Friday, 18 March 2011
-
National Socialist Letters. Section One
This is just a draft, notes mainly. It'll be incorporated into other Letters and Articles .....
The National Socialist Program
The following are simple and unequivocal statements as to the assumptions that will underlie a future National Socialist state. Explanation of each statement will be made in the notes to each and will be made in explicit language in order that in future circumstances there will be no opportunity for the interpretation of these statements into meaningless ink on a piece of paper.
1. A nation rather than a country is the most desirable form of geographical state.
2. A nation may not enclose more than 1% of non-national ethnos and must be composed demographically of at least 99% of the national ethnos.
3. A nation is a geographical area composed of one single national ethnos.
4. A nation shall only be governed by members of the national community (i.e. ethnos) alone.
5. Non-national interest groups shall be outlawed as deprecatory to the domestic and international interests of the nation.
6. The organic and inorganic member of the national ethnos within his or her nation has certain rights which they are entitled to as such but also corresponding duties to the nation.
7. If a member of the national community does not perform their corresponding duties to the state under specific conditions the state they will lose their entitlement to their national rights until such time as they perform their corresponding duties.
8. The member of the non-national ethnos has one right and corresponding duty and is not counted as a member of the nation but as a non-national resident.
9. If a member of the non-national ethnos does not perform the corresponding duty they are judged to be a deprecatory element; thus losing their corresponding right, and are to be dealt with appropriately by the nation.
10. Nations and countries who protect fugitives who have committed crimes against or within the nation are to be dealt with by the imprisoning and/or ejection of all members of that non-national ethnos and the ejection of non-national ethnos with special privilege under international law.
Notes to the Program
1. A nation; as per the linguistic origin of the term, is defined as a homogenous state in terms of biological origins (as per point 3 of the program). For practical purposes the ratio of population is given in point 2 of the program. The biological origin of the population which concerns NS Int. is that which is commonly termed; Aryan, or more accurately as persons of unmixed Indo-European Nordic and/or Alpine descent. The two; Nordic and Alpine, maybe mixed but no other sub-racial or racial groups may be included. In the unsuitable racial groups we include those who adhere to Judaism (the religion) or have any known recent ancestor who did so. The same applies to other unsuitable groups especially those as those of known Slavic (of any variety) or Romani (gypsy) descent. This is in addition to all non-Nordic and/or Alpine ancestry, which is classed as unsuitable if recent.
Recent ancestry is defined as being within 3 generations; excluding the individuals generation, of the individual concerned. If an individual has a single undesirable ancestor within this period then that individual will not be considered part of the nation and will be subsequently treated as a member of the non-national ethnos by the nation. Individuals; with the exception of those who have any known jewish ancestry, with an unsuitable ancestor beyond the stated period are to be regarded as members of the nation but are to be regarded as unsuitable for any position of authority beyond that of Level B within the nation as they are unsuitable for a certificate of pure Aryan descent. The levels and the certificate of pure Aryan descent will be discussed and defined later.
2. The nation may not under any circumstances increase this ratio beyond 1% but may decrease or increase it within this boundary as it wishes and as its needs require. If the nation for any reason has more non-national ethnos than this 1% then this program specifically charges the nation to begin a program of removing the surplus non-national ethnos as quickly as possible. This may only be temporarily suspended in the case of great natural mortality within the national ethnos, which this program then requires the nation to take steps to bring the national ethnos back into balance and/or to remove the surplus non-national ethos to the 1% ratio of national to non-national ethnos. This suspension will only be allowed for 4 years and may not be extended or renewed by either the leader and/or by popular vote. If at the end of this period the balance has not be affected then the nation is charged with expelling the appropriate number of non-national ethnos to bring it into effect.
3. The national ethnos is further defined as individuals being of suitable religious belief. The state religion will be Christianity of the Roman Catholic denomination. The nation will however allow suitable Protestant denominations, Atheism, Agnosticism and suitable (i.e. ancient European) Pagan denominations. The nation will outlaw all forms of non-suitable worship, which are not listed as suitable, as subversive influences and hence any citizen found to be adhering to such religious practices in contravention of the nations judgment will be subject to the full brunt of the law. Members of the national ethnos who are willing converts to Judaism or Islam are to be regarded as having willingly given up all ties to the nation and are hence to be regarded as members of the non-national ethnos and may not re-enter the national ethnos. Individual members of the nation may appeal to the Leader for special license in regard to their faith (with the exception of converts to Islam or Judaism) and may if special circumstances permit gain a dispensation from the Leader for this. Members of the PSS External Security Department are granted special dispensation in this regard only as befits the need of their mission to protect the nation.
All decisions regarding the suitability of non-Roman Catholics is to be made by the Aryan Church Synod, which may or may not given its permission to denominations dependent on their merits and flaws alone. A denomination may at any time be brought under review by the Aryan Church Synod, which then may decide to revoke the permission of worship if new conditions arise, but must have the Leader's signed approval to do so. The Aryan Church Synod may not however proscribe all non-Roman Catholic worship and if it does revoke the permission of worship of a denomination to worship it must state its case publicly and the denomination is given thirty days to launch an appeal against the decision, which will then be reconsidered by the Synod. A denomination may not re-launch a bid to be permission of worship unless it can marshal fresh evidence for why it should be allowed to worship and said denomination must be of European origin (with the exception of suitable European forms of Christianity, which are hereby stated to be of Aryan origin). Specifically we must state that Judaic and Islamic denominations of any form are to be deemed eternally subversive to the nation and are never to be granted any permission of worship within the nation; including non-national ethnos but excluding non-national ethos with special dispensation under international law. This dispensation may only apply to Embassies and Consulates and does not permit non-national ethnos without special dispensation under international law to worship in said structures or anywhere within the geographical area of the nation.
4. By governance of the nation we stipulate that only members of the nation with a certificate of pure Aryan descent may hold posts of level B or above. To gain this certificate members of the nation would have to apply to the Heritage and Ancestry Office and submit their particulars and person to rigorous checks in order to be awarded said certificate. Certificates of pure Aryan descent are awarded to those who can show no non-Aryan ancestors to 1800 or to whenever their genealogical tree is untraceable any further (if between 1800 and 1850) and show no non-Aryan traits in genetic testing. This will thus create two types of member of the nation; one with certificates of pure Aryan descent and those who do not. Those who do will have the opportunity for promotion on grounds of merit and achievement to positions of high-level governance and management of the nation. Those who do not will not have the opportunity for promotion to positions of high-level governance and management of the nation.
.
5. We define non-national interest groups as organizations of a non-national character (i.e. not originating from the members of the nation for the purpose of influencing the nation or members of the nation in an organization acting in non-national interests internationally or domestically). These groups will be outlawed and any attempt by them to form or reform without explicit sanction from the leader will be treated with the full force of national law.The nation will not outlaw national interest groups unless they are acting in contravention of the good of the nation internationally but domestically they are allowed to influence policy in a non-subversive manner i.e. not undermining the national government, no knowingly encouraging and/or abetting outlawed groups or activities and not knowingly causing harm to the nation as a racial community.
6. The rights and duties of the member of the nation are defined in Appendix 2; where the member of the nation is further broken down into two categories; organic and non-organic, with their corresponding rights.
7. If a member of the national community does not perform their duties they do not have the opportunity to exercise their rights; since these are on a quid pro quo basis i.e. the member of the nation complies with the national community's legal requirements in terms of their duties; which are not more than common sense and allow freedom in all aspects of life within reason. If a member of the nation does not reciprocate the nations trust by carrying out their duties then the nation is obliged to rescind the rights bestowed upon them until such time as they honour the duty or duties to the nation and have undergone an appropriate punishment for this lack of national spirit.
Special dispensation may of course be applied for and given; which will give the members to whom it has been granted an exemption from specific duties to the nation if it is held that by doing so this will further the nations interests more than that gained by requiring the members to perform that specific duty.
Hence 'The Rights of the Individual' in the nation are not universal constants but rather representative of the symbiotic relationship between the nation as a national community and individual members. The good of the national community must always come before the good of the individual; but the nation must always strive to reconcile the two interests when they occasionally conflict and forge an understanding between the two. The nation is not only the whole but also the individual; since both are composites of the other.
For example; if a member of the nation were to steal a new vehicle he would under this document be in violation of his Duty to keep a lawful society because he is violating the criminal law statutes by taking another members property that he has not purchased in kind or by currency. When he is caught he still has his rights as given to him by the nation but when he is tried by a national court and found guilty he will be stripped of his rights. This means that he has to accept any punishment within the legal statute handed down by the national court once found guilty and if the member works through this and has shown contrition for his crime and breach of duty he will be considered to be part of the nation again.
It is important to note in this case that the member of the nation who has been stripped of his rights has to show both genuine contrition and complete the punishment given to him. Whether the former has been shown is to be determined by the PSS and the later by representatives of the national court. During this punishment period he has no rights other than the legal requirements for him to be fed, watered, clothed and be kept healthy, physically active and hygienic by those administering the punishment to him.
Hence both the interests of the national community (the duty to remove unlawful members from the public community in the interests of that community) and the individual (to be given the opportunity of reform and to be properly maintained) are reconciled. In some cases there will be a need for execution and hence it is judged that because the member has broken the legal code to such an extent that said member's interests (the same as mentioned above) have to be subordinated to the duty of the state to its members and the interests of the national community. Hence while the nation will do all it can to reconcile the interests of the individual member with those of the national community it is not always possible to do so.
8. The right and duty of the non-national resident is defined in Appendix 3; which should be compared to those rights and duties defined in Appendix 2 in order to show how the national basis of the nation is defined by biological inheritance and the choices made by members of the nation. The resident is held to be an individual of different biological stock or an individual who has made a irreconcilable breach between themselves; as a member of the nation, and the nation (see the notes to point 3 above).
9. The nation reserves the right to punish non-national residents according to its legal code and does not recognize the right of other nations or countries to harbor those wanted for breaking its legal codes. That said the nation will always engage in pragmatism and consistency where possible in deal with other nations and countries. This means in practice that where the national community's international interests would be unfavorably affected to such a degree as to render the individual violation of the legal code as a minor situation when compared to the situation that would develop from pressing the matter forcefully. The nation when forced to choose between being pragmatic and being consistent must choose the former but can only abandon consistency if the nation would be under threat of ceasing to exist. However after this immediate threat has passed the nation must become consistent again. This is not to say that the nation must side with the stronger of two sides but rather the nation must weigh up its duty of honor to its friends, survival and the interests of the national community, which may or may not result in the most favorable decision being that of consistency and honour with ones allies and friends. However should this choice occur; the nation will explain with all honesty why it has taken this course to its allies for the act of honesty aids the nations international standing and will always do so.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
This is an excellent article:
Plato and the National Socialist IdealBy Johann Luther
It has been said before that the National Socialist Weltanschauung is a spirit embedded deeply in the roots of our folk. To the reader this might appear to be a statement akin to the fictional tales told by film makers, or a romantic notion invested entirely in a desire to justify National Socialism. But permit me this slight moment of reflection, wherein I will attempt to show the parallels between Plato's "Republic" and National Socialism.
When describing his perfect community, during a discussion regarding the rewards of a moral society as opposed to that of an immoral society. Plato makes some startling revelations, that demonstrates not only the intellectual depth of this man, but also his inherent Aryan spirit, the Weltanschauung (world view) which resides within us all. In showing this I will formulate the key focal points of Plato's republic into different sections, and examine them in parallel with that of National Socialism.
The Role Of Each Man In The Society
In discussing the role of each man in the community, Plato quite aptly remarked that, one could never be an expert at more than one profession, that people are inherently suited for different kinds of occupation since each has a different nature [1] . It is with reason that I state this to be an apt description of the role of each man in the society:
National Socialism celebrates the inequality of man as something unique and natural to the order of society. It recognizes that each of us are biologically limited in our abilities, and implores us to strive to be the best we can be within those limitations. People more suited for their respective tasks should indeed be championed to take up these tasks and fulfill the role in society that had been gifted to him. We cannot all strive to be Physicists or Scientists, which is what society today purports we believe. It might sound good on the face of it, and it is this "noble" suggestion that most of us eventually succumb to, however, when we look a little deeper into the matter, the sheer fallacy of such a suggestion becomes easily exposed, if at once we consider society as a whole and what is needed for it to function. If we had all been equal and equally capable of these tasks, had only mere environment been generous to us, then society would at once lose the threads that bind it together and succumb.
It is not our environment which determines what it is we are capable of and what we aren't, it is our biological make up. It determines through hereditary traits whether we are to be more capable than another or less capable, of course it is true that education plays a part in our intelligence...The role it plays however is secondary to the role of biology. If we can explain it in another way, which would be more sensible as well as irrefutable : Our biological selection also determines our physical make up and because of this we can't all run equally fast, regardless of how much time we spend practicing and doing the laps. Some are just more gifted than others-..it is their natural calling.
This of course is not to suggest that we should all be accepting of mediocrity, or not strive at all to improve ourselves to the fullest extent of our abilities. Rather that we embrace fully that quality which is gifted to us, and which naturally separates us from the rest. If each man embraced that gift which is natural to him, far more good can be brought for society and it's advancement. Why strive to be "similar" when being unique is such a more rewarding sense of being? I could never understand why people would desire being stale and similar.
Education
To Plato one of the important aspects of a moral community, is its education in terms of how it deals with educating the youth as well as the adult participants in the community. Plato states that:
"Education consists of cultural studies of the mind and of exercise of the body" [2] he continues further to state that "Cultural studies should be before physical studies" [3]While it is a given that both exercise and cultural studies should be an integral part of an education system, I can't help but disagree with Plato on the latter part of this statement. It makes more sense to have them done simultaneously, purely because a healthy mind requires a healthy and fit body. Exercise provides the body with the healthy blood flow required in order to function properly. A well trained body, therefore gives the mind the necessary oxygen it needs to function healthy and clearer.
Now that we have dealt with the relevance of education and physical training, it's important for us to deal with the more important points Plato raises in his discussion regarding the education of the Society:
Plato argues that it is necessary for the educative material as well as publicized material to be regulated. And if found to be lacking, removed on the basis that it undermines the development of the student and subverts the society as a whole.[4] I am sure that most people would consider this in some way or another as undermining the "freedom" of speech and of expression. However, when we consider that this is already done, especially where the education of the youth is concerned there is little point in delving into reactionary responses. Before judgments are passed on this particular matter, consider the following question posed to you, the reader :
Are materials that deal on the basis of "race, creed, nationality, sex or sexual preferences" not undermined as a focal point of studies in our education systems today?
The reason is not because it lacks any scholarly validation, on the contrary, the reason is simply that it goes against the grain of the Governmental doctrine. Equality preaches that there are no distinctions between man in anyway shape or form, whether racial or otherwise. Any suggestion even the slightest hint that it is a baseless ideology, ends in the teacher immediately being muzzled, expelled from the school and replaced with one who is more willing to toe the doctrinal lines.
In this instance it is perceive as being "contrary to the interest of society", on the basis that it is "deemed offensive material". Whilst we're on the subject of mentioning the "offensive" nature of material, let's examine this preposterous nature of such a claim:
There can be nothing more ridiculous than to formulate laws on the basis of an emotional state that can neither be confirmed nor denied, since it is a personal condition of both the accuser and of the accused. You may find offensive what I deem to be perfectly legitimate and likewise the same way I could deem offensive what you deem perfectly legitimate...I ask then, how is it sensible for such ridiculous laws to determine what is right and what is wrong? especially in the academic field where inquiry is the soul of knowledge.
Is the willful neglect of biological studies that is at the core of inquiry into the origin of man and it's differences, good for society?
Certainly not, it's effects are harmful despite it being viewed as "having good intentions", therein lies the difference between Plato's regulation of harmful material, and that of the current ruling body:
Whilst Plato's intentions were purely for the advancement and upliftment of society and so too the intentions of our State, the same cannot be said for Democracy as a whole, on the grounds that it does not seek advancement, but rather it seeks to drag every one down to a standard that's below their capacity for the sake of maintaining the illusions of equality, and thereby perpetuating the most immoral conditions for a society. Democracy seems to take on a sort of child like envious position when it concerns the morality of it's people. If "we can't all be equally good, then conditions would be so that we are all equally guilty of immoral actions", it doesn't matter if these actions are equal in depravity, rather that neither one can judge another as we're all guilty of some form of ill-behavior. It further does this undermining of societal advancement through quota systems. Systems that replace the able individuals with individuals who are perceived to be "just as able" based on paper, but never quite so. Then of course there is the numbing of the education system to such a docile state, where students nowadays find it difficult to master even the language they speak at home!
Now as a supplement to this section on education, I will present Plato's views on further education for the youth.
The Raising And Development Of Children
Although there are several ideals mentioned by Plato in the chapter titled "Woman, Children and Warfare" that aren't feasible when looked at in context of the modern era, he does make some valid points that are still applicable to it. We'll start by listing the more feasible idea's and then explore the less feasible ones in due course.
Plato considers the sharing aspect of a community to be an important part of it's continued existence, he argues that, if each considers the other a brother, sister, father or mother, then they'd all feel the pain and the joy of every citizen in the community.[5] It does have validation, if we consider that biologically our racially homogeneous society are linked together. However, where Plato errs is by arguing that the parental biological bonds between parent and child should be "blurred", that is to say no child should know his biological parents and no mother either, this he argues, to foster a genuine feeling of "brother hood" to all citizens of the community.[6] This is contra the interests of our natural biological basis upon which our entire Weltanschauung rests. And because of this, the latter aspect must be dismissed entirely, since the biological bond between parent and child, is an important aspect of childhood growth.
Instead we'll suggest that the sentiment of brotherhood be fostered by other means, perhaps educational and societal.
One of the more important aspects of the childhood life, is the warfare aspect of it, Plato argues that it is important for the children to accompany their parents to war as much as possible, and to act as apprentices, so they may fully grow to understand their duties to the Community.[7]
We are much aware of the changes and the modernizing of institutions for apprenticeship such as the Military schools. We therefor do not suggest they actually accompany parents to warfare, rather that Military schooling would serve the purpose of educating and introducing the child to what is expected of him as a citizen of the Country.
To determine the proper age for Military schooling is a difficult task, and one where most will likely be in disagreement with each other. In our opinion, it's recommend to start from the age of 12 - 18, as this would provide those who prefer Military service with an already furnished entry point into the Military. Furthermore, the years from 12 to 18 would allow the child to have developed the necessary social skills required of a child. Given that he would acquire these in his first 12 years of normal schooling.
It is important we feel, to allow the child to attain the proper structural discipline needed for everyday adult life, and this a military school will provide them.
The Life and Duties of a Guardian
The Guardians of society, in Plato's view are those individuals who bear the following characteristics:
1)The Intellectual elite and have proven themselves competent for the duty.
2) Who care for the community and intertwine their fates with that of the community.
3) A selection of men that are willing to give their entire lives in the service of that community.
4) And refuses to partake in practices that are harmful to their community.[8]
The effort by Plato to determine who and what characteristics these Guardians should have is no different at all to the effort National Socialism undertakes to ensure such Guardians for their society. The difference between the two is slight but significant all the same, and not only in name..we have a slightly more complex system. Albeit similar in intention, it logically as time progressed evolved as thought and complexity of thoughts progressed. National Socialism's "Guardians" or the "Elite" of the society is the "SS", but it is not quite so simplified:
While Plato's "Guardian" was relegated to a single member of the community, the SS is a protectionist branch that reaches out to the racial elite of a society. And in doing so it is the elite of every branch of society. From farmers to poets, musicians to Intellectuals. Each member of society is charged with a moral code to adhere to, but the SS man more so than most. He is the moral compass that guides society, the individual who is charged with upholding and never wavering his moral righteousness for anything. Quite similar to the requirements Plato listed for his Guardians, he is charged to never do practices that is harmful to his community.
When today we consider that the influential people of our society are often seen doing the most incomprehensible acts, and considering the consequences these have on our children and on our society as a whole. There is much to be said for such a system, which seeks to actively improve both the biological and the intellectual moral life of the folk.
I am sure the question begs "how does it improve the biological life of the folk?":
The answer is quite simple, an SS man is charged with the responsibility to marry a wife who is either his equal in attributes and qualities or his better, in this sense I do not argue in favor of the principle of equality, since it clearly would contradict the position of our Weltanschauung. Rather, that the attributes and qualities i.e. Racial, Moral, and Spiritual qualities is to be similar or higher than that of the partner, this is to continue to ensure the strive for perfection. While we do recognize that perfection is unattainable, it is the beauty of the struggle for it which we celebrate. As mentioned before, there is no need to accept mediocrity simply because we are human and ipso facto imperfect.
There had never existed such a great anesthetic to our people, whom in spirit strived for improvement in every aspect of our lives, for exploration on the basis of increasing our knowledge, than to suggest we ought to be satisfied with being "imperfect" to suggest that accepting mediocrity is a sign of true virtue.
The Philosopher King And The FuehrerInspecting the "Political systems" Plato concluded that an Aristocracy based on the intellectual caste of society, was the best political system in which a society could be ruled. And the perfect ruler for this Intellectual-Aristocracy was the Philosopher King, giving his explanation for this Plato states the following :
"Unless communities have philosopher kings or current kings practice philosophy with enough integrity there will be no end to societal problems".[9]
There are several attributes Plato uses to describe this Philosopher king, but none more striking than the unequivocal statement that the Philosopher king is one who uses personal power for the good of the Community, rather than for self satisfactory reasons, and this we ourselves envision for our Leader. Plato places high value on the Leader being a man of philosophical thought or a philosophical nature, and not because it is something he himself had been, but rather because a man of philosophical thought is a lover of knowledge, and in being a lover of knowledge so as well a lover of morality.
It's hard to imagine that a lover of morality could be easily swayed away and toward the path of immorality, that he could act and use his power for his own good rather than for the good of the Folk and of the Nation. If only because he removes such devices and temptations from his immediate presence.
The principle of a Leader who devotes his life in the service of his folk and of his nation, is certainly not a new one, but definitely one that is based within the natural laws. That Democracy is not the nature of our people, is evidenced by the simple truth that, despite the power of the President being limited by the power of congress, we as people still solely hold responsible the man elected into office. Anger is directed at the President himself for the failures and shortcomings, rather than toward the entire Democratic system under the auspices of the current "regime". This clearly shows our inherit steer toward a Monarchical form of rule.
Unlike the Democratic system we reside in today. We know that our Leader could hardly afford himself such a luxury as to hide behind others, for he is indeed the sole man responsible for the operation of the Nation. I am sure that most here would consider those of his advisers equally responsible but, unlike Republicanism under a Democratic system, he can ill afford hiding behind the ones he appointed as overseers of the tasks, this is a luxury extended only to the Democratic system.And because he can ill afford to hide behind a poor choice of advisers, he naturally has to appoint himself advisers that are the best suited for the task rather than those who are popular. The incompetent are at his mercy, and easily replaceable. An incompetent Democratically elected regime lasts for four years, eight years if he manages to swindle the folk a second term.
Being popular in the minds of others necessitates one wear a mask to hide his true intentions, to tell the people what they want to hear rather than what is. This is the fallacy of "Majority Rule".
Notes:
[1] Rep., 370B
[2] Rep., 376E
[3] Rep., 377B
[4] Rep., 377D
[5] Rep., 462B - 462D
[6] Rep,. 457D
[7] Rep,. 467A
[8] Rep,. 412D - 412E
[9] Rep,. 474D
Organic Philosophy, Plato and National Socialism
-
recommend
- recs 0
-
email
- sent 0
- like
Post a Comment