Things come apart so easily when they have been held together with lies

Dorothy Allison, Bastard Out of Carolina

In his book The New Ecological Order, philosopher Luc Ferry, the former French Minister of Education (2002-2003), shocked animal protectors, whom we shall henceforth call “animalists,” the counterpart of “humanists” for humans. In a chapter of his book entitled “Nazi ecology: the legislation of November 1933, July 1934, and June 1935,” Ferry had the misfortune not only to praise the legal provisions of the National Socialists relating to animal welfare, but also to make overlaps between the philosophical theses of the German legislation and those of the contemporary animalist movements.

This sulfurous amalgam between the National Socialists and today’s animal lovers caused a huge scandal, the echoes of which can still be heard today. Deeply wounded in their self-esteem, these ladies of the animalist movement refused to admit that the Germans loved animals and nature as well as, if not better than them. Unable to face this terrible conflation between fascism and their movement, they set out to prove it wrong.

Thus, if the Germans of the time had the most progressive animal protection laws in the world, they did not apply them, according to the animalist’s philosopher in chief, Mrs. Elisabeth Hardouin-Fugier, but used them only as a pretext “to adorn themselves with a supposed humanism.”

Adolf Hitler’s notorious love of animals was ridiculed. It was claimed that he was photographed with animals only for demagogic reasons and that he wasn’t really a vegetarian. Even though, Margot Woelk, one of his regular tasters, is clear on this subject: “The Führer was indeed a vegetarian, eating neither meat nor fish, but mostly fresh products. He also forbade himself cigarettes and alcohol.”

How can this determination to deny Hitler’s vegetarianism, which has been confirmed by historians, be explained? The National Socialists’ extraordinary love of animals has been proven. As Luc Ferry confirms: “This legislation did not remain in words, but was embodied in deeds.”

Why do today’s animalists fear being lumped together with the National Socialists to the point of obscuring in the literature on ecology and animal welfare any reference to National Socialist legislation on animals and nature? “The presence of a genuine interest in ecology [and animals] within National Socialism is not, in itself, in my opinion,” says Luc Ferry, “a relevant objection in a critical examination of contemporary ecology. On this account, one could also denounce as fascist the construction of freeways, which was one of the priorities of the Hitler government.”

Someone needs to tell animalists that at the time when animal welfare and nature legislation were implemented, i.e., in the early 1930s, Germany, which was not yet at war, enjoyed a solid reputation of integrity and high ethical standards. Visitors came from all over the world to greet Chancellor Adolf Hitler and see the German economic and social miracle with their own eyes.

In seven years, from 1933 to 1939, Hitler, the most popular man in the world at the time, put seven million unemployed people back to work, ended class warfare, put work (production) instead of money at the centre of the economy, eliminated usury and finance capitalism, expelled the rogues of stateless finance, closed down the Masonic lodges, put the German Communists out of business and restored order to the utterly depraved society of the Weimar Republic that was briefly surveyed in Sex with Animals in a Weimar Democracy.

As a result of this public health work, within two years Germany had no more debt or inflation and its currency was solid and stable. After the ordeals of the Treaty of Versailles and the hunger blockade (which killed as many children, women and old people as the Iraqi blockade of Israel’s Washington foreign minister Madeleine Albright), the entire German people had regained their pride, dignity, and happiness. It is no exaggeration to say that the Good, the true, and the beautiful reigned supreme in the National Socialist kingdom of the pre-war period.

Voted “Man of the Year” in 1938 by Time Magazine, which featured him on its cover in 1936, Hitler was adored by his people and admired by many, including Winston Churchill, who said of Hitler in 1935: “…One may think what one likes about these achievements, but they are undeniably among the most remarkable in the history of the world.”

As for Canadian Prime Minister William Mackenzie King, he compared the Führer to Joan of Arc, no less:

My sizing up of the man as I sat and talked with him was that he is really one who truly loves his fellow men, and his country, and would make any sacrifice for their good. That he feels himself to be a deliverer of his people from tyranny… His face is much more prepossessing than his pictures would give the impression of. It is not that of a fiery, over-strained nature, but of a calm, passive man, deeply and thoughtfully in earnest. His skin was smooth; his face did not present lines of fatigue or wariness; his eyes impressed me most of all. There was a liquid quality about them which indicate keen perception and profound sympathy. He has a very nice, sweet and, one could see, how particularly humble folk would come to have a profound love for the man… As I talked to him, I could not but think of Joan of Arc.

Even after the war, in 1945, there were still people who could speak well of Hitler. This is notably the case of the future president of the United States, John F. Kennedy, who wrote in his diary:

Within a few years, Hitler will emerge from the hatred that now surrounds him as one of the most significant figures that ever lived… he had a mystery about him in the way he lived and in the matter of his death that will live and grow after him. He had in him the stuff of which legends are made.

As author Laurent Guyénot points out in his book The Unspoken Kennedy Truth, as a young man,

Kennedy never saw Hitler as an evil man, let alone as a man responsible for WW2… In 1946, in his book, Profiles in courage, John praised Senator Robert Taft, for having at tremendous personal cost, denounced in 1946, the hanging of eleven Nazi officials as motivated by the ‘spirit of vengeance’ and as ‘a blot on the American record that we shall long regret.’

With such a track record and reputation, why did the world gang up on Hitler? Was it because he invaded Poland? Was it about money, usury, economics? Those are some of the usual suspects that most well-informed people are familiar with, but what are the other possible suspects? There is only one, really, although it is linked to all the others, race is basically the crux of the matter.

Hitler’s goal was a “Europe of Nations” based on race and similar to the Roman Empire when it was all powerful and not yet eviscerated by Christianity and race mixing. According to Belgian politician Léon Degrelle, one of Hitler’s most brilliant soldiers, the Führer wanted a pan-European union with freedom of movement within it, but restricted to the people who are part of the European gene pool. To paraphrase evolutionary psychologist, Dr. Keven MacDonald, such a race realist point of view would have stressed the genetic interests of Europeans first. It would have constituted a group evolutionary strategy to the extent that it had the political will to keep other races out. It would have turned Europe into a superpower as powerful if not more than any of its competitors. The problem, of course, comes from the fact that such a race-based policy was completely contrary to the interests of Hitler’s Jewish enemies, as is the case today, more than ever. So, of course, it had to be stopped. How Jews proceeded to do so is brilliantly summarized in the following quote from the great Hungarian journalist Louis Marschalko:

Hitlerism was not the only thing the World Jewry hated. They dreaded even more those [fascist] movements paving the way for a new understanding among the nations of Europe. Jewry’s main aim was to discredit these new [fascist] trends as well as to make them disliked by the rest of the world. While campaigning on one side for full cooperation, they tried to strangle on the other side all those who were collaborating with their enemies—the Germans.

“They unhesitatingly opposed even the slightest thought of making peace,” writes French writer Maurice Bardèche.

But today we have definite proof that the Germans tried most earnestly to establish cooperation and partnership among the European elite. They were not looking for “Quislings” but for those who were considered good patriots in their own country, people devoted to the cause of their own native land. An almost exaggerated idealism pervaded the elite of the National Socialist revolution. In their own country, they stated what they believed to be the truth. They recognized that the individual has social rights. They demonstrated that this is the only satisfactory solution if Bolshevism was to be avoided.

They believed with revolutionary fervour that if they could succeed in liberating the European masses from capitalist exploitation, then peace would be secured for a long time. They had seen how Jewish “Nazism” interposed itself to disrupt the unity of the German people by means of its money power and its control of the press in order to secure exclusive domination over the entire nation. Having successfully done away with all this by their National Socialist revolution, they had high hopes of securing peace and also the cooperation of neighbouring peoples, once the influence of the supranational Old Testament “Nazism” was eliminated in those countries too.

This was “New Europe” in the making. And this was the very thing World Jewry had to prevent at any cost, even if it entailed reducing the Christian culture of Europe to the dust. Because should this plan succeed, more and more states would be released from the grip of Jewish domination.

Therefore, the mere thought of European Unity or of any possible cooperation had to be discredited. And because more than 60% of the press of the Western World is in Jewish hands, and according to American statistics, 85% of the American press and 100% of American films, this campaign was conducted on a larger scale than any other propaganda operation in the history of the world.

By misinterpreting the racial concept, the Jews pretended that the Germans were claiming sole supremacy for the German nation over all other nations. Thus, they succeeded in estranging the other nations from Germany. They distorted the racial theory by insinuating that Germany wanted to conquer the world and the basis of this theory was claiming world supremacy. The Nineteenth Century magazine in its issue of September 1943, during the height of the war, admitted on the contrary that:

“The general belief that Germany started this war to achieve world power, in our view, is a mistake. Germany wanted to become a first-rate power, but to be a first-rate power and to achieve world domination are two different things. Great Britain is also a world power but also does not rule the world.”

The Jews also misinterpreted the theory of “Blut und Boden” (blood and soil), i.e., the theory that a man belongs to his native soil, the concept of unity between a country and its inhabitants was so twisted as to suggest that the Germans claimed all the territories in which any inhabitants of German origin happened to be living. By this means they aroused the jealousy of all independent European nations where German minorities were to be found. Poland, Lithuania, Hungary, Slovakia, Yugoslavia, Bohemia, Rumania, and other neighbouring countries began to regard with mistrust the German Reich.

They tried to explain Germany’s steadily growing export trade as a preparation for war and attempted to make the world forget that Goering’s slogan of “guns and butter” had a precedent in the boycott by American Jewry. They ridiculed the sincerely pro-British parts of Mein Kampf, at the same time working on the fears of both East and West by quoting certain passages of this book out of their context.

The poisoning of the mind was thus stimulated on a gigantic scale throughout the world. When the German administration tried to stop this trouble-making, it was promptly accused of dictatorial tyranny. As a background to all these forms of anti-German propaganda there was, of course, the undeniable fact that the abolition of the reign of gold together with the peaceful cooperation between capital and labour was a real shock for Jewry. World opinion was induced to believe that the German worker’s living standard was rising only because of rearmament. But, in fact, they knew very well that large workers’ settlements were everywhere under construction, and that the existence of workers and satisfied families was a living refutation of those things [communism] taught by Jewry for over a century.

“What can have happened?” They asked one another in fear, “Have these hated Nazis really wrecked the splendid theory of the Marxist class-struggle theory which was serving our ends so well? As Bettelheim expressed it, can great cities such as Berlin, Vienna, and Budapest get along without Jews? Can a nation really live without exploitation, without a Jewish national press, without the films, theatre, and the Jewish ’mercenary spirit? After all, we have kept the whole world under our influence for centuries by suggesting that without our cultural activities, our business sense, and our supercilious intellect all nations would perish and all “progress” would cease. And now Germany prospers without us—with a prosperity which is the living negation of our arrogant nationalism. Anyone looking at these steadily growing garden cities, at the satisfied and happy people, and the prospering intellectual and economic activities can see that our great nationalist writer, Bettelheim was wrong when he predicted that world civilization would perish without the Jews. So far, these Christians are becoming more and more satisfied, while we Jews are losing more and more ground. If the rest of the world learns about this on an international level, and if the foreign tourists and the world’s proletariat see that all this is possible without us, indeed, even against us, they will realize that we have lied to them. Our politicians, journalists, trade union leaders, capitalists, and labour leaders will all become liars! Therefore, we must destroy the proofs! Therefore, these beautiful homes with their gardens, together with the new factories, nurseries, hospitals, and youth camps, must be wiped off the face of the earth. For we have at our disposal our secret nationalist weapon—the same used with such effect at the siege of Jericho. Let us, therefore, sound the trumpets for our world propaganda.”

After the war, the Master Race made sure that their alleged god given racial superiority would never again be challenged. With the charter of human rights, the UN, the Nuremberg trials, they poisoned the well of racial consciousness with anti-racism, individualism, liberalism, consumerism, democracy, and the particularly powerful Holocaust venom, which they injected in the minds of every White person on the Globe.

As admitted by Jewish supremacist Stephen Steinlight, the source of Jewish power in America [and in Europe, especially in Germany] is White guilt over the Holocaust, and that is mostly how Jews have been able to prevail.

Why do you think Jews spend so much money and energy defending this weapon of White destruction? Why do you think Jewish Hollywood and Jewish directors such as Steven Spielberg (Schindler’s List), Alan J. Pakula (Sophie’s Choice), and more recently, Jonathan Glazer (The Zone of Interest), work overtime in an effort to destroy with guilt every vestige of racial consciousness and nationalism among White people? Because this is what allows them to hold on to the tail of the dog that they need to subdue in order to stay on top.

The “the light of humanity,” in other words, does not want to see the rebirth of a far superior political doctrine that would rain on their parade and foil their plan of world conquest. The famous catchphrase “Never Again” does not refer to the alleged gas chambers but to National Socialism (and fascism in general), one of the best antidotes to political Judaism that deadly poison which has been eating away at humanity for at least 2000 years.

“What Jews fear more than anything else,” writes author F. Britton in his book Behind Communism, “is a rebirth of race consciousness among the great White majority of the Christian world. They remember that at the very instant that the German people became race-conscious they turned with deadly fury against the Jews.” “It is precisely for this reason,” concludes Curse, an anonymous commenter on one of the social medias, “that they have stigmatized racism in our minds, they know it’s the best survival strategy. Their position in our societies is a testament to that.”

Likewise, should Whites regain their racial consciousness, they would quickly turn against their Jewish overlords, and send the minorities they are weaponizing against them back running to where they came from as they do in race-conscious Israel.

In the end, Hitler and National Socialism will continue to be relentlessly demonized by the Jews. To achieve their Jewish utopia, Israel (as the Jewish race as a whole is also called) will systematically seek to destroy any individual, group, or country that stands in its way. Nationalism and race consciousness are particularly targeted because they know from their own experience that the unity, strength, and cohesion of a nation are rooted in its racial and ethnic homogeneity. They are well aware that racial and cultural diversity in the same country is not a strength, but a Trojan horse used to divide, fragment, and weaken those who succumb to its charms. They know, finally, that the ethno-state is the only model of society capable of ensuring the security and happiness of men.

To sum up, WW2 was basically a war between two racially conscious nations: Israel and Hitler’s Germany, the first one, voraciously ambitious, dishonest, intellectually inferior, and hateful of all non-Jews, and the second, convivial, nature and animal friendly, honest, intellectually superior by a long-shot, and willing to live in peace with the other nations and races.

On a larger scale, this war is much like the story of Antonio Salieri vs Wolfgang Amadeus Mozart.

It’s a sad story when you think about it, the saddest story never told, because, unfortunately for mankind, the inferior race won over the most promising one. How do we know it’s inferior? By its fruits. What we see today in Ukraine and Gaza, the present threat of nuclear war, and the chaos observed in all Western countries is the culmination of thousands of years of incompetence and “By way of deception thou shalt wage war.” The Jewish race, which has lived by lies all its existence is trapped by its hubris in a false reality which will eventually be its downfall.

That’s what happens when you build your house on lies. It catches up on you and destroys you.

Notes

Luc Ferry, Le Nouvel Ordre écologique : L’Arbre, l’Animal et l’Homme, Grasset, 1992, p. 147-168. An English version is available: The New Ecological Order – August 15, 1995 by Luc Ferry (Author), Carol Volk (Translator).

Élisabeth Hardouin-Fugier, “La protection de l’animal sous le nazisme,” Luc Ferry ou le Rétablissement de l’ordre, Éditions Tahin Party, 2002, p. 129-151.

Protection of nature and animals under the Third Reich. Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia.

Blandine Le cain, “La goûteuse d’Hitler raconte ses années de terreur,” Le Figaro, Feb. 24, 2014.

Hal Herzog, “Was Hitler a Vegetarian? The Paradox of the Nazi Animal Protection Movement,” Psychology Today, 2011.

Luc Ferry, work cited, p. 149.

Ibid.

Friedrich Kurreck, “Life in the Third Reich and the World Political Situation Then and Now,” Der Schlesier, July-August 2002.

Richard Tedor, Hitler’s Revolution. Ideology, Social Programs, Foreign Affairs, Castle Hill Publishers, 2021.

Benton Bradberry, The Myth of German Villainy, Money Tree Publishing, 2^nd edition, 2022, p. 148.

Robert Fisk, “The Premier Who Thought Hitler Was a ‘Joan of Arc,’” The Independent, October 23 2011.

John F. Kennedy, Prelude to Leadership: The Post-War Diary of John F. Kennedy: Summer, 1945, Quoted in Benton Bradberry, work cited, p. 171.

Robert Taft, quoted by Laurent Guyénot in The Unspoken Kennedy Truth, 22021, p.99.

Léon Degrelle, Hitler pour mille ans, La Table Ronde, 1969.

Ibid.

Kevin MacDonald, Individualism and Western Liberal Tradition. Evolutionary Origins, History and Prospects for the Future, Kindle Direct Publishing Edition, 2019, pp. 88-89.

Louis Marschalko, The World Conquerors: The Real War Criminals, Britons Publishing Society, 1958, pp. 85-88.

Stephen Steinlight, “The Jewish Stake in America’s Changing Demography. Reconsidering a Misguided Immigration Policy,” Center for Immigration Studies, October 1, 2001.

Michael Collins Piper, The New Babylon. Those Who Reign Supreme. A Panoramic Overview of the Historical, Religious, and Economic Origins of the New World Order, American Free Press, 2015.

Ibid.

Michael Higger, Ph.D., The Jewish Utopia, The Lord Baltimore Press, 1932.

Lazar Berman, “5 of Ovadia Yosef’s Most Controversial Quotations,” The Times of Israel, October 9, 2013.