Survivalism vs Militarism

 

“Both of us were about to capitulate facing spiritual breakdown. Then we helped each other to stand tall and did not falter. My answer was: Resistance!
You challenged your fate. To surmount or to die! It was not yet time. Therefore you became a victim. Your answer was: Death!
I stood in front of your grave; in radiating sunshine there was a still, green mound. And it was preaching about mortality. My answer was: Resurrection.” – Joseph Goebbels

Fighting skills can be learned through instruction and mastered through training by any able-bodied person, but a belief common to many ancient civilizations was that the warrior spirit is an attribute of personality. A fighter without this spirit, no matter how talented in fighting, is merely a bully and a thug. The IDF, or Golden Dawn, for all their proficiency in organized bloodshed, will never be warriors worthy of any amount of respect whatsoever. This is because they are not militarists, but merely survivalists who have acquired fighting skills to bolster their survivalism.

One of the most bifurcated Hitler quotes of all time is the following: “He who is not willing to fight does not deserve to live.” The survivalist interprets it to mean: “If you want to stay alive, then fight [for your survival].” The militarist interprets it to mean: “If not to fight [for a purpose], why bother staying alive at all?” These two readings are reflections of two diametrically opposed perspectives. The survivalist reading presumes instrinsic value to life, and then recommends fighting as a means to secure life. The militarist reading presumes absence of intrinsic value to life, and then recommends fighting in service to a genuine purpose as the only way by which life - as a means towards that purpose – could have any value.

This bifurcation is the root of divergence between neo-Nazis and authentic National Socialists. More generally, it is the most unbridgeable difference between non-Aryans, all of whom are survivalists at heart, and Aryans, all of whom are militarists at heart. Can you guess which reading Zionist academia promotes? And which reading we promote to anti-Zionists?

“The GOYIM will bow down before us, if for no other reason but to get the right to exist.” – Protocols of Zion

“As soon as man is called upon to struggle for purely material causes he will avoid death as best he can; for death and the enjoyment of the material fruits of a victory are quite incompatible concepts.” – Adolf Hitler

Hitler made every effort to emphasize that National Socialist Germany was “not warlike, but soldierly”. Understanding authentic National Socialism today more than ever depends on recognizing this distinction.

The Clash of Worldviews

“We have now arrived at the stage of our human evolution when we can not only, and for the first time, consciously understand ourselves, but when we can consciously decide how we are to react, and what it is that we should do.” – David Myatt

What we are all looking at

What the Jew sees

  What the Gentile sees

What the Aryan sees

Survivalism is the principle of choosing life over death in all circumstances. It is ignobility manifest, as it ensures that whenever slavery and death are the only available options, slavery will be chosen, contrary to David Myatt’s advice: “A man or woman of honour is prepared to die – if necessary by their own hand – rather than suffer the indignity of having to do anything dishonourable.” For this reason, slavemasters have always valued and demographically promoted the trait of survivalism (fear of death) among their slaves.

The non-Aryan mind has never evolved beyond survivalism, which requires the ability to destroy the abstraction of the self. This is not to say that non-Aryans do not recognize on a pragmatic level the negative consequences of selfishness; apparent exhortations to “unselfishness” are found in both Judaism and many Gentile ideologies. However, instead of attacking the abstraction of the self, they appeal merely to exchanging a smaller-scale self for a larger-scale self. Their arguments are limited to how the survival of the individual can prove detrimental to the survival of the collective, or how the survival of the subgroup can prove detrimental to the survival of the supergroup, or how short-term survival can prove detrimental to long-term survival.  In other words, instead of opposing survivalism, they chastise the survivalist for being not survivalist enough, arguing that if he were more survivalist, he would think in terms of the survival of a bigger or more durable entity.

“Jews act in concord only when a common danger threatens them or a common prey attracts them. … It would be a complete mistake to interpret the mutual help which the Jews render one another when they have to fight – or, to put it more accurately, to exploit – their fellow being, as the expression of a certain idealistic spirit of sacrifice.” – Adolf Hitler

“The aims of these people — of the men within Time, par excellence, — are always selfish aims, even when, owing to their material magnitude and historical importance, they transcend immeasurably any one man’s life, as they actually do, sometimes.” – Savitri Devi

This method of reasoning by enlargement is no less ridiculous to the Aryan mind than trying to borrow one’s way out of debt by paying off a smaller loan using a larger loan. Even more ridiculous is the concept of survivalism itself. This is because the Aryan mind is the consummate militarist mind.

“During the war some fellows carried a Bible in their rucksack, others carried something else; I had Schopenhauer in my rucksack throughout the entire war.” – Adolf Hitler

Militarism is the concept of the mission - an elementary concept taught in all military training institutions. A troop unit with a mission devotes itself to completing the mission no matter what. From the moment the mission is given, the unit does not think about survival except in the context of living long enough to complete the mission. Obviously, it is the duty of the unit to keep itself alive in any circumstance where its death will jeopardize completion of the mission. But by the same token, should completion of the mission require the unit’s death, it is equally the duty of the unit to die without hesitation.

“What distinguishes Vindex and the new warrior clans of Vindex is their vigorous, and living, warrior belief that honour is more important, more valuable, than their own lives, so that they are ready, eager and indeed more than willing to fight and if necessary die in pursuit of an honourable duty they have sworn to do.” – David Myatt

Key to this is one requirement: the mission must have a well-defined completion point. In Hitler’s words: “New champions are attracted to a cause by the appeal of great sacrifices made for its sake, until that indomitable spirit is finally crowned with success.” Any so-called ‘mission’ lacking such a completion point would be rejected on the spot by any competent unit leader. Militarists do not do anything which cannot be completed.

Survival has no completion point. One can, by definition, never ‘finish surviving’; each day survived only brings another day to survive. As such, militarism rejects survivalism and all survival-based directives. Jews and Gentiles have troops willing to die too, but invariably for the survival of some other Jewish or Gentile entity respectively, rather than for a mission. They are not militarists, but merely survivalists reasoning by enlargement.

A mission can only be defined in terms of the defeat of an enemy, for only in this way does a completion point exist. This way of thinking is innate to the innermost Aryan spirit that not only has no desire for material existence but indeed is impatient for the day when we can wrap up and leave, yet cannot in good conscience abandon the world to a fate of enslavement by our enemies, thus cannot depart until we have removed our enemies first. In Hitler’s words: “Before the opposition to it can disappear, the malady itself must disappear.” This attitude alone is militarism wholly untainted by survivalism.

 Totenkopf

The militarist, like any dutiful soldier on a mission, is duty-bound to complete his mission with haste. He tries his best to spend no more time than is necessary in the war zone, and certainly does not deliberately prolong the duration of action. In Hitler’s words: “A war-leader is what I am against my own will. If I apply my mind to military problems, that’s because for the moment I know that nobody would succeed better at this than I can.” This is in contrast to the survivalist, whose entire existence is an exercise in procrastination: the longer the time survived, the more successful the survivalist considers himself.

 Gyokusai

The survivalist is a preservationist: he believes that perpetuation of what already exists requires no justification. He is only against perpetuation of something if it poses a threat to something else whose perpetuation he desires more. In contrast, the militarist requires justification for everything according to one question: is it needed for the mission? We are fundamentally defined by what we are against; we are for something only conditionally upon that thing being helpful in fighting what we are against.

 Shahid

“What a responsibility! What a hard combat! To resurrect all the dead who have not died, to reach the end of the Great Work, to vindicate Lucifer, to give birth and Light to the Son of Man, the Son of Death.” – Miguel Serrano

In short, the survivalist culture defines its enemies as whoever threatens itself, whereas the militarist culture defines itself by who its enemies are.

Let the Storm Break Loose

“The privileged ones — the wise — are those few who, being fully aware of the increasing worthlessness of present-day mankind and of its much-applauded “progress,” know how little there is to be lost in the coming crash and look forward to it.” – Savitri Devi

How can one terrorist with a handgun dominate an entire room of people, when the number of people in the room greatly exceeds the number of bullets in the handgun? Analytically, combat odds are in clear favour of the people in the room, since once the handgun is empty, the remaining people combined can be expected to defeat the terrorist. However, this calculation assumes militarism (ie. willingness to work solely for the purpose of defeating the terrorist) among the people in the room, which is rarely the case. It is more likely that the people in the room are dominated by survivalism (ie. the priority not to defeat the terrorist, but to keep themselves alive). Even if the handgun only has six rounds, no survivalists will want to be among the six who must be shot by the terrorist before the terrorist can be defeated, thus none will act. By the desire of each to survive, all are enslaved.

Now consider the same dynamics in play on a world scale. How can the single terrorist Jewish state of Israel and the numerically tiny international Jewish diaspora dominate the entire planet? Doubtless the IDF has a formidable arsenal, including nuclear, chemical and biological weapons, robots, satellites and other technology that we probably do not even know about yet. But I consider it unlikely that the IDF can defeat in combat the rest of the world combined. Even in nuclear war, Israel is decidedly disadvantaged due to its relatively small land area.

The only reason for Jewish power is Gentilism ie. fear of death on the tribal scale. Gentiles are not determined to defeat Zionism if to do so requires the end of their own tribal identity. As such, Jews need only strategically bond the Jewish identity and the Gentile identity in symbiosis, and Jewish continuance is assured as Gentiles seek their own continuance as a higher priority than Jewish dissolution. (This is why the Jewish media gives people like David Duke (Gentile) free publicity: his ideology does not threaten Jewry.) Gentiles cannot be anti-Zionists. The two concepts are mutually exclusive. One who is “pro-” something cannot be “anti-” anything, ever, because whenever forced to choose between the two he will inevitably make the survivalist choice.

“Our war aim does not consist in reaching certain lines, but in the physical destruction of the enemy.” – Adolf Hitler

Hereupon those of us who consider ourselves anti-Zionists must ask ourselves and answer honestly: what is the real reason why we have declared our sworn enemies as such? Is it because we fear the danger to our own in the future if we do not take a stand now? Is it because of the suffering to which they have subjected us as their Goys throughout the past? Or is it simply because of we recognize the evil that they are in themselves, irrespective of whether or not it affects us? If the first reason, would we then be satisfied with a guarantee of future liberty for ourselves and our descendants while Jews dominate the rest of the world? If the second reason, would we then be satisfied with full reparations, or perhaps to take our turn as slavemaster instead of slave? Thus it is the third reason alone which qualifies us as true anti-Zionists - those known in Jewish lore as Amalek.

“Punishment is not in the first instance a means of education as our humanitarians wish to persuade us. Punishment is also not revenge. Punishment is, and here we are discussing punishment for dishonourable behaviour, simply the singling out of types and natures alien to our type.” – Alfred Rosenberg

Judaism is the most perfectly formulated survivalist ideology in human history. Judaism sets the standard against which all other survivalist ideologies are measured. All Gentile survivalist ideologies are but clumsy imitations of Judaism, and the less clumsy they are, the more they resemble Judaism in content. Jews are happy to encourage Gentiles in their own survivalist ideologies because this keeps them playing by values under which Judaism – and its political expression in Zionism - has been the consistent champion for 5000 years or more.

To say that Aryanism was specifically designed to counter Zionism is no exaggeration. The only mentality that can trump survivalism is militarism. Judaism knows this very well; in the Midrash it is written: “When Israel came out of Egypt, and Yahweh split the sea before them and drowned the Egyptians within it, the fear of them fell upon all the nations. But when Amalek came and challenged them, although he received his due from them, he cooled the awe of the nations of the world for them. … Yahweh’s name is not complete, nor his throne complete, until the memory of Amalek will be lost.” The only mentality that can trump the Jewish (or Gentile) will to survive at any cost is the Aryan will that the death of every last one of us matters not so long as every last one of our enemies disappears with us. This is the asceticism of fury known to all heroic warriors, to which Joseph Goebbels alluded when he said: “If the day should ever come when we must go, if some day we are compelled to leave the scene of history, we will slam the door so hard that the universe will shake and mankind will stand back in stupefaction.”  This is the only spirit by which we can be sure to defeat the last line of Zionist defence known as the Samson Option when the day comes to confront it. This is the noble road towards the perfection of the Arhat – the Foe Destroyer.

“Man must deal the final blow to those whose downfall is destined by God.” – Adolf Hitler