This Is All Grimly Soviet

°°°°°

England, April 2020. The other day, I was in a long queue at my local ‘supermarket’ store waiting to be allowed in. The footway where we queued was helpfully marked every 2 metres (around six feet, six inches) reminding us to obey the government diktat of “social distancing”. Once inside, after a long wait, the same markings, the same reminders, with staff observing whether or not we meekly obeyed the rules. Some old gentleman – who looked like an archetypal English eccentric – did not and was immediately told by a security guard to observe the rules and “be patient”. So the slow moving people in the queue – fenced in by barriers which dictated how we moved around the store – make their steady way to gather the necessary essentials. Essentials selected, they had to queue again, six feet six inches apart, before being directed by staff to a particular checkout.

Such docility; such people to watch over us and ensure we complied to various government diktats. It was as if we were part of some nation-wide experiment.

Once back home and indulging in a welcome alcoholic beverage, the television presented another half-hour of government propaganda disguised as “news” with government politicians, and “experts”, reminding us about “staying safe” and about “social distancing” and about the gravity of the situation, and with members of the public – from their homes of course and as “talking heads” – spouting about how they were following government demands to “stay safe”, remain at home, and observe the diktat about “social distancing”. Several of these “talking heads” offered advice about how we and our family could cheerfully endure “staying at home” amid the government-imposed lockdown.

There followed a normal television programme, but interspersed (this was a commercial television channel, with ads) with government “shorts” (propaganda) containing the new mantras of government: about staying safe and “protect the NHS”. One commercial television channel even had, in the top left corner of the screen, the government message to “stay at home”.

Outside, on the streets, normal social life has been suspended, with no date set for when the normal life of Western society will be resumed. There are regular police patrols to ensure that there are no public gatherings of three or more people and that the diktat about “social distancing” is being obeyed.

This is all very dystopian. All very Nineteen Eighty-Four. All grimly Soviet. With docile citizens obeying government dicktats because they have, apparently, been brainwashed into believing it is for their own good and for the good and the safety of their society.

Now it has emerged that the social media platform Facebook has – following government pressure – banned posts and messages from people and groups who were organizing or trying to organize or who were promoting protests against government diktats such as “social distancing”, lockdown, and the ban regarding public gatherings. This is censorship by any other name.

Meanwhile, in Britain, it seems the government driven social experiment to make its citizens docile, compliant, and test its power and the effectiveness of its propaganda, has succeeded. No politicians, of whatever flavour – Liberal or Labour or Tory – have spoken out about the tyrannical government dicktats and about its pervasive propaganda. No mainstream newspaper, no television news channel, no independent journalist, has questioned or dissented from those dicktats and the now all-pervasive government propaganda.

No one – no politician, no newspaper, no television news channel, no independent journalist – has pointed out the utter hypocrisy of those who lead the government and who now regale us with propaganda. Those politicians, being wealthy and privileged, do not have to queue outside shops. They and their families do not have to choose between paying rent and eating sufficient to sustain them. They have not had their livelihood – their income from work – taken away. They do not have to live in some small inner-city flat with young, bored, restless children.

On the aforementioned “news” programme I watched and heard some politician tell us what we should be doing and why. Yet the politician had never done a day of real work in his life. He was never a First Responder; never a manual labourer; never an artist or artisan struggling to make ends meet; never in the armed forces; never in a war zone.

He was never, as an adult, short of money, because he was a journalist and then a professional politician spouting rhetoric and is now a wealthy man, and of course like his leader Boris Johnson (the mischling) declares that he is a “proud Zionist” and a friend of media tycoon, and Zionist, Rupert Murdoch.

It seems only a few of us – a few of we, the people – comprehend the situation and are spreading our dissent – of rebellion, of revolution, now or in the future, and our message of a different government-free way of life – person to person, in real time, in real life; or via messages such as this.

What does all this mean for our future, for the civilization of the West, and for we as a folk?

Haereticus
April 21, 2020

°°°°°

Editorial Note: This article was first published in the latest edition of Das Reich, the internal bulletin of Reichsfolk.

°°°°°


The Harsh Reality

odal3

°°°°°°°

In regard to the Covid-19 pandemic, I have six concerns about current government policy in the UK, in the US, and elsewhere in the lands of the West.

The first is that the UK government, like many States in the US, have issued decrees which almost overnight have taken away our basic freedoms, our right to make our own decisions and act on those decisions.

The second concern is that other decrees have, again almost overnight, forced businesses to close and taken away the livelihood of many people. The result has been the unprecedented loss of our social lives and thus of the type of society we in the West have known for centuries, such as going to the Pub, going to and taking part in sporting and other outdoor events, going on holiday in our land, playing games – such as football – on a beach. Not even during two world wars was our social life curtailed in such a way, with those wars resulting in millions more deaths than are predicted from the current pandemic.

My third concern is that we as a species have survived worse pandemics in the past, like The Black Death and the 1918 pandemic, with The Black death – which was 90% fatal, unlike the relatively low 5% mortality rate of Covid-19 – being one of the causes that led to the European Renaissance and positive changes in Western society. We survived such pandemics because of three things: what is known as “community immunity”, genetics, and because such adversity aids our evolution: Was mich nicht umbringt, macht mich stärker.

In terms of genetics and community immunity, some people – only a few in the case of The Black Death for example – are naturally immune, with many who are infected surviving and becoming immune and passing on their immunity to others through social contact.

My fourth concern is that the tyrannical-like decrees by Western governments and the meek compliance to such decrees by most of our folk shows how passive we as folk seem to have become, and how powerful and tyrannical our so-called “democratic” governments can be, which perhaps does not bode well for our future.

My fifth concern is that current data shows a relatively low mortality rate from Covid-19 with most who die being elderly or having underlying health problems. This data does not – at least to me – justify the panic, the constant propaganda, the FUD (fear, uncertainty, doubt) by the government and the media, and the tyrannical “lock down” imposed on us.

My sixth concern is that most of our folk – and even some National Socialists – seem to have forgotten or neglect the fact we have created the most civilized society ever known not by “staying safe”, not by “staying home”, but by accepting and overcoming challenges and disasters, by being defiant, and by accepting that death is a fact of life and even in some cases is or may be necessary. Every year in the UK, for example, there are around 600,000 deaths from various causes. Will there be an additional 600,000 deaths from Covid-19 in the UK? Not even the worse case scenario suggests such high mortality.

Which brings me to my final point, which is that in respect of Covid-19 governments rely on scenarios which are the result of computer models and inputted data. The accuracy of the models is unproven, and the data which is fed into the models has been selected based on certain criteria and may be inaccurate or selected on the basis of fallible assumptions. In other words, the predicted mortality rate for Covid-19 is only a current “best guess”.

Thus my answer to what might be done instead of panic, lock down, and “best guesses” is to help the sick and the dying, but allow Nature to take its course and develop community immunity, accept there will be deaths, continue with our Western, social, way of life, and move on, learning from the tragedy, and thus change, adapt, evolve. To me, this would be the National Socialist thing to do.

The harsh, the stark, reality of our human history, a reality we as a folk once accepted and was part of our ancestral tradition, is – as I noted in a previous article – “that many of us die or will die from disease, viral or otherwise; that elderly people are more prone to die from infections – viral or otherwise; that epidemics and pandemics and disease – from the Black Death to the Spanish 1918 pandemic to malaria – are a fact of Nature and a means whereby we have changed, evolved; that we can either accept the power of Nature, and who and what we are, or we can try to struggle against Nature and try to conquer Nature and believe we are fighting a war against epidemics and pandemics and disease.” {1}

It is sheer arrogance – hubris – for us to believe we can fight Nature and win. Our ancestral wisdom informs us that we should work in balance with Nature, not against it.

This working in balance with Nature is, I believe, enshrined in National Socialism and implies an acceptance of the stark, the harsh, reality of civilizations and especially the stark reality of the birth, growth, evolution of our Western civilization. If we do not accept this stark reality how can we hope to even maintain, to defend, our civilization?

The current crises has revealed how tyrannical our governments can be and now are, and how many of our folk do not know or cannot accept the harsh reality behind our Western civilization and the harsh reality needed for us to defend it, and develop it, and ourselves, further.

For my view is that it is tyranny for the government – any government – to confine most people to what is in all but name “house arrest” and to take away our centuries old liberty to, for example, go to the Pub or watch or take part in outdoor sports or other events, or travel somewhere in our land for a holiday, or play a game of football on a beach.

Our governments have now shown that they have total power – they command what we do and where we go, ultimately on pain of imprisonment if we don’t pay the fines imposed by the police for breaking what the government has commanded. Their commands have totally disrupted our Western societies in an unprecedented way.

It has also shown just how meek and tame we as a folk seem to have become. That there is a meek compliance to such government decrees by most of our folk shows how passive we as folk have become. Would Vikings, would the Anglo-Saxons, would the Kelts, would Germanic tribes, have embraced such a message as “stay safe at home” and obeyed their tyrannical overlords? Would they have been bothered by deaths from disease, viral or otherwise, to the extent of staying meekly in their dwellings? Or would they have accepted that death – from disease or from war or from other causes – is a natural and necessary fact of human life and thus continue to live, and to fight, according to ancestral custom?

Thus, the question really is: what have we, as a folk, now become or are becoming?

D.L.
April 2020 ev

{1} https://regardingdavidmyatt.wordpress.com/2020/03/24/covid-19-update/

°°°°°°°


Covid-19 Update

odal3

°°°°°°°

Today, Monday 23 March 2020, the Prime Minister of Britain – grandson of a Russian Jew, and great-grandson of a Turkish Muslim – sits like a dictator in a plush room flanked by the national flag, and by means of a live televised broadcast announced to the nation that even more tyrannical measures will be introduced which will severely restrict the rights and liberties of ordinary citizens. All the name of “public safety” and “protecting life”.

For now – today – “public safety”, protecting life, and the fight – the war – against the new viral enemy has replaced slogans about the fight – the war – against terrorism and replaced even older slogans about the so-called “evil” of Nazi Germany and the need to fight a “total war” in order to protect and save democracy. The rhetoric is the same: only the name of the enemy, and the means to fight this new war, have changed.

Meanwhile, the social fabric of our British society – going to the pub, to bars, to restaurants, going to concerts and events, playing or spectating at outdoor sports, sending our children to school, and so on – slowly breaks down. There is no time-scale for when life will return to normal. If, after this, it can ever return to normal.

What is happening is dystopian. The powerful politicians, like the Prime Minister, the wealthy and the well-connected, continue with their lavish lifestyles in their mansions or in their large residences with their manicured gardens, while ordinary folk have to endure shortages of food and domestic essentials, lose their jobs because their places of work have been shut down, and are told to stay indoors or risk fines or risk being taken away and forcibly placed in isolation. Gatherings in public of more than two people who do not live together have been declared illegal.

That there is no vocal or organized dissent – in the media, from politicians, even from anarchists and nationalists – about the severe and unprecedented and tyrannical restrictions of the rights and liberties of ordinary citizens is extraordinary. It is as if the majority of people uncritically believe what the government and the media tell them. Which belief and lack of active dissent allows tyranny to survive and propser.

Yet the government policy of (i) isolating ourselves – for up to 12 weeks in the case of those considered to be most at risk in terms of health – and (ii) of “social distancing” and (iii) of “lockdown”, of closing pubs, bar, restaurants, and other aspects of our social society, is not based on fact but on speculation.

The speculation is that hundreds of thousands of people will die if government policy is not followed and enforced. That we would be selfish and irresponsible if we did not do what the government demanded. There is currently no data, no verifiable research, which supports such speculation.

What the latest data – March 21-23, 2020 – does reveal is that worldwide there have been 332,935 confirmed cases and have been 14,510 deaths. {1} In Britain there have been 5,683 confirmed cases and 281 deaths.

This means that the survival rate – even in the worst affected areas, such as Italy and Spain – is greater than 90%. In other words, Covid-19 is not a new Black Death; not a pandemic like the Spanish influenza of 1918. And thus does not require such draconian, such tyrannical, measures.

In addition, the policy of isolation, of social distancing and of “lockdown” does not allow for community – herd – immunity, which for millennia has been Nature’s way of protecting us, en masse, from pandemics. This is the immunity that develops in the general population because those who have been infected and survived pass on such immunity to others as a result of social contact. This is what occurred, for example, during the 1968-1969 Hong Kong influenza pandemic the death toll from which was reduced because a significant portion of people had some immunity to the virus as a result of community immunity.

What the government and their vocal supporters in the media and elsewhere also do not want to acknowledge is that it is a fact of life, part of our nature as mortal biological beings, that many of us die from disease, viral or otherwise; that elderly people are more prone to die from infections – viral or otherwise; that epidemics and pandemics and disease – from the Black Death to the Spanish 1918 pandemic to malaria – are a fact of Nature and a means whereby we have changed, evolved; that we can either accept the power of Nature, and who and what we are, or we can try to struggle against Nature and try to conquer Nature and believe we are fighting a war against epidemics and pandemics and disease.

The government and others have chosen to struggle against Nature since it seems that they want to be seen as “saviours” in a much hyped “new war” against Nature, and because they fear that the option of working with Nature – through community immunity, and allowing our societies to carry on almost as normal – may mean they will be somehow blamed for inaction when people die during the new pandemic.

In other words, they have taken the short-term, short-sighed, political option, disrupting society in an unprecedented way, rather than the option that ancestral wisdom, that an understanding of Nature reveals: of community immunity; of ourselves as biological beings prone to illness and accidents, and of how epidemics and pandemics can be a means whereby we as a species change and evolve. As The Black Death – which unlike Covid-19 was almost always fatal – brought about positive social, religious, and political changes and the European Renaissance itself; for as Nietzsche wrote, Was mich nicht umbringt, macht mich stärker.

That such ancestral wisdom is enshrined in the modern political philosophy of National Socialism {2} is, of course, one more reason why modern Western politicians and the media have chosen the short-term, short-sighed, political option of disrupting society in an unprecedented way. For they have so demonized National Socialism and the folk society of The Third Reich for so many decades – made it a modern heresy – that the majority of our folk have no conception of how that political philosophy enshrines our native, our European, ancestral wisdom.

Which ancestral wisdom does not mean the heartless way of being indifferent to suffering and letting people die, as politicians and many others mistakenly believe. Rather it means caring for the sick and the dying; letting society function almost as normal; allowing for the development of community immunity, and introducing measures which encourage the benefits of outdoor exercise. There is only one country in the world which, so far, has taken this route: Russia, where its leader Vladimir Putin has not imposed “lockdown” and who recently was out and about in Crimea, meeting crowds and shaking hands, and not socially-distancing himself. {3} This natural approach by President Putin – this ray of hope – may, however, change. If it does change {4} then we who are of European descent face a bleak future, our only hope – it seems to me – to carry within our hearts the truth about National Socialism and personally pass on this truth to others.

D.L.
March 2020 ev

{1} https://www.who.int/emergencies/diseases/novel-coronavirus-2019
{2} Refer, for example, to Myatt’s 1990s essay The Meaning of National-Socialism, and his Esoteric Hitlerism: Idealism, the Third Reich and the Essence of National-Socialism which are included in https://regardingdavidmyatt.files.wordpress.com/2018/11/myatt-selected-ns-writings1.pdf
{3} https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-51972974
{4} Update, 31 March 2020. It has changed, to “lockdown”, https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-52109892

°°°°°°°


Christianity and the Aryan Way

odal3

°°°°°°°

Conventional Religion, Christianity, and the Aryan Way
(pdf)

°°°°°

We reproduce here chapter 13 from Myatt’s 1990s, and neglected, tract The Complete Guide to the Aryan Way of Life . The chapter deals with the difference between “the Aryan way” and Christianity and contains some interesting insights.

Myatt’s idealistic and at times polemical tract begins with the statement that

“To be Aryan is to be of Aryan descent and to uphold and follow the Aryan way of life. The decadent and ignoble way of life which exists today in all nations is the total opposite of this Aryan way of life.

An Aryan is someone who behaves and thinks like an Aryan; someone who upholds and who lives, day after day, by Aryan customs and who is aware and proud of their Aryan culture and heritage. Above all, an Aryan is someone who judges everything by Aryan standards, and who strives to do what is Aryan.”

Myatt goes on to state that the Aryan way is the way of Honour, Loyalty and Duty, and that

we use the term Aryan instead of “White”. White refers just to the colour of the skin; Aryan refers to our culture, our heritage, our character, our Aryan way of life.

A true Aryan is much more than just a “White” person: a true Aryan is a White person who has an Aryan character; who has an Aryan “soul”. A true Aryan is a White person who behaves, who thinks, who lives, like an Aryan: that is, in accord with our own Aryan traditions, our own Aryan heritage, our own Aryan way of life.

RDM Crew
2019

°°°°°°°


Applying Myatt’s Philosophy To The Real World

odal3

°°°°°°°

The following pdf document contains our essay Applying Myatt’s Philosophy To The Real World, issued in two parts in February 2019.

We argue that the modern terms – the denotata – “racism” and “hate-speech”, and what derives from them, such as “racist”, are examples of the Myattian principles that (i) denotata hide the physis (the nature) of living beings and thus the ontological relationship between living beings and between an individual being and Being itself, and (ii) such denotata depend on the supposition that named opposites exist and that implicit in such a supposition is a dialectic; that is, a real or assumed or a potential conflict.

We also suggest that such modern denotatum as “racism”, and “hate-speech”, derive from the ideological movements that have come to dominate the political life of the nations of the West; movements which Myatt wrote about in his earlier monograph Vindex: Destiny Of The West, published in 1984.

We conclude that Myatt’s apparently “above time” philosophy of pathei-mathos is ineluctably Western, pagan, and practical, and in essence opposed to the Magian abstractions – such as the concept of “racism” – that now dominate the nation States of the modern Western world to the detriment of our ancestral Faustian ethos.

Applying Myatt’s Philosophy To The Real World
(pdf)

Part One: Racism and Racist
Part Two: The Crusade Against Hate-Speech

°°°°°°°

Related:

Vindex: Destiny Of The West
(pdf, facsimile of 1984 text)

The Mythos Of Vindex
(pdf)

°°°°°°°


Zionism: An Influential Myth

odal3

°°°°°°°

Editorial Note: We reproduce the following article since it appears to be relevant to the current (June 2019) war-mongering by the American government against Iran – a country which the Zionist entity that currently occupies Palestine regards as its number one enemy – with the President of America declaring that Iran would face “obliteration” if it did not do as the American government wanted. A war-mongering and provocations such as flying surveillance drones inside Iranian air-space and then claiming, after one was shot down, that it was in international air-space and that there should be a measured military response. A war-mongering that includes an attack on an oil tanker in the Gulf of Oman and which attack some consider was a “Black Op” by the American military {1}

RDM Crew
June 2019

{1} Preparing For Another War.

°°°°°°°

Zionism: A Powerful And Influential Myth

The United States ambassador to the Zionist entity that currently occupies Palestine – who was appointed by the pro-Zionist administration of the current President, The Vulgarian – declared in May 2019 that the Zionist entity was “on the side of God.” {1}

He also declared that in relation to moving the US embassy to Jerusalem in compliance to Zionist demands,

“the move of the embassy was a validation by the strongest nation in the world, not just strong militarily, strong economically, but strong morally, strong ethically, with a bedrock of Judeo-Christian values.”

Such declarations, and the fact that the ambassador – David M. Friedman – is Jewish and that his remarks were made at a meeting of an American Christian evangelical group provides the necessary context.

A context also provided by comments such as that “God gave the Land of Israel to the Jewish people thousands of years ago” {2}, and as does the plan by the current US national security adviser John Bolton to either get the US to invade Iran {3} – the arch enemy of the Zionist entity – or to support a proxy war against Iran undertaken by Middle East states such as Iraq and Saudi Arabia. A proxy war similar to the current conflict in Yemen where the US provides military hardware, military intelligence, and incentives to a Saudi-led coalition in their war with Shia rebels and which Shia rebels look to Iran as their spiritual home.

That the wealthy John Bolton, a staunch Christian, was instrumental in getting the US to invade Iraq in 2003 by using the lie of “weapons of mass destruction” and instrumental in supporting armed “regime change” – and conflict – in Libya and Syria, and yet like the Vulgarian {4}{5} cowardly managed to avoid military service in Vietnam {6} says all that needs to be said about his posturing war-mongering.

        The necessary context is how so many influential individuals in the pro-Zionist administration of the current President of the United States promote “Judeo-Christian values”, and believe in the myth that the Zionist entity is “on the side of God” and accept the myth that “God gave the Land of Israel to the Jewish people thousands of years ago.”

In other words, the most powerful nation on Earth is – in the 21st century – not only promoting a particular ancient religious myth but is using that myth to support policies of foreign aggression and unconditional support for Zionists and the Zionist entity that currently occupies Palestine.

In practical terms this amounts to Zionist control and manipulation of the most powerful nation on Earth, just as the Zionist myth of the so-called holocaust – the foundation myth of the Zionist entity that currently occupies Palestine – keeps all other Western governments in thrall and obedient. A thralldom evident, for example, in the acceptance of holocaustianity by the current British Prime Minister who in May 2019 stated that belief in holocaustianity was “a sacred, national mission.” {7}

Is there an alternative to belief in such an ancient religious myth and in the acceptance of the belief that the Zionists and the Zionist entity are on the side of God?

Yes: it is the alternative of National Socialism. But not the Hollywood type of Nazism and White racialism {8} in which the modern myth of the holocaust and hate and misogyny play a central role. But the authentic National Socialism manifest in the deeds and writings of the likes of Waffen-SS General Leon Degrelle {9}.

The Hollywood type of Nazism and of White racialism – the Zionist myth about National Socialism and racialism – has conjured up people like Jack Renshaw and Thomas Mair who in their cowardice and weakness both fantasized about killing women, with Mair succeeding in his Hollywood-inspired plan to kill a defenceless woman.

Would the likes of Waffen-SS General Leon Degrelle, of SS-Obersturmfuhrer Per Sorensen, or SS-Obersturmbannführer Otto Skorzeny, or Major-General Otto Ernst Remer, have murdered defenceless women? Of course not.

That the Hollywood propaganda version of Nazism and of White racialism – with its hatred, its misogyny, and its often reliance on Judeo-Christian myths and values – still dominates the lands of the West is indicative of just how powerful and influential modern Zionists have been and still are.

As does the fact that the genuine National Socialism – of the likes of Waffen-SS General Leon Degrelle, SS-Obersturmfuhrer Per Sorensen, SS-Obersturmbannführer Otto Skorzeny, and Major-General Otto Ernst Remer {9} – is apparently unknown among the majority who in the 21st century profess to be either National Socialists or White nationalists.

Reichsfolk
May 2019

{1} https://www.nytimes.com/2019/05/14/world/middleeast/us-ambassador-israel-god.html
{2} https://israelunwired.com/bolton-said-palestine-grabbed-attention/
{3} https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2019/may/16/john-bolton-trump-iran-nuclear-deal-danger
{4} https://reichsfolktimes.wordpress.com/2018/07/20/the-vulgarian/
{5} https://www.nytimes.com/2016/08/02/us/politics/donald-trump-draft-record.html
{6} https://yaledailynews.com/blog/2005/04/28/boltons-conservative-ideology-has-roots-in-yale-experience/
{7} https://reichsfolktimes.wordpress.com/2019/05/07/accepting-holocaustianity/
{8} “Hollywood was founded by a band of buccaneering Jewish immigrants.” Times Literary Supplement, April 29, 1983.
{9} https://reichsfolktimes.wordpress.com/2018/12/26/a-new-interpretation-of-national-socialism/

°°°°°
Related:
Zionism And The Zeitgeist Of The West

°°°°°°°


A Rotten System

odal3

°°°°°°°

We are not surprised that mainstream newspapers publish the propaganda lies of a hateful propagandist financed by a Zionist billionaire {1} without bothering to check the facts or give the person who is being lied about the opportunity to give their side of the story.

For that is how the vast majority of newspapers now operate: as purveyors of gossip and propaganda with little or no regard for the truth knowing full well that ordinary citizens in a land such as Britain will not sue for libel because they cannot afford to since only the wealthy can afford to pursue a claim of defamation through courts of law.

In other words the journalists and publishers of such newspapers are part of the rotten and rotting system that exists in nearly all the lands of the modern materialistic West, led as those lands are by egoistic politicians or, as Myatt wrote in 2010 in a perceptive essay {2} by politicians with their own personal (sometimes emotive) political agenda and/or by the agendas of whatever special interest groups have helped them get elected.

“Such special interest groups invariably include those with particular business and political concerns who have the financial resources to employ professional lobbyists, Media consultants, and propagandists.

The result is that the political party and/or particular advocacy groups who have the most money during elections campaigns, and who have the support of a substantial part of the Media, and/or who have a candidate for high office who is a persuasive public speaker, influence the result of elections, having persuaded or influenced the percentage of people necessary to win an election.

In other words, modern elections have become an often cynical process of targeting, persuading, and influencing, people […]

[Another] problem with modern democracy is that modern politicians – with only a few exceptions – have mastered and use the art of propaganda, evident in their inability to be open and honest about their own failings and culpability while in public office, and in their inability to be honest about the failure of the policies of their government. Instead, they are adroit at manufacturing excuses, or shifting the blame away from themselves and government policies, or are disingenuous when answering questions or when addressing concerns about their culpability or that of their government […]

The always well-off political clique will continue to laud it over the poor and those whose ‘front-line’ public service keeps society functioning. The self-perpetuating political clique will continue to makes excuses for their own failures, for declining public services, for government failure to solve social problems, and for increasing poverty, homelessness, and crime.” {2}

Myatt’s solution is somewhat reminiscent of the idealism inherent in both fascism and National Socialism, albeit that this idealism has been been almost air-brushed out of history by concerted anti-fascist and anti-NS propaganda campaigns during and after the Second World War. Propaganda campaigns such as the ones about “the holocaust” which continue to this day; and propaganda campaigns such as the one being waged today by a “grubby little propagandist” at the behest of a Zionist billionaire which involves rants about fascist and nazi “hate” speech, the hateful dehumanizing of opponents, the praising of multi-racialism, and telling lies about people, all under the pretence of “defeating hate”.

Myatt wrote that the solution is

“to reform modern democracy so that leaders and politicians must have such personal character-revealing experience as qualifies them to lead and to govern, with that personal experience consisting of proven and years-long ‘front line’ service to their country and to their people such as in the armed forces or serving as a ‘first responder’ in such occupations as paramedic, a police officer, and in the Fire & Rescue service.”

This solution could easily be applied to broadcasters, to journalists, to the publishers of newspapers and to the owners of media organizations.

Until the day of such reforms arrives the purveyors of gossip and propaganda via means such as newspapers and ‘special interest’ groups will continue with their grubby trade.

Richard Stirling
Reichsfolk
February 24, 2019

{1} https://regardingdavidmyatt.wordpress.com/2019/02/23/a-grubby-little-propagandist/
{2} https://davidmyatt.wordpress.com/2010/05/29/the-moment-of-my-reading/

°°°°°°°


One Insight: Honour And Beauty

odal3

°°°°°°°°°

One Insight: Honour And Beauty

Here, an insight: Honour creates Beauty – and it is beauty that I desire: to be surrounded by beauty, without and within. Our modern world is ugly: it has made ugliness into an art, a business, a cult and a way of life.

Our environment is for the most part ugly; the attitude of many, many people is ugly – concerned as they are for the most part with mundane things, with profane things, and all to ready and willing as they are to do what is not honourable: to gossip, to be petty, to put their own ego, desires, before what is honourable, and subsumed as they often are with the ethos of ugliness that pervades our modern world. They do not feel beauty; they do not desire beauty; they are, for the most part, content to live, breathe, desire, be part of, the ugliness of the modern world and its dishonourable way of life. For instance, most of the music, the “entertainment”, the art, of this modern world is ugly; the buildings, the cities, the towns, are ugly.

There are a few places where beauty lives, today: A concert, perhaps, where sublime, numinous, music presences for an instant what elevates us beyond ourselves; a woman of empathy, whose face, whose eyes, whose manner, radiates both a warmth and a reminder of our own fragile humanity. A sunny day in Spring or Summer in rural England or Germany when, atop some hill, ones sees, feels, senses the connexion that we are with all life and especially with the ancient land of our ancestors. A simple shared and wordless moment when two lovers become one, through their uncomplicated loyal love, through the immediacy of a shared momentary experience… But these are isolated, increasingly fewer, incidents, among the tawdriness, the urban sprawl, the egotism, the obsession with materialism, the dishonour, the disloyalty, the profanity, the commonness, of modern life.

Beauty is not the norm – the ideal, the archetype, the goal – as it can and should be.

Why do I admire – why have I steadfastly admired, for thirty-five years – National-Socialist Germany? Because I found, and find, in it an intimation of beauty – a desire to bring beauty, joy, back into the lives of ordinary people; a desire to raise them up from the ugly. And what was wonderful, inspiring, remarkable was that this was done within the confines, within the constraints, of a modern nation with its cities, towns, industries: and that it involved all of the people, not a minority, not an elite. National-Socialism was a means whereby the beautiful could be felt and known – a means whereby beauty was once again presenced in the lives of ordinary people. A means whereby a connexion was made to those things which can and do elevate and evolve us, and which thus create an inner beauty. This is the simple, profound, beautiful message of National-Socialism.

How did those National-Socialists do this? Through honour; through duty; through loyalty, through understanding the importance of beauty and of our connexion, through our folk and homeland, to Nature.

So many lies have covered this beauty; so many lies to try to distance us from that truth; so many lies to try and prevent us from seeing, understanding, striving to follow, that beautiful, inspiring, example. And yet – the truth lives; the beautiful, numinous, archetype is there, and will always be there so long as some of us remember, and recount to others our remembering.

David Myatt
December 114yf

Editorial Note: The article was first circulated by Reichsfolk and then published on various “right-wing” internet forums in 2003, including Stormfront and Skadi. It was subsequently translated into many languages, including a Dutch version as given below.

°°°°°°°

Een inzicht, eer en schoonheid

Hier is een inzicht: uit eer komt schoonheid, en het is schoonheid welke ik nastreef: om door schoonheid omringt te worden, van buiten en binnen. Onze moderne wereld is lelijk: het heeft lelijkheid tot een kunst verheven, een business, een cultus en tot een manier van leven.

Onze omgeving is voor het grootste deel lelijk; de houding van velen, vele mensen zijn lelijk, bezig als ze zijn met voor het merendeel moderne dingen, met overbodige dingen, en maar al te snel klaar om bereid dat te doen wat oneervol is: te rodelen, om mooi te zijn, om het eigen ego en de eigen wensen voor dat wat eervol is te plaatsen. De manier waarop ze vaak opgaan in de lelijkheid welke onze moderne wereld doordringt is pervers te noemen. Zij voelen niet de schoonheid, ze streven de schoonheid niet na; zij zijn, voor het meerendeel, gelukkig te leven, ademen, wensen en deel uit te maken van, de lelijkheid van de moderne wereld en zijn oneervolle manier van leven. Bijvoorbeeld, de meeste van de muziek, de zogenaamde entertainment, en de kunst, van de moderne wereld is lelijk; haar gebouwen, steden en dorpen, worden tot lelijkheid verheven.

Er zijn een paar plaatsen waar de schoonheid leeft heden ten dag: Een concert, wellicht, waar sublieme, overweldigende, muziek welke ons wij voor een moment boven onszelf getild worden; een vrouw van empathie, wiens gezicht, wiens ogen, wiens manieren, zowel warmte uitstralen als ons herinneren aan onze eigen breekbare menselijkheid. Een zonnige zomerdag in een landelijk stuk Europa wanneer, boven op wat heuvels, iemand de connectie met al het leven, en special de oude landen der onze voorouders, voelt. Een simpel gedeeld en woordeloos moment wanneer twee geliefden eender worden, door hun ongecompliceerde trouwe liefde, door de urgentie van een direct gedeeld kortstondig moment… Maar dit zijn ge- isoleerde, steeds minder voorkomende, incidenten, onder de stedelijke nonchalante houding, het egoisme, de obsessie met materialisme, de oneervolheid, de onloyaliteit, de individualistische gemeenschappelijkheid, het modern eleven.

Schoonheid is niet de norm, het ideaal, de ruggengraad, het doel, wat het kan en zou moeten zijn. Waarom bewonder ik, en heb ik stavast bewonderd, voor 35 jaren, het NationaalSocialistische Duitsland? Ik vond, en vind, daarin een uiting van schoonheid – een wens om schoonheid, vreugde, terug in het leven van gewone mensen te brengen; een wens om hen van lelijkheid te verhevenen. En wat prachtig was, opmerkelijk en inspirerend was, dat dit binnen de grensgebieden, binnen de beperkingen, van een moderne natie met zijn dorpen, steden en industrie werd gedaan: het ging eenieder aan, niet een minderheid, niet een elite. NationaalSocialisme was een middel waardoor de schoonheid gevoeld en gekend kon zijn, een middel waarbij de schoonheid nogmaals present was in de levens van de normale mensen. Een middel waarbij een connectie gemaakt werd naar die dingen welke ons kunnen verheven en evolueren, en daardoor dus innerlijke schoonheid waar maken. Dit is de simpele, diepgaande, mooie boodschap van het NationaalSocialisme.

En hoe deden deze NationaalSocialisten dit?

Door eer; door plichtsgevoel, door trouw, door het begrijpen van het belang van schoonheid in van onze verbintenis, door ons volk en vaderland, naar onze aard.

Zo vele leugens hebben deze schoonheid gemaskeerd; zo vele leugens welke ons op afstand willen houden van de waarheid; zo vele leugens welke trachten te voorkomen dat we zien, begrijpen en streven hetgeen te volgen, dat mooi en inspirerend is. En toch, de waarheid leeft; de schoonheid en de ruggengraad is er, en zal er altijd zijn zolang een aantal van ons zich het herinneren, en het doorgeven aan anderen om te herinneren.

°°°°°°°°°

Related:

° Myatt: Selected National Socialist Writings (pdf)
° Vindex: Destiny Of The West (pdf, facsimile of the 1984 text)
° David Myatt And Reichsfolk

°°°°°°°°°


Reichsfolk National Socialism

°°°°°°°°°

odal3

Reichsfolk:
A New Interpretation Of National Socialism

What is not widely known in the modern Western world is that there are two very different interpretations of National Socialism. “Ours” – that of groups such as Reichsfolk and of those who know and who appreciate the writings and deeds of people such as Waffen-SS General Leon Degrelle {1} – and that of the majority of latter-day self-described “neo-nazis”.

Latter-Day Neo-Nazism And The National-Socialism Of Reichsfolk

The first and most well-known latter-day interpretation of National Socialism is that of the majority of self-described “neo-nazis”, and which interpretation is accepted by most anti-fascists who actively oppose such modern “neo-nazis”.

This is the National Socialism with a belief in a strong, powerful, nation-State, and with an overt racist ideology. A National Socialism with a dislike – often hatred – of non-White immigrants and non-White neighbours; with a belief in the instinct of “might is right” and the necessity of kampf; with a dislike – even a hatred – of those whose love is for someone of the same gender; a National Socialism with a misogyny based on the masculous instinct that it is the natural duty of most women to be wives and home-makers; and a National Socialism with a dislike – even a hatred – of Islam and Muslims.

The second, and not very well-known, interpretation of National Socialism is that of the “revisionist”, non-racist, National-Socialism developed by David Myatt in the 1990s and manifest in the Reichsfolk group {2} inspired as this version was by Myatt’s meetings with Waffen-SS General Leon Degrelle and by his correspondence with Jost Turner whose vision was of a new Aryan folk-community in America and of other “NS kindred” communities around the world.

In this Myattian interpretation of National-Socialism {3} it is regarded as both (i) “an ethnic philosophy which affirms that the different races, the different peoples, which exist are expressions of our human condition, and that these differences, this human diversity, should be treasured in the same way we treasure the diversity of Nature. National-Socialists believe our world would be poorer were these human differences to be destroyed through abstract ideas,” and as (ii) “a pure expression of our own unique Aryan ethics, based as these ethics are upon the idealism of duty to the folk, duty to Nature, and upon the nobility of personal honour.” {4}

It is also the National-Socialism which rejects the notion of a strong, powerful, modern nation-State in favour of new ethnic folk-communities and which National-Socialism is not politically active “on the streets” but instead is “a social, educational, cultural, and spiritual, movement based upon and dedicated to disseminating the noble principles of ethical, non-racist, National-Socialism which are honour, reason, fairness, loyalty, duty to one’s own folk and to Nature, and respect for and understanding of other cultures and other ways of life.” {2}

              In simple terms, the Myattian interpretation of National-Socialism is based on both honour and race, whereas the neo-nazism of most modern nazis and of modern neo-nazi political groups is based on the glorification of race and the glorification of “racial struggle” at the expense of personal honour; a difference Myatt emphasised is his essay A Brief Criticism of William Pierce, written in 114yf,

“The main weakness of the theorizing of Pierce is that he has failed to see that it is a combination of race and honour which defines National-Socialism, and which should define the racialist movement in general. Without the evolutionary, moral, concept of honour, there is only the inhuman ethics of the past, and in practice this leads to the creation of people who are ignoble and societies which are anti-evolutionary. Thus, Pierce is firmly stuck in the past: an ignoble past of unreason and dishonour.

This lack of an ethical dimension to his thinking leads to him supporting the old concept of racial struggle and the inhuman consequence of considering that some races are superior to others.” {5}

Myatt expanded upon this in his seminal text Esoteric Hitlerism: Idealism, the Third Reich and the Essence of National-Socialism,

“An affirmation of race without an affirmation honour is not National-Socialism, just as an affirmation of honour without an affirmation of race is not National-Socialism.

It is this living, organic, dialectic of honour and race which defines National-Socialism itself, and a National-Socialist is an individual who strives to do their honourable duty to both their own race and Nature herself, of which other human races are a part.

That is, a National-Socialist must always be honourable, whatever the consequences, or the perceived consequences. Quite often, this means a National-Socialist is faced with what seems to be difficult choices and difficult decisions, although in reality if National-Socialism itself is properly understood, there is no conflict, no moral dilemma and no difficulty in doing the right, the honourable, thing.

Thus if something, some act or deed, seems to affirm race – or be beneficial to one’s race – but is dishonourable, then that something is not something a National-Socialist should do. What honour does is define our duty to our race and other races – it prevents us from committing hubris.” {5}

In addition, in Myatt’s revisionist version of National-Socialism there is no misogyny, for the NS Code of Honour applies equally to both men and women,

“A man or woman of honour treats others courteously, regardless of their culture, religion, status, and race, and is only disdainful and contemptuous of those who, by their attitude, actions and behaviour, treat they themselves with disrespect or try to personally harm them, or who treat with disrespect or try to harm those whom the individual man or woman of honour have personally sworn loyalty to or whom they champion.” {6}

Our National-Socialism

The National-Socialism of Reichsfolk is Myatt’s revisionist, non-racist, ethical, version of National-Socialism.

This is the National-Socialism where

“a true National-Socialist knows or feels that some things are honourable, and other things are dishonourable. It is dishonourable, for instance – cowardly and unfair and uncivilized – for several people to attack and try to injure or kill a single individual.

Thus, if several Caucasians attack one Negro, they are acting dishonourably – they are being uncivilized and cowardly. A true National-Socialist would never do such a thing. They would always want to see, or take part in, a “fair fight”.

Furthermore, I myself – a life-long National-Socialist – would go to the aid of a Negro if I saw him being attacked by several Caucasians, for that would be the just, the fair, the honourable, the civilized and the National-Socialist thing to do. That so many people today who adhere to ‘political National Socialist’ organizations do not agree with this just shows how far these so-called ‘National Socialists’ are from genuine National-Socialism. Which, incidently, is why I always write ‘National-Socialism’ rather than National Socialism.”

This is also the National-Socialism where there is respect for the Muslim way of life and Muslim culture, with honourable co-operation between National-Socialists and Muslims regarded as desirable {8}.

That this revisionist, non-racist, ethical, version of National-Socialism is not appreciated – and certainly not understood – in the societies of the modern West is regarded by our kind as just one more indication of just how successful the Magian, the hubriati, and the neo-nazi hordes of Homo Hubris, have been in propagating the Magian latter-day (mis)interpretation of National Socialism as something “racist”, homophobic, misogynist, anti-Muslim, and uncivilized.

R.S.
Reichsfolk
December 129yf
v.1.07

°°°

{1} Waffen SS General Leon Degrelle was awarded numerous medals for war-time bravery including the Knight’s Cross of the Iron Cross with Oak Leaves, a German military award similar to the British Military Cross. His writings include:
° The Eastern Front: Memoirs of a Waffen SS volunteer, 1941-1945. Institute for Historical Review. 2014. ISBN 9780939484768.
° Hitler, né à Versailles. 1–3. Paris: Art et histoire d’Europe. 1986. ISBN 2906026085.
° Ich war Gefangener. Nürnberg: Hesperos Verlag. 1944.
° Hitler pour 1000 ans. Paris: La Table Ronde. 1969.
{2} qv. https://regardingdavidmyatt.files.wordpress.com/2016/05/intro-reichsfolk.pdf
{3} qv. Myatt: Selected National-Socialist Writings (pdf).
{4} Myatt, Why National-Socialism is Not Racist, 111yf. The essay is included in Myatt: Selected National-Socialist Writings.
{5} The essay is included in Myatt: Selected National-Socialist Writings.
{6} The Code is given in the third edition of Myatt’s The Meaning Of National-Socialism, included in Myatt: Selected National-Socialist Writings.
{7} Myatt, The Spirituality of National-Socialism: A Reply to Criticism, included in Myatt: Selected National-Socialist Writings.
{8} See, for instance, the essay Islam and National-Socialism in https://regardingdavidmyatt.files.wordpress.com/2018/12/ns-islam.pdf

°°°°°°°

Related:

David Myatt And Reichsfolk

°°°°°°°°°


Article source:
https://reichsfolktimes.wordpress.com/2018/12/26/a-new-interpretation-of-national-socialism/


David Myatt and Tommy Robinson: A Contrast

odal3

°°°°°°°°°

Editorial Note:

We republish here an article from 2013 which raised suspicions about the person using the alias Tommy Robinson. The article was first privately published in Das Reich, the internal bulletin of Reichsfolk, and then publicly posted on the well-known Right-Wing Stormfront internet forum. {1}

The 2013 article contrasts the showmanry, publicly-seeking behaviour of “Tommy Robinson” with the restrained behaviour of David Myatt, with Mr Robinson announcing his apparent “change of heart” in 2013 in public at a Press Conference broadcast live on Sky TV News. In contrast Myatt did not publicly mention his private conversion to Islam in 1998 until two years later when interviewed by the BBC for the Panorama TV programme about David Copeland and which brief remarks by Myatt about his conversion were cut from the programme and never broadcast.

The article also drew attention to the fact that the person behind the alias Tommy Robinson – Stephen Yaxley-Lennon – was associated with and friends with influential Zionists such as Richard Spencer and Pamela Geller. Which influential people perhaps explains why the 2013 Press Conference and Mr Robinson himself attracted so much Media attention at the time.

            In the five years since the article was published it has become public knowledge that “Tommy Robinson” is now and has been for over a year not only mentored and financially aided by wealthy Zionists such as Ezra Levant, Daniel Pipes and David Horowitz, but also is supported by British Establishment figures like Eton-educated millionaire Lord Pearson and influential American figures such as the Republican Congressman Paul Gosar. {2} Gosar, incidently, is a staunch supporter of the pro-Zionist Middle East Forum run by millionaire Daniel Pipes which group paid for the July 2018 trip to England by Gosar where he met with “Tommy Robinson” and spoke at a pro-Robinson public rally organized and paid for by Daniel Pipes and Ezra Levant.

In summary, Stephen Yaxley-Lennon – a convicted criminal who has been jailed for violence and fraud – is a man who is not only, as the 2013 article states, a publicity-seeker “hooked on attention” but is also, as more recent articles have revealed, a useful muppet whose strings are being pulled by his Zionist paymasters while Establishment figures like Lord Pearson massage his ego by wining and dining him in exclusive venues such as the British Houses of Parliament with the muppet now well-dressed and well-coiffured courtesy of his wealthy mentors but still spouting the same old Islamophobic rhetoric he spouted five and more years ago.

In contrast David Myatt – despite also being a convicted criminal who has also been jailed for violence – is a man who not only now lives like a reclusive mystic but who also as a result of pathei-mathos has, in extensive writings, renounced both his extremist past and all forms of extremism. {3}

RDM Crew
November 2018

{1} http://www.stormfront.org/forum/t999405/

The Das Reich bulletin published by Myatt’s Reichsfolk group was mentioned in the Nazi Satanism And The New Aeon chapter of the book Black Sun: Aryan Cults, Esoteric Nazism, and the Politics of Identity, authored by Nicholas Goodrick-Clarke (page 223 of the edition published by NYU Press in 2003). It was also mentioned – in the section headed David Wulstan Myatt – in the earlier book Encyclopedia of White Power: A Sourcebook on the Radical Racist Right, edited by Jeffrey Kaplan and published by Rowman & Littlefield in 2000.

{2} See for example https://reichsfolktimes.wordpress.com/2018/11/05/an-example-of-zionist-power/

{3} For an overview of Myatt’s recent writings see the book The Mystic Philosophy Of David Myatt (pdf)

°°°°°°°

David Myatt and Tommy Robinson – A Comparison

In early October 2013 the founder and leader of the anti-Muslim EDL, one Tommy Robinson (aka Stephen Lennon aka Stephen Yaxley-Lennon aka Andrew McMaster aka Paul Harris, or whatever his real name is) with much fanfare publicly announced he had left the English Defence League (EDL) because he had “concerns over the dangers of far-right extremism”.

He subsequently gave many interviews to journalists and even held a press conference which was not only broadcast live by Sky TV but also was widely covered by many mainstream newspapers and media including The Guardian and The Sunday Times.

In several of these interviews he announced his intention of continuing to combat what he termed Islamic extremism and even spoke of forming or being part of some new group dedicated, among other things, to preventing the establishment of any new mosques in Britain and propagating the belief that “the Koran promotes violence”. He also declined, when pressed by several journalists, to renounce his association with and support for prominent anti-Islam activists and propagandists such as Pamela Geller and Robert Spencer with whom he had a long-standing association.

Unsurprisingly, many anti-fascist groups and commentators were suspicious of Robinson’s sudden ‘conversion’ with one association – the Measuring Anti-Muslim Attacks – even going so far as to say that unless Robinson met with the victims of anti-Muslim prejudice where the perpetrators were EDL sympathisers they would not believe his ‘conversion’ was genuine.

Contrast the public shenanigans of Robinson with David Myatt, the founder and first leader of the NSM (of which David Copeland was a member) who was, for thirty years, a violent neo-nazi activist and regarded not only as the “ideological heavyweight behind Combat 18” but also as “the mentor who drove David Copeland to kill”.

In the Fall of 1998 Myatt privately, and without any public fuss, converted to Islam at a Mosque in Worcester. Following this conversion he gained a reputation, according to the author Martin Amis, as a “fierce Jihadi”, and – according to Professor Robert Wistrich – travelled and spoke in several Arab countries and wrote one of the most detailed defences in the English language of Islamic suicide attacks, with the Simon Wiesenthal Center commentating in 2003 that,

“David Myatt, the leading hardline Nazi intellectual in Britain since the 1960s […] has converted to Islam, praises bin Laden and al Qaeda, calls the 9/11 attacks ‘acts of heroism’, and urges the killing of Jews. Myatt, under the name Abdul Aziz Ibn Myatt supports suicide missions and urges young Muslims to take up Jihad. Observers warn that Myatt is a dangerous man.”

Over ten years later (in 2010) Myatt, again privately, and without any public fuss, renounced all forms of extremism, admitted his past mistakes, expressed regret regarding his extremist past, and wrote, in an oblique reference to his former political opponents (such as those involved with the Searchlight organization), that –

“I harbour no resentment against individuals, or organizations, or groups, who over the past forty or so years have publicly and/or privately made negative or derogatory comments about me or published items making claims about me. Indeed, I now find myself in the rather curious situation of not only agreeing with some of my former political opponents on many matters, but also (perhaps) of understanding (and empathizing with) their motivation; a situation which led and which leads me to appreciate even more just how lamentable my extremism was and just how arrogant, selfish, wrong, and reprehensible, I as a person was, and how in many ways many of those former opponents were and are (ex concesso) better people than I ever was or am.” Source – http://www.davidmyatt.info/genesis-of-my-unknowing.html

Myatt then withdraw from public life, to reclusively concentrate on developing his rather mystical ‘philosophy of pathei-mathos’ which extols the virtues of compassion, humility, empathy, and love.

This comparison of Myatt with the shenanigans of ‘Tommy Robinson’ leads to the inevitable conclusion that, as one journalist wrote, Robinson’s “defection is not a transformation” and that Robinson “is a man who is hooked on attention” who is simply “changing his method” (his tactics) and not his fundamental beliefs.

°°°°°

Related:
Latest: Criminal Case Against Zionist Muppet Postponed
The Zionist Muppet Archives – Part One

°°°°°°°°°