As National Socialists, we prefer to use the word “Aryan” when referring to our race. We have written about this before, here: “Aryan” Is the Correct and Proper Name of Our Race! | NEW ORDER.
This is our favored designation for our people, and has been so since the early days of the Movement in Germany nearly a century ago. Adolf Hitler uses the term “Aryan” almost exclusively in Mein Kampf, although he does refer to the “White race” on a handful of occasions, such as in this celebrated passage:
“It was and it is Jews who bring the Negroes into the Rhineland, always with the same secret thought and clear aim of ruining the hated White race by the necessarily resulting bastardization, throwing it down from its cultural and political height, and himself rising to be its master.” (Volume II, Chapter 11, page 325 in the Manheim translation)
Nevertheless, whatever word we prefer as National Socialists, the reality is that in ordinary discourse in the United States on racial matters it is “White” that is employed.
Recognizing this fact, the Registered Supporters Application Form for the NEW ORDER requires that applicants state that they are “a non-Jewish White person.”
But what, exactly, does that mean in practical terms? Who is “White?” What is “White?”
In the first instance, being White (or Aryan) in a biological sense means being descended from any of the Caucasian peoples indigenous to Europe. Even in the US, where most Whites have mixed national descent, there is a basic awareness of who is White and who is not, based primarily on physical appearance, but also on cultural cues such as speech, dress and behavior. And here we are helped by the age-old tradition of classifying anyone of mixed White/non-White descent as non-White, in so far as this is readily discernable.
But there is the rub: What if someone has a fraction of non-White ancestry that does not show up in their appearance? Someone who is 75 percent White and 25 percent Black will still have noticeable Black physical characteristics, if not in their colorization then surely in their facial features. But what about someone who is only five percent Black? Or what if someone is 10 American Indian, and appears White for all practical purposes? How about someone who is one percent Asian? Where do we draw the line?
National Socialists are not the only ones interested in fractional non-White ancestry. We note with interest the current fad of sending a DNA sample to such companies as Ancestry.com and 23andme. For a small sum, these companies will analyze your DNA, and give you an impressive-looking report listing your ethnic and racial background in considerable detail. Might such testing not be the solution to deciding who is – and who is not – “White?”
Unfortunately, no, because these tests are not entirely reliable.
We call your attention to the case of the Dahm sisters. These young women are strikingly beautiful identical triplets from Minnesota. They are so similar, that even the fingerprints of one sister cannot be readily distinguished from those of the other two by advanced fingerprint technology.
Earlier this year, presumably a part of publicity stunt to advance their careers as models, sisters Erica, Jacklyn and Nicole submitted their DNA to 23andme to determine their exact ethnic background. The tests revealed that the triplets were, as supposed, absolutely genetically identical – but the company reported a different ethnic make-up for each of the three. Nicole, it was said, was 11.4 percent Scandinavian, but Jacklyn and Erika were only 7.4 percent. And whereas Nicole was listed as being 11 percent “German/French,” Erika was 22.3 percent and Jacklyn was 18 percent.
How is this possible? If they are all genetically identical, should they not have identical ethnic backgrounds?
The short answer is that is it not possible: the test results are simply wrong. It may be that the DNA technology that yields these results is defective or inexact, or it may be that the results themselves are subject to human error in analysis or reporting. Perhaps it is a combination of the two shortcomings.
But this much is clear: if DNA testing cannot yield reliable results with identical triplets, how can we count on it to give an accurate analysis for anyone?
DNA testing of this type is relatively new. Before its advent, the primary way of determining someone’s racial or ethnic background was through genealogy. This is done by examining a person’s ancestors, beginning with their parents and tracing their descent back a far as possible. Because the White population in the US has historically had greater social cohesion than most non-White populations, it is frequently possible to trace someone’s forebears a number of generations to when their family first arrived in the New World. But not always, and not for every given branch of the family tree. In any event, following someone’s direct ancestors back across the Atlantic Ocean to Europe is difficult, and often the thread of descent is lost.
In Europe, frequently with the aid of Church records, people can trace their genealogy back further, sometimes for many hundreds of years. But what does this really prove? Only that someone’s ancestors came from this region or that region, not that they were White in a biological sense. And beyond that, if a single wife cheated on her husband on a single occasion, a line of descent that one may have traced back to Charlemagne could be false.
Genealogy is a fascinating and important field of knowledge. It teaches us about our ancestors, to whom we owe our identity both individually and an as a race. But in itself, genealogy proves nothing.
Likewise, oral family histories are sometimes erroneous, and are not reliable for establishing a person’s biological descent. We have encountered the “Cherokee princess” phenomenon on numerous occasions: a family may have a tradition that a distant ancestor was a noble redskin, when, in fact, no such ancestor ever existed.
A Practical Approach
All theory aside, a practical, utilitarian method for the Movement of deciding whether or not someone is of acceptable White descent is by examining the following criteria:
1. Do they look White?
2. Do they self-identify as White?
3. Do they have any immediate non-White ancestry?
4. Are they culturally White?
5. Do they display White values and behavior?
6. Are they accepted as White by their neighbors and co-workers?
7. Are they committed to the racial struggle?
As a practical matter, the answer to these questions tells us more about someone’s racial value than does reviewing dubious DNA tests or examining the paper trail of a person’s forebears. These criteria are more important to us than whether someone has a trace element of non-White descent in the distant past.
Robert Matthews, a White revolutionary who attempted to form a guerrilla army in the 1980s, boiled this policy down to a single sentence: “If you think you’re White, and we think you’re White, then you’re White.”
The Struggle for the Ideal
Racial purity is a central value of the National Socialist worldview. But we do not live in an ideal world. The migration of peoples; the conquest of one folk or race by another; and the establishment of global multiracialism with porous borders: all of these have contributed to what scientists term “genetic drift,” and which we National Socialists call racial pollution. In a future NS state, advances in genetic technology will allow us to comb through our collective genome, fixing defects or shortcomings, and establishing absolute standards of racial purity.
In the meantime, we should heed the words of Adolf Hitler concerning the struggle for the ideal:
“We are not simple enough, either, to believe that it could ever be possible to bring about a perfect era. But this relieves no one of the obligation to combat recognized errors, to overcome weaknesses, and to strive for the ideal. Harsh reality will of its own accord create only too many limitations. For that very reason, however, man must try to serve the ultimate goal, and failures must not deter him any more than he can abandon a system of justice merely because mistakes will creep into it, or any more than medicine is discarded because there will always be sickness in spite of it.
Care must be taken not to underestimate the force of an idea.” (Volume II, Chapter 2, p. 437)
The undeniable reality that non-White genes have contaminated our race to some minute extent must not be used as a reason to exclude valuable racial comrades from our ranks.
SOURCE: In Practical Terms, Who Is White? by James Harting, 2017