Keith's whole argument rests on a false premise: There have been other successful ethnic nationalist movements in Europe after 1945.
There hasn't been. Not one.
In every single European country, the great replacement is going on at various paces and these nationalists are powerless to stop it. They run not a single government in Europe or have run any since 1945.
At best these nationalists are useful tools of Washington like Azov in Ukraine or Baltic nationalists seething about Russia.
Only in Russia, the situation isn't as bad. This is less owed to a successful non-nazi nationalist movement and more because Russia isn't controlled by Jewish interests like the west and its outside the thumb of American hegemony.
The Russian nationalist movement has only been making strides since the beginning of the Ukraine war and they're heavily nazi-esque like Rusich and Wagner.
But I digress.
The fact of the matter is that Christianity and conservatism have been on a relentless 236 year losing streak since the French Revolution in 1789.
The only time in this entire period when a movement managed to not only stop the advance of liberalism and Jewry in its tracks but outright reverse it and expel them from power was the Nazis. The German nazis.
Even Mussolini's stupid fascist movement was asleep on the Jewish question. Franco's catholic sharia larp collapsed within months of his death and Spain is now one of the most hardcore leftist countries on earth.
So, it behooves modern nationalists to take inspiration from nazism and follow its precepts. Because Nazism has been the only successful white rebellion against Judeo-liberalism in the last 235 years.
And ethnic nationalism in itself is a dead and stupid end. It's the nationalism of dialects.
Hitler wisely looked down upon petty nationalism and advocated a wider racial nationalism. He wanted a Nordic racial empire rather than a German one and wanted to integrate the low countries and Scandinavia into the German fold.
He didn't advocate for petty nationalism like Irish, Czech, or Ukrainian nationalism. Because these movements create geopolitical irrelevancies like Ireland, Czechia and Ukraine that have no weight on the world stage and are easy pawns for American and Jewish power.
The type of racial nationalism Hitler advocated sought to create large polities like a Germanic union that would actually have weight on the world stage and could be actually sovereign, unlike some petty baltic statelet.
Ethnic nationalism has been a disaster for Europe. Together, Austria-Hungary was a great power and one of the top 6 industrial powers in the world. After the blessing of ethnic nationalism, they're now all irrelevant little statelets prey fo Washington.
Yugoslavia was equal to Turkey in strength when united but thanks to petty ethnic nationalism it's now a bunch of states you'd need a microscope to see.
How big was the difference between Croat and Serb? or Russian or Ukrainian for that matter?
Tell me you are know nothing about anything East of Germany. There are no independent nationalist movements in Russia. Every true nationalist is either in jail, in exile or in the ground. The rest try to not attract attention.
Putin has successfully destroyed Russian nationalistic movement and since his first day in the office promoted multiculturalism.
My info on Russia comes from the fact, that I speak Russian since 1 year old and have watched and read countless materials on Putin and modern day Russia. I know Russians, I know Russia and thus I have 0 illusions.
Mikhelson, Abramovich, Fridman, Bukhman, Khan, Prokhorov, Miller, Vexelberg, Boguslavsky, Kantor, Aven, Nesis and many, many other billionaires who are tied to the Russian political machine.
Russia rule in the 90-s was called colloquially as "semybankirshina" (the rule of the 7 bankers, 6 of whom were Jews).
There are disproportionate amount of Jews in Duma, the late leader of the LDPR, a Russian nationalist party was a Jew, the founders of many TV and radio channels, including NTV channel were Jews.
I swear, right wingers who sympathise with Russia are even more naïve, than woke leftists.
Yeah this is weird cope and a stain on your otherwise impeccable charge, caspar. I for one would invite NATO aggression and invasion of Russia precisely because only a nuclear war or at least a destruction of statehood might give the Aryans a fighting chance - and unfortunately, there is no genocidal Chinese invasion of California in the cards.
When National Socialism is tried outside of Europe it's also successful. Ex: until America and Israel went to war with them the Ba'athist were a model for the Arab world.
Germans imported forced labor. They forced the POWs to work and other prisoners.
They were at total war and needed manpower for the industry as German men were conscripted to fight the war.
Greater Germany had a population of about 85 million or so. Of that, a total of 5.3-7.6 million men served in the military at any given time.
Mathematically, the entire German nation had around 26 million or so able-bodied men. So, 20 -28% of the total able bodied male population was in the military at any given time. This was on top of millions of casualties. Germany suffered 5 million military deaths, 4.3 million were taken prisoner, and perhaps another 3-5 million were seriously wounded.
So, a severe shortage of manpower was inevitable. They brought in millions of slave laborers to do work in place of the millions who were conscripted or lost in action.
And mind you in wartime, production had to increase to cope with the enormous materiel demands of the war.
And as for expanding into non-German lands, that's what every proud and powerful country does. They conquer other lands to gain resources and wealth. For Germany it was especially necessary as it lacked many of the raw materials with which to run its industry. To ensure the import iron ore from Sweden, they took over Denmark and Norway.
They conquered France which had declared war on them, and invaded Yugoslavia which had flipped to the British and had vital tungsten reserves.
That's just par for the course in large wars. The British invaded Iceland, Iraq, and Iran in ww2 as well and these were neutral countries.
But they waged the war to achieve exactly that. German landowners and soldiers and non German workers. I think it was stupid even from German nationalist point of view. Healthy nation does not depend on other people's labour.
> "So I guess you agree with, autocratic militarism, destroying the Slavs as a culture etc.?"
It's either that, or the chemical castration of children as befits the Anglo liberal Christian world order. Life overall is yucky, but meh, if you pick anti-Nazis, you are literally homosexual, so it should be easy to choose?
Also, the Anglo poofters have destroyed the Slavs anyway lmao, I can't even go outside because the libtards are abducting males for being male.
I dispute your contention that there haven’t been any successful ethnic nationalist movements since 1945.
Consider the Australian Labor government of Ben Chifley. It was elected in 1946 by returning service men who had directly fought German and Japanese imperialism.
Chifley was elected on a platform of ethno-nationalism (strict adherence to the White Australia Policy) and economic socialism. His economic socialism extended to an (unfortunately) unsuccessful attempt at nationalising the banks.
The imperialist and chauvinist (against Slavs) policies of the Hitler regime bear no resemblance to Chifley’s considered policies.
This was a genuinely nationalist and socialist government, elected by people who had heroically resisted Asian imperialism - and suffered terribly for their people.
Outside of Australia, consider the Argentine government of Juan Peron.
If we must seek inspiration in the Germany of the 1930’s, we’d do far better to look to thinkers like Gottfried Feder, Otto Strasser or Ernst Niekisch who stood for a genuinely nationalist German revolution.
But that’s unnecessary. There were solid examples of ethno-nationalist movements outside Germany post 1945.
No, to the point you can be disregarded entirely but I'll elaborate for you.
Hitler offered to work with Poland repeatedly, he even gave them part of Czechia. However Poland refuse to allow Danzig to rejoin Germany. Hitler said he would take it, but allow the Poles to keep a different port and to hold a vote in West Prussia, he also wanted the Poles to stop killing their minorities like the Germans but said they could have a population exchange (so much for destroy Poland if he's taking Germans back from it). The Poles refused so he invaded, he still offered to give them independence for peace but the west refused. Poland and Czechia were treated better by Germany than they treated the Germans (Poland even got land back while under occupation, why bother if they're just going to be exterminated). Slovakia got it's independence because of Germany (if they plan to exterminate the Slavs why not annex it).
Yugoslavia allied with Germany (and previously Germany forbade Italy from invading it) until the West couped it and then it's peoples allied with Germany. Croatia was ultimately given land at Italian expense. Bulgaria allied with Germany and was given land despite not actually helping Germany during the war. Why would Germany give them land despite not helping if they were anti Slavic?
Millions of Soviet Slavs allied with Germany, even when the war turned against them they were often brought back with the retreating Germans, not just the soldiers either. Nazi law defined Slavs as Aryan and Robert Ley, leader of the NS labor union, called them that too. The worst you could say is Hitler was German first before pro European, but he's German so who cares. He's still more pro European than any of the Allies.
Until you understand that you were lied to about WW2, and that these lies built the anti White world we live in, you aren't going to bring this debate to a close. You will either continue defending a lie that will become all the more obvious, or you will accept you were wrong. As for the rest, National Socialism is rather pragmatic so it can be adapted anywhere. Nationalism that doesn't seek to preserve it's people and culture or acknowledge history and that it has enemies has already failed a million times. You don't need to strut in leather to be a Nazi or even hate Jews, but if you won't defend your people from extinction or against old slander than you not only can't be a National Socialist, but you are going to fail in helping your people if you even care.
That is what he states as part of his ultimatum and justification for war. Shall I say Hitler did not state that when he did? Shall I pretend he was not actually concerned about things like the DKVP rally bombing or the BLMesk political violence carried out by Poles against their minorities? But please tell me how telling you what Hitler actually said makes me an idealogue and making any excuse to deny reality does not make you an idealogue.
You mean the Normans, Vikings, Tudors, and Cromwell? Or do you mean the internationalists of all stripes who are currently flooding Ireland with all of Africa and the Middle East?
I don't hate the closest relatives of my people. We have a long and storied history together. The Norse vikings became the famous Gall Ghaeil, the Norse Gaels who have many famous and patriotic clans. The Normans later became the Hiberno-Normans, again who have many patriotic members. The Anglo-Irish are a rather large group historically and nowadays, with countless famous men from this group fighting for Ireland. But of course, we forget the Ulster Scots and the Scots-Irish, who are often seen as problematic, yet out of the whole diaspora they tend to be the most supportive of the homeland.
Let's shut the fuck up about old brother wars when Irish traitors and foreign Zionists are currently shipping the whole world there.
Living space was necessary after the British Navy starved 2 million Belgians and Germans after armistice day and before the treaty of Versailles was signed. ~7months. I doubt they planned to GENOCIDE all Poles… does anyone really think the Nazis planned to do that? They saw the Germanic bloodlines of the Russian nobility and aristocracy had been decimated by communism and planned to fill the void.
Except Hitler offered to give Poland independence for peace, and gave them extra land during their occupation. So no.
Millions of East Germans died, during "peace" times. I don't believe might makes right, right makes right. Might is power though.
Slovakia is not Southern Slavs, Hitler also spoke very positively of them (and the Poles minus their leaders). How does demanding Mussolini not invade Yugoslavia, then giving part of Italy to Croatia, benefit Germany (more the latter half of that)? Unless you're arguing Southern Slavs flatly don't count.
Primary source data. Robert Ley officially referred to all Europeans as Aryans. Nazi law defined Slavs as Aryan. Hitler making derogatory remarks to his friends in private is less relevant than either. The most you could say is that Hitler was a German Nationalist first. Giving the Slavs better lives and greater independence is a good thing even if purely for German benefit than letting them be ruled under worse conditions by the Soviets who also hate them.
It's a hard fact. Deny at your peril. Why did we invade Iraq? Saddam was literally Hitler. Why did we overthrow Assad? Assad was literally Hitler. Why is there war in Ukraine? Zelensky and Putin are both literally Hitler. Why was Biden elected? Trump was literally Hitler. Why can't Whites have self determination? Hitler wanted that. To pretend that we don't live under the lies of WW2 is frankly preposterous.
You misunderstand, in every peace offer Hitler gave he included an independent Poland. Idk where this ten word obsession is coming from, I assume a joke from Hitler that can't be sourced? Anyway Hitler was going to give Poland independence in exchange for peace.
Okay but I'm not Davis.
I mean that means you can't say anti Slavic then. You could argue anti Russian perhaps (even then with counter arguments), but since you acknowledge that the Nazis did not hate all Slavs for more than pragmatic reasons you know they weren't anti Slavic.
Respectfully I'm going to wager I know more about WW2 than a random poster on axisforum. The land Germany wanted was annexed into the Reich during the war. Due to what would be an independent Poland had they won (as part of their peace plans), annexing anywhere in Ukraine or Russia would have been unrealistic. The Baltics and Belarus could have still been but they weren't in our time anyway. You may say they'd be vassals, even if true that's still a better outcome than being part of the USSR. Hence the Soviet Slavs often serving Germany.
Yes I did, like you said he's some guy. Someone could spend their whole life researching something, if they miss basic information it doesn't matter. That said he calls the plan pipe dreams divorced from reality. The Nazis had plans to invade Switzerland, it doesn't make it so. Half of these say no document exist as well. The other half make no mention of trying to kill anyone, 2 of which only talking about Germanizing the areas I referred to, the Reich itself and what could be semi reasonable called Germany, like Luxembourg.
Again no. In all of Hitler's peace offers he included an independent Poland, even if he hadn't if the British demanded it for peace he would have given it. You can read his peace offers, they weren't hard to find a few months back but let me know if that's changed.
The decree that gave amnesty to German soldiers committing crimes in response to Polish crimes? The one that was only in effect from September to October 4th?
I know nothing about him except his previous article. Him being imperfect is less relevant than having to go to war because some retard decided not to would be to appease Hitler. Or if some ghoul destroys Europe.
Czechs were not treated well, Hitler didn't like Czechs especially, they were destined to annihilation first among occupied nations, but they were totally disarmed. So there wasn't armed resistance, so very few loses during war. The only armed people in protectorate were Gestapo. I don't know what makes you believe Czechs are more Nordic than Austrians. Czechs are quite dark compared to neighbors.
They were treated very well, Prague was the only eastern European capital to largely survive the war. The Czechs were largely left alone. I did not call them Nordic, though they were defined as Aryan by the Nazis.
Because Czechia was the first to fell (without fight) and last to be liberated (most of it after German capitulation). Means little war destruction. Does not mean Germans treated Czechs any better than slaves.
I am a Czech. Poles are definitely lighter on avarege than Czechs. Austrians outside Vienna too. In Vienna many people have south Slavic or Italian origin.
The Czech area was planned to be Germanized first, most population moved to Russia.
Czechs were used as slaves, there weren't any Czech Waffen SS units, even the police was disarmed.
Not that I care about your racial nonsense. I definitely don't want to be included into your fourth Reich.
I believe Joel's point that unless we dispel the lies about Hitler being basically the devil and the myth of the holocaust as well, then it will not be possible to win as those are the very things the enemy claims will happen again should whites have control of their own nations. The enemy won't allow us any 'stepping over' that, but we do have the truth on our side and should stand by that.
Dispelling the myth is fine—that’s currently underway, and as Keith says, there are massive accounts that aren’t even far-right or necessarily pro-white that are now doing a better job at this. This camp has had a total intellectual victory. Tearing down the foundational myths of the post-war consensus is a good thing.
What the New NS is trying to do is turn back the clock and undo the Axis defeat. They’re trying to win a lost battle that has defined reality for 80 years, and instead of trying to build a new paradigm, they’re locked in as the inversion of the boomer worldview, rather than abandoning it altogether.
This doesn't describe Joel or any of the major NS guys. And the only reason more normie people like Ian Carrol and others is because the Alt Right exploded when new young NS trolls took to the meme war. We owe this current situation to them, but people who came to this scene through the Alt Right or through occupy, or any libertarian pipeline, will have your views and takes.
With the Holocaust denial, there is tremendous danger of becoming the woketard kind of an anti-Semite, however. Do not mistake the generic liberal normie sperg-out against Israel as genuinely Jew hatred! So many racists wish the Holocaust had never happened because they want to see Hitler as a lover of Jews, as a Christian. But he was nothing but.
I personally never researched the question myself, too much noise, so can't say either way. But I see terrible danger in Jew love, as its roots are Christian, the instinct is Christian, to deny genocide, instead of being proud of it.
Sure, you could point out to the Turks... But while the Turks deny the Armenian genocide under immense Christian pressure, they nevertheless still conducted another Armenian genocide in 2023. Can anyone ever expect it of the Holocaust deniers? They'd call you a fed shill for suggesting it, LOL!
It's actually an important discussion. Also it pushes some of the most spergy anime avatar and NJP types to foam at the mouth, which is incredibly funny to witness.
But yes, this is not the main goal, just a funny pursuit.
From my perspective, things are very clear.
- nationalism, not imperialism
- small(er) peoples (like the Irish, or Slavic tribes) do deserve their homelands, which is hard to achieve and often endangered by these predatory large states, such as Russia is now, or Germany used to be. This is a VERY complicated issue, as these smaller peoples do require alliances and diplomacy to maintain those homelands, as there is no realistic way to defend against large empire-like entities
- there can be pan-Europeanism, but that means each of us need to leave behind something and accept others from the continent. Another thorny issue. However, I would say we absolutely need this, or we will not survive vs Africa, US, Russia
Nazism has nothing to offer here. If Hitler never started his "totally provoked" rampage through the continent, yes, we would see things differently, but that is not the history that has happened.
It also cannot ever be the focus, as there are more important fish to fry here. Open Nazis can enjoy their eternal ostracization and seething for 1K telegram followers, often by their own purity spiral choices.
Your optic cuckoldry nationalism has produced nothing but false promises and delusion when it comes to creating a pan-nationalist movement in Europe. Those who support white identity or any racial beliefs in the Western world will invariably be labeled as Nazis by mainstream society and the establishment, which is why it seems futile for nationalists to try to distance themselves from Nazism. Hell, consider Keith Woods, for example, as he promotes his nationalist racial beliefs to mainstream society, and they label him either a fascist or a Nazi. Pretty ironic.
2, Settler imperialism is based, liberal Christian imperialism is cringe.
3, "each of us needs to leave behind something" - this is feminine and Christian, this is EU, this is democracy.
4, No, Hitler's admittedly unprovoked (yet glorious) sperg-out changed absolutely nothing - did you miss the memo as to how the things were going for Europe in 1935? Look at the population numbers - India, the Philippines, Iraq - were those societies settled by Aryans? No, they were bred by retarded woke Christians before being given self-rule. This is the same cuckoldry, just in tamer colours, as modern chemical castration of children.
You either attack or you lose. Even North Korea has it written in their constitution that they must get Lebensraum in the South - what I'm saying is that genocide and extermination are natural courses for any race, even if you must be on the defensive for a hundred years, you must remain a beast eager to strike.
If you're a pacifist, you're a Christian you're a traitor.
It didn't die, it's fire was smothered because NatSoc could actually save the peoples jews want dead and gone. The embers are still burning, and the flames are rising once again.
I find it most interesting that this essay and all the ones linked either ignore or gloss over the most important concern of NS, which persists100 years later. How can a "nation" exist when an amoral and resentful minority controls its government, finance, media, and culture and will silence, often permanently, any opposition? How can this control be broken?
Keith, I'm sorry you relied on Richard Parker's reliance on the eel-slippery Albert Speer to claim that Hitler ordered the destruction of military and civilian infrastructure throughout the Reich--the text of the order itself and the absence of compliance across the Reich (except for combat zones) makes a liar out of Speer on the face of it. Clearly he was seeking to ingratiate himself with his captors.
You and Parker and Greg Johnson make valuable points about the applicability of National Socialism to the situation of the white race today. I wonder whether, beyond condemning latter-day storm trooper parades, raising denunciation of Hitler and NS to a test oath for our own deliberations is the way to go.
A lot of information here is misleading or outright wrong. I'm going to give one example when Goebbels said in a speech 'National Socialism is not for export'; he didn't mean it wasn't pan-European or not for other nations.
He meant the Reich was not trying to coup other countries like the Soviet Union was.
Another thing is the supposed Hitler plan to massacre the Polish and to completely take over Slavic countries which is laughable and disputed by many historians wayyy more educated than me.
Interesting viewpoints but based on fundamentally wrong beliefs.
Thank you Keith for bringing some much needed sanity to this bedeviled topic. Joel, Thomas, Jacob etc mean well and are stand up men. They share our desire for a White homeland. They get it. However, they just need to let go of their trance-like fealty to the comparatively ancient NS/Hitlerian ethos and understand that it simply isn’t required nor will it EVER appeal enough to cross over to the mainstream to achieve the broad acceptance of White collectivism we all desire. Hopefully they’ll come around and join the ranks of the rational Pro-White ethnocentric movement that can actually upend this Zog paradigm controlling the West? My gut tells me this will be easier said than done.
Accusations of cowardice from this camp can never be taken seriously. It worked 15 years ago when these ideas lurked in the obscure corners of the internet. It doesn’t work when the most successful musician of all time, by raw sales, is rhetorically retconning the secular Satan of liberals. Hundreds—perhaps thousands—of people have been doxxed, lost their jobs, and some even their relationships, for taking far-right positions and producing content that brought millions of people to where we are now.
The New National Socialists (whom I differentiate from both the historic NSDAP and post-war neo-Nazis) have never considered that an entirely new generation—perhaps the first—to define itself not simply by inverting the post-war consensus has actually risen, with genuine nationalist sentiments, yet without identifying with the 20th century.
Hello, I am honored that you mentioned my essay. I believe the callus disregard he showed for the lives of his own in the German military is equally despicable, a matter I discuss at some length. Some apparently question the Nero decree, surmising that Alber Speer fabricated this to save his own skin. I am dubious, and in any case it comports with summary executions of any German, military or civilian, with even a suspicion of desertion, defeatism, etc.
My pleasure. If you could please list my essay in your works cited at the end, either from my subdtack or the version published on The Occidental Observer, it would be most appreciated.
Whether fabricated or not, the two alleged Hitler orders Speer produced at Nuremberg were clearly not intended to destroy industry, transport, and communications through Germany. It suffices to read them to see that they pertained to installations conquered or threatened by the Allies—which is doubtless why Parker refrains from citing either. (The epithet “Nero order,” by the way, is a postwar invention of the Allies and their German stooges, aimed obviously at transforming measures commonly taken by invaded nations into the horrors breathlessly invoked by Parker.)
Need it be said that there is no evidence that systematic destruction of the German infrastructure was carried out (by the Germans) across the Reich? Or that neither Hitler nor his minions seem to have acted to counter such evident defiance of what Speer and Parker argue was the Fuehrer’s order?
Flimsy stuff on which to accuse Adolf Hitler of a measure worthy of the Morgenthau Plan for the destruction his people. Cui bono?
A response to Joel's defense of Hitlerism was needed and you delivered, thank you for that. You still lost the argument but you reiterated your point and it is valid; the Slavic people will NEVER rally behind Hitlerism because he was wrong in his judgement about them and what he did and said is unforgivable (to them). Even the revised Hitlerism of neo-nazism is too big of a pill for them to swallow. So they will be the last to join our ranks and we will drop Hitler when that time comes in favor of White unity. But Hitlerism will get us to that point because it has persisted despite all persecution and propaganda. It has esthetics, uncompromising ideology, inspiring rhetoric and suppressed truth.
"Ein volk, Ein Reich, Ein Fuhrer" is the motto. But not that it is intentionally missing the word "nation". We need to think bigger and be willing to drop symbols that offend some of our White brethren if we truly want to rid ourselves of the division and subservience to a tiny demonic tribe someday. And time is running short. Technology has provided a window for red pilling but it also provides greater surveillance and military might.
Finally, I think this is a great discussion and much needed. Both of you are great thinkers and both have excellent points. But please do not lose sight of the real goal which is not simply Ireland for the Irish, Poland for the Poles and damn everyone else. It is the self-detetmination of our entire race because, make no mistake, we are being attacked as an entire race and the future of ALL of our descendants depends on us getting our strategy and ideology right at this critical time.
Poles are retards who wouldn't let Danzig go, they will have to be dragged to salvation, but drag them we shall. Despite that the Germans treated them well, like all other Slavs. Today there's plenty of Nazis in Ukraine, Russia, Croatia, and indifference in Bulgaria and Slovakia.
Cope. The Ukrainians served the Germans because the Germans treated them better, Hitler didn't want them in the military due to their volatility. However even today there are Ukrainian Nazis.
"Pro ANC Whites" depends how broadly you define White. Yes there were pro Hitler Jews even during the war, like Milch or Hitler's buddies he forced Himmler to let join the SS. The Ukrainians mostly wound up killing Jews, many of whom were terrorists, some of whom were civilians hence Hitler's hesitancy to let them serve, also due to them serving the Soviets only shortly prior. Some still served though. Rosenberg was ignored due to being a goober atheist, even if he was right on this matter. The lesson is don't be a goober atheist so people take your good ideas seriously.
Russian/Ukrainian neo-Nazis celebrate April 20, but I've never seen it being a thing in the Anglosphere. So not sure why you're saying that Slavs are unable to venerate Hitler. Of course, I myself have plenty of issues with post-1945 understanding of NatSoc, but the point still stands.
And using this opportunity, what nobody ever seems to mention is these 3 points about Hitlerianism:
1) ban on jazz anti-music (would be rock and metal in this day);
2) removal of females from universities (staunch Taliban/ISIS anti-feminism in our age);
3) animal welfare (I hate this point because cruelty is the way of life, and this makes me non-Nazi, unfortunately).
I think what’s being described is a real phenomenon. The Nazi fandom, the irritating over zealous convert type, the purist, etc. Listen if we can acknowledge that that type is a scourge, can we also acknowledge that the pearl clutching over any positive word said over Hitler is just as loathsome. I mean let’s be dead honest, both extremes drive people up the wall. The over the top “Hitlerite” and the sanctimonious person who treats WW2 as a topic that can’t be violated both don’t really represent the average nationalist. I’m willing to bet 90% of nationalists fall somewhere in between indifference to WW2 and to having sympathies to Nazi germany (without any of the “fandom” behavior described). Let’s be real, it’s difficult to get deep in to nationalist ideas and not look over at Nazi Germany and not feel some degree of “yeah I kind of get it.” That feeling is more or less strong in people and 9 times of 10 it doesn’t result in a single purchase of any Nazi related thing or a personality built around it.
One more point that has to be acknowledged is that the media environment that conservatives stew themselves in is inundated with insane conspiracy after conspiracy… a few revisionist concepts here and there don’t really shock conservatives anymore. They’re perfectly receptive. The normie today is a different animal than he was 10 years ago. If you identify as a Nazi, I’m sure they would recoil, but if you discuss some alternative history of WW2 or Germany whenever the topic happens to come up, they’re all ears. They believe they’ve been lied to about everything already, so they’re not resistant to an alternative on WW2.
So, food for thought. I think overt larping is obviously dumb. I think being sanctimonious is cringe. Most nationalist have already struck a reasonable balance between historical interest and not letting that consume them. Maybe this debate needed to happen. Maybe it didn’t. Maybe it just made people unnecessarily choose a side because we’re tribal retards, when in fact, the middle ground was a reasonable compromise all along… Have your sympathies (if you have any) but don’t make it a focal point.
It would be interesting if you now considered the path forward more broadly. Do you support a mass movement, or vanguardism? What do you think about trying to build an 'order' of upstanding, intelligent, active men?
Our societies are becoming increasingly authoritarian as the only way to maintain social order in multiculturalism, and this will continue. We're moving into a state closer to Tsarist Russia for dissidents, a situation that necessitated vanguardism. Look beyond the superficial Hitlerism of the NSN, and their strategy of building an order and a vanguard seems very much correct.
As an example, Tom Sewell wrote an essay years ago noting that NSDAP aesthetics was militarist because of the high status of soldiers in 20s-30s Germany, and trying to translate this into the modern day (revolving around the Active Club aesthetic). It's worth reading if you can find it.
Keith woods is a bad actor. Simple as. He may have started or sincere or is still currently sincere but he wants to eat his cake and have it too; He wants to be optical, get pushed by Elon and Trump's retarded right which brings with it a world of clout and connections yet also wants to have White people take their own side, or at least seems to want that.
You can't have an easily trodded path when your intentions are pure. The right thing is always the hardest thing to do. Mark Collette sat down in prison, Joel Davis is/was/will for similar reasons, Sam Melia is more of the same, David Duke also (tho I don't trust him personally). Those guys have stripes, Keith doesn't. Keith ame on the late half when the road was already paved with blood and livelihoods of the guys who came before him and now he has the nerve to bitch about optics and what works and doesn't work from his armchair when he should be out organising the already activated Irish people against the migrants and traitors bringing them in.
You're a pussy Keith and that's being lenient, worse than that you're a subverter, wether u know this or not is only for you to know for sure. You're either a useful idiot or an out and out thot polluter, I mean thought.
They're only ad hom because they're true, remember that. His arguments are rooted in a false premise of national socialism/fascism being bad optics and why they never work, instead advocating for a path that's easier to take.
Now ask yourself why is it that the right thing to do is very often the harder thing to do. Go on and ask yourself. Then ponder on Keith's flaccid point. Anyone taking Keith's advice will end up with this nasty rotten political system changing them to suit it rather than the other way around. But Keith is a smart guy and knows this already I'm sure, so the next question to ask is why does he insist on making thosecflaccid points.
Nope but I do think Hitler was a fool who got outmanoeuvred because he made it all about jews AGAINST THE WISHES of some of his most inner circle. See Ezra Pound's comment on litler and mussolini for example. He said both men had their hearts in the right place but they weren't as politically savvy as Jews so they were out played.
Oswald Spengler literally predicted, to the fucking letter, how long nat soc germany would last (10 years) and what would happen after, with his premise being hitler had the right ideas but wrong implementations which would lead to purity spiralling. Nobody took him on, he screamed into the void.
The problem isn't national socialism, the problem is White people's propensity to get caught up in the weeds over bullshit that either doesn't matter or is not RELEVANT to the problems which needs solving.
JFK gets shot, it's an obsession over the magic bullet. 9/11 happened and it's an obsession with wether the planes caused the collapse or bombs blew up on the inside of each floor. Fascism and later on national socialism were founded and demonstrated how quickly a state/people's could be organized around their ethnicity/culture, now it's a race to see who can get the blonde hair and blue eyes genetics or who can scalp the most kikes, all else be damned.
Here's the thing, I get Keith wants to knock up a new Switzerland somewhere in his ideal world inside his head space but that's not going to happen because jews and white traitors/subverters won't allow it to happen. The only pushback against these gatekeepers are the types who support/espouse the one, simple tenet; Are you pro White or anti white?
Pro whites don't try to "sanitise" their position Nigel Firage style on their way to the stratosphere of clout like Keith attempts to do.
Keith's whole argument rests on a false premise: There have been other successful ethnic nationalist movements in Europe after 1945.
There hasn't been. Not one.
In every single European country, the great replacement is going on at various paces and these nationalists are powerless to stop it. They run not a single government in Europe or have run any since 1945.
At best these nationalists are useful tools of Washington like Azov in Ukraine or Baltic nationalists seething about Russia.
Only in Russia, the situation isn't as bad. This is less owed to a successful non-nazi nationalist movement and more because Russia isn't controlled by Jewish interests like the west and its outside the thumb of American hegemony.
The Russian nationalist movement has only been making strides since the beginning of the Ukraine war and they're heavily nazi-esque like Rusich and Wagner.
But I digress.
The fact of the matter is that Christianity and conservatism have been on a relentless 236 year losing streak since the French Revolution in 1789.
The only time in this entire period when a movement managed to not only stop the advance of liberalism and Jewry in its tracks but outright reverse it and expel them from power was the Nazis. The German nazis.
Even Mussolini's stupid fascist movement was asleep on the Jewish question. Franco's catholic sharia larp collapsed within months of his death and Spain is now one of the most hardcore leftist countries on earth.
So, it behooves modern nationalists to take inspiration from nazism and follow its precepts. Because Nazism has been the only successful white rebellion against Judeo-liberalism in the last 235 years.
And ethnic nationalism in itself is a dead and stupid end. It's the nationalism of dialects.
Hitler wisely looked down upon petty nationalism and advocated a wider racial nationalism. He wanted a Nordic racial empire rather than a German one and wanted to integrate the low countries and Scandinavia into the German fold.
He didn't advocate for petty nationalism like Irish, Czech, or Ukrainian nationalism. Because these movements create geopolitical irrelevancies like Ireland, Czechia and Ukraine that have no weight on the world stage and are easy pawns for American and Jewish power.
The type of racial nationalism Hitler advocated sought to create large polities like a Germanic union that would actually have weight on the world stage and could be actually sovereign, unlike some petty baltic statelet.
Ethnic nationalism has been a disaster for Europe. Together, Austria-Hungary was a great power and one of the top 6 industrial powers in the world. After the blessing of ethnic nationalism, they're now all irrelevant little statelets prey fo Washington.
Yugoslavia was equal to Turkey in strength when united but thanks to petty ethnic nationalism it's now a bunch of states you'd need a microscope to see.
How big was the difference between Croat and Serb? or Russian or Ukrainian for that matter?
Tell me you are know nothing about anything East of Germany. There are no independent nationalist movements in Russia. Every true nationalist is either in jail, in exile or in the ground. The rest try to not attract attention.
Putin has successfully destroyed Russian nationalistic movement and since his first day in the office promoted multiculturalism.
Tell me your info on Russia comes from thuletide and azov telegram without saying it.
Your info on Russia comes from grifter wignats and Russian funded networks
My info on Russia comes from the fact, that I speak Russian since 1 year old and have watched and read countless materials on Putin and modern day Russia. I know Russians, I know Russia and thus I have 0 illusions.
Can you actually refute him
The cope about russia tho, jusr because they suck less, it doesnt mean all their oligarchs arent jewish.
Oligarchs don't run Russia, Putin's gang does.
Oligarchs run the state in democratic societies not in dictatorial ones.
In any case, the majority if Russian billionaires aren't ✡️ anymore either.
Mikhelson, Abramovich, Fridman, Bukhman, Khan, Prokhorov, Miller, Vexelberg, Boguslavsky, Kantor, Aven, Nesis and many, many other billionaires who are tied to the Russian political machine.
Russia rule in the 90-s was called colloquially as "semybankirshina" (the rule of the 7 bankers, 6 of whom were Jews).
There are disproportionate amount of Jews in Duma, the late leader of the LDPR, a Russian nationalist party was a Jew, the founders of many TV and radio channels, including NTV channel were Jews.
I swear, right wingers who sympathise with Russia are even more naïve, than woke leftists.
Putin can seize the wealth of any jew and can kill him if he chooses and he has.
He took over the properties of Berozhovsky and khodorkovsky and the former died under mysterious circumstances in London.
Nemstov was shot dead in broad daylight and Prigozhin was assassinated after trying to coup putin.
The deal putin cut with oligarchs was simple: you stay out of politics and my FSB mafia won't come after you and you get to keep your wealth.
The remaining oligarchs took that deal. When he came to power Jews owned all of Russia's wealth. Now it's down to 20%.
Most Russian wealth and resource industries are owned by the government.
Putin is personally a philosemite due to his childhood experiences but he isn't owned by them like Trump or Biden.
Putin doesn't need oligarch money to win elections like in the west. There are no real elections on Russia and he runs everything anyways.
There's a lot to hate about him but acting like he's another Trump is disingenuous.
Yeah this is weird cope and a stain on your otherwise impeccable charge, caspar. I for one would invite NATO aggression and invasion of Russia precisely because only a nuclear war or at least a destruction of statehood might give the Aryans a fighting chance - and unfortunately, there is no genocidal Chinese invasion of California in the cards.
I'd rather have Russia conquer all of Europe and eliminate the current European elites.
Under Soviet communism Germany remained 99.9% German.
When National Socialism is tried outside of Europe it's also successful. Ex: until America and Israel went to war with them the Ba'athist were a model for the Arab world.
Arabs are low iq inbred retards who lose wars despite having a 10 fold advantage.
Their failures are mostly down to themselves. They fail with all types of governments.
Assad's Syria had an economy growing faster than America's until we funded a civil war.
Sure but that happened because of their retarded sectarianism.
By Arab standards Ba'athism was successful.
Fair
Truly vatnick hours right here.
Indeed.
No worries, comrades Putin and Trump will save us all, and will deliver us from the evil fascists infecting Europe!
Eastern block socialist countries were more nationalist than NS Germany which imported foreign workers and expanded to non German areas.
Germans imported forced labor. They forced the POWs to work and other prisoners.
They were at total war and needed manpower for the industry as German men were conscripted to fight the war.
Greater Germany had a population of about 85 million or so. Of that, a total of 5.3-7.6 million men served in the military at any given time.
Mathematically, the entire German nation had around 26 million or so able-bodied men. So, 20 -28% of the total able bodied male population was in the military at any given time. This was on top of millions of casualties. Germany suffered 5 million military deaths, 4.3 million were taken prisoner, and perhaps another 3-5 million were seriously wounded.
So, a severe shortage of manpower was inevitable. They brought in millions of slave laborers to do work in place of the millions who were conscripted or lost in action.
And mind you in wartime, production had to increase to cope with the enormous materiel demands of the war.
And as for expanding into non-German lands, that's what every proud and powerful country does. They conquer other lands to gain resources and wealth. For Germany it was especially necessary as it lacked many of the raw materials with which to run its industry. To ensure the import iron ore from Sweden, they took over Denmark and Norway.
They conquered France which had declared war on them, and invaded Yugoslavia which had flipped to the British and had vital tungsten reserves.
That's just par for the course in large wars. The British invaded Iceland, Iraq, and Iran in ww2 as well and these were neutral countries.
But they waged the war to achieve exactly that. German landowners and soldiers and non German workers. I think it was stupid even from German nationalist point of view. Healthy nation does not depend on other people's labour.
Fuck off nordcuck.
Was that his "whole argument" for you?
So I guess you agree with, autocratic militarism, destroying the Slavs as a culture etc.?
There's as much proof for slav genocide as there is for the holocaust. No documentation of the sort.
The Germans recruited over 1 million Russians into the military.
Croatia, Slovakia, Hungary and Romania were close allies of the Reich.
I remember as recently as 2015 when the holocaust bill was 11 million. 6 million Jews and 5 million slavs and gypsies.
Now the Jewish library itself denies the 5 million number and calls it a fabrication of Eli Wiesel to get more gentiles on board the holocaust train.
In easterners Europe, particularly Russia, the holocaust is used very differently.
There it's used as an anti slavic genocide myth and slavs are the main star instead of Jews.
> "So I guess you agree with, autocratic militarism, destroying the Slavs as a culture etc.?"
It's either that, or the chemical castration of children as befits the Anglo liberal Christian world order. Life overall is yucky, but meh, if you pick anti-Nazis, you are literally homosexual, so it should be easy to choose?
Also, the Anglo poofters have destroyed the Slavs anyway lmao, I can't even go outside because the libtards are abducting males for being male.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Collaboration_in_the_German-occupied_Soviet_Union
>Hitler wanted to exterminate slavs
I dispute your contention that there haven’t been any successful ethnic nationalist movements since 1945.
Consider the Australian Labor government of Ben Chifley. It was elected in 1946 by returning service men who had directly fought German and Japanese imperialism.
Chifley was elected on a platform of ethno-nationalism (strict adherence to the White Australia Policy) and economic socialism. His economic socialism extended to an (unfortunately) unsuccessful attempt at nationalising the banks.
The imperialist and chauvinist (against Slavs) policies of the Hitler regime bear no resemblance to Chifley’s considered policies.
This was a genuinely nationalist and socialist government, elected by people who had heroically resisted Asian imperialism - and suffered terribly for their people.
Outside of Australia, consider the Argentine government of Juan Peron.
If we must seek inspiration in the Germany of the 1930’s, we’d do far better to look to thinkers like Gottfried Feder, Otto Strasser or Ernst Niekisch who stood for a genuinely nationalist German revolution.
But that’s unnecessary. There were solid examples of ethno-nationalist movements outside Germany post 1945.
National socialism was able to politically capture power in the country and purge the Jews.
It was militarily defeated by three global empires combined.
The issue is that national socialism has a proven record of being able to capture power in a Jewish run country.
No other nationalist movement after 1945 has managed to take power in their country and purge Jews.
They failed this first step.
https://www.jewishvirtuallibrary.org/non-jewish-victims-of-the-holocaust
"The Nazis were undeniable anti Slavic."
No, to the point you can be disregarded entirely but I'll elaborate for you.
Hitler offered to work with Poland repeatedly, he even gave them part of Czechia. However Poland refuse to allow Danzig to rejoin Germany. Hitler said he would take it, but allow the Poles to keep a different port and to hold a vote in West Prussia, he also wanted the Poles to stop killing their minorities like the Germans but said they could have a population exchange (so much for destroy Poland if he's taking Germans back from it). The Poles refused so he invaded, he still offered to give them independence for peace but the west refused. Poland and Czechia were treated better by Germany than they treated the Germans (Poland even got land back while under occupation, why bother if they're just going to be exterminated). Slovakia got it's independence because of Germany (if they plan to exterminate the Slavs why not annex it).
Yugoslavia allied with Germany (and previously Germany forbade Italy from invading it) until the West couped it and then it's peoples allied with Germany. Croatia was ultimately given land at Italian expense. Bulgaria allied with Germany and was given land despite not actually helping Germany during the war. Why would Germany give them land despite not helping if they were anti Slavic?
Millions of Soviet Slavs allied with Germany, even when the war turned against them they were often brought back with the retreating Germans, not just the soldiers either. Nazi law defined Slavs as Aryan and Robert Ley, leader of the NS labor union, called them that too. The worst you could say is Hitler was German first before pro European, but he's German so who cares. He's still more pro European than any of the Allies.
Until you understand that you were lied to about WW2, and that these lies built the anti White world we live in, you aren't going to bring this debate to a close. You will either continue defending a lie that will become all the more obvious, or you will accept you were wrong. As for the rest, National Socialism is rather pragmatic so it can be adapted anywhere. Nationalism that doesn't seek to preserve it's people and culture or acknowledge history and that it has enemies has already failed a million times. You don't need to strut in leather to be a Nazi or even hate Jews, but if you won't defend your people from extinction or against old slander than you not only can't be a National Socialist, but you are going to fail in helping your people if you even care.
"he also wanted the Poles to stop killing their minorities like the Germans"
This sentence alone shows you're an ideologue who doesn't care about the actual history.
That is what he states as part of his ultimatum and justification for war. Shall I say Hitler did not state that when he did? Shall I pretend he was not actually concerned about things like the DKVP rally bombing or the BLMesk political violence carried out by Poles against their minorities? But please tell me how telling you what Hitler actually said makes me an idealogue and making any excuse to deny reality does not make you an idealogue.
This alone shows *you* are on the other ideaological fence doing the same thing. You seem quite worried about ebil Nordicists.
Evil nordicists were responsible for the greatest death and destruction Ireland ever faced. Read your own history instead of sperging out over Germans
You mean the Normans, Vikings, Tudors, and Cromwell? Or do you mean the internationalists of all stripes who are currently flooding Ireland with all of Africa and the Middle East?
I don't hate the closest relatives of my people. We have a long and storied history together. The Norse vikings became the famous Gall Ghaeil, the Norse Gaels who have many famous and patriotic clans. The Normans later became the Hiberno-Normans, again who have many patriotic members. The Anglo-Irish are a rather large group historically and nowadays, with countless famous men from this group fighting for Ireland. But of course, we forget the Ulster Scots and the Scots-Irish, who are often seen as problematic, yet out of the whole diaspora they tend to be the most supportive of the homeland.
Let's shut the fuck up about old brother wars when Irish traitors and foreign Zionists are currently shipping the whole world there.
❤️
Living space was necessary after the British Navy starved 2 million Belgians and Germans after armistice day and before the treaty of Versailles was signed. ~7months. I doubt they planned to GENOCIDE all Poles… does anyone really think the Nazis planned to do that? They saw the Germanic bloodlines of the Russian nobility and aristocracy had been decimated by communism and planned to fill the void.
Except Hitler offered to give Poland independence for peace, and gave them extra land during their occupation. So no.
Millions of East Germans died, during "peace" times. I don't believe might makes right, right makes right. Might is power though.
Slovakia is not Southern Slavs, Hitler also spoke very positively of them (and the Poles minus their leaders). How does demanding Mussolini not invade Yugoslavia, then giving part of Italy to Croatia, benefit Germany (more the latter half of that)? Unless you're arguing Southern Slavs flatly don't count.
Primary source data. Robert Ley officially referred to all Europeans as Aryans. Nazi law defined Slavs as Aryan. Hitler making derogatory remarks to his friends in private is less relevant than either. The most you could say is that Hitler was a German Nationalist first. Giving the Slavs better lives and greater independence is a good thing even if purely for German benefit than letting them be ruled under worse conditions by the Soviets who also hate them.
It's a hard fact. Deny at your peril. Why did we invade Iraq? Saddam was literally Hitler. Why did we overthrow Assad? Assad was literally Hitler. Why is there war in Ukraine? Zelensky and Putin are both literally Hitler. Why was Biden elected? Trump was literally Hitler. Why can't Whites have self determination? Hitler wanted that. To pretend that we don't live under the lies of WW2 is frankly preposterous.
You misunderstand, in every peace offer Hitler gave he included an independent Poland. Idk where this ten word obsession is coming from, I assume a joke from Hitler that can't be sourced? Anyway Hitler was going to give Poland independence in exchange for peace.
Okay but I'm not Davis.
I mean that means you can't say anti Slavic then. You could argue anti Russian perhaps (even then with counter arguments), but since you acknowledge that the Nazis did not hate all Slavs for more than pragmatic reasons you know they weren't anti Slavic.
Respectfully I'm going to wager I know more about WW2 than a random poster on axisforum. The land Germany wanted was annexed into the Reich during the war. Due to what would be an independent Poland had they won (as part of their peace plans), annexing anywhere in Ukraine or Russia would have been unrealistic. The Baltics and Belarus could have still been but they weren't in our time anyway. You may say they'd be vassals, even if true that's still a better outcome than being part of the USSR. Hence the Soviet Slavs often serving Germany.
Yes I did, like you said he's some guy. Someone could spend their whole life researching something, if they miss basic information it doesn't matter. That said he calls the plan pipe dreams divorced from reality. The Nazis had plans to invade Switzerland, it doesn't make it so. Half of these say no document exist as well. The other half make no mention of trying to kill anyone, 2 of which only talking about Germanizing the areas I referred to, the Reich itself and what could be semi reasonable called Germany, like Luxembourg.
Again no. In all of Hitler's peace offers he included an independent Poland, even if he hadn't if the British demanded it for peace he would have given it. You can read his peace offers, they weren't hard to find a few months back but let me know if that's changed.
The decree that gave amnesty to German soldiers committing crimes in response to Polish crimes? The one that was only in effect from September to October 4th?
I know nothing about him except his previous article. Him being imperfect is less relevant than having to go to war because some retard decided not to would be to appease Hitler. Or if some ghoul destroys Europe.
Czechs were not treated well, Hitler didn't like Czechs especially, they were destined to annihilation first among occupied nations, but they were totally disarmed. So there wasn't armed resistance, so very few loses during war. The only armed people in protectorate were Gestapo. I don't know what makes you believe Czechs are more Nordic than Austrians. Czechs are quite dark compared to neighbors.
They were treated very well, Prague was the only eastern European capital to largely survive the war. The Czechs were largely left alone. I did not call them Nordic, though they were defined as Aryan by the Nazis.
Because Czechia was the first to fell (without fight) and last to be liberated (most of it after German capitulation). Means little war destruction. Does not mean Germans treated Czechs any better than slaves.
I am a Czech. Poles are definitely lighter on avarege than Czechs. Austrians outside Vienna too. In Vienna many people have south Slavic or Italian origin.
The Czech area was planned to be Germanized first, most population moved to Russia.
Czechs were used as slaves, there weren't any Czech Waffen SS units, even the police was disarmed.
Not that I care about your racial nonsense. I definitely don't want to be included into your fourth Reich.
I believe Joel's point that unless we dispel the lies about Hitler being basically the devil and the myth of the holocaust as well, then it will not be possible to win as those are the very things the enemy claims will happen again should whites have control of their own nations. The enemy won't allow us any 'stepping over' that, but we do have the truth on our side and should stand by that.
Dispelling the myth is fine—that’s currently underway, and as Keith says, there are massive accounts that aren’t even far-right or necessarily pro-white that are now doing a better job at this. This camp has had a total intellectual victory. Tearing down the foundational myths of the post-war consensus is a good thing.
What the New NS is trying to do is turn back the clock and undo the Axis defeat. They’re trying to win a lost battle that has defined reality for 80 years, and instead of trying to build a new paradigm, they’re locked in as the inversion of the boomer worldview, rather than abandoning it altogether.
This doesn't describe Joel or any of the major NS guys. And the only reason more normie people like Ian Carrol and others is because the Alt Right exploded when new young NS trolls took to the meme war. We owe this current situation to them, but people who came to this scene through the Alt Right or through occupy, or any libertarian pipeline, will have your views and takes.
Beautifully said Fortissax.
With the Holocaust denial, there is tremendous danger of becoming the woketard kind of an anti-Semite, however. Do not mistake the generic liberal normie sperg-out against Israel as genuinely Jew hatred! So many racists wish the Holocaust had never happened because they want to see Hitler as a lover of Jews, as a Christian. But he was nothing but.
I personally never researched the question myself, too much noise, so can't say either way. But I see terrible danger in Jew love, as its roots are Christian, the instinct is Christian, to deny genocide, instead of being proud of it.
Sure, you could point out to the Turks... But while the Turks deny the Armenian genocide under immense Christian pressure, they nevertheless still conducted another Armenian genocide in 2023. Can anyone ever expect it of the Holocaust deniers? They'd call you a fed shill for suggesting it, LOL!
It's actually an important discussion. Also it pushes some of the most spergy anime avatar and NJP types to foam at the mouth, which is incredibly funny to witness.
But yes, this is not the main goal, just a funny pursuit.
From my perspective, things are very clear.
- nationalism, not imperialism
- small(er) peoples (like the Irish, or Slavic tribes) do deserve their homelands, which is hard to achieve and often endangered by these predatory large states, such as Russia is now, or Germany used to be. This is a VERY complicated issue, as these smaller peoples do require alliances and diplomacy to maintain those homelands, as there is no realistic way to defend against large empire-like entities
- there can be pan-Europeanism, but that means each of us need to leave behind something and accept others from the continent. Another thorny issue. However, I would say we absolutely need this, or we will not survive vs Africa, US, Russia
Nazism has nothing to offer here. If Hitler never started his "totally provoked" rampage through the continent, yes, we would see things differently, but that is not the history that has happened.
It also cannot ever be the focus, as there are more important fish to fry here. Open Nazis can enjoy their eternal ostracization and seething for 1K telegram followers, often by their own purity spiral choices.
Your optic cuckoldry nationalism has produced nothing but false promises and delusion when it comes to creating a pan-nationalist movement in Europe. Those who support white identity or any racial beliefs in the Western world will invariably be labeled as Nazis by mainstream society and the establishment, which is why it seems futile for nationalists to try to distance themselves from Nazism. Hell, consider Keith Woods, for example, as he promotes his nationalist racial beliefs to mainstream society, and they label him either a fascist or a Nazi. Pretty ironic.
Who cares how they label him? What's true here?
So true king
We need to be super extreme
I fully support you in your endeavor to be non-optical!
Go blast at them king - spare not one sinful soul!
1, Racism is based, nationalism is cringe.
2, Settler imperialism is based, liberal Christian imperialism is cringe.
3, "each of us needs to leave behind something" - this is feminine and Christian, this is EU, this is democracy.
4, No, Hitler's admittedly unprovoked (yet glorious) sperg-out changed absolutely nothing - did you miss the memo as to how the things were going for Europe in 1935? Look at the population numbers - India, the Philippines, Iraq - were those societies settled by Aryans? No, they were bred by retarded woke Christians before being given self-rule. This is the same cuckoldry, just in tamer colours, as modern chemical castration of children.
You either attack or you lose. Even North Korea has it written in their constitution that they must get Lebensraum in the South - what I'm saying is that genocide and extermination are natural courses for any race, even if you must be on the defensive for a hundred years, you must remain a beast eager to strike.
If you're a pacifist, you're a Christian you're a traitor.
National socialism died in 1945. What we need is an original Nationalist movement copys of foreign movements never work.
It didn't die, it's fire was smothered because NatSoc could actually save the peoples jews want dead and gone. The embers are still burning, and the flames are rising once again.
What do you propose as an example? There have been many 'nationalist' organizations what came the closest to your ideal?
I find it most interesting that this essay and all the ones linked either ignore or gloss over the most important concern of NS, which persists100 years later. How can a "nation" exist when an amoral and resentful minority controls its government, finance, media, and culture and will silence, often permanently, any opposition? How can this control be broken?
Well that's not the point of the debate and everyone involved in it wants to restore sovereignty to our homelands so I'm not sure what your point is
Keith, I'm sorry you relied on Richard Parker's reliance on the eel-slippery Albert Speer to claim that Hitler ordered the destruction of military and civilian infrastructure throughout the Reich--the text of the order itself and the absence of compliance across the Reich (except for combat zones) makes a liar out of Speer on the face of it. Clearly he was seeking to ingratiate himself with his captors.
You and Parker and Greg Johnson make valuable points about the applicability of National Socialism to the situation of the white race today. I wonder whether, beyond condemning latter-day storm trooper parades, raising denunciation of Hitler and NS to a test oath for our own deliberations is the way to go.
A lot of information here is misleading or outright wrong. I'm going to give one example when Goebbels said in a speech 'National Socialism is not for export'; he didn't mean it wasn't pan-European or not for other nations.
He meant the Reich was not trying to coup other countries like the Soviet Union was.
Another thing is the supposed Hitler plan to massacre the Polish and to completely take over Slavic countries which is laughable and disputed by many historians wayyy more educated than me.
Interesting viewpoints but based on fundamentally wrong beliefs.
If it's "laughable", explain away the sources I presented from the mouths of the Nazi leadership directly
Thank you Keith for bringing some much needed sanity to this bedeviled topic. Joel, Thomas, Jacob etc mean well and are stand up men. They share our desire for a White homeland. They get it. However, they just need to let go of their trance-like fealty to the comparatively ancient NS/Hitlerian ethos and understand that it simply isn’t required nor will it EVER appeal enough to cross over to the mainstream to achieve the broad acceptance of White collectivism we all desire. Hopefully they’ll come around and join the ranks of the rational Pro-White ethnocentric movement that can actually upend this Zog paradigm controlling the West? My gut tells me this will be easier said than done.
You are wrong, and I must imagine it's because you are a woman.
Accusations of cowardice from this camp can never be taken seriously. It worked 15 years ago when these ideas lurked in the obscure corners of the internet. It doesn’t work when the most successful musician of all time, by raw sales, is rhetorically retconning the secular Satan of liberals. Hundreds—perhaps thousands—of people have been doxxed, lost their jobs, and some even their relationships, for taking far-right positions and producing content that brought millions of people to where we are now.
The New National Socialists (whom I differentiate from both the historic NSDAP and post-war neo-Nazis) have never considered that an entirely new generation—perhaps the first—to define itself not simply by inverting the post-war consensus has actually risen, with genuine nationalist sentiments, yet without identifying with the 20th century.
15 years ago you could find the obscure corner in youtube
Hello, I am honored that you mentioned my essay. I believe the callus disregard he showed for the lives of his own in the German military is equally despicable, a matter I discuss at some length. Some apparently question the Nero decree, surmising that Alber Speer fabricated this to save his own skin. I am dubious, and in any case it comports with summary executions of any German, military or civilian, with even a suspicion of desertion, defeatism, etc.
Thanks for your contribution!
My pleasure. If you could please list my essay in your works cited at the end, either from my subdtack or the version published on The Occidental Observer, it would be most appreciated.
I hyperlinked your OO post when I mentioned it and I li fed your substack in thr list of other essays at the end.
Apologies--I did not see it late last night. 🙏🏻
Whether fabricated or not, the two alleged Hitler orders Speer produced at Nuremberg were clearly not intended to destroy industry, transport, and communications through Germany. It suffices to read them to see that they pertained to installations conquered or threatened by the Allies—which is doubtless why Parker refrains from citing either. (The epithet “Nero order,” by the way, is a postwar invention of the Allies and their German stooges, aimed obviously at transforming measures commonly taken by invaded nations into the horrors breathlessly invoked by Parker.)
Need it be said that there is no evidence that systematic destruction of the German infrastructure was carried out (by the Germans) across the Reich? Or that neither Hitler nor his minions seem to have acted to counter such evident defiance of what Speer and Parker argue was the Fuehrer’s order?
Flimsy stuff on which to accuse Adolf Hitler of a measure worthy of the Morgenthau Plan for the destruction his people. Cui bono?
A response to Joel's defense of Hitlerism was needed and you delivered, thank you for that. You still lost the argument but you reiterated your point and it is valid; the Slavic people will NEVER rally behind Hitlerism because he was wrong in his judgement about them and what he did and said is unforgivable (to them). Even the revised Hitlerism of neo-nazism is too big of a pill for them to swallow. So they will be the last to join our ranks and we will drop Hitler when that time comes in favor of White unity. But Hitlerism will get us to that point because it has persisted despite all persecution and propaganda. It has esthetics, uncompromising ideology, inspiring rhetoric and suppressed truth.
"Ein volk, Ein Reich, Ein Fuhrer" is the motto. But not that it is intentionally missing the word "nation". We need to think bigger and be willing to drop symbols that offend some of our White brethren if we truly want to rid ourselves of the division and subservience to a tiny demonic tribe someday. And time is running short. Technology has provided a window for red pilling but it also provides greater surveillance and military might.
Finally, I think this is a great discussion and much needed. Both of you are great thinkers and both have excellent points. But please do not lose sight of the real goal which is not simply Ireland for the Irish, Poland for the Poles and damn everyone else. It is the self-detetmination of our entire race because, make no mistake, we are being attacked as an entire race and the future of ALL of our descendants depends on us getting our strategy and ideology right at this critical time.
White Nations For White People
Poles are retards who wouldn't let Danzig go, they will have to be dragged to salvation, but drag them we shall. Despite that the Germans treated them well, like all other Slavs. Today there's plenty of Nazis in Ukraine, Russia, Croatia, and indifference in Bulgaria and Slovakia.
Cope. The Ukrainians served the Germans because the Germans treated them better, Hitler didn't want them in the military due to their volatility. However even today there are Ukrainian Nazis.
"Pro ANC Whites" depends how broadly you define White. Yes there were pro Hitler Jews even during the war, like Milch or Hitler's buddies he forced Himmler to let join the SS. The Ukrainians mostly wound up killing Jews, many of whom were terrorists, some of whom were civilians hence Hitler's hesitancy to let them serve, also due to them serving the Soviets only shortly prior. Some still served though. Rosenberg was ignored due to being a goober atheist, even if he was right on this matter. The lesson is don't be a goober atheist so people take your good ideas seriously.
Russian/Ukrainian neo-Nazis celebrate April 20, but I've never seen it being a thing in the Anglosphere. So not sure why you're saying that Slavs are unable to venerate Hitler. Of course, I myself have plenty of issues with post-1945 understanding of NatSoc, but the point still stands.
And using this opportunity, what nobody ever seems to mention is these 3 points about Hitlerianism:
1) ban on jazz anti-music (would be rock and metal in this day);
2) removal of females from universities (staunch Taliban/ISIS anti-feminism in our age);
3) animal welfare (I hate this point because cruelty is the way of life, and this makes me non-Nazi, unfortunately).
April 20 is celebrated in American nationalist circles.
I think what’s being described is a real phenomenon. The Nazi fandom, the irritating over zealous convert type, the purist, etc. Listen if we can acknowledge that that type is a scourge, can we also acknowledge that the pearl clutching over any positive word said over Hitler is just as loathsome. I mean let’s be dead honest, both extremes drive people up the wall. The over the top “Hitlerite” and the sanctimonious person who treats WW2 as a topic that can’t be violated both don’t really represent the average nationalist. I’m willing to bet 90% of nationalists fall somewhere in between indifference to WW2 and to having sympathies to Nazi germany (without any of the “fandom” behavior described). Let’s be real, it’s difficult to get deep in to nationalist ideas and not look over at Nazi Germany and not feel some degree of “yeah I kind of get it.” That feeling is more or less strong in people and 9 times of 10 it doesn’t result in a single purchase of any Nazi related thing or a personality built around it.
One more point that has to be acknowledged is that the media environment that conservatives stew themselves in is inundated with insane conspiracy after conspiracy… a few revisionist concepts here and there don’t really shock conservatives anymore. They’re perfectly receptive. The normie today is a different animal than he was 10 years ago. If you identify as a Nazi, I’m sure they would recoil, but if you discuss some alternative history of WW2 or Germany whenever the topic happens to come up, they’re all ears. They believe they’ve been lied to about everything already, so they’re not resistant to an alternative on WW2.
So, food for thought. I think overt larping is obviously dumb. I think being sanctimonious is cringe. Most nationalist have already struck a reasonable balance between historical interest and not letting that consume them. Maybe this debate needed to happen. Maybe it didn’t. Maybe it just made people unnecessarily choose a side because we’re tribal retards, when in fact, the middle ground was a reasonable compromise all along… Have your sympathies (if you have any) but don’t make it a focal point.
Best comment I’ve read so far. Well said.
It would be interesting if you now considered the path forward more broadly. Do you support a mass movement, or vanguardism? What do you think about trying to build an 'order' of upstanding, intelligent, active men?
Our societies are becoming increasingly authoritarian as the only way to maintain social order in multiculturalism, and this will continue. We're moving into a state closer to Tsarist Russia for dissidents, a situation that necessitated vanguardism. Look beyond the superficial Hitlerism of the NSN, and their strategy of building an order and a vanguard seems very much correct.
As an example, Tom Sewell wrote an essay years ago noting that NSDAP aesthetics was militarist because of the high status of soldiers in 20s-30s Germany, and trying to translate this into the modern day (revolving around the Active Club aesthetic). It's worth reading if you can find it.
You started saying the most valid criticism is when people agree with you but think this is pointless. You aren't being serious.
I am serious
I really doubt it, but I enjoyed the article. You are touching on a topic that will generate a lot of interest.
Thank you! Glad you liked it
Keith woods is a bad actor. Simple as. He may have started or sincere or is still currently sincere but he wants to eat his cake and have it too; He wants to be optical, get pushed by Elon and Trump's retarded right which brings with it a world of clout and connections yet also wants to have White people take their own side, or at least seems to want that.
You can't have an easily trodded path when your intentions are pure. The right thing is always the hardest thing to do. Mark Collette sat down in prison, Joel Davis is/was/will for similar reasons, Sam Melia is more of the same, David Duke also (tho I don't trust him personally). Those guys have stripes, Keith doesn't. Keith ame on the late half when the road was already paved with blood and livelihoods of the guys who came before him and now he has the nerve to bitch about optics and what works and doesn't work from his armchair when he should be out organising the already activated Irish people against the migrants and traitors bringing them in.
You're a pussy Keith and that's being lenient, worse than that you're a subverter, wether u know this or not is only for you to know for sure. You're either a useful idiot or an out and out thot polluter, I mean thought.
They're only ad hom because they're true, remember that. His arguments are rooted in a false premise of national socialism/fascism being bad optics and why they never work, instead advocating for a path that's easier to take.
Now ask yourself why is it that the right thing to do is very often the harder thing to do. Go on and ask yourself. Then ponder on Keith's flaccid point. Anyone taking Keith's advice will end up with this nasty rotten political system changing them to suit it rather than the other way around. But Keith is a smart guy and knows this already I'm sure, so the next question to ask is why does he insist on making thosecflaccid points.
Nope but I do think Hitler was a fool who got outmanoeuvred because he made it all about jews AGAINST THE WISHES of some of his most inner circle. See Ezra Pound's comment on litler and mussolini for example. He said both men had their hearts in the right place but they weren't as politically savvy as Jews so they were out played.
Oswald Spengler literally predicted, to the fucking letter, how long nat soc germany would last (10 years) and what would happen after, with his premise being hitler had the right ideas but wrong implementations which would lead to purity spiralling. Nobody took him on, he screamed into the void.
The problem isn't national socialism, the problem is White people's propensity to get caught up in the weeds over bullshit that either doesn't matter or is not RELEVANT to the problems which needs solving.
JFK gets shot, it's an obsession over the magic bullet. 9/11 happened and it's an obsession with wether the planes caused the collapse or bombs blew up on the inside of each floor. Fascism and later on national socialism were founded and demonstrated how quickly a state/people's could be organized around their ethnicity/culture, now it's a race to see who can get the blonde hair and blue eyes genetics or who can scalp the most kikes, all else be damned.
Here's the thing, I get Keith wants to knock up a new Switzerland somewhere in his ideal world inside his head space but that's not going to happen because jews and white traitors/subverters won't allow it to happen. The only pushback against these gatekeepers are the types who support/espouse the one, simple tenet; Are you pro White or anti white?
Pro whites don't try to "sanitise" their position Nigel Firage style on their way to the stratosphere of clout like Keith attempts to do.
Are you pro White or Anti white?