Seeing the path the world has taken over the last 80 years I have occasionally wondered whether the demonic forces behind World War Two were not so much aiming to win a conventional victory as hoping to use the reaction against the defeated Nazis to promote their agenda to bring down Western civilisation and, more to the point since that was already on the turn, corrupt human souls.
This is not to say the Nazis weren't the tools of darkness but dare one suggest without being accused of contrarian revisionism, that they were not uniquely evil either? They, and especially Hitler, have been made into figures of archetypal wickedness, devils in human form, and it probably suits our self-image to cast them in that light because it makes us appear virtuous, but this is a problem because investing them with such unique evil gives the impression that everything they believed must have been wrong. Consequently, it becomes easy to define good as the opposite of that. This false idea then provides a fruitful area for exploitation in that morality becomes anything that is anti-Nazi.
Let's see how this plays out. The Nazis believed in Aryan supremacy so whatever works against that is good. Anti-racism, mass immigration, belittling one's own people and one's own country to the point that you accept or even welcome their disappearance if you are an Aryan, i.e.white, all this is good because it is the opposite of what the Nazis believed. If it's good we go along with it even if it is against our own interests and our better judgment. The feeling we should do what is right for some and the glow of moral superiority for others overcome any lingering instincts of self-preservation.
The Nazis were against sexual deviance, notwithstanding the personal behaviour of some of them. Therefore, it becomes obvious that sexual liberation is a good thing. To oppose that is to be a cruel fascist, a control freak, a prude, a Nazi. To want to restrict love, you must be a hateful person. Love, or what is called love, is a justification for anything. (By the way, a lot of misunderstandings could be avoided if we, like the ancient Greeks, had more than one word for the many different feelings covered by the simple word 'love'.)
The Nazis wished to ban degenerate art, Entartete Kunst, which we know simply as modern art. They saw this as un-German in inspiration and effect, criticising it for its "Freemasonic, Jewish or Communist nature" (Wikipedia). Their defeat left anyone with similar doubts about this kind of art, that it did not reflect the higher worlds as art traditionally was supposed to do but was more in tune with infernal regions, in a difficult position. If the Nazis thought modern art bad, then it must be good. If you too think it's bad, well then, you are a Nazi sympathiser. At the very least, you belong to an outmoded, out of touch and ignorant group.
And so on. Now, in order to stop any latent Nazi tendencies to rise up once again we must encourage all those things they were against. Evil then spreads not by force of arms but through propaganda and even morality. And this, I would say, is because we have allowed ourselves to see the war against Hitler as an absolute good against absolute evil situation. As a result, for the last 80 years World War Two has become a replacement foundation myth for Western civilisation. And yet it was really just a war like many others. We need to put it behind us and no longer define ourselves in terms of our reaction to it but it seems more important now than it ever was. When I was growing up in the '60s it did not form a big part of my history lessons but my children's history syllabus seemed to revolve almost entirely around it. They were taught a lot about Hitler and the Holocaust and practically nothing about Alfred the Great and the Armada.
Maybe the reaction against the Nazi beliefs became Plan B for the dark forces but, in terms of defeating the Christian West, that plan has been most effective. And speaking of Christianity, one should note that this was the one thing the Nazis were against that has not benefitted from an anti-Nazi reactionary support. Coincidence?
The defeat of Germany prompted the emigration of many European Marxists to America where they spread their ideological poison, first in academia and then throughout the culture, in the process capturing all the institutions which now work against the nations they were set up to support. Whether this was part of the plan to begin with or whether it became the plan after military defeat is irrelevant at this point. The fact is the West allowed itself to be infected by a spiritual virus which has caused the sicknesses we suffer from today. Along with Russia, the West may have won the war on the battlefield but in that victory there lay the seeds for its subsequent defeat.
This piece is not written as part of the recent Churchill-bashing trend. Churchill was clearly a complicated character. My friend Michael Lord knew him quite well in his later life and would sometimes be invited to lunch at his house at Chartwell. On one occasion he watched as Churchill fed his pet goose pate de foie gras from the dinner table, making the bird, in effect, a cannibal. A jolly joke. But, though one might wonder whether the state of Europe after the war was any better than it would have been without a war, with Britain ruined and Eastern Europe communist, it must have seemed at the time as though there was no other option in the face of Nazi aggression, and Churchill was probably the right man to lead the country at that time. However, one may still be permitted to speculate as to whether the dark forces saw the war and its aftermath as a means to infect the West with atheistic communism as it had to that point proved reasonably resistant to that spiritual disease, a disease to which we have now succumbed if you look at it, as you should, as something much more than an economic system.
There are many people talking and writing about the, to all intents and purposes, communist takeover of the West and how we are being taught by this ideology to hate ourselves and all our past achievements. Our countries are being flooded with aliens and our cultures debased. Feminism is destroying the family and masculinity, which, properly functioning, might arrest the decline, is derided. However, we can never understand what is happening until we see the assault as primarily spiritual and the object of its attack being the soul and its relation to God. It is to sever this relationship that is the purpose of everything else. Jesus said "Seek ye first the kingdom of heaven and all else will be added to you". He could just as well have said "Abandon the search for the kingdom of heaven and you will lose everything else." We would do well to bear this in mind. It is no good resisting communism if you do not do so with the full remembrance of God for what communism is chiefly all about is the replacement of God with man but man in his fallen mode. This is how we can easily identify its Satanic origin.
Excellent analysis! It is hard to exaggerate this, and its shallow inconsistency.
ReplyDeleteOur current mania got going from the mid sixties. Before that it was more balanced.
That the current ideology is insane has been revealed by the literally fanatical support for literal nazis, which has been made possible by suppressing that nazis were just as anti Slav and anti Polish as they were anti Jewish, and anti communist, as revealed by the preponderance of inhabitants of concentration camps and (worked to death) slaves.
But, as you say, the real motivation is almost opposite of anything good.
watch Europa the Last Battle dot net to see the full story on what's been left out of WW2 history in the west.
ReplyDeleteWhen my children were in the public schools, we shared quite a few laughs over the steady diet they were fed of slavery and the holocaust. I'm not sure they read any fiction that was unconnected to these themes, although there must have been novels a about misunderstood homosexual. We laughed, but it was a lugubrious laugh on my part.
ReplyDeleteI don't remember just when I perceived that the memory of World War II was reviving as mythology, but it was probably forty years ago and the perception was a major step in my understanding of culture. Here in the States the Civil War has likewise risen from the grave--or I should say, has been raise from the dead like a zombie. Many people have read what Orwell said about history, but too few have really taken it to heart. Those who control the present control the past; those who control the past control the future.
I think it is worthwhile to ask why our memory of World War II is so different than our memory of World War I, and why our memory of World War II in 2024 is not like our memory of World War I in 1999. In 1999 World War I was "ancient history" and scarcely one person in 1,000 could have spoken of it with feeling or intelligence. In 2024 World War II is the litmus test that separated mankind into steep and goats.
The basic answer to this question is, as you say, that the world we live in is largely legitimated by a myth of World War II. We can tell it is a foundational myth because serious dissent or divergent opinion is punished, often severely. You note the recent brouhaha over the sacred memory of Churchill, a complex character, to say the least. The myth of Churchill conveniently hides the fact that Stalin won the WAR.
This is a large and dangerous topic, but I'm glad you broached it with your usual level-headed good sense.
Thanks. I often think of my father (who died in 1997) and grandfather (1970) who fought in the war and how astonished/horrified they would be if they saw how things were today. "Why did we bother?" comes to mind as the first thing they might say. But it's clear to me that the memory of the war has been weaponised and used as a means of national self-destruction. I view this as ultimately spiritual in origin and having an ultimately spiritual purpose. When I say spiritual I am using that word to include the demonic.
ReplyDeleteConsidering the question in your third paragraph about the difference between WW1 and WW2, could it be that the first war cannot be used to dismantle our culture and society the way the second one can and is? It can't be made into an ideological thing.
ReplyDeleteIt seems it took around 20 years to transform the Nazis from historical figures into mythological ones which gave them a greater power over the psyche. But there were other factors that made the '60s a time of such transformation, including more money, the rise of youth culture and a general push of liberalism onto a civilisation that had become exhausted and lost its way and so was ripe for the picking, so to speak.
ReplyDeleteWorld War I was used to advance Leftism until World War II came along and threw it into the shadows. Ir was used to illustrate the evils of capitalism ("merchants of death"), nationalism, imperialism, and the "bourgeois" world generally. I'll be the first to grant that there were evils to illustrate, but the implicit message was that some sort of Leftist internationalism (social democratic or bolshevik) was the only solution.
ReplyDeleteWorld War II reinforced this message by representing fascism as an atavistic reaction to Leftist internationalism, and not as a third, thoroughly modern ideology. Franklin Roosevelt's United States was a social democratic polity mislabeled as "Liberal." Stalin's U.S.S.R. was bolshevik. Where Great Britain fit on this ideological map is hard to say, and this may be one reason for the cult of Winston Churchill.
In the mythic representation of World War II, fascism is simply the atavistic state to which humans will revert if they lose their enthusiasm for international Leftism. The power of our managers is not justified by the fact that they protect us from hostile foreigners, but rather by the fact that they protect us from this atavistic tendency in ourselves. I mentioned Orwell in ny first comment, so I will say here that Fascism is the Snowball/Goldstein (Trotsky) of our ideology.
I agree with what you say about the 60s, but would add that the 60s didn't really happen for most people in the West until the 70s or even 80s. I lived in England in the middle of the 70s, and it, like the US, was then suspended between two worlds. I vaguely understood this as I wandered through the abandoned factories by the river Irwell north of Manchester. I can still picture one gloomy afternoon among the abandoned red-brick factories finding in the dirt the tattered remains of a fairly shocking pornographic magazine, and soon after being questioned rather closely by two policemen. Maybe the resemblance of the names Irwell and Orwell is not a coincidence, so far as my personal mythology is concerned.
Yes, that all makes sense. The 60s were not very swinging for most people in the UK, especially not outside London. The changes didn't seep into the general population to a large extent until the 80s when a lot of (probably fake) money came into the system.
ReplyDeleteNazism represents a real competition to LEFTism but let us remember that this is competition over the same grounds of modern, individualistic, and materialist ideology of "shoulds." It promotes LEFTism to be seen as being against a thing that by being contrary, people will adopt something else that is much the same.
ReplyDeleteWe have to grow up, in that wonderful metaphor of spiritual adolescence, and determine once and for all that which governs us and whom the rulers who will be loyal to none other but us in their quest to make known that which rules above all.
Once more and never often enough, thank you William for your word.
Thanks Christopher. You could say that Nazism and leftism are two cheeks of the same... you know the rest!
ReplyDelete