ALL BLOG POSTS AND COMMENTS COPYRIGHT (C) 2003-2020 VOX DAY. ALL RIGHTS RESERVED. REPRODUCTION WITHOUT WRITTEN PERMISSION IS EXPRESSLY PROHIBITED.

Wednesday, August 16, 2017

From the Nazi's mouth

A number of historically ignorant defenders of national socialism have tried to claim that it is not a left-wing socialist ideology. This is utterly and absolutely false, and can be easily and conclusively proven to be false in a number of ways, including by reading a number of direct quotes from Mr. Hitler himself. Note, in particular, that the ultimate goal is "international socialism".
  • It is not Germany that will turn Bolshevist but Bolshevism that will become a sort of National Socialism. Besides, there is more that binds us to Bolshevism than separates us from it…. I have always made allowance for this circumstance, and given orders that former Communists are to be admitted to the party at once. The petit bourgeois Social-Democrat and the trade union boss will never make a National Socialist, but the Communist always will.
  • We National Socialists wish precisely to attract all socialists, even the Communists; we wish to win them over from their international camp to the national one.
  • I have learned a great deal from Marxism as I do not hesitate to admit… The difference between them and myself is that I have really put into practice what these peddlers and pen pushers have timidly begun. The whole of National Socialism is based on it… National Socialism is what Marxism might have been if it could have broken its absurd and artificial ties with a democratic order.
  • After all, that’s exactly why we call ourselves National Socialists! We want to start by implementing socialism in our nation among our Volk! It is not until the individual nations are socialist that they can address themselves to international socialism.
  • The Revolution we have made is not a national revolution, but a National-Socialist Revolution. We would even underline this last word, "Socialist."
  • There is a difference between the theoretical knowledge of socialism and the practical life of socialism. People are not born socialists, but must first be taught how to become them.
  • I, on the other hand, have tried for two decades to build a new socialist order in Germany, with a minimum of interference and without harming our productive capacity.
As you can see, no adherent to this ideology has any place on the Right, nor can he reasonably describe himself as being Alt-Right. I direct your attention to the very first point of the Alt-Right:
  1. The Alt Right is of the political right in both the American and the European sense of the term. Socialists are not Alt Right. Progressives are not Alt Right. Liberals are not Alt Right. Communists, Marxists, Marxians, cultural Marxists, and neocons are not Alt Right.
Being socialists, national socialists of any stripe can never legitimately claim to be Alt Right.

UPDATE: I will be debating Greg Johnson about that contention. Tara McCarthy will host. More info about when it will be broadcast tomorrow.

Labels: ,

249 Comments:

«Oldest ‹Older 201 – 249 of 249
Blogger pnq87 August 16, 2017 11:43 PM  

@204 We're going to move you out.

Anonymous Charlottesvillain August 16, 2017 11:45 PM  

Keep posting, Halo. You're doing much heavy lifting in revealing tribal behavior to the unlearned.

Blogger Lucas Alaman August 16, 2017 11:46 PM  

Was it not Staling that branded Nazism as "right wing" and "reactionary"? Do these Neo-Nazi types not realize that they are buying into the leftist narrative when they claim National Socialism is of the right?

Anonymous Another Guy August 16, 2017 11:47 PM  

@Vox
1. It is not Germany that will turn Bolshevist but Bolshevism that will become a sort of National Socialism. Besides, there is more that binds us to Bolshevism than separates us from it…. I have always made allowance for this circumstance, and given orders that former Communists are to be admitted to the party at once. The petit bourgeois Social-Democrat and the trade union boss will never make a National Socialist, but the Communist always will.
Translated: "So, because you are lukewarm--neither hot nor cold--I am about to spit you out of my mouth." (Rev 3:16)
2. We National Socialists wish precisely to attract all socialists, even the Communists; we wish to win them over from their international camp to the national one.
Translated: Take the energetic enemy and make them your ally.
3. I have learned a great deal from Marxism as I do not hesitate to admit… The difference between them and myself is that I have really put into practice what these peddlers and pen pushers have timidly begun. The whole of National Socialism is based on it… National Socialism is what Marxism might have been if it could have broken its absurd and artificial ties with a democratic order.
This quote is missing some information, so it can easily mean anything you want it to.
4. After all, that’s exactly why we call ourselves National Socialists! We want to start by implementing socialism in our nation among our Volk! It is not until the individual nations are socialist that they can address themselves to international socialism.
Hitler chose to redefine socialism to gain the masses who liked socialism. It was a branding choice, so this quote could easily be misinterpreted by applying a different definition of socialism than what Hitler was using.
5. The Revolution we have made is not a national revolution, but a National-Socialist Revolution. We would even underline this last word, "Socialist."
Same as above.
6. There is a difference between the theoretical knowledge of socialism and the practical life of socialism. People are not born socialists, but must first be taught how to become them.
Translated: Each new generation born is in effect an invasion of civilization by little barbarians, who must be civilized before it is too late. (Thomas Sowell)
7. I, on the other hand, have tried for two decades to build a new socialist order in Germany, with a minimum of interference and without harming our productive capacity.
Same as 4.

The Nazi's are in the Alt-Right, consider themselves Alt-Right, and commonly understood as Alt-Right. Don't waste energy on a losing battle. Your definition of the Alt-Right has lost.

Blogger Heian-kyo Dreams August 16, 2017 11:49 PM  

Bingo! I got Jewism bingo!

They keep saying the same things in the same way, totally on script.

Anonymous LurkingPuppy August 16, 2017 11:55 PM  

Cail Corishev wrote:This thread got further into the weeds
Yes, it drew in a remarkable amount of tardery for something that, on the face of it, looks like it should be a dry discussion of economic systems.

The organized Left's mothership always sends paid trolls. What does that tell us about the (((Alt-Retard)))?

Blogger Pineapple-in-Chief August 17, 2017 12:13 AM  

(((Halo))),

The Constitution of the United States was written in 1787, ratified in 1788, and went into effect in 1789. It contains not a word about universal human equality, but it does prohibit a hereditary aristocracy. The Preamble makes it clear that the Constitution was created and ratified by white men to provide good government for themselves and their posterity, not all of mankind. The Constitution treats Indians as foreign nations, allows Negro slavery, and defines free and enslaved blacks as non-citizens, each one counting as only three-fifths of a person for the purposes of Congressional representation.

The colonial consensus that blacks and Indians were not part of white society was reflected in the Constitution. It was further elaborated in the Naturalization Act of 1790, which defined who could become a citizen of the United States. Naturalization was limited to free white persons of good character. This excluded American Indians, indentured servants, free and enslaved blacks, Muslims, and later, Orientals.

Right up to 1965, the United States restricted non-European immigration, and even eschewed non-northern European immigration.

Ultimately, the foundation of America is those who constituted the Constitution. As liberals love to remind us, its a 'contextual document.' We're changing the context back to where it belongs. A 'revolution' in the sense of returning to origins.

I thought Jews had high verbal intelligence? Can't you distinguish between who you are and what you do? If I change jobs, does that mean i cease speaking the same language, belonging to the same family, retaining the same genes, and celebrating the same festivals. GTFO you glib yid.

We are, of course, adding a new part to the 'sum', building a wall against time, banning Kebabs, and empowering Israel's enemies in Syria. Think of it like the way you added a new part to the 'sum' of Palestinian history when you ethnically cleansed them from their ancestral villages. Personally, I'm pretty whitepilled where this is all heading. See if your post-hoc justifications can stop us.

Blogger Azure Amaranthine August 17, 2017 12:21 AM  

Lemur, Fascism is collection of all power from a society into an individual in order to achieve ends. This is deeply ironic because fascism also assumes that individuals have next to no (really, none, for the hardcore philosophers) free will, and are entirely shaped and made by the society. Thus, Fascism attempts to create a utopian society, and individual lives are meaningless in pursuit of this goal.

The irony is that it believes individuals are meaningless minions with no free will, and yet somehow some of these meaningless minions with no free will (the philosophers and revolutionaries of marxism/socialism/communism/etc) can ex-nihilo change the society to be better. It's a system of thought based on multiple contradictory lies.

This has nothing to do with the right wing, morons. You're exhibiting the basic bias wherein leftists assume that anything in any way authoritarian that they don't like is fascism. This is a patently absurd belief held by nigh mindless (yet not meaningless) minions. Where do you think those philosophers and revolutionaries got their ideas? By looking at idiots like you guys.

News flash: Any movement that pushes collection of all power into an individual in order to change society in order to change individuals. THAT is fascism, and that's why it's absurd. Not some power, not even a lot of power, all power.

Blogger Pineapple-in-Chief August 17, 2017 12:33 AM  

(((Halo))), you can go at the back of the oven.

Blogger Azure Amaranthine August 17, 2017 12:35 AM  

This is also why the actual Nazis objected to being called Fascist. They weren't really. They were a personality cult around Hitler, basic on Darwinist/Nietzschean lines of thought. Did they want to collect all power? Yes, but they didn't want to do it to change the society, they did it to exalt Hitler. Power-addicted, blood-mad Hitler.

The reason the Nazis one-upped basic-b**ch socialism or communism (on the short term) is because it's based on exactly one lie (God does not exist), where socialism/communism are based on multiple contradictory lies (God does not exist, yet man has meaning as (and only as) a component of society, etc.), making them weaker. The reason it lost in the long term is because, brace yourselves, Hitler died, like any mortal does, regardless of how godlike any number of people may think they are.

Yes, there are modern National Socialists in all but name, but they aren't exactly like the Nazis, and they certainly don't call themselves Nazis either. They also don't have any significant pull in the US as far as I can tell.

Blogger Mr.MantraMan August 17, 2017 12:37 AM  

Bannon has spoken ethnonationalism sucks (Israel what up) and the Ds need to to focus on race and identity because they are stupid

Blogger Pineapple-in-Chief August 17, 2017 12:42 AM  

"News flash: Any movement that pushes collection of all power into an individual in order to change society in order to change individuals. THAT is fascism, and that's why it's absurd. Not some power, not even a lot of power, all power."

That would almost include the definition of absolute monarchy. Furthermore, you are mistaking paternalism for Fascism. Fascism was paternalistic, but that is not its distinguishing feature which are, namely, reaction to mass society and social decay, intense centralization, technocratic mobilization of all national resources, and cult of personality. Thus, its highly anti-traditional in many ways.

Their are various totalitarianisms, and Fascism is distinguished in a substantive fashion from other ideologies which called for the concentration of power.

Anonymous A Most Deplorable Paradigm Is More Than Twenty Cents August 17, 2017 12:46 AM  

@204 @205
It's always the same, isn't it? Starting off with "Hello, Fellow (((white people)))" like some old TV episode of He-Man, where Skeletor disguises himself as a harmless person but pieces of his costume slowly drop off.

Over and over again, we come to the stage of "So just DIE already, goyim!", like the end of a scary movie or a boss fight at the conclusion of a game.

Blogger Pineapple-in-Chief August 17, 2017 12:47 AM  

It was more than just Hitler. That's the basic bitch conservative position,

this dude came waltzing alongg
he sung the Kraut a merry song
but turned out he was rather wrong
and next minute the jews were gone

Most of Europe during the interwar years moved toward authoritarian government. There were systematic environmental factors and cultural predilections which contributed to this phenomenon.

Anonymous A Deplorable Paradigm Is More Than Twenty Cents August 17, 2017 12:50 AM  

Pastor Tim Keller goes full cucked retard over the Virginia riot. But he gets spanked a bit in comments.

Blogger Pineapple-in-Chief August 17, 2017 12:52 AM  

Germans will never stop being authoritarian. They can't function without hierarchy and authority. Right now, progressive 'democratic' principles are enforced in an authoritarian fashion.

The Germans have to find a system which realizes the Prussian values (loyalty, duty, self-sacrifice, order) which authenticate the German soul without it being directed toward liberal ends ('we'll exterminate ourselves saving wog refugees its out duty!) or embarking on grandiose adventures in other people's countries.

Blogger Pineapple-in-Chief August 17, 2017 12:57 AM  

@219

yup, i had a Zionist professor who adopted a similar style. Did his level best to suppress the Palestinian side of the Israel question on campus. I don't particularly care who is genociding who over there, but its bad academic form.

The leading cause of anti-antisemitism is Jewish behavour.

Blogger Sean August 17, 2017 1:53 AM  

Was watching Mike Cernovich's periscopes the last few days and he regularly calls out the alt-right, but Mike C's definition of the alt-right is more like what Vox calls the alt-reich or alt-white.

Mike C calls himself new-right but I think we are heading into semantics territory; as I don't think Mike C's new-right is too different to Vox's alt-right; albeit with disagreement on some of the 16 points. However, I'm aware that sometimes, the optics of what something is called can be quite important.

Would love to see a debate of Vox Day vs Mike C on this.

Blogger Robert August 17, 2017 2:00 AM  

I'm not interested in defending national socialism, but it seems questionable to judge political systems as liberal and conservative purely based on economic stance. From a cultural perspective, Nazis and Fascists were trying to preserve a traditionalist society culturally while the Communists were trying to tear apart traditions and build something new.

Shouldn't the Nazis be considered conservative socially, at least when compared to communists and other European socialists (who jettisoned tradition and embraced leftist social positions)?

Nevertheless, I agree that Nazi Larping is counterproductive at best and outright poisonous at worst. Making jokes on the internet is one thing, but actually expecting the populace at large to flock to your movement when you're waving a swastika flag is ridiculous.

Blogger EscapeVelocity August 17, 2017 2:13 AM  

Seems like a failed brand, at this point.

Nobody on the Left is trying to exclude people. You dont grow by exclusion.

It's clear that Monarchists and Royalists are on the Alt Right. As well as Techno-Libertarian Futurists, Paleocons, Christian Nationalists, Ethno-Nationalists (which includes Nazis).

Alt Right is groups surrounding ideas on the right which are not mainstream.

Blogger Snidely Whiplash August 17, 2017 2:33 AM  

Robert wrote:From a cultural perspective, Nazis and Fascists were trying to preserve a traditionalist society culturally
No, they had a new vision of man, as an atomized cell in the body of the state.
This is not traditional anywhere, even China.
They were trying to build a new society, and a new culture.

Anonymous Unamused Flyover Resident August 17, 2017 2:44 AM  

The leading cause of anti-antisemitism is Jewish behavour.

In some ways, I'm Halo's worst nightmare. Just a middle-aged, middle-class woman with a college degree from a good school who's never lived in the South or in a trailer park. I'm even a Deadhead, for heavens sake!

Had close Jewish friends growing up (I can still remember how shocked I was to discover in third grade that my best friend's parents would sit Shiva for her if she marred outside the faith,) cried for the Israeli athletes at the Munich Olympics. In short, if ever there was a Semetic-phile, it was me.

But. Then I had a son - a blonde haired, blue eyed son. One day, when he no older than, say, seven years old, he asked me: "Mama, why do the movie villains always look like me?"

So, I started ... noticing. One of the things that comes along with a SD+3IQ is pattern recognition, and the Every. Single. Time. phenomona struck.

Cheering the coming white minority? Check. Demanding pasty people examine their "privilege?" Check. "Abolishing whiteness?" Check. Continually advocating mass third world immigration or you're an eebil natsee who wants to commit another genocide? Check.

Every time, Every. Freaking. Time., somebody said or did something that looked/sounded very much like an eliminationist, genocidal, hatred of people who look like me and my kid, every time someone publicly advocated policies that would make him a despised, legally discriminated against, minority in the nation his ancestors built it turned out to be a member of the tribe.

So, Mr. Halo, in the end I had to believe my lying eyes. I don't hate you/your people for no reason. Hell, I don't even hate you, not really. I just want y'all to stop trying to destroy my kid to benefit your own. Stop forcing him to "celebrate diversity" at gunpoint while y'all openly practice a rather ruthless ethnic nepotism. Stop pretending that the wealthiest and most powerful in-group in America is a disadvantaged minority but Appalachian whites must "examine their privilege." Stop using "anti-racism" as a(n increasingly threadbare) cover for being anti-white.

Stop the hate.

Blogger M Cephas August 17, 2017 3:11 AM  

Stefan Molyneux just so happened to put out a video very recently, with Dinesh D'Souza, discussing this very topic.

Anonymous AB.Prosper August 17, 2017 3:22 AM  

EscapeVelocity wrote:Seems like a failed brand, at this point.

Nobody on the Left is trying to exclude people. You dont grow by exclusion.

It's clear that Monarchists and Royalists are on the Alt Right. As well as Techno-Libertarian Futurists, Paleocons, Christian Nationalists, Ethno-Nationalists (which includes Nazis).

Alt Right is groups surrounding ideas on the right which are not mainstream.


Nazis are not Right Wing. Its a socialism variation and Libertarians are also Leftists. Harmless mostly but not .Alt Right . Palecons (which is what I am not .Alt Right) and the rest fit

Functionally the .Alt Right is "Paleocons using rules for radicals" along with a few odd friends and similar reactionary conservative movements

To your points failure to exclude people drags a movement down to the lowest common denominator and lets in the crazy people. Its possible this car idiot was one of those mistakes

As far as the rest the .Alt Right made a mistake by tolerating Nazis and White Supremacists since both groups are philosophically opposed to major parts of what it means to be .Alt White (among them parts one and part fifteen) Shack up with dogs and you get fleas

They can and should speak freely just not on our dime or our time.

So live and learn. The .Alt Right doesn't care what people think of it but it needs people that support it and that rules out the Nazis ninnies
.
Now the White Nationalists and Ethno Nationalists who are normal people who just want a White or Whiter country certainly have a place, most are Right wing anyway. Normies can't yet tell the difference but give them time they will.

As an aside one thing to be learned from Charlottesville is that part of the .alt Rights job will be providing and alternative to the the current order that's not AntiFa or Nazis if things go south.

An actual .Alt Right society is a good place to live.

However as chaos increases and it will , as we can see the response to Trump's speech virtually no one in office other than the President appears capable of basic nuance or any loyalty, this means there is no fix for the system and that violence and conflict will increase

People start looking for a faction when things get real bad and when good people come looking , I don't want the Nazis to get at them. If either they or the AntiFa get numbers, whatever lands they control will be a major problem

They way out of that is to have an alternative and push for a political revolution (that is legal and non violent) It almost certainly won't work but it lays the foundation. Us or chaos and frankly, that is the only way

.Alt Right or the Republic dies

Anonymous AB.Prosper August 17, 2017 3:41 AM  

Halo wrote

In answer to (((Halo)))'s whining about anti-semitism is for the Jews to quit being such bad guests"

That's a similar response to the proper response to the Alt Right's whining about white genocide: White's should be better Americans.

if you read more carefully you'd see they did.


And you are right that Whites should be better Americans, where I live tribalism is the American way. People look out almost entirely for their own race , do more for their own race and go out of their way to put their own race into jobs. Well except Whites who apparently aren't allowed to do this.

If we were better Americans , we'd do the same but we are sticking to the old civic nationalist script of a dead republic for now . That nation isn't coming back and you cannot guilt anyone into making it happen.

Its tribes all the way down and the future looks more like (paraphrase Ice-T)

But my true mission is just my kin
You ain't my set, you ain't my friend
Be the wrong color your life could end


No amount of NCIS LARPING or shaming language can change that , civic nationalism and the melting pot are over and ethnic conflict is the future

Now despite all the fear, the Right isn't going to start anything but neither is it going to go quietly into camps either and it looks like AntiFa and the rest of the Left has that in mind.

Quell the Left something I think is politically nearly impossible and maybe you can hold it together and you'll get the usual for a multi-ethnic society, no trust, low prosperity second or third rate power until it just falls apart

You don't do that and no matter how hard you cuck you get Rwanda X Bosnia waged right here by people with nothing to lose and few limits to brutality

or optionally you can embrace the 16 points and fight for Western civilization itself

Choose wisely

Anonymous Ackbars of the Galaxy August 17, 2017 3:48 AM  

The Communist Manifesto itself has a section on the various competing 'socialisms' of the day including: Feudal Socialism, Bourgeois Socialism (!), Reactionary Socialism, and German Socialism.

Socialism in the broadest sense is collectivism for the stated benefit of group X.

Racial socialism, or National Socialism is still a kind of socialism; if you can have Feudal-Socialism and Bourgeois-Socialism...then why not Racial and National Socialisms?

Marx's point was that his socialism did away with the particular features for whom the socialism would be for, for the benefit of of dead or dying classes, or particular national groups (we can add racial groups) in that his version is global-abstract in character and based on the simple fact that people all over the world work for a living, and thus are the most universal class best able to embrace his global-abstract socialism.

The real world of course cannot ever be put through a mincing machine fine enough to make us all global-abstract in character and is doomed to failure. We remain all too real, historically and biologically given, and existing in local concrete circumstances.

But yes, National-Socialism would appear to be a type of socialism.

Obviously collective action of some kind is necessary to save the West, but that is not the same as socialism.

Blogger VD August 17, 2017 4:10 AM  

You're banned for lying, Halo. Don't come back.

Blogger Achilles August 17, 2017 4:10 AM  

The problem isn't that Vox is wrong. The problem is priorities. Are we fighting an economic war? Are those corporate CEOs and bankers socialists hellbent on tearing down capitalism and the class system? No. They are seeking to tear down whites and western civilization. We are fighting non-white globalists. This war comes down to race and nation. We are white nationalists. NatSocs are white nationalists. That makes them an ally. Our priority shouldn't be to kick out allies over economic disputes. We can fight that battle later. When the globalists are all dead. Destroying globalism is the priority. Not destroying socialism. Remember that according to Vox mass immigration has been more destructive than communism to nations.

The globalists want to exterminate us. Are we really going to say to natsocs, "no thanks we believe in private charity we don't need your help." Where is the strategy in that?

And by denying that common ground you lose any chance to convert them to your approved version of the Alt-Right.

"Sorry fam, we could use another squad to take that town but autobahns are gay. Sit this one out."

Blogger VD August 17, 2017 4:11 AM  

Don't cross-post, map.

Blogger Sam August 17, 2017 4:27 AM  

The Nazis were right in the most basic sense- they were supported by other groups on the right against groups aligned with the left.

Nazis allied with German National People's Party, Centre Party and Bavarian People's Party

SPD (social democrats) allied with KPD (communists)

People here seem to caught up on the idea of democracy. If whites become a minority in the United States, you are going to have to choose between democracy and ethnostate. Be like the Zionists; pick the latter.

Anonymous Ivar August 17, 2017 4:56 AM  

This is an argument essentially about nothing. Most of the 'Neo Nazis' are attracted to the symbolism and the elan associated with the WW II German armed forces. I doubt many or them know or care about the fine points of economic and social theory. I don't think 'wearing the shirt' is useful or mentally healthy, but I do think it is one way the mind protects itself when it has had enough.

Anonymous Perfunctory Quotidian August 17, 2017 5:14 AM  

What was the German-American Bund all about? I know about it only in the vaguest details. Was it really an attempt to "Americanize" NS ideology, or just a LARPing fan club? (I thought this might have relevance to the current year.)

Blogger ZhukovG August 17, 2017 5:22 AM  

@Achilles: Yes, priorities is exactly the issue. We want to win. But we have players, who say they are on our team, but insist on scoring points for our opponents. We have tolerated their affection for a failed German Socialist movement in hopes that they would at least modify their behavior.

But, apparently they prioritize idolization of German Socialism over the struggle for American Nationalism. I also think their groups may be riddled with 'agents provocateur', to such a degree that they are effectively working for the opposition.

Blogger ZhukovG August 17, 2017 5:25 AM  

Perfunctory Quotidian: From what I understand Hitler himself considered them little more than LARPers. He was willing to use them, but had little respect for them and largely considered their leader a joke.

Blogger Azure Amaranthine August 17, 2017 6:29 AM  

If we're looking at different characteristics on a sliding scale, we first have to realize that there are a lot of twisted catch-words that muddy the waters. Things like "Authoritarian" (quick, what's the opposite of authoritarian? .... right, does the word even really mean anything?) which should be replaced with, perhaps domination/submission.

Axis A: Individualism(Liberty) vs. Collectivism(Community).

(Meanwhile in reality, both the individual and the collective/group are important. Individual liberty should be maximized, but to do so in a way that harms the collective (how much? /thread) is wrong. This gets really, really difficult to judge when you start to think about consequences, karma, trends, etc. Individual actions have universe-changing consequences.)

Axis B: Hierarchic(Domination/Submission) vs. Democratic(Equality).

(What's not to like about democratic? Well, the problem of people. Some people are easily manipulated, some people want nothing more in life than to exercise power over others. True democracy does not and cannot exist while Evil does, because people can interact with each other, and people are anything but equal. Hierarchies will develop, so the best option is to drive societies towards the healthiest possible hierarchies. [Let's not go down the road of "creating" or "forcing" democracy. We don't have the capability to fix all people, so the only route that can possibly go is breaking all people])

Look at it this way, and you'll see that if you take Axis A to either extreme, you either end up with the Solipsistic single individual in a dead world (Ultimate Liberty) or the soulless, inhuman Collective that has no individuality, no personality, no beauty, no intelligence, and ultimately no life (Ultimate Communism).

Meanwhile, on Axis B, Democracy, while a nice concept, is one of those toys humans can't have because we inevitably break it. Hierarchy did/can/does/will exist, so are you going to say it shouldn't? Good luck with that.

That being said, Hierarchy doesn't have to be evil, even though libtards really get a hard on portraying it that way. Ideally, a place can be found in a hierarchy were every individual will fit perfectly and no abuse need occur. Sadly, the world isn't a perfect place.


So, where do we fit Commie/Fascist/Nazi/Democrat/Republican on here?


Communism is pretty straightforward here, it's community to the max, and it kills individuals by the hundreds of millions, because the community is worth it (somehow) and individuals have no free will or meaningful existence anyway.

Socialism is the same thing. Originally Communism was the theory of the ideal communist state (didn't and doesn't exist) and Socialism was the way to get to it. No, I don't care that people try to redefine it as Communism = econimic/political/social while Socialism = just economic. It's a bullshit attempt to separate socialism from its evil effects so that people can try it all over again. Surely it will work this (XXth) time!

(Continued below.)

Blogger Azure Amaranthine August 17, 2017 6:30 AM  

(Continued from above.)

Fascism is Communism with a very high Heirarchic score on Axis B. As I said before, all power is concentrated toward a single individual with hopes of them using it to create utopia. Yes, that's right, it's a society of mindless minions focusing power to yet another mindless minion (who of course is firmly convinced that They are Superior Somehow TM.) in order to reform the society into paradise.

This differs from Monarchy in that Monarchy never claimed that "No Lives Matter". Monarchy, while not fantastic, is still extremely sane compared to Fascism. Monarchy also often claimed to have the "will of God" behind them somehow or another, in direct contrast to Communism/Fascism that are firmly rooted in Atheism and would say that there is no God.


National Socialism (Nazis) are, of course, Socialist! The main differences are twofold:

#1: They understood that it was bats**t insane to try to do Communism on the whole world at once (too bad they only saw that clearly), so they decided to do it to themselves first and then Hierarchically dominate the world! Scary thing being that the Germans were high-trust enough that they actually got away with the Socialism part more or less (it probably helped that they had a penchant for getting rid of the Jewish banksters who loved to prey on socialism).

#2: They (the Nazis) weren't exactly just National Socialists. They also had a cult of personality going around Hitler, along with a "Power for Power's Sake" and "Might makes Right" philosophical leanings courtesy of Darwin/Nietzsche. Hitler was their god and their conscience. I think we can all see the problems here.


Democrats are all about a system that cannot possibly work (as I pointed out above)! Really though, they're two different populations. Population #1 knows better, and is all about making it work for the most dishonest and manipulative individuals. Population #2 is full of stupid, easily manipulated people who honestly think Democracy can work, and Pop2 is many times as numerous as Population #1. Can you say Master/Slave morality? Hi Nietzsche!

Republicans knew democracy didn't work (and no, a republic is NOT a "representative democracy", although the USA isn't exactly a republic anymore either... women and non-landowners/non-soldiers and everyone else vote? Not a Republic), but they don't realize that the USA stopped being a Republic a long time ago.


Okay, NOW we're ready to discuss left vs right vs Nazi. The new left is remnants of the Democrats (Master/Slave morality!) with relatively new socialist/communist leanings. They're a mashup of Nazi/Communist by pretty much anyone(sane)'s estimation. Yeah, they aren't exactly like "Thee Nazeez"(TM) because they don't currently have a cult of personality, and the Nietzscheism is still on the down-low (Masters be sneaky mofos).

Sure, there are a handful of old-school(ish) Liberals in there somewhere, but they are (and have been for a looong time) a lot like the Libertarians. Their ideology doesn't last a minute in contact with footsoldier reality, and they basically enabled the commies and Masters(TM).


Yes, Nazis are creatures of the left. It couldn't be much more plain.


Incidentally, you notice the major difference between Communism and Monarchy? Monarchies believed in God and believed that human beings (even the peasants) were made in the image of God, rather than being soulless deterministic meat-machines. While the Alt-Right isn't about Monarchy, the same distinction (even if not the only one) is in effect.

Blogger szopen August 17, 2017 7:04 AM  

I was debating a lot of leftism over whether nazis were left- or right- wing. I know that their two main arguments, which they always throw at you and think that settles the debate, are "nationalism" and 'right-wing authoritarianism'. They are usually unaware that historically leftist ideologies were quite often nationalistic, and, in fact, one can safely argue that in XIX century nationalism WAS left-wing; and second, "right-wing authoritarianism" is named wrongly, and
(1) while in USA people scoring high on RWA tend to support the right, in eastern europe there is at least one study showing that those scoring high on RWA tend to support left-wing parties
(2) One study replaces "right-wing authorities" (police, government) with "left-wing authorities" (professors, social activists) and immedietely the results were reversed, ie leftwingers scored higher on authoritarianism than rightwingers.

Anonymous Walter Oleg August 17, 2017 7:30 AM  

VD wrote:this bickering is pointless.

The truth is never pointless.


It was a star wars quote. But I don't think an ongoing conflict between you and the Alt-White is a good idea at this time.

However, the Alt-White needs to look at itself very closely. There were some bad optics at the last rally. Uniformed people, swastika flags, fascist salutes.

People need to sort themselves out before engaging in political activism. You can have acid thrown in your face or be hit by baseball bats. You can be doxed and see your children threatened by strangers in stores.

You better be sure you have your roomed cleaned.

Anonymous Walter Oleg August 17, 2017 7:38 AM  

VD wrote:this bickering is pointless.

The truth is never pointless.


THis isn't a good time for in-group feud. Spencer's been doing a good job. But the Alt-White needs to sort itself out. Swastika, military uniforms, roman salute are bad optics.

Everyone interested in street politics needs to be squared away. You can be blinded or hit on the head with a bike lock, or doxed and have your family threatened.

Clean you room first

Blogger Silly but True August 17, 2017 8:02 AM  

Rando,
Should not have been necessary? Is this somehow a suggestion that leftists are restrained in killing? Or killing their own?

It's according to SPLC's own bio on Kessler that he was turned from the Obama-voting global socialist into a national socialist because the liberal social media was too mean to itself -- he turned into a nazi because twitter was too salty towards Justine Sacco's brand of humor. So it was liberal whites who harassed Sacco who are ultimately to blame for Heyer's death.

Don't think global and national socialists won't kill each other given the chance: check out the Greensboro massacre. Charlottesville is just one stop in the path these socialists have been travelling for nearly a hundred years now.

The left is doing the heavy lifting here: it made itself very clear that it was not using the rhetorical use of nazi to mean any old thing it found to be fascist.

It was precise in it's language to literally call Trump literally Hitler (or literally worse) and his alt-right supportors literal nazis.

They are wrong, of course. And the discission of the finer dialectic points of national socialism is worth having.

The next one after that is the origins and history of the Ku Klux Klan.

Silly but True

Blogger Desdichado August 17, 2017 8:20 AM  

Ivar wrote:This is an argument essentially about nothing. Most of the 'Neo Nazis' are attracted to the symbolism and the elan associated with the WW II German armed forces. I doubt many or them know or care about the fine points of economic and social theory. I don't think 'wearing the shirt' is useful or mentally healthy, but I do think it is one way the mind protects itself when it has had enough.
Yeah, sure. The apparent rise of the skinheads and Stormfronters right now, most of whom never really went away, but who have now achieved a kind of prominence in the eyes of the media, because they're salivating to paint everyone to the right of Che Guevara as a Nazi, was always based on two pressure points, both of which have increased dramatically in the last twenty years or so. 1) White people are continually oppressed and backed into a corner in their own nation that they're own ancestors built, and which is their birthright and inheritance—what hasn't already been spoiled or destroyed, that is. There's a great deal of resentment and anger over this, as the effects of it are becoming more visible and more obvious all of the time. 2) The constant shaming attempts, such as by (((Halo))) here, by way of example, have started getting to people who are sick and tired of it, and are starting to ZFG on the issue. If they're going to call you a Nazi anyway, go ahead and dress like one, or become a Nazi apologist, or whatever—it's kind edgy and fun to be the despised counter-culture. These same people would probably have been free luv-n-drugs hippies fifty years ago for the same reason; it's edgy and it's tweaking their parents' values. Not because they care about economic systems except in a rudimentary, shallow way, but because it's counter-culture and rebellious.

Blogger Unknown August 17, 2017 9:39 AM  

Reminds me of the Carlist motto Dios, Patria, Rey. They were also regionalist without that impeding them from believing in a united Spain. They were also anti-French revolution.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dios,_rey_y_patria

Anonymous Anonymous August 17, 2017 3:57 PM  

Unlike socialist leftist Karl Marx and libertarian leftist Ayn Rand, the right is not thrall to economic ideology.

The right reverences God, family and nation. To the right, economics is a mere tool to be used pragmatically.

If Vox goes into this debate thinking right = Ayn Rand, Johnson will chew him up and spit him out.

The real reason Hitler was a radical centrist fascist, rather than a true man of the right, has nothing to do with economic philosophy. Hitler defied God and disgraced the German nation by planning to murder brother nations such as the Poles, Czech, Serbs, Russians etc. He used Leninist methods of mass murder to kill millions of Jews, Gypsies, Slavs etc.

That is the real issue. And don't let Johnson, another radical centrist, make you think that we Whites should be indifferent to the murder of Jews. As inheritors of European Christian civilization, we men of the right need never feel guilty for deploring the murder of any human beings.

Blogger Ben Sanderson August 17, 2017 7:29 PM  

Best to go with Rothbard's analysis : socialism is in the middle of the spectrum. To be on the right is to be on the side of the King and Church, throne and altar. To be on the Left is to be on the side of the Squirearchy, the small businessman, the tradesman.
Socialism is in the middle - equidistant between left and right - because it uses state apparatus, the throne and altar, to distribute wealth and Gibs to the masses.

Anonymous reactionaryguy August 17, 2017 8:37 PM  

International Socialism: Communism
National Socialism: Nazism
Democratic Socialism: Fabianism


sounds about right.

wouldnt International Socialism be closely related to Bolsheviks tactics used b Lenin and Trotsky. they tried to spread revolution and linking with Germany,
by invading Poland and were stopped. apparently Stalinists were different.

The original Right was King, Church, and Nation.

I usually avoid left vs right talk because of so many different views.
But this comment I can agree. During the French Revolution
the Monarchs were on the right and the Republicans and Liberal on the left (they were considered revolutionaries). Had support from freemasonry (which today has some power amongst elites).
So the old revolutionaries are in power today across the Western world.


Anonymous reactionaryguy August 17, 2017 8:43 PM  

On numerous occasions Vox Day and those in his comment section have broad brushed jews and lumped them all together

Halo, none of those comments were hates. Lumping Jews as a collective isnt hate in itself.
Criticizing Jews is not hate either.

Anonymous Moonbear August 18, 2017 1:32 AM  

This ought to be interesting.

Blogger Sillon August 18, 2017 4:02 AM  

@84
Zitelmann agrees that Hitler was a socialist, albeit a socialist of a new and revolutionary type.

Like the Chinese communist party, when it suits me I'm communist and capitalist when is good for the bottom line. A new revolutionary form of communism.

Anonymous Anonymous August 23, 2017 4:36 PM  

If the Right endorses individual freedom and the Left endorses government control, then the FAR RIGHT (to the sounds of the opening of Bach's Toccata and Fugue in D Minor) should be anarchists and the FAR LEFT (cue the Theremin) should be advocates of totalitarianism. Totalitarianism, you know, like Nazis.

«Oldest ‹Older 201 – 249 of 249

Post a Comment

Rules of the blog

<< Home

Newer Posts Older Posts