Two other aspects of the European New Right are important to note, especially as they relate toAllerseelen: the ENR’s pagan aspect and its stress on fighting a cultural war. In contrast to the AmericanNew Right of the time, which was generally a Christian movement, the ENR’s identity was stronglypagan and anti-Christian. Christianity is presented as an alien force that imposed itself on indigenousEuropean peoples; the universalist aspect of Christianity is seen as a major enemy.
The ENR also seesthe capitalist market as spreading the pathogen of universalism, and hence adopts a sort of fascist “anti-capitalism.” In terms of strategy, the European New Right borrows from the Italian Communist leaderGramsci, who argued that lasting political and economic change would have to be preceded by a majorshift on the cultural terrain.
The ENR therefore focuses on creating a cultural environment favorable totheir political ideas flourishing—especially culture that popularizes (imagined) “indigenous” Europeancultural / ethnic identities and lashes out at universalism and Enlightenment values.While Gerhard Petak does not generally reference de Benoist or GRECE—and it is possible that Petakhas theoretical quibbles with some of de Benoist, just as de Benoist himself does not like Petak’s musicalgenre
—Petak’s ideas and output are nevertheless infused with ENR influence. This influence is alreadyapparent by Petak’s statements being carried in ENR journals, and the influence becomes especially clearwhen examining Petak’s attitude towards the Third Reich. Some of this influence may have arriveddirectly through Petak reading specific ENR theoreticians, while some may stem from the broader far-Right cultural / political milieu which Petak works within. Even if he has never thought much of deBenoist’s work, Petak has certainly been presented by third parties as having something to do with theEuropean New Right. In the second volume of the book-sized American “Radical Traditionalist” journal
, an interview with Petak is one of the longest of the issue, only shorter thanthe extensive interview with de Benoist.
There is also an Allerseelen track on the journal’saccompanying CD; one of the editors of
is Petak’s friend Michael Moynihan, more about whom later.
The Iron Guard (Romania)
Petak / Allerseelen contribute to the ultra-Right culture war through his attempts to circulate andrehabilitate classical fascist ideas and imagery. Petak is especially keen on the Romanian fascistmovement the Legion of the Archangel Michael, also known as the Iron Guard. This movement, led byCorneliu Codreanu (1899 – 1938) “displayed all the characteristics of fascism”
and “was an extremelyviolent organization”
noted for its anti-Semitism, aiming for “not just the purification of Romanian lifefrom Jewish influence but also the ‘moral rejuvenation’ of Romania on a Christian as well as a nationalbasis.”
While the Iron Guard’s outer embrace of Romanian Orthodox Christianity may appear as at oddswith Petak’s paganism, it is the esoteric and mystical elements of the movement that most fascinate Petak:the Legionaries had their own mysticism and internal rites, including members of its death squads rituallydrinking each other’s blood.
Such a combination of violence, fascism, blood, and the occult isirresistible to Petak, who claims that “The Iron Guard [still] exists, of course” in terms of an eternal idealand motivating myth. Petak then quotes with approval Ovidiu Gules,
who edited the
Gazeta de Vest
publication that promoted the Legionary tradition. (This publication was further linked to the fascistInternational Third Position organization.
) Gerhard Petak not only issued a pamphlet about Codreanuand the Iron Guard in his
but also in 1998 issued a set of two 7” vinyl records ofLegionary music, with the fourth side containing a speech by Codreanu.