Category: Hitler

Hora vs. Oktoberfest

The betrayal of the Legionary movement by Saint Adolf

Read this. Emphasis added:

In the same book are found innumerable passages which demonstrate German complicity in ousting the Legionary Movement in addition to the premeditation of the coup d’état. Germany found it easier to get along with General Antonescu than with the indomitable Legionary Movement. Thus, in the course of a visit with Hitler, in the midst of a discussion on the modem revolution, General Antonescu made the following remark:

“And what do you do with the fanatics, for it would be difficult to make a renovating movement without them?”

“You have to get rid of them,” replied Hitler without hesitation, and he smilingly threw the General a look of complicity. 

Hitler ended his exposition with these sentences:

The man who allows himself to be dispossessed of his command — and he stared at the General with insistence — proves that he does not know how to use a machine gun. A 20th century dictator cannot be overthrown. If he falls, it is because he committed suicide…

Back in Bucharest, Antonescu maintained absolute silence about the matters discussed during the fifteen minutes he spent alone with Hitler. The conversation which had taken place in the presence of witnesses gave the impression that he had gotten satisfaction as far as his conflict with the Legionary Movement was concerned…

January 22, 1941: Dawn of this day finds the military forces and the Legionnaires face to face. The military attacks buildings occupied by Legionnaires, the latter defend themselves. The clashes between the two belligerents seem more like a siege, in which the besieged are those who are accused of fomenting the rebellion and who defend themselves with whatever weapons they can find. It is a strange “rebellion” in which the supposed rebels choose not to attack and to avoid any conflict with the forces that besiege them.

There appears to be a kind of stabilization of positions and expectations of the two sides. In certain regions there is even collaboration between the army and the Legionnaires. Some local incidents have taken place in Bucharest, Braila and Prahova where several Legionnaires but no military fell. The most serious problem for General Antonescu arises on January 22, 1941, because of the attitude of the peasant masses. By the hundreds of thousands they begin to penetrate into the cities to help the besieged Legionnaires.

In the meantime, negotiations take place during the day between the German representative, Neubacher and Horia Sima for the cessation of hostilities. Result: The Legionary Movement agrees to stop all resistance. General Antonescu pledges not to take any action against the Legionary Movement or its militants. However, parallel to those negotiations, General Antonescu increases his intrigues, his accusations against the Legionnaires and his military offers to Hitler. All of those accusations only completed the series of calumnies made in Berlin against the Legion and worsened the Legionary position in Hitler’s eyes. Under those circumstances, nothing could be more natural than the order received during the night of January 22-23 by the German troops stationed in Romania to “… put themselves at the disposition of General Antonescu to crush the Legionary rebellion.”

Therefore, it was the Germans who determined the fate of General Antonescu’s coup d’état.

January 23, 1941: The troops being unable to rout the Legionnaires from the official buildings they occupy, General Antonescu gives the order to employ artillery against them. At the same time, the troops in the Capital receive orders to fire into the crowd of passers-by who are automatically considered as partisans of the Legionary Movement. Several hundred who had nothing to do with politics or the Legionary Movement were killed. These were premeditated actions which were to be charged to the Legionary Movement and presented to the Germans as undisciplined and unconscionable actions on the part of the Legionnaires.

And yet, at dawn, Horia Sima had ordered that the resistance cease and that the buildings be evacuated. It should be pointed out that in many cases, the public buildings occupied by the Legionnaires were first turned over to the German army, which then turned them over to Romanian military authorities so that all possibility of conflict would be entirely avoided.

The pact accepted by Horia Sima and General Antonescu before the German diplomat was categorical: total liberty for Legionnaires. Nonetheless, that pact was not respected by the General, nor even considered by the Germans. A few hours after the Legionnaires’ capitulation, General Antonescu gave the order for repression. The enactment of that repression’ registered several hundred killed and tens of thousands arrested. The Legionary Movement entered a new phase of persecution.

April 9, 1941: Horia Sima, leader of the Legionary Movement, arrives in Berlin as an ordinary refugee.

April 18, 1941: The Legionary refugees in Germany are informed that they will be confined from then on to compulsory quarters in certain areas (Rostock, Berkenbruck, etc.) as a result of agreements between the German and Romanian governments.

Absolutely disgusting.  Meanwhile today, Europe as a whole is betrayed by Mama Merkel, while the sweaty fetishists have the nerve to run hit pieces against the Romanian people in places like Amren. I’ll take the Romanians any day.

Advertisements

In Der News, 9/24/18

More commentary. In all cases, emphasis added.

Read this.

Deborah Ramirez, 53, told the New Yorker that Kavanaugh exposed himself at a college dorm party when they were both studying at Yale, “thrust his penis in her face, and caused her to touch it without her consent as she pushed him away.”
“Brett was laughing,” she told the magazine, which posted the story Sunday night. “I can still see his face, and his hips coming forward, like when you pull up your pants.”
Ramirez claims that a male student brought out a fake plastic penis at the party, where the group was playing a drinking game. At one point, she claims another male student exposed himself and other students encouraged her to “kiss it.”
“I wasn’t going to touch a penis until I was married,” Ramirez, a devout Catholic, said. “I was embarrassed and ashamed and humiliated.”

Yes, indeed, she’s a devout Catholic!  So devout and so devoted to not touching a penis until married (and maybe not even then!) that she attended a “college dorm party” “where the group was playing a drinking game.”  Her priest would have approved, no doubt!  Hint: you wouldn’t have been “embarrassed and ashamed and humiliated” if you had been spending your time studying, instead of attending – like a devout Catholic should! – drunken dorm parties.

First, even if it happened, so what?  Second, all these stories only reinforce the idea that women have no business being involved in any serious aspects of human society. We should have sex-segregated dorms; better yet, sex-segregated colleges and universities.

HBD marches on; the despicable Zman:

The new opposition that is forming up in opposition to Team Brown is explicitly white, as well as nationalist and populist. While it is not explicitly antisemitic, despite what some claim, it will certainly be hostile to the sort of cosmopolitanism Jews have historically preferred. Jews could be left without a home…That said, Jews are the most adaptive people in human history. There’s no reason why Jews in America could not simply throw in with the white majority. Just as the neocons broke with the Left over opposition to the Soviets, perhaps liberal Jews will break with the Left over the issue of identity politics. After all, in a balkanized country, the only way for a tiny minority to survive is to attach to the most powerful tribe. Given the options on Team Brown, Team White is going to look like a better option, assuming the option is open.

Consider – “There’s no reason why Jews in America could not simply throw in with the white majority… assuming the option is open.

How about we make damn sure that the option is not open?  I believe in accountability…let the Asiatic Levantine Middle Eastern Jews lie in the bed they made.  “Team Brown” is in large part a Jewish creation, this people has been waging war on the White majority for endless decades – what now? – we have to embrace them if they are “left without a home?”  So we can have Hart proposing a multiracial “White separatist state” or Weissberg telling us we should support the “racial status quo” and equating WNs with child molesters or maybe Levin suggesting that racial preservation for its own sake is crazy?  No sir.  They have a home.  It’s called Israel.  Don’t let the door hit you on the way out.  

We have no obligation to provide a safe haven to the enemy.  Why should we?  To put it in language both the Levantines and their HBD worshippers can understand: to allow the Jews, after all they’ve done and knowing what they are, to “join the White majority” would be like Israel giving a welcoming refuge to “Nazi war criminals.”  Sorry, it isn’t an option.

She’s…HuWhite.

That’s not saying much, Richie.  The great Mudshark Annie, another affirmative action case with piss-poor judgment – remember “In Trump We Trust?’’ Or are current shilling for Antifa Jeff Sessions, also known as Sleepy Jeff?

The God Emperor: all bluster, no action. If Sessions is sleepy, then Trump is comatose. Except, of course, when Donnie Fats wants to pardon some Negro criminals – that really gets the juices flowing, said juices ready for the next Big Mac or the next porn star.

More Hitler worship.

Yeah, Kev, you know, as someone who has intensely studied Hitler and National Socialism for most of my life, I can’t help but notice that “changed stance” of Hitler and his regime toward a more “Pan-Aryan” (whatever that means) concept mysteriously coincided with Germany starting to lose the war, and desiring additional allies (i.e., cannon fodder) among non-Germanic Europeans to desperately try and stop the Soviets from over-running Germany,

It’s true that there were genuinely Pan-European (a more descriptive and accurate term than “Pan-Aryan”) elements within the Waffen SS, but these were ignored and powerless, and the Nordicist “Black SS” faction dominant, until after Stalingrad, when the need for non-Germanic stepandfetchits necessitated a surface veneer change in policy (sort of like Pierce’s National Alliance, eh?).  Even then, Hitler’s conception of “Europe” meant a Europe dominated by Germany – sort of like we have now, and we all know how well that’s been working out, with a childless, broad-faced Borreby hag presiding over the invasion and conquest of Europe by “Team Brown.”

The German Hammer

Constructive criticism.

Germans rank with the English as the ethnies that have contributed the most to human progress over the last several centuries – science and technics, art and music, literature, philosophy, military prowess, etc. But I hope my German readers will not mind some constructive criticism of their ethny.

The problem with Germans is that they are too fanatical, too ponderous and serious, unable to find humor in themselves, not being able to find balance and measure in the objectives they pursue and the belief systems they follow.  So, when the Germans accept nationalism, we end up with Hitler, WWII, and the wreck of the White World.  Then, when the Germans accept anti-nationalism and universalism, we end up with Merkel, Camp of the Saints, and the destruction of Europe.  No balance, no measure, insufficient feedback control.

Now, I am not saying that the Germans should become like feckless, hedonistic, superficial swarthoids.  It’s always better to be the hammer than the anvil.  But, please, can you be a prudent hammer?  Create and not destroy?  I realize that Faustian striving is part of German national greatness, but one can retain the striving without lurching from one extreme to another. Other European ethnies may not, on average, have the Germans’ sustained capacity for productive creativity, but perhaps they may know better when it comes to the balance of life…and death.  The Germans at some point need to stop always pushing themselves on Europe, either from the Right or the Left.  They need to be more flexible, more introspective when it comes to politics and the world stage, more careful in the exercise of their power and influence.

The Germans should also reflect on the fact that Jews and Gypsies were not the only victims of Nazi policy.  Europeans were as well, and if the Germans were a bit more self-aware, and less arrogant in their current moral self-righteousness (aka guilt atonement), they’d think twice before engaging in the spectacle of hectoring Czechs and Poles to destroy themselves by talking in the migrants Mama Merkel foolishly invited into Europe.

The relevance to EGI should be obvious, particularly since Nazism is considered by Salter as a classic example of a “fitness bubble” – an overinvestment in ethny that backfired from the EGI standpoint.  Today, we have the opposite from the Germans – a fitness underinvestment bordering on bankruptcy.  And they are taking all of Europe down with them (not that most other Europeans need much help in being self-destructive).

The Ascent of Saint Adolf

Brief book review. 

Reading this relatively new Hitler book, which concentrates on the first 50 years of Hitler’s life (1889-1939) I note that it contains the usual snide, conformist, and biased anti-Hitler and anti-NS comments one comes to expect from politicized hacks. The anti-Hitler and anti-NS comments come fast and furious; after all, Mr. Ullrich, the author, has to maintain his status in polite society as a good-white cuck (and also does not want to suffer the same fate as David Irving, eh?).

One example of Ullrich’s gratuitous anti-Hitlerism is his smug labelling of the grand architectural plans of Hitler and Speer as “sheer insanity” and “megalomania.”  In contrast, I view those plans as inspiring, and as a reasonable model of what a European Imperium should build – nay, even greater than Hitler and Speer had planned!  

Hitler and Speer planned for the ages, planned for eternity, planned for what they hoped would be a German Empire.  What would the likes of Ullrich wish to see instead, I wonder?  A “Germany” full of mosques, perhaps, with NECs running wild in the streets and African Negroes swinging from the trees?  If that’s what they wish, they are, thanks to Mama Merkel, well along in those developments. “Germany” as a subaltern cuck nation colonized by the Third World: that sounds like a textbook definition of “sheer insanity” to me.

Particularly amusing is the author’s description of the Nuremberg race laws as an example of “grotesque senselessness” because of some sort of alleged inability of the Nazis to define Jewish ancestry (which, for some mysterious reason, the Jews themselves were perfectly capable of doing).  Modern genetics confirms the validity of the Nuremberg concept, as even quarter-Jews can be genetically distinguished from gentile Europeans.  The bulk of what we know as Jews constitute a reasonably defined ethnic group, and certainly, within that larger grouping, the Ashkenazim, consisting of the vast bulk of those Jews that the Nuremberg laws dealt with, constitute a particularly well defined ethny.  Given the strong correspondence between Jewish identity and Jewish genetics, the Nazi identification of, say, a half-Jew, as someone with two grandparents belonging to the “Jewish religious community,” is actually biologically sound, and far from the “grotesque senselessness” that the scientifically illiterate Ullrich pretends it is.

There are some even more obvious factual errors in the book as well; for example, what to make of September 27, 1939 being described as “several weeks before the beginning of the Second World War” (emphasis added)?

An annoying part of the book is all the sob stories about the “persecution” of the Jews during this pre-WWII period of the Nazi regime. We have the gnashing of the teeth about Kristallnacht, as well as the alleged horrors Jews suffered in Vienna after the Anschluss – university professors made to scrub the streets with their bare hands, or “pious” old Jews made to do “leg squats” in temples while yelling “Heil Hitler!”  But didn’t others have things worse, including ethnies that were the victims of Jewish communist-led genocide?  How many Slavs were slaughtered by the Jews in the Soviet Union?  Was scrubbing the streets or doing deep knee bends worse than millions of Ukrainians being deliberately starved to death in the Holodomor, while grinning Levantines carted off the foodstuffs?   Ullrich doesn’t have the common decency to acknowledge that Nazi “persecution” of Jews was at least in part motivated by the knowledge of what Jewish communists did to Europeans in the USSR, and the fear that they would have done the same in Germany if they had the opportunity. Yes, indeed, I would assume that Ukrainians watching their children die from starvation would have wished they could have got off easy by scrubbing streets and squatting up and down a few times.  But, hey, they were only Slav gentiles, so who cares about them, right?  

Ignoring all of these glaring flaws, the book is fairly well-written and the objective facts buried under the subjective hysteria do shed some light on the Hitler phenomenon, but I came away from this book with a profound disrespect for Ullrich and his “character.”

And Hitler himself?  Saint Adolf was like an individual given a choice of what to do with his money: either put it into prudent, long-term investments; or got to a casino and engage in the most risky forms of high-stakes gambling – and chooses the latter, losing everything.  The money in this case represents the long-term EGI of the German people and of Europeans as a whole, and, also, the money represents the legitimacy of “Far Right” nationalism, particularly fascist thought, and especially the tenets of National Socialism.  Hitler, being the archetype of the Type I “movement” Nutzi and ethnic fetishist, of course took the gambling route, losing all and ruining all; indeed, it is no wonder Saint Adolf is a grand hero and role model for Der Movement, Inc., since the behavioral patterns of he and they are exactly the same.  In summary: Hitler was an idiot.

The Scorpion and the Frog

Europeans are the Frog.  Guess who the Scorpion is.

A summary.

A scorpion asks a frog to carry it across a river. The frog hesitates, afraid of being stung, but the scorpion argues that if it did so, they would both drown. Considering this, the frog agrees, but midway across the river the scorpion does indeed sting the frog, dooming them both. When the frog asks the scorpion why, the scorpion replies that it was in its nature to do so.

Read this – Quinn’s finale on the MacDonald-Cofnas dustup.

See this article from 2010, which is relevant to the questions and criticisms of Quinn.

Ultimately, in a sense, Quinn is correct in that whether the Jews are, or are not, acting on behalf of their own evolutionary group interests is irrelevant from the perspective of the victims of Jewish behavior.  Maybe the Jews hate Whites more than they love themselves.  Maybe the Jews are dooming themselves by their embrace of, and promotion of, the poisons they are using to undermine European survival.  It could be irrational; it could just be their nature, as like the Scorpion in stinging the Frog.  In Mein Kampf Hitler asserted that if the Jews succeeded in destroying Aryans, they would turn on each other next, in hate-filled struggle.  Of course, whether or not the Jews will destroy themselves does not obligate Europeans to allow themselves to be destroyed as well.  For the victim of murder, a murder followed by the suicide of the murderer is not more palatable than murder alone.

Perhaps Europeans should worry more about defending themselves against Jewish behavior rather than worrying whether or not that behavior is, or is not, evolutionarily beneficial to Jews.  We need to shift the focus on us rather than on them.

Happy Saint Adolf Day 2018

SLC News.

“World Brotherhood of Europeans” – excluding Afrowops and Romanohorians of course.

Did you ever notice that:

***When Americans fight wars that benefit Jews (e.g., WWII, any of the Middle Eastern wars that benefit Israel), then veterans are good and noble, and popular culture fetishizes veteran worship; however, when Americans fight wars that Jews disapprove of (e.g., Vietnam or even the entire “Cold War” military endeavor), then veterans are despicable “baby killers” to be scorned, while anti-war protesters and draft dodgers are lionized.  Funny, that.  It’s almost as if the entire American culture is modulated to reflect Jewish concerns and Jewish views. 

***In a typical modern American classroom, half the students have attention deficit disorder and the other half have a peanut allergy.  And most are overweight.

More SLC News:

The Alt Right’s “generational warfare” is ludicrous from my perspective for many reasons, foremost among them is that virtually every White Millennial I have known (many in fact) is not only an extreme leftist, but they all are hysterically ultra-SJW extreme leftists, oozing with the most virulent anti-White attitudes imaginable.  Boomers may be cucked cowards, but many (most?) Millennials are open enemies.

Read this.

The roots of what we now call the Alt-Right lay in the Ron Paul movement.

And that is why the Alt Right is doomed to fail.  It was tainted by libertardism from the very beginning.

Read this, emphasis added (from the original book):

….the degree of genetic differentiation among Indian jati groups living side by side in the same village is typically two to three times higher than the genetic differentiation between northern and southern Europeans.

Let’s unpack that for a moment.  Typically, population genetics tells us that the greatest genetic differentiation in Europe is along the north/south axis, being a bit larger than east/west; the first axis in PCA is north/south, the second is east/west.  However, that differentiation, the north/south, in Europe is two to three times smaller than that between Indian brownster “micro-castes” who live “side by side in the same village.”  

Chuck the gamester pussy pedestalizer.

IQ and Leadership

Part of the explanation?

Why “movement” leaders tend to be, in general, incompetent mediocrities leads to a number theories.  There is of course Der Movement’s stringent ethnic affirmative action program. The dominance of Der Movement by Type I activists, who favor their own, for leadership, also is a factor.  Dissident movements tend to draw in marginal personalities, while the elevation of defective freakishness repels the less marginal; the lack of suitable candidates leads to marginal leaders. Leaders are almost always overt and public activists, typically attracting people who have “little to lose” IRL (unless they are trust fund babies or the retired wealthy).

Another mechanism is that even when other variables are controlled for, the perception (perception, NOT reality) of who is an effective leader is related to the leader’s IQ, but in a curvilinear and not linear fashion.  Thus, assuming an average IQ of 100, the peak for optimal perceived leadership is an IQ of 120 – not only are dumber people perceived as less effective, but smarter ones as well. One can theorize mechanisms for this phenomenon, but it is what it is.  Emphasis added:

Although researchers predominately test for linear relationships between variables, at times there may be theoretical and even empirical reasons for expecting nonlinear functions. We examined if the relation between intelligence (IQ) and perceived leadership might be more accurately described by a curvilinear single-peaked function. Following Simonton’s (1985) theory, we tested a specific model, indicating that the optimal IQ for perceived leadership will appear at about 1.2 standard deviations above the mean IQ of the group membership. The sample consisted of midlevel leaders from multinational private-sector companies. We used the leaders’ scores on the Wonderlic Personnel Test (WPT)-a measure of IQ-to predict how they would be perceived on prototypically effective leadership (i.e., transformational and instrumental leadership). Accounting for the effects of leader personality, gender, age, as well as company, country, and time fixed effects, analyses indicated that perceptions of leadership followed a curvilinear inverted-U function of intelligence. The peak of this function was at an IQ score of about 120, which did not depart significantly from the value predicted by the theory. As the first direct empirical test of a precise curvilinear model of the intelligence-leadership relation, the results have important implications for future research on how leaders are perceived in the workplace.

This may be another explanation for “movement” failure.  120 IQ people are intelligent no doubt, but have limitations.  Most prominent “movement” leaders would tend to be in this range (Hello Alt Right!  Hello Alt Wrong!) and more intelligent and capable people are weeded out (and for other reasons such as those discussed above).

But, but, but…”what about William Pierce?” Der Movement mutters.  There are those other variables to consider: “leader personality, gender, age, as well as company, country, and time fixed effects.”  Pierce benefited from ethnic affirmative action, although not particularly charismatic he had certain alpha male personality traits, he was tall and physically imposing, people respected him for giving up his academic career to associate with Rockwell, and there was a time/era effect – he came to prominence in an America more appreciative of the science/technical men; today’s Beavis-and-Butthead “movement” is unlikely to value an “egghead” physicist.

And consider Strom, likely equally intelligent, but never considered as leadership material even before his legal troubles.  Although ethnically acceptable, Strom’s personality and other traits could not compensate for a high-IQ (and likely contributed to a more negative view).  Gliebe was much more acceptable to the rank-and-file: how did that turn out?

Historically: Hitler was likely less intelligent than Goebbels, Mussolini less intelligent than Gentile or Evola, Codreanu less intelligent than Cuza, etc.  Francis Parker Yockey failed as a practical leader, and a careful reading of Coogan’s book suggests reasons why, some of which relate to Yockey’s own personality quirks and personal failings, but also because of jealousy over his obvious genius as well as the inability for him to effectively explain his concepts to the Type I riff-raff.

Getting around this problem would entail the high-IQ leader compensating like Pierce if possible, or surrounding himself with high-IQ advisers and listening to them, or a fundamental change in the “movement” that would allow it to overcome the societal prejudice against the higher-IQ.