My embrace of National Socialism - Page 6 - Politics Forum.org | PoFo

Wandering the information superhighway, he came upon the last refuge of civilization, PoFo, the only forum on the internet ...

The non-democratic state: Platonism, Fascism, Theocracy, Monarchy etc.
Forum rules: No one line posts please.
#14645680
noir wrote:ThirdTerm, enough with Aryan thing. Please


Haha. ThirdTerm is a legendary PoFo poster. There are some posters that stand out not because of how many posts they make (though this usually has something to do with it) but because of the uniqueness of the poster. Like I was saying in TLTE the other day, Rich is another one that maybe doesn't post like a machine but still he is one of the most memorable.
#14645690
This thread could be very interesting. For a first time you hear a bright and sane German who says that he's so frustrated that he's ready to consider to become National Socialist. Yet, sister ThirdTerm keep returning to the trivial Aryan thing which the Op already says it doesn't bother him. Any way, the Aryan theme reminds stormfront forum. Enough
#14645700
Paul Sanderson wrote:I think I've spoken about this on the forum before, but modern day Nazis and fascists should carry on as they are but use a different name. Fascism is probably an attractive ideology to a lot of people, but people don't like to admit it. Anyone who becomes a Nazi today probably isn't thinking straight and is doing it to be rebellious.
Why do you feel you need to hide what you are. If you think that Mussolini and Hitler were good leaders why do you shun being associated with them? Its like if you're Leninist you need to stand up and make the case for Lenin. I can't see you getting very far if you're embarrassed about what you believe.

I'm not any kind of fascist. I'm not impressed by their economic policies, but if I was a National Syndicalist, but felt that Mussolini had betrayed and distorted National Syndicalism, then it would give me great pleasure to call myself a Nasy.
#14645704
noir wrote:This thread could be very interesting. For a first time you hear a bright and sane German who says that he's so frustrated that he's ready to consider to become National Socialist. Yet, sister ThirdTerm keep returning to the Aryan thing which the Op already says it doesn't bother him. Any way, the Aryan theme reminds stormfront forum. Enough

Yeah I know, ThirdTerm takes genetic information blasts to the extreme. Why hasn't the OP posted on here for a while I wonder. I'd like to ask him some questions about why he's a Nazi and doesn't join or start a different organisation if he wants to do something.

I visited Stormfront once and it wasn't that great. It didn't seem like it was that active. I doubt many of them are active fascists/nazis anyway but it might be interesting to speak to them.
#14645709
Rich wrote:Why do you feel you need to hide what you are. If you think that Mussolini and Hitler were good leaders why do you shun being associated with them? Its like if you're Leninist you need to stand up and make the case for Lenin. I can't see you getting very far if you're embarrassed about what you believe.
I'm not any kind of fascist. I'm not impressed by their economic policies, but if I was a National Syndicalist, but felt that Mussolini had betrayed and distorted National Syndicalism, then it would give me great pleasure to call myself a Nasy.


Mate, I was just singing your praises as one of the most heroic posters PoFo has ever seen and now you're starting an argument with me. But to answer your question, people need to hide it so that the general population can morally justify supporting you by telling themselves "they're not the same". And they would no doubt be correct in thinking that. By actually giving yourself the title Nazi you're showing that you are the same. Every group is a fascist group, it's just some are more fascist than others. Your movement will never leave the ground if you call yourself Nazis.
#14645794
Paul Sanderson wrote:20% is actually quite achievable if you’re talking about creating something that people can “relate to”. But being “armed and organized” is a different thing. It sounds like you want to set up a paramilitary organisation haha. I think I know what you’re saying though, it probably does help to have people who are ready to fight. But 20% of the entire country as paramilitaries would be like Vietnam haha.


I envisage a sort of "patriotic" movement coming to power with military backing, in a future crisis due to the failings of democracy.

Your movement will never leave the ground of you call yourselves Nazis.


Or even fascists. I do predict a much different political atmosphere if/when democracy screws up big time. Still it would be wise not to go too far too fast.
#14645956
Paul Sanderson wrote:Mate, I was just singing your praises as one of the most heroic posters PoFo has ever seen and now you're starting an argument with me.
It wasn't meant as an attack but as a genuine question. I was genuinely perplexed, not just being rhetorical. I guess I'm not trying to win an election, at most encourage some deconstructive currents, but for myself I tend to find that if I have genuinely thought through a position then people's initial reactions are not so important.
#14646035
Rich wrote:It wasn't meant as an attack but as a genuine question. I was genuinely perplexed, not just being rhetorical. I guess I'm not trying to win an election, at most encourage some deconstructive currents, but for myself I tend to find that if I have genuinely thought through a position then people's initial reactions are not so important.

Yeah it is important to be upfront about your policies but people shouldn't be expected to be completely honest. And the part you mentioned about winning an election is important- people hide their true beliefs in their day to day lives to avoid causing themselves problems. If you want to win an election, the same thing has to be necessary.
#14646431
Deutschmania wrote:All of fascism has initially had socialist roots. If you were to study how it's socio-political philosophy historically developed , you'd notice that fascism evolved from national syndicalism , and other currents of yellow ,right-wing socialism. Even National Socialism has had an ideological tradition of socialism , as represented by the anti-hitlerian Strasserists. So I think that if a post fascist really wants to move to the right , he should instead consider national conservatism.


If you are a German, or even know history, you should be aware that the NDSAP utterly destroyed any and all remnants of Socialism within the party when the SA was disbanded and the Strasser faction purged during the Night of Long knives. From then on the party were no long "National Socialist", but just "Nationalist".

They never were international Socialist. But after 1933 they weren't any kind of socialist.

I have accepted National Socialism because, at this point, I find it necessary to favor ethnic homogeneity in white nations. It's really that simple. I don't have to accept all the tenants of the movement. But the only ones that favor complete ethnic homogeneity in white nations (besides paleoconservatives such as the National Front and Swedish Democrats) are Nazis. Nazism is Fascism. I reject multiculturalism and multiethnicism in western nations. This is not hard to understand. I am not confused. Europe for Europeans only.

Vanilla Fascism is useless in this regard. National Socialism is not. Problem solved for me.

As for Vanilla Fascism - it makes no provisions for things such as race or ethnicity. National Socialism does. Not to mention the fact that 90% of Fascists these days are National Socialist. Multiculturalism is a problem.

I am not extremely thrilled about certain aspects of Nazi ideology - I would be a liar if I said otherwise. But the important thing is that only the National Socialist Fascists of today are addressing multiculturalism and RACE. Neo-Nazis and paleocons. And I damn sure despise paleocons. So I don't exactly have a lot of options.

Fascists must awaken to race. I was in the dark for too long. I was too intellectual and vain to want to admit that race existed. But all Fascists must make this concession if western civilization is to be preserved.
Last edited by Stormvessel on 27 Jan 2016 00:26, edited 2 times in total.
#14646433
Stormvessel wrote:
I am have accepted National Socialism because, at this point, I find it necessary to favor ethnic homogeneity in white nations. It's really that simple. Vanilla Fascism makes no provisions for things such as race or ethnicity. National Socialism does. Not to mention the fact that 90% of Fascists these days are National Socialist. Multiculturalism is a problem.

I am not extremely thrilled about certain aspects of Nazi ideology - I would be a liar if I said otherwise. But the important thing is that only the National Socialist Fascists of today are addressing multiculturalism and RACE. Neo-Nazis and paleocons. And I damn sure despise paleocons. So I don't exactly have a lot of options.

Fascists must awaken to race. I was in the dark for too long. I was too intellectual and vain to want to admit that race existed. But all Fascists must make this concession if western civilization is to be preserved.


Can't agree with you. The Nazis were above all Jew haters and the align with the Arabs was corestone of their policy. Not the left (if there is such a thing as left in Germany) invented the pro Arab policy. Nazi means both NSDAP and NPD
#14646435
noir wrote:Can't agree with you. The Nazis were above all Jew haters and the align with the Arabs was corestone of their policy. Not the left (if there is such a thing as left in Germany) invented the pro Arab policy.


Well, I can't get into that or I might say some things that get me banned. I am not going to discuss Jews and Jewish problems because that isn't decent. All people have problems.

Suffice to say, I wouldn't have a problem bestowing "honorary status" on Jews in European nations that take up our cause.

I do not believe Jews have a biological problem.
#14646441
Stormvessel wrote:I have accepted National Socialism because, at this point, I find it necessary to favor ethnic homogeneity in white nations. It's really that simple.
What's wrong with Liberalism? Surely the immigration policy of pre world war II Liberals would be fine? I'm using the term Liberalism broadly here including much of the the American Republican party at the time. I can't think of any pre war Liberal party that would have dreamt of supporting the current madness. Or what about the great hero Abraham Lincoln, did he support mass immigration of non Europeans? I don't think so. I can assure you the people support mass immigration are not doing it to support Liberal democracy, no they are doing it to destroy Liberal democracy and rule as bloody tyrants.
#14646444
Hi Stormvessel. I'm interested to know why you want to outright associate yourself with the Nazis. I'm not in favour of the Nazis but I can see some appeal. It's easy to admire the way the German state was administered by the Nazis. Numerous scientific and technological achievements were possible and I think fascism really turned Italy around as well. But it's important to think about electibility and appeal.

Out of interest, do you tell the people you live around that you are a National Socialist? I wouldn't blame you if you didn't, but I think a lot of the success of a movement depends on how acceptable it is for its members and voters to publicly state they are in favour of it. It would be easier to create a different movement and use widespread propaganda to gain an initial feeling of goodwill towards your movement.
#14646481
Stormvessel wrote:

I have accepted National Socialism because, at this point, I find it necessary to favor ethnic homogeneity in white nations. It's really that simple. I don't have to accept all the tenants of the movement. But the only ones that favor complete ethnic homogeneity in white nations (besides paleoconservatives such as the National Front and Swedish Democrats) are Nazis. Nazism is Fascism. I reject multiculturalism and multiethnicism in western nations. This is not hard to understand. I am not confused. Europe for Europeans only.

Vanilla Fascism is useless in this regard. National Socialism is not. Problem solved for me.

As for Vanilla Fascism - it makes no provisions for things such as race or ethnicity. National Socialism does. Not to mention the fact that 90% of Fascists these days are National Socialist. Multiculturalism is a problem.

But all Fascists must make this concession if western civilization is to be preserved.


You should correct this to all European Fascists. Let me preface my response by saying that I prefer the term Third Positionist.

One problem with your post and your advocacy of race to all Fascists is that it doesn't address the problems of many countries, particularly mine, the US. I'm not certain in the existence of any inherent racial differences. I will however freely admit that people are happier, and function better in homogenous societies which also tend to be more socially cohesive. The problem here is that ethnic nationalism, or even racial nationalism is not workable in the US, history happened. The actions that would need to be taken to turn back that clock would be so horrendous, difficult, and expensive that the benefits would never be worth it. Like wise dividing the country into ethnic enclaves would nearly weaken the whole and its ability to enforce interests on the world stage.

This isn't to say that I believe in multiculturalism. I consider myself a cultural nationalist, common language, and tradition need to be the focused, and divisions need to be subsumed within the national narrative, and national consciousness. These can be invented in some cases, provided that the groundwork is there.

This also involves recognizing that some groups are inherently more suited for this than others, for example many Americans will complain about the Hispanic population, while I'm in favor of immigration control I have no animosity toward Hispanics. They come from a culture that is heavily European influenced, and has Christianity as a dominant cultural force. All of this means that the values are broadly similar, this is something that I can work with. Arab Muslims are something else entirely, as would be African Muslims.

Western Civilization isn't a race, its a culture, it can be preserved even without any kind of ethnic homogeneity (however useful it may be). The key is not allowing groups who wish to destroy it thrive, whether they are immigrants or not.
#14646577
Paul Sanderson wrote:It's easy to admire the way the German state was administered by the Nazis. Numerous scientific and technological achievements were possible


They did make excellent use of some technology. Generally though the nazi technical performance was abysmal--lagging behind the allies in radar, codebreaking and a-bomb development.

and I think fascism really turned Italy around as well.


Unfortunately they didn't seem to motivate Italian soldiers much or even properly arm them.


But it's important to think about electibility and appeal..... It would be easier to create a different movement and use widespread propaganda to gain an initial feeling of goodwill towards your movement.


Right if you want to actually get anywhere or make a difference you have to be realistic and practical.

Stormvessel wrote
I find it necessary to favor ethnic homogeneity in white nations.


By now a lost cause and unnecessary as all races have people able to contribute. Fascism, authoritarianism, whatever you want to call it, has to have a better basis than race.

noir wrote:
He destroyed both the Arab world...


Shrub jr and his neocon screwballs are ultimately to blame for that.
#14646804
starman2003 wrote:They did make excellent use of some technology. Generally though the nazi technical performance was abysmal--lagging behind the allies in radar, codebreaking and a-bomb development.

The radar and code breaking achievements were the work of the British. So was much of the work on the Manhattan Project. Britain had always been the most skillful innovator and overshadowed all other countries in this area. This doesn't mean Germany didn't make any advances in military technology. If you type "Nazi technological achievements" into Google you'll see enough websites about this. Their medical discoveries are also very well documented, although they came at an unacceptable price.
starman2003 wrote::lol: Unfortunately they didn't seem to motivate Italian soldiers much or even properly arm them.

Maybe not, but the country was weaker before. From what I understand, there was widespread poverty and unrepayably high debt. Inflation was out of control and the country was experiencing serious unrest. But I don't think the Italians were successful during the war, true enough.
#14646814
Maybe not, but the country was weaker before. From what I understand, there was widespread poverty and unrepayably high debt. Inflation was out of control and the country was experiencing serious unrest. But I don't think the Italians were successful during the war, true enough.

Italy has been a clusterfuck of epic proportions for centuries now. Mussolini and his band of merry fascists seemed to be the solution to some of those problems, but it turned out to be a false dawn. Still, what is remarkable is that Italy is still a unified nation and is still reasonably successful by European standards (the northern half at least), despite its deep-rooted political and social problems.
  • 1
  • 4
  • 5
  • 6
  • 7
  • 8

I view this as just more anti-Israel propaganda. […]

Trump and Russiagate

@blackjack21 That's pure bullshit. There are […]

It's a conflation because the commission claims […]

Election 2020

This just makes me more convinced that I must vot[…]