A Brief Ethnographic Comment

Thoughts.

Contra MacDonald’s wrong-headed claim that I am some sort of spokesman in favor of (Southern) Italians, long-time readers of this blog know that I am in fact highly critical of Italians (of all types, North and South). However, my criticism is based on reality, not crazed fantasy, and I am equally critical of other groups. In contrast to Der Movement, I do not say that Italians are bad and Germans are good; instead, I say that both groups are bad (and of course each has some good as well). Indeed, all groups can be justly criticized, including each and every European ethny.

I see Italians as undisciplined lazy hedonists who act the buffoon and whose pathological individualism makes then comically inept with respect to collective action, and who therefore are the subject of well-deserved contempt.

I see Germans – and here I also include Austrians – as humorless comically self-unaware fanatics who lurch from one extreme to another and who are oblivious to the damage that their crazed behavior does to themselves and others. 

If Italians are a comedy, then Germans are a horror movie.

The ultimate indictment of wops – the common fate of Rienzi and Mussolini.

The ultimate indictment of krauts – the mirror-image extremism of Hitler and Merkel.

No one else should smugly laugh at that; I can criticize your ethny with equal accuracy and effectiveness.

Odds and Ends, 12/27/20

In der news.  In all cases, emphasis added.

Note the reference to Mike Rienzi.  Ted Sallis interview of Mike Rienzi here.  That’s mocking of Der Movement, for the Type I retardates who can’t figure that out for themselves.

Interesting comment:

attilathehen says:

December 2, 2017 

@geokat62

Thank you!!! This proves everything that I’ve been saying. This also reveals what VDare is really about. Derbyshire has been writing with a forked pen for years and very few people call him out on this. This is because Jews have high intermarriage rates with blacks/Asians. And VDare has a lot of semitophiles in its organization. The idea that a white man can write about saving the West when his Chinese wife and daughter voted for Obama reveals the degeneracy of this man…

I agree wholeheartedly.

An example of the affirmative action Johnson denies exists. I understand the animus against the GOP, and I have expressed the same, as part of the Sallis Strategy, among other things, but every situation needs to be judged on its own merits.  After four years of “all bark and no bite” Trump and the Alt Right, the Left is out for blood, and it is height of foolishness to empower the Left at this time, particularly since Der Movement is so inept and helpless that it is in no position to resist further persecution. True enough, Republican senators will support similar persecution (to some extent), and yes, the GOP needs to be punished for its habit of taking White voters for granted. But how is the GOP going to get that message by Whites voting for the Far Left?  Wouldn’t the message in that case be that the GOP failed for being insufficiently anti-White? If Whites didn’t vote, and it was made clear that the reason was the GOP’s betrayal of White interests, then that would be one thing. If, in a general election (not a run-off), a pro-White third party siphoned off White votes from the GOP, that would be even better. But, in this situation, in the current circumstances, what kind of idiot would endorse the Far Left?

Move affirmative action here.  One of the major themes of the discussion is Taylor’s naiveté, which he himself admits and his friend Dickson repeatedly points out, and that is on full display in that podcast. Compare Dickson’s and Taylor’s views in this discussion. Taylor’s naiveté is an issue that has been brought up in many forums, it is something that has been going on for years. The same problem, the same issue, occurs again and again, with no change. Well, why change?  If there are no consequences for error in Der Movement, then there is no incentive to change; there is no selective pressure for adaption. That’s a perfect example of affirmative action and nothing Johnson says, none of his childish insults, can change the facts.

But, hey, keep on supporting these folks, all you rank-and-file out there, and when you keep on losing, time and again, you’ll scratch your heads and wonder why.  You are just as naïve as Taylor is, in your own way.

According to Dickson, only “insiders” can criticize an entity – only Southerners can criticize Southerners, and others cannot do so.  Interesting.  Does that apply to other groups as well?

I agree with Dickson with respect to his cynicism, skepticism, and hostility to the System. However, does Dickson ever wonder how the Left has taken over the entire System, despite the decades-long activism of people such as himself? Does Dickson ever wonder if his “movement” is a complete and utter failure?  

Jim Goad’s favorite movie scene is undoubtedly from 9:40-11:00 here.

Goad:

We also left behind the fat black lady from across the street…

Rewritten to be more succinct:

We also left behind the black lady from across the street…

The adjective “fat” is an unnecessary and superfluous descriptor for “black lady” – the term “black lady” in and of itself already includes the assumption of “fat.”

Strom and the National Alliance are disgracefully promoting Luddite anti-vaxx pseudoscientific nonsense.  In other words, because some folks are embittered that their children have autism and because they need to blame “someone else,” that means that Whites need to be afflicted with, and suffer morbidity and mortality from, easily preventable diseases.  While I don’t like to be the one to introduce personal matters into these debates, Strom did it himself by mentioning his son. Therefore, I would suggest he watch that “Revilo Oliver memorial tape” produced by the National Alliance in the mid-90s for a possible clue other than “toxic vaccines pushed by Jews and Big Pharma” for the problem in question. Every single person who I know who watched that tape noticed the same thing I did.

Der Right is an intellectual, moral, and spiritual embarrassment. Der Right is never going to attract the sort of intelligent STEM people it needs since it is rife with crackpot nuttiness. 

Der Movement and Der Right must be unalterably opposed by all thoughtful racialists – their vision of a “White ethnostate” would be of a “bring out your dead” 14th century Black Death-ridden pestilential hellhole. Meanwhile, as the Chinese reach for the stars, Whites will be firing up rusty old iron lungs for the newest generation of polio victims.

Question: When Pasteur inoculated  Meister – was that a conspiracy of “Jew doctors?”  

Between the Sallis Groupuscule and Der Movement is a gulf almost as wide as that between each of those entities and the System/Left.

Legionary Fascism as the Most Pure Fascist Form

Palingenesis.

Which major fascism can be considered the most pure form of the creed – considering Griffin’s definition of “palingenetic ultra-nationalism?”

Of the various major historical forms of fascism, the Italian version was the least “pure,” the least palingenetic.  Indeed, that is why we read:

….Codreanu has also become a main reference point for the Italian neofascist groups, alongside Evola and the ideologues of Nazism. He argues that this phenomenon, which tends to shadow references to Italian Fascism itself, is owed to Mussolini’s failures in setting up “a true fascist state”, and to the subsequent need of finding other role models.

Although I am often critical of the Italian character, I do not believe that character is responsible for the failures of Italian fascism with respect to palingenesis. After all, there is evidence of palingenesis at various points in Italian history. Fascism as an integrated political movement began in Italy; further, Italy had a history of definite early proto-fascism centered on national renewal – Cola di Rienzi being a prominent example (and then there are Garibaldi and D’Annunzio), and Gentile’s Actual Idealism provided a sound philosophical basis for palingenetic activism in the service of the State.  And we cannot forget the undercurrents of Futurism in early Italian fascism.  No, the failure of Italian fascism most likely had its roots in certain defects of Mussolini’s character, as well as the attachment of Italian fascism (pre-Salo) to the monarchy and to the perfidious influence of the Catholic Church. In Romania, the Legionaries were never slavishly adherent to the pontifications of decrepit nobles (although they did support the monarchy in principle) and the Orthodox faith was more robust than effete and superficial Catholicism.  In Germany of course, the Kaiser was gone and Hitler did not tolerate religious interference in the function of the Third Reich.  

Now, Italian fascism was indeed respectfully palingenetic in its beginning and at its end.  Early fascism, with its strain of novelty, Futurism, and under the influence of Gentile, was sufficiently robust; further, in the Italian Social Republic (Salo), the monarchy has been jettisoned, the influence of the Church weakened, and a more militant, socialist, and pan-European form of fascism emerged from the ashes of the former fascist state.  It is telling that Gentile, before his assassination, made a re-emergence as a figure of importance at this stage, demonstrating that his instincts were always sound. Unfortunately, these positive eras in Italian fascism bookended a long reactionary period, starting with the Vatican accord and ending with Mussolini’s overthrow, in which fascist revolutionary zeal stagnated, and a dull authoritarianism replaced palingenetic fervor.

Having said all of that, there may well be a contribution to the Italian character to the relative lack of fanaticism and discipline exhibited by Italian fascism compared to other versions of the creed. That’s not palingenesis, but the degree of commitment and willingness to sacrifice to the cause. However, even so, much blame must still go to Mussolini for essentially wasting a generation in power.  But, with that, Mussolini was still a very great men, and Yockey’s praise for him in Imperium was fully justified. It is unfortunate that his greatness was tainted by flaws that prevented the potential of fascism to be actualized in Italy.

German fascism, not surprisingly, exhibited discipline and considerable fanaticism.  It did have significant palingenetic aspects, focused on race and eugenics.  However, there are some problems here.  It’s true that that Nazi regime was technically advanced – think of the V-1 and V-2, the jet and rocket planes, advanced U-boats, and other “German secret weapons” (albeit unfortunately not the atom bomb) – but still, the Nazi regime was anti-Futurist, and was focused on a “traditionalist” return to the ideal of Nordic Germanic tribes, manifested in 20th century reality by a neo-feudal society of Germanic overlords and Slavic serfs in conquered Eastern Europe.  So, balancing out the palingenetic aspects of German Nazi fascism were reactionary elements, coupled to a hyper-materialist focus on a strictly biological palingenesis.

As regards the Romanian Legion, see this.  Also see this.

Despite some superficial traditionalist elements, the Legionary movement had definite Futurist strains, and it was the single most palingenetic fascist movement in its insistence on the renewal of the individual, on the most fundamental spiritual levels of character, and on the renewal of the society into something different and better. Concepts of self-sacrifice and personal overcoming was maximized in the Legionary movement, on a personal level, compared to other fascisms.  To paraphrase Codreanu, Italian fascism was about the State, German fascism was about the Race, but Romanian fascism was about the Soul, about the New Man, about forming a new type of Romanian without which national renewal would be impossible.  In this sense we can see why I consider Romanian Legionary fascism to be the most pure form of the creed – it was at least as ultra-nationalist as any other fascism, but it brought the concept of palingenesis, of over-coming, to a higher level of any other fascist creed; it called for the most radical alteration of self and society, particularly if we are to consider the creed on its own terms and elevate the importance of Spirit over Matter (at least with respect to Palingenesis). The Italians focused on remaking the State, the Germans on improving the biological race, but the Romanians emphasized remaking the Man and Society.

Antebellum Palingenetic Ultranationalism

More on fascism.  Red font emphasis added.

This here is a link to an essay in the Fascism journal arguing that the Antebellum American South had “proto-fascist” features similar to “Germany’s nineteenth century Völkisch movement.”  This paradigm may be of interest to “Southern nationalists” extant in Der Movement (which I am not), so I’ll just reproduce a few interesting excerpts with very brief comments, and let the “Hunter Wallace” types delve into this in more detail if they are so inclined.

The abstract:

This article examines how the Southern proslavery defense produced a distinctly proto-fascist ideology. Rather than comparing the Antebellum South to twentieth century racist regimes, this study compares Southern fascist thought to Germany’s nineteenth century Völkisch movement. The author uses Roger Griffin’s Palingenetic Ultranationalism to explore how the Antebellum South promoted an illiberal vision of modernity. The author argues that proto-fascists rejected liberalism, had a profound sense of social decay, and advanced a vision of a new man, new political structure, and a new temporality. The striking similarities between nineteenth and twentieth century fascist movements mandates that the Antebellum American South should be included in comparative fascist studies. The results of this study contextualize the comparisons made between American racism and fascism along with deepening our understanding of fascism’s protean qualities.

It’s interesting how these “analysts of fascism” stress “fascism’s protean qualities” and then they proceed to impose rigid definitions on various fascist sub-genera. While those are different authors, they share the same mindset, writing for the same journal, and yet construct fascism according to pre-conceived notions while also asserting “protean qualities.”  True, there are some fundamental constant in fascism, but “anti-modernity” and völkisch racialism are not, in my opinion two of those.

Similarly, Riehl also believed that hierarchies are natural and it is modernity which is alien for the aristocracy preserved the true nature of the Volk. Such ideas were not limited to Europe. For the South, hierarchy, inequality, and slavery was, too, a patriarchal system descended from God. With such strong convictions, it is no wonder the South sought a palingenesis. They regarded their aristocracy not only as the best hope for the future of humanity but as a God ordained institution besieged. For the Southern intelligentsia, to allow Northern abolitionists to criticize slavery was intolerable.

Fair enough, I suppose.

Nonetheless, perhaps the largest hindrance toward the development of a populist fascist movement was the proto-fascist cult of aristocracy. The proto-fascist image of the new man is rooted in traditional elitist conservatism and excluded popular participation. Nevertheless, there were signs that this position was untenable. Southern elites were facing increased pressure from a newly emerging class consciousness of the poor and sought ways to mobilize popular participation to the extent possible at the time. The South’s emphasis on the white race was, to a certain degree, a populist message which promised to elevate the non-slave owner through his skin color. Fitzhugh even advanced the idea of a Southern education to disseminate principles of the new man: ‘We alone are a new people. Our social relations and institutions differ widely from those of other civilized countries of modern times, and in some respects from those of antiquity. New, original, and valuable combinations of thought will be suggested by our social organism . . . A Southern university will beget Southern thought and a Southern literature . . . When we cease to study Northern and European books . . . [we will] build up a Southern literature, more truthful, more Christian, more natural, and therefore superior to any that has preceded it.’ In fact, Fitzhugh advocated the elevation of white masses to the positions of superiority: ‘Our citizens, like those of Rome and Athens, are a privileged class. We should train and educate them to deserve the privileges and to perform the duties which society confers on them.’ Later, in Sociology for the South, Fitzhugh continues to venerate classical aristocracies as a paragon, ‘Like the Roman citizen, the Southern white man would become a noble and a privileged character’. De Bow contributor, L.W. Spratt believed that reopening the Atlantic slave trade would open Southern slavery to the masses, enabling popular participation in the slavocracy. In De Bow’s Review, he stated: ‘for all to become slave owners . . . will thus bring all the ruling race to the same social stand point; it will thus reintegrate and erect our social system . . . and open the prospect to a broader and brighter future than was ever yet expanded to the eye of man.’ Although the South was a rigid oligarchy, Southern intellectuals envisioned popular participation in the creation of the new man; heralding the future arrival of the populist ultranationalism of future fascist regimes.

Thus, the tension between aristocratic elitism and populism…possibly resolved through a common set of racial interests?

Proto-fascists between the South and Germany believed stripping the individual of their rights created a better society. Although the assault on individual liberty strikes at the very foundations of American notions of freedom, Southern intellectuals portrayed their alternative in a positive manner.

The Ramseyian Alt Liters weep.

Conclusion and Discussion: Toward a Fascist Revolution?

The Southern intellectuals sought the creation of a new man and a new modernity in a new nation. This palingenesis would enable Southerners to end their status as victims under Northern degeneracy. It would preserve traditional social roles between men, women, and race. It would be a forward looking ideology, a distinctly Southern modernity as an alternative to the liberal society of the North. The core of the Southern palingenesis was the creation of a new type of industrial slave society.

So, after all the pontifications about fascist” anti-modernity” we see “a distinctly Southern modernity” and “a new type of industrial slave society.”  Modernity is not something to be fought, but something to be leveraged and used, according to your society’s own unique Race-Culture.  The “protean qualities” of fascism are compatible with the more healthy aspects of modernity – particularly science and technics.

Although the South prized slavery as the ideal of communist goals, they abhorred the ideology. The Southern intelligentsia sought a third way between capitalism and communism because they believed free labor begat revolution and degeneracy. Low paid workers fermented revolution, abolition and feminism.

Slavery has never been stable throughout human history.  Slaves always ended up being freed.  It seems that the slave-owing antebellum southern aristocracy were justifying their own greed and reactionary refusal to change with the times and cut their losses.  Free White labor is infinitely better than free Colored labor, and ultimately, that was the only long term choice.

Above all, a working class led to socialism, not only in terms of the emancipation of their slaves as property but in inaugurating equality between race and sex.

Nonsense, if you believe an absolute inevitability.

To fight against degeneracy was to fight against democratic participation, abolitionism, feminism, socialism, and communism. To control and roll back the discontent of the working class and the revolutions they ignited, it was necessary to control them as tightly as possible, hence, a renewed and modernized slave state was the answer.

Short-sighted.

Cumulatively, the proslavery ideology of the South was proto-fascist. The palingenesis of the South did not completely resemble the fascist regimes of the next century. As previously stated, the South’s proto-fascism shares the same ineliminable core of the rejection of modernity…

Compare that last phrase to what is written above about the Southern embrace of a distinctively “Southern” and “industrial slave” modernity. These types of authors are so hysterical in their rigid and dogmatic interpretations and definitions of fascism that they cannot be consistent from one paragraph to another.

…and proposal for a radical new order as interwar fascist regimes such as Nazi Germany or Mussolini’s Italy. Historian George L. Mosse, said: ‘Ideas of regeneration, of sacrifice, and a vision of utopia were the staple of all fascism’. Indeed, Southern calls for a new nation centered on their notions of race and sex heralded the Nazi’s doctrine of master race utopianism and Lebensraum when a South Carolinian politician polemicized:

Unite, and your slave property shall be protected . . . Unite, and . . . . California shall be a slave State; the dismembered territory of Texas shall be restored, and you shall enjoy a full participation in all the territory which was conquered by your blood and treasure. Unite, and you shall form one of the most splendid empires on which the sun ever shone, of the most homogeneous population, all of the same blood and lineage.

The Southern nationalists fought and died for their palingenesis.

If slavery was s essential for “southern nationalism,” then what are the modern “Southern nationalists” doing?  Perhaps there is more to core Southern culture than slavery?

Nonetheless, these ideas continued to live on in a defeated South. For the Völkisch proto-fascists, their ideas would find new life and be incorporated into Nazi Germany. One question than can be conjectured is – if the proto-fascism was similar between the Antebellum South and the Völkisch movement – how did the experience of war lead to completely divergent directions? In post-First World War Germany, liberal modernity was associated with defeat coupled with a weak Weimar Republic. In the United States, liberalism triumphed so soundly that the South’s resentment of defeat never aroused the mass mobilization on the scale of the Europeans. After all, the North forced liberal-democratic institutions on the vanquished South. In Europe, proto-fascism was able to take root because liberal-democracy’s validity was questioned with the defeated nations and their ruined economies. For a defeated South, the best they could do was Klan terrorism and Jim Crow. The triumph of liberalism ensured that Jim Crow would never reach the extent of the Holocaust. Under Northern occupation, racist terrorists had to be secretive about their activities.

Liberalism was triumphant in America because the nation was in some sense founded upon it; in contrast to the deep roots of European High Culture and Race-Culture with a blood-soil component, the diaspora colonial American experience lacked those historical deep roots and exhibited a more ephemeral idea-based paradigm.  I am not saying America was, is, or should be an “idea nation,” but that, in a relative sense, compared to the Old World of Europe, it is more in that direction.

Furthermore, the notion of proto-fascism, like post-fascism, deepens our understanding of the ‘protean’ or adaptive qualities of fascism to historical and external forces.

Right…except when the author wants to confine fascist ideology into a rigid cage, so as to prevent more modern interpretations that can prove a threat to the globalist liberal order.

The ineliminable core of palingenesis explains similarities to contemporary ‘pseudo-fascism’ – such as through American President Donald Trump’s ‘Make American Great Again’ slogan for instance.

Laughable.

This study has shown that there was a continuum of illiberal forces which preceded and survived through the Southern nationalist movement that culminated in the American Civil War. The proto-fascist features of the Antebellum South explain many of the similarities other historians have drawn between the Third Reich and the post-Civil War South. As such, the Antebellum South of the United States warrants serious study in the discourse of comparative fascism.

Those similarities may be one reason why Type I American Nutzis are so enamored of Hitlerian völkisch racialism.

On another note, I’d like to see an analysis of Cola di Rienzi in this journal.