we’re never told that flying towards the fire
was the 1930s version of Twilight
Much has been said of ‘book burning’. It was of course popularized in the 1930s with the solidification of the National Socialist’s control over Germany. The propagandists of the Third Reich wished to destroy books that were deemed damaging to the national character, and such rallies where hundreds if not thousands of books were heaped upon bonfires were organized by student unions at German universities, and aided in their execution by Adolf Hitler’s original muscle organization, the SA. However, this real history of this phenomenon, as usual, doesn’t tend to conform with the whitewash we are fed by our cultural betters.
First, the burning of books was not a practice without precedent. For an exhaustive list of all the book burnings in history, one can follow this link. The fact is that the early Christians routinely burnt heretical tracts and forgeries of Biblical documents. Long before, the Athenian state had similarly ordered the destruction of the writings of agnostic philosopher Protagoras. In 213 BC, the Qin Dynasty in Imperial China ordered the destruction of all Confucian texts, favoring Legalism as superior central ideology for the Chinese people.
Books have been burned throughout history, and most often this is condemned almost universally as an assault on knowledge itself. It appears, even if a book is of horrendous quality or forwards lies, even subversion, it should never be burned.
What foolishness. Books are a media item. Even those of the strictest non-fiction are vehicles for an ideological lens, through proposition or presupposition. A state has absolutely no duty to preserve any media item which could prove dangerous to the state itself, since the state is the vanguard of the nation and its traditions, the life of the state takes absolute preeminence over any concerns about the toleration of dissent. Of course, book burnings only take place when the books in question have been permitted to be produced prior to their condemnation. Because the Reactionary must favor censorship of degenerative ideas (historically this has been one of the duties of the priestly caste), he can’t really condemn censorship-after-the-fact. For a robust defense of censorship, see here (1, 2).
With regards to Germany in the specific sense, it must be understood just how depraved the Wiemar Republic actually was. With the abdication of the Kaiser after the First World War, Germany became a brand new Liberal Democracy in the truest sense of the word. All sorts of ideas became fair game and were produced in various forms for the public without protest by the government. Germany was no longer in the business of telling its citizens what they ought to believe about the world around them, especially in the arena of moral values. Pornography in particular became wildly popular. What was worse, from this milieu and the growing surge in the psychological pseudosciences, Germany got its own Alfred Kinsey, putting a scientific spin on utter depravity.
Magnus Hirschfeld (1869-1935)
one of the most perverted freaks in history
Here is an account of a tour which Magnus Hirschfeld gave of his sex museum to visiting American writers:
“After lunch they were given a tour by a “silly solemn old professor with his doggy mustache, thick-peering spectacles, and clumsy German-Jewish boots” who took them to the extraordinary Gallery of Derangements of the Sexual Instincts. There were displays of fetish objects donated by research subjects of the institute, including a home-made masturbation machine made of a bicycle wheel and used female shoes. There were historical sex aids from across the world and antique steam driven vibrators. The visitors looked at lacy female pants found on the corpses of ferociously masculine Prussian officers and female rubber body parts used by male transvestite prostitutes. The museum exhibited photos and fantasy art including sadistic drawings by ‘Lustmord’ prisoners convicted for crimes of sexual violence and murder. There were torture instruments from a German brothel and paper sailor-dolls made by German homosexuals during the Great War. The dolls were naked except for sailor caps and boots, and had aroused genitals and smiling faces. For a final touch tiny red drops were splattered on for deadly battle wounds.”
Hirschfeld was perhaps one of the first campaigners to argue for the legitimization of sexual deviations in the mainstream, his movement supported by other German intellectuals, the most notable of which being Albert Einstein.
With the rise of the Nazis however, his institute became an immediate target of Germans incensed by the damage being done to their culture by Hirschfeld and others, many of these offending authors being Jewish. In raids, books and research papers were gathered up and burned publicly to spare the next generation of irredeemable garbage. Other targets included books denigrating German history, and novels deemed to be encouraging of things such as communism, miscegenation, and pacifism. Garbage of course, is a big consequence of the printing press and the easy access to text-replication technology, and one of the responses to such garbage is to burn it. It’s important people get a sense of why the early Hitlerites went after books, because it wasn’t primarily about shutting down dissent at this time, it was concerned with purging out literature deemed harmful to the nation. In fact, of all the deplorable things that the Nazis did, this was actually one of the small examples of a noble purpose.
Apparently we should weep for Hirschfeld’s work and the work of his fellow luminaries. I think not. Be honest, if you were put in charge of which media items were to be preserved for the public in a Reactionary State, would you preserve the works of Kinsey? Would you preserve the works of the early suffrage movement, the works of slavery reparation-beggars, the works of Karl Marx? Would you save this, or this, or this, or this, or this, or this, or this? As far as I am concerned, if you would not burn this trash, if you wouldn’t love to watch it all go up in smoke on a pyre, then you are mad. How could anyone honestly think that it is enough to unseat the current intellectual class, to destroy the institutions through with they propagate their ideas (schools & universities), and think that somehow you can neglect what they’ve produced? Has God placed some holy protective aura around intellectual property, for which we seem to have even more reverence than for life itself?
Media is a weapon. Even the political novice knows this. In the hands of evil, media can do immeasurable damage, because it can forward views of the world especially tailored to titillate and pull at heartstrings. It can take advantage of feigned scientific grounding and so-called psychology. Too many on the right believe that if you silence the professor, you prevent the indoctrination, but it’s written on every page of the books that people consume on a daily basis, the never-ending stream of crap that issues forth from the worst elements of our society. Worse still, on a mass level there can be no argumentative victory over it. The intellectual current it forwards is perfectly tuned to man’s fallen nature, encouraging further, irresistible degeneration. There is only one ultimate vaccine to an influence so strong.
We have this baseless aversion to the idea that any media should be destroyed, and instead believe that the apparatus is enough. No! If you want for the stability of society and for the good of nations both moral and practical, you must come to your senses and endorse the position that one of the first duties of a Reactionary State is the complete incineration of all texts and other media formats which are suffused with the Modern ideology. The Cult of Progress has its Bible, but unlike a static document this is instead a narrative which weaves its thread through every foul tract they produce, fiction and non-fiction alike.
Burn every last scrap of it.
“for our God is a consuming fire.”
– Hebrews 12:29