A response to Joel Davis's letter to Keith Woods
That is why we MUST place ourselves alongside Russia as equal partners in the struggle for this freedom which means everything to us. - Dr. Joseph Goebbels
Earlier this week, Keith woods put out a piece Critical of Joel Davis, where he argued against Joel’s embrace of National Socialism, and that efforts to rehabiliate nazism is counter productive to the nationalist cause. On March 10th Joel responded and argued that National Socialism is the ONLY ideology that serves nationalism, that all others have only temporary affinity with nationalism and “ultimately serve other core ideas” . He argues that” national socialism represents biological racialism, folkishness, anti-egalitarianism and the existential view of life as struggle “. He claims to whole heartedly reject Marx as a perversion of Hegel, among a number of other claims. In this article I am not going to address every point, instead I firstly aim to prove that National Socialism in no way has monopoly on nationalism. That National Bolshevism in particular has an equal, or perhaps greater claim to Nationalism and the same type of state that National Socialism claimed it wanted, a totalitarian organic social organizing of a people along Volkish lines, and this equal or greater claim cannot be denied, as National Socialism’s origins lie in National Bolshevism, and National Socialism started as another variant of National Bolshevism that evolved into an attempt to compromise with the liberal-conservative order, and capitalism, and this compromise is why it failed, so not only is it not necessary to resurrect National Socialism, but doing so will simply repeat the same mistakes, thus guaranteeing failure, again. Secondly, That many Nazis, even at the very top had affinity for National Bolshevism, and that rather then being anti-egalitarian, on the contrary National Socialism has its origins in a kind of racial communism and an egalitarianism practiced only intra-nationally. Joel invokes National Socialism as the leading form of Third positionism, yet we see during the interwar period within the NSDAP, an affinity for Nationalist communism, and post war Third positionism largely openly aligned with communism against liberalism, particularly when we look at high ranking members of the NSDAP who survived the war and continued the struggle, greatest among them being General Otto Remer. following up with that thought, And continuing to the logical conclusion of the aforementioned pro-soviet ideological trend of the post war Third Positionists I will thirdly, aim to show that aligning with the neo-Soviet, illiberal world order, heirs to the Legacy of the Soviet Union, is the natural solution to liberalism, and can provide us with the desired outcome, but without the baggage, as National Socialism is, in a particular way, counter productive to our cause, as Keith Woods argued.
Joel argues that National Socialism is the only authentic “Nationalism”. That there has been “Nationalist liberalism” such as the early United States, or Australia under White Australia. There has been Communist movements that invoked Nationalism, -Ceausescu, the Somalian Communist uprising, the Pashtun-Aryan ultranationalism of Afghanistan, the Derg of Ethiopia, Enver Hoxha in Albania, Milosevic in Serbia/Yugoslavia, and last but not leas Pol Pot and the incredible Juche idea of the Great Leader’s Kim il Sung, Kim Jong Il, and Kim Jong Un. Yet he argues in all these cases Nationalism fell by the wayside because of affinity to other ideas that competed with nationalism for the spotlight. Is this really the case though ? because National Socialism died, while for example the Juche idea still rules North Korea.
What is National Socialism ? quite simply it was a form of fascism that arose in interwar Germany that was deeply effected by the Volkisch movement, and Scientific racism. German, Volkish Fascism. Like Italian Fascism, National Socialism began as as a “left wing” REVOLUTIONARY movement Fascism itself, began as an offshoot of a Marxist project Mussolini was on. Before fascism, “THE RIGHT” was associated with reaction, and the dichotomy of revolution vs reaction, left vs right, and in true Hegelian fashion, the possibility of a synthesis.
Reaction, Conservatism the right, vs Revolution, and the left. Its important to understand these terms, Conservatism and reaction are “the right” While revolution, and change are the left. A reactionary seeks to return to a previous state or status quo, often resisting change. For example, someone wanting to restore traditional values in society is reactionary. In contrast, a revolutionary advocates for significant change or upheaval, aiming to create a new system or way of life. People often try to suggest that “tradition” is the purview of conservatism, but Evola, a radical traditionalist is someone I would consider revolutionary. During the pre-war era, as National Socialist Germany and Fascist Italy were remaking society, Evola wrote a book, desribing his hope for Nazi Germany, and the kind of change that would take place, the name of that book is “Pagan Imperialism”. He hoped, that Nazi Germany and Fascist Italy, rather then working to re-establish the status quo or achieve the goals of conservatives, and “protect society” from revolution and liberalism, that they would Create a brand new type of society, a Pagan (as in culturally pagan, warrior brotherhoods, a new type of warrior aristocracy etc. ) Empire built on blood and conquest and war. This desire to create an entirely new society, often built on the principles of an idealized mythical past, rather then the traditionally social conservative desire to protect existing values from change,,,, to remake the nation. Its called Palingenesis, or palingenetic rebirth. And it is the defining feature of fascism. Its what makes Fascism different then conservatism, or nationalism.
The fires of revolution were lit in France. There are many great sources for understanding of what happened in revolutionary France. Comte Arthur De Gobineau and his associate Ludwig Woltman, believed that the revolution was a race war, a rebellion of the Latino-Gallic race led by the Semitic race, against the Germanic nobility. Woltman interestingly, while one of the original scientific racists, a hardened Nordicist and racially focused anthropologist…. was also a communist with a unique racialist and Nordicist interpretation of Marxism that had the Nordic race fill the role of the Proletariat, the producers of both material wealth and civilization while the jew was the bourgeois, who through maniuplation of curreny and Usery steals the Nordic Aryans wealth, more on him later…. Kalergi of the famous Kalergi plan, says in practical idealism that modern history beginning with liberalism and the enlightenment was a conflict between the Nobility of the sword, a bloody handed Germanic warrior elite that ruled all European civilization, and the urban bourgeois, the dam holding back Urbabuty furst sprung a leak with the Americans, the revolution became a metaphysical force effecting all of Europe during the french revolution, replacing the warrior aristocracy with a new cosmopolitan caste, the rise of Napoleon changed its course, the old aristocracy had lost its virtue and racial quality under the ancien regime and the French revolution was the bourgeois taking power. But Napoleon and a reinvigorated, racially healthy and uncorrupted subsect of the warrior caste seized control of the revolution, but to heal the world of the warrior caste, not destroy it. The bourgeois revolution had already been very jewish, Napoleon’s radical beliefs turned the jews against him fully, and represented the first great, international flexing of jewish muscle, and set Europe on the course for, as Kalergi put it, the jews to become the new nobility of the west.
Royalist France, had legal slavery, but interracial sex was commonplace especially in the colonies. The jew was more or less free to make a living as a he saw fit. France was a “nation” of regions, with nothing, or very little in common. The french revolution itself was an orgy of blood against the aristocracy, all manner of sexual perversions, a cult that declared there was no God, that became so vile, so perverse and so orgiastic that even bloody Robbespierre, the man who ordered blondes hunted because they might be nobles, was forced to ban it and replace it with a Deist culture (Deism is the belief that God exists, but he acts through nature and does not directly interfere with mankind).
Then Napoleon took control of the revolution, made himself Emperor. But rather then Emperor of France, he called himself Emperor of the French, and he set about forging a common french identity and ethnicity. before Napoleon, in France your region was most important. Frankish and Norman Nobles all the around. Basques and Italian like Occitans and Provencal’s in the South. Celtic Bretons and Normans in the North. Bugundy shared a common heritage with the Germans, Dutch, and Flemish, Anjou with the Anglos, and Alsace-Lorraine with the Germans. all these were forged into one common identity under Napoleon. Whats more, he inisted on a racialization of citizenship. He banned black Africans including as slaves from coming to mainland France. He outlawed interracial sexual relations. He created a NEW Nobility, the “nobility of service” or “napoleonic Nobility, largely derived from the officer corps and military heroes. He “freed” the jews, in 3 decrees culminating in the one, the final decree, known as “the infamous decree that turned the Jews especially the british Rothschild’s into his arch enemy . The infamous decree : emancipated the jews. Banned them from working jobs in Finance, education, or the news. It ordered the jews to get real jobs and become farmers and craftsmen. He cancelled all loans that were owed to Jews, banned jews from loaning money or charging interest. He turned all the jews against him, and Lord Rothschild in England personally got involved in his deat. loaning money to all the memebers of the continental alliance, he personally paid for Lord Wellington’s armies of spanish mercenaries, and he had a network of carrier pigeons constructed to follow Napoleon’s armies and report their movements, they methods were instrumental in his Defeat. But Napoleon represented the first synthesis of reaction and revolution, the first Nazbol.
As we examine fascism, we see the same left wing revolutionary fervor, and commitment to Palingenesis. Mussolini credited Sorel as his greatest influence
Sorel was a Marxist ideologue, who tried to unite the extreme right and extreme left in France. He believed in the power of national myth, and desired to use violence to achieve palingenesis : A national rebirth. He believed that Marxism could be used, basically, to turn the clock backwards. He desired class war to create the conditions for a new warrior caste, that would eliminate the bourgeoisie for good, while neither right nor left, he considered himself a Marxist and was influenced by left-wing Marxism, he emphasized the importance of direct action and the empowerment of the nation’s working class through class war. The decidely national character of Sorel’s dreamed of revolution was an area he broke with Orthodox Marxism, as he did not believe in a international proletariat, but the workers of a nation, whose identity would be tied to a nation organically. He believed that revolutions should be driven by violent,collective action, with the general strike a centerpiece. He also believed in Palingenesis, and that the revolution should be part of a powerful national myth with a heroic character to inspire unity and commitment among the whole nation. In Sorel's view, the warrior caste—individuals embodying discipline, courage, and dedication inspired by the medieval warrior aristocracy of knighthood—Should play the leading role in revolutionary societies rather then the proletariat. Instead the warrior caste would inspire and galvanize the masses and provide necessary leadership during violent revolution and class war leading to a national rebirth.
Sorel also expressed a complex relationship with monarchism, seeing potential in strong, unifying authority post-revolution. He believed that a monarch could embody national ideals and inspire collective action, thus serving as a stabilizing force in society after class struggles have led to desired reforms. He envisioned a dynamic royal authority that could align with revolutionary goals while addressing the needs of the working class. the Monarch/supreme leader would be the Commander of the warrior caste, and protector of the working class, while being a living embodiment of the ideals of the nation, and his bloodline would be the eternal guardians of the revolution.
All of these influences, I would call National Bolshevism, even if the name had not yet entered the discourse, and they are responsible for National Socialism, so how can National Socialism have a SOLE claim to Nationalism if that is the case ? Joel Says it is because National Socialism has no affinity for anything but the nation and is anti-egalitarian. But was it ? lets take a look at the Nazi 25 point plan, as you read it, consider National Communism, and why it would be any different ? Shortly we will be examining the beliefs of some of the highest ranking Nazis, and we will see that they themselves knew there was no real difference. Mussolini in fact had called Stalinism, “the triumph of Slavic fascism”.
25 point program of the NSDAP, numbers 7 through 20
7. We demand that the State shall above all undertake to ensure that every citizen shall have the possibility of living decently and earning a livelihood. If it should not be possible to feed the whole population, then aliens (non-citizens) must be expelled from the Reich.
8. Any further immigration of non-Germans must be prevented. We demand that all non-Germans who have entered Germany since August 2, 1914, shall be compelled to leave the Reich immediately.
9. All citizens must possess equal rights and duties.
10. The first duty of every citizen must be to work mentally or physically. No individual shall do any work that offends against the interest of the community to the benefit of all.
Therefore we demand:
11. That all unearned income, and all income that does not arise from work, be abolished.
Breaking the Bondage of Interest
12. Since every war imposes on the people fearful sacrifices in blood and treasure, all personal profit arising from the war must be regarded as treason to the people We therefore demand the total confiscation of all war profits.
13. We demand the nationalization of all trusts.
14. We demand profit-sharing in large industries.
15. We demand a generous increase in old-age pensions.
16. We demand the creation and maintenance of a sound middle-class, the immediate communalization of large stores which will be rented cheaply to small tradespeople, and the strongest consideration must be given to ensure that small traders shall deliver the supplies needed by the State, the provinces and municipalities.
17. We demand an agrarian reform in accordance with our national requirements, and the enactment of a law to expropriate the owners without compensation of any land needed for the common purpose. The abolition of ground rents, and the prohibition of all speculation in land.
18. We demand that ruthless war be waged against those who work to the injury of the common welfare. Traitors, usurers, profiteers, etc., are to be punished with death, regardless of creed or race.
19. We demand that Roman law, which serves a materialist ordering of the world, be replaced by German common law.
20. In order to make it possible for every capable and industrious German to obtain higher education, and thus the opportunity to reach into positions of leadership, the State must assume the responsibility of organizing thoroughly the entire cultural system of the people The curricula of all educational establishments shall be adapted to practical life. The conception of the State Idea (science of citizenship) must be taught in the schools from the very beginning. We demand that specially talented children of poor parents, whatever their station or occupation, be educated at the expense of the State.
21. The State has the duty to help raise the standard of national health by providing maternity welfare centers, by prohibiting juvenile labor, by increasing physical fitness through the introduction of compulsory games and gymnastics, and by the greatest possible encouragement of associations concerned with the physical education of the young.
Nationalization of companies, confiscation of land, a state that has a duty to provide for the welfare of its people. No interest. no rent, profit sharing in all large industries. old age pensions. care for mothers.
What is anti-egalitarian about this ? If I told you it was a communist parties platform, you would believe it. and Infact, the majority of members of the NSDAP, were originally communists, the main competition for the NSDAP in the elections was not the mainstream parties, conservatives, liberals, social democrats. It was the communists, in just a moment we will dive deeper into this.
Eventually the NSDAP, around the time of the night of love knives, reached a point where Hitler made a conscious decision to purge the extreme elements from the party. The Northern Prussian faction, including Goebbels, the Strasser Brothers, and Rohm.
Rohm, despite the myths around it, was not a homosexual. thats completely made up. It was rumors created by the communist party. The Communists and the Nazis had settled into a battle of name calling. The Nazis called the DKP jewish puppets, the DKP called the nazis homosexuals.
Rohm, and the rest of the Northern faction, believed in a “stab in the back” theory, which suggested the German industrial barons had along with the jews, betrayed Germany and led to its defeat.
So the Prussians advocated for a “second revolution”
Many SA "storm troopers" had working-class origins and longed for a radical transformation of German society.[48] They were disappointed by the new regime's lack of socialistic direction and its failure to provide the lavish patronage they had expected.[49] Furthermore, Röhm and his SA colleagues thought of their force as the core of the future German Army, and saw themselves as replacing the Reichswehr and its established professional officer corps.[50] By then, the SA had swollen to over three million men, dwarfing the Reichswehr, which was limited to 100,000 men by the Treaty of Versailles. Although Röhm had been a member of the officer corps, he viewed them as "old fogies" who lacked "revolutionary spirit". He believed that the Reichswehr should be merged into the SA to form a true "people's army" under his command, a pronouncement that caused significant consternation within the army's hierarchy and convinced them that the SA was a serious threat.[51] At a February 1934 cabinet meeting, Röhm then demanded that the merger be made, under his leadership as Minister of Defence.[52]
This horrified the army, with its traditions going back to Frederick the Great. The army officer corps viewed the SA as an "undisciplined mob" of "brawling" street thugs, and was also concerned by the pervasiveness of "corrupt morals" within the ranks of the SA. Reports of a huge cache of weapons in the hands of SA members caused additional concern to the army leadership.[52] Unsurprisingly, the officer corps opposed Röhm's proposal. They insisted that discipline and honor would vanish if the SA gained control, but Röhm and the SA would settle for nothing less. In addition the army leadership was eager to co-operate with Hitler given his plan of re-armament and expansion of the established professional military forces.[50]
In February 1934, Hitler told British diplomat Anthony Eden of his plan to reduce the SA by two-thirds. That same month, Hitler announced that the SA would be left with only a few minor military functions. Röhm responded with complaints, and began expanding the armed elements of the SA. Speculation that the SA was planning a coup against Hitler became widespread in Berlin. In March, Röhm offered a compromise in which "only" a few thousand SA leaders would be taken into the army, but the army promptly rejected that idea.[53]
On 11 April 1934, Hitler met with German military leaders on the ship Deutschland. By that time, he knew President Paul von Hindenburg would likely die before the end of the year. Hitler informed the army hierarchy of Hindenburg's declining health and proposed that the Reichswehr support him as Hindenburg's successor. In exchange, he offered to reduce the SA, suppress Röhm's ambitions, and guarantee the Reichswehr would be Germany's only military force. According to war correspondent William L. Shirer, Hitler also promised to expand the army and navy.[54]
Although determined to curb the power of the SA, Hitler put off doing away with his long-time ally. A political struggle within the party grew, with those closest to Hitler, including Prussian premier Hermann Göring, Propaganda Minister Joseph Goebbels, and Reichsführer-SS Heinrich Himmler, positioning themselves against Röhm. To isolate Röhm, on 20 April 1934, Göring transferred control of the Prussian political police (Gestapo) to Himmler, who he believed could be counted on to move against Röhm.[55]
Both the Reichswehr and the conservative business community continued to complain to Hindenburg about the SA. In early June, defence minister Werner von Blomberg issued an ultimatum to Hitler from Hindenburg: unless Hitler took immediate steps to end the growing tension in Germany, Hindenburg would declare martial law and turn over control of the country to the army.[56] The threat of a declaration of martial law from Hindenburg, the only person in Germany with the authority to potentially depose the Nazi regime, put Hitler under pressure to act. Hitler decided the time had come both to destroy Röhm and to settle scores with old enemies. Both Himmler and Göring welcomed Hitler's decision, since both had much to gain by Röhm's downfall—the independence of the SS for Himmler, and the removal of a rival for Göring.[57]
So right here, at the Night of long knives, is the day in which Hitler broke with many of the true believers, who wanted to take control of German industry away from the treacherous industrialists.
Hitler chose to compromise with capitalism.
That is the ultimate downfall of all fascist movements and why they cannot be revolutionary Nationalists. There is no such thing as “class collaboration”.In online nazi/fascist circles we hear this term all the time “ class collaboration is much better because reasons”…. Class collaboration means they keep their wealth and power, they just cooperate with the fascist state. If you believe Bill Gates should remain in power, just because he’s rich and “attacking the rich is bad” for some reason, despite all of them being vicious anti-White criminals then you reveal yourself as a capitalist. not a nationalist. This is EXACTLY, what Joel ironically condemned, having other affinities that Mark you with yhe willingness to betray all of their own principles and become just another generic “anti communist”…. This anti-communism, for no reason is what resulted in Germanys loss, and defeat, suffered overwhelmingly at the hands of the Soviet Union.
Soviet troops caused more then 75% of every Axis casualty in ww2. Only 59 German divisions fought the US and Britain on the western Front…. and still nearly won against them. 11 divisions fought in North Africa. more then 220 German divisions fought on the eastern front. If Germany did not attack the Soviet Union, they would have suffered 75% less casualties. the US would have faced 280 German divisions, and been crushed.
and Whats more, despite the online belief that Hitler was waging an anti-communist crusade. Molotov-Ribbontrop shows different, but beyond that, Germany made am official offer of alliance to the Soviet Union, but it fell through because Hitler would not meet the territorial demands of the Soviets. mind you we are not talking about Molotov-Ribbontrop, I mean a full blown alliance, an offer to the Soviet Union to become the 4th power in the tripartite pact. The question is, would you accept it, or is anti-communism and making sure the rich keep their money long enough to betray the nation, more important then the nation itself ?
that brings us to actual Nazbol.
Alexsander Dugin, when asked to define National Bolshevism, in his essay “the metaphysics of national bolshevism” he responded with “ an enemy of the open society”
the open society of course referring to Karl Popper and George Soros.
National Bolshevism is a political ideology, although in my opinion it is a metaphysical concept, of total nationalism, including the economy, characterized by an elitist, warrior-revolutionary as the ruling caste. This elite would combine the revolutionary vanguard with the ancient concept of a warrior caste, a neo-knighthood. but These Knights would be Knights of the people’s revolution.
It is the idea, that the Volk, the state, and the economy must form an Organic whole. One single organism, unbreakable, the life of the individual is nothing except as part of the Nation.
Nazbols arose in Germany, among the far right national revolutionary movement and volkisch movements, as well as among the Russian White forces, nearly simultaneously.
Among the German Nazbols, Prussia was held up as sacred. More then a nation, a metaphysical concept, almost a perfect platonic form for the ideal state. Prussia, and Germany as led by it, defined Citizenship is explicitly ethnic terms, perhaps the first country to do so, if you were German anywhere, you were considered a part of the German empire. and Prussia offered its citizens DUTIES, rather then Rights. An entirely Novel concept.
They were anti-nazi, but for the same reason that Rohm had felt betrayed “ Hitler has given us half a revolution”. Those who had betrayed Germany in ww1, all the conservatives and industrialists, saw in the NSDAP a vehicle. It had some “programmatic blemishes” that we went over above, but Hitler made them feel secure that their property was not to actually ever be confiscated. Rather then the nation above all, the NSDAP became a vehicle for the traitors to maintain their power. We see this right now in the Ukraine, where neo-nazis, obsessed with anti-communism, are shedding their blood by the Ocean full, to keep in power a jew, at the head of a jewish oligarchy, that rules the MOST CORRUPT country in Europe, and is transforming itself into an outpost of the American Deep-state’s global empire.
Yes, it is marching with swastikas and saying racial words. but in practice it is fighting to preserve the Ukrainian ruling class, and their project to integrate into the global elite. The price will be homosexuality, transgenders, and uncontrolled immigration in exchange for wealth, to be hoarded by the Ukrainian elite. The same as everywhere else.
Shortly after ww1 ended, France occupied the Saarland and Rhineland, the industrial heartland of Germany. they occupied it specifically, and on purpose with black african troops, who unleashed a wave of rape and terror on the German people of the Rhineland. its too this day known as the black horror on the rhine
the german people resisted. a rebellion broke out. it was infact two, a communist lead rebellion, and a FreiKorps lead rebellion. The Soviet Union was the only country to offer the Germans any aid, and some members of the Freikorps, ardent nationalists, they were willing to form a united Front against France. They loved their country so much, they were even willing to make common cause with communism to free it.
one must ask oneself, am I a nationalist, or an Anti-Communist.
for the Nazbols this was made very clear.
From the national Bolshevik Manifesto of Karl Otto Paetel, in 1933
the VOLK, and the Nation, are the highest value to the Nazbol.
The threat of England, and the beauty of the Soviet Union, as a spiritual successor to Prussia, was not only recognized by members of the National Revolutionary Combat Party (the national Bolshevik party) but by members of the NSDAP, whose ideology had been forged before the compromise with the capitalists.
The most well known survivor of the knight of the long knives from the northern, Prussia sect of the NSDAP, friendly to the ideas of National Bolshevism, and a Volkisch nationalist state allied with the Soviet Union against the west was Goebbels.
:
It is rotten and dismal that a world of so many hundred million people should be ruled by a single caste that has the power to lead millions to life or to death, indeed on a whim...This caste has spun its web over the entire earth; capitalism recognizes no national boundaries...Capitalism has learned nothing from recent events and wants to learn nothing, because it places its own interests ahead of those of the other millions. Can one blame those millions for standing up for their own interests, and only for those interests? Can one blame them for striving to forge an international community whose purpose is the struggle against corrupt capitalism ? Can one condemn a large segment of the educated youth for protesting against the greatest ability? Is it not an abomination that people with the most brilliant intellectual gifts should sink into poverty and disintegrate, while others dissipate, squander, and waste the money that could help them? …You say the old propertied class also worked hard for what it has. Granted, that may be true in many cases. But do you also know about the conditions under which workers were living during the period when capitalism “earned” its fortune?
Letter to Anka Stalherm (April 14, 1920), Goebbels (Harvest, 1994), pp. 33-34
Communism. Jewry. I am a German Communist.
Peter Longerich , Goebbels: A Biography , New York, NY, Random House (2015) p. 26, “Memorial Sheets,” 27, Part 1, Volume 1, page 27, (Goebbels diary entry: 1924)
The social is a stopgap. Socialism is the ideology of the future.Open Letter to Ernst Graf zu Reventlow in the Völkische Freiheit , 1925, as quoted in Goebbels: A Biography , Peter Longerich, Random House, 2015, p. 55
You and I, we are fighting each other but we are not really enemies. By doing so we are dividing our strength, and we shall never reach our goal. Maybe the final extremity will bring us together. Maybe.National Socialism or Bolshevism? ( National Socialism or Bolshevism ), open letter to “My Friends on the Left,” National Socialist Letters (Oct. 15, 1925) ; Joseph Gobbles
Yesterday you beat about the bush on the Jewish question. I know why. Please don't object. We don't want to deceive each other. You are an anti-Semite as I am. You don't yet want to admit this to yourself. The Jew can just barely exist in Communism. The Jew in a national-Bolshevist state however is an absurdity.National Socialism or Bolshevism? ( National Socialism or Bolshevism ), open letter to “My Friends on the Left,” National Socialist Letters (Oct. 15, 1925) Lenin was the greatest man, second only to Hitler, and that the difference between communism and the Hitler faith was very slight.
The New York Times , “HITLERITE RIOT IN BERLIN: Beer Glasses Fly When Speaker Compares Hitler and Lenin,” (Nov. 28, 1925) p. 4.
The Soviet Union is our natural ally against the fiendish temptation and corruption from the West.About Russia, National Socialism or Bolshevism (November 15, 1925), National Socialist Letters , co-written with Gregor Strasser for the Völkisch Work Community . Quoted in Dr. Joseph Goebbels: (1st edition)
That is why we MUST place ourselves alongside Russia as equal partners in the struggle for this freedom which means everything to us.“Orientation: West or East,” National Socialist Letters ( 15 January 1926), as quoted in Goebbels: A Biography , Peter Longerich , Random House, 2015, p. 65
The system of liberal capitalist democracy is already so rotten inside that there is nothing left to mend or reform. It must be fundamentally destroyed, shattered spiritually and in terms of power politics, so that a young, new generation can build a future on the ruins of the past. - Dr. Joseph Goebbels
The will to freedom rises up from the collapsing system. It finds its form in fundamentally new ideas: in Bolshevism and National Socialism. Both emerge with the ultimate belief that they will bring freedom to an entire world by overthrowing it. Bolshevism and National Socialism are embodied in two people who lead a purposeful minority in the will to the future: Lenin and Hitler. - Dr. Joseph GoebbelsWe have been over the words of Goebbels. But he was not the only one. The man who saved Hitler and Ended project Valkyrie, General Otto Remer. After the war he attempted to reunite what was left of the NSDAP, and ran for elections, he was so successful he was quickly banned by the US opposition who issued an arrest warrant for him. they called him Hitler’s Heir.
He was backed by Stalin. and East Germany
Stalin in fact, offered to pull Russia troops from Germany, and allow reunification, as long as every party including Remer be allowed to take part. because he understood, a Nazi Germany, would be a power against the United States, and an ally of the Soviet Union.
Additionally, along with Rene Binet of the European Social Movement, he helped create what became “third positionism”. explicitly pro-Soviet aside from Binet. Although Binet, while the only anti-Soviet White nationalist leader in this alliance…. was a Trotskyist. and His Racial Trotskyist beliefs came out in the ideology of his organization the new European order. which opposed “nationalism”, and instead embraced international White Supremacy.
The New European Order (NEO) was a neo-fascist, Europe-wide alliance set up in 1951 to promote pan-European nationalism. The NEO, led by René Binet and Gaston-Armand Amaudruz, was a more radical splinter group that broke away from the European Social Movement after denouncing their restrained program.In the words of scholar Nicolas Lebourg, "the NEO virulently defended the idea of a new world order based on racial hierarchy, in which 'white humanity', by federating its nations, will see the birth of 'the new man within the new race' through a totalitarian party-state."[1]
Chilean Nazi esotericist Miguel Serrano had been reportedly connected to the organisation.[2]
René Binet (16 October 1913 – 16 October 1957) was a French fascist political activist. Initially a Trotskyist in the 1930s, he espoused fascism during World War II and joined the SS Charlemagne Division. Soon after the end of the war, Binet became involved in numerous neo-fascist and white supremacist publications and parties. He wrote the 1950 book Théorie du racisme (Theory of Racism), deemed influential on the European far-right at large. Binet died in a car accident in 1957, aged 44.According to scholar Nicolas Lebourg, "Binet’s openly advertised racialism has paved the way to an anti-colonialist and anti-immigrant ethnopluralism celebrated by the New Right and then the Identitarians. Abandoning classic nationalism and Aryanism for the notion of a 'white world', Binet clearly outlined the forthcoming themes of 'white genocide' and the ZOG (Zionist Occupation Government)."[1]
As far as the SRP, and General Remer, we have quotes, from Remer, and from the CIA’s declassified intel trove “the family jewels”. Which proved that the Soviet Union was financially backing, basically every neo-fascist and neo-nazi cause in Europe. :
According to Martin A. Lee, although the SRP was anti-communist, it focused on criticizing Britain and the United States for "splitting their beloved Fatherland in two" and avoided criticism of the Soviet Union in the hope that a future deal could be made with the Soviets to reunite Germany.[18] The SRP took the stance that Germany should remain neutral in the emerging Cold War and opposed the West German government's Atlanticist foreign policy. In case of war between the Soviet Union and the West, Remer "insisted that Germans should not fight to cover an American retreat if the Russians got the upper hand in a war", and said that he would "show the Russians the way to the Rhine" and that SRP members would "post themselves as traffic policemen, spreading their arms so that the Russians can find their way through Germany as quickly as possible".[19][20] Martin A. Lee alleges that these statements attracted the attention of Soviet officials, who became willing to fund the SRP for tactical reasons. According to Lee, for a few years in the early 1950s the SRP received Soviet funds while the Communist Party of Germany did not, due to being purportedly viewed as "ineffectual".[21][22] The SRP viewed Israel as an "enemy power" in its foreign policy.[23]One of the most significant pieces of evidence is the testimony of Otto Ernst Remer. In a 1997 interview, Remer admitted that he had received Soviet backing during his time in the party. Remer stated that he had met with KGB officials in East Berlin and had received financial and logistical support from the Soviet Union.[24] In addition to Remer's testimony, there are other sources of evidence that support the claim that the Soviet Union supported the SRP. For example, a 1953 KGB memo outlines the agency's efforts to cultivate and support right-wing extremist groups in Germany, including the SRP. The memo states that the KGB's aim was "to create a rightist movement that will weaken the position of the United States, weaken the position of the Atlantic bloc, and encourage the German population to seek a neutralist policy".[25][26] Similarly, the CIA's declassified "Family Jewels" documents reveal that the agency had evidence of Soviet funding for far-right groups in Europe, including the SRP.[27] Other examples of this include a comment supposedly made by Wolf von Westarp that the West Comminission of East Germany´s ruling Socialist Unity Party, was a substantial patron of the party.[28] Historian Michael Burleigh, in his book The Third Reich: A New History, discusses the Soviet Union's support for the SRP during the Cold War in extreme detail.[29] Additionally, the Gauck archives in Germany contain evidence of Soviet support for the SRP. The archives contain documents that show that the Stasi, the East German secret police, had frequent meetings with SRP officials and provided them with financial and logistical support.[24]
All of these movements, during the war and in the early post war years, lead up to the precursors to modern White Nationalism. Nouvelle Droite, the new Right, and the Third positionist movement.
Alain De Benoist - Nazbol
Yockey - fascist, pro-Soviet
Remer - Nazi, pro Soviet
Thiriart, who proposed as his key idea, an fully unified Europe, “An Empire from Lisbon to Vladivostok”. pro-Soviet, orthodox National Bolshevik
Joel Seems like a good dude, but Nazism IS holding us back. Nazism is absolutely hated in eastern Europe. in Places like Russia, even White nationalists, hate Nazism, because they believe that Nazism = Anti-slavic. and basically considered jews irrelevant.
Belarus, recently changed its laws around school curiculum dealing with world war two, and banned any mention of jews, as victims of the holocaust. the Holocaust still happened, according to Belarusian schools. but the target was Slavs, nobody else even mattered to the Nazis.
this was the policy of the Soviet school system for decades, and because of this believe that the Nazis hated Russians, not Jews. things like calling Zelensky, who is jewish, a Nazi, make perfect sense to Russians.
even worse then this, Nazism has a tendency to attract schizophrenics, and “anti communists”. people who consider communism worse then the jews, or worse then liberalism.
This is a demographic map of Germany. we can see quite clearly, formerly communist East Germany, averages around 95% German. substantially higher then racially mixed, “diverse” west.
east germany was protected, and it heritage preserved by being occupied by the Soviets as compared to the Americans, who filled west Germany, and western europe in general with black and brown invaders as well as jewish overlords, homosexuality and transgenderism
Nazism has proven itself in the past a failure, a device to defend the power of the elites. that history is repeating itself with Azov, the Nazis are brought out to defend the globalist-capitalist class. Just like the first NSDAP hid its actions behind words about economic justice and seizure of estates, the modern Nazis call it “racial holy war” and claim they are fighting “Orcs” from Mongolia. a bunch of Blonde haired Mongol Orcs who are “clearly”, “not White”
Meanwhile, as we see here, the very White British army of pure Aryan English men are ready and willing to fight for White EVROPA
….
this intellectual and ideological incoherence is Why Nazism is counter productive. it is too confusing, and only attractive to schizophrenics on the internet debating whose White or not