As the year begins, there is no doubt that the US will attempt to reverse its loss of international influence over the last decade. The desired resurgence would have been best immediately upon Obama’s election, amongst the fervour felt more by the rest of the world than the American people themselves, which made it much easier to amend the errors of Bush’s administration. Despite discussion that Obama has done little that he has promised, this attitude is still prevalent. For this reason, 2010 will likely be a year of unprecedented expansionism. If we are ever to see a renewal of policies against Iran, Syria and Venezuela, then it is likely to occur this year.

Germán runs a good blog and YouTube channel on the situation in Iran which gives much insight into the claims and counter-claims of Iran and the USA, revolving around the protests of the last election and the nuclear programme. His blog gives politico-historical insights into US-Iranian relations and I suggest that his blog be used in educating anyone on the issues regarding Iran.

It seems that it is now or never for America. Obama’s administration will most likely be the final burst of virility experienced by America, and there should be no illusions as to whether this is realised by Jewry. While the financial crisis did weaken the US severely, the significance of the subsequent recession is in terms of the declining sustainability of America as world hegemon. With mounting debt, dissent and a largely unproductive population, only Obama’s ability to inspire the masses will possibly see America retain its position as a world power for the short and medium terms. Evidence of his success in inspiring an American advance can be seen with continuing high military spending, the success in recruitment for a new troop surge, as well the recent “Haiti expedition”.

Therefore, if Obama and the US do opt for expansion, as all signs seem to be indicating, then this will be a vital focus for propaganda efforts. Most likely, US expansionism will coincide with a more aggressive Israeli foreign policy. It should go without saying that propaganda regarding the Palestinians should be stepped-up; but also that of Lebanon, Syria, and more importantly, Iran. The failure so far of America and Israel in dealing with Iran can be partially attributed to the ability of activists in distributing propaganda. By increasing our propaganda efforts, any advances on Iran will be made much more difficult and costly for America and Israel.

The main website has a PDF archive. The books contained therein are not all from an Aryanist perspective or even directly related to Aryanism. However, the page should facilitate any research non-Aryanists wish to embark on in order to understand Aryanism, as well as for Aryanists to formulate content on the various topics included in the library.

We are taking suggestions for PDFs. If there is anything not featured there which you think is relevant, contact us with all the details you can (include the PDF if possible). Also, if you notice any broken links, or broken PDFs, notify us.

Browse Library!

Alex Jones is undoubtedly the leader of the “truth movement”. The truth movement, covering 9/11 to fractional-reserve banking, is inclusive of almost every alternative outlook there can be on any subject. For this reason, Alex Jones stands as the most important figurehead and is representative of these alternative opinions. There is no denying that we should make a strong attempt at targeting the truth movement in a broad sense, due to the similarities in basic beliefs. Alex Jones himself must eventually be targeted, which will be the topic of this post.

As has been mentioned in previous posts, namely “Aryanism’s Future” and “Building a Movement”, Aryanism as a revolutionary movement must become the only option for the masses seeking an alternative to the current status-quo. At the moment, of course, Aryanism is only a fraction of the alternative movement, with the bulk of people finding their alternative in the truth movement, irrespective of their favourite leader (David Icke, Alex Jones, etc.). However, with Aryanism’s expansion as a movement, there will necessarily be an absorption of other “alternativists” in order to come closer towards our goal of dominance of the alternative. To accomplish this requires that the Aryanist movement either absorbs or opposes other alternatives. The case for both will be briefly discussed in terms of Alex Jones, but is applicable on all levels; even on a person-to-person basis as one person will generally have influence and authority over other people.

Absorbing the truth movement will be one of the most difficult actions which a revolutionary movement must undertake. Alex Jones is the self-styled leader of all dissent, as is fitting for either an agent or a fool. Alex Jones has shown a large degree of resistance to identifying the “Elitists”, especially steering clear of criticism of Zionism. His unwillingness to expose International Jewry has been proven to be due to his intimate relationship with his supposed enemy. However, to a revolutionary movement this is largely irrelevant as long as Alex Jones remains the figurehead of the truth movement. Whether or not this remains the case is dependent upon the decisions the Aryanist movement takes: whether to absorb the truth movement; or oppose it.

Absorbing the truth movement would require Alex Jones being subordinated to the leader of the Aryanist movement, otherwise Aryanism would be absorbed by the truth movement. Total absorption would cause the truth movement as a whole to be Aryanised (similar to the NSDAP’s absorption of the Nationalists). Absorbing the truth movement would obviously require Jones’ personal acceptance of this subordination and of Aryanism. This is highly unlikely since he has already spoken ill of anti-Zionism and would probably continue to do so with the popularising of anti-Zionism. If we believe he is an agent, it is likely that his rhetoric against anti-Zionism would increase with its popularisation, making absorption impossible. If, however, he continues to avoid the subject, absorption would prove quite easy. On top of this is the consideration of Alex Jones the figurehead. Due to his popularity, it is unlikely that the masses that follow him religiously would eagerly replace him with the leader of an Aryanist movement. Therefore, it seems overall that Alex Jones could be absorbed, at least fully.

Opposing the truth movement is troublesome since it would mean the ostracism of a large number of people with whom we have little disagreements. Not only would this created a large and more unified bloc that will constantly oppose Aryanism but it will constantly drain our recruits, some of which will inevitably be drawn to Alex Jones. This division could be deadly if Alex Jones is able to improve his propaganda (through extra funds and exposure), which seems likely due to his connections with Jewry. This blunder could have significant repercussions on the image of Aryanism as a revolutionary movement with momentum. Therefore, opposition would; at best, result in a constant threat to an Aryanist movement, and at worst, would undermine the movement’s drive towards dominating alternatives and cause its decline.

Therefore, it seems that neither will solve this dilemma. The situation will undoubtedly change by the time this becomes an issue. The movement’s decision should be based upon lifting Aryanism to the position of the sole alternative to the status-quo. This goal should be kept in mind for all matters of political persuasion and conversion. At the moment, the best option would appear to be making Alex Jones an affiliate of the broader Aryanist movement. Therefore, while he would still remain the leader of the truth movement; he would, in some way, be subordinate to the Aryanist movement.

With the votes being cast for the general elections in Japan, we should reflect on Aryanism in respect to this nation. Being one of the few countries which still has most of the requirements for an Aryanist State, Japan should be of particular interest.

While the results of the elections will not at all be surprising, the nature of Japanese politics should be the basis of our understanding of Japan and how Aryanism should be introduced there. The nature of Japanese politics is reflected by the continuity of government and the large degree of loyalty the people have for the government and leaders they elect. For the past half a century, Japan has been ruled almost exclusively by the Liberal Democratic Party. While a “Liberal Democratic” party, it is, by Western standards, rather conservative. This is generally the case for most Japanese parties considering Japan is the only country which has modernized (twice) without becoming thoroughly Americanized.

This conservatism impedes any radical parties. With the exception of the Japanese Communist Party, Japanese politics is very aristocratic in nature. For this reason, I am dubious of Aryanism taking the form of a radical and revolutionary movement in Japan. Not only is Japan rather anti-revolutionary, but it is very corporatist in nature. While the party which is likely to be elected claims to be opposed to the favourable place business takes in Japanese politics and society, it is doubtful that this tradition – which has been a characteristic of Japan since the Meiji Restoration – will be abandoned. It is therefore most likely that an Aryanist think-tank will be most effective in Japan, which attempts to influence the major political parties.

The success of this can be demonstrated by the increase in support of modifying the constitution. The “military” of Japan was an issue which was solely discussed by neo-Imperialist and other autocratic and militaristic parties, whose support was, and remains, minimal. Over the span of a decade, the belief that Japan should change its constitution to allow for a proper military (and not merely a “self-defence force”) has become popular amongst politicians of the mainstream parties. While not yet an election-deciding issue for the Japanese public, its importance is growing rapidly.

In summary, I believe the progress of Aryanism in Japan lay in its introduction to the pre-established elite of influential political and business families.

This article is posted as a response to many genuine and sincere Aryanists (and others) who believe that our economic policies should be similar to those of currently-established powers. Although not adopting a neoliberal economic perspective, they still adopt an overly “orthodox” economic outlook for an Aryanist State.

Much of this discussion as to the economics of an Aryanist State is well-founded. Information about National Socialist Germany’s economy is scarce in comparison to the data that we have today. Furthermore, the methods used by the National Socialists are “unorthodox” in the sense that it is outside of normal economic practice for all modern economies and those running them. While it isn’t necessary to devise an economic alternative in all its details, as the situation will have changed when the chance comes to implement them, considerable effort should be made to construct a solid economic philosophy and, in this article, the means by which this philosophy will be fulfilled.

The discussion mentioned above of economics comes primarily from those who have been influenced by Anarchism or its many variations. Anarchism, in either its political or economic form, is not relevant to Aryanism. The compulsion for orthodoxy and acceptability, I think, is what drives many to anarchism as it is a revolt and not revolution. An Aryanist State must necessarily be authoritarian, both politically and economically. The age of granting rights for this or that activity, group or belief must end. The current situation we find ourselves in with an unstable geopolitical climate, environmental disaster and a demographic nightmare is a direct result of the beliefs still held by Libertarians, Anarchists, Conservatives and others. The reaction to these issues by these groups confirms this, with some downplaying the issues, some providing small quick-fixes (fluorescent light bulbs, hybrid cars, education for the poor to decrease birth rates, etc.), and some even completely denying their existence or relevance. All those beliefs born in 1789 are irrelevant to Aryanism.

Aryan economics must redefine economics as it must redefine the fundamentals of existence. This does not mean that the theories accumulated by economists should be ignored, but that the bad and irrelevant separated from the good. Aryan economics must shift towards centrally planned economies that are self-sufficient (German: autarkic) in order for large scale reforms, instead of the mere influence that governments have over market economies, to take place. And unless we wish to continue the present capitalist-socialist rivalry, class-rivalry and all its implications, reforms are required. Therefore, in order to redefine economics we must redefine its purpose, namely, the “fundamental economic problem”. The purpose of the economy must be redefined in an Aryan manner as to shift the focus from consumption and profit-obsession to a socially-based efficient economy.

Most people who were educated in the West are aware of the fundamentals of economics (supply and demand). Just as the economic problem must be redefined (and thus the purpose of economics), so must an economy’s basic functioning. Modern economists enjoy faith in the “invisible hand” and the relation between supply and demand. For a theory to be exercised, its fundamentals must be well-founded, and both the fundamentals of modern economics are filled with holes if not totally irrelevant.

Additionally, the tendency to dismiss economics as unimportant to an Aryan State is an illusion. Those who promote this and care not whether an Aryanist State operates by a barter-system or by fiat money, are not paying enough attention to the value of economics. Economics is undeniably linked with the social, cultural and political aspects of man. Failure to associate these factors with a functioning economy will cause an abrupt end to an Aryanist State. For the pragmatic, a functioning and powerful economy will be needed at the very least to arm the state for an inevitable war.

Initially, economic growth and full employment should be the main aims of an Aryanist state. A mostly self-sufficient economy (not an export economy) with imports coming only from allies or from close neighbours to avoid the impacts of a blockade during war. Most Aryanists will be aware of the barter trade system of Germany with its neighbours which will be pursued by a modern Aryanist State in order to keep money in the country in question as well as to stop the accumulation of debt. Also, reliable credit must be created for the expansion of the economy (particularly if the Aryanist State inherits an economy contracted by recession). This credit mustn’t come from overseas, particularly America, as that necessarily leads to foreign debt and subservience to the USA. Price and wage controls will be a necessity on at least the most basic goods to prevent inflation. As you can see, the policies will be different from those of all countries today, although slightly similar to those of centrally-planned Communist countries of the past.

As most Aryanist policies will differ before and after a war is fought, as will the economic policy. Leading up to the war a focus on production, particularly of armaments must be stressed more than it will be after this war. Furthermore, the state may have to enact policies that will be repealed after the war in order to increase production or any other war priority. However, if the war is pursued in its totality and is concluded with the defeat of hostile neighbours, the freedom to reform the state and its economy will present itself now that foreign threats are less drastic. Without doubt, the first to go will be those policies which were enacted reluctantly as preparation for war. Following this will likely go the stress of full employment over productivity growth. This must be pursued gradually and with caution in order not to cause structural unemployment. Similar services like the Reichsarbeitsdienst (RAD), while already created, may have to be expanded in order to offer retraining for those made redundant by the increase in productivity following further mechanisation of industry. At this moment, one will notice the need for demographic policies to reduce the population to suit the needs of the economy, which will likely follow from the reduction of inferior births.

This represents the technicalities of an Aryanist economics policy. Much has already been discussed about its philosophy which follow the themes of agrarianism, “beauty of work”, “strength through joy”, which require no revision but should be discussed later in more depth.

Update (21st September, 2009): 1939 German Economic Policy

Pentti Linkola has been introduced in the past few months to myself and others with whom I share environmentalist convictions. Linkola is a Finnish environmentalist who has a particular interest, and as his new book demonstrates, a limitless familiarity with Finland and its flora and fauna. While Linkola’s awareness does not reach far beyond Finland, the scope demonstrated in his book definitely does. Linkola’s views are radical and his works are definitely a reprieve from the contemporary environmentalists. Linkola’s new book, “Can Life Prevail?”, is worth-reading for all Aryanists as an introduction to the particulars of European and Finnish environmentalism as well as a sufficiently radical and total solution to this problem.

Can Life Prevail? Is one of the few environmentalist books I have read. It seems that in the many years Pentti Linkola has spent immersing himself in what he believes to be the proper, natural and most healthy life; that is, a life in constant contact with nature. It is immediately noticeable that Linkola is an idealist, which is most likely why his views are so extreme. Linkola recognises that Western culture and humans themselves are the problem. Linkola is a true radicalist and wishes to truly revolutionise the lifestyle of humans, not simply for sustainability and maximum exploitation, but for the ultimate health and happiness of all life. As a taste of Linkola’s beliefs, I will quote parts of the last section of the book.

A Demographic Plan

The cornerstone of any population platform is the dismantling of the freedom of procreation, the most senseless form of individual freedom. Puzzlingly, this policy has only been implemented so far in the country with the oldest culture of the world: China.
Procreation should be licensed: on average, every woman should be allowed to bear only one child. This policy should be followed for several generations, until a sustainable population is reached. The quality of the population must in all cases be taken into account as well: procreation licences would be denied to homes deemed genetically inadequate or unsuitable for the raising of children, whereas families capable of providing a stimulating environment for children would be granted several licences.

Energy

Fossil fuels, including peat, will be abolished on the first day the programme is implemented. Even the production and distribution of electricity ? the harnessing of which should probably be seen as a great misfortune in the history of mankind ? will largely be brought to an end. Electricity may continue to be used as a source of energy by the media and to illuminate rooms (strict quotas would have to be set in this case); but street lights and other external lighting would be banned. Households, as well as businesses, will have to switch to manual labour.
Other power plants will be demolished. The worst kind of plants, energy dams, will be the first to go. Indeed, the waterpower has caused the third great ecocatastrophe alongside the clearing of fields and the forest economy: the faltering of our whole marine economy. The new policy will restore our waters to their natural state.

The Collection of Carbon Dioxide

The only large-scale method of removing the colossal surplus of carbon that has already been released into the atmosphere is by absorbing it with vegetation: firstly with the trees, then with bushes. In Finland, the mean volume of living trees on growing forestland now amounts of 70 cubic metres per hectare. This figure will be increased to about 400 cubic metres per hectare, which corresponds to the natural density of forests. Additionally, a significant amount of carbon is stored in fallen trees: this increases the more north the woodland is and the slower the decomposition. It will take about one hundred years to reach the suggested figure of 400 cubic metres.
Still, in order to deliver orders and announcements to the population, to maintain the media and literary culture (all of which must be preserved in order to sustain society), the production of paper will continue.
Reforesting a significant portion of field acreage is the most notable step that will be taken.

Agriculture, Industry and Wares

Farming will be organised in small units, while machines will be abolished and a major portion of the population will be made to practise light agricultural work.
Industrial manufacturing will be subject to licensing: no product will be manufactured unless there is a buyer in real need of its use.
Most businesses will come to an end. Only a handful of large corporations will be maintained: for instance, those linked to the production of equipment used for public transportation, bicycles and paper. These industries will be in the hands of the state.

Education

The school system will be cherished as the most precious aspect of society. Foreign languages will be removed from the syllabus and less mathematics will be taught. The greatest emphasis will be placed on all-round education (natural sciences, history, Finnish), sports, arts and, most importantly, civic skills (which the adult population will also be taught).

I would suggest reading this book which is a compilation of articles written by Pentti Linkola over more than a decade. Visit his fansite for more information.

The free world, the democratic world, has long been known to be a fallacy and a disguise for American economic interests. With the re-election of Mahmoud Ahmadinejad in the 2009 Iranian elections, the true nature of America and democracies around the world is shown without a doubt to be a form of patron-client relationship.

The world media reports that Ahmadinejad “apparently”, “reportedly”, even “allegedly”, has won the Iranian elections. Over the past few weeks the media has been, as always, promoting the “student movements” which generally call for the same ill-defined reforms and freedoms as well as, conveniently, friendly relations with America. Beyond the obvious links these movements have with the CIA, an interesting relationship reveals itself during the course of elections in the “less-than-free world”.

Despite Iran being a democracy, it is subject to the close-eye of American analysts and their lapdogs. It is America’s role to protect and further democracy which causes it to justify itself as the supreme dictator of which elections are legitimate, which parties and countries stand for freedom; and ultimately, which leaders will be elected. Despite Ahmadinejad’s re-election, the media in the west has doubted the legitimacy of his victory. Of course, this was an obvious outcome since, for weeks, the western media – in combination with presenting the reformists as the next leaders of Iran without a doubt – has stated plainly that if Ahmadinejad wins the election it is most likely due to vote rigging. Of course, the countries in which vote rigging actually occurs are almost always allies of America.

This role is the same with all democracies, but particularly democracies outside of “the West”. Democracies are the clients of the American patron and in return for the meagre returns of democracy and capitalism, the patrons promise a steady supply of these scraps for their clients. This relationship is deeply ingrained within the minds of the west after decades of American global hegemony and the acceptance and praise of this status-quo. For this reason, the West as a whole casts judgement on these democracies as if they were vassals of the free-world.

This can also be seen in the case of Palestine. America, and Israel alongside it, only support one party in any Palestinian elections. This party, like all parties supported by the free world, is entirely docile and a non-threat to these powers. Thus, whenever Hamas gains votes that circumstances are considered suspect, whether the claim is vote-fraud or intimidation.

No Aryanists are under the illusion of democracy, so this is not an attempt to sway anyone towards anti-democratic positions. This article is an articulation of the problem of democracy for non-Western countries primarily, but also all countries outside of America, Britain and Israel.

There are numerous confusions in the use of the term “Aryan”, particularly what an Aryan appearance is. Defining this with confidence will remove any confusions with interpretation of the Aryan phenotype as the same as a “White phenotype”.

In my opinion, there is not much improvement that must be made upon the theories of National Socialist Germany and other, unaffiliated, groups and individuals. Aryanist demographic policy, most importantly the policies which deal with selective breeding, should prefer those of “Nordid” phenotype. It is also my opinion that, at least initially, a wider range of “Aryans” should be included as acceptable for reproduction. However, the Nordid phenotype is, at the moment, the bearer of the most Aryan traits.

Any racial studies will have obvious negative drawbacks from difference in opinion to difference in interpretation. Identifying the phenotype that is most likely to coincide with higher prevalence of Aryan traits as well as the phenotype of the original Aryans is the main aim of any racial study on an Aryanist basis. To avoid the likely bickering over the technicalities of classification and trivialities that will not matter for the Aryanist movement but will be a concern for an Aryanist state, a range of Nordids should be considered acceptable.

For an emerging Aryanist movement, phenotype should play a role. We should understand the basics of what the desired phenotype is and analyse applicants generally with little regard to excluding periphery types. This way, contradictions which will inevitably occur from even professional classifications will not occur. A lenient classifications, with non-Nordid admixtures should be allowed as long as there are no compounding factors in either phenotype, ancestry or personal record (e.g. Jewish ancestry or criminal record).

For an Aryanist state, it would be best to prioritise research on phenotype as well as a genotype for correlations between Aryan traits and any manifestations mentally and physically. Until then, relying on internet research and the small number of studies done each year, is pointless. We do not have the resources, nor do we really require the needs, to research either Aryan phenotype or genotype.

The main traits that should be preferred are:

• Dolichocephalism
• Ectomorphism
• Defined jaw, chin and nose
• Bridged and long nose
• Relatively straight profile

Below are some of the better examples of the “Nordid” phenotype by the artist Wolfgang Willrich.

N.B. Many have interpreted this post in a way I had no intended. Phenotype should not dictate anything at all in an Aryanist society. Phenotype is merely a means to identify the groups of people with the greatest occurrence of Aryan traits.

Many seem to be focussing on the BNP for the upcoming elections in Britain and the party’s faults with their platform, ideology and leadership. This will be an article regarding what I believe is the unsurprising result of British culture, history and its people.

When one looks at Britain, one sees many similarities with America. Both are “exceptionalist”, in that, they believe that they are exceptions to the rules governing everything else. They both consider themselves to be great powers, as nations which will be remembered, and will continue to be great, until the end of time due to their endless contributions to humanity. And both were formed upon abstract and undefined concepts in a manner which constantly reaffirms their own morality and just-cause. After making these observations, one should note that they are all characteristics of a thoroughly Tribalist spirit.

Britain’s history should prove sufficiently that:

• Britons are an amalgamation of several racial groups, resulting in a non-Aryan populous that has been suppressed by Anglo-Saxon rulers
• Britain is spiritually deprived due to its confused soul
• Britain has only ever used its power to damage the rest of Europe

These points should force the conclusion that Britain, like it has from its inception, is a barrier to Aryandom and Aryanism itself. It will always oppose Aryanism because, to exist, it must. It has proven this time and time again. Most importantly, for Aryanists, we should not let our idealism cause us to misplace our faith and altruism in Britain’s friendship.

The British National Party, and the White Nationalism upon which it is based, is the political descendent of this bastardised country. I doubt that the BNP will be successful in anything more than increasing their votes marginally. However, the BNP is the closest Britain will ever get to Aryanism. This is no reason to support the BNP. It is the reason to ignore Britain in our political motives – Britain is lost, in fact, Aryanism never even had a hold on that “green and pleasant land”.

Regarding the BNP’s mainstream aspirations, all that needs to be said is that they wish to replace the immigrants with themselves as the sole subjects of their Jewish masters. The BNP is a “Revolt”, as defined on the glossary page. The BNP, and indeed the British people, do not care about the direction of their country, only the means of accomplishing it; for they know, their country does not have any direction beyond its self-fulfilling promises of “freedom”, “justice”, etc..

Put bluntly, Britain should not be the focus of our attentions. When the time comes, and indeed it will, Britain must simply be crushed without any illusions of possible friendship.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7f8lprxiOFc&fmt=18&w=505&h=310&rel=0

Election Results

The results are as I had suspected. The British National Party took 2 seats with 6.5% in the European Elections. Interestingly, only 14 million people of a 40 million electorate voted – a sign of British fatalism regarding their power and influence over politics. This is also perhaps the main reason for the increase in the BNP’s popularity. The growing discontent and helplessness amongst the British electorate, as well as the latest scandal involing the expenses of MPs has been capitalised upon by the BNP. This boost is thus rather small and will, I suspect, be temporary. Unless the BNP receives even larger – and thus blatantly obvious – support it will not increase its popularity in the next elections.

The results can be viewed on the BBC’s website.

The results for all the countries in the 2004 and 2009 European elections can also be viewed on the BBC’s website.

The problem of scapegoating is important to how we view ourselves and our enemy and is itself detrimental to Aryanism. Scapegoating Jews, or anyone other group, is the result of a partial or complete denial of the fallibility of Gentiles. Aryanists should easily be capable of discerning between what is the result of the Jews and what is the result of ourselves.

Many of us will have experiences to draw from where scapegoating has been the cause of some obscene claims. When anti-Jewish websites attempt to write articles on certain periods of history, or certain groups from history, nearly all blame the smallest of perceived discrepancies on nothing short of total Jewish control of the subject-matter. Examples I have come across are too numerous to fully list. The most notable are claims that “Jewish banksters” caused the Dark Ages through contraction of the money supply. This is simply, again, confusion between actual Jewish power and Gentile fallibility. Some find it almost inconceivable that the world would not be perfect if the Jew no longer had any power; and, subsequently, blames any part of history that is not of sufficient quality, in whatever form and by whatever subjective means, to be thoroughly Jewish. Others that are more well-known include: the purported Jewish ancestry of nearly every historical figure; the Jewish origins of many of the modern institutions (Vatican, Banks, etc.); and the long list of perceived Jewish ideas and concepts. This is nothing more than the result of burdening the fools of the anti-Jewish movement with too much knowledge and a shortage of wisdom.

The material relationship between Jews and Aryans is one of parasitism. However, the spiritual relationship; the relationship which is most evident throughout history, is a separate phenomenon. While the Jews themselves have been quite successful in their destruction of; first the Aryan, and then the Gentile spirit, the problem that is the essence of their success that has existed long before the two groups had any contact of note, is the Aryan himself. It has been said before, but without the necessary emphasis. While the Jews have cleverly exploited Gentile weaknesses, it is not unthinkable that even without the existence of the Jews, Gentiles would follow a similar path. For this reason, it should be evident that most of history is not the result of the plotting of some clever Jews, but in-group fallibility. Every Aryan civilisation has caused its own degradation. In this way, the Trans-Atlantic Slave trade should not be viewed any differently to the Slave trades of Rome, nor should any figure or period with negative connotations be blamed on the influence of the Jews.

The core of this scapegoating problem is, as stated above, a problem of the inclusion of the insufficiently intelligent within the intellectual ranks of this anti-Jewish movement. For the Aryanist movement, we should aim for action and not moribund, relentless; and worst of all, pointless, pseudo-inquiry and rejection of actual authority. This is required, for the reason the unintelligent are included amongst the intellectuals is primarily because there is nothing to do in the anti-Jewish movement but speculate on this or that historical or contemporary person, era or idea. This is opposed to any group which supports the concept of a victory by informing, that “we” will be victorious simply by “awakening the masses” through ceaseless flooding of pseudo-intellectual and historical information. While information is definitely important in swaying the masses, it is only information in small doses; and preferably with proportionately high emotional content, that is necessary. This way, the prevention of the unintelligent from contradicting the intellectuals; and because of their numbers, overwhelming them, becomes as simple as restricting our propaganda efforts to a generalised and condensed format.

However, there are also a number of causes which pollute the propaganda and beliefs of those intelligent enough to be involved with the intellectuals. I think the fundamental issue is a lack of respect and a lack of thought. The majority of the anti-Jewish movement is composed of Americans who were born after the 1970s. As is stereotypically the case, they lack both respect and thought and indulge in their opposites. None are too afraid to accuse a certain person of historical value of being a Jew after only an hour of research. Similarly, many are under the illusion that their opinions, based on typically immature insights, opinions and a lack of wisdom, are actually of substance. Perhaps one of the reasons the anti-Jewish movement is having so much trouble is precisely because of this. For those in the past lacked the degree of, and in some cases any, historical precedence – at least that they were aware of – that proved their beliefs. Even in the case of National Socialist Germany, many may notice that certain members of the Elite were comparatively un-educated on the “Jewish Problem”. Despite this, the National Socialists were completely capable of forming proper policy and establishing an “official line” on the subject. While we are far more informed, we lack any wisdom. Instead of thinking, we give our opinions. Instead of analysing, we wait for someone else to do so, in order to reproduce the same analysis with alterations fitting our own opinions. All in all, this is the result of the badly parented younger generations who have been nurtured to the point of a collective egotistical narcissism.

An enormous amount of collective dysfunction are part of this problem, but I believe the above are the most detrimental. While they do not yet effect Aryanism, they will with its expansion. For this reason, we must target the right groups with our propaganda and our members must be able to follow without fully understanding the situation. We must entice the Elite with Aryanist spirit and the masses with a party platform. All in all, if we are able to create loyalty, we will be able to successfully create a mainstream movement which does not suffer from the usual side-effects of division, factionalism and fragility.