A lot has happened in the world this year, and the mood of the masses has become increasingly ugly. I do not consider this a positive development. Positive ideological revolution must indeed be preceded by discontent, but must be built on idealism. Great discontent without greater idealism leads to a mobilization of selfishly aggressive people (generically known as the right wing) who can easily be manipulated against the wrong targets.
I wish to begin by admitting an elementary communication oversight, so that others do not repeat it. I have constantly declared that authentic National Socialism is opposed to racism. However, many right-wingers this year have also been claiming (falsely) that their politics are not racist, but merely about preserving their own racial identity. The result is that many people who first hear my declaration mistakenly assume I am one of those guys, which has led to a lot of confusion.
Let me clarify one more time: I am not interested in preserving any currently existing race or culture. I am interested in starting fresh. In Hitler’s words, underlying National Socialism is “the will to create mankind anew”. Furthermore, I restate a term from the Glossary page:
Preservationism: (non-Aryan) belief that any arbitrary identity should continue to exist just because it already exists, in other words that perpetuation requires no justification
Radicalism in general begins with demanding justification for perpetuation, and Aryanism in particular maintains that no identity deserves continued existence except those committed to eliminating the ignoble aspects within themselves. Otherwise, all identities are indeed arbitrary (in David Myatt’s jargon, “abstractions”). For example, the BNP call to preserve “indigenous Britain” is trivially countered by a call to preserve “contemporary Britain”. Both cannot be preserved (ie. the BNP claim to support the ‘right’ of every identity to be preserved is a complete lie), so why should one feel that the former has greater validity than another, unless one is indeed racist? The question we should really be discussing is: what identity can best ennoble society? (I suggest that ”contemporary Britain minus Jews and Zionist Gentiles (incl. BNP)” might be a decent start.)
Returning to the anti-Zionist movement, I would say we started well in the first half of the year, but then seemed to run out of steam during the second half. Many sites have slowed down or disappeared, but honestly, how many times are we supposed to repeat the same information on Jewish crimes over and over again? Is repetition by itself supposed to accomplish anything?
I have been studying why the right-wingers have been in some ways more effective at rallying support than the anti-Zionists despite anti-Zionist propaganda being better both in quality and in style. Both groups expose crimes, but the right-wingers seem to generate more outrage with less effort. One theory I have is that most people have stronger emotional reactions to small crimes involving individual criminals. In contrast, huge crimes - be it 9/11, the international banking scams, or the IDF slaughtering the Palestinians - are too complicated to generate emotional reactions from many people.
I have no doubt that this behavioural pattern was long known to our enemies. As such, it is clear that the true agenda behind immigration is not “ethnic replacement” as the right-wingers claim, but diversion. By getting their right-wing agents to preoccupy the masses with constantly repeated and exaggerated stories about immigrant crime, they reduce the time and attention available to the masses to learn about Zionism. The giveaway is that the right-wingers have been turning up the volume of their immigrant crime and other race-baiting propaganda in direct proportion to the progress of the anti-Zionist movement.
Pictured – the Israeli English Defence League and their flag:
The idea (promoted by a few dubious activists) that race-baiting can somehow be used to gradually lead people to Zionism has been disproven. Instead, it has only cooled the enthusiasm of non-Jewish minorities towards fighting Jewish domination, because they now believe that hypothetically empowered white Gentiles would treat them even worse than the currently empowered Jews.
The attitude I recommend towards crime propaganda is simple. Nationalists talking about the dangers of immigration are no different from neocons talking about the dangers of terrorism. Both are trying to frighten you into supporting them. This is the way of slavemasters towards slaves, not the way of genuine revolutionaries.
Another issue of frequent controversy is the value of debate between competing movements. Should we debate our enemies? Is debating a waste of time? Or does refusing to debate prevent us from being taken seriously? But does winning a debate translate to winning converts?
I think that now might be a good time – perhaps the last chance before chaos descends – for debates. What worries me most is not that the masses have been successfully distracted by competing movements, but that some would-be intellectuals have followed the masses. While some may be Zionist agents and others may be unscrupulous opportunists, I believe that others still are simply bandwagoners who - seeing the condition of society and in hurry to start doing something – signed up with the first reactionary movement that came along without thinking through the alternatives.
As such, I think the most important issue is to recognize the different types of debating opponent, and respond accordingly. I suggest that those merely interested in showing off their debating skills and wasting everyone’s time should be avoided entirely, while those who have shut off their minds to other viewpoints should be ruthlessly dismantled for the viewing of their audiences, but those who are well-intentioned should be debated respectfully with a view to learning from each other and possibly even achieving synthesis.
Aim for 2010
Speaking to Aryanists in particular, I believe that our most important upcoming aim is to function as a bastion of idealism amid the discontent. Embracing our own rarity as idealists in current times is our only chance to gather like-minded radicals under one banner even as many others flock to movements that preach the opposite of idealism.
With 2012 less than three years away, many people are bringing up end-time prophecies. Savitri Devi prophesized the arrival of Kalki, but according to her, Hitler was the One-Before-Last. I regret to point out that she has oversimplified the matter. She correctly diagnosed Hitler as possessing too much Sun and not enough Lightning (her terminology), but she optimistically presumed that the one after him would automatically achieve the perfect balance. I believe that, had she lived to see current conditions, she would by now have realized the great danger of the next influential leader getting the balance wrong the other way ie. possessing too much Lightning and not enough Sun. In which case there will be not a true revolution, but only further descent.
We are one of the only groups right now that - in the present swing of the pendulum towards an unprecedently vicious and cynical right-wing - continues to use the Sun (swastika) as our symbol. Our purpose in this struggle is clear. We are Men Against Time. We must stop the pendulum in its tracks.