/fascist/ - Surf The Kali Yuga

National Socialist and Third Position Discussion

New Reply
Files Max 5 files32MB total
[New Reply]

Sieg Heil!

[Hide] (194.9KB, 960x913) Reverse
Welcome to /fbc/

As a wise man once said, in a roundabout way, books are tools. They exist to inspire the coming man and other revolutionaries, and to aid the process of iteration. We, therefore, would be fools not to take advantage of them. 

Fascist Book Club plans to meet on a weekly to biweekly basis to share well-written insights on books chosen by /fbc/ members. The book of the week will be chosen in the thread, and after an allotted time period, anons will return to discuss their reading. Posts related to the chosen book should be high quality, and anons are expected to keep discussion civil and productive. Lastly, and most importantly, have fun with it! While the topics being discussed can be serious, there is no reason why you can't enjoy it. So, let's get started.
Replies: >>719 >>812
[Hide] (9.4KB, 197x255) Reverse
Our first book is:

Impeachment of Man
>Written by Savitri Devi

Discussion starts on 9/23
Replies: >>983
Archive.org link for Impeachment of Man:
Replies: >>391
Sorry to be a beggar but could you post the file here, please?
Replies: >>393
My bad, bad etiquette.
I'm wondering, if the first discussion goes well, what everyone wants to read next? I was thinking that we could do something by Nietzsche or Gottfried Feder, but suggestions are more than welcome.
Replies: >>453
Beyond Good and Evil would be a good choice. One of Spengler's lesser talked about works like Man and Technics or Prussianism and Socialism could also give some good discussion, but they're rather short.
I think Feder's pretty much already read by everyone here. I think one of his influences like Othmar Spann might be a better choice.
Replies: >>455
>Beyond Good and Evil
I've read it before, but I could probably benefit from a rereading. All the discussion I hear around Nietzsche is usually pretty good, but all I got from Beyond Good and Evil was a rootless cosmopolitan whining about post-modernism while following a philosophy steeped in it and praising the people who brought it about. 

>Man and Technics or Prussianism and Socialism
> Othmar Spann
These all sound like good ideas. I've also shilled the american transcendentalist movement for a while, but that might be a little too abrahamic for /fascist/.
[Hide] (90.4KB, 1135x196) Reverse
I suppose I'll start. This book was prophetic and way ahead of its time. Mass extinction caused by humans, problems with vaccinations, and even social causes like loggers replanting trees are all things that have only relatively recently made it into mainstream discourse. One thing I always love about national socialist literature is how it seems like it could have been written yesterday. The evils they fought against then are the same ones we fight against today. In Chapter 1 Devi discusses how ideological minorities will spring up in civilizations throughout history and set the stage for moral judgements, just as we see fellow travelers of national socialism and fascism spring up regardless of time or place, already awakened to a national socialist worldview.

I'm usually not into the ecofascist or metaphysical stuff and never would have read this if not for this thread. My only experience with Devi is The Lightning and the Sun, which I enjoyed immensely, so it was nice to experience her writing style again. She has a way with words that really pulls one in. I won't say much about the things I agree with because I don't think that fosters discussion, so I'll post some of the thoughts I had while reading that put me in opposition with Devi's vision. 

Her discussion of valuing animal life as equal to or even above human life is usually based on a critique of religion (eg. Jesus died for the sins of Man, not animals), but it's also possible to take a more secular viewpoint. That man is a rising beast using his ability to reason to rise above animals and plants while still existing within his role in nature is briefly addressed by Devi, but she boils everything down to the "usefulness" of an animal species to man. She creates an all-or-nothing argument where if one values the ability to reason, then one also has to value every human life regardless of that individual's circumstances or if he can even reason at all. This is wrong because if Man is lifted above beasts by his ability to reason, then a man who cannot reason is nothing more than a beast and would be subject to similar treatment. It seems Devi may have agreed somewhat with this viewpoint as one of her main critiques of man-centered worldviews was that of hypocrisy. For example, she frequently highlights the inconsistency with people who support testing on animals, yet oppose "war crimes." Devi also claims it is not in nature to be omnivorous, and man has only picked up meat as an acquired taste, but we know of multiple species that are omnivorous in nature. This claim and her claim that domesticated dogs and cats could live on bread and milk in a meatless world might be a product of the time it was written, since these are obviously incorrect with our current knowledge of animal species and nutrition. Based on that, the argument that humans are naturally omnivorous still stands. One thing Devi does not address at all is the killing of animals to maintain fruit and vegetable farms. The number of mice, birds, and other "vermin" that are exterminated to maintain a field of fresh vegetables is no small number, so I was hoping to see how she would reconcile that in her vision of a meat free, cruelty free society.

Ultimately, one doesn't need an animal to be "useful" to value its existence nor does one need to completely abstain from consumption of meat, rather the focus should be on avoiding unnecessary harm to any living thing. One also does not need to see even the worst humans as superior to animals or having some sort of divine soul. While I can fully support the abolition of factory farms, it wouldn't do to also shut down a small time farmer or homesteader raising animals with kindness in a clean environment for the purpose of feeding their family or community.
[Hide] (94.7KB, 694x423) Reverse
[Hide] (100.6KB, 545x197) Reverse
I can't really disagree with any of your post, so I guess I'll expand on it. 

Devi talks a lot about the morality of eating meat, and I agree with most of her points. Reducing and eliminating cruelty wherever possible should be a primary concern of a post-establishment Aryan society, as kindness to animals and nature is a defining trait of the Aryan psyche. The consumption of meats like veal is wrong, as it deprives the animal of a fulfilling life and a mother of her children, as well as callous exploitation of animals in slaughterhouse and factory farm conditions. Where I start to disagree with her, like (you) said, is the notion that the Aryan man can reach his full potential eating only plants. The nutrients found in offal and other meats, which have been systematically demonized and eliminated from modern diets for the express purpose of harming Aryan men and women, are essential to the proper development of Aryan children. If the fairer races are needed healthy and in their prime to establish a perfect world, as Devi says, then the consumption of meat is necessary. 

She also relies too much on examples of situations involving feral cats, and this reveals the somewhat limited scope of her understanding of the love for all living creatures, unless she is using this to make the arguments she uses more appealing to the common person. Cats and dogs in most places are invasive species. When people feed them, they only cause their populations to multiply further. They cause untold havoc on local ecosystem, like in examples of the cat's colonization of islands in the Pacific. When one steps back and truly sees the situation, they realize that the most humane thing to do would to be to remove invasive cat populations in the least cruel way possible. By this, I mean that sometimes traditional kindness to all animals (feeding stray cats), although it makes us feel good, might not always be the best thing to do. The greater good is not always what would look "right" to the common man. 

Also, I do not agree with Devi's praise of the concept of the universalist soul. Just because all beings are imbued with the fire of life, does not mean that they are inherently the same. They are united by one principle, not equal in power or importance (they do all have some purpose though). The idea that a man can reincarnate as an animal seems like a dangerous slipping point into ideas of equality of other kinds. The Aryan is an Aryan because his soul could be nothing else but that. To reject his purpose would be adharmic, which is why it is used as a punishment in many myths like those mentioned by Devi, and others, like the Bacchae.  

Keep in mind, I do not think that Savitri Devi wrote any of this maliciously, but only that she had deficient information about nutrition and that she did not properly analyze the rule of Eternal Struggle. Most of the problems Devi has with meat consumption could be solved by relying more on dairy consumption for protein intake, and only eating livestock that are old or already dying. She also fails to acknowledge the harmful effects of modern agriculture, like the repeated harvest of fast growing plants as opposed to more permaculture related plantings, the loss of soil, and the incompatibility with unmanaged ecosystems. Still, the book was a very engaging read.
Replies: >>468 >>505
So first of all I'd like to thank you all, ladies and gentlemen.
Thank you for the opportunity to be here today with you.
Since I am from a land where free speech is basically nonexistent today, I do not take this opportunity lightheartedly.
Thank you all.

So first of all what a book...
Even though written some 80 years ago it reads as if written yesterday, as you said >>457.
The writing style is impeccable and I would even consider this a Whitepill.
Why? Because even if written as a critique there shines a glorious light out of these sentences.

>Ultimately, one doesn't need an animal to be "useful" to value its existence nor does one need to completely abstain from consumption of meat, rather the >focus should be on avoiding unnecessary harm to any living thing.

And this positive outlook on life is what completely distinguishes her from the modern times, the modern socalled elites and even the modern ecologists I would argue.

The fighting of "climate change" is solely based on the fear of life itself.
And this does not stop at the human level, as can be seen with people arguing not to procreate for the sake of modern "ecology".
So this is actually anti-life.

Which brings me to the main thing this book provided.
Which is: Distortion. Or rather the conciousness of distortion.

It is not so, that the ecologist "masses" are all "anti-life" even if that is what is being preached.
To the contrary, most of them are actually pro life and actually hold beliefs that are absolutely aligned with Devi's, even if not so profoundly developed.

But the idea got distorted.
A true aryan idea that many if not most of us hold somewhere in our hearts got distorted in such a way as to turn it against us.
Distorting it in such a way that forces some of us us to oppose it.
Thereby effectively turning us against ourselves.

This can be seen with many things that got somehow distorted:

((( Ecology ))) = anti natural life.
((( Healthcare ))) = anti health.
((( Feminism ))) = anti feminine.

True male rolemodels = the ((( glowing ))) nigger andrew tate.

You name it.
The good thing in all this is that we can now be sure that below these distortions there always was and is something good.

The most difficult task now is achieving "perfect balance".

Because nothing less than "perfect balance" is needed.

Is needed to hold your balance between being opposed to the  distortion and embracing the aryan truth.
Is needed to walk the path across the drahtseil.
To the other side.
Replies: >>465
>Even though written some 80 years ago it reads as if written yesterday
I think most authors who have a firm grasp on the truths of the universe end up writing in this way, like Hitler, for example. A lot of his writings about the political climate of Germany, and his view of the future geopolitical climate still rings true today. Once you see the general motion of history, you get where everything is going. 

> Distortion. Or rather the conciousness of distortion.
This is a really interesting topic, and I'm glad you understand it so well. One of the biggest example of this "distortion" concept is the molding of the figure of Jesus to match the Germanic conception of the archetype of Baldr. With figures like Baldr already being associated with Mirth and Fidelity, and the Aryan compassion for all life, it was not much of a stretch to push the figure of christ onto the germanic people, as the Arian Christian of the Goths shows. 

Andrew Tate, who is essentially PUA for the zoomer generation, accomplished the same thing by pointing out the truth of the degeneration of modern women. Most Gen Z young men are acutely aware of the state of women, but, being the most negrified and atomized generation to date, in the US at least, they either are not present enough to act on it, have no interest or desire to change the situation, or are too embarrassed to speak out. Now, having the Zoomer's attention, Tate provides a false solution. He tells the young man that it is the woman's fault for being a whore, and that he must exploit women's psychology in order to pump and dump as many of them as possible. He is providing a cheap imitation of true masculinity to kids that don't know any better. The only real way to solve the woman question would be to take personal responsibility for the actions of women and stop them from being whores. 

One of the worst examples of distortion I've seen is with the "literally me" media phenomena. Hollywood has created characters, which, on the surface, appear to be in agreement with a sane viewer's ideals, but in fact are neurotic weirdos. Characters like Travis Bickle from Taxi Driver, William Foster from Falling down, Daniel Balint from The Believer, and Holden Caulfield from the book Catcher In The Rye and all characters dreamt up by jews to subvert the viewer into adopting neurotic, alienating traits, and to associate National Socialist adjacent ideas with insane people in the popular mind. I might make a more in-depth poster about this later.
Replies: >>471
>Cats and dogs in most places are invasive species. When people feed them, they only cause their populations to multiply further. They cause untold havoc on local ecosystem, like in examples of the cat's colonization of islands in the Pacific. When one steps back and truly sees the situation, they realize that the most humane thing to do would to be to remove invasive cat populations in the least cruel way possible. By this, I mean that sometimes traditional kindness to all animals (feeding stray cats), although it makes us feel good, might not always be the best thing to do. The greater good is not always what would look "right" to the common man. 
I agree with you here. This and her rejection of the idea of natural omnivorousness are my main (admittedly small) critiques of this book. She also later presents an argument against spay and neuter of pets as destruction of that animal's ability to play its part in the natural order. This seems asinine to me, not only because of the aforementioned issue of overpopulation of strays, but also because of it's probably THE most humane way to eliminate suffering of the unwanted pets. It would be one thing if she objected to the keeping of pets entirely, but she insists that the general human population actively care for animals and to avoid the idea that "do no harm" is enough. 

Oftentimes, "do no harm" is exactly what should occur. Any interference by man shows preference to one species or another, and Devi seems keen to reject that notion.
Has anybody here read For My Legionaries yet?
Replies: >>472
>molding of the figure of Jesus to match the Germanic conception of the archetype of Baldr
Having personally experienced jewish behaviour the concept of Jesus being one of them is just totally and utterly laughable to me. Anyway that's a most interesting subject. So if you could recommend me some books that aren't ((( distorted ))) I'd be most grateful. Maybe we could read something of the mythological sort next. 
>Hollywood has created characters, which, on the surface, appear to be in agreement with a sane viewer's ideals, but in fact are neurotic weirdos.
I really liked reading your take on that "literally me" media phenomena. They really love those "weird" characters don't they. The thing is that this "weirdness" is becoming more and more blatant in newer movies. At the same time forums like the kiwifarms are getting censored, where actual "weird" real/internet personalities are being called out. Makes one wonder. But that one is an entirely new topic in itself.
Years ago, yes. Main takeaways were:
>Embrace masculinity, embrace fraternity
>Traitors are worse than enemies
>Jews can't Jew you if your society is healthy
He had a Christian take on this last one, but it's a fair point irrespective of religious affiliation.

A lot of the rest was autobiographical if I remember correctly. Let me know if I've forgotten anything - it might be worth a revisit.
[Hide] (696.6KB, 709x1071) Reverse
[Hide] (194.5KB, 662x1069) Reverse
Our next selections will be:

>Written by Tacitus

The Nibelungenlied
>Written by Unknown 

With all of Savitri Devi's talk of the life affirming attributes of ancient Germanic civilizations, what better way would there be to further our discussion of this but to analyze the ancient Germanics. This week, you will read a selection of two texts, "Germania", a text written on the germanic tribes in the Roman Imperial Era by Tacitus, and "The Nibelungenlied", a germanic epic which finds it's origins near the time of the fall of the Roman Empire. 

Discussion begins on 10/3
Replies: >>478 >>479
Nibelungenlied PDF
>Germania 0MB
>the ability to reason, then one also has to value every human life regardless of that individual's circumstances 

>Also, I do not agree with Devi's praise of the concept of the universalist soul. 

This just further proves my point I made on 8chan on how Dharmists and Abrahamics are all the same and both have a universalist perspective on how everything is ultimately equal. I will never understand why NatSocs are trying to adopt Santana Dharma, especially the Gita, which are incompatible with many of the beliefs and nature of National Socialism. Himmler reading it means little to nothing and I doubt he blindly absorbed all of its contents. The true face and brains of the NSDAP was Hitler anyway. I still like Devi though, she was one of a kind and her books were all on point.
Also, this thread is for civil discussion. Refrain from insulting the people you are replying to, an keep the tone respectful. I admit I got a little aggressive in my post, and I apologize for that
If the discussion is not related to the book itself, move it to an appropriate thread.
Replies: >>522
Is there any way for you to move the last 3 posts to the aryan religion thread?
/lit/ here.
Reading through Roman literature at present. 
Also third position economic works, which are diverse and at present I can't synthesize.

I would strongly recommend the Aeneid, it's very readable, thought often discounted as a poor man's oddesey and a deification of Roman elites who sponsored it's writing the book is a rare primary account of Roman values as they really were.
I suppose it's discussion time already. These were good choices to follow up Impeachment of Man. These readings covered a number of subjects and you could spend time discussing any number of them. Here are some things that caught my interest in reading.

The Nibelungenlied does a pretty good job showcasing Aryan ideals and how they can be subverted to the detriment of all. At the very beginning it is said "meet is it that the old help the young, even as they in their day were holpen" which is immediately followed by an example, Siegfried receiving land and castles from his father as his father had received from those before him. It is our duty to build up our "kingdom" (your livelihood, reputation, etc) in order to pass it on to our descendants. All too often these days we see elders hoarding what they've built up and would rather die alone in nursing homes than pass it on for the next generation to continue building on. We see brotherhood and fraternity between Siegfried and Gunther in Gunther's wooing of Brunhild. There are two main topics I'd like to touch on from this work, however, and that's the role of women and the subversion of the people.

Initially the relationship between the men and women in the story is close to the ideal. Women are strong, such as Brunhild challenging men to a test of strength against her, but they ultimately defer to the men, who are brave warriors and conduct the business of the house. They support each other, women managing the household and kingdom and while the men are away, and while the idea of the inferiority of women is somewhat present, it is presented as mere chivalry. This reminded me of Himmler's speech on homosexuality to the SS, where he briefly discusses attitudes towards women in a national socialist society. He states "The attitude about the inferiority of women is a typical Christian attitude, and we also who have been national socialists up to this day - many even who are strict heathens - have unwittingly adopted this set of ideas." It is not my intention to start a debate on Christianity vs whatever, but to illustrate that some of our forefathers in the movement realized the importance of respecting women as they seem to be respected in the Nibelungenlied. The "women question" appeared in some of the deleted posts in this thread and it's a nice coincidence that we get a chance to talk about it so soon. As Dr. Sofia Rabe said in her pamphlet on the role of women in a national socialist Germany, "the misery of women is a part of that great misery of the German Volk, and can only be solved in conjunction with it." The current miserable state of our women is merely a symptom of our corrupted society, which leads us to the next topic.

The argument between Kriemhild and Brunhild was turned into a great ordeal, destroying at least two kingdoms. Gunther and Siegfried failed to reign in their women and despite settling the issue themselves, a certain element was allowed to seep into the cracks. I'm sure this was familiar to many of you. The bold and honorable Siegfried betrayed by a cowardly schemer. I thought I may have been reading too much into it so I decided to investigate and found the same interpretation from Wagner himself! Hagen is the eternal Jew. He is portayed as a half dwarf in Wagner's opera and Högni, his norse counterpart, is a half elf. The idea of an impure racial element seems to span the continent in later versions of the story despite not being present in the original work for what seems to be obvious reasons. His scheming causes the dissolution of a moral society, with many betrayals following and Kriemhild becoming unhinged, abandoning all of her honor. Then at the very end Hagen refuses to give up the location of his stolen treasure even with death upon him and no one to inherit it. Despite being revealed in the second volume to be a powerful knight, at his core he is greedy, cowardly, and refuses to take responsibility even when caught. 

As for Tacitus, Germania was interesting and reiterates some of what I've already discussed. He notes the purity of the German race and calls out the Bastarnae as an exception, saying they have a deteriorated physique due to interbreeding with Sarmatians. Women are brought to battle to shame cowards and the morals regarding women and marriage are praised by Tacitus who says "good morality is more effective there than good laws elsewhere." This goes back to my previous discussion about women and it's worth noting that these values were present even 1200 years before the Nibelungenlied was written. They are a part of us. Tacitus says "none of the German peoples live in cities" and criticizes this fact as if it is a trait of an uncivilized people. We are not a people made for cities. We are miserable in cities, as Hitler says many times in Mein Kampf. Tacitus praises city architecture with houses that are close together and "efficient," but it clashes with our sensibilities. The culture behind lebensraum is as old as our race and once again, it is part of who we are. "This people is neither cunning nor subtle." See Siegfried. That a friend could betray him never crossed his mind. We are not schemers, so it's only right that our greatest natural enemy is one.
Replies: >>603 >>605
It was pleasant to read your review anon, thank you.
On the women question: very interesting what you pointed out there. It really is distinguishing that germanic societies always had such a high degree of honor that expresses itself towards women. 
Tacitus described the warring of the tribes. But also that they had some kind of unwritten rules. That they were honest. Truthfull. That even the slaves were relatively free. He ascribes that to the overall degree of freedom. He describes that they only did little chores and were otherwise not obliged. Hypothetically speaking such a society would not even push vaccination on the slaves.
The customs of the Germans as recorded in Germania serve as a great contrast to the failing values of Imperial Rome. Tacitus himself recognizes this within the text, one saying "no one there laughs about vice, nor is seducing or being seduced considered 'modern'", and commenting on the unique nuptial practices of the Germans, like they're relative lateness to marry. An increasing decadent Rome permits more and more sexual degeneracy, with wet nurses and court intrigue becoming common, while the Germans do not feign to even mention vice. It goes to show that settling into avarice and degeneracy is an ever-present threat to civilization, as the Tacitus's account of Roman degeneracy rings true in current society. It also shows us that, with or without the Jews, (although Jews were present in abundance in places like Alexandria), degeneration will come, meaning that it is the Germanic man's responsibility first and foremost to uphold the values of his civilization. 

Aspects of both the Nibelungenlied and Germania show the integral nature of competition in Germanic societies. In the Nibelungenlied, fair competition, often with grave consequences for the loser, plays a big role in the development of the story. Gunther bets his life in a competition over his marriage to Kriemhild, and Siegfried's war with the Saxons is an extension of this, with it being a sort of gentleman's war. The ancient Germans treated sport and war as almost one in the same, and it helped to develop an attitude of detached violence. In Germania, Tacitus mentions the same attitude, talking about how Germans would sometimes bet their freedom in dice games, and would hold themselves to their word when they lost. Since this attribute is present in the ancient and medieval Germans, this must be a constant of the Germanic spirit.

I think the portion of your post about the role of women in a NS society, and how both texts correspond to it was very insightful. Many people adjacent to our circle see our relationship with our women as adversarial. The truth of the matter is that they are only obeying their nature, and it is our fault for letting a society that does not reflect our higher values to draw them in. White women are complimentary to white men, and they can often be our muses. How many things are more beautiful that seeing a beautiful, healthy woman with an equally heathy baby? Women in Germania are not confined to their homes, nor are they covered in concealing clothing. It is not right to treat them like animals to be muzzled, as, again, it is the man's responsibility to bring them up right and resist their urges.
[Hide] (708.4KB, 750x1099) Reverse
Our work for the next week or two is:

Beyond Good and Evil
>Written by Friedrich Nietzsche

Moving away from more esoteric works, we now enter the world of modern German philosophy, which we will explore over the next several weeks. Our first work, Beyond Good and Evil, by Nietzsche, disagrees with the fascist worldview in many places, but also affirms it in others. It should be ripe for analysis.  

Discussion starts on 10/15
Replies: >>608
Beyond Good and Evil PDF
It has been a while since I read anything by Nietzsche and I'm rather powerfully reminded that I still don't have the philosophical background to really tackle his works. Ironic since I suggested it, I guess. His references to Spinoza and others besides Kant were lost on me, but luckily he lays off the other philosophers after part 1. There are any number of topics you could pick from this to focus on, but I'm going to take a look at three: the concept of "beyond good and evil," religion in society, and slave vs master morality.

Nietzsche says the concepts of good and evil are culturally constructed rather than inherently true; different cultures develop different systems of morality in order to maintain social order. The idea of good and evil only exists to weaken the strongest members of a group. All humans have the "will to power" and systems of morality  bypass this will by privileging the group over the individual. You see here the radicalized individualism of Nietzsche, but Nietzsche also goes on to say that societies are advanced by these strongest members. Plato, Alexander, and Hitler were "beyond good and evil" because they broke free from traditional moral principles. So as national socialists (or fascists) we have to ask ourselves whether we agree with Nietzsche's individualism or if we're "herd animals" following the morality of the collective. This will also go into slave vs master morality so I'll leave that for later and talk about the nature of morality. Is morality universal or cultural? We know that Nietzsche says it's culture, but that goes against Kant's categorical imperative. I believe the ultimate philosophy of national socialism is the blending of Kantian and Nietzschean philosophy, the categorical imperative being the NS idea of "natural law" concerning morality. There are some cultural aspects to morality (laws in France will be different than laws in Germany for historical and cultural reasons) but there exists a universal baseline for morality in European nations and their colonies.

In 48 Nietzsche ties religion to race. I found this very interesting, but even more fascinating was his follow up. He says that for Latin peoples, a revolt against Catholicism would be a revolt against the spirit of the race, but for Aryans it's the opposite. We have a poor talent for religion, according to Nietzsche. I tend to agree. Just look at our movement for the proof. Many of us are more concerned with using religion for it's perceived merits than an actual belief in the religion itself. This is perfectly fine so long as we don't use religion to divide ourselves. In Mein Kampf Hitler said anyone creating division in the movement over religion is doing the work of the Jew. In 61 Nietzsche goes on to discuss the merits of religion for society as an educational and disciplinary medium that ennobles a race. Then in 62 he shows how a religion becoming the end rather than the means can degenerate a society. Many people believe Nietzsche was vehemently against religion itself, but this shows that he was really against the institutions like the priesthood corrupting a pure religion. This is consistent with his views in his "Antichrist." Again, it is perfectly fine to say we don't have a "talent" for religion because it allows us to use religion as a tool to improve ourselves and refine our virtues. 

In this work Nietzsche also establishes his ideas of "slave" and "master" morality. Slave morality being a moral system like Christianity (or communism) requiring submission to others for "the greater good." Master morality is individualistic; it is that which makes a man the master of his own destiny and fate. So are we slave moralists or master moralists? I could see this twisted in either direction. The master morality is Mussolini's "new man" of fascism. He has his own ideals and lives by them. A national socialist now could be seen as this "new man" but what about a national socialist among a nation of national socialists? One could also say that a collectivist working towards the betterment of the race as a whole is submitting to his community for the greater good. It seems his "Genealogy of Morals" (which I haven't read) delves deeper into this topic, so I can't say for certain where we'd stand according to Nietzsche. It is true that we work for the betterment of the nation and race, but we also value the individual. Every brilliant idea begins with an individual. Without that we wouldn't have Mussolini, Hitler, Rosenberg, Feder, or any of the other great minds of our movement. I reject Nietzsche's atomized individualism, but I also reject the slave morality of democracy and communism. Perhaps there is a third position here as well.

I'll leave you with 274. I felt personally attacked by this and some of you may have as well. Here lies the problem of those who wait. How many of us are waiting for "the chance which gives permission to take action"? Improve yourself daily. Read, exercise, whatever. Then go out and apply it. It's the hardest part of what we do and I'm certainly guilty of neglecting the real world aspect of our movement. Do not wait for the chance, but rather "take chance by the forelock"!
I have trouble with Nietzsche.  In one aphorism, he recognized that the philosophy of a people is derived from their racial characteristics, while in another, he says that there was a pre-moral period of mankind. If the philosophy of a people is a codification of accepted "assumptions", as Nietzsche calls them, and with distinct races having existed since before the advent of agriculture, how could this pre-moral culture exist? The only conclusion that can be drawn from his assertion is that the European culture of his time had somehow been influenced by outside racial influences, since he himself describes German philosophy as fraternal to Vedic and Greek philosophy. This makes sense, but Nietzsche also goes on to identify Christian Philosophy with German Philosophy, like Kierkegaard. How could he say that Christian philosophy is in any way similar to that of the Vedics or Greeks? Does he not see that most German philosophy, and most medieval philosophy by extension is poisoned by Christian thought?  How could could he praise the Jew's parasitic lifestyle and "artistic prowess". I understand what he is trying to say with the Jew's ability to survive, but I do not understand how he can see it as better that the more noble leanings of the Germans. 

He at once points out the wretchedness of cynicism and the danger of modern culture, but at the same time praises it's progenitors. He dotes on the jews, and drools over Aristophanes, who, much like Nietzsche, criticized his cultures rotten aspects while still participating in its degenerate Dionysian aspects. He dismisses nationalism as a crutch for the weak (he has a point when referring to modern "Patriotism").  
I can't help but get frustrated while reading his work. 

Putting all of this aside though, he also has some powerful insights. His understanding of will is definitely an important concept for a fascist to understand, and his description of a nihilistic people and society is still very much relevant. I think what Nietzsche was missing was the "nuance" he described in Aphorism 31. For him, the spiritual world is a farce and all that is done is to further the desires of the man doing it. This may be the case, but Nietzsche fails to acknowledge that the Aryan man, through his capacity for compassion, is able to see the entire world as a part of himself. He should also be more accepting of the spiritual aspects of reality, seeing as he identifies the ignoring of observable reality as an issue. 

> It's the hardest part of what we do and I'm certainly guilty of neglecting the real world aspect of our movement. 
I think that this is the most important thing for people in our movement to understand. Very few people are worthy of being called National Socialists, because it is a way of life, rather than merely a political ideology. A libertarian, for example, has no pressure to implement his ideas. He theorizes and that is the end of it. But National Socialism is defined by action; his options are "struggle or die". He must exemplify his ideology and be a reflection of it's beauty.
Replies: >>721
[Hide] (152.1KB, 356x538) Reverse
>>376 (OP) 
We continue with German Philosophy with:

Thus Spoke Zarathustra
>By Friedrich Nietzsche 

Discussion begins on 10/25
Replies: >>720 >>721
Thus Spoke Zarathustra PDF
I believe part of your post is in regard to aphorisms 250 and 251, correct? Although Nietzsche praises the teachings of the old testament, he also says the "slave revolt on morality" began with the jews. I think his praise of the Jews here is just a backhanded compliment. Paraphrasing, he goes on to say "Yeah sure they COULD control all of Europe, but lucky for us they don't want to!" When Nietzsche says the Jew is satisfied with a radical revaluation of values of his enemies, it seems to me that he's just saying these are not an original people. They blend in and assimilate, but use their "moral genius" to twist a nation's values. It's also important to remember the era in which he was writing, as you said. In the Victorian Era just saying Jesus was a Jew would be met with outrage. His backhanded praise for the Jew is more a criticism of the modern German than it is real praise. Alfred Baeumler said Nietzsche's praise for them was meant as a foil for the German reader in order to goad him to greatness. Nietzsche loves contradictions and oxymoronic statements. He presents multiple viewpoints and leaves it to the reader to read between the lines and come up with his own interpretation. I suggest picking up his "Antichrist" at some point if you haven't already read it. I think he makes it pretty clear there that, while he might not be a raging anti-semite, he has no love for the Jews as a whole or their religion.

Only 9 days, whew. I'm a slow reader as it is, but I'll see what I can do. This should be a good follow up to Beyond Good and Evil.
Replies: >>723
>Only 9 days, whew. I'm a slow reader as it is, but I'll see what I can do
If you don't make it, let me know in the thread and we can extend the time.
I was a little worried about not having much to say since I had to blaze through this, but it looks like I've conjured another wall of text. Reading this with no prior knowledge of Nietzsche's philosophy would have been a nightmare, so I thank you for putting Beyond Good and Evil first. 

Thus Spoke Zarathustra differs from other works of Nietzsche with its literary style. Everything is presented as a metaphor and you either have to have prior knowledge of his ideas and who he is as a person or you need to have a lot of time and dedication to cut through the veil of his metaphorical style. You could, and indeed some people have, spend your life studying Nietzsche and going through each paragraph of Thus Spoke Zarathustra dissecting each line to try to get at the true meaning. I also believe this is why it's considered Nietzsche's flagship work. It didn't strike me as anything particularly special compared to his other works, but the added complexity from his unique style here allows academic types to pat themselves on the back for finding the "true" meaning of a passage after much study. Some passages refer to his personal life with references to solitude and digestive issues (nausea and entrails are mentioned throughout) while other passages refer to Darwin, Dostoevsky, Schopenhauer, and others. His philosophical musings seem to mostly focus on his idea of the Übermensch, or "overman" as the translation I read puts it, and Nietzsche ties his previous philosophical ideas to the Übermensch in this work. One interesting thing to note about his literary style is the constant repetition of "over" and "under" throughout the work, symbolizing going toward the ideal of the Übermensch or away from it. This is reminiscent of the use of "up" and "down" in Plato's Republic. I do not know if this was intentional on Nietzsche's part, but the stylistic similarities are clear.

Nietzsche speaks of the death of god. Faith in god is dead and any meaning of life found in some supernatural purpose is gone. It is up to man to give life meaning by raising himself above the animals. The idea of raising oneself above the animal kingdom goes back to our discussion on Impeachment of Man. "What is great in man is that he is a bridge and not an end." Man is a bridge to the Übermensch. To become more than the "all too human," man must become a creator and break with previous norms, or "revaluate all values." One starts out as the camel, a beast of burden laboring under the weight of tradition, then he becomes a defiant lion rebelling against tradition, finally becoming a child creating a new system of values. This can only be done by a man who has subjected himself to the discipline of tradition, according to Nietzsche. I think his scorn for tradition is interesting here and it also goes into his views on stoic philosophy. In Beyond Good and Evil he calls stoicism "self tyranny." He claims stoics do not actually live in accordance with nature, but rather try to dictate their ideals and morals TO nature. He goes on to say that philosophy itself is a tyrannical impulse. In Zarathustra he says "in me there is something invulnerable and unburiable, something that explodes rock: that is my will" and this is very much the ideal we see in Epictetus and Marcus Aurelius. His attack on stoicism is really an attack on the idea of natural law because Nietzsche, as discussed before, believes morals are a cultural phenomenon. Nietzsche describes cheap morals and virtues as a panacea. He says these "traditional" virtues can create mediocrity and "good sleep" but then life lacks meaning. I think here an important distinction can be made between tradition and convention. Nietzsche obviously respects tradition. He has a great respect for the arts, music, and dance. He is well read and wants everyone else to know it. Some may see Nietzsche's attacks on tradition as an attack on the fascist/NS worldview, but it's really an attack on the burden of convention.

Back to the Übermensch, Nietzsche discusses three evils. These evils are sex, the lust to rule (or the will to power), and selfishness. He calls these evils because they have been twisted by Christianity, these are the evils that separate the regions of Hell in Dante after all, but Nietzsche says these are essential elements of the Übermensch. Nietzsche wants to return to the Aristotelian way of thought, with the weakness of will being one of the true great evils. In "On the Way of the Creator" Nietzsche breaks away from his typical individualistic attitude. Only the creator, the Übermensch, must break with tradition. This answers my question on slave vs master morality in my post on Beyond Good and Evil.

Nietzsche also speaks of the state. The state tells nothing but lies and has stolen all it has. The state signifies the will to death, the true evil; it is the "coldest of all cold monsters." His criticism of the state echoes his criticism of modernity. This is very similar to the discussion of the state in Mein Kampf. I do not know if Hitler had prior knowledge of Nietzsche while writing, but it seems he had an innate understanding of this truth. To Nietzsche, to go away from the state is to go toward the Übermensch. The Übermensch is someone who does not really exist, merely an ideal, but Hitler is someone who has come very near this ideal. "They crucify him who writes new values on new tablets; they sacrifice the future to themselves - they crucify all man's future." I couldn't think of anyone other than Hitler when I read this line.

We also see an interesting line on Nietzsche's idea of friendship. He was a solitary person in life, so it felt like a rare statement coming from him and showed that he truly had broken free from Schopenhauer's influence. Do not simply love thy neighbor, but rather make friends who will elevate you and strive together toward the ideal of the Übermensch. Simple and beautifully put.

The fourth part was kind of lost on me. It was published unfinished after Nietzsche had gone insane and was apparently supposed to go before part 3. I thought it was somewhat repetitive, so maybe it would have been trimmed down and refined if Nietzsche had time to finish it. Whether put at the end or elsewhere, it does carry on the theme of self overcoming with each character either representing a part of humanity or a part of Nietzsche himself. 

"Behind your thoughts and feelings, my brother, there stands a mighty ruler, an unknown sage - whose name is self."
Replies: >>742
I find it ironic that one of the more "cryptic" works of Nietzsche has brought me to a much better understanding of him. Maybe Beyond Good and Evil was too sterile, unfeeling, but even at it's end there was an impassioned speech in favor of Dionysus. The poetry he criticized as shallow and unfocused has reached me, as he himself criticizes his musings on the overman as too poetic. There was, too, a certain genuineness that came with the mimicking of vedic and buddhist texts, and perhaps the texts of all wise men. 

Zarathustra is the man deserving of the title of National Socialist. He truly internalizes the love of eternal struggle, or as he calls it: "Eternal recurrence". The good moments he takes with the bad, and he hopes for the worst suffering over mediocrity, with the whole spectrum of existence being deserving of his love. There is room in the world for "moles and dwarves", as he says. This is not to say that evil should not be rooted out and destroyed though. Loving evil is overcoming pity and conquering it. 

The "Eternal recurrence", which many forsake and wish to escape from, is the privilege of the Aryan man. His people are the only ones consistently able to become conscious of the cyclicality of time, and of the privilege of his position. He is gifted with the greatest burden and the greatest honor. He is capable of being the bridge to the "overman".  Zarathustra speaks of this burden repeatedly, talking of carrying the human being on his shoulders. That is what we must do, too. We, who are capable of taking responsibility, are tasked with taking up this mantle and making the world that "will be".

Another important aspect to touch upon, I feel, is Zarathustra's effort to create followers and then teachers. In the first part, he learns that he cannot appeal to the "herd", but to the individuals who would understand his message, thus he would amass disciples. But disciples follow and Zarathustra needed leaders, creators, so he left them to weather the world alone. This would weed out the weak of will and the disingenuous. In the same way, we need to filter out the maladapted and weak-willed in our movement. Dr. Pierce once made a speech on this topic, although I cannot remember what broadcast or convention it was from.

>The fourth part was kind of lost on me.
I took the fourth part as Nietzsche describing the way his readers interpreted his work, as mirrored by how Zarathustra's teachings were interpreted. The Kings are noble and search for the Overman, but are content with not changing themselves. The Man who is conscientious in Spirit throws off the values of his society, but does not build back up new ones. Nietzsche is saying that his readers are striving towards being the overman, but that all of their approaches are flawed in some way. They are "One huge limb", as he put it.

Are you interested in continuing on with Nietzsche or moving to a different author? I feel that most of what he had to say was said in TSZ, but maybe I'm wrong.
Replies: >>743
I'm glad you mentioned the "eternal recurrence" because I completely forgot to bring it up. It's something central to our ideals and you summed it up perfectly. The message about turning followers into leaders was insightful as well. I remember the passage you're talking about, but I didn't make this connection when I read it. The NSDAP used to have meetings dedicated to that very purpose. Even with a Fuhrer, the party needs a strong leadership to back him up and potentially replace him if the worst happens. One Zarathustra is not enough.

Your interpretation of the fourth part is most likely correct. 

>Are you interested in continuing on with Nietzsche or moving to a different author?
I will most likely read some more of his work on my own time, but I'm ready to move on here. This is the fascist book club, after all. While Nietzsche's ideas greatly influence fascist thinkers, he's not a fascist himself. I think these works adequately covered his ideas that influenced the fascist worldview.
Replies: >>744 >>745
No, the AntiChrist is required reading for /fascist/ so make that an addition to whatever you decide upon reading next.
Replies: >>745
Reading the Antichrist will probably be superfluous, as almost all of the books we have read so far have provided in-depth criticism of Christianity (Impeachment of Man, Beyond Good and Evil, Thus Spoke Zarathustra). I wouldn't be opposed to doing a series on Christianity, like ready the bible and other Christian texts (Maybe Gnostics) for the purpose of criticism and analysis of where they went wrong and of jewish influence. 

It would also be great to have you in the book club if you were interested.

>I think these works adequately covered his ideas that influenced the fascist worldview
Ok, good. I was thinking of making the next book Sex and Character by ((( Otto Weininger ))), though I hesitate greatly to call it German Philosophy. If not that, then we will do Schopenhauer and then move on. I'll decide by tommorrow, but you are pretty much the only anon here since the german anon left, so let me know what you want to read.
Replies: >>746
I'm ok with either of these choices. I've read a few of Schopenhauer's essays and definitely want to read more of him. I haven't read any of Weininger, but I've seen him mentioned enough to be curious.
Our book this week is:

Sex and Character
>By Otto ((( Weininger )))

Fair warning, this book is written by a jew. Read with a critical eye and recognize the mark of the jewish psyche when you see it. Otherwise, enjoy the reading. 

Discussion begins on 11/7
Replies: >>749
[Hide] (166.6KB, 452x672) Reverse
Sex and Character PDF
I had some trouble with this book. After reading most of it and disagreeing on nearly every point, I found myself agreeing with him completely in the final chapter. Otto Weininger discusses the nature of man and woman on two fronts: the physical and the psychological. I won't make much mention of his Jewish nature here because I think we can be above saying "he's a Jew and therefore wrong," but it will come up for a few topics. 

His idea of the existence of manlike women and womanlike men immediately struck me as similar to the "gender as a spectrum" nonsense we see today. Weininger proposes a biological basis for this spectrum, stating "However, the answer of the anatomists is clear enough, whether it refer to the brain or to any other portion of the body; absolute sexual distinctions between all men on the one side and all women on the other do not exist." This is somewhat understandable for his time, but this has later been disproven with the advent of forensic science and the discovery of DNA. The idea of an embryo being of a neutral sex (or as some still claim to this day, that all embryos are female and "become" male) is also outdated as XX, XY, and other mutated chromosome sequences exist from conception. This fundamental error causes Weininger to treat sex itself as a spectrum which, like an early error in a math problem, causes him to be far off the mark later on. It would be unfair to hold this against him though because we have an extra 120 years of knowledge and scientific progress to work with. It's worth noting that Weininger hypothesizes the existence of male and female hormones roughly 20 years before they were actually discovered. However, he believes different concentrations in individuals are what work to create this sex spectrum. We know now that hormone levels can fluctuate and can even be corrected if out of balance.

Deriving equations for sexual attraction was amusing and love as a function of time spent together is certainly valid. His idea of compatible sexual partners producing superior offspring was also good, but I was a bit disappointed that a discussion of eugenics never happened. 

He believes that homosexuality is due to female characteristics in men and male characteristics in women. The cause of homosexuality is still not understood because, other than a fruitless search for the "gay gene," scientists are not allowed to touch the subject. It remains a fact that abused children are more likely to be homosexual and Himmler posits that society's masculinization of women (agreeing with Weininger's assertion that the emancipated woman is masculine in nature) affects boys in their developing years causing homosexuality. These suggest that homosexuality is acquired to some degree at some point in development rather than having a genetic cause and I think we can rule out a hormonal cause as well. If it were a hormonal cause, or a male having more female characteristics as Weininger puts it, it could be cured simply by supplementing testosterone. Weininger's claim gives way to the "just born that way" idea that has been so detrimental to western societies. He goes on to claim that any friendship between men has some element of sexuality in it. I found this to be the moment where the jewish mindset really rears its ugly head.

He accurately predicts the modern feminist movement that sees man as its perpetual oppressor. He says "real intellectual freedom cannot be attained by an agitated mass; it must be fought for by the individual" but then goes to explain how woman has no individuality or agency at all. This suggests that intellectual freedom is not possible at all for woman, but he seems to contradict himself in the last chapter, which we will get to later. The passages on the nature of genius, talent, and memory are extremely anti-woman. Rather than recognize the nature of genius in woman as something separate from man, he judges woman by the same measures as man and finds that she comes up short. He claims woman has no talent for the arts or music and has no gift for memory, making her a compulsive liar. In addition, woman cannot reason or have independent thought and therefore she has no soul. He then talks about the nature of guilt in woman, which I agree with. Woman is not herself guilty and everything for which woman is blamed should be laid at man's door. I do not believe this is because women have no soul, as Weininger asserts, but rather due to the cooperative nature of man and woman covered in our discussion of Tacitus and the Nibelungenlied. Man's failings create a failure in woman.

The mother and prostitute chapter is probably the most accurate and relevant to the true understanding of his idea of woman (and to the nature of woman in reality). Weininger seems to change his tone in the last chapter and affirms my belief that man's failure has caused a failure in woman. He says man's purity will bring about the salvation of woman, allowing her to overcome materialism and become a "real human being." The true emancipation of woman is the emancipation from the prostitute element. Further understanding of his idea of woman can be found in Wagner's Kundry, who is idolized by Weininger. I found it interesting that she would be Weininger's standard for the "absolute female." Kundry initially follows the classic "wandering Jew" archetype and has to wait for a savior to cure her curse. Weininger merely saw in Kundry what he wished for himself, which shows that he too is subject to his idea of compatible sexual partners and that his own biases influence what he defines as masculine and feminine traits. 

I imagine his discussion of Judaism would generate the most interest, but I don't have much to say about it. His statements on communism vs Aryan socialism were spot on and were reiterated by Mein Kampf and the anti-communist (and therefore anti-jewish) attitudes of the NSDAP. While I understand the concept of Judaism as a state of mind, I don't like using it. It muddies the waters and can be used to divide a movement. Disagreements on fringe topics (eg. ethnoglobe) would lead to shitflinging within the movement over who is "mentally a jew" and cause members to lose sight of the overall goal of the movement. That would be absurd.

Ultimately, we should only be concerned with the nature of woman as far as it determines her role in a national socialist society. Rudolf Jung's National Socialism allowed Weininger's prostitute element to exist somewhat, demanding the legal and political equality of women. In his view of National Socialism, the woman was just as capable as the man of holding power in a National Socialist state. Hitlerian National Socialism favored the mother element, leaving no room for the prostitute. While it may seem more conservative and restrictive, it's closest to Weininger's proposed emancipation from the prostitute element and it would have been interesting to see how the role of women would have played out 20 or 50 years down the road in Hitler's National Socialist Germany.
Replies: >>806
Although Weininger is able to grasp the dichotomy of the masculine vs. the feminine, and the aryan. vs the jew, I feel that he never really breaks away from a jewish mindset in his book. His worldview is entirely centered around man and what is useful to man, which is the opposite of an aryan view. He makes this explicit with quotes like "man is the only organism with a history". Morality and worth is determined by the nature of each creature it applies to, so separate forms (animals) should be judged on a case to case basis. We do not ask for a horse to be a good carpenter, and in the same way we do not ask women to be good men. 

He also only views great men as acting in the interest of their own legacy, which reduces them to mere materialists. Claiming that memory is the only thing that never fades, he says that great men recognize this and seek to make themselves immortal, and with this assertion I completely disagree. Marcus Aurelius made the definitive statement on fame in his Meditations, being that it, like everything else physical, will decay and be forgotten. Truly great men have always acted without concern for fame. In fact, they act against it. Hitler knew that he could very well lose WW2, and acquainted the german people with this idea in speeches. He knew that if they lost, his fame, as well as that of all of Aryandom could possibly be erased from history, and yet he fought. True men, true geniuses spit in the face of immortality, for it is the wish of only the morally feminine. All will perish, so all that is left to do is act justly. 

The deeds of great men do not inspire us because we remember others, but because they each touch upon the archetype of the Aryan Hero in different ways. Great actions do not echo through eternity, but echo eternity

>He goes on to claim that any friendship between men has some element of sexuality in it
It's funny. This actually mirrors what he says about women and friendship. He proves his theory of the feminine only being capable of sexual relationships (relationships based on hierarchy, not mutual respect) by demonstrating that a person on feminine morality (jewish) is only capable of perceiving relationships as sexual in nature. This, I believe, is also the origin of Freudian Psychology. It's thoroughly jewish progenitor is only capable of seeing the base aspects of psychology, without the higher values of respect and empathy. 

>Disagreements on fringe topics (eg. ethnoglobe) would lead to shitflinging within the movement over who is "mentally a jew" 
A jewish mentality in an aryan body is much less dangerous than a jewish mentality in a jewish body. The jewish mindset is fundamentally anchored to the jewish form and blood, if you want to get a little more spiritual about it. A jewish mentality is really just a feminine mentality in a man. And on the subject of enthoglobe, I would say that it doesn't really matter. It is not nearly as integral to the aryan mode of living like "pagan", for lack of a better word, philosophy, and the NS form of government. Whether or not enthoglobe happens, we will still face struggle. The idea that we can stop struggle forever is not only stupid, but also non-aryan. There will always be something else to overcome because it gives us purpose. We are the righters of wrong.
Replies: >>807
>A jewish mentality in an aryan body is much less dangerous than a jewish mentality in a jewish body.
False, it is much more dangerous, to be Aryan and infected with jewishness, brings out the worst of both worlds, as we have seen over the last century alone. Our race's seeming balance of the fundamental forces of creation and destruction gives us the capability of waging war and destruction like no other and of creating like no other, infecting beings such as that with the most poisonous mindset ever to exist leads nowhere save total and complete destruction. You thinking it is less dangerous than jews being jews, shows you to have an infantile understanding of the problems facing our race this is directly why Christianity is poison to our cause, and has at every fuicking turn stopped our movements dead in their tracks.
>The jewish mindset is fundamentally anchored to the jewish form and blood, if you want to get a little more spiritual about it. A jewish mentality is really just a feminine mentality in a man.
No, it's not, a jewish mentality is not a feminine mentality in a man it is a mentality against nature and life, that is not feminine in nature it is a corruption and warping of feminine nature.
 >And on the subject of enthoglobe, I would say that it doesn't really matter. It is not nearly as integral to the aryan mode of living like "pagan", for lack of a better word, philosophy, and the NS form of government.
It is integral to the central thesis of survival of our race, it is the natural result of the 14 words, there is no other outcome.
>Whether or not enthoglobe happens, we will still face struggle.
Ethnoglobe is not about eliminating struggle it is about maximizing the effect of struggle, once alone we will struggle against ourselves and make ourselves ever better and no longer wasting effort on caring for or fighting lesser beings.
[Hide] (398KB, 750x946) Reverse
>>376 (OP) 
Our next selection is:

The Essays of Schopenhauer 
>Written by Arthur Schopenhauer 

This week, I have chosen for us to read a collection of short essays written by Schopenhauer because his seminal work, The World as Will and Representation, seems to be a bit of a monster. Unless anyone wants to read the work I previously mentioned, these essays will be the end of our series on Modern German Philosophy. Let me know what you all are interested in reading next.

Discussion begins on 11/15
Replies: >>813
>Essays of Schopenhauer PDF
Schopenhauer's that guy you love to hate. He writes to perform what he considers the noble service of sharing his misery with the rest of the world. However, underneath his pessimism and misanthropy there's a bit of hope as he hints that human compassion along with individual will are the means of overcoming despair. I think these hopeful undertones make his writings beautiful in a way and I can see what Nietzsche saw in his work.

A lot of these essays are just introductions to Schopenhauer as a person rather than what we've typically seen in philosophy. These are his own views and don't go much toward building a worldview, but there are still some useful ideas in here. You can see where he influenced Nietzsche on every page. "On Noise," "The Emptiness of Existence," and "Religion" are very reminiscent of Nietzsche and "Metaphysics of Love" lays the foundations that Weininger built his work on. Even though Schopenhauer came first, I think it was very appropriate to explore his work after getting our introduction to Nietzsche and Weininger.

I think "On Authorship and Style," "On Reading and Books," and "Thinking for Oneself" are the most valuable essays for our purposes and they are all connected. Schopenhauer discusses the disposable nature of media well before the age of television and the internet. I find it interesting that even in an age where paper and printing were scarce resources, garbage was still being mass produced. It really shows how some struggles have been going throughout history, but also serves as a reminder that our current struggles have been overcome before and can be overcome again. On style, Schopenhauer says "Men should use common words to say uncommon things" which is very characteristic of his own writing style and the thing I like the most about reading him. If you've ever had the misfortune of reading something related to a more modern philosopher like Heidegger you've probably seen the opposite of what Schopenhauer is saying here. You'll get an essay that's written half in English and half in a twisted mix of Latin, Greek, German, and newly created terms like "mathematics1" and "mathematics2". Schopenhauer says when you read, you're only reading someone else's thoughts and can forget how to think for yourself. Reading is something one can use as a substitute for one's own thought, which can be useful so long as you do not read too much and take time to think about what you have read. This goes to what I consider "the importance of being bored." It's important to give yourself time to think and mull things over. Don't listen to a podcast or music while you run or do some other monotonous activity; just be alone with your thoughts. As Schopenhauer says about free thinkers, nothing is valid unless you yourself authorize it. On reading books, he says you shouldn't waste your time on a book that won't serve a purpose. One should only read a book that has stood the test of time and will improve oneself in some way. Of course, I agree and that's exactly the purpose of this thread.

As for the next read, I'm still going to shill for Othmar Spann's "The True State" and Rudolf Jung's "National Socialism". Both seem like fairly dense reads so it might take a little more time to explore them thoroughly. It might also be appropriate to read Gentile or something else from Italian Fascism. I know Italian Fascism isn't very popular, but it could be worthwhile to commemorate the 100 year anniversary of the March on Rome, which passed recently with little fanfare. Of course, I'm just shilling for things on my reading list that I haven't gotten to yet so take that as you wish.
Replies: >>888
I don't feel that there is much with discussing with this selection, so I'll start by expanding on the essay "On Reading and Books". Schopenhauer talks about the value of books and the banality of most literature that is produced. He answers the question of what will be read in schools, but never what a perfect state would do for entertainment. Novels, he says, and, by extension, all entertainment media, serve only to stop the consumer from thinking original thoughts and to confuse them with nonsensical values and worldviews, so what would the entertainment of a true National Socialist state look like? I would say that schopenhauer indirectly answers this question through his description of the Novel's corrupting properties. We need to create media that ingrains National Socialist values into it's viewers, and the truth of National Socialism it makes it great literature. Its earnestness and truth is what makes it great, just like many of the unspoiled myths of ancient Aryan faiths. We must create modern myths. 

The essay "On Education" brings up some points that are adjacent to those discussed earlier. He claims that a man should be taught only objective subjects until the age of 16, when he should be taught philosophy. I agree for the most part with this sentiment. It would seem that the most beneficial way to use education is to raise a child in the right way so that he can see the truth in what he has been taught. The foundation for this should be, of course, the earlier discussed National Socialist media, like german/aryan myth, tales of more modern heroism, and of newly written literature, and the objective sciences like math, as well as extensive physical fitness. Education should promote critical thinking as well as establish a moral base for students. 

>I know Italian Fascism isn't very popular, but it could be worthwhile to commemorate the 100 year anniversary of the March on Rome, which passed recently with little fanfare.
Sounds interesting, but I'm worried that it'll all just be 200 pages of civic nationalism. Might as well try it out for a week and see what we get out of it though.
Replies: >>890
>We need to create media that ingrains National Socialist values into it's viewers, and the truth of National Socialism it makes it great literature. Its earnestness and truth is what makes it great, just like many of the unspoiled myths of ancient Aryan faiths. We must create modern myths. 

Absolutely and this was the conclusion the Reich came to as well. Most people know the Eternal Jew propaganda films, but there were also films about Horst Wessel, Bismarck, etc. As Hitler said about the nature of propaganda, you need different material to appeal to the masses than you do to appeal to the intellectuals. Normal people aren't going to read Mein Kampf or Myth of the 20th Century. However a movie about a martyr like Horst Wessel is bound to resonate with the masses. As for other forms of entertainment, the strength through joy program is certainly worth emulating. Teaching history in an appropriate manner rather than rote memorization of dates and speeches would generate interest in the history of the nation and race and make nonfiction books a real form of entertainment for youth. As for your statements on education, I agree as well and I believe reforming our education system should be one of our biggest priorities. Ever since I read my first platonic dialogue (Protagoras) I've always wondered why he isn't read in schools. As you said, education should promote critical thinking, and introducing somewhat older students to the foundations of western thought is absolutely vital.
Replies: >>915
>Ever since I read my first platonic dialogue (Protagoras) I've always wondered why he isn't read in schools
Good point. There is a reason people say to start with the greeks, and more specifically Plato. His dialogues are structured like the internal iteration that non-lemming, for lack of a better term (the term "lemming" suggests that the large percent of the population who are wholly controlled by the decisions of the ruling group are an inherently bad thing, which they are not. They are a necessary part of society) individuals do constantly in their heads. Teaching Plato in schools would probably have the same effects that Common Core curriculum is supposed to have on blacks in america. It would teach the process of idea synthesis to students who are not adept at it naturally, much like common core is meant to teach blacks visualization techniques for math that most whites use intuitively.
[Hide] (352.1KB, 716x1040) Reverse
Our next book is: 

Origins and Doctrine of Fascism
>Written by Giovanni Gentile

Discussion begins on 11/24
Replies: >>917
Origins and Doctrine of Fascism PDF
Some of the fears about civic nationalism were warranted, but this turned out to be a worthwhile read nevertheless. One thing that struck me straight away was the willingness to define Fascism. This shouldn't be something someone here would need, but it makes this work a useful recommendation for someone who may be interested in Fascism in general. If you watch a lecture about Fascism by a modern "intellectual" like Jason Stanley or Robert Paxton, you'll notice that they never actually define Fascism, so it's good to have a clear definition to point to.

There are three points that Gentile uses in his discussion of what Fascism is. First, he states the totalitarian character of its doctrine which concerns itself with the political order and direction of the nation along with the its will, thought, and sentiment. Sacrifice from the individual is necessary to achieve his proper value to society. If needed, he must sacrifice his private comforts, interests, and even his life. Second, Gentile considers Fascism a method rather than a philosophical system. He says Fascism is "at other times making and unmaking, now moving forward and at other times returning to the beginning out of the logic of development." Third, Fascism is born as a conception of the State and that State is the center of gravity in a Fascist political system. Morality and religion must exist in a Fascist State, but they are subordinated to the laws of the State. Gentile also discusses Fascism's roots in Syndicalism. Fascism is the unification of Syndicalism with the State to create the corporatist State.

Gentile speaks of the Fascist ideal as a higher conception of life that is not limited to present fact, but must progress in order to conform to "a superior law that acts upon souls with the force of the soul's own convictions." Fascism is an anti-materialistic and essentially religious conviction based on eternal struggle. This speaks to natural law, of course. Gentile may seem to deny natural law in some later passages, but there he's referring to mindless violence. Gentile does believe that violence is necessary, however, in support of laws and ideals as a part of any revolutionary idea. He affirms his belief in natural law in his discussion of Kant's Categorical Imperative. One weakness I see here, which also goes back to his second point of Fascism, is that Gentile's Fascism is not rooted in a specific ideal; the idea that it is not limited and changes with the times. On one hand, it is natural that a worldview will have to make some changes over time, but it is important to root it in some foundation such as the NSDAP's 25 points. Leaving it somewhat ambiguous like Gentile suggests would leave the movement and the future State founded on that movement open to subversion from within.

Fascism is often accused of being an "anti intellectual" ideology and Gentile addresses this. Fascism does not reject science and philosophy, but recognizes the importance of putting theory to practice. Fascism is the unification of thought and action. To Gentile, the Fascist intellectual cannot be the Man Above Time, but rather can only be the Man in Time, rejecting the Nietzschean concept of "beyond good and evil." The true anti intellectuals are those who dedicate themselves to abstract intellectual activity, far removed from reality.

The Fascist concept of freedom is one of the most interesting and controversial subjects. If you have ever tried to introduce a friend to the Fascist worldview, you've surely been met with the "muh freedoms" argument. Gentile's Fascist State rejects the liberalism of the individualist, yet claims Fascism is more liberal than the liberal State itself. In Fascism, the will of the citizen is executed through the State. As we discussed previously, the State is a means rather than an end. Rudolf Jung explores the National Socialist idea of freedom in his National Socialism. National Socialist freedom is not only freedom from the interference of other races, but implies something greater dwelling within the people. That something is different for each Volk. For the Germanic races, he refers to Spengler's Prussianism where strict outer obligation prepares the people for inner freedom. The National Socialist has a deep faith and highly developed sense of duty. This would create freedom in political life and create a foundation which is best suited to the Volk. From here we can see where Jung and Gentile's concepts of freedom merge as this would create a state in accordance with the Volk's innermost convictions.

Finally, we have Gentile's view of the nation as a people. He says the nation is not a natural existence, but a social construct. The nation does not exist in nature, but is a product of an active will that directs itself towards its ideal. As a National Socialist, this is something I reject outright. One could argue that the nation as it exists as lines on a map is merely a social construct, but the nation as a people is rooted in race. Some cases such as the nations in South America may be more culturally focused, but for Europe and her colonies, there is an undeniable racial aspect. Our earlier discussions show race, as our nature, having a clear influence on the people even after thousands of years. I do not know the ethnic situation in Italy in Gentile's time, so it's possible that this was a concession made out of political necessity. 

With Yuletide, Christmas and the new year coming up, I suggest giving about a month from mid December to mid January to read because I will not be able to access this website while I'm visiting family. This could give us a chance to read something a little longer like Kant's Critique of Pure Reason, a volume of Decline of the West, Myth of the 20th Century, or something else along those lines. We could also just pick a subject of moderate length and spend the holidays reading/doing whatever we want. I'll leave it to your discretion.
Replies: >>976 >>1742
Gentile's discussion of the cultural lead-up to Mussolini's march on Rome and Fascist Italy makes clear our role in reviving the fascist spirit in white people. The Italy of the early 20th century was in completely different situation than we are now. Racial awareness and real nationalism were more of a constant, with people like Bismarck uniting waring states into united nations. What was needed was for someone to ignite this awareness and lead their people to greatness, much like Mussolini lead former war veterans and inspired youths in the march on Rome. We, however, cannot do this, especially in America. There has been no true war based on national identity since world war one, and racial awareness and slowly slipped away from the average person. We have almost no one to lead. Our task, then, is to be both Bismarck and Mussolini. A pan-ayran identity must be fostered and ignited in the same action.  

A almost perfectly articulated summary of the Fascist view on heritage, tradition, and the love of one's fatherland is also included in the book. Gentile correctly asserts that a fascist's genius springs from the ancestral stories and native lands of his people. His speeches are created in and refined by his father's language, and his new creations a synthesis of his father's ideas. At the same time, though, he says that we must realize that we drive history, and that we must not get stuck in the past. This willingness to innovate while still keeping tradition in mind is one of the things that separates a reactionary figure from a true fascist.  He does not merely seek to preserve the past, but to make a future for himself. 

The fascist, and, by extension, the aryan man, is a creative force. This creative force stems from his racial soul, and therefore is not limited by the land he lives in, for he sees beauty in all nature. The story of the Aryan man has always been one of migration and movement, and for this reason I agree with Gentile's assessment of a fascist being ready to step away from portions of his traditions. 

To expand on what >>971 said about Gentile's addressing of fascist anti-intellectualism, I would like to point out his description of it. He describes modern intellectualism as a suicidal striving towards the voiding of all conviction and objectivity, specifically "a state of apathy". I can't help but see how this is similar to the anti-life doctrines of modern eastern religions like buddhism. They both pursue a state of absolute nothingness: one of no objective truth, and one of no experience. They reject individual experience and beauty, calling all individual experience useless and harmful. The rejecting of individual experience, sensation, and will are poison to a functioning society. 

I think we could do a more in-depth, independent reading for the next month. Either that, or a volume or two of The Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire or The Passing of the Great Race. I'm going to start making a list of things we can read in the future from suggestions and personal preferences.
Replies: >>984
[Hide] (295.1KB, 750x548) Reverse
Our next selection is:

Independent Study

With all of the reading we have been doing lately, one of the subjects we have come across has, no doubt, caught your interest. Now is the time to pursue it! The Yuletide season is busy for many, so it seems fit to pursue a more lax pace of study. Choose a book or books to read, and come back with a summary and some interesting insight. Good luck, have fun with it, and we'll talk in the new year!

Discussion begins on 1/2
Replies: >>984
Your tying the Fascist conception of life with ancestry and connecting that to the historical context presented in the book was very insightful. I read those first few chapters and just took it as history, but you looked it at with a much more critical eye. That helped put a lot of things into perspective.

Perfect, I look forward to seeing your picks!
[Hide] (41KB, 342x500) Reverse
Replies: >>1320 >>1813
[Hide] (31.1KB, 324x500) Reverse
Happy New Year! I hope the Yuletide festivities treated you well. I was planning to read two books and post about them here, but ended up busier than expected. I did finish one of them, however, and that book is A New Nobility of Blood and Soil by Richard Walther Darré. This was only translated into English rather recently, so it was nice to get something fresh that hasn't been discussed much in English speaking National Socialist circles. Unfortunately, I wasn't able to find a pdf version to upload or link here, but the hard copy is sold by Antelope Hill and is reasonably priced.

Darré argues for the necessity of a nobility saying that the growth and prosperity of a people is directly related to the health of its nobility. Darré discusses the nature of the German nobility and states that the upper class can only become a nobility when it consists of families rather than individuals. It is necessary for the German nobility to ensure the hereditary nature of its proven leadership talents through an educational tradition that guides the noble youth. Nobility is the selection of gifted generations promoted into an achievement based leadership stratum, providing a continuous performance test and proof of achievement for future generations. Put simply, the nobility is simply a pool of individuals of proven stock that could potentially make up the leadership of the nation. The new nobility would need to retain the blood of proven value in a hereditary line, repel inferior blood, and retain the ability to absorb newly emerging talents from the people. The hereditary line would also provide a eugenic benefit as there can only be one heir. The head of a family with many children can choose the best to inherit his nobility. Darré does not believe that a nobility based on merit alone can lead the Reich, although a ruling class based on merit would have to create the nobility in the first place, but follows the Nietzschean ideal that blood alone ennobles the spirit. Darré then goes into the history of the German nobility, detailing how their nature was subverted by the influence of Christianity, the idea that all people are equal as the children of God, and became subservient to the Roman Empire. Although Rome recognized the inequality of man, the inequality of Rome was based on ownership of property rather than blood dynasties. Land as an asset to be bought and sold at a whim and also as a speculative asset is a major issue in our time as well and the time of this book's writing. For the Aryan, land is inherently tied to family and is a necessary link in the unity of the Aryan people. This separates National Socialism from materialistic ideologies such as Liberalism and Marxism. Darré also discusses how Germanic peoples are incompatible with city life, preferring the countryside. This echoes our previous discussion of Tacitus. That we have unknowingly come to the same conclusions as those considered foundational to National Socialism shows that we are stumbling upon some universal truths and that our discussions have been worthwhile.

As for who will make up this nobility, Darré asserts it will be composed of individuals who are not driven by egocentric goals, but rather goals superior to his own ego. A man who puts his people above himself and will set an example for others. Darré notes that Germany at the time of his writing has an abundance of potential new nobles as the brave men who fought in the World War all meet this criteria. If those bloodlines could have been preserved, they could have provided descendants who would be up to the task if called upon again. As it was pointed out earlier, we no longer have this sort of grouping of brave men to choose from. If a new nobility were to be created in our times, we would need another source.

Darré struggles with two conflicting facts. That state involvement in land ownership will erode the confidence in the inviolability and permanence of property and that a change in land organization must happen. Much like today, the Germany of Darré's time had large estates owned by a small number of elites. Darré proposes splitting the land between living relatives or friends of the elites or providing monetary compensation for the land to be reorganized. Darré also proposes the formation of a Noble Cooperative, a self governing body composed of each German noble that provides a confirmation of the inheritance of a hegehof (Darré's all encompassing term for the noble estate). Darré proposes a Peasant Cooperative to operate independently, but alongside the Noble Cooperative. This Peasant Cooperative would be functionally identical to its Noble counterpart, but would work in matters of the peasantry and their heirs. The peasant's land may or may not be as large as a hegehof, with peasants owning only as much land as is needed to feed his family. Darré goes on to describe in detail his proposed layout of various noble organizations at the local, Gau, and Reich levels. His organization seems rather convoluted with multiple organizations and sub-organizations performing what appear to be the same tasks. I question this since each organization would have to be funded and staffed somehow, but it's obvious that some organization would have to exist to allow the nobility to manage themselves and their lands for the good of the Volk.

Darré spends about 1/3 of the book discussing marriage and breeding laws. This concept should be fairly self explanatory for those already familiar with the movement, so I won't go too far into discussing it. One interesting thing Darré does here is outline how women would be divided for eugenic purposes. He forms four classes, 2 for women who are desirable and 2 for women who aren't. Class I has women who are desirable in every respect. This would be roughly the top 10% of women and any young hegehof candidate can freely choose his wife from this class. Class II consists of women whose marriage and reproduction would be considered desirable, however the hegehof candidate would need the approval of the Noble Cooperative to marry a woman from this class. This would be the largest group, containing most women. Class III is made up of those who could potentially marry, but due to some hereditary flaw could only marry if their childlessness could be guaranteed. Finally, Class IV is all those women who are fit for neither marriage nor children. These are the mentally ill, criminals, and illegitimate children of unknown origin. On the subject of illegitimate children of unknown origin, they may be moved up to Class II if they are deemed fit through their own merit. These clear divisions seem like a suitable sketch for what eugenic breeding laws should look like, but I would suggest putting men in similar classes as well if they were applied to the general population rather than just to the proposed nobility. Of course, pedigree alone is not enough to determine someone's class and Darré recognizes this. Only through consistent performance testing can an individual attain status in Class I or II. A person who fails to meet these minimum requirements, even if she were born to a young noble and a Class I woman, would be dropped to Class II or even lower.

Darré also tackles the subject of education, much as we discussed before. He separates the education of a German citizen into three stages: education of the community, vocational education to create a functional person with useful skills, and civic education to turn that functional person into a citizen of the Reich (which includes compulsory military service). Outfitting a citizen with technical skills early in life then allowing them to exercise those skills in the military or labor force while also using the time in those programs for civic education is certainly efficient. I'm interested in seeing how the Reich's education system was really set up, but information seems scarce. The outline given by Darré here reinforces our previous ideas on proper education and the importance of a reformed education system throughout the West cannot be stressed enough.

Ultimately, Darré doesn't seem to be arguing for the restoration of the monarchy, but rather the restoration of the Prussian spirit of Germany as described by Spengler. Nevertheless, this book would probably be of great interest to any monarchists you encounter in your travels and I'll be using it as a regular recommendation. As a text highly influential on the NSDAP's policy, I'd consider it a must read for National Socialists as well. Darré includes an extensive list of related works in an appendix at the end of the text, all with descriptions of their content. Sadly, most are untranslated, but maybe one day in the future we will be able to use this as a legitimate reading list.

I've been slowly reading through this archive over the last year or two and I finished the pre 1933 section in its entirety. There are a lot of good articles there that are just as relevant now as they were then. There's a lot to be learned there and it's really an invaluable resource.
Replies: >>1322 >>1323
[Hide] (2.6KB, 182x276) Reverse
Thank you, and likewise. Nothing beats the holidays. My book of choice was volume 1 of 6 of Edward Gibbon's The Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire, which covers the period of time from the peak of the Roman empire -the reign of the five good emperors- to the ascension of constantine and widespread adoption of christianity. Of the author, Gibbon, there isn't really much to say. He is opinionated for a historian, sure, but I much prefer an author capable of analyzing the subject he is working with, and most of his insight is pretty valuable.

Many people like to talk about the "glory of Rome" in circles adjacent to us, and, to a certain degree, I agree with their sentiment. The conquests of Rome saw the soft beauty of Grecian culture sharpened and refined by Roman martiality and disposition for the stoic, and then turned outwards on the rest of an uncivilized world. Their achievements are unmatched, their technology never replicated in some cases until the American Civil War, and their bridges, roads and theatres still stand today. As a white person, it is hard not to respect something like that. The problem is that when one looks through this smokescreen, he sees only a degenerate and rotting society. It had been decaying since before the destruction of the Roman Republic, and  Gibbon gives a great insight into it's start. 

Gibbon rightly claims that the real death of the Roman Empire was the moment the equites, a portion of the Roman nobility, stopped serving actively in the military. Here, like in every other case of the collapse of an aryan nation, the nobility grows soft and careless, neglecting the duties necessary for respect among his nation and for the fitness of his noble family. It can be assumed the same happened in Vedic India, which fell to race-mixing with lower dravidian castes, and again in Greece, where the nobility also failed to eliminate the pre-invasion element in their society and was effectively bred out of the population. The same can also be said of modern day Whites in Africa, who, although they might not be considered a traditional noble class, constituted the same social position as the Aryan Vedics did and are suffering from the same problems.

Emperors like Marcus Aurelius show the aloofness of the nobility. While he is one of the best emperors, a seemingly good man, and an extremely useful philosopher, Aurelius completely failed a raising a son fit for the throne. Instead of his son staying humble and ruling justly despite palace live and total power, he took so sport and styled himself a gladiator. I like stoicism, but I can't help but think that Aurelius's philosophy of "nothing lasts" reflects the attitudes of his time. A real aryan nobleman values both the perspective of the tangible present and of the infinite future. Both are important.

From here, the blood of the Roman Nation dilutes. It can be seen in the most popular cults in Rome, like the Cult of Isis the Cult of Mithras were both foreign. Efforts to destroy the former were made, yet both were popular. It can also be seen in the streets of Rome itself, filled almost exclusively of people from different nations. Semitics from Carthage, in which the Romans had salted in disgust, known baby sacrifices, walked Rome's streets along with every other type of people but Romans. The military became like this too, with the praetorian guard becoming the last outpost of an ethnic Roman manned military, but this position was also lost. All of this was solidified by the ruling of Caracalla, son of half roman, half carthaginian Septimius Severus, which declared all free men citizens of Rome. 

The Roman Empire as a state, though, refused to die. Much like the modern United States or Moorish Spain, the Roman Empire continued to act as a sort of economic zone rather than any real state. It lived as a giant bag of blood for other nations to suck on before it collapsed. This is the optimal state of a nation for the jew. He can exist among the mixed masses, making trades and manipulating without the fear of any cohesive community doing harm to him, and he is using it as a blueprint for our current world.

Of course, none of this is to say anything of Christianity, given fertile soil by miscegenation and religious turmoil, but all of this should speak for itself. The point is, the failure of the noble class leads to the decay of a nation's racial stock and the societal collapse.
Replies: >>1332
>That we have unknowingly come to the same conclusions as those considered foundational to National Socialism shows that we are stumbling upon some universal truths and that our discussions have been worthwhile
It makes me really happy to hear this, as this was my reason for starting the /fbc/. Almost everybody here has a gut understanding of what is right, but we still need to refine it. 

>Darré does not believe that a nobility based on merit alone can lead the Reich, although a ruling class based on merit would have to create the nobility in the first place, but follows the Nietzschean ideal that blood alone ennobles the spirit
I like the idea of nobility, but one of the things that always bothered me about it was that people of good racial stock but of different class did not have class mobility. In is inevitable in a state practicing eugenics that new families deserving of nobility will arise from agreeable mixtures of blood. A system based on merit would resolve this.

>Darré notes that Germany at the time of his writing has an abundance of potential new nobles as the brave men who fought in the World War all meet this criteria
This reminds me of something I heard said about the SS. They were meant to be the genetic elite of the new Reich, since they were tested for health issues, chosen by height and other traits, and were able to show their loyalty and bravery in battle. They were the best test of a new German nobility, or at least a warrior caste, that we have seen.
Replies: >>1332
>I like the idea of nobility, but one of the things that always bothered me about it was that people of good racial stock but of different class did not have class mobility. In is inevitable in a state practicing eugenics that new families deserving of nobility will arise from agreeable mixtures of blood. A system based on merit would resolve this.

Agreed. Darré gives some room for the nobility to be refreshed from the peasantry with his class system, but this renewal only comes from the female side. He does not give room for proven men of agreeable blood to move into the nobility. If there were a means to allow peasant landowners to become nobles, it may become a desirable system.  I think we should defer to tradition as well when considering the case for a noble class. In the USA, for example, it wouldn't make much sense to have a nobility. In Germany's case, I believe Darré makes a fairly convincing argument that's worthy of consideration. I believe from reading Darré and from what was revealed in >>1322 that if a noble class were adopted, the most important thing would also be the establishment of a means for the common volk to hold the nobility accountable and prevent degeneration. If Darré's ideals were adhered to, this should be accomplished through the Noble and Peasant Cooperatives.

Again, I'm not arguing for the establishment of a nobility, but after reading Darré I do see it as a viable path that a National Socialist state could take and it can be used as common ground with sympathetic monarchists.
[Hide] (35.6KB, 480x767) Reverse
Our next book is:

The Passing Of The Great Race
>Written by Madison Grant

Discussion begins on 1/20
Replies: >>1334 >>1425 >>1491
The Passing of the Great Race PDF
>the SS were meant to be the genetic elite. 
I like this, but the feats of valor and honor dont translate to the modern age. Its incredibly rare to find renaissance men tempered in the forge of all day struggle like ww1.
Replies: >>1350
[Hide] (2MB, 2048x1284) Reverse
I'd argue being drugged and sodomized by jewish trannies your entire childhood is a greater struggle than spending a few months in a trench with your buddies
[Hide] (897.5KB, 584x794) Reverse
Sparta and it's Law
>Written by Eduardo Velasco
Sparta and it's Law should be mandatory read for all /fascist/ here, the entire history of Sparta and it's tragedic ending will inspire higher feelings as well motivate the reader to learn from lessons of what the Spartans had succeeded in and what were their mistakes.
Replies: >>1444 >>1445
Yo. Anyone have the Hindu reading chart?
Replies: >>1425
People in the Fascist and Third Position Book thread would probably have it. This thread is for periodic discussion of selected books, like >>1333
It is said that Madison Grant's "The Passing of the Great Race" was highly influential on Hitler's conception of the European races. While there are many similarities with Hitler's discussion of the Aryan's culture and ideals, I found many more similarities with Rosenberg's "Myth of the Twentieth Century." This was almost a perfect mirror of the first part of Rosenberg's work. I do wonder just how much Grant's work was read in Germany at the time or if his ideas were just spread through the NSDAP inner circle. Both Rosenberg and Grant discuss the successes of great civilizations such as Rome and Hellas, noting the presence of Nordic blood among their leadership, and their eventual decline due to a loss of the Nordic element (this also ties into our previous discussion of the decline of the nobility in Rome). I know Grant considers "Aryan" to be a linguistic group rather than a race, but nowadays that has fallen out of use and I'll be using "Aryan" interchangeably with "Nordic" because I think that will be more easily understood by anyone passing through and reading this.

Grant accurately predicts the extermination of a race through demographic replacement. He speaks of a lower race outbreeding a greater one by infiltrating a nation and taking on menial tasks, as is happening across the West today. In many ways he accurately predicts our current racial situation, but one of his greatest errors is his view on birth control and abortion. Grant says these things can be used to weed out weak elements and control the population of outsiders, but he completely failed to predict the "sexual liberation" of women. Grant's claims can only be realized in a society that has already achieved a higher conception of life.

"No ethnic conquest can be complete unless the natives are exterminated and the invaders bring their own women with them. If the conquerors are obliged to depend upon the women of the vanquished to carry on the race, the intrusive blood strain of the invaders in a short time becomes diluted beyond recognition." This is the answer to any "BLEACHED" shills. Grant notes that the blood of the conquistadors died with them and that Indians retain no visible trace of Aryan blood. The idea that we should just breed with latinas or whatever for a couple generations and hope to see some white great grandchildren is complete nonsense.

Grant also discusses the dysgenic effect of war and how the Nordic man is the most affected. We can relate this to WWII and the loss of the SS. As previously discussed, the SS was the new genetic elite that would have served as the blueprint for the ideal German. This loss on top of the loss of millions of other Aryan men of good stock throughout both world wars is nearly insurmountable. However, I remain whitepilled. The philosophy of eternal struggle is burned into our blood. Grant says the harsh nordic environment allowed only the strongest and most capable to survive. I believe this is the evolutionary basis for this great Aryan truth and our current times are simply one more struggle for the Aryan to overcome.

I must confess, when reading racial work from our side I worry about approaching "we wuz kangs" territory by giving the Aryan too much credit. While there is much credit to be given, and Grant gives it, Grant also rightly acknowledges the achievements of the Mediterraneans. Grant says both the Nordic and the Mediterranean are comparable intellectually, but the Mediterranean is superior in the realm of art while the Nordic is superior in literature and scientific research. I'm not going to argue about whether this is true or not or whether the Mediterranean culture of aesthetics was really due to a Nordic element, but Grant's words here do open up an interesting discussion on the nature of intelligence. We often rely too much on IQ as a judgement of intelligence and overall worth. While IQ is a valuable metric, arguably the best single metric we have to measure intelligence, there are other pieces missing of this puzzle. The jew's verbal IQ has been noted to be some amount higher than average. I'm aware of several issues with previous studies on jewish IQ, but I think the statement that they have a verbal IQ higher than average is probably correct. The Talmud is based entirely on trickery and if you have ever argued with a jew, they rely on semantics on wordplay rather than facts. These are all signs of a high verbal IQ. However, the jew is creatively bankrupt. He has never created anything and, when given control of something created by another race, he can only destroy. Meanwhile, the creative element is abundant in the Aryan and our capacity for empathy is unique. As Grant notes, only the Nordic man has the capacity for racial suicide out of empathy for the lesser races.

One lingering question I have comes from the very beginning of the book. In the preface Grant says nationalist movements are a result of the weaker race rising up against the stronger. The idea that we, as National Socialists or Fascists, oppose a Jewish system and are upset about the superiority of the Jewish people is one of the most overused shill lines. As Grant is the son of a decorated officer of the Union Army, I assumed he was speaking about the American Civil War. However, he later says the degeneration of the American south happened only after the war was over, with the best genetic lines being eliminated by the war. The best example I can think of that fits Grant's reasoning is the so-called "Russian" revolution, which hadn't happened at the time of his writing. So why would he say something so anti-national? Perhaps he was thinking of the French Revolution? I was expecting this to be addressed later in the work, but I either missed it or he really never mentioned it again.

All said, I found this to be a good subject to study despite my initial hesitation. Having some knowledge of antiquity was a great boon for understanding Grant's discussions on races and their migration through the ancient world. I probably wouldn't recommend this to someone unless I knew they were familiar with Herodotus, Thucydides, or another writer of antiquity.
Replies: >>1440 >>1491
To start, I've found that Grant's work, much like any other truly National Socialist work, borders on being prophetic at some points. Just as Nietzsche saw the society of the last man and the coalescing of individual kindred spirits, Devi ecological issues, and Hitler the rise of the superstate and the jewish potential to destroy all life (the atom bomb), Madison Grant saw the racial patterns of history and correctly depicted the future of America as well as other states. He correctly recognized northwest America as the most likely spot for a new nordic population to naturalize itself, and this would later manifest as the Northwest Front. His theory of lower races taking over the working class, proven in his time by the influx of slavs and Italians in factories and cities, has again been proven by the invasion of the "greasers" which he mentions in passing. The 1910's also saw the arrival of scores of Polish and German jews whom Grant recognized as deceitful, noting their willingness to change their surnames. It is also interesting that Grant notes the replacement of nordics in Austria, since a young Hitler was awakening to the plight of the Germans at the same time. 

While I tended to disregard much of what Grant had to say about the "evolution", as evolution a theory presented both without tangible evidence and is consistent with a semitic conception of linear history, he did bring into perspective many of the thoughts I had about the differentiation and migration of different Nordic populations. Grant's conception of the changing of races is still consistent with the principles of mendelian inheritance, so most of his historical chronology can be accepted. It is both his and my understanding that populations of the nordic race have a limited set of traits, and that when a population migrates, the existing traits are sifted so that those left are suited for the environment. I think he is wrong, though, in thinking that new traits besides deformities appear. In this way, the physical differences between a Scandinavian and an older nordic race can be accounted for. Grant also brings up the lower states of nordic people living in hotter climates, specifically the whites of the Kentucky Appalachians, which he blames on the inability to withstand humid, tropical weather, and which others blame on the presence of the hookworm. I could see the problem being both, but I would think that the Kentucky wilderness would provide ample challenge to keep an aryan mind moving and healthy. 

The ancient myths of the Greeks, Romans, and Celtic Britons correspond with Grant's conception of the nordic migrations. The Greeks and Trojans, said by Grant to be of the same migration group who split into the Achaeans and the Phrygians and who spoke similar languages, were rightly chastised for fighting their brothers over a single woman. The Romans, who claimed to be descended from a group of Trojans, were a nordic tribe, and the Britons, who claimed during the Roman invasion of their country, to be of the same blood as the Romans, also came from the same Gallic migration wave. These myths seem to be historical accounts that were mixed together, and they show the value of oral tradition. 

Lastly, I want to touch upon Grant's evaluation of the Mediterranean as superior to the Nordics in the arts and in early history. What I see are stagnant cultures surrounded by megaliths and technologies of peoples past. The Egyptians knew no real advancements besides the chariot and bronze for their whole known history, the former of which can be claimed almost definitely by nordic steppe peoples, and the latter first found in Sumer, the civilization that represented their gods with blue eyes. Most megalithic structures cannot be properly dates or understood, so they cannot be claimed by the mediterraneans either. On the front of art, we see that all great art comes from some mixture of nordic blood. The study of the natural world is also the most pure science, as all art seeks to imitate the patterns and symmetry of nature. Everywhere the northman goes, invention follows. This is a constant with no other race. Despite all of this, all of Grant's insights on modern history (starting with 3000 BC) are on point. 

>However, I remain whitepilled. The philosophy of eternal struggle is burned into our blood. Grant says the harsh nordic environment allowed only the strongest and most capable to survive. I believe this is the evolutionary basis for this great Aryan truth and our current times are simply one more struggle for the Aryan to overcome.
Well said. The next big population crash will make the way for a nordic resurgence. 

> So why would he say something so anti-national? Perhaps he was thinking of the French Revolution?
I believe he says that a revolution can also be a more noble race rising up to stop itself from disintegrating near the other stuff about revolutions.
Replies: >>1442 >>1443 >>1491
I forgot to talk about this when I first posted, but Grant does also make some good observations about Aryans and religion. He says that Nordics are attractive to more "free" religions, for lack of a better word. Religious schisms are often founded on the basis of race, like the more free protestants and arian christians versus the servile catholics, and burgeoning christianity against the ancestral paganism of the nordics and stoicism of the Romans. The alpine and mediterranean elements respond to the religions of the lowly, while the naturally individualist nordics are attracted to whichever religion celebrates nobility and independence.
>Lastly, I want to touch upon Grant's evaluation of the Mediterranean as superior to the Nordics in the arts and in early history.
This paragraph helped fill a few gaps I had on the subject. I wanted to connect Grant's discussion of the Nordic race compared to other races with Hitler's three categories of races (builders of culture, stewards of culture, and destroyers of culture) and your analysis supports Hitler's conclusion that only the Aryan can be classified as a builder. One could extend this further into Nietzsche's evolution of the Übermensch, with the final stage of the child, or the creator, and how it's the culmination of a purely Aryan concept over thousands of years.
[Hide] (26.5KB, 183x275) Reverse
Our next selection is:

Timaeus and Critias
>Written by Plato

We've been working with more tangible texts for the past few months, so I figure it is time to take a break with some hard philosophy. The dialogue Timaeus covers the creation of the world and it's metaphysics as told by Plato. At the very least, it should help the reader consider the structure of metaphysics in a Fascist and National Socialist worldview or show the influence of eastern and pythagorean sensibilities in corrupting Aryan philosophy. Critias is an account of the legendary Atlantis myth, which is mirrored in myths like that of the flight of the Trojans either because of the patterns of history or through it's influence as a founding myth. 

Discussion starts on 1/31
Replies: >>1445 >>1492
Timaeus and Critias PDF

Meant to reply to your post by saying that we should do your recommended book next along with Xenophon's writings on the Spartan and Athenian constitutions.
Really meant to respond here sooner. Excellent read, downright prescient at times, as others have said. It's interesting to see, even a century ago, the roots of race denialism, race-mixing, globohomo, fake news, censorship, pathological altruism, herd morality, and rule by mediocrity. Sadly, I believe his pronouncement of Finis Americæ is the fate of my country, and I don't see any recourse, except to build anew from the ruins, preferably in the Northwest -- as Grant points out, among the other qualities I've promoted, it has the right climate for Aryans.

>but one of his greatest errors is his view on birth control and abortion. Grant says these things can be used to weed out weak elements and control the population of outsiders, but he completely failed to predict the "sexual liberation" of women. Grant's claims can only be realized in a society that has already achieved a higher conception of life.
This is a fair criticism, although it's a forgivable mistake. He considered these tools from a eugenics perspective (which was current at the time of writing), without taking into account hedonism, Jewish blood sacrifice, and disruption of human relations. Things can be used for good or evil, and Grant hadn't considered the potential for evil in this case.

as I've said, it's a useful metric, but it's limited in scope and doesn't tell the whole story.

>The idea that we, as National Socialists or Fascists, oppose a Jewish system and are upset about the superiority of the Jewish people is one of the most overused shill lines. 
This is like saying a virus or parasite is a superior life-form because it can infect and kill you. Granted, it's very well adapted to its role, and has fitness as a predator. But it's a mindless creature than can only live off of more complex life; unlike its hosts, it can't create or build anything on its own.

I think the Nordics, Alpines, and Mediterraneans are all worthwhile in their way. However, it's likely that Nordic/Aryan admixture is required to bring out the potential of other types. This is consistent with the historical examples given, such as the Varangian conquest of Russia, or the Normans being descended from Vikings.
I couldn't help wondering, as I read, about myself. I have blond hair (darkened with maturity), my skull isn't round, I have a roman nose and full lips, and dark brown eyes (a disharmonic combination according to Grant), also 5'10". I'm definitely Nordic/Aryan to an extent, but I seem to have some admixture from Mediterranean. Maybe Alpine too, despite not having the skull shape? I'm anglo-saxon, irish, german, & northern italian, and I'm Catholic, so maybe I'm a mix of all three. I guess it doesn't matter, this is an irrelevant detail, but it caught my interest.
>Critias is an account of the legendary Atlantis myth
Plato said Solon learned of Atlantis from an Egyptian priest. The notion that Plato himself did not believe in the actual existence of Atlantis is false.
Timaeus and Critias are rather unique for Plato. Rather than taking the form of a dialogue, both are presented as a narrative based on the society Plato developed in Republic based on natural law. Hermocrates was promised his turn to speak as well, but no dialogue for him was ever written and Critias remains either incomplete or lost. Shame. Since the Pythagoreans were mentioned, I read these with them in mind and referenced a book on the early Greek philosophers I read last year. This gives us a few interesting things to think about. Are all attempts to describe nature through mathematics Pythagorean in nature? Was Plato a Pythagorean or merely influenced by them?

Timaeus asks if the universe always is and has no becoming or if it is that which becomes but never is. Was the universe created from the void by a divine being or has it always existed? Timaeus says our universe is eternal. Of course, this is a well reasoned conclusion based on Aryan wisdom. The alternative, the creation of the universe from nothing, is anti-Aryan in nature. The Aryan Indian and Germanic creation myths work on the idea of a cosmos arising from an ordering principle working against chaos. It does not recognize the idea of nothingness or void, a nihilistic concept arising from semitic materialism. The demiurge of Timaeus brings the universe from disorder to order. The soul of the universe is divided up in connected geometrical proportions, then applied to the universe as it was known at the time. The proportions here are harmonic rather than esoteric. They were chosen because of a known relation to each other known as Pythagorean tuning. This may appear like the influence of infamous Pythagorean numerical mysticism, but Plato keeps things rooted in reality. Rather than extend the harmonic series to infinity or to 10 (the number of heavenly bodies hypothesized by the Pythagoreans because 10 was seen as the "perfect" number), Plato stops at 7 which is what had been observed at the time. 

Once the soul is divided among the heavenly bodies and the fixed stars, it is then divided among living things. This leads to the concept of the universal soul we discussed before. Those who live a virtuous life as a man ascend to heaven among the fixed stars while those souls who live a wicked life are reincarnated as lesser beings until they are purified. This was also the belief of Pythagoras and it is said that, like the Hindus, Pythagoras abstained from meat for this reason. While this gives us a connection to the eternal recurrence and the Aryan ideal of eternal struggle, it has the same pitfalls as the universal soul in Hinduism.

Timaeus, building on the ideas of earlier philosophers like Thales and Heraclitus, goes on to describe how fire, water, earth, and air were taken from their natural condition (disorder) and given their distinctive shapes using forms and numbers. The elements that make up these forces take the form of right triangles, as every shape can divided distinctly into triangles and each triangle can be divided further into right triangles. The use of right triangles as the building blocks of the cosmos could be misconstrued as a Pythagorean influence due to the Pythagorean Theorem, but the theorem actually predates Pythagoras by about 1500 years, going back to Aryan Mesopotamian civilizations. Unlike the Pythagoreans, who claim numbers are the substance of all things (including the truth), Timaeus declares that geometry is the substance of all things. This may seem like a trivial distinction, but geometry implies a form while numbers do not. A number without form is simply void. Plato utilizes reason rather than relying on number mysticism existing outside logic in his composition of the universe. So was Plato a Pythagorean? I say the answer is definitely "no," but the influence of the Pythagoreans on his natural philosophy cannot be denied.

Plato also ties pain and pleasure to unnatural vs natural states. When an unnatural state is brought on gradually, the pain is not noticed. However, the recovery is even more intense. He speaks of two diseases of the soul: madness and ignorance, which are brought about by excessive pleasures and pains. We have seen this realized throughout history with the slow degeneration of a society and the fall of a people into hedonism. Plato tells us that a person with a diseased soul will be thought of as willfully evil by others and that a man becomes evil as a result of corrupt conditions of his body and an uneducated upbringing. Plato is only considering this from an Aryan view of honor. In his dialogue with Gorgias, we learn his belief that it is worse to commit injustice than to suffer injustice. His reasoning can only be applied to a people that has honor, but not to those completely devoid of honor or shame. Additionally, Plato states that the introduction of a foreign element into a body causes disease and degeneration, while the introduction of elements similar to the body allow it to remain healthy. Surely Plato was writing based on his own experiences after the Peloponnesian War and the decline of both Athens and Sparta.

There isn't much to say about Critias. Critias is telling the story about Atlantis waging war against ancient Athenians based on the society hypothesized in Republic. Critias heard the story of Atlantis from Solon, a real Athenian statesman from history. If Solon did indeed hear this story from an Egyptian priest, it's likely he also saw any writings associated with it. It's a shame those writings would have been stored in the great library at Alexandria and did not survive the mongrel hordes. Aside from apocryphal sources, Plato is the only primary source remaining for the tale of Atlantis and it was only written to illustrate the supposed superiority of his Republic. Plato only gives us part of the founding myth of Atlantis and ancient Athens, but does not get into the conflict between them. While unfinished, there were a few notable parts. The symbolism of the Atlanteans being the descendants of gods while the ancient Athenians were like beasts who sprouted from nature shouldn't be missed. Critias says Atlantis' quarry produced black, white, and red rock, colors that are the symbol of the Aryan. As discussed in Timaeus, the Atlanteans became greedy and monstrous when they lost their divine purity, showing how the introduction of foreign elements will always lead to the degeneration of society.
Replies: >>1502
I chose the Dialogues Timaeus and Critias because I thought that they would help me as well as others chip away at the creation of a comprehensive system of Aryan Meta-Physics, but it seems that I have bitten off more than I can chew. It could be that I do not have the foreknowledge and philosophical experience to really understand what Plato meant by many of the concepts he puts forth in these two dialogues (it most likely is), but much of Timaeus does not make sense to me.  Concepts like the creation of time (perhaps the measurement of time) the origin of the creator, and the chaos vs. order dichotomy, I think, do not fit within an Aryan worldview.  I had understood time as one of the few constants of universal law. It ensures that both creative forces and entropy can work upon the world, and these things are necessary to the function of a cyclical conception of time. If the demiurge exists outside of time, then he cannot then exist in the physical (non-meta-physical) realm. By this logic Plato conception of the Demiurge does not make sense. Similarly, if the universe was already in existence and therefore governed by the universal laws, how could the state of the unformed earth be called chaos? It is not the physical world we know, but it is still a part of the process of forming the tangible physical world. 

Plato's conception of the beginning of the tangible universe also raises some serious questions of what the end of a Yugic Cycle means for the world. If a new world is one of unformed chaos, does that not mean that the old must be destroyed? That instead of an ever spinning wheel of true golden ages and depths of filth, the world ends with a slow decline, a great, virtuous rise, and then death? I would certainly seem so. I say a final rise because the continued existence of the universe and the Aryan spirit would require the defeat of the jewish entropic spirit that infests the modern day, and what could defeat that but a force that matches it's vileness with equal virtue. It would make sense, too, that this end would be the ultimate sacrifice and testament to the Aryan spirit, which itself is a reflection of Plato's "ultimate good". The Aryan man is one who stands up in the face of death, knowing that fame and pleasure will fade, and that all that matters is the morality of his actions and therefore the preservation of his race. None of this would discount the current struggle of the Aryan man of true. 

Critias corroborates the historical narrative of the deluge through the description of Atlantean Athens and the wearing away of its land through heavy rains and floods. Besides this, I think that everything that can be said about Critias has been said in other posts.
Replies: >>1505
>Critias says Atlantis' quarry produced black, white, and red rock
Is this how the the NS swastika came to be?
Replies: >>1505
>If the demiurge exists outside of time, then he cannot then exist in the physical (non-meta-physical) realm. By this logic Plato conception of the Demiurge does not make sense.

I took Plato's Demiurge to be more of a concept than a being itself. More like the personification of Platonic virtue or wisdom. It is just a principle or idea that brings order to chaos. While Plato believes in the eternal nature of the universe, he doesn't seem to believe in a cyclical universe, at least not in these dialogues. He acknowledges some aspects of history repeating, like the floods, but he doesn't seem to believe in cycles. I don't think there's much to be gained trying to make his proposed theology fit with other more established and fleshed out theologies like Hinduism.

>Is this how the the NS swastika came to be?

Not directly, of course, but I think there's something that exists on an instinctual level that draws certain ethnic groups to these colors. The NSDAP's flag colors were based on the Imperial German flag, which was based on the old Prussian and Brandenburg flags. If you go back even further you'll notice other similarities like the Spartans wearing red cloaks with black and white crests or the Macedonians adorning their artworks with an ancient sun symbol. Maybe I'm just being selective, but I thought Critias brought up an interesting "coincidence" nonetheless.
[Hide] (7.1KB, 174x290) Reverse
[Hide] (19.8KB, 184x250) Reverse
Our next readings are:

Sparta and It's Law
>By Eduardo Velasco
The Constitution of the Lacedaemonians
>By Xenophon

Discussion starts on 2/15
Replies: >>1511
>Sparta and It's Law PDF
>Constitution of the Lacedaemonians PDF
Replies: >>1512
Files were giving me issues with posting
One more point on the previous reading, The Passing of the Great Race:
>Vox populi, so far from being Vox Dei, thus becomes an unending wail for rights and never a chant of duty.
This, along with Finis Americæ at the end of the intro, is my favorite line from the book.
Also, who are the White men on the cover? I recognize a conquistador and a viking, but I'm not sure about the middle. a priest/scholar?
Replies: >>1565
[Hide] (24KB, 194x260) Reverse
>Also, who are the White men on the cover? I recognize a conquistador and a viking, but I'm not sure about the middle. a priest/scholar?
Judging from the style of beard and the hat, I would guess that it is Persian priest or king
Replies: >>1567
[Hide] (201.1KB, 1200x740) Reverse
That makes sense, thanks. The Persians definitely have Aryan admixture, moreso in antiquity. It seems to represent a Zoroastrian priest before Islam/Abrahamism, pic related (the hat is a bit taller, but that's a detail).
There isn't much to say about Xenophon's "Constitution of the Lacedaemonians" that isn't already in "Sparta and its Law." "Sparta and its Law" does our job for us by portraying Spartan society through a Fascist worldview. 

One thing that caught my eye in Xenophon that wasn't brought up in "Sparta and its Law" was in X 6-8. Lycurgus believes that crimes such as fraud and robbery injure only their victims and declares that wicked men and cowards are traitors to the nation. This stands in stark contrast to the Athenian view we see in Plato where a man who commits injustice is hurting his soul more than he is hurting others. While Plato still has enough sense to say an unjust man must cleanse his soul through just punishment, his view opens the path for the absurd "rehabilitative justice" that we see today. The negative foreign influence on Athens makes itself clear here, compared to Sparta which was able to maintain ethnic unity and therefore a more Aryan worldview for longer. Xenophon also share the Spartan view of citizenship, which can be compared to National Socialist Germany. A man was not a citizen until he began his military service and his citizenship was not guaranteed forever after. He had to maintain good standing with his nation and race in order to maintain citizenship. Traitors and cowards should not be considered racial comrades.

On Sparta itself, I don't see it as a society to emulate completely, but "Sparta and its Law" shows where it stands out and gives us numerous admirable qualities. The Spartan notion of honor was second to none and is probably their best trait. If you read Xenophon's Agesilaus, you'll see examples of an honorable king despite being in a period of overall decline in Hellas. However, I can't stand by using racial inferiors as a slave class that permanently lives among the people. In such a situation mixing is inevitable, even otherwise honorable men will be tempted by lust, and degradation of the race occurs. We've seen this numerous times throughout history with the most recent and most destructive example being the use of African slaves. Eventually Helots were able to mix with the Dorian Spartans and their bastard children served as Spartiate warriors and later statesmen, just as Africans are doing throughout the West today.

Contributing to this mixing of races was the Spartan view of war. War was seen as a glorious thing that sharpened men and honor was gained on the field of battle. While this is true, our previous discussion of war as a dysgenic element is also true at the same time. Spartans kept balancing on this razor's edge for hundreds of years, an impressive feat to be sure, but eventually fell off. The need to refill the ranks caused those of non-Spartan blood to be allowed in higher Laconian society. Xenophon's own children are examples of foreigners being allowed to serve and Xenophon himself mentions the attitudes of Spartans toward foreign peoples changing over the years.

Spartan society gives us a good sketch of how to develop a potential SS-like warrior caste. "Sparta and its Law" gives us a suitable view of Spartan Society as a Fascist one, but the book could use an update. I noticed a few inconsistencies and historical inaccuracies during my read (for example, they attribute the "fight in the shade" line to Leonidas, but it was really a Spartan named Dieneces). A person interested in Greek history who may be open to Fascism could dismiss this book entirely based on a few minor errors, but the overall message showing Spartan society as an Aryan one should ring true to any reader willing to stick through it.
Replies: >>1644 >>1646 >>1654
Starting off, I find issue with the almost blind reverence the author of 'Sparta and Its Law" expresses towards the Spartans. While I enjoy the fact that the text feels as if it is written by a nationalistic Spartan, and understand the need to push back hard against modern culture's vilification of the Spartans' eugenics and the like, making excuses for the more oriental aspects of Spartan culture can only hurt National Socialists. I feel that many people in our circles our circles fall into a false dichotomy wherein they feel the need to defend every decision an Aryan society makes, even when they are clearly a detriment to that society. We do not need to choose between swearing off a culture or adopting its values in full. In many ways, Sparta represents the peak of Aryan society. The resolve they often showed in the face of death, their mastery and proper channeling of their carnal emotions, and their willingness to sacrifice all that they could for their people are matched by a handful of civilizations at most. I do not see why we cannot foster these attributes while rejecting those that could be harmful to a future Aryan nation. We are in a unique position in history which, after setting things right, allows us to create a society which fosters both the barbaric spirit and mercy of the Aryan, while throwing away the more aimless violence and weakness that came with those things in the past.

I also question if the excess cruelty and squalid conditions pressed on young Spartans only brought positive outcomes. Did the nutrient deficient diet used in Spartan training really benefit the student? The book mentions the average height of a group of excavated Spartans being 5'9", which, while taller than the average Greek, falls short of the true Nordic average height of roughly 5'11". This could very well be because of slight admixture with other populations, considering the still excellent physique and mental fortitude of Spartan warriors, but I would think it very possible that a subpar diet and sleep contributed to stunting some of them. The beatings given to young Spartans and their barbaric torture rituals, said by the text to promote a hardness of the mind and soul, I think, are also harmful. I remember Hitler spoke of adding boxing to school curriculum as a way to toughen kids to pain in the same spirit as the Spartans did, but Hitler's Germany created strong, moral soldiers without whipping children's backs raw. It seems to me that many Spartan customs had good purposes, but were taken to unnecessary extremes.

On Xenophon's writings, the art of the Spartans, and ancient authors in general, I would like to speak to the a value forgotten by many modern authors. The simultaneous brevity and complexity found in many ancient works is not often found in modern works (maybe as a result of Jews in media's tendency to replace beauty with meaningless complexity); the ancients did not mince words. The Spartans saw the value of music and poetry, but never lost sight of the beauty of simplicity. Good art inspires, but nothing can inspire a man more than witnessing a great deed firsthand. The Spartans also, like Plato, knew the true purpose of music.
Replies: >>1654
>The negative foreign influence on Athens makes itself clear here, compared to Sparta which was able to maintain ethnic unity and therefore a more Aryan worldview for longer.
Touching on our earlier reading of Germania, the Spartans similarly allowed for their children to choose their husband/wife, while the Athenians made politically and monetarily motivated matches. The purer nation retained the Germanic practices of marriage, while the mixed one fell to orientalism.
Replies: >>1654
[Hide] (414KB, 689x991) Reverse
Our next book is:

National Socialism
>By Rudolph Jung

Discussion begins on 3/8

You had mentioned Othmar Spann's writings a while back, but I haven't been able to find a pdf of an english translation of The True State anywhere. It looks like the translations are recent and not freely available, so if you have it, let me know. Besides that, I'm running out of ideas of what to read, so I think it would be a good idea to start putting together a list of books to read in the future. I feel like I would just keep recommending ancient primary sources and philosophy without someone else's input, since I know more about those than political and economic theory.
Replies: >>1647 >>1663
>National Socialism PDF
>Spartan society gives us a good sketch of how to develop a potential SS-like warrior caste.
Indeed. There's value to be gained from the Laws of Lycurgus, but as you said,
>Spartans kept balancing on this razor's edge for hundreds of years, an impressive feat to be sure, but eventually fell off.
In the very long run, their triumph was not sustainable. I think we can borrow some ideas and apply them judiciously without duplicating the entirety. Going on a tangent, I think there are also ideas that can be borrowed from Liberalism, especially from the US Bill of Rights, while discarding the larger whole as a failed experiment. Don't mean to equate the two either; Sparta, for all its mortality, was much more stable than the Liberal West of the past few centuries.

>I also question if the excess cruelty and squalid conditions pressed on young Spartans only brought positive outcomes. ... It seems to me that many Spartan customs had good purposes, but were taken to unnecessary extremes.
It's possible that these customs were at first more proportionate and reasonable, and tilted into an excess of asceticism as part of their gradual degeneration. I recall that some Eastern religions made the same mistake.

>The simultaneous brevity and complexity found in many ancient works is not often found in modern works (maybe as a result of Jews in media's tendency to replace beauty with meaningless complexity); the ancients did not mince words.
The Jews are known for high verbal IQ, and are experts at hair-splitting, gaslighting, lying by omission, and general sophistry. This is related to their ancient strategy of attaining power through control of media, with plagiarized Scriptures being ancient media. But that's another tangent.

The book mentioned the parallels between Germanic & Spartan customs, with their emphasis on healthy living and combination of freedom and discipline. Their strict laws coincided with greater personal liberty, while the supposedly free and democratic Athens fostered dependency, bondage, and various forms of perversion & degeneracy (even moreso true of Persia).
Replies: >>1663
I didn't realize there was no pdf available for The True State. I've had a hard copy sitting in my stack for a while, so I never checked for a digital one. The only Othmar Spann work I could find was his "Types of Economic Theory," which might be interesting, but probably not good for our purposes. I think Carl Schmitt's "Concept of the Political" and anything by Spengler would be worthwhile. There are some big name titles we could read as well like Codreanu's and Mosley's works or Goebbles' "Struggle for Berlin." Hell, I'd even be down to read something like Imperium or White Power, but length might be an issue for those.

>ancient primary sources and philosophy
I'm ok with these as well. Aristotle's Politics or Plato's Laws would probably be useful. Historical and philosophical works are definitely worth reading, but I think the focus should be Fascist and "Fascist adjacent" authors so we can not only see what's worth reading when we recommend these books to others, but also form a more comprehensive idea of the ideal Fascist government for our respective nations.

>I think there are also ideas that can be borrowed from Liberalism
Agreed, especially for a nation with a history of Liberalism like the US. Going back to the previous of topic of books to read, something outside of our circles that may have some useful ideas like the Federalist Papers or Antifederalist Papers could be good reads. Something completely against our ideas like the Communist Manifesto could also be worth reading if only to critique it and better argue against it when speaking outside of our circles. I wouldn't recommend FBC jumping into topics outside our circles just yet, but these are things we could consider for the future.
Replies: >>1673 >>1743
yes indeed. We should stay focused on core /fascist/ texts for now, but branching out is a possibility.

As for Sparta, they reached a lofty ideal of militarism, like a pure, hard diamond. And yet, they were martians (in the archaic sense, not sci-fi). All their creative energy and will to power went towards molding themselves into super-soldiers, with little left over for other human pursuits. Living off the helots led to bondage and dehumanization, eg the crypteia/secret police terrorizing the population, and like any other system of bondage, it decayed into race/caste mixing which eventually brought them down.
Athens, on the other hand, has much to offer in arts, philosophy, economy, and so on, yet they tended towards decadence and degeneracy, and they too eventually paid the price.

My point is, we're not stuck choosing between Athens and Sparta, that's a false dichotomy. A healthy society should have masculine and feminine attributes in proper proportion and balance; by no means is this an even 50/50 split, but it shouldn't be all or nothing either.
Jung gives us a look at the more moderate pre-Hitler National Socialism that originally attracted the likes of Feder, Goebbles, and Gregor Strasser. While Jung doesn't really cover anything new to someone familiar with the writings of Hitler, Feder, and Darré, this was still a worthwhile read just for the rarity of early National Socialism and the fact that it gives us real world applications of National Socialism to discuss. Because of this, I think the translator's choice of the 2nd edition was the most wise. The appendix showing the party programs of ten different National Socialist parties through the early 20th century was also most valuable. There are many varying opinions of what "true" National Socialism is, but Jung shows us that any of them can be correct when applied to the right Volk.

Jung states the goal of National Socialism is to reform life itself; it is the fight against everything which arises out of foreign thinking. So how would this apply to a non-Germanic nation or to a colonial nation like the US or Australia? For a non-Germanic nation I think it's as simple as tailoring the party program for the specific people in mind. Things get more complicated for the colonial nations, however. In this case it could be based on the blood of the founders of the nation, but that could also cause issues due to immigration from various nations, even if the nations in question are of the same race.

Land reform makes up a significant part of Jung's National Socialism and comes from the belief that only land reform will allow housing reform and implementation of homesteads on a large scale. Jung's discussion of ground rent is rather interesting. It's based on the old Germanic outlook that land is not independently owned, but communal property. Citizens were allotted land for personal usage only and only as much land as was needed to feed a family. Jung wishes to return to this method of land management. He would allow private ownership of property, but any rent would be confiscated and ground rent would be controlled by the state. There is some merit in having a ground rent over a property tax, and perhaps in Germany this return to Germanic law makes more sense, but I can also see a rejection of both on the basis of true land ownership. If an individual were to truly be the owner of his property, a running property or land tax could not exist. Since Jung wanted ground rent to be the primary means of taxation, a one time tax added at the time of purchase could also work and would bypass enslaving the people to a lifetime tax on land while also maintaining state control of land ownership, but I'll admit I'm not economically savvy enough to know which would be better. I do not know what the Reich actually ended up doing with this idea.

Like Darré, Jung recognizes large estates leading to a poor housing situation, which in turn leads to the physical and moral decay of the Volk. This is a problem that persists to this day throughout the western world. Darré discusses this in much more detail, so I won't cover it here. In his discussion of land reform, Jung also calls back to the working schedule of the medieval German peasant. The peasant had fewer "working days" (it's worth noting that this figure never includes the undoubtedly significant amount of time the German peasant spent working his own land), but he also had higher purchasing power. While the modern left likes to use this information to moan about work hours, Jung highlights the higher purchasing power and higher standard of living of the peasant due to the abolition of usury. He also notes that medieval land that was not built on within a year was forfeit, demonstrating the significance of state ownership of land for the benefit of the Volk. Goodson's "History of Central Banking" covers the effect of usury on the peasant's life in much more detail.

Shifting to National Socialism as a cultural idea, Jung tackles the effects of the Industrial Revolution on German labor. The laborer no longer feels the joy of the craftsman or creator. While technological innovations are important, ultimately they are nothing more than civilization and are multi-ethnic in nature. Culture and morality are distinct entities from technological progress and they are inherently national and unique to a race. Following this, much like today, we see the effects of Jews infiltrating academia, law, medicine, media, and politics. Hitler points out their increasing influence during the war due to Germans leaving for the front, but Jung makes this even more clear by giving us actual numbers, showing just how drastic and deliberate this change in demographics was. The shift to democracy encouraged politicians to place the needs of the party above the needs of the Volk. Jung notes that democracy requires a "politically mature" state in order to succeed; civic education is the greatest necessity. This brings up an interesting point. It can be reasonably argued that nearly any political system could succeed if the Volk had a higher conception of life. I believe it was Feder who said eventually the NSDAP would no longer be necessary once National Socialism became the natural mindset of the Volk and argued in favor of a constitution once that point were reached. Jung was in favor of maintaining parliament. Darré wanted to restore the monarchy in some form. Many wanted to maintain the leadership of the Führer. This shows us that National Socialism is not necessarily beholden to a specific political system, but comes from a higher conception of life shared by the Volk. To elaborate on Jung's parliamentarianism a bit, he suggests creating a second chamber of parliament for economic representatives pulled from various occupations. This occupational chamber may seem like a pseudo-corporatist half measure without taking what I previously said into consideration.

Jung initially rejects the idea of class struggle, but then is convinced to accept class struggle in the DNSAP. He claims that class struggle in a National Socialist movement would mean the confrontation between productive labor and unearned income. I don't like the idea of redefining terms, but I can see the use in doing it to attract people from certain groups. In any case, I'm glad the NSDAP did away with it. One social measure that's often associated with that of class struggle is profit sharing. Profit sharing was a part of every National Socialist platform. Jung justly points out that proposed measures of profit sharing do not account for losses, which puts an unreasonable pressure on the owner of the company in question, an owner who is one of the Volk in a National Socialist state. I don't have an answer for this. If there is profit sharing, should there also be loss sharing? It's easy to discuss profit sharing for a company that always succeeds and grows, but reality is not so kind. Perhaps one answer lies in nationalization of the economy, as some early National Socialists suggested, but I think the benefits of privatization under the NSDAP can't be ignored. Some claim that privatization itself was a half measure taken out of necessity due to the times, but the fact remains that not only did it raise money for a broken Germany, but it returned the economy to the Volk and fostered a competitive market. Profit sharing was the 14th point of the NSDAP's 25 point program, but I don't know how it was carried out under them. Resources on how the National Socialist economy was actually run are scarce.

I was going to mention Jung's concept of freedom, but then realized most of what I had to say was already discussed in >>971 in relation to Giovanni Gentile's work. In addition, Jung says National Socialist freedom is freedom to act without influence from other races, the freedom and will to exercise self defense, an obligation to the Volk which fosters internal growth, the rejection of materialism, and the virtue of selflessness. Inner freedom, the freedom of conscience, is the most important and allows for outward duty.

Jung leaves us with a whitepill, showing that the materialist Marxist-jewish spirit has not yet devastated the spirit of the Volk. We still see this today where the good spirit of our people is occasionally able to shine through the darkness. The spirit of our Volk is not destroyed, merely softened.
Replies: >>1746
[Hide] (34.9KB, 434x625) Reverse
I would be down for comparing the influence of Jung's National Socialism on Mein Kampf, maybe even True State with it's concept of Ganzheit as well with the possible influence on the modern-day fascist mythos (including Next Leap).
>I didn't realize there was no pdf available for The True State. I've had a hard copy sitting in my stack for a while, so I never checked for a digital one.
Fortunately, there is an PDF available on the Internet Archive. it is German only however, if that is a problem for other anons.
Replies: >>1744
>it is German only however, if that is a problem for other anons.
I considered making it one of our books, but I can't read German.
It looks like the anon in >>1742 covered most of what there is to talk about, but I'll see what I can do.

There question that is not asked enough among fascists: What is to be done after the first generation of NS leaders die and there is no longer a Hitler figure to rely on? Jung answers this in his description of the Aryan "collective" form of government as opposed to the Jewish individual and political party power. This "collective power" shows that an Aryan state can be flexible in the way it represents it's people's interest. The Roman Republic and it's rulers, avoiding the pitfalls of the later Roman empire and the "Roman law" Jung condemns, saw that a certain flexibility was needed to keep the nation stable in times when the use of a senatorial system was appropriate, and when a singular, strong leader was available and needed. The office of dictator could be used to carry out the will of the nation when the consul was not sufficient. Now, this is far from a perfect description of the Roman Republic, but it helps get the idea across that a National Socialist government has the ability to evolve alongside the problems it faces. Consequently, I think that voting for representatives for a government might not be as much of an evil as Jung makes it out to be, but a established semi-nobility who chooses representatives might be a better move. I realize now that I basically repeated another anon's point, but hopefully this adds to it in some way.

I was also surprised to see christianity confronted in such a direct way, with Jung calling for the rejection of the Jewish god Yahweh and his calling out of the Jewish nature of large portions of the Bible. Still, though, it is still "Positive Christianity", keyword "Christianity". I assume this is only outward policy, considering how Hitler handled Christianity, but much of what he said about promoting a new faith rings true. There is no re-creating what has died. We can resurrect faiths no easier than we can resurrect the dead. What must be done is to take aspects old paganism but fit them in with the attributes of the new, more complete Aryan state (as Jung points out with his son of Odin and son of Baldur). We need both mercy and frenzy. And, while on the subject of Baldur, Jung makes a connection between the figure of Jesus and the archetype of Baldur that I agree with. Christianity was able to take hold because his better aspects spoke to the Aryan spirit, and this unfortunately carried with it the jewish spirit and a non-white idol.

>Profit sharing was the 14th point of the NSDAP's 25 point program, but I don't know how it was carried out under them. Resources on how the National Socialist economy was actually run are scarce.
Since Jung talked about the corrupting power of money, I assumed that the profit would be distributed through public amenities and luxuries that eased the cost of living. This would make it so wages were able to go further, while also avoiding the problem of squabbling over who gets how much money. Free Hitler Youth membership, free vacations sponsored through the state, and better schooling systems worked on this principle under Hitler, I think.
Here is a working list of potential /fbc/ books. It's obviously very bare, so feel free to add to it as much as you feel is appropriate. I'm not what you would call a "classically educated fascist", so you all probably know more fascist authors than I do.

- Decline of the West
- Man and Technics
- Prussianism and Socialism
George Lincoln Rockwell
- This Time the World
Carl Schmitt
- Concept of the Political
- Constitutional Theory
- State, Movement, People
Henry Ford
- The International Jew (Retreading ground)
Joseph Goebbels
- Struggle for Berlin 
Oswald Mosley
- Fascism: 100 Questions
- Greater Britain 
- Tomorrow we Live
Julius Evola
- (I have no idea what order people recommend reading his works in)   
Gottfried Feder
- (Whatever people haven't read yet)
Replies: >>1814 >>2427 >>2721
[Hide] (18.9KB, 180x280) Reverse
Our next book is:

Struggle For Berlin
>Written by Joseph Goebbels

Discussion starts on 3/26
Replies: >>1755
>Struggle for Berlin PDF
A very inspirational book. It's similar to the 2nd volume of Mein Kampf, but goes into further detail about the trials of the SA and also provides a timeline of how opposition will respond to the formation of a genuine movement. The translation is a little lacking, which limits the impact of Goebbels' writing style (for examples his style, there are a number of Der Angriff articles translated in >>1277), but it still carries the passion that went into the SA struggle. "Kampf um Berlin" reaches into our present day and shuts down the biggest critics of a movement-based takeover.

We come across the party as it was when Goebbels first arrived in Berlin. A few hundred National Socialists who had each formed his own opinion of what National Socialism really was. Nothing more than armchair ideologists. There was some infighting, but the party was so insignificant that even the press ignored it. The movement was too small to be met with any resistance from the outside. This was beneficial to Goebbels, who was allowed time to rebuild the Berlin branch from the ground up. In some cases, we come across a discussion of whether to reform a large party or to reform/found a smaller party. Goebbels shows us the benefits of the latter by reforming the Berlin NSDAP while remaining unmolested by the communists and social democratic jewish press. If one were to reform a larger, already established party, he would be fighting a war on two fronts both from within the party itself and from outside forces. 

The party did not only focus on mass and number, but set out to shape the people itself through the belief that only through the state does the mass become Volk and Volk become nation. The "mass" in the mass movement is important, but it's more important to have a strong foundational backbone supporting the movement. When the party increased in size, it was finally noticed by the jewish press and communist "antifascist" agitators. Goebbels tells us tales of the heroism of the SA and the herculean effort that went into protecting party comrades at mass meetings and the cowardly street attacks they fell under by communists and jews. There were attacks on National Socialists in the press and physical attacks in the streets. It wasn't uncommon for a National Socialist to be hospitalized with a serious injury or even killed.  Things have not changed. Opponents of gaining power through a political movement in the modern day will always say something like "Things were different in Hitler's day than they are now!", but Goebbels shows that they are exactly the same. We see the same weaknesses of the so-called "free press" almost 100 years later. The press would run a bogus story to sway public opinion and that story would then get picked up by smaller press organs. This is how the Associated Press operates today. Goebbels describes how the press would lie, get out of consequences in court, and then finally quietly issue a correction. Sound familiar? I think this is something everyone in our movement knows about our modern day, but I don't think most know just how similar life was for the early NSDAP. It seems too soon to throw in the towel on a political movement just because it appears to be "too hard."

When it comes to the formation of a propaganda organ, I think this is one thing modern National Socialists do well. Goebbels and Hitler both describe how propaganda should be developed for the masses rather than just the intellectuals. In this respect, our various infographics, podcasts, memes, writings, etc are effective in delivering a message. They may not have much reach, but Goebbels' "Der Angriff" also didn't see much initial success, even being criticized within the party for being too aggressive, and was in constant financial struggle. 

Goebbels gives us four stages in the lifecycle of a developing movement. First, the anonymous individual from whom the idea of the movement is formed. Then, the small unknown group which is, at worst, merely mocked by the opposition. This is how Goebbels found the Berlin NSDAP (and how even the most successful "third positionist" movement is today). Third is defamation and persecution. This is the great filter of political movements. "Kampf um Berlin" gives us a suitable roadmap for how to navigate this stage for those brave enough to dare. It seems none are willing to take the risk at this time. The few groups with numbers that have reached into the triple digits are still hiding away, only giving speeches in barns to mere dozens of vetted supporters rather than taking their movement to the next stage. If one were to take this road and survive, the final stage of development awaits. The enemy becomes demoralized over their repeated failed attempts to silence you, some of them even being won over to your side, and those sitting on the fence see your efforts and are either inspired or at least curious to hear what you have to say. Growth and glory await.

The slogan "despite ban, not dead" survives in spirit to this day and I'd like for it to see a revival. In Goebbels' time the party was banned in Berlin, but they persevered and conquered. What ideology is silenced more in our times than National Socialism? For us, it's nearly a worldwide ban rather than just Berlin! Yet here we are, despite it all.
Replies: >>1822
[Hide] (3.4MB, 5000x3827) Reverse
I forgot to touch on this earlier. These are all solid picks and just this list could probably cover us for the rest of the year. I have only a few comments.

>The International Jew
Very long and I'm not sure if it would be worthwhile. The version I have has tiny print and is still 500 pages. I've always kind of avoided the books focused solely on the jewish question because I don't think I need 500 pages to figure out that jews are evil. 
Pic related is one suggested order that I've found. While I haven't read Evola, I think "Fascism Viewed from the Right," "Notes on the Third Reich," and "A Traditionalist Confronts Fascism" would be best for our purposes. The others may be a bit too esoteric, but I'm willing to explore them if you think it will be beneficial.
I've read all of his works and they're definitely worth reading, but I think we've already explored his ideas through other works. A deep dive into the 25 points may be fruitful, but I think we've already covered a lot of that with our discussion of Jung. I can't say I have the economic know-how to really go into his Manifesto, so I can only take it at face value.

Ultimately, I'll leave it to your judgment since everything we've read so far has lead to good discussion even if I had some initial hesitation.
Replies: >>1822
In reading Joseph Goebbels' Struggle for Berlin, I found that much of Goebbels' experiences apply no only to modern day NS movements, but also, and more specifically, to /fascist/ as it stands today. As much as I find discussion on this forum useful and cathartic, I don't see /fascist/ as having enough influence or active users to effectively spread propaganda. As it stands, we probably have roughly 20 active posters, many of which disagree on some topics, although decent measures are taken to succinctly define what /fascist/ stands for. I can't help but feel like I am like one of those unemployed Germans, trapped in the cigarette smoke of the "Opium Den". I'm sure that many of the anons here, or from 8chan or Anoncafe or 16chan, have taken action in one way or another irl, but I have not yet met a person of good character that understood or seemed to be coming toward the National Socialist worldview. I can take heart, though, in Goebbels' description of the beginning of the NSDAP. He saw that only a few isolated actors could create a movement, if only they acted genuinely and with absolute certainty in their chances of victory.

With this in mind, it is important that we keep in mind what Goebbels correctly says about the nature of every-man oriented propaganda. The nature of the "masses" does not change, so public gathering and speeches still remain the most effective means of convincing the average person of the validity of our cause. Physical, observable action backed by truthful ideology is really the only way foreword. The proven effectiveness of physical propaganda thus proves the ineffectiveness of lone wolf tactics. How can someone who only acts through lone wolf tactics expect to turn around after destroying a nation's power grid and have the average person fall into his arms? To be trusted, a NS organization needs real rapport with a community, or else they will crumble in the face of their ZOG's retaliation. Those masses make up the backbone of your movement, just as the SA made up the backbone of the early NSDAP.

Goebbels' also paints an inspiring picture of the men in the SA. In one portion of the text, he describes the SA man almost exactly like a Spartan warrior. If you will recall our reading of Sparta and It's Law, you will remember that a Spartan man provided for his dining band, and that if he failed in this duty or failed to preform deeds that lived up to his name of his band, he was released from it. In the same way, the SA man was defined by his deeds. The more active and more brave man was most often promoted and respected. The SA man knew what he fought for, and most of his life was bound to the NSDAP whether by wealth or comradery, and so went to fight with the same spirit as the Spartan. In an earlier chapter, he also speaks of the humble, yet important jobs many of the old SA men took in later years. They worked effectively as middle management for the affairs of the party. In this, they took pride and worked hard, and why shouldn't they? Goebbels was right in his assessment of the SA men knowing that their names would be forgotten, but that their achievements would always be a part of the memory of the German Reich. I would even take this a step further, saying that they recognized that as long as their work contributes to preserving the youth and beauty of future aryandom, their work has meaning. This is a way of thinking that a future NS movement should carry with it: Wherever you end up, your contribution matters.

>Things have not changed.
Really, there are only one major difference: almost all North and South American cities have been overrun by non-whites, with European cities fairing better but not far behind. New York City is only 26% white with hispanics and jews removed from the statistic. Is this even enough to work with? I see suburbs, small towns and rural communities as holding the majority of spirited whites, so influence would have to build outward from them until cities could be reclaimed.

>I can't say I have the economic know-how to really go into his Manifesto, so I can only take it at face value
That's really why I wanted to take a look at Feder, because don't really understand the nitty-gritty of economics. Maybe reading Sowell or something would be useful?

Also, it bothers me that I can't find a resource on more proto-fascist literature like The New Nobility of Blood and Soil you read for the independent study period. For example, in Jung's National Socialism, he brings up the names of many obscure economists and early NS and Fascist thinkers. I feel like I remember a book that was written on the history of ethno-nationalism in America by one of the people involved with the Northwest Imperative.
Replies: >>1832
[Hide] (29.1KB, 179x281) Reverse
Or next book is:

Man and Technics
>Written by Oswald Spengler 

Discussion begins on 4/4
Replies: >>1831
>Man and Technics PDF
>I can't help but feel like I am like one of those unemployed Germans, trapped in the cigarette smoke of the "Opium Den".
Agreed, and there's nothing inherently shameful in that. While Goebbels' description of those times was less than glamorous, as you pointed out it's a necessary first step for the formation of a movement.

>almost all North and South American cities have been overrun by non-whites
It's true, while the social system and overall structure of the jewish press and antifascist agitators remains the same, the demographic crisis can't be ignored. Whether concessions should be made to focus on national values without a blatantly racialist (but still anti-jewish) program or if National Socialism should take its true form from the start is a real question a serious movement will have to answer. If one were to seize power through the electoral process, the former may be preferred for gaining votes, but some of our principles will be lost in the process. What would make us different from any other political party at that point? I think there are roundabout ways to institute a racialist policy, but even that would probably bother some of our most genuine and passionate National Socialists. Certainly a tricky situation, but I believe it can still be overcome by smart and well executed action.

>Maybe reading Sowell or something would be useful?
Funny enough, I read his "Basic Economics" after I read Feder's Manifesto. Sowell is a good writer despite his background, but he mostly sticks to attacking central planning and stays within the boundaries set by laissez faire economics. He provides some good real world examples to counter marxist talking points, so I recommend reading him, but when it comes to something "out of the box" like abolishing the stock market or abolishing interest, he doesn't address these directly and he doesn't give a comprehensive enough view of the economy as a whole to give you the ability to determine the effects of these policies on the greater economy. One reason I was shilling for Othmar Spann is because I'm hoping he has some answers written on a level that the layman can understand and written from a "Fascist adjacent" perspective.

>Also, it bothers me that I can't find a resource on more proto-fascist literature
It doesn't seem like there's anything centralized. I have the "Zundel's Bunker" library downloaded, but it's hard to sort through the massive amount of titles it contains to find what might be considered essential. The drawback of the list in Blood and Soil is that it was written by Darré himself and most of the titles have never been translated. Of the five or so I thought would be interesting reads, none were translated. Similarly, Otto Dickel's work mentioned by Jung also remains untranslated except for a short excerpt that was translated for an anthology of Fascist works. I think one benefit of this thread will be the ability to construct such a list ourselves for future use, although it will be difficult without the ability to speak German.
Man and Technics is a short read, but there's a lot of information in it. It's somewhat of a survey course for Spengler's "Decline of the West." While its length might make it tempting for someone looking for an entry level work by Spengler, one should have a sufficient background in Nietzschean philosophy before tackling it. Nietzsche's views of tragedy, eternal recurrence, and master/slave morality are very influential throughout.

Technics is described as the tactics of living. It does not refer to a tool itself, but the inner form of the process utilized in man's eternal struggle. Spengler sees the progression of technics as a "war on nature," the eternal drive by man to create and improve. He views art as a counterbalance to nature and every technical process of man is an art. Man is in an endless cycle of feeling the joy of the creator followed by the emptiness felt once the task is complete. Man and technics are one and the same. There is no cause or effect; both came into being at the same time. Technics is also the means to determine the brilliant minds of an age, with genius as nothing more or less than creative power. The passion of the inventor has nothing to do with the consequences of his creation, but the joy that comes in his triumph over a difficult task regardless of whether the outcome is beneficial. I don't agree with Spengler's idea that progress is inherently a war on nature. While it can certainly be seen that way, technology and knowledge can also be used to facilitate our life alongside nature. One must recognize that Spengler was writing at the peak of Weimar's collapse which likely influenced his views on technology and the exploitation of nature.

Spengler puts his own spin on the concept of master and slave morality with his beast of prey and the herbivore. He tells us there are carnivore and herbivore ethics. The beast of prey has a Will to Power, putting his eyes forward on an objective and taking action toward it. It may seem strange that Spengler dwelled on the eyes of the predator for a few pages here, but he always had a fascination with the development of eyesight in predators and even wrote his dissertation on it. The beast of prey becomes sick, both physically and spiritually, in captivity. The herbivore feels comfortable living among the herd and gives up nothing in being domesticated. I prefer Spengler's separation of carnivore and herbivore to Nietzsche's master and slave. The master morality is atomized and purely individualistic. While the beast of prey progresses society through a Will to Power, the herbivore, the masses, is still a necessary component of life. The carnivore is the man who is able to command and the herbivore obeys. 

Spengler has a cyclical view of civilization. He sees western civilization (Faustian civilization, as he calls it) as a tragedy, doomed from birth. History is a natural event and takes no notice of our expectations. Originally speech was the "thought of the hand," its sole objective was the completion of the task. There was no need for theoretical discussion. As civilization progressed, we saw the thinking man emerge in the form of the priest and scholar.  

The nobility and the priesthood are the two orders that make up basic society and Spengler sees the "priest of the machine" as the post Industrial Revolution priesthood. This is not to say that there's a "religion of science" as some claim, but rather that the educated/creator class has shifted to the engineer, entrepreneur, and scientist. The mechanization of the world has had negative effects such as deforestation and extinction of animal species. Civilization itself has become a machine that does everything in a mechanical fashion. When looking at the world, modern man sees nothing but resources to be exploited. Workers see themselves as exploited (and in some ways they certainly are) and view work as a curse. The leader and the led no longer understand each other. The cooperative spirit has vanished and a spiritual barrenness has set in, allowing for bitterness against the creators. Modern man fails to see that the leaders' work is the harder work and that their lives depend on its success. They see the joy of the creator and hate him for it. This is the very attitude behind the jewish Marxist spirit we've seen for the last 100 years. I find it strange that Spengler got this far and still rejected the racialism of the NSDAP and failed to acknowledge the effects of the degenerative jewish spirit on a nation and race. We've seen in our previous readings that the NSDAP also recognized this and took efforts to reverse this trend. We will have to do the same.

Spengler sees us on the edge of the abyss and accurately predicts the catastrophic conditions of today. He predicts the BRICS coalition that formed almost 90 years after his death with startling accuracy and describes the poor nonwhite countries replacing White ones through cheap labor. When civilization has fallen into nonwhite hands, progress will stop. Machine technology ends with us and will lie forgotten. Just as bronze age Egypt lived among the ruins of a once superior civilization, our descendants will live among our ruins. In some ways I see us as already living among the ruins of a superior people. Land is a resource to be traded and exploited and beautiful architecture is replaced with featureless rectangles to maximize "useful" space. The techniques that built the great cathedrals no longer exist.

The question for any man reading this is whether to take an active role is Spengler's "tragedy" of western civilization or to passively wait for our superior culture to run its course. The Fascist answer should be obvious.
Replies: >>1875
For how often Spengler is recommended by National Socialists and similar ideologues, I was surprised at how reactionary Spengler's ideas felt. In some parts, he makes specific references to the Nordic race and it's nigh-monopoly on the Faustian Spirit, and to the non-white races' majority understandings of technics as a tool of destruction and temporary gain, with in others he pins the downfall of all civilizations on "culture", although this could come down to a confusion of terms on my part. If by "culture" he means the formation of cosmopolitan/jewish attitudes on race, we would agree. Really, though, I think what bothers me is the general tone of "Man and Technics" is its sardonic tone. Everything is a "tragedy", and the relinquishing of freedom and "Creatures of prey against the herd". It is exhausting and not at all the frame a National Socialist should be looking at the world through. When reading Nietzsche, or at least Beyond Good and Evil, I encountered the same issue. Such works make one pictures the jewish media created image of the stereotypical "Nietzschean", who is really no different from the Machiavellian.  We are not here to hopelessly stand at the gates of Pompeii, even though our situation seems at times hopeless, ready for a solemn death; we are here to win, because failing to preserve the Aryan means total entropy, the death of every living thing, forever and ever, and that we cannot let happen. Let it be a beginning rather than an end.

The only other thing of I haven't seen talked about is Spengler's idea of The Viking of the Mind and The Viking of the Blood, so I'll dive into that. Spengler sees the two modes of Aryan being, or two stages of Aryan history as either the viking of the blood, the conqueror, or the viking of the mind, the inventor. The Blood is the virile civilization of conquerors who impose their will on the world through looting and colonization, and the Mind is the will of the inventor and innovator. This, I think, is much the same concept as Devi's Lighting and Sun, and like the Lighting and the Sun, the Aryan must keep both virtues in turn. National Socialist Germany has shown this to be possible. I've talked about this theme in roughly half of my book discussions, though, so I'll pivot to something I found the Viking Mind applicable to. There seems to be a fascination in the modern west with the asking of questions, rather than finding the answers. Big jewish "thinkers" and their lackeys ask questions like "Why are we here?" and "Does consciousness exist?" and then never really search for answers. They've formed this cult around a state of constant, meandering searching and bastardized "spirituality" that prevents any questions from being answered because it's core virtue is the act of questioning. It is a limbo between Spengler's Blood and Mind. "Agnostic" is probably be best fitting word, but it isn't perfect.

>Man is in an endless cycle of feeling the joy of the creator followed by the emptiness felt once the task is complete. Man and technics are one and the same. There is no cause or effect; both came into being at the same time.
The vedic, and, by extention, the Aryan worldview is one of cyclicality: Cyclical architypes and cyclical cause and effect. One of the biggest problems with christian metaphysics is that they shirk cause and effect by using "a priori", making it false because it fails to fill in the chain of cause and effect. I don't think we'll do it anytime soon, but I think it would be really useful to jump into some church father writings to deconstruct them.

>While it can certainly be seen that way, technology and knowledge can also be used to facilitate our life alongside nature.
I don't know how most /fascist/s feel about antediluvian (I mean this in the least jewish sense of the word) technology and civilization theories, but ideas like separate technology "trees" present interesting ideas on how technology could develop in tandem with nature in the future. Even if that stuff wasn't true, the implications of NS Germany's advances in science and development speed after throwing of the yoke of jewish science also make it clear how much different a future where technology is designed to work in tandem with nature could be.
Replies: >>1876
>I think what bothers me is the general tone of "Man and Technics" is its sardonic tone.
I was a bit put off by this as well. While I wouldn't go so far as to call him nihilistic, in fact I'd say he's quite the opposite, he seems to be more "blackpilled" than our other writers. Even Nietzsche, despite his tone, celebrated life. Spengler's view of the lifecycle of civilization makes the eventual collapse a foregone conclusion, but it will be followed by an eventual rebirth and a new age.

>Big jewish "thinkers" and their lackeys ask questions like "Why are we here?" and "Does consciousness exist?" and then never really search for answers.
Asking questions with no answers seems to be the trend in our age. Not just in the realm of the philosophical or spiritual, but in the scientific as well. Some may disagree, but I believe the scientific method as it's intended, is a perfectly valid means to test a hypothesis. Yet in modern science, we fail to get real repeatable results. We continue to ask questions and come up with no results besides jewish media articles that start with phrases like "study suggests" or "experts say." The jewish intellectuals are not interested in answers. They ask questions as nothing more than a distraction to agitate the masses.

>Cyclical architypes and cyclical cause and effect. One of the biggest problems with christian metaphysics is that they shirk cause and effect by using "a priori", making it false because it fails to fill in the chain of cause and effect.
I've been reading Hume's "Treatise of Human Nature" in my spare time and found Spengler's view on cause and effect to be an interesting contrast. It sounds like Aryan metaphysics may provide for Hume's "necessary connection" that fills the gap between cause and effect. This isn't an area I've studied before, so it may be useful to explore it in the future as you suggest.
[Hide] (19.4KB, 180x279) Reverse
Our next reading is:

Prussianism and Socialism
>By Oswald Spengler

Now that we've started with Spengler, we might as well see him through. Prussianism and Socialism is an essay Spengler wrote with notes he intended to use in the second volume of The Decline of the West. We'll read this in order to wade into Spengler's philosophy, rather than jumping straight in and realizing that it is not worth reading. If all goes well, we'll continue by going through the Decline of the West volume by volume, with different works read in between volumes if needed. 

Discussion begins on 4/19
Replies: >>1881
>Prussianism and Socialism PDF
There is a shadowy group among us. They have infiltrated our highest institutions with their alien thought and twisted morality. They see profit and wealth as an end rather than a means to an end. Who could it be? Of course, it's the English!

In all seriousness, I did enjoy Prussianism and Socialism more than Man and Technics. It seems Spengler got blackpilled as he got older, but this predates Man and Technics by 13 years and we get a fresher view of Spengler's philosophy of history. Like Man and Technics, this seems to be an abbreviated form of the concepts laid out in his Decline of the West, but this focuses on Spengler's ideas of "Prussianism" and "Socialism" as well as a critique of Marxism and international socialism.

Spengler defines Prussianism as the embodiment of spiritual and intellectual traits. These are the classical Aryan concepts of realism, discipline, energy, and esprit de corps. He says the viking spirit gave rise to two antithetical imperatives: personal independence and supra personal community spirit. Put more simply, individualism and German socialism. This manifests itself in the National Socialist concept of freedom, outlined by Rudolf Jung, of inward freedom and outward duty. Spengler believes a people who can simultaneously serve and be free deserves to take upon itself a great destiny. On the other hand, beliefs like cosmopolitanism, international friendship, and humanitarianism stem from "gothic vestiges mixed with bits and shreds of English ideas." Yet with these "English" ideas, there is also the belief that every man is for himself as opposed to the Prussian ideal of every man for every other man. These same antithetical viking ideas made their way to the English, but became twisted. We see these same "English" ideas of humanitarianism and international friendship  today while, seemingly paradoxically, people are more isolated and individualist than ever. Spengler also addresses Liberalism in this discussion, saying it is "the state for itself and every man for himself." Liberalism stands for mental sterility and ignorance of historical necessity. That is, an inability to cooperate and make sacrifices. 

The spirit of old Prussia and the socialist attitude are one and the same. The elements that make up Spengler's philosophy of history are blood, race, and thought which coordinates the energies of body and mind. Spengler saw WWI as the beginning of the struggle of socialism against capitalism, the last great struggle of the Faustian soul. Spengler defines socialism in his time as the Faustian will to power and the infinite. All must submit to the Western man's social or economic ideals or perish. This may seem extreme to those among us who "just want to be left alone" but the history of Europe and her colonies (and even just the existence of our colonies) support Spengler's ideas. I do not think an endlessly expanding international empire suits National Socialism, but even Hitler envied the undeniable benefits of colonial powers in Mein Kampf.

Spengler ends this short work with a critique of Marxism, which I found to be the most relevant subject to our modern day. According to Spengler, ideologies are a thing of the 19th century. The people no longer want ideas and principles, but action. He says this in relation to Marxism, but we must consider it for ourselves as well. While I'd argue that ideology is certainly important, it's something an incredibly fringe minority will entertain for any length of time. This is a problem with conservatism both in Spengler's day and ours. Conservatives who shrink back and mumble something about state's rights when the left takes action against them will never win over the masses. The masses are a simple people and they only respond to passionate words backed by meaningful action. The impotence of the "German" revolution was not truly backed by ideology, but rather was carried out to enrich certain jewish Marxists. Spengler contrasts this with ancient revolutions as defensive actions. The goal of these ancient revolutions was strictly to improve quality of life rather than solely to replace the government with a new system. A people can choose the outer form of government, but not the essential thing. What gets written into a constitution is never essential. What is important is how the will of the people interprets it. I believe this is the argument to be made any time a Fascist is accused of being a "traitor" against his people in our times.

Spengler says Marx's thought was primarily English. This seemed laughable at first glance and I even poked fun at it in this very post, but through my reading of Hume alongside this I can't help but at least partially agree and Spengler even addressed Marx's jewish nature later. For the Prussian, the distinguishing feature of class is rank rather than wealth. In writings on the German idea of Socialism, such as Mein Kampf, we see the term "bourgeois" used to describe a person who has obtained a certain rank without any real work. To the Englishman and American, work is merely a path to wealth. We live in a materialistic culture where work is just seen as something you do so you can retire later rather than a duty to nation and race. Marx transformed our instinctual divisions along racial lines into a material dichotomy between classes. He assigned Prussian Socialism to his proletariat and "English" capitalism to the bourgeois. With class as an economic concept, agriculture and labor are sacrificed for big business. All is for the almighty GDP. Marx's jewish instinct gave him a contempt for work, which he passed along to his proletariat. In Marxism and capitalism, work is viewed as a commodity rather than an obligation. Strikes were used as a means of withholding the commodity of work from the buyer. Here we see the projection of the modern left when they call Fascism "capitalism in decline" since it's clear that it is really the opposite. Marxism arises from capitalism and finishes its work of impoverishing and destroying the Volk. Fascists wish to transcend capital; Marxists merely want to reappropriate it. 

Marxists only show strength when tearing down ideas and society. They cannot think or act positively and Marx's "proletariat" is a purely literary concept that does not exist in the real world. Ultimately, Marxism is a series of vapid slogans. For all their virtue signaling there is no real progress under them and they can only believe in nothingness. A great man understands the spirit of his time and how to fulfill it, the antithesis of Marxism. The National Socialist is the embodiment of this man against Marxism and modernity. Spengler sums up the importance of the struggle against Marxism on page 44. "This being the case, war will be waged until one side gains final victory. Is world economy to be worldwide exploitation, or worldwide organization? Are the Caesars of the coming empire to be billionaires or universal administrators? Shall the population of the earth, so long as this empire of Faustian civilization holds together, be subjected to cartels and trusts, or to men such as those envisioned in the closing pages of Goethe’s Faust, Part II? Truly, the destiny of the world is at stake."

Spengler believes a day will come that people will look back on "international socialism" with amusement. Given the worldwide destruction it has since caused, I don't believe that to be the case, but perhaps one day we will be able to laugh at the concept of international socialism and wonder how anyone ever believed in something so ridiculous. 

So far, I have found Spengler's works to be worth reading and I think going into Decline of the West would be worthwhile. I am just a little biased, however, because I bought both volumes a while ago and it would be a good excuse to clear them from my stack. Spengler was not a National Socialist or even a Fascist, so it's expected to have some disagreements, but I don't think his influence on the movement can be ignored.
Replies: >>1911 >>1914
As a preface to my post, I'd like to say that I agree with >>1908 sentiment that we should continue on to The Decline Of The West. Spengler forms the bedrock of modern third-positionist literature, and it could only hurt us to not have a full knowledge of what we are talking about in discourse involving it. My opinion on Spengler has not changed since my reading of Man and Technics, however. I found many ideas presented by Spengler, like that of the "English" and "Prussian" dichotomy to cause more trouble than they are worth. I can't help but feel that Spengler's conception of the English and French, although true in many aspects, is upstream of the modern trend of trashing the two countries endlessly as a safe target, while avoiding the real culprits behind their societal decay. Maybe this is a result of a lack of understanding of racial dynamics, as in the nordic theory of Grant. The problem of phrasing, which many of my problems with Spengler boil down to, came up in the last discussion, too. Really, it Spengler would have only had to change a few words out to have been right on the dot with his analysis of the Faustian European.

I found Spengler description of the "Fourth estate" to be compelling. The fourth estate, he says, was a result of the reckless industrialization of cities in the nineteenth century, are a roaming, rootless class of people who are left without a place in modern society. The unseen cruelty of the ever pervasive blank slate fallacy leaves these people helpless because it tells each and every man that they are interchangeable, when in reality certain men are fit for certain roles. By destroying the agricultural class, Spengler says, European capitalists drove those men into the arms of the jewish marxist. What else were they supposed to do? In forgetting their duty to the common man, the European nobility allowed communism to fester. We see this today with the devaluing of college degrees and the shrinking of the skilled working class. Young men are pushed into college degrees that end up meaning nothing, and end up falling for the marxist trap rather than seeing the greater picture if the issue. 

Spengler also brings up the dress habits of the British, Prussians, and French, which got me thinking about the modern state of dress standards. He says that the British dress according to financial class standing, the Prussians by rank, and the French focus on feminine dress. As amusing as the last description may sound, I think the Prussian method of dress deserves serious analysis. The Prussian man dressed in uniform as a show of nobility, and I think that the Brownshirt's wearing of their uniform in daily life is not much different. Both showed outwardly that they were one in the same as their duty, and that that duty did not end when they left the battlefield or a party meeting. Now, compare this with the modern state of dress. Formal clothing is only seen briefly, at work or formal events, and quickly exchanged for casual wear in any other circumstance. Women clothing has become more and more like men's clothing, and men's clothing is little different than children's clothing save for size. Casual clothing has become more and more sloppy in recent decades, with sweatpants and t-shirts being the articles of clothing of choice for most younger people. Outward action influences inward thought, so how are the citizens of a nation supposed to fit their roles when their appearances contrast them. Men should be men, women should be women, children should be children, and National Socialists should be National Socialists. 

Despite my dislike of Spengler thus far, I can see his usefulness as an author capable of clearing the name of "Socialism". I'm sure many of us have run into the issue of people seeing Communism and National Socialism as the same because "Socialism and Communism are the same thing". This is largely because of the jewish tainting of the memory of National Socialist Germany, and Spengler work sidesteps this hurdle by analyzing Prussia, which most conservatives would have a much easier time relating to. 

>The elements that make up Spengler's philosophy of history are blood, race, and thought which coordinates the energies of body and mind
I can't shake the feeling that Spengler sees "race" as more spiritual than genetic. Maybe I'm wrong, but I don't understand why he would have given National Socialist Germany such a hard time otherwise.
Replies: >>1912 >>1917
>Maybe I'm wrong, but I don't understand why he would have given National Socialist Germany such a hard time otherwise.
Spengler has Jewish ancestry.

Replies: >>2308 >>2427
[Hide] (33.1KB, 315x475) Reverse
Our next (very long) book is: 

The Decline of the West
>By Oswald Spengler

I had no idea that The decline of the West was roughly 450 pages per volume, but we did Thus Spoke Zarathustra and that was only a hundred pages less, so I'm sure we'll be fine. The book will be read volume by volume, and the pdf will contain both.

Discussion of Vol. 1 begins on 5/9
Discussion of Vol. 2 begins on 5/27
Replies: >>1914 >>1917 >>1918
PDFs are giving me trouble with the file size and its too late to try for a forth time to upload them. I assume >>1908 'll be good untill I upload them tommorrow since you have a physical copy.
>I can't shake the feeling that Spengler sees "race" as more spiritual than genetic. Maybe I'm wrong, but I don't understand why he would have given National Socialist Germany such a hard time otherwise.

It certainly seems that way, since he considers Marx English, despite Marx being a jew born in Germany who only lived in England later in life. Whether he truly has jewish ancestry or not isn't something I've delved into, but may give some insight to his view of race.

It's important to note that Thus Spoke Zarathustra had significantly less words per page. I ran both pdfs through a word counter and TSZ came in around 117k words while both volumes of Spengler's Decline were a whopping 505k words total, or roughly twice as long per volume. In light of this, I recommend giving significantly more time for a thorough reading, but I can push myself to finish either way.
Replies: >>1918
The first listed discussion will be for Chapters 1-6 of Volume One, and the second will be for Chapters 7-11 of Volume One. 

Also, the PDF for Vol. One refuses to be posted, so here is the archive.org link for now. Replace the [dot]:
If anybody knows of a way to minimize the files, let me know.

>In light of this, I recommend giving significantly more time for a thorough reading, but I can push myself to finish either way.
Thanks for letting me know, and I agree that we need more time for it.
So far Decline of the West Volume I has been different than expected. Every discussion of Spengler that I have seen has only encompassed his 8 high cultures and cyclical history. Thus far volume I has focused mostly on Spengler's metaphysics and somehow this is completely ignored by commentators. I don't think there is much for us to discuss from a Fascist perspective, but my notes on this are the longest of anything we've read and the length of this post will probably reflect that. If the idle lurker doesn't care for metaphysics, he can go ahead and skip this post, but I think an understanding of Spengler's metaphysics is central to understanding his view of history. Spengler (or possibly the translator) uses much of his own vocabulary throughout and I've tried to summarize this reading to be as understandable as possible.

Spengler begins by discussing the purpose behind his philosophy of history. He sees traditional historians, including Classical historians like Thucydides and Tacitus, as short sighted. They do not consider a cyclical view of history. This is kind of an autistic criticism, because creating an all-encompassing philosophy of world history was never the intention of these historians. Thucydides and Tacitus were not compiling a history of the world; they were merely recording events they lived through as they saw them. I find it even more curious that Spengler seems to praise Eastern cultures despite them having no historians at all. I took an interest in the warring states period for a time and how surprised I was to discover they did not have their own Thucydides! Despite this, I do agree with Spengler's assessment that history should not be viewed simply as the passing of one event to the next. I found a few of Spengler's other historical anecdotes to be inaccurate throughout. For example, in his discussion of mathematics, he claims that the Classical man would be unable to understand abstract mathematics because he is rooted in Actuality, yet one need only to examine Euclid to see discussion of primes and number theory. This is just one example and I think it would be rather pointless to pick apart Spengler's arguments in this manner as they don't encompass the true subject of this book.

Back to the subject of history, Spengler describes how it was previously discussed as either a fanciful or strictly factual phenomenon based on the writer's particular interests. This obscures much of our knowledge of ancient times as Romans, Greeks, Mesopotamians, and the Chinese would replace their history with myth. Spengler says the object of his "Decline of the West" is the liberation of history from the observer's prejudices. Spengler later boldly declares that this "physiognomic of world-happening" will indeed be the LAST Faustian philosophy. A materialist conception of history leads to setting up of usefulness ideals such as "enlightenment" and "world peace" as aims of world history, to be reached by the "march of progress," an idea that is in direct conflict with our ideals and further separates the Marxist ideals from the Fascist ones.

The "Decline of the West" comprises nothing less than the problem of Civilization. Spengler defines Civilization as the inevitable destiny of the Culture. Civilizations are an end, but they are reached again and again by man's inward necessity. Spengler borrows from Nietzsche's revaluation of values when he says that pure civilization consists of a progressive taking down of forms that have become inorganic or dead. Later Spengler says the high cultures of his time (German, French, etc) would no longer exist in hundreds of years. Reading through that the first time, I thought this was purely anti-national, but in the context here we can see that it fits. The German of today is definitely not the German of 300 years ago, even though Germany has continued to exist. The German, and every other culture, has progressively shed forms and revaluated their values for better or worse. However, Spengler fails to notice the racial element that exists at the core of every culture. While some forms will be shed, an unalterable racial soul remains, as we saw some of our previous readings such as the works of Tacitus.

The first volume, "Form and Actuality," starts from the form-language of the high Cultures (Faustian, Apollinian, Magian, Egyptian, Chinese, Indian, Mexican, Babylonian) and attempts to penetrate to the roots of their origins. The second volume, "World-historical Perspectives," starts from the facts of Actuality and from the historical practice of higher mankind to obtain an essential historical experience that we can set to work upon the formation of our own future. Spengler proposes we can use his cyclical view of history not only to predict later stages of our civilization, but also to uncover the secrets of our long forgotten past. He considers two people "contemporaries" if  they exist in the same relative time of their respective civilizations, which I find to be one of the more interesting concepts in these chapters. "Higher history," related to life and becoming, is the actualization of a Culture. Culture, with a capital C, is Spengler's concept of culture as the body of an idea. It is the sum of its visible, tangible, and comprehensive expressions. I could probably go on and on about the material contained in just the introduction, but I'll assume everything else is covered in more detail later and move on.

Spengler approaches history from the viewpoint of a skeptic, denying the existence of a higher thought consisting of general and eternal truths, and asserts that his philosophy of history can only ever be applicable to Faustian man. This is the heart of Spengler's cultural relativism that is spread throughout this volume. The biggest weakness of his analysis has already been discussed, and that is the lack of the racial element. Spengler completely neglects the facts of race and the demographic changes in regions through the ages. He includes Persians among the Magians, along with semites. He believes the people who built ancient Egypt are the same people who were still there 2000 years later showing no cultural or technical progress, who stopped building pyramids and instead tossed their dead into the Valley of the Kings. He says that the musical and artistic tastes of one Culture will be unpleasant to members of another Culture for reasons one cannot identify. Spengler does identify that race exists on page 179, but likens the difference between races to the differences between individuals. While individuals can "agree to disagree," such a thing cannot be said of races who have different ideas of justice and honor or conflicting behaviors due to differences in intelligence and genetics. 

Alongside Spengler's cyclical view of history is his concept of "Destiny." Just as there is a necessity of cause and effect as the logic of space, there is a necessity of Destiny as the logic of time. Spengler has a linear view of time (this must be understood to be separate from the cyclical view of history, which is specific to civilizations rather than time itself) where time is a direct, irreversible, living process. Causality is the reasonable and law-bound badge of our waking and reasoning existence. Destiny is an inner certainty that not describable; it is the living idea of becoming, which reveals itself intuitively. We see this Destiny concept in Mein Kampf in the many mentions of "providence." The causation-free living grace that can only be experienced as an inward certainty. The title of this volume, "Form and Actuality," takes several forms throughout this volume: destiny and causality, time and space, history and nature, form and law, etc. where Form is the hallmark of Faustian man and Actuality makes up the quintessential Apollinian. Space (Actuality) is an instant of time, the snapshot of Spengler's cyclical history that makes up conventional history. Time (Form) is the Nietzschean Will to Power and the infinite while space is the intellect as morality and denial of instinct.

Spengler sees nature as the sum of law imposed necessities. Nature is a strict image projected by a knowing intellect, bound to a set of natural laws. The laws of nature exclude incident and causality; they are "the become" rather than "becoming." Conversely, becoming has no number and lies beyond the realm of cause and effect. History, in the conventional sense, is not pure becoming, but an image created from the consciousness of the historian, in which the becoming dominates the become. Spengler believes the idea of Goethe's "living nature" was true history and pure becoming. In Spengler's view, nature is something real and timeless. It existed before history and will exist after it, and he believes Faustian history is nearing its end. How does this mesh with the Fascist conception of "natural law"? I don't think there's any conflict here. While Spengler doesn't believe Actuality suits Faustian man, we still recognize and respect its existence. While Faustian man may yearn for higher purpose, the rules of nature still exist and must be obeyed.

As I alluded to earlier in this post, Spengler incorporates mathematics into his view of history. Mathematics and the principle of causality lead to a naturalistic chronology and a historical ordering of the phenomenal world. Spengler treats mathematics as an ontological structure more basic than science or the science of mathematics. It is especially clear here that Spengler had a significant influence on Heidegger's early thought. Spengler believes numerical thought has a direct influence on the worldview of a Culture and becomes a view of the universe. In his view, there are as many "number-worlds" as there are higher cultures. Most of Spengler's mathematical ideas were discussed in our reading of Timaeus and I already stated my disagreement with his view of Western vs Classical mathematics, so I won't get further into it here.

The last thing I'll discuss in this post are the stages of a Culture as defined by Spengler. We often see the "good times create weak men, etc" meme attributed to Spengler's philosophy, but Spengler separates the lifecycle of a Culture by the arts or, simply, "style." Style, as a Spenglerian concept, is the outward expression of the soul of a people. First is the timid, despondent, naked expression of a newly awakened soul which is searching for a relation between itself and the world. Then the style-history reaches manhood and Culture changes into the intellectualism of the great cities that will dominate the countryside. Grand symbolism withers and worldly arts dominate. Next is the golden age of style. The soul of the people depicts its happiness, conscious of its self-completion, representing a return to nature. The arts exist as a sensitive longing to the infinite. Finally, the style fades out and is left with the flat and senile classicism of the Hellenistic megalopolis. Money represents the power of a civilization and economic forces dominate politics and culture. The rootless cosmopolitans of the world cities become the economic center and the city culture radiates outward. Style in this period is a tedious game with dead forms to keep up the illusion of a living art. This was the world of Spengler's day and even more so of our own.

I will save Spengler's further discussion of the arts for the next half of Volume I. He covers some in this volume, but it would be incomplete without the discussion from the following chapters and I run a real danger of hitting the character limit at this rate. While much of this doesn't directly pertain to Fascist ideologies and there are some flaws, I think it has been a valuable read. The influence with regard to views of history and the arts that Spengler had on the minds behind National Socialism is clear. The influence this had on Rosenberg in particular, just based on comparison with his Myth of the Twentieth Century, is tremendous. This has been a very slow, dense read and it's understandable if you want to read something lighter between Volume I and II. I also understand wanting to just power through it, so I'm fine either way.
Replies: >>1985 >>1987
I've had a pretty busy last few weeks, so I figure I'll save the more pertinent for next discussion. Who knows, maybe the spirit of Spengler has come out of the pages of the Decline of The West to haunt my life with his pervasive clinically and needless complexity. I see one way to dispel this geist: to reveal his true nature, and through the text of The Decline of the West, at that! All jokes aside, my mind is a little to scattershot to do Spengler's ideas justice right now. With the benefit of the rest of the volume, I'll be more ready do discuss it, but for now I'll examine the core flaw of Spengler's philosophy, and how it corrupts most of his ideas as a result of its existence. 

The main issue of TDOFW for the first seven chapters is, you guessed it, race. From the introduction, the problem is apparent. In it, Spengler says "But in Homeric Greece, as in Vedic India, we find a change, so sudden that its origins must necessarily be psychological, from burial to that burning which (the Iliad gives us the full pathos of the symbolic act) was the ceremonial completion of death and the denial of all historical duration". Here, we find the ever-present a priori, the beloved copout of the semitic minded. The clockwork of nature is suddenly broken, cause and effect thrown to the wind, to justify the view of the spirit emerging suddenly to form culture and then to die by the hands of civilization. The blood of a race means nothing simply because it cannot mean anything for Spengler. From this gall, the poison of the separation of the spirit and the racial body spreads, spoiling perfectly good metaphysics with a miasma of falsehood. The idea of morality as governed by race, which holds real merit, is muddled by the conception of race as spiritual (With the understanding of morality Plato finds in the Republic, which I believe to be true, the morality of each and every living creature corresponds with that creature's nature. This idea insures ensures that you do not grow to hate the "masses", since they are only doing what is in their nature to do. It is you, the aware Aryan, who the onus of helping them lies upon). The analysis of Aryan art at different points in history is butchered into the haggard pieces of "Catholic and Protestant" and "Grecian" style, obscuring their true natures. All of this could be made acceptable if one were able to take Spengler's proposed end of the Faustian age as the culmination of the struggle between the Apollonian and Faustian spirit, but Spengler seems to see this as a death rather than a synthesis and rebirth, despite token phrases that might fool some. At the risk of repeating the words of earlier, I'll again bring up the closing words of Man and Technics. The description of the West's last men as the guards of Pompeii, Spengler shows his true views on the fate of Faustian spirit, which is in truth the Aryan spirit. He sees the Aryan spirit being turned to lava-cast, being remembered only in the distant future as those who struggled, but died. Spengler is not our ally; he belongs wholly to the present era. He planned on going down with the occidental ship at the end of history, entranced with the idea of tragedy as he was. I am sure most people here are aware of this, but it is still important that we keep this in mind going forward with this and future reads. 

I apologize for my post not going as in depth as I would have liked it to, but again, rough few weeks and another few rough days left.                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                

>I also understand wanting to just power through it, so I'm fine either way.
I'm thinking that, with all we've been hearing about Goethe, I'll do some research and find some shorter selections of his to read.
Replies: >>1987
>"But in Homeric Greece, as in Vedic India, we find a change, so sudden that its origins must necessarily be psychological..."
A good find. This quote really sums up Spengler's obliviousness (willing or not?) to the racial question. The rest of your analysis is spot on, especially about Spengler being entranced with the idea of tragedy. His Schopenhauer-like pessimism combined with a lack of awareness of race is really his biggest flaw and this sends out ripples affecting nearly every aspect of his philosophy. Such a small thing would make him complete, like a puzzle piece that slides perfectly into place to make up the full picture, but its absence has left an immense void.

>I'm thinking that, with all we've been hearing about Goethe, I'll do some research and find some shorter selections of his to read.
It seems we had the same idea! I just ordered several volumes of his works last week, so I'm all for this suggestion.

>page 179
I felt silly when I realized that this may not be very helpful since different versions of books exist. This part was in Chapter V Section V.
[Hide] (3.3MB, 2655x5043) Reverse
[Hide] (1.1MB, 1914x2682) Reverse
[Hide] (6.6MB, 4096x2731) Reverse
The second half of Volume I of Oswald Spengler's "Decline of the West" naturally builds on Spengler's metaphysics established in the first half. This volume is almost entirely focused on Spengler's philosophy, without much in the way of actual political thought. I assume that will be the focus of Volume II.

Spengler continues with his discussion of art throughout history and civilization. Technical form-language is no more than the mask of the real work. Style is inaccessible to art-reason; it is a metaphysical order, a Destiny. It has no concern with artificial boundaries of different arts. Spengler sees art as an organism, not a system. The ideas of Newton and Kant are formed from laws and equations that are then reduced to a system. Conversely, the organism of pure history, as the idea of becoming, is intuitively seen and inwardly experienced while being rendered in poetical and artistic conceptions. The becoming effects a become, which signifies time and evokes space. Per Spengler, an art without space ("abstract art") is a priori unphilosophical. As stated in my previous post, the longing for nature, the infinite, and mysterious compassion are the elements of the Faustian soul. A metaphysical element exists within painting and Spengler sees the Western portrait as the ultimate expression of the Faustian soul, at once cosmic and historical. Endless becoming is comprehended in the idea of motherhood. Woman as mother is pure time and destiny. Only through motherhood is the man made an individual member of this world in which a destiny. For Faustian man, the nursing mother is the symbol of life. This is practically absent in non-Western art, but was very prominent in Germany under the NSDAP. Spengler invokes Goethe's Theory of Color when discussing the Western portrait, showing that colors such as blue and green, virtually absent in Classical art, are representative of the great infinite and a destiny governing the universe from within.

Some of Spengler's art discussion contrasts Egyptian and Chinese architecture, but most of it focuses on the differences between the Apollinian and Faustian. Spengler sees the Faustian and Apollinian as opposites, with Faustian man rooted in Form and Apollinian in Actuality. With respect to art, Spengler substitutes "form and actuality" with "imitation and ornament." Imitation is something religious. It consists of an identity of inward activity between the soul, body, and external world. The aim of imitation is effective assimilation of ourselves into something alien, inseparable from creative activity. Ornament is something which does not follow the stream of life, but faces it. Here we have established motives and symbols which are impressed upon the alien being. Ornament employs a language emancipated from speaking, while imitation is speaking with means that are born of the moment and therefore unreproduceable. Imitation is time, but Ornament is pure extension, settled and stable. In short, following our usual pattern with Spengler, Imitation is becoming and Ornament is the become. When civilization sets in, true ornament and great art as a whole are extinguished. At the twilight of a civilization, there is a decline in creative power. The artist requires to be emancipated from form and proportion. Art today is no more than impotence and falsehood. Artists are looking to produce something that will "catch on" with the public for whom art, music, and drama have ceased to be spiritual necessities. Spengler says this and I can't agree more. What can we say we possess today as art? More importantly, how can we revive the Aryan arts for the general public? The easiest method would probably be for the state to act as patron for select artists, but I've seen other suggestions that include giving a set income to all artists. I think this is one of the most important questions for the longevity of the West. Talk about how to gain power is all well and good, as is what policies to set forth once we get there, but the revival of the arts, the soul of our people, is key to the resurgence of the West.

Spengler continues his discussion of the arts and sciences through various media. He says for Faustian and Egyptian man age ennobles all things. However he claims this is the opposite for Classical man, who lives in the present. Our tragedies are of the past and future, where men are shown to be carriers of a Destiny. Nietzsche somewhat agrees here when he says that profound suffering ennobles and history, like all other life affirming aspects, should be an art. However Nietzsche differs himself from Spengler in his unpublished Will to Power when he says the spirit can only be ennobled by blood. Spengler continues his cultural relativism with morality and the Will by stating that each culture possesses a moral constitution unique to itself. While partially true, he fails to mention the differences in morality and justice that form between these cultures and their inherent incompatibility and dismisses Kant's idea of objective morality. Spengler neglects the "world" in "World as Will." Spengler notes that psychology does not possess an object and psychologists cannot define Will, but Spengler falls into the same trap. 

The last art I wish to discuss that is covered by Spengler is that of language. Abstract ideas, representations of numbers, judgments and conclusions, and causality all exist within language. For Faustian man, this includes the previously discussed Will. Some words exist in one language to represent an idea unique to its respective Culture, but will be absent in other languages (eg. "logos" for Classical man). Expanding on the power of language is the power of speech. Spengler says speech is the basic element of Classical life-feeling. We know from our previous readings, and some know this intuitively, that this is true for Western man as well. Mein Kampf and Kampf um Berlin both focus on the power of the spoken word. Great orators are absent in our era where the creative will is dim and art is dying. As with other arts, a revival of the spoken word will also be needed.

Much of Spengler's discussion of art and science focuses on a complete separation between Faustian and Apollinian man, with the Faustian focus on form and Apollinian on actuality. That Faustian and Apollinian man are opposites is a fundamental idea of Spengler's and it permeates the rest of the work, but I have to disagree. I already discussed the issue with Spengler's mathematics in my previous post and I find much the same issues when he applies his theory to the arts. On the subject of speech, Pericles' famous funeral oration focuses on abstract concepts like liberty, freedom, and justice. The metaphysics of Aristotle and Plato can't be said to be representative of Actuality. There was clearly more to Greek metaphysics than "man with thunderbolt who really lives on Mt Olympus." I can't say I have enough knowledge of works of art to really critique Spengler on the subjects of sculpture and painting, but it seems to me that there isn't much difference between Western and Classical sculpture that can't simply be explained by 1500 years of refining the craft itself rather than a difference in subject matter. Spengler says traditional historians are limited by their own personal interests and Spengler falls into this as well in his discussion of art and science.

Lastly, I'll revisit the race problem since Spengler actually addresses it towards the end of the volume. Spengler acknowledges race as an inherent immutable aspect of man. Recognizing Spinoza's jewish nature, Spengler says he was spiritually Magian and therefore couldn't possibly understand the Faustian worldview and couldn't include it in his system. Spinoza lived among the Faustian culture, but his ideas were still alien due to his nature. In his discussion of science, Spengler says the idea of force is the basic element of Faustian science. The significance of Hertz, a jew, trying to eliminate the concept of force altogether seems to be lost on Spengler, but should stand out to the reader who is used to the workings of jews. Spengler's science discussion is also relevant to those who disparage "jewish science" and turn their backs on Aryan science as a result. I'm sure this will be controversial in our circles, but to deny the reality of the work of someone like ((( Einstein ))) is to deny Gauss, Helmholtz, and the rest he stole his work from. Many people in our movement will also deny the scientific progress of National Socialist Germany because of a grudge against the allies for using our best Aryan minds after the war in Operation Paperclip. Discard the jew and then consider the merit of the science itself. The Faustian longing for the infinite extends to all things, and I have to agree with Spengler when he says science is just another way for us to realize that.

Spengler predicted that soulless nihilism would set in around the year 2000. At this time, the brain would rule and the soul of the people would abdicate. In hindsight, this was very accurate. The creative power of our people is currently dead and must experience a revival if we are to survive. That much is clear. However, time has yet to tell if Spengler's tragedy of a 200 year decline will prove true. I believe a resurgence of the West is still possible and widespread National Socialism and Fascism are the keys to the future. As I said earlier, I expect Volume II to cover more concrete world history and politics. I also expect Spengler to expand on the racial issue since footnotes in his sections on Spinoza's jewish nature and race in general linked to sections of Volume II. I look forward to seeing what's in store for us as we wrap up Spengler for good.
Replies: >>2158
Spengler makes a passing reference to the uneasy relationship most artists of the past five or six centuries (or more) have had with Classical civilization, and I think this problem needs more exploring. Many Renaissance works center around biblical figures whose original images clash with their portrayal by artists. The youthful beauty and strength Michelangelo's David is contrasted by the conniving actions and subversion of the natural order of the original David. Raphael's Madonna is a struggle between the historical Mary and the Aryan image of the Mother Archetype. Where Spengler sees a passive rising and falling of different civilization-ideals, I see an active struggle between Aryan and oriental thought. European artists had, for centuries, been uncomfortable with the pagan-ness of their art not because their psychology changed with their state, but because christianity actively sought to disconnect them from their heritage. It is the same reason bathing fell out of fashion and the desecration of groves came into vogue. If one only listened to Spengler on this subject, he would never be able to fight to renew his nations artistic prowess against christian restriction. 

I think Spengler is also wrong about his outer mimicry vs inner exploration dichotomy in respect to art. Aryan art, in the sense of painting, sculpture, architecture, etc., is ultimately an exploration of the patterns of nature that create beauty and an attempt to strive to further and further understand them. Concrete imitation as well as more expressionistic works are fine if they are made in accordance with these rules, but they start to work against the Aryan spirit when they are made to specifically arouse ill feelings like disgust, fear, or lust. Again, we find that Spengler leaves part of the picture out when he presents a faustian vs apollonian dichotomy to the reader rather than an aryan vs semitic one.  

Spengler posits another a priori transformation in chapter 9, as he did in the introduction of Volume One. He identifies a change in linguistics, and, consequently, the soul in the change between conjugated verbs and verbs independent of subject. For Spengler, "feci" must become "ego habeo factum" spontaneously. It is not a question of how this happened, but when and what happened because of it. Ironically, the shift between classical and vulgar latin the two phrases represent was caused by the degradation of the original nordic roman stock, the very phenomena that Spengler chooses to avoid discussing. 

In the last chapter of Volume One, Spengler starts his discussion on "Nature-Knowledge" with an acknowledgement that no scientific achievement comes without "religion", meaning ideological or spiritual drive. I think this is true in a way. Aryan science flourished under National Socialism primarily because of the will to innovate and the love of their people they possessed, and real scientific advancement has stagnated in recent years as a result of the lack of this spirit. Present day "scientific advancement" seems to propel us towards a jewish dystopia. Recent advances in A.I. and network tech are evidence of this. They superficially appear as advancement, but they really serve to keep the world as stagnant as possible. Really, it could be that this is all technology developed by whites that is abused for jewish purposes, but I am unsure. I felt that it had to be acknowledged either way.

>The easiest method would probably be for the state to act as patron for select artists, but I've seen other suggestions that include giving a set income to all artists.
Having a list of artists sanctioned by the state seemed to have worked for Hitler with Breker, Hoffmann, and Goebbels' film projects. Once our art has been cleansed of jewish themes, we would only need to give inspired artists the means to produce and hone their craft. It might be worth looking into how Caesar Augustus handled state funded art, too.

>but to deny the reality of the work of someone like (((  Einstein  ))) is to deny Gauss, Helmholtz, and the rest he stole his work from.
I need to look into this more, as it seems that this holds true for some fields but not for others. I've seen some pretty interesting arguments for there being big problems with modern day astrophysics. Still, I can say I know enough to form a proper opinion on any of it yet.
[Hide] (47.5KB, 400x669) Reverse
Our intermission between Volume 1 and Volume Two of The Decline of the West is:

Faust 1&2
>Written by Johann Wolfgang von Goethe

I don't know how much we will get out of Faust 1 (sort of a Oedipus Rex and Oedipus Colonus situation), but I figure its required reading for Faust 2.  

Discussion begins on 6/8
Replies: >>2166
>Faust 1&2 PDF
Goethe's Faust is truly a unique work of art. You can't really put it into any genre. It stands alone. It's not simply a poem telling the story of Faust, but an artistic expression of the Aryan spirit itself. At first I was shocked to see how much of our ideology was reflected in the philosophy of Faust, but it should really come as no surprise. It's only natural that the expression of the Aryan spirit in art would share many similarities with the reflection of the Aryan spirit in politics. From self sufficiency and lebensraum, money power, the state of academia, the unification of the Classic and Romantic, the eternal conflict with the jewish spirit, and much more. Even with just the surface level reading I could get done in our limited time frame, there are a number of topics I could choose from. In the interest of not taking up too much space, I will only choose a couple. 

Initially, I wanted an understanding of Spengler's idea of what exactly he meant by "Faustian man," but it turned out this was very basic and introduced early on. Looking back, it's even said by Spengler himself. Faust is introduced as a man who has studied and mastered many fields. He has accumulated much knowledge, but is overcome with ennui, feeling that he really knows nothing. Faust turns to the study of magic. We see him contemplating the signs of the Macrocosm and the Earth Spirit, reflecting on the relationship between man and the universe. As he contemplates, he feels empowered and connected with nature. Here we can see not just the German man, and Goethe himself, in Faust, but we can see a clear reflection of ourselves. Many of us arrived at Fascism and Fascist-adjacent ideologies from various paths, but a good many of us felt the same feelings as Faust before opening up a "forbidden book" and continuing to explore a subject deemed taboo. Upon meeting Mephistopheles, Faust agrees his soul will be forfeit if he is ever satisfied. Faust knows he will never be satisfied by worldly pleasures. This is Spengler's "Faustian man" yearning for the infinite. 

While Faust is a representation of the Aryan spirit, Mephistopheles is the jewish spirit given form. When Mephistopheles introduces himself in line 990 of part 1 he says "I am the spirit who evermore denies!" He is the opposite of affirmation of our world. After the uplifting message from the spirits at line 1256 in part 1, Mephistopheles subverts their message, twisting it and claiming it as his own. When a student tries to approach Faust for advice, Mephistopheles confronts him. The student finds academia stifling. He misses the outdoors and his freedom. Mephistopheles assures him that he will grow used to it and he should study logic and metaphysics instead of law. Every field Mephistopheles suggests is something that could be valuable in conjunction with another field, but all together these are fields that do not have a practical purpose and will prevent the student from contributing to his nation and Volk. In the conversation with the monkeys in lines 2036-2037 of part 1 he shows his affinity with the jewish spirit by saying he takes pleasure in all things ugly and low. His degenerate nature is on full display in the final moments of part 2 when he is overcome with unfulfilled desire at the presence of the angels. He is incompatible with our ideals of beauty. All these are simply examples that show his jewish nature, but the depraved jewish soul of Mephistopheles makes other larger impacts on the story. 

Gretchen is the symbol of innocence in Faust. She is symbolic of the object of human striving as we see at the end of part 2 when Faust is saved in heaven by her pleas and Goethe leaves us with the final message "The eternal feminine draws us above." Faust's salvation is similar to Spengler's idea of the mother as the center of Western art, but it also brings us back to Dante being led to heaven by Beatrice. Mephistopheles using Faust's admiration of Gretchen to plot her downfall is symbolic of the jew subverting German culture. It's fitting that Mephistopheles takes interest in Martha, the materialistic and jaded friend of Gretchen. The materialistic couple of the modern world is brilliantly contrasted with the innocent "first love" of Faust and Gretchen. We see their first kiss and blooming love, but the jew can't have that. He goads Faust into seducing her and leads Gretchen to accidentally poison her mother. When we last see her alive, she is miserable and imprisoned, awaiting execution. This is Faust's (the character) moral downfall and the corruption of the Aryan spirit by the jew.

At the beginning of part 2 we see Mephistopheles has inserted himself into the Emperor's court and Faust tags along, hoping to win a fiefdom and establish a self sufficient nation. The Emperor is the quintessential failed ruler. He does not concern himself with the welfare of his kingdom or his subjects; he only thinks of himself and his own amusement. His land is without law. The judge is on the side of the criminals, the army is without pay, and the state treasury has no money. Mephistopheles "fixes" the problems for the Emperor by introducing paper money. In the pleasure garden we see that the paper money has led to an increase in wealth, but also idleness and self-indulgence. Rather than making this wealth available through labor, the Emperor relaxes and paves the way for the dangers threatening the nation. Finally, in Act IV, the Emperor's actions have led to an insurrection. Faust and Mephistopheles help him put the rebellion down, but the Emperor, rather than learning from the rebellion and establishing a beneficial government, augments the power of the princes and allows them to impose taxes arbitrarily. Meaningless ceremonialism replaces genuine political activity. Currency without a backing, that isn't based on a real value like labor, is bound to destroy the nation eventually and this is one of the most prominent political messages in part 2 that isn't buried in symbolism.

That this may be misunderstood as a Christian work may put some people in our movement off from reading it. It must be understood that religion in Faust is merely a narrative device. We first hear of Faust during the prologue in heaven when God refers to Faust has his servant. One may expect a pious man like Job, but instead we are greeted with a world weary older man studying magic and contemplating suicide. Like Goethe, Faust was turning away from Christianity, substituting a belief in God for a belief in himself. There is a lot of disagreement on what Goethe's religion really was, with theories ranging from simply a Christian with unconventional beliefs, to a polytheist, to a Spinoza style atheist who believes Being = God. While there are Christian elements to the story, they take a backseat to the Classical elements. The only meaningful Christian element is Faust's soul being saved by effort other than his own, but I think the concepts put forth in my previous discussion of Gretchen make up for it.

I could go on with other subjects, but I'll leave it at this. I would highly recommend Faust to any National Socialist. After reading, I believe we could go as far as to call it National Socialist literature, but it also resonated with other political groups in Germany. It's clear why Goethe's childhood home was considered a place of pilgrimage in Germany. I was lucky enough to pick up a well annotated copy which used several excerpts of Eckermann's "Conversations of Goethe" that helped immensely. Part 2 would have been nearly incomprehensible to me without it. I suppose it's back to "boring" old Spengler next, but I started part 2 today and already saw a reference to Euphorion's fall that I would not have understood previously.

I had trouble attaching "Conversations of Goethe," so here's a link. It mostly seems mundane, but there's some good insight into his writings. https://ia600903.us.archive.org/20/items/conversationsofg00goetrich/conversationsofg00goetrich.pdf
Replies: >>2216
I found Faust to be at once easy and difficult to understand. There are a lot of surface level (not to say wrong or not useful) critiques on Goethe's German society and blatantly presented philosophical insights, like Goethe's parody of court culture and Faust's speech to Gretchen on the nature of god, but some portions of part 1 and much of part 2 do not fall into this category. I tried to read these through a Classical vs. German framework, but this alone did not seem sufficient. Viewing it through an Aryan spirit vs. Jewish spirit lens yielded similar results, with it applying to only portions of the poem. Really, Faust cannot be understood through one dichotomy or another. It is not meant to be a simple argument in favor of one side of an issue or another. Goethe, in the same way Tolkien manufactured a modern day epic, created his own cultural epic through modifying existing folk tales. The breadth of ideology, morality, and human experience contained in the poem is a microcosm of Romantic Germany. 

Characters like the young student and the Emperor represent the physical problems of Goethe's Germany. The student, eager to learn but afraid of being consumed by his studies, is wooed by Mephistopheles into studying Logic. When we meet him again in part 2 he considers himself to know everything that he needs to, and fails to recognize Mephistopheles. It seems that Goethe was dealing with the same sort of slave to "science" that our institutions are infested with today, and that he recognized them as being completely disconnected from any true understanding of the world as well. The Emperor is a caricature of an absentee statesman. He almost always defers his judgement to his court on most occasions, and he is more focused on placating his people with bread and circuses, like in the Lent Carnival, than actually seeing them thrive. Instead of defending his country on his own, he allows Mephistopheles to practically fight his civil war for him. The Emperor is negligent and corrupt rather than malicious because he is meant to represent the issue of corruption in a purely German society rather than a society plagued by jewish influence.

Helen and various mythological and religious figures that Faust encounters represent the inner struggle of the Romantic German. In contrast to what would be expected in a typical christian work, many of the spirits and creatures Faust interacts with are presented as benign or good. The Homunculus specifically is portrayed positively, since he, like Faust, strives for purpose. The departure from the traditional christian evil spirits against yahweh's pantheon approach signifies the struggle between christianity and the traditional Germanic view of the world. The Germanic world is a harmonious struggle. Note that god allows for Mephistopheles to try to steal Faust's soul in order for Faust to grow closer to heaven.

Faust himself represents the Aryan synthesis of life purpose. Faust, just have many of us have, feels empty despite obtaining high status and near mastery over conventional knowledge. Wagner's praise does nothing to soothe Faust. He still feels an existential sense of unease, given form by the hell-hound. Through his first foray into the hidden arts, he accidentally traps Mephistopheles and is thus sent on his path towards finding his purpose. Faust dives into periods of hedonism (his lust for Gretchen), denial of reality (his flight to Arcadia) and egotistical striving (his seizing of Baucis and Philemon's home), but, on the brink of succumbing to degeneracy is saved by just, innocent people like Gretchen, and Philemon and Baucis. Neither is the world entirely cynical as Mephistopheles would have him believe, nor can Faust escape into better times and turn back time. Once Philemon and Baucis have been killed, Faust is forced identify what he truly values, and he dies finally finding true happiness in the striving for the benefit of his people. 

For all the inspiration Spengler took from Goethe, he missed the most important part of Faust. Faust found happiness through striving for his subjects, and not from striving alone. 

>I had trouble attaching "Conversations of Goethe," so here's a link. It mostly seems mundane, but there's some good insight into his writings
Thanks. I feel like I should have gone through it with a commentary.
[Hide] (7.5KB, 188x268) Reverse
We will continue with:

The Decline of the West
>By Oswald Spengler

Discussion of Vol. 2 Ch. 1-7 starts on 6/28
Discussion of Vol. 2 Ch. 8-14 starts on 7/16
Volume 2 of Spengler's "Decline of the West" picks up where volume 1 ends, finishing Spengler's explanation of the arts and continuing into real, physical topics. Much of his discussion involves explanations of historical events, which I won't get into. Instead I will focus on his concepts of the arts, religion, and race.

Spengler begins by discussing music, something that was virtually absent from volume 1. Music lies outside the light-world (the world we can see) and lets us imagine we are on the verge of reaching the soul's final secret. This was the age of Wagner, where music and opera ruled. However, our waking consciousness is dominated by sight. Man's thought is visual thought, with concepts derived almost solely from vision. The modern world is one dominated by television and the internet, much different from Spengler's world of Wagner. Spengler does not account for technological progress; there's practically no mention of the motion picture in his work. With man as a visual being, we must come to terms with the vast influence visual media have on the mind. Propaganda is king and even George Lincoln Rockwell recognized that television was the most potent propaganda tool ever created. This goes back to our discussion of modern National Socialists from "Kampf um Berlin." Modern propaganda must take the visual element into account. A fat or otherwise unattractive person may have brilliant ideas, but he will never be able to send a message to the Volk in the modern day. This should be held separate from the idea of optics. It's more a matter of aesthetics.

Only the active man, the man of destiny, exists in the world of Actuality. This is the world of political, military, and economic ideas. As Goebbels says, form and expression, Spengler's concept of "style," are the elements required of a true man. Only a man of action can be a moving force in history. Spengler says men of theory belong in the background of great events. True statesmen do not follow theory or convention, but rather the path to success. Hitler and Mussolini are the rare exceptions as true philosopher kings. They built up a system and acted within it. Likewise, this is the path that must be taken by modern Fascist leaders.

Spengler talks about the loss of Mesoamerican "literature" under the Spanish, but this is somewhat misleading. He seems to imply that a great deal of thought and knowledge was lost and these people were comparable to our Classical forefathers. Most Mesoamerican writings were songs and monument inscriptions commemorating some deed or other. They didn't have their own Plato, Aristotle, Aristophanes, Thucydides, Herodotus, etc. Spengler uses the loss of his imagined Mesoamerican literature to say that history has no meaning at all. Of course, this could be true when taken to a nihilistic extreme, but history has the ability, as Spengler himself said previously, to give us insight into both the past and future. It seems laughable that any city could be compared to Alexandria or Athens in a society that had no philosophy or history and regularly practiced human sacrifice. Spengler's praise here is mere speculation and he admits that history only has value to the forward thinking Faustian man, who sees history as a source of knowledge for future events. Spengler does not take racial differences into account.

Spengler's splits race into two categories: the physical and the spiritual. Spengler believes that physical race is only skin deep. With modern forensic science we know this to be untrue, but it's understandable for Spengler's era. To people in his age, a skeleton was a skeleton regardless of race. However, it's unfortunate that this opens up an opportunity for subversive elements to take Spengler's beliefs about race out of context to attack those who would build on his work. Spengler also discusses spiritual aspects of race as an immutable characteristic of a Volk. We touched on this previously, but he finally confirms it for us here in volume 2. Race is something innate, written in blood, and can't be attained by simply living among a people for some period of time. So is Spengler a subversive element like the article linked in >>1912 claims? While Spengler seems to downplay the importance of race and demographic shifts through the ages, I'd say the answer is clearly "NO" and I'll elaborate on this in my final post on Decline of the West.

"Race, in the end, is stronger than languages, and thus it is that, under all the great names, it has been thinkers - who are personalities - and not systems - which are mutable - that have taken effect upon life." Wittgensteinians in shambles.

Spengler also touches on the conflict between Faustian and Roman law. Roman law uses experience, the idea of precedent, in its judgements. In contrast, the goal the Faustian law is to create a timeless and eternal law. Valid laws are meant to represent the social and economic existence of their times. Rosenberg also wrote extensively on the conflict between Roman and Germanic law in his "Myth of the Twentieth Century," saying Roman law had a disintegrating effect on the Germanic essence and must eliminated. The attorney who acts on behalf of the state hinders the guiding of the Volk. Roman law is ultimately a product of the Roman people and cannot be imitated by Faustian man. However, knowledge of Classical law can provide us with an example of how a law can develop out of the practical life of its time. 

The contrast of the Magian "world-as-cavern" and the Faustian world as infinity is useful for our movement. While critiques of Christianity in our circles exist, Spengler provides us with a timeline that shows the development of Judaism from Magian culture and how Christianity branches off from there. The Magian aspects of Christianity make it incompatible with Faustian culture. This is pretty well known, but Spengler provides an intelligent and methodical approach to prove this. While I think the problem of Christianity will persist, and many National Socialists before us have come up with mitigating ideas like positive Christianity, Spengler's approach could be used to change the minds of any fence-sitters in our midst.
Accidentally deleted the vast majority of my post, so I'll sum it up.

Spengler's identification of the categories of the "cosmic" and the "microcosm within the macrocosm" are blatantly false. No man can spend his entire day completely consciously aware, whether through the intervention of dreamless sleep or zoning out. Consciousness exists on a spectrum, as observed by the average conscious person. Consciousness as a spectrum also nullifies Spengler's binaries of "tension" and "beat", and "being" and "waking consciousness". Modern discoveries like grief responses in the animal kingdom, plant's responses to music and high-frequency pain responses show that consciousness may be more universal than usually thought. 

Spengler speaks much of causality but never seems to internalize the concept. His dynasties and races seem to appear from thin air. A culture, for him, is somehow able to form from a people a thousand years dormant, despite his acknowledgements that most of the civilizations of the past were founded by roaming bands of Aryans. Further, the aversion to answers to causality Spengler describes is common to the last man (not a pejorative) of today, because the acknowledgement of higher law and consistent causality would harm his ability to convince himself not to act. The more the image of a just world forms in his mind, the harder it is to convince himself that his current lifestyle and actions are just. To avoid taking responsibility, he must hide himself in our current age of "thinking", far away from the future of synthesis of thought of action.

This isn't all of what I had before, but when you see 4/5ths of a (for once) concise and pertinent post disappear in less than a second because you were resting your hand on the keyboard in a weird way, you get a little demoralized. Apologies for the shortened post. I'm almost ready to believe that Spengler's ghost really is haunting, though, for as rough of a time I'm having with his works.
Replies: >>2327
That's a shame. Hopefully you can remember what you had and include it in your next post. 

>Consciousness as a spectrum also nullifies Spengler's binaries of "tension" and "beat", and "being" and "waking consciousness".
Spengler does seem to think mostly in binaries and it's easy to get caught up in his pattern of thought. This is good insight and I'll have to keep it in mind as I continue.
I had a much different idea of what Spengler's "Decline of the West" would be about before we got into it. I expected a political treatise explaining a decline of society and a system that Spengler would conjure to remedy it. However, Spengler sees the death of a civilization as a natural thing and instead gives us a brilliant philosophy of history of which Spengler seems to remain the sole pioneer. I'd like to get Otto Dickel's previously mentioned "Resurgence of the West" translated to see how it measures up, but the quote I got was around 5000 USD so it will have to wait. The second half of the second volume of "Decline of the West" is easily the most relevant portion of the work to modern politics and Fascist movements as a whole. It covers several topics that would be relevant to our movement such as the role of women, asceticism, the role of jews, the concept of "might makes right," war, money, along with topics covered in "Prussianism and Socialism" and "Man and Technics." Since we've covered many of these topics already, I won't go too far into Spengler's own ideas on them.

While we have discussed the futility of retreating from society in our discussion of "Kampf um Berlin," Spengler tackles ascetic ideals themselves. Spengler, drawing heavily from Nietzsche's "On the Genealogy of Morals," acknowledges the dangers of flawed compassion and the denial of the blood born out of fear. The priest class is the antithesis of the worker, as is demonstrated in their conflicting attitudes towards woman. Asceticism is the killing of being, a death without heirs. By its very definition, it is a race-denying ideal. However, Spengler does praise ascetics who are men of action (he gives a few saints as examples), willing to sacrifice for the sake of their people. To Spengler, the highest victory of Space over Time is the warrior become ascetic. Asceticism born of fear is a retreat for the coward, but asceticism born of a love that overcomes life is that of the hero and the saint.

The nature of the State is one discussed by several writers we've already explored and Spengler gives us his take on it, mostly agreeing with our Fascist forefathers. A people with History makes up a nation; the individual family is the smallest and the nation the largest unit of History. The nation is a living thing which possesses the State as an idea. As a reflection of the Volk, the State is based on actuality rather than mere theory. Spengler agrees with Hitler and Feder when he says that it would not matter what form the State took. The State is simply a means to an end. Spengler's idea of Caesarism is a return to old forms. Money collapses and race springs forth. Money power has a significant role to play in a declining society such as our own. The power of money over the press and politics as a whole is unmatched. In the old days, and in the coming days, men were wealthy because they were powerful. As things are now, they are powerful because they are wealthy. "Might Makes Right" still rules our society, but as Spengler discusses and as Socrates alludes to in Gorgias, it can change forms over the ages. The "Might" of our declining civilization is that of international money power and scheming. Spengler's Caesarism and the fall of money power would be a return to what some call the "primacy of politics." Marxists have since tried to adopt the term and subvert its meaning, but it was embodied in its ultimate form by the NSDAP.

Perhaps the most important topic covered is Spengler's opinion of the JQ. We have speculated on his views of race and jews and we have found an answer for both here in Volume 2. His view of biological race is lacking but he says "to have honour in one's body means about the same as to have race," which shows an undeniable belief in the spiritual race and we've previously seen his belief that spiritual race is an intrinsic part of every man. However, his position on jews is somewhat lacking. Ultimately, Spengler acknowledges the role of jews in the media and finance, but he attributes this to a differing stage of civilization. He says that because jews are an older civilization, they are different from Faustian man. He goes to say that Romans played the role of the jews during the peak of Magian civilization. Rosenberg disagrees, claiming that the jewish nature of late Rome was due to the involvement actual jews. I don't have enough knowledge on the history and makeup of the late Roman empire to confirm or deny this discrepancy, but based on what I've read it would seem Rosenberg is correct. This could be interpreted as an excuse for jewish behavior on Spengler's part, and it some ways it is, but Spengler never advocates for the existence of jews within Faustian civilization. In fact, Spengler makes a case for the separation of civilizations. Whether jews are simply at a "later stage" or naturally subversive is irrelevant for Spengler. In the essay "Is World Peace Possible?" which Spengler wrote later in life, he said "Pacifism will remain an ideal, war a fact. If the White races are resolved never to wage war again, the colored will act differently and be rulers of the world." There isn't much room for debate on his views of race with this quote in mind.

So is Spengler a subversive element working on behalf of jews as the article in >>1912 claims? On the subject of his alleged Jewish ancestry, I freely admit I don't have enough knowledge of the German language to research his ancestry. However, the Renegade Tribune article cites his Wikipedia article, which references a book written by two Marxist jewish women. Is this book accurate? It's possible that Spengler does indeed have jewish ancestry and his later disposition towards the NSDAP was due to some psychological defensive mechanism, but one must keep in mind that the greatest slander a jew can give his opponent is to include him among them. The later quotes by Rosenberg are not condemnations. A cursory read of Rosenberg's Myth will show significant Spenglerian influence. Rosenberg built upon Spengler's ideas, including the importance of biological race, and his comments should only be seen as a knowledgeable and respectful critique emphasizing how his work builds upon Spengler's. I'm not familiar with the gentlemen running Renegade Tribune. Maybe this is just a bad article, but it would seem that the person writing this article would only have to look in the mirror to see what subversion is. Those who discourage others from reading major works just because they don't agree with absolutely everything within or think something is "too old" to be taken seriously are like a plague in our movement. 

It's clear now why Spengler was a highly influential character among Fascists and continues to remain so. I'd definitely recommend his shorter works and anyone serious about Fascism should at least read the second volume of his "Decline of the West." Spengler's "Hour of Decision" apparently critiques National Socialism pretty heavily, but I think we should hold off on that for now. As for what to read next, I think anything in >>1747 is okay, but I'll leave it to your discretion as always. A lot of these are short enough that I won't mind reading them as a pdf. I ordered a copy of "This Time the World" that has been stuck in shipping hell for over a month, so I'd rather not do that just yet.
Replies: >>2438
Spengler's Idea of Magian Religion may apply to most non-whites, but I do not believe it applies to the Jews. Whereas Arabs, Negroids, etc. often have religions tinted with fear, the jew, like the Aryan, does not. The Aryan frees himself from fear through his own sense of inner justice and then acts in accordance with his inner feelings, and the Jew does the same. Where we differ is in what our sense of justice is. The Aryan is empathetic; he seeks out equal justice for all creatures and wins self-assurance through positive action. He makes himself worthy of life. The Jew, meanwhile, schemes his way around making true sacrifices. Think of the Talmudic practice of "tricking god" by transferring a jew's sins onto a chicken and then killing it, or their invoking of yahweh's wraith and shamanism against their enemy rather than physical confrontation. He thinks it an insult that the world would ask him to prove himself. Here we see that the races of the earth can be defined as either "active" or "passive". The active define themselves in their struggle against one another, and the passive (Magian) are merely a part of the active races' struggles.

Spengler also seems to, at best, not know much about the contents of the Talmuds, or, at worst, be intentionally misleading his readers about them. This quote from pg. 246 of my translation sums it up best.

>>"Gothic Christianity had no secrets and hence it doubly mistrusted the Talmud, which it rightly regarded as being only the foreground of Jewish doctrine"

You would have to be very naive or ill-informed to think that the occult nature of the Talmud is the main reason Europeans fought against Judaism and its adherents. Any of its contents from in-depth guides on how to properly deface idols to its disgusting writings on child-brides and sexuality or its treatment of Jesus would me more than enough to enrage the average churchgoer. There is something to be said about the uselessness of anti-jew sentiments arising from christian doctrine rather than racial sentiments, but I doubt this is what he meant, lest he would have decried it in the same sentence from a more modern perspective.

I am also confused as to why Spengler was so against National Socialism when it would appear to be the "sudden awakening" of a racial consciousness he laid out as the beginning of every civilization. Here is the new State, right in front of him, complete with a new racial understanding of religion, economics, and culture, and yet he is against it. 
In the end, I'm going to have to make the same compromise with Spengler as I did with the Transcendentalists. I love Thoreau's writings and I recognize that they are very spiritually valuable, but the man behind them did not always act in the best interest of whites. He and Emerson are basically the progenitors of the revival of the nature-religion of Savitri Devi and their works read like it, but that doesn't change the fact that Thoreau supported abolition without a hint of support for repatriation and that Emerson refused to remove the veil of Judaism from his almost entirely Aryan-influenced sermons. 

Spengler did away with the judaism of the christian religion, but he failed to grasp the concepts of physical and spiritual race properly. I believe, in chapter 13, Spengler speaks of peasants as being the "plant-like" portion of a nation. This is often true because of the racial make-up of a nation, yet Spengler does not acknowledge this. At another point (I should have copied the quote into my notes), Spengler says that race cannot be preserved because any bloodline will be diluted within a few centuries, or at least something to that effect. Perhaps Spengler was against the Third Reich because of his fundamental misunderstanding of Aryan genetic heritage. If Spengler saw the preservation of the white race as an impossible task, he would surely see the Germany's new nation as a suicidal one. Spengler, then, like Thoreau or Emerson, or, really any author, must be used as stepping stone towards the final synthesis and honing of the idea of National Socialism.

>Those who discourage others from reading major works just because they don't agree with absolutely everything within or think something is "too old" to be taken seriously are like a plague in our movement. 
I wouldn't say that people should be discouraged from reading certain works, but they should definitely be given an idea of the core of an author's philosophy and an outline of their life before they read it. I guess I'm really just describing a book introduction, but it would be nice to have introductions penned by National Socialists in the future, and it would probably pay to do it even now. I also fear that some people will read a book and then become [author's name]-ist/ians, but higher quality people will most likely avoid this.

>Spengler's "Hour of Decision" apparently critiques National Socialism pretty heavily, but I think we should hold off on that for now. 
I wish we would have read it going into Decline of the West so I had a better idea of where Spengler was coming from. I'll check it out on my own time unless you want to save it for later.
Replies: >>2439
>Spengler's Idea of Magian Religion may apply to most non-whites, but I do not believe it applies to the Jews
Including jews, Arabs, and Persians in a single group was a fundamental disagreement I had with Spengler. I'll give him the benefit of the doubt on his understanding of the Talmud though. I'm of the understanding that it was fairly secretive before the age of mass media. It also comprises over 70 lengthy volumes (in those including commentary) which would have been difficult to search through manually even if he were able to get his hands on it.

>I wouldn't say that people should be discouraged from reading certain works, but they should definitely be given an idea of the core of an author's philosophy and an outline of their life before they read it.
Agreed. There's nothing wrong with a well reasoned critique allowing a would-be reader to make his own decision. In fact, I hope this thread can serve that purpose for at least one person lurking around.

>I wish we would have read it going into Decline of the West so I had a better idea of where Spengler was coming from. I'll check it out on my own time unless you want to save it for later.
I think it's probably best to save it for last since it was written at the end of his life. As we saw with "Man and Technics," Spengler was much more of a pessimist later on. I was going to read it on my own time as well, so perhaps it would be better to do it as part of this book club, though I'd prefer a few books between now and then to give ourselves a break.
[Hide] (21.6KB, 128x198) Reverse
Our next book is:

Tomorrow We Live
>By Oswald Mosley 

Discussion begins on 7/29
Replies: >>2443
>Tomorrow We Live PDF
Oswald Mosley's "Tomorrow We Live" serves as a good overview of the BUF program. This could be read and understood by the layman, but shows a vision that can also be appreciated by those already familiar with Fascism. I wasn't as familiar with Mosley as others, having only listened to a few speeches and skimmed some of his writings, so this helped put a lot of things into place. He presents an interesting approach to Fascism that ultimately failed to take off, but there are still things worth learning from here. This was written when the world was on the verge of WWII and Mosley's anti-war ideals are on full display throughout. He acknowledges a nation's right to self defense, but also recognized the obvious warmongering of his own nation and France against Germany.

Mosley starts with the failures of democracy and parliamentary systems. He confronts the idea of an "opposition party," exposing just how ridiculous it is to have a party dedicated to preventing the nation from performing its task. That task being executing the will of the Volk. Previous revolutionaries who found a place in politics ended up losing their grit and became part of the system they resented. Mosley proposes that BUF members who were elected to office would not mix socially or even speak to political rivals. This is certainly the way, but I find it interesting that Mosley never refers to his political enemies as such. Mosley is rather mild mannered throughout the text. Whether this is out of concern for appealing to the mainstream is something I do not know, but it makes him look soft.

Ironically, Mosley seems very democratic compared to others. He believes in a majority vote with each profession existing as a voting block (doctors voting as doctors, etc) which would seem like some sort of democratic corporatism if you want to slap a label on it. Local leaders would be selected from the movement from which the majority of people have voted, which would essentially mean that the people dwelling in the cities would choose the political party that would rule every town and village in the nation. This is an obvious weakness from the perspective of modern Western Democracy, but I believe Mosley was thinking ahead to a time where the British Union would be established and the British people have attained a higher conception of life. I doubt he would seriously suggest putting Tories or Labour Party members in charge of the entire Volk.

One thing I appreciated most about Mosley was his ability to be straightforward and honest about his view of the British Empire. He supported the Empire and supported maintaining her colonies. Most modern Fascists seem to shy away from the idea of imperialism and maintain an "ideology of peace" facade, but it's only natural for a nationalist from a nation that has or had a colonial presence to want to maintain or regain it. The downside is the multi-racial aspect of an empire. Mosley boasts that Britain is a multi-racial empire composed of many races. While he supports separation of the races (except jews, apparently), he believes in an Empire where Africans and Europeans work in harmony for the betterment of their respective Volk. This is something that is not possible. For an empire to exist successfully, there must be a superior and an inferior. Once the inferior is allowed rights and equality, collapse is imminent as they are different peoples with differing levels of intelligence and competing goals. Mosley is equally weak on the JQ as he is on the racial question. He is only against Marxists and Capitalists. The poor jew who is simply minding his own business and tending to his shoe store should not be bothered, according to him. Of course, we know these jews only exist in the fantasies of the kind hearted.

Mosley was an interesting personality in the Fascist movement and his only major flaw was the desire to see the best in people, even those who wished the worst for him and his people. Like Goebbels, he focused more on the Socialist aspect than the National, but there's nothing inherently wrong with that at the right time. At the time he lived through, however, it would ultimately lead to obscurity. If only Britain had listened.
Replies: >>2505
I found Mosley's Tomorrow We Live to have the best potential for mainstream palatability out of everything we have read so far. The vast majority of what was covered in Tomorrow we live has made it's way into mainstream discourse, from a general dissatisfaction with the lack of representation of the common man in government, to the recognition of the fact that several large monopolies control most media, and a general attraction to civic-nationalism-esque notions of religious tolerance and "white man's burden" style colonialism. Save for the racial components, which Mosley mostly avoided, it sounds like normal republican (local, common people, not news media) talk. It goes to show that our situation government wise is not too different than that of the 1920's and 1930's, and that public discourse is very close (if not already actively doing so) to heavily considering how racial dynamics effect whites in most political situations. 

Free Speech existed in Mosley's Britain in the same way as it does in current day America. Modern day "Free Speech" is mean to function as a play-pen of sorts, wherein people are theoretically allowed to express any idea under the stipulation that they only ever theorize. Should they ever want to act, they must give up the ghost of Freedom of Speech and evolve into complete (ZOG approved) understanding if the world, lest they be annihilated for acting against jewish interests. Mosley reports the same situation, and identifies the core motivation behind creating such an environment. Modern "Free Speech" severs the unity between thought and action inherent to any success movement, and traps them in a loop of philosophizing and adjusting theory.  

Circling back to Mosley's previously mentioned policy of religious tolerance, I found it surprising how easy Mosley went on the JQ. He seemed to only identify jews associated with international finance as enemies of the British state, and he had the same issue in his understanding of how oversea colonies should be run. I don't know much about how much presence the British Union had in British Politics, but I would chance to guess that this attitude is why they did not succeed on the level of Hitler or Mussolini. Hitler's positive Christianity operated with the Aryan people at its center, and a society divided between catholics, protestants, etc. cannot achieve that.

Still, I find Mosley's vision of true democracy charming. I do not think that he would have been able to create such a democracy out of the who's who of Nordic and Mediterranean racial elements that Britain was and currently is, but, given enough time, I believe a healthy stock of Nordic Britons would be capable of democratic rule.  

I was thinking about spending another week or so with Mosley before we move on. Thoughs?
Replies: >>2506
>I was thinking about spending another week or so with Mosley before we move on.
I support it. The BUF seems pretty unique, boldly branching off from Mussolini and Hitler to forge their own path, so it would be worthwhile to investigate in greater detail.
[Hide] (21.3KB, 181x279) Reverse
Our next book is:

Europe: Faith and Plan
>By Oswald Mosley

If anyone can find a copy of "Mosley's Blackshirts" floating around, post it here or in the fascist lit thread. It doesn't look like a pdf is available anywhere. 

Discussion starts on 8/12
Replies: >>2518 >>2606
>Europe: Faith and Plan PDF
About 20 years have passed between "Tomorrow We Live" and "Europe: Faith and Plan." It would seem during this time Mosley changed his tune from British nationalism to pan-Europeanism. Those opposing a European union, and Mosley specifically includes Fascists in this, are living in the past and are afraid of change! Cast aside your culture and values! Only the almighty GDP matters! Of course, Mosley contends that merging all European nations into one union will have no effect on the various cultures. I remain unconvinced, but as I do not live in Europe I will leave judgments on the true value of pan-Europeanism to the discerning European reader.

Mosley's call for a European union is a response to two events: American trade dominating the world and the very real and present threat of Communism. Britain had lost her empire and could no longer even feed her own people without imports. This remains true today, with Britain relying on imports for roughly 40% of their food consumption. Along with this, European nations were (and still are) forced to rely on American charity for national defense. Mosley's solution to this is to unite Europe and create a new economic powerhouse. With the advent of nuclear weapons, he focuses on disarmament as a solution to military problems. Of course, we have the gift of hindsight and know the foolishness of disarmament, but even Spengler warned that making yourself weak will just make you prey. Pacifism and Fascism are incompatible; the father of all things is eternal struggle.

While Mosley wants Europe to expand to Africa to increase economic power, he does not want to reinstate colonialism. He believes Africans are capable of working alongside Europeans as equals. We discussed this already, but it seems to be a core element of his worldview so it's worth pointing out again. 

Much of Mosley's argument for a European union is economic in nature and focused on the wage-price mechanism. In short, this involves the government setting wages and intervening on the price of commodities as it deems necessary. The destructive results of wage control by a central government are well documented in our time. Wage controls have shown up in the West (and I believe this is true for NSDAP Germany as well) during war-time, but the negative impact was outweighed by the war effort. During peacetime, they would be purely destructive and altogether unnecessary. While Mosley acknowledges problems of overproduction during war, where the people, particularly in the case of America during WWII, cannot possibly use all of what they have produced and have to rely on international markets to pass it off, this isn't very relevant in Mosley's day. This is all an attempt to keep wages down and profits up to make Europe the center of the economic world once again. Is it truly necessary to be at the top of the world economy? While any nationalist would be proud to be on top, of course, slavery to the GDP is not the purpose of the Volk. While it's common sense to a Fascist that the economy exists in service to the Volk, Mosley has cast aside Fascism in desperation and claims the business of Europe is "struggling for life on world markets between the rival giants." The idea of self sufficiency supplemented with necessary trade from local nations is not an option to him. If your GDP can't be the largest, why even live? He seems to have adopted much of Spengler's later pessimism when he says "The great qualities in man should grow in proportion to the age, not diminish. Let us remember the past only long enough to learn this. Then let us forget. Europe needs a great act of oblivion, before a new birth."

It may seem like I'm being overly harsh, but that's only because I value Mosley's thoughts as a fellow traveler of Fascism. I want to grab him by the shoulders and say "Get it together, man!" Many of Mosley's positions continued to resemble Fascism in "Faith and Plan", but I don't think I would consider him a Fascist at this point. It's a little surprising to me that Europe a Nation gained a fair amount of support among nationalists across Europe at the time, but with the threat posed by the Soviets I can see how some may have been swayed. I freely admit my own biases against the current European Union have negatively impacted my view of Europe a Nation, but I still can't see it as anything other than internationalism. 

>Mosley's Blackshirts
I wasn't able to find a pdf. Odd since physical copies seem easy to come by, even being sold on Amazon.
Replies: >>2616 >>2617
Mosley's "Europe: Faith and Plan" lays out the basic economic and political structure of a post-fascist Pan-European superstate. Perhaps seeing Hitler's future of an earth dominated by mega-states slowly coalescing, Mosley attempts to give the European man a fighting chance in a world dominated by two states, Russia (communism) and America, that were working actively against white interests by proposing the combining of the small states of Europe into a United European economic bloc. He realizes that the new political landscape (at least for the foreseeable future) support neither "Old democracies" nor "Fascism", and so seeks to adapt to the "fresh truths" of the world through this new government. 

As shrewd as Mosley's proposal of an European Union was, it is destined to fail for many of the same reasons the modern European Union has failed economically. Mosley was naive to expect minor economic guidance to completely transform the more racially degenerated nations of Europe. Countries like Greece and (Southern) Italy would be an economic drain on the Union as they are today without any sort of eugenics program being instituted. The idea of the "Europe-Africa" hegemony would similarly affect the economic destiny of the union, since the establishment of independent African nations would require constant expenditure to maintain a proper state. While I find Mosley's efforts to create a peaceful Africa for both Africans and Europeans noble, I do not think that it is a real possibility. Nothing short of complete colonization and segmentation of Africa would make it fit for long term settlement and economic use. 

There is no way out of our modern jewish, materialist paradigm besides slamming straight through it, and Mosley unfortunately tried to work with it. It's a shame, really. The man was a worthy fascist, he had a little to much sun in him for a world that needed lightning. In the last chapter of "Europe: Faith and Plan", he states the European Man's mission in a phrase that should be familiar to any Fascist, even if he rejects such a label in the book: "Man must either reach beyond his present self, or fail"

>Is it truly necessary to be at the top of the world economy? 
I would say that Mosley saw the world economy as the only way left for whites to effectively defend themselves on the world stage after the defeat of the most influential Fascist states and the subsequent crackdown on their ideas. It was a means to an end rather than an end in itself, an evolution of methods rather than a hopeless longing for what had been very recently lost. I'm not saying that he was correct in his opinions, but I can certainly understand where he was coming from.
Replies: >>2617 >>2630
>>I wasn't able to find a pdf. Odd since physical copies seem easy to come by, even being sold on Amazon.
That's frustrating. I'll have to get a page scanner sometime in the future for things like these.  

>>He seems to have adopted much of Spengler's later pessimism when he says "The great qualities in man should grow in proportion to the age, not diminish. Let us remember the past only long enough to learn this. Then let us forget. Europe needs a great act of oblivion, before a new birth."
I have to admit, I was swayed towards believing in Mosley's genuineness by the closing "form" chapter, so I don't necessarily see that quote as pessimistic. Most Fascists have no illusions about the fact that things will get much worse before they get better, and that, during that time, much will be lost (as we have lost much already), but no one will allow the Aryan race to be lost forever; this is where Spengler and Mosley differ. Spengler fully expects the Faustian lineage to disappear when Faustian Civilization collapses, while Mosley expects full-blooded Aryans to emerge from the ashes of Faustian Civilization, stronger for having survived the collapse.
>I would say that Mosley saw the world economy as the only way left for whites to effectively defend themselves on the world stage after the defeat of the most influential Fascist states and the subsequent crackdown on their ideas.
I suppose in a sense autarky could be seen as the equivalent of hiding out in a cabin the woods. You might survive, but it doesn't do anything to further the cause for Whites overall. I was having trouble seeing Europe a Nation from a Fascist perspective, but this helped settle some doubts I had. I still can't see it as a winning strategy for reasons both you and I already posted, but it's not an unreasonable position given the historical context.

>The man was a worthy fascist, he had a little to much sun in him for a world that needed lightning.
Well said.
[Hide] (18.2KB, 285x445) Reverse
Our next book is:

The Myth of the Twentieth Century
>Written by Alfred Rosenberg

Not including "This Time the World", we have burned through the list of Fascist authors compiled earlier this year. We could take a quick tour of Japanese and Russian (if it can be found) Fascist literature, but, beyond this, either some extensive research on minor fascist authors or a change in direction is needed. We could shift towards more spiritual authors like Serrano, Jung, and Evola, non-fascist works ripe for critique, or primary and secondary source historical writings. All of these options could of course be pursued in any combination that seems desirable.

We'll take the time spent on our next reading, "The Myth of the Twentieth Century", which we will move through sub-book by sub-book, to meditate on these options. The sub-books vary in length, but three-ish weeks for each section should be enough unless proven otherwise. 

Discussion for Book One of "The Myth of the Twentieth Century" begins on 9/2.
>Myth of the Twentieth Century PDF
I first read Alfred Rosenberg's "Myth of Twentieth Century" a few years ago, well before we started this book club. I was planning to give it another read now that I'm more familiar with Spengler and other relevant works from the period. This book was intended as a sequel to Houston Stewart Chamberlain's "Foundations of Nineteenth Century," which I have not read, but the general idea of the work should be clear based on the context Rosenberg gives. Like all great works of philosophy, Rosenberg's "Myth" certainly benefits from repeated readings. This time around has been much more pleasant than the slow struggle that my first read was. It is listed on any basic reading list on National Socialist philosophy, but unlike Mein Kampf, it is not written for the layman and can be difficult to understand. Rosenberg was unique among NSDAP leadership in that he was not a soldier, but an academic, and his target audience was his peers. However, the impact of the "Myth" is not to be underestimated. It sold over one million copies in the Reich and is likely to be the direct cause of Pope Pius XI's encyclical (pdf attached) "Mit Brennender Sorge." It is also extremely likely that writing this book was the great crime for which he was executed at Nuremberg.

Rosenberg's "Myth" casts aside class conflict in favor of the struggle of our spiritual values of blood, race, and Volk. Rosenberg claims he does not wish to be a reformer, but rather wishes to raise a German awareness of soul and spirit to struggle against the chaotic values of his time. His ultimate goal for German society is revitalization of the blood. Race, personality, and culture perish through desecration of the blood. It is through this book that he illustrates the unbending resolution of the nobility of mind of the racial soul. Rosenberg builds on Spengler's racial history, including the biological and spiritual aspects of race. The history of the religion of the blood is the great world story of the rise and fall of peoples and their heroes, thinkers, and artists.

Rosenberg was not a Pagan. He recognizes the church co-opting Pagan symbols and the old gods for their uses, but also acknowledges that the old religions are dead and unlikely to return in their original forms. This came up in our previous discussion of Jung as well. Rosenberg wishes to separate the image of Christ from jewish and the otherwise alien ideas of Saul of Tarsus (Paul) and Augustine, fostering a return to early Nordic Christianity for the Volk. Rosenberg, like Spengler, recognizes that the foreign influences on Christianity are not compatible with the Aryan racial soul. He recognized the Roman church and judaism as responsible for the corruption of Christianity and God's covenant. Naturally, the German church should be based on Germanic values rather than Roman. Rosenberg uses Meister Eckhart as proof that the Germanic soul can still shine through in Christianity. Rather than viewing God as an external being ruling over mankind, Eckhart believed that God was found not in the temples of men, but within their hearts. This bypasses the typical egalitarian nature of Christianity in favor of the idea that a man is only worth as much as the nobility of his soul. To Eckhart, laws and contracts had no purpose to a moral man.

"But isn't Jesus le dead jew on a stick?!" some might cry. Rosenberg saw Jesus as being of Aryan stock, with Joseph leaving Galilee and returning to Bethlehem not as a Hebrew, but as a gentile exile expelled by the jews after they established dominion over Galilee. According to Rosenberg, all claims to Jesus' jewish heritage were due to Saul's influence. As for whether Jesus was religiously jewish, Rosenberg will cover that subject later in the "Myth." 

Rosenberg recognizes love and honor as competing values throughout history. The value that has preserved our race and nations has been honor. This honor is connected to the concept of duty, originating from consciousness of our inward freedom. Conversely, love and sympathy began the ages of racial and national dissolution. Love is the prerequisite for democracy and humanitarianism and is the soul of judaized Christianity. True love is based on inner values, such as pride in self and race, not through an acceptance of destructive or degenerate behavior as your equal. There are two racial types: those with and those without honor. Jews have no concept of honor, which is why their God had to give them a law set in stone. A jew can never display a moral character unless his life or property are placed in jeopardy. Meister Eckhart's internal morality and God of the soul are alien to them.

Luckily, we've already covered a philosophy of history and the Nordic migrations through the ages in our discussions of Spengler and Grant, so we don't need to cover that again here. However, we are left with some questions for discussion that shouldn't be answered too hastily before considering the rest of Rosenberg's "Myth." Can Christianity truly be compatible with the Aryan soul as Meister Eckhart shows us? Is "Positive Christianity" (not necessarily the movement as it existed, but the idea behind it) a viable path forward for White Christians or is it merely a half measure that doesn't solve the real problem? Should there be a focus on the "religion of the blood" or a secular society where religion is considered separate from the Volk and nothing more?

We also have Carl Schmitt to read. Mosley's 100 Questions could be a good read as well. Feder could be read for a deep dive into the 25 points or his Manifesto if desired. I've already him, but a deeper look into these could be worthwhile. If you can find any Japanese or Russian Fascist literature, that would also be very interesting. Branching into some other ecofascist authors like Linkola could work as well. Some good works to critique could be Ted Kaczynski's "Technological Slavery" or Marx's Communist Manifesto and maybe some "Fascist adjacent" thinkers like de Benoist or Dugin. Of course, historical and philosophical writings or literature are always on the table.
Replies: >>2725
The Myth of the Twentieth Century has, so far, been a joy to read. The same "freshness" that pervades works like our previously read Thus Spake Zarathustra is felt here. It is a feeling of sureness and truth that is felt in the depths of the heart, and imparts the body with a lightness not often felt. I couldn't be happier to work with this book for the next six-ish weeks. Despite this, I am at a loss for what to discuss without repeating information, so my discussion will take on a narrower focus.

The figure of Jesus presented by Rosenberg is not one that I am impartial towards. The Jesus of Paul has no documents that can properly claim to back up his character and deeds as laid out by the Pauline Epistles and the first gospel, with the closest thing to a confirmational document being the attesting of Tacitus to the rumor of a figure named Jesus existing, and even this came about 50 years too late.  It is very possible that, as an act of malice, Paul of Tarsus took the image of a recently killed Nordic sage (perhaps by Rome to appease the jews, perhaps by the jews of Judaea themselves out of rage or hatred) and twisted him into a figure capable of relating with Nordic peoples while also spreading semitic ideals. None of this, though, would ever be able to sever the image of Jesus from his association with the faith of the Jews unless all other artifacts of jewish religion were erased from the public conscious.

Rosenberg knew just as well as we do that Nordic spiritually stems from the blood and soul of the Nordic man. He says that Odin had his last laugh though his forcible conversion into figures like St. Martin and St. George, and Baldr still lives on through the Nordic image of Jesus. The solar cycle still has significant relevance, whether subconsciously or fully acknowledged, through major holidays and general interest. Wherever Aryan blood is pure, our gods and spirituality will continue to manifest over and over again. 

This shows that Positive Christianity and Eugenics are meant to work in tandem. Positive Christianity, as it worked in National Socialist Germany, would really be a distraction while the newfound purity of German blood would do most of the work needed to shift the German spiritual perspective. With time and with the absence of the influence of other races, the image of Jesus would, over time, shift towards a more pure manifestation of the Baldr archetype. 

>Can Christianity truly be compatible with the Aryan soul as Meister Eckhart shows us?
Eckhart's christianity is, in essence, completely alien to all modern forms and derivatives of christianity. When discussing christianity, it seems that Rosenberg is really referring to Nordic conceptions of spirituality and honor, while trying to not dishonor the figure of Jesus as the Sage, rather than Jesus as the jewish Messiah.  This would show us that the only way to truly mesh christianity with the Nordic soul is to strip christianity of all of it's doctrine while retaining it's original name. 

>Japanese or Russian Fascist literature
I found a work called "Testament of a Russian Fascist", which seemed to mostly be about Jewish influence in Russian from 1900-40. The PDF was nowhere to be found, though. 

Also, any luck with getting your hands on This Time the World?
Replies: >>2726 >>2727
>Positive Christianity, as it worked in National Socialist Germany, would really be a distraction while the newfound purity of German blood would do most of the work needed to shift the German spiritual perspective.
This is my belief as well. Positive Christianity seems to be a useful practical measure to put in place until the spiritual awakening of the Volk. One fact that is often neglected in our movement is that Christianity has been a major religion in Europe for well over 1500 years. Most people won't be willing to cast it aside so easily when it has had such an influence of our lives, our ancestors, and our culture. Removing the alien aspects of the religion should prevent agitating the masses while also opening the path to their spiritual revitalization.

>"Testament of a Russian Fascist"
I've seen this book as well. It looks to be an interesting read, but I think it was only translated into English this year so a pdf probably isn't around yet.

>Also, any luck with getting your hands on This Time the World?
After much waiting, it finally arrived! I have no idea what a fair price for an old copy is supposed to be, but I believe I got a good deal on it and I was rather nervous about it getting lost in shipping.

Also, I forgot to mention Spengler's "Hour of Decision" as a future read. I didn't want to jump into it right after finishing Decline, but I think Myth, plus anything else you want to cover first, will give us plenty of time to recover.
>Rosenberg knew just as well as we do that Nordic spiritually stems from the blood and soul of the Nordic man. He says that Odin had his last laugh though his forcible conversion into figures like St. Martin and St. George, and Baldr still lives on through the Nordic image of Jesus. 
Pretty much. This is goes along the lines of the many things I say to followers of Christian identity whenever they argue that White people of the distant past have always seen the Israelites, such as Moses, Abraham, and so-on, as "wuz White!". The only reason why the ancestors of White people saw Yeshua as an Aryan is because they're following along their blood-duty of respecting their ancestors, and that Yeshua has been presented with characteristics resembling Aryan sages/warriors throughout all of Europe that made him sympathetic and appealing.
Discussion for Book 2 of the Myth of the Twentieth Century will begin on 9/22.

Also, /fbc/'s 1st anniversary is coming up on the 13th. Its hard to believe its been a year since we started this, but a year it has almost been.
[Hide] (26.1KB, 349x642) Reverse
God, you guys are awful at trolling.
[Hide] (3.6KB, 150x150) Reverse
Happy 1st Anniversary, /fbc/!

So, its been a year! That also means its been about a year since our migration from 16chan, yet both /fascist/ and /fbc/ are still kicking. Between the ever common choice of future, or death, we seem to have chosen future, and I have faith that we, /fascist/, and our greater movement will make that same choice for many years to come.

Thank you to the lurkers, our few ephemeral posters, and, most importantly to the other blackshirt that has stuck with us the whole time. I look forward to sharing another year of discussion with you, and to the future projects that may grow out of /fbc/. 

To the future.
Replies: >>2788 >>2826
happy anniversary :)
In Book 2 of "Myth of the Twentieth Century" Rosenberg focuses on the arts, building mostly on Spengler's views. Much of Rosenberg's discussion focuses on Schopenhauer, the Nibelungenlied, and Faust, which we have already discussed in detail. Luckily, we are still left with a few topics for discussion as Rosenberg addresses many of our complaints about Spengler and improves his philosophy immensely. I find it interesting that Dalton chose to remove chapter 4 altogether. While he claims it's a "mess," the aesthetic will plays a large role in Rosenberg's idea for the creative rebirth of Germany. 

Rosenberg acknowledges that previous philosophers have neglected the idea of the racial ideal of beauty and art. The art of our own people will obviously bring about a different response than art from an alien people. This does not necessarily mean a complete distaste for foreign art. One can respect and appreciate it, much like Rosenberg clearly respects Lao Tzu's writings, but it should be recognized as something that is not compatible with our racial soul. Two things happen when men focus on alien art forms above their own. First, they become frustrated that they can never fully understand the art because they are of a different racial soul. Second, the individual in question becomes a man without a nation or Volk. He cannot comprehend alien art, but also can no longer relate to his own racial art forms. He loses touch with his people without being able to truly join another. For Rosenberg, this also applies to ancient Greek and Roman art. While they had some Nordic relations at certain points in their history, they were never truly Germanic cultures. Art should be adapted to the personality of the Volk rather than focused on technique and aesthetics. Art expresses the highest values of the race. It completes the culture of the Volk, raising it to the highest state of perfection. True art is that which shows the true nature and racial essence of the Volk. Degenerate art depicts racial bastardization and seeks to ennoble alien peoples. 

There are three prerequisites on which European aesthetics must be based for the reawakening of the Nordic West: the Nordic racial ideal of beauty; the inner dynamic of European art; and the recognition of an aesthetic will. The aesthetic will is a concept alien to laws and forms that can only be intuitively perceived. Our concept of aesthetics is different from the Greek. It is based on spiritual content and the longing of the will. The Nordic concept of beauty can only be understood at the spiritual level. The wanderer with no spiritual roots, who only relies on "objective criticism" based on supposed technical laws, will never understand it. A new Myth must be created for the rebirth of Germanic art.

The discussion of art and the direction we should take in our modern day is nothing new to us in /fbc/. Rosenberg seems to come to the same conclusions as we have in previous discussions, both in filling the gaps in Spengler's philosophy and his analysis of the literature we have discussed. I can't help but feel a kinship with him and it feels like we have been guided in our previous readings to lead up to an examination of his work. While I didn't find anything "new" in this part of the "Myth," it tells us a lot about the direction we have taken with this book club and gives an affirmation that we are on the right track.

What a year it has been! When I think about it, it's hard to believe it has already been a year. Yet when I look at how much ground we have covered, it's hard to believe that it has only been a year. What kind of madmen would read Spengler, Rosenberg, Nietzsche, Schopenhauer, Grant, Jung, Goethe, and so much more in only 365 days? If one were to stack all of these books on top of each other, it would seem a nearly impossible task reserved for only the most hardcore among us and yet we've kept a fairly casual pace of about 20 pages or less per day, showing that consistency is key. I thank the OP of this thread and everyone else involved for these enlightening discussions and superb book choices and I look forward to seeing what this year will bring.
Replies: >>2834
I'm sure I've referenced Grant and The Passing of the Great race enough already, but reading the second book of The Decline Of The West has put the need for a true understanding of the Nordic race into an even greater perspective than before. The contrast between Spengler's muddled timeline of art history, whose excessive use of esoteric terminology and meaningless cultural categories obscure much of the meaningful insight that can be gleaned from such an analysis, save for the refutation of his points, and Rosenberg's clean identification of the Nordic artistic spirit throughout history is clearly evident. Spengler's needless complexity exists in an attempt to justify his false view of history; Rosenberg needs only to state the facts (complexity and simplicity should exist simultaneously). This is part of the reason I am apprehensive about getting into Evola and Serrano, since they both resort to excessive use of specific terminology and write in a needlessly complicated fashion, at least in what I have read from them. When the truth is stated, like in our readings of Jung, Goebbels, etc., it is airy and simple and lofty, and that is the sense I get in reading Rosenberg, so it is no coincidence that he has a true understanding of racial dynamics.

Speaking of Goebbels, Rosenberg's description of the Nordic face within Nordic Art appear's in Goebbels description of the young SA member who had had a glass thrown into his face during a fight with communists. If I remember correctly, he had a gash across his forehead with blood running down it, and yet his face remained firm as he kept fighting. I think this is the beauty of the Aryan countenance, a tense brow and thoughtful eyes, a face without fear, a perfect combination of thought and action. This principle of National Socialism is weaved into the very structure of the Aryan man and woman. In regards to the rest of the commentary contained in the second book, there isn't much to comment on besides the fact that we seem to be in agreement with Rosenberg.

>I can't help but feel a kinship with him and it feels like we have been guided in our previous readings to lead up to an examination of his work
I think that we stand at the same point of the coalescence of a broader movement as the time of his writing of The Myth of the Twentieth Century. We are still in the Opium den, but its walls are starting to crumble and more and more of the sun's light is reaching us. I'm sure most of us know that /fascist/ won't be and hope that /fascist/ will no be the end-all-be-all of the fascist movement, but it is becoming very clear that we have very little time until real communities begin coming together irl (most likely through rural farming co-ops and control of local government). We are on the precipice of this new movement, and I can only hope we will be a part of it. Really, we're only here until we feel ready to lead and help to raise more "zarathustras"; like you said, our progress here is enough evidence that we are on the right path, and will continue to be on it no matter what we endeavor to do, because the Aryan Spirit calls out from within us.
Discussion for Book 3 of the Myth of the Twentieth Century will begin on 10/11
[New Reply]
163 replies | 66 files | 117 UIDs
Show Post Actions



Select the solid/filled icons
- news - rules - faq -
jschan 1.1.1