Nationalsocialism in the XXI century

The RODOH Lounge is a place for general discussion, preferably non-Holocaust. The Lounge is only lightly moderated but please keep this a friendly place to chat with and get to know your fellow board participants.
User avatar
been-there
Propositions Moderator
Posts: 9601
Joined: Tue Apr 30, 2013 8:59 am
Contact:

Re: Nationalsocialism in the XXI century

Post by been-there »

Alonso wrote:
Fri Jul 17, 2020 5:00 pm
been-there wrote:
Thu Jul 16, 2020 12:12 pm
Rochus Misch on neo-Nazis:
“Ach, neo-Nazi. There is no such thing.

What does ‘neo-Nazi’ mean? New Nationalist, right?
There aren’t any. That’s just a buzzword.
What you have are nationally conscious people, people who say, ‘my fatherland, right or wrong.’
'My fatherland, nothing more', am I right?
The British say it, the Swiss say it, the Israelis say it.
‘My country,’ they say, 'and I’ll fight for it'.
The Israelis are [also] nationalistic people, they [also] defend their region, they defend their people...
The whole Iraq war isn’t about Saddam Hussein; it’s about Israel. Israel can’t exist on avocados and oranges! A nation lives from business. They have to have money. And the Americans always pay in. This is just my opinion, but why did they occupy Iraq? Supposedly because of WMDs? In my opinion, because Iraq is a wealthy oil region..."
-- From a 2005 interview with American author Ida Hattemer-Higgins and published in Salon.
Put a bit more faith in me, guys. I always search the forum before I post a question. I had already searched for all the uses of the term "neo nazi" in this forum before I posted my question, and I read all the posts that seemed remotely relevant. This was indeed the one that seemed more relevant to my question, but still it doesn't provide an answer. "Neo nazi" might be a buzzword, but it is clear that many people use the term, including people in this forum, so it must have a meaning, however misguided its use might be. Even clincher in the post above seems to imply that the guy in the picture on the left is a neo nazi.

Maybe it helps if I ask more specific questions:
  • Are there any people in the world who consider themselves neo nazis? If so, who are they?
  • Do nationalsocialists consider themselves neo nazis? Why, or why not?
  • What do YOU mean when YOU use the term "neo nazi" (if you use it at all)?
  • What do other people or groups of people (for example, mainstream media, zionists, leftists, etc.) mean when they use the term "neo nazi"?
Hi Alonso,
I always enjoy your questions. It's great to see someone checking, researching, testing, THINKING THINGS THROUGH.🙂

I posted that just because I thought Rochus Misch's evaluation is worth repeating.
No intention to suggest anything about your research methods. :)

Glad to hear you use the RODOH search engine.
When I first started looking into the protected mythology surrounding the Jewish WW2 experience, I also looked up topics here to see what the arguments were pro and con.

As for your questions on this topic of 'neo-nazis', my view is that it's become a hopelessly misused word.
It would be like asking the same thing of 'terrorists' or 'fascist'.
Both those terms have also become almost meaningless from misuse.

So I would say Misch said almost all that needs to be said. People use the term as a perjorative to discredit people and groups whom they don't agree with and wish to destroy. The end.

I would add that in my view, if any person or group today calls itself a 'neo-Nazi' group then you can be sure it has nothing to do with the NSDAP, or its aims and values.
Er... I think maybe Misch suggested that also. ;)
"When people who are honestly mistaken learn the truth,
they either cease being mistaken
or they cease being honest"
-- Anonymous

SUPPORT RODOH!
Would you like to financially contribute to the upkeep of RODOH? Please kindly contact Scott Smith ([email protected]). Any and all contributions are welcome!


User avatar
Admiral E. Rastus
Posts: 139
Joined: Sat Jun 18, 2016 6:01 am
Location: coming soon to a place near you
Contact:

Re: Nationalsocialism in the XXI century

Post by Admiral E. Rastus »

Alonso wrote:
Tue Jul 14, 2020 6:47 am
Admiral E. Rastus wrote:
Sun Jul 05, 2020 7:35 pm
Bolshevism, i.e. foreign rule proxied by ideology.
What do you mean by this?
Bolshevism critiqued things that hit home for many people, but its solutions in practice meant foreign rule. The ideology underpinning it functionally became a sideshow.
Alonso wrote:
Tue Jul 14, 2020 6:47 am
Admiral E. Rastus wrote:
Sun Jul 05, 2020 7:35 pm
National Socialism was [...] deliberately diverted into inchoate, inane nonsense.
And this?
There's no equivalent vacuum of power, therefore there's no modern equivalent to National Socialism. In fact, there are no political movements whatsoever nowadays in many places in the world until the U.S. empire contracts. A political movement requires prominent backers and intellectuals and space to operate in. There's no space to operate in, there's Netflix instead, and many satrapies deliberately target and undermine what may became prominent backers and intellectuals in an opposition by putting disturbed, unreliable people to the fore. And because there's no space to operate in, communists are gone as a force too, at best playing pretend while being footsoldiers of the Establishment, and should never be taken seriously.

Alonso
Posts: 204
Joined: Fri Aug 16, 2019 8:16 pm
Contact:

Re: Nationalsocialism in the XXI century

Post by Alonso »

been-there wrote:
Fri Jul 17, 2020 7:30 pm
As for your questions on this topic of 'neo-nazis', my view is that it's become a hopelessly misused word.
It would be like asking the same thing of 'terrorists' or 'fascist'.
Both those terms have also become almost meaningless from misuse.

People use the term as a perjorative to discredit people and groups whom they don't agree with and wish to destroy. The end.
I don't think it's so simple. I'm sure the term neo nazi is used in a very misguided way, but that doesn't mean it's meaningless, just like the term "holocaust" is used in a misguided way, but isn't meaningless either. In a previous post, for instance, clincher suggests that a picture displays a neo nazi while another picture displays a nationalsocialist. That certainly means something. If you search "neo nazi" in Wikipedia you find a definition which has nothing to do with what is said in this forum, but it certainly has a meaning, however wrong that meaning might be. Etc.

Alonso
Posts: 204
Joined: Fri Aug 16, 2019 8:16 pm
Contact:

Re: Nationalsocialism in the XXI century

Post by Alonso »

Admiral E. Rastus wrote:
Wed Jul 22, 2020 6:41 pm
Bolshevism critiqued things that hit home for many people, but its solutions in practice meant foreign rule. The ideology underpinning it functionally became a sideshow.
Can you elaborate? I just had a quick review of the history of bolshevism, but couldn't find anything that supported that idea. Then again, it's quite likely that the source I've used (Wikipedia, to be honest) is heavily manipulated.
Alonso wrote:
Tue Jul 14, 2020 6:47 am
There's no equivalent vacuum of power, therefore there's no modern equivalent to National Socialism. In fact, there are no political movements whatsoever nowadays in many places in the world until the U.S. empire contracts. A political movement requires prominent backers and intellectuals and space to operate in. There's no space to operate in, there's Netflix instead, and many satrapies deliberately target and undermine what may became prominent backers and intellectuals in an opposition by putting disturbed, unreliable people to the fore. And because there's no space to operate in, communists are gone as a force too, at best playing pretend while being footsoldiers of the Establishment, and should never be taken seriously.
I'm really struggling to follow you here. Keep in mind that my knowledge of politics is limited. Do you think that you could express this in a more accessible way?

Turnagain
Posts: 8813
Joined: Tue Jun 17, 2014 11:44 pm
Contact:

Re: Nationalsocialism in the XXI century

Post by Turnagain »

Admiral E. Rastus wrote:
And because there's no space to operate in, communists are gone as a force too, at best playing pretend while being footsoldiers of the Establishment, and should never be taken seriously.
I'm not all that confident in the accuracy of that statement. ANTIFA, the communist front group, is enjoying a good measure of success in US cities that are under "liberal" e.g. communist sympathizer administration. In cities such as Seattle, Portland, et al. police have been essentially ordered to stand down while ANTIFA targets specific businesses for arson and looting. The phony plandemic and the BLM excuse supported by the Jew owned MSM has created just such a power vacuum and ANTIFA has obligingly stepped up to the plate.

User avatar
Admiral E. Rastus
Posts: 139
Joined: Sat Jun 18, 2016 6:01 am
Location: coming soon to a place near you
Contact:

Re: Nationalsocialism in the XXI century

Post by Admiral E. Rastus »

Turnagain wrote:
Sun Jul 26, 2020 9:51 am
Admiral E. Rastus wrote:
And because there's no space to operate in, communists are gone as a force too, at best playing pretend while being footsoldiers of the Establishment, and should never be taken seriously.
I'm not all that confident in the accuracy of that statement. ANTIFA, the communist front group, is enjoying a good measure of success in US cities that are under "liberal" e.g. communist sympathizer administration. In cities such as Seattle, Portland, et al. police have been essentially ordered to stand down while ANTIFA targets specific businesses for arson and looting. The phony plandemic and the BLM excuse supported by the Jew owned MSM has created just such a power vacuum and ANTIFA has obligingly stepped up to the plate.
There is absolutely nothing ANTIFA can do to bring about anything close to communism. They are merely shock troops of the establishment and serve the purpose of intimidating groups that may actually threaten the elites or current power imbalance, such as organized whites. Communist states in Eastern Europe had phony pro-establishment riots, with the other side forced to keep mum because the hammer would have been dropped on them immediately if they tried similar. This is the exact same phenomenon, just with more intrusive media manipulation.

If you know any significant trend that was going in one direction but that has actually changed direction completely with ANTIFA and BLM, you can be granted that it's something new and not the existing establishment putting its foot down. But I really don't think you'll find anything.

What are blacks with access to smartphones other than the global H.R. department for corporations, providing a rationale for them to curtail white workers' means and political power further, having already been attacked in other venues? And if there is a power vacuum and supposed communism is filling it, why is Jeff Bezos' estate perfectly safe?

There is no "phony plandemic," of course. It is serious and one recommends stopping the spread of SARS-CoV-2 as far as possible as quickly as possible, even if it violates some expired libertarian political tenets or is useful for staging a partisan food fight.

Turnagain
Posts: 8813
Joined: Tue Jun 17, 2014 11:44 pm
Contact:

Re: Nationalsocialism in the XXI century

Post by Turnagain »

Admiral E. Rastus wrote:
There is no "phony plandemic," of course. It is serious and one recommends stopping the spread of SARS-CoV-2 as far as possible as quickly as possible, even if it violates some expired libertarian political tenets or is useful for staging a partisan food fight.
Such gullibility renders your analysis suspect.

User avatar
Admiral E. Rastus
Posts: 139
Joined: Sat Jun 18, 2016 6:01 am
Location: coming soon to a place near you
Contact:

Re: Nationalsocialism in the XXI century

Post by Admiral E. Rastus »

There's an opportunity cost to arguing about masks: not arguing about anything important, like affordable family formation for your group.

Turnagain
Posts: 8813
Joined: Tue Jun 17, 2014 11:44 pm
Contact:

Re: Nationalsocialism in the XXI century

Post by Turnagain »

I think that "lockdowns" and the crashing of the economy might have a little to do with affordable family formation.

User avatar
Admiral E. Rastus
Posts: 139
Joined: Sat Jun 18, 2016 6:01 am
Location: coming soon to a place near you
Contact:

Re: Nationalsocialism in the XXI century

Post by Admiral E. Rastus »

Lockdowns are useful. Haven't heard of them implemented in the United States. Did I miss the police-enforced internal border controls between states and cities, protective quarantines of uninfected places and serious health warnings against interacting with members of populations who are chiefly spreading it, such as Blacks and Hispanics in the US? All occurred in China, which got a handle on things in the end. Getting rid of the weeds in the economy can be a bonus.

Nope, affordable family formation for a certain group that doesn't have it is a policy choice, much like it is a choice to currently subsidize it for alien groups.

Post Reply

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 4 guests