Adolf Hitler inspects works of Volkswagen in Wolfsburg, with Reich organizer Robert Ley  and Professor Porsche, the designer of VW, May 26, 1938.

Published in: on November 7, 2016 at 7:13 pm  Leave a Comment  


Published in: on November 7, 2016 at 7:11 pm  Leave a Comment  

Joachim Peiper Decorating A Soldier


Published in: on November 7, 2016 at 7:08 pm  Leave a Comment  


Published in: on November 7, 2016 at 7:03 pm  Leave a Comment  

The French Invasion of Germany

Trivial incidents of wars are often more important than the unfolding chain of events. For example:

This raid on the night of May 11 1940, although in itself trivial, was an epoch-marking event since it was the first deliberate breach of the fundamental rule of civilised warfare that hostilities must only be waged against the enemy combatant forces.”

Even the better informed of us need reminding that the first conflict between France and Germany was not the Reich invasion of May 10, 1940 but France’s invasion of Germany eight-months earlier. This occurred on September 7, 1939. On this date the French launched 40 Divisions, with 4,700 artillery pieces and 2,400 tanks at Germany’s Western borders.

September 1939: French R-35 tanks (5th BCC) in the Warndt forest, during the offensive in the Sarre.

For the French invaders the invasion should have been a walk in the park. The German defence forces could muster only 22 Divisions and a mere 100 military pieces.

One of the reasons given for the French invasion was to draw the Germans away from the on-going Polish campaign. However, the French were so hapless that the German defence found it quite unnecessary to distract their comrades in Poland who were otherwise engaged.

9th September 1939: French soldiers of the 42th infantry division in the German village of Lauterbach

This is where it really gets embarrassing: The French did penetrate German territory and sure enough French troops occupied German towns and villages. The resourceful Germans in the meantime pulled back to the Siegfried Line and left behind only unoccupied booby-trapped properties. It never occurred to the French to bring mine detectors.

Map showing the positions of the German territory hold by the French troops during the Saar Offensive
 Maurice Gamelin, French Commander in Chief in 1939
Maurice Gamelin, French Commander in Chief in 1939

After penetrating German territories the French formations came into artillery distance of the Siegfried Line. For the French things went from bad to worse. The German defensive wall built to deter French and British aggression was impregnable. Despite their superior firepower the French guns failed to penetrate the German defences.

The French 155mm shells weren’t heavy enough to penetrate the concrete bunkers. Surely things would improve when the French then trundled up their 220mm and 280mm shells. Not really for these shells lacked the essential delayed fuses. Rather than penetrating the outside casements first before detonating the shells exploded on impact.

The British arrived to offer a helping hand on September 12 but by that time it was realised that Poland was a lost cause. One week later the Soviets invaded Poland and the French invasion of the Workers Reich spluttered out in ignominious retreat.

Published in: on November 7, 2016 at 6:33 pm  Comments (1)  

Reinhard Heydrich







Published in: on November 7, 2016 at 2:22 am  Leave a Comment  

National Socialism Basics Part 5


“Our economic principle is: the duty of the national economy is to provide the necessities of life and not to secure the highest possible profits for capital.” – Gottfried Feder

“Our principle as regards social subjects is as follows: the general welfare is the highest law of all. This principle of ours is in direct opposition to present-day practice according to which every class tries to gain advantages for its own particular group.” – Gottfried Feder

No less important to National Socialism is how the leader should treat the folk, and how members of the folk should treat one another. In this, the analogy of the pop culture icon and the fanbase continues to be useful.

A pop culture icon obviously wants his fans to be in the best personal condition possible to appreciate his work. A fan who is hungry or homeless, or who has difficulty paying bills or who remains stuck in debt despite working long hours, or who must deal with chronic illness, or who is intermittently subjected to the stress of litigation, or who is otherwise saddled with formal banalities that consume most if not all of his daily faculties of attention, is unlikely to have the time and concentration or even be in the mood to devote himself to his icon no matter how much he would theoretically wish to. The same is true of a follower in relation to his leader under National Socialism, except that the leader – as a politician – is in a position to actively improve the living conditions of his followers via state initiatives. Therefore an initial objective of the National Socialist leader is to make sure his followers have enough physical and mental health as well as financial and civic reassurance in day-to-day living, all while sparing them from unnecessary bureaucracy, that followers can get back to doing that which they most love to do: providing fan support.

“To fill forms — one of the international occupations of modern civilised humanity.” – Savitri Devi

“It nauseated me to think that one day I might be fettered to an office stool, that I could not dispose of my own time but would be forced to spend the whole of my life filling out forms.” – Adolf Hitler

“Forms and questionnaires should be reduced as much as possible. People have no time to write out their entire biography on some ridiculous form to get something that is important to them. One should be reasonable and require of them only that which is essential.” – Joseph Goebbels

“National-Socialist law … does not accept the absolute necessity of “professional lawyers” or “solicitors”, regarding such a necessity as dishonourable … All the proceedings should be understandable by ordinary people.” – David Myatt

Only a person can help another person. Bureaucracy has never helped anyone.

Of course, a person has to be willing to help.

But by the same reasoning that National Socialism aims to relieve worry among the folk concerning the basic necessities of life, it discourages the pursuit of affluence beyond modest comfort. Just as uncertainty and insecurity in daily life diminishes fan enthusiasm, so too does the lure of unlimited profit distract from it. This is why it is rare for high-powered speculators, entrepreneurs and the like to also be die-hard fans of pop culture icons: their intensive observation of financial trends and networking with lucrative opportunism in mind uses up most of their energy, and they receive immediate rewards for attention or penalties for inattention, so their entire mindset is trained away from contemplation of personality. The National Socialist principle of strictly prohibiting income other than what is earned via productive labour, at the same time as it is about protecting the savings of honest workers against inflation, is also part of establishing a folkish habitat, which is fundamentally incompatible with the presence of capitalist temptations, but which instead works best with simple living.

“A re-organization of our people into a national unit that includes all those whose labour is productive simply pushed aside the old organizations of employers and employees.” – Adolf Hitler

 What we had back in the Golden Age.

Simple life is the best!

Further to this line of thought, fans of pop-culture icons are also in poor condition to provide fan support when they feel they are in competition against one another even within the domain of fandom, for this turns their focus away from the icon itself and towards rivalries inside the fanbase. A fanbase thrives when every fan helps every other fan support the icon to the best of each fan’s capacity, but it withers when some warped fans try to restrict the support of other fans in order to prevent them from offering more support than themselves. And again, all the same is true of a folk under National Socialism. Therefore it is incumbent upon the National Socialist leader to instill in each sincere follower a feeling of being valuable to the folk in a way that does not require knocking down the value of other similarly sincere followers. Other forms of socialism rely on the (false) premise of egalitarianism to argue in support of this, but National Socialism, which rejects egalitarianism, relies instead on the principle of citizenship. It matters not that two people are unequal; the simple fact that both are citizens means that both are people whom the leader is glad to have among the folk, both people whom the leader would rather be present than absent, and this is all that any citizen needs to know in order to have an attitude of fellowship towards any other.

Egalitarianism, which argues for fellowship based on equality, actually implies that non-equality is sufficient reason for rejecting fellowship. Thus it sets up a backlash against itself (which is what Zionists designed it for). Fellowship based on citizenship avoids this.

“Life divides us perforce into many groups and occupations. It is the task of the political and mental education of the nation to overcome this division. This task has in the first line been alloted to the Labour Service. Its duty is to unite all Germans in work, and thus to form a community out of them. To this end let us place the same tool in the hand of all, the tool that a nation honours most, the spade.” – Adolf Hitler

Citizenship is not the same as nationality. The term “nation” etymologically derives from root “natus” meaning ”birth”; people are fellow nationals by being born in the same country and therefore possessing shared experiences of growing up in that country. (Racists who claim that common nationality requires common ethnicity again display their illiteracy.) The term “citizen”, on the other hand, etymologically derives from the root “civitas” meaning “commonwealth”; people are fellow citizens by having added value to the same country and therefore possessing a shared stake in that country. For the pop culture comparison, a fan of an icon is supposed to be more than merely a viewer/subscriber of the icon – a fan is expected to have actively participated in fanwork and thus supplemented the icon’s impact rather than merely enjoyed the icon’s impact. It is hoped by the National Socialist state that nationality serves as sufficient motivation for citizenship that every national becomes a citizen, but non-nationals can certainly also become citizens, whereas nationals who have not contributed to the country (as well as warped nationals who themselves may contribute to the country but who try to obstruct others who wish to contribute to the country from doing so) will certainly not become citizens.

“Citizenship must not be a gift at birth, but must be acquired by labour. Only the fulfilment of duty and service for the honour of the folk can award this right. Consequently, we must make a ceremony out of the award of citizenship to take the place of confirmation. Only when sacrifices have been made for something, is one also ready to fight for it. This last measure will also automatically push those racial elements into the foreground which are organically most of all capable of serving the supreme value of our folk.” – Alfred Rosenberg

Therefore it is the duty of the National Socialist state to rigorously define contribution, set the minimum quantity of contribution required from each person for citizenship to be awarded to that person, and establish a system of measuring contribution. Again, this is no more complicated and conceptually no different than running a fanclub. The more purposeful the definition of contribution, the more wisely set the minimum quantity of contribution required for citizenship, and the fairer the system of measuring contribution, the better the state is an example of competent National Socialist administration.

Published in: on November 7, 2016 at 1:38 am  Leave a Comment  


Published in: on November 7, 2016 at 1:03 am  Leave a Comment  

Prosecutor drops probe into Danish Nazi camp guard

A top Nazi hunter from the US-based Simon Wiesenthal Centre, Efraim Zuroff, travelled to Denmark in July last year to file a police complaint against Helmuth Leif Rasmussen, over war crimes alleged to have taken place between 1942 and 1943.
“Information has not emerged during the investigation to support the complaint we received from the Simon Wiesenthal Centre,” chief prosecutor Steen Bechmann Jacobsen told AFP.
A Danish book released in 2014 claimed Rasmussen worked as a guard in the Bobruisk camp in Nazi-occupied Belarus, citing a police report from 1945.
“We have worked closely with two historians, one of whom is the author of the book,” Jacobsen said, adding that the book itself did not prove that Rasmussen had “committed concrete crimes or that he was complicit in any.”
Rasmussen, who has since changed his name and now lives in the Copenhagen area, has admitted to being part of a volunteer unit created by the Danish National Socialist Party, but has claimed that he only went to Bobruisk as a 17-year-old to undergo military training.
Another Danish man at the camp, who was now a Swedish citizen, had also been investigated but would not be prosecuted, Jacobsen said.
  Around 6,000 Danish  volunteered for the Free Corps Denmark,  1,500 of these belonged to the German minority in Denmark, during the German occupation between April 1940 and May 1945.
  Up to 1,000 Danes served in Bobruisk according to the book released in 2014 by Danish historians Dennis Larsen and Therkel Straede.
Published in: on November 7, 2016 at 12:57 am  Leave a Comment