In Reply to Michael Malice’s “The New Right”

Early last year I was interviewed for Michael Malice‘s book “The New Right“. I recorded the interview, and have attached the audio of that interview to this blog post. The post, you’ll find, is lengthy, as the subject matter Malice tried to address is complex, and I felt it worth taking the time to point out some (honest) errors I felt he made in the book by providing the necessary detail, as well as giving interested parties some background information on how I came to be the subject of the second to last chapter. For those of you interested in a briefer version of my review, I begin with a TLDR, which copies and pastes some choice bits from this lengthy review.

TLDR

If you’re here to check if Michael Malice accurately represented my views, I’ll save you a lot of reading and listening. He did. He was a standup guy throughout the entire process, and if my fellow Gentiles had half his integrity, we’d already have won this fight.

In Reply to Michael Malice's "The New Right"
In Reply to Michael Malice’s “The New Right”

The book arrived in the mail late in the week, and I was otherwise occupied throughout the weekend. Monday, after broadcasting that evening’s episode of the Radical Agenda, I figured I’d try and get through a few chapters. I had been told by others that my interview was the subject of the second to last chapter, leaving me with the coveted title of being the final “New Right” figure profiled before the author’s artful and thought provoking conclusion. So my ego compelled me to begin there.

As an anti-Semite, well versed in the conniving tactics of agenda driven Jewish writers, I was prepared for the worst. In this instance however, Malice did not live up to his name. My views were presented accurately, to the letter. Just as importantly, since not every word of the interview was necessarily worthy of publication or response, he did some picking and choosing as to what portions to publish, rather than a leaving the reader with a direct transcript of the conversation. His editorial choices in this regard, I felt were just and sound.

It was an excellent read. I finished it in two days. I hadn’t been so glued to a book since I got out of solitary confinement. The distractions provided to me in the free world had grown overwhelming since my release from Virginia custody, and I felt a renewed thirst for literature once I had completed the text.

Malice defines The New Right in the beginning as “A loosely connected group of individuals united by their opposition to progressivism, which they perceive to be a thinly veiled fundamentalist religion dedicated to egalitarian principles and intent on totalitarian world domination via globalist hegemony.” This is a fine definition for someone averse to mentioning Jews. The Alt Right is at its root an anti-Semitic movement, and the Alt Lite are our more timid counterparts, who enjoy banking services and access to Facebook too much to tell the truth, but occasionally have trouble containing their resentment. We are the anti-Left, and the Left is a Jewish phenomenon.

Malice’s exploration of it then, being a Jew himself, provides a thought provoking, if at times misguided, perspective. You can tell he is making an honest effort to understand the subject matter and communicate his understanding of it to the reader, though the tint of the ethnic lense through which he necessarily views the world, becomes obvious at times to a Nazi. His literary talents are remarkable, and his subtle method of guiding the reader from intellectual stimulation to edgy humor, sometimes leaves the reader on the second word of the next sentence, before he realizes the hilarity of the joke he just read, even as he still stands in awe of the brilliant analysis which preceded it. That’s what really makes this book a page turner, and it would be even if everything he said was complete fiction, which it isn’t. Malice is smart, and he’s taking you on a guided tour of his interactions with some truly amazing people and ideas.

You’ll hear in the audio of our interview that I agreed not to release this recording, which I had forgotten about when I announced that I would be releasing it. It occurred to me that, given the stereotypes involved in our narrative, it would be a notable hypocrisy for me to be the one breaking an agreement after my Jewish interviewer had been so honorable throughout the process. I reached out to Michael via email, and he released me from that agreement, so I am thus presenting it to the listener with honor.

Full Length

Nice To Meet You

On the significant chance that you’re here for the first time, allow me to welcome you. My name is Christopher Cantwell. By any meaningful definition of the phrase as it is used today, I’m an anti- Semite. I believe that Jews, on account of factors endemic to their very ethnic psyche, are detrimental to the health and wellbeing of European societies, and in this I include the United States, though this description may in the near future fail to describe the region, lest we do something to stop the decline.

What follows in the text below is a quite lengthy and long overdue compilation of many ideas, from minds far greater than my own. If I deserve an ounce of credit, it is only for finding the mechanism to deliver you these ideas.

If you’re here to check if Michael Malice accurately represented my views, I’ll save you a lot of reading and listening. He did. He was a standup guy throughout the entire process, and if my fellow Gentiles had half his integrity, we’d already have won this fight.

Sadly, as a people, Europeans have not, despite centuries of effort to alleviate themselves of the Jewish boot on their collective necks, managed to successfully emulate the sort of ingroup cooperation which has led the Jews to outcompete us. Amongst out own, we achieved excellence through the discipline of failure. Contributors faired well enough to leave replacement level offspring, predators were executed or imprisoned, and elites made more elites. Or so was the theory…

Eventually, those in power, came to see themselves as transcendent of the market order. From here, no aspect of the human condition could be off limits. This was a revolution against the very nature of mankind, and against reality itself.  With every failure, they simply demanded more power, and for decades, they received it. Then, in 2016, America elected a “literal Nazi,” to hear some tell it.

I’m a guy who doesn’t get offended when people call me a Nazi. Let Hitler primary Trump, and I vote for Hitler. Let Hitler survive the election, and I join the Russia Hoax, in the hopes I might install my chosen ruler and subvert the democratic order, but don’t be so quick to flatter you’re Leftist friends by calling them Nazis.

Michael Malice is not a Nazi. That should be obvious from his very Jewish last name (I kid, kinda). He’s a Jew, and I say that with all due respect. Whatever the case, I’m sure his book will remain for sale on Amazon for far longer than anything I might publish in the future. So I thought I might use this as a long overdue opportunity to tell you about some things you desperately need to understand. The survival of your race, and everything it has accomplished, is at stake.

In the wake of the Unite the Right Rally in Charlottesville, Virginia in August of 2017, I was framed for a crime by malicious actors who thought my politics justified any act of violence, coercion, or deception on their part. The prosecutor, a Republican named Robert Tracii, knew my accusers had lied repeatedly in this pursuit. He saw the videos. He saw the glaring contradictions between what they had portrayed to investigators, and their social media activity. He saw everything he needed to see to know that prosecuting me made him complicit in perjury, malicious prosecution, and terrorism.

But, terrified of being seen as a Republican who was sympathetic to Nazis, he wasn’t going to let a minor inconvenience like the truth, stand in the way of his career ambitions.

After my release from the Albemarle Charlottesville Regional Jail in December of 2017, I took up residence in the home of a man who was previously all but a stranger to me. I had spent the prior 107 days held without bond or probable cause, and had gained a modicum of freedom after my accusers were exposed as liars at a preliminary hearing in the District Court.

Now out on $25,000 secured bond, with an electronic monitor strapped to my ankle, I was forbidden from doing so much as taking the trash to the dumpster in the apartment that had become my upgraded and exorbitantly expensive jail cell. There, I awaited trial on two felony charges which carried a minimum sentence of 5 years each, and a maximum of 20 each.

Ultimately, they didn’t want a trial anymore than I did. The witnesses had given conflicting testimony at different times, all of which stood in direct contrast to the video evidence. No matter what they testified to, it would have contradicted prior sworn testimony (which is a crime on the watch of honest courts and prosecutors). So after having 11 months of my life stolen on the basis of lies, I was presented with a plea offer. Either I go to trial on 40 years worth of lies, with a prosecutor who had proven his willingness to suborn perjury, and risk exposure to a felony conviction and 10-40 years in prison, or I plead guilty to two misdemeanors and go home the same day.

Though I was not guilty of the crimes I was accused of, I did deploy pepper spray in self defense during an altercation with violent communist agitators, and Charlottesville juries had proven unsympathetic to our self defense claims. Though I had twice refused such offers prior, after having seen two other innocent men go to prison for defending themselves against violent negro terrorist DeAndre Harris, I decided this was my best course. Not only to stay out of prison, but to protect my gun rights, which I hold in similar regard to my ability to breathe, and for good reason.

While I was still on house arrest, awaiting the outcome of the case, I was contacted by an old acquaintance who had since made a name for himself as an author. Years prior, Michael Malice and I had shared some fond moments together with a very cool group of anarcho-capitalists in the New York City area. I had no idea that he was Jewish, which made for an interesting if somewhat uncomfortable beginning to our conversation, after I had been prominently featured as one of the Nation’s most notorious anti-Semites in an HBO segment on the Unite the Right rally.

He informed me that he was writing a book about the Alt Right, and wanted to ask me some questions for his work. I agreed, and we spoke for about an hour over Skype, the audio of which is attached to this blog post. I agreed not to release the recording before he published the book, and after publication, I agreed to read it and give my commentary on it along with the audio.

So here goes…

The book arrived in the mail late in the week, and I was otherwise occupied throughout the weekend. Monday, after broadcasting that evening’s episode of the Radical Agenda, I figured I’d try and get through a few chapters. I had been told by others that my interview was the subject of the second to last chapter, leaving me with the coveted title of being the final “New Right” figure profiled before the author’s artful and thought provoking conclusion. So my ego compelled me to begin there.

As an anti-Semite, well versed in the conniving tactics of agenda driven Jewish writers, I was prepared for the worst. In this instance however, Malice did not live up to his name. My views were presented accurately, to the letter. Just as importantly, since not every word of the interview was necessarily worthy of publication or response, he did some picking and choosing as to what portions to publish, rather than a leaving the reader with a direct transcript of the conversation. His editorial choices in this regard, I felt were just and sound.

He begins by briefly describing to the reader some of our prior interactions, which brought back some fond memories for me.

He mentioned Trollboard, which was a Facebook group to which we both were members. This was the source of considerable entertainment back when I had the privilege of membership. Michael says that I “ragequit”, but as I recall I had been kicked out of the group. I believe by a lesbian named Buzz. Buzz and I always had a tense and unfriendly relationship, and I suppose she had me pegged for a Right winger before I knew it myself. With a haircut to match her name, and the entirely too stereotypical attitude of such a dyke, you can imagine how this might have gone down.

Given the stereotypes involved in a narrative such as ours, I should note that I do not ascribe any sinister motive to Malice’s recollection. I only issue this correction because Trollboard is actually a fine place from which to familiarize the reader with some backstory about how I came to find myself the subject of Malice’s excellent writing. (In a subsequent email conversation, Michael pointed out that there was more than one “Trollboard” and that the one he referenced, Buzz was not an admin of. I suspect I “ragequit” that one, after being kicked out of the other)

I asked a woman I was friends with (and I suppose enough time has passed for me to confess, I had a crush on) to add me back, and she informed me that this would incur significant social penalties upon her. This pissed me off, not only because my love interest had revealed her measure of my standing, but because I thought the whole point of the group was pushing boundaries, which even then had become something of a speciality of mine. I noticed this to be the case with a lot of “edgy” libertarian groups over time. While one could push limits, especially with regards to sex and drugs, there were certainly limits one could find, but only in the rightward direction.

My subsequent “I’m gonna be a famous comedian, fuck you!” routine, was in response to that ejection, rather than some spontaneous desire to scream about my own value.

Though as Michael notes, my standup career met a similar fate to the contents of a Planned Parenthood dumpster, I did manage to become a professional entertainer in the habit of making his audience laugh. This is of course far more than can be said for 99.9% of the people who claim my ideas don’t deserve a platform, even when I have earned it in the marketplace despite substantial force and fraud levied against me by criminals in both the private and public sectors.

My clash with Buzz and subsequent ejection from Trollboard was typical of many interactions I had with the libertarians, which Michael describes as the drama of my infighting.

He recalls my expulsion from the Free State Project, which was ostensibly for voicing the heretical opinion that violence against State agents was justified under the anarcho-capitalist philosophy of non-aggression. In reality, the views I expressed, however flawed in their origins, were wholly sound interpretations of this worldview. For that matter, my views were near indistinguishable at the time from those expressed by Larken Rose, who was more than welcome to say nearly identical things at their annual Porcupine Freedom Festival the very next year.

I didn’t realize it at the time, but the enemies I made in libertarian circles were near universally Leftists. I had entered that scene under the mistaken impression that libertarianism somehow transcended the Left/Right paradigm, and was thus caught off guard by their tactics. As time went by, and I became more informed about the deep rooted realities of our political inclinations, it became clear to me that these conflicts were not honest disagreements over the issues on the surface, but rather a hostile intrusion of Left wing activists into the libertarian movement, aimed ultimately at the prevention of its success.

Larken Rose is an open borders Trump hating fanatic with no concept of economics. So his advocacy of violence is just fine with Left libertarians. It favors their revolutionary interests, after all.

Though by no means was I so much as a conservative at the time, much less a Nazi, I was wholly apathetic toward “diversity” and had little interest in catering to the emotional needs of homosexuals. I also saw the differences between men and women to be as obvious and natural as a thing could be, and hardly in need of repair, as the feminists insisted. This allowed the dyed in the wool Leftists to spot me for a Right winger before I knew it myself. They knew before I did, that if my side used violence, it would be against them, ultimately, and this they could not abide. My influence had to be crushed before it could become a threat to their aims.

That “Cantwell is violent” garbage haunted me for years, though it took a decade of this propaganda and a corrupt politician to see me convicted of so much as a bogus misdemeanor. An organized coalition of smear merchants conspired at every turn to get my speaking engagements canceled, and have me banned from groups and events.

I was determined to defeat them, and this motivation fed heavily into my pull toward the Alt Right. I was hardly unique in this regard, as the Alt Right is largely comprised of former libertarians who saw this Leftist infiltration destroying the movement they once thought held the keys to minimizing human conflict. We came to see the Left for what it is, a threat to be destroyed, rather than some alternative viewpoint to be discussed in good faith.

Setting aside for a moment your White male Democrat friend who isn’t particularly informed, but thinks free health care sounds cool, understand that the sweeping generalization to follow is of informed and active people who contribute intentionally to advancing Leftist aims.

Leftists, whether they call themselves communists, socialists, Democrats, or libertarians, are universally dishonest, and destructive to all that is just and righteous. They have chosen, often after considerable deliberation, to set themselves in root and branch opposition to the human condition and reality itself. Their words are not tools of communication, but rather weapons of deception. So when one endeavors to converse with such an individual, one must look beyond what they are saying to find their true aim, and attack that position, instead of the illusion they attempt to create with their trickster tongues.

This realization will make a racist out of anyone, in due course. Once you realize that all of their race obsessed talking points are aimed, not at liberating the marginalized, but rather dragging down the White men whom they hate and envy, it becomes impossible not to see the world through the lense of an ethnic martial conflict.

All their cries about tolerating and even celebrating gays are exclusively catered to Whites. You’ll never see them go to a black neighborhood or event and call Tyrone transphobic – both because they know that Tyrone is a violent negro who doesn’t give a fuck about tranny feelings, and would sooner kick their lilly asses than tolerate their whining – and because they have no interest in reducing black breeding. You’ll never hear them accuse a black man in a suit of cultural appropriation. You’ll never hear them complaining about Mexican immigration policy. You’ll never see a left wing protest against Islamic attitudes on gender equality, unless of course it occurs near the American embassy in a country the Jews want war with.

All that matters domestically is reducing the social status of heterosexual males of the dominant group, in our case Whites. For White women, the aim is encouraging them to engage in behaviors which will leave them childless come menopause (polyamory, birth control, abortion), or better still, raising a half nigger baby on her own (literally everything on MTV), and transferring the wealth of her parents to the bastard offspring in the process.

Diminishing the males is most important, though. Once they have been sufficiently reduced, the women will be defenseless.

It is absolutely genocidal, and must be treated as such.

This is why I found it humorous when Malice said (emphasis mine) “In a sense, Cantwell can be regarded as a validation of the left’s critique of the New Right. He was effectively the slippery slope made flesh. He went from making provocative jokes to freely using racial slurs in a humorous context to becoming a full fledged Alt Right white nationalist – heavy on the anti-Semitism.

It is true enough that I could be described as the incarnation of everything the Left fears, though I am hardly validating anything the Left has to say. I am what they fear because I am not intimated by their screeching, threats of violence, lawsuits, or false accusations. When they try to bully me, I bully back. I am agree and amplify, made flesh.

The “slippery slope” describes the rapidity with which the scales fall from one’s eyes, once they realize the indisputable truth about ethnic conflict. You make a provocative joke, and some communist loses his composure. You find this humorous, and decide to trigger the sissy further by throwing out a racial slur, and he immediately resorts to violence and deception, exposing himself for the crook and the thug he always was, beneath the thin facade of “tolerance” and “inclusion”.

Why?

Because the truth about race becoming widely known would put an END to the Left in a day, and Jews in particular. Their entire existence is rooted in the obvious and easily disproven lie of human equality, and if people get too comfortable discussing race, that lie goes right out the window, along with all of their social programs and welfare benefits and immigration, not to mention foreign, policy.

It is true then, as I found out the hard way, that racist jokes lead to actual racism and, as we’ll soon see, that actual racism leads to racist laws.

Jokes break down the social taboo. Just like how Jews used humor to break down all our sexual boundaries, before trying to con us into thinking men could get pregnant and women could be the fathers. Once the taboo is broken, it is no longer so much humorous as it is a regular feature of the culture. Politics being downstream from culture, legislation necessarily follows. Again using the example of the Jewish assault on our sexual norms, denigrating Christians and propping up gays eventually and predictably translated into anti-discrimination laws and transgender pronoun/bathroom nonsense.

This can, and should, be done in the exact opposite direction without undue delay, and I am amongst the most active participants in precisely that effort.

Here is the truth about race, and I warn you, this is no joke: Blacks are going to prison and getting shot by police, not because of White racism, but because of black behavior which they are naturally inclined toward by their genetics. Low IQ and high testosterone in the males makes for a deadly combination, even when all they have to kill one another with is rocks and sticks in their natural environment. Bring them to the White man’s land and give them guns and cocaine, subsidize their breeding even as they do everything in their power to thin their own numbers, and, well, go check the fucking crime statistics.

Jews have not been kicked out of over a hundred jurisdictions, in every corner of the Earth, by every race, religion, and creed which has ever suffered the misfortune of encountering them, just because of sheer irrational prejudices against their hats, noses, or manor of prayer. To the educated man, it becomes obvious the enmity stems rather from the catastrophic influences they visit upon the societies foolish enough to host them. Influences, I might add, which they brag about in the open on the pages of publications like Forward.com and Haaretz, under the banner of tikkun olam (repair of the world), in between calling you a Nazi for noticing.

Diversity is not a strength. Homosexuality is not even remotely close to equal that which perpetuates the species. Transgenderism is just them seeing how much they can fucking get away with, and most importantly, White people succeed despite legal hindrances, not because of a ridiculous concept like “white privilege”.

These are all outrageous, and easily exposed lies, pedaled by our only real resource competitor. Namely, the Jew.

The Jews are a diaspora people. Dispersed throughout the Earth, yet united, not by shared landmasses and systems of government, as we Gentiles conceive of a Nation, but by blood and ritual. From this reality stems the “trope” or “canard” about divided loyalties which, like other such truisms, the Jew regards simultaneously as blood libel and badge of honor, on the pages of his many publications. From this stems his screeching of “dog whistle” whenever someone uses the word “globalist” with the slightest of negative connotations. Look behind nearly any communist, be he not a Jew himself, you probably won’t have to go back to Marx to find the Jew who brought him to this horrifying state.

He is a clever parasite, the Jew. Not entirely dissimilar to the Lancet liver fluke, or dicrocoelium dendriticum.

He is highly intelligent, and exhibits unrivaled ingroup cooperation in defeating his Gentile competitors. They need not “conspire” in the traditional sense, mind you. No more than blacks “conspire” to drive up the crime rate. Jews simply do what comes naturally to them, and a cycle such as the following repeats itself throughout history.

The Jew enters the Gentile society, invariably with the “why do they persecute me so?” origin story from his prior hosts. They just started slaughtering his kind for “no reason at all,” again. Totally weird, right? He reminds you that your (or his) God, commands of you to welcome the refugee.

Once there, he puts his skills to work. He proves himself useful in mathematics, finance, science, medicine, technology, law, and above all, art and media. Any position of influence made available to him, he will take. The Gentile benefits from his presence, initially gaining a competitive advantage over his fellow Gentiles with the Jew’s help, and thus the Gentile pays the debt by elevating the station of the Jew to his equal.

Once there, the Jew riles the peasants under the banner of communism, to slaughter the Gentile elites, leaving him to serve as the Nation’s central nervous system, thus ruling over them. He plunders what he can for his kind, and as the Nation collapses in economic and genetic cataclysm, he moves on to the next host Nation.

Always with the same story, “why do they persecute me so?”

It is worth noting here, that this cycle comes at the expense of many Jewish lives with the enthusiastic approval of powerful Jews who do not give a fuck about the wellbeing of their coethnics individually. They care not about “a Jew” anymore than Robert Bowers, but “the Jews” collectively are of the utmost importance. They are the quintessential racists.

This is one of many reasons why shooting up synagogues is more than an “optics” problem for White Nationalists. The type of Jews you’ll find in a synagogue that you could walk into with a rifle, are the same Jews their elites are more than happy to see die in the pogroms that will inevitably follow in the wake of their trouble making. They know this and they don’t care, nor should they, if you understand their perspective.

Imagine if we Gentiles just euthanized the bottom 10% of income earners every generation or two. What impact would that have on the genetic fitness of the next generation? A thoughtful person here points out that this would be a tremendous loss, since income is not the only measure of value with regard to human life.

But we’re not talking about the designs of thoughtful people now, are we?

Imagine we just did this race blind in the United States today. You would be accused of genociding the blacks, and for good reason.

This cycle of pogrom revolution pogrom, it is theorized by some, is a eugenic practice which the Jewish people have, perhaps unconsciously, mastered. Some believe it explains the Ashkenazi IQ advantage, albeit at some tolerable expense to overall number. It also helps in maintaining group cohesion, by keeping individual Jews always wary of their Gentile hosts.

One of the most familiar themes of Jewish open borders advocates, is that we Americans owe the invasion of our country as penance, for when we turned the Jews away as they fled Hitler. Of course, we were hardly unique in this regard. Skepticism of Jews was well understood back then, and based in sound reasoning. Nobody wanted Hitler’s Jews, no more than Hitler wanted them himself. Indeed, the debate between “Holocaust deniers” and Jewish historians emerges only when Hitler’s efforts to deport the Jews proved challenging, for lack of a place to send them.

Gas chambers? Sure. Right behind the wooden door. SMH.

Foolishly, as the Jewish led Bolshevik revolution collapsed in the USSR, we had let down our guard. The same Jews who led Russia to communism and collapse, or perhaps, their descendants, were now flooding (in some cases back) into the United States, and we are suffering the consequences of this today. Sure we got some fine folks like Michael Malice, and I am happy to have him here, all else being equal. But the list of communists and myriad other subversives and traitors who also came is easily just as long as that of noteworthy good ones, and surely costed us enough to at least question the risk vs. reward ratio.

Irving Kristol’s Jewish parents migrated to the United States from Eastern Europe in 1890s. He gave us the abomination known as neoconservatism.

I hope Mike can understand, that I would not find it a difficult decision, with the information available to me today, to forgo the benefits of his considerable charm and literary talents, or perhaps just enjoy them from afar, if that admittedly substantial sacrifice, might spare my nation the scars of the neocons.

From the perspective of some, our “pathological altruism” is the original sin that visits this plague upon us. It is precisely because me and my countrymen refuse to make cold our hearts to ostensibly good folks like Michael Malice, that we refuse to do what is necessary to keep threats like Irving Kristol at bay. In our weakness, we accept the lethality of a type 2 error, over the discomfort of a type 1.

A country has the Jews it deserves” writes Corneliu Zelea Codreanu, in For My Legionaries, Just as mosquitoes can thrive and settle only in swamps, likewise the former can only thrive in the swamps of our sins.

You had to know that with the Internet, somebody was going to spot this pattern, eventually. So it is no surprise that they are trying to censor and terrorize folks like me.

Once you understand these things, you can’t help but get mad at the people who lied to you about them your entire life. When you find out the perpetrators of this deception are overwhelmingly of a tiny but incredibly powerful ethnic minority, who eternally play the victim card even as they run your banks and media institutions, and have repeatedly been kicked out of country after country for doing the exact same thing, the solution to the problem becomes obvious.

Get rid of the fucking Jews!

And do what with them? You ask… Not my fucking problem. They love the blacks so much, send them to fucking Africa, as long as I don’t have to pay for it.

It doesn’t mean you hate every Jew. It doesn’t mean that you want any harm to come to innocent Jews. It doesn’t mean you have to kill them. This conclusion is most certainly not based in envy.

Indeed, it pains me to make the observation, since Michael Malice is far from the only good hearted and decent Jew I’ve known in the course of my life. It just means that I know with a high level of certainty that removing Jews from the political equation, will save countless lives and improve the quality of life for everyone who remains.

I know this in the same way that I know I can dramatically reduce my crime rates by removing blacks from the equation. Knowing this doesn’t mean I hate the black woman I damn near had a child with before I knew any of this crap, it’s just a tragic example of the philosophical trolly problem.

With the Jews out of the way, there is no immigration debate.  There’s a complete moratorium in that parallel universe, and there, Ann Coulter works at the ACLU, helping the poor souls stupid enough to enter illegally last year get home in one piece. The Jews are the only ones who benefit from this open borders insanity, and for that matter the mockery they make of the word “free” by describing our trade policies as such.

They worry about “White Supremacists” today, but the true horror the Jews will face is if the blacks ever figure out how badly they have been used by these criminals. Which is why Zuckerberg finally got around to banning Farrakhan, just as he purged the final remnants of the right edge of our politics from his platforms.

This might validate the fear the Left has, as indeed they should be afraid, but it provides no validity to their critiques, which are absolutely devoid of anything resembling validity. They begin from the premise that “racism” is a backwards way of thinking, rooted in falsehood and evil, knowing full well that we are the ones who speak the truth. Before this scam has even completely taken root, they try to pull the same trick with gender, but fortunately, we had not become so estranged from our mothers, sisters, and wives, as to fall for this blaspheme.

I couldn’t “validate” that with ten world wars, but you better believe these kikes will lead us to all ten trying, if somebody doesn’t stop them.

Marx, Trotsky, Kristol, everyone knows where this list is going.

Even the good guy “Right Wing Jew” Ben Shapiro, whose tikkun olam knows only such boundaries as are required to keep the mercenaries of his ethnostate in fighting shape.

Remember when he consigned that outrageously fraudulent assault allegation by spic whore Michelle Fields, against Corey Lewandowski?

The Nazis do, and we won’t forget it come the true transfer of power.

But I digress, back to the book…

It was an excellent read. I finished it in two days. I hadn’t been so glued to a book since I got out of solitary confinement. The distractions provided to me in the free world had grown overwhelming since my release from Virginia custody, and I felt a renewed thirst for literature once I had completed the text.

Malice defines The New Right in the beginning as “A loosely connected group of individuals united by their opposition to progressivism, which they perceive to be a thinly veiled fundamentalist religion dedicated to egalitarian principles and intent on totalitarian world domination via globalist hegemony.” This is a fine definition for someone averse to mentioning Jews. The Alt Right is at its root an anti-Semitic movement, and the Alt Lite are our more timid counterparts, who enjoy banking services and access to Facebook too much to tell the truth, but occasionally have trouble containing their resentment. We are the anti-Left, and the Left is a Jewish phenomenon.

Malice’s exploration of it then, being a Jew himself, provides a thought provoking, if at times misguided, perspective. You can tell he is making an honest effort to understand the subject matter and communicate his understanding of it to the reader, though the tint of the ethnic lense through which he necessarily views the world, becomes obvious at times to a Nazi. His literary talents are remarkable, and his subtle method of guiding the reader from intellectual stimulation to edgy humor, sometimes leaves the reader on the second word of the next sentence, before he realizes the hilarity of the joke he just read, even as he still stands in awe of the brilliant analysis which preceded it. That’s what really makes this book a page turner, and it would be even if everything he said was complete fiction, which it isn’t. Malice is smart, and he’s taking you on a guided tour of his interactions with some truly amazing people and ideas.

The aforementioned ethnic lense immediately reveals itself, as Malice seems to begin from the near universally accepted Jewish lie that “racism” is a bad thing that can become “full blown“. White Nationalism “can safely be described as reprehensible by today’s standards” after all.  Some of us are “irredeemable, horrible people.” This book is not about the Israeli ethnostate, so we can pardon him for not addressing his opinions on the Jewish exercise of the practice, but stateside, he’s definitely made uneasy by we goyim becoming “full blown” racists.

And understandably so…

There is some significant overlap in interest however. Coming from the anarcho-capitalist perspective so familiar to this writer, Malice is comfortable with the concept of, and perhaps even eager to achieve, a post (pre?) democratic order. His libertarian beliefs are not only sincerely held, as anyone who knows him personally can attest, but also extraordinarily well informed, as evidenced by his masterful command of the ideas and literature. He recognizes that the Left is a lethal threat to human liberty, which must be kept at bay, if not vanquished, for mankind to realize his full potential.

How then, to defeat the howling marauders who wave high the banner of diversity? You rub elbows with Nazis of course, and, if you’re a Jew, you keep one eye on the exit at all times.

Malice is not the first Jew to grapple with this dilemma, and he won’t be the last. Murray Rothbard was sometimes called a self hating Jew, and I have a hard time imagining a world where he would have lacked the intellectual curiosity to read Mein Kampf for himself.  Right Wing Populism could be described as Hitlerian, and Egalitarianism as a Revolt Against Nature was amongst the most ruthless denunciations of the equality myth ever penned. Ludwig von Mises, also a Jew, is quoted as having said “It cannot be denied that Fascism and similar movements aiming at the establishment of dictatorships are full of the best intentions and that their intervention has, for the moment, saved European civilization. The merit that Fascism has thereby won for itself will live on eternally in history.

The quote ends with Mises doubting the long term viability of such an “emergency makeshift” which, from a Jewish perspective, makes perfect sense.

They don’t typically have the brightest of futures under such regimes.

Malice seems, however uneasy with it, willing to at least consider race realism as just that. Realism. In our talk, I saw no indication of surprise in his eyes as I casually brushed by topics which would have brought most conversations to a full stop. But then, I was the second to last chapter, after all, and he may have simply become numb to it by this point in his work. In the book, he shows a bit more hesitation.

In his chapter “The New Hwite” (a play on Jared Taylor’s over pronunciation of the H in White, typically stylized by non-Jews as Huwhite) he descibes the Alt Right conception of race as;

The best way to think of the Alt-Right conception of race is to compare human populations to dog breeds. There are certainly many Yorkshire terriers that aren’t yappy, and it was a Labrador retriever that actually bit the Dog Whisperer. But anyone who knows the slightest thing about dogs would regard these as aberrations—and that includes dog breeders themselves. In other words, it is precisely the people who have the most knowledge and experience with a given breed that will be the first to explain that there are certain behavioral tendencies that can be expected.

Humans aren’t dogs, of course. Well, dogs aren’t dogs per se either: A French bulldog in Berlin doesn’t become a German shepherd. A Yorkie is a Yorkie in Ireland, and a Welsh corgi can tend cattle in Scotland just as well. It’s easy to argue that an immigrant who is culturally Muslim or Jewish or Christian would gladly adopt liberal Western values while maintaining their faith at home and recognizing the rights of others to do the same. It happens all the time. Yet the Alt-Right claim is that not only does this not happen enough, but it can’t. For them, demographics is destiny, and it is our genetics that determine our culture.

This is perhaps an oversimplication, but that might be forgiven since this wasn’t fundamentally a book designed to promote our ideas. Sure, non-Whites do adopt White lifestyles and mannerisms, so it is obvious that they can do so, but the evidence is clear that they don’t do so in large enough numbers to offset the consequences of immigration.

Malice knows this on some level, as he is familiar with the work of Hans Hoppe, and Hoppe is a favorite on the Alt Right. Not just amongst the former libertarians, either. Physical removal is universally preferable behavior on the Alt Right. (Yeah, I know, physical removal as such cannot be universally preferable behavior, unless…. Shut up and take a joke)

He identifies himself as an anarchist throughout the book, but seems to grasp the necessity of controls on immigration, standing in contrast to the unmitigated free movement envisioned by many libertarians. He cites the Free State Project as such an example; “The idea was, if enough liberty absolutists moved to a small state and became politically active, they would theoretically be able to make it an enclave of freedom. As such, it’s fun to bring up the example of the Free State Project to open-borders types: Can a small population drastically change the larger culture or not?

His hesitation comes into focus repeatedly throughout the text though, particularly in his conversation with Jared Taylor.

According to the 2015 FBI Crime in the United States report, 37 percent of violent crime arrests were of black people. Yet as reported in A Primer on Social Problems, “people in the 15–24 age range account for about 40 percent of all arrests even though they comprise only about 14 percent of the population.” This number obviously includes nonviolent arrest, but by that metric blacks only constitute 26.6 percent of all arrests. So even stacking the deck against black Americans, it makes as much sense to blame blacks—who are around 13 percent of the population—for the actions of black criminals as it does to blame everyone for the actions of young criminals.

It might be absurd to argue that we can get rid of all people aged fifteen to twenty-four, but it’s almost as absurd to argue that “we” can get rid of African Americans. The idea that they can somehow be removed (to where?) does not seem remotely plausible. Further, black people were here before the Italians and the Irish. Surely they have more of a right to be here than them.

I can’t speak for everyone on the Alt Right, but a lot of us have lost interest in the concept of “rights”. How somebody being dragged here on a slave ship generations ago entitles their descendants to anything is something you’ll have to ask advocates of reparations. Moreover, how some other person’s ancestors being responsible for said dragging (disproportionately Jewish, I might add), obligates us to deal with the fallout, escapes reasoning. In any  case, we are far more interested in outcomes, and regardless of who one blames for violent crime, the realization that we can reduce our violent crime by 37% by eliminating blacks from the equation, certainly warrants further exploration to say the least.

The reality, I suspect is far starker even than this. Without black cultural influences, such as gangsta rap, would young White males be nearly as inclined to criminal behavior? If blacks weren’t sucking up the generosity of the welfare state, would White people be so disinclined to making an honest living, as they are today? Without blacks voting Democrat, would public policy be nearly so favorable to criminals, as it is today? I have my doubts.

We can get rid of blacks a lot easier than we can get rid of young people, as Malice seems to recognize by calling it absurd to blame youth for criminality in general. Likewise, nearly all violent crime is committed by men, and we certainly would not want to leave the ladies all alone with such a large country to manage and defend in our absence. The fact is, Whites can do without blacks, in a manner we cannot do without young people or men. White populations do not benefit from the presence of blacks, it’s that simple. Why do we keep on putting up with them, if we don’t have to?

The Jewish outlook says we are morally obligated to, and through media this outlook is transmitted to Whites. But the fact that we literally owned and sold them as property not all that long ago, would suggest that this way of thinking is not permanently endemic to our psyche. George Lincoln Rockwell envisioned sending them back to Africa. Me personally, I’m happy to cede some portion of the United States to them.

He continues;

What makes matters difficult is when any slight connection between race and crime is forbidden to be discussed at all. Yet even Taylor wouldn’t say that crime is caused by being black per se so much as it is caused by high testosterone and low IQ, which are supposedly correlated with being black. But then it would be the testosterone and IQ that are the problems, not the actual race itself.

Now, let’s take on the IQ issue, leaving aside the idea that having any population without an enormous amount of stupid people is somehow possible. As the comedian George Carlin put it, “Think of how stupid the average person is, and realize half of them are stupider than that.” Having a higher IQ or simply higher intelligence would also correlate very well with being effective at implementing bad ideas, such as committing atrocities. The undisputable fact is that the worst butchers in human history—Mao, Hitler, and Stalin—all came from populations that white nationalists regard as being highly intelligent. There’s an undercurrent in Alt-Right circles that if a white person had to randomly choose where to live, they would want to be in a majority-white country. Given that the worst atrocities are under white and yellow, this feels a bit like Russian [sic] roulette.

So what, in the end, does Taylor really want? Much of race-realist talk seems like a shell game to me. There is rarely contempt expressed for high-test, low-IQ whites. If white nationalists could wave a magic wand and cause all high-test, low-IQ people from America to vanish, would that make things better? Probably. But again: it’s about preserving the race. It seems like the high-test, low-IQ criterion is just a pretext for whom to expel. Taylor views Asians as high-IQ, with low or average test. Yet they would not be welcome either, and would “properly” be in their own countries.

We are ethnonationalists, not IQ nationalists, and the focus on IQ in some circles causes such confusions. Testosterone is necessary for certain things, including but not limited to, war. A certain percentage of the population being of below average intelligence is necessary for the carrying out of tasks which are not cognitively demanding, such as manual labor, or data entry. If Whites just did away with all our low IQ high testosterone people, we would find ourselves like the Jews, reliant upon other civilizations to survive. The IQ and testosterone distribution amongst Whites makes for an ideal division of labor, which is why we dominated so much of the world, before a misguided moral dilemma caused us to abandon our positions.

We have damned ourselves by trying to gain an advantage through the introduction of other races into our societies. Most obviously by bringing in lower IQ, higher testosterone blacks through slavery for cheap labor. Blacks displace the White working class, and the profound misery this creates amongst the working class leaves them seeking answers, which would normally come from White elites. Unfortunately, we have less obviously, though even more hazardously, damned ourselves by trying to harness the Jewish intellect, as the Jews have thereby displaced the White elites. Since the Jews cannot confess the racial component of their suffering, as it would see them deposed for the masses to know, they instead tell them their salvation lies in communism, and millions of people die.

I am made to recall Aldous Huxley’s Brave New World when people talk about this. In that book, for those of you not fortunate enough to have had the chance to read it, human beings are not born, but rather grown in a laboratory. Though the story is about a totalitarian future, sort of the kinder, gentler version of George Orwell’s 1984, even there equality is recognized as wholly impossible. The lab is more than capable of producing a society of truly equal people, but through experience they learned this misguided ideal was hostile to the healthy functioning of society.

Study.com describes the plot thusly;

The World State produces five distinct social classes named from the Greek alphabet. Alphas and Betas are society’s elite, while the Gammas, Deltas, and Epsilons make up the working class. Each caste has a distinct responsibility in the community, as society could not function without any of them. Epsilons are conditioned before birth to be the lowest class worker. Embryos are deprived of oxygen to ”keep the embryo below par.” To make sure the Epsilon will be satisfied with the monotonous labor, ”an Epsilon embryo must have an Epsilon environment as well as an Epsilon heredity.” Intelligence would get in the way of happiness for an Epsilon.

They learned the necessity of this inequality the hard way, as is explained at one point in the story.

“I was wondering,” said the Savage, “why you had them at all-seeing that you can get whatever you want out of those bottles. Why don’t you make everybody an Alpha Double Plus while you’re about it?”

Mustapha Mond laughed. “Because we have no wish to have our throats cut,” he answered. “We believe in happiness and stability. A society of Alphas couldn’t fail to be unstable and miserable. Imagine a factory staffed by Alphas-that is to say by separate and unrelated individuals of good heredity and conditioned so as to be capable (within limits) of making a free choice and assuming responsibilities. Imagine it!” he repeated.

The Savage tried to imagine it, not very successfully.

“It’s an absurdity. An Alpha-decanted, Alpha-conditioned man would go mad if he had to do Epsilon Semi-Moron work-go mad, or start smashing things up. Alphas can be completely socialized-but only on condition that you make them do Alpha work. Only an Epsilon can be expected to make Epsilon sacrifices, for the good reason that for him they aren’t sacrifices; they’re the line of least resistance. His conditioning has laid down rails along which he’s got to run. He can’t help himself; he’s foredoomed. Even after decanting, he’s still inside a bottle-an invisible bottle of infantile and embryonic fixations. Each one of us, of course,” the Controller meditatively continued, “goes through life inside a bottle. But if we happen to be Alphas, our bottles are, relatively speaking, enormous. We should suffer acutely if we were confined in a narrower space. You cannot pour upper-caste champagne-surrogate into lower-caste bottles. It’s obvious theoretically. But it has also been proved in actual practice. The result of the Cyprus experiment was convincing.”

“What was that?” asked the Savage.

Mustapha Mond smiled. “Well, you can call it an experiment in rebottling if you like. It began in A.F. 473. The Controllers had the island of Cyprus cleared of all its existing inhabitants and re-colonized with a specially prepared batch of twenty-two thousand Alphas. All agricultural and industrial equipment was handed over to them and they were left to manage their own affairs. The result exactly fulfilled all the theoretical predictions. The land wasn’t properly worked; there were strikes in all the factories; the laws were set at naught, orders disobeyed; all the people detailed for a spell of low-grade work were perpetually intriguing for high-grade jobs, and all the people with high-grade jobs were counter-intriguing at all costs to stay where they were. Within six years they were having a first-class civil war. When nineteen out of the twenty-two thousand had been killed, the survivors unanimously petitioned the World Controllers to resume the government of the island. Which they did. And that was the end of the only society of Alphas that the world has ever seen.” The Savage sighed, profoundly.

“The optimum population,” said Mustapha Mond, “is modelled on the iceberg-eight-ninths below the water line, one-ninth above.”

“And they’re happy below the water line?”

“Happier than above it. Happier than your friend here, for example.” He pointed.

“In spite of that awful work?”

“Awful? They don’t find it so. On the contrary, they like it. It’s light, it’s childishly simple. No strain on the mind or the muscles. Seven and a half hours of mild, unexhausting labour, and then the soma ration and games and unrestricted copulation and the feelies. What more can they ask for?”

Granted, Huxley’s book is a work of fiction, but increasingly we see his vision of a totalitarian future coming to fruition. People used to debate, if it would be “Brave New World” or “1984” that more closely resembled mankind’s future. The full horrifying truth is that Orwell’s vision has converged with Huxley’s. The boot stamping on a human face – forever, has been made tolerable by an abundance of Soma, and thus only a small fraction of the populace sees fit to do anything about it.

Jews are highly intelligent, and understandably averse to manual labor. This as much as anything to do with their origin story, is why they are a diaspora people. It also explains their disproportionate role in the slave trade. Israel exists only by the support of other countries, most notably the United States. Absent our military to fight their wars, and ample subsidies of varying absurdity, they would be overrun in a matter of hours, and they certainly would not have any designs for territorial expansion. They are what happens when you have a society full of high IQ low testosterone people. Absent outside help, such a society cannot exist.

In Brave New World, the engineers had the good sense to instill in their populations a gratitude in each caste for the contributions of other castes. The Bureaux of Propaganda and the College of Emotional Engineering, hammered these sentiments home through all night long repetitions.

“All men are physico-chemically equal,” said Henry sententiously. “Besides, even Epsilons perform indispensable services.”

“Even an Epsilon…” Lenina suddenly remembered an occasion when, as a little girl at school, she had woken up in the middle of the night and become aware, for the first time, of the whispering that had haunted all her sleeps. She saw again the beam of moonlight, the row of small white beds; heard once more the soft, soft voice that said (the words were there, unforgotten, unforgettable after so many night-long repetitions): “Every one works for every one else. We can’t do without any one. Even Epsilons are useful. We couldn’t do without Epsilons. Every one works for every one else. We can’t do without any one…” Lenina remembered her first shock of fear and surprise; her speculations through half a wakeful hour; and then, under the influence of those endless repetitions, the gradual soothing of her mind, the soothing, the smoothing, the stealthy creeping of sleep…

“I suppose Epsilons don’t really mind being Epsilons,” she said aloud.

“Of course they don’t. How can they? They don’t know what it’s like being anything else. We’d mind, of course. But then we’ve been differently conditioned. Besides, we start with a different heredity.”

“I’m glad I’m not an Epsilon,” said Lenina, with conviction.

“And if you were an Epsilon,” said Henry, “your conditioning would have made you no less thankful that you weren’t a Beta or an Alpha.” He put his forward propeller into gear and headed the machine towards London.

Interestingly, we find similar programming in the Talmud, albeit with far less gratitude for the goyim than the Alphas and Betas of Brave New World have for the Gammas and Epsilons…

Moed Kattan 17a: If a Jew is tempted to do evil he should go to a city where he is not known and do the evil there.

Sanhedrin 57a . A Jew need not pay a gentile the wages owed him for work.

Baba Mezia 24a . If a Jew finds an object lost by a gentile (“heathen”) it does not have to be returned.

Sanhedrin 57a . When a Jew murders a gentile, there will be no death penalty. What a Jew steals from a gentile he may keep.

Baba Kamma 37b. The gentiles are outside the protection of the law and God has “exposed their money to Israel.”

Baba Kamma 113a. Jews may use lies (“subterfuges”) to circumvent a Gentile.

Yebamoth 98a. All gentile children are animals.

Abodah Zarah 36b. Gentile girls are in a state of niddah (filth) from birth.

Abodah Zarah 22a-22b . Gentiles prefer sex with cows.

Yebamoth 63a. Declares that agriculture is the lowest of occupations.

Menahoth 43b-44a. A Jewish man is obligated to say the following prayer every day: “Thank you God for not making me a gentile, a woman or a slave.”

These are just a few of the reasons why Taylor’s “They look pretty huwhite to me” line is so misguided.

I’m made to recall a line Milo said about Muslims and Leftists. Muslims are like the common cold, and Leftists are like AIDS. A common cold is no big deal, unless you have AIDS.

Well, pick your non-White, blacks, Hispanics, Arabs, they’re like the common cold. Jews are like AIDS. Repeat the prior punchline, and realize that the truth of the statement impacts the comedic value as much as the fact that we’re telling the same joke twice.

The Jews ALWAYS have to try and convolute racial issues. It’s just a simple matter of survival for them. They cannot live separately from us, because they need us to survive. So they live amongst us in a state of constant fear, like a rabbit who lives in a lion’s den. Even though we might say “they look pretty huWhite to me” now, the Jews are always afraid, and with good reason, that once White men start acting in a racially aware manner, it is only a matter of time before we turn on the Jews.

In fact, if Taylor’s strategy has any value, it is that he is trying to con the Jews into this exact scenario.

Why do you think there is this constant push for censorship and hate speech laws by Jews? And make no mistake about it, this is entirely about Jews. The blacks and Hispanics and Muslims do not have the financial or political power on their own to push this nonsense. It is Jews pushing it.

Jews finance half of the Democrat Party, and a quarter of the Republican Party. That’s a dramatically more disproportionate ethnic representation in political influence than are blacks are overrepresented in the prison population. So can this be seen in the willingness of our government to turn on us for Jewish interests, censorship in particular, gun control a close second, no coincidence. Democrats, funded to the tune of 50% by Jews, are enthusiastic to see us censored and disarmed. The Republicans, still needing us for 75% of their financing, are a little bit more reluctant, but 25% is still a lot of money, so they eventually cave or face a well financed primary challenge from someone who will.

Israel’s Ambassador to the UN, Danny Danon, literally, and recently, said of anti-Semitism “Until it becomes criminal, this bigotry will persist; it will fester. It is only a matter of time until it erupts again in violence and bloodshed.”

To hammer home the point, in case it isn’t obvious already, the Jewish ethnostate’s chosen representative, seated at a gathering of their aspiring global government, flat out said that wherever people are allowed to hate Jews and want to kill them, people will definitely do so. It is only the power of the State to suppress the speech of their populations, which keeps the Jews alive. Those are the words of their Ambassador to the United Nations, not Adolf Hitler.

Imagine if you will, an America without blacks or Hispanics. What would be the politics of the Democrat Party be in that world? They certainly would not be engaged in the sort of blatantly anti-White identity politics they are presently engaged in, for any amount of Jewish cash. They would still need the votes of White people to wield any power to sell.

With the Democrat Party defanged and no longer looking to censor and disarm us, do you really think my views would be so controversial as they are today? Of course not. Everybody would take one look at America, and one look at Africa, and say “I’m glad those animals are not over here” and race realism would be completely normal.

But with Jews among us, as Taylor purports to envision, the angling would begin all over again to bring them back. First as laborers, then as equals, then as masters.The Jews being such creatures of familiar habit as they are.

As they did, people like me would be screaming “The Jews are trying to do it again, get them the hell out of here before they become a problem!” and if the Jews tried to see us censored in that world, there would be no far left Democrat Party waiting in the wings to legislate their anxiety away. Without a non-White fueled far Left party to contend with, Republicans could actually afford to be Right wing. They would have no reason to bow before Mark Zuckerberg or Anderson Cooper, and they might actually have the guts to stand up and protect us from these subversives.

Hopefully you can see the dynamic here. Jews benefit from immigration. They benefit from the “legacy of slavery”. We don’t, and they know it, but they need tens of millions of mindless twits to vote for their scams. They need to keep us focused on the other ethnic minorities, and they use them as a foil. In the absence of those other ethnic minorities, we would turn on the Jews, as we did in Germany and countless other times throughout history. Diluting us demographically under a democratic government, is the only way they can wield the political power they need to survive.

I don’t care how much the government has to intervene in the economy to remedy this. If that makes me a National Socialist, then fine, but we are not being presented with an alternative of Liberty, here. We are faced with our own government intervening on our behalf, or hostile foreign ethnic groups depriving us of everything we have through the mechanisms of our own States. Neither of these things are “freedom” in the Orthodox Rothbardian sense, but one of them is infinitely preferable to the other for any sane White person.

Which is why I found it humorous when Malice attempted to refute the Leftist bent of Jewish influence in the chapter I was featured in. He says;

The frequent argument among anti-Semitic white nationalists is that as Jewish influence increased, the country moved further and further to the left. But this perspective doesn’t match the data. In 1952 the United Steelworkers of America announced their intention to go on strike. Before the strike even began, President Truman moved to have the federal government seize control of the industry. Under FDR the federal income tax had a top marginal rate of 79 percent, well before World War II. The assaults on the press and free speech under Wilson were wide and pervasive. It is impossible to imagine even Bernie Sanders—so far left he’s not even a Democrat!—advocating for any of the preceding policies in this day and age (and yes, he’s Jewish).

I don’t have to sing the praises of Truman, Wilson, or FDR to correct this point.

Like many libertarians, Malice suffers from the same monomania as the Marxists. Everything is a question of the economy and government’s intervention in it. Who during the Wilson administration could have imagined gay pride parades, much less gay marriages being celebrated on the steps of the United States Supreme Court? Who living during the reign of FDR could have reacted with anything but laughter and violence at the ridiculous image of illegal immigrants blocking the entrances to iconic amusement parks and demanding citizenship?

Who do you think organized the strikes that Truman almost nationalized an industry to stop?

Look no further than the Congress of Secular Jewish Organizations for your answer. In a piece titled, Jews in the American Labor Movement,  by Bennett Muraskin, we are given a lengthy history of Jewish involvement in labor unions and labor strikes in particular. Of interest to the matter at hand,

The most radical union in this period, i.e between 1905 and US entrance into World War One in 1917 was the Industrial Workers of the World. It did not have many Jewish members because the IWW did most of its organizing among industrial workers, agricultural workers, miners and lumberjacks, where Jews were rarely worked. But in their forays into the East, most notably the 1912 Lawrence, Mass. textile workers strike and the 1913 Paterson, NJ silk workers strike, thousands of Jewish workers participated, including Hannah Silverman, a Paterson mill worker, who became an important strike leader. Matlida Robbins, born Tatiana Rabinowitz, led a strike of textile workers in Little Falls, NY in 1912 and was hired by the IWW as one of two paid female organizers.

The best known Jewish Wobbly was Frank Tannenbaum, who organized unemployed workers in New York City to demand food and shelter from churches during the bitter cold winter of 1913-14. He was falsely accused of inciting to riot and served a year in a notorious city prison where he organized a strike of inmates against harsh conditions. Tannenbaum later dropped out of the labor movement to pursue a higher education. He earned a PhD from Columbia University and become a scholar specializing in race relations, criminology and Latin American history.

The Jewish-dominated labor unions constituted the left wing of the AFL, along with a few others unions where Jews were not a factor. In 1919, when an organizing drive led to a mass strike among steelworkers, the Amalgamated Clothing Workers donated nearly 40% of the funds raised by the entire labor movement, even though the number of Jewish steelworkers was miniscule. The Forvertz covered this and other strikes by non-Jewish workers for its Yiddish readership, not only for their news value, but to encourage labor solidarity.

A small CIO union, called Local 1199, led by Jewish communist Leon Davis, organized the mostly Jewish pharmacists and other drug store employees in New York City during the Depression and World War Two. In the late 1950s, it branched out into organizing Black and Puerto Rican hospital workers in New York City and achieved success by engaging in very militant strikes, first in New York and later in other states.

Jews were also prominent as attorneys for the CIO unions. Lee Pressman was general counsel to the CIO during the late 30s and 40s; Maurice Sugar general counsel to the United Auto Workers and John Apt general counsel to the Amalgamated Clothing Workers from 1938 to 1946 and a top advisor to its president Sidney Hillman. Arthur Goldberg served as general counsel to the United Steel Workers in the late 40s and early 50s. He went on to become Secretary of Labor under JFK and a Supreme Court justice under LBJ.

Jews might not like to labor, but they sure do love labor movements. They lead them, they organize them, and they turn them against the governments of their host societies for Jewish interests.

Truman wasn’t moving Left by crushing the strike. He was fighting communism with the economic force of the State, just like Hitler did. Just months after Hitler was appointed Chancellor, he took the decision to end trade unions in Nazi Germany. On May 2nd, 1933, police units occupied all trade unions headquarters and union officials and leaders were arrested. The responsibilities of the trade unions were taken up by the State.

Libertarians understandably view this as “socialism” and strictly speaking, it is, but so is the alternative. It wasn’t long after he arrived in Vienna that Hitler came to realize the problem that trade unions posed, and the Jewish origins of those problems. He wrote in Mein Kampf,

By the beginning of the present century the Trades Unionist Movement had already ceased to recognize the purpose for which it had been founded. From year to year it fell more and more under the political control of the Social Democrats, until it finally came to be used as a battering-ram in the class struggle. The plan was to shatter, by means of constantly repeated blows, the economic edifice in the building of which so much time and care had been expended. Once this objective had been reached, the destruction of the State would become a matter of course, because the State would already have been deprived of its economic foundations. Attention to the real interests of the working-classes, on the part of the Social Democrats, steadily decreased until the cunning leaders saw that it would be in their immediate political interests if the social and cultural demands of the broad masses remained unheeded; for there was a danger that if these masses once felt content they could no longer be employed as mere passive material in the political struggle.

I gradually discovered that the Social Democratic Press was predominantly controlled by Jews. But I did not attach special importance to this circumstance, for the same state of affairs existed also in other newspapers.

I recalled to mind the names of the public leaders of Marxism, and then I realized that most of them belonged to the Chosen Race – the Social Democratic representatives in the Imperial Cabinet as well as the secretaries of the Trades Unions and the street agitators. Everywhere the same sinister picture presented itself. I shall never forget the row of names – Austerlitz, David, Adler, Ellenbogen, and others. One fact became quite evident to me. It was that this alien race held in its hands the leadership of that Social Democratic Party with whose minor representatives I had been disputing for months past. I was happy at last to know for certain that the Jew is not a German.

It was indeed through their influence on the trade unions that Hitler began to hate the Jews.

Thus I finally discovered who were the evil spirits leading our people astray. The sojourn in Vienna for one year had proved long enough to convince me that no worker is so rooted in his preconceived notions that he will not surrender them in face of better and clearer arguments and explanations. Gradually I became an expert in the doctrine of the Marxists and used this knowledge as an instrument to drive home my own firm convictions. I was successful in nearly every case. The great masses can be rescued, but a lot of time and a large share of human patience must be devoted to such work.

But a Jew can never be rescued from his fixed notions.

It was then simple enough to attempt to show them the absurdity of their teaching. Within my small circle I talked to them until my throat ached and my voice grew hoarse. I believed that I could finally convince them of the danger inherent in the Marxist follies. But I only achieved the contrary result. It seemed to me that immediately the disastrous effects of the Marxist Theory and its application in practice became evident, the stronger became their obstinacy.

The more I debated with them the more familiar I became with their argumentative tactics. At the outset they counted upon the stupidity of their opponents, but when they got so entangled that they could not find a way out they played the trick of acting as innocent simpletons. Should they fail, in spite of their tricks of logic, they acted as if they could not understand the counter arguments and bolted away to another field of discussion. They would lay down truisms and platitudes; and, if you accepted these, then they were applied to other problems and matters of an essentially different nature from the original theme. If you faced them with this point they would escape again, and you could not bring them to make any precise statement. Whenever one tried to get a firm grip on any of these apostles one’s hand grasped only jelly and slime which slipped through the fingers and combined again into a solid mass a moment afterwards. If your adversary felt forced to give in to your argument, on account of the observers present, and if you then thought that at last you had gained ground, a surprise was in store for you on the following day. The Jew would be utterly oblivious to what had happened the day before, and he would start once again by repeating his former absurdities, as if nothing had happened. Should you become indignant and remind him of yesterday’s defeat, he pretended astonishment and could not remember anything, except that on the previous day he had proved that his statements were correct.

Sometimes I was dumbfounded. I do not know what amazed me the more – the abundance of their verbiage or the artful way in which they dressed up their falsehoods.

I gradually came to hate them. 

But he didn’t hate the German worker, as Jewish historians and allied war propagandists would like to pretend. He loved them. He was one of them. He saw them as the victim of Jew inspired Left wing mobs, because he too had been such a victim.

The Social Democrats know how to create the impression that they alone are the protectors of peace. In this way, acting very circumspectly but never losing sight of their ultimate goal, they conquer one position after another, at one time by methods of quiet intimidation and at another time by sheer daylight robbery, employing these latter tactics at those moments when public attention is turned towards other matters from which it does not wish to be diverted, or when the public considers an incident too trivial to create a scandal about it and thus provoke the anger of a malignant opponent.

These tactics are based on an accurate estimation of human frailties and must lead to success, with almost mathematical certainty, unless the other side also learns how to fight poison gas with poison gas. The weaker natures must be told that here it is a case of to be or not to be.

I also came to understand that physical intimidation has its significance for the mass as well as for the individual. Here again the Socialists had calculated accurately on the psychological effect.

Intimidation in workshops and in factories, in assembly halls and at mass demonstrations, will always meet with success as long as it does not have to encounter the same kind of terror in a stronger form.

Then of course the Party will raise a horrified outcry, yelling blue murder and appealing to the authority of the State, which they have just repudiated. In doing this their aim generally is to add to the general confusion, so that they may have a better opportunity of reaching their own goal unobserved. Their idea is to find among the higher government officials some bovine creature who, in the stupid hope that he may win the good graces of these awe-inspiring opponents so that they may remember him in case of future eventualities, will help them now to break all those who may oppose this world pest.

The impression which such successful tactics make on the minds of the broad masses, whether they be adherents or opponents, can be estimated only by one who knows the popular mind, not from books but from practical life. For the successes which are thus obtained are taken by the adherents of Social Democracy as a triumphant symbol of the righteousness of their own cause; on the other hand the beaten opponent very often loses faith in the effectiveness of any further resistance.

The more I understood the methods of physical intimidation that were employed, the more sympathy I had for the multitude that had succumbed to it.

I am thankful now for the ordeal which I had to go through at that time; for it was the means of bringing me to think kindly again of my own people, inasmuch as the experience enabled me to distinguish between the false leaders and the victims who have been led astray.

We must look upon the latter simply as victims. I have just now tried to depict a few traits which express the mentality of those on the lowest rung of the social ladder; but my picture would be disproportionate if I do not add that amid the social depths I still found light; for I experienced a rare spirit of self-sacrifice and loyal comradeship among those men, who demanded little from life and were content amid their modest surroundings. This was true especially of the older generation of workmen. And although these qualities were disappearing more and more in the younger generation, owing to the all-pervading influence of the big city, yet among the younger generation also there were many who were sound at the core and who were able to maintain themselves uncontaminated amid the sordid surroundings of their everyday existence. If these men, who in many cases meant well and were upright in themselves, gave the support to the political activities carried on by the common enemies of our people, that was because those decent workpeople did not and could not grasp the downright infamy of the doctrine taught by the socialist agitators. Furthermore, it was because no other section of the community bothered itself about the lot of the working classes. Finally, the social conditions became such that men who otherwise would have acted differently were forced to submit to them, even though unwillingly at first. A day came when poverty gained the upper hand and drove those workmen into the Social Democratic ranks.

I haven’t read any books by Truman to know his true motivations, but Hitler would have crushed a steel worker strike too had he not had the good sense to nationalize them from the outset of his chancellorship. Not out of some sheer maniacal lust for exercising State authority, but to rescue the Nation and its industries from Jewish communist influences. Not every government intervention in the economy is Left wing, any more than every sex act is aimed at procreation. If the Jews control the trade unions, and the Jews are egging on communism, then the State has to step in and wrench control if its labor force from the Jew. Failure to accomplish this will put Jews in control of the State, and communism will follow. Or perhaps almost as frighteningly, neoconservatism.

Decades after risking his life to fight the Germans in Word War II, George Lincoln Rockwell would go on to form the American Nazi Party. He wasn’t crazy. They tried to prove he was and put him in an insane asylum. But the doctors couldn’t argue with what he had to say, so they set him free.

He went on to write White Power in 1977. He titled Chapter 7 “Friends of the Captain” (think Ben Shapiro), and Chapter 8 “Friends of the Crew” (think Bernie Sanders).

One gang of Jews are friends with the Captain. They are the capitalists. The free traders. The open borders advocates.

But, Rockwell notes of capitalism…

Few notice that the phrase “capitalist” was popularized by none other than that bloody old Jew, Marx, himself -a ship-wrecker. (Communist Manifesto and Das Kapital).

Until Marx told our kind of people they were “capitalists” in his “Das Kapital,” they never gave what they were doing economically such a formal name, but they did know what they believed in.

It was NOT “capitalism.”

Capital was only a tool for our people in the process of production. Men like Henry Ford were not interested simply in getting money. Rather they were trying to do something – in Ford’s case, give all Americans an automobile via Ford’s discovery of “mass production.”

The American economy does not produce miracles because it is “capitalist,” but because it is enterprising and productive! The correct name of our system is not “capitalism,” but “productive enterprise.”

Productive enterprise needs capital.

But it also needs labor, material, management and a hundred other things. Capital is only one of the tools of a productive enterprise system.

It took the Jewish parasitic genius of Karl Marx to elevate that one tool, capital, to the status in our civilization by attacking it and calling it “capitalism.” He has thus trapped us into defending what he created, and has thereby doomed us to defeat because we defend a system based not on production, but money manipulation.

Rockwell goes on to antagonize against a familiar foe of the libertarians. The Federal Reserve. The Federal Reserve, so loyal to the Captain, provide him with all the money in the world to do anything he wants and pave over all of his increasingly abundant failures. This sounds like a great idea to him, of course. He gets to spend this newly minted currency first, and as prices go up in consequence, he always has access to more.

Another gang of Jews are friends with the Crew. “Workers of the World Unite” they shout, as they rally under the Red banner of Marxism. “That guy with all the money who’s telling you want to do, he’s ripping you off!” they say. “Pay no attention to the Jew behind the curtain giving him all that cash, which by the time it gets to you has already lost its value. It’s that rich prick you see spending it that needs to die!”

And just like that, the captain is killed, in a mutiny called communism. A revolution instigated by Jews, and led by Jews, for the benefit, of Jews. If that causes Jews to suffer and die in the process, they are all to happy to make that sacrifice for their God, which for the Jews, is the Jewish Race.

In Conclusion

This could go on forever. It already has. This will be the longest thing I have published on this blog to date, though not the longest thing I have written. Stay tuned for that, once certain obstacles have been cleared from my path…

Each time I think to close it out, I come up with more that needs to be said, because this subject is so infinitely complex, and so transcendent of time and space. Hence the title of the 1940 Nazi propaganda film The Eternal Jew. To one who familiarizes himself with the literature, nearly the entire history mankind could be summarized as a struggle for the Jews to dominate all other races of peoples, by claiming to be the victims of exactly such a plot.

That is why they go through so much effort to see men like me silenced. Not because we’ll offend people. That’s laughable. These are the bastards pedaling incest porn for free to anyone with an internet connection, including children. They don’t care who gets offended. Does MasterCard take a moral stance against BrattySis.com? My Family Pies? Of course not. Coercing your stepsister into sex acts so you won’t tell Mom she was masturbating is good clean fun for the whole family, so far as Jewish finance is concern.

But the contents of this blog post, those are too obscene to use dollars. These ideas don’t deserve the common respect meth dealers enjoy upon their release from prison. These are the kinds of ideas which justify rioting in the streets, framing honest men for felonies, filing frivolous lawsuits, committing perjury, and even repressing JEWS who sympathize with out plight.

The only time these oligarchs give a shit about the ideological, moral, and ethical hygiene of the Nation is  when it threatens Jewish influence.

So I’ll save myself some trouble, and borrow once more. This time from Richard Tedor, author of Hitler’s Revolution: Ideology, Social Programs, Foreign Affairs, a book I cannot recommend highly enough, but will no less ruin for you by giving away the ending.

During January 1942, the Soviet Black Sea fleet landed Russian marines along the German-occupied section of the Crimean coast near Odessa. An engineer with a German infantry division there recalled this: “Many houses along the beach had served as hospitals or as collection areas for the wounded. The Russians entered, killed the orderlies and the physicians, and raped the nurses and female assistants. Then they threw the women into the ice-cold waters of the harbor basin. They shot the wounded and sick soldiers, or dragged them into the street and poured cold water over them, so that they would freeze to death in the outdoors.”

The Soviets renewed the invasion of East Prussia in January 1945. They surrounded Königsberg. The German army conducted a relief operation beginning on February 19. Several German divisions, including the 5th Panzer, simultaneously attacked outward from the invested city. In the town of Metgethen, advancing troops recovered the bodies of 32 women whom the Russians had raped, murdered, and thrown into a shell crater. Master Sergeant Kurt Göring, a German tank commander participating in the attack, offered this testimony: “Then we reached Metgethen. We were appalled to see what had happened here. At the rail station was a refugee train standing on the tracks, with women and young girls. They had all been raped and murdered. We wrote on the side of the rail car, ‘Avenge Metgethen.’ The fighting went on without quarter.”

Another eyewitness participating in local German counterattacks was Sergeant Günther Adam, who recalled this: “We attacked and recaptured a town displaying the same crimes of these beasts. On a snow-covered, trampled-down village street was what remained of a young woman. It looked as though she was wearing a fur coat. She was lying on her back, her arms and legs outstretched. (The Soviets) had run her over with a tank and crushed her. This bloody, ground-up mass was frozen solid and the most horrible thing I ever saw during the war…. In a house, we found some men who had been beaten to death. In blood-soaked beds were ravaged women, who were still alive. Then worst of all, we found the head of a baby spiked to a bed-post.”

The Western powers also waged war against German civilians, but from the air. In July 1943, the British Royal Air Force and the U.S. Army’s 8th Air Force conducted several nearly consecutive bombing missions against Hamburg. In the bombardment 30,482 residents perished by being blown apart, incinerated, asphyxiated, or buried by rubble. Among them were 5,586 children. Fires destroyed 24 hospitals, 277 schools, and 58 churches. An officer assisting in the evacuation of refugees described how some passenger cars carried grey-haired children, aged practically overnight from the terrors of the raid.

Among the eyewitnesses was Gerd Bucerius of the resistance movement. In a Hamburg suburb, he watched the approach of the English bombers from his rooftop: “Finally, I shouted! Too long I have waited for the Allies to destroy the world-enemy Hitler. . . . What horror, what sorrow, I naturally thought back then. But also, you dead want it this way. And whom did I worry about during the attack? The pilots! They were valiant and did what I had hoped of them.” After the war, the U.S. Army conducted a survey of German morale. Responding to the query about what caused the population the greatest suffering under Hitler, 91 percent of Germans who were polled cited Allied air raids. Just two percent completing the questionnaire marked “loss of freedom” or “Nazi crimes.”

Upon Germany’s surrender in May 1945, Allied occupational forces began the mass arrest, interrogation, and imprisonment of thousands of Germans who had been variously affiliated with the National Socialist government. Among those detained was the renowned authority on international law, Friedrich Grimm. Ten years before, Hitler had solicited his counsel when planning to reinstitute compulsory military service. Now Grimm sat opposite an Allied officer who showed him samples of new leaflets printed by the victors. They were in German language for distribution throughout the conquered country. Describing German war crimes, the flyers were the first step in the re-education program designed for Germany. Grimm suggested that since the war was over, it was time to stop the libel. “Why no, we’re just getting started,” the officer replied. “We’ll continue this atrocity campaign, we’ll increase it till no one will want to hear a good word about the Germans anymore, till whatever sympathy there is for you in other countries is completely destroyed, and until the Germans themselves become so mixed up they won’t know what they’re doing!”

The perpetual campaign of negative publicity kept old wounds open for decades. To this day, it precludes objective analysis of a system developed by one of our most advanced, productive, and creative civilizations, which raised it from economic distress and social discord after World War I, to prosperity and harmony within a few short years. In the aftermath of the 1939-1945 war, which deeply scarred the countries that fought, decimating the younger generation of some, there is merit in exploring notable elements of the ideologies involved. The lessons learned may contribute to a better understanding among peoples for the future.

With respect to Germany, much can be gained from investigating not just what Hitler did, but why. Condemning the National Socialist state as a criminal abomination was the precursor to the present mindset that non-democratic governments are unenlightened at best, as tyrannies withholding freedom from the population or as “rogue states.”

To esteem liberal democracy as humanity’s crowning political achievement leads to complacency, diminishing in its supporters the self-critical eye so useful for correction and improvement.

Reform is a product of restlessness and dissatisfaction. This was the genesis of the Enlightenment, the intellectual challenge to the royal regimen that had barred the common people from opportunity. First to give political expression to new ideas were the American colonists, unaccustomed to immoderate authority, and the French, spirited and self-assured. Their governments shifted focus to advancing the individual, contrary to the monarchial structure maintaining the control of an exclusive, self-serving minority.

In Germany, the enlightened age evolved differently. The Germans’ contemplative, methodical approach led to a gradual integration of liberal values with elements of the old order. Flanked by powerful neighboring states, a strong central authority was still necessary to preserve national independence. Together with the unification of the Reich in 1871, liberalism enabled the Germans to mature and prosper. The royal house, unable to keep pace with the progress of the times, failed dismally in foreign policy and at waging war, and ultimately vanished in 1918. The Weimar Republic, shackled by crippling tribute to the Allies, was unable to restore prosperity.

Dissatisfied, the Germans turned to a new ideology. When Hitler came to power, which was by no means an easy and rapid process, he more or less occupied a political vacuum. He reached beyond democracy and the imperial era, reviving ideas of the German intellectual movement of the early 19th Century. The National Socialists promoted individual liberty, but not a laissez faire policy regarding commerce; profit and advancement at the expense of the community they considered detrimental and discordant. “Liberalism indeed paved the way for economic progress, but simultaneously abetted the social fragmentation of nations,” concluded the protocol of the Science of Labor Institute’s conference at Bad Salzbrunn in March 1944. “The starting point for any orderly society is the people’s collective good; it subordinates all individual interests. It insures life and progress of the personality. Social policy can therefore not be limited to serve only the momentary advantage of particular persons or groups.”

Performing one’s “duty to work” was the prerequisite for belonging to the national community and benefiting from citizenship. This complimented the traditional German work ethic, which seeks fulfillment in creative endeavor and industriousness. The National Socialists defined education as “opening the road to social advancement.” Among the academic institutions were leadership schools. These based enrollment more on the sound moral character of the pupil than on scholastic performance. Stressing patriotism and communal service, discouraging egocentric or elitist attitudes, educators trained the young to place the welfare of all before personal gain, to respect group achievement over individual accomplishment. In this way, they hoped to produce future leaders who would not abuse their authority but sincerely regard the public trust as a sacred responsibility. These were values applicable for both political careers and in private enterprise.

No matter how promising a state form may appear on paper, the integrity of the men in charge significantly determines the benefit of its programs. Though he set the standards for the social and political structure of the new Germany, Hitler afforded subordinates considerable latitude to implement fresh ideas and modifications. He allowed competition among government agencies with overlapping jurisdiction. He intervened only after the rivals had demonstrated the strengths and weaknesses of their opposing viewpoints, and then usually in favor of the more revolutionary solution.

Encouraging initiative, Hitler inspired unconventional thinking and risk-taking from those in authority. Thus he backed Fritz Reinhardt’s novel economic proposals against those of the conformist Schacht. The Führer cast his lot with Robert Ley, after years of his DAF leader’s grappling with the conservative labor ministry over increasing expenditures to improve workers’ social welfare. He approved founding the Adolf Hitler Schools, which disregarded the ministry of education’s curriculum and didn’t even teach the NSDAP program. Himself a nationalist, Hitler did not interfere as the Waffen SS gradually dismantled nationalism and challenged the racial policy of the National Socialist party.

At times, the German leader actually seemed reluctant to exercise the power he possessed. Even during wartime military conferences with the generals on his staff, some of whom he considered cowards, the Führer seldom dropped the hammer. Adjutant Colonel Below wrote, “Hitler rarely gave a direct order. He confined himself to persuading his listeners so that they would come to the same point of view. . . . After December 1941, when Hitler took command of the army, he only gradually accomplished his purposes through direct orders. He still tried to win conference participants for his intentions in part through lengthy explanations.”

Hitler sometimes displayed a willingness to acquiesce to contradictory viewpoints, demonstrating the latitude he granted party and state functionaries. In 1933, Reinhardt’s “Now Program” offered young women financial incentives to leave their jobs to marry and start families. This enabled out-of-work men to fill the vacated positions, helping relieve unemployment. Once the work force was fully employed, the government continued sponsoring programs to keep women in the home, both to promote traditional family life and to maintain a healthy national birthrate. To be sure, prior to 1933 Hitler had already warned the NSDAP’s male members that he would not tolerate any further perceptions of women as “baby-making machines or playthings.  As chancellor, he facilitated opportunities for the female gender to pursue vocational careers, though restricting them from politics. Germany still maintained certain previous discrepancies, however, such as reduced salaries for women performing the same job as men.

During World War II, German women filled many positions in the armaments industry, on a lower wage scale, as more males entered military service. In April 1944, Ley, who had campaigned for equal pay for women for years, confronted Hitler on the subject. The Führer explained that Germany’s planned post-war social structure envisions women as the hub of the family, adding that this does not imply a negative opinion of their intelligence or occupational capability. Ley retorted that successful German women have a modern cognizance of their role in society and consider Hitler’s ideas archaic. In the course of the meeting, Ley tenaciously defended his stand against an avalanche of counter-arguments his leader presented. The Führer finally relented by offering a compromise, that women should receive less base pay, but be eligible for incentive awards and bonuses to compensate for the disparity. In general, Hitler’s personal view had little influence on developments: In the winter semester of 1943/44 for example, 49.5 percent of students enrolled in German universities were women.

In most governments, politicians promising reform are the least anxious to implement it. Few of them wish to improve a system through which they attained prominence. Those who succeed in a particular political milieu are the mortal enemies of change. Hitler stood against this custom. A child of the working class, he led the NSDAP to power without compromising with democratic factions in the Weimar Republic. Once chancellor, he owed no loyalty to the political parties entrenched in the government or to special interest groups in industry and commerce. Though consolidating his authority, Hitler did not create a system designed to perpetuate it. Through frequent public speeches, he used his station to inspire the Germans with love of country, appreciation for the nobility of work, and a sense of belonging. He believed that once these values guided his countrymen, it would be possible to gradually relax state controls.

The government’s role was not to secure the continuous supremacy of a dominant party or class, but to discover society’s more creative and trustworthy elements and promote their careers. This was to be an eternal process, guaranteeing that fresh blood and new ideas steadily flow forth from the wellspring of the population. Wrote the philosopher Nietzsche, who endeavored so ardently to kindle the German psyche, “When a nation genuinely leaps forward and grows, each time it bursts the cordon that had till then defined its repute and standing as a people. But when a nation retains much that is fixed, then this is proof that it prefers to stagnate.”

The Enlightenment instructed mankind that governments deserve obedience only insofar as they discharge their responsibility to serve the public. In democracy, Western civilization believes it has achieved the state structure that holds those in power to this obligation. Liberal nations more or less abide by this arrangement, no longer exploring or tolerating alternatives. Somewhere in their development, they stopped short of the comprehension that no single form of government is best for every age or for every culture. To be truly representative, a system must conform to the character and requirements of the people in its charge, and not vice versa.

Hitler also accepted liberalism as important for nurturing the inventive impulse of humanity. He wanted each generation to advance and mature, every individual motivated to realize his or her potential while rising together as a community. He demanded two prerequisites: one, that society become educated in a spirit of civic responsibility, and two, that the state encourage profound reverence for German history, art and ethnic traditions, to keep his countrymen on the evolutionary course that molded them into a proud and unified people. The historically maligned leader of National Socialist Germany interpreted the duty of government as to foster, never restrict, the creative energy of a nation and to expedite its progress, for without progress there is no future, and in the future rests the hope for a better life.

This was the substance, of Hitler’s revolution.

Never Forget What They’ve Taken From You

 

 

[wd_hustle id=”email-embed” type=”embedded”]

Follow Chris on Telegram

Chat with Radical Agenda Listeners
Podcasts RSS Feed
.
.
.

Chris

Christopher Cantwell comedian, writer, voice artist, and Patriot.

Let’s keep in touch! This site has been heavily censored by search engines and social media platforms. Please give me your email address so I can contact you directly.

Alternatively, you can follow me on Telegram