Posts Tagged ‘wwii’

Why No One Should Commemorate D-Day

Tuesday, June 6th, 2017

Every June 6th, the media and patriotic brain-dead conservatives fawn over D-Day, the event that occurred 73 years ago when the Allied forces invaded Fortress Europe. Instead of celebrating reputable holidays, we commemorate a People’s Holiday for a war no one won.

It does not require us to be National Socialists, or even to have felt that the National Socialists offered a better alternate because on the whole they did not, to notice that World War Two was a war for democracy, which is essentially the antechamber to Communism.

As Plato wrote 2400 years ago, democracy naturally leads to tyranny of the sort promised by Communism: a revolt of the plebes, overthrow of social order and caste structure, and its replacement with many equal people dependent on government. When this happens, the intelligent and good die out and are replaced by the kind of thoughtless, short-term, high time preference and low foresight people found in the third world.

Democracy arises from a long chain of events that occur with the pitfall of success. When one task is vanquished, another one arises, and this one is invisible because it is intangible. A society that thrives must find a long-term purpose other than its citizens and their individualistic wants, or it falls prey to egalitarian thinking.

The West succeeded beyond all other civilizations in recent history, but by doing so, it bred and attracted people who wanted simply to participate instead of participating in an active culture. These went into cities, started businesses and became prosperous, and quickly — i league with the Church, foreign groups and secret societies — began agitating for power over those above them in the hierarchy.

With prole revolt, the West overthrew the social order that had worked so well for it, and began a thousand-year fall into Leftism, which triumphed with the end of WWII and since that time has ravaged this society so thoroughly it is unrecognizable. Leftism is egalitarianism, which arises from individualism, which comes from hubris or the “me first” attitude that denies the natural hierarchy of ability.

On D-Day, democracy won its greatest victory since the French Revolution, and a mere twenty years later the people of the West — drugged on postwar economic booms and Leftist self-congratulatory rhetoric — voted for their own ethnic replacement. They were not aware that this was what they were doing, but this is the failing of democracy: voters are not personally accountable, nor do they experience direct consequences, so they treat voting like going to the circus and choose whatever they think makes them appear to be wise, compassionate, generous and most of all, egalitarian. Democracy always goes Leftward for this reason.

As happened in World War One, the West sacrificed many of its best to destroy those who opposed democracy, and drugged itself with talk of freedom, equality, liberty, tolerance, pluralism, justice and peace as a way to explain away the obvious collapse of civilization. Generations despaired. Culture faded away. Religious faith died, and the family was hollowed out.

After 1945, the West still had Communism to keep it in check. Leftism cannot advance when there is an example of how bad Leftism will inevitably become if not opposed, and the rampant murders and genocide of the Stalinist years made it clear that the Soviets had to fall for the Leftist mental virus to continue unchecked. As the 1980s closed and the Soviets fell, Leftism flew free like a pandemic.

Since that point, the West has gone so far democratic and Leftist that it would be unrecognizable and hated by those who stormed the beaches on that first D-Day. As usual, what the politicians promise is an illusion, but like all victims of scams, the voters delude themselves. WWII was a slaughterhouse like the war before it, and we all lost for what the West has become.

For that reason, there is no point celebrating D-Day; it is a tomb, both for those on all sides who lost life and limb in the conflict, and for the West itself. No one won, and the West will never win again until it abandons the arrogant and greedy prole revolt that is democracy.

There Were No “Good Guys” In World War Two

Thursday, May 18th, 2017

Many of us flinch when we see Nazi imagery pop up whenever there is political strife. It is not just that we detest neo-Nazis / white supremacists / white nationalists, who seem to specialize in forming cliques and driving normal people away, but also that we have doubts about Hitler himself.

After all, in his hands Germany was defeated in a costly war, her women raped and her cities bombed into ruin. There were also Jewish people left in German custody who, through neglect or mistreatment, perished en masse. Many of us see this as the opposite of what our people stand for, which is conquest without cruelty and establishment of lasting social order.

In addition, National Socialism had some fatal flaws. It depended on dictatorship and near-totalitarian conditions. It stood in the way of restoring aristocracy. Worst of all, perhaps, it refused to leave behind modernistic thinking, basing itself in both socialism and the idea of treating people as equal units to be stamped with official dogma and made into perfect citizens.

No, leave me out of the HitLARPing, please. It just makes me ill. Not all lost causes are bad, but the best lost causes are those which could have won and endured, not those which were unstable and prone to self-destruct even if their enemies had fallen at their feet.

But with the same spirit of honesty that we criticize Hitler, we should also acknowledge that there were no good guys in WWII. The Soviets were genocidal idiots; the Americans nuked civilians; the British delighted in fire-bombing citizens. On top of that, the Allies were an ecological disaster:

German munitions were dumped in the sea on the orders of Allied forces following their victory over Adolf Hitler in 1945. The US, Britain and France also dumped large amounts of weaponry off their coasts.

Although the majority of the German weaponry dumped was conventional (explosives or fire ammunition), about 40,000 tons contained chemicals including mustard gas, phosgene – a chemical weapon that gained infamy during World War I – and arsenic.

We have fallen so far that terms like “incendiary” for ammunition are now baffling to most readers. You have to distill it to a simple term, like they see on Taco Bell sauce packets. It’s “fire ammunition” now in Democracy-speak.

The war ends, and the victorious Allies — aware of how the voters are tired of the whole thing and want it to just go away — avoid the costly task of disposing of munitions by instead dumping them into the Baltic Sea. Out of sight, out of mind, just like every other pollution control under democracy.

Seventy years later, fish are mutating thanks to this massive dump of toxic stuff (this is unrelated to the term “toxic dump” as used in the context of Taco Bell):

They believe the cancerous growths found on the species known as the common dab could be linked to the estimated 1.6 million of tons of armaments that were dumped at the bottom of the Baltic and North Seas at the end of World War II.

As usual, in democracy the safest bet is to sweep the problem over the rug and to pass it on to future generations. Even if you know the disaster will become a problem eventually. In fact, certain future problems are a great idea to create. That way, you have an excuse to seize power in the next dozen generations as well as the current one.

American Establishment Tries, Fails to Revive Cold War

Sunday, December 11th, 2016

It is hard to tell whether the American media is an organ of its government, or the government an organ of its press. Either way, this group took the original idea of American liberty, which was egalitarian, and converted it into the type of end-times-of-Rome egalitarianism to which any degree of liberalism inevitably expands. They now act together as an ideological bloc that we call the Establishment or Cathedral.

Currently, this Establishment wants you to believe that the Russians interfered with the American election, relying on earlier dubious statements attributing the Wikileaks dump of Democrat emails to the Russians. Official state organ Pravda-On-The-Potomac issued the following communiqué:

The Post’s report cites officials who say they have identified individuals connected to the Russian government who gave WikiLeaks emails hacked from the Democratic National Committee and top Hillary Clinton aide John Podesta. One official described the conclusion that this was intended to help Trump as “the consensus view.”

The report highlights and exacerbates the increasingly fraught situation in which congressional Republicans find themselves with regard to Russia and Trump. By acknowledging and digging into the increasing evidence that Russia helped — or at least attempted to help — tip the scales in Trump’s favor, they risk raising questions about whether Trump would have won without Russian intervention.

This shows us the uncanny insect-like persistence of the Left. They have combined two agendas: overthrowing the election, which they spent $1.2 billion to lose, and unifying their base by creating a new Emmanuel Goldstein. That character was the constant state enemy in 1984, a book written by Leftists to disclaim the more disturbingly accurate Brave New World, an anti-modern diagnosis by Aldous Huxley that argued it was not totalitarianism but mob rule that would do us in.

Leftists have tried several strategies to subvert this election. First, they announced and then performed almost a week of riots which failed because the only people they could recruit were in Leftist stronghold cities, and burning those down bothers very few, since the cost is socialized to insurance and taxes, which is a Leftist tenet anyway. Next, they tried claiming Trump was a Nazi again. When that failed, they announced the recount. Since the recount backfired as voter fraud appeared back on the public television screen, they are trying a new angle.

The Left intends to argue that Trump stole the election with the help of a foreign power, and that therefore, the courts should intervene. It is a simple strategy based on the Leftist majority at the Supreme Court, and it is as dishonest as it is clear. The point is to invent a plausible excuse for overthrowing the election, and then to demand that all goodthinkers get excited about it and demand it, putting pressure on those who do not want to be excluded from the Left-herd to do their duty as good Commu– Democrats.

Naturally, this will also fail. If Russia leaked emails and these unnerved people so much they voted for the other side, that is hardly a convincing case for intervention. The media is hoping always that it can present two stories side by side and then by shaking up the narrative, get them to blur together. One story is that the digital voting machines were interfered with; this is the recount myth. The other is that Russia leaked emails. Blur them, and you get “Russia hacked our computers and helped Trump steal the election,” which is exactly the kind of slogan that demagogues want to see carried in filthy little hands during the next round of riots.

Their second agenda is more insidious. The Left, following its birth from peasant revolutions and the French Revolution, always needs a symbolic enemy; this takes the form of the enemy-who-is-not-the-threat. In Revolutionary France, for example, the actual threat was overpopulation and continued European conflict; the false target, or official state enemy, was the King. During WWII, the actual threat was the Soviet Union, but the fake enemy was Hitler, who was not concerned with the USA except as an intervening party in a European conflict against Leftism.

With the rise of Trump, the fake enemy of Hitler finally fell. This was helped by Brexit and the populist revolt in the EU which essentially affirmed that Hitler was right about diversity and Leftism: both were paths to a uniquely European doom. The Lügenpresse came out all guns blazing to call Trump and his supporters racists, KKK, Nazis, Hitler, etc. and the Trump team shrugged it off. They had no guilt, and their supporters, who had witnessed the rise of extreme Leftism — a.k.a. moderate Leftism given power — under Barack Obama and the ensuing war on whites and anyone else with money, simply did not care. So the old enemy, Hitler, fell, and the Left has to vary it up a bit.

Our new pseudo-enemy in Russia takes after not the Reagan years of fighting Communism, but a far earlier political myth. As with the French Revolution, America was born of overthrowing a monarchic power ruling over it, but the Americans, being savvier to the ways of humans than the French, did not go full democracy because they feared and specifically stated that they feared mob rule. But, a revolution requires a tyrant or it is illegitimate, so the Americans cooked up George III as not just a tax-greedy leader, but a true-blue Platonic tyrant.

This turned out to be half-right, mostly because George III was in an impossible spot owing to British politics, which were no longer monarchic except in name, and in order to keep the UK’s own overpopulation problem in check, and satisfy the wealthy interests that now routinely bumped the elbows of the Crown, he was in a difficult political situation involving apparently unending wars and domestic instability. The “tyranny” imposed on America was mostly that it was taxed to pay for England’s needs, including a union with near-white disaster state Ireland, and that it was ruled from afar by sailing ship, which meant that any command of the king was obsolete long before it arrived at its destination.

In Putin, the Left has found an enemy. He is not a weak leader, which makes him a possible threat. He is not a Leftist leader — the Russians have less than fond memories of their flirtation with moderate Leftism given power — and he has made rumbles of creating an alternative to the Americanization project that is the EU (not NATO, as most Rightists incorrectly identify). His European project is the idea of European cultural unification, not political unification. Most importantly, he has turned down the shibboleths of Leftist goodthink obedience, such as championing gay marriage and diversity.

How much he believes any of this is hard to say. An intelligent realist sees each country as a self-interested actor, and the self-interest of Eastern Europe has always been the conquest of the West. Eastern Europe is formed of those who fled feudal service in the West and, like Satan reigning in Hell, they are mostly content — but always seek to validate themselves and justify their choices by reconquering the higher authority that rejected them. A Revolution, if you will, in parallel to France, but this time comprised of recapturing territory once made off-limits.

The Soviets, never fools, tapped into this mythos among the Russian people when the West became its enemy. The Russians love the idea of finally getting to own Germany, much as they tried to by retaining control and destroying Eastern Germany. They adore the thought of being able to crush Germany again and rape its women. This fulfills a hole in their own souls: the knowledge that they were those who could not make it in Germany or were exiled, as after the Peasant Revolts, fills them with resentment which they think physical conquest can master.

Pure Machiavellian questions also arise. Eastern Europe is broke and starving despite having vast oil reserves, massive amounts of land, and plenty of talented scientists. Prole-rule does not work after all, and in Eastern Europe, the states are all dysfunctional because too many of the people are dysfunctional, as is the condition in Southern Europe and third-world states everywhere. As a result, political myths are more important than reality, which is everyone eating beets after making all of the potatoes into vodka from now until eternity.

Not being fools, or completely fools, the Left have resurrected Putin-as-Hitler instead of Putin-as-Soviet because they need a new Cold War but know it cannot be against Communism. The Americanization project, based in the idea of equality and diversity, is the new Comintern, and the American system is essentially Communism plus working grocery stores — they learned from last time — so if we exhume the Cold War, it will become apparent that we are the new Soviets and the Russians are not really the new Nazis. So we dug up George III, implied he was Hitler and the Confederacy at once now, and hope to send people off to fight the new racist, sexist, xenophobic, ableist, saneist, elitist, realist myth-monster in the political sky.

This puts us at an interesting juncture in history. The Leftist attempts to unseat the presidency have failed for a simple reason: most people, even if they voted against it, are OK with it, especially as signs of health and order return after the positively Soviet Obama years. Trump has ably defeated the slurs against him by treating them as the tantrums of spoiled children, which they are, and the recount effort ended in shambles and the knowledge that Jill Stein just legally defrauded her donors to the tune of millions. The Left is disunified at the failure of its magic words — “racism,” “sexism,” “homophobia” — to cow its adversaries and unite its base.

And so, in the grand tradition of banana republics everywhere, something must be done to tie us all together and most importantly, distract from the fact that we are an empire in decline, a bag of special interests instead of a people cooperating toward a goal we all share. The distraction enemy must avoid the real threat, which is the decline of our civilization and its impending third-world status, by focusing us toward a scapegoat. And so, a new Cold War hybrid with World War Two is born, and yet it is stillborn, and we remain desperate, seeking an escape from reality and an explanation for our failure that does not involve the obvious: the real enemy is, as always, us.

Hitler won and the Holocaust is about to happen

Tuesday, January 27th, 2015


WWII ended in 1945 but we fight it every few years in metaphorical form. Like the archetypes upon which it was built, the French Revolution in Europe and the Civil War in the USA, it was the well-intentioned inclusionists versus the evil not so sociable people and this message united the “free world” to truck off to war yet again.

But as we celebrate 70 years at Auschwitz it becomes clear that Hitler won the argument, even if he lost the war, and that for all that the Holocaust was terrifying, it was merely a precursor to the actual genocide of the Jewish people which will use less terrifying methods but be absolute in its success. Like the philosophers and artists who inspired him, Hitler and the German Nazis were always outnumbered and knew they could not win on the basis of strength because the mob always wins. What took the NSDAP down was not superior fighting ability of their enemies, but greater numbers and more materiel, allowing the Allies and their Soviet cohorts to essentially spam German forces with too many targets to shoot and then bomb them into submission.

This mirrors the situation with humanity as a whole: a few smarter people note problems, but are outnumbered. Not just the average person but most except a very few want to keep kicking the can down the road and keep themselves enfranchised in the system even if it collapses. They just want it to collapse after they are done with it, sort of like shoppers hoping for an going-out-of-business sale at their favorite shop.

The Jewish people now face a greater threat not just in Europe but worldwide than they ever did under the Holocaust. This threat comes from the Left who, being far more populist and popular than the right, mask their opinions under moralism and then use that to — much as in the Civil War or WWII — justify destruction of those who disagree. The Left has turned the Palestinians into the new denizens of Auschwitz and will gladly do everything it can to deny the Jewish people in Israel any recourse. The UN, the media, academia and most NGOs have now turned on Israel and by extension, the Jewish people, who by wanting to exist as a people seem to exhibit the kind of nationalist sentiment that enrages liberals about Israel. This dovetails with a general process of assimilation by Jews in their host countries through outbreeding, secularization and most of all, a lack of belief in culture itself as leftism takes over and makes ideology, not culture and social order, the basis of society.

Hitler could be viewed as a philosopher or artist who chose statecraft as his medium. He advanced many ideas, but the biggest were these:

  1. Equality is suicide. The quest to make everyone equal is not only mathematical nonsense, but leads to a complete breakdown of social order. Men and women need different roles, as do different castes in society, and we all benefit when the best are on top.
  2. Internationalism is a failure. Internationalism is the same idea as multiculturalism and diversity: that we can form nations from arbitrary groups. Hitler thought nations needed an identity made from culture and race, and that the “proposition nation” united by ideology and economics was a farce controlled by commercial and oligarchic interests.
  3. People need more than self-interest. Liberalism wants us to aim for “happiness” through enlightened self-interest, but in reality happiness is not found through the self but through discovering how the individual can affect something larger than itself, even if only through participation.
  4. Humanity needs a quest. The idea of humanity as many individuals content to be comfortable is a modern invention. In reality, people need a goal that makes them accept their sufferings and ignore them because they feel that these are trade-offs in order to work toward something better.

While I find his methods abhorrent, and consider Holocaust I to be one of the worst moments of humanity, the fact is that Hitler’s goals are near realization through the hands of his enemies. Thanks to liberalism, Europe and the USA have obliterated themselves financially in pursuit of the egalitarian dream. Although Hitler’s goal was not destruction of worldwide Jewry — he originally planned to relocate them to Madagascar — in Europe and the USA, “diversity” means that many groups who co-exist hate each other as part of their DNA, and so Jews are under attack and now are not protected by the liberal media establishment. Most will simply outbreed and raise their children as atheists, anglicize (or more likely, translate to Spanish) their names and forget any Jewish past. The Jewish people will be obliterated. Already the fruits of diversity have become visible even to a bunch of latent Reds like the BBC:

Ronald S Lauder, president of the World Jewish Congress, told the commemoration: “Jews are targeted in Europe once again because they are Jews…

“Once again young Jewish boys are afraid to wear yarmulkes [skullcaps] on the streets of Paris, Budapest, London and even Berlin.”

For the last seven decades we have fought ourselves in the West to avoid admitting in any way that anything Hitler did was right. He is our Emmanuel Goldstein after all, the official state Enemy who must be blamed for all ills and destroyed wherever he, like an ancient god of disease, appears in avatar form. It’s an amusing superstition based in our fear that he might be right after all. Even more than the money we sacrificed on the Cold War, we have sacrificed the wealth of several generations on social programs, civil rights, lawsuits and regulations. We have sabotaged education and turned our children into Soviet-style political actors who will report their parents for a racist joke. Racial equality is but one part of the egalitarian dream which has turned our social experience sour. Everywhere we are surrounded by incompetents and endless rules, bureaucracy and ugly commercialism. These things are necessary for us to all be equal, we are told, so we do not protest. We cannot — to do so is to be called Hitler and fired from our jobs, ostracized and left in homeless camps.

Our society is miserable. Our daily lives are stained by the ugliness of a society that insists on illusions and, when they fail, prefers to sacrifice everything it has instead of admitting that these ideas are non-workable and therefore, the ideology might be wrong. We grind on, crushing ourselves into dust with boring jobs and no-culture living that is unfulfilling, caught up in a neurosis of sexual liberation and obedience to dogma that makes us miserable. You wonder why no one is intervening to stop the disaster. The answer is that they want it to get worse and they want this world to die in flames.

Well, this is a fine state of affairs. I never wanted to arrive at such conclusions, but “I must speak as I find.” I don’t have to like it however. Years of observation have impressed upon me the notion that the misery of modern first-world people is exceeded only by their fanatical and fundamentalist insistence on not admitting that, since to do so is to lose what they have and to realize how much of their lives they have wasted. Seven decades later, we still fight WWII, and like everything else we do, we lose the battle even when we win the war. All of this conceals the real question, which is as simple as it is profound: but how do we fix this?

Recommended Reading