|
FRANCIS PARKER YOCKEY
Page II
Go to:
Conservative
Revolution, National Revolution
And National Bolshevism Revisited
byJim Saleam
The Destiny
of America
by Francis
P. Yockey (From 1955)
THE
WORLD IN FLAMES
An Estimate of the World Situation
by
Francis Parker Yockey
(published
February 1961)
THE
PROCLAMATION OF LONDON
1949
Of
The
EUROPEAN LIBERATION FRONT
By Francis Parker Yockey
CONTENTS:
INTRODUCTION
SECTION I. THE HISTORICAL
FOUNDATIONS OF THE LIBERATION FRONT.
1. The Unity of the Western Culture
2. The Age of Materialism
SECTION II. THE CHAOS OF THE
PRESENT.
A. THE UNDERMINING OF THE NATIONS.
1. Class-War
2. The Emergence of the
Jew
3. Social Degeneration
B. THE DESTRUCTION OF THE POLITICAL UNITY OF EUROPE.
C. THE DESTRUCTION OF EUROPE'S WORLD-EMPIRE.
SECTION III. THE MISSION OF
THE LIBERATION FRONT.
INTRODUCTION
THROUGHOUT all Europe there
is stirring today a great super-personal Idea, the Idea of the Imperium of
Europe, the permanent and perfect union of the peoples and nations of Europe.
This Idea embodies in itself the entire content of the future, for unless this
Idea is fulfilled, there will be no European future.
Those who regard this Idea,
which is expressed at this moment in the Liberation Front, as a danger to them,
wish to destroy it at all costs. Its enemies are, first, the anti-European
forces without the Western Civilization who, at this moment of history, dominate
the entire world, and second, their subservient lackeys within the Western
Civilization, the reactionary party-politicians, together, with the
self-interested forces they represent. Both are united in their blind hatred of
this young and vital Idea, which is irresistibly releasing forces which threaten
to engulf these old powers of reaction, finance-capitalism, class-war, and
Bolshevism.
This is addressed to the
entire Western Civilization: to the colonies planted all over the world, and to
the heart and soul of the West, the Mother-soil and Father-Culture of Europe. It
is Europe that is the focus of the historical force of the world. The profundity
and strength of this soul and body dominate even those extra-European forces
which have just concluded a temporarily victorious war against Europe, and who
are now engaging in preparations for war against one another, in which each
hopes to push its crude and formless lust for negative conquest even to the
mastery of the world. In the plans of their masters of today, the true American
people and the Russian people figure only as expendable material. In these two
populations, there are wide and deep strata which inwardly belong to the Western
Civilization and who look to the sacred soil of Europe as to their origin, their
inspiration and their spiritual home. To these also, this proclamation is
addressed.
By gigantic war, by terror,
and by manifold persecution, the party-politicians and their extra-European
masters have sought and seek to stifle this mighty Idea. They have sought in
vain to deprive it of voice, and of all means of self-expression, through the
written word or the spoken.
They themselves thus testify
that the Liberation Front is already a power in Europe. Against the organic
Imperative of the Front, they seek to enlist all the forces of the past. They
create thus a spiritual disjunction which compels all men to take their place on
the one side or the other.
It has become necessary that
those who are in the service of this Idea should proclaim to the Western
Civilization the spiritual foundations and significance of the Liberation Front
and of the Imperium of Europe for which the Front will clear the way, for this
Front is the sole creative force of our times. Therefore the representative
adherents of the Front, from all, the former nations of Europe, have gathered
together in London for the purpose of documenting their outlook, their aim, and
their position in the world. This Proclamation is published in the original in
the German, English, Spanish, Italian, French and Flemish languages.
THE HISTORICAL FOUNDATIONS
OF THE LIBERATION FRONT
1. THE UNITY OF THE WESTERN
CULTURE
From the beginning, the
Western Culture has been a spiritual unit. This basic, universally formative
fact is in the sharpest contrast to the shallow and ignorant outlook of those
who pretend that the unity of the West is a new idea, a technical thing which
can only be brought about on a limited and conditional basis.
From its very birth-cry in
the Crusades, the Western Culture had one State, with the Emperor at its head,
one Church and religion, Gothic Christianity, with an authoritarian Pope, one
race, one nation, and one people, which felt itself, and was recognized by all
outer forces, to be distinct and unitary. There was a universal style, Gothic,
which inspired and informed all art from the crafts to the cathedrals. There was
one ethical code for the Culture-bearing stratum, Western chivalry, founded on a
purely Western feeling of honour. There was a universal language, Latin, and a
universal law, Roman law. Even in the very adoption of older, non-Western
things, the West was unitary. It made such things into an expression of its
proper soul, and it universalized them.
More important than anything
else, this Culture felt itself to be a power-unit as against all outer forces,
whether barbarians like the Slavs, Turks and Mongols, or civilized like the
Moors, Jews, and Saracens. Embryonic national differences existed even then
within the West, but these differences were not felt as contrasts, and could not
possibly become at that time the focus of a struggle for power. A Western knight
was fighting equally for his Fatherland whether in battle against the Slav or
the Turk on the Eastern Marshes of Germany, against the Moor in Spain, Italy, or
Sicily, or against the Saracen in the Levant. The outer forces recognized as
well this inner unity of the West. To Islam, all Westerners whatever were lumped
together as Franks, giaours.
This higher Cultural unity
embraced within its rich possibilities the several Nation-Ideas which were to
actualize so much of Western history, for it is obviously a part of the divine
plan that a High Culture create as phases of its own unfolding, not only higher
aesthetic units, schools of music, painting, and lyric, higher religious and
philosophical units, schools of mysticism and theology, higher bodies of
nature-knowledge, schools of technics and scientific research, but also higher
power-units within itself, Emperor versus papacy, Estates versus Emperor and
Pope, Fronde versus King, Nation versus Nation. In Gothic times, the
intra-Cultural power struggle between Emperor and Pope was always strictly
subordinated, by the universal conscience, to the outer tension with the
non-member of the Culture, the barbarian and heathen. The Nations existed then,
but not as power-units, not as political organisms. The members of the nations
felt themselves to be different from one another, but the differences were in no
case determining of the whole orientation to life. A Slavic, Turkish, or Moorish
attack on Europe was met by forces drawn from all parts of Europe.
The first political
expression of Europe was in the Crusades, in which Europe was a power-unit,
acting against the outer world in unitary self-assertion of its new-born soul.
Alongside of this form of politics there arose the tension, which endured for
three centuries within the Culture, of the twin factions of Emperor and Pope.
And then from the middle of the 13th century began the revolt of the great
barons and bishops against the absolute power of Emperor and Pope. This was a
step further away from the prime Cultural unity, but it in no way affected the
great essential idea of unity of the West vis-à-vis any extra-Cultural
force. Thus, during this period, the Pope decreed that the crossbow was a
barbarous weapon and forbade its use against members of Western Christendom, but
expressly sanctioned its use against barbarians and heathens.
The increasing political
differentiation within the Culture was simply the organic process of fulfilling
the manifold possibilities of the soul of the Western Culture. The entire
process was organically necessary, and thus divinely necessary, for the soul of
a High Culture is a direct emanation of the Godhead. The development continued
with the breaking of the religious unity of the West, in Renaissance,
Reformation and Counter-Reformation. These phenomena, religious in origin, show
us the true meaning of the political: whenever any superpersonal movement or
idea rises to the intensity at which it involves the question of life or death,
it therewith becomes political, regardless of its origin in a non-political
sphere. From that moment, the contestants are States, political organisms,
regardless of how they describe themselves, and the way of conducting the
organism is the political way: dividing the world into friend and enemy; seeking
after power, and not after truth; pursuing alliance, war, and negotiation and
not conversion and salvation. This is the lesson of the Reformation-centuries as
it had been of the centuries of the Papal-Imperial conflict.
Accompanying the break-down
of religious unity, which transformed itself into a political struggle, was the
rise of the dynastic State, and the beginning of large-scale intra-Cultural wars
among Western States. Again, the disunifying process within the Culture was
limited. The intra-European wars which took place were conditioned entirely by
the great Pact, felt and understood by all, that the European States belonged to
the same Cultural world. Thus these wars never proceeded to the political
annihilation of the opponent. They were prosecuted only to the point where the
limited issue which had occasioned the war could become the object of
negotiations which could satisfy both contestants.
The handing over of a strip
of territory, or the recognition of an inheritance such were the limited issues
of these intra-Cultural wars. The scale of these dynastic wars gradually
increased, until the dynastic form of politics itself finished, towards the
close of the 18th century, when a new form of intra-Cultural power-struggle
emerged.
But during the centuries of
dynastic politics, with its limited wars, and its consequent preservation of
Cultural unity, the other type of politics, with its other form of war, went on
between Western political units and outer forces: absolute politics. These wars
were unconditioned by the fact of mutual membership in a High Culture, and the
presence of a common code of honour, for the barbarian and the heathen did not
share the feeling of Western chivalrous obligations. The Hussite Wars,
1420-1436, show the nature of warfare between a Culture-people and a barbarian
people. For 16 years, the Hussite armies flooded over large areas of Germany,
burning, ravaging, killing, and destroying. This nihilistic Slavic outburst was
totally unconnected with any constructive war-aim, and was thus merely an early
expression of what is now called Bolshevism, the spirit of negation and
destruction, wherever it manifests itself, which aims at the utter annihilation
of everything Western. During the centuries of Gothic and Baroque, it was
primarily Germany and Spain which protected the body of the West, and saved it
from the barbarian horrors which had been its fate if the outer forces had
prevailed.
2. THE AGE OF MATERIALISM
During the centuries of its
growth and unfolding, the Western Culture increased in power and maturity. The
inner aspects of life steadily receded before the external aspects, until by the
and of the 18th century, the West stood before its deepest crisis up to that
time. Since the issue was great, fundamental, and intense, it immediately became
a matter of life and death, that is to say, political. The great crisis took
political shape in the French Revolution. As ever, when an idea rises to
political intensity, it absorbs everything else within it, and focuses all human
attention and effort onto the power-struggle. The Revolution, however, was not
French alone, but European.
This total revolution marked
the victory of democracy over aristocracy, parliamentarism over the State, mass
over quality, Reason over Faith, equality-ideals over organic hierarchy, of
Money over Blood, of Liberalism, pluralism, free capitalism, and criticism over
the organic forces of Tradition, State and Authority, and in one word, of
Civilization over Culture. Rationalism and materialism were the common
denominators of all the new ideas which rose in revolt against the old order of
thought, State, economy, society, war, and politics. Metaphysics was to be a
matter of weighing and measuring; government was to be a matter of counting
noses; economy was to be entirely reduced to money-trading; the structure of
society was to be a reflex of money; international relations of war and politics
were to be the apotheosis of national egoism, with utter, disregard of the
great, inclusive, Cultural unity, of which the nations are mere separate
manifestations.
Even today, after more than
a century of undermining, the traditional connections of the Culture-bearing,
stratum of Europe are unimpaired, and reach straight back to the self-evident
pride and mastery of our Gothic youth. And this connection is not weaker, but
stronger with time, for the direction of our spiritual development has changed,
and a second great world-transformation has occurred in the life the West.
We are now in the midst of
the second great turning-point of the maturity of Culture. The noise and
shouting of democracy and materialism have died away; liberalism has become a
foul tyranny masking an evil and anonymous dictature of money; the parliaments
talk now only to themselves, and it no longer matters what they say; the critics
have dissolved themselves in their own acid, and cannot believe now in either
their methods or their results; rapacious capitalism has eaten up its own
foundations; finance has converted the nations into huge spider-webs of debt in
which all Western mankind is trapped; above all, fanatical chauvinism has
destroyed all the former Fatherlands and delivered them to the occupation of
extra-European forces, of barbarism and Culture-distortion.
All of this is the legacy of
the Age of Materialism. The servants of that Age continue to apply its outmoded
and sterile methods to the living tasks of the present. But even as their dead
and rigid hands grip the reins of power, the revolt continues. They cannot build
a wall against Destiny; they cannot order History and Time to stop in their
tracks. The assertion of liberal-capitalistic-democratic-parliamentarism that it
has a timeless and eternal right to rule is an organic lie. The methods of the
materialistic Age, its antiquated ideologies and cadaverous sterility, cannot
even survive except as an instrument of extra-European forces, unfeeling to the
inner force of European destiny.
Even as the cadaver of
Materialism tries to divert the life-blood of the new and vital forces into its
hardened arteries, it sinks deeper into the clammy rigidity of Death. Against
this corpse rises now the upthrust of the Resurgence of Authority, the highest
embodiment of the old, eternally young and manly virtues of Discipline,
Responsibility, Duty, Loyalty, and Faith. In the face of the chaos of
individualistic-liberal-capitalism, it flings its demand for a super-personal
ethical-socialist Order. Over the equality-ideals of democracy and the chaos of
national and international pluralism rises now the imperative of Hierarchy and
Imperium. Displacing suicidal petty-statism is the Idea of the monolithic
Culture-State-Nation-Race-People of Europe as the prelude to the greatest task
of all: the expression of the absolute western will to unlimited political
Imperialism.
The ultimate outcome of this
gigantic struggle is known to us, for we have seen before this struggle of the
Past to retard the Future. From 1800 to 1850, the reactionary adherents of the
negative alliance against democracy allied themselves with the ideas and methods
of the Past in order to prevent the Future. But it was the democrats of that
time who represented the true idea of the times, and history does not go
backward. The Holy Alliance had to fail, regardless of the material power at its
disposal, for armies and cannon cannot fight against an Idea.
Within a mere century, the
democrats, egalitarians, liberals, critics, ideologues and parliamentarians have
become the most radical opponent of the Spirit of the Age, for this Age is no
longer that of Money, Democracy, and Equality, but that of Authority,
Discipline, and Faith.
No more than the
Liberal-democrats could be permanently suppressed in 1850 can they suppress us
in 1950. Even as the liberal-democratic tyrants bring their economic pressure,
they have a bad conscience. They show it further in their vacillation between
senseless cruelty and clumsy bribery, in their childish propaganda and their
vain cajolery. But to the bearers of a superpersonal mission, no yielding is
possible, either to terror or to compromise, for this mission emanates directly
from the ultimate reality of God. To the
materialistic-liberal-Communist-democrats, the inner enemy of Europe, we present
only one, unalterable demand: they must vanish from the face of History.
Against this inner enemy and
the spirit he embodies, we now document our charges before all Europe.
In three realms,
materialistic-communistic-liberal-democracy has injured the body and thwarted
the Destiny of Europe: (1) within the European nations, (2) in the relations
among the nations of Europe, and (3) in the relations of Europe to the rest of
the world.
THE CHAOS OF THE PRESENT
A. THE UNDERMINING OF THE
NATIONS
1. CLASS-WAR
In its first phase, the
great revolution of nationalism and Materialism turned itself against the two
poles of the Cultural life, the forces of Authority in the spiritual life and
the political-social life, Encyclopedism, Jacobinism, Freemasonry, and
Republicanism are some of its early forms. They fought all signs of rank, and
against anything which had grown organically through the centuries. The spirit
of this revolt permeated the ruling strata in some countries, particularly in
France, and it was this weakness above that made the Revolution and the Terror
of 1793 possible. The canaille never breaks loose until the ruling
elements permit it; this was equally true in 1789 as in 1944, with the American
conquest of Europe.
The worship of Reason
applied to State and Society developed the test of quantity as the sole measure
of legitimacy. Not rank, talent, genius or ability, but number alone mattered to
the materialists. The source of power, according to the doctrinaire democrats
was in the broadest, most undifferentiated mass of the population, and not in
the spiritually differentiated strata born with the mission of accomplishing the
life-task of the Nation, and actualizing the national Idea.
Blindly, the democratic
ideologues continued with their work of levelling and destroying. In the century
1850-1950 they actually succeeded in undermining the State and society. What
succeeded the old order? Nothing that the democrats of the early period had
sought. The new centre of gravity of Life was in economics, and the dominating
economic rivalry was between the industrial-capitalist and the financier. All
the idealism and all the sacrifice of the egalitarians had only succeeded in
wiping out an organic aristocracy and substituting for it a sordid and vulgar
plutocracy. Within all countries, there now began the next form of class-war,
the war between economic groups instead of between social groups. The
differences engendered by quality and tradition had been undermined, and the
economic materialism now supplied the cadre of forms of the struggle.
By speculation and
manipulations on the exchange, the finance-capitalist attacked the productive
forms of property so that they might all be working for him, the unseen and
unknown master, controlling the economic life of continents through his
universal network of debts and interest. The exigencies of the struggle forced
the industrialists to squeeze every possible source of profit tighter, and thus
to increase the already cruel oppression of the labourers and their families.
The ruling code of honour
was now that of the cut-throat, and the economic life of the nations was a vile
scramble for profit. Into this scramble there now entered new contestants. First
was the proletariat, which now allied itself with the finance-capitalist in the
attack on the industrialist from above and below. The proletarian conscript was
fitted out by his self-chosen non-proletarian leaders with a doctrine,
organization, and tactics. The doctrine was that the entire history of the world
was nothing but a continual class struggle, with money as its sole end and aim.
The fact that this repulsive and grotesque outlook could even be formulated is
itself the only commentary necessary on the kind of world Liberalism creates.
The organization-form was the trade-union, and the tactic was the strike. All
three, the doctrine, the organization, and the tactic, are entirely economic,
purely materialistic and capitalistic. Although they proclaimed themselves
against capitalism, they thought in its cadre, shared its aim, and fought with
its weapons.
Instead of manipulating the
supply of goods, like the industrialist, or the supply of money, like the
finance-capitalist, they manipulated the supply of labour. The labour-leader now
became the third member of the snarling capitalist trinity.
2. THE EMERGENCE OF THE JEW
More important than these
domestic contestants was a new element, the Culture-alien. His entrance into
Western affairs was a direct result of the victory of Rationalism and
Materialism. Since only quantity mattered, then obviously the quality of a man
was indifferent. The fact that he came from a different Culture, that therefore
he felt himself to be a member of a different race, people, nation, State,
religion, society -- these meant nothing to the doctrinaire liberals. They spoke
fervently of "humanity" and wished to embrace it, little thinking that
outside of the Western Culture there was no reciprocal feeling, but only sullen
envy, indifference, or resentment. The liberal ideology prevailed, and from that
moment the Rothschilds, Ricardos, Marxs, Lasalles, Bobels, Dreyfuses,
Guggenheims, Loebs, Trotskys, Staviskys, Kruegers, Baruchs, Frankfurters, and
Blums entered into the public life of the West.
The
Culture-State-Nation-Religion-Race-People of the Jew is a product of a Culture
which was already completed and rigidified by the time of our Gothic period. At
the time when we were just emerging from the primitive, these Culture-aliens
dispersed themselves throughout Europe. Money-thinking, regarded as evil by the
West, was the forte of the Jew. Interest-taking was forbidden to Westerners by
their religion, and the Jew was not slow to seize the usury monopoly that this
conferred on him.
In the Culture of which the
Jew was a product, a nation was a unit of belief, entirely independent of the
notion of territory, of Fatherland. Strewn over all Europe, the Jew naturally
regarded all Westerners as alien. There was no place in the Western world of
Gothic Christianity, chivalry, piety, and simple agricultural economy for this
landless and uprooted stranger with his Torah and Talmud, his money and his
cynicism, his dualistic ethics, one for his own kind, and another for the goyim.
The Jew created his own ghetto as a symbol of his complete inner isolation from
his environment. The general feeling of the religious Gothic Age was that the
Jew was the creation of the Devil, who appointed him to drive his trade of
usury.
Between the members of the
Western Culture and this element which lived in and on the body of the West, but
in no way shared in or contributed to its development, there arose mutual hatred
and oppression. Crusaders massacred entire Jewish communities on their way to
the Levant, and returning. Protests against usury produced plunder and burning
of the Jews. Popes and Scholastic philosophers denounced the Jew. All Western
kings, at one time or another, drove out the entire Jewish population of their
kingdoms. Jews were hanged en masse as reprisal for their usury and
counterfeiting. Any possibility of assimilation of the parasite by the host that
may have been present was forever rendered impossible by the infinitely deep
resentment and revenge-imperative that developed in the
Culture-State-Nation-Race-People of the Jew.
Between him and his Western
host-surroundings there was no inner connection. He looked upon all Western
developments with an even eye, the eye of the calculating spectator who seeks
solely his own advantage. Shylock is the symbol of the Jew in the Western
Culture, the usurer counting his coins and accumulating his resentment. For
almost a thousand years the Jew drank his gall and bided his time, and then at
last his opportunity emerged. With the coming of materialism, capitalism,
democracy, and liberalism, a great wave of excitement went through the Jewish
world. The Jew had seen the potentialities of these things and had fostered
their growth in every way. The Illuminati and all of its Freemasonic offspring
were infiltrated by the Jew and made into instruments of his revenge-politics.
To the Jew the great attraction of all of these Western movements was that they
were quantitative, and thus all tended to break down the exclusiveness of the
West, which had kept him out of its power-struggles, and confined in his ghetto,
dreaming of his revenge for centuries of persecution. Henceforth, he was
generously accorded the same spiritual status as Westerners in their own
Culture, and the same civic status as Westerners in their own Nation-States. He
kept his own exclusiveness of course, and his own public life, for the New
Year's Resolutions of Liberalism -- humanitarian is in, brotherly love,
"tolerance" and the like were one-sided. They were a phase of our
development and could not be echoed in the Jewish organism, which had long since
passed beyond all development, like the Chinese, Hindus, and Moslems.
In finance, in trade, in
society, in education, in letters, in diplomacy, the Jew now forged steadily
ahead, a closed organism inside an open one. While Westerners applied the test
of ability, the Jew chose his associates and subordinates on the basis of their
membership in his Culture-State-Nation-Race, or in one of his secret societies
which extended horizontally through the Western nations.
By 1858 the Jew was able
effectively to demonstrate his ability to direct the power of Western States
into his channels, in the Mortara affair. During the entire 19th century, the
Jew intervened constantly in the internal and external affairs of all the
European Nation-States. Within each country he sought to impose the policy which
would give the Jew at last the complete mastery over the Western Civilization.
Thus in England, he was an Imperialist and Free-Trader, in Germany and Austria
he was a liberal and social-democrat, in France he was a liberal or communist.
During the latter part of
the 19th century, the Jew embarked upon an invasion of America, when the word
went through the Jewish Culture-State-Nation-Race that opportunities were as
great there and resistance was less, because of the absence of high traditions.
In Europe, it has been impossible for the Jew to annihilate Tradition, which
constantly opposed its silent and strong barrier, but in America, because of its
colonial origins, there had never been creativeness and exclusiveness, and there
were no barriers to the Jew. America was more thoroughly disintegrated by
rationalism, materialism, liberalism and democracy than any European land,
because a colony has not, and cannot have, the spiritual profundity and
continuity of the Mother-soil of the Culture. As a result, the success of the
Jew has been greatest in America, and in the year 1933, the entire continent of
America passed into the control of the Jewish Culture-State-Nation-Race-People.
The presence of a
Culture-alien generates spiritual, political, economic, and social phenomena of
a kind which could never arise from domestic elements and happenings. These
phenomena are manifestations of Culture-disease and of necessity arise when
human groups are in contact which do not share the same Culture. When one of the
groups belongs to the Culture, and the other does not -- the case of the negroes
in the Boer colony, or the negroes and Indians in Brazil -- the relationship is
simply Culture-parasitism. The disease-condition displaces Culture-members and
has a slowly sterilizing effect on the Culture-body.
More aggravated is the
condition when the Culture-alien intervenes in the pubic, and spiritual affairs
of the host, for then he must of his own inner necessity distort the life of the
host, warping and frustrating its proper tendencies to make them serviceable to
his alien needs. The Jew is the only Culture-alien who at present exercises this
Culture-distortion on the life of the Western Civilization.
The domestic
disease-elements within the Culture which wish to retain the outmoded ideas and
methods of the Past and to fight against the creative spirit which is
actualizing a Cultural mission, are the forces of Culture-retardation. These
have been brought into the service of the Culture-distorter. Actually these
elements simply desire to lead, but are themselves incapable of leadership, and
therefore devote their lives to opposition to great formative Ideas, creative
spiritual currents, and leaders of vision and genius. They are the churchills,
the spaaks, the gaulles, the rejects of higher history who offer themselves to
the forces of negation and destruction. The most critical form of the disease of
Culture-retardation is the condition in which it seeks to prevent the
realization of the Idea of the Future even at the shame of allying with outer
forces, the degradation of becoming their vassal, and the risk of destroying the
entire Culture. Before showing the effect of the disease-elements on the
external relations of the Culture, their internal effects must be summarized.
3. SOCIAL DEGENERATION
The forces of rationalism,
materialism, atheism, Jacobinism, democracy, and liberalism became ever more
radical in their demands during their century. Their most intransigent product
was communism. The leading values of communism are identical with those of
liberal democracy: communism also preaches the economic meaning of life, the
supremacy of the individual, the sublimity of "happiness", the
doctrine of heaven-on-earth, the superiority of the lowest type of man,
materialism, criticism, atheism, intellectualism, hatred of authority, race
suicide, feminism, and pacifism. The sole difference between liberal-democracy
and communism in practice was that communism was an intensification of those
beliefs to the point where they became political. Liberalism was anti-political,
and hope to conquer with drooling sentiments, but communism was filled with an
intense hatred which demanded expression in class-war.
All aspects of social decay
were permeated by the Culture-distorter, who well realized their value in his
programme for ascendancy. At the same time that he spread and advocated all of
these forms of social decay for the White nations, he carefully strove to keep
his own Culture-State-Nation-Race-People free from them. It was an invariable
characteristic of the tactics of the Jew that he himself the bearer of
Culture-disease, instinctively allied himself with all forms, theories,
doctrines and practices of decadence in every sphere of life.
The degradation of the
social life did not merely happen, it was planned, deliberately fostered and
spread, and the systematic undermining of the entire life of the West continues
today.
The instruments of this
assault are the weapons of propaganda: press, radio, cinema, stage, education.
These weapons are controlled at this moment in Europe almost entirely by the
forces of Culture-disease and social degeneration. The chief fount of the
propaganda is the cinema, and from his capital of Hollywood, the Jew spews out
an endless series of perverted films to debase and degenerate the youth of
Europe, as he has so largely succeeded in doing with the youth of America.
Concomitantly he inspires a vicious literature of journalism, novels, and dramas
which preach the same message of destruction of healthy individual instincts, of
normal familial and sexual life, of disintegration of the social organism into a
heap of wandering, colliding, grains of human sand.
The message of Hollywood is
the total significance of the isolated individual, stateless and rootless,
outside of society and family, whose life is simply the pursuit of money and
erotic pleasure. It is not the normal and healthy love of man and wife bound
together by many children that Hollywood preaches, but a diseased
erotic-for-its-own-sake, the sexual love of two grains of human sand,
superficial and impermanent. Before this highest of all Hollywood's values,
everything else must stand aside: marriage, honour, duty, patriotism, sternness,
dedication of self to a higher aim. This ghastly distortion of the sexual life
has created the erotomania which obsesses its millions of victims in America,
and which has now been brought to the Mother-soil of Europe by the American
invasion.
Not only the individuals are
the victims of this technic of degeneration, but the family and the race are
dissolved wherever it touches. Divorce replaces marriage, abortion replaces
birth, the home acquires a purely commercial raison d'etre, the family
becomes the battleground of individual strife for personal advantage. The
erotic-as-its-own-end deliberately reduces the numbers of the race, even as it
also disintegrates the higher organism into sand. As a part of the technic,
woman is made into a feminist, an unhappy derailed creature who would contest
with man in his own domain and seek to lose all the attributes of her polarity
which assure her destiny of its unfolding, and guarantee her the natural dignity
which is hers. The end of the process is seen in those wide strata in America
which have been completely Hollywoodized. Hollywood-feminism has created a woman
who is no longer a woman but cannot be a man, and a man who is devirilized into
an indeterminate thing. The name given to this process is the "setting
free" of woman, and it is done in the name of "happiness", the
magic word of the liberal-communist-democratic doctrine. It accompanies the
spreading of inverted Puritanism, which seeks to spread erotomania by
surrounding the sexual life with an aura of attractive evil.
From the standpoint of the
race, the result of this technic of degeneration is the attenuating, and finally
the dying out, of racial instincts. The disintegrated victims, shorn of their
organic connections with the great super-personal content of Life, become
unfruitful, lose their will-to-power, and soon lack the ability to believe in or
to follow anything onward and upward. They become cynical, give up all inner
discipline, seek a life of ease and pleasure, and sneer at all seriousness and
honour. All intense feelings depart, for they might involve risk and sacrifice.
Love of Fatherland gives way to money-madness and erotomania.
The complete mediocrity that
results is shown by the disintegrated and unhappy Americans who were conscripted
and thrown onto Europe in the Second World War. Utterly lacking as they were in
any desire to fight or to accomplish even the destruction which was expected of
them, nevertheless they allowed themselves to be sent abroad and killed rather
than defend themselves and their Fatherland against the plans of the alien
regime in Washington.
This condition of
degeneration, so widespread in America, with its colonial lack of resistance to
Culture-disease, and so threatening to Europe under the present American
domination, has not arisen by accident. A century ago, the
liberal-communist-democrat Karl Marx and his coterie formulated as their
programme the destruction of the family, of marriage, and of the Fatherland.
They declared a horizontal war against the Western civilization, affirming their
aim of disintegrating all social, cultural, and political forms. America is
their programme in process of actualization, and its example shows Europe what
the liberal-communist-democratic regime of Culture-distortion is preparing for
it during the coming generations.
But let there be no mistake:
there is nothing inevitable about this Culture-disease. As long as the
Culture-organism retains its traditions, its racial instincts, its
will-to-power, and its natural exclusiveness and resistance to everything
culturally alien, this result cannot be. The example of Quebec is proof. There,
healthy instincts of resistance to Culture-disease made it impossible for the
Washington regime to conscript the population of an entire third of Canada in
its war of revenge, hatred, and destruction against the Father-Culture and
Mother soil of Europe. The mass-heroism of the entire Quebec regiment which laid
down its arms and refused as a unit when ordered to participate in the hostile
invasion of the sacred soil of Europe is all inspiring proof of the presence and
high potential, even in the colonies, of the invincible Western tradition of
cultural purity and exclusiveness. Similarly, in the Boer colony, strong
resistance was continually opposed to the war of the extra-European forces
against the Western Culture. Even in America itself, the main focus of the
efforts of the Culture-distorter, and the base of his great power, the main body
of the people held aloof from the War in the attitude castigated by the alien
regime as "isolationist". Far from being isolated, the inner soul of
the true American people is connected indivisibly by the strongest possible tie,
the mystical cord binding the Mother-Organism to its colony, and it was
precisely because of this connecting bond that the American instinct shrank from
the hateful war against Europe. It sought isolation only from the foul treason
against Europe which was hatched and directed in Washington.
This great fact demonstrates
to Europe and to History that America is not lost, and from this moment the
Liberation Front exists also in America. The war for the Liberation of the
Western Civilization embraces the colonies as well, since it is a horizontal
war, like the Culture-diseases against which it is fighting. Attempts to split
the West into separate units, economic, political, military, racial, are purely
artificial in this age. The vertical battle of all against all belongs to the
dead capitalist-nationalistic past, and its resurrection now is simply a technic
of the inner enemy, an attempt to strangle the future with the dead clutch of
the past. The Liberation Front, both on the Mother-soil and in the colonies,
turns its back on the old vertical struggles, and opposes the Washington regime
within America as totally as it opposes the puppet administrations it maintains
in Europe. Within the Western Civilization itself, there are no more real
vertical differences; the only real struggle of this kind in the world is the
revolt of the outer world against the supremacy of the European race.
In the sphere of national
economy, Culture-disease pursued during the materialistic age the same programme
of destruction which the liberal-communist-democratic Marx had enunciated for
it. Communist-democratic literature demanded crushing income and inheritance
taxes in order to destroy the industrialists and transfer the wealth to the
finance-capitalist, whose wealth is invisible, and cannot be found or taxed. In
a century-long battle the forces of disease almost completely succeeded in
destroying any propertied groups with Western traditions whose ascendancy itself
represented a barrier to degeneration and conquest by Culture-distortion. They
brought in the device of huge anonymous financial structures, called holding
companies, they made the currency of nations a function of their banks, and
enforced the principle of constant flux on the national economy, in order to
create the possibility of financial coups.
The corrosion of
Culture-disease affected not only the forms of society and economy, but those of
government as well. Where once the State had stood, speaking authoritatively for
all, the focus of respect and the source of order, they introduced the chaos of
ideologies, each claiming to have the formula for millennium, the secret of
building the old Testament promised land, in each case purely materialistic and
economic. They did not speak of a World-Idea, of the Western mission in the
world, of the construction of the Imperium of the West, but of trade,
distribution, and the exchange. The soul of Western-man was to them a function
of imports and exports, of shipping and book-keeping, of possessing and
non-possessing, of rivalry between classes. The World-Mission of the West they
understood as the securing of markets and raw materials overseas.
Where Authority had stood,
clothed with dignity, they now brought in gabbling parliaments, wherein the
gabble became ever more meaningless, and the sham ever more patent. For these
deputies are mere things, replaceable units describable only mathematically, in
aggregates. Among them there is not, and cannot be, a strong individuality, for
a man, a whole and entire man, does not sell himself like these parliamentary
whores.
To replace the authoritative
principle of public responsibility Culture-disease has brought in the anonymous
irresponsibility of the decision of the amorphous majority, which can never
again be found after it has committed its treason to Europe. To complete the
destruction, the lying fraud of so-called elections tries to re-convince the
European peoples every few months that somehow they govern themselves. Between
the lies that the candidates offer the populace, and the commitments they make
to their real masters, there is not the slightest connection. The programmes
submitted to the electorate are compounded out of old
liberal-communist-democratic ideological material, long-since historically dead.
To these creatures without honour, character, or even bare understanding, the
future is to be simply an extension of the past. To talk of new organization is
to talk about a bigger and better parliament, of a league of nations with a
gigantic parliament, bringing possibilities of higher prices for greater lies.
Only the scale is to be raised. Even in England, the birthplace of the
parliamentary idea, and the only place where it even had dignity and value, the
idea is completely dead. With a sound instinct, the population dubs the local
parliament the "gas-house". Everywhere in Europe, the populations show
what they think of this putrescent fraud by insulating themselves from it: they
close their ears against the programmes and the lies, they hate the ideologies,
they boycott the elections, they despise from their souls the entire
old-Testament Tower of Babel which today has the temerity to call itself
government, and to ask for the confidence of the peoples.
This is the world that the
inner enemy, the liberal-communist-democrat, has created, working with, and
often under the very direction of the Culture-alien, the
State-Nation-People-Race-- Society of the Jew. With their disease of
Culture-retardation, with which they would strangle the future of Europe, they
have reinforced the diseases of Culture-parasitism and Culture-distortion which
are the gift of the Jew to Europe.
They have brought in
materialism, atheism, class-war, weak happiness-ideals, race-suicide,
social-atomism, racial promiscuity, decadence in the arts, erotomania,
disintegration of the family, private and public dishonour, slatternly feminism,
economic fluctuation and catastrophe, civil war in the family of Europe, planned
degeneration of the youth through vile films and literature, and through
neurotic doctrines in education. They have sought to rot Europe, to attenuate
its racial instincts, to devirilize it, to deprive it of honour, heroism and
manliness, of the sense of its World-Mission, of its sense of Cultural unity,
even of its chivalrous military code. They have sought to paralyze the will of
Europe and destroy its will-to-power by bringing in the ethical syphilis of
Hollywood to poison the sacred soil of Europe.
This we lay to their charge.
Those things are facts, and nothing in the future can ever eradicate the
knowledge that they have been done and attempted by the inner enemy. Nor is this
the full extent of the destruction wrought by the hatred, negation, and revenge
of the enemies of Europe. This is the devastation within the peoples of Europe.
It remains to document their effect in the sphere of the mutual relations of the
nations of Europe, and lastly, in the sphere of the relations of Europe to the
outer world.
B. THE DESTRUCTION OF THE
POLITICAL UNITY OF EUROPE
During the dynastic period
of Western history, although intra-European wars were of large-scale and long
duration, they were limited into their aim, and the exploitation of victory was
strictly conditioned. They were not national wars, but dynastic wars. Power was
the stake, but only power within the prevailing forms of chivalrous ethics,
comity, and Cultural unity. This unity was known as the Concert of Europe, and
the very name itself reflects the deep sense of unity throughout the European
family.
With the coming of the Age
of Materialism, and the assault on all the traditions of the West by the forces
of liberalism, Jacobinism, democracy, money, and rationalism, the dynastic
concept of the Nation-idea slowly broke down and was replaced by the linguistic
concept of the nation. The mystical-authoritative symbol of the ruling house had
been the ultimate expression of the Nation-Idea for centuries, but now a new age
demanded a new form of the nation-concept to reflect the materialistic outlook
of the 19th century. Materialism thus created the linguistic test of
nationality.
The increasing expansive
tendency of the Western organism had resulted in a vast increase of the Western
population, the reflection of its more extensive life-task. From this arose huge
economic systems, stronger States than any that had previously existed,
larger-scale wars, and constant increase of the power-content of the struggle.
The literary concept of the
Nation-Idea, isolated the nations from one another, and accentuated their
national feelings vis-à-vis one another. Out of this arose the distorted
patriotism called chauvinism, or jingoism. It invaded the universities, the
world of letters, the cabinets, and the political parties. It concentrated all
of its hopes, feelings, ideals, and understanding onto the nations, and in its
last stage, it finally attained to the ridiculous idea that nations are the
creators of culture, that, thus, there were as many Cultures in Europe as there
were nations. Since it had been the feeling of Culture unity which had bound
Europe together, and had kept its internal politics and wars limited and
chivalrous, this insane form of nationalism war, striking at the very basis of
the unity of Europe. If, in a war between two European States, each one regarded
itself as a Culture, then the opponent was a total enemy, and the struggle was
an absolute one. This new concept of war and politics governed the minds of the
materialistic democrats and liberals, who now welcomed the jingoist into their
republic of destruction. The jingoists reinterpreted the entire Past in terms of
the 19th century nations. They spoke of these, nations as though they had always
existed, and were mechanically and causally necessary to the existence of the
world, as if they were the sole units of higher history, and as if the future,
as well the past, belonged to these historical building blocks.
But once more, the
materialistic assault was not entirely successful. Tradition did not break down
completely, because it is the very core, the wrapping of the soul of the Western
Culture. Thus, after the Franco-Prussian War, late in the 19th century, Bismarck
saw to the safety and honourable treatment of the defeated French Emperor, and
the treaty of peace was in the 18th century chivalrous style. The vertical
nationalism of materialistic jingoism did not succeed in destroying entirely the
feeling of Cultural unity, and the proof is in the Western reaction to the
Chinese Boxer Rebellion in 1900. As one, the European nations joined, together
with the American colony in sending a joint expeditionary force to represent and
protect Europe as a unit, under the command of the German Field-Marshal
Waldersee.
The struggle between
Tradition and vertical nationalism continued and finally reached its highest
intensity with the caesura of the First World War. But suddenly, with the
end of that war, there was a new world in existence. Europe, in that powerful
tremor, had entered upon a new phase of its existence. The break was just as
profound as that of the Revolution of 1789, the other great turning-point in
recent European history. The old notions of materialism nations, society,
history, Politics, State, war, culture, education, ethics, science, were all
swept away. In their place was a new, complete, organic view of life. Its
relation to the old materialist-rationalist-democratic-communist view is most
easily understood, not as true to false, but as the Future to the Past. The old
materialistic, disintegratory, atomistic, liberal-parliamentary view of the
world had simply died a natural death. This is the only way historical Ideas can
be overcome, the organic way, by complete fulfillment and death. The First World
War itself was a creation -- the last independent creation -- of that old
outlook; it was the highest expression of vertical nationalism and the age of
materialism.
Out of the death of the age
of materialism came the new values. First, in the realm of economics, the
favourite preserve of the liberal-communist-democratic gentry, the old ethical
principle of capitalism yielded to the new principle of ethical socialism.
Instead of the cut-throat code of every man for himself, and the concept of life
as a ruthless Darwinian competition to get rich, there arose the new code of
each man for all, the feeling that the State is the custodian of the destiny,
and thus, of the power, of all within it that the aim of Life is not to get
rich, but to actualize one's self and one's possibilities within the higher
organism. Instead of the supremacy of economics and individualism, the
subordination of economics and the integration of the individual into the
super-personal life. The good conscience and theoretical foundations of laisser-faire
vanished.
In the spiritual realm,
atheist materialism slowly began to recede from its heights and to yield to a
renewal of true religious feelings. In philosophy, sensualism gave way to the
historical method, and the organism of the Western Culture throbbed anew with
the rediscovery of its unitary destiny and its mighty Imperialist mission in the
world.
In the sphere of Society,
opposing the chaos of atomism, feminism, disintegration of home and family,
race-suicide, and universal decadence, arose the idea of race-ascendancy,
fertility, the preservation and integration of society, the return to social
health.
The idea of the State
resumed its pristine sway in the realm of politics, and parliamentarism, with
its chaotic train of election, programmes, utopias, and corruption, took its
place among the archaic things. The attempt to use legalism to deprive the
European organism of life was overthrown, and the European will-to-power
increased. The political life intensified, pacifism disappeared, European man
oriented himself to the coming absolute wars for the survival of Europe, and
against the outer forces.
After more than a century of
constant disintegration, division, and disunification, of a constant crisis
arising from the autopathic Culture-disease of rationalist-materialism, the
Culture came back once more to health and soundness, to Authority and Faith. The
provisional form of the restoration of Europe to health and unification of
Europe was gradually assimilated by the countries of Europe, one after the
other.
In the First World War, the
Rationalism and Materialism, of the 18th and 19th centuries had won a
pseudo-victory over the Resurgence of Faith, Authority, and Imperialism, which
are the spirituality of the 20th and 21st centuries. The Culture-retarding
elements which exploited this victory strove to perpetuate the old ways and
ideas. With their capitalist-parliamentary league of nations they accentuated
the pluralism of the States of Europe, just as they continued within each State
to accentuate social-economic pluralism. The difference now was that these
States were not true political units, but merely remnants which had to unite if
the organism of Europe were even barely to survive. The attempt in this
situation to perpetuate petty-statism and vertical nationalism was treason to
Europe and to every petty-State within Europe as well. But treason is the
profession of Culture-disease elements; their only acquaintance with Europe's
grand Imperialist mission in the world is as with an enemy. When they see
something great arising, they resolve in their crooked and envious souls to
thwart it and to tear it down.
Thus it is that they
resolved to destroy the European Resurgence of Authority, with its reborn Faith,
and its high task of uniting the European organism for its World-Mission. When
in 1936 the four leading powers of Europe signed a pact forever renouncing war
among themselves, and thus affirming their European unity, the Future of Europe
seemed forever guaranteed.
But in the outer world,
hostile developments towards Europe far transcended the efforts of the
inner-disease elements, the liberal-communist-democrats. For in America in 1933,
the Culture-State-Nation-Race-People of the Jew had seized the total power, and
the entire resources of America were at his disposal in his mission of hatred,
revenge, and destruction of the Western Civilization, and in particular of its
heart and soul, the European organism. By poisonous propaganda, by bribes on an
unprecedented scale, by the purchase of whole governments and parliaments, by
financial manipulations with European currencies, and by economic pressure, the
Culture-distorting regime of Washington split Europe into two halves and began
to prepare a World War against Europe. The instrument of this preparation in
America was the monster Roosevelt, who made of his life a study in infamy, and
whose name is synonymous with the pinnacle of Jewish power in the world. The Jew
and his Roosevelt accomplished what no inner force in Europe ever could have
attained, the creation of an unnatural and inorganic war of destruction and
terror against Europe which at long last succeeded in its negative aim. The
re-union of the European organism is temporarily frustrated, the Resurgence of
Authority is temporarily halted, the power of every one of the former States of
Europe is reduced to nil, the power of the European organism in the outer world
is gone, the prestige of Europe is overshadowed by extra-European powers.
This is the new Europe, the
creation of Liberal-communist democracy, the Europe of rationalist-materialism,
of proletarian-Marxist-finance-capitalism, of class-war and vertical nationalism
pushed to their limits. From the one direction comes the Jew, dragging in his
train his nervous unhappy American victims, with their self-appointed task of
"educating" Europe; from the other direction, at the invitation of and
with the assistance of the Washington regime, comes the barbarian flood of the
Moscow Red Army into the heart of Europe.
Where yesterday the
Resurgence of Faith and Authority had stood up to open the way into the European
Future, where the will-to-power, to order and achievement, to plenty and to
beauty, had gone calmly ahead with its work, today the hysterical legalism of
excited Jews and dead liberals enforces a grisly and monstrous terror against
the peoples of Europe. Replacing the one will to unit and power, there are now a
multitude of parliamentary houses where every day the soul of Europe is bought
and sold, and where the economic existence of European humanity is treated as an
entry in the ledger of the American foreign ministry. The triumphant
disease-elements have destroyed the stability and the order of the economy of
Europe, and have brought in universal poverty to replace the security and plenty
which are Europe's right. With their disintegration, cut-throat capitalism,
petty statism, senseless competition, and canonized selfishness, they have
created want and insecurity, hunger, malnutrition, unemployment, despair and
suicide. When they hang the chain of economic dependence on America around our
necks, they expect a song of gratitude from the peoples of Europe, who have
known independence and grandeur, but who have never known slavery.
This also we lay to their
charge. The disease-elements of liberal-communist-democracy, the inner enemy of
Europe, have sought to destroy permanently, and have temporarily brought low,
the Cultural unity of Europe, which served to unite all the peoples through the
superior Cultural bond, holding them, even in war with one another, to
chivalrous usages, mutual self-respect, and political restraint. They have done
it, and they cannot explain it away for these results have flowed of necessity
from their inverted outlook and their dis-honourable methods.
Nor is this yet all: with
its social degeneration of more than a century, with its undermining of the
Cultural unity of Europe by intensifying the petty-statism, chauvinism, and
vertical nationalism, the coalition of Jewish Culture-distortion and
liberal-communist-democratic Culture-retardation has accomplished automatically
a third result, namely in the political relationship of Europe to the rest of
the world.
C. THE DESTRUCTION OF
EUROPE'S WORLD-EMPIRE
In 1900 the affairs of
9/10ths of the surface of the earth were ordered directly from European
capitals. This was the World-Empire of Europe. This empire was the basis of the
power, the security, the prosperity, yes, the very existence of Europe's
peoples. In reality this Empire was simply and solely European, and its
superficial organization as a collection of empires -- French, English, German
-- was only apparent. But the internal tension created by petty-statism was
generating a centrifugal tendency within the European Empire, and extra-European
forces were exploiting this tendency. In particular, a revolt was spreading
among the coloured races. The only way the great World-Empire could maintain its
world-strength was by firmer integration in order to uphold its mastery and
reverse the diffusion of power.
The final proof of the
organic unity of this World-Empire was the fact that no single European
Nation-State could injure the power of another European Nation-State without at
the same time injuring itself in an equal or greater measure. But this ruling
organic fact was ignored, and the tragedy of the First World War, the creation
of the Culture-retarders, the chauvinists, jingoists, and vertical nationalists,
was the price Europe paid for the presence of Culture-disease. Any coloured or
extra-European troops whatever that fought in this war were fighting against all
Europe. Any extra-European fleets that participated were fighting the sea-power
of Europe.
The demonstration of these
organic facts was the new situation created by the war. The English fleet, the
chief upholder of European power on the seas of the world was defeated by the
extra-European sea power of Japan and America. The new arbiters of the destinies
of the earth-ball were the extra-European forces, Japan, America, and Russia.
Before the First World War,
Russia had figured as a Western State. Its ruling strata, its ruling outlook,
were Western. The tension which existed between the Western elements of Russia
and the Asiatic will-to-destruction underneath was however strained to the
breaking point by the First World War, and the Asiatic elements, in conjunction
with and assisted by the Culture-State-Nation-Race-People-Society of the Jew all
over the world, gained the upper hand and re-oriented Russia against Europe.
From then onward, and also today, 1950, Russia figures as one of the leaders of
the coloured revolt against the European race. But European possibilities still
exist within Russia, because in certain strata of the population adherence to
the great organism of the Western Culture is an instinct, an Idea, and no
material force can ever wipe it out, even though it may be temporarily repressed
and driven under.
The First World War showed,
to those who did not know the difference, the mutual independence of military
and political Victory. Thus, although Russia was defeated in the field, it
emerged from the war with increased power and voice in the affairs of the world.
Japan, which took no military part in the war, was a leading political victor.
Although England was supposedly victorious in the fight it lost its power in the
Pacific to Japan and America, its power in the Western Hemisphere to America,
its naval hegemony to Japan and America, and its world-prestige to the coloured
revolt against the European race. The European-English Raj in India was
completely undermined by the war, and the successful Indian Mutiny in 1947 stems
directly from the First World War.
But the Culture-retarders
had not finished their work. They had found a Europe which controlled 9/10ths of
the surface of the planet. With their suicidal war, they had reduced the empire
to the point where it controlled 2/10ths of the world, but their destructive
potentialities and instincts were not yet exhausted. They formulated a league of
nations to strangle Europe and to admit the entire world into the direction of
Europe's internal affairs; they asserted their system of degeneration,
destruction and death was the legal system, and that it could never be changed.
Law does not exist to express and to serve life, no, these
liberal-communist-democrats said that Life exists in order to serve the Law.
This old Testament legalism determined to forever prevent Europe from rising
again out of the general defeat of the First World War and from reconquering the
world-domain which belongs to it by virtue of its strength of will, its
organizatory ability, its necessity of self-expression, its irrepressible
instinct, its Destiny and its Faith. Here, as always, the various forms of
Culture-disease showed their natural affinity. The Culture-distorting Jewish
State-Nation-Race supplemented the efforts of the Culture-retarders to hold
Europe down and back, to strangle it economically, and to force the dispersion
of the European populations over the earth as despairing poverty-stricken,
futureless emigrants.
All the disease-elements
united in the negation and hatred of the great European Resurgence of Authority.
The conquest of the savage negro landscape of Abyssinia by the European race was
diabolically represented as a "crime" by the Jewish
democratic-liberal-communist disease. While the soul of Europe throbbed with
renewed hope and vigour at this manifestation of its old eternally-young
reassertion of its will and its Destiny, the disease-elements embarked on the
preparation of a treacherous and dis-honourable war forever to destroy the
European World-Empire, the European homeland, the soul of Europe, and the high
Destiny of Europe.
They sought to open the war
in European Spain in 1936. Russian Bolshevism sent agents and arms,
Hollywood-American Bolshevism sent military and financial assistance, Jewish
Bolshevism sent leaders and organizers. The liberal-communist-democratic gang
all over the Western world, the inner enemy of the West, waxed enthusiastic, and
from their ranks flowed a stream of conscripts on their mission of destruction.
But Europe reacted as a unit and frustrated the Bolshevik-trinity of the outer
enemies.
The next attempt was on the
European frontier of Bohemia in 1938. Again, the four leading units of Europe
mutually joined to prevent the destruction of the Empire and organism of Europe.
Therefore, the next assault was more carefully prepared and preceded by a
thorough organization of the Culture-retarding elements for the supreme treason
of creating a Second World War in the form of a senseless struggle within the
European organism. All the world knew that such a war, if prolonged, could only
ruin the European Empire and every people and province of Europe. Even the
traitors knew it in part of their souls, but a traitor is wilfully blind.
Treason is nothing but incapacity when it becomes resolute. If it had not been
clear to them before the war, it was made clear during the war. The Architect of
the War, the crypto-Culture-distorter Roosevelt, expressly stated his two
war-aims to his churchills as the destruction of the German State and the
English Empire, the two halves of the body of Europe, the foundation and the
edifice of the European Empire.
This was their Second World
War. It was made possible only by the treason of the inner enemy, the
liberal-communist-democrat. No force within the Western Culture could even think
of opposing successfully the powerful wave of Destiny sweeping through Europe,
the Resurgence of Authority and the will-to-Imperium. But in their crooked,
dark, and jealous hatred of greatness and grandeur, the
liberal-communist-democrats, the class-warriors and finance-capitalists, the
materialists and parliamentarians, called in the outer forces, the Bolshevisms
of Washington, Moscow, and Tel-Aviv, and invited them to do the destruction to
which they were not equal. Chauvinism and jingoism were merely techniques, and
they could not inspirit any Europeans. The burden of the fighting was borne by
the extra-European forces, for European troops simply were not equal spiritually
to a contest against the organism of Europe.
The very tactics of the war
were in the pattern of negation and hatred. The extra-European forces, led by
the Culture-distorter, evolved the principle that the purpose of warfare is to
destroy the civilian population of the arbitrarily-chosen enemy. The industrial
life of Europe was unimpaired, the armies were intact, but the American-Jew and
the Jewish-American continued their war against homes and families, while the
forces of Asiatic Russia carried on the real, the military war. The warfare of
revenge and hatred from the air was a deterrent to the military victory of the
American-Jewish synthesis, but that did not matter, for their mission was not
political victory, but total destruction, destruction of the
Culture-People-Race-Society of Europe. Thus, the military assistance to Russia
was not on a political basis, but was given recklessly, without any thought to
the future, because the Washington-Tel-Aviv alliance was not even thinking of
increasing its own power or of building a world-empire for itself, but simply,
solely, and only, of destroying the Empire, the organism, and the Destiny of
Europe. Consequently, American-Jewry negotiated a generous peace with Japan,
which recognized the victory of the Japanese mission in the Orient, and in the
occupation of Japan, a policy of friendship, benevolence and reconstruction was
put into effect. Their exploitation of victory was in the same twisted and
crooked pattern as their own souls. Their great, compulsion is the inversion of
every truth and the perversion of all higher life.
At the beginning of their
efforts to create the Second World War in the form which they gave to it, they
found a Europe which was master of its own territory and ruler of 1/5th of the
world. At the end of their war, they were able to survey the Europe of their own
creation. Europe stripped of its world-empire and occupied by extra-European
forces, economically dependent on them as a slave upon his master.
In this Europe of
liberal-democracy, the enemies of Europe proceeded to exploit their victory.
Drunk with their power they began to kill en masse those who had opposed
them and who had devoted their lives to furthering the Destiny of Europe. Even
in murder, they could not be straight: they had to find Old-Testament reasons,
legalistic rituals, to mask their murders. They invented, and sought to engraft
onto the Culture of Europe, the device of the scaffold-trial. They revelled,
they gloated, they prolonged their greatest Mosaic trial of all for a year. They
sought to humiliate their victims in life by every imaginable meanness, and in
death they thought to deprive their victims of historical rank by the hateful
and stupid trick of distributing their ashes over the landscape. They tore into
shreds the chivalrous traditions of treatment of war-prisoners, and twisted the
Geneva Convention out of shape by assorting it gave them power to hang any
soldier as a criminal who had opposed the victory of the
American-Jewish-liberal-democratic forces. The more they widen their Mosaic
ritual of trial-killing, the more transparent it is to Europe that it is two
worlds which are here in front of one another, and that this conflict cannot be
settled in an Old-Testament courtroom, but will grow and continue, deepen and
intensify, until the Culture-alien is expelled totally and finally from the
sacred soil of the West.
Their terror includes every
land of Europe, despite their pretence that it is isolated. The trick of showing
a smiling face to part of Europe and concentrating the hostility onto another
part of Europe deceives no one. As long as the Culture-retarders who administer
Europe remain docile, accept American food rations, service American
investments, and receive American garrisons, the Washington regime will smile.
But Europe has seen the other face of the American-Jew and the Jewish-American,
devoid alike of sympathy, wisdom, and policy, cruel, sneering and stupidly
arrogant. This attempt to divide Europe might perhaps succeed if the feeling of
comradeship were absent from European populations. But a thousand years of
Cultural unity, of the same experiences in every realm, of the same sufferings,
even at one another's hands, has united the Europeans indissolubly. They know it
now more than ever before, for they have learnt it anew under the
Jewish-American lash.
Lastly, we lay to the charge
of the inner enemy that he has destroyed the World-Empire of Europe with his
vertical nationalism and petty-statism, and by his vassalage to the Bolshevism
of Washington, Moscow, and the Culture-State-Nation-Race-People of the Jew. He
has thus destroyed the power of every European State, and has turned over the
soil of Europe to outer enemies.
III. THE MISSION OF THE
LIBERATION FRONT
Europe knows the identity of
the inner enemy and that for which he is responsible. It knows that he is the
worst enemy of Europe, because he masquerades as a European, but Europe has
outer enemies toward whom also it must adopt a definitive position.
The outer enemies are the
Bolshevik regime of Moscow, the Jewish-American Bolshevik regime of Washington,
and the Culture-State-Nation-Race of the Jew, which has now created a new centre
of intrigue for itself in Tel-Aviv, a secondary New York.
The outer enemies are today
the arbiters of Europe. They have set up their alternative to the natural,
destined Europe of Authority and Faith: Europe as a source of booty for
extra-European forces; Europe as a reservoir of man-power for the disposition of
the American generalate; Europe as a loan-market for the New York financier;
Europe as a beggar-colony watching for crumbs from the table of rich America;
Europe as a historical sight for visiting colonials, a place where once there
were great happenings; Europe as a museum, a mausoleum; Europe as a moribund
collection of petty-states and squabbling peoples; Europe as an economic
mad-house where every tiny unit is against every other; Europe as a backward
population waiting for reeducation by the American world-clown and the sadistic
Jew; Europe, as a laboratory for gigantic social experiments by Moscow and for
the genocide experimentation of New York and Tel-Aviv; Europe as a Black Mass of
scaffold-trials, backward-looking persecution, treason, terror, despair and
suicide.
And a mere fifty years ago,
Europe was a proud independent organism, sure of Itself and master of the world.
The sacred soil of the Western Culture is now occupied by the Mongols,
Turkestani, and Kirghizians of Asia, by the Negroes of America, the Senegalese
of Africa, the Jews from the pavements of the world. This is democratic Europe,
liberal Europe.
But these conditions are
only external, material. The soul of Europe cannot be occupied, ruled, or
dominated by Culture-aliens. Only a materialist could think that the possession
of the tangible appurtenances of power guarantees the eternal continuance of
power. If that had been so, a few castes and States would have always ruled the
world, from its beginning. But, in the ultimate test, power is the reflection of
inner qualities, and these qualities are not possessed by any of the outer
enemies of Europe. Their transitory empires are built on sand, because
underlying them there is no super-personal soul, no World-Mission, no World-Idea,
no Destiny. Even in our short lives we have seen empires come and go, and the
temporary power-agglomerations of Moscow and Washington will go the same way.
The outer enemies of Europe
are doomed just as the inner enemy is. Time is against the inner enemy, because
History cannot go backward, even if for a short time backward-looking dotards
may try to force History to share the death-rattle with them.
And so with these crude and
heterogeneous things that the Moscow barbarian and the Washington Jew like to
think are empires. They will vanish like the morning mist under the bright rays
of History. The Future belongs only to those who have the Inner Imperative to
actualize a World-Idea latent in them, and there is only one source of this
Imperative. It cannot be invented artificially, it must be organic, and no man
or men can make it. It derives from the basic cosmic-spiritual origin of the
universe, itself, derives from God.
Thus, the Liberation Front
now states to Europe its two great tasks: (1) the complete expulsion of
everything alien from the soul and from the soil of Europe, the cleansing of the
European soul of the dross of 19th century materialism and rationalism with its
money-worship, liberal-democracy, social degeneration, parliamentarism,
class-war, feminism, vertical nationalism, finance-capitalism, petty-statism,
chauvinism, the Bolshevism of Moscow and Washington, the ethical syphilis of
Hollywood, and the spiritual leprosy of New York; (2) the construction of the
Imperium of Europe and the actualizing of the divinely-emanated European will to
unlimited political Imperialism.
Replacing the
Culture-disease of extra-Europeans and traitors are the pristine ethical values
of Europe: Authority, Faith, Discipline, Duty, Order, Hierarchy, Fertility,
Will-to-Power.
This Proclamation is thus a
Declaration of War. In this War, the Liberation
Front speaks for Europe, it represents Europe, it is the custodian of Europe's
Destiny. It is thus clothed with the mantle of super-personal invincibility that
is the attribute of the European organism. No massacres, and no scaffold-trials,
no terror or persecution can touch this force; the cannon and bayonets of
Washington cannot harm it, but in the end it will dissolve them. It will drive
the Jewish-American forces into the seas, it will throw the Asiatic armies of
Moscow back into the remoteness of Asia.
In this struggle, all the
former peoples, races, and nations of Europe coalesce, for in the beginning the
war is solely a horizontal one:
Race now means, in Europe,
the duality of having honour and pride;
People means the we-feeling
of all Europeans;
Nation now means the
organism of Europe Itself.
English, German, French,
Italian, Spanish -- these are now mere place-names and linguistic variations.
Like all of the other rich products of our great Culture, they will continue but
they are no longer political terms. Local cultures in Europe may be as
diversified as they wish, and they will enjoy a perfect autonomy in the European
Imperium, now that the oppression of vertical nationalism is dead. Anyone who
seeks to perpetuate petty-statism or old-fashioned nationalism is the inner
enemy of Europe. He is playing the game, of the extra-European forces, he is
dividing Europe and committing treason.
Treason now has only one
meaning to Europe: it means serving any other force than Europe. There is only
one treason now, treason to Europe. The nations are dead, for Europe is born.
The Liberation Front does
not allow Europe to be distracted by the situation of the moment, in which the
two crude Bolshevisms of Washington and Moscow are preparing a Third World War.
In those preparations, the Culture-retarders, the inner enemies, the
liberal-communist-democrats are again at their posts: with one voice the
churchills, the spaaks, the lies, the gaulles, croak that Washington is going to
save Europe from Moscow, or that Moscow is going to take Europe from Washington.
There is nothing to substantiate this propaganda. The fact is that only American
intervention in the Second World War prevented Europe from completely destroying
Bolshevik Russia, as a political unit. The present Russian Empire is thus the
creation of America. Never in the 500 years of Russian history has Russia been
able to make its way unaided into Europe. It invaded Prussia against the great
Frederick only when aided by France, Austria and Sweden. It invaded France in
1814 and 1815 only when assisted by England, Austria and Prussia. It invaded
Europe in 1945 only by the help of America. Russia is only a threat to a divided
Europe; a united Europe can destroy the power of Russia at the moment of its
choosing. It is a crass lie to say that Europe cannot defend itself against
Russia. Do they think it is possible for Europe to forget the knowledge that it
has just purchased with the blood of millions of its sons? Do they believe that
Europe can forget that the Jewish-American regime, and it alone, brought the Red
Armies into the heart of Europe? Is it possible that they think that Europe can
forget that the inner enemy with his liberal-communist-democracy led Europe into
this abyss? Europe remembers, and it knows the liberal-democrat as the creature
of the abyss, the spirit of negation who seeks an ever-lower abyss. He destroyed
a world-Empire, and now he asks for the confidence of Europe for a new crusade.
Washington's programme is to
conscript the Europeans -- what it cynically calls the "man-power" of
Europe -- and thus to spare the jitterbugs of North America the losses of
arduous campaigns against Russia. Abysmal stupidity motivates this wish-thought.
Do they really think that Europeans will accomplish military wonders fighting
against one enemy of Europe on behalf of another? Do they think an
American-Jewish High Command inspires the feelings necessary in a European
officer-corps to elicit its heroic instincts?
No, Europe is no more
interested in this projected war than in a struggle between two negro tribes in
the Sudan.
The European struggle is the
fight for the liberation of our sacred soil and our Western soul. It is a
horizontal struggle, against all enemies of Europe, inner enemies and
extra-European forces, whoever they are. Before Europe can fight a vertical war,
it must be constituted as the Imperium of Europe, the organic
Culture-State-Nation-Race-People of the West. And when Europe makes war then, it
will, be against the political enemy of its own choosing, and at the time of its
choosing. In these decisions, Jew, Moscow, and Washington will figure not at
all. The propaganda of the American-Jew and the Jewish-American deceives no one.
With their talk of a struggle between "East" and "West" they
hope to entice the marginal minds of Europe into cooperation with them. But to
us, the West is a word containing a divinely-emanated Mission, a sacred word,
and it does not refer to America, to Russia, or to the Jew, but solely to the
sacred soil of Europe and to the European organism.
All extra-European forces on
European soil are enemies to precisely the same extent and in exactly the same
degree. Europe will never fight for any extra-European force; Europe will never
enter into any relationship in which it is not master; the outcome of wars
between extra-European forces is a matter of indifference to the future of
Europe.
The crude power structures
of Washington and Moscow have no Past, and therefore no Future. They are without
Tradition, without a World-Mission, without a Nation-Idea, without a Destiny,
without organic unity, without a State, and without Imperial possibilities. Both
of these formless things are mere pale caricatures of the one, true,
World-Mission, which inheres in Europe alone. This Mission does not arise from
human will, but is a direct emanation of God.
In this great struggle for
the Liberation of Europe, every European of race, honour, and pride belongs with
us, regardless of his provenance. The only Europeans outside of our ranks are
the Culture-traitors, the disease of our Age. The Liberation Front itself is the
provisional form of the European nation, and it will endure until the permanent
form of the European Imperium is established.
In the mission of the
Liberation of Europe, the exact date of final accomplishment is secondary to us,
precisely because we know that our victory is already determined.
With every decade, every
year, that goes by the European will to the perfect union and full flowering
which are its Destiny becomes stronger. Our will is unbroken, our resolution
stronger than ever a European resolution before us. With massive calmness we
enter upon this greatest of all tasks to which ever European men have dedicated
themselves.
Against the bayonets and
cannon of the extra-European forces we oppose a will harder than their steel,
which will wrench their weapons and their power from their grasp. With contempt
we will grind the inner enemy into the dirt.
A millennium of European
history, of joy and sacrifice, of heroism and nobility, impel us to our task. To
the blood that has flowed on the sacred soil of Europe we shall add the blood of
our enemies. We shall continue until Europe is freed from its enemies, and the
European banner floats over its own soil from Galway to Memelland and from North
Cape to Gibraltar.
Europe Awake!
The Nature of Politics
Francis Parker Yockey
First, what is politics? That
is, politics as a fact. Politics is activity in relation to power.
Politics is a domain of its
own—the domain of power. Thus it is not morality, it is not esthetics, it is
not economics. Politics is a way of thinking, just as these others are. Each of
these forms of thought isolates part of the totality of the world and claims it
for its own. Morality distinguishes between good and evil,
esthetics between beautiful and ugly; economics between utile
and inutile (in its later purely trading phase these are identical with profitable
and unprofitable). The way politics divides the world is into friend
and enemy. These express for it the highest possible degree of
connection, and the highest possible degree of separation.
Political thought is as
separate from these other forms of thought as they are from each other. It can
exist without them, they without it. The enemy can be good, he can be beautiful,
he may be economically utile, business with him may be profitable—but if his
power activity converges on mine, he is my enemy. He is that one with whom existential
conflicts are possible. But esthetics, economics, morality are not concerned
with existence, but only with norms of activity and thinking within an
assured existence.
While as a matter of psychological
fact, the enemy is easily represented as ugly, injurious, and evil, nevertheless
this is subsidiary to politics, and does not destroy the independence of
political thinking and activity. The political disjunction, concerned as it is
with existence, is the deepest of all disjunctions and thus, has a tendency to
seek every type of persuasion, compulsion, and justification in order to carry
its activity forward. The extent to which this occurs is in direct ratio to the
purity of political thinking in the leaders. The more their outlooks contain of
moral, economic or other ways of thinking, the more they will use propaganda
along such lines to further their political aims. It may even happen that they
are not conscious that their activity is political. There is every indication
that Cromwell regarded himself as a religionist and not as a politician. A
variation was provided by the French journal which fanned the war spirit of its
readers in 1870 with the expectation that the poilus would bring car-loads of
blonde women back from Prussia.
On the other side, Japanese
propaganda for the home populace during the Second World War, accented almost
entirely the existential i.e., purely political nature of the struggle.
Another may be ugly, evil and injurious and yet not be an enemy; or he may be
good, beautiful, and useful, and yet be an enemy.
Friend and enemy are concrete
realities. They are not figurative. They are unmixed with moral, esthetic or
economic elements. They do not describe a private relationship of antipathy.
Antipathy is no necessary part of the political disjunction of friend and enemy.
Hatred is a private phenomenon. If politicians inoculate their populations with
hatred against the enemy, it is only to give them a personal interest in the
public struggle which they would otherwise not have. Between superpersonal
organisms there is no hatred, although there may be existential struggles. The
disjunction love-hatred is not political and does not intersect at any point the
political one of friend-enemy. Alliance does not mean love, any more than war
means hate. Clear thinking in the realm of politics demands at the outset a
strong power of dissociation of ideas.
The world-outlook of
Liberalism, here as always completely emancipated from reality, said that the
concept enemy described either an economic competitor, or else an ideational
opponent. But in economics there are no enemies, but only competitors; in a
world which was purely moralized (i.e., one in which only moral contrasts
existed) there could be no enemies, but only ideational opponents. Liberalism,
strengthened by the unique long peace, 1871-1914, pronounced politics to be
atavistic, the grouping of friend-enemy to be retrograde. This of course belongs
to politics—a branch of philosophy. In that realm no misstatement is possible;
no accumulation of facts can prove a theory wrong, for over these theories are
supreme, History is not the arbiter in matters of political outlook, Reason
decides all, and everyone decides for himself what is reasonable. This is
concerned however only with facts, and the only objection made here to
such an outlook in the last analysis is that it is not factual.
Enemy, then, does not mean
competitor. Nor does it mean opponent in general. Least of all does it describe
a person whom one hates from feelings of personal antipathy. Latin possessed two
words: hostis for the public enemy, inimicus for a private enemy. Our Western
languages unfortunately do not make this important distinction. Greek however
did possess it, and had further a deep distinction between two types of wars:
those against other Greeks, and those against outsiders of the Culture,
barbarians. The former were—and only the latter were true wars. An agon was
originally a contest for a prize at the public games, and the opponent was the
"antagonist." This distinction has value for us because in comparison
with wars in this age, intra-European wars of the preceding 800 years were
agonal. As nationalistic politics assumed the ascendancy within the Classical
Culture, with the Peloponnesian Wars, the distinction passed out of Greek usage.
17th and 18th century wars in West-Europe were in the nature of contests for a
prize—the prize being a strip of territory, a throne, a title. The
participants were dynasties, not peoples. The idea of destroying the opposing
dynasty was not present, and only in the exceptional case was there even the
possibility of such a thing happening. Enemy in the political sense means thus public
enemy. It is unlimited, and it is thus distinguished from private enmity.
The distinction public-private can only arise when there is a super-personal
unit present. When there is, it determines who is friend and enemy, and thus no
private person can make such a determination. He may hate those who oppose him
or who are distasteful to him, or who compete with him, but he may not treat
them as enemies in the unlimited sense.
The lack of two words to
distinguish public and private enemy also has contributed to confusion in the
interpretation of the well-known Biblical passage (Matthew 5:44; Luke 6:27)
"Love your enemies." The Greek and Latin versions use the words
referring to a private enemy. And this is indeed to what the passage
refers. It is obviously an adjuration to put aside hatred and malice, but there
is no necessity whatever that one hate the public enemy. Hatred is not contained
in political thinking. Any hatred worked up against the public enemy is
non-political, and always shows some weakness in the internal political
situation. This Biblical passage does not adjure one to love the public enemy,
and during the wars against Saracen and Turk no Pope, saint, or philosopher so
construed it. It certainly does not counsel treason out of love for the public
enemy.
II
Every non-political human
grouping of whatever kind, legal, social, religious, economic or other becomes
at last political if it creates an opposition deep enough to range men against
one another as enemies. The State as a political unit excludes by its nature
opposition of such types as these. If however a disjunction occurs in the
population of a State which is so deep and strong that it divides them into
friends and enemies, it shows that the State, at least temporarily, does not
exist in fact. It is no longer a political unit, since all political decisions
are no longer concentrated in it. All States whatever keep a monopoly of political
decision. This is another way of saying they maintain inner peace. If some
group or idea becomes so strong that it can effect a friend-enemy grouping, it
is a political unit; and if forces are generated which the State cannot manage
peace-ably, it has disappeared for the time at least. If the State has to resort
to force, this in itself shows that there are two political units, in
other words, two States instead of the one originally there.
This raises the question of
the significance of internal politics. Within a State, we speak of
social-politics, judicial-politics, religious-politics, party-politics and the
like. Obviously they represent another meaning of the word, since they do not
contain the possibility of a friend-enemy disjunction. They occur within a
pacified unit. They can only be called "secondary." The essence of the
State is that within its realm it excludes the possibility of a friend-enemy
grouping. Thus conflicts occurring within a State are by their nature limited,
whereas the truly political conflict is unlimited. Every one of these internal
limited struggles of course may become the focus of a true political
disjunction, if the idea opposing the State is strong enough, and the leaders of
the State have lost their sureness. If it does—again, the State is gone. An
organism either follows its own law, or it becomes ill. This is organic logic
and governs all organisms, plant, animal, man) High Culture. They are either
themselves, or they sicken and die. Not for them is the rational and logical
view which says that whatever can be cogently written down into a system can
then be foisted on to an organism. Rational thinking is merely one of the
multifarious creations of organic life, and it cannot, being subsidiary, include
the whole within its contemplation. It is limited and can only work in a certain
way, and on material which is adapted to such treatment. The organism is the
whole, however, and does not yield its secrets to a method which it develops out
of its own adaptive ability to cope with non-organic problems it has to
overcome.
Secondary politics often can
distort primary politics. For instance the female politics of petty jealousy and
personal hatred that was effective in the court of Louis XV was instrumental in
devoting much of French political energy to the less important struggle against
Frederick, and little French political energy to the more important struggle
against England in Canada and India and on the seas. Frederick the Great was not
beloved by the Pompadour, and France paid an empire to chastise him. When
private hostility exerts such an effect on public it is proper to speak of
political distortion, and of such a policy as a distorted one. When an organism
consults or is in the grip of any force outside of its own developmental law,
its life is distorted. The relation between a private enmity and a public
politics it is circumstanced to distort is the same as that between European
petty-Statism and the Western Civilization. The collectively suicidal game of
nationalistic politics distorted the whole destiny of the West after 1900 to the
advantage of the extra-European forces.
III
The concrete nature of
politics is shown by certain linguistic facts which appear in all Western
languages. Invariably the concepts, ideas, and vocabulary of a political group
are polemical, propagandistic. This is true throughout all higher history. The
words State, class, King, society—all have their polemical content and they
have an entirely different meaning to partisans from what they have to
opponents. Dictatorship, government of laws, proletariat, bourgeoisie—these
words have no meaning other than their polemical one, and one does not know what
they are intended to convey unless one knows also who is using them and against
whom. During the Second World War, for instance freedom and democracy were used
as terms to describe all members of the coalition against Europe, with an entire
disregard of semantics. The word "dictatorship" was used by the
extra-European coalition to describe not only Europe, but any country which
refused to join the coalition.
Similarly, the word
"fascist" was used purely as a term of abuse, without any descriptive
basis whatever, just as the word "democracy" was a word of praise but
not of description. In the American press, for example, both during the 1914 war
and the 1939 war, Russia was always described as a "democracy." The
House of Romanov and the Bolshevik regime were equally democratic. This was
necessary to preserve the homogeneous picture of these wars which this press had
painted for its readers: the war was one of democracy against dictatorship;
Europe was dictatorship, ergo, anything fighting Europe was democracy. In the
same way, Machiavelli described any State that was not a monarchy as a republic,
a polemical definition that has remained to this day. To Jack Cade the word
nobility was a term of damnation, to those who put down his rebellion, it was
everything good. In a legal treatise, the class-warrior Karl Renner described
rent paid by tenant to landlord as "tribute." In the same way, Ortega
y Gasset calls the resurgence of State authority, of the ideas of order,
hierarchy and discipline, a revolt of the masses. And to a real class warrior,
any navvy is socially valuable, but an officer is a "parasite."
During the period when
Liberalism ruled in the Western Civilization, and the State was reduced,
theoretically, to the role of "night-watchman," the very word
"politics" changed its fundamental meaning. From having described the
power activities of the State, it now described the efforts of private
individuals and their organizations to secure positions in the government as a
means of livelihood, in other words politics came to mean party-politics.
Readers in 2050 will have difficulty in understanding these relationships, for
the age of parties will be as forgotten then as the Opium War is now.
All State organisms were
distorted, sick, in crisis, and this introspection was one great symptom of it.
Supposedly internal politics was primary.
If internal politics was
actually primary, it must have meant that friend-enemy groupings could arise on
an internal political question. If this did happen, in the extreme case civil
war was result, but unless a civil war occurred, internal politics was still in
fact secondary, limited, private, and not public. The very contention that inner
politics was primary was polemical: what was meant was that it should be.
The Liberals and class-warriors, then as now, spoke of their wishes and hope as
facts, near-facts, or potential facts. The sole result of focusing energy onto
inner problems was to weaken the State, in its dealings with other States. The
law of every organism allows only two alternatives: either the organism must be
true to itself, or it goes down into sickness or death. The nature, the
essence of the State is inner peace and outer struggle. If the inner peace
is disturbed or broken, the outer struggle is damaged.
The organic and the
inorganic ways of thinking do not intersect: ordinary classroom logic, the logic
of philosophy textbooks, tells us that there is no reason why State, politics
and war need even exist. There is no logical reason why humanity could
not be organized as a society, or as a purely economic enterprise, or as
a vast book club. But the higher organisms of States, and the highest organisms,
the High Cultures, do not ask logicians for permission to exist—the very
existence of this type of rationalist, the man emancipated from reality, is only
a symptom of a crisis in the High Culture, and when the crisis passes, the
rationalists pass away with it. The fact that the rationalists are not in touch
with the invisible, organic forces of History is shown by their predictions of
events. Before 1914, they universally asserted that a general European war was
impossible. Two different types of rationalists gave their two different
reasons. The class-warriors of the Internationale, said that inter-national
class-war socialism would make it impossible to mobilize "the workers"
of one country against "the workers" in another country. The other
type—also with its center of gravity in economics, since rationalism and
materialism are indissolubly wedded—said no general war was possible because
mobilization would bring about such a dislocation of the economic life of the
countries that a breakdown would come in a few weeks.
The Destiny
of America
By Francis
P. Yockey (From 1955)
The early American arrived
at a land of which he knew nothing. He did not know its geography, its
fertility, its climate, its dangers. In the North, he encountered forests, rocky
soil, and winters of a rigor he had not known before. In the South, he met with
swamps, malaria, and dense forests, Everywhere he encountered the hostile savage
with his scalping knife and his warfare against women and children. In little
groups, these early Americans cleared the forests, and built homes and forts.
The men plowed the fields with rifles slung over their shoulders, and in the
house, the wife went about her duties with a loaded weapon near at hand. There
were ships to and from Europe, and the colonials could have left their hardships
and gone back -- but they would not admit defeat.
Out of these colonials was
bred the Minute Man. Minute Man! These American farmers were ready at a minute's
notice to abandon the plow and seize the gun. They knew that the hour of their
political independence was at hand and instinctively they prepared for it. When
the moment arrived, with a British order to arrest two of their leaders, the
Minute Men assembled before daybreak at Lexington to face the British force sent
to seize them. Though heavily outnumbered they stood their ground in the face of
Major Pitcairn's order to disperse. "If they mean to have a war," said
Captain John Parker, leader of the Minute Men, "let it begin here!"
Begin it did, and for 8 long
years it continued. Concord, Bunker Hill, Boston, Ticonderoga, Quebec, New York,
Long Island, Harlem Heights, White Plains, Fort Lee, Fort Washington, Valley
Forge, Trenton, Princeton, Brandywine, Saratoga, Stony Point, Savannah, Camden,
The Cowpens, Yorktown -- these names recall at once the terrific odds against
which the colonials fought, the low points to which their fortunes reached, and
the silent and steadfast devotion of the troops. At Valley Forge, the men were
but half-clad, and rations, when there was food issued at all, were slim.
Sickness was rife, and mortality was high, Yet no one thought of surrender.
General Washington said of them: "Naked and starving as they are we cannot
enough admire the incomparable patience and fidelity of our soldiery."
No nation has produced
individual soldiers to excel Nathaniel Greene, General Know, General Sullivan,
John Stark, Nicholas Herkimer, Anthony Wayne, Daniel Morgan, John Paul Jones,
nor greater patriots than John Dickinson, Richard Henry Lee, John Adams,
Benjamin Franklin, John Rutledge. These are but a few. The spirit which animated
these heroes is part of the white race, and it will last while this race lasts.
It waits for its reawakening upon the coming of great events to American soil
once more. When the fields of this continent are visited once again by the stern
creativeness of war -- war for the independence and the liberation of the
pristine American colonial spirit -- the world shall see that Americans are not
the weak-willed, self-interested, pleasure-mad morons that Hollywood has tried
so desperately to make them. It was the individual imperialism of the
frontiersman-type that actually opened up and conquered the North American
continent. Explorers like George Rogers Clark and John Fremont preceded the
frontiersman into the wilderness, and he followed into the hostile land with its
lurking warlike savages. With slung rifle he took wife and children and all his
earthly belongings into the land ahead, unknown, unsettled, unplowed. Daily he
surmounted a thousand dangers, he lived in the face of Death. This intrepid type
who was at once explorer, warrior, minister, doctor, judge, and settler,
advanced until he reached the Pacific, and then he looked toward Alaska and the
westward-islands. The tragic defeat of the Federalists by the less worthy among
the post-Revolution generation made it possible for sectionalism to arise in
America, and out of sectionalism issued the disastrous "War Between the
States." That war proved only that the heroic type of American occurred
everywhere in this broad land. The only lesson we can learn from the sacrifice
is that big-mouthed agitators of the vicious stamp of Theodore Parker and Horace
Greeley are capable of consigning nations to the flames in order to actualize
their fantastic egalitarian theories.
During the conquest of the
continent, small carping voices were continually raised against the heroic
performance. Congressmen laughed at the idea of governing a region so far away
as the distant Pacific coast. The Poets Lowell and Whittier and the agitators
Garrison and Phillips did their best to bring about a sectional war during all
of the 40's and 50's. Calhoun's attempt to annex Texas was defeated by the
Congress. Small minds were against the Mexican War and the acquisition of the
Southwest. They opposed the acquisition of Hawaii, of the Philippines, of the
Cuban protectorate. After the War Between the States, this type of mind,
represented by men like Summer and Stevens, wanted to treat the Southerners as
an alien and inferior people and to gloat over them while placing the
conqueror's foot on their necks.
This type of mentality still
survives in America. Today it still fights against greatness and heroism. Today
it teaches the doctrine of liberalism with its pacifism, its love for the
inferior and misbegotten, its internationalism which makes a virtue of treason,
its hatred of all who possess strong national feelings, its toothless desire for
racial equality, and its tolerance of everything and everyone, particularly the
alien and the unfit. Today this type of mind -- namely, all those to whom
liberal doctrines appeal -- are working for the anti-American forces, whether
consciously or not. The sub-Americans are in the service of America's inner
enemy. We have seen the spirit of the white race: the spirit of divine
discontent and self-help, the spirit of self-reliance, of fearlessness in the
face of great danger, the feeling of racial superiority, the urge to great
distances and the will to conquer all that lies between, the spirit of the
Alamo. To the true American, his is a living, organic, white nation, and not a
set of principles, of "four freedoms" or a
"world-policeman". Of this feeling was every great American:
Washington, Hamilton, Henry Clay, Robert E. Lee, Sam Houston. The American
soldier shows in every war that even today this true American type survives.
But today the true
Americans, the former great leaders, have been displaced by Morganthaus,
Ezekiels, Paswolskis, Cohens, Frankfurters, Goldsmiths, Lubins, Berles, Schenks,
Edelsteins, Baruchs, Goldwyns, Mayers, Strausses, Lilienthals, Hillmans,
Rosenmans, Lehmanns, Rosenbergs, Eisenhowers. We know the true American and we
know the liberal -- the sub-type within the white race. Let us now look at the
third group which came here only yesterday and which today is linked with the
liberals, the internationalists, the class-warriors, the subverters, of
America's white, European traditions. This group makes use of American slogans
and American ideas, but that cannot conceal its alien provenance. Let us measure
the significance of the newcomers and examine their history.
THE HISTORY
OF THE JEW
The culture which produced
the Jewish nation arose in Asia Minor around 100 B.C. This culture produced many
nations, all of them, so far as we are concerned, similar to the Jews. These
"nations" were not nations at all in our sense of the word, for they
had no homeland. Citizenship in this alien type of nation was gained by being a
believer in the religion of the group. Jews, Marcionites, Gnostics, Mohammedans
-- all these were nations, and to all of them membership in the nation was
gained by being a believer. Intermarriage with non-believers was forbidden, and
this inbreeding for two thousand years has made it possible today to pick out
the Jew by his countenance. Thus, for the Jew, race and religion became
identical, and if the Jew loses his religion, he loses little for he still
remains a Jew by race. The unity of the race is not destroyed even though the
great masses of the Jews becomeatheists. After the dispersion of the Jews
throughout Europe and Russia, they were entirely cut off from any contact with
nations similar to themselves. They shut themselves up in the ghettoes of the
cities and lived completely unto themselves. There they had their own religion,
their own law, their own language, their own customs, their own diet, their own
economy. Since they were nowhere at home, everywhere was equally home to them.
The early European nations
felt the Jew to be as totally alien as he felt his surroundings to be. The
Anglo-Saxons, the Goths, the Lombards, the Franks, all despised the usurious
infidel. A popular rhyme of Gothic times portrays the three estates as the
creation of God, and the usurious Jew as the creation of the Devil. Crusaders on
their way to the Holy Land carried out wholesale massacres of Jews. Every
European king at one time or another robbed the Jews and drove them from his
domain. For 400 years the Jew was shut out from England. When he was allowed
back, centuries more passed before he acquired or wanted civil rights of
Englishmen. This persecution of the Jew that went on for 1,000 years took
different forms -- robbery through forced fines, extortion, exile, massacre --
and it has had one determining, unchangeable result: it has reinforced in the
Jew his original hatred for Christian civilization to the point where it is the
sole content and meaning of his existence. This hatred is the breath of life to
the Jew. He wants to tear down everything which surrounds him, every Western
form of life, every Western idea. For a thousand years he cringed before the
European master, who was so unassailable in his superiority. The figure of
Shylock, drinking his gall and biding his time, taking his usury and saving the
coins which represented to him the means of his liberation -- this is the
symbolic figure of the Jew for a thousand years. This consuming hatred on the
part of the Jew is one of the most important facts in the world today. The Jew
is a world power. How did this come about?
THE RISE OF
THE JEW TO POWER
It was the Industrial
Revolution in Europe and America which enabled the Jew, from having been Shylock
for a thousand years, the despised and cringing usurer, to become the type of
the modern Jew, the cinema dictator, the tyrant of the inmost thoughts of
100,000,000 Americans. The Jew had been thinking in terms of economics and money
for a thousand years before Europe and America began to develop a money
civilization. Consequently when money stepped out as the supreme force, the Jew
shot upward like a meteor. There was still a barrier however to his complete
conquest of power. The heathen, the outsider, was still barred from civil
rights. Of old he had not sought them, but now they were necessary if he was to
conquer the master of yesterday. Nation after nation succumbed to the principles
which the butchers of the French Revolution preached, and which the Jew took up
and excitedly shouted over the world. A money civilization wants no aristocracy
to stand in its way, so Money and Jew preached equality. Nor must there be any
barriers to the employment of money, so the Jew preached liberty. He sought to
lose his mark as outsider, for in his new role he wanted to be accepted as a
member of whatever nation he might be among, so that he might conquer the power
for his revenge. So he preached fraternity for others and the brotherhood of
man.
But his "equality"
meant only a new inequality -- the dictatorship of the Master of Money over the
economic slave tied to his bench with a wage-chain. His "liberty"
meant that the Jew was free to squeeze out the life-blood of nations through
usury and financial dictatorship. The "brotherhood of man" -- that
meant that the Jew was to be accepted as an equal -- but that he was to maintain
his ancient unity and desire for revenge. Now the point has been reached where
he steps out and asks for special privileges -- and gets them! Yesterday he
denied aristocracy -- today he affirms it -- and he is the new aristocrat!! Did
not Albert Einstein, before whom Americans are supposed to bow and scrape, write
in Colliers Magazine an article entitled "Why the Jew is Superior"?
And did not the white Americans afraid to think for himself any longer, read it
and believe?
The Jew did not conceive nor
organize modem industrialism. No more did he organize liberalism. But when these
two things had become realities, he cleverly insinuated himself into the new
social and economic fabric which arose, and he has now identified himself with
the rapacious capitalism of the sweatshops and with the dishonest and revolting
"democracy" of the type where Tweedledum opposed Tweedledee, and the
Jew cares not which wins for he nominates them both.
There was a great danger to
the Jew in this removal of all barriers between him and the host nations. This
danger was assimilation of the great mass of Jews. If this were to occur, the
Rothschilds, Baruchs, Frankfurters, Rosenmans, Guggenheims, Schiffs, Lehmanns,
Cohens -- all these would be leaders without followers. They would lose their
trustworthy followers who could penetrate everywhere and spread the influence of
the Jew. One fruitful source of taxation would be gone. So the word
"assimilated" became a term of contempt used by arch-Jews to describe
other Jews who were losing their Jewish feelings and instincts. The Jew, with
his two thousand years behind him, was faced with a perilous situation. No mere
money manipulation could cope with this emergency. In this situation, the Jewish
leaders invented Zionism.
ZIONISM AND
THE PINNACLE OF JEWISH POWER
It was a political
master-stroke on the part of the Jew to bring out the movement known as Zionism.
Its ostensible aim was to seek a "national home" for the Jew, a plot
of ground to which all Jews would theoretically return and there settle. Since
the idea seemed to be to make the Jews into a nation like America, one with
geographical boundaries, it seemed a praiseworthy movement to Americans. It
seemed to promise the end of the Jews as the shifting sand dunes among nations,
and to herald their establishment as a civilized nation. Hence unlimited Zionist
activity and propaganda could be carried on among the Jews by their leaders, and
no suspicion was aroused in the minds of the host nations.
But the real aim of Zionism
was merely to save the Jew, wherever he was, from assimilation by the Western
peoples, the European and American people. It enabled their leaders to unite the
Jews firmly, to prevent assimilation by giving the Jews a political aim to
follow. The spurious quality of the movement is shown by the fact that almost no
Jews were moved to Palestine. A few only were moved, for commercial and
political reasons and to conceal the Zionist fraud, but the millions remained in
America and Europe. The real aim of Zionism -- to reaffirm and perpetuate the
solidarity of the Jew -- has been successful. Zionism has become the official
policy of the Jewish entity, and its ascendancy means, as far as the simple,
ordinary Jew is concerned, that he is an utter slave in the hands of his
leaders. It is probably superfluous to mention that no leading Zionist has gone
from his position of power in white America back to Palestine. Nor need it be
pointed out once more how few out of the millions of Jews driven from Europe
have gone to Palestine. Almost to a man, they have come to America, their land
of promise, the last base for their power, the last place for their revenge.
The invasion of Palestine,
strategically important though it is, nevertheless stands in the shade of the
vast invasion of America. During the short half century since Jewry adopted
Zionism, some ten millions of Jews have been dumped on the shores of North
America to displace Americans biologically and economically, to live
parasitically on the American organism, to distort the social and spiritual life
of the nation. The volume of the invasion has been such that even the
slumbering, politically-unconscious white American has begun to blink his eyes
and look around him in amazement, as he becomes gradually cognizant that his
native land has passed into the possession of scheming, power-hungry,
money-grubbing, total aliens.
The alien has his own press,
in which he reveals those things which the democratic-liberal press dutifully
conceals at the behest of the Jew. Pick up at random an issue of the
"Contemporary Jewish Record" -- that for June 1941. On page 282 we are
told how Jewish educators are combatting successfully "the un-American
movement of 100% Americanism". On page 259 a member of the American Jewish
Committee joyfully reports that because of the hostility between American and
Jew the successive waves of Jewish immigrants "will develop into a cohesive
American Jewish community". The article "The Jewish Emigrant --
1941", describing the arrival of the Jew in America, says: "Our sole
conclusion is that when the emigrant has finally arrived at his destination, he
can consider himself at the entrance to Heaven". (sic). Seven million of
these immigrants have arrived at their "entrance to Heaven" since
1933. There is admitted hostility between them and their host-people. The Jew
opposes 100% Americanism. Yet he calls his arrival here his "entrance to
Heaven". How is this?
THE RISING
INFLUENCE OF THE JEW IN AMERICA
The North American continent
was discovered, explored, cleared, plowed and settled by the individual
imperialism of members of the European-American white race. The political
independence of America was won, and the industrial-technical system of the
continent was planned and built by the white race. The American merchant marine
was built and sent into the seven seas by white men. Every creative idea in
whatever realm -- political, economic, technical, religious, legal, educational
social -- that has been brought forth on this continent has originated with, and
been developed by, members of the white European-American race. America belongs
spiritually, and will always belong, to the Western Civilization of which it is
a colonial transplantation, and no part of the true America belongs to the
primitivity of the barbarians and fellaheen outside of this civilization,
whether in Asia Minor, the Far East, or Africa.
And yet, even though the Jew
was not present at Valley Forge, even though he was not at New Orleans in 1814,
nor at the Alamo, nor at Bull Run or Chancellorsville, nor at Guantanamo Bay or
Manila, even though he took no part in the conquest of the continent -- in spite
of this complete dissociation of the Jew from the American past, it is a stark
and gruesome fact that America today is ruled by the Jew. Where Americans hold
office, they hold it at the pleasure of the Jews and use it in deference to his
policy. Baruch argues with Roserman on the steps of the White House -- once the
residence of Washington, Madison, Adams -- and the policy of America is thus
determined. LaGuardia calls Lehmann by a Yiddish term of abuse in public. As
lawyer, the Jew brings in excessive litigation; as judges he imports chicanery
into the administration, and has the power to pronounce rules of law for
Americans. A rabbi states: "The ideals of Judaism and the ideals of
Americanism are one and the same," And the "Jewish Chronicle"
(April 4, 1919) says: "The ideals of Bolshevism are consonant with the
finest ideals of Judaism". The notorious rabbi Wise announces, "I have
been an American for 67 years, but I have been a Jew for 6000 years". The
"Jewish Chronicle" tells us: "The Jews in America are 100% Jewish
and 100% American". These schizophrenic percentages resolve themselves into
the thesis of the rabbis that Judaism, Trotskyist Bolshevism, and Americanism
are one and the same. The synagogues have a parade of liberals -- sub-Americans
with defective instincts -- come before them to parrot back at them their own
view-point.
The Jew numbers
approximately 10% of the North American populations but in the Second World War,
a war fought solely for Jewish interests, a war of his fomenting, a war to
increase his power, the conscripts in the American Army were only 2% Jewish,
according to official records. Neither in his assumed role of American, nor in
his actual status as member of the JewishCulture-State- Nation-Race-People, was
he willing to risk his blood, even in his own war. In the fighting forces he
limited his participation to the administrative branches: Judge Advocate,
Medical, Quartermaster, Finance. In the American Army Jewish conscripts have an
unconditional right to a furlough for Passover, for Yom Kippur, for Rosh
Hashanah. The induction of Jews into the Army is delayed over Jewish holidays --
"to avoid undue hardship". The Central Conference of American Rabbis
in the 47th annual convention in New York addressed a resolution to the American
Congress asking that Jews be exempted from conscription "in accordance with
the highest interpretation of Judaism"! In the publicly supported
educational institutions for higher learning, the Jew is driving out the native
American student. In the free universities, such as Wayne University and City
College of New York, the Jew's possession is complete. The Stock Exchange
presents a similar picture. The New York Exchange is dormant on Jewish holidays.
The Officers Reserve Corps is ever more penetrated by the Jews. The police
forces of the large cities are under his control, and the Federal secret police
enforce his bidding. He commands the National Guard in the populous states.
How has this come about? How
has the native American been driven from the positions of representation, of
power and respect in his own land? How has he been chased out of the
professions, out of government, of the universities, out of the sources of
public information? How did the interloper from Asia, the ghetto-creature from
Kishnev, attain to his eminence whereupon he holds in his hands the decision of
war or peace, and decides who are America's friends and who are America's
enemies?
Two things are responsible
for this situation in which America finds itself serving as a mere tool in the
hands of an alien. First is Liberalism -- the enemy of national greatness, the
virus that eats up national feelings. Liberalism is the doctrine that everyone
is equal, everyone acceptable, the doctrine that the botched, the misbegotten
are equal to the strong and the superior, that there are no foreigners and no
distinctions. Liberalism gnaws away at the structure for which patriots and
great leaders gave their lives and fortunes. To Liberalism, America is a
"melting-pot", a dump heap for the world's human refuse. When the
white race in Europe drives out the Jew, he goes to America where weak heads and
inferiors who are jealous of that to which they are not equal have laid down for
him the red carpet of Liberalism, and on this carpet, the Jew has advanced to
supreme power in the short half a century since he first discovered that America
is a fine host for an enterprising parasite. Liberalism is the inversion of that
100% Americanism which the Jew hates.
But mere Liberalism alone
does not account for it. The second factor has been the aggressive unity of the
Jew, his cohesiveness born of hate, which has welded him together and organized
his forces for his mission of destruction. By virtue of the cohesiveness of the
Jewish entity, at once Culture, State, Nation, People, Race, Religion, and
Society, the Jew conquered the cinema industry, the news-gathering associations
which controls all "news" and journalistic opinion, the periodical and
book press, and the radio networks. When it became obvious the
"Republican" party was about to lose the 1932 election, he cleverly
insinuated himself into the "Democratic" party, and placed his
candidate in the Presidency. This was the Revolution of 1933, but since it had
occurred in the form of a simple change of parties, the politically-unconscious
American remained unaware.
In 1933, there descended
upon Washington the swarm led by Baruch, Lehmann, Morgenthau, Frankfurter, Niles
and Rosenman. In their train were thousands of Paswolskis, Messersmiths, Lubins,
Berles, Fortases, Lilienthals, Cohens, Ezekiels, Silversteins et al, and
bringing up the procession came enough lesser Jews, deracinated liberals,
technocrats and aliens to double the population of the capital city within a few
years.
Between the cracks in the
pavement the Jew recruited a thousand sub-Americans as "radio
commentators", newspaper "columnists", and professional
propagandists to disseminate the world-outlook the Jew considered appropriate
for the American. A multiplicity of government bureaus came into existence,
necessarily staffed with Jews. The Jew sought to bring under his control every
factor of public expression and influence, thus to make sure that never again
would there be a free national election for he did not intend to relinquish his
power, so long dreamt of, and now at last real, through the free play of any
constitutional game of parties and majorities. He purged the central government
of whoever could not be led by the nose, or bought. Who opposed was shouted
down, smeared with vile labels, and so silenced. Thus America was given a
semitic countenance.
THE
WORLD IN FLAMES
An Estimate
of the World Situation
by Francis
Parker Yockey
(published
February 1961)
In October 1946, in a quiet
garden in Wiesbaden, an unknown person, whose writings and actions are only
valued by his enemies, and that negatively, composed a short monograph entitled
"The Possibilities of Germany", and this Estimate can best begin by a
short citation from that unpublished work:
"Eventually -- not
before 15 years, not more than 30 -- the Anglo-Saxon-Jewish combine and the
Russian Empire will wage the third of the series of World Wars."
1960 was the first year in
which the world political situation was ripe for a great war. But the exact
moment of its outbreak is known to no one at this time, not even to any
clairvoyant. It may take place this year, or any year after this, the last
possible time being about 1975.
I
A brief comparison is in
order with the situation of 1946. In that year, America-Jewry controlled, in a
political if not military, sense the entire Western Hemisphere, all of Western
Europe except a part of Germany, all of Africa, all the Near East, the Middle
East, and the Far East. This all amounted to 9/10 of the surface of the earth
and more than 3/4 of the earth's population.
Since then, this
preponderance of power vi-a-vis Russia has dwindled to a point where the
Washington regime at this moment has no preponderance of power vis-a-vis Russia,
but stands in an inferior power-position.
The basic reason for the
diminution of power is spiritual-organic. Power will never stay in the hands of
him who does not want power and has no plan for its use. Desire for revenge,
desire to "stop Hitler", desire to destroy Europe, desire to kill
80,000,000 Germans by the Morgenthau Plan -- all these are not will-to-power.
Will-to-power means inherently the will to do something positive with that
power, not the will to prevent something.
The more superficial and
direct reason for the diminution of power was political incapacity on the part
of the Zionists, or Washington regime as it is here interchangeably called. This
incapacity manifested itself first in total incomprehension of the Russian soul,
leading to the belief that this wild, chaotic, spirituality had surrendered
itself permanently to the guidance of a small group of Jewish intellectuals.
A person who believes that
the seizing of the apparatus of power -- government, army, police, press,
education -- guarantees the continuance of power is a political non-entity. Yet
the whole Washington regime believes this. In philosophy they are materialists
and thus cannot ever understand that visible facts are only the manifestation of
invisible spiritual movements.
To the extent that a people
is materialistic in its religion and philosophy, it is non-revolutionary, but
the Russians are completely non-materialistic, being completely dominated by
feelings, and acting always from their feelings. Thus it was that the Russians,
even without disturbing the Bolshevik governmental structure or ideology,
effected a complete revolution and deprived the Jewish leadership of all power.
The Jew in contemporary Russia is allowed to be a Jew, if he is first and
foremost a Russian. In other words he is not allowed to be a Jew, and is being
exterminated without physical violence.
Since the Washington regime
believed in the"friendliness" -- i e. Jewish domination -- of Russia,
it gave China to Russia, as it had already given part of Germany and part of
Japan. One cannot call this treason on the part of the nincompoop Marshall who
accomplished the actual transfer of China from the Washington regime to the
Russian sphere, for he was sent by the Washington regime on this very mission,
and when he died, years later, was called by the Zionist press the greatest
soldier, etc., etc. Legally speaking, it makes no sense to say the entire
government of a country is committing treason, for it is they who define the
enemy. In a spiritual sense, of course, the Washington regime are traitors to
the United States and its people, but they have so defined the relationships
that those who are loyal to the United States in a spiritual and political sense
are regarded as traitors in a legal sense.
India was surrendered in
1947, and lost to the control of the Washington regime. Together with China it
accounts for about 40% of the world's population.
Since then, Egypt has been
lost and half the Arab world, through the creation of the foolish, unnecessary
Jewish State in Palestine.
Cuba and Venezuela have been
lost, with only financial bridgeheads retained, and all the Latin American
possessions of the Washington regime, from Nicaragua to Argentina, are growing
restive.
Because it retained the
fiction of the independence of the European lands, the Washington regime has
imperilled its grip on France, by allowing De Gaulle to set up himself up as a
leader.
In Korea, the Zionists
fought against the Chinese armies they had created, through the Great General
Marshall, and these armies used the very equipment which Marshall had delivered
to them, sufficient to equip 60 divisions. Not only did they lose the war, but
they demonstrated to the entire world that the United States infantry is
inferior, and that the Zionist empire is, in the Chinese phrase, a paper tiger.
On the positive side, there
is little to record. The Zionists conquered Spain without a war, and have
occupied it with their troops. They have completely incorporated England, and
occupied it once more with troops.
Of all that they possessed
in 1946, there remain only the greater part of Latin America, (now precariously
held), all Europe except part of Germany and the greater part of the
Mediterranean littoral (also precariously held). Japan has been lost, but
Australia, without military value, is still held. The Philippines are still
precariously held.
What the Washington regime
has lost Russia has gained, either by extension of its influence directly or by
increasing the neutral area. The extension of neutrality is of immediate benefit
to Russia, exactly as it is of immediate loss to America-Jewry. This is so
because of the concentric shape of the geographical theater of the political
struggle. Russia occupies an inner circle, and America-Jewry an outer circle.
The neutralization of India, Japan, Egypt et al. represent breaks in the outer
circle, and weakening of the Jewish-American economic-political structure.
This is so also for a moral
reason. Jewry always claims to speak for, and to represent, all humanity, with
the exception of one unit, which is thus automatically the enemy of humanity. In
a war of attrition, it is a positive detriment to be labelled by most of the
world's press as the enemy of humanity, even though in a short war it makes no
difference. Therefore, the more the Jewish-American control over the press of
the countries of the world is weakened, the better is Russia's moral-political
position.
II
It is instructive to compare
the Second and Third World wars in their aspect of the quantitative
relationships of the combatants. In the Second World War, on the one side
(Germany, Italy, Japan, Hungary, Finland, Rumania and Bulgaria) were 225,000,000
people, with an area of less than 1,000,000 square miles at the beginning of the
conflict. On the other side were approximately 1,000,000,000 people and
approximately 50,000,000 square miles. In addition the so-called neutrals (with
unimportant exceptions) were enrolled in the economic service of the
Jewish-American-Russian coalition, since the coalition possessed a monopoly of
their trade.
In the distribution of 1960,
the quantitative aspect looms thus: on the one side of the Jewish-American
leadership is a population of 400,000,000 and an area of approximately
30,000,000 miles. (These figures include all North and South America, all
Western Europe, and more than half of Africa, together with Australia and
environs.) On the other side of the Russian-Chinese coalition is a population of
800,000,000 and an area of approximately 15,000,000 square miles. (This includes
Russia, China, and the Russian-held areas of Europe.)
These quantitative estimates
are generous to the American-Jewish front, for much of what is given is
questionable, from the standpoint of military value of the population and
accessibility of the territory. Thus it is quite clear that none of the armies
in Jewish-American occupied Europe will have great military value, since the
essence of the armies, i.e. morale, will be absent. Furthermore, the entire
population of Latin America is at best available only for economic service;
there is no expectation that in the Third, any more than in the First or Second
World Wars, this population can be used as cannon-fodder. And if the movement
for Latin American independence spreads, almost a third part of the figures,
both for population and land area given above must be stricken. If the Arab
revolt spreads further, it may cut off much of Africa from Zionist control.
On the moral side, the two
wars are quite different. In the Second World War, Germany and Japan were both
nationalist. Only secondarily, and in a propaganda way did they claim to
represent any principle which was of universal validity. Thus they offered no
great persuasion to the population in enemy countries or neutral countries to
sympathize. The Jewish-American-Russian-English etc. etc. coalition, however,
used no nationalist feelings except as propaganda against Germany. Their whole
war cry was a universal one: Freedom, Happiness, Justice; a birthday-party every
day for every person in the world.
In the Third World War two
universals are offered by the contestants: on the one side the joys of
Capitalism, on the other the perfect happiness of Communism. Germany, Italy and
Japan all got out of the League of Nations when it was clear that it was
entirely dominated by the enemy. Russia stayed in the United Nations all through
a long period when the thing was entirely Jewish-American, and has persevered to
the point where the thing can be sometimes useful to them even though they do
not have the major control.
Thus, while the United
Nations was at war against Russia's ally in Korea, a Russian was the head of the
Security Council, the organ charged with the prosecution of the war.
A national, or particular,
principle against a universal principle is at a crushing disadvantage in a World
War. But this time, the Zionists face another Universal, and one with which half
of their very own people are secretly, half-openly, or openly in sympathy. In a
wax between Capitalism and Communism, the Jewish people finds itself physically
on the one side, but spiritually on the other. Their minds are divided from
their pocketbooks. This weakens leadership corps of America-Jewry, for this
corps is entirely Jewish. The Jewish-American entity is Jewish as respects its
head, American as respects its body.
In view of the complete lack
of spirituality, intellect, political awareness, and moral courage in the
American population, the possibility of an American revolt against Jewish
domination has been entirely omitted. Such a thing is only a possibility after
America-Jewry suffers a thorough military defeat, and even then only if it is
followed by large-scale economic disasters.
III
The regimes of Washington
and Moscow together make up a Concert of Bolshevism, just as the Culture States
of the West made up the Concert of Europe of the 18th century. Moscow and
Washington share all basic values, and recognize it mutually. No matter how
strong their political rivalry, they make "cultural" agreements
whereby each may export its brand of culture to the other. Thus Washington sends
the clown Bob Hope to Russia, and Moscow sends the cacophony expert Shostakovich
to North America, causing the intellectuals to gush with admiration. The
American cinema is not anti-Russian, regardless of preparations for the Third
World War. Compare this with the preparations for the Second World War, when
this same cinema created many thousands of hate-Germany films, which it is still
turning out.
Bolshevism means, as simple
historical fact, destruction of the West and of the remnants of its Culture. The
Communist Manifesto sets forth a program to accomplish this on the
economic-social side. In the ten demands that it makes, only nine are possible,
and all these have been realized in the United States, but not one of them has
been realized in Russia. The barbarian nature of the Russians is itself
Bolshevism, but Marxian Communism is purely an export article in Russia, while
in the United States, it is an accomplished fact.
The reality of this Concert
is shown especially by the Policy of America-Jewry toward Germany. Much as it
needs a German Army, it will not create a real German Army, but only a mass of
helpless rifle-battalions to be slaughtered by Russia without a chance of
winning. Both Russia and America-Jewry have failed to get the best performance
from their German captives who make the rockets for them. Russia overworks its
German rocket-men, and America-Jewry has so thoroughly denationalized,
brain-washed and Americanized its German rocket-men that they are no longer
German, and have thus lost the source of their technical superiority, i.e. their
German inwardness. This is the final explanation why the German rockets made in
Russia are better than the German, rockets made in the USA.
Most of the cinema in North
America treats Russia and Russians as interesting and admirable, human and good.
The cinema's purpose in the general scheme of propaganda is to control the
emotional attitudes of the population. Control of the intellectual attitudes is
the work of the press, and here Russia is treated negatively. Why this duality?
Every ruling regime gives perforce in its propaganda a picture of itself, and
the Washington Zionist regime itself suffers from this quality. Russia is not a
total enemy, but a rival. The Korean war, 1950-1953 expressed the limited
hostility of the Washington regime toward Russia and its official war-aim was
not "victory" or "unconditional surrender", but "a just
truce".
When the Germans in Russia
make some new technical advance, Eisenhower congratulates the Moscow regime.
Roosevelt never congratulated Hitler on such occasions. The Russian flag is
flown in the United States on all festive, "international" occasions.
Never did the German flag appear, nor does it today. The fundamental
ineradicable Jewish hatred of Germany appears in the fact that even the Germany
they control directly is not permitted to sit among the United Nations, on a par
with the other puppets. The spate of anti-German films in the theatres and on
television continues unabated. The anti-Russian films are few indeed,
One conclusion emerges, of
military-political significance: in the Third World War, the Washington regime
will list Germany among its enemies. Already the radio propagandists say
"Russia and Red Germany." The intention here is, not only that the
German rifle battalions be slaughtered by the Russian advance, but that the way
be opened for the bombardment of Germany again, this time with more destructive
bombs.
The Concert of Bolshevism is
a reality only because of the attitude of the Washington Regime. Russia does not
disturb it, since it works to their ends -- it gave them China, neutralized
India and Japan. But they do not take it seriously, any more than they regard
the United Nations as a serious thing.
IV
We now come to the military
aspect of the Third World War, It is perfectly clear that the Washington regime
has put its entire faith in "strategic bombardment." They plan to
deliver the explosives to their targets by ballistic missiles, guided missiles,
submarines and airplanes, land-based and carrier-based. This faith in
bombardment is just that: it is faith, but not rational. Faith has certain
advantages, but not in the realm of technics. Belief that I will discover a new
weapon, will or at least, may, lead me to that discovery, but belief that this
weapon will destroy my enemy all by itself will not increase the power of the
weapon. Black magic would be better in this case, for it works directly on the
morale of the enemy, whereas the faith in the weapon merely assumes that if his
cities are destroyed, he will be disheartened.
Russia is a porous target,
and rockets are effective only against dense targets. The Jewish-American
citadel is far denser than the Russian citadel, and is thus vulnerable to
rockets to a far greater decree. America-Jewry would be better off if rockets
did not exist. In that case its citadel would be inviolate, and it could never
sustain a military disaster of the greatest magnitude, for its armies would be
at the antipodes and their victory or defeat would be of minor consequence. Thus
the basic Jewish-American military doctrine is one which cannot possibly give it
victory. But this same military doctrine, if adopted by the enemy, could give
victory to the enemy.
Russian morale is tough,
because of the barbarian nature of the soldier-material, and not because of good
leadership, organization, or indoctrination. The Jewish-American morale is poor,
the soldier material is utterly worthless in itself. This population has no
political awareness, no significant military tradition, no military instinct, no
military ambition, and no moral strength, and no respect for, or belief in
anything whatever. This youth is characterized by the Beatnik, the American form
of the Nihilist. He believes in nothing and respects nothing because there is
nothing within his range of vision worthy of respect or inspiring belief. The
Beatnik is not an insignificant entity: he is the ruling type in the American
youth. He represents the fashion, all other youth feel inwardly inferior to him,
as non-fashionable elements always do toward the fashion-corps.
Russian barbarians cannot be
demoralized by rockets. The Beatnik can, because he has no morale to start with,
no inner participation. The Russian population is young, and it is rural, mostly
in fact, the rest in spirit. The American population is old, and it is
megalopolitan, mostly in fact, the rest in spirit. Speaking in general, only
rural people are good fighters, not city-people, especially if the fighting is
severe.
Rockets are merely
artillery, and thus can never conquer. It is true that the doctrine arose in
military circles during 1914-1918 that "artillery conquers the ground; the
infantry occupies it." But this is mere stupidity, on a level with the
military leadership and conduct of that war. Only infantry can conquer.
From this fact comes the
Russian military doctrine. It derives from Clausewitz and is valid for all wars
between powers based on the same continent. That doctrine is that the aim of war
is the destruction of the enemy's armies by decisive blows. The Russian military
sees in the Jewish-American bombardment of German cities in the Second World War
mere stupidity, and here they are correct. But this same Russian military has
not yet fully grasped the fact that the Clausewitz doctrine on The Aim of the
War is not valid for intercontinental warfare. As far as the Jewish-American
puppet armies in Europe go, the doctrine is correct. For Russian victory in
Europe, these puppet armies must be rounded up, as they inevitably will be. But
there still remains the Jewish-American citadel. How is Russia, without massive
means of sea-transport as it is, to destroy the Jewish-American armies? It is
simply not possible. Does this mean therefore that Russia cannot win?
It is clear that both
contestants in the Concert of Bolshevism have a ruling military ideation
according to which they cannot possibly win.
America-Jewry, which
believes in rockets, can win only with infantry.
Russia, which believes in
infantry, can win only with rockets.
So much for their
similarity; now for the difference. Although the ruling doctrine in Russian
military circles is an infantry-oriented one (as it should be), nevertheless the
Russian military has equipped itself with good German rockets, better than the
German rockets of America-Jewry.
But the Military of
America-Jewry, though it talks out of one side of its mouth about "balanced
forces," has not equipped itself with good infantry, for the simple reason
that it cannot, entirely lacking any human material which could be shaped into
good infantry. The Jewish-American naval forces now have the doctrine that they
are mere artillery auxiliaries. The submarines exist to throw rockets; the
carriers exist in order to carry airplanes to throw rockets; The cruisers exist
to -- yes, why do they exist? Away with them, to the mothball closet! The naval
battle at sea, the meaning of the fleet, is not contemplated. Protection of
commerce is forgotten, since overseas commerce will almost all be cut off in the
Third World War.
The Russian forces are
prepared to fight with infantry, with artillery, with armor, with air forces,
with missiles, ballistic and guided, thrown from land and from submarines. The
American-Jewish forces are prepared to fight only with rockets.
Since the rocket is the only
Jewish-American weapon, it is understandable that they do not want to abolish
atomic weapons, nor to agree to stop their further testing and developing. By
the same token it is understandable that the Russians sincerely want to render
illegal the only weapon which America-Jewry can use against them.
But here only the Russian
position is rational. The American-Jewish position would make sense if (1) it
could win with rockets, and (2) it had superiority in rockets. But neither
condition is present. It would be better to get out of the competition before
the war than to lose the war, but politicians in general do not think that way.
The dispute rages in Russian
military circles on whether American rocket manufacturing, storing, and
launching facilities should have top target priority, or whether that should be
given to American cities. Those who think nationalistically, organically,
patriotically, humanly, would attack the rocket facilities first; those who
think in terms of cold reason, regardless of domestic damage and losses, would
attack the great cities as the prior targets.
V
Now, it has been said that
America-Jewry can win only with infantry, and that Russia can win only with
rockets. These propositions must be fully explained.
First, the meaning of the
concept to win. Immediately the political and military planes separate
themselves out. Politically, the concept of winning means the conclusion of
peace on terms satisfactory to one's self Militarily it means that the enemy
asks for peace.
This does not contradict
Clausewitz in his statement that the military aim of war is the destruction of
the enemy's armies. It merely widens the concept of military victory to cover
the case, which arises now for the first time in world-history, in which a war
is fought between two powers whose armies can have no contact with one another.
This assumes that in the
first phase of the war the Jewish-American forces in Europe and their local
auxiliaries will be entirely destroyed or expelled from Europe, including
England of course. A minor series of operations will follow, hardly to be called
a phase of the war, i.e. the finishing of the complete domination of Asia by
Russian or Chinese arms. This will include the occupation of Hong Kong and
Singapore, the neutralization of Pakistan, the occupation of Persia, the
conquest of Turkey, and the delivering of the Jewish-American puppet formations
in the Near East to the United Arab movement. A small-scale war may also be
necessary to clean out completely the Jewish-American bases in North Africa.
Japan will be neutral or allied to Russia.
But after this phase, the
issue of victory remains undecided. The Jewish-American regime will not
surrender, since the very existence of Jewry is at stake, and the whole United
States and its population is there to secure the existence of Jewry.
So here is a war between
continents whose armed forces have no contact, nor can they have any contact.
Russia has no possibility of delivering a large army to the North American
continent, Nor is it possible for America-Jewry to deliver a large army to the
Eurasiatic continent, first because it has no such army, nor can it raise it in
the numbers and quality necessary, and second, because it is impossible to mount
an invasion of Eurasia from the North American continent.
Thus the only
"contact" the hostile armies can have with one another is in the
limited form of an intercontinental artillery duel. By these means, it is
possible for neither contestant to destroy the armies of the other, since these
will be widely deployed, offering no target. The only real target for
intercontinental ballistic missiles is a large city. Here the United States
offers a plethora of targets, and Russia few.
What is the effect of
Jewish-American bombardment of Russian cities? And what is the effect vice
versa? The Russian is a peasant, whether or not he tills the soil. He, is not
city-oriented, even when he lives in the city. When the city is destroyed,
little is destroyed, so he feels, The American, and a fortiori the Jew,
is a megalopolitan, whether or not he lives in Megalopolis. When the city is
destroyed, all is destroyed, so he feels. He who reads may draw his own
conclusion at this point.
Next is the question of
bombardment at intercontinental range by guided missiles. Since their precise
degree of accuracy is a secret-secret-secret-secret matter, only common sense is
available. Common sense teaches first that at thousands of miles distance no
rocket can be guided to say, a factory, or within destructive range of it, and
second, that against every weapon, even superior weapons, defenses, even if not
complete and perfect, are always worked out. It would appear that guided
missiles will be simply an auxiliary to the basic artillery, namely ballistic
missiles, and will thus not be decisive.
Next is the question of
bombardment by bomb-carrying aircraft. After the first phase of the war, the
heaviest Jewish-American aircraft will have to take off on their bombing
missions thousands of miles from their targets in Russia and Germany. These
targets will be Russian rocket factories, stockpiles and launching facilities,
as far as they know where these are located. On this point there is no doubt
whatever that Russian counter espionage is many times as effective as that of
American-Jewry. There is also little doubt that Jewish-American espionage in
Russia labors under almost invincible handicaps. Thus, these aircraft will not
be too well supplied with targets, and will not be decisive.
What was said above about
bombardment at intercontinental range by ballistic and guided missiles applies
equally well to bombardment at continental ranges by the same type of missiles,
launched from ships of all types. And what was said about land-based bombing
aircraft applies still, even though with less force, to bombing aircraft based
on, aircraft-carrying ships. These have a shorter distance to travel, but since
they cannot destroy something whose location is unknown to them, such airplanes
are no more dangerous than Jewish-American espionage makes them.
On the point of bombardment
by aircraft, Russia is thus better situated by virtue of the superiority of its
espionage, and the relative inferiority of the counter-espionage of
America-Jewry. But the fact that they have few if any aircraft carriers means
that their aircraft must fly thousands of miles before reaching the target.
We come back to the city as
the target. If bombardment of cities is not decisive, no other form of
bombardment will be decisive. But it is quite clear that only in the case of
America-Jewry can bombardment of cities even possibly be sufficient for a
decision to ask for peace.
If this happens, an
interesting new possibility opens up. In November 1918 Germany surrendered to
the English-led coalition, consisting of England, France, Italy, Japan, China,
India, Portugal, USA, etc. But after the surrender, England continued the
blockade, a war-measure after the war. Since the war was over, this could not be
called a means of destroying the enemy's armed forces. It was solely a means of
killing civilians, and in this blockade, continued until July 1919, a million
people died of starvation in Germany.
Now England was a civilized
power, yet it continued war after surrender of its enemy. There is thus the
distinct possibility that barbarian Russia, signatory to no treaty to mitigate
the harshness of war, would continue to bombard USA after a surrender, in order
finally to eliminate it as a potential world-power, by complete destruction of
its industrial potential (which is almost entirely in cities). That which the
Jewish-American-English-French forces did in Germany after the Second World War;
destruction of industrial plants, and irrational plundering of natural resources
in order to destroy them, could be equally well done by Russia after the Third
World War: further destruction of cities, perhaps occupation (large armies might
no longer be necessary) to destroy industry systematically, on the pattern used
by American-Jewish forces in Europe 1945-1950. If there were no occupation, the
forest areas could be destroyed by systematic bombardment, converting most of
the North American Continent into desert.
VI
The foregoing has assumed
that Russia and China would be able completely to occupy the Eurasiatic
continent. How far is this assumption justified?
At present the Russian army
is in a class by itself, being the only large army in existence which is fully
equipped with the best weapons and of good fighting quality. The Chinese army is
large, not fully, equipped, not equal to the Russian in moral qualities. The
Jewish-American army is quite inferior in size to both its enemies, extremely
well equipped, but of poor fighting quality. The German army is small, entirely
without equipment, entirely without morale. The Turkish army is small well
equipped, and of good moral quality. The Italian and French armies are both
small, ill-equipped and without morale. The English army is small, well
equipped, and without morale. The Spanish army is small, not well equipped, but
of good morale.
In a war between a coalition
and a single power, the single power will win if other conditions are equal. A
coalition must outweigh a single power. The coalition forces against Russia in
Europe, however, are vastly outweighed by Russia in addition to their decisive
handicap of being quite lacking in fighting morale.
The only army in the
coalition of the Jewish-American forces in Europe which can be expected to fight
well is the Spanish. The terrain in Spain also favors a defender. If De Gaulle
is able to consolidate his regime he may neutralize France, and, as already
seen, neutrality works for Russia. Not only France would be affected by such a
development. Neutrality is the wish of all the peoples of Europe, and this force
will definitely reach the political plane if it's given the encouragement of an
example.
While it is possible that
the Jewish-American forces might be able more or less to stabilize a front in
France, in Spain, or in Turkey, this possibility is abstract at this moment, for
the armies are neither in existence nor in a position which could stop a Russian
invasion force.
Thus, the assumption that
the first phase of the Third World War will develop as outlined above is one
justified by the conditions of 1960.
No estimate would be
complete which leaves two great political developments out of account, both of
recent years. The first is the Arab Revolt, led by a great and vigorous man,
Gamal Abdul Nasser. The second is the formation of nationalist, neutralist
regimes by such brilliant statesmen as Marshal Jozef Broz Tito of Yugoslavia,
Nehru of India, Field Marshal Ayub Khan of Pakistan, General Ibrahim Abboud of
the Sudan, Sekou Toure of Guinea, Sukarno of Indonesia, Nkruniah of Ghana, and
others. These personalities embody an Idea, none are out for money or publicity.
They live simply, work for and live for their ideas. One such man, in a position
of leadership, is a world-historical force. All lead weak political units, and
cannot by themselves fight either of the great world-powers. But all want
independence for their people; Nasser, for example, for some 300,000,000
Moslems. Each is a symbol to great human masses. Their significance, in each
case, in this Estimate, is that they diminish the Jewish-American power without
augmenting the Russian-Chinese power. By their Palestine policy, the Zionists
may even succeed in driving the Arab world to fight for Russia.
Eventually responsible
leadership for a restive mass of some 180,000,000 Latin Americans will evolve.
Already the seeds of revolt against Jewish-American economic domination have
been sown. Witness Cuba.
The growing tide of
neutralism in the world, is due to the political incapacity of the leadership
corps of America-Jewry. If this tide rises in Europe, America-Jewry would be
defeated before the war. De Gaulle is not a great man, but if he is able to gain
French independence, he will immediately find himself the spiritual leader of
all Europe, pygmy though he is. De Gaulle is a cretin, but people will follow
even a cretin if he embodies their deepest, most natural, instinctive feelings.
De Gaulle's driving force is a vanity of super-dimensional extent. Even
Churchill, the embodiment of the Idea of Vanity itself, was still content to be
a Zionist executive with a front position, a big office, and a resounding title.
But De Gaulle wants more: he wants to be equal to the masters who created him
and blew him up like a rubber balloon. Because of the spiritual force upon which
he has accidentally alighted -- the universal European desire for neutrality --
he may even succeed. An idiot might save Europe. History has seen things as
strange.
VII
An unusual point among the
historically-unique relationships of the Third World War is that while neither
side can win -- in the classical military meaning -- neither can lose, in the
classical military meaning of that word. The armies of America-Jewry cannot
destroy the armies of Russia, and the armies of Russia cannot destroy the armies
of America-Jewry on the North American continent. Into the middle of an Age of
Annihilation Wars comes now a war in which political and military annihilation
is mutually impossible to the contestants.
But in a political sense,
victory is still possible. Victory means, in the Third World War, not
annihilation of the opponent, but conclusion of peace on one's own terms.
Speaking thus of political victory, it is clear that America-Jewry -- under the
conditions of 1960 -- must lose, and Russia must win.
Russia holds the initiative,
it has the moral force, it has the arsenal. America-Jewry has no moral force,
completely inadequate military forces, and has moreover a military doctrine (or,
perhaps, an anti-military doctrine?) according to which it does not need any
military force except artillery.
This Russian preeminence is
not at all owing to Russian cleverness but solely to its opponent's stupidity.
To cite once more the unpublished "Possibilities of Germany" from the
year 1946: "In every respect but one, Russia is superior to the enemy.
Technically, America-Jewry is better prepared. The only way Russia can overcome
its handicap in this respect is through German brains. In a word, Russia needs
Germany." Since 1946, Russia has obediently armed itself with such rockets
as Germans have made for it, and this has been its main cleverness.
It was not Russian
cleverness which drove out Chiang from China, but the Jewish-American agent
Marshall. Russia did not neutralize India -- The Anglo-American troops there
were withdrawn by order from Washington. Russia did not occupy Eastern Germany
-- America-Jewry gave it to Russia. Russia did not take the Suez Canal -- Nasser
did it. Russia did not liberate Cuba -- Cubans did that. Russia is not making
trouble in France for America-Jewry -- that is being done by De Gaulle, and the
Communist party there has opposed him to the utmost. The Russian Communist Party
in the Western European countries harms the Russian interests, and merely serves
as scapegoat, bogey, and whipping boy for the Washington regime.
Russian
"successes" -- except for its German-made rockets -- are all the gift
of the Washington regime. Jewish-American political stupidity is invincible. But
the power-gifts which the Washington regime has made to Russia are not
explicable entirely by simple stupidity, simple incapacity. There is the further
factor at work that the Zionist Washington regime is on both sides of most
power-questions in the world. Its sole firm stand is its fundamental anti-German
position: Germany must be destroyed, its young men must be slaughtered. In
Algeria, Washington is on both sides: it is with the French Government, as its
"ally": it is with the rebels by virtue of its world-program of
"freedom" for everybody. In Egypt, the Washington regime told
Palestine, England and France to attack, and when Russia rose, it told them to
stop. It was, within a week, anti-Nasser and pro-Nasser. It occupied Lebanon,
then evacuated. It held back Chiang when from his island, he would have attacked
China with whom the Washington regime was then at war. It defended South Korea,
but helped the Chinese maintain their supply line to the front. During the
Chinese War in Korea, it made and negotiated peace at the same time, for years.
In Cuba it forbade exportation of arms to the loyal Batista and thus helped
Fidel Castro; now it is committed to the overthrow of Castro.
It is a psychological
riddle, decipherable only thus: the Zionists have two minds, which function
independently. As Zionists, they are committed to the destruction of the Western
Civilization, and in this they sympathize with Russia, with China, with Japan,
with the Arabs, and as such they anathematize Germany, which is the mind and
heart of the Western Civilization. As custodians of the United States, they must
half-heartedly remain at least the technical and political domination of that
Civilization even while destroying its soul and its meaning. In a word, they are
working simultaneously for and against the Western Civilization. Quite obviously
they are thus doing more damage than conferring benefit! If a commander of a
fortress sympathizes with the enemy, but yet insists in defending the fortress
rather than surrendering it, he has surely found the highest formula of
destruction.
Thus the newspaper tag of
"East versus West" is meaningless. It is East versus East, with the
West supplying the lives and treasure for destruction.
If Russia represents the
Principle of Stupidity, then Zionism represents the Principle of Malice. Of
course neither of the two is without the leading characteristic of the other,
but stupidity reigns in Moscow, and Malice in Washington.
The orchestra is in the pit,
the spectators gape uncomprehending, the curtains rustle with expectation. The
play is entitled "Where Ignorant Armies Clash by Night." Stupidity is
in the lead, supported by Malice. The producer is Destruction, and the company
is called The Forces of Darkness.
It is already the
predetermined curtain-time. Will the drama commence on time?
Conservative
Revolution, National Revolution
And National
Bolshevism Revisited
Jim Saleam
The Social Revolutionary Nature Of Australian Nationalism
Introduction.
The publication of Kevin
Coogan’s DREAMER OF THE DAY: FRANCIS PARKER YOCKEY AND THE POSTWAR FASCIST
INTERNATIONAL (New York: 1999), brought into focus alternate
‘radical-nationalist’ ideology, politics and organizational-method to
challenge the forces of seemingly “triumphant” New World Order capitalism.
It reminded Nationalists that in a world no longer divided between ‘Eastern’
and ‘Western’ (ie. communist and capitalist) blocs, a way would have to be
found to mount a credible challenge to the dominant
liberal-internationalist/free-market ideology. In the past, Nationalist forces
in every land were pressed by the East/West divide. Some erstwhile
‘nationalists’ took the Western road, often ending up as
agents-in-all-but-name of Establishment parties (or utterly marginalised
“electoral” parties with a tough-guy conservative image and programme),
while others took the more dangerous roads of absolute neutralism or an
‘Eastern’ tilt. The latter positions also had consequences for policy and
political style, as we shall see in our review of the debates within Australian
Nationalist ranks in the past, and in discussions currently under way to define
future activism.
Coogan’s study of Yockey
was of a ‘neo-fascist’ philosopher and activist who in the post-1945 period
down to his death in 1960, did locate a ‘possibility’ for the forces of
nationalism. Described by scholar Nicholas Goodrick-Clarke in his introduction
to Coogan’s text as a "pro-Soviet fascist", Yockey sought to
mobilize the then-communist camp behind a project which was crafted to lead to a
European Revolution to free the old-Continent of the dominance of American
capitalism. For Yockey, the overturn of Marxist internationalism and the
‘Jewish component’ of the Marxist state, by Stalinist practise, had created
a peculiar situation with which any national revolutionary project would be
forced to confront. The latter facts explained much of the ‘Western’
hostility to the Soviet bloc. It helped to explain why the Eastern Bloc was not
the ‘first’ enemy of the Euro-nationalists, but a secondary opponent whose
internal order could be changed by a slow penetration of new Euro-nationalist
politics.
Yockey’s belief system
challenged dominant dogmas on the international ‘Right’ in his day. There is
no need to discuss the 1950’s here. The reader may refer to Coogan’s
excellent book for the full context of this struggle. Our interest is more
immediate. Nonetheless, the matters raised by Yockey have had ‘life’ on the
Australian Right in the last 20 years and have been the bones of ideological
contention. Some will be fought over again. As Australia sinks into the Asian
Pacific Economic Order, a factor of the New World Order (NWO) system, clear
thinking alone can serve the development of a radical-nationalist party in this
country. We ask: how did Australia get into its present position?; who is the
enemy?; how do we struggle against the system and the ‘American’ philosophy
which inspires it?
The revival of interest in
Yockey’s work (IMPERIUM, THE PROCLAMATION OF LONDON, THE ENEMY OF EUROPE,
WORLD IN FLAMES) has of late inspired various European and American
radical-nationalist organizations. Yockey has been linked by one
‘International’ (ie. an international liaison agency which interlinks
several parties, publications and groups), to Jean
Thiriart (died 1993) and
Otto Strasser (died 1972), two thinkers who long-advocated: a federation of
Europe involving Russia, a revolution against both capitalist and Marxist
ideology, a system of popular but strong government, the decentralisation of
property and the aggressive measures to save the embattled ‘white race’ -
which sustains the European Civilisation - from biological and other
challenges.
It is the broader-than-Yockey
issues of ideological clarification, which shall be addressed here. Yockey was
just one figure in a wide movement of thought and today this ‘thought’ is
being utilised as one ‘base’ for the creation of new ideology for new
times.
In the struggle at
Russia’s ‘White House’ in September-October 1993, the forces of
nationalism (former communists included) fought with guns-in-hand against a
creature called Yeltsin, a lackey of the NWO system. Followers of Thiriart -
calling themselves the European Liberation Front - from other countries, fought
with the anti-Yeltsin forces grouped around the National Salvation Front. Since
that time, a flowering of new alliances and the blending of ideas in Russia, to
challenge the new ‘evil empire’ of globalist capitalism, are matters of
fact. The experience of the NATO attack on Serbia in 1999 brought the matter
into relief again. Again, young European nationalists fought with Serbia, while
others demonstrated in the streets of their homelands, against the New World
Order. Open nationalists found themselves in ‘alliance’ with some members of
the Left, while in Serbia itself the ‘communists’ serve as pro-national
elements against internationalism. Old labels are becoming meaningless.
Commentators are talking of ‘red/brown’(ie. communist/fascist) alliances,
and of new hybrids of thought, which could undermine liberal internationalist
capitalism.
Indeed! Coogan told us that
Marxism was played out; but issuing from its organizational debris were people
who were looking for an alternative to the destruction of all nationality in the
global market. Coogan wrote that the ‘Right’ forces were not the neo-nazis
of the journalists’ dreams, but people with visions of a different world of
peoples, nations, cultures and identities in struggle against the drab
marketplace system.
Our task as Australian
Nationalists is to serve the Australian People and Nation, to find allies across
old divides and to develop an ideology which can sustain a determined attack
upon the New World Order traitor class in our country. We are not in Europe. We
are an ex-colony of one European state, part of the ‘European Civilisation’,
but with practical problems unique to ourselves. Nonetheless, the birth of the
New World Order system and emergence of European nationalist challenges to it,
are decidedly to our interest.
First: we shall go over the
past debate on the character of Australian Nationalism. Second: we shall discuss
those ideological concepts, which can serve our challenge to the new capitalism.
Third: we shall discuss the political and organizational consequences that flow
from a new course.
1. A Pamphlet
Sets Up An Argument
In July 1984, a pamphlet
appeared under the signature of Alec Saunders. Entitled, THE SOCIAL
REVOLUTIONARY NATURE OF AUSTRALIAN NATIONALISM, the pamphlet set out to do a
number of things. First, the Nationalist movement (represented then, chiefly by
Australian National Action) was young, and it was necessary to differentiate its
beliefs from either old-style rightism or neo-nazism. Second, the pamphlet
referred at length to the thinkers of former German schools of thought to
Ernst Niekisch, Arthur Moeller van den Bruck and Oswald Spengler, thinkers who
were styled by France’s ‘New Right’ theorists as part of the broad
‘Conservative Revolution’ in 1920’s/1930’s Germany. This non-Nazi German
system was examined for qualities which supported an
‘anti-American’/anti-consumer capitalist /anti-liberal, politics. Third, the
pamphlet set out to argue that aspects of Australian Nationalism from the past
shared reference points of this system. Certainly, the ‘revival’ of the
principles of the Conservative Revolution, lie at the basis of much of the
present activism of the Euro-nationalist forces.
The Saunders’ pamphlet set
off in the right direction. Because certain points made are relevant to the
present discussion, I shall record the key findings.
(i) The Second World War,
which permitted the hegemony of the ‘Western’ liberal ideology, was a sort
of intra-European civil war. However, in counter-argument to those ‘tiny
minds’ who tried to make too much out of the fascist experience, it was
suggested that Nazism/Fascism (ie. the German/Italian states) represented a last
gasp of the old nationalism. They encouraged petty state-ism and were even in
alliance with Japan against ‘White Australia’.
The implication was, that a
genuine concept of ‘white racial interests’, could not be found within the
experience of the fascist states.
(ii) The former and present
Australian Nationalists were rightly opposed to Zionism, but were not ‘anti-semites’.
It was implied that the old conservative Right and the copyists of fascism might
head in that direction, but that it was a diversion.
(iii) The main enemy of
entire humanity was the cosmopolitan plutocracy (ie. the money elite); it was
seen that this international class ruined the natural environment of the planet
to feed its "growth" and compelled ‘sameness’ to overcome all
diversity amongst the races and nations.
(iv) The Eastern Bloc,
whatever its ideological and internal shortcomings, was an enemy of the emergent
World Order. This enmity was based upon the "Slavic renaissance" which
had occurred in the USSR during and after the Stalin period.
(v) There were other
objective challenges to the plutocrats in movements such as Gaddafism, Black
African Socialism and with Tito, Castro and the Islamic Revolution.
(vi) The Australian
‘Socialist’ school of William Lane and others, by identifying a value in the
Indo-European heritage of ‘barbarian’ ethics, of the old tribal-communism,
of the old paganism, was linked with Niekisch, van den Bruck and Spengler. This
vitalism offered a possible ideological anvil for philosophic and political
opposition to liberal-internationalist values.
The Saunders’ pamphlet was
essentially a new dimension for Australian Nationalist ideology.
Needless to say, these core
arguments created a storm in so-called nationalist circles.
2. Neither
Left Nor Right.
The Australian Nationalists
had to confront the question: was our Nationalism really "social
revolutionary"? Was it ‘Right’ or ‘Left’ or something else? Who was
the enemy?
The Australian National
Alliance (1978-80) addressed some related questions: was Australia’s real
enemy the American alliance or the USSR?; was it not America which was
condemning the Nation to an ‘Asian future’?; was the conservative Right
wrong to push old anti-semitic arguments about the "Jewish nature of
communism"?; was it advisable to bloc with "anti-communist"
rightists, if that only led back to Establishment politics?; was it okay not to
criticise capitalism?
The Australian National
Action also published THE RUSSIAN QUESTION (1982), which argued against
any support for ‘Cold War Two’. It suggested that Soviet
"imperialism" was an enemy of the then-operative Peking Tokyo
Washington Axis, not of Australian Independence. Our party’s programme, A
POLITICAL PROGRAMME FOR AUSTRALIAN NATIONAL ACTION, advocated a policy of
non-alignment with all superpowers and showed a commitment to the support of
national independence movements everywhere; but our main target remained the
domination over Australia by the American superpower. The slogans of the party
attacked multinational capitalism.
In the 1980’s Australian
National Action maintained that our Nationalism was ‘Neither Left Nor
Right’, but represented a third way or third position in politics. The
collapse of the Eastern Bloc after 1989, problematicized that argument;
thereafter, there was only one dominant ideology and system capitalism
(although not all countries were integrated into it and while Red China was a
defacto superpower). Since then, the ‘propaganda’ of Australian Nationalists
has taken these facts into account.
But in the context of the
1980’s the fight to build Australian Nationalism upon a sound ideological
footing (and party-building must be placed upon a rock-solid foundation), was
not easy. We shall discuss this struggle which clarifies where we will go in
the near-future.
3. Conservative
Revolution; National Revolution;
National Bolshevism: Traditions For
Mobilization.
It is necessary for our
readers to be clear as to the significance of these ideological traditions. They
embrace in fact some of the most significant theorists of European politics:
Oswald Spengler, Carl Schmitt, Ernst Junger, Arthur Moeller van den Bruck, Ernst
Niekisch, Friedrich Hielscher and Otto Strasser of Germany and a veritable host
of publicists of inter-war Europe. Some have been categorized by New Right
theorist Armin Mohler into three different schools (as above). This need concern
us only in generalities. Commonly, they represented the Conservative
Revolution.
In the context of
Germany-before-Hitler, these theorists offered an alternative to the disaster
for any idea of European Revolution, which Hitler symbolised, and ultimately
became. For Spengler, the issue was not German revanchism and eastern expansion,
but the international position of the "white world"; this leader of
the ‘Conservative Revolution’ school desired the moulding of a new state of
‘Prussian-Socialism’, the inter-linked union of the classes. For Schmitt, a
new European political idea would overcome the old narrowness of the nations;
this Conservative Revolutionary saw each state, supreme over the former
divisions of class and party, individualism and liberal weakness, perfecting a
cooperative European commonwealth. For Junger, a new state must perfect the
total mobilization of the people towards modernization and the creation of real
social wealth; this leader of the ‘National Revolution’ school saw a new
‘Worker’ of brain and brawn, utilizing technology to conquer the future. For
Moeller van den Bruck, the ‘young peoples’ of Germany and Russia were in
revolt against the Western capitalist path; this thinker who spanned the three
schools called upon youth to reject materialism and capitalist atomism and seek
a higher mission. For Niekisch, there was the call of a new ‘barbarism’
against capitalist rationalism; this prominent ‘National Bolshevik’ urged a
revolutionary alliance with communist Russia (he predicted it would soon become
‘national’), to overturn the burgeoning international capitalism and argued
for a union within Germany of all revolutionary anti-liberal forces against the
status quo. His fellow ‘National Bolshevik’, Hielscher, recognized in the
various oppressed nationalities of the earth, potential allies not enemies in a
massive program to strangle the false-international order of capitalism. For
Strasser, the man who quit the Nazi party for his principles, there was a
blending of the schools in his ‘Black Front’ party, a plan to revitalize
Europe in a commonweath, neither capitalist nor Marxist, based upon organic
social classes and a genuine division of wealth and responsibility.
The reader can assess the
strengths and viability of these systems by reading: James Ward, "Pipe
Dreams Or Revolutionary Politics: The Group Of Social Revolutionary Nationalists
In Weimar Germany", Journal Of Contemporary History, Vol.15,
1980.
Nazism had other
‘traditions’. Its great strength was ‘organization’ with which it
out-played its ‘competitors’. We know now that Nazism’s racial doctrine,
while relying on a lot of ‘Volkish’ notions, was driven by an occult system
called Ariosophy. This ‘system’ of racial-theosophy was born in the old
Austro-Hungarian Empire in the first decade of the 20th century. It believed in
a war of the Aryan Light against the Jewish Dark, of the timeless Aryan struggle
against the debased races of Eastern Europe, of the inferiority of the Slav, of
the need for ‘scientific breeding’; the
Ariosophists thought a new
knightly order would return the civilisation to the past of the lost worlds of
Aryan greatness. For those interested in this doctrine and its undeniable impact
upon Hitler, the work by Nicholas Goodrick Clarke THE OCCULT ROOTS OF
NAZISM: THE ARIOSOPHISTS OF GERMANY AND AUSTRIA 1890-1935. is essential
and ‘final’.
It has been established by
Goodrick-Clarke that the Nazi Party melted together the synthesis of nationalism
and socialism with this madhouse of the occult. Does this idea not explain why
Hitler planned his war of genocide against the Russian people? If anything, it
invalidates absolutely the perverse proposition of the neo-nazi sects that
German Nazism was some sort of white-race-redeemer-doctrine.
The Nazi state did not
destroy the rival schools of Conservative Revolution, National Revolution and
National Bolshevism. Far from it. They operated within the state and were locked
in struggle against the dominant ideology, but were unsuccessful in supplanting
it. The destruction of Nazism in 1945 released these tendencies of thought back
into the German Right and eventually they took on a European significance as the
formative ideas of new movements.
For the impact of the whole
pattern of Germany’s Conservative Revolutionary heritage (which includes the
three specific ‘schools’ named here), on contemporary radical-nationalist
thought and action, see: Goran Dahl, "Will ‘The Other God’ Fail
Again? On The Possible Return Of The Conservative Revolution", Theory,
Culture And Society, Vol.13, No.1, February 1996.
Regrettably, these
‘schools’ had little following in Australia and were essentially unknown
regardless of whether any individual theorist was available to Australian
readers. This presented a problem for the processes of ideological formation
here. These ideas were relevant, but were not accessible. This meant that
ideological formation within the ranks of would-be Australian Nationalists was
occasionally in the hands of those who had come from the anti-communist Right
and hence they could not be expected to understand the nature of the
liberal-internationalist-capitalist enemy. Criticism of this enemy often led to
genuine Nationalism being denounced as "communism".
4. Rebel
Against Reactionaries!
The presentation
ultimately of ideas drawn of the German ‘schools’ of radical-nationalism
was, to certain so-called nationalists, a veritable ‘red flag’ (and not
‘to a bull’ as the saying goes).
In the struggles that went
into the creation of an Australian Nationalist position, the Nationalists had
been forced to address these so-called nationalists. They wanted a
"strong" anti-communist foreign policy for Australia, an
alliance-system that relied on Britain, and an economic system which basically
left Big Business alone, but promised to tear away its internationalism. Their
‘parties’ would be built on the ‘rightists’ within the Liberal and
National parties (initially) and would appeal to ‘middle class voters’ of
all parties; these ‘nationalists’ would aim for respectability. They would
deny the native-Australian national identity in favour of the
"British" formula so popular amongst old conservatives. Small numbers
of neo-nazis took the road of appealing to the conservative rightists, "cos
that's what Hitler did".
The real Nationalists
rejected all of this. From around 1977 onwards, there were Nationalists who
argued for Australian Independence in foreign policy, who put no emphasis on
Britain at all, who promised the nationalization of multi-national capital and
the development of a planned economy which permitted small scale private
enterprise, but no monopoly. They looked to working people of all classes for
support and were aware there was no ‘respectability’ to be had. They
favoured an Australian nativist concept of our European identity. The main
external enemy lay in Asia; the main general enemy was international capital and
there was an internal enemy: the internationally connected traitor class.
Unsurprisingly, the old
‘nationalists’ rejected the real Nationalist position. They went one step
further and some openly stated that we were "communists" or
"national bolsheviks". The latter term was thought to mean
‘communists who were somehow nationally oriented’. It was on that basis, the
struggle between the National Alliance with the "National Front of
Australia" and its co-thinkers, was fought (1977-82). It was on this basis
the struggle continued between National Action and the neo-nazi,
but-also-conservative (per the above) - "Australian Nationalists
Movement" (ANM).
The genuine Nationalist
position became a bugbear with ANM and some other conservative groups, and was
regarded as a proof of ‘leftism’ in National Action. It was no such thing.
When stripped of all rhetoric, it was all about a search for possibilities. The
old reactionary line had no potential. A radical-nationalist line offered a way
forward.
Sometimes the rebellion
against reactionary rightism was personalised. Throughout the period 1977-90,
the attack of "national bolshevism" was married to all-out slander
against genuine Nationalists. In that way, false ‘nationalists’ were exposed
and the cause grew stronger.
It was through the
insistance of Australian National Action that the three German schools of
thought entered into the open use of Nationalists. Not that they were unknown
amongst advanced Nationalists. But now they were invoked where relevant in
the ideological struggle.
The collapse of the Eastern
Bloc changed Nationalist politics in Australia. Our Nationalist rebellion
against the uselessness of ‘rightist’ positions was vindicated by history.
There were now only two real positions in Australian politics: the
liberal-internationalist position and the Nationalist position. The so-called
Left, made up mainly of the Trotskyist organizations, is fundamentally liberal.
It stands for open borders, free trade and mass immigration. It will subordinate
everything to the "struggle against racism". The Left is on many
occasions nothing but a stormtroop for capitalism.
So: how can we develop
Australian Nationalism if not as a social-revolutionary force?
5. Against
The New World Order
We understand now the type
of world under construction. It was implicit in the history of imperialism and
capitalism since the Second World War.
There has been a steady
internationalization of capital leading to the growth of the multinational
corporations and the international banks to a stage where their power is
organized through international institutions- the World Bank, the International
Monetary Fund, the General Agreement On Tariffs And Trade forums and the
European Economic Community bureaucracy. The forces of global capital have
created political ‘clubs’ such as the Trilateral Commission and the
Bilderberger Group. In Australia we have the Committee For The Economic
Development Of Australia. We are witnessing before our eyes the emergence of a
transnational class. This group has no allegiance to any ‘Western’ state, to
any race or cultural identity. It is beyond the structures of international
politics as have developed over centuries. The ownership of capital is not the
sole entry ticket to membership of this class. Service in politics, management,
the arts, academia or in certain professions, will win admission.
The "values" of
the transnational class are economic. In the free-market of goods and ideas, a
New World Order of plenty and peace will be built. All countries, all peoples
are welcome to "join". All barriers to the movement of money and
people will come down. Philosophies and religions will all become aspects of a
cultural pluralism which can be ‘chosen’ by people on the basis of taste.
Like a new Roman Empire, all is permissible if loyalty is rendered unto
Caesar.
This New World Order was
proclaimed the moment the old Eastern Bloc disintegrated. It is obvious that
there are peoples who are not part of this Order. The Chinese superpower is not
a member of the club; nor is India, and Russia remains unwelcome. The Islamic
world cannot be part of a system that directly involves Zionism. African
countries scarcely count at all. This does not mean that these lands are not
penetrated by international capital, nor that they don’t contain sectors who
would dearly welcome globalism. It does not mean that cheap labour countries are
not exploited to provide cheap products or immigrants to the factories of the
home-bases of the NWO. The fact that whole areas of the globe are outside this
system means that its claim to political normality is a basic lie. It must
thence rely upon the impact of economic globalisation for its power.
In the struggle against the
New World Order it is necessary to appreciate the presence of peoples and states
outside of it, and possibly opposed to it. Not all these forces are fulsome or
even conditional friends. Some are eying Australia also as an open-land
available for possible settlement. Yet, in the world of realpolitik, facts are
facts and it is necessary to surrender to the facts. It is obligatory that we
mobilize our ideological weapons to win allies where we can, or to disintegrate
or damage those structures imposed upon any people by the new Order. We must
weaken this system.
This means we understand
that if we demand national freedom for ourselves, we cannot repudiate it for
others. We must favour national independence struggles. We must accept the
genuine plurality of cultures and peoples, as opposed to the false pluralism of
liberal-internationalism, which seeks to standardize humanity and culture. We
must encourage armed neutrality against alien blocs and support - even
critically - any regime bullied by the new Order.
Inside Australia, we must
not engage in confrontation with groups that are not really our enemies. We must
also avoid the leftover Trotskyite Left wherever possible; the Trotskyites are
satellites of the Establishment, those who defend its liberalism by other means.
We must not be sidetracked in our quest for defacto friendships and alliances
with groups that in any way oppose or challenge significant aspects of the new
Order.
We are talking of a new
strategic plan for Australian Nationalism.
6. Full
Circle: Ideas To Serve A New Path.
Our discussion of earlier
ideological traditions and their value in defining Nationalist ideology, now
turns full circle. How can we creatively apply historical ideas to the present
external and internal situation for Australia?
1. It is a fact that
Australian Nationalism rests mainly upon three nineteenth and twentieth century
Australian historical traditions: the labour movement, the republican movement,
the native-nationalist movement. These elements constitute the core belief
system. From there, we obtain our emblems, our idea of a new social order of
class unity and equality of opportunity, our commitment to the ‘Promise’ of
a new European nationality upon a continent, our essential native-land reference
points, and very concept of identity. This Nationalist Idea is necessarily a
social-revolutionary one, directed as it is against foreign imperialism and its
internal traitor class.
2. We recognize
however, that we live in the modern period. Consequently, we shape this core
system into a modern propaganda. We place it amidst issues such as the
population/food crisis of Third World, the environmental crisis of our own
country, the issues of globalisation and the New World Order, the collapse of
old ideological certainties and the absence of any credible new radical
discourse.
3. Because we
concerned to express the core Australian Nationalist Idea in the modern period,
we are aware of the ideological struggle waged to delegitimize us. It is at this
point the hoary old claims that we are linked to "neo-nazis", or that
we find some inspiration in German Nazism, are raised. Here, we can rely upon
the ideological traditions of Conservative Revolution, National Revolution and
National Bolshevism to critique both the Nazi system, and the inadequacies of
historical fascism.
4. These traditions
pointed also towards collaboration with world and local political movements that
managed to challenge dominant alliances and forces. Because these systems did
not preach, and in their contemporary European applications do not preach,
doctrines of race-hate and imperialism, possibilities exist for challenging new
political patterns.
5. We Australians
develop our ideology from our native-history and international facts, but we are
also part of the ‘Western’ culture and are defined that way. It follows that
the schools of radical-nationalism assist us in developing doctrine on the
higher philosophical level. In opposing the development of the cosmopolitan
‘Westernism’ or Americanism of the last 50 years, we ‘require’ a
counter-system of thought. We must be able to examine the spiritual syphilis
which the cosmopolitan liberal doctrine is; we must be able to show that this
system is itself a type of decadence now rampaging across the planet destroying
anything ‘traditional’ or valuable.
6. The
radical-nationalist schools of the Conservative Revolution examined the
bourgeois ideology of wealth-worship. In the 1920’s and 1930’s, this illness
was still a baby! This liberal ideology is now the substantive enemy of our
movement. A ‘return’ to philosophy which was not contaminated by the
rightist fixation of ‘fighting communism’ assists us in moving beyond any
remains of the old Left/Right divide.
The year 2000 does not
signal for us the birth of the market millennium. Quite the contrary. It
indicates the continuation of the ‘civil war’ inside our Western culture.
The two sides are drawn in bold relief.
7. Special
Task Of A New Party.
The revisitation of the
three schools of radical-nationalist ideology took place in the context of
examining whether Australian Nationalism is a social-revolutionary proposition.
We decided that it was, and that it is. It would change Australia’s position
in the world by winning Australian Independence. To sustain the new nation
against external threat and internal traitor class challenge, it would be a
Nationalism compelled to alter the domestic political and economic order in the
favour of the working people of all classes.
The crucial issue for
Australian Nationalists is the creation of a party to wage the struggle.
However, at no point can ideology be forgotten. This short pamphlet is nothing
but a call to ensure that the deeper questions of political philosophy are also
addressed. Spengler observed: "in the final instance civilization is always
saved by a platoon of soldiers". Correct. However, we political soldiers
must fight with an ideology grounded in modern facts and with a higher
political-cultural significance.
In the future others will
necessarily develop upon the themes here and equip our political soldiers with
this vital armour in the struggle for the resurrection of our Nation and our
European culture. I leave the last word of our commitment to these tasks, to
Francis Parker Yockey:
"This is promised, not
by human resolves merely, but by a higher Destiny, which cares little whether it
is 1950, 2000 or 2050. This Destiny does not tire, nor can it be broken, and its
mantle of strength descends upon those in its service. What does not destroy me
makes me stronger."
Dr. Jim
Saleam
drnatbol@alphalink.com.a
August 1 2000
SYNERGON
Brussels, 25th May 2001
European Office
robert.steuckers@skynet.be - Cercleuropa@wanadoo.fr
- sineur@tin.it - synergon@verlag-zeitenwende.de
- tulaev@whiteworld.ru
SYNERGON ONLINE (in 6 LANGUAGES): http://www.nationalbolshevik.com/synergon/directory.html
INFOEUROPA (en espanol): http://www.gratisweb.com/kaineus/
Archivio EURASIA (italiano, English, francais): http://utenti.tripod.it/ArchivEurasia/index.html
HAGAL / ZEITENWENDE (Deutsch): http://www.verlag-zeitenwende.de
EURASIAN MOVEMENT HOMEPAGE (English): http://www.geocities.com/eurasia_uk/index.html
Webpages hosted by the Russian sites: http://www.whiteworld.ru
& http://www.nationalism.org/synergie
Go
to Francis Parker Yockey Page I
Go
to Francis Parker Yockey Page III
Criticism Of His Beliefs and Writings
For a long
and detailed dissertation of Francis P. Yockey's
The Enemy
of Our Enemies, go to this web site:
THE
ENEMY OF OUR ENEMIES:
A Critique of Francis Parker Yockey's The Enemy of Europe
by
Professor Revilo P. Oliver
Edited by Kerry Bolton
Editor’s Preface:
Yockey wrote this essay in 1952 under his nom-de-plume, Ulick Varange.
It appeared in two parts in Frontfighter, the newsletter of the European
Liberation Front,
issue no. 22, March, and issue no. 23, April, 1952. Only the second part has
been preserved,
while the extracts and comments from the first part are taken from an FBI
analysis.
Yockey here advocated a “neutralist” line in regard to the “Cold War,”
and states that neither the “Communist” (i.e. “Jewish”) nor the “military”
“factions”
running the USA were friends of Europe.
...The Cabinet minister FORRESTAL, who
resisted the official policy vis-à-vis Israel,
was killed, and his murder portrayed as suicide. It is now known everywhere
that shortly before his death, FORRESTAL was warned by BARUCH
to abandon his resistance to the Israel policy.
Continue reading on Counter Currents website
|
