International Conference in Moscow

[Uri]

This is a brief summary of the international conference that was held in Moscow the 20-21 of July of the current year, organized by the russian rewiev ATENEY, and by the participation of other important figures of identitarian-patriotic organizations.





WHITE FORUM 2007
Press-Release

We are very grateful to everyone who took part in preparing and
organizing the international conference “Europe and Russia: New Perspectives".
The new forum, conducted successfully on July 20-21, 2007, on the day
of Perun – the Indo-European Thunderer – is a direct continuation of
the forum “The White World’s Future”, that took place in 2006
[http://www.ateney.ru/eng/eng011.htm#c]. The conference was held in the
assembly hall of the Russian Writers’ Union (Moscow, Komsomolsky
Prospekt, 13) in accordance with the following program:

PROGRAM OF THE CONFERENCE
Friday. July 20, 2007.

9:30 - 10:00. Registration and accreditation for participants and
press.
10.00. - Pavel Tulaev (Russia): opening speech and brief account of the
work of the organising committee in 2006-2007
10:30. Guillaume Faye (France): “Euro-Russia: Concrete Bases for the
Future Imperial Confederacy” (main report of the conference).
• Manfred Roder (Germany) “The Continental Axis of Survival”;
• Enrique Ravello (Spain): “NATO as an organization opposed to
Euro-Russia: from Morocco to Chechnya”;
• Kris Roman (Belgium) “Euro-Rus as a Positive Antibiotic against
the Negative Cosmopolitan Virus”;
• Yann-Ber Tillenon (Bretagne) “The Bases for the Future European
State”;
• David Duke (USA) “From the Abbyss: an Analysis of European
Mankind’s Existential Crisis”;
• Stephanos Gekas (Greece): “The Inner Roots of a New
Regenerative Policy";
• Galyna Lozko (Ukraine): “Renaissance of Pan-Aryan Thought”;
• Anton Ratchev (Bulgaria): “Between East and West”;
• Pavel Tulaev (Russia): “The Essence of White Renaissance”;

Saturday. July 21, 2007.
10.00. - Anatoly Ivanov (Russia) “Three Europes and Three Countries”;
• Emmanuel Leroy (France): “A Letter to a Russian Friend”;
• Vladimir Avdeev (Russia): “Cross of Sight: the North against
the South; the West against the East”;
• Alexander Thiel (USA) “Cultural Instauration”;
• Constantin von Hoffmeister (Germany): “From Jerusalem to Berlin
to Moscow”;
• Kai Murros (Finland) “Military Cooperation Between Western
Europe and Russia”;
• Alexander Rudakov (Russia) “The Strategy of our Victory”;
16:00 - 17:00 – Friendly greetings and other reports sent in advance;
discussion.
18:00. Closing speech by Pavel Tulaev.

Due to the length of David Duke’s speech (approx. 90 minutes), the
speeches of Pavel Tulaev and Anton Ratchev were postponed to July 21. The
same day Anatoly Ivanov read out the translations of the reports “Will
is Victory!” by Pierre Krebs (Germany) and “Russia – the Stronghold of
Europe” by Silvano Lorenzoni (Italy) sent to us in advance. The leader
of the Forum gave publicity to the brief greetings of our comrades from
Byelorussia, Ukraine, Poland, Greece and Germany.
The report by Constantin von Hoffmeister, who suggested a cooperation
of European nations with the state of Israel, as a possible ally on
anti-Islamic front, caused a lot of controversy and became a subject for
heated debate. The report by C. von Hoffmeister was severely criticized
by D. Duke, whose views on the Jewry are well-known. At the same time,
G. Faye, M. Roder, S. Gekas, K. Roman and other delegates suggested,
that it is better to concentrate on elaborating a positive program for
pan-Aryan White Revival, and forming an alliance between Europe and
Russia, rather than discussing the Jewish question.
Several book stores exposed their literature in the assembly hall of
the Russian Writers’ Union during the two days of the conference. The new
books by Guillaume Faye: “What are we fighting for”
[http://www.ateney.ru/Gijom.htm] and “Euro-Russia: Concrete Bases for
the Future Imperial Confederacy” (in French, Russian and German) as well
as the new issue of ATHENAEUM magazine (containing all the texts and
documents of the “White World’s Future” Forum and other important
publications in Russian) were most in demand.

Other events

After the two workdays of the conference the participants had a dinner
party at “Hemingway” summer cafe. After that they had free time for
walking around Moscow, visiting the Museum of Constantin Vasiliev and
seeing the organizers of the Forum.
On July 27 a friendly meeting of a circle of colleagues with Guillaume
Faye took place at “Intellekt” private school, rented by Moscow
Institute of National and Regional Relations (MINRO). After a brief speech of
our French colleague, every participant had a chance to ask Guillaume
Faye a few questions. In the end, the rector of MINRO, Elena
Kalashnikova (PhD), invited Guillaume Faye to give at the university a special
course of lectures on modern international problems. The invitation was
accepted with gratitude.
Some time will be required for a more profound analysis of the Forum.
We are planning to post the most important reports on the ATHENAEUM
website together with the photos from the Forum by September 2007.

Organising Committee of the Conference, ©2007

[Sergius]

Sorry to see you working with people such as Duke and Hoffmeister.

[Menydh]

You are not the only one to be sorry.

From what I've been told by one of the assitants to the conference, Duke's speech was like what you would expect from the average Stormfront American nutcase. He insisted in that there is no problem with Islam and that the only problem are the Jews.

Faye got angered and answered him that not only there is a problem with Islam, but Muslims are the first problem for Europeans.

Our old friend Constantin von Hoffmeister also went round the bend, like Duke, but on the exact opposite direction. He argued that Jews are not only allied of the Europeans, but they are actually European. I'm not sure if he said Aryans or something along those nutty lines.

I've heard that Faye and the other Identitarians have made the case clear this time, about those two nutcases. It will be up to Tulaev to solve the problem if there must be a III edition next year.

[Uri]

I don't work with this people, I only colabore in some magazines. As I know, Hoffmeister is the enfant terrible of the european movements; nationalbolshevik, panaryan, and now, pro-sionist ...the fact is that he is yet invited in some european symposiums, but I know that he was banned from Stirpes. It's a polemic person and a lot of people, naturally don't agree with him (I don't).
Duke, a yankee (or southerner, no difference), is listened in more european circles because it's the only transatlantic voice that can be heard in Europe without speaking with more of the typical neocon tics of the american right. Naturally, I will not agree with more of his opinions, but the point, as I see, is that this kind of meetings are good for revitalizing the european milieu of organizations and think tanks. Discrepances are sometimes good if they conduce to a good debate.

[Menydh]

Originally Posted by Uri

I don't work with this people, I only colabore in some magazines. As I know, Hoffmeister is the enfant terrible of the european movements; nationalbolshevik, panaryan, and now, pro-sionist ...the fact is that he is yet invited in some european symposiums, but I know that he was banned from Stirpes. It's a polemic person and a lot of people, naturally don't agree with him (I don't).

Speaking in terms of agreement and disagreement with Hoffmeister doesn't make any sense. You don't agree or disagree with such an individual. You only wonder who opened the gates of the loonies house.

To put an example, one thing he said once on Stirpes is that the Latins were to blame for the decadence of the Germanic peoples because they introduced white flour bread.

Do you agree or disagree with such a statement? Or you just worry that he might be behind your back with an axe, while mumbling that God has told him to kill you.

Duke, a yankee (or southerner, no difference), is listened in more european circles because it's the only transatlantic voice that can be heard in Europe without speaking with more of the typical neocon tics of the american right. Naturally, I will not agree with more of his opinions, but the point, as I see, is that this kind of meetings are good for revitalizing the european milieu of organizations and think tanks. Discrepances are sometimes good if they conduce to a good debate.

Well, I have to disgress strongly there.

To have your name or your cause related to such an individual is the worse thing that you can do.

As a matter of fact I was looking forward to the intervention of Natalia Narochnitskaya in the conference. But from what I heard she refused to take part when she knew of the presence of a certain individual (guess).

I warned about this last year. Well, it looks as if people take long to learn.

[Uri]

Originally Posted by Mynydd

To put an example, one thing he said once on Stirpes is that the Latins were to blame for the decadence of the Germanic peoples because they introduced white flour bread.

Do you agree or disagree with such a statement? Or you just worry that he might be behind your back with an axe, while mumbling that God has told him to kill you.

Really?

[Menydh]

Along with statements like that of Hitler and nazism being unrelated to the Germanic people, and a creation of the Latin people.

Such people are not just freaks. They are also dishonest freaks.

[Cristoforo]

The problem of these conferences is that ideas vary too much, from Duke's obsession with Jews to Costantin's obsession with well, the same people.

If we as etho-nationalists want to create some form of international association, there must be some very basic principles with which all those associated must agree with.

My opinion is that now, jews are not a problem in Europe (maybe they are in the US where they may have too much influence). On the other side, culturally and demographically muslims are Europe's biggest threat.

[Errigal]

Originally Posted by Cristoforo

The problem of these conferences is that ideas vary too much, from Duke's obsession with Jews to Costantin's obsession with well, the same people.

If we as etho-nationalists want to create some form of international association, there must be some very basic principles with which all those associated must agree with.

My opinion is that now, jews are not a problem in Europe (maybe they are in the US where they may have too much influence). On the other side, culturally and demographically muslims are Europe's biggest threat.

I'd agree that immigration is by far the most pressing problem.

The goal of international conferences such as these should be to come up with a broadly based set of goals which one-third to one-half of the population could agree to and work on a strategy to make it happen. As for the Jewish issue, it should really be sidelined to private conversation and should not be part of any political platform. I myself don't have any strategy, plan or project concerning Jews, I just have opinions about them. Conferences should be about strategies rather than opinions.

[Menydh]

There is one problem with Jews. It is that they are pretending to pass themselves as Europeans (with the implicit support of America), and thus linking Europe to the problem of the Middle East on their side.

That doesn't mean that the first and foremost problem in Europe right now are not the Muslims, which they are. But the battlefield is in Europe and for the Europeans, not in the Middle East and for the Jews.

After all, Arabs and Jews are cousins and one should not meddle in family fights.

[Errigal]

Originally Posted by Mynydd

There is one problem with Jews. It is that they are pretending to pass themselves as Europeans (with the implicit support of America), and thus linking Europe to the problem of the Middle East on their side.

That doesn't mean that the first and foremost problem in Europe right now are not the Muslims, which they are. But the battlefield is in Europe and for the Europeans, not in the Middle East and for the Jews.

After all, Arabs and Jews are cousins and one should not meddle in family fights.

I think the Jewish problem is greatest in the English-speaking world. Ireland has been left mostly alone but the Anglosphere is currently the happy hunting ground of Jews. Why this matters to other European nationalities is that the Anglosphere-based Jews make it nearly impossible for anyone to have a free and open discussion about nationalism and the history of the 20th Century.

Nevertheless a plan can be put together by nationalists that doesn't set off the paranoid alarm bells of North American Jews. Having David Duke stay home would be a big first step.

[Cristoforo]

Originally Posted by Errigal

I think the Jewish problem is greatest in the English-speaking world. Ireland has been left mostly alone but the Anglosphere is currently the happy hunting ground of Jews. Why this matters to other European nationalities is that the Anglosphere-based Jews make it nearly impossible for anyone to have a free and open discussion about nationalism and the history of the 20th Century.

Nevertheless a plan can be put together by nationalists that doesn't set off the paranoid alarm bells of North American Jews. Having David Duke stay home would be a big first step.

My opinion is that one should not invite Duke, not to avoid upsetting Jews (someone ends up upset anyway) but because he is not credible. The reputation of the conference depends entirely on who takes part.

[Carnyx]

Well, I don't consider for instance Asians a lesser threat to Europe than are Muslims just because they are "peacefull" buddhists and hardworking peoples.

It all depends on where you are living in Europe. All Europeans don't have the same perspectives. I can understand Muslims are for Spaniards the number 1 problem, the same way a Maltese won't consider certain people a problem either.

[Menydh]

Originally Posted by Cristoforo

My opinion is that one should not invite Duke, not to avoid upsetting Jews (someone ends up upset anyway) but because he is not credible. The reputation of the conference depends entirely on who takes part.

If speaking of reputation, Natalia Narochnitskaya, who was scheduled to speak and who is a member of the Duma, refused to do it when she learned who was going to be there.

I have read very little from her, as virtually all of her articles are only in Russian. But I found this woman very interesting and appealing.

Originally Posted by Carnyx

Well, I don't consider for instance Asians a lesser threat to Europe than are Muslims just because they are "peacefull" buddhists and hardworking peoples.

It all depends on where you are living in Europe. All Europeans don't have the same perspectives. I can understand Muslims are for Spaniards the number 1 problem, the same way a Maltese won't consider certain people a problem either.

Well, Muslims are the biggest problem for France (N. Africans), Germany (Turks), England (Pakis and others), The Lowlands (all of them), Scandinavia, Italy (Albanians and N. Africans), and for different reasons Bulgaria and other SE European countries. They are also a huge problem enough for Russia, as many of the Asians there are in fact Muslims.

In fact France has at present a bigger number of Muslims than Spain has. In fact Muslims are the most imminent and biggest threat to Europe as a whole.

What makes the difference for Spain is that jihadists openly include "al Andalus" in their list of lands of the Islam.

[Blood Axis]

Originally Posted by Errigal

Conferences should be about strategies rather than opinions.

Dah Only it seems that nowadays conferences are places for small talk, "big" talk, cosy group photos and exchange of compliments between participants