Wrath of the Naughtmen: Post-Nazi Tendencies in Alt Media
Again we hear the same old refrain: “There are too many people in this world, so many that one can properly call them useless eaters”. Kissinger misbehaving in his old age? UN’s got a new agenda? Himmler quote? No. Just two alt right cum alt media boys shooting some breeze.
In this podcast we indicate some sinister tendencies stemming from alt right movement and now pervading some of the main alt media nodes.
Notes
(If for some reason the Mixcloud presents you with problems, the podcasts are available on Kali Tribune’s Youtube channel. Podcasts can be downloaded via this link )
Branko Malić
Kali Tribune runs on reader’s support. If you found the above informative and/or enlightening, consider making a donation
What’s the problem with “Nazis” though? The title of your podcast suggests that the German National Socialists were the bad guys or something. The only reason the “Nazis” (a smear word) are reviled today is because they lost. If Germany had won World War 1 or 2, today we would be talking about the murderous and genocidal Anglos and how their system of government – imperial liberal democracy – was responsible for 10’s of millions of deaths (which it was) and how the Anglo-American/Judeo-Communist alliance systematically tried to exterminate the German nation and enslave the world – which would be a much more accurate reading of history. The Nazis dindu nuffin, they was good boys.
Yet they lost. Ever wondered why?
Because might makes “right”. It’s not that complicated. “Right” – capital R – is another story, for which we might turn to Hegel.
No. It was because time was not yet ripe for their global gay pride.
Ok, think whatever you want. But moving forward, people who rant about “Nazis” will automatically discredit and side-line themselves because they represent a viewpoint that is on the wrong side of history.
I hate to add insult to injury, but not being on the “wrong side of history” is a main selling point of gay movement …
Is that the “only” reason? Nazi Germany attempted to impose an authoritarian-bureaucratic model on the rest of Europe where the interests of a single nation unscrupulously dominate that of others and the interests of a certain arisen socio-economic class within that nation trumps what remains of politically realizable opportunities. The experience that served Hitler well in establishing centralized power in Germany proved to be disastrous when bluntly carried over to other states – the political infrastructure for such action did not exist beforehand in many of the occupied countries. And even in places where it did, the Nazis failed to make proper use of it. In principle it’s only different from EU’s chaotic and counterproductive mandate in ideological enthusiasm of the officials willing to put in effort above their pay grade to fulfill it.
One can tweak the details concerning victims of the Holocaust and other alleged “war crimes”, but completely denying every historical fact that casts Nazis in a negative light is simply insanity.
Nazism failed because it failed to transcend the merely German element. It was a highly localized movement that attempted to function on a global, imperial scale. From the start, contrary to what most people believe, it had little in common with other right-wing movements in Europe and did even less to establish a connection between them, beyond that in the interests of subordination. It alienated the majority of occupied nations with characteristic Teutonic brutality and denseness of its formal bureaucratic structure (features it shared hand in hand with Bolshevism), failing to win over more than a minority of sympathizers and collaborators. Even some ecumenical initiatives, such as the creation of the SS foreign divisions was impeded at every step by an ethnic particularist obstacles thrown by imbecilic and self-interested party members, officers and power brokers. It failed to collect the discordant elements of Europe into a single unified whole dominion with a shared ideology and political culture, unlike what the very similar Qin dynasty successfully accomplished in the past, as well as the Muslim and Orthodox empires.
Another reason was its idiotic and illogical (even from the questionable perspective of Nazi racial science) separation of Nordic and non-Nordic Europeans, despite the fact that the former counted among Germany staunchest and most implacable historical enemies, whereas the latter (Slavics) readily accepted Germanic cultural dominion many times in the past, and were structurally more aligned with the ideal of society which the Nazis tried to implement.
The Nazi leadership, aside from a few figures, was largely characterized by feeble minded, dogmatic and racially inferior individuals who were unsuited for the responsibilities allotted to them. This kind of assessment comes from none other than surviving former Nazis. Since many of these memoirs were printed in exile, frequently published posthumously, I highly doubt the individuals in question attempted to curry favor with anyone. If we are to look at Nazism in a historically appropriate context, we need to do so in light of its own eugenic standards applied to its own so called leaders.
I agree that the role of a counter-revolution movement that Nazism represents was necessary given the condition of Europe at the time. It still remains necessary. However neither Nazism nor the alt right as of today, embody even the basic qualities such a movement needs to have. It’s not enough to be anti-this or that, what is needed is a positive, distinct alignment which draws to itself by virtue of the substances it embodies. So far I can only recognize in the alt-right another meme ordained Millennial political identity, no different from the LGBT or the SJW crowd. Am I supposed to be inspired by a group whose idols include frogs and ponies?
In summary, Julius Evola’s critical essay “Fascism viewed from the right” poses the question in a similar vein.
“I agree that the role of a counter-revolution movement that Nazism represents was necessary given the condition of Europe at the time. It still remains necessary.”
No it wasn’t. But, judging by your objections to Nazism, Alt Right could just accommodate you. And frogs and ponies are important for revolution in our age, woe to one who underestimates them.
Maybe, but then we would be looking at an entirely different phenomenon. If you consider the meaning of the term “alternative right”, it should represent a radical departure from conservative mainstream establishment. Whereas mainstream conservatism seeks to defend or return to state of things that existed a short time ago (in the American case, to the 1980’s Reagan Era) down to the ridiculous point where it is considered “paleoconservatism” to uphold political convictions that prevailed 50-70 years ago, the alternative right in principle should have embodied political disciplines and doctrines of a positive character relevant to the present situation, and which stand in contrast to the mainstream prevailing leftist-liberal current of progressivism. As such, it is not a crime for alt-right to hold anti-Semitic, antidemocratic or politically incorrect views and opinions. Such accusations could be leveled against your own body of writing. Please do not descend to the level of SPLC, I know you can do better.
I don’t advocate eugenic mass murder or feel inspired by “Satanist” currents as you seem to suggest in your podcast. And to be fair, it is false to level this accusation against many of those who identify themselves as alt-right. However, I would not waste my time here if I did not agree with the observation that there has been a steady downward direction in the “breeding centers” of alt-right, namely 8chan and 4chan /pol/ and their associated social media extensions.
As someone familiar with the way it has all evolved over the years, I can offer the following observations. In the beginning, Nazism was just another meme. The mentality of the 4chan crowd was nihilist, against everything, mocking all. Early /n/ and /pol/ discussions, though exceedingly insulting and offensive, nevertheless reflected many ideologies and denominations on all spectrums. People pretended to be Nazis usually in 4chan’s best tradition of expressing for the sake of impression, i.e. to elicit reactions from easily triggered posters. Eventually they became “redpilled”, meaning that the the edgy factor gave sway to the rule of extremism, and what was a manifestation of Poe’s law took hold of their own minds. Extremism, although a powerful motivating factor in any action oriented goal, without self discipline and control imposed over it, eventually consumes itself. That is why open debate and diversion of opinion were no longer tolerated on the /pol/’s, the only acceptable opinion was the one which competed with the one before it in extremeness. A strict mob mentality now enforces what constitutes as acceptable opinion, and any individuated sentiment or voice is driven out with utmost aggression.
However, then as you point out frequently, this is the same as being led on a string by anyone who knows to manipulate and mobilize these energies. Indeed the mob is the easiest thing to steer because when one allows his mind to be subsumed by the prevailing sentiments of the majority, personal critical thinking has to be shut off. “An open mind is like a fortress with its gate unbarred and unguarded”. In this sense I find myself in full agreement with your conclusions.
Where my sentiments diverge is your statement regarding political movements in general. Whereas this particular movement is motivated by disappointing and you could even say demonic influences, judging by the amount of esoteric baggage that is seems to carry, the era and experience of mankind is far greater and more encompassing than the character of present contingency suggests. If some of my opinions concur with those held by the alt-right party, it’s only because they are part of something far more older and universal than what the ideology itself represents.
The reason why I haven’t pointed out that not all Alt right people are of the same mentality is because I on principle don’t make caveats. I start on assumption that you and anyone else can pick the sound ideas from this movement for yourselves and defend yourself against objections from the Left – or from someone like me for that matter. The problem, however, is that Alt right is a movement with a set goals, values and publicly acclaimed leader. If any political success should occur, it would be along these lines and not along the lines someone like me, presumably you or,to take an example of my favorite Alt right man, Andy Nowicki would like to see. The proclaimed idea of this movement is “white nationalism” which rests upon, as you correctly observe, not biology but something else. Well, this “something else”, as it seems to me, is along the lines of ideas of F.P. Yockey and his ilk – a race as a spiritual given, which is in my opinion far worse than crude biologism. This means the political purpose of Alt right is a creation of some kind of Imperium and this is precisely what post-Nazism were striving for from Forties of previous century. The Satanism I talk about is a political tool employed by adherents of this goal, and antinomian dialectics designed to bring about a sort of “rebirth” through attack on all accepted moral norms. I cannot help but notice some of them, as Kerry Bolton for instance, reinventing themselves as Christians and intellectuals of the Right. Those ideas are completely modern and have nothing to do with tradition of any kind; indeed they are here to clash with any given tradition because they strive to bring about a “new beginning”. I, for one, do not believe in new beginnings at all. In my future work I will dwell more into these themes and I will endeavor to be as much as possible true to my sources – the intellectuals, activists and precursors of Alt right – because they themselves are very clear about what they want.
I don’t consider any kind of thinking as a crime punishable by law. Some of it, however, I consider to be a grave peril to the soul of thinker.
Biological racism is a non-negotiable tenet of the modern alt right. Advocating even a milder form, such as “spiritual racism” is one of those ideas that would swiftly get you kicked out of any discussion. The influences that seem to play a part don’t even come from the likes of Yockey or Chamberlain but Turner Diaries and the “one drop rule” of American neonazis. The core belief of white nationalism is the creation of separatist ethnic states, based on stringent certification of belonging to the Aryan Nordic group, the expulsion of all non whites followed by an eventual race war of extermination against them. There is no room for caveats and nuances.
My purpose was not to spit on Mr. Old Ez’s face, nor warn his soul of ensuing eternity in hellfire for upholding whatever it is he believes in, but to demonstrate to him that historical Nazism represents both an ideological dead end and a practical dead weight from the point of view of the right. Yet Nazism still represents an orientating influence in the alt-right, in most discussions on /pol/, the final word is upheld by examples of Hitler policies in a similar vein as Papal encyclicals and statements of dogma. People simply refuse to sever themselves from the Third Reich and offer ideas and principles grounded on thousands of years of human experience instead of their twelve.
On this I would disagree to an extent that “spiritual racism” is not a milder but far more intense form of racism. However, practical politicians relying on demagogy would probably ditch it because it is too cerebral for average Joe. Yet let us not forget that Alt right does rest on assumption that Nazis were wrong precisely for alienating some of the white races with their biological notion of Aryan man. “Spiritual racism”, if packaged right, could win over at least intellectual classes across the far broader spectrum of “white” peoples. Bolton, for instance, was able to give it a Christian garb, almost seamlessly. And Alt right is still targeting mainly intellectuals and, as you correctly observed, young people infesting the forums and chans, also highly intelligent for the most part.
The problem with the Nazis is that they were an inhuman, demonic political cult. The fact that the Allies weren’t led by righteous men either changes nothing. Both sides were, at the end of the day, under the influence of evil. Hence why certain factions on the winning side were quick to save Nazi criminals for their own nefarious purposes, via Operation Paperclip etc.
Great one Brako. Really appreciate your discursive reasoning. Very deft and always a pleasure to listen to lectures like these. I have almost zero contact/ experience with alt right (i live in the rif mountains) yet the folks i talk to coming through here sure are getting stirred up back home. Anyways, cheers. Look forward to what’s next.
The loser is always in contradiction to the spirit of the time.
peace
Thanks
@Old Ez: About the wrong side of history thing- how did you determine which the right side is? And what is “the right side of history” anyway?
How’d hell EU took Romanians in before Croats? You fail at basics:
Fantastic talk, and a much needed counter argument to the “alt” right.
Thanks. Do share it with your friends.
In line with most of my predecessors here, I thank you for the astute analysis. Like the person living in the Rif, I didn’t really have “close” contact with alt-right yet. Funnily, there does not seem to be a hip, catchy information movement of that kind in Germany yet, or else I’ve missed it so far. The oldschoool neonazis hereabouts aren’t really appealing to the lifestyle of academically schooled people as far as I can tell. We have a budding political party, including youth section, though…
Thank you for your thank you. I think that German laws make it difficult for anyone to come out with this sort of ideas. To a large extent Alt right festers on reaction to lunatic Globalist policies that invoke unfettered immigration and do indeed aim to erase any kind of ancestry and difference in peoples. So, with Merkel et al. in power I’m certain you have Alt righters aplenty in Bundesrepublik.
If you do a little looking you will find that David Myatt and the O9A are connected to members of the British organisation National Action. In particular a character called Ryan Fleming aka Ryan Prometheus aka A. A. Morain – who wrote a book called Codex Aristarchus, allegedly on “amoral vampiric praxis” and “predatory astral vampirism” amongst other things – I haven’t had the misfortune of reading it yet, but have been meaning too. There are others involved with Satanism within National Action, and I had data on them, but I was subject to a fire and unfortunately lost my computer. There is something insidious about Myatt’s lingering influence on the right, especially after his whole alleged set of connections to Project Gladio, the British deep state and even potentially Jimmy Savile.
The O9A at one point in late 2014 tried to influence the NRx circle, via co-opting /fringe/, but it didn’t really work properly. Nick Land himself actually came out around that time as having being influenced by O9A doctrine and is most certainly a self-described Satanist occultist transhumanist – plus more. Land’s influence, whilst not strictly alt-right, should not be overlooked. At one point NRx was quite a bit more influential than the alt-right, due to the wave of interest in Mencius Moldbug aka Curtis Yarvin’s blog Unqualified Reservation, but has really now been subordinated to a subset of it. Yarvin himself works on a startup for Peter Thiel iirc.
I think it is somewhat expected to have former Satanists convert, especially after realising they were perhaps duped, but the chaos magick symbol element is a bit too prevelant to be a concidence. Troy Southgate the founder of National Anarchism (and writer for Pravda) who has connections to Opus Dei, and Jonathon Bowden (ex-Monday Club ex-BNP etc.) founded the London New Right, a forum that also bore the chaos magic symbol. Bowden used to speak regularly with Richard Spencer on a podcast (it was actually rather interesting). There are plenty of connections.
Palmgren apparently has connections to Roscrucianism and the Irish dodger Michael Tsarion (Red Ice used to host Tsarion’s forum). I cannot remember the details though.
Anyway, great podcast, I look forward to any developments in the future.
Thank you very much for this info. I was not aware of Myatt’s connections you point out. I know he boasted a one time membership in Column 88 which he explicitly related to Gladio, although he likes showing off so I don’t entirely take seriously things he says about himself. I’m very sorry to hear Mencius and NRx was targeted by O9A – my first contact with Alt right was through some Croatian admirers of his who ran great blogs and discussion groups. Then again, one should be careful about the words one uses to identify his projects: Dark Enlightenment is a term that just reeks of LHP. I’m aware of other individuals you mention and I do agree that Bowden is interesting, I would even go so far as to say: a brilliant lecturer and orator, but he was himself quite a dangerous man and I think, a tortured soul.
I’m more interested in ideas than links between the individuals, but it is certainly important to be aware of this. Please, if you have something to share, in terms of information or thoughts on this or any other matter, and want to talk in depth, just email me: branko.mali@yandex.com
If it is true that these luciferians deemed NRx to possibly present fertile ground for their sinister influence, this in itself is significant as it shows that NRx, even if they aren’t aware of it, finds itself in shadowy or grey territory that opens onto the darkside in certain respects.