The Sunic Journal: Interview with Israel Shamir

March 13, 2012

Israel Shamir

Tom Sunic interviews Israel Shamir. Topics include:

  • Shamir’s background as journalist, writer and translator of classic literature;
  • His youthful decision to join the Israeli military and his transformation to activist critic of Israeli policy;
  • How the “masters of discourse” delimit public conversation and consciousness;
  • The “sacrality” of the Holocaust and how it’s used to justify U.S. hegemony;
  • The forces behind the recent protests against Putin;
  • Russia’s foreign policy intentions;
  • Shamir’s belief that distinct peoples can coexist in unified states.

Israel Shamir is a spiritual/political writer of Jewish descent and a convert to orthodox Christianity. He moved from Russia in 1969 to become an Israeli citizen and take up a worthy fight. Believing in the righteousness of its cause he served in their army but eventually his experiences led him to become critical of Israeli policy. His comments about this, current affairs and their deeper meaning are published on his site and elsewhere. They are also collected in his books: The Pine and the Olive, Galilee Flowers, Cabbala of Power and recently published Masters of Discourse.

13 MB / 32 kbps mono / 0 hour 56 min.

Contact Tom:

The Sunic Journal: Kevin MacDonald on the WASP Question

February 28, 2012

Kevin MacDonald and the WASP Question by Fraser

Tom Sunic and Kevin MacDonald discuss:

  • Andrew Fraser’s book, The WASP Question;
  • The Puritan revolution, American Revolution and Civil War;
  • Aristocratic structures traced to Indo-Europeans;
  • Egalitarian impulse traced to Nordic hunter-gatherers;
  • Protestantism, Anglicanism, and rationalism;
  • Strengthening White identity.
13 MB / 32 kbps mono / 0 hour 56 min.

Contact Tom:

The Sunic Journal: Interview with Andrew Fraser, Part 2

February 14, 2012

Andrew Fraser - 'The WASP Question'

Tom Sunic and Professor Andrew W. Fraser discuss:

  • Feedback from listeners on part 1 of the interview;
  • Fraser’s long-term vision of an Anglo-Saxon tribal confederation;
  • The problems faced by Anglo-Saxons analyzed as spiritual;
  • Fraser’s assertion that White racial identity is propositional;
  • Americanism regarded as the “divine economy”;
  • The need to rethink everything in the coming world without cheap energy.

Andrew W. Fraser is a retired professor of law from Macquarie University, Sydney, Australia. Born in Canada, he completed academic studies there and in the US, where he received a Master of Laws, (LL.M) from Harvard Law School. His teaching and professorial career in Australia spanned 40 years and has included visiting lecture commissions at Oxford, England, at Passau, Germany, and Halifax, Canada.

In addition to two books on law, he authored The WASP Question (2011), which bears upon his current independent research project: Anglo-Saxon Christian ethnotheology versus WASP atheology.

13 MB / 32 kbps mono / 0 hour 56 min.

Contact Tom:

The Sunic Journal: Interview with Andrew Fraser, Part 1

February 7, 2012

Andrew Fraser

Tom Sunic interviews Professor Andrew W. Fraser. Topics include:

  • Fraser’s thesis that WASPs surrendered identity based on ties of blood and faith in favor of civic-nationalist pseudo-religion;
  • How loss of ethnic identity has made WASPs victims of the successful states and corporations that they created;
  • The internationalism of the papacy, and the excesses of American Puritans and revolutionaries;
  • How the Anglo-Saxon “spiritual disease” has been imposed on Europe and the rest of the world;
  • The orthodox Anglican Church’s potential to bring about spiritual revival for Anglo-Saxon “tribes” around the world.

Andrew W. Fraser is a retired professor of law from Macquarie University, Sydney, Australia. Born in Canada, he completed academic studies there and in the US, where he received a Master of Laws, (LL.M) from Harvard Law School. His teaching and professorial career in Australia spanned 40 years and has included visiting lecture commissions at Oxford, England, at Passau, Germany, and Halifax, Canada.

In addition to two books on law, he authored The WASP Question (2011), which bears upon his current independent research project: Anglo-Saxon Christian ethnotheology versus WASP atheology.

13 MB / 32 kbps mono / 0 hour 56 min.

Contact Tom:

The Sunic Journal: Interview with Charles Carlson

January 31, 2012

Charles Carlson

Tom Sunic interviews Charles Carlson. Topics include:

  • Charles’s experiences while visiting the Gaza Strip;
  • American Christian Zionist culpability in Israeli aggression against Palestinians;
  • The origin and defining belief of Christian Zionism, namely that Israel rather than Jesus Christ is the fulfillment of biblical prophecy;
  • Christian Zionism’s relationship with neocons, Zionists, Republicans, and the military-industrial complex;
  • Christian Zionists’ nearly exclusive support for war against Iran;
  • The need to reach and educate Christian Zionists.

Charles E. Carlson was a conscript of U.S. Army twice and then a businessman before becoming a Baptist Deacon. With the help of several close friends he organized We Hold These Truths (WHTT) in 1996. Among WHTT’s video titles are Christian Zionism: The Tragedy & The Turning, John Hagee With Benny Hinn: Praying For War, In the Name Of Jesus, and their introductory must-see Cause of Our Conflict.

13 MB / 32 kbps mono / 0 hour 56 min.

Contact Tom:

The Sunic Journal: Interview with Ward Kendall

January 24, 2012

Ward Kendall

Tom Sunic interviews Ward Kendall. Topics include:

  • Ward’s novel, Hold Back This Day, set about 100 years in the future when only a few thousand Whites remain among a population of 19 billion non-Whites;
  • The cast of characters of the novel, their psychologies, and their parallels with Whites and non-Whites in the real world;
  • The world depicted in the novel, and its parallels with the non-White areas such as those in Paris or Compton;
  • A sober assessment of the current situation, and the need for a better way forward if Whites are to avoid the fate depicted in the novel.

Warning: There are some spoilers in this interview!

Ward Kendall is a pro-White author. His widely acclaimed novel, Hold Back This Day (available at Counter-Currents and Lighthouse Literature), is a tale of the last Whites on Earth and their heroic struggle to save their race. Mr. Kendall and his wife have lived and worked both across the the United States, and abroad. He is concerned for the future of his two daughters and of Whites everywhere. He advocates moving past the tragedies of history, and proposes a new quest – one of positive goals building upon a network of White cooperation from coast to coast – and around the world.

13 MB / 32 kbps mono / 0 hour 56 min.

Contact Tom:

The Sunic Journal: Interview with Søren Renner

January 17, 2012

Søren Renner

Tom Sunic interviews Søren Renner. Topics include:

  • Pessimism sufficient to understanding the perils ahead, a prerequisite to optimism and plan of action;
  • God being on “their side, not ours” – a recent, maladaptive development;
  • Necessary theocratic realignment may be allowed for in outflanking;
  • Possibility emerging through declarative unanimity in anticipation of a “partial collapse” for which the enemy is unprepared.

Søren Renner, declaring, “billions will die; we will win”, encapsulates his pessimistic/optimistic naturalist perspective on the White demographic predicament. He has devoted considerable attention in anticipation of the Malthusian catastrophe and its impacts on just who in particular? Whites.

Moving through ecological concerns that were race neutral to begin, Søren was triggered into that racial awakening, leading to his becoming a central contributor to Majority Rights. There, Søren explores the advantages of superior i.q. in the struggle for White survival, including interviews of such prominent figures as Sunic and Lowell. Tonight he finds himself on the interviewee end of a conversation with Dr. Sunic.

13 MB / 32 kbps mono / 0 hour 56 min.

Contact Tom:

The Sunic Journal: Kevin MacDonald on “Guilt by Association”

January 3, 2012

guilt by association

Tom Sunic and Kevin MacDonald discuss:

  • The psychological underpinnings of guilt by association and self-denial against the backdrop of Ron Paul’s White supporters;
  • The question of whether the presidential candidate should shrug off the liberal media or rather distance himself from his “politically incorrect” supporters;
  • The important essay, A Real Case Against Jews (1928) by the Jewish scholar Marcus Eli Ravage on Christianity and Judaism, including Gentile love-hate relationship towards Jews.
13 MB / 32 kbps mono / 0 hour 56 min.

Contact Tom:

The Sunic Journal: The American Third Position Party—The Hope of Our Future?

December 27, 2011

American Third Position logo

Tom Sunic and Kevin MacDonald discuss:

  • The American Third Position Party (A3P)—its goals, its agenda, its attitude toward non-European immigration;
  • The A3P’s platform, which is neither “left” nor “right”;
  • The A3P’s main goal, to reach out to Americans of European ancestry and particularly to disenfranchised White workers, farmers and students who have become victims of the discriminatory affirmative action policies;
  • The recent nomination of the A3P presidential candidate, Mr. Merlin Miller and his running mate, Prof. Virginia Abernethy.

To find out more about the A3P:

13 MB / 32 kbps mono / 0 hour 56 min.

Contact Tom:

The Sunic Journal: Kevin MacDonald on Media Pathologization

December 20, 2011

Breivik and Emma West

Tom Sunic and Professor Kevin MacDonald discuss:

  • The media’s pathologization of Whites and how the irresponsible and violent behavior of some Whites feeds into the already negative imagery doctored up by the media against White nationalists;
  • The mimicry of Zionism by some US presidential candidates in their effort to please the Jews and thus exempt themselves from any putative charges of a “shut up” word “antisemitism”;
  • The role of the American Third Position Party and its candidate for the presidential election, Mr. Merlin Miller.
13 MB / 32 kbps mono / 0 hour 56 min.

Contact Tom:

The Sunic Journal: Speech in London, Nov. 5, 2011

November 29, 2011

Tom Sunic

Tom Sunic gave a speech at a meeting of IONA / London Forum in London, Nov. 5, 2011. The speech was entitled “Ernst Juenger and the Balkanisation of Europe”.

13 MB / 32 kbps mono / 0 hour 56 min.

Contact Tom:

The Sunic Journal: MacDonald on Jewish Psychology

October 25, 2011

Kevin MacDonald

Tom Sunic and Kevin MacDonald, in the third of three consecutive interviews, discuss the meaning of Zionism and Judaism and their historical transformations. This week focuses on Jewish psychology.

13 MB / 32 kbps mono / 0 hour 56 min.

Contact Tom:

The Sunic Journal: Kevin MacDonald on Christian Zionism

October 18, 2011

John Hagee

Tom Sunic and Kevin MacDonald, in the second of three consecutive interviews, discuss the meaning of Zionism and Judaism and their historical transformations. MacDonald also draws parallels between self-perception of Gentiles vs. Jewish self-perception. Questions raised also focus on the “genealogical proximity” between Judaism and Christianity and the role of Christian Zionism and their “false consciousness”, forcing them to be more “Jewish” then Jews themselves. How does this all play out in the US political arena?

13 MB / 32 kbps mono / 0 hour 56 min.

Contact Tom:

The Sunic Journal: Kevin MacDonald on Gilad Atzmon

October 11, 2011

Cover of 'Wondering Who'

Topics includes:

  • Kevin MacDonald’s review of Gilad Atzmon’s recent book, The Wondering Who?;
  • The phenomenology of the “self-hating Jews” — from Jesus to modern times;
  • Israel – as a superego of the White House and the Hill;
  • Turkey and Israel, long time allies from the Ottoman times — till now;
  • Current events in USA – fraud and failure of the Lehman’s and the bank system.
13 MB / 32 kbps mono / 0 hour 56 min.

Contact Tom:

The Sunic Journal: Speech at the NPI conference

October 4, 2011

NPI Conference - Tom Sunic

In a speech delivered at the NPI conference in Washington, on Sep. 10, Tom’s main thesis is that America presents far better opportunities than Europe for the revival of a nationalist right-wing party or a movement. The big advantage of White nationalists in North America is their racial and linguistic unity stretching from Alaska to Arkansas. The first objective of White Americans and new emerging parties like the A3P, however, is to quit liberal inspired feelings or racial and cultural guilt and restore the language whose meaning has been hijacked by liberal and Marxist elites. Cultural consciousness is a crucial veneer one needs to add to our racial consciousness.

13 MB / 32 kbps mono / 0 hour 56 min.

Contact Tom:

Tom Sunic to Speak in Germany on Oct. 1, 2011

September 28, 2011

Tom Sunic

Dr. Tom Sunic will speak at a seminar in Germany on Oct. 1, 2011. This literary seminar will feature several prominent German thinkers. The main theme of the event, which runs Sep. 30 and Oct 1-2, is Europa in Umbruch (“Europe in Upheaval”), exploring the role of Europe, Russia, and the idea of the Empire. Tom, in his speech Balkanisierung Europas; Umbruch oder die Endzeiten (“Balkanization of Europe; the Upheaval or the End Times”), will focus on “end times” as seen by a prominent German nationalist- conservative writer and novelist Ernst Juenger.

For more information about the event, contact Dr. Rigolf Hennig.

Information in German:

Volk in Bewegung und der Reichsbote / Verfasser- und Lesertreffen

Leitthema: „Europa in Umbruch“

Liebe Leser, Verfasser, Gäste und Vortragende,

Für Ihre Zusage, am vierten Verfasser- und Lesertreffen vom 30. September – 2. Oktober teilzunehmen danke ich Ihnen namens der Schriftleitung.


Voranmeldung unter 036331/48125.


Voranmeldung unter 036331/48125.


30. September bis

  • 18 Uhr Anreise, Zimmervergabe
  • 18 Uhr gemeinsames Abendessen
  • 19 Uhr 30 Dr. Rigolf Hennig: Zur weltpolitischen Lage
  • Anschließend Liederabend

1. Oktober

  • 8 Uhr gemeinsames Frühstück
  • 9 Uhr gemeinsames Lied O Deutschland hoch in Ehren
  • 9 Uhr 10 Dr. Walter T. Rix: Deutschland und Rußland
  • 10 Uhr 15 Richard Melisch: Arabellion
  • 11 Uhr 30 Wolfgang Nahrath: politische Justiz
  • 13 Uhr gemeinsames Mittagessen
  • 15 Uhr Dr. Tomislav Sunic: Balkan oder die Balkanisierung Europas: Umbruch oder die Endzeiten?
  • 16 Uhr 30 Bernhard Schaub: Europäische Aktion
  • 18 Uhr gemeinsames Abendessen
  • 19 Ur 30 Liederabend mit Frank Rennicke

2. Oktober

  • 8 Uhr gemeinsames Frühstück
  • 9 Uhr gemeinsames Lied kein schöner Land
  • 9 Uhr 10 Uhr Alfred Zips: Zur Abschaffung der Wehrpflicht
  • 10 Uhr 30 Roland Wuttke: Rüstzeug im geistigen Endkampf
  • 12 Uhr Abschluß mit dem Deutschlandlied
  • Anschließend Abrechnung, Räumung der Zimmer, ggf. noch Mittagessen, Abreise.

Das Treffen findet gemeinsam mit der Tagung der Europäischen Aktion statt.

Diese tagt teilweise geschlossen in eigenen Räumen nach eigenem Programm.

Wir wünschen eine gute Anreise, empfehlen Fahrgemeinschaften und grüßen bestens bis zum 30. September.

Immigration: The Reserve Army of Capital

September 27, 2011

By Alain de Benoist

Translated from the French by Tom Sunic

North African immigrants arriving at Lampedusa

Immigrants from North Africa arriving daily on the Italian island of Lampedusa

In 1973, shortly before his death, the French President Georges Pompidou admitted to have opened the floodgates of immigration, at a request of a number of big businessmen, such as Francis Bouygues, who was eager to take advantage of docile and cheap labor devoid of class consciousness and of any tradition of social struggle. This move was meant to exert downward pressure on the wages of French workers, reduce their protesting zeal, and in addition, break up the unity of the labor movement. Big bosses, he said, “always want more.”

Forty years later nothing has changed. At a time when no political party would dare to ask for further acceleration of the pace of immigration, only big employers seem to be in favor of it — simply because it is in their interest. The only difference is that the affected economic sectors are now more numerous, going beyond the industrial sector and the hotel and catering service sector — now to include once “protected” professions, such as engineers and computer scientists.

France, as we know, starting with the 19th century, massively reached out to foreign immigrants. The immigrating population was already 800,000 in 1876, only to reach 1.2 million in 1911. French industry was the prime center of attraction for Italian and Belgian immigrants, followed by Polish, Spanish and Portuguese immigrants. “Such immigration, unskilled and non-unionized, allowed employers to evade increasing requirements pertaining to the labor law” (François-Laurent Balssa, « Un choix salarial pour les grandes entreprises » Le Spectacle du monde, Octobre, 2010).

In 1924, at the initiative of the Committee for Coalmining and big farmers from the Northeast of France, a “general agency for immigration” (Société générale d’immigration) was founded. It opened up employment bureaus in Europe, which operated as suction pumps. In 1931 there were 2.7 million foreigners in France, that is, 6.6 % of the total population. At that time France displayed the highest level of immigration in the world (515 persons on 100,000 inhabitants). “This was a handy way for a large number of big employers to exert downward pressure on wages. … From then on capitalism entered the competition of the workforce by reaching out to the reserve armies of wage earners.”

In the aftermath of World War II, immigrants began to arrive more and more frequently from Maghreb countries; first from Algeria, then from Morocco. Trucks chartered by large companies (especially in the automobile and construction industry) came by the hundreds to recruit immigrants on the spot. From 1962 to 1974, nearly two million additional immigrants arrived to France of whom 550,000 were recruited by the National Immigration Service (ONI), a state-run agency, yet controlled under the table by big business. Since then, the wave has continued to grow. François-Laurent Balssa notes that

when a workforce shortage in one sector occurs, out of the two possible choices one must either raise the salary, or one must reach out to foreign labor. Usually it was the latter option that was favored by the National Council of French Employers (CNPF) and as of 1998 by its successor, the Movement of Enterprises (MEDEF). That choice, which bears witness of the desire for short-term benefits, delayed advancement of production tools and industrial innovation. During the same period, however, as the example of Japan demonstrates, the rejection of foreign immigration and favoring of the domestic workforce enabled Japan to achieve its technological revolution, well ahead of most of its Western competitors.

Big Business and the Left; A Holy Alliance

At the beginning, immigration was a phenomenon linked to big business. It still continues to be that way. Those who clamor for always more immigration are big companies. This immigration is in accordance with the very spirit of capitalism, which aims at the erasure of borders (« laissez faire, laissez passer »). “While obeying the logic of social dumping, Balssa continues, a “low cost” labor market has thus been created with the “undocumented” and the “low-skilled,” functioning as stopgap “jack of all trades.” Thus, big business has reached its hand to the far-left, the former aiming at dismantling of the welfare state, considered to be too costly, the latter killing off the nation-state considered to be too archaic.” This is the reason why the French Communist Part (PCF) and the French Trade Union (CGT) (which have radically changed since then) had, until 1981, battled against the liberal principle of open borders, in the name of the defense of the working class interests.

For once a well-inspired Catholic liberal-conservative Philippe Nemo, only confirms these observations:

In Europe there are people in charge of the economy who dream about bringing to Europe cheap labor. Firstly, to do jobs for which the local workforce is in short supply; secondly, to exert considerable  downward pressure on the wages of other workers in Europe. These lobbies, which possess all necessary means to be listened to either by their governments or by the Commission in Brussels, are, generally speaking, both in favor of immigration and Europe’s enlargement — which would considerably facilitate labor migrations. They are right from their point of view — a view of a purely economic logic [...] The problem, however, is that one cannot reason about this matter in economic terms only, given that the inflow of the extra-Europe population has also severe sociological consequences. If these capitalists pay little attention to this problem, it is perhaps because they enjoy, by and large, economic benefits from immigration without however themselves suffering from its social setbacks. With the money earned by their companies, whose profitability is ensured in this manner, they can reside in handsome neighborhoods, leaving their less fortunate compatriots to cope on their own with alien population in poor suburban areas. (Philippe Nemo, Le Temps d’y penser, 2010)

According to official figures, immigrants living in regular households account for 5 million people, which was 8% of the French population in 2008. Children of immigrants, who are direct descendants of one or two immigrants, represent 6.5 million people, which is 11% of the population. The number of illegals is estimated to be between 300,000 to 550,000. (Expulsion of illegal immigrants cost 232 million Euros annually, i.e., 12,000 euro per case). For his part, Jean-Paul Gourevitch, estimates the population of foreign origin living in France in 2009 at 7.7 people million (out of which 3.4 million are from the Maghreb and 2.4 million from sub-Saharan Africa), that is, 12.2% of the metropolitan population. In 2006, the immigrating population accounted for 17% of births in France.

France is today experiencing migrant settlements, which is a direct consequence of   the family reunification policy. However, more than ever before immigrants represent the reserve army of capital.

In this sense it is amazing to observe how the networks on behalf of the “undocumented,” run by the far-left (which seems to have discovered in immigrants its “substitute proletariat”) serve the interests of big business. Criminal networks, smugglers of people and goods, big business, “human rights” activists, and under- the-table employers — all of them, by virtue of the global free market, have become cheerleaders for the abolition of frontiers.

For example, it is a revealing fact that Michael Hardt and Antonio Negri in their books Empire and Multitude endorse “world citizenship ” when they call for the removal of borders, which must have as a first goal in developed countries the accelerated settlement of the masses of low-wage Third World workers. The fact that most migrants today owe their displacement to outsourcing, brought about by the endless logic of the global market, and that their displacement is precisely something capitalism strives for in order to fit everybody into the market, and finally, that each territorial attachment could be a part of human motivations — does not bother these two authors at all. On the contrary, they note with satisfaction that “capital itself requires increased mobility of labor as well as continuous migration across national borders.” The world market should constitute, from their point of view, a natural framework for “world citizenship.” The market “requires a smooth space of uncoded and deterritorialized flux,” destined to serve the interests of the “masses”, because “mobility carries a price tag of capital, which means the enhanced desire for liberty.”

The trouble with such an apology of human displacement, seen as a first condition of “liberating nomadism,” is that it relies on a completely unreal outlook of the specific situation of migrants and displaced people. As Jacques Guigou and Jacques  Wajnsztejn write, “Hardt and Negri delude themselves with the capacity of the immigration flows, thought to be a source for new opportunities for capital valuation, as well as the basis for opportunity enhancement for the masses. Yet, migrations signify nothing else but a process of universal competition, whereas migrating has no more emancipating value than staying at home. A “nomadic” person is no more inclined to criticism or to revolt than a sedentary person.”  (L’évanescence de la valeur. Une présentation critique du groupe Krisis, 2004).

“As long as people keep abandoning their families, adds Robert Kurz, and look for work elsewhere, even at the risk of their own lives — only to be ultimately shredded by the treadmill of capitalism — they will be less the heralds of emancipation and more the self-congratulatory agents of the postmodern West.  In fact, they only represent its miserable version.”  (Robert Kurz, « L’Empire et ses théoriciens », 2003).

Whoever criticizes capitalism, while approving immigration, whose working class is its first victim, had better shut up. Whoever criticizes immigration, while remaining silent about capitalism, should do the same.

Alain de Benoist is a philosopher residing in France. The above article was first published in the  quarterly Eléments, “L’immigration; armée de réserve du capital” (April-June 2011, Nr. 139).

The Sunic Journal: Interview with Virginia Abernethy

August 30, 2011

Virginia Deane Abernethy

Tom Sunic and Virginia Abernethy, Professor Emeritus of Psychiatry (Anthropology) at Vanderbilt University School of Medicine, discuss:

  • Immigration in Europe and the United States;
  • Birth rates of immigrants v. those of natives;
  • The relationship between demographics and the environment, culture, and IQ.
13 MB / 32 kbps mono / 0 hour 56 min.

Contact Tom:

The Sunic Journal: Interview with Margaret L. Siegrist

August 23, 2011

Margaret L. Siegrist is the author of the book How Far Away Is Never, which describes her terrible ordeal of a five-year-old German-Croat girl fleeing Communist massacres. Her family endured mass hunger, typhoid disease, ethnic cleansing coming from the East, and Allied aerial fire bombings from the skies in the early 1945 in northern Croatia and southern Austria. This is just one example of millions of similar ordeals, a story you seldom hear in the mainstream media.

Siegrist writes:

In spite of all the suffering and trepidation I lived through, I now live quietly in southern California. I will forever be grateful for the freedom and opportunities these United States offered me but my heart still longs for the land of my birth and the sound of the music of my forefathers. In the US, especially, freedom is taken too much for granted. My contention is that to kill a few is wrong; to kill masses is an abomination. Because the truth was kept from so many from 1945 until now, history is repeating itself. May God help us!

Cover of 'How Far Away Is Never' by Margaret L. Siegrist
Margaret L. Siegrist signing her book
Margaret L. Siegrist signing her book
13 MB / 32 kbps mono / 0 hour 56 min.

Contact Tom:

Ludwig F. Clauss: Racial Style, Racial Character (Part 1)

August 18, 2011

By Tom Sunic

Ludwig F. Clauss (1892-1974)
Ludwig F. Clauss (1892-1974)

The liberal-communist propaganda against Fascism and National-Socialism has produced results contrary to those originally anticipated. It has created the conceptual model of a value system that often defies the objective reality of the bygone Fascist and National-Socialist epochs. It has given birth to dangerous and subconscious infatuation with hyperreal would-be Fascism, best to be seen in modern mimicry of Hollywood Nazism, especially among troubled young White people. The decades-long antifascist propaganda has produced a peculiar type of infra-political narcissism among a number of estranged White nationalists who often conceive of Fascism as a life style or a vicarious Internet escapade. The deadly offshoots of such liberal propaganda are deranged Whites such as Anders Breivik who recently killed scores of innocent people in Norway.

After World War II, National-Socialism and Fascism were officially and normatively designated by the liberal system as the symbols of absolute evil. Consequently, if Fascism stands today for absolute evil, all other systems of beliefs, all other political regimes, or other political values—however aberrant they may be or will be in the future—must  be viewed as lesser evils. The history of Communist mass killings and the ongoing economic corruption and mendacity of the liberal system, however inhumane they are, or may be in the future, must willy-nilly be tolerated.

As was noted on several occasions in TOO articles (e.g., here), nowhere has the communist-liberal propaganda been as destructive as in higher education and in the media. Thousands of titles in the field of psychology, sociology and genetics, published in Europe and the USA in the 20s, 30s and 40s of the twentieth century, had to disappear from social science curriculum. Any dispassionate, unbiased and objective talk—for instance about race, especially if a researcher refers to scholarly titles from the Fascist and Nationalist-Socialist epoch—is met with suspicion, ostracism, smear campaigns and the occasional judiciary inquisition. The problem is further aggravated by the insufficient scope of analysis exhibited by many contemporary well-meaning racialist scholars, particularly in America, who oftentimes neglect other approaches in the study of race. Thus when the word ‘race’ is mentioned one is led to think about the structure of a person’s body, forgetting that the study of race can be addressed from a psychological and spiritual point of view as well.

There is also a considerable divide between American and European researchers regarding the race issue. American racialist scholars tend to use an empirically-based, quantitative approach; hence their penchant for Darwinism and the evolutionary theory and the inescapable measurement of IQ. In Europe, especially in the first part of the 20th century, the subject of race had a large following among scholars from different and often mutually conflicting disciplines, ranging from the field of biology to the field of religious mysticism. Among many others, mention should be made of the philosopher Julius Evola, whose study of race combines both the natural science and the social science approach.

Evola was hostile to Darwinism and in his books he argues that higher species (e.g., the White man), could not possibly evolve from other races (Blacks) or from lower animal species, such as African primates. If we concede that the White man evolved from lesser species, why panic today at the sight of interbreeding we are witnessing in modern multicultural society? Accordingly, sooner or later all of mankind (based on the liberal-communist dogma of progress) will end up being beautiful and the same and sport very high IQs. Evola argues, based on the legacy of Indo-European sagas and myths (all being replete with stories on demigods, magical, transcendental and invisible forces), that our predecessors, the antediluvian Hyperboreans represented our only true race. What we are witnessing today is involution resulting in racial chaos.

'Rasse und Seele' (1943) by Ludwig D. Clauss

Clauss was a highly influential  academic in National- Socialist Germany, a reputation which did not diminish after WWII. His later works on the psychology of Arabs are quite sympathetic to Islamic culture are widely quoted. Although a member of the National Socialist party, he helped his Jewish aide Margaret Landé, thus earning himself in Israel, after his death, the title of “righteous among the nations.”  What follows is my translation of his chapter and some excerpts from his books Rasse und Seele (Race and Soul) and Rasse und Character (Race and Character). The chapter was published in the third edition of Clauss’ Rasse und Seele, in 1943, a highly influential work in Germany back then, which, when perused today, does not sound “Nazi” (?) at all. Clauss’ books tells us that the enigma of race and racial psychology needs to be looked at over and over again — in a dispassionate, across-the-board, and interdisciplinary fashion.

“The question of value”

“When something new enters history it does not need to wait long in order to encounter fierce resistance. Whatever the German research on racial psychology encountered in Germany, a similar fate befell the entire German research on racial psychology from the rest of the world. Outrageous allegations were thrown all around, which in most cases were so clumsy and stupid, that with the passage of time they died of their own accord. Gradually, however, the fight against us became more refined. In most cases at the center of the argument, which had us as targets, surfaced the question of value: we were accused of viewing the Nordic race as the only valuable race while considering other races inferior. Wherever this “evidence” found credibility, it worked against us, all the more as the word ‘Nordic’, which among ignorant people is easily misinterpreted, causes all sorts of nonsense.

Unfortunately, the Vatican, in this campaign against the findings of racial psychology, leveled attacks against us in L’Osservatore Romano, April 30, 1938 — an attack using its usual methods. Given that my books are also targets of the attacks, it seems to be my duty to add a few words and put things in the right perspective, insofar as they are of concern to me. It won’t hurt if the explanations in this book are anticipated in advance. There are three fallacies by means of which each attack attempts to drive a wedge between us and our neighbors.

Firstly, the impression has been created that German science of race accords to each race a certain grade — as does the teacher to his pupils, i.e., placing, so to speak, races into hierarchical slots, whereby the first place must be awarded to the Nordic race. It follows from this that the Mediterranean race must reconcile itself with the second position, or worse, settle for an even lower one.

This is patently false. Undoubtedly, in Germany and elsewhere, books and booklets have been published that support such views. The psychology or race, however, which, in the last analysis, is the only qualified field to make decisions about  racial-psychological values, has taught from the very beginning and with a distinct precision:

Each race in itself represents the highest value. Each race carries in itself its own system of values and its own standard of values and must not be measured by the standards of another race.

It is absurd and unscientific to analyze the Mediterranean race through the eyes of the Nordic race and to evaluate it according to the Nordic system of values. The reverse process is also scientific. In practical life such things happen over and over again and it seems to be unavoidable. In science, however, it is contrary to simple logic. To make decisions about the value of a human race in an “objective” manner could only be done by a human being who stands above all races. But there is no such human being because to be human means to be racially conditioned.

Maybe God knows the hierarchy of races, but we do not.

The goal of science is to find laws that determine the mental and physical shape of each race. Only after the laws of each race are discovered can its inner value system be agreed upon. These value systems can be compared with each other: for instance the inner value system of the Nordic race with the inner value system of the Mediterranean race. Such comparisons are instructive because each thing in the world shows, in a clear fashion, what it is — if one sets it apart from other things that are different. But such value systems cannot be evaluated from a superior standpoint because there is no such standpoint.

The Nordic man should be Nordic; the Mediterranean man Mediterranean.
Only then can every man be real, only then can every man be good — each in his own way. This is the conviction I hold of German racial psychology, and it is the position which has also been adopted by the racial policies of the German government. The Office of Racial Policy of the NSDAP(Das Rassenpolitische Amt der NSDAP)has printed pictures and plaques and has distributed them in German schools, where we read in large letters the following words:  Each race in itself represents the highest value.

The second fallacy that the L’Osservatore Romano would like to promote is the following: according to German science each race differs from others insofar as each one has characteristics that the others don’t. Thus, the Nordic race is characterized by the ability to compare, and by energy, responsibility, diligence, and a sense of heroism. Other races do not have such characteristics. It cannot be denied that in some older anthropological works, but also in the German ones, such un-psychological statements can be found. Nevertheless, it is advisable to listen to a shoemaker when one talks about footgear, to a sailor about seafaring, to a psychologist about the laws of psychology — and not to an anatomist.

Since 1921 German racial psychology has been teaching with clear cut precision: the racial-psychological factor does not lie in this or that characteristic. Characteristics are a matter of each individual human being; somebody has such-and-such characteristics, somebody else has a different set of characteristics. The sense of heroism, for instance, can undoubtedly be encountered among many Nordic men; yet it can also be encountered among people of different races. The same is true concerning energy (will power), the ability for discernment, etc. The racial-psychological factor does not lie in such-and-such a characteristic, but rather in the manner in which these characteristics express themselves with each individual. The Heroism of the Nordic man and that of the Mediterranean man can be equally “great,” yet each looks different, i.e. expresses itself in a different way and with a different gesture.

The childlike attempt to put together individual characteristics, which are to be found among representatives of a particular race, as  for instance among the Nordic race, and then to assume that the racial factor lies in the possession of such-and-such a characteristic, is no wiser than an attempt at depicting someone’s physical appearance—for instance, Nordic racial appearance. Nordics have noses, mouths, arms, and hands.  But other races also have noses, mouths, arms, and hands. Therefore the racial factor does not lie in the possession of these body parts.  Race determines the shape of the nose, the shape of the mouth, and the way it is held and moved. Nobody who has eyes can dispute the fact that a man of the Mediterranean race moves differently than a Nordic man, that he walks differently, dances differently, accompanies his speech with different gestures. Who can now ask the question as to which sort of a movement, or what sort of a gesture is of more value: the Mediterranean or the Nordic? This question is pointless.”

Continue at Part 2.

Tom Sunic (Web sites: [1], [2]) is an author ([1], [2]), translator, former US professor of political science, and former Croat diplomat. He is also a member of the Board of Directors of the American Third Position and a VoR radio host. Email him.