EVOLA AS HE IS is a Restricted Group with 185 members.

The regimes which were included under the label of ‘Fascism’ by post-war historians, both by those who supported Fascism, in order to convince themselves that there was a solidarity between each of these regimes, and by those who opposed it, in order to make people believe that this solidarity would still be active in the form of a secret, underground, net, posing a threat to democracy, had very little in common both in practice and ideologically, except nationalism.

In one of the short articles gathered together by Fondazione Julius Evola in a booklet called “La questione sociale”, J. Evola argues that the ‘social question’ was largely created by capitalism, for the greater benefit of Marxism, which, indeed, posited socialism as a transitional stage between capitalism and communism on an international scale. Now, the ‘social question’ is there, and, therefore, socialism in the strictest sense, beyond all the varying definitions of the term, which however seem to agree on a common point, namely, the transformation of society, becomes inevitable. Is this transformation going to be carried out along internationalist lines or, on the contrary, along national lines ? This is the fundamental point.

Along internationalist lines, socialism is a poison, whereas, implemented from a nationalist perspective in a society which finds itself in the aforementioned transitional stage, a society which is therefore destructured and torn apart in every respect, and whose state is reduced to a welfare agency in the hands of faceless international finance, a certain dose of socialism, still considering the inevitability of the ‘social question’ in modern times, is necessary.

The provision of a minimal level of wellbeing and social support for all citizens is acceptable, legitimate, and even essential in a chaotic society open to the four winds, whose imminent collapse its new reforming leaders take the necessary measures to avoid, but it is so as a transitional solution, until the positive effects of such measures are felt on the economic and social level ; it is so insofar and only insofar as the citizens in question are full-fledged, whether active or passive (excluding, at least in a country which still has colonies, those who, while being biologically white, have actively collaborated with the occupying forces), full-fledged citizens of the state.

The provision of financial or other assistance to individuals or families from any foreign state, especially if these individuals or families originate in a Third World country, whether or not to the detriment of full-fledged citizens, as is now the case in European countries, occupied as they are by alien forces, is, on the other hand, as any extension of a concept from a national level, on which it has its validity, to an international level, is the best recipe for the successful dissolution of what may still be left of this nation into a globalised magma.

Hitler’s definition of socialism, or rather, in a less abstract way, of a socialist is as follows: “Whoever is prepared to make the national cause his own to such an extent that he knows no higher ideal than the welfare of his nation; whoever has understood our great national anthem ‘Deutschland über Alles’ to mean that nothing in the wide world surpasses in his eyes this Germany, people and land – that man is a socialist.” This echoed with the view upheld by members of the anti-Marxist and anti-Semitic Volkisch groups on ‘National Socialism’ as a force able to strengthen the nation, as opposed to the egalitarian version of socialism espoused by fellow contemporaries like Gregor Strasser.

G. Strasser, as a pure coincidence, was tolerant “of a degree of feminist militancy… (which) permitted the issuing of 'Principles of the NS-Frauenschaft' which flamboyantly propagated the idea of a 'women's renewal movement' and demanded a prominent place for women of ability in Hitler's 'new Germany'. Strasser himself could be found using the term 'women's movement' about the NSF, a term favoured by a number of Nazi women in spite of its obvious liberal and socialist connotations. » (The Nazi Organisation of Women, p. 1922). A few matriarchist German lobbyists in the cultural field at that time were spotted by J. Evola.

His brother, Otto, and him represented, together with the Chief of Staff of the SA, Röhm, the leftist wing of the NSDAP, which Otto Strasser had left in 1930, on the principle that “Socialists leave the NSDAP”, while Röhm, together with G. Strasser, was eliminated in the Night of the Long Knives. Their anti-democratic, anti-bourgeois, anti-capitalist, pro-Bolshevik movement had a strong socialist and revolutionary character. Incidentally, just as Slavophil diatribes against the “Rotten West” had their roots in “German romanticists’ criticism of the French Enlightenment, of aspects of the French revolution, and of the first glimmerings of modern technical and materialistic thinking” (The Eastern Orthodox Church: Its Thought and Life, p. 190), so National-Bolshevism originated in World War I Germany, where so-called National-conservative authors such as Moller van den Bruck, Karl Radek, and Ernst Niekisch championed Soviet Russia against Western capitalism ; Radek’s journal, entitled ‘Widerstand’, soon became a platform of opposition to all ‘western oriented’ politics and expressed a turn to the East, an Ostorientierung. The influence of the Widerstand-Kreis spread in different directions, towards the Youth Movement and towards the volkische sects, as well as towards the nationalrevolutionar Bewegung of Junger.” (Studies in the Theory of Ideology, p. 215). The importance of National Bolshevism became clear in 1930, when, as abovementioned, Otto Strasser left the NSDAP, to found the ‘Fighting Community of Revolutionary National Socialists’, latter called the ‘Black Front’, whose programme was outwardly socialist. By then, J. Goebbels had unconditionally sided with A. Hitler. In the mid-1920’s, however, he had joined forces with Gregor Strasser, with whom he created and published a semi-monthly periodical, not designed for public consumption. “The first issue appeared on October 1,1925, and the slogan was the “Reconciliation of Socialism with the East.” The program of this group was formulated by Goebbels in the middle of 1925 in an article in the Völkischer Beobachter, where the following statement appeared: “The future lies with the dictatorships of the Socialist idea.” The Strasser-Goebbels group attacked Rosenberg's anti-Russian and anti-Semitic conceptions. It demanded eastern orientation of the Nazi Party, opposition to American and English imperialism and assistance to Russia's fight against this imperialism. Germany's place was on the side of Russia, Turkey, China, India, in short on the side of all those people which are hostile to Versailles. Russia therefore is the natural ally of Germany and it is nobody's concern how Russia is internally governed (Secret Reports on Nazi Germany, p.157).

By the time A. Hitler had become Chancellor, National Bolshevik trends were reportedly no longer represented in the NSDAP leadership. Ten years later, the campaign in Russia showed it was not the case: “STALIN knew the value of national myths. According to his political needs, he glorified some Czars, such as Ivan the Terrible or Peter the Great and former Russian military chiefs as Koutousov, Napoleon’s conqueror. At the time of international tension before the Second World War, STALIN sought the support of the population. He had well understood that one day the Red Army would be engaged militarily-and soldiers without a national ideal fight badly. This is why and in the line with ”red patriotism”, during the years of the civil war he re-established the honour of the ideals of former Russia: hence the red army received uniforms fashioned after czarist times. The war that had to be waged, STALIN called the’big patriotic war.’”

“In the beginning of 1943, after the battle of Stalingrad for the first time a number of high ranking German officers, who rightly felt betrayed and sold by Hitler, capitulated. STALIN, together with the cadres of the KPD harboured in the USSR and Anglo-Saxon countries, decided to win these officers over to soviet objectives and with them the rest of the German prisoners of war. They didn’t do so with the red flag of the Communist world revolution, but with the traditional colours of Germany: black-white-red, while evoking the memory of the German-Russian coalition against Napoleon in 1812 and the German-Russian political alliance with Bismarck around 1880. This is how in Krasnogorsk July 12, 1943 in the model prisoners camp n° 27 close to Moscow, the ”NATIONAL COMMITTEE of FREE GERMANY” was born under the united portraits of LENIN and the German imperial flag. The Committee immediately published a MANIFESTO co-signed by the KPD’s leaders and the German soldiers. The signatures of eleven Communist leaders – amongst whom were PIECK and ULBRICHT- stood by those of 16 soldiers and non-commissioned officers, as well as those of 11 officers- three of them high ranking officials. The Committee was presided by a Communist militant, Erich WEINERT, former fighter in Spain and author of the famous poem ‘Song of the international Brigades.’”

“Hitler’s adversaries in the officers’ corps, whose adherence was sought after, followed in September 1943 when ”the German Officers UNION” was founded. Then Marshal VON PAULUS, loser at Stalingrad, general VON SEYDLITZS, VON DANIEL, KORFES, LATTMENN and other hundreds of general officers joined the National Committee.”

”Hitler’s old adversaries were found there again, such as Ottomar PECH, future general of the NVA, who belonged to the Berliner network of the ”RED ORCHESTRA” controlled by the national ARNACK Bolsheviks and SCHULZE-BOYSEN. Or General Otto KORFES, member of the national-revolutionary group of STAUFFENBERG (his brother-in-law was executed for having participated in the heroic uprising of July 20, 1944).”

“The propaganda campaign of the ”National Committee”, with its millions of newspaper tracts and the daily calls in Radio Moscow ”to the German people and in the German Wehrmacht”, contributed to the disintegration of the Nazi war machine.” (http://vansternationell.wordpress.com/national-bolshevik-documents/east-german-communitarism-and-european-communitarism-the-national-communist-vision-of-the-other-socialist-and-prussian-germany/)

Some of these officers, which appeared to have embraced, either out of conviction, or out of necessity, National Bolshevik beliefs, were to serve as a nucleus of the German government, administration and future army of the Federal Republic of Germany ; others, to be instrumental in the setting up the National Democratic Party in East Germany. (Marxism and the reality of power, 1919-1980, p. 117)

This is edifying, and it could be supplemented by an overtly Pro-Soviet, pro-Eurasianist statement Otto Strasser made at the end of WW2, which I once posted onto the French section of http://www.stormfront.org/forum/, a nest of ‘French’ Eurasianists. If someone happens to find it, please forward it to me. Once again, there were so many covert anti-National-Socialist elements in the administration, in the army, that it is hardly surprising this experience only lasted 12 years, that it is almost a miracle it lasted 12 years. Among the enemies within, there were also, unlike what conspirationists would have people to believe, and in many cases successfully so, quite a few industrialists. http://mises.org/daily/2225 shows that, in the United States, those who lobbied for the development of the infrastructures of the welfare-state were, together with leftists, leading industrialists. Well, leading industrialists, together with insurance companies, were those who opposed strongly, and effectively, the attempt of National-Socialism at curtailing the welfare-state which it had inherited, and, in this, they could rely on the crowd of bureaucrats who continued to work under the Third Reich (H. L. Wilensky, Rich Democracies, p. 233).

Another message I am positively sure I posted years ago onto the French section of http://www.stormfront.org/forum was about the meeting leading German entrepreneurs were invited to in a castle near Berlin by the Chancellor upon ascending to power. The meeting was held in the great hall of the castle, whose doors were guarded by SS, who were instructed not to let anyone out until the conditions dictated by the Chancellor would be approved by all participants. Instructions were followed to the letter. Some 16 hours later, they surrendered to his conditions, and, still sweating like hell, were escorted from the room. We quoted a passage of the biography I which this event I related, and whose references we have lost. If someone finds this post, too, please forward it to me as well. 

The opportunist is a potential traitor, who finds favourable soil in troubled times, let alone in war times. Any liberal democratic party, government, and regime, which, as a result of the internationalist and universalistic nature of its ideological premises, imply a political staff with an unfailing loyalty to stateless high finance and therefore determined to betray the state, are a breeding ground for traitors. It is well known that most totalitarian regimes, from their inception, seeks to eliminate undesirable people, opponents, particularly among those in power, as well as in the political party to which their leaders belong. In this respect, the history of the USSR was a long succession of purges, whose tradition was inaugurated by Lenin during the Eighth Party Congress in March 1919, and continued by himself at the Central Bureau of Statistics in 1924, and which culminated in the Great Stalinist Terror in the second half of the 1930s. On the other hand, purging for political reasons is unknown to liberal democratic parties, governments, and regimes, for the simple reason that, whether “leftists” or “rightists”, the puppets who belong to these have no political power, which is in the hands of high officials, who are themselves subject to supranational instances and which, from term to term, do slavishly what they are dictated to do by these.

National-Socialism tarnishes this picture, with its Gleishchaltung, the restructuring of German society and government into centralised hierarchies of power, with the intention of gaining total control and co-ordination of all aspects of society. The administration of the Third Reich, from bureaucrats to petty officials, remained what it was under the Weimar Republic. If Jewish executives were removed from major banks by Schacht, there was no purge in the police forces: most ‘Gestapo’ officers had served in the Weimar Republic. No attempt was made ​​at destroying the organisational framework of the Catholic Church ; no Catholic bishop was ever interned in a concentration camp. If many leading unionists were arrested, and the various trade unions merged into the Deutscher Arbeitsfront, there was no purge in the army ; von Blomberg and von Fritsch were just forced to resign in 1938, the first because of his marriage to a former prostitute, the second because of a homosexual relationship. The Wehrmacht remained as it was, that is to say, a nest of potential conspirators, until the plot of the 20th of July 1944 against A. Hitler. The Night of the Long Knives took thousands of lives in the imagination of court historians and, according to Ian Kershaw, 81, of which 50 members of the SA.

Far from welcoming this status quo, as was recently done with a rare inconsistency by a French member of the school of historical revisionism who sees himself as a tactician, any White patriot can only regret that National Socialist leaders failed to do all that was in their power to test any member of the political, military, judicial and administrative organisation the Third Reich had inherited, to ensure that they did not represent a potential danger to the stability and the very existence of the National-Socialism regime, and to take the necessary measures against those tested positive for democratic beliefs, elements which turned out to be, as noted by Savitri Devi, “far more important than one is generally inclined to believe. Post-war political literature — and, to begin with, in various detailed “Memoirs,” the surviving traitors’ own description of their past doings, — goes to prove that the whole machinery of the National Socialist State was simply with them. And the fellows were active long before the war; in fact, from the very day Adolf Hitler rose to power. And they were in constant secret touch with Germany’s bitterest enemies in diplomatic circles abroad.”

A more complex issue is that of the “startlingly large number of German military men were classified by the Nazis as Jews or ‘partial-Jews’ (Mischlinge), in the wake of racial laws first enacted in the mid-1930s. Rigg demonstrates that the actual number was much higher than previously thought--perhaps as many as 150,000 men, including decorated veterans and high-ranking officers, even generals and admirals” – another inheritance of the Weimar Republic. It is examined at http://www.veteranstoday.com/2014/03/29/hitlers-jewish-soldiers-part-i/ In any case, for obvious reasons, these Jews, whatever their deeds during WW2, cannot possibly be considered as traitors, only as “enemies within”.