Debaser11
01-11-2011, 10:15 PM
I know I have a bit of a reputation for being a Nazi/Hitler sympathizer. But leaving all that baggage aside for the moment, I propose that the root cause for the current obstacle to preservation is apologetics (which globalist machinations capitalize on).
The Big Lie is not the one that the Nazis alledgedly put forth prior to 1939, but rather, everything that has been dispriviledged as a natural result of the shaky WWII mythology that had to follow from a war of the most tragic proportions without any real glory for Western man in any sense. From this new mythology, gender, race, and even religious identity became sacrificial lambs to varying extents in order to prop up a The Big Lie we all live under today. Each mode of identity become frivolous at best, and dangerous at worst. Essentialist notions of identity so characteristic of healthy rising civilizations were extinguished. We now are told to "become one" with optimism. We are told to celebrate the wholesale destruction of human identity in the name of a profit, "progress," and other reckless short-term considerations.
Because we have to convince ourselves that WWII was fought against the forces of racism, fascism, and just general oppression (instead of being honest and acknowledging that it was about power and control) in order for the victors to justify the wholesale destruction of people and infrastructure, even the healthy incarnations of ethnic pride and tradition are allowed to be "discredited" and mocked by mainstream media both implicitly and explicitly at will. These views go virtually unchallenged. This interpretation of WWII has also lead to the (on the surface) perplexing rise of modern political correctness and the double standard which allows non-whites to unabashedly claim pride for their identities while European-descended peoples are regarded with suspicion for similiar sentiments. While the cultural Marxists are a strong, corrosive force, they had substantial help from the "historical winds" so to speak.
Oswald Spengler criticized Adolf Hitler and the Nazis for being too narrowly German in their outlook despite Hitler's admiration of British Empire and the English people in particular. And in hindsight, it's clear to see he was right as was his prediction about Nazi Germany's fate. But it's also clear that the Allied side was also too narrow in their own outlooks and interests. (This view is substantiated by Churchill's later remark of "we slaughtered the wrong pig" or something to that effect.) My proposal is that Western man see this conflict for what it is above all regardless of how one wishes to interpret the details leading to and involving the actual struggle itself: a tragedy of the greatest proportions with great deal of gray in the details. Just as one views the Peloponnesian War in such a manner. No one focuses too heavily on whether Athens or Sparta were more correct in their thinking. It's small potatoes next to what the war itself was all about.
Today, the common mode of historical interpretation is extremely myopic in most cases. Twenty years (or five U.S. Presidential terms) is seen as a long time span for a contemporary historical critique concerning even major events. Such selective narratives with limited context are expected to be the standard operating procedure in societies where the general public's undestanding of history and culture is so desperately lacking. This is why, in my opinion, the current nationalist movements and the Tea Party in the U.S. will likely fail. But when one looks at history from a macro perspective instead of a myopic persepective, it seems best to simply call this war the Second Great Western Civil War (the Pacific theater is a tangent next to what happened in Europe) while understanding that all the cultural decline we see around us today is a direct result of it.
So my proposal is that we, as preservationists, not get too hung up on any dichotomies concerning this conflict even if we do have our opinions about the details. (I am guilty of this, I realize.) Such weighted considerations concerning the details does not behoove Western man. This is not to say that we should not be proud of the heroic nature with which our predecessors fought and struggled. They are not politicians. Their heroic spirit is no less heroic even if their services were misused. But at the end of the day, I feel that the only way Western man can survive is by somehow learning to interpret the Second Great Western Civil War as an admirer of Greek culture would interpret the aforementioned Peloponnesian War: with a mix of reverence and a sense of tragedy. It should shake the core of each one of our being in the most profound way. This, in my view, must become the overarching attitude and it must replace the prodominant one that revolves around divisive bickering and a false sense of glory.
The Big Lie is not the one that the Nazis alledgedly put forth prior to 1939, but rather, everything that has been dispriviledged as a natural result of the shaky WWII mythology that had to follow from a war of the most tragic proportions without any real glory for Western man in any sense. From this new mythology, gender, race, and even religious identity became sacrificial lambs to varying extents in order to prop up a The Big Lie we all live under today. Each mode of identity become frivolous at best, and dangerous at worst. Essentialist notions of identity so characteristic of healthy rising civilizations were extinguished. We now are told to "become one" with optimism. We are told to celebrate the wholesale destruction of human identity in the name of a profit, "progress," and other reckless short-term considerations.
Because we have to convince ourselves that WWII was fought against the forces of racism, fascism, and just general oppression (instead of being honest and acknowledging that it was about power and control) in order for the victors to justify the wholesale destruction of people and infrastructure, even the healthy incarnations of ethnic pride and tradition are allowed to be "discredited" and mocked by mainstream media both implicitly and explicitly at will. These views go virtually unchallenged. This interpretation of WWII has also lead to the (on the surface) perplexing rise of modern political correctness and the double standard which allows non-whites to unabashedly claim pride for their identities while European-descended peoples are regarded with suspicion for similiar sentiments. While the cultural Marxists are a strong, corrosive force, they had substantial help from the "historical winds" so to speak.
Oswald Spengler criticized Adolf Hitler and the Nazis for being too narrowly German in their outlook despite Hitler's admiration of British Empire and the English people in particular. And in hindsight, it's clear to see he was right as was his prediction about Nazi Germany's fate. But it's also clear that the Allied side was also too narrow in their own outlooks and interests. (This view is substantiated by Churchill's later remark of "we slaughtered the wrong pig" or something to that effect.) My proposal is that Western man see this conflict for what it is above all regardless of how one wishes to interpret the details leading to and involving the actual struggle itself: a tragedy of the greatest proportions with great deal of gray in the details. Just as one views the Peloponnesian War in such a manner. No one focuses too heavily on whether Athens or Sparta were more correct in their thinking. It's small potatoes next to what the war itself was all about.
Today, the common mode of historical interpretation is extremely myopic in most cases. Twenty years (or five U.S. Presidential terms) is seen as a long time span for a contemporary historical critique concerning even major events. Such selective narratives with limited context are expected to be the standard operating procedure in societies where the general public's undestanding of history and culture is so desperately lacking. This is why, in my opinion, the current nationalist movements and the Tea Party in the U.S. will likely fail. But when one looks at history from a macro perspective instead of a myopic persepective, it seems best to simply call this war the Second Great Western Civil War (the Pacific theater is a tangent next to what happened in Europe) while understanding that all the cultural decline we see around us today is a direct result of it.
So my proposal is that we, as preservationists, not get too hung up on any dichotomies concerning this conflict even if we do have our opinions about the details. (I am guilty of this, I realize.) Such weighted considerations concerning the details does not behoove Western man. This is not to say that we should not be proud of the heroic nature with which our predecessors fought and struggled. They are not politicians. Their heroic spirit is no less heroic even if their services were misused. But at the end of the day, I feel that the only way Western man can survive is by somehow learning to interpret the Second Great Western Civil War as an admirer of Greek culture would interpret the aforementioned Peloponnesian War: with a mix of reverence and a sense of tragedy. It should shake the core of each one of our being in the most profound way. This, in my view, must become the overarching attitude and it must replace the prodominant one that revolves around divisive bickering and a false sense of glory.