Explosion Norway

[Jan Klimkowski]

In the midst of the analysis below, note the claim that Ruslan Berenis is "the decendant of Hitler's North Caucasian mountaineers".

NB. So, in essence, post-Nazism is Nazism minus Antisemitism?

VS. It is, in part. Anti-communism, anti-Sovietism, and Russophobia were shared equally by all conservative groupings in the ruling circles of Britain, France, Germany, Italy, the United States, and Japan. They played with Nazism and fascism as the weapons of last resort against communism. Hitler was an aberration in two ways: 1) he wanted to bite a piece of the world too hard to chew for the Germans, and 2) he made Antisemitism central to the Nazi doctrine along with anti-Bolshevism and anti-Sovietism. However, Antisemitism is entirely accidental to Nazism and Fascism. Italian fascism was not anti-Semitic. Romanian, Hungarian, Ukrainian, Lithuanian, Estonian, and Lettish fascists were zoological anti-Semites, but Spanish, Finish, French, and English fascists were not. It were the three phobias of anti-Bolshevism, anti-Sovietism, and Russophobia that inited them allNazis, Fascists, and conservative, without exception. This is why it was so easy for Churchill and Truman to begin a new crusade against the Soviet Union immediately after Hitler's had failed.

In practice, many post-Nazis are blood descendents of the ideologically committed Nazis or traditional German imperialists who made peace with Jewish elites and formed a common front with Zionists against the Soviet Union in the Cold War. What distinguishes the FarWest post-Nazis like Fritz Ermarth, Robert Gates, and Ruslan Berenis (the decendant of Hitler's North Caucasian mountaineers) from the traditional Anglo-Saxon ultra-right is that their goal has been the destruction of Russia proper, not just the Soviet Union, and the creation on her territory a number of client states of Western imperialism. The present day post-Nazis are not pan-Germanists as Haushofer and the conservative elites of the post-Bismark Germany were. Nor do they fancy Germany in the role of a New World Order master. They are happy with the "fascist-light" United States at the helm of Western ultra-imperialism. In their political imagination, this U.S.-dominated "West" has replaced the Third Reich of their ancestors, just as the latter's "Rassenkampf" and "Kulturkampf" cum "Ostforschung" have been replaced by the "clash of civilizations" and "Western civilization" cum "Russian Studies" curruculum. It's just that the post-Nazi idea of "the West" demands the "final solution of Russian Question."

NB. In other words, post-Nazis represent the most extremist trend within Western ultra-imperialism.

VS. Yes, and historically speaking, as I've just argued, post-Nazis owe not only to German imperialism and Nazism but to conservative Atlantic elites as well. Let's recall that British intelligencethe fighting vanguard of British conservativeswas overwhelmingly pro-German, fanatically anti-Communist and anti-Russian. Even in war with Germany they collaborated with Nazi secret services and the military in Finland and Ukraine against the Red Army. The only difference between Churchill's "opposition" and Chamberlain's "appeasement" was that of tactics. All of them hated the Soviet Union and wanted to destroy it, but Churchill did not believe that Britain could do this by using Hitler as its proxy. Born imperialist, Churchill had the unerring instinct as to what imperialism was all about. He felt that the "appeased" Germans would be playing their own game against the British Empire. Churchill and his group of imperialists hoped to create a common front against the USSR while keeping down the Teutons. Hitler was their rival for world hegemony. The Soviet Union will be subverted through British and French proxies in the Eastern Europe, the cordonne sanitaire, through the semi-fascist Polish state, the emigrant organizations like the Promethean League and the Intermarium, and by inciting Muslim nationalities along the southern rim of the Soviet Union: the Caucasus, the Caspian, and the Central Asia, as it was proposed in Fitz Maclean's memorandum of 1939. It is noteworthy that Canaris and Oberländer in their proposals to Hitler for bolder use of ethnic struggle against the Soviets followed not only Haushofer's thinking but that of the British imperialist Halford Mackinder, who influenced both Haushofer and MI6 ideologists, including the "hawkish hawk" Fitz Maclean from the Northern Desk of the Whitehall.

Mackinder was the early prophet of North Atlantic ultra-umperialism that took the form of Nato after the WWII. All these characters, big and small: Hitler, Canaris, Oberländer, Ermarth and Haushofer; Churchill, Menzies, Maclean, and Mackinder; Trumen, Donovan and the Dulles brothers were of the same mind in regard to the first socialist state and Russia. The Soviet Union provoked their class-conscious hatred, Russia was to be crushed because, as the "geographical pivot of history," she stood on the way to the world lordship either by British, German or US empires. You are rightnothing has changed since then. The enormous Western machinery of the Cold War remains intact and continues the cause of Hitler, Churchill, and Truman. Sooner or later the Russians will face another genocidal attack by the West who will have the same allies in the Russophobic elites of Eastern Europe as Hitler did in 1941.

Ermarth clearly saw this commonality of interests regarding communism and the Soviet Union and constructed his messages to US elites accordingly. In the midst of WWII, he repeatedly suggested that the Allies should join the Nazi Germany against the Soviet Union as the precondition for getting rid of Hitler and he found sympathetic listeners in the leadership of the OSS. Otherwise, they would not have protected him from Hoover.

Source.