As a comment on “Now or Never,” Jason Here said we had best take baby steps because our day was not anywhere near here yet.
I don’t know exactly what he means, but it reminds of one of our basic lessons here. God bless Stormfront, but us Stormfront Refugees remember when all we heard about was how the writer was ready to go out and Seize Power in a Torchlight Parade. Shouts about “Der Tag” is coming were our daily fare.
When I say Now or Never I do NOT mean “preparing for der Tag” or the imminent Day of Judgment.
PLEASE LISTEN: Now or Never means this is the time for you to do the IMPORTANT work.
Der Tag goes with the same kind of thinking that made the Weakest Generation proud of fighting a war that put one third of the human race under the Communists. They STILL call it a War for Freedom!
Hero or potato peeler, everybody, all Americans, in that war committed a horrible crime against humanity. But even a “der Tager” who wishes Hitler had won can’t understand that statement. To him, that generation fulfills his one ideal: They fought, they won, and they pounded their chests for seventy years at last count.
When I say Now or Never I mean now or never is when to do the IMPORTANT stuff. It is the exact OPPOSITE. Not one single genuine war hero has ever had the slightest effect on history.
Let me REPEAT that: NO WAR HERO HAS EVER HAD THE SLIGHTEST EFFECT ON HISTORY.
That’s the axiom. The corollary to that axiom is that anyone who joined up for the torchlight parade had nothing to do with CAUSING it.
So please don’t black out on me. The time to do something that changes the world’s fate is NOT just before the March on Rome or the March on Rome or whatever the juveniles are screaming about.
BY the way, after Horatio made his Stand at the Bridge, Rome was conquered and burned.
#1 by Coniglio Bianco on 04/30/2012 - 7:16 am
You’ve got to be kidding. We are all the same race the ‘human race’? What ‘human race’? It’s the human species and even then species could be singular or plural.
#2 by Epiphany on 04/30/2012 - 7:24 am
Someone, somehow, has got to demolish the whole Roosevelt myth. The Rooseveltists, after all, operated much more like the Stalinists and Hitlerites than most “Americans” like to remember.
Besides, National Socialism had nothing to do with Race. Much like Communism, it was merely a form of Wordism. Insecure Whites, who by the lie that National Socialism was necessarily a White Movement, seem to gravitate to “Neo Nazism”. Still, anyone who has studied History, the History of America, knows that the National Socialists were no more racist than most “Americans” back then.
The Media is even slipping up, by pointing out that there was racism among “Americans”, as well. Point out “American” racism against the Japanese, and make point by point comparisons between Rooseveltist anti–Japanese sentiment and Hitlerite anti–Semitic sentiment. That would remedy things considerably.
#3 by Jason Here on 04/30/2012 - 8:22 am
Can you provide some evidence that NS had nothing to do with race? I’m not a NS fan, but that seems like a strong statement. Hitler and the Nazis talked extensively about racial and ethnic traits. Although, I am intrigued by the idea that NS is just a form of wordism – but it seems exaggerated to say race had nothing to do with it.
#4 by Epiphany on 04/30/2012 - 8:27 am
Well, racism had a little to do with it. After all, the NS were trying to impress the British! And besides, the British as well as “Americans” of English and other forms of British ancestry, were every bit as racist as the National Socialists. That is precisely why I do not think that National Socialist racism was as significant as others make it out to be.
Of course, the key component of NS was Jew Hatred (what is referred to by the Euphemism, “anti–Semitism). That came from the New Testament of the Bible, according to Eric Zuesse. Google “Eric Zuesse.”
#5 by Jason Here on 04/30/2012 - 8:39 am
NS should not be given a monopoly on being race-aware. American Presidents before WWII were almost as explicit about racial differences as Hitler. Yet Hitler is put forward as THE savior of race by some WNs. But NS appears to have had a more official concern over race than England or America did. And I read that Hitler said his thinking on Jews got straightened out when he STOPPED thinking of them as merely as people with a different religion, and instead viewed them as an alien ethnic/racial group with distinct and incompatible biological differences.
#6 by Epiphany on 04/30/2012 - 9:03 am
Perhaps, Hitler was trying to impress the British, with his statement about perceiving the Jews as a race, for you see, the British were obsessed with race and racial science at the height of their Colonial Empire. When Hitler spoke of “Images of God”, that betrayed his religious fanaticism, since he assumed that only some were made in God’s image and others were not. It is interesting!
#7 by Epiphany on 04/30/2012 - 8:38 am
Well, one has to remember: the racist attitudes of the National Socialists were not all that different than those of the British and “Americans” at that time. The National Socialists may have been racist, but no more racist than their British or “American” counterparts.
#8 by beefcake on 04/30/2012 - 9:33 am
Well Epiphany, all those myths, the Roosevelt myth, the qoute “geatest generation” unquote myth and so on, are just PUZZLE PIECES.
What we NEED to do around is what we ARE doing as a BUGSER.
That is spreading the truth in a way that shows people the BIG PICTURE, the picture on the BOX the puzzle comes in.
The big picture is White Genocide.
Once people are awake to that, only then can they learn the truth about those puzzle pieces.
You cannot break through conditioning where people have been brainwashed to ignore and dismiss the puzzle pieces, you got to show them the picture it comes in.
While the truth about Roosevelt is great information, its for people who already ARE aware of White Genocide.
So when you say someone, somehow needs to demolish the Roosevels myth… that IS EXACTLY what we are doing here.
THing is we cannot just address the issue directly, not at first anyway, as this is information people are conditioned to dismiss.
Hence the importanct of sticking to The MANTRA for the breaking of the BIG lie first.
Expose White Genocide first and the rest of the truth will follow.
#9 by Jason Here on 04/30/2012 - 7:29 am
My garbled statement left some verb or something out. I was thinking of us speaking out publicly in the future, and I was trying to say, as individuals, maybe we can take baby steps until we get good at it, instead of thinking we have to announce all at once we are White Nationalists at church. Take time to get our skills up so we can “represent” well, as the youths say.
In other words, I wanted to take my time so I didn’t look stupid. I’m a guy that needs several trials before i get any good (like getting a sentence right).
#10 by Epiphany on 04/30/2012 - 7:33 am
Indeed, National Socialism may have actually been about religion rather than race. They disguised it as a racial movement, in order to convince the British and the Northern Italians to go along with it. “Aryan” was a code word for non Jewish White: one of the Christian religion in particular.
As such, it was a form of wordism, and one can find all the various anti–Jewish attitudes that they had in teh New Testament of the Holy Bible. The idea of disguising itself as a racially conscious movement had the unintended consequence of the British and the Americans giving up their own racial sentiments.
None of the combatants, in the Good War, were fighting against Racism. All tried to promote their own version of Racism. Even the Soviet Union was promoting Jewish Supremacy!
#11 by Epiphany on 04/30/2012 - 7:40 am
It sickens me that the Christian Zionists, who love Israel for the same reason that most claim to hate the Third Reich, tend to deny that Hitler was their fellow Christian at all. For if anything, Hitler’s ideas about The Jews came from Christianity, and many Historians have pointed that out.
National Socialism was about RELIGION, thus it was a form of what Robert Whitaker calls Wordism. Zionism, the Jewish version of National Socialism, is also about RELIGION, although concerning itself with the promotion of a rival and enemy religion. The Nazi SS wanted to impress the British, so they selected English looking recruits for their ranks.
The British Imperialists were heavily into Race Science, before anyone had ever heard of Herr Hitler. Another thing to look at is British attitudes towards the Irish, which are also based as much on religion as anything.
#12 by Epiphany on 04/30/2012 - 8:10 am
Racism has become a scapegoat!
Almost everything is blamed on racism, these days. People no longer talk about the evils of Communism, if they had ever. They certainly never raise the issue of all the evils done in the name of RELIGION. As stated before, National Socialism was more of a religious movement than a racial one.
I really have to wonder about how we “Americans” nowadays tend to define it? It is usually specifically the racist attitudes of Whites against nonWhites that is termed “racist.” Blacks certainly blame all their problems on Racism, much like– irony of ironies– the National Socialists blamed all their problems on Judaism.
None call themselves “racist”; but use it as an epithet to refer to others. That is intriguing in and of itself. Besides, no matter what the Chinese Communists do to the Tibetans, that is never termed “racist.”
#13 by Epiphany on 04/30/2012 - 9:08 am
The operational word is “appears” in the last sentence. The “Americans” and British may have been so racist, at that time, that it need not always be stated. Hitler, trying to impress the British, went out of his way to make the appearance of being racially conscious.
Was he really a racist, whatever one may mean by the term, or, was he merely a RELIGIOUS Fanatic, as some suggest? I wonder!
#14 by Epiphany on 04/30/2012 - 4:02 pm
Roosevelt probably was a racist, too!
#15 by c-bear on 04/30/2012 - 7:49 pm
The race issue with NS is focused on because the NS were white, and they were – at that time – successful.
You will rarely hear about any of the other NS policies, because that is not what “they” want you to hear. Epihany is correct in that the NS were no more focused on race then anyone else.
But that was then.
Now when people think of NS they think of race. What they thought then is not nearly as important today as what peoples perception is now.
#16 by Jason Here on 05/01/2012 - 1:41 am
Well, someone who runs another WN website has suggested over at TOO that anyone who “upholds the current anti-White morality or history” be banned from posting at any WN site. Sadly, what he means is anyone who thinks associating ourselves with Hitler is a bad idea, is virtually a traitor. In his view, anyone who wants to ignore Hitler is a concern troll. Or an agent working to get close enough to betray them.
That little group of so-called White Nationalists are really a strange cult that has no interest in real success. Oh well, if it happens, I’ll be posting more of my inane prattle here. 🙂