Home Blog Page 182

National Socialism in Practice

0

IDEOLOGY. Are our detractors right when they claim our soup kitchens for disadvantaged Swedes are a “PR trick”? Are such tactics populism? Fredrik Vejdeland responds.

Last weekend the Nordic Resistance Movement organised a soup kitchen for vulnerable Swedes in Gothenburg. The event caused a great deal of consternation to the establishment media and liberal keyboard warriors, both of whom had a hard time figuring out their response. After all, this kind of community outreach activity doesn’t exactly fit their idea of “Nazism”.

The media’s solution was to attack us ad hominem, hoping to distract people from the real reason for our presence in Gothenburg and our charitable activities. Meanwhile the anti-white leftists took to social media to proclaim the soup kitchen as “populist” and a “PR trick”, something that even the Gothenburg Post and Gothenburg Times only hinted at.

Their argument was that the soup kitchen wasn’t genuine, as we are “Nazis”, and “Nazism” isn’t about helping people but “discriminating against them”. In their view, we are really just wolves in sheep’s clothing, pretending to care about vulnerable members of society. So what’s the reality?

National Socialism – the opposite of “Nazism”
The problem here is that “Nazism” is an artificial concept, constructed chiefly by Hollywood and the mass media. No real National Socialist has ever referred to himself as a “Nazi”, and, in truth, we are just as much as opposed to the media-created caricature as everyone else is. “Nazism” is a straw man, a fictitious term the media has defined for itself and which it attaches to anyone it wishes. In reality there are no “Nazis”, as Henrik Pihlström has previously explained.

Another aim of the term “Nazism”, besides causing instinctive negative reactions, is to conceal the “Socialist” part of “National Socialism”. If our political opponents were to describe us accurately, as National Socialists instead of just “Nazis”, it would be far more difficult for them to dismiss us out of hand. It would also be harder to convince the public that our soup kitchens are a “PR trick”.

The national community is fundamental to National Socialism
The soup kitchen wasn’t just a well-received relief effort; it was also an opportunity to highlight local politicians’ betrayal of their own people. The city of Gothenburg was recently given 90 million kroner by the EU and the Swedish state, which its leaders chose to spend on initiatives for “disadvantaged EU migrants”; that is to say, Romany gypsies. We therefore wanted to demonstrate how neglected Swedes have been failed by a state that has neither the capacity nor the will to help them. We were also able to expose the hypocrisy of the politicians and the media, who are all too happy to see money given exclusively to foreigners, yet are horrified by initiatives to help ethnic Swedes.

Rudolf Kjellén, political scientist and the father of geopolitics. He coined the term “folkefellesskap” (national community), which promotes the idea that all sections of society should work together to defeat social injustices.

Organising a soup kitchen for those in need is much more than a simple charitable event, however; it’s National Socialism in practice. An important part of the socialist component of National Socialism is helping socially vulnerable people – of our race – and uniting the social classes towards a common goal. This is what is meant by the national community, and it is a fundamental part of the ideology. Interestingly, and somewhat appropriately, the very concept of a national community was coined by a Gothenburg professor, Rudolf Kjellén (who also introduced and defined the concept of National Socialism itself), in the early 1900s. It later became known as Volksgemeinschaft in National Socialist Germany.
The NSDAP first organised soup kitchens in the 1920s, and after coming to power they also established “Stew Sunday”. These initiatives later grew to become “Winter Aid for the People of Germany”, a state-financed charitable organisation that collected food, money and clothes for the needy and whose purpose was to “strengthen the German people’s social and national solidarity”.

National Socialist Germany impressed people the world over, including Swedish social democrats, who made research trips to the country to gain inspiration for the “folkhem”, or the Swedish welfare state. As well as Winter Aid, other notable feats achieved by the NSDAP included: providing jobs for five million unemployed Germans, ensuring workers were better paid than any others in Europe, introducing safeguards against unfair dismissals, forcing companies to conform to new health regulations at the workplace, and legalising new holiday requirements that were the most worker-friendly in the world.

Food distribution to hungry citizens in National Socialist Germany, in 1933. “Winterhilfswerk des Deutschen Volkes” (Winter Aid for the People of Germany) was a charitable organisation for impoverished Germans. Its maxim was “None shall starve or freeze”.

With all this in mind, it’s absurd to state that Nordic Resistance Movement activists were being “populist” when they helped out vulnerable Swedes via socially responsible activism. The reality is that they were merely following old National Socialist traditions and practising their own ideology.

Only a National Socialist administration can help those in need
The Nordic Resistance Movement has certain criteria regarding how our soup kitchens and other such activities should be organised. For one thing, we have to be clear why we’re organising the event and make sure people know we’re the ones responsible for it. The activity must also be in line with the fundamental principles of National Socialism; we don’t engage in stunts just to try to look morally superior, like SJWs.

It’s also important that the activity highlights the system’s inability or unwillingness to help vulnerable people. This way we can expose the anti-white nature of the ruling elite, which prioritises foreign ethnic groups above our own. In Gothenburg this was easily done by referencing the 90 million kroner given to gypsies while homeless Swedes freeze and starve.

Through these soup kitchens and similar initiatives, we are able to demonstrate to those in need how we are different from the system. We also present an image of the kind of society we will build in the future. Even so, people should not be fooled into thinking that we’re able to fix all the problems of modern-day Sweden. If that’s the case, we haven’t gotten our message across properly. The present state of affairs are the result of the rotten system we live in, and such serious societal problems will not be solved as long as that system remains intact.

The soup kitchens organised by the NSDAP in 1920s Germany didn’t result in any lasting change for the impoverished citizenry. It was only in 1933, when the Party took power, that real progress could be made. In other words, only when a traitorous regime is defeated can a new society, built on the concept of a national community, rise from the ruins.

THE REVOLUTION STARTS WITH YOU

0

IDEOLOGY. In this article, the Resistance Movement’s Norwegian leader, Haakon Forwald, explains how Nordic men and women can reclaim their lives.

As I’ve stated before, most recently in my article “Fight for the North!”, the nationalist movement often has a bad habit of spending a large amount of time and energy focusing on society’s ills. Don’t get me wrong: it’s important to document and shed light on what’s happening to our countries and people, but at the same time this needs to be balanced with a positive message, a message that serves to remind us what we are fighting for and not just what we are fighting against.

Mass immigration – just one of many symptoms
There’s no doubt that mass immigration is a huge threat to Europe and the Nordics. If it isn’t stopped and reversed, it will effectively destroy the whole continent, for good. Race, ethnic distinctions, culture, identity, science, beliefs, traditions and so on – everything will be wiped out. Put simply: the world’s white population will be annihilated if there is no resistance. That is the painful truth.

However, it’s important to remember that mass immigration is just a symptom. This cannot be emphasised or repeated too often. It is a symptom of a sick country and a sick people, a symptom of a people who have been under constant attack for a long, long time. In no way do I think that opposition to mass immigration is wrong. We must fight against it tooth and nail, but we must also remember that mass immigration is just one of many tools, or rather weapons, that are used to destroy white civilisation.

A war that has lasted for generations
Mass immigration is a direct consequence of a war that has been waged against the world’s white civilisations for generations. The fact that European men and women currently accept an outright INVASION of their lands says a little about how effective this war has been. We have been attacked on a broad front for a long time. Sworn enemies of the white nations of the world have committed cultural, spiritual and intellectual warfare of biblical proportions, all to tear down our moral and mental immune systems, as well as our people and civilisation.

In order to see the result of this warfare, just visit a random European capital city. How does it look? What are the demographics like? Can you travel safely there at night, or in the daytime, for that matter? What are the crime statistics? Is there prostitution? Drugs? Pollution?

Let’s take another example. What does the youth of today spend their time doing? Do they pursue healthy activities? Do they possess good moral values? Do they watch constructive films and TV programmes? Do they listen to pleasant music with a positive message?

What are the most popular TV programmes these days? Which films are shown at the cinema? What magazines are people reading? What kind of music? Are there positive white role models for white boys and girls, or men and women, in any of the above? Do they promote wholesome values and morality? What kind of “intellectual” diet are people being fed in today’s society? And, most importantly, what do you think the result of all this will be?

The revolution starts with YOU!
So what should we do? How are we going to overcome these problems? By tearing them up by their roots! After all, with the exception of mass immigration, most of the aforementioned issues are things we can control in our everyday lives. So, I say again – tear this filth up by its roots!

Start with yourself. Take control over your own life. Throw away your TV, and decide for yourself what you will fill your mind with. Read books about history, ideology, philosophy, art, and so forth. Listen to beautiful and uplifting music, music with substance, meaning and maybe even a positive message. If you watch a film, make it a decent one you can learn something from. Get in shape. Work out. Eat healthy food, and cut out bad habits. Learn self-defence. Start a family. Take care of your children, and bring them up to be the opposite of today’s declared role models.

The list is endless, but the main lesson is that you must take control over your own life. Our existences must be reclaimed, both physically and mentally, and we as a movement, as a unit, must be smarter about accentuating the positive. We must not focus exclusively on what we are fighting against, but also what we are fighting for, and why.

Every person is like a building block, an important individual part of our race as a whole. Only by starting with ourselves, by practising what we preach, can we bring about the changes that are necessary to reclaim the Nordic nations and free our people.
The revolution begins with YOU!

A New Mentality

During the Swedish folkhem (lit. the people’s home) era, lasting approximately from the early 1930s to the mid 1970s, much of society was like a peaceful idyll. Sweden was a largely homogeneous country. Work opportunities were plentiful, and public finances were used to build up the social welfare system. There was a genuine sense of community and reciprocity between citizens.

People rarely had to lock their doors, and were not apprehensive of strangers. In fact, hitch-hiking with complete strangers was nothing unusual. Much has been said and written about this era that stretched from the days of Per Albin Hansson, until the end of Tage Erlander’s administration.

If you are romantically inclined, it can be tempting to look back at the days when society was functioning better, where there was a sense of harmony and Sweden was still Swedish. The traditional Sweden as we knew it is unfortunately not going to come back, considering that today’s circumstances are altogether different. We cannot make promises that the idyllic Sweden of old will be brought back through some kind of magic political formulas, now that we are staring down a multi-ethnic abyss. We also cannot promise that there will be an “alternative way” to resolve the current situation, by which today’s high material standards can somehow be maintained.

The future we face will require an entirely new mentality – one that can do away with the old, materialistic premises, which revolve around personal financial gain. If you look at electoral politics, it is obvious that individual monetary gain has become by far the most important consideration for voters. Before any election, voters are expected to ask themselves in what way liberal-conservative or left-wing policies, respectively, can maximize their personal comfort. In anti-immigration circles, the line of thought is similar: their criticism of immigration focuses mainly on the costs involved.

My opinion is that it would be better if Swedes had their salaries cut in half, with the burden of taxa;on doubled. If this is the price we would have to pay for a society with no asylum centers, and where our children can have a future, then the cost is irrelevant. As a matter of fact, this seemingly less attractive alternative might be exactly what we will need to promote.

If nationalism were to become a truly popular movement with real influence in society,then that society would, predictably, be severely punished through international sanctions. This is still a fairly optimistic scenario, which doesn’t take into account the very real possibility of foreign military intervention. International embargoes would likely make society regress to a de-industrialized stage, with scarce technological resources.

Modern communications and transport would probably be very limited. Society would need to go through significant adjustments to face these sort of challenges. An en;rely new infrastructure would need to be built from scratch in order to meet the population’s most basic needs. With cars grounded due to oil embargoes, it would perhaps be necessary to re-introduce horse and cart as a primary mode of transport. It would take generations to create anything that can be compared with today’s living standards.

It is not going to be fun offering people a future with a way of life reminiscent of a de-industrialized 18th-century society. This prospect most likely does not appeal to many nationalists or anti-immigration proponents, either. Even so, it is a realistic scenario and one that is important to discuss. Of course, it is true to say that immigration is an economic burden, but it is equally true that the globalist elite will impose harsh economic sanctions upon us, as soon as we cease to be their obedient puppets.

If you want to continue living in an industrialized society, it makes sense to keep voting for the centre-right, or other politically correct alternatives approved by the globalist establishment. This will eventually lead to our ruin, although in a short-term perspective you do need to be politically correct if you want a comfortable life. No nationalist alternative can offer material wealth other than in their slogans.

Despite the gloomy outlook, there is hope of change. The success of the Sweden Democrats (SD) is an indicator that something is happening. More and more people are recognizing the madness of mass immigration, and are starting to recover from their political correctness-induced mental illness. This is not primarily a result of SD’s work, but a public reaction against the forced transition towards a multi-ethnic society.

Our task cannot be to imitate the average politician, selling promises that sound attractive. We promote an ideal with a sen;mental value that is more important than material values. We must not try to emulate SD, but instead follow our own path in a completely new direction, and thus overcome the impending storm.

The coming hardship is in no way an end in itself. Nor do I advocate techno-phobia, and I certainly do not want to take away the faith in our own ability. I do, however, call for the cast-iron mentality required to meet the challenges that the future holds. We need to realize that it will not be an easy journey.

Fight and live forever!

STRUGGLE. Fight today and you can live forever through your race – if too many of us choose not to fight, we will soon all die and be forgotten.

Nordic Resistance Movement marchers on May Day 2018 in Ludvika, Sweden

Every man dies. Not every man really lives.
— William Wallace (Braveheart)

Everyone dies sooner or later. Death is inescapable. Death is natural and a part of life. Death is one of evolution’s means for improving the race.

We can’t change whether we live or die. All we can do is choose how we live our lives and how we meet our deaths. Some people’s aim is to keep themselves alive as long as possible, or to live life as comfortably as possible. Others use their short time on earth to make a difference in a meaningful way, even though this could mean meeting death sooner than they otherwise would.

It is the latter kind of people who are remembered throughout history. No one remembers the cowardly and comfortable people, let alone praises them. Our forefathers understood this and expressed it thus:

Cattle die,

and kinsmen die;

and so must one die oneself.

But there is one thing I know

which never dies:

the fame of a dead man’s deeds.

— Hávamál

Or more concisely:

What we do in life, echoes in eternity.
— Maximus (Gladiator)

Portraits of Alexander the Great, Caesar, Hitler and Napoleon
Four historical figures who will never be forgotten as long as learned people walk the earth – even if they may dispute exactly how some of them should be remembered.

Those of us who have become involved with the Resistance Movement have chosen to try to make a difference with our lives. We understand that in this critical moment for our racial survival certain people need to step forward and take responsibility, even if our struggle demands we make various forms of self-sacrifice. If we do not succeed, thousands of years of evolutionary development will be lost and our race will eventually completely disappear from the earth.

Unfortunately, far too many today choose safety and a comfortable life ahead of the struggle. This is the greatest threat to our victory. A race that doesn’t fight for its survival does not deserve to survive, and a worldview that lacks adherents is just an empty and dead idea.

Public support for our cause does not need to be total. All that’s needed is for a sufficient number of Swedes to put their foot down sufficiently hard in response to those working to make us a minority in our country. Politics is about will and strength. If there is just a sufficiently strong will and a sufficiently strong force behind it, nothing is impossible.

Because our political enemies have criminalised many of the best arguments for our cause via “hate speech” laws, we have no moral obligation to play by their rules. The thieves who stole Sweden from the Swedes can thus be treated like the thieves they are.

Victory is possible, but only if more people go from thinking what’s right to doing what’s right, and not being afraid to fight and take risks. More people need to use life’s gift to take responsibility:

Don’t be a shirker. Don’t try to be a smart guy by continuing to cheer from the sidelines but refusing to join the team and get out on the field. Stand up and become a participant in life. Make of your life a model that people will remember and talk about long after you’re gone.
— William Pierce

Anyone who reads Nordfront regularly will have all the information they need to understand what the Resistance Movement is fighting for and why. Most of the people who read our website presumably share our views, yet the majority have not yet chosen to get active and fight. I will therefore end this article with the following questions:

How do YOU plan to live your life?

Are you going to fight and strive to become one of those immortal people who lives forever in our race’s memory?

Or will you waste your life and watch as our race dies out?

A Link to the Past

0

IDEOLOGY. A people who no longer defend their land are a people destined to perish. A people who doubt their own identity and have lost their desire for independence are a people who lack the will to live.

It isn’t unusual to meet people who ask the question: “What’s so special about the Nordic peoples?” Or: “Why should our people survive anyway?” The simplest way to respond is to descend to their level. Ask: “What is so special about you? Why should you survive?”

To be or not to be applies just as much to a people as to an individual – the difference is that a people are far more important than a single person. However, in today’s extremely individualistic society, we have forgotten that a single person is merely a leaf on a large tree. The tree is the most important thing, not the leaf. And likewise, in the grand scheme of things, an individual’s fate is of microscopic importance when compared to that of the people.

Foolish questions like “Why do I exist?” and “What’s the meaning of life?” are the sort of things people should have stopped asking in childhood. The problem is that our society can no longer answer such basic questions simply and correctly, and therefore people retain this childish mentality into adulthood, which is catastrophic for the future.

The population as a whole must share some of the blame for this, but the chief responsibility is borne by those running our country: those charged with the education and development of our youth, those who control the media, and so on. They have not only betrayed their responsibility but also bear the guilt for the lies spread in our schools and the media.

In the past, when we lived closer to nature and still enjoyed pure and unbroken traditions, a grandmother could sit with a child on her knee and explain why things are the way they are – that protecting one’s own people, their tree, was integral to every individual. The whole concept was so self-evident that no one ever needed to ask themselves such self-evident questions.

We have lived in this land since ancient times, and since ancient times we have been on a journey – a journey of evolution. Now we have lost our way. The question therefore isn’t just “Who am I?” but also “Who are we?” or “Where are we?” An entire people have become infantile. An entire people demonstrate an egotism and naivety that was previously only exhibited by children.

The story of how this came to be is much too long to be retold in this article. Suffice it to say that it likely began when St Ansgar and his gang first set foot on Nordic soil a thousand years ago. A thousand years of spiritual poison leaves its marks. Christianity softened us up for what was to come – that which has come now.

I will say in our forefathers’ defence that, as they couldn’t understand Latin, they likely didn’t understand the Bible’s contents before it was too late. The priests of the time held masses that were more spiritually Nordic in character than Oriental, and Jesus and his apostles were depicted as blond and Nordic, presumably so our forefathers would not be shocked by their “message”.

Throughout these thousand years, our instincts and our ancient traditions have come into conflict with Christianity. In the 16th century Gustav Vasa was able to partly break this foreign grip over our thoughts, and for a long time we grew stronger, right up until modern times, when a new set of foreign ideas again penetrated our people’s spiritual immune system. But now it is far worse than it was in Gustav Vasa’s time. Never before have we found ourselves in such a serious situation. Never before has there been more reason to fight than now.

What we are seeing today is a total dissolution, not just of our people and our country but of all our morals. However, it’s difficult for ordinary people to get a proper perspective on this when they are pumped full of multiculturalism, materialism and new “values” 24/7 – on the internet, through TV shows, films, newspapers, and so on. The entire modus operandi of the mass media is to promote, encourage and defend all kinds of degenerate phenomena. Notably we are bombarded with exultations that we must be tolerant. Every year we must tolerate more and more. Many ask themselves what we must tolerate next…

Thankfully, I am proud to say the Nordic Resistance Movement is not a “tolerant” organisation, and we do not tolerate the mess multicultural society dumps on us.

The Resistance Movement doesn’t ask “why” – for we are an organisation deeply connected to our race’s family tree: a tree whose roots run into the depths of the past we were born to protect, and whose branches and leaves stretch towards the future we were born to secure.

National Socialism in Our Time

0

It is my personal opinion that Adolf Hitler was one of the twentieth century’s greatest figures. However, due to the propaganda, political interests and emotional reactions that surround his life and legacy, judgements of him and his beliefs can become clouded. This doesn’t just apply to our opponents, either, but to us as well.

Those of us who acknowledge Hitler as one of the greatest social reformers should always be careful to avoid being drawn into any kind of cultural or religious worship of him. Such irrational approaches will not help us in the struggle. Hitler was a human being, and, like all of us, he had strengths and weaknesses. He was a man who operated in a difficult age, a man who made both good and bad decisions. In fact, it is for these very reasons that he is arguably more worthy of admiration than if he were some kind of demigod.

We must remain level-headed when we assess the world around us. Irrational reactions are a hindrance. We must be self-critical and understand that our struggle cannot be allowed to devolve into sectarianism or some form of orthodoxy in an attempt to replicate the shining example of the Third Reich. Such tendencies in our organization must be opposed as nonconstructive.

On the other hand we have an important task in rehabilitating Hitler and restoring him to his rightful place in history. This is an absolute necessity for our cause’s renaissance and eventual victory. But though this is a part of our political mission, it doesn’t mean we are obligated to promote him in our daily struggle as a movement. We must learn to separate the two.

We must also acknowledge that Hitler sometimes made errors of judgement, and that those of us who live and fight seventy years after his death do not have to defend everything he or his government did. Neither are we bound to the NSDAP’s political programme or the Third Reich’s policies. In fact, by acknowledging the mistakes the Third Reich made, we can also learn from them.

We must understand that the political landscape has changed dramatically since the Second World War. Russia is no longer communist; Germany is no longer National Socialist, and so on. Old friends and alliances have ended, and today old friends are sometimes enemies, and enemies friends. We cannot use an outdated map as our guide. If we do, we will lose our way. Historical knowledge should be something that gives us the ability to understand the present and the future, not something that blinds us.

For example, we National Socialists shouldn’t allocate too much importance to nations’ artificial borders. We are not cultural or civic nationalists, even though National Socialism itself evolved from early nationalist thinking. Our loyalty is to the present moment in time and is not tied to any specific country. Borders have changed and will continue to change in the future. Geopolitical situations – and therefore appropriate strategies – are in constant flux.

If National Socialism is to survive and compete, now and in the future, then it must be adapted to present conditions in order to handle today and tomorrow’s important questions. At the same time, however, it must not lose its essence. This is a difficult balancing act, but nonetheless a necessary one. It might well be much easier to do away with the term “National Socialism” and call ourselves something else. However, in practice this would likely either lead to diluting our beliefs, or to our accepting an ideological stagnation that would be guaranteed to lead to marginalization.

The choice for us therefore is not to decide between “liberalism” and “conservatism” when it comes to National Socialism. Our goal must be an ideological evolution. Instead of taking a step backwards in history and choosing a more ambiguous ideological concept like nationalism, we must work for a strong National Socialism as a clear, distinct worldview for our time. We must adapt it to our needs here and now, just like a living organism develops through evolution, or a technology is improved to meet new challenges.

We must be able to achieve this change without distancing ourselves from National Socialism or renouncing it altogether. It is not our aim to sugarcoat our beliefs or exchange them for some watered-down substitute; our aim is to create the ultimate National Socialism for the modern day. This is one of our most important tasks. To what extent we are able to achieve it remains to be seen. But if anyone can succeed – and protect our cause from liberalization – it is we in the Resistance Movement.

National Socialism and Animal Rights

0

IDEOLOGY. Readers often send us questions regarding our views on certain issues. One of the most frequent subjects we’re asked about is the National Socialist position on animal rights. In this article, the founder of the Nordic Resistance Movement, Klas Lund, responds.

It’s a widely unacknowledged fact of history that National Socialist Germany was the first nation to achieve political and legislative breakthroughs on the issues of animal rights and environmentalism. Even today, 80 years on, many countries the world over still have no kind of animal protection laws at all, and it’s only in Northern Europe that real progress has been made.

In its nascent stages, National Socialism developed an organic outlook on the world, in contrast to the prevailing anthropocentric and geocentric mindsets largely inherited from Judeo-Christianity. The anthropocentric worldview regarded animals as mere creatures that could serve humans, machines that lacked a “soul” (an opinion held by the Church, Pope Pius IX, Descartes, among others). National Socialism opposed this doctrine and considered man a fellow animal, although on a higher level. He was therefore not automatically worth more than other creatures but was a part of the natural order and subject to the laws of nature.

National Socialist Germany was revolutionary in introducing animal and wildlife protection laws that safeguarded animals from inhumane slaughter and harmful experiments. These laws were established on the principle that animals should be protected for their own sake, rather than for profit. However, the idea of man being part of nature was considered dangerous by many “anti-Nazis”, who believed assigning greater value to animals inferred some kind of “lowering” of humanity and, following this logic, indirectly paved the way for the alleged genocide of the Jews. Although it sounds ridiculous, this thought-line nevertheless forms the basis for one of the recurring critiques of the National Socialist position on animal rights. A similar argument is used today against those who believe overpopulation is destroying the environment. Such people are labelled “environmental fanatics”, purely because they have come to the rational conclusion that the global population needs to be reduced one way or another so that life on Earth can be saved.

For Christians and those who have inherited an anthropocentric view, human life is regarded as “holy” and worth more than that of other animals. We, on the other hand, understand there are no objective grounds for such beliefs, and recognise they originate from our subjective view of humanity. Such people are basically demanding special and existential rights for themselves, based on the perception that they are “chosen”.

We Nords can be proud that the Swedish scientist Carl Linnaeus was one of the first who dared to oppose such dogmas. Linnaeus claimed that humans were primates and therefore also animals, a view that earned him criticism from the Christian authorities of the time. He also maintained that animals could be considered to have souls and therefore ought to be well treated.

This view correlates with the National Socialist stance on animal rights. Even though human beings have long been forced to kill to live, just like other animals (at least until the invention of modern agriculture), it does not follow that we have a right to cause our fellow creatures unnecessary suffering. On the contrary, we higher beings are duty-bound to treat animals with as much decency as humanly possible. If we choose to remain meat-eaters, we have no choice but to kill animals for food, but doing so in a way that causes them to live in undignified and distressing circumstances to maximise profits is completely reprehensible. The keeping of animals in captivity to produce luxury goods is also unacceptable; for example, the mink farms that are still permitted in the Nordics.

Despite such instances, however, there has generally been much progress in the field of animal rights in the Nordic countries, especially when compared to some other parts of the world, where animals have no legal or moral protection whatsoever. It’s very difficult for some Westerners to understand just how badly animals can be treated in other cultures, and a lot of people would rather bury their heads in the sand than confront the truth. For example, I recently read an article about an animal rights group in China that documented how raccoons are skinned alive for their pelts. The day before another story related how a Chinese she-bear killed its own cub and then itself to avoid a life in captivity in which both mother and cub would regularly have their gall bladders emptied to make some kind of “medicine”. It was difficult to read the whole thing, and reading the two articles combined made me feel ill for days. And to think we’re told this communist dictatorship will save our economy… Can you imagine?

Put simply, any type of animal testing that causes suffering should be banned. Painful experiments on animals cannot be justified just because they provide us with medication, and certainly not in cases of non-medicinal products. We must find other ways to carry out such research, regardless of whether it costs us more. Current punishments for animal cruelty are also far too lenient, and, in a National Socialist state, such acts would be viewed as very serious offences. In my personal opinion, people guilty of extreme animal cruelty have acted so reprehensibly they have forfeited their right to live.

Finally, I am of the firm opinion that a National Socialist society must work diligently and purposefully to return a large number of people to the countryside. We have to combat the current trend of ever-expanding agriculture, and a National Socialist state would strive for small-scale agriculture and more self-sufficiency. The state must also have a well-developed system for controlling animal husbandry and slaughterhouses. Instead of large central slaughterhouses, we should try to increase local production and consumption, and work towards ensuring animals are slaughtered on local farms, rather than being transported from their natural habitat where they have been raised and feel secure. We also need to combat the industrialisation of agriculture and animal husbandry, meaning a ban on genetically modified foods, artificial fertilisers and chemical pesticides.

Status Quo ante Revolution

0

At the time of writing [2011], one year has passed since SD won representation in the Swedish parliament. This was, above all, a backlash against the mass immigration that has flooded our country for decades. At long last, a segment of our people has woken up to these issues, but only to a certain extent, and with the only tangible result being a surge in votes for what is essentially a wishy-washy, populist party.

Given the current situation in Sweden, there really can be no doubt that SD will continue to grow – that is, as long as the system in which we live remains stable. This is because more and more people are bound to turn against an ever more dysfunctional, multicultural society. For these people, SD will be the obvious and easiest alternative. The party will appeal to those who want change in some shape or form, but who do not question the very foundations of the current system.

The SD phenomenon is, in essence, a reaction by those who have faith in the present system but wish to reform our society, albeit only to a limited degree. They do not view mass immigration and other issues in a wider perspective – they fail to realize that the problems we see are a direct consequence of the current system – and they are ignorant of (or do not acknowledge) certain basic factors that affect society in decisive ways. Two of the most important factors in this context are Zionism and the issue of race, respectively.

SD are seeking to reverse the destructive direction our society is heading in, but without changing the system itself or the foundations of society. The idea is that the current system would have been acceptable, if accompanied by more sensible policies. In their understanding, this would mean curtailing non-European immigration, emphasizing the importance of moral and ethics in society, hiring more police, imposing harsher criminal sentences, strengthening the national defense, slashing foreign aid, investing in the Swedish cultural life, etc.

In other words, they want to uphold the present political system. From a National Socialist perspective, this is an altogether reactionary outlook. Essentially, the message they are conveying is: “If you let us keep our red cottages and guarantee our social and financial security, we will carry on pretending that we are not ruled over by Zionist media moguls and bankers!”

If your aim is to achieve something here and now, and you are prepared to make significant concessions (e.g. when it comes to criticizing Jewish power) – that is to say, you are not seeking to radically transform society – then it does make sense to back SD. If you are less willing to compromise, but want to achieve whatever political breakthrough the current circumstances permit, you still need to come across as “mainstream”. In this case, it would make sense to support one of the nationalist parties. You then become part of the prevalent political culture, and you make sure to act in a way that corresponds with ordinary people’s understanding of how politics works. You would of course avoid behaving in ways that do not appeal to the middle class’s perception of what is diplomatic and respectable. You would refrain from speaking about revolution or radical change. You would try to be populist, and adapt your message to the

Zeitgeist and prevalent attitudes.
The Nordic Resistance Movement is a revolutionary, National Socialist organization – this sets us apart from SD and other nationalist parties / organizations. In essence, this means that we endeavor to create an entirely new society. We believe that the current system in itself is racially and culturally degenerate, and economically corrupt. We therefore reject this entire system and do not believe it can survive long-term.

The world is currently undergoing major changes, and the capitalist economy is showing signs of increasing volatility. Even so, the economy is still strong enough for us living in Europe to live in relative abundance. However, dark clouds are forming on the horizon. There are simply too many negative factors that must be taken into account (Peak oil, environmental degradation, overpopulation, etc.) for anyone with their eyes open to feel secure. Sooner or later, the current system will be subject to major strains, at which point things will rapidly and significantly deteriorate.

“…but instead build something completely new upon the ruins of the current system; a National Socialist society in harmony with nature.”

We believe that capitalism – and, consequently, the present system – is on the verge of collapse, and we do not wish to prolong its existence by being part of the reaction, but instead build something completely new upon the ruins of the current system; a National Socialist society in harmony with nature.

We have come to realize that an outright change of system is absolutely necessary, and that there is no point trying to maintain a societal structure that is thoroughly rotten. We will of course keep the “foundation” of the structure – our land, people and the sound parts of our culture – but we believe the rest ought to be demolished and rebuilt in accordance with new ideals and objectives for the future.

We are, naturally, conscious that it will be very difficult to convince people of these things under the current circumstances. People are still well off, and are not yet prepared to side with anything or anyone that is perceived as being too controversial. Most of them will continue to vote for whatever party will benefit their bank account. We are also aware that most people desiring change will initially opt for alternatives within the present system, before turning to the Nordic Resistance Movement as a last resort, having tried all other ways.

During the current phase of our struggle, we must sow the seeds that will allow us to reap in due course. We must make ourselves known as an uncompromising force that is diametrically opposed to the system. We must prepare the people by spreading the National Socialist message already at this point. We must proclaim our vision of a free and unified Nordic nation, and constantly criticize the current order. Slowly but surely, we must build up a well-organized base of revolutionaries and try to expand wherever we can, so that we are in as good a position as possible when the time comes.

If you are reading this and consider yourself a nationalist, you should reflect on these things. It is imperative that you choose which way you want to go. Are you in favor of the present system; do you think it will endure; do you want it to endure? If so, the Nordic Resistance Movement is not for you. The difference between us and the others is that we do not focus on the limitations of the present, but on the possibilities that the future holds. We do not fear nightfall, but recognize that it will lead to a new dawn. We do not view the prevalent attitudes of the people as something absolute, but are conscious that things can, will and must change. We will act as a consistent, revolutionary force, and we hope that you will decide to support us in whatever way you can.

Back to the Trenches

0

IDEOLOGY. Klas Lund writes about stopping the retreating Nords and making them get back into the trenches.

As every officer knows, you need more than clever arguments to prevent a group of soldiers from deserting the battlefield. To make Swedish men stand up and fight for their people, we will need a whole lot more than just convincing arguments. In some cases, we will probably have to make examples of the weakest and most cowardly. Apart from using the “stick and carrot” approach, the organization tasked with stopping the retreat must be equipped with a strong voice and imposing physical strength.

Imagine that we are at war, deployed near the front, an area scarred with craters and bunkers, barbed wire and gutted military vehicles. Something has happened here, panicked Swedish soldiers are fleeing in disarray, away from their trenches towards some imaginary safety. No one wants to stay in the rain of bullets, no one wants to be ripped to shreds by bombshells. Hardly anyone dares stay in their trenches – those who remain cannot offer any meaningful resistance. The army is in full retreat, the enemy winning ever more territory. All authority is gone, only the enemy seems to have a set plan executed by single-minded and skillful leaders. On our side, all organization has collapsed – some divisions continue the battle by themselves but are only a nuisance to the enemy and cannot stall his advance whatsoever.

Enemy propaganda
This is the situation we are in. Swedish men are fleeing in disarray. The enemy has the initiative, he can choose the time and place for every decisive battle. Our enemies are accomplished in psychological warfare, they are highly skilled when it comes to demoralizing our men who should be fighting at the front, as well as the rest of the population.

The enemy’s agents divide and conquer by stirring class and gender struggle, they try to divert the people’s attention from the battle at hand to more trivial and “comfortable” illusions. His agents spread all kinds of drugs among the people to weaken it even further. Through his agents, he spreads false, subversive ideas, he supports all kinds of superstition and misunderstandings. The enemy tells us that Sweden belongs to everybody, and that as long as we cease our resistance and surrender our evil prejudices and suspicions, everything will be fine, everyone will live at peace with each other in a pleasant, utopian democracy. He also tells us that the occupation is already an unchangeable fact – the aliens are here to stay – “we all have to get accustomed to it” – “Swedes must learn to live and accept the new, foreign society”. Those who resist are depicted as evil “nazis”, “racists” and “criminals”. Organized religion is mobilized by our enemies to become a trojan horse, eroding the people’s sense of fellowship and community from within. Priests and bishops actively take a stand for the aliens, proclaiming that those who resist them are “evil”. Parliament is full of spineless snakes who grovel for their new, foreign masters. The aliens rape Swedish women by the hundreds, Swedish youngsters are stabbed on the streets of the major cities. The elderly are robbed and assaulted in cities as well as on the countryside. Our ancestors and our culture are mocked. All kinds of sick phenomena are aided by enemy propaganda. Both people and nature are exploited; everything noble and honorable is trampled in the mud.

Victory is all that matters
The retreat has to be stopped. Resuming the battle is imperative. The fleeing men must be made to return to the trenches. The only question is how to make this happen.

I have seen officers and soldiers, who have themselves been victims of enemy disinformation, trying to stop the flight of the Swedish people using arguments and fine words. This has always failed. I have seen small groups of Swedish men who have tried to combat the enemy, I have seen them fight with bad tactics without any greater, overarching strategy. I have seen some men fight simply for the sake of fighting, without a second thought as to what the consequences will be for them; real idealists who are ready to sacrifice themselves for their people.

In the heat of the battle, we often forget that the overarching aim must be to achieve victory. Everything else has to be subordinate to this. Our strategy and tactics must be adapted to the conditions of the battle field. The enemy often spreads disinformation concerning our methods. He wants to stop us from using effective tactics at all costs. You can be sure that he has agents among us, “officers” who point their soldiers in the wrong direction, “soldiers” who spread mean rumors, and others who sabotage our efforts in various ways. The methods are many – and so far, they have been successful.

As every officer knows, or should know, it makes no sense to try to stop your men from fleeing using a soft voice, nor using clever arguments to try to convince them to return to the trenches. No – rational and civilized arguments will only make them run past you.

Most Swedes have been under the influence of the enemy’s destructive propaganda since they were children. Immature and disloyal, they believe that the only sensible thing is to move as far away from the sound of battle as possible. With most of them, this egoistic side to their personality now unfortunately controls their actions. Some flee because they are cowards, others because they are confused, but most of them flee simply because “everyone else is doing it”. The fact is that most Swedish men, though they would not admit it in public, do support our cause. But they are demoralized, they lack leadership, they think the enemy has all the authority, that fighting is futile. No one has succeeded in putting their feelings into words, arguments and action. Yes, it’s true that a few low-lives have changed sides and are more or less working actively for the enemy. But these are the lowest and worst elements of the people – they are filthy rats who sided with the enemy either for personal gain, or because they are severely confused or simply mad. These rats can seem to be “better” and greater in number than they actually are, because the enemy constantly depicts them as “role models”, “leaders” and “celebrities” in his propaganda. Everyone can see them on TV each day, made-up and directed like puppets in a glittering yet hideous and tragic display.

Swedes have allowed themselves to be cradled into a sleep-like condition, forgetting that the reason why wars and colonizations happen has always been a people’s need for more territory and resources, when their natural habitat has been exhausted.

Cowardice should be punished
It’s all well and good to appeal to the noble side in your troops. The brutal truth, however, is that the soldiers must be kicked all the way back to their trenches, while they are being told that cowardice is the worst thing imaginable and that the struggle for our people’s survival is all-important.

Officers need to bark and threaten, urge and appeal. Some of them need to set good examples – but only after they’ve won the trust of their men. A few deserters must be shot or otherwise severely punished, not because it is the “right thing to do” but because examples need to be made in order for the others to understand that cowardice can be just as costly as courage.

A hard core
To achieve this, a band of hardcore and realistic officers and soldiers needs to be formed at some point during the retreat, people who in turn use carrot and stick to make a growing number of Swedish men join the ranks. But for this we need discipline, ruthlessness and authority built on strength.

IDEOLOGY

National Socialism and the laws of nature

IDEOLOGY. Living in harmony with nature was once something that was taken for granted, but today everything that is natural is relativised and we...

Status Quo ante Revolution

Rob Rundo with Antifa banner

Healthy activist culture

For Our Race