Our enemies admit Hitler was not rightist but Judaism is

Here is a good example of what high-end gender-obsessed rightist thought looks like in 2019:

https://www.eurocanadian.ca/2019/01/for-archeofuturist-renewal-catholicism.html

Among the different varieties of nationalism that have emerged in the world, since the French Revolution, most are very largely gynecocratic: an eminent example is the nationalism of 1789, which abolished rank inequalities (in favor of a motherly and egalitarian conception of the nation), but also Hitlerian nationalism or Soviet nationalism. This led Julius Evola to point out that, “The modern world shows a return of the themes that were proper to the ancient Southern gynecocratic civilizations;” and that, “Socialism and communism” ultimately prove “materialized and technological revivals of the ancient telluric, Southern principle of equality and promiscuity of all beings in Mother Earth.”

Obviously I disagree with their choice of intentional perjoratives to describe Hitlerism, such as “egalitarian” or “gynecocratic”(????), but the main point is that they are finally being forced to admit that Hitlerism is nothing like what they as recently as a decade ago used to presume it was (ie. neo-Nazism), but rather what we have been adamantly and ceaselessly saying – from the very beginning of our activism – it actually was (ie. authentic National Socialism). Not “egalitarian” (in the sense of ignoring quality), of course, but simply anti-racist. Nor “gynecocratic”, but simply anti-sexist.

I do broadly agree with two of Evola’s adjectives “telluric” and “Southern” to describe authentic National Socialism, though of course Evola had little in-depth grasp of the characteristics of what he has accurately labelled. Here are some quotes reflecting Hitler’s essentially Mediterranean blood memory (consistent with the location of Asgard in our Aryan Diffusion theory):

“The southern peoples are not acquainted either with a meat diet or with cooking. I lived marvellously in Italy. I don’t know any country that enlivens one more.” – Adolf Hitler

“Once when I was travelling to Florence, I thought, as I passed through it, what a paradise this land of southern France is ! But when I reached Italy—then I realised what a paradise on earth can really be!” – Adolf Hitler

“We know to-day why our ancestors were not attracted to the East, but rather to the South. Because all the regions lying east of the Elbe were like what Russia is for us to-day. The Romans detested crossing the Alps. The Germanic peoples, on the other hand, were very fond of crossing them—but in the opposite direction. … For any Roman, the fact of being sent to Germania was regarded as a punishment—rather like what it used to mean to us to be sent to Posen. You can imagine those rainy, grey regions, transformed into quagmires as far as eye could see. The megalithic monuments were certainly not places of worship, but rather places of refuge for people fleeing from the advance of the mud. The countryside was cold, damp, dreary.” – Adolf Hitler

Bonus music video: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qqIIW7nxBgc

(It was Himmler who was the Nordicist, and this is what Hitler once said to him:

“You’ll understand, Himmler, that if I want to establish a genuine civilisation to the North and East, I’ll have to make use of men from the South. If I were to take official architects of the Prussian Government to beautify Berlin, for example, I’d do better to abandon the project!” – Adolf Hitler)

As for “telluric” (a.k.a. Aryan):

“The preying type of man is always envious, always seeking something fresh to possess. … The solid man of the soil is absolutely modest in his ideas. He wants no more than he can get by his work.” – Gottfried Feder

“It is only in the pictures of the Court artists that one sees peasants gazing at the stars in heaven. The real peasant keeps his eye firmly on the land, and he lives by the plough.” – Adolf Hitler

These two quotes (Feder’s more so) almost perfectly predict our enemies’ explicitly self-declared values:

an archeofuturist Catholicism would consist in reconciling domestic and economic individualism with these two Indo-European archaisms that are permanent innovation and the aristocratic-warlike ethos.

And, best of all, our enemies finally agree with us on the true origin of these values:

Among the great historical religions of the West, neither the sacerdotal Judaism of the Old Testament nor Talmudic Judaism nor Greco-Roman paganism nor Catholicism nor Calvinism are gynecocracies. … Catholicism fits with its Judaic parent but also its Calvinist offspring; Greco-Roman paganism proves equally virile: inegalitarian, heroic, favorable to progress and to the exploitation of nature. However, Catholicism currently finds itself in a crisis situation, insofar as it has become gynecocratic and has disowned its own Indo-European character: a degradation triggered with the Counter-Reformation and accelerated with Vatican II.

Of course our enemies continue to get wrong what “Aryan” means:

Catholicism is a virile and Aryan [<<<Wrong! - AS] religion that venerates the figure of the Father; it affirms inequality in all respects, endorses the heroic and warlike virtues, advocates economic, cognitive, artistic, and technological progress.

this ethos is properly Indo-European and also permeates the Old Testament, the Talmud, or Kabbalah (whose Indo-European origin is debatable, but which undoubtedly share the aristocratic-warlike ethos with Aryan [<<<Wrong! - AS] peoples and were therefore incorporated within the Aryan [<<<Wrong! - AS] Weltanschauung).

but as long as we keep beating them over the head with the etymology from which “Aryan” derives, they will eventually have no choice but to admit that it is those whom they call the “tellurics” (ie. Neolithic farmers) who are the true Aryans, not their precious steppe subhumans (a.k.a. Turanians, ancestors of Jews, hence the Old Testament indeed being an expression of Turanism). See also:

http://aryanism.net/blog/aryan-sanctuary/western-civilization-late-20th-century-pop-culture/comment-page-2/#comment-170659

All in all, I am always happy to achieve academic agreement with our enemies, even though we remain ideologically opposed, because academic agreement with our ideological opponents improves clarity over what the opposition between us is about. Here are my favourite lines from the rest of the enemy article:

It is hardly surprising that Trump, Orbán, and Netanyahu, but also Putin, are thought of as the chosen of Providence to defend the Christian Whites against the machinations of what the Roman Church has become!

Let us add that Calvinism, in its doctrinal foundations, refuses to render any worship to the Virgin Mary, which seems to prevent all the better a gynecocratic drift on its part. It is not fortuitous that the two great leaders of the resistance of the peoples to cosmopolitanism, namely Donald Trump and Victor Orbán, are Calvinist.

You are welcome to have Trump, Orban, Netanyahu and Putin. Thank you for ceasing to claim Hitler. (To the cynics from a decade ago, I told you I would be bringing home the swastika flag. It was inevitable ever since archaeological evidence confirmed the swastika to belong to the Neolithic farmers, not to the steppe subhumans.)

The bad conscience towards deported Jews, which facilitated the establishment of anti-racism (and therefore, the implementation of the great replacement), cannot hide the vigor of the hate and jealousy that the chosen people continues to undergo: that is witnessed by the persecutions—coming from the UN—that the Israeli nation must endure day after day, and by the slanders that the Western press spreads to skew the public opinion in favor of Palestinians. It is also witnessed by the hypocrisy of the anti-racist jurisdiction, which claims to fight against anti-Jewish racism, but systematically or almost systematically spares and protects the Muslims who hold negationist speeches or commit anti-Semitic attacks. Among European-Caucasoids, the vivacity of hateful feelings and behaviors towards the Jewish ethnicity echoes the de-judaization of the contemporary (pseudo-) Catholicism, a de-judaization that we will see is culminating into the ecologism of Pope Francis

Culminating? No, what you are seeing is just the prelude. De-Judaization will culminate in the revival of Gnostic Christianity. Watch us.

We have mentioned, above, this decisive aspect of the Indo-European tradition that is permanent innovation: innovation in the arts and techniques, but also in the knowledge of the world and the economy. “The Indo-European tradition of permanent innovation,” which is another formula that we owe to Guillaume Faye, culminates into the Promethean ideal of Greco-Roman paganism: the figure of Prometheus to the extent that it symbolizes the encouragement to technological progress and to the exploitation of nature. However, technological progress is here perceived as a transgression of the order desired by the gods: it means an infringement of the divine will, which is likely to arouse their wrath. The Indo-European ethos of permanent innovation also culminates into the divine anthropology of the Old Testament, by which is to be understood the Hebraic conception of man as made in the image of God, and as mandated to complete and crown the creative gesture of the divine.

Greco-Roman paganism encourages innovation and industry, but represents them to itself as a transgression of the divine will: in other words, an infringement of the order desired by the gods. For its part, Judaism conceives of industry and innovation as the object of the divine will; it sees them simultaneously as the manifestation of the divine nature of the human being and as the fulfillment of the order desired by God. The ecologism of Pope Francis does not only break with the Indo-European tradition of permanent innovation; it amounts to a de-judaization of the contemporary Catholic Church, a de-judaization that finds its culmination in the replacement of the biblical call to subjugate nature with the ecological call to dismantle modern industry. An archeofuturist Catholicism would remedy such a de-judaization by brandishing the Old Testament’s divine anthropology in front of the ecologism that has tacitly supplanted it (and which is nothing but an aspect of the gynecocracy that has replaced Catholicism itself within the Church).

It should also be specified that the Italian Renaissance did not only see flourishing the aristocratic-warlike ethos—in its properly Pagan and Greco-Roman form—in the persons of the Borgia or the Medici, but also Jewish esotericism in philosophy and the arts; and that the divine anthropology of the Old Testament inspired the shattering progresses of the Italian Renaissance in art, finance, technology, logico-experimental knowledge, and occultism.

Very good; we have come to agree quite closely indeed on what Western civilization is. We only disagree on whether or not it should die.

Today, facing the Islamic barbarian hordes invading the old continent, it is time for us, more than ever before, to return to Julius II, the Pope of archeofuturism, who reaffirmed the aristocratic-warlike ethos of Pagan Rome, but also the divine anthropology of the Old Testament by making himself the protector of the arts; and besides, by letting Michelangelo paint the Genesis and defend Jews in the decoration of the Sistine Chapel.

See you on the battlefield.

Now only the low-end rightists remain who still think Hitler was one of them, and even they are being exposed as closet fans of Judaism:

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-6381527/Father-named-baby-Adolf-Hitler-spent-year-Israel-studying-JEWISH.html

This entry was posted in Aryan Sanctuary. Bookmark the permalink.

23 Responses to Our enemies admit Hitler was not rightist but Judaism is

  1. Philistine says:

    This whole thing is so hilarious to me. Jews should be throwing a party over articles like that. Let’s listen to the wise rabbi Tovia Singer: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=j_34HPyxaac
    “And I encourage you to turn to Torah, and as we know that is what will happen in the Messianic Age, when, in fact, ten Gentiles of different languages will grab (…) the hem of a Jew and say ‘we will go with you because we have heard that God is with you.’”

    Of course, that same person will also discourage non-Jews from converting to Judaism (he clearly differentiates “turning to Torah” from full conversion in other videos), thus proving that Jews don’t actively seek to “save” other people, they just want slaves. Good for them that subhumans such as whoever wrote that article are more than glad to accommodate!

    And I have to agree with the author, please let us never lose sight of the Jews’ “divine anthropology”! https://volkundvaterland.files.wordpress.com/2014/01/uglyjews.jpg

  2. ItIsWhatItIs says:

    @AS:

    I have an iPad now so I will be more efficient in rewriting and finishing what I already have written in regards to the True Left ideology as I will be able to work on it while I work for my living wage. I was also distracted, and wasting my time, on something nonsensical there for a while. No more. I have begun the outline and would like to share it with Aryanists when done so that they may add any topics I may have forgotten about, or remove any topics that they believe don’t belong. I plan on making this ideology one of my life’s works that I can leave behind when I transcend this place.

    I will let you know here once I’m ready to send it out. Do you still have the same email?

  3. Lucius Rhine says:

    @IIWII

    Do you still have my contact info?

  4. ItIsWhatItIs says:

    @Lucius Rhine:

    Just sent you an email to the address I have for you.

    ”One day all the lies will collapse under their own weight and the truth will once again triumph.” – Joseph Goebbels

    How can we take any western and non-western academic alike seriously when they have been obviously wrong on so many topics for so long? How can these so-called academics around the world even look in the mirror without questioning how ridiculous they themselves actually are, and how their entire life’s work has been a complete waste of time? If any of them had any honor they would leave their field of study and find a different line of work….

  5. ItIsWhatItIs says:

    “Now only the low-end rightists remain who still think Hitler was one of them, and even they are being exposed as closet fans of Judaism”

    This is a perfect example of the ridiculous nature of rightist thought in tandem with Jewish Identity politics and the lying nature of the Jew which many scholars have documented throughout human history:

    Netanyahu: Hitler Didn’t Want to Exterminate the Jews
    Prime minister tells World Zionist Congress that Hitler only wanted to expel the Jews, but Jerusalem’s Grand Mufti convinced him to exterminate them, a claim that was rejected by most accepted Holocaust scholars. https://www.haaretz.com/israel-news/netanyahu-absolves-hitler-of-guilt-1.5411578

    For new-comers to the site, ask yourself why these same “holocaust scholars” refuse to debate any non-Jew in regards to the holocaust?

    The truth does not fear investigation….

  6. ItIsWhatItIs says:

    @Lucius Rhine:

    Can you please send me an email, I have something I would like to discuss with you.

    Mezza_Nine@outlook.com

  7. ItIsWhatItIs says:

    ^There’s an underscore. Mezza_Nine.

  8. ItIsWhatItIs says:

    @AS:

    I have also just sent you an email to the last known email address I have for you.

  9. Edward Ingersoll says:

    I’ve got a quick question for Aryanists: what are your thoughts on gun control? I know this website is very left-leaning, however I know that one of the people who you promote on this site (John Alan Martinson, Jr.) has exposed the Jewish role behind gun control. Also, what are your thoughts on abortion? I’m pretty interested in hearing the left-wing NS view on that.

  10. ItIsWhatItIs says:

    “what are your thoughts on gun control?”

    Aryanist’s thoughts on gun control are inline with Hitler’s thoughts on gun control.

    “Also, what are your thoughts on abortion?”

    If reproduction is in the hands of the state there would be no need for abortions.

  11. Manuel Bauer says:

    I see that Putin is on a good term with Ayatollah Khomenei and President Al-Assad. What do you think? http://tass.com/world/1022404

  12. ItIsWhatItIs says:

    I actually have a lot to say about that Manuel Bauer, but I’ll leave it for my website. I’ll post a link when it’s finished.

    I’ll say this though, had Jews not invented the atomic bomb there would never have been a “Cold War”. Had Jews not perpetrated the 9/11 terrorist attacks on America, America may have left her “Cold War” mentality in the past, and there would never have been an increase in refugees fleeing their homes in the Middle-East. Had Jews not created their theifdom of Israel in Palestine after WWII the Middle-East would never have become fragmented and Balkanized. Had Jews not helped the rise of western democracy and spread it around the world, along with capitalism and communism, WWI and WWII may never have happened, and Putin and Trump May never have become what they are. If Jews had not invented Neoconservatism and Neoliberalism, the world would probably not be facing ecological collapse, and 80% of the world population would not be forced to live on less than $10 a day in a ruthless capitalist system, and the list goes on….

    Such a blessing “God’s self-proclaimed chosen” have been to this planet, and all life.

    _______

    I find it a shame that more swastika-bearers do not feel the need to express their views here. I may be too old and corrupted by this world to ever be an Aryanist, but I still feel it is important to defend the truth! I’ll support these causes until my dieing day, but where is all the young blood? Where is all the outrage at Jews from the general public for just the beginning of the list of Jewish crimes against humanity and life on this planet I have listed above?

  13. ItIsWhatItIs says:

    While my blood is still boiling I thought I should add this for the record:

    In the Jewish created documentary Defamation the Jew being interviewed in the very beginning of the film says at 0:20, ”No way man, the Jewish people control the world…”, which would only take a person an hour or two to verify as being true, considering it is Judeo-Christian Western capitalism that controls most of the worlds economy at this point, and it is Judeo-Christian Western democracy that most nations of the world have been forced to try an emulate, at this point. So, the next obvious logical conclusion should be: If it is true that Jews control the world as Jews themselves believe, then it is Jews who are solely responsible for the condition of the world today, and the disastrous direction the world is obviously heading in.

    Defamation: https://youtu.be/2FDxQgTDsf0

    The fact that it is literally that easy to pin-point the problem, and that so few are willing to do it, absolutely disgusts me, even more than the fact that there are still people on this planet who want to be Jewish. ABSOLUTELY FUCKING DISGUSTING!!!

    This world is shyte for good people because obviously the majority of people are not that good to begin with.

    Fuck democracy, and fuck Judeo-Christian-Western civilization!!!

    Western Civilization Must Die, and all these scumbags gotta go down with it!!!

  14. ItIsWhatItIs says:

    @Aryanists:

    I’d be curious to know how Aryanists think INTJ personality types fit into the Aryanist worldview considering INTJ’s personality types can often turn-off their feelings completely? If the recommendation from an Aryanist to one of these personality types is to never turn-off ones feelings, wouldn’t that serve to handicap this personality type, considering that an INTJ can actually think just like a psychopath, and we are currently oppressed by a psychopathic socio-political economic system are we not?

    Furthermore, if personality types are important to the Aryanist worldview, why does Aryanism spend very little time discussing them?

  15. Manuel Bauer says:

    I’m Thai and my name here is fictional. I want to ask you about these.

    1. The EU recognized Juan Guaido, the President of the National Assembly of Venezuela, as the legitimate president of Venezuela instead of Nicolas Maduro. What do you think? https://www.aljazeera.com/news/2019/02/european-nations-recognise-guaido-venezuela-acting-president-190204122026259.html

    2. What do you think about the current military junta of Thailand led by Gen. Prayut Chan-o-cha and Gen. Prawit Wongsuwan?

  16. Terry says:

    Hasidism appealed to many Europeans because it was easy to learn, did not require full immediate commitment, and presented a compelling spectacle. Hasidic Judaism eventually became the way of life for many Jews in Eastern Europe. Waves of Jewish immigration in the 1880s carried it …

  17. Nottelling says:

    As an atheist I oppose all religion. That includes gnosticism. I feel like gnosticism is just as toxic as other religions because it advocates denying the body and material reality. I looked through your website and I must say its interesting, as a liberal I find myself agreeing with some stuff on here. Though I would like to point out a few areas where I feel you’re mistaken. Your definition of liberalism is flawed. We don’t believe progress is undefinable, we just advocate the belief that everyone should be free to do as they please so long as they do not violate the NAP. I won5 bring up other things because I don’t want to derail the thread. As far the other things you talked about in this post, I don’t agree that Mediterranean are superior. I believe the nords are superior. I’m not a nord just for the record. But I believe people romanticize Roman and Greek history. They were quite barbaric, their entire civilization was built on slavery and war. Very gentile if you ask me.

  18. ItIsWhatItIs says:

    @Nottelling:

    “As an atheist I oppose all religion. That includes gnosticism. I feel like gnosticism is just as toxic as other religions because it advocates denying the body and material reality.”

    You have a flawed understanding of Gnosticism.

    “Omitting to seek after God, and creation, and things similar to these, seek for Him from (out of) thyself, and learn who it is that absolutely appropriates (unto Himself) all things in thee, and says, “My God my mind, my understanding, my soul, my body.” And learn from whence are sorrow, and joy, and love, and hatred, and involuntary wakefulness, and involuntary drowsiness, and involuntary anger, and involuntary affection; and if you accurately investigate these (points), you will discover (God) Himself, unity and plurality, in thyself, according to that tittle, and that He finds the outlet (for Deity) to be from thyself.” – Monoimus

    How sure are you that your understanding of Liberalism is also not flawed?

  19. RP says:

    Good. Now all they have to do is stop calling themselves “Aryan”.

  20. ItIsWhatItIs says:

    How accurate is the title of this blog post and post turning out to be considering the outcome of the Israeli elections today?

    I even heard someone on a local radio station say, “Israel is definitely turning to the far-right.”….

    There is no real left in Israel I don’t think. There is no real left in much of the western world either, many countries of which have Judeo-Christianity as a pillar of their societies. Hmmmmm…..

    Thomas Paine was spot on about Judaism in his book Age of Reason:

    “Whenever we read the obscene stories, the voluptuous debaucheries, the cruel and tortuous executions, the unrelenting vindictiveness with which more than half the Bible is filled, it would be more consistent that we call it the word of a demon than the word of God. It is a history of wickedness that has served to corrupt and brutalize mankind;and, for my part, I sincerely detest it, as I detest everything that is cruel.” – Thomas Paine

    Israel election: Netanyahu set for record fifth term
    https://www.bbc.com/news/world-middle-east-47876539

  21. Nottelling says:

    @itiswhatitis nice quote, one of my favorites from Thomas Paine

  22. Nottelling says:

    Also interesting quote from monimus. I am interested in your gnostic beliefs is it ok if I ask some questions? Also, I’m curious, what are aryanisms views regarding the enlightenment and enlightenment virtues ?

  23. AS says:

    @Nottelling

    You are welcome to ask questions about Gnosticism.

    “what are aryanisms views regarding the enlightenment and enlightenment virtues?”

    We are Romantics. We consider the Enlightenment a mistake, but not for the same reasons that the Counter-Enlightenment (also our enemies) considers the Enlightenment a mistake:

    http://aryanism.net/politics/national-socialism-basics/

    On the intellectual plane, the empiricist worldview had (from the Renaissance onwards and ever more sharply with accelerating advances in experimental science during the so-called Age of Enlightenment) increasingly threatened spirituality with materialistic reductionism, promising to ultimately trivialize such things as emotions, dreams, free will and the spirit itself as mere side-effects of entirely physiological mechanisms. As the pressure became too great, philosophical reaction arose in opposition to empiricism by re-affirming intuition and sentiment as valid – indeed superior – routes to knowledge, as Alfred Rosenberg describes: “In various guises, an abstraction began to uproot life. The reaction in the form of German romanticism was therefore as welcome as rain after a long drought. … Where the Greek generalised, … the Romantic man personified.” However, this reaction itself immediately split into two movements, as reliance on feeling led to different types of people feeling differently.

    The Romantic movement began as a movement proposing that empiricism, though powerful in generating knowledge about what is, does so at the devastating cost of cutting us off from knowledge about what ought to be. (“We are capable of distinguishing the component parts of a molecule. But when it’s a question of explaining the why of a thing, words fail us.” – Adolf Hitler) The latter is considered accessible only via a personal undertaking to refine the spirit, which in turn can only be achieved by immersion in conditions (in practice usually generated by works of art) that remove the usual social constraints to emotional activity, thus allowing us to distance ourselves from our lower emotions and, if possible, hand ourselves over totally to our higher emotions. Particular emphasis is placed on pure love, poetic justice and appreciation for beauty, all of which are believed to converge towards – and function as conduits towards – the Romantic ideal.

    The Counter-Enlightenment movement, on the other hand, proposed quite differently that empiricism was cutting us off from primal human urges and hence leading to a dry, sterile humanity that experiences life less richly than those still connected to the primal. The response they recommend is to seek immersion in conditions that unleash primality. They admit that primal feelings might not converge, and indeed often clash with each other for dominance even inside the same mind, but argue that this is not something that should be worth concern, because the very expectation of convergence is a non-primal feeling in itself, and therefore to be rejected. Primalism is considered the only valid guide; rationalism is to be rejected along with empiricism.

    In short, the Counter-Enlightenment feared that empiricism would devalue the lower emotions (which they value as primal), whereas the Romantics feared that empiricism’s trivializing method of devaluing the lower emotions would inevitably devalue also the higher emotions (which we value as salvational) at the same time, thereby interfering with the Romantic eschatological vision of the higher emotions directly vanquishing the lower emotions in a triumph of the will. Alfred Rosenberg summarizes the problem with the Counter-Enlightenment from a Romantic perspective: “One is immediately reminded of the sentimental return to nature and the glorification of the primitive which appeared in the late eighteenth century. … But the nature of primitive man—as far as we can reasonably conjecture—was not particularly heroic.”

    The Enlightenment can be interpreted as a form of progressivism, whereas Romanticism can be correspondingly interpreted as a form of regressive leftism:

    http://trueleft.boards.net/thread/4/leftists-progressivism

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

*

You may use these HTML tags and attributes: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>