OK, it was yesterday. If you care consider yourself the recipient of a belated “Happy Hitler’s Birthday!” card.
There are all kinds of things I could write about, but don’t. The volume of things is overwhelming, and I have other things to do, including nothing some of the time. I’m not a scholar and if I was I would read and research primary sources, but I usually just shoot from the hip on stuff I come across in my intellectual wanderings. Take anything I say in that vein.
The subject of Holocaust revisionism came up on one of my RSS feed. Some opponents of the system want to claim the Nazi effort to kill large numbers of people, particularly Jews, did not happen or is exaggerated. They correctly believe that Holocaust propaganda is used as a cudgel against people Jews don’t like, or who may not be sufficiently enthusiastic about Puritan globalism, and incorrectly believe the way to respond to this is to say it didn’t happen.
I believe that the Holocaust, or “Shoah” as the Jews like to call it, did happen pretty much as we are told. I don’t think it discredits nationalists because it was an event that happened in a greater context which is poorly understood.
The first and best known context of Nazism is Bolshevism, or the nihilistic, terrorist form of communist revolution that started in Russia. Jews didn’t invent it; Nechayev was not a Jew. Nonetheless Jews saw it as an opportunity to improve their position, and became a crucial part of it, especially in the secret police. Outside of Russia they were the foremost activists for this revolution. Communists led by Russian Jew Eugen Leviné murdered Bavarian noblemen in the aftermath of World War I. Janusz Bardach was a Jewish student in Poland on the eve of World War II. In his autobiography “Man Is Wolf to Man“, he describes how he and all his secular Jewish friends supported communism and welcomed the Russian invasion. (He mentions that his girlfriend and her family were orthodox and did not.) He even helped a drunken, nasty NKVD officer help round up people.
The greater, and more important context of German nationalism and thus Nazism was English manipulation of European, or continental politics. The English goal was to ensure no European nation could gain primary power over the whole continent, and thus become a threat to English global power. The worst threat to England since the Spanish Armada was the French Revolution and then Napoleon. England ultimately won the Napoleonic Wars but did not want such a situation ever to happen again. Whatever other alliances they might make, Russia was a key piece in maintaining European disunity. A huge country on the eastern edge of Europe, Russia couldn’t dominate Europe itself, but could prevent any other country from doing so.
And this is what I think Moldbug, Foseti and others don’t understand. The Puritans were not allied with Russia because they were communists, they were allied with Russia because it was their spoiler in Europe. The political structure of Russia wasn’t important, its geography was. This alliance didn’t apply always and everywhere- England fought Russia in the Crimea and played the “Great Game” against it in Asia- but for European matters it was critical.
After the defeat of Napoleon, the reunification of Germany in 1870 provided the next great challenge to English hegemony. England allied with France, Russia and others to surround Germany and neutralize it. Unfortunately this network of alliances did not prevent war, but eventually triggered it. The old chauvinist Anglophone explanation of World War I was “the Germans started it.” The more recent, nuanced one is “it was a failure of diplomacy.” But English desire to contain Germany has to be seen as a primary cause, possibly the primary cause.
The disaster of World War I destroyed much of England’s young male population and wide swaths of France. Germany was left in chaos. Punitive reparations destroyed the economy and created hyperinflation. Many Germans felt, not unjustifiably, that their nation had been unfairly victimized and should rise again to assert itself.
In this atmosphere was born the National Socialist German Worker’s Party, or by its German initials the NSDAP. This political organization must be taken separately from German nationalism, German militarism, the pagan and romantic creed of Nazism, and the modern boogeyman of “Nazism”, which is any kind of assertion of ethnic self-interest or nationalism by non-Jews, all of which are different in small but important ways. What is most important here is Nazism, not a philosophy, not a set of economic and political policies, not a religion, not just a thought crime as currently understood by the system, but a combination of all these things.
Nazism was fundamentally an expression of German Romanticism, just as communism is. It was the belief that man, when he seeks not merely the good but the great, the ideal, becomes a kind of god and hero and labors under no kind of what is ordinarily understood as moral limitations imposed by society, religion, civilization, or custom. Nothing that would be considered a crime or sin to the ordinary man is forbidden him, including killing on whatever scale. He may commit errors, but because he strives for the ideal these errors are not only not held against him, they are positive proof he is a superman above all others. In the context of Nazism these attitudes are considered horrifying and repellent, but in the context of communism they are held firmly by a great many people.
The superman to Nazis was not an individual, but the Aryan people or in practical specifics, the German people in Europe, whatever political jurisdiction they lived under, and they annexed German areas of other countries before the war.
Nazism was hostile, in rough order, to Jews, Slavs, the British Empire, and any Europeans who opposed German hegemony. Jews, as communist activists and potentially terrorists, were an immediate internal threat. Nazis didn’t make the distinction between German Jews, who were fairly assimilated and probably loyal to Germany, and Eastern European Jews, who were quite hostile. In the atmosphere of the times fine distinctions weren’t made by anyone. Russia and the Slavs were adjacent, communist and expansionist. Beyond the political and military situation the Nazis simply regarded the Slavs as inferior, and Germanic peoples had dominated or preyed on them from the time of the Varangians to the Teutonic Order. The British Empire, which should probably include the US for practical purposes, had been containing or fighting Germany since its modern inception. Other Europeans had to submit to Germany or be conquered.
Nazism adopted things like nature worship, the love of being out in nature and hiking and camping in the woods and mountains, and health food, that we now associate with “hippies” but are part of pagan German romanticism. It was not originally hostile to homosexuality, although after the Night of the Long Knives it reined in the more freewheeling and non-bourgeouis aspects of army and vagabond life found in the SA.
Nazism was eugenic, and believed not only in the elimination of entire populations that it regarded as hostile, such as Jews and Gypsies, but mentally retarded and physically handicapped Germans. The application of eugenics to Germans was hardly a pagan Teutonic idea. To quote the Havamal- “The lame can ride horse, the handless drive cattle,
the deaf one can fight and prevail, ’tis happier for the blind than for him on the bale-fire,
but no man hath care for a corpse.” In other words, to the Germanic pagans a handicap was a burden in a world of burdens, but something to be coped with, not despaired of. It was better than being dead. The god Hoder was blind, the od Tyr missing a hand. In a brutal world of war and hard labor, permanent injuries were part of life, and handicapped relatives were cared for. The idea of eliminating the feeble could only have come from Puritan progressivism, which was highly eugenic.
Nazism was simply a product of a certain time, place and culture. Was it the unique and ultimate evil of human existence? I will blaspheme here by saying no. It was one of a long line of human evils and tragedies that will afflict us until the end of time. Specifically it was a reaction to the evil of Russian communism, and more generally a reaction to Puritan globalism.
Hitler and the Nazis, with the support of most of the German population, sought to take on and defeat Russian communism, break the English checkmate on European power and make Germany the master of Europe. They got the living crap beaten out of them. Nazism and German militarism were ended forever and Germany was finished as a political and social force outside its own borders. As a cultural force, Germany is a powerful and ever-present ghost through German Romanticism, which animates leftism in communism and environmentalism.
As an aside, while Nazism is limited to the history books, “Nazism” is with us always. “Nazism” is the accusation that any European who asserts ethnic or cultural self-interest obviously wants to kill millions of Jews. It’s an idiotic Stalinist non-sequitir but the accusation of “Nazism” will lead to social and economic destruction, so do your best to avoid it.
What relevance do Hitler, National Socialism and Nazism have today? Almost none. Some white nationalists use German National Socialism as their model. But German National Socialism was a political movement of its place and time. Hitler was not pro-white, he was pro-German, and he killed huge numbers of white people in his pursuit of German power. Does the Nazi killing of Jews make them especially, uniquely and ultimately evil, as in the current belief? Any political system that relies on killing a huge number of people is evil and defective. However I don’t believe that the killing of a Jew by a German Nazi is more evil or tragic than the killing of a Russian or Ukrainian by a Jewish communist. The Soviet secret police were heavily Jewish- 75% in the Ukraine in 1936, a number not from a hostile source but from a Jewish book on the Holocaust in the Ukraine. The particular economic policies of the NSDAP in Germany in the 30’s are of no more than passing interest today.
The significance of Nazism to both those who hate it and those who want to use it as a model is almost entirely symbolic. Nazism was the one great international challenge to Puritan progressive globalism. For Puritan progressive globalists, that is its great, incredible, unforgivable sin and the reason to tar its opponents with that brush. But for the same reason it has deep appeal to those who find the collar of Puritanism binding, even white, English, Protestant Americans whose fathers or grandfathers fought for it. No one is more obsessed with the Nazis than the English, for the same combination of reasons- awe at those who would challenge them, and a secret hatred of the oppressiveness of their own superiors.
For the modern American National Socialist, just as for the modern American Confederate, a big part of the appeal is the romanticism of a doomed cause. But that hardly helps today.
If there is any lesson to be learned from National Socialism it is the need to look outside the English political outlook for ideas. Few understand how limited the American imagination is by deeply ingrained English ideas, even people who oppose the system. The English class system exists in America in a somewhat attenuated and less obvious way, moreso in the last couple of decades, and people don’t see or understand this.
Sometimes history has important and well-understood lessons, sometimes important lessons that aren’t well-known, and sometimes it’s just stuff that happened. German National Socialism is mostly the second and third.