"I have been reading your amazing blog and listening to some of your podcasts with Carolyn. Not sure how I haven't run across your work before. Amazing stuff." (reader's comment, 10 May 2016)
Come chat with us! Download and install an IRC-client -- Hexchat is recommended -- and go to the channel #National-Socialism on the Undernet server.

17 May 2011

National-Socialism Not for Export?

Sir Oswald Mosley, leader of the British Union of Fascists, as of 1938 was referring to his worldview as national-socialism.

Occasionally some sophomore, somebody hostile to national-socialism, usually somebody wedded to liberal notions (by which I mean a so-called conservative),  will argue that national-socialist ideas have no application outside of Germany, adducing as evidence  some statement attributed to Adolf Hitler: "National-Socialism is not for export." Ipse dixit!

Isn't it interesting how these people who are basically hostile to our worldview, suddenly, when it suits them, treat Adolf Hitler as a man whose every casual word must be taken as an inviolable commandment? The assumption seems to be that there is no general idea, no substance in national-socialism, except to copy Adolf Hitler on every point.

Let us examine, however, what this statement, in its original context, must have meant.

In 1934 and 1935 Dr. Joseph Goebbels declared that National-Socialism was not for export, as part of an attempt to maintain positive relations with foreign governments, including that of the United States, that were concerned about the influence of National-Socialist Germany on their ethnic-German populations. The dictum, "National-Socialism is not for export," was in the first place simply a piece of diplomacy to avoid conflict with foreign governments.

In 1942 when Hitler himself made essentially the same statement in the context of a private conversation, he gave an additional motive behind the position that would have been impolitic to state publicly:

I am firmly opposed to any attempt to export National-Socialism. If other countries are determined to preserve their democratic systems and thus rush to their ruin, so much the better for us. And all the more so, because during this same period, thanks to National Socialism, we shall be transforming ourselves, slowly but surely, into the most solid popular community that it is possible to imagine. [Hitler's Table Talk, entry for 20 May 1942]

Hitler was not saying that other nations could not apply national-socialism: on the contrary, the assumption was that neighboring European states, having adopted national-socialism, would become strong. Hitler was saying that it was simply not in Germany's interest to encourage nations that might eventually come into conflict with her to adopt national-socialism.

At the same time, however, Hitler did not say that Germany should attempt to stifle the development of national-socialism anywhere, only that Germany should not exert herself to bring about such a development. Let the other nations keep their liberal system if that's what they want.

As with many things, Hitler had not been entirely consistent in the application of this principle.

Where it was a question of a nation's becoming strong and nationalist or aligning with Germany's enemies, as in the case of Spain in the 1930s, Hitler provided the necessary assistance for the ideologically kindred forces to prevail.

Also, for a few years Hitler subsidized Sir Oswald Mosley, who as of 1938 was referring to his political creed as national-socialism. At that time Hitler was hoping to avoid conflict and even to have harmonious future relations with Britain as described in Mein Kampf, with Britain ruling the seas and retaining its empire while leaving hegemony on the European continent to Germany. When the war broke out, a plan to have Mosley broadcast to Britain from a transmitter on German soil had to be scrapped.

Ultimately, whether or not to attempt to export national-socialism seems to have been determined in each case based on whether it appeared likely to help or hurt Germany's security.

The statements of Adolf Hitler and Joseph Goebbels about national-socialism being "not for export" did not mean that other nations could not apply national-socialism, only that Germany would not attempt to make the world National-Socialist the way the Soviet Union worked at making the world Communist.   


fezr said...

Glad you posted the link to this on TOO.
So many pretentious writers buy the forgeries about Hitler just as they were taught to do.

How many times have these pretenders SHOUTED FROM THE ROOFTOPS that "NS is NOT for export"
Well it is the ONLY system that can save America, if not the West entirely.
The SYMBOL has enormous power and the weakling, craven, suit and tie crowd shun it.

Visión Blanca said...

Greetings. Very interesting post. By the way, are you agree with this?:



Hadding said...

I don't mind if Mongolians want to have a national-socialist party, although I think they probably tend more toward national-communism.

I am not sure of the race or nationality of those people in the bottom photo.

I tend in general to dislike using memorabilia or replicas of Third Reich items. That looks too much like a superficial attempt at historical reenactment rather than the thinking of the national-socialist idea.

Organon tou Ontos said...

Randall Bytwerk of the "German Propaganda Archive", translated a letter from a German to an American friend that had been written in August 1933. The German's name was Karl Schotte, who was part of a government entity whose purpose was to strengthen Germany's image abroad. He makes a note in the letter quite explicitly echoing the point you make in this blog post (which I remembered and looked up when I happened on the letter again). According to Bytwerk's translation, Schotte remarked:

"You never will hear the truth about presentday Germany, for America at present is a jewish country. Jewish influence is dominating, and sooner or later the American aryans will realize what they shall have to fight for. Nationalsozialism would never come to America from Germany but from the aryan population in America and such will bring about a rebirth of Washingtons United States."


Obviously, this implies at least two things:

1) It wasn't the explicit or even implicit aim of the National-Socialist government of Germany to "export" National-Socialism abroad, which stands in contrast to Soviet Communism at different phases in its history, much less to Western Europe or the United States.

2) The German government nonetheless recognized that it could flower elsewhere, if soil and nutrition (i.e. racial conditions) were sufficient. The remark from Schotte was penned at a time when "Aryans" in America were in a far more advantageous position, demographically and politically, than today, despite Schotte's remark that the USA of 1933 was a "Jewish country".

Incidentally (given Schotte's use of the term), too much is often made about the term Aryan. There is a tendency of some (such as Aryanism.net) to use the term in its literal, etymological sense ("noble"), to deracialize it on the one hand, and to make it too restrictive on the part of some who do intend it in a racial sense. From the National-Socialist legal and institutional perspective, 'Aryan' was a practical term that encompassed people that could be assimilated in Germany, and the reality of immigration (Marika Rokk from Hungary, Irish-American William Joyce, and Johannes Heesters [who was not very Germanic in appearance]) reflected a view that was not too rigid.

Anyway, I remember the people at the former Original Dissent forum trying to use that argue with you and me, and though I didn't raise the above points, I did point out that there was a National-Socialist party in existence in the Netherlands. Prior to 1936, it even had Jewish members, and during German occupation, it became the only legal party (obviously, if Germany had insisted on a German-only National-Socialism, anywhere and everywhere, they would have shut it down upon occupation).