Here and elsewhere on the Net, I try to write according to the audience. For a good explanation of why, see George Lincoln Rockwell’s „From Ivory Tower to Privy Wall: On the Art of Propaganda“, National Socialist World (1966). But as yet, I am still learning to adjust to the level of the audience. As a learner, I must herewith request feedback from people who already agree with my message—who, sharing my goals, will thus be earnest and forthright in their opinions.
Rockwell explains where I am going. Now, please understand where I am coming from (in so far as sound discretion permits that I say).
Privately, I consider every word I write to be sacred and unalterable. Call me arrogant if you wish; but I write for posterity, not for those living in the present. However, such an ambition presupposes the existence of posterity—meaning, Aryan posterity. Those born long after my death are the ones whom I care about: The immortal posterity of Aryan ancestors who gave rise, directly or indirectly, to all the great cultures of the world. To select a single representative symbol from a shortlist which would fill a lengthy tome: The posterity of the ancestors of Johann Sebastian Bach.
To adapt the words of the Führer only a bit out of context, my inner nature which I always heretofore betrayed is to one of „those who are said to please the gods only because they wish for and demand the impossible. They will always have to renounce contemporary fame; but if their ideas be immortal, posterity will grant them its acknowledgment.“ Mein Kampf I Ch. 8. I do wish for and demand the impossible. I have but little interest in contemporary fame, which I would rather prefer to avoid; and of the pleasures of this life, most are physically, unalterably beyond my reach anyway. In my particular case, if I please the Aryan gods, then perhaps I may earn the right to join after my death the posterity which my race-mixing parents forbade to me in life. Such is a matter between me and the gods, with my judgment to be passed by Aryan posterity.
But at current trends, that immortal posterity will soon cease to exist. It is terribly degraded already. Pragmatism is in order: I must learn to conform my writing to the audience. For the greatest masterwork of philosophy, culture, or science will be useless if the Aryan does not survive. I am confident that Dr. Goebbels would agree with my assessment. It is indeed for this very reason that Dr. Goebbels, a Doctor of German Literature, sacrificed his literary aspirations to push campaign slogans; and that the Führer himself threw aside his first love, art and architecture, to struggle and fight for the his greatest love, the German people. Should I do otherwise?
Still, it is wise to start with what I have, not what I must learn. I have tried to start in venues where I could aim first for the level of that grandmaster of English-language Jew-hating, Dr. Revilo P. Oliver. That my natural comfort zone, although I am currently rusty and not nearly as fluid as he. (In so saying, I refer only to style and usage complexity. I lack Dr. Oliver’s vocabulary; and I must regard his polyglot linguistic expertise with an admiring envy.) However, it is not a style of writing which will reach most people. Indeed, the very first reader e-mail I received in response to a piece in a reputable „highbrow“ publication accused me of being „arcane“. Well, I admit the charge.
Elsewhere, I have often sought to write generic Internet posts for an intelligent audience. Sometimes too, I work to produce useful cut-and-paste material for other propagandists.1 But when I try to cook Rockwell’s Delmonico steak or anything product stocked below the Dr. Oliver shelf, I do know I may inadvertently splash about some Kirschwasser.
(1 It is sad that to-day I must remind the audience, the term „propaganda“ did not always carry negative connotations. It derives from the Church Latin term propaganda fides, idiomatically „spreading the faith“. I use it in that sense, as did the Reich’s Propagandaministerium. I always try to distinguish lie-propaganda explicitly. —As I know but little of Latin, I must note that I myself learned this from (whom else?) Dr. Oliver.)
On „popular“ forums, I would try to speak much more colloquially. However, a substantial problem of our era is communicating with those whom I might call Winchellized, or worse, Twitterized. Such use, or more properly abuse of language is worse than „hawg jowl“; it is unfit for human consumption. The literary level of average people (especially youth) has been so far degraded as to open an abyss between them and anybody who has even attained basic literacy.
It is not difficult for a literate mind to emit simple sentences drawn from a moderately restricted vocabulary; and the result can even attain a high elegance, if done properly. It is excruciatingly painful (and nearly impossible in practice) for such a mind to conform itself to the negroidal trash language used by many younger folk to-day—and in so describing it I refer to far more than vulgarity, although that does make the abyss even wider. There exists a large and ever-growing linguistic Lumpenproletariat; and only a fool would assume this trend to be accidental or unintended. When non-Jewish thinkers are completely unable to communicate with the masses, cui bono? You know there is always but one answer to that question!
I had a most excellent post 4 U bout h8 n ppl n jews n stuf but it not fit in 140 caricters LOL :-(. —Now, excuse me whilst I tidy up my will and shoot myself. That, I cannot do; it is physically impossible, no matter what my desire in the matter!
All of which is a roundabout means of requesting feedback on those of my writings which are not intended to be abstruse or arcane. Is my piece about the Goebbels children accessible to persons of reasonable intelligence and average education? Is my syntax too complicated? (This may be difficult to answer, for my syntax has been inconsistent; as I said, I am rusty.) What real-world audiences can I expect to reach? Most importantly, how effectively have I communicated my message to you?
All well-meaning and constructive comments and criticisms are welcome; and insult will not be inferred where none is intended. All for the cause.