Germany’s Surrender May Herald Her Death After All, Incrementally
Berlin in ruins. And this is a cause for celebration, even in Germany.
May 8, 2025 marks the 80th anniversary of Germany’s unconditional surrender to the Allies and the Soviet Union. Many modern-day Germans are so deluded and so brainwashed that they actually celebrate their nation’s catastrophic defeat and ruin. The leadership of Adolf Hitler was, of course, ultimately a disastrous failure. But, as argued in “Denouncing Hitler for Very Different Reasons,” a more enlightened perspective denounces him not in the way conventional wisdom demands, but for many of the same reasons many of his best officers and generals did: for losing the war and for the immoral brutalization of certain White Europeans Slavic peoples and even the German people themselves. As that essay also sets forth, there is a fundamental distinction between the motivations and reasons why1 the German people embraced national socialism and the swastika—das Hackenkreuz—on one hand and the many defects and failings of the political leadership at the top. To not condemn the Allies and Soviets for their own peculiar evils and celebrate the catastrophic ruin and devastation afflicted on Germany, replete with 80 years of occupation and cultural and linguistic colonization is nothing less than the worst fit of ethno-masochist delirium imaginable. And if the Germans do not disabuse themselves of this madness, and fast, Germany will perish, as will all of Europe.
On the left, on May 7, 1945, General Alfred Jodl signed the Instrument of Surrender in Reims, France, at Allied headquarters, marking Germany’s capitulation to the Western Allies and the Soviet Union. On the right, on May 8, 1945, Field Marshal Wilhelm Keitel signed a second surrender document in Karlshorst, Berlin, formalizing the surrender in the presence of Soviet and Allied representatives. Both Jodl and Keitel were soon tried and executed.
The leadership of the Allies and the Allies way of doing things are not only as bad as the Nazis, but worse. Sacred Germany and, with the fall of the Iron Curtain in 1989, much of Europe is nothing more than a collection of vassal states under the American Empire. American hegemony has infused an unrelenting stream of Unkultur into the cultures and societies of Europe. English advertising and mass media are ubiquitous throughout the nations of Europe: shit music and shit culture that can hardly be called music or culture at all. Graffiti mars the cityscapes and even some landscapes of vanquished Germany. A McDonald’s stands in almost every European city, even in the most historically and culturally significant quarters of Europe’s most cherished towns and cities. Madonna, rap music, Katy Perry and an endless litany of other such dreck pervade the proverbial airwaves. A certain sort of German Tussi actively seeks out black GIs and other blacks and racial imposters who have no right to be there. And Germany and all of Europe are on an accelerated course to racial suicide and civilizational ruin. All of this is while under the heel of the United States.
Many if not all of these auspices of American hegemony pertain to Germany in particular but all of Europe generally. Unlike the rest of Europe, however, Germany has been marinating in a potent concoction of war-guilt, a program of indoctrination that began with so-called de-Nazification in the immediate aftermath of the war, culminating in decades of an ever-worsening guilt complex. That guilt complex, also known as Kriegschuld, has unfortunately become a defining characteristic of the German national character in the modern age, warped by the trauma of catastrophic defeat and ruin followed by decades-long marination in Allied propaganda and degenerate pop culture. This new programming is augmented by a reformed education system directed if not installed by the Allied victors, facilitated by modern mass media and the steady infusion of American Unkultur described above. These elements have created, in concert, a vicious cultural milieu pervading modern Germany: a cultural milieu that has programmed large contingents of the German populace to seek the very abolition of the German people, its culture, and even its language.
For these and other reasons, the defeat and capitulation of Germany is no cause for celebration, as this date may mark the slow, gradual death of sacred Germany and by extension all of Europe. In many ways, an unsustainably low birth rate far below the death rate seems planned, calculated, and perpetrated with the intentional infusion of feminist dogma, the sexual revolution, multiculturalism, and all the other auspices of a dystopia that is peculiarly American in both its origins and characteristics. In this way, it seems as if the Morgenthau Plan was never called off, it was just implemented on a more gradual timeline. This makes it all that much more pernicious as it is that much more difficult to detect. The more subtle something is, the harder it is to perceive and discern a pernicious evil for what it is. This in turn makes it that much difficult for thinkers, writers, and others to articulate on both the existence of that evil and the various existential threats it poses.
When reflecting on the 80th anniversary of Germany’s capitulation, as with any day, there can only be sadness, particularly in consideration of how the deutsche Wehrmacht was unparalleled in heroism and fighting prowess. So too were select Waffen SS divisions that bolster the mythos behind the double sig runes: SS Panzer Divisions Leibstandarte Adolf Hitler, das Reich, and Wiking in particular, but even also Totenkopf, its particularly unsavory reputation notwithstanding, were among the most formidable combat units fielded by the Third Reich. Compelled to challenge the bulk of the entire planet because of the combined machinations of Churchill, Roosevelt, as well as the mad delirium that persuaded Hitler he could somehow involve Germany in a war with three peer powers simultaneously on three fronts without leading to absolute ruin, the Wehrmacht and the Waffen SS fought tenaciously to the bitter end—bis zum letzten Mal. Those fallen, tragic heroes, forgotten and defamed all too often, made it much more of a contest than seems humanly possible. In victory and defeat, the vaunted deutsche Wehrmacht was arguably the greatest fighting force in the annals of warfare. May the memory of those fallen, forgotten heroes, those tragic, fearsome formations in feldgrau2be purged of defamation and honored and revered with the respect, admiration, and awe they so richly deserve. Although one wonders at times if the Soviet Union was any greater of an evil than the American Empire, it is because of the heroism, valor, and sacrifice of both the Wehrmacht and the Waffen SS that the Red Army did not march all the way up to the English Channel.
The memory civilian victims of both Allied and Soviet war crimes must also be honored—and never forgotten. The allied terror bombing campaigns were deliberately perpetrated to target and kill civilian populations in Germany. Such crimes are compounded by the wholesale rape and murder at the hands of the marauding Red Army, as well as the expulsions in Silesia, Prussia, and other lands east of the Oder River that forever destroyed important regional cultures that had helped defined Germania for centuries. Between some 12-14 million German civilians were displaced, with some estimate of over two million civilian deaths. This was all set in motion when Churchill and Stalin sat down at Yalta and played a little game with three matchsticks.
This and other crimes and horrors perpetrated against the German people are what modern “good” Germans in fact celebrate when they celebrate the defeat, occupation, and ruin of their own country, Being bludgeoned so thoroughly by absolute devastation and ruined, coupled with decades of intensive programming do not entirely account how so many could buy into such utter bullshit.
This ethnic cleansing coincided with the subsequent partition of what remained of Germany between the Soviet Union on one hand and France, Britain, and the United States on the other, forming die deutsche demokratische Republik (German Democratic Republic, also known as East Germany) and die Bundesrepublik, also known as West Germany and the current German Federal Republic, which is nothing other than an American puppet state.
The division of Germany is something the western allies allowed to happen; they had the atomic bomb, Stalin did not, thus giving the do-goody Alllies leverage to not allow the division of Germany to happen, to say nothing of General George S. Patton’s epiphany that they were on the wrong fucking side and fought the wrong enemy. Allied and Soviet policy alike ripped German families apart, and to the extent one believes in human rights3, generations of so-called “East Germans” had such “inalienable rights” violated for decades, with both Allied and Soviet blessing. Those familiar with modern German history, the history of East Germany in particular, know the legacy of die Stasi, know that the East German government coerced husbands and wives to inform on each other, know about the shoot-to-kill orders at the Berlin wall and along the border of divided Germany.
As has already been stipulated in this and other writings, there are many reasons for condemning the political leadership of Nazi Germany, but they are grossly overstated, to put it mildly, when compared with the abject lies and hypocrisy of the Allies and Soviets. Whatever conclusions one reaches about who is the greater or lesser evil in World War II and its origins, causes, and consequences, the idea that either the western Allies or the Soviets were the “good guys” is a preposterous and abject lie, made all that much more outrageous by how many people actually believe it. At the very least, the very absolute minimum compromise that can be agreed upon is that all actors are gray, with very bloody hands all around. I defiantly submit nonetheless that both the Allies and Soviets are far more insidious.
Today is not a day for celebration, but a day for mourning and loss. I weep for Germany and Europe. Those of a similar inclination should listen to a sound, competent performance of Brahm’s Ein Deutsches Requiem, as was played over Deutscher Rundfunk after unconditional surrender was announced over the airwaves. And as time is running out, I pray for a spark that will reanimate Germany with a revived national consciousness that is at once both old and new. Ich bete, daß heiliges Deutschland noch wieder erwache!
Two instruments of surrender were signed. On May 7, 1945, General Alfred Jodl signed the Instrument of Surrender in Reims, France, at Allied headquarters, marking Germany’s capitulation to the Western Allies and the Soviet Union. On May 8, 1945, Field Marshal Wilhelm Keitel signed a second surrender document in Karlshorst, Berlin, formalizing the surrender in the presence of Soviet and Allied representatives. Both Jodl and Keitel were soon tried and executed. Und das heißt Siegerjustiz.
Other articles and essays by Richard Parker are available at his publication, The Raven’s Call: A Reactionary Perspective, found at theravenscall.substack.com. Please consider subscribing on a free or paid basis, and to like and share as warranted. Readers can also find him on twitter, under the handle @astheravencalls.
While the German people of the time and today are undeserving of the unmitigated villainy that has unfairly maligned them, the regime—or more precisely its political leadership at the top—had a number of moral failings, not to mention a number of catastrophic strategic and tactical blunders that doomed Germany, despite the deutsche Wehrmacht being a most lethal instrument and one of the great paragons of military discipline in all history; even the greatest warriors cannot fight three peer powers on three fronts simultaneously and emerge victorious. As stated elsewhere, I am most ambivalent about the Nazi period, as I regard Hitler and those in his inner circle with a strong aversion, although this aversion diverges largely from conventional wisdom. I am deeply sympathetic to the reasons for which everyday Germans followed Hitler—without the advantage of hindsight—as I regard the Allies as bad or worse. I do condemn Hitler however, for in effect losing the war by involving Germany in a war with three peer powers simultaneously, not to mention the barbarism he perpetrated against Slavic Europeans, the Russians in particular although the German armed forces saw much barbarism perpetrated by the Russians as well from the very onset of Operation Barbarossa. Hitler also brutalized his own people, and showed callous disregard for the lives of his own men in “stand or die” orders. While in Allied captivity, Field Marshall Ritter von Leeb once stated “The excesses of National Socialism were in the first and final analysis due to the warped personality of the Führer,” to which Heinz Guderian responded, “the fundamental principles were fine.” This is an entirely reasonable position on the matter.
2 The color palette of the Wehrmacht and Waffen SS was of course wonderfully varied, from pea-dot and leaf camo patterns to the black tunics of the panzer crews.
https://www.theoccidentalobserver.net/wp-content/uploads/2018/06/TOO-Full-Logo-660x156-1.png00Richard Parkerhttps://www.theoccidentalobserver.net/wp-content/uploads/2018/06/TOO-Full-Logo-660x156-1.pngRichard Parker2025-05-08 06:57:182025-05-08 09:55:33Finis Germania: Reflections on the 80th Anniversary of Germany’s Unconditional Surrender
On this episode of TBR Radio’s, “The TBR History Hour,” host José Niño sits down with Dr. Kevin MacDonald, retired psychology professor and author of The Culture of Critique, to talk about his most recent work, Individualism and the Western Liberal Tradition.
MacDonald explores the evolutionary and historical roots of individualism in Western societies, tracing its origins from Indo-European aristocratic traditions to the egalitarian ethos of modern liberal democracies.
Is individualism the key to Western success—or does it carry the seeds of societal decline? Join us for a thought-provoking discussion on the future of Western civilization.
https://www.theoccidentalobserver.net/wp-content/uploads/2018/06/TOO-Full-Logo-660x156-1.png00Kevin MacDonaldhttps://www.theoccidentalobserver.net/wp-content/uploads/2018/06/TOO-Full-Logo-660x156-1.pngKevin MacDonald2025-05-07 06:10:212025-05-07 06:10:21Interview with Jose Nino: Western Individualism: A Blessing or a Curse?
Ethnic groups organise their societies in particular ways according to their group psychological differences. These differences have been outlined by Harry Triandis, who has theorised that societies tend to be Vertical Individualist, Vertical Collectivist, Horizontal Individualist, or Horizontal Collectivist. Certain characteristics tend to correlate such as hierarchical with collectivist. Similarly, egalitarianism and individualism tend to correlate with each other. While these types are relative and comparative, Irish people and society tend to collectivism and hierarchy in comparison to Germanic peoples who are the most egalitarian and individualistic. This article uses observable cultural features as points of comparison.
This Irish tendency can be seen in Celtic mythology with its prominent themes of kingship and kinship, as well as in the Irish language whereby its verb-subject-object structure indicates that the people who created it have a collectivist nature; that the being, doing, or making is of more primacy than the person involved connotes a hive-like social structure. This feature of Celtic languages contrasts with most other European languages which begin with the subject.
This contrasts particularly with German, where verbs are sometimes placed at the end of sentences. Similarly, it was the Germanic peoples who created and generally adhere to Protestantism, with its egalitarian and individualist nature, while Celts, Latins, and Slavs generally follow the more hierarchical Roman Catholicism or Orthodox, respectively.
Republicanism and Monarchy
Another feature of the Irish language is that it traditionally has no equivalent of the word “Republic”—with the modern word that is used ‘Poblacht’ having only been coined in 1916. Poblacht is derived from pobal which means community, nation, or society, but none of these denote an explicitly egalitarian nature.
At the time of the creation of the Irish Free State, the Welsh-speaking British Prime Minister David Lloyd George asked what word the Irish were going to use for Republic, and when told “Saorstat”, which is the literal compound of Free State, he replied “must we not admit that the Celts were never republicans and have no native word for such an idea”. Republicanism was introduced to Ireland by the Ulster Presbyterian-dominated Society of United Irishmen. Independence movements before this time were led by Gaelic nobility, and subsequently by Jacobites.
By contrast, the German word for polity is gemeinwesen, a compound of the words gemein, an adjective from Old High German gimeini, meaning ‘belonging to one another, in common, universal, belonging to the great body’ and wesen from Middle High German wësen, meaning ‘sojourn, domestic affairs, manner of living, quality, situation’. Gemeinwesen connotes an egalitarian mindset in those who created it.
While many Germanic countries are ostensible monarchies such as Norway, Sweden, Denmark, Netherlands, Britain, Canada, and Australia; a constitutional monarchy is not a “monarchy” in any meaningful sense, as laws therein are made by a democratically-elected parliament, decisions are taken by an appointed cabinet of ministers, and justice is administered by independent judges. In substance, any of the aforementioned countries are similar to the republics of Germany, Austria, or Iceland. By contrast the Republic of Turkey and the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia are similar to each other as all powers are concentrated in one person.
Hierarchical Politics and Society
It is no coincidence that it was the first Irish representative political party — the Irish Parliamentary Party (IPP) — that introduced a “party pledge”, essentially the first party whip in modern politics, or that there has been such a heavy use of the whip system for the duration of Irish politics. This demonstrates that formally introducing a “parliamentary democracy” will not substantially achieve one if it is not suited to the nation. Charles Stewart Parnell’s hierarchical, collectivist leadership of the IPP foreshadowed “democratic centralism”, a policy still practiced by Sinn Féin. It is also the case that Ireland has the weakest local government in Europe with minimal powers relative to central government. The powers that they do have are largely exercised by an appointed chief executive.
Other features of collectivism are an increasingly nationalised civil society whereby political parties receive most of their revenue from the taxpayer, the dominant media is RTE, a tax-funded organisation, while very many NGOs receive most of their funding from the State. Ireland is the only country in Europe that mandates the fluoridation of its public water supply, an unethically illiberal attempt at promoting public health, as well as having had among the harshest Covid lockdowns in Europe.
The Gaelic Athletic Association (GAA) was founded and continues to be organised on an amateur, community, and co-operative basis which connotes a collectivist mindset. Another feature of Ireland is the prevalence of “one-off” housing, whereby many people are inclined to build their own house in its own field outside of the compact urban fabric. While this could be taken to represent individualism, this practice is predicated on a large fiscal transfer regarding roads, public transport, electricity, and the postal service which therefore entails a form of collectivism albeit one which contains Irish psycho-spatial unfastidiousness.
Religion
Another feature of the Irish psyche is a closeness between church and State often entailing a compact at the top of society. In Gaelic Ireland, the druids’ counsel was sought on matters of governance, druids and kings were mutually dependent, and religion and governance were intertwined with kings taking part in religious ceremonies to legitimise their rule. This nature would again manifest when Charles Stewart Parnell sought an informal alliance with the Catholic Church, and after Irish independence when the Catholic Church was allowed to manage health and education services. It has morphed into the modern practices of leading politicians ingratiating themselves with the LGBTQ+ cult by introducing gender self-identification, attending “gay pride” events, and funding and being advised by Non-Governmental Organisations (NGOs) focused on identity politics.
Democracy
Democracy is a form which will be rendered by the substance of the people who are practicing it. In sub-Saharan Africa, there traditionally existed a tribal social structure whereby the chief had all power without opposition and could only be removed through force of arms. This continues in contemporary ostensibly democratic republics in Africa, where it takes the form of a president-for-life who may only be removed by means of a military coup.
Substantive representative democracy is a product of Germanic psychology and social organisation. Tacitus described the egalitarian nature of Germanic societies two thousand years ago, and how the entire tribe would deliberate in council. This culture was the basis of the “Things”, with the Althing, the earliest extant parliament having been established in Iceland in 930. Ancient Gaelic Ireland had no popular law-making assemblies. The closest equivalent was a gathering of notables who modified laws and made decisions.
It is therefore clear that the naturally occurring form of government of the Irish people is hierarchical and that provision should be made for suitable structures which reflect this. Instead of the pretence of democracy, where there actually pertains a powerful executive who is unduly influenced by certain vested interest groups, a suitable alternative would be a corporatist state where all interest groups would formally meet and consensually compromise on policy, with an additional aristocratic layer whereby Gaelic clans could be restored to land ownership.
This could be comparable to the British system of ownership by the Duchy of Cornwall and the Duchy of Lancaster. Profits from these lands could be beneficial in regard to patronising education, the arts and crafts, and they would be independent of both commerce and the State. The value of an aristocracy is that they would be permanent, patriotic custodians of land, and be able to influence decision-making; they would have the long-term interests of the country at heart. These forms of government would explicitly accord with the Irish hierarchical and collectivist psyche and would therefore produce governance more suited to the nation.
https://www.theoccidentalobserver.net/wp-content/uploads/2018/06/TOO-Full-Logo-660x156-1.png00Seaghan Breathnachhttps://www.theoccidentalobserver.net/wp-content/uploads/2018/06/TOO-Full-Logo-660x156-1.pngSeaghan Breathnach2025-05-06 11:34:202025-05-07 11:42:24The Irish Psyche: Against Democracy and Republicanism
“Europe is the faith and the faith is Europe.
—Hilaire Belloc
Whatever may be the opinions of dissident right types regarding Christianity, I’m fairly confident that virtually all would admit that it in its current form is dying, as is its European heartland, or the region of the earth once called Christendom. Unlike some in the Dissident Right, I feel that there is a strong causal link between those two progressing mortalities, with the former serving as one of the major reasons for the latter; I also believe that revitalizing the one will lead to the recovery of the other.
Rather than spend time running the gauntlet of angry detractors of Christianity talking about the origins of the faith or how it got to its current, mostly effeminized and multicultural (which most often implicitly means antiWhite) forms—be they the ones who argue that it is nothing more than a Jewish theological Trojan horse or the ones who believe it to be a genuine religion, though a genuinely ruinous one, here I intend to show what its reformed manifestation would look like and how that would aid our cause of saving the White West.
To be clear from the get-go: I am not in this essay going to get into the theological weeds of doctrinal minutiae (e.g., the nature of the Trinity or whether Mary was without sin), no matter how important those might be for particular Christian creeds; rather, in the spirit of a work such as C. S. Lewis’s Mere Christianity, I intend to focus on issues which all true Christians (i.e., not those of too many churches in their current, decadent forms) could find common ground on. With that in mind, let’s get into the main areas of contemporary Christianity that are in desperate need of reformation.
By far the most critical issue is that for Christianity to be restored to its true form, it must forcibly remove and toss into the fire those parts of it which make it a cult rather than a true religion.
What’s the difference?
Well, although this definition is somewhat idiosyncratic, I’m fairly sure that most people, save those who hate religion in general (e.g., the late, ironically named Christopher Hitchens), would agree with it: the difference between a true religion and a cult is that the latter demands that earthly matters which are amenable to the God-given faculty of reason be made matters of unquestioning faith while the former does not; that is, true Christianity requires us to take on faith only those things which go beyond the ability of the mind alone to grasp, those things which are of this world only by the way in which the choices that we make in dealing with them echo, to our everlasting joy or sorrow, beyond the grave. So, the pondering of whether the act of killing a man out of malice rather than self-defense is a grave sin and leads to hell in the afterlife (if the murderer refuses to truly repent and mold his actions for the rest of his life to conform to that resolve) will necessarily lead to the realm of matters of faith, whereas whether any particular act of killing was or was not done in self-defense would most definitely not require an act of faith—and attempting to make it do so would be not stupid but downright sinful, even the point of blasphemy.
How so?
Well, because it runs afoul of the first Commandment: “I am the Lord thy God. . . . thou shalt have no other gods before me. . . . Thou shalt not make unto thee any graven image. . . . Thou shalt not bow down thyself to them, nor serve them.” Graven images or idols, you must understand, are not limited to literal statues, but rather mean anything to which we accord the reverence and worship that is owed to God alone. To God and Christ alone we owe faith . These are one and the same, but like I said I’m not getting into Trinitarian matters here; to make anything earthly that is amenable to reason a matter of faith is to treat it as a de facto god and thus to commit implicit blasphemy. And beyond that, even if one does not make important earthly matters into matters of faith, to refuse to subject them to the acid test of reason is to refuse to make use of that gift from God and thus, like the man in the parable of the talents who refused to use the talents given him, to commit sin.
This is how true Christianity is needed to revive the West. Virtually all the power that our elites hold is held thanks to citizens in general and Whites in particular not embracing the true Christian principle of subjecting all earthly matters to reason’s scrutiny: only evil needs darkness to conceal itself in, while good has no such need; as we call Christ the Light and the Truth, so fidelity to truth is fidelity to God. And beyond the metaphysical, there are very earthly practical reasons (biological and physical ones, in fact) why this is so.
To put it as concisely as possible, our elites are parasites, and like all parasites are reliant on much larger bodies than themselves (national and politic, in their case) for the resources that they desire, entities which could easily crush them were they to suddenly become aware of their nature and intent. So like all parasites, they must rely on stealth and deceit to achieve their goals. An iron law of nature is that the moment the costs of maintaining the deceit exceed the benefits gained from it, the parasite is doomed. Were the host population to give the pursuit of truth the value that true Christianity accords to it, the cost of maintaining their parasitic deceit would make the elites’ efforts utterly unsustainable. To prevent this, evil must attempt to lure men into idolatry: it must make ideology their de facto god.
Ideology is for many men a de facto god, since any facts or issues seen through its twisted lens (in the case of most ideologies) are not truly seen at all but rather put beyond questioning and thus made into articles of faith. The most glaringly obvious examples of this in our time are liberal attitudes toward race and sex: for them race realism and the from-time-immemorial notion that there are two genders are not positions to be debated but heresies to be stamped out. Gregory Hood referred to anti-racism/wokeism as the church of the damned for good reason: for these ideologues, such things really are matters of faith alone—matters by which Whites face damnation by faith alone—to invert Luther’s famous idea, since they have no way of questioning their anti-racist notions that they are the source of all evil in this world.
Although the broader Right is usually better about this than the Left (though that’s not saying much), most of the normiecons have quite a few self-induced, pseudo-religious blind spots: the value of Israel or the evil of Russia being two prominent examples. Even many on the dissident right have a bit of this, particularly with regard to the value of Christianity itself: a few of them take it as a matter of faith that the faith has been nothing but an unmitigated disaster for Europeans and Whites in the lands beyond old Christendom and display an adamant refusal to even debate the matter. Save for the neo-pagans, most of these people are atheists—atheists who, ironically, turn atheism itself into a religion wherein the gravest mortal sin is finding anything worthwhile in religion in general and Christianity in particular; the ultimate irony of this is that their dogmatically held anti-God notions prevent them from using reason to see the very practical uses of upholding true Christian doctrine.
For from a purely practical (even cynical) standpoint, nothing could be more useful to the dissident right than nominal Christians taking true Christian principles to heart. As our side likes to say, we are not afraid to debate race realism and the Jewish question because we know we have truth on our side and would win. So what is stopping that debate from occurring? Ideologies, the Overton window (less so now, but people are still not ready for a full and honest discussion of race, the Jewish question, etc.), etc.—in other words, all those things that would hold no sway over men’s minds were they to live according to true Christian precepts and pursue truth no matter where it leads. True Christianity would smash the intellectual idols and allow race realism to reign supreme. Beyond that even, it would give an absolute advantage to anyone with truth on their side: thus, it’s rather odd for many on the DR, who never tire of proclaiming truth to be on the side of their policy recommendations, not to wish Christianity to spread across the West (though to be fair, most of them are taking the current, degenerate forms of the faith as true ones, not the militaristic faith described by Jim ).
And the very same can be said of scriptural exegesis: while the Word of God is indeed timeless and infallible, human interpretation of it is most certainly not; hence, while the ultimate truth of scripture is a matter of faith, a correct understanding of the specific meaning of any parts requires reason. Just take the example of: “If any man come to me, and hate not his father, and mother, and wife, and children, and brethren, and sisters, yea, and his own life also, he cannot be my disciple” juxtaposed with “Honour thy father and thy mother: that thy days may be long upon the land which the Lord thy God giveth thee”—at first glance there seems to be a contradiction, one which the atheists are ever wont to point to as proof of the irrationality of scripture; but once we realize that the former was simply a case of Christ using hyperbole to make the point that there is a hierarchy of values with love of God and salvation at the top—since without God’s love, there is nothing to our love of our parents beyond mere genetically encoded biological drive that has no significance that can hold beyond the grave—the seeming contradiction resolves itself.
The very opposite would occur with some of the deadliest heresies and pseudo-religions of our time, since all of them are based on intellectually vacuous interpretations of scripture which are then taken as articles of faith in and of themselves. If this true Christian idea of holding the ultimate truth conveyed in scripture as a matter of faith but correct interpretation of scripture as matter of reason were to take hold in the minds and hearts of nominal Christians, it would sound the death knell for the oxymoron of Christian Zionism: just the line, “Jesus saith unto him, I am the way, the truth, and the life: no man cometh unto the Father, but by me” by itself would be enough to destroy the heresy, let alone a contrasting of it with the Talmud passage described thus: “Whereas pious Muslims consider Jesus as the holy prophet of God and Muhammed’s immediate predecessor, according to the Jewish Talmud, Jesus is perhaps the vilest being who ever lived, condemned to spend eternity in the bottommost pit of Hell, immersed in a boiling vat of excrement” and Martin Luther’s description of the Jews’ treatment of the mother of God when he writes, “Then they also call Jesus a whore’s son, saying that his mother Mary was a whore, who conceived him in adultery with a blacksmith.” And with the death of Christian Zionism, Jewish power in America would be massively reduced—and would be ended entirely if this were paired with an absolute pursuit of the truth that reveals the degree to which Jews are responsible for the degradation of current and formerly White Christian nations.
Even from a purely practical standpoint, there is no getting around the fact that men have a deep-seated need for faith, “[t]he need of some imperishable bliss,” to quote Wallace Stevens, and so, as Chesterton’s Father Brown says, “It’s the first effect of not believing in God that you lose your common sense, and can’t see things as they are,” which in our case leads to soy boys and single cat ladies wanting to burn you at the stake for believing to be true what Steve Sailer has called “the most settled science in all the social sciences,” i.e., “the White-black intelligence gap.”
There is simply no escaping the need for a faith: banish it, and men begin to believe anything and believe it with all the fervor of a religious zealot; allow it in its degenerate form and it aids rather than defeats the destruction of White nations. By pushing for an embrace of true Christian principles, we can inspire men to fight for their homelands with all the truth of our timeless understanding of race, sex, Jewish malignant influence, etc. (and the fear of sinning by compromising truth), and all the zeal of knowing that our work will echo not only into future ages but even beyond the grave.
This is simply not something that neo-paganism is capable of. To be clear, I have nothing against my Nordic ancestors: I love them and appreciate the struggles they endured to keep their bloodlines alive and well long enough for me to be born; I also love the old pagan tales, having spent long hours in my youth reading them (along with many other mythologies, most of which I felt paled in comparison, as well); but I could never enjoy them as part of a faith, for the simple reason that I know in my heart and mind they aren’t true enough to live and die for. As Harmonica pointed out in a series of articles on Identity Dixie (all of them well worth your time) which argue that neo-paganism is a dead end for the DR and for the White nations they are trying to save:
The political problem with paganism, and why it leads to a dead end for the Right, is that the vast majority of self-described modern “pagans” do not believe Odin exists, either. They may claim to be the “Soldiers of Odin” (or some other nonsense), but when challenged, they will fall back and claim that they do not actually believe in Odin. Instead, modern pagans view Odin as some sort of role model, looking up to him in the same way a young boy admires Bruce Wayne and Superman.
That is one of the biggest flaws of modern paganism, and why embracing it is suicidal for the Right. It is a fringe movement for edgy atheists and, more importantly, it cannot inspire the kind of fanaticism that is needed to save the West. The truly devout will always have a great advantage over the wishy-washy, and that devotion can topple empires.
Although I wish to see the White West return to its true Christian roots for the transcendent truth in them, I do not overlook the fact that from a purely cold and calculating standpoint it makes a lot more sense to try to save our peoples by reforming the now corrupted Christian faith which vast numbers of them at least nominally follow: by the numbers alone, reforming Christianity is a winner, while returning to an older pagan faith that even its modern adherents do not truly believe is not.
Could the DR achieve a neo-Reformation, they could blast apart the oppressive power structures built on lies and sustained by the irrational zealotry of innumerable pseudo-faiths (anti-racism, transgenderism, etc.) without firing a single literal shot, without any violence at all. For the true Christian notion that fidelity to truth is fidelity to God could raise the costs of our parasitic elites’ deceptions to the point at which they become utterly unsustainable. For that reason alone, even the atheists among us have reason to want to see, as Belloc so wished to, Europe (and the lands its children settled and built up into great nations) and the Christian faith become one once again.
https://www.theoccidentalobserver.net/wp-content/uploads/2018/06/TOO-Full-Logo-660x156-1.png00D. H. Coraxhttps://www.theoccidentalobserver.net/wp-content/uploads/2018/06/TOO-Full-Logo-660x156-1.pngD. H. Corax2025-05-06 11:11:572025-05-06 11:11:57Religions vs Cults, or How to Reform Christianity to Restore the White West
Leonie Plaar standing among the environs that surround her. She has been conditioned to be content with that which is objectively distressing and jarring. A perfect symbol for modern Germany and Europe on the precipice of oblivion.
Meet Leonie Plaar, who goes by the moniker Frau Löwenherz as well as Leonie Löwenherz. Far-left, lesbian, Antifa, she is a most grotesque figure who exemplifies many of our troubles. Quite regrettably, she has a TikTok account with over 500,000 followers, while other social media accounts, namely her German language TikTok and Instagram accounts, have just under 100,000 and just over 50,000 followers, respectively.[1] She has made various appearances on German television, some of which were made objects of derision and ridicule by a number of detractors. Most amusing of all, she stormed off twitter and migrated towards Bluesky due to Elon Musk’s policies allowing users to express themselves more freely, including those that offend her far-left orthodoxy.
A screenshot of her last tweet announcing her departure from Twitter, migrating to Bluesky. The German language along with her likeness are weaponized against that very essence.
Pictures from several years ago attest to her natural beauty which she has, to put it mildly, neglected. Facial contortions resulting from a permanent state of outrage manifesting from the wokescold ideology seem to be making her, if not ugly, far less attractive. There is a certain, bitter irony in her moniker of Frau Löwenherz, a name that draws from her Germanic personage even as her message and very being advocate for the abolition of Germany and the German people. In this way, she and her handlers are using her Germanic phenotype and mannerisms to deconstruct or dismantle that Germanic essence. Given how pedestrian and unoriginal her takes are, a matter discussed at length below, one cannot help but conclude she has been choreographed and boosted by certain nefarious, powerful interests.
In this video from last year, she made a presentation in Cologne talking about her decision to cut off contact from her father. Her stated reasons, like most if not everything this woman has ever uttered, are cut whole cloth from the boilerplate of cliched thoughts of the far-left hive mind that pervade both America and Europe. What grievances compelled her to such a drastic decision? Her father supports Alternativ für Deutschland (AfD) and is generally opposed to how the Bundesrepublik handled the Covid pandemic and vaccination requirements.[2] For these unforgivable sins, for such political heresy of the day, she destroyed her relationship with her father, as it is unclear what effect this has had with other members of her family. Based on what is divulged in this presentation, by all accounts he was and is a loving father (she describes herself as a Papakind or daddy’s favorite), and a man who, supporting the AfD, loves Germany and wants to protect it from national and racial suicide.
The video is distressing, but there are some silver linings. The YouTube thumbs down extension reveals a ratio of over four to one dislikes and likes, and that is with the disincentive to even bother given how youtube tries to hide such feedback. In addition, a number of German language comments left by Antifa sorts and other such lefty rabble indicate a number of comments denouncing this woman, the decisions she made, and what she stands for have been deleted.
A brief perusal of her TikTok accounts and other content reveals that she only utters tired cliches that could very well be taken for verbatim by millions of others so inclined, both when she is speaking in English and her native German, with some buzzwords including “cishet male,” “toxic relationships” and “all men” being a few that stick out after a very brief perusal of her main TikTok page. Another cliché from her German TikTok account is “Liebe wen Du willst” (love whom you want). While in college, as she was being indoctrinated in cultural Marxist claptrap, she wrote a poem called “Alter Weißer Mann” (“Old White Man),” proving that pulling all the registers from intersectioanlist feminism and other such wokery is a tried-and-true formula for poetry so bad it does not warrant discussion let alone translation here. Then there is this presentation on a Ted Talk offshoot— aside from speaking in unoriginal boilerplate, her far-left activism seems to be correlated to putting on some pounds. But just as this reveals that she and so many of her ilk are incapable of an original thought or idea, the ubiquity of these clichés, the maggots of the mind, further demonstrate how they have consumed so many tens of millions, across different nations and languages. It is such unvaried, uniform regurgitation of the very same language that gave rise to the NPC meme.
A screenshot of her Ted Talk. More thumbs down ratings than otherwise, and this despite the disincentive to even bother. One is reluctant to make comments on another’s appearance, but she has packed on some pounds. One can only infer that the dysfunction of her far-left nuttery is giving her the body of a middle-age woman before reaching 30.
Many such cliches are seen in this video. Use of the word “triggered” to describe how Plaar has rightly incurred the ire of her detractors, or “non-binary lesbian” friends as people she was protecting by destroying the relationship with her father. Denouncing the AfD for “at the very least taking an indirect part in deaths of people” sounds very reminiscent of lefty woke jargon about “stochastic terrorism” lodged against various right-of-center influencers. When discussing her decision to cut off her father, and ostensibly much of her actual family, she talked about how she has her own family of friends and supporters in the LGTBQ community. She has a “magnificent family,” (großartige Familie), a family of queer people her age, by now a tired cliché repeated so many thousands of times over. This by now is a familiar yarn, covered for example in Irreversible Damage by Abigail Shrier, which discusses at length the modus operandi of those indoctrinated in the transgender cult to cut off family as a matter of course (sometimes while still accepting payments for college tuition and living expenses). It is a growing phenomenon that is coming to characterize millennials and Generation Z. In most contemptible fashion, at the conclusion of this presentation Plaar encourages others in a similar situation as her to do the same, asserting that no one is obligated to maintain a relationship with people who “are a danger to you,” “take energy from you,” or that “you do not feel comfortable around,” assuring audience members there is a “family out there for you.”
Towards the end of the presentation, seen above, Plaar encourages audience members to cut contact from family members they disagree with. The image of Grumpy Cat is a bizarre touch to such a sinister message. In addition to how terribly dated “Grumpy Cat” is, another silver lining is the down vote to up vote ratio, exceeding 4-1.
That every utterance is so thoroughly unoriginal—verbatim the same slogans, phrases, and sentences simply translated into German— is proof that she is a product of cultural programming. As explicated in “Thrust Into It All; The Individual Defined by Culture and Circumstance,” we all are a product of cultural programming to a profound, even incalculable degree. A great irony with individuals like Frau Plaar is that she assuredly likens herself to be a very unique individual. Many of her videos denounce racism, neo-Nazis, and the like, from which it can be inferred that she has lapped up—with a voracious appetite and most ardent fervor—the servings of Kriegschuld offered to her on an unremittent basis since birth as a “good,” modern German.
As explained in “Thrust Into It All,” one could take an exact clone of Plaar, but place her in a different cultural milieu and period of time, and, that clone—by virtue of being born in that different time and circumstance alone–would be a radically different individual than what we now behold. If she were not born in modern Germany with the decades of national self-flagellation, the indoctrination through both education and culture of Kriegschuld talking points, but in Germany in the 1920s or 30s, she would most likely have views that would make her father and other AfD supporters seem radical in a very different way, not because of any accusations of being “far-right,” but because of their classical liberalism and, one, would presume, some measure of aversion to Hitler and the more onerous policies of that regime. If she were born in the 1920s or ’30s, she would have been compelled to join the Bund deutscher Mädel, but most likely would have joined of her own free volition, to the extent one really chooses to do anything at all. Rather than be indoctrinated with war guilt and later the tenets of intersectionalism and other such cultural Marxist jargon proffered at the University of Osnabrück and elsewhere, she would have a greater awareness as well as righteous resentment and indignation towards the number of hardships afflicted on the German people in the wake of the 1918 armistice and later the Versailles Diktat, including paying not a million but a billion marks for a loaf of bread during the number of inflation crises that Germany experienced, the nigh one million Germans who died during the naval blockade of 1918, among other hardships and indignities suffered by the German people on direct account of the do-goody Western democracies. Doubtless she would also have a more enlightened view on the legitimacy of Germany’s territorial claims on the Sudetenland and Danzig, as well as a more enthusiastic view of marching into the Rhineland Palatinate (Germany marching into her own backyard) and the Anschluss (Austrians overwhelmingly supported it). German newspapers in the 1920s and ’30s covered atrocities and mass murder in Stalin’s Soviet Russia in a way that did not exist in the English-speaking world and in a way that is downplayed to this day in Germany, so her affinity for the historical predecessors to Antifa and the far left, namely the KPD would be most unlikely. It is almost certain she would have supported Germany’s war effort in the Second World War, particularly after the German armed forces avoided a protracted war by making France capitulate in six weeks, and not without good reason, especially without the advantage of hindsight.
Images of BDM girls like this are illustrative. The programming instilled from that cultural milieu versus the one we see today is the only real difference between women like this and those like Frau Plaar. Culture matters, and matters more than anything. Culture is of course a projection of power. ◊
The role of cultural milieu as programming of each individual is not merely illustrated by considering what Leonie Plaar would be like 80 to 100 years ago, but is further demonstrated by the realization that, in many ways, the choices she makes and the utterances she makes are not an individual choice at all as properly understood, but are part of a greater rubric of sociological and cultural phenomena that shape and define the individual in any context, but most especially in modern Germany as she stands on the precipice of nationaler und völkischer Abschaffung. The real terror of Leonie Plaar is that she is not just an individual, not an isolated incident, but is part of a greater hive mind that is leading Germany and all of Europe to ruin—to racial and national suicide. Having chosen to be lesbian[3], she is part and parcel of the antinatalism that has a death grip on Germany, Europe, and White populations across the world.
Since the original date of publication, this image was recently posted on her Instagram account, confirming this author’s contention that she had a boyfriend in college. A precise translation is unncessary, as it is nothing other than cookie-cutter, boilerplate misandry of the lesbian sort.
Proof of this contention—that her cookie cutter far left leanings are not an individual trend but part of an insidious cultural and societal trend in Germany and to a lesser extent Europe—is pervasive and is demonstrated in any number of news stories about modern Germany. See the demonstrations against the AfD, as tepid and restrained as that party is, most recently in Essen, or that “good” Germans have a fleet of ships, as part of an organization called the Sea Eye, to interdict boats and rafts of Africans—not to send them back or. . . other, harsher measures to prevent them from reaching European shores, as ought to be done—but to rescue them and ferry them to European shores for settlement.
When compared with a certain, tragic generation of Germans nearly a century ago, Plaar and “good” Germans like her, as products of a pernicious social programming, are in many ways an inversion of the two excellent Terminator movies worthy of discussion and acknowledgement.[4] Everyone knows the difference between the original terminator in the first movie, sent to kill Sarah Connor, and the second cyborg, once referred to as “Uncle Bob,” sent in Terminator 2: Judgment Day to protect John Connor: programming. Skynet of course programmed the first terminator to assassinate Sarah Connor to prevent John Connor from being born, and after that failed John Connor and the human resistance overtook a Skynet stronghold in 2029 and programmed a captured terminator, sending him back in time to protect him in 1991 from the T-1000 played by Robert Patrick. In human affairs, the cultural milieu that envelops the individual is the programming, defining the individual in such profound ways that are only slightly less determinative than the programming of a Cyberdine Systems Model 800 cyborg.
Programming Status: Complete: A screenshot from the presentation, focusing on a blonde German woman absorbing the message. The process of indoctrination is captured at this very instant in time. As discussed below, in order to win, nationalists will have to stop the process of programming and indoctrinating young people.
Many would of course object to the analogy for comparing the generations of Germans who came of age during the Third Reich to the cyborg terminator sent to protect John Connor and the future of humanity. Simply stated, Germans of this period have been unfairly maligned, as the vilification of them is always made with the advantage of hindsight, and never accounts for the legitimate reasons everyday Germans followed Hitler without that advantage of hindsight[5], including the myriad injustices of the Versailles Diktat, the deprivations and hardships suffered by the German people at the end of World War I mentioned above, the legitimate threat of communist revolution, the shocking and extreme decadence and sexual degeneracy of the Weimar Republic, especially Weimar Berlin, not to mention legitimate territorial claims on Sudetenland, Danzig, and Austria. Ernst Nolte and others correctly distinguish between the German people at the time and the political leadership at the top that failed them in such utterly devastating, catastrophic fashion. In spite of such unfair vilification, Germans of this time period advocated for the family, advocated for natalist policies that would allow the German people to propagate beyond a couple of generations, and they fought for their country against the evils of liberal democracy, Soviet Bolshevism, and International Jewry. Despite the catastrophic moral and military failures of the top leadership, this generation did have a decency utterly absent in individuals like Plaar who seek the abolition of their own people. Contrary to conventional wisdom, and contrary to what deluded Germans like Plaar insist as she and those of her ilk march Germany to her very abolition, the hypothetical Plaar born in 20s and 30s—or really the generation of women from that period—is much closer to the benign, savior of humanity “Uncle Bob” variety of terminator cyborg than its predecessor sent to snuff out the future of humanity. And no matter how much Plaar and those like her would deny it, it is a nigh certainty she would have gladly fallen in line as a BDM girl as a clone born in the 20s or 30s. She has after all shown a strong propensity to follow whichever way the winds of power blow.
A still from the Victory Parade in Berlin after the capitulation of France in 1940, depicting what appears to be a BDM girl, perhaps 17 or 18, giving flowers to a German soldier. Behold a different sort of German woman of very much the same phenotype. One might call this woman Fräulein Löwenherz. Such a woman did not fancy herself bisexual at 15 and later alternate between lesbian and lesbian bisexual, nor did she forsake her father or her male counterparts to bolster her lefty credentials on social media. Cultural milieu is the defining difference between her and so much of what we see today.
The Terminator analogy is of course somewhat simplistic in other ways, as few metaphors bear close scrutiny. The concept of Geworfenheit as formulated by Martin Heidegger is of course in tension with Entwurf¸ or projection, the way the individual interacts with the externalities that envelop him. Some of us are endowed with some small semblance of autonomy, even if free will is far more limited than the Anglo-American tradition so foolishly supposes. In many ways, free choice is but an extensive drop-down menu, in which the choices available to the individual are prepopulated by the externalities that envelop him, including time and circumstance one is born into and other externalities from cultural milieu to familial and religious upbringing.
There is another imperfection in this analogy, however, namely that many societies present a conflict between receding incumbent cultures and ascending subversive ones, with Germany being arguably a better example than any other in the Occident. To be sure, Germany, like almost all of Europe, is in serious trouble, beset on all sides by this sort of subversive cultural programming, the intake of junk American Unkultur, replete with English-language advertising and English-language pop songs that imperil the future of not just the German language but many European languages and other languages around the world. This however is in tension with the incumbent culture of Germany, one that has developed over centuries and that rejects the insidious views and lifestyles of persons like Plaar, or those who commit miscegenation or want to flood Germany and other European lands with Third World hordes who have no right to set foot on the sacred continent. In this way, individuals are subject to two competing efforts to program, although the insidious, malignant cultural programming that infected Plaar does seem to be ascending.
The opposition between an incumbent and at the moment receding culture and an ascending subversive new culture might lead some to question whether the constraints on individual autonomy are as severe as argued for. Although the analogy to cyborg programming may be a bit simplistic and overstated in some respects, those who insist on free will overlook things such as the abiding tendency of sorts like Plaar, especially women, to go with the dominant social order, the power of peer pressure, the appeal of authority wielded by whatever professors indoctrinated her with feminist and intersectional jargon at the University of Osnabrück, the irrational compulsion to rebel against one’s parents, among other externalities that most are not even conscious of.
In many ways, simplistic and erroneous notions about individual autonomy, whatever that is supposed to mean, combined with the greater philistinism of mainstream conservatism that holds matters of culture and the arts in open contempt, at least here in the States, have contributed greatly to many of our troubles that have allowed young women like Plaar to be so indoctrinated, to be so programmed. All of this might have been avoided if there were an established opposition to cultural Marxism that actually cared about culture, and was not merely feigned opposition by paid-to-lose shills who only pretend to serve their constituencies. Germany, alas, is a special case, being a vanquished country, a nation that did not have legal sovereignty until after reunification, a country that abides by a constitution written at the direction of and with assistance from the victors that conquered her. Germany is a country in which leftist youth wear t-shirts reading “Germany Must Die So That I May Live,” it is a country in which an insidious philosophy called “anti-Germanism” compels self-hating Germans to brandish signs thanking Bomber Arthus Harris for firebombing Dresden to counter protest sensible Germans who protest the war crime perpetrated by the “do-goody” Allies.
Of course, these elements in the culture and higher education stem from the march through the institutions of power here in the States by cultural Marxism. Intersectionalism, the anti-white rhetoric, everything that comprises Plaar’s malignant programming of the mind was imported from the United States, much of which was imported from German Jews fleeing the Nazi regime in the 1930s.[6] Because these harmful “ideas,” to the extent one can call them ideas, most immediately originate from the United States, those beholden to more mainstream views or who are (somehow) still beholden to quaint and erroneous views about American exceptionalism make a grave error in thinking all of this is peculiar to the Germans or that somehow the Germans collectively deserve this or are responsible for this. ◊
It is unclear what the best short- and long-term solutions are for those Germans (and other European peoples) not infected by the insidious programming that has infected those like Frau Plaar. As always, no matter how daunting and seemingly intractable a problem may be, any solution requires a correct understanding of the nature of the problem. Germans, Europeans, and the European Diaspora have no hope of prevailing without the critical, essential understanding that Frau Plaar and those like her are a product of the cultural milieu that envelops them and envelops us all. To save heiliges Deutschland und Mutter Europa, the cultural programming must be changed by any means necessary and available, not unlike how the programming of the Model 800 cyborg determines whether he is a friend or foe of humanity in the two Terminator films. For Germany in particular, changing the cultural programming, and doing so in time, will be difficult, but German nationalists do have an incumbent cultural foundation that has existed for centuries. That incumbent cultural foundation needs to be protected and touted with much greater vigor than has been seen in recent memory.
The fate of not just Germany but all of Europe may hinge on whether a critical mass of Germans can overcome decades of war guilt. The ridiculous outrage from Sylt, where chants of “Ausländer Raus, Deutschland den Deutschen, Ausländer Raus” to L’Amour Toujours” became a national scandal, including the “cancellation” of persons involved, calls for five year prison sentences, and banning the song from Octoberfest and other festivities. Conversely, different variations of the song shot up on the varous German music charts, one sign of many showing there is still hope for Germany yet.
At some point, Germans and Europeans writ large need to understand that the United States is not their friend and find some way to expel not only the American armed forces from Germany and other European countries, but expel and expunge many horrid auspices of American Unkultur from their midst. This will require a more enlightened, authoritarian ethos, a dark enlightenment, that rejects American platitudes about individual autonomy and especially the absurd notion that what consenting adults do is no one else’s concern. If for example Germany were to ban or oust McDonald’s as ought and must be done, a critical mass of persons must come to understand that persons making the “choice” to patron these portents of Pax Americana affect Germans and Europeans collectively.[7] The same rationale—the same dark enlightenment–applies to embracing intolerance for a certain sort of German woman who desires to copulate with men of different races, holds “refugees welcome” signs at the train station to greet passenger trains full of migrants, and so on. Above all, Germany and other vassal states of the American empire must come to the realization that they are occupied nations and develop the political will demanding they cease to be so. These are just some of the steps necessary to end the process whereby young Germans and Europeans altogether are programmed by this insidious American creed. The failure to either discern this fundamental truth about culture as programming or to successfully implement measures to disrupt and end such programming will ensure that persons like Plaar and her handlers will prevail, even as her phenotype and lineage will be assured of extinction through the auspices of antinatalism and the Great Replacement should these elements continue to succeed.
Other articles and essays by Richard Parker are available at his publication, The Raven’s Call: A Reactionary Perspective, found at theravenscall.substack.com. Please consider subscribing on a free or paid basis, and to like and share as warranted. Readers can also find him on twitter, under the handle @astheravencalls.
[2] She makes a number of outlandish claims in denouncing both the AfD and her father. In addition to accusing the AfD of engaging in “Nazi rhetoric,” and associating the party with the Hitler salute, she further claims her father indulged conspiracy theories about Bill Gates wanting to put microchips in people through these experimental vaccines. In addition, she states the last utterance compelling her to break off contact with her father was when he “unironically compared the vaccine mandate to the Holocaust.” She even accuses AfD supporters of engaging in rhetoric expressing a desire to see “people like me dead,” a sentiment that I cannot condemn entirely but also highly doubt has any basis in fact, particularly as Alice Weidel is lesbian. Given the number of outlandish statements she has made that have no apparent basis in fact, one would be wise to consider her an unreliable narrator. Shortly before the Holocaust accusation, at approximately 15:25, she challenged her parents regarding the vaccine asking, what would convince you to take the opposite conclusion from your reticence to take the vaccine. Her father replied “nothing.” This is much more likely to have happened, and, of course, it is no reason to destroy a relationship with a loving father. Finally, this video likely references her last visit with her father, demonstrating her intentions were not in good faith. She went there looking for a fight.
[3] In the video presentation discussed at length in the second paragraph on, Plaar divulges that she discovered she was bi-sexual at 15 and determined she was lesbian at 17 and came out at some point in time thereafter, when precisely is unclear. However, in thesetwo TikTok videos, she identifies as “lesbian and bi.” Additionally, about a year ago, I seem to recall discovering a video evidencing she had a boyfriend in college among other materials. Regrettably I now am unable to locate these videos. Regardless, that she identifies alternately as lesbian or bisexual demonstrates her lesbianism is a choice and socially and culturally conditioned, as female sexuality is generally much more fluid than male sexuality. EDIT March 31, 2025. A recent entry on her instagram confirms she had a boyfriend in college. She the note made on this date to see the image.
[4] One is reluctant to make any reference to American popular culture, but there are outliers for almost everything Terminator and Terminator 2: Judgment Day are great cinema with profound themes and great story-telling that distinguish them from so much dreck.
[5] While the German people of the time and today are undeserving of the unmitigated villainy that has unfairly maligned them, the regime—or more precisely its political leadership at the top—had a number of moral failings, not to mention a number of catastrophic strategic and tactical blunders that doomed Germany, despite the deutsche Wehrmacht being a most lethal instrument and one of the great paragons of military discipline in all history; even the greatest warriors cannot fight three peer powers on three fronts simultaneously and emerge victorious. As stated elsewhere, I am most ambivalent about the Nazi period, as I regard Hitler and those in his inner circle with a strong aversion, although this aversion diverges largely from conventional wisdom. I am deeply sympathetic to the reasons for which everyday Germans followed Hitler—without the advantage of hindsight—as I regard the Allies as bad or worse. I do condemn Hitler however, for in effect losing the war by involving Germany in a war with three peer powers simultaneously, not to mention the barbarism he perpetrated against Slavic Europeans, the Russians in particular although the German armed forces saw much barbarism perpetrated by the Russians as well from the very onset of Operation Barbarossa. Hitler also brutalized his own people, and showed callous disregard for the lives of his own men in “stand or die” orders. While in Allied captivity, Field Marshall Ritter von Leeb once stated “The excesses of National Socialism were in the first and final analysis due to the warped personality of the Führer,” to which Heinz Guderian responded, “the fundamental principles were fine.” This is an entirely reasonable position on the matter.
[6] See Culture of Critique by Kevin MacDonald, for starters.
https://www.theoccidentalobserver.net/wp-content/uploads/2018/06/TOO-Full-Logo-660x156-1.png00Richard Parkerhttps://www.theoccidentalobserver.net/wp-content/uploads/2018/06/TOO-Full-Logo-660x156-1.pngRichard Parker2025-05-05 00:01:132025-05-04 16:35:41On the Indoctrination of Frau Löwenherz: A Case Study of Culture as Programming
This article was originally published in Danish on January 20, 2020.
A Facebook friend of mine recently announced that he would be spending less time on Facebook in the future – simply because he couldn’t bear to read all the twisted nonsense national-minded people sometimes spout in this forum. I’ve known the person in question for 35 years, during which we’ve both fought for Denmark’s cause, both together and separately, so it’s something that must necessarily give you pause for thought. And unfortunately, he is right. It’s incredible how many rational people can suddenly get themselves to write posts that lack any inner connection with what they otherwise write.
The right wing simply needs to get its thoughts in order. It simply has no ideological basis – no fundamental idea from which it can take a sensible position on all the problems of our time in a coherent way. In addition, it submits to the enemy’s world of ideas and adopts the enemy’s definitions and enemy images – perhaps as an alibi reaction, but perhaps also because no thought has been given to the purpose of the enemy’s insults and values and the wider scope of these. The enemy’s tactics are, of course, entirely deliberate. They want to ensure that the right wing continues to wander around in all directions like a bunch of confused chickens, so that it accomplishes nothing. Only a unifying idea can unite the forces into an effective resistance movement, the creation of which the enemy will prevent with all its might. A truly national resistance movement means death to the traitors and consistent cleansing of the country of unwanted existences.
The overarching idea that unites national Danes is love of country and the belief that only a homogeneous society can ensure the survival of the people. But this necessary foundation lacks a philosophical, ideological and scientific underpinning that can make the world fit together in a meaningful way. It is partly because of this lack that conservatism has never and will never be able to win over other political ideas with a more powerful vision – or over all the crazy ideas of the time, from climate chaos to gender confusion. Conservatism lacks a real foundation of ideas that it struggles to realize. It is content to defend its positions as long as it can, and then make lukewarm compromises with its opponents in the hope of clinging to at least some vestiges of its positions. It is pathetic.
However, one unifying enemy image holds the right wing more or less together: the dislike of Islam. Of course, we can fully share this dislike. Islam is a primitive religion for primitive people and we don’t want it here, not today and not in a thousand years. But if primitive people choose a primitive religion, it is only natural. Why should we really interfere with that? If the people of today’s Muslim countries want to remain in the Middle Ages, stoning each other and cutting each other’s heads off, they should be allowed to do so, as long as they keep that religion to themselves, of course! We should not nurture universal ‘human rights’, because they do not and should not exist in the real world. Every society must define the rights of its citizens according to its norms and values. Anything else is a globalist invention designed to weaken us – and the authors are the usual culprits.
However, primitivity can also be a positive quality – to the extent that it serves to ensure the survival of the group at the expense of other groups that have become so refined, sophisticated and spiritual that they have lost the will and ability to defend themselves. And here we are at the heart of the matter. Everything the right criticizes about Islam is pretty much what makes Muslims strong – stronger than us!
We are busy criticizing their burqas, veils, scarves and social control of their girls and adult women. We may think it’s exaggerated – and perhaps to a certain extent also hypocritical – but we ourselves have until recently also had restraints on our girls – until we lost the will to live as a group, and until Jewish scientists gave us the Pill and their opinion makers convinced us that women can only realize themselves by not having and raising children – and that it is even okay to kill children before birth. Already in Manu’s Book of Laws, written around the beginning of our era but whose content is much older, the ancient Indians stated that the sure way to destroy a people is to destroy its women. It is the woman who bears the children – and it is she who must bring them up. The man provides for them. Since it is the woman who carries on the family line, it is also important to know that the children are the man’s. Men can probably have an average of 100 children a year – women usually only have 1 child during that period. In other words, the woman is far more important to the survival of the group than the man. The group can survive with very few men – but only with many fertile women. That’s why the man goes to war and gets killed – while the woman stays at home and gives birth. The man can be replaced, the woman cannot. She is simply too valuable to use as cannon fodder. This is also why monogamy is actually against nature. In a society living in the state of nature, there will be more women than men, and from a biological point of view it doesn’t matter much. But since we no longer live in the state of nature, monogamy has societal benefits as we do not have a large surplus of women. However, when monogamy is sometimes difficult to live up to, well, it’s nature that takes over. When Muslims have up to four wives, this results in many children in the family, but not necessarily a larger total number of children in the population, as today there is simply a surplus of men, which leads to a battle for women. However, this battle is also a selection factor that we have eliminated. In the past, it was women who had to fight over men, but it had the same effect. When you no longer have any selection factors, but live in a society where everything is equal and there is no difference between good and bad genetic material, you degenerate and eventually perish. Every breeder of dogs, horses and canaries knows this, and the same rules apply to humans, who are basically just animals with clothes on. However, it must be said that most of our guests don’t think about biology either – they only think about strengthening family ties – which is fine in principle, of course, but it leads to inbreeding and thus often to degeneration.
A woman only realizes herself by procreating and raising her children (and thus helping to possibly displace other groups). That’s the whole point of life – not to have a job at a checkout line or act as prime minister. It’s the man’s job when he’s not at war, and of course it’s also important because it ensures the economic existence of the family and the people, but it cannot replace the woman’s job. Feminists consider this to be a denigration and degradation of women. Nothing could be more wrong. The degradation of women is that they are not valued in themselves, but only as a slave of capital in the labor market on a par with men. She is worth much more in herself than the man. Women who are EU commissioners, prime ministers or CEOs of even the largest companies are essentially a biological waste – even though they may have had a few children that they have left for society to raise. The family is the building block of society, and women are the ones who must ensure the quality of these building blocks. Therefore, it is also important to give women a good education so that they have something to pass on to their children. Of course, this is especially true today, when women can’t be expected to bring anything from home. It should be emphasized that the Nordic woman was never oppressed. She ran the household and the entire family’s finances when they were away at war. The oppression of women first came with Christianity, which saw women as sin personified because of Eve’s love for the fruit of the Tree of Knowledge. However, this oppression was opposed by the Nordic man and disappeared over time, only to reappear with Jewish feminism, which wants to force women into a role that is not natural for them.
The destruction of the woman is very advanced here. The brainwashing has been violent. Today she thinks she is happier in her materialism than women were before, but the number of mental disorders has never been greater. Marriages have no lasting existence – children have no family. They are children in shared families and raised in multicultural institutions – essentially rootless, without a share in the common culture and without existential grounding. They have been taught no respect for the words of adults, there are no boundaries set for them, and they have been led to believe that they can create their own identity by changing their name, their gender, coloring their hair and disfiguring themselves with tattoos, rings in their ears or tongue, horns on their forehead and so on. Children now have to undergo psychiatric treatment if they don’t get enough “Likes” on Facebook. Scouts are no longer allowed to earn merit badges, because that could make some people feel inferior – and grades should of course be abolished. After all, everyone is equal. Their self-esteem is zero, they barely know their parents, let alone their grandparents. It is not part of their upbringing that they should be part of a community and that the good of the whole must necessarily take precedence over the individual’s immediate wishes. Suicide, self-harm, drugs etc. are the result. I have great respect for families who, against all odds, manage to raise healthy and well-functioning children, but as a whole we are a dying people and no one seems to want to change that – not even on the right wing.
With the foreigners, this is different. The families are far more robust. Girls don’t get drunk from the age of 14 and they don’t sell their bodies for a burger in a gate on Strøget. They don’t go around playing with boys and are therefore not disturbed in their schooling. Therefore, they often achieve good results in school, but suddenly they quit, get married and devote themselves to their true destiny. It’s just as it should be – it’s just a shame that they are not Danes and will never be able to become Danes. But Denmark will be theirs – they will conquer it with their abdomen, while Danish women are busy “realizing themselves” at the expense of the whole. This is one of the “Danish values”.
Another point of attack against Islam is the Muslim view on homosexuality. Here too, we bring our false values that weaken us. Sexuality really only has one purpose: reproduction to ensure the survival of the group. That it can also be very enjoyable is another matter. Homosexuality as such has no place in nature’s great household – which is why it is hated in both the Koran and the Bible and actively opposed by Islam, while the national church has long since renounced Christianity. For the same reason, it should not be supported by us. Of course, we do not think it is necessary to whip homosexuals and hang them from construction cranes. You could argue that they are handicapped to a mild degree and should therefore be pitied. They are missing out on the most important things in life, which is a shame for them – and not a reason to chase them through the streets like we used to do. We should be past that stage. However, homosexuals must accept that their practice may be abhorrent to normal people and that they must keep it within their own doors. Ordinary people also have a right not to be offended! There are no special rights associated with this disability, no marriage and certainly no adoption of children – it is simply a crime against the children and an attack on the healthy family as the cornerstone of society. If they won’t accept it, a healthy society will respond. We don’t want parades in the streets and we don’t think there is anything to be proud of in that regard – but nothing to be ashamed of either. However, homosexuality today has to some extent become a fad – a choice. It is a product of the general pornification of society, where sex has been made what it’s all about and a public issue, and that is unacceptable. It’s one thing to be born with a disability, it’s another to consciously choose it. It’s like sawing off your own leg, and society cannot accept that. This topic should not be part of the public debate. And it’s not just homosexuality, but sexual life in general that should be kept under wraps. If anything, it is a private matter!
In this respect, our guests may not differ much from the Danish population as far as the men are concerned, but not the women! As mentioned, they are too valuable. And sex is still not a public issue, just as there is no room in Muslim society for discussions about whether there are 50 or 70 “gender identities”, or for other egocentric identity-political discussions and the associated culture of violation and splitting the natural community into atoms. The Muslim community is centered on Allah. From him come the values, and you submit to him if you want to be part of the community. If you don’t, you will ultimately be killed. For Christian immigrant groups, the community works in much the same way – only without Allah. You are nothing – your people are everything.
This is not a bad attitude to have. It gives the group strength, and if the group is not strong, the individual will also be weak. Danish society today consists of weak individuals with no strong common group affiliation. This is the road to certain doom. This is another of the “Danish values”. It is one of the reasons why we stand to lose to Muslims and other foreigners.
For many on the right, it is these “values” that foreigners must adopt in order to become “Danish”. They must become as degenerate as we are. It will take some time before that happens, and by then we will have long since disappeared from the history books.
Another example of straying can be seen in the relationship with Iran, where large sections of the right were overjoyed by Trump’s assassination of Iranian General Qasem Soleimani and full of support for American warfare in the Middle East, even grateful that they will “save” us from terrorism. However, let us be clear that we have no quarrel with Iran. If we have a terrorism problem in Europe, it is not primarily Iran’s fault – it is our own. We have let millions of foreigners into Europe and these foreigners have brought terrorism with them. A very large proportion of them do us no good – they want to take over our countries and destroy our civilization. If we didn’t have foreigners in the country, we wouldn’t have terrorism – it’s as simple as that. We would live as peacefully as we lived here 60 years ago and it is very difficult to see what benefits this multiculturalism has brought. This is one of those questions that is often asked but never answered – simply because it cannot be answered positively. Think of what we wouldn’t be able to do with our money if we didn’t have this burden – and think of all the time and attention this foreign element demands. What filled our newspapers before they arrived? It did things that concerned our lives and our culture.
The blame for having these foreigners, and with them terrorism, lies solely with politicians and the rest of the elite! And yet the Danes continue to elect them. They were the ones who should have been eliminated, not Soleimani. He is none of our business and the US has no business in the Middle East. The US intervention has been devastating and we have just seen in Syria how the US is ready to betray its allies, in this case the Kurds, at any time.
We can only repeat what we have said before: It is the destabilization of the Middle East by the US (and thus Israel) that has provoked mass immigration to Europe and set the whole of North Africa on fire. The only reasonably stable state left is Iran – and it too must be destroyed by any means necessary.
We have no special love affair with the regime in Tehran. However, that is none of our business, because we are not the ones who live there and the people who live there have to find out for themselves. Under no circumstances should they be granted asylum here.
It is perhaps worth repeating a little history. At the beginning of the last century, Iranians established a so-called democratic rule within the framework of a constitutional monarchy, but this was overthrown by Britain and the US in a coup in 1953 and replaced by an absolute rule under the Shah – but effectively controlled by the two powers that made Persia their main support in Western Asia along with Israel. The Shah’s rule was certainly not bad – it turned Persia into a modern Western-oriented state – but his dependence on foreign countries and especially on Israel gradually created a growing popular opposition to him. The people didn’t want secularization – they wanted Islam and they didn’t want to be allied with Israel. Ayatollah Khomeini filed for asylum in Paris, from where he directed an intense cassette tape propaganda for the creation of an Islamic terrorist state. It used to be good practice that you cannot actively engage in politics when you have political asylum. It would probably have been a very good idea to prevent him from doing so, and that was probably when the US should have supported the Shah, but they let him fall – and that’s why we have the regime we have today, and that it is strongly anti-American is probably no surprise to anyone.
It didn’t get any better when Iraq under Saddam Hussein, with American support, attacked Iran and inflicted a very bloody war on it in the 80s. However, they did not succeed in breaking Iran – and shortly afterwards, America also let Saddam Hussein fall, as it had let the Shah fall. As mentioned, the United States is not a faithful ally – only towards Israel does it never fail. One can’t help but wonder why the US prefers that small piece of land without oil or other important raw materials to the entire Arab and Muslim world. For anyone who knows America, the answer is self-evident. Jewish power in the US is so great and paramount that no one can become president or get elected to any other office – except maybe dog catcher – without the support of American Jews. Kennedy tried to prevent Israel from getting nuclear weapons – and look what happened to him. Significantly, this is the only angle of the Kennedy assassination that has never been thoroughly investigated. Both Clinton’s daughter and Trump’s adult children are married to Jews. The US is effectively an Israeli colony ruled from Jerusalem.
However, it is also a war of values, and we should be waging one against the US. American ‘values’ and the American way of life are deadly to any people who indulge in them – but it’s a first-class dance of death. Add to that the fact that it is from the US that the destructive ideas of human rights, queer theories, gender theories, rape culture, the fight against whiteness etc., etc. come. It is from American intellectuals (often of Jewish descent) that we learn to be ashamed of our history and culture because it is colonialist, fascist, racist, male chauvinist, etc. In Iran, English has reportedly been removed from the school curriculum on the grounds that the English language is only used as a medium of harmful influence. How true! We should follow suit.
Wherever you go in the world, you will find countless American academies, schools and universities that attract flocks of children and students – especially from the “upper class” who think it is smart, modern and progressive to have such an educational background. Unfortunately, the fact of the matter is that American education is largely worthless. The purpose of this American cultural imperialism is not to impart knowledge, but to destroy everything that is healthy in a people. Unfortunately, this is the system we have copied in the so-called Bologna Process.
It’s difficult to see how a nationally conscious Dane can support America and still keep his universe together. “Yes, but America saved us from Hitler!” Yes, and they gave us the world we have today. They gave us mass immigration and mass rape, the European Union and the free movement of fraud and other crime. They destroyed our education, our families, our peasantry and our business. They took away all our cultural values and gave us emptiness instead! Without the victory over Hitler, Europe today would still be populated by rooted white people with their cultural consciousness intact – and that is the most important thing. Political systems come and go, but as long as the people remain, civilization will live.
We must therefore also beware of adopting the language of the enemy and uncritically throwing around words like Nazi, fascist, racist, etc. as insults and to annoy Hitler whenever we need something negative to compare to. This is not the place to go into a lengthy showdown with Hitler, about whom much bad things can be said, but the same can be said about Stalin, Churchill, Truman and pretty much any other leader of a certain stature. The difference between them is that Hitler lost and was unable to defend himself, while the others have been allowed to write history as they want it to appear. And historians have not been given much freedom to correct that picture.
However, Hitler’s starting point was European culture and civilization and respect for the natural order. All these concepts had suffered damage after the First World War and he was now trying to repair this damage. The difference between his society and those of England and the United States was partly economic and partly rooted in German history and mentality. In terms of race, there was absolutely no difference – only that in Germany it was the Jews they concentrated on, as there were no others of a more alien race. There were in the US, and the racial laws in the southern states were somewhat stricter than the Nuremberg Laws. However, the National Socialist society lacked a braking device, and therefore the development was allowed to get out of control. Had Hitler been killed in the 1938 assassination attempt, he would have gone down in history as one of the greatest statesmen of all time – and the world would probably have been spared many disasters. Perhaps Europe would have been saved. I recently found a book in a bookstore in Baku with the translated title “History doesn’t like subjunctives, but …”. It is about the struggle for oil during the Second World War, but the title could also apply here. Counterfactual history is kind of pointless, but exciting.
Fascism is a political ideology that wants a strong state modeled after Mussolini’s Italy. Nazism is actually a term of abuse for National Socialism, an ideology that wants a strong people. For National Socialism, the people are more important than the state, but a strong people creates a strong state. Racism is simply love for Denmark or any other people you may belong to. Racism does not imply contempt for other peoples, but recognizes the differences between them. When you see right-wing writers throwing around words like red fascists or red Nazis, it makes no sense. The thugs and terrorists who today persecute and harass nationalist Danes and obstruct their meetings are the very same communist thugs who exercised the very same terror against the followers of Hitler and Mussolini – and who necessitated the creation of a defense against them, in Germany SA. The difference is that national-minded people then defended themselves, while today they bend their necks. I have always wondered why the right has not been able to create a response to Demos, Redox and other communist intelligence services. The only answer I’ve been able to find is incompetence and lack of focus.
However, the mistakes of the past and the shortcomings of the past must never divide today’s patriots. We cannot change the past, but we can learn from it if we will study it and think about it, instead of reacting like Pavlovian dogs. It is our mortal enemies who have written history. The fact that Hitler said something does not necessarily mean that it is wrong! Unfortunately, it is very often – but of course not always – right!
You could compare the right wing to a group of children trying to put together a puzzle. They have all the pieces, but they are missing the lid of the box where the picture of the assembled puzzle is. Therefore, they can’t put it together. That’s the picture we on this blog would like to help give them!
The first and most important realization, however, is this sad statement: It is our own fault that we are approaching extinction, not the fault of foreigners, not even of politicians and elites. It is Mr. and Mrs. Denmark’s own fault. Our opponents are only strong because we are weak. As long as we run in opposite directions and celebrate false values and false ideals, things will not change. As long as we do that, we are doing the enemy’s bidding and moving closer to the abyss day by day.
Translated from the Danish with the help of AI
https://www.theoccidentalobserver.net/wp-content/uploads/2018/06/TOO-Full-Logo-660x156-1.png00Povl H. Riis-Knudsenhttps://www.theoccidentalobserver.net/wp-content/uploads/2018/06/TOO-Full-Logo-660x156-1.pngPovl H. Riis-Knudsen2025-05-04 15:16:032025-05-04 15:16:03A unifying idea
What follows is an interview conducted by James Edwards with Filip Dewinter, a Member of the Flemish Parliament in Belgium.
James Edwards: You were first elected to office in 1987, when you were just 25 years old. Since 1995 you have held a seat as a Member of the Flemish Parliament. What are your signature issues?
Filip Dewinter: I think it’s the duty of a politician to be controversial if they truly want to make a difference. Topics like immigration, the rise of crime, and the deterioration of the welfare state are issues that have always been the closest to my heart. And yes, it’s not always easy to speak out about these sensitive topics because once you do, the left-liberal media immediately brands you as racist, fascist, or whatever ad hominem attack that’s in vogue at the time. Whoever talks about politically incorrect topics is immediately branded as the bad guy. Regardless of what they call me, however, I continue to speak up about what topics I view to be most important.
Edwards: You are a very well-known and unabashed advocate for the historic European majority in your country, and you cruise to reelection whenever you are challenged. How have you been able to turn your unapologetic pro-European positions into a political asset?
Dewinter: We oppose mass immigration and the ideology that makes mass immigration possible: multiculturalism. As the opposition politicians, we are the stick, the watchdog of democracy. We have put many issues on the political agenda: political corruption, asylum and migration, and fighting crime. Of course, you never get credit for that, but often other parties copy your views and run with your success. My generation and I were the icebreakers who had to build the path with a pick and shovel. That meant that sometimes we had to hit hard, provoke, and take quite radical positions.
Edwards: Vlaams Belang, the political party you have long been associated with, is a massively popular party in Flanders, correct?
Dewinter: Yes. It is obvious that our ideas are becoming mainstream. Our opponents, the old, mainstream parties, along with mainstream media, say that our ideas are extreme, provocative, and so on. Maybe it is they who’ve become extreme, and we are the mainstream now! After all, how can a party be considered extreme or radical when it enjoys so much public support? It’s worth noting that this phenomenon isn’t only happening in Flanders but in many other countries across Europe.
Edwards: Can you address the liberal-left concept of multiculturalism in Europe? What are the essential values of the various European nations and how can Europeans be protected in the future?
Dewinter: For many decades, the progressive left has been trying to force multiculturalism upon us. Through an open-borders policy that facilitates mass immigration they want to realize the “Great Replacement.” This means that the native European people are replaced by a melting pot of all kinds of cultures.
In practice, European cultures are disappearing and being replaced by Islamic culture. That cannot and must not be the intention.
Essential to our European identity is the diversity of the European people and their specific cultures. There is a lot of diversity in Europe. Not the so-called multicultural diversity in which non-European civilizations are forced upon us, but the real diversity of “The Europe of 100 flags,” each representing a unique nation and people.
We can only preserve our diverse European culture, which is Christian and Western and is based on human rights and the values of the Enlightenment, if we also respect the cultures of the ethnic minorities in Europe.
Edwards: What are the main threats to European identities and cultures?
Dewinter: The main threat to our European culture and certainly the smaller cultures is, of course, the mass immigration forced upon us by the EU and the globalist elite. The “Great Replacement” is imminent. The native European people are in danger of being replaced by Third World people. And whoever brings in the Third World becomes the Third World.
Everything that has to do with identity and cultural uniqueness must apparently be destroyed. Racism has become a pretext to undo our European identity and cultural uniqueness and replace it with multiculturalism and the melting pot society. As always when socialism strives for equality, this means a downward leveling. This cultural genocide must end.
Edwards: You have a new book out titled Repopulation: The Great Replacement. Our opponents allege that it is a “myth” or a “conspiracy theory” to point out that the European populations are being replaced in their homelands by others. What say you?
Dewinter: This is yet another attempt to stifle debate. Stick the label “racist,” “fascist,” “anti-Semite,” or “conspiracy theorist” on your opponent and the debate is closed. Anyone who has eyes in their head and is not multiculturally blind will find that repopulation is not a conspiracy theory, but a simple empirical observation that everyone makes when you walk around any metropolis in Western Europe. You then see the repopulation around you, full stop.
Edwards: Why did you feel it necessary to write about the Great Replacement?
Dewinter: I thought it was necessary to write this book because I don’t think the greatest danger to our democracy and to our civilization is tyranny — it’s mass immigration. If you really look at the situation at hand, the quality of life, the overburden on our welfare state, the rise of crime, and the quality of our education system, these issues are inextricably linked to immigration. Therefore, I think that mass immigration, and of course also the ideology that pushes for mass immigration, is the greatest threat.
If mass immigration continues at its current levels for much longer it will be the end of our European civilization. Demographically, Europeans will cease to be politically, culturally, and economically relevant.
Edwards: In what ways is Islam incompatible with Western civilization?
Dewinter: It is clear that Islamic ideology and Islamic culture are not compatible with our Western way of life and our European culture and civilization. We stand for the values of European civilization — freedom of speech, the separation of state and church, the equality between men and women, and democracy. We clearly need a revitalization of those values. In that regard, the rise of Muslim extremism has had one positive consequence: these fanatics have made us stop taking our traditions and cultural mores for granted.
As a result, Europe is nearly ready to start a civilizational moral offensive, based on the foundations of our greatness: Rome, Greece, Christianity, humanism, and the Enlightenment. These are the common European values that need to be promoted rather than the warped tenets of multiculturalism or the crude, dusty dogmas of Islamism.
Edwards: You wrote a previous book Inch’Allah? The Islamization of Europe, which was translated in English. What is this book all about?
Dewinter:Inch’Allah? is an account of radical Islam’s inroads into Europe. The book reveals the true nature of Islam which, unlike other faiths, also comprises a dangerous totalitarian ideology, contrary to European freedoms, values, and standards. While Europeans are being lulled by multicultural indoctrination and propaganda, mass immigration serves as a Trojan horse of Islam.
By means of a cunning ghetto strategy, based on the deliberate formation of Muslim enclaves in our cities, Islam seeks to establish bridgeheads from which the only true belief can be promulgated. Radical Islam has chosen the path of conversion, infiltration, agitation, intimidation, and, if necessary, violence. Left unchecked, the demographic, cultural, and military jihad will totally transform Europe into Eurabia.
The third Muslim invasion is in full swing, but the tide can still be turned. It is not too late to bring an end to the Islamic colonization of Europe. Therefore, instead of embracing Islam and multiculturalism, Europe must pull itself together and stop the influx of ever more immigrants, halt the silent advance of Islam, and instead celebrate and propagate its own priceless cultural identity.
Edwards: Racism, xenophobia, Islamophobia — the accusations are always the same. Those who are critical of immigration are immediately accused of being a racist. What is your comment on that?
Dewinter: First and foremost, do not forget that in Western Europe and almost all major cities the population transition is already a fact. In Brussels, Paris, Amsterdam, London, and so many other large cities, the original native population has been replaced by a mixture of Third World people. The elected politicians in these cities and countries are therefore indebted to these new voters with all the consequences that entails. They are saying what these imported voters want to hear and try to outdo each other as the best and the most radical anti-racist.
Anti-racism and anti-discrimination are the new politically correct buzzwords for witch-hunting and exorcism. In the past, alleged heretics and witches were burned at the stake. Today, the same is done with so-called racists and patriots. As a politician, it is enough to be critical of immigration to be boycotted in the media, bombarded with lawsuits and legal proceedings, and treated as a political pariah. In the Middle Ages, this also happened to anyone who claimed that the Earth was not flat but round.
Edwards: What’s next for Filip Dewinter?
Dewinter: Continue my work as a politician on what is important for the Western people, namely protecting our values and standards for our own people first.
https://www.theoccidentalobserver.net/wp-content/uploads/2018/06/TOO-Full-Logo-660x156-1.png00James Edwardshttps://www.theoccidentalobserver.net/wp-content/uploads/2018/06/TOO-Full-Logo-660x156-1.pngJames Edwards2025-05-04 07:42:072025-05-04 07:49:20James Edwards Interviews Filip Dewinter
We may request cookies to be set on your device. We use cookies to let us know when you visit our websites, how you interact with us, to enrich your user experience, and to customize your relationship with our website.
Click on the different category headings to find out more. You can also change some of your preferences. Note that blocking some types of cookies may impact your experience on our websites and the services we are able to offer.
Essential Website Cookies
These cookies are strictly necessary to provide you with services available through our website and to use some of its features.
Because these cookies are strictly necessary to deliver the website, refusing them will have impact how our site functions. You always can block or delete cookies by changing your browser settings and force blocking all cookies on this website. But this will always prompt you to accept/refuse cookies when revisiting our site.
We fully respect if you want to refuse cookies but to avoid asking you again and again kindly allow us to store a cookie for that. You are free to opt out any time or opt in for other cookies to get a better experience. If you refuse cookies we will remove all set cookies in our domain.
We provide you with a list of stored cookies on your computer in our domain so you can check what we stored. Due to security reasons we are not able to show or modify cookies from other domains. You can check these in your browser security settings.
Other external services
We also use different external services like Google Webfonts, Google Maps, and external Video providers. Since these providers may collect personal data like your IP address we allow you to block them here. Please be aware that this might heavily reduce the functionality and appearance of our site. Changes will take effect once you reload the page.
Google Webfont Settings:
Google Map Settings:
Google reCaptcha Settings:
Vimeo and Youtube video embeds:
Privacy Policy
You can read about our cookies and privacy settings in detail on our Privacy Policy Page.
