Libertarian National Socialist Green Party

Like any transition between belief systems, the process of coming to understand National Socialism involves a plethora of detail-oriented questions before one comes to the point where a summary statement can be made. This statement, if presented too early to those who wish to understand the system to which they are in transit, will appear paradoxical or meaningless.

In the case of National Socialism, an experienced learner will have a different view from an outsider. An outsider might categorize it as "racism" or "totalitarianism" or even "tribalism," but the experience learner will probably say more simply: National Socialism is a transitional state on the path toward a traditional civilization. It is a way out of modern society and a conduit to a healthier, less manipulative form of existence.

Of course, those very words go against everything most people have been taught about National Socialism, so if they're still reading, they have probably formed a kneejerk response in their minds: "That's propaganda," or "They're covering up their real intentions" or even "Nazis don't have that kind of brainpower." These are the people who are truly "closed-minded." They won't stop to question what they've been taught long enough to learn what National Socialism actually is, starting with its goal.

Imagine that there was another way of organizing civilization that could have all of the things that modern society does, but would be motivated by an entirely different force. Where we motivate ourselves with utilitarian means, such as money (if people buy it, it's good) and votes (if it's popular, it's good), it is possible there is an entirely different way of finding out what is "good" for a civilization.

To escape our current civilization, and transfer over to this other civilization, will probably require an intermediate step based on what the two systems have in common instead of their differences (think of key changes in music: you select notes in common between the two keys, and play those for long enough to accustom the ear to that sound, and then add to it the notes for the new key). This means that when one looks at National Socialism from modern society, what we see are the intermediate and not final goals of the type of society that National Socialists desire.

The goal of National Socialism is to create a new civilization of a traditional type; the purpose of the National Socialist transition is to nurture the best people among us and educate them in the ways of traditional thinking so they are ready to create the new society in the future. This process will take longer than one generation, and if done correctly, will have none of the problems of revolutions and other destructive transfers of power.

What is a traditional society? It encompasses the methods, theory and culture of a type adapted for any circumstance; it will always be the best method of organizing intelligent creatures to work together, regardless of race or even species (if dolphins crest 100 IQ points, they will do well to adopt it). A traditional society is first of all a completely different method of thinking about society:

The West has not had a sane government for so long that we have forgotten that it is like to live under an order that sustains us and nurtures us toward health. Modern society, like all great evils, hides itself behind pleasant illusions that have only long term consequences, much like snake oil salesmen who sell their product and then quickly ride out of town so as to be far away when the deception is uncovered.

Traditional societies -- and this sounds childlike to those of us raised under modernity -- aim at doing what is right by an order that includes humanity, but is not limited to it. There is no division of thought into science, politics, religion, and culture as independent disciplines; there is one worldview, and into that all kinds of learning fit. Both past and future societies will be traditional: these principles are eternal, and any sensible society will discover them if it survives long enough.

This worldview suggests that there is an order to the universe which we can discover by examining the consistency of its response to our actions, and because these responses are consistent, there will always be some ways of dealing with the world that are superior to others -- we call these ways more "realistic," in that they are better adapted to reality.

In the traditional worldview, there is a cosmic order, or reason to the universe, and we fit ourselves into that, and try to do what is right by that order that also advances us. We think less in terms of strict boundaries like the individual, or society, or nature, but recognize all three as interdependent and that actions which serve the interests of all three at the same time turn about to be the best for each. Traditional people did not think of themselves as much as they thought of themselves as a unique part of this order; there was no linear top-to-bottom order as there seems to be where money and popularity are concerned.

The individual in traditional societies did not conceive of his or her role in terms of individual versus society, individual versus world or individual versus him or herself; actions were not judged on "good" and "evil" as much as they were assessed by how close they were to the traditional order, and therefore, how likely they were to be able to achieve balance with the cosmic order. Actions that were more in touch with the order advanced the individual, or his or her descendants, while retrograde actions caused either stagnation or loss. It was less of a yes/no moral system than a moral system based on degrees of common sense to any action.

Money was used in traditional societies, but it was a means to an end, not as a reason for actions as it is in modern time. One would not say, for example, "This product sells, therefore it's a good thing," unless the product also served a traditional objective. That is why these societies were neither capitalistic nor socialistic, but a mixture of the two rooted in the idea of having a higher value system than the economy.

They were similarly both quasi-democratic and anti-democratic, in that votes were used to determine some choices, and citizens had rights, but these rights/votes were not in and of themselves a reason for an action -- if the citizens voted for a great error, or if the rights of an individual conflicted with public need, those votes/rights would be ignored, even if compensated as was the custom.

Traditional societies positioned people in careers, and gave them lifelong sustenance, through a system of birthright and caste which prevented the need for a modern economy. Everyone born had a birthright to some profession and unless they were grossly incompetent, would serve in that position for life. This lessened economic competition and allowed craftspeople to focus on the details that open market competition does not reward, like making exceptional products instead of competitive (a balance of cost and function that inevitably rewards cost) ones. This is why goods were individualized, intricate, specialized and beautiful during the traditional era of European history.

Efficiency was seen as important, but like votes and money, it was not a reason in and of itself; what was important was complementing the traditional order with one's work, including making things that exceeded simple function. The product that was solely efficient was not as valued as one which fit with greater grace and harmony into the traditional order as a whole. The idea of disposable or deliberately cheap products was alien.

Traditional societies were anti-Utilitarian (Utilitarianism is the belief that if most people are pleased with a result, it is the best course of action). These societies recognized that you could assemble a group of people and have them agree something was good, and yet they might be completely wrong and thus unwittingly bringing destruction on society. It was recognized that leadership is a subtle skill like writing well or quantum physics to which very few members of even a healthy society ascended. From this came the caste system.

Castes are hereditary groupings of professional. They allow a society to concentrate people with certain abilities together and to encourage them to breed future generations to have those same abilities. We will always need leaders, warriors, artisans and laborers; when one gives each group a divinely-sanctioned role in the traditional order, there is no longer a need to compete on the basis of money and one is able to perpetuate the production of superior individuals for each task. Leaders often make poor artisans and vice versa. Hence, separation.

There was a caste for leadership and religion and philosophy; there was a caste for warriors and officers and artisans; finally, there was a caste for laborers and merchants. This is in direct inversion of our modern society, which places merchants and entertainers and professional athletes above the rest of us. What pleased those who needed entertainment was not as important as organizing society to complement the traditional order.

As part of this anti-utilitarian system of thought, traditional societies favored localization and differentiation over one-size-fits-all and uniformity. Each nation was organized according to ethnocultural similarity, or the congruence of heritage and culture and language in the same individuals. Nations were ruled by emperors who ruled over kings who presided over a number of local lords who in turn administered local cities, towns, townships and geographic entities. The emperor did not directly command kings, nor did they directly command lords, but would pass down edicts and needs and allow those to be implemented according to the standards of the local community.

In contrast to the modern society, in which through "individualistic" thinking every warm body is granted the same expectations as any others, traditional societies rewarded actions in accord with traditional order and saw doing right by that order as more important than self-preservation. As a result, they were honor-based and embraced a code of heroism, and it was seen as possible to lose a battle or even die and preserve honor, thus doing what was right was imperative in every situation. This caused people to have inherently strong self-esteem and a moral compass toward the whole of society and nature that does not exist in modern society.

Religion was part of the same worldview that united science and philosophy and culture, what was broadly called "tradition" (hence the name of traditional societies: unlike in modern times, things tended to be labeled as what they were to avoid confusion, something that is incompatible with marketing). The religion of traditional societies tended to focus less on life after death, but on ways to achieve a higher state of mind, or "transcendence," in life, through which by valuing what is right and rewarding in life over its pitfalls one achieves a holy state of mind.

Such societies were always concerned with ascendant breeding. They respected people who were of better health/beauty, intelligence and nobility of character, and wanted to eventually breed everyone to such a level; where modern societies compensate with "equality," traditional societies hope to instead raise everyone to the same level of ability. This takes multiple generations but through quality breeding can be achieved; the caste system, which slowly advanced the best candidates from one level to the next, aided greatly in this pursuit.

Throughout every aspect of their reign, traditional societies emphasized uniqueness and internal quality of objects instead of universality and abundance. By the nature of traditional order, that which was more selective and disciplined always rose above the rest, and was more valuable for its uniqueness in being finely wrought in a world that most commonly produces coarser things. Chastity, honor, discipline, compassion and sobriety were not enforced as much as rewarded when they occurred in conjunction with other ascendant behaviors in the traditional view.

In this outlook, traditional societies were a complete refutation of materialism, which was seen as a "descending" worldview in contrast to the idealism of tradition, which was an "ascending" outlook. Materialism caused people to forsake the divine mindset of traditional order, and encouraged the production of shrewd but dishonorable people who formed a social order that would deny or falsify higher states of mind, art, learning and spirit. Traditional societies were exclusively idealistic, and from this, a spirit of cooperation and constructive behavior often triumphed over the meaner default behavior of the human animal. In traditional societies, humans were encouraged to rise above the animal level, and rewarded when they did.

Among other advantages, in many sense traditional societies unified the existential questions (what do I do with my life so that I mind death less) of individuals with the common good of society by coming up with a system that rewarded more enlightened mindsets and did not give approval to the greedy, selfish, hateful, underconfident and parasitic outlooks it saw as evil. In contrast to modern societies, which deal exclusively with the material, traditional societies put management of the material under the reign fo the ideal.

Traditional societies saw civilization as an organic entity in which all parts were dependent upon each other and nature; the idea of introducing motivations that pitted internal elements against one another would have been seen as insane, although competition was heartily encouraged. There was a sense of fair play, of honesty and of a goal beyond simply "winning": these were societies based around unifying the individual mind with the organic order of tradition, and thus not only rewarding the body but the spirit with the knowledge that what one was doing was right, and therefore that each life so lived mattered.

As we enter the final days of modernity, the writing is upon the wall. We have ten times as many people as we logically should have, and most of them are unintelligent and of low moral and physical quality; we have polluted our earth, used up too much land, and disturbed its ecosystems and exterminated its species. As climate change dawns upon us, we see this irrefutably yet are equally aware that our leaders give it only lip service.

Even worse, within our society we are not happy. We work more than in traditional societies and are subject to aggressive competition from all angles, which requires increasing amounts of our time if we want to live in non-criminal, non-toxic, non-outlying areas and thus have a chance to raise our families well. Our society pits us against each other like rats in a cage.

Not surprisingly, this produces a neurotic population with low self-confidence. They distract themselves with material possessions, entertainment and status, but have trouble getting to sleep at night; modern people feel on some subliminal level that they have traded their time for something tangible yet of token real value, and through that action have missed out on life as experience -- life itself. We have all the material and technological comforts, but we are not existentially satisfied.

Each year more people recognize that modern society is inherently disgusting and that it cheapest everything to its crudest level, while encouraging our decay for the profit of a few who will ultimately not escape the disaster they are creating. Those of us who are still capable of independent thought are no longer thinking of solutions within society, but how to replace it with something that works better.

The best of our thinkers from the ancient Greeks through the modern philosophers agree on the idea of a traditional civilization, noting that without it civilizations take a descending path toward ignorance, poverty and failure. Modern people are like kids behaving badly when a teacher's back is turned; we can get away with it for a little while, but eventually we have to face the mess we've made.

Europeans and Americans were told that the evil in the world could be eliminated through two gigantic wars, World Wars I and II, but that did not end the problem; rather, everything we feared about our enemies cropped up within us. It is not as simple as one political idea versus another, but that we need a whole new way of life.

National Socialism is an attempt to bridge modern society with this new way of life. In Germany 1939-1945 it got derailed by internal struggles, and in modern neo-Nazi circles it is completely misinterpreted as "modern society with added bigotry," but the LNSG strives to get closer to the ideal of National Socialism as a conduit toward a traditional society.

We desire to work with our different ethnic groups and separate them so each may live autonomously and determine its own future; we want to bring out the best in all of our populations. We want to make a sane life not just for the worker and not just for the rich, but for all of us and our environment, and we want to not only deal with the physical side of this issue but the existential as well. We believe a traditional existence would be far less crass and destructive than modern society, and would also reward us for our spirituality and personality traits that are unique and honorable.

Each day, we get closer to this goal, as more people turn from modern methods as unworkable; we will get even closer as more people realize that our ultimate goal is a traditional society and not some intermediate state -- racial separation or serial diversity, capitalism or socialism, conservatism or liberalism, greenism or libertarianism -- and that we must measure our task by its ultimate objective and not its transitional states.

When one understands this path away from modern progress toward a way of doing things correctly that fits into any age, the ideals of National Socialism are given context and seen for what they deliver that is positive, instead of the fears beaten into us by years of propaganda and entertainment. Our goal is to fix the problems of modern society by replacing it, and only with that knowledge does National Socialism not only make sense but become eminently desirable.