The Principles of National-Socialist Law (David Myatt)

[rhadley]

Check out the concept of NS, and Aryan, law as defined by Dave Myatt in the following article. He bases this on the principle of personal honor - no one, no government, has the right to take away our honor, and our right to defend ourselves and our kinfolk. This, Myatt says, is the basis of true freedom and allows for the creation of a real Aryan society. [ See his The Complete Guide to the Aryan Way of Life, section - 6 Toward Freedom: Creating a New Society Based on Aryan Law]



The Principles of National-Socialist Law



I: The first, and fundamental, principle of National-Socialist law is that there are only honourable and dishonourable deeds, with dishonourable deeds being the concern of National-Socialist laws. That is, there is no concept of "crime" as "crime" is now understood in modern societies. National-Socialist laws thus define what is dis-honourable.

II: The second principle of National-Socialist law is that the penalties for committing dishonourable deeds should be compensatory, rather than punitive, and involve: (1) exile of those found guilty of dishonourable conduct; (2) compensation by the guilty person, in goods, or money, of the victim of the dishonourable deed, or of the family/relatives of the victim. If the person found guilty of having committed a dishonourable deed or deeds has little or no goods or money then they can give their labour for a specified period.

Imprisonment is reserved for serious deeds of dishonour and should never exceed a period of one year, with all those sentenced to imprisonment being given the option of exile instead. As an alternative to all the foregoing, a penalty of work serving the community for a fixed period of not more than six months is permissible.

Only these types of penalties are permitted by National-Socialist law, for only these are honourable, fair and just. The death penalty is expressly forbidden.

Exile can be of two kinds: Greater Exile, where the person is exiled from the homeland for the rest of their life; or Lesser Exile, where the person is exiled for a period of three years.

Someone who has been exiled is an outlaw: outside the protection of National-Socialist law.

III: The third principle of National-Socialist law is that an accusation of dishonourable conduct - that is, of someone doing a deed which has been defined, in law, as dishonourable - must be made: (a) in person by either the victim of such a deed, or by the family/relatives of the victim; and (b) in public, in front of several witnesses.

That is, National-Socialist law is concerned only with dishonourable actions between individuals: with deeds which are actually done in real life and which affect an individual or individuals. Thus, there is not and can never be, in National-Socialist law, (a) any prosecution of a person by some "Institution" or Government or officials of these; (b) any prosecution for something which has not been committed; (c) any such thing as a dishonourable deed committed against some "Institution" or some "Government": that is, no such thing as a "crime" against the State.

There is thus no such thing as "conspiracy" in National-Socialist law, just as individuals cannot be prosecuted for "intending" to commit a dishonourable deed.

What must be proved in an National-Socialist Court of Law is that the accused did do the dishonourable deed they are accused of. An intention to commit such a deed is not and never can be contrary to National-Socialist law.


IV: The fourth principle of National-Socialist law is that every individual has the right to defend themselves, their family, and those to whom that individual has sworn, before witnesses, an Oath of Loyalty, and the right to use lethal force in such defence.

Should an individual or individual be harmed or injured in such defence, then it is the right, of that individual to seek redress from the individual who has harmed or injured them. Should an individual be killed in such defence, then the family/relatives of that individual have the right of redress.

This redress consists either of accusing, in public, the person of dishonourable conduct, or of a direct challenge to a duel or a trial by combat.


V: The fifth principle of National-Socialist law is that disputes between individual - involving injury or any other matter - may be settled through either a duel between the individuals involved, or by a trial by combat between those involved.

That is, it is a fundamental right, and duty, of the individual to be responsible for themselves, their family, and those given an Oath of Loyalty, and to seek, if necessary, personal vengeance and satisfaction, through a duel or trial by combat. Justice, for National-Socialist law, is a matter of honour and of being seen to be fair.

What matters, what is important, for National-Socialist law is the personal honour of the individual and the right, and duty, of the individual to defend their own honour. This right and duty cannot be taken away from the individual by, for example, the State, for that would be contrary to National-Socialist law, a denial of the freedom of the individual based as this freedom is on personal honour, and personal responsibility to defend that honour.

National-Socialist law thus accepts that a duel, or a trial by combat, is an honourable way of settling disputes between individuals.

In the matter of duels and trial by combat, National-Socialist law specifies that there must be an independent referee, Umpire or judge, at least two independent witnesses, and that such duels and trials be conducted in an honourable way according to custom. National-Socialist law affirms that should any person be injured or killed in such a duel or trial by combat then that is their own responsibility. That is, National-Socialist law considers such duels and such combats - when performed honourably according to custom - as honourable deeds.

VI: The sixth principle of National-Socialist law is that anyone publicly accused of a dishonourable deed or deeds has a right to either challenge the person making the accusation to a duel, or of accepting a trial in an National-Socialist Court of Law.

Should the person so making the accusation agree to a duel, then the matter is considered settled, according to National-Socialist law, by the outcome of that duel provided it is done in an honourable way.


VII: The seventh principle of National-Socialist law is that an individual accused of any dishonourable deed or deeds, who has accepted a trial in an National-Socialist Court of Law, can either elect to have their case heard, in public, with witnesses called, or elect for a public trial by combat between the accused and a member or relative of the family of the person who has made the accusation.

It is up to the Court to ensure that such a combat is fair: that is, that the two combatants are fairly evenly matched in skill and physical strength.

If the accused accepts a public Court, then they are bound by the verdict of that Court. That is, there is no appeal. Thus, if the accused is found guilty, then they must accept exile, or pay whatever compensation is demanded by the Court. According to National-Socialist law, failure to pay such compensation within the time specified by the Court means the immediate exile of the person, with the type of exile being decided by the Court.


VIII: The eighth principle of National-Socialist law is that a public trial involves an accusation made by one individual against another individual before a Jury of twelve honourable individuals, with their being a presiding Judge. It is the duty of the Jury to judge the case on the evidence of independent witnesses, and after hearing arguments from the accused and the person who has brought the charge. The accusation must be supported by the evidence of independent witnesses: if there is no such evidence, the case is dismissed. It is the duty of the Judge to pass sentence according to the principles of National-Socialist law.

Thus, according to National-Socialist law, the people who should prosecute a case, and who should defend an accusation, are either the two individuals involved - accused and accuser - or members/relatives of their families. That is, someone accused of some dishonourable deed or deeds must either defend themselves in such a Court, or have a member/relative of their family do this. The same applies for the person bringing or making the accusation: they should if possible present their own case, or have a member/relative of their family present it.

It is also the duty of the person who believes a dishonourable deed has been done to them - or the members/relatives of their family - to find and accuse the person responsible, if such a person has not been seen and identified during the deed, and to find any witnesses to the deed.

National-Socialist law thus does not accept the absolute necessity of "professional lawyers" or "solicitors", regarding such a necessity as dishonourable and a negation of the liberty of the individual. All the proceedings should be understandable by ordinary people, and involve only the direct evidence of witnesses, whether or not a deed is dishonourable according to National-Socialist law, and whether or not such a deed has been done by the accused.

An independent witness is defined in National-Socialist law as a person who is not a member or relative of either the person accused or of the injured party, and who is not bound by an Oath of Allegiance to either the accused or the injured party, or to any member of their families.

Both the Judge and Jurors at such a trial must also be independent by the same criteria, with both Judge and Jurors expected to have proved and be known for their honour by their deeds, their work, their service to the community.


IX: The ninth principle of National-Socialist law is that if a person who has suffered a dishonourable deed according to National-Socialist law has no living family members or relatives, then it is the duty of an honourable person in the community to act on their behalf, and so find and accuse the person they believe is responsible if that honourable person sees such a deed committed, or sincerely and justly believes that a dishonourable deed has been committed.

The person who so begins to act is bound by the rules of National-Socialist law: that is, they must present the case themselves, and can be challenged to a duel or a trial by combat by the person they accuse.

This honourable duty of acting on behalf of a person who has no living family members or relatives, or whose family members or relatives cannot be traced, or who for some honourable reason such as infirmity or sickness, cannot act on their behalf, may be undertaken by a public official appointed to undertake such duties, with this official being publicly known for their honour by their deeds, their work, their service to and on behalf of the community.

[Moody]

Honoured rhadley, thank you for posting here the words of the Noble David Myatt [DM]; you have excelled in taste and duty.

However, I would like to make the following observations;

The Principles that DM gives here must be for the Elite Warrior Caste Only.

These are described admirably, and there are indications given on how they would interact with a General N-S State Law.
However, the latter is not given - I do not believe that these Elite Laws are meant to be in anyway applicable to the general run of citizens in a N-S State.

So when you say, rhadley, that;
"no one, no government, has the right to take away our honor, and our right to defend ourselves and our kinfolk".

I would agree, but would add that a NS government is the best guarantee of those principles, whether those of the Elite - as given here - or those of the generality.


I just want to make some asides on each point in brief;

"I: ... there are only honourable and dishonourable deeds ..."

This is a brilliant truth and the very Foundation of Morality [NOT 'might is right']- Hail!

"II: ... the penalties for committing dishonourable deeds should be compensatory, rather than punitive ..."

Here one thinks of the ancient Germanic laws of the Heathen; they are certainly applicable to the Elite, but I would argue that they are not for the Generality.

"... the death penalty is expressly forbidden".

But see IV, below; by allowing the duel, mortal combat and the Blood-Feud, the Death Penalty is DE FACTO allowed. Again, I would argue that the N-S State could accordingly administer the Death Penalty for non-Noble individuals.

"... Someone who has been exiled is an outlaw: outside the protection of National-Socialist law".

Again, this is a de facto Death Sentence; an oath-breaker unprotected by N-S Law is as good as dead.

"III: ... an accusation of dishonourable conduct ... must be made: (a) in person by either the victim of such a deed, or by the family/relatives of the victim; and (b) in public, in front of several witnesses ... there is ... no such thing as a 'crime' against the State ..."

I disagree on the last point here; if the State is the embodiment of the N-S Will, then crimes against it's citizens or its security are by that very notion, 'crimes against the State'. It is possible that the Noble Warrior caste cannot be accused of this, but I would say that the rest of the citizenry [and others] most certainly can.

"IV: ... every individual has the right to defend themselves ... and the right to use lethal force in such defence ... Should an individual be killed in such defence, then the family/relatives of that individual have the right of redress".

Here we have a return to the ancient Deadly Blood-Feud, which would explain the following;

"V: ... disputes ... may be settled through either a duel ... or by a trial by combat between those involved".

It is worth thinking of Hitler's objections to duels amongst the SS Elite. While there was a craze for such, Hitler disliked such duels and sought to stop them. Why? - because he recognised that the best quality Blood was being spilt, and some of the most Noble SS men were dying needlessly in such combats.

"VI: ... anyone publicly accused of a dishonourable deed or deeds has a right to either challenge the person making the accusation to a duel, or of accepting a trial in an National-Socialist Court of Law".

This N-S Court of Law may refer to a different level of general NS Law not explicated here. The Law of the Commonality, as opposed to that of the Elite.

"VII: ... an individual accused ... who has accepted a trial in an National-Socialist Court of Law, can either elect to have their case heard, in public, with witnesses called, or elect for a public trial by combat".

The former option contrasted strongly with the Warrior code explicated above.

"VIII: .. a public trial involves an accusation made by one individual against another individual before a Jury of twelve honourable individuals, with their being a presiding Judge ... National-Socialist law thus does not accept the absolute necessity of 'professional lawyers' or 'solicitors' ".

This is admirable, and would necessitate a high level of legal sophistication amongst the population of a N-S State.

"IX: ... if a person who has suffered a dishonourable deed ... has no living family members or relatives, then it is the duty of an honourable person in the community to act on their behalf".

Again, a return to older forms, in this case 'The Champion'.


To reiterate; the code is an excellent one, but I do not feel it is a General Code for the whole of N-S society.
However, it demonstrates that the N-S Priciple is not 'Might', but HONOUR.

[rhadley]

Honoured rhadley, thank you for posting here the words of the Noble David Myatt [DM]; you have excelled in taste and duty.

However, I would like to make the following observations;

The Principles that DM gives here must be for the Elite Warrior Caste Only.

Why?

I ask this because it seems to me to be a denial of the "socialism" in NS - the equality of all those, of the same race or folk, in a NS State or Reich, or society, or community, or whatever we want to call it.

I don't believe Myatt intended the law of honor to apply only to some "elite" within a new NS society

These are described admirably, and there are indications given on how they would interact with a General N-S State Law.
However, the latter is not given - I do not believe that these Elite Laws are meant to be in anyway applicable to the general run of citizens in a N-S State.

Well, if you read Myatt's Constitution for a Future Reich I think you'll see that the general laws for such a Reich are the law of honor. This is a very detailed Constitution. It's on his NS writings geocities site at


http://www.geocities.com/myattns/cons_reich.html

"V: ... disputes ... may be settled through either a duel ... or by a trial by combat between those involved".

It is worth thinking of Hitler's objections to duels amongst the SS Elite. While there was a craze for such, Hitler disliked such duels and sought to stop them. Why? - because he recognised that the best quality Blood was being spilt, and some of the most Noble SS men were dying needlessly in such combats.

Well, I think Myatt has evolved NS. The law of honor and the duel has to apply absolutely, because the noble would wish to settle such disputes in that way. To rely on a court of law, or someone else, is dishonorable.

I think you either accept honor and all its consequences or you do not. The duel is integral to defending one's honor.

it demonstrates that the N-S Priciple is not 'Might', but HONOUR.

Exactly what I feel.

[Moody]

rhadley; "I don't believe David Myatt [DM] intended the law of honor to apply only to some "elite" within a new NS society".

Moody Lawless; I agree with what you say, and as I have read more of DM's writings since that last post of mine, I appreciate that I could've been wrong.
BUT - did not the inner SS operate an Elite system, where a particular moral code functioned?
I was thinking of this idea of an Elite within an elite, such as Himmler's project of a Knightly Caste in Wewelsburg.
DM's Honour Code reminds me of that; but I now understand that he intends to make such an Ethic TOTAL.
In that alone, the breadth of his vision astounds me.

rhadley;"Well, if you read Myatt's Constitution for a Future Reich I think you'll see that the general laws for such a Reich are the law of honor. This is a very detailed Constitution. It's on his NS writings geocities site at
http://www.geocities.com/myattns/cons_reich.html

Moody; I was looking at a similar document of DM's, called a 'Constitution for a Folk Democracy'. Its an astounding work, and very challenging.
We have discussed already the Honour Morality; there is also his attitude to Punishments. Many of my pre-conceptions were shattered there [I have always believed in State Capital Punishment].
Thank you for that link; it goes to show that the very highest level of N-S endeavour did NOT end with the fall of the Third Reich. Those who mourned the loss of the great N-S thinkers of the past needn't fear - DM takes up where they left off.
We are so blessed that such a one writes in the English tongue.

rhadley; "I think Myatt has evolved NS. The law of honor and the duel has to apply absolutely, because the noble would wish to settle such disputes in that way. To rely on a court of law, or someone else, is dishonorable.
I think you either accept honor and all its consequences or you do not. The duel is integral to defending one's honor".

Moody;You are right; the point is that the ethos of the duel and combat is extended culture-wide.
A fascinating proposal, and one that needs to be pondered on.
Again, I am very grateful for your advocacy of DM's work, and would appreciate any elaboration on these principles from all and sundry ... let's set-up a DM study here!

[rhadley]

First, thank you for your appreciative and reasoned reply. How refreshing to find someone who reflects on what they read and in the light of such reflection is prepared to change their own views.

rhadley; "I don't believe David Myatt [DM] intended the law of honor to apply only to some "elite" within a new NS society".

Moody Lawless; I agree with what you say, and as I have read more of DM's writings since that last post of mine, I appreciate that I could've been wrong.
BUT - did not the inner SS operate an Elite system, where a particular moral code functioned?
I was thinking of this idea of an Elite within an elite, such as Himmler's project of a Knightly Caste in Wewelsburg.

Well, I don't know if this idea of an inner elite really existed. Myatt doesn't seem to think so. This, from his Occult and NS:

"What needs to be understood is that all these various organizations were necessary for the correct balance to be achieved and thus a numinous society, or State, created. National-Socialist Germany was more than just another State - it was the first time, in the history of our evolution as a species, that a State-form was used in an evolutionary way. Indeed, a new form was thereby created, and this form is so revolutionary, so crucial for our future as a species and as 'thinking-beings', that its importance cannot at this time be over-estimated.

There has been a tendency to try and identify the SS as the most important 'esoteric-type' organization of the Reich - as some sort of 'mystical' organization which embodied the principles of National-Socialism in a higher form. This tendency shows a basic mis-understanding of National-Socialism, the SS itself, and in particular what National-Socialist Germany was. The SS was a warrior organization, with an Aryan warrior ethos, and as such exemplified some of the highest Aryan ideals. It was also intended to be archetypal - creating its own traditions, and bringing about, partly through the test of combat, the development of higher beings. But other organizations embodied other Aryan ideals, and all of them together were necessary and vital for a healthy, balanced society to be achieved. The SS was a vital and necessary part of the practical organic whole that was National-Socialist Germany."

Moody; I was looking at a similar document of DM's, called a 'Constitution for a Folk Democracy'. Its an astounding work, and very challenging.

Agreed. It's the same as the NS one basically.

We have discussed already the Honour Morality; there is also his attitude to Punishments. Many of my pre-conceptions were shattered there [I have always believed in State Capital Punishment].
Thank you for that link; it goes to show that the very highest level of N-S endeavour did NOT end with the fall of the Third Reich. Those who mourned the loss of the great N-S thinkers of the past needn't fear - DM takes up where they left off.

We are so blessed that such a one writes in the English tongue.

I completely agree. He's raised it to a new level, and with his Folk Culture - which he calls the inner essence, or esoteric meaning, of NS - there's a complete, reasoned, honorable, folkish way of life which is easy to understand and can be appreciated by a whole new generation.

It's taken him a while to complete, what with the ethics, the theology, the NS/Aryan laws - about five years since his Combat 18 days, but IMNSHO it's been worth the wait.

Moody;You are right; the point is that the ethos of the duel and combat is extended culture-wide.
A fascinating proposal, and one that needs to be pondered on.

Agreed. It would be the beginning of a new type of human being - what he calls, after Sophocles, the "thinking warrior". The foundation of true freedom.

let's set-up a DM study here!

Sounds a good idea!