With the gigantic catastrophe of 1945, the greatest setback to human evolution in recorded history, still close behind us, its chilling and choking memory still omnipresent, and before us difficulties and disadvantages so gigantic as to deny us any immediate or early prospect of gaining power over our respective countries, what can be done?
One option it may be instantly stated with certainty we do not have in this doleful situation, and whereby it is vastly less doleful than otherwise, is of course to give up.
This is something which a real National Socialist is by nature and by definition utterly incapable of doing because the will to struggle, which is the elixir of National Socialism, is in the very bones of his being.
Without it he would not be who he is, but some spiritual eunuch of the living dead. A real National Socialist is one who, in the last resort, even if it could be proved to him with mathematical certainty that physical defeat would attend all his efforts, would still go on fighting.
He would do so, inflicting as much punishment as possible on the enemy, and with a warrior’s song in his heart, because it is his nature to do so, and because a victory of the spirit is always won thereby.
But having ruled out surrender, what else? In the new convulsive decade of the 1980s is National Socialism to become at best the minute defiant echo of a bygone age, a barren exercise in nostalgia, or at worst the puerile mummery of morons and misfits; or is it to be subjected to cosmetic surgery which National Socialism amounts to castration in order to fit the times? Or is there a way in which it can both respond to circumstances with hope of success, and yet retain its integrity?
Now, on the threshold of a new decade, is high time for some careful and comprehensive stocktaking which must begin with a sharp scrutiny and a complete survey of our ideology.
Changing and Unchanging Creed
A creed is not, while it thrives, a static conception, but something lifelike, growing in the minds of its upholders. Absolute fixity comes only with what amounts to death and mummification.
The measure of its historical stature, its relevance and consequent longevity, lies in its fusion of the timeless and the time-full, or the extent to which it combines a permanent constancy of basic principle with a supple adaptability of form and method to time and place, along with a capacity to grow by the development of its potentialities. Where adaptability encroaches on basic principle itself, modifying this in the pursuit of expediency, the trespass creates its own penalty in the fatal illusion of quicker and easier success, for the creed itself fails and disappears through dismemberment. Therein lies the blindness and folly of compromise.
On the other hand, where inviolability, which belongs to basic principle, is attached to form and method, and where even that change which is pure progression or germination is denied, then the result is no less disastrous. The creed atrophies and becomes a sterile husk because of this particular confusion of the time-full and the timeless. Therein lies the blindness and folly of rigidity.
There is the further complication that ways and means, however optional and variable otherwise, must be consistent with basic principles and thus ultimate objectives. That the ends justify the means is a facile assertion much misunderstood and misapplied in the absence of its corollary, which is that those means must, ipso facto, be in harmony with those ends, which can logically be nothing other than the fulfilment of the basic principles, in order to receive their justification thereby. In fact the ends prescribe the means, and the means, determine the actual results. That is the precise interaction. To repeat an old but worthy analogy: you cannot combat cannibalism by consuming cannibals.
Illusion in Compromise
One cannot promote National Socialism by departing from it, either in the sense of discarding or postponing vital aspects of it, as distinct from truly transitory details of time and place, or resorting to methods which are at variance with basic principles. Those who attempt to do so on the pretext of increasing popularity and quickening victory, and with the assurance that thereafter the real thing will follow, fail to comprehend two facts.
Firstly, they fail to perceive the addictive consequences of compromise, according to which power gained by means of compromise is so likely to be used to retain power by means of compromise.
Secondly, they fail to perceive that the ultimate end or true purpose of National Socialism is not merely a revolution in the state, but a revolution in the minds of men and women. This must begin before and continue after the attainment of authority in the state, and will necessarily be thwarted by any disabling compromise in the course of attaining that authority. In short, power must be gained through National Socialism in order to be sure of the power to implement National Socialism. Otherwise, the great and bitter irony of the exercise is that the nearer and quicker compromise gets you to power, the further it takes you away from your original ideal and objective. So compromise is indeed a fool’s accelerator.
National Socialism today, entering the new decade, is endangered fully as much by those within its nominal ranks who incline to try and modify its essential nature by a compromise of principle or the adopting of a conflicting practice, or to confine it to its antecedents, petrifying it in. the time-capsule of the 1930s and the place-capsule of Germany. The Jew at the microphone or the communist at the Street comer is an enemy readily detected and confronted, but the nominal National Socialist with the weakening words of expediency or the fossilised antiquarian outlook is another more insidious and more injurious menace, effectively an enemy within, albeit unconsciously and unintentionally so.
Rightists and Populists
There are those, on the one hand, who seek to reduce National Socialism to something of the so-called “right,” stifling its supra-national and pan-Aryan implications to present it as nothing more than a militant form of the old nationalism; suppressing its radical economic and social implications to make it an accomplice of capitalism; thus depriving it of its revolutionary content in order to accommodate it within the old order which it exists to overthrow and replace.
Alongside them are some who want instead to pervert it into something of the “left” of the old order by distorting its concern for thorough social justice and economic equity to deny that beneficial extent of private enterprise, that justifiable amount of private property, and that essential degree of personal responsibility for one’s own welfare which is equally its concern; thus reducing it to a form of national bolshevism.
In the same business of seeking in one way or another to make our creed acceptable to the old order, and thus to render the remedy harmless to the disease, are those slick practitioners of political perversion who seek to make political “pop” out of National Socialism, thus defiling it to death on the plea that they are giving it new life.
In the wanton spirit of feeble confession to feckless fashion, they express the foul and ridiculous heresy that to make progress we have to become like the enemy and copy his abominable ways.
They then proceed to pride themselves in their meretricious cleverness in seeking to “modernise” National Socialism by presenting it as “with it,” meaning in accordance with the very trends of decadence it exists to eradicate. They even go to the extent of wanting to dress it up literally in the slovenly jeans which are today’s uniform of democratic degeneracy, to crown it even with the long scruffy hair of the dissipated rabble of ragamuffins comprising the “modem” generation, and to give it as accompaniment even the infernal noise known as “pop” which is the authentic flatulence of multiracialism.
This they favour in blind disregard of the fact that smartness of personal appearance is the inevitable expression of that perception of order against chaos as the secret of the universe which is the pith and kernel of our creed, and that the variations of jungle music are abandonment to chaos in sound as contrary to our creed as anything else.
The habits and paraphernalia of abandonment and reversion to the jungle are being deliberately promoted, no less than all the miasmic claptrap of “permissiveness” and “brotherhood” which goes with them, because of the coarsening and cheapening, spiritually sterilizing and racially dissolvent effect.
Those ultimately responsible for this conditioning of the masses are those for whom there is most profit in an indiscriminate society of banal barbarity, a mongrel herd kept occupied with trivialities and oblivious to ugliness, inspired by the market-cry of the television commercial in its pursuit of electronic happiness as its ethos.
These Elysian fields of bovine contentment constitute the ultimate containment for the goyim in the oncoming Hebrew millennium.
For National Socialism, in mortal conflict with this world wilderness of the zombies, all higher and thus truly human as distinct from animal happiness is not to be sought in itself, but is the satisfaction of fulfilment which is the by-product of service of something greater than self, and wherein courage is the motif, not the superficial and perverse “kindness” which is the ubiquitous poisoned sugar in the deadly diet of democracy.
Dealers in Flotsam and Jetsam
Parallel with the debasing modernists of National Socialism are the equally debasing patrons of the chronic misfits. Because judicious violence in the true service of National Socialism is justifiable as at one with all the other forms of Nature, and because we National Socialists are rebels against the present society of multiracial democracy, they misinterpret this to sanction association with all sorts of other rebels against this and any and every other society, who, with corresponding misunderstanding, conceive National Socialism to be a haven and stamping ground for their kind.
These dealers in flotsam and jetsam are the sort of people who in Britain today resort to increasing manpower by recruiting the mindless oafs called “skinheads,” these tonsured, nihilistic hooligans being against all order, old or new, and for violence for violence’s sake and the pure pleasure of damage and destruction.
The argument of the patrons of the vandals and hooligans is, at its least, the simple admission that they think they can make use of the vandalism and hooliganism, which is the old error of the means defeating the ends, for in truth it is the anti-social ones who make use of them.
At its most, it is the claim that the antisocial ones are the helpless victims of environment, and will be drawn to higher purposes by association with them. Now, if the latter was not merely wishful thinking but an actual fact, the experiment could be justified, but then in proportion to its success such as “skinheads” would manifestly cease to be “skinheads,” whereas in the instances contemplated they remain basically the same.
The problem is always to convert to us, and not in the process of gaining attention and influence to fall into what amounts to conversion to others.
In the cases in question the acceptance of such elements, while they clearly remain such elements, as members and conspicuous participants in marches and other public events indicates the degree of conversion the wrong way, comparable to the psychiatrist who begins to contract the psychosis of his patient.
The “skinheads” have stayed “skinheads” while the supposed National Socialists have become that much less of authentic National Socialists. It is not the former who have been uplifted, but the latter who have been downgraded by the experiment.
These particular protagonists of popularisation, meaning perversion, have committed the cardinal error of thinking that putting National Socialism on the streets means allowing it into the gutter with the garbage. They have depleted it to a crude and negative racial hatred and for superficial anti-Red confrontation in the mode and mood of a mob of football fans for whom National Socialism is an excuse for a “punch up,” and the Swastika a gimmick for shock and scare, and a talisman for mayhem.
A different but no less dangerous debasement from within, being an extreme form of that rigidity which fossilises our creed by failing to cultivate freely and fully the implications of its true principles while slavishly conforming to details which can and should be alterable, comes from those politically superficial and primarily theatrical and positively juvenile exponents, who may be termed “Hollywood Nazis.”
For these exhibitionists dressing up in the costume of the past, treated as a fetish, and posturing and parading as part of the masquerade provides the pleasure of pretence, which is all it is, although the performance undoubtedly has the psychotherapeutic effect of serving to ease the feeling of inadequacy in its performers, in a manner akin to the African savage who dons the skin of a lion as a mantle in the sure belief that he will thereby become invested with the strength and courage of the king of the jungle.
Akin to these performing political playboys, the fancy dress and regalia freaks with their burlesque show, are those who, in their similar bondage to the outward forms of the past, entomb National Socialism in museum of their minds.
Content to confine it to the collection of relics and records, and to participate simply by association with souvenirs, they treat it as a finished phenomenon only to be contemplated in recollection, whereas National Socialist Germany was not the entire and final happening, but the majestic opening act of a continuous work.
Law of Nature
The National Socialism of the Germany of Adolf Hitler, as expressed by its prime exponents, was the first systematic articulation of the orientation of society in conscious harmony with the discerned laws of Nature, as opposed to the harmful contrary artificialities of all other schools of thought.
Perceiving the constant struggle of Nature which is the assertion of existence itself, and the process of the selection of the fit and the rejection of the unfit which is improvement, it saw in the order and pattern and ultimate harmony of the Universe the essence of beauty, and sought actively to conform to and promote this in the arrangements of Man.
Since Nature is totality, National Socialism could only respond by being a totality of outlook, an attitude to everything, not something limited to the territory of politics, and thus a fragment of life. It could not be less than a cosmic philosophy extending to all parts of life in a coherent structure, the spiritual and the cultural no less than the economic and political, and in consequence generating its own scale of values and distinctive code of ethics.
Thus distinguishing itself by casting Man as the fulfilling agent instead of the foe of Nature in an entelechy sought and expressed by living life to the full, National Socialism accordingly dedicated itself to the primary role of race in human affairs, parallel to the role of comparable differentiations in all other living things.
It recognised in the human differentiations both between and within the races the working of the great test of Nature which is life itself, and through which suitability and superiority are established, and thus the ascent of Man on the ladder of creation takes place.
In doing so, it observed the paramount civilizing potential of the Aryan, the obstructive and destructive capacity of the Jew, the decline which is the result of the mixture of the races, and the great need for and benefit of eugenical action within the race.
Applying this same insight, appreciative of the stimulus and the benefit of competition, to the economic sphere, it upheld private enterprise and private property, personal responsibility which is inseparable from competition, and is the acknowledgement of true freedom and the beginning of leadership in self-leadership, and leadership itself as the duty and privilege of superiority. At the same time the same racial awareness which prompted all this prompted also and no less a concern from kinship which enjoined the reconciliation of competition with cooperation and social justice. This called for measures to allow a fair start and free play to human worth, to sustain competition by the prevention of abuses including its suppression by monopoly, to ensure a fair reward to all by the prevention of excessive gain to any, to ensure an adequate living in retirement after a useful working life, to confine money to the service of production and consumption, to encourage the health and strength of the people and their native culture, and to preserve all the natural resources and amenities of this world.
This may be said to be the bedrock of belief, the basis of principle of the creed of National Socialism. Anything less than or different from this makes something other than National Socialism.
Mass Support Not Now
With elements so radical and contents so comprehensive, National Socialism was necessarily a revolutionary creed to overthrow and replace the old unnatural order, not to try and reform it to prolong it. Yet, after an unsuccessful coup in its early days, it finally attained power by way of negotiation, not seizure.
While this was in some respects a safer and easier procedure, since the end beyond this means was the achievement of a revolutionary change in society, the inevitable accommodation thereby and thereafter of elements of the old order carried with it grave impediment at the best and downright sabotage at the worst; and thus made it in other respects a more dangerous and harder procedure.
It may well be a fact that without this accommodation National Socialism would not have come to power at that time, but, if so, it can no less be a fact that because of the consequent hindrance or restraint, the true National Socialist revolution had only just begun, however glorious that beginning, when its opponents from the outside, aided by those on the inside, destroyed it. Furthermore, in the inchoate National Socialist state, far too many nominal National Socialists had only a superficial understanding of the common and simple version of their creed, and no real appreciation of its deeper and ultimate implications. While the terrible shortage of time afforded by destiny makes a powerful excuse for this dilution of the revolution, must we not also consider the mixture of both the masses and the elite in one and the same body, the party, as an error of the past to be avoided in the future?
Our position today is vastly different. We do not possess the support or any near likelihood of the support to make us the necessary bargaining factor to tempt us to any accommodation with the Establishment of the old order, whereby we can be helped to power at the price of impediment to the revolution. Indeed, all the signs are that, unless and until there is a complete breakdown of the old system to administer sufficient of a jolt to the masses to bring them to see sense, they will not come to support National Socialism in sufficient numbers to enable the acquisition of power by any means: election, negotiation, or seizure (which last is in any event only feasible in a breakdown, and then finally justified).
Accordingly any and all efforts in the present period to muster the masses to provide the necessary support for the attainment of power, including the contesting of elections, are doomed to failure, and are a waste of time, money, and energy; and this, whatever the enfeebling compromises to try and coax them by debasing our creed to fit their present debasement, because we cannot in this outbid the old politicians already in power, even by descending to their level.
Conversely, when the time is ripe this ipso facto, will mean that such will be the mood of the masses that they will not be looking for the compromises of ‘moderation,” but the “extremism” of emergency measures in an emergency. Only when they are intolerably fed up will they turn against the old order, and only then will they respond to its replacement: National Socialism.
What Chance Have We?
Have we, therefore, any real chance of ultimate success? Even with the most shrewd preparation and procedure on our part to take advantage of any and all opportunity, will not the enemy, having learnt the lesson of the 1930s, be competent enough to prevent a sufficient breakdown, including an economic collapse, to give us our breakthrough?
The answer is surely that the chance will be there, inevitably so, because the enemy is committed to the forces of breakdown, with consequent danger that they will be turned against him, in necessarily seeking to tear down old traditions and old standards in the course of creating the ultra-materialistic multiracial mankind which is the common aim of all the parties opposed to National Socialism; and because his economic system has such a high inherent proclivity to crises, however great the desire to keep the cattle contented with sufficient fodder and synthetic fun.
But will the masses move against their master even in extremity, or will their spirit be sapped to submission more than sparked to revolt by the process of misrule?
The chance that they will move is heavily related to the fact that, behind its array of illusory liberties, the politics of the enemy in its distinctions of left and right are pre-eminently the politics of the belly.
In consequence, if the belly in the comprehensive meaning of material pleasures anticipates or suffers deprivation, then democracy’s claim to support evaporates.
What we now have to concentrate on is what lies within our power now as the starting point in the chance of chances, and that is to maximise our own potentialities in accord with prevailing circumstances.
Today’s Six Tasks
What does this entail? It entails the following six requirements, and, far from being a matter of gloom, contemporary circumstances should be seen as providing considerable compensation in the ultimate advantage of activities their constraint encourages in response to the exciting challenge of our great adversity.
The lack of short cuts, so prone to be illusory, should oblige our slower advance to be that much more thorough.
Firstly, we have to purify and develop our creed, free from all compromises and omissions of expediency, all confusions, and all contradictions. This is the starting point and matrix of the revolution of the future, and we shall return to this crucial subject in detail shortly.
Secondly, instead of seeking prematurely to mobilise the masses, we have to apply ourselves without this distraction to the prerequisite task which is to build a real elite imbued, as its standard bearers, with our purified and developed creed, and trained as functionaries of the National Socialist state in microcosm in its propagation and implementation.
Thereby, in the time of future opportunity, the essential cadres will exist to step forward, trained and dependable, to take charge of events. Thereafter, in the marshalling of the masses both for the attainment of power and for its subsequent utilisation, those masses will not swamp us, and draw us their way, but instead will be harnessed and led our way by our elite.
The very futility of seeking to organise the masses in present circumstances and the necessity instead to concentrate on the elite, should really be welcomed, not deplored, as a salutary discipline resulting not only in the development of that vital distillation of leadership, the elite, which hitherto has been impeded, if not frustrated, by the organisation of a party campaigning for mass support; but the formulation for the future of a clear and exclusive division, whatever the nomenclature, between that organisation which embodies the elite, and any organisation which formally enrolls the masses who are by nature only meant to be auxiliaries.
The folly of striving vainly against nature to make regular activists, a natural minority, out of the vast majority of people, and thereby creating a weakness by and from numbers in the illusion that quantity in itself means strength, is a vital lesson to be learned now.
Given a real elite, the extent to which lack of numbers can be amply made up for by intensity of belief harder work, greater courage, the acquisition of higher skill, and the employment of greater enterprise, is amazing. Far from a radical, uncompromising creed being injudicious in the present period, it will desirably frighten away the unsuitable many, and attract the desirable minority.
Thirdly, the acquisition of total national power, at one go, being at present out of reach, we must meanwhile give our attention to the acquisition of power in other lesser and more gradual ways.
We must take note of, and practice as far as possible, the art of making revolution by infiltration, gaining power piecemeal by stealth, being successfully practiced by our opponents.
Those who say that communism cannot come in this or that country because of its inability to do so by the overt means of the ballot box or a march on the capital are blind to the fact that power can also be gained bit by bit, slowly but no less surely, through the infiltration of persons to positions of power in all fields and at all levels, and the exercise then of the influence these positions provide.
It is happening right now in country after country where a creed of multiracial equality and collectivism, which amounts to a very substantial first instalment of communism, accompanied by encouragement to many aspects of barbarity as a corrosive to facilitate the revolution in view, is being purveyed by the deliberate agents of infiltration.
With Britain today, communism is not something outside her gates, or restricted within to its overt adherents, but is already functioning in the press, radio, and television, in the race relations and social security networks, and in the schools and the trade unions, because of the number of Reds who have taken power there.
Obviously we are severely handicapped in comparison, but not to the exclusion of all possibilities.
Fourthly, as another form of power snatching in bits and pieces, even if very small bits and pieces, we must give due attention to the promotion of all possible piecemeal implementations now of National Socialism in microcosm as an infiltration of our society of the future into the society of today.
For instance, where National Socialists can set up schools for the education of their children, even as additions where they cannot be substitutes for the orthodox ones; labour service projects for their teenage sons and daughters; business enterprises on thorough National Socialist lines; even whole miniature local communities: in all such we can today anticipate and experiment with our system of the future. Some such projects can have application and benefit to the local area and the local people in general, and, since practice is more potent propaganda than preaching, can lay foundations for future support; while at the same time benefitting us by providing experiment for prototypes in preparation for the future.
In this present period, when desires and efforts to grasp at the state as a whole and at the top are unrealistic, the new radical National Socialism has to show itself by its appropriate concentration on the roots of society, capturing ground from the democratic state at the bottom as it can.
The full extent to which society can be changed short of national state power is a matter which must be thoroughly investigated and appreciated, and then exploited to the utmost.
Fifthly, attention must be given to those deeds of high imagination, high daring, high organisation, which have a proportionately high propaganda impact, winning attention beyond mere words which come cheaply, sensationally asserting the existence of the Movement now and staking its claim for the future in a period when ordinary campaigning for the attention and support of the masses is unprofitable and hence to be eschewed.
These are activities which call for the elite and in turn attract people suitable for the elite, and keep the sword bright and sharp, so that there is no question of a withdrawal from mass activity being a retreat to a political hermitage, which is indeed a very real danger to be guarded against. At their, highest development it may be said to be a matter of applying the principles of Otto Skozeny to political warfare, whereby small elite groups of specially trained men can through the use of the most unconventional audacity achieve results vastly in excess of their numbers.
Our creed is the creed which upholds quality above quantity in life, and, especially in these days when quantity is so obviously not on our side or near at hand, it behoves us to concentrate on the powerful art of making quality make up for that lack of numbers.
Finally, since we need the breakdown of the old order to build the new, the more spanners which can be thrown in the works of the present system, the better.
Its systematic sabotage in every possible way is purposeful commendable demolition for the real National Socialist revolutionary, who appreciates that things have got to get worse before they get better, and that an existing decrepit structure has to be tom down before a new and better edifice can be erected in its a place.
At first glance, however, this might be taken to pose a dilemma by carrying the suggestion that decadence itself is to be encouraged and promoted, but it is resolved by adherence to the criterion that National Socialism as the end justifies all means consistent with National Socialism, but none other.
Development Of Doctrine
To return, now, to the first and foremost of our six great tasks for the 1980s in detail, this may be defined as the pursuit of that revolution of the mind which is the precursor of that revolution in the state leading to the revolution in society. It involves exploring, examining, distinguishing, and declaring the entirety of our creed in its fullest and deepest implications, devoid of the dilutions of expediency, as a pure product of the reason and the spirit.
It then extend to its application in the formulation of schemes and measures to meet the forthcoming problems of our countries and their communities, so that the eternal voice of National Socialism sounds not aged from afar, but youthful from at hand.
In this projection of principles, which are outside and above time and place, to compatible applications in time and place we have to show that National Socialism, not being in principle something peculiar to Germany and the 1930s, but instead universal and ageless, is therefore as native to America and Britain as anywhere else, and as timely relevant now as in the past. In all of this there is much to be done. In doing this we have to investigate and decide the presentation of our creed in the most persuasive form consistent with all its essentials.
This, it needs emphasizing, is the subtle art of bringing people to accept those essentials, and nothing other or less than them, in contrast to compromise which is the omission of essentials in order to secure support, and thereby for something different.
In one and the same process, based on the same penetrating analysis of the mind of the outsider, we have to formulate and perfect our counter-arguments to the hostile arguments of our opponents.
In this we have to succeed in showing that National Socialism, far from being the denial of freedom and justice as depicted by its opponents and believed by the masses, is in truth the optimum increase of both. Hitherto, the power of our opponents and the apathy of the masses have been made the excuse far too much for the downright incompetence of post-war National Socialist presentation which has been woefully unimaginative and clumsy.
In this and our propaganda as a whole, which can be decisive in the battle for the mind, our aim must be to learn to be professionally proficient, and even better than our successful opponents.
In our doctrinal introspection, the life-embracing extent of National Socialism as the creed of man’s conformity to Nature necessarily gives rise to the conception of Man as a functioning aspect of the cosmos, in its great eternal rotational process of growth and decay. In this being, which is both changeful and continuative, death is no absolute extinction, but a transformation whereby the decomposition of one life-form results in the composition of some new life-form, and thus the beginning of a new cycle.
From the soil and its atmosphere we spring by way of its elements and products, on which, directly or indirectly, we depend and which become part of us, and to the soil and its atmosphere we return. To ascribe this earthbound state to Man is not to belittle him, as the believers in a soul which lives on and migrates to a heaven in the sky after the death of the body will contend. Instead it is to evaluate him no less highly in revering Nature that much more by appreciation of his total involvement, which is infinite and eternal, in Nature.
It is not to reduce him to some crude hedonistic materialism, but, in rejection of this, to exalt him in an idealism of this world which is spiritual.
Our cosmic conception of Man, and the struggle which is the meaning of life in its urge for achievement as the expression of identity, the courage against adversity which achievement demands and which is will, the voice of identity, the satisfaction in achievement which is the higher form of happiness, and the role of Race in its fullest sense in this struggle of life: this inevitably constitutes a compulsive scale of values and a consequent code of ethics.
What fulfils Nature; what benefits the race as the servant of Nature; what benefits National Socialism as the servant of the race; are good: what does not is bad. That which truly seeks and secures this good is right. That which does not is wrong.
No other command contrary to this can be accepted by National Socialists. Otherwise there is no National Socialism. Now all this of course rightly raises National Socialism to a religious level, and a question which National Socialists have got to face up to and resolve in the 1980s, as part of their promotion of the revolution of the mind, is whether this is really compatible with what is really Christianity, and, if not, whether now is the time to say so.
It will immediately be objected by some, if not many, that to open up this issue is divisive, and, moreover, at a time of acute numerical weakness when we desperately need all, the adherents and friends we can obtain.
But surely it does not in the long run make for greater strength to maintain an ideological weakness, attempting to reconcile the irreconcilable, even if tacitly so; and surely now is the time to build strongly for the future with clear, courageous, and consistent thought, discarding the contradictions and the inhibitions and the cobwebs.
Certainly there are many otherwise good, and even very good, men and women who somehow, in a blind spot in their minds, manage to allow National Socialism and Christianity to cohabit.
One would hate to hurt them, let alone alienate any of them. Yet, if, as must be, the logic of our creed, and thereby its integrity of character, is our paramount consideration, then surely we must, seek in every patient and pleasant way to bring them to see that Christianity is inevitably opposed to National Socialism, whatever some of its nominal followers may think and do to the contrary.
Christianity is committed to multiracialism because its Jesus Christ, who is its entire justification, sanctioned and promoted racial equality and racial brotherhood, which in turn sanction and promote racial integration and racial interbreeding, when he proclaimed that all mankind, regardless of race, is equal in the eyes of its god.
Thereby it is devoted to an anti-Aryan purpose, whatever the contortions of those who try to give it an Aryan look, and whereby people are diverted into a crippling morass of biblical reference and interpretative conjecture.
In addition, its guilt complex of original sin; its servile message of docility; its belief in a deity who is omnipotent and omniscient and who nevertheless tolerates the most obvious and indisputable and grossest injustices; and its anti-eugenic conception of sanctity and compassion for all human life as god-given: all this, which is an integral part of Christianity, is demonstrably at variance with the thought and spirit of National Socialism.
Accordingly, Christianity cannot be the religion for us, and needs to be rejected now as such.
Otherwise, it is bound sooner or later to cause disruptive problems of allegiance, and inspire debilitating inhibitions, which will most gravely handicap us in our struggle for power, and will create trouble galore for us on coming to power, as happened before in Germany.
There Hitler bought needed support it is true in return for restraint on this fundamental issue, but had to pay a terrible price for it in the long run.
To reject Christianity without putting anything in its place would be to exchange one error for another, and so would any attempt to replace it with the dead form of some ancient paganism which would be an artificial and barren imposition.
While we can and should indeed relate our religious outlook to our pre-Christian heritage with its substantial similarity, this outlook is a precise paganism which belongs to National Socialism, being entirely generated by National Socialism. It has to be expressed in contemporary forms and terms as a reflection of the present world order to be relevant and so to thrive.
Battle of the Arts
Along with recognizing and pursuing its implications even to the extent of religion, we have to present and emphasise all the cultural implications of this life-wide creed of ours.
The total war is to be fought on all fronts, and to the neglect of none. All art forms can either be in accord with National Socialism as expressive of harmony and order, or in conflict with it in departure from these qualities.
Just as the sublime grandeur of the music of Wagner is pure National Socialism in sound, so is the primitively repetitive and diabolically discordant din of “pop,” particularly in its extreme forms, anti-NS chaos in this medium; and its hideous purveyors are to attacked as fiercely as any renegade politician or race mixing cleric in theirs.
Likewise, the mess-daubing of “modem” painting is chaos in line and colour, and thus an expression of anti-National Socialism.
Likewise, the indeterminate shapes of “modem” sculpture are anti-National Socialism in whatever the material used. Their deranged perpetrators are part of the multifarious array of the active enemy. Those persons who call themselves National Socialists, but at least tolerate these forms of decadence in their perniciously partial and superficial understanding and acceptance of our creed, if they do not actually dabble in them themselves, are not really on our side, and we would be better off without them as they are.
Representation and Criticism
In advocating leadership with its personal responsibility instead of the collective irresponsibility and inertia which characterises and condemns democracy, providing the opportunity for great vested interests and alien elements to rule by manipulation from behind the scenes, it is not enough to cite the superlative qualities and achievements of Adolf Hitler.
Of him there has been one, and one no more. It is incumbent on us to devise a system of honest and effective representation of the people, consistent with true leadership, whereby it is clear that we uphold this form of freedom for the people, and that we reject democracy precisely because it fails to provide this while pretending to do so.
In the course of this, proper provision must be made for the succession in the event of death, incapacity, or downright failure of the Leader, in the understanding that this planet can hardly hope to be lucky enough to be presented with a second Hitler in the immediate future.
Another problem that National Socialism in this preparatory period of searching review has to resolve is the adjudication of the National Socialist State as the zealous promoter of the National Socialist good between the advantages and disadvantages of so-called “free speech.”
To allow the propagation of what is distinctly and seriously harmful, according to the National Socialist view, is clearly abhorrent and impossible, but seriously harmful too can be any suppression of justifiable criticism, and the protection this undoubtedly gives to abuses and defects. We have to determine and justify the precise position we propose to adopt in this respect, bearing in mind that bans and punishments should be the last resort, and the fewer the better, being an admission of the failure of National Socialism in obtaining the end by other and earlier means; and that any appearance of being unable to face the arguments of opponents in open controversy is undesirable.
Another important field for the formulation of extended National Socialism to fit our own times and places is that of industrial relations.
Here we have to be able to detail a permanent remedy for the continual conflict and perpetual strikes ravaging the economy in Britain and other countries, and of a nature which disposes of the Marxist argument that National Socialism is the servant or ally of capitalism.
All workers’ and employers need to be bound by some contract of employment under some charter of industry which accords to each both the rights and the obligations of their positions, including that of arbitration, which excludes strikes and lock-outs as outdated demonstrations of economic anarchy; which provides for workers’ representation throughout the community; and for workers shares in the profits of the firm.
Along with this introduction of just and mutually beneficial economic government in the place of internecine chaos, there needs to be the abolition of those schemes of the misnamed “Welfare State” which, whatever they may provide from the public purse by way of general taxation, take away personal responsibility, breed dependence, and encourage the lazy and improvident to exploit the industrious and thrifty.
Instead, the system of the National Socialist State should ensure, after exaction of proportionately less taxation, an adequate net wage to everyone who does an adequate day’s work, and then require its citizens to assume responsibility for themselves, and pay their way; and, in respect of any special assistance needed in an emergency, ultimately to repay its provision. The double-headed dictum of National Socialist economic justice should thus be: no one shall want through no fault of his own, and no one shall gain through no effort of his own. This does not of course preclude any and all social provisions based on a direct and adequate personal contribution.
In all its economic and social plans the true development of National Socialism is, and has to be shown and stressed as, something neither of capitalism nor Marxism, being not for one class or the other, or any section whatsoever, but for the whole community; and based not on a cash nexus but on the bond of race. Because of this, we National Socialists in fulfilling and asserting this revolutionary distinction have relentlessly to reject being labelled as some kind of right-wing nationalists. Being no part of the old order, we are against it right, left, and centre.
National Socialism Not Nationalism
We have not only to avoid deviation into confusion with rightwing nationalism in its economic and social aspects. We have also to break free from, reject, and rise above that right wing nationalism in its external aspect which up to now has been so much confused with and so greatly compromised and corrupted National Socialism, deforming it to tremendous loss.
We have to go forward into the future with a dynamic answer both to the nationalism and the internationalism of both capitalism and Marxism. That answer must be the world-wide call of Aryan kinship to create, above all lesser attachments and divisions of class and country, a real community of united Aryan peoples. Nothing less than this is the maturity of our creed in the fulfilment of its implications of the Aryan “folk.”
It may be that National Socialism had in the 1930s to find its beginning and make its early way through a resurgence of nationalism as the route of the times, and indeed to take this into its very title for its folkism as a matter of contemporary convenience rather than eternal aptness of definition. Yet, from our vantage point today, it cannot be denied that, if nationalism was utilised to carry it forward, the same nationalism reacted to hold it back. We serve our creed best today not by pretending that everything was perfect in the past, which is the way to confine it to the past and deprive it of a future, but by recognizing any errors or imperfections from a National Socialist point view, providing this is done with ample reason and in perspective within a context of overall appreciation of the nevertheless gigantic achievements of the past, and constructively in order thereupon to correct and improve.
“National Socialism is not for export,” as a pronouncement attributed to the Third Reich, may well have served certain purposes, including the major truth that each particular country needed to evolve its own particular form.
But taken, as it may so very easily be done, as the confinement of the whole doctrine to one people, one country, and one time, this total endorsement of exclusive local nationalism is an appalling deformation of true National Socialism.
Jewish Weapon Of War
This restrictive element of the old nationalism, which probably prevailed most of the time among the adherents of the German National Socialism of the 1930s, did immense harm to its prospects in reducing the power of its appeal to those outside Germany to join in preventing the move to war, and, after the war had broken out, to side with Germany in a European New Order.
At the same time it was reflected in the forms of professed National Socialism which arose in other countries. In Britain, the same old nationalism led Mosley, after so commendably opposing the move to war, to exhort his followers, after it had broken out and the testing time had come, not to hinder the conduct of the war against Germany.
It led to most of his followers, in fact, actively aiding the war against National Socialism, many of them in the Forces; and to followers of his even now proudly upholding this in their favour.
That insane fratricidal inter-Aryan war, which brought about the physical downfall of what, despite any and all shortcomings, was most certainly the finest achievement so far of the self-conscious Aryan spirit and will, was the result of German and other European and Aryan nationalism exploited by Jewish international racialism.
This is the monumental lesson to be learned now, at long last, and never henceforth to be forgotten. Never must it happen again! The remedy can be nothing other than the emergence of Aryan international racialism, leading to the unity of the whole Aryan folk.
Though the old, restricted nationalism still pervaded not only the great bulk of the German population under National Socialism, but also the great bulk of party members, and the great bulk of German National Socialist exposition, the new extended racialism of the future, which is the fullest flowering of our creed, and our task now to propagate, showed itself appropriately in that part of the German movement which was its highest elite.
The foremost leaders and thinkers of the SS were distinctly pan-Aryan in their outlook, and this outlook was reflected in the formations of European volunteers which the SS sponsored, and possessed by the best of those volunteers themselves.
Then, theirs was the vision which in time and force could have won the war. Now, theirs is the vision with which in the future the defeat of 1945 can be made but a lost battle in a continuing war which ends in our total and everlasting victory. This will be so, if the National Socialist elite, which is what the National Socialist movement of the present and the future must be, will embrace it wholeheartedly, and carry it forward fanatically.
Folk Comes First
A racialism which is purblindly partial is not good enough. The racial nationalist who keenly invokes racial factors relating to the nation, and then stops short, and equally keenly turns his back in purblind partiality on the way in which the same racial factors proclaim an entity above and beyond the nation, is a self-destructive and split personality.
The existing nation-states, to whatever extent they are now or have been homogenetic racial units, arose in the course of migrations and divisions of the great race, and are only one form of folk community, and no divinely ordained highest and final form as the myopic nationalists in Britain and elsewhere try to make out.
For us they can only have merit to the extent to which, like everything else, they serve and do not hamper and harm the race, and that the whole race and nothing less than the whole race, the entire Aryan folk.
The Aryan folk preceded all forms of state in the past, and now must take precedence over all existing forms of state in order that it may survive unprecedented perils by proceeding to its coalescence, and thus reunion, in a culminant world community of united states.
Let us not be too small to respond to such a great imperative of history! If we are, we shall instead contribute to that titanic catastrophe whereby, ultimately, the Aryans become extinct like the dinosaurs. This must be the parting of the ways between the mere nationalists and the National Socialists. Now must be an end to any illusion that we are in the same broad camp, and that we are fighting side by side in the same broad cause. The distinguishing gap between us which cannot be bridged is that on the determinant issue of race we belong to and fight for the whole in unity, and not, as they do, for one part against the other parts.
This does not mean for one moment that our concern for that part, our own nation, and that territory, our own country, which are the most native and tangible to us, is lost in a vague concern for others and elsewhere, or truly made lesser or insignificant in consequence.
It means instead that, in realizing that they are truly part of something which as a whole is greater we care for them and serve them best in far-sighted relation to that whole, instead of detachment and isolation. Top emphasis now has to be put on the top, which is the whole, for the sake of all the parts, and the parts served through devotion to the whole instead of concentration on the part to the detriment of the whole. In this way, henceforth, nationalism must be seen not as a means of National Socialism, but as the negation of National Socialism.
White Peoples of the World, Unite!
We must each and all of us now take the great step forward into the future of firmly and avowedly, without hesitation or reservation, pledging allegiance to the entire Aryan folk as the apex of our creed to which it is inherently dedicated; and this above all other loyalties.
This we must do in explicit and positive rejection of the nationalists, who put country above folk and creed; alongside and equal to our rejection of the Marxists, who put class above race.
We have to accept that in the last resort, if we are obliged to choose between loyalty to folk and creed and loyalty to country contrary to this, we can only choose the first. There our supreme allegiance must lie.
This will make us in the eyes and words of other traitors, traitors to what they stand for, which is not what we stand for, but it will never make us traitors to our rightful allegiance which we freely recognise and accept, and beyond which there is no other due from us.
William Joyce was the executed loyalist to his folk and creed at the price of so-called “treason” to his (nominal) country. He was ever a truer champion of the true interests of the real British people than the unhanged traitor to our race, Winston Churchill.
This bold step of crystal-clear logic will be the sign of the emancipation and emergent maturity of a National Socialism fit to contest and conquer in the future.
Let the cry now go forth loud and clear that we National Socialists are not nationalists, not right-wing patriots, not conservative reformers, but revolutionary racialists summoning the white peoples of the world to unite for survival and supremacy!
Only with a world creed as wide as the whole race, and as wide as the whole of life, can we match our world enemies and thus have the chance to attain full power, and in the world of tomorrow the only full power is world power.
Only National Socialist world supremacy will suffice. Either we and our ideas or our enemies and theirs will dominate the globe.
The revolution of the mind which has to begin before all else, and which is the pure development of our creed to the full, whereby it has the capacity to win the world, is a revolution which begins now in you with your comprehension and acceptance of it.
Source: Racial Idealism