Islam and National-Socialism: The Basis for Co-operation

0

blacksun23

Islam and National-Socialism: The Basis for Co-operation

Should we seek to find allies and friends among those of other races who are fighting the common Zionist enemy? Or should we regard such people as ‘racially inferior’? Indeed, how should we react to and interact with people of other races, other cultures?

Our own Aryan ethics must guide us, and our ethics alone. Our Aryan – our National-Socialist – ethics are based upon the principles of honour, loyalty and duty. Honour demands that we act in a cultured, a civilized, way: that we have self-control, and manners. Honour demands that we strive to treat others fairly. That is, honour demands that we act with nobility of spirit. Of course, honour also demands that if someone tries to bully us, or attacks us, that we stand our ground, that we fight back.

Our guiding principle in our everyday lives should be one of our honour giving us the inner strength, the self-respect, we need, based as this strength and self-respect is on our acceptance of our noble duty to our own folk: that is, on knowing how we relate to our folk, our culture, and thence to our past, our ancestors, and to Nature itself. Our acceptance of honour – our inner strength – also means that we have a noble respect for others, regardless of their status and origins. As it says in our Aryan Code of Honour:

“A man or woman of honour treats others courteously, regardless of their culture, religion, status, origins, and race, and is only disdainful and contemptuous of those who, by their attitude, actions and behaviour, treat they themselves with disrespect or try to personally harm them, or who treat with disrespect or try to harm those whom the individual man or woman of honour have personally sworn loyalty to or whom they champion.”

Thus, the basis for co-operation between National-Socialists and Muslims is mutual respect, deriving from the warrior – the civilized – principle of honour. We must respect them, as individuals; be respectful toward their culture, their Way of Life (Islam); and treat them as comrades-in-arms fighting our common enemy. In return, they must respect us, and be respectful toward our own Way of Life (as manifest in genuine, ethical, National-Socialism).

Hence, we should not regard them – and/or their culture, their Way of Life – as ‘inferior’, for that is a dishonourable thing to do; contrary to our ethics. Instead, there should be a mutual respect based on our honourable acceptance of our differences. National-Socialism accepts that Nature has worked to produce, in human beings, diversity and difference, and that we should respect and value this natural diversity and difference, and aid and further evolve it. This means that we should be proud of our own heritage, culture and identity, and accept that others should be proud of theirs. It also means that one of our aims is to work toward the creation of free, independent, homelands where the different peoples of different cultures and different ways of life can live according to their own values and according to their own ways of life.

David Myatt


The Aryan Code of Honour

The word of a man or woman of honour is their bond – for when a man or woman of honour gives their word (“On my word of honour…”) they mean it, since to break one’s word is a dishonourable act. An oath of loyalty or allegiance to someone, once sworn by a man or woman of honour (“I swear by my honour that I shall…”) can only be ended either: (i) by the man or woman of honour formally asking the person to whom the oath was sworn to release them from that oath, and that person agreeing so to release them; or (ii) by the death of the person to whom the oath was sworn. Anything else is dishonourable.

A man or woman of honour is prepared to do their honourable duty by challenging to a duel anyone who impugns their honour or who makes dishonourable accusations against them. Anyone so challenged to a duel who, refusing to publicly and unreservedly apologize, refuses also to accept such a challenge to a duel for whatever reason, is acting dishonourably, and it is right to call such a person a coward and to dismiss as untruthful any accusations such a coward has made. Honour is only satisfied – for the person so accused – if they challenge their accuser to a duel and fight it; the honour of the person who so makes such accusations or who so impugns another person’s honour, is only satisfied if they either unreservedly apologize or accept such a challenge and fights such a duel according to the etiquette of duelling.

A man or woman of honour may also challenge to a duel and fight in such a duel, a person who has acted dishonourably toward someone whom the man or woman of honour has sworn loyalty or allegiance to or whom they honourably champion. A man or woman of honour always does the duty they have sworn to do, however inconvenient it may be and however dangerous, because it is honourable to do one’s duty and dishonourable not to do one’s duty. A man or woman of honour is prepared to die – if necessary by their own hand – rather than suffer the indignity of having to do anything dishonourable.

A man or woman of honour can only surrender to or admit to defeat by someone who is as dignified and as honourable as they themselves are – that is, they can only entrust themselves under such circumstances to another man or woman of honour who swears to treat their defeated enemy with dignity and honour. A man or woman of honour would prefer to die fighting, or die by their own hand, rather than subject themselves to the indignity of being defeated by someone who is not a man or woman of honour.

A man or woman of honour treats others courteously, regardless of their culture, religion, status, origins, and race, and is only disdainful and contemptuous of those who, by their attitude, actions and behaviour, treat they themselves with disrespect or try to personally harm them, or who treat with disrespect or try to harm those whom the individual man or woman of honour have personally sworn loyalty to or whom they champion.

A man or woman of honour, when called upon to act, or when honour bids them act, acts without hesitation provided always that honour is satisfied.

A man or woman of honour, in public, is somewhat reserved and controlled and not given to displays of emotion, nor to boasting, preferring as they do deeds to words.

A man or woman of honour does not lie, once having sworn on oath (“I swear on my honour that I shall speak the truth…”) as they do not steal from others or cheat others for such conduct is dishonourable.

A man or woman of honour may use guile or cunning to deceive sworn enemies, and sworn enemies only, provided always that they do not personally benefit from such guile or cunning and provided always that honour is satisfied.

Editorial Note: The above article was written by Myatt, for his Reichsfolk group, sometime in 1998  CE.


Advertisements
%d bloggers like this: