|
|
|
Death of a patriot “We must turn the country around to face its citizens. The scale of the repair will be so great that Poland will become a new republic.” Any president of a populous European nation who can utter these words, at once loyal and revolutionary, is a rare and valuable bird likely to be much loved by his people. Such, we now know, was Lech Aleksander Kaczy?ski who died in an air accident at a fog-bound Smolensk-North airport today, aged sixty.
With him died all ninety-five aboard the Polish Air Force Tupolev Tu-154, including Kaczy?ski’s wife Maria and many members of the Polish ruling elite. The mainstream media coverage of this tragedy will keep rolling for days, no doubt. Kaczy?ski’s career will be closely analysed, his successes and failures picked over, his patriotism and social conservatism described perhaps more charitably in some quarters than ever they were while he was alive. But where here, besides the simple, respectful marking of yet another sadness in Poland’s national life, is the legitimate angle for a nationalist to explore? It seems to me that Kaczy?ski represents something we should understand well, and that is how liberal democracy limits the action of any patriotic national figure outside of, and hostile to, the neo-Marxist/neoliberal dispensation. Kaczy?ski enjoyed little freedom of action. During his presidency he was unable to avoid putting his presidential signature to the Lisbon Treaty. He saw his Law and Justice (PiS) party ejected from office by Donald Tusk’s neoliberal and europhile Civic Platform. Earlier he was, as mayor of Warsaw, even dragged before the European Court of Human Rights for refusing homosexuals an opportunity to parade - no doubt, as grotesquely and offensively as possible - through the capital in the name of a non-existent equality. He had come to the presidential office promising:
How much of this he achieved I leave it to someone more informed about Polish politics to say. But the definite sense I have is that he was continually frustrated by the democratic process, which is to say, by the ubiquity and resilience of liberal presumptions and by the power of the liberal dynamic - things that must have seemed so desirable to Poles in 1989. All conservative political careers end in failure. Lech Kaczy?ski’s ended in the shocking and sudden violence of a national tragedy too. Comments:2
Posted by Grimoire on Sun, 11 Apr 2010 06:31 | # For the past few decades, many of Europe’s Republicans meet their end through strange and unfortunate accident. Briefly; the central tenet of both is majority rule. However in Democracy, majority rule extends over all other concerns - including the Nation, it’s enshrined Law, the people as represented by the individual (versus the collective or masse), and the individuals rights and property. See the difference? In both, the people hold sovereign power - but in Democracy the powers are held by the people as a collective, while in a Republic, those powers are held by the people as individuals. 3
Posted by Alaric on Sun, 11 Apr 2010 17:48 | # Leave it to the philosemitic anti-German MR to hail an anti-White traitor as a hero. Here’s a quote from the dear departed: “Yes. I love Jews. I had many Jewish friends in the different periods of my life. I understand today what I did not understand as a child: that my attitude toward the Jews was that I viewed them as Poles in every respect, albeit as special Poles. At home and in my milieu I heard that Christos was actually a Jew.” So, you see, the Jews are just like anybody else. Only special. 4
Posted by Gudmund on Sun, 11 Apr 2010 18:16 | #
If the first part were true, then FB would love it here. But he doesn’t, you see, because this site isn’t philosemitic; GW is fairly hardline on the JQ. As for the anti-German part, that is one thing that seriously detracts from its value. If the goal is to promote the survival of all the white peoples, then why are certain groups so vociferously denounced? Is “dealing with the [long dead - ed.] spectre of NS” so important that Germany must still be in the crosshairs so much? Inquiring minds do wonder. 5
Posted by jamesUK on Sun, 11 Apr 2010 19:50 | # Why haven’t you mentioned Poland before for everything you advocate for the future as being the crux of New European archetype? Is it true or false that Poland massacred German civilians in territory given to Poland under Versailles which sparked a German intervention with Poland after British/French guaranteed to declare war on Germany on Poland’s behalf as a Polish land grab or the official narrative that Germans themselves staged civilian deaths as a pretext for war against Poland? 6
Posted by Captainchaos on Sun, 11 Apr 2010 19:55 | # The English and Germans have different natural baseline rhythms of life. As the largest and most culturally sophisticated of the Nordic peoples there will be always so long as they continue to exist something of a rivalry between them - to construct a world in which their interests are served at the expense of the other, no matter how slight that expense may be. Yes, ‘construct a world’ is an appropriate scale in which to discuss the scope of their endeavours. The Nordic subrace is the Master Race, whether de facto or de jure, the last five hundred years is a total vindication of that contention. They are the preeminent people, and it is not really even close, in terms of competing for resources collectively and civilization building capacity. And any philosophy which denies them that truth about themselves does itself not dwell in truth. 7
Posted by Captainchaos on Sun, 11 Apr 2010 20:19 | #
Because English ontological philosophers don’t actually take non-Nordic nations seriously as leadership entities. From a perspective beyond good and evil, that is to say a Darwinian perspective, Poland was a prop used by the English to facilitate their resource competition with the Krauts. The Krauts smashed Poland in the cause of resource competition, the English in coalition with other White nations smashed the Krauts in the cause of resource competition. The Krauts wished to enter into a pan-Nordic arrangement with the English where they would be partners on the global stage in resource competition. The English rebuffed that offer, and here we are today, facing collective genetic annihilation. I’m afraid it really is that simple, things like ‘teleology’ and a ‘moral’ abhorrence of ‘bullying’ (the Krauts cast as the bully implicitly assumes superiority in ability to compete for resources) are window dressing. But what is done is done and cannot be undone, yes I know that all too well. The clear lesson to my mind is that Nordics must cooperate in securing first their own existence and interests whilst fully conscious of their merits as contrasted with other peoples. And of course within moral constraints as suits their nature, more benevolent masters one will never find, yet masters still, whether de facto or de jure. 8
Posted by FB on Sun, 11 Apr 2010 21:04 | #
This site has been anti-German from its very inception 6 years ago or so. Why are you still whining about that? My comment dealt with low quality of material and the lack of comments reflects the tedious nature of current posts. Have a look at OD or the Alternative Right produces in comparison. This place seems exhausted. 9
Posted by Captainchaos on Sun, 11 Apr 2010 21:11 | # I believe that the National Socialists were justified in attempting to secure the existence of our race in one fell swoop. And that the German people would not have been collectively - and that no other people could possibly have been capable collectively - of achieving that herculean feat sans NS. And that whatever moral outrages (at least from our perspective) committed by the National Socialists which would ordinarily justify the bodily destruction of those that perpetrated those outrages cannot be considered but relative to the larger task set by NS of the salvation of the entire race. It is a damn hard thing to do to continue to be ruled by one’s moral compass when one’s back is against the wall as the world is consumed in fire. 10
Posted by PF on Sun, 11 Apr 2010 21:18 | # Gudmund wrote:
What has always been in my crosshairs and will forever be is the contention that NS somehow embodies or is synonymous with the German nation. The statement above conflates the two again. I was a long time student of german language and history and frankly, I love that place and that people. The best years of my youth, my late teens and early twenties, I spent kicking around Niedersachsen, Dortmund, Cologne, Essen, occasionally making trips to Berlin and the north sea coast. To take that violent episode in their history as characteristic of, or necessary for, or essential to the life of that nation - a thing we as foreigners do simply because it addresses questions which have been ignored in our own culture, which is at a critical juncture in this regard - is the greatest conceptual misrepresentation that I believe is possible. Taking the mickey out of Jerry for being unsubtle and unfunny (its kind of true if you have English blood that these people appear this way) is nothing compared to confabulating the meaning of their history and peoplehood with one 13-year dictatorial episode which was a disaster for them in so many ways, as they themselves acknowledge. People who do this, really do them wrong. Ask your local germans what they think. All subsequent mickey-taking on my part is just to emphasis my disagreement with the slavishly Germanocentric loving-germany-from-afar-without-having-any-idea-what-one-actually-means, Its like being with a woman and then meeting some guy who was head-over-heels in love with her, And you think: I was rib-dabbling on her pippety-pops just last week, it was nice, in fact it was awesome, but she’s just another chick. Then you realized that you lived this guy’s dream, and you dont even care about it as much as he does, and you wonder, if he could have her, would he feel like you do? You’re listening to him rant and rave about her beauty and accomplishments, and you’re just like… Plus its pathetic. I’d rather hear people rant and rave about midwestern America, or learn to appreciate midwestern America… which is difficult, if you have condemned it for falling to Jewish influence… but why should one live in adulation of a foreign people, even if one’s family derives from them partly? It seems that contempt for one’s people is wrong, but adulation is also wrong. Somewhere between is the “realistic appraisal” which a genuine love requires as a precondition… 11
Posted by Captainchaos on Sun, 11 Apr 2010 21:24 | #
The output at Occidental Dissent and Alternative Right can basically be summarized as marketing, esoteric paganism and re-ethnicization of Christianity. That is not serious thinking, it is bullshit, and the knowledge by those that produce said that that is precisely the case is implicit in their ever hovering hands over the censorship button. They will not endure serious criticism, the small men that many of them are. I mean my god, Wallace actually openly flirted with the idea of going back to his old pro-Americana propaganda and cozying up to the philo-Semitic subverters. All the intelligence of those men is rendered as of nothing but ashes blown away in the wind if they have not the resolve or indeed the ability to conceptualize and communicate what actually exists. They do not do that. 12
Posted by Captainchaos on Sun, 11 Apr 2010 21:31 | #
The irony is that English ontological ‘philosophers’ are as fixated, if not more, with NS, and it affects their ability to conceptualize what is. 13
Posted by Dasein on Sun, 11 Apr 2010 21:51 | #
Kaczy?ski won’t be missed in Germany or Russia, whatever the press and leaders in those countries might say. He interfered in energy deals between the two countries, denounced the creation of a centre to commemorate German refugees, and supported the Orange Revolution and Georgia. However sensible he might have been in some areas, he was not a good European, and did his bit to keep historical grievances alive. History, again, repeats itself, even if not exactly. Once again, Polish intransigence (the pilot crashed on the fourth attempt to land, after being warned by the flight tower to fly on to Minsk) is followed by the death of elites in a forest outside Smolensk. I don’t mean this to be disrespectful to Kaczy?ski, I just find the historical parralels interesting. 14
Posted by FB on Sun, 11 Apr 2010 22:39 | # On learning of Kaczynki’s et al. untimely demise I opened a new bottle of a Riesling. I like Polacks…in the Katyn forest! A pig stye of a nation of drunks and thieves. That entire gang won’t me missed. 15
Posted by Captainchaos on Sun, 11 Apr 2010 23:01 | # Well, Braun, I don’t think it is any mystery that you are a moral bankrupt. And if by some ‘misfortune’ you were to come to reside beneath small trees in a mound in the woods I would not shed a tear for you. Do keep at trying to be a good Jew, now. 16
Posted by Lurker on Sun, 11 Apr 2010 23:39 | #
Are you for real? What a douchebag… 17
Posted by Gussie Fink-Nottle on Sun, 11 Apr 2010 23:41 | #
An excellent point. It’s bizarre, counter-productive, and just really fucking silly. Unfortunately internet nationalism tends to attract and encourage these types of fantasists. You get to play act as some sort of German alphaman and believe that this will somehow help save your people. 18
Posted by Dan Dare on Mon, 12 Apr 2010 00:48 | # PF is of course absolutely correct. There is absolutely no contradiction between having a deep admiration of the German people, their many qualities and unparalleled contribution to western civilisation and having an equally deep abhorrence of Nazism. It’s a great shame that obviously intelligent people like the Cap’n appear unable to grasp that obvious truth, which I can only put down to an intellectual short-circuit occuring at some point during his formative years. 19
Posted by Gudmund on Mon, 12 Apr 2010 01:04 | #
Well, I’ll take your (and PF’s) word for it. I suppose I didn’t see the context when reading the (what I called) anti-German posts in question. It was not libel I was engaging in accusing the site of anti-German ideology but rather a misinterpretation of your posts’ purpose. But why the focus on NS in any case? Do you and PF actually see it’s resurgence as a possibility? 20
Posted by Dan Dare on Mon, 12 Apr 2010 01:17 | #
PF can of course answer for himself, but I don’t, personally. NS is as dead as a dodo, and a complete irrelevance in view of the existential questions that confront us as members of the global European peoples. That it still appears to have traction in some quarters of the nationalist movement can have only a retarding effect on our progress, since it offers such a covenient rod for our enemies to beat us with. Nazism is a totally discredited ideology that has no functional value for us going forward, a dead cult which should be allowed to quietly expire and lie forgotten. 21
Posted by Guessedworker on Mon, 12 Apr 2010 01:29 | # Gudmund,
Not “certain groups” but certain politics. And not denounced, I think. That’s not the spirit of it at all.
We don’t speak much of NS but, rather, more broadly of fascism. Indeed, more broadly than that: it is the pursuit of non-real goals as a solution to a real existential crisis which is at the root of the problem, Gudmund. CC
As far as I am aware, such truths require no trumpetry. It may be just a “British reserve” thing, but I think that, if one must rule over other peoples - and I am not at all sure why one would want to - it is best done with a quiet voice, and probably one speaking in the local dialect. Ruling over other Nordics, and any Europeans, is best not done at all.
NS has no impact whatsoever, at any level or to any degree, upon the process of thought. I don’t know how you could come to such a conclusion that it did. It seems you know more about me that I do myself. If we manage over time and with the work of many hands to develop a real idea it will for nothing if the nationalist world at large remains in awe of the glorious and the unreal. Attacking its hegemony is part and parcel of the effort here. Only by capturing nationalist hearts and minds can a new idea be carried into conflict with liberalism. 22
Posted by jamesUK on Mon, 12 Apr 2010 02:24 | # What about Germany’s invasion of Poland sparking WW2? Is the official narrative true? @Dasein For Russia at least he was not as bad as Havel in the Czech Rep but still bad with constant reference to the MR pact and fictitious alliance with Germany to partition Poland, wanting Katyn officially recognised as genocide although over eight thousand of Russian citizens killed by NKVD are also buried next to Polish officers in Katyn forest so it was not exclusively targeted at Poles and wanting $22 billion for the victims families. 23
Posted by Dan Dare on Mon, 12 Apr 2010 02:29 | #
I whether wonder this is representative of the superior sort of fare that FB feels we should be emulating here. It certainly seems to have engaged the attention of the punters at OD, 300+ comments the last time I checked. 24
Posted by PF on Mon, 12 Apr 2010 02:52 | #
Hahaha! No! Nazism is currently the only explicitly formulated system for large-scale European racial preservation via politics. As such, it is constantly exerting a pull - sometimes more, sometimes less obvious - on several of the participants in all of our discussions. Some will only go so far as to dabble in a bit of apologetics, while others have made clear that they view Hitler as having been our last hope. While I don’t know what kind of debates you’ve seen on here in 2009 and 2010, the debates 2007-2008 were full of nazi sympathizers and apologists. Actually one way to consistently derail *any* thread on MajorityRights, back in those days, was to link the topic under discussion to any assertion about an aspect of WWII which supported the mainstream narrative. Immediately people with pseudonyms like “SKULLFACE” would materialize out of the woodwork and start cross-posting the various memoranda… Actually Friedrich Braun had an interesting trick back in those days. Someone would mention something only tangentially related to WWII, like say, Winston Churchill’s favorite brand of whiskey, and like a hawk swooping down to capture a field-mouse, Braun was all over it:
Whereupon a flood of memoranda, soldiers’ diary entries, memos to the chief of staff of the allied army, and receipts for meals Hitler had eaten at various restaurants would materialize in the comments section. *- note: I may have exaggerated slightly in the above, and there was no one named SKULLFACE… 25
Posted by Dan Dare on Mon, 12 Apr 2010 03:06 | # I’m grateful to PF for the entertaining tour d’horizon of the MR archives (1933-45 Abteilung). Being a relatively new boy I’m sorry to say that I Wasn’t There At The Time and missed what sounds like lots of fun. Actually though I did notice that the Cap’n re-presented for what must be the nth time those venerable old chestnuts aka the ‘voluminous peace overtures’. As a rule whenever this resurfaces, as it does with montonous regularity, I usually ask for citations for sources where we can examine the terms proposed in these various offers, proposals and initiatives for ourselves. But on this occasion I decided not to rise to the bait so I won’t. 26
Posted by FB on Mon, 12 Apr 2010 03:16 | # Rebranded Tories a pale imitation of Labour The Australian, 10 April 2010 Britain has embarked this week on one of the oddest general election campaigns in memory. The Labour government under Gordon Brown could hardly have a more catastrophic record to defend. It has bankrupted Britain with astronomical levels of debt. Standards of public services have deteriorated while the number of bureaucrats has soared. Brown’s government itself has become synonymous with bullying, corruption and deceit. Yet despite all this, opinion polls suggest the election result is wide open. David Cameron’s Conservative Party is only about seven points ahead of Labour — scarcely enough to gain an overall majority. The buzz is of a hung parliament, maybe even with Labour gaining the largest number of seats. With such a discredited government in office, Cameron should be streets ahead. Yet he has still not ’sealed the deal’ with the British public. Even after a recent biography of Brown revealed how he flies into violent rages and does not relate to people in a normal way, Cameron’s ratings still refused to budge. Partly, this is because of a widespread mood of ‘a plague on all your houses’. But it’s mainly because of Cameron himself. People don’t generally trust him. Cameron’s election pitch is that the Tories stand for change. But as a poll this week confirmed, voters don’t believe Cameron’s Conservatives offer a change from Labour. This is ironic, since Cameron has made ‘change’ his mantra. But what he has sought to change is the Tory party so that it would appear more modern and sympathetic. He did this by espousing social liberalism and environmentalism. That is because Cameron and his inner circle believe as an article of faith that the reason the Tories have been out of power these past 13 years is that they were not left-wing enough. And so far from offering a change from Labour, the Tories have in fact become more like them. What has happened to demoralise the British Tories in this way? Remarkable as this may seem, Cameron and his ‘modernising’ circle remain thoroughly spooked by the party’s Thatcherite past. This may seem more than a little perverse, since Margaret Thatcher is one of the most successful Conservative politicians. But the Cameroons were also mesmerised by the achievement of Tony Blair in keeping the Tories out of power for so long. They thought (wrongly) this was because Blair showed himself so much in tune with non-judgmental, multicultural Britain which wore its heart on its sleeve. By contrast, the Tories were painted by the media as heartless, racist and selfish — ‘the nasty party’. So to rebrand the Tories as ‘nice’, the Cameroons espoused gay rights, let their hearts bleed for criminals and imposed radio silence over Britain’s uncontrolled rates of immigration. The result has been that millions of conservative voters have been brutally abandoned. This great swathe of Middle Britain wants a halt to immigration, the restoration of the powers of self-government ceded to the EU (on which Cameron is seen to have broken a promise), and an end to the onslaught on British national identity and morality through ‘politically correct reverse discrimination against majority values. But in today’s Conservative Party they find merely a pale-blue imitation of Labour. Not only do such voters feel betrayed; worse still, they don’t even trust the Tories to be true to the image they are now projecting. For because the focus-group-driven Cameroons are aware of the disapproval of core conservative voters, they are tacking to both right and left simultaneously — saying, for example, that they will take stern measures to reduce the financial deficit and safeguard all social programs — and so are coming across as incoherent and unprincipled. They have thus fallen into the greatest of contemporary political elephant traps. For what voters today prize above all is authenticity — the perception that a politician is utterly true to himself, and that what you see is what you get. In Australia, that is precisely why Tony Abbott is scoring so well. People can see he is true to his own principles, which he will courageously assert even at risk to his own popularity. Which is why politicians like John Howard and Margaret Thatcher were so successful. And which is why even Gordon Brown’s reputedly violent rages are viewed as evidence that he has passionate and genuine convictions. By contrast, Cameron is regarded as an opportunist — and one recent eye-opening development shows just how shallow he is. For the Tories announced that they would create a ‘neighbourhood army’ of 5000 community organisers directly based on the movement established by Saul Alinsky in the US - and which had employed one Barack Obama. This was simply astounding. Alinsky was a ‘transformational Marxist’ from Chicago who believed that the revolution had to be carried out through stealth and deception. So he invented the ‘community organiser’ as an apparently centrist figure but who would actually mobilise direct action by the downtrodden masses against their capitalist oppressors. Why is the British Conservative Party starry-eyed about the most far-Left President ever elected to the White House? Why on earth is it endorsing a revolutionary subversive? The Cameroons are transfixed by Obama just as they were by Blair for the simple reason that Obama won big. Moreover, the ‘community organiser’ theme doubtless seemed superficially to dovetail with a key aspect of Cameron’s repositioning of the party around the agenda of ‘broken Britain’. Loudly trumpeting the Tories’ commitment to tackle Britain’s epidemic problems of family breakdown, teenage pregnancy, drug-taking, alcohol abuse and the like has been a way of showing that they are no longer ‘nasty’ but now sport a social conscience. But they are so opportunistic and shallow that they don’t grasp they have now endorsed a Marxist radical whose agenda was the covert destruction of the West. Then people wonder why voters aren’t falling over themselves to vote for David Obameron. Of course, everything is still to play for. Labour has not had a sure-footed start to the campaign. TV debates between the leaders being held for the first time may change everything. But at present the real victor in the British general election looks like being ‘none of the above’. Article printed from Melanie Phillips’s Articles: http://www.melaniephillips.com/articles-new URL to article: http://www.melaniephillips.com/articles-new/?p=729 27
Posted by Alaric on Mon, 12 Apr 2010 03:20 | #
Ahh, a lovely and truthful comment. Also why National Socialism will make a strong and this time, triumphant return, while anti-German hatemongers like PF will keep squealing like the swine they are. Pseudo-intellectuals are so trite. Es lebe Nationalsozialistische Bewegung. 28
Posted by Dan Dare on Mon, 12 Apr 2010 03:32 | # Friedrich - I feel quite confident in stating that the eyes of most regulars here would glaze over at the sight of a Melanie Phillips byline, so I am curious what is so remarkable about this particular piece that moved you to post it in toto. Or what indeed is its relevance to the topic at hand. 29
Posted by Gudmund on Mon, 12 Apr 2010 03:40 | #
If this is true, then why is the BNP not miles ahead? I’m inclined to believe those around here who’ve said they have lackluster leadership and strategy, if the above quote is in fact representative of British attitudes. 30
Posted by FB on Mon, 12 Apr 2010 03:44 | #
That’s one post out of thousands. In any case, we don’t get enough females on these types of fora. 31
Posted by PF on Mon, 12 Apr 2010 03:48 | #
My squealing rebuttal to this wont be forthcoming since there is a more pressing debate on another forum: they have found the last surviving Cro-magnon man, and he wants to debate the pros and cons of harnessing fire. 32
Posted by FB on Mon, 12 Apr 2010 03:48 | #
You can delete it. Her criticism of multiculturalism and spot-on analysis Tory approach is still more relevant than the lead about a plane crash of drunk polacks. I bet you $100 that we’ll eventually learn that the pilot was drunk or drinking. This thread is emblematic of the intellectual exhaustion of M.R. 33
Posted by Dan Dare on Mon, 12 Apr 2010 03:51 | # Very few females seem to have the capacity for analytical, original or abstract thought necessary to hold one’s own in a forum such as this one. Even on Stormfront the WN Ladies seem most comfortable within their own circle, from which male posters are barred. 34
Posted by Dan Dare on Mon, 12 Apr 2010 04:04 | # FB - I won’t take your bet, being probably even more acquainted with Poles than you are. But what I find so astonishing about this episode is that so many of Poland’s ruling elite felt confident in going aloft in a geriatric Tupolev, a marque which even Aeroflot dumped yonks ago. It wasn’t directed initially towards the Tu-154, but the label some wag applied to an earlier British accident-prone design “It’s like ten thousand rivets flying in close formation” seems particularly apposite. Equally astonishing is that official protocols allowed so many Prominenten to travel on the same flight. In corporate America it is common practice to prohibit more than two VPs from taking the same flight. 35
Posted by PF on Mon, 12 Apr 2010 04:11 | # Dan wrote:
Yeah there was a lot to enjoy about MR through all the epoches of its existence. Here are some threads where I duked it out with apologists: http://majorityrights.com/index.php/weblog/comments/hitler_as_a_political_britney_spears/ http://majorityrights.com/index.php/weblog/comments/vienna_at_the_turn_of_the_century/ You can see especially from the Hitler Psychology 101 that he had a broad fanbase. 36
Posted by FB on Mon, 12 Apr 2010 04:19 | #
This seems crazy to you because you’re not a polack. We’re not discussing a normal civilized people. Unlike you, I would be shocked if polacks showed common sense and intelligence. As to the state of the plane, two words : Polnische Wirtschaft. 37
Posted by Dan Dare on Mon, 12 Apr 2010 04:28 | # Tomorrow I will call my brother who has lived in Warsaw for almost 20 years for his reading of the situation, and for a report on what the local intelligentsia (yes there is such a thing) are making of it. 38
Posted by RZ on Mon, 12 Apr 2010 06:20 | #
A brilliant insight. Yes, the rivalry between the Brits and Germans is legendary. Still one must wonder, apropos the topic, where the Poles will end up. One imagines that perhaps the 21st century will see the full blossoming of their culture. They certainly seem more vital than either the Anglo or Teutonic culture at this particular junction in time. The Poles live in the space between the Nords and the Germans, and share most of the culture of both, but with some attenuation that provides something both others lack. The Poles freed their East German brothers through a stubborn refusal that the Germans did not possess. The Poles seem to have a spiritual quality that is completely lost to the Nordics, English and Germans. And, as for preeminent cultures, (and I know I’m going to piss off a few people here) we must add the Jews, at least the European Jews. They have built a culture of their own that seems impervious to the depredations of the modernity they force on the rest of us. 39
Posted by Dan Dare on Mon, 12 Apr 2010 06:38 | #
No it isn’t. Until Kaiser Bill let Bismarck go Britain/England and Germany, or whichever was the dominant state within German-speaking Europe, usually Prussia, were inseperable allies against other states, principally France or Austria, which sought to establish hegemony over continental Europe. This natural alliance persisted from the time of the Seven Years war until even after the establishment of the Second Reich in 1870. If Wilhelm II had not been so reckless in pursuit of his unattainable ‘Place in the Sun’ and had not challenged British naval supremacy in the process there is every chance that the Entente Cordiale would never have been consummated, and an Anglo-German Alliance could well have been concluded instead. Which means that the First World War would not have taken place, there would have been no Hitler and the United States would still today be a provincial backwater in a world still managed under Anglo-German supervision. It was the failure of the British and Germans to reach such an accord that allowed the USA to assume a dominant role in world affairs. 40
Posted by Lurker on Mon, 12 Apr 2010 07:04 | #
Aeroflot have only recently dispensed with the Tu-154, the last flight was in December 2009. Not quite yonks ago. The Russian air force are still using some. This is significant because the Polish Tu-154 that crashed was a Polish air force plane, not a civilian airliner. If its good enough for the Russian air force why not the Polish? As far as I can tell the Polish AF only had two before the crash, now only one. The USAF is still using large numbers of Boeing 707s yet they have largely gone from civil use. The RAF were the last operators of VC-10s. The RAF & USAF have used DC-10s and L-101s as they have left civil fleets. Its not hard to see military TU-154 operation in the way. Just saying. 41
Posted by Grimoire on Mon, 12 Apr 2010 07:06 | # Ah Skullface…forgotten rebel…. Harvester of fire…Oh, pardon me, thou bleeding piece of earth, —————————————- I read that post you linked to at OD. Thought it was good. @Alaric ———————————————- ————————————————- @Dan Dare Again 42
Posted by Dasein on Mon, 12 Apr 2010 09:14 | # Further to Lurker’s point above, according to our local paper the TU-154 is the most reliable of the Tupolews. This particular plane had 5,141 flying hours, while the maximum recommended is 30,000. At the moment, it looks to be all down to pilot error. One must ask, though, to what extent the pilot persisted in trying to land based on his own stubborness, versus fear of incurring the wrath of Kaczy?ski. In 2008, during the Georgian-Russian war, Kaczy?ski flew to Tiflis to visit Saakaschwili. Out of concerns for security, the pilot chose to instead land in Azerbaijan. Afterwards, Kaczy?ski berated the pilot for disobeying his orders and told him that if one decides to be an officer, one cannot be fearful. 43
Posted by Dasein on Mon, 12 Apr 2010 09:19 | #
Does it exist in a non-parasitical form? A High Culture should be self-sustaining, which, IMO, excludes Jewish culture. 44
Posted by Biscuit on Mon, 12 Apr 2010 10:18 | # Looks like it had nothing to do with alcohol. Just your usual Polish stupidity: “In August 2008, during Russia?s brief war with Georgia, Mr. Kaczynski got into a dispute with a pilot flying his plane to the Georgian capital, Tbilisi, according to reports at the time. Mr. Kaczynski demanded that the pilot land despite dangerous conditions, but the pilot disagreed and diverted to neighboring Azerbaijan. Mr. Kaczynski threatened that there would be consequences for the pilot, the Polish newspaper Dziennik reported. ?If someone decides to become a pilot, he cannot be fearful,? Mr. Kaczynski said. ?After returning to the country, we shall deal with this matter.?” 45
Posted by the Narrator... on Mon, 12 Apr 2010 12:03 | # I haven’t watched the news much this past weekend, but of what I did see it seems that this is a non-story here in America. Even on Drudge it has been pushed down to sideline stories along with tabloid junk about Oprah and Saturday Night Live. I guess since he was the White leader of an overwhelming White nation it’s no big deal. ... 46
Posted by Silver's change of heart on Mon, 12 Apr 2010 13:26 | # http://accidentaldissent.wordpress.com/2010/04/10/im-on-a-boat/#comment-908
47
Posted by Dasein on Mon, 12 Apr 2010 13:46 | #
One of the worst effects of the fall of communism on the democratic process in Germany, perhaps also unforeseen in 1989, has been the incorporation of the ‘anti-fascist’ networks of the DDR into mainstream German politics. 48
Posted by Fred Scrooby on Mon, 12 Apr 2010 13:58 | # Silver’s a hypocrite as all are on the other side, because he won’t live among Negroes if he can help it, or among some other races and I stress races here, not cultures though there are those too he won’t live among. Races. Negroes and mulattoes in abundance whether Catholic, Protestant, Moslem, voodoo, Santeria, or animist, whether in the United States, the Paris banlieus, Jamaica, Rio, Morocco, or the Sub-Sahara, he will refuse to live among because of what boils down unavoidably to their racial characteristics not their culture, not something changeable, their race, unchangeable characteristics which, as certain as the law of gravity, will manifest loud-and-clear in their aggregate populations and no one can do anything about it except wait a couple of million years and see what they evolve into next if anything (chimps haven’t evolved into anything else in several million years and maybe Negroes aren’t destined to either). Yet he condemns us for seeing matters the same as he. Why? Because in his eyes our unfavorable opinion is mean, nasty, soul-destroying while his own, amounting to the same unfavorable opinion, is nice, moral, angelic even. There are no liberals, zero liberals, who are willing to live in a Negro or mulatto neighborhood yet they expect us to. And if we won’t, they’ll force us. So, Silver’s dropped the pretense and reverted back to the side whence he came? Good riddance to bad rubbish. 49
Posted by Or maybe Silver never changed his mind? on Mon, 12 Apr 2010 14:01 | # A blast from the past: old quotes by Silver
51
Posted by PF on Mon, 12 Apr 2010 18:23 | # Silver, Your pretense to have peeped the heart of each nationalist is wrong. The very fact that you would lambaste us all generally based on the worst characteristics of some of us, speaks volumes about you and your proximity to us in terms of heart-feelings. And a man doesn’t leave all his worth behind when he gets a fixed idea, even if its of revenge and grievance; for all its distorting influence on the personality, his worth is not destroyed. The wayward souls who are tempted to extreme thinking are not our enemies, but by virtue of your alienation and the tone with which you gleefully taunt, you clearly are - regardless of your supposedly having hatched the grand scheme which is sufficiently racialist to allow for our inconvenient truth while not scaring away herd-man: that is your whole claim to fame, that you, a man without a country who keeps his heart free from hatred, will be able to do this tightrope walk and so seduce herd-man. You may be sufficiently fluffy and ‘nuanced’ to win the love of a few, but to a loyalist someone with your history and origin “will always come up smelling of fish”. What do you want from us? To be acknowledged superior to internet racialists generally? To be acknowledged as holding the key to the racial preservation of a group whose fate you’ve mocked? To be acknowledged as the golden middle way? As a deracinated anti-Nordic racialist sine patria, what can you tell us, except that our cruder elements live in a revenge dream and act like cavemen - something we already know? 52
Posted by Gudmund on Mon, 12 Apr 2010 18:38 | #
Yes. Even in his supposedly “friendly” stage, there was the ever-present undercurrent of resentment. When you look at the things he wrote which (allegedly) Rienzi posted, I have a very hard time believing those sorts of things could be uttered by anything other than a hardline pro-race replacement, communist. What a nut. 53
Posted by Say Whaaat? on Mon, 12 Apr 2010 19:09 | #
Captain, While it is admirable of you to defend your turf and your peeps, I’m left wondering if you have had a gander at the archives of MR? Specifically the “deep” thinking of one JR Richards? Bottom line is there is enough room at the trough for all and this endless, petty bickering is horribly childish and disastrous. 54
Posted by Wandrin on Mon, 12 Apr 2010 19:21 | #
NS ideas, and particularly symbols, have an enduring pull on white rabbits who are past a certain point of radicalization. However they have an equally strong repellant effect on white rabbits who are below that level of radicalization. Therefore NS, at least in an obvious form, could only make a triumphant return among white rabbits if and when our existential crisis became obvious even to the blindest - which would probably be too late. In a less obvious form, maybe. My other problem with NS thinking is, apart from wanting England to stay English, i don’t have a problem with Poles, Russians etc. I think if white rabbits want some lebensraum they should take it off the mozzies. 55
Posted by Guessedworker on Mon, 12 Apr 2010 21:46 | # Silver, You had at opportunity - an important opportunity - to fight for a unity of European survivalisms by, since you lived in Anglo-Australia, fighting as a fellow European for Anglo-Australian survival. But that would be an act of such inhuman generosity I don’t think it is fair to berate any man for failing in it, or even to appreciate it Of course, it is deeply regrettable that, as a result of that failure, your childhood embitterments have not moderated but, on the contrary, has involved downward into hatred. Truly, that is unnecessary. Neither is it remotely necessary to project that same hatred upon us, which you are very plainly doing. But you are by no means the first to do that. Silver, if you have now “found your home” in hatred of us, I can see no useful purpose in you continuing to comment here, can you? 56
Posted by Grimoire on Tue, 13 Apr 2010 07:10 | # Well, if Silver leaves I shall be sorry not to debate with him. I have the impression he is intelligent, aware with the sensitivity to intuit that here in the West, the Status Quo’s mask of Delphic technique, of predetermined outcome… are failing. Only stopgaps, ‘sleight of hand’ and misdirection remain. Time is not against us. Those such as Silver can feel it, hear it…the sound of the inevitable. The veil trembles and wise Silver unerringly is troubled. 57
Posted by (allegedly) Rienzi posted on Tue, 13 Apr 2010 11:00 | # (allegedly) Rienzi posted As I’ve already made clear to Guessedworker elsewhere, the comments that are referred to were not from me. To clarify: I do not post here, except in instances such as this, in which I’m mentioned in threads in which heretofore I’ve had nothing to do with. 58
Posted by Jawake on Fri, 16 Apr 2010 05:11 | # On a post about Poland and Katyn, perhaps it is appropriate to remember the work of Louis Fitzgibbon. He worked against the Marxist pressure put on him, and the rest of the world, to forget. 60
Posted by John on Wed, 21 Apr 2010 09:19 | #
And yet we’re villified for trying to do the same things they’re lauded for but everybody seem blind to this double standard. The WWII psyop worked extremely well. 61
Posted by Jean West on Fri, 23 Apr 2010 10:55 | # Perhaps you’ve already seen this: http://www.totallyjewish.com/news/national/c-13853/cameron-i-will-empower-uk-jews/ Looks like there may be hope for England yet. . . As long as there are people who see and despise the Jewish takeover and transformation of their countries, there will be those among them—those whose minds are freer of guilt, ignorance, or bias, so as to see more clearly, thoughts of the one country that tried to stop it, and the desperate measures it needed to resort to in order to make that effort, will persist. And rightly so. Germany and NS are not the enemy. They are the precedent. Until present day “nationalists” make that connection, they’re whistling in the wind. Just as WWII, the big bad Nordic Germans, the “Holocaust,” and the poor, persecuted Jews comprise the bulk of Jewish mythology with which they overpower us, we must, of necessity, rebut and debunk those elements in a counterattack. A broadly defined battle against ill-defined “fascism” is a spot of nothingness. : ) JW Post a comment:
Next entry: The attack has begun
|
|
Existential IssuesDNA NationsCategoriesContributorsEach author's name links to a list of all articles posted by the writer. LinksEndorsement not implied. Immigration
Islamist Threat
Anti-white Media Networks Audio/Video
Crime
Economics
Education General
Historical Re-Evaluation Controlled Opposition
Nationalist Political Parties
Science Europeans in Africa
Of Note MR Central & News— CENTRAL— An Ancient Race In The Myths Of Time by James Bowery on Wednesday, 21 August 2024 15:26. (View) Slaying The Dragon by James Bowery on Monday, 05 August 2024 15:32. (View) The legacy of Southport by Guessedworker on Friday, 02 August 2024 07:34. (View) Ukraine, Israel, Taiwan … defend or desert by Guessedworker on Sunday, 14 April 2024 10:34. (View) — NEWS — Farage only goes down on one knee. by Guessedworker on Saturday, 29 June 2024 06:55. (View) |
Posted by FB on Sun, 11 Apr 2010 03:41 | #
This place has really become a boring ghost town.