Sympathy for the Nazis... well...
The issue with this generational feedback loop from boomers to the millennial generation and beyond is that the right wingers and liberals among these demographics are being played by Jewish interests to keep White identity and motions to systemic self correction, homeostasis and sovereignty, ineffective if not down right destructive.
And some Xer’s, particularly STEM types who have been encouraged in their personal lives by relative success through the tech field, are going to be susceptible to look upon would-be post modern corrective as so much nonsense, particularly as it is red caped, of course. And instead of being part of the corrective to the Boomer cancer, they use their nerd-tech skills to patch up the right wing conduit of modernity from Boomers to the subsequent generations.
By golly, that’s where we want wrong; the boomer right wingers are right, we didn’t do it hard enough! And they patch up (or try to patch) the glaring epistemic contradiction between “left and liberal.” As noted, the first casualties of didactic incitement will be on the the tautological level.
The YKW have been experts in in playing White people, not only ascribing White identity and nationalism as right wing (or far right, alt-right, dissident right, or letting in right wing destabilization by claiming “neither left nor right, “national socialist” or third position – anything but white left ethnonationalist, but in getting them to confuse what really are opposite terms, left and liberal.
They have done this by co-opting the basis of the left, unionization and coalition building, and red caping it as a Marxist internationalist union, workers of the world uniting against nationalism, the nation state which is supposed to wither away on behalf of communist utopia; and where that was slow going, co-opting the left as Cultural Marxist, Politically Correct unions of blacks, women, gays and whomever they might gather in coalition against Whites, with absurd red capes of post modern concepts to wield against “White privilege.”
But the point is, their red caping, whether of the Marxist international unionization of “international proletariat” or the unionization of Cultural Marxist anti-White, supposed victim groups, us founded upon the concept of unionization: which is conservative of that which is within the union. While liberalism opens boundaries and borders. Hence, in attacking White borders and bounds, they are effecting liberalization of White boundaries. That is, it is NOT Leftism for Whites. It is imposed liberalism (though Whites continue to confuse the terms left and liberal, using the terms interchangeably).
In depth grammar, the left unionizes people, facilitates accountability, systemic correctability, thus homeostasis, autonomy and sovereignty, while liberalism opens borders and boundaries.
This holds true cross contextually.
Liberalism opens boundaries and maintains its warrant to license and licentiousness on the claim of objective basis. The internationalist left would be trying encourage this liberalization of our borders and bounds until we are dead, in effect, and it can impose its union rule with finality.
Right wingism is also based on objectivism, a confirmation bias to justify the merit of its position while minimizing indebtedness to its social group; but is a bit more disingenuously calculating or naively unknowing in how it leaves borders susceptible for the rational blindness to social accountability in its purity spirals. And with that, lacking the structure of social accountability and anchoring in social correctivity thereof, it is inherently unstable
With their marketing campaign against “the left” (on the market since 2008), Jewry is doing its usual thing, only hyperbolically so, of trying to disrupt European/White systemic homeostasis.
They are doing this by preventing us from taking on left organizational concepts in White interests (i.e., White Left Ethnonationalism), notably, unionizing against the power of Jewry, their right wing cohorts (who take the pay offs to be freed from group accountability through the proposed “objectivity” of their individual merit) and liberal cohorts (who take the license and licentiousness to be freed from group accountability through the proposed “objectivity” of their individual merit).
And with that marketing campaign bought into by Whites, White identity is not known as, and functioning with that “fictional” structuring of unionization, with its facilitation of social accountability, correctivity and systemic homeostasis; it is not known as being stable and sane, within the bounds of human reason, nor compassionate, recognizing and empathizing with OUR marginalized in fellowship, so as to gain popular adherence; nor gaining thus, the ability to coordinate coalitions as we are not increased in our anthropecentric empathy; our own resource not secured, we are not in better position to coordinate with others.
Xer Semiogogue, having a taste of e-celeb, right wing Xer dummy chasing the red cape of post modernity that he is, doesn’t want any of that recentralization of Praxis, na ah.
Thus when the Xer philosophical mediocrity, Greg Johnson (PhD Philosophy, editor Counter-Currents), says in conversation with Millennial Woes (I don’t suppose that they suck each other off – yet) that when the internationalist left is imposing draconian measures against White free speech that “this is not liberal”, he is not understanding (typical of him not to understand some of the most important philosophical issues) he is wrong; it is liberalism, even though the philosophical mediocrity cannot understand that – it is a late stage, hyperbolic liberalization of our borders and boundaries and holding that liberalization in place – it is a weaponized all-American conserving of liberalism until the end of Whites.
We should not place too much faith in Greg Johnson’s snooty, right wing elitism; he is the same guy who called Hitler “a great statesman” in the Lindtner thread at Majorityrights. Johnson seeks lateral discriminatory means to garner audience from the said American demographic; and pandering to these right wing reactionaries is comfortable for this snob.
And as I’ve said before, his lateral snobbery in elitism as opposed to horizontal discrimination on behalf of niches of the racially loyal and sincere, can get him into troubling company; while this enmeshment with the boomer conduit to generation internet bubble and his philosophical mediocrity keeps him wedded to right wing positioning, it also keeps him off the mark in important White Post Modern philosophical concepts.
And Greggy’s ability, which is considerable, has him circulating the false currency of White identity as right wing and more explicitly, against the left. It suits him and others, like Millennial Woes, who place a bit too much concern for audience and market – thus a little of the money backing right identity, probably, as opposed to the proper grounds of White advocacy. Millennial Woes trades the currency back, “people are just going to have to accept that World War II shouldn’t have happened. I apologize to the Germans. Britain and America were on the wrong side, should not have started the war.” Really? If you are going to moan in 20/20 hindsight, how about “the great statesman Hitler” doesn’t start the war?
STEM Xer conduit of the right wing boomer cancer to subsequent generation internet bubble pipe line.
The issue with right wingers and liberals is that they are being played by Jews.
It is an unfortunate part of this, therefore, that when I am forced to address one right wing expression, such as Nazism, that its proponents, such as Xer Tanstaafl, exacerbated by his STEM tendency to look for “the one thing” that breaks/links the circuit” and false, absolute binary either/ors (unlike the reality of praxis) can double down in playing into the altercast, depicting anti-Nazism as “my big bugger bear”, to use his term applied to myself, like it is my own myopic obsession; and my looking not just at Jews but at holes, vulnerabilities in our philosophical system as my being like Jared (“they look huWhite to me”) Taylor, trying to let Jews into our group system and defense, and naively letting them off the hook.
in fact, I am concerned to shore up our group system and its philosophical advocacy, (which, unlike Jared Taylor’s idea, does not include Jews; and DOES see them as being in profound adversarial position); even if attacking them were the thing to do, how could we be effective in our goals if we are not capable of organizing and defending our system – if its got holes.
And since I like and advocate all European peoples and their national sovereignty; and most importantly from my position, am focused on coordination of our interests, I’d rather not have to deal with Nazism at all (let alone its being my obsessive bugbear, what Tanstaafl is hearing, rather, is annoyance at my having to deal with it at all – I shouldn’t have to), as it is bound to stir up conflict between Europeans, whether by trolls or by true believers – neither of whom I should have to deal with: it should be obvious to anyone who cares about European/White peoples that we are ALL under attack in anti-racism; and that trying to redeem Hitler and Nazism is beyond impractical. It’s cruel, genocidal supremacism, imperialism and excuse making thereof, is not going to allow us to get along, become popular as we show human compassion rather than the iron law of nature, will not facilitate coordination and alliance building among our race, not going to be practical in coordination with other races either
But in my frustration and annoyance with the Nazi trolls and true believers, Tanstaafl is wont to see me on the other side of his false / either or, as if I am fooled or in league with the Jews, like Jarod Taylor, whereas he, and only the Nazi kind, recognize the significance of Jewry as mortal enemy.
That world view would go a long way to alleviating guilt trips that he and people like him may choose to accept (though I don’t know why they would; or reject, which they should) and “justify” Nazi Germany – which they should not try to do; especially not since they are only exercising 20/20 hindsight.
But some people, Xer’s among them, are just smart enough and have the skill set, to keep patching up deeply mistaken philosophy; and they get a lot of confirmation and popular currency through this position, for the largely German and Irish demographic of beleaguered reactionaries, wishing to hear redemptive stories of the Nazis.
Thus intent in the purity spiral, when Tanstaafl tries to pretend that I am obfuscating, that he is a “White winger” (none of this left or right stuff) it may sound clever; but he’s right wing, evidence his standing by Hitler, if nothing else.
Again, it is a problem with the White American boomer demographic, followed by the xers that they have been able to channel as conduits of their right wing message, to the millennials and z’s who await in their internet bubbles buffered from reality and historical testing, is that they are largely of nationalities, German and Irish, susceptible to trade in (what is to them the relief of) the false currency of either/ or “Nazis were the good guys / or you are naively/disingenuously on the side of Jewry” and over sympathy with the Nazis side in their beleaguered reaction to the politically correct onslaught.
Having said that…
Indeed, Dr. Christian Lindtner (debunker of holocaust deniers) asked of me prior to his interview, “you think that Hitler was right about some things, yes?”
I thought it was a fair question to test for a man of reasonable empathy. I answered yes, of course.
In corrective of this regard, we might tip our hat to a truth, at least for most of us, that Boomer James Bowery added by a word of restraint to those who react against this reactionary demographic and facilitate the concordance with Germans and German ethnonatioanlism that we appreciate, as an integral partner in our ethnonatioalist coalition.
“You have to have some sympathy for Nazi Germany and Hitler” (it’s a matter of how much).
Before going whole-assed in absolute non-sympathy for Nazi Germany, let me relate some of my visceral reaction, as I am quite sure that they’d be visceral reactions shared by most any who care about European/White people. Though I’ve said much, I will say more for my visceral reaction against those who try to redeem Hitler. And those who do that, should be aware of the kind of intense hatred that they are generating against them.
While it is true that moaning about the Versailles Treaty’s economic terms as unjust and causative of the WWII is taken for granted, especially among WN; and economic terms aside, I am satisfied that the national lines drawn were not unreasonable, Germans were not the only one’s who suffered population shifts and should be the last people complaining about that (civilian deaths in this process aside, that’s bad) even though I’ve never heard anyone else raise that argument, and the arguments about the source of WWII among WN tend to be so very German biased in terms of Versailles being the problem that I have tended to lose patience, there is an aspect of how enforcement of the Versailles treaty in interwar Germany invokes my empathy, though it is only something that the Treaty allowed for, did not require.
It has to do with the incidence of France bringing-in black soldiers from its colonies to occupy and police the Rhineland. This was the first that blacks would be brought into the nation in any number and the race-mixing would inevitably follow. Adding to the indignity was a reaction to provocations wherein black soldiers went over the border into Germany and shot about twenty Germans.
While from what I understand, Germany was more to blame than other nations for WWI, and I do understand France’s rage over WWI, furthermore, that France was undermanned in their capacity to defend the Rhineland and the rest of France; I do not sympathize with their bringing in blacks to assist in this regard – not at all.
I’m not saying that it was his reasoning, but if I were Hitler, and I saw France bringing in blacks, to take German women, adulterate the population and shoot resisters, I would be ready to invade France, “you think you won that war, hu?” We were just resting. Now we’re going to control you because we have to. Then I suppose I might look east and say, “you think you are going to deploy elite Jews to strategize against German interests, huh?” Now we are going to control you because we have to and because we can.
Of course, I would be mistaken, tactlessly overcompensating where I should, rather, in operating from my new position of strength, cooperate with conservative elements in adjacent nations.
And that is the point of 20/20 hindsight.
I can even understand maybe thinking imperialist supremacism was a cool thing to do at one time, in circumstance. Not now.
Of course the sane perspective of 20/20 hindsight is also, probably first, to look critically upon Germany’s imperialist aspirations in WWI, the brutal results which effected some bad reactions among the French, especially; but with the understanding as to why they, the Belgians et al. would be so angry. Then we can talk about the other side went too far, as in the French bringing blacks into the Rhineland.
The problem is, when it comes to American WN, there is a shocking unanimity of currency. Nazi Germany and Hitler could do no wrong; WWII was everybody else’s fault. Shocking, but that is the line these guys are taking. It’s either that or hey, “why do people criticize Jews?”
I hasten to add that I cannot relate to forced sterilization at all; to me this is the weird, most rogue side of German logic. I can understand de-nationalizing Mulattoes, deporting them, even wanting (i said wanting to, folks) to kill them. But to sterilize them and let them live among you? Weird.
The sane position with regard to Jews, of course, is to see them as a different people from Europeans/Whites (even those with significant European admixture, such as Ashkenazi; and those who see themselves as “White”); a people who are not a part of our group; who have different interests; who generally look after their own interests and have significant power to do so, while they are typically indifferent where not outright antagonistic to our interests – antagonistic which they often are thus,’ the legitimacy for separatism must be the working hypothesis – pursuit of our autonomy and sovereignty from them must be the perspective, not an agenda to murder them: that is neither a practical focus in organizing our sovereignty, which needs to be systemic (an array of concerns not singular focus on Jews, let alone, trying to get people to kill them all), attending to a circle of issues. Nor is tactful in giving Jewry a clear argument that they are legitimized in trying to destroy the threat of White identity and critical separatism from Jewry – the overcompensation of Nazi Germany has already been enough of a weapon against White Nationalism by its association, turning away popular assent to our side.
With a working hypothesis that Jews are another people, with different interests that they can look after for themselves, while we pursue our own autonomy, not an aim to kill them, we may rest comfortably in the court of the gods: even if our hypothesis is a bit off, I.e.. Jews or particular Jews are not that bad, not that responsible for our plight, no irreversible harm done. Thus, we should be more free to pursue our ends in the court of the gods if genocide is not our aim but rather autonomy.
We need to anchor our world view in stabilizing our Praxis system, not expecting everyone to hop-to and start killing Jews.
And between Europeans, It’s not like there is a middle ground between European ethnonationalism and the Nazis. No, the Nazis are out of bounds. You can’t coordinate European peoples with Nazism.
Since we’re exercising 20 20 hindsight, we can see the prudence of coordinating nationalisms as opposed to launching imperialist supremacism…
We can understand how the Nazi regime may have seemed right at the time to Germans in the situation but we have better perspective now. We know that they were not under clear and immanent threat, that other nations were against the Soviets and willing to deport Jews.
Particularly with our demographics susceptible as they are to be overly sympathetic to Nazi Germany, pandered to by both true believers and enemies playing divide and conquer, trading in this false currency, we must be careful and attend to our epistemological premises noting that Wall Street Bob from D.C. had it exactly backwards when he said that Tanstaafl is the “greatest epistemologist.” That is exactly what Tanstaafl is NOT.
Wall Street Bob, a Boomer, is like every WN stuck on the Hitler – they come by way of the very compelling William Luther Pierce (STEM guy, physicist) – who was from the “greatest generation” but nevertheless a guru for boomers who want to redeem Hitler.
The Working Hypothesis of Praxis as Opposed to Scientism.
Bottom line with regard to Jewry: the sane view is to hold that they are a different people with different interests and we must look after ours by means of separatism, pursing our autonomy; the working hypothesis of the need for our pursuit of sovereignty and corresponding need for separatism from Jewry is increased significantly in its legitimacy by the clear statement that our objective is separatism and functional systemic autonomy, not to kill and eliminate Jewry.
We may proceed comfortably with this working hypothesis as it is innocent enough: even if hypotheses about Jewish antagonism are demonstrated to be a bit off, irreversible damage is far less likely to be done to anybody.
We are also far more likely to gain popular and powerful support in defending ourselves if we are attacked while innocently pursuing our sovereignty.
While we might even understand their rage, certainly the association with Nazism’s overcompensations has been one of the greatest stigmatizing and inhibiting factors in the pursuit of ethnonationalism; association with denial and its redemptionism only tend to make the ethnonationalist cause look worse, egregiously dishonest. Therefore, it is necessary to necessary to counter those who would try to associate Nazism with White Nationalism, to reject it and to demonstrate why it makes perfect sense to do so.
Tansstaafl might feel good taking that angle and it logically “justifies” Nazism and Hitler, relieving him of his guilt trips, but it isn’t just tactless, though it is that, it is to partake of a massive epistemological blunder.
A convulsive, stasis over correction to the parasitic destruction is not what we need, and those who try redeem that are not just bad optics, they are reacting into a fool’s game.
After all, systemic autonomy is what we want, sovereignty. How Jews might interfere is in part a separate issue where we have any agency at all, and we do. On the other hand, we lose much agency when we engage the causative, “that’s just the way it is” arguments of the right, and react over the top, fixing to kill all the Jews. It has been said that war is a Jew harvest and if we’re not careful to be in systemic balance and correctivity, we are likely to get a large percentage of our quality people killed, if not getting our qualitative species basically destroyed while the historical result of this approach has only been to increase their more virulent types in horizontal transmission. Finally, of course, as it is more clear to the public through our stated objectives and practices that our aim is sovereignty from, not genocide over others, we are warranted to defend ourselves and draw upon support in our defense.
At the same time and with that, our free speech, even where quite critical, ought to be perceived as less of a threat and less cause to clamp down on our freedoms.
It’s a false either /or to say that the Jews are singularly responsible for our problems (as Tanstaafl veritably maintains) or that our problems are almost singularly our fault (as Jared Taylor maintains); and I am definitely not on Jared Taylor’s side (decidedly not). Nevertheless, part of Tan’s flare up with me came with the idea that I was siding with Jared Taylor’s concept of “pathological altruism” which seeks to put all blame for the plight of Whites in their abnormal psychology… I will not allow myself and my platform to be depicted that way (big hero Tanstaafl) but there are holes and vulnerabilities in our system, its philosophy do have to be corrected.
So let me go there next, my experience of Tanstaafl as an obstruction to this correction.
I’ve made a few corrections and additions to the final two paragraphs, so the reader my be advised to check that, while I’m now ready to move on to part 6.