Page 6 of 7 FirstFirst ... 234567 LastLast
Results 51 to 60 of 61

Thread: Too Many "I'm British and I'm Proud" Pics

  1. #51
    Vķnsk
    „Friend of Germanics”
    Skadi Funding Member
    Rodskarl Dubhgall's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2004
    Last Online
    @
    Status
    Available
    Ethnicity
    Swedish
    Ancestry
    Roslagen til Danelagen
    Subrace
    Nordid
    Y-DNA
    Uppland R-BY30613
    mtDNA
    Dalarna K2A5A1
    Country
    Vinland Vinland
    State
    Upland Upland
    Location
    Nya-Sverige
    Gender
    Age
    38
    Zodiac Sign
    Leo
    Family
    Married parent
    Occupation
    Väring och Vķking
    Politics
    Munsöätten
    Religion
    Forn Sed
    Posts
    3,846
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    8,970
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    412
    Thanked in
    359 Posts
    Quote Originally Posted by Coillearnach View Post
    When a "neutral" country engages in economic warfare through embargoes & sanctions, choking off your access to critical supplies like steel, iron, and oil when you're in the middle of a war, and returns with escalating demands in response to your concessions in negotiation, formalities like war declarations seem trivial.
    Are you referring to the same theatre?

  2. #52
    Senior Member
    Ward's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Last Online
    1 Week Ago @ 05:04 AM
    Ethnicity
    Vinlandic
    Ancestry
    1/2 German, 1/4 Norwegian, 1/4 Irish
    Country
    Vinland Vinland
    Location
    The Wild Frontier
    Gender
    Posts
    703
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    50
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    70
    Thanked in
    45 Posts
    Quote Originally Posted by Captain Blackpill View Post
    Of course it was. Is this supposed to counter me somehow?
    Yes. You said:

    "factually speaking, nothing about mainstream left wing politics today is in line with what was once considered left wing prior to the event of WWII."

    You've been implying that prior to WWII, the left wing referred to good ol' workers who just wanted fair treatment and a decent standard of living. There has always been more to the ideological left than that. Before WWII there was the NAACP, ACLU, and myriad other culturally degenerate and subversive left-wing groups. The SJWs that we see today, including such groups as Antifa and BLM, are absolutely following in the left wing tradition that traces back to the Jacobins. Why is that so difficult to understand?

    Likewise it would be quite absurd to posit that National Socialism and Fascism in general would have had such a form (or even existed, I would consider it in the line of a Hegelian synthesis) had it not been for the fact that Marxism did indeed have accurate criticisms of industrial society, yet proposed an incorrect remedy to the situation.
    NS/Fascism rose in response to both international finance capitalism and Marxism. Marx's criticism of capitalist exploitation holds some water, but his conception of history denied the significance of race and individual personalities, making it antithetical to nationalism and incompatible with the laws of nature. And he didn't offer much in the way of remedies other than claiming that communism is scientifically inevitable. Marxism is just another Jewish pseudoscience in the same vein as psychoanalysis.

    But apparently it is verboten for a Third Positionist to do anything other than slander everything as left-wing. What a completely retarded and reactionary approach to philosophy and ideology; and this is part of why it has been losing. This is why I take such issue with reactionaries, whose ideology can be best summed as a person longing for time machine that goes back to the past. Once in the past, the reactionary will be apolitical, even if he knows how it ends.
    You're clearly out of your league in trying to discuss these matters.
    Last edited by Chlodovech; Wednesday, July 8th, 2020 at 02:28 PM. Reason: Ad hom
    — Always outnumbered but never outclassed —

  3. #53
    Retarded in mysterious ways
    „Friend of Germanics”
    Skadi Funding Member
    Žoreišar's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Last Online
    4 Hours Ago @ 12:46 AM
    Ethnicity
    Scandinavian
    Gender
    Posts
    2,788
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    2,892
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    1,925
    Thanked in
    977 Posts
    Guys, can you please stop the name-calling and ad hominems? The discussion is actually worthwhile, but there's no reasons to be hostile towards each other.
    A nation is an organic thing, historically defined.
    A wave of passionate energy which unites past, present and future generations

  4. The Following User Says Thank You to Žoreišar For This Useful Post:


  5. #54
    Active Funding Member
    „Friend of Germanics”
    Skadi Funding Member
    Rędwald's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2012
    Last Online
    3 Hours Ago @ 02:12 AM
    Ethnicity
    Anglo-Saxon
    Gender
    Age
    28
    Occupation
    Thrower of Rocks
    Politics
    Anti-Judaist
    Religion
    Crypto-Marcionite
    Posts
    867
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    181
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    355
    Thanked in
    198 Posts
    Quote Originally Posted by Rodskarl Dubhgall View Post
    What about Strasserism?

    https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Strasserism
    https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Beefsteak_Nazi

    Personally, I'm anti-political. Blood and soil don't require ideology.
    In their context, the Strasser brothers were too revolutionary. Josef Goebbels was actually in the Strasserite faction initially (being one of the most vocal critics of capitalism, and extremely pro socialist), yet he came around to Hitler's vision and remained loyal to him for the rest of their lives. The problem at the time was that rebuilding of the German military required co-operation from the military class, which was still very much home to aristocrats. Serious proposals of replacing the Reichswehr with the Sturmabteilung would've lost any support from this class, which was obviously still very relevant and powerful. Secondly, the German industrialists were not entirely compromised like modern ones, and subjugation to the goals of the state was considered more desirable than outright nationalization as a rule (this did occur also, however). Strangely enough today, Strasserism is arguably more relevant, considering that no such positive national sentiment remains anywhere within the military or industrial classes. Comparatively, Mussolini's RSI claimed that it was inhibited by certain reactionary forces in the monarchical age of Italian fascism, and even sought to re-engage some of the quasi-communist elements politically. His promises were of more land reform, monopoly-busting, etc etc. I know less of Italy and the RSI, but it's still curious.

    But today, communism is dead; and the dimensions of capitalism have evolved very far beyond what was relevant almost a century ago. Capitalism, and not Bolshevism, was triumphant. Francis Parker Yockey would actually argue the former was the prime enemy - ahead of his time, considering the latter is nonexistent today. In the time of these broadly fascist movements, the West was in an industrial age, where economics was controlling the field of politics. Now more than ever we are increasingly controlled by technology (in collaboration with economics, of course). We live in an age of debilitating economics surplus, where automation is increasingly making both white and blue-collar occupations redundant. What was once inalienable is now alienable - something that can be taken from you and sold back to you. Everything is a commodity (when you can buy ASMR as a service, you are living in hell). It becomes increasingly harder to discover the Real in life. Providing answers to these issues is going to be a serious challenge going forward.
    Last edited by Chlodovech; Wednesday, July 8th, 2020 at 02:29 PM. Reason: Reply to ad hom
    If only you knew how bad things really are

  6. #55
    Senior Member
    Coillearnach's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Last Online
    Monday, October 12th, 2020 @ 08:16 PM
    Ethnicity
    Anglo-American
    Ancestry
    Anglo-Celtic
    Gender
    Age
    32
    Family
    Married
    Occupation
    Vagrant
    Politics
    Nativism/Nationalism
    Religion
    Summum bonum
    Posts
    426
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    397
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    396
    Thanked in
    193 Posts
    Quote Originally Posted by Rodskarl Dubhgall View Post
    Are you referring to the same theatre?
    I'm only referring to the behavior of the USA towards Japan.

  7. #56
    Vķnsk
    „Friend of Germanics”
    Skadi Funding Member
    Rodskarl Dubhgall's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2004
    Last Online
    @
    Status
    Available
    Ethnicity
    Swedish
    Ancestry
    Roslagen til Danelagen
    Subrace
    Nordid
    Y-DNA
    Uppland R-BY30613
    mtDNA
    Dalarna K2A5A1
    Country
    Vinland Vinland
    State
    Upland Upland
    Location
    Nya-Sverige
    Gender
    Age
    38
    Zodiac Sign
    Leo
    Family
    Married parent
    Occupation
    Väring och Vķking
    Politics
    Munsöätten
    Religion
    Forn Sed
    Posts
    3,846
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    8,970
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    412
    Thanked in
    359 Posts
    Quote Originally Posted by Coillearnach View Post
    I'm only referring to the behavior of the USA towards Japan.
    Your observation or complaint is usually a matter of the Atlantic, not the Pacific. Are you defending Japan, or asserting their justification on behalf of Germany? In the former, I don't know any strident NS today who would, while the latter is rather asymmetrical violence. You don't beat up somebody for annoying your friend; it's bad form.

  8. #57
    Senior Member
    Coillearnach's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Last Online
    Monday, October 12th, 2020 @ 08:16 PM
    Ethnicity
    Anglo-American
    Ancestry
    Anglo-Celtic
    Gender
    Age
    32
    Family
    Married
    Occupation
    Vagrant
    Politics
    Nativism/Nationalism
    Religion
    Summum bonum
    Posts
    426
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    397
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    396
    Thanked in
    193 Posts
    Quote Originally Posted by Rodskarl Dubhgall View Post
    Your observation or complaint is usually a matter of the Atlantic, not the Pacific. Are you defending Japan, or asserting their justification on behalf of Germany? In the former, I don't know any strident NS today who would, while the latter is rather asymmetrical violence. You don't beat up somebody for annoying your friend; it's bad form.
    I was responding to Sol in the context of her having a go at the Japanese. It wasn't a veiled defense of Germany, it was explicitly in the context of conflict between Japan and the USA. I'd rather walk on glass than debate the merits of Germany's motivations around WWII with anyone, but especially on right-leaning forums - the shifting sands of "facts", tedious minutiae, mostly bad faith etc make that an absolutely repulsive enterprise for me I am not, have never, and will never be NS - just for reference.

    As for asymmetrical, I'm not sure what species of alternative Japan really could have had in response to a supposedly non-aligned actor completely gutting their war engine - it's kind of like the complaints larger, first-world states have against smaller, 3rd-world states when they employ terrorism or guerilla warfare - what else are they really supposed to do?

  9. The Following 3 Users Say Thank You to Coillearnach For This Useful Post:


  10. #58
    Senior Member
    Astragoth's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2018
    Last Online
    6 Hours Ago @ 11:20 PM
    Ethnicity
    Anglo-American
    Country
    United States United States
    State
    New York New York
    Gender
    Posts
    1,094
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    1,125
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    1,127
    Thanked in
    620 Posts
    Germany was the victim in WW2, it's that simple. They had something like a third of their country simply given to other countries and new ones invented for the express purpose of weakening Germany. Then the British and French act outraged when the Germans want their country back. Then they get pounded flat when the allies declare war on them and ignore twenty plus separate peace offers. Every city is pounded flat millions of civilians dead and their women raped. Oh and Germany is somehow responsible for the war oh and they're responsible for six million dead jews that we cant find bodies for or evidence for. It's obscene.

  11. The Following User Says Thank You to Astragoth For This Useful Post:


  12. #59
    Vķnsk
    „Friend of Germanics”
    Skadi Funding Member
    Rodskarl Dubhgall's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2004
    Last Online
    @
    Status
    Available
    Ethnicity
    Swedish
    Ancestry
    Roslagen til Danelagen
    Subrace
    Nordid
    Y-DNA
    Uppland R-BY30613
    mtDNA
    Dalarna K2A5A1
    Country
    Vinland Vinland
    State
    Upland Upland
    Location
    Nya-Sverige
    Gender
    Age
    38
    Zodiac Sign
    Leo
    Family
    Married parent
    Occupation
    Väring och Vķking
    Politics
    Munsöätten
    Religion
    Forn Sed
    Posts
    3,846
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    8,970
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    412
    Thanked in
    359 Posts
    I'm not about to compare the Japanese to the Germans regarding American noncombatant sabotage justifying non-White violence in "solidarity" across racial lines. That's silly, suicidal Leftist whining. Oh, but since the non-Whites actually supported some Whites, they should be lionised? Sounds like the French and Indian War: I can just picture some Anglo-Saxon in New England scalped (yes, at least one of my ancestors) and the Frogs praising "les savauges noble" for it. It's not new that Eurocentrists look so poorly upon Americans and yet pretend some superiority and solidarity that doesn't exist, due to their own machinations. Hypocritical blame is a fun game, don't you think?

    It's also funny to say Germany was "just" a victim and not a full, frequent participant in sadomasochistic escapades, wanting to perpetrate and not feel any blowback. Hitler brought Germany down knowing full well he was picking one fight after another they couldn't win, but that's got to burn for those ultranationalists thinking too highly of the capacity of their country. As rightly pointed out, geography doesn't favour Germany, any more than it does Poland. Few natural advantages don't usually lead to insularity AND dominance. Like the band Anal Cunt pointed out, "Hitler Was A Sensitive Man" and the wrong one to lead, still smarting over his artfag career and this despondency coloured everything quite recklessly. If Germany couldn't win, then he had to drive them to suicide over it. Not every country has it in them for greatness. You don't see most countries with such sore losers wistful about alternative realities and with a chip on the shoulder, although Iran and Greece might theoretically be good candidates for that.

  13. #60
    Vķnsk
    „Friend of Germanics”
    Skadi Funding Member
    Rodskarl Dubhgall's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2004
    Last Online
    @
    Status
    Available
    Ethnicity
    Swedish
    Ancestry
    Roslagen til Danelagen
    Subrace
    Nordid
    Y-DNA
    Uppland R-BY30613
    mtDNA
    Dalarna K2A5A1
    Country
    Vinland Vinland
    State
    Upland Upland
    Location
    Nya-Sverige
    Gender
    Age
    38
    Zodiac Sign
    Leo
    Family
    Married parent
    Occupation
    Väring och Vķking
    Politics
    Munsöätten
    Religion
    Forn Sed
    Posts
    3,846
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    8,970
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    412
    Thanked in
    359 Posts
    Quote Originally Posted by Idis View Post
    You cannot uphold peace when your adversary's plans are to take over other countries. What did Hitler expect? When he remilitarized Germany and prepared it for war, it put it in a position that would be considered a threat. It would be foolish to pretend that Germany had no hegemony plans or desires. It wanted to rival the British as a world power. Hitler had plans to create an empire with his own world capital. The difference between Britain and Germany was that Germany were the losers of WWI and had signed a treaty, a treaty whose clauses Hitler broke one by one. By doing so, Hitler basically destroyed his and his country's credibility. Why should the British have trusted him to stop at Poland? What was to stop NS Germany from expansion, if not the British? Anyway, one could argue about the moral implications of war and whether it was generally ethical or not. I'd generally believe that war is rarely ethical and almost always about hegemony and expansion. The difference here is that the NS side claims to be spotless, which it is not.

    People here might have relatives who fought for their countries in WWII and were killed during the war, maybe even by the German side, and yet nobody has attacked proud Germans. The NS have posted significantly more WWII-related material than people from Allied countries but as soon as someone posts a proud British symbol there are complaints and accusations. Well, if we seek for all-Germanic unity and reconciliation, then the concerns on both sides must be taken seriously. Sadly, when it comes to WWII topics, there is a form of political correctness on Skadi that mirrors what we have in our countries. The only difference is that the sides have been reversed.


    What I was referring to was not merely the fact of invading Czechoslovakia on its own, but the fact that Hitler had been dishonest about his intentions when he signed an agreement not to invade the remainder of Czechoslovakia, yet did so nonetheless. That coupled with Versailles was like a nail in the coffin to Hitler's reputation. If you were to lend money to an acquaintance and they repeatedly promised to pay you back but ended up never returning your money, would you continue to trust to lend him money in the future? If you did, I'd have to question your sense of awareness.


    NP has already outlined the most important reasons. As to your counterargument, the reason they did not use the A-bomb on the USSR, I agree with what Rodskarl Dubhgall outlined: the Russians were seen as fellow whites and fellow Europeans, unlike the Japanese. I'd add geographical proximity to Europe here as well, considering the long-term effects of dropping such a bomb on the continent.
    I agree with the overly pervasive double standard about idealising the past actors of events in rose-coloured glasses. It's not that the scions of Germanic Allies at online communities are anti-Germanic and self-loathing, only rather come at the issues down the middle of the usual hyperbolic rhetoric issued in triumphalistic historiography. Time has been the judge of both parties, with adequate reflection. If your parents divorced because of cheating and/or domestic violence and were both guilty of wrongdoing each other, would you feel obligated to take sides with only one and condemn the other, or stay more neutral and resolve not to play a pawn in such games? The offspring of such conflicts have to concoct a synthesis of the strengths of their parents and find the nerve to object to the cause of their ruination and resultant miseries of his/her childhood.

    I'm sure we are all acutely aware of the suffering faced by Axis Germanic children, or at least those old enough like myself who were born during the split between East Berlin and Bonn, told tales of ancient greatness contrasting the reality of humiliation throughout those years. Yes, it's possible to weep Anglo tears of joy at the Wall coming down, contrary to the typical Comintern and Warsaw Pact disinformation campaign that was official "truth" in the GDR and some of us have family who were stationed in Germany during the Cold War--my grandfather's cousin married a local German woman and adopted her daughter as his own, who took my surname to the grave on her headstone. If Poland under Lech Walesa and the FRG were on the same side, this "Solidarity" should be seen favourably, as it coincided more or less with the Papal successions of JPII and BXVI in opposition to the Iron Curtain. Perhaps, instead of simple bad faith accusations toward the victors, the losers should take into consideration the fact that the Anglosphere did end up crushing the Soviets by forcing them to perform beyond their limits and imploding upon themselves.

    It was obvious that a hot war as pursued by Hitler was as bound to fail as that of Bonaparte before; perhaps because the Muscovites learnt from surviving the Mongol hordes. If the Japs could defeat Russia in Manchuria, it was only due to their natural advantage along the Pacific coast, but rolling back the Siberian conquest to the Urals wasn't in their capacity, nor should anybody believing in "White solidarity" have wished such a thing as accommodating that partition agreed to by Rome and Berlin on behalf of Tokyo. As some stated, like (former) member Taras Bulba who used to post here when I started in early 2004, Slavs have borne the brunt of most Steppe invasions of the Continent, but they are typically the first to receive abuse from us despite the cushion they've provided at their expence. Just imagine if their second-wave Sarmatia also went the way of the dodo--what then? How would a war between Germany and Italy with Japan at the Urals have fared? Where would Britain and America be in such an event? The most probable scenario, is that the former Axis would have imploded by similar processes as that which toppled the USSR, which means that the UK would get Europe and the US would get Asia anyway, trusting that post-War France and China wouldn't be much opposition. Therefore, yes, the Anglosphere could have made some popcorn and sat it out, while officially in a shared armed neutrality and clandestinely directing every outcome.

    Not to sympathise with Slavic aggressions or those of the Celts, I simply find that they amongst all other Indo-European metaethnics might be the most like us and cultural imperialism over them is preferable to outright slaughter. Every Polack or Irishman who actually wants to be German or English and is ashamed of their inadequacies is far better propaganda for us than eternal crybabies guilting our children about mistreatment, whether real, or imagined slights like the Potato Famine.

    Quote Originally Posted by Žoreišar View Post
    Not any more of a threat than Britain and France was to Germany. Would you show the same understanding for Germany making a defensive pact with Ireland against Britain? Or would you consider that a transgression into the British realm of affairs?

    And this differs from the USSR how?

    I think any reasonable person would find a lot of objections with the Versailles treaty. From what I gather, even the British thought it was too harsh. Besides, the treaty was not agreed upon by Hitler. And he rose to power, in part, due to his promise to tear it up.

    Why should the British have trusted the USSR to stop at Poland?

    I think both sides should be proud of their forebears who fought in the war. They did what they were forced to do, and I don't hold any of them personally responsible for whatever outcomes the war resulted in. Still, I sympathize a lot more with the German cause in WW2 than the Allied cause. I think even nationalists in the Anglosphere have good reason to do so.

    Sure, I don't blame the Allies for not trusting Hitler. But I also don't see why they should care, or at least why they should care more about Hitler than Stalin.

    1. The rest of Japan was not damaged by the nuclear bombs on Hiroshima and Nagasaki. The distance between Moscow (or the industrial areas behind the Urals) was great enough to not pose any risk to Central or Western Europe.

    2. The Allies had already shown their lack of "White solidarity" with the Germans. Notably exemplified with the bombing of Dresden.

    Seems like people are only fishing for bad excuses for the Allies' lack of action against the USSR.
    There seems to be this myth that Germany was all-powerful, stoked by William I's luck with Bonaparte's nephew, but the Second French Empire was actually a rather weak state despite its colonies and the victories were blown well out of proportion--certainly not requiring the skill of Frederick the Great, although (re)gaining Elsaß-Lothringen was a "guilty pleasure" hardly worth any shame. Therefore, when it came to picking fights, Germany was to lose everything and Britain only lost subordination of the Dominions, who by then were to become equal partners much like America, but otherwise continued the Commonwealth beyond the Empire. Ireland was replaced by America in terms of British interests; indeed, as the Union came after 1776 and seemed like a bandaid for the interim.

    As for America, the Philippines were replaced by the Northern Mariana Islands. Last but not least, is poor Austria--dragged into playing second fiddle for upstart Prussia, after Wuerttemberg and Bavaria were thus beguiled. If you think about it, Prussia rather than Austria is as odd a choice for Germany as Jerusalem would have been rather than Sicily for the Holy Roman Empire, in Staufen times. How could a non-contiguous state of Teutons, or Franks, be thus the focal point for the Reich? It would be as absurd as America having Britain join as the 51st State, instead of, say, the reverse as a Kingdom replacing Ireland, of course (it's bad enough that Quebec isn't the separate Republic instead, but maybe the status quo keeps France from incorporating them and/or Louisiana as Outremer). Imagine a different world where Vienna would still rule Germany (although I personally would prefer Munich, with Austria as Ostmark) and Prussia would exist simultaneously like Hungary and Ireland do now.

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/North_Russia_intervention
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Allied...sian_Civil_War

    Maybe you have amnesia and feign ignorance, but being where you are in Norden, there's little good excuse for it, except to rehabilitate the judgment of Quisling (polishing a turd), condemned by the Folk and King of Norway for treason (forced to as a sacrificial lamb, lol?) and it wasn't a muddled situation like with Benedict Arnold, who condemned the typical Scottish tactic of resorting to the French against Britain, but was otherwise a classic English patriot who drove the war into Quebec upon our ancient enemy. You know very well Quisling would not have been praised to allow the Hanse to use Bergen as capital of Norway either, for even if Oslo was resented for being used by Copenhagen or Stockholm to keep the North down, Trondheim stands equally aloof and therein lies true Norse spirit.

    If you look closely, you'll see that even Italy and Japan were helpful Allies in the Russian Civil War, but nowhere was Germany to be seen, except in exacerbating the situation as it unfolded for us all. "White supremacy" was everywhere undermined by the decision of Berlin to treat the Reds as legitimate representatives of the Kremlin; don't blame Churchill for cutting and running in the wake of that. Besides, there's long been a debate between Whigs and Tories about the profitability of imperial management of colonies and it was actually thought for the better that America self-govern, for the ledger books at least. His grand designs were inspired by his ancestor the Duke of Marlborough in the War of the Spanish Succession and certainly lived up to the family pride of Blenheim. Also, much like every Anglosphere member at Skadi, he was proud of the materials with which he deigned to write "A History of the English-Speaking Peoples", no part of which was based upon basic excoriation of any foreign group at all, but purely positive and warm. It was composed beginning in 1937, with the onset of hostilities and which drove his famous speech during the Blitz. That was for the fortitude of us Anglos in the same style as Elizabeth at Tilbury!

    My loving people,
    We have been persuaded by some that are careful of our safety, to take heed how we commit our selves to armed multitudes, for fear of treachery; but I assure you I do not desire to live to distrust my faithful and loving people. Let tyrants fear. I have always so behaved myself that, under God, I have placed my chiefest strength and safeguard in the loyal hearts and good-will of my subjects; and therefore I am come amongst you, as you see, at this time, not for my recreation and disport, but being resolved, in the midst and heat of the battle, to live and die amongst you all; to lay down for my God, and for my kingdom, and my people, my honour and my blood, even in the dust.

    I know I have the body but of a weak and feeble woman; but I have the heart and stomach of a king, and of a king of England too, and think foul scorn that Parma or Spain, or any prince of Europe, should dare to invade the borders of my realm: to which rather than any dishonour shall grow by me, I myself will take up arms, I myself will be your general, judge, and rewarder of every one of your virtues in the field.

    I know already, for your forwardness you have deserved rewards and crowns; and We do assure you in the word of a prince, they shall be duly paid you. In the mean time, my lieutenant general shall be in my stead, than whom never prince commanded a more noble or worthy subject; not doubting but by your obedience to my general, by your concord in the camp, and your valour in the field, we shall shortly have a famous victory over those enemies of my God, of my kingdom, and of my people.
    http://www.bl.uk/learning/timeline/item102878.html



    There's also that!



    Oh, if you look closely, you'll see Oswald Mosley of yesteryear!

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Treaty_of_Brest-Litovsk

    Look at that proto-Molotov-Ribbentrop Pact! Who aided and abetted the Soviets to start with, but Hitler's unsung champions of the Second Reich? Who was on the "Right" and "White" side of the Russian Civil War, but the Allies? It's plain to see that in and of itself led to Weimar. If World Jewry were behind the Bolsheviks, they were also controlling Germany's relationship in favour of them and in overthrowing the Kaiser himself.

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/League_of_the_Just

    It's no secret that Mein Kampf is a synthesis of the Communist Manifesto, all of this going back before the 1848 Revolutions, nothing of which had anything to do with the Anglosphere Allies, but hatched right there in Germany long before Weimar, before spreading like wildfire elsewhere in the Paris Commune, with Russia and China much later following suit.

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chinese_Civil_War

    If Germany and America were implacable foes upon WWI, they at least backed the same side in Peking and Washington twice so, making the Allied cause that much more invested in anti-Communism than neo-NS revisitionists work themselves up over. After all, the Second Reich worked with Lenin and the Third Reich worked with Stalin long before the Atlantic Charter founding parties followed.



    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eight-Nation_Alliance

    Ideally, that should be LoN and UN policy.

    Quote Originally Posted by Ward View Post
    What do you want me to say? The Strasser brothers were basically the original NazBols and they would have wrecked the German economy if they had their way. A. Hitler recognized their harmful influence and sensibly had them dispatched.

    Hitler once said something to the effect of, "our economic policy is that we have no economic policy," meaning that he had no time for dogmatic economic theories. His basic approach to economics was that private enterprises would be subordinate to, and work to fulfill, national policies. If they fell short of their duties, the state would intervene. To that simple and sensible formula I say .

    Incidentally, reducing everything in life to either a free market or egalitarian economic obsession seems to be a Jewish predilection.



    Why did you bother to take issue with my referring to Antifa and BLM as left wing? That's what NazBols do.



    I just think you're extremely confused.



    So the Jew-ridden, sexually and artistically degenerate culture that plagued Weimar Germany wasn't associated with the left wing?



    Heed your own advice.
    Each wing of the NSDAP were peas in the same pod and operated on the same bipolar spectrum as that which sustained the Chairman and Il Duce. Most of us mostly comfortable with the Allied position on things see infighting in the NSDAP as similar to that between Trostky and Lenin. Own all of it, because it's from the same source. Hitler and Strasser were just each a latter-day Engels in their own fashion and they all worshiped Robespierre.

    Quote Originally Posted by Captain Blackpill View Post
    In their context, the Strasser brothers were too revolutionary. Josef Goebbels was actually in the Strasserite faction initially (being one of the most vocal critics of capitalism, and extremely pro socialist), yet he came around to Hitler's vision and remained loyal to him for the rest of their lives. The problem at the time was that rebuilding of the German military required co-operation from the military class, which was still very much home to aristocrats. Serious proposals of replacing the Reichswehr with the Sturmabteilung would've lost any support from this class, which was obviously still very relevant and powerful. Secondly, the German industrialists were not entirely compromised like modern ones, and subjugation to the goals of the state was considered more desirable than outright nationalization as a rule (this did occur also, however). Strangely enough today, Strasserism is arguably more relevant, considering that no such positive national sentiment remains anywhere within the military or industrial classes. Comparatively, Mussolini's RSI claimed that it was inhibited by certain reactionary forces in the monarchical age of Italian fascism, and even sought to re-engage some of the quasi-communist elements politically. His promises were of more land reform, monopoly-busting, etc etc. I know less of Italy and the RSI, but it's still curious.

    But today, communism is dead; and the dimensions of capitalism have evolved very far beyond what was relevant almost a century ago. Capitalism, and not Bolshevism, was triumphant. Francis Parker Yockey would actually argue the former was the prime enemy - ahead of his time, considering the latter is nonexistent today. In the time of these broadly fascist movements, the West was in an industrial age, where economics was controlling the field of politics. Now more than ever we are increasingly controlled by technology (in collaboration with economics, of course). We live in an age of debilitating economics surplus, where automation is increasingly making both white and blue-collar occupations redundant. What was once inalienable is now alienable - something that can be taken from you and sold back to you. Everything is a commodity (when you can buy ASMR as a service, you are living in hell). It becomes increasingly harder to discover the Real in life. Providing answers to these issues is going to be a serious challenge going forward.
    When you point out Goebbels being a Strasserite and he was Propaganda Minister, that is the veritable missing link between Marx and Hitler conveniently swept under the rug, but it makes the NSDAP seem like a secular version of Gentile Neo-Con Christian Zionists. That makes me agree with Dagna and Sol about the un-Germanic and even anti-Germanic nature of the NSDAP, both thoughts and actions being inimical to Germanic preservation, what with the Axis consisting of Roman Empire restorationist Mussolini (whose aesthetic Hitler demanded Speer imitate for Welthauptstadt Germania) and the very Yellow Peril the Kaiser warned about.

    Thus spake Wilhelm II in the Weser-Zeitung, 28 July 1900, second morning edition, p. 1::

    Wie vor tausend Jahren die Hunnen unter ihrem König Etzel sich einen Namen gemacht, der sie noch jetzt in der Überlieferung gewaltig erscheinen läßt, so möge der Name Deutschland in China in einer solchen Weise bekannt werden, daß niemals wieder ein Chinese es wagt, etwa einen Deutschen auch nur schiel anzusehen
    Would Hermann be rolling in his grave or not when the Fuehrer, basically a new Hagen under the spell of Loki, mocked our Voelkerwanderung forebears whom Himmler was then giving credit to? Wouldn't it make Dietrich and Gunther roll in their graves to know that 1500 years later, not only would Germans be called "Hun" but be once again dependent upon those worse than Attila, as if Nedao was worthless?

    It's hard to square a supposed concern with racial purity about Jewry and Negroes with a return to Dark Ages alignments, because the map would look like Victor Emmanuel as Valentinian III, Mussolini as Petronius, Hitler as a Germanic tribal leader alongside Tojo under Hirohito as Attila. That practically guarantees George VI as Theodoric of the Visigoths (i.e. future Theoden of Rohan) and de Gaulle as Aetius at the Battle of the Catalaunian Plains. If anything, Indian contingents under Britain would take after the Alans, both being actual Aryans. Those are just rough approximations, but you get the point about how the battle lines were drawn. I totally wouldn't want to be on the other side of the War and not simply due to them losing, nor out of any Schindler's List fantasy.

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Radagaisus

    I much prefer that bloke.

    It seems like maybe Himmler was the only genuine Teutonicist and the rest of the NSDAP exploited his enthusiasm for the true populism he represented among the masses. Therefore, a lot of this neo-NS revisionism is truly backward mentality and not for trite reasons like bleeding hearts over political incorrectness. We see the main demographic problem of America since 1965 being a massive influx of Latinos and Asians, as what, the revenge of Italy and Japan? If the Axis won, worse than that fate would have thus been prescribed--so much for "White solidarity". In the end, it would be no better than what we have now, as the EU (what, Rome and Berlin?) sides with Arabs and the Anglosphere sides with Israelis in proxy conflicts similar to the Cold War. Nowadays, however, Russia and Japan each seem to have taken a backseat.

Page 6 of 7 FirstFirst ... 234567 LastLast

Similar Threads

  1. Proud of the Mixture or Proud of Being "Pure"?
    By Blutwölfin in forum Physical Anthropology
    Replies: 110
    Last Post: Saturday, May 29th, 2021, 01:49 AM
  2. Replies: 9
    Last Post: Saturday, July 4th, 2020, 09:11 PM
  3. The British Empire is 'Something to Be Proud Of,' Say Most Britons
    By Nachtengel in forum The United Kingdom
    Replies: 1
    Last Post: Saturday, July 4th, 2020, 07:16 PM
  4. So proud of myself!
    By Rodulf in forum The Hearth
    Replies: 3
    Last Post: Thursday, November 21st, 2019, 06:23 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
  •