by Brett Stevens on December 15, 2011

If neo-Nazism would die, several necessary and positive things could happen.

Honest conservatives, whose ideology inherently includes nationalism, could gain more power. People could stop wasting their time on a self-isolating movement that undermines its own members. Minorities could avoid the risk of hate crime. And no one would have to hear the horrible two-note grating music anymore.

The prefix neo means “new” or more practically, “not the original.” It implies a re-interpretation and, by the very fact that it requires differentiation, a misinterpretation of the original. Any clear ideology will be immortal, not temporal.

Neo-Nazism is a modern attempt to resurrect Nazism, which is “National Socialism,” or a nationalist version of modern liberal democrat European-style socialism, e.g. capitalist-infused socialism. It inherits elements of the nascent green movement, the Volkisch folk-conservative movement, and influences from Italian fascism.

Nationalism is a well-defined concept that means one nation is comprised of the unity of a single racial-ethnic group, culture, language, customs, heritage, values and beliefs. All these forces are in synchronicity around a central concept, compared to the modern idea of disunity, which results in constant internal power struggles.

Nationalism is the belief that political groups should be constructed around the idea of “nation,” or population group unified by culture, heritage and language. As such, Nationalist is “rule by culture” where cultural values come before profit motive or popularity, which enables forward-thinking leadership instead. With profit motive, every object and idea and person is for sale, and society leads itself in circles. With leadership, society determines its goals and moves toward them. The term “nationalism” comes from the term “nation,” which has a

different meaning in current politics. Currently, the nations of the world are political constructions made of borders, legal systems and economies, called “nation-states.” These are not compatible with the view of nation that was common in history up until the last century: The term “nationalism” is generally used to describe two phenomena: (1) the attitude that the members of a nation have when they care about their national identity and (2) the actions that the members of a nation take when seeking to achieve (or sustain) self-determination. (1) raises questions about the concept of nation (or national identity), which is often defined in terms of common origin, ethnicity, or cultural ties, and while an individual’s membership in a nation is often regarded as involuntary, it is sometimes regarded as voluntary. – Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy, “Nationalism” The nation-state, in our current model, uses abstract concepts to unify its populations who have little in common on a cultural or ethnic level, and so become competing cultures. These abstract concepts usually take the form of an absolute which will never be demonstrated as being singularly right or wrong, like “freedom” or “free trade,” but in the absence of cultural unity what brings people together is economics. Economics thus replaces culture, and soon every object and idea and person is for sale. – The Nationalism FAQ

The Nazis were National Socialists, which meant existing Social Democratic ideals adjusted to a Nationalist context. The problem was that they then took this too far. Instead of creating a healthy cultural transition, they created a dogma that was self-perpetuating, like Communism. It drove people past an appreciation of reality to an insane quest. The war was insane because it could not be won as it was created, and that should have been obvious to everyone. It was more of a temper tantrum than anything else.

To any thinking person, The Holocaust discredits Nazism a great deal. Relocation to North Africa was possible (Israel at the time being a possession of the UK), obviating genocide or even imprisonment; even more, the project of using Jews as forced labor in concentration camps was obviously stupid because using people who hate you to make your own munitions is a stupid idea, as is shown by the high failure rate of German munitions during the war.

Israel today is experiencing an analogue to the situation Hitler was in: a unique ethnic-cultural group attempting to defend itself against assimilation or outbreeding. What do you do with the Palestinians? Relocate. It’s the only answer. The world will hate it, but if you do it quickly, it will be forgotten. Do not fixate on the Other or it eats you up. Relocate them instead.

Modern-day “neo-Nazi” and “white nationalist” movements fixate on the Other. They are not national socialism; they are “Racial Marxist” movements that encourage a binary view of the world (white is right, everything else is must be beaten and killed). They are a way for lower-caste whites to consider themselves superior to higher-caste whites by virtue of having a political dogma, which is the opposite principle of what we need, which is a reversal of our fake caste system to put morally upright, effective, practical, honest, intelligent, healthy and wise people above all others. Neo-Nazism, like anti-racism and the politically correct left, takes a mundane person with no purpose and transforms him into a saviour because he alone upholds the increasingly shrill and insane dogma.

Neo-Nazis remove quality-control limits on white people, which is a terrible idea, as we’ve now got too many idiots, liars, cheats, rapists, scumbags, perverts, passive-aggressives, grifters and fools that we need to weed out. In addition, these movements are defensive and passive. In their view, the Jew and African (who are morally bad) somehow control the world, and so all that we can hope for is jobs flipping burgers while we prepare for the ultimate race war (which we will not win). There is no room for positive growth in these dogmas, only a struggle toward a final hopeless war.

It’s brain-breakingly stupid which is why almost all of the people in these movements come from broken homes and broken lives, many if not all are alcohol and drug abusers, and they listen to angry pointless music which requires you to scream out Sieg Heil at “significant” moments. Neo-Nazism brings death to whatever it touches because it’s a self-hating, self-destructive, hopeless movement.

Liberalism is the same way, just more insidious and less extreme. (Which cancer would you prefer: one that shows up while it’s still stage 1, and so you can remove it, or one that is silent until it’s stage 5 and there’s nothing to do but dig your self a grave?)

No realist could ever support liberalism, leftism, anarchism, socialism, communism, progressivism or even social goodwill — these are the same thing, which is a placing of the herd-as-individuals above both (a) the individual and (b) a common, transcendent, continuing goal like “God” or “be a culture worth of the ancients” or even “adaptation.” Sensible people prefer a collective, cooperative goal as expressed in culture. Traditional conservatism delivers that vision. Liberalism and neo-Nazism are part of the other side, which is to replace a healthy vision with a violently doctrinaire and binary dogma.

Racism and race-hatred are pointless and distracting. It is not activism. It is indulging frustration. Again, nothing but hatred arises from it. Interestingly, this applies equally to Antifa and other “anti-racist” groups, who are basically bigots who want an object to beat on that is not protected by social rules. Then again, they’re leftists — see comments above.

Nationalism (self-rule by ethnic-cultural group) is a traditional value of all conservatives. It is also a superior system for human civilization. Each group has its own rules and should keep them. Mass immigration creates overpopulation.

Equality, which is a scheme by the less-equal to take from the more-equal, inevitably and always results in a reversal of natural selection and a less-competent society. You can see the results today. 1940s America was relatively crime-free, intelligent, orderly and genteel. Now we live in a crass dystopia. What intervened? A gradual process of liberalization.

Our solution to these problems is not political dogma but undertaking a cultural revolt and revolt in values. It’s already happening. Nationalism is rising world wide, as is conservatism (although I prefer the term rightist, as in morally right and right to power). The liberal nightmare of 1789-2009 is showing its true colors, which are dystopia and internal conflict, and now the pendulum is swinging the other way.

An intelligent option is to avoid any taint of neo-Nazism or equally confused “white nationalism” in favor of a traditional society which brings religion in line with science, science in line with philosophy, enslaves government to culture, removes liars and scumbags, gently repatriates the non-indigenous, and creates the kind of society we see mentioned in the Deep Ecology mission statement:

We believe that true ecological sustainability may require a rethinking of our values as a society. Present assumptions about economics, development, and the place of human beings in the natural order must be reevaluated. If we are to achieve ecological sustainability, Nature can no longer be viewed only as a commodity; it must be seen as a partner and model in all human enterprise. We begin with the premise that life on Earth has entered its most precarious phase in history. We speak of threats not only to human life, but to the lives of all species of plants and animals, as well as the health and continued viability of the biosphere. It is the awareness of the present condition that primarily motivates our activities. We believe that current problems are largely rooted in the following circumstances: The loss of traditional knowledge, values, and ethics of behavior that celebrate the intrinsic value and sacredness of the natural world and that give the preservation of Nature prime importance. Correspondingly, the assumption of human superiority to other life forms, as if we were granted royalty status over Nature; the idea that Nature is mainly here to serve human will and purpose. The prevailing economic and development paradigms of the modern world, which place primary importance on the values of the market, not on Nature. The conversion of nature to commodity form, the emphasis upon economic growth as a panacea, the industrialization of all activity, from forestry to farming to fishing, even to education and culture; the drive to economic globalization, cultural homogenization, commodity accumulation, urbanization, and human alienation. All of these are fundamentally incompatible with ecological or biological sustainability on a finite Earth. Technology worship and an unlimited faith in the virtues of science; the modern paradigm that technological development is inevitable, invariably good, and to be equated with progress and human destiny. From this, we are left dangerously uncritical, blind to profound problems that technology and science have wrought, and in a state of passivity that confounds democracy. Overpopulation, in both the overdeveloped and the underdeveloped worlds, placing unsustainable burdens upon biodiversity and the human condition. As our name suggests, we are influenced by the Deep Ecology Platform, which helps guide and inform our work. We believe that values other than market values must be recognized and given importance, and that Nature provides the ultimate measure by which to judge human endeavors. – Deep Ecology Mission Statement

Conservatism is the idea that a larger order than the individual exists. In its simplest form, it is cause-effect logic; our intentions do not translate into the results we desire unless we study the world and understand its natural laws fully, so we learn about it and use that to discipline our actions.

In a broader sense, conservatism values the whole society. It is not based on deconstruction or individuality (which ends up being conformity, since everyone focuses so hard on themselves they lose out on any greater sense of meaning), but cooperation and unity. It has a clear goal, clear rules, clear values and a clear process. No one is abandoned to the raw competition of capitalism or the whims of the Crowd.

By this very nature, conservatism includes some controversial things. It believes religion and science must be expressing the same basic truths and thus must be compatible; it doesn’t like government, and instead wants most social activity to take place through culture, or the shared unity of values, customs, language, heritage and beliefs. It is inherently nationalistic, meaning it supports self-rule and geographic isolation for every ethnic group. It is also both pro-capitalist and anti-capitalist, in that it supports capitalism, but only as directed by cultural values.

Conservatives have a hard enough time explaining their ideals without violent misinterpretations like white nationalism, neo-Nazism and even Nazism itself coming into the picture. What we need right now is united strength. If everyone who was not leftist got over their small doctrinal differences, and joined together in the Republican party, the Republican party would respond to its new audience and change itself to accomodate. Results would be had, instead of many basement-dwelling “activists” screaming over the internet.

Change in societies starts with a small group of people in each situation. This small group does something important, which is hashes out its differences in beliefs, creates a doctrine, and then relentlessly pushes that doctrine without doubt as to its content. That enables this small group to join with others and create a snowball effect. Soon the informal leaders of that society all know of the platform, and borrow some of its ideas, which give it an entryway into mainstream politics.

If you believe in any of the ideas discussed in this article, consider this: you are at heart a conservative. Your most effective action is to join the biggest mainstream group of conservatives, make it understand your opinion, and bring together others who may partially agree but are waiting for the right overture. This will produce results.

When we denigrate neo-Nazism (and Antifa, white nationalism, Nazism, Macintosh computers and other sick cults) on this blog, it is to remove the dead weight of the past and to let people see where we have unity. There, we have power, and can make the change we seek in the world, which is more important than re-fighting the sad wars of the past anyway.

Tags: crowdism, extremism, race

Please enable JavaScript to view the comments powered by Disqus.