The recent vigorous and energetic exchange between writers at Alternative Right and Counter-Currents-- regarding the colorful exploits and complicated legacy of a certain mustachioed Austrian watercolorist and hot-headed orator-- has gotten me to notice something. Much of the debate concerning Adolf Hitler among alt-rightists, white-wingers, WNs, and suchlike seems centered around PR concerns. In his Alt Right article, Colin Liddell has argued that we (however “we” might be defined) ought to take pains to distance ourselves from any and all expressions of Nazi-sympathy, lest the world think that “we” are just a bunch of flaky Hitler groupies, thus giving ammo to our enemies and alienating possible allies.
Perhaps I should backtrack for a moment before explaining my position here. (And being a co-editor of this outfit, along with Colin, I think it’s incumbent upon me to have a position, after all.)
To begin with, I don’t at all see myself as a “movement” man. I never have conceived of myself, that is, as part of some all-important, collective “we,” whether that “we” is defined racially or otherwise. For me, gravitation towards the alternative Right has been occasioned by nothing less than a violent disgust with the Zeitgeist. What appalls me most about the Geist of our particular Zeit is its rampant and brazen bad faith. Zeitgeist-upholders say that they are guardians of free enquiry, even as they strive to enforce conformity, outlaw dissident thought, and generally make life intolerable for anyone who chooses to opt out of their smug, intellectually and aesthetically stultifying, smelly and malignant little dystopias.
I’ll go ahead and say it: I’m much more a hater of trendy anti-white PC Cultural Marxist dogmas than I am a lover of the great white race. (Disparage me for that if you must, but you’ve gotta admit, a lot of white people are pretty annoying these days, especially the smug, self-righteous, SWPL, blue-state types. I’m supposed to claim people like this as my own? No, thanks!)
Of course, I recognize the double standards which assert racial consciousness as a positive trait for every race except whites. Black, brown, and yellow folk are actively encouraged to have pride in themselves, but if white people choose to take pride in their whiteness, they are seen as wicked “racists.” Naturally, I also find it grating that a white-majority neighborhood, school, or region is commonly attacked these days for its absence of “diversity,” when predominantly black, brown, and yellow neighborhoods, schools, and areas are never assailed or criticized for such reasons. And yes, finally , I do find it pretty damned irritating that since Adolf Hitler was an Aryan supremacist, he is therefore seen as some sort of uniquely awful monster, his foul deeds polluting history with a particularly unspeakable stench, while numerous left-wing dictators, who have done indisputably worse things to a far greater number of people generally go unnoticed, their crimes un-remarked upon, their depredations forgotten. It hardly seems fair to the poor, perpetually-glaring bombastic loudmouth from Branau-am-Inn to single him out for such ignominy in the midst of such company. It’s a little like a teacher punishing only one boy in a class full of miscreants, just because that boy happens to have a really stupid-looking mustache.
For these reasons, I see quite well the appeal of flinging “Nazi” stuff in people’s faces, just to get a rise out of them, much like Sid Vicious did with his swastika T-shirts back in the 70s, or like Charles Krafft is doing with his Hitler teapots now. The utilization of shock value for the purpose of getting under the skin of the insufferably censorious has an immense appeal to me.
That said, however, I feel no loyalty to Hitler. I don’t see the need to distance myself from Nazism because I never was close to it in the first place.
Indeed, though the odium with which Mr. Eva Braun is today regarded is in many ways over the top and out of proportion, this doesn’t make him a good guy. Just because annoying liberal lefties think you’re the worst thing ever doesn’t mean that you’re actually the bee’s proverbial knees. (Remember the oft-heard metaphor of the stopped clock being correct twice a day.) And though the Nazis’ persecution of Jews is often cited by lefties as a means of attempting to shame white conservatives who wish to preserve their culture by dwelling among their own kind and stemming the tide of Third World immigration into Western nations (i.e., a perfectly legitimate desire for self-preservation is construed as a disguised wish to commit genocide against the “other”), a cursory examination of the history of the NSDAP’s 12-year reign in Germany confirms that a great many of the regime’s victims were thoroughgoing full-blooded Aryan citizens who simply didn’t take well to the swastika-brand of totalitarianism.
Consider such worthy dissidents as Hans and Sophie Scholl of the student “White Rose” movement, or Claus von Stauffenberg, or Deitrich Bonhoffer. Each an eminently noble, devoutly religious, deeply conservative figure, none of them Red or even mildly pink in ideology, nor remotely Semitic in heritage. My point: you can dislike the Nazis without fetishizing Jews in the embarrassingly obsequious manner so often on display among groveling luminaries these days; similarly, you can oppose the brown-shirt ideology without subscribing to the Holocaust-centric guilt trip of white ethnomasochism, which outrageously pathologizes white Gentiles as “Hitler’s willing executioners.”
More could be said on this front. As a fellow of mongrelized Slavic blood (possessed of a Polish surname), I suppose I could get uppity about Hitler and Stalin’s tag-team gang rape of my forefathers’ mother country, and about the Nazis’ overall plan to pulverize Eastern European and enslave its populations. But so it goes. I think it can be plainly discerned that an allegiance to pan-white interests need not translate into support for Hitler, and that declining to be a Nazi enthusiast doesn’t make one a sellout to political correctness, as some have alleged.
It should be added, of course, that I read Counter-Currents, and respect Greg Johnson as a writer and a thinker; moreover, I am deeply indebted to him for publishing two of my books, with a third slated for publication later this year. Though Counter-Currents and Alternative Right have a different focus and orientation, we both share a common bond, and in my view there is no reason why we can’t work together in spite of occasional disagreements. An earnest plea: Let not Hitler be our Stalingrad, comrades!
Andy Nowicki, co-editor of Alternative Right, is a Catholic reactionary writer who loathes all modernist dogmas and superstitions. He is the author of five books, including Heart Killer and The Columbine Pilgrim. He occasionally updates his blog (www.andynowicki.blogspot.com) when the spirit moves him to do so.