Archive for the “Elysium” Category

Elysium’s posts.

Over the past year or so the concept that the races, broadly defined as “White”, “Black”, “Asian”, “Arabic”, and sometimes “Native American”, should unite as a common front against Jewish domination has been influential amongst the otherwise aware theorists and commentators on Jewish control. The concept has caused the opposite of its aim; a passionate disunity, fueled by raw emotion and an embarrassing display of the primitive nature of men. This stalemate and bitter rivalry must be concluded either through a continuation of the unification concept or its rejection.

I think it is first important to withdraw from the clinging to this notion of unification for a proper analysis. To analyse and evaluate this concept, the reasons for and against its adoption should first be established. Subsequently, a decision must be made regarding what constitutes unification across racial lines. Is it a multiracial melting pot or more of a separatist alliance of nations and races? The desired conduct between nations and races should be established and the short and long-term goals of this unification concept should be developed. Overall, the current attempt at racial unification and cooperation is a weak and ill-thought out attempt which could have only been destined for failure.

The role Afrocentrism has played in this unification has been perhaps one of the main causes of its failure. Another attempt, lacking in logic, to create an equal footing, particularly between “Whites” and “Blacks”, turned into what is inevitably going to be the case: another form of supremacism. In an attempt to reduce or remove any notions of racial supremacy held by “Whites”; “Blacks”, who are involved in this racial unification against Jewish control of all goyim, have resorted to Afrocentric rhetoric. In doing so, they are promoting one supremacism for another. It has been started previously that the Jews create circular relationships, beliefs, structures and concepts in order to divide and paralyse the goyim. Furthermore, we can see the role of Jews play a more direct role in Afrocentrism. Afrocentrists, particularly those involved in the movement against Jewish control, are quick to point out that the author of two anti-Afrocentric books, one addressing Afrocentrism in general and one addressing “Black Athena”, Mary Lefkowitz, is a Jew.

Just as many are quick to point out the funding of Hitler by not only American bankers, but also Jews, as a reason to discard Hitler as “another puppet”. However, when one has properly studied Jewish behaviour throughout history, a short analysis of these two cases will prove interesting. Just as the Jews enjoy constant division, they also thrive with never-ending and circular debate. An example of this is the constant battles between Capitalism and Socialism, both being instigated and promoted by Jews or those of Jewish spirit. It should go without saying that Mary Lefkowitz is only one point of this circular debate. Her book, “Black Athena Revisited”, is addressed as a rebuttal to the book, “Black Athena”, by Martin Bernal, who is also a Jew. It is now obvious that Afrocentrism is simply a ploy in order for the goyim to react primitively and naturally to perceived threats against the nation or race they associate with.

Once racial unification and cooperation has been properly analysed and assessed, it should either be fully adopted as a fundamental part of the movement?s philosophy or totally discarded. Half attempts like has already occurred can only result in a repeat of the current disunity and fragmentation. However, it is also important to note that unity does not exclusively mean the integration of all similar beliefs. It is far more beneficial to have proper unity amongst a smaller group than less unity amongst an all-inclusive group.

If racial unification and cooperation is adopted as a legitimate tenant, then neither the constant inclusion nor the total exclusion of race from all other topics should be desired. Total exclusion leaves the movement easy prey to infiltrators who can easily create disunity and an over accentuation of race can cause what has already happened, a replacement of one supremacism over another.

Comments No Comments »

article-banner6

A fundamental component of any revolutionary movement is an overall Weltanschauung. For a movement, this is derived from its outlook on history. This should not be confused with an improvised or impromptu refutation of sections of history which are only incomplete applications of the historical component of Aryanism. This historical outlook must stem from the movement’s Weltanschauung and must not be empirical. In due course, the completed historical outlook will be applied to history itself and the movement’s views of the eras and periods will be formulated using its Weltanschauung and historical outlook.

The Aryanist movement already has the foundations of a Weltanschauung. All that is remaining is the removal of contradictions and confusing concepts and its general improvement in quantity. The historical outlook should be a general, overall and firm view through which history can be interpreted. This will ensure that we form more accurate views of the past and thus the present and future.

The most obvious need for this is shown with the abundance of focus directed at “Jewish crimes” such as the attack on the USS Liberty. It should be stressed that these should only be employed for propaganda purposes. Focus on these events is only beneficial for causing emotional reactions as they are evidently insignificant on a historical scale. And this is what the Aryanist movement is lacking, insofar as it views particular events through a vague Weltanschauung and does not apply this Weltanschauung – and thus a historical outlook – to history in general for meaning and understanding.

A symptom of this lack of historical outlook is shown in the “truther” crowds. I do not use the word ‘movement’ for movement requires a direction, which the “truthers”, particularly those of Alex Jones, lack because of the absence of any paradigm shift in worldview upon awakening. Quite often the truthers will place Adolf Hitler alongside George Bush, Mao Zedong or a Rothschild. This is solely due to a lack of historical understanding. They claim that the Reichstag fire and the various American financiers of the NSDAP are evidence enough to view Adolf Hitler (and others) as another tyrannical puppet under the direct control of the Financial Elite. They make similar assumptions with numerous historical figures simply because they view each person as an individual, while ignoring their actions in the context of history.

However, if someone you already disliked stole a loaf of bread from you and then another person, whose identity you did not know, also stole a loaf of bread, your first reaction is to assume that their motives are similar or identical. Sometimes, you may even assume that they are working together. Without knowing the second person, you merge the person into the first because of the evident similarities. However, the inaccuracies become apparent when you consider that a rich man stealing a loaf of bread is completely different from an impoverished man stealing a loaf of bread. This can, and must be, applied to history. In the case of the Reichstag fire, it would have been impossible for anyone of that period to gain enough power to remove the Financial Elite, which is apparently so dreaded by the truthers, without the fire and the subsequent Enabling Act. Thus, a two-part conclusion is reached: firstly, that the truthers and their leaders are indeed not a movement, instead they are a chaotic crowd of motion without direction; and secondly, a historical outlook must be developed for a better understanding of past, present and future.

Another symptom of the lack of historical outlook is the overly pessimistic group of “truthers” and their affiliates. These types generally feel that the Financial Elite is far too powerful for them to defeat. The fatalistic of these are generally inclined towards Apocalyptic and Doomsday beliefs. Nevertheless, this also stems from a lack of historical understanding and scale. Without much difficulty, one can see when and where there existed no Financial Elite which had the same traits as its modern counterpart. However, the focus on particular events in history gives the impression that this Financial Elite has dominated all the civilisations of the world from time immemorial. In turn, this can either lead to a surrender to this power or a naive and dangerous fight against this Elite and all that ever existed, driving these types towards believing in absurdly radical forms of “progress”.

However, while this historical outlook can and should be applied to the larger groups from which we will eventually gain a support base, it is far more important to focus on the historical outlook of the Aryanist movement. While we do not suffer from the same degree of naivety and ignorance as the truthers, we nevertheless lack a vital organ of any revolutionary movement. Particular instances of this lacking are few amongst Aryanists. However, this is only due to a historical outlook of each individual instead of a more central, and perhaps more general, historical outlook and Weltanschauung. The aim is to complete the Aryanist Weltanschauung and develop a historical outlook. From here, a more cohesive and precise movement will emerge.

Adolf Hitler said:

The man who has no sense of history, is like a man who has no ears or eyes

Comments 1 Comment »

article-banner-5

As the engineered economic crisis morphs into a recession the anti-Government elements will now receive an increasing amount of popular support. The masses will be more likely to believe the theories of what were considered in the economic-boom “extreme” groups. As we know, dissent is controlled where necessary. This economic crisis should not be considered a re-run of the Great Depression. This time, they wield far more influence and power over the structures of the governments of the world, but unlike before they also have a firm grasp on the hearts and minds of the masses. They expect this to change with the material losses of the middle and lower classes. Machiavelli said:

People are quicker to forgive the death of a loved one than the confiscation of their property.

Therefore, they have set up numerous diversions and saviours ready for such an occasion. Popular interpretations of these diversions and saviours include Alex Jones and Barack Obama respectively. This is the ideal time to build a movement which will quickly gain a measure of popular support.

As the masses have not been dealt unbearable economic hardship we will not receive any increase in popular appeal. This is the period we should use in order to form the Elite of the movement that will become a party in a single country. The main countries on which to focus should be the nations of Western Europe as it is quite evident that their power is too deeply entrenched in the structure of the United States government as well as its remarkably docile inhabitants. In the USA we will not be able to build a movement that is precise and bears an accurate message. The best we can do is to disrupt the foothold the Jewish bankers have in the USA. It is highly doubtful that the USA will soon have a regime or administration that will deal a decisive blow to overall Jewish power from the bankers to congressmen and bureaucrats. This not to say that the USA should be abandoned. A determined effort should be made, but not for power in the USA but for certain political aims and reforms.

In the early stages of a movement it must be able to form a cohesive and unified Elite. Their beliefs may differ in opinion on minor matters, but differences of opinion mustn’t approach the possibility of disunity and factions in the movement. This Elite must include primarily men who are university-educated and who have the necessary qualifications for their positions. In the beginning this is not a realistic aim, therefore the Elite will be made up of primarily “intellectuals” and will later incorporate the educated men through whom the beliefs of the intellectuals will be carried out. Nevertheless, this Elite must be disciplined and must all have the same core beliefs. Most importantly, very few exceptions and compromises must be made to include people who do not fit this criteria. Once this movement structure is formed a gradual expansion, particularly in positions associated with Propaganda, should occur in a hierarchical fashion. I may post an article in the future with all the positions that are required for the initial phase of this movement.

This Elite must decide on the ends and means of the movement. It must create short and long term goals. A platform must be devised and perhaps a manifesto written, if only for reference amongst the members of the Elite. Positions according to merit must be assigned to members of the Elite and communication between the various sections of the Elite must be developed. Many people of like mind insist that we should all take our signs and “protest” in front of Synagogues or confront congressmen despite the impracticality of it. It is stupidity alone that would dictate a man with a degree in history who is of the same mindset as is compatible with this movement is encouraged to use his time and effort performing unimportant tasks. Such tasks should be the responsibility of those most adept with Propaganda and their staff.

Once this Elite is formed it should expand by targeting those already involved in the affiliated groups, parties and movements. Again, nothing short of a fundamental agreement should be reached before assimilation of these figures or groups into this movement. From here, previously exposed groups such as “truthers”, anti-NWO groups, Tribalists and the like should be targeted for suitable individuals to incorporate into the movement. It must be stressed again that major compromises only result in disunity and that the initial benefits of such an incorporation will be outweighed by the inevitable creation of factions that will occur. It is much better to keep this Elite small and unified than vice versa. For this reason, groups led by the likes of Alex Jones will be easy targets because of their lack of unity.

Without the formation of this Elite any efforts at Propaganda are pointless as they do not bring the frustrations of the masses, nor the skills of intellectuals and the educated, into the movement.

Comments 3 Comments »

article-banner4

Within our movement and its associated or affiliated branches there is an overriding and fanatical anti-Communism. This being so, instead of distancing oneself from Capitalism many amongst us adopt it as the axis upon which the world operates; while, at the same time, we dissociate ourselves from the negative aspects of Capitalism. We refer to Capitalism and “the West” as if they were the messengers of the correct worldview and judge everything based on its principles and theories that are incorrectly considered fact. This disease is greatest in economic theory and philosophy.

While we associated the economic theories adopted by Communist, more precisely Bolshevist, regimes with the ill-effects it had on its subjects as in the case of Stalinist Russia, our anti-Capitalism is somewhat limited to a bourgeois form of class-warfare. We see far fewer “atrocities” committed by the Capitalist states throughout history and thus our anti-Capitalism is weakened and suffers from a moderate tone. This is a false perception. Our anti-Capitalism and anti-Communism must be primarily, if not solely, based on principle. The effects of both systems should only be employed for propaganda purposes, of which we mustn’t indulge.

Capitalism and Communism both have roots in the same fatalist, materialist and identifiably Jewish spirit. On that principle alone we should not adopt Communist or Capitalist economic theories – for they are both theories that do not have Aryan roots. To adopt them entirely or partially is the acceptance of materialist principles that should not plague Aryanism. While our own economic theories may contain elements found in either Capitalist or Communist economics it does not symbolise an acceptance of Jewish principles unless they are derived from such worldviews and theories.

Therefore, we should not associate with Conservatives who preach laissez-faire Capitalism as in the case of Ron Paul or any espousing the gospel of the gold-standard. This must be the case with any preachers of Capitalist or Communist thought, no matter to what degree. Our economic theories should derive solely from Aryan sources without consideration to whether they coincide with Capitalist or Communist theories. For this, we must use history as our guide.

Capitalism and Communism must be considered as two sides of the same coin. Both are fatalist, materialist and classist. It should go without saying that based merely on principle – that Capitalism and Communism are notably anti-Aryan – their exclusion from our worldview and economic theories is a priority.

Comments 1 Comment »

article-banner3

This article will be open-ended as I hope that others will be able to comment or write their own articles in response.

Is Julius Evola an Aryanist? Is Traditionalism, as espoused by Evola, Aryanism? Should Evola’s works be incorporated into Aryanism?

These questions are hard to answer in a definite manner because, although overall Evola’s Traditionalism is similar, there are many omissions and contradictions on Evola’s part if he were describing the common forms of Aryanism.

Aryanism is usually expressed in a form of Socialism with a dismissive attitude towards the caste system or to any ?traditionalist? form of social hierarchy. In Revolt Against the Modern World, Evola presents the caste system, particularly the ascetic, virile and warrior upper caste, to be the fundamental aspect of creating and maintaining a Traditionalist society. An obvious comparison to a commonly accepted form of Aryanism would be the Schutzstaffel and Waffen-SS as an almost exact emulation of this warrior caste.

Another belief held amongst Aryanists, particularly those of the past, is that there once existed a pure Aryan race and civilisation, which after numerous disasters was destroyed and dispersed, with the race losing its purity by intermingling with the peoples of the earth. This belief is identical to Evola’s, except that Evola does not explicitly use the word Aryan. He also explains the various ages (Doctrines of the Four Ages) associated with the fall of this civilisation and the popular myths associated with them, most notable of which is Atlantis.

Increasingly it appears that Evola is an Aryanist who calls himself a Traditionalist, or perhaps vice-versa.

Modern Aryanists also take liberalised views on common ideological issues of which include: women; culture; nationalism; economics; science; and the masses. It is common to see an unwillingness to discuss such uncomfortable topics in depth. This is where Traditionalism and Aryanism have far-reaching contradictions. Evola, in Revolt Against the Modern World, dictates the Traditionalist stance on most of the above-mentioned. However, Aryanism does not know what it believes and thus the inclusion of Julius Evola into Aryanism becomes very much a matter of personal opinion.

Therefore, our own various opinions should be discarded while we dictate the Aryanist perspective on particularly women, culture and economics. Without at least a general idea of what Aryanism is in terms of such common place concerns, Aryanists will not be able to determine what is or is not part of this Weltanschauung.

Comments 9 Comments »

article-banner2

It is a very popular assumption amongst “truthers”, anti-Zionists, White Nationalists and their associated groups that the right to bear arms was and remains one of the protections against tyranny. In this article I would like to point out that this assumption is not necessarily correct. It should be noted that it is up to your own judgment as to whether or not you will entertain this belief further.

The main theme of this article will be the false sense of security that the right to bear arms gives to Americans. This belief that guns are a line, or the final line, of protection against tyrannical governments is not as absolute as it may seem. For the mundane materialist, the gun may seem as his best defence against his enemy. One question; however, destroys this absolute. Why is it that Americans do not act, while those with less rights and freedoms continue their struggles year after year? Why do Americans, with their stockpile of guns and concrete bunkers, prove ineffective against their governments and enemies, while the Palestinians and Iraqi resistance prove so effective? Of course, it goes without saying that a material weapon is needed to continue struggle. However, as we can see, it is not the right to bear arms that has ever provided protection from internal enemies. What truly guarantees this is ?the will?.

While the American sits on his couch, with his Kool-Aid, watching the Superbowl, resistance is the last thing on his mind. No matter what arsenal the American has, it has proven ineffective. This is entirely because of will. Even those who are not the average ignorant American; those who claim to be part of the “resistance”, continue to beat their drums and chant, “from my cold dead hands”. We know where this ends. The man who still has fragments of his rights and freedoms, particularly the American, waits for his enemy to strike while confident of his victory. Always, this results in massacres of these “resistance fighters”. Many miles away; however, the Palestinian who barely has the funds and means to feed himself, carries his flag against the enemy. And, as we know, it is not Americans with guns, the many millions of useless, demoralised and weak-minded gun owners, who are feared by our enemies. It is the young man, grasping a stone, who is the true fighter - a man of struggle. No matter what the man of struggle must face, he continues his advance.

It should be evident to the audience that the right to bear arms means nothing. As has been demonstrated in New Orleans, the gun owner without will is not a man of struggle at all. And perhaps if Americans never had the right to bear arms they would depend more on their will than grotesque and petit-bourgeois manifestations of material intimidation and power.

Comments 1 Comment »

article-banner1

Aryanism is not a movement and has arguably never been one. However, one can consider ideologies such as National Socialism as interpretations of Aryanism. The reason for Aryanism’s failure is because it is not a movement, an organisation, or an entity in any sense. More precisely, Aryanism has no definition, no common vocabulary, no parameters, very few of its own literature, as well as no hierarchy or leadership. Here lies the reason for Aryanism’s failure in either its purest form or any interpretation such as National Socialism, or to a lesser extent, Fascism.

I propose, for the near future, that Aryanism must first be defined. From this definition, all those who consider themselves Aryanists by this new definition should be brought together. With this group, those with suitable attitudes, abilities and characteristics shall form the movement’s Elite. To do this, an extensive list of definitions and vocabulary should be created in order to clarify misunderstandings and to better understand dissenting opinions. Moreover, this glossary should be used to set borders, or parameters, on what is Aryanist and what is not. From here, a leader or leaders should be chosen to form the highest level of the new hierarchy. Then, an organisation must be formed which acts as a centralised authority for Aryanists.

Once the above is accomplished suitable literature must be produced and disseminated. High-value targets should be prioritised. We should all know by now that the masses are next to worthless. We should start with integrating and converting the websites, organisations; but more importantly, those running them, into the centralised organisation. This will naturally increase exposure and sway many of the devout followers of these people towards our sphere of influence.

The most important aspect of this must be stressed. With a common vocabulary, leadership, hierarchy, centralised authority and adequate planning, the rest will come in time.

Comments 1 Comment »