Hitler and Nazism were Not White Nationalism, Part 3 Hitler and Nazism were Not White Nationalism, Part 3Thus we have established a first principle of this discourse, a positive tautology that the World Wars are history, the people of today are not to blame and should not be subject to the collective punishment of losing their peoplehood and corresponding nations. There is a second principle that we will invoke at this point, one which the internet has provided for in spades, but which White Nationalists have not utilized to anything like its full potential. That is correctability, the correctability of ideas and understanding through interactive participation, whether through comments or speaking directly to people and engaging correction. To date, what has been imposed as if correction, has largely been World War II revisionism - which tends to be dishonest excuses and apologetics for Nazi imperialism where not outright recitation of Nazi propaganda that could be falsified rather easily if they cared to do it. Misrepresentation and omissions of important facts can remain if would-be interlocutors are not of good faith, don’t really want to pursue the truth, though Nazi apologetics usually claim the truth as their mission. On the other hand, taking interactive correctability for granted and expecting the voices of correction to chime-in has left me susceptible to allow oversights to linger, because many would-be WN, who’ve accepted the rightist identity and its own political correctness will not say “boo” and alert me to oversights, especially when calling attention to these matters will call negative attention and shoot holes in their pro-Hitler/Nazi position. Graudenz, Kulm, Thorn and Bromberg, a would-be occlusive salient. To the south of those cities, Poznan and Gniezno are the cradle of Polish nationhood. There is a third and ancillary tautology to be invoked which is that for whatever grievances that either side had of the times, they were more than made up for. We will apply this as a third tautological principle then, after ‘it’s history and nobody had anything to do with it’, and after correctability, that is, the tautology that for whatever complaints of the time, “they more than made up for it in retaliation.” We will take a critical perspective on grievances and injustices alleged by the Nazi apologists, such as allegations made against Polish nationals and partisans, since those allegations have tended to go uncorrected within the philoNazistic PC of so called White Nationalism. But we need to circle back to our second principle at this point, which is interactive correctability and the fact that so called WN has not been acting in good faith to call matters to attention, especially when they would reflect badly on Nazi Germany. In previous discussions of Hitler’s complaints over where Versailles borders were drawn, I have made the claim that there were really only three cities of significance lost by Germany - Poznan, Bromberg and Thorn and one made neutral, Danzig (made neutral, not Polish, as in something the Poles could unilaterally return to Germany as misinformed Hitler apologists often claim they should have); and there were some village areas in the corridor and near the Versailles established border where Germans were caught in Polish territory, and we must add that there were Poles caught in German territory. But though Danzig was at the time occupied by Germans, it was a historically disputed city and a strategic city for all concerned, thus justifiably deemed neutral by Versailles. Cities to the south of the corridor, such as Poznan, Gniezno and Leszno, should not have been considered anything remotely but Polish. While it is true that in previous discussions of this issue I had neglected to mention two cities of significance in the Polish corridor which were inhabited by Germans, Graudenz and Kulm , known in Polish as Grudziądz and Chelmno, it does not change the thesis. First of all, circling to principle three (mis-spoke; it is “principle two”, correctability that is invoked here) again, that the comment section has been open and feedback of good will is expected to correct oversights such as that. More fundamentally, these cities being under German political jurisdiction would only extend the salient that would be formed by Bromberg and Torun to obstruct and potentially occlude crucial strategic and economic sea access for Poland. In addition, Graudenz and Klum were formed of brutal Teutonic and Prussian imperialism on cities that were originally Polish. Finally, it is a history that only provides more examples of the enormous toll that the Nazis took against impositions of Polish patriotism in these areas; invoking principle three, that they more than made up for it. Thus, it is no wonder that the Hitler redemptionists didn’t particularly care to take me up on my open offer to correct whatever prior oversights of mine… No, the Hitler redemptionists, in their claim to be after the truth of history, tend to begin history at or about World War I. And of course, Germany was a sheer victim of the rest of the world, from the Schiff’s backing of the Trotskies, to the Balfour Declaration to the Treaty of Versailles. But really, to do enthnonationalism justice, we need to go further back in history… Comments:Post a comment:
Next entry: Raab goes. McVey goes. Two junior ministers too. The Brexiteer rebellion is on.
|
|
Existential IssuesDNA Nations
|
Posted by Ecceflux on Sun, 01 Sep 2019 07:17 | #
Unfortunately, Eccelux, a newbie to the struggle and very promising as an exponent of White Nationalism, has shown bad judgment in taking right wing misdirection, markedly, by platforming (and without pushback) “Ovfuckyou”....
I started listening to a live stream in which they talked the other day and commented in the chat that Ovfuckyou was not getting any push-back.
Typical of his obnoxiousness, OV remarked that “Daniel Spergowitz” is in the chat and that he (Ov) is willing to talk to him (DanielS) but he has to wait his turn.”
As if I want to talk to him. The only time that I’ve been in any sort of interlocution with him has been by happenstance of a few streams that we both became involved in; or as a result of a trick (getting lured into a “discussion” with him by those who wanted to ridicule me for not loving “the Fuhrer”).
OV did then remark that his emails to me go into my spam-box…
Clearly, I do not want to talk to him let alone would I “wait my turn.”
Note: this great defender of The Third Reich had never even heard of Himmler’s Posen speeches. But I should wait on line to be informed by him?
Rather, I was commenting on the stupidity of people who would platform him.
But the more fundamental reason that I would not talk to him is not his ignorance, but because he is not coming from a position of respect and good will toward all European nations.
He is coming from a position that “Hitler was correct across the board” and all European people should be behind him as “the leader.”
That is not the starting point for meaningful discourse, for discourse that is supposed to meet in a well integrated place of good will for the defense of European peoples. It is rather an expression of the utter hubris and disrespect that is manifest by this fool - manifest in ad hominem attacks and effusive talk-overs in any moment that you might lay out a position that would demonstrate that his attempt to redeem Hitler/Nazism across the board as exemplars of White Nationalism is, in several important respects, off the mark, in many important respects plainly wrong and in perhaps the most important respect, unnecessary.
To say that “Hitler had some things right, that there were reasons why they reacted in epistemic blunder [they weren’t “evil” ex-nihilo] that led to catastrophe and that Jews were a precipitating factor” is enough to pluck out a few things from time to time if an account is requested. But from the standpoint of WN and for the purpose of coordinating good relations, it should be qualified with a rejection of the Nazi platform for its epistemic blunder, its supremacism and imperialism, part and parcel of badly drawn friend/enemy lines and catastrophic epistemic blunder.
This is not about laying guilt trips. Rather, if we are to exercise 20/20 hindsight, it is about using it to make a better effort to cooperate and coordinate European/White ethnonational interests.
Hitler/Nazism do not model ethnonationalism, and do not model leadership that all European nations and other nations can trust and back with moral confidence (whereas coordinated ethnonationalism should be a program we can all endorse).
Alas, the enormity of the Nazi project does not provide a clue, but rather a floodlight to the issue of conflicting interests with Jewry: people aren’t going to be distracted from the seriousness of the J.Q. even though Hitler’s platform is rejected on balance as ill conceived.
- DanielS