60:41
To listen in a player, click here. To download the mp3, right-click here and choose “save link as” or “save target as.” To subscribe to the CC podcast RSS feed, click here.
Greg Johnson, John Morgan, and Michael Polignano reconvene for a new weekly Counter-Currents Radio podcast. This week, we discuss the results of the German federal election as well as the independence referendums in Catalonia and Iraqi Kurdistan.
- German federal election: 0:00
- Catalan independence referendum: 21:45
- Kurdish independence referendum: 43:15
* * *
If you would like to help Counter-Currents fight back from deplatforming attacks, please consider making a donation. There are several ways to do so.
First, you can use a credit card.
Note: Credit card numbers are not stored on our server, and all connections are secure and encrypted.
Second, you can use Hatreon.
“Hatreon” is like Patreon but for the “haters” who are being purged from Patreon as part of the vast ongoing deplatforming of white advocates and dissident Rightists. Hatreon helps creative dissidents enjoy steady, predictable incomes from patrons who make monthly pledges of support. Just go to my Hatreon profile page and make a pledge. (Use the invite code MAJDRZUDYWLG.)
Hatreon is run by a dissident Rightist like us. Hatreon is highly ethical and takes only a very small percentage of donations to cover their costs. I very much want Hatreon to succeed, so please sign up for an account today. Help Hatreon get off to a strong start — and help Counter-Currents stay in the fight.
Third, Counter-Currents also takes Bitcoin.
Our Bitcoin address is: 1ChE5DZVVZJpv8mnJ3fRrtSDrTikBh7uFL
In the coming weeks, we will begin accepting donations in all digital currencies, and we will publish a tutorial on how you can begin using them.
Finally, you can also mail donations to:
Counter-Currents
PO Box 22638
San Francisco, CA 94122
USA
We are profoundly grateful for the outpouring of generosity from a large number of readers. But we need to hear from all of you. Especially from our monthly donors. Please renew today.
Winter is coming for white advocacy. We must be industrious ants, building up capital and bracing ourselves for further attacks and deplatforming. We can no longer be happy-go-lucky grasshoppers, depending on the kindness and fair play of capitalists. Fear not, we will never quit. But we need to build new institutions, an integrated electronic ethnostate offering everything from domain registration to webhosting to DDOS protection to mailing list management — all controlled by our movement. This is a huge task, and we obviously should have started building it years ago. But when you donate, you are helping us build it today.
Thank you for your loyal readership and generosity.
Greg Johnson
8 Comments
In my opinion, the success of the AfD is empirical evidence that metapolitics can be successfully pursued through the electoral system. The question of how to pursue that method successfully needs to be re-visited in Anglophone countries, and Nationalists should move away decisively from the “anti-political” strain of thought that has infected the Movement in recent years in which it is assumed that we should withdraw from electoral activity altogether.
We can win elections, if we can construct a narrative and a credo that is acceptable to the public, and if we can go about things professionally. That is not to suggest that electoral politics can or will lead to a white ethno-state (a different question that can be more adequately discussed on sites like this and others), but a subtle and charismatic Popular Nationalist party could make considerable tactical in-roads under the existing system – in Britain at the local level especially.
The Eastern swell of support for the AfD correlates with broader political trends in the post Eastern bloc space. Uncle Joe Communism prevented the infiltration of bourgeois liberal attitudes. So to some extent, the AfD coasted on the metapolitical legacy of the Soviet imposed regime. On the other hand, right wing forces in Germany have managed to capitalize on this phenomenon.
People may be interested in this article by Antoly Karlin, in which he posits Germany goes through ‘Reich cycles’. http://akarlin.com/2009/10/return-of-the-reich/
He concludes:
“Germany is a spiritually bifurcated and psychologically tortured nation; though it played a major role in manufacturing the Faustian world of machines, rationalism and the intellect, it is safe to say that a nation which produced the likes of Nietzsche, Spengler and Heidegger possesses a profoundly mystical soul, and secretly yearns to return to its past-and-future despite the ostensible comfort of its material surroundings. The imposition of liberalism on its soil was artificial, not organic, and its social effects have been disastrous of late.
Furthermore, Germany is now facing an unprecedented set of challenges stemming from its economic malaise, demographic collapse and the imminent global energy crisis. The USSR has retreated, NATO is retreating, and the US itself will soon follow; as the last constraint, the EU looks strong, but at its heart it is nothing more than a paper tiger (a very big one, admittedly) that will likely dissolve in the upheavals ahead, leaving behind only a glorified free trade zone, if that.
Germany is now becoming an increasingly free actor in Europe, free to follow its own optimal geopolitical strategy. Although it is now relatively pacifist and militarily weak, but history shows that can metamorphose with unsettling rapidity – just compare the Germany of 1929 with the Germany of 1939. Then as now, momentous change is on its way. This is not to imply that it will become fascist or even abandon its current political system (though those are distinct possibilities), but it will become more a more illiberal, authoritarian and expansionist state.”
We are still left with the plain fact that a nationalist party can succeed, if the right strategy if pursued. This runs directly contrary to what certain people (not necessarily here) have been telling us for years, that we should not bother with elections. Clearly we should bother, very much. The BNP were successful to an extent and represented a serious threat. Nationalists in Scandinavian countries have been successful, to a degree. The Front National have had success. What’s needed in each country is an approach that reflects the particular environment and history of that country. In most cases, this will mean that we have to begin from a moderate starting-point. I see this as akin to building scaffolding.
Hitler succeeded partly because Germany already had a significant conservative and reactionary hinterland: that was the scaffolding on which he stood. I believe it is our task to build that scaffolding, yes partly through cultural activity, but the main effort in my view should be in politics – especially at the local level. So what I am saying here, in a nutshell, is that this idea that metapolitics must exclude electoral activity is completely wrong. It has gained currency in some quarters, as if it is an axiom or truism that has to be accepted by all right-thinking people, but it is demonstrably nonsense.
I don’t doubt that the AfD has succeeded on the basis of factors particular to Germany, which is only to be expected. I also accept your point that the AfD’s deepest support is in Germany’s east, though there is also strong support for the AfD in the southern and central parts of Germany as well, and some strongholds in a few areas of the west: it’s a national party. But strength in the east is to be expected. It’s also the case that, as with Pegida, there is a cleave between ‘racialists’ from the east of the country and ‘civics’ in the west, but this division does not seem to have stopped the AfD. Far from it, they have identified where they can win, and they have focused their efforts accordingly. They also seem to play a clever media game in which provocation is played off against moderation, so they somehow achieve the feat of speaking to two different constituencies at the same time.
I think the east-west/civic-racialist German divide is analogous to the north/south divide in England. One of the reasons Paul Nuttall’s leadership of UKIP failed is that he, or the party as a whole, adopted the wrong strategy. It was thought that UKIP should appeal to Labour voters, especially in the North, and it was felt that his persona would assist this. In fact, what UKIP should have been doing was appealing to Tory voters. UKIP have a great deal of potential appeal among that constituency, but an entirely new party is needed to address post-industrial Labour strongholds in the north of England – and that, I believe, is where a social nationalist party could step into the breach.
I have a request. I would like to see an exhaustive essay on the political thought of Celine. The various snippets I have picked up on this website have raised a curiosity in my mind. He was so red pilled in a relative vacuum.
One of the concerns I have with breaking up the existing major nation states in Europe is it could de-fang Europe politically and militarily. There needs to be some large scale states like Germany, France, and the United Kingdom who can provide substantial, unified muscle on the inter-civilizational stage (and the capacity to keep America at bay). Confederation within these states could be an answer. As an Anglo-Scot myself, I would not like to see the UK break up. It would represent a negation of British identity, which ideally should unify four nations on their own terms – Scotland, Wales, England, and Northern Ireland.
The Kurds are covertly ethnically cleansing Assyrians and other minorities. They sound quite fashy underneath the liberal veneer they present to the West. Of course we should probably be supporting the Christians, but on ethno-nationalist/autonomy principles.
From what I’ve read, the Kurds think their time is now while Baghdad is weak and favourable media coverage in the West has depicted them as democratic moderates battling the forces of radicalism. I see quite a few Borg media outlets pushing their cause. The anti-imperalist left people like Moon of Alabama are vilifying the Kurds because they’re ‘another Israel.’ Israel is the only power which has openly stated their preference for a Kurdish state, no doubt because they believe it will act as a new counter-weight to Iran. I’m increasingly struck by the hatred some liberal whites can develop for browns who veer from the liberal path. There’s been hit pieces at Unz review against the majority Buddhist population removing kebab by these sort of people too. I think the more ‘principled’ leftists, whose beliefs are not just a transparent excuse for anti-white animus, are starting to realize the winds of change are blowing globally against them.
I am perplexed by Greg’s regard for Frauke Petry. Admittedly she has had 5 handsome white babies, but there are certain other things a nationalist needs. She has made it abundantly clear that she will form a new party and will destroy the AfD if she can. She is nothing but a free market hack and obviously has no interest in what might be called racial social justice as against the dessicated capitalist formulae that put “market mechanisms” (ie. chaos) on a pedestal. Reported here –
https://www.rt.com/newsline/405432-petry-afd-germany-party/
Agree. AfD has enjoyed some success this time around, but it’s worth considering whether they offer any real alternative to the German liberal establishment, or just a more market-friendly version of it. Ms Petry seems to epitomise the most worrying tendencies inherent in AfD. A reasonable discussion of the AfD phenomenon here:
https://apfeurope.com/2017/09/afd-and-national-action-lessons-for-real-nationalists-as-the-fakes-hit-the-headlines
.
According to Germany’s public broadcaster ARD, when compared to the 2013 elections, AfD saw their greatest gains among those who had not voted at all in the previous election.
And while Merkel’s Christian Democratic Union (as well as the Social Democrats and The Left Party) did lose a significant amount of voters to the AfD, even more significant is the number of CDU voters who have simply died since the last election.
While AfD did best among blue-collar workers and the unemployed, Merkel’s party and the SPD did best among pensioners. Both SPD and CDU are largely running on fumes at this point, since their most reliable supporters are old people who vote for them simply out of habit, or because the staff of the numerous retirement homes run by organizations associated with the CDU and SPD tell them what to vote, and in many cases even directly fill out their absentee ballots for them.
As for the highly accomplished and charismatic Frauke Petry, I’m sure the AfD wouldn’t have done nearly as well in the election if not for her. But given some of the statements she has made after the elections, I’m also glad that she is leaving the party and won’t have a say in AfD’s official positions. For example, when Gauland criticized Merkel’s assertion that “securing the existence of the State of Israel is raison d’etre of the German state” and warned that this ultimately implies a readiness to send German soldiers to defend Israel, Petry made clear that she actually supports this notion. In fact, she even criticizes Merkel for not being consistent enough in her commitment to “Germany’s highly important partnership with Israel,” demanding an end to CDU-supported sanctions relating to Israel’s settlement policy.
Some commentators have warned that the establishment will attempt to destroy the AfD by trying to get more moderate members to opportunistically disavow and leave the party, while ruthlessly harassing the rightists and true believers. My worry is that Petry may offer herself as a pliable tool for bringing about such a split into one camp of cuckservatives and another of increasingly marginalized radicals.