Thursday, 29 October 2015

Open response to question about SWPE and 'National Socialism'

The following was prompted by a question asked about SWPE and how it relates to pre-Night of the Long Knives 'National Socialism.'  As pointed out by the questioner, National Socialism died in the summer of 1934. The brutal war of 1939-45 with all the horrors that were part of it, were by the design of Capitalists in London, Washington and Berlin, with the addition of the USSR as combatants fighting initially out of self defence as the territories they governed were attacked.  By the outbreak of the Second World War, all the genuine National Socialists were either dead or marginalised, or had betrayed the ideology and become paid accomplices of the Capitalist war machine.   Thank you to Steve for your question.

Our ideology is what we term Real Socialism.  We say Real Socialism because what often passes for socialism is nothing but decadent liberalism, hedonism and forced globalism.  Very often, the so-called socialists of today (such as the UK Labour Party and the rapist-apologist moslem-hugging SWP) are pushing ideologies based on nothing but economics, making them a variant of the capitalists they feign to oppose.  Real Socialism puts economics in its correct place as a part of the bigger picture, and not as the over-riding factor.  Where the confusion comes in with people who call themselves Socialists, but are really globalist liberals, is that they fail to understand that a country is more than just a geographical area, but an area with a people tied to it.

Socialism is National in every aspect because it is a belief in achieving the best which is possible for the maximum number of people in the Nation.  The Nation is the extended family - the Nacio / the People.    We fully endorse Walther Darré's concept of Blood and Soil.  Ironically and which must be to the chagrin of any globalist liberals who bother to look into the origins of their ideology, Darré's work can be seen as the blueprint for the sensible aspects of the Green movement.  Mass migration is damaging to the planet, destroying the ecology of each place that the locust like mass of people moves to.  A sustained environment needs a constancy of population, not the addition of millions of outsiders who are an extra drain on natural resources, and who add to the criminal waste of agricultural land through the increase in building of accommodation to house them.  Borders are beneficial to nature. Open borders allow for global exploitation and the ruination of the planet.

Socialism is International because it supports the continuity of free Nations, as opposed to the nation destroying fraud of the globalists.  International cooperation is beneficial to everybody involved.  We support a free Europe of free nations, in which each country acts in the way which best suits its own people.  Peace is beneficial to the people, war is only beneficial to the Capitalists in the armaments industry and speculative markets.  We would abolish the EU and after that the UK.  We support a Europe in which England sits side by side with our neighbours (Ireland, Scotland, Wales, France, the Netherlands, Flanders, Wallonia etc), as free and mutually respectful neighbours, not as inmates of the same prison cell.

We oppose the free movement of people and goods because both undermine the ability of each country to be self-governing.  The Strasserites were anti-war and favoured International cooperation.  Hitler was a Capitalist Imperialist who favoured a war of aggression to build an empire in eastern Europe on the corpses of the rightful peoples of that area and the Germans he would use to secure it.  The hated EU is Hitler's legacy and like the real National Socialists who Hitler had murdered, we want nothing of such anti-people entities.

The National Socialists post-1934 betrayed the Socialist Revolution of the previous year, and adopted a Germanised version of Italian Fascism.  We are not Fascists - we are anti-Fascists, understanding that Fascism is Corporatism, which means the rule of the corporations over the people (which is what we have today in what many term the New World Order).  Because Hitler was a Fascist and a wrecker of the original (national) Socialism of Germany, we have no truck with his distortion of Socialism.

The Strasserites were good people who paid the ultimate price for staying true to their ideals.  They held fast to the principles of Socialism as a means of overthrowing the usurious exploitative system of Capitalism.  The much slandered Ernst Röhm was amongst those murdered in 1934 - officially for his homosexuality (which was blatantly hypocritical considering many of those around Hitler were of the same sexual orientation), but really because he was a danger to the Capitalist backers of Hitler, and unlike the man who ordered his brutal murder, a genuine revolutionary.  The Strasserite faction was heavily influenced by the works of Ernst Niekisch, who we also have points in common with, but that doesn't make us National Bolsheviks or Strasserites!

Our ideology is rooted in the English soul, and in the greater European family, which is why we are proud of the Germanic, Nordic and Celtic strands which make up our people.  We do not limit ourselves to just Englishness, but we do see the need to keep ourselves anchored in our heritage.  This again steers us towards Strasserism, as the ideal of the Revolutionary National Socialists was for Germany to be restored to a federation of free nations which existed before the German State was created.  We propose the return of the ancient nations of Mercia, Kernow, Kent, Northumbria, Anglia and a federalised pan-Saxon nation including Wessex, Essex and Sussex, all under the umbrella of England.  Hitler went so far as to abolish Austria and the Sudeten territories, crushing native diversity in a drive for uniform obedience to his 'thousand year empire', which under close examination would have become something similar to the EU had it succeeded.

We don't use the term National Socialism, because to do so is to needlessly duplicate two terms which are really indistinguishable:

Nationalism which doesn't put the people first, is not Nationalism, and the same can be said for Socialism - the two are one.  Hitler was a Capitalist who wore the clothes of nationalism but made the people in his care into servants of the global war machine.  Corbyn claims to be a Socialist but wants open borders which will crush the Working Class under a flood of parasites who we will be forced to pay for, whether through taxes to pay their benefits lifestyle, or in jobs taken by them at our expense.

Further Reading:

Blood and Soil, by Anna Bramwell:
Hitler and I, by Otto Strasser (complete text):
Otto Strasser's "New Europe", by Kerry Bolton:
Ernst Röhm:
The Anti-Hitler Underground within the German Conservative Revolution, by KR Bolton:


  1. Steve [Questioner]6 November 2015 at 15:46

    You use the term "Real Socialism" -- I use the term "True Socialism" -- beyond the slight difference in terminology, we may be refering to more-or-less the same
    variant: my Real Socialism is influenced by Louis Blanc, and [amongst other things] advocates Worker Co-operatives, advocates obligating the state to Take Care of the
    elderly and the sick, advocates Protecting Culture therefore supports MonoCulturalism, and is Nationalistic -- as opposed to Marxian Socialism, which [amongst other
    things] advocates Class Warfare, is fixated on crazy Egalitarianism, is additionally fixated on mad MultiCulturalism achieved by MultiRacialism attained by Open
    Borders Mass Immigration, and is InterNationalistic.

    I agree that stand-alone Nationalism has innate Socialism; and agree that True Socialism has innate Nationalism.

    With regard to diversity: I contend that a World composed of regions, with each region occupied by indigenous people -- is very much more diverse than a Pangaea, occupied by coffee-coloured people.

    I can't agree with your "world view" -- mine is somewhat different:
    I would like to see the pre 1970s Historical Counties re-instated;
    I'm a Unionist, and as long as the people wish the Union to continue, then I believe that it should -- infact, I advocate the greatest alliance that can possibly be
    achieved between all the countries of "These Islands": England, Wales, Scotland, Northern Ireland, Eire;
    Similarly with Europe -- I would tear down the vile EU tomorrow -- and replace it with the greatest alliance that can possibly be achieved between all the countries
    of the European Continent -- allied in defence, allied in trade viz a European Trading Block aiming for European Autarky, etcetera;
    I would erase Globalism / Internationalism from the dictionary.

    In my view, Corbyn is undoubtedly a Socialist -- a Marxian Socialist -- and in the DNA of such, is InterNationalism -- and that leads to Open Borders Mass
    Immigration, which is the Wet Dream of all Marxian Socialists.

    As for Ideology:
    I perceive that the Strassers wanted "Socialization Of The Means Of Production" and used that term synonymously with "Nationalisation Of The Means Of Production" -- and were it not for the fact that they also wanted Worker Profit Sharing, one could assume that they wanted a form of Communism -- indeed, I have read somewhere of them seeking to forge links with the Bolsheviks in Russia;
    Whereas I seek Worker Co-operatives whereby Responsibilities and Rewards rest with the Workers -- each Worker being a Co-owner of his/her place of work;
    I aim for a Pan-European Racial Socialist Alliance.

  2. Thank you for your reply. I agree that Real Socialism and True Socialism are pretty much the same thing. Louis Blanc coined the phrase 'From each according to his ability, to each according to his need', which he founded on an earlier French saying from the 17th century. The phrase is attributed to Marx, making it yet another example of his theft of other people's intellectual property(!)

    Otto Strasser was more of a Bolshevik than Gregor, and should be regarded differently from his brother. The real National Socialists were those around Gregor Strasser. It is comical but true that the Strasserism of Otto is different to the Strasserism of Gregor. 'G Strasserism' shines as a beacon for the revival of Europe, 'O Strasserism' fizzled out as a variant of National Bolshevism, and an inferior one to that of Niekisch.

    Unionism in the sense of a UK controlled from London is a form of imperialism. A confederation of the Isles is a different matter, with a fraternal relationship being preferable to one in which a central power controls all else. We wish to end the dominance of London in England and create a nation of cooperation regions; a collection of Soviet Repubics to borrow a term from the east of Europe.

    A Pan-European Racial Socialist Alliance is of course a good idea, but it needs to extend beyond physical Europe to include all European nations across the globe, and of course to exclude non-European lands such as Albania, Kosovo, Turkey which may have territory in Europe, but are not of Europe, and must ultimately be expelled from Europe.

  3. Steve [Questioner]8 November 2015 at 11:02

    I knew that the phrase you quoted originated with Louis Blanc and not Thief Marx -- but believe that it no-more defines Louis Blanc than Blue Monday defines New
    Order; both are flies in the ointment of their respective owners' otherwise outstanding compositions.

    I agree that there is a difference between the ideology of Gregor Strasser and that of Otto Strasser -- and as you may have guessed, between the two, I place myself
    firmly in Gregor's camp, as I believe that he favoured Worker's Co-operatives -- whereas Otto was only one step removed from being a Bolshevik / Communist who's idea of "Socialism" was actually Nationalisation = State Ownership of everything, although he did attempt to negotiate a 10% share of profit distributed between each enterprise's workers when he realised that AH intended to leave the means of production in the hands of their current capitalist owners whilst having his own hands on the control levers like the good Corporate Fascist Dictator that he was.

    Again -- similar to Gregor -- I favour Worker Co-ownerships whereby an individual worker shares responsibility and profit, being a direct co-owner of his / her

    I would never advocate London being the controlling capital of an imperialist UK -- I actually objected to the new National Stadium being located in Wembley, and
    favoured a central location, not least to put one in the eye of the London-Centrics -- so, yes, a fraternal confederation of the Isles is what I meant.

    As you guessed, a Pan-European Alliance of Racial Socialists, was only "the tip of the iceberg" -- and my ultimate aim is indeed a Global Alliance of European and
    European-Descended Racial Socialists.

    With regard to who should or shouldn't be in Europe:
    Because the Turks, in my view, are not Europeans, I would gladly cede to the Turks that piece of land that is currently classed as being in Europe but is populated by the Turks;
    I believe that Albania and Kosovo have claims as strong as or stronger than -- Abkhazia; Armenia; Azerbaijan; Cyprus; Georgia; Kazakhstan;
    Personally, I wouldn't have a problem with re-drawing the European border to exclude all of them.