David Duke Interview
For many Whites, even those who are beginning to awaken to the increasingly hostile conditions around us, the name David Duke rings a giant Pavlovian bell. In "polite" discourse allusions to Duke function as a variant of Reductio ad Hitlerum, often accompanied by snide insinuations about pointy hoods, lynching, and - underneath it all - "anti-semitism".Whether or not you believe David Duke is mentally or morally defective, if you've never heard him speak for himself then please consider this invitation to judge for yourself. Listen to The Nationalist Report: Interview with David Duke, with Mishko Novosel and Mike Conner at Voice of Reason Broadcast Network.
I take special interest in a point Duke makes early on about what happens when someone finally comes to recognize and throw off a lifetime of anti-White guilt-tripping. For myself, part of that process resulted from reading and hearing the thoughts of certain purported madmen, Duke among them, and realizing that their positions are perfectly rational and reasonable. In this interview, which Duke describes as unlike any other he's given in a long time, he expresses one rational and reasonable thought after another.
Labels: david duke, vor, white nationalism
posted by Tanstaafl at 1/14/2011 05:21:00 PM
50 Comments:
My experience regarding Mr Duke has been exactly yours. I was especially impressed with his work Jewish Supremacism (which I picked up at a used book store for under $5!!!!). The reviews on Amazon are instructive, and illustrate quite well the rhetorical devices used against him.
Another recent Duke interview:
James Edwards of The Political Cesspool interviewed him on January 1st of 2011: Listen here.
(Past two years of Political Cesspool shows available here). For those who may not know, The Political Cesspool is syndicated on many "real" AM radio stations and makes the news from time to time. James Edwards has been on CNN, and so on.
One of the things Duke touches on in this interview (all too briefly) is the Republican nomination in 2012. He may run. His aim would be carrying some delegates at the convention, thus putting a nationalist/racialist voice on the national stage for the first time since...when? Wallace?
http://freenorthcarolina.blogspot.com/2011/01/george-washington-statue-hidden-in-box.html
The annual MLK observance at the state house in Columbia SC had an interesting twist this year. The event is held on the north side steps of the statehouse. Prominent at that location is a large bronze statue of George Washington. This year, the NAACP constructed a "box" to conceal the Father of His Country from view so that participants would not be offended by his presence.
See photo!
Certainly hope that Duke shall run in 2012!
He is reaching the age where this may be his last chance and also 'the stars seem to be aligning' for such a Racialist Run.
1.) Reaction to Black President and Attorney General who don't care about Black Panther Case.
2.) Continued horrible economy.
3.) Massive illegal immigration.
Massive illegal immigration is a huge problem but so is the under-the-radar importation of unknown and undercounted numbers of "legal" immigrants through various State Department/UN legal immigration programs which are all financed by US taxpayers.
For instance, increasingly haitian and somali "asylum seekers" are crossing the southern border into San Deigo.
www.refugeeresettlementwatch.wordpress.com
If you're not familiar with this site please go there and check out their extensive archives.
The biggest Pavlovian bell of all rings for Adolf Hitler. I bought a copy of Mein Kampf a few years ago. Though I haven't read the whole thing, I have read this chapter, excerpted by Chechar. Read and learn for yourself the thoughts of the most notorious and demonized man in history.
This Pavlovian phrase is so precise that I’ll start to use it as a hatnote in my next entries of Mein Kampf chapters. Isn’t it amazing how even Hitler’s stuff becomes plain commonsense once we leave the Matrix of political correctness?
I think people should study Hitler and Nazism, as there were many good things achieved. But readers will also note that the top level Nazis, including Hitler most of all, inflicted deliberately a scorched earth policy on the German people.
If Hitler is to be replicated to save us, then God help us all. Our goal is to preserve us and our people. Ultimately Hitler was a megalomaniac (just like Churchill and Roosevelt - none of those 3 any where near as pure evil as Stalin) who, faced with defeat, wanted the Germans to be erased from the face of the earth.
Hitlers logic ran that the world belonged to the strongest and that German defeat meant they weren't the strongest. Ergo, Germans should be annihilated.
btw, that comment wasn't a rebuke to anyone here. I have just noticed in my internet travels a reactionary, it seems to me, absolute attachment to Nazism.
I'd recommend pretty much all of David Irving's works, Albert Speers' "Inside the Third Reich", and William Shirer's "Rise and Fall of the Third Reich", plus the movie "Downfall" for starters.
Not that I'm an expert on the subject, I'm not. I need to completely read Mein Kampf and Chechar as per usual is doing good work bringing it to our attention.
I merely point out the facts about Hitler so that others not be swayed into being absolutist on the subject of Hitler and the Nazis.
I think we should be pointing out as well how barbaric Churchill was. That Churchill was very similar in many ways to Hitler. That Churchill by declaring war on Germany was the cause of the defeat of White people, not Hitler. Churchill by his actions brought the British empire to and end and worse, ushered in the age of anti-White totalitarianism we all suffer from today.
Just as Hitler attempted to implement Götterdämmerung on the Germans, so to did Churchill in his English way on his people. The difference is that the Allies "won". That is, Churchill won and we continue this false worship of him even today.
Pat Hannagan: "Ultimately Hitler was a megalomaniac who, faced with defeat, wanted the Germans to be erased from the face of the earth."
An excerpt from Wikipedia: "By late 1944, the Red Army had driven the Germans back into Central Europe and the Western Allies were advancing into Germany. Hitler realized that Germany had lost the war, but allowed no retreats. He hoped to negotiate a separate peace with America and Britain, a hope buoyed by the death of Franklin D. Roosevelt on 12 April 1945. (...)
[Hitler] ordered the complete destruction of all German industrial infrastructure before it could fall into Allied hands, saying that Germany's failure to win the war forfeited its right to survive. Rather, Hitler decided that the entire nation should go down with him. Execution of this scorched earth plan was entrusted to arms minister Albert Speer, who disobeyed the order."
Germany had forfeited its right to survive, the whole nation should go down with Hitler. But the article gives no specifics except an order to destroy the "German industrial infrastructure". My conclusion is that this is probably another lie about Hitler.
Point taken Tan and, like I said, it was just something on my mind as I was reading some other sites and then came here.
You're right of course and I totally agree.
I meant to say the other week thanks for the link. That is an excellent interview with Duke. That is the first time I'd ever heard him speak and he comes across as a compassionate man who simply loves his people and wants the best for them. And a key point he made is that we use tha language of our audience when speaking to them. It gave me encouragement.
Here's a great vid by Duke I haven't got all the way through yet. It urged me to look up Finkelstein's book on the Jewish holocaust which you can download a free internet version here.
I like these links to WN resources so keep 'em coming. Cheers mate.
This is the most recent video/documentary up by David Duke on his Youtube channel. It's a good one, nearly thirty minutes long.
I'll be doing a post on my recommended Youtube clips for White Nationalists some time today. There's a lot of gold on Youtube with a disappointing number of views.
Armor, Speer's autobiography goes into detail re Hitler's orders for scorched earth.
Speer may have been self serving in that he was trying to minimise his attachment to the Nazi party in his autobiography. But Speer's work is an historical source on the subject.
The movie Downfall, which I recommended is based on: "the books Inside Hitler's Bunker, by historian Joachim Fest; Until the Final Hour, the memoirs of Traudl Junge, one of Hitler's secretaries; portions of Albert Speer's memoirs Inside the Third Reich; Hitler's Last Days: An Eye–Witness Account, by Gerhardt Boldt; Das Notlazarett Unter Der Reichskanzlei: Ein Arzt Erlebt Hitlers Ende in Berlin (memoirs) by Doctor Ernst-Günther Schenck; and Soldat: Reflections of a German Soldier, 1936–1949 (memoirs) by Siegfried Knappe." (from Wikipedia)
I am nervous of using Wikipedia as a reliable source since it’s obvious that the wiki is The Enemy, as I state in my Wikipedia user page where I use my real name.
Anyway: idolizing Hitler is the last thing I’ve in my mind. The Irmin article pretty much summarizes what do I think of him.
Tan,
In considering the merits and demerits of National Socialism you must be willing to extend yourself further than merely considering the utility NS could have in defeating the Jews. In other words, there would come a time after which the Jews were removed from our lives, a time during which our lives would be lived out under National Socialism; but what life that? Is that the political system you would choose, given the choice, to live under? Is that the dispensation you would wish your children to live under? These are questions the "anti-White/pro-jew" frame cannot ultimately answer for you. They are existential questions and not a question of who does what to whom ("Who - whom?" as Lenin put it).
I take it that is what Pat Hannagan was getting after.
To put it another way, and in keeping with the lingua franca of this blog: There is, I think, a certain threshold beyond which to do what is "anti-jew" in defense of Whites is not "pro-White" but in consequence "anti-White" in that Whites would be harmed. For instance, who can honestly say that the extermination of the mentally ill and physically handicapped under NS was anything but a moral outrage? And what of the plan to extract living space for Germans at the expense of Slavs and to enslave the latter who were to be reduced to subliterate serfs put to work for the Herrenrasse? These are things that cannot simply be papered over. To embrace them as lamentable yet necessary evils is truly to have committed "suicide" in some moral sense. And if that is not "anti-White", then what pray tell is?
Germany had forfeited its right to survive, the whole nation should go down with Hitler. But the article gives no specifics except an order to destroy the "German industrial infrastructure". My conclusion is that this is probably another lie about Hitler.
The Allies were the ones who proceeded to demolish German industrial infrastructure in the wake of the military occupation of Germany. The Wiki article sounds like complete BS.
The only thing which really stopped the de-industrialization of Germany (not to mention the mass starvation of its people) was the realization by the soon-to-be NATO powers that Russia was no longer a friend, and that Germany could act as a suitable buffer zone between eastern and western blocs. This, on top of Robert Schuman's coal and steel integration plan rendered the initial US-led de-industrialization plan moot.
@ Who can honestly say that the extermination of the mentally ill and physically handicapped under NS was anything but a moral outrage? And what of the plan to extract living space for Germans at the expense of Slavs and to enslave the latter who were to be reduced to subliterate serfs put to work for the Herrenrasse? These are things that cannot simply be papered over. To embrace them as lamentable yet necessary evils is truly to have committed "suicide" in some moral sense. And if that is not "anti-White", then what pray tell is?
One of my two best friends got a Mongolic sister who ruined his life. I see nothing wrong with exterminating Mongolics if that’s done in a humane way. On the contrary: this is one of the values where the old Greek/Roman ethos was better than the moral grammar we got in Christendom. The Nietzschean NS men were right about revaluating such values and we better revaluate those values in our souls (cf. my preface to Conservative Swede’s worldview).
As to invading Russia, I think you are right here but from a purely strategic viewpoint (Napoleon’s blunder, General Winter, etc.). Hitler should have chosen Africa instead or the Arabic peninsula: a whole continent for the Aryan race. But at his time the oil reservoirs were known to be located in the enormous Soviet Union, not in Arabia. Furthermore, in The Gulag Archipelago I got the feeling that the Germans were almost the good guys and Stalin’s executioners [mostly Jews] the bad guys. I would not have objected a German victory on a Jewified and genocidal Russia even if that would imply committing genocide. From the military viewpoint, Hitler just had to wait for a decade or so until his Reich created the A-bomb (alas, he didn’t know how nuclear physics would revolutionize the world in the 1940s).
Hitler has been “the most tragic character that ever walked the earth”. Have you guys read one of the most fascinating articles published at Occidental Observer (available also in my blog, here)?
________
Since yesterday I have been unable to open the Counter-Currents page. Yes: I cleaned the cache, etc, but the page cannot be opened. Anyone of you experienced the same problem with C-C?
This comment has been removed by the author.
The demonization of Hitler means that we cannot dwell too long on the subject of Nazi Germany. The important thing is to stop the current policy of race-replacement. Even if there was no demonization of Hitler, I think that the Captain's idea of reviving Nazism is absurd. The only way someone can be a National Socialist is if he is a German living in Germany between 1920 and 1945. Even at the time, it is impossible that everyone in the Nazi party had the same views. And we have to make a distinction between what Nazi officials thought, and what policies were really implemented before the war and during the war. Many people in Europe and the USA had similar views to Hitler's about the necessity to protect their race. I think what's remarkable about Hitler is not his political views, but the fact that he took power and tried to translate his views into action. Today, we don't need any political theorist to tell us what must be done. It is obvious that we must stop immigration and try to expel the immigrants. It means that we must fight Jewish activism. But it is not the same as reviving Nazism. Most of us know little about Nazism in the first place. We mainly know what the mass media say.
Hitler had many theories about how a country should be run, and he put them in practice before the war. I think this is what the Captain is interested in. But when the war broke out, his priority was to win the war. Today, our priority is to save our collective existence. I have no idea how our countries should be run once we are out of this mess. Any social improvement that we work on today will be canceled by the rising tide of color. We must try to protect ourselves, but a grand plan to improve society is impossible at the moment. Hitler also had experience in creating a political organization and bringing it to power. But it happened in different circumstances and cannot be reproduced.
Captain: "who can honestly say that the extermination of the mentally ill ..."
It doesn't matter, as no one except you wants to revive "Nazism". But did it really happen, or is it anti-German propaganda? If it happened, did it happen as an isolated incident or as a consistent government policy? How many people were killed? At the time, most people didn't approve of abortion, and I cannot imagine them approving the murder of mentally ill people. How much resistance was there?
In the final analysis, even if the Nazis coldly killed 6 million mentally ill people + 6 millions Jews + 6 million Slavs, it doesn't mean that resisting race-replacement is wrong. So, it doesn't really matter. Even so, I hope the Nazis didn't kill too many people gratuitously. Of course, unlike me, Wikipedia and the Jewish media deeply want to believe that the Nazis deliberately killed millions of innocents. It is an unfriendly attitude.
I don't know exactly why I hope the Nazis were not monsters. The Jews would claim that it makes me a defender of the Nazis, and a neo-Nazi myself, which is absurd. I feel that I'm more like the Germans than like the Jews. I don't particularly want people like me to be monsters. I think the demonization of the Nazis is used to demonize white people by and large, including me.
I see nothing wrong with Captain’s efforts to rehabilitate National Socialism. NS will become pretty handy when democracies collapse and whites crave for a new paradigm (cf. Covington’s futuristic novels). But I agree with you: for decades allied propaganda has implanted viruses to our minds. See e.g., my last Mein Kampf entry where uncle Adolf discusses how American and English propaganda even infected the German minds, here.
"I see nothing wrong with Captain’s efforts to rehabilitate National Socialism."
If he is going to rehabilitate National Socialism, he shouldn't say that killing the mentally ill was an integral part of the nazi philosophy. The only possible way to rehabilitate National Socialism is to say that it was not about killing the Jews, the Slavs, and the mentally ill. But my country has a special law to deal with people who say that. In the USA, people may be fired from their jobs for saying that.
I'm glad for the stubbornness of the revisionists. I'm glad that they care for the truth. By going to jail, they prove that we are under Jewish domination. If we overcome that domination, the revisionists will have played their part. Personally, I'd rather spend my time complaining about the over-representation of Jewish immigration activists in the media.
"NS will become pretty handy when democracies collapse and whites crave for a new paradigm"
It's one thing to post excerpts from Mein Kampf on your blog to show that Hitler was not a raving lunatic. But you are not going to make NS into a popular model for the future. If you talk too much about a political movement that has been demonized, you will simply look crazy.
There are many lively discussions on the internet about the immigration problem. If half of that was replaced by discussions about Nazism, it would not be good for the anti-immigration cause.
@ “If you talk too much about a political movement that has been demonized, you will simply look crazy.”
That’s exactly why I mentioned Covington’s novels. He explains how to practice takiya on brainwashed whites by selling NS principles without NS costumes, swastikas, etc. (cf. the tricolor flags in my blog).
"selling NS principles without NS costumes"
What are those principles?
I’ll mention two among others. Uncle Adolf was the first head of a modern Western state who addressed the JQ in a brutally honest way, without euphemisms. He also deemed it necessary to create a large ethno-state for the Aryan people. The Northwest Front holds exactly the same. Exactly but without any swastika whatsoever.
You say that we must sell NS principles without the costumes and the swastikas, but you do exactly the contrary of what you preach.
I agree that the Jewish domination must stop, and that White people must have a territory of their own. But I wonder why you have to say that those ideas are NS principles. If you avoid swastikas, you should also avoid verbal references to NS. The idea of breaking the Jewish power and expelling immigrants doesn't naturally make me think of NS Germany.
No need to avoid verbal references to National Socialism when the Enemy harps on this issue 24 hours a day. We need to demonstrate that we have been brainwashed by the Enemy about Hitler and the so-called nazis (in the lines of the Irmin article linked above). Covington does not wear swastikas anymore, but like the late Lincoln Rockwell he is a pure NS child. I don’t have to wear a swastika to say: “Hey: do you know that Stalin’s Jews killed more innocent civilians than Himmler?” and start a discussion upon bare facts like those mentioned in Solzhenitsyn’s non-fictional books.
A couple of years ago I still believed the Enemy’s propaganda. The historical facts alone—and I don’t even mean revisionism—had been hidden from my view. But if a discussion unfolds honestly, the brainwashed man will be checkmated by the pure weight of the facts.
I almost never start talking about Hitler, etc. Instead, I mention the Jewish influence on the media, Solzhenitsyn’s "Gulag" and "200 Years Together", etc., until I manage to confront the acquaintance with a thoroughly novel approach to politics (IQ studies is also a good argument).
Why I am like a NS now? Because I believe religiously in the 14 words, or rather in my appropriation of those words: “THAT THE BEAUTY OF THE WHITE ARYAN WOMAN WILL NOT PERISH FROM THE EARTH”, and I always imagine a Germanic girl when thinking of it. You will be surprised to learn how many Mediterranean whites here down the South treasure the female Nordish looks (I for one want to cover almost the entire planet with this kind of phenotype).
Presently the old phrase “working towards the Führer” could be reinterpreted to mean that everything we do should lead toward a white revolution in western nations, like the one painted in the Northwest Quartet novels by a NS writer, even though he does not use costumes anymore.
Chechar and Armor,
I can't say I disagree with the bulk of the points you both have raised. To gainsay them would only serve captiousness, so I won't and can only say that in the main I agree.
Chechar writes:
"No need to avoid verbal references to National Socialism when the Enemy harps on this issue 24 hours a day."
Exactly. NS is part of the discussion whether we like it or not as the Jews will not let us hear the end of it. If they insist on attacking us on that front in perpetuity we will inevitably be forced to respond. How each man chooses to respond is a choice ultimately he will have to make for himself. Discussion of NS can aid to clarify each of our personal understanding of and response to NS.
Besides, no doubt some aspects of NS would be helpful in the moral and material improvement of our people and would thus be studied with profit.
"I see nothing wrong with exterminating Mongolics if that’s done in a humane way."
Respectfully, I cannot agree. As I conceive it, that would manifestly be an insult to our moral nature. It would prove in the end morally deforming and thus self-injurious.
What I want is exclusive living space for our race and to live therein in a manner as suits the nature of our people. This would entail individual rights as would enable the full blossoming of the creativity and individuality that are native to our people. (I think there is definitely the possibility of accommodating individualism as found in our people in a manner which is not pathological.) So far as non-Whites don't affect that, they can be left to their own devices.
"What I want is exclusive living space for our race and to live therein in a manner as suits the nature of our people. This would entail individual rights as would enable the full blossoming of the creativity and individuality that are native to our people. (I think there is definitely the possibility of accommodating individualism as found in our people in a manner which is not pathological.) So far as non-Whites don't affect that, they can be left to their own devices."
I take it Tan can endorse the above non-controversial statement of what it is we desire.
'The Jews hit us, we hit them back, and if we need to hit them with NS, then that's what we'll do!' Well, certainly. But hitting the Jews back, in a tit-for-tat ad infinitum, is not our goal. Our goal is to secure the existence of our people and to see them live on in perpetuity in a manner consistent with their (moral) nature.
This endeavor is ultimately about us and not about the Jews.
Another mythical Nazi crime:
Ditlieb Felderer - Charged, tried, convicted and jailed in Sweden. Vilified in the press. Forced to live in exile. Background and contribution: Felderer, at one time a prominent Jehovah's Witness, is known as an early researcher into the physical evidence in every major concentration camp in then Communist Eastern Europe. Felderer took over 30,000 photographs of every conceivable detail in the camps. He discovered that there was a swimming pool for the inmates in Auschwitz, modern hospital facilities, including a gynecological section, as well as an orchestra, live theatre, well-stocked library, and sculpting classes. He discovered the musical score of the "Auschwitz Waltz" in the secret archives accessible only with special permission. He found that an intimate role was played by Jehovah Witnesses in the camps, who cooperated with the SS-Administration, and he exposed the lie of the 27,000 Jehovah's Witnesses killed. (On his initiative and insistence, the inflated number was reduced to 270). For his Revisionist work, Felderer was excommunicated - that is, drummed out of the Jehovah Witnesses' sect. He has been persecuted by the Holocaust Enforcers ever since.
@ “Respectfully, I cannot agree. As I conceive it, that would manifestly be an insult to our moral nature. It would prove in the end morally deforming and thus self-injurious.”
As usual the current photo of a Wikipedia article on Mongolism is deceiving. When I wrote that phrase I had in mind my friend’s sister: the most severe type of Down Syndrome that exist. Besides being almost a dwarf, her IQ was so low that she couldn’t leave home a few yards away without becoming lost. I mean: her IQ was even lower than the intelligence of a dog (no offence: I am describing what I saw). Of course, she was unable to speak.
My friend inherited the burden from his late parents. I told my friend that if I had to carry such a burden I would take the measures that both Greeks and Romans took in such cases.
Like the NS men, I oppose abortion for Aryans and even contraception for Aryans. But euthanizing my friend’s sister would not be an insult to my moral nature. (She died a few years ago after a surgical operation anyway.)
White people need to have their own countries. But euthanasia is a separate question. In fact, many leftists like very much the idea of euthanasia. Conservatives, not so much. If you take position for NS and euthanasia at the same time, everyone will run away from your blog.
@ “If you take position for NS and euthanasia at the same time, everyone will run away from your blog.”
I have never written about euthanasia in my blog and I don’t plan to write on that subject. Anyway, I don’t care the least bit if they run away. The way I understand my blog is as a sort of archive for the most didactic articles I encounter in the internet.
At any event, a specifically Greek and Roman ethos on genetically-defective people is nowhere near the Left. On the contrary: Leftist lemmings freak out whenever I talk about revaluating liberal values in some ways not even back to the 1950s or before the French Revolution, but in other aspects to the hard Roman ethos.
Another family unrelated with my friend cited above had a Mongolic member. She was committed and, since (I presume) was abused in the asylum she constantly lost her temper. The physician recommended lobotomy and the family consented.
I do NOT agree with mutilating any brain, even with the worst sort of behaviors. NS-like euthanasia to such poor woman strikes me as far less questionable from the moral sense than outright lobotomy or continue to abuse the Mongolic woman in the asylum.
With this exception I usually never write about this stuff. It is just that my moral standards are so absolutely alien to the people of the culture where I’m living for the moment that sometimes I feel as a Martian here.
I don't believe NS to be a stable political system capable of enduring unto the ages. Even assuming Germany had won WWII, NS would almost certainly have undergone liberalizing reforms eventually. The initial intensity of NS could not have been maintained in the long run as it is not in keeping with the natural, baseline behavioral proclivities of our race, particularly our individualism that bristles under the heavy hand of authority.
The utility of NS is that it is a Hail Mary pass into the end-zone that is almost certainly likely to connect with a receiver if executed correctly. It can win the game, and quickly, rendering all prior setbacks moot. But one cannot expect to have a winning season if the only play in the play-book is the Hail Mary. Our team demands a full complement of plays in order to make it a winning team and a happy team. The mindset that says, "We've got to beat the Jews! Nothing works against the Jews like the Hail Mary. Tear up the rest of the play-book and only run the Hail Mary!", is ultimately a myopic one.
Chechar, what I think you may be missing here is that it is *love* families have for their mentally and physically handicapped members that prevents them from disposing of said as so much offal. It is this love that would be dealt a grievous injury were the State to mandate the liquidation of their loved ones. (A hideous crime that any decent man would fight to the bone to prevent.) Insofar as NS as historically incarnated demanded that it can only be said to have been in error.
I understand. The clicking together of shiny boots, the rolling of Panzer divisions to swift and mighty victors, the towering neoclassical architecture on an unprecedented scale - all that is quite impressive and tends to capture the imagination, particularly of literary types. To believe - to know! - that not only can we merely survive but we can also be great again. But there is more to life than all that.
Captain,
As far as I know, the NS did not mandate the liquidation of, e.g., Mongolic children. Some parents voluntarily sent them to the asylums where the nutritional conditions were poor and they died prematurely. I have investigated psychiatry for some years and discovered that exactly the same happened in other Western countries. The difference is that the NS men spoke honestly about it while our countries paid lip service to the culture’s mores.
If I were Mongolic I would prefer the lot I’d have got at NS Germany that the abuse that those who take care of those people report that happens ubiquitously in those institutions. I don’t see that maintaining a defective person alive has anything to do with love and everything to do with axiological cowardice. The poor life that my best friend got with his sister is living proof of that. In this aspect, and however harsh it may sound to Christian sensibilities, “neo-Christianity”—i.e., modern secular liberal—values must be reverted back to Greco-Roman mores. At the very least, I am not obliged to subscribe to neo-Christian standards (cf. the article of Con Swede linked above).
@ “...But one cannot expect to have a winning season if the only play in the play-book is the Hail Mary.”
NS wasn’t merely a tactic to solve the JP. It was a long-term strategy, a thousand-year Reich, to revive the Aryan spirit (the latest article I have republished in my blog, “Rome vs. Jerusalem”, explains it all). These days I have been listening Wagner’s Parsifal. You have to be imbued with that music in your mind to understand both Aryanity and the NS geist: the diametrically opposite of the degenerate, anti-music of today.
It is a difference in nature that separates the men of the North.
Tacitus:[The Germani] hold it shameful to kill any unwanted child."
Anonymous: I am absolutely against infanticide of non-defective children (Obama is a madman who wants to reintroduce barbaric infanticide of non-defective children in the West). I have written long, academic-like articles on the subject. And no: before Christianity the Nordic people, Germans included, killed non-defective children just as Southerners did. Cf. my fully referenced article.
Biologist JBS Haldane once jokingly put it, he would lay down his life for two brothers or eight cousins. It must now be revised. He will lay down his life for his two brothers and eight cousins if they do not possess an extra 21st chromosome.
If altruism for one's kin and family is so easily derailed how can Salter's concept of ethnic nepotism ever be adopted? His new book, On Genetic Interests: Family, Ethnicity, and Humanity , (but only if you're not a defective). What does it say for loyalty to family when a brother or a parent cannot selflessly commit to their own blood...better to kill the defecto at birth and feed it to the other children...sad, cowardly people.
I have to say that more or less (if I understood well what he says) I agree with Chechar.
Today we have turned from the normal humane compassion toward the handicapped to an institutionalized worshipping of everything that is biologically outside the norm. The consequences are so bad, that the first victims are the handicapped themselves (in PC translation, "people with disabilities") and their families.
I've been following for a while the debate regarding autism. Autism is so glamorized in MSM and Hollywood movies, that some activists talk about "an autistic culture" and they push the theory that autists are undiscovered geniuses who should be left as they are, no need for a cure and an effective treatment. Usually they present a minority with a slight form of the disease and in most cases children, because the cuteness of the children hinder us to see the adult autists with diapers, with violent and criminal impulses toward the members of their own families, unable to take care of themselves (which means more than 90% of the handicapped).
Somehow, the glamorized version of the physically and mentally handicapped resembles the special protection offered to the minorities, like that image of the Negroes in American TV series as rocket scientists and the true geniuses behind any important invention of humanity delivered during Black History Month. I'm not saying that Blacks are handicapped, I'm saying that the mental glamorizing PC mechanism is the same. The more they are outside the civilized norms of behavior and abilities, the more they are worshiped by the establishment.
"Today we have turned from the normal humane compassion toward the handicapped to an institutionalized worshipping of everything that is biologically outside the norm."
No, you are projecting your own interpretation onto what Chechar wrote. Chechar is, has I implied, a "literary type," (as is Greg Johnson, as is Wintermute), so this is how he will naturally relate to racialism. Nothing wrong with that, as far as it goes. But I take it you cannot overlook the glaring contradiction between "normal humane compassion" as you conceive it and killing handicapped infants in accordance with "Greco-Roman mores."
Captain,
I believe Armance read me accurately. And incidentally I feel uncomfortable with being only a “literary type”. I prefer action in the real world. Real action I mean: not the OD activism kind. I would rather be Alexander than Homer, or the (fictional) Turner who dropped an A-bomb on the Pentagon than Wm. Pierce.
@ "normal humane compassion"
It is precisely compassion what moves me toward NS. Above I said that if I were a Mongolic person—remember: those who take care of them have told me that they are, sooner or later, invariably abused by their own families—, I would prefer to be euthanized than living with an eternal disability. How Christian and neo-Christian (liberalism) mores have ruined the lives of those who maintain these people at home is something I have observed in non-blood relatives and in the cases of friends I recounted above. Maintaining such person alive is a self-imposed cross which burden they carry all of their lives.
I know that there are Christians in the nationalist movement. So there were in the NS movement. But when the world was saner even some German Christians realized that they needed to breed only normal offspring for the Reich. Pierce and his National Alliance, Johnson at C-C and Guessedworker at Majority Rights have complained a lot about the ill-effects that Christianity wrought to the white race. Even the rustic southerner Jim Giles has noticed it in his broadcasts.
I am curious if you have read the preface to an entry in my blog, linked above?:
/Quote:
As far as I understand Con Swede, the current suicidal Zeitgeist in the West has roots in Christian and neo-Christian (i.e., post-Enlightenment) axiology.
While Con Swede gives us the big, meta-perspective picture, activists in the counter-jihad movement, whether Christians or neo-Christian secularists, are myopic.
Con Swede’s point can best be summarized in his reply to my question, quoted way below: Why pick on Western Christian Civilization when all of this suicidal mess seemed to come just after the 1960s?
Con Swede answers that an amalgamation of Christian and secular axiological standards produced the runaway demographics in the Third World. Today’s Muslim migration into Europe is but the epiphenomenal tip of the iceberg of the deranged altruism in Western morals that started in Christianity and which was washed out, but ironically strengthened by, secular humanists after the Enlightenment.
Therefore, after the world collapses because of our stupid axiology Con Swede predicts an Umwertung aller Werte, a term that R. J. Hollingdale, the Penguin Books translator of Nietzsche translates as “revaluation of all values”. Con Swede and other GoV-ers see the forthcoming “end of the world as we know it” as catastrophic as the fall of Rome.
Nonetheless, Con Swede in particular is very optimistic. Badly hurt but phoenix-like, later in this century the westerners will not only revert to the ethical values before the 1960s, but in other aspects to the values cherished by us before World War I and even before the French Revolution and Christendom (both Con Swede and I admire the hard ethos of the ancient Romans).
After the current paradigm collapses, people in the Third World should be left to die—as they were left to die due to natural causes (epidemics, hygienics, infant mortality, etc.) before the deranged altruism took hold of the Western psyche. Otherwise westerners only worsen the suffering of the billions of people in the Third World. For the current meta-ethical standards, the mere thought of this proposal is monstrous. Con Swede argues that the real monstrosity is to allow these poor bastards to breed into runaway poverty and misery. To boot, this situation creates hordes of “orcs” that have invaded our Western soil, including Muslim jihadists.
Chechar,
It is precisely eugenic abortion which can and does eliminate the defective in a manner that is not a monstrosity. Yet this, which would achieve the eugenic ends you seek in a manner that is more plausibly "humane," you would outlaw. No disrespect intended, but your thinking is fuzzy on (at least) this issue - to say the least. But that is the very point in having these discussions, is it not? To arrive at mutual clarity.
What makes you think that I want to outlaw eugenic abortion for whites?
Um, let me see here...oh yeah, this:
"I oppose abortion for Aryans and even contraception for Aryans."
Of course: I had in mind non-defective white children. NS Germany only allowed abortion for non-whites, which strikes me as the most commonsensical policy. But this has little if anything to do with the pro-Life movement as understood by conservatives today.
Hey Tan, you NS or what? Unless you are of predominantly Germanic ancestry (such as my self) I don't see why you would be. Cuz, I take it you understand, NS was all about "what is good for Germans." And as for the rest? They could submit to this hegemony, like it or not. That is the cold reality of the situation, whatever "literary" filter our latter-day interpreters care to filter the real deal through.
It’s true that, strictly speaking, a Francoist couldn’t have been a national socialist. But they were good friends.
When my father studied music composition in Madrid in the 1940s, the hotels’ rooms had to hold a copy of Mein Kampf besides the bed (just as today in American hotel rooms you find copies of the King James Bible). I have some cousins and aunts that look like pure Nordish type (skull structure) with blue eyes, blond hair and a skin pigmentation whiter than mine even if they are of Iberian white ascendancy.
If the Northwest Front migration becomes a reality, every white person whether Mediterranean or Nordic would be considered national socialist if they embrace NS.
Chechar wrote:
I have some cousins and aunts that look like pure Nordish type (skull structure) with blue eyes, blond hair and a skin pigmentation whiter than mine even if they are of Iberian white ascendancy.
Here is an interesting site on the racial anthropology of the Spanish people (in Spanish), by region of Spain.
Racial type in Spain common among Spanish aristocrats.
Thanks! I looked at the site. My ancestors came from Catalonia. Two of those girls look like pure Nordic type and all of them are beautiful (#5 represents the best of the gracile-type of Mediterraneans).
Post a Comment
<< Home