PDA

View Full Version : Should the Nationalists Renounce "Stereotypical" Imagery?



Siebenbürgerin
Tuesday, September 15th, 2009, 10:52 PM
What is your view on this theme?
Stereotypical imagery is Third Reich and Hitler imagery, swastikas, skinheadism, the Celtic cross and other white nationalist symbols. In other words, many of the symbols which are associated with racism and hate by ordinary peoples.
Do you think nationalism should embrace a new image and work on new symbolism, which isn't socially stigmatised, to cater to more normal peoples?
Please post pro and contra opinions, it's a theme which I consider important to the future strategy of nationalistic movements.

Oski
Tuesday, September 15th, 2009, 11:08 PM
I think there is always a place for stereotypical imagery. Why should we give up our ancient and important symbols? Do you see the mainstream giving up their multicultural propaganda?

Renwein
Tuesday, September 15th, 2009, 11:21 PM
I think there is always a place for stereotypical imagery. Why should we give up our ancient and important symbols? Do you see the mainstream giving up their multicultural propaganda?

I agree, although it's also wise to be discreet and not 'hollywood nutzi' about things.

I do think though that one problem is that images, icons and history were used so effectively as propaganda to attract people in the past, that it's hard to use them again in todays world (because people are put off by the connection), but there is nothing to replace them either, and there can't be either, since we can't just make up a new history and symbols of the past.
For instance, runes etc. are on sites like ADL as 'hate symbols'. :oanieyes

Anyway, no matter what we do we'll be considered 'evil' so might as well get on with it

Siebenbürgerin
Tuesday, September 15th, 2009, 11:21 PM
Why should we give up our ancient and important symbols?
That's a good question. On this theme nationalists have split opinions. Some say it should be given up because it's illegal, and it's not worth wearing a swastika shirt if it's going to put peoples in prison. In the USA it's not however, but there's a negative message through it nonetheless. Because some peoples who still care about Germanic preservation avoid these symbols and the people who wear them.


Do you see the mainstream giving up their multicultural propaganda?
Hmm, in the present situation no, because there isn't a proper need for it. Their propaganda is legal and accepted. But if the roles were reversed, and nationalists gained control over social norms, I would see them subverting. Because a message can be sent in many ways, even subtly.

Dagna
Tuesday, September 15th, 2009, 11:28 PM
I believe in freedom of speech, so I do not wish to stop a National Socialist from waving his NSDAP flag. I do believe however that is it not an intelligent move if he wants to do more than attract other National Socialists. National Socialism is an un-Germanic ideology and it acts as a repellent. The National Socialist Movement in the USA has never got anywhere far despite that associating according to this ideology is protected by our Constitution, while European right-wing parties who do not use National Socialist symbols have even made it to Parliaments.

Nachtengel
Tuesday, September 15th, 2009, 11:33 PM
Parties who want to play a role in the FRG should keep it legal. If they used swastikas they would be immediately banned for being anticonstitutional, so that should be avoided. But otherwise, if it's legal, a symbol it shouldn't be dropped just because some Jew labels it racist and hateful. If Germanics do that, the multiculturalists will realize they can control the movement, and label more and more things as racist. If nationalists give them up one by one, the movement will soon remain void, because it will have stripped itself from everything it stands for.

velvet
Tuesday, September 15th, 2009, 11:34 PM
This is an interesting question with a difficult answer.

I think the swastica is quite problematic and is better not used to label organisations, parties or whatever, at least not in Germany.

With other 'typical NS' imagery which includes runes the answer though is far more difficult. Runes are our heathen symbols, they belong to our faith, as well as jewelry such as Thor's Hammer, Valknut, etc pendants. I think on them we should stand strong against the stigma and if necessary play their tricks back on them and demand religious freedom.

The swastica though is the only symbol that is loaded with so much history burden and therefore should not be used. It would indeed repel the most people.

For the other symbols that are commonly brandmarked as hate symbols, runes, celtic crosses, things that belong to our culture, it would be utterly contraproductive to self-censor them. It is our culture that we want to preserve after all. In fact, I think we should increase their usage and make them a common view again.

The people connect hate symbols with a minority, it loses its hate symbolism when it's seen everywhere. People will refuse to think that everyone belongs to an extreme minority. :D

For official organisations or parties there should be a new 'corporate identity' like every business needs today. Specially parties shouldnt play with old or known symbolism but indeed use their own design. It is a question of good marketing to catch the attention of people. And a good marketing concept will create a sense of first-sight integrity.

Matrix
Wednesday, September 16th, 2009, 12:23 AM
I think the arguing about nazi symbols on forums is a silly thing.
Nationalists have something else to worry about now, to arrive in a position from where they can make significant changes. Once they are there, they can use any symbol they like.
Until that happens, it's more important to focus on reaching their goals. If you have to wear a suit or a potato sack to do it, why not? Just do whatever it takes. The end justifies the means, that's how they should think about it.

oakenbough
Wednesday, September 16th, 2009, 12:32 AM
It is interesting to me that you added the Celtic cross, that is not seen as an extremist symbol here at all. But I do think that the symbols should be dropped, I agree that we should not have to, but sometimes sacrifices must be made because we must manage to converse with the majority of people, and to them "Nazi" imagery is just that, a huge turn off and an instant way stopping them listening to anything else you may have to say.

Siebenbürgerin
Wednesday, September 16th, 2009, 12:44 AM
It is interesting to me that you added the Celtic cross, that is not seen as an extremist symbol here at all.
Hmm, I see. It's not the same in Germany. There I heard it's been banned. Here a theme about it:
Celtic Crosses Banned In Germany (http://forums.skadi.net/showthread.php?t=110356)

In the UK they might not be seen as extremists because of the Irish heritage there?

Here they're used by white nationalists. For example the New Right (http://www.nouadreapta.org/limbistraine.php?lmb=eng), they've the Celtic cross on flags, but I think it happens in other countries too.

Oski
Wednesday, September 16th, 2009, 01:11 AM
Nice conversation people :thumbup

OK here is a scenario: There are two preservation groups marching on your nation's capital (in separate places) and you feel you must join one.

The first group: One million dressed in black carrying one million of the same swastika flag.

The second group: One million dressed however carrying a million assorted national & runic flags, banners etc.

What group are you going to join?

AngloTeutonic
Wednesday, September 16th, 2009, 01:23 AM
Nice conversation people :thumbup

OK here is a scenario: There are two preservation groups marching on your nation's capital (in separate places) and you feel you must join one.

The first group: One million dressed in black carrying one million of the same swastika flag.

The second group: One million dressed however carrying a million assorted national & runic flags, banners etc.

What group are you going to join?

Whichever group is getting the job done better.

Oski
Wednesday, September 16th, 2009, 01:39 AM
Whichever group is getting the job done better.

Agreed, you have a point.

Dagna
Wednesday, September 16th, 2009, 01:41 AM
Nice conversation people :thumbup

OK here is a scenario: There are two preservation groups marching on your nation's capital (in separate places) and you feel you must join one.

The first group: One million dressed in black carrying one million of the same swastika flag.

The second group: One million dressed however carrying a million assorted national & runic flags, banners etc.

What group are you going to join?
The second group, because I am not a National Socialist. The first group caters to only one category of nationalists (for the argument's sake I will call them nationalists, although I don't believe there is anything nationalist in NS). The second group caters to a diverse nationalist audience. A non-National Socialist will only think this: I don't believe I will fit in this group. If he sees the second group, he will think: I believe I might fit in this group. The first group narrows down its possibilities, and thus its audience in numbers.

Nachtengel
Wednesday, September 16th, 2009, 01:46 AM
Nice conversation people :thumbup

OK here is a scenario: There are two preservation groups marching on your nation's capital (in separate places) and you feel you must join one.

The first group: One million dressed in black carrying one million of the same swastika flag.

The second group: One million dressed however carrying a million assorted national & runic flags, banners etc.

What group are you going to join?
The 1st one, and not just because I'm nationalsocialist. But seeing them carry the same symbol would tell me they're united and have a common cause.
The second group would seem dubious to me, prone to squabbles, infighting and an easy target for the divide et impera strategists.
They might stick together until they gain something, but what will happen afterwards? Each will want to impose his own point, and it will become chaotic.

Segestan
Wednesday, September 16th, 2009, 01:56 AM
Nationalism for whites, needs to hold the past symbols in great respect , but create new symbols for the future. The problem with old symbols is they have a history that can often be abused of by the foe. New is new. Nationalism as whites need the idea is a new political strategy not like the past where it was a white west and whites fought for supremacy over the third world. Today the white nations must find there roots because of many dangerous trends have evolved out of mass immigration and globalization.
Find a common bond in the past and build a new foundation.

BlauVogel
Wednesday, September 16th, 2009, 03:41 AM
I personally think that we have to stop all this political "decorum". If we want to be treated like serious and intelligent people, there is no place for skinheads, swastikas, big boots, bombers jackets and all the Bs. Let's just act like normal people ; be normal, dress like a lambda citizen, have a "normal" haircut, i am sure that this could work.

The question is not "Do you want to find skinhead friends because you're a social looser ?", but "Do you want to change something in the politics, the Mores of your society ?".

Grey
Wednesday, September 16th, 2009, 05:01 AM
The 1st one, and not just because I'm nationalsocialist. But seeing them carry the same symbol would tell me they're united and have a common cause.
The second group would seem dubious to me, prone to squabbles, infighting and an easy target for the divide et impera strategists.
They might stick together until they gain something, but what will happen afterwards? Each will want to impose his own point, and it will become chaotic.

Exactly. The second group would not be as united towards a single cause; a group working toward a common end is more effective than a collection of individuals each working toward their own ends.

oakenbough
Wednesday, September 16th, 2009, 10:01 PM
Nice conversation people :thumbup

OK here is a scenario: There are two preservation groups marching on your nation's capital (in separate places) and you feel you must join one.

The first group: One million dressed in black carrying one million of the same swastika flag.

The second group: One million dressed however carrying a million assorted national & runic flags, banners etc.

What group are you going to join?

The second group, because in the first there will (probably) be to much conformism for there to be enough ideas to win. And I'm an individual and I would like it to stay that way.

Sissi
Wednesday, September 16th, 2009, 10:13 PM
If you use swastikas and Third Reich imagery, you catalogue yourself as a fringe lunatic, because that's what the average person thinks about the NS.
If you shave your head and dress up like skinhead, people will think you are a racist, even if you aren't. So if it's not that kind of message you want to send across, then you should be more sensible about the imagery you choose to represent your ideas. Even people who aren't hostile to NS, don't want a kind of Hollywood nazi ideology, like these guys:

http://www.againstnazi.com/capt-pack10409260205-neo_nazi_rally_pack104.jpg

Let's be honest, they produce some giggles and head shaking even within the "movement".

Fewer people are put off by runes than the swastika.

Oski
Thursday, September 17th, 2009, 07:32 AM
If you use swastikas and Third Reich imagery, you catalogue yourself as a fringe lunatic, because that's what the average person thinks about the NS.
If you shave your head and dress up like skinhead, people will think you are a racist, even if you aren't. So if it's not that kind of message you want to send across, then you should be more sensible about the imagery you choose to represent your ideas. Even people who aren't hostile to NS, don't want a kind of Hollywood nazi ideology, like these guys:

http://www.againstnazi.com/capt-pack10409260205-neo_nazi_rally_pack104.jpg

Let's be honest, they produce some giggles and head shaking even within the "movement".

Fewer people are put off by runes than the swastika.

These are the assorted people I was talking about, they use all kinds of runic and hammer imagery etc. I'm talking about well dressed people with proper swastika flags that are so united and well spoken that everyone that doesn't fit in will try. It's better to set an example for everyone to strife towards than accept an assorted bunch and dumb down the movement.

Siebenbürgerin
Thursday, September 17th, 2009, 07:55 AM
Nice conversation people :thumbup

OK here is a scenario: There are two preservation groups marching on your nation's capital (in separate places) and you feel you must join one.

The first group: One million dressed in black carrying one million of the same swastika flag.

The second group: One million dressed however carrying a million assorted national & runic flags, banners etc.

What group are you going to join?
I would join the group which has the beliefs and programme which is the best for my peoples. The swastika flags don't represent my favourite imagery, however, if they've goals which are better than the ones of the diverse group, it wouldn't be such a significant element. The most important thing is the politics and aims of the group. Because a group could use traditional imagery, but not be the best choice. I'm meaning for example groups like the heathens against hate. They use runes, valknots and other Germanic sacred symbols. But are they really for preservation? They're universalists, and want to accept anybody within the group.

But we've to think not everybody thinks like me. Peoples need to have an open mind to accept controversated symbols like the swastika, and judge beyond the appearance.


I personally think that we have to stop all this political "decorum". If we want to be treated like serious and intelligent people, there is no place for skinheads, swastikas, big boots, bombers jackets and all the Bs. Let's just act like normal people ; be normal, dress like a lambda citizen, have a "normal" haircut, i am sure that this could work.

The question is not "Do you want to find skinhead friends because you're a social looser ?", but "Do you want to change something in the politics, the Mores of your society ?".
Indeed that should be the real question.

Huginn ok Muninn
Thursday, September 17th, 2009, 09:51 AM
The 1st one, and not just because I'm nationalsocialist. But seeing them carry the same symbol would tell me they're united and have a common cause.
The second group would seem dubious to me, prone to squabbles, infighting and an easy target for the divide et impera strategists.
They might stick together until they gain something, but what will happen afterwards? Each will want to impose his own point, and it will become chaotic.

Exactly my thoughts. But if there were a million marching with Swastikas, we would already have won. :) Really, I knew the answer to this before I finished reading.. unity of purpose is essential to getting anything done, but more importantly, it is a symbol of strength, which psychologically attracts folk, especially when they see that strength as the savior of their people. That is why it worked so powerfully in the 30s.

This has been a theme here and moreso on Stormfront, where Swastikas were banned so as not to "scare off" potential converts. Really, the symbolism does not matter to me. The Swastika is essentially borrowed from India, if I'm not mistaken, with the idea that the Aryans brought it with them from the common PIE urheimat. We're not even sure that's true, though, so there is really no need for us to be connected to such a symbol.

However. If the swastika were to be somehow "liberated," THAT would be a symbol in itself, because it would confirm that the jew had lost his power to shame us for that era, and would signal his powerlessness. I think this is one of the keys to breaking the dominance of the jew.. to make impotent in the minds of the people all the words and ideas used to enslave us. I see this happening within the past couple of months here in the U.S. That all important tool of the jew, the term "racist," has become quite a bit overused. Obama has even been trying to get people to stop throwing this term around so haphazardly.. he knows this will make it impotent and anger the White population which is so remorselessly slandered with it every day. And that's what is happening.. they are beginning to go too far with this.

Back to the psychology of strength.. the reason people follow a government which is so much against their best interests is that they feel powerless to oppose it. The more you liberate people's thoughts toward nationalism, the more powerful it becomes, until it will quite naturally be a real force. In days of old, the contender who was viewed as most powerful became king, because people wanted to side with the winner. Things are changing fast in this world, and our people are beginning to realize that they will have to stand up and unite against the oppressors who enslave us and the minds of our children. Nationalism has a chance.

Siebenbürgerin
Thursday, September 17th, 2009, 10:02 AM
This has been a theme here and moreso on Stormfront, where Swastikas were banned so as not to "scare off" potential converts.
Hmm, was that the only reason? Isn't it that swastikas are illegal in most of Europe, and that forum has European chapters and European staff too? In that case it's better to avoid such problems. In my view at least. Because a symbol isn't worth going behind bars for, especially if you could still express the same ideals through a substitute.

Huginn ok Muninn
Thursday, September 17th, 2009, 10:10 AM
Hmm, was that the only reason? Isn't it that swastikas are illegal in most of Europe, and that forum has European chapters and European staff too? In that case it's better to avoid such problems. In my view at least. Because a symbol isn't worth going behind bars for, especially if you could still express the same ideals through a substitute.

Yes, now that you mention it, that was a reason as well. Thanks.

I agree that we don't need the swastika.. but the BRD seems overly eager to ban anything nationalists use as a symbol. We could just usurp the star of david.. that would make their circuits overload. ;)

Siebenbürgerin
Thursday, September 17th, 2009, 10:13 AM
Yes, now that you mention it, that was a reason as well. Thanks.

I agree that we don't need the swastika.. but the BRD seems overly eager to ban anything nationalists use as a symbol. We could just usurp the star of david.. that would make their circuits overload. ;)
Hmm, I don't see them banning the star of David even if it was used by nationalistic peoples. They've banned swastikas, Celtic crosses, the black sun, hmm, if I'm correct even some runes, but they couldn't ban the symbols of the peoples and culture they consider impossible to be racist and hateful.

Blod og Jord
Thursday, October 1st, 2009, 05:29 AM
I don't like when nazi imagery is used for nationalist Germanic movements.
I don't support the hate laws.
But not all of us are nazis,
and in some countries like Denmark nazism isn't close to the nationalist's heart.
If you want a symbol for all Germanics to feel good about,
it must be accepted unanimously.
I think it's better if we go back in time when Germanics were having a single faith,
and use the symbols accordingly.

Thusnelda
Monday, November 2nd, 2009, 05:25 PM
Well, I think the old symbols are quite outdated and old-fashioned. Their image is just too negative and we won´t attract new valuable supporters of our common goals with them. :| But people need symbols and some kind of imaginery to identify themselves with a specific movement. So using no symbols at all isn´t a good idea as well. We need new symbols, symbols who don´t stand for a country alone but for the whole Germanic world and our matter of self preservation as a cultural entity.

Berrocscir
Monday, November 2nd, 2009, 05:30 PM
Some autonomous nationalists in Europe have began using the Red flag and Black flag. This infuriates the leftists, confuses the media/liberals and appeals to anti-capitalist youth. There is no copyright on symbols - we should use all symbols when we think it is appropriate - different symbols for different target audiences.

NormanRollo
Thursday, December 3rd, 2009, 02:46 AM
I answered yes, but only for the more extreem symbols (like Swastikas, or fascist symbols). Other symbols which are more present in european culture, like runes, mjolnirs, stylised celtic crosses, christian crosses (etc..) are ok because they are true to our ancestral heritage. Shocking people may be fun when you're a teenager, but it never brought anything politically.

I have often thought the "stupid nationalists" or "stupid nazis", although providing helpful manpower in some situations, tend to make the entire nationalist movement look bad by their behavior. I mean, just one drunk skinhead on night who starts provocations and fights probably ruin a year's worth of militant activity by sincere and intelligent nationalists.

As for political parties, a good stance would be NOT using any shocking symbols, trying to appeal to a majority of voters and not only the extreem ones. In today's western society, I believe the only far right political parties which can gather a fair amount of voters are those which can appeal to many different people, from simple patriots to racists/nazis. Losing the simple patriot vote would mean a considerable percentage of the electorate.

Mjolnir
Thursday, December 3rd, 2009, 03:16 AM
The soft approach is better to ripe the minds of the sheeple. We shouldn't be blunt with GERMANIC symbols like swastikas and sieg heils. It s sad we shouldn' t, but unfortunately we can't . Those symbols are still rejected unfortunately.

I am in favour of getting our agenda across, in stead of getting symbols across..

Ulfvaldr
Thursday, December 3rd, 2009, 09:08 AM
swastikas, and the Celtic cross, are Asatru (Or Heathen) symbols that predate Nazi Germany by many years. Whether you are pro, or con Nazi these are very important religious symbols and if you see them as religious symbols, you should never renounce them.

NormanRollo
Friday, December 4th, 2009, 12:51 AM
No one is talking about renouncing them altogether. Well not me anyway. I think they should just not be used for politics because the masses will obviously see a Swastika as the nazi symbol, and the celtic cross as a neo-nazi symbol (at least the unstylized celtic cross). Using them is unproductive if we want to appeal to the masses, because its scares them off.

Oski
Friday, December 4th, 2009, 01:07 AM
Look it doesn't matter what symbols we use they will always make parodies of us with the old symbols and connect us with the past so whats the use in censoring ourselves?

Kogen
Friday, December 4th, 2009, 01:33 AM
No one is talking about renouncing them altogether. Well not me anyway. I think they should just not be used for politics because the masses will obviously see a Swastika as the nazi symbol, and the celtic cross as a neo-nazi symbol (at least the unstylized celtic cross). Using them is unproductive if we want to appeal to the masses, because its scares them off.
Is there a different attitude for the Celtic Cross in Europe?

Here it is not seen as a negative symbol at all.

Siebenbürgerin
Saturday, December 5th, 2009, 07:14 AM
Is there a different attitude for the Celtic Cross in Europe?

Here it is not seen as a negative symbol at all.
The Celtic cross is banned in Germany and in many European countries it's used in different versions by white power and skinhead groups. I think they used the American movements as inspiration.

http://www.dc.state.fl.us/pub/gangs/images/r-ccross.gif

Bleyer
Saturday, December 5th, 2009, 07:22 AM
Some groups use imagery like the life rune.


http://www.dcpoliticalreport.com/PartySymbols/NA.gif

This figures in the ADL database of "hate symbols". Whichever symbol you use, it will figure there sooner or later, if your organisation stands for Germanic preservation.

NormanRollo
Monday, December 7th, 2009, 05:23 PM
The Celtic cross is banned in Germany and in many European countries it's used in different versions by white power and skinhead groups. I think they used the American movements as inspiration.

http://www.dc.state.fl.us/pub/gangs/images/r-ccross.gif

Banned? Hell, that's ridiculous! Even the stylized one? (as opposed to the simple schematic one you posted which is indeed used by white power groups). In France its not banned at all, perhaps because we have Brittany, which is a "celtic nation".
What happens when German archaeologists find the sunwheels in a Hallstatt site? :p


Is there a different attitude for the Celtic Cross in Europe?

Here it is not seen as a negative symbol at all.

Well I didn't know the celtic cross was banned in some European countries. In France its not a negative symbol unless its the schematic one like the one posted by Siebenbürgerin. Its probably not negative in North America either because the continent has a high population of irish descendants who often wear celtic crosses (mostly the Saint Patric's cross or whatever, which is more like a christian cross). As a continent of immigrants, North America tends to accept racial inheritance more than in Europe, where these symbols are considered more like "folklore used by neo-nazis".

Old Winter
Monday, December 7th, 2009, 07:10 PM
These are the assorted people I was talking about, they use all kinds of runic and hammer imagery etc. I'm talking about well dressed people with proper swastika flags that are so united and well spoken that everyone that doesn't fit in will try. It's better to set an example for everyone to strife towards than accept an assorted bunch and dumb down the movement.

Here is your well dressed version:

http://michelle2005.files.wordpress.com/2008/12/neo-nazi-photo.jpg

:oanieyes

These people are a bigger ''enemy'' then those extreme left winged nutheads.



The Celtic cross is banned in Germany and in many European countries it's used in different versions by white power and skinhead groups. I think they used the American movements as inspiration.

http://www.dc.state.fl.us/pub/gangs/images/r-ccross.gif

I am allergic to that white power symbol, its so fake, so superficial and empty.


I also want to ad this article:

Neo-Nazi rally was organized by FBI informant

Neo-Nazi marchers and Left-wing counterprotesters face off as the loving storm-troopers in black uniforms step in to save everybody. All three sides are controlled by the same police state agenda.

http://aftermathnews.wordpress.com/2007/02/17/neo-nazi-rally-was-organized-by-fbi-informant/

Blod og Jord
Monday, December 7th, 2009, 09:37 PM
I wouldn't try to fit in a neonazi group.
Some of these groups are paid by the government to make the image of nationalism the media writes about become true.
I don't trust them.

Katiskatos
Monday, December 7th, 2009, 11:24 PM
Since I am not a supporter of nazism or white power movements, I feel no inclination toward their symbology, nor do I believe their symbology is useful. It simply scares away too many of your "brothers and sisters".

Since I usually lurk Skadi and never post, but today feel the urge to do so, I will now post my views on your "struggle" and how I would solve your problems:

If you would really wish to protect or preserve German genes, (Or whatever your preferred genepool might be.) I would advize your movement and members to start a religion instead of wasting your time with politics. The basis of this religion would be "love" (copulation) and any member who procreates with a non-Germanic would be removed from the "congregation". The religious excuse for this would be something in the line of "Starchild must be reborn from two white people, so there must be at least two whites at the time of the apocalypse".

This said, I believe you will never be able to stop "the tide" through normal parliamentary methods. It's too late, and I believe most of you have by now understood this. Revolution is also impossible, since you simply lack the numbers needed for such an ordeal. (And I'm not even talking about the weapons and logistics and elite support you'd need.)

Hitler failed at revolution, so will you.
Hitler succeeded through elections, but your enemies remember.
Religion seems to be the only possible strategy to achieve your aims of preservation.

'Religion of the blood,' but camouflaged with a sharade story.

And to all the big mouths on this website who keep claiming action and all this crap... Stop wasting time online and start a conference with dogma and rituals. I would also propose for you to organize an international meeting for this (preferably in Germany), where all Skadi members could meet and discuss this new religion and what it's symbols would be. While a swastika might then be funny or somewhat historically advantageous, I sincerely doubt it has much use. Sunwheels are despotic in nature and you are more about preservation than power. Anyway, these are my two cents.

An alternative strategy to avoid discrimination, however, would be to create a "new zion" faith or something of that matter. A faith in which you proclaim Germanics to be the "special Jews" or whatever... allowing you to use the whole "anti-semite" thing to your advantage.

:thumbup

I will now lurk again, since that is what I usually do here. If you plan to perform my proposed strategy, could you please inform me by telling Chlodovech. He will understand which European I am.

Greetings.

Neophyte
Tuesday, December 8th, 2009, 12:58 AM
Uniforms, Sam Browne belts and jackboots are just outdated, and I think that the whole image thing only serves to detract attention from the message. What works today is a plain business suit and a pair of nice shoes, and overall I must say that nationalist politicians seem to have got that message.

What you use symbols for is branding. If you start with an old and well used symbol you inherit all that is connected with it, and that is maybe not something that you want to do. Plus, you also get half a century of negative campaigning 'for free' if you do so. For those reasons we should stay clear of using hammers, valknots, swastikas and so on as logos. They do continue to have a central role as cult symbols, but their political use seems limited. You do not see the Christian Democrats campaigning using a crucifix as their logo.

If you are selling a controversial message there is no use make it even harder by adding on some controversial imagery and form. We want to present our ideas to the people using the same format as they are used to receive political information in. We want to present our information in the same format and using the same manners as everyone else. Let the message be the difference.

baroqueorgan
Tuesday, December 8th, 2009, 01:08 AM
If you would really wish to protect or preserve German genes, (Or whatever your preferred genepool might be.) I would advize your movement and members to start a religion instead of wasting your time with politics. The basis of this religion would be "love" (copulation) and any member who procreates with a non-Germanic would be removed from the "congregation". The religious excuse for this would be something in the line of "Starchild must be reborn from two white people, so there must be at least two whites at the time of the apocalypse".


Um, that religion already exists, it's called Mormonism (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mormonism). It would also be nice if your tone wasn't so cynical and condescending - not everyone here, not even the majority I would say, is some crazy neo-Nazi "White Nationalist" with a celtic cross and a swastika tatooed on their chest.

Sissi
Thursday, December 31st, 2009, 04:33 AM
Speaking of symbolism and the Aryan Brotherhood, I've seen that one of their members has a tattoo of a Star of David on one arm, and a Swastika on the other. It turns out he is part Jewish, not unlike a few other members. Others have Amerindian ancestry. One of their former members said they should rename themselves, because what they're mostly about is drug trafficking. Not to mention their relationship with Mexican criminals or their way of dealing with traitors by killing their family. I'm sorry, but I can't trust such groups. I understand in prisons going with your race is the safest option you have, thus many whites joining their group. But, after years inside the group, some of them began to realize it wasn't just a matter of racialism.

Old Winter
Monday, January 4th, 2010, 04:51 PM
Speaking of symbolism and the Aryan Brotherhood, I've seen that one of their members has a tattoo of a Star of David on one arm, and a Swastika on the other. It turns out he is part Jewish, not unlike a few other members. Others have Amerindian ancestry. One of their former members said they should rename themselves, because what they're mostly about is drug trafficking. Not to mention their relationship with Mexican criminals or their way of dealing with traitors by killing their family. I'm sorry, but I can't trust such groups. I understand in prisons going with your race is the safest option you have, thus many whites joining their group. But, after years inside the group, some of them began to realize it wasn't just a matter of racialism.

He is not just a member, he is one of the two people who started the aryan brotherhood.

Nachtengel
Monday, January 4th, 2010, 04:54 PM
He is not just a member, he is one of the two people who started the aryan brotherhood.
A Jew? :confused Any sources on that? if it's true, then they would be yet another fabricated Nazi group.

Mjolnir
Monday, January 4th, 2010, 07:13 PM
He is not just a member, he is one of the two people who started the aryan brotherhood.

I have read the same thing......

Old Winter
Monday, January 4th, 2010, 07:27 PM
A Jew? :confused Any sources on that? if it's true, then they would be yet another fabricated Nazi group.

Tyler Bingham has a tattoo of a Swastika and a Hexagram on the other. The hexagram is the jewish Star of David. Bingham, one of the leaders of the Aryan Brotherhood, is part Jewish.

http://www.absoluteastronomy.com/topics/Aryan_Brotherhood


I am glad that the group is fake.

Sól
Monday, March 19th, 2012, 02:18 AM
The swastika is not only a Germanic symbol but an Indian symbol. Even stripping it from the Nazi connotations, it could remind people of Hinduism, Buddhism and Jainism which have little to do with Germanics and continue to put some of us off. I think the swastika isn't a very appealing symbol therefore, because of its stigmatized connotations.

The symbolism the Nazis used was popular and successful at their time but now it's "outdated and old-fashioned", like Thusnelda put it. The Nazis were brilliant propagandists. They wouldn't use something counterproductive. I doubt they would still use the swastika today.

Look at the attendance of their rallies and speeches. Impressive. Now look at the attendance of nationalist events nowadays. Can we say the same? Obviously Germanics are doing something wrong. We can't worship the ashes forever. Hitler is dead and gone, he won't save anybody. We need to reorganize and live in the present, think about our future.

The question is then what should we use? We could conduct a virtual workshop and invite graphic designers to use a combination of old symbols or create something new.

Even assuming the elites would ban anything we use as a hate symbol, Germanics possess a precious trait: creativity. We can create new symbols to represent our people and beliefs each and every time. Like a phoenix from the ashes. That's an idea, a phoenix rising from the ashes on our banners, a symbol of nationalism returning.

Catterick
Saturday, May 21st, 2016, 03:07 AM
Exaggerating sensible positions into extremism works by disarming a listener so they will sit up and listen what you have to say. (Shock humour works this way but much better.) Unfortunately it gets out of control and it ends in bizarre purity spirals. On the right there are currently people would call Hitler a "cuckservative" meanwhile the left is on the brink of consuming itself as identity politics goes insane.

Its a bad idea to use banned symbols of course. But unless you re-appropriate extreme words and symbols, they will be used to tarnish others by implied association. So moderate conservatives are "just like Hitler" and so on. Re-appropriation actually becomes undermined by the obsessive types so avoid them. Case in point - the dead end of Holocau$t denial when the facts are irrelevant, the Finkelstein approach is most compelling because looking at wider facts the accusers have no moral authority.

People just have to use extremism as a narrative means not an ends. Its properly done for agitprop only with care not to isolate oneself into a clique.

Siebenbürgerin
Sunday, June 19th, 2016, 10:25 PM
As I read again through some old topics and looking at the current political movements it seems at least in Europe there has been a consensus about using new symbols and ideas. Politicians and movements have strained away from the Third Reich era and apart from some few isolated cases we've a contemporary theme with symbols dedicated to current realities. The language, expression and fashion statement of nationalists have also changed for the positive. The skinhead hooligan is now a tiny minority and the left can no longer appeal to it to scare average people away from nationalism. In fact nationalism is slowly rising in Europe as an ideology of normality. Populism and politics for the people are favored by many Europeans. Let's hope it continues to shift in the right direction. :thumbup

Shadow
Monday, June 20th, 2016, 01:30 AM
Hitler? Once again words seem to fail me. This is another example of Skadi as a sewing circle, exploring tired, worn out "Germanic" topics. What is next, reviving discussions of Germanic food or Germanic costumes?

Get real, the central issue at Skadi should be Germanic Preservation or have we forgotten all about this? Nationalist themes are wonderful in combating the seeming prevailing globalist, multiculturalist, race-mixing view of what the world ought to be. As nationalist or ethnic strengths, food and clothes have value but only in that. Anything which combats and excludes the immigrant flood from all our countries is valuable.

Look, I am not back here at Skadi to please people or make friends. I am here to sound the alarm and I hope I am not alone. Sleeping Germanics have to wake up. We at Skadi should have higher priorities than this.

Hauke Haien
Monday, June 20th, 2016, 06:05 PM
From a German perspective, Hitler is valuable as the last German man to effectively fight against the United States and against the global community they have been instrumental in creating, culminating in the conditions we experience today. Restoring German power means restoring German sovereignty, which means resuming the war against the United States and its allies. Therefore, any effective action in the resumption of German duty will inevitably end up looking vaguely Hitleresque.

Additionally, the symbols and traditions used by the National Socialists are not innovations specific to their era. Even the gathering of large masses of uniformed people and their precise movement as masses has more of an old-timey Prussian Army feel to it than being a precursor to the disorganised, chaotic crowds we typically see in modern mass consumer societies. This means that if we do not aim to copy the aesthetics of NS society, defending our traditions and preserving our biological identity as Germans will still result in giving off the distinct impression that we are Germans. That is what we are hated for and we must respond aggressively against it.

Even more so, the symbols used by Germany and denounced and abandoned by our enemies have a deep history and significance both among our people and among various related peoples. We can never give them up entirely, but we can strive to use them more appropriately and effectively. For example, the hooked cross beyond its immediate meaning has always had an association with divinity and royalty. It is found persistently in the archaeological record of our predecessor cultures, but it is not exactly plastered over every single item. The symbol can survive if we do not use it all the time, but only where it counts.

However, all of this is missing the point a bit, so I will approach the question from a different angle and you will see where the two approaches meet.

If your goal is to spread information and give instructions to members of your family, then you have to be someone whose opinion is valued by your family, who has authority through his status and function in the family and you need the practical skill to teach charismatically. Far beyond a simple demand for factual correctness in the things you talk about, this is a demand for excellence and virtue as a relative and as a person. Its presence or absence will inevitably manifest in your outward appearance: the way your body is shaped, the way you dress. That reveals your moral cleanliness.

When trying to gain power over different sorts of strangers, the mechanism is similar, but the precise requirements might differ. Just like you do not wear the same clothes to all occasions, whether it be weightlifting or mountaineering or attending a funeral. It is said that God Odin became powerful through his ability to change his shape, to appear so beautiful and noble to his friends that he was a joy to behold, while his enemies perceived him as fierce and terrible when they came against him.

There is no shortcut to becoming a great man or woman, to cultivate the virtues that adorn your gender. It takes lifetimes and generations. I warn against the delusion that we can drop everything we are doing, fight against this emergency and then go back to being happy citizens of the American Empire living in the 1980s or 1950s. We are involved in a war that has lasted forever and will continue to last forever and we have to shape our souls in this total war to remain privileged in our virtue, shining and victorious.

Catterick
Monday, June 20th, 2016, 06:11 PM
Look, I am not back here at Skadi to please people or make friends. I am here to sound the alarm and I hope I am not alone. Sleeping Germanics have to wake up. We at Skadi should have higher priorities than this.

Sounding the alarm is done on social media now, at least till the shuttening takes full effect. Forums get too little traffic to be used for outreach nowadays, they should be viewed as vanity else community projects.

SaxonCeorl
Monday, June 20th, 2016, 06:42 PM
Sounding the alarm is done on social media now, at least till the shuttening takes full effect. Forums get too little traffic to be used for outreach nowadays, they should be viewed as vanity else community projects.

Plus, you're just preaching to the choir on a forum like this.

Shadow
Monday, June 20th, 2016, 08:24 PM
Plus, you're just preaching to the choir on a forum like this.

Oh no. There is no choir here. Here there is mainly ostrich politics.

Catterick
Monday, June 20th, 2016, 09:06 PM
Oh no. There is no choir here. Here there is mainly ostrich politics.

Am I in the choir after that Moslem thread? ;)

Shadow
Tuesday, June 21st, 2016, 01:03 AM
Am I in the choir after that Moslem thread? ;)

I have no idea where you are in the choir. But it is the Muslim threat which is the biggest threat to Europe.

Catterick
Tuesday, June 21st, 2016, 01:18 AM
I have no idea where you are in the choir. But it is the Muslim threat which is the biggest threat to Europe.

Peace with Islam. But keep the Saudis at arms length till their oil-based economy gets buggered. ;)

Shadow
Wednesday, June 22nd, 2016, 02:33 AM
Peace with Islam. But keep the Saudis at arms length till their oil-based economy gets buggered. ;)

First of all, F---K Islam, F---K Mohammed and F---k the horse they rode in on. There is no reason to pay lip service to some religion, some way of understanding the universe, which is totally wrong. All the Semitic religions are simply pieces of S--t and the very worst is Islam. Furthermore, Islam is incompatible with Western Culture and especially American culture. I don't need Islam, personally, not one of them.

Mööv
Wednesday, June 22nd, 2016, 02:58 AM
I don't need Islam


No one needs it.
We need Taylor Swift! :rofl

Catterick
Wednesday, June 22nd, 2016, 01:32 PM
Furthermore, Islam is incompatible with Western Culture and especially American culture. I don't need Islam, personally, not one of them.

That incompatibility holds some appeal. ;)

"Allahs Sonne über dem Abendland"...

Flag-Soil
Monday, November 7th, 2016, 06:00 PM
Symbols expire. The Hammer and Sickle for example, it represents a historical movement and not even reenactors take it seriously, the same goes for most Skinhead symbols, they are cultural not political.

Sasa
Tuesday, November 8th, 2016, 01:09 AM
What do people think of movements like the ''Alt Right''? They seem to be gaining popularity among the mainstream. Is this the way of the future?

Wulfaz
Tuesday, November 8th, 2016, 09:38 AM
I think we should drop all the neonazi-whitepower trash with their symbols (swastika, Celtic Cross, Skinhead) to the proper place, to the garbage.

The Skinheads were a movement from the 80s and the 90s, nowadays it is not fashionable, moreover it shows a bad picture about nationalist. Well, they have some cool, rebellious track, however this is the past, a wrong way.

I think we shall use the historical symbols as the Runes and the Valknut, the official national flags or other national variant (F.e. in Germany the official Black-Red-Gold and the unofficial, but historical Black-White-Red), we shall wear normal, civil closing, not piece of military uniforms like as the Skinheads. We should carry on the high cultur of our nations, not the pub-cultur of the neonazis.

I am as a National-Conservative, I wear conservative, elegant clothing, I do not shave my whole head, I have not swastika tattoo, I like the Nationalrock, but I know and hear classical, folk and mainstream music too. My example is not Hitler or the crap mass murderer nazis, but those excellent Germans as Otto von Bismarck or Richard Wagner.

I think in the long run we should make a new national elit that we mix the most ancient heritage like as the Runes, our Mythology, with the 19th century rainessance of the German nationalism and policy and with the new ways of the post-modern era in the 21th century.

However a bald, empty-headed, alcoholist in Martens boot and Bomber jacket with hate music what verbally attack the Jews and other people who is not German/English/Polish/Hungarian/etc. whos idaelize Hitler and the other ganxter, mass murderer, idiots whos have maden Germany knock out for one hundred years... We do not need this idiot. They go back to the Stormfront and hear Skredriver and drink a barrel of bear, but they are a bad way, a cul-de-sac. :thumbdown

SpearBrave
Tuesday, November 8th, 2016, 10:01 AM
Not all National Socialist are skinheads, in fact I don't think many Nationalist are the skinhead type at all. I do very much agree with the dropping of the military type of clothing, it has very negative connotations. Keep in mind you are trying to win hearts and minds and not fight a armed conflict.

Symbolism will always be around. Flags are symbols of each separate nation. I'm not a National Socialist, however I do think they need a new image and to drop the swastika and other symbols of the Third Reich era. These things are tainted and symbols that are related to them are tainted as well, thanks to the media propaganda.

Lead by example, get good jobs, live a clean wholesome life, raise a family. All of the good things that make us good productive people. These are the examples we should be living by and teaching others to live by. If you are young and looking for military or violent style adventure, I will tell you from experience that it is overrated and only causes self harm in the end. To me there would be no greater adventure even at my age than to start a family, to love a good woman and have good children to share the beauties and wonders of this world with, that is true adventure and challenge. Knowing that your people and culture will survive is a great inspiration. Our families should be our symbolism.

Coillearnach
Wednesday, November 9th, 2016, 12:06 AM
What do people think of movements like the ''Alt Right''? They seem to be gaining popularity among the mainstream. Is this the way of the future?

I think it is the way in the sense that people like Robert Spencer and Jared Taylor have gotten farther than anyone else dressing smart (well, except for Robert's fashy haircut but maybe that's hipster now) and speaking even sharper. We can redeem old imagery and speech but we have to get through the door first.

Nattevind
Wednesday, November 9th, 2016, 05:48 AM
I'd never sacrifice old imagery, from the Swastika to the runic systems, for they are very sacred to me and many other pro-whites. It is apart of my very spirituality and that of my people and I'll never compromise that.

What needs to be addressed is the terminology. Among the enemy's greatest weapons against us is the term "white supremacist". To the vast majority of pro-whites that simply isn't true. "White Preservasionalist" would be far more fitting and accurate. I personally would wish the best for all other hypothetical ethno-states if such a chance were to be given to ALL races, including us. Is that not the true meaning of "diversity"?

Call me crazy, but there's plenty of room on this crazy old planet of ours for multiple ethno-states to exist. People need to understand that most of us are not some crazed Hollywood Nazis trying to "take over ze whooole verrrld!"

Primus
Wednesday, November 9th, 2016, 06:51 AM
Stereotypical Imagery = the Christian cross, rosary beads, Thor's hammer, the 'swastika,' etc., i.e. the imagery of 'white supremacy.'

Wulfaz
Wednesday, November 9th, 2016, 09:23 AM
The method of Liberal-Globalist is simple. The word is a weapon and when they give a bad-sounding name for something, they attack that thing. F.e. the Leftist call everybody naz who is rightist. Each other the most pollcorrect central-liberal-right is nazi in their eyes. Yes, f.e. Merkel who is so many thing, but not a nazi, she is just a nazi among the Leftist each other. They brainwash the people with own vocabulary, they use the word as a weapon.

This would be similar that we would call all the leftist high traitor communist opinionterrorist. However some of them is not this, the lot of supporters of the Leftist a brainwashed puppet.

Sasa
Thursday, November 10th, 2016, 04:30 AM
Good news is that the Left are looking quite extreme these days;

http://www.smh.com.au/content/dam/images/g/l/m/2/g/3/image.related.articleLeadwide.620x349.gl m2vd.png/1463811732258.jpg

http://www.infostormer.com/wp-content/uploads/2016/02/antifa-berlin.jpg

Modern Bolsheviks...

Primus
Thursday, November 10th, 2016, 04:32 AM
^What a bunch of trash. The Bolsheviks of old would take one look at this rabble and put them before a firing squad.

Sasa
Thursday, November 10th, 2016, 04:34 AM
^What a bunch of trash.

Be prepared to see more of these morons in the future

Primus
Thursday, November 10th, 2016, 04:35 AM
Be prepared to see more of these morons in the future

They're bullies whose usual tactics are to do the bum's rush on some 'fascist'- but only when they outnumber their victims. They're essentially cowards and feel safe only when they mob someone, like in this case:

http://www.dailystormer.com/remembering-josue-estebanez-de-la-hija-spanish-nationalist-crucified-for-defending-himself-against-antifa-traitors/

Antifa hooligans mob a Spanish patriot and he shivs some of them in self-defense and one or two croak. Boo-hoo.

Wulfaz
Thursday, November 10th, 2016, 12:03 PM
Good news is that the Left are looking quite extreme these days;

http://www.smh.com.au/content/dam/images/g/l/m/2/g/3/image.related.articleLeadwide.620x349.gl m2vd.png/1463811732258.jpg

http://www.infostormer.com/wp-content/uploads/2016/02/antifa-berlin.jpg

Modern Bolsheviks...

These men (men?) looks simply terrorist. The last nazis is dieing in these decade and the neonazi trash is not dangerous to the average civil society, because the State Police tracks their every activity. However this kind of hippy-bolshevik groupes are very dangerous as they claim who is the nazi who is that. In their twisted minds are everybody nazi excluding their circles. All the Right is nazi and the Socialdemocrats and Greens whos do not eat rightist for dinner, they are the lackeys of the evil nazi rightists. :|

Sasa
Thursday, November 10th, 2016, 11:15 PM
These men (men?) looks simply terrorist. The last nazis is dieing in these decade and the neonazi trash is not dangerous to the average civil society, because the State Police tracks their every activity. However this kind of hippy-bolshevik groupes are very dangerous as they claim who is the nazi who is that. In their twisted minds are everybody nazi excluding their circles. All the Right is nazi and the Socialdemocrats and Greens whos do not eat rightist for dinner, they are the lackeys of the evil nazi rightists. :|

These guys are modern bolshevik/commies. The crimes of such people are massive and millions died at their hands in the past. Perhaps this is the story that should be told about these modern groups. Perhaps their flags etc should be banned. Their violence and anti-democratic means should be highlighted. They are protesting against democracy at the moment in the US....

Wulfaz
Friday, November 11th, 2016, 08:39 AM
These guys are modern bolshevik/commies. The crimes of such people are massive and millions died at their hands in the past. Perhaps this is the story that should be told about these modern groups. Perhaps their flags etc should be banned. Their violence and anti-democratic means should be highlighted. They are protesting against democracy at the moment in the US....

If you would ban their symbols, they get others like as the neonazis as the nazi symbols are banned in Europe, hence they use the conservative nationalist symbols what is annoying, because f.e. the Black-White-Red flag was the flag of the North-German Union, later the of the German Empire and nowadays it is a nationalist symbol, but those nazi idiots use this, hence the people will identitify that flag with them.

I cannot believe that the Antifas, the White Knights of Anti-Racism, Equality and Democracy that they protest against democracy. If this would be true, they will be truly bolsheviks.

Side by side the uniform of your picture is banned Europe, because the SS had massacred millions of Jews, Slavs, etc. The SS is a war crimer organisation by the inernational law. It would be a Wehrmacht soldier as the Wehrmacht was not war crimer. It was leaded by conservative officers, some of them hate the nazis like as Rommel or Stauffenberg and the nazis killed them.

Generalfeldmarschal Erwin Rommel killed by the nazis.

http://4.bp.blogspot.com/_AuPoOCVtSzM/TEY7qt3dqoI/AAAAAAAACj8/La1PAtNa4Ns/s1600/Rommel01.jpg

Sasa
Monday, November 14th, 2016, 01:54 AM
If you would ban their symbols, they get others like as the neonazis as the nazi symbols are banned in Europe, hence they use the conservative nationalist symbols what is annoying, because f.e. the Black-White-Red flag was the flag of the North-German Union, later the of the German Empire and nowadays it is a nationalist symbol, but those nazi idiots use this, hence the people will identitify that flag with them.

I cannot believe that the Antifas, the White Knights of Anti-Racism, Equality and Democracy that they protest against democracy. If this would be true, they will be truly bolsheviks.

Side by side the uniform of your picture is banned Europe, because the SS had massacred millions of Jews, Slavs, etc. The SS is a war crimer organisation by the inernational law. It would be a Wehrmacht soldier as the Wehrmacht was not war crimer. It was leaded by conservative officers, some of them hate the nazis like as Rommel or Stauffenberg and the nazis killed them.

Generalfeldmarschal Erwin Rommel killed by the nazis.

http://4.bp.blogspot.com/_AuPoOCVtSzM/TEY7qt3dqoI/AAAAAAAACj8/La1PAtNa4Ns/s1600/Rommel01.jpg

Not all of these ''war criminals'' sentenced in Nuremberg were SS. According to the victors in WW2 all of Hitler's regime were war criminals.
Regarding the SS though, yes they killed many people, but there were many foreign SS divisions, and in particular from Slavic countries - Croatia, Bulgaria, Ukraine, Belarus, Russia

Wyrd
Friday, September 1st, 2017, 08:31 PM
I voted, Yes, but only the most extreme symbols. Not for example the runes or valknot.

I mainly have the swastika and nazi symbols in mind, which are also illegal in some European countries and could attract undesirable consequences if nationalists displayed them. They are also too negatively charged, including for other nationalists...

Theunissen
Friday, September 1st, 2017, 09:07 PM
Hmm, I see. It's not the same in Germany. There I heard it's been banned. Here a theme about it:
Celtic Crosses Banned In Germany (http://forums.skadi.net/showthread.php?t=110356)

In the UK they might not be seen as extremists because of the Irish heritage there?

Here they're used by white nationalists. For example the New Right (http://www.nouadreapta.org/limbistraine.php?lmb=eng), they've the Celtic cross on flags, but I think it happens in other countries too.
They banned a lot, which is merely a provocation to use it.

I voted: "Other Option". Never renounce,denounce, condemn, disavow, etc. anything and anyone unless, if that person committed a common law crime in our book.

You won't get a movement without some "stereotypical symbols", which functions as trademark. I should however add that those using NS-symbols more than often are "from the other side", paid provocateurs there to cause trouble. Most of those types would probably spent some weeks in Buchenwald would National Socialism rule in their country.

Spjabork
Friday, September 1st, 2017, 09:55 PM
Generalfeldmarschal Erwin Rommel killed by the nazis.He was not "killed by the nazis", this is a lie.

Chlodovech
Saturday, September 2nd, 2017, 01:14 AM
Since the Charlottesville debacle, a lot has been written about 'optics cucking' in American far right circles. And there's something to be said for it - for not using symbols already successfully tarnished by our adversaries - for decades. For national socialists, for instance, it's wise not to use national socialist imagery in a public space, rather they should create new symbols. Walk around with a Third Reich flag at a demo and more than 90% of people don't even listen to anything you have to say anymore, all the more so because how the media will focus on such things. Hence it's rather contraproductive.

Spjabork
Saturday, September 2nd, 2017, 02:03 AM
Since the Charlottesville debacle,
What was exactly the debacle? That was no debacle at all. Now for example, now also people in Germany know, that there is real opposition also in USA, which Germans didn't know before! Up to before Charlottesville, all the Germans, no matter which "orientation" were under the impression that all Americans are the same, that you can forget about all of them so there is no hope. Now there is hope. And that is a good thing.

a lot has been written By whom?

And there's something to be said for it - for not using symbols already successfully tarnished by our adversaries - for decades. For national socialists, for instance, it's wise not to use national socialist imagery in a public space, rather they should create new symbols.Chlodovech, now listen carefully: the more you yourself draw back, the closer the jew is drawing the iron circle around you, until you finally can not even turn your bottom anymore. They have banned the swastika. Then people used the "Keltenkreuz", and it was banned. A guy who had a tattoo of it was sentenced to prison. There is now talk to ban the Lambda, the "new" sign of the identitarians also. The jew will corner you forth an forth. Because he is a pervert and is getting something out of it.

Walk around with a Third Reich flag at a demo and more than 90% of people don't even listen to anything you have to say anymoreWe have a saying in German: Who does not want to listen, must feel. Those people who have been in troubles with the aliens, they already "listen" more attentively than ever.

all the more so because how the media will focus on such things. Hence it's rather contraproductive.
Why was attention by the media "contraproductive"? Else I always heard it otherwise: "Bad news is good news!";)

You know, we must show them that we are still there. If we get no attention, then "they" will not even reckon with us anymore. And we will get down the drain faster, not slower.

Chlodovech
Saturday, September 2nd, 2017, 02:35 AM
What was exactly the debacle?

It was a debacle, Spjabork. That's the general consensus amongst the American alt-right, all the more so amongst the talking heads. Not in the least Richard Spencer. And now Charlottesville has become an excuse to expand the repression against nationalists and to start a crackdown in the only public space we have or had a noteworthy presence, namely the interwebs.

Of course, what happened in Charlottesville is very different from the fake news portrayal of events -it was a G. Soros ambush, the UtR march was set up to fail. There probably was never a terror attack. In all likelihood the driver simply panicked after his car was attacked by leftist demonstrators, and then he stepped on the gas and caused an accident.

Real or not, this type of violence always throws nationalist movements a few years back in time again. Yes, people will forget about Charlottesville, as they tend to do - Breivik isn't on the mind of people when they see their countries flooded by wave after wave of migrants, after all.


Now for example also people in Germany know, that there is real opposition in USA. Up to before Charlottesville, all the Germans, no matter which "orientation" were under the impression that all Americans are the same, so there is no hope. Now there is hope. And that is a good thing.

What matters is what Anglo-Americans think, Germany doesn't even have an independent policy from America. The BRD is a puppet state, sadly.


They have banned the swastika. Then people used the "Keltenkreuz", and it was banned.

The Keltenkreuz is still preferable to the swastika. Our enemies are flexible with words and symbols, every few years they have to come up with a new word for migrants after the old one became tainted, we play a role in spoiling their terminology and symbols too. But it's a smart move on their part. They also change the names of their political parties while their ideology remains the same. I'm suggesting we do the same thing.


Why was attention by the media "contraproductive"? Else I always heard it otherwise: "Bad news is good news!";)

I don't believe all attention is good attention, not for us, in part because we have little cultural power and don't control the narrative. For antifa: yes. Yes, all attention is good for antifa because their only purpose is dominating the streets through violence, that's why antifa was created. The media will never associate antifa with the left as a whole or with its backers, including the state. And footage of violent leftists will only draw more crazies and freaks to antifa - the unhinged violent types. The type of recruit they seek.

It works the same for nationalists, but it's not a good thing for us: Charlottesville certainly lures more undesirables and loonies to the alt-right at the expense of our message reaching the masses - street fights never accomplish much. The far right already understood this back in 1990 when nationalists decided to end the battle for the streets because it was pretty pointless, giving the hard left free reign over the streets. Instead nationalists decided to invest in political parties and when the internet came about, the strategy shifted again.

Bloody events like Charlottesville close the door for many normal people, the people who we desperately need to join the struggle - even the people who are (still) sympathetic to the alt-right will think twice before going to an alt-right meeting when people die at rallies, lowering the number of attendees.

The dominance of the streets is one of the last goals any nationalist movement should pursue, after becoming culturally and politically relevant again, much more than we are today.

Aries
Saturday, September 2nd, 2017, 04:31 AM
Chlodovech, now listen carefully: the more you yourself draw back, the closer the jew is drawing the iron circle around you, until you finally can not even turn your bottom anymore. They have banned the swastika. Then people used the "Keltenkreuz", and it was banned. A guy who had a tattoo of it was sentenced to prison. There is now talk to ban the Lambda, the "new" sign of the identitarians also. The jew will corner you forth an forth. Because he is a pervert and is getting something out of it.

The propaganda has to reach the people. Therefore it is necassary to defer to psychotic problems of the people. Hitler already said it:


Die Propaganda ist in Inhalt und Form auf die breite Masse anzusetzen und ihre Richtigkeit ist ausschließlich zu messen an ihrem wirksamen Erfolg.


Zu einer abstrakt richtigen geistigen Vorstellung, die der Programmatiker zu verkünden hat, muß sich die praktische Erkenntnis des Politikers gesellen. So muß sich ein ewiges Ideal als Leitstern einer Menschheit leider damit abfinden, die Schwächen dieser Menschheit zu berücksichtigen, um nicht an der allgemeinen menschlichen Unzulänglichkeit von vornherein zu scheitern. Zum Erforscher der Wahrheit hat sich der Kenner der Volkspsychose zu gesellen, um aus dem Reiche des Ewig-Wahren und Idealen das menschlich Mögliche für kleine Sterbliche herauszuholen und Gestalt werden zu lassen.

The memory of the Nationalsozialismus is a psychosis for at least the german people today. It is connected to destroyed lives, destroyed cities and a destroyed moral.

The ideology of the morally decadence will rule as long as enough prosperity is there as the foundation of decadence. But if the opposition is strong less prosperity less will be enough to lead to a regime change. Some kind of populism is the way to go. Using the swasitka looks in the eyes of the people like the wish to kill jews and to fight a world war again, what is a psychosis for them. Someone who just says he will stop immigration and to dispose Turks in Anatolia will have more success.

Using symbols loathed by the society will also attract people who loathe the society more than anything else. There was a hardcore-vegan once in this forum calling himself a Nationalsozialist, who cried some years later about the bad Nazis. To much persons within the followers, who just want to express their loathing to the society, aren't good.

velvet
Saturday, September 2nd, 2017, 07:09 AM
It works the same for nationalists, but it's not a good thing for us: Charlottesville certainly lures more undesirables and loonies to the alt-right at the expense of our message reaching the masses - street fights never accomplish much. The far right already understood this back in 1990 when nationalists decided to end the battle for the streets because it was pretty pointless, giving the hard left free reign over the streets. Instead nationalists decided to invest in political parties and when the internet came about, the strategy shifted again.

In what political parties? The unfortunately untrustworthy NPD? Great, ~0.5% party. The Reps? Do they even still exist? DVU? It's remnants merged with the NPD, didnt change a post-zero-bit on their results.

Not falling into your discussion with Spjaborg in general, but the bit about "street violence" and something to think about:
Despite that the Antifa / radical left vandalizes several cities each year (May 1st, but essentially on every occasion, the G20 summit, what have you), throws Molotov coctails at police etc pp, "their" parties (which is most of all the SPD!) do fairly well in elections. The RAF terrorism of the 70s/80s did not lead to a wholesale rejection of leftism, and the SPD now employs former RAF terrorists, the Greens still hold up their RAF advocate "lawyer" Ströbele, while the KPD was outlawed somewhen, the LINKE is allowed without anyone ever questioning their presence in the Bundestag... all the while leftist thugs roam the streets, beat up random people, promote "Bomber Harris do it again" on Dresden anniversary...

I'm still holding the opinion that if we had not backed down during reunification, the mood Germany had, that tiny small flower of a national consciousness, a mood in which asylum centers were burnt down and the people stood around and applauded, nationalism would not be as marginalised as it is now. Who's going to follow people who back down just because the media wails and points fingers? If we had stood strong... where would be today?

Yes, I do have hope that AfD will enter parliament in a spectacular manner. But it's too late, too little, and Petry being the biggest problem, as she's exactly that type who will try to adapt to the system (despite she has herself said otherwise on many occasions... and then is the first one who condemns Höcke when media point fingers at him) just to not offend anyone too harshly.

Gauland and Alice Weidel have eventually understood that backing down is not a solution. They've intensified their attack against Aydan Özoguz (SPD "integration" minister, only qualification: being Turkish, has two brothers who're linked to terrorism, says that there is no German culture etc), despite that media and left-radical politicians (and that explicitly includes politicians of the CDU, the entire "spectrum" of German politics is left-radical) throwing their textblocks of consternation around, mimimi racism. Weidel threw another attack against Merkel right behind that one, Merkel should be tried for treason. Never back down. You dont get rid off the image of an "evil, hating nazi" anyway anymore once you've been branded as such. The only way is forward. This is what we should finally understand.

Hauke Haien
Saturday, September 2nd, 2017, 07:15 AM
Since the Charlottesville debacle, a lot has been written about 'optics cucking' in American far right circles.
f6JREcGk4og
When they talk about "optics", they really mean an ideological purge of the sort that has led to our worthless anti-Islam, slow suicide parties. I think the Nordic Resistance Movement has a rather good grasp of aesthetics and symbols (Tiwaz and Ingwaz), or at least they have advanced greatly in that regard. Their uniforms are neat and they place a strong emphasis on physical power and fitness. In America, you mostly see disheveled fat guys holding my country's flag. The Nordic Resistance Movement promotes a Nordic form of neo-NS. You can find their website at Nordfront.se (https://www.nordfront.se) and if you like melodic Swedish voices, there are podcasts on Radio Nordfront (https://www.spreaker.com/user/radionordfront). Radio Regeringen (https://www.spreaker.com/user/radionordfront/radio-regeringen-79-ett-aar-med-radio-re) in Swedish and the Nordic Frontier (https://www.spreaker.com/user/radionordfront/nordic-frontier-32-the-nordic-days) in English.

QsC2mkkNkRE
https://www.proxfree.com

Theunissen
Saturday, September 2nd, 2017, 09:15 AM
It was a debacle, Spjabork. That's the general consensus amongst the American alt-right, all the more so amongst the talking heads. Not in the least Richard Spencer. And now Charlottesville has become an excuse to expand the repression against nationalists and to start a crackdown in the only public space we have or had a noteworthy presence, namely the interwebs.
....
That purge on the internet, seems to have had a longer preparation time. That means this wasn't the "trigger" for it, it just was a convenient culmination point to strike. Bear in mind several outlets independent of each other appear to have been hit in what seems to be a coordinated attack.

Chlodovech
Saturday, September 2nd, 2017, 10:00 AM
In what political parties? The unfortunately untrustworthy NPD? Great, ~0.5% party. The Reps? Do they even still exist? DVU? It's remnants merged with the NPD, didnt change a post-zero-bit on their results.

Vlaams Blok, Front National, B.N.P., etc. They all enjoyed a measure of success, either locally or on a national level. And like you said you Germans too experienced a brief revival of national consciousness after the reunification - there was little need for street violence ... but useless terror attacks tragically ruined the mood and the momentum. Several German nationalists I've spoken to over the years regret how events unfolded back then.

In the end these parliamentarian initiatives weren't successful, but in the mid nineties you could be forgiven for thinking something may be achieved after all.

The point is that running around with a swastika flag, larping, fighting with antifa and terrorism are dead ends. Parliamentarianism is a dead end too, of course. AfD is going to be a huge let down - even if they gained power through a miracle, they'd find themselves completely cornered and unable to change anything, just like Trump. Politicians aren't going to save us, we're gonna have to save ourselves. We must see to it that we're worth of saving, moreover.


Despite that the Antifa / radical left vandalizes several cities each year (May 1st, but essentially on every occasion, the G20 summit, what have you), throws Molotov coctails at police etc pp, "their" parties (which is most of all the SPD!) do fairly well in elections.

Antifa are anarchists though, not social-democrats, they don't have a party as such - but sure, they're funded and assisted by the SPD, the (deep) state/police, the media... and the media don't make any connection between antifa and its allies and overlords. So SPD has nothing to fear in this regard, antifa's violence doesn't have to bother them. We don't have that luxury. After Charlottesville every American rightwinger is suspect, but no leftist has to ever distance themselves from antifa.

And for all their violence, antifa is rarely lethal. And its murders that make headlines first and foremost. Our side is less violent but more lethal.

If 10 Germans peacefully come together to demonstrate for the national cause they are utterly wrecked by the media. That's the difference, Velvet. You can't ignore being powerless. The enemy rules, we're trying to survive.

I wouldn't compare our situation to that of the hard left at all. :-O The hard left is influential at the highest levels of political decision making in our countries, their agenda is put into practice by the mainstream parties.

All morals aside, it's super clever indeed to use a violent mob which can not be traced back to you - but that only works if you're already in charge of a country, otherwise it's pointless, especially for a vulnerable, not very numerous side like ourselves.


The RAF terrorism of the 70s/80s did not lead to a wholesale rejection of leftism.

What could be said about antifa can just as easily be said about the R.A.F.

Let's turn this around. German ethnonationalists were in power in the second half of the interbellum, Weimar degenerates had to go underground again. When you're the underdog you have to accept that you're the underdog and work according to a different set of rules.

In NS-Germany there were a few individual Germans who went after random Jews all by themselves - they were arrested, BTW - but it didn't lead to a rejection of national socialism either. Of course not!

A communist underdog set the Reichstag on fire and it led directly to a ban of the KPD... and that's exactly the issue here. If an alt-rightist sets Capitol Hill on fire it would be the end of the alt-right.

That's the difference between being the hammer and the anvil, between being in charge and being bossed around. Between dominating the institutions and the media - and lurking in the shadows. And our enemies are good at what they do too.


You dont get rid off the image of an "evil, hating nazi" anyway anymore once you've been branded as such. The only way is forward. This is what we should finally understand.

True, and that's why Richard Spencer stays far away from "nazism", he speaks of 'identity politics for white people' - and that's great in the American context. Of course we'll always be branded as "nazis" for demanding an ethnostate, regardless of what we do or say ... yet ordinary people may sympathize with the idea of the ethnostate. But if we act as Hollywood nazis all that potential is squandered though and nobody will support us. Everyone will ridicule us and no-one will take us seriously. Heck, I laugh at the larpers who try to alter their appearance to look like Hitler - they're never going to convince anyone but similarly insane people.

75% of Western Europeans think there are too many migrants - the question is how to gain their support. Not by running around with a swastika flag, that's for sure.

And you know I have no problem with NS, I'm just saying: use a different flag, that's all. Consider the identitarians - they came up with a nice logo.


When they talk about "optics", they really mean an ideological purge of the sort that has led to our worthless anti-Islam, slow suicide parties.

Optics cucking really just means no confederate battle flags and no Third Reich flags, Hauke - and not dressing up like a Hollywood nazi. We don't allow swastika avatars on Skadi either, that's optics cucking. We've been doing it forever ourselves.

We're not talking about a political party here, a movement just like a forum has the luxury of being capable of ideological purity. If the alt-right had been a political party then yes, I would be worried too now. But the alt-right is still the same radical movement it was a month ago. And as long as they stay far away from parliamentarianism they will never be less radical.

Hauke and Velvet, you guys wouldn't run around with a Third Reich flag at a political rally, would you? Well then... Because if someone does that it reveals one thing: that they don't take their ideals seriously and that they don't want to progress. And ordinary citizens know this. Such people should stick to cosplay. They're larpers, or they're probably just working for the government ... they may also be leftists trying to make us look bad.


I think the Nordic Resistance Movement has a rather good grasp of aesthetics and symbols (Tiwaz and Ingwaz), or at least they have advanced greatly in that regard.

Yes, agreed. That's exactly what I mean. It's great.

Hauke Haien
Saturday, September 2nd, 2017, 11:31 AM
Optics cucking really just means no confederate battle flags and no Third Reich flags, Hauke - and not dressing up like a Hollywood nazi. We don't allow swastika avatars on Skadi either, that's optics cucking. We've been doing it forever ourselves.

We're not talking about a political party here, a movement just like a forum has the luxury of being capable of ideological purity. If the alt-right had been a political party then yes, I would be worried too now. But the alt-right is still the same radical movement it was a month ago. And as long as they stay far away from parliamentarianism they will never be less radical.
No, there is currently a power struggle in preparation of yet another schism between people who want the Alt-Right to be about White Identity and fighting "leftists" and those who want to oppose and break Jewish power. You can observe this most readily in the YouTube and Twitter comments posted on the channels of popular personalities like the philosemitic Lauren Southern, the mongrel Tara McCarthy and many others, who have experienced sustained pressure for months now to speak out against the Jews, and only Tara McCarthy has half-heartedly obliged. The opposing side usually dismisses them as "Nazi trolls".

This mirrors to some extent the extreme hostility of the new Identitarians in Germany and Austria against other right-wing currents, usually revolving around the aggressive denouncement of counter-Judaism and NS Germany. These people believe that they can follow left-wing tactics like those described by Srdja Popovic and Gene Sharp and succeed like they did, not knowing that leftist revolutionaries were only ever the pawns and icebreakers of the Judaised power elite that enabled their victories. Given that Jews are the nervous system of the international elites, harming their position will throw the entire constellation into disarray. By only talking about nebulous "globalists", they turn the enemy power elite into a black box that resists internal analysis and without solid reconnaissance, and tactical procedures based on it, no war can be won.

The truth is that the Alt-Right will not survive in a thousand pieces, some of the factions will wither and die and end up being partially reabsorbed. That is how the entire movement will become more moderate over time, with the Alt-Light forming the largest bloc. Government action will certainly help along this process until the only remaining groups are once again entirely unaware what powers are systematically undermining them and hacking them apart.

Chlodovech
Saturday, September 2nd, 2017, 12:34 PM
No, there is currently a power struggle in preparation of yet another schism between people who want the Alt-Right to be about White Identity and fighting "leftists" and those who want to oppose and break Jewish power.

It's nothing new, that isn't optics cucking/cosmetics anymore, optics cucking is by definition not changing anything but the form and shape of the resistance, not the content. You're describing an unavoidable ideological clash about a minor but meaningful difference of opinion... we have this debate on Skadi too without any side overcoming the other, yet it's about Germanic identity here rather than white identity. I've never heard anyone speak of optics cucking in any other context than the one I mentioned, it's quite innocent. Either way, both groups are fine and are clearly not about enlightenment extremism or so-called islamophobia, neither would be welcomed by Geert Wilders. Both can stay ideologically pure.

I'm reading YT comments too, I know exactly what you're talking about - it seems to me you're speaking of the alt-right vs the alt-reich debate. It's not identitarians vs the hardest right as you see it in Germany. This is a very American thing - forget the German context, they don't even have that many Muslims in America, although there are more every single day. It's more like Velvet vs Spearbrave. :D It's racially aware libertarianism, Anglo nationalism, Anglo supremacism vs people who are red pilled on the J.Q. and national socialists no doubt. Of course there are overlaps.

These are people who in some ways are more than a decade behind us, we were very avant gardistic then.


That is how the entire movement will become more moderate over time, with the Alt-Light forming the largest bloc. Government action will certainly help along this process until the only remaining groups are once again entirely unaware what powers are systematically undermining them and hacking them apart.

And yet the alt-lite can't do without the alt-right, all the high quality content and memes come from the alt-right. So does the alt-lite inspiration. that's how, for instance, the alt-lite is aware of "race and I.Q'.

I don't think there will be moderation on any side any time soon because there's no practical reason for it. It's not necessary. The alt-right/alt-reich and all its subdivisions don't have to be unified, not for now at least.

Theunissen
Saturday, September 2nd, 2017, 02:50 PM
Vlaams Blok, Front National, B.N.P., etc. They all enjoyed a measure of success, either locally or on a national level. And like you said you Germans too experienced a brief revival of national consciousness after the reunification - there was little need for street violence ... but useless terror attacks tragically ruined the mood and the momentum. Several German nationalists I've spoken to over the years regret how events unfolded back then.

In the end these parliamentarian initiatives weren't successful, but in the mid nineties you could be forgiven for thinking something may be achieved after all.
I'd agree, party-politics didn't achieve anything above zero. The only value was probably entertainment and retardation on what the left was pushing for. But ultimately the left and status-quo parties/"elites" were unhindered with this. It was the same in South Africa with the "right" parties like HNP, KP, Freedom Front. Their "success" isn't measurable. The money wasted can probably be counted in some way. It's a several digit million figure. And then I didn't count the man-hours put in by activists.



The point is that running around with a swastika flag, larping, fighting with antifa and terrorism are dead ends. Parliamentarianism is a dead end too, of course. AfD is going to be a huge let down - even if they gained power through a miracle, they'd find themselves completely cornered and unable to change anything, just like Trump. Politicians aren't going to save us, we're gonna have to save ourselves. We must see to it that we're worth of saving, moreover.
....

I'd agree to some extent. Street brawls attracts a special kind of character: disgruntled, immature and probably not much to lose. Hostile media is going to have a field day with this, especially, if it's garnished with symbols they can vilify. And lets face it, for a big part such "violent events" are managed by so-called intelligence services. After all with such "threats" they can justify inflated budgets for their departments and gain career opportunities for their skills that aren't that much in demand otherwise.

From my birds-eye perspective I'd give more points to the AfD than to the other "rightist" parties on the European scene. At average they contain knowledgeable, socially skilled people that can make convincing arguments for their goals of essentially preserving Germany. I doubt they'll be successful the parliamentary way, though. However this may act to mobilize a larger number of Germans who are politically "homeless" at the moment, for whatever that's worth.

The thing is that, while Germany or other European countries for that matter have the pretenses of Freedom and Democracy, all institutions that matter for power are in the hands of people that are either hostile or submissive to indifferent towards those that are hostile.

Cultural Marxist or Postmodern leftists have the sway over universities. Perhaps not all professors are committed to that ideology, but even if they aren't, virtually none of them speaks out against it. The universities are the place where 99% of future (or present) elites are (or were) educated. That's the profs themselves, but also journalists, teachers, preachers and those with some say in civil society.

Media, Publishers, civil associations are infected by what is taught there. And even if you find journalists or teachers that disagree, they are or feel alone among their colleagues and will be rather careful to speak out, since that may have consequences for their positions.

Dissent has been banned onto "the right", which has been vilified over decades with the imagery of Auschwitz created by leftists and their collaborators. Of all that Germany's enemies had in stock against Germany, Reeducation seems to be the most successful project of them all. But me thinks this was exactly the one all other projects required to be implemented as well.

Spjabork
Saturday, September 2nd, 2017, 06:39 PM
But if we act as Hollywood nazis all that potential is squandered though and nobody will support us.
Wait a minute! In which respect whatsoever has the Charlottesville incident to do with Hollywood nazis?? Where did you even get the idea to mention the two things in one breath? One guy rolled over a woman with his car -- and this was a "Hollyood nazi"?? Are you serious?

Everyone will ridicule us
Yes. And as "everyone" is already doing it, so you don't have to help. That would set you apart from "everyone", by the way.

Optics cucking really just means no confederate battle flags and no Third Reich flags,
Again an interesting equation.

and not dressing up like a Hollywood nazi.
The guy who rolled over that woman was not dressed up in that way. So, strictly speaking, and visibly obvious for every observer, he had nothing to do with someone who might have been dressed up in this way, and was there.

We don't allow swastika avatars on Skadi either, that's optics cucking. We've been doing it forever ourselves.
I do clearly remember that when I joined Skadi, that is in 2006, swastika signs and flags were allowed, even as indication of nationality, and quite few Skadi members used and posted them. And as to my knowledge, under United States law, which applies to the Skadi board solely, the swastika was then, and is still now, not forbidden to show or display.

What is going on on a forum is decided by the forum owner. So that leaves only one possible conclusion: within the past 11 years, the forum owner either has turned outspokenly opposed to that symbol himself, or he has been intimidated, or outright threatened by someone.

The Aesthete
Saturday, September 2nd, 2017, 07:37 PM
I was thinking yes, then I thought the Celtic cross is considered by many as an extreme symbol and the media will only vilify whatever new symbols anyway.

Dagna
Saturday, September 2nd, 2017, 09:33 PM
Should the nationalists renounce "stereotypical" imagery? I believe the following photographic material speaks for itself:

https://www.thesun.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/2017/04/nintchdbpict000316359106.jpg?strip=all&w=960

https://ssl.c.photoshelter.com/img-get2/I0000mTMMXH7uoTQ/fit=1000x750/Neo-Nazi-Rally60.jpg

http://d3i6fh83elv35t.cloudfront.net/newshour/wp-content/uploads/2015/06/RTR3NLCN-1024x721.jpg

https://localtvwtvr.files.wordpress.com/2017/08/gettyimages-810893610.jpg?quality=85&strip=all&w=770&strip=all

https://farm5.static.flickr.com/4139/4924488254_9ac66d6b0f_b.jpg

http://media.gettyimages.com/photos/white-supremacist-neonazi-group-the-national-socialist-movement-hold-picture-id539905654

https://thenypost.files.wordpress.com/2017/03/170303-mister-hitler-name-feature.jpg?quality=90&strip=all&w=642

http://i.dailymail.co.uk/i/pix/2013/05/13/article-2323883-19C26FC6000005DC-846_964x635.jpg

https://hungaryansforsatanexposed.files.wordpres s.com/2014/11/herrington2002and_his_oldguard.jpg

http://www.iranpoliticsclub.net/photos/nazi-girls4/images/Neo%20Nazi%20Girl%20Leader.jpg

https://yooniqimages.blob.core.windows.net/yooniqimages-data-storage-resizedimagefilerepository/Detail/22145/09e3b9cc-4e0e-4ae8-8805-cffd4cb49ae4/YooniqImages_221458743.jpg

Do we want to look like Germanic preservationists or do we want to look like some comical image in tabloid newspapers? There is your answer. We need less degenerate, ultra-tattooed, smelly & uneducated white power/skinheads and more decent, hard-working, responsible Germanics.


You know, we must show them that we are still there. If we get no attention, then "they" will not even reckon with us anymore. And we will get down the drain faster, not slower.
"You" as in national socialists, I presume? The only attention you would be getting in Germany is that of the authorities. You may also appear in the news, "neo-nazis arrested for xyz", but that would hardly cause an uproar with the populace since it is nothing new. This "any publicity is good publicity" mantra is a myth used by tabloid celebrities and exhibitionists like the self-proclaimed troll Andrew Anglin and misogynist Jew weev, to justify their ostentatious nature. In fact, sometimes it is wiser to stay put, than to stand out in a lowbrow, obtrusive kind of way (Si tacuisses...)

European neo-nazis seem to believe that the only thing holding their success down is the fact that national socialist groups and imagery were outlawed. In my county, however, neo-nazis can freely associate and express themselves through their symbols, yet most people still do not take them seriously. Neo-nazis tried the desperate strategy of door-to-door solicitation to recruit people but they got the doors slammed in their faces. The way you present your message does matter. If you are going to hand out flyers to promote your message with nazi flags, "the eternal Jew" or "evil dark men", people are going to perceive you negatively, that you want to destabilize the country and reign through terror/violence. And acting like a violent left-wing extremist thug will not help you either, since you are not in the same position and not up against the same things.

If nationalists are going to appeal to the the average person, then they need to touch on topics that really speak to them (e.g. the economy). People are not going to rally against "the Jews". Speak against banks plunging citizens into debts, against the Federal Reserve, Hollywood, etc. and people are maybe more likely to identify with some of the concerns and lend an ear. And yes you do need to appeal to average people. Regardless if you choose the way of campaigning for elections or another way, whichever that is, you are going to need the people, logistics, and funds.

So be smart and if you are going to imitate the left, imitate those concepts which would not mean placing you into an even more negative light and reinforce stereotypes. Proud racists and neo-nazis are not going to get public sympathy so Germanic preservationists should ditch those stereotypes.


I do clearly remember that when I joined Skadi, that is in 2006, swastika signs and flags were allowed, even as indication of nationality, and quite few Skadi members used and posted them. And as to my knowledge, under United States law, which applies to the Skadi board solely, the swastika was then, and is still now, not forbidden to show or display.

What is going on on a forum is decided by the forum owner. So that leaves only one possible conclusion: within the past 11 years, the forum owner either has turned outspokenly opposed to that symbol himself, or he has been intimidated, or outright threatened by someone.
Interesting that you are bringing this up, as this is a perfect example as to why Germanic preservationists should renounce neo-nazi imagery.

The 2007 "Big Schism" was quite likely related. Perhaps Skadi owners realized it was counterproductive and not going with the times, perhaps they did so for legal reasons, or perhaps they decided to mold the community closer to their personal beliefs (Skadi owner is an admirer of Stauffenberg and a critic of nazism.) Either way, I applaud the decision.

Fellow "Thiazianer" have learned the hard way that the use of neo-nazi and white power motives is a suicidal strategy, such groups and organizations ultimately get banned or shut down. It is not a matter of "if", but of "when". Using such imagery is the equivalent of baking a pie and then throwing it later down the toilet. It is counterproductive to nationalism and Germanic preservation. Something German neo-nazis do not understand is that the "US law" is not going to save them if they break their own. They can still be pursued by their authorities and sites hosted in the US catering to a German audience or breaking the German law can still be shut down, even if not directly/officially because of those reasons.

Why don't you ask Thiazi administrator WPMP3 if he still advises proudly displaying swastikas as a badge for Germanic ideology? How is sitting behind bars and getting a criminal record conducive to Germanic preservation? Or ask this Austrian neo-nazi (https://www.thelocal.at/20150928/nine-month-conditional-sentence-for-nazi-posting), who was sentenced for posting neo-nazi content on Thiazi. As one can read in the article, Thiazi was an attraction to young rebels or introverted society outcasts who wanted to fit in somewhere, and they delved into neo-nazism to "fit in". Hundreds of cases of young German men being sent behind bars. Instead of building a CV, they build criminal records and turn into the jobless, uneducated stereotype. Is this what we should teach our Germanic youth? Punished neo-nazis are more likely to reject Germanic preservation, even if only publicly, and instead support anti-Germanicism, to prove that they have "moved on".

Some of Thiazi's staff members did not live their offline lives the neo-nazi way. Some of them were actually part of anti-racist organizations and leading "double lives". As long a Germanic preservation is something people find shameful or not worthy to wear as a badge outside of online fora, it is never going to help the Germanic folk advance. Germanic online communities should not be places one can't surf from a library and has to constantly look over their shoulder. Germanics have to ditch stereotypical symbolism and adopt positive images, which they are not reluctant to display offline.

Conclusion: if you want to be a Germanic preservationist, even a neo-nazi in the year 2017, you will want to ditch the swastika, Hitler and Third Reich imagery and adopt something else.

Or perhaps, you have some different, ulterior reason why you would like Skadi members to toy with national socialist imagery.

Spjabork
Saturday, September 2nd, 2017, 09:56 PM
Conclusion:
You posted a lot of idiotic photographs, some of them quite obviously fabricated on demand. I can only say: I do not look like anyone on these products. I do look very smart and handsome in SS uniform. :)

if you want to be a Germanic preservationist, even a neo-nazi
I do not "want to be" a "Germanic preservationist", but I am a Germanic - stop. Some may not like this, some may not like me, some may not like me being this -- I give half a XXXX for them. :)

And what a "neo-nazi" must do, if he "wants to be one", you hardly can tell him.

you will want to ditch the swastika, Hitler and Third Reich imagery and adopt something else.
And what would that be? The Stars'n'Stripes? Forget it. Or perhaps the inverted blue triangles? You can wear them. I will not. Everyone who sees us will know who stands for what.

Or perhaps, you have some different, ulterior reason why you would like Skadi members to
Oh yes, I have. My "ulterior reason" in this special case is, I just want to uphold freedom of speech. Because this is really a precious good. To every Germanic man.

You know: without freedom of speech, life on earth is only half as worth. ;)

It astonishes me that I must tell this to a "classical liberal".

Chlodovech
Saturday, September 2nd, 2017, 10:18 PM
Wait a minute! In which respect whatsoever has the Charlottesville incident to do with Hollywood nazis??

Have you any clue as to who was there? Did you look at the pictures of the event? Most attendees were decent, but the dregs or agent provocateurs came out in Charlottesville and the media focused on them.


Yes. And as "everyone" is already doing it, so you don't have to help. That would set you apart from "everyone", by the way.

I'm giving hints, that's all. But certainly, if you dress up as a confederate soldier or go to a nationalist march in full KKK outfit, then that's pretty silly. Of course it is ridiculous.


The guy who rolled over that woman was not dressed up in that way. So, strictly speaking, and visibly obvious for every observer, he had nothing to do with someone who might have been dressed up in this way, and was there.

Who cares. Who said he was a larper? Not me. Charlottesville was a debacle because of /our guys/ playing dress up AND the dead and wounded counterdemonstrators.


I do clearly remember that when I joined Skadi, that is in 2006, swastika signs and flags were allowed, even as indication of nationality, and quite few Skadi members used and posted them.

You're mistaken, swastika avaters weren't allowed back in 2006 or before that.

Norman Pride
Saturday, September 2nd, 2017, 10:22 PM
What was exactly the debacle? That was no debacle at all. Now for example, now also people in Germany know, that there is real opposition also in USA, which Germans didn't know before! Up to before Charlottesville, all the Germans, no matter which "orientation" were under the impression that all Americans are the same, that you can forget about all of them so there is no hope. Now there is hope. And that is a good thing.
Hope for what exactly?

You could say that there was some hope when people voted for Trump, as it showed a mass dissatisfaction with the system. Nationalism and conservatism became more mainstream, less taboo. No, I didn't expect Trump to be any different than your typical politician, however his election was symbolic because now nationalists/conservatives/the alt-right were represented on a political level. There was an important public figure who was at least partially acted as a voice for them. As someone here said before, I believe it was Wyrd if I'm not mistaken, it's totally different when you have an official representative. In reality, objectively, a leader or government isn't better just because he is in that position, however people tend to see ideologies that are represented by them in a more positive light, or viceversa e.g. many people condemn neo-nazism because it's illegal, drugs because they're illegal and so on. So now with an alt-right president, regular people started to associate with it more openly, to find it more appealing. It wasn't just a bunch of misfits anymore. Nationalists proved to be civilised enough to stop talking about RaHoWa and take the electoral ways, gain the sympathy of the average people.

But nationalism was still not overwhelmingly supported, it was just slowly making its way back to public opinion. Small, baby step progress. It was not strong enough to afford an event like Charlottesville. Trump still only had the support of only about half his nation. Charlottesville was a tactical move, which destroyed his popularity and that of the alt right even further. Without Charlottesville, sites like the Daily Stormer, Vanguard America and Stormfront would have probably still been online. Charlottesville turned nationalism back into a fringe ideology associated with violent people, race war shouters and sociopathic people with criminal tendencies. It is probably going to take a long time to repair this damage.

Huginn ok Muninn
Saturday, September 2nd, 2017, 10:31 PM
You posted a lot of idiotic photographs, some of them quite obviously fabricated on demand. I can only say: I do not look like anyone on these products. I do look very smart and handsome in SS uniform. :)

Let's examine the word "uniform" for a minute. It means "of one format," meaning an identical suit of clothes which all members of a large group wear to distinguish themselves as part of that group.

https://thenypost.files.wordpress.com/2017/03/170303-mister-hitler-name-feature.jpg?quality=90&strip=all&w=642

This is one guy... not a group. One guy wearing a uniform looks like a fool already, because it's not a uniform now... it's a costume. Add to that the inevitable swastika tattoo and the total seriousness with which he takes his little role-playing game, and this person simply looks like he has mental problems. How does this help our cause?


Oh yes, I have. My "ulterior reason" in this special case is, I just want to uphold freedom of speech. Because this is really a precious good. To every Germanic man.

You know: without freedom of speech, life on earth is only half as worth. ;)

It astonishes me that I must tell this to a "classical liberal".
Sure, you have free speech, and you can use it to help a cause you claim to believe in, or to bring ridicule down upon that cause. Which will it be?

The thing about free speech in a society where Jews have a near monopoly on mainstream media is that some people's speech is more free than others. Where they have 1000 TV stations making you look like an idiot, you just have yourself trying to explain why you're standing there in a uniform from some bygone era, having never been a member of this fighting force yourself. You can't. You'll always look like a pitiable fellow with a mental age of 9 playing army.

Theunissen
Sunday, September 3rd, 2017, 12:08 AM
Let's examine the word "uniform" for a minute. It means "of one format," meaning an identical suit of clothes which all members of a large group wear to distinguish themselves as part of that group.

https://thenypost.files.wordpress.com/2017/03/170303-mister-hitler-name-feature.jpg?quality=90&strip=all&w=642

This is one guy... not a group. One guy wearing a uniform looks like a fool already, because it's not a uniform now... it's a costume. Add to that the inevitable swastika tattoo and the total seriousness with which he takes his little role-playing game, and this person simply looks like he has mental problems. How does this help our cause?
It's not wrong only one person wearing a uniform, but at least look need in it;).

Of course you are right that uniforms purpose is to signal people belonging to a group distinguishable from others. Additional a uniform may convey rank of the person earning it. Rank that needs to be earned in the first place. Same applies to medals. I recall meetings with people wearing WW2 or NS-regalia. Among this were Iron Crosses and other medals. I found this kind of obscene, reminded me a bit of Blacks wearing uniform pieces, or wires with glas pieces in it to emulate White men's glasses:D.

The best part is men wearing mother's crosses, apparently not knowing what those medals were.





Sure, you have free speech, and you can use it to help a cause you claim to believe in, or to bring ridicule down upon that cause. Which will it be?

The thing about free speech in a society where Jews have a near monopoly on mainstream media is that some people's speech is more free than others. Where they have 1000 TV stations making you look like an idiot, you just have yourself trying to explain why you're standing there in a uniform from some bygone era, having never been a member of this fighting force yourself. You can't. You'll always look like a pitiable fellow with a mental age of 9 playing army.

Indeed like a Mardi Gras costume competition. And those dudes are just play acting, which makes it a charade, playing just the role hostile media will use to further stereo-type. Well, I'm not saying that the media does do a fair portrayal. They don't, they'll just pick the most despicable photos from a meeting. So at least we shouldn't make it easy for them. Wear something need to meetings. Or at least something that looks ordinary and relaxed. Something that a larger portion of society with some good standing would easily be able to identify with.

I recall the NASPES media's tactic against Conservatives in South Africa during the 1980s. They tried to play the status game. Implying that more "enlightened" Whites were people of education and good social standing, while Conservatives were uneducated losers. This wasn't entirely true, of course, but it was easy to create that image. Some of the liberals had high positions in Business, Government or Academia. Put them into the limelight when writing positive articles. When attending "to the right" simply ignore all the exemplary middle class people and focus on some badly dressed drunk guy at a meeting or pick out some outlandish looking old lady in unfashionable clothing. You'll always find people that fit your desired profile and certain people will even pay some dudes to play the desired role for them.

Personally I think we should be dressed at public meetings in neat clothing or even in either artistic way (I think of German Tracht, or baroque type of dresses). Highly handsome business suits would also be an option. And then there is always the possibility that you can come up with something original that will leave a good impression on people.

Chlodovech
Sunday, September 3rd, 2017, 12:29 AM
I was thinking yes, then I thought the Celtic cross is considered by many as an extreme symbol and the media will only vilify whatever new symbols anyway.

Yes, the media will always attack us no matter what. However, this is not about convincing the media or staunch adversaries (which is impossible), but normies. Normal Anglo-American people. The optics cucking is done for them.

Even christian democrats come up with a new logo every ten years or so, American ethnonationalists can do it too.

It would be infinitely better if ethnonationalists purely used American imagery in the states - a sea of American flags - now that is something the average American may love to see. It would be a much more positive message. And instead of swastikas or black suns painted on shields, why not use the colors of the American flag on every piece of material people bring to the demos?

Dagna
Sunday, September 3rd, 2017, 02:12 AM
You posted a lot of idiotic photographs, some of them quite obviously fabricated on demand. I can only say: I do not look like anyone on these products. I do look very smart and handsome in SS uniform. :)
The KKK and NSM88 are legal and official white supremacist/neo-nazi organizations. But if these are not "true national socialists", as neo-nazis usually say when confronted with a stereotype, if this image is wrong, then you are free to rehabilitate it. I invite you to post pictures of these so-called smart and handsome neo-nazis and let others be the judge. Someone from the year 2017 in a nazi uniform, whom the average person would take seriously. Thank you.


I do not "want to be" a "Germanic preservationist", but I am a Germanic - stop. Some may not like this, some may not like me, some may not like me being this -- I give half a XXXX for them. :)

And what a "neo-nazi" must do, if he "wants to be one", you hardly can tell him.
If being Germanic was enough, Germanics would not be in the situation that they are. The future of Germanics matters as much if not more than the present. Germanic heritage continues through physical preservation, on the one hand, i.e. having Germanic children, and through cultural/spiritual preservation, on the other hand, passing on and teaching them Germanic values. Yet costume nazis do not even that, but cast a shadow and stigma on this future.


And what would that be? The Stars'n'Stripes? Forget it. Or perhaps the inverted blue triangles? You can wear them. I will not.
Yes, for Americans, our flag would be a positive symbol, connected to our history and values. Our nation was built on independence and our flag represents the birth of our nation and unifies us. A swastika does not. You would need a symbol that appeals to the average person, is family friendly (since you do not only want to appeal to skinhead thugs and costume nazis), does not require indoctrination and fanaticism to appreciate and doesn't attract too much public stigma. April Gaede dressed her daughters up in Hitler shirts and taught them about the superiority of blond hair and blue eyes, they now dress in modern clothes and dye their hair in all colors of the rainbow.


Everyone who sees us will know who stands for what.
Indeed. I invite you to make a practical experiment yourself. Go with your uniform and symbols to any place where you can find Germanics, and ask random people what comes to their minds.


Oh yes, I have. My "ulterior reason" in this special case is, I just want to uphold freedom of speech. Because this is really a precious good. To every Germanic man.

You know: without freedom of speech, life on earth is only half as worth. ;)

It astonishes me that I must tell this to a "classical liberal".
And it astonishes me that neo-nazis and white supremacists cannot comprehend that "freedom of speech" does not equate freedom from consequences. Freedom of speech means you have the right to espouse your views without interference from the government. That's all. So you can wave your swastika flag and wear your uniform in public places, but you can, and most likely will still be ridiculed for it. Others also have right to freedom of speech. Concerned Germanics use their own freedom of speech and warn others about the consequences of stereotypical exhibitionism.

Hauke Haien
Sunday, September 3rd, 2017, 03:44 AM
It would be infinitely better if ethnonationalists purely used American imagery in the states - a sea of American flags - now that is something the average American may love to see. It would be a much more positive message. And instead of swastikas or black suns painted on shields, why not use the colors of the American flag on every piece of material people bring to the demos?
I assume some just do not want to pledge allegiance to the flag of the United States of America, and to the republic for which it stands. One could argue that the republic does not represent any ethnic identity but only displaced the ethnic identities then present in the American colonies at the time of its foundation. Or perhaps they just reject America altogether.

HmG1-gPpxnE
German/Austrian Identitarians either use the flag of their organisation (https://www.reddit.com/r/vexillology/comments/6sig7v/the_identitarian_flag/) or regional flags in preference over both Black-Red-Gold (seen on occasion) and the NS flag (never). One thing they can be praised for is their impeccable sense of aesthetics, although they have toned it down with their clothes in recent years in order to seem more accessible to common folk. But I think that one should dress to impress. Hollywood offers some advice in that regard:

pjKFIim6Gj8

velvet
Sunday, September 3rd, 2017, 08:03 AM
Vlaams Blok, Front National, B.N.P., etc. They all enjoyed a measure of success, either locally or on a national level.

Ehm, hasnt the BNP been dissolved?
Netherlands failed to get Wilders into parliament too, guess FN is the only party that made it sort of into the mainstream^^



And like you said you Germans too experienced a brief revival of national consciousness after the reunification - there was little need for street violence ... but useless terror attacks tragically ruined the mood and the momentum. Several German nationalists I've spoken to over the years regret how events unfolded back then.

Of course it is regrettable, but it's what I mean. There have been people acting on their own, and "we" back down due to the media hype made about it and let that momentum of national consciousness been taken away from us. Because there were then people who said that we have to keep our feet still for a while. That "while" was 25 years ago! Instead of keeping our demand for a Germany for Germans alive and running. We silenced ourselves most of all. And because "we" backed down, no one followed us either, because people didnt even know anymore that there probably were people to follow.




The point is that running around with a swastika flag, larping, fighting with antifa and terrorism are dead ends. Parliamentarianism is a dead end too, of course. AfD is going to be a huge let down - even if they gained power through a miracle, they'd find themselves completely cornered and unable to change anything, just like Trump. Politicians aren't going to save us, we're gonna have to save ourselves. We must see to it that we're worth of saving, moreover.

If we want to save ourselves, we eventually will have to fight.
We are already in war, the problem is that only one side obviously is aware of that fact. Just saying...



Antifa are anarchists though, not social-democrats, they don't have a party as such - but sure, they're funded and assisted by the SPD

They are part of JuSos, the youth organisation of SPD, they're funded by SPD.
The SPD was behind the Antifa in 1920 just as they are behind it today.



the (deep) state/police, the media... and the media don't make any connection between antifa and its allies and overlords. So SPD has nothing to fear in this regard, antifa's violence doesn't have to bother them. We don't have that luxury. After Charlottesville every American rightwinger is suspect, but no leftist has to ever distance themselves from antifa.

Why not? Because we are silent, we dont point fingers at that point. We should force the associated political parties to take responsibility for their street activists, just as they point fingers at us for a lone idiot. We should learn to reject that brandmarking, too.

Murders by leftists
https://bibliolinx.wikispaces.com/Todesopfer+linker+Gewalt

and that's just what made it into the "official narrative" of a deed. 65 killed since 1990. Kills by right-wing (excluding the murders by NSU): uh, 5.

More lethal? Really?



If 10 Germans peacefully come together to demonstrate for the national cause they are utterly wrecked by the media. That's the difference, Velvet. You can't ignore being powerless. The enemy rules, we're trying to survive.

We will not survive if we bend over backwards on every occasion.



A communist underdog set the Reichstag on fire and it led directly to a ban of the KPD... and that's exactly the issue here. If an alt-rightist sets Capitol Hill on fire it would be the end of the alt-right.

I was not talking about the ban of KPD during NS, but that post-war one in the 1960s/early 70s or so.

It was the violent street "protests" that led to the ban, and likewise it led to a widespread infiltration of mainstream politics by the far-left. Suddenly Ohnesorg became a hero, just a few weeks earlier politicians(!) wanted to end the leftist madness with tanks rolling the scum down. And today we have a chancellor that was the hopeful of SED's "agitation and propaganda" wing. Germany wasnt "leftist" in the 70s, and even not in the 80s, Germany was still anti-communist. Tell me again where violence failed to change that "old" Germany. The left was not in charge, the left was not even close to being in charge.


That's the difference between being the hammer and the anvil, between being in charge and being bossed around. Between dominating the institutions and the media - and lurking in the shadows. And our enemies are good at what they do too.

Yes, they are. But we failed to stop them, we failed to point fingers at them for everything that is wrong with their ideology.
Why? Why did we silence ourselves?



75% of Western Europeans think there are too many migrants - the question is how to gain their support. Not by running around with a swastika flag, that's for sure.

And you know I have no problem with NS, I'm just saying: use a different flag, that's all. Consider the identitarians - they came up with a nice logo.



Yes, Swedish resistance movement is that shining example to follow, I'm saying that for years.

And I'm not advocating street violence, but I advocate presence in the streets, and in that manner Resistance Movement is doing it. They came up with their own imagery, which btw is right away identifiable as NS-derived, they also go down streets shouting Sieg Heil (hell seger) and bring the peaceful neighboorhood multikult via a truck loaded with boxes and on full volume a muezin shouting like there was a minaret and stuff, at 5 in the morning, then ringing bells and ask people how they like their new neighbors ( :thumbup :D ). They are NOT restrained about their ideology, they dont make a secret of it and they are not denying it either. And they're present in the streets, doing a lot of activism, and always in their neat uniforms. :)

Indeed a movement to learn from.

The Identitarian movement formerly used a Rune too, their logo was reworked however. The IB is linked to the "institute for state's politics" residing in Schnellroda, a right-wing think tank. We are not as powerless as we think we are, Chlod. We have newspapers, we have think tanks, we have several street activist movements, why are we still thinking we'd have nothing?


Optics cucking really just means no confederate battle flags and no Third Reich flags, Hauke - and not dressing up like a Hollywood nazi. We don't allow swastika avatars on Skadi either, that's optics cucking. We've been doing it forever ourselves.

Doing street protests in Germany with a Third Reich flag? Yes, that would be utterly stupid, I totally agree. I also agree to the wanna-be Hitler clowns and all that other freak stuff. Apart from that it is illegal, it's also just a clownshow.

Using the confederate flag in America is an entirely different thing, however. It's not outlawed, it's not illegal, and until like 2 years ago it wasnt a "symbol of hate" either.

Dear Americans, point fingers at the hate organisation SPLC, use all the channels you have to make people aware that this is no official state institution but an entirely private club of anti-American, white-hating leftist thugs, who somehow managed to get heared and listened to. Protest the demolishing of historic monuments, prevent the demolishing if you somehow can. Stop this insanity before the white house is painted brown or blown up because it's "racist".

This is what I mean, Chlod, we cant just bend over backwards each time they push harder than before due to an entirely blown up, exaggerated incident. Should Americans accept their history being trampled upon like this? I dont think so. Organise demonstrations in support of historical correctness. We Germans failed to do that, and today we get a new invented horror holocaust story every day. Do not back down. They wont stop just because the alt-right keeps their feet still for a while, they'll only push harder and tear down every monument they'll find.

HerrSchulze
Sunday, September 3rd, 2017, 10:33 AM
https://thenypost.files.wordpress.com/2017/03/170303-mister-hitler-name-feature.jpg?quality=90&strip=all&w=642

Freaks of nature, such as the gentleman above, unfortunately are in no shortage among so-called "National Socialist" groups. If not some dreg of society that goes shopping for eggs in his Chinese-made SS costume then some tattooed from head-to-toe "skinhead" with a criminal record that reads like an encyclopedia.

Unfortunately as it may be, the nature of National Socialism as a vilified and wholly socially unacceptable ideology is the force that draws these types to it. If they weren't out playing role-playing as members of officers from an extinct historic political party, they'd probably be typical sub-culture freaks with 50 piercings and green hair.

In my personal opinion, it is the usage of the prominent symbolism associated with the Third Reich that serves to draw these outcasts in. When Nationalists cease to project certain stereotypical imagery and focus more on actual ideology, this is just one step towards weeding out the undesirables that have no actual interest in or even the intellectual capacity to understand political ideologies to begin with.

Theunissen
Sunday, September 3rd, 2017, 11:36 AM
Freaks of nature, such as the gentleman above, unfortunately are in no shortage among so-called "National Socialist" groups. If not some dreg of society that goes shopping for eggs in his Chinese-made SS costume then some tattooed from head-to-toe "skinhead" with a criminal record that reads like an encyclopedia.
Sounds like those people would have spend a lot of time in concentration camps under Hitler. Hint, it wouldn't be as guards. So actually they are wearing the wrong uniform.



Unfortunately as it may be, the nature of National Socialism as a vilified and wholly socially unacceptable ideology is the force that draws these types to it. If they weren't out playing role-playing as members of officers from an extinct historic political party, they'd probably be typical sub-culture freaks with 50 piercings and green hair.
The irony is that, if you'd take the core tenets of National Socialism 80% of the people would probably agree with 90% of the key points. You'd just give it a more neutral wording, while preserving essential meaning.

But it's true. Those Hollywood Nazi types don't care about the ideas, they care about the emotional effects in that NS makes a lot of people scared or at least excited. And those people would use anything that would do that. Think of punks and satanist, I'd guess most of them also joined there for exactly those superficial reasons.



In my personal opinion, it is the usage of the prominent symbolism associated with the Third Reich that serves to draw these outcasts in. When Nationalists cease to project certain stereotypical imagery and focus more on actual ideology, this is just one step towards weeding out the undesirables that have no actual interest in or even the intellectual capacity to understand political ideologies to begin with.

Indeed. The symbolism is what draws attraction from people. And given that it attracts outcasts and low class types of people, it's also easy to funnel in informants and agent provocateurs.

Perhaps right-wing leaders shouldn't focus on mass recruitment at all and first on the education of a core group? Meaning some project planning management prior to executing the project could do first.

What I don't get is that even seemingly serious NS/Nationalist activists, parties etc. have no problem appealing to and including the Hollywood-Nazi-types. They don't try to be selective with whom they allow in or near their organisation. Well, they got a negative selection that way. In fact they often try to appeal to the left behind and downtrodden. I guess, because they can make quick wins they in members signing up. Since the emotional are easier to persuade than those thinking more rational, who'd actually be long-term committers once they're convinced.

Spjabork
Sunday, September 3rd, 2017, 06:13 PM
Hope for what exactly?
Oh, I can tell you this.

Up to before that so-called "incident", all the German people no matter of which direction, no matter whether they regretted or they welcomed it, all of them 100 percent thought, felt, and were absolutely sure that all white Americans are completely lost, that they are good for literally nothing anymore, except maybe for starting some stupid, final war somewhere, the "armageddon", on behalf of the jews.

Now, since the so-called "incident", all the German people and again no matter of which direction, no matter whether they regret or they welcome it, all of them 100 percent do know that what they assumed about white Americans obviously hasn't been so. AND THAT IS THE HOPE.

Did you get it now?

Yes, for Americans, our flag would be a positive symbol, connected to our history and values. Our nation was built on independence and our flag represents the birth of our nation and unifies us.
When I was little boy, I was -- as most healthy boys are -- interested in weapons. But especially I was interested in WW II weaponry. I collected photographs, I cut them out and glued them into notebooks. It struck me as a little boy that tanks and planes, often displayed a five-ragged star. Most of WW II photographs are black and white, so you can not tell the colors with certainty. I was puzzled and confused. Already I was versed in weapons and could tell by its shape whether a plane, or a tank was Russian or American. But to someone else, who was not so deep into the matter as I, it really must have been difficult to tell exactly whether a tank or a plane was bolshevik-russian, or "liberal"-american. The color of the star was red, or white. Yet the shape and the size of the star was the same.

Some time ago I accidently came accross that the German poet and novelist Ernst Jünger actually already in the early 1950s had pointed out, that in that war, WW II, Russian bolsheviks and American "liberals" fought against Germany united under the same symbol.

Norman Pride
Sunday, September 3rd, 2017, 08:05 PM
Oh, I can tell you this.

Up to before that so-called "incident", all the German people no matter of which direction, no matter whether they regretted or they welcomed it, all of them 100 percent thought, felt, and were absolutely sure that all white Americans are completely lost, that they are good for literally nothing anymore, except maybe for starting some stupid, final war somewhere, the "armageddon", on behalf of the jews.

Now, since the so-called "incident", all the German people and again no matter of which direction, no matter whether they regret or they welcome it, all of them 100 percent do know that what they assumed about white Americans obviously hasn't been so. AND THAT IS THE HOPE.

Did you get it now?
Do you have some figures to back this up or is it just a personal feeling?

I know that some people would like for that to be true, and I understand it, however I'm afraid the situation is not quite so simple. Anyway, you gave me an ambiguous/circular answer, aka there is hope because there is hope. Still, what does that hope translate to more specifically? If it has to do with the popularity of nationalism, as I assume it does, I already explained what the problem with Charlottesville was in the part of my post which you left out. Another possibility which needs to be considered is that Charlottesville was a false flag or even controlled opposition, made to create an illusion. Trump is probably also part of some sort of controlled opposition, or if he isn't, he was probably recruited, but at least Trump's position helped nationalism become more attractive and less taboo to the average person.

If those "Hollywood nazis" from the NSM88 are likely fabricated, why couldn't a website like the Daily Stormer also be? It fits many stereotypes, so it's a possibility.

Bleyer
Sunday, September 3rd, 2017, 09:12 PM
Symbols like the swastika are too loaded, not to mention illegal, so it wouldn't be a good strategy to use them to promote nationalist ideology. That said, we should also be careful not to fall into a slippery slope and avoid anything leftists and organisations like the ADL list as a hate symbol. To them, basically anything that has to do with being proud of our heritage and preserving it is considered hateful. I am not going to feel ashamed of my heritage and denounce it publicly just because anti-Germanics expect it.

Schmetterling
Sunday, September 3rd, 2017, 09:54 PM
I think symbolism should illustrate the core ideas of what nationalist groups are about and those which would reason most with the people. e.g. if you took the traditional family side of NS, or the environmentalism, or animal welfare, people would not be as repulsed by them as they would by the totalitarian or anti-Semitic part. The problem with using swastikas and Hitler portraits is that you marginalize yourself, and cater only to those who are already sympathetic or fascinated with NS, in addition to people who just want to rebel and be controversial for the sake of it, and who don't care about the principles but are only attracted to the scandalous part.

If you wear SS uniforms in 2017 and you are not involved in historical reenactment or museum-type preservation, you will be looked at as a freak, not only by the mainstream population, but even by other nationalists. The value of these symbols has changed overtime and displaying them again is not going to do much about that, it's much more complicated. To give value again to those symbols, you would need to have a different average mentality. So the premise that taking back "our" symbols would lead to an acceptance of Germanic preservation may not necessarily be true, rather the reverse - an acceptance of Germanic preservation would lead to the possibility to take back those symbols. It's not the symbols that are the priority rather what they symbolize. The same thing can be said in many different ways. We just need to find the right one.

Theunissen
Sunday, September 3rd, 2017, 10:23 PM
Hope for what exactly?

You could say that there was some hope when people voted for Trump, as it showed a mass dissatisfaction with the system. Nationalism and conservatism became more mainstream, less taboo. No, I didn't expect Trump to be any different than your typical politician, however his election was symbolic because now nationalists/conservatives/the alt-right were represented on a political level. There was an important public figure who was at least partially acted as a voice for them. As someone here said before, I believe it was Wyrd if I'm not mistaken, it's totally different when you have an official representative. In reality, objectively, a leader or government isn't better just because he is in that position, however people tend to see ideologies that are represented by them in a more positive light, or viceversa e.g. many people condemn neo-nazism because it's illegal, drugs because they're illegal and so on. So now with an alt-right president, regular people started to associate with it more openly, to find it more appealing. It wasn't just a bunch of misfits anymore. Nationalists proved to be civilised enough to stop talking about RaHoWa and take the electoral ways, gain the sympathy of the average people.
His election really wasn't what was that important, although it's a nice feat to anger liberals. The point was his civic-nationalism stance, reservations against unlimited immigration and talking political incorrect got him a substantial part of voters, sending a sign to a vast amount of people telling them that they are not alone in America.

That's btw. the reason the Left insists on the fact that he didn't win the "popular vote", since they are aware of exactly that. Their public reaction were however so pathetic that this was another win.

And I should two other important feats:
- He got the overwhelming support of White voters.
- The non-voters will tend more to political incorrectness, since the left always manages to mobilize more of their voters. Non-voters are more right-thinking people that just despise the Republicans almost as much as the Democrats (For their scheming, Israel-firsting and being overall cucks).



But nationalism was still not overwhelmingly supported, it was just slowly making its way back to public opinion. Small, baby step progress. It was not strong enough to afford an event like Charlottesville. Trump still only had the support of only about half his nation. Charlottesville was a tactical move, which destroyed his popularity and that of the alt right even further. Without Charlottesville, sites like the Daily Stormer, Vanguard America and Stormfront would have probably still been online. Charlottesville turned nationalism back into a fringe ideology associated with violent people, race war shouters and sociopathic people with criminal tendencies. It is probably going to take a long time to repair this damage.
Got to disagree. The taking down of WN-sites was a concerted effort that must have started at least several weeks before Charlottesville. The left now tries to score points with that woman that got hit by the car directly or indirectly, while blocking the road for ordinary traffic there.

On the positive side a lot of ordinary Americans will now be aware of what pathetic freaks the Antifa are. The majority of Americans won't be our model of WNs / Germanic preservationists, but they aren't to eager of a political correct utopia as envisioned by the left (and which ultimately will turn into a third-world shithole), neither.

Spjabork
Sunday, September 3rd, 2017, 10:38 PM
If you wear SS uniforms in 2017 and you are not involved in historical reenactment or museum-type preservation, you will be looked at as a freak,
I did not say that I do wear SS uniforms, I just said I look smart and handsome in them. Anybody who would see me in such uniform would certainly not think I am a "freak". Though it may well be that the trousers of some of them would be full.

not only by the mainstream population, but even by other nationalists.
This is mainly so because most people who do wear these uniforms do not fit into them.

Schmetterling
Sunday, September 3rd, 2017, 11:38 PM
No, that's not mainly why. It can fit your measurements, but it doesn't fit the picture, the overall scenario. It's because it is anachronical and out of style. Wearing a SS uniform in 2017 looks as weird as wearing a medieval armor. It can fit you like a glove, if you march the streets wearing it people will raise their eyebrows, and not in the good way. If you want to display some sort of uniform or military style, there are many ways to do it without drawing negative attention to yourself. Standing out for the sake of standing out is not always going to help you. Sure you need to stand out somehow, but not in a way that people can ridicule you. At the same time people must also feel that they can identify with you.

Identitarians and the alt right wear pretty regular, contemporary era-specific clothes, yet still express themselves through their style. If you want to display some sort of NS-related style, you can get a Hitler youth-inspired haircut and balance it with a print T-shirt, a leather jacket or black trench coat, to make a statement. Look at them, they have some elements that stand out yet they don't look like they just got out of a time machine, they wear dark/black clothes and their flags/shields, that's their "uniform".

https://i.imgur.com/qYW3BLS.jpg

They don't call themselves generation identitarian for nothing, they appeal to a generation. Some of them wear jeans, others suits, blazers, sweaters, jackets, just normal, typical clothes for their age category and the era we live in. The shields express some sort of warrior theme, which you can also use in some posters, to evoke some historical heritage/continuity, e.g.

http://americanfreepress.net/wp-content/uploads/2013/05/21_Euro-Identity-Movement.jpg

But not dress yourself up like that or use a symbol that is as loaded as a swastika or SS uniform is. The point is to mark yourself as part of a movement, but not in a way which you're also marking yourself off from the rest of the population in an exclusionary way.

Dagna
Monday, September 4th, 2017, 12:06 AM
Yes, Swedish resistance movement is that shining example to follow, I'm saying that for years.
The Nordic Resistance Movement is known as one of the most violent neo-nazi groups in Sweden.

Three Swedish men get jail for bomb attacks on asylum centers (https://www.reuters.com/article/us-sweden-attacks-verdict/three-swedish-men-get-jail-for-bomb-attacks-on-asylum-centers-idUSKBN19S1M5)

Suspected neo-Nazi gangs attack migrants in Sweden (https://www.timesofisrael.com/suspected-neo-nazi-gangs-attack-migrants-in-sweden/)

Neo-Nazis thugs warn of a 'year of violence' following attacks on child migrants at train station in Sweden (http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3426413/Neo-Nazis-warn-year-violence-following-attacks-child-migrants-train-station-Sweden.html)

Man with alleged Nazi links admits driving his car into a refugee demonstration in Malmö (https://www.thelocal.se/20170614/man-with-alleged-nazi-links-admits-driving-his-car-into-refugee-demonstration-in-malmo-sweden)

Swedish Police arrest 28 people after neo-Nazi attack (http://www.romea.cz/en/news/swedish-police-arrest-28-people-after-neo-nazi-attack)

Police on cyber-trail of Swedish neo-Nazi fugitive (https://www.thelocal.se/20140427/police-follow-cyber-trail-of-swedish-neo-nazi-fugitive)

Sweden: Racist murderer of immigrants gets life in prison (http://www.romea.cz/en/news/sweden-racist-murderer-of-immigrants-gets-life-in-prison)

etc.

These would be beyond "neat activism" or "presence in the streets", but you are correct in that they have no restraints about their ideology. In a 2009 report, Swedish security police said the organization's goal was to establish a totalitarian government through revolution. They found bombs, illegal weapons and ammunition. It is highly unlikely that this is going to happen however, since they have neither the sufficient numbers nor the logistics. However what is likely is that they are infiltrated for this reason.

Hauke Haien
Monday, September 4th, 2017, 04:41 AM
The Nordic Resistance Movement is known as one of the most violent neo-nazi groups in Sweden.
Yes, definitely. They also know how to stand their ground when attacked:
72oPFeGEXf4

It is highly unlikely that this is going to happen however, since they have neither the sufficient numbers nor the logistics. However what is likely is that they are infiltrated for this reason.
I do not think that there is a coordinated campaign of violence at this point, certainly not officially. The fact that they are infiltrated is completely unremarkable. The Identitarians are also "under observation", and therefore infiltrated, by domestic intelligence in most countries where they are active, and they are first and foremost a street theatre group. Petr Bystron, leader of AfD Bayern said that they are good boys who did not do nothing, so the Office for the Protection of the Constitution started spying on him as well. It is like a state seal of approval. In the US, infiltration is even more heavy and pervasive in order to misguide and destroy these groups. In combination with private lawsuits and corporate activism that is more than enough to compensate for freedom of speech or whatever it is called.

IWu26pijK-U

Sigurd
Monday, September 4th, 2017, 04:54 AM
Should we renounce 'stereotypical' imagery? It's not a question of 'should', it's a question of 'must'. We can always re-integrate some things we're more sad to see go when we're in a position to do so. :)

We must be looking neater and more dynamic than the rest. This includes clothing styles that can range from traditional to traditional-modern-mixed to modern clothing all via elegant clothing, but can never include 'scene' type of attire. This includes finding our own symbols that appear like something 'new' - heck, cabinet ministers are founding 'new' movements and winning elections on this trick - let's make this work for us in our every day activism. ;)

I wish it was otherwise, but content alone doesn't win anything in this era. The most unkempt man could spread all the wisdom he could, this is a visual era, and no one will hear him out. This era is all about glamour, looks. superficiality - and this is how one's going to be judged. :|

In superficial times, the package is as important as the content. The only way we can outrun the opposing side on that count is by offering both package and content - because we know, they can at best have the package (and often don't), but never the content. :thumbup

Dagna
Monday, September 4th, 2017, 04:07 PM
Wait a minute! In which respect whatsoever has the Charlottesville incident to do with Hollywood nazis?? Where did you even get the idea to mention the two things in one breath? One guy rolled over a woman with his car -- and this was a "Hollyood nazi"?? Are you serious?

The guy who rolled over that woman was not dressed up in that way. So, strictly speaking, and visibly obvious for every observer, he had nothing to do with someone who might have been dressed up in this way, and was there.
Have you actually seen the imagery and symbolism of the neo-nazi group Vanguard America? Their "International Jew (https://1.bp.blogspot.com/-g_B6i7j5N_o/WY_fV2lMaDI/AAAAAAAAuCM/q7C2ti6JeLASRuITnWX-ckHizm7qO8BDwCLcBGAs/s1600/internationaljew.png)" poster, for instance? Or perhaps their babble about an "Aryan" nation. Or maybe their cooperation with the equally Hollywood nazi (or should I say Hollywood nutzi) group, NSM88 and race-mixer Jeff Schoep's, self-proclaimed "warrior for the interests of White Americans" and ideologically schizophrenic, kosher traditionalist Matt Heimbach's, who changes his politics more often than his underwear, Nationalist Front. They see themselves as mighty Aryan soldiers (https://encrypted-tbn0.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:ANd9GcRwh2SB_mEQzh4nw_LXyss-1Yyju28LV6o84J3gl9zlvFmf0yQz) who are going to "free the world from Jewry" (https://encrypted-tbn0.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:ANd9GcS-S2CbDyvdz7tVcs1xlW3a40VgFbpeVWHgH2dfGVhy YU8oOhwm) and instate a totalitarian regime through revolution (https://encrypted-tbn0.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:ANd9GcQsouTltsF6IDf1YlU1fbC advy9IgFZdX9w1OYuXJ4xg9D0oy3C1g) in the US. More exhibits:

http://i.dailymail.co.uk/i/pix/2017/08/13/06/433642FA00000578-0-James_Alex_Fields_Jr_far_left_with_glass es_of_Maumee_Ohio_was_ar-a-86_1502601205689.jpg

http://assets.nydailynews.com/polopoly_fs/1.3408116.1502637415!/img/httpImage/image.jpg_gen/derivatives/article_750/vanguard14n-1-web.jpg

https://www.thesun.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/2017/08/nintchdbpict000345196890-e1502527732352.jpg?strip=all&w=960

https://i.ytimg.com/vi/vwPxCh2QNZw/hqdefault.jpg

https://christophercantwell.com/wp-content/uploads/2017/05/Radical-Agenda-EP301-Vanguard-America.jpg

https://pbs.twimg.com/media/C5JC6KtWAAA6uZp.jpg

http://i.dailymail.co.uk/i/pix/2017/05/29/17/40EAC4A300000578-4552552-image-a-32_1496074892440.jpg

https://www.gannett-cdn.com/-mm-/a53b07b9faa75e1c330393aef34b00dba22d0d08/c=0-773-3020-2479&r=x803&c=1600x800/local/-/media/2017/08/23/NJGroup/AsburyPark/636390764973043795-antisemitic-2.jpg

Bonus: Thug life

https://img.washingtonpost.com/rf/image_480w/2010-2019/WashingtonPost/2017/08/15/Local/Images/tk3.jpg?uuid=tE4P9oApEeezWRWjYXx2ew

Norman Pride
Monday, September 4th, 2017, 05:26 PM
Got to disagree. The taking down of WN-sites was a concerted effort that must have started at least several weeks before Charlottesville. The left now tries to score points with...
Why then were those efforts fruitless until Charlottesville? Stormfront was allowed to run for over 20 years, the Daily Stormer for 4. Obviously, there have been attempts to remove them before, that is nothing new and happens to most politically incorrect and/or controversial sites. In Stormfront's case, they wrote repeated letters, starting at least June (if we judge by the official letter), but they were all ignored. Why was the site taken down specifically after the disappearance of the Daily Stormer and specifically after Charlottesville? Most probably because Charlottesville and the disappearance of the DST set a precedent. It was because of Charlottesville that tech companies started feeling pressured to "take action against hate speech". It was the violence at Charlottesville, the support/involvement of the DST and SF in the event, and particularly Anglin's article about Heather Heyer which caused the uproar. It is much easier to get people to feel scandalized about the death of an innocent person, who was "only there to spread love" than it is to get them scandalized about a few racial slurs, which may be "racist", but are protected by the 1st Amendment and don't create an actual physical victim.


that woman that got hit by the car directly or indirectly, while blocking the road for ordinary traffic there.
It had nothing to do with "blocking ordinary traffic". It was a demonstration so people from both sides were marching on the streets, not just that woman. The street was fully packed, there was not supposed to be any "ordinary traffic" there. The guy who drove the car first crashed it into some cars parked on the sides, and then backed up and sped further straight into the crowd. In addition, pedestrians were also hit and injured, about 19 people. One could say, he was speeding too fast, lost control and accidentally hit a car, but that doesn't explain why he'd plunge into the crowd and increase his speed. So it was no accident, regardless if it was really someone who wanted to injure people or if it was a planned stunt.

Some other things to ponder: why were there people chasing the car with bats, as if they had known it would be there? Why were there ads requesting crowd actors for a movie in the area? Why were there ads hiring protestors with 25$/hour? Why did the driver in the photo not match the one they apprehended and why was he driving without glasses? Why do the photos look almost like perfectly staged propaganda? In one photo, the leg of someone who is in the air obstructs a letter from the word "fuck". Why does the car look like it just had a paint job in between photos? There are many things that don't really fit about Charlottesville, pointing to the possibility of a false flag: http://www.neonnettle.com/news/2547-charlottesville-rally-attack-exposed-as-false-flag

Whether people really died in that scene, or whether they were stunt actors, it was wrong. Nationalists don't need to defend or condone Charlottesville as a good thing. That is unwise, and most probably what they want them to do.

By the way, Chlodovech and Dagna are right about the "Hollywood nazi" part. Probably those could have also been actors. A witness writes:


So they advertise and they have a ‘unite the right – don’t be racist’ rally and of course these guys with torches come and you look them up and most of them are actors, you can even look up their names. They’re Democratic Party operatives. They’ve been caught painting swastikas on black people’s places and burning crosses and they always get caught.

So I look at the ‘white nationalists’ last night that were leaving this deal, I mean they’re straight out of Hollywood with their little white shirts and their Hitler haircuts. I mean, some of them you track and it comes out they are Southern Poverty Law Center operatives. I mean, they RAN the Oklahoma City bombing. That came out in court documents.


On the positive side a lot of ordinary Americans will now be aware of what pathetic freaks the Antifa are. The majority of Americans won't be our model of WNs / Germanic preservationists, but they aren't to eager of a political correct utopia as envisioned by the left (and which ultimately will turn into a turd-world shithole), neither.
Pathetic for what, for "blocking the traffic"? To understand the real significance of the events would imply for ordinary Americans to want to look for answers. The average, politically disinterested person doesn't know them. They just know, someone has been killed and two violent/racist/white supremacist websites have been removed as a result. Charlottesville was a setback for white nationalism, with more and more people convinced they have no place in the country. Also, some people make the mistake to confuse left-wing extremists with the government or with the mainstream. They're not. Many Americans also condemn antifa violence, as much as they do white supremacist violence. Nationalists should not rest on their laurels and identify with heavy/Hollywood symbolism because they think "there is hope". It's not that time, not yet at least.

Spjabork
Monday, September 4th, 2017, 08:03 PM
The Nordic Resistance Movement is known as one of the most violent neo-nazi groups in Sweden.
I have a question! :)

And please, be more vocal when it comes to answering my questions! ;)

You are not a male, as you indicate in your profile. You know, there are quite a few males, in Germany and elsewhere in Germanic lands, who publicly declare, on any proper and any improper occasion, that they "do reject physical force in all of its kinds".

Now my question is: Would you, as a female, mate with such a male? :)

A yeah, and thank you so much for all these many nice photographs in your last post! They look so much better that those which you posted before! I really like them a lot, and I appreciate you taking the time to post them, I really do! :)

Sigurd
Tuesday, September 5th, 2017, 04:53 AM
"do reject physical force in all of its kinds". [...]
Now my question is: Would you, as a female, mate with such a male? :)

There's no legitimate reason to assume it's so dualistic here. Neither the completely pacifistic wimp that will turn as many cheeks as he knows to offer nor the abrasive, constantly street-brawling type make either a good leader,
a good activist or a good father to look up to. Fights aren't always pre-decided, sometimes the better fighter loses, too. ;)

Violence, and especially political violence is by and at large, an ultima ratio. It may at times be necessary, and when it's necessary it may be resorted to, but it should be used shrewdly and to the least necessary effect. This is actually very Germanic. For good or for ill, we've traditionally had mercy on our opponents in war-time, Germanics have never been about completely annihilating an adversary Sun Tzu style. Heck, we even have dozens of sports (technically, "mock warfare" of sorts) where gentlemanly conduct is part of the laws of that game. :P

When there's groups that preach peaceful patriotic protest, this also shouldn't be frowned upon. Peaceful is also meant in that sense: Violence isn't meant as a political means unless push really comes to shove. It doesn't mean going into fetal position when attacked but also suggests people to also engage in learning self-defense techniques. It also means jumping to a woman's or child's help whenever needed, also against an assailant. That's kind of obvious, really. :shrug:

Much as we all have our moments when we just want to form a batallion to smack in our opponents' heads, SA type tactics isn't going to get preservationism anywhere. In fact, relying overly on political violence effectively prevents from even rounding up enough men of fighting age to ever even form such a batallion, let alone win the people over or achieve anything. :P

Huginn ok Muninn
Tuesday, September 5th, 2017, 05:52 AM
It had nothing to do with "blocking ordinary traffic". It was a demonstration so people from both sides were marching on the streets, not just that woman. The street was fully packed, there was not supposed to be any "ordinary traffic" there. The guy who drove the car first crashed it into some cars parked on the sides, and then backed up and sped further straight into the crowd. In addition, pedestrians were also hit and injured, about 19 people. One could say, he was speeding too fast, lost control and accidentally hit a car, but that doesn't explain why he'd plunge into the crowd and increase his speed. So it was no accident, regardless if it was really someone who wanted to injure people or if it was a planned stunt.

I wonder if you actually saw the video, and if you did, why you are willfully spreading the anti-white communist point of view. The video begins as the driver runs into the cars in front of him, and he is immediately beset upon by communists wielding 2x4s and other weapons. They smash the back window of his car. At that point, he is TOTALLY JUSTIFIED in throwing his car into reverse and getting out of there as quickly as possible, because anyone at that point would reasonably fear for his life. It looks like the dead woman was the one caught between his car and another parked to the side. People who willingly enter a street brawl are not "innocents," no matter how many anti-white puppets on the MSM news say otherwise. What I find so incredibly disgusting is that a Germanic woman was killed because she took cause with the enemy of her blood. Even if she were a traitor in her heart, as a woman she does not belong in a violent street battle, which is what these "demonstrations" ultimately become where antifa is involved. She should never have been there in the first place.

By the way, why are we are sitting here debating the actions of the driver and ignoring the actions of antifa attacking "unite the right" people who were simply trying to get out of there? Which of these things upsets you more? One is led to wonder, if there actually were a civil war in this country, and you were actually a citizen, which side would you take?

velvet
Tuesday, September 5th, 2017, 08:06 AM
Obviously, there have been attempts to remove them before, that is nothing new and happens to most politically incorrect and/or controversial sites. In Stormfront's case, they wrote repeated letters, starting at least June (if we judge by the official letter), but they were all ignored. Why was the site taken down specifically after the disappearance of the Daily Stormer and specifically after Charlottesville?

How about leftist thugs threaten the company with physical force?
Antifa does it here with hotels, if there's an event not to their liking. They threaten them with letters and/or in person to cancel the event, and if they dont, that all their antifa friends will come in for a party.

Plus, consider that the antifa, blacklivesmatter etc movements are financed by Soros, you can bet that there's a lot of money behind it, maybe one of the organisations bought up some debt at their local bank and bam, you have a quite "convincing" argument to do as you want them to do, otherwise your company is going to go bankrupt.

It's relatively unlikely that the hosting company of Stormfront just quits a 20 year relation (one that resisted all the attacks against Stormfront for 20 years, too) over such an incident, no matter how unfortunate that incident might be. Plus that the statement of the hosting company reads exactly like it was written by a leftist. It doesnt read like a statement of a company, it's all leftist wording.

Charlottesville may or may not have anything to do with it. The war against whites in America intensified with Trump's election, just look how the monuments are teared down and how loud the left screams - openly! - for a rewriting of history in favour of blacks, and for whites to acknowledge their guilt and accept their replacement. And taking down Stormfront is but one casualty in that war.

Why isnt there such an uproar about the veteran in a wheelchair who got beaten up by leftist thugs during the same event in Charlottesville?

Theunissen
Tuesday, September 5th, 2017, 10:13 AM
Why then were those efforts fruitless until Charlottesville? Stormfront was allowed to run for over 20 years, the Daily Stormer for 4. Obviously, there have been attempts to remove them before, that is nothing new and happens to most politically incorrect and/or controversial sites. ....
Sure, there were attempts to get them shut down. They just didn't push too hard for it, such things need time, and they require effort. The left was only mobilized enough, since Trump got elected.



It had nothing to do with "blocking ordinary traffic". It was a demonstration so people from both sides were marching on the streets, not just that woman. The street was fully packed, there was not supposed to be any "ordinary traffic" there. The guy who drove the car first crashed it into some cars parked on the sides, and then backed up and sped further straight into the crowd. In addition, pedestrians were also hit and injured, about 19 people. One could say, he was speeding too fast, lost control and accidentally hit a car, but that doesn't explain why he'd plunge into the crowd and increase his speed. So it was no accident, regardless if it was really someone who wanted to injure people or if it was a planned stunt.
...
But, the demonstrations were declared illegal and ended prior to that. So they were blocking the street crossing unlawfully and harassing cars there. The car was hit by an ANTIFA before it hit the crowd.

Norman Pride
Tuesday, September 5th, 2017, 04:20 PM
I wonder if you actually saw the video, and if you did, why you are willfully spreading the anti-white communist point of view. The video begins as the driver runs into the cars in front of him, and he is immediately beset upon by communists wielding 2x4s and other weapons. They smash the back window of his car. At that point, he is TOTALLY JUSTIFIED in throwing his car into reverse and getting out of there as quickly as possible, because anyone at that point would reasonably fear for his life. It looks like the dead woman was the one caught between his car and another parked to the side. People who willingly enter a street brawl are not "innocents," no matter how many anti-white puppets on the MSM news say otherwise.
I already mentioned that I saw the video and the people hitting the car with bats, so the question is obsolete. There are several people who recorded the video before the car arrived. The people hitting the car came to beat it after he already drove towards the crowd, and started hitting it after he backed up. He rams into a group, then puts his car in reverse and accelerates. If he was just trying to get out of there, he could have turned on a lateral street as he was backing up, which wasn't packed with as many people. The back and lateral streets were virtually empty, so a much more practical and faster way to get out rather than pushing in front, accelerating through a crowd of people. If someone is coming after you with bats, and you have a wall of people blocking your front, it's much riskier to try to drive through them (and risk those people with bats getting to you and even hitting you, than it is to continue driving in reverse on a less populated street.

And could you please stop these unfounded accusations of "communist by association"? I have ancestors who died in communist gulags because of their ethnicity and do not take kindly to an American living in one of the freer countries in terms of speech, telling me what communism is. Ask European members who actually lived to see what communist regimes were and what it meant to have a different or especially opposition political opinion in a communist country. Anti-fascism, anti-racism, leftism and political correctness =/= communism. You live in a country where you can still be an open white nationalist without being incarcerated for it, where you can host a forum like this one, without being censored or prosecuted by the government. It's not your picture perfect scenario, but it's not communism either.

You should realize that accusing anyone who doesn't agree with your radical views to be a communist or spreading communist propaganda looks and sounds as ridiculous as accusing anyone who is proud of their Germanic heritage as a racist. It's not that black and white, and this aggressive, confrontational style of you either agree with me or you're the enemy turns normal people, who aren't as radical as you, but still have an interest in Germanic preservation off. I have made an argument but not accused anyone of being a communist, a troll, a traitor or an enemy.


What I find so incredibly disgusting is that a Germanic woman was killed because she took cause with the enemy of her blood. Even if she were a traitor in her heart, as a woman she does not belong in a violent street battle, which is what these "demonstrations" ultimately become where antifa is involved. She should never have been there in the first place.
That has also been my point all along, someone has died, and it is a Germanic woman. I don't find that ok and I don't think her death should be trivialized or justified because she was a woman, politically correct or "blocking the traffic". Paradoxical that so many people call themselves white or Germanic nationalists or preservationists, but at the same time they divide people's worth according to ideology, looks or gender (fat slob, bitch, useless drain on society etc. pp.)

Even if she really was a militant "anti-fascist", which she was most likely not, but the media are making it look like it because of tactical reasons. Like someone here said before, she was most probably just someone supporting mainstream trends, who was disgusted by "racism" and "discrimination" because she didn't analyze things critically and she thought protesting there was the morally right thing to do.


By the way, why are we are sitting here debating the actions of the driver and ignoring the actions of antifa attacking "unite the right" people who were simply trying to get out of there? Which of these things upsets you more? One is led to wonder, if there actually were a civil war in this country, and you were actually a citizen, which side would you take
Because this is a discussion forum and not a choir preaching platform. Or do you want it to be 100 different posts where everyone is agreeing on everything? The actions of different groups upset differently. The violence against nationalists upsets in a different way, but so does the violence and negligence coming from our side. The actions of our people reflect on us more, and we have abismally different expectations from them than we have from antifa. Nobody here justifies the actions of anti-fascists either, that's a given. But we will never get anywhere if we don't analyze and criticize those actions which are detrimental and bring us down, if we ignore every mistake because we think in black and white, that is likely to come and bite us back later. It seems to me some basically want here a radicalization center, where any critical opinion that doesn't fit your mainstream means "you are against us".

If you read my post calmly and thoroughly you can clearly see that I also criticized the actions of the other side. I pointed out to many inconsistencies and the possibility that this may have been a false flag, created by "anti-racists". My question again: has this ever occurred to any of those who quickly jump to accuse those who don't justify the actions of the driver? Has it occurred to you that this was exactly the plan all the time, to get WNs & co. to defend/support/condone what happened at Charlottesville, so that it is easier to point fingers at them, get them ostracized socially and on the Internet, get companies to dissociate from them?

It is not that black and white. President Trump was probably the most balanced about it, condemning violence, hatred and bigotry from all sides.


How about leftist thugs threaten the company with physical force?
Antifa does it here with hotels, if there's an event not to their liking. They threaten them with letters and/or in person to cancel the event, and if they dont, that all their antifa friends will come in for a party.

Plus, consider that the antifa, blacklivesmatter etc movements are financed by Soros, you can bet that there's a lot of money behind it, maybe one of the organisations bought up some debt at their local bank and bam, you have a quite "convincing" argument to do as you want them to do, otherwise your company is going to go bankrupt.

It's relatively unlikely that the hosting company of Stormfront just quits a 20 year relation (one that resisted all the attacks against Stormfront for 20 years, too) over such an incident, no matter how unfortunate that incident might be. Plus that the statement of the hosting company reads exactly like it was written by a leftist. It doesnt read like a statement of a company, it's all leftist wording.

Charlottesville may or may not have anything to do with it. The war against whites in America intensified with Trump's election, just look how the monuments are teared down and how loud the left screams - openly! - for a rewriting of history in favour of blacks, and for whites to acknowledge their guilt and accept their replacement. And taking down Stormfront is but one casualty in that war.

Why isnt there such an uproar about the veteran in a wheelchair who got beaten up by leftist thugs during the same event in Charlottesville?
I doubt that an association of lawyers would need to threaten with physical violence, although all is possible, what is more likely is that they simply threatened them with negative publicity or legal action - they had terms which said their domains could not be used to transmit racism, and refusing to remove Stormfront could have had such repercussion for them. It's also possible that the domain host himself was opposed in principle to racism or WN, as it happened in the case of CloudFlare, where the decision was also ideological.

In reality, it's probably much simpler. If you hosted a domain company under your name, and it was fairly successful, and you also made a living out of it, but you had to have rules against violence, etc. and you received some notice from a lawyer association about a "violent" or "illegal" site, you would probably also feel uneasy. (Let's assume it wasn't a site of your ideological persuasion but just a random site, where people discussed topics you're largely unfamiliar with or indifferent towards. Just one out of the thousand other topics you host). You'd wonder if they could sue you or publish slanderous articles, if it would mean losing a good part of your clients, maybe even that your business could not recover as a result. You'd also most probably not go through the millions of posts on that site to conclude if they are right or not, and you'd wonder if one single site would be worth the effort and risk. At the end, most people would just wash their hands from it and pull it on the basis of a violation of ToS. It's quite common, think about it. Many members who have radical opinions and write them on forums like SF would rather have their accounts deleted than have their posts associated with their real names, many people don't tell their friends or acquaintances about the forums and keep their membership a "secret", people in Europe convicted of NS plead guilty and publicly denounce it, saying it was wrong and a mistake, or something stupid. It's easy to say it was wrong and I would do it differently, but would you really? You don't really know until you are in that situation.

Also it's unsure if the domain was always registered with the same company and they just didn't transfer it over the years. But even so, Network Solutions is one of the oldest and top domain companies so it's likely it has many long-term clients and no "special" relationship with individual sites. It probably works based on the same principle as many companies: they will host nearly anything as long as it doesn't mean trouble for them. So it's quite possible they never really knew about the nature of Stormfront or if they did, they just didn't mind much.

Either way, whether it was de facto about Charlottesville or not, it is de jure, just like the Daily Stormer also is. So, another forum/site condoning, excusing or justifying Charlottesville is quite likely to also get complaints. It could very well be used as a pretext. But why give them one in the first place? Publicly condoning, excusing or justifying Charlottesville is not going to make sites more likely to be endorsed or protected by their hosts, but the contrary. It does not lead to more free speech but to less. It does not lead to our image being less marginalized and more respected, but to the opposite. So why is there a need for us to plsce the noose around our own necks, just because we think it will happen anyway?


Sure, there were attempts to get them shut down. They just didn't push too hard for it, such things need time, and they require effort. The left was only mobilized enough, since Trump got elected.
So to you it is simply a coincidence that two major sites and one minor site who were all involved in the organization of an event and one of them which trivialized the death of a person who was killed in the event and mocked said person, got shut down precisely after the event, with the event used as a justification to shut them down? Anyway, see above. In the end, whether it was a pretext or not, it does not matter, but it certainly helps if you already have a pretext.


But, the demonstrations were declared illegal and ended prior to that. So they were blocking the street crossing unlawfully and harassing cars there. The car was hit by an ANTIFA before it hit the crowd.
Neo-Nazis can still rally because there is no law against 'hate speech' (https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/politics/onpolitics/2017/08/18/neo-nazis-can-still-rally-because-there-no-law-against-hate-speech/579321001/)

Judge allows Unite the Right rally to stay in Emancipation Park (http://www.dailyprogress.com/news/local/judge-allows-unite-the-right-rally-to-stay-in-emancipation/article_9965d0be-7ee6-11e7-ab0e-f342e0cf9488.html)

The city granted a permit on June 13 for organizer Kessler to hold the rally in Emancipation Park, before reversing the decision less than a week before the event. The basis for the refusal was that the city could not safely manage a demonstration involving 400 people or possibly thousands. Kessler however took them to court and won. A federal judge granted an injunction allowing the rally to be held because supporters would show up there anyway, thus requiring the presence and vigilance of the police.

Police intervened after clashes broke out and dispersed the crowd, and at around 11 am a local state of emergency was declared by the City of Charlottesville. The car crash took place at around 13:40. It's true that the governor's office urged all members of the community to stay home on Saturday evening, because of the previous clashes. It's true that both white nationalists and protesters should have heeded the advice and be careful, however both showed up prepared for violence (with torches, bats, shields), which was probably a factor on incitement on both sides. However, none of that justifies driving into a crowd and hitting pedestrians. Pedestrians and parked cars were not there "unlawfully". There was also a yellow warning sign indicating that there would be pedestrians or people crossing the road.

The Aesthete
Tuesday, September 5th, 2017, 04:29 PM
bfIfywQkxOk

Dagna
Tuesday, September 5th, 2017, 06:07 PM
I have a question! :)

And please, be more vocal when it comes to answering my questions! ;)
I have several. Are you going to return the favor?


You are not a male, as you indicate in your profile.
Indeed I am not. Brilliant observation.


You know, there are quite a few males, in Germany and elsewhere in Germanic lands, who publicly declare, on any proper and any improper occasion, that they "do reject physical force in all of its kinds".

Now my question is: Would you, as a female, mate with such a male? :)
I did not say that I am interested in Jainists. Sigurd has already said much of it: it is not as dualistic (or simplistic, I may add) as you think. I neither appreciate wimps and cowards, nor thugs and brutes (and there is also violence exerted out of cowardice).

But since in your world, everything is between A or B, I suppose the "ideal" choice would have been someone who "accepts physical force in all of its kinds", would it have not?

I reject dishonorable, unprovoked, unjustified, cowardish physical force (such as beating a woman or child, cheating on a duel and shooting someone in the back, attacking someone after you have given your word you would not, baiting someone in self-defense and pretending they provoked you, raping, murdering or dishonoring civilians), all actions unworthy of a proud Germanic man. And do not tell me that the actions of most Hollywood nazis and white supremacists who engage in violence are honorable, justified or "self-defense". Self-defense is not when you kill innocent Germanic children because they could turn into socialists when they grow up and threaten your neo-nazi dictatorship fantasy.

Let us get something else straight: white supremacist neo-nazis do not have the logistics to start any NS "revolution", so trying to bomb migrant centers and stash weapons under their mothers' beds is not a very effective tactic. It leads them to be even more marginalized, not to mention how bad it reflects on Germanic nationalists. It never ceases to amaze me how some people refuse to grow out of the ineffective, outdated WN 1.0 and still harp on about the same things they did 10, 20, 30 years ago, endlessy awaiting Ragnarök.


A yeah, and thank you so much for all these many nice photographs in your last post! They look so much better that those which you posted before! I really like them a lot, and I appreciate you taking the time to post them, I really do! :)
My pleasure. I expected that you would appreciate such fine "arts".

Bärin
Tuesday, September 5th, 2017, 06:23 PM
I think the fine line is somewhere in between: we reject the comical caricatures the media says nationalists are, but we shouldn't renounce anything labeled a hate symbol either. The ADL are an anti-Germanic group, which label all symbols of Germanic heritage as hateful. We reject what we are not, not what we are, just because someone doesn't like it.

As far as those "Hollywood nazis" go, they're considered degenerates by old school NS, and many of them are just moles whose job is to defame nationalists. To put it in a nutshell,

http://swordofelysium.files.wordpress.com/2011/03/aryanwp_3.png

velvet
Friday, September 8th, 2017, 06:59 AM
Also it's unsure if the domain was always registered with the same company and they just didn't transfer it over the years. But even so, Network Solutions is one of the oldest and top domain companies so it's likely it has many long-term clients and no "special" relationship with individual sites. It probably works based on the same principle as many companies: they will host nearly anything as long as it doesn't mean trouble for them. So it's quite possible they never really knew about the nature of Stormfront or if they did, they just didn't mind much.

Either way, whether it was de facto about Charlottesville or not, it is de jure, just like the Daily Stormer also is. So, another forum/site condoning, excusing or justifying Charlottesville is quite likely to also get complaints. It could very well be used as a pretext. But why give them one in the first place? Publicly condoning, excusing or justifying Charlottesville is not going to make sites more likely to be endorsed or protected by their hosts, but the contrary. It does not lead to more free speech but to less. It does not lead to our image being less marginalized and more respected, but to the opposite. So why is there a need for us to plsce the noose around our own necks, just because we think it will happen anyway?

So, pointing out the truth about Charlottesville now is "condoning"?
See, no one was actually "killed by a white supremacist neo-nazi" there, Heather Heyer died on a heart attack.

n1Ll0F3uhDs

So the "de jure" case is gone, puffed up in ultra-red communist smoke, as always.


In 2002, Google complied with French and German legislation forbidding links to websites which host white supremacist, Holocaust-denying or historical revisionist material by removing Stormfront.org from their French and German indexes.[19]

Stormfront returned to the news in May 2003, when Fox News Channel host Bill O'Reilly reported on a racially segregated prom being held in Georgia and posted a poll on his website asking his viewers if they would send their own children to one. The next night O'Reilly announced that he could not report the results of the poll as it appeared Stormfront had urged its members to vote in the poll, thus skewing the numbers.[20]

Doug Hanks, a candidate for the city council of Charlotte, North Carolina, withdrew his nomination in August 2005 after it was revealed that he had posted on Stormfront. Hanks had posted more than 4,000 comments over three years, including one in which he described black people as "rabid beasts".[21][22] Hanks said his postings were designed to gain the trust of Stormfront users to help him write a novel: "I did what I thought I needed to do to establish myself as a credible white nationalist."[21]

In 2012 Italian police blocked the website and arrested four people for allegedly inciting racial hatred.[23] The measure was taken after the publication of a blacklist of "prominent Jews and people who support Jews and immigrants" on the Italian section of the website. The list included possible targets of violent attacks, including gypsy camps.[24] The subsequent year, Italian police raided the homes of 35 Stormfront posters, in November 2013. One man who was arrested in Mantua had two loaded weapons, a hand grenade casing, and a flag with a swastika in his possession.[25]

According to a 2014 two-year study by the Southern Poverty Law Center (SPLC)'s Intelligence Report, registered Stormfront users have been disproportionately responsible for some of the most lethal hate crimes and mass killings since the site was put up in 1995. In the five years leading up to 2014, Stormfront members murdered nearly 100 people.[26][27][28][29] Of these, 77 were massacred by one Stormfront user, Anders Behring Breivik, a Norwegian terrorist who perpetrated the 2011 Norway attacks.[30]

Just a short list (from wiki (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stormfront_(website)#Controversies)) from all the controversies around Stormfront, none of them ever led to the hosting company kicking the site offline. The host company was not aware of what Stormfront was all about? Give me a break :-O

There's an coordinated effort to silence any opposition to and dissent from the communist, anti-white "mainstream", in which Charlottesville will continue to be abused as a case against evil whitey.

Maybe it's time to turn it around, and expose all the hate organisation of the leftists, like the private club SPLC, like the private club ADL, like that "lawyers" club, for what they are?

Dagna
Friday, September 8th, 2017, 07:09 AM
I believe this article (http://jonupsalsgarden.blogspot.nl/2017/07/nod-and-wink-nazis.html) by a folkish Germanic heathen expressed quite well what the problem with stereotypical imagery is. I will outline the most important paragraphs:


... Nazi Germany... had its day. And that day ended in 1945. (And that goes tenfold for the actual Nazi roleplayers, with the uniforms and the salutes and the rest;

There are the people who will take Nazi imagery and retool it into something that they can then say is innocuous. But we all know what it came from, and why you're using it. Even if you replace the swastika with an irminsul, or uruz rune, or something else, I know what you did, and so does everyone else.

When you take something, in modern usage, is only known because the SS popularized it, and say "but it's really an obscure 18th century Swedish design", I know what you did, and so does everyone else.

If you take a Waffen-SS poster and replace the SS runes with something else, but keep everything else the same or use photos of Waffen-SS soldiers in memes about "defending your folk", or say "Wotan mit uns" because you think nobody will know it's a play on Wehrmacht soldiers' belt buckles, I know what you did, and so does everyone else.

If you use the straight-armed, clockwise-swastika, or if your color scheme is all red-white-black, or replicas of SS and SA dagger designs with the swastikas and eagles replaced by something else or the "black sun" symbol which was in Himmler's castle at Wewelsburg (and claim that you're reproducing an Allemanic brooch that has a lot fewer arms), I know what you did, and so does everyone else.

If you say "Sieg Heil!" at sumbel, and then turn around and say "I was just saying 'hail victory' using one of the ancient tongues of out ancestors" (despite those two words being the only ones spoken by you in any language other than English during an entire weekend), I know what you did, and so does everyone else.

And on and on and on.

You're not being clever, you're not fooling anyone, and there's only two reasons to actually do it.

Reason the First: You're trying to signal to other people who know the original source, "hey, we're cool with the Nazis, but we know we have to change it a bit to make it socially acceptable and give us a thin veneer of deniability." You can tell people like this because, when called on it, they'll immediately try to downplay it and say it "really was more of a pre-Nazi thing" or whatever.

You're not being clever, and you're not fooling anyone.

Reason the Second: You're genuinely trying to reclaim some bit of Germanic lore or folk-practice that the Nazis appropriated and corrupted. Easily confused with the first, but with one essential difference; you come out and say how despicable the Nazis were, how awful it is that whatever-it-is became associated with National Socialism, and you explicitly say you're trying to reclaim it to expunge that taint.

See the difference?

Now, I'm not saying we as Folkish Asatruar, or Asatruar in general, or white people, need to constantly abase ourselves because of what happened in Germany between 1933 and 1945. That's patently absurd, any more than a modern Italian needs to constantly apologize for the Roman Empire having institutional slavery. It's in the past, everyone involved is dead, and it's time to move on.

On the Uni(versalist) side, there are some who are completely obsessed with the Nazis, and think that anyone to the right of Che Guevara is a crypto-Nazi. You try to constantly expand the definition of "Nazi", with the hope of tarring everyone you disagree with, with the taint associated with the label. But in reality you're just diluting the word to the point where it has no meaning. If you think Donald Trump (or Stephen McNallen) is literally a Nazi, you're deluded.

On an ideological level, I genuinely believe it is possible to love my own folk and not hate, or want to exterminate, other folks. That includes not admiring ideologies like National Socialism that literally and legitimately did so.

On a practical level, you have so completely lost the "Hitler was the worst thing that ever happened" battle in the popular mindset that it's inconceivable that you think you're ever going to make any headway on that front. Yes, Marxism killed ten times as many people as Fascism. I tout that figure myself, but when I do it, it's in an attempt to clue people into the horrors of Marxism that many have forgotten since the fall of the Soviet Union. It's not an attempt to downplay the horrors of National Socialism.

You're not fooling anyone, and all you're doing is giving ammunition to the people who want to destroy Folkish Asatru, giving them a legitimate reason to say "they're all crypto-Nazis" because you insist on playing games with Nazi iconography. If your goal is to bring more people home to Asatru, slyly connecting it to what in most peoples' minds is the most horrific regime of the 20th century IS THE FUCKING WRONG WAY TO DO IT!!!

If we want to advance Germanic preservation and bring more people into our ranks, then as Sigurd said, it is not a question of should. It is a question of must.

Juthunge
Friday, September 8th, 2017, 08:00 PM
If we want to advance Germanic preservation and bring more people into our ranks, then as Sigurd said, it is not a question of should. It is a question of must.Do you know what doesn’t attract people either?
Obsessing about and arguing against a part of your own side at any given opportunity and criticising them with more emotional passion than your actual enemies. Then accusing them of oppression of your point of view, when they debate you.

Infighting is very unappealing to most people, especially if it’s entirely unnecessary.

Theunissen
Saturday, September 9th, 2017, 12:34 AM
So, pointing out the truth about Charlottesville now is "condoning"?
See, no one was actually "killed by a white supremacist neo-nazi" there, Heather Heyer died on a heart attack.

n1Ll0F3uhDs

So the "de jure" case is gone, puffed up in ultra-red communist smoke, as always.

....?

One can of course now imply that the Heather Heyer's heart attack was induced by the car hitting the crowd. But those people didn't exactly do what is in accordance with law and rules. They were blocking the cross-roads and harassing car drivers. That's why the Field's car hit into another car, after which it reversed.

That induced heart attack argument would only hold water, if Fields physically attacked her directly.

Spjabork
Saturday, September 9th, 2017, 01:25 AM
those people didn't exactly do what is in accordance with law and rules. They were blocking the cross-roads and harassing car drivers. That's why the Field's car hit into another car, after which it reversed.

That induced heart attack argument would only hold water, if Fields physically attacked her directly.
But that was exactly how the "incident" was represented in Germany's media. It was literally said that he "drove into a crowd" and "rolled over" a woman, thereby killing her. That was what I knew.

So they told lies to the people.

Why does that not surprise me?

velvet
Saturday, September 9th, 2017, 04:27 AM
But that was exactly how the "incident" was represented in Germany's media. It was literally said that he "drove into a crowd" and "rolled over" a woman, thereby killing her. That was what I knew.

So they told lies to the people.

Why does that not surprise me?

The incident was reported in German media (and worldwide for that matter) as the "murder by an evil white supremacist neo-nazi" before she was even officially declared dead or the driver of the car was known.

There's quite some interesting footage of the show on youtube. That freakish "Vegan Warrior" collected several hours of footage of the entire rally (including the beatings with sticks and clubs by leftist/blacklivesmatter "peaceful" protesters, who beat up two elderly men 65+ and another guy into the ground of a parking house and many other aggressions), also of the show around her dying, some of it is well worth to watch. None of it will ever be shown in German media.

Norman Pride
Saturday, September 9th, 2017, 11:23 AM
So, pointing out the truth about Charlottesville now is "condoning"?
Have you read the articles from the Daily Stormer? If not, please do. Especially the ones where Anglin calls James Fields a gentleman who "loves his race and wants to protect civilization."


See, no one was actually "killed by a white supremacist neo-nazi" there, Heather Heyer died on a heart attack.
Whether someone was killed because of the injuries sustained of because of a heart attack does not change the fact that they were killed.

That is like saying e.g. that chronic myeloid leukemia does not kill someone suffering from it, if the patient dies from a secondary, co-morbid condition like chronic pulmonary disease, renal insufficiency, cerebrovascular disease or heart failure. Or that anorexia nervosa is not lethal because someone suffering from it dies from dehydration, renal insufficiency or heart failure. If you are strictly talking medically about the cause of clinical death, then that is correct, you can only pick one and that is the immediate cause of death, however, from there to conclude that the main condition was irrelevant to the cause of death is fallacious.

If a murderer stabbed his victim lethally, piercing a vital organ or artery, the cause of death may be hemorrhage. That does not make the stab irrelevant.

If someone burnt his victim alive the cause of death may be suffocation, that does not make the fire irrelevant.

If someone drove into an anorexic pedestrian or an anorexic crossing the road and the hit caused their heart to fail, that does not make the hit irrelevant.

People with a faint heart are going to have their heart shut down on them first. Heather Heyer was overweight and unfit, so it's quite possible that the shock of the hit got her heart to stop.

Legally, even assuming you did this unintentionally, it qualifies as dangerous driving causing death or vehicular homicide. If you do not stop after you have had the accident, it qualifies as hit and run driving causing death and it carries severe punishment (in many cases imprisonment).

The Daily Stormer thinks this can be solved with a $500 ticket. So yes, it is also grossly downplaying on the crime.

To be honest though, the more and more I read about it, the more and more I am starting to believe that this is a false flag.


Just a short list (from wiki (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stormfront_(website)#Controversies)) from all the controversies around Stormfront, none of them ever led to the hosting company kicking the site offline.
Some of these controversies regard Europe and the only tech company mentioned is Google, who removed the results from the European web searches. Do we even know if Stormfront had the same domain provider all this time? It's possible they changed it once or several times. But assuming the domain provider knew about the controversy, why did they not shut it down? Especially in light of this, you cannot seriously deny that Charlottesville had anything major to do with it.


The host company was not aware of what Stormfront was all about? Give me a break :-O
I said it is a possibility, not the only possibility. It's a big company, with Stormfront being just one of the million or billion websites it hosts. Do you think their CEO or abuse/complaints team reads the news every day and reviews each and every single site they have hosted? Unlikely, what's more likely is that they only investigate if they receive complaints about a hosted site, like most services do.

It's possible they had a huge backlog and slow complaints team or that the case had to be forwarded to a higher instance who decided to contact the CEO himself, which could explain why nothing was done in June, etc. but it's not the only possibility. It's possible they knew what Stormfront is about and just didn't care, but when they saw the Charlottesville scandal, they decided they couldn't dodge the issue anymore.


There's an coordinated effort to silence any opposition to and dissent from the communist, anti-white "mainstream", in which Charlottesville will continue to be abused as a case against evil whitey.

Maybe it's time to turn it around, and expose all the hate organisation of the leftists, like the private club SPLC, like the private club ADL, like that "lawyers" club, for what they are?
I am not against pointing out facts and exposing these organisations, I am actually against censorship.

But you have to keep in mind that you are not on your own terrain and terms. Governments don't like open confrontation and Internet smart alecs of the Anglin kind.


This is war mode now. We are going on the offensive.

We are done complaining about what is happening to us and we are going on the offensive against the people who made it happen.

So get ready to roll, brothers.

Susan Bro is going to wish she never would have fucked with the white race.

If he is genuine, we all know how this will end eventually. Whether we like it or not, the Internet is not a free, unregulated platform where words have no consequences. Open confrontation and aggressive "bravery" on online fora, frequent talking about revolting and "crushing the enemy" can only go one way. We are in a glass house. We saw what happened to the Thiazi owners, a few weeks after they wrote an open confrontation to the Jugendschutz (sp?), which was not even a government organisation to my knowledge. They felt secure because it was online and hosted in the US.

Also making certain statements which you think sound vague or ambiguous, but which you know very well what they mean, and so do the rest, on the Internet, is well, not the brightest idea. Things you write now and think sound very brave and confrontational can come back to bite you years later, even if you regret them or no longer share them. This happened on the European side of Stormfront, where members who had previously accused others of being too pacifist, cowards or traitors, requested their posts and accounts deleted because they were afraid of the consequences. This happened, as in the Stormfront controversy example, to Doug Hanks when he decided to run as a candidate for the city council of Charlotte, North Carolina, but it was revealed he had posted on Stormfront. And he was not even genuine but registered to pose as a white supremacist for the purpose of writing a book.

You (maybe not you you, but someone else you) may want to write a Ph.D or a book, get a certain job, maybe even run for office or be part of a setting where stereotypical imagery could be used to your disadvantage. Once something is posted online, it stays there. Forever. By the time you realize it could have real consequences for yourself or for others, it will have already been too late. Antifa take screenshots, Web Archive indexes everything online so it can be easily found and traced back.

Speaking of infiltrators, has it ever occurred to anyone that Andrew Anglin or some other personalities involved in the WN scene may not be what they seem? It has been said that the staunchest advocates of aggressive activities in an organization is likely to be an agent provocateur.


An agent provocateur (French for "inciting agent") is a person who commits, or who acts to entice another person to commit an illegal or rash act or falsely implicate them in partaking in an illegal act. An agent provocateur may be acting out of their own sense of duty or may be employed by the police or other entity to discredit or harm another group (such as a peaceful protest or demonstration) by provoking them to commit a crime, thereby undermining the protest or demonstration as a whole.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Agent_provocateur

That James Fields, like Anders Breivik, could be government agents or pawns in false flags to discredit the right wing or white nationalist scene? Stromfront was infiltrated, Thiazi was infiltrated, the Daily Stormer is most likely infiltrated, and so was/may be Skadi. There is nothing speaking against the theory that (white) nationalist communities are not currently being infiltrated by such elements who want to bait out the "bravest" and "loudest" nationalists. If you were smart, and you were the government or an organisation like the ADL, would it not occur for you to do it, or would you just sit and watch and allow them to "expose" you? If Anglin will have been still here, unaffected after declaring open war, one has to wonder why. It's not necessarily because he is so mighty and the government is weak and has its hands tied. Maybe that is what they want people to believe, so that they take the bait and come out on all offensive. It's not the only possibility, but it's certainly possible.

To sum up, no, I am not saying that we should cuck and be silent. I am saying that we should be smart and cautious. It's not just what we say, but also the way we say it. To come back to the original topic regarding stereotypical imagery, we don't have much of a choice. Open NS symbolism like swastikas, NSDAP flags, slogans and Hitler salutes are out of the question. It's not because anybody likes "image cucking" or because we want to "bow down to our enemies". But as Sigurd said, we live in a visual era. Tailoring our message and adapting it to the current realities is vital to our survival.

Spjabork
Saturday, September 9th, 2017, 09:53 PM
Whether someone was killed because of the injuries sustained of because of a heart attack does not change the fact that they were killed.
... and whether a "neo-nazi" did this or did that -- really or just allegedly -- does not change the fact that you are not interested in the truth, you just want them anyway do disappear altogether from earth, correct? :)

We know this. ;)

But what we do not know is, why you are so full of hatred for them "neo-nazis"? That would be interesting to know, though.

If the "neo-nazis" really disappear from earth, altogether, then the jew has won. That's it. And then it is OVER. For humankind.

This is what keeps us alive. Because we would not allow this.

Nordic Angel
Monday, September 11th, 2017, 09:10 PM
I have a question! :)

And please, be more vocal when it comes to answering my questions! ;)

You are not a male, as you indicate in your profile. You know, there are quite a few males, in Germany and elsewhere in Germanic lands, who publicly declare, on any proper and any improper occasion, that they "do reject physical force in all of its kinds".

Now my question is: Would you, as a female, mate with such a male? :)
I know, the question wasn't directed at me, but I am a female too, so here's my answer:
No, I would never ever mate with a male who "rejects physical force in all of its kinds".

Otherwise, I could as well turn lesbian and marry another female instead of a male, that wouldn't make any difference.

It is the duty of a man to protect his family, period. And it's the duty of the Germanic men to protect the Germanic women and children.

So males who "reject physical force in all of its kinds" are completely pointless. They make no sense.

Sigurd
Tuesday, September 12th, 2017, 02:28 AM
then the jew has won.[/b] That's it. And then it is OVER. For humankind.

Wrong - infighting takes away energy from our need to survive. With the one exception, and it may seem unfair: but the way things are currently going the smaller group will have to find a consensus with the larger group, and radical NS types are the minority.

If they wish to preserve either or both their world-view and our people they must know to leave this battle of philosophies for later. This counts for both sides, actually, but it always counts all the more for the fringe group within a spectrum. ;)

Any adversary, real or supposed, will only - and then irrevocably so - win if our kinds leaves the face of the Earth or becomes such an unimportant minority in our own countries that we're no longer capable of making ourselves heard and might be actively hunted down. At current replacement speeds, we're talking of one generation, two generations tops.

And then, no one will care whether our people vanished from the face of the Earth for being Cucks, Liberals, Alt-Right or NS. Dead is dead. :|

Ocko
Tuesday, September 12th, 2017, 04:14 AM
Whether someone was killed because of the injuries sustained of because of a heart attack does not change the fact that they were killed.


He s facing murder charges. To murder someone by heart attack is pretty much nonsense.

A heart attack is based on a precondition in that person and then can happen anytime. That fat woman had a precondition and went to fight with nationalist.

It looks closer to suicid.

If Fields knew she had a precondition and then drove into a crowd with the intention to kill her by heart attack, you might have a point, but that scenario is pretty absurd.

Do you have any proof that someone actually died or do you only have the Fake-News-Media? Is there a police report?

Norman Pride
Tuesday, September 12th, 2017, 04:34 AM
... and whether a "neo-nazi" did this or did that -- really or just allegedly -- does not change the fact that you are not interested in the truth, you just want them anyway do disappear altogether from earth, correct? :)

We know this. ;)

But what we do not know is, why you are so full of hatred for them "neo-nazis"? That would be interesting to know, though.

If the "neo-nazis" really disappear from earth, altogether, then the jew has won. That's it. And then it is OVER. For humankind.

This is what keeps us alive. Because we would not allow this.
Incorrect. I am neither a hater, nor want anybody to disappear from the earth. If you want to point fingers at anyone for wanting a certain group to disappear from the face of the earth, try people like Andrew Anglin. See whose "abolishment" he is talking about and whether you disagree with it or not. I think we both know the answer to that, and who the real hater is.

Since you seem to have trouble understanding, I will clarify again: I think neo-nazi symbolism, imagery and the like is a strategy which is counterproductive to nationalism, Germanic preservation, and our survival. If people want to be (neo-)NS though, they can go ahead, they can believe in whatever they want, just that this public packaging holds us back. It cancels any progress made. My people are the Germanic people not the neo-nazis (which can be any nationality) and their survival is more important than the survival of an ideology. NS as an ideology is of no use to us as long as there are no Germanic people. And if people continue to marginalize themselves, this is going to be the long-term effect. Equating Germanic preservation with neo-nazism and Germanic with nazi, which as I've noticed, some people here also support, yet point fingers at others for "repeating enemy propaganda". The moment Germanic and preservation become negative words/concepts, associated with guilt and atrocities, people will accept their own demise. They will be conditioned to seek out foreign partners and stay away from anything that has to do with war and shame. So instead of propagating this toxic image, nationalists should propagate one of positivity, which makes people proud and want to preserve their heritage, makes them leave the past in the past, stop dwelling on what was and focus on what will be.


He s facing murder charges. To murder someone by heart attack is pretty much nonsense.

A heart attack is based on a precondition in that person and then can happen anytime. That fat woman had a precondition and went to fight with nationalist.

It looks closer to suicid.
Yes, because attempting to cause yourself a heart attack is so easy. I've already explained in my previous post why hitting someone with a heart condition would also make that person responsible for their death.


If Fields knew she had a precondition and then drove into a crowd with the intention to kill her by heart attack, you might have a point, but that scenario is pretty absurd.

Do you have any proof that someone actually died or do you only have the Fake-News-Media? Is there a police report?
I suggest you read the whole thread and posts before making more assumptions. I clearly wrote that I have doubts that anyone died in the first place, and that it was a false flag. Which is more the reason why Fields shouldn't be glorified and condoned as Anglin does. Anglin himself may be part of this story.

Idis
Wednesday, November 8th, 2017, 04:28 AM
It depends what the aim of the nationalist scene is. Does it want to preach to the choir or does it want to win new people over? If the former, then it doesn't matter. If the latter, then they have to consider catering to a wide variety of groups (age, sex, political conviction, social and educational background, etc.)

To be honest, I was initially reluctant to join the forum because of certain right-wing slogans. However, the friendly imagery and presentation format lured me to nevertheless try and ask questions. Nationalist movements could do something similar, use a family friendly presentation, renounce extreme and bigoted speech and symbols when addressing their target audiences, and they could grow much more rapidly.

Dagna
Thursday, November 16th, 2017, 03:32 PM
Do you know what doesn’t attract people either?
Obsessing about and arguing against a part of your own side at any given opportunity and criticising them with more emotional passion than your actual enemies. Then accusing them of oppression of your point of view, when they debate you.

Infighting is very unappealing to most people, especially if it’s entirely unnecessary.
First of all, I do not consider neo-nazis to be on "my own side", except for those cases that grow out of this ideology and return to reality. For this of course, they would need to take their heads out of their clouds and realize:

1. it is not 1939-1945.
2. the Führer is dead and there will be no "second coming".
3. neo-nazism will not overtake Germany - or any part of the world except for Israel - again.

Otherwise, neo-nazis who play dress-up and stereotypical symbolism do nothing but to destroy any work that could advance the idea of Germanic preservation into the hearts and minds of our folk. The Germanic folk has been infected by indoctrination and dogma for decades. We do not need more indoctrination and dogma - which is what NS teaches - to get out of this mess, but we need independent minds, who are not afraid to think and judge for themselves. We do not need cult personalities for the Führer but we need a folk that question authority and arrives at their own conclusions. Neo-nazis merely want to replace an authoritarian system with another, perhaps even more authoritarian.

Any halfway thinking person knows deep inside how ridiculous those skinheads waiting for 40 years for Ragnarök to come or trying to start silly little race wars - and drink in the meantime and beat up 1-2 underage migrants to show what great warriors for the white race they are - look. Please. And if they look ridiculous to people who support Germanic preservation, you can imagine how they look like to the average Joe. He wants nothing to do with them. Nothing. They are a laughing stock, nothing more nothing less.

Furthermore, a reason to reject neo-nazis is the fact that they have been staunch supporters of Zionism. It started with Hitler himself and ends with the alt-right, NSM88, the Traditionalist Workers Party and the Nationalist Front.

B6mnwW4g1G4

We need to progress and cut the cancer from its roots, otherwise we will be merely pawns in a game.

fjaran
Thursday, November 16th, 2017, 06:13 PM
First of all, I do not consider neo-nazis to be on "my own side", except for those cases that grow out of this ideology and return to reality. For this of course, they would need to take their heads out of their clouds and realize:

1. it is not 1939-1945.
2. the Führer is dead and there will be no "second coming".
3. neo-nazism will not overtake Germany - or any part of the world except for Israel - again.

Otherwise, neo-nazis who play dress-up and stereotypical symbolism do nothing but to destroy any work that could advance the idea of Germanic preservation into the hearts and minds of our folk. The Germanic folk has been infected by indoctrination and dogma for decades. We do not need more indoctrination and dogma - which is what NS teaches - to get out of this mess, but we need independent minds, who are not afraid to think and judge for themselves. We do not need cult personalities for the Führer but we need a folk that question authority and arrives at their own conclusions. Neo-nazis merely want to replace an authoritarian system with another, perhaps even more authoritarian.

Any halfway thinking person knows deep inside how ridiculous those skinheads waiting for 40 years for Ragnarök to come or trying to start silly little race wars - and drink in the meantime and beat up 1-2 underage migrants to show what great warriors for the white race they are - look. Please. And if they look ridiculous to people who support Germanic preservation, you can imagine how they look like to the average Joe. He wants nothing to do with them. Nothing. They are a laughing stock, nothing more nothing less.

Furthermore, a reason to reject neo-nazis is the fact that they have been staunch supporters of Zionism. It started with Hitler himself and ends with the alt-right, NSM88, the Traditionalist Workers Party and the Nationalist Front.

We need to progress and cut the cancer from its roots, otherwise we will be merely pawns in a game.

To me national socialism is just about the nation and its folk, nothing inherently more or less.

You lead by example in being well-dressed, honorable, intellectual, caring, and inspiring. I agree that running around sieg heiling and playing dress-up or looking ridiculous doesn't help. It only reaffirms how the lying media falsely portrays nationalists to the masses.

Theunissen
Thursday, November 16th, 2017, 07:28 PM
To me national socialism is just about the nation and its folk, nothing inherently more or less.
You might add a set of financial and social policies there.



You lead by example in being well-dressed, honorable, intellectual, caring, and inspiring. I agree that running around sieg heiling and playing dress-up or looking ridiculous doesn't help. It only reaffirms how the lying media falsely portrays nationalists to the masses.

Full agreement, no costume contest. Especially from weirdos for whom it's all about provoking some grown ups by "being a Nazi".

Be well dressed, well spoken and good at your work. And exemplary citizen, if you want. Right now, I think Heimbach is on a right track with that as far as follow ups of National Socialism are concerned.

In my view Think Tanks and Vanguards decide what direction society is going. Hint: It's not enough to use it in name only.

Juthunge
Sunday, December 3rd, 2017, 12:49 PM
First of all, I do not consider neo-nazis to be on "my own side", except for those cases that grow out of this ideology and return to reality.
They’re on our side in so far they’re not actively propagating our physical and psychological destruction, as does about everyone else. Whether they’re a very useful addition is doubtful, yes.


Otherwise, neo-nazis who play dress-up and stereotypical symbolism do nothing but to destroy any work that could advance the idea of Germanic preservation into the hearts and minds of our folk.
True but you seem to appear to devote more time despising them than were your contempt would be more due.


The Germanic folk has been infected by indoctrination and dogma for decades. We do not need more indoctrination and dogma - which is what NS teaches - to get out of this mess, but we need independent minds, who are not afraid to think and judge for themselves. We do not need cult personalities for the Führer but we need a folk that question authority and arrives at their own conclusions.
Well, it seems we’ve now moved on from larping to actual historical NS.
In an ideal world, I would agree with you and I disagree with the Führerkult, nor would I call myself a Nationalsocialist. But is the historical record in favour of letting the mass decide either?
As it stands, very few people are actually capable of free thinking. It’s not something you can teach them either because by that alone, they’re influenced. Unless someone could be entirely objective but that is unrealistic.


Neo-nazis merely want to replace an authoritarian system with another, perhaps even more authoritarian.
What is better:
An (rather indirect) authoritarian system that seeks to destroy your people, your culture and everything you love?
Or an (rather direct) authoritarian system that seeks to preserve you and elevate you to new heights but is perhaps not to supportive of any little nonsense “freethinkers”(none of whom is actually free) come up with?

In the end, the mass of people will always be influenced. The question is only, from which side.


Any halfway thinking person knows deep inside how ridiculous those skinheads waiting for 40 years for Ragnarök to come or trying to start silly little race wars - and drink in the meantime and beat up 1-2 underage migrants to show what great warriors for the white race they are - look. Please. And if they look ridiculous to people who support Germanic preservation, you can imagine how they look like to the average Joe. He wants nothing to do with them. Nothing. They are a laughing stock, nothing more nothing less.
Yes, all of this is true, but what will ranting about it all the time help? The type of “neo-nazi” you speak about is probably so unintelligent that nothing you or anyone else could say, would convince him of putting himself to better use for his people nor is he probably actually interested in it.
But, again, there are very few of such people and if there is nothing we can do about them it’s better to focus our limited resources on something else.


Furthermore, a reason to reject neo-nazis is the fact that they have been staunch supporters of Zionism. It started with Hitler himself
I never understood this rejecting of a “Zionism” that merely sought to get the Jews out of Europe. Unless you’re speaking about the ridiculous little theory of a NS infiltrated and controlled by the very people they persecuted.

Resist
Friday, June 15th, 2018, 12:00 PM
Like most others, I voted for the second option. I believe that it would benefit nationalists if they avoided copying certain stereotypes. For example, I have nothing against the swastika, it being an ancient symbol used by Germanics, however using it as a representative symbol would immediately lead to marginalization and associations with (neo-)nazism. The question is, would that help or hinder nationalists. I believe it would hinder them, and this without even considering the value of national socialism itself.

That said, I don't believe in watering down what we believe in. "Mainstreaming" an image should only refer to the presentation, and not the essence. In short, the same thing can be said in many different ways.

Nationalists just need to stick to the most effective one, both from a legal and a strategical point of view, and more importantly, we need to stick together. If we argue about symbols amongst ourselves, then perhaps they are counterproductive. The most important should be the goal, not the badge.

A similar topic would be Nationalist Solutions: Be the Answer Not the Sterotype (https://forums.skadi.net/threads/168795-Nationalist-Solutions-Be-the-Answer-Not-the-Sterotype). I've posted this in a separate thread because it doesn't only concern imagery. But I will post a relevant excerpt here too, as I think it applies quite well:


The idea is to show the public that the establishment portrayal of Nationalism is wrong and is politically and ideologically motivated to prevent a fair hearing of an alternative political narrative. Nationalists should aim to deconstruct the negative stereotype of the Nationalist by not living up to the stereotype.

Basically, I believe that nationalists shouldshow that they are more than and beyond "stereotypical" imagery. After all, there is more to a book than its cover.

Theunissen
Friday, June 15th, 2018, 02:21 PM
Like most others, I voted for the second option. I believe that it would benefit nationalists if they avoided copying certain stereotypes. For example, I have nothing against the swastika, it being an ancient symbol used by Germanics, however using it as a representative symbol would immediately lead to marginalization and associations with (neo-)nazism. The question is, would that help or hinder nationalists. I believe it would hinder them, and this without even considering the value of national socialism itself.
....
That's the problem. "Neonazis" copy stereotypes that are transmitted via the mass-media, educational system, cultural industry. They don't even copy the original National Socialists. At least that is the norm. But even if they copied the NSDAP and it's subsidiary organisations, I wonder if that would be advisable. I mean Italians don't copy the Romans, French don't copy the Sans-culottes, Norwegians don't copy the victims. Any generations needs to find an expression of their own. Otherwise, we're dealing with nostalgia clubs, reenactors at best. That has staunchly limited value, but what we need is present actors, with an outlook on the future and not reactionaries that are in a defensive position and act accordingly in a way that is manageable for the enemy.

And I believe the present institutions have the capability, in fact are almost specialized, to handle "Neonazis" and reactionaries. All they need to do is to say:"Look, those Neonazis are just like you know it of the movies" or "Oh, look those reactionaries, they dream of yesterday and the average age of their club members is way beyond pension age". They also have an arsenal of figures to infiltrate that kind of organizations. It's no coincidence that a lot of "Neonazis" are informants or agent provocateurs at the same time.

To me the approach of the Identitarians seems to be the most promising right now. It's insufficient though. We need to have an intellectual arm, an activist arm and a support leg (economic + supporter base) to stand on. There are some in the broader identitarian movement that already think like that.

As for "authoritarianism", we need to realize that any persistent system is hierarchical in nature. The question is rather how disguised that hierarchy is or not. There is not a single egalitarian movement or organization of note. All successful companies, parties or other organisations have some sort of hierarchical structure. They may preach egalitarianism of some sort, but that's not how they work in practice. So why not embrace hierarchy and authority? That would at least be honest.

Rodskarl Dubhgall
Saturday, June 16th, 2018, 04:33 AM
Hmm, I see. It's not the same in Germany. There I heard it's been banned. Here a theme about it:
Celtic Crosses Banned In Germany (http://forums.skadi.net/showthread.php?t=110356)

In the UK they might not be seen as extremists because of the Irish heritage there?

Here they're used by white nationalists. For example the New Right (http://www.nouadreapta.org/limbistraine.php?lmb=eng), they've the Celtic cross on flags, but I think it happens in other countries too.

LOL @ Irish extremists and the Celtic Cross. I'm all for banning it, just to watch the shitfit eruption, no different than the Indian Mutiny. All Muslims should be forcefed swine and all Hindus should be forcefed oxen, enough to make them leave or get with the programme.

Where me, myself and I are concerned, the proper imagery includes flags, coats of arms and family trees as well as baptismal certificates. I celebrate Germanic architecture like stave churches and Germanic scripts like Runic and Fraktur. I have zero use for WWII kits and decor. To me, all that is a parody of true Germanic aesthetic. Don't get me wrong; I think the Swastika looks superficially cool and the SS symbol is okay, but that's the extent of it. I'd rather hoist a Raven banner and Nordic Cross. I have lots of imagery and refuse to be lost in the 20th century.