[ FOR THE LOLs ]

Introduction to National Socialism

After the disastrous second world war, it seemed as if National Socialism was defeated with its armies. In the intervening years, however, it has grown in popularity so as to necessitate a constant stream of movies, books, and news articles denying it and insulting it. Even with this onslaught, each new generation has found increasing appeal in National Socialism, especially as the long-term consequences of liberal democracy are seen. This document exists to separate reality from the fantasies of news-entertainment products by explaining the beliefs behind National Socialism.

Modern society is a deviation from the traditional societies which governed our civilization for centuries. After only four hundred years, the consequences of modern society are showing in their fullness, and many are seeing that it represents the twilight years of Western civilization. National Socialism is a values system from the previous, traditional civilization, and rejects the politics and beliefs of modernity. As a result, it is the only political system currently which seeks to undo modernity at its core and replace it with an entirely different way of running our society.

There is no easy way to sum up this fundamental schism. We can start by looking at modernity as its two components, industrial society and liberal democracy, both of which emphasize an approach toward central regulation of individuals motivated exclusively by personal profit and comfort. As a result, modernity uses mechanisms of control to impose standard ideas of moral right upon the population from external sources, believing that its bureaucracy can streamline the chaotic desires of the population into a single order. In contrast, traditional civilization uses social and cultural values to rule from within a population by appealing to common sense.

Idealism

Industrial society is essentially materialistic; its highest value is personal comfort and the ability to gain wealth through competition. It hopes to hold this limitless force in check with governmental agencies and economic controls, and does not at all regulate the goals of its population. Similarly, liberal democracies have no goal except for the people to manifest their desires through that which the largest amount of voters can select, and on top of this formless system, uses moral laws to restrict abuses of the autonomy of other citizens. It is thus entirely method-based, and has no goal other than maintaining itself.

Traditional society believes that order comes from within the culture of a given area, and that there is no need to standardize values so that a central authority can impose them equally upon all people. For this reason, it has no need for political and economic systems to act out this power, but favors stable and less competitive societies in which the economy is a means to an end. Traditional society thus has a goal: fulfillment of the culture of each local area through sustaining its people and holding industry and mass attitudes in check. Its ultimate goal is the furtherment of culture through the ongoing growth of knowledge, individual strength and intelligence, and a heroic spirit.

This traditional outlook is in direct conflict with the goals of modernity, because while modern society allows everyone to participate, traditional society recognizes that different people are specialized in different areas. Further, traditional society does not look toward each individual as fully autonomous, but recognizes that most people need a good living, a good social arrangement, and a culture that supports them through every stage in life. Traditional society is oriented toward the specialization of individuals, and the breeding of better individuals, and its goal is the health of the whole of a civilization, including its natural habitat, more than the fulfillment of individual desires.

Consequently, the difference between tradition and modernity can be seen as a split between idealism and materialism. While modernity aims to provide for individual material comfort through economic competition, traditional society sees not only material but individuals as a means to the health of the whole. As a result, trade and marketing are not the central focus of traditional societies, but the people as a whole are. For this reason, traditional societies limit certain "freedoms" to keep people from doing that which, while enriching them individually, is destructive to all of the people around them.

This idealism recognizes that what matters most in the questions of civilization is not the individuals and whatever short-term desires they may have, but the health of the whole as an enduring, organic entity. Idealism sees all material things, including our own lives, as a means to an end, and this end is a fulfillment of the traditional ideal. In contrast to modern values, the traditional ideal is not one of humankind dominating nature for its own pleasure, but one of humankind coexisting with nature and applying discipline to itself so that it has fewer desires, and individuals can focus more on the aspects of life that endure despite death: personal accomplishment, greater personal ability and an evolution of intelligence and character, and a greatness of civilization measured in terms of its art, architecture, philosophy and martial skills.

Reality

Idealism seems contrary to reality, which most of us measure in what we can touch and feel. However, over the course of a lifetime, it becomes clear that what is most important is not the tangible but intangible aspects of life. A great heroic act is not measured in dollars, and great learning or character cannot be found in comfort or material desires. Idealism states that reality as we know it occurs through ideas, and all of our material struggles aim to bring these ideas to fulfillment. As a consequence, idealism places human desires secondary to doing what is right. As a result, what is right can break free of the bounds of individual egos, and include nature and civilization as a single unitive entity.

"Reality" exists more profoundly for traditional societies because there is no divorce between individual impulse and the continuity of nature. Humans are no longer seen as masters directing nature through bureaucracy, but as part of nature, and thus as living in the real physical world more than existing in the bureaucratic fantasies of morality and numbers on paper (economics). Consequently, it values the natural environment more than modern societies do, as in the modern time natural surroundings are seen as raw material which is worthless unless converted into products and sold.

This realism of traditional societies has three major aspects: nature, character, and heroism.

Nature

The first is the natural environment itself. In a traditional society, chaotic nature is seen as beautiful, and there is no weeping for the cruelty of nature, which is seen as necessary for its beauty to exist as well. Evolution is championed, because through this seemingly brutal process, nature brings us more refined creatures and healthier, more efficient ecosystems. In an abstract state of mind, this efficiency of nature is a beauty which rivals its physical beauty, exemplified in traditional societies by an appreciation for forests and animals.

Character

In modernity, the fundamental determinations of individual importance are wealth and popularity. In traditional society, what ranks an individual is character and strength, of both physical and mental kinds. The view of National Socialism and all ancient civilizations (India, Greece, Rome) is that strength and character are inborn, and are determined through centuries by breeding and evolutionary factors. For this reason, traditional societies believe in a hierarchy of leadership according to character, not just of the individual but of the individual's lineage. This applies locally in every ethnic-cultural group according to the standards of each group; traditional societies recognizes that different races and localities have different standards which cannot be compared across cultural lines.

This emphasis on character reduces the predominance of what Buddhists and others call the "ego obsession" of the West. The individual is not an island, and it did not create itself, nor can it be shaped by the "right" education and rules into something found equally in all people. Character is formed through breeding over generations of individuals faced with challenges. Where they take heroic paths, they become stronger in character, and thus breed for a higher standard and produce a following generation of higher character. In modernity, each person envisions himself as everything he or she could desire to be, and as a result, the individual does not focus on character but on external means of implying that he or she is important (money and popularity).

Heroism

The highest expression of idealism is heroism, which is a willingness to risk self-sacrifice so that an idea can become real, or part of the physical world in which we live. In battle, this is facing death to defeat an enemy and expand the provenance of a tribe. In normal day to day existence, heroism means doing what is right even if one is not rewarded for it. The moderns bitterly shake their heads and exclaim that "no good deed goes unpunished," but in traditional society, no reward is expected except the chance to indulge in heroism itself, and with success, to change the world positively for the ideal one holds. This is a human form of natural evolution.

Opposite to heroism is passivity, which in a modern time means not taking direct action but marshalling together large groups of people to decree what is "moral" or "legal" or "profitable," and thus to as a group impose it on others. This low-risk strategy has long-term negative consequences in that it breeds passive people who are unable to individually see what is correct, and thus require increasingly large and discoordinated governments to force upon them external rules and regulations to keep them in line.

While heroism sacrifices many good individuals for a given cause, it also produces many survivors who, having faced death and overcome it, no longer value material comfort over doing what is right. In this change of outlook is the only hope for a civilization to become increasingly stronger from within.

Solutions

To bring about such a society in a modern time without giving up our modern technology requires a fundamental attitude shift. As expressed in modern politics, the traditional attitude shift can be found in National Socialism and national Environmentalism. What will bring society from its current state to this future ideal is hard work and peaceful change, starting with a shift in attitudes to favor these ideals over those of modernity. When the functional people remaining in each modern nation see the wisdom of this course, they will impose it in uncountable ways by choosing attitudes and means which are compatible with it. This will in time dilute, divide and drown out those who favor modernity.

Translated into modern political language, there are four aspects to these attitudes: nationalism, socialism, environmentalism and tradition.

Nationalism

Often confused with patriotism, nationalism is a belief that for every local area, an ethnic-cultural group exists which should rule itself according to its own standards. Populations have evolved differently, and thus are inherently inclined toward different values and cultures; each should have its own. Nationalism is the belief that ethnicity and culture are inseparable, and reinforce each other, thus all races and ethnic groups should be given their own lands to rule according to the principle of localization. This avoids using powerful central governments, and returns the responsibility of management to each local community.

Throughout history nationalist movements have been the most concerned with preserving culture and natural surroundings, despite the lure of monetary reward by sacrificing either. Consequently, they have sought to exclude those of foreign value systems or value systems based in internationalism. Internationalism is the culture of no-culture, which owing to its having no single ethnic-cultural origin, embraces the lowest common denominator values that any randomly assembled group of people can share. Internationalists tend toward values systems emphasizing material wealth and personal importance in social settings.

Socialism

Another term likely to be confused is Socialism. In the traditional use, it means that able members of any community are given a guarantee of employment unless they are completely inept or morally deprived, in which case they are exiled from the community. When society transferred from feudal organization to that of economic competition, there was a sudden proliferation of beggars; competition allowed some to get wealthy, but displaced many more who wanted only a working wage and were less inclined toward wealth. Socialism in the National Socialist sense resembles feudalism, in that each is guaranteed working employment, although competition allows those who are more adept to advance further. In this it is distinct from both capitalism and Communist-related Socialist movements.

Environmentalism

The effect of humanity on its environment has been vast: it is impossible to find any place on earth untouched by human development or, at least, free of litter. Among environmentalists there are those who wish to apply symptomatic treatment to this problem, with recycling programs and government agencies to curb pollution, but environmental damage does not confine itself to any single symptom. Its predominant cause is not pollution, nor overconsumption, but the overexpansion of humanity. Even with the best of our "clean" resources, too many people adds up to land overuse and destruction of natural ecosystems.

Most moderns wave away this ongoing disaster by rationalizing that its effects will not come to pass in their own lifetimes. Like most insidious problems, its consequences are only seen in the long term, and not in the short. We can attempt to pass governmental legislation, stage boycotts, and write angry letters to newspapers, but these are ineffective in a society motivated by material wealth. There will always be someone to plunder the resources remaining with no concern for its effect, as they are focused on climbing out of the poverty engendered by economic competition. There will never be enough police to watch them, nor will society have the collective wealth to enforce environmental laws. For this reason, the basic fabric of society must change to favor the environment over the expansion of individual wealth.

Traditional societies achieved this by focusing on quality rather than quantity of individuals, and thus encouraged slower population growth and the production of more intelligent people of better character. These individuals are more likely to realize the consequences of reckless action, and to avoid it even if it does not impact their own mortal span, and thus require no policing to ensure they do not dump toxic waste in rivers and replace ancient forests with city sprawl. Further, National Socialism through its "Blood and Soil" concept emphasizes the unity of each people with its local environment, and thus commits each population to conceiving of itself as inseparable from the health of its natural environment.

Tradition

The least definable of the terms approached so far, tradition is upholding culture as more important than individual desires. The individual can be greedy, but culture is the learning of the ages, and shows us what long term consequences may exist for our actions. Further, culture is a compendium of values applied in different areas. Art, learning, religion, athletics and even mundane actions like food preparation are influenced by culture. In this, unlike the divisive force of modernity which separates learning into distinct and irreconcilable disciplines, tradition unifies all learning into localized culture and uses that culture as a guidepost to its goals.

As a result, in traditional societies, the short-term "make a buck and fly by night" mentality is depressed and that which upholds and builds upon the great deeds of the past is encouraged. As nothing of grandeur comes from another factory, or garbage dump, or strip mall, this is naturally conducive toward more enduring and monumental social values. Since modernity is defined by its predominance of the individual, through political and social and economic means, tradition is incompatible with modernity; tradition places culture and a holistic system in which the individual has a place above all of these methods elevated to goal status for the convenience of mass attitudes.

The Future of National Socialism

If one listens to the rhetoric of modern society, there is no greater evil than National Socialism, but it is appropriate that they feel this way, as a traditional society is what will replace modernity as its errors become more clearly known. It takes centuries for the impact of grand statements and abstract moral concepts to strike, but as we live now in a world of corporate servitude, with our politicians manipulated behind the scenes by oligarchs, and our natural environment crumbling into a toxic and hostile place, the people who can still think independently are seeing that liberal democracy and industrial society are our downfall.

Our lives have become empty; there are no heroic challenges. Our days have become meaningless; we fill out forms and file and serve others, but for no cause other than wealth - there is no goal. The more astute among us have already noticed that this is how the ancient Greeks passed into oblivion from the height of culture. Infighting divided the nation, outbreeding corrupted its culture and heritage, and soon the only thing which united people was money and democracy. Democracy inevitably becomes a show to fool the masses while the elites buy votes and distract the herd from seeing the real agenda of making vast profit at the expense of nature and humankind alike. Where industry takes over, people cease to be individuals and become tools for others to make wealth, no matter how much "freedom" they are told they have.

As a result, the time is right for National Socialism, and not only among Germans, but among every population on earth. All of us face the same degenerative disease, and all of us, if united, can overcome it. Anyone who realizes this is an ally with all others who see the same, even if they are from populations which would sensibly separate from one another. For National Socialism to have a future, it must overcome the bigotry that sees a need to denigrate those who are of other tribes; racial separation is not accomplished by bigotry, but since bigotry "feels" like action, it supplants meaningful action. Further, race hatred alienates potential allies who together can create a world order to replace modernity, benefitting each race equally by returning it to a sensible, traditional society.

The primary opposition to National Socialism, much as it was in 1939-1945, is thus the demands of the individual for its own desires and self-image, whether this manifests itself in the selfish attitude that doing right cannot occur if it limits individual "freedom," or in bigotry and hatred as a replacement for meaningful activism. All that National Socialism seeks can be accomplished through democratic means, but even more powerfully, through the preferences of individuals for this type of order as an alternative to modernity. Although change occurs slowly, what makes it possible is that a traditional society, including a National Socialist one, is the only option that will fix the problems of modern society at their source by changing fundamental attitudes.

The Libertarian National Socialist Party (LNSG) represents the type of order that replaces both dysfunctional modern society and the bigots who pretend to be Nationalists, but have no plan for changing society toward a more functional entity. Our goal is to overcome all of the errors of modernity, and to unite with all those who can see the truth of what we espouse in order to bring about an end to the modern era and a return to reality. In this is the only long term future for humanity and its natural world, and the only hope of our collective survival.

Copyright © 1997-2005 Libertarian National Socialist Green Party

http://www.nazi.org/nazi/policy/introduction/

Misanthropy is much easier.

SO IS METH LOL