By Kasredin:
I have hesitated before now to write anything about Nazi Germany, not least because I am sure that many readers of this site will be better informed on that subject than I am.
The story effectively begins in 1918 when Germany agreed an armistice with its enemies, thereby bringing the combatant phase of the Great War to an end. On paper however the war continued until the following year when the major players signed a treaty in the Hall of Mirrors in Versailles.
This treaty was utterly contemptible. It required Germany to hand over large chunks of land to France and Poland, and the signatories to the treaty appear to have had no regard whatever for the effect that this might have on the lives of the inhabitants of those places. Germany was also required to pay reparations to France and other countries, apparently without regard to the misery that this would almost certainly inflict upon the German people.
In the 1920s, France and Belgium both invaded Germany to enforce payment of the reparations. Germany at this point was officially known as the German Reich, but was unofficially known as the Weimar Republic. Its government reacted to the demand for reparations by printing more money, which led to a period of hyperinflation, which lasted from the summer of 1921 to the beginning of 1924.
During this time, many ordinary Germans struggled to feed and clothe themselves, and the poverty endured long after the end of the hyperinflation. Many German women turned to prostitution and Berlin became one huge red light district.
It was in this atmosphere of poverty and debauchery that the National Socialist German Workers’ Party came into existence – nowadays more commonly known as the Nazi Party.
The circumstances of the rise of the Nazi Party are documented to a large extent by the party’s enemies and one such person was the British novelist Christopher Isherwood. As a young man he was drawn to the amoral world of Berlin, where he could indulge his homosexuality free from the constraints common in other countries at this time. He is famous for two novels he wrote set in Germany in the 1930s – ‘Mr Norris Changes Trains’ and ‘Goodbye To Berlin’. Together they inspired the film ‘Cabaret’, with its famous beer garden scene:
The Nazi Party came to power in the early 1930s, by which point in time it was firmly under the leadership of Adolf Hitler. The people who supported the party almost certainly believed that they were supporting a nationalist political party, but they were wrong.
In many respects, the Nazi Party led Germany as we might expect a nationalist government to do. Unemployment fell rapidly as Germany assumed its rightful place as a major industrial power. Nevertheless, all was not well. For me it is a critical tenet of nationalism that a government’s ambitions should not extend beyond the frontiers of the country it governs. Diplomacy is one thing, but military offensives are quite another.
When Germany under the leadership of Hitler began invading other countries, it should have been obvious to anyone that Hitler was more of an imperialist than a nationalist.
As I watch the beer garden scene, I cannot help but reflect upon how those impoverished Germans, dreaming of nationalist government, allowed themselves to be deceived into helping an imperialist into power. Germany in 1930 may have been impoverished, but Germany in 1945 was a scene of devastation.
A little known feature of Nazi rule in the 1930s was that the government encouraged Jews to leave Germany and settle in Palestine. While this may have seemed like a good idea at the time, it was merely replacing one problem with another. Hitler perceived Jews in Germany to be a threat, but the Jews who emigrated to Palestine were able in the later 1940s to help found the terror state of Israel, thereby destabilising the middle east.
Another mistake that Hitler made was to regard Jews as a race rather than a religious group. This quote is from his book ‘Mein Kampf’: “The Jew has always been a people with definite racial characteristics and never a religion”.
Jews are not a race, although that is not to deny that some of them display what appear to be common racial characteristics.
It is easy, for example, to look at Esther Rantzen and Tracy Solomon and detect common facial features, but we do not find similar features in Rachel Stevens – and yet she is Jewish by religion.
Jews cannot realistically claim to be a race unless they can trace their ancestry to the Jews of Biblical times – two thousand years ago. They cannot.
As I watch Brother Nathanael videos on Youtube, it is easy for me to forget that Hitler would have sent this man to Auschwitz.
We can learn from a study of the life and leadership of Adolph Hitler, but all too often we see examples of what a nationalist government should not do. I for one am no admirer of Hitler, even though I do believe that certain allegations against him are untrue.
By Kasredin © 2013
# # # #
Max Musson
- Edit
While I am as always most grateful to Kasredin for submitting this article, I had certain misgivings about publishing it as it stands, due to the nature of certain of his assertions that I do not agree with and which I know others will find contentious.
.
I could have rejected the article or I could have published it with substantial editorial changes, but I try to avoid these if I can help it, as they seem to have a demotivating effect upon writers, who are then deterred from writing for us again.
.
The first contentious issue stems from Kasredin’s assertion that true nationalism cannot be expansive and by implication nationalists should always respect a neighbouring nation’s borders on the ‘Mrs Do as you would be done by’ principle.
.
This is of course a misconception, as in a world with an expanding population and finite natural resources, life becomes a ‘zero sum game’, in which nations can only survive and prosper at the expense of competitor nations.
.
At present for example, it would be impossible for all of the nations of the world to attain a Western standard of living because this Earth possesses only a quarter of the resources that such an egalitarian aim would require. Therefore if a nation wishes to improve the living standard of its people, this can only be achieved by somehow securing the natural resources that would otherwise be consumed by it’s competitors.
.
The securing of one nation’s vital interests therefore inevitably becomes viewed as imperialism by the nation that loses out.
.
Moving on to Kasredin’s interpretation of Hitler’s statement about Jews, I have not looked up that particular passage, but my interpretation of the statement quoted would be that Jews have always been a people with a definite racial characteristic, never just a religion.
.
Kasredin appears to interpret Hitler’s statement as meaning that ‘all Jews exhibit the same racial characteristics’, which is not what that statement means in my view.
.
Furthermore, when we look at the three Jewish women that Kasredin cites as proof of his criticism, Esther Rantzen appears to be more the odd-one-out with the least obvious Jewish features, not Rachel Stevens.
.
In my opinion, while there is a strong Semitic/Turkic racial strain among Jews, not all Jews exhibit the physical characteristics that are typical of those racial groups.
.
Similarly, while most Jews are adherents of Judaism, some Jews are atheists and these factors would appear to support the statement attributed to Hitler.
AAA
- Edit
I thank Kasredin for his candour in light of the inevitable reaction he has received. Please do not be deterred, Kasredin, write more.
.
However, I do not agree with some of his points –but I can see where he is coming from.
.
Imperialism –contrary to what Max Musson advances– is the antithesis of nationalism and is, by all intents and purposes, internationalism. Example: is it nationalistic to want to invade other people’s countries (vis-a-vis the present Israel/U.S. administration) to enforce upon them “Western” norms, values, and culture? Of course it is not. Nationalist mindset would not want to enforce its ways upon anyone –but in reciprocation it would expect the same from other nations. This mutualistic Nationalist mindset creates a natural balance that upkeeps the culture, homogeneity, and sovereignty of each and every nation. This is a KEY nationalist tenet. If we think otherwise, we are little more than crass hypocrites.
.
With regard to so-called need for expansion –where do we stop? Shall we just conquer the world by dint of our need to acquire resources? If so –and following that ‘logic’ through to its natural conclusion– those who agree with this will of course have no problem with the expansion of the Chinese onto our shores. They need land. They need money. They need to expand. OK: come one, come all –it’s your ‘right’.
.
And what of the Negro? Do the above points excuse them for their piracy operations off the west coast of Africa where they are boarding and ransacking Western ships because of their need? According to the expansionist mindset they are. You can’t have it both ways.
.
Regarding Geo-politics: this ‘need’ and therefore ‘right’ to expand will in accordance with this mindset be ‘justified’ –thus creating a perpetual state of world war as one nation tries to muscle in on another. (Are we yet seeing the modern-day imperialistic Israel/U.S. paradigm we all so descry?)
.
To return to Kasredin, Germany was not imperialistic. After the grossly unjust Treaty of Versailles (thereafter regretted by the Allies for is heavy-handed demands and thus later resulting instead in the Marshall Plan), Germany simply sought to regain areas of Prussia (Poland) and the Alsace-Lorraine (France) taken from her by such a treaty. Germany was pushed (by design?) to re-conquer her lands. This is not imperialism.
.
I will discuss the other points in due course.
Max Musson
- Edit
There is a belief among certain nationalists that for nationalism to be moral, we must always respect the rights and interests of other nations, even when they conflict with our own.
.
Such people have a naïve vision of a utopian world in which all of the nations of the world live side-by-side in a state of joyous mutual respect and harmony.
.
The problem with this vision is that it means that all of the nations of the world must strive for a situation in which their population is in balance with the resources available to them, i.e. be limited to the maximum population that can be supported by the resources that can be produced within the geographical living space allotted to them.
.
The problem with such a utopian ideal is that like all utopian ideals it leads to a situation in which a nation stagnates like a pot-bound house plant. Because for any organism, and a nation is an organism, to be healthy, it must grow and not become the human equivalent of a bonsai tree.
.
The laws of Nature demand that all life forms strive to grow and expand to fill all of the ecological niches and living space available to them, and those who defy the laws of nature make themselves vulnerable to eclipse by those who obey them.
.
Nations need not necessarily be imperialist, if they have vast untapped reservoirs of natural resources at their disposal, but nations who have reached the limit of what their homeland can sustain have a duty to seek further living space, because nations like trees must grow if they are to remain healthy and cannot exist for long in a state of suspended animation and arrested development.
.
Empires such as the British Empire were eventually of no benefit whatsoever to the British people, because instead of simply securing only the territory needed for our continued expansion, the governments of the time strove under pressure from unscrupulous commercial forces to extend that Empire much further than was ever needed and in such a way that we needed to preserve and retain and enlist the help of the conquered peoples in order to administer it properly.
.
The British Empire was further weakened by the insistence of the governments of the time that it should be ruled from Westminster in such a way that those people of British stock who settled various parts of the Empire were effectively disenfranchised, and consequently campaigned for independence.
.
Had we displaced the conquered peoples and repopulated their lands with people of British stock and had we given those colonial settlers the right together with their kinfolk in the Motherland to elect our governments, the interests of the British Empire and the interests of the British people as a nation would have coincided and we would today still be the most powerful nation on Earth.
SerpentSlayer
- Edit
The Bolshevik empire in the east was a threat to all of Europe and had to be attacked. Germany was not alone in thus, Italy, Romania and Hungary followed Germany and thousands of European volunteers answered the call to join the crusade against Communism. Nationalism within European countries is helpful, but defending Europe from foreign menaces such as Jewish Bolshevism come first. Britain and France should have joined the crusade wholesale but instead were intent on waging waring upon Germany, with the aim of bringing that country back under the control of the powerful dynastic banking families of international finance, as they eventually did (partly in 1945, wholly in 1990).
Hitler should serve as a model for a future leader of a whole Europe, unmeddling in peace and ferocious and inspiring in war.
We must sideline our petty artificial nationalisms in favour of European Nationalism. We may govern our own affairs as peoples (rather than nation states) have our own Kings and Queens, but we must all be connected to our racial brethren in times of strife. A small governing group representing the whole of Europe must ensure our internal unity, the protection of our traditions and the protection of Aryan peoples from enemies within.
It is unacceptable to allow corruptible nation states, unconcerned with each other on a personal level to exist. Our forefathers in Germania, Gallia and Britannia were able to resist Romes multiracialism and eventually defeat it by not forming nation states, but as tribes able to unite in National defence should they need to.
Culture was shared by Druids and Skalds, unity was maintained between these peoples even when Germanic folk moved across the seas, and so too must our nationalism be Racial Nationalism extending across petty national boundaries.
Steve
- Edit
Whilst doing a bit of research I found the following letter, written after the second world war, by Churchill to Lord Boothby :
” Germany’s unforgivable crime before the second world war was her attempt to extricate her economic power from the world trading system and to create her own exchange mechanism which would deny world finance its opportunity to profit. ”
Says it all really.
Max Musson
- Edit
Have you got a link to that letter Steve?
Steve
- Edit
I’ll have to dig again. I can’t remember where I found it but I jotted it down and kept it in my wallet.
Steve
- Edit
Only thing I can find at the moment.
https://majorityrights.com/weblog/comments/hitlers_unforgivable_error
Dispater
- Edit
“Germany’s unforgivable crime before the second world war was her attempt to extricate her economic power from the world’s trading system and to create her own exchange mechanism which would deny world finance its opportunity to profit.” Churchill to Lord Robert Boothby, as quoted in: Sidney Rogerson, Propaganda in the Next War (Foreword to the second edition 2001).
Taken from majorityrights.com
Thomas a'Becket
- Edit
The following video is well worth watching Kasredin https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7mA0kk29DBA
I am afraid you are wrong on many of the complexities of the period. With all the adverse propaganda over many years it comes as no surprise.
But thanks for writing it gives others a chance to comment on the subject.
ConnalOakesHolt
- Edit
It is my opinion that Adolf Hitler was a nationalist. Hitler was a nationalist in the sence that he saw the German people as the nation and not the geographical Germany that was defined by the re-drawn borders post Versaille.
Regarding Jewishness. If I were to convert to Judaism today and tomorrow set off for Israel in order to settle there permanently on the basis of my Jewishness, after taking the DNA test, would the Israeli authorities permit me to reside there on a permanent basis? I very much doubt it.
Yet there is obvoiusly a racially defined Jew according to the Jewish authorities in Israel.
The problem of defining Jewishness as either a racial or religious quality or both is that we use the one word interchangeably to describe any or all three of the definitions, which differ to a large degree.
The quote from Mein Kampf appears to reflect the attitude of many Jews today, certainly of those Jews in Israel who advertise for non religious Jews to come forward and take the DNA test to be approved entry to Israel.
Madagascar was the place being discussed by the NSDAP prior to the suggestion put to Hitler by the Zionists in Germany that Palestine would be their prefered destination of choice after leaving Germany. At that time Palestine was under British rule. Was this suggestion put to Hitler taken up because he saw in it an opportunity to solve two problems in one move, be rid of the Jews and bog down the British in Palestine thereby reducing the threat that the British posed to Germany. We can never know for certain.
Though I am gratefull to Kasredin for opening debate and also to Max for publishing the un adulterated text , thereby allowing open debate. Not only does this affirm my opinion of Western Spring as being an genuinely honest team, but open debate sharpens our wits and leads us closer to realising an ideal based upon truth and fact.
Let us leave the silencing of honest open debate and the blurring of history to our enemies in the hope that it will undo them.
.
Michael Woodbridge
- Edit
Whether Hitler was an Imperialist or a nationalist comes down to race. It’s possible to be an imperialist and ignore race but it’s not possible to be a nationalist and ignore race because race defines a nation. I’d like to add my thanks to Max for publishing the article. As no individual has a monopoly of truth, free speech is essential amongst men and women of goodwill.
Albion
- Edit
Of course some Jews can trace their origins back to biblical times, but the majority cannot. Ashkenazi Jews are descended from European Kazhars who converted to Judaism over 1000 years ago. Although moves are now afoot to attempt to rewrite that particular bit of history, because it doesn’t fit the convenient narrative of Jews simply going back to their ancient homeland of Israel, it remains a fact. They are a race, and generally have common racial characteristics, but largely have no more historical connection with the ancient land of Israel than the rest of us – and certainly not as much as the Palestinians.
Steve
- Edit
Agreed, I think I have as much claim on Israel as they do but I don’t do that, this is my home & I resent it being given away, largely by those who defend zionism.
I suppose it’s balanced, they want a land that isn’t theirs & in return they give away land that isn’t theirs either.
frederickdixon
- Edit
Hitler was most certainly a nationalist because:- 1/ he freed his country from foreign debt bondage and imposed international obligations under the Versailles treaty and 2/ he sought to unite all the Germans of Austria, Sudetenland and western Poland within the Reich i.e. to create “Greater Germany”
He was also most certainly an imperialist because he sought to unite all the continental Germanic countries in a “Greater Germanic Reich” and to endow that new Germanic organism with a vast land empire built on the ruins of the Soviet Union. Whether or not that was a practical proposition is another matter because it ran headlong into the nationalisms of those various countries.
There is, though, a broad and fuzzy border between nationalists and imperialists because a patriot can be both. Many British nationalists of the past fifty years began their political careers in the League of Empire Loyalists, itself a founder member of the NF.
As for the Jews, they are both a religion and a race as the great majority of them, and certainly almost all European Jews, share a common ancestry in the ancient Near East. This was recognised in the Nazi definition of a Jew i.e. a person who is of the Jewish faith, or who is not of the Jewish faith but derives more than half of his ancestry from persons who were; if religion had been the only criteria for being a Jew why insist that Christians and Atheists of Jewish descent are Jews?
Descurar14
- Edit
https://www.campbellmgold.com/archive_general/quotes_ww2_germany.pdf
https://trutube.tv/item/photos/39/2HR2SSWMSUMM/Germany’s-unforgivable-CRIME-Hitler-attempted-to-deny-world-finance-it’s-opportunity-TO-PROFIT
katana
- Edit
By Kasredin: I have hesitated before now to write anything about Nazi Germany, not least because I am sure that many readers of this site will be better informed on that subject than I am.
———–
An honest disarming start to an article that demonstrates that disclaimer!
“When Germany under the leadership of Hitler began invading other countries, it should have been obvious to anyone that Hitler was more of an imperialist than a nationalist.”
———-
Without specifics, I assume Poland and so on. Poland was the result of provocations beyond endurance for any country. The German invasions after that were offensive/defensive moves following the British and French declarations of war on Germany, which were largely at the behest of organised Jewry.
“As I watch the beer garden scene, I cannot help but reflect upon how those impoverished Germans, dreaming of nationalist government, allowed themselves to be deceived into helping an imperialist into power. Germany in 1930 may have been impoverished, but Germany in 1945 was a scene of devastation.”
———————
I watched that garden scene when that movie originally came out and also swallowed the lying message by the Jewish producers. I know better now (finally).
The Germans of that time understood and fought against the organised Jewry and suffered the consequences. It’s us Whites who fought the Germans who were (and remain) the deceived.
“Another mistake that Hitler made was to regard Jews as a race rather than a religious group. This quote is from his book ‘Mein Kampf’: “The Jew has always been a people with definite racial characteristics and never a religion”.
Jews are not a race, although that is not to deny that some of them display what appear to be common racial characteristics.”
————————-
Wrong. Jews are a race with stereotypical appearances. They have their own diseases and own identifiable DNA (wherever they come from). Jews marry into the non-Jewish society and then create all sorts of variations the more they inter-marry.
“Jews cannot realistically claim to be a race unless they can trace their ancestry to the Jews of Biblical times – two thousand years ago. They cannot.”
————————–
Nothing to do with tracing back to Biblical times. Whatever and wherever they come from, organised Jewry exercise disproportionate influence within our society and it is they who declared war on Germany prior to WWII. Furthermore, the machinations of organised Jewry still have a very damaging impact upon the interests of the White nations of the world.
Sorry about the criticism Kasredin. Understanding the real truth of recent history is a journey involving disabusing oneself of a whole series of certainties taught since childhood.
The bottom line is this: the Germans fought on the right side. We didn’t and are now suffering the consequences.
Steve
- Edit
All Jews are not a unified race, there are some that could be lumped together in that way, others are Jewish by their beliefs, then others are zionist without being Jewish in anyway.
It’s the whole Sephardic & Ashkenazi divide.
Some believe that Sephardic are the race & religious whereas the Ashkenazi are religious or at least generally zionist.
You can find Jews who are virulently against Israel as it was not God given but taken.
In the US you have a lot of pro Israel fundamentalist Christians who think they’re going to heaven as righteous people.
David Yorkshire
- Edit
The subect of Hitler and nationalism is a complex one. Hitler was indeed a German nationalist, but not a white nationalist: in other words, he cared only for the interests of Germany, although he does show respect for other European peoples in Mein Kampf. That said, Hitler had an unhealthy love of war: in an industrial age of warfare, there is little glory and much indiscriminate slaughter en masse. Wars between white nation states ought therefore to be avoided whenever possible.
.
There is a lot of pro-Hitler bias shown by white nationalists, which ignores certain facts. Hitler was always on a trajectory towards war. He was appeased for some considerable time before war was declared by Neville Chamberlain. People talk about Churchill, yet Churchill was a peripheral figure in parliament before Hitler’s actions actually brought him back from the political wilderness. For Lord Halifax, who had continually appeased Hitler, the breaking of the Munich Agreement was the final straw, as, for him, it showed that Hitler could not be trusted and it left him feeling personally betrayed and dishonoured.
.
One can debate the rights and wrongs of their actions, but one cannot ignore the foolishness of Hitler’s action in breaking the Munich Agreement. As people have mentioned, international Jewry wanted a war against Germany and Hitler duly obliged them. Hitler before 1938 did many good things for the German people, but after 1938 was a liability. His generals (such as Generaloberst Beck) warned him that any war started before 1940 could not be won. He ignored them. He later took personal charge of military decisions during the war, which was catastrophic, including making the exact same error in Russia that Napoleon had made over a century earlier.
.
In short, instead of engaging in a disastrous war, all Hitler had to do was support the fascist parties in western Europe, which were growing. Instead, Hitler’s actions allowed the left to propagandise against him, causing those parties to be demonised in the mainstream.
Barry
- Edit
I believe this to be a very balanced post. Too many nationalists are apt to take an extreme view of Hitler ie either subscribing to the mainstream media’s view of him or to the sort of views found on Stormfront which won’t broach any critical comments of his actions. The truth is surely somewhere in the middle?
Steve
- Edit
Yes I would broadly agree, one of his big mistakes was too much invasion!
Support for like minded people would have been better.
It seems the war was used as an excuse here to purge “anti Semites” from the establishment, which lead to a very strong zionist lobby ever since.
Some “anti Semites” favoured the setting up of Israel so as to rid of us of the Jews but we all know what happened there.
They have their cake & eat it.
Michael Woodbridge
- Edit
Whilst we can all be wise after the event, I think it right to point out in answer to David Yorkshire’s letter that it was the Jews who were on a trajectory to war rather than Adolf Hitler. As the famous ‘Daily Express’ lead story put it in 1933 “JUDEA DECLARES WAR ON GERMANY”. Hitler had little choice but to defend his race and nation. Furthermore, we learn the following from historian Louis Kitzer,
.
“Hitler didn’t want a world war, and had no stomach for fighting England, according to Pulitzer Prize winning journalist Louis Kilzer, author of Churchill’s Deception (Simon & Schuster, 1994). Hitler believed the future of Western civilization depended on the cooperation of Germany and her Aryan cousins: England and the United States. His territorial demands were limited to Communist Russia, which he regarded as a proxy for Jewish world ambitions. He was determined to avoid fighting a war on two fronts. The “miracle at Dunkirk” was in fact an extraordinary peace overture to England. We don’t normally associate Hitler with such magnanimity. In May 1940, the British were on the verge of defeat. The English army was trapped at Dunkirk. Rather than take them prisoner, Hitler halted his generals for three days allowing 330,000 men to escape. “The blood of every single Englishman is too valuable to shed,” Hitler said. “Our two people belong together racially and traditionally. That is and always has been my aim, even if our generals can’t grasp it.” (Kilzer, p.213)
David Yorkshire
- Edit
As I pointed out, he was appeased for an awful long time before war was declared and had he not invaded Poland, the Jews would have remained impotent in their lobbying, and would probably have become increasingly unpopular in their warmongering. All Hitler had to do was sit and wait…. This is the thing about many nationalists: they attribute all these almost supernatural powers of foresight to Hitler, yet he couldn’t even see what was obvious to men like Ludwig Beck. Now Beck, he really would have been a great leader.
John Beattie
- Edit
AMEN !
Steve
- Edit
Also when the invasion of Poland was carried out, it should be mentioned that Stalin also did exactly the same thing at the same time & that lead to the Katyn forest massacre, which was blamed on the Nazi’s for years.
Steve
- Edit
Having looked at the 1933 “JUDEA DECLARES WAR ON GERMANY” threat over the years, wasn’t it a fairly impotent threat that people didn’t really get behind?
It shows what the Jewish lobby thought of Hitler at the time.
In the mainstream here a lot of people thought Hitler was wonderful & film at the time shows a prosperous bustling modern Berlin.
But equally there were fans of Stalin’s Russia who thought it was wonderful, ok they say mistakes were made but they were for the right reasons….
David Yorkshire
- Edit
I suppose I ought to mention the subject everyone talks about in relation to Hitler: the so-called Holocaust. As most nationalists know, international Jewry declared war on Germany in March 1933, as the Daily Express headlines from 24th March 1933 attest: ‘Judea Declares War on Germany’ and ‘Jews of all the World Unite’. They there declared themselves as enemies of the German people and, given the terrorist attrocities already committed in the British Mandate of Palestine, including against British peacekeeping soldiers, something had to be done.
.
This was why they were moved into ghettoes and encouraged to leave Germany, preferably to Palestine. This plan suited both the NSDAP hierarchy and Zionist leaders and the Haavara Agreement was signed, and emigration was only halted when war broke out, as it made safe travel impossible. This is when Jews were moved to camps, because one cannot have potential terrorists on the streets during a war. People forget that people of German extraction were also rounded up in Britain. It has also been forgotten that the Jews in Palestine did not let up on their terrorist activities against the British during the war, which included the murder of Ambassador Walter Guinness, the First Baron Moyne in 1944.
.
If the plan was to exterminate the Jews, then the question poses itself as to why the Germans bothered to feed them. If one is going to kill people, one kills them. It is true that the Jews were found starved and emaciated at the end of the war, but this was no different to the average German, who had taken to eating cats and dogs to survive. The atrocity stories were propaganda, but Jewish organisations realised they could get anything they wanted with such stories – including a nation state. Ironically, these stories are modern reworkings of medieval folktales about Jewry, like Sir Hugh or Chaucer’s Prioress’ Tale, updated for an industrialised age.
Steve
- Edit
Human skin lampshades & other such horror stories can be traced back to being first used in WW1.
The 6 million figure also features with regard to Russia but that didn’t get any result, so……
Anonymous
- Edit
As David noted above, the subject is a complex one, and given its many aspects, it is advisable to concentrate on one. I’ll focus on his foreign policy, not least because this strikes me as seriously misrepresented.
Hitler was not just a German nationalist, an Aryan racialist, and an enemy of the Semites. He was a visionary who looked far ahead of his peers – and his foreign policy has to be understood in this context. He felt – like many other thoughtful men before him, that an age of small states was giving way to one of large superstates – and that if Germany did not adjust to this reality, it would pay the price. On this point, not only was he correct, but his views are not dissimilar from those of the founders of the European Union – and frankly, the Nazis did a better job of uniting Europe than the bureaucrats in Brussels.
A key passage in Mein Kampf demonstrates this clearly:
‘Thus we find in the world to-day not only a number of States that are much greater than the German in the mere numerical size of their populations, but also possess a greater support for their political power. The proportion between the territorial dimensions of the German Reich and the numerical size of its population was never so unfavourable in comparison with the other world States as at the beginning of our history two thousand years ago and again to-day. At the former juncture we were a young people and we stormed a world which was made up of great States that were already in a decadent condition, of which the last giant was Rome, to whose overthrow we contributed. To-day we find ourselves in a world of great and powerful States, among which the importance of our own Reich is constantly declining more and more.
We must always face this bitter truth with clear and calm minds. We must study the area and population of the German Reich in relation to the other States and compare them down through the centuries. Then we shall find that, as I have said, Germany is not a World Power whether its military strength be great or not. There is no proportion between our position and that of the other States throughout the world. And this lack of proportion is to be attributed to the fact that our foreign policy never had a definite aim to attain, and also to the fact that we lost every sound impulse and instinct for self-preservation.’ (Mein Kampf, page 283 of 301).
In the ideology of National Socialism – and particularly the unifying principle of the Aryan race, Hitler had an idea that could bind Europeans of various nations together – without each losing their individual identities. Perhaps the clearest manifestation of this was in the SS, which had Scandinavian volunteers in the Viking division, French in the Charlemagne division, Germans in das Reich, etc… This was the nucleus of the nascent European superstate which would hold its own in a world dominated by giants like the USA, China, Russia, etc… And yes, Germany would, by virtue of its geographical position and economic strength play a central role in that superstate.
Prior to the outbreak of war, Hitler’s policy was much more modest – simply rectifying the injustices of Versailles by diplomatic means, (what the American historian David Hoggan termed ‘Peaceful Revision’). This policy was still in effect in 1939: the Nazi takeover of the Czech remnant of Czechoslovakia was not violent by any means – indeed, Prague was the main central European city that avoided destruction in World War Two. Had it not been for London’s decision to guarantee support to Warsaw in the event of a war with Germany, peaceful revision would probably have succeeded with regard to Danzig as well – sparing Europe misery and subjugation.
It was the outbreak of war, and the force of events, that brought the grander vision back into view. By 1940, with the fall of France, and with most of continent being under fascism or allied to it – the goal of an European superstate was being realized. Had Hitler passed away at the end of that year, he would have gone down as the greatest man in modern history – and I’d probably be posting this in German.
To criticize Hitler’s actions up to this point in time, is to fail to understand his vision.
The invasion of the USSR – as everyone knows, was his one great mistake. Yet, as mistakes go, it is one that was understandable: after all, if the Second Reich had succeeded in bringing the Russian Empire to its knees, why couldn’t the Third Reich do the same to its successor – especially given the poor performance of the Red Army in the USSR’s war with Finland? In hindsight, we know better – but at the time….
To do justice to Hitler, I think it prudent to draw an analogy with another extraordinary and ruthless individual in another civilization’s history: China’s First Emperor Shi Huang Ti. Under the latter’s leadership, the state of Ch’in succeeded in defeating and integrating the other Sinic warring states, thus politically uniting the civilization into a single superstate – i.e. China. This was done under the inspiration of a ‘Legalist’ ideology propounded by the philosopher Shang Yang – which has been compared to Fascism. The Chinese later overthrew the Ch’in dynasty after the death of the emperor and replaced Legalism with Confucianism – but they kept his political achievement intact – for even his foes understood its value.
Just as Shi Huang Ti’s triumph turned out to be China’s triumph – so Hitler’s tragedy….
ettienne farrier
- Edit
The Jews are effectively a ‘man-made’ race. A part-national, part-racial,part-cultural entity sometimes held together by Judaism, sometimes Zionism. They acquire the genes of other races but also their nucleus furiously breeds inwards. They are an anomaly among the world’s ethnic types but the end result is that the core of that group has a tendency towards obtainting influence and then promoting Internationalism and multi-racialism.
Michael Woodbridge
- Edit
I would just like to endorse the comments of both ettienne farrier and Barry. Having had quite a lot to do with Jews it has often occurred to me that it would be difficult to distinguish a cross-section of Jews in a crowd from a cross-section of Italians. Both groups tend to have quite a genetic mixture in their race but the Jews have evolved some more of their own distinguishing features through inbreeding..
As regards Barry’s comment about the need for balance I think he’s absolutely right. The beauty of a site such as ‘Western Spring’ is that it doesn’t have to follow a party line. ‘Western Spring’ doesn’t have to garner votes from an ignorant brainwashed public. What is true or false about history is not altered by wishful thinking or democratic consent. This is something those countries that deal out draconian prison sentences to those questioning the hollow cause have yet to learn.
Steve
- Edit
Jews themselves often seem to argue it both ways to suit whatever the situation is, so as to be on the winning side.
You often find them on what appears to be opposing sides but ultimately backing zionism.
johnb
- Edit
Max
I really thought the article was good but frankly you personally appall me with your beliefs. Are you TRYING to make a case, that nationalists should believe as Hitler did that the interests of their nation justified conquering and exterminating neighboring peoples, or that Nationalists must not be “moralist”?? If so stop calling yourself a nationalist and openly state what you are, an imperialist Racist.
Also please openly state that other nationalists such as those who support the BNP and its current leadership oppose your racial supremest frankly NAZI views.
Or is it your plan to help Cameron and company have us all smeared with the NAZI label?? JJB
Max Musson
- Edit
Hi johnb,
I’m glad you liked the article, Kasredin is a thoughtful writer.
.
As for Hitler, I’m not trying to do what you suggest, I am simply stating that Hitler’s views that the German people needed ‘lebensraum’, do not automatically debar him from being thought of as a nationalist.
.
I have not stated that nationalists should be immoral, on the contrary I have simply stated that we should if we wish to survive and flourish, base our morality upon the Laws of Nature. Whenever our moral code goes against the Laws of Nature, we diminish our survival chances and place at risk our future wellbeing.
.
When someone such as you bandies about the terms like ‘Racist’ and ‘Nazi’, it suggests that you are rather naïve and/or perhaps somewhat lacking in mental faculties. Do you think that “Cameron and company” have not already smeared all nationalists with the ‘Nazi’ label? … and do you really think they would stop doing so, if we simply disavowed the need for living space?
Steve
- Edit
Is this the real “johnb”?
I have read his comments elsewhere & this seems not to chime with them?
David Yorkshire
- Edit
John, are you seriously trying to pose as a nationalist whilst simultaneously hurling the word “racist” at another nationalist? – even capitalising the word, no less. I might have argued against the perceived merits of Hitler’s leadership, but it was reasoned and balanced; yours is a hysterical rant.
Gramm
- Edit
Hitler may or may not have been a great statesman and nationalist, on the whole the picture of him is of a modest even humble man when he was not being the Fuehrer. He may have been a bit of a bore but no one dared say that to his face. What Hitler was not was as good at was as a military leader. Just because he was the dictator of Germany it did not mean that he had greater military knowledge than his general staff, most of whom were very high powered individuals indeed, high achievers in many ways and Hitler was a bit overawed by them. It is noticeable that Joseph Stalin’s attitude to his general staff was the reverse of Hitler, first he ignored the officers then the put them totally in charge of the war and so won the war. Hitler gradually removed his most difficult and talented officers and lost the war. Even the most ardent admirer of Hitler cannot ignore Hitler’s disastrous ego driven decisions. It is not just hindsight even during the progress of the war the British military intelligence regarded Hitler’s decisions as some contributions to the allied victory.
Steve
- Edit
Churchill was also reputedly a difficult man to be close to, making extreme demands on his staff.
johnb
- Edit
Max, My beliefs and those of Griffin are based upon Jesus’s injunction love thy neighbor as thyself, and of course upon the fact that God created all peoples and Nations …
JJB
Max Musson
- Edit
Sorry Johnb, let me stop you there. That’s Christian universalism, not nationalism. I can almost hear the Halleluyahs and the distant tapping of tambourines as I write. You’ll be telling me next that the Jews are God’s chosen people and that the lion shall lie down with the lamb.
johnb
- Edit
Max when one “stops someone right there he admits that the rest of the argument would be convincing to others, indeed you just admitted that you cannot counter it. Then you put words in my mouth about the Jews, At least be honest enough to let me express my own opinions rather than those you select for me. No the Jews were not Gods chosen people. Abraham the father of the Arabs the Esauites as well as the grandfather of Israel and great grandfather of ELEVEN other sons besides Judah. He , was the one God chose because he sought Gods will. I will not deny that the Jews puff themselves up over others of Abraham’s descendants but since they deny the Son of God they are more the Black sheep of the family than the favorites.
And since when do you get to decide who gets to be a nationalist or not?? I believe God likes diversity and that he willed separate places for people to develop their own cultures.
So whether or not you ever get to hear halleluiahs or not at least do me the basic courtesy of not putting words in my mouth.
Max Musson
- Edit
Hi Johnb, I’m sorry if I deprived you of the satisfaction of seeing your earlier bit of Bible-bashing published, but what it states in a book of ancient Jewish folk tales really is not of much interest to most nationalists and has very little relevance in the modern day.
.
As you can see, I have published your most recent missive unedited and now sadly, everyone will know what a religious fruit-cake you are.
.
You are very fond of telling us what God does or does not think, so unless you have a private hotline direct to the almighty, who now is guilty of putting words in to whose mouth?
Steve
- Edit
OMG RAOTFLMAO!
“My beliefs and those of Griffin are based upon Jesus’s injunction……………”
OK surely most of us now believe that “Griffin” has no beliefs except in saying things that get him support & preferably money?
He changes opinion like the wind & after the 2010 GE seemed to be in fantasy land with his “New Model Army” statement.
Steve
- Edit
Also if that is the real “johnb” (makes me think of the Beach Boys for some reason) & he believes all that, why does he think he is a Nationalist, surely he believes in the orthodox PC mainstream?