For years, many of us on the right have been warning that Cultural Marxism is the most dangerous threat to the nations of the West. We have scribbled furiously on fringe websites, debated awkwardly in workplace lunch-rooms, and alienated friends and family with gusto as we tried to warn our well-meaning but dangerously blind fellow citizens that there is a red tide of identity warfare coming in the West. We were aware of the toxic neo-Marxist ideology of the New Left that has been hammered into our children now for fifty years with greater and greater ferocity. A million seeds of envy, hate and guilt have been planted in our youth since the radical left took over education in the late ’60s; their harvest of rage is now here.
Events in the United States and throughout the West over the last year have made it clear even to those who disagreed with us that we were on to something. Civil unrest is here and revolution may well be on the way. Don’t for a moment think the Left will settle down. Their utopian vision has been upended, and they will not cease their violence until they are forced to by superior violence.
We didn’t defeat Marxism when we seemed to defeat the Soviet Union. The West was arming itself with submarines and aircraft carriers for the devils without, while paying no attention to the teeming devils within. The outbreak of revolutionary civil unrest has now appeared. It will not die down before either the SJW totalitarians take complete control and ban all forms of plain speech, or they are put down forcefully by a committed and determined citizenry. Either Big Sister crushes us or we crush her; there is now no other way.
As I have outlined previously, Western Marxism is different from its now-defunct Eastern cousin. In the East, the Bolsheviks, Maoists and Khmer Rouge applied the Marxist doctrines they had learned in Western universities fairly directly. Once the peasants had been sufficiently whipped up by them to capture the government, they set to work nationalising industries, liquidating the intellectuals and the middle class and pumping out constant propaganda to convince the peasants it was all worth it. The result was half a century of misery while the Western economies powered ahead.
In the West, capitalism and Christianity proved too strong for the radicals. The revolution didn’t spread beyond Russia after 1917. After scratching their greasy beards for a few years, Marxist intellectuals identified that they needed to apply the Marxist dialectic of class to identity instead. This was their great breakthrough. They would destroy the family, discredit Christian culture and set the races and the genders against each other. This strategy was developed fairly early, and was brought to the nations of the West by mainly Jewish intellectuals from the ’30s onwards.
It has been remarkably successful. Male authority in the home has been discredited. Divorce has skyrocketed as women now work in the way only men did before. As a result, children are shunted off to daycare, as often extended families are absent or dysfunctional. The foundations of society have eroded, and it was not inevitable; it was done intentionally. This fifth column agenda to destroy Western societies was supported by the financial oligarchs, whose interests it aligned with. The victims of it have been the everyday men, women and children of the West.
Our children are taught by their neo-Marxist teachers to view everything through the lens of identity. It is the ultimate conspiracy theory – white males control the superstructure of society to ensure that every other group is oppressed for their benefit. Once you believe this toxic nonsense, there is no crime against white males which is out of bounds. White males become the untermenschen – the morally repugnant category of humanity which must be controlled, undermined and ridiculed at every opportunity. Such is the mindset we have implanted in our kids. Not only is it child abuse, it is civilisational suicide.
One of the many harmful consequences of this invidious indoctrination is an obsession with the issue of race. Along with gender and sexuality, race becomes a topic about which it is impossible for a Western Marxist to think clearly. No matter how much evidence you show them of Human Biological Diversity, they will reject it out of hand as sinister. The truth doesn’t matter. They have made a categorical moral determination that any questioning of radical racial equality is evil. If you even begin to do so, you are sinning, and in their cult there is no possibility of redemption. You are an untermensch.
Once someone thinks in such a way, they become retarded. You just can’t talk to them any more about the topic; and once debate is impossible, violence becomes inevitable.
It is also a thoroughly Marxist mentality. What many people fail to see is that Marxism is more than just a theory about class or even identity. Marx’s philosophy was predicated entirely upon the Hegelian dialectic. This is a model of change over time which views change as fractal and not linear. Hegel, who stole the idea from his student Fichte, posited that every action or thought generated its opposite, which then resulted in a higher synthesis of the two being formed.
Marx turned it into a social control technology. He realised that if collectives could be formed based upon a common identity, rooted in reality but exaggerated by the Marxist, and given a narrative that history could be understood as their oppression by another, more powerful group that must be overcome to achieve utopia, hey presto! It’s a recipe for totalitarianism like never seen before in history. Society could be divided up by a tiny oligarchy into warring factions and used to justify totalitarian control.
If Marxists could convince the poor that they were a category of humanity distinct from the king and the aristocracy and that indeed the nobles were only rich because they stole the wealth of the poor, then they could weaponise the peasantry against the landed gentry and take power for themselves and their financial backers.
Marxist theorists also applied the Hegelian dialectic to the control of society. The famous dictum of the Marxist dialectic is ‘problem > reaction > solution’. This refers to a method of social control by which those in power create a problem which then elicits a reaction in the masses, and the elites come forward with the solution.
An example includes the formation of the United Nations. The League of Nations had fallen apart in the 1930s. Not deterred, the globalist oligarchy fomented a war between the Axis and the Allies which helped them achieve many of their objectives (including centralisation of power). The peoples of the world were desperate after the horrors of World Wars I & II to have world peace. The elite granted their wish with the creation of the United Nations.
Problem > reaction > solution. It works every time.
If we consider then Cultural Marxism, the dominant ideology of the New Left for the past fifty years – what is its dialectical opposite? What is the natural and expected reaction to an ideology of hatred toward white males, the white family and the continuity of white civilisation?
White nationalism, of course. It worked during the Weimar Republic in Germany, and the elite expect that it will work again. Just as Cultural Marxism is the dialectical response to Nazism, neo-Nazism will be the dialectical response to Cultural Marxism. The establishment media is talking about neo-Nazism non-stop these days. They even got Harry Potter to star in a film about it. Just as with the formation of the New Left, they are no doubt funding many of the leading writers and intellectuals pushing NatSoc white nationalism. They want their Nazis.
Unfortunately, there are many young white men and women who are falling into this dialectical trap. After enduring years of abuse at the hands of degenerate SJWs, seeing broken families and self-destructive lifestyle choices by those around them, they fall into a movement which tells them Hitler did nothing wrong, that NatSoc Germany was a cultural utopia and that every problem we have will magically be fixed if only we get rid of (((the Jews))).
It’s an appealing narrative: it’s edgy, it’s inspiring and it’s not complicated. It’s also woefully naïve. Hitler did plenty wrong, as did Churchill and Stalin and Roosevelt and Mao and all the other wartime leaders. On balance, Western governments have committed not democide (killing your own people) and genocide to the same extent as Eastern governments, in my view. We can debate that, though. What is not debatable is that Hitler’s Germany was a socialist tyranny that turned the nation into a smoking ruin and pozzed Europe for decades after. Our grandfathers fought National Socialists at Tobruk with a level of heroism that rivalled that of the Spartans at Thermopylae. I will not dishonour their memory by valorising the regime they were fighting. Anyone who believes that Nazi Germany was a utopia has joined a cult.
The difference between the left and the right is a basic disagreement about social order. The left believe in utopian social equality and are revolutionaries in order to achieve it; the right believe in natural social hierarchy and are reactionaries in order to maintain it. Hitler was not a reactionary; he was a revolutionary.
Sorry, fashy goyim. Hitler was a leftist. He was a socialist and an egalitarian. The traditional German aristocracy, who represented the real right, detested him as a result.
Ethnic nationalism is a good, wholesome and Godly thing. God made the nations, after all. It is right for a man to take care of himself so that he can provide for a family which can be part of a community which together form an ethnos. That’s the way it’s been for all of human history.
What we do not need is a generation of young men and women who fall into the trap laid out for them by the (((financial oligarchy))). Yes, I happen to agree with you about who runs the world. I just don’t obsess about race when I try to deal with it. I fight their methods, rather than just running for the red flag they place before me like an ignorant bull. Because if there’s one thing (((they))) know as well as me, it’s that becoming a fanatical absolutist based upon a Marxist dialectical worldview makes you a retard. And they’re right.
Photo by Marion Doss