A Request To Dr. Lindtner - To Build The Case Warranting Native European Defense Despite The Guilt Trips of World War II (discussed below on the anniversary of Dresden) Here is an interview request that I sent to Dr. Christian Lindtner on February 12th Dear Dr. Lindtner, As producer for Majorityrights.com, I am writing you to inquire as to the possibility of arranging for an interview. Majority Rights takes a position (secular) regarding Christianity which very much respects your scholarly critique. Nevertheless, while I am writing you at this email address, my inquiry actually has more to do with a hope to discuss appropriate response to the fall-out of World War II, facts and mythos. Your videos discussing holocaust revisionism are the most credible on the topic that I have seen. I do not see it as necessary to go-over that same ground in exhaustive detail. My position is that subsequent generations of Germans and others are innocent and ought not have to continue to pay, irrespective of the facts of Nazi Germany. I am not anti-German and I am assuming that neither are you, anti-German. My question is, how do we assert our innocence, along with that of present day Germans, to warrant implementing our defense of our nations as the preserves of our native nationals? - particularly in light of, and despite, the holocaust? I believe that despite the holocaust that Germany and Europe does not owe the world, Jews, or anybody, its destruction through immigration and assimilation. This is different from what holocaust deniers, even revisionists, are saying. Committed revisionists and deniers seem to believe everything, all of our defensive warrant, hinges upon debunking the holocaust. It is perhaps easier for me to see that as not necessarily the case as my ancestors even, had even less in the way of historical responsibility. Nevertheless, revisionists seem to have an overwhelming desire to unburden us of guilt trips* for these events, for which no guilt ought to be assigned them - and as a result, it seems to me that they are making the cause for European national sovereignty more resisted and less trustworthy when, in fact, it is a fully legitimate cause and ought to be seen that way irrespective of the holocaust. What I seek from you in an interview is to help build this case to establish the warrant of European nations to preserve their nations for their native kinds despite The World Wars, whatever the facts. Please say that you will grant us the interview Dr. Lindtner. It can be very important to inter-European peace and survival. R.S.V.P. ............................................................................
............................................................................... For those of you who take exception to my deferential use of the word “holocaust”, understand that by it I mean a name given to mass deaths of Jews in the world war, however they came about, irrespective of any obnoxious elevation of importance of Jewish deaths over European deaths - which Dr. Lindtner recognizes in his characterizing it, holocaustianity, as a religion.
.....................................................................................................................................................................
At the Yalta conference, just days before the Dresden firebombing..
And this comment on the article.. com contrarian From a particularist/nationalist perspective it’s best to write it off as a painful learning experience and get on with nationalism 2.0.”
I keep hearing these retarded arguments that the Nazis shouldn’t have invaded Russia and that Britain should’ve let Nazi Germany do as it liked with Poland. If 20/20 hindsight is exercised, then it should be said that Hitler shouldn’t have invaded Poland. The next argument, also retardedly Buchananesque, is that Poland was betrayed to the umpteenth degree anyway and therefore Germany invading was of no matter. But even under Soviet control, Poland retained a semblance of national boundaries, more importantly from its point of view, its language and more importantly still, its native genetic homogeneity. Horrible as Soviet control was, neither Poland’s boundaries, language nor genetics were in Hitler’s plans. The holocaust of the peoples of Dresden is horrible. It is an unspeakable loss of European genetic treasure. As were all the European deaths of World War II - a war unnecessarily fought as a 1) conventional military war and unnecessarily 2) inter-European as it largely was, pitting R1b against R1a - both frames, conventional militarism and anti-Polinism/anti-Slav, were Hitler’s/Friedrich The Great’s. If you want to use 20/20 hindsight to re-frame World War II and what should not have been done, take it to herr E1B1B1 Hitler. Don’t kid yourself. Look at how sick and enraged that Europeans were of ANOTHER World War, which Hitler and his worldview had some small part in initiating, a worldview that had the thin pretense of warrant to take lands and displace peoples up to the Urals on the basis of three and a half small cites being given to Poland by Versailles, a world view that had the design of removing your nation newly established after a bitter ordeal and fight of 123 years, and the realization of his plans of smashing it, taking it away again, killing your father, wife, your daughter, your brother, and you too, charged with an imperson- al mission of bombing a precious German city, might just allow yourself to do that. A habit, custom, and world view following the line of Friedrich the Great, based on inter-European militarism and a friend enemy distinction of Germanics/Slavs is what should be rejected with 20/20 hindsight - not that Roosevelt and Churchill shouldn’t have gotten into the war, but that Hitler shouldn’t have ordered it in that way. And don’t kid yourself either - if you know that a European nation like his has plans to take your nation and eliminate you (that was basically known) and some Jew points a gun at that European guy looking to kill you, what are you going to say? No, Mr. Jew, don’t shoot at this guy looking to kill me? If you want to exercise 20/20 hindsight, for all the European deaths, where it should not have started, the epistemological blunder was with herr E1B1B1 Hitler’s world view and actions thereupon. And if you want to keep Europeans hating and fighting each other, just keep promoting the “innocence” of his worldview and the “supreme and singular guilt” of the Allied leaders. ............................................................................................... Comments:2
Posted by ownmost innocence on Mon, 02 Mar 2015 07:05 | # I am going to defend Europeans, which includes Germans, obviously, among all our discreet kinds, whether the holocaust is a thousand percent true or false. Admittedly, it is from my perspective that holocaust denial does not seem necessary and in fact, quite unhelpful as it casts suspicion upon our innocence and otherwise eminently warranted motive to defend ourselves in these generations far removed from the World Wars. Particularly as the facts stand in the past and nobody alive bears live responsibility for their happening - only perhaps some legacy of survivor’s guilt and speculation that there might be a genetic tendency to repeated behavior under certain circumstances (a suspicion only exacerbated by denial) - it is easier to proceed with defense of Germans and European survival as a genetic whole and national parts if the holocaust is more or less factually true (how those facts “count”, say, as a “religion”, commanding punishment for eternity, is another matter). But if the facts are more or less true, they beg the question of “why?” such hostility toward Jews? There are only two general answers in response: either the Nazi Germans were ex-nihilo homocidal, determinedly linked to such ideological proclivity, or there was interaction with provocation which created a reaction beyond their normal, every day state. We all know the experience of being provoked and overreacting. Upon reflection we realize that we might have acted differently, for even if we got revenge to some extent, we hurt and misrepresented ourselves at the same time. We were not in our authentic character where might lay our ownmost innocence. Under provocation of foreign influence, and not having our full, authentic bearing, we overreacted, overcompensated to throw-off the malign influence, taking us beyond optimal parameters of our authentic range of functional autonomy. Thus, it may be said that our true character was not represented, but there were mitigating circumstances of provocation. Our true character shows in recognition of a different course, a more measured, rational response, which retains the light of our interests while handling provocation in such a way that does not induce us to assimilate the role of the antagonistic and exploitative agency which provoked us. It is perhaps taking that very measure of authenticity, as in GW’s focus, which is crucial to our understanding. And, I suspect, that The Golden Rule and its universality is a dangerous trick played upon us, through what Bowery describes as the first popularized instantiation of Jewish media hegemony - the Christian texts; wherein, as GW says, we play the role of “undifferentiated gentile masses”, to be mixed away while Jews retain particular identity as the special, chosen people and all that bull. One measure in correction then, is The Silver Rule of “do not do to them what you would not want done to yourself”, to replace the toxicity and non-discrimination of The Golden Rule’s undifferentiated obsequiousness. I wouldn’t be the least bit surprised if there were some biological, cybernetic correction on the part of the Nazis as a result of Christianity’s obsequiousness. Following a cycle of feedback for needed correction, and subsequent over- compensation (viz. WWI), Gregory Bateson had an interesting take on the Nazis, suggesting that they manifested malevolent transformation as a result of having been kicked when they were down in Versailles - this was a betrayal on a meta-communicative level; having surrendered (in WWI) the nature of the relationship was invoked - could we trust your mercy? If kicked when down in surrender, it then became doubly hard to trust, and made “moral puritans” of the victim..we might say, “factual, truther taskmasters”, in the case of the present day deniers unending and fanatical concern for minutia of proof. The absurd, pure unanimity, professions of complete denial and perfect victimhood by Nazi apologists indicates a manifestation of this puritanism. Nevertheless, Dr. Margaret MacMillan argues that The Treaty suffered from bad publicity, that it was not quite as unreasonable as popularly taken. That would then lend itself to the claim of “over-perception of having been kicked when down” - but even so, sufficient enough, as perception, to precipitate overreaction. These expressions, therefore, would call into question the social interaction of the Germans which took them away from their optimal and authentic character. Now, it may be true that Germans are characteristically top-heavy in logic, and with enough provocation and stress, a few planks of relational judgment might come unhinged. But if something like that is known and honestly taken into account, it might be managed in cooperation with the management of other European populations. And as for their excellent logic, as opposed to V2’s being directed at fellow Europeans, judgment may allow the rockets to be redirected to the stars.. 4
Posted by DanielS on Tue, 03 Mar 2015 08:18 | # Angelo John Gage returns to Renegade: http://www.renegadebroadcasting.com/solar-storm-angelo-john-gage-3-1-15/ He claims that he’s never heard anyone use the term “anti-supremacist.” While that may be true, and again, fine and good with me, Bowery has said the same thing almost exactly, as have I, and many others, in essence. Next, Gage goes on to claim that in his three years of White activism that he has become so informed that he can refute all arguments by the enemy. He provides the example that the evolution of DNA existed before humans and therefore race is not a social construct. Again, of course, all he proves is that he does not understand social constuctionism. He says that you “cannot deny Hitler’s economic miracle.” But while many aspects of Strasser’s economic miracle may be commendable, Hitler’s betrayal of it, beginning with “the night of the long knives” (perhaps “The Road to Resurgence”, even further back) does fly in the face of Hitler’s credit. And to focus on domestic economic turnaround is a bit like Gage’s next argument, focusing on one aspect of an overall failed regime - saying, “no gas chambers therefore no” etc At which point a retarded person calls into the show and says that “anybody who oppose(s/d) Hitler is opposed to Whites.” Of course the opposite is true, anyone who advocates Hitler advocates the most obvious conflict and self destruction among Whites. But Hunt and Gage do not rebuke the caller’s position in that manner and go right on talking…. Next, Gage refers to “Hippies being too busy smoking pot at Woodstock” and thereby Gage falls into the right-wing trap of being distracted from Jewish, Jewish feminist programs and into right-wing motives (corporate/military industrial), while blaming White men for pursuing the guiding light of their survival despite a compulsory draft into a war (Viet Nam) irrelevant to their EGI. Idiot. The two go on to discuss their belief in natural elites…but with their commitment to Hitler, etc, demonstration is again provided that there is a difference between judgment and logic. Logic is for followers, judgment is for the elite, from which these two show themselves to be far removed. 5
Posted by Churchill's unthinkable plan on Tue, 03 Mar 2015 09:28 | # ‘Finest Years: Churchill as Warlord 1940-45′ by Max Hastings.
6
Posted by Love your enemy, weapon against sociopaths on Wed, 04 Mar 2015 07:10 | # In hour one of the Stormfront podcast of Date: 03-03-15 Truck Roy provides and interesting interpretation of “Love Your Enemy” He maintains that this is a meant to provide a mindset to overcome the emotional response to sociiopaths, because they are not phased by emotion and concern for the pain and suffering they cause. Therefore, it is best to understand them, even “befriend them” in some dishonest, Jewish way, and then might one know how to defeat them…. or worse, “befriend them” in the Jewish prescribed “Gentile way” of loving the undifferentiated other so as to convert and assimilate with them. There are these clever interpretations, “turn the other cheek” to know if the man striking is doing so on calculation rather than emotional impulse, is another. Knowing that it is calculated, one is more free to go ahead and defend oneself. While there are clever interpretations of Christianity, such as these, there are still too many Jewish bugs and tangles for a normal European population. We, being at one with the undifferentiated gentile other, to be subject to universal panmixia as GW points out, being a central problem. Moreover, Truck Roy counterposes Christianity to Nietzsche, a false dichotomy. 7
Posted by Helvena on Wed, 11 Mar 2015 19:39 | # experiment with why the italics won’t turn off after Helvena 8
Posted by Good War / Better Peace on Sun, 19 Apr 2015 12:10 | # “Good War . . . Better Peace” by Thomas Goodrich, April 18, 2015 To help celebrate the upcoming 70th Anniversary of the end of the “Good War” and the beginning of the “Good Peace,” I offer the following from my books, Hellstorm—The Death of Nazi Germany, 1944–1947, and Rape Hate—Sex & Violence in War & Peace. And so, with the once mighty German Army now disarmed and enslaved […] And so, with the once mighty German Army now disarmed and enslaved in May, 1945, and with their leaders either dead or awaiting trial for so-called “war crimes,” the old men, women and children who remained in the dismembered Reich found themselves utterly at the mercy of the victors. Unfortunately for these survivors, never in the history of the world was mercy in shorter supply. Soon after the Allied victory in Europe, the purge of Nazi Party members from government, business, industry, science, education, and all other walks of German life commenced. While a surprising number of Nazis were allowed—even compelled—to man their posts temporarily to enable a smooth transition, all party members, high and low, were sooner or later excised from German daily life. In theory, “de-Nazification” was a simple transplanting of Nazi officials with those of democratic, socialist or communist underpinnings. In practice, the purge became little more than a cloak for an orgy of rape, torture and death.
Soon after occupation, all adult Germans were compelled to register at the nearest Allied headquarters and complete a lengthy questionnaire on their past activities. While many nervous citizens were detained then and there, most returned home, convinced that at long last the terrible ordeal was over. For millions, however, the trial had but begun. “Then it started,” remembered Anna Fest, a woman who had registered with the Americans six weeks earlier.
Few German adults, Nazi or not, escaped the dreaded knock on the door. Far from being dangerous fascists, Freddy and Lali Horstmann were actually well-known anti-Nazis. Records Lali from the Russian Zone:
9
Posted by Dresden's strategic importance on Mon, 04 May 2015 22:07 | # Dresden did have strategic military value - it was an important listening post of all frequencies: ...more of what you won’t hear from the American Right: 10
Posted by The Korherr Report on Sat, 22 Aug 2020 12:19 | # David Cole Stein explains that while the Korherr report is most inormative regarding the number and means of Jewish deaths during the Nazi campaign, it has not been promulgated as it does not serve the narrative of the two extremes. Holocaust deniers are dissatisfied, of course, because it makes it clear that millions of Jews were deliberately killed by the Nazis, they didn’t “disappear” by escaping to other nations, and that they didn’t just die of typhus. However, those who want to maintain the 6,000,000 number are dissatisfied, because the report shows that number to be inflated by a million or two. Post a comment:
Next entry: Philosophical universe: Part 1
|
|
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— Patriotic Alternative given the black spot by Guessedworker on Thursday, 14 March 2024 17:14. (View) On Spengler and the inevitable by Guessedworker on Wednesday, 21 February 2024 17:33. (View) Twilight for the gods of complacency? by Guessedworker on Tuesday, 02 January 2024 10:22. (View) Milleniyule 2023 by Guessedworker on Friday, 22 December 2023 13:11. (View) — NEWS — Collett sets the record straight by Guessedworker on Thursday, 14 March 2024 17:41. (View) The legacy of Richard Lynn by Guessedworker on Thursday, 31 August 2023 22:18. (View) CommentsThorn commented in entry 'On Spengler and the inevitable' on Mon, 18 Mar 2024 23:20. (View) Guessedworker commented in entry 'On Spengler and the inevitable' on Mon, 18 Mar 2024 00:31. (View) Thorn commented in entry 'On Spengler and the inevitable' on Sun, 17 Mar 2024 23:58. (View) Thorn commented in entry 'A Russian Passion' on Sun, 17 Mar 2024 23:12. (View) Al Ross commented in entry 'What lies at the core' on Sat, 16 Mar 2024 03:28. (View) |
Posted by In the sway of Faurisson on Mon, 02 Mar 2015 05:35 | #
In a coming podcast with Majority Rights, Dr. Lindtner will touch upon the Stolz case, seeing her as used, similar as Dieudonné, in the dishonest and malign sway of Robert Faurisson.