Zionism: A Powerful And Influential Myth

Reichsfolk

°°°°°°°

The United States ambassador to the Zionist entity that currently occupies Palestine – who was appointed by the pro-Zionist administration of the current President, The Vulgarian – recently declared that the Zionist entity was “on the side of God.” {1}

He also declared that in relation to moving the US embassy to Jerusalem in compliance to Zionist demands,
             “the move of the embassy was a validation by the strongest nation in the world, not just strong militarily, strong economically, but strong morally, strong ethically, with a bedrock of Judeo-Christian values.”

Such declarations, and the fact that the ambassador – David M. Friedman – is Jewish and that his remarks were made at a meeting of an American Christian evangelical group provides the necessary context.

A context also provided by comments such as that “God gave the Land of Israel to the Jewish people thousands of years ago” {2}, and as does the plan by the current US national security adviser John Bolton to either get the US to invade Iran {3}- the arch enemy of the Zionist entity – or to support a proxy war against Iran undertaken by Middle East states such as Iraq and Saudi Arabia. A proxy war similar to the current conflict in Yemen where the US provides military hardware, military intelligence, and incentives to a Saudi-led coalition in their war with Shia rebels and which Shia rebels look to Iran as their spiritual home.

That the wealthy John Bolton, a staunch Christian, was instrumental in getting the US to invade Iraq in 2003 by using the lie of “weapons of mass destruction” and instrumental in supporting armed “regime change” – and conflict – in Libya and Syria, and yet like the Vulgarian {4}{5} cowardly managed to avoid military service in Vietnam {6} says all that needs to be said about his posturing war-mongering.

The necessary context is how so many influential individuals in the pro-Zionist administration of the current President of the United States promote “Judeo-Christian values”, and believe in the myth that the Zionist entity is “on the side of God” and accept the myth that “God gave the Land of Israel to the Jewish people thousands of years ago.”

In other words, the most powerful nation on Earth is – in the 21st century – not only promoting a particular ancient religious myth but is using that myth to support policies of foreign aggression and unconditional support for Zionists and the Zionist entity that currently occupies Palestine.

In practical terms this amounts to Zionist control and manipulation of the most powerful nation on Earth, just as the Zionist myth of the so-called holocaust – the foundation myth of the Zionist entity that currently occupies Palestine – keeps all other Western governments in thrall and obedient. A thralldom evident, for example, in the acceptance of holocaustianity by the current British Prime Minister who recently stated that belief in holocaustianity was “a sacred, national mission.” {7}

Is there an alternative to belief in such an ancient religious myth and in the acceptance of the belief that the Zionists and the Zionist entity are on the side of God?

Yes: it is the alternative of National Socialism. But not the Hollywood type of Nazism and White racialism {8} in which the modern myth of the holocaust and hate and misogyny play a central role. But the authentic National Socialism manifest in the deeds and writings of the likes of Waffen-SS General Leon Degrelle {9}.

The Hollywood type of Nazism and of White racialism – the Zionist myth about National Socialism and racialism – has conjured up people like Jack Renshaw and Thomas Mair who in their cowardice and weakness both fantasized about killing women, with Mair succeeding in his Hollywood-inspired plan to kill a defenceless woman.

Would the likes of Waffen-SS General Leon Degrelle, of SS-Obersturmfuhrer Per Sorensen, or SS-Obersturmbannführer Otto Skorzeny, or Major-General Otto Ernst Remer, have murdered defenceless women? Of course not.

That the Hollywood propaganda version of Nazism and of White racialism – with its hatred, its misogyny, and its often reliance on Judeo-Christian myths and values – still dominates the lands of the West is indicative of just how powerful and influential modern Zionists have been and still are.

As does the fact that the genuine National Socialism – of the likes of Waffen-SS General Leon Degrelle, SS-Obersturmfuhrer Per Sorensen, SS-Obersturmbannführer Otto Skorzeny, and Major-General Otto Ernst Remer {9} – is apparently unknown among the majority who in the 21st century profess to be either National Socialists or White nationalists.

Reichsfolk
May 2019

{1} https://www.nytimes.com/2019/05/14/world/middleeast/us-ambassador-israel-god.html
{2} https://israelunwired.com/bolton-said-palestine-grabbed-attention/
{3} https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2019/may/16/john-bolton-trump-iran-nuclear-deal-danger
{4} https://reichsfolktimes.wordpress.com/2018/07/20/the-vulgarian/
{5} https://www.nytimes.com/2016/08/02/us/politics/donald-trump-draft-record.html
{6} https://yaledailynews.com/blog/2005/04/28/boltons-conservative-ideology-has-roots-in-yale-experience/
{7} https://reichsfolktimes.wordpress.com/2019/05/07/accepting-holocaustianity/
{8} “Hollywood was founded by a band of buccaneering Jewish immigrants.” Times Literary Supplement, April 29, 1983.
{9} https://reichsfolktimes.wordpress.com/2018/12/26/a-new-interpretation-of-national-socialism/

°°°°°°°


Advertisements

Accepting Holocaustianity

Reichsfolk

°°°°°°°

Accepting Holocaustianity

The current British Prime Minister, Bumbling May – otherwise known as Teresa May – has reaffirmed her acceptance of the new religion of holocaustianity, declaring that belief in the modern myth of the holocaust is a sacred duty. Speaking in support of a proposed “national holocaust memorial” in Victoria Tower Gardens, London, next to the River Thames, Mrs Bumbling said that
                   “we make a solemn and eternal promise that Britain will never forget what happened in the Holocaust… [This] is a sacred, national mission.” {1}

That the ‘memorial’ to a modern myth will involve destroying Victoria Tower Gardens with its trees and green spaces is quite acceptable to the British Prime Minister since the holocaust zealot stated such destruction is necessary since the ‘memorial’ would have “an important symbolic meaning” and that “in the face of despicable Holocaust denial, this memorial will stand to preserve the truth forever.”

All still living former British Prime Ministers have also declared their belief in holocaustianity, with Mr Smirker, otherwise known as Tony Blair – architect of British participation in the invasion of Iraq, and directly responsible for the killing of tens of thousands of civilians in that land – stating that “it’s absolutely right that this new national memorial is situated right next to parliament.”

No doubt Mrs Bumbling and Mr Smirker will soon add their voices to Zionist calls for denial of the holocaust to be made a criminal offence in Britain and punishable by imprisonment.

Once the new Temple to holocaustianity is built in the symbolic centre of London, no doubt it will be mandatory for British schoolchildren to visit it – worship at it – at least once a year as proof that they also believe in the modern myth of the holocaust having been taught – brainwashed – into accepting that holocaust denial is “despicable” and that those who doubt the truth of the religious holocaust myth should be vilified and punished.

Thus does the medieval religious mind-set live on in the modern world in a land such as Britain, with talk of “a sacred mission”, of “a solemn and eternal promise,” and of preserving “the truth forever,” with heretics – in the modern world, those who dare to question the veracity of ‘the holocaust’ – being “despicable”: that is, “despised, vile, base, contemptible” and thus who can be persecuted, hated, and vilified in public.

R.S.
Reichsfolk
2019 ev

{1} May backs building of Holocaust centre near parliament. The Guardian, May 6, 2019.

°°°°°

Related:

° Theory Of The Holocaust in https://reichsfolktimes.files.wordpress.com/2018/11/myatt-selected-ns-writings1.pdf

° https://reichsfolktimes.wordpress.com/2018/08/15/maintaining-a-cosmic-balance/

°°°°°°°°°


A New Interpretation Of National Socialism

°°°°°°°

Adolf Hitler

°°°°°°°°°

Reichsfolk:
A New Interpretation Of National Socialism

What is not widely known in the modern Western world is that there are two very different interpretations of National Socialism. “Ours” – that of groups such as Reichsfolk and of those who know and who appreciate the writings and deeds of people such as Waffen-SS General Leon Degrelle {1} – and that of the majority of latter-day self-described “neo-nazis”.

Latter-Day Neo-Nazism And The National-Socialism Of Reichsfolk

The first and most well-known latter-day interpretation of National Socialism is that of the majority of self-described “neo-nazis”, and which interpretation is accepted by most anti-fascists who actively oppose such modern “neo-nazis”.

This is the National Socialism with a belief in a strong, powerful, nation-State, and with an overt racist ideology. A National Socialism with a dislike – often hatred – of non-White immigrants and non-White neighbours; with a belief in the instinct of “might is right” and the necessity of kampf; with a dislike – even a hatred – of those whose love is for someone of the same gender; a National Socialism with a misogyny based on the masculous instinct that it is the natural duty of most women to be wives and home-makers; and a National Socialism with a dislike – even a hatred – of Islam and Muslims.

The second, and not very well-known, interpretation of National Socialism is that of the “revisionist”, non-racist, National-Socialism developed by David Myatt in the 1990s and manifest in the Reichsfolk group {2} inspired as this version was by Myatt’s meetings with Waffen-SS General Leon Degrelle and by his correspondence with Jost Turner whose vision was of a new Aryan folk-community in America and of other “NS kindred” communities around the world.

In this Myattian interpretation of National-Socialism {3} it is regarded as both (i) “an ethnic philosophy which affirms that the different races, the different peoples, which exist are expressions of our human condition, and that these differences, this human diversity, should be treasured in the same way we treasure the diversity of Nature. National-Socialists believe our world would be poorer were these human differences to be destroyed through abstract ideas,” and as (ii) “a pure expression of our own unique Aryan ethics, based as these ethics are upon the idealism of duty to the folk, duty to Nature, and upon the nobility of personal honour.” {4}

It is also the National-Socialism which rejects the notion of a strong, powerful, modern nation-State in favour of new ethnic folk-communities and which National-Socialism is not politically active “on the streets” but instead is “a social, educational, cultural, and spiritual, movement based upon and dedicated to disseminating the noble principles of ethical, non-racist, National-Socialism which are honour, reason, fairness, loyalty, duty to one’s own folk and to Nature, and respect for and understanding of other cultures and other ways of life.” {2}

In simple terms, the Myattian interpretation of National-Socialism is based on both honour and race, whereas the neo-nazism of most modern nazis and of modern neo-nazi political groups is based on the glorification of race and the glorification of “racial struggle” at the expense of personal honour; a difference Myatt emphasised is his essay A Brief Criticism of William Pierce, written in 114yf,
                  “The main weakness of the theorizing of Pierce is that he has failed to see that it is a combination of race and honour which defines National-Socialism, and which should define the racialist movement in general. Without the evolutionary, moral, concept of honour, there is only the inhuman ethics of the past, and in practice this leads to the creation of people who are ignoble and societies which are anti-evolutionary. Thus, Pierce is firmly stuck in the past: an ignoble past of unreason and dishonour.
                   This lack of an ethical dimension to his thinking leads to him supporting the old concept of racial struggle and the inhuman consequence of considering that some races are superior to others.” {5}

Myatt expanded upon this in his seminal text Esoteric Hitlerism: Idealism, the Third Reich and the Essence of National-Socialism,
                   “An affirmation of race without an affirmation honour is not National-Socialism, just as an affirmation of honour without an affirmation of race is not National-Socialism.
                   It is this living, organic, dialectic of honour and race which defines National-Socialism itself, and a National-Socialist is an individual who strives to do their honourable duty to both their own race and Nature herself, of which other human races are a part.
                   That is, a National-Socialist must always be honourable, whatever the consequences, or the perceived consequences. Quite often, this means a National-Socialist is faced with what seems to be difficult choices and difficult decisions, although in reality if National-Socialism itself is properly understood, there is no conflict, no moral dilemma and no difficulty in doing the right, the honourable, thing.
                   Thus if something, some act or deed, seems to affirm race – or be beneficial to one’s race – but is dishonourable, then that something is not something a National-Socialist should do. What honour does is define our duty to our race and other races – it prevents us from committing hubris.” {5}

In addition, in Myatt’s revisionist version of National-Socialism there is no misogyny, for the NS Code of Honour applies equally to both men and women,
                   “A man or woman of honour treats others courteously, regardless of their culture, religion, status, and race, and is only disdainful and contemptuous of those who, by their attitude, actions and behaviour, treat they themselves with disrespect or try to personally harm them, or who treat with disrespect or try to harm those whom the individual man or woman of honour have personally sworn loyalty to or whom they champion.” {6}

Our National-Socialism

The National-Socialism of Reichsfolk is Myatt’s revisionist, non-racist, ethical, version of National-Socialism.

This is the National-Socialism where
                   “a true National-Socialist knows or feels that some things are honourable, and other things are dishonourable. It is dishonourable, for instance – cowardly and unfair and uncivilized – for several people to attack and try to injure or kill a single individual.
                   Thus, if several Caucasians attack one Negro, they are acting dishonourably – they are being uncivilized and cowardly. A true National-Socialist would never do such a thing. They would always want to see, or take part in, a “fair fight”.
                   Furthermore, I myself – a life-long National-Socialist – would go to the aid of a Negro if I saw him being attacked by several Caucasians, for that would be the just, the fair, the honourable, the civilized and the National-Socialist thing to do. That so many people today who adhere to ‘political National Socialist’ organizations do not agree with this just shows how far these so-called ‘National Socialists’ are from genuine National-Socialism. Which, incidently, is why I always write ‘National-Socialism’ rather than National Socialism.”

This is also the National-Socialism where there is respect for the Muslim way of life and Muslim culture, with honourable co-operation between National-Socialists and Muslims regarded as desirable {8}.

That this revisionist, non-racist, ethical, version of National-Socialism is not appreciated – and certainly not understood – in the societies of the modern West is regarded by our kind as just one more indication of just how successful the Magian, the hubriati, and the neo-nazi hordes of Homo Hubris, have been in propagating the Magian latter-day (mis)interpretation of National Socialism as something “racist”, homophobic, misogynist, anti-Muslim, and uncivilized.

R.S.
Reichsfolk
25 December 129yf
v.1.07

°°°

{1} Waffen SS General Leon Degrelle was awarded numerous medals for war-time bravery including the Knight’s Cross of the Iron Cross with Oak Leaves, a German military award similar to the British Military Cross. His writings include:
° The Eastern Front: Memoirs of a Waffen SS volunteer, 1941-1945. Institute for Historical Review. 2014. ISBN 9780939484768.
° Hitler, né à Versailles. 1–3. Paris: Art et histoire d’Europe. 1986. ISBN 2906026085.
° Ich war Gefangener. Nürnberg: Hesperos Verlag. 1944.
° Hitler pour 1000 ans. Paris: La Table Ronde. 1969.
{2} qv. https://reichsfolktimes.files.wordpress.com/2018/07/intro-reichsfolk.pdf
{3} qv. Myatt: Selected National-Socialist Writings (pdf).
{4} Myatt, Why National-Socialism is Not Racist, 111yf. The essay is included in Myatt: Selected National-Socialist Writings.
{5} The essay is included in Myatt: Selected National-Socialist Writings.
{6} The Code is given in the third edition of Myatt’s The Meaning Of National-Socialism, included in Myatt: Selected National-Socialist Writings.
{7} Myatt, The Spirituality of National-Socialism: A Reply to Criticism, included in Myatt: Selected National-Socialist Writings.
{8} See, for instance, the essay Islam and National-Socialism in https://reichsfolktimes.files.wordpress.com/2018/12/ns-islam.pdf

°°°°°°°

Related:

David Myatt And Reichsfolk

°°°°°°°°°


Myatt: Selected National Socialist Works

°°°°°°°°°

Selected National Socialist Writings Of David Myatt
(pdf)

°°°°°°°

We republish here a selection of the National Socialist writings of David Myatt. As noted in the Preface:
             [quote] From the voluminous writings of David Myatt about National Socialism we have selected those that – alongside his Vindex, Destiny of The West, first published in Virginia (USA) in 1984 by George Dietz in his Liberty Bell magazine – have not only been most influential among contemporary neo-Nazis from the 1990s on but are also not stridently polemical…
              In these writings Myatt presents his revisionist version – his evolution – of the National Socialism of Adolf Hitler. His vision of National Socialism is certainly idealistic, inspiring, ideological, at times mystical, and marks him – in the words of one academic – as arguably one of the “principal proponent[s] of contemporary neo-Nazi ideology”. [/quote]

As Myatt writes in one of the included works:
             [quote] “This work, along with several other NS works I have written, has been slightly amended to reflect only the essence of National-Socialism. Thus, all polemical and political remarks – incompatible with Esoteric Hitlerism – have been removed.” [/quote]

In our view in the first two essays in the compilation, The Meaning of National-Socialism – written in 108 yf (1997) with a third revised edition published some years later, in 2003 – and the Esoteric Hitlerism: Idealism, the Third Reich and the Essence of National-Socialism – written in the year 2000 {1} – Myatt provides a clear and contemporary understanding of National Socialism and which understanding is very different from, in fact diametrically opposed to, how National Socialism is perceived today both by those opposed to it and by the majority who are described as “neo-nazis” or who describe themselves as “neo-nazi”.

In his Esoteric Hitlerian essay Myatt also provides an interesting autobiographical aside:
                  [quote] “Like many National-Socialists who live in the post First Zionist War world, I have in the past, out of desire to at least do something, used both the rhetoric and the tactics employed by the NSDAP in the hope of gaining some kind of political power. Thus, my older writings – and the propaganda I employed as leader of the now disbanded National-Socialist Movement – contain much strident rhetoric and appeals for political action of one kind or another. I have given all of my adult life to striving to aid the Cause in one way or another, as have many other National-Socialists.
                   In the past thirty or more years, I have used every tactic I could, some covert, some overt, some dubious and perhaps dishonourable, to further our noble Cause, as I have, on occasion, used deceit to try and deceive our now powerful enemies. In the end I and those others who have used similar tactics have achieved nothing because the tactics, and sometimes the intention, were wrong, as I have slowly and painfully learned from experience. This post First Zionist War world is very different from the world which Adolf Hitler and the members of his NSDAP knew and many people – myself included – have in past mistaken some of the rhetoric of the past for the essence.
                   We have concentrated on fighting perceived enemies, and on somehow taking over the status quo, to the detriment of what is fundamentally important. We have perceived our duty as fighting these perceived enemies, and taking part in some war, whereas our real duty is to be and to strive to be a becoming, a continuation of our folk and of evolution itself – to belong to our folk; to be honourable; to express our humanity through our Nature-given talents and abilities; to create genuine folk communities in harmony with Nature.” [/quote]

As Myatt makes clear in two of the essays included in the compilation – his Theory Of The Holocaust and the The Life of Adolf Hitler section of his The Religion of National-Socialism – in his revisionist version of National Socialism “the holocaust” is regarded as mendacious anti-Nazi propaganda.

RDM Crew
November 2018

°°°

{1} It worth noting that the third edition of his The Meaning of National-Socialism (the version included in the compilation) and his essay Esoteric Hitlerism were both written during his early years as a Muslim during his notorious campaign for an alliance between radical Muslims and National Socialists so that they might unite in their fight against their common “Zionist” enemy.

°°°°°

Related:
Vindex: Destiny Of The West (pdf)
Maintaining A Cosmic Balance

°°°°°°°°°


Maintaining A Cosmic Balance

Reichsfolk

°°°°°°°°°

We find it both indicative and amusing when people like us – post-WWII National Socialists and fascists who assert that the ‘holocaust’ is a myth, a legend – are accused of being “anti-Semitic” and of being full of “racial hatred” and of “inciting racial hatred”.

Indicative

Such accusations are indicative because concepts such as “racial hatred” and “inciting racial hatred” are modern inventions, innovations which when enshrined in criminal law – as there now are in many Western lands – represent a particular political agenda and a modern zeitgeist that is the foundation of that political agenda.

The zeitgeist is of the necessity and the encouragement of multi-racial societies based on the claim that all races are equal in terms of intelligence, ability, and in their propensity toward being good and just; and that it is only such things as “racism” by Whites along with White colonialism, and “institution racism” in majority-White societies and nations that had kept and which keep non-White races – and especially “people of colour” – from realizing their potential and from showing that they are equal to White people in terms of intelligence, ability, and in their propensity toward being good and just.

The particular political agenda based on this zeitgeist is that of introducing criminal and civil laws in majority-White societies and nations, which laws (i) seek to promote a multi-racial society, (ii) seek to propagate the claim of “institution racism” in majority-White societies and nations, and (iii) seek to criminalize those who oppose such multi-racial societies by stereotyping such opponents as intolerant bigots, as racists, who are full of “racial hatred” and who “incite racial hatred”.

In addition, this political agenda now includes the assertion that majority-White societies and nations, especially in Europe, have a “duty of care” in respect of non-White races and which duty (i) demands that majority-White societies and nations accept and welcome and support non-White immigrants and refugees in their thousands and hundreds of thousands, and (ii) demands that majority-White societies and nations give aid to non-White Third World countries in Africa and elsewhere, and (iii) demands that majority-White societies and nations do not draw undue attention to the corruption, the lawlessness, the violence, that now exist in former European colonies or in lands once governed by a White minority such as Rhodesia and South Africa.

That this particular political agenda – part as it now is of government policy in most European lands – amounts to favouring non-Whites over Whites and to actively (almost tyrannically) suppressing White dissent against such a political agenda and the zeitgeist it is based upon, is not more widely known among White folk is (i) due to the propaganda campaigns waged by governments in favour of that political agenda and (ii) due to the propaganda campaigns of such governments to stereotype their opponents as intolerant bigots, as racists, who are full of “racial hatred” and who “incite racial hatred”.

Amusing

Such accusations are amusing because “holocaust denial” and “anti-Semitism” are also modern inventions, innovations which when enshrined in criminal law – as they now are in many Western lands – represent the same particular political agenda and the same modern zeitgeist that is the foundation of that political agenda.

Amusing to us because we know, we understand, how such tyrannical attempts to criminalize “holocaust denial” and “anti-Semitism” are, Aeonically, in the time-scale of centuries, of millennia, doomed to failure, knowing and understanding as we do that our folk, our White peoples, have sooner or later always rebelled against tyrants, against tyranny, against oppression, against unjust laws. For we in our majority have within us such an instinct, such a propensity, toward what is good and just, that we abjectly refuse to be dominated by those who are not good, who are not just.

Our so-called “anti-Semitism” is, for example, just our recognition of how a certain minority demands that we now accept both the modern zeitgeist – of racial equality – that they have invented and propagated {1} and the myth of the holocaust that they have also invented to stereotype and to criminalize us.

Amusing, because we know, we understand, that although they will “have their day” – evident for example in their Zionist entity that currently occupies Palestine and in their “holocaust denial” laws – they cannot, in their hubris, affect The Cosmic Balance and thus cannot avoid the consequences of their hubris.

For we – we post-WWII National Socialists and fascists who assert that the ‘holocaust’ is a myth, a legend – currently represent and will in the future represent an aspect of that Cosmic Balance. Of the dialectic, the dissent, the rebellion, that informs – that makes – our human history, our human evolution.

Thus, as someone recently wrote in respect of the Zionist entity that currently occupies Palestine:

{quote}

                  Perceived Aeonically, the Zionist entity may well be successful, for a while: be it for some decades, be it for a hundred years or perhaps more. However, their success is dependant on the continuing support of America, on a continuing belief among the peoples of the West in both the legend of the holocaust, and in the myth supported by evangelical/traditionalist Nazarenes (especially in America) that their support for the Zionist entity that currently occupies Palestine is authorized by Nazarene Scripture which they believe revealed that their Nazarene God intended Palestine for those who consider themselves “the chosen people” as thus who regard themselves as the descendants of the Hebrews tribes mentioned in the Old Testament.

                  However, regarding American support, both the demographic and the belief of the people of America are changing. Demographically, the move is away from a White majority toward those hitherto ethnic minorities – the Hispanic and the Negro – who have an instinctive aversion to the policies and politics espoused by people such as The Vulgarian. {2} In terms of belief, it is estimated that, in America, every year around 3,000 Nazarene churches close due to falling congregations, with a 2017 study by the American based Public Religion Research Institute revealing that in 1996 around 65% of Americans identified themselves as White Christians while a decade or so later only 43% did so.

                  Thus it is reasonable to conclude that in a hundred or so years time the people of America, and their beliefs, will be different from that of today, with there being no guarantee of American support for the Zionist entity that currently occupies Palestine.

                  Regarding belief among the peoples of the West in the legend of the holocaust, although it is likely that over the next three or four decades more Western lands will introduce Zionist-supported tyrannical laws making questioning “the holocaust” a criminal offence punishable by imprisonment, the history of Western peoples over the last three millennia reveals that rebellion against tyrannical laws is inevitable, sooner or later, be that later a century or more. For every tyranny, every Empire, has its day with none, in the entire history of humanity, lasting more than three or four centuries. There is always a revolution or rebellions; there is always the death – from natural causes or otherwise – of a tyrant or potentate; there is always a change of government; always the removal, the overthrow – violent or otherwise – of a ruling cabal. And there are always new ideals, new ideas, new ways of living, which replace – gradually or otherwise – the old.

{/quote}

Thus, Aeonically, Cosmically, understood, the hubriatic pursuit by Zionists among White nations of their “racial equality” zeitgeist – and their hubriatic promotion of the myth of the holocaust – will eventually be their undoing.

Perhaps they will then understand – or more likely, given their physis and thus their history of hubris, they will not understand – that as Aeschylus wrote millennia ago:

                   Δίκα δὲ τοῖς μὲν παθοῦσιν μαθεῖν ἐπιρρέπει

                   “The goddess, Judgement, favours someone learning from adversity.” (Agamemnon, 250-251)

Richard Stirling
Reichsfolk
129 yf

{1} The roots of this zeitgeist are described in David Myatt’s seminal and heretical text Vindex: Destiny Of The West, available at https://reichsfolktimes.files.wordpress.com/2019/01/myatt-vindex.pdf

Editorial Note: This is a facsimile of David Myatt’s text as published in the January 1984 edition of the American Liberty Bell magazine edited by Virginia based George Dietz, a former member of the Hitler Youth who emigrated to America in 1957.

{2} qv. https://reichsfolktimes.wordpress.com/2018/07/20/the-vulgarian/


David Myatt And Reichsfolk

°°°°°°°°°

One question which we have been repeatedly asked since 2000 ev – and especially since 2012 ev – is why we publicize and use the National-Socialist writings of Mr Myatt given his conversion to Islam in 1998 ev and then his post 2012 ev development of his “philosophy of pathei-mathos” with his condemnation of German National Socialism and of Adolf Hitler.

Our answer, pre-2012, was always along the following lines:

° That, in our opinion, his NS writings – such as those in the pdf collection the Selected National Socialist Writings Of David Myatt – are among the best modern writings about National Socialism and cement his reputation as “England’s principal proponent of contemporary neo-Nazi ideology and theoretician of revolution.” {1}

° Because even during his decade as a Muslim he not only wrote such gems as Esoteric Hitlerism: Idealism, the Third Reich and the Essence of National-Socialism and National-Socialism, Folk Culture, and a Muslim Khilafah (pdf) but also embarked upon a campaign to bring National-Socialists and Jihadi Muslims together in order to fight their common “Zionist” enemy. {2}

To which answer we, post-2012, have added the following:

° That we consider that he has in the words of JR Wright in her article One Man Above Time: David Myatt, Reichsfolk, Esoteric Hitlerism, and Savitri Devi (pdf) moved from living a practical “in Time” life to one that is totally “above Time”. {3}

° That in the context of Reichsfolk – with its emphasis on new, local, leaderless, folk communities as opposed to the concept of The State, and with the Reichsfolk emphasis on personal combat as opposed to impersonal war between States – Myatt’s criticism (i) of German National Socialism (predicated as it was on a powerful State and on kampf) and (ii) of Adolf Hitler, may well be valid since all “in Time” States and Empires and armies are, in the perspective of centuries, transitory, and since all leaders, however gifted and charismatic, are fallible and inevitably make mistakes and often commit the error of hubris. Was, for example, Hitler’s invasion of Russia a strategic mistake that inevitably led to the destruction of the Third Reich?

° That Myatt’s latest writings – such as his Classical Paganism And The Christian Ethos and his Tu Es Diaboli Ianua – as well as his translations of classical ancient texts such as Sophocles and Aeschylus and his Corpus Hermeticum: Eight Tractates expound the pagan ethos that formed the genesis of our Western “Faustian” civilization.

Thus we consider Myatt as migrating – due to his pathei mathos – from an “in time” activist and ideologue to an “above time” philosopher and mystic. As Savitri Devi wrote in her Lightning And Sun:

[quote]
                  “But there are also men ‘outside Time’ or rather ‘above Time’; men who live, here and now, in eternity; who (directly at least) have no part to play in the downward rush of history towards disintegration and death, but who behold it from above – as one beholds, from a strong and safe bridge, the irresistible rush of a waterfall into the abyss – and who have repudiated the law of violence which is the law of Time…..
                  But the salvation which the men ‘above Time’ offer the world is always that which consists in breaking the time-bondage. It is never that which would find its expression in collective life on earth in accordance with Golden Age ideals. It is the salvation of the individual soul, never that of organised society…..
                  Men ‘outside Time’ or ‘above Time,’ at the most saviours of souls, have, more often than not, disciples who are definitely men ‘against Time.’
                  No organisation can live ‘outside Time’ – ‘above Time’ – and hope to bring men back, one day, to the knowledge of the eternal, values. That, all men ‘above Time’ have realised. In order to establish, or even to try to establish, here and now, a better order, in accordance with Truth everlasting, one has to live, outwardly at least, like those who are still ‘in Time’; like them, one has to be violent, merciless, destructive – but for different ends.
                  Knowing this, the real men ‘above Time’ are the first ones to understand and to appreciate the wholehearted efforts of their disciples ‘against Time,’ however awful these might appear to ordinary people…. The fallen world can never understand them.”
[/quote]

Most people today apparently do not understand David Myatt, and perhaps never will. But we like to believe we do.

Richard Stirling
Reichsfolk
July 129 yf

{1} Michael, George. The New Media and the Rise of Exhortatory Terrorism. Strategic Studies Quarterly (United States Air Force), Volume 7 Issue 1, Spring 2013.
{2} Michael, George. The Enemy of My Enemy: The Alarming Convergence of Militant Islam and the Extreme Right. University Press of Kansas, 2006, pp. 143ff.
{3} The categories “in time” and “above time” refer to Savitri Devi’s book The Lightning and the Sun in which she describes three basic types of leaders. Those “in time” – like Genghis Khan – who concentrate on military might; those “above time” – like the Egyptian Pharaoh Akhenaten – who are otherworldly and mystic; and those “against time” – like Adolf Hitler – who are both “in time” and “above time”, both Lightning and Sun.


Redefining Anti-Semitism

Reichsfolk

°°°°°°°°°

Redefining Anti-Semitism
A Tale For Our Times

The current political row about so-called “anti-Semitism” in the British Labour party is a relevant tale of our times for several reasons.

I.         It is a relevant tale, firstly, because the term “anti-Semitism” is a fairly recent invention, dating from the 1870’s but only becoming common in English due to the anti-German propaganda that proliferated before and during the Second World War. {1} As defined in the Complete Oxford English Dictionary (Second edition, 1989) it means “hostility and prejudice directed against Jewish people, and the theory, action, or practice resulting from this.”

II.         It is a relevant tale, secondly, because it reveals how influential and powerful certain Jewish advocacy groups are since they have for years lobbied the British government – and police forces and other official bodies – to accept the new definition of “anti-Semitism” invented by the International Holocaust Remembrance Alliance (IHRA).

The IHRA’s definition is: “Antisemitism is a certain perception of Jews, which may be expressed as hatred toward Jews. Rhetorical and physical manifestations of antisemitism are directed toward Jewish or non-Jewish individuals and/or their property, toward Jewish community institutions and religious facilities.”

However, as well of this definition, the IHRA helpfully provide examples of what according to their definition constitute the “crime” of “anti-Semitism”. Among their examples are the following:

           ° Accusing the Jews as a people, or Israel as a state, of inventing or exaggerating the Holocaust.

           ° Accusing Jewish citizens of being more loyal to Israel, or to the alleged priorities of Jews worldwide, than to the interests of their own nations.

           ° Denying the Jewish people their right to self-determination, e.g., by claiming that the existence of a State of Israel is a racist endeavour.

           ° Drawing comparisons of contemporary Israeli policy to that of the Nazis.

Since this IHRA definition – and its examples – define things which it advocates and supporters consider to be “wrong”, morally reprehensible, it should be obvious that it enshrines an ideology; that is, it is a scheme of ideas relating to ethics, politics and society, and forms the basis of action and policy.

Furthermore, since this ideology, enshrined in the IHRA definition and its examples, is now increasingly being used by police forces, councils, and other official bodies, to determine if a “hate crime” has been committed, it is clear that there is a movement, not yet written in law but continually agitated for, to make things such as a “certain perception of Jews”, “holocaust denial” and criticism of Zionists and of the Zionist entity itself, punishable crimes in the modern West.

That this ideology – whose advocates and supporters seek to criminalise “a certain perception” that some other people do not like or approve of – is an assault on freedom of expression and freedom of belief should be obvious. That this assault is still not obvious to many is tribute to just how effective the propaganda of the Zionist lobbies and of “holocaust remembrance” lobbies is and has been, for such propaganda – repeated almost every day, every week, every year, since 1945 – is that “anti-Semitism led to the horrors, the inhumanity, of the holocaust and such horrors must never be allowed to happen again.”

Yet if – as those who write and speak in favour of historical revisionism claim and believe – the holocaust did not happen as portrayed in the holocaust literature then persecuting and criminalizing those who question or doubt it is repressive and intolerant. This intolerance was summed up following the criminal conviction in May 2018 in a British court of law of a singer – Alison Chabloz – just for singing songs questioning the veracity of the holocaust, with the leader of the Campaign Against Anti-Semitism declaring that “in Britain Holocaust denial […] will not be tolerated.”

In other words, advocates and supporters of a particular ideology demand that their zealous intolerance becomes official policy and is enshrined in the law of the land, just as they rejoice when someone is convicted in a court of law on the basis of the intolerant ideology they advocate and support.

It really does seem as if we in the West have not learned much from the religious intolerance of former centuries when those who did not believe in certain things – and who perhaps had “a certain perception” that differed from what was then the accepted, the non-heretical, norm – were persecuted and criminalized.

III.         It is a relevant tale, thirdly, because it reveals just how intertwined the modern legend of the holocaust is (i) with re-defining “anti-Semitism”, (ii) with intolerant attempts to criminalize “a certain perception”, (iii) with support for and the survival of the Zionist entity that currently occupies Palestine, and (iv) with the religious belief that the Jews were and are the “chosen people of God” and that therefore they have a God-given right and duty to create and then to live in the Zionist entity. Hence, of course, the Zionist “law of return”.

For without the legend of the holocaust the Zionist entity would either not exist or would not be supported as it is and has been – economically, financially, militarily, propagandistically and otherwise – by the wealthy nations of the modern West.

It should therefore come as no surprise that, in an unguarded moment, the Chief Rabbi of the United Kingdom, Dr. Jakobovits, declared that “The Jews were chosen to act as pathfinders for the world, and Israel has a special place as an instrument to effect the Jew’s social engineering upon the world.” {2}

Where by the term “social engineering” he meant and implied both (i) government and State efforts (through laws, propaganda and other means) to influence the attitudes and ideas of people and the structure of society, and (ii) efforts by the Media and special interest groups to bring about certain changes in society.

For re-defining the term “anti-Semitism”, criminalizing questioning or doubting the legend of the holocaust, and – among things – demanding that a certain ideology becomes official policy and is enshrined in the law of the land, most certainly amounts to social engineering.

Haereticus
23rd July 2018 ev

{1} An example of such propaganda occurred in The Economist magazine dated 24th August 1935: “The Nazi Party stalwarts […] have all been leading an anti-Semitic, anti-Catholic, anti-Protestant crusade.”

{2} The Guardian newspaper (London), 7th August 1982.

°°°°°°°

Relevant & Necessary Disclosure:
It should also be noted that the pseudonym Haereticus – “a heretic” – is used by several different authors.


We Have To Face Our Barbarism

Reichsfolk

°°°°°°°°°

While we as ethical National-Socialists {1} are proud of our Aryan heritage and proud of the advanced ‘Faustian’ civilization created in the lands of the West we have to accept that a certain percentage – perhaps even a large percentage – of our own people, our own folk, are still in their heart and soul (in physis) barbarians, with such barbarity often perhaps concealed but ready to break forth when circumstances conspire to break down such concealment thus allowing their primitive instincts to overwhelm and control them.

Which barbarity within our psyche is one reason why Reichsfolk does not, and never has, considered our race, our folk, as “superior” and thus why we are not and never have been what our enemies define as “racist”. {2}

One of the most recent manifestations of the barbarity still lingering in our folk was the rape and murder of a White six year old girl by a sixteen year old White male on the Scottish isle of Bute. Historical examples of such barbarism abound: from Emile Cilliers, to Jeffrey Dahmer, to the “Railway Rapists” John Duffy and David Mulcahy, to the “Moors murders” committed by Ian Brady and Myra Hindley. There is also, of course, “Rumpledhatevik” who in 2011 shot dead sixty-nine people on the island of Utøya, the majority of whom were young people.

However, such truths about ourselves are probably not what most of the modern Far Right – in Britain and elsewhere – want to hear or read about. Instead, they concentrate on finding fault with – even hating – those outwardly different from them, those of a different ethnicity.

Perhaps they are more comfortable with more historical manifestations of the barbarity still lingering in our folk, such as the millions upon millions killed in the two fairly recent World Wars; and a barbarity especially manifest in the many millions of German civilians – women, children, old men – who were: (i) killed and suffered because of Allied air raids during World War Two; (ii) who because of Allied bombing and blockades died of starvation in the last years of that war and the years immediately following it; and (iii) who died due to and who suffered because of the forced expulsion of Germans from the Eastern territories in the years between 1944 and 1950. In addition, and often forgotten, is just how many German women were raped by advancing Soviet troops between 1944 and 1945, and just how many German soldiers were summarily executed by Soviet troops or sent to endure years of suffering in Soviet labour camps.

Instead of remembering such atrocities committed by the Allies, the governments of the modern West religiously celebrate “The Shoah” as if that myth somehow justifies or officially obscures such Allied atrocities.

Similarly, the modern Far Right in Britain and elsewhere – and especially self-described racist “neo-nazis” – trumpet the superiority of The West and the “superiority” of what they term The White Race, forgetting or never knowing that National-Socialism, whether of The Third Reich or of modern movements such as Reichsfolk, was and is concerned with – was and is imbued with – the principle of honour and thus with the reformation of, the evolution of, our folk by means of honour.

As David Myatt expressed it, way back in the 1990’s,

                  “It is a combination of race and honour which defines National-Socialism, and which should define the racialist movement in general. Without the evolutionary, moral, concept of honour, there is only the inhuman ethics of the past, and in practice this leads to the creation of people who are ignoble and societies which are anti-evolutionary […]
                  In my own [National Socialist] works I have again and again stressed that while race in important – and our connection to Nature – honour is also important, and in particular honour defines how we view ourselves, others and the world […]
                  Thus, I do not consider the Aryan race as ‘superior’ – only different. Honour demands that we treat other races with respect, and our aim should be the creation of independent ethnic nations which co-operate together, for their mutual benefit, on the basis of honour, respect and reason and not on the basis of some barbaric ‘struggle’ to see who is the strongest. In this sense, I have evolved the ideas of National-Socialism.” {3}

Reichsfolk believes that the way to evolve ourselves – to implement the National-Socialist ideal of honour – is to eschew politics and instead form, create, new folk communities based on families who will be the nucleus of a resurgent National-Socialism.

Richard Stirling
Reichsfolk
129 yf
v.1.03

{1} Ethical National-Socialism (pdf).

{2} Refer, for example, to the essay Why National-Socialism is Not Racist in the Ethical National-Socialism compilation.

{3} A Brief Criticism of William Pierce, included in the pdf compilation Selected National Socialist Writings Of David Myatt.

°°°

Related:

° A New Interpretation Of National Socialism

° An Introduction To Reichsfolk
(pdf)


A Secret History

Reichsfolk

°°°°°°°

Hate Not Hope
A Secret History

With the events in Christchurch, New Zealand in March 2019, the campaign against so-called “hate speech” {1} reached a new intensity with the mainstream Media readily quoting individuals involved with ‘special interest’ groups who campaign against what they term “right-wing extremism” and which ‘special interest’ groups invariably propagate a demand that governments must do more – including manufacture new laws – to combat “hate speech” and “right-wing extremism” in general and in particular get “Social media companies” to remove “hate speech” and anything and everything that such ‘special interest’ groups declare promotes “right-wing extremism”.

In other words, such ‘special interest’ groups demand that governments censor the Internet and prosecute – criminalize – those whose views such ‘special interest’ groups oppose.

That such demands are increasingly echoed by elected politicians – such as, in Britain, and as of March 2019 by the Home Secretary Sajid Javid – is indicative of just how successful such groups are and have been in promoting their own Marxist-derived “racial equality” ideology and which ideology has State-censorship and the criminal prosecution of “right-wing extremists” as fundamental principles.

It should therefore be no surprise that certain Zionist ‘special interest’ groups propagate and have for years propagated – in places such as Britain – both their belief that “denial of the holocaust” is “hate speech” and their demand that “denial of the holocaust” be made a crime punishable by imprisonment.

It should also be no surprise that, terrible as those New Zealand events were {2}, they seem to pale in comparison to the killings that a modern State such as America has sanctioned and continues to sanction around the world in the last three decades or more.

Who – for example – now remembers the civilians killed when Iranian Flight 655 was shot down in 1988 by an American missile resulting in 290 people – including 66 children – being killed? Who remembers the thousands of individuals executed in recent times by America in Iraq, in Syria, and in Afghanistan, by drones and by other means? For there was no legal trial of those individuals who were murdered. There was even no remembrance in the lands of the West of the thousands of others killed, women and children included – as “collateral damage” – in such drone and missile strikes. Who remembers the tens of thousands of civilians killed as a consequence of the American and the NATO invasions of Iraq and Afghanistan?

Yet the “hate speech” that engendered and supported such invasions, such extra-judicial killing of suspects, is not now and never has been a topic that the special interest’ groups who oppose “hate speech” write and talk about. Thus they do not demand that those who ordered the missile to be fired and those who fired the missile that killed 290 people on Flight 655 be brought to justice. Just as, for example, they do not demand that those who ordered the missile to be fired and those who fired the missile that killed at least 30 civilians in Garmsir, Afghanistan, in November 2018 be brought to justice or accused of “hate speech” because of their demonizing, their dehumanizing, of those they considered were their enemies and whom they seemed to be only too eager to kill.

Where are the tributes, the memorials, to and the speeches by Western politicians mourning the tens of thousands of civilians killed in the last three decades due to the “hate speech”, the “extremism”, that engendered and supported such American and NATO invasions, such extra-judicial killing of suspects and thus the deaths of so many civilians as collateral damage?

There is hypocrisy here, a political agenda, by the ‘special interest’ groups who declare they are combating “hate speech” and “right-wing extremism”. They are not, as they claim, defending humanity, peace, tolerance, hope, and love, but instead are championing intolerance and hatred against and the dehumanization of those considered to be their enemies; championing State censorship of views they oppose; and are most certainly not in the business of truth, of combatting the “hate speech”, the “extremism”, that does not meet their limited, their selective, definitions of what constitutes such “hate speech” and such “extremism”.

Understood thus, their political agenda is clear, based as it is on the premises of (i) “Never Forget” (what we want you to never forget) and of (ii) “Never Forgive” (those we consider to be our enemies).

Which agenda is of course their Marxist-derived “racial equality” ideology with its “holocaust mythology”, its demonization of the Third Reich; its demand for multi-cultural societies in all of the lands of the modern West; with its support of mass immigration to Western lands by non-Europeans, and with its demands that any resistance to their ideology by indigenous Europeans who value their civilized European culture must be deemed to be “extremist” and “hateful” and thus suppressed and criminalized.

Morena Kapiris
Reichsfolk
March 2019

{1} https://regardingdavidmyatt.wordpress.com/2019/02/25/the-crusade-against-hate-speech/
{2} Terrible, etymon: Latin terribilis, “frightful, dreadful”. Middle English, c. 1500: terrabyl, terrable, terryble. “The last and greatest of all terribles, Death it selfe.” Joseph Hall, Heauen vpon earth; or, Of true peace, and tranquillitie of minde, London, 1606.

°°°°°°°


Zionist Propaganda Sent To Moon

°°°°°°°°°

In an aeonically failed attempt to desperately preserve their version of history the Zionist entity that currently occupies Palestine has – with the necessary financial and scientific and technological help from currently Zionist-loving America – sent a spacecraft to deposit 25 nickel discs on the surface of the Moon.

Discs which recount the Zionist propagandistic version of human history replete, of course, with their legend of “the holocaust” and of “nasty nazis” and of how various cultures in various lands over millennia have been hatefully prejudiced against and persecuted the “innocent” Jewish people.

This is a failed attempt to preserve their propagandistic version of history for two simple reasons.

First, because:
{quote}
Perceived Aeonically, the Zionist entity may well be successful, for a while: be it for some decades, be it for a hundred years or perhaps more. However, their success is dependant on the continuing support of America, on a continuing belief among the peoples of the West in both the legend of the holocaust, and in the myth supported by evangelical/traditionalist Nazarenes (especially in America) that their support for the Zionist entity that currently occupies Palestine is authorized by Nazarene Scripture which they believe revealed that their Nazarene God intended Palestine for those who consider themselves “the chosen people” as thus who regard themselves as the descendants of the Hebrews tribes mentioned in the Old Testament.

However, regarding American support, both the demographic and the belief of the people of America are changing. Demographically, the move is away from a White majority toward those hitherto ethnic minorities – the Hispanic and the Negro – who have an instinctive aversion to the policies and politics espoused by people such as The Vulgarian. In terms of belief, it is estimated that, in America, every year around 3,000 Nazarene churches close due to falling congregations, with a 2017 study by the American based Public Religion Research Institute revealing that in 1996 around 65% of Americans identified themselves as White Christians while a decade or so later only 43% did so.

Thus it is reasonable to conclude that in a hundred or so years time the people of America, and their beliefs, will be different from that of today, with there being no guarantee of American support for the Zionist entity that currently occupies Palestine.

Regarding belief among the peoples of the West in the legend of the holocaust, although it is likely that over the next three or four decades more Western lands will introduce Zionist-supported tyrannical laws making questioning “the holocaust” a criminal offence punishable by imprisonment, the history of Western peoples over the last three millennia reveals that rebellion against tyrannical laws is inevitable, sooner or later, be that later a century or more. For every tyranny, every Empire, has its day with none, in the entire history of humanity, lasting more than three or four centuries. There is always a revolution or rebellions; there is always the death – from natural causes or otherwise – of a tyrant or potentate; there is always a change of government; always the removal, the overthrow – violent or otherwise – of a ruling cabal. And there are always new ideals, new ideas, new ways of living, which replace – gradually or otherwise – the old. {1}
{/quote}

Second, because if despite the above the Zionist entity endures then by the time an alien – a non-terrestrial space-fairing race – has discovered those propagandistic discs human civilization will be extinct because of the success of the social engineering engendered by Zionists in the 20th and the 21st century of Earth’s history {1}.

Which successful Zionist social engineering prevented the emergence of a National Socialist inspired Earth-bound and then Galactic Imperium. {2}

As Adolf Hitler wrote:

{quote}
“If, with the help of his Marxist creed, the Jew is victorious over the other peoples of the world, his crown will be the funeral wreath of humanity and this planet will, as it did thousands of years ago, move through the ether devoid of men.”
{/quote}

Reichsfolk
February 2019 ev

{1} qv. https://reichsfolktimes.wordpress.com/2018/08/15/maintaining-a-cosmic-balance/
{2} qv. Myatt’s Vindex, Destiny Of the West available at https://reichsfolktimes.files.wordpress.com/2019/01/myatt-vindex.pdf

°°°°°°°°°


The Truth About Mau-Mau

°°°°°°°°°

Editorial Note: This item was first posted in 2016 on a then (and now defunct) private Reichsfolk internet forum. It was subsequently published on the widely-read and public Stormfront forum.

°°°°°°°°°

In a 2005 book much celebrated by liberals and used by others to defame the achievements of the British Empire, the author Caroline Elkins ranted on and on about British colonialism using as one of her weapons uncorroborated aural accounts of some of the Africa natives of Kenya who had allegedly suffered because of British brutality during the Mau-Mau emergency. There were allegations of widespread torture and of a cover-up by the British authorities.

The book has inspired other so-called ‘studies’ into the British response to the Mau-Mau insurgency in Kenya, which of course – just like Elkins – condemn the British response while failing to highlight, or which make excuses for, the barbarism and the anti-White racism of the Mau-Mau terrorists and their supporters. Barbarism such as the hacking to death of Roger Ruck, his wife Esmee, their six-year old son Michael, and the African houseboy who came to their aid.

As a White person who lived in Kenya in the 1950s, the brutal truth about Mau-Mau is that they hated White people and that their hatred led them to commit atrocity after atrocity and led them to encourage anti-White violence and to incite anti-White hatred in other natives. They also hated any Kenyan who worked with the British or who supported the law and order that the British had established. In one of many such instances the Mau-Mau terrorists killed almost a hundred Africans in a village by setting their homes alight and hacking to death anyone who managed to escape the flames. In another typical incident they mutilated a tribal chief, cutting off his genitals, cutting out his tongue, and hanging his body from a tree. In total, the Mau-Mau killed over two thousand people, most of them native Kenyans.

Given the atrocities and the hatred and incitement to violence, the British response to such overt large-scale terrorism was both vigorous and effective. Furthermore, the majority of natives at the time did not support Mau-Mau. For instance we – like most colonial families – had African servants who were Kikuyu, who were appalled at what some of their tribe were doing, and who loyally stayed with us even at much risk to themselves. During the emergency British children still went to school – often with an armed escort – as we still travelled into Nairobi where life carried on almost as normal because of British sang-froid.

Decades later some of those detained by the British government – aided, of course, by White liberals – arrived in London to sue the British government, alleging torture, just as their White liberal allies were ranting – to anyone who would listen – about “White racism” and about the inhumanity of British colonialism. Naturally, not one of the Mau-Mau butchers appeared in a London court at the same time charged with terrorism and murder, just as the British media were not printing story after story, or making documentaries, about Mau-Mau terrorism and about how corrupt and crime-ridden Kenya now is because so many places in that land are now places where law and order no longer exist with banditry commonplace. For example, during colonial times Nairobi – during the day and during the night – was a relatively safe place for both Whites and Kenyans, whereas now robberies, car-jacking, murder, home invasions, and rape, are almost daily occurrences. Similarly, one could in colonial times go out ‘into the bush’ on safari without the threat of being ambushed by armed bandits.

Whenever I talk to people about Kenya during Mau-Mau, I ask them a simple question: what would be the response, what should be the response, of a government if today a large organized group of people, motivated by hatred, were brutally murdering hundreds of people in their homes and were openly inciting and organizing others to commit terrorist acts against ordinary civilians? Would we tolerate such barbarity? Would our media be awash with stories sympathetic to such people? Would liberals be running around telling us it was really the fault of the government – and the fault of ordinary citizens – because our government and we ourselves were racist? Would liberal lawyers seek to protect the ‘human rights’ of such terrorists?

There are common themes here, propagated by liberals: White colonialism was bad; hatred of and the killing of Whites excused, even tolerated because Whites by nature are ‘racist’ and there is no such thing as anti-White racism; the corruption and crime of formerly stable, uncorrupted, colonies is a ‘legacy of colonialism’ or the result of faceless international corporations and has nothing to do with the natives.

These common liberal themes are much in evidence today whenever a police officer in some American city, trying to do their difficult duty of upholding law and order, shoots a non-White person. There are protests, often riots; there are accusations of personal racism, of police racism, of institutional racism. There are demands for the officer to be arrested and tried. Little wonder then that morale among police officers is at an all-time low. Would that bleeding-heart White liberals and journalists were forced to spent some months ‘on the front line’ as trainee police officers trying to do their difficult duty, for that would surely give them a personal perspective based on reality, on personal experience. Perhaps, then, they would report the truth about the racial realities of our times.

A.P.
(a Florida based retiree)
2016


Honour And Beauty

°°°°°°°°°

Honour And Beauty

Here, an insight: Honour creates Beauty – and it is beauty that I desire: to be surrounded by beauty, without and within. Our modern world is ugly: it has made ugliness into an art, a business, a cult and a way of life.

Our environment is for the most part ugly; the attitude of many, many people is ugly – concerned as they are for the most part with mundane things, with profane things, and all to ready and willing as they are to do what is not honourable: to gossip, to be petty, to put their own ego, desires, before what is honourable, and subsumed as they often are with the ethos of ugliness that pervades our modern world. They do not feel beauty; they do not desire beauty; they are, for the most part, content to live, breathe, desire, be part of, the ugliness of the modern world and its dishonourable way of life. For instance, most of the music, the “entertainment”, the art, of this modern world is ugly; the buildings, the cities, the towns, are ugly.

There are a few places where beauty lives, today: A concert, perhaps, where sublime, numinous, music presences for an instant what elevates us beyond ourselves; a woman of empathy, whose face, whose eyes, whose manner, radiates both a warmth and a reminder of our own fragile humanity. A sunny day in Spring or Summer in rural England or Germany when, atop some hill, ones sees, feels, senses the connexion that we are with all life and especially the ancient land of our ancestors. A simple shared and wordless moment when two lovers become one, through their uncomplicated loyal love, through the immediacy of a shared momentary experience… But these are isolated, increasingly fewer, incidents, among the tawdriness, the urban sprawl, the egotism, the obsession with materialism, the dishonour, the disloyalty, the profanity, the commonness, of modern life.

Beauty is not the norm – the ideal, the archetype, the goal – as it can and should be.

Why do I admire – why have I steadfastly admired, for thirty-five years – National-Socialist Germany? Because I found, and find, in it an intimation of beauty – a desire to bring beauty, joy, back into the lives of ordinary people; a desire to raise them up from the ugly. And what was wonderful, inspiring, remarkable was that this was done within the confines, within the constraints, of a modern nation with its cities, towns, industries: and that it involved all of the people, not a minority, not an elite. National-Socialism was a means whereby the beautiful could be felt and known – a means whereby beauty was once again presenced in the lives of ordinary people. A means whereby a connexion was made to those things which can and do elevate and evolve us, and which thus create an inner beauty. This is the simple, profound, beautiful message of National-Socialism.

How did those National-Socialists do this? Through honour; through duty; through loyalty, through understanding the importance of beauty and of our connexion, through our folk and homeland, to Nature.

So many lies have covered this beauty; so many lies to try to distance us from that truth; so many lies to try and prevent us from seeing, understanding, striving to follow, that beautiful, inspiring, example. And yet – the truth lives; the beautiful, numinous, archetype is there, and will always be there so long as some of us remember, and recount to others our remembering.

David Myatt
December 114yf

Editorial Note: The article was first circulated by Reichsfolk and then published on various “right-wing” internet forums in 2003, including Stormfront and Skadi. It was subsequently translated into many languages, including a Dutch version as given below.

°°°

Related:
Myatt: Selected National Socialist Writings
(pdf)

°°°°°°°

Een inzicht, eer en schoonheid

Hier is een inzicht: uit eer komt schoonheid, en het is schoonheid welke ik nastreef: om door schoonheid omringt te worden, van buiten en binnen. Onze moderne wereld is lelijk: het heeft lelijkheid tot een kunst verheven, een business, een cultus en tot een manier van leven.

Onze omgeving is voor het grootste deel lelijk; de houding van velen, vele mensen zijn lelijk, bezig als ze zijn met voor het merendeel moderne dingen, met overbodige dingen, en maar al te snel klaar om bereid dat te doen wat oneervol is: te rodelen, om mooi te zijn, om het eigen ego en de eigen wensen voor dat wat eervol is te plaatsen. De manier waarop ze vaak opgaan in de lelijkheid welke onze moderne wereld doordringt is pervers te noemen. Zij voelen niet de schoonheid, ze streven de schoonheid niet na; zij zijn, voor het meerendeel, gelukkig te leven, ademen, wensen en deel uit te maken van, de lelijkheid van de moderne wereld en zijn oneervolle manier van leven. Bijvoorbeeld, de meeste van de muziek, de zogenaamde entertainment, en de kunst, van de moderne wereld is lelijk; haar gebouwen, steden en dorpen, worden tot lelijkheid verheven.

Er zijn een paar plaatsen waar de schoonheid leeft heden ten dag: Een concert, wellicht, waar sublieme, overweldigende, muziek welke ons wij voor een moment boven onszelf getild worden; een vrouw van empathie, wiens gezicht, wiens ogen, wiens manieren, zowel warmte uitstralen als ons herinneren aan onze eigen breekbare menselijkheid. Een zonnige zomerdag in een landelijk stuk Europa wanneer, boven op wat heuvels, iemand de connectie met al het leven, en special de oude landen der onze voorouders, voelt. Een simpel gedeeld en woordeloos moment wanneer twee geliefden eender worden, door hun ongecompliceerde trouwe liefde, door de urgentie van een direct gedeeld kortstondig moment… Maar dit zijn ge- isoleerde, steeds minder voorkomende, incidenten, onder de stedelijke nonchalante houding, het egoisme, de obsessie met materialisme, de oneervolheid, de onloyaliteit, de individualistische gemeenschappelijkheid, het modern eleven.

Schoonheid is niet de norm, het ideaal, de ruggengraad, het doel, wat het kan en zou moeten zijn. Waarom bewonder ik, en heb ik stavast bewonderd, voor 35 jaren, het NationaalSocialistische Duitsland? Ik vond, en vind, daarin een uiting van schoonheid – een wens om schoonheid, vreugde, terug in het leven van gewone mensen te brengen; een wens om hen van lelijkheid te verhevenen. En wat prachtig was, opmerkelijk en inspirerend was, dat dit binnen de grensgebieden, binnen de beperkingen, van een moderne natie met zijn dorpen, steden en industrie werd gedaan: het ging eenieder aan, niet een minderheid, niet een elite. NationaalSocialisme was een middel waardoor de schoonheid gevoeld en gekend kon zijn, een middel waarbij de schoonheid nogmaals present was in de levens van de normale mensen. Een middel waarbij een connectie gemaakt werd naar die dingen welke ons kunnen verheven en evolueren, en daardoor dus innerlijke schoonheid waar maken. Dit is de simpele, diepgaande, mooie boodschap van het NationaalSocialisme.

En hoe deden deze NationaalSocialisten dit?

Door eer; door plichtsgevoel, door trouw, door het begrijpen van het belang van schoonheid in van onze verbintenis, door ons volk en vaderland, naar onze aard.

Zo vele leugens hebben deze schoonheid gemaskeerd; zo vele leugens welke ons op afstand willen houden van de waarheid; zo vele leugens welke trachten te voorkomen dat we zien, begrijpen en streven hetgeen te volgen, dat mooi en inspirerend is. En toch, de waarheid leeft; de schoonheid en de ruggengraad is er, en zal er altijd zijn zolang een aantal van ons zich het herinneren, en het doorgeven aan anderen om te herinneren.

°°°°°°°°°


Vindex: Destiny Of The West

°°°°°°°°°

Vindex: Destiny Of The West

A facsimile of David Myatt’s seminal text Vindex: Destiny Of The West published in the January 1984 edition of the American Liberty Bell magazine edited by Virginia based George Dietz, a former member of the Hitler Youth who emigrated to America in 1957.

Vindex: Destiny Of The West
(pdf)


A New Perspective

°°°°°°°

Adolf Hitler

°°°°°°°°°

This is not the kind of article that I – as a British supporter of the non-racist, the ethical, National-Socialism of Reichsfolk – desired to write.

But as someone who grew up in the Britain of the 1960s – whose father fought in the Second World War and whose grandfather fought in the Battle of the Somme – I believe I have a duty to express an unpopular truth. A truth which no doubt the “politically correct” generation will consider to be “racist” and which expression perhaps others will deem to be “illegal” in certain lands of the modern West.

This truth is how our land of Britain now seems subsumed with violence and killings by a certain racial minority and by those others who also are of non-British ethnic descent.

From murders on the streets of London – by knives and guns – by those of a certain racial minority to the recent invasion of a children’s party in Old Catton, near Norwich also by those of a certain racial minority wielding knives, to a recent raid on a café in Manchester also by men of a certain racial minority armed with a gun, a machete, and other weapons, to the scandal of the grooming and rape of British girls by those whose ancestry is that of Colonial India and specifically the region now known as Pakistan.

Not mention how our land is now home to others from the lands once described as Eastern European who according to crime statistics disproportionately perpetrate frauds and scams and who are also disproportionately implicated in the vile trades of human trafficking and sexual slavery and the importation of addictive drugs.

What, I wonder, would our land be like were it not now home to such foreign immigrants? Would it be as it once was: the land that I as a child, as a teenager, once knew? A land – born from the trauma of the First and the Second World Wars – where decency prevailed among the majority and where violent crime was limited to certain “inner city” gangs – like the Krays who knew and who respected certain boundaries – and to those of our own kind whose motivation was petty, parochial, and so often personal.

Have we therefore, in these British Isles of ours, come too far? So far, because in creating a “multi-racial society”, and even now encouraging further immigration, have sowed the seeds of violent, criminal, chaos within our once relatively peaceful British society?

Personally, I believe we have come too far.

What, therefore, can we who understand, we who know, do? Is the answer, as I am inclined to believe, that of the ethical, National-Socialism of Reichsfolk with its emphasis on new, Aryan, folk communities? Or is the answer of a British nationalist movement – an uprising, a political revolution – by those of us who treasure our folk and who understand if only instinctively “political correctness” for the alien (the non-British) tyranny it is?

Richard Stirling
Shropshire