David Irving – Lessons from History

Will Wright

I have recently begun reading David Irving’s book, Goebbels – Mastermind of the Third Reich. This book is 533 pages and I have currently read 140 pages. I am trying to rush my way through it, among what else I have to do, including my other reading.

Why am I reading this book? Is it of any value? Well, I have always been interested in history. So is this a self-indulgent activity? Up to a point. It is history, about a foreign country a hundred years ago. In many ways Germany is, and was, a very different country to the United Kingdom. So much of life was very different a hundred years ago.

Bearing that in mind then, are there any lessons to be learned by modern British Nationalists? Yes. David Irving is inspirational. The lengths he has gone to in order to uncover the information that he needed to create this book. The hurdles that he had to clear. The lengths which the organised international Jewish community went to in order to crush Irving’s efforts. The Jews do not want you to read any of David Irving’s books. Doesn’t that make any truly enquiring mind want to know what is in those books that World Jewry fears?

Irving’s own life story is about intellectual rigour, a terrific work rate, and the courage and bloody-mindedness to persist against powerful enemies. That should be a lesson for everyone. But what about the subject of the book? Joseph Goebbels was a thinking man. That is why the book is subtitled Mastermind of the Third Reich. He too worked very hard. He too had a lot of courage. That is moral courage as well as sheer physical courage. He was a physically small man with a crippling physical disability. One that caused him constant pain. Yet he regularly placed himself in very dangerous situations for the Nazi cause – not least by attending a staggering number of very violent political meetings.

Irving tells us:

The tide of political violence was rising. Eighty-six Nazis were murdered during 1932; Goebbels alone lost seven men, and the police seldom caught the murderers.

The killing of fifteen-year-old Herbert Norkus was particularly nasty. He and five pals had been distributing leaflets early one Sunday morning when they were overwhelmed by communists. The body of Norkus, son of a working-class Nazi from Plotzensee, was found in the entrance hall of No. 4 Zwingli Strasse, where he had bled to death from six stab wounds. Goebbels personally inspected the scene with its twenty-yard trail of dried blood and the one bloody handprint on the whitewashed wall. After going on to the morgue he wrote these words in his newspaper: “There in the bleak grey twilight a yellowing childish face stares with half-open, empty eyes. The delicate features have been trampled to a bloody pulp.” The next day he buried the artist Professor Ernst Schwarz, an SA officer gunned down in a communist ambush a week before.

Anyone who combines intellectual brilliance, industriousness, and courage should be an example to British Nationalists. Because so many people in Britain today are not at all intellectual, nor do they even behave intelligently. A great many people are lazy, selfish, and materialistic. On top of that, they are cowardly. And then they do not understand why they do not succeed.

This blog recently posted a review of an article written by Simon Heffer, written by veteran British Nationalist Martin Webster. Simon Heffer is intelligent and well-educated. As a senior and prominent journalist he must know all sorts of information that the general public does not. But like almost all Conservative types he appears to put self-interest and self-preservation above speaking out about what he must know has happened and is happening.

A big reason that modern Britain is in the mess that it is, is because of people like Simon Heffer. They should be providing our national leadership against decline, corruption, and foreign subversion. People like him will only go so far when writing or speaking about what is wrong with the country. Those people will never speak out against Jewish power. Britain’s current race and immigration problems (and much else) are a result of Jewish-led policies over a long period of decades. Anyone who does not think so has obviously never read the books of Kevin MacDonald.

Rarely, an established journalist such as Peter Oborne, comments on “Britain’s Israel Lobby” and they suffer the downturn in their career as a result. But this is very much a rarity.

Jews, politically-correct leftists and those who ‘go with the flow’ usually work very hard. They are now the ones with political power because of their efforts in the past. How do any British Nationalists expect to succeed if they are uninformed and poorly read, lazy, and cowardly? Life does not just throw up changed circumstances – those have to be worked for – and usually, fought for.

British Nationalists –
Should we be pessimistic or optimistic?


Will Wright

Optimism floats

Optimism floats while pessimism sinks. You are unlikely to win at anything if you do not believe that you can, and will, win. Probably for this reason, some people believe that it is still better to be optimistic, even if you are later proved to be wrong, than to be pessimistic and then be proved right. And there are British Nationalists who think that they would rather go down proclaiming that they are right, even in defeat.

A part of modern political warfare appears to be psychological. You need to properly convince your own followers that you can win. But you also need to convince your enemies that their defeat is inevitable. That is what our enemies are doing: they are trying to convince racial nationalists that we cannot win.

Enemy propaganda suggests that British Nationalists are a small minority now and always will be. When George Galloway interviewed Martin Webster on the RT television channel, repatriation of non-Whites was discussed. Galloway asked, “But it is too late now, isn’t it?” Martin replied that London’s Blacks “are not happy here”.

A viewer asked Nigel Farage, on GB News, whether ‘Woke’ could ever be defeated. Farage replied that “Of course it can! The political pendulum swings back and forth. Political fashions change”.

Optimism is important. Of course, it is easier to be optimistic if you enjoy good health and are reasonably physically fit. Young people especially should be optimistic. It is downright evil when young people are encouraged to commit suicide by some internet propagandists.

Optimism is a good starting point. But political crusaders should also know what it is that they want to achieve. We should know what a British Nationalist victory will look like. Because it is hard to score a goal if you don’t know where the goalposts are. It is hard to hit a target if you don’t know where the target is. We need to know our ideology. Leaders should also have a strategy for winning political power, because that is the aim of all realistic politics.

Enemies of our British Nationalist cause?

If we need to be optimistic, then is everyone within our ranks who sows the seeds of pessimism an internal enemy of sorts, intentionally or otherwise? Is everyone who wants to change our ideology an enemy? The short answer to both these questions seems to be yes.

We need to believe that we can win. We need to believe that policies such as repatriation are moderate and necessary and must win mainstream support. We need to know what we are aiming for. Anyone who deliberately interferes with either our morale, or our ideological principles, is hurting our cause.

But I think our optimism should be tempered by realism. That we have to face facts. We have to deal with the world as it really is, not as we would like it to be. We have to face unpalatable truths – about our country, and about our movement.

Bad ideas can be defeated. Both Karl Marx and Sigmund Freud have gone out of fashion. Their ideas are now discredited. Now we need to see the ideas of Franz Boas defeated. The man who told us that there is no such thing as Race. We need to see the ideas of the Frankfurt School defeated. The group that gave the world political correctness. Cultural Marxism is a greater evil than the original Communism from which it sprang.

If we are optimistic about defeating bad ideas, then what about the race problem? When racial minorities were a small number of people they could have been comparatively easily repatriated. Larger numbers of racial foreigners will present a greater problem. They could still be repatriated, but over a longer period of time. Provided that a reasonably big majority of the indigenous population are supportive of the idea.

But the larger the alien presence, the harder it is to remove. That is why our enemies want open borders and miscegenation. Provided that most White people don’t interbreed with non-Whites, then repatriation is, in theory, always possible.

Even a White minority population, in our own country, could conceivably win, even if this is highly unlikely. This couldn’t be done democratically, at that point.

The only way that racial nationalism could be permanently defeated is if the British population became almost totally of mixed race through inter-racial breeding. That is why this evil idea is being continually plugged in our television advertising and tv dramas etc.

A new threat is identified

Edward Dutton writes that our population is becoming increasingly of a lower intelligence. He adds that this process has been happening now for over two hundred years. He is writing about the indigenous population, quite apart from any low intelligence immigrants now here. Those of you who want to know why and how this has happened should read his book mentioned in a previous post.

If British Nationalists were in power, then we could take steps to reverse this. But when we are a small political minority, we cannot. But a low intelligence country (however that happens) is ripe for invasion. This is an alarming problem. Especially with a resurgent China that is resentful against us because of the imperial era. Chinese conquerors are not likely to treat us well.

Is Dutton a pessimist for mentioning the decline in the intelligence of the national population? No. He is sounding the alarm. British Nationalists should be aware of this. If civilisations have always risen and then fallen as a law of nature because of the process that Edward Dutton describes then this is hardly Dutton’s fault. But we could take steps to reverse this, or at least slow things down.

Time is against us. We should still not be afraid to know what the threats to our survival are. But we must believe in the potential for a racial nationalist victory. We must spread our ideas in order to make that possible, when the time is right.

Express Group now openly promoting the English Defence League

Martin Webster*

This blog post was first published in Professor Kevin MacDonald’s The Occidental Observer on February 10, 2011. A link to that site is under ‘Friendly Sites’ to the right of this page.

The promotion which the billionaire Zionist Jew Richard Desmond is giving to the English Defence League via the Express Group component of his ever-growing media empire would seem to challenge the ‘official’ position of the Board of Deputies of British Jews and its Community Security Trust that Zionist-Jewry in Britain is firmly opposed to the EDL and its ‘Islamophobic’ policies. An article in Desmond’s Daily Star (“EDL to go political“), touts the electoral prospects of the EDL and reports results of a phone poll finding that 98% of Daily Star readers agree with EDL policies.

Desmond has always been a bit of a maverick. He built his fortune on pornography before selling up to raise the capital to buy the Express Group, which includes the Daily Express, the Sunday Express and the Daily Star. Last year he bought Channel 5 TV. Recently he withdrew his publications from the Press Complaints Commission, to which all major national and small local newspaper groups belong.

But his backing of the EDL should not be seen a genuine split within the Jewry.

Throughout history, wherever they have settled, the Jews have not been bothered by the concept of a principled, unified and consistent approach to any issue — except one: the survival and advancement of the Jews. In all other matters they are entirely morally pragmatic and often deliberately contradictory.

Thus it is that they want to promote immigration and race-mixing among non-Jews in Britain — and indeed among all White European peoples and nations — but also want to make Britain an uncomfortable place for Muslims, except those who are willing both to accommodate themselves to the Jewish domination of Britain’s ‘Establishment’ and abandon the Palestinians to Israel’s genocidal ethnic cleansing.

So they operate a ‘Good Cop, Bad Cop’ routine which confuses the Goyim, be they indigenous Anglo-Saxon-Celtic British, or any one of several hundred varieties of ethnic aliens who have been encouraged (by the Jews) to invade and settle in our homeland since WW2.

P.S.: In connection with Jewish backing of the EDL, you might care to check out this video:

It’s is a short clip from the speech given by the EDL’s religious advisor, Rabbi Nachum Shiffren. In this, during a ‘Freudian slip’, he blurts out the truth concerning Jewish racism. I think he gave this speech at the EDL’s pro-Israel rally held last year outside the Israeli Embassy in Kensington, London.

A week before that rally the EDL held an anti-Muslim rally in Leicester and the “anti-fascist” rabble led by Searchlight mobilised against it. For some reason Searchlight did not mobilise its supporters against the EDL’s pro-Zionist, pro-Jewish rally outside the Israeli Embassy. I e-mailed Searchlight via its web site to ask why. Guess what? I didn’t get a reply!

*Martin Webster (email him) has been a racial-nationalist activist in Britain since he was an 18 year old in 1961. From 1969 until 1983 he was National Activities Organiser of the National Front and a member of its National Directorate. In 1973 he was the first nationalist in Britain (pre- or post-WW2) to “save a deposit” (then set at 12.5%, currently set at 5%) in a parliamentary election when he won 16.02% of the poll at West Bromwich in 1973. Since 1983 he has not associated with any political organisation. He issues occasional e-bulletins to a world-wide circle of friends (and some enemies).