roiled up neocon whacked some of our common enemies.

He was not a WN! And maybe Labor will have second thoughts about being traitors.

Spooky says:

Thank you Kievsky. Revolution makes strange bedfellows. Doesn’t make sense to argue ideological purity. I’m going to get a knock on the door for this shit. Just talking Janet! Just talking!

Brutus says:

“it’s ABOUT the FACT that your Anders hero just screwed White Nationalism forever. ”

Hardly.

Where have you been? It used to take a few months, but now it is only taking about two weeks for the public to forget.

Rob says:

“How would you like it if an anti-racist leftist killed your kids because of what you believe?” - Lew

Well they are targeting our kids. Its called Demographic Warfare and Genocide by assimilation. Just because the anti-whites keep their hands clean, by using non-whites to do their dirty work, does not mean they are not every bit as guilty as Anders. The only difference between Anders and the anti-white left, is Anders did not delegate.

All Rapes in Oslo Committed by Immigrants, British National Party (here). So please explain who is responsible for bringing in these rapists and why they are not responsible for their crimes.

Is the only difference between them getting actual dirt on your hands?

Richard Harlos says:

This is a sober interpretation of the situation and an icon of sanity following two days of reactionary bias-confirmation by those who seemed to jump from fanatical opportunity of bias-confirmation to the next. This is only the second piece I’ve read on this site, being introduced to it only yesterday but I’m quite pleased with what I’m reading and I’ll surely return for more.

Thank you for having the courage not merely to look at the situation for what it is, but also for having the courage to state it so plainly.

sybille says:

This article was like a breath of fresh air indeed. I thought I was the only one who was not actually mourning the demise of some far-left youth and “youfs” (I believe many were non-white).

And if it keeps people from becoming white nationalists, Denise, what use would they have been anyway if they care more for the deaths of some leftwing youth than they care about the impending extinction of our entire culture and race due to those cultural-Marxist leftists and their parents?

AnalogMan says:

William,

Good article. Your shares have gone up. I understand what many others seem to have missed: that you have consistently argued against this kind of action.

There are only two ways that the present situation can be resolved. The peaceful solution means the death of the race. We may not win a racial war, but we can’t win any other way. History often turns on seemingly trivial events. I have no idea whether Breivik’s actions will be one of those events, nor whether they will lead to the extinction of WN, as Denise believes, or to escalating rounds of reaction and counter-reaction. But I agree that it was a logical development, and quite likely not the last.

This is not to be interpreted as endorsement of his actions. I’m not wise enough to judge them. There is no evidence that he did them to further our cause.

One point of fact seems to have been overlooked by some commenters agonising over the image of Nordic children being slaughtered. This was a political camp attended by the rising generation of the perpetrators of the multicult – and their clients. Many of them were immigrants from Africa and Asia. At least one of the survivors quoted in the press was a Member of Parliament. As you point out, it was a logical target.

On a lighter note, for any readers of golden age science fiction, here’s a parable from 1961 that illustrates the logic.

Norman Lowell says:

Very good article expounding the result of Breivik’s action. The Left, the Do-Gooders, the Traitors will tremble–as they should.

The follow up action to Breivik will all be positive for us: the RRRRR: Radical, Racialist Right, Revolutionary Reactionaires. But his ideology and intentions were wrong–terribly misguided. He was a patsy, a tool in the hands of the Rodents: a Christian Zionist.

Can one get any lower than that? You couldn’t. But yes, Breivik has set in motion a ripple, a wave, a Tsunami of wrathful Whites–the Right ones.

This is just the beginning: just the start of the White Man’s Fury. And our Ideology, our Intentions will be diamond pure, diamond hard.

The Final Battle has started. No quarter given to Traitors–and none asked. 2012: Anno Zero!

Kevin MacDonald

Kevin MacDonald on Breivik

Post author By C .T.
Post date July 25, 2011
3 Comments on Kevin MacDonald on Breivik

In a previous post I quoted a stub article on Anders Behring Breivik that Hunter Wallace later expanded. It is amazing to witness that even Dennis Mangan has tacitly implied that he is too coward to discuss the events at Norway. OK, Mangan’s is not a white nationalist site: but besides the stub article at Occidental Dissent only Prof. Kevin MacDonald has been capable of seeing the catastrophic event objectively.

Below, MacDonald’s “The Political Ideas of Anders Behring Breivik” minus a very long Breivik quotation that comprises most of the professor’s article:

A quite clear picture of Anders Behring Breivik emerges from this collection of his online posts.

I thought the following quotes were reasonably representative; they are edited slightly for English usage.

These snippets portray a Geert Wilders-type of cultural conservative, very opposed to ethnocentrism as a strategy, very positive about the Vienna School, staunchly pro-Israel (which he sees as beset by militant Islam), and very hostile toward Islam. Breivik sees Islam as eventually taking over Europe via differential fertility if nothing is done, noting historical data on other areas (e.g., Turkey, Lebanon, Kosovo). Based on his reading of history, he believes that the triumph of Islam would unleash horrific repression and violence against Europeans and against all manifestations of traditional European culture. It would be the end of European civilization based on Christianity and ordered liberty.

He also has a 1500-page book, titled 2083: A European Declaration of Independence, suggesting his actions were intended to call attention to himself as a way of publicizing the book and maximizing its impact. See also the (very powerful) video below which is based on the ideas of the book. The video images strongly suggest that he identifies with historical figures like Charles Martel who fought to prevent the Muslim conquest of Europe in previous centuries. Note the many photos of Christian knights battling Islam (suggesting he sees Christianity [correctly] as a historically powerful force for the preservation of Europe rather than mainly about religious faith) and (at the very end) photos of himself in military dress and armed with automatic weapons.

In general, it must be said that he is a serious political thinker with a great many insights and some good practical ideas on strategy (e.g., developing culturally conservative media, gaining control of NGOs. and developing youth organizations that will confront the Marxist street thugs). (Parenthetically, during a recent lecture tour of Sweden, I was struck by the elaborate security procedures that were taken out of fear of physical beatings by “Communists,” described to me as typically the children of leftist elites. It is no exaggeration to say that racially conscious Scandinavians feel physically intimidated.) It could well be that Breivik’s silence on Jewish hostility toward Europe and the West and his rejection of ethnocentrism (see here) are motivated by his strategic sense.

In the excerpts below, note his hostility toward the Frankfurt School which he identifies with cultural Marxism, but never mentions that the Frankfurt School is a Jewish intellectual movement or the anti-European, anti-Christian attitudes that pervade Jewish elites in the West—as noted in Paul Gottfried’s recent vdare article and repeatedly emphasized here. He notes the failure of “ethnocentric strategies” but ignores the role of Jewish intellectual elites in pathologizing expressions of ethnocentrism by Europeans since WWII (particularly the Frankfurt School) and in combating the scientific basis of the legitimacy of racial/ethnic interests (Boasian anthropology; the video identifies cultural Marxism with cultural relativism, one of the main thrusts of the Boasian school). He is also highly critical of the media (without noting that the Norwegian media is controlled by a Swedish/Jewish family). In my experience, racially conscious Scandinavians are quite aware of Jewish media control. Again, these may be tactical moves, although I rather doubt it.

In any case, he is certainly right in characterizing multiculturalism as an ideology of hate. Note particularly his anger at the action of the Labour Party in England in opening the gates of immigration in order “to humiliate the right-wing opponents of immigration.” As he notes in several places, multiculturalism is hatred of Europeans and their culture masked by humanism.

It remains to be seen what the long term effect of his actions will be. There is certainly great revulsion at the murder of young people. However, I suppose it is possible that in the long run European elites will understand that the glorious multicultural future will not be attained without a great deal of bloodletting (including themselves and, as in this case, their children) and realize they will have to change their ways. Indeed, one of his insights is that in the long run “the multi-cultural neocolonial regimes will either have imploded or have become very Stalinist.” I agree.

The fear is that Breivik’s actions are more likely to result in Stalinism in the immediate future than to lessen the grip of the forces of evil.

* * *

My 2 cents:

Well… Stalinist actions upon us only if we white people continue to behave as we have behaving every day since the Battle of Stalingrad: like meek sheep en route to the slaughterhouse. This is what I responded to Greg Johnson at the most recent article at Counter-Currents:

@ “He might inspire copycats, but lone gunmen, even a lot of them, do not overthrow governments. It is far more likely that this will set our cause back, not advance it.”

But here’s where I agree with Pierce, who wrote Hunter as a more likely scenario than his Turner Diaries. The point is, if westerners have become so deracinated with the panem et circences that the System feeds upon them, why haven’t hundreds, thousands of Hunters cropped up? You know that Pierce dedicated his novel to an actual serial killer of mixed couples. I can only imagine the impact of a growing number of Breiviks throughout the West… Yes: unlikely. But I was imagining it as a sort of Gedankenexperiment to ponder the moral issue of Breivik’s deeds.

Justice / revenge

Two opposite views on the Norway massacre

Post author By C .T.
Post date July 24, 2011
8 Comments on Two opposite views on the Norway massacre

Yesterday, at Majority Rights Trainspotter commented:

While not unmindful of the possibility that our understanding of this event may change dramatically in the coming days, weeks and years, a few preliminary observations are in order. Regardless of what the ultimate “truth” turns out to be, there are some things we’ve learned already.

I should also mention, sincerely and not by way of candy coating the points to follow, that the slaughter of these young people was an astonishing atrocity, and the mind staggers while contemplating the type of individual that would do such a thing.

Having said that:

1. If a group of white nationalists had been slaughtered in such a fashion, would the Labour party youth have shed a single tear, even so much as a crocodile tear? Or would they have laughed and guffawed? In your heart, you know the answer. The Left wants nothing for us but humiliation and death. Of course, this is one of the reasons that many of us came to hate the Left, for they are of a different spirit than us.

2. Whatever the truth of the killer’s (or who knows, perhaps killers) motivation, the Left will always seek to blame the Right. They will shamelessly use any tragedy to their own advantage, even though we know that atrocities don’t really bother them at all, unless it fits their political script. Atrocities tear us up, they make us sick. Not so with the Left. The Left will shamelessly smear, deceive and lie in order to accomplish their goals.

3. On the other hand, the Left never worries about being smeared itself. By their stars, Leftist terrorists are at worse somewhat misguided idealists who got a bit off track. The imported non-whites that set about raping and murdering the indigenous white stock? You’re an evil racist if you point out the truth. Leftist anger is entirely directed at you, the speaker, as opposed to the rapist. As Linder has so often pointed out, the Left is far angrier at the white who speaks the truth than the black who is dripping with the blood of a white victim.

Point is that the Left never lets a tragedy go to waste. God, how much they must love being able to use blonde, fair haired and Nordic in this context.

O.K. So what does this mean for us? It will undeniably create problems, but over time I don’t think it’s going to be as bad as some people think. The West really is in crisis, the demographic conquest of our nations really is happening, and the cultural degradation, rapes and murders will continue apace. We are, quite literally, losing everything. This isn’t a TV show, we can’t just change the channel. It really is happening.

Many will point to Timothy McVeigh and how his actions took the steam out of the American militia movement. While there is a lot of truth to that, the reality is that the militia movement was largely populated by either oddballs or well meaning yahoos. They had no intellectual foundation, no real worldview beyond a vague paranoia and sense that the country was slipping away, and no solutions beyond putting on some camo and running around play acting as soldiers. Just go to some of the militia type sites that are still out there. They are a total joke. They really are know nothings.

We, on the other hand, are building on something far more substantial. A few nutballs, cranks and kooks aside, we’re a different breed today. Our understanding of the situation is not only far broader than that of the yahoos, it’s about a thousand times deeper – and that’s being charitable to the yahoos, I can assure you. We’re not going away. We will continue to hone and refine our worldview, spreading our message because it is true and right and necessary. And we will continue to find a growing audience receptive to our cause, because after all the sturm and drang, our people are still being victimized on a massive scale. The existential threat to our people remains. This tragedy doesn’t change any of that, and reality is a helluva lot more obvious today than it was in 1995.

This is one of the reasons why it is so important to build an intellectual foundation, a worldview that is appealing but strong. Once somebody adopts it, they become immune to the cultural toxins. But a movement that lacks such a worldview and solid foundation is easy pickings. Events like the tragedy before us can in fact destroy a movement of know nothings. But it can’t destroy white nationalism, no matter how hard they try to pin this on us.

Fortunately, the guy doesn’t seem to have much in terms of white nationalist ties, and has described his views as anti-racist, pro-homosexual, and pro-Zionist. For now, that’s may mantra. We need to hammer that home. He’s not one of us. He’s opposed to us.

We also need to take a lesson from the Left’s playbook, which I somewhat went into above. The Left blames us for everything, absolutely, all the time. It never stops. For example, if they can’t find an example of explicit racism, they will come up with “institutional” racism, disparate impact, or something rather less tangible. They don’t quit, they are winners.

We should blame the Left for this. Diversity and multiculturalism demonstrably reduce trust and cohesion in a community. We are probably going to see more nutjobs going off as our societal fabric frays. The Left destroyed our culture, our sense of shared values, our sense of belonging, and our most important civic institutions. In such a context, tragedies happen. They are every bit as much responsible for this as they are for the crimes they facilitate in integrated schools. They are every bit as much responsible for this as they are for turning once peaceful and safe white communities into war zones. The Leftist (Jew or otherwise) who comes after you on this? Within 30 seconds you should have put the blood on his hands, hammering him over the countless murders and rapes of innocent whites that he has never once brought up to you, that he demonstrably doesn’t care about. He is a psychopath.

We can and should condemn this tragedy in no uncertain terms. It was terrible. But never cede the moral high ground, not even for a minute. Always attack, just as the Left does.

On the other hand, this is what Chris Saltarello told me tonight at Facebook. I don’t know how to properly respond…

They deserved it.

Terrorism is when you deliberately target non-combatant civilians in order to extract certain demands. Anders Behring Breivik did not do that. He did not target the Muslim or ethnic quarters of Oslo which motivated his actions, he targeted those parties directly responsible.

What sort of “democracy” is it which weans its future political leaders from a narrow group of teenagers who are all ideologically motivated both within and by an ideologically biased, Cultural Marxist educational system? – That is not a “democracy”, that is a single party state.

If you make ethno-masochist Marxist Extremists out of Norwegian teenagers it’s no different from making boy soldiers out of Congolese minors.

They were all legitimate military targets of political interest, no different from when the United States, or Israel or NATO eliminates Islamic leaders in Afghanistan, Iraq and Palestine.

These were all legitimate military targets and this was a completely justified act of war by Norwegian National Resistance Forces.

Whilst I cannot speak for Mr. Breivik’s Zionist leanings, as Nationalists, our only regret is that more enemy combatants were not killed in this, including the corrupt Prime Minister of that enemy state.

Postscript of 12:40 PM

The discussion at several nationalist blogsites is getting deeper. I received more than a hundred follow-up emails on comments of those threads that I still haven’t read. Here I’ll limit myself to include a couple of comments from one of the threads at The Occidental Observer:

Schlageter said…

I haven’t watched his video or read his blog entries. But think about from this perspective: he knew he would be relatively powerless to combat each and every Muslim/ immigrant criminal currently raping, murdering, and defiling a once docile country. He likely rationalized that the best way to tackle the problem was to take the fight directly to the facilitators of the multi-kulti policies which have enabled these criminals to run rampant. Therefore, he attacked Stoltenberg and his leftist party in Oslo, and more importantly tried to amputate the future leadership of the organization–the future leftist agitators, jurists, and parliamentarians being schooled at the indoctrination camp on the island.

I’m not condoning the action, nor do I see him as truly “right-wing” in a pan-European sense (more like a Christian Zionist).

Of course, the focus of rage will come down on true adherents to the former while the latter, as always, will be scot-free.

Thomas Mallon said…

Apparently the camp that was attacked was also a breeding ground for multiculturalist ideologues (here).

Tags Norway

Justice / revenge

Hunter Wallace on the 2011 Norway attacks

Post author By C .T.
Post date July 23, 2011
1 Comment on Hunter Wallace on the 2011 Norway attacks

It’s pathetic to see conspiracy theories cropping up in some threads of the nationalist blogosphere. I may disagree with many things of Occidental Dissent after the blog made a wrong turn at the beginning of the last year. But at least it has been an oasis free from all sorts of conspiracy theories.

Here’s what Hunter Wallace wrote today about the Norway 2011 massacre. He places the burden of responsibility to one man’s decision: Anders Behring Breivik, the subject of my previous post.

Norway

Anders Behring Breivik isn’t a lunatic.

This is someone who clearly understands the gravity of the situation and who was disturbed enough by what is being done to his country and his civilization to take matters into his own hands.

Just watching this video, I found myself thinking: we always knew that it was going to come to this, we always knew the Eurabian civil war was inevitable, we always knew the revolt was coming against the EUnuchs who led the people to the precipice of destruction.

[Here Wallace embedded the same video authored by Anders Behring Breivik I added in the postscript of my previous entry.]

* * *

P.S.

Prof. Kevin MacDonald has written an article that quotes extensively Breivik’s work. It is worth reading and I must say that I am perfectly familiar with the sources that Breivik quotes, since I was involved in the counter-jihad movement before I came to the nationalist camp.

Videos

No white nationalist…

would open fire on White kids, ever!

Today’s entry at Balder Blog, Norway: Mass murderer Anders Behring Breivik is anti-racist, pro-homosexual and pro-Israel advices us: “If you have a website please copy this post to your site, before my webhost again shuts me down for too much traffic”:

Some comments about the ideological background of the Oslo bomber and Utoya shooter Anders Behring Breivik

Norwegian sources have identified the man who, dressed up as a policeman, shot perhaps as many as 80 or more innocent young people on the island of Utoya [Utøya] as the 32 years old Anders Behring Breivik. He is also alleged to stand behind the bomb in Oslo, which so far killed seven people.

The perpetrator was a regular poster on several Norwegian Internet media, notably the blog document.no, which is run by Hans Rustad,[1] a former left wing journalist. Hans Rustad is Jewish, and extremely pro-Zionist, and warns against islamization, violence and other problems connected with Muslim immigration. Many regular contributors on his blog naturally more or less share his views.

They represent an ideology where the importance of ethnicity is played down or dismissed completely, and the need for the preservation of Western cultural and democratic values is commonly used as the substitute key argument against immigration. Their rhetorics and activities are almost completely focused on Islam and Muslims; other immigrant groups such as Vietnamese, Chinese, non Muslim Africans and other groups are routinely painted as “harmless,” or even as “positive contributors to society.”

This is the currently most popular strain of the anti-immigration movements in Europe, as represented by Geert Wilders’ Freedom Party, the Danish People’s Party, the Sweden Democrats, and in Germany the so called “Pro-movement,” of which Pro-Cologne (Pro-Köln) is one of the most active, as well as several recently new established parties with a similar ideology. In England the EDL is connected to this ideology, together with groups such as SIOE and its local chapters, The Danish Free Press Society and their magazine Sappho, and some others. Note that the SIOE uses the slogan: “Racism is the lowest form of stupidity! Islamophobia is the height of common sense.”

This picture was taken on the island of Utøya the previous day. (Chechar’s note: Could it have irritated philo-Semite Breivik?)

Their American allies are people such as Pamela Geller, Robert Spencer, Daniel Pipes, etc. The dedication to the Zionist cause, and their rejection of classical nationalist ideas such as the importance of ethnicity, sets them apart from the sincere nationalist parties such ad the British National Party, Front National (France), Jobbik (Hungary), and NPD (Germany—and the only clearly National Socialist inspired movement of those mentioned).

Their heroes are mainly Jews such as German Henryk Broder, the French Zionist Bernard Henry Levy, British Melanie Philips, Bernard Lewis, to mention just a few, and many more. The Flemish Nationalists fall somewhere in between, and are mainly traditional Nationalists with no love for the US, Zionism or Israel, who are trying to adapt to a new pro-Zionist image, inspired by the success of Geert Wilders’ Freedom Party in Holland, and the Danish People’s Party in Denmark.

Members of the pro-Zionist groups and parties often paint their non-philosemitic fellow nationalists as Nazis, anti-Semites and racists, copying the rhetorics the left wing PC-brigade uses against themselves, and try to present a more polished image towards the mainstream. They are also much better connected to mainstream politicians than the traditional nationalists, and at times are supported by mainstream newspapers, such as Jyllands-Posten in Denmark, as well as by right wing Jewish groups and individuals. The mainstream press usually judges these groups more favorably than traditional nationalists, who are invariably accused of being “Nazis.”

Anders Behring Breivik, the Norwegian bomber and gunman also pursued this line of thought:

Posted on 2009-09-14 10:57:20 as a reaction to post by “Caper”

Caper,

I didn’t see that the EDL as it is today is what we would have wanted. But it is essential that the intellectual conservative forces (unofficially) offer political and ideological schooling to our youth between 15 and 25. Who else is to do that?

We cannot despise the young in society and refuse to come closer to them only because they lack ideological training, since it is exactly OUR (culturally conservative intellectuals) responsibility to do so.

Bawer [referring to homosexual anti-islamist Bruce Bawer] is probably not the right person to work as a bridge builder. He is a liberal anti-Jihadist, and in many ways not a culturally conservative. I have my suspicions about him being TOO paranoid (with reference to his homosexuality). It could seem as though he fears that “cultural conservatives” will become a threat against homosexuals in the future. Therefore he refuses to take his chance to influence them into a positive direction? That seems completely irrational.

It has to be said that many organizations such as VB [probably referring to the Flemish nationalist party Vlaams Belang] needs to go through many “reforms,” before they reach our level.

Anyway, we are not in a position where we can pick and choose our partners. That’s why we have to ensure that we influence other culturally conservatives to take our anti-racist, pro-homosexual, pro-Israeli line of thought. When this direction has been taken we can take it to the next level.

The consolidation MUST continue, and people must contribute by influencing (instead of isolating).

The above was translated from this page, where document.no has collected all posts by Anders Behring Breivik. So far it is not possible to read the separate comments in the original thread; according to an announcement on the website, they changed IT-systems a few days ago, and are working on bringing the comments and the full posts back online. The URL to the article to which this comment belongs is here; maybe it will work later on.

Footnote:

¹ I dislike Mr. Hans Rustad for at least one reason: He does not support freedom of speech when it comes to WWII history and the holocaust.

Total deathtoll at this moment 9:00 local Norwegian time: 91

___________________

I commented at Age of Treason:

One thing is clear: Anders Behring Breivik is no White Nationalist. No White Nationalist would ever open fire on White kids, ever! I mean: not even in the most gruesome pages of William Pierce’s or Harold Covington’s novels such a thing happens. In those revolutionary novels the nationalists don’t even kill colored kids! (It is important to say this over and over if some nut tries to relate yesterday’s incident at Norway with us.)

P.S. Anders Behring Breivik’s manifesto:

http://www.dailymotion.com/video/xk41xw_knights-templar-2083-movie-trailer-anders-behring-breivik_news#from=embediframe

Tags Norway

Holocaust

Spielberg & the holocaust

Without the wisdom of Irmin Vinson on the subject of the Holocaust (see e.g., here and here) no nationalist will ever reach intellectual maturity. “Spielberg & the eleven million” is only the latest of his articles at Counter-Currents:

“The Holocaust has increasingly become, for the democratic world at least, a symbol of all the other Genocides, for racism, anti-Semitism, hatred of foreigners, ethnic cleansing, and mass destruction of humans by humans generally. The reason for this is, possibly, that a vague realization is taking hold of people that the Holocaust, the planned total annihilation of the Jewish people at the hands of the Nazi regime, is both a Genocide like other Genocides, and also an unprecedented event in human history, which should serve as a warning to all of us.” — Prof. Yehuda Bauer, Yad Vashem

In an episode of Steven Spielberg’s miniseries Band of Brothers (2001) American soldiers, the men of Easy Company, stumble upon a German concentration camp, a satellite of Dachau, where to their horror they discover hundreds of emaciated Jews, along with about an equal number of Jewish corpses. It is the spring of 1945 and we are — or so Spielberg would have us believe — in the midst of an extermination facility, one part of the vast industrialized machinery of mass murder designed to effect the nazi Final Solution, the physical extermination of the Jewish people. All of the inmates in the camp are thus Jews, identified by the yellow stars stitched into their striped camp uniforms, and they identify themselves as Jews to the startled liberators.

That was Spielberg’s first inaccuracy, which we shall call Falsehood #1. Most of the inmates at Dachau and Buchenwald, about eighty percent, were non-Jews. When we look at photographs of liberated German concentration camps, we now think that all of the “survivors” we see are Jews. But that, as a matter of uncontested fact, is untrue. In 1945 American media coverage of the liberation of the camps on German soil rarely spoke of Jews, for the simple reason that Jews were a minority among their various inmates. The Americans who liberated the camps did not “confront the (Jewish) Holocaust,” as Spielberg’s Band of Brothers wants us to assume. They instead discovered, as a contemporary British documentary put it, “men of every European nationality, including … Germans.”

Falsehood #1 — the ejection of Gentiles from Dachau and their replacement with Jews — generates a problem for Spielberg. If all of the inmates in the concentration camp presented in Band of Brothers are Jews, and if Hitler wanted to exterminate all Jews, then why are the inmates still alive? That is also, of course, the monumental problem that the Jewish Holocaust has always faced. Why did the Germans fail to kill all the Jews under their control? Why did they bother to evacuate Jewish internees from the East? Why is Elie Wiesel, evacuated in 1945 from Auschwitz in Poland to Buchenwald in Germany, still alive? Why was Anne Frank not gassed at Auschwitz? Why was she instead relocated to Bergen-Belsen, where she tragically succumbed to typhus?

By falsely making all of his camp’s inmates Jews, Spielberg faces the same problem, and he invents a solution — Falsehood #2. The camp guards, a Jewish survivor tells Spielberg’s American liberators, desperately shot as many of the inmates as they could, knowing that the imminent arrival of Allied liberators would end their genocidal mission. Then they ran out of ammunition. So they fled, no doubt disappointed at their failure to implement fully their part of the Final Solution to the Jewish Question. They had killed as many Jews as they were able to kill, but not as many Jews as they had wanted to kill (i.e. all of them, every single person in the camp). The emaciated Jews we see on the screen are still alive because the nazi killers fortuitously ran out of bullets.

Liberation of Dachau, 29 April 1945: In photographs of concentration camps we now see Jews, but in fact the men above are Poles.

Even for most mainstream Holocaust scholarship, the presence of survivors at Dachau poses no insurmountable problem, since the bulk of the inmates interned there were not Jewish. We should keep that significant yet often overlooked fact in mind: In 1945 none of the American liberators of German concentration camps believed that they had uncovered the physical machinery of a plan to murder all Jews, because the majority by far of the inmates they liberated were Gentiles.

A mainstream historian today can account for living men and women in Dachau even if he accepts the proposition that NS Germany planned the extermination of all Jews. A revisionist historian, who denies that NS Germany planned the extermination of all Jews, can also (and much more plausibly) account for Jewish survivors in the German camps: Hitler did not attempt to murder every Jew on the face of the planet, and the survival of the twenty percent of the inmates at Dachau and Buchenwald who were indeed Jewish proves it. If Hitler had wanted them dead, and if exterminating Jews was the central motive of his political career, they all would have been killed long before the Allies arrived. The Jewish survivors in the various camps therefore prove the revisionist thesis.

Falsehood #1, which amounts to the judaizing of Dachau, is necessary for Spielberg, because it preserves the concentration camp as distinctively Jewish symbolic territory. Spielberg, who rediscovered his Jewishness after studying the Holocaust, has no intention of commemorating German crimes by depicting non-Jews as the majority of the victims. He wants to retain the potently Jewish symbolism of a concentration camp, established in public consciousness by hundreds of Holocaust films and Holocaust memorials, and he is willing to ignore factual history to achieve his political aims. Falsehood #2 — the claim that Germans tried to exterminate Dachau’s inmates — is also necessary for Spielberg, because without it the death camp presented on our television screens would be reduced to an internment camp or even to a mere prison, ceasing to appear as a site for genocide. A nazi concentration camp not dedicated to genocidal mass killing would be a contradiction in terms.

We are thus prepared for Falsehood #3, which is the ideological culmination of the others. A final notice, which brings this episode of Band of Brothers to its conclusion, reads: “During the following months, Allied Forces discovered numerous POW, concentration, and death camps. These camps were part of the Nazi attempt to effect the ‘Final Solution’ to the ‘Jewish Question’. Between 1942 and 1945 five million ethnic minorities and six million Jews were murdered — many of them in the camps.”

Falsehood #3 — the “five million ethnic minorities” — is more complex than its two predecessors and requires a longer explanation.

In popular memory the Holocaust is the extermination of Six Million Jews. Any man on the street asked to put a numerical figure to the Holocaust’s victims will have a simple answer: Six Million. Yet at a more official level the Holocaust is really the extermination of Eleven Million: Six Million Jews plus five million “others,” even though those “others” are generally absent from the Holocaust’s public representations.

Many Holocaust museums, including the US Holocaust Memorial Museum (USHMM) in Washington, are officially dedicated to the Eleven Million. Unsurprisingly the Jews running the USHMM have blithely ignored an explicit mandate to that effect, secure in the knowledge that no politician would dare complain that the Museum is too Jewish and should diversify itself by sharing almost half its space with five million dead Gentiles. In theory, however, about half of the Holocaust is non-Jewish, and if the Holocaust were an affirmative-action employer, about half of all the Holocaust films and Holocaust museums and Holocaust educational programs would be devoted to non-Jews.

In Band of Brothers Spielberg elects, as an act of multicultural inclusion, to present the Holocaust as the extermination of the Eleven Million, not simply of the Six Million, because he wants to construct Dachau as an unmistakable embodiment of “racism.” He wants us to believe that Germans murdered, in camps like Dachau and elsewhere, Six Million Jews and five million other minorities as part of their deranged racial vision of the world, which required the physical extermination of various non-optimal racial types, not only Jews.

The liberation episode in Band of Brothers is thus appropriately entitled “Why We Fight,” indicating that the Americans who liberated the camps belatedly discovered an “anti-racist” justification for World War II in their horrific “confrontation with the Holocaust.” A White American in 1940 might not have known what “racism” could lead to — he might even have been a “racist” himself — but after he saw “racism” concretized in the camps in 1945, he knew what he had been unwittingly fighting to prevent. That, at any rate, is the lesson Spielberg hopes we will learn.

This formally inclusive anti-racism also provides an official rationale for the presence of the USHMM on the Mall in Washington, at the symbolic heart of American nationhood: “This museum belongs at the center of American life because America, as a democratic civilization, is the enemy of racism and its ultimate expression, genocide.” The Eleven Million are a more ecumenical and democratic statement of anti-racism than the Six Million, and they imply that not only Jews have a stake in the institutionalized commemoration of Jewish deaths.

The five million others are always dispensable, but they are, despite their virtual absence from public view, structurally useful to the Holocaust when it provides anti-racist lessons to multiracial America, because they prove that Holocaust commemoration is not simply a self-serving warning against the evils of anti-Semitism. If you think of yourself as a racial or an ethnic minority, then you too are included in the Holocaust, even though you may find yourself relegated to a few footnotes or (as in this case) to a single line at the conclusion of a television program that has otherwise deliberately excluded you.

Spielberg could have accomplished his educational objective by eliminating Falsehood #1 while retaining Falsehood #2. In other words, he could have visibly embodied the Eleven Million in a throng of emaciated European “ethnic minorities” milling about the camp awaiting liberation, with a few Jews wearing yellow stars sprinkled among them. Falsehood #2 could have been spoken by (say) a Pole or a Serb, a non-Jewish minority, a member of one of the ethnic groups whose victims (allegedly) comprise the five million.

Although Polish Holocaust survivors in speaking roles are likely too WASPish for the purposes of contemporary anti-racism, and although Jews hate Poles even more than they hate Germans, their visible presence would be a reasonable concession to the historical fact that most of the inmates at Dachau were Gentiles, many of them Poles and Catholics.

Band of Brothers would have remained, even with this gesture to multiethnic inclusion, an ideologically driven fiction, still falsely presenting Dachau as a place where Germans warehoused minorities whom they planned (when time and available ammunition permitted) to murder; yet it would have been spared the burden of one theoretically unnecessary lie, the lie that Dachau was filled with Jews.

Spielberg is not, however, interested in anti-racism alone, so the lie was politically imperative. He, like most Holocaust promoters, has little interest in generic anti-racism. He prefers a special kind of anti-racism, a Judeocentric anti-racism wherein his Jewish minority can stand for other minorities, whose literal presence then becomes optional. The Holocaust can be reduced to the Six Million in most public presentations, or enlarged (for the sake of multicultural inclusion) into the Eleven Million whenever Jews think it expedient.

Jews have successfully figured Jewish Holocaust survivors and Jewish Holocaust deaths into synecdoches for the results of “racism,” one part standing for the rest, so that other victims become semantically superfluous and need not be exhibited. It is a politically valuable symbolic structure that no activist Jew would willingly endanger, and hordes of White Holocaust survivors in a didactic version of Dachau are thus unthinkable.

This flexible structure has important practical consequences. A student being indoctrinated into the truths of multiracialism can learn his anti-racist lessons while contemplating only the Six Million, which is the normal educational practice in most Holocaust museums. “Because of its Jewish specificity,” Yad Vashem’s Avner Shalev argues, “[the Holocaust] should serve as a model in the global fight against the dangers of racism, anti-Semitism, ethnic hatred and genocide.” Jewish specificity is somehow equivalent to human universality, so through the symbolic magic of the Holocaust we can commemorate crimes against any given minority by commemorating German crimes against Jews.

If a Euro-American wants to rid himself of “racism” and learn tolerance for Blacks, he need only study German atrocities against Jehovah’s Chosen People, whose victims during the Holocaust serve, in the words of philosopher Paul Ricoeur, as “delegates to our memory of all the victims of history.” As the result of a process purportedly involving nothing extrinsic to the events of the Holocaust, nothing so vulgar as Jewish media power, Jewish Holocaust victims have come to signify all other racial victims from time immemorial down to the present.

Spielberg therefore presents the Eleven Million while dispensing with all visible evidence of any victims other than Jewish victims, a prerogative that the Holocaust entitles him to exercise. Indeed he gains the best of both worlds: He explicitly states the Eleven Million, signaling multicultural inclusion, while eradicating all Gentile camp inmates from the screen. His wildly unhistorical version of Dachau is an exact duplication of the ideological structure of an anti-racist Holocaust museum: Jewish victims stand for all other victims.

Yet in fact — and here we enter into the strange complexity of the Eleven Million — Spielberg’s multicultural deference to the five million others, Falsehood #3, is more historically inaccurate than his racial devotion to the Six Million Jews. For the Eleven Million are bogus, pure fantasy. If the five million others who form the Holocaust’s Gentile Auxiliary include all Allied civilians who died during the course of the war, the figure is far too low; if it means (as Spielberg intends) targeted ethnic minorities who perished in German concentration camps, it is far too high. (See Peter Novick, The Holocaust in American Life [Boston: Houghton Mifflin, 1999], 215–216.)

Although revisionists seek to reduce the Six Million to some smaller number, it remains a genuine result of mainstream scholarship, whether it is true or not. No revisionist, furthermore, denies that millions of Jews were killed by Germans or died in German concentration camps. The five million, on the other hand, are completely fictional and no Holocaust scholarship could ever account for their official recognition as co-victims with the Six. They were conjured up, on the basis of political expediency alone, by nazi-hunter Simon Wiesenthal in order to provide an emotional reason for non-Jews to commemorate the Holocaust, while retaining preeminent Jewish victimhood.

Five million dead Gentiles are simply one million victims fewer than Six Million dead Jews, and that elementary arithmetic is literally the source of the Eleven Million victims that the Holocaust is officially supposed to commemorate, an obligation honored more in the breach than the observance. So by paying occasional lip service to the five million, Jews are falsifying history; by regularly ignoring them, they are unintentionally respecting the historical record.

Since most Americans have probably never heard of the five million, who constitute only a small part of the Holocaust’s public mythology, we should not exaggerate their political significance. It is, however, worth noting the symbolic instability of this five million. Insofar as the five million are Gentiles they are us, our stake in the Jewish Holocaust, invented as a motive for our commemoration; insofar as they are “ethnic minorities” they are Other, not us, essentially surrogates for rainbow-coalition minorities, who can thereby be transported back into wartime history to teach anti-racist lessons.

In the five million we are supposed not only to see ourselves but also to see the potential victims our of “racism,” our reason for avoiding nazi-like racial self-assertion. A nonracialized interpretation of the five million would be useless for Holocaust lessons in racial tolerance; a five million comprised of powerless “ethnic minorities” provides an appropriate supplement to Judeocentric anti-racism.

Tens of millions of European deaths occurred in World War II, together with an incalculable number of casualties. Through Holocaust arithmetic they have all dwindled into one million less than Six Million, reduced to a symbolically ambiguous cohort of token Gentiles that Jews rarely even deign to exploit.

____________

See endnotes at the original article in Counter-Currents.

Tags History, Jewish problem (JP)

Audios Intelligence quotient (IQ) Neanderthalism Racial studies

The Bell Curve

The totalitarian system of political correctness in which we live has hidden from us the main reason why has crime grown so much in Mexico.

When Richard Herrnstein and Charles Murray, authors of The Bell Curve, published their study, with chapter 13 discussing the differences of intelligence quotient (IQ) between the various races, I was in Houston. Like thousands of other naïve westerners I swallowed the media claim that the science behind Herrnstein and Murray’s book was not solid. No, I didn’t read the book, even though by 1996 a Houstonian friend used to recommend it: the politically correct book-review at Scientific American had already brainwashed me.

Today, fifteen years after I believed the silly book-review of The Bell Curve that prevented me from reading it, I listened the YouTube clips on the actual content of the book, of which I will insert # 3, presently featured at The Occidental Observer:

[Note of February 21, 2014: the Thought Police has removed this instructive video from YouTube]

The information in clips #3 and #8 has been extended more recently by other authors who have written on the “Color of Crime,” or how people with lowest IQs are more prone to violence.

I do not agree with everything of the spoken introduction to The Bell Curve. In clips #6 and # 8 for example individualism is presented as the cornerstone upon which American culture must be built, and the book promotes a return to the egalitarian values of the founders of the United States as to how to stratify society.

However, even though if compared with white nationalists Herrnstein and Murray seem too cautious and even shy, their book has the merit of having brought a science spanning more than a century to the public eye. And if something can be inferred from IQ studies is that the explosion of crime at both sides of the Río Grande has to do with the type of people that the system has helped to breed geometrically: some blacks to the north and especially the slightly “mestized” Indians at the south.

Anyone willing to understand the crime rates in Mexico in recent decades, with all those ghastly beheadings and kidnappings, an unheard of phenomenon when I was a child, should become familiar with IQ studies. It is obvious that the calamity that many of us have suffered here down the South—I have been kidnapped twice in Mexico City—could have been avoided with a reverse social engineering policy of the very trendy currents of today.

Tags Mexico

Francis Parker Yockey

Excerpts of “The world in flames”

Post author By C .T.
Post date July 18, 2011
1 Comment on Excerpts of “The world in flames”

Recently at Counter-Currents I read Francis Parker Yockey’s “The world in flames”, published at the height of the Cold War, in 1961: eight months after this dense, brilliant intellectual was liquidated in what was probably a planned prison murder by the United States. No ellipsis added between unquoted paragraphs:

Francis Parker Yockey 1917 – 1960

A brief comparison is in order with the situation of 1946. In that year, America-Jewry controlled, in a political if not military, sense the entire Western Hemisphere. Since then, this preponderance of power vis-à-vis Russia has dwindled to a point where the Washington regime at this moment has no preponderance of power vis-à-vis Russia, but stands in an inferior power-position. The basic reason for the diminution of power is spiritual-organic. Power will never stay in the hands of him who does not want power and has no plan for its use. The more superficial and direct reason for the diminution of power was political incapacity on the part of the Zionists, or Washington regime as it is here interchangeably called.

A person who believes that the seizing of the apparatus of power—government, army, police, press, education—guarantees the continuance of power is a political non-entity. Yet the whole Washington regime believes this. In philosophy they are materialists and thus cannot ever understand that visible facts are only the manifestation of invisible spiritual movements.

To the extent that a people is materialistic in its religion and philosophy, it is non-revolutionary, but the Russians are completely non-materialistic, being completely dominated by feelings, and acting always from their feelings. Thus it was that the Russians, even without disturbing the Bolshevik governmental structure or ideology, effected a complete revolution and deprived the Jewish leadership of all power. The Jew in contemporary Russia is allowed to be a Jew, if he is first and foremost a Russian. In other words he is not allowed to be a Jew, and is being exterminated without physical violence.

In a spiritual sense, of course, the Washington regime are traitors to the United States and its people, but they have so defined the relationships that those who are loyal to the United States in a spiritual and political sense are regarded as traitors in a legal sense.

The Jewish-American entity is Jewish as respects its head, American as respects its body.

In view of the complete lack of spirituality, intellect, political awareness, and moral courage in the American population, the possibility of an American revolt against Jewish domination has been entirely omitted. Such a thing is only a possibility after America-Jewry suffers a thorough military defeat, and even then only if it is followed by large-scale economic disasters.

The American cinema is not anti-Russian, regardless of preparations for the Third World War. Compare this with the preparations for the Second World War, when this same cinema created many thousands of hate-Germany films, which it is still turning out.

When the Germans in Russia make some new technical advance, Eisenhower congratulates the Moscow regime. Roosevelt never congratulated Hitler on such occasions. The Russian flag is flown in the United States on all festive, “international” occasions. Never did the German flag appear, nor does it today. The fundamental ineradicable Jewish hatred of Germany appears in the fact that even the Germany they control directly is not permitted to sit among the United Nations, on a par with the other puppets.

But after this phase, the issue of victory remains undecided. The Jewish-American regime will not surrender, since the very existence of Jewry is at stake, and the whole United States and its population is there to secure the existence of Jewry.

What is the effect of Jewish-American bombardment of Russian cities? And what is the effect vice versa? The Russian is a peasant, whether or not he tills the soil. He is not city-oriented, even when he lives in the city. When the city is destroyed, little is destroyed, so he feels. The American, and a fortiori the Jew, is a megalopolitan, whether or not he lives in Megalopolis. When the city is destroyed, all is destroyed, so he feels. He who reads may draw his own conclusion at this point.

If this happens, an interesting new possibility opens up. In November 1918 Germany surrendered to the English-led coalition, consisting of England, France, Italy, Japan, China, India, Portugal, USA, etc. But after the surrender, England continued the blockade, a war-measure after the war. Since the war was over, this could not be called a means of destroying the enemy’s armed forces. It was solely a means of killing civilians, and in this blockade, continued until July 1919, a million people died of starvation in Germany. That which the Jewish-American-English-French forces did in Germany after the Second World War; destruction of industrial plants, and irrational plundering of natural resources in order to destroy them, could be equally well done by Russia after the Third World War: further destruction of cities, perhaps occupation (large armies might no longer be necessary) to destroy industry systematically, on the pattern used by American-Jewish forces in Europe 1945–1950. If there were no occupation, the forest areas could be destroyed by systematic bombardment, converting most of the North American Continent into desert. Speaking thus of political victory, it is clear that America-Jewry—under the conditions of 1960—must lose, and Russia must win.

It was not Russian cleverness which drove out Chiang from China, but the Jewish-American agent Marshall. Russia did not neutralize India—The Anglo-American troops there were withdrawn by order from Washington. Russia did not occupy Eastern Germany—America-Jewry gave it to Russia. Russian “successes”—except for its German-made rockets—are all the gift of the Washington regime. Jewish-American political stupidity is invincible. But the power-gifts which the Washington regime has made to Russia are not explicable entirely by simple stupidity, simple incapacity. There is the further factor at work that the Zionist Washington regime is on both sides of most power-questions in the world. Its sole firm stand is its fundamental anti-German position: Germany must be destroyed, its young men must be slaughtered.

[The Jewish-American entity] occupied Lebanon, then evacuated. It held back Chiang when from his island, he would have attacked China with whom the Washington regime was then at war. In Cuba it forbade exportation of arms to the loyal Batista and thus helped Fidel Castro; now it is committed to the overthrow of Castro.

It is a psychological riddle, decipherable only thus: the Zionists have two minds, which function independently. As Zionists, they are committed to the destruction of the Western Civilization, and in this they sympathize with Russia, with China, with Japan, with the Arabs, and as such they anathematize Germany, which is the mind and heart of the Western Civilization. As custodians of the United States, they must half-heartedly remain at least the technical and political domination of that Civilization even while destroying its soul and its meaning. In a word, they are working simultaneously for and against the Western Civilization. Quite obviously they are thus doing more damage than conferring benefit! If a commander of a fortress sympathizes with the enemy, but yet insists in defending the fortress rather than surrendering it, he has surely found the highest formula of destruction. Thus the newspaper tag of “East versus West” is meaningless. It is East versus East, with the West supplying the lives and treasure for destruction.

If Russia represents the Principle of Stupidity, then Zionism represents the Principle of Malice. Of course neither of the two is without the leading characteristic of the other, but stupidity reigns in Moscow, and Malice in Washington.

Tags Germany, Jewish problem (JP), United States