14 Words

What is this site's consensus in regards to the 14 Words and our greater struggle to preserve our people?

I'm probably a lot more Racialist than the majority of those who follow the tenets of Progressive Nationalism

I am still relatively unclear as to what exactly constitutes Progressive Nationalism and how it differs from what White Nationalism.

I'm still a new comrade, so please don't flame me for promoting "reactionary ideas"

The way I see it, any person who wishes to preserve the future of our race is a comrade of mine.

What is the Socialist Phalanx's stance on the 14 Words?

I think the 14 words are a noble cause, and really outline our cause to be honest. The 14 words are a divine command of sorts. We MUST fulfill them. So true, and I don't think most here would be opposed to them because they have no hint of anything reactionary in them, especially chauvinism.

Left-wing nationalism differs from what's generally regarded as 'White Nationalism' by virtue of the fact the former is explicitly anti-capitalist and strictly opposes any and all forms of imperialism and exploitation, whereas the latter frequently invokes a "might is right" approach to foreign policy and typically endorses some variety of capitalism—in other words, White Nationalism is reactionary. (I provide a concise definition of left-wing nationalism here). White Nationalists are also prone to scapegoating and outlandish conspiracy theories, while we employ methods such as institutional and structural analysis to explain social phenomena.

With respect to the "14 Words," there's nothing inherently reactionary about them (though the same cannot be said of the rest of David Lane's canon) and I think they accurately summarize an objective we all seek. Left-wing nationalists advocate on behalf of national self-determination and preservation for all peoples; but, unlike White Nationalists, we recognize that capitalism is a homogenizing force which serves to significantly undermine such an objective. Not only is an ethnically homogenous nation which continues to feature exploitative social relations undesirable in its own right, but capitalism's very laws of motion will ensure that such a nation will revert back to multiculturalism in due course. In this respect, socialism can be viewed as possessing an intrinsic instrumental value, insofar as maintaining cultural and ethnic homogeneity is concerned.

Celtiberian wrote:Left-wing nationalism differs from what's generally regarded as 'White Nationalism' by virtue of the fact the former is explicitly anti-capitalist and strictly opposes any and all forms of imperialism and exploitation, whereas the latter frequently invokes a "might is right" approach to foreign policy and typically endorses some variety of capitalism—in other words, White Nationalism is reactionary. (I provide a concise definition of left-wing nationalism here). White Nationalists are also prone to scapegoating and outlandish conspiracy theories, while we employ methods such as institutional and structural analysis to explain social phenomena.

With respect to the "14 Words," there's nothing inherently reactionary about them (though the same cannot be said of the rest of David Lane's canon) and I think they accurately summarize an objective we all seek. Left-wing nationalists advocate on behalf of national self-determination and preservation for all peoples; but, unlike White Nationalists, we recognize that capitalism is a homogenizing force which serves to significantly undermine such an objective. Not only is an ethnically homogenous nation which continues to feature exploitative social relations undesirable in its own right, but capitalism's very laws of motion will ensure that such a nation will revert back to multiculturalism in due course. In this respect, socialism can be viewed as possessing an intrinsic instrumental value, insofar as maintaining cultural and ethnic homogeneity is concerned.

What is "reactionary" about David Lane if I might ask?

As far as the issue of white nationalism vs. progressive nationalism...first of all not all nationalism is based on "white."

I think a big difference between white nationalists and progressive nationalists who are influenced by Marx is that white nationalists think they have to "save the race" by building a new nation, "whiteland," whereas progressive nationalists realize that the incompetence of the ruling order and class conflict created by capitalism will either cause the destruction of the ruling class or keep the working class from fully cooperating.

There will be no need to save the white race by explicit action because the capitalist class will commit suicide by its own inept stupidity, or the capitalist class will keep the working class angry and angry people will reject multi-culturalism if they associate it with the exploiting class.

SSocialistStateSS wrote:What is "reactionary" about David Lane if I might ask?

You really have to ask?

Admin wrote:

SSocialistStateSS wrote:What is "reactionary" about David Lane if I might ask?

You really have to ask?

I think you and I will have to respectfully disagree on the man, Admin.

As I said to 'romanticist' on the chatbox. It's not so much a case of whether 'we must', but 'how we can'. Stop debating about how "We must secure the existence of our people and a future for White Children", and concentrate on "How we can secure the existence of our people and a future for White Children". Because how long has the WN movement been displaying that slogan? And how much has been actualy done to make it a reality?

And as to Lanes position as a reactionary, "Lane was a member of the John Birch Society before joining the Ku Klux Klan, becoming the organizer of the Denver unit of the Knights of the Ku Klux Klan in 1979. In late 1981, Lane became Colorado State Organizer of Aryan Nations." http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/David_Lane_%28white_nationalist%29

And which of these groups are not reactionary? Hitler spoke some good words, a hell of a lot more than 14, but I would still send his posts to the reactionary section.

Isakenaz wrote:As I said to 'romanticist' on the chatbox. It's not so much a case of whether 'we must', but 'how we can'. Stop debating about how "We must secure the existence of our people and a future for White Children", and concentrate on "How we can secure the existence of our people and a future for White Children". Because how long has the WN movement been displaying that slogan? And how much has been actualy done to make it a reality?

And as to Lanes position as a reactionary, "Lane was a member of the John Birch Society before joining the Ku Klux Klan, becoming the organizer of the Denver unit of the Knights of the Ku Klux Klan in 1979. In late 1981, Lane became Colorado State Organizer of Aryan Nations." http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/David_Lane_%28white_nationalist%29

And which of these groups are not reactionary? Hitler spoke some good words, a hell of a lot more than 14, but I would still send his posts to the reactionary section.

I agree fully Isakenaz. We have to start asking how to, in order to make the 14 words a reality. Though Lane had some bad history with the KKK types, I don't think it is good to pick on a man's past. Everyone has faults in their past. He even wrote an article called Misdirected Hate which explains that we shouldn't be hating other races, only the system which oppresses our own. I think the fellows at Stormfront could learn a thing or two from him. No doubt, many here would call some of David's views reactionary, but he never called for the plundering of nations. In fact he was even opposed to imperialism, and slammed the US imperialism for not only destroying our culture but the culture of all races on the planet.

SSocialistStateSS wrote:What is "reactionary" about David Lane if I might ask?

1.) His promotion of polygamy and general view of women as being little more than breeding machines.

2.) His membership in the John Birch Society—to my knowledge, he never renounced the views espoused by that organization.

3.) His constant invocation of "Nature's Law" (nature doesn't have a consciousness and is far too complex to provide the narrow ethical principles he attempted to draw from it).

4.) His denunciation of democracy.

5.) His view of taxation as being "oppressive."

6.) His promotion of- and participation in- terrorism (i.e., 'The Order').

etc.

Celtiberian wrote:6.) His promotion of- and participation in- terrorism (i.e., 'The Order').

Have you read his short story KD Rebel? I have, and it's beyond bizarre. It's about a colony of "Wotanists" who live out in the forests, who train day and night to invade the USA (which has long since been relegated to the status of a rump state), breed constantly (there's a ratio of one man to three women, who are constantly pregnant), and carry out assassinations of American law enforcement officials with laser rifles.

Towards the end of the story, a group of Russian nationalists seize power in Moscow, prompting the Wotanists to lead an attack on what is left of the USA.

It was from KD informers inside the System and from short-wave radio that the beginnings
of Ragnarok became known. White Nationalist forces in Russia, in the Baltic
states, and in Ukraine had cooperated in a well planned and carefully timed overthrow
of their Jewish-controlled governments. Other eastern European governments were
given ultimatums to immediately expel NATO (i.e., American) occupation forces or face
invasion and internal subversion.

Presumably, the image we are meant to be left with is of a million man army of LDAV (Latter Day Aryan Vikings), who come flying out of the west with laser rifles and other such goodies.

Tell me, Celtiberian, what 'movement' fiction writings are you familiar with?

Bladridigan wrote:

Celtiberian wrote:6.) His promotion of- and participation in- terrorism (i.e., 'The Order').

Have you read his short story KD Rebel? I have, and it's beyond bizarre. It's about a colony of "Wotanists" who live out in the forests, who train day and night to invade the USA (which has long since been relegated to the status of a rump state), breed constantly (there's a ratio of one man to three women, who are constantly pregnant), and carry out assassinations of American law enforcement officials with laser rifles.

Towards the end of the story, a group of Russian nationalists seize power in Moscow, prompting the Wotanists to lead an attack on what is left of the USA.

It was from KD informers inside the System and from short-wave radio that the beginnings
of Ragnarok became known. White Nationalist forces in Russia, in the Baltic
states, and in Ukraine had cooperated in a well planned and carefully timed overthrow
of their Jewish-controlled governments. Other eastern European governments were
given ultimatums to immediately expel NATO (i.e., American) occupation forces or face
invasion and internal subversion.

Presumably, the image we are meant to be left with is of a million man army of LDAV (Latter Day Aryan Vikings), who come flying out of the west with laser rifles and other such goodies.

Tell me, Celtiberian, what 'movement' fiction writings are you familiar with?

I have perused two chapters of the story that you have referred to thus far and am only pressing forward due to sheer incredulous amusement. The writing seems to follow in the style of a bargain bin thriller with romantic features. The ideas projected are coarse to the point of vulgarity. Take this as an example of Lane's copious descriptive elements of female sexuality:

As the raucous noise subsided, the sound of sensuous music could be heard. The
two girls on stage faced each other within touching distance, and began to undulate in a
provocative sexual dance, synchronized to the music. Their incomparable charms were
blatant and undeniable. Equal in beauty, yet with complementary differences, they
formed the ideal blend for visual erotica. The voluptuous Candy was the epitome of
classic Nordic beauty. Her long shimmering tresses, the color of ripe, yellow wheat,
swung freely around her shoulders. A trim waistline accentuated the matchless symmetry
of her hips and breasts. Golden skin and flawless geometric curves of calves and
inner thighs projected that effect which causes a man to literally ache with need and desire.

She was Aphrodite, goddess of love, sex and wanton lust, reincarnated in the flesh,
reborn to command, perform and orchestrate primordial pagan fertility rites.

If Candy was the essence of Aphrodite, then Heather was a Vestal Virgin. Short
brown hair framed a delicate face. A cute nose and expressive eyes proclaimed demure
modesty. Her slender figure mirrored the nubile form of a nymph, just past puberty.
Each exquisite inch declared the passion of first sexual awakening. She was girlish innocence,
fearful yet eager, an irresistible invitation to be ravished and deflowered.

Of course, both Candy and Heather are Aryan goddesses ripe for fertilization by Lane's brutish Viking rebels. Heather's youthful presence and presumed virginity are, naturally, her defining features; her social worth measured by her ability to offer an "irresistible invitation to be ravished and deflowered."

Rev Scare wrote:

Bladridigan wrote:

Celtiberian wrote:6.) His promotion of- and participation in- terrorism (i.e., 'The Order').

Have you read his short story KD Rebel? I have, and it's beyond bizarre. It's about a colony of "Wotanists" who live out in the forests, who train day and night to invade the USA (which has long since been relegated to the status of a rump state), breed constantly (there's a ratio of one man to three women, who are constantly pregnant), and carry out assassinations of American law enforcement officials with laser rifles.

Towards the end of the story, a group of Russian nationalists seize power in Moscow, prompting the Wotanists to lead an attack on what is left of the USA.

It was from KD informers inside the System and from short-wave radio that the beginnings
of Ragnarok became known. White Nationalist forces in Russia, in the Baltic
states, and in Ukraine had cooperated in a well planned and carefully timed overthrow
of their Jewish-controlled governments. Other eastern European governments were
given ultimatums to immediately expel NATO (i.e., American) occupation forces or face
invasion and internal subversion.

Presumably, the image we are meant to be left with is of a million man army of LDAV (Latter Day Aryan Vikings), who come flying out of the west with laser rifles and other such goodies.

Tell me, Celtiberian, what 'movement' fiction writings are you familiar with?

I have perused two chapters of the story that you have referred to thus far and am only pressing forward due to sheer incredulous amusement. The writing seems to follow in the style of a bargain bin thriller with romantic features. The ideas projected are coarse to the point of vulgarity. Take this as an example of Lane's copious descriptive elements of female sexuality:

As the raucous noise subsided, the sound of sensuous music could be heard. The
two girls on stage faced each other within touching distance, and began to undulate in a
provocative sexual dance, synchronized to the music. Their incomparable charms were
blatant and undeniable. Equal in beauty, yet with complementary differences, they
formed the ideal blend for visual erotica. The voluptuous Candy was the epitome of
classic Nordic beauty. Her long shimmering tresses, the color of ripe, yellow wheat,
swung freely around her shoulders. A trim waistline accentuated the matchless symmetry
of her hips and breasts. Golden skin and flawless geometric curves of calves and
inner thighs projected that effect which causes a man to literally ache with need and desire.

She was Aphrodite, goddess of love, sex and wanton lust, reincarnated in the flesh,
reborn to command, perform and orchestrate primordial pagan fertility rites.

If Candy was the essence of Aphrodite, then Heather was a Vestal Virgin. Short
brown hair framed a delicate face. A cute nose and expressive eyes proclaimed demure
modesty. Her slender figure mirrored the nubile form of a nymph, just past puberty.
Each exquisite inch declared the passion of first sexual awakening. She was girlish innocence,
fearful yet eager, an irresistible invitation to be ravished and deflowered.

Of course, both Candy and Heather are Aryan goddesses ripe for fertilization by Lane's brutish Viking rebels. Heather's youthful presence and presumed virginity are, naturally, her defining features; her social worth measured by her ability to offer an "irresistible invitation to be ravished and deflowered."

I am not going to lie as one who considers himself a Wotanist (Odinist) even I found those stories very bizarre. I think he lost his mind during his later years in prison and even became sexually frustrated.

Bladridigan wrote:Tell me, Celtiberian, what 'movement' fiction writings are you familiar with?

Fortunately, I've yet to read a single White Nationalist novel. I read precious little fiction as it is, so when I do, I try my best to stick with the classics—or at least great contemporary authors, like Cormac McCarthy.

Celtiberian wrote:

Bladridigan wrote:Tell me, Celtiberian, what 'movement' fiction writings are you familiar with?

Fortunately, I've yet to read a single White Nationalist novel. I read precious little fiction as it is, so when I do, I try my best to stick with the classics—or at least great contemporary authors, like Cormac McCarthy.

Then I can give you some advice (who could ever imagine that), avoid anything by David Lane, as well as the two novels written by William Pierce (actually, as a matter of fact, just avoid WN fiction by default). The only good 'movement' novels are by a fellow named Harold Covington, though they're about twice as long as the LOTR.

I'm actually (and dozens of others, by email) helping him on another novel, due to be published next year or so.

Romanticist wrote:

What is this site's consensus in regards to the 14 Words and our greater struggle to preserve our people?

I'm probably a lot more Racialist than the majority of those who follow the tenets of Progressive Nationalism

I am still relatively unclear as to what exactly constitutes Progressive Nationalism and how it differs from what White Nationalism.

I'm still a new comrade, so please don't flame me for promoting "reactionary ideas"

The way I see it, any person who wishes to preserve the future of our race is a comrade of mine.

What is the Socialist Phalanx's stance on the 14 Words?

I agree with White Racialist's on many things ( for example I am opposed to miscegenation) however I am not a White Racialist. I used to be one but now I have become a firm Hungarian Nationalist. White Racialism is simply the belief that the interests of the White Race must be upheld. I only believe that the interests of the Hungarian nation must be upheld ( it goes without saying that, being a Socialist, I believe that only a Socialist economy will be good for the Hungarian nation). The problems of other Nations do not concern me. Simply put I have no business worrying about the problems of ( say) the French just because they belong to the same Race as I do. My Nation has enough problems of its own already.

Rebel Warrior 59 wrote:I agree with White Racialist's on many things ( for example I am opposed to miscegenation) however I am not a White Racialist. I used to be one but now I have become a firm Hungarian Nationalist. White Racialism is simply the belief that the interests of the White Race must be upheld. I only believe that the interests of the Hungarian nation must be upheld ( it goes without saying that, being a Socialist, I believe that only a Socialist economy will be good for the Hungarian nation). The problems of other Nations do not concern me. Simply put I have no business worrying about the problems of ( say) the French just because they belong to the same Race as I do. My Nation has enough problems of its own already.

I think this is a horrible attitude to take. As Europeans we need to stand united. I can see not wanting to marry outside of your nation or sub-race, but to say you don't care about the fate of other Europeans is horrible. Of course be proud to be Hungarian, but we are all of the same race in the end. I believe this is what matters the most.

SSocialistStateSS wrote:I think this is a horrible attitude to take. As Europeans we need to stand united. I can see not wanting to marry outside of your nation or sub-race, but to say you don't care about the fate of other Europeans is horrible. Of course be proud to be Hungarian, but we are all of the same race in the end. I believe this is what matters the most.

Tell me why should I care about the fate of the White Race? What business do I have worrying about the fate of people who have nothing in common with me except the fact that they belong to the same biological category as I do?

For example why should I feel any sort of solidarity with the Danes? Sure Danes belong to the same Race as I do but that is where any sort of similarity ends with them. I cant even communicate with many other Europeans for crying out loud. And I am supposed to feel some sort of solidarity with them just because I happen to have some physical and genetic traits in common with them?

As for uniting, I dont see why Europeans need to stand united. All the problems ( such as Non European Immigration) that White Racialists talk about can be solved by each individual European Nation. Non Europeans, after all, are still a minority in every single European country. They could be easily resettled if the native inhabitants had the guts to do so. Not to mention White Racialists seem to be okay with European immigration which I am totally against as well. I dont want any Non Hungarians settling down in Hungary. I could care less if they are European or Non European. They have no place in my Nation's homeland.

It also goes without saying that it is totally impossible for many European Nations to " unite" or even be friendly with each other. Russians and Ukrainians, Flemings and Walloons, Serbs and Croats, etc will never like each other. It is an Utopian fantasy to even suggest Nations such as these will ever like each other much less unite.

White Racialism is meaningless in my eyes. Let me rephrase a saying by the Russian Nazbols" The Hungarian Nation is Everything, the Rest is Nothing". That is my belief.

Rebel Warrior 59 wrote:Tell me why should I care about the fate of the White Race? What business do I have worrying about the fate of people who have nothing in common with me except the fact that they belong to the same biological category as I do?

For example why should I feel any sort of solidarity with the Danes? Sure Danes belong to the same Race as I do but that is where any sort of similarity ends with them. I cant even communicate with many other Europeans for crying out loud. And I am supposed to feel some sort of solidarity with them just because I happen to have some physical and genetic traits in common with them?

As for uniting, I dont see why Europeans need to stand united. All the problems ( such as Non European Immigration) that White Racialists talk about can be solved by each individual European Nation. Non Europeans, after all, are still a minority in every single European country. They could be easily resettled if the native inhabitants had the guts to do so. Not to mention White Racialists seem to be okay with European immigration which I am totally against as well. I dont want any Non Hungarians settling down in Hungary. I could care less if they are European or Non European. They have no place in my Nation's homeland.

It also goes without saying that it is totally impossible for many European Nations to " unite" or even be friendly with each other. Russians and Ukrainians, Flemings and Walloons, Serbs and Croats, etc will never like each other. It is an Utopian fantasy to even suggest Nations such as these will ever like each other much less unite.

White Racialism is meaningless in my eyes. Let me rephrase a saying by the Russian Nazbols" The Hungarian Nation is Everything, the Rest is Nothing". That is my belief.

I am actually inclined to agree with you. It would indeed be very hard for all Europeans to unite, but it would be beneficial. It would put an end to imperialistic wars throughout Europe at least. I also agree with you that we shouldn't be settling non Hungarians in Hungary. Each Nation has a right to self determination and a right to maintain its culture. Hungary for the Hungarians, Germany for the Germans and so on. However; I do believe an alliance would be good, an agreement of mutual assistance. I believe our bond by blood is reason enough to form this. You may not think it important enough, but I do. If I were ever given the chance to support Hungarian Nationalism I would.

SSocialistStateSS wrote:I am actually inclined to agree with you. It would indeed be very hard for all Europeans to unite, but it would be beneficial. It would put an end to imperialistic wars throughout Europe at least. I also agree with you that we shouldn't be settling non Hungarians in Hungary. Each Nation has a right to self determination and a right to maintain its culture. Hungary for the Hungarians, Germany for the Germans and so on. However; I do believe an alliance would be good, an agreement of mutual assistance. I believe our bond by blood is reason enough to form this. You may not think it important enough, but I do. If I were ever given the chance to support Hungarian Nationalism I would.

May I ask what do you mean by unite?

I am opposed to Imperialism however, the truth is, there is no way to guarantee that there will be no more Imperialistic wars between Europeans. You might have some sort of peaceful union, for say a 100 years, but then it may break up and Imperialistic wars may start again. Nobody can see the future therefore nothing is certain.

I am not opposed to a Pan European alliance per se. I would definitely support one if ( let us say) the entire Continent was invaded by China. However, like I wrote before, I see no reason why there should be one now. Each Nation can take care of its own immigration problems by itself ( in the present time). Now of course if ( lets say) Austria was in danger of being overtaken by Turks then I would definitely support sending aid to the Austrians. After all it is in my Nation's interest that our neighbors be peaceable ( which the Turks are not). I must say however that I am totally against any sort of European superstate ( including the EU). Each European Nation should rule itself.

Just to let you know Im not opposed to White Racialism in itself ( I just oppose those White Racialists who believe that national differences between Europeans should be erased). Like I wrote before I agree with them on many things. I just think the problems they focus on can be better solved by Nationalism than by Racialism.

Rebel Warrior 59 wrote:May I ask what do you mean by unite?

I am opposed to Imperialism however, the truth is, there is no way to guarantee that there will be no more Imperialistic wars between Europeans. You might have some sort of peaceful union, for say a 100 years, but then it may break up and Imperialistic wars may start again. Nobody can see the future therefore nothing is certain.

I am not opposed to a Pan European alliance per se. I would definitely support one if ( let us say) the entire Continent was invaded by China. However, like I wrote before, I see no reason why there should be one now. Each Nation can take care of its own immigration problems by itself ( in the present time). Now of course if ( lets say) Austria was in danger of being overtaken by Turks then I would definitely support sending aid to the Austrians. After all it is in my Nation's interest that our neighbors be peaceable ( which the Turks are not). I must say however that I am totally against any sort of European superstate ( including the EU). Each European Nation should rule itself.

Just to let you know Im not opposed to White Racialism in itself ( I just oppose those White Racialists who believe that national differences between Europeans should be erased). Like I wrote before I agree with them on many things. I just think the problems they focus on can be better solved by Nationalism than by Racialism.

I think you and I are almost in full agreement actually. I apologize if my initial post came off like I was on the offense, but I did not infer as much from it. By unite that is exactly what I mean. A pan-European alliance. I also disagree with the idea of a European superstate. Even one that supposed white racialists propose. I notice most of them time it is Americans suggesting these ideas which I think is a bit silly, as an American myself, most of the Americans suggesting such things have no cultural ties to their native country.

About the alliance, it is impossible to see what the future holds. But nevertheless, it dosn't hurt to foster friendly relations and mutual aid among ourselves.

SSocialistStateSS wrote:I think you and I are almost in full agreement actually. I apologize if my initial post came off like I was on the offense, but I did not infer as much from it. By unite that is exactly what I mean. A pan-European alliance. I also disagree with the idea of a European superstate. Even one that supposed white racialists propose. I notice most of them time it is Americans suggesting these ideas which I think is a bit silly, as an American myself, most of the Americans suggesting such things have no cultural ties to their native country.

About the alliance, it is impossible to see what the future holds. But nevertheless, it dosn't hurt to foster friendly relations and mutual aid among ourselves.

If a Pan European alliance is necessary then I will definitely support it. By the way your post did not come off as being on the offense so there is no need to apologize ( of course I accept your apology if you insist on apologizing).

I dont know if most White Racialists ( White Nationalists, call them what you want) who are in favor of a Euroepean superstate are American but I definitely oppose their views. Like you wrote many of these people cant speak a European language ( besides English) and have probably never even been to Europe yet they think they have the right to dictate how Europeans should live.

I am all in favor of trying to foster friendly relations and mutual aid with other European Nations. After all I dont believe in being unfriendly with my neighbor anymore than I do with being unfriendly with a neighboring Nation. All European Nations should avoid an Imperialistic or Chauvinistic foreign policy towards their neighbors.

I think you and I simply have two different approaches. You think in terms of what is good for your Race while I think in terms of what is good for my Nation. Nevertheless our views are similar, in a way, so we do have common ground. I view White Racialists ( or Nationalists if you prefer), such as yourself, as potential allies rather than potential enemies.

Rebel Warrior 59 wrote:If a Pan European alliance is necessary then I will definitely support it. By the way your post did not come off as being on the offense so there is no need to apologize ( of course I accept your apology if you insist on apologizing).

I dont know if most White Racialists ( White Nationalists, call them what you want) who are in favor of a Euroepean superstate are American but I definitely oppose their views. Like you wrote many of these people cant speak a European language ( besides English) and have probably never even been to Europe yet they think they have the right to dictate how Europeans should live.

I am all in favor of trying to foster friendly relations and mutual aid with other European Nations. After all I dont believe in being unfriendly with my neighbor anymore than I do with being unfriendly with a neighboring Nation. All European Nations should avoid an Imperialistic or Chauvinistic foreign policy towards their neighbors.

I think you and I simply have two different approaches. You think in terms of what is good for your Race while I think in terms of what is good for my Nation. Nevertheless our views are similar, in a way, so we do have common ground. I view White Racialists ( or Nationalists if you prefer), such as yourself, as potential allies rather than potential enemies.

Well I'm European and I am a Pan European nationalist, though I believe that the unification should only come generations after initial take over of Europe by the left wing nationalist parties. Just like Adolf Hitler planned for Poland, France etc. for those nations ''worthy'' of being assimilated into the german folk

''Take away memory about the history of the nation, and the second generation will cease to exist'' A.Hitler

WodzuUK wrote:Well I'm European and I am a Pan European nationalist, though I believe that the unification should only come generations after initial take over of Europe by the left wing nationalist parties. Just like Adolf Hitler planned for Poland, France etc. for those nations ''worthy'' of being assimilated into the german folk

''Take away memory about the history of the nation, and the second generation will cease to exist'' A.Hitler

You are entitled to your opinion but may I ask what would be the point of such a Pan European superstate?

Rebel Warrior 59 wrote:You are entitled to your opinion but may I ask what would be the point of such a Pan European superstate?

I believe that in order for our people to advance we must unite, use the intelect, resources etc. that all of our nations possess to reach for the stars and take the Indo-european aryan race to other planets.