Page 4 of 4 FirstFirst 1234
Results 31 to 37 of 37

Thread: National Socialism and National Anarchism

  1. #31
    Senior Member
    Aethrei's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2003
    Last Online
    Wednesday, February 16th, 2005 @ 05:40 AM
    Subrace
    Other
    Gender
    Occupation
    Explorer
    Politics
    Caesareanism / Euronazi
    Posts
    44
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    0
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    0
    Thanked in
    0 Posts

    Post Re: National Socialism and National Anarchism

    > Small comment if I may be allowed, on your wanting to adopt Jewish strategies. Havamal says, "uncertain is the gain borne in another's breast" - lets pay heed to this. Jewish strategies 'worked' because we had a unified body, a political government; you cannot apply this back at them - they morph without principles. We must maintain our heritage in distinguishing ourselves from them. Honour in the face of set-backs, come on! There would be no such thing as 'White' or 'European' or 'Aryan' otherwise.

    Also, Gramscian techniques were applied because the Jews saw us as foreign and used subversion through mind-control, etc.; we don't need to use that on our people simply because they are our kin and the question of control or manipulation of the collective unconscious becomes unnecessary. It would be interesting to see if the Gramscian technique could work on the Jews, say, for making a case that they adopt Gesell's Demurrage-charge system! I would wager not. But this is one topic where both you and Moody would together agree because Gesell does not care either for race, or for capitalism. That's why libertarian-socialists and anarcho-integralists favour it.

    So what I am asking is, Jack, can you show why N-S cannot work today? Maybe that would be a better way of arguing instead of disagreements on adopting Jewish ideologies, etc. Do you think N-S is bound to fail; if so, why?

  2. #32
    Senior Member
    Aethrei's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2003
    Last Online
    Wednesday, February 16th, 2005 @ 05:40 AM
    Subrace
    Other
    Gender
    Occupation
    Explorer
    Politics
    Caesareanism / Euronazi
    Posts
    44
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    0
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    0
    Thanked in
    0 Posts

    Post Re: National Socialism and National Anarchism

    ---
    Last edited by Aethrei; Tuesday, December 30th, 2003 at 12:54 PM. Reason: Comments just got posted

  3. #33
    Member Darksphere's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2003
    Last Online
    Saturday, January 15th, 2005 @ 07:59 PM
    Subrace
    Nordid
    Location
    Scandinavia
    Gender
    Politics
    National-Anarchist
    Posts
    9
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    0
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    0
    Thanked in
    0 Posts

    Post Re: Let them eat cake.

    Quote Originally Posted by Moody Lawless
    I agree, but don't they both share a basically self-negating set of contradictions?
    "Rootedness" and "personal" freedom?
    Is that not wanting your cake and eating it?
    I really don't see how the principles of rootedness and personal freedom are contradictionary to each other.

    Indeed rootedness and sense of unity has always thrieved in small communities like the village communities of old and various secret societies and brotherhoods.

    Communities, of course, far from the reaches of government and with a rather large degree of personal freedom at least in the sense that people were free to leave if they didn't like the way things was run.

    I don't think it's that hard to imagine people who love their heritage setting up their own communities to indulge in it without the need for a state.

    Of course I understand that many people may be worried that such a society - without strict immigration laws etc. - might be far too vunerable to immigrant groups, who would like to settle into the community thus destroying the homogenous nature of the community.

    In reality though I don't think this is a very grave threat... I expect people wouldn't want to live in a community dedicated to a heritage that wasn't their own. Would Muslims be interested in moving to a community entirely occupied by Christians? Probably not... when immigrants move to another country they usually try to settle together in ghettoes. The fact is that if people are given free choice of where to live they like to live amongst their own kind.

    The problem though remains the effects of economics. Even though they wouldn't like it immigrants might move into a community dominated by people of another heritage if they were suffering from poverty and famine and the community in question had enough ressources.

    There are several ways to counter such an accident however:

    1. A community should be careful not to flaunt about it's wealth as to not attract attention from sourrounding desperate or greedy groups.

    2. A community could support people who were suffering with whatever surplus they had. Hence nobody would have any reason to move to the community since theyd already given away whatever surplus they had.

    3. A community could very effectively defend itself with an armed militia or the like. Some might argue that this is against the principle of freedom. It is however worth noticing that anybody who would attempt to destroy a functional community build upon shared values would be straight Fascist. It should be noticed though that any military response should be put to use only when negotiations with the immigrant presence had been attempted.
    A community who has nothing to offer trying to defend it's own existance cannot be to blame. A rich community however defending it's riches in the face of starving immigrants would be immoral on the other hand.

    So only if the immigrants persisted in their demands after the community had helped as best it could could military action be justified...

    Of course no community can ever be truly safe from being swepped away but we aren't safe with the current statist system and I suspect a system of small communities would at least be a better safeguard of our heritage than the current system.

    Regards,
    Darksphere, webmaster of: http://www.geocities.com/nationalanarkisme/whatsup

    Other National-Anarchist sources:

    http://www.terrafirma.rosenoire.org

    http://www.rosenoire.org

  4. #34
    Senior Member
    Jack's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2002
    Last Online
    Friday, March 25th, 2016 @ 07:28 AM
    Ethnicity
    Anglo-Celt Australian
    Subrace
    Keltic Nordic
    Country
    Australia Australia
    State
    Victoria Victoria
    Location
    Terra Australis
    Gender
    Age
    33
    Family
    Married
    Occupation
    Guerilla Philosopher
    Politics
    Aristotelian Nationalist
    Religion
    Roman Catholic
    Posts
    1,810
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    0
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    2
    Thanked in
    2 Posts

    Post Re: National Socialism and National Anarchism

    Quote Originally Posted by Aethrei
    > Small comment if I may be allowed, on your wanting to adopt Jewish strategies. Havamal says, "uncertain is the gain borne in another's breast" - lets pay heed to this. Jewish strategies 'worked' because we had a unified body, a political government; you cannot apply this back at them - they morph without principles. We must maintain our heritage in distinguishing ourselves from them. Honour in the face of set-backs, come on! There would be no such thing as 'White' or 'European' or 'Aryan' otherwise.

    Also, Gramscian techniques were applied because the Jews saw us as foreign and used subversion through mind-control, etc.; we don't need to use that on our people simply because they are our kin and the question of control or manipulation of the collective unconscious becomes unnecessary.
    I am not advocating our using mind control against fellow whites (for that, I advocate cultural revolution), but at the very least a re-taking of the State. Gramsci knew the path to do that, and Lenin knew the way to march down it. As Njörd has pointed out, and I lean towards his outlook (similar to that of Norman Lowell's) that the State should simply prevent non-whites from living on soil occupied and claimed by Europeans.

    It would be interesting to see if the Gramscian technique could work on the Jews, say, for making a case that they adopt Gesell's Demurrage-charge system! I would wager not. But this is one topic where both you and Moody would together agree because Gesell does not care either for race, or for capitalism. That's why libertarian-socialists and anarcho-integralists favour it.


    So what I am asking is, Jack, can you show why N-S cannot work today? Maybe that would be a better way of arguing instead of disagreements on adopting Jewish ideologies, etc. Do you think N-S is bound to fail; if so, why?
    This is going to be slightly controversial I think. Nationalism is largely dead. Is there any country apart from the Balkans where hundreds of thousand of bright strong youth would volunteer for national service upon a declaration of war? Where? I know of none except perhaps Ireland if the British were to attempt to take over the Republic. Putin calls for Russian patriotism but he refuses to link this with the East-Slavic peoples, while the geopolitician and National Bolshevik traitor Alexander Dugin whispers Eurasianism into his ear - and yet the Russian Army has to conscript its troops to fight the Chechens. We know there's a world of difference between blood nationalism and soil patriotism (except the followers of Francis Parker Yockey, who think transplanting an infant Asiatic Turk to German soil will give him the phenotypical characteristics of a German when he's grown up) but when they're both using the same label to identify what they regard as important. Every step a European/Western Government takes to identify the national identity with the State instead of the blood-culture group that national identity was built on, nationalism (as opposed to patriotism) weakens.

    'National' Socialism is doomed, and that is why. Our national identities are being ground into dust by the Jews and their system. On one hand they support patriotism (example: Mahathir rejected Australia's entry into the south east Asian trade bloc, because Australia was not 51% Asian. Our Prime Minister, John Howard, 'rebuked' him by saying Australia is and always will be Australian. He does not define what Australian is.) - so that racial foreigners can join our 'in group' - while supporting multi-culturalism/racialism and tolerance so we are effectively forbidden to set up our own exclusive in group. Very well then - I do not consider myself Australian but a member of the Irish diaspora.

    The new 'nationalism' will be somewhat different to the vertical nationalism of world war one. It will be Pan-Germanic nationalism, pan-Slavic nationalism (which may or may not contain pan-East Slavic nationalism and pan-West Slavic nationalism), Pan-Latin nationalism, pan-Colonial nationalism and perhaps Pan-Celtic nationalism, and if the future is to work in our favour we must work to make sure these new nationalisms do not resort to petty intra-European revanchism - or at least wait until we've got control of our continents again...
    All men dream, but not equally. Those who dream at night, in the dusky recesses of their minds, wake in the day to find that it was vanity. But the dreamers of the day are dangerous men, for they may act their dreams, with open eyes, to make it possible.

  5. #35
    Senior Member
    Moody's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2002
    Last Online
    Tuesday, July 10th, 2012 @ 09:18 AM
    Status
    Available
    Ethnicity
    English
    Ancestry
    Albion
    Subrace
    Paleo-Atlantid
    Country
    United Kingdom United Kingdom
    State
    Essex Essex
    Location
    England
    Gender
    Family
    Single adult
    Occupation
    Investigator of Souls
    Politics
    Pan-Germanic Nationalist
    Religion
    Runosophy
    Posts
    1,904
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    0
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    9
    Thanked in
    9 Posts

    Post Re: Let them eat cake.

    Darksphere;"It is however worth noticing that anybody who would attempt to destroy a functional community build upon shared values would be straight Fascist".

    Moody; I disagree here. I know you are using 'fascist' in a purely negative sense, but not all alien influences intent on attacking a community are outwardly hostile. Think of the innate tendency to CONVERT others.
    There are groups both religious and political whose whole reason to be is devoted to converting others to their way of thinking/way of life.
    How could the communities you envisage defend against such influences which are very well-equipped to work in such small-scale enviroments?
    Why are there beings at all, & why not rather nothing?
    [Leibniz/Heidegger]

  6. #36
    Senior Member
    Aethrei's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2003
    Last Online
    Wednesday, February 16th, 2005 @ 05:40 AM
    Subrace
    Other
    Gender
    Occupation
    Explorer
    Politics
    Caesareanism / Euronazi
    Posts
    44
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    0
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    0
    Thanked in
    0 Posts

    Post Re: National Socialism and National Anarchism

    Jack> I am not advocating our using mind control against fellow whites (for that, I advocate cultural revolution), but at the very least a re-taking of the State. Gramsci knew the path to do that, and Lenin knew the way to march down it. As Njörd has pointed out, and I lean towards his outlook (similar to that of Norman Lowell's) that the State should simply prevent non-whites from living on soil occupied and claimed by Europeans.


    > Nationalism is largely dead.

    But you have just proposed a cultural revolution.


    > We know there's a world of difference between blood nationalism and soil patriotism (except the followers of Francis Parker Yockey, who think transplanting an infant Asiatic Turk to German soil will give him the phenotypical characteristics of a German when he's grown up) but when they're both using the same label to identify what they regard as important.

    Oh, I have been reading this a lot lately here; no Yockey's idea of race-and-soil [and Spengler's too for that matter] is not Boasian but is a borrowing from Nietzsche who showed in Beyond Good and Evil how soil, climatic conditions and environment in general has power to shape people - hence the difference he introduces between Meds. and Nords. Yet please note that in his speaking of the need for Meditteraneanising the North, he is implying this is possible in the first place Because they share some originary affinity to respond to such a type of environment. This is why Afrikaners in South Africa irrespective of the Black environment can still be identified as Whites. Also, elsewhere you spoke of some Jew with a White's soul - I can only explain this as a result of the incompatability of the Jewish environment and White blood [that must dominate] and not reason from this that Jews are Whites or Aryans or whatever. To me the two are distinct. The incompatability itself shows the two are different and not that Blacks can be whites because they have white souls, etc.
    I do not believe this is mysticism but an evolutionary trait that allows a certain type of soil and a particular type of blood-group to interact.

    > Every step a European/Western Government takes to identify the national identity with the State instead of the blood-culture group that national identity was built on, nationalism [as opposed to patriotism] weakens.

    But the Nazi Reich IS a typical example of what you are saying. The National identity was based and built on a blood-culture group; the Reich State was only an expression of this and not something ready-made standing on the outside with its own agenda/idealism to which this nation/kin-group seemingly existing separately identified with.

    > 'National' Socialism is doomed, and that is why.

    So you are saying N-S isn't by itself flawed, its merely inappropriate for the age before us. Then why do you advocate the re-taking of the State as above?

    > The new 'nationalism' will be somewhat different to the vertical nationalism of world war one. It will be Pan-Germanic nationalism, pan-Slavic nationalism (which may or may not contain pan-East Slavic nationalism and pan-West Slavic nationalism), Pan-Latin nationalism, pan-Colonial nationalism and perhaps Pan-Celtic nationalism, and if the future is to work in our favour we must work to make sure these new nationalisms do not resort to petty intra-European revanchism - or at least wait until we've got control of our continents again...

    Then why do you say, >As Njörd has pointed out, and I lean towards his outlook (similar to that of Norman Lowell's) that the State should simply prevent non-whites from living on soil occupied and claimed by Europeans. -?

    If your Nationalism is only blood-patriotic, why do you care about soil? As diasporas blood-kin groups could live anywhere and flourish, sticking together, wandering together, living like Jews and even they see they need an Israel for their identity to flourish...

    This is not feasible. Because you know you cannot separate blood and soil. Land is stabilising. You need territory to cultivate your blood-group into a distinct nation. Its absurd to want to be adopting Jewish ideas when they are plainly mimicking our NS ideas precisely because they know it works. Unfortunately, their spirituality/morality being different from ours, NS can only be rendered in its pervereted Zionist form it takes in their hands.

    You may say there is no Aryan race [I understand how you mean], it might have been so till the 19th century, but Hitler legitamised it by giving it real expression. Also, on the Voluntary soldiers, I will say, all the more reason why N-S is necessary, because in Voluntarism, only the best of our men would go to the front as you say. In this willingness, we stand a chance to lose our bravest and most precious assets - the real Volunteers, yes. Conscription should be institutionalised so that we don't lose our real warrior stock entirely - prudence in not placing all eggs in one basket.

    I think we have a real chance here to remodel N-S into a more European, more White framework - we ought to do our best to realise this. Gramsci's march... lets look at our own Mussolini's march and his taking of Rome.

    Hail our Fascism.

    Thanks for responding Jack.

  7. #37
    Senior Member
    Moody's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2002
    Last Online
    Tuesday, July 10th, 2012 @ 09:18 AM
    Status
    Available
    Ethnicity
    English
    Ancestry
    Albion
    Subrace
    Paleo-Atlantid
    Country
    United Kingdom United Kingdom
    State
    Essex Essex
    Location
    England
    Gender
    Family
    Single adult
    Occupation
    Investigator of Souls
    Politics
    Pan-Germanic Nationalist
    Religion
    Runosophy
    Posts
    1,904
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    0
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    9
    Thanked in
    9 Posts

    Post Re: National Socialism and National Anarchism

    Jack; "Nationalism is largely dead...
    'National' Socialism is doomed ...
    Our national identities are being ground into dust by the Jews and their system..."

    Moody; This is rampant Negativity. Nationalism will never die while nations still exist; the destruction of nations is highly unlikely.
    While nations still exist and while the Aryan mythos still exists [and that mythos has proved hardy enough to survive three millennia], then National Socialism will continue to live as it does.

    Jack; "I do not consider myself Australian but a member of the Irish diaspora".

    Moody; Do you speak Gaelic?

    Jack; "The new 'nationalism' will be somewhat different".

    Moody; Ah - so now nationalism isn't dead! It is presumably the 'old' nationalism that is dead!
    False alarm folks!
    Why are there beings at all, & why not rather nothing?
    [Leibniz/Heidegger]

Page 4 of 4 FirstFirst 1234

Similar Threads

  1. What Would You Choose? National Socialism or National Anarchism?
    By DieMenschMaschine in forum Political Theory
    Replies: 54
    Last Post: Tuesday, June 28th, 2011, 05:51 PM
  2. Introduction To National-Anarchism
    By Welf in forum Political Theory
    Replies: 16
    Last Post: Tuesday, September 2nd, 2008, 05:11 PM
  3. What is National-Anarchism?
    By Magi in forum Political Theory
    Replies: 36
    Last Post: Monday, August 18th, 2008, 06:09 PM
  4. Your Views About National Anarchism?
    By Sigurd in forum Political Theory
    Replies: 6
    Last Post: Monday, August 18th, 2008, 06:01 PM
  5. Replies: 27
    Last Post: Friday, April 11th, 2008, 08:47 AM

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
  •