"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.

18 June 2011

Dr. Goebbels prescribes the Proper Attitude toward Jews

I notice that Calvin College also offers a translation of this essay, but their translation is rather loose. For example, Kabalistik is translated as simply "abilities." Jewish trickery is more like it.


Most of Dr. Goebbels' advice could be summarized as, Don't argue with the Jews. Don't worry about what they might say about you. Don't be distracted by them. Stay on the attack. Perhaps this was why Dr. Goebbels called his newspaper Der Angriff (Attack).

An effective form of attack, according to Dr. Goebbels, is to expose malefactors in national life as Jews. Dr. William Pierce, whose first tabloid Attack! even imitated the logo of Dr. Goebbels' newspaper, put this advice into practice by compiling Who Rules America?, which documented that the people controlling the mass-media of news and entertainment (the real seat of power) in the United States were almost all Jews.

In the United States, probably moreso than in Germany, this simple exposition must be followed by an uphill battle to explain why the wielding of power by Jews is a bad thing, since Americans unlike Europeans do not automatically see Jews as outsiders but regard them as "Americans like everybody else" -- if not as God's Chosen (a superstition that hardly exists in Europe).

A point of particular importance for Americans is no. 6, that Jewish power can only be broken "politically," in other words, through the use of governmental power. It is easy to see the promotion of "anti-statism" among patriotic factions in the United States as an attempt by Jews to forestall application of this insight.


They should not lie! -- Dr. Goebbels, 10 February 1933.


The Jew
by Joseph Goebbels
 Der Angriff, 21 January 1929

(translation by Hadding Scott, 2011)

There is open discussion about all questions in Germany, and every German claims the right to decide this way or that on all issues. One is Catholic, another Protestant; one is a job-seeker, another an employer; the capitalist, the socialist; the democrat, the aristocrat. A commitment to this side or that has nothing inherently dishonorable for the man of our era. It happens in all openness, and where the opposites still appear unclear and muddled, through discussions one clarifies them into argument and counter-argument. Only one issue is barred from public consideration, and it is provocative even to say it: the Jewish Question. It is taboo in the Republic.

Against all insults the Jew is immunized: words like rogue, parasite, deceiver, profiteer [Schieber], affect him like water on a duck's back. Call him Jew, and you will discover with amazement how he is startled, how he is struck, how he suddenly shrinks into himself completely small: "I am recognized."

It is pointless to defend oneself against the Jew. With confidence he will proceed lightning-quick to the attack and with his trickery [mit seiner Kabalistik] will crush all means of defense in his opponent.

Quickly he makes his opponent into what the opponent wanted to attack in him: the liar, the disturber of the peace, the terrorist. Nothing would be more wrong than to try to defend oneself against that. Indeed the Jew would like it. Then he invents new lies daily, against which his opponent must constantly be on the defensive, and the result is that in the midst of loudly defending himself he never gets around to what the Jew really fears: to attack him. The accused has now become the accuser, and with a great shriek he forces the accuser into the dock. Thus it always went until now, whenever a man or a movement saw the need to combat the Jew. So also would it go for us, if we were not familiar with his nature to the last detail, and if we did not have the courage to derive our radical conclusions from this awareness. And they are:

1. One cannot combat the Jew positively. He is a negative, and this negative must be erased from the German equation, or it will always spoil the equation.

2. One cannot discuss the Jewish Question with the Jew. Indeed one cannot prove to anybody that one has the right and the duty to render him harmless.

3. One ought not to afford to the Jew in the struggle the means that one affords to every honest opponent; for he is not an honest opponent; he will merely exploit magnanimity and chivalry to place his enemy at a disadvantage.

4. The Jew has no say in German questions. He is a foreigner, an alien to our folk, who enjoys only the right of a guest, and indeed without exception abuses that.

5. The so-called religious morality of the Jew is not a morality but a guide to deception. Therefore it has no claim to the defense and protection of the law.

6. The Jew is not more intelligent than we, but only more sophisticated and cunning. His system cannot be broken economically -- for indeed he fights economically under completely different moral laws than we -- but only politically.

7. A Jew cannot attack the reputation of a German. Jewish smears are only badges of honor for a German who opposes the Jews.

8. The value of a German man or of a German movement rises with the opposition of the Jew. If anyone is fought by the Jew, it absolutely vouches for him. Whoever is not persecuted by the Jew or indeed is praised by him is useless and harmful.

9. The Jew assesses German issues always from the Jewish perspective. Usually therefore the opposite of whatever he says is correct.

10. One must say yes or no to anti-Semitism. Whoever aids the Jew sins against his own people. One can be either a servant of the Jew or an opponent of the Jew. Opposing the Jew is a matter of personal cleanliness.

With these principles the movement to oppose the Jew has a prospect of success. And therefore such a movement for the first time is taken seriously and feared by the Jew.

That he makes a lot of noise and objects to it, is only a proof that it is correct. We are happy to find the appropriate certification immediately in these lines in the Jewish gazettes. Let them scream terror there. To that we answer with the famous utterance of Mussolini: "Terror? Never! It is social hygiene. We are taking these individuals out of circulation, as a physician takes a bacillus out of the body's circulation."

14 June 2011

Goodbye to the War of All against All



Accusation

"National Socialism is just racist Marxism. People want to live in a non-competitive world and be valued for their race, rather than for their own personal accomplishments or character. Blaming Jews is just a cop out."


Hadding Responds

The essence of Marxism is the class-struggle leading to the leveling of society. National-Socialism is about class-reconciliation. National-Socialism pulls the rug out from under Marxism. National-Socialism replaces cutthroat capitalism with an economic order that is tolerable and viable without leveling society.

I won't say that there is no competition under National-Socialism, since all are not made equal; there is higher and lower status, and people will compete for that. But getting the most money is no longer the meaning of life in such a system.


Why should economic competition be the meaning of life and the criterion by which every man is judged?


A relatively non-competitive society in which people are valued for who they are is actually not so unusual. I think that's a pretty good description of Mediaeval Europe, where everybody was expected to do his job of course, but not strive to change his status within society.


A reduction of economic competition is appropriate under the global conditions that have prevailed for the past century. Unrestrained economic competition leads to massive unemployment such as we are seeing, and which would be much worse if the country were not currently involved in several wars which act as a government jobs-program.


Ultimately the USA will have to move to some kind of more regulated economy, at least as much as it had from FDR until Ronald Reagan. That will be an economy in which competition is muted. The only question after that is whether that change will be accompanied by national-socialistic measures to maintain discipline and prevent the biological decay of the population. Most likely the USA will not do that, but other countries will.


Whether we like it or not, social order in some form is on its way back and the war of all against all is on its way out. Continuing on the present course would produce a kind of Mad Max world. Since very few people will want that, I don't believe it's going to happen. Adjustments and accommodations will be made.


Jews are in the way. You cannot have a cohesive and harmonious society where Jews have any significant power, because the Jews are all about maintaining their collective distinctness without having to risk being either subsumed or expelled from the society. The Jew depends on social conflict. He has to keep a society disunited and weak for his parasitism to continue. That's why the class-struggle and racial strife and large-scale non-White immigration all are pushed by the Jew.

08 June 2011

Adolf Hitler's View of the Jewish Problem in 1919

Source: Eberhard Jäckel (ed.), Hitler. Sämtliche Aufzeichnungen 1905-1924 (Stuttgart, 1980), pp. 88-90. Translated by Richard S. Levy.

[September 16, 1919]

Dear Herr Gemlich,

The danger posed by Jewry for our people today finds expression in the undeniable aversion of wide sections of our people. The cause of this aversion is not to be found in a clear recognition of the consciously or unconsciously systematic and pernicious effect of the Jews as a totality upon our nation. Rather, it arises mostly from personal contact and from the personal impression which the individual Jew leaves--almost always an unfavorable one. For this reason, antisemitism is too easily characterized as a mere emotional phenomenon. 

And yet this is incorrect. Antisemitism as a political movement may not and cannot be defined by emotional impulses, but by recognition of the facts. The facts are these: First, Jewry is absolutely a race and not a religious association. Even the Jews never designate themselves as Jewish Germans, Jewish Poles, or Jewish Americans but always as German, Polish, or American Jews. Jews have never yet adopted much more than the language of the foreign nations among whom they live. A German who is forced to make use of the French language in France, Italian in Italy, Chinese in China does not thereby become a Frenchman, Italian, or Chinaman. It's the same with the Jew who lives among us and is forced to make use of the German language. He does not thereby become a German. Neither does the Mosaic faith, so important for the survival of this race, settle the question of whether someone is a Jew or non-Jew. There is scarcely a race whose members belong exclusively to just one definite religion.

Through thousands of years of the closest kind of inbreeding, Jews in general have maintained their race and their peculiarities far more distinctly than many of the peoples among whom they have lived. And thus comes the fact that there lives amongst us a non-German, alien race which neither wishes nor is able to sacrifice its racial character or to deny its feeling, thinking, and striving. Nevertheless, it possesses all the political rights we do. If the ethos of the Jews is revealed in the purely material realm, it is even clearer in their thinking and striving. Their dance around the golden calf is becoming a merciless struggle for all those possessions we prize most highly on earth.

The value of the individual is no longer decided by his character or by the significance of his achievements for the totality but exclusively by the size of his fortune, by his money.

The loftiness of a nation is no longer to be measured by the sum of its moral and spiritual powers, but rather by the wealth of its material possessions.

This thinking and striving after money and power, and the feelings that go along with it, serve the purposes of the Jew who is unscrupulous in the choice of methods and pitiless in their employment. In autocratically ruled states he whines for the favor of "His Majesty" and misuses it like a leech fastened upon the nations. In democracies he vies for the favor of the masses, cringes before the "majesty of the people," and recognizes only the majesty of money.

He destroys the character of princes with byzantine flattery, national pride (the strength of a people), with ridicule and shameless breeding to depravity. His method of battle is that public opinion which is never expressed in the press but which is nonetheless managed and falsified by it. His power is the power of money, which multiplies in his hands effortlessly and endlessly through interest, and which forces peoples under the most dangerous of yokes. Its golden glitter, so attractive in the beginning, conceals the ultimately tragic consequences. Everything men strive after as a higher goal, be it religion, socialism, democracy, is to the Jew only means to an end, the way to satisfy his lust for gold and domination.

In his effects and consequences he is like a racial tuberculosis of the nations.

The deduction from all this is the following: an antisemitism based on purely emotional grounds will find its ultimate expression in the form of the pogrom.[1] An antisemitism based on reason, however, must lead to systematic legal combatting and elimination of the privileges of the Jews, that which distinguishes the Jews from the other aliens who live among us (an Aliens Law). The ultimate objective [of such legislation] must, however, be the irrevocable removal of the Jews in general.

For both these ends a government of national strength, not of national weakness, is necessary.
The Republic in Germany owes its birth not to the uniform national will of our people but the sly exploitation of a series of circumstances which found general expression in a deep, universal dissatisfaction. These circumstances however were independent of the form of the state and are still operative today. Indeed, more so now than before. Thus, a great portion of our people recognizes that a changed state-form cannot in itself change our situation. For that it will take a rebirth of the moral and spiritual powers of the nation.
And this rebirth cannot be initiated by a state leadership of irresponsible majorities, influenced by certain party dogmas, an irresponsible press, or internationalist phrases and slogans. [It requires] instead the ruthless installation of nationally minded leadership personalities with an inner sense of responsibility.

But these facts deny to the Republic the essential inner support of the nation's spiritual forces. And thus today's state leaders are compelled to seek support among those who draw the exclusive benefits of the new formation of German conditions, and who for this reason were the driving force behind the revolution--the Jews. Even though (as various statements of the leading personalities reveal) today's leaders fully realized the danger of Jewry, they (seeking their own advantage) accepted the readily proffered support of the Jews and also returned the favor. And this pay-off consisted not only in every possible favoring of Jewry, but above all in the hindrance of the struggle of the betrayed people against its defrauders, that is in the repression of the antisemitic movement.

Respectfully,
Adolf Hitler

02 June 2011

National-Socialist vs. Soviet Propaganda Posters

Some silly documentary arguing that National-Socialism and Bolshevism are essentially the same uses a comparison of National-Socialist and Soviet propaganda posters to support the claim. At first glance there are some striking graphic similarities, but the posters are only on the screen for a very brief time, so that they cannot really be scrutinized by the viewer, and of course since most viewers do not know German, they are really taking the narrator's word that these posters support the narrator's point.

I want to make it a little easier to see why these superficial similarities do not demonstrate the narrator's point.

The poster on the right is some Soviet poster with a slogan in Russian, obviously depicting a manual laborer. The man carrying a heavy tool on his shoulder always represents manual labor. 

The German poster on the left has a manual laborer, but also another man standing very close to him. Who is that other man?

The caption says, "WORKERS of the FOREHEAD, of the FIST, vote for the front-soldier HITLER!" "Workers of the fist" (Arbeiter der Faust) is a German expression meaning manual laborers. "Workers of the forehead" (Arbeiter der Stirn) means men whose work consists largely of thinking and planning. The reference to Hitler as "the front-soldier" (den Frontsoldaten) is a note of nationalism. This electoral campaign poster urges the unity of Germans as Germans, in spite of class differences, in voting for the German nationalist Hitler.


I am told that the caption on the Russian poster says something to the effect of, Be on the lookout at work.
 

Although, yes, the Soviet and NSDAP posters both portray a man carrying tools, the messages are certainly different. The NSDAP's campaign poster represents class-reconciliation, the exact antithesis of Marxist class-warfare and "dictatorship of the proletariat," as well as implicit rejection of internationalism.


These posters are also superficially similar, but if you see them for more than a second or two, you can't help but notice differences. These both seem to be urging a yes-vote for something. The most significant difference reflecting the different attitudes of National-Socialism and Bolshevism is that in the Bolshevik poster there is not just one but a whole mob of hands voting the same way. The Bolshevik poster is evoking groupthink, while the National-Socialist poster represents an individual, rational choice.

Superficial resemblances in the visual composition of propaganda posters do not signify that the ideas conveyed or promoted are the same. The Soviet Union under Stalin was notorious for copying Western models. They didn't just copy from the Germans, either. In particular there was a French war-propaganda poster with the caption On les aura! that was shamelessly plagiarized by Soviet propaganda. There was no reason not to do that, since people in the Soviet Union could never know.