I.
One of the blessings wrought by the Coronavirus is that VE Day celebrations have been muted this year - indeed, Putin has postponed Russia's until September. Given the importance accorded by our globalist masters to anniversaries, I expected - before the breakout of the virus - for 2020, the 75th anniversary of the unconditional surrender of National Socialist Germany, to be an orgy of triumphalism, a real grinding of the boot in the face of Germany and sympathisers with German, European and Western nationalism everywhere. In contrast, I anticipated that the 75th anniversary of the unconditional surrender of Japan would receive much less attention, because, despite the fact that the Pacific War claimed millions of lives, 'Jewish America' (as Yockey calls it) regards the War as a sideshow to the more important war in Europe.
To explain the political significance of the VE Day celebrations, I must go over some of the history of the thirties and forties, at the risk of putting off some of the more experienced and well-read members of the nationalist movement, who will find the following so much boilerplate.
Before 1933, America had a government but lacked a State. As Yockey explains it, no elite existed which looked out for the interests of the American nation - no Continental-style cabinet politics existed, not even the equivalent of an English upper class (which held sway in the English Parliament) steering the ship of state. The two-party system, and elections, were designed to facilitate the divvying up of spoils, nothing more, and America acquired its colonies the Philippines, Guam, Hawaii, etc., instinctively, that is, without thinking about it, as America, unlike its European forebears, did not working according to a conscious plan for expansion.
Then came the election of Franklin Delano Roosevelt and what Yockey calls the 'American Revolution of 1933'. In that year, American Jewry took over America, formed a State, and set to work plotting war against National Socialist Germany, which had humiliated their compatriots in Europe. (If you want a crash-course in how Jews achieved their takeover, watch the Star Trek: The Next Generation episode 'Conspiracy' (1988) - this allegory will teach all you need to know. It is surprising that the Anti-Defamation League of the B'Nai B'Rith, which is always on the lookout for anti-Semitic 'tropes' and 'canards', hasn't called for 'Conspiracy' to be banned). America used France, Poland and England (which by then had fallen into a decrepit state) as proxies to start a war with Germany, and did while it did wage undeclared war against Germany in the years 1940 and 1941, it struggled to bring that war out into the open. It faced an uphill battle against the Isolationist movement, which sought to prevent America's involvement in another fratricidal war on England's behalf. But after America provoked Japan into attacking it at Pearl Harbour, the Isolationist movement was finished off once and for all, and America threw its massive industrial might into battle. It ground Germany and Japan into a powder.
During the years 1942 to 1945, America (and Britain) carried out a war of extermination against the civilian population of Europe, a war which continued after the German surrender: according to James Bacque's figures, as many Germans died after the war as during. (You can read about the Allies' post-war depredations in James Wear's Germany's War: The Origins, Aftermath and Atrocities of World War II (2014)).But future generations will marvel at how America succeeded in framing the Germans as the villains. America accepted, and helped promulgate, anti-German atrocity propaganda from Jewish groups (who alleged that the Germans gassed, poisoned, electrocuted, steamed, parboiled, etc., Jews in the millions) and it got into the game itself and concocted its own spurious propaganda (during the Nuremberg Trials, prosecutor Robert H. Jackson produced evidence that the Germans had killed 20,000 Jews at Auschwitz with an atomic bomb).
All of this is past history, water under the bridge, you might say. But Jewish influence in America has not diminished since 1945, and it is directly - or indirectly - responsible for many of the difficulties America finds it in now. As the American Neo-Nazi Bill White once observed, Jews, once in power, never seem to 'get it right': they do harm even when they intend to do good. Whites, on the other hand, nearly always 'get it right'. That explains how white people built, from nothing, America up into one of the most prosperous nations in the world - so much so that 67 million emigrated there (in what was the greatest wave of immigration in the world) after Hart-Celler.
For an example of Jews 'getting it wrong', take the gold standard. Until 1971, America fixed its dollar to gold, floating it only a few times in its history (most notably during the American Civil War and WWII); its politicians, central bank governors, economists, journalists, businessmen may not have possessed the most sophisticated understanding of how the gold standard worked, but they did know that it did work. But in the summer of 1971, that American tradition was shoved to the way side. Nixon came under tremendous pressure to leave gold from all sections of American society, but most notably, from his Jewish economists, and it was their counsel, I argue, which proved to be decisive. Nearly fifty years later, it has become clear - especially during the most recent financial crisis - that the advocates of floating exchange rates have lost the argument. Trump would make America great again by restoring the dollar's link to gold. But a chorus of Jewish economists, journalists, academics, finance industry professionals, would condemn such a move, and not just because Trump was proposing the policy. They know, instinctively, that bringing back the gold standard would lead to order, and they instinctively cleave to the side of chaos, not order, and it was for that reason that the German historian Mommsen referred to the Jews as a 'ferment of decomposition'. The Jews in charge of American economic life do not want America to win.
It should be pointed out that Nixon's Jewish economic advisers Milton Friedman and Ben Stein wanted nothing but good for America: these two men were not malign individuals. It is simply that, given two alternatives, one good and one bad, these men would always choose the latter over the former. And if they do not bear the bulk of the responsibility for pushing Nixon towards floating over fixed rates, they and their co-religionists bear responsibility for cementing floating rates some fifty years on, to such an extent that Americans policymakers cannot even engage in a serious discussion on reestablishing gold without it being shouted down.
Immigration constitutes another example of destructive influence. In the 1920s, America, after a short post-war recession, 'got it right': it stuck to gold, cut its taxes, and kept to a regimen of free trade. The supply-side publicist Jude Wanniski called this system 'perfection', but what supply-siders (most of whom today are for open borders) never acknowledge is that America in that same decade brought into force a tough anti-immigration law with the intent of preserving America's white racial majority, a law which was stay until Hart-Celler. Again, as with the abolition of the gold standard, the entire blame for Hart-Celler should not be laid at Jewry's door: whites do make bad decisions by themselves. But supposing that the 'American Revolution of 1933' did not take place, supposing that Jewish intellectuals, journalists, academics, lobbyists, businessmen, et al., did not wield enormous clout in American life, it seems unlikely that Hart-Celler would have ever been passed into law, or at least not been repealed or watered-down some time after 1965 after its disastrous effects had been felt. (I contend this even though - in irony of ironies - the biggest immigration restrictionist in the Trump administration, Stephen Miller, is Jewish: the exception proves the rule). As Yockey writes, in the introduction to the Enemy of Europe (1953),
The Washington regime’s leading internal thesis — which has not changed since 1933 — is that Americans must be “tolerant” of the alien elements (which now number roughly 50% of the population), since, after all, these aliens are “brothers.” “Brotherhood” is glorified on all public occasions, by all public officials, is taught in the schools and preached in the churches, which have been coordinated into the master-plan of the Culturally-alien Washington regime. Newspapers, books, magazines, radio, television, films — all vomit forth the same “Brotherhood.” The “Brotherhood” propaganda is a ghastly caricature of the Christian idea of the Fatherhood of God and the Brotherhood of Man, but there is no religious intent to the propaganda. Its sole purpose is to destroy whatever exclusiveness, national feelings, or racial instincts may still remain in the American population after twenty years of national leprosy. The result of the “tolerance” and “brotherhood” campaign is that the alien enjoys a superior position in America — he can demand to be “tolerated.” The American can demand nothing.
II.
In the Hour of Decision (1934) (a book subtitled, 'Germany in danger'), Spengler, the prophet of decline, conducts a gloomy survey of the white world's prospects. But he does put his hope in Germany:
Why is the German people the least exhausted of the white world, and therefore the one on which may be placed the most hope? Because its political past has given it no opportunity to waste its precious blood and its great abilities. This is the one blessed aspect of our wretched history since 1500: it has used us sparingly. It turned us into dreamers and theoreticians in matters of world policy, made us ignorant of the world, narrow, quarrelsome, and provincial; but that can be got over. It was no organic defect, no inherent lack of ability — the days of the Holy Roman Empire are there to show that. Good blood, the foundation of every kind of intellectual as well as physical superiority, there was and still is.
And:
Germany, too, has lost a great deal of its best blood in foreign armies and to foreign nations. But the provincialism of its political conditions tuned down the ambitions of young talent to service at small courts, in small armies and administrations. These settled down to form a healthy and prolific middle class. The nobility remained for the most part a superior peasantry. There was no high society and no fullness of life. “ Race,” in the people, was asleep, waiting for the call of a great age. But in this people there lies, notwithstanding the devastations of the last decades, a store of excellent blood such as no other nation possesses. It can be roused and must be spiritualised to meet the stupendous tasks before it. The battle for the planet has begun. The pacifism of the century of Liberalism must be overcome if we are to go on living.
Modern-day academic commentators on Spengler, who are sympathetic, try their best to distance him from the National Socialists. But one can see the parallels between the above ideas and those of Hitler, Himmler, Rosenberg - and between National Socialism and Spengler's 'Prussian Socialism'. And, like the National Socialists, Spengler opined that the Western world had a great deal to learn from Germany:
True — truly Prussian — loyalty is what the world most needs in this age of great catastrophes. We can only lean on what offers resistance... It is high time that the “white” world, and Germany in the first place, should consider these facts. For behind the world wars and the still unfinished proletarian world-revolution there looms the greatest of all dangers, the coloured menace, and it will require every bit of “race” that is still available among white nations to deal with it. Germany, of all countries, is not an island, as the political ideologues who would make it the object of their programs seem to imagine. It is but a small spot in a great, fermenting world, though undoubtedly a spot in a decisive position. But it alone has Prussianism as a fact within itself. With this treasure of exemplary Being it may become the “educator” of the “white” world, and perhaps its saviour.
Spengler distinguishes between 'old' and 'young' nations, nations which are used up and nations which still possess something in the way of possibilities. He correctly points out that England belongs in the category of the used-up. Seventy-five years after its 'victory' in the war, it has earned itself the reputation as the most 'pozzed' (to use Alt-Right parlance) nation in Europe, an Orwellian and totalitarian nightmare state... It is this undeniable fact that makes Queen Elizabeth's statement on the British war dead, 'They died so we could live as free people', so ironic.
But does Germany still qualify as an exemplar, an educator, a potential saviour? Spengler in these passages exhibits a certain German self-confidence, one might say arrogance - the same German arrogance one finds in the Nazis in hundreds of Hollywood war movies. It did exist, it was real - it was not a mere figment of the imagination of the anti-German war propagandists (in both world wars). General Otto Remer, in his post-war memoirs, comes across as thoughtful and introspective man, but in his wartime footage, a strutting cockerel. He had that 'Nazi' look, that mien, that swagger. But, seventy-five years after the war, we can safely surmise that the Germans have had that self-confidence driven out of them, and with it, the 'Prussianism'. And the results we all know...
In his anti-Nazi book The War Against the West (1938), the Jewish intellectual Aurel Kolnai examines the ideas of a German nationalist, Franz Haiser, who believes that 'Germany many needs the Man who will knock down all unmanageable fellows, all "personalities". The Man to Come, he writes (1926), must be a man of action, he must even have something in common with "adventurers" and "brigands"' - in other words, a Jack the Lad. We must ask the Germans: where is that Jack the Lad today? The German will retort, 'Gone', because 'We tried Haiser's ideas, and they didn't work'. In the jargon of the evolutionary biologists, Germany (in both wars) undertook a high-risk, high-reward strategy - one which failed, hence the disappearance of the leaders like unto 'adventurers' and 'brigands'.
I argue that it is not so much the failure but the knowledge of that failure which has affected Germany's self-assurance the most. In the decades following the end of the war, revisionists (starting with Austin J. App) shone a light on the horrors meted out to the German population by the Allies, the Soviets, the Czechs, the Poles after the German surrender. Now in 2020 we know more than ever how the Germans suffered (and also the people who helped them during the war - the French, Italians, Yugoslavs) in that dark period of Europe's history. But this knowledge has only served to demoralise the Germans and the people who would follow them into battle: would Leon Degrelle have signed up with the Germans had he received, through a time machine, a copy of Thomas Goodrich's Hellstorm: The Death of Nazi Germany, 1944-1947 (2010)? After years of revisionist education, the self-image of the German-as-Nazi, the German-as-soldier, has become transformed. The Jack the Lad had been turned into a victim.
III.
In the famous scene in The Godfather (1972), the singer Johnny Fontane (a character modeled on Frank Sinatra) pours out a litany of woe to his godfather, Don Corleone, who snaps back: 'Be a man!'. Today's blackpilled German nationalists, and today's sympathisers with German nationalism, remind me of Fontane. 'Everyone hates our ideas... The Jews are too strong... They've forced us to submit to their Holocaust story, which is nothing more than Jewish religious gibberish... Germans won't listen to us anymore, they only want to get on with their lives... We're not relevant any more... I've read "Hellstorm" and now I'm depressed... I'm weak, weak...'.
We on the Right hold to racialist and hereditarian beliefs which teach us, above all, that people do not change and that they always revert to type. This doctrine should not be suspended in the case of Germany. It will reassert itself, and gain ascendancy - its natural ascendancy - on the Continent, and the nations of Western and Eastern Europe will look to it for leadership. This will occur over time as the grip of America and England loosens. In three years, America will mark another anniversary - the 90 years since the 'American Revolution of 1933', nearly a hundred years of Jewish rule! But what is a hundred years from the viewpoint of history? The Germans, the French, the Italians, the Spanish, have been on the Continent for a long time and have endured far worse than the years 1944 to 1947...
Spengler makes the prediction that this current age - the age of liberalism, materialism, rationalism, the age of the rule of the money-power and the trade-union barons and the city-pavement intellectuals - will come to end, and the new age, the age of Caesarism, will commence, and according to his tables in the Decline, unfold over the course of the next two hundred years. Again, this fits in with the Far Right's racialism and hereditarianism. The message is that the West cannot escape its destiny; it cannot avoid the fate of the seven Cultures that preceded it. Spengler, wisely, did not give much in the way of detail as to the future, but suffice to say, the American ideals of liberty, equality, democracy, the rule of law and the rights of man, will not carry over into the new Imperium. And that is good news for Germany, and for 'Prussian Socialism', and for Europe (as Spengler points out, 'Prussianism' is not confined to Germany). I think that the signs of coming Caesarism are apparent even in the supposedly authoritarian Trump, and this is one of the reasons why the Left despises him so much. The tremors we feel in 2020, which signify a coming earthquake, puts the lie to the notion, spread by Hitler's detractors on the Far Right, that 'We cannot return to the politics of the 1920s and 1930s'.
The bad news is that Germans lost millions during the war and after - men, women and children of that fine racial stock that Spengler rhapsodises over. (Plenty of German newsreels from the war can be found on YouTube, and something that strikes me is how physically healthy these people are, how good looking, how beautiful). Additional bad news is that what Spengler calls 'race' and 'blood' will out over time, but time, a precious commodity, is in short supply for Europe. Given the speed of the 'great replacement', it is not inconceivable that within fifty to a hundred years the whites of Western Europe will wind up in the same position as the whites of South Africa.
Only Germany can prevent that. Yes, Germany cannot go it alone, and Germany needs a united Europe - as the post-war architects of European unity (Mosley, Yockey, Evola, Thiriart) asserted; at the same time, a proud, dignified, united Europe cannot come about with a humble, prostrate Germany at its center.
No comments:
Post a Comment