After the performance there was Q and A, and I wasted my one shot by noting the golden-haired nazi…too bad. Because I was not gonna get another chance.

One older jew got up and stated that his uncle had some relationshiip to Hannah Arendt. Boy! Living History!

He stated that his father and brothers were as follows: one way a commie, one was a socialist, and one was a zionist. The audience of course thought that was very cool and would not have gotten it even if I had had another chance at a remark…all the jews at war with Germany.

Bowden does get to the absolute center of at least one matter: the stupidity of the Left /Liberalism and its rejection of essence.

As a young man fooling around with leftish thought, the idea of no essence (human nature) struck me as so stupid that I could never take left “philosophy” seriously after that, I would read it, always sucking on my teeth.

So If the essence of H.’s position is Essence, then what else.? Essence must be genetic endowment. If you want to add God to it, why bother? Evoluiton and biology are enough.

If H. were alive today, he would Probably take the human genome studies and react “A Ha”! Then, I hear Michael exhaling and saying , “wait”, there is something else. Well there is a lot of something else, and that is the cultural/intellectual/art and science inheritance of the West which keeps the more reasonable of us…rational and grounded in Reality studies.

So, what kind of a God is H. proposing?

As for his National Socialism, why is that a problem, other than for PR? The times are very different and any resemblance in future to historical NS…will not be coincidental e, but who cares, so long as rank is fair, free speech is preserved in peacetime, a cooperation of state and private enterprise mixes to take on China, etc.?

God comes up when we get a bit emotional. My emotional experience in loving my race is god enough for me. JOe

To he who bears the name of my favorite French revolutionary: To give it away, Heidegger was probably a devoted National Socialist, even if an unorthodox one.

The worse philosophical criticism one can make of Hitler’s NS, as I see it, is that it wasn’t completely true to the tradition to which it was heir — the tradition that is primordial to the white man, particularly as that tradition culminated in the work of those great (paradigm-creating) German thinkers who came out of the wars and revolutions of the 20th century.

Knowing this makes Heidegger that much more interesting to me — though I’ve always been enchanted by Heidegger — my favorite poet, after Homer — who created us all. (There’s that German-Greek thing again).

However, National Socialism got most of its ideas from the so-called Conservative Revolution – of which Heidegger was a part. Hence, the alleged Nazi ideas of Heidegger’s philosophy – which I assume Faye claims (I haven’t read him yet) – are actually ideas of the Conservative Revolution, not National Socialism.

Heidegger’s temporary support for the NS-Party and his philosophy have next to no relation.

Plus much of the negative aspects of National Socialism did in fact not originate in the Conservative Revolution, but in the rationalism that it opposed. The objectifying of humans, treating human being as present-at-hand rather than as existence, which made the alleged Holocaust possible, is of course alien to Heidegger’s philosophy.

Herr Hitler showed us the way forward for White nations.

National Socialist Germany was an advanced civilization, twenty years ahead of its contemporaries.

National Socialism is natural socialism; society based upon and in harmony with nature’s eternal laws.

Nazi Germany was the last great hurrah of the White race. It was also the Alamo of the White race. When we wantonly destroyed it, we set the seeds of our own demise.

The more I learn about National Socialism, the more I like it.

French, Freiburg was in the French zone.