Comments posted

Page 1 of 3429 pages  1 2 3 >  Last ›

Trainspotter wrote:

GW: “Nothing seems to touch it.” 

Indeed.  Aggressive liberalism appears to be, in the vast majority of cases, incurable. It does not respond to reason or evidence.  The anti-white liberal will look you right in the eye and insist that 2+2=5.  Then it equals 3, and then 7.  If it suits his purposes, it might even equal 4.  And then a few minutes later it doesn’t. 

Its adherents operate as if they are members of a cult.  I seem to remember a part of Raspail’s Camp of the Saints where he is describing the white lunatics that assisted the non-white armada in its voyage.  He says something to the effect that while none of them knew one another, they understood each other perfectly.  Raspail really hit upon something there, and while I’ve always remembered it, it’s only been in recent years that I’ve truly grasped it.  They get it instinctively: it’s about destroying the white world.  Whatever their differences, they are all pulling in the same direction.   

Our mistake has been to view them as our fellow citizens, as part of our people.  We have tried to convince them, to reason with them, to view them as rational creatures.  This is what “conservatives” have been doing for generations now, and it never works.  The anti-white marches forward, undeterred.  As long as we exist at all, his work is not done. 

As one example among many: In the United States, untold thousands of once good schools have been submerged under the tidal wave of racial integration.  As the blacks and browns take over, test scores collapse, crime increases, social trust evaporates.  Wonderful places decompose into the depressing, ugly and stupid.  This happens again and again and again. 

Does the anti-white liberal respond to this reality and question his values?  Not at all.  Instead, he looks you straight in the eye, and says that “Diversity is great for our schools.  Your school needs more diversity.”  He will consider you crazy and hateful if you disagree. 

I should note that I here refer to the genuine white liberal, not Jews.  For Jews, destroying white schools is not a bug, but a feature.  They are merely an alien tribe undermining a competitor, and therefore must be seen in a different light than the subset of the white population that really believes this insanity.  A few exceptions exist here and there but, by and large, this particular brand of insanity among whites appears incurable. 

The good news is that the percentage of whites who are truly part of the cult, those who operate out of malevolence with malice aforethought (as opposed to ignorance and misinformation) is fairly small.  I would guess only a few percent, but perhaps as much as ten percent or even a bit higher.  There is of course a larger chunk that are easily influenced and susceptible to the machinations of the real sickos. 

The only solution is complete and utter separation from these lunatics (Leon Haller is correct).  They are not mere traitors for profit, but malevolent quasi-psychopaths.  The idea of a meaningful polity must necessarily exclude such people, for these are not fellow citizens with normal differences of opinion, exercising their voice in the public square.  They instead demand that whites be dissolved as a people, either dying out entirely or becoming Africanized hybrids.  How do you reason with that?  You can’t; it’s utterly outrageous. It’s like trying to reason with a knife wielding lunatic. 

Instead, always attack.  Never argue with these people with the idea of converting them, but rather with the goal of speaking to onlookers who still retain a measure of health.  In the private realm, build communities of all sorts, whether they be geographical white enclaves or simple networks of like minded people, perhaps a co-op gym (read Jack Donovan’s article on that) or a communal garden, or some sort of business.  The point being, don’t bother trying to convert the anti-white.  Instead, bother to exclude him.  Freeze him out in the private realm, humiliate him for the benefit of onlookers in the public realm (thread wars, etc.). 

In any event, that’s what we missed: we thought we were dealing with people who were merely mistaken, who had fallen into error, perhaps even as a result of good intentions.  But we were not dealing with such people at all. It should be obvious now that they don’t have good intentions, if they ever did.  They are destroyers, proceeding with malice aforethought, and it is our very people that they mean to destroy.  All else is just window dressing.

Create networks that freeze them out in the short run, with the long run goal of creating polities that exclude them entirely.

This comment appeared in entry 'Forty-five years of thought-free liberal-left emotionalism on race and immigration' on 04/23/14, 05:01 PM. (go to entry to post a reply)

Tyler wrote:

@ DanielS,

Please leave the lecturing and self righteous attitude behind. I treated you with respect and intellectual honesty so far, but I see very very little reciprocity. So I will adapt a bit to your style from now on, if I may.


1. I am a ‘‘victim of Hitler propaganda’’ grin . Yeah right.  Hitler propaganda is massively encouraged, top notch quality and is overwhelming these days, isn’t it?? Especially in Europe.  Since you asked: I am dutch-belgian-french and your site records will show you where I live. I lost ancestors fighting him. Hitler propaganda in Core Europe these days… do you have any idea what you are talking about ??? Do you know the laws in Europe??  This is the most laughable rebuttal from you which makes me wonder if you are intellectually capable at all, let alone intellectually honest (which I already noticed to be a very close call).  Especially so since you and some of your mates here claim to be so intellectual.

2. You spit on NS, on Hitler and ridicule those who do with poor rebuttals. You use the language of the liberal system, of our enemies, (use of ‘‘nazi’‘, ‘‘normal’’ people do not approve of Hitler’’  etc). You make ridiculous and false associations and thus play in the hands of our enemies.  Fine. Yet you DO link to so many websites that do glorify NS and Hitler. What is the point of that? Cause more confusion and division??  I now asked you several times, what ideology do YOU suggest that we use, as someone that proclaims to speak for WN? Point me and us in the right direction please. I have shown above that we ARE interested to compromise, I am myself not even a ‘‘Nazi’‘, but I most definitely won’t fall for pseudo intellectual rubbish, silly experiments nor shills.   

3. Back to propaganda:  Good propaganda doesn’t have to lie. Goebels was right in that respect. Looks like your mind has already been lost to master of deception Bernays who rules in your homecountry. You have been studying history I understand, that says it all. Try a bit of historic revisionism instead.  If you think you are the only one with a degree and some life experience, you are seriously mistaken. I won’t even mention maturity and age. 

4. It appears that your grudge against NS and Hitler are purely anecdotal,  seen from your perspective as an indoctrinated historian but above all, as a beaten slav. I do regret that your people were victims, but so were my people. It doesn’t mean I have to condemn NS, an ideology. It was war for christ’s sake. If you want to play a leading role in the WN movement and SPEAK for us all, it would make sense to put yourself above these anecdotal things and look at the big picture. There are always 2 sides and narratives to those historic events, which I hope you will admit if you are an intellectual. I can wipe the floor with your people and show their role in our demise, but I will refrain from it. 

 

This comment appeared in entry 'Majority Rights: For Those Who Will See The Obvious..' on 04/23/14, 04:46 PM. (go to entry to post a reply)

SunShine wrote:

The only reason Cubans have been more successful than other minorities is because they are white, or at least some of them are. I hope they preserve their white genes and don’t mix with the less civilized darkies.

This comment appeared in entry 'The Cubans of Miami' on 04/22/14, 11:02 PM. (go to entry to post a reply)

Guessedworker wrote:

Carolus,

I asked a question:

Besides anti-Jewish action, what is there in its social dispensation I have missed, and which you approve of?

You replied without actually answering it.  Fancy a shot at it?

This comment appeared in entry 'Majority Rights: For Those Who Will See The Obvious..' on 04/22/14, 06:18 PM. (go to entry to post a reply)

Guessedworker wrote:

Leon,

For your info, I floated the Our Land idea a few times during the period when people were expecting Andrew Brons to launch a successor party to the BNP.  One or two folk noted the name.  But those who actually decide these things seemed to want to stick to the usual mix of “National”, “Democrat”, “British” and “Party”.

Anyway, it made no difference.  Nothing meaningful happened.  Brons feared adding to the long list of micro-parties, and the opportunity was lost.  Paul Weston’s Liberty GB seems to be the only party really gaining any attention.

This comment appeared in entry 'Majority Rights: For Those Who Will See The Obvious..' on 04/22/14, 06:12 PM. (go to entry to post a reply)

DanielS wrote:

.....
Tyler says:


“Any alternative will have to deal with the same negative emotions and associations anyhow, so you mikght as well face the reality head-on. To believe that dismissing Hitler will solve a big problem, is to be fooled.  Remember what the late Jonathan Bowden said in that respect: white nationalism…. is nationalism and your opponents will push you in ‘‘that’’ (sic) corner and make you squirm for the obvious reasons. And he is right. So we better adapt to that reality.”

Absolute nonsense. Nobody could EVER make me cop to being a Nazi or to admiration for Hitler. I am not alone, quite to the contrary.

You will find, sooner or later, that those who do try to embrace Hitler will be confronted with the reality of why it is not a good idea, with a rude awakening of the people that they are betraying in one way or another as such; those who take the angle of loyalty to Hitler will never be popular and respected for it, and they should not be. They will be confronted with a fury, and they should be. Reality will show you why..the answer to your next statement should provide a further clue..

You say


“@DanielS and Thorn
I’m not sure if you are aware of that new US-based white nationalist website that does not dismiss H nor NS but rather explicitly glorifies them without complexes when necessary.  That site rose quickly to the top nationalist site in the alexa rankings, which proves (to a large degree) my points”


The popularity of some pro-Hitler sites, like The Daily Stormer, Renegade, Counter Currents (the litmus test that Greg Johnson has made of respect for Hitler there), the insistence by the imbeciles at “The American Nationalist Network” that “nobody who rejects Hitler can be a true White nationalist”, The Realist Report with John Friend, are among the reasons why I have made this post…anticipating that they would be fawning over Hitler on his birthday..


Now then, you say that you will never spit on Hitler and turn your back on him.


I know the history in Eastern Europe and I know that Americans do not know the history here. They have known the Jewish side, they are starting to know the Nazi side (and my goodness is it some vile propaganda), but they do not know the side of the Slavic nations - I do.

Let me tell you, Tyler, your saying you will not turn your back on Hitler is tantamount to saying that it is ok with you to invade Eastern nations, take their countries and kill any of their people who try to resist and fight back. That’s not the half of it.

As I have previously noted, one of the reasons why a pro-Hitler position can gain audience in America is due to its largely German and Irish demographic - the largest White demographics there. These groups, most saliently, but among others, were not in a path empathic to the butt-end of the Nazi wrath… there would rather be some inclination to see the Nazis as “the good guys” and to exclude all contrary information. That is, it is you Tyler, who is falling for propaganda and lies.

I remember the first times I saw Poland and Russia. The rage I’d felt to see these places and people.

To realize that American media and culture had lied to me all of my life, had degraded these people.. growing up in America, I would not reveal my Polish side to people, because I knew it would automatically mean a Polish joke about stupid people.. But when I saw Poland and Poles, it was shocking, I found that on average, that Polish people were better specimens than Americans: the rage I felt at having been made ashamed of these people… I suppose the reason for the stereotype was because America is a largely Germanic population headed by a Jewish media…hence, Poles were a convenient mark..

..we had another stereotype about Russian women being ugly (weight lifters with mustaches), can you imagine?

I don’t know if you are American, but my point is that Americans, for example, have not known the truth of eastern Europe…the number crunchers do not tell the story either..but certainly, certainly Nazi propagandists will not tell you the truth of the history and the present reality.

No Tyler, it is you who is believing lies. To say that we may as well embrace Hitler bespeaks one who needs a bit of time yet.

Check out GW’s comments, he is correct: “National Socialism was a construct of Nietzschean morality, Judaism, and Fascism.”

This comment appeared in entry 'Majority Rights: For Those Who Will See The Obvious..' on 04/22/14, 05:43 PM. (go to entry to post a reply)

Desmond Jones wrote:

But is there any evidence from WW2, say, that this is the only foundation on which peoples can be called to their own defence?

Israel might be considered as one example of applying the above traits in some degree to assert a people’s natural right to life and land.

This comment appeared in entry 'Majority Rights: For Those Who Will See The Obvious..' on 04/22/14, 04:26 PM. (go to entry to post a reply)

Bill wrote:

This is beyond belief that people are so caught up in the past that they can not change for the betterment of society in general.  Why do we waste our energy and time trying to justify why Hitler did what he did and if there was a valid argument in his favor. 
I for one feel it is time for a change and when every one decides that they want what is best for the world, they will do the same. I may be a little naive as to reality in some peoples eyes, but if we keep living in the past, how can we ever truly move forward.

This comment appeared in entry 'Elitism, secrecy, deception … the way to save white America?' on 04/22/14, 03:45 PM. (go to entry to post a reply)

Tyler wrote:

@ Leon,
Consider us in full agreement,  Pan European Ethnofascism certainly ticks a lot of boxes. Note that what I said earlier about Hitler § NS was first and foremost a reaction to the article and its title as I for one will not spit on Hitler and certainly not on NS and its achievements in the then given circumstances, even if we have to drop them in any other ideologic alternatives. Any alternative will have to deal with the same negative emotions and associations anyhow, so you mikght as well face the reality head-on. To believe that dismissing Hitler will solve a big problem, is to be fooled.  Remember what the late Jonathan Bowden said in that respect: white nationalism…. is nationalism and your opponents will push you in ‘‘that’’ (sic) corner and make you squirm for the obvious reasons. And he is right. So we better adapt to that reality.

Besides, look at the successes of Golden Dawn and how they deal with the negative associations and pressures from extremist liberal groups. They cope with it and do so very well without betrayals and without squirming. They have strength of ideology and appeal to the masses without complexes nor lies and because of steadfastness. (this point also is a response to @Thorn and his last comment).


@ DanielS: H and NS lost, not solely because of some internal mistakes, but rather because in simple terms, ‘‘the world’’ believed the liars and ganged up on Germany. Worse in fact, the US was ganging up with arch rival communist SU. Why would this be??? Because they were both ultimately ruled by the same tribe, and the american brothers fell for their tricks. So it is ultimately internal betrayal once again.   

What I also find remarkable is your saying in the article:

DanielS: Let there be no mistake, those who insist upon Hitler and Nazism are Not White Nationalists

 
I have mentioned several times I don’t insist (see above : not a conditio sine qua non) but I find such a statement regrettable and I have only briefly mentioned why.

@DanielS and Thorn
I’m not sure if you are aware of that new US-based white nationalist website that does not dismiss H nor NS but rather explicitly glorifies them without complexes when necessary.  That site rose quickly to the top nationalist site in the alexa rankings, which proves (to a large degree) my points. Admittedly, it remains to be seen how long they will manage to do so.

Fraternal regards.

 

This comment appeared in entry 'Majority Rights: For Those Who Will See The Obvious..' on 04/22/14, 02:53 PM. (go to entry to post a reply)

Carolus wrote:

Guessedworker,

National Socialism was not a construct of “Nietzschean morality” or Judaism.

Not only is it incorrect, it’s a really lazy critique. Why don’t you just say that they were “racist” and “big meanies” or something?

This comment appeared in entry 'Majority Rights: For Those Who Will See The Obvious..' on 04/22/14, 02:07 PM. (go to entry to post a reply)

DanielS wrote:

Graham, I appreciate your explicit rejection of Hitler/Nazism, and I realize that you are probably not following what is going on in “White Nationalism” but the fact is that there are some vocal adherents to Hitler who are establishing popular sites and podcasts. At the same time, they are trying to engraft if not equate Hitlerism with “true” White nationalism, which is hugely false, misleading to the possibility of establishing solid grounds and to making headway among normal and intelligent people. Though we can agree that their premises are terribly unsound, they do not always cooperate by being entirely bereft of intellectual skill; nor do they lack social appeal, especially under the circumstances. Incredibly, some of them accuse others of lacking character (moral and otherwise) and threatening to give WN a bad name. I understand and share your frustration, but it emerges a matter that requires an occasional house cleaning as they are purveyors of some compelling arguments. After all, Hitler would not have gained such popularity by being lexically empty. Hence the importance, but also the opportunity, to underscore MR’s distinction from Hitler redemption - I knew that his birthday would bring celebration and laudatory articles about him on those popular sites, therefore I took occasion to mark what really is an important distinction here.

I still find your pending thoughts on fratricide and paternal intervention looming important.

GW, all of your comments are excellent. Thank you very much.

Thorn, the kind words are noted.

This comment appeared in entry 'Majority Rights: For Those Who Will See The Obvious..' on 04/22/14, 02:00 PM. (go to entry to post a reply)

Thorn wrote:

The SPLC and the ADL are all too happy to hear Hitler and Nazi appologetics. It legitimizes their claims in the minds of the gullable masses; hence, given the fear factor that it generates, it results in a steady stream of contributions. Enter the Genn Miller rampage. That alone will probably cause an avalanch of contributions to those anti-white Jewish activist hate groups.

Not only is Danny essentially right about Hitler… but as a practicle matter, it’s counterproductive to try to keep legitimising him.

This comment appeared in entry 'Majority Rights: For Those Who Will See The Obvious..' on 04/22/14, 12:32 PM. (go to entry to post a reply)

Graham_Lister wrote:

Not this utter crap again.

I think the topic has been dealt with here by someone else (cough, cough).

http://majorityrights.com/weblog/comments/the_ghosts_of_the_past

“In the stygian murkiness, reckless and despairing forces multiplied. Munich was their favoured venue. . .”

Now perhaps those without antinomian tendencies and a meta-political IQ above room-temperature can be left in peace? There are many site in cyber-space devoted 24/7 to ‘costume politics’ – please, please go to them. Enjoy you’re fractal wrongness, but not where non-idiots hope to gather – thanks.

This comment appeared in entry 'Majority Rights: For Those Who Will See The Obvious..' on 04/22/14, 09:58 AM. (go to entry to post a reply)

Leon Haller wrote:

I wish I had the time at the moment to engage this discussion at length. Great to see some new blood brought out.

Tyler:

When you speak of the present, are you saying we should try to rehabilitate NS, or that we should try to develop a contemporary movement like it?

I think that’s a key issue. I tend to think contemporary advocacy of Hitlerism (even shorn of the Germano-supremacism, which really seems to rankle DanielS) is an irredeemable loser, if only for PR reasons. Ditto the Left’s rehabilitation of communism. Neither is going to happen. The present Left is still viciously marxisant , but they understand that the old Leninist revolutionary rhetoric (“dictatorship of the proletariat”, “revolutionary vanguard”, “state ownership of the means of production”, etc) no longer resonates (at least outside of small circles of hardcore a@@holes). Why would you suppose that WNs could ever overcome the massive anti-NS indoctrination to which you allude (not to mention its illegality across much of Europe)?

OTOH, if what you are really advocating is some type of ethnofascism - or, even closer to the original spirit of NS, pan-European racial fascism ... that is, a white preservationism allied to ideological extreme authoritarianism and revolutionary street militancy ... then we are in agreement.

Europe will NOT be saved except through revolutionary violence. No one at MR should be under the slightest illusion on this point. GW had what I thought was a good name for an English ethnonationalist successor party to the (I gather) increasingly defunct BNP: Our Land [whatever became of that idea/proposal?]. Even if Our Land Party starts to gain traction, does anyone imagine that it will be able to achieve its ultimate racial objective - the removal of all nonwhite citizens from British soil - through normal democratic politics? Spare me. At best, an absolutely vital renewed English ethnonationalism, operating within the political system, might grow strong enough to halt future immigration. But I see no possibility that an English majority will actually vote for forcible repatriation. [Do any Englishmen disagree with me?]

So, to truly restore England, we must recognize from the outset that a non-democratic politics will ultimately be required. (Certainly, a lot of ‘tosh’ about ontology isn’t going to get the mosques shuttered and the black bodies removed!) But should this ultimate necessity for a period of authoritarian rule be acknowledged upfront, or should we recognize at the outset that our goals require a sequential process of gradually increasing political radicalization?

support UKIP > form Our Land to halt immigration > Our Land/UKIP alliance to challenge Tories > Our Land/UKIP/Tory coalition government, which finally halts immigration > Our Land (+ increasing street militancy) to push for consensus on repatriation or open civil warfare with alien communities > rightist/WN military coup d’etat or WN armed revolution > WN state conquest > repatriation.

I think an English ethnonationalism rigorously shorn of distractive NS attachments is the correct path, at least in the early phases of the indigenous reconquest of the UK.

 

 

 

This comment appeared in entry 'Majority Rights: For Those Who Will See The Obvious..' on 04/22/14, 08:04 AM. (go to entry to post a reply)

Guessedworker wrote:

Carolus,

National Socialism was a construct of Nietzschean morality, Judaism, and Fascism.  Besides anti-Jewish action, what is there in its social dispensation I have missed, and which you approve of?

This comment appeared in entry 'Majority Rights: For Those Who Will See The Obvious..' on 04/22/14, 04:08 AM. (go to entry to post a reply)

Carolus wrote:

So, let’s look at the key elements of National Socialism - those which are not purely economic, at least - and determine what role, if any, they could have today.

This is just a caricature - a bad one at that.

If you like caricatures, here’s one that’s at least good:

“Englishmen, you’ve got to admit, are a funny sight … A cross between a pastor and a little boy … Everything about them is ambiguous. Mostly they bugger each other …”

- Céline, Death on the Installment Plan

 

This comment appeared in entry 'Majority Rights: For Those Who Will See The Obvious..' on 04/21/14, 08:44 PM. (go to entry to post a reply)

Lurker wrote:

I’m pretty sure Hitler’s biggest mistake was not bombing Britain into oblivion when he had the chance - Arch

I see what you are saying but Hitler never had the chance to do that. It simply wasnt an option - whether he wanted it of not. No matter how thorough Britain’s defeat on mainland Europe, defeat and invasion of the British Isles was never possible at any point up to or during 1939-45.

D-Day was regarded as a risky operation. Yet an invasion of Britain in 1940 would have been conducted without full air superiority, without full naval superiority, without any of the specialised amphibious equipment, preparation and training seen on D-Day and other allied invasions.

Hitler called the brits our brothers. He could have defeated them, but didn’t - Tyler

I just dont think thats true, he maybe held back before Dunkirk, allowing the British Army to get away, to a degree. Maybe the air war wasn’t pursued as hard as it might have been etc but even so the Germans fell way short of inflicting defeat or opening the way for invasion. Germany didn’t invade Britain not just because Hitler didn’t want to but because it wasnt physically/militarily/logistically possible either. We know Hitler didnt want that but it wasnt an option anyway. He merely wanted Britain to stop fighting.

Thats getting off the point I know…

This comment appeared in entry 'Majority Rights: For Those Who Will See The Obvious..' on 04/21/14, 08:36 PM. (go to entry to post a reply)

Arch Hades wrote:

I’m pretty sure Hitler’s biggest mistake was not bombing Britain into oblivion when he had the chance and having a delusional and misguided fantasy that the British were on par with the Germans in terms of racial character, when in fact they’re very different.

Britain has chosen it’s glorious anti Nazi path, Autism, Muslim riots, and race mixing with Negroes.

This comment appeared in entry 'Majority Rights: For Those Who Will See The Obvious..' on 04/21/14, 08:12 PM. (go to entry to post a reply)

DanielS wrote:

....
Posted by Septimius Severus on April 21, 2014, 06:02 PM | #

http://youtu.be/olFDBeEQYTU

“The president of Poland is a fraudstuh in the pacckets of the Jewish lobby.”

Septimius, he probably is, as virtually all western leaders are now, a legacy thanks in large part to Nazi Germany’s inability to cooperate with other European nations.


Posted by Simo Häyhä on April 21, 2014, 06:23 PM | #

“I noticed someone is spouting the typical “genocidal, Slav/Polack-hating German” nonsense, so allow me to intervene.”

I assume you meant to say that I am German-hating, and I am not. And I have the opposite intention from genociding them, I seek to help them achieve sovereignty and to thrive right along with all European peoples.


Posted by Simo Häyhä on April 21, 2014, 06:28 PM | #

“Oh, not to mention the complete and utter fucking ABSURDITY (and hilariousness) of watching an American trying to define what Hitler and NS stood for, or if they’re “useful” (LOL) for Europeans today.

But of course, ‘MURICA speaks for the whole white race; as it is the center of the world, right? Or maybe this is just a case of a polack being a polack.”

Hm, seems more like a projection of a Nazi-kraut being a Nazi kraut. But again, I am half Italian and half Polish American. I’ve looked into the pro’s and cons of NS Germany: they did some things right and some things very wrong (Take a look at GW’s list above, it’s quite good). I know something of the nations adjacent to Germany and they are nothing like they have been characterized by the Nazis or even by American media over the years.

This comment appeared in entry 'Majority Rights: For Those Who Will See The Obvious..' on 04/21/14, 07:56 PM. (go to entry to post a reply)

DanielS wrote:

Now 18


Posted by Tyler on April 21, 2014, 05:53 PM | #

“Shoveling shit? He was a product of that time and the very particular circumstances: Versailles and the threat of being consumed by Communism. We musn’t forget that. We musn’t judge him now by today’s selective liberal standards.”

I didn’t say there were not causes and circumstances that went into his configuration.

He was a visionary. A superb leader.

For whatever good ideas he may have had, in sum, he blew it, catastrophically.

“He understood the pig picture, “

Exactly. He understood the PIG picture.

“geopolitics and saw all threats correctly.”

Obviously not.

“He was extremely intelligent, very well read and cultivated.”

He was intelligent in some ways, of course, but deeply flawed.

“He was courageous and just”

Absolutely not just.

“did what had to be done for the good of the state and the people.”

For Germans maybe.


“Albeit not a good military leader. But above all, he loved his people and country and worked relentlessly and selflessly for the betterment thereof.”

He only cared about Germany, and in the end, didn’t even care enough about them.

“He managed to get Germany out of the sh*t and bring the nation together as one whole, including the industrialists, working class and different political fractions inside NS.”

That is a consequence of logic that comes together when you conceptualize the people as a whole.

I refuse to shit on that.

But you also refuse to understand that he is not the only one who conceived or is able to conceive of something like that (minus the garbage that comes along with him).

“My own ancestors did fight against him, but they didn’t know that the current state of things is the outcome. I’m sure they would not approve. They thought they were fighting evil, because they were told lies.”

It was in Hitler’s power to not fight that war. He is far - FAR - far more to blame than your ancestors.

It is you who is falling for propaganda.

“The german people of then can be all of us Europeans today. Slavs are our brothers. Just as the north europeans and south europeans are, with different mentalities. We know exactly who are NOT our brothers, even if they are white. No more brother wars, that we agree on. We must unite and we therefore must focus on core elements, not details which will divide us.”

Well, fine, unless you try to say that Hitler is going to unite us, because it is not going to happen.


Call it what you want, but we are today under liberal extremist threat. Sweden has just now as I type approved a bill which makes criticising immigration a criminal offense. That is liberal ‘‘fascism’‘.

Indeed, enforcing liberalism upon us is the policy of our enemies.

“We all know this is fact now. How do you think you can tackle these developments? You need a comprehensive, strong ideology to address this onslaught, not some new loose idea by a few warped or lost liberals who are only worried about race.  We are entering live or death conditions as a people, so we need a comprehensive solution. Think about it.”

We are thinking about it, you are not paying attention. You just want to tell people that they should be following Hitler verbatim.

“Imperialist?”

Yes, Hitler was an imperialist. ..modeled after Friedrich the “Great”

“Look, we live today under pax americana (pax judaica) and liberal extremism. We can all see where that is leading to now.  It could have been a pax germanica.”

No thanks to any of that.

“I am not so sure if that would have been worse, quite to the contrary. And if you were not an enemy / subversive of the state, you had a good life. Many non-germans went to fight for NS Germany. Look at how the Ukrainians are still siding with the Germans.”

They looked upon the Nazis as help against the Soviets. Those Ukrainians who become familiar with Table Talk will see what Hitler had in mind for them and for Ukraine.

This comment appeared in entry 'Majority Rights: For Those Who Will See The Obvious..' on 04/21/14, 07:38 PM. (go to entry to post a reply)

DanielS wrote:

..............
Well, GW’s comment number 16 SHOULD have been enough.

But then they came shoveling the shit, in droves:

17, 18, 19, 20, 21.


For those in need of a short summation, we know this sort: Hitler can do no wrong, and anybody who says anything negative about him must be lying. That is their line, they are that impervious, that absurd, quite reminiscent of the YKW.

That’s the short version, now let me commence shoveling:

First, number 17


Posted by Goybbels on April 21, 2014, 05:44 PM | #

On August 22, 1939, just before the invasion of Poland, Hitler gave explicit permission to his commanders to kill “without pity or mercy, all men, women, and children of Polish descent or language.”

“-that gave me a good laughter.”

Did that give you a laugh, Goybbels? You know the thing of it is, I could just as well leave out that example and point to a myriad of misdeeds.


“but to be seriously for a moment, who believes in this crap Mr. Sienkiewicz? Polish Patriotards/stooges of the late british empire back then and US lackeys nowadays like you?”

Oh yeah, its all a lie. Nice try dirbag. There is plenty more crap that your god, Hitler, has spewed.


“how is it anti-white if the polish government has been and still is a Puppet under jewish Hegemony via US as a proxy?”

Because there were then and there are now Poles and other eastern Europeans who are nationalists and want their sovereignty.

“since poland got her lebensraum in the west (sadly not enough, like berlin for example)”

And you talk about lying propaganda? As if Poland had designs to take over Berlin.


“you won’t skvetch about the Nazi-Germanics that settled there before the first slavic tribes”

Actually, Slavs were there first, but no, nobody in recent history sought to deprive Germans of Berlin.

“arrived or the anti white Prussians ,right?”

Well the Prussians were inclined to be anti-some-Whites.


“It fascinates me that someone like you can get space to write something like this on a supposedly pro white platform.”

No, the real wonder is that someone like you, so determined to provoke inter-European conflict, has a voice that has not been dissuaded by now.

“I’m waiting for more anti-german drivel, I’m really enjoying your whining.”

Whining, right. “Whining and Yammering” (stock phrase of Dr. Pierce). You are waiting for something anti-German because that is what you are about, that is what you want, inter European fighting and pseudo justifications for Hitler’s disastrous worldview.
.........

This comment appeared in entry 'Majority Rights: For Those Who Will See The Obvious..' on 04/21/14, 07:14 PM. (go to entry to post a reply)

Simo Häyhä wrote:

Oh, not to mention the complete and utter fucking ABSURDITY (and hilariousness) of watching an American trying to define what Hitler and NS stood for, or if they’re “useful” (LOL) for Europeans today.

But of course, ‘MURICA speaks for the whole white race; as it is the center of the world, right? Or maybe this is just a case of a polack being a polack.

This comment appeared in entry 'Majority Rights: For Those Who Will See The Obvious..' on 04/21/14, 06:28 PM. (go to entry to post a reply)

Simo Häyhä wrote:

I noticed someone is spouting the typical “genocidal, Slav/Polack-hating German” nonsense, so allow me to intervene.

http://www.holocaustianity.com/german-silesia.html

https://www.hawaii.edu/powerkills/SOD.CHAP7.ADDENDA.HTM#S4

http://uncensoredhistory.blogspot.com.br/2012/12/ethnic-cleansing-of-germans-after-ww2.html

This comment appeared in entry 'Majority Rights: For Those Who Will See The Obvious..' on 04/21/14, 06:23 PM. (go to entry to post a reply)

Septimius Severus wrote:

http://youtu.be/olFDBeEQYTU

“The president of Poland is a fraudstuh in the pacckets of the Jewish lobby.”

This comment appeared in entry 'Majority Rights: For Those Who Will See The Obvious..' on 04/21/14, 06:02 PM. (go to entry to post a reply)

Tyler wrote:

Shoveling shit? He was a product of that time and the very particular circumstances: Versailles and the threat of being consumed by Communism. We musn’t forget that. We musn’t judge him now by today’s selective liberal standards. He was a visionary. A superb leader. He understood the pig picture, geopolitics and saw all threats correctly. He was extremely intelligent, very well read and cultivated. He was courageous and just, did what had to be done for the good of the state and the people. Albeit not a good military leader. But above all, he loved his people and country and worked relentlessly and selflessly for the betterment thereof. He managed to get Germany out of the sh*t and bring the nation together as one whole, including the industrialists, working class and different political fractions inside NS. I refuse to shit on that. My own ancestors did fight against him, but they didn’t know that the current state of things is the outcome. I’m sure they would not approve. They thought they were fighting evil, because they were told lies. 

The german people of then can be all of us Europeans today. Slavs are our brothers. Just as the north europeans and south europeans are, with different mentalities. We know exactly who are NOT our brothers, even if they are white. No more brother wars, that we agree on. We must unite and we therefore must focus on core elements, not details which will divide us.

Call it what you want, but we are today under liberal extremist threat. Sweden has just now as I type approved a bill which makes criticising immigration a criminal offense. That is liberal ‘‘fascism’‘.  We all know this is fact now. How do you think you can tackle these developments? You need a comprehensive, strong ideology to address this onslaught, not some new loose idea by a few warped or lost liberals who are only worried about race.  We are entering live or death conditions as a people, so we need a comprehensive solution. Think about it. 

Imperialist? Look, we live today under pax americana (pax judaica) and liberal extremism. We can all see where that is leading to now.  It could have been a pax germanica. I am not so sure if that would have been worse, quite to the contrary. And if you were not an enemy / subversive of the state, you had a good life. Many non-germans went to fight for NS Germany. Look at how the Ukrainians are still siding with the Germans.  Same goes for the Baltic States…

 

This comment appeared in entry 'Majority Rights: For Those Who Will See The Obvious..' on 04/21/14, 05:53 PM. (go to entry to post a reply)

Goybbels wrote:

On August 22, 1939, just before the invasion of Poland, Hitler gave explicit permission to his commanders to kill “without pity or mercy, all men, women, and children of Polish descent or language.”

-that gave me a good laughter.

but to be seriously for a moment, who believes in this crap Mr. Sienkiewicz? Polish Patriotards/stooges of the late british empire back then and US lackeys nowadays like you?

how is it anti-white if the polish government has been and still is a Puppet under jewish Hegemony via US as a proxy?
since poland got her lebensraum in the west(sadly not enough, like berlin for example), you won’t skvetch about the Nazi-Germanics that settled there before the first slavic tribes arrived or the anti white Prussians ,right?

It fascinates me that someone like you can get space to write something like this on a supposedly pro white platform.

I’m waiting for more anti-german drivel, I’m really enjoying your whining.

This comment appeared in entry 'Majority Rights: For Those Who Will See The Obvious..' on 04/21/14, 05:44 PM. (go to entry to post a reply)

Guessedworker wrote:

So, let’s look at the key elements of National Socialism - those which are not purely economic, at least - and determine what role, if any, they could have today.

Ayran supremacism (die Herrenrasse)

Today we are seeking to represent our people’s natural right to life and land.  Supremacism is completely off-target.

Slave-labour

Ditto.

Lebensraum

Ditto.

The cult of the Führer

The English, Scots, and Welsh, anyway, are simply too worldly and cynical to love up the leader to the required volume.  Sorry.  Can’t be done.

The total state

Well, in significant respects the version of democracy we have now is not too far from totalitarianism.  But I think the voting public might be quite interested in more democracy rather than less, or in genuine democracy rather than an abuse of it.

State terrorism

Who in their right mind ...

Eugenics, racial hygiene

All we really need is some awareness of self ... some honesty ... and the important aspects of racial life will take care of themselves.  Won’t they?

The militarisation of society

And so we arrive at the chief attraction, indeed, the only real attraction for many.  The Schutzstaffel elite ... the Hitlerjugend ... a prescribed set of actions and horizons for the lost souls of urban Postmodernia.  But is there any evidence from WW2, say, that this is the only foundation on which peoples can be called to their own defence?  Really?

This comment appeared in entry 'Majority Rights: For Those Who Will See The Obvious..' on 04/21/14, 04:59 PM. (go to entry to post a reply)

DanielS wrote:

Sometimes I feel like a proctologist.

Or for another apt metaphor, talking to Nazi advocates is like shoveling shit.

From Hitler’s table talk

August 1-2, 1941

Context:

Luftwaffe had been striking at Moscow for a week, the Wehrmacht pushed against Smolensk on the 28th of July.

Hitler:

“We are going to have a continent to rule.

When that happens, the different positions of the sun will bar us from uniformity.

In many places we shall have to control immense regions with a handful of men.

Thus, the police there will have to be constantly on the alert ...what a chance for men from the party.

We must pay the price for our experiences of course, mistakes are inevitable. But what difference does it make if in ten years I can be told that Danzig, Alsace and Lorraine our now German.

What will it matter then if it can be added that three or four mistakes that have been made at Colmar and five or six at other places; lets take the responsibility for these mistakes and save the provinces; in ten years we will have formed an elite of whom we know that we can count on them whenever there are new difficulties to master. We will produce from it all a new breed of man, a race of rulers; a breed of Viceroys. Of course there will be no question of using men like that in the West.

World History knows three battles of annihilation: Cannae, Sedan and Tannenberg

We can be proud that two of them were fought by German armies.

Today we can add to them our battles in Poland and the West

and those which we are now fighting in the East

All others were battles of pursuit.”


On August 22, 1939, just before the invasion of Poland, Hitler gave explicit permission to his commanders to kill “without pity or mercy, all men, women, and children of Polish descent or language.”

On March 15, 1940 Himmler stated: “All Polish specialists will be exploited in our military-industrial complex. Later, all Poles will disappear from this world. It is imperative that the great German nation considers the elimination of all Polish people as its chief task.” At the end of 1940, Hitler confirmed his pronouncement demanding liquidation of “all leading elements in Poland”

This comment appeared in entry 'Majority Rights: For Those Who Will See The Obvious..' on 04/21/14, 04:39 PM. (go to entry to post a reply)

DanielS wrote:

Posted by Ereignis on April 21, 2014, 03:34 PM | #

“Hitler and the Nazis were German nationalists. This is not in dispute.”

Not only is in dispute, but it is clear that they were German imperialists.

“Nationalism is not necessarily inconsistent with imperialism, and you suggest this yourself.”

It is inconsistent with White nationalism when it is at imperialist war with other White nations.


“Furthermore, all nationalisms, past and present, have entailed at the least imperialism over the units below the nation, however defined.”

Tribe against tribe is not conflict within the nationalist/imperialist paradigm

“At the time, virtually all of the earth’s territory was under the control of European states. Doing anything could have been construed as being “at the expense of other Europeans.”

That sentence says nothing, it is nonsense. We are not talking about fighting over colonies.

This comment appeared in entry 'Majority Rights: For Those Who Will See The Obvious..' on 04/21/14, 04:11 PM. (go to entry to post a reply)

DanielS wrote:

/
Tyler number 10 and 11:

“One mistake we all certainly made was believe the propaganda of our own masters and fight the Germans for the wrong reasons. We know better now don’t we?? Unless you believe the propaganda of your enemy.

IMHO, as long as we see NS and Hitler as an obstacle, a mistake, we are victims of the propaganda and lies of our enemy, we believe our enemy and thus we are powerless. We can rise above that. All it takes is uncover lies.”

I repeat, Hitler had some things right and some things wrong - very wrong. Chief among his mistakes was the militarism/conflict that he placed at the basis of human existence, the imperialism that he placed in lieu of nationalism.

And of that, there is not question, if not clear enough for you in Mein Kampf, then beyond doubt in Table Talk and confirmed in deed.


“I’m really surprised you say that. Com’on DanielS, this is/ was an allied pretext to motivate and approve the war. Besides, the brits had their own colonies and its vast imperium then, which was widely accepted. So… pot / kettle ??!!”

That is why I tacked-on belatedly to that comment the following:

German imperialists - which might not be so bad, were it not directed at the expense of other Europeans.


“Germany and Hitler had never any intention to invade England, as is widely accepted. Hitler called the brits our brothers.”

I did not say that Hitler did not have a less antagonistic if still condescending disposition toward the brits. He was still an imperialist - but eastwardly.

“In addition, Hitler fought soviet communism (and knew the communist threat was real in Germany.) The Brits used Hitler for buffering the communists, to saveguard themselves from becoming bordered by communists.”

So too did the Poles, the Belarusians, the Ukrainians and more: but they had Nazi Germany’s stab in the back to contend with as well.

We need to, and can unite in European defense, but you are going to have to understand it is not going to happen under Hitler’s worldview.

This comment appeared in entry 'Majority Rights: For Those Who Will See The Obvious..' on 04/21/14, 04:04 PM. (go to entry to post a reply)

Ereignis wrote:

Hitler and the Nazis were German nationalists. This is not in dispute.

Nationalism is not necessarily inconsistent with imperialism, and you suggest this yourself. Furthermore, all nationalisms, past and present, have entailed at the least imperialism over the units below the nation, however defined.

At the time, virtually all of the earth’s territory was under the control of European states. Doing anything could have been construed as being “at the expense of other Europeans.”

This comment appeared in entry 'Majority Rights: For Those Who Will See The Obvious..' on 04/21/14, 03:34 PM. (go to entry to post a reply)

Tyler wrote:

@DanielS

You say

They were not German nationalists, they were German imperialists

I’m really surprised you say that. Com’on DanielS, this is/ was an allied pretext to motivate and approve the war.  Besides, the brits had their own colonies and its vast imperium then, which was widely accepted. So… pot / kettle ??!!  Churchill just didn’t want the germans to become too strong, but he needed them to buffer the communists.  He lost his own empire declaring war to Germany, using Poland as a pretext. Germany and Hitler had never any intention to invade England, as is widely accepted. Hitler called the brits our brothers. He could have defeated them, but didn’t. That was his mistake. Besides, the british royal family was in favour of Hitler.  We know Hess went to England with a comprehensive peace plan. But we are still not allowed to know from the British secret services what was really Hess’s proposal.  It’s obvious why. 

In addition, Hitler fought soviet communism (and knew the communist threat was real in Germany.) The Brits used Hitler for buffering the communists, to saveguard themselves from becoming bordered by communists.

The essence here is that Churchill caved in for the usual gangsters behind the screen, who declared war on Germany already before.  White man got screwed and divided again, by the usual suspects.

 

 

This comment appeared in entry 'Majority Rights: For Those Who Will See The Obvious..' on 04/21/14, 03:28 PM. (go to entry to post a reply)

Tyler wrote:

I’ll be polite Tyler, and tell you that I have carefully read your comment and do not buy it whatsoever.

Many thanks for having read it.  And no offense taken. I wasn’t out to misrepresent the points you made in your article either. I just shared my opinion. And, NS is not a conditio sine qua non for me. But I repeat, I just fail to see any viable alternatives at this moment in time that will be strong enough to confront the destructive forces.  The comprehensive framework is there. It just needs small adaptation to the current day’s situation. And it is getting late. Awfully late. But I won’t let NS divide us. I am ready for alternatives.

Intellectuals? Too many intellectuals we have and nothing gets done. Intellectuals don’t make good leaders and seem too absorbed into their egos and personal advancement, being victims of the liberal individualistic paradigm in which we live today. You need something / somebody / language that cuts trough the BS and appeals to the masses. It is up to our intellectuals to make their complex musings into something that appeals to the masses. Constant showing off of knowledge doesn’t do the job.

Mistakes? I guess we can fall into longwinded intellectual discussions about the mistakes that were made by NS and Hitler, without ever reaching an agreement on that. There is no point, I’m sure we can all agree on that. Our current masters make terrible mistakes too and we seem to take it. It all depends on what the narrative is. 

One mistake we all certainly made was believe the propaganda of our own masters and fight the Germans for the wrong reasons. We know better now don’t we?? Unless you believe the propaganda of your enemy.

IMHO, as long as we see NS and Hitler as an obstacle, a mistake, we are victims of the propaganda and lies of our enemy, we believe our enemy and thus we are powerless. We can rise above that. All it takes is uncover lies.

This comment appeared in entry 'Majority Rights: For Those Who Will See The Obvious..' on 04/21/14, 03:02 PM. (go to entry to post a reply)

DanielS wrote:

They were not German nationalists, they were German imperialists - which might not be so bad, were it not directed at the expense of other Europeans.

This comment appeared in entry 'Majority Rights: For Those Who Will See The Obvious..' on 04/21/14, 02:06 PM. (go to entry to post a reply)

Ereignis wrote:

Hitler and the Nazis were German nationalists.

Germans are White/European.

Therefore Hitler and the Nazis were White/European nationalists.

Seems pretty obvious to me. It’s a basic syllogism.

This comment appeared in entry 'Majority Rights: For Those Who Will See The Obvious..' on 04/21/14, 01:47 PM. (go to entry to post a reply)

Page 1 of 3429 pages  1 2 3 >  Last ›