Page 9 of 9 FirstFirst ... 456789
Results 81 to 88 of 88

Thread: National Socialism, Fascism, and Communism

  1. #81
    Proffessional Hickerbilly
    „Friend of Germanics”
    Funding Membership Inactive
    SpearBrave's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Last Online
    2 Weeks Ago @ 10:42 AM
    Status
    Available
    Ethnicity
    American of German decent
    Ancestry
    Bavaria/Switzerland
    Country
    Other Other
    State
    Kentucky Kentucky
    Location
    Central
    Gender
    Age
    54
    Zodiac Sign
    Libra
    Family
    Married
    Occupation
    Kunstschmiede
    Politics
    Self-Reliance
    Religion
    Asatru
    Posts
    4,575
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    2,799
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    1,428
    Thanked in
    683 Posts
    I am not a National Socialist, Fascist or Communist. Truly I don't know what I am politically other than a generic Germanic Preservationist.

    However like any other ideology there are good and bad aspects to them all. In favor of Germanic preservation I will admit that National Socialism is the best of all three. However I don't think it is a good idea for America because of demographics.

    What I don't like are the Hollywood type of National Socialist mainly from here in America. To me it seems they don't understand all the aspects of it and only pick and choose the select parts. If someone is a National Socialist and they are serious about it I don't have a problem with it. If they are just trying to glorify the symbolisms of the Third Reich era without a full understanding then they have problems.
    Life is like a fire hydrant- sometimes you help people put out their fires, but most of the time you just get peed on by every dog in the neighborhood.

  2. The Following User Says Thank You to SpearBrave For This Useful Post:


  3. #82
    Holiness is in right action, and courage on behalf of those who cannot defend themselves.
    „Friend of Germanics”
    Skadi Funding Member
    Wulfaz's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2011
    Last Online
    Friday, January 24th, 2020 @ 11:05 AM
    Ethnicity
    German
    Ancestry
    Germans, Hungarians, Slavs
    Subrace
    Nordid
    Country
    Holy Roman Empire Holy Roman Empire
    Gender
    Politics
    Democratic National-Conservativ
    Religion
    Christian
    Posts
    1,561
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    62
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    83
    Thanked in
    57 Posts
    Quote Originally Posted by Haliaeetus View Post
    Seriously, Wolfface, you are starting to sound like a broken communist record with all the "evil nazis killing and destroying everything and everyone" talk all over the forum.
    Because the nazis were an evil like as the communists. Both of them killed millions and both of them start unlimited war what had carried more million of death.

    The two idiot in Berlin, Wilhelm II and Hitler had destroyed that unified Germany what their ancestors, Friedrich the Great and Otto von Bismarck have build. I know that among that the nationalists are romantic feelings to the WWII and well, the German weapons, the warmachines and the uniforms are an interesting part of the military history. However those are the facts of History that Hitler started the war without any military potential to win it, hence he lost it what had led the total destruction of Germany and the death of millions of German in the front, under the runaway from the Ostgebieten and in the captive-lagers. Furthermore Hitler's SS killed million of Slavs and Jews.

    "Remember that, even when those who move you be kings or men of power, your soul is in your keeping alone. When you stand before God, you cannot say, "But I was told by others to do thus,"or that virtue "was not convenient at the time." This will not suffice."
    /King Baldwin IV in the Kingdom of Heaven/

  4. #83
    Funding Member
    „Friend of Germanics”
    Funding Membership Inactive
    Georgia's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Last Online
    @
    Ethnicity
    German
    Ancestry
    Deutschland
    Country
    Confederate States Confederate States
    Gender
    Religion
    Christian
    Posts
    1,019
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    14
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    25
    Thanked in
    19 Posts
    SpearBrave
    I am not a National Socialist, Fascist or Communist. Truly I don't know what I am politically other than a generic Germanic Preservationist.

    However like any other ideology there are good and bad aspects to them all. In favor of Germanic preservation I will admit that National Socialism is the best of all three. However I don't think it is a good idea for America because of demographics.

    What I don't like are the Hollywood type of National Socialist mainly from here in America. To me it seems they don't understand all the aspects of it and only pick and choose the select parts. If someone is a National Socialist and they are serious about it I don't have a problem with it. If they are just trying to glorify the symbolisms of the Third Reich era without a full understanding then they have problems.
    You are absolutely right, SpearBrave that National Socialism is not a good idea for America because of the demographics. National Socialism works and is good in nation states, like the former Deutschland. BTW, if one looks at the Social Programs in Germany they are modeled much after the Third Reich model. Compare the social programs during the horrible Weimar Republic time with the Third Reich programs and then the ones existing there today. And the correct interpretation/meaning of a nation or nations is, and I am using a quote from Dr. Hill, the president of the LS, as it describes is so beautiful:
    "... true nations, based on the organic reality of race and ethnicity, kith and kin, blood and soil."

    I don't think an independent South would chose National Socialism; the majority of truly white people in the South have heard different doctrines and world views and to them National Socialism is bad and evil. They too have been taught by the history written by the victor, even their own victor who waged an uncivil and unconstitutional war upon them back in 1861 - 1865. And reconstruction which is a type of war as it aims to destroy the culture and heritage of the conquered people, never ended. And always remember, it is race which determines ones culture. However, I would support a homeland for the white race without National Socialism on this continent as long as it was a constitutional republic with true servants of the people as leaders.

    Lastly, one has to understand National Socialism. Obviously, the self-proclaimed National Socialist found here in the US don't understand the world view of National Socialism at all, except a few. Reading "Mein Kampf" preferably an older edition which still can be found hidden here and there in the deutsche Schrift, as the English translation does not do justice to the original text, is a start. Der Wortschatz in the deutsche Sprache is so much more defined and larger, many times translations take away from the true meaning and substance or the original text.

    Georgia
    I have but one lamp by which my feet are guided; and that is the lamp of experience. I know of no way of judging the future but by the past.
    Patrick Henry

  5. The Following User Says Thank You to Georgia For This Useful Post:


  6. #84
    Senior Member
    Mööv's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    Last Online
    Sunday, March 21st, 2021 @ 05:54 AM
    Status
    Available
    Ethnicity
    German
    Ancestry
    Donauschwaben
    Subrace
    Keltic nordid/Alpinid
    State
    Danube Swabian Community Danube Swabian Community
    Location
    Wigrid
    Gender
    Age
    39
    Zodiac Sign
    Aquarius
    Family
    Single parent
    Occupation
    Mad scientist
    Politics
    Politically incorrect
    Religion
    Heathen
    Posts
    1,400
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    666
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    202
    Thanked in
    128 Posts
    Quote Originally Posted by Wulfaz View Post
    Because the nazis were an evil like as the communists. Both of them killed millions and both of them start unlimited war what had carried more million of death.

    The two idiot in Berlin, Wilhelm II and Hitler had destroyed that unified Germany what their ancestors, Friedrich the Great and Otto von Bismarck have build. I know that among that the nationalists are romantic feelings to the WWII and well, the german weapons, the warmachines and the uniforms are an interesting part of the military history. However those are the facts of History that Hitler started the war without any military potential to win it, hence he lost it what had led the total destruction of Germany and the death of millions of German in the front, under the runaway from the Ostgebieten and in the captive-lagers. Furthermore Hitler's SS killed million of Slavs and Jews.

    You've been reading too many communist books.
    Lieber tot als Sklave!

  7. #85
    Roslagen til Danelagen
    „Friend of Germanics”
    Skadi Funding Member
    Rodskarl Dubhgall's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2004
    Last Online
    @
    Status
    Available
    Ethnicity
    Vínsk
    Ancestry
    Engelsk (Autosomal), Uppland (Y-DNA) och Dalarna (mtDNA)
    Subrace
    Nordid
    Y-DNA
    R-BY30613
    mtDNA
    K2A5A1
    Country
    Vinland Vinland
    State
    Kentucky Kentucky
    Location
    Nya-Sverige
    Gender
    Age
    38
    Zodiac Sign
    Leo
    Family
    Married parent
    Occupation
    Väring och Víking
    Politics
    Munsöätten
    Religion
    Forn Sed
    Posts
    3,848
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    8,994
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    412
    Thanked in
    359 Posts
    SpearBrave is right, but Georgia is wrong. National Socialism inverted the folkishness of WWI, by not merely advocating for nation-states, but in annexations of all soils wherein one's blood was found and instituting the lebensborn program. Nation-states are supposed to be libertarian, not imperialist. No Borg Collective could be good for ethnic nationalism, concentration camps and apartheid notwithstanding. It's one thing to have the Anschluss of Ostmark and take the Sudetenland, but the General Government of Poland was just an alien occupation that pretty much sums up what happened to Cold War Germany afterward.

  8. #86
    Senior Member Verðandi's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2002
    Last Online
    Wednesday, September 12th, 2018 @ 02:42 PM
    Ethnicity
    Germanic
    Country
    Luxembourg Luxembourg
    Location
    Asgård
    Gender
    Age
    37
    Family
    Two sisters
    Occupation
    Wyrd-weaver
    Posts
    8,107
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    0
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    579
    Thanked in
    380 Posts

    National Socialism – The Fundamentals (Part 8)

    Genetic Hygiene principles have been abandoned, which has led to the biological degeneration of mankind that we are witnessing today on a massive scale.

    More...

  9. #87
    Roslagen til Danelagen
    „Friend of Germanics”
    Skadi Funding Member
    Rodskarl Dubhgall's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2004
    Last Online
    @
    Status
    Available
    Ethnicity
    Vínsk
    Ancestry
    Engelsk (Autosomal), Uppland (Y-DNA) och Dalarna (mtDNA)
    Subrace
    Nordid
    Y-DNA
    R-BY30613
    mtDNA
    K2A5A1
    Country
    Vinland Vinland
    State
    Kentucky Kentucky
    Location
    Nya-Sverige
    Gender
    Age
    38
    Zodiac Sign
    Leo
    Family
    Married parent
    Occupation
    Väring och Víking
    Politics
    Munsöätten
    Religion
    Forn Sed
    Posts
    3,848
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    8,994
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    412
    Thanked in
    359 Posts
    Quote Originally Posted by Verðandi View Post
    Genetic Hygiene principles have been abandoned, which has led to the biological degeneration of mankind that we are witnessing today on a massive scale.

    More...
    I'm eugenicist. I deliberately took to wife a pale, fair maiden without immigrant ancestors, from a Colonial and Confederate family of Lothian origins. My own family tree is all from where the Union Jack flew in 1763, Deira in particular. This makes fully Northumbrian paternity, while our fathers are R1b and R1a, our mothers are K2b and K2a, from Lundenwic.

  10. #88
    Roslagen til Danelagen
    „Friend of Germanics”
    Skadi Funding Member
    Rodskarl Dubhgall's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2004
    Last Online
    @
    Status
    Available
    Ethnicity
    Vínsk
    Ancestry
    Engelsk (Autosomal), Uppland (Y-DNA) och Dalarna (mtDNA)
    Subrace
    Nordid
    Y-DNA
    R-BY30613
    mtDNA
    K2A5A1
    Country
    Vinland Vinland
    State
    Kentucky Kentucky
    Location
    Nya-Sverige
    Gender
    Age
    38
    Zodiac Sign
    Leo
    Family
    Married parent
    Occupation
    Väring och Víking
    Politics
    Munsöätten
    Religion
    Forn Sed
    Posts
    3,848
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    8,994
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    412
    Thanked in
    359 Posts

    Post

    NatSozArbeiter proves that there is no cookie-cutter version of National Socialism that universally applies and for a political or socioeconomic philosophy to take root, it must transcend the lifetimes and popularities of particular individuals like Hitler or Strasser, so the post-Weimar conception and activism is moribund. Furthermore, Nationalism very often has roots in Jacobinism and Socialism almost always in Marxism, but there are multiple derivations for what may amount to National Socialism. It's just ironic that the Third Reich tied itself to ideologies held by its enemies who plundered Germany in the end and occupied the country according to those very dictates supposedly not held by the Third Reich. What is the difference between one polity operating on a one-size-fits-all platform and imposing it on hostile neighbours, with those very same hostile neighbours with overlapping ideologies turning it right back onto where it came from? The difference is who's in charge, not so much as in their ideologies, or we'll just witness nonstop hair-splitting and finger-pointing, like Rome vs Avignon vs Pisa as to ownership and operation of the Papacy as well as who were the Antipopes. There was never just one Nationalism, Socialism, National Socialism, Fascism or Communism, which leads to a 'shifting ground' fallacy of dodging legitimate discussion in an atmosphere fully revelative.

    Quote Originally Posted by Ralf View Post
    I sometimes wonder what the difference between Fascism and Communism actually is, at least the way they were presented by Russia and supposedly Germany in the time of Stalin and Hitler, in fact Stalin-ism with its paranoid mass murders, its genuine "death camps" and complete totalitarianism, seems more like Fascism to me, than Hitlers so called "Fascism" that involved taking money and power from the big capitalists, and actually building a better society for the ordinary German which is surely the claim Communism makes.
    Fascism is officially a reactionary stance to Communism, but which merely furthered the abuses of Communism by taking inspiration from that which it supposedly opposed. Generally, Fascism appealed to those using the Latin alphabet and Communism appealed to those using the Cyrillic alphabet, but Nazism was an opportunisitic mixed bag. To say a kleptomaniacal state is idealistic is shocking. You would prefer Rule of the Generals under Cromwell, when the profits from attainders were doled out like candy, which is what happened later when the 1776 Revolutionaries sequestered all Loyalist properties as they shouted: "Life, Liberty and Pursuit of Happiness!" You are also making the case that many Socialists do about Communism, on how it is the perfect society and can only work on paper, which means it's a work of fiction by Marx, turned into a religion like how the Book of Mormon by Joseph Smith made up the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints and like how Dianetics by L Ron Hubbard made up the Church of Scientology. Since when was Utopia by Thoma More ever real? Maybe it was just a contrast from life in the Black Death, but totally unworkable. Mein Kampf fit the Great Depression in the same way, but I could never subscribe to being programmed willingly as some automaton for greener pastures never green enough. All that crap's so elusive.

    Quote Originally Posted by Alfadur View Post
    Authoritarian politics are partly influenced by religion and culture, but that's far from the whole reason behind them. There is no "Just So" explanation that neatly explains why certain ideologies have caught on in certain places. National Socialism is not especially Protestant in nature - the only NS state in existence, Germany, was half Catholic anyway - but rather the most extreme form of the "folk socialism" that has always existed in the German and Scandinavian society. Religion has very little to do with it, on the national and geopolitical level.

    On the other hand, you are halfway right: NS Germany had different schools of thought, which were pretty influenced by area and religion. The Prussians had a left-wing tendency which Mohler called "National Revolutionary", which upheld the Lutheran-Prussian tradition, had a distinct mix of German and Slavic ideas, and oriented towards the East while opposed against Western capitalism. In contrast were the Bavarian and Austrian Catholics, who had a strong right-wing tendency and took the exact opposite stance. (Hitler himself was one of them.)

    Lastly, Communism is not "natural" to Orthodox Christian areas. It's an ideology created by a Jew, and was forced upon Russia by the Bolsheviks who were largely Americanized Jews. Russia, in turn, enforced it on the rest of Eastern Europe. It's true that Eastern Europe has a long tradition of authoritarian rule and collectivism, and democracy has never really caught on there, so that's probably one of the reasons why the Russians grew to accept it eventually (and are nostalgic about it today). It was simply an accident of history that Eastern Europe went communist.
    It's true that Slavs are naturally receptive to collectivist ideas (and that's totally unrelated to their Orthodox Christianity, which was very anti-communist), but this tendency to anti-democracy and collectivism could just as easily have expressed itself as NS.


    Hitler and NS Germany belonged to the political spectrum that can be termed as "Fascism", along with Mussolini in Italy and the Iron Guard in Romania. These three did have obvious differences, but they were all part of a nationalistic bloc that was anti-democratic and emphasized the national community above all.

    Military dictatorships, such as Franco's Spain, are not fascism. A military junta is often the worst enemy of fascists, as all professional career generals are. Franco was a little traitor who destroyed the Falangists in Spain; Antonescu betrayed the Iron Guard in Romania; Pinochet helped the Jewish capitalists come into Chile and allowed the global corporations to plunder his country. Those greedy opportunist Latino dictators have nothing in common with genuine fascism. (The word "fascism" has been used and abused to death, anyways ).

    My conclusion: your whole OP is a bit of a stretch.
    No, you confirmed the gist of what I aimed for. There was no mere historical accident that geopolitics unfolded as they did. I observe this without bias for or against any of the three in competition for each other. If I were to state that I was a 'Republican Nationalist', it would be based upon the Zeitgeist of the Anglo-American model between 1649, 1776, 1861 and 1916, not the French ones of 1789 through their Fifth Republic, none of which come close to the type of society I'd prefer and I don't even want to praise the ones in my own culture.

    Quote Originally Posted by Ralf View Post
    Hi Grimston, as an aside in view of your admirable admission for a passion for Christian ideology.
    My own so called "anti-semitism" world views, I principally base on Jesus own words about our own time in Revelation where he states that the "Great city, and Harlot has a kingdom over the kings of the Earth"

    :- 18 The woman you saw is the great city that rules over the kings of the earth.”

    So, a great city that controls all the worlds governments, now either Jesus was lying, or just before the establishment of the one World Government, there would be a group of people who do indeed have undue influence on the worlds individual nations, and who is this group of people or what is this city?

    Revelation 18 v24 In her was found the blood of prophets and of God’s holy people,
    of all who have been slaughtered on the earth.”

    Now compare that verse with the words Jesus addressed Jerusalem and the elite ruling Jews of the time with at Matthew 23

    29 “Woe to you, teachers of the law and Pharisees,
    35 And so upon you will come all the righteous blood that has been shed on earth,
    37 “Jerusalem, Jerusalem, you who kill the prophets



    Now that to me is just a small part of the evidence that Jesus identifies it is indeed Jews that are controlling our governments in our time, and I have yet to find evidence that he was wrong whenever I search deeper.
    Psychological projection is something Christianity inherits from Judaism, so I'm not surprised to see the pot calling the kettle black. In this environment, where is there neutrality and where is there a valid self-representation? Christianity supposedly outlays a fair environment for Gentile hangers-on of Jewry, which is exactly the cause of this problem you address, as only the Jew is allowed self-representation in the Bible. Christianity prescribes that the only justice is for the Jew way and for them to let us be as dogs begging for scraps from the master's table. Have you not read the discourse between Jesus and the Samaritan Woman at the well?

    If Christianity opposes the Pharisees, why did Peter let Paul bully him into replacing the Nazarene community with him in charge, after having Stephen stoned to death? If the Petrine succession from Jesus is right in the main, how can Gentiles be Christians, when Jesus told his Apostles to avoid Samaritans and Gentiles, but only seek out the lost sheep of Israel? Therefore, Christianity is NOW a Pharisee conquest of what was Nazarene and not even of Jesus, but Paul, who has you submit to worship a dead Jew, like you should scramble for the chance to do such a thing and cry if they wouldn't let you do so. This is without even addressing the Sadducee and Essene nature of the Sanhedrin or Pentarchy as it developed, but the Bible itself shows you the Pharisees killing Jesus and replacing his right hand man with one of their own. Still think this religion is Christian, when Nazarenes were strictly Hebrew under Jesus? Still think Christianity isn't Judaism, when it is aligned with the rabbinical Pharisees' foremost persecutor under Caiphas, who had Jesus Crucified? It's not just Judas who betrayed Jesus, as Peter denied him thrice and abdicated responsibility for recuperating Nazarenism once the Temple was destroyed and the Pharisees at Masada were wiped out, letting the Pharisee survivor Paul come take his place and the Hebrews' place by staffing their synagogue with Greeks. This Judaised at the same time Galatians claimed to oppose Judaisers, thus immobilising Hellenists except to box themselves within the Abrahamic worldview by advertising the sophistry of Solomon, that obviously is shared with Islam. The New Testament praises Jew prophets, along with that terrorist Moses.

    Jesus tells his flock to not be like the Gentiles, so it's not true what Paul said about there being neither Jew nor Greek in Christ, because only the Greeks have to give up who they are to join their exclusive-inclusive sect. When Jesus told his Nazarenes to not be like Gentiles, he contradicted himself about paying tribute to Caesar, because if the denarius belongs to Caesar, it is he who rules over them in such a way Jesus teaches his followers to oppose. That is exactly what led to the reaction of Diocletian, so Pilate was correct in Crucifying Jesus, even if Caiphas wasn't anything but an Edomite collaborating hypocrite trying to look good for Rome and not genuinely adhering to the cause of the Sicarii--not that I'm siding with the purists worshiping the Davidic line or anything like it, just pointing out the obvious. We've got to be washed, because our Aryanness is dirty and our dietary habits are foul, etc. That is a form of Aryan debasement before the Heebs which happens ritualisticallly and habitually without any Heeb in the room to gloat, as he does it from afar in his 'synagogue of Satan', if this doesn't refer to the Muslims-to-be in the time John wrote the Apocalypse.

    Jesus also tells us to deny our families for him, when the Ten Commandments tells the Hebrews to honour thy father and mother, so the situation is such that only the Jew ends up preservationist in the face of all odds.

    Quote Originally Posted by Wulfaz View Post
    Because the nazis were an evil like as the communists. Both of them killed millions and both of them start unlimited war what had carried more million of death.

    The two idiot in Berlin, Wilhelm II and Hitler had destroyed that unified Germany what their ancestors, Friedrich the Great and Otto von Bismarck have build. I know that among that the nationalists are romantic feelings to the WWII and well, the German weapons, the warmachines and the uniforms are an interesting part of the military history. However those are the facts of History that Hitler started the war without any military potential to win it, hence he lost it what had led the total destruction of Germany and the death of millions of German in the front, under the runaway from the Ostgebieten and in the captive-lagers. Furthermore Hitler's SS killed million of Slavs and Jews.
    There are differences between Kaiser Bill and a Sensitive Man (credit goes to A.C.--R.I.P. Seth Putnam), but it's true that they both foolishly threw away what Germany gained. When you fight those with more resources and they win, you lose more than they do, even if it seems they would give up their pride to hold you down, when your pride is the reason for your suffering with nothing in the end. That is the position of Germany over the course of the 20th century--quite different from the 19th century. The best thing Germany did in war was defeat the namesake and wannabe of Napoleon Bonaparte, which was a much smaller scale of previous events that century when it was Britain who wiped the floor with the real Corsican Frenchman. It did no good for those of the 20th century to take events like those out of context and turn reality on its head, learning nothing. If Britain could defeat the original First Consul, we could do so with those who could only defeat his shadow and not just once, but twice making the same mistakes as the shadow's original.

    So what if Britain didn't want to be bested by anyone and sacrificed the Empire to prove that point that Germany thought they could even without those resources? Britain lost less than Germany, then the Dominions began to grow up and into their own shoes, still on Britain's side, whereas Germany had nothing left, not even a singular country and two to four components thereof instead. So what if Britain, Jr rose up and took the place of his father, when that's filial piety? It would have been wrong if America sided with Germany, as anti-Folkish and proof that Anglos were just universalistic moral crusaders agreeing with the mantras of those in Deutschtum instead of the Anglosphere. If the Anglo moral crusade is against a marriage of Jacobinistic Nationalism and Marxistic Socialism, then that's a worthy reason for diatribes, as more or less important as opposing alien Fascism and Communism. There's nothing wrong with populism or expansion, save that this can only be achieved in peaceful means if there is no competition, but that is totally unrealistic.

    For Germanic brothers like Britain and Germany to feud is no different than what went on with France and Italy, as it's not guaranteed that Britain and Germany would go against France and Italy, even though this is much more preferable. Did the Jew force the Hundred Years' War or the Wars of the Roses to come about? Where was the Jew between the time of Longshanks and Old Ironsides? Don't need a Jew to have excuses to fight. Sibling rivalry, however, has a central place in Jew mythology, when Cain slew Abel. Where did Scandinavians get the inspiration to throw away Kalmar for fratricide? Why did Germans go brother against brother? Did the Jew tell them to, or finance them? How about the Medici (behind the French Wars of Religion) or Fugger (a Germanic clique) fatcats?

    In a war that does not consist of personal combat like a holmgang or duel, all is fair or unfair, but no matter and provocation is provocation. 'Crimes against humanity' is just icing on the cake by the victors, to rub salt in the wounds and the effect is obvious. I don't care about that part, only about the power politics. I was in a number of hand-to-hand fights in my youth, regardless of ethnicity or race and whether or not somebody was my size. Who says they won't respond to a challenge when issued by anybody, unless they be near and dear, perhaps living under the same roof? Yes, except for the issues of the Habsburgs, Orangists, Hanoverians and Saxe-Coburg-Gothans, there wasn't any common household for Britain and Germany and even then, it wasn't the same as incorporating Wales into England, or the Isles into Scotland, nor Angles and Scots sharing Britain, followed by the addition of Ireland in a common Union and neither was the relationship one as intimate as the Dominions with the UK--even America had attachment to the failed Republican state in Britain. It doesn't mean Britain and/or America discarded Germanic heritage, by losing patience with Germany, who was obviously outmatched by 2/1. Neither did Germany forfeit Germanic heritage in doing their thing the way it seemed fitting to them. Whatever!

    P.S. Don't care about Slavs in times of war or Jews in times of peace.

    Quote Originally Posted by SpearBrave View Post
    I am not a National Socialist, Fascist or Communist. Truly I don't know what I am politically other than a generic Germanic Preservationist.

    However like any other ideology there are good and bad aspects to them all. In favor of Germanic preservation I will admit that National Socialism is the best of all three. However I don't think it is a good idea for America because of demographics.

    What I don't like are the Hollywood type of National Socialist mainly from here in America. To me it seems they don't understand all the aspects of it and only pick and choose the select parts. If someone is a National Socialist and they are serious about it I don't have a problem with it. If they are just trying to glorify the symbolisms of the Third Reich era without a full understanding then they have problems.
    Yes, agreed completely. Apart from whether one's religion is Aryan or Semitic, I don't think an ideological litmus test is always appropriate for Germanic preservation and the conditions vary according to the Germanic subculture involved, which is usually dependent upon the particulars of their situation. Considering the nature of Continental politics at the time, the Third Reich was hardly extraordinary, which is why they ought not have been singled out. However, the fact that Berlin was a Germanic polity falling into the same errors as non-Germanics around them, meant an alien establishment had formed in the place of one more recognisable. It seems 'Hun' was said too soon, because I don't see much different in Prussian Germany from Saxe-Coburg-Gotha Britain, but this slur seems to fit the situation after the transformation into Windsor and the way in which Hitler echoed Attila.

    Quote Originally Posted by Mööv View Post
    Seriously, Wolfface, you are starting to sound like a broken communist record with all the "evil nazis killing and destroying everything and everyone" talk all over the forum.
    Yeah, the Nazis killed and destroyed themselves, which may have been their worst legacy. Look at Israel and tell me that the Nazis were successful, yet this proves both the Axis and Allies were all talk and no action about the Jewish Question, so everyone is to blame for our current afflictions. Seems like the NSDAP failed to deliver on their major promises, but empty rhetoric takes a lot of hot air and Hitler had it in spades--just watch Triumph of the Will. At least Churchill made good on his threats. Only if Jews everywhere accepted Israel as their place and acknowledged their lack of importance in the world, but this requires Marxists and Christians to toe the line here.

    Quote Originally Posted by Mööv View Post
    You've been reading too many communist books.
    If I read a Communist book, I might become a Nazi, hence, Mein Kampf could only be written with the Manifesto in mind. I prefer not to go down that rabbit hole, thank you very much, since there's little to learn that hasn't been already demonstrated. I can pride in blood and soil without Marx telling me to combine race and class for an all-out societal implosion, where revolution is a permanent, unending cycle of dysfunction, as it began in Weimar and continued in the Third Reich, as well as during the various stages of the Soviet Union and every step of the way since the fall of the 'Ancient Regime'. The marriage of race and class struggle espoused by Marx was made a priority by Hitler, no more or less than Strasser, just with different emphases. The delivery system was the same as that of the Jacobins, in another Reign of Terror, but supposedly for a holy cause even as it entailed rampant corruption and backstabbings no different than what happened after the Reds defeated the Whites, turning on one another. WWII might have been called the German Revolutionary Wars, or the Adolfeonic Wars, but not without coming up with equivalent Russian Revolutionary Wars or Vladimireonic Wars, etc.

    Who says we have to pick a side? So, Germanic Germany has a problem because they're at least halfway Fascist and the Communists they're in conflict with are non-Germanic...it's non sequitur to expect that Anglos must support National Socialist government as if superior over metaethnic reasons. The Windsors were doing Ein Volk Ein Reich Ein Fuehrer in the Great War, long before that Austrian painter copied it in his own way. Furthermore, Hitler was as much a showman as Reagan or Trump, with an artistic background totally prescient of the Beatniks before they became pacifist Hippies. Not only was Hitler totally untraditional in this way, but he was an unassailable figurehead and abstract symbol, sort of how in that somewhat recent Marvel film of Iron Man 3, when the 'Mandarin' was a scripted and staged apparition for the camera. Yes, here I allude to that time Clint Eastwood went on stage, pointed at an empty chair and talked to it as if it were Obama. If any think this is the folly of a constitutional monarch like George VI who kept his life past WWII after having faced no conviction for treason before illegally seizing absolute power to conduct a war of revenge, nor took cyanide during the Nuremberg Trials or died by a murder-suicide pact in some miserable pillbox, then you are bonkers.

Page 9 of 9 FirstFirst ... 456789

Similar Threads

  1. Replies: 66
    Last Post: Sunday, September 12th, 2010, 12:20 AM
  2. National Communism
    By Taras Bulba in forum Political Theory
    Replies: 97
    Last Post: Sunday, October 18th, 2009, 10:02 AM
  3. Chauvinism, National-Socialism or Racial-Socialism?
    By Lusitano in forum Political Theory
    Replies: 4
    Last Post: Thursday, May 4th, 2006, 06:02 PM
  4. Replies: 22
    Last Post: Friday, November 5th, 2004, 03:08 AM
  5. National Socialism or Fascism?
    By Pera_Z in forum Political Theory
    Replies: 46
    Last Post: Monday, April 12th, 2004, 01:07 PM

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •