Not a bad take from Degrelle there. Shame he still was preaching a worldy gospel of faith in life, not God. When we know a lack of faith in God is precisely the issue here.

Although I think that the Axis was the good side, or the least bad of the WWII. I must disagree with Degrelle's Catholicism, and to prove it I post an excerpt from the book written by Leon Degrelle, which deals with his vision of religion. Bold is added:

«(…) For me, God is everything. The churches, the clergy, are transmission chains. They are not the essential: They help to achieve the essential. What is difficult is to reach the heart of man, which naturally tends towards spiritual life. Whether through one religion or another. If he were Russian he would have loved God according to the Orthodox rite. As an Arab he would have followed, to reach him, the ways of Islam. And of Hinduism if he had lived in Calcutta. The important thing is God. The rest, bishops, popes, mollahs, bonzes, are nothing more than steps, sometimes wobbly, however indispensable they may be to a people that cannot do without milestones and guides.

If a man gives himself, with all the strength of his heart, to God, the detours and turns to which the rites force are nothing more than invoking.

As a child, in catechism, when it was explained to us that Catholicism was the only admissible path to God, I was surprised. That monopoly of Christian salvation seemed abusive to me. Because a child who was born on the banks of the Ganges, or the Yansetian, or the Congo River, was he spiritually lost? Was heaven forbidden to him? And this simply because the Bouillon priest had not exercised his ministry in the dusty deserts of Arabia or in the tropical jungle?

This excommunication of four-fifths of humanity was shocking to me. God is the God of all men, of the black boy in the equatorial forest, of the Hindu contemplating his cow, of the Kanak in his mangroves. According to the catechism that we were taught, it would have been necessary for them to abandon all those heavenly perspectives that were not strictly Catholic, and that by virtue of doctrinal interpretations that these peoples had neither the occasion nor the possibility of analyzing and comparing.»

Transcribed excerpt from the book “Léon Degrelle, Persiste et Signe– Interviews for French television collected by Jean-Michel Charlier” (1986), Spanish Version, Dyrsa Editions, pages 51-52. 





I suppose it can be found in English as well, though I don't know what the English version is called.

As we can see, Degrelle's Catholicism is quite questionable. This was a relatively common problem among National Socialist leaders, let's remember Himmler for example, perhaps the most extreme case of this. 

Paganism and the occult, as well as racial supremacism, were in my opinion the main problems of National Socialism. Perhaps if they had not considered the Slavs as Untermensch they would have united a large part of the USSR against Stalin. Much more than they managed to unite. 

Wow, thanks for sharing that quote from Degrelle. Hopefully he recanted of those errors before died. 

As we can see, Degrelle's Catholicism is quite questionable. This was a relatively common problem among National Socialist leaders, let's remember Himmler for example, perhaps the most extreme case of this.

Paganism and the occult, as well as racial supremacism, were in my opinion the main problems of National Socialism. Perhaps if they had not considered the Slavs as Untermensch they would have united a large part of the USSR against Stalin. Much more than they managed to unite.

It seems that the kind of racial supremacism you see among certain NS thinkers (particularly with the condemnation of the Slavs as inferiors) and modern White Nationalists/Neo-nαzιs were held only by a certain few of the Third Reich's intelligentsia. The average German soldier didn't believe the outrageous theories we're all familiar with. Considering that I find him a trustworthy primary source, I quote from one of Degrelle's books: 

One may imagine the surprise of the Germans, hurtling towards Russia, at meeting only blond men with blue eyes, exactly the types of perfect Aryans that they had been made to admire exclusively! Blond men! Blond women! And what blond women! Big farm girls, splendid, strong, with light blue eyes, more natural and healthy than anything the Hitler Jugend had gathered together. One could not imagine a race more typically Aryan if one adhered to the most sacrosanct canons of Hitlerism!

In six months the entire German army had become Russophile. They fraternised everywhere with the peasants. And with the peasant women!

....

Some nαzι theoreticians professed some violently anti-Slav theories. They would not have resisted ten years of Russo-Germanic cohabitation. The Russians of both sexes would have learnt German very fast. They already know it. We found German handbooks in all the schools. The link of language would have been established in Russia quicker than anywhere in Europe.

Hitler for a Thousand Years, pgs. 174-175

But still the problems present within the Church before Vatican II would be present, which means that Vatican II would've happened regardless. It's a shame to see so many right-wingers sucked into the racial idolatry these days. I know I was for a time before I became Catholic. And I still see them placing race over religion in the comment sections all over the place, calling Christianity a Jєωιѕн psy-op or whatever.

Even if the Right did prevail over Globohomo, we would still wind up in the same rut within a generation or two.

I am of the opinion that Italy would have fared much better off had they stayed out of the war (as was indicated by a warning that Bl. Sister Aiello received from Christ, and sent to Benito Mussolini). The Axis would have beaten the Russians without the Germans having to postpone Barbarossa by an entire month to assist the Italians in their botched campaign in Greece. It's been said by prominent men on both sides. And without the Russians, Rothschild puppet Churchill would have had to make peace and end his suicidal war against Germany. 

One can argue that the relationship between the Italian Fascist government and the Church wasn't the ideal, but in my view, Mussolini's government produced a better relationship than what came before or since. Certainly Mussolini defended the union between Church and State, whereas under the reign of John Paul "the Great" this union was entirely rescinded, and Italy has been a secular country since 1984. 

It's interesting that Mussolini is so hated by MartinezPerspective (a WN online personality) and other guys like him, because according to them, Mussolini wasn't racialist enough. This is despite the fact that Italian Fascism had a lot of overlap with Italian irredentism, a belief held by Italian nationalists that all lands that held a significant number of Italians in other European countries (such as Malta, Corsica, and certain parts of Croatia) should be annexed by Italy one way or another. Mussolini himself supported these views, which demonstrate that he definitely wasn't a civic nationalist. But of course, because Mussolini wasn't race first, that automatically makes him a civnat to these people, who ignore information like this that points out the absurdity of their accusations. 

They also accuse him of being a crypto-communist, because he signed a pact in the 1930s with the Soviets that was essentially a trade deal (probably to reduce Italy's reliance on the West - the "Battle for Grain" happened around the same time). 

This uncharitable interpretation of events ignores the fact that Italy violated the Italo-Soviet Pact by joining the Anti-Comintern Pact in 1937, only a few years after it was signed. 

And they seem to ignore that by this same standard, Hitler was a crypto-communist for approving the Molotov-Ribbentrop Pact .

He also accuses Mussolini of centralizing a lot of the Italian economy and uses this as proof of him being a crypto-communist. I am personally suspicious of the data he used, but will do more research into it. It is interesting to note that I read some years ago in a VERY anti-Mussolini book that his government promoted laws that still protect small businesses in Italy today, which puts a serious hole in that accusation. 

Let it also be mentioned that Martinez is half European Spainard (that's where his surname comes from - he's not Latin American, as some idiots assume) and hero worships Franco, who certainly would have disagreed with the man's racial supremacist ideals. This gets even sillier when you consider that Mussolini pushed very hard to help Franco in his war against the Communists, even though his measures invited condemnation from the international community.

Strange, after all these years, that I would find myself favoring Mussolini over the other Axis powers. I, too, held the false opinion of him being a civnat.

I favored Mussolini over all of them when I first embraced his ideology. Being part Italian certainly made that easier for me. 

Wow, thanks for sharing that quote from Degrelle. Hopefully he recanted of those errors before died.


It seems that the kind of racial supremacism you see among certain NS thinkers (particularly with the condemnation of the Slavs as inferiors) and modern White Nationalists/Neo-nαzιs were held only by a certain few of the Third Reich's intelligentsia. The average German soldier didn't believe the outrageous theories we're all familiar with. Considering that I find him a trustworthy primary source, I quote from one of Degrelle's books:



I am of the opinion that Italy would have fared much better off had they stayed out of the war (as was indicated by a warning that Bl. Sister Aiello received from Christ, and sent to Benito Mussolini). The Axis would have beaten the Russians without the Germans having to postpone Barbarossa by an entire month to assist the Italians in their botched campaign in Greece. It's been said by prominent men on both sides. And without the Russians, Rothschild puppet Churchill would have had to make peace and end his suicidal war against Germany.

One can argue that the relationship between the Italian Fascist government and the Church wasn't the ideal, but in my view, Mussolini's government produced a better relationship than what came before or since. Certainly Mussolini defended the union between Church and State, whereas under the reign of John Paul "the Great" this union was entirely rescinded, and Italy has been a secular country since 1984.

It's interesting that Mussolini is so hated by MartinezPerspective (a WN online personality) and other guys like him, because according to them, Mussolini wasn't racialist enough. This is despite the fact that Italian Fascism had a lot of overlap with Italian irredentism, a belief held by Italian nationalists that all lands that held a significant number of Italians in other European countries (such as Malta, Corsica, and certain parts of Croatia) should be annexed by Italy one way or another. Mussolini himself supported these views, which demonstrate that he definitely wasn't a civic nationalist. But of course, because Mussolini wasn't race first, that automatically makes him a civnat to these people, who ignore information like this that points out the absurdity of their accusations.

They also accuse him of being a crypto-communist, because he signed a pact in the 1930s with the Soviets that was essentially a trade deal (probably to reduce Italy's reliance on the West - the "Battle for Grain" happened around the same time).

This uncharitable interpretation of events ignores the fact that Italy violated the Italo-Soviet Pact by joining the Anti-Comintern Pact in 1937, only a few years after it was signed.

And they seem to ignore that by this same standard, Hitler was a crypto-communist for approving the Molotov-Ribbentrop Pact .

He also accuses Mussolini of centralizing a lot of the Italian economy and uses this as proof of him being a crypto-communist. I am personally suspicious of the data he used, but will do more research into it. It is interesting to note that I read some years ago in a VERY anti-Mussolini book that his government promoted laws that still protect small businesses in Italy today, which puts a serious hole in that accusation.

Let it also be mentioned that Martinez is half European Spainard (that's where his surname comes from - he's not Latin American, as some idiots assume) and hero worships Franco, who certainly would have disagreed with the man's racial supremacist ideals. This gets even sillier when you consider that Mussolini pushed very hard to help Franco in his war against the Communists, even though his measures invited condemnation from the international community.

The problem is that this perspective was in the one who commanded and organized the campaign. And he organized the war against the USSR, not to end Soviet communism and establish puppet states in the area, or integrate them into the Reich, but to achieve Lebensraum, that is, to get land for the Germans at the expense of the local population. , which had to be expelled or exterminated. Of course, with this approach it's impossible to get the local population on your side.

Hitler went far beyond being a mere Nordic nationalist, he defends a Racial reading of History. According to Hitler's thought, there is a superior race, the Aryans, who contain in their blood the germ of culture and civilization. The Aryan peoples create strong nations, and in doing so they expand, dominating the inferior races and bringing their productive forces under their control. By doing this, however, the Aryans end up mixing with the lower races, dissolving their blood, and consequently the nation weakens and civilization collapses.

For this reason, for National Socialism it is of paramount importance to avoid miscegenation, racial crossing, mixing of blood, and preserve racial purity, since otherwise the Nation collapses.

In this scheme of superior races and inferior races, the Jєωs occupy a special place. As an inferior, non-Aryan race, the Jєωs are incapable of creating civilization, and therefore incapable of building nations. But they have the peculiarity of having preserved their racial purity, their identity as a race. Thus, they infiltrate the Aryan nations and parasitize civilized peoples, thereby causing their decline and collapse.

According to Hitler's racial theory of History, the Roman Empire collapsed because the Roman Aryans mixed with inferior races (not referring here to the Germanic ones, of course, but to the Eastern and African races). The Spanish Empire collapsed because of miscegenation, while in North America the United States prospered because they maintained their racial purity. The Austro-Hungarian Empire, in which Hitler was born and grew up, collapsed due to the increasing presence of Slavic blood. And the German Empire, for which Hitler fought in the WWI, collapsed because of the parasitic infiltration of the Jєωs in the rear.

With this I don't intend to agree with Hitler, only to expose his thoughts on this subject. He develops all this in Mein Kampf. There is nothing even remotely like this in the thought of Mussolini or Franco

Italian fascism was philosophically based on Giovani Gentile's actualism, which proposes a staunch defense of free will, so a genetic determinist racism like the National Socialist, does not fit with that defense of free will. Of course, this doesn't mean that Mussolini was a multicultural liberal.