ION MOTA
Mota's Ashes: Requiem for a Legionary
By Mike Rienzi
"We
all of us have the most formidable dynamite,
the most advanced weapon of war,
more powerful than tanks and machine guns:
it is our own ashes!"
- Ion Mota, 1935
Who was Ion Mota, described by Roger Griffin as "a fanatical
anti-Semite" (1), and why is he and his life important for pro-Western
activism? Mota was the "right-hand man" of Corneliu Codreanu, founder
and leader of the Romanian Legion of the Archangel Michael, also known as the
Iron Guard (2,3). An understanding of the Legionary movement is essential for
an understanding of who Mota was as a historical figure, and why he was and is
important . Thus, this essay will be not only about Ion Mota, but about Codreanu
and the Legionary movement as well.
The seeds of the Legionary Movement were sown in the so-called Student
Movement of 1922 (2). Unlike most modern-day American and European university
students, a large number of the Romanian students of that day were nationalist
and strongly anti-communist. Romanian students were in ferment not only because
of the Bolshevik threat and the increasing Marxist propaganda, but also because
of a more proximal problem: the domination of Romanian academia by Jews. As
Sima tells us (2), in the Faculty of Medicine in Iassy there were 832 Jewish
students vs. 556 Romanian students, while Jews as a group made up only a small
percentage of
Mota proposed a radical solution, one entirely consistent with the path
he would take throughout the rest of his life. Mota suggested that the strike
end, and the mass of the students be allowed to continue with their lives; the
fight for the Numerus Clauses was a failure. However, Mota further suggested
that the elite of the Student Movement "punish" those deemed
responsible for this state of affairs: Mota proposed the assassination of some
Liberal party ministers and Jewish bankers. Plans were drawn up, but the
conspiracy failed when one student, named Vernichesco, defected and informed to
the authorities (2).
The whole incident made a profound impression on the entire nation. The
establishment was quite concerned about the existence of such radical hardness
and self-sacrificing commitment in the students, who were thought to lack these
character traits. Demonstrations and strikes were one thing, but the killing of
ministers and of prominent members of Romanian Jewry was quite another. As Sima
(2) described the problem:
"What does alarm the government is the firmness of decision of
these young people, the clarity of their convictions, their belief in their
cause. A new type of character had arisen: men with an integral vision of the
nationalist struggle and ones ready to give their lives for the victory of the
Ideal. It was something new in the history of
The student radicals were put on trial on
Romanian nationalism struggled on for several years, with Codreanu and
associates attempting an ultimately unsuccessful alliance with the
"anti-Semitic" nationalist professor Cuza. Finally Codreanu decided
to go his own way. Inspired by a beautiful icon of the Archangel Michael,
Codreanu resolved to found a new organization, based on an entirely new set of
principles (2). The date was
"Order of the day', item number 1:
Today,
I appoint Radu Mironovici as the Guardian of the Icon."
Thus it began. With zero money, with zero resources, with nothing but
the name of Codreanu and the resolve of he and his small band of fellows -
including his good friend Ion Mota - a new nationalist organization was
founded, one which would ultimately shake Romania to its very foundations.
The Legion was unique. Rather than emphasize winning elections, making
compromises, or seizing power in some sort of "coup," Codreanu
ultimately stressed internal, rather than external, achievements. The aim of
the Legion was to create the "New Man", to alter the internal
character of the individual, to create an elite of a dedicated, spiritually
committed, self-sacrificing cadre, a cadre capable of leading the Romanian
people out of what Codreanu considered their "bondage" to Jewish and
other anti-nationalist interests, and into an era of national greatness. The
Legion was based on a strong belief in Christianity (thus demonstrating that
sincere Christian belief can be compatible with hard-core nationalism),
hierarchical in nature, with an emphasis on character-building, personal
responsibility, love of nation, and a connection with all Romanians - those
presently alive, those who have lived and died before, and those yet to be born
(2). The Legion was almost like a revolutionary monastic movement, more like a
priesthood than an army, more spiritual than crassly materialistic.
But Codreanu knew he had to implement his ideals in the world of
material reality. Organizing his growing group of followers into
"nests", he put forth the value of constructive practical work,
rather than empty talk, to win the hearts and minds of the people. Singing and
marching, Legionaries would enter Romanian towns and help the peasants with
their chores. They started journals, recruited leading intellectuals, and
built, with their own hands, the "Green House" (Casa Verde), a place
of refuge for persecuted Legionaries, and later Legionary headquarters. And
indeed, they were persecuted by the government with a ruthless, illegal
savagery, for the government saw in the Legion a direct challenge to its own
authority over the masses of the Romanian people. To leave the Legion unscathed
would eventually mean power for the Legion, especially after, once having grown
immensely, the Legionary movement started getting involved in politics as the
"end game" to implement its vision of a renewed nationalist
The Legion was banned again and again. Legionaries were arrested,
beaten, and killed by the forces of a corrupt government. When the Legionaries
organized a propaganda squad called the "Death Team" - so named
because of the willingness of its members to die for the cause - the government
stated that it was a "death squad", and arrested its members. In 1933
the government of I.G. Duca tried all methods - including brutal terror - to
crush the Legion. Duca was assassinated by three young Legionaries in response,
which led to even more vicious repression of the nationalist Legionary youth
(2).
Meanwhile, Ion Mota was becoming prominent within this increasingly
popular (and persecuted) movement, and was becoming heavily involved not only
in the Legion's domestic affairs, but in foreign affairs as well (2). On
Codreanu chose Ion Mota as the Legion's representative at this
conference. Besides being Codreanu's confidant, Mota had particular
qualifications in the field of international relations. On
Mota at the Montreux conference focused on the problems of building a
true international coalition of nationalist Euro-derived groups; a
"Fascist International", as it were. How to avoid destructive
conflicts? How to avoid disruption of unity, and preserve a common front? How
to balance the rights of national and ethnoracial sovereignty against all these
concerns? What about the Jewish Question? Mota spoke, and the delegates
listened. Some of his major points (2):
"The problem at hand, that of building a new unity, especially
concerns me. It is going to be necessary to do the impossible so that the
fascist world of tomorrow is not divided into several blocs fighting one
another. The problem of the Universality of
As the Congress President has already said, we can hope for one thing:
that the fascist world of tomorrow forms a whole, from every point of view. We
must not set ourselves too grandiose objectives, but we must recognize that
each people has the right to settle its own particular problems, into which no
one has the right to intrude. However, from another perspective, it is quite
right that, on great international questions, we should remain united so as not
to compromise the fascist unity of tomorrow."
Mota later introduced two questions which needed to be addressed in
order to promote the unity of which he spoke. Here Mota introduces the Jewish
question:
"One is the actual existence of several bodies studying problems
common to nationalist movements (4). These centres of study and activity would
have to agree amongst themselves at the first opportunity. Furthermore, they
would have to be invited to take part in future meetings of the Committees.
The second question concerns one of the main factors in the building of
a unique, European and world bloc. This factor is that no major international
problem must be ignored or left aside. And, amongst these problems there is the
Jewish Question, which is very serious for some countries and especially so for
This latter topic was not on the agenda for this meeting; however, after
Mota's comments, the topic was discussed, and a resolution was decided upon,
unanimously, as follows:
"The Congress, seeing that each State, in virtue of the principle
of national sovereignty, is alone qualified to decide, over its own territory,
the attitude that it must take towards the citizens, groups, races and religions
within its borders and, taking into account both natural law and morality,
declares that the Jewish Question must not be seen as a campaign of hatred
against Jewry.
However, seeing that, in a great many countries, certain Jewish groups
exercise, whether openly or covertly, a harmful influence on the moral and
material interests of the Nation, and form a kind of State within a State,
claiming all sorts of rights but refusing to comply with all the commensurate
duties, and working for the destruction of Christian civilization, the Congress
denounces the sinister activity of such elements and is prepared to combat them
(5)"
Thus, we can see an honest attempt made to balance the needs of the
whole with the needs of the part. As is common in pan-European activism, the
sensitivities of sovereign peoples are fully respected, while the need for
unity against the enemies of the West is stressed. This can be a winning
formula for activists today, if they would only learn to overcome petty and
divisive animosities and narrow hatreds.
An "amusing" sideshow to this conference was the continuing
harassment of the Legionary movement by the ostensibly Romanian government. The
foreign minister of
On
"It is not enough to reassert the ideals of the students; a student
conference cannot be reduced to a mere show of ideology; a conference must be
an occasion to study the interior capacity of students to achieve their ends.
It is pointless to talk of ideals if, at the same time, one does look to the
means by which these ideals will be achieved.
What is the capacity for sacrifice of the youth united at this
conference? It is only by a fusion of the student's personal life with his
ideal that the latter's achievement can be assured.
The essential thing is the spirit of sacrifice.
We all of us have the most formidable dynamite, the most advanced weapon
of war, more powerful than tanks and machine guns: it is our own ashes! Every
power in the world is destined to collapse, whilst it remains with the ashes of
brave fighters, fallen for Justice and for God."
This eloquently summarizes the difference between a real movement and a
mere organization; Mota urges the students to make their ideals part and parcel
of their personal lives, to live and breath their ideals, and, if necessary, to
die for them.
Mota was always interested in keeping the spirit of the 1922 student
movement alive. When, in the mid-1930's, anti-Legionary forces attempted,
through indirect means, to subvert the nationalist student heritage via the
formation of a "Student Bloc of 1922", Codreanu and Mota countered by
forming "The 1922 Generation Student Movement Association", with Mota
being chosen as its President (2). Mota argued that the spirit of 1922 was for
all students who believed in it, not just those specifically from the
"1922 generation", and via this successful argument Mota prevented
splintering of the student activists along the artificial lines that the forces
behind the "Student Bloc of 1922" desired. Thus, a scheme by the
government to hijack the ideals of the 1922 student revolt was thwarted, and
the ideals of the Legionary Movement were promoted further with much success.
Mota believed in letting his actions speak more eloquently than words.
Thus, when a force of seven Romanian Legionary "commanders" was
organized to fight in Spain on the side of the anti-communist nationalists,
Mota (by now Codreanu's brother-in-law) signed up enthusiastically (2,7). Mota
seemed to predict his ultimate fate. On
"This is why I too have now taken leave of my nearest and dearest,
why I will no longer be with you physically, beloved comrades and readers of Libertate.
But as the song puts it so eloquently:
'Those who have been cut down by the enemy's bullets
March in the ranks of those who remain'
As the Legionaries know full well, when they are mustered at the front
for the 'roll call of the dead', and the names of those killed in battle are
called out, all the Legionaries reply, loudly and with conviction, in place of
whoever no longer has a voice: PRESENT!"
On
"That is why you are going to swear that you understand that being
a Legionary elite in our terms means not only to fight and win, but it also
means above all a permanent sacrifice of oneself to the service of the Nation;
that the idea of an elite is tied to the ideas of sacrifice, poverty, and a
hard, bitter life; that where self-sacrifice ends, there also ends the
Legionary elite."
The presence of the dead martyrs Mota and Marin served to underscore
these points. Codreanu recognized what Mota did; the most powerful weapon of
the Legionary movement were the "ashes" of its followers, in other
words their willingness to stand firm and die for their beliefs if necessary.
The next day Mota and Marin were buried in the Green House. The funeral
procession was described as "several kilometers long", attended by
"several hundred thousand people (2)." Such was the esteem that Mota
and Marin were held by the Romanian people (9).
Following Mota's death, the popularity of the Legionary Movement
continued, as did plans by the government to crush it. By the spring of 1938
Codreanu was in jail on the basis of a "lawsuit for insult and
injury" by one Professor Nicolae Iorga. An immense persecution of the
Legionary Movement, spear-headed by the corrupt King Carol, his Jewish
paramour, and the minister Calinescu ensued. Many Legionaries were thrown into
concentration camps, a preview of their further persecution under the post-war
communist regime. On
In recent years however, the Legionary spirit and ideal has caught the
imagination of many nationalists in
Thus: the Legionary Movement. A vehicle for a higher, more spiritual
form of nationalist activism, a model which may hold more promise for success
than the failed strategies of the previous three-four decades. Thus: Ion Mota.
A man of ideas, of man of action, a man of principle, a man who - like Codreanu
himself- can be viewed as the prototype of first step towards the development
of "The New Man" of the Legionary movement. Mota's persona, his
spirit of sacrifice, his balance between nationalist patriotism and
pan-Europeanism, his words and his actions, should serve as a model for today's
sincere pro-Western activist. Mota has shown that indeed, his ashes are a
powerful weapon, and when nationalists congregate and read out the roll call of
comrades, the name Ion Mota should be read as well: Ion Mota, PRESENT!
Footnotes:
1. In his book, "Fascism." (Oxford University Press, 1995). It
would seem that Roger Griffin meant that description to be viewed in negative
terms. However, as becomes clear after reading Dr. Kevin MacDonald's trilogy on
the Jews and Jewish-Gentile relations throughout history, the term
"anti-Semite" is often reserved for those Gentiles who promote the
interests of the own ingroup, in competition to the Jewish group. Thus,
non-Jews defending their legitimate ethnoracial rights and interests are
"haters", while for Jews to do so is "good." We must eschew
such irrational and emotion-laden labels for pro-Western activists, past,
present, and future.
2. The primary sources of information for this article are: The History
of the Legionary Movement, by Horia Sima, Legionary Press, 1995; and the
article: "The Legionary Movement in Romania" by Alexander Ronnett and
Faust Bradescu).
3. The Legionary movement is better known by the name the "Iron
Guard." Initially, the Iron Guard was meant by Codreanu to be an umbrella
organization for various Romanian nationalist groups; however, since only the
Legion took it seriously, the Iron Guard and the Legion became essentially one
and the same.
4. This is, nearly 70 years later, an excellent idea, and one which
needs be seriously considered. One of the advantages of pan-European activism
is the gains accrued from the pooling of resources, ideas, and the cooperation
of intelligent activists with varied perspectives. Nationalist "think
tanks" can be of great benefit for advancing the cause of Euro-Western
biocultural preservationism.
5. This resolution, besides its summary of the negative effects of
organized anti-national Jewish interests on the West, also is indicative of the
true nature of pan-Europeanism: cooperation and an overall unity, but within
the framework of national and ethnic sovereignty, and within the framework of
letting all peoples decide their internal problems as they best see fit.
6. This message, entitled "The Essential", was later published
in the student journal Cuvantul Stuentesc (the Student Word).
7. The others were: Vasile Marin, Gheorghe Clime, Neculai Totu,
Alexandru Cantacuzino, Banica Dobre, and Father Ion Dumitrescu-Borsa (2).
8. Testamento di Ion Motza (All' Insegna del Veltro):
9 The song "Imnul Mota-Marin" (Hymn of Mota and Marin) was
composed for these fallen heroes, written by Radu Gyr and lyrics by Ion
Manzatu. See:
http://www.soundclick.com/bamds/legiunea_music.htm