Legionary Fascism as the Most Pure Fascist Form

Palingenesis.

Which major fascism can be considered the most pure form of the creed - considering Griffin's definition of "palingenetic ultra-nationalism?"

Of the various major historical forms of fascism, the Italian version was the least “pure,” the least palingenetic.  Indeed, that is why we read:

….Codreanu has also become a main reference point for the Italian neofascist groups, alongside Evola and the ideologues of Nazism. He argues that this phenomenon, which tends to shadow references to Italian Fascism itself, is owed to Mussolini's failures in setting up "a true fascist state", and to the subsequent need of finding other role models.

Although I am often critical of the Italian character, I do not believe that character is responsible for the failures of Italian fascism with respect to palingenesis. After all, there is evidence of palingenesis at various points in Italian history. Fascism as an integrated political movement began in Italy; further, Italy had a history of definite early proto-fascism centered on national renewal – Cola di Rienzi being a prominent example (and then there are Garibaldi and D'Annunzio), and Gentile’s Actual Idealism provided a sound philosophical basis for palingenetic activism in the service of the State.  And we cannot forget the undercurrents of Futurism in early Italian fascism.  No, the failure of Italian fascism most likely had its roots in certain defects of Mussolini’s character, as well as the attachment of Italian fascism (pre-Salo) to the monarchy and to the perfidious influence of the Catholic Church. In Romania, the Legionaries were never slavishly adherent to the pontifications of decrepit nobles (although they did support the monarchy in principle) and the Orthodox faith was more robust than effete and superficial Catholicism.  In Germany of course, the Kaiser was gone and Hitler did not tolerate religious interference in the function of the Third Reich.  

Now, Italian fascism was indeed respectfully palingenetic in its beginning and at its end.  Early fascism, with its strain of novelty, Futurism, and under the influence of Gentile, was sufficiently robust; further, in the Italian Social Republic (Salo), the monarchy has been jettisoned, the influence of the Church weakened, and a more militant, socialist, and pan-European form of fascism emerged from the ashes of the former fascist state.  It is telling that Gentile, before his assassination, made a re-emergence as a figure of importance at this stage, demonstrating that his instincts were always sound. Unfortunately, these positive eras in Italian fascism bookended a long reactionary period, starting with the Vatican accord and ending with Mussolini’s overthrow, in which fascist revolutionary zeal stagnated, and a dull authoritarianism replaced palingenetic fervor.

Having said all of that, there may well be a contribution to the Italian character to the relative lack of fanaticism and discipline exhibited by Italian fascism compared to other versions of the creed. That's not palingenesis, but the degree of commitment and willingness to sacrifice to the cause. However, even so, much blame must still go to Mussolini for essentially wasting a generation in power.  But, with that, Mussolini was still a very great men, and Yockey’s praise for him in Imperium was fully justified. It is unfortunate that his greatness was tainted by flaws that prevented the potential of fascism to be actualized in Italy.

German fascism, not surprisingly, exhibited discipline and considerable fanaticism.  It did have significant palingenetic aspects, focused on race and eugenics.  However, there are some problems here.  It’s true that that Nazi regime was technically advanced – think of the V-1 and V-2, the jet and rocket planes, advanced U-boats, and other “German secret weapons” (albeit unfortunately not the atom bomb) – but still, the Nazi regime was anti-Futurist, and was focused on a “traditionalist” return to the ideal of Nordic Germanic tribes, manifested in 20th century reality by a neo-feudal society of Germanic overlords and Slavic serfs in conquered Eastern Europe.  So, balancing out the palingenetic aspects of German Nazi fascism were reactionary elements, coupled to a hyper-materialist focus on a strictly biological palingenesis.

As regards the Romanian Legion, see this.  Also see this.

Despite some superficial traditionalist elements, the Legionary movement had definite Futurist strains, and it was the single most palingenetic fascist movement in its insistence on the renewal of the individual, on the most fundamental spiritual levels of character, and on the renewal of the society into something different and better. Concepts of self-sacrifice and personal overcoming was maximized in the Legionary movement, on a personal level, compared to other fascisms.  To paraphrase Codreanu, Italian fascism was about the State, German fascism was about the Race, but Romanian fascism was about the Soul, about the New Man, about forming a new type of Romanian without which national renewal would be impossible.  In this sense we can see why I consider Romanian Legionary fascism to be the most pure form of the creed – it was at least as ultra-nationalist as any other fascism, but it brought the concept of palingenesis, of over-coming, to a higher level of any other fascist creed; it called for the most radical alteration of self and society, particularly if we are to consider the creed on its own terms and elevate the importance of Spirit over Matter (at least with respect to Palingenesis). The Italians focused on remaking the State, the Germans on improving the biological race, but the Romanians emphasized remaking the Man and Society.

Antebellum Palingenetic Ultranationalism

More on fascism.  Red font emphasis added.

This here is a link to an essay in the Fascism journal arguing that the Antebellum American South had “proto-fascist” features similar to “Germany’s nineteenth century Völkisch movement.”  This paradigm may be of interest to “Southern nationalists” extant in Der Movement (which I am not), so I’ll just reproduce a few interesting excerpts with very brief comments, and let the “Hunter Wallace” types delve into this in more detail if they are so inclined.

The abstract:

This article examines how the Southern proslavery defense produced a distinctly proto-fascist ideology. Rather than comparing the Antebellum South to twentieth century racist regimes, this study compares Southern fascist thought to Germany’s nineteenth century Völkisch movement. The author uses Roger Griffin’s Palingenetic Ultranationalism to explore how the Antebellum South promoted an illiberal vision of modernity. The author argues that proto-fascists rejected liberalism, had a profound sense of social decay, and advanced a vision of a new man, new political structure, and a new temporality. The striking similarities between nineteenth and twentieth century fascist movements mandates that the Antebellum American South should be included in comparative fascist studies. The results of this study contextualize the comparisons made between American racism and fascism along with deepening our understanding of fascism’s protean qualities.

It’s interesting how these “analysts of fascism” stress “fascism’s protean qualities” and then they proceed to impose rigid definitions on various fascist sub-genera. While those are different authors, they share the same mindset, writing for the same journal, and yet construct fascism according to pre-conceived notions while also asserting “protean qualities.”  True, there are some fundamental constant in fascism, but “anti-modernity” and völkisch racialism are not, in my opinion two of those.

Similarly, Riehl also believed that hierarchies are natural and it is modernity which is alien for the aristocracy preserved the true nature of the Volk. Such ideas were not limited to Europe. For the South, hierarchy, inequality, and slavery was, too, a patriarchal system descended from God. With such strong convictions, it is no wonder the South sought a palingenesis. They regarded their aristocracy not only as the best hope for the future of humanity but as a God ordained institution besieged. For the Southern intelligentsia, to allow Northern abolitionists to criticize slavery was intolerable.

Fair enough, I suppose.

Nonetheless, perhaps the largest hindrance toward the development of a populist fascist movement was the proto-fascist cult of aristocracy. The proto-fascist image of the new man is rooted in traditional elitist conservatism and excluded popular participation. Nevertheless, there were signs that this position was untenable. Southern elites were facing increased pressure from a newly emerging class consciousness of the poor and sought ways to mobilize popular participation to the extent possible at the time. The South’s emphasis on the white race was, to a certain degree, a populist message which promised to elevate the non-slave owner through his skin color. Fitzhugh even advanced the idea of a Southern education to disseminate principles of the new man: ‘We alone are a new people. Our social relations and institutions differ widely from those of other civilized countries of modern times, and in some respects from those of antiquity. New, original, and valuable combinations of thought will be suggested by our social organism . . . A Southern university will beget Southern thought and a Southern literature . . . When we cease to study Northern and European books . . . [we will] build up a Southern literature, more truthful, more Christian, more natural, and therefore superior to any that has preceded it.’ In fact, Fitzhugh advocated the elevation of white masses to the positions of superiority: ‘Our citizens, like those of Rome and Athens, are a privileged class. We should train and educate them to deserve the privileges and to perform the duties which society confers on them.’ Later, in Sociology for the South, Fitzhugh continues to venerate classical aristocracies as a paragon, ‘Like the Roman citizen, the Southern white man would become a noble and a privileged character’. De Bow contributor, L.W. Spratt believed that reopening the Atlantic slave trade would open Southern slavery to the masses, enabling popular participation in the slavocracy. In De Bow’s Review, he stated: ‘for all to become slave owners . . . will thus bring all the ruling race to the same social stand point; it will thus reintegrate and erect our social system . . . and open the prospect to a broader and brighter future than was ever yet expanded to the eye of man.’ Although the South was a rigid oligarchy, Southern intellectuals envisioned popular participation in the creation of the new man; heralding the future arrival of the populist ultranationalism of future fascist regimes.

Thus, the tension between aristocratic elitism and populism…possibly resolved through a common set of racial interests?

Proto-fascists between the South and Germany believed stripping the individual of their rights created a better society. Although the assault on individual liberty strikes at the very foundations of American notions of freedom, Southern intellectuals portrayed their alternative in a positive manner.

The Ramseyian Alt Liters weep.

Conclusion and Discussion: Toward a Fascist Revolution?

The Southern intellectuals sought the creation of a new man and a new modernity in a new nation. This palingenesis would enable Southerners to end their status as victims under Northern degeneracy. It would preserve traditional social roles between men, women, and race. It would be a forward looking ideology, a distinctly Southern modernity as an alternative to the liberal society of the North. The core of the Southern palingenesis was the creation of a new type of industrial slave society.

So, after all the pontifications about fascist” anti-modernity” we see “a distinctly Southern modernity” and “a new type of industrial slave society.”  Modernity is not something to be fought, but something to be leveraged and used, according to your society’s own unique Race-Culture.  The “protean qualities” of fascism are compatible with the more healthy aspects of modernity – particularly science and technics.

Although the South prized slavery as the ideal of communist goals, they abhorred the ideology. The Southern intelligentsia sought a third way between capitalism and communism because they believed free labor begat revolution and degeneracy. Low paid workers fermented revolution, abolition and feminism.

Slavery has never been stable throughout human history.  Slaves always ended up being freed.  It seems that the slave-owing antebellum southern aristocracy were justifying their own greed and reactionary refusal to change with the times and cut their losses.  Free White labor is infinitely better than free Colored labor, and ultimately, that was the only long term choice.

Above all, a working class led to socialism, not only in terms of the emancipation of their slaves as property but in inaugurating equality between race and sex.

Nonsense, if you believe an absolute inevitability.

To fight against degeneracy was to fight against democratic participation, abolitionism, feminism, socialism, and communism. To control and roll back the discontent of the working class and the revolutions they ignited, it was necessary to control them as tightly as possible, hence, a renewed and modernized slave state was the answer.

Short-sighted.

Cumulatively, the proslavery ideology of the South was proto-fascist. The palingenesis of the South did not completely resemble the fascist regimes of the next century. As previously stated, the South’s proto-fascism shares the same ineliminable core of the rejection of modernity…

Compare that last phrase to what is written above about the Southern embrace of a distinctively "Southern" and "industrial slave" modernity. These types of authors are so hysterical in their rigid and dogmatic interpretations and definitions of fascism that they cannot be consistent from one paragraph to another.

…and proposal for a radical new order as interwar fascist regimes such as Nazi Germany or Mussolini’s Italy. Historian George L. Mosse, said: ‘Ideas of regeneration, of sacrifice, and a vision of utopia were the staple of all fascism’. Indeed, Southern calls for a new nation centered on their notions of race and sex heralded the Nazi’s doctrine of master race utopianism and Lebensraum when a South Carolinian politician polemicized:

Unite, and your slave property shall be protected . . . Unite, and . . . . California shall be a slave State; the dismembered territory of Texas shall be restored, and you shall enjoy a full participation in all the territory which was conquered by your blood and treasure. Unite, and you shall form one of the most splendid empires on which the sun ever shone, of the most homogeneous population, all of the same blood and lineage.

The Southern nationalists fought and died for their palingenesis.

If slavery was s essential for “southern nationalism,” then what are the modern “Southern nationalists” doing?  Perhaps there is more to core Southern culture than slavery?

Nonetheless, these ideas continued to live on in a defeated South. For the Völkisch proto-fascists, their ideas would find new life and be incorporated into Nazi Germany. One question than can be conjectured is – if the proto-fascism was similar between the Antebellum South and the Völkisch movement – how did the experience of war lead to completely divergent directions? In post-First World War Germany, liberal modernity was associated with defeat coupled with a weak Weimar Republic. In the United States, liberalism triumphed so soundly that the South’s resentment of defeat never aroused the mass mobilization on the scale of the Europeans. After all, the North forced liberal-democratic institutions on the vanquished South. In Europe, proto-fascism was able to take root because liberal-democracy’s validity was questioned with the defeated nations and their ruined economies. For a defeated South, the best they could do was Klan terrorism and Jim Crow. The triumph of liberalism ensured that Jim Crow would never reach the extent of the Holocaust. Under Northern occupation, racist terrorists had to be secretive about their activities.

Liberalism was triumphant in America because the nation was in some sense founded upon it; in contrast to the deep roots of European High Culture and Race-Culture with a blood-soil component, the diaspora colonial American experience lacked those historical deep roots and exhibited a more ephemeral idea-based paradigm.  I am not saying America was, is, or should be an “idea nation,” but that, in a relative sense, compared to the Old World of Europe, it is more in that direction.

Furthermore, the notion of proto-fascism, like post-fascism, deepens our understanding of the ‘protean’ or adaptive qualities of fascism to historical and external forces.

Right…except when the author wants to confine fascist ideology into a rigid cage, so as to prevent more modern interpretations that can prove a threat to the globalist liberal order.

The ineliminable core of palingenesis explains similarities to contemporary ‘pseudo-fascism’ – such as through American President Donald Trump’s ‘Make American Great Again’ slogan for instance.

Laughable.

This study has shown that there was a continuum of illiberal forces which preceded and survived through the Southern nationalist movement that culminated in the American Civil War. The proto-fascist features of the Antebellum South explain many of the similarities other historians have drawn between the Third Reich and the post-Civil War South. As such, the Antebellum South of the United States warrants serious study in the discourse of comparative fascism.

Those similarities may be one reason why Type I American Nutzis are so enamored of Hitlerian völkisch racialism.

On another note, I'd like to see an analysis of Cola di Rienzi in this journal.

What Should Be Done, Again

Strategies.

Every once in a while at this blog, I find it useful – albeit somewhat repetitious for long time readers – to discuss the strategies that I believe that (American, but also applicable throughout the White world) racial nationalism needs to implement in order to make progress and achieve objectives.  As noted, this has been discussed here before.  Also see this.

Read this.

1. Build a legionary cadre.  No defectives, no Alt Right lulzers, no obsessives and fetishists, no zombies mindlessly parroting “movement” dogma, but hardcore, “vanguardist” political soldiers, truly vetted (extremely!) and put through years of long apprenticeship, a genuine movement akin to that of Codreanu, a pan-European Brotherhood that will form the core of the undermining of the old System and the creation of a new one.  And guess what?  This is not talked about in “interviews” with the media, it is not recruited online in sniggering “forums,” it is instead done privately and prudently, slowly, carefully, and with forethought.  Obviously, the existence of such an organization would not be a secret, just as the existence of the CIA, MI6, KGB, and GRU were not secrets, but the inner workings of the group, by analogy to those others, would of course be hidden from the public.  

2. Community activism.  Real community activism is done, not talked about.  It is done as much as possible “under the radar.”  You do not broadcast it to mocking media operatives, you don’t go through the motions for the sake of a quick blog post, this is not something done overnight.  True community activism is for the long-term, it is a work of years, it is done to help the community, not with an attitude of expecting an immediate compensation – the idea of compensation should not come into it at all. Of course, community activism by its nature cannot be kept secret; the point is that such activism is its own publicity – in other words, it becomes known because it occurs and it is effective, it is its own advertisement, it doesn’t become known because activists spend more time talking to the media than they do actually helping people.

3. Metapolitics and infrastructure. Metapolitics has been discussed endlessly by the Far Right, and so there is no need to repeat all of that here. Such activity is essential, as long as it is fresh, creative, and open-minded, and not merely the regurgitation of fossilized “movement” dogma.  We need real infrastructure to carry out our objectives, approaches to defeat social pricing, funding that goes beyond tin cup panhandling but actual involves earning money through some sort of productivity, service, and/or representation, we need lawyers (and not to drive them out of the “movement”), we need businessmen, doctors, academics, plumbers, mechanics, schoolteachers, politicians, we need a recreated and actualized society. By the way, metapolitics should include Salter’s democratic multiculturalism, which overlaps with both community activism and electoral politics.

4. Electoral politics. This has three purposes.  First, education, propaganda, and recruitment.  Second, provocation, heightening the contradictions, undermining the System, promoting chaos and balkanization.  Third, if elected, these people can not only leverage their office for the preceding two purposes, but also to protect the movement as much as possible.

5. Rallies, etc. - false-flag and genuine. False-flag rallies are meant as a distraction, to focus attention of adversaries to the open and superficial “cosplay actors on the street” as opposed to the more serious work going on elsewhere.  It would still need to be credible, to be viewed as a genuine threat and so worthy of attention, and also so as not to repulse Whites interested in joining the cause.  Later on, with the success of the other objectives 1-4 above, rallies and mass meetings, of a highly professional nature (even more so that the false-flag ones), can occur for all the positives such events can genuinely provide to a real and growing firmly established movement.

I would once again like to describe what I think should be done, so as to pre-emptively answer the screeching of the Quota Queens, who would falsely accuse me of only criticizing and not offering constructive suggestions. I have of course often given such suggestions, as noted above, and will do so again now. Let us consider the three major legs of the strategic tripod.

1. Electoral Politics

I have often talked about the need for involvement in electoral politics, as well as the wasted opportunity right after 2016. Right wing populism was “hot,” there was momentum; prudent planning could have set up some interesting local campaigns for 2018.  But, instead, the Quota Queens gave us Unite the Right, drunken podcasts, the Pilleater Chronicles, and all the rest.  But the wheel turns and as the Left exposes their insanity for all the world to see, and as Trump exposes himself as an insincere, semi-retarded fraud, there may once again be room for maneuver on the Far Right edges of American electoral politics.

2. Metapolitical education

There is not much need to discuss this here, as it is straightforward, and it is the one thing of the three that Der Movement is actually focusing on right now. Of course, I believe that Der Movement is doing a terrible job of it, doing more harm than good.  But as far as the type of activity, then, for example, the type of thing done by Counter-Currents would be an example of metapolitics, although I of course almost completely disagree with their content.  

3. Infrastructure/Community/Organization

What is meant by this?

Infrastructure – this covers such things including, but not limited to, financial resources, physical structures such as headquarters and meeting halls, competent personnel, equipment, a very competent and aggressive legal team, media resources, publishing, Internet hosting, and all of the various things required for the day-today running of a dissent movement, and its constituent organizations and groupuscules, in the context of operating in a hostile System.  

Community – you can read some of the ideas I proposed in my interview with Robert Griffin (long ago) in his One Sheaf One Vine book as examples of things we can do for outreach to the broader White community. And of course, community building can mean for our own people, setting up alternative community structures, leveraging infrastructure (see above) to defeat social pricing and allow pro-White activists to survive and thrive in a hostile System environment, and all of this can range from meetings at the small scale to actual physical communities, relatively self-sufficient, at the large scale.  And, as stated, we need outreach to the broader White population to provide assistance to them (and receive such in return) and for recruitment.

Organization – we will need the spectrum of organizational complexity, from slime mold to rhizome.

One crucial component, which overlaps with the need for community (and for metapolitical education) is the Legionary concept.  To be successful, we need The New Man.  We need a “school of palingenesis” in which activists can be reborn, improved in every way, particularly morally and spiritually. Given inherent problems with Whites in general, and pro-White activists in particular, today, this is essential.

This infrastructure/community/organization component will be the most difficult section of the three-part strategy to actualize.  After all, metapolitical education is already occurring; although I disagree with most of it and most of it is currently at a low level of quality, at least the pattern is established, and such education is scalable from the individual blogger up to a large scale organization or political campaign. Such education requires less organization and discipline for success than the other components, particularly the last one. Political campaigns can be done and the open and more “mainstream” nature of those endeavors also proves some leeway in the competence of its actualization.  

However, building community, infrastructure, and quality vanguardist organizations will require a very high level of competence, prudence, foresight, sanity, and reasonableness, all qualities profoundly lacking in the “movement.”  Look at the disasters that have occurred when any of this has been tried in even a crude initial form. Can you imagine?  You’ll have a bunch of Nutzis marching around screaming “Pepe,” “Kek,” “Jews will not replace us,” agonizing over the dire racial threat of hora-dancing Romanians and two foot tall Southern Italian Africans, while allowing homosexual sexual harassment and transparently obvious infiltrations. Actualizing these objectives will require the New Movement I have proposed.  The Old Movement will be completely incapable of doing what needs to be done.  They’ll just make a mess of everything, strangle it in the crib.

Each of these strategies synergizes with the other two.  The electoral campaigns provide a platform for propaganda, thus boosting metapolitical education and the campaigns can enhance community building, organization, and infrastructure – at the very least bringing like-mined people together and giving them real-world training in running an important endeavor.  In the unlikely event any of the candidates are elected, this would be a practical asset if they can use their position to provide assistance and protection (to the extent possible) for the other legs of the strategy, and, of course, such a victory would be a boost for morale and a propaganda asset. Metapolitical education provides the ideological framework for the other two components, and is a crucial component in recruiting people for those other components. Infrastructure/Community/Organization actualizes the metapolitical education into reality, it is the real-world outcome of metapolitical/education/propaganda efforts, and it provides the raw material in personnel, infrastructure, and other resources to assist in the other two legs of the overarching strategy.

And if we fail, I for one at least offered a generalized scheme for a back-up plan.  Meanwhile your “leaders” endorse Tulsi Gabbard and Andrew Yang, or scream about “Pepe” and “Kek.”  Your choice, my friends. Real, serious, sober leadership or comically inept infantile grifters. We all know the outcome of that choice now, don’t we?

In any case, once again, this is what needs to be done.  This is what should have been done after the 2016 election, this is what should have been done in the years and decades preceding, and this is what needs to be done going forward, starting now.

Will it be done?  Of course not.  With your majestic leaders, dancing through cemeteries with swastika-soled boots, expect nothing more than continued endless failure.