Society

Present and future tasks

In honor of Germany

We are politically proud descendent of National-socialists. We may take inspiration or respect the input of many other movements, many if not most that would want the others and us dead and buried. And this is no problem: by discovering natural laws, we reconcile all differences and learn from all sides, from their insights as well as errings . It seems necessary first to debunk a number of lies and misconceptions about Germany. And the Fatherland and whole Axis alliance demand justice for all the lies drilled into young people’s heads, as do the millions of women raped by crazed Soviet savages at the order of Jews, as do the deads of Nurember and Hiroshima.

The 2nd world-war did not end. The only path forward is the creation of 4th and last Reich based around the understanding of nature and the powers of the mind, if we are to avert the end of our race and nature at the hands of cultural and racial subhumans goaded by Jewish milenarist interests, who in their religious madness wish only to destroy the world in order to eschew their End times.

The final solution

The gazing and cremation of millions of people in the conditions described in all Holocaust manuals is physically impossible. Killing through gas is excruciatingly complex and dangerous for the operators. On the other hand the modern revised death toll for each camp in any recent book unsurprisingly matches the curve of episodic diseases caused by damages caused by war from the moment the bombing of Germany became intense and infrastructures and supply lines suffered, making treatment of said epidemics impossible. Everyone could contract the typhus, but it is a fact it was endemic to Jewish communities, owing partly to their historical or cultural lack of hygiene and medical care.

If physical extermination had ever been considered, Germans also possessed large stockpiles of chemical nerve agents (Sarin, Soman, Tabun) they did not use during the war, and that had an exponentially higher lethality rate in much smaller concentrations than Zyklon B—only a mundane, commercial pesticide used for delousing operations. The myth of the “gas chambers” themselves dethrones in ludicrousness even the lousiest, worst science-fiction pulp magazine.

As the first Leuchter Reports summarizes the locations investigated “could not have then been, or now be, utilized or seriously considered to function as execution gas chambers”. Executing by gas today, requires a prison to empty an two entire floors of its inmates, by precaution. But only to kill one person iInside an extremely thick one-place metal sarcophagus. Yet supposedly Germans could do it on hundreds of people at once, locked only by normal walls and a light wooden door with a measly glass visor and no gas exhaust chimneys. Nor have aerial photographs taken by Allied forces shown any smoke.

The pressure of this new holocaustic religion, formatted minds so deeply that we suspend our disbelief to degrees hitherto unforeseen. All the mentions of extermination, eradication, getting rid and other such terms always refer to emigration: This was the true Final Solution. Many locations were imagined, including Madagascar, but they settled with the far borders of Eastern Europe. The Haavara Agreement (meaning “transfer”) between Nazi Germany and Zionist German Jews signed on 25 August 1933 meant to , finalized after three months of talks by the Zionist Federation of Germany, the Anglo-Palestine Bank (under the directive of the Jewish Agency) and the economic authorities of Nazi Germany, meant to solve the Jewish question by sending about 60,000 German Jews to Palestine in 1933–1939.

It stopped as Jews resumed their warpath-fuelled propaganda against Germany, and it appeared they were harassing and killing Palestinians for which Germans could only feel sympathy for. The hoax of the genocide of the Jews made possible a gigantic financial-political fraud, the principal beneficiaries of which are the State of Israel and international Zionism, and whose principal victims are the German people - but not their leaders - and the entire Palestinian people.

During the six years of peace that the Third Reich was granted, the concentration camps had no economic significance. Their purpose was to isolate habitual criminals, as well as opponents of the regime who were considered incorrigible, from the general population, and to reform those regarded as re-educable to become good citizens in the spirit of National Socialist ideology. In pre-war times the number of concentration camp inmates was relatively small; in the summer of 1937, for example, the population of all concentration camps, including the criminals and the “anti-socials” (vagrants, beggars etc.), totaled 7,500. After the war broke out, more and more concentration camps were set up and the number of inmates skyrocketed. The war brought an internationalization of the camps; aside from resistance fighters from the nations under German occupation, ever-increasing numbers of prisoners-of-war were also committed, and as of 1941 numerous Jews also joined the inmate population.

Constantly more Germans were called to fight at the front as the war dragged on. Manpower shortages became a problem of paramount importance for the economy of the Third Reich. This resulted in a change of the concentration camps’ function. The re-education function was pushed into the background, and the economic aspect grew in importance.

On April 30, 1942, SS-Obergruppenführer Oswald Pohl (Chief of the WVHA) acknowledges the transition of the camps’ organization from political to mostly economical, in a letter to the Reichsführer-SS Heinrich Himmler¹. Jews in particular were detailed to work in the camps². A wealth of documents demonstrates the role of the Jews in the National Socialist war economy. On May 11, 1944, for example, Adolf Hitler personally ordered 200,000 Jews employed within the framework of the Fighter Plane Construction Program Of course. The extremely high death rates in the camps, resulting primarily from diseases but also from inadequate rations and clothing as well as from overwork, detracted severely from the economic efficiency of the camps. For this reason, under the order of Himmler all concentration camp commandants on December 28, 1942 were made them personally responsible for maintaining the inmates in a work-fit condition, which led to a very considerable improvement in the conditions in most camps, and mortality decreased by almost 80% within eight months.

As for the famous eye witnesses of the gassings invoked by history books and the media, only produced fantastic, incoherent, physically impossible statements, lacking any coherence, sometimes even in the same text. As for discourses produced years after the war… they can not have any value in a fair trial, for the same reason we don’t allow witnesses or presumptive culprits to talk with each other, and potentially concoct a convincing lie. And lies, many famous Jews have been shown to serve the public. The financial appeal isn’t negligible… If a trial granted you a hefty sum of money as compensation for your damages, confessing a lie isn’t easy. Now, considering the tens of billions of dollars and euros given to the Jewish community and State of Israel explicitly as reparation for the Holocaust, how could a community go back in such conditions ? How could a group of individuals accept that their parents and grandparents have all either been lied to, or taken part in a lie, with dreadful global consequences on other countries ? This kind of stories are very common among Chosenites, a fact a few brave souls complained about, as (and rightfully so) producing more antisemitism.

Confessions of Nazi officials like that of Rudolf Hoss have been obtained through torture and the explicit threat of sending their family to the communists, at the hands of which they would suffer much worse than death. The Nuremberg trials were a parody of justice: for instance there was a claim at Nuremberg that the Germans gathered jews in a village outside of Auschwitz only to blow it up with a nuclear bomb. Yet judges nonetheless acknowledged nothing in the nazi doctrine per se could be considered criminal nor hateful.

The famous piles of hairs came from the systematic cutting of shaving to avoid lice. There were functional, advanced medical facilities catering to the inmates’ needs, a swimming pool, schools, orchestras, and legal prostitution provided by the camp’s military. Why spend resources on all of that for people meant to die from hard labor, or children to be killed as soon as they arrived ? German authorities at Auschwitz tried to provide appropriate health care for the inmates to their best capabilities. This is frequently described as special measures to improve the inmates’ health and thus ability to work in Germany’s armaments industry. This, after all, was the only thing the Auschwitz authorities were really interested in due to orders from the highest levels of the German government.

Aside from the economic significance of inmate labor to the Third Reich, security considerations were the second most important reason for the expansion and consolidation of the concentration camp system, in order to fight against resistance movements in occupied territories. Armed resistance was particularly powerful in Poland, and most especially in the vicinity of the city Lublin. Polish sources comment the comments the dreadful extend of the damages³⁴.

As a general rule civilian populations (including Jews) were taken care of politely, but those who rebelled, took part in terrorism, or helped communists while hiding among civilians, were severly severly punished, which, in the haste and desperation of the Eastern front, led to wholesale massacres. Many resented these orders to pacify territories by any means necessary, getting legit PTSD from the experience. But the moral dilemma was undeniable: kill 5 persons to take one communist out, which could go on to kill tens of soldiers, ruin vehicles, planes and thus indirectly kill many more soldiers and civilians. The choice was quick to make. This was reality, and not the ideal dream world our hypocritical righteous politicians fancy, while carrying equally lethal strikes on countries far away. Germans reasoned from an utilitarian standpoint with good intentions and foresight, trying to minimize the overall future suffering, which depended on their winning the war: for that some people, including innocents, had to die. It happens when you must make the hard decisionso while lacking the time and resources to deal equitable justice. It led to the death of whole families children included, to squash the seed of terrorism before it take roots. This was however but a small part of the Einsatzgruppen’s pacifying role: they also revitalized local cultures previously violently repressed by the Communist regime. Lastly it appears that the number of killings has been grossly exaggerated by Soviet fantasy testimonies—and surprisingly by Germans too, though not intentionally.

Those responsible for the war

Political antisemitism was a logical consequence of a nation-wide political and cultural takeover, and the acquisition of an influence wholly disproportionate to their demographic importance. Moreover this takeover is well and fully documented and still today a source of pride in the Jewish community. It was distinctly felt as undeserved, when weighed against the service of the Jewish community in favor of the wider community, to the folk. They also identified as a nation, both abroad and in Germany, calling for terrorist attacks and a world war against Germany before it even began. In those conditions the concentration of Jews in ghettos was both legitimate and legal, and has been done by Americans for citizens of Japanese origin. Expulsing individuals pertaining to an enemy nationality as a safety measure, also abides to legality. Jews had an incredibly subversive influence on German society in general, as jews that found themselves in position of social significance were often found pushing socially subversive cultural trends such as gender fluidity, race-mixing, and sexual hedonism.

Exemples of such Jews would be Erwin Blumenfeld, the first to photograph Black and White mixed couples, and Magnus Hirschfeld (declared a “Jewish Criminal” who started the Institut für Sexualwissenschaft which was the first institute for “gender studies” in the world from which very prominent ideas were pushed in Weimar society. It was also the first place in which “gender-reassignment” surgeries occurred. His endeavor was stopped swiftly and without a fuss, with a beautiful autodafé.

Despite all that, repression was selective and Jewish life conditions in Germany did not actually change much, on the contrary restrictions on the number of professions prompted an economical growth, just as segregation allowed the Black community to prosper in the USA while its removal initiated the community’s economic downfall.

The other allegued allied justification for the war, is the the myth of German aggression of Poland. To give historical background too an often misrepresented and propagandized subject we shall first start with Hitler’s initial opinions on the Polish nation. Hitler was a genuine big admirer of the Polish marshal Jozef Pilsudski who was a big hero of the Polish-Soviet war that saved Poland and in turn much of eastern Europe from Bolshevik rule with his brilliant military leadership. Hitler had grand plans to work with the Polish government under the Marshal’s leadership, and was very enthusiastic about the future of Polish-German relations. Big plans were put in place, Hitler hoped to have Poland as an ally in its Bolshevik crusade that it was planning to undertake in order to rid the continent of Communism. However all those plans fell apart with the death of the Marshal in 1935. Hitler was deeply distraught by this event and in fact held a large memorial service for the late Marshal, he expressed his deepest condolences to the Polish government and the Marshal’s beloved wife.

But they did not wait long following the death of the Marshal, and before long the so-called loyal student of Pilsudski - Jozef Beck, Polish minister of foreign affairs, assumed a very aggressive and hostile stance towards Germany, believing Poland could conquer Germany and Berlin within 2 weeks if war was to ever start. He held this delusional belief that the Germany army was a paper tiger with only 9 divisions (the restrictions imposed upon Germany according to the Versailles treaty), all the way up to 1939⁵. In April of 1939 he met with Joachim Ribbentrop in a meeting which would seal the fate of Poland. The German government proposed a pact under which Poland would give up civil administration of the Free City of Danzig (an ethnically German city and sign the Anti-Comintern Pact, which would align Poland with the anti-Communist axis of Europe. In return, Poland would be given the right to conduct business in Danzig, and run an independent port. In case of Soviet attack Poland would receive Ukraine and significant portions of Belarus and Lithuania.

Beck refused, believing instead in a British guarantee that would somehow “secure” Polish independence. Beck was most likely being influenced by interests of foreign capital, putting his trust in a nation thousands of kilometers away from Poland rather than accepting an offer of cooperation from an immediate neighbor that had shown nothing but respect and amenableness and truly wanted to unite in a common cause with them against a common enemy that had openly advocated for the destruction of both of them. Nevertheless, the fate of Poland was from this point onwards set in stone. Little known to Hitler was the fact that the large German minority of Poland living in past Prussian territories was facing the utmost oppression even before the outbreak of hostilities, which would only escalate with the Bromberg massacres, a senseless genocide of the native Germans living in Poland at the hands of Polish authorities and civilians alike.

This plus the staunch Polish untractability in the territorial dispute perfectly justified the German invasion. Poland had once again squandered its independence by its own hands, as it had done many other times in history. After the invasion, Poland’s insubordination did not wane. For the time from January 1, 1941, and June 30, 1944, we have precise details on the extensive damages inflicted on the Germans by the Polish resistance⁶. This alone justifies the harsh but just treatment Germans inflicted on them, which was nevertheless largely exagerrated by later Polish propaganda, only equaled in outrageous lies by that of the Jews.

National-socialism, morality and homosexuality

Contrary to popular myths, Germans did not kill homosexuals in mass, or castrated any of them. No historian denies that the operation, although often brought without consent, was ligature of the fallopian tubes for women, and vasectomy for men… it also applied to all racially unfits and disabled people. Hitler did nothing wrong: it meant to protect the people’s genetic legacy. To sterilize any criminal whatsoever is justified and impacts in no way one’s sexual life, nor even the possibility of raising a family for that matter, as adoption was highly praised as a moral duty.

Statistics show no correlation between sterilization and side effects, same for tubular ligation. There are also no documented changes in sex drive after receiving sterilization surgery; on the contrary many women find sex more enjoyable after getting sterilized because they don’t need to worry about getting pregnant anymore. While many myths about the side effects of tubal ligation or other sterilization methods exist, none of them have been confirmed in research. One self-reported and self-diagnosed name for this affliction is post-sterilization syndrome, however, neither experts nor the women who experience discomfort after their sterilization surgery agree on the symptoms of this syndrome, they are deluded. Vasectomy is also proven safe.

There never was a campaign of systematic extermination of homosexuals. Small number were sent to prison according to the law, a fraction of whom sojourned in concentration camps where they worked and enjoyed life conditions identical to those of any other category, in fact higher than outside the camps. There are no evidences homosexuals were “singled out”, “beaten up” or anything like it. Actual statistics of the time whitewash Germans of that charge. Legends of hundreds of thousands of killed homosexuals inflated only after the end of the war, with accepted figures ranging only between 50,000 to 63,000 convictions in the period 1933-1944, of which about 10,000 went to camps after, so about 18%, so but a tiny fraction of the total number of homosexuals according to Himmler himself.

This meant a maximum 5.5% of the masculine homosexual popuplation sentenced, with 1% going to camps. There they died like everyone else, due to the Allied bombimg ruined the infrastructures, cutting the camps’ drug and food supplies.

According to Himmler himself, they had access to much more names than a mere 50 000. So why did the SS (in “Schwarze Korps”) abound in death threats against homosexuals ? Mere propaganda, chest beating addressed to themselves. Himmler said at least one case of homosexuality was found in the SS per month yet evading these accusations was often as simple as marrying or having kids, Himmler himself exonerating a lot of accused soldiers.

As a sidenote, Himmler and right-wing homophobes until now like to quote Germanicus from Tacitus, even though the rest of the literature unilaterally describes both Celts and Germans specifically as preferring boys to girls, in Christian as well as Pagan times⁷. As for Tacitus’s text itself, it never mentioned homosexuality whatsoever.

In early boy scouts organizations homosexual relationships were common, and not much of a secret in France or the US, and this accusation (far from groundless) persisted up until now. However they never explicitly and proudly assumed it like the Wandervoegel group did, before being absorbed by the Hitlerjugend after 1933⁸. Due to the phrasing of the law and Germans sticking to the words of the law, conviction required proving penetration through direct witnesses and so were rare, resulting even more rarely resulted in more than one year of jail time.

Before the war, dozens of cases were reported to the Gestapo concluding in no sentencing⁹. During the war, concealment increased more than prosecution, numerous cases indicating an active protection of pederasts among their ranks¹⁰. Persecution of homosexuals in Nazi Germany was not genuine, and laws mostly served as an excellent political weapon to silence the Church and rabid political opponents¹¹.

An unwillingness from leaders, Hitler among others, to take a definite public stance on a number of social topics, here sexuality, resulted in widely inconsistent policies impossible to make head or tail of without the precise political context of the year. They also had the decency not to treat their people like children, but left them free to decide of their own destiny.

The same paradoxical attitude showed up regards to interracial relationships and naturism. Germans had developped even before the Third Reich, a world-savy racism appreciative of all races. In fact, the only people Germans grew to positively hate, were Jews: in the pages of Der Adler, one could find photographs of Ethiopian women with sensual commentaries. They never suffered jingoistic delusions of grandeur like Poles, Turks or English people, or thought of themselves as Gods.

The unabated popularity of naturism despite a fierce opposition by Christians, Catholics most of all (championed by Goering), illustrates well the cultural fight at stake. Associations were not “exterminated”, and the overwhelming majority of nudists did not enroll in any organization anyway. At most in 1933 a catholic civil servant passed a decree prescribing full-body costumes even for men¹², cringy even for Islamic fanatics: a new Nazi leadership of the nudist association repelled it the same year.

Their economic, cultural and military achievements spoke for themselves and testified of the stellar degree of inspiration. Germans were no gaggle of frustrates. This simplistic myth of Nazi sexual retardation is no longer accepted by historians. Beyond narrow notions such repression or liberation, Germans in fact attempted sexual correction.

About the role of women

In our opinion, the only really damning mistake, was their attitude toward women. The first generation of party members suffered from a reactionary Christian education exacerbated (understandably) by the excess of the Weimar republic, a striking reflection (decades before) of what modern sexual liberation"liberation” begat. Hitler shared this misconception regarding women, considering them publicly as homemakers, period, with no right to take part in “99% of subjects of deliberation”, going thus far beyond just sparing them the harshness of soldiering. A feeling shared by Goebbels, Himmler, and everyone else among the higher-ups¹³.

Obviously, history shows that women can fight on the frontline (as snipers) handling the sight of bloodsheds and massacres just fine, if the example of Soviet’s harpies is anything to go by. And not just the war, but working in factories - while absolutely necessary for the war efforts - also was widely considered as unfitting for women, too masculinizing. Despite reassuring declarations that no one would sane consider keeping women at home as mere breeding machines¹³, they were effectively discouraged if not outright banned from participating in a gradually higher number of activities.

Traditional gender roles (as much as modern feminism) rob women of the opportunity and need to grow collectively and as individuals. Ggirls shaped by such an education, as Sparta proved, could totally provide for an adequate father role (a so-called pole of discipline) without losing their feminine grace. On the other hand modern fathers are either careless tyrants or spineless wimps. Traditional wives measuring their worth in their ability to breed should not be given any political right whatsoever, let alone the education of children.

Socio-economic system

Before the end of this century, possibly before 2050, the natural resources of the world will be fully depleted while the global population (compounded by its industrial progress) will reach an absolute peak, and world wars most likely involving nuclear weapons will occur will cause untold numbers to die, around racial and religious lines. With no foreseeable (voluntary) slowing down, and considering the White race is the only one even remotely interested in ecology and sustainable development, without taking extreme measures Europeans will die out and then the whole of humanity not long after.

In a hundred years from now if not before, everything we grew to love: The great majority of wild animals, insects, plants, forests, will be no more, leaving a scarred planet as humans set into motion the biggest extinction event since that of the dinosaurs. Humanity in its current form is a plague on our planet. Non-White countries which gained access to the product of Western technology such as China, India and the Middle-East, while at the same time lacking our most basic ecological tendencies, are all racial, ecological and ideological enemies of the first order.

When the time comes, the current world order will have fallen, either due to wars, food crisis, all caused by population pressure with no other outcome than total war. The purifying fire of nuclear armagedon in a unprecedented scale will purge the planet of its scories, cutting global at least in half. Only then can humanity be rebirthed and the united advanced humans to claim the planet. The only hope for our planet lies in the advanced races, Nordics and East-Asians, descendents of higher species, to wake up from their spiritual slumber and take over the planet in the interest of all life.

The priorities are national power and the elimination of existential dangers for the planet, namely polluters like China, Brazil and India, the main responsible for unimaginable suffering and destruction. They must be stopped at any cost. Some countries will be swayed into compliance, bribed, and others anihilated from the face of the Earth because they will never comply to the new order, or much too late. Human lives rank second to the interest of Life.

The economy will be planified to allow the full deployment of the working population, at first toward the most immediate national goals. Private interests might persist for a time as conglomerates of industries tighly bound with the State and controlled by it, mirroring WW2’s Italian and Japanese corporatism. Then quickly as goods of consommation become standarized and simplified, total communism on a racial and scientific basisthe sole purpose of life the satisfaction of the fundamental needs of love, sexuality, food and the conscious joyful improvement of the human mind and body.

Restoring our species to its former on the biological and psychic level dwarfs in importance mere economics, which are only a technical issue Nazi Germany had figured out in its time. They understood the balance between the individual and the State, and how trust in society as well as lasting material progress can only develop organically, when we focus on bettering ourselves and humanity and material gains take a second seat. Economy has always been a human, and thus spiritual matter, explaining why in practice regulations, planification and administrative control can take various levels without contradiction. But the most self-aware a race is, the most we can benefit from total socialism, and deploy its working population toward national goals.

When loving, honest people share all their have with each other, they become more than the sum of their part, because everyone can be trusted with society’s accumulated wealth and knowledge.

Private interests might persist for a time as conglomerates of industries tighly bound with the State, but then quickly as goods of consommation become standarized and simplified, we can bring about total communism on a racial and scientific basis.

The three main problems with the Soviet planned economy were:

• A stifling rigidity of the bureaucracy with no organic liaison at the local level, due to an overcentralization of planning.
• No respect for personality and the inborn diversity of individuals due to the communist emphasis on equality of outcome, against equality of opportunity. Administration should be simplified and decentralized as much as possible, instead of reflecting global social distrust and the compulsive need of a paranoid State to control its people.
• This led to a brewing individualism and the death of high ideals, with no one willing to work for a system rewarding them with neither human dignity nor a significant purchasing power, nor even basic necessities of life much of the time.

But the innermost driving force of this historical failure was Soviet’s dialectical materialism, which as its core stems from the jewish religion. When no sould can thought to exist, there can be no inspiration, and nihilism and individualism settle, as the cement to a lasting connection to a greater community is true love, hence demands a spirituality on the highest level, and thus the highest racial quality.

Obviously, a State whose public sector fails to provide all the goods expected from consumers, let alone cater for spiritual needs, should not attempt to substitute itself to the private sector lest people grow resentful, degenerate and beliefs in the ideals die. National-socialism discovered that a sound people possessed by an idea and a belief in their bright future will find a working balance between collectivism and liberalism fitting the circumstances and availability of resources.

The unavoidable concentration of capital is an historical inevitability apparent in our societies for a century already, effectively eliminating competition in most industry branches while the inner parts of products get produced by a limited few companies often owned by the same shareholders, and enormous barriers to entry forbid new players to enter. In these integrated branches technically speaking the difference between capitalism and socialism all but disappeared: The only important question is how these fortunes are invested. And this is not a problem of State interference or legislation, but simply the movement of capital, observable in advanced economy.

Workers’ condition never improve, they do not care if the few priviledged hail from the entrepreneurial bourgeoisie or the soviet nomenklatura. They will loose the will to work if their conditions never improve, while if they are contended and given basic self-respect, they obey anyone giving order, and will tolerate all sacrifices.

The second main argument for a planned economy, is the inherent harmfulness of competition, psychologically and socially. By that we mean not the healthy emulation of a sport competition in Ancient times, mixed with religion and potent eroticism, but the vicious poison of liberalism killing love between people of objectively opposed interets. On a bigger scale private property of the means of production led to an enormous and deliberate destruction of capital, from investments in purely non-productive areas aimed solely at increasing the market shares, to the wastage of perishable goods due to the refusal to sell at reasonable prices for the people, or the inescapable wars for resources for oil, gold or arable land.

Furthermore, liberalism supposes an open and fluid market with little initial investment and many producers, and a low entry barrier, but those conditions are all invalidated in today’s economies: high value markets are also the most granular and necessitate huge initial investments, effectively barring entries to anyone but the highest fortunes backed by international finance.

The “invisible hand of the market” causes unknowing consumers to seek the cheapest products, all too eager to rationalize their choice, while producers will seek to make the most of the smallest investment, creating a pressure on lowering the standards of quality. The unregulated pursuit of one’s own selfish interest at the core of this system led to the general dumbing down of products, programmed obsolescence and the current near-destruction of nature by pollution and exploitation.

The accelerated uniformization of food quality and a degree of ecological compliance the State demands norms in all matters of production. Simimlarly, technology would have followed very different paths in their international standards or industrial deployment norms had developped from a concert effort and free circulation of ideas. In the future, the desire to help each other and be acnowledged will replace material necessity and hardships as the drive behind work and creativity. Absence of information stiffles innovation, leading to trying the same obvious dead-ends again and again. Information must flow freely.

The free market ideology supposes buyers make rational choices and that the information on the market is freely available. They are supposed to understand the finer technical qualities and inner working of their products, instead they only know what the dishonest advertisement tells them. But to push for the adoption of sound standards thousands to millions of consumers would have to become experts, which makes no sense. Competitors know very little about each others due to the hoarding of commercial secrets and inventions for profit, through the patent system. This makes sound predictions for future investments an impossible guesswork, leaving many small companies and independent workers in the dust if not the street.

The pitfalls of Nazi Germany during the war showcased the detriment of competition as an organizing principle. The most intuitive behavior for a tightly knit community is to share strengths, not hoarding resources. Primitive societies alike share everything within family groups or clans, and engage in barter with other tribes depending on affinities and extended family ties. Later on money appeared, and with it the possibility of speculation, profiting. Gaining more than you offer, is the root imbalance in capitalism.

The only way to promote durable products lasting centuries using costly materials and in fair working conditions, is heavy State intervention, directly or through the self-government of trusted craftsmen and craftswomen working with the central authority. Such institutions would educate producers, subsidize investment in better materials and machines and provide the human and financial capital to form new qualified professionals. Public supervision of all the production process and absence of competition will lower prices without the fear of unforeseen economic conjectures threatening producers.

Until now devaluations and inflation have been devised centrally (be it in the US, UK, or Brussels) to please capitalist interests of share-holders and bankers in order to ensure their continuous profiteering at the detriment of workers: we promote the opposite, the adoption of the National-Socialist financial system and money based on the work of a high-trust productive society. The more trust in one’s own intelligence and skills, the more luxury a Völk can allow itself, confidence in its capacity to compensate with more work or more production later on. As the capitalists imposes sanctions on the racist ethnostate, we must create separate economic zones on the basis of barter and bilateral recognition of economic needs and values of national goods between like-minded countries.

We can regulate the volume and value of money until people have been socialized and its lifestyle streamlined enough, to permit direct administrative control of more and more of the economy by local authorities, with people ultimately concentrated in garden-cities or otherwise self-sufficient units. This solves the other main problem of planned economies: complexity and the impossibility to predict people’s changing needs and wishes in consummable goods. The reason behind this constant need for innovation and novelties, has always lied in the inner spiritual and erotic dissatisfaction.

In pre-Industrial society the primary (agricultural) sector of the economy was enough to service it almost in its entirety and plenty of people survived on basic subsistence farming, selling off any agricultural surplus to the small towns and cities. Existing industries were negligible in proportion of population, though important politically and well regulated and mostly served the primary sector through the production of high-quality tools or weapons for the army. Following the industrial revolution agriculture progressively transformed a result a large bulk of the workforce could now be funnelled into industrial jobs, in the case of England literally ripped out of their field and forced into factories, dramatically reducing their health and standard of living. The population divide of early capitalism led to an increasingly small minority of exploiters and an increasingly poor majority of exploited workers.

The expansion of a middle class both producing and consuming gave some stability to the system. From the end of World War II until the early seventies, the extension and intensification of liberalism had mirrored and accompanied in the West the increase in workers’ rights and purchasing power. But the trends of consommation habits can not be predicted, they constantly shift hence in order to fuel reliable economic growth consommation is fostered artificially, manufacturing desires by preying on people’s inner frustration. Natural love will be the nail in the coffin of capitalism, and turns the focus again to improving the real quality of life.

True evil however only appeared with the modern era and the interconnected global economy, as capitalists and oligarchs suddenly understood that the increased worker rights no longer allowed the same profit margins as before to be made, and for this reason they tapped into the huge workforce of the third world, suddenly shifting the bulk of our manufacturing capabilities to countries such as China and other Asian states considered undeveloped. This entailed a complete disaster as the already established environmental and worker protection laws present in the west were completely ignored leading to the insane environmental destruction in the form of heavy metal and microplastics pollution in the ocean and extensive deforestation.

The disappearance of a large part of the manufacturing sector led to the explosion of the parasitic tertiary sector centered entirely around services, with the ideal of the frivolous white collar jobs contributing nothing to the common good becoming the new ideal, while the bulk of useful jobs requiring physical activity and dedication, like garbage men, plumbers, etc are given to migrants - when they are not wellfare - justifing our racial replacement¹⁴. In truth today most people are paid to do nothing, women in particular.

The first source of economic activity should be bolstering military defense and research (as well as energy and R&D), closely followed by putting most people back to growing whole forests and revitalizing agricultural lands. That much of Western industries have been outsourced already is a good thing: we can practically start anew. We can build a thoroughly planned-out structure for national industries, incentivizing sectors considered crucial for national security and social well-being, such as various tools needed for craftsmen, computational power, mechanization and automation, and armament.

Lifestyle

Our position on industrialization, is neither Völkisch, with its appeal to “nature” or “tradition”, nor blindly progressist. It is practical: Technology and science can provide new vista of opportunities for human passions, but only if we use them to learn more about our common humanity. We will also need science to repair the Earth on a global scale, and apply geoengineering on a massive scale. But what hope is there to live in space, or bring life to other planets if technology can’t improve our own ? To liberate our potential we must avoiding the dependency on technology on an individual level. Without the need to improve upon pain of death, both individually and collectively, nothing will change. Whenever speed is not paramount (in military or strategic endeavors typically), devices will cease to prop up the natural strengths of the human body. In particular we must cease the deterioration of the human mind through the reliance on computers.¹⁵

This prohibition of unnecessary technology, will foster a culture of self-sufficiency and local resilience, two values of paramount strategic importance in case of war or any situation of stretching resources. As much as practically possible, people will live in habitats varying in kind, location and size, to please a wide range of aspiration and provide a wide range of experiences, over all the Imperium’s territory. People will move throughout their life to gather said experience, and learn to identify with the marvels of the world, as their shared human legacy.

The adoption of cultivation of cereals has lowered our intelligence: modern agriculture only amplified this trend. A single man plowing a desolate field with his tractor to produce a monoculture crop, itself used to make degenerate processed foods to feed the equally degenerate masses, eroding the overall genetic quality of humanity generation by generation. Human nutrition must be varied and free from processing as the one of our ape cousins, and the only type of cultivation that aligns with our nutritional needs would be an agriculture that isn’t based on plowing the fields to sow soil eroding monocrops, but a type of agriculture based on the cultivation of foods that we are adapted to eating, such as various fruit trees and vegetables instead of grains and legumes.

A command economy will allow the full deployment of the working population, at first toward the most immediate national goals. Private interests might persist for a time as conglomerates of industries tighly bound with the State and controlled by it, mirroring WW2’s Italian and Japanese corporatism. Then quickly as goods of consommation become standarized and simplified, total communism on a racial and scientific basisthe sole purpose of life the satisfaction of the fundamental needs of love, sexuality, food and the conscious joyful improvement of the human mind and body. Life will be organized so as to limit the dependency on technology as much as practically possible, while also using it to provide ever wider opportunities for human experience. We shall know life under the ice of Antarctica, in fabled underterranean realms of our making, on orbital stations and floating cities in the Jovian athmosphere. Where our feet can not bring us, we will fly.

Modern comfort as we usually mean it, is neither pleasantness nor healthy. Having to run between two points, eventually taking a bit more time, does not degrade the quality of life but enhance it tremendously. In a great many number of cases, modern societies have become less economically speaking in fulfilling the same or equivalent tasks: social inertia has made those tasks a lot more complicated, and robust, smart (relatively) low-tech solutions to old problems. Nearly all problems societies know, have been around for a very long time already indeed, and needs have been met with for equally as long, as soon as possible. Otherwise, solutions evolve slowly.

On the contrary, new sudden problems seemingly requiring technological solutions are almost always not resulting from social needs but as byproduct, side-effects of technology. The useless consumer society and hyper-industrialization have created cheap knock-out products of stupidly low quality, it brought us programmed obsolescence, an untold level of pollution absolutely unimaginable for previous generations, the near total loss of the whole Amazonian forest, and a bit closer to us, frequent traffic jams which see ever more powerful cars actually being slower than velocycles. While making everyone sick.

Computers should amplify the mind, but using them to reduce efforts and stop working already led to complacency and feeble-mindedness. It applies to material technology too: for tasks not conducive to progress in their scope (such as individuals fetching fruits in the tree), to introduce high technology in them is disruptive and degenerative. We shall keep technology on as much as it expands the individual mind: no more clutch, no more mental calculation spared to the average folk, no more easy life.

We need adequate levels of technology to meet needs, and first and foremost address the social root of each issue by changing habits: less material needs (or less technological ways to go about them) make for less work, liberating (whenever the estimated all-around trade-off is a net positive) productive power for more important tasks. Our cavemen ancestors had few needs but extreme comfort, pleasure and fulfilling lives.

As we strayed away from nature, we created all the problems and neuroticism that successive social institutions and cultural innovations respectively try to solve. Technology is inherently neither evil or good, but the predictable consequence of the biblical Fall, Man trying to reassert himself through his intellect.

The most pressing step toward that is attaining total military supremacy to neutralize the enemies of our race and the planet as a whole. Then we will be free to live as pleases our inborn sense of aesthetics, either in spaceships, caverns or trees, or trees in spaceships. This position aligns with reactionary modernism: Anything to ensure the strength of the Reich and betterment of human life in its vital qualities, as opposed to providing infinite comfort for the individual at the expense of their health, very soul and the survival of the natural world.

In the meanwhile, some precise guidelines can be issued: we must achieve fully circular economies, reliance on non-renewable (fossil or otherwise) energy by definition is not sustainable, all waste must be reintegrated. The moral and economical issue with nuclear power is the very high technicality involved which is not efficient: we feel that the lower the tech level the longer the infrastructure can last, Roman roads, aqueducts and medieval houses being prime instances. Complexity breaks down eventually. Heavier, harder meter-thick natural materials used by antediluvian cultures, put to shame anything modern aiming at doing similar things.

For the same reason we should build only with stones or similar sturdy materials made to last thousands of years. Technology should redirect its effort toward ever-lasting (or nearly so) devices not requiring maintenance for centuries. Houses warming or cooling using natural energies and isolation, mass heat storage, solid foundations still worthy of inhabiting when all the people who built it and their descendants will be long dead. We must learn to limit technology to the barest minimum compatible with a pleasant life, and learn to rely once again on human powers - on oneself and each other.

A revolution in communication

One of if not the most important revolution to come, lies in language. When the extrasensory develops, it is inevitable that our way of communicating will undergo a profound shift in paradigm. We think it was the language of our ancestors too, as symbolized by the story of the Tower of Babel.

Ferdinand de Saussure, father of modern linguistics, defined language, written or oral, as a series of related symbols following a syntax and referring unequivocally (without ambiguity) and a biunivocal correspondence to a series of similarly related concepts. Sentences are understood by drawing on that unambiguous correspondence between a series of signs (whose smallest meaning-carrying units are morphemes, and phonemes in oral speeches), signifiers (their verbal meaning as we understand it) and signified (the reality behind). We learn language through conventional associations made during social interactions with parents, teachers, coworkers. This makes up the two key postulates of modern linguistics: concepts as learnt patterns, and the arbitrariness of signs: We could all decide to call cats “dogs” and vice versa and be none the wiser for it. There is intrinsic semantic or metapĥysic association between labels we use, and what they describe whether they be concepts themselves or physical things.

However, Saussure was wrong in his key assumption, that the meaning of sentences is contained entirely in associations between words and what we see or hear born from habits. We should not look for exceptions in Onomatopoeia are no valid exception, because they are very few in number and so low in information content that they always rather form a separate paralinguistic set of vocalics, outside grammar. They can not handle most day-to-day concepts, let alone high philosophy, and all attempts to progressively build a system from a simple basis fall into conventionality.

Among pictograms or ideograms only very concrete symbols representing simple visual things rate high in either translucency or transparency, while onomatopoeia in different countries sound nothing alike.

No, the proof that language can not be reduced to an algorithmic process however complex can be found in researchs on language acquisition, whether by machines or blind children.

Machines can not derive even the most characteristics of an object from a succession of phonemes (/cat/) or video recordings. There is no logical way to tell apart good associations from erroneous ones purely from pattern-matching like a computer should do, no matter how large the data set. If it was possible, then mild misunderstandings and minor impairments in our senses absolutely should create entirely alien languages and concepts¹⁶. But they do not. Never. Children with sensory deficiencies (as opposed to mental deficiencies) do not suffer lasting development issues.

The acquisition of language in blind children indicates that the acquisition of language (learning through exposure with no prior frame of reference) is intrinsically non-deterministic, non-algorithmic. It is not possible to learn it from the environment only, instead we all rely on inborn biases to make sense of our physical senses, but above all it happens irrespective of their limitations… which means those biases can operate even without relevant data. Small delays in development fade as soon as the child develops cognitive faculties to fill his lack of experience, to the point of grasping colors like normal children do, in roughly the same time¹⁷.

One concludes that the “learning procedure [is] significantly modulated and constrained by the child’s natural (innate) biases about the content and form of a natural language”. So most specialists concur that we come to life with an innate understanding of semantic relationships that curtail the infinite field of concepts the mind could conceive. But these biases can not possibly be some algorithmic rules.

We claim that this volatility and multiplicity of languages to the point of unintelligibility is an aberration born from the absence of the extrasensory and rise in endogenous excitation, compounded by the generational gap and shortening of lifespans.

For all intent and purpose, languages are not a human invention. The criteria we use to separate humans from other animals have changed with times: that languages are acquired, not innate, a complex grammar (rules that create meaning from assembling in order smaller words), specific grammar property, mostly self-embedding (the ability to insert sentences into larger ones, ad libitum). But not only not all human languages check all those boxes (see the Pirahã lacking recursion), accumulated findings in the whole animal world showed that not a single of these traits, isolated or taken together, is unique to humans.

It shattered our century-long preconceptions about linguistics:

• Very complex systems in social animals arise regardless of brain size (but unrelated to brain-body mass ratio or more likely, neuron-number to body mass ratio), in higher vertebrates, birds and insects alike
• They seem both under control both by genes in a simple manner, and by the environment, discarding the old acquired versus innate dichotomy.
• Whether the same bee colony could perceive the need to change their dance patterns in a new environment and do it in a few generations is unknown, but individual bee, but they can quickly learn each other’s dialect. In some cases we know the brain responsible for learning new languages and some species are better at it (and can say more) than others.
• Species can even learn comprehend each other’s across whole taxonomic families (as seen with ants and bees or orcas and dolphins, if biology provides common sensory ground, common interests and what amounts to “good will”.
• The acquired and open-ended character is evident, since dialects are both formed and learnt, even in insects.
• Arbitrary recursion or self-embedding in found in birds or cetaceans.

The communication of a capacity of a species depends both on its cognitive abilities (how much it can think) and ecological needs (strictly solitary or worse, cannibalistic species do not collaborate). Even insects show the existence of a species-specific, inter-intelligible core grammar or set of signals, which can be expanded upon. But the differences with humans is that these dialects always reflect actual differences in perception, either from a different environment or a different brain: they involve no arbitrariness¹⁸.

Speech recognition software are programmed with the phonetics of particular languages, how to tell apart words, and such a thing in our brain would need to include whole ranges of non-visual, logical or temporal relations and cues, beside visual or auditory cues alone, exceeding by a dozen of orders of magnitude the complexity of computers. Nor would it account for the grasping of notions far removed from any sense of evolutionary habituation or pre-understanding, or of non-visual concepts from non-visual cues only: the information just would not exist. A brain can not learn to delimit morphologic units within a stream of sensory information at the same time for a language it has no notion of, not for a single one, nor a fortiori all of them.

In all animals capable of a measure of language or symbolic representation, there is a psychic sense of the world, without which one can not connect the world of senses with that of concepts, or acquire new ones. Through all of history inspired people left discourses that transcended time and culture, speaking directly to the heart, imparting a much greater understanding and with much greater ease than mere textual or logical consistency could ever do.

And what goes for individuals, goes for whole cultures. Better people spiritually, produce objectively better grammar and vocabulary marked with a higher metaphysical insight. Divorcing from the divine in the long run creates excessively intellectual cultures or empty, emotionality without substance. Communication devolves to the level of a mindless Chinese room or LLMs. In these conditions entropy is the natural “evolution” of all systems of communication, natural¹⁹ or artificial²⁰, as successive generations understand less and less the lives and values of previous ones.

Abstract concepts, let alone glyphs, must be either conventional… or originating in visions. Because archetypal symbols are both the lock and the key, the cipher and the code, just like the genetic code encodes in itself the rules to read it. It is possible that the limited syntax and grammar as we know it, might be a paradox, an effort by our intellect to replace visions with a conventional structure hampering our range of expression and thought patterns. This idea of a primeval language of a time when men walked with gods pervades our culture since before Christianity. There were various attempts to recreate it by artists, occultists, scientists and philosophers²¹.

We believe that the human language should be no exception, just enormously more complex than animal languages (with the exception of cetacean communication). Evolution and the richness of Language should be based purely on actual change in our thoughts, either from living in environments, or race-based differences in our brain and how or how much perceive things. The seal of the imagination would bridge the gap between word and and things of the phenomena world, and guarantee mutual understanding world-wide. Our propension for symbolic manipulation was never meant to degenerate into this juggling with empty and inadequate labels: Children ought to grow up learning how to speak either from his relatives, or from spirits of the air or whatever other form visions ought to take²².

Daniel Belrichard, at 18 years, between 1979 and 1980, one of Mr Burger’s lovers at the same of the Trois Noyers in Switzerland (a community before much of the theoretical development of meta psychoanalysis had taken place), received a series of complex and detailed symbols totalling in the low hundreds, with no resemblance to any historical or artificial language, and only stopping due to incoming unfortunate events.

All signs, of various complexity, made us only of curved and straight lines and dots or circles. As dishonest a tale as it may sound, the notebook that housed those visions was lost in adversarial circumstances²³. But what God gives, He can give again, so we shall not mourn this loss. We found the closest graphical equivalent not in real life scripts, but in a few very inspired TV series and Japanese animes. While no concept nor syllable or word appeared to come along these symbols, their expected numbers would match a composable ideogrammatic system in which less naturalistic (more abstract) concepts can be composed. If not for those adverse circumstances we might have received something close to a rébus system, an extreme minority among writing systems, bypassing reference to orality altogether along with its syntactic constraints.

It may also have in common with the free syntax of Aymara and Lojban, the first a language famously capable to accommodate any foreign idiom or word through metaphors in a very natural and concise way, while keeping its own structure intact, and the second an artificial language made exactly to reflect that property and be as idiomatically and culturally neutral as possible, as well as covering the whole range of logical categories a century of linguistics has catalogued. A visionary language or rather system of communication, would espouse seamlessly any coherent thought pattern in a minimum of words²⁴.

Notes on education

The bedrock of education between 6 and 10 should be skills building characters and last a lifetime. It must be dedicated to extreme psychophysical mastery including meditation and thorough martial training, bare-handed and armed all the same, survival skills, the basis of genetics as it relates to races and an in-depth understanding of functional biology (how bodies work). Nothing should be learned to then be forgotten quickly after as is customary today, resulting in an egregious as well as systematic waste of time and attention span of all children up to and including the university level. We will remember everything effortlessly, through better food and energy.

Children should learn to survive in all environment, from mild to life-threatening, from scorching deserts to jungles and arctic forests. They would acquiere an intuitive understanding of ecology and how to recognize and use the flora and fauna to survive, thus cementing an undying appreciation of the hardships all other lifeforms face with courage, and of the mantle of responsability toward Life species that overcame short lives and natural selection bear.

Mathematics and logic will lay the foundation of strong and clear minds, honing core analytical skills of symbolic manipulation, most strongly exemplified by varied forms of algebra (many of which today fraught with erroneous formalisms). Geometry can develop the capacity for spatial-temporal representation inherited from our tree-dwelling ancestors put to good use in physics.

Into space

The Universe for all intent and purpose is infinitely vast and old beyond our comprehension. What awaits us might be good, or bad, beneficent or malignant, and it does not need sentience to wipe out life on Earth as cosmic impacts nearly did several times.

Space, the untamed parts of the planet such as the bottomless pits of the ocean’s trenches or its yet 95% unexplored immensities, will provide. The world must become this mysterious, infinite place it used to be, upon which to sharpen the human spirit and push its limits ever further. But despite the need for a united government and an incredible concentration of human resources, as well as the furthering of science by all means possible, the mystery in life and culture should persist lest life become monotonous and culture degenerates. Just as the pain of loss or risk of bad choices makes the value of trust. We do not want a perfect but bland paradise.

For the sake of a richer life, we must strive to diversify our lifestyles and radiate in all directions, exploring the furthest limits of human experience. We shall strike a balance between maximum collective efficiency in the pursuit of racial goals, and the freedom individuals require to fulfill their destiny. Truly, the only freedom society must destroy is what undermines our human nature at the deepest level, robbing us of free will. Therefore we must wipe out cooking and race mixing from the face of the Earth.

Then, once subhumans and ideological enemies have been eradicated, we will be free to roam the planet, to explore life in subterranean cities, out in the Arctic wilderness, on flying zeppelins or jovian ring habitats, sheltered from economic concerns thanks to the post-scarcity utopian future that population control and automation can bring about, in this new Age for Mankind.