National Socialism vs Marxism

If you are new to this subject and still believe that Adolf Hitler and the National Socialists were evil, wanted to eradicate Jewish people and had the goal of taking over the world then please read my other articles on this site in the ‘Hitler and WW2’ section, and undo your brainwashing. If you have an open mind and want to learn some very important Truths about National Socialism, as well as Marxism, then please read on. There is also a companion article to this one, called ‘National Socialism versus Liberalism, ‘Democracy’ Capitalism’. The link to it will be at the end of the article.

Sections:

  1. Introduction – (Classical Marxism and Cultural Marxism)
  2. The ‘Socialism’ in National Socialism
  3. National Socialism vs MarxismHitler’s Revolution
  4. Concluding Thoughts

Introduction:

We are seeing the ever increasing rise of Marxism, particularly in Western / White and European Nations. Our education institutions and our media have been hijacked. Many young people are graduating from university or college brainwashed against all that helped their civilization to flourish. They are not being indoctrinated with Classical Marxism, though some do espouse some of this rhetoric, but have succumbed to the Cultural Marxism, which came out of the Frankfurt School… a more subtle form of indoctrination. Classic Marxism was not as popular as Jewry had hoped, the worldwide revolution did not occur – so these groups of subversives formed the Frankfurt School and came up with Critical Theory / Cultural Marxism… to slowly subvert Nations – and to bypass the use of direct political avenues. This was all carefully planned. Many of the younger generation do not know that they are Marxists and Communists… they do not realise what has happened to them… they just espouse the rhetoric that they have been bombarded with from birth. In the UK, the BBC, which is supposed to be an impartial organisation for the British people, is full of Marxist propaganda and is actively working against the Native British people… many people wish to defund and abolish it.

Links to videos with overviews on Cultural Marxism:
https://www.bitchute.com/video/jrvJRPC86WwE/ and https://www.bitchute.com/video/VNnWIgRgYCrH/

Overview of Classical / Orthodox Marxism and how it is a Jewish ideology – Europa The Last Battle, Part 1: https://archive.org/details/EUROPATheLastBattle/EUROPA+-+The+Last+Battle+-+Part+1.mp4

The ex KGB operative Yuir Bezemenov warned us about this ideological subversion… (Videos of him are easy to find online) and we can see this ideological subversion coming into full force now. The rhetoric we see coming from this younger generation of neo-liberals, social justice warriors, feminists and Black Lives Matter and Antifa supporters are based on lies, propaganda and emotions… they are not based on facts, true history and statistics… and what they promote will certainly not benefit these people in the long run… and most of these groups clearly receive much funding and promotion from very rich Jewish people and organisations. The younger generation think that they are working against ‘the man’, against ‘the oppressors’ but they are merely working for International Jewry and the Banking Cartels to destroy the very civilisations that gave them all they have, and that provides them with high standards of living… to destroy all that their ancestors struggled to create. They are, without realising it, working towards the Communist Marxist New World Order.

Yuri Bezmenov – Cultural Marxist Subverison

The German National Socialists also warned the world about Marxism, Communism and the agenda of International Jewry… they were strongly against Marxism and Communism and had to deal with it in their own Nation.

Before The NSDAP and Hitler were elected into power Germany had a huge problem with Marxist and Communist groups after the Bolsheviks (the Jewish led Marxist revolutionary movement) overthrew the Russian government. Supported by the Bolsheviks in Russia the ‘German’ Marxists established soviet republics within the Reich. These groups activities involved armed insurrection… a wide variety of violent acts and subversion. These Marxist groups actually killed and injured a great many National Socialists, as well as many other innocents.

The aftermath of WW1, and the fact that the government of Germany had neglected the needs of labor and the working class, also contributed to this rise of Marxism. The disenchanted working class were easy pickings for the Marxists, though most of these Communists in Germany were from their jewish population.

Whereas we in the West / White Nations currently face Cultural Marxism, Germany faced Classical Marxism – both of course have the same goal… and both are, of course, extremely destructive to Nations. Whereas Classical Marxism used the workers / laborers (the proletariat) for their aims, Cultural Marxists mainly use all the minority groups within White Nations.

What saved Germany from these Communist / Marxist groups? National Socialism did. National Socialism was diametrically opposed to Marxism – it was the nemesis of Marxism. Hence why Jewry conspired to destroy Germany via WW2.

Jewry are of course behind both Classical Marxism and Cultural Marxism. Karl Marx was jewish and was funded by rich Jews (Karl Marx’s real name: Moses Mordecai Levi). The Frankfurt school, that created Critical Theory and Cultural Marxism, was run by Jews.

National Socialism came from the people, a movement from the people, initially focused on the working classes, eventually it was able to involve all classes – to unify them into a National Community. National Socialism was not really just one man’s ideology, it was a natural progression for Germany and stemmed from many German minds. Whereas Marxism and Communism comes from privileged International jewish minds who stand apart from the Nations… Marxism is there to subvert and destroy a Nation.

When the National Socialists peacefully marched, or gathered, in the streets of Germany they would be regularly attacked by these Communist / Marxist groups. Similar to how Antifa work today, but these groups in Germany were more violent. National Socialists were killed and maimed by them.

Of course Antifa are not ‘anti-fascist’- and should just be called ‘anti-Nation’ or ‘anti-White-Nations’ – or Communists, if you like. This was demonstrated more clearly than ever when the Irish people gathered in Dublin to peacefully protest against paedophilia, as well as against a suspected paedophile (a very suspect character) being moved into a prominent position as Minister for Children. Antifa were there to disrupt the gathering. Clearly showing Antifa is just against White People gathering and having solidarity in their own Nations, and nothing to do with ‘fascism’. Just look at the symbol/logo below on The Communist Party of Germany Headquarters all those years ago.

The Communist Party of Germany (German: Kommunistische Partei Deutschlands, KPD) Headquarters.
Karl Marx displaying the Freemasonic hidden hand gesture.
A reminder of what Marxism and Communism can achieve

The ‘Socialism’ in National Socialism.

Some shills, or misinformed ignorant minds, like to say Hitler was a ‘socialist’ and then bizarrely lump him in with Communists… some do this merely because there is the word ‘Socialism’ in National Socialism and they are too lazy to really research… and some say this to be subversive… It is so ludicrous when you know the Truth. As described below, the term ‘Socialism’ was subverted by the Marxists.

Germany’s Hitler, by Heinz A Heinz, on National Socialism:

“German Socialism – Adolf Hitler’s Socialism (National Socialism) – is a totally different thing from what is generally understood by this term, from the Socialism derived from Marxian and Communistic theory. The first essential difference between the two consists in this, that the former is strictly national in aim, scope and limit ; the latter is international, without boundaries of race or land . The second vital distinction is that the first has been set up by the wish of the people concerned, the second is imposed upon nations by the will of those who organise and propagate it. A third contrast can be drawn inasmuch as German Socialism tends to draw all sections of the nation closely together, international socialism initiates class war. German Socialism is directed by the country’s nationals ; international Socialism is an instrument of the Jews .’ In the former it is the personality of the Leader which tells ; in the latter we have nothing but the inertia of the mass which is exploited by its organisers.” – http://www.jrbooksonline.com/PDF_Books/Germanys_Hitler-Heinz_A_Heinz-1938-263pgs-POL.pdf

This is an excerpt from an interview Adolf Hitler did in 1923 with George Viereck (friend of Nicola Tesla, fun fact) – The Fuhrer speaks on the difference between Marxism and Socialism:

“Socialism is the science of dealing with the common weal (‘weal’ means well-being). Communism is not Socialism. Marxism is not Socialism. The Marxians have stolen the term and confused its meaning. I shall take Socialism away from the Socialists. Socialism is an ancient Aryan, Germanic institution. Our German ancestors held certain lands in common. They cultivated the idea of the common weal. Marxism has no right to disguise itself as socialism. Socialism, unlike Marxism, does not repudiate private property. Unlike Marxism, it involves no negation of personality, and unlike Marxism, it is patriotic.”

“We might have called ourselves the Liberal Party. We chose to call ourselves the National Socialists. We are not internationalists. Our socialism is national. We demand the fulfilment of the just claims of the productive classes by the state on the basis of race solidarity. To us state and race are one.” – https://carolynyeager.net/bonus-g-s-vierecks-1923-interview-adolf-hitler

Another explanation from Adolf Hitler on some of the many differences between Marxism and National Socialism

National Socialism versus Marxism

Hitler’s Revolution: Insights into National Socialism and Marxism

This section is broken up into 4 parts:

  1. The Rise of Marxism in Germany
  2. Marxism’s and National Socialism’s different attitudes to Labor
  3. Fundamental Differences Between Marxist ‘socialism’ and National Socialism
  4. Race vs Marxism

The information in this section is from the book Hitler’s Revolution, by Richard Tedor

This excellent book draws on over 200 German sources. Using documents from the German, Soviet and British archives. A wide variety of National Socialist minds and publications are quoted and cited. My thoughts below are always in Italics and all page numbers refer to the book ‘Hitler’s Revolution, by Richard Tedor’. I have broken up some of the text by adding bold text for the different sources of the quotations, and then the quotation itself is in dark blue. As a qualified teacher I know this can help some people when faced with a large block of text.

The source for every quotation is cited in the footnotes of Richard Tedor’s Book. I have inputted the footnote numbers in the excerpts, like it appears in the book, so you can easily find the source. It is an excellent book. I recommend that you purchase it and read it.

The aftermath of WW1, the neglect of the needs of labor / the working classes and the Marxsit / Bolshevik Revolution in Russia led to Marxist / Communist groups gaining some popularity in Germany. These Marxist and Communist groups, run by Jewish people, were a huge threat to Germany… a great amount of violence from these groups ensued.

The Rise of Marxism in Germany:

“A fresh wave of nationalism swept Germany when World War I broke out in August 1914. Members of the middle class, common laborers and tradesmen fought side by side in the German army during the prolonged struggle. The comradeship at the front partially overcame class barriers and diminished individualist attitudes. Within Germany, the endless nature of the conflict, food shortages, and the government’s neglect of domestic morale led to war fatigue. When the Bolsheviks, a Marxist revolutionary movement, overthrew the Russian government and concluded a peace treaty with Germany and her allies in March 1918, this encouraged German Marxists. They organized public demonstrations by labor as well as strikes and finally a naval mutiny. This helped topple the emperor. A democratic government assumed power, and Germany concluded an armistice with her Western adversary, the Entente, in November 1918.

Supported by the Bolsheviks in Russia, German Marxists established Soviet republics within the Reich. The military commander of the Communist Party of Germany, Hans Kippenberger, stated, “Armed insurrection is the most decisive, severe, and highest form of class struggle which the proletariat must resort to… to overthrow the rule of the bourgeois.”46 The month-old Spartacus League staged a Communist uprising in Berlin in January 1919. German military formations suppressed it, causing considerable loss of life. The army quickly crushed Soviet republics proclaimed in Brunswick and Baden. The Communist seizure of Munich in April led to another armed clash, resulting in 927 deaths. The German army and patriotic militia known as the Freikorps (Volunteer Corps) put down additional Soviet revolts throughout Germany over the next three years.

Despite the unifying influence of the World War, class distinctions resurfaced during the 1920s. The largely impoverished middle class maintained social aloofness from the industrial work force. Labor was consequently still susceptible to Communist propaganda about exploitation by capitalism. The Red Front attracted millions of followers during the politically tumultuous years of Germany’s Weimar Republic. The Communists sought power through elections after 1923. To win labor for his cause, Hitler endeavored to make the destructive nature of Marxism apparent to German working men and women. National Socialism described it as a perverse by-product of the Industrial Revolution. It owed its success to the neglect of the working class by the imperial government in the 19th Century, liberalism’s creation of social barriers within Germany’s national community, and labor’s abrupt loss of roots. The former farmer or artisan, accustomed to creative, useful work with his hands and bound to the soil, was suddenly displaced and operating unfamiliar factory machinery in drab urban environs. A handbook published for German armaments workers summarized labor’s alienation as follows: “The person hatefully regards the machine he feels chained to. It is not his friend and helper. It only drives him in a pointless race for the avaricious interests of individual capitalist employers. It represents unemployment and starvation for many of his fellow workers. The machine distances the person more and more from nature, more unnatural becomes his perception, and the result is an unparalleled devaluation in every aspect of human creativity”P 21-22

Marxism’s and National Socialism’s different attitudes to Labor:

“Society’s failure to nurture and accept the working class as equal divided Germany, contributing to Marxist-organized strikes and mutinies that sabotaged the war effort in 1918. This circumstance supported. Hitler’s contention that various groups within a nation, while maintaining their individual character and function, must work together as a mutually supportive entity for common goals, impartially regulated by the state. To disregard one group was to jeopardize all. Entering politics in 1920, Hitler had to combat the substantial Marxist trend among the workers. At this time, many social and economic strata in Germany formed parties championing their individual interests. This was especially dangerous in labor’s case, since it allied itself with Communism, an international revolutionary movement employing subversion, terror and armed insurrection to advance its objectives.

Hitler’s ponderously-named National Socialist German Labor Party (NSDAP) departed from political convention of the period by standing for all Germans. Though he privately disparaged intellectuals, the aristocracy and even the middle class, Hitler recruited from every walk of life. Above the interests of group or individual, he set those of Germany. This was the common denominator that welded his diverse membership into a formidable and aggressive political bloc. He stated in 1928 that National Socialism “is not a movement of a particular class or occupation, but in the truest sense a German people’s party. It will comprise every stratum of the nation, thereby incorporating all vocational groups. It wants to approach every German who wishes only to serve his people, live with his people, and belongs to them by blood.”5

Germany’s Marxist parties, the Social Democrats and the Communists, did not campaign for labor’s acceptance into the German community but to overthrow the existing social order and supplant it with an international “dictatorship of the proletariat.” They did not solicit followers from among the educated classes. The NSDAP program described the Marxists as “united by feelings of hatred and envy, not by any constructive purpose, against the other half of the nation.”54 Karl Ganzer wrote in Der Schulungsbrief, “Marx did not come from the labor movement but from the liberal sphere. … He incorporated the concept of a perpetual struggle within society…. Earlier German labor leaders had wanted to solve the social problem through assimilation. With his class warfare ideas, Marx wanted to settle it by bringing chaos to the community.”

Ganzer wrote that Marx hoped to drive the working people “into a current that carries them further from the society they once wanted to be a part of.”56 He also pointed out an important distinction between National Socialist and Marxist perceptions of labor. The NSDAP honored it. Hitler publicly stated that “No German should be ashamed of this name, but should be proud to be called a worker.”57 Ganzer described the denigration of labor as “the worst crime of Marxist teachings. This class awareness Marx did not base on a sense of value but on a psychosis of worthlessness. Marx gave the sons of free farmers and tradesmen the derogatory name ‘proletariat.’ Just 40 years earlier, this expression had meant asocial riffraff. In this way, he draped the soul of an entire stratum in gloom.”P.22 – 23

We can see the chaos that is beginning to ensue via this Cultural Marxism in our Western / White nations, particularly in America. Two Marxist groups, Black Lives Matter and Antifa, have been instigating a great deal of it. Marxism is only destructive and only divides.

Fundamental Differences Between Marxist ‘socialism’ and National Socialism:

There is considerable difference in the socialism of Hitler and that of Marxist doctrine. Die SA explained that the objective of a socialist state is “not the greatest possible good fortune of the individual or a particular party, but the welfare of the whole community.”62 Marx’s purely economic socialism “stands against private property… and private ownership.”63 Marx saw socialism as international, unifying the world’s working class people who were social pariahs in their own country. He therefore considered nationalism, advocating the interests and independence of one’s own nation, incompatible with socialist ideals. Die SA argued that since socialism really stands for collective welfare, “Marxist socialism divides the people and in this way buries any prerequisite for achieving genuine socialist goals.”64

Hitler saw nationalism as a patriotic motive to place the good of one’s country before personal ambition. Socialism was a political, social and economic system that demanded the same subordination of self-interest for the benefit of the community. As Hitler said in 1927, “Socialism and nationalism are the great fighters for one’s own kind, are the hardest fighters in the struggle for survival on this earth. Therefore they are no longer battle cries against one another.”65 Die SA summarized, “Marxism makes the distinction of haves and have-nots. It demands the destruction of the former in order to bring all property into possession of the public. National Socialism places the concept of the national community in the foreground. . . . The collective welfare of a people is not achieved through superficially equal distribution of all possessions, but by accepting the principle that before the interests of the individual stand those of the nation.”– P. 25

Hitler regarded Marxist economic policy as no less repugnant to genuine socialism as the concept of class warfare was. Marx advocated de-privatizing all production and property. State control would supposedly insure equitable distribution of manufactured goods and foodstuffs, and protect the population from capitalist exploitation. Hitler advocated private ownership and free enterprise. He believed that competition and opportunities for personal development encourage individual initiative. He said in 1934, “on one hand, the free play of forces must be guaranteed as broad a field of endeavor as possible. On the other, it should be stressed that this free play of forces must remain for the person within the framework of communal goals, which we refer to as the people and the national community. Only in this way can we attain … the highest level of human achievement and human productivity.”71

Der Schulungsbrief dismissed Marx’s disparate clamor for equitable shares in national assets and equal pay for all work as stifling to personal motivation: “The man capable of greater achievement had no interest in realizing his full potential, when he saw that the lazy man sitting next to him received just as much as he himself. . . . Any initiative to do more and willingness to accept responsibility could only die out under this system.”72

Well before taking power, Hitler combated a tendency toward Marxist socialism in his own movement. In November 1925, district party leaders in Hannover proposed dividing large farms and distributing the land among farmhands. The state would require everyone employed in the agrarian economy to join a cooperative. Independent sale of foodstuffs would be illegal. “Critical industries” such as power companies, banks and armaments manufacturers were to yield 51 percent of the shares as “property of the nation,” in other words become state controlled. The program also recommended that the government acquire 49 percent of other large business enterprises. In May 1930, Hitler met with a Berlin subordinate, Otto Strasser, who supported a similar program. Hitler told him his ideas were “pure Marxism” and would wreck the entire economy.73 He bounced Strasser out of the party that July, underscoring his intolerance of Marxist socialism. Hitler considered the opportunity to acquire wealth and property an incentive for “eternal, enterprising personal initiative.” Enabling talented individuals to realize their full potential in life also elevated the society they belong to and serve.” P. 26

A definitive characteristic of National Socialism was its rejection of foreign beliefs, customs and ideas within the German community. It holds that a nation consists of its blood and soil: an ethnically homogenous people and the land they cultivate, the domain that provides shelter, refuge and nourishment from the soil where their ancestors lie buried. Through self-development will a people realize their potential; through awareness of their intrinsic identity will generations fulfill the role nature and providence intended. The NSDAP held that every nation exhibits a collective personality. The influence of foreign peoples whose life experience, environment and ancestry formed them differently will debauch the nation and is hence immoral. Leers saw the introduction of liberalism and Marxism to Germany during the 19th Century as “threatening to destroy our own values…. The history of the German people is a centuries-long struggle against spiritual foreign penetration into the realms of politics, law, tradition and our way of life, a struggle against the destruction of our race and perversion of our souls.”P. 27

Race vs Marxism:

“A fundamental principle of liberalism and Marxism is the belief in universal equality of mankind. It challenged the bastion of absolutism, which had held that a superior privileged class was ordained to rule. It established a moral and legal foundation for individual freedom and parliament. The dictum of America’s Declaration of Independence, that “all men are created equal,” underscored a political demand for representative government. The French Revolution interpreted universal equality in a biological sense as well. It maintained that “all who bear the human countenance” possess comparable natural ability regardless of physical dissimilitude, gender or historic performance.

Scientists and historians disputed this view long before Hitler’s time. The 19th Century English naturalist, Charles Darwin, theorized natural selection and evolution based on the study of animals and fossils. He concluded that species develop unequally, and that nature strives for improvement by favoring reproduction of those exhibiting superior traits and eliminating the unfit. Francis Galton researched the human personality, deducing that intellectual prowess and morality are inherited from parents. He advocated marriages among talented people, believing superior offspring important to advance civilization.

The French aristocrats Arthur de Gobineau and Georges Vacher questioned universal equality from a historical perspective. Gobineau identified a correlation between the growth and vitality of cultures and the races that founded them. Both men argued that ancient civilizations like Persia and India gradually crumbled as the original white populations intermarried with captive or neighboring non-white tribes. Published in 1899, Houston Steward Chamberlain’s The Foundations of the 19th Century attributes all great cultures to the creativity of Germanic peoples. German language editions of Gobineau’s and Chamberlain’s writing appeared in Germany at the turn of the century.

Newly formed institutions there challenged the liberal doctrine of equality on scientific and historical grounds. Similar movements came to life in Scandinavia and in Italy, where Paolo Mantegazza and Giuseppe Sergi founded academies for anthropology and race studies. Eugenics, Galton’s term for the biological investigation of inheritable traits in human lineage, became racial hygiene in Germany. European universities excluded these studies from the curriculum. Racial hygiene nonetheless acquired some legitimacy early in 20th Century. Grounded in the theories of Darwin and Galton, its proponents offered cogent arguments, based on research and analysis, to establish it as a valid science.” P. 30-31

The National Socialists viewed Marxism as the political descendant of revolutionary France. It leveled humanity off to a “faceless mass” by destroying society’s more talented, productive elements.110 According to Der Schulungsbrief, “Marxism is a radicalized variant of liberalism strongly rooted in the brutality of the French Revolution.” P.36

Goebbels described the rise of the NSDAP as “one continuous confrontation with the problem of Marxism.”115 The ideologies were at loggerheads regarding questions of the significance of race. The German study Der bolschewistische Weltbetrug (The Bolshevik World Swindle) provides this comparison: “The National Socialist world view interprets the nation racially, as a national community grounded in common historical blood ties of its people as determined by fate. The primary conviction of Marxist ideology is the class concept defining those with possessions and those who possess nothing. This class concept is bound neither by nationality nor by race. It stands like a dividing wall between people of the same nation. At the same time, it joins as brothers persons of the most diverse racial types. ’society is dividing into two immense, diametrical, hostile camps, bourgeois and proletariat,’ declared the Communist Manifesto…. Adolf Hitler’s judgment runs a different course. It desires the unity of naturally related people, the removal of class distinctions, and the personal feeling within every individual of belonging to the national community that the person, through fate, was born into.”116

A primary liberal argument against the significance of race is environmentalism. Supported by democracy and Marxism alike, this theory holds that not racial ancestry, but factors such as climate, arable land, education, luck, and social opportunities determine group or individual achievement. As Der Schulungsbrief explained it, “Marxism is built on the teaching that all men are equal at birth. Differences that become apparent in the course of a lifetime are the result of external influences. Personal development therefore depends on surroundings. The more favorable the environment, the better the person will turn out.”117 The periodical NS Briefe countered that this view “degrades man to a slave of his circumstances. . . . The determining factor supposedly rests with the environment; that man does not mold the age, the age molds the man.”P.37

This Marxist outlook that is promoted on Race obviously screams of Jewish subversion. Jewish people are the most tribal and racially conscious people on Earth – and they wish to convince everyone else – particularly White Folk – not to be Tribal and Racially Conscious. None of the leading Marxists actually believe this rhetoric of theirs on race, but promoted it to subvert, to go against nature and natural order…. for the benefit of themselves and Jewry. It is used to undermine the more successful races in the world.

Just by looking at the civilisations that developed around the world we can see the huge effect of DNA and Genetics. Africa is such an abundant continent – full of natural resources – but grand civilisations did not develop. (Please don’t say ‘Egypt’ – that ancient civilisation was not created by Africans.) Conversely in Europe, with our hard winters and less resources, grand advanced civilisations developed. None of this is saying that humans do not have equal rights, but it is just one of the ways that shows that there are significant differences between the races.


Concluding Thoughts

You can see that these two world outlooks are completely opposed to one another. For someone to support Marxism and Communism is insanity… it has been, and always will be, violent, destructive, divisive and genocidal. The only people who will benefit from it in the long run are the Jewish elites and those psychopathic billionaires that wish to create this New World Order. National Socialism is diametrically opposed to Marxism and was it’s nemesis in Germany.

Marxism divides a Nation and creates conflict. National Socialism unites the people in a Nation and creates peace.

Marxism subverts, regresses and stifles Nations. National Socialism brings morality, advancement and abundance.

Marxism takes away private property and free enterprise. National Socialism encourages them both.

Marxism discourages individual achievement, critical thinking, creativity and assertiveness. National Socialism encourages them all.

Marxism destroys cultures, traditions, family, history and racial communities. National Socialism preserves them all.

Marxism benefits ‘The Elites’ / International Jewry. National Socialism benefits the people in that Nation.

We can see that so many youngsters are brainwashed with the Marxist rhetoric they are bombarded with, and as mentioned previously, many do not realise who they are working for and what they are really working towards. They need to be educated by those of us who know the historical Truths and statistics. No sane, well balanced, knowledgeable, historically literate, conscious person could support Marxism. Cultural Marxism has been incredibly devious.

Some Marxists are just twisted and envious, some are power hungry people who want to bring down our Nations and destroy. But many of our young Westerners, particularly White men and White women, are just hoodwinked and have not been exposed to the Truth. Some of the younger generation, who have a fire burning in their heart, large amounts of compassion and feel that their is injustice in the world, have been subverted – their energies and natural inclinations to fight for, or attempt to speak for, justice have been tricked by Cultural Marxism. They are on the wrong side and they do not realise it. Every person like this you can educate and bring onto the side of Truth is a big victory – bringing that passion and energy onto the side of Truth. Having some prepared facts, statistics and historical Truths committed to memory, to sow some seeds of Truth when you encounter these people is the least you can do.

One of the reasons for them being confused and subverted is that they just can’t fathom what the answers could be to their Nations success and to their own disillusionment, unhappiness and anger with the world… how they can find that unity and fairness they desire. Because the answer has been demonised so incessantly that they could not possibly contemplate it as the answer. “National Socialism? What? You mean the Evil Nazis!?” If they truly understood what National Socialism is then they would have the answers.

That is why they destroyed Germany via WW2, and so incessantly lied about them. (((They))) never defeated the worldview and system of National Socialism, it was so incredibly successful. They just destroyed the Nation and killed all the people who created it and implemented it.

The same tribe of people who were behind this destruction of Germany are behind Marxism and Cultural Marxism… behind the current subversion and destruction of White Nations.

Many can see that Capitalism is not the answer, but pretty much the only alternative they are exposed to is Communism / Marxism. Our Marxist controlled school systems and universities will not introduce them to the Truth of National Socialism.

If enough people can learn the Truth about National Socialism then maybe, like it did against Classical Marxism in Germany, it can help us win the battle against Cultural Marxism and this Communist New World Order agenda.

End.


My companion article to National Socialism versus Marxism:

I have three more articles on National Socialism on this website that are linked at the very end of this post.

Some additional links on Marxism and National Socialism:

Russian Bolshevik Funded Terrorist Group Black Lives Matter Linked to Israel, by Vigilant Intelligence :

Hitler vs International Marxism, by VertigoPolitix:

Europa The Last Battle – Part 1 – Marxism

A decent overview of Cultural Marxism – I have seen a better one, but I cannot find it uploaded anywhere online at the moment:

A video on the Frankfurt School, Critical Theory, Cultural Marxism:

Classical Marxism Article: Bolshevism – Jewish Sub-Humanity: http://www.renegadetribune.com/bolshevism-jewish-sub-humanity/

Excerpt from the article:

“Rule of the Proletariat!”

“Where is the “rule of the proletariat” that the Jew Mardochai has presented so much to the betrayed workers of the world? The worker has only changed the master. He has become the slave of purely Jewish exploitation.

That is the great crime of Marx: He tore the worker from any folkish life foundation, degraded him to an international proletarian, who supposedly only had his chains to lose and a world to gain. He took the soul from work and promised the proletarian the destruction of international capital.”

Some useful articles on National Socialism from elsewhere: http://www.renegadetribune.com/?s=national+socialism+the+fundamentals

This link takes you to a series of articles called ‘National Socialism the Fundamentals’ (Parts 1 -14)

Three more of my articles / posts on National Socialism:

4 thoughts on “National Socialism vs Marxism

  • August 13, 2020 at 9:43 pm
    Permalink

    Thank you for this article, you are doing awesome work
    I guess writing a summary of all the facts, statistics and truth that could help us spread truth to young people manipulated by marxism would be a great thing to do.

    i’ve just watch this video and i thought you would be interested in looking it too, i’m not sure yet if she understands all the picture, i have the feeling both of your view could be extremely beneficial put together :
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NHex-kecZGk

    Keep the good work
    100% supported

    Reply
    • August 17, 2020 at 11:12 am
      Permalink

      Hi vortex modulation. Thanks for the positivity.

      I am certainly not a fan of that video you have linked though. I will give you the benefit of the doubt with this one – but that woman is a controlled opposition agent that puts some disinfo into her content. She has the words ‘Epstein’ and ‘Maxwell’ in the title and then proceeds to tell us that ‘Nazi Spies’ laid out to the U.S and other Nations how the world was going to go after the end of WW2! … Give me a break – what a lot of nonsense! She also mentions some nonsense about ‘Nazis’ ‘experimenting on humans… and she also mentioned that ‘Nazi’ scientists went to Russia and the US after WW2, but doesn’t talk about how they were kidnapped and blackmailed… and she did not mention how the ‘Allies’ totally ransacked Germany and illegally stole all their patents, equipment and technology… and starved to death millions of Germans while they were doing it. I did not watch anymore after this. I just wanted to get the gist of what she was saying in the video. She is clearly a subversive disinfo agent.

      I want to make this clear to people. You will not get any Truth about WW2 on YouTube. Every single Truth video on WW2 has been taken down and censored. The only people talking on this subject on YouTube are ignorant people incapable of critical thinking and controlled opposition disinfo agents.

      Reply
  • August 14, 2020 at 10:00 pm
    Permalink

    Hey, I really like this article, and agree with it wholeheartedly. Hopefully more people can attain mindsets like yours in the future.

    I also wanted to tell you I’ve finished the first part of a manifesto I’ve been working on, but I’m stumped on something.

    You know how National Socialist Germany had the German Labor Front? I’m aiming to create a similar national organization. I’m planning to nationalize and unite all labor unions in the United States and form what I call, the “American Labor Front.”

    Do you think this is a good idea, and how do you think I can improve upon it? Thank you again 🙂

    Reply
    • August 17, 2020 at 10:57 am
      Permalink

      Hi Connor. Thanks for the comment.

      I do not know enough about the United States to give you much advice on this…. It is a big place with many states, and I don’t live there.

      I would say that it is important to look into the differences between modern day United States and pre National Socialist Germany before you formulate anything. But something along those lines is going to be a good thing for a Nation.

      I am not sure if you have read this book, but here is an excerpt from ‘Hitler’s Revolution’, it gives an overview of the philosophy behind it:

      “Having disbanded the trade unions in 1933, Hitler wanted an umbrella organization devoted to the welfare of both labor and management, so that “Within its ranks the worker will stand beside the employer, no longer divided by groups and associations that serve to protect a particular economic and social stratum and its interests.” In his own proclamation defining the organization’s objectives, Hitler stated, “It is in essence to bring together members of the former trade unions, the previous office worker associations and the former managers’ leagues as equal members.”

      The structure supported the goal of eliminating strife within industry by encouraging mutual respect, based not on position but on performance. As defined in one publication, “There is neither employer nor employee, but only those entrusted with the work of the entire nation…. Everyone works for the people, regardless of whether a so-called employer or so-called employee, as it was in the previous middle class order.”

      This represented a revolutionary departure from the liberal democratic perception, as another German study maintained: “In the capitalist system of the past, money became the goal of work for the employee as well as for the employer. It was the individual’s wages that appeared to give work a sense of purpose. The employee saw the employer simply as someone who ‘earns more.’ And the employer regarded the staff of workers in his firm only as a means to an end, an instrument for him to earn more. The consequences of this thinking were ominous. Should the working man have any ambition to work anymore when he says to himself, ‘I’m only working so that the man over in the office can earn more?’ Can a business deliver quality work if everyone thinks only of himself? . . . Labor—its purpose, its honor, the creative value, the German worker as a master of his trade and a proud, capable working man, all this became secondary. Reorganizing labor does not just mean removing the crass material deficiencies of life. It must penetrate the relationship of person to person.”

      In May 1933, the first congress of the German Labor Front took place in Berlin. Known by the acronym DAF, it replaced the disbanded unions and managers’ associations. Hitler stated, “The goal of the German Labor Front is the creation of genuine cooperative fellowship and efficiency among all Germans. It must see to it that every single person can find a place in the economic life of the nation according to his mental and physical capabilities that will insure his highest level of achievement. In this way, the greatest benefit to the overall community will be realized.”

      The DAF therefore contributed to Hitler’s goal of welding the Germans into a Volksgemeinschaft. Here, he stated, “the head and the hand are one. The eternal petty differences will of course still exist. But there must be a common foundation, the national interests of all, that grows beyond the ridiculous, trivial personal squabbles, occupational rivalries, economic conflicts and so forth.” The Führer’s blueprint for eliminating class division was largely an equalization process. Through useful work, everyone could earn the respect of the community. “No one has the right to elevate himself socially above another because some outward circumstance makes him appear better,” Hitler argued. “The loftiest individual is not the one who has the most, but the one who does the most for everyone else…. The honest man, even if he is poor, is worth more than a wealthy one possessing fewer virtues.” – Hitler’s Revolution, by Richard Tedor

      Reply

Leave a Reply

css.php