1.) What West describes here is a description of the triumph of Communism over the West as a result of WW II. The post-Nazi peace she describes is, in point of fact, a peace driven not by a over-reaction to Hitlerian National-Socialism but a peace driven by Communist triumph. The Western “Democracies” got in bed with Stalin and the result was a Communist peace at the end of the war that resulted in all that West describes above. Consider that it has always been a descriptor of Communism to flatten out all distinctions. This flattening of all distinctions brought on by the Bolshevik Communist victory in WW II is what Lawrence above refers to as “dismantling all the existing ordinary particularisms.” This dismantling that occurred as a result of WW II was not a matter of Hitler “unwittingly managing to destroy democracies by effecting a post-Nazi peace” but rather a matter of the Communists – in Russia and in the Democracies – wittingly setting loose a virus that would destroy those democracies.
In brief, where we are at now, is not a matter of something that accidentally happened as a result of WW II, rather where we are at now is a matter of being purposefully designed and pursued by the Communists in the West in the US government and US universities.
2.) Note above that while Diana West properly notes that exclusionary practices that favor Western traditions in culture are now condemned as bigotry and evil chauvinism what remains just as vibrant as ever are the exclusionary practices. The habit of exclusion has not disappeared in the West with the triumph of Communism and political correctness. We are every bit exclusionary today as we were before WW II. The difference is that our exclusionary vision today now chooses different exclusions. What has been excluded today is a White Christian patriarchal culture and that in the name of an anti-bigotry inclusionary vision. We are not bigoted against particularity of any sort save the particularity that pursues a different particularity then the particularity of the New World Order (Babelism … Alienism … Oikophilia, etc.).
3.) The reason that Christian Nationalists today as so adamantly opposed is due to the fact that they want to pursue a different set of exclusionary practices than the anti-Christ One Worlders desire, but have no doubt, both the anti-Christ One Worlders and the Christian Nationalists are every bit as exclusionary in their vision of a desired culture. The reason that so many people find Christian Nationalism to be such a threat is that the Communist anti-Christ one world vision has been fed to us, as a people, morning, noon, and night, for every generation since the Communist victory in WW II.
4.) IF, having a normal attachment to our own ways and our own society is now seen as “Nazism,” as Auster writes above, then we should just own the fact that we are Nazis. If that is the way that the Communist are going to define Nazism then we need to get over being called “Nazis,” because that is what they are going to call us all day long. It is clear that to a Communist any proper love for a particular people, particular place, and a muscular Christian faith, is now routinely called “Nazism.” We should laugh at the pejorative the way Nick Fuentes laughed at Piers Morgan.
5.) We need to understand that our Communist enemies today desire to do to us what they did to the Germans when they triumphed over them in WW II. This is not a polite disagreement. This is a fight for life and death. Those people intend to destroy us. They are beginning with seeking to ruin people economically and professionally but if they get their way eventually they will move beyond “ruin” to “dead.”
NS Germany had no desire to ‘destroy the Western democracies’. They were doing a good job of that all by themselves.
“Where is it written that the development of world politics may only be viewed from a Liberalistic aspect, that it may be formed exclusively according to Liberalistic principles of the last centuries? … Nobody expects the world to regard the New Germany from the National Socialist point of view. But the great future problems, requiring international recognition and solution, frankly compel the nations to observe without prejudice the structural changes which are being organically completed in individual nations. Progressive discernment … can only result from such a neutral, sober view.
It is a fact that National Socialism in Germany has materialized a new State idea, born from the people themselves and which satisfies the people’s own will. The fundamental and highest standard of this new State Idea is not the “Individual,” nor “Humanity,” but the nation as the sole real and organic totality which life knows. … Liberalism apodictically claimed for itself the eternal title of the most purposeful and best form of representation of the people’s rights. Today, after a few months of National Socialist dominion regarded by the Nation with undeniable instinct as self-government, Germany looks back—morally free from anxiety—with pitiful eyes upon those unhappy past periods of “Democracy,” when she was the slave of the Nation’s organized incapacity. At last, with its own eyes the Nation has recognized National Socialism as the organization of naturally chosen leaders.” pp. 96-8.
Otto Dietrich, ‘With Hitler on the Road to Power: Personal Experiences with My Leader’, Ostara 2016
Pretty sure all those battles and all that fighting by Germany against the Democracies during WW II is proof positive that Germany wanted to destroy the Democracies. Now, one may argue that they deserved to be destroyed, Ron, but even if that is true Germany still fought against the Democracies.
They were forced to do so by those same democracies … or, more precisely, their handlers. The NS government would have been perfectly content to let FDR and Churchill wallow in their own crapulence, without a war. One further quote:
“Roosevelt, together with the foreign groups in America, is today liquidating democracy in the United States. And democracy itself fosters the very weaknesses which contribute and aid in its destruction. The downfall of democracy is due, very largely, to corruption. Democracy is tolerant of corruption because it is so corrupt itself. Under a democratic form of government groups of men form political parties to promote group or class interests. In cities and nations where reside many different nationalities, those groups are more in number than in places where the population is homogeneous. New York City has always contained the largest percentage of foreigners of all American major cities. It is largely because of this that the administration of New York City is the most dishonest and corrupt in the United States.”
Donald Day, ‘Onward Christian Soldiers’
“The NS government would have been perfectly content to let FDR and Churchill wallow in their own crapulence, without a war.”
This is something that no one can know one way or the other.
“Fourteen wars were waged between 1919 and 1938 alone, in none of which Germany was concerned. … “The United States alone has carried out military interventions in six cases since 1918. Since 1918 Soviet Russia has engaged in ten wars and military actions involving force and bloodshed. p. 125. The whole German Colonial Empire, in contrast to the colonies of other nations, was not acquired by way of war, but solely through treaties or purchase. … Moroccans, Berbers, Arabs, Negroes &c., have all fallen victims to a foreign might, the swords of which, however, were not inscribed “Made in Germany’, but ‘Made by the Democracies’. p. 133. –Hitler’s reply to Roosevelt, Reichstag, April 28, 1939.”
Michael Walsh, ‘Adolf Hitler: My Last Testament – Let God Judge Me’
Ummm … between 1919-1938 Germany having been crushed in WW I and by the Versaille treaty was prostrate and wasn’t in the position to be an aggressor.
I’m not justifying the aggression of the Democracies. I’m saying that this quote doesn’t carry much weight in terms of finding Germany “not guilty” when it comes to aggression.
Two book recommendations:
https://barnesreview.org/product/germany-speaks/
https://barnesreview.org/product/truth-for-germany-the-guilt-question-of-the-second-world-war/
At the beginning of February 1938, Roosevelt wrote, in a private letter to the influential British politician, Lord Elibank, that with heart and soul he was working towards “training the American public to join the crusade against Hitler.” p. 351.
[FDR pontificated]: “The world is too small to provide adequate “living room” for both Hitler and God. In proof of that, the Nazis have now announced their plan for enforcing their new German, pagan religion throughout the world – the plan by which the Holy Bible and the Cross of Mercy would be displaced by Mein Kampf and the swastika and the naked sword.” -FDR to Congress on 6 January 1942. p. 368.
It is a fact that Hitler, in his “Mein Kampf”, does draw attention to the need of essential “Living space [Lebenraum] in the East” for the German nation. He does not however, — and this is a significant difference – claim that he was going to take it should he ever become head of the German government. p. 383.
Note: Mein Kampf’s title was originally to have been “Four and a half Years of Struggle against Lies, Stupidity, and Cowardice.” p. 448.
Udo Walendy, ‘Truth for Germany’, trans. E.M. Parker
No room in the world for both Hitler and God??? Pray tell … who and what is ‘God’ in his reprobate brain? Enforcing a pagan religion throughout the world? This no doubt had it’s calculated effect on the emotions of the gullible, but no thinking person could receive it without a scoffing contempt at its hypocrisy.
Hitler’s invasion of the Soviet Union was a preemptive strike. Stalin had been amassing forces along the border for his own invasion of Western Europe.
Yes… I do agree that Hitler’s move was a preemptive strike. Hitler struck Stalin before Stalin could strike Hitler.
Icebreaker by Viktor Suvorov IMO is a must read.