Before you read any further, I want you to consider the following questions a test regarding your personal political proclivities:
- Are you against teaching children as young as five years old about pan-sexualism, homosexuality, and transgenderism?
- Are you for the enforcement of border laws and the expulsion of illegal aliens?
- Are you opposed to outsourcing manufacturing to other countries?
- Should the government encourage domestic economic self-sufficiency (i.e., the production of anything needed stays within the confines of the country)?
- Do you believe that the people should have a direct say on government spending priorities such as infrastructure projects (e.g., roads, hospitals, communications towers)?
- Should the government embrace a balanced budget, predicated on a strong currency?
- Do you believe AntiFa and BLM terrorists should be prosecuted?
- Should the income tax be capped at 14% – without any games regarding ridiculous deductions?
- Do you believe patriotism and civil manners should be taught in schools?
- Do you believe that social welfare benefits (e.g., food stamps, welfare, housing) should be tied to work and good moral behavior, to include when necessary, government provided jobs (e.g., cleaning the streets, washing ambulances, etc) and requiring drug and alcohol tests before receiving such benefits?
If you answered “Yes” to all or a majority of the questions I just posed, welcome to the National German Socialist Workers Party. You are a “NAZI” – or more accurately, a member of the Nationalsozialistische Deutsche Arbeiterpartei (NSDAP). Most Americans hear “Nazi” and immediately shudder. This article explores the possibility of a fascist United States and why they should not reject the ideology without exploring its potential.
Americans, as well as the rest of the West, have been conditioned to hate “Nazis” – a derogatory term applied toward Nationalist Germans by Communist Jewish activists. Grandpa or great-grandpa fought the Nazis. For the Baby Boomer Generation, their parents fought the Nazis. We have been taught to hate the NSDAP platform without ever really exploring the party’s platform itself. The ten questions I posed are the policies that so-called American patriots generally support, but when packaged as “Fascism,” they recoil. Yet, whether they know it or not, most on the Right are natural born Fascists – and should embrace the term.
Another common misunderstanding of the NSDAP is the term “Socialist” in the center of the name. American conservatives immediately reject the platform on the basis of its supposed socialist leanings. Correspondingly, they also try to tie Far Left activists, like AntiFa, to the Nazi party because of their support of “socialism.” But the fact is, the German understanding of socialism in 1935 was far different than the Marxist definition of socialism since Karl Marx. The economic policies of the National German “Socialist” Workers Party puts both American political parties to shame.
The highest tax rate in Germany under the National Socialists was 13.7%; in the 1950s, the United States had a 90% tax bracket (albeit, not an effective tax rate). Today, our highest tax bracket is 66% (a New York City resident). The National Socialists were not collectivists, contrary to what your Baby Boomer uncle may scream on Facebook at his BLM supporting niece. The National Socialists privatized several industries, almost immediately, to increase productivity. They maintained strict conditions on performance, but energy production, energy output, military equipment manufacturing, and road construction were all privatized. Generally, the way government contracts were issued for infrastructure projects in 1930s Germany was a tripartite commission of (1) government officials (who held the tax revenue), (2) private industry (that would manage the project and receive payment for a job well done), and (3) local unions or trade guilds that would participate in the project (i.e., the workers and beneficiaries of the projects). This is how the Autobahn was created so quickly and beautifully. This is also how Germany brought back much of its manufacturing under the National Socialists.
The term socialism to the NSDAP referred to social welfare benefits – such as the introduction of social security for retired persons (pensions), housing for the indigent with a priority on World War I veterans, and a mother’s benefit – encouraging women to spend time at home with their children in the form of a subsidy while her husband found gainful employment. The latter policy was designed to help indigenous population increases (vs imported immigrants) while helping unemployed men find gainful employment, reinvigorating their self-esteem and removing labor supply (i.e., women) from the workforce to increase German worker earnings. Those are the “socialist” policies to which the NSDAP subscribed. There was nothing collectivist about it. There was also no wealth redistribution. Only German tax paying homes received tax rebates in the form of subsidies when they were down on their luck.
All this stated, the German National Socialists did not rise due to their economic policies per se. There is a common misperception by Americans and many in the West that the Nazis rose due to the economic fallout of the post-WWI Treaty of Versailles. This misperception is largely driven by Yankee Anglo academics who are prone to view everything through an economic lens. It is false.
The German people were hurting economically at the time of Hitler and the NSDAP’s rise, that is true. But it was not the brutal economic conditions that led the German people toward National Socialism. Rather, it was the complete collapse of societal norms in post-WWI Germany. Libertine values introduced by Weimar political actors were fully exploited by radical Marxists – mostly Jewish – who sought to destroy and dismantle Germany in a quest to transform her into a Marxist paradise. Thus, began the devastation of German identity at the hands of Judeo-Bolsheviks throughout 1920s Germany.
The Frankfurt School, a philosophical program that conceived of the term Cultural Marxism, introduced a platform upon which conservative German norms would be dismantled, preparing Germany for a Marxist conclusion. They trained numerous academics and media personalities, primarily Jewish, to undermine traditional German values. The immediate results were astounding. Seemingly overnight, a handful of academics, radio personalities, and newspapers, transformed patriotic Germany into a basket case of societal collapse. The largely church-going, German middle-class, suddenly awoke to a fundamentally changed Germany at the hands of a few dedicated Judeo-Bolsheviks.
Transgenderism and homosexuality consumed as many as 25% of German men prior to the rise of Hitler, many of whom were veterans emasculated by their defeat to forces they deemed inferior. Pan-sexualism (the idea that anything goes as long as it is pleasurable) was introduced into German classrooms – teaching young boys about homosexuality and gender fluidity. Disruption of “the patriarchy” became a priority of 1920s German feminists. Illegal immigration into Germany septupled between 1918 and 1925, primarily from Slavic states that did not achieve the economic success they assumed would result from Austrian independence; this devastated both earnings and order in Weimar Germany. Jewish academics and media personalities encouraged all of this broad chaos. Worse, anyone who attempted to push back against such lascivious insanity were viciously targeted by a new group of violent Communist radicals that would ultimately name themselves Antifaschistische Aktion… longhand for “AntiFa.”
The AntiFa began as ultra-violent, Communist activists who sought to destroy patriotic Germany and traditional society by fighting against the rise of the German National Socialist Workers Party. They are the same today as they were yesterday. The AntiFa have always been Bolsheviks, largely led by Jews, intent on destroying Western civilization.
Originally entitled the Kommunistische Partei Deutschlands (KPD), ultra-violent Bolsheviks would target anyone who rejected the teaching of young German boys to kiss each other on the penis (a suggestion by Sigmund Freud to introduce pansexual desires to children). These same Communist radicals would destroy small businesses, target police stations, and tear down historical monuments to “recreate a new national narrative.” For those who opposed illegal immigration, there homes and persons were physically assaulted. Meanwhile, the Weimar Republic did nothing to stop the Communist radicals. Rather, they seemed to support the violence, burning, and looting of German city centers by Marxists while targeting German patriots, like those engaged in the early Fascist movement. Adolf Hitler would become one of many who were arrested and imprisoned for crimes that were far less severe than that which the Communists engaged in the years prior to the nominal Beer Hall Putsch.
Any of this sound familiar yet?
In the book, The Nazi Seizure of Power, by William Sheridan Allen, the author describes how normal, primarily small business owners, looked around 1920s Germany and thought the madness had to stop. They began organizing small, patriotic cells of support for a new pro-German political party. Hitler did not create the National German Socialist Workers Party. Ordinary church-going, patriotic Germans with traditional values formed the nuclei of the NSDAP – and it succeeded by bringing order, economic freedom, economic recovery, traditional values, and a sense of normalcy to German society after years of insanity. Contrary to popular Jewish-inspired mythology, the NSDAP also encouraged gun ownership.
Now, if you have read this far, ask yourselves the following: are you sick and tired of the double standard shown toward violent Communist extremists while patriotic Americans are rounded up and targeted by the very government they once supported? Are you sick and tired of the encouragement of transgenderism and homosexuality upon your children? Are you sick and tired of outsourcing our economic future to Communist China? If so, you can now at least empathize with the desperate German voter who saw the NSDAP as the answer to their problems and, for its part, the NSDAP delivered incredible results for the German people.
In human history, the only government system that has successfully defeated Communism, once it has taken root in a given country, is Fascism. This is true of Spain, Italy, Greece, Chile, the Ukraine, Finland, and of course, Germany. But is it the medicine we need in the United States to rid ourselves of the Communist menace that is now systematically destroying the United States? Depends on the states.
First, I am a Southern Nationalist. I see no reason that the South should remain in the United States. Southern states would be best served to break away from the detestable USA and form their own confederation of like-minded states. The South is culturally and economically distinct from the rest of the United States, as is evidenced by our traditions, history, culture, and devout Christianity. We are the most conservative bloc in the United States and remain so. The political parties have changed but the South has remained the same fiercely independent region.
Well before so-called “White Nationalism” was embraced by edgy Yankees or even German goose-steppers, Southerners defined the epitome of White superiority through class and legal distinctions that endured and maintained order for generations – before Yankee interlopers disrupted that order not once, but twice (1861 – 1865; 1948 – 1964). We cannot trust that the Yankee dominated North will not slide into an anti-White abyss again if it recovers from its self-inflicted embrace of Marxism. Consequently, I do not care to reform or save the Empire.
Second, the South may be a hodgepodge of various ethnic groups from Europe – whether they be French, Italian, German, etc – it is culturally defined by two dominant ethnicities: Anglo (English) and Celtic (Scotland, Ireland, and the Scots-Irish). These two societies share a common clan-centric societal model. It is natural for these British Isles peoples to empower a local lord (or lords) with family connections to that same lord who, in return, has a moral obligation to provide good governance and moral stability within the land to which he has been entrusted. This methodology of leadership can be summed up by a great Anglo legend, that of King Arthur, with the sage advice, “You will be the land, and the land will be you. If you fail, the land will perish; as you thrive, the land will blossom.”
The notion of a careless and exploitative aristocrat in the midst of a suffering people is a Marxist fantasy. While it is true some leaders are better than others, throughout British and Gaelic history, lords and family (clan) allegiances played an intricate role in societal management. In fact, the Antebellum South and its plantation class of Cavalier descendants are a good example of the balance between Southern aristocracy and the Southern working-class. To this day, economically less off Southerners – rednecks, as such – may tease the higher born elites within Southern society (good ole boys and country club gentry who wear boat shoes, smoke cigars, and drink bourbon), but there is a mutual respect for one another. They recognize the values that are brought to the table.
I have personally witnessed higher born Yankee elites in so-called egalitarian Massachusetts dismiss lower born Yankees out of hand, while ironically encouraging their daughters to marry ghetto blacks for the sake of social credit at the country club. No such obfuscation exists in Southern society. The Good Ole Boy (Lord) and the Redneck (People) have a symmetry. They can each appreciate fast cars, SEC football, and a shared cultural disdain for Yankee intruders. At the same time, the Good Ole Boy and the Redneck respect their relative positions in society. It is the higher born Southerner’s privilege to help his less privileged neighbor when possible; the less privileged neighbor would never “expect” or demand such willfully provided assistance.
Robert E. Lee was a high-born member of the Southern aristocracy. His men loved him. He also had some of the strictest anti-fraternization rules on either side of the War of Northern Aggression. Societal order is a powerful force in Southern society.
Cumulatively, this brings me back to my initial question: is Fascism the answer? For the North, I say it is. It would be more natural for a people divorced of local clan identity to seek a stronger central government to fix their societal ills. For the South, however, I say it is not. To be fair, Hitler did not believe German Fascism could be exported, either. Consequently, while I focused this piece on German Fascism, I did not focus on the broad range of Fascist national varieties, such as those enjoyed by Italy, Greece, Chile, or the model which I believe would be most closely aligned to Southern structural realities, Franco’s Spain. Regardless, the South has a traditional order to which it should return promptly.
Some aspects of Fascism I believe would be great for the South – especially, its neo-mercantilist policies. But ultimately, the South would be better off to embrace a variant of clan-centric, quasi-monarchism. She would thrive under a system of governance that is more natural to her DNA. The South would flourish under a system within which the people determined their own government based upon cultural norms and morality directed by themselves and enforced locally by powerful local leaders.