By Carolyn Yeager

TWO YEARS AGO, I ran a series of excerpts from Adolf Hitler's Mein Kampf, Vol. One, taken from Thomas Dalton's new 2017 German to English translation.

I'm now into Volume Two, and will do the same (summarizing the chapters) with it. I'll begin right at the beginning this time with Chapter 1, WORLDVIEW AND PARTY. But I'm going to START at subheading 1.4, page 25, “The Folkish Concept:

____________

ALL KINDS OF PEOPLE, with all kinds of divergent opinions, are parading around under the 'folkish' banner. [...] The word 'folkish' doesn't express any clearly specified idea. It may be interpreted in several ways, and in practice it's just as vague as the word 'religious,' for instance. [...] The word 'religious' acquires a precise meaning only when it's associated with a distinct and definite form through which the concept is put into practice.

1.6, page 31-33: “Marxism versus Race and Personality”

If we try to penetrate to the inner meaning of the word 'folkish,' we arrive at the following conclusions: The current political conception of the world is that the State, though it possesses a creative, culture-creating force, has nothing to do with racial considerations.The State is considered rather as something resulting from economic necessity, or at best, the natural outcome of political forces. Such a conception, together with all its logical consequences, is not only mistaken about basic racial forces, but it also underestimates the individual. A denial of racial differences with respect to their culture-creating powers must also extend the same error to the valuation of the individual. The assumption of racial equality becomes the basis for a similar way of viewing nations and individuals. And international Marxism is nothing but the application, by the Jew Karl Marx, of a pre-existing worldview to a definite profession of political faith. Without the foundation of this widely-diffused infection, the amazing success of this doctrine would have been impossible. In reality, Karl Marx was the one among millions who, in a slowly decomposing world, used his keen insight to detect the essential poisons; he then extracted and concentrated them, with the skill of a wizard, into a solution that would bring about the rapid destruction of the independent nations of this Earth. And all this was done in the service of his race.

[…] For this reason alone, it's out of the question, and even ridiculous, to think that our so-called bourgeois world can offer any effective resistance. [...] In opposition to this, the folkish worldview recognizes that basic racial elements are of the greatest significance for mankind. […] It serves the truth of the aristocratic principle underlying all Nature's operations and it believes that this law is valid down to the last individual. [...]

In this world, human culture and civilization are inseparably bound up with the presence of the Aryan. If he dies out or declines, then the dark shroud of a barbarian era will again envelop the Earth.

In the eyes of a folkish worldview, to undermine the existence of human culture by destroying it's carriers would be a deplorable crime. […] Hence the folkish worldview corresponds to the innermost will of Nature.

1.7, p 35-37: “Organization of a Party”

Therefore it's necessary to create an instrument by which the folkish worldview can fight, in the same way that the Marxist party organization clears the way for internationalism. […]

Such a party formulation is a pre-condition for the victory of the folkish worldview. […]

The internationalist ideology succeeded because it was organized as a political party; the opposing worldview failed because it lacked a unified body to defend it. [...]

The National Socialist German Workers' Party extracts the essential principles from the generally folkish conception of the world. On these principles it establishes a political doctrine … This doctrine makes possible the organization of great masses of people in a strictly integrated sense. And this organization is the main pre-condition for the victory of this worldview.

I think this is crystal-clear and doesn't need any further commentary. I will say I'm very glad to get this understanding of "folkish" from the Leader, which I'm not sure comes across as clearly in other, older translations.

CHAPTER TWO OF VOLUME TWO, THE STATE, is quite long so I will present my selected excerpts in several separate installments--as many as it takes. It begins with a description of different conceptions of the State, followed by comments on the policy of so-called  “Germanization.”

(See here for series introduction)

_____________

GENERALLY SPEAKING, one can distinguish three different conceptions [of the State].

(1) Those who hold that the State is a more-or-less voluntary group of men under a ruling authority … those who worship legalized authority; the will of the people has no role whatsoever. This is the largest group.

(2) The second group ... includes those who desire a uniform system of governemt, but also a uniform language—though solely for technical reasons of administration. State authority … must also promote the good of its subjects … it's primary duty is to ensure the economic well-being of the individual citizens. The chief representatives are to be found among the average German bourgeoisie, especially our liberal democrats.

(3) The smallest group sees the State as … a people who are ethnically homogenous and speak the same language … they think-basically falsely-that it would enable them to carry out a process of nationalization in a definite direction.

During the last century it was regrettable to witness how these circles played with the word 'Germanization' … They didn't understand that Germanization can only be based on soil and not on mere people. What they mostly meant by this word was simply the forced acceptance of the German language.

But it's an almost inconceivable mental error to think that a Negro or a Chinese will become a German because he has learned the German language and is willing to speak it in the future, or even that he will vote for a German political party. […]

That which make a people, or better, a race, is not language but blood. Therefore it would only be justifiable to speak of Germanization if that process could change the blood of the subjected people. [...]

Today we must consider it fortunate that a Germanization of Austria, according to the plan of Joseph II [to make German the official language throughout the Habsburg empire -cy], did not succeed. … For the (survival of the) German nation, it was better that this process of intermixture did not take place. […]

A Polish policy, involving a Germanization of the East, was demanded by many and was unfortunately based on the same false reasoning … [that it] could occur by a purely linguistic union. The result would have been catastrophic: A foreign people expressing their foreign thoughts in the German language. […]

A terrible damage is indirectly done to Germanism today when, due to the ignorance of many Americans, the German-babbling Jews are classified as Germans when they set foot on American soil! […]

That which has been beneficially Germanized in the course of history is the land that our ancestors conquered with the sword and settled with German farmers. To the extent that they introduced foreign blood into our national body in this process, they aided that catastrophic splintering of our inner being, resulting in our German hyper-individualism—something which is unfortunately frequently praised.

[…]

We can sum things up as follows: All these views have the common feature that they don't recognize that the capacity for creating cultural values is essentially based on a racial element. They therefore fail to acknowledge that the highest purpose of the State is to preserve and improve the race; this is the indispensable condition of all human cultural development.

To be continued ...

THIS POST CONTAINS EXCERPTS FROM CHAPTER TWO OF VOLUME TWO of Thomas Dalton's translation of Mein Kampf, pages 47-69, presenting the essence of Hitler's rationale for his belief that preserving the original racial “purity” of the folk as much as humanly possible was vitally necessary to preserve the “culture-creating” element in Aryan civilization. Let's keep in mind that this was written in 1924-25 when Hitler was 35 years old and serving a prison term of 5 years. He did not know whether his now-outlawed movement would survive, or that he would be released after 8 months for good behavior. (See here for series introduction.)

_______________________

2.3 - It's the first obligation of any new movement based on a folkish worldview to put forth a clear and logical doctrine of the nature and purpose of the State.

The fundamental principle is that the State is not an end in itself, but the means to an end. It's the pre-condition of a higher form of human civilization, but it's not the cause. This cause is found exclusively in the existence of a culture-creating race. … if the Aryan culture-bearer died out, no culture would exist that corresponds to the spiritual level of the highest peoples today. […]

The State per se may well exist unchanged for hundreds of years, though the cultural faculties and the general life of the people—which is shaped by these faculties—may have suffered profound changes because the State didn't prevent a racial mixture from taking place. … Thus the indispensable precondition for the existence of a superior humanity is not the State but the nation, which alone possess the essential ability.

It's therefore outrageously unjust to speak of the pre-Christian Germans as 'cultureless,' as barbarians. They never have been that. But the severity of the prevailing climate of their northern homeland hampered development of their creative faculties. If they had come to the fairer climate of the south without any culture whatsoever, and if they had acquired the necessary tools from inferior nations, then the dormant cultural faculty would have blossomed radiantly—as happened in the case of the Greeks, for example. The Laplander would not have become creators of a culture if they were transplanted to the south, nor would the Eskimo. No, this glorious creative faculty was only bestowed on the Aryan; it becomes active or lies dormant depending on whether there are favorable circumstances or whether adverse Nature prevents it.

2.4 - We National Socialists, who are fighting for a new worldview, must never base our stand on the famous 'accepted facts'—and false ones at that. If we did, we would never be the protagonists of a new and great idea, but rather would become slaves of the present lie. We must make a clear-cut distinction between the State as a vessel and race as its contents. … What they want to impose upon us as a State today is usually nothing but a monstrosity—the product of a profound human error that brings with it untold suffering. [His use of “slaves” here sheds light on his later description in Table Talk of the Russian peasant as a “born slave.” He meant they were not creators of new ideas, but acceptors of the status quo. -cy]

2.5 – On these principles, we National Socialists base our standards for evaluating a State. ... A State may be considered as exemplary if it adequately serves not only the vital needs of the nationality it represents but if it actually ensures the preservation of this same nationality by its very existence—no matter the general cultural significance of this state formation in the eyes of the rest of the world. … [A] state may be called bad if, despite a high cultural level, it undermines the racial composition of the bearers of that culture.

2.6 – [W]e must first clearly understand which kind of people [the German State] should contain and what purpose it should serve. …The blood-poisoning of our national body, especially since the Thirty Years' War, has degraded not only our blood but also our soul. ...[T]he various racial elements continue to exist side by side, with the result that—especially in times of crisis, when the herd usually sticks together—the Germans disperse in all directions. … Aside the Nordic type we find the East European; aside the Easterners there is the Dinaric; the Westerner intermingles with both—with cross-breeds among them all.

[…]

Even today our nation still suffers from this lack of inner unity; but the cause of our past and present misfortunes may turn out to be a future blessing for us … it was fortunate that at least a part of our best blood was thus kept pure and escaped racial degeneration. A complete assimilation of all our racial elements would certainly have brought about a homogeneous national organism; but, as has been proven in every case of racial mixture, it would have been less capable of creating a civilization than the highest of its original elements (he means the Nordic -cy).

2.7 - As a State, the German Reich must include all Germans. Its task is not only to assemble and preserve our most valuable racial elements, but to lead them slowly and surely to a dominant position.

2.8 – Thus a condition of stagnation is replaced by a period of struggle. And here, as in every other sphere, the proverb holds good that 'he who rests—rusts.' Furthermore, victory always lies with he who attacks. … For the weakminded, the State and its authority is nothing but an end in itself; while for us, it's only an effective weapon in the service of the great and eternal struggle for existence. […]

Against us is the endless army of those who are lazy-minded and indifferent rather than evil, as well as those whose self-interest lead them to uphold the present situation.

2.9 – Nature generally takes certain corrective measures with respect to racial purity. … The products of cross-beeding suffer bitterly, especially the third, fourth, and fifth generations. … their lack of blood-unity also means a lack of unified will-power and vigorous vital energies. At all critical moments … the racially-mixed person becomes confused and takes half-measures. […] For instance, if an individual member of a race were to mix with someone of a lower race, the first result would be a lowering of the racial level, and furthermore the descendants of this cross-breeding would be weaker than those who remained racially unmixed. [Example of lower resistance: in the U.S. all non-white persons demonstrate less natural resistance to the Covid-19 virus across the board, yet it is blamed on “racism,” for political reasons, rather than differences (inequalities) inherent among the races. -cy]

[In] the course of thousands of years … a new people would be developed that possessed a certain herd resistance, but its intellectual and cultural significance would be markedly inferor to that of the first cross-breeds. [The Greeks are an example -cy] … The herd solidarity of this new national body, even though developed over thousands of years, would still be no match in the struggle with an equally unified, but spirtually and culturally superior race. [...]

Among those people with a strong racial instinct … [when] this compulsion [to mix] ceases …Then the mongrels will recede quite naturally into the background, and that part of the race that has remained intact will tend to mate with its own kind, thus halting further mixture. […]

[I]t's the task of the Germanic states in particular to bring a halt to this bastardization.

Our contemporary generation of weaklings will naturally decry such a policy, and whine and complain about it as an assault on the most sacred of human rights. No, there's only one right that is sacrosanct: that the purity of the blood should be preserved, thus preserving the best types of human beings and rendering possible a nobler development of humanity itself.

We can easily see this decline due to race-mixing playing out today in American and European cities. The evidence is growing daily that proves Adolf Hitler right.

FROM MEIN KAMPF, SUMMARY OF CHAPTER TWO OF VOLUME TWO, pages 69-87 of the dual-translation. (See here for series introduction.)

______________________

2.10 - A folkish State should begin by raising marriage above the level of being a constant scandal to the race. […] In our present state of law and order, this brave, bourgeois-national world looks upon it as a crime to make procreation impossible for those who suffer with syphilis, tuberculosis, hereditary diseases, and also cripples and cretins. But the actual prevention of procreation among millions of our very best people is not considered an evil, nor does it offend against the noble morality of this social class, but rather encourages their short-sighted laziness.

[...]

The fact that the churches join in committing this sin against the image of God, even though they continue to emphasize the dignity of that image, is quite consistent with their present activities.They talk about the Spirit, but they allow man, as the embodiment of the Spirit, to become a degenerate proletarian.Then they are amazed at how little influence the Christian faith has in their own country, and at the depraved 'ungodliness' of this physically and therefore morally degenerate riff-raff. Then they try to make up for it by converting the Hottentots and the Zulu Kaffirs, and to grant them the blessings of the Church.

[…]

The folkish State will have to make up for everyone else's neglect in this area. It must put race at the center of all life. It must ensure its purity. It must declare that children are a people's most valuable treasure. It must see to it that only those who are healthy shall beget children. There is only one disgrace: for ill or defective parents to bring children into the world; and one highest honor: to refrain from doing so. … [The State] must ensure that the normally fertile woman is not restricted by the financial irresponsibility of a political regime that sees the blessing of children as a curse to their parents. The State will have to abolish the indifference by which it handles the problem of social amenities for large families, and will have to be the supreme protector of this greatest blessing of a people.

[…]

If only for a period of 600 years, those individuals who are physically degenerate or mentally ill were to be prevented from procreating, humanity would not only be freed from an immense misfortune but also restored to such a condition as we at present can hardly imagine.

[…]

The folkish worldview must finally succeed in bringing about a nobler era in which men will no longer pay exclusive attention to breeding dogs, horses, and cats, but will improve the breed of the human race itself. It will be an era in which one class knowingly and silently renounces, while the other joyfully sacrifices and gives. That such a thing is possible cannot be denied in a world where hundreds and thousands voluntarily accept the principle of celibacy, without being obliged or bound to do so by anything except religious injunction.

[...]

Naturally, our wretched army of contemporary bourgeois won't understand this. They will ridicule the idea, or shrug their shoulders and groan out their eternal excuses: “Of course it's a fine thing, but it can't be done!” … [I]f a generation suffers from defects that it recognizes and admits, and is nevertheless quite pleased with itself—as the bourgeois world is today—and is satisfied with the cheap excuse that nothing can be done, then such a society is doomed.

Education Principles of the Folkish State

2.11 [E]ducation must initialy be directed towards the development of sound physical health; as a general rule, a strong and healthy mind is found only in a strong and healthy body. The fact that geniuses are sometimes not robust in health, or even sickly, is no proof against this. These cases are only exceptions that—as everywhere else—prove the rule. But if the mass of people is physically degenerate, it's rare for a great spirit to arise from such a swamp.

[I]t is character that has to be developed first of all, especially will-power and decisiveness, along with promoting a readiness to accept responsibility; technical schooling comes last. ... Physical training in the folkish State is therefore not a matter for the individual alone, nor is it a duty that rests primarily on the parents and only secondly or thirdly on the community, but rather it's necessary for the preservation of the people who are represented and protected by the State.

[…]

Today, even in the high school curriculum, only two short hours per week are reserved for gymnastics, and it's not even obligatory but left to the individual. This is a gross disproportion … Not a single day should go by in which the young pupil doesn't have one hour of physical training in the morning and one in the aftrernoon, and of every kind of sport and gymnastic.

There's one sport that should be particularly encouraged: boxing. … The fact that a young man learns how to fence and then to duel is considered quite natural and respectable, but boxing—that's brutal! Why? There's no other sport that demands such lightning-fast decisions or that gives the body a steely flexibility. […] If our entire intellectual upper-class had … learned to box, it would never have been possible for low-lifes, deserters, and other such riff-raff to carry through a German revolution. The success of this revolution wasn't due to the bold, courageous energy of the revolutionaries but to the lamentable cowardice and indecision of those who ruled the State at that time and were responsible for it.

[...]

The army offers the best example of the fact that the knowledge of one's physical ability develops a man's courage and militant spirit. … The excellent training that German soldiers received before the war imbued the members of the whole gigantic organism with a degree of confidence in their own superiority that even our enemies never thought possible.

[…]

Our German people, who today lie broken and walked-upon by the rest of the world, need the power that comes from self-confidence. But this self-confidence must be instilled into our children from their early years. … We must have no illusions: The collapse of our people was overwhelming, and the efforts to put an end to this misery must also be overwhelming. … Only by a superabundance of national will-power, a thirst for freedom, and the highest passion can we recover what has been lost.

To be continued ...

FROM MEIN KAMPF, CONTINUING SUMMARY OF CHAPTER TWO OF VOLUME TWO, pages 89-117 of the dual-translation. (See here for series introduction.)

2.12 Between School and Military Age

The folkish State will have to regard post-school physical training as a public duty, one equal to intellectual training; these should be conducted through public insititutions. … [C]onfident in his own strength and in the basis of that commonly-experienced espit de corp, [the youth] must become convinced that he belongs to a people who are invincible. [...]

The folkish State will also have to direct the education of girls, analogously to that of boys. Here again, special importance must be given to physical training, and only later to spiritual and intellectual values. The final goal of female education should always be that she will one day be a mother.

2.13 Training in Secrecy

[T]he essential traits of the individual character are already inherent. ...But apart from those with distinct characters, there are millions who are indefinte and vague. …[P]eople who show only a certain tendency toward criminal acts may become useful members of the community, if rightly trained; whereas, unstable characters may easily become bad elements if the education is bad.

How often during the war did we hear that our people were incapable of silence? … But let's ask this question: What did the German educational system do in pre-war times to teach individuals about secrecy? Wasn't it true that, in school, the little tattle-tale was preferred to his silent companions? … Has any attempt ever been made to teach that secrecy is a precious and manly virtue? No, for such matters are trifles in the eyes of our educators. But these trifles cost our State innumerable millions in legal fees, because 90 percent of all defamation lawsuits arise only from a lack of discretion. … Secret preparations for our national defense are rendered illusory because our people have never learned to stay silent, but rather they repeat everything they hear. In wartimes, such talkativeness may even cause the loss of battles …

Here again, we may rest assured that adults cannot do what they haven't practiced in youth. A teacher shouldn't try to discover boys' silly tricks by encouraging loathsome tattle-tales. Youth have their own State, and they face adults with a certain solidarity—this is quite natural. … A boy who snitches on his friend commits an act of treason, and displays a character that is, bluntly speaking, the equivalent of treason to one's country. Such a boy must never be called 'good' or 'upstanding,' but rather as one of undesirable character. [...]

Loyalty, self-sacrifice, and discretion are virtues that a great nation must possess, and their teaching is a more important matter than many other things now included in the curriculum.

2.14 Joy in Responsibility

It has been often lamented that, in November and December 1918, all authorities failed and that, from the monarch on down to the last divisional commander, no one had the strength to make a decision of his own responsibility. That terrible fact constitutes a grave rebuke to our educational system because what was then revealed on a colossal scale, at that moment of catastrophe, recurs on a smaller scale. It's the lack of will-power, and not the lack of arms, that renders us incapable of resistance today. This defect is found everywhere among our people and prevents decisive action wherever risks are found—as if any great deed did not involve risk. ...[A] German general found a formula for this spinelessness when he said: “I act only when I can count on a 51 percent chance of success.” In that 51 percent we find the very root of the German collapse: The man who demands from Fate a guarantee of success deliberately denies the significance of the heroic act. […]

Just as the folkish State must one day give its attention to developing will-power and decisiveness among the youth, so too must it inculcate in their hearts a joy in responsibility and the courage of avowal. Only if it recognizes the full importance of this necessity, will it succeed in building up a nation that will no longer be subject to those weaknesses that have contributed so disastrously to our present decline.

2.15 to 2.20 Necessary changes to Education

Technical training, which constitutes the chief work of our educational system today, can be taken over by the folkish State with only a few changes. These changes lie in three areas.

      (1) First of all, the youthful brain must generally not be burdened with subjects that are 95 percent useless and therefore forgotten. … [For example] the subject matter of our historical teaching must be curtailed. … History must be studied not merely with a view to knowing the past but as a guide for the future, and for the preservation of our own people … the average man is not a history professor. ...The man who wants to become a history professor can devote himself to the details later on. [...]

To sum up: The folkish State must restrict our system of general instruction in order to embrace only the essentials. Beyond this, it must make possible a more advanced, specialized teaching. … This shortening of the curriculum would free up many hours for development of the body, character, will-power, and decisiveness.

      (2) The second change in curriculum that the folkish State must make is: Though our materialistic age is turning ever more towards practical subjects, such as mathematics, physics, chemisty, etc … the nation's general education should always be directed toward ideals … founded on humanistic subjects, and offer only the foundation for further education in a specialized field. Otherwise, we would sacrifice those forces that are more important for the preservation of the nation than any technical knowledge. … [W]e must not omit the study of ancient history; Roman history along general lines is and will remain the best teacher, not only for today, but also for all times. […]

Since the German revolution and the death of the monarchy, the purpose of teaching history has been nothing more than merely acquiring knowledge. The State has no use for patriotic enthusiasm … Actually, this [Weimar] Republic has been allowed to exist only by its willingness and promise to pay reparations and to sign every territorial renunciation. The rest of the world finds it sympathetic; just as a weakling is always more pleasing to those who need him than a tough man. But the fact that the enemy likes this form of government is the most destuctive criticism … they could find no better instrument for enslaving our people.

      (3) Therefore, the third point to be considered in our educational system is the following: The folkish State must realize that science too can be a means of promoting national pride. … the whole history of civilization must be taught from this standpoint. An inventor must appear great not only as an inventor but also, and even more so, as a member of the nation. … Out of the abundance of great names in German history, the greatest must be selected and presented to the youth in such a way as to become pillars of an unshakable national spirit. […]

In order to ensure that this national feeling be sincere … one iron principle should be hammered into the heads of those capable of learning: The man who loves his people can prove it only by a readiness to sacrifice for it. There's no such thing as a national sentiment that is directed towards personal gain. And there's no nationalism that embraces only certain classes … One can be proud of one's people only if we are unashamed of every class. … Only when a nation is healthy in all its members, in body and soul, can a joy of belonging be properly raised to the level of national pride. … Our present-day fear of chauvinism is a sign of impotence. […]

This world is certainly facing a great revolution. The only question is whether it will be to the benefit of Aryan humanity or to the profit of the eternal Jew. [We know, mainly because of American interference, it was the Jew -cy]

______________

The crowning task of the whole organization of education and training in the folkish State is to instill a racial instinct and a racial feeling into the hearts and brains of the youth entrusted to it. No boy or girl must leave school without attaining a clear insight into the necessity and essence of blood purity. This creates the groundwork for preserving the racial foundation of our nation, and it thereby secures the basis for future cultural development.

…

Finally, from a racial standpoint, this training also must find its culmination in military service … the final stage of the average Germans' normal training.

To be continued ...

FROM MEIN KAMPF, FINAL SUMMARY OF CHAPTER TWO OF VOLUME TWO, pages 121-133 of the dual-translation. (See here for series introduction.)

Note the importance Hitler puts on "selection" in the Folkish State. It brings to mind (or it can bring to some minds) the use of "selection" in the forced labor-work camps during the war years 1941-45. In these labor camps, detainees were often lined up and 'selections' were made for the most appropriate workers to be sent on particular day jobs. This was also the purpose of the selection process at the time of entering a camp for the first time: then selections were made between those who could work and those who couldn't to be put into different barracks, and also for what type of work skills each entering detainee had. Much distortion has been made in "holocaust" literature of this German policy of selecting the best man or woman for the job at hand, rather than haphazardly assigning people where they might be of little value. Interesting to consider, I think.

______________________

2.21 State selection of the fittest

[A]nother educational task awaiting the folkish State – to select the most competent heads from the mass of the nation and promote them … to put talent on the proper track. It must open the doors of higher State education to talent of every sort, no matter from what social class it may come.

[...]

Our intellectual classes are so segregated and fossilized that they lack a living connection with those beneath them. … [They] neither understand nor sympathize with the broad masses. Secondly, the intellectual classes lack the necessary willpower. … God knows we Germans have never lacked in scientific education, but we've always been lacking in willpower and decisiveness.

[…]

If instead of a Bethmann-Hollweg [German Chancellor during WWI -cy] we had had a rugged man of the people as our leader, the heroic blood of the common soldier wouldn't have been shed in vain. …

Here the Catholic Church offers an instructive example. Clerical celibacy forces the Church to recruit its priests not from their own ranks but increasingly from the masses of the people. … It's the cause of the inexhaustible strength that characterizes that ancient institution  … by [doing] thus … the Church not only maintains an instinctive bond with them but also assures itself of a sum of energy and active force that only exists in the broad masses. Hence the surprising youthfulness of this gigantic organism, its spiritual flexibilility, and its iron willpower.

2.22 Evaluation of Work

The folkish state's task … is to sift out and carefully assess those persons who are endowed with natural talents, and employ them in community service. … This applies not only to official positions but also to the intellectual leadership of the nation in all fields. … If two nations of equal strength compete, that nation will come out victorious that has entrusted its total intellectual leadership to its best talents; and that nation will lose whose government represents only a common feeding trough for privileged groups or classes, without regard to the in-born talents of its individual members. ...

The objection will immediately be raised that it's too much to expect the son of a higher civil servant, for instance, to work with his hands simply because some child of working-class parents seems more capable of a civil service job. … [T]he folkish State will have to take up a fundamentally different attitude towards the concept of manual labor. … The individual must be valued, not by the class of work he does, but by the form and quality of his achievement. This statement may sound monstrous in an age when the most brainless columnist is more esteemed than the most expert mechanic, merely because he pushes a pen. But … this false evaluation doesn't correspond to the nature of things, but rather was artificially introduced, and … is based on the generally diseased phenomena of our materialistic age.

[…] Certainly, the material reality of an invention may be greater than the service of an everyday workman, but it's also certain that the community needs each of those small services just as much as the greater. … all workmen become equal the moment each strives to do his best – in his own field.

In a rational State, care must be taken that each individual is given the kind of work that corresponds to his capabilities. […] Material reward may be given to him whose work has a corresponding benefit to the community; but ideal reward must lie in the public esteem granted to all those who serve the people with the powers that nature gave them, and which were developed by the national community. … Then it will be obvious that men shouldn't be given tasks that they are incapable of doing.

[...]

The present age … introduces universal suffrage, and chatters about equal rights, but can find no basis for this. … Equality cannot and does not depend on the work a man does, but only on the manner in which each one fulfills his special obligations. Thus, mere accident of nature is set aside as determining a man's worth, and the individual alone becomes the creator of his own importance.

[…]

[T]his would be the concern of the National Socialist movement: to put aside petty bourgeoisie thinking, and to join together and coordinate all those popular forces ready to become the vanguard of a new worldview.

2.23 Ideal and Reality

Of course, the objection will be made that … the lower prestige attached to physical labor is shown by its lower wages. And that these lower wages are in turn the reason why the manual worker has less chance to participate in the national culture. […]

[T]hat's the very reason why we must see that, in the future, there shouldn't be such a wide difference in wages. … All the greatest inventions … discoveries … revolutionary scientific work … the most magnificent monuments of human culture were never given to the world under the drive for money.

[…]

We aren't so simple as to believe that there will ever be a perfect age. But that doesn't absolve us from the duty to combat recognized defects, to overcome weaknesses, and to strive for the ideal. … I would remind [those faint-hearted ones today], if they were ever soldiers, of the time when heroism was the most convincing proof of the power inherent in idealistic motives. It wasn't concern for their daily bread that led men to die, but love of fatherland, faith in its greatness, and an all-round feeling for national honor. Only after the German people became estranged from these ideals and followed the material promises of the Revolution … did they sink into the purgatory of universal contempt and universal want.

That's why we must confront the calculators of the present materialist republic with a faith in an ideal Reich.

End of Chapter 2

FROM MEIN KAMPF, SUMMARY OF CHAPTER THREE OF VOLUME TWO, pages 135-141 of the Thomas Dalton dual-translation. (See here for series introduction.)

___________________

TODAY [1925] THE RIGHT OF CITIZENSHIP is acquired primarily by being born within the borders of a State. Race or nationality plays no role whatsoever. A Negro who once lived in one of the German protectorates and now takes up residence in Germany, has a child that automatically becomes a 'German citizen' in the eyes of the world. Similarly, the child of any Jew, Pole, African, or Asian may automatically become a German citizen.

Apart from birthright citizenship, there is the possibility of later naturalization. […]

Racial matters play no part at all.

3.1 Citizens-Subjects-Foreigners

The whole process of acquiring citizenship isn't that different from being admitted into an automobile club, for instance. […]

In this way, every year, those organizations that we call States take in poisonous material that they can hardly ever overcome.

The citizen is only distinguished from the foreigner by the fact that he's open to all public offices, that he may eventually have to do military service, and that, in return, he's permitted to take a passive or active part in elections. Regarding personal rights and personal freedom, the foreigner enjoys the same amount of protection as the citizen, and frequently even more; anyway, that's how it happens in our present German [Weimar] Republic.

[…]

At present there is one state that's making at least some modest attempts at a better conception—the American union that attempts to at least partly conform to reason. By refusing immigration of those with bad health, and by excluding certain races from naturalization, the American union has begun to introduce principles that are particular to the folkish State.

The folkish State divides its inhabitants into three classes: citizens, subjects, and foreigners. [Being a] subject carries no right to fill any office … or take part in elections. … A subject is always free to cease being a subject. … The only difference between a foreigner and a subject is that the former is a citizen of another country.

3.2 The Citizen as Master of the Reich

The bestowal of a diploma of citizenship must coincide with a solemn oath of loyalty to the national community and the State. … This high honor also has its obligations. Those without personal honor or character, or common criminals, or traitors to the Fatherland, can be deprived of this right at any time … become once again merely a subject.

The German girl is a subject, and becomes a citizen only when she marries.* But those female German subjects who earn an independent livelihood can also become citizens.

[*I'm not sure if this actually became the law during 1933-45, since I can't find any mention of it. The fact that AH added that German females could become citizens without being married does take away from it's significance, and by the time 1935 rolled around, he may have dropped the whole subject. -cy]

FROM MEIN KAMPF, SUMMARY OF CHAPTER FOUR OF VOLUME TWO, pages 143-161 of the dual-translation. (See here for series introduction.)

____________________

THE NATIONAL SOCIALIST folkish State must adapt its own organization to meet it's principal task: to educate and preserve the bearers of the State … and train them for practical life.

It would be absurd to appraise a man's worth by his race, and make war against the Marxist principle that all men are equal, while being unwilling to draw the ultimate consequences … (that) the same applies to individual men within their national community. [O]ne head is not equal to another because, here too, the constituent elements of the same blood vary in a thousand subtle details, though they are equal in broad outline. [...]

This sifting according to capacity and ability cannot be effected mechanically, but rather is a task that can be accomplished only through the ongoing stuggle of daily life.

4.1 Building on an Aristocratic Principal

A worldview that rejects the democratic mass ideal and aims at giving this world to the best people … must also … ensure that positions of leadership and highest influence are given to the best minds. Hence, it's based not on the idea of the majority, but on that of personality.

Anyone who believes today that a folkish National Socialist State should distinguish itself from other states only mechanically, through the better construction of its economic life—thanks to a better balance between rich and poor, or by extending economic power to the broader masses, or by a fairer wage through elimination of large differences in pay—understands only the most superficial features of the matter, and hasn't the faintest idea of what we mean by our worldview. All these features just mentioned couldn't in the least guarantee us a lasting existence, and certainly would be no claim to greatness. A nation that could content itself with superficial reforms wouldn't have the slightest chance of success in the general struggle among nations.

4.2 Personality and Cultural Progress

It may be worthwhile to glance again at the real origins and causes of human cultural evolution.

The first step that visibly brought mankind away from the animal world was that of invention. Invention itself owes its origin to the ruses and stratagems that assist man in the life stuggle with other creatures, and that often provided him with the only means to success. … [I]n the case of man, his first skilled tactics in the struggle with other animals undoubtedly originated in individual and specially-capable subjects … [skills] which were later taken over by the whole of humanity as a matter of course.

Man complemented his first discovery by a second: He learned how to master other things and other living beings, and to make them serve him in his struggle for existence. Those material inventions—beginning with the use of stones as weapons, the domestication of animals, the production of fire by artificial means—show clearly that an individual was the creator. The nearer we come to our own time, and the more important and revolutionary the inventions, the more clearly we see this. […]

[A]ll such individuals, willfully or not, are benefactors of mankind, both great and small. Through their work, millions and indeed billions of human beings have received the means and resources to facilitate their life-struggle. The masses do not invent, nor does the majority organize or think—but always and in every case the individual man, the person.

A human community is well-organized only when it facilitates individual creative forces in a helpful way, and utilizes them for the community's benefit. ... The first and supreme duty of an organized folk community is to make the inventor useful to all. … Not only does the organization possess no right to prevent thinking individuals from rising above the masses but, on the contrary, it must use, enable and promote that ascension as far as possible.

[…]

Such minds are selected mainly, as already stated, through the harsh life-struggle. The idea of personality rules everywhere—in the realms of thought, in artistic creation, and even in economics. … It's only in political life that this very natural principle has been completely excluded. [I]n the administration of the national community … the principle of the value of the majority becomes decisive, and … allows all life to be gradually poisoned. … The destructive effects of the Jew's activity in other national bodies can be fundamentally ascribed to his persistent efforts at undermining the importance of personality among the host nations, and replacing it with the mass. The constructive principle of Aryan humanity is thus displaced by the destructive principle of the Jews. They become the 'ferment of decomposition' among nations and races and, in a broad sense, the dissolvers of human culture.

4.4 Marxism Negates the Value of Personality

In politics, this corresponds to the parliamentary form of government. We can observe its disastrous effects everywhere, from the smallest municipalities up to the highest leadership of the Reich … and in the trade union movement which doesn't serve the real interests of the employees but rather the destructive aims of international world Jewry.

Even if Marxism were a thousand-times capable of taking over the present economy and guiding its operation … it could never create something like that which it overtakes today. … Not only has it been unable anywhere to create a culture of its own, but it hasn't even been able to sustain existing ones. Rather, after a short time, it has had to make compromises and return to the principle of personality; even in its own organization, it can't dispense with it. […]

If the National Socialist movement failed to understand the fundamental importance of this essential principle [the value of race and thus personality] … then it would really do nothing more than compete with Marxism. For that reason, it wouldn't have the right to call itself a worldview.

4.4 The Best Form of State

The best constitution and form of State is that which naturally allows the best minds to reach positions of dominant importance and influence in the community.

… [A]ble men cannot be designated from above, but must struggle forward themselves … life itself is the school whereby the real lessons … are taught.

The principle that made the former Prussian army an admirable instrument of the German nation must become the basis of our state conception: authority of every leader directed downward and responsibility directed upward.

Even then we won't be able to do without those corporate bodies that today we call parliaments. But then they will really have to give counsel; responsibility, however, can and must be carried by one man, and therefore he alone will be vested with authority and the right to command. Parliaments per se are necessary because they alone furnish the opportunity for leaders to gradually arise who will be subsequently entrusted with positions of special responsibility. […]

This principle of combining absolute authority with absolute responsibility will gradually cause a selected group of leaders to emerge, such as is unthinkable in our present era of irresponsible parliamentarianism.

4.5 National Socialism and the Coming State

Regarding the possibility of putting these ideas into practice, I would like to recall the fact that the parliamentarian principle of democratic majority rule has not always dominated. On the contrary, it's found only during short periods of history, and always during the decline of nations and states.

One mustn't believe, however, that such a transformation could be effected by purely theoretical measures … Such a revolution can occur only by means of a movement that is itself organized under the spirit of these principles and thus bears the future State within itself.

Thus the National Socialist movement should familiarize itself completely with those principles today and actually put them into practice within its own organization, so that not only will it be in a position to serve as a guide for the future State, but it will have its own organization that can be placed at the disposal of the State itself.

FROM MEIN KAMPF, SUMMARY OF CHAPTER SIX OF VOLUME TWO, pages 185-215 of the Thomas Dalton dual-translation. (See here for series introduction.)

______________________________

[O]UR FIRST GREAT meeting [was] in the banquet hall of the Hofbräuhaus on 24 February 1920.

6.1 Fight against Poisonous Propaganda

There was a meeting every week, almost always in that hall, and each time it was fuller than before, and the people more attentive! […]

We gave greatest attention to the peace treaties … in those days, a public mass meeting … with the topic 'The Peace Treaty of Versailles' meant an attack on the Republic … one could expect an immediate and almost stereotyped reply: 'And Brest-Litovsk?' 'Brest Litovsk?'* … One wanted to pound one's head against a wall in despair over these people! They would neither listen nor understand that Versailles was a scandal and a disgrace, a dictate that marked an unprecedented thievery of our people. … the enemy's poisonous propaganda had robbed these people of their reason.

* TheTreaty of Brest-Litovsk was signed on 3 March 1918. It marked Russia's withdrawal from World War One, and was cast in very favorable terms for Germany.

[…]

I then saw clearly that the question of war guilt had to be cleared up for the small kernal of our movement—and cleared up in light of historical truth. … At the time, the masses viewed this peace as a success of democracy. Therefore we had to form a united front against it, and engrave ourselves into men's minds as an enemy of this treaty.

6.2 Against the Tide

The NSDAP shouldn't be the servant of public opinion, but rather must dominate it. … While the international world-Jew slowly but surely strangles us, our so-called patriots shout against a man and his system with the courage to free themselves from the shackles of Jewish Freemansonry … and to oppose nationalist resistance against this international world-poison. But weak characters were too tempted to sail with the wind and capitulate to the clamor of public opinion. … Thus it was necessary to grasp the movement with an iron hand, in order to save it from a path of ruin.

6.3 Politics of the Wide View

[…] I quickly learned something important, namely to snatch the enemy's weapons of reply from his own hands. One could soon see that our adversaries—especially the discussion leaders—were furnished with a definite 'repertoire' of arguments that were being constantly repeated. ... We were thus able to recogrnize the incredible discipline of the enemy's propaganda, and I'm proud to this day that I discovered a means, not only of making this propaganda ineffective, but of beating its makers with it. … It was necessary to mention all the possible objections and show their inconsistency; this made it easier to win over an honest listener by disposing of all the doubts that had been imprinted on his memory. That which he had learned was automatically refuted, and this made him all the more attentive to the speech.

6.4 Enlightenment about the Peace Treaties

I henceforth spoke of the 'Treaties of Brest-Litovsk and Versailles.' … people really knew nothing about the Treaty of Brest-Litovsk, and that clever party propaganda had succeeded in presenting it as one of the most scandalous acts of violence in the world. The persistent repetition of this lie to the broad masses caused millions of Germans to see the Treaty of Versailles as a just retribution for the crime that we had committed at Brest-Litovsk. … this was also the reason why the shameless and monstrous word 'reparations' came into common use in Germany. […] I compared the two treaties with one another, point by point, showing the immense hunanity of the one treaty and the unhuman barbarity of the other—and the result was striking. … A great lie had once again been torn from the hearts and minds of a crowd of thousands, and a truth implanted in its place.

[…]

Furthermore, these gatherings gave me the benefit of gradually transforming myself into a speaker at mass meetings, and I became skilled in the pathos and gesture demanded by large halls with thousands of people... at that time I found no party engaged in explaining things to the people in this way. […]

The leaflet was also put to use … The first meetings were distinguished by the tables covered with leaflets, newspapers, and pamphlets of every kind. But we relied mainly on the spoken word.

6.5 Speech More Effective than Writing

[…]

One must also realize that the mass in itself is mentally inert, that it remains attached to its old habits and isn't naturally inclined to read something that doesn't conform to its own beliefs, especially when it doesn't contain what they hoped for. Therefore, an essay … is for the most part read only by those who are sympathetic. Only a leaflet or poster, by its brevity, can hope to arouse a momentary interest in those who think differently. The visual image, in all its forms, has better prospects—including films.

[…]

Only through its capacity for adaptability does writing approach speech.

[…]

Not infrequently, it's a case of overcoming ingrained prejudices that are mostly unconscious and are supported by emotion rather than reason. … False ideas and ignorance may be removed by instruction. Emotional resistance, never. Only an appeal to these hidden forces themselves will be effective; and the writer can scarcely ever achieve this, but rather almost exclusively the speaker.

6.7 Psychological Conditions of Effective Speech

Success depends on imponderable conditions and influences … even the time of day at which the speech is delivered has a decisive influence on its results. ... [T]he performance's impression in the afternoon isn't nearly as great as in the evening. The same is true of motion pictures.

[…]

[W]e are dealing with the problem of influencing man's freedom of will. … The superior rhetorical art of a masterly preacher will succeed better in winning over to a new will those who have naturally been subject to a weakening of their forces of resistance.

[…]

The illiterate masses weren't aroused to Communist revolutionary enthusiasm by the theoretical writings of Karl Marx but rather by the promises of paradise made to the people by thousands of agitators in the service of an idea.

6.9 Necessity of Mass Meetings

Only in the rarest cases will a convinced Social Democrat or fanatical communist be induced to acquire an understanding of our world-conception ... by procuring and reading one of our pamphlets or even one of our books. […]

It's totally different with the 'spoken' leaflet! Especially if given for free … Perhaps the reader, after having perused such a leaflet more or less thoughtfully, will have new viewpoints and attitudes, even toward a new movement. But these, even in the best case, will only provide the slightest impulse, and nothing definitive. The leaflet … can become effective only by subsequently causing the reader to become more fundamentally informed and educated. This is, and will always be, the mass meeting.

Mass meetings are also necessary for the reason that the individual … acquires a picture of a great community; this has a strengthening and encouraging effect on most people.

[…]

The National Socialist movement should never forget this, and it should never allow itself to be influenced by these bourgeois simpletons … who have foolishly gambled away a great State—along with their own existence and the rule of their own class.

FROM MEIN KAMPF, SUMMARY OF CHAPTER FIVE OF VOLUME TWO, pages 163-183  of the Thomas Dalton dual-translation. (See here for series introduction.)

Another highly enlightening chapter for me, even more so than the previous one. Read it thoughtfully. So glad to be able to bring these abbreviated versions to you. -cy

______________________

THE FOLKISH STATE ... WON'T BECOME A REALITY simply due to the fact that we know what's necessary for it. It's not enough to know how such a State should appear. … The existing parties … cannot be expected to bring about a change in the regime … because the leading elements are always Jews and yet more Jews. The present trend of development would, if allowed to go on unhampered, lead to the realization of the pan-Jewish prophecy—that the Jews will one day devour the other nations of the Earth and become their master.

In contrast to the millions of 'bourgeois' and 'proletarian' Germans—who are stumbling to their ruin, mostly through timidity and stupidity—the jew persistently pursues his way and keeps his mind fixed on his future goal. … his interests certainly have nothing in common with those of the Aryan nations. [...]

If we wish to transform our ideal picture of the folkish state into reality … the first objective isn't the creation of a folkish State-conception, but rather the elimination of the Jewish one.

That's why the fighter for a new idea is unfortunately, and despite his desire for positive work, compelled to wage a negative battle first—in order to abolish the existing state of affairs.

5.1 Struggle and Criticism

[A] young doctrine of great and essential importance must adopt the sharp probe of criticism as its weapon. … A worldview is intolerant and cannot exist as 'one party among many.' … It can never allow the previous condition to continue in existence.

Political parties are prone to compromises, but worldviews never. Political parties tend to reckon with their opponents, but worldviews proclaim their own infallibility.

5.2 Community as Basis for a New Worldview

In the beginning, political parties … almost always show a slight tendency to become worldviews. But the limited nature of their program robs them of the heroism that a worldview demands. The conciliatory nature of their will attracts those petty and weak-hearted people who aren't fit for any crusade. And so they soon become stuck in their miserable pettiness. They give up fighting for their worldview and, by way of so-called 'positive collaboration,' they try as quickly as possible to wedge themselves into some tiny place at the feeding trough, and to stay there as long as possible. That's their whole effort. […]

Any new worldview will bring its ideas to victory only if the most courageous and active element of its time and its people are formed together in a powerful fighting organization. … While the program of the solely political party is nothing but a recipe for favorable results in the next general election, a worldview's program represents a declaration of war against an existing order of things, against present conditions—in short, against the established world-conception.

5.3 Leadership and Following

By it's very nature, an organization can exist only if leaders of high intellectual ability are served by a large and emotionally-devoted mass. […]

The fact that only the so-called uneducated classes joined Marxism was the very basis on which this party achieved its success—something that was always greeted with head-shaking by our bourgeoisie. Because they mostly consisted of intellectuals, the bourgeois parties were only a feckless band of undisciplined individuals; whereas the Marxists, from non-intellectual human material, formed an army of party soldiers who obeyed their Jewish masters just as blindly as they formerly obeyed their German officers. [… ]

The decisive factor is the leadership itself. … This is the basic knowledge that we must always bear in mind when we examine the possibility of transforming a worldview into action.

5.4 Guiding Principles of the Movement

If the folkish idea, which is at present an obscure wish, is one day to attain a clear success, it must draw forth certain definite principles … which, of their essence and content are calculated to attract a broad mass of men. This mass can alone guarantee that the worldview will be fought for. [my emphasis -cy] This is the group of German workers.

Therefore, the new movement's program was condensed into a few guiding principles, 25 in all. They are meant … to give the ordinary man a rough sketch of the movement's goals. They are, so to say, a political faith that, on the one hand, is meant to win recruits for the movement and, on the other, to unite such recruits together in a commonly-recognized covenant.

Hence we must never lose sight of the following: What we call the movement's program [the 25 Points of the NSDAP -cy] is absolutely right in its ultimate aims, but … in the course of time, the opinion may well arise that certain principles should be expressed differently and might be better formulated. But any attempt at a different formulation usually has a disastrous effect. … As soon as a single point is removed from the sphere of dogmatic certainty, discussion won't simply result in a new, better, and more consistent formulation, but may easily lead to endless debates and general confusion. ...[W]hich is better: a new and more adequate formulation, though it may cause a controversy within the movement, or to retain the old formula that, though probably not the best, represents a solid, unshakeable, internally-unified organism.

All experience shows that the second alternative is preferable. … [G]iven that most people think superficially, there's a great danger that the merely external formulation of the program will be taken as essential to the movement. Then the will and power to fight for these ideas are weakened, and activities that ought to be directed outward are dissipated in internal programmatic squabbles.

The essentials of a teaching must never be sought in external formulas, but always in an inner meaning. And this is unchangeable; and in its interest, one can only wish that a movement should exclude everything that tends towards disintegration and uncertainty, in order to preserve the necessary force.

Here again we can learn from the Catholic Church. … It has rightly recognized that its powers of resistance would be weakened by introducing greater or lesser adaptations to meet the temporary conclusions of science, which in reality are always fluctuating. Thus it holds to its fixed dogmas, which alone can give to the whole system the character of a faith. […]

Therefore whoever really and seriously desires the victory of a folkish worldview must realize that this can be assured only through a militant movement, and that this movement must ground its strength only on the firmness of an impregnable and coherent program.[...]

In its 25-point program, the National Socialist German Workers' Party attained a foundation that must remain unshakable. … For most of our followers, the essence of the movement will consist not so much in the letter of our principles but in the meaning that we attribute to them.

5.5 National Socialism and the Folkish Idea

In order to carry the folkish ideal to victory, a popular party had to be founded—a party that didn't consist only of intellectual leaders but also of manual workers! …

Just as the fundamental principles of the National Socialist Movement are folkish, so folkish ideas are National Socialist. [… We have] not only the right but also the duty to sharply emphasize that any attempt to represent folkish ideas outside of the National Socialist German Worker's Party is impossible, and in most cases fraudulent. […] For what previously existed under this name was utterly incapable of influencing the destiny of our people, since all those ideas lacked a clear and coherent formulation. … Only the National Socialist Movement has accomplished this. … Only the work of the NSDAP gave [the folkish] ideas meaning, and only then was it adopted by all kinds of people.

FROM MEIN KAMPF, SUMMARY OF CHAPTER SEVEN OF VOLUME TWO, pages 217 to 265 of the Thomas Dalton dual-translation. (See here for series introduction.)

Compare then and now ...

__________________________

IN 1919-1920, AND ALSO IN 1921, I attended some of the so-called bourgeois meetings. It invariably had the same effect on me as the compulsory dose of castor oil in my youth. It has to be taken because it's supposed to be good for you, but it tastes terrible! […]

7.1 Bourgeois 'Mass Meetings'

… At that time, I attended meetings of the Democrats, the German Nationalists, the German People's Party, and the Bavarian People's Party (the Bavarian Center). … Nearly always they were made up exclusively of party members. The whole thing was more like a yawning card game than an assembly of people who had just gone through a great revolution.

The speakers did all they could to maintain this peaceful mood. They spoke—or rather read out—their speeches in the style of an intellectual newspaper article or a learned treatise, avoiding all strong expressions. Here and there, they threw in a feeble professorial joke, whereupon the honorable ones felt themselves obliged to laugh; not loudly or provocatively, but encouragingly and with subdued reserve.

What a committee!

I once saw a meeting in Munich's Wagner Hall; it was a demonstration to celebrate the anniversary of the Battle of Nations at Leipzig. The speech was delivered or read by a venerable old professor from one of the universities. … it was more like a religious ceremony … After 45 minutes the audience fell into a sort of hypnotic trance … [The chairman] finally closed the meeting by asking everyone to sing the Deutschland song. … By the third verse my belief strengthened that most of those present weren't very familiar with the text. [...]

Thereupon the meeting broke up, and everyone hurried to get outside … into the fresh air.... [W]as this the way to honor a heroic struggle in which hundreds of thousands of Prussians and Germans had fought? To the devil with it all!

[…] The minister for law and order need not fear that enthusiasm might suddenly get the better of public decorum; that suddenly, in a frenzy, these people might pour out of the room and, instead of heading to beer halls and cafes, march in rows of four through the streets, singing Deutschland hoch in Ehren [O Germany in high esteem] and causing some unpleasantness to a police force in need of rest.

No, they are quite satisfied with that kind of citizen.

7.2 Despicable Red Posters

On the other hand, National Socialist meeting were by no means peaceful. Two distinct worldviews raged in bitter opposition to one another, and these meetings didn't close with the insipid rendering of a patriotic song but rather with a passionate outbreak of folkish national feeling.

It was imperative from the start to introduce rigid discipline into our meetings and establish the absolute authority of the committee. … Our speeches … [were] intended to arouse our opponnents! And there were opponents in our meetings! How often they came in masses, with a few individual agitators among them … with insturction to smash up everything once and for all and put an end to these meetings.

And they had every reason to be irritated.

Merely the red color of our posters drew them to our meeting halls. The ordinary bourgeoisie … regarded this as something deviously ambiguous. … another variety of Marxism, perhaps even Marxists, or better still, socialists in disguise. The actual difference between socialism and Marxism still remains a mystery to these people. The specter of Marxism was conclusively 'proven' when it was discovered that we … addressed each other as party comrade. How often we roared with laughter at these silly faint-hearted bourgeoisie and their efforts to figure out our origin, intentions, and aims.

We chose red for our posters after thorough and careful deliberation, our intention being to irritate the Left … to drive them to our meetings … so that we had a chance to talk to the people.

7.3 Vacillating Tactics of the Marxists

… First they appealed to their followers to ignore us and keep away from our meetings. …

But as time went on, more and more of their followers gradually found their way to us and accepted our doctrine. …

Appeals were then made to the 'class-conscious proletariat' to attend our meetings in masses, and to strike at the representatives of a 'monarchist and reactionary agitaion' with the clenched fist of the proletarian. Our meetings suddenly became packed with workers, fully three-quarters of an hour in advance. [These meetings had an admission fee, unusual for political speakers then and now, which helped greatly in meeting their expenses.-cy] … People came as enemies and, when they left, if not ready to join us, were at least in a reflective mood and thinking critically about the correctness of their own doctrine. Gradually over time, my three-hour lectures resulted in supporters and opponents united into a single mass. … until finally the advocates of the radical tactic won the day. We had to be broken up. Then, after two, three … or ten meetings, it was realized that breaking [the meetings] up was easier said than done. … the other catchword was reintroduced: “Proletarians, comrades! Avoid meetings of the National Socialist agitators!”

The same eterally alternating tactics were also found in the Red press.

[…]

We were exceptionally well-informed in regard to these gentlemen's intentions. Not only because we allowed several of our party colleagues to remain members of the Red organizations for reasons of expediency, but also because the Red wire-pullers were afflicted with a degree of talkativeness that is still unfortunately very prevalent among Germans. They couldn't keep their mouths shut, and more often than not started cackling before the egg was laid. ...

7.4 Illegal Police Activity

The times compelled us to take the defense of our meetings into our own hands; one can never depend on the protection of the authorities; on the contrary, experience shows that it always favors only the disturbers. … The moment [the police] were informed of a threat that a meeting was to be broken up, instead of arresting the would-be-disturbers, they promptly advised the innocent parties that the meeting was forbidden. … This step they called a 'precautionary measure for the prevention of illegality.'

The political work and activities of decent people could therefore always be hindered by desperate gangsters. … [We see the very same with Antifa today -cy]

To avoid such eventualities, it was therefore necessary to see to it that every attempt at disturbance was nipped in the bud.

Another feature had to be considered: … Meetings that are only possible with the protective assistance of a strong police force convert no one, because in order to win over the lower strata of the people, there must be a visible display of one's own strength.

7.5 Psychologically Correct Meeting Management

[…] We had in those days 15 or 16 National Socialists against five-, six-, seven-, or eight-hundred opponents. But we tolerated no interference, and the attendees knew that we would rather be beaten to death than capitulate. […]

Those 15 or 20 men would certainly have been overwhelmed in the end, But the others knew that three or four times as many of them would have had their heads bashed, and they weren't willing to chance it.

We had done our best to learn from the Marxist and bourgeois meeting techniques, and learn we did.  [Could be called the Peace Through Strength approach? -cy]

Chapter 7 to be continued ...

FROM MEIN KAMPF, CHAPTER SEVEN OF VOLUME TWO, pages 217 to 265 of the Thomas Dalton dual-translation. (See here for series introduction.

This completes Chapter 7. A lot here for dissidents to learn about a confident attitude and fearless organizing.

____________________________

7.6 Marxist and Bourgeois Meeting Techniques

The Marxists always exercized the most rigid discipline, and thus the question of breaking up a Marxist meeting could never have originated in the Bourgeoisie. …

Therefore the moment a bourgeois meeting was announced a howl of rage went up from the Red press. …

One simply had to witness such a bourgeois meeting, and see its leaders in all their miserable fear! Very often, such threats were sufficient to call off a meeting at once. … The chairman … did his best … to welcome a visit from men who as yet were not in sympathy with them … also assured them that the meeting had no intention whatsoever of interfering with anyone's professed convictions. No indeed, everyone had the right to form and hold his own political views, as long as others were allowed to do so likewise. He therefore requested … the speaker be allowed to deliver his speech without interruption—the speech wouldn't be long, in any case. …

The brothers on the Left had little if any appreciation for that; before the speaker had even begun, he was shouted down, and not seldom, one had the impression that such speakers were grateful to Fate for quickly ending the painful procedure. …

Therefore, it was something quite new to the Marxist when we National Socialists organized our first meetings. They came to our meetings in the belief that the little game they had so often played could be repeated on us. “Today we'll finish you off!” How often did they boast this to each other upon entering our meeting, only to be thrown out with lightning speed before they had time to repeat it.

In the first place, our meeting committee was entirely different. … We simply stated that we were masters of the meeting, that we would do as we pleased, and that anyone who dared to interrupt would be unceremoniously thrown out. … This in itself astonished them.

7.7 National Socialist Security Troop

Secondly, we had at our disposal a well-organized hall guard—or better, security service—... composed chiefly of young men [who] had been trained and instructed to realize that only terror is capable of smashing terror—that only courageous and determined men had succeeded in this world, and that we were fighting for an ideal so great and noble that it was worth the last drop of blood. They were trained to realize that the best means of defense was attack, and the reputation of our security troops marked us as a combat group and not a debating club. …

And how eagerly did this youth yearn for such an order! …

Thus it became clear to everyone that the Revolution had only been possible thanks to the disastrous bourgeois leadership of our people.

[…]

Already in midsummer of 1920, the organization of security troops was gradually assuming a definite shape, and by the spring of 1921 they were partitioned by hundreds, which in turn were sub-divided into smaller groups.

This was urgently necessary because our meeting activity had steadily increased. … In the autumn and winter of 1920-21, our meetings in the Bürgerbräu and Munich Kindl-Keller had become more massive; NSDAP demonstrations were always overcrowded, so that the police had to close the doors before they even began.

7.8 Old and New Black-Red-Gold

[…] After the War, I was at a Marxist mass-demonstration in Berlin, in front of the Royal Palace and the Lustgarten. A sea of red flags, red scarves, and red flowers was in itself sufficient to give that huge assembly of about 120,000 persons an outward appearance of strength. I could feel and understand how easily the man in the street sucumbs to the hypnotic magic of such a grandiose spectacle.

The Reich was formed without the aid of the German bourgeoisie, and the flag itself was born of the War. Hence it was merely a State flag, possessing no importance in the sense of any particular philosophical mission. …

Until 1920, then, there was no flag to confront Marxism that would have represented its philosohical polar opposite. … At best, [the bourgeoise parties] had in mind a reconstruction of the old Reich.

The black-white-red banner of the old Reich is indebted to this ideal for its resurrection, as the flag of our so-called national bourgeois parties.

[…]

Unlike our bourgeois politicians, I've always adopted the standpoint in our movement that it was true good fortune for the German nation to have lost its old flag. … The [Weimar] Reich of today, which sells-out itself and its people, must never be allowed to adopt the honorable and heroic black-white-red colors.

As long as the November outrage endures, let it continue to bear its own external sign and not steal that of an honorable past.

7.9 The National Socialist Flag

[W]e National Socialists recognize that hoisting the old flag would not symbolize our own activity. We had no wish to resurrect the old Reich from the dead, which had been ruined through its own blunders, but to build up a new State.

[…]

After innumerable trials, I myself decided upon a final form: a banner of red material with a white disc, and a black swastika in the middle. … Along the same lines, we immediately ordered armbands for our security squad: similar red material with a white disk on a red field, and a swastika in the middle. …

The new flag appeared in public for the first time in midsummer 1920. …

As National Socialists, we see our program in our flag. In red, we see the social ideal of the movement; in white, nationalism; in the swastika, the mission of Aryan humanity to fight for victory, and at the same time, for the victory of the idea of creative work, which has always been anti-Semitic and always will be anti-Semitic.

Two years later, when our security troops had long since grown into storm troops [Sturmabteilung], incorporating many thousands of men, it seemed necessary to give this defensive organization of a young worldview a special symbol of victory: the Standard. I also designed this, and entrusted it to an old party comrade, master goldsmith Herr Gahr. Since then, this Standard has been the distinctive symbol and battle sign of the National Socialist struggle.

7.10 First Meeting in the Circus

… [B]y the winter of 1920-21 we could already be regarded as a strong party in Munich. … The Munich Kindl Keller, which held 5,000 people, was more than once overcrowded, and there was only one other hall that we hadn't yet used; this was the Circus Krone.

At the end of January 1921 there was again great cause for anxiety in Germany. The Paris Agreement, at which Germany pledged to pay the insane sum of a hundred billion gold marks, was to be confirmed in the form of the London Dictate [also known as the London Ultimatum or the London Schedule of Payments]. … A Munich working committee representing so-called folkish groups wanted to call a public meeting of protest. ...day after day went by … the working committee couldn't decide on a definite date …

On Wednesday (2 February 1921) … I lost all patience and decided to conduct a protest demonstration of my own. … [I] hired the Circus Krone for Thursday, 3 February.

… I hired two trucks … had our new flag hoisted on [them] and filled with 15 to 20 party members … to canvas the streets thoroughly.

[…]

I arrived at the Circus at 8:02 … The hall was before me, like a huge shell, packed with thousands and thousands of people … More than 5,600 tickets had been sold and, allowing for the unemployed, poor students, and our own security men, there must have been 6,500 present.

My theme was “Future or Downfall'... I spoke for about two and a half hours. ...only when the last word had been spoken did the applause thunder forth, culminating in the “Deutschland” song, sung with the greatest fervor. […]

And to dispel all doubt that the meeting was merely an isolated success, I immediately arranged for another at the Circus for the following week, and again we had the same success. … I decided to hold a third meeting in the same style. And for a third time, the giant Circus was packed full of people, bottom to top. …

The result was an ever-increasing number of supporters and members for our movement.

7.11 An Attempted Disruption

Naturally, such success did not leave our opponents inactive. At first their tactics fluctuated between the use of terror and silence in our regard, but they soon recognized that neither could hinder the progress of our movement. …

It was eventually decided to interrupt one of our meetings planned for the Munich Hofbräuhaus Festsaal, at which I myself was to speak.

On 4 November 1921 … When I arrived in the entrance … at 7:45 pm, the hall was filled, and therefore the police had it closed. Our opponents, who had arrived very early, were in the hall and our followers were for the most part outside. The small SA guard awaited me at the entrance. I … made it clear to the 45 or 46 men that, perhaps on that evening … not one of us would leave the hall unless carried out dead. I was greeted with a triple Heil, which sounded more robust and violent than usual.

I then went into the hall and assessed the situation with my own eyes. Our opponents sat closely huddled together, piercing me with their eyes. … Yet we were able to open the meeting, and I began to speak. … After about an hour and a half … the leaders of the disrupters became more uneasy … suddenly a man jumped on a chair and shouted: “Freedom!” … In a few seconds, the entire hall was filled with a yelling and shrieking mob, above which flew—like howitzers—innumerable beer mugs; amid this uproar, one heard the smash of chair legs, the crashing of mugs, groans, yells, and screams. …

I stood my ground and observed my boys thoroughly doing their duty. …

Like wolves they threw themselves on the enemy again and again, in packs of eight or ten, and began to steadily thrash them out of the hall. After five minutes … hardly one of them wasn't streaming with blood. …

The pandemonium continued for 20 minutes, but then the opponents, who numbered 700 or 800, were mostly dirven from the hall or thrown out headlong by my men, who numbered not even 50. Only in the left corner, a big crowd still held out against our men and put up a bitter fight. Then two pistol shots suddenly rang out from the hall entrance, toward the platform, and now a wild din of shooting broke out.

At that moment it was impossible to identify who had fired the shots; but at any rate I could see that my boys renewed the attack with increased fury, until finally the last disturbers were overcome and driven out of the hall.

About 25 minutes had passed; the hall looked as if a bomb had exploded. Many of my comrades had to be bandaged, and others carried away, but we remained masters of the situation. Hermann Essen, who was chairman this evening, declared: “The meeting will continue. The speaker has the floor.” And so I went on with my speech. …

That evening we learned a lot, and our opponents never forgot the lesson they received.

As of the autumn of 1923, the Münchener Post never again mentioned the fists of the proletariat.

FROM MEIN KAMPF, SUMMARY OF CHAPTER EIGHT OF VOLUME TWO, pages 267 to 283 of the Thomas Dalton dual-translation. (See here for series introduction.)

_________________

GERMAN PATRIOTIC ASSOCIATIONS, for the purpose of facilitating their work, [may] establish mutual relations … for carrying out common actions … clubs, associations, or parties whose goals and methods are not too far apart. … Here arises a general conviction that such a union is an immense gain in strength, and that previously weak, small groups have now suddenly become strong.

This, however, is mostly false! …

[I]t would be logical to expect that one goal should be fought for by only one association. … One man proclaimd a truth somewhere and, calling for the solution of a definite problem, fixed his goal and founded a movement to realize his view. That's how an association or a party is founded—the scope of its program is either the abolition of existing evils or the establishment of a certain state of affairs in the future.

8.1 A Movement's Right of Priority

Once such a movement has come to life, it possesses a certain practical right of priority. …

The reason why the solution of one definte task is usually not left to one association alone is as follows: In general, every action carried out on a grand style on this Earth is the expression of a longstanding desire in millions of people, a longing silently harbored by many. … [O]ne day, Fate bestows on them a man capable of liberating his people from some great oppression, or of wiping out some bitter distress, or of calming the national soul … thus bringing the long-yearned-for fulfillment.

8.2 The Struggle for Leadership

...[M]any feel themselves called to this task—yes, even that Fate itself has proposed many for the choice, so that, through the free play of forces, the stronger and bolder shall finally be victorious, and will be entrusted with the task of solving the problem. …

The people hold vague desires and have only general opinions, without having any precise notion of their own ideals and desires or how they will be fulfilled. … [M]any men struggle to reach the same objective by different roads, without knowing one another.

These movements, parties, and religious groups originate entirely independently of one another. … Nature herself … leaves these diverse groups to compete with one another … thus choosing the clearest, shortest, and surest way by which a movement attains its goal.

How could the correctness or incorrectness of a path be determined from without, if the forces at hand weren't given free play? [T[he final decision is … entrusted to [the] indisputable logic of visible success—which, in the end, always confirms the ultimate correctness of a course of action! …

This rivalry helps each individual fighter develop his faculties, and humanity frequently owes its progress to the lessons learned from the misfortunes of previous attempts.

8.4 Causes of Folkish Splintering

[A] second cause for the fact that movements of the same characteristics strive along different paths … arises from a sad mixture of envy, jealousy, ambition, and a thievish mentality, which are often found united in single specimens of humanity.

The moment a man arises who profoundly understands the distress of his people and … takes measures to cure it … small and petty minds take notice and eagerly follow [his] activity … A crowd of lazy loiterers will prick up their ears and begin to sniff around for whatever little morsel may lie at the end of that road. …

Certainly the founding of a multitude of new groups, parties, etc. in 1918-19, calling themselves folkish, was a natural development of things for which the founders were not at fault. By 1920 the NSDAP had slowly crystallized from all these parties and become victorious. There could be no better proof of the sterling honesty of certain individual founders than that many of them decided to sacrifice their less successful movements to the stronger—by joining it unconditionally or dissolving their own.

This is espeicially true in regard to Julius Streicher, who at that time was the chief fighter for the German Socialist Party (DSP) in Nuremberg. … As soon, however, as the superior strength and stronger growth of the NSDAP became clear and obvious to him, he gave up his work in the DSP and … called upon his followers to fall into line with the NSDAP. … The decision was as personally difficult as it was profoundly decent.

...What we now call 'folkish splintering' owes its existence exclusively to the second of the two causes that I mentioned: Ambitious men who at first had no ideas—much less any goals—of their own, and felt themselves 'called' exactly at that moment that they saw the undeniable success of the NSDAP. Suddenly programs appeared that were mere copies of ours … and all means were attempted to explain why ... it was necessary to establish these new parties. …

At that time, there wasn't a concept or idea of others that these political kleptomaniacs didn't quickly seize upon for their own new business. Those … were the same people who subsequently, with tears in their eyes, deplored the 'folkish splintering' and spoke inceasingly about the 'need for unity.'

8.5 'Working Federations'

At that time, everyone who couldn't stand on their own feet joined one such working federation, believing that eight cripples hanging on to each other could surely form one gladiator. …

Through the formation of a working federation, weak organizations can never be made strong, whereas a strong organization can and does often become weak. … [E]xperience shows that, under all forms and conditions, the majority represents stupidity and cowardice. … Also, through such a coalition, the free play of forces is paralyzed, the struggle for the selection of the best is abolished … and final victory of the healthier and stronger is always impeded. …

One must never forget that nothing really great in this world has ever been achieved through coalitions, but that it has always been due to the success of a single victor. Coalition successes, due to the very nature of their source, carry the germs of future disintegration—yes, even the loss of what has been achieved. Great, truly world-changing revolutions of a spiritual sort are inconceivable and impossible without titanic struggles between individual natures, but never as coalitional undertakings.

HI FRIENDS. Well, I stopped my summaries of Mein Kampf, Vol. II after Chapter 8 back in November 2020, took a break for Thanksgiving through New Year, after which the madness of January 2021 began, with the U.S. Capitol “riot” and the beginning of the criminal Biden administration taking center stage. Now that I've slowed way down on writing original commentary, and finished making much more of my site content visible and linked from the front page side bar (have you noticed?), I've decided to complete the special section on Mein Kampf (still so relevant today). So we begin with Chapter 9, Vol. II, using Thomas Dalton's side-by-side German to English translation (pictured here). Enjoy.

Chapt. 9, p 285 Basic Ideas Regarding the Meaning and Organization of the S.A.  Summary (Part One)

9.1 The three bases for authority in a state are popularity, power (force,) and tradition. Popularity alone is weak and must be bolstered with power. If these two are united, the authority becomes more stable and secure. An invincible foundation is laid by adding the authority of tradition.

The 1918 Revolution totally abolished this last case (tradition) with the collapse of the old Reich, the elimination of the old State form, and the destruction of the old sovereign emblems and Reich symbols. Force also ceased to exist when the army was dissolved. As the armies at the Front arrived at the demobilizing centers, they fell into the confusion of so-called 'voluntary obedience' when confronted with the homeland's acid of disintegration, and the Soldiers' Councils. This left only popularity.

Every national body is made up of three main classes: the best of the people, whose virtues include particularly courage and self-sacrifice. At the other extreme are the worst dregs of humanity, in whom vice and selfishness prevail. Between are the third class, made up of the broad middle stratum who embody neither the best or the worst.

A nation's rise is marked exclusively by the absolute leadership of the extreme best.Times of national collapse are determined by the dominant influence of the worst elements. [This is the situation in the USA today under the Biden-Democrat administration.] The broad masses – that I have called the middle classes – come forward only when the two extreme sections are engaged in mutual struggle. In case of victory for one of the extremes, the middle readily submit to the victor. The middle never fight their own battles.

9.3 The truly enormous amount of heroic German blood that was shed during the four-and-half years [of the Great War] was irreplaceable. It was always a call for “volunteers to the Front', 'volunteers for patrol,' volunteer dispatch carriers,' 'volunteers for telephone squads,' and so on. It was always the same result: Beardless youths or mature men, filled with an ardent love for their Fatherland, with great personal courage or the highest sense of duty – tens of thousands, indeed hundreds of thousands – they came forth, and gradually this type of humanity grew scarcer and scarcer.

While, for four and a half years, our extreme best were being horrendously thinned on the battlefields, the broad middle of our nation gave its share of blood sacrifice, while our extreme worst succeeded wonderfully in saving themselves. This well-preserved scum of our nation then made the Revolution, and could do so only because the extreme best elements were no longer there to oppose it.

9.4 The German Revolution, from the very start, was only conditionally popular. In those days of December, January, and February 1918-1919, the matadors of the Revolution felt the ground trembling beneath their feet, and they looked around them for men who, through love of their people, would stengthen them—by force of arms. But their popularity was grounded only on a society of hooligans, thieves, burglars, deserters, slackers, etc. Hence the cry for help sent out by the public representatives went unheard. [...]

Then, for the first time, large numbers of young Germans appeard who were ready once again to button on the military uniform in the service of peace and order. As volunteer soldiers, they formed into free corps and, although hating the Revolution, began to defend and, in practice, to secure it. They acted in the best of faith. [...]

9.7 A minority of the worst elements had made the Revolution, and they were immediately backed by all the Marxist parties. The Revolution itself outwardly appeared moderate, which aroused the anger of the fanatical extremists.To prevent terror from developing further, a truce was concluded between the new regime and the old order, to wage a common fight against the extremists, with the result that a fight by the old state against the new was averted. Only for this reason was it possible that a nation in which nine-tenths of the people hadn't joined in a revolution, with many repudiating it and even hating it – could have this Revolution imposed upon them by the remaining one tenth.

As the Spartacists and the Nationalists gradually petered out, the masses of the middle triumphed. The Republic began to be 'consolidated.' Honesty, it was not. Since the common bourgeois politician had broken with the monarchy, he now felt better in the slime of republican corruption than in the harsh decency of the forgotten State.

Next up: Part Two

Chapt. 9, Vol II: Basic Ideas Regarding the Meaning and Organization of the S.A. (Part Two)  Summary

9.8 The Revolution led to the enforced creation of a new power factor to ensure state authority—a worldview in direct contradiction to the former one. It was able to create a new army—limited externally by the peace treaties—that was subsequently transformed in spirit into an instrument of the new state conception.That the revolution as a political act succeeded was due to: 1) a paralysis of our conceptions of duty and obedience, and 2) the cowardly passivity of our so-called state-preserving (conservative) parties. [Mitch McConnell is the epitome of this in the US.]

To this must be added: The paralysis that attacked our concepts of duty and obedience was fundamentally due to our wholly non-national and State education. Consciousness of duty, fullfillment of duty, and obedience are not ends in themselves but means to facilitate and assure a community of spiritually and physically homogeneous people. According to our current bourgeois state conception, if a divisional general received an order not to shoot, he acted dutifully and thus rightly in not shooting because blind, formal obedience is more valuable than the life of a nation. But according to the National Socialist conception, it isn't obedience to weak superiors that should prevail at such moments, but obedience to the national community. The duty of personal responsibility towards the whole nation comes to the fore. The Revolution succeeded because that concept had ceased to be a living concept with our people, and government – and gave way to something that was merely formal and doctrinaire.

On the second point, the deeper reason for the cowardice of the 'state-preserving' parties is that the most active and well-intentioned section of our people died in the war. The bourgeois parties were covinced they ought to defend their principles only by intellectual ways and means, To fight Marxism with 'intellectual weapons' only was an absurdity. Marxism always professed the doctrine that the use of arms was purely a matter of expediency, and that success justified their use. From 7 to 11 November 1918, the Marxists did not bother themselves in the least about parliament or democracy, but gave the death blow through their yelling and shooting mob of criminals. The bourgeois talking clubs were defenseless.

9.9 After the Revolution, the new state developed along its own course, as if there were no national opposition at all. When the Law for the Protection of the Republic was introduced, the bourgeois 'statesmen' voted for the law because they feared they might get their heads smashed by the demonstrating Marxists on leaving the Reichstag. Marxism's success was due to a perfect combination of political will and ruthless brutality. Nationalist Germany lacked both.

9.10 The French Revolution and the Russian Revolution owed their success to a new and great idea. It was [equally] an idea that enabled fascism to triumphantly subject a whole nation [Italy] to a process of complete renovation. Bourgeois parties are incapable of this.

Marxism gradually acquired the authority to enforce its power over the Reichswehr, and then proceeded to abolish those defense leagues that seemed so dangerous. Some rash leaders who defied orders were sent to prison. (Sound familiar? -cy)

9.11 The founding of the NSDAP initiated, for the first time, a movement that sought to substitute an organic folkish State for the present absurd state mechanism. From the first day, it took its stand on the idea that muscular force would be employed to defend it with its own forces. Acknowledging that one worldview can only be conquered by a new and different worldview has always been unpleasant for the bureaucrats of the State. Bourgeois simpletons babble about the necessity of not governing against the wishes of the workers, and by 'workers' they mean Marxism.

The German State is strongly overrun by Marxism. In view of the complete subordination of the present State to Marxism, in 70 years of struggle the State has been unable to prevent the triumph of this worldview. [In light of this] the National Socialist movement feels all the more bound to prepare for the triumph of its idea, but also to take upon itself a defense against the terror of the International.

9.12 What distinguishes the security troops of the National Socialist movement from all other defense leagues is the fact that our formations weren't meant to defend the conditions created by the Revolution, but that they fought exclusively for a new Germany.

In the beginning, [it] merely had the character of a meeting-hall guard, making it possible to hold our meetings, which otherwise would have been completely prevented by our opponents. After the meeting-hall fight in the Munich Hofbräuhaus, our security troops were called the Sturmabteilung [storm section] (SA). They are only one section of the movement, one link, just like propaganda, the press, educational institutes, and other sections.

We learned how necessary that formation was when we sought to gradually spread the movement beyond Munich. Once we began to appear dangerous to Marxism, they lost no opportunity to try to preempt or break up any NS meeting. All Marxist organiations always blindly supported the policy and activities of their representatives and reduced to silence the bourgeois parties. Yet these bourgeois parties were pleased with every set-back we had in our fight against Marxism! They were happy that those whom they could not defeat, couldn't be broken by us either. What can be said of persons who debased themselves so far, for a pitiful word of praise from the Jewish papers?

Our movement became secure and attracted public attention and the general respect given to those who can defend themselves when attacked, only when it built up its own defense.

Next: Part Three

Chapt. 9, Vol II: Basic Ideas Regarding the Meaning and Organization of the S.A. (Part Three)  Summary

9.13 As an underlying principle in the SA's internal development, we decided to have nothing to do with the bourgeois type of defense organizations, and especially not with any secret organization. Rather, we decided the men should be perfectly trained in physical education, also instructed in the National Socialist idea [worldview] and finally, educated toward the strictest discipline.

9.14 In examining the question of the creation of defense leagues, I've not stopped asking: For whom am I training these young people? For what purpose will they be employed when they are called up? The answers to these questions provide the best rule for us to follow.

The SA of the NSDAP should be nothing like a military organization. It was an instrument of defense and education for the National Socialist movement.

Considering the talkativeness of the German people, it shouldn't be a secret organization. Only very small groups can become real secret societies, and that only after many years of sifting. But the very smallness of such groups deprives them of value for the National Socialist movement. The work must be done through formidable mass demonstrations in public—by conquering the streets. We must show Marxism that National Socialism will be future master of the street, just as it will one day become master of the State.

The same consideration may be given to the question of eliminating so-called national traitors. It is illogical to shoot a poor wretch who has betrayed a howitzer's position to the enemy while the highest positions of the government are occupied by scoundrels who sold out a whole Reich, who were responsible for millions of dead and maimed in the war.

My view is that small thieves should not be hanged while big ones go free. Based on these considerations, I steadfastly forbade all participation in secret societies, and kept the National Socialist movement away from experiments undertaken by idealistic young Germans who became their own victims because they couldn't assist their Fatherland's destiny in the slightest way.

9.16 By following these ideas in 1920 and 1921, by midsummer 1922 we had an imposing number of formations. In late summer, we participated in the great mass demonstration of all patriotic groups opposed to the Law for the Protection of the Republic on the Koenigsplatz in Munich. Our party procession was led by six Munich blocks, followed by the political sections of the party. Two bands marched along and about 15 flags were carried. Our entry aroused unbounded enthusiasm. I myself had the honor of being one of the speakers who addressed the crowd of about 60,000 people.

Red Republican defense corps tried to terrorize the marching columns but they were scattered by SA detachments within a few minutes. The National Socialist movement had shown for the first time that it was determined, in future, to exercise the right to the streets, and take this monopoly away from the international traitors and enemies of the people.That day we had incontestable proof that our ideas for the structure of the SA were right both psychologically and organizationally.

9.17 The second important event was the march at Coburg in October 1922. 'Folkish' associations decided to hold a so-called 'German Day' at Coburg. I picked 800 SA men as my escort, who had to be brought by special train from Munich [about 150 miles]. When we arrived, the organizers informed us they had made an agreement with the local trades unions that we would not unfurl our flags or have our band playing. I rejected these disgraceful conditions and we marched in a solid column with flags flying, a 42-piece band playing.

When we arrived back in the station yard, we were met by a howling and screaming mob of several thousand. Our young SA remained a model example of order. After the police led us to our quarters, the crowd took to throwing stones. That ended our patience, and in 15 minutes there were no more Reds in the street. In the evening, more serious clashes occurred but by the following morning the Red terror that had afflicted Coburg for years was smashed. We arrived back in Munich safe and sound.

For the first time since 1914, the equality of all Coburg citizens before the law was reestablished.

9.18 From that day the self-confidence of the victorious SA was considerably enhanced, as was their faith in their leaders. Only the democrats lamented that we had the audaciy to hit back with fists and clubs, rather than with pacifist chants. A few decent newspapers expressed satisfaction that someone had dared to deal with the Marxist thugs.

The SA grew so quickly that on Party Day, Jan. 1923, around 6000 men participated in the flag dedication ceremony, and the first blocks [marching columns] were fully clad in their new uniform. Our Coburg experience proved how essential it is to introduce one distinctive uniform for the SA. Until then they had only worn an armband. Additionally, after Coburg we were determined to break the Red terror in all localities where they prevented freedom of assembly.

9.20 The close of 1923 brought terrible events for our movement that I won't go into here. In 1925 the NSDAP was re-founded, and had to reorganize and re-train its SA according to the original principles.

The SA mustn't ever be allowed to sink to the level of a kind of defense league or secret organization, but instead become a vanguard of hundreds of thousands of men, on behalf of the National Socialist – and thus folkish – ideal.

End of Chapter 9

Chapter 10, Vol II: The Mask of Federalism
summary

(I inadvertently skipped from Chapt. 9 to Chapt 11. I can't change the order of the posts, so Chapt 10 is appearing after Chapt 11. But give me credit that I did finally notice it! -cy)

10.2   Until November 1918, the average man misunderstood what was happening, and didn't realize what the inevitable consequences would be of the internecine quarrel between North and South Germans. On the day that the revolution broke out, the leader and organizer of the revolution in Bavaria, the international Jew, Kurt Eisner, began to play off Bavaria against Prussia.

Eisner exploited existing antipathies in Bavaria as a means to break up Germany—believing the shattered Reich would then easily fall prey to Bolshevism. Eisner was not acting from Bavarian interests, but rather as a representative of Jewry. His tactics were continued for a time after his death in February 1919. The fight waged against the military contingents sent to liberate Bavaria was represented as a 'struggle of the Bavarian worker against Prussian militarism.' It bore rich fruit: The Communist parties went from only 13,000 followers to 100,000 after the fall of the Bavarian Republic of Councils.

10.3  It was then that I took the unpopular stand against the anti-Prussian incitement. One woiuld have had to live through some of the meetings of that time to understand what it meant when, surrounded by only a handful of friends, I raised my voice against this madness at a meeting in the Munich Löwenbräukeller.

10.4 By insisting primarily on federalistic intentions as the sole motives of the agitation, the real tendencies were concealed. … But it's quite obvious that the anti-Prussian hatred had nothing to do with federalism. One cannot propagandize for a federalist form of the Reich by debasing, abusing, and besmirching the essential element of such a political structure, namely Prussia. … It's no surprise that they were careful not to attack the Jews, and this perhaps gives the solution to the whole riddle.

10.5  After the revolution, the Jew had to camouflage his campaign of plunder by provoking the so-called 'national' elements against one another: the conservative Bavarians against the equally conservative-minded Prussians. He acted with extreme cunning inasmuch as he provoked such crude and tactless aggressions that they set the blood boiling of those who were affected. ...The Bavarian didn't see the Berlin of 4,000,000 industrious and efficient workers, but only the rotten, decadent Berlin of the vilest West Side! (Jewish quarter)

In 1918 there was nothing like an organized anti-Semitism. ...Whenever we mentioned the word “Jew” we were confronted either with dumb-struck looks or a lively resistance. … The 'Watch and Resist League' at least had the merit of reopening the Jewish Question. ... Later on, the National Socialist movement presented the Jewish Question in a new light. The moment we succeeded in placing this problem before the German people in the light of a great, unified struggle, the Jew reacted [by] bringing up the ultramontane question [the legitimacy of the pope], (so) the resulting clash between Catholicism and Protestantism (would) distract public attention from an attack against Jewry.

10.6   Think how the process of racial disintegration is debasing and often even destoryying the fundamental Aryan values of our German people, such that our national cultural creativeness is regressing and we run the risk, at least in our large cities, of sinking to the present level of southern Italy. Both Christian denominations look on with indifference at the desecration and desturction of a noble and unique creature who was given to the world by God's grace. ...Yet, the two Christian denominations are not fighting against the destroyer of this kind of man but are trying to destroy each other. ...In view of the religious schism that exists in Germany, to attack the essential characteristics of one denomination must necessarily lead to a war of extermination between the two denominations.

I have no hesitation in saying that these men who seek to embroil the folkish movement in religious quarrels are worse enemies of my people than any international communist. The National Socialist movement's mission is to convert the communists. … It's in Jewish interests today that the energies of the folkish movement are bled out in religious conflict. ...Only someone who is entirely ignorant of history could imagine that [this movement] can solve a problem that has defied the centuries and the greatest statesmen. In this way, our people have often been drawn away from the real problems of their existence … while others were carving up the world. Regarding that kind of 'folkish' warrior ... I pray with all my heart: “Lord, protect us from such friends, and then we can easily deal with our enemies.”

10.7  The struggle between federalism and centralization, so conningly propagated by the Jews in 1919-1921 and onwards, forced the National Socialist movement to take a position on its essential problems.

What is a federal State? By this term, we mean a union of sovereign states that come together, of their own free will and in virtue of their sovereignty. They cede ... as much of their own sovereign rights as makes the existence of the union possible. In Germany, as opposed to the American Union, the individual states existed first, and the Reich was formed from them. In most of [the German] states, because of their small territorial size, it cannot be maintained that they ever enjoyed real sovereignty, and 'state sovereignty' was only an administrative phrase.

Bismarck's principle to only take from the individual states what was absolutely necessary for the Reich was a moderate and wise policy. It showed the highest regard for customs and traditions, and also ensured a great measure of love and willing cooperation. [It has turned out] that the Reich's sovereignty has coninually increased at the cost of the sovereignty of the states, fulfilling Bismarck's expectations.

10.8  The abolition of the monarchical State form and its representatives dealt a hard blow to the federal character of the Reich, and even worse was the acceptance of the obligations that resulted from the peace treaty. ...The subsequent steps that led the Reich to take over the postal service and railways were necessary effects of enslaving our people, initiated by the peace treaties.

[...]

Blame must be placed on those men and parties that failed to do everything possible to win the War … especially in Bavaria. … It was an unparalleled example of hypocrisy to raise the cry of lamentation over the loss that the federal states suffered in being deprived of their sovereign rights.

[...]

The lack of sympathy for the Reich political idea isn't due to the loss of state sovereign rights, but rather is a result of the deplorable manner in which the State represents the German people. … Its constant desire to protect itself against its own citizens by means of laws and imprisonment provides the most destructive criticism of the whole institution. (! And this coming from the man who is blamed for turning Germany into a police state?!! No, he did not. -cy)

10.9  The chief characteristic difference between the present Reich's policy and that of former times is this: The old Reich gave internal freedom and showed strength towards the outside world, whereas the Republic shows weakness outside and oppresses its own citizens at home. In both cases, one attitude determines the other; a vigorous national State needs fewer internal laws because of the affection and attachment of its citizens, while an international slave state can live only by coercing its citizens to render their labor.

[...]

The republic, having no sense of tradition or respect for past greatness, dragged those symbols through the mud, and will one day be surprised to discover the superficial devotion of its citizens to its own symbols. … The National Socialists would reverse this formula and adopt the following rule: A strong national Reich that recognizes and protects its citizens' interests to the greatest degree can allow freedom at home without trembling for the safety of the State.

10.11  We National Socialists feel it our duty to energetically oppose centralization in the modern State [such as railways, postal service, finances], especially when the proposed measures mask a disastrous foreign policy. … Hence the struggle against the present centralization of vitally-important institutions, undertaken only to facilitate payment of billions of marks and other collateral for our post-war foreign policy.

The second reason we oppose such centralization is because it might reinforce a system of internal government that has brought the greatest misfortune on the German nation. The present Jewish-democratic Reich is seeking to negate the criticism offered by the federal states … by reducing them to total insignificance.

The third reason is the conviction that a large part of this so-called nationalization is only a means of removing certain institutions from sovereign control of states, in order to open the doors to the interests of the revolutionary parties. …Jews especially have been obtaining positions in economic institutions and administrative apparatuses taken over by the Reich, such that today both have become domains of Jewish activity.

This last consideration obliges us to sharply examine every further attempt at centralizaiton and to fight it at every step. But our standpoint must always be that of a lofty national policy and never a petty particularism. … For us the State is nothing but a form; its content—that is the nation, the people—is the essential thing.

End of Chapter 10

Chapt. 11, Vol II:  Propaganda and Organization summary

11.1  Organization is something that owes its existence to organic life, to organic development. […] One must take account of those human weaknesses that make men hesitate, especially at the beginning, to submit to a superior mind. For this reason it's advisable to sift through the gathering human material to look for leading minds. It sometimes happens that apparently insignifical men will nevertheless turn out to be born leaders.

Great theoreticians are only very rarely great organizers. The organizer must first of all be a psychologist. He must take men as they are … must not have too high or too low an estimate of human nature. Rarely is a great theorist also a great leader. ...An agitator who shows himself capable of transmitting ideas to the broad masses must always be a psychologist, even though he may only be a demagogue. …Being a leader means: to be able to move the masses. The gift of formulating ideas has nothing to do with leadership abilities.

The noblest conceptions of human understanding remain without purpose or value if the leader cannot move the masses towards them. …When the theorist, organizer, and leader are united in one person, then we have the rarest phenomenon on this earth; this combination creates the great man.

11.2  If a movement proposes to overthrow a certain world order and construct a new one in its place, then the leader must ...first divide them into two groups: supporters and members. The function of propaganda is to attract supporters; the function of organization is to win members. A movement's supporter is one who understands and accepts its aims; the member is one who fights for them. Understanding is sufficient for the majority of humanity, who are generally lazy and timid. Membership requires intellectual activity, and therefore applies only to a minority of men. [The word "timid" relates to "intimidation." A great word choice by A.H. The timid are easily intimidated. -cy]

Propaganda works on the whole from the standpoint of an idea, preparing the way for its victory; whereas the organization achieves victory through the persistent, organic, and militant union of those supporters who have proven willing and able to carry the stuggle to victory. [...] As a result, there's no limit to the number of supporters, but the number of members can more easily be too large than too small.

[...]

The greater and more revolutionary an idea is, the more active will be its members, because a doctrines's subversive force becomes a danger to the small-minded and faint-hearted. Some will privately be supporters but are afraid to acknowledge their belief publicly. By reason of this very fact, however, an organization inspired by a veritable revolutionary idea will attract into its membership only the most active of those supporters who have been won over by propaganda.

11.3  The greatest danger that can threaten a movement is an abnormal increase in the number of its members, due to its too-rapid success. So long as a movement is carrying on a bitter fight, people of weak and egotistic temperament will shun it. But these same will rush to be accepted as members the moment the party achieves a manifest success through its development. … As a result of their early successes, so many undesirable, unworthy, and especially timid individuals entered the organization that they finally secured the majority over the militants. They then turned the movement to the service of their personal interests, debased it to the level of their own miserable heroism, and no longer struggled for the triumph of the original idea.

It is therefore necessary that a movement should block its enrollments the moment it becomes successful. Any further increase in its organization should be allowed to take place only with the most careful foresight and after a painstaking sifting of those who apply for membership. Care must be taken that the movement is led exclusively by this core.

11.4  As propaganda director for the party […] the more radical and inflammatory my propaganda was, the more it frightened away any weak and hesitant characters, thus preventing them from entering the core of our organization. … They said that the movement was so radical that membership would expose them to the gravest difficulties and dangers, so that they would rather continue on as honest and peaceful citizens and remain aside for now, though at heart devoted to our cause.

And that was good.

The lively and combative form that I gave to all our propaganda resulted in only radicals [being] ready for membership. Within a short time, hundred of thousands became convinced in their hearts that we were right and wished us victory—even though they were personally too timid to make sacrifices for our cause or even participate in it.

11.5 In the summer of 1921, this simple activity sufficed to benefit the movement. A group of folkish dreamers attempted to take over the party, which led to me being given leadership of the whole movement. From 1 August 1921 I undertook an internal party reorganzation and was supported by a number of excellent men. I introduced principles that none of the other parties possessed or would even have recognized.

The party currently embodied that which the movement was fighting against, namely parliamentarianism.... It was imperative to change this, so the party could fulfill its high mission. There was no such thing as personal responsibility. I refsed to submit to that kind of nonsense, and avoided the meetings. I did only my propagada work, and didn't permit any incompetent to poke his head into my activities. Conversely, I didn't interfere in the affairs of others.

11.6   When I was appointed as first chairman, I had the necessary authority and right to introduce the principle of absolute responsibility in place of committee decisions. Each man is solely responsible for the task assigned to him, subordinate only to the chairman. This law of fundamental responsibility is gradually being adopted throughout the movement [as of 1925] – it will take years before this principle can be [fully] imposed, because cowards and incompetents are naturally opposed to it; for them sole responsibility for an act is always unpleasant. They always feel freer and better when hiding behind the majority of a so-called committee. … Ultimately this ['law'] will bring forth leaders who are truly called and chosen for the role.

11.7 This idea led to a sharp distinction between the principles of personal responsibility and political leadership, bringing a healthy liberation from political influences and allowing them to operate solely on economic principles. [...]

We first met in a tavern on the Herrengasse and then in a cafe on Gasteig. I quickly set to work to rent a [private] room for use by the party. Our first business office was small, dim and gloomy. Slowly we got electric light, slower still a telephone; a table, chairs, etc.

Our system of running the movement with weekly leadership meetings was unsustainable; only a paid official … could guarantee ongoing operations. The movement still had so few members that it was hard to find among them a suitable person. After a long search, we found a soldier, an old war comrade of mine, Schüssler, to be our first business manager. He eventually extended his hours to full time, and he worked from morning until late at night. He was an industrious, upright, and thoroughly honest man, devoted to the movement. Schussler brought with him his own small Adler typewriter; the first machine used in the service of the movement. Later the party acquired it through installment payments.

[…]

A year and a half later, our business office had become too small, so we moved to a new place in the
Corneliusstrasse. We were again in a tavern, but we now had three smaller rooms and one large room with great windows. We stayed there until November 1923. [When the party was banned and disbanded and Hitler went to prison -cy]

In December 1920, we acquired the Völkisher Beobachter, a newspaper that was to become the organ of the NSDAP. In contrast to the enormous Jewish press, there was hardly a single significant folkish newspaper. I learned the reason for this was the incompetent management of the so-called folkish enterprises. They were conducted according to the view that conviction should prevail over achievement. … The underlying idea was that folkish newspapers should be subsidized by folkish contributions, without recognizing that it had to compete with the others, and that subscriptions of good patriots could not make up for negligence or errors.

Luckily, in midsummer 1921 I met one day by chance … my old Army superior from 1914, Max Amann [and asked him to be the business manager]. After a long hesitation (he then held a good position), he agreed to my request on the condition he not be at the mercy of incompetent committees.

This first business manager brought order and integrity into the party's business affairs. [...] The movement remained pactically debt-free, except for small current accounts. Employees hold their jobs by virtue of their achievement and can in no sense take cover behind that famous 'conviction.' … He who doesn't fulfill his duty in the job he holds cannot boast of his conviction. […] No one got a position based solely on party membership. […] It's offensive and un-National Socialist when incompetent people constantly interfere in the work of capable persons.

(End of Chapt. 11)

Chapter 12, Vol II: The Trade Union Question summary

12.1 In the first volume of this book, I explained that unless measures are undertaken to change the employer's attitude toward the worker … the worker has no recourse except to appeal to his equal rights as a contracting party within the economic sphere. I further stated that this would be in the interests of the national community if social injustices could be addressed that would otherwise cause serious damage to the whole social structure. Moreover, the worker would always find it necessary to undertake this protective action as long as some among the employers had no sense of their social obligations, or even elementary human rights. I concluded by saying that if such self-defense was considered necessary, it could only exist in the form of a workers' association on a trade-union basis.

Now it was necessary to find a clear and precise formula regarding these problems.

As things stand, I'm convinced that we cannot dispense with unions. When the broad masses of a nation see their vital needs satisfied through a sound trade union movment, the whole nation will be exceptionally strengthed in its struggle for existence.

The National Socialist movement, which aims at etablishing a National Socialist folkish State, must always bear in mind that every future insitution in that state must grow from the movement itself. It's a great mistake to believe that we can bring about a definite reorganization without the help of a certain reserve stock of men who have been trained in their convictions. [...] This organization must possess National Socialist life in itself, so as to create a living National Socialist State.

12.2 The trade union is not a tool of 'class struggle,' but the Marxists made it into an instrument for use in their own class struggles. They created the economic weapon that the international world-Jew uses for the purpose of shattering the economic foundations of free and independent nation states, and for destroying national industry and trade, thereby enslaving free peoples to serve a supra-state Jewish world-finance.

12.3 By contrast, the National Socialist trade union will enhance the security of the national economic system itself, reinforcing it by the elimination of all those anomalies that ultimately exercise a destructive influence on the national body.

National Socialist employees and employers are both servants and guardians of the whole national community. The large measure of personal freedom accorded to them for their activities can be explained by the fact that individual efficiency is more enhanced by a generous measure of freedom than by coercion from above. Furthermore, such freedom promotes the natural selection process that brings forth the ablest, most capable, and most industrious people.

The Economic Chamber's duty will be to keep the national economy operating and to remove any injuious defects or errors. … Executives and employees will no longer be drawn into a mutual conflict over wages and pay scales, damaging the economic interests of both. The iron principle must be observed, that the interests of the Fatherland come before party.

It would be senseless to have a National Socialist union alonside other unions. It must have a thorough feeling for its philosophical task and the resulting obligation not to tolerate other similar or hostile organizations.It can come to no understanding and no compromise with related efforts but must assert its own absolute and exclusive right.

Today the National Socialist movement must fight against a long-standing and monstrous organization that is developed down to the smallest details. The Marxist trade-union fortress can be governed today by mediocre leaders, but it can only be stormed by the dauntless energy and genius ability of a great leader on the other side. If such a man cannot be found, it's foolish to force the issue without adequate replacement.

Here one must apply the maxim that, in life, it's often better to let something go than to try it half-way, due to a lack of suitable forces. We should learn from experience that the more the combined strength of our movement is concentrated on the political struggle, the sooner we can count on success down the line; but the more we prematurely busy oursleves wih union, settlement, and other problems, the less will be the benefit for our cause as a whole.

12.4 At that time I had—and still have today—a firm conviction that it's dangerous to mix up a great politico-worldview struggle with economic questions at an early time. This applies particularly to our German people. The economic struggle would divert energy from the political fight. Once the people come to believe that they can buy a little house with their savings, they'll devote themselves solely to this task; no spare time will be left for the political struggle against those who, one way or another, will some day take away their savings. Instead of fighting in the political conflict on behalf of the opinions and convictions they have won, they'll surrender to their 'settlement' idea, and in the end will lose out.

In November 1918, the German people didn't wage any political fight for the future of Germany because they thought they could secure it sufficiently by constructive economic work. We should learn from experience; the more the combined strength of our movement is concentrated on the political struggle, the sooner we can count on success down the line. If our movement takes up the other problems too soon, they will prove a hindrance to the philosophical will.

A National Socialist union movement must declare war against the Marxist unions, not only as an organization, but above all, as an idea. It must strike down the promoter of the class-idea and class warfare, and in its place declare itself as the defender of the occupational interests of the German people.

12.5 All these viewpoints argue, then, against the founding of our own trade unions. Unless, that is, someone suddenly appears who is obviously called by Fate to solve this particular problem. I recommend that our party members remain in the unions for now, while working as destructively as possible. … During the inflation period, the financial advantage to the union from our members was almost zero due to the few individuals in our young movement. But the damage to the union was great because the National Socialist supporters were its sharpest critics.

We acted on these views in 1922. Others thought differently and founded trade unions. They attacked us for being short-sighted and mistaken. But it wasn't long before these organizations disappeared and the same would have happened to us.

End of Chapter 12

Chapter 13, Vol II: German Post-War Alliance Policy  Summary

13.1   [The November Criminals] had no interest in an alliance policy that would untimately result in the restoration of a free German State. It would have interrupted and indeed put an end to the internationalization of the German economy and labor; the domestic political effects of a successful fight for freedom from foreign countries would be disastrous for those who now hold power in the Reich.

Since 1918, governmental authorities have failed us in foreign affairs, and State leaders have almost constantly and systematically worked against the interest of the German nation.

13.2  Our movement has always proclaimed the principle that external freedom is not a gift from heaven or any earthly powers, but can only be the fruit of our inner strength. Only by the elimination of the causes that led to our collapse, and the destruction of all those who profit from it, can we fight for the restoration of our external freedom.

The fundamental and guiding principle that we must always bear in mind when studying this question is that foreign policy is only a means to an end, and the sole end is the promotion of our own people. ...This is the sole preoccupation that must occupy us in dealing with this question. Party politics, religion, humanitarianism—all other viewpoints are totally irrelevant.

13.3  Today we must make our nation powerful once again by reestablishing a strong and independent State. [...]

The interests of the separated regions must be subordinated to the one purpose of acquiring sufficient political power and strength for the remnant State to correct the hostile will of the victorius enemy. Not flaming protests, but only the mighty sword will restore oppressed territories to the bosom of a common Reich.

The forging of this sword is the task of a nation's internal political leadership; to secure this task, and to seek out comrades in arms, is the task of foreign policy.

13.5   For the past 300 years, the history of our continent has been fundamentally determined by England's efforts to keep the European states opposed to one another in an equilibrium of forces, thus assuring the necessary protection of its own rear while pursuing the great aims of British world-policy.

The shift in British policy against Germany took place only very slowly. […] England allied itself with those countries that had a definite military importance, and this was consistent with its traditional caution in estimating the adversary's power and also in recognizing its own temporary weakness. […]

When the German Revolution occurred, England's fears of a German world hegemony came to a satisfactory end. [...] European equilibrium was unhinged within 48 hours; Germany destroyed, and France the first European continental power. […] During those months of [peace treaty] negotiations & bargaining, the only power that could have altered the course of things—Germany itself—was torn asunder by a civil war, and its so-called statesmen declared themselves ready to accept any dictate.

13.6  Thus, the political result of the war to prevent the development of German power was French hegemony on the continent. The military result: the consolidation of France as the first continental power and the recognition of the union (USA) as an equal sea power. The economic result: the surrender of great spheres of British interests to former allies.

13.8  The premise for linking together the destinies of nations is never mutual esteem or mutual sympathy, but rather the prospect of advantages for both contracting parties.

[...]

We must be very clear on this point: France is, and will remain, Germany's implacable mortal enemy. … Their foreign policy will always be directed towards acquiring posession of the Rhine frontier, and to consolidating France's position on this river by dismembering and shattering Germany. […] England doesn't want Germany to be a world power, but France wants no power at all called 'Germany'!

Italy cannot and will not want any further strengthening of France's power in Europe. […] Serious and cool-minded consideration shows that these two states, England and Italy, have natural self-interests that not only are not in opposition to Germany's essential conditions for existence, but are to a certain extent identical with them.

13.9-10  When we consider the possibilities of alliances, we must be careful not to overlook three factors.

Can any power today hope to establish useful relations in the fight for common interests when this State has neither the courage nor the desire to lift a finger even in the defense of its own naked existence? … No—any self-respecting power that expects something more than commissions for greedy parliamentarians will not ally itself with our present-day Germany; indeed, it cannot.

Second, we must not overlook the difficulty in overcoming the mass propaganda of our former enemies. … When a nationality has been represented to the public for years as a horde of 'Huns,' 'robbers,' vandals', etc., they cannot suddenly overnight be presented as something else. The former enemy cannot be recommended as the ally of tomorrow.

But the third factor is of essential importance for establishing future alliances in Europe: Contrary to the interests and welfare of the British state, Jewish finance desires not only the absolute economic destruction of Germany but its complete political enslavement. The internationalization of our German economy—that is, the transference of our productive forces to Jewish world finance—can only be completely carried out in a politically Bolshevik state.

Hence it is that the Jew today is the great agitator for the complete destruction of Germany. … In peacetime and during the War, Jewish stock exchange and Marxist press systematically stirred up hatred against Germany, until one state after another abandoned its neutrality and placed itself at the service of the world war coalition, renouncing the real interests of people.

13.11 The Bolshevization of Germany—that is, the rooting out of national folkish German intellectuals [die Ausrottung der nationalen voelkischen deutschen Intelligenz]—is only a prelude to an extension of the Jewish tendency for world conquest. […] It is certain that Jewry uses all its agitational efforts not only to maintain national animosity toward Germany but, … it is the more or less 'cosmopolitan,' pacifist-ideological thoughts—in short, the internationalist tendencies that they use in their struggle for power. In France, they exploit the chauvinism, and in England, the commercial and world-political outlook.

In France today, there exists a profound accord between the views of the Jew-controlled stock exchange and the chauvinistic national statecraft. This identity constitutes an immense danger for Germany; for this reason France is and will remain by far the most terrible enemy. This people, who are becoming more and more niggarized, represent an enduring danger to the existence of the white race in Europe because they are bound up with the Jewish goal of world domination.

For the forseeable future, there will only be two European allies for Germany: England and Italy.

13.13-14   From August 1914 to November 1918, I did my share of fighting to save South Tyrol,* and every other German province, for the Fatherland. [W]e carried on that fight in the belief that a victorious outcome of the war would preserve South Tyrol for the German nation, while the loud-mouthed traitors agitated and plotted against victory

It must be made clear that we cannot recover lost territories by depending on solemn appeals to Almighty God, or by pious hopes in a League of Nations, but only by force of arms.

[...]

It must be said: South Tyrol was 'betrayed,' first, by every German of sound limbs who did not offer himself for service to the fatherland in 1914-18;

Second, by every man who did not help to reinforce the national body's power of resistance, so as to enable the country to carry on the fight to the very end;

Third, by everyone who took part in the November Revolution—either directly or indirectly by a cowardly toleration of it;

And fourth, by those parties and their followers who signed the disgraceful treaties of Versailles and St. Germain.

Now, I have no hesitation in saying that today it's not only impossible to win back South Tyrol through a war but I should definitely reject it, because I'm convinced it would not be possible to arouse the German people's enthusiasm over this question to the degree necessary for success.

If the German nation wants to end a condition that threatens to root it out of Europe (drohenden Ausrottung in Europa), it must determine the most dangerous enemy (Jewish Bolshevism​? -cy) and then concentrate all its power to strike at it.

(*South Tyrol is a semi-autonomous province in northern Italy, comprised primarily of German-speakers.)

13.17  The general anti-German psychosis cultivated by war propaganda in other countries must inevitably continue to exist until there is a renaissance of a German will to self-preservation. […] This will take years of clever and continuous work. … One mustn't try to change national sentiment based on empty bragging … but only if there's a tangible guarantee of the value of the new orientation. Otherwise, there could be a complete shattering of public opinion.

Therefore a nation, in our situation, will be seen as a possible ally only if government and public opinion are united in the same enthusiastic determination to fight for freedom. This must be firmly established before any attempt can be made to change public opinion in other countries.

13.18  Here is a mission for the National Socialist movement. It must teach our people to overlook the small things and focus on the great ones; to not become divided over minor issues; and to never forget that the object for which we fight today is the naked existence of our people, and the sole enemy that we must confront is that power which is robbing us of our existence. … There is no excuse for raising senseless outcries against the whole world, instead of concentrating all our forces against the most deadly enemy.

13.20-22  Is it conceivable that those who represent the true interests of those alliance-possible nations could uphold their views against the will of the Jewish mortal enemy of free peoples and nation-states?

The fight that fascist Italy is waging against the Jews' three principal weapons—furnishes the best proof that the poisonous fangs of this supra-state power are being torn out, albeit indirectly. The prohibition of Freemason secret societies, the suppression of the supra-national press, and the continuous demolition of international Marxism … will, over the years, enable the Italian government to more and more serve the interests of the Italian people, without regard to the hissing of the Jewish world-hydra.

Things are harder in England. … And yet there is a perpetual struggle between advocates of British state interests and the proponents of Jewish world dictatorship.... Despite ties of kinship, there is a certain amount of jealousy in England over the growing importance of the American Union in all spheres. It's quite understandale that today England should reexamine her old alliances

[...]

The destruction of Germany was not an English interest, but primarily a Jewish one.

[…]

Now, due to his thousand years of adaptation, the Jew […] can mimic the ways of the German and the Englishman, the American and the Frenchman, but he has no means of approach to the yellow Asiatic. … So he incites nations against Japan today … by using the war-cry in the British-Jewish press: “Down with Japanese militarism and imperialism!”

That's how insubordinate the Jew has become in England today.

13.23  The National-Socialist movement has a tremendous task to fultill: In the place of hatred against Aryans—from whom we may be separated on almost every other ground but with whom the bond of common blood and kindred civilization unite us—we must arouse a general wrath against the maleficent enemy of mankind, as the real author of all our sufferings.

Chapter 14, Vol II: Germany's Policy in Eastern Europe  Summary

14.1  A source of anxiety to me:  The members of our movement are not recruited from those who are indifferent, but rather mostly from among those with very extreme worldviews. [...] It's only natural that their understanding of foreign politics should suffer from prejudice and inadequate knowledge ... However harmful their previous teaching may have been, this was at least partially balanced by a residue of sound and natural instincts. [...] Thus I feel myself obliged to offer to my own colleagues a clear exposition of the most important problem in foreign policy, namely, our relation to Russia.

A folkish state's foreign policy must first of all bear in mind the duty of securing the existence of the race on this planet … by establishing a healthy relation between the number and growth of the population and the quantity and quality of the soil.

14.2  The only healthy condition is one that assures a people's sustenance on their own soil.

I have already explained [in Volume 1, Chapt. 4] that a state's land area is of importance, not only as the source of the nation's food, but also militarity and politically. […] The German nation can assure its own future only as a world power. For nearly 2,000 years, the defense of our national interests was a matter of world history … We ourselves have been witnesses to this: The gigantic struggle of nations from 1914 to 1918 was only the struggle of the German people for their existence on this globe.

In 1914, if there had been a different relation between our area and population, Germany really would have been a world power and … the war would have ended in our favor.

Germany today is no world power. What importance does a State have in which the relation of population to area is so miserable as in the present German Reich? [Our] political Motherland is confined to the laughable area of barely 500,000 square kilometers. [Ed: Present-day Germany is around 357,000 square kilometers.]

14.3  The British world empire, which owns almost a fourth of the Earth's surface, the American Union, Russia and China … and even France must be ranked among the world powers of today. […] If France continues to develop in the present manner for the next 300 years … [it] would be a formidable, self-contained settlement area from the Rhine to the Congo, filled with an inferior race that gradually emerged through a process of continuous bastardization.

[…]

Never has the relation between area and population in the German Reich been as unfavorable relative to other world states. Formerly we were a young people storming into a world of crumbling great states, whose last giant, Rome, we helped to bring down. Today we find ourselves in a world of great power-states in which our own Reich is constantly sinking into insignificance.

14.4  We must always face this bitter truth clearly and calmly … Germany is no longer a world power, regardless of whether its military strength is strong or weak—thanks to the wholly catastrophic leadership of our people in foreign policy, and to the loss of every sound impulse and instinct for self-preservation.

[…]

[We] must find the courage to organize our national forces and set them on a path that will lead them away from the present restricted living space and toward new land and soil. […] In doing so, [the National Socialist Movement] must bear in mind the fact that we are members of the highest humanity on this Earth, that we have a correspondingly high duty to inspire the German people [to] not only breed good dogs, horses, and cats, but also care for their own blood.

14.5  If we examine the political experiences of our people during more than a thousand years, recalling the innumerable wars and struggles, and scrutinizing it all in the light of present results, we must confess that this sea of blood has produced only three phenomena that we may consider as lasting fruits of specific actions in foreign policy and overall politics:

1) The colonization of the Ostmark, mostly by the Bavarians;

2) The conquest and settlement of the territory east of the Elbe; and

3) The organization of the Brandenburg-Prussian state by the Hohenzollerns, which became the model for the crystallization of a new Reich.

The first two have remained the most enduring. Without them our people would play no role today. […] The third resulted in the German army's instinct of self-preservation and self-defense, which was suited to the modern world. […] The German people became disciplined under the organization of the Prussian army, and in this way recovered some of their long-lost organizational capacity. […] Ten generations of Germans without corrective and educational military training, leaving us to the evil effects of racial, and hence philosophical, division—and our people would lose the last remnant of an independent existence.

[…]

We must take our stand on the highest viewpoint regarding all foreign policy, namely: to bring the land into harmony with our population.The aim of our political conduct must lie in two directions: 1) land and soil as the objecive of our foreign policy, and 2) a new, philosophically established, uniform foundation as the goal of domestic political activity.

14.6  To demand the restoration of the 1914 borders is a political absurdiy … the 1914 Reich borders were anything but logical ... Indeed they were partly the result of chance.

[…]

If we are convinced that the German future calls for the highest sacrifice ... then we must establsh a worthy goal, and fight for it.

The 1914 borders are of no significance for the German future. They neither served to protect us in the past, nor do they offer any strength for the future.

14.7  [W]e National Socialists must stick firmly to our foreign policy goal, that the German people be assured of the land and soil entitled to it on this Earth. And only this action, before God and our German posterity, would justify any sacrifice of blood: because we are sent into this world with the mission to struggle for our daily bread, as creatures to whom nothing is given, and who must be able to win and defend their position as lords of the Earth only through their own intelligence and courage. […] The land on which our German peasants will one day be able to bring forth their sturdy sons justified the investment of our sons today. And even though the responsible statesmen may be persecuted by their contemporaries, posterity will absolve them from all blood guilt for this sacrifice of their people.

Here I must offer the sharpest protest against those folkish pencil-pushers who pretend that such territorial extension would be a 'violation of sacred human rights.' One never knows who stands behind such persons but … the confusion they provoke is desireable and convenient for the enemies of our nation. […] No nation on Earth possesses even a square meter of land by decree of a higher Will or a higher Right.

[…]

State borders are made by man, and can be changed by man. […] If the German people are imprisoned within an impossible area, and face a miserable future, this is not by the command of Fate, anymore than to oppose such affairs is to disobey it. Just as no higher power has promised more territory to other nations than to the German, so it cannot be blamed for an unjust distribution of soil. [T]he soil on which we now live … had to be conquered by mortal risk—so too in the future.

Today we're all convinced of the need to reckon with France, but this would be broadly ineffective if it were the sole aim of our foreign policy. It will have significance only if it serves in the struggle for an enlargement of our people's living space in Europe. Colonial acquisitions won't solve that problem. This will happen only by the winning of settlement territory such as will extend the area of the Motherland … in a unified expanse.

The folkish movement mustn't be an advocate for other nations, but rather a protagonist for itself. […] The old German policy was unjustly determined by dynastic considerations; future policy must not follow this sentimentality. We must especially not be security police for the well-known 'poor, small nations,' but rather soldiers of ourselves.

We must go still further: The right to land and soil becomes a duty when a great nation seems destined to go under, unless its land is extended. … Germany will either be a world power, or not at all.

14.8  Therefore we National Socialists have purposely drawn a line through our pre-war conduct of foreign policy. We resume where we left off six centuries ago. We shut off the colonial and trade policy of pre-war times, and pass over to the land policy of the future.

[...]

Destiny itself seems to wish to point the way for us here. In delivering Russia over to Bolshevism, it robbed the Russian people of that intelligentsia that had once created and secured the Russian state. [That] was not a result of Russian Slavic political ability, but rather was a marvelous example of the state-building capacity of the Germanic element amidst an inferior race.

Many powerful empires were created on the earth in this way. .. For centuries, Russia owed its sustenance to the Germanic nucleus of its ruling upper class.

Today this class has been almost completely rooted out (ausgerottet) and extinguished (ausgelöscht). The Jew has taken its place. … He himself is no organizing element, but rather a ferment of decomposition. This colossal Eastern Empire is ripe for dissolution. And the end of Jewish rule in Russia will also be the end of Russia as a state. We are chosen by Fate to be witnesses of a catastrophe that will afford the strongest confirmation of the folkish race-theory.

Our task … is to develop the political insight in our people that will enable them to realize that their future aim … [lies in] the industrious labor of the German plow, for which the sword will provide the soil.

End of Part One. Part Two (14.9 to 14.16) coming soon.

Chapter 14, Vol II: Part Two - Germany's Policy in Eastern Europe  Summary

14.10   As early as 1920-21 […] the party was approached from various quarters in an attempt to connect it with liberationist movements in other countries. This was in line with the much-promoted 'League of Oppressed Nations.'

[...]

I always resisted such attempts. […]

The alliance with Austria, as well as that with Turkey, was not very helpful. (Referring to the recent Great War -cy) […] Germany paid dearly for that mistaken foreign policy. But it wasn't bitter enough to prevent our eternal visionaries from falling back into the same error again. The attempt to disarm the all-powerful victors through a 'League of Oppressed Nations' is not only ridiculous but disastrous, … because it continually diverts the German people from real possibilities, which they abandon for the sake of fruitless hopes and illusions.

14.11   I remember well the childish and incomprehensible hopes that suddenly arose in folkish circles in the years 1920-21, to the effect that England was nearing collapse in India.

[...]

It's a bad sign of having learned nothing from the World War, and of thoroughly misunderstanding or knowing nothing about Anglo-Saxon determination, to imagine that England could lose India wihout risking everything. […] England will only lose India if it allows racial degeneration in its administrative machinery (which is presently out of the question in India) or if it's overcome by the sword of some powerful enemy. […] I, as a German would far rather see India under English rule than under any other.

It's impossible for a coalition of cripples to attack a powerful state, if it's determined to shed the last drop of its blood for its existence. As a folkish man who appraises the value of humanity by their race, I must recognize the racial inferiority of the so-called 'oppressed nations,' and this prevents me from linking my own peoples' destiny with theirs.

14.12  Present-day Russia, deprived of its Germanic ruling class, is not a possible ally in the struggle for German Freedom, … from a purely military viewpoint, a Russo-German coalition waging war against Western Europe, and probably against the whole world, would be catastrophic. […] Germany's industrial area would lie undefended to the concentrated attack of our adversaries. Additionally, the Polish state lies between Germany and Russia, and it's completely in French hands.

[…]

[T]he World War situation would be repeated but in a more terrible manner. German industry then was drained to help our glorious allies [sarcasm -cy], and from the technical side, Germany had to conduct the war almost alone.

[...]

German youth would have to shed even more blood than before, because, as always, the honor of fighting would fall on us alone, and the result would be an inevitable defeat.

[…]

One must never forget that the present rulers of Russia are blood-stained criminals, that they are the dregs of humanity which, favored by circumstances in a tragic hour, overran a great state, extinguished and rooted out (ausrottete) millions of the leading intelligentsia out of sheer blood-lust, and that now, for nearly ten years, they have ruled with the most savage tyranny of all time. One must also never forget that these rulers belong to a people in whom the most bestial cruelty is allied with an inconceivably artful lying, and which is, today more than ever, conscious of a mission to impose its bloody oppression on the rest of the world. One must never forget that the international Jew, who is today the absolute master of Russia, regards Germany not as an ally but as a state condemned to the same fate. One does not form alliances with someone whose only aim is the destruction of its partner. Above all, one doesn't form alliances with subjects for whom no treaty is sacred ...

[…]

In Russian Bolshevism we see an attempt undertaken by Jewry in the 20^th century to secure world domination—just as, in other epochs, they worked towards the same goal but with different, though related, means.

[…]

But the impotence of nations, their death through senility, only comes with loss of blood purity. And this is something that the Jew has preserved better than anyone else on Earth. […] Germany is today the next great war-aim for Bolshevism. […] How can we release our people from this poisonous grip if we turn ourselves over to it? How can we teach the German worker that Bolshevism is an accursed crime against humanity if we ally ourselves with this hellish monstrosity and thus recognize its legitimacy? …

The fight against Jewish world-Bolshevization demands a clear stance towards Soviet Russia. One cannot cast out the Devil with Beelzebub.

If folkish circles today grow enthusiastic about the idea of a Russian alliance, then let them look around Germany and become aware of who is supporting them. Or do these folkish people believe that a policy recommended and acclaimed by the international Marxist press can be beneficial to the German people?

14.13  [T]he old German Reich … spoiled its relations with everyone by leaning this way and that, and by its pathological weakness in trying to preserve world peace at any price. […] I frankly admit that, in pre-war times, I thought it would have been better if Germany had abandoned its senseless colonial policy and its naval policy and had allied with England against Russia. … I can't forget the constant insolent threats that Pan-Slavist Russia made against Germany.

I haven't forgotten the constant practice military mobilizations that served only to antagonize Germany. I cannot forget the tone of Russian public opinion which, in pre-war days, excelled in hateful outbursts against our nation and Reich. Nor can I forget the big Russian press, which was always more favorable to France than to us.

[…]

Circumstances are different today. […] The present consolidation of the great states of the world is the last warning signal for us to look to ourselves and bring our people back from their dream-world to hard reality. … [then] the catastrophe of 1918 may turn out to be an infinite blessing for the future of our nation.

[…]

In its dealings with the outside world, the political testament of the German nation should, and must always be, the following:

Never permit two continental powers to arise in Europe! Any attempt to organize a second military power on the German border by the creation of a state capable of military strength, will be viewed as an attack against Germany.

[…]

See to it that our nation's strength is grounded not on colonial foundations but on the soil of our European homeland! Never consider the Reich secure unless, for centuries to come, it can give every descendant of our people his own piece of land and soil! …

14.14  In the previous chapter, I … cited England and Italy as the only two European states that would be desirable and advantageous allies.

[...]

The full significance of such an alliance lies in the fact that, upon conclusion, Germany would no longer be exposed to a sudden, hostile invasion. … The Entente, which brought such misfortune to us, would dissolve, and France—the mortal enemy of our people—would be isolated. […] [O]ur flank would be strongly protected and [we would have] the complete assurance of food and raw materials.

[…] For the first time, Germany would have allies who would not be like leeches on our economy but who can and would contribute their part to complete our technical arms.

14.15  […] The future goal of our foreign policy must be neither West-nor East oriented, but rather must be an Eastern policy in the sense of securing the necessary soil for our German people.

14.16  Today, naturally, we are subjected to the hate-filled jabbering of the internal enemies of our people. But we National Socialists will never allow this to stop us from proclaiming the absolute necessities of our innermost convictions.

[…]

It's necessary that, in the eyes of the rest of the world, our National Socialist movement should be recognized as establishing a definite political intention. Whatever Heaven has in store for us, let everyone recognize us by our aim.

End of Chapter 14  -  Go to Part One

Chapter 15, Vol. Two: The Right to Emergency Defense  Summary

15.1  Developments in Germany since 1918 prove that the hope of winning the victor's favor by voluntary submission has the most disastous influence on the political views and conduct of the broad masses.

[…]

Seeing that the direction of our post-war historical destiny was now openly controlled by Jews, it's impossible to admit that defective knowledge was the sole cause of our misfortune. Rather, we must conclude that our people were intentionally driven to ruin.

15.2   Seven years after November 1918, the Locarno Treaty was signed. It's purpose was to formalize post WWI borders and to promote reconciliation. [The primary German Signatory was Foreign Minister Gustave Stresemann, whose wife, Kaete Kleefeld, was Jewish.]

Thus in Germany, edicts for disarmament, enslavement, and political and economic plundering followed one after the other.

Finally, they created a mood that caused many to look upon the Dawes Plan as a blessing, and the Locarno Treaty as a success. As incompetent as our leaders were, they were equally conceited!

…

The less real service provided by the parliamentary statesmen of this Republic (Weimar), the more savagely they persecuted all who expect real achievements!

15.3  By the beginning of 1922-23, it should have been generally recognized that France was still endeavoring to attain it's original war aims.

[...]

The aim was: Disintegration of Germany into a collection of small states.

[…]

For England, the war was really won when Germany was destroyed as a colonial and commercial power, and was reduced to the rank of a second-class state. It wasn't in their interest to wipe out the German State altogether, but they had every reason to want a future rival against France in Europe.

… thus, Clemenceau's statement – that peace was only a continuation of the war – acquired an enhanced significance.

I emphasize, and am firmly convinced, that this second alternative will one day occur, whatever happens. [...]

The French nation is slowly dying out, not so much because of depopulation, as through losing the best racial elements, and it can continue to retain its world position only by shattering Germany.

Only when the Germans have fully understood this, will they stop allowing the national will-to-life to wear itself out in merely passive defense, but will rally together for a final active contest with France.

Today there are 80 million Germans in Europe! Our foreign policy will only be recognized as correct if, after barely a hundred years there will be 250 million Germans living on this continent … as farmers and workers whose labor guarantees each other's existence.

15.4  In Dec 1922 the situation between Germany and France became particularly threatening. […]

With the occupation of the Ruhr District, France hoped that not only would the moral backbone of Germany be finally broken … but that … we'd be forced to submit to every obligation, even the worst.

[…]

What first appeared as a great misfortune was found, upon closer examination, to hold extremely encouraging possibilities for ending Germany's sufferings.

[…]

The largest iron mines and coal fields in Europe were now united in the hands of one nation that, in contrast to Germany, had always defended it's life-interests with determination and action. The French occupation of the Ruhr coal fields had deprived England of all the successes it had gained in the war.

In Italy too, the attitude toward France, which hadn't been very favorable since the end of the war, now became a veritable hatred.

15.5   By occupying the Ruhr, France committed a glaring violation of the Versailles Treaty. This brought it into conflict with several signatory powers, especially England and Italy.

[…]

It was quite clear from the beginning that the fate of this district occupied by the French would one day be decided at some conference table.

15.6  Just as in 1918, when we had to pay with our blood for the failure to crush the Marxist snake once and for all in 1914 and 1915, so we now have to suffer retribution for the fact that, in the spring of 1923, we didn't seize the opportunity to halt the handiwork of the Marxist traitors and murderers of our people.

[…]

And so in the year 1923, brutal action was required to seize the vipers that fattened themselves on the body of the nation. … I often talked myself hoarse in trying to make clear, at least to the so-called national circles, what was then at stake, but I preached to deaf ears.

At that time—I openly admit—I conceived a profound admiration for the great man south of the Alps [Mussolini], whose ardent love for his people inspired him not to bargain with Italy's internal enemies but rather to use all ways and means to destroy them. […]

Since the German government was unable to take such heroic action at that time, it could only have chosen the first way; namely, to do nothing at all and let things take their own course.

15.9  In view of the great common misfortune of our Fatherland, I must abstain from offending and perhaps alienating those who must, at some future date, form one real united front of truly loyal Germans, against the common front of the enemies of our people.

Here at the end of this second volume, let me again bring to mind the memory of those 16 fallen heroes to whom I dedicated the first volume, to remind our supporters and champions of those who, in the clearest consciousness, sacrified their lives for us all.

And among them, and as one of the best of all, I wish to mention a man who devoted his life to reawakening his—our—people, through his writing, his ideas, and finally his deeds: Dietrich Eckart.

End of Chapter 15 - end of MK, Vol Two.