tWn_The_Heretics_Hour_20130708.mp3
(27.47 MB)
July 8, 2013
The controversy over the word “Nazi” rages on–as to whether it is a Jewish-invented epithet against the dignity of National-Socialism which should never be used, or simply a shortened form that was coined and used by the National-Socialists themselves. Carolyn uses examples to show that it is the latter, and also makes clear that “Nazi” has no relation at all to "Ashkenazi" Jews (the word said to have derived from Ashkenaz, a grandson of Noah in the Bible).
The 19th Century German Volkish Nationalism movement and how it culminated in the Third Reich is also looked at, including some of the “misunderstandings” of its aims.
- 1368 views
Comments (1)
Original comments on this program
carolyn
27 Responses
katana
July 9, 2013 at 9:23 am
Another good podcast Carolyn.
Regarding the first hour’s topic on the origins of the term ‘Nazi’ and whether we should use it or not, I agree with your line of thinking. If the NS used the term themselves then that really settles it. The separate issue about ‘Nazi’ coming from ‘ashkenazi’ is on the face of it, bizarre.
There’s also the argument that since our jew media uses ‘Nazi’ constantly with a evil meaning attached to it then we shouldn’t use it. Even if we go along with the idea that it was a jew word from the start (which it wasn’t), why should it stop us from rehabilitating it, co-opting it by using it with a positive meaning?
By not using the world-wide known word ‘Nazi’ and insisting on it being ‘National Socialism’ we end up in a ridiculous, time wasting, distracting semantic game like something out of Monty Python, …
J: You’re a Nazi!
NS: No, I’m not. I’m a National Socialist!
J: A Nazi in others words!
NS: No, a National Socialist in the same words!
J: Admit it! You’re a Nazi!
NS: You’re a Jew!
J: You’re a stinking NAZI!
NS: You’re a stinking JEW!
and so on ….
[apologies to Monty Python]
Given that the label ‘Nazi’ has such sticking ‘brand’ power, compliments of the jew media, let’s slowly but surely reclaim it and associate it as a positive label. That in reality the Nazis were actually the good guys while the brainwashed American and British goys fought for international jewish evil, killing tens of millions of goys on all sides in the process.
Markus
July 9, 2013 at 10:41 am
-Here is a study work on the term Nazi: (I don’t know if you read it already)
http://justice4germans.com/2013/04/16/exposing-the-nazi-epithet-who-started-it-why-how-and-who-benefits/
-Stalinist Soviets really always referred to Fascists and not National Socialists. Stalin’s Victory Speech demonstrates this.
-Ashkenaz & Togarmah
I didn’t say Ashkenaz’ brother was the father of non-Whites, but of the Turcic people including the Khazars, as I have read it on various reference pages. It is also not my opinion that Ashkenaz was the father of the Germanic people, but I found this on various reference pages. If Germanic included other White peoples (Slavic, Romanic, possibly Persian and others) in the original meaning, I don’t know but it could be, since German originally referred to “blood relation” (more what we call Germanic now, possibly Aryan) and not exclusively to the German political (or cultural) entity in Central Europe, what is now known as Germany or Greater Germany.
So, as Katana thinks this idea is bizarre, I don’t. Nazi may not stem from Ashkenazi, but it would not contradict either, since Ashkenazi means German. Ashkenazi Jew means German Jew. Ashkenazi by itself means German only and has nothing to do with Jews.
Carolyn
July 9, 2013 at 10:52 am
A point that I missed (which came to mind this morning) is that Nazi is not a proper name, in the sense of the name of the Party, nor should it be used that way. It’s a “shortcut” word. The Socialists would never have referred to their party as the Sozi Party, nor would National Socialists call theirs the Nazi Party. Nazi (the German pronunciation of Nati – the first two syllables of National) was mostly used to refer to the members or adherents, eg. “the plaza was filled with Nazis,” or “we are Nazis.” Currently there is an American Nazi Party which bills itself as the successor of George Lincoln Rockwell’s American Nazi Party. Should they not be using that name? I think they should not and, considering some of the statements of their leader, they are not following too closely in the footsteps of GLR or the NSDAP. Rockwell reportedly said he was going to change the name of his party, that he used it originally for its attention-grabbing power. In any event, it may have added to some of the confusion.
Katana is right that it is such a powerful word that we should not hand it over to our enemies, but retain it and reclaim its true meaning. At the same time, we should not get carried away throwing the word Nazi around. We can use the original National Socialists as an example.
John
July 9, 2013 at 11:46 am
I found this on SF, but I’m sure Hadding knows the facts of how the term “Nazi” came into being. I think we should always refer to ourselves as National Socialusts and not “Nazi”.
————————
The term Nazi comes from the full political group’s name, Nationalsozialistische Deutsche Arbeiterpartei. Specifically, it uses the first two heavily-stressed syllibles in the name. Nationalsozialistische, forming the abbreviation Nazi.
Party members rarely referred to themselves as Nazis, and instead used the official term, Nationalsozialisten (National Socialists). The word mirrors the term Sozi, a common and slightly derogatory term for members of the Social Democratic Party of Germany (Sozialdemokratische Partei Deutschlands). When Adolf Hitler took power, the use of the term Nazi almost disappeared from Germany, although it was still used by opponents in Austria.
In Austria, Nazi was favored among opponents of National Socialism because the nickname Nazi (from the masc. proper name Ignatz, Ger. form of Ignatius) was used colloquially to mean “a foolish person, clumsy or awkward person.” Ignatz was a popular name in Catholic Austria, and according to one source, in WWI, Nazi was a generic name in the German Empire for the soldiers of Austria-Hungary.
The use of Nazi Germany, Nazi regime, etc., was popularized by German exiles abroad.
Carolyn
July 9, 2013 at 1:39 pm
John – I’m kind of tired of hearing about “Ignatz” as though that really has anything directly to do with the word Nazi. And I would like to know what this “one source” is [according to one source, it says]. This paragraph is repeated often, word for word; I guess people think it makes them look well-informed.
Here’s a new comment at Scrapbookpages Blog by “Black Rabbit of Inle”
Here’s just two examples of the term ‘Nazi’ being used in Goebbel’s Der Angriff in 1934:
http://fotos.fotoflexer.com/755ff1360657502cd51b1a52e180fcdf.jpg
http://fotos.fotoflexer.com/fd6ea3b3afb4e9aeae5710706606a979.jpg
(I got these off a microfilm and have many more)
Markus
July 9, 2013 at 3:20 pm
The two linked “Nazi” articles don’t explain any self-description for National Socialist in itsself. It could also be used in a rather humerous way to portray the “alien Nazi” in Palestina.
Like a Jew might write a story about a “Kike” in NS Germany/Czarist Russia or a European might write a story about a “long nose” in China. Or a Latino might write a story about a “wetback” in Texas to explain his situation.
Carolyn
July 9, 2013 at 4:26 pm
Gosh, we find here the same wording on Konrad Heiden and Ignatz. Fancy meeting them again. And still no source. Where does it document that Heiden “invented” or “started” using Nazi as an epithet before anyone else? And note there is not a single footnote on this Wiki page, yet justice4germans quotes it in full.
Justice4germans takes everything in this article directly from various Metapedia and Wikipedia pages. That doesn’t really make for an expose’.
Okay, he’s the father of the Turcic people according to your “various reference pages.” Please refrain from posting things you find on various reference pages, with no identification, in these comments. We are not in need of this kind of “help.”
Ashkenazi is a Hebrew word but has nothing to do with Jews. This is why so much of what you write doesn’t make sense, and doesn’t make a point. It goes round in circles. You and Dana.
Carolyn
July 9, 2013 at 4:56 pm
It was a serious endeavor. Sponsored by the government. I did a whole radio program on it (http://carolynyeager.net/heretics-hour-disinformation-internet-part-one), and about the medals (not coins as some have called them) that were made as a promotional gimmick. Why would the party or NS government agency use a “jew-invented word?” Which is what the story you linked to tells us.
Markus
July 9, 2013 at 5:21 pm
Carolyn,
יְהוּדֵי אַשְׁכֲּנַז Y’hudey Ashkenaz, “The Jews of Germania”)
http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ashkenazi_Jews
(you can google Ashkenaz & Togarmah in more sophisticated lexicons as well, it says the same thing).
I will leave it to this, as emotions get in the way now).
Markus
July 9, 2013 at 5:53 pm
One last thing, the German MayDay medal of 1934. Are Nazis Communists after all if these medals are the source of wisdom now?
http://www.coinpeople.com/index.php/topic/20376-tag-der-arbeit-1934/
Carolyn
July 9, 2013 at 6:56 pm
Markus,
You are really misunderstanding what I am objecting to. You seem not to be able to follow a line of argument. Yes, Ashkenaz is a Hebrew word meaning German. A Hebrew word, the Hebes connect it to German. Not the Germans! So who cares what they say or how they use it. Obviously you do.
Nationalsozialisten (and varients) is German. From this, it has already been explained how we get Nazi. There is no connection between the two, but you WANT to think so. Go ahead, but I won’t post anything more from you on this.
Carolyn
July 9, 2013 at 7:14 pm
Now you’re worried about the medals. I did not even bring up the word ‘Nazi’ on the Palestina trip medal [added 7-10: It was brought into the discussion here by the justice4germans article you linked to], and I’m not saying it proves anything. But it does show that they were not averse to using the word when it fit. And Goebbel’s WAS aware of these stories in Der Angriff. He kept up with ALL publications; he had to, he was responsible for them.
“if these medals are the source of wisdom now?” … source of wisdom?? You once again bring in something new to confuse the issue. This medal comparison sheds no light. In fact, it does the same as bringing up that Ashkenaz was the grandson of Noah – adds nothing.
James Bodge
July 9, 2013 at 11:07 pm
Hey Carolyn,
Great show! I agree totally with your analysis. I guess it’s because I have been studying this for a while. I used to believe that nazi’s were zionists and mostly jewish so listening to people like Daryl Bradford Smith it sounded so logical a couple of years ago. Like you said “it sounds good” well unfortunately i was fooled for a while by disinfo agents like him. Maybe agent is a little guessy but supposedly someone that is so “jew wise” and who should have a brain would know that it is nonsense because i have only studied this for four years and he has for at least the last eight.
Speaking of this, I know it is kind of off topic but it is a huge problem that needs to be solved or i don’t think we will go anywhere. I have a huge beef with some of the letters i hear from certain shows like for example, last week, someone wrote into a pro white radio channel stating, and i quote, “and acting like a neo-nazi nut job”, now i know that there are some out there, if you are a white person and you are calling everyone that supports the nazi’s, in my opinion one of the greatest if not the best white civilizations ever created, it is so asinine and ridiculous. Maybe its because they are new, but i think the biggest problem for people is that they listen to all of these disinfo agents. The reason i say disinfo is because i can’t believe that someone that has done a show for as long as DBS or TPC, they have to know. They have to!!
That is why i get so mad at the radio show hosts. Unlike the letter writer who wants to know the truth, he gets directed into saying something as logical as “um, yeah i like Jesus, but i hate the bible” it is idiotic, but people believe what they hear. I found this out, fortunately, from you, but also from reading, and unfortunately people don’t read, well you need to, because if you read enough sources you can arrive at a pretty high percentage of truth, maybe not 100% in history that is impossible to me, even diaries can be manipulated, especially nazi diaries, i heard that hugh trevor-roper’s is highly questionable, mr. david irving has pointed some of that out, even though he is wrong about some things too, but reading different views you can come up with a pretty high amount of truth, but people won’t get it if they don’t read because the interent is full of nazi disinfo!
When i found out the truth about hitler and germany in this 20′s 30′s and 40s it hit me harder than 911, because i could tell who most of the shills were in the truth movement. Since i found the truth on this great era in white history, i knew why this subject had the most mis and disinfo on the internet, because they know that Hitler and the Nazi’s program is the only way that we can beat the jewish and i believe masonic/illuminati enemy, white’s uniting and forming their own government with a leader that actually keeps his word.
Sorry this is so long, i need to vent because this blatant (in my book) disinfo makes people hate their own people without them even knowing it, and not only that, they think they are getting the truth and they are following the judas goat, oh well, but people like the two on the politcal cesspool, who supposedly supports white people, down nazis too, if you don’t believe me i can find the file, it was not mike edwards though, it was keith alexander. I think since they are either forced not to say good things about the nazis or they are just liars, they are not on my side.
In conclusion, we as white nationalists who know the truth, should be more like TOTAL FASCISM’s Andrew Anglin. He is exposing the people that are shills, but there are so many. It is getting on my nerves so i am going to start one soon, with this stuff because i believe andrew doesn’t know how bad it is, but its awful, especially with proud white people, and if you are really pro white, as a show host with all this experience, and if i hear you say it i am going to start exposing you because this is a poison for our people.
James Bodge
July 9, 2013 at 11:31 pm
sorry about they typos, i meant at the end of the message, “that if you say this kind of disinfo, i am going to start exposing you because i believe that this is a poison for white people.
katana
July 10, 2013 at 9:50 am
I’m interested in Hadding’s take on this ‘Nazi’ term. Can you chime in?
Thanks if you do.
John
July 11, 2013 at 2:39 am
I got such a laugh when you said you were thinking that you wanted to talk about something that was in your heart, and what came to mind? “National Socialists”!
I thought the words before you said them – who’da thunk it!
My first time commenting. Just want to say you’re a very dear lady and I enjoy all of your podcasts as well as learn a lot from them.
Will Williams
July 12, 2013 at 10:45 am
katana: “There’s also the argument that since our jew media uses ‘Nazi’ constantly with a evil meaning attached to it then we shouldn’t use it.”
—
Whatever its origins “our” Jew media use the “Nazi” buzz word like a weapon to marginalize us hapless goyim, out of the gate, to shut down anything we have to say to our people that’s opposed to race-mixing, queers, Jews and other non-Whites in our midst.
Hadding did write something about how we should refer to NS as National-Socialist, in full, like that, with the hyphen. He was even successful in convincing Dr. MacDonald to quit allowing the use of “Nazi” as an epithet in his online Occidental Observer comments. I don’t see what he wrote at his blog, but in searching for it found this article from three months ago at the Justice4Germans blog: http://justice4germans.com/2013/04/16/exposing-the-nazi-epithet-who-started-it-why-how-and-who-benefits/ Several sources at the end besides the Wiki ones.
This is how Dr. Pierce advised his mostly American National Alliance members to deal with the terms “Nazi” and “neo-Nazi”:
4.g.v.10. Nazis and neo-Nazis:
Inevitably, every member who engages in public activity, so that he is recognized publicly as a member, will be asked, “Are you a Nazi?”
So how does a member answer the question? If he wants to give a meaningful answer, he must know what is in the mind of his interrogator: What is his interrogator’s understanding of “Nazi”? If it’s a Politically Correct bigot [...] the member is perfectly correct in answering, “No, I am not a Nazi and the National Alliance is not a Nazi organization.”
Suppose, however, that the person asking the question is a potential recruit, someone with an open mind who really wants to understand our beliefs and goals. In this case we are obliged to explore the question more deeply, and in so doing we may have an opportunity to use one of the catchiest ideas of all: the idea of National Socialism.
Hadding
July 12, 2013 at 11:52 am
I have never seen an original publication of the NSDAP that used “Nazi” instead of National-Socialist. This was a word used in Western news-reports but not in National-Socialist publications.
An obvious motive for using this nickname instead of the proper name is that it omits any indication of what National-Socialism was about. It becomes easier to misrepresent the doctrine as unregulated capitalism and anti-labor (which leftists today still say) if one doesn’t have to deal with the word socialism in the name. “Nazi” in itself is gibberish that conveys no meaning, and thus could be molded by propagandists into whatever they wanted it to be.
Today, that “nazi” is used as a word of attack because of the stereotypes that propaganda has attached to it.
National-Socialist, by contrast, carries very little emotional baggage, because Anglo-American and Jewish propaganda have rarely used that term. When somebody calls you a nazi, he is automatically making a load of accusations and applying a caricature. If he calls you a national-socialist, there is no caricature or inherent accusation in that.
Here is an example of how much difference that word makes. On The Occidental Observer’s blog, I had at times to endure sniping from BUGSters. The BUGSters’ rules tell them to use emotional;y loaded words, to try to stimulate an irrational response in their favor. I understood that this was what BUGSter Jason Speaks was trying to do with his constant use of that word in his nonstop sniping at me. His rhetoric for attacking me revolved entirely around that word and the stereotypes associated with it. When Professor MacDonald banned that word from TOO at my request, Jason Speaks was left empty-handed, because if he had tried to state his accusations and justify his caricature of me instead of simply using a word that did it all at once, it would have been too easy to pick apart.
I am trying to get people to view national-socialism with fresh eyes, without bias, and the word nazi is a tool used to prevent that. This is a very good reason for not using that word and for objecting to its use.
Carolyn
July 12, 2013 at 1:09 pm
Will, if you want Katana and other readers to read the entire “Nazis and neo-Nazis” section by Pierce, please link to it rather than copying it all out. It’s not particularly relevant to what was said on the program anyway.
FYI, I wrote to justice4germans just 2 days ago telling him that the blog post you link to was directly lifted from 2 Wikipedia pages and 1 Metapedia page, and I just thought he should make it more clear when he does that. I am not attacking him or his site, which does a good job. My point is that the Internet is full of “information” circulating, copied again and again with no source given, but becoming accepted as fact because of familiarity. Or because people trust a certain site or person. But everything needs to be sourced so the reader can judge. Otherwise it’s plagiarism … putting your name on someone else’s words and thinking.
Will Williams
July 12, 2013 at 4:04 pm
Very good explanation, Hadding. Thanks. I had a detractor years ago on Usenet who was much like Jason Speaks. He always managed to call me a “Nazi” in every response to one of my postings. I asked him to stop doing that and he ignored the request. I finally said, “Look, Bub, from now on every time you refer to me as a “Nazi” I will refer to you as a “GD MF nigger-lover.” After just a couple of more times calling me a “Nazi,” and me replying in kind, as promised, he quit calling me a “Nazi.”
I can’t recommend that method; it’s just what I did that happened to work in that circumstance. I can recommend Dr. Pierce’s advice on how to deal with those who call us “Nazis” and “neo-Nazis,” however.
There is no link to what I posted from the National Alliance Membership Handbook because, to my knowledge, that book is not to be found online. That excerpt is something I transcribed from the original book. Here, I did post it as a comment a couple of years ago to one of Dr. Pierce’s transcribed editorial replies, if your readers want to see the part you cropped: http://williamlutherpierce.blogspot.com/2011/06/in-defense-of-national-socialism.html
katana
July 13, 2013 at 9:15 am
Thanks Will and Hadding for your comments. BTW, Will, I went to your link and read Pierce’s article and your good comments.
Hadding, you make a good point in noting that the word ‘Nazi’ allows leftists to hide the ‘socialist’ aspect of NS and therefore avoid complications with associations to their form of socialism.
You also say ‘I have never seen an original publication of the NSDAP that used “Nazi” instead of National-Socialist.’
Okay, it makes sense that in any official publication they would use NS, but what about everyday use among party members in their unofficial writings or speech? It would seem they didn’t, according to the following.
In the book SS Panzergrenadier – A true story of World War II by Hans Schmidt (Second Edition), in a footnote on pages 23 and 24 he writes:
“The designations “Nazi” party and “Nazis” were coined by the enemies of the National Socialists in the early 1920s, and had derogatory connotations, albeit without a specific pejorative interpretation except, after 1945, in connection with “Nazi Germany,” for the never-ending wartime allegations. In the meantime though both designations have become part of everyday use, and in the minds of many Americans they do not generally contain a negative value judgment, obviously to the dismay of the public opinion molders in the so-called democracies.”
What I find interesting is his last sentence. The term ‘Nazi’, itself, for me has never really meant anything other than being a kind of shorthand for the NS. Whether this shorthand is associated with evil deeds or not it’s been a handy label.
The label ‘Nazi’ is just that. We will get Whites on side about NS by explaining NS. The ‘Nazi’ label will then become no longer negative.
A couple years ago before I started realizing that we have been totally lied to about that era, the word ‘Nazi’ was a label for a movement that carried out ‘unspeakable evil’. Now days, it has a positive ring about it.
So, to return to Carolyn’s question, expressed as, ‘To say Nazi or not to say Nazi – that is the question’, I’m still inclined to think that we can use it and turn it to our advantage. But as Will and Hadding has indicated it’s a double edged sword at this point in time, all depending.
In our future, the day will surely come when Hitler and his whole era will be vindicated as the truly heroic movement that it was, and whether it is referred to as NS or the ‘Nazi’ movement will both be a source of pride.
Hermann the German
July 13, 2013 at 4:17 pm
Der Nazi-Sozi – Fragen und Antworten fuer den Nationalsozialisten (1932)
Author: Goebbels, Joseph
Keywords: nazism; propaganda; antisemitism;
Publisher: Elberfield; Verlag von NS-Brief
Year: 1932
Language: German
http://archive.org/details/GoebbelsJoseph-DerNazi-sozi-FragenUndAntwortenFuerDen
Author: Joseph Goebbels
Keywords: nazi; socialism
Publisher: Valley Forge, Pen; Landpost Press
Year: 1992
Language: English
http://archive.org/details/NaziSozi
The Nazi-Sozi: Q&A for National-Socialists
htts://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-qKNajQbTRA&list=PLA5F4ABACB529CAB4&bpctr=1373748392
Weichseler
July 14, 2013 at 11:36 am
To me, the word “Nazi” is invariably used, by both enemy slanderers and the clueless public, as an epithet with negative connotations. As a result of the corrosive loaded nature of the word, I only use it, as Will says, in a very guarded way in conversation. In writing, I use it only in quotation marks to belittle its impact. Goebbels seems to have used it very sparingly during the Kampzeit, in his ideological battles with political enemies.
Hadding
July 14, 2013 at 7:02 pm
I was quite aware of Goebbels’ pamphlet “The Nazi-Sozi.” Note that the socialist part is not omitted: it is not Nazi; it is Nazi-Sozi.
You won’t find the term “Nazi-Sozi” in the archives of English-language news-reports even once. “Nazi” is what the enemies National-Socialism called it.
Alexander (from Flanders)
July 17, 2013 at 7:28 pm
I try to avoid the term “Nazi”. It sounds a little bit to silly to me. National-Socialism sounds way better, and if I have to make several mentions of it in writing, I simply switch to the letter code “NS”.
Imagine for a moment a documentary about the Soviet Union. They are explaining the origins of Communism and Marxism, and the commentator continuously refers to them as “commies”, “sozis” and “marxies” (I just made that last one up, don’t know if it really exists). It would sound so childish.
I have talked to many people who were there back in the day (family members, and others), and none of them ever refered to themselves as “nazis”, or talked about “nazism” (or anything similar like that). And I do mean NEVER.
Just say it in German people: “NATIONALER SOZIALISMUS”… it just roles of the tongue with such beauty and elegance.
Livonia
July 21, 2013 at 4:15 am
Thank you, Carolyn, I’ve listened to quite a few of your shows, and I very much like your style.
My father and uncle served in the German army WWII, and know a bit about it. We were from Baltic- former Livonia.
Agreeing on all points about the Jews and Judaism, and the White Nationalism, this talk about nazional SOCIALISM really makes me quite mad. I understand, that the youngsters here have no clue what the dictatorship and socialism feels like in reality, but I do, and it is not pretty. I was born under Stalin 1948.
To prefer the collectivism over freedoms of an individual It is a bit sickening to me, sorry.
It was hard to listen to that part where you were talking about the folk culture and such, and how good it all was- it is comical- if one knows the Germans.
btw- why cant you pronounce simple German words?
But over all, I think you are quite wonderful, and I am glad I’ve found you radio.
Carolyn
July 21, 2013 at 2:42 pm
Thanks for commenting, Livonia. What is your opinion of present-day Germany? Do you think it is democratic and free? I know people who lived during the time of the Third Reich and were happy with it. What is your opinion of Alfred Rosenberg, National-Socialist ideologue? He was a Baltic German.