|
Francis Parker
Yockey
Page III

Criticism
of his person and work from various sources
Go to articles:
Review
by John J. Reilly
Review of:
Kevin Coogan.
Dreamer of
the Day. Francis Parker Yockey
and the Postwar Fascist International.
Autonomedia.
New York, 1999. 642 p. $16.95.
by Loren Goldner
Francis
Parker Yockey's
"Imperium,
The Philosophy of History and Politics"
a Summary and
Evaluation
by Neighbors Network
Shofar/Nizkor Site.
Looking
Backward,
Francis
Parker Yockey, an American fascist who died in jail in 1960,
is being
resuscitated as ‘a prophet for our movement’
By
Martin A. Lee
Imperium: The Philosophy of
History and Politics
by Ulick Varange (Francis Parker Yockey)
The Noontide Press, 1962 (First Published 1948)
626 Pages, US$ 7.75
ISBN 0-911038-10-8
"Imperium" may be
the closest thing that the real world offers to H.P. Lovecraft's fictional
"Necronomicon." Though little more than a rumor in the world at large,
it is a key text in the underground universe of international fascist ideology,
and it seems to have had a significant effect on the development of Traditional
Satanism. At the risk of making "Imperium" sound more interesting than
it actually is, we may note that the book claims an almost magical essence for
itself. By its own account, "Imperium" is "part of a life of
action" and "only in form a book at all," so that reading it is
more than a merely mental event.
"Imperium" was
written in the service of an ambitious cause. The author, Francis Parker Yockey,
holds that it is the destiny of the West to found a universal empire, the core
of which will be a Nazi Europe. His book promotes European unity and the
expulsion of the United States from the continent's affairs, as well as a
fascist revolution in the United States itself. "Imperium" is a
reprise of history and political theory, designed to show why the outcomes of
the world wars of the first half of the 20th century were only temporary
setbacks toward the ultimate goal.
If America were a church,
Yockey would have been an apostate. Born in Chicago in 1917, he was involved
with various right-wing political groups as a young man. He took both a BA and a
law degree at Notre Dame University and was commissioned an officer during the
Second World War, though he soon received a medical discharge. As a civilian
attorney, he served on the staff that helped to prepare war-crimes trials in
Germany, but was dismissed for siding with the defendants. (This may have
included spying for them.) Yockey retired to Brittas Bay in Ireland to write
"Imperium," finishing it in 1948. (January 30 of that year, to be
precise: the 34th anniversary of Hitler's accession to the chancellorship of
Germany.)
The pseudonym that appears
on the cover, "Ulick Varange," is supposed to illustrate the author's
pan-European sympathies. "Ulick" is allegedly a Danish-Irish name,
while "Varange" refers to the Norsemen who roamed early-medieval
Russia. Readers of "Prince Valiant" will no doubt recall the Byzantine
Emperor's "Varangian Guard," who were recruited from such people.
We know that Yockey soon
published "Imperium" himself, in a very limited edition, but the rest
of his biography after 1948 quickly becomes crepuscular. He worked for the Red
Cross for a time, but he also seems to have acted as a courier for Communist
Block countries during the coldest part of the Cold War. He was probably
involved with Odessa, the legendary international network of postwar Nazis and
fascists. In any case, it is clear that the US State Department stopped renewing
his passport: he was arrested at Los Angeles in 1960 for having entered the
country without a valid one. He was visited while in jail by W.A. Carto, one of
the key figures in American Neo-Nazism, who contributed a brief introduction to
the Noontide Press editions of "Imperium." While still incarcerated,
Yockey probably killed himself, though his admirers suggest he was murdered by
the authorities.
Yockey begins "Imperium"
with the sentence, "This book is different from other books," but
readers will be reminded of other authors. Yockey often seems to be actually
trying to match the gassy, abstract style that Hitler uses in the
non-autobiographical passages of "Mein Kampf." ("Imperium"
is dedicated "To the hero of the Second World War," about whose
identity we need not speculate.) Yockey fails to write as badly as Hitler,
though it is hard to imagine anyone getting very far into this book simply to
enjoy the prose. The most important single source for "Imperium" is
"The Decline of the West," by Oswald Spengler. Yockey purports to be
developing Spengler's cyclical interpretation of Western history, and many
passages of "Imperium" are near paraphrases of Spengler's famous book.
What "Imperium"
most resembles, though, is "The Hour of Decision," a short work that
Spengler published in 1934. Some evidence, if any were needed, that Spengler was
not an infallible prophet is provided by his suggestion in that book that the US
would respond to the crisis of the 1930s by breaking up along ethnic lines, with
the largest fragment a Communist regime based in Chicago. Still, as is often the
case in intellectual history, "The Hour of Decision" (and, I suppose,
"Imperium") have become less anachronistic with the passage of time.
Their formulation of geopolitics as the "clash of cultures" is
formally similar to the arguments put forward in recent years by Samuel
Huntington, though of course with quite different content and policy
recommendations.
A more recent book that
"Imperium" brings to mind is Patrick J. Buchanan's "A
Republic, Not an Empire." That work restates the old "America
First" argument that America had no business in either world war, a
position Yockey shares. They also both assume that the natural form of
interstate relations is opportunistic predation.
Finally, one may recall
that, in "The Turner
Diaries," William L. Pierce's infamous novel promoting a Nazi
revolution in the US, the protagonist's life is changed by reading a semi-sacred
ideological text called simply "The Book." It is not too much of a
stretch to suggest that "The Book" may have been suggested by "Imperium,"
or at least by its cult.
My own reason for reading
"Imperium" is that I am prepared to go quite a long way with
Spengler's cyclical model of history, and I am always curious to see what other
people make of it. Since I actually have a short book on the subject available
online (Spengler's
Future), it was inevitable that "Imperium" would be brought to my
attention. Having read it, I now see that it is not in any serious sense
Spenglerian, though it appropriates some of Spengler's vocabulary. "Imperium"
is most significant as the missing link that connects the more esoteric features
of Nazism from the 1920s to the 1990s.
Now Spengler was indeed a
“fellow traveler” with the Nazi Party. However, as his defenders must
inevitably point out, his support was opportunistic. He thought that the Party
was the only hope for Germany in a world that, he believed, was in the midst of
a prolonged crisis that could be negotiated successfully only with a high degree
of national cohesion. Spengler, as a citizen, was just another conservative
nitwit who thought that the Nazis could be used to preserve the Prussian virtues
for the future.
Spengler was not much
interested in race. Actually, like the postmodernists of the later 20th century,
he thought that race was pretty much a construct. His ideas about nationhood and
peoplehood were conspicuously sensible. A nation, he argued, was just the more
or less variegated population of a given area whom historical events had
organized to march in the same direction. (William
Strauss and Neil Howe's idea of a formative generational "crisis"
is not so different.) Nations are thus not primordial entities. Their effective
life-spans are just a few centuries long, after which they collapse back into
mere populations.
Spengler was also not much
interested in the Jews, though his account of Jewish history in "The
Decline of the West" is both sympathetic and acute. One may take or leave
his notion of the origin of the Jews as a confessional "nation," not
different in kind from the Muslims or the Parsees or even the Byzantine Greeks,
within what he called "Magian Culture." In any case, Spengler
suggested that Western antisemitism had been largely the result of the fact the
older Magian societies had been "out of phase" with the Culture of the
younger West, and forecast that the phenomenon would disappear as the West
approached its final form.
Spengler's vision for the
future of the West is really about completion and exhaustion. Intellectual life
would become a self-referential glass-bead game, satisfying in its own terms,
that will gradually be abandoned for personal religious experience. Politics
would eventually pass into the hands of powerful individuals as traditional
institutions lose legitimacy, a process whose distant end is the return of
dynastic politics. He did forecast a future "universal state" (the
phrase is Toynbee's), which would at least encompass Europe, and possibly the
whole planet. However, he said it would occur primarily because the members of
the international system would find it more convenient to cede most of their
sovereignty to the most prestigious member of the system. This was, pretty much,
what happened to the nations of the ancient Mediterranean world: the Roman
Empire was, formally, a system of alliances. Spengler clearly hoped that Germany
would be the Rome of the future, though he recognized this meant that the
Germany he knew would dissolve into Europe. His support for German nationalism
was based on the belief that, for Germany to play the role he hoped for, Germany
would have to be the last nation to dissolve.
Yockey saw things
differently. He saw the future empire, the Imperium of his title, as the outcome
of a great act of will. The next century or so, he said, will see a phenomenon
he calls the Resurgence of Authority. This will be based on the activity of a
dedicated international minority with a clear vision of where the world is
supposed to go. This sounds like a traditional 20th-century revolutionary
vanguard, with perhaps some overlay of Nietzsche's ideal of the "artist
politician," but Yockey takes it a step further. He does not aim for just
the creation of a new class, but of a new race, a pan-European one that would be
the ethnic basis of the Imperium. Hitler talked about ideas like this to Otto
Wagoner in the 1920s, and to Hermann Rauschning in the 1930s. It is a feature of
the historical scenario promoted today by some Satanists. (Incidentally, an
essay I wrote on this subject, The
Dark Imperium, was written long before I read Yockey's book, though I had
almost certainly run across his title by then.) These notions have some origin
other than Spengler: a good candidate is the Theosophical forecast of the Sixth
Root Race.
Spengler is often criticized
for his vitalist approach to history, and in fact taking him altogether
seriously probably requires finding some more respectable mechanism for his
historical cycles. He spoke of the small set of civilization-producing Cultures
(the noun is usually capitalized in the Atkinson translation of Spengler's
"Decline") as organisms of some sort. His use of the term may have
been more than metaphorical, but it is reasonably clear that he did not think
they were actually alive. For Yockey, however, Cultures become a whole new order
of life. They exercise a subtle force upon the members of a Culture, and they
fight with other Cultures. Though the terminology is not quite the same,
Yockey's Cultures seem to be metaphysical entities of the same order as the
Aeons of more recent right-wing occultists. There is nothing in "Imperium"
like the "Aeonic Magic" employed by certain Satanist groups that have
clearly been influenced by the book, but it is not hard to see how Yockey's idea
might have been developed in that direction.
Yockey is also taken by
other crank ideas which I have not seen elsewhere, but which I suspect are
probably not original with him. For instance, in explaining the deleterious
effects of the bout of immigration to the US from about 1900 to 1920, he states
the remarkable principle that immigration has never actually increased the total
population. Rather, there is some ideal figure toward which the population is
tending. Immigration simply causes the birthrate of earlier arrivals to fall.
Thus, he says, the immigration of the first two decades of the 20th century
simply replaced Western people with Slavs and Jews and Asians.
Something that Yockey has in
common with Nazism as it is generally understood is the designation of trends he
dislikes as pathologies, which in Yockey's system become pathologies of Culture.
Spengler, who held that Cultures never affect each other in anything essential,
gave the name "pseudomorphosis" to the process whereby one Culture
affects the superficial features of another. His great example was the Byzantine
Empire, which he said had been part of the Magian Culture along with its
Sassanid neighbor, but which maintained a misleading Greco-Roman veneer after
the death of the Greco-Roman Culture, whose territory it partially occupied.
Yockey takes this unremarkable idea and turns it into "cultural
distortion," which is what he says happens whenever members of one Culture
influence the development of another. For Yockey, "culture distortion"
is not just an accident, but a disease. Although the idea is stated in neutral
terms, it soon becomes evident that the chief cultural distorter of the last two
centuries is the Jews, and that almost the whole of 20th-century art and
politics has been one, long Jewish distortion. While he does allow that some of
the problems of the modern West, such as democracy and capitalism, are "autopathic,"
nonetheless he leaves no doubt that the overthrow of the Jews is the
precondition for the Imperium.
Yockey identifies two great
20th-century revolutions. One was the American Revolution of 1933, whereby the
cultural distorter took full control of the United States, and the other the
European Revolution of 1933, when Europe first began to organize itself against
the Slavic threat from the East. Yockey really does use terminology like this.
If the words "Nazi" or "National Socialist" occur in "Imperium,"
I do not remember seeing them. The Nazi hierarchy become simply the
"European leaders." The US, because of its high level of cultural
distortion, is simply written out of the West. As for the Russians and the Slavs
in general, he held that they were assimilable to the West, but only as
individuals. There is, it seems, no alternative to the Germanization of eastern
Europe. However, in a remark that may shed significant light on Yockey's later
career, he notes that Russian occupation policy after the Second World War was,
to some extent, preferable to that of the Western Allies. The Russians did not
persecute the "European leadership" as a class, but worked with those
who were useful.
Yockey does not argue that
the Holocaust did not occur. Rather, he dismisses the question out of hand,
referring to it as "the concentration-camp propaganda." The only
slaughter of innocents in the 1940s that concerns him was the suffering
inflicted on the German population during the dual occupation by the barbarian
Russians and the distorter Americans. Both of these, he believes, must be driven
from Europe. At a later stage, something of the United States might be salvaged
through a national uprising that would overthrow the Jewish government.
One could lengthen the list
of odd things about this very odd book. I suppose that an author who thinks of
slavery primarily as a benevolent social-welfare program might be expected to
think that Abraham Lincoln was a "charlatan." On the other hand, it is
a mystery to me how anyone, Nazi or otherwise, could characterize the
professorial Woodrow Wilson as an "adventurer." Specific points like
these simply underline the fundamental weirdness of a 30-year-old American
sitting on the Irish coast in 1948 and arguing that his country had actually
lost the recent European war.
Still, the oddest thing of
all may be the persistent and variegated nature of the audience for "Imperium."
It took Amazon.com a few weeks to shake down a copy from an American Neo-Nazi
publishing house for me, but it is apparently not very hard to come by. It is
known, not just to fascist-leaning people in the US, but, it would seem, in
Russia and Europe. The book has never been famous, and to my knowledge it has
never been a big seller, but it has not gone away, even after 50 years. This is
very disconcerting.
END
Copyright
© 1999 by John J. Reilly
(The following book review will
appear in the journal Race Traitor, 2001. )
An American
National Bolshevik
by Loren
Goldner
Review of:
Kevin Coogan. Dreamer of
the Day. Francis Parker Yockey and the Postwar Fascist International.
by Loren Goldner
"Provincial patriotism
of the nineteenth- century type can evoke no response. The unity of the West
which the barbarian has always recognized is recognized at the last hour by the
West itself."
"Western policy has the
duty of encouraging in its education of the youth its manifestation of strong
character, self-discipline, honor, ambition, renunciation of weakness, striving
after perfection, superiority, leadership--in a word--Race."
Francis Yockey, Imperium, (1948).
Fascism in every country, until 1945, almost always conjured up archaic,
pre-capitalist, pre-Enlightenment national myth for its symbolism: Mussolini and
the Roman Empire, Franco and the Falange, Hitler and the Thousand-Year Reich. In
the United States, the task was made more difficult by the absence, for the
radical right, of a "usable" pre-capitalist past; for stone white
supremacists, the Iroquois Nation or Yoruba culture would hardly do.
Fascism, two world wars, the genocide of the Jews
and gypsies, and the weakening of the nation-state through exhaustion cast
a cloud over nationalist archaisms in the advanced capitalist world after 1945
(the emerging Third World was of course another story). For these reasons, and
because of an important internationalization of capitalism through U.S. world
hegemony, it was inevitable that the radical right in the advanced capitalist
countries would turn to archaic symbols connected to the West as a whole. Thus,
throughout Europe and to some extent in the U.S., "Aryans" (the
word having acquired a bad odor) were rebaptized Indo-Europeans, and highbrow
intellectuals such as Martin Heidegger, Mircea Eliade, Marija Gimbutas, and
Julius Evola created the high road for the rehabilitation of the old ideas,
followed on lower roads by Atlantis buffs, occultists, Celtic
tree-worshipers, fake Tibetologists, Wagner freaks, Holocaust deniers and
Teutonic rune scholars.
Today, in Europe, including Russia, and to some extent
in the United States, important factions of the radical right have quietly
buried the old biological racism and the nationalist chauvinism of pre-1945
fascism. The most sophisticated figures, such as Alain de Benoist, freely quote
from Antonio Gramsci (for which Gramsi is of course not to be blamed), argue
that the old categories of "left" and "right" are dead(1),
and insist that their desire to expel immigrants and Jews from Europe has
nothing to do with "grandpa's fascism", but rather because they see
such groups invariably as bearers of "other cultures", not inferior,
mind you, but "different". These theorists have their own version of
post-modern cultural relativism, and say that Jews, blacks and Arabs are fine--
just as long as they stay in their own countries, or return there, the sooner
the better. The European radical right supported Iraq in the Gulf War, a type of
"Third Worldism" that was marginal in Western interwar fascism (but
not entirely absent, as we shall see).
What fascism hates above all is universalism, and it
hates the Jews for having, through the monotheism they passed to Christianity,
supposedly inflicted the "slave morality" (Nietzsche) of universalism
on the "strong", "young", "nature-loving"
"blond beasts", the Indo-Europeans and other pagans, and for
having, through the ban on image-making, destroyed such peoples' pagan
nature-worship and myth. Capitalism for the fascists mostly means finance
capital, Jews and money; the link between monotheism and abstraction on one hand
and commodity production and wage labor on the other is beyond their ken. Behind
the hatred of universalism is the hatred of the idea of humanity, or what Marx
called "species- being"; fascism sooner or later, and usually sooner,
identifies some group, whether whites, or Teutons, or an aristocratic cultural
elite, the "Uebermenschen" (supermen) as destined to dominate, or
expel, or annihilate the "Untermenschen" (inferior beings), or, more
up to date, those who are ineffably "different". The trendy
post-modern left supports "difference" and argues for relativistic
tolerance (which extends to tolerance of barbaric archaisms, such as
cliterodectomy, among "subaltern peoples"), the hard radical right
supports it to advocate (at least in its politer forms) removal, but both
currents find themselves in profound agreement on the fundamental issue of the
denial of humanity as a meaningful reality. Like their predecessors,
the early 19th century enemies of the Enlightenment and the universalism
of the French revolution, they "know Frenchmen, Germans, Italians and
Greeks", but consider "man" a meaningless abstraction.
Thus the contemporary right-wing publicist Armin Mohler
is not wrong to say that today's post-modernists are the bastard progeny of the
Conservative Revolution of the 1920's (about which latter more below).
It is fairly well known that Hitler and the Nazis
always insisted that they had learned a great deal from America, and in
particular from the American eugenics movement, which preceded their own Social
Darwinism, racial laws and ban on interracial marriage, doctrines of blood
purity, and medical experiments on "Untermenschen", by decades.
What is less well known is that an American fascist
theoretician, Francis Parker Yockey (1917-1960), himself marginal in the
American radical right even today, is actually a theoretical pioneer of
the contemporary international fascist revival with its new cultural politics,
and is recognized as such from France to Russia's contemporary
"red-brown" ferment. (Yockey is promoted in the U.S., and somewhat
disingenuously, mainly by Willis Carto and the Liberty Lobby.(2))
Contemporary fascism, internationally, finds it a largely losing battle to
conjure up the old biological racism and master-race theories: they can chip
away at the still-powerful association of such biological determinism with the
concentration camps, but they have found a far more fertile path in
circumventing such questions with a whole new battle over "culture".
And once this is recognized, the centrality of Francis Yockey, the subject
of the excellent book by Kevin Coogan under consideration here, and who spelled
this out in his 1948 book Imperium, looms into view.
Yockey, in in his youth, in the depths of the depression, was briefly
sympathetic to Marxism, but quickly abandoned it for fascism.
Subsequently, in late 1930's Chicago, he jostled different far-right groups such
as pro-Hitler German Bundists, anti-labor vigilantes, Silver Shirts and
the Father Coughlin movement. But Yockey himself was no storefront fascist.
Possibly the decisive ideological influence in his life had been the reading, in
1934, of Oswald Spengler's Decline of the West (a world-wide best seller in the
1920's). Through Spengler (including his later works Years of Decision and
Prussianism and Socialism) Yockey stepped into the ferment of 1890-1933 Germany
known as the "Conservative Revolution", and such other (sometimes
brilliant) reactionary theorists as Carl Schmitt, Karl Haushofer, Ernst Niekisch,
Ernst Juenger, Moeller van den Bruck, not to mention the highly ambiguous
earlier figure of Friedrich Nietzsche. For most of these intellectuals, Hitler
and the Nazis were vulgar guttersnipes and their "voelkisch" (i.e.
populist) ideology merely one more version of the mass society the Conservative
Revolutionaries despised. What mainly characterized the Conservative Revolution
were variants of an aristocratic radicalism that imagined a regeneration of
decadent bourgeois society from the throes of materialism, democracy, socialism
and feminism by a "hard" cultural elite of "supermen", men
such as those tempered in the trench warfare of World War I and the "storms
of steel" (the title of Juenger's 1920's best-selling novel) of the modern
technological battlefield. Spengler, in his major work, had defined
"universalism" as the passage from "culture" to
"civilization" in an organic rise and fall; this phase emerged when
the old culture-bearing elite was sinking into effete aestheticism, and prepared
the way for Caesarism (an anticipation of the coming of Hitler).
Aside from Spengler himself, two figures of the
Conservative Revolution in particular stand out as decisive influences on Yockey:
Carl Schmitt and Karl Haushofer. As a student at Georgetown University in the
mid-1930's, Yockey encountered Schmitt as the leading international Catholic
jurist of the period. Schmitt's relationship to Hitler and the Nazis was
complex, but hardly (to put it mildly) a hostile one. Schmitt's sophisticated
legal theory was little short of state-idolatry, and presented a distinction
between "enemy" and "foe" which passed easily into fascist
political and legal thought. An "enemy" for Schmitt was an opponent of
the moment, with whom there was temporary conflict and disagreement, but a
"foe" was an irreconcilable opponent against whom the struggle was
potentially total and lethal. Schmitt ridiculed Western parliamentarism and
democracy, and developed ideas about the inevitability of extra-parliamentary
activity -- i.e. activity in the streets -- which also influenced the German New
Left in the 1960's (Schmitt was among other things an admirer of Lenin). This in
turn shaped Schmitt's idea of Ernstfall or "ultimate confrontation" in
which normal legality had to be suspended. (Schmitt provided the legal cover for
the 1934 "Night of the Long Knives" in which Hitler eliminated the
"red fascist" wing of the Nazi Party around the Strasser brothers).
Last but not least (for Yockey) was Schmitt's idea of "Grossraumordnung",
literally "great space order" but more concretely a "geographical
zone dominated by a political idea" (a concept beyond the nation-state),
which after 1945 was taken over into Yockey's call for an "Imperium of the
West", a European super-state capable of resisting both the Soviet Union
and the United States (though Yockey considered the U.S. the greater danger)(3).
But if Schmitt was one of the more brilliant theorists
(along with the Italian philosopher Gentile) of fascism's well-known mystique of
the state, the figure of Karl Haushofer leads us into some of the most
unusual, and important, aspects of Yockey's later development. Haushofer
was the leading German exponent of "geopolitics", a theory of
international power politics developed by the German Ratzel and the Englishman
Mackinder. Based ultimately on a Social Darwinist idea of struggle for
"space", geopolitics was a theory of the struggle for world empire,
essentially the pre-1914 struggle between then-dominant Britain and ascendant
Germany. The basic idea of geopolitics was that the world power which controls
the perimeter of Russia controls the world, thus making it the theory of the
"great game" among the world powers from the Baltic to China and
Japan, via Iran and Tibet. Haushofer spoke Far Eastern languages
(Japanese, Chinese, Korean) as well as Russian fluently, and spent years in
Japan as a German military attaché, in the wake of Japan's stunning defeat of
Russia in 1905. The Russo-Japanese war was of particular significance since it
was the first time that a "white" nation had been defeated with modern
weapons by a "non-white" nation, and it was a kind of "wake-up
call" to emergent anti-colonial struggles everywhere. (Because it also led
to the 1905-06 mass strike wave, a dress rehearsal for the Bolshevik Revolution
of 1917, it also set down the association, with a brilliant future ahead of it,
whereby colonial peoples came to see 1917 primarily as a national and not as a
proletarian revolution.) Haushofer knew a great deal about esoteric
schools of Japanese Buddhism (and was rumored to belong to one), and later
distinguished himself as an officer in the German army during World War I. But
the most important idea which Yockey took from Haushofer was the latter's
advocacy of German support for anti-colonial peoples in their struggles against
the British and French empires, as well as Haushofer's
rejection of white supremacist reticence about such support, at a time when
ideas of the "yellow peril" and the rising challenge to
"white" world supremacy were common coin throughout the West.
Haushofer is often cited as the inspiration of the lucid passages treating
foreign policy in Hitler's Mein Kampf, but, as Coogan points out, Hitler and
Haushofer parted ways over race. Hitler preferred an India under white (i.e.
British) rule to Indian independence, however much the latter might weaken the
British empire. This Hauhofer link to Yockey emerges after 1945 in Yockey's
sympathy for Third World liberation struggles, including those of the
Palestinians, Nasser's Egypt and Castro's Cuba.
The real key to Yockey, however, is summed up in the
term "National Bolshevik", a somewhat obscure yet very important
strand of the 1920's Conservative Revolution, and one which is increasingly
important today. The term "National Bolshevik" refers to an
ambiguous minority current that appeared in the revolutionary wave in Europe
immediately following World War I. The term was first used by Bela Kun, head of
the short-lived Communist government in Hungary in 1919, and cropped up in some
statements of Karl Radek, the Communist revolutionary who conducted Comintern
business from his prison cell in Berlin in the same year, meeting with members
of the German business(4) and military elite as well as with the German radical
left. (He also laid the foundation for Russia's commercial treaty with Attaturk
in 1920, concluded even as Attaturk was murdering leading members of the Turkish
Communist Party.) In 1923, the German CP undertook the brief "Schlageter
turn"(5) of several months during which it worked with the Nazis in a
campaign against the Versailles Treaty, staging rallies and sharing podiums from
which Ruth Fischer attacked "Jewish capital" in a way sometimes
difficult to distinguish from fascist rhetoric(6). Already in 1922, Germany had
signed the Rapallo treaty with the Soviet Union, allowing the defeated German
army to to use the Ukraine for secret training and maneuvers banned under
the Versailles Treaty. Because of Germany's central position in continental
Europe, the possibility of a German- Russian rapprochement against the West
often hovered over European power politics, posing a direct threat to Britain
and France, and much of the foreign policy of the two major world empires was
aimed at preventing just such an alliance. Germany since 1870 had been the
"new power" threatening British and French hegemony , and
German support of different kinds for anti-colonial movements in the British and
French empires (which dated from the pre-1914 Kaiserreich) was a constant
problem for the latter. Thus in 1922 when the Rapallo treaty brought Germany
into an alliance with revolutionary Russia, there was general consternation in
Anglo-French ruling circles. In 1932, (as in 1923) the German Communist Party
again cooperated with the Nazis (7) in strikes and street actions against the
"main enemy", the "social-fascist" German Social Democrats,
a perspective they bizarrely maintained even after Hitler seized power and put
them into concentration camps, expressed in their slogan "After Hitler
Comes Our Turn". Finally, the consternation occasioned by
Rapallo was completely eclipsed by the impact of the Stalin-Hitler Pact in 1939.
But "National Bolshevism" refers to much more
than just a rapprochement between Germany and Russia, or tactical collaboration
between Communists and Nazis against liberals and Social Democrats. It
condenses a series of attitudes which reach far beyond Europe, and which have
wider currency in the contemporary world than is generally recognized: hence the
importance of Yockey and of Coogan's study of Yockey. National Bolshevism is one
of the most extreme forms of appropriation of elements of the revolutionary
socialist movement for the preservation of class society. Weimar Germany
from 1918 to 1933 was a laboratory of a myriad of currents thrown up by the
simultaneous potential of working-class revolution (1918-1921) and of the
extreme reaction (which borrowed significantly from the workers' movement)
brought to bear against that potential, culminating in Hitler's triumph in 1933.
Though figures such as Bela Kun and Karl Radek are better known, National
Bolshevism entered the workers' movement most dramatically in Hamburg and Bremen
in 1920, articulated by the two German ex-Wobblies Wolffheim and Laufenberg, who
threw themselves into the German workers' councils that sprung up after World
War I. For Wolffheim and Laufenberg, as for a number of other currents of the
early 1920's in Germany and elsewhere(8), workers' revolution was the
royal road to the national revolution; for the National Bolsheviks, the Russian
Revolution was itself a national revolution(9). (To his credit, Lenin called
National Bolshevism "eine himmelschreiende Absurditaet", roughly, a
"monstrous absurdity". Unfortunately, other figures of the Third
International were not so careful.)
The National Bolsheviks, and later Yockey, saw the
cosmopolitan proletarian internationalism of Lenin, Trotsky and the early
Russian Revolution as a superficial veneer which was cast aside by Stalin(10).
"National Bolshevism" ultimately transposes Marx's theory of the war
between the classes to an international theory of struggle between
"bourgeois nations" and "proletarian nations", and buries
the singularity and autonomy of the working class (the international class par
excellence) in a mystique of the state and the nation. In the interwar
period, the main "bourgeois nations" (or plutocracies, as
Georges Sorel, among others, called them) were Britain and France; after 1945,
the same logic was transposed to the new center of world capital, the United
States. And nowhere moreso than in the work of Francis Yockey. The
"proletarian nations" were first of all Germany and Italy, but the
term applied equally (if not moreso) to all the "new nations"
created by the Versailles Treaty, beginning with Eastern and Central Europe, not
to mention the Latin American nations under the thumb of Anglo-French or
American finance capital, and last but hardly least the growing nationalist
ferment in the colonial world, a ferment encouraged, as indicated earlier, by
successive German governments.
It is still little recognized today how ideologies
first developed in interwar Europe to describe the tensions between the
"core" bourgeois democracies and the "periphery"(11) of
"young" or "new" nations were exported to the semi-colonial
and colonial world, often directly through the influence of "National
Bolshevik" or later National Socialist figures,
and after 1945 by the Nazis who fled to the Middle East and Latin America. After
1918, dozens of new nations emerged from the four defeated empires (Hohenzollern
Prussia, Habsburg Austria-Hungary, Romanov Russia and the Ottomans) and after
1945, dozens more appeared in Africa, the Middle East and the rest of Asia from
the breakup of the British and French empires. In most of these "new
nations", as well as in the semi-colonial countries of Latin America
(Peron's Argentina and Vargas's Brazil come to mind), there was a real or
potential local elite that recycled alloyed or unalloyed "National
Bolshevism" from its original Central and Eastern European interwar sources
into international "left" "anti-imperialist" currency. The
1960's Western leftist admirers of Chou en-lai and Lin Piao would have perhaps
been surprised to learn that the latter's occasional references to the struggle
between "bourgeois nations" and "proletarian nations"
had been articulated decades earlier by Joseph Goebbels and Gregor Strasser. It
would have been less of a surprise, or none at all, to Francis Yockey.
In 1947, Yockey settled in a remote village in Ireland
to write his magnum opus, Imperium, in which he attempted to reinvent
fascism for the new U.S.-dominated world. Yockey had gone AWOL from the U.S.
Army in 1942 after a ring of German and pro-German saboteurs to which his family
had connections was arrested by the FBI. Two months later, this "Fifth
Columnist" (as opposed to an actual spy for Germany, in Coogan's
assessment) had returned voluntarily to the Army and, after a real or feigned
mental breakdown, managed to be honorably discharged in 1943 for
"medical" reasons. He held a couple of government jobs and then,
("incredibly", as Coogan puts it) in late 1945 went to Germany as a
prosecuting attorney for the Nuremburg trials. Less than a year later, he was
fired from this position, in which he had distinguished himself by chronic
absenteism, using that year to build up contacts to the anti-Allied German
underground which was actively conducting terrorism and sabotage against
American military targets.
Much of Imperium reads like recycled Spengler,
arguing for a hierarchy of culture elites, drawing on the same organic metaphor
of rise and decay of cultures used by Spengler.
Like Spengler, Yockey in Imperium (12)
rejects the old fascist race theories:
"Race is not group
anatomy.
Race is not independent of the soil.
Race is not independent of the Spirit of History.
Race is not classifiable, except on an ability basis.
Race is not a rigid, permanent, collective characterization of
human beings, which remains always the same throughout history."(13)
The
hierarchy of races at any given time are historical creations which "can
have, of course, no eternal validity"(14).
"Thus the school of
Gobineau, Chamberlain...was on the same tangent as the materialists who
announced that there is no such thing as Race...The source of a hierarchy of
races is History, the forces of happening...Thus, in the subjective sense, there
is also a hierarchy of race. Above, the men of race, below--those without
race"(15).
For Yockey the
"twentieth- century
viewpoint on this matter" (in contrast to the biologistic view of 19th-
century reaction-LG) begins from the "observed fact...that all strong
minorities--both within and without a High Culture--have welcomed into their
company the outsider who was attracted to it and wished to join it, regardless
of his racial provenance, objectively speaking. The racial snobbery of the
nineteenth century was intellectual, and its adoption in a too-narrow sphere by
the Resurgence of Authority in Europe between the two World Wars was a
grotesquerie."(16)
"...'safeguarding the
purity of race' in a purely biological sense is sheer materialism.
Race, in both its meanings, is the material of history, not the reverse...To the
twentieth- century outlook, a man does not belong to a race; either he has race,
or does not. If the former, he has value to History; if the latter, he is
valueless, a lackey."(17)
Following this
critique of biological racism, Yockey spells out his own view:
"...Western policy has
the duty of encouraging in its education of the youth its manifestations of
strong character, self-discipline, honor, ambition, renunciation of weakness,
striving after perfection, superiority, leadership--in a word--Race."(18)
As with race, so with
narrow nationalism:
"Provincial patriotism
of the nineteenth- century type can evoke no response. The unity of the West
which the barbarian has always recognized is recognized at the last hour by the
West itself."(19) .
It
was the Slansky show trial in Czeckoslovakia in 1952 which brought Yockey's
"National Bolshevism" to its final form, in which he transposed the
German-Russian "Rapallo" strategy of the interwar period to the new
world situation of U.S.-U.S.S.R. polarization, now advocating that Europe as a
whole should ally with the Soviet Union, as the lesser danger, against the
greater menace of the United States. Along with this view (articulated at a time
when most Nazis and other far-rightists were virulently anti- Soviet) went
Yockey's revival of Haushofer's call for full support for Third World struggles
of national liberation, for the purpose of weakening the U.S. world empire. By
executing 11 Jewish members of the Czeck Communist Party, the Stalinist bloc was
signaling, in Yockey's view, that it was ready to abandon the last pretenses of
"Jewish-inspired" proletarian internationalism and fully assert the
"barbaric" culture of the peasant masses which had been the other
force of the revolution.
Yockey laid this out in his 1953 book The Enemy of Europe. In this
shorter work, Yockey more sharply rejects, in his own barely-coded language,
the "nineteenth-century" aspects of Nazism:
"the engrafting of the
outworn nonsense of the vertical race notion onto the glorious European
Resurgence of Authority brought about by the European Revolution of 1933 was an
enormous tragedy"(20)
Yockey argued that unless Europe unified around a "Prussian-ethical
Future", the "nation-building Ethic of Authoritarian Socialism"
then
"the Europe of 2050
will be essentially the same as that of 1950, viz. a museum to be looted by
barbarians, a historical curiosity for sightseers from the colonies; an odd
assortment of operetta-states; a reservoir of human material standing at the
disposal of Washington and Moscow; a loan market for New York financiers; a
great beggars' colony, bowing and scraping before the American
tourists."(21)
Yockey's basic view, drawing on his Spenglerian categories, was that the rule of
the "culture-distorters" (i.e. the Jews) who had "taken
power" in the U.S. in Roosevelt's New Deal, posed a greater threat to
Europe that the Soviet Union, which was merely a peasant-barbaric society. If
the Soviet Union conquered Europe, in Yockey's analysis,
it would finally be "Europeanized" in the same way so many barbaric
conquerors (e.g. the Mongols) had been culturally absorbed in the past by the
peoples they conquered. The U.S., on the other hand, had in Europe a stratum of
willing "traitors", the "churchills, degaulles, adenauers",
et al. (Yockey relished writing their names in the lower case) who were
willing to be the flunkies of American domination. Whether by sparking a
European uprising against Soviet domination or by absorbing the Soviet bloc into
a European super-state organized along the lines of "Authoritarian
Socialism", Soviet control of Europe was preferable to the ongoing rule of
the pro-American stratum of "traitors".
Thus: a culturally-based rather than biological theory
of race, a rejection of narrow nationalism for a European super-state conceived
along the lines of Carl Schmitt's Grossraumordnung, and a pro-Soviet, pro-Third
Worldist "tilt" against U.S. world hegemony are the core of
"orthodox Yockeyism", and have been taken over, as one source, into
the contemporary European New Right by theoreticians such as Alain de Benoist
(France), Jean-Francois Thiriart (Belgium) and Aleksandr Dugin (Russia). As
indicated earlier, the anti-universalism which Yockey got from Spengler
(cultures do not interpenetrate, Jews and blacks are not part of the West
because they are bearers of "other cultures") is strangely echoed by
contemporary leftist post-modernism's (e.g. Edward Said) view that cultures
confront each other as invariably distorting "texts"(22) .
This distillation of "orthodox Yockeyism",
however, hardly begins to do justice to Kevin Coogan's book on Yockey. By
focusing on ideology, we are neglecting Coogan's painstaking reconstruction of
Yockey's political activities from the mid-1930's until his suicide in FBI
custody in 1960. We are neglecting in particular Yockey's peripatetic life on
the fringe of the far-right fringe (as indicated, his one U.S. promoter, Willis
Carto, rejected both Yockey's culturalism and his anti-Americanism). But above
all we are neglecting or downplaying Coogan's detailed history, through the
prism of Yockey,
of the post-1945 international fascist regroupment which in many ways is as or
more interesting as the account of Yockey himself. Coogan devotes major space
and rich detail to important fascist intellectuals such as the Italian Julius
Evola (who wrote an important favorable review of Imperium in 1951), as well as
Yockey's connections to and influence on the entire Nazi network that escaped
into exile in Latin America and the Middle East after the war. In addition
to the portraits of Spengler, Schmitt and Haushofer in the formation of Yockey's
own thought, Coogan provides remarkable detail on the cultivation, in these
circles, of esotericism (Evola's books, often with no reference whatever to his
lifelong fascist leanings, can be found in any New Age bookstore in the U.S. or
Europe today). He shows the far-right uses of J.J. Bachofen's theory of
matriarchy (which also influenced Marx and Engels) and of the sexual theories of
Otto Weininger, who argued that every culture is aligned somewhere on a spectrum
between absolute poles of masculine and feminine. Some Nazis had used
Weininger's theories to buttress their own views of the subordination of women,
as part of a general view of contemporary democracy as a largely feminized
society in which the old warrior values had been eroded. Coogan provides
material on the Rumanian anthropologist Mircea Eliade, who in the 1930's had
been a vocal intellecual and activist of the fascist Iron Guard in that country,
(a fascist movement whose sadism toward Jews nauseated even the German SS
officers during the war!) and who became a world-renowned professor at the
University of Chicago.
Last but not least, Coogan delves into the history of
the political activities of these networks. The story of Evola leads into the
"strategy of tension" of the terrorist far-right in Italy up to the
1970's, with murky connections to the clandestine armed network called Gladio
which was established under U.S. auspices in Italy (with direct counterparts in
other major European countries) for purposes of armed action against the Italian
left and a possible Soviet invasion. Perhaps most remarkable in Coogan's account
are the activities of the Naumann Circle, a group of ex-Nazis who
developed "astonishing influence" in various nationalist regimes (e.g.
Nasser's Egypt) and movements (e.g. the Palestinians, first of all through the
well-known pro-Nazi Grand Mufti of Jerusalem). Hjalmar Schacht, Hitler's finance
minister, became a consultant in Nasser's Egypt and negotiated deals for German
industry aimed at undercutting Anglo-American deals with Egypt and with Mao's
China. Nasser hired the former Nazi manager of the Skoda armaments factory in
Czechoslovakia to upgrade Egypt's military, and in 1955 the Skoda works, now
under Stalinist rule, concluded a major arms deal with Nasser. (Here was
"National Bolshevism" point-blank.) Coogan tells the equally
remarkable story of the new fascist and "red-brown" currents in Russia
well before the collapse of the Soviet Union, with the sponsorship of
anti-Semitism from the highest levels. Finally, he traces the evolution of
certain "Yockeyite", "National Bolshevik" figures of the
European far- right, such as Alain de Benoist, who broke with Jean-Marie LePen's
National Front over the question of race, and came out for various Third
Worldist movements, all the while propagating Indo-European paganism against
"universalism" (code word for "Jewish" influence) and
promoting Holocaust "revisionism" in Third World countries he visited.
In 1992, de Benoist was at the center of a "National Bolshevik"
episode in which far- right and Stalinist intellectuals participated in a forum
to discuss what they had in common. Similar meetings have taken place
periodically in Libya.
Thus Coogan's excellent book, starting from an obscure
American fascist figure who has little currency in the far-right of his own
country, takes us into the whole world of the international fascist revival
since 1945, and in particular to the sophisticated cultural forms of race theory
that have pushed aside the old biologism and national chauvinism, and the
disconcerting ways in which this constellation of ideas of a "new
fascism" has made its way into high cultural expression. Coogan's book is
essential for an understanding of the "reactionary-radical" ideologies
that are emerging to challenge the
international communist project.
1-As the French writer
Charles Péguy put it 100 years ago, "the slogan 'neither left not right'
always means 'right'" ("qui dit 'ni de droite ni de gauche' dit de
droite")
2-As Coogan points out, Carto rejected Yockey's rejection of biological racism
and considered his pro-Soviet, anti-American stance more than a bit over the
top.
3-The rejection of both the Soviet Union and the United States as two variants
of "materialism" was a common theme on the European far-right from the
1920's onward.
4-These contacts included Walter Rathenau, a German-Jewish industrialist who
advocated an advanced kind of corporatism as the solution to the "social
question", and who was assassinated by the radical right in 1922.
5-Leo Schlageter was a German nationalist killed by French troops during the
1923 occupation of the Saarland, and who thus became a hero of the nationalist
right and far-right. Radek announced the Schageter turn with a famous speech in
Moscow entitled "Ein Wanderer Ins Nichts", "A Wanderer Into the
Void".
6-Fischer's full statement was "he who denounces Jewish capital is already
a warrior in the class war, even though he does not know it". (Cited in E.H.
Carr, The Interregnum, p. 190.
7-It should be pointed out that in 1923, the KPD was not yet fully Stalinized
and the Third International had not yet embraced the previously unheard-of
theory of "socialism in one country"; thus the "Schlageter
turn" of 1923 can be charitably interpreted as a foretaste of the
full-blown "Third Period" policy of 1932.
8-It should not be forgotten that the full name of the Nazi Party in German was
Nationalsozialistische Arbeiterpartei (NDSAP), the National Socialist Workers'
Party. The National Bolsheviks, as indicated, looked down on the National
Socialists with aristocratic disdain, but they emerged from the same ferment and
the same "oscillation" (Jeam-Pierre Faye's term) between the
Conservative Revolution and the proletarian revolution.
9-See the eccentric but highly informative book of Michael Agursky, National
Bolshevism in the USSR,
(Boulder, 1987).
10-In far-right circles, it was common to consider thedefeat of Trotsky in 1928
as the defeat of the "Jewish" internationalism of the early
revolution, and the victory of Stalin as the triumph of Russian nationalism.
11-The terms "core" and "periphery", more familiar from
now-discredited 1960's and 1970's Marxist theories associated with figures such
as Andre Gunder Frank or Immanuel Wallerstein, were actually first used by the
ambiguous (to say the least) sociologist Werner Sombart to describe Germany's
relationship to England and France. Cf. the key work of Joseph Love, Crafting
the Third World (Stanford, 1996), for a detailed discussion of the migration
of these concepts from Germany to Eastern Europe to Latin America. For an even
more remarkable study of an Ottoman bureaucrat who theorized first Turkish and
then Arab nationalism under the influence of German romantic philosophy, cf.
Bassam Tibi Arab Nationalism (New York, 1980).
12-The book was published in 200 copies in 1948; quotations are from the 1962
New York edition.
13-Imperium, p. 282.
14-ibid. p. 285.
15-ibid. pp. 285-294.
16-ibid. pp. 300-301.
17-ibid. pp. 301-302.
18-ibid. p. 307.
19-ibid. p. 316.
20-F.P. Yockey, The Enemy of Europe, 1985 ed. p. 44.
21- ibid. p. 45.
22-See the devastating critique of Said's "provincial" relativism by
the Syrian Marxist Sadek Jelal al-Azm, which has been reprinted in numerous
places, including the journal Khamsin.
Break Their Haughty Power
http://home.earthlink.net/~lrgoldner
Francis
Parker Yockey's
"Imperium,
The Philosophy of History and Politics"
a Summary and
Evaluation by Neighbors Network
The end of the Cold War, the
collapse of the Soviet Union, and the growing violence and instability both
around the world and here in the United States, have impressed on the minds of
millions the idea that the world is at a crossroads. People with an interest in
history and in ideas are hungry for a perspective that can show their own
country and the world what new direction it can take to get out of the current
confusion. So far, two trends have emerged. New nations have arisen and claimed
what they consider to be their rights, including sometimes the right of revenge
against their neighbors for centuries-old grievances, as in Bosnia-Herzegovina.
On the other hand, former U. S. President George Bush and others have expressed
the hope for a New World Order.
"Imperium, The
Philosophy of History and Politics" by Francis Parker Yockey, published in
1948 and still available, provides an ambitious perspective on the future,
specifically for all peoples of European descent. Francis P. Yockey was no
statesman, nor a professional academic, and he has been dead for thirty years.
Why is his book important today?
"Imperium" is
important because Willis Carto is important. Willis A. Carto, publisher since
the Seventies of the tabloid newspaper "Spotlight," knew Yockey in the
last decade of his life, was one of the last visitors to Yockey before Yockey's
mysterious death in jail in 1960, wrote the introduction to the 1962 edition of
"Imperium", and has recommended the book on many occasions since.
Because readers of "Spotlight" have been engaged in much discussion
about the alleged anti-Semitism or "fascist hidden agenda" of
"Spotlight," they will no doubt be interested to know what "Imperium"
has to say about the possibilities for the survival of Western Culture.
"Imperium" begins
with a biographical sketch of Yockey by Carto. Yockey was born in Chicago in
1917. He received a B.A. in 1938, then attended Notre Dame Law School,
graduating cum laude in 1941. Though opposed to intervention in World War II
before the Pearl Harbor attack, he enlisted in the U. S. Army, but received a
medical discharge in 1942.
Back in civilian life, he
began a law practice in Illinois, but soon relocated to Detroit, where he became
an Assistant District Attorney in Wayne County, Michigan. In 1946, Yockey was
offered and accepted a job preparing testimony for the War Crimes Tribunal, set
up by Allied occupation forces after World War II to try Nazi leaders. For
eleven months, he worked in Wiesbaden, Germany, helping to prepare the cases
against some mid-level Nazi leaders. After a quarrel with his superiors, who, he
claimed, were pressuring him to produce propaganda instead of indictments based
on objective facts, he resigned in early 1947. Yockey returned to America for a
short time, and then moved to Ireland, where took up residence in an inn in
Brittas Bay, County Galway. There he wrote "Imperium". Anticipating
controversy, he wrote under the pen-name Ulick Varange. Only a handful of copies
were printed, at the author's expense, and the two-volumn first edition
attracted little notice. Carto published a one-volumn hardback edition in 1962,
and a paperback edition in 1969.
With a few followers, Yockey
founded the European Liberation Front in London in 1949. For his activism, he
was beaten in Hyde Park. The group soon collapsed because, according to Carto,
Yockey's collaborators were consumed by their great envy for his enormous gifts,
and because a great philosopher is almost never also a great man of action.
Carto considered Yockey a thinker first and foremost. After a brief job at the
Red Cross, he resigned in 1951, and began to travel. Carto does not say where
Yockey went on his travels, nor how he supported himself. The FBI, however,
revoked his U.S. passport. In 1960, he was arrested in San Francisco for
passport fraud, after three passports had been found in one of his suitcasese.
Yockey allegedly committed suicide in his cell. Carto is skeptical of this
official story.
The following evaluation of
"Imperium" is footnoted, so the reader can easily verify from the text
the points which are summarized here. The index Carto's 1969 paperback edition
is very inadequate, containing only references to proper names.
Yockey on History
Yockey's philosophy of
history proposes a cyclical "life-cycle" for the history of all
hitherto existing civilizations. He proposes to demonstrate the existence of
this "organic" process in eight distinct "Cultures" existing
in the past, to explain what part of the cycle our own "Western
Culture" is in, and thereafter to expound the political principals which
alone can effectively guide the West out of the Civilization Crisis which he saw
around him. He acknowledges a large debt to Oswald Spengler, author of
"Decline of the West," whom he calls "the philosopher of the
twentieth century"; and to Friederich Nietzsche. (1) To understand Yockey's
philosophy, one must first understand his definition of Culture, a word which he
uses to define the whole history of a civilization.
Yockey's definition of a
Culture includes not only the arts and literature of a period of history, but
also its technology, politics, and economic activities. This resembles the
anthropologist's definition of culture, except that for an anthropologist, any
people, including a primitive tribe, has a culture, while for Yockey only
certain peoples in certain times and places can have a Culture. It also
resembles the more typical historical use of the word Civilization, but for
Yockey Civilization is a specific later stage in the development of a Culture.
The Cultures are Egyptian, Mesopotamian, Indian, Chinese, Arabian, Classical,
Western (also called European), and Mexican-Peruvian, for a total of eight in
all. (2)
Following Spengler, Yockey
rejects the usual Ancient-Medieval-Modern "linear" conception of world
history. For Yockey, what is commonly called "ancient history" is
actually the history of Egyptian, Babylonian, and Classical cultures. Egypt,
Babylonia, and the Classical world each went through stages of early growth,
vigor, senility, and death, followed by barbarism. Medieval history is not
merely "a middle age" in between ancient and modern history. It is
actually the history of a new beginning, the early stages of the history of the
Western Culture. (3)
The human mind cannot make
sense of reality without grouping observed facts into categories. However, any
attempt to categorize will produce ambiguities, doubtful cases that straddle the
borderline between two categories. Yockey does not recognize that his grouping
of civilized human history into eight Cultures creates such doubtful and
ambiguous cases. For example, the two halves of the "Mexican-Peruvian"
Culture were separated by hundreds of miles, and before the Spanish conquest
they were not aware of each other's existence. On what historical grounds are
they the same Culture? Was the Byzantine Empire a remnant of the Classical
Culture, or the Medieval Greek section of the Western one? Did the Ottoman
Empire belong to the Arabian Culture? Yockey does not trouble himself to
acknowledge, let alone answer, these questions. Others could be raised as well.
A Culture (sometimes he uses
the term High Culture) has an organic nature. "Since a Culture is organic,
it has an individuality, and a soul. Thus it cannot be influenced in its depths
from any outside force whatever. It has a destiny, like all organisms. It has a
period of gestation and a birth-time. It has a growth, a maturity, fulfillment,
a down-going, and a death." Therefore it has its own individual stamp.
After its death, it does not recur. There will not be another Indian or Peruvian
Culture, and after its death there will be no recurrence of the Western Culture
either. (4)
Yockey contrasts the organic
view of Culture, which he prefers, to the rationalist-materialist view of
history. The latter seeks cause and effect in events of human history. This is,
according to Yockey, a misleading way to view history. "Material happenings
can be controlled, are reversible, produce identical results under identical
conditions, are recurrent, can be classified, can be successfully comprehended
as though they are subject to an a priori, mechanical necessity, in other words,
to Causality." (5) On the other hand, the events of a Life are
"uncontrollable, irreversible, never-recurring, unique, cannot be
classified, are not amenable to rational treatment, and possessed of no external
mechanical necessity." (6) Destiny-thinking (or organic thinking) is the
most fruitful way of viewing history, because the history of a Culture is the
history of a type of life. Causality-thinking (or rationalistic-materialist
thinking) has produced errors in understanding of history and erroneous theories
such as Marxism, Darwinism, and Freudianism. (7)
Yockey opposes Materialism
on the grounds that it fails to take into account the spiritual aspect of
history and of human activity. He does not distinguish between Materialism as a
method of analysis and Materialism as a value system. He lumps together
Materialism and Rationalism. Moreover, he does not recognize the usual
distinction made by philosophers between Rationalism and Empiricism. Here is his
list of the foremost philosophers of Causality-thinking: "Kant is the
height of this type of thinking, and to this side of Western philosophy belong
also Hume, Bacon, Schopenhauer, Hamilton, Spencer, Mill, Bentham, Hobbes, Locke,
Holbach, Descartes." (8) This is a curious collection. Yockey, who
vehemently rejects atheism, includes in his list the eighteenth century French
atheist and materialist Holbach, but also Descartes, who proved to his own
satisfaction the existence of God from the existence of thought. What have all
these thinkers in common? According to Yockey, they have in common that they all
sought to find "Causality" in human institutions, even in Culture.
The enmity of a Culture to
all outside itself is a fundamental concept for Yockey. "Each Culture-soul
is stamped with individuality. From others it takes nothing, and to them it
gives nothing. Whatever is on the frontiers is the enemy, whether primitive or
Culture-populations. They all are barbarians, heathens, to the proper culture,
and no understanding passes between them." According to Yockey, historical
facts prove this. "We saw the Western peoples prove the lifeworthiness of
the European culture by their Crusades against the highly civilized Saracens,
Moors, and Turks. We saw the Germanic populations in the East and their
Visigothic brothers in the South push the barbarian Slavs and the civilized
Moors continually back during the centuries. We saw Western ships and Western
armies make the whole world into the object of booty for the West. These were
the relations of the West to that [sic] and those outside." (9)
A Culture is the highest
form of life, in a hierarchy that consists of plants, animals, "man",
and Culture. (10) "A High Culture is plantlike in its attachment to its
original soil ....; animal-like in its ruthless devouring of other life-forms;
man-like in its spirituality; and original in its power to transform human life,
its great life span, and the forcefulness of its destiny." (11)
However, not everyone
belongs to a Culture. Those outside are no better than animals. "... Man's
life in primitivity, and in an area where a High Culture is fulfilling itself,
are two incommensurable things. . . . Vis-a-vis the history of Culture-man,
primitive man seems merely zoological." (12)
By Yockey's premises, there
is no such thing as humanity, and therefore no universal ethical duties which
any human being owes to any other human being. In fact, there is no serious
discussion of ethics in "Imperium". Yockey implies something about his
ethical philosophy when he asserts that a Culture proves its "lifeworthiness"
by conquest and looting.
We can also now note an
important feature of Yockey's methodology. Whenever in history Europe is
antagonistic to those outside, he cites "the facts" to support him. He
ignores the many known historical facts of borrowing between Cultures, or of
peace between them. For instance, as Yockey defines his terms, Christianity must
be considered a product of at least two non-Western Cultures, the Classical and
the Arabian. In the Arabian, Yockey includes not only the Arab civilization at
its height, but also both the ancient Israelites and all modern Jews.
Nonetheless, Christianity has had a profound influence over the arts,
literature, social life and politics of Europe during the whole of what Yockey
calls "the Western Culture." So what are we to make of Christianity,
according to Yockey's scheme? A profound silence on this subject is maintained
throughout the book.
A Culture must have a
Culture-bearing stratum, which contains all the creators of "religion,
philosophy, science, music, literature, the arts of form, mathematics, politics,
technics [i.e., technology], and war." It also contains the appreciators
who "transmit the great creations downward" and thereby recruit the
more talented of individuals into the Culture-bearing stratum. The
Culture-bearing stratum is not a class. Some of its members are poor (like
Beethoven), and others are unnoticed until after their deaths (like Copernicus
and Kierkegaard). (13)
According to Yockey, the
life-cycle of a Culture is as follows. First there is a Race, which then
develops into one or more Peoples, which then develop into Nations, after which
there is a Civilization-Crisis, which ends with the resurgence of Authority and
the founding of an Imperium. Civilization is the stage at which a Culture
becomes "completely externalized" through conflicts (military and
Cultural) with alien peoples. Yockey is unclear on the precise difference
between the terms "Civilization" and "Civilization-Crisis."
He seems to be saying that Civilization is a higher category comprising the two
stages of Civilization-Crisis, and Imperium. (14)
According to Yockey, it is
possible to recognize a person's race at a glance, but he admits that it is
difficult to say exactly how one knows a person's race. For Yockey, pigmentation
and facial characteristics are mere "group anatomy," and insufficient
to characterize a race, for a race possesses a "spiritual" as well as
a material nature. He concedes that races can only be classified
"arbitrarily," though he also maintains that a Race is
"organically" related to its native soil. (15) However, races can be
ranked in a hierarchy according to function. The function that Yockey considers
most important is "will-to-power." Will to power, the desire to
control, is the fundamental difference between human beings and animals. Only by
classifying races by will-to-power can modern history and the imperatives of the
Western Culture in this age be understood. (16) Will to power is a healthy
racial instinct, and is not only good for soldiers, but also impels the higher
intellectual achievements of a ulture. "Life which places rationalistic
ideas of 'individualism,' 'happiness,' 'freedom' before the perpetuation and
increase of power is decadent. Decadent means moving towards extinction,
extinction of Higher Life in particular, and finally even of the life of the
race." (17)
Two things, a superpersonal
idea and a leader, transform a Race into a People. The superpersonal idea is
communicated by a leader, or a leader-stratum. The leader and the superpersonal
idea can be, but are not necessarily, at the service of a Culture. The leader
can transform a race into a people if he harmonizes instinct and intellect.
"Instinct says, preserve! Multiply! Increase power! Intellect seeks means
of preserving Life and increasing power." (18) There must also be some
tension between the People and the surrounding human environment. (19)
Peoples can exist outside a
Culture, but only a Culture is able create Nations. Each Culture has its own
conception of nations. In the Arabian Culture, people of the same religion were
of the same nation. Their nations had no national frontiers at all. All Muslims
were a nation, and all Jews another. In the Classical Culture, the nation was
the City-state, a few hundred square miles in extent. The modern concept of a
nation-state with wide-ranging boundaries would have been incomprehensible to
inhabitants of Arabian or Classical Culture. (20) Nations play a role in the
development of the Culture. A Culture goes through a succession of stages, and
each stage has its corresponding Spirit of the Age. Since each Nation has a
distinct Nation-Idea, the Nation whose Nation-Idea best expresses the Spirt of
the Age will come to dominate the Culture. The Nation-Idea is not something that
can be summarized in words, but can only be shown by deeds. The English
Nation-Idea, for instance, includes Rationalism, money-making, and parliaments.
These ideas (which most people would call institutions) have advanced in recent
centuries because the English Nation-Idea was in tune with the Spirit of the Age
during the "English Age," which Yockey dates from 1750 to 1900. (21)
At the height of the
Civilization-Crisis, whatever the constitutional law may say, the real power
behind the government is the Master of Money. Rationalistic theories of all
sorts are now his servant in the realm of thought. Rationalism's "sole
effect is to destroy. It destroys . . . art forms and literature, its destroys
traditions of service, dignity, loyalty, honor. It destroys the State-idea as
embodied in its last refined form, the Absolute State. It lays Civilization
waste from within, politically speaking." Meanwhile, the Master of Money
keeps all real power in his own hands by corrupt means. What can freedom mean in
such a setting? Only two things. "Freedom was attractive to two great
groups, the intellectuals and the trading-class. To both of them, the State was
a burden. For its one pulse, one imperative . . . the pavement-intellectuals
wish to substitute universal criticism, and the traders introduce universal
trade without any restriction whatever. . . . The intellectual with his atheist
pamphlet and the trader in his counting-house are respectively the masters in
the democratic world of thought and action." (22)
The twentieth and
twenty-first centuries mark the transition from the Civilization-Crisis to the
resurgence of Tradition and Authority, and creation of an Imperium. The Imperium
will unite all the Nations of the Western Culture, and it will be governed by an
Absolutist State. (23)
Yockey makes a detailed
attempt to demonstrate the Civilization-Crisis only in the Western Culture. He
makes passing references to such a stage in the Classical, Egyptian, and Chinese
Cultures, and merely asserts that it occurred in the other four. In the whole
text of "Imperium", nearly all of the historical references come from
the Western and Classical Cultures, with only occasional references to Egypt and
China, and about two sentences on the "Arabian" Culture. The others
are barely mentioned. In fact, there are no footnotes at all in "Imperium",
and according to Carto's introduction, Yockey wrote the entire book without
notes. In short, Yockey has failed to document adequately the life cycle of a
Culture from his eight historical Cultures. Therefore, there are no historical
grounds for believing what he says about the Civilization-Crisis and the Destiny
of the "Western Culture."
Yockey on Politics
When Yockey speaks of the
State, he refers to sovereignty, like a European theorist, not to the autonomous
States of the Union which most Americans means with they speak of
"States." His views on the State can be summarized briefly. "The
State is the form of the nation for action." In Western Culture, it
transforms itself through stage of (a) Empire and Papacy; (b) Feudal or
aristocratic State; (c) Absolutist State; (d) Democracy, by which he means the
whole history of constitutional and elected government; and (e) Resurgence of
the Absolute State, which instead of being merely National constitutes the unity
of the West in a single Imperium. (24)
"Politics," as
Yockey defines it for us, "is activity in relation to power. . . . Thus it
is not morality, it is not esthetics, it is not economics. . . . The way
politics divides the world is into friend and enemy." (25) Inner political
differences within a State can exist, but if the State has to resort to force,
then there are at least temporarily two States, not one. Yockey sometimes uses
the term "political unit" to mean State. (26) Since he separates
politics from morality, he provides what he calls a political justification for
war. "Units engaged in politics may either gain or lose power. Instinct and
understanding direct them to seek to increase power. War is the most intense
method of trying to increase power. Thus a war that has no practically
foreseeable possibility of increasing power is not politically justifiable. A
war which promises an increase in power is politically justifiable." (27)
He goes on to declare that a political victory can emerge from a military
defeat. His example is the utter defeat of France in the Napoleonic Wars,
followed by Tallyrand's diplomatic victory for France at the "Congress of
Vienna." Yockey's illustration proves the opposite of what he claims for
it. When we compare France's position in defeat after the negotiated settlement
at the Congress of Europe with its highly influential diplomatic and strategic
position in the last quarter of the eighteenth century, it is obvious that
France lost power. By Yockey's own criteria, France was defeated.
Yockey's definition of a
true enemy is very revealing. "To say that a unit gained a military victory
and also suffered a political defeat is only another way of saying that the
military opponent was not a real enemy. A real enemy is he whom one can strike
down and thereby increase one's own power." (28) The real enemy is someone
weaker than oneself. This is the consequence of Yockey's complete separating of
politics from ethics: the politics of a bully, and therefore the politics of a
coward.
He criticizes Great Britain
for fighting two World Wars. In the process, he says, Britain lost commercial
supremacy, supremacy at sea, the Empire, and even allegedly its own
independence, and survives as a weaker ally of the United States. How did this
disaster happen? Because Germany and Britain were not real enemies. Both were a
part of Europe and therefore of the Western Civilization. Their real enemies
were Russia, Japan, and the United States. Yockey, an expatriate American, does
not regard Russians and his fellow countrymen as part of the Western Culture. To
him, both are as alien as Japan. (29) Is "Imperium" a post-War
rationalization for the Nazis? Yockey himself removes all doubt. Referring to
the end of the Second World War, he says, "The Western Civilization was not
extinguished . . . even though it was brought to the lowest possible point
politically." (30) This can only mean that Germany and her allies were the
political representatives of Western Civilization in that war. Yockey does not
note the fact that Japan, alleged threat to the West, was Hitler's ally. Perhaps
he considers the alliance with Japan as Hitler's temporary expedient, like his
two-year-long pact with Stalin.
Yockey's attitude toward
cross-cultural borrowing and cooperation can be summarized in two words: Culture
Pathology. Because a Culture is a form of life, it can suffer from diseases,
which can kill it, thereby preventing it from achieving its destiny. As Culture
Pathologist, Yockey enumerates three diseases: Culture Parasitism, Culture
Distortion, and Culture Retardation. Immigrants into an Alien culture cause
Cultural Parasitism. They are parasites because the native Culture comes into
conflict with them, and has to expend energy fighting them. Race riots in the
United States are Cultural conflicts, in which the host body is attempting to
expel the parasites. Such conflicts are not caused by hatred, intolerance, or
ignorance. Hatred, intolerance, and ignorance are merely traits of individuals.
However, racial conflicts are the result of "higher organic unities"
which "impel the mere individuals." (31)
Culture Distortion is the
borrowing from one culture into another. Any sort of borrowing is unhealthy to
the Culture and prevents it from achieving its destiny. Inviting in troops from
a State Alien to the Culture---such as the Russian troops in Europe in 1815 and
in 1945 and after---is Culture Distortion, for instance, since Russia is outside
the European Culture-idea. The political influence of Jews in American life is
Culture Distortion also. Writing in 1948, Yockey insists that the Jews control
broadcasting, the film industry, book and magazine publishing, and the
Universities, as well as both political parties. The election of Franklin D.
Roosevelt was "the American Revolution of 1993," in which the Culture
Distorters (that is, the Jews) took over the U. S. Government. (32) Culture
Retardation is the failure to keep up with the latest advances of the Culture.
In America, it means that Americans do not appreciate the advances in thought
made by Oswald Spengler and other twentieth century German apologists for the
Third Reich. (33)
By this point, the reader
call well imagine what Yockey thinks of the Jews. Because of the Middle Eastern
(Yockey prefers "Arabian") origin of their religion, the Jews are
spiritually alien to the Western Civilization. It is only to be expected that
the European or European-descended majority would resent their presence, or even
persecute them. The Jews would as naturally resent the Gentile majority in
return. (34) When Jews in Great Britain and America were given equal rights,
they merely took advantage of their Gentile fellow-citizens, as revenge for many
years of persecution. They used the new freedom to undermine the Western
Culture, working through secret societies such as "the Illuminati and its
offspring." Yockey believes that the Jews have one ethic for themselves and
another for the Gentiles, which requires them to treat a fellow Jew decently,
and allows any crime no matter how vile if done by a Jew to a Gentile. These are
standard anti-Semitic slurs. Anti-Semitism is no problem for Yockey. He sees it
as a sign of the fundamental health of Western Civilization. "Anti-Semitism
is precisely analogous in Culture pathology to the formation of anti-bodies in
the bloodstream in human pathology. In both cases, the organism is resisting the
alien life." (35) In other words, the Jews are bacteria, and their presence
makes Western Culture sick.
We have seen that Yockey
uses historical facts to prove his point about the necessity of conflict between
a Culture and anyone from outside it. However, when he deals with cross-cultural
influences, he places a value judgement on the facts, calling them symptoms of
Culture Pathology. The medical analogy does not disguise his obviously
contradictory and subjective method of treating the facts. One might as well
compare anti-Semitism to the immune system's attempts to reject a kidney
transplant, even though the host body needs at least one functioning kidney and
both original kidneys have had to be removed.
Yockey's alleged
Jewish-controlled conspiracies, of course, do not exist. Judaism teaches that a
Jew has precisely the same ethical duties toward a Gentile as toward another
Jew. Because Yockey avoids discussing religion in any concrete terms, he never
explains in what precise sense the Jews, whose ancestors wrote most of the
Bible, can be "spiritually alien" in the predominantly Christian
Western Civilization.
Given all Yockey has said
about the utterly alien nature of the Jews, and given what he has said
throughout "Imperium" about the inevitability of conflict between
Cultures, then presumably he would consider the Holocaust, in which millions of
Jews perished, to be just another example of the German antibodies consuming the
alien Jewish bacteria, out of organic necessity. Yockey does not do this.
Writing in 1948, he is a pioneer of what is now called Holocaust denial. The
photographic evidence is all fraudulent, the gas chambers never existed, and the
survivors are all liars. After all, the Jews have one ethic for themselves and
another for the Gentiles, so why wouldn't they lie to us? This is what Yockey
really meant when he condemned as propaganda the evidence which he was required
to gather for the War Crimes Tribunal. (36)
According to Yockey,
American ideas of liberty and equal rights are nonsense, and were only adopted
because the Spirit of the Age was the spirit of the Civilization-Crisis, which
promotes individualism and every type of decadence in the name of liberty. In
his chapters on America, he repeats the charges which many others have made
before him, in his own time, and since, about corruption in American politics.
Yockey, however, is not interested in reform. He even questions whether European
settlers should have come to America to begin with. White people are
"organically" related to their home soil in Europe, and emigration to
other continents weakens their resistance to Culture Pathology. (37)
The pro-Axis minority in the
United States who still opposed the war after Pearl Harbor were the real
patriots of World War II in America: "Certain American nationalists were
held in gaol for having said in 1941 that a military defeat was to be desired
for the welfare of America, since a defeat would destroy the hold of the
Culture-distorting group." Those who fought were merely dupes of the
Culture Distorters who have controlled America since 1933. (38)
If the Axis was fighting for
Western Civilization, did the defeat of Germany in World War II spell the doom
of the West? Yockey urges the sympathetic reader to take courage. The Spirit of
the Age favors revival of the Imperium. Men will no longer die for
"liberty." The last chapter of the book is an extended outburst of
ranting, the text of which Yockey might have subsequently used in his Hyde Park
addresses on behalf of the European Liberation Front. In these last few fervid
pages, he assures us that the West possesses "the mightiest superpersonal
idea that has ever appeared on this earth-ball." He looks forward to the
day when "the Western banner waves on its home soil from Gibralter to the
North Cape, and from the rocky promontories of Galway to the Urals." There
is no room for his native America in such a vision. Yockey finishes with his
favorite quote from Nietzsche: "What does not destroy me makes me
stronger," which he presents both in English and in the original German.
Conclusion
Yockey repeatedly calls for
a resurgence of Faith, Tradition, and Authority. Implicitly, Yockey asks the
reader of "Imperium" to take his philosophy of history on faith. If
"Imperium" is a religious revelation to be accepted on faith, then we
can take Western Culture to be its God. Oswald Spengler or Friedrich Nietzsche
takes the place of Abraham, the nations of Europe play the role of Israelites,
the upcoming Western Imperium is the location of the Promised Land, and Adolph
Hitler is the Aryan Moses who pointed the way to the Promised Land without
himself being allowed to enter it. If this is Yockey's faith, what personal
satisfaction did he receive from it?
Earlier we noted that,
according to Carto's admiring preface, Yockey's brilliance provoked envy in
those less talented than himself throughout his life. Yockey could play the
piano well enough for the concert hall, was able to speak several languages,
never lost a case in the courtroom, was well-versed in finance, and, above all,
knew all the main issues of modern philosophy. Carto does not mention that
Yockey's discharge from military service in 1942 was for dementia praecox, a
synonym for schizophrenia. His medical report stated that he head disembodied
voices speaking to him, believed that a great destiny lay ahead for him, and
included important world leaders in his delusions. Perhaps he did have all the
intellectual gifts and talents which Carto ascribes to him, but the
schizophrenic episode of 1942, even if of brief duration, is the real clue to
his philosophy, and to his faith. Yockey's undocumented and ill-conceived "Imperium"
is a pseudoscholarly rationalization of his delusion that the envious and
resentful dupes of Culture Distortion who were forever dogging him. Yockey wrote
"Imperium" confident that History would vindicate him, for it was his
destiny to be the prophet of the future Western Imperium!
Footnotes
(1) Friedrich Nietzsche was
not, or course, a twentieth-century man, but Yockey credits him for anticipating
the Spirit of the Age of the next age.
(2) Yockey, Francis Parker,
"Imperium," (Sausalito, California, 1969), pp. 1-8. All references are
from the paperback reprint of "Imperium" published by Noontide Press
at the date given.
Not only are Yockey's
definitions of the terms Culture and Civilization unusual, he scatters other
idiosyncratic usages through "Imperium". He uses the adjective
"erotic" to mean "eroticism" or "eros." In the
place of "traditional" he always says "traditionary," a less
familiar but acceptable synonym. Instead of "technology" he always
writes "technics," which is an acceptable synonym for
"techniques," but not of "technology." He refers to
Charlemagne in one place as Karl der Grosse, and in a passing reference to the
Belgium city of Dunkirk, he calls it Dunkirchen. Throughout, Yockey's choice of
words reveals a fondness for the sometimes inappropriate display of obscure
vocabulary, and shows him to be an extreme Germanophile.
(3) Ibid., 29-37. In
opposing the "linear" view of history, Spengler wished to give
appropriate significance to the breakdown of the Classical civilization through
barbarian invasions during the 5th Century A.D. However, the debt of Western
Civilization to the Classical world has been vast and deep. How can a sharp line
be drawn between 5th century Rome and Medieval Europe? Since "Imperium"
was written, Spengler's criticism of the "linear view" of history has
been more convincingly made by Arnold Toynbee and others. Toynbee, for instance,
does not insist on the enmity of different Cultures. His theory that a
"universal church" can survive from the end of one civilization to the
beginning of another accounts for Spengler's objection, without ignoring the
profound cultural influence of the Roman Catholic Church, a legacy of ancient
Rome and of the ancient Jews, on Medieval Europe.
(4) Ibid., 12. (5) Ibid.,
13. (6) Ibid., 13.
(7) Ibid., 66-97, 224-230.
Yockey's critique of Marxism is directed at a narrow, mechanical post-Engels
Marxism which was popularized during his lifetime by pro-Moscow intellectuals
and propagandists. Yockey is unaware that Marx and Engels conceded that an idea
can achieve a "material force" when it is believed in and acted upon
by large numbers of people. However, many Marxists of Yockey's time, and since,
have been equally unaware of this concept.
Yockey's treatment of
Darwinism and Freudianism is equally superficial, and with less excuse, since
all the significant concepts of Darwin and Freud had been widely published and
debated in the literature available in his time.
(8) Ibid., 13. (9) Ibid., 9.
(10) Ibid., 38-39.
(11) Ibid., 369. Like nearly
every male English language author before 1975 or so, Yockey uses
"man" where many people today would say "humanity" or
"human beings" or "a man or woman."
(12) Ibid., 43. (13) Ibid.,
253-254. (14) Ibid., 612-614. (15) Ibid., 274-285.
(16) Ibid., 286-291. Despite
all he has just told us, Yockey has no difficulty detecting
"blondness" as the physical sign of strong will-to-power in European
populations.
(17) Ibid., 294-295. (18)
Ibid., 321. (19) Ibid., 323. (20) Ibid., 330. (21) Ibid., 334-337. (22) Ibid.,
362-363. (23) Ibid., 364-366. (24) Ibid., 355-362. (25) Ibid., 127. (26) Ibid.,
131. (27) Ibid., 147. (28) Ibid., 149. (29) Ibid., 150. (30) Ibid., 123. (31)
Ibid., 376-381. (32) Ibid., 402-439, 491-511. (33) Ibid., 517-523. (34) Ibid.,
311-313. (35) Ibid., 381-391. (36) Ibid., 533. (37) Ibid., 450-471. (38) Ibid.,
549-558. (39) Lipstadt, Deborah, "Denying the Holocaust: The Growing
Assault on Truth and Memory," (New York, 1993), p. 147.
Reproduced From: Nizkor
Web Site
Looking
Backward
Francis
Parker Yockey, an American fascist who died in jail in 1960,
is being
resuscitated as ‘a prophet for our movement’
By Martin A.
Lee
Late one night in June 1998,
a disabled black man was chained to the back of a pickup truck in Jasper, Texas,
and dragged by his ankles on a rough rural road for several miles until his head
ripped off his body. White supremacist John William King, 25, and two of his
friends were subsequently tried and convicted for the gruesome murder of James
Byrd Jr.
The first of the accused to
go to court, King showed little remorse when the death sentence was handed down.
He issued a terse statement through his lawyer that ended with a quote from
deceased American fascist Francis Parker Yockey: "The promise of success is
with the man who is determined to die proudly when it is no longer possible to
live proudly."
That Yockey’s name should
have surfaced in connection with the gruesome hate crime in Jasper attests to
his enduring reputation within neofascist and white supremacist circles.
Yockey’s turgid, 600-page book Imperium -- which King quoted in court
-- has widely influenced right-wing extremist leaders in the United States and
Europe.
Born and raised in Chicago,
Yockey was one of the most elusive and enigmatic characters associated with the
American far right in the 20th century. After World War II, he traveled
extensively abroad, weaving a web of neo-Nazi contacts. When the FBI finally
caught up with this wandering anti-Semite in 1960, Yockey was carrying seven
birth certificates and three passports, all bearing his photo but each with a
different name. Shortly thereafter, Yockey committed suicide in a San Francisco
jail.
Since his death, Yockey has
emerged as the patron saint of the Holocaust-denial circuit and a cult figure
among white supremacists worldwide. "He is a prophet for our
movement," says longtime Ku Klux Klan leader Roy Frankhouser, who keeps a
photo of Yockey prominently displayed on his bedroom wall in Reading, Penn. But
Frankhouser admits, "It’s a challenge to read Yockey’s writings. His
ideas are really complex. I can’t say I comprehend him completely."
Boogie-Woogie,
Jews and the Soviets
Written as a kind of
extended philosophical pep talk for brainier right-wing radicals, Imperium
pitched an upbeat message to beleaguered fascists, urging them to engage in a
"world-historical struggle" at a time when things looked rather bleak
for their cause. Yockey insisted that the fall of the Third Reich was merely a
temporary setback that paved the way for a future triumph.
While Yockey never mentioned
Hitler or the Nazis by name in Imperium, he defended their legacy by
claiming that the Final Solution was a myth. He was one of the first American
writers -- if not the first -- to deny the Holocaust in print:
"‘Gas-chambers’ that did not exist were photographed, and a
‘gasmobile’ was invented to titillate the mechanically-minded." Yet in
private conversations, according to FBI reports, Yockey praised how the Germans
exterminated the Jews during World War II.
Yockey was a severe critic
of democratic elections, which he described as "a mere cover for unhampered
looting by the financier." Yockey also harbored a fierce antipathy toward
American popular culture. As he saw it, postwar Western Europe had become a
colony of the United States, which was debased by alien minorities and their
decadent manifestations -- Hollywood, jazz, boogie-woogie dancing and the like.
Yockey’s anti-American
views were so extreme that he denounced U.S. cultural domination as a greater
threat to Europe than the more heavy-handed military repression imposed by the
Soviet Union. He saw the Soviet-orchestrated anti-Semitic show trials in Prague,
Czechoslovakia, in 1952 as proof that Russia had become an enemy of world Jewry
and was therefore a potential partner in the anti-American resistance struggle.
Yockey’s sympathy for
Stalinist Russia put him at odds with most white supremacists in the United
States who were fixated on the notion that Soviet Communism was part of a Jewish
plot to take over the world. George Lincoln Rockwell, founder of the American
Nazi Party in 1959, was vehemently opposed to Yockey’s pro-Soviet line.
Rockwell chided Yockey’s supporters for falling "into one of the most
deadly traps ever set by the scheming, villainous Hebrew: the monstrous fraud of
Soviet ‘anti-Semitism.’"
Impatient with U.S.
right-wing extremists who obsessed over little else than Russia and the Red
Menace, Yockey searched for allies in other countries. He crisscrossed Europe
and the Middle East in an effort to enlist others in his war against America and
Jewry. He even spent a few weeks in Cuba, shortly after Fidel Castro seized
power, trying to drum up support for his cause.
Cyanide for
the ‘Creative Genius’
Whatever strange game Yockey
was playing came to an abrupt halt a few months later when the FBI arrested him
in Oakland, California, on charges of passport fraud. "This is not a small
fish. This is a man that we are very, very interested in," a U.S.
government source told the San Francisco Examiner. On June 17, 1960,
after 11 days in prison, Yockey took his own life by swallowing a cyanide
capsule.
Yockey’s story might have
ended there, if Willis Carto, the founder and godfather of the anti-Semitic
Liberty Lobby, had not appeared on the scene. Carto was the last person to visit
Yockey in jail before he committed suicide. In his monthly newsletter Right,
Carto eulogized Yockey, describing him as "a great creative genius"
and "a martyr" who had been "hounded and persecuted like a wild
beast."
More than anyone else, Carto
was instrumental in promoting Yockey’s writings and his posthumous reputation
among fascists as a so-called American visionary. Carto’s Noontide Press
published a paperback version of Imperium. "Now, for the first time,
those soldiers who enlist in the service of the West have a profound theory to
inspire and guide them," Carto stated in a lengthy introduction to the
Noontide Press edition, which has sold more than 20,000 copies. Alluding to the
Third Reich, Carto predicted that Yockey’s tome would "live a thousand
years."
Samples of Yockey’s
inflammatory prose -- including an essay addressed to America’s youth -- were
later featured in The Spotlight, the weekly tabloid of the Liberty Lobby.
And the Institute for Historical Review, yet another tentacle of the Carto
complex, was founded to elaborate upon Yockey’s claim that the Nazi Holocaust
never happened.
After supporting Alabama
Gov. George Wallace’s third-party presidential bid in 1968, Carto took control
of Youth for Wallace and renamed it the National Youth Alliance. The ousted
directors of the Wallace youth group grew concerned when they discovered that
the movers and shakers behind Carto’s political apparatus were part of a
subterranean neo-Nazi cult known as the Francis Parker Yockey Society.
"They belong to secret cells," columnist Drew Pearson reported in
1969, "where they are known only by code names. ... They sing the old Nazi
songs, hoard Nazi war relics and display the swastika at their meetings. ...
They seek the overthrow of democracy in the United States."
Imperium
was
introduced as the founding theoretical text of the short-lived National Youth
Alliance, which disbanded amidst internecine strife. (It would be reconstituted
as the National Alliance by William Pierce, a former Rockwell ally and today a
key neo-Nazi figure.) For several years, one-time Klansman David Duke sold Imperium
through his mail-order book catalog. In 1981, Liberty Bell Publications, run by
George Dietz in Reedy, W. Va., brought out another book by Yockey called The
Enemy of Europe. This obscure tract was dedicated to "the founder of
the Francis Parker Yockey Society, Louis T. Byers, an Aryan of Aryans… ."
Excerpts of The Enemy of Europe had previously appeared in TRUD! From
the White Underground ("Trud" is Russian for "truth"), a
small-circulation journal edited by American rightist Douglas Kaye, who also
published a collection of Yockey’s essays.
Yockey and
the Modern Right
Yockey’s books and
articles continue to be distributed by neo-Nazi and white supremacist groups in
the U.S. and abroad. German and Spanish translations of Imperium are now
available in European bookstores. In addition, Yockey is admired by leading
British neo-Nazis, including former British National Party chief John Tyndall,
who described Imperium as a work "of outstanding philosophical
importance." And a group of French Yockey fans were involved in launching a
new European Liberation Front, which has close ties to "red-brown"
extremists in post-Soviet Russia.
Yockey’s influence also
persists today among the growing number of practitioners of Odinism (see
"Pagans and Prisons" in this issue) -- in particular, the Ásatrú
Alliance, headquartered in Arizona -- who seek to revive the pagan rituals of
pre-Christian Nordic culture. These circles intersect with the occult
underground, the Church of Satan, and racist elements of the "black
metal" music scene. For several years, Kerry Bolton, a New Zealand-based
publisher of Yockey’s writings, has been advocating a bizarre fusion of
occultism and fascist politics.
Kevin Coogan, author of a
recently published authoritative biography of Yockey (Dreamer of the Day,
Autonomedia, 1999), notes that elements of what he calls "the current
Yockey revival" also can be seen reflected in personalities like Michael
Moynihan, a musician and writer who inhabits the netherworld of black
metal/occult/fascism and is a leading member of the Ásatrú Alliance.
Moynihan’s Portland, Ore.-based Storm Records even sells a CD which includes a
song that, according to Coogan, is "directly inspired" by Yockey.
Coogan also points out the interest in Yockey within the Abraxas Foundation,
"a Church of Satan-influenced group."
While Yockey remains a cult
hero only among right-wing extremists, his story has broader significance. It
underscores the fact that resurgent fascist movements can assume widely
diverging forms, some of which may be difficult to recognize. This is important
to remember at a time when progressive and far-right critiques of economic
globalization and the World Trade Organization appear, at least on the surface,
to overlap in certain respects. If fascism should return as a serious political
force, it is much more likely to appear in an unexpected guise than in a hooded
sheet or a brown shirt with a swastika.
Martin A. Lee is the
author of The
Beast Reawakens (Routledge, 1999), a book about resurgent fascism and
right-wing extremism in the U.S. and Europe.
Intelligence Report
Issue No. 98
Spring 2000
Reproduced
From:
Go
to Francis Parker Yockey Page I
Go
to Francis Parker Yockey Page II
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
|