White Politics II: Julius Streicher and the Enemy This Time

[Streicher facts taken from Little Man, What Now?: Der Stürmer in the Weimar Republic, by Dennis E. Showalter (1982).]

by Alex Linder

Julius Streicher comes to us across the decades as a sex-obsessed nut so disgusting that even his fellow Nazis steered clear of him. But that's Jew-filtered half-truth. The editor of Der Stürmer was an Iron Cross winner and highly successful orator who produced curiously strong propaganda that put the NSDAP over the top in Bavaria and Franconia. Thanks to his relentless editorializing, speaking and legal wrangling -- and the help of a first-rate cartoonist -- the infamous soldier-propagandist soldered Weimar corruption to the guilty Jew and burned that link into the cerebellum of the German Everyman.

The sleaze of the system was so perfectly embodied in his cartoon kikes that a generation of Germans came to see itself as Us, and to understand what needed to be done with Them. That's a lesson the fissiparous White West has yet to learn today, and it's the reason Streicher and his story are worth cracking open in 2001.

What did Streicher know? How did he discover it? How did he put his knowledge to use? These are the questions that make investigation of Streicher and DS of more than historical interest. In sum: How can we take what Streicher had and apply it to our war?...

He must have possessed something powerful since he was hanged at Nuremberg for his words and ideas alone -- called "war crimes" by the victors. That's right: the "democratic" victors put him to death for using the First Amendment! Welcome to reality, democracy fans! Democracy advocates place a lot of faith in their theory, almost as much as they do in a stout hemp rope.

Is it possible that what they were afraid of then is what they are afraid of now? Is it possible that Streicher holds the key to the door they don't want us to unlock? The answer is yes. Streicher was no Christian coward, like so many of the "courageous" Christian columnists we see backslapping and logrolling on the Internet and tv. He had an Iron Cross and convictions and defended them on the street, in court, on paper and from the podium. No Zionist lickspittle Cal Thomas he; no Israeli suckpoop Joe Farah; no Holy Land Tour Guide Pat Robertson.

He knew that identifying the Jew was real politics and everything else beanbag. He was right. And he was influential. And he won... What have our Christian cowards ever won? History records the Nazis retook a country from the Jews, and it shows that they were exceptionally brave and able men in so doing. They were better men than the Jew-toadying Christian cowards who denounce them today, no matter what the books say.

Streicher applied: Where he came from and where we're going...

Like most of the Nazi hierarchy, Streicher was of undistinguished origin, and seemed likely to carry on trackless. But WWI changed him, left him restive, filled with energy with no obvious outlet. Most White Americans today, grown up comfy in the suburbs, have never stretched themselves. Is it odd that war brings out the best in man, while peace brings out the belly?

Streicher too might have settled for a nice gemütlich life had not the Great War intruded. But during that war he came to realize that he had dash and vigor and that maybe there was a bit more to him than a schoolteacher. As Showalter puts it, the war -- his bravery and its rewards -- taught him that his own actions properly applied could alter reality. In commercial parlance, he had just done it, and having done it wanted to do it again. How to do that in peacetime?

Well, German peacetime wasn't peaceful. Towns were clogged with scrofulous Jews plotting insane revolutions. Politics was the answer. Streicher became a socialist, went to meetings, argued, got whipped by people who'd read books. Showalter paints him as realizing he couldn't get by on bluster when crossing swords with indoctrinated Marxists. Maybe that's true. I suspect he came across the Jews that dominate these things and had a visceral reaction. Perhaps a little of both....

After one meeting, somebody pressed a copy of a Jew-critical tract into his hand, and shortly thereafter Saul became Paul. He converted to the cause of "anti-Semitism," and it was apparently a genuine intellectual conversion. That's unusual: most people are anti-Semitic instinctively -- anti-Semitism being the natural reaction of the non-Jew to the Jew, based on his appearance and behavior, whether in Palestine, Poland or Paraguay.

Hitler details in Mein Kampf the horror with which he regarded his first Jews in Vienna. Anti-Semitism is the natural reaction of a human to an Alan Dershowitz, and that very formulation is how Streicher would have phrased it, or more likely had it drawn -- because the overriding technique he employed, the technique he is famous for, was capturing -- crystallizing -- the corruption of a country in the cover caricature of a kike.

One may write ad infinitum about crooked government, but why? A picture of Alan Dershowitz, Barbara Boxer, Chuck Schumer, Paul Wellstone, Larry King, Dick Morris, etc. etc. will suffice. Conjure their faces in your mind and you'll see what I mean. Even better than a picture is a cartoonist's rendering of these mortal monsters! Streicher took over a paper, found a great cartoonist named "Fips" and was off to the races...

The idea we have that Germans are a docile folk is laughable if we are implying that Americans by contrast are bold and pertinacious. Little Man, as does Irving's free Goebbels diaries download, gives you the real picture: Political debate was extremely vicious and personal and no-holds-barred in the Weimar Republic. It wasn't the dithery, mugwumpish pussyfooting we know today.

Compared to the ubiquitous pro-government pablum in our papers these days, Streicher in Nuremberg, like Goebbels in Red Berlin, constantly badgered the local Jews and government and police officials as part of a corrupt machine -- and was constantly being hauled into court for libel or defamation because of it. And constantly being fined and sentenced. But never giving up. And ultimately winning.

Germans docile and sheeplike compared to Americans? No. America, by long odds the freest nation left in the White West, won't tolerate a word of criticism of the preferred stock, by which I mean Jews and their colored tools. No 'nigger' ever peeps its head into the funnypapers where redneck and White trash find happy asylum. If there is a hair's breadth difference in editorial content between the most esoteric queer giveaway in the bowels of Zoo City and the primmest newsletter circulating Mormon stakes in Provo, then it certainly doesn't touch on anything real.

Nothing dealing with power politics in this country, where Jew-controlled Consumer is King, is touched on outside the Internet. Attacking Whites is the only acceptable position in the Jew-controlled media, which are everything but the 'Net and pillow talk, and the cowish, cowed Caucasian majority implicitly tolerates this, even as it tolerates being discrimimated against on the job, having its women raped by rank ape Negroes, its paycheck cut in half to feed proliferating pickaninnies, its guns yanked out of its hands and reforged into burrocrats' staples and paper clips, its mouth papered over with double-thick duct tape...

Streicher was a Jew-hater, a bigot and an evil coward, say our controllers. What are we, White man? Our freedom is being slowly taken from us, and we kick back and knit our hands behind our head. We are free to be foolish, and we are too foolish to be free.

When you read VNN, you always get something that reads you back. That's because our writers grew up in the Jew-constructed Propasphere and came to their views through reading, thinking and experience. Very few leftists can say the same, which is why their works are so tepid, vapid and complacent. The idea that someone disagrees is foreign; they've never encountered it.

In similar vein, almost any book you pick up on the Third Reich will be weak analytically. The left cannot explain the nationalists because it can't afford to examine their arguments. It can only afford to label and dismiss them. The Jew-led left isn't interested in accuracy, it is interested in winning politics. Falsified history is a useful tool. And just as in Weimar, there's a battle going on today that it intends to win.

Lying about the past and misrepresenting it to the present serves a number of goals. The Nazis beat the Jews, folks, and the Jews don't want you to understand how or why they did that. They want you pig-happy in your indolent ignorance. Not out in the streets speaking and fighting for your cause like the Germans did.

Jew or not, Showalter hasn't the fortitude or motive to consider that the Nazis might be right. Indeed, it is invariable that those who write about the Nazis write against them. That's why they are perpetually at a loss to understand the phenomenon. So it is with Little Man.

Showalter, like every other leftist, can't explain anything but can explain away everything. What motivated the Nazis and those who voted for them? Why, fear, confusion and alienation, of course. With side dishes of hatred, envy and malice. What did you expect? Heroic patriotism and a desire to save a foundering nation? Are you kidding? Do you think Hymie's going to publish rubbish like that? No. What Hymie will publish -- the only thing he will publish -- is this: Nazis were attractive to "people who, whatever their objective circumstances, perceived themselves as actual or potential losers." Typical Jewish smearing; social-forces scatology masquerading as explanation.

And this inevitable misreading of the Nazis leads, inevitably, to a misreading of their opponents. If the Nazis are losers, then surely we need give no credence to their criticism of the Jews. The two are joined: Taking the Nazis seriously means examining Jewish behavior. And that's the one thing the Jews will not allow, because they know where it will lead. So it's always -- always -- hate and stupidity and alienation and low bank accounts explain everything; Jewish character and behavior explain nothing. A tad 'simplistic' methinks, to use one of the Jews' favorite put-downs.

What's the point even pretending to explain X's actions if you've written off X's own explanations as wrong before you've started? The fact is that in America today, just as in Germany in the '30s, Jewish domination of the media makes it exceedingly difficult to get an alternative view in edgewise. If you point out that, say, Jews control the media corporations that put out about 99% of what the average American reads and sees and hears, then these Semitically Correct "academics" like Showalter will, when they get around to writing about you, point out that you were attempting to mobilize hostilities and frustrations based on the "perceived fact of Jewish involvement."

See, the Nazis felt strong enough to make it the basis of their arguments, but Showalter just dismisses their attitude as a "perception." He doesn't want to take on their claims about Jewish actions directly. Can't have that. Because the brilliant, omniscient Jews already have provided us with all the "explanation" of the Nazis we need -- alienated, hateful losers -- so what need have we to consider Nazi views at all?

Thus, we modern libs don't need to take on the Nazi arguments. We don't have the strength, we simply label and move on. And this is done anywhere majority interests run up against Jewish interests: If you oppose any item on the Jewish agenda, you are swept into one of a handful of "hate" categories designed by their master propagandists: racist, sexist, homophobe, anti-Semite, etc. And the Jewish media control that really does exist through repetition makes that label stick in the public mind. That's reality, folks. It can't be denied. It can't be explained away. It can only be covered up or dealt with, like VNN does.

There are perhaps three sentences in the entire book where Showalter lets his guard down and plays it straight.

1) He says that Streicher's editorials and cartoons had "just enough truth to be plausible."

So even the liberal, probably Jewish Showalter admits that there was a factual basis for the caricatures and complaints. The door opens a crack. But not wide enough for a no-holds-barred discussion of Jewish behavior, character and actions. Not even for a polite discussion of Jewish actions and motives and interests. Those are off limits to dumb goyim like us -- unless we make it our business to break through the Jew-installed barriers.

2) Der Stürmer was "more sophisticated than critics are willing to concede. Its tone may be aggressive, loud, crude and banal -- but it is above all comprehensible."

In other words, it has a point of view that is intelligent and direct and treats Everyman with respect. Unlike anything the Jewish media -- then or now -- produce, which is filled with casuistries, lies and evasions because truth is not in the Jew's interest and not on his side.

I can't say it any better than Streicher, who said he was "flinging the truth in the faces of bastards in Bavarian-German style." Or, as Kid Rock put it, he raised both middle fingers and kept on gunning. And won. He won. He won. He won...

Have you ever won, White man? Conservative? Republican? Truth is, you have no idea how it feels, do you? You have no idea how winning politics actually works, do you? The Jews do. And the Nazis did too!

They hit hard and directly at:

The honesty of an Alan Dershowitz

The character of a Chuck Schumer

The integrity of a Dick Morris

The love of a Susan Sontag

The generosity of a Gloria Allred

The beauty of a Bella Abzug

Real Jews, real qualities!

Make these fucking yids TASTE it! THAT's the way to win. Jared Taylor and his pay-stub philo-Semites are a hundred miles away from anything that works. You don't get from here to success by appearing on BET and "Queen" Latifah, you get there the way Streicher and the pro-Germans did, by physically, verbally, legally DAILY fighting the Jew. That's why we say, no man who won't openly defend Whites and openly name the Jews the enemy is on our side. The days of pay-stub, philo-Semitic racialism are over. William Pierce and National Alliance-style confrontation -- verbally and physically -- lead the way.

Streicher and Fips put out beautiful page-sized ink renderings of these unspeakable hominid blotches every issue. See the evil! Feel it! Snuffle around in it until you grasp the smell and savor of the yid, until you feel him, and imbibe what he is up to. Bury your senses in him like a bloodhound until you couldn't mistake that worm under the yard-thick pile of offal he calls home.

If you want to be a Christian conservative coward, you stick to safe and stingless "secular humanists" and "atheists" and bureaucrats and other faceless demons. If you want to be effective, like the Jewish Bolvsheviks and the Nazis who fought them, you make it harsh and personal and direct.

The Jews in America denounce right-wing Christian extremists seeking to impose their morality. They make it wickedly personal and they spare no cudgel in beating God's own sadomasochists. And the Christians, well, they keep prim and ineffectual with their beloved "secular humanist" teddy bear.

The Jews always win, the Christians always lose.

The way out, White man, is to attack the Jews as Jews. And attack them in harsh and personal terms. To subject them to endless, ceaseless ridicule. All of which they deserve, and all of which they have been subjecting US to for decades. It is time we turn the tables on these liar-swindlers and start bashing them even harder than they bash us. They are corrupt, ugly and evil creatures, and if you don't think for a minute they are intent on our genocide, you are a fool who can't reason from evidence. No Jews. Just Right. That must be our byword.

Men of today? Why we run around slurping up to "African-Americans," begging Mexicans to vote for us, yanking our ancestors' flags off tiny plaques. No wonder we lose. No wonder we lost our country.

Men of tomorrow? -- no quarter.

Racialism versus Republicanism...

This is the choice before us today: White racialism and White revolution or whiteblind Republicanism. I say whiteblind because although Republicans like to say they are colorblind, they are full of concern for reaching out to minorities and discussing their colored interests the same way the Democrats do. Political debate is scripted so that advocating collective minority group-interests is not merely legitimate but expected; by the same token even to speculate about the existence of White interests is immediately and by all quarters branded "hate."

The idea that Whites are a group and possess interests is denigrated across the board between the media-set poles that bound "respectability." Whites only exist as something bland -- 'whitebread' -- or racist -- 'redneck' -- or low-class -- 'white trash.' All these terms are ubiquitous in the "hate"-hating Judenpresse. White is something to be looked down on and discriminated against; all official sources -- schools, tv and government -- impart this message. White is something to be afraid of and gotten away from post-haste.

These are the terms of the debate in 2001, and Republicans accept them. Which should be a sign that although the party is made up of White people, it isn't run by them, though the face of the party stays White to fool the voters. The Republicans have been belittled. They content themselves with nudging around the edge about taxes, and focusing on their persons and problems. Their controllers will handle the big issues.

Sam Francis calls Republicans the Stupid Party, updating what John Stuart Mill said about conservatives in the 18th century. Hard to argue. But here's why what the Republicans are doing makes sense, given their character and circumstances. Three propositions:

1) Republicans won't fight. I feel no need to make a case for this point. If there's any principle the Republicans haven't backslid on since FDR, I have no idea what it is.

2) Media is politics [sic], as the Russian-Jewish media mogul correctly stated.

3) The media are controlled by Jews.

So we've got people who won't fight, and other people who control the media completely except for the Internet, which they are also working hard to bring under their thumb. And there's also the fact that much of the money funding the Republicans comes from Jews. The conclusion naturally presents itself not that Republicans are Jewish puppets, but that they serve that function by lending the appearance of a genuine contest to what actually is a rigged outcome. They don't do whatever Jews tell them, but they never step outside the Jew-set line on the essentials.

Republicans know they are addicted to Jewish money and constrained by Jewish media. Those facts alone make genuine resistance impossible. Knowing that because of the media Big Stick they can't fight on the issues their Jewish controllers will brook no dissent on -- race and open immigration and "civil rights" -- the Republicans content themselves with the small beer: niggling over how much to cut taxes.

Republicanism is not for people who want to fight the real battles of the day, it is for people who are "realistic," who accept the status quo. Seventy years ago, they would have told anybody supporting the same "civil rights" they slobber over today to be "realistic" -- there's no way we can get the support of Southern Whites if you want to do away with segregation. Today they preach that being "realistic" demands we accept the nobility and correctness of FDR and MLK, just like Ronald Reagan did.

But realistic people aren't the force driving the world. They merely follow along in the train of whoever has the guts to make his vision real. Reps will not be a problem, they are intent on what's good for them -- individually. We will be able to flip them easily when the time comes. The minute we show the slightest ability to do them harm, they will roll over like soft little puppies, in the same way that women will become racists the minute our opinion spreads fashionably over the wires.

The thing about being "realistic" that matters to White revolutionaries is that the people who mouth it can be dictated to by us just as easily as the Jewish racists. The hatred for "racism" that appears to exist in America is skin-deep, belied by every White family that has had to move away to escape influxing coloreds. If we have the power to sing our song over the satellites, the White majority will have no problem singing along. The Jew knows that, and the fact shivers him.

Republicans today are the folks who do not want to buck long odds, they want to be elected and reelected, and they want the emoluments that go with it. They want to live comfortably with the respect of the media and their peers, and if the price of that is ignoring a few paltry racial facts, well, that's not too steep.

They may not like the Jewish insistence that the Mexican invasion run unopposed, but, just like a real job, you've got to do what the boss says. That's life. That's reality. You've got to be a team player, no matter your private opinion. You've got to go along to get along. Politics is the art of the compromise, the art of the deal, the art of the possible. For realistic people, that's true. So they wax fat and happy, content with niggling the small points, confirmed in their complacency by the matrix in which they exist.

What Republicans have in store, they think, are decades more of the same. Winning plenty of seats while losing slowly overall, and abandoning one by one the principles they pretend to defend. The only principle Republicans truly defend is that they ought to get their share of the spoils. There are still enough White Americans in rural areas to guarantee electoral success at least for a couple more decades, and Republicans aren't interested in looking any farther ahead, and couldn't do anything if they did. Whatever vestigial sense of fight or honor they have left is channeled in the only politically safe direction: harping against their colleagues for not reaching out enough to the minorities; indulging in the safe-because-impotent pipe dream that majorities of coloreds, with their low IQs and third-world habits, can be persuaded to vote conservative.

It seems obvious that Republicans are the de facto party of White people, and that by advocating White interests, they could maintain majority status. But this fails to take into account decades of Jewish media agitprop and how deeply the "don't fight" lesson has been ingrained in our White pols. You can't expect heroism from beaten dogs, and time after time, the Jew-controlled media have proven their ability to demonize anyone who resists the two-party line. The illusion of debate, the illusion of contesting principles -- the reality of all but total control on the issues that matter to the controllers.

There is a reason we have anti-White discrimination, called "affirmative action" or "civil rights," and there is a reason we have open invasion from Mexico. Real political control in the U.S. is held by the Jews who own and edit the media and donate the money that drives the system, not by clowns vying to replace Bozo in the sports-politics you see on tv every couple years.

If we call the Republicans the Stupid Party, all we are doing is pretending that we on the sidelines know how to campaign better than the professionals. But anyone in the business -- read ex-Rep. Paul Findley's book They Dared to Speak Out -- knows that countering Jewish interests brings a hailstorm of hateful criticism and quick political death. Lacking the revolutionary temperament, the conservatives make the necessary adjustments, and soon enough they come to love Big Brother. No, the Republican Party is not at this late juncture in any way capable of being the vehicle for advancing White interests.

It will require a revolutionary party to do that.

Fighting for White interests means rejecting the system as illegitimate. It means recognizing and refusing to play along with the Jews with a deathgrip on the organs through which we discuss our problems. It means building our own alternative media like VNN and our own political parties that reject Jewish money and influence outright, with absolutely no exceptions.

Jared Taylor can puff his lungs out on Queen Latifah and other important shows but it won't make a bit of difference. Our circumstance is grave. Our arguments must be equally so. When you're up against the most murderous gang of crooked kikes the world has ever seen, politeness won't get the job done. Nietzsche be damned, we Whites are going to have to produce our own monsters, or this baby's going down with the bathwater.

ALEX LINDER

Back to VNN Main Page