Featured Articles

The Year of Remembrance vs. the Year of Death: 1814, 1914, 1944, 2014…

/in , /by

 Below is the English translation of my speech given on June 14, 2014 at a historic manor house, in the village of Guthmannshausen, in the vicinity of Weimar, the state of Thuringia, Germany. The speech was delivered on the occasion of the 100thanniversary of the beginning of WWI, the 100th anniversary issue of the magazine Deutsche  Militärzeitschrift (DMZ) and the monthly magazine of politics and culture ZuErst! whose host and editor in chief, Dietmar Munier, marked on that occasion his 60th birthday.  This was a private event attended by approximately 150 people, mostly journalists and contributors to these journals, accompanied by their families.

*   *   *

Each anniversary year brings back memories of times past which one either wishes to revive for himself and his people, or administer to others as a political-pedagogical year of admonition. The German word “Gedenkjahr” cannot be easily translated into other languages, ​​and often this word causes serious misconceptions among different nations. The word “Gedenkjahr” is translated into English or French as “memorial year” and as “jubilee year” — two completely opposing political notions.  Depending on different nations, depending on their historical sentiments, an anniversary year can be memorized as hope, joy, and nostalgia. But it can also be used as an exhortation, a threat of punishment, or a fear-inducing tool. As far as our own anniversary year is concerned, we recall today our own life span and we enthuse about cheerful dates in our nation’s history.  When celebrating one’s happy birthday, and if one, as an old man, still retains good memory, such as Ernst Jünger and Johann Wolfgang Goethe did, then one can say that life has some meaning.

When one is past his 60th birthday one needs to raise a question: “Why any more anniversaries?” The Franco-Romanian philosopher Emile Cioran, an ultra-nihilist and cultural pessimist, wrote that one shouldn’t live past one’s 40th birthday. On the occasion of his 70th birthday Cioran said that any further well-wishing for further life sounds grotesque to him. In an interview, in 1987, several years before his death, he said:” Within fifty years, the Notre Dame will become a mosque.”

By contrast, when hostile nations or groups commemorate the anniversaries of their political disasters, they are often inclined to use the buzzphrase: “Never again!” Commemorative years convert then quickly into symbols of the year of the dead and the days of admonition, especially when hostile nations and groups start cobbling together their endless anniversaries and present them as victimhood teachings at the expense of other nations. Read more

David Cameron on Muscular Britishness

/14 Comments/in , , , /by

In the wake of Operation Trojan Horse, the plot to Islamicise Britain by co-oping schools and then running them according to Islamist ideas an beliefs, British Prime Minister, David Cameron, has now written an article for The Daily Mail, expressing his commitment to promoting “muscular” Britishness in schools.

Muscular Britishness? This sounds very similar to Cameron’s call for “muscular liberalism”, made in 2010, when he concluded, decades too late, that “multiculturalism has failed”.

With such an antecedent, readers could certainly justify a measure of scepticism. And, indeed, when one analyses Cameron’s piece, there is much to comment on.

His central thesis is that “we”—an inclusive euphemism for “the British political establishment”—have been far too tolerant, effectively saying that if you don’t like democracy, or can’t get excited about equality, or would rather not be tolerant, it’s all good, nothing to worry about, we’re happy to live and let live. And this, he says, has got to stop. Particularly since it has led to division, extremism, and violence. Instead, the British government should use the system of education to promote British values and pride in Britishness, so that the “diverse nation” can be unified. Read more

Tales of Blood and Gods: Some Thoughts on Religion and Race

/32 Comments/in , /by
asatru

Mjolnir, the hammer of Thor; one of the major symbols of Ásatrú.

“How strangely things grow, and die, and do not die! There are twigs of that great world-tree of Norse belief still curiously traceable.”
Thomas Carlyle, Lectures on Heroes, 1841. 

I come from a long line of atheists, heretics, and breakers of convention. I’m sceptical about anything related to what’s considered the paranormal or supernatural. I don’t think I’ve ever held an honest religious belief. I consider myself, above all, to be an ardent rationalist. I look for facts, I weigh evidence, and I attempt to come to measured conclusions.

Despite this, I’ve never had a problem with religion qua religion. I like the idea that there is more to our existence than what can be seen, and I am happy for any collection of sky-searchers to worry about my soul so long as those who believe in their chosen deity or deities refrain from interfering in my “real” interests. A Muslim in Riyadh can dictate to the females around him as he pleases; it doesn’t concern me. It does concern me, however, when that Muslim wishes to import his beliefs and attending actions (not to mention about one hundred equally ‘pious’ relatives) into my locality.

Closer to home, I can’t say I’ve had much of a problem with Christianity among my fellow Whites. In fact, I have a number of Christian friends; as a group they’re a polite bunch, and normally seem quite cheerful. A few of them had struggled with depression and myriad social difficulties until they “found Jesus,” so perhaps there is something to be said for the palliative benefits of that faith; and perhaps this explains, more than any other fact, its endurance and appeal in all ages.

However, controversial though it may be to say it, it occurs to me that Christianity is coming more and more into conflict with what I perceive to be my interests and those of my ethnic group. Curiously, for a religion which grew like a weed from the rabidly ethno-centric soil of Judaism, Christianity has been anything but a friend to the ethnic group which breathed life into it, energized it for centuries, and took it to the four corners of the earth. The source of almost unceasing fratricidal conflict for centuries, the Church now reveals itself a party to the abolition of the European peoples. In the past, when Europe, North America and other White nations were ethnically homogenous (and confidently so) some of the fundamental conflicts between ideas of the “universal man under God,” and an acknowledgement that one was part of a specific ethnic community with concrete interests, could be masked. Not so in this brave new world. Only since the 1950s can we assess the utility of the Christian faith in acting as a boon to the folk who for centuries granted it lordship over them. And in the assessment of this writer, it has been found wanting. Read more

A Plague for the Proletariat: How the Workers’ Party Betrayed Its Own

/3 Comments/in , /by

 

Hating the workers: Ed Miliband and his shadow cabinet]

Hating the workers: Ed Miliband and his shadow cabinet]

The clue’s in the name: the Labour party was founded to fight alongside the trade unions on behalf of the British working-class.  You can see the roots of the alliance forming when a mining company in Scotland tried to import foreign workers at the beginning of the twentieth century. One of Labour’s greatest future heroes spoke up for the men whose wages were being undercut:

Trade Unions were openly hostile, claiming that the newcomers’ lack of English made them a danger at work; the Glasgow Trades Council declared the Lithuanians in Glengarnock as “an evil” and wrote to the TUC [Trades Union Congress] demanding immigration controls to keep them out.

Even a figure such as Keir Hardie, founding father of the Labour Party, led a fierce, xenophobic campaign against the Lithuanians. Hardie, as a leader of Ayrshire miners, wrote an article for the journal, The Miner, in which he stated that: “For the second time in their history Messrs. Merry and Cunninghame have introduced a number of Russian Poles [as the Lithuanians were described] to Glengarnock Ironworks. What object they have in doing so is beyond human ken unless it is, as stated by a speaker at Irvine, to teach men how to live on garlic and oil, or introduce the Black Death, so as to get rid of the surplus labourers.” (Lithuanians in Lanarkshire, BBC History, February 2004)

Keir Hardie wasn’t being “xenophobic.” He was doing exactly what a Lithuanian socialist would have done if the situation had been reversed: standing up for the workers he was elected to serve. By the time Tony Blair became Labour leader in 1994, all that old-fashioned socialist nonsense had been discarded. Now the Labour party champions the downtrodden bosses against the oppressive workers. Read more

The Ukrainian Conflict: A Ukrainian Nationalist View, Part 6: Svoboda, the Right Sector, and the Future of Ukrainian Nationalism

/31 Comments/in , /by

svoboda2

Part 1
Part 2
Part 3
Part 4
Part 5

Many Western nationalists ask: why are Ukrainian nationalists fighting only the mercenaries in eastern Ukraine, and not the current liberal Ukrainian government?

In general, there are two Ukrainian nationalist movements or organizations that exist at the moment: the Svoboda party and the Right Sector movement. Unfortunately, at the moment a huge amount of friction and mutual hate exists between them. However, thankfully, at the lowest levels people from both organizations work together very closely.

The Svoboda party has existed in different forms since around 1991. In 2012, it won around 10% of votes to the Ukrainian parliament. At the end of 2012, it won the “honor” of having two of its leaders listed by the Simon Wiesenthal center among the ten biggest “anti-Semites©”in the world. The program of the party is by far the most radical, anti-capitalist, anti-liberal program of any major organization that exists in Europe. It contains ideas such as banning usury, creating a Ukrainian computer operating system to be used on the territory of Ukraine instead of Microsoft Windows, essentially severely restricting any foreign news and information in Ukraine, banning homosexual propaganda, banning the advertisement of alcohol and cigarettes (with later attempts to ban them all together), forbidding anyone who is not Ukrainian by ethnicity to obtain Ukrainian citizenship, having the state promoting Christianity. There are also many points regarding nationalization of industry and business, returning Ukraine’s nuclear status, banning “Ukrainophobic” parties and many other great initiatives.

Svoboda’s program is a mix of every positive element of classical Strasserism and modern nationalism. During the 2012 elections, many voted for Svoboda hoping the party would fight the oligarchs — indeed, many old Communists even voted for the party due to the anti-capitalist economic program of the party. Read more

The Ukrainian Conflict: A Ukrainian Nationalist View, Part 5: The Conflict in Eastern Ukraine

/1 Comment/in , /by
Ukraine

Masked pro-Russian demonstrators prepare to storm the military Prosecutor’s Office in Donetsk, eastern Ukraine, Sunday, May 4, 2014.

Part 1
Part 2
Part 3
Part 4

Returning to the events in a few (out of over a dozen) regions of eastern Ukraine, then there is a saying amongst many Ukrainians that, regarding Ukraine, the Kremlin is a slave to its own propaganda. It essentially creates its own myths and acts those myths out in real life as if they were somehow close to reality. One of the biggest myths the Kremlin created is that speaking Russian in Ukraine means having more loyalty to the Russian Federation than Ukraine.

This is why the Russian mercenaries have received so little support from the local population in eastern Ukraine. Even the commander of the Russian-funded mercenaries in eastern Ukraine (himself a citizen of the Russian Federation) stated quite clearly during a speech posted to You Tube that essentially, no locals are joining his ranks to “fight Ukrainian nationalists”  (why not Ukrainian liberals?) — despite being provided with money and modern weapons. In fact, he stated that “those who join our ranks usually just get weapons, take some money and go home to rob shops. We provide people the opportunity to fight Ukrainian nationalists, but they would rather stay at home and drink beer.”

Eastern Ukraine in general is the more liberal region of Ukraine, and the Donbas region — the only eastern region of Ukraine where Russian-funded mercenaries have not yet been driven out — is by far the most liberal region of the country. Before these events, the leader of Donbas, who is now supporting the Russian mercenaries, even stated that “a gay parade would take place peacefully in our region.” (Incidentally, I hate constantly using homosexuals as an example, but the organized modern homosexual movement is simply a symbol of the dominance of liberal elites in Western societies that are hostile to the traditional peoples, cultures and ethnic identities of all European peoples.) In fact, as usual, only nationalists (and also members of Churches) went to protest the possibility of a parade in Donetsk. None of the current “anti-Western” movements were seen, nor were activists of the “Donetsk Peoples Republic.”

The local governments of the region, most of which now support the Russian mercenaries, have been actively bringing “diversity” to the region as well. Yet, who protests illegal (and not only illegal) immigration to the region? Perhaps the Kremlin might finance some movements to keep the region Slavic? Of course not.  As usual, it is only nationalists who do such things. Mass protests have been led by nationalists (typically the Svoboda party) throughout the region against illegal (and not only illegal) immigration — despite intense opposition from the local governments. Read more

The Ukrainian Conflict: A Ukrainian Nationalist View, Part 4: Russia as a Globalist, Liberal, Anti-Ethnic Nationalist Power

/17 Comments/in , /by

Part 1
Part 2
Part 3

Why does the Russian Federation push and defend Western liberalism so much in Ukraine? The answer can be found by looking at modern Russia as a country.

The Russian Federation is, in essence, itself a liberal state. It is a typical liberal democracy that, in many ways, differs little from Western European countries. It is a country that attacks the culture of its founding people; a country where the youth could not care less about the traditions of their ancestors;  a country where MTV rules the airwaves and McDonalds is the most popular destination for those looking to dine out (indeed, the biggest McDonalds in Europe is in Moscow); a country that defines itself as a proposition nation with a political — not ethnic — understanding of the nation (“everyone who is a citizen is Russian”); a country that, on the state level, closely deals with the IMF and the UN; a country that even  is helping American and NATO forces in Afghanistan; a country where the most popular musicians, in addition to Western artists like Madonna or Lady Gaga, are non-ethnically Russian degenerates like Filipp Kirkorov and rapper Timati — exactly the types that the globalist media uses to brainwash the youth around the world to forget their ethnic heritage and traditions; a country where Chechnyan president Ramzan Kadyrov — whose father actively fought against Russian forces and was responsible for essentially ridding Chechnya of Russians — is officially a state hero.

In fact, the one and only way that the Russian Federation differs from Western Europe — and one of the only things that gives Western dissidents illusions — is the way it banned LGBT propaganda. Yet this has been grossly misinterpreted. It is a great law, of course, but it was passed with huge resistance even within the ruling party and pro-government media. Essentially, all it does is ban gay parades (in itself, of course, a good initiative). Yet pro-LGBT propaganda is increasingly present in all the media, and gay clubs flourish.

When looking at such cases, people forget that the destructive ideology of liberalism as it is now defined in the West appeared in the Russian Federation far later than in the West. In this sense Russia today is the same, in terms of the LGBT movement, as the West 30 or 40 years ago. Banning homosexual propaganda is merely a compromise — a tactic by the ruling elite that will satisfy the millions of Muslims in Russia and the millions of people from the older generation who grew up in the Soviet Union where it was a criminal violation. If the elite of the Russian Federation were truly sincere about this, they could do far more than essentially only ban gay parades for a while, without touching the immense presence of LGBT propaganda in the media. But it doesn’t.

Hardly better than Konchita or Lady Gaga: modern Russian show business

Hardly better than Konchita or Lady Gaga: modern Russian show business

In fact, the regime now in power in the Russian Federation has virtually completely uprooted any authentic pro-Russian opposition: far from being neo-Nazi clowns, truly nationalist and Orthodox, anti-Zionist Russian opposition leaders like General  Vladimir Kvachkov — a former SPETSNAZ (Special Forces) colonel and high-ranking official of the Russian army  who was implicated in an assassination attempt on Jewish oligarch and privitization czar Anatoly Chubays — have been completely humiliated, destroyed and thrown in prison. Read more