News

No More Brothers’ Wars

Small arms fire clatters in the distance, the rhythm broken only by the boom of artillery. “The cease-fire is holding up well,” my guide says wryly. Every third building has had its roof blown off, so the cold rain pours into the apartments where you can still see residents walking around; they have nowhere else to go. As we move through the complex, armed guards by our sides, heads emerge cautiously from doorways, followed by lone scouts sent out to confront us and determine if we are friend or foe. Eventually, the beleaguered and mostly elderly denizens pour out, venting their fury against the Ukrainian “junta,” the “fascists” of the hated Azov Battalion, and of course, the Americans who are supposedly behind it all. Each oath was punctuated by explosions getting disconcertingly closer. After one particularly loud one, I catch the guards shoot each other a nervous glance. It’s time for us to go, but those old men and women we were just interviewing are staying put.

It seems like a lifetime ago, but it was only two years back when I found myself in the Donetsk People’s Republic, carefully being chaperoned with a small group of mostly leftist journalists and academics as part of an endearingly obvious propaganda effort by the Russian government. How I had managed to talk them into letting me be part of this trip is still not clear, nor do I really know who sponsored it, nor do I even know what the Kremlin and their separatist allies hoped to accomplish with this junket.

But after spending time on the literal front lines of the new conflict between the Russian World and the post-White “West,” I didn’t walk away a firm partisan of one side or the other, instead feeling only a vague sense both sides were being played, pawns in a game neither they nor I fully understood.

Now, with only one rash act separating us from a far more ominous conflict, all our lives depend on penetrating this web of shadows. The United States of America escalated its war with the anti-terrorist government of Bashar al-Assad recently by shooting down a plane attacking the “moderate” rebel troops the Washington government is backing. In a particularly chilling detail, we are told the unfortunate Syrian pilot was forced to parachute into ISIS-controlled territory, so we may see him being burned alive or blown apart somewhere on the Chans any day now thanks to the heroism of the American military.

The controlled media grants “our” government, inconveniently based on the post-constitutional order created by Abraham Lincoln’s victorious armies, the right to wage war on a sovereign state combatting a violent rebellion. It’s also taken for granted that the overthrow of Assad will somehow be a great boon to American national security, with the chaos unleashed in Afghanistan and Iraq by our “victories” there blithely overlooked. Indeed, any American elected official who expresses skepticism about the wisdom of yet another Middle East war and a possible confrontation with a nuclear power is subject to a blistering defamatory campaign from the Washington regime’s hirelings in the press, whether it’s Republican State Senator Dick Black of Virginia or Democrat Representative Tulsi Gabbard of Hawaii.

One would have to be as hopelessly naïve as an Oathkeeper to entertain the Washington regime’s rhetoric about being opposed to “terrorism” as such, especially after President Trump’s nauseating pilgrimage to Saudi Arabia and absurd attempt to blame Iran for an ISIS attack on Tehran. The main objective of Washington is to destroy strong sovereign states in the region (Syria, Iran) that Israel perceives as threats and that could conceivably complicate access to oil resources and pipelines. The latter at least appears as a semi-plausible concept of “national interest,” except for the amount of blood and treasure expended in each of these idiotic adventures far exceeds any possible material gain.

American foreign policy is defined by an almost perfect nihilism. Wars are waged for their own sake, enemies are endlessly created and combatted in turn, and staggering sums of taxpayer funds are apportioned to contractors and defense companies in a process no different in intent or execution than how the federal government bankrolls leftist activist groups or blows billions on welfare programs that perpetuate the very problems they’re supposed to solve.

In Syria, it’s not just that the United States of America is once again unnecessarily intervening in a foreign civil war. It’s that we are on the wrong side. If America had anything close to a legitimate government, we’d be shipping arms to Bashar al-Assad, the sole protector of Christian minorities and a champion of secular nationalism in that tortured region.

If American Christians are right about the existence of God, many of them may find retribution in the afterlife rather than salvation because of how they have shamefully tolerated or even supported the genocide of Christian communities in the Levant. I doubt the Almighty will be appeased by the excuse that they were too busy posting images of themselves on Facebook adopting befuddled African children.

Unquestionably, it is Russia that is the champion of anything that can even remotely be called a civilized order in Syria. Ten years after the moral atrocity that was the Iraq War, only the most unhinged criminals can un-ironically champion regime change in Damascus. Nor can we pretend those who advocate an American military effort to achieve this end are anything other than deadly enemies of overwhelmingly Christian servicemen who will be ordered to throw away their lives to make their countrymen at home and fellow believers abroad less safe. 

And yet, the narrative of Russia as some international champion of the far right or as the savior of the West is completely mistaken. The mainstream media, partially out of professional jealousy, mostly out of tribal ethnic hatred, accuses the Kremlin of undermining confidence in the Western system by promoting “fake news.” But most of this news, even if we grant the premises that the Russian government is directly promoting it or even that it is phony, is just a variation on the same leftist narratives you can find anywhere else. It’s no longer even true that someone like Richard Spencer is moderately more likely to make an appearance on RT than on a major American news network.

Ultimately, the Russians, albeit for far different reasons, are trapped in the same postwar ideological trap as the post-White West. Never before have I heard the word “fascism” so often as I did in the DPR and in Russia during that week. While in Moscow, ordinary people complained to me about the “Nazi government” in Ukraine, ostensibly preparing to relaunch the blitzkrieg into the heart of the Rodina. Seminars and lectures were held on the supposed war crimes of Azov Battalion, Right Sector, and other “fascists,” with endless SPLC style discussions of their “links” to various mainstream figures in the Ukrainian government. Though Vladimir Putin has condemned the post-White West’s unwillingness to defend its own children in the manufactured “refugee crisis,” the same Western style restrictions on speech can be found in Russia itself.

Of course, “fascism” means something far different in the Russian context than it does on an American college campus, there it’s something akin to “anyone who opposes Russia.” (Every Serb I’ve ever met has a similar definition of the word related to opposition to their own country.) This led to several amusing scenarios during my sojourn.

In one case, some kind of defense official in the ad-hoc DPR government, whose only direct military experience seems to have been some time in the Soviet Navy in the 1980’s, held court with the overwhelmingly leftist journalists and academics and boasted about his new country’s heroic resistance against fascism. In the next breath, he casually remarked how interesting he thought it was that Ukraine’s government was dominated by Jews. In another case, a paramilitary festooned with hammer and sickle speechified to us about how Novorossiya was leading the new struggle against global capitalism. And one of the most destructive aspects of reactionary capitalism, he warned darkly, was homosexuality. In both cases, the appalled silence of my leftist colleagues was broken by the sound of me failing to stifle my laughter.

Yet in another way, there’s no ideological confusion here. Traveling through the eastern Ukrainian countryside, with its endless plains, you can almost see the Wehrmacht crashing into the limitless waves of T-34’s. Then Savur-Mohyla swells out of the earth, a strategic height home to a massive monument to the Soviet army. The villages surrounding the height are rubble, the statues on the height itself pockmarked by bullets or entirely destroyed. A war monument from the pages of history, it now hosts the fresh graves of men of my own generation who died to possess it, as its strategic location was the site of a furious back-and-forth battle between DPR and Ukrainian forces in 2014.

I ascend the steps, finding tortured iron and stones at the pinnacle, as well as a breathtaking view of the countryside where one can still visualize hostile troops assembling below. And of course, something else – a bewildering array of flags – the DPR, the tricolor of the Russian government, the tsarist emblem, the orange and black flag of the Saint George ribbon, the Soviet flag, the motley flags of various DPR regiments and militias, and others I was never able to decode. Ideologically, it makes no sense. From a Russian perspective, it makes perfect sense, as the tragedies and triumphs of systems diametrically opposed to each other, the Tsardom and the Supreme Soviet, have been seamlessly woven together into a great national saga.

The Soviet victory of 1945 is at the centerpiece of this. At the monument To Donbass Liberators, a twenty-something girl who had been serving as my interpreter stared up at the heroic representation of the soldiers, her eyes shining, and spoke without irony or cynicism about how the Great Patriotic War was a time when the entire country (by which she meant the USSR) and all its many peoples were totally united in a great cause. There was no acknowledgment, or perhaps even knowledge, of the crimes committed by the Red Army during its march through Germany, nor of the dehumanizing methods used to achieve this military conquest. The youth of the DPR was getting to essentially reenact what they have been told their entire lives was the greatest triumph and most incredible adventure in their history. And sometimes, even with the same exact weapons, as I stared at the gap in the line of vehicles on display a JS-3 Stalin heavy tank had actually been refitted and sent to the front.

It works both ways. To the Ukrainians in the west, some of whom have adopted the names and symbols of those who worked with the Reich to fight against the Reds, history is also playing out again as the young refight what to many of their grandfathers thought was a struggle for national liberation and crusade against Communism. In the Baltic states, many openly hail the SS while nations such as Poland tear down the monuments to their Soviet occupiers. As no one but a fiend can today claim Western Civilization was “saved” by World War II, it’s tempting to just interpret this as a purely ideological development, that the boys in black are rising again. But ideas follow the currents of subtle and complicated national and identity politics, with various nationalist movements associated with the “left” or “right” because of historical chance rather than ideological conviction. It’s at least as much about nationalism and intra-European rivalries than it is about a comeback of National Socialism. 

And nationalism is both our salvation and our curse. Realistically, at this point in history, any political movement designed to safeguard the interests of the White race and the existence of Western culture will be labeled a “nationalist” movement. Of course, even (or especially) a “nationalist” government can be tempted to fight other “nationalist” governments, making it easy for rootless cosmopolitans to manipulate patriots to fight each other in mutually ruinous conflicts, as we saw in World War II.

Now, we may get the same thing again. The most uncucked nations in Europe, the Eastern Europeans, are also those most fearful of supposed Russian expansion. They are thus cheerleading the effort to position NATO troops on the borders with Russia (something NATO promised not to do during the 1990 talks over German reunification). More importantly, the nations of Eastern Europe are left open to having to accept refugees, granting leftist NGO’s the freedom to operate, and committing to various destructive social policies as the price for defense. It’s the exact same technique the federal government uses to force left wing policies on recalcitrant states and localities in our own country.

The “Maidan” revolution in Ukraine, that relied upon right-wingers, nationalists and some outright National Socialists for its street fighting, has already been revealed as part of a plot not to save Ukraine, but to deconstruct it entirely. Already, Ukrainians are being told the “true” meaning of Maidan was to ensure that there would be gay pride festivals in Kiev.

What kind of independence has been won when George Soros is dictating policy instead of Vladimir Putin? Kleptocracy is far preferable to utter subversion. Interference from Moscow is less harmful than the wholesale destruction of sovereignty and independence that comes with integration into the “West.”

Of course, many brave Ukrainian patriots know their country is being ruled by an alien elite and that they are being used. Why haven’t the Ukrainians toppled the hostile elite ruling their country? Well, easier said than done. After all, why haven’t we?

Putin knows what Maidan was really all about; avoiding one of America’s color-coded revolutions has been the driving impulse behind much of his rule. This is why he won’t let foreign NGO’s operate within the country, why he has painstakingly cultivated youth groups that support the regime, why he made sure he can call upon pseudo-official street fighters like the Night Wolves motorcycle club if there is an attempted coup, and why many of Putin’s supposed political adversaries are actually working in league with the Kremlin as part of a faux opposition.

Those on the ground in Donetsk knew this too; the word “Maidan” was used as an adjective to describe subversives and agents of the Americans. I learned this firsthand.

Unwisely wandering off from the group, I made the mistake of saying something in English while purchasing something at a market. As Americans aren’t exactly common in the DPR, before long, a man, perhaps intoxicated, randomly accused me of being in the CIA and shoved me, leading to the formation of an angry mob. Naturally, I shoved him and yelled back (in retrospect, a poor decision when outnumbered about 20-1 by mostly uniformed paramilitaries and you don’t speak the language). Luckily, an official (a blonde haired Muslim) soon arrived, dressed down the instigator, explained the situation and dispersed the mob. Following this furious diatribe, my shamefaced antagonist embraced me, pledged eternal friendship, and demanded I drink vodka with him. (The Muslim did not partake.)

But the mob was fundamentally right in its initial fear. The American government is, unquestionably, trying to overthrow Vladimir Putin through the same playbook it has used to overthrow other governments, with the (still) taxpayer subsidized Soros NGO’s as one of the key weapons in its arsenal. And the ultimate American geopolitical goal, as outlined by the recently deceased Zbigniew Brzezinski in his book The Grand Chessboard, is to break up Russia itself, ensuring there is almost no power able or willing to challenge the neoliberal economic and political order.

The “Russian hacking” narrative of the Democrats, the neoconservatives, and their friends in the media is pure projection. If every single one of Louise Mensch’s tweets were true, it would still pale in comparison to what the American government has been trying to do to Moscow for decades. Why shouldn’t they respond in kind?

Perhaps more importantly, the “Russian hacking” narrative boxes in President Trump and commits him to a course almost guaranteed to end in war. For a supposed Manchurian candidate, President Trump has done nothing to actually ease tensions with Russia. This may not even be his fault; the Deep State and Congress have tied his hands. The sanctions are still in place, America is still absurdly demanding Russia give back Crimea, and American forces are now attacking the Syrian government directly. If there is a real crisis, easily imaginable considering how closely Russian and American forces now are in both Syria and Europe, it will be impossible for President Trump to make any kind of a compromise or float a friendly proposal without risking accusations of treason or sparking a political or even military effort to remove him from power.

Trump, who already seems overmatched in negotiations over health care, is perhaps the sole obstacle standing in the way of the conflict the Deep State so desperately wants. He might, out of pressure or newfound conviction, take an even more militant stand than  President Clinton would have done. The Republicans have never been able to decide if their problem with the Democrats’ Russian policy is that it’s too confrontational or not confrontational enough. It’s the likes of Pence, Ryan, and McCain who will be whispering in Trump’s ear in the event of a crisis. In short, “this business will get out of control, it will get out of control and we will be lucky to live through it.”

If there is a World War III, in America and in Eastern Europe, soldiers will be called to fight in the name of God and Country, and the Beltway Right will thrill to those old-fashioned values, perhaps only because once again they will be marshaled in the service of their own destruction. It will be the “Greatest Generation” tripe all over again, only with more affirmative action cast members. Similarly, much as Stalin called upon the legacy of Alexander Nevsky, Russians will once again live out the Great Patriotic War, that provides additional motivation to those Eastern Europeans who will sacrifice themselves to defend their independence from Moscow, only to surrender it to Brussels and Washington.

Preventing this scenario must be at the heart of everything we do. A war between Russia and the United States would be the ultimate proof President Trump has either been neutered or totally subverted. And to suggest we share a meaningful national identity with the likes of Kamala Harris or Chuck Schumer that must be defended is as debased as Elsagate.

No Russian ever called me White trash. No Russian ever told me he was going to take my country away from me, rejoice in the genocide of my race, or extirpate even the memory of my people’s accomplishments like some ISIS knockoff. No real enemy facing the historic American nation lies within the borders of the Russian Federation. The furious mob on the streets of Donetsk was far less hateful and hostile to the authentic American people than the typical delegate to the Democratic National Committee.

I defer to Russian comrades whether Vladimir Putin is an authentic champion of his people or a cynical manipulator desperately trying to hold together a ramshackle imperial structure. (One of my armed guards, for example, wore a T-shirt festooned with the smiling visage of Ramzan Kadyrov.) But I do know there is no authentic conflict between Russia and the United States, nor any casus belli that wouldn’t eventually be as self-discrediting as Washington’s claim of WMD’s in Iraq. An American “victory” in such a conflict would simply seal the fate of nations such as Poland, Estonia, or Lithuania, not ensure their independence. And the centralization of authority and censorship always created by war would justify the crackdown on dissenters (us) that the journalists and their scriptwriters at the SPLC and the ADL have been urging ever since Trump’s election.

Those motley paramilitaries I spent time with had motivations I do not share, experiences I can’t fully relate to, and goals I may think are misguided. Yet for any American to call these cousins “enemies” is not just a mistake but an act of unspeakable malevolence. Indeed, even their initial fury against me as an American was totally justified, as it is Washington D.C. that houses that Swamp and threatens to drown every one of our peoples. And what looks likely to push us into conflict is not Ukraine (where there is at least an argument for both sides), but Syria, where the Washington government is obviously and explicitly backing the enemies of the West and the forces of wickedness. 

For America to start a war in order to remove Bashar al-Assad would be an act of murderous evil and reckless brigandage unmatched since the days of Tamerlane. If Americans were to die in service to such an unquestionably despicable cause, especially after electing a president who vowed peaceful relations with Russia, the obscenity would be so great it would justify the nuclear annihilation that would ensue.

And that’s the only positive spin we can see for any of this. Most of the time, for a ruling caste to be displaced, it must set its own doom in motion. No matter how much we organize, how many brave men step forward on the streets, how much money is raised, how many books are read or how widely ideas are spread, our rulers are likely to remain secure until and unless they are massively discredited by a grave miscalculation. A war with Russia could well be that miscalculation.

All White men worldwide must rally to the cause of No More Brother Wars. But if it comes, all rules are abolished, all institutions forever discredited, all methods legitimate. If our insane rulers, with or without President Trump, launch such a conflict, let all the Earth be reduced to ash and dust if this creates but a chance an alternative can be created.

Treason to the occupation is loyalty to the nation. We must have freedom and sovereignty at any cost, we must either revolutionize or totally break free of this system of filth simply to ensure our own survival. And as for America, just as in every White nation the only real enemy is at home.

  • This site keeps getting better and better! Keep up the good work guys!

  • JMoore

    This great article shows some real hope in the midst of the apocalyptic gloom we live under. Imagine a real, grassroots, international, no more brothers wars movement could undermine the NWO UN EUSSR, even grow into something the (((UN))) never was.

  • Vitchyovski

    The reason Russians and Serbs call their national opponents ‘fascists’ is because of the legacy of communism. Russia was the core of the USSR, just as Serbia was the core of Yugoslavia. When both states fell apart, it was Russia that saw itself as the successor to the USSR, just as Serbia saw itself the successor of Yugoslavia. Even today, Russia uses many Soviet-era symbols and songs and is trying to synthesize its communist history with its own national one. Likewise with Serbia; most see Yugoslavia as part of Serbia’s history and many people look back on it positively.

    This contrasts with Ukraine (in the case of the USSR) and Croatia (in the case of the SFRY); both of whom explicitly rejected the legacy of the USSR/Yugo when they declared independence. Rather than seeing themselves too as successors of the USSR/Yugo, they rejected it wholesale leaving Russia and Serbia as the sole owners of the entire legacy, and then go even further and claim that the whole USSR/Yugo period was nothing but Russian/Serb occupation.

    When you combine that with the old Communist claim that everyone who opposes Communism is a fascist, it’s rather easy to see why Ukrainian/Croatian nationalism is expressed in ‘fascist’ imagery, and why Russian/Serb nationalism is expressed in more ‘communist’ imagery. Also, the fact that many Ukrainians and Croats actually have a real WWII-era fascist legacy probably doesn’t help.

    In saying that however, it is worth pointing out that millions of Russians and other Slavs died fighting Germans, not because they believed in Communism or loved the prison that was the USSR, but because the Germans wanted to wipe them out and settle their countries. One of the main reasons Serbia rejected an alliance with Germany prior to WWII was because of significant anti-German sentiment among the population: it had nothing to do with ideology, but historical memory. The Chetniks are an example of this: both anti-Nazi and anti-Communist, though they themselves were labelled as fascists by Communists because they fought against Communists.

    Too many people on the alt-right seem to believe that the USSR-Nazi war was a purely ideological one, and to a degree I can understand why, as it seems that most alt-rightists tend to be of Germanic stock. Either way it is incorrect, and to expect Russians to drop the communist imagery that their grandfathers died fighting under so that the Germans wouldn’t wipe them off of the face of the earth, is kind of absurd and presents a very poor reading of history. Poland is perhaps the best example of this: the entire country was ruined completely by both the Nazis and the Soviets. If anyone can show a pure, unadulterated hatred for both Nazis and Communists it would be a nationalist Pole, and I don’t imagine that such a Pole would respond particularly well to being told that Nazism was essentially in his best interests because Communism was for Judah. While Nazism might have been right about (((some))) things, it was not in the interests of most Slavs because the non(((star)))-related goals that Nazism had set for the Germanic nations were in direct contradiction to Slavic existence. It just so happened that most Slavs were under the red banner at the time, but even if Communism wasn’t part the picture, I don’t see how it would have went down any differently.

    National Socialism might have been the German answer to (((Communism))), but you’ll have to forgive the Slavs for refusing to allow themselves to be thrown out with the bath water by the Germans and their Slavic useful idiots.

    • Vincent Law

      What could have been in Germans and Slavs had united and Hitler went Westward…

      • Vitchyovski

        There was a point in time when that option was considered by Hitler. There’s a book called ‘Hitler’s World View: A Blueprint for Power’ by Eberhard Jäckel which contains a chapter on foreign policy that discusses this question. If you haven’t read this book, I would seriously recommend checking it out. Definitely worth a read.

        On a related note:
        “By quarreling amongst themselves, instead of confederating, Germans and Scandinavians, both of them belonging to the same great race, only prepare the way for their hereditary enemy, the Slav.” -Karl Marx (The Eastern Question p.90)

        • Vincent Law

          The pro-Eastern faction died out when the Strasser bros movement was stamped out.

          • silviosilver ✓ᵀʳᵘᵐᵖ ˢᵘᵖᵖᵒʳᵗᵉʳ

            Oh please, it wasn’t this or that specific policy or personality; it was the whole damn attitude of ethnic chauvinism that was the problem. Any movement built on that despicable basis was bound to come to grief – to heap wholly unnecessary, wholly pointless, and totally easily avoidable pain on other Europeans.

      • Lucy Lipinska

        I wish they had, as it would have spared me from being a migrant in Sweden, where being a Slav has not seldom been a veritable trial. “Thanks” to the recent massinvasion by real “untermensch”, Swedes now have bigger problems to worry over than my Slavic cheek bones. (I actually have been living in Germany for a few months (as a young woman) and had not experienced such a negative attitude because of my Polish background.) Truth be told, most of the propaganda isn’t in the hands of ethnic Swedes, which might be behind this in my eyes inexpicable tendency to smear all Slavic.

        • Vincent Law

          Most Swedes really hate Slavs. Just like Brits hating Poles.

          It’s like in America how Coastal snobs hate fly-over whites. In Europe it’s taken to a country-wide scale.

          • Lucy Lipinska

            As a retiree I actually could move to a country with less bigotry/hypocrisy, but I cannot imagine moving far away from my son, as I already have lost my only daughter. Swedes absolutely “love” blacks and gypsies, probably viewing those as a different species. Slavs are ostracized, even those who do not differ in appearance and behaviour, naturally not in public, as pretending is an absolute must.

          • Vincent Law

            We’re the Bad Whites to the Liberals and the Non-Whites to the Nationalists. Haha don’t let the Eternal Swede get you down.

          • silviosilver ✓ᵀʳᵘᵐᵖ ˢᵘᵖᵖᵒʳᵗᵉʳ

            the Eternal Swede

            What a tryhard.

          • Miłosz Jezierski

            Bullshit I live in Sweden and coop with their nationalists.

          • Vitchyovski

            I wouldn’t take it too personally. They are Niemcy after all. (using that word in its etymological sense). Who cares what they think of us.

          • A more accurate version:

            How Scots-Irish Appalachians and English-German WASPs dislike Irish “rednecks.”

        • silviosilver ✓ᵀʳᵘᵐᵖ ˢᵘᵖᵖᵒʳᵗᵉʳ

          a migrant in Sweden, a country where being a Slav has not seldom mean a veritable trial.

          Oh, boohoo-fucking-hoo. You’re breaking my heart.

          Immigrants have got to be the most spoiled, ungrateful sons of bitches on the planet. It’s just fucking unreal how incapable they are of forgiving the slights that they suffered (which I don’t doubt for a second were real).

          And get a load of the language this prize specimen uses: it would have “spared” her from having to live most of her life in Sweden. Yeah, wow, living in Sweden, major bummer.

          • White ethnic diversity seems to fail just as much as racial diversity.

            Interesting how the principle is the same: diversity = suck, homogeneity = win.

          • silviosilver ✓ᵀʳᵘᵐᵖ ˢᵘᵖᵖᵒʳᵗᵉʳ

            Intraracial ethnic diversity is easier to overcome than interracial diversity. I don’t get the sense that white (or even off-white) ethnic diversity matters very much at all, at least not among people with more liberal sort of outlooks. The only people endlessly bitching about it are hardass rightwingers, who are laboring under the misapprehension that good living requires 100% ethnic and cultural homogeneity.

        • Baby Shoes

          The Scandinavian women hate you because they can’t compete with Slav beauties and you complement a man so well. Their feminist cult crumbles when Eastern European women come into the mix.

      • Alex Delarge

        Operation Barbarossa was an incredibly stupid blunder. Hitler’s generals begged him not to order the surprise attack on the USSR. The fact that Hitler ignored them worsened the already tense relationship between the Nazi party and the Wehrmacht.

      • silviosilver ✓ᵀʳᵘᵐᵖ ˢᵘᵖᵖᵒʳᵗᵉʳ

        What could have been if Germans and Slavs had united and Hitler went Westward…

        Well, like what for example? How exactly would it have been beneficial for one group of Europeans to be ruled over and oppressed by another group of Europeans? Call me stupid, but I can’t avoid getting the impression that it wasn’t the fact that Germany invaded Russia that was the problem; it was that Germany invaded Russia – invading anyone else would apparently have been A-OK.

        Given everything that’s gone wrong since 1945, I can easily understand the comment as expressing a throwaway sentiment, but no more than that.

        • Crud Bonemeal

          Well, if that happened, it’s possible that the liberal, Jewish occupied powers of the United States and the United Kingdom would have been crushed, changing the course of European history.

          Of course, it kind of relies on a revisionist interpretation of Stalin’s Russia, which is debatable.

    • Lucy Lipinska

      As I was born and bred in Poland (live in Sweden since decades) I know quite a deal about the German danger. This however is a complicated matter, as Jews seem to have played both sides. Poland’s elite was back then dominated by Jews after all (Marshalk Edward Rydz-Smigly was a useful Pole-moron but the secretary of the state, (((Jozef Beck))) definitely wasn’t an idiot.

      • Vitchyovski

        I was referring specifically to the Ustashe and Nazi-allied Ukrainians when I said ‘Slavic useful idiots’. Those people were willing to throw all other Slavs under the German bus in their deluded hope that they’d get a seat on it as equals.

        The reason I mentioned Poland specifically is because it was in Poland that the anti-Slavic nature of Nazism was seen and cannot be denied or covered up in an “anti-Communist” facade. When the Nazis decided to move East against the Russians with the expectation of a British partnership (instead of the reverse), then Communism or no Communism, Slavs were enemy no.2. I guess it can be argued that the Nazis only made this decision in the first place because the Russians were Communist, but this is where historical “what ifs” become messy because:
        1- It should be noted that Russia only fell into Communist hands because of problems directly related to WWI (Germans, both in Germany and Austria were the enemy here, and Hitler’s service in WWI and his upbringing in the Autro-Hungarian Empire had a large influence on his views, especially on foreign policy)
        2- Germans were the ones that sent Lenin to Russia in the hopes of destabilizing it in the first place
        3- For better or worse, Russia was as a fact red at that point in time, and the rest of the Slavic world soon followed, as could be expected. Do I think it would have been better if the reds never took power, and if instead something else happened? Of coarse. Something like a Slavic NS would have been great. But this is not what happened. The Slavs got stuck under the red banner whether they liked it or not, and they were going to live or die under it.

        Now, the pro-Nazi argument, accepting those premises, expects Slavs to willingly have allowed themselves to be exterminated so that Communism could be exterminated. I would categorically reject this because I think it is not worth it, to put it lightly. If Slavic existence means Communism, then I’ll take that instead of a (((red)))-free world of happy Germans with no Slavs in it. Far from ideal, but if the rest of the white world has to suffer the nasty effects of Communism for the sake of Slavic survival, I’m willing to support that.

        I would accept the claim that Germanic and Slavic interest here were simply at odds; it was brutal and nasty, but was what it was. Fine. But I can’t tolerate claims made by non-Slavs that Nazism was in Slavic interest too if only not for Communism, because it clearly was not, and I find that sort of duplicity extremely unappealing, and is why I mentioned Poland, because if these claims were true, then Poland wouldn’t have been treated the way it was by the Germans. I guess one could say Poland was just an exception to rather than part of a wider Nazi anti-Slavic program, but I would want more proof for this assertion, and considering the damage inflicted on the Slavs by the Nazis (ignoring the damages Communism inflicted on Slavs), it would have to be very, very convincing.

      • Vitchyovski

        I wrote a long reply to you further explaining what I meant, but it was “detected as spam” and removed.

        • Lucy Lipinska

          Thank you, Mr Vitchyovski. I actually have received your insightful reply.

        • Better Dead Than Red

          Great reply, BTW.

        • orbit

          just make a new account. Once you trigger Disqus’s spam filter, your posts will start randomly be getting detected as spam until its impossible to use anymore.
          just copy and paste your post again, you dont even have to change it.

          btw, as per your original post, most on the alt-right have an extremely simplistic view of WW2 which has been molded by retarded revisionists. anything bad said about Hitler is Jewish propaganda. He didn’t want to destroy and enslave the peoples of the East, he was protecting the “white race” against Jews.. lol. seriously. im not sure if people actually believe this garbage or if, like you said, they are actually practicing ethnic favoritism themselves if they are from germanic stock and consider Russians/poles etc to be expendable anyway

          • Vitchyovski

            Upon further reflection, I think the divide is also a Euro-American one. American-raised White nationalists tend to deal with WWII in a rather abstract way. With the exception of Pearl Harbor and the troops that were shipped overseas, Americans were rather removed from the war. This is in radical contrast to Europeans who had armed enemy troops just outside their front door. In many places in Europe to this day you can still see the bullet holes in many residential buildings (the ones that survived destruction). I think American distance to the war, as opposed to the European proximity to it, is partially responsible for the difference in attitudes as well.

            As for ethnic favoritism -I totally understand that. I can’t hold it against them because I agree with them in principle. You know, don’t hate the player, hate the game sort of thing. What I won’t let slide however is when they try and pass off their subjective interests as an objective truth that is binding on all. That is what (((they))) do.

            I probably will make a new account.

          • orbit

            yes you are 100% right. WW2 is abstract for them. time, and distance. 20 year old American burger kids watch “the greatest story never told” and think the Nazis should have won the war because Hitler was just misunderstood. facepalm
            thats what happens in extreme politics. everything becomes black and white.

          • As for ethnic favoritism -I totally understand that. I can’t hold it against them because I agree with them in principle.

            This is the essence of nationalism: enlightened, universal xenophobia.

  • alex i

    That’s because nowadays the Western Left supports anyone who is anti-Russian. In Ukraine they chose to prop up the Ukrainian nationalistic groups that were created during WW2 and used to collaborate with the German Nazis in their fight against the Soviets. That’s why people in Moscow complained about the “Nazi goverment” in Ukraine.

    • Hagarqim

      before one re-writes History you have to destroy it first… The puppets at the EU have come up with this notion that the state does not exists, hence there are no boarders and the story which formed those same boarders which were formed by the same people who protected them!

  • snowwhite’s creepydwarf

    Well done.

  • Klas2

    Amazing article. Thank you.

  • Ris_Eruwaedhiel

    I wish that Mr. Hood has his own blog. I would be happy if he wrote a piece every day.

  • Cascadia

    I doubt all that stuff about your personal experiences is true but it was at least entertaining to read.

  • spirild2

    Important article. For all ages.

  • Ajudeo

    And what Family is devoid of Conflict and Rivalry?

    We’re Human Beings……..

    If a Twin Double of Myself was created by some Futuristic Biotechnology Company…….

    I’d fight with Myself……

    In fact, I do fight with Myself right now…..

    And thankfully so……

    Ha!!

  • One Man’s Chorus

    This is first rate stuff!

  • Literally Gerbils

    This piece, No More Brothers’ Wars, by Mr Hood, should be carefully read, re-read, and taught to our children.

  • Diversity Heretic

    Very good piece by Greg Hood, as usual. I’ve been living in Moscow for almost a year now and I have never been the subject of any hostility from Russians, even those who know that I am an American. I couldn’t blame a Russian for harboring hostility towards Americans, given the nearly-demented anti-Russian propaganda emanating from the U.S. media and government.

    Greg is right–somehow we need to get the message out that Euroeans simply cannot afford any more brother’s wars. We’ve just become too good at killing each other; the casualties of World Wars I and II, in the European Theater, were staggering. I think at this stage European and European-origin peoples are less than 10% of humanity. To fight among ourselves under such circumstances is pure madness! The Celt, the Teuton, the Slav don’t have to be friends, but the need to learn to get along and resolve differences peacefully.

    Greg may be right that a confrontation with Russia may occur in Syria, which is, of course, of no vital strategic interest to the U.S., but into which Israel has dragged the U.S. due partially to Jewish influence and a gentile culture that is astoundingly philo-semitic. I just hope that the consequences aren’t nuclear–those weapons are really scary. (I talked to old-timers at the Department of Energy who had seen atmospheric tests.) Perhaps a defeat of U.S. forces in Syria could be the catalyst for a purging of the Deep State, although it’s a strange feeling to be hoping for the defeat of “our” armed forces. But I console myself with the observation that the U.S. armed forces are only the tool of the government–they no longer protect the genuine American nation.

    Finally, Greg–stay out of dangerous situations if you can! You’re too valuable! Your message: No more brothers’ wars, needs to be disseminated more widely.

    • Lucy Lipinska

      @Diversity Heretic, than you for an excellent comment on this excellent piece of work by Greg Hood.

    • Dave Overman

      Russians are truly some of the only true Europeans left.

      • silviosilver ✓ᵀʳᵘᵐᵖ ˢᵘᵖᵖᵒʳᵗᵉʳ

        What makes them such “true Europeans”? From what I can tell, they’re savagely self-interested petty nationalists who betray nary a hint of giving a damn about the wider racial grouping they belong to. I fail to see how encouraging such attitudes is beneficial to white interests. It simply makes no sense to encourage petty nationalism and then be shocked to see one group of Europeans baying for the blood of another group of Europeans.

        • Marshall Lentini

          Alt-right kids are every bit as monstrous as the “SJWs” they abhor. Petty, fanatical, and utterly sterile human beings, living in a bubble.

      • orbit

        I’ve been living in Moscow for almost a year now and I have never been the subject of any hostility from Russians, even those who know that I am an American

        yeah? go up to some skinheads at 2 am and start talking English to them and check back with us

        • Baby Shoes

          Probably Jew propaganda just to discourage our people.

  • Stephen McCourt

    As an example of idiotic Brother Wars, consider the Orange parades currently taking place in Northern Ireland and Scotland: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GVFS-3Y051c

    • Robert Bruce

      Scots are basically Irish for the most part. One of my ancestors briefly held the title of king of Ireland for about a year or two before they executed him. I guess the Bruce and co were really waging one helluva war over there and were wreaking havoc, virtually destroying Ireland in the process, thus, along with other issues poor Edward got beheaded and drawn and quartered, etc.

      • Percival Ruggles

        You’re mistaken I’m afraid. Only the Highland Scots are essentially Irish. Lowland “Scots” are of Anglo-Saxon/Norman and Welsh origin. Lowland Scots make up about 90% of the population.

        Lowlanders:

        http://en.metapedia.org/wiki/Lowland_Scots

        Highlanders:

        http://en.metapedia.org/wiki/Highland_Scots

        As for the Northern Irish (Ulster Scots), they are Lowland Scots and Northern English people that colonized Ulster during the Plantation period after the north of Ireland had been ravaged and depopulated by war.

        Even the surname of your pseudonym is Anglo-Norman in origin. It came to the Lowlands probably during the time of the Davidian revolution.

        https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Davidian_Revolution

        Notice how in the Lowlands, the overwhelming majority of surnames are Anglo-Saxon/Norman. Meanwhile, you see most of the Gaelic names in the Highlands. https://uploads.disquscdn.com/images/0ded819c8460cd7badb6b848754338866a176428316fd5b546c7962e93bfe64f.png

        • Robert Bruce

          Thanks for the correction. I didn’t know the
          Anglo Saxons made up that high percentage of the Scottish population.

          • Percival Ruggles

            I didn’t know myself for quite sometime.

        • Stephen McCourt

          Both Ireland and Scotland have political parties with “National” or “Nationalist” in their title, yet all are SJW Kalergi fanatics. When I was young – 1980’s mid 1990’s – to see an African was still very rare, now their are black no-go zones forming. The Scottish “National” Party have an objective of making 25% of the population non-white immigrants. They even want to give sanctuary to all of Africa’s homosexuals………unbelievable.

  • Jarod

    Fantastic article, but what the hell is a ‘blonde Muslim’?

    • silviosilver ✓ᵀʳᵘᵐᵖ ˢᵘᵖᵖᵒʳᵗᵉʳ

      A muslim with blond hair, which do exist. Look up reality some time, it’s all there.

      • Jarod

        Islam hasn’t infested my city yet. I plan on keeping it that way.
        Enjoy your blonde muslim.

        • silviosilver ✓ᵀʳᵘᵐᵖ ˢᵘᵖᵖᵒʳᵗᵉʳ

          It’s not got nothing to do with “infecting” anyone’s city. It’s just a fact that such people have existed for a very long time. You don’t have to like them (I don’t), but to act astonished at the phrase a “blonde muslim” betrays some pretty sever ignorance of the world, doncha think?

      • Marshall Lentini

        I remember the first one I saw, a Bosniak in France. They’re usually Bosniaks. The blond Pathans don’t get out much. The Amazigh are also all over France, though it’s usually the males who exhibit blondism (beautiful specimens in fact) . There’s really a greater tendency to red hair overall, in my opinion.

  • orbit

    good article