Every year the 28th of february the heart of nationalist Europe beats at Risorgimento Square in Rome and this specific day thousands of nationalists from all over Europe gather to the place of Miki's Mantakas sacrifice to pay tribute to the Greek student who was killed by communists bullets in 1975 and to scream to the faces of the murderers "you killed the man not the idea".
Check also:
More certain was the open admiration expressed for the National Socialist Revolution by Vincent Price ("Vincent Price, A Daughter’s Biography", by Victoria Price, NY: St. Martin’s Press, 1999), even before the Third Reich was born. In 1932, during a visit to Vienna, he observed that the Austrians "are ruled by the Jews, who tax them to excess ... Three hundred small boys called the ‘Hitlerknabe’ are marching outside and singing. From the spirit here and the faith in the man (Hitler) and the lack of faith in Austria, which is completely under the control of the Pope and Judea, I feel he must be right, and at least it (National Socialism) is a direct appeal to the right emotion in man, love for his brother." His daughter recalled, "Vincent liked to tell friends that his visit to Nuremberg had coincided with the famous National Party Day rally immortalized by Leni Riefenstahl in ‘Triumph of the Will’, that he had heard Hitler speak ...". The Fuehrer, she writes, was her father’s "hero", until it became clear to Vincent that continued admiration for "the greatest man in two thousand years" would sabotage his career in kosher Hollywood.
« The concept on “Hvis Lyset Tar Oss” is the elucidation of a new moral unknown to the ludicrous Christians. They don’t get it that their “warmth and light” is nothing but hell for me and my brethen. In “If The Light Take Us” the concept is “let it not take you”. “Filosofem” is a disparaging assertion proposed in a philosophical erudite language. A continuance of “Hvis Lyset Tar Oss” and the other, earlier, albums. It’s all about Burzum (Darkness). »
Count Grishnackh/Varg Vikernes’ interview on “Descent” zine (1994)
"Typical of his S.A. foot soldiers was the young law student Horst Wessel, whose diary we now have. Aged just nineteen, he had joined the Party that autumn. ‘How I came to the National Socialists?’ he asked. ‘Out of disillusion really. My nationalist radicalism, or rather my radical nationalism had not found a home. But the Nazis, as they were already called, were radical—radical in every respect.’ Wessel had been a member of the Bismarck- and then Viking League since 1922, but these organisations had just played soldiers. Goebbels’ gau was, he soon found, different. Goebbels put the accent on socialism. ‘The rightwing parties spurned us for our socialist slant,’ wrote Wessel, ‘and they weren’t all that wrong, because National Socialists had more in common with the [communist] R.F.B. [Rote Frontkämpferbund] than with the [rightwing] Stahlhelm.’ At first he found it hard to follow the new Nazi policies. ‘But unlike earlier, I now began to think politics.’ "
"Horst Wessel was one of those dedicated to the Party. ‘No sacrifice in time or money,’ he would write, ‘no danger of arrest or violence could scare me off… The Sturmabteilungen, the S.A., were the stewards, the movement’s fist against the police and the marxists. The structure itself was copied from the communists—sections instead of locals, the cell-system; our press advertising and propaganda clearly betrayed their [communist] inspiration. The vitality of this new movement was vast, best demonstrated by the defections to us from the marxist camp.’ Goebbels created an atmosphere of constant activity. ‘To Dr Göbbels alone,’ wrote Wessel, ‘goes the credit for having impinged the movement so rapidly on the Berlin public’s consciousness. The man had extraordinary talents for oratory and organisation. There was nothing he couldn’t turn his hand to. The members were devoted to him. The S.A. would have let itself be torn to pieces for him. Göbbels was like Hitler himself… He took care of the injured—he really was a first class leader, a leader with class.’ "
"Horst Wessel, soon to become commander of No.5 Sturm based on the communist-infested Alexander Platz area, was in the thick of it all. ‘March through Neukölln,’ he summarized. ‘Eight hundred against tens of thousands... We carried it off! That’s the main thing. We were the first to carry it off. Then Battle of the Pharus rooms, four hundred versus three thousand; ten badly injured, but victory. Gunfight on East Lichterfelde station, three injured but victory. Victory everywhere the S.A. goes into action : everything for the movement!... We relied only on ourselves, that was our strength.’ ‘We accomplished what no other movement had in Germany,’ wrote Wessel with bitter irony in 1929, ‘namely to unite the entire people: because they were all united against us—incredibly united.’ "
"There was one episode with the S.A. that forewarned of trouble to come with them. Hitler was in mid speech when the heavy doors burst open. Several hundred communists had arrived from Berlin under the leadership of Max Höltz, bent on staging a bloodbath. The S.A. dealt with them roughly and, their blood lust aroused, rampaged through the streets of Nuremberg afterwards leaving two dead and many injured. Hitler sent a chalk-faced Goebbels out by car to call the stormtroopers to order. Horst Wessel showed particular bravery in reining in his young toughs. Walter Stennes, his S.A. commander, later said that the Brownshirts would have taken over the city there and then had he and their national commander Franz von Pfeffer not headed off the catastrophe."
"Horst Wessel’s No.5 Sturm launched a violent attack on the communist headquarters in Berlin-Kiez, injuring several Reds. ‘Drive the fascists out of the factories,’ the Red Flag screamed, ‘smash them wherever you meet them!’ In private Goebbels rejoiced. ‘This is a fight we’re going to see through with brute force.’Nazis and communists alike declared savage war on each other. Goebbels called the Reds ‘roaring, raging sub-humans,’ and the women worst of all—‘They scream, they shriek, they bare themselves to us quite shamelessly.’ The communists referred to him as ‘Goebbels the workers’ assassin.’"
"No murder really fired the imagination of the Party so much as that, when his time came, of young Horst Wessel himself. Goebbels had considered him one of his most promising apostles although still only twenty-two. But he was a marked man. Wessel’s No.5 Sturm had angered the communist high command by recruiting freely from their ranks. More recently, according to Stennes, he had fallen in with bad company. He dropped out of his law studies and was working as a labourer. Perhaps this was no more than youthful rebellion—his late father was an evangelical pastor and freemason. Against his mother’s will he had moved into a sleazy attic room at No.62 Grosse Frankfurter Strasse with his girlfriend Erna Jänichen, whom he had rescued from the streets. That December his brother Werner had frozen to death in the mountains; Goebbels buried him with a torchlight parade routed provocatively past the communists’ Karl Liebknecht building. On the evening of January 14 the enemy squared accounts with Horst: a dozen communists and Jews beset his lodgings; Albrecht Höhler, Salomon Epstein, and another raced upstairs and hammered on his door. As Wessel, inside with Erna and another girl, opened up Höhler, a carpenter, shouted ‘Hands up!’ and discharged a nine-millimetre Parabellum pistol into his face, blowing away his jaw. Seizing papers and a gun from Wessel’s locked cupboard (his disaffected landlady, widow of a communist, had obliged them with the keys) the attackers escaped; Höhler kicked the prostrate Wessel as he ran out, yelling, ‘You know what that’s for!’ The communist HQ put a well-oiled escape plan into action for Höhler, providing refuges in two Jewish households and then funds and a forged passport to flee to Prague.
Horst Wessel clung to life in the hospital for weeks. Goebbels visited him often, and mused once that this was the stuff of a real Dostoyevsky novel— ‘The Idiot, the Workers, the Harlot, the Bourgeois Family.’
Once Wessel croaked, ‘We must go on!’ "
"Foolishly returning to Berlin, Höhler was arrested and confessed. The aftermath was a textbook example of the brilliant disinformation techniques used by Goebbels’ opponents. The defence lawyer hired by the communists, Löwenthal, started a whispering campaign to smear Wessel as Erna’s pimp. Thus he could portray Höhler’s motives as purely personal. The ‘Judenpresse’ seized on this tidbit. Communist playwright Bertolt Brecht mocked, ‘In the search for a fitting hero who really personified the movement, the National Socialists opted, after considerable deliberation, for a pimp.’ Goebbels gritted his teeth and fought back: he now had the one real martyr the movement needed. On February he had the Horst Wessel anthem, ‘Hold the Flag High,’ sung by massed choirs at the end of a Sport Palace rally. Visiting the hospital he urged him not to give up the fight to live, but the young man died sixteen days later. ‘Thou shalt live on with us,’ wrote Goebbels mawkishly after visiting the death bed, ‘and shalt partake in our victory.’ He ordained a colossal funeral parade for March 1 [...] Fearing major disturbances Dr Weiss banned the parade, allowing only ten cars in the cortege and a ceremony confined to the walled Nikolai cemetery itself. Police officers confiscated the flag draping the coffin. Communists, out in force along the route, snatched the wreaths from the horse-drawn hearse and sang the Internationale. At the cemetery Goebbels found a large libel painted on the wall: A FINAL HEIL HITLER TO WESSEL THE PIMP! He swallowed his fury. As the coffin sank into the ground a thousand throats defiantly roared the anthem that bore its murdered composer’s name. In ten years, Goebbels prophesied to the S.A. men parading within the cemetery walls, in one of the finest speeches he ever delivered, that anthem would be sung by every schoolchild, by every factory worker, and by every marching soldier in Germany. A barrage of rocks came flying over the wall from the jeering mob outside. ‘They rampage,’ recorded Goebbels upon his return home: ‘And we win.’
David Irving - Goebbels - Mastermind of the Third Reich (1996)
In this article, the leader of the Nordic Resistance Movement responds to those who would slander National Socialism, explaining why the ideology is the obvious and natural path to follow for the Nordic people – philosophically as well as politically.
By Simon Lindberg - February 15, 2019
A common misconception about National Socialism is that it’s simply a combination of nationalism and socialism. In fact, National Socialism is a complete worldview in its own right, and thus something entirely different than simply a merge between nationalism and socialism. Unlike these ideologies, National Socialism can “hold its own” without being supplemented by religious dogmas or other external philosophical influences. National Socialism is a complete ideology in and of itself, offering a higher meaning for our everyday lives as well as giving us clear and practical political guidelines.
Whilst National Socialism is a relatively new ideology, it’s actually built on age-old wisdom. It’s a worldview founded in the natural order by which our people has lived for thousands of years, long before ideologies such as nationalism and socialism were conceived, and long before the Christianization of Northern Europe. This doesn’t mean we want things to be the way they were during the Stone Age, because apart from representing the natural order, National Socialism is also progressive and revolutionary. We progress through the creative genius endowed upon our people by nature. We would of course love to see the rest of the world and its peoples advance at the same pace we do, but if for some reason they can’t, then they mustn’t stand in the way of our advancement. We care for our own people first and foremost. Our people must survive and live free and independent of other nations and peoples.
As National Socialists, we consider it a crime to break the laws instituted by nature. By opposing these laws, you oppose National Socialism by extension. Nature would not have created two interdependent sexes had it wanted them to rival each other, or avoid contact with one another altogether. Cultural Marxism, feminism and homosexuality are all at odds with the laws of nature. Moreover, nature would not have produced different races with radically different appearance and characteristics, had it wanted them all to mix and become one single race. Miscegenation and multiculturalism are therefore also at odds with nature. Man is dependent on social interaction to be able to develop anything beyond what he himself is capable of. Human beings have therefore always joined together as groups in order to protect one another and benefit from each others’ differences. An outlook that is overly egocentric is therefore also opposed to the laws of nature. Materialism and capitalism are both polar opposites of National Socialism.
If our ancestors had been individualists who constantly betrayed and fought each other, mankind would not have survived. Of course there have been various groups that have behaved in this way against each other, but over the years, groups that were biologically similar often joined forces and became tribes; tribes became societies; and societies became nations. In today’s globalized world, our distinct group has grown to become a race that extends across national borders – we have become a biological unit. Part of the aim of National Socialism is to unite our race and make each of its individuals work together as one.
Within the laws of nature, we can find guidance that makes religion as well as philosophical frameworks redundant. For example, killing other people purely for killing’s sake is clearly wrong, as humans are creatures of nature. However, killing in order to ensure one’s own survival is a completely different story. Ruthless exploitation of nature is obviously wrong, whereas using natural resources for the advancement of one’s people isn’t. Our natural moral compass can often help us make the correct decisions, and in complex matters, National Socialism can help us settle these moral dilemmas.
The laws of nature live inside each one of us, in the form of instincts, common sense and logical thinking. The concepts of not stealing from each other and not killing our neighbor are hardly social constructs or something we derive from religion, but are simply natural concepts that intelligent, sophisticated people are either born with, or learn from experience. To live in harmony with one’s own people is entirely natural. Christianity is often held up by its followers as a defender of sound morality. This is true to some extent, but it was hardly Christianity that invented this morality. I would strongly challenge the assertion that Christians have been more effective defenders of sound morals than our ancestors would have been, had they refused to convert to Christianity.
National Socialism, having its roots in the eternal laws of nature, therefore has an inherent, crystal clear concept of right and wrong. It also has a higher purpose – the survival and unification of the world’s preeminent race, enabling us to live and evolve in harmony with nature, for the benefit of the entire world and all mankind. From this point of view, our very lives have a higher meaning, namely that we should be a link between the past and the future, obtaining eternal life through the preservation of the purity of our blood.
The fact that I refer to my people as being the world’s preeminent race doesn’t mean that I “rank” human races based on specific qualities, nor that I look down on other races. This is purely my subjective understanding of things. It’s an undeniable fact that without our race, the incredibly advanced civilization that it built would simply never have appeared. Conversely, it may be the case that e.g. Africans with their natural preferences don’t consider our kind of civilization to be in any way superior.
As a National Socialist, one is perfectly free to follow a religion as long as one doesn’t compromise on these fundamental values. You are free to believe that e.g. God or Oden is the force that’s behind the natural order, and you could also make the claim that the scientific concept of eternal life through a continuous bloodline – which I discussed above – has religious implications.
Having addressed the philosophical aspects of National Socialism, I will now elaborate on its implications as a political ideology, and how it differs from – and is superior to – nationalism as well as socialism. National Socialism, owing to its foundation in nature and its laws, is uncompromising when it comes to making one’s own people (as defined from a biological and racial perspective) the focal point of all policy. Nationalism is a much vaguer term, in which the concept of the nation doesn’t even necessarily involve race. The foundations of the ideology are not defined by the laws of nature, but instead by national borders, language and the dominant culture. Proponents of nationalism might even say that people from different ethnic groups who live in the same country have more in common due to their shared language, than members of the same ethnic group living in different countries. With this outlook, an African who speaks Swedish has more in common with an ethnic Swede, than the Swede would have in common with an ethnic Norwegian.
Nationalism is generally conservative at its core. Conservative policy is often divisive, pitting societal groups against one another. The idea behind conservatism is that the upper class need defending from the working class, the elderly need defending from the youth, and men need defending from women. Socialism is actually seeking to do the exact same thing, but because it’s radical as opposed to conservative, it always sides with the “weaker” party. National Socialism is unique in that it strives to unite the whole of the people, always working in the best interest of the people at the expense of the cosmopolitan elite, with its media moguls, lobbyists and bankers.
National Socialism doesn’t have the egalitarian element that is inherent in socialism, but instead recognizes that people are different, while considering every segment of the people valuable for the common goal. Someone who is an intellectual but is physically weak is not superior or inferior to someone with the opposite traits. The same is true in the relationship between men and women. Rather than being superior and inferior, they complement each other, each deriving their worth from the other.
National Socialism is based around meritocracy and accountability, always seeking to give the right responsibilities to the right person. Your lifestyle, your qualities and the loyalty you’ve demonstrated render you the place that you deserve, in accordance with the natural order. Nationalism simply assumes that you’re born with the same attributes as your parents, whereas socialism seeks to grant everyone the same level of influence and authority. In nature, a wolf pack would neither accept the son of the alpha male as their leader without first putting him to the test, nor would they give every member of the pack the same level of influence.
Finally, the timeless values of National Socialism always guard against corruption as well as liberalization. Representatives of various religions and ideologies, including nationalism, tend to transform the very foundation of their “creed” to keep up with changes happening in society or in the sphere of politics. The foundation of what they believe appears to always be open for discussion, and the representatives would rather compromise in order to gain power than become irrelevant.
The minutiae of how National Socialism should be applied have not been set in stone, but because its foundations are in the natural order as well as in the desire to secure the survival and freedom of one’s people, there is far less room for compromise than perhaps in any other ideology. National Socialism as a worldview is therefore fundamentally unchangeable.
Sparta one of the glorious city-states of ancient Greece does not really have the number of monuments one would expect to find. Have you ever wandered why? Romans, crusaders; the Venetian general Morozoni and Lord Elgin destroyed or stole many Greek treasures and ancient secrets but the list would not be complete without the name of Michele Fourmont.
No one demonstrated such greed, barbarism, ignorance, disrespect and hatred for the ancient Greek civilisation as abbe Michele Fourmont (1690-1746), envoy of King Luis XV of France. Fourmont surpasses Elgin in the amount of destruction caused and hatred towards the Greek civilisation. In trying to make himself favoured by the king of France and to ensure the exclusive access to the information collected from discovered scripts and monuments he decided to destroy all that he could so as to not leave any traces for future explorers. Fourmont, during his expedition in Sparta, Athens, Salamis, Megara and various other locations in the Peloponnese destroyed everything in his sight after he had documented his findings.
Fourmont confesses in a letter sent to Count Maurepas that he copied 1,500 ancient inscriptions (300 in Sparta) and brags about destroying them in order to avoid access to the information by any future travellers. In his letter Fourmont writes:
“For more than 30 days, 40 to 60 workers are, destroying the city of Sparta. I am still left with four towers to destroy. At the moment I am engaged with the destruction of the last ancient monuments of Sparta. You understand how happy I am. Mantinia, Stimfalia, Tegea, Nemea and Olympia are also worth annihilating. I have travelled extensively looking for ancient cities of this country and I have destroyed some of them. Amomg them are Trizina, Ermioni, Tiryns: half of the acropolis of Argos, Fliasia and Fenesia. For six weeks I have been busy with the total destruction of Sparta: destroying walls, temples and not leaving one stone on its place making the site unrecognisable in the future so that I can make it famous again.In this way I will give glory to my expeditions. Is that not something?”
In another part of his letter he writes about Sparta:
“‘Sparta is the fifth city I have destroyed. I am now working on the demolition of the deeper foundation of the temple of Apollo. I would destroy more temples if I was allowed to do so. The tower, I completely demolished.”
About the ancient city of Trizina:
“I have destroyed all that was left from the fortress and the temples”
He then demonstrates true barbarism by stating:
“I do not know of any travellers before me that dared to destroy towers and other large buildings”
Fourmont is responsible for the anhillition of ancient Sparta, Trizina and Ermioni. According to information provided by Fourmont, he paid 1,200 days of labour for the destruction of monuments. If Fourmont had not been called back to France he would have also destroyed ancient Olympia as planned.
“Indignation is the privilege of the Chandala; so is pessimism. “The world is perfect”—so prompts the instinct of the intellectual, the instinct of the man who says yes to life. “Imperfection, whatever is inferior to us, distance, the pathos of distance, even the Chandala themselves are parts of this perfection.” The most intelligent men, like the strongest, find their happiness where others would find only disaster: in the labyrinth, in being hard with themselves and with others, in effort; their delight is in self-mastery; in them asceticism becomes second nature, a necessity, an instinct. They regard a difficult task as a privilege; it is to them a recreation to play with burdens that would crush all others.... Knowledge—a form of asceticism.—They are the most honourable kind of men: but that does not prevent them being the most cheerful and most amiable”
Friedrich Nietzsche. The Antichrist
The third and final part of Ekthelion's macabre Trilogy has come ! From the realm of the moon to the endless valley of the vampyric rulers under the sight of a mournful moon !
"Feel the devastation of Ottoman Empire while our Lord and Savior Vlad Drakul cleanses its armies , fight along the hordes of the black moon, kneel under the Order Of The Dragon and mourn while the light of the mournful moon rips your soul"
https://ekthelion.bandcamp.com
Savage Tales #2 1973
"Cimmeria"
I recall only the stillness of that sombre land; the clouds that piled forever on the hills, the dimness of the everlasting woods. Cimmeria, land of Darkness and deep Night.
Script by original pulp author Robert E. Howard with artwork by Barry (Windsor-) Smith (Conan the Barbarian) & Tim Conrad (Worms of the Earth.)
An illustrated poem written by the great Robert E. Howard.
"Achilles replies that there is no equality of right between the
weak and the strong, for men have never made pacts with lions nor have lambs and wolves ever shared the same desires. This was the law of the heroic people, based on the belief that the strong were of a different and more noble nature than the weak. Hence arose that law of war through which, by force of arms, the victors deprive the defeated of their rights of natural liberty, so that the Romans took them as slaves in place of material things. "
Giambattista Vico, Vico: The First New Science
The Spirit of Ancient Europe lays dormant in your Blood.
Unmitigated Power and boundless potential reside in those few brave souls who dare to partake in a communion with their ancestors.
For Blood alone moves the wheels of history...
In this darkened epoch of degeneration, there stirs the voices of dissension, great melancholy, agony and hatred. From the unleashed Power of Blood is born The Cult Of The Holy War, springing forth from the wrath of the people betrayed.
An alliance formed to set right all that is wrong with the world.
DREADFUL LEGIONS MARCH WITH DOOM...
by Jeff Rense
On the evening of February 13, 1945, an orgy of genocide and barbarism began against a defenseless German city, one of the greatest cultural centers of northern Europe. Within less than 14 hours not only was it reduced to flaming ruins, but an estimated one-third of its inhabitants, possibly as many as a half a million, had perished in what was the worst single event massacre of all time.
Toward the end of World War II, as Allied planes rained death and destruction over Germany, the old Saxon city of Dresden lay like an island of tranquillity amid desolation. Famous as a cultural center and possessing no military value, Dresden had been spared the terror that descended from the skies over the rest of the country.
In fact, little had been done to provide the ancient city of artists and craftsmen with anti-aircraft defenses. One squadron of planes had been stationed in Dresden for awhile, but the Luftwaffe decided to move the aircraft to another area where they would be of use. A gentlemen's agreement seemed to prevail, designating Dresden an "open city."
February 13 and 14, 1945: Holocaust over Dresden, known as the Florence of the North. Dresden was a hospital city for wounded soldiers. Not one military unit, not one anti-aircraft battery was deployed in the city. Together with the 600.000 refugees from Breslau, Dresden was filled with nearly 1.2 million people. Churchill had asked for "suggestions how to blaze 600.000 refugees". He wasn't interested how to target military installations 60 miles outside of Dresden. More than 700.000 phosphorus bombs were dropped on 1.2 million people. One bomb for every 2 people. The temperature in the center of the city reached 1600 o centigrade. More than 260.000 bodies and residues of bodies were counted. But those who perished in the center of the city can't be traced. Approximately. 500.000 children, women, the elderly, wounded soldiers and the animals of the zoo were murdered in one night.
On Shrove Tuesday, February 13, 1945, a flood of refugees fleeing the Red Army 60 miles away had swollen the city's population to well over a million. Each new refugee brought fearful accounts of Soviet atrocities. Little did those refugees retreating from the Red terror imagine that they were about to die in a horror worse than anything Stalin could devise. Normally, a carnival atmosphere prevailed in Dresden on Shrove Tuesday. In 1945, however, the outlook was rather dismal. Houses everywhere overflowed with refugees, and thousands were forced to camp out in the streets shivering in the bitter cold. However, the people felt relatively safe; and although the mood was grim, the circus played to a full house that night as thousands came to forget for a moment the horrors of war. Bands of little girls paraded about in carnival dress in an effort to bolster warning spirits. Half-sad smiles greeted the laughing girls, but spirits were lifted. No one realized that in less than 24 hours those same innocent children would die screaming in Churchill's firestorms. But, of course, no one could know that then. The Russians, to be sure, were savages, but at least the Americans and British were "honorable." So, when those first alarms signaled the start of 14 hours of hell, Dresden's people streamed dutifully into their shelters. But they did so without much enthusiasm, believing the alarms to be false, since their city had never been threatened from the air. Many would never come out alive, for that "great democratic statesman," Winston Churchill--in collusion with that other "great democratic statesman," Franklin Delano Roosevelt--had decided that the city of Dresden was to be obliterated by saturation bombing. What where Churchill's motives? They appear to have been political, rather than military. Historians unanimously agree that Dresden had no military value. What industry it did have produced only cigarettes and china. But the Yalta Conference was coming up, in which the Soviets and their Western allies would sit down like ghouls to carve up the shattered corpse of Europe. Churchill wanted a trump card--a devastating "thunderclap of Anglo-American annihilation"--with which to "impress" Stalin. That card, however, was never played at Yalta, because bad weather delayed the originally scheduled raid. Yet Churchill insisted that the raid be carried out--to "disrupt and confuse" the German civilian population behind the lines. Dresden's citizens barely had time to reach their shelters. The first bomb fell at 10:09 p.m. The attack lasted 24 minutes, leaving the inner city a raging sea of fire. "Precision saturation bombing" had created the desired firestorm. A firestorm is caused when hundreds of smaller fires join in one vast conflagration. Huge masses of air are sucked in to feed the inferno, causing an artificial tornado. Those persons unlucky enough to be caught in the rush of wind are hurled down entire streets into the flames. Those who seek refuge underground often suffocate as oxygen is pulled from the air to feed the blaze, or they perish in a blast of white heat--heat intense enough to melt human flesh. One eyewitness who survived told of seeing "young women carrying babies running up and down the streets, their dresses and hair on fire, screaming until they fell down, or the collapsing buildings fell on top of them."
There was a three-hour pause between the first and second raids. The lull had been calculated to lure civilians from their shelters into the open again. To escape the flames, tens of thousands of civilians had crowded into the Grosser Garten, a magnificent park nearly one and a half miles square.
The second raid came at 1:22 a.m. with no warning. Twice as many bombers returned with a massive load of incendiary bombs. The second wave was designed to spread the raging firestorm into the Grosser Garten.
It was a complete "success." Within a few minutes a sheet of flame ripped across the grass, uprooting trees and littering the branches of others with everything from bicycles to human limbs. For days afterward, they remained bizarrely strewn about as grim reminders of Allied sadism.
At the start of the second air assault, many were still huddled in tunnels and cellars, waiting for the fires of the first attack to die down. At 1:30 a.m. an ominous rumble reached the ears of the commander of a Labor Service convoy sent into the city on a rescue mission. He described it this way:
"The detonation shook the cellar walls. The sound of the explosions mingled with a new, stranger sound which seemed to come closer and closer, the sound of a thundering waterfall; it was the sound of the mighty tornado howling in the inner city."
MELTING HUMAN FLESH
Others hiding below ground died. But they died painlessly--they simply glowed bright orange and blue in the darkness. As the heat intensified, they either disintegrated into cinders or melted into a thick liquid--often three or four feet deep in spots.
Shortly after 10:30 on the morning of February 14, the last raid swept over the city. American bombers pounded the rubble that had been Dresden for a steady 38 minutes. But this attack was not nearly as heavy as the first two.
However, what distinguished this raid was the cold-blooded ruthlessness with which it was carried out. U.S. Mustangs appeared low over the city, strafing anything that moved, including a column of rescue vehicles rushing to the city to evacuate survivors. One assault was aimed at the banks of the Elbe River, where refugees had huddled during the horrible night.
In the last year of the war, Dresden had become a hospital town. During the previous night's massacre, heroic nurses had dragged thousands of crippled patients to the Elbe. The low-flying Mustangs machine-gunned those helpless patients, as well as thousands of old men, women and children who had escaped the city.
When the last plane left the sky, Dresden was a scorched ruin, its blackened streets filled with corpses. The city was spared no horror. A flock of vultures escaped from the zoo and fattened on the carnage. Rats swarmed over the piles of corpses.
A Swiss citizen described his visit to Dresden two weeks after the raid: "I could see torn-off arms and legs, mutilated torsos and heads which had been wrenched from their bodies and rolled away. In places the corpses were still lying so densely that I had to clear a path through them in order not to tread on arms and legs."
The death toll was staggering. The full extent of the Dresden Holocaust can be more readily grasped if one considers that well over 250,000 -- possibly as many as a half a million -- persons died within a 14-hour period, whereas estimates of those who died at Hiroshima range from 90,000 to 140,000.
Allied apologists for the massacre have often "twinned" Dresden with the English city of Coventry. But the 380 killed in Coventry during the entire war cannot begin to compare with over 1,000 times that number who were slaughtered in 14 hours at Dresden. Moreover, Coventry was a munitions center, a legitimate military target. Dresden, on the other hand, produced only china--and cups and saucers can hardly be considered military hardware!
It is interesting to further compare the respective damage to London and Dresden, especially when we recall all the Hollywood schmaltz about the "London blitz." In one night, 1,600 acres of land were destroyed in the Dresden massacre. London escaped with damage to only 600 acres during the entire war.
In one ironic note, Dresden's only conceivable military target -- its railroad yards -- was ignored by Allied bombers. They were too busy concentrating on helpless old men, women and children.
If ever there was a war crime, then certainly the Dresden Holocaust ranks as the most sordid one of all time. Yet there are no movies made today condemning this fiendish slaughter; nor did any Allied airman--or Sir Winston--sit in the dock at Nuremberg. In fact, the Dresden airmen were actually awarded medals for their role in this mass murder. But, of course, they could not have been tried, because there were "only following orders."
This is not to say that the mountains of corpses left in Dresden were ignored by the Nuremberg Tribunal. In one final irony, the prosecution presented photographs of the Dresden dead as "evidence" of alleged National Socialist atrocities against Jewish concentration-camp inmates!
Churchill, the monster who ordered the Dresden slaughter, was knighted, and the rest is history. The cold-blooded sadism of the massacre, however, is brushed aside by his biographers, who still cannot bring themselves to tell how the desire of one madman to "impress" another one let to the mass murder of up to a half million men, women and children.
“What does Christianity mean today? National Socialism is a religion. All we lack is a religious genius capable of uprooting outmoded religious practices and putting new ones in their place. We lack traditions and ritual. One day soon National Socialism will be the religion of all Germans. My Party is my church, and I believe I serve the Lord best if I do his will, and liberate my oppressed people from the fetters of slavery. That is my gospel.”
Joseph Goebbels, 1928
Deep through
Where battle rages on
Through the fire of endless war
There in the middle of every fight
TIME IS FORGING - CHRONICLES OF MIGHT
All times your dreams are cast aside
A piece of your soul's condemned to die
Mountains - So massive and so high
They dare to climb up towards the endless light
Follow the sign
Follow the storm
Ride through the darkness
Reach the dawn
A throne is waiting in the kingdom of the sky
Follow the madness
Follow the hope
Unveil the mystery
Search for the cause
Your dreams are calling
Bathed in starlight of the night
Awake
Go and cross the sea
Hear the windsongs
Singing destiny
The bard - Around the fire tonight
Will sing the legends
THE CHRONICLES OF MIGHT
https://battleroar-epic.bandcamp.com/
This theme has a multi-faceted past . It is rooted in very old mythological traditions: among the ancient Greeks, the abduction of Persephone (Proserpine among the Romans) by Hades (Pluto), god of Hell, is a clear prefiguration of the clash between Eros and Thanatos. The young goddess gathered flowers in company of carefree nymphs when she saw a pretty narcissus and plucked it. At that moment, the ground opened; Hades came out of the underworld and abducted Persephone.
This old vision will take a new form at the end of the 15th century and become the theme of Death and the maiden,which will culminate in Germany at the Renaissance. In many dances of Death already figured a representation of Death with a fine lady or with a beautiful virgin. The image of a young woman was also found in the three ages and Death. However in both cases, there was no trace of erotism. But with Death and the maiden theme, something new happened. People discovered a dark bound between sexuality and death. In this type of iconography, the young lady was not involved in a dance anymore, but in a sensual intercourse, which will become always more erotic as time went by. Unlike the dance of death, the Death and the maiden pictures dont have any verses to explain them. Due to that, this new kind of illustration lost somewhat of its dramatic intensity; its didactic role became less impotant. On the other hand, this form of art gained a kinf of intinacy. However in spite of the sensuality of this genre, it still had a moralistic goal; it kept on pointing out the fact that life is short as is the proud beauty of a woman. Her body, her face, her hair and her chest will someday feed the worms. The theme of Death and the maiden has sometimes been used pretexts to represent female nudity.
The motif was revived during the romantic era in the arts, a notable example being Franz Schubert's song "Der Tod und das Mädchen" (1817), setting a poem by the German poet Matthias Claudius. Part of the piano part was re-used in Schubert's famous String Quartet No. 14, which is therefore also known by this title, in either English or German. The theme of the song forms the basis of the second movement of the quartet. The theme is a death knell that accompanies the song about the terror and comfort of death.
The Maiden:
"Oh! leave me! Prithee, leave me! thou grisly man of bone!
For life is sweet, is pleasant.
Go! leave me now alone!
Go! leave me now alone!"
Death:
"Give me thy hand, oh! maiden fair to see,
For I'm a friend, hath ne'er distress'd thee.
Take courage now, and very soon
Within mine arms shalt softly rest thee!"
But it is not only this theme of the quartet that recalls death. The quote from the song "makes explicit the overriding theme of the work, its bleak vision and almost unremitting foreboding," writes Andrew Clements.From the violent opening unison. the first movement runs a relentless race through terror, pain and resignation, ending with a dying D minor chord. "The struggle with Death is the subject of the first movement, and the andante accordingly dwells on Death's words," writes Cobbett. After a scherzo movement, with a trio that provides the only lyrical respite from the depressing mood of the piece, the quartet ends with a tarantella – the traditional dance to ward off madness and death. "The finale is most definitely in the character of a dance of death; ghastly visions whirl past in the inexorable uniform rhythm of the tarantella," writes Cobbett.
It was composed in 1824, after the composer suffered a serious illness and realized that he was dying. Some interpret it as Schubert's testament to death, and find that the theme of death is palpable in all four movements of the quartet.
So strong is the association of death with the quartet that some analysts consider it to be programmatic, rather than absolute music. "The first movement of Schubert's Death and the Maiden string quartet can be interpreted in a quasi-programmatic fashion, even though it is usually viewed as an abstract work," writes Deborah Kessler. Theologian Frank Ruppert sees the quartet as a musical expression of Judaeo-Christian religious myths. "This quartet, like so many of Schubert's works, is a kind of para-liturgy," he writes. Each movement is about a different episode in the mythic process of death and resurrection.
1823 and 1824 were hard years for Schubert. For much of 1823 he was sick, some scholars believe with an outburst of tertiary stage syphilis, and in May had to be hospitalized. He was also without money.
In a letter to a friend, he wrote:
Think of a man whose health can never be restored, and who from sheer despair makes matters worse instead of better. Think, I say, of a man whose brightest hopes have come to nothing, to whom love and friendship are but torture, and whose enthusiasm for the beautiful is fast vanishing; and ask yourself if such a man is not truly unhappy.
Sources: http://www.lamortdanslart.com ,Wikipedia
"[...] Contrary to the claims of a growing number of people encouraged by the so-called “new atheism”, the Nazis held a coherent worldview that was vehemently anti-Christian. To deal with criticism of Christianity by these writers and speakers, it is necessary for Christians to become aware of the Nazi worldview and how deeply it was rooted in modern paganism."
"Like Marx, Lenin, and Gramachi, all of whom had very definite ideas about the importance of creating small party elites, Hitler also developed a clear theory about the need for a small, tightly knit party that would change the world. In this process, propaganda was to play a key role. In Mein Kampf he writes:
If a movement has the intention of pulling down a world and of building a new one in its place, then there must be absolute clarity about the following points in the ranks of its own leaders:
Every movement, at first, will have to divide the human material it has won into two groups: into followers and members.
The task of propaganda is to attract followers; the taks of organization to win members.
A follower of a movement is one who declares himself in agreement with its aims; a member is one who fights for it … there will be at least ten followers for every one or two members at most …
The first task of propaganda is the winning of people for the future organization; the first task of the organization is the winning of people for the continuation of propaganda. The second task of propaganda is the destruction of the existing condition and the permeation of this condition with the new doctrine, while the second task of the organization must be the fight for power, so that by it, it will achieve the final success of the doctrine.
The most striking success of the revolution of a view of life will always be won whenever the new view of life is, if possible, taught to all the people, and if necessary, is later forced upon them, while the organization of the idea, that means the movement, has to embrace only so many people as absolutely necessary for the occupation of the nerves centres of the State involved. (Hitler, 1941:849-852; cf. Hitler, 1940:651-655.)
"This rather long passage is crucial for understanding the relationship between Hitler and Rosenberg, whom he appointed as his chief theoretician in charge of propagating the Weltanschauung (or worldand life view) of the movement, while Joseph Goebbels directed his day to day propaganda aimed at securing power."
"Strasser claimed that during a meeting early in 1928, Hitler told him the following:
‘The ideology of Rosenberg is an inalienable component of National Socialism’, he shouted stressing every syllable … ‘At the moment, Christianity is one of the points of the party program as I formulated it. But, one must look beyond. Rosenberg is a forerunner, a prophet – his theories are the expression of the German soul.’ (Strasser, 1948:125.)
Similarly, Ludecke (1937), an early confidant of Hitler, records this exchange with him:
‘You haven’t met Rosenberg yet?’ Hitler asked me abruptly. I replied that I knew him but slightly. ‘You must get to know him better, get on good terms with him. He is the only man whom I always listen to. He is a thinker.’
Then Ludecke adds:
Rosenberg, the twenty-five year old Baltic German, became Hitler’s closest thinker, and more than anybody else, in his later writings, shaped the Nazi ‘Weltanschauung’ – a word somewhat inadequately translated ‘world-outlook’. (Ludecke, 1937:79, 84.)
" Nevertheless, it seems clear that Hitler had no doubts about Rosenberg’s value as a theoretician. Two key pieces of documentary evidence provide direct information about Hitler’s personal attitude towards Rosenberg. First, he was the first recipient of the National Prize for Art and Science. The official citation, approved by Hitler and read by Goebbels to a mass meeting at the 1937 Party Congress, states:
Alfred Rosenberg distinguished himself because he helped establish and stabilize the worldview of National Socialism both scientifically and intuitively. He especially distinguished himself because he fought untiringly to maintain the purity of the National Socialist worldview. (Schmitt, 1937:49 ff.)
Secondly, in a personal letter sent by Hitler to Rosenberg on his 50th birthday in 1943, Hitler wrote:
I still remember the day when I met you in the home of Dietrich Eckart. Since then you became the first spiritual and intellectual co-builder of the party. One day history will record how much you did to clarify and stabilize the worldview foundations of the movement … you are one of the most distinguished human personalities that Fate has granted me to meet. (Hitler, 1943.)
"[...] Nevertheless, these two documents, both of which were dictated by Hitler when he could easily have sidelined Rosenberg, show a remarkable appreciation of his ideas and role in creating the Party’s Weltanschauung."
"Many observers of Germany in the 1920s and 1930s came away convinced that Rosenberg’s Mythus was hugely influential. These writers include Dodd, a journalist and daughter of the American Ambassador (Dodd, 1940:241); Kneller, an American Ph.D. student writing on German Education (Kneller, 1941:194 ff.); De Rougemont, a French university professor teaching in Frankfurt-am-Main (De Rougemont, 1998:75); Heuss, who later became State President of the Bundesrepublik (Heuss, 1968:109); Klemperer, a Jewish professor of Romance languages and literatures (Klemperer, 1995:291, 318, 385), and Hoess, the former Commandant of Auschwitz (Gilbert, 1947:267). The German-Jewish philosopher Löwith also commented on Rosenberg’s influence upon German students and even claimed that he discovered that Rosenberg’s work was popular among Japanese Nationalists (Löwith, 1986:11, 118). Further, despite his attempt to distance himself from Rosenberg’s Der Mythus des 20. Jahrhunderts (1930), Speer (1970:110) confirmed that “the public regarded the book as the standard text for party ideology …”
"Equally important is the fact that Hutchinson has meticulously documented a mass of evidence to show that Rosenberg exercised considerable influence over German intellectual life and popular belief during the National Socialist era. This includes Rosenberg’s personal travel itinerary involving numerous speeches to crowds of up to 100 000, frequent newspaper reports proclaiming him the intellectual spokesperson of National Socialism, and a large collection of letters from individuals expressing gratitude for his work, especially his Mythus. Letters and other documents show that at times top National Socialist leaders Bormann, Frick, Frank, Goebbels, Hess, Himmler, Ley, Schirach, and Göring, praised and promoted Rosenberg’s work while soliciting his support (Hutchinson, 1977:33-58).
The latter tendency was particularly important in the formative years of the Hitler Youth. Rosenberg, as prophet of a new Der Mythus des 20. Jahrhunderts became the liaison between the Hitler Youth and the dozens of völkisch youth groups. Thus already in the 1920s, Rosenberg’s influence reached far beyond the Party into the religioracial völkisch movement (Brandenburg, 1968:61, 74-75)."
"Further evidence demonstrating the popularity of Rosenberg’s ideas is found in the impressive sales figures of Rosenberg’s Mythus, which became a runaway best seller long before Hitler’s election victory in 1933. When the book appeared in 1930 it was said to have caused “a great sensation” (Hüffmeier, 1935) and went through seven editions before Hitler’s election victory in 1933. After that sales of the Mythus increased, until it sold between 1 and 2 million copies by 1945 (Hutchinson, 1977:63). At the same time German observers noted that the Mythus was “being ‘devoured’ by German students” (Chesterton, 1934:9). Later, in 1935, when Rosenberg responded to critics in his An die Dunkelmänner unserer Zeit (Rosenberg, 1935a) his polemical tract sold 300 000 copies in the first month and over 900 000 by 1942 (Hutchinson, 1977:63)."
"With the notable exception of Chamberlain, the authors who inspired Rosenberg were leading figures in modern thought. Even Chamberlain, whose The foundations of the twentieth century (1899; 1911) and The Aryan worldview (1905) were unscholarly works, drew his ideas from mainstream scholars and received rave reviews by both the popular press and academics, with people like highly respected theologian Adolf Harnack thinking very highly of Chamberlain’s work (Field, 1981:225-316)."
"[...] the Myth becomes a coherent argument offering Germans a new religion. Rosenberg begins by assuming that both Christianity and Humanism were “buried in the bloody chaos of the Great War” (Rosenberg, 1935b:21). Consequently, it is no longer possible to believe in the Bible as the Word of God, the Trinity, original sin, redemption through the sacrifice of Christ, the deity or Christ, or even the Christian God who is revealed as an Asiatic tyrant (Rosenberg, 1935b:76-79).
Into this situation of chaos, Rosenberg claimed a new Weltanschauung had been born that turned away from absolute and static values to a new dynamic creed based upon a rejection of the type of self-knowledge derived from the Delphic injunction “Know thyself,” which he interprets as a ploy by priests to enslave free men (Rosenberg, 1935b:259-260). This new worldview, Rosenberg argues, means recognising that the religious and racial heritage of Europe has been poisoned by Christianity, leading to the degeneration of Nordic peoples (Rosenberg, 1935b:442). Now the isolation of visionaries, like Wagner, has come to an end and a new religion is about to be born from the people themselves (Rosenberg, 1935b:443).
By rejecting the Christian degradation of humankind and throwing out the teachings of St. Paul which were “shaped by Judaism” and intended “to spiritually turn us into Jews”, a new beginning is possible. Consequently, all free people must rid themselves of “the so called old testament” (Rosenberg, 1935b:602-603)."
"Thus the myth of a suffering god has to be replaced by the more noble myths of Nordic origin. Yet, even though we may recognise echoes of our situation in works like the Edda, they are no more than echoes from a time past (Rosenberg, 1935b:219). Today “a new genius who will reveal the new Myth to us” is needed. Therefore we have a duty to prepare for this new revelation. This new message must be directed to “all those who have already broken inwardly with church belief, but have still not found their way to another Myth” (Rosenberg, 1935b:600-601)."
"Importantly, contrary to what many writers claim, Rosenberg strongly rejected monism (Rosenberg, 1935b:125-126). In doing so he argues that at their core, Judaism and Christianity are monistic (Rosenberg, 1935b:127-128). This, he suggests, leads paradoxically to the “polarity” absolutist beliefs in things like good and bad, true and error (Rosenberg, 1935b:125-127). Against such a “static” view he urges a “dynamic” vision of the world that recognises the continuous interaction and development (Rosenberg, 1935b:127). Rosenberg sees Protestantism, however, as divided between the “Jewish” impulse to monism and the “German desire for freedom” (Rosenberg, 1935b:128-129). Yet in the end, he argues, Protestants failed to free themselves from such beliefs, because Luther popularised the Old Testament as a “Christian book”, thus making the break with Jewish monism impossible (Rosenberg, 1935b:129).
Finally, it needs to be recognised that Rosenberg’s neo-paganism borrowed from a rich tradition of German philosophical thought that was familiar to his readers. Thus, without mentioning them by name, he appropriates the ideas of Feuerbach (1804-1872) and Strauss (1808-1874) as interpreted by De Lagarde (1827-1891), and Nietzsche (1844-1900), who he does cite on these type of issue (Rosenberg, 1935b:37, 138, 237, 443, 454-456, 424, 530, 691-692)."
"[...] Christian and Jewish myths destroyed life by misdirecting the individual’s attention to a life beyond this world and a God created in their own image. Therefore, he claimed that men and women must choose between commitment to a dynamic, life affirming religion arising out of a specific historical culture, or a death affirming religion that glorifies a tyrannical God. The choice was simple. Embrace a religion that expresses the dynamic genetic values of heroism and virtue or an alien one that glorifies a static world realm beyond this world. Either become a true human by discovering oneself or allow the Old Testament and the Christian tradition to destroy individual freedom and true humanity (Rosenberg, 1935b:73-82, 698-701)."
Excerpts from Irving Hexham's article "The mythic foundation of National Socialism and the contemporary claim that the Nazis were Christians." Department of Religious Studies University of Calgary CALGARY Canada.
"Brasillach was convicted of "intelligence with the enemy" and, despite a petition for clemency signed by Albert Camus, Francois Mauriac, Jean Anouilh, Jean-Louis Barrault and Arthur Honegger, Brasillach went before the firing squad on Feb. 6, 1945 - the only writer of distinction to be killed for what he wrote."
"Brasillach's trial, as recreated by Kap-lan, is suffused with the drama and heft of Dreyfus' or Joan of Arc's. The writer was measured and brilliant in his own defense, explaining that he was a patriot, loyal to the constitutional Vichy government."
"Brasillach, whatever his crimes or lapses, never stood a chance. The judge had served Vichy and may have thought he could exonerate himself by condemning Brasillach; the jurors were veterans of the Resistance he had denounced so furiously. They deliberated for 25 minutes. As Brasillach's death sentence was read, his supporters exploded into outrage, but the defendant shouted, "It's an honor!" De Gaulle considered the plea for clemency, but upheld the sentence. He later wrote, "in literature as in everything, talent confers responsibility." If Brasillach had been less adept at his noxious art, he might have been spared.""
Richard Corliss for TIME
Robert Brasillach on conservatism:
We do not have much in common, in spite of appearances, Mr Conservative. We are defending a few truths in the way we think they ought to be defended, that is violently, passionately, dis-respectfully, with our lives. At times, this has been of some value to us, Mr Conservative. It may be to you, one day. At moments when you think you can do without those compromising bodyguards, you prefer to talk of other things and look at them from a long way away. They are running their own risks, aren’t they? That is their affair, not yours. It was you that said it, Mr Conservative. Their own risks. Not yours. We are not mercenaries. We are not the shock-troops of the bien-pensants. We are not the SA of conservatism.’ (To a conservative, Je suis partout, 23 February 1940).
