Archive
Categories

Hostility Towards Germans Part II: German Self-Hatred and Leftist Ideology

Written by Manfred Kleine-Hartlage  

Translated by J M Damon

<Following is a translation of a German blog posted at <http://korrektheiten.com/2011/08/04/deutschenfeindlichkeit-teil-2-deutscher-selbsthass-und-linke-ideologie/>

[Part I of my lecture on “Hostility Towards Germans” dealt with the ideology that has resulted from the anti German narrative in the West.
I described how and why this ideology has always been and will always be inappropriate for Germany.
In the following section I discuss the consequences that necessarily derive from the adoption of this narrative by the Germans themselves.
In conclusion I discuss the role played by leftist ideology in the overall complex of hostility toward Germans.]

German Adoption of the Western anti German Narrative

As the result of the powerful effect of various venues of American propaganda following World War II, a cataclysmic shift took place in German political thinking. It was a shift in the direction of the Anglo Saxon ideology of revolutionary liberalism and later Marxism. In both cases it consisted of the acceptance of the basic assumptions of the revolutionary Meta-Ideology.

Among other things, this created a “We – You” differentiation based on ideology rather than ethnicity or national political basis.   The new norm was accepted as a matter of course, until “We” were no longer Germans or even the Europeans. “We” became a party in the global ideological civil war (“The West,” “Western Community of Values,” or “The Free World”). “We” became whoever shared revolutionary Utopian ideals.

Following the demise of the Soviet Union ever larger portions of the Left have come over to this “We,” as is quite obvious from the comet like careers of former “‘68ers”.

For the victorious powers, this new definition of the We-group, based on ideological allegiance meant a latent contradiction in their self-identity as nations. This was true not only for the Russians, who had fought more for Mother Russia than Communism (but whose victory served Communism more than Russia); it was also true for Americans and Britons. It was not easy to equate “My Country Right or Wrong” with the latest scheme to “make the world safe for Democracy.” As we have seen, these contradictions were just latent for the wartime Allies since they had fought as nations rather than as standard bearers for abstract ideas.

Among us Germans the contradictions were more than latent. They could not be ignored the instant we adopted the narratives and Utopian ideologies of our victorious enemies, as we did after the Second World War. A national “We Group” is a supragenerational community that includes past generations as well as those yet to come. The logic that compels a German Chancellor to participte in Allied victory celebrations in Paris, Normandy and Moscow implies that both world wars were battles in European and global civil wars.
They were gigantic struggles won by “The Western Community of Values” or simply “Democracy” (in Russia’s case, it was Utopian ideology as such) over the Forces of Darkness, and since “we” (re-educated, reconstructed Germans) belonged to this community of values, “we” were among the victors whereas “the Germans” (i.e. the strange people which called itself “the Germans”), the embodiment of all evil, were the losers.

The German adoption of Western Ideology and of Meta-Ideology in general implies a loss of identification with our own VOLK. It compels us to consider our own VOLK as the enemy, to abhor ourselves as an outgrowth of evil and to hate our own forbears. Germany is the only country in the world that erects monuments to traitors and deserters, the only country in which it is considered exemplary to spit on the grave of one’s grandparents. The historical narrative of the victors – with its global political concepts, its highflown Utopian worldview – can never be the narrative of Germans who want to be German. If they adopt it, it will be at the cost of self-obliteration. The contradiction between being German and being part of a historical subject called “Western community of values” is  unbridgeable.

The problem is underscored rather than solved by lame efforts to unite incompatibles in formulaic compromises such as “constitutional patriotism.”
This hostility towards one’s own VOLK is specifically German, as is illustrated than by the fact that the so-called “anti Germans” (as they call themselves!) comprise the only political grouping that refers to itself with the word “German.”  Not even the Neonazis do that, as they refer to themselves simply as “nationals,” emphasizing that they consider nationalism to be something good in itself – not only for Germans but for everyone. The anti Germans, by contrast, express the opposite wish: they want to eradicate the German VOLK, but not necessarily the very concept VOLK. Interestingly, they are attempting to do this through ideological rationalization, precisely what I identified as the foundation of anti German hostility in Part I of this series: The idea that Germany is (or was) the epitome of anti Utopian, anti globalistic counterrevolutionary force normally goes unstated except among anti Germans. My analysis is not far removed from that of the anti Germans; only the qualifying prefixes are reversed.

Leftist Ideology

Inner logic compels societies that support the fundamental assumptions of liberal Utopianism to quickly become involved with its hostile twin, Marxism – Socialism. In general terms we can refer to them both as Leftist Ideology. Whoever condemns society’s power imbalances on the basis that they are not founded in rationalism, and believes these imbalances are evil and must be stamped out, should not be surprised when the imbalance between rich and poor also comes under the crosshairs of criticism. Whoever champions freedom and equality as universally valid, and as basic values of society, has to deal with opposition to freedom in the name of equality. The Marxists who actively oppose capital because its power is not rationally legitimate but rather arises through automatism (derived from the nature of capitalism itself), leading to the mastery of one class over the other, rely on the same logic as the liberals who polemicize against church and king. In some regards Marxists are more consistent than liberals, since they condemn all social inequalities. For example, they condemn inequality between rich and poor; employed and unemployed; the citizen and the state; and between parents and children as well as majority and minority (either ethnic or religious).

From the point of Leftist ideology the more powerful party is illegitimate simply because it is more powerful. This implies that it should not be allowed to deal with the weaker on the basis of “merely formal” equality before the law, but must be actively disadvantaged. Correspondingly, from this point of view, it is not injustice to plunder the rich for the benefit of the poor or the employed for the benefit of the unemployed. Leftist Ideology assumes that the law and the state are repressive, since they use the same measuring stick to measure dissimilar entities, instead of causing what is unequal to be equal; and needless to say, there are no laws to protect the majority from the minority. On page 28 of “DEUTSCHE OPFER, FREMDE TÄTER” Götz Kubitschek and Michael Paulwitz cite a typically Leftist position asserting that racism against Germans cannot exist. This is because racism is a medium of repression that by its very nature cannot be inflicted on a majority by a minority because of the minority’s lesser social power to enforce its will.

In simple language this means that the “weaker party,” that is, an ethnic minority, is allowed to do everything, whereas the “stronger” (in Germany, the Germans) are not allowed to do anything, but must endure everything.
The power that is presumed to be stronger is automatically the evil power since it benefits from the alleged repression (that it also reinforces.)

Furthermore: since the mere existence of power disparity is the “evil” to be faced and fought, a belated “equalizing” injustice will no longer suffice.
The very basis of the power imbalance must be eliminated: wealth itself; or, as is especially pertinent to our theme, the ethnic majority must be eliminated.
From the point of view of the Left, a majority VOLK or ethnic group has no right to exist.

The Left is not satisfied with representing the interests of the “weak;” it is determined to delegitimize the “strong.” In our country the Left deligitimizes the interests of Germans, Christians, men, nonfeminist or nonlesbian women, whites, heterosexuals and gainfully employed workers. In other words, the Left opposes the interests of the majority and seeks to either force these majorities into the minority or else annihilate them altogether. This is the logic behind the policy of de-Christianization, de-Germanization, de-Europeanization, feminization and the promotion of homosexuality.
Only the gainfully employed cannot be abolished; however, it is permissible to pick their pockets, since they have placed themselves in an evil and repressive position just by existing from the fruits of their own labor.

It is self-evident that such a policy cannot possibly be democratic, since it is systematically directed against the majority. Thus leftist ideology naturally results in the propagation of demophobia (fear of the masses), de-democratization and coups d’etat. Of course it finds allies in minorities of every description.

All this has to do with the psychology of minorities in general, which is characterized by deep resentments. The minorities feel that the way of life of the majority, in which they are unable and unwilling to participate, should at least be spoiled for the majority. A good illustration of minority resentment is the bum who urinates in the vestibule of the bank. Racism against Germans is just one variation of this sort of resentment although a significant one.
Leftist ideology seeks to mobilize such destructiveness.

Related posts:

  1. Hostility Towards Germans Part I: The Anti-German Narrative in the West
  2. From a German Point of View: a Reply to Lawrence Auster
  3. Doctor Schäuble’s governmental neuroses
  4. Why? Reflections on the Oslo Massacre
  5. U.S. Strategy for Europe: Re-education

6 Kommentare zu „Hostility Towards Germans Part II: German Self-Hatred and Leftist Ideology“

  • The author has a profound understanding of the ideologies that are destroying Germany. He may like to read some of the chapters in the “Policy” section on my website.

  • The author has a profound understanding of the ideologies that are destroying Germany. He may like to read some of the chapters in the “Policy” section on my website.

  • The author has a profound understanding of the ideologies that are destroying Germany. He may like to read some of the chapters in the “Policy” section on my website.

  • The author has a profound understanding of the ideologies that are destroying Germany. He may like to read some of the chapters in the “Policy” section on my website.

  • Mike:

    Quote: “it was a shift in the direction of the Anglo Saxon ideology of revolutionary liberalism and later Marxism”. The author is being disingenuous here. Angles and Saxons were Germanic tribes that invaded England after the Roman withdrawel. What he REALLY means is the JEWISH ideology of revolutionary liberalism; but being German and writing from Germany, he cannot say that, without fear of prosecution.

    • I know well where the Angles and Saxons came from. Anglo-Saxon Ideology means an ideology favoured by the Anglo-Saxon powers, whether under Jewish influence or not. It will be hard to prove that this ideology as such has something Jewish, although a majority of Jews tend to support it; but it can be easily proved that Great Britain and America were the powers who did most to spread it, and this is what I was talking about

      And no, I do not say this for fear of prosecution.

    • I know well where the Angles and Saxons came from. Anglo-Saxon Ideology means an ideology favoured by the Anglo-Saxon powers, whether under Jewish influence or not. It will be hard to prove that this ideology as such has something Jewish, although a majority of Jews tend to support it; but it can be easily proved that Great Britain and America were the powers who did most to spread it, and this is what I was talking about

      And no, I do not say this for fear of prosecution.

    • I know well where the Angles and Saxons came from. Anglo-Saxon Ideology means an ideology favoured by the Anglo-Saxon powers, whether under Jewish influence or not. It will be hard to prove that this ideology as such has something Jewish, although a majority of Jews tend to support it; but it can be easily proved that Great Britain and America were the powers who did most to spread it, and this is what I was talking about

      And no, I do not say this for fear of prosecution.

    • I know well where the Angles and Saxons came from. Anglo-Saxon Ideology means an ideology favoured by the Anglo-Saxon powers, whether under Jewish influence or not. It will be hard to prove that this ideology as such has something Jewish, although a majority of Jews tend to support it; but it can be easily proved that Great Britain and America were the powers who did most to spread it, and this is what I was talking about

      And no, I do not say this for fear of prosecution.

  • Mike:

    Quote: “it was a shift in the direction of the Anglo Saxon ideology of revolutionary liberalism and later Marxism”. The author is being disingenuous here. Angles and Saxons were Germanic tribes that invaded England after the Roman withdrawel. What he REALLY means is the JEWISH ideology of revolutionary liberalism; but being German and writing from Germany, he cannot say that, without fear of prosecution.

  • Mike:

    Quote: “it was a shift in the direction of the Anglo Saxon ideology of revolutionary liberalism and later Marxism”. The author is being disingenuous here. Angles and Saxons were Germanic tribes that invaded England after the Roman withdrawel. What he REALLY means is the JEWISH ideology of revolutionary liberalism; but being German and writing from Germany, he cannot say that, without fear of prosecution.

  • Mike:

    Quote: “it was a shift in the direction of the Anglo Saxon ideology of revolutionary liberalism and later Marxism”. The author is being disingenuous here. Angles and Saxons were Germanic tribes that invaded England after the Roman withdrawel. What he REALLY means is the JEWISH ideology of revolutionary liberalism; but being German and writing from Germany, he cannot say that, without fear of prosecution.

  • Mike:

    I stand by what I said. Don’t blame the Anglo Saxons. It wasn’t us who invented Marxism, communism, femminism, homosexual rights and racial equality. It makes about as much sense as blaming Vandals and Visigoths. In todays world, Anglo Saxon just means White.
    To be sure, Great Britain and America are the powers most responsible for pushing this evil agenda, but neither of them are Anglo Saxons, per se; they are just the most useful tools.
    The New World Order, Globalism, Communism, Zionism; whatever you choose to call it, is a conspiratorial alliance of organised jewry and super-rich whites of every ethnicity (including Germans).

    • To be sure, Great Britain and America are the powers most responsible for pushing this evil agenda

      That’s exactly the sense in which I used the term “Anglo Saxon”, i.e. as a synonym for “GB and US”, so what are we talking about?

    • To be sure, Great Britain and America are the powers most responsible for pushing this evil agenda

      That’s exactly the sense in which I used the term “Anglo Saxon”, i.e. as a synonym for “GB and US”, so what are we talking about?

    • To be sure, Great Britain and America are the powers most responsible for pushing this evil agenda

      That’s exactly the sense in which I used the term “Anglo Saxon”, i.e. as a synonym for “GB and US”, so what are we talking about?

    • To be sure, Great Britain and America are the powers most responsible for pushing this evil agenda

      That’s exactly the sense in which I used the term “Anglo Saxon”, i.e. as a synonym for “GB and US”, so what are we talking about?

  • Mike:

    I stand by what I said. Don’t blame the Anglo Saxons. It wasn’t us who invented Marxism, communism, femminism, homosexual rights and racial equality. It makes about as much sense as blaming Vandals and Visigoths. In todays world, Anglo Saxon just means White.
    To be sure, Great Britain and America are the powers most responsible for pushing this evil agenda, but neither of them are Anglo Saxons, per se; they are just the most useful tools.
    The New World Order, Globalism, Communism, Zionism; whatever you choose to call it, is a conspiratorial alliance of organised jewry and super-rich whites of every ethnicity (including Germans).

  • Mike:

    I stand by what I said. Don’t blame the Anglo Saxons. It wasn’t us who invented Marxism, communism, femminism, homosexual rights and racial equality. It makes about as much sense as blaming Vandals and Visigoths. In todays world, Anglo Saxon just means White.
    To be sure, Great Britain and America are the powers most responsible for pushing this evil agenda, but neither of them are Anglo Saxons, per se; they are just the most useful tools.
    The New World Order, Globalism, Communism, Zionism; whatever you choose to call it, is a conspiratorial alliance of organised jewry and super-rich whites of every ethnicity (including Germans).

  • Mike:

    I stand by what I said. Don’t blame the Anglo Saxons. It wasn’t us who invented Marxism, communism, femminism, homosexual rights and racial equality. It makes about as much sense as blaming Vandals and Visigoths. In todays world, Anglo Saxon just means White.
    To be sure, Great Britain and America are the powers most responsible for pushing this evil agenda, but neither of them are Anglo Saxons, per se; they are just the most useful tools.
    The New World Order, Globalism, Communism, Zionism; whatever you choose to call it, is a conspiratorial alliance of organised jewry and super-rich whites of every ethnicity (including Germans).

  • Mike:

    Manfred,
    I clearly explained it in my previous post. I am not going to argue any further.
    Though we may disagree about certain things, the fact remains that we are on the SAME side, and THAT is what matters! So I’m prepared to generously forgive your unfair slur against Anglo Saxons, and simply wish you all the best, as a fellow White Nationalist and comrade.
    Mike.

  • Mike:

    Manfred,
    I clearly explained it in my previous post. I am not going to argue any further.
    Though we may disagree about certain things, the fact remains that we are on the SAME side, and THAT is what matters! So I’m prepared to generously forgive your unfair slur against Anglo Saxons, and simply wish you all the best, as a fellow White Nationalist and comrade.
    Mike.

  • Mike:

    Manfred,
    I clearly explained it in my previous post. I am not going to argue any further.
    Though we may disagree about certain things, the fact remains that we are on the SAME side, and THAT is what matters! So I’m prepared to generously forgive your unfair slur against Anglo Saxons, and simply wish you all the best, as a fellow White Nationalist and comrade.
    Mike.

  • Mike:

    Manfred,
    I clearly explained it in my previous post. I am not going to argue any further.
    Though we may disagree about certain things, the fact remains that we are on the SAME side, and THAT is what matters! So I’m prepared to generously forgive your unfair slur against Anglo Saxons, and simply wish you all the best, as a fellow White Nationalist and comrade.
    Mike.

Kommentieren