← Autodidact Archive · Original Dissent · Texas Dissident
Thread ID: 14329 | Posts: 24 | Started: 2004-06-26
2004-06-26 20:11 | User Profile
[url=http://www.vnnforum.com/main/2004b/62404haddenperil.htm]Beliefs of Peril[/url]
by Max Hadden
24 June 2004
Some ignorant Americans who call themselves Christian White Nationalists (WN) continue to claim that it's a mistake to use National Socialism (NS) or Nazi Germany as a model or an ideal because the Germans were defeated. To them I reply, "So what if they lost?" Does military defeat by numerically superior forces mean they were wrong, or that they were liars, or that they were not the good guys? Is that what we say about the men at the Alamo? This is like saying if a gang of thugs invades my house and kills me that everything I stood for MUST have been wrong and to continue to espouse any of my beliefs, facts, or opinions is to pledge allegiance to a defeated cause. That's obviously an absurd stance to take. To ignore the achievements and truths of National Socialism simply because the Germans lost to the overwhelming forces of Jew-controlled and brainwashed masses is simply stupid. I shall dissect a few more of these beliefs of peril.
Thank God for the Russians...
Let's clarify the Christian view of the WN movement today compared to what happened in WW2. Christian WNs today claim that if we don't have Jesus on our side, then we are doomed to lose. Ignoring that this failure mentality is defeatism, let's look at what happened in WW2. The Germans were defeated, so that must mean that Jesus was not on their side. Which means that Jesus was on the Allies' side which most of all included the Soviets and in particular the Jewish atheist rulers of Russia. So America was an ally to a nation that was the most anti-Christian nation of the time, whose Jewish leaders (NKVD et al.) killed at least 25 million Christians by 1939, and who burned, closed, or converted to public latrines and storage houses every Christian church in Russia. These are the acts of the celebrated winners of WW2. And that's what Jesus wanted? Yes, he wanted the anti-Christians to conquer a White racial political state, NS Germany, full of Catholic and Lutheran Christian and pro-Christian men. Well, praise the Lord and pass the ammunition! Morons.
Nazis want power, and it'll be bad if they get it...
Then there are some of these Christian WNs that say you can't believe what those evil National Socialists or "Nazis" say because they will tell you all kinds of "little white lies" because they want power; but if the Nazis ever get power, that's when you're in trouble. In trouble for what exactly? Did the Nazis do anything against the church in Germany? No. Even after the Judeo-Masonic-infested Catholic Church decided to send encyclicals to Catholics lying about National Socialism, the Germans still didn't do anything but smash a few printing presses that were spreading Jewish lies. The only thing the National Socialists fought against were Jews, Communism, Marxism, Judaism, Capitalism, homosexuality, Gypsies, criminals and lies. They did not fight against the religion of Christianity and were largely composed of Christians as I said before.
Let's look at the part about the Christian idiots who tell people they can't trust the Nazis because they want power. Oh yeah, well, what do these idiots want? Slavery? Or do they want power too? You know the answer: they want power, they just don't want those evil "Nazis" to get into power. Of course, the reason they are idiots is not the result of their brand of Christianity as much as it is the result of the ignorant corruptors of their ranks who continue to whisper in each other's ears and nod sagely to each other believing that the Nazis who fought the real anti-Christians are somehow anti-Christian themselves. I've said this before, if people want to pray to Jesus and keep him in the loop for the WN cause, that's fine with me. It can't hurt. But they should ask their Lord some time, "What have You done for me lately?" Didn't save all those Christians who died on 9/11, did he? Didn't save Rachel Corrie, did he? Sounds like Old Scratch has been given freedom to cause bedlam. More of this kind of help we don't need, thank you.
The Nazis are a bad example, but not the Klan...
Anyway, some well-meaning folks recommend using the Klan, or its methods, as an example of how to succeed. I have nothing against the Klan. But my response to that is, really? What the hell kind of success did they ever have? And I'm referring to success at the national level. Local politics are not going to solve our national problem. The KKK never stopped any of the anti-White, pro-African, and pro-Israeli bills, laws, agreements, and acts that our federal government has been foisting on White America since at least the start of the 19th Century. Not much of a success story in my book.
So did the National Socialists succeed? You're damn right they did. As Herr Linder recently pointed out, what was the only country that defeated Jewish domination? NS Germany. Not only that, but they embarked on an economic expansion that has never seen another rival, including post-war Germany. One reason NS Germany did so well is that a National Socialist state does NOT exploit the people. It might be hard to believe for the average ignorant American, so I'll step back and explain it from a bigger picture. Many know that when Jews say that Hitler said, "the bigger a lie is the more people will believe it," it meant Hitler was advocating lying, but when one reads Mein Kampf he discovers this is not true. Hitler said the "Big Lie" was a Jewish technique to be reviled and hated. The Holocaust "6 million dead Jews" myth is the greatest modern example of the Big Lie technique.
Another misconception is that the "socialism" of "National Socialism" means socialism as defined by the Jews. Nothing could be farther from the truth. It is not taking property or business out of private hands or in any way similar to Communism. What Hitler meant by socialism is essentially this: the smallest social unit of human beings is two people working together. This can be two siblings, a husband and wife, or even two friends. These people have a bond of love that makes each want the other to do well and live to their fullest potential. When a family is in social harmony, they will do well. When the families in a community are in harmony, their village or town will do better. And when a nation of people who are distantly related and racially homogenous are in social harmony, their nation will live its best life. But it must stop at the natural border, the nation, made distinct by a people's culture (language, literature, art, music, architecture). A culture is the result of certain genetic traits of varying strength among the same race of people (black = Run DMC, white = Mozart) and this difference should be recognized and allowed to grow separately. These differences are our White "diversity" that we should love and enjoy, whether bagpipes in Scotland or lederhosen in Bavaria. We should encourage a belief in Socialism, constructive social harmony, and for each distinct culture we should embrace National Socialism.
People who bash Bush are on our side now...
In our current mass information society ,which appears to be pulling every which way with conflicting opinions and interests, one has to be somewhat of an amateur psychologist and psychoanalyze the issues in detail to understand what it all means. As I am a National Socialist, you already realize that I do not like any of our current anti-White so-called leaders in the U.S. government; that being clear, the reason that some Democrats, whether Jewish or not, will continue to slander Bush, or make anti-Bush films such as Michael Moore's "Fahrenheit 9/11" crap, or bash Ashcroft or Cheney or Rumsfeld, is because they want to say to us White American males -- WHO BUSH AND THESE OTHER WHITE MALES IN OUR GOVERNMENT ARE ALLEGEDLY REPRESENTING, BUT IN REALITY THEY ARE NOT -- "See? You White men can't run your own country. You're a danger to yourself and to the rest of the world with your invasion of Iraq and all. So you MUST let us control you. Give up your reins of power. We will show you the proper way." And this ultimate control is the New World Order. The One World Government under the rule of the Jews.
Some Jews disagree with the Bush bashers and continue to back Bush because of his pro-Israel, anti-terrorist stance, but that's just because their timing is off. Many haven't jumped on the bandwagon to the new approach yet probably because they don't think it's the right time. The Jews always go through these family squabbles. They always know what's "good for Jews", but they'll argue over "what's best for Jews". Eventually, most of them will come aboard and row the boat the same direction.
Conclusion
These are some musings I've had recently and I felt like getting them off my chest. Please don't misunderstand me to think that I am saying that the Klan is a bad thing. I've already explained my belief in what the best approach to solving America's problems are in "[url=http://www.vnnforum.com/main/2004b/51204haddensun.htm]Third Reich from the Sun[/url]," but many of us must also strive to avoid the previously mentioned, and other, beliefs of peril.
MAX HADDEN
2004-06-26 20:58 | User Profile
LOL. Why doesn't the guy just come out and say he's responding to OD's Walter Yannis?
2004-06-29 00:22 | User Profile
What MAX HADDEN is acknowledging is the fact that different White efforts are not bad, even if the sources are diverse. This is where true unity lies, in the steady and unrelenting force that continues onward at the detriment to the Jew and it's kind, the negro and it's kind, the homosexual and it's kind,...etc.
The unyielding force continues onward,....
2004-06-29 11:48 | User Profile
Tex:
I dig your signature, dude. The quote from Thessalonians is one of my all-time favourites!
Walter
2004-06-29 16:00 | User Profile
[QUOTE=golfball]What MAX HADDEN is acknowledging is the fact that different White efforts are not bad, even if the sources are diverse. This is where true unity lies, in the steady and unrelenting force that continues onward at the detriment to the Jew and it's kind, the negro and it's kind, the homosexual and it's kind,...etc.
The unyielding force continues onward,....[/QUOTE]
I don't see this at all in here.
Some ignorant Americans who call themselves Christian White Nationalists (WN) continue to claim that it's a mistake to use National Socialism (NS) or Nazi Germany as a model or an ideal because the Germans were defeated. To them I reply, "So what if they lost?".................
I've said this before, if people want to pray to Jesus and keep him in the loop for the WN cause, that's fine with me. It can't hurt. But they should ask their Lord some time, "What have You done for me lately?" Didn't save all those Christians who died on 9/11, did he? Didn't save Rachel Corrie, did he? Sounds like Old Scratch has been given freedom to cause bedlam. More of this kind of help we don't need, thank you........................
The Nazis are a bad example, but not the Klan...
Anyway, some well-meaning folks recommend using the Klan, or its methods, as an example of how to succeed. I have nothing against the Klan. But my response to that is, really? What the hell kind of success did they ever have? And I'm referring to success at the national level. Local politics are not going to solve our national problem. .........................
So did the National Socialists succeed? You're damn right they did. As Herr Linder recently pointed out......................
I don't see any of this acknowledgement of "the fact that different White efforts are not bad, even if the sources are diverse" at all. I see another of the typical NS attacks on any brand of nationalism but their own, buttressed with the usual lies and half-truths about NS.
And he says NS was a success. :lol: The movement that never did anything for white people but deliver them into the totalitarian embrace of cpmmunism and neo-Marxism (aka Frankfurt Schoolism). The movement that can't beat even the most basket cases of the left, but whose only success was overthrowing and subverting the work of genuinely conservative, pro-white governments like those in Eastern and Central Europe before the war. Just like today, where they're only real impact is the negative one they exert on genuinely nationalistic movements with real chances of success.
The only way you can keep talking this "we're just one big happy family" dimples is to ignore everything the Linderites say and do.
2004-06-29 19:14 | User Profile
[QUOTE=Okiereddust]And he says NS was a success. :lol: The movement that never did anything for white people but deliver them into the totalitarian embrace of cpmmunism and neo-Marxism (aka Frankfurt Schoolism). The movement that can't beat even the most basket cases of the left, but whose only success was overthrowing and subverting the work of genuinely conservative, pro-white governments like those in Eastern and Central Europe before the war. Just like today, where they're only real impact is the negative one they exert on genuinely nationalistic movements with real chances of success.
The only way you can keep talking this "we're just one big happy family" dimples is to ignore everything the Linderites say and do.[/QUOTE]
Ditto.
I'm so glad they've moved from OD on to greener pastures. It's so nice and peaceful like with them gone.
But enough about that. Out of sight, out of mind.
Walter
2004-06-30 02:44 | User Profile
[QUOTE=Walter Yannis]Ditto.
I'm so glad they've moved from OD on to greener pastures. It's so nice and peaceful like with them gone.
But enough about that. Out of sight, out of mind.
Walter[/QUOTE]A com'mon Walter - you know you haven't forgot about them, just like they sure haven't forgotten about you :lol:
2004-06-30 03:51 | User Profile
If Herr Hitler had won the war we would be today in the 25 century, that's how advanced they were,,,,,,,,,,,, Have you seen the planes that they made, the so called flying sources,,,,,,,,, sure, a few people would be dead but we would not me in the mess that we are in today because of the Jews.
2004-06-30 04:28 | User Profile
Quite so. The Nazi's were not totally wrong about everything, but they were spectacular failures. Today, neo-Nazi groups are like a chain 'round the ankle of the Right. --But not, I think, necessarily much of one, outside of the web context.
[QUOTE=Okiereddust] The movement that never did anything for white people but deliver them into the totalitarian embrace of cpmmunism and neo-Marxism (aka Frankfurt Schoolism). The movement that can't beat even the most basket cases of the left, but whose only success was overthrowing and subverting the work of genuinely conservative, pro-white governments like those in Eastern and Central Europe before the war. Just like today, where they're only real impact is the negative one they exert on genuinely nationalistic movements with real chances of success.
[/QUOTE]
2004-06-30 05:42 | User Profile
[QUOTE=Ponce]If Herr Hitler had won the war we would be today in the 25 century, that's how advanced they were,,,,,,,,,,,, Have you seen the planes that they made, the so called flying sources,,,,,,,,, sure, a few people would be dead but we would not me in the mess that we are in today because of the Jews.[/QUOTE]Did you mean flying saucers?
2004-06-30 18:31 | User Profile
[QUOTE=darkstar]Quite so. The Nazi's were not totally wrong about everything, but they were spectacular failures. Today, neo-Nazi groups are like a chain 'round the ankle of the Right. --But not, I think, necessarily much of one, outside of the web context.[/QUOTE]
Well put.
Even without regard to the thorny ideological questions Nazism raises, using Nazi symbols nowadays to build a broad mass movement has to be the worst dog marketing proposal I've ever heard.
And it is at bottom a marketing question. The simple historical fact is that the Nazis were losers without peer, which is bad enough, given that Americans like their heroes to win. But add on to that negative store of marketing value the fact that their memory has been bitch-slapped and piled on relentlessly for the past sixty-plus years, and one can only conclude that re-conquering those Nazi trademarks in the mass mind of our sheeple is a suicidal proposition. ZOG made gargantuan capital investment in negative brand placement in regard to Nazi symbols, and you'd have to be a fool to attempt frontal PR assault against that sort of massive consumer brand awareness.
This inexorable conditioning causes these symbols automatically to trigger in the minds of our sheeple low "loser" status associations, and they instinctively recoil from them. And at this point there's nothing anybody can do about that, absent monopoly control of the media for their own sixty-plus years. Right. Dream on.
Clearly, the whole notion of using Nazi symbols to lead any mass movement in the West is just a non-starter for that marketing reason alone, even without refererence to the substance of National Socialism. And I repeat that anybody who would counsel such a suicidal frontal assault against those heavily fortified walls when a rearguard marketing action is available to us has to be either a marketing moron or working for the other side (although one doesn't necessarily exclude the other).
We need to choose our fights carefully, and (again without regard to my personal beliefs) that means we use trademarks that already have broad recognition and positive associations. In short, Christianity.
Lose the losers. Stick with the winners.
Walter
2004-06-30 18:47 | User Profile
[QUOTE=Walter Yannis]Clearly, the whole notion of using Nazi symbols to lead any mass movement in the West is just a non-starter for that marketing reason alone, even without refererence to the substance of National Socialism. And I repeat that anybody who would counsel such a suicidal frontal assault against those heavily fortified walls when a rearguard marketing action is available to us has to be either a marketing moron or working for the other side (although one doesn't necessarily exclude the other).
We need to choose our fights carefully, and (again without regard to my personal beliefs) that means we use trademarks that already have broad recognition and positive associations. In short, Christianity.[/QUOTE]
Well, it's impossible to argue with any of that. I agree completely with the analysis and the strategy outlined above.
Speaking of one-and/or-the-other, by the way, are you making any headway with your "Christian Taliban" initiative...?
2004-06-30 19:10 | User Profile
[QUOTE=weisbrot]Well, it's impossible to argue with any of that. I agree completely with the analysis and the strategy outlined above.
Speaking of one-and/or-the-other, by the way, are you making any headway with your "Christian Taliban" initiative...?[/QUOTE]
No, dude. Totally hit a wall. I'm still trying to figure out how to pin the crucifixes on the pesky turbans (they're actually really hard to tie).
Seriously, though, I think that OD is on the right track not only with its overall Christian flavour, but also by choosing to emphasize Distributism and challenging Dispensationalism. Both hit ZOG where he lives; the former challenges the entire "virtual economy" environmental niche in which our kosher friends thrive, and the latter drives a wedge between Israel and American Protestantism and greatly enhances Israeli strategic insecurity.
OD is just a little candle, but any doubt that we can cast on the legitimacy of the "virtual economy" of publicly traded companies, derivative markets, and mass mailed, pre-approved credit cards on the one hand, and Red Calf theology on the other, the better off all of us will be.
Walter
2004-06-30 20:32 | User Profile
[QUOTE=Walter Yannis] We need to choose our fights carefully, and (again without regard to my personal beliefs) that means we use trademarks that already have broad recognition and positive associations. In short, Christianity.
Lose the losers. Stick with the winners. Walter[/QUOTE]
Walter, just to play "devil's advocate" here. I agree with you guys overall, but some questions that might arise.....
Christ said His Kingdom is not of this world, nor was everyone predestined to be saved or to be true believers. There's masses of people who claim to believe in Jesus, but that doesn't mean they're all true believers, nor do they really want to be one, nor do they desire to live under His commandments.
Christ says that "[B]heaven and earth [/B] will pass away, but my words will never pass away", so how does one justify using Christianity as a vehicule for political revolution, or even a temporal political platform beneficial for White people when Almighty God is allowing this world to decay into it's Final Judgement?
As for 'sticking with winners', Jesus said to his disciples in Matthew "All men will [B]hate[/B] you because of me, but he who stands firm to the end will be saved." It's certainly not only "neo-nazis" who hate Christ, but it's ALL men who are not saved. If we stand firm with Christ, there's nothing that men can do to change our salvation.
Is your ideal, a theocratic Christian state? If it is, would it not include non-Whites?
I hope you don't mind me posing these questions. Personally, I thought the original US Constitution was very close to perfect. We should fight for that to be restored as the law of the land.
2004-06-30 20:42 | User Profile
[QUOTE=Walter Yannis]No, dude. Totally hit a wall. I'm still trying to figure out how to pin the crucifixes on the pesky turbans (they're actually really hard to tie).
I'm thinking rosary beads might be your best bet. Tied around a turban, dangling from the neck- shoot, even used as a self-flagellation appliance, those things would be dang handy for future converts.
Seriously, though, I think that OD is on the right track not only with its overall Christian flavour, but also by choosing to emphasize Distributism and challenging Dispensationalism. Both hit ZOG where he lives; the former challenges the entire "virtual economy" environmental niche in which our kosher friends thrive, and the latter drives a wedge between Israel and American Protestantism and greatly enhances Israeli strategic insecurity.
OD is just a little candle, but any doubt that we can cast on the legitimacy of the "virtual economy" of publicly traded companies, derivative markets, and mass mailed, pre-approved credit cards on the one hand, and Red Calf theology on the other, the better off all of us will be.
Walter[/QUOTE]
Is it current OD policy to "emphasize" Distributism, or is it perhaps featured as one possible alternative?
2004-06-30 23:45 | User Profile
[QUOTE=Walter Yannis]Clearly, the whole notion of using Nazi symbols to lead any mass movement in the West is just a non-starter for that marketing reason alone, even without refererence to the substance of National Socialism. And I repeat that anybody who would counsel such a suicidal frontal assault against those heavily fortified walls when a rearguard marketing action is available to us has to be either a marketing moron or working for the other side (although one doesn't necessarily exclude the other).[/QUOTE]
That's fine, but I never understood the obsession about this straw-man at OD, specifically because no one in the history of the Original Dissent forum ever used Nazi symbols here, with the possible exception of a troll I might not have seen because they only lasted two days. Not even Franco (who I have come to miss) fell into this category.
2004-07-01 04:59 | User Profile
I agree that there is a somewhat odd obsession with Stormfront and VNN among certain posters here. No, Stormfront and VNN do not represent what is typical of white racialism: they represent a certain strain of crude, hate-filled, and very explicitly white racialist Internet rhetoric. Out in the real world, white racialism typically involves various degrees of subterfuge; action from instinct without rhetoric; and deep-seated valuing of whites based in universal moral codes.
[QUOTE=PaleoconAvatar]That's fine, but I never understood the obsession about this straw-man at OD, specifically because no one in the history of the Original Dissent forum ever used Nazi symbols here, with the possible exception of a troll I might not have seen because they only lasted two days. Not even Franco (who I have come to miss) fell into this category.[/QUOTE]
2004-07-01 05:29 | User Profile
[QUOTE][weisbrot]I'm thinking rosary beads might be your best bet. Tied around a turban, dangling from the neck- shoot, even used as a self-flagellation appliance, those things would be dang handy for future converts.[/QUOTE]
Thank you for that helpful suggestion.
[QUOTE]Is it current OD policy to "emphasize" Distributism, or is it perhaps featured as one possible alternative?[/QUOTE]
I admit that I overstated my case there. I can't say rightly that Distributism and anti-Dispensationalism are OD policy, you're right. These are just alternatives that we're discussing.
But I do believe these are the two pressure points we can most profitably press to our advantage, because both go directly to the heart of Jewish power in America and indeed the world.
And from a marketing perspective, both offer the same key advantage; i.e. both are on their own terms not about Jews at all, and so we can talk about them freely and openly without triggering our sheeple's doublethink "crimestop" mechanism that activates itself whenever anything Kosher is mentioned.
Double bonus!
In short, Distributism and anti-Dispensationalism allow us to do steal a page from Team Jehuda's playbook - the veiled propaganda attack.
So, let me re-phrase it as a question for discussion here.
Do the policies of Distributism in economics and anti-Dispensationalismin religion propaganda advantages that we should avail ourselves of?
In other words, should OD as a group concentrate on those to policy positions?
Walter
2004-07-01 05:36 | User Profile
[QUOTE=PaleoconAvatar]That's fine, but I never understood the obsession about this straw-man at OD, specifically because no one in the history of the Original Dissent forum ever used Nazi symbols here, with the possible exception of a troll I might not have seen because they only lasted two days. Not even Franco (who I have come to miss) fell into this category.[/QUOTE]
I don't think it was a strawman problem at all.
Neo and others openly advanced the Nazi cause. Others were Linderites, and so were virulently anti-Christian and at least favourably disposed to all things Nazi.
All of that is a marketing non-starter, and must be avoided at all costs. Most of us here appear to agree on that much.
In fact, I'd go one step further and say that using anti-Christian and/or Nazi symbols is such suicidal lunacy that no movement that hopes for success can afford to be associated with it in any way. Indeed, we need at least ten degrees of separation from all of that, and we need to develop and maintain the clearest separation from all things Nazi and anti-Christian in the public mind imaginable.
But here I am talking about this again.
Out of sight, out of mind.
Walter
2004-07-01 05:36 | User Profile
[QUOTE=PaleoconAvatar]That's fine, but I never understood the obsession about this straw-man at OD, specifically because no one in the history of the Original Dissent forum ever used Nazi symbols here, with the possible exception of a troll I might not have seen because they only lasted two days. Not even Franco (who I have come to miss) fell into this category.[/QUOTE]Regarding Franco surely you noticed Franco's avatar, the one that "harmless puppydog" replaced. Of course Franco and Co were clowns anyway, whether or not their avatar.
And I think your making your own strawman. No one ever I think thought we needed to argue the symbology of Nazism. But the discussions, most extensively from Triskelion, in the context of endless attacks on paleoconservatism, suggestions of a new form of national socialism, and constant whining whenever anyone criticized the legacy or virtue of National Socialism or Linder certainly aren't any strawman.
2004-07-01 10:01 | User Profile
[QUOTE=Walter Yannis]I don't think it was a strawman problem at all.
Neo and others openly advanced the Nazi cause. Others were Linderites, and so were virulently anti-Christian and at least favourably disposed to all things Nazi.
All of that is a marketing non-starter, and must be avoided at all costs. Most of us here appear to agree on that much.
In fact, I'd go one step further and say that using anti-Christian and/or Nazi symbols is such suicidal lunacy that no movement that hopes for success can afford to be associated with it in any way. Indeed, we need at least ten degrees of separation from all of that, and we need to develop and maintain the clearest separation from all things Nazi and anti-Christian in the public mind imaginable.[/QUOTE]
I detect a subtle shift in the use of wording here from "symbols" to "discussion." Symbols can get in the way of context and understanding and thought, so I am in complete agreement on this. Discussion, on the other hand, provided it is gramatically correct and free of four-letter words, is a good thing.
You see, it's not so easy to maintain the hygienic standards some here seek when it comes to things deemed "Nazi" and "anti-Christian." These are labels loaded with a lot of emotion, and thus very difficult to keep control of once deployed. I'm sure the parties involved have their own definitions of these terms, but I get the sense that these labels end up being affixed too freely in debate. These days, in terms of "mainstream" society, anything to the right of Al Gore is "Nazi," and depending on one's reading of the Bible, everything is "anti-Christian." It becomes even more complicated when you consider that "Nazi" ideas existed before the Nazis did in history--I believe Walter once touched upon this when he called Nazism "derivative." Therefore, one pursuing the course of "rooting out" various ever-expanding forms of "heresy" (a word that means "choice") will need lots of luck.
2004-07-01 10:06 | User Profile
[QUOTE=Okiereddust]Regarding Franco surely you noticed Franco's avatar, the one that "harmless puppydog" replaced. Of course Franco and Co were clowns anyway, whether or not their avatar.
And I think your making your own strawman. No one ever I think thought we needed to argue the symbology of Nazism. But the discussions, most extensively from Triskelion, in the context of endless attacks on paleoconservatism, suggestions of a new form of national socialism, and constant whining whenever anyone criticized the legacy or virtue of National Socialism or Linder certainly aren't any strawman.[/QUOTE]
For Franco, admittedly in a category of his own, I recall a photo of Goebbels, which isn't really a "symbol." That never seemed a big deal to me because most people wouldn't even know who that is visually anyway--or at least the people dim enough not to be able to handle "dangerous" ideas to "mainstream" society in their proper context. As far as criticizing Buchanan and such, people are free to do that and have my respect as long as they keep it on the level of ideas. I'd be disappointed if they focused on personal aspects such as "where are his kids" and the like. As for me, I'm no doubt "to the right" of Buchanan, but I offer no criticism toward him since I think his three books which sit on my shelf are excellent and useful in educating the public on a wide range of topics often neglected by the two-party system currently in place. In his last run for office, I donated $300 to his campaign.
2004-07-01 17:21 | User Profile
[QUOTE=PaleoconAvatar]I detect a subtle shift in the use of wording here from "symbols" to "discussion." Symbols can get in the way of context and understanding and thought, so I am in complete agreement on this. Discussion, on the other hand, provided it is gramatically correct and free of four-letter words, is a good thing.
Well, the shift seems more in keeping with the original purpose of this discussion anyway. Just saying people never use Nazi symbols doesn't really address the issue. We can all see that the content of what people say can be just as hateful and damaging, irregardless of whether they use symbols or four-letter words. The neocon flamers at Free Republic for instance certainly at times used such hateful speech..
You see, it's not so easy to maintain the hygienic standards some here seek when it comes to things deemed "Nazi" and "anti-Christian." These are labels loaded with a lot of emotion, and thus very difficult to keep control of once deployed. I'm sure the parties involved have their own definitions of these terms, but I get the sense that these labels end up being affixed too freely in debate. These days, in terms of "mainstream" society, anything to the right of Al Gore is "Nazi," and depending on one's reading of the Bible, everything is "anti-Christian." I haven't heard anyone outside of a few religious activists use "anti-Christian" for a long time. As for criticism for using the word "Nazi", our case is completely different than for mainstream society. In society its used as broad brush, but here its often just hairsplitting. People would even complain about my use of "Nazi" who were self-described National Socialists, like Triskelion/Bjarni. Again, to resort to people always accuse us unfairly of being Nazi's is diversionary.
In any event Madrussian accussed me of going on Nazi witchhunts and using the term unfairly, but when I pressed him, couldn't supply a single instance of doing so.
2004-07-01 18:25 | User Profile
[QUOTE=PaleoconAvatar] As far as criticizing Buchanan and such, people are free to do that and have my respect as long as they keep it on the level of ideas. I'd be disappointed if they focused on personal aspects such as "where are his kids" and the like. As for me, I'm no doubt "to the right" of Buchanan, but I offer no criticism toward him since I think his three books which sit on my shelf are excellent and useful in educating the public on a wide range of topics often neglected by the two-party system currently in place. In his last run for office, I donated $300 to his campaign.[/QUOTE]Well I always appreciate this commonsensical view toward Buchanan, and likr you I'm disappointed over personal criticisms of him, or people like Trisk who said he thought he was a fraud, based on what he heard him say on TV last night, or people that say he's an enemy, , or whine about every little thing they disagree with him on, etc. etc.
This was a big discussion of ours on this forum with Triskelion, whether he and his fellow WN were really being reasonable and completely different than the VNNers when they all line up in lockstep with Linder's "Squinty Pat and Canny Sammy" mindset.