Serving Justice Part IA revaluation of Culture that was promoted in the Third Reich. The core question I want to pose in this article is: Why is a certain style in European art so consequently stigmatised while that style in its form language was nothing but a continuation of already existing tendencies in European art.

After watching the video “Degenerate Art-1993 The Nazis vs Expressionism” on www.youtube.com , I felt the need to verbalize all the thoughts and arguments concerning this theme that I had gathered in the course of half of my life , and throw an essay on the table which could also be considered to be a pamphlet or a battle cry.

After carefully taking in the images and the arguments of the commentators in the said video it is obvious that almost 70 years after the end of World War II, when a neutral and objective view on National-socialistic Germany should be the standard, this kind of videos can only be seen as the product of a revengeful, emotionally retarded mindset. The people who made the video seem to make all efforts to keep a resentment alive that in its proper context in this time anno 2014 is pathologic in its attitude, and the moral high ground they claim is so terribly false that it needs to be exposed.

To get an all over inclusive impression of this theme I was reading on Youtube all the comments on this video that have been posted since its release.

These comments are truly showing what nowadays people think of the video and the art that was promoted in it.

Reading the hundreds of comments on this video one thing stands out clearly and that is that a clear majority of commentators has an appreciation for the National-socialistic approach art that goes from partly liking and partly criticizing to outright admiration! To be clear I will give a few of the best formulated comments at the conclusion of my study. Remember also that part of the falsification here is that there is no such thing as “National-socialistic art”, this an invented label, because art in the Third Reich was just a continuation of a tradition that existed during the whole of the 19th century but with a preference for a sober monumentality.

All this makes clear that this is one of too many hypocrite culture critiques that are nothing more than an effort to slander, politicize and demonize the Germans as a nation. One thing I am certain of and that is that the makers of this video have never taken serious notice of the comments that have been written after its release.

It is time once and for all to be done with the scheme of distortion and deceit that is brought forward by the Anglo-Saxon victors after the 2nd world war about the cultural and artistic developments in the Third Reich.

This video is an example of the many efforts of the established Jew dominated art clique to curse and smear the artistic happenings in the Third Reich. Many documents have become available to the public these days which they have been holding back all those years. These documents show that things were not that evil and satanic as that they have been proclaiming from the rooftops. Here I can refer to the extensive historical research done by David Irving, David Cole and Ernst Zündel.

The quintessence of this video seems to be that an evil regime has condemned and taken away the real art of the German people, the art that was the greatest and that they loved above all and that this regime replaced it by a fake sort of art that had no “artistic” quality. Historical knowledge and research in the field of pre war art in Germany leads me to the conclusion that there is no bigger lie than this. A selected number of photo s of sculptures from a German book “Deutsche Bildhauer um 1900” published in 1927 by Richard Sauerlandt, I will put in between my text to make clear what quality the sculpture had that was established in the beginning of the 20th century in Germany and how its development was in the few decades running up to the second world war, and how the very last produced sculptures fell out of grace in the Third Reich.

My statements come from existential experience in the field of art, as a professional sculptor who is also a drawer and painter, and I have a thorough knowledge of the history of the second world war. My personal situation has

brought me to the insight that in Europe after the second world war a cultural falsification has taken place that is without precedence in the European history.

One of the most crucial statements made in the video by the commenting art critics themselves was that the art exhibition “ Degenerate Art” was visited by more than 3 million visitors, and that 95 % of them ridiculed the presented art pieces! This is a resounding statement.

What do I conclude from this fact? It is in its totality a response of an overwhelming majority that says enough in itself and actually undermines the whole verbal war that the established art clique has been waging against art of the Third Reich.

Democracy , which is the holy cow par excellence of the US led allied forces, has thus spoken : The German people did not like the “Degenerate Art”. Why the hell are these art critics going on with pounding their arguments after such a resounding judgment?

Just from a purely logical standpoint one can conclude in this situation the following.

There are different possibilities here.

As a good statistically representative test sample of the German populations opinion, there is no way to move around this judgment.

Then, according to the art critics opinions there must have been wrong something with 95 % of the German population.

What could that be? They can be brainwashed against their will just by listening to the radio and then being seduced to visit an art exhibition. O.K., the entrance was for free. Either they were victims or they were all wicked people, of a bad nature, that could not appreciate the blessings of the art that the critics held in so high esteem. In Jewish art circles it is an addiction to underpin this by saying that Germans anyway listen too much to authority and are subservient. Purely prejudiced statements like this we have been hearing all too many times. Daniel Goldhagen s book “Hitler s willing executioners” is an example of this.

Every time they want to drive home their point of the wickedness of the National-socialist system they come with this image of the emaciated bodies of

inmates of Dachau being bulldozed in a mass grave. There is something sick and pathologic in using this image again and again as an argument, and even in hundred years they will try to plug this image into our minds to make us feel guilty. If we would have had all the images of the bloodshed and genocides that Stalin or Mao created , not to talk about the horrors that the Jewnited states recently created in Irak and Afghanistan, the National-socialist crimes would pale before all that. There is a sick mind behind this relentless driving home one point. It is called an obsession, in Jewish terms: a Masada complex. It is the same sick mind that has organised in post war Europe that we were to hear only carefully selected fragments of Hitler s speeches in which he just went emotionally over the top for a few minutes. In this way they created a false image of Hitler as an evil madman who was ranting and raving continuously. . But they did not count on the internet and David Irving.

The third option is an unspoken assumption by the art critics defending the degenerate art that quality in art is defined as the outcome of the work of artists that happens to be in the forefront in those years. This leads to the question of what had made that these art works of degenerate artists came to the fore front. Of course it was through media who were before 1933 dominated by Jews. This leaves a question mark as to the notion that the

selected “degenerates” were actually the only German art as they would like to suggest.

Before I draw a conclusion I want to put the changes in art after the second world war in a historic perspective , and refer to the intellectual and philosophical battles that have been fought.

What all the defenders of the degenerate art have as an unspoken assumption is absolute freedom of expression in a democratic setting and an accessibility of the media for all. It looks like there can be no objection against that!

It should be noted that especially in this video it are always the non artists and intellectuals who seem to know exactly what all those artists they are talking about were up to , even better than the artists themselves, and present themselves so to say as a priesthood of the sacred god of “art”. And only they know the gospel, which is this time not the Latin mass but the psychotherapeutic blah blah invented by the Jewish psychiatrists like Freud, Adler and Reich.. The pimps of art so to speak.

Alone this fact already should be the clearest objection to this kind of videos. We are being worked on. The question is only by whom and for what purpose.

And It has become an unspoken dogma that art is holy , it is to be respected at all times like the holy bible by everybody . It looks like political correctness has entered the scene here.

If artistic expressions are that valuable that we are putting them in great musea and spend millions on art exhibitions and its commercial exploitation, let us say it is for the good of mankind that this happens and it should be part of our education, why then is the present state of western society so depressing and in an undeniably socially and culturally disintegrating state? Please read the comments at the end of this article.

Think of the undeniable increase in violence, corruption, pollution, diseases and economic crisis? Obviously the art that has been on the forefront has not been able to nurture western mans psyche at all . Something is off here. Why spend so much money when it is just but some entertainment at best? Why this status game? My understanding is that modern art is mostly a reflection of and an end product of exactly that violence , corruption, pollution and disease. So we want to glorify this down going?

Definitions of art in general are at best ambiguous. Friedrich Nietzsche, one of the greatest thinkers of humanity has said: “Kunst” is derived from the German verb “kunden” which means communicating. So what are we communicating?

History shows that before the industrial revolution , roughly 150 years back , art did not have the status that it has now. It is just the word that has got a status that is cultivated to a semi religious level. Let us understand our need for emotional communication as a substitute for the waning influence of religion

In those preindustrial times art was just a natural part of society that fulfilled also practical esthetical needs , and the difference between art and crafts was not so great, basically skill in both was highly promoted and valued. But there were no philosophies woven around art in general till the time that sophisticated financial thinking entered the European minds as a consequence of the enormous industrialisation that unstoppably took place. Then smart minds figured out that the needs of people , even the emotional and the spiritual needs could be made into commodities by a carefully crafted language that sought to give a high status to everything that could be branded as art. And thus art galleries came into life and commerce put its claws into the art world.

Art these days is a fake religion. As it were a new phase on a psychological plane in the development of the human race which was never before. It is an

increase of ego , of sophistication in creating mental structures to wield power over nature and especially other man, basically structured by rational scientific thinking.

We have two things here : the commercialisation of art by non artists, on which I will not comment right now because it is a process that everybody that has a bit of cultural education is familiar with, and the degeneration process that took place in the instinctive levels of the artists mind as a consequence of the disturbance of a natural way of life, changing his expressions into something falling absolutely out of line with any historic perspective. This an option that has not been looked at, let alone has been discussed.

To my understanding these are the deciding mechanisms that created the present situation in art and culture.

We have to deal with here with these mechanisms if we want to come to an understanding of the matter..

The second mechanism is the most fundamental because it is active at the source of creation and has not come into conscious focus as such.( see my article “Divine Whisperings”). The difficulty is here that in broad changes in cultural patterns , which go usually over generations these changes are not perceived as alien or repulsive by the people because of a slow adaptation process of tastes and habits. The deciding force within this mechanism is really how people connect their emotions to the struggles of life. History has shown that art is a reflection of this inner situation of man. And it is against all sound mental mechanisms to perceive one s own expressions as alien or harmful. That is why it is not to be expected that when a culture has sled slowly into a degeneracy participants within this culture will soon experience themselves as degenerate.

This freedom of expression in art which is in its core an essential value for any authentic culture is a mental construct which most of us uphold ( in old fashioned language: a morality ) which says that we should not obstruct when someone is expressing himself in whatever way as long as it does not harm anybody.

But what about pornography?

Why is pornography by law forbidden in almost all countries of today s world? What is the harm that it is supposed to be creating if this type of expression is unhindered? The psychiatrist can answer here. No need to elaborate. But then there is a conflict with the above mentioned idea of freedom of expression. Certain factions in society seem to be wanting to eradicate the ban on pornography by plugging the educational institutes in Europe and US with the so called Kinsey report. This is a report about the sexual behaviour of western man in this century and aims at “freeing” man from all inhibitions on the sexual plane. Now it has come out by recent research that this professor Kinsey was a sexual pervert and a paedophile. Is this not saying enough?

Without a shade of a doubt there is a deep conflict, a schizophrenia in the western mind.

To concretise my take on the second mechanism the following:

After the “Jugendstil” period in art was finished we see the European artist go into expressions which are seen from a historical viewpoint unprecedented. The main features of these new expressions are distortion, especially of the human figure and face, and abstraction per se. ( see my article). Especially after the 1st world war many artists of the warring nations admitted to be traumatised by their war experiences and lost inner balance and mental health which became visible in their works.

Now from a traditional cultural standpoint these expressions are to be valued as the art of the epoch and are sanctioned by this mental construct or morality of freedom of expression. After 1914/18 this art was a sincere expression of an inner emotional situation of a major part of artists relating to the misery many had gone through in the trenches of the war. Many artists committed suicide, amongst them the painter Ernst Ludwig Kirchner and the sculptor Wilhelm Lehmbruck, not because they were chased for their avant-garde style of work

but because they faced serious psychological problems in their life. Many of them had seen the battlefields of the 1st world war.

But from a medical, a neurological and a psychological standpoint they are the symptoms of a shattered inner balance . Nervous breakdowns and suicides were rampant. Never before were the symptoms of distortion and abstraction in art per se to be witnessed so massively.

Here I dare even say that this turbulent time bears the signs not only of emotional but above all spiritual corruption. In the whole 20th century intellectual life has been obsessed with coming to terms with this crisis, and the fact that no clear spiritual revival has set in means that on the emotional and spiritual level people are as sick now as they were then. Nowhere any body was allowed to name these cultural changes as a chronic collective ailment. The price for progress. The explanation is that the vested powers, money, industry and the catholic church held on to their power tooth and nail, because their economic power depended on the continuation of the general misery.

There was hardly any culture on the earth in known history that did not have anthropomorph tendencies. This means that basically the depicting of nature was always there. Dropping this tendency categorically just means that one does not like one s own image anymore, which means self hate. It is an anti life feeling, the trust in life has gone.

Another thing is the sheer artificiality of the discrimination between abstract and realistic art. Everything a painter puts on canvas is abstract, even a figure.The recognition of artistic quality is something that happens in the brain only and is a purely individual process that decides if one likes to see a blotch as a blotch of paint or as a blotch that reminds one of a figure.

Vig.

Part II and III will follow.