1 December, 2009
Iron Guard Leader Codreanu on Democracy, Equality and Other Silly Things
Posted by Socrates in America, AmeriKwa, democracy, democrazy, Eastern Europe, egalitarianism, equality, equalocracy, jews, Romania, Socrates, White leaders, White martyrs, white nationalism, White Nationalists, White philosophy at 9:00 pm | 
Permanent Link
“Democracy is incapable of perseverance. Since it is shared by political parties that rule for one, two, or three years, it is unable to conceive and carry out plans of longer duration. One party annuls the plans and efforts of the other. What is conceived and built by one party today is destroyed by another tomorrow.” He was right. Just look at America:
About Codreanu (click on the English flag): [Here].
1 December, 2009 at 9:43 pm
The Iron Guard was the greatest Fascist movement in Eastern Europe. In the election of December 1937 they received 17% of the vote, and King Carol II of Romania who had a Jewish girlfriend was so frightened by the growing popularity of the Iron Guard in the nation that he created his own personal dictatorship and declared the Iron Guard an illegal organization and imprisoned and later murdered Codreanu.
1 December, 2009 at 9:45 pm
In 1941 Goebbels said of King Carol II, “He wasn’t fit to shine Codreanu’s shoes.”
1 December, 2009 at 9:57 pm
Chapter 32 of Douglas Reed’s 1939 book Disgrace Abounding has a good chapter on the battle between Carol and Codreanu.
http://www.douglasreed.co.uk/disgrace.pdf
2 December, 2009 at 6:07 am
Some very weird posts from A Linder in the last few hours….I refer to “New Rules Proto II” and “Rictus Nation”. Is he drunk? That’s the very strong sense I get and I know whereof I speak….
PS – how about a podcast sometime soon? The recent interview with Jim Giles was very good by the way….
2 December, 2009 at 6:56 am
The link to the Rumanian site has some interesting information on Codreanu’s life and nationalist thought. He is a figure little known in the English speaking world, although NF old guard Derek Holland has been for a number of years promoting Codreanu’s brand of ‘blood and soil’ grassroots activism.
2 December, 2009 at 9:57 am
Boris Says: “Some very weird posts from A Linder in the last few hours….I refer to “New Rules Proto II” and “Rictus Nation”. Is he drunk? That’s the very strong sense I get and I know whereof I speak….
PS – how about a podcast sometime soon? The recent interview with Jim Giles was very good by the way….”
Alex is hooked on pork rinds – he has all the symptoms. No, seriously, he’s just clowning around, trying to make a point. (No, I don’t know what the point is…)
2 December, 2009 at 2:19 pm
Democracy and liberalism are very much core to European culture historically though, you have to recognise.
I don’t mind betraying that though. Preserving the White Race is what I’m interested in. I couldn’t care less about preserving lofty liberal ideals that European man is inclined to.
But let’s at least be intellectually honest. Codreanu is to some significant extent being anti-European. Anti-European culture that is, not anti-European race.
2 December, 2009 at 5:55 pm
“Democracy is incapable of perseverance. Since it is shared by political parties that rule for one, two, or three years, it is unable to conceive and carry out plans of longer duration. One party annuls the plans and efforts of the other. What is conceived and built by one party today is destroyed by another tomorrow.” He was right. Just look at America:
If democracy is incapable of perseverance, then why has the trend, not only in America, but throughout the West, been overwhelmingly in one direction? Why does every new development do nothing but further doom the white race? Why does the Jew always win, no matter what happens? Could it be that it is because the trend of events has absolutely nothing to do with the outward form of government, but rather correlates with the spectacular increase in complexity and reach of the global technological system, especially over the course of the last 100 years?
2 December, 2009 at 8:20 pm
“Why does the Jew always win, no matter what happens?”
–Adam
Because he controlls ALL sides of the debate.
And plays ALL sides of the fence.
He owns ALL of the parties.
He controls ALL facets of the media.
Thus, how can he lose?
2 December, 2009 at 9:46 pm
I see that Ein is quite a fan of the All-Powerful-Jew hypothesis, very popular in these parts.
If the Jew is in fact all-powerful, his position is hopeless. Perhaps he should give up and convert.
As for me, I still have a lot of questions. For example, I continue to wonder how the all-powerful Jew forced the whites of Washington’s and Jefferson’s time to import vast amounts of niggers, which made race-mixing all but inevitable? And how did the Jew force himself onto these shores in the first place? And then, how did he force whites to give him control of all technical means of communication such as radio, television, film, and the other mass media? How is he forcing white women to abort their children, or prevent conception altogther? History contains no record of the Jew forcing whites to do any of these things, as far as I can discover. A better hypothesis: The trend is caused by technological developments initally welcomed by all, but which have extremely toxic side-effects for the white race.
3 December, 2009 at 8:39 pm
Adam, that’s an interesting take that I’ll have to ponder. Frankly, when I think of technology I think of the internet, probably the Jews’ worst enemy.
I consider Southerners the best White people in America (IN VERY GENERAL TERMS!) but they’ve never learned the lesson of the war that they rightly spot as the overthrow of their beloved system. Democracy, or even republicanism, doesn’t work, not because the mainstream parties change policies – they don’t – but because it doesn’t work. It naturally laid itself open to subversion ala the “civil war”. Anything that open and free is going to attract parasites. And as we’ve seen over and over, slogans sell.
4 December, 2009 at 12:02 am
Adam Says: “I see that Ein is quite a fan of the All-Powerful-Jew hypothesis, very popular in these parts.
If the Jew is in fact all-powerful, his position is hopeless. Perhaps he should give up and convert.
As for me, I still have a lot of questions. For example, I continue to wonder how the all-powerful Jew forced the whites of Washington’s and Jefferson’s time to import vast amounts of niggers, which made race-mixing all but inevitable? And how did the Jew force himself onto these shores in the first place? And then, how did he force whites to give him control of all technical means of communication such as radio, television, film, and the other mass media?”
Granted, nobody forced Whites to do those things. But White people have an automatic disadvantage: they don’t “think tribally, 24/7” like the Jews do. In other words, Whites are easy prey for the Jews. If you haven’t read Dr. Kevin MacDonald’s work, I suggest that you do.
4 December, 2009 at 1:22 am
Alfred Rosenberg Says:
Adam, that’s an interesting take that I’ll have to ponder. Frankly, when I think of technology I think of the internet, probably the Jews’ worst enemy.
Thanks for approaching with an open mind.
Properly speaking, the word “technology” consists of the word elements “techn-” (> Gr. “techne”, art or skill), and “-ology”, by which we usually mean “the study of” something (e.g., gerontology is the study of the old, anthropology is the study of man, etc.) Yet through constant misuse the word has come to mean mere machinery, collectively, including electronic machinery such as computers and the internet. My usage is different. I’m using the word here in the same sense that Jacques Ellul uses it in his writings: as the entire ensemble of techniques whereby man obtains what he wants from the world. Thus, under this definition, birth control techniques, techniques of re-distributing and applying capital and labor, and propaganda techniques, all are included under the rubric technology. All such techniques considered together, worldwide, in all their interlocking complexity, are what I’ve referred to as “the global technological system”.
I agree that the internet is, for now, the one place that one can make a case against the Jews. Such arguments are for the most part locked out of academia, government, and the mass media. As for the internet being the Jew’s worst enemy, too bad hardly anyone understands or is persuaded by reasoned discourse nowadays. Politically correct or incorrect, almost everyone operates by first deciding what they want to be true and then trying to find for evidence for it. This is as true for people who just want to blame Jews for all white problems as it is for the lemmings who want to believe in racial equality; i.e., that “race does not exist”, and that all the problems of non-whites are because of whites.
The ancient Stoic philosophers had a saying: An ignorant man is one who blames others for his problems; a man at the beginning of wisdom blames himself; the man of perfect wisdom blames neither himself nor others. This meshes in an interesting way with an insight from Sun Tzu: Know neither yourself nor your enemy, and you will lose every battle; know yourself but not your enemy, or your enemy but not yourself, and you will win half the time and lose half the time; know yourself and know your enemy, and you will win every battle.
Victory for the white race will occur when it understands both itself and the Jew, gets over its obsession with affixing blame, and instead just takes steps to solve the problem. The complete destruction of the global technological system cannot fail to accomplish this. It would reduce the Jew to what he would have been all along, except for the power that that system grants him. Jews would be instantly reduced to a tiny tribe of hate-filled religious fanatics, irrelevant and powerless.
4 December, 2009 at 2:22 am
Socrates Says:
Granted, nobody forced Whites to do those things. But White people have an automatic disadvantage: they don’t “think tribally, 24/7? like the Jews do. In other words, Whites are easy prey for the Jews. If you haven’t read Dr. Kevin MacDonald’s work, I suggest that you do.
If nobody forced whites to do those things, then they did them voluntarily; and if they did them voluntarily, then it would seem clear that they considered their actions, at least at the time they did them, to be of benefit to themselves. It was regarded as necessary for “progress”, and therefore inevitable. This is a characteristic of technological developments generally. They are initially implemented out of a sense of necessity and often heralded as a great advance, but then they later turn out to have extremely toxic side effects. It is certainly the case that every technical solution to a problem creates additional problems. Every technique has bad side effects, only some of which can be foreseen. To use technique at all is to accept that there will be bad effects, and thus, the bad effects are, in this sense, inseparable from the good effects. Unfortunately, this means that the popular wisdom — that technology is just a tool, neutral in effect — is wrong. Close analysis will show that most of the problems that beset the white race are a result not of Jewish conspiracy, but of the unintended effects of the expansion of the use of technique. They are inevitable consequences of the expansion of the global technological system.
As for the genetic difference between whites and Jews, I addressed exactly that in the Jewish genetics thread. For ease of reference, I’ll reproduce part of what I said again here:
And as for reading MacDonald, yes I have. MacDonald himself grants that “modernity” (his word for the technological system, apparently) has also had an effect in creating the problems that the white race now faces. In The Culture of Critique he never engages the question of the relative proportion of the effect, but one gets the definite impression that he thinks it is small compared to the influence of the Jews. But in that he is quite mistaken. The problem of race-mixing, the existence of the Jew in American society and in the West generally (without which he would be unable to affect us, obviously), and the declining white birth rate and breakup of the nuclear family, can all be laid principally at the doorstep of the expansion of the global technological system, without which none of those things would have happened. They are all either completely or partially unforeseen side effects of actions that were taken that were considered to be necessary at the time. At best, they were thought to be a great boon, at worst to represent “progress” and to be inevitable.
5 December, 2009 at 10:39 pm
Adam mocks awareness of Jewish media control as “the all-powerful Jew theory” (strawmen are always useful – I am only surprised you didn’t work the word “conspiracy” in there) and then says: “For example, I continue to wonder how the all-powerful Jew forced the whites of Washington’s and Jefferson’s time to import vast amounts of niggers, which made race-mixing all but inevitable?”</i
Oh. So by using Blacks as slaves, George Washington and Thomas Jefferson were in fact pursuing race equality. Who knew! “Hey, we’re using Negroes as slaves. To condition you, uh, to think that you should treat Negroes as equals and not beasts of burden. Yeah, that’s the message we’re going for, obviously.”
That’s some nice 180-degree turn of reality there, Adam. Not even a Bill Kristol or Rahm Emanuel could have done it better.
5 December, 2009 at 10:46 pm
Adam opines, It was regarded as necessary for “progress”, and therefore inevitable. This is a characteristic of technological developments generally.
Man, you sure harp on endlessly about evil technology. In thread after thread after thread. That vicious technology, making people kill their race.
Strange then how technology has not turned China, Russia, Israel and many other countries into copies of the West. Oh well, it was a good try. Anything to sound unique I suppose.
But in fact, you are simply repeating the old Marxist dogma that their victory is inevitable, because technology brings about all ideological change, and will eventually lead to communist revolution. Never happened, never will. In fact, the “revolution” happened in backwards agrarian Russia, not in technological Britain and Germany like Marx claimed it would. The technology-made-them-do-it theory is so full of holes, exceptions, and events that have to be ignored, that it would take hundreds of pages to document it. But what for? No one believes in it today anyway. Except you. And a handful of Trotskyites.
5 December, 2009 at 11:00 pm
It’s simply a fact of history that every time human races have occupied the same geographical area for any extended period of time, race mixing occurs, and eventually reaches a large enough scale that the original “pure” races are replaced by hybrids. This has happened everywhere, even where there were no Jews. Therefore, the act of importing niggers to the New World essentially doomed the white race already living there to eventual destruction via race mixing. Jefferson was certainly aware that it would happen, as were most thinking white men of that time.
6 December, 2009 at 1:56 pm
Unfortunately, the Spanish and Portugese conquerors of the New World were, in many but not all cases, already tainted by several hundred years of interbreeding with the Moors. So I guess that’s where the vicious, cut-throat nature of the Mestizo hybrid comes from.
I think Jefferson contradicted himself when it came to race. Or maybe he was just conflicted. But at some point he did write a letter to an Indian chief, telling the man that eventually, the White and Red races would intermingle and produce a great mixed race of Americans. And then Washington wrote that suck-up letter to the Jews at the Turo Synagogue……I’m afraid I’ve lost more than a little respect for the so-called Founding Fathers.
9 December, 2009 at 1:44 am
Petre Tutea was the Minister of Economics in the short lived (131 days) National Legionary State.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/National_Legionary_State
He and thousands of Legionaires were thrown into prisons after the Legionary “revolt” of January 19-23 which was really a putsch. Many stayed in these dungeons until l965 when an amnesty was declared. Petre Tutea was in prison for 13 years and under a sort of house arrest afterwards. He emerged from this an unrepentant Orthodox Christian fighter against “Judeo Masonic Bolshevism.” http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6o-0ciKkdF4
I met Cornelieu Z. Codreanu’s youngest brother Caitalin Z. Codreanu who was also in Communist prisons in 2001. I was the first American he’s had ever met in his life and he was 90 years old. The story of the autohchthonic struggle of the “The Criterion Group” (the Iron Guard brain trust) to preserve Romanian culture is one of the great paradigmatic tragedies of the last century. .
12 December, 2009 at 3:01 am
To answer Linder’s question from the forum about Iron Guard books in English:
You could read Codreanu’s autobiography written in 1936 called For My Legionaries. There is an English language version of it available on Amazon
http://www.amazon.com/My-Legionaries-Iron-Guard/dp/1593640005/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1260603850&sr=1-1
Another good Iron Guard book is Prince Michel Sturdza’s 1968 book The Suicide of Europe: Memoirs of Prince Michel Sturdza, Former Foreign Minister of Romania. Sturdza was foreign minister for the Iron Guard and his son was also a member of the organization, he knew Codreanu personally. This is a book Revilo Oliver recommended.
http://www.amazon.com/Suicide-Europe-Memoirs-Sturdza-Minister/dp/B000E7RWZA/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1260603992&sr=1-1
If you want a book about the Iron Guard that just introduces you to the key events in the history of the organization you’d probably enjoy Nicholas Nagy-Talavera’s The Green Shirts and the Others: A History of Fascism in Hungary and Rumania. Talavera lived in Transylvania during the 1930’s and saw Codreanu face-to-face in Transylvania in 1937. When Talavera wrote this book he was a professor in California in the mid 1960’s. Talavera is a Jew but he’s surprisingly fair to Codreanu perceiving him as a man who wanted the best for Romania.
http://www.amazon.com/Green-Shirts-Others-History-Fascism/dp/9739432115/ref=sr_1_2?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1260603894&sr=1-2
12 December, 2009 at 3:37 am
Iron Guard-
If you don’t want to spend a lot of money you can get the book European Right: A Historical Profile by Hans Rogger and Eugen Weber which covers every Fascist movement in Europe during the 1930’s and 1940’s and they feature a chapter on Romania which has 73 pages of Iron Guard history. These are mainstream writers so this won’t be pro Iron Guard but you’ve read enough mainstream stuff to be able to figure out when they aren’t giving you the whole truth.
http://www.amazon.com/European-Right-Historical-Hans-Rogger/dp/0520010809/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1260606723&sr=1-1