Wherefore the Swastika?

I am „not exactly“ a National Socialist.  I do not wish to be a culturally misappropriating anti-wigger.  I do have my own radical ideas.  And should my ideas and any works I ultimately achieve be judged by posterity to be National Socialist, then thus will I be honoured.  So why do I fly the Swastika?

There are positive reasons, and a negative reason.  The latter deserves some attention first; for it is precisely the same reason why many people avoid the Swastika, namely, that it will displease the Jew and thus make their work „socially unacceptable“ in Judaized society.  Now, why should I desire such a thing?  Turn briefly to the historical record:

Schopenhauer excoriated the Jew in most unequivocal terms.  How does the Jew respond?  „He establishes a Schopenhauer Society.

Voltaire was especially vehement in his condemnation of the Jew.  (Also in his contempt for African Negroes.)  Jewish professors either conveniently omit that part, or try to spin it away with divers fantastic evasions, dissimulations, and sophistries.

Shakespeare wrote an „anti-Semitic“ play which was alternatively titled, „The Jew of Venice“ (a parallel to Marlowe’s extremely anti-Jewish „The Jew of Malta“).  It carried a morale against Jewish usury, Jewish hate, and Jewish vengefulness.  And some early editions of „The Merchant of Venice“ bore the subtitle, here changed to modern orthography:  „With the Extreme Cruelty of Shylock the Jew towards the said Merchant, in cutting a just pound of his flesh“:

[Scan: „The Excellent Hiſtory of the Merchant of Venice. With the extreme cruelty of Shylocke the Iew toward the ſaide Merchant, in cutting a iust pound of his fleſh.  And the obtaining of Portia, by the choyſe of three Caskets.“]

How does the Jew respond?  Around 1800, Shylock, the cruel and hateful Jew usurer, suddenly became Shylock, the victim of anti-Semitic persecution.  As it has occurred throughout history, the Jewish criminals against mankind recast themselves as their own victims’ victims!

Hamsun sent his Nobel Prize medal (for Literature) to Dr. Goebbels (a Doctor of Literature) as a token sealing their mutual respect.  He wrote that the cause of „anti-Semitism“ is Jews.  And he eulogized Adolf Hitler as a „warrior for mankind“.  After the War, he and his family suffered terribly from the revenge of the Judeo-Masonic Norwegian government.  Yet nowadays, just within the past decade or two, he is being „rehabilitated“—meaning that his work is being stolen, twisted, and misappropriated by people whom he hated.

Upon considerable study of this problem, I have concluded that the best means to prevent the Jew from eventually misappropriating my work for his own ends seems to be to publish it under a Swastika imprint.  It is true that the Jew, whose language contains the concept of chutzpah, is so audacious in his swindles that I fear even the Swastika may be no guarantee.  But empirically, National Socialist publications thus far seem to be safe from Jewish intellectual piracy.

In positive terms, the Swastika is firstly a dedication to Aryan mankind, and secondly an homage to the greatest Aryan leader who ever lived.  But in negative terms, it is thirdly a ward against the thieving Weltfeind:  A sign declaring, „Jew, out!  Handen weg!  No Jews allowed!  Ever!“

For I do not want to ever be „rehabilitated“ by the Jew.  I do not want for Jewish professors to ever „teach“ (that is: deconstruct, dismember, and corrupt) my work.  I do not wish for the product of my mind and my soul to ever be praised by Jews.  It is not for them.

Heil Hitler!

To Die For; To Live For

The following is the substance of what I wrote in irration at a display of what I categorized as „defeatism, nihilism, self-absorbed whining, self-righteous cowardice, and [an] attitude rooted fundamentally in fear and hatred rather than the unyielding iron determination to either do the right thing, or die trying“:

Speaking as a man who is physically crippled, has forsworn the seductive „benefits“ of the Nietzschean slave-morality disability/welfare trap,¹ is to all intents and purposes totally alone, and is now facing imminent homelessness and starvation with slim chances of survival:  There is no room in this world for those who do not have the will to struggle and fight.

(¹ So described with the note that I am a socialist on the model of National Socialism, which raised people to new heights rather than sinking them into an abyss of endless dependency.  N.b. too the aphorism, „You can’t bite the hand which feeds you.“)

O, woe and despair!  If I let myself for one moment indulge in my own helplessness and hopelessness, then I would either kill myself immediately—or ring up a psychiatrist with a kindly Jewish face for nerve-deadening happy pills by the fistful.  Few whiners could have better excuses than I do.  But I don’t, because I know the principle that no matter how badly I have it, somebody, somewhere has it worse.  Indeed, others have faced far worse than I, much more nobly, only to be rewarded with horrible deaths followed by endless Defamation of their ghosts.  Who am I to wring my hands and weep, rather than forcing myself to rise with even one-tenth the courage that they had?

I know that amidst a society of fashionable purposelessness and quests for „self-actualization“² which can never quite be found by those who seek it, all that sounds lofty and idealistic—or perhaps even „grandiose“.  What positive goal could justify such effort?  Something larger than oneself, something worth more than one’s own life—something worth dying for.  I wrote as my own personal motto:  „Only they who have something to die for, have something to live for.“  Thus being oriented toward life, I know that my only chance of achieving that „something“ is to not give up„Kapitulieren?  Nein!“

(² Term originated by Abraham Maslow, a Jew with both Boazian cultural anthropologist and Cultural Marxist connections.)

And that positive „something“, the only „something“ worth living and dying for, must be something given to others such that I may live on in them long after I am dead.  In other words, something for posterity—a concept of collective heritage by a common future, which in any meaningful sense can be only a racial matter.

The race shall be to the swift.  The battle shall be to the strong.  And the laurels of final victory shall rest on the brows of those motivated by such a spirit of internal resistance as grants them power tantamount to a force of Nature.

„Lieber tot als Sklave!“

Propaganda Fide

Why do I care to attack such patent absurdity as Flat Earth?  Why waste my time?  Why bother?

The principled and the practical are always but mirrors of each other.  And while a practical answer to that question is forthcoming, as to principle, first know ye this:

I wield the sword of my pen to defend the faith of the Führer against the well-poisoning impostures of self-described apostates and vagabonds, i.e. renegades.  And this faith which I, a self-described propagandist, so defend and spread, is not the faith of they who believe in Sky-Jews or nigger voodoo.

Rather, it is the passion of the National Socialist martyrs.

It is the noble Aryan faith of those who aspire to the best and the greatest, consistently with the Aristocratic Principle, a law of Nature.

It is the Nature-faith of those who do not reject reality.

It is the racial faith of those who revere great Dead White Men—the great men of Aryan Art and Aryan Science, the great poets and thinkers, the great statesmen and military generals.  The faith of Bach and Armin, of Galileo and Gauss and Planck, of Goethe and Wagner and Breker, of Plato and Schopenhauer and Nietzsche, of Aristarchus and of Kepler.  The faith which admires great men of the past, and uplifts great men in the present, such that the world may have more great men in the future.  The faith of the inventor of the wheel—the faith which gives all and sacrifices all on the altar of posterity.  The faith of Adolf Hitler!

Above all, it is the faith of those who pray to „never forget that admiration for everything that is great is not only a tribute to one creative personality but that all those who feel such admiration become thereby united under one covenant“ (Mein Kampf I:12 (14)).

’Tis the faith of those who seek to save Aryan posterity by eradicating from society this nihilistic renegade attitude, which falsifies history when convenient and heaps scorn on great men and their achievements:

[„‚Flat Earth Theory‘ is to Aryan Science as Dadaism is to Aryan Art. This man would ban both Jew poisons: DR. GOEBBELS“]

Heil Aristarchus, heil Copernicus, heil Galileo, heil Kepler—und heil Hitler!

Renegade Onomastics

[Image of Skeat’s entry for „renegade“, as quoted below.]
Figure 1:  Name suitable for Flat Earthers.

Continued from „Political Onomastics“, which briefly explored the intelligent and careful naming of the parties of Hitler, Mussolini, Quisling, Degrelle, Codreanu, Remer, Mosley, Franco, Rockwell, and Pierce:

I admit, I am a pedant—a stickler for correctness—why, some might suspect me of having a bit of German blood.  Others may even insinuate that persons such as I have Asperger’s (but at least I am not alone).  And I do not expect to help my case with those others by confessing, I attach great import to the names people voluntarily choose for their own own lives’ works.

A few months ago, I set aside my usual pickiness on pragmatic grounds.  I know that society has gone downhill, and people no longer generally uphold the standard of care they once did in any matter whatsoever.  I also know that from time to time, youths nowadays acquire a nickname which sticks to them—and they accept it, even carrying it in some fashion to later enterprises.  Especially online, an unfortunate name may even be naïvely assumed to rise from such an accident, absent any real evidence.  I thought I should not be prejudiced by a nickname, the title of a book, or the name of a website.

I will now run posthaste screaming back to my original principles, based on my experience with something I understood, but deliberately ignored:  The meaning of the name Renegade, i.e. Kyle Hunt’s online moniker and his name for the web operation he runs with his wife, Sinead McCarthy.

On its face, „Renegade“ is a name chosen by somebody who rebels for the sake of rebelling.  Unlike the names covered in the previous article, it is neither positive nor constructive; it is purely negative; it symbolizes not being for anything in particular, but rather being against something—in practice it seems, against everything, up to and including the roundness of the Earth.

Continue reading “Renegade Onomastics”

Political Onomastics: What’s in a name?

Names are important.  They reveal much about the internal thought process and intentions of those who choose them.  Most people do not choose their own personal names; but the founders of philosophies and also parties, movements, and other organizations certainly must encapsulate in no more than a few words just who they are and what they stand for.  Consider these ten examples: Continue reading “Political Onomastics: What’s in a name?”

On Dixie

Paraphrasing from a draft article a thought which deserves its own mention, I suggest to my friends who fly the Stars and Bars the following slogan as to what victor’s history calls the „Civil War“:

Slavery was no more the fundamental reason for the Second American Revolution, than tea taxes were the fundamental reason for the First American Revolution.

Channelling Dr. Goebbels, who always knew how to pinpoint the substance of any question in terms which can be popularly understood, I am happy to help.

Personal context:  I am not an American Southerner; and indeed, I was raised to despise American Southerners as uncouth and uneducated „racist rednecks“ and „white trash“.  Imagine my astonishment when I grew up, and discovered that I generally prefer the company of friendly, polite Southerners to that of stereotypically rude, arrogant, abrasive, presumptuous, money-grubbing materialistic Yankee-Americans.  Which does not describe all American Northerners, but certainly describes almost all of the coastal-region urban and suburban ones.  Per my experience.

Said as somebody who has long thought of himself as anti-American, but questions whether he might just be anti-Yank.