DEMOCRACY BRINGS THE POLICE STATE
“Democracy” has been made at the close of the Twentieth Century the great political key-word, the supreme criterion of life: something sacrosanct, standing unquestionably for the highest form of government, the best type of society and the finest way of life. This is so much so that acceptance has been made compulsory in the Britain of the 1990s by virtue of the special protection now accorded to Democracy by the secret police here which now formally treats rejection of Democracy as “subversion”.
Time was when national security was viewed simply as a matter of protection from a foreign foe intent on depriving us of ownership of our land and control of our affairs. Now, in addition, one particular form of government and that alone is allowed to us, and any and every effort to replace it is classed as subversive and accordingly prohibited. Now because of the development of Democracy as dictatorship in disguise, what is called “national security” ironically aids alien intrusion from both within and without.
This enforcement of creed under a fraudulent flag of liberty was unequivocally, unashamedly and publicly enunciated by secret police chief Stella Rimington, Director General of Military Intelligence 5, otherwise known as the “Security Service”, on 24 June 1994 on BBC Television Channel One in her “Richard Dimble by Lecture 1994”.There and then she declared: “The intention to undermine democracy is what ‘subversion’ means to us.”
To this avowed definition of purpose she added in accounting for the apportionment of MI5 time: “Some of that is now devoted to groups on the extreme right who are seeking to undermine democracy through the exploitation of racial hatred and xenophobia.” In the Rimington vocabulary “racial hatred” of course encompasses anything which gives recognition to the determinative factor of race as distinguishing native Britons from others who have come here; and “extreme right” encompasses all who are “extreme” enough to perceive and attach importance to this racial factor, and want to do something in keeping with it.
“Racial hatred” indeed for her covers anything and everything critical and disrespectful to Democracy’s “Chosen Ones”, the Jews, and thus includes for instance any accusation of cruelty laid against the Jewish ritual slaughter of animals for food, whereby they are bled to death without prestunning to prevent suffering, as required of gentiles, apart from Muslims who are similarly granted privileged exemption from the law affecting us. Much of the meat resulting from Jewish ritual slaughter ends up being consumed by Aryans without them being aware that they have been made a party to this abominable Jewish practice because the fastidious Jews will not eat the rear part of the animals they slaughter.
The legislative basis for the special protection of Democracy as a matter of national security was laid down in 1989 by the Security Service Act, Clause 1(2) of which placed “actions intended to overthrow or undermine parliamentary democracy by political, industrial or violent means on a par with “threats of espionage, terrorism and sabotage, from the activities of foreign powers”. This means that even entirely non-violent political canvassing of the public in favour of some other form of government, one truly representative of the authentic British people and their genuine interests, and conducive to their proper freedom, is deemed subversive by the real rulers of Democracy. Working with MI5 as other parts of the apparatus of suppression of opposition to the disastrous Democratic system, we have firstly the “Special Branch” of the Police, concerned with political activities, and coming under the Metropolitan Commissioner of Police. The present holder of this office is a Paul Condon who, in a conference lecture at the outset of his tenure, pinpointed “racism” as a prime concern on a par with the worst of crime, being a rejection of the essential multiracialism of Democracy (Independent 1 March 1993).
Secondly: we have GCHQ, the Government Communications Headquarters at Cheltenham, which monitors all radio, telex and telegraph communications into and out of Britain. Thirdly, constant co-operation is provided by Democratic America’s National Security Agency’s surveillance installation on British soil at Menwith Hill just a few miles from me near Harrogate in Yorkshire which can listen in on telephone conversations all over Europe by interception of the broadband microwave network over which long-distance telephone communications travel. (See “The Puzzle Palace”, James Bamford; Sidgwick & Jackson, London, 1983)
DEMOCRACY IS WHAT DEMOCRACY DOES
Democracy claims descent from Ancient Greece whence the word originated, but the truth is that what exists today in its name bears no solid resemblance to its alleged prototype. The democracy of the days of Plato and Aristotle was a form of government confined to a particular town and surrounding area which constituted a state, and was therefore of the nature of local government with the area and the people so comparatively small as to allow immediate and personal contact between the government and its affairs and the governed. The direct participation of the people was thus a reality in the Greek city-state where the people were, moreover, an ethnic community so that citizenship was a matter of kinship.
What is called “Democracy” today stands in stark contrast as a matter of huge units of assorted population nominally represented by members of parties which actually represent particular assortments of interests, the dominant array of which, through a mind-moulding media, particularly television, injects into the public desirable influencing material for the mind-set in view, and excludes what is deemed undesirable in influence for that mind-set. In the outcome of this mind-moulding the conditioned public then votes as between one or the other variation of the Democratic creed concerning which all the approved parties form a consensus. Performing thus, like Pavlov’s dogs with their conditioned reflexes, the public fondly imagines that it does the deciding, whereas it merely registers choice within the latitude allowed by the real rulers who are clandestine dictators. Democracy is thus the colossal confidence trick of the century.
Furthermore, Democracy which is counterfeit at the core, has been embellished by its manipulators into something far more than just a method of government in order to provide maximum power, profit and protection for those manipulators. It has in interpretation been turned into a whole creed concerned with a multiracial, egalitarian society.
What it does, more than what in some respects it claims to stand for, provides the most accurate definition of the Democracy afflicting us. The results of Democracy in Britain today are a teaching profession and educational system which turns out a brainwashed, anarchic, egocentric, ideal lacking, crudely materialist, drug-taking younger generation addicted to a typifying din of decadence known as “pop”. Adults are taken care of to similar effect by the mind controlling media, acting in conjunction with the propaganda and practices of the Democratic political parties. The overall effect of this, in a crime-ravaged, run down vestige of a former world power and vast empire, is a British public which offers no effective resistance to being intruded on and ousted by hordes of Afro-Asians; subjected to an ever extending alien control of British affairs from within and without; and restricted by more and more measures to prevent and penalize opposition to this alienation of their homeland.
THE COLOURED INVASION
The primary issue or preserving the British people as an ethnic community in ownership of its homeland, and therefore stopping and reversing the Coloured Invasion of Britain which has been allowed by the rulers of Democracy ever since the end of the Second World War, supposedly fought to keep Britain for the British, is one on which the wish of the indigenous population has never been the determinant. The British people undoubtedly did not want the Coloured Invasion, but they certainly got it, precisely because Democracy, as the will of the people, is a sham.
In consequence of this invasion by dictation, we now learn from a headline in the Daily Telegraph (20 January 1994), reporting a detailed study of ethnic data from the U.K. 1991 Census, that the “Number of Blacks and Asians ‘will double in 40 years’.” Another headline in the same newspaper a short time previous (2 December 1993) had recorded “Europe’s birthrate plunges to record low”. Taking these two items together, it is only a matter of time, and not much time at that, before thanks to Democracy the British become a minority in what was once their homeland.
An account sheet of all the costs of the Coloured Invasion in its every aspect and detail, including a reckoning for all the catastrophic consequences of miscegenation and outbreeding and this as just one part of the total harm of Democracy -would make a gigantic condemnation of the political system responsible for it. This colossal bill should be drawn up in full, put before the British public who have to pay it, and thrust in the face of the treacherous scoundrels at Westminster and Whitehall and elsewhere who are to blame for this looting of our resources, squandering of our heritage, and despoliation of our future.
To suppress opposition to this Coloured Invasion our freedom is being more and more taken away from us by more and more legislative and executive measures against what is indiscriminately and collectively called “racial hatred”, while continual demands resound for more severe enforcement of existing law, and the introduction of additional laws against it. Hardly a week goes past without the Jewish community’s main organ, the Jewish Chronicle, recording yet another round of lobbying by this minority to put pressure on the Government to impose further restriction on the native majority. The Minister responsible, as Home Secretary, for keeping the public in order is currently Michael Howard, identified as a Jew by the Jewish Chronicle and thus to be regarded as an illegal immigrant in view of the unrevoked law of expulsion of 1290.
Under Howard, as he calls himself now, although his original family surname was undoubtedly different, comes both MIS and the Special Branch political police commanded by Metropolitan Police Commissioner Paul Condon. The latter luminary of Democracy has identified “racism” as “the greatest challenge” for the police today, denouncing “The dire consequences of racially based nationalism” enjoining his officers to be “totally intolerant” of those who for political ends cause “racial hatred” ( Independent1 March 1993). Behind Home Secretary Howard there is in the network of enforcement, in addition to MIS and the Special Branch, a judiciary now headed by Lord Chief Justice Taylor (also identified by the Jewish Chronicle as a Jew, whose original family surname is also at present unknown to me), and a Crown Prosecution Service plentifully staffed with his kind of people, as is the whole legal profession.
COMMUNISM COMES TO BRITAIN
Full understanding of the nature and purpose of Democracy requires a perception of its inherent proclivity to become a fancy equation for Communism. Jewish High Finance houses in the Democratic U.S.A. subsidized the initial establishment of Communism in Russia. The Communist regimes there and elsewhere claimed to be and styled themselves new and fuller forms of Democracy. In this guise they proceeded to conduct a mass extermination of opponents the scale of which vastly exceeded all the Jewish allegations against Germany. Recent Russian estimates of those killed or brought to death by Communism in Russia alone range between 30 and 80 million. Churchill and Roosevelt linked arms with the Red mass murderers in a war for Democracy, Communist and Capitalist style combined, against the cause of racial freedom and resurgence represented by National-Socialist Germany. Under Churchill just under 2,000 British citizens, targeted by the secret police of MI5 and Special Branch because of opposition to the war, were seized and held in prison or concentration camp under Regulation 18B without trial. (See “In the Highest Degree Odious”, A.W. Brian Simpson, Clarendon Press, 1992)
The Red Holocaust must be loudly exposed whenever the word “holocaust” is raised by the Jews and their supporters which is more or less all the time. Their latest star-studded replenishment of propaganda is the absurdly sensational, fictional film “Schindler’s List” based on a book which itself stated it was fiction, and made by a Jewish maker of fantasy movies, Steven Spielberg. Let us stand for free speech and full enquiry on all alleged atrocities including the Jewish “holocaust” and Allied war crimes.
Suddenly, several years ago, Communism seemed to vanish from Russia and Eastern Europe to great acclaim in the Western Democracies followed by a pay-off in massive aid, the U.S.A. announcing at the beginning of April 1993 a $1.6 billion package of short-term aid to its accredited protégé, President Boris Yeltsin, as the first down payment to help his brand of Democracy survive. Quite soon after this foreign financing of Russian Democracy started, Democratic dictator Yeltsin proceeded to ride roughshod over the Russian parliament, arbitrarily dissolving it, and, when the parliamentarians resisted, sending troops to attack the parliament building and kill many inside; all this with the sympathetic understanding of the Western upholders of Russian Democracy.
Money and materials have not been the only form of aid to help set up in Russia the system and society we are afflicted with here. Our secret police chief Stella Rimington has admitted in her lecture to which we have already referred that Britain’s secret police have been working with that of Democratic dictator Yeltsin to further the imposition of Democracy in his country. Said the lady: “Together with our sister service SIS, we provided advice and support for the reorganised and reoriented security services, particularly to help them establish a democratic framework for their work.” (SIS = “Secret Intelligence Service” or MI6, coming under the Foreign Secretary)
So has Communism really gone, or only done a conjuror’s vanishing trick on the world stage in order more conveniently and effectively to operate in times now and ahead? Has it been decided that the time is now ripe for it to proceed and succeed better in seeming disjoined and piecemeal fashion under a different name, disguised as “Democracy”: the slower but no less sure vehicle to the same destination?
Well the fact is that, in the slower and surreptitious form, we have got it right here in Britain today in our schools staffed with those who are Lefties, either formally or virtually, with all their indoctrination of our children with multiracial, anti-patriotic, antiauthoritarian, super-egalitarian notions. Communism is here in substance in the dictatorship of the media with its constant conveyance of material destructive of traditional values, and expression of the crass materialism of a nomadic, global, consumer society which extols the emancipation of the common man and the will of the majority in theory while ensuring his plutocratic exploitation in practice.
Communism is here today in all the reaches of that regimentation of thought known as “political correctness”, and in the suppression of racial patriotism by means of “racial hatred” law and a secret security service and a political police. Apropos this communistic law, let it be remembered that “anti-semitism” was made a crime within a few months of the Communist Revolution in Russia in 1917, just as it is being made a crime in the Britain of Democracy today.
Some 50 years ago the advocates of world government were striving to get acceptance for it in its entirety at one go. They failed, but they learned by their failure, and they took to bringing it about bit by bit without an offputting name, and without attracting attention to the ultimate aggregation; and now they are succeeding. The Communists have learned the same lesson, and are now following the same methods leading to the same ultimate aggregation in view.
“Communism” and “Democracy” are interchangeable titles for basically and mostly the same thing” a Great Pretence under which in the first case a dictatorship of the proletariat” pretends to represent the people in a “classless society” of the exploited and enslaved masses; and in the second case another oligarchy, a dictatorship of the media, big business and finance, exercises its power and reaps its profit behind a facade of representation of the people in a society which is uniform or classless in the liberty to conform, which is the compulsion to do so.
DEMOCRACY IS DEATH
Democracy, as Britain’s pioneer National-Socialist Arnold Leese proclaimed, is death. Its synthesis of Communism and Capitalism, distinguished by a fusion of deceit, deprivation and degeneration, is sure to bring about the diminution of the White folk of this country and the world at large to the point of virtual extinction within the coming century through the rapid proliferation of the Coloured peoples and the ever increasing ratio of half-breeds resulting from stimulated miscegenation which Democracy by its very nature engenders. The Jews, however, who are predominantly non-European racially, will undoubtedly not only survive but surmount and hold sway by means of the religious racialism which so powerfully permeates them and is so zealously practised by them. In this dire situation the one and only way to future life for the White peoples of the world lies in overthrowing the death-system of Democracy, and replacing it with a life-system devoted to the preservation, improvement and proliferation of White or Aryan stock. The name of this life-system is National Socialism. The question is: can it be done?
To attempt to answer this most fateful question we have to shed all illusions, all wishful thinking, conjured up to lessen apprehension and to generate optimism. We have to face up fully to the gravity of the menace, the consequent immensity of the task, the slightness of the chance of success which is dwindling daily as the enemy extends and consolidates its power; and we have frankly to admit the impotence of our side. The thorough and realistic appraisal which is required can only lead to the terrible truth that our side is getting nowhere fast, and that if it continues in its present ways it is doomed to certain failure. Its time and effort will continue to be wasted until the last chance has gone, and the everlasting darkness descends.
That is my conclusion. Yet it is one to which I immediately add another which is that this certain defeat under present circumstances, since it will be decided by the accumulated consequences of wrong thinking and wrong practice, can even now be avoided. This can be done if, firstly, we are resolved to make the effort to subject all present attitudes and practices to the most searching and severe examination, scrutinizing without inhibition and reservation all habitual routine which can so very easily become rigidly restrictive habit, precluding awareness and admission of fault. Secondly, having performed this rigorous survey as our initial achievement, we have as our second achievement to gain the liberating benefit of the lessons discerned by making the effort, however exacting, to rid ourselves of the wrong thinking and wrong practice detected, and to introduce and unswervingly follow what has been seen to be essential.
We can win, and I think I can tell you how to do so, but whether you will win that I cannot say for it depends on you. What I will here now seek to do is to set down what I regard as the three primary requirements for victory, and then proceed to unfold them. They are
(1) The right ideology – which has to be world-wide and life-wide; a Weltanschauung of religious significance and force.
(2) The right people – who have to be people adhering to this Weltanschauung in heart and mind, conforming to it in personal conduct, and zealously implementing it in every possible way.
(3) The right forms of organization enabling the right people with the right ideology to work and fight to maximum effect.
REJECTION OF DEMOCRACY
Accepting the three requirements for victory calls for a clear perception of and complete rejection of the enemy. The enemy, collectively, is a whole way of thinking and behaving; a whole political system and society incorporating this thought and behaviour; and a whole array of persons effectively responsible for promoting this thought and behaviour, and this system and society of Democracy. It has to be seen that Democracy is at war with us on all the fronts of life, and that our response therefore has to be a counterattack on all those fronts of life and nothing less. Ousting Democracy begins with thoroughly ousting it from you, your outlook, your habits, and your daily life as far as possible.
Democracy has to be recognized and denounced as the creed and system of death which it is. Let there be no hesitation, no diffidence about this: no feeble fudging to try and make out that you are just another and better Democrat through intricate contortions to dissemble anti-Democracy as its opposite. You cannot set about distributing the elixir of life by peddling more of the old poison. To squirm to evade forthright denunciation is a fatal exhibition of inner failure at the outset, a lethal lack of the will to win; whereas the purging act of repudiation is a demonstration of that will without which nothing is possible and with which everything is.
Rejecting the death-system of Democracy as the prerequisite for the salvation of the Aryan folk requires the clearest and fiercest indictment of those principally responsible for its operation here and throughout the world. This partly but particularly means the politicians past and present of the Democratic parties, including those of Britain, these latter having to be seen and unreservedly and constantly referred to as the greatest criminals in our land and history. Theirs has been the supreme crime of betraying our folk by their policies and practices, and in particular by opening our doors to mass Afro-Asian and Jewish immigration, and coercing our folk to accept this immigration and to integrate with the immigrants; and opening our affairs to alien influence and control from both inside and outside.
The rejection of Democracy is necessarily, as the other side of the coin, the acceptance of its only complete replacement which is National-Socialism: the creed composed by Adolf Hitler and his colleagues, drawing on antecedent elements, and bequeathed by them to us to extend to suit contemporary conditions by any legitimate development of its implications, or adapt ion of secondary details of implementation, consonant with the principles of the creed. In contrast no mere patchwork of oddments of reform, composed as some compromise between what is really needed and what presently prevails, and conceived to suit the present state of the public mind besotted with the infusions of the enemy media, is worth ten seconds consideration. Only a revolutionary creed with the necessary profundity and amplitude and dynamic strength to meet and match and remedy the emergency Democracy confronts us with deserves our attention. All else is utterly inadequate, and the wishy-washy presenters of these supposed short cuts by way of Democratic acceptability are just pathetic, time-wasting distracters.
NATIONAL SOCIALISM NOT FASCISM
National-Socialism, as the right ideology and only remedy, has to be carefully differentiated from Fascism with which it is commonly and conveniently lumped by opponents, and carelessly confused by adherents. The former is founded on and inseparable from the conception of the folk or racial community. This determines the nation, and this delineates its citizenship. With National-Socialism, as Arnold Leese put it, “Race is the basis of politics”.
It inescapably follows from this that National-Socialism, properly understood in its inevitable implications, is not and cannot be simply a conventional nationalism, even one based on a proclaimed racial identity, albeit one geographically circumscribed and confined. Racial characteristics, whatever the particular blend within a particular country, transcend the boundary of that country, and thus potentially unite where the barriers of conventional nationalism divide. The Aryans of this earth have been brought to their present appalling plight by way of the divisive wars of conventional nationalism with non-Aryans fostering and profiting by the friction. The creed of salvation must thus be one of pan-Aryan racialism.
Fascism, despite merits, is not founded on Race, and is not pan-Aryan. Instead it is only a reformed and vitalized nationalism for the old, geographical, national state. This is why Mussolini in his early days of power, before the influence of Germany as an ally was felt, had Jewish colleagues, and the Fascist Week in the U.K. (27 April – 3 May 1934) included a report that “The Chief Rabbi (of Italy) was a Fascist, and was a strong supporter of Mussolini.” It is why his granddaughter, Alessandra Mussolini – standing as a candidate for the modified version of the MSI in the March 1994 elections, and obtaining 50.4% of the vote in the racial rubbish heap of Naples happily played the part of a Jewess in a 1989 film, and dismisses anti-Jewish opinion as “old hat” (Sunday Telegraph 5 December 1993)
Based on recognition of Race, and with this being not only the recognition of and zeal to preserve the racial identity of the Aryan folk as distinct from other folk, but recognition also of qualitative differences within the folk itself, and the need therefore to improve the breed as the most effective way to produce a better society; National-Socialism applies this racial outlook to all aspects of government and all else of life in a totality of comprehension. It derives an ardour for economic and social justice from the notion of kinship; an adhesion to leadership within a hierarchy of talent and responsibility from an appreciation of the workings of Nature conducive to the ascendancy of the superior; and from this oneness with Nature a desire to conserve by organic management the resources of this planet.
WITH HITLER TO VICTORY
In embracing National-Socialism to its full extent as the needed ideology for victory, there can be no question of failing for any reason of crippling timidity or myopia to give rightful recognition to Adolf Hitler as the great personification of this creed. To attempt to present it without this recognition of its founder, prophet and leader is the equivalent of seeking to propagate Christianity a spiritual underpin of Democracy without mentioning Christ. To say this is not to attempt to deify Hitler, and at the cost of depreciating the contribution made by his followers in those days which was gigantic, or the contribution that will have to be made by his followers now and in the future if victory is to be secured, which will have to be even more gigantic.
The necessity to give homage to Adolf Hitler as towering genius, superman of our cause, is not simply a matter of justice in fair acknowledgement, or even the test of sincerity and strength involved in making this acknowledgement, but of the immense advantage thereby to be gained, contrary to the lament of feeble nationalists and “patriots” that association with Hitler and National-Socialism is a ruinous disability which can and must be avoided. These trembling warriors are forever in full flight from their own shadows, seemingly unable to comprehend that their complaints against the system point towards, and will certainly be portrayed by the astute enemy as pointing towards Hitler and National-Socialism, and the more they protest at this conclusion the more the enemy will know that they can be put to flight by raising it. Thus these political eunuchs are powerless from the start, while ludicrously congratulating themselves on a “wisdom” which is in fact an imperviousness to the real thing.
We National-Socialists, unlike these people with their flaccid messages of hotchpotch programmes to repair the Democratic system in a Democratic way, have not only a whole Weltanschauung, but within it a well of great depth of inspiration provided by the example of the tremendous devotion, the enormous hard work, the glorious heroism and colossal achievements of National-Socialist Germany under Adolf Hitler. Far from this wonderful and unique heritage of ours being some fatal drawback as the vendors of nostrums acceptable as conformable to Democracy aver, it is our exclusive strength: the sustenance of and for giants in the gigantic struggle facing us.
The argument that the general public will not, now, accept National-Socialism and its pivotal figure of Adolf Hitler is meaningless in the context that general publics never make or break revolutions, and soliciting their participation is a futile deviation, not the proper way to salvation. That general public will remain in bondage to the almighty enemy media and the real rulers of Democracy until the Democratic system is brought to its breakdown. Then and only then will our breakthrough become possible. Then the general public will have become sufficiently sick and tired of Democracy to become sufficiently receptive to what we have to say. With the acquisition then of state power, and a media of liberation in place of one of bondage, we will be able to bring the mind of that public to acceptance of and thereby the necessary willing support for the measures of revolutionary transformation of society.
Having identified in outline the first requirement for victory over Democracy, namely the ideology of National-Socialism, we will return to this subject in further detail at a later point, meanwhile passing on to consider the second requirement: the right people.
THE PEOPLE WE NEED
The best of ideas must fail to come to fruition unless their bearers are worthy of those ideas. For the gigantic task of overthrowing the death-system of Democracy we do not need, and must not aim at, and instead must eschew striving for some big collection of all and sundry types of human being of greatly varying value ranging from the vast majority who are mediocre at the very best, willing for and capable of giving only a little service at the most and taking only a little risk, if any, to the few who are of high worth; being of the calibre of constant and invincible believers, regular hard-workers, and courageous fighters. It is only the last-mentioned who are fit for and needed for the vanguard for victory, the assembly of the elite. Confusion with and attachment to the rest, it must be emphasized to the utmost, is not as current wrong thought and practice has it some desirable aggregation whereby the little bits from the little people all helps. To the contrary, the little people with their little bits are in such a combination infinitely more harm than help, hobbling the elite on which ultimately all depends. They belong in the background as sympathizers and auxiliaries, and must be ruthlessly relegated to this position. We cannot afford to clutter up and cripple our fighting force with an outnumbering and impeding array of camp followers.
The way to victory is to be found in the triumph of quality, and not in the indiscriminate pursuit and use of quantity. Democracy, all-powerful as it may well now appear in the strength of the minority who rule by means of it and the prevalence of the ideas which that minority spreads, is really a leviathan with feet of clay in that it is vulnerable to the extent of its reliance on an infrastructure of increasing complexity manned by people who are largely ordinary in their lack of dedication, stamina and courage; and in its commitment to policies which inherently involve great strain and stress. Our superior few, the supermen and superwomen, can because of this succeed against the rulers of Democracy.
The ultimate battle to decide the fate of our race and nation will be between two political minorities: that of the enemy wielding power over the state, and that of ours working and fighting to seize that state power. It is a battle we can win if and only if we produce as our minority an elite more powerful to disrupt Democracy than their minority with its lesser quality and its entanglement with inferior supporting personnel is to defend it. We can only do this if we avoid an entanglement of our elite with a mass of people of lesser quality. Numbers will not decide our future in our favour. Quality, the efficacy of a superlative elite, can do so.
Stop to imagine and fully appreciate the fighting strength, the capacity to strike and damage, which belongs to the superman or woman, meaning the person afire with devotion to the cause felt in religious dimension as the supreme motivation of his or her life; the person who educates himself or herself to the highest degree in his or her beliefs and their application; the person who invariably puts principles into practice, living his or her beliefs as a daily way of life; the person who systematically trains himself or herself to be in one specialist capacity or another a most effective instrument for the revolutionary pursuit of those beliefs. The combination thus in one and the same person of thinker, zealot, worker, warrior makes an unbeatable coalescence of human qualities, an unequalled unit for revolutionary action which Democracy can never match or withstand. This is our special weapon which can compensate for all other deficiencies. With but a few dozen of these supermen and women great havoc can be wrought upon the enemy. With hundreds of them Democracy will be in deadly danger, and victory will be in sight.
The vital spark, becoming the flame of victory energizing the vanguard of victory, is the will to win in the minds of the National-Socialist elite. We can succeed and we must succeed, but the measure of our right to succeed and the sign that we will succeed lies in the inflexible determination to fight: to fight on regardless of the immediacy or even the certainty or even the likelihood of attaining state power. This is because the 100% National-Socialist fights for National-Socialism as nothing less than a necessity of being, and not because of any assessment of chances of success. Doing so, he knows that a victory of the spirit is always won, whatever else happens. Indeed the lesser the possibility of physical victory over the hostile state, the greater the honour and the greater the moral victory of doing so.
STARTING THE REVOLUTION IN YOU
So the people we need are those with the will to win. With it they are on the threshold of the very first phase of the National-Socialist Revolution. This is an internal revolution: a seizure of power within themselves. The other phases are, secondly, the attainment and exercise of forms of power short of state power; thirdly, the attainment of state power; and fourthly, the exercise of state power to bring the people to adopt the desired new ways of living.
The “Vanguard” is my term for the National-Socialist elite intent on accomplishing the fourfold course of the National-Socialist Revolution. No one becomes a member of the Vanguard simply by completing some piece of pc per and paying some subscription as happens with the numbers game of the old organizations. One only becomes part of it in name by virtue of becoming part of it in thought and action.
Given the will to win, you start the revolution – in you – by renouncing allegiance to the Democratic state which has no moral or other legitimate claim to your allegiance and obedience, and thus exerts only a wrongful compulsion by brute force. Our supreme law lies not in the decrees of Democracy in pursuit of its foul purposes against our folk, but instead in the high ordinances implied in the vital requirements for the protection and welfare of that folk. This understanding initiates the whole salutary process of evicting the enemy from the moral high ground it has usurped, and relegating it to the depths as vile and vicious, perverted and hateful.
The above renunciation as an expression of the will to win should mean an end to being hesitant, diffident and defensive about your beliefs. Henceforth you have to be on the offensive. No more, for example, can it be permissible to fight shy of the label “racialist”, trying to talk round and away from this loaded hate-word of the enemy. Yes, yes you are indeed a racialist as a defender of our race from ruin, and proud to say so.
The Vanguard member on the attack with the will to win needs to be a fit person in all respects, physically, mentally and spiritually. He or she needs to respect Nature in the temple of the body as just as much a matter of National-Socialism as anything else, exercising adequately, and acquainting himself or herself with the requirements of a good diet because what, eat becomes what we are. While it is all right for the supporters of Democracy to stuff their stomachs with such as puffed-up potato crisps, chemically doctored “soft drinks”, nutritionally-deprived white flour, fat-soaked fish and chips, excessive salt and sugar, debilitated and adulterated “convenience foods” and suspect or definitely harmful additives galore, not forgetting that manna of modernity in the form of MacDonald’s reconstructed beefburgers; our pioneers of a better world have to practise a better form of feeding.
The personal revolution is no mere matter of continually saying you are against the system of Democracy, and meaning it -up to a point -but at that point unthinkingly retaining its habits and appearances in your own daily life. You have to cast off its conventions of speech such as the terrible “t” of “tolerance”, meaning tolerance of what is detrimental to the survival and welfare of our folk. You have to cast off its garb too, meaning in particular the slovenly jeans and sloppy footwear which are Democracy’s authentic uniform for its disorderly, “casual”, cosmopolitan citizen:
With the will to win fully applied in your personal life, so that you are waging the first phase of the revolution, each morning should start with the vow to find in the following twenty-four hours good ways of effectively fighting the multiracial abomination of Democracy. You only live once, so give meaning to your life by fighting the good fight throughout
The Vanguard member pursues an ongoing course of study and training to make him or her a more and more efficient instrument of revolution. At t end of this primer a list of recommended general reading will be provided as a beginning for study. Further reading should include books dealing w whatever field of action the particular member feels most interested in and suitable for. We have to be professionals in the business of revolution, thereby making quality more than make up for lack of numbers and other resources. Every form of activity has to be seen as falling within an art or a science to be methodically pursued by study and training, rehearsal, critical review of that rehearsal, yet more study and training to remedy shortcomings shown by the rehearsal; and thus to reach the pitch of achieving maximum effect for minimum time and effort and minimum risk.
The Vanguard member is the person capable of converting by personal example meaning personal appearance and behaviour. You have won the first battle in the field of conversion when clean, tidy and courteous you have made an attractive personal impression. Thus qualified, you can go about your life with your eyes open for others suitable to be brought into the fold, always understanding that any and every approach must involve watching the prospect for an adequate length of time to be reasonably sure that you have someone of the right type: genuine and reliable and capable. It is far better to take time to make sure than later to regret it.
Young people particularly are needed because of the vigour of youth, and also because they tend not to have become materially tied to the existing order as older people with their established commitments and concern for their accumulated resources tend to be.
Women must not be neglected or cast in some inferior role as is the bad habit of the old organizations. Democracy, as one of its deceits, acutely degrades women in its pretence of emancipating them; whereas National-Socialism elevates them by honouring their natural role and ensuring for them the freedom to fulfil it. It is imperative that Vanguard members only take or retain as spouse someone who, if not also a Vanguard member, is at least dependably sympathetic to National-Socialism and, moreover, to involvement in the Vanguard. You cannot afford to have to face friction in the home over Vanguard involvement, along with all other problems of the struggle.
In the German struggle for power women played a great part. Front rows at meetings addressed by Adolf Hitler were packed with intensely enthusiastic members of the fair sex. In the desperate later days of the war “Great numbers of them had written to Hitler and Goebbels demanding the right to fight”. A women’s force, Adolf Hitler, was formed in March 1945, but too late. (“Reich”, James Lucas, Grafton Books, London, 1990; p. 134) Let us not be too late in bringing women into the fight.
The deed speaks loudest, and the great deed obliges everyone to listen. In the final analysis a creed only proves its significance for life if adherents are prepared to give up liberty and even life itself for it. In the Hitler era huge numbers of adherents were prepared to do exactly that. Postwar National-Socialism is so far comparatively short of new heroes. We have a few martyrs abroad: men who have undergone or are undergoing long periods of imprisonment, and who have remained undaunted in spirit. These wonderful people deserve and must receive our commensurate respect and support.
Along with them we have as a glorious example of the political soldier the heroic leader of The Silent Brotherhood in the U.S.A., Robert Mathews, who voluntarily made the supreme sacrifice, going down fighting against a massive besieging array of the armed police of Democracy in a triumphant display of the spirit of “No surrender! ” (See Gothic Ripples 22/23) But in Britain, so far, no one has been similarly prepared to go to Valhalla.