Posts Tagged ‘Jew’

Hitler’s speech in Munich SPEECH OF APRIL 24, 1923

Monday, August 13th, 2012

I REJECT the word ‘Proletariat.’ The Jew who coined the word meant by ‘Proletariat,’ not the oppressed, but those who work with their hands. And those who work with their intellects are stigmatized bluntly as ‘Bourgeois.’ It is not the character of a man’s life which forms the basis of this classification, it is simply the occupation – whether a man works with his brain or with his body. And in this turbulent mass of the hand-workers the Jew recognized a new power which might perhaps be his instrument for the gaining of that which is his ultimate goal: World supremacy, the destruction of the national States.

And while the Jew ‘organizes’ these masses, he organizes business, too, at the same time. Business was depersonalized, i.e., Judaized. Business lost the Aryan character of work: it became an object of speculation. Master and man were torn asunder . . . and he who created this class division was the same person who led the masses in their opposition to this class division, led them not against his Jewish brethren, but against the last remnants of independent national economic life.

And these remnants, the bourgeoisie which also was already Judaized, resisted the great masses who were knocking at the door and demanding better conditions of life. And so the Jewish leaders succeeded in hammering into the minds of the masses the Marxist propaganda: ‘Your deadly foe is the bourgeoisie; if he were not there, you would be free.’ If it had not been for the boundless blindness and stupidity of our bourgeoisie the Jew would never have become the leader of the German working-classes. And the ally of this stupidity was the pride of the ‘better stratum’ of society which thought it would degrade itself if it condescended to stoop to the level of the ‘Plebe.’ The millions of our German fellow countrymen would never have been alienated from their people if the leading strata of society had shown any care for their welfare.

You must say farewell to the hope that you can expect any action from the parties of the Right on behalf of the freedom of the German people. The most elementary factor is lacking: the will, the courage, the energy. Where then can any strength still be found within the German people? It is to be found, as always, in the great masses: THERE ENERGY IS SLUMBERING AND IT ONLY AWAITS THE MAN WHO WILL SUMMON IT FROM ITS PRESENT SLUMBER AND WILL HURL IT INTO THE GREAT BATTLE FOR THE DESTINY OF THE GERMAN RACE.

The battle which alone can liberate Germany will be fought out with the forces which well up from the great masses. Without the help of the German workingman you will never regain a German Reich. Not in our political salons lies the strength of the nation, but in the hand, in the brain, and in the will of the great masses. Now as ever: Liberation does not come down from above, it will spring up from below…. If we today make the highest demands upon everyone, that is only in order that we may give back to him and to his child the highest gift: Freedom and the respect of the rest of the world….

The parties of the Right have lost all energy: they see the flood coming, but their one longing is just for once in their lives to form a Government. Unspeakably incapable, utterly lacking in energy, cowards all – such are all these bourgeois parties and that at the moment when the nation needs heroes -not chatterers.

In the Left there is somewhat more energy, but it is used for the ruin of Germany. The Communists on principle reject the discipline imposed by the State: in its stead they preach party discipline: they reject the administration of the State as a bureaucracy, while they fall on their knees before the bureaucracy of their own Movement. There is arising a State within the State which stands in deadly enmity against the State which we know, the State of the community of the people. This new State ultimately produces men who reject with fanaticism their own people so that in the end Foreign Powers find in them their allies. Such is the result of Marxist teaching….

What we want is not a State of drones but a State which gives to everyone that to which on the basis of his own activity he has a right. He who refuses to do honest work shall not be a citizen of the State. The State is not a plantation where the interests of foreign capital are supreme. Capital is not the master of the State, but its servant. Therefore the State must not be brought into dependence on international loan capital. And if anyone believes that that cannot be avoided, then do not let him be surprised that no one is ready to give his life for this State. Further, that greatest injustice must be corrected which today still weighs heavily upon our people and upon almost all peoples. If in a State only he who does honest work is a citizen, then everyone has the right to demand that in his old age he shall be kept free from care and want. That would mean the realization of the greatest social achievement.

Enhanced by Zemanta
Share on Facebook
Share

Hitler’s speech in Munich SPEECH OF APRIL 13, 1923

Monday, August 13th, 2012

IN OUR view, the times when there was no ‘League of Nations‘ were far more honorable and more humane.. .. We ask: ‘Must there be wars?’ The pacifist answers ‘No!’ He proceeds to explain that disputes in the life of peoples are only the expression of the fact that a class has been oppressed by the ruling bourgeoisie. When there are in fact differences of opinion between peoples, then these should be brought before a ‘Peace Court’ for its decision. But he does not answer the question whether the judges of this court of arbitration would have the power to bring the parties before the bar of the court. I believe that an accused ordinarily only appears ‘voluntarily’ before a court because, if he did not, he would be fetched there.

I should like to see the nation which would allow itself to be brought before this League of Nations Court in the case of a disagreement without external force. In the life of nations, what in the last resort decides questions is a kind of Judgment Court of God. It may even happen that in case of a dispute between two peoples – both may be in the right. Thus Austria, a people of fifty millions, had most certainly the right to an outlet to the sea. But since in the strip of territory in question the Italian element of the population was in the majority, Italy claimed for herself the ‘right of self-determination.’ Who yields voluntarily? No one! So the strength which each people possesses decides the day. ALWAYS BEFORE GOD AND THE WORLD THE STRONGER HAS THE RIGHT TO CARRY THROUGH WHAT HE WILLS.

History proves: He who has not the strength – him the ‘right in itself’ profits not a whit. A world court without a world police would be a joke. And from what nations of the present League of Nations would then this force be recruited? Perhaps from the ranks of the old German Army? THE WHOLE WORLD OF NATURE IS A MIGHTY STRUGGLE BETWEEN STRENGTH AND WEAKNESS – AN ETERNAL VICTORY OF THE STRONG OVER THE WEAK. There would be nothing but decay in the whole of Nature if this were not so. States which should offend against the elementary law would fall into decay. You need not seek for long to find an example of such mortal decay: you can see it in the Reich of today….

. . . Before the war two States, Germany and France, had to live side by side but only under arms. It is true that the War of 1870-1 meant for Germany the close of an enmity which had endured for centuries, but in France a passionate hatred against Germany was fostered by every means by propaganda in the press, in school textbooks, in theaters, in the cinemas. . . . All the Jewish papers throughout France agitated against Berlin. Here again to seek and to exploit grounds for a conflict is the clearly recognizable effort of world Jewry.

The conflict of interests between Germany and England lay in the economic sphere. Up till 1850 England’s position as a World Power was undisputed. British engineers, British trade conquer the world. Germany, owing to greater industry and increased capacity, begins to be a dangerous rival. In a short time those firms which in Germany were in English hands pass into the possession of German industrialists. German industry expands vastly and the products of that industry even in the London market drive out British goods.

The protective measure, the stamp ‘Made in Germany,’ has the opposite effect from that desired: this ‘protective stamp’ becomes a highly effective advertisement. The German economic success was not created in Essen alone but by a man who knew that behind economics must stand power, for power alone makes an economic position secure. This power was born upon the battlefields of 1870-71, not in the atmosphere of parliamentary chatter. Forty thousand dead have rendered possible the life of forty millions. When England, in the face of such a Germany as this, threatened to be brought to her knees, then she bethought herself of the last weapon in the armory of international rivalry – violence. A press propaganda on an imposing scale was started as a preparatory measure.

But who is the chief of the whole British press concerned with world trade? One name crystallizes itself out of the rest: Northcliffe – a Jew! . . . A campaign of provocation is carried on with assertions, libels, and promises such as only a Jew can devise, such as only Jewish newspapers would have the effrontery to put before an Aryan people. And then at last 1914: they egg people on: ‘Ah, poor violated Belgium! Up! To the rescue of the small nations – for the honor of humanity!’ The same lies, the same provocation throughout the entire world! And the success of that provocation the German people can trace grievously enough!

WHAT CAUSE FINALLY HAD AMERICA TO ENTER THE WAR AGAINST GERMANY? WITH THE OUTBREAK OF THE WORLD WAR, WHICH JUDAH HAD DESIRED SO PASSIONATELY AND SO LONG, ALL THE LARGE

JEWISH FIRMS OF THE UNITED STATES BEGAN SUPPLYING AMMUNITIONS. They supplied the European ‘war-market’ to an extent which perhaps even they themselves had never dreamed of – a gigantic harvest! Yet nothing satisfied the insatiable greed of the Jew. And so the venal press which depended upon the Stock Exchange kings began an unparalleled propaganda campaign. A GIGANTIC ORGANIZATION FOR NEWSPAPER LYING WAS BUILT UP. AND ONCE MORE IT IS A JEWISH CONCERN, THE HEARST PRESS, WHICH SET THE TONE OF THE AGITATION AGAINST GERMANY.

The hatred of these ‘Americans’ was not directed solely against commercial Germany or against military Germany. It was directed specially against social Germany, because this Germany had up to that time kept itself outside of the principles which governed the world trusts. The old Reich had at least made an honorable attempt to be socially-minded. We had to show for ourselves such an initiative in social institutions as no other country in the wide world could boast. . . . This explains why, even in Germany itself, the ‘comrades’ under Jewish leadership fought against their own vital interests. This explains the agitation carried on throughout the world under the same watchword.

For this reason the Jewish-democratic press of America had to accomplish its masterpiece – that is to say, it had to drive into the most horrible of all wars a great peace-loving people which was as little concerned in European struggles as it was in the North Pole: America was to intervene ‘in defense of civilization,’ and the Americans were persuaded so to do by an atrocity propaganda conducted in the name of civilization which from A to Z was a scandalous invention the like of which has never yet been seen – a farrago of lies and forgeries. Because this last State in the world where social aims were being realized had to be destroyed, therefore twenty-six peoples were incited one against the other by this press which is exclusively in the possession of one and the same world people, of one and the same race, and that race on principle the deadly foe of all national States.

Who could have prevented the World War? Not the Kul- tursolidarität, the ‘solidarity of civilization,’ in whose name the Jews carried on their propaganda: not the so-called World Pacifism – again an exclusively Jewish invention. Could the so-called ‘Solidarity of the Proletariat?’ . . . All the wheels stand silent, still, If that be your strong arm’s will…. The German wheel on November 9, 1918, was indeed brought to a standstill. The Social Democratic party in its principal organ, Vorwärts, declared in so many words that it was not in the interest of the workers that Germany should win the war. . .

Could the Freemasons perhaps stop the war? – this most noble of philanthropic institutions who foretold the good fortune of the people louder than anyone and who at the same time was the principal leader in promoting the war. Who, after all, are the Freemasons? You have to distinguish two grades. To the lower grade in Germany belong the ordinary citizens who through the claptrap which is served up to them can feel themselves to be ‘somebodies,’ but the responsible authorities are those many-sided folk who can stand any climate, those 300 Rathenaus who all know each other, who guide the history of the world over the heads of Kings and Presidents, those who will undertake any office without scruples, who know how brutally to enslave all peoples – once more the Jews!

Why have the Jews been against Germany? That is made quite clear today – proved by countless facts. They use the age-old tactics of the hyena – when fighters are tired out, then go for them! Then make your harvest! In war and revolutions the Jew attained the unattainable. Hundreds of thousands of escaped Orientals become modern ‘Europeans.’ Times of unrest produce miracles. Before 1914 how long would it have taken, for instance, in Bavaria before a Galician Jew became – Prime Minister? – Or in Russia before an anarchist from the New York Ghetto, Bronstein (Trotsky), became – Dictator? Only a few wars and revolutions – that was enough to put the Jewish people into possession of the red gold and thereby to make them masters of the world.

Before 1914 there were two States above all, Germany and Russia, which prevented the Jew from reaching his goal – the mastery of the world. Here not everything which they already possessed in the Western democracies had fallen to the Jews. Here they were not the sole lords alike in the intellectual and economic life. Here, too, the Parliaments were not yet exclusively instruments of Jewish capital and of the will of the Jew. The German and the genuine Russian had still preserved a certain aloofness from the Jew. In both peoples there still lived the healthy instinct of scorn for the Jew, and there was a real danger that in these monarchies there might one day arise a Frederick the Great, a William I, and that democracy and a parliamentary regime might be sent to the devil.

So the Jews became revolutionaries! The Republic should bring them to wealth and to power. This aim they disguised: they cried ‘Down with the monarchies!’ ‘Enthrone the sovereign people!’ I do not know whether today one could venture to call the German or the Russian people ‘sovereign.’ At least one cannot see any trace of it! What the German people can trace, however, what every day stands in the most crass form before its eyes, is debauchery, gluttony, speculation ruling unchecked, the open mockery of the Jew….

So Russia and Germany had to be overthrown in order that the ancient prophecy might be fulfilled. So the whole world was lashed into fury. So every lie and propaganda agency was brutally set in action against the State of the last – the German – idealists! AND THUS IT WAS THAT JUDAH WON THE WORLD WAR. OR WOULD YOU WISH TO MAINTAIN THAT THE FRENCH, THE ENGLISH, OR THE AMERICAN ‘PEOPLE’ WON THE WAR? THEY, ONE AND ALL, VICTORS AND VANQUISHED ARE ALIKE DEFEATED: one thing raises itself above them all: the World Stock Exchange which has become the master of the people.

WHAT GUILT HAD GERMANY HERSELF FOR THE OUTBREAK OF THE WAR? HER GUILT CONSISTED IN THIS: THAT AT THE MOMENT WHEN THE RING CLOSED ABOUT HER EXISTENCE GERMANY NEGLECTED TO ORGANIZE HER DEFENSE WITH SUCH VIGOR THAT THROUGH THIS DEMONSTRATION OF HER POWER EITHER THE OTHERS, DESPITE THEIR ABOMINABLE PURPOSES, WOULD HAVE BEEN ROBBED OF THEIR WILL TO STRIKE, OR ELSE THE VICTORY OF THE REICH WOULD HAVE BEEN ASSURED.

The guilt of the German people lies in this: that when in 1912 a criminal Reichstag in its unfathomable baseness and folly had refused to allow the raising of three army corps the people did not create for itself those army corps in the Reichstag’s despite. With these additional 120,000 men the Battle of the Marne would have been won and the issue of the war decided. Two million fewer German heroes would have sunk into their graves. Who was it who in 1912 as in 1918 struck its weapons from the hands of the German people? Who was it that in 1912, as in the last year of the war, infatuated the German people with his theory that if Germany throws down her arms the whole world will follow her example – who? – the democratic-Marxist Jew, who at the same hour incited and still today incites the others to arm and to subjugate ‘barbarous’ Germany.

But someone may perhaps yet raise the question whether it is expedient today to talk about the guilt for the war. Most assuredly we have the duty to talk about it! For the murderers of our Fatherland who all the years through have betrayed and sold Germany, they are the same men who, as the November criminals, have plunged us into the depths of misfortune. We have the duty to speak since in the near future, when we have gained power, we shall have the further duty of taking these creators of ruin, these clouts, these traitors to their State and of hanging them on the gallows to which they belong. Only let no one think that in them there has come a change of heart. On the contrary, these November scoundrels who still are free to go as they will in our midst, they are, even today, going against us. From the recognition of the facts comes the will to rise again. Two millions have remained on the field of battle. They, too, have their rights and not we, the survivors, alone. There are millions of orphans, of cripples, of widows in our midst. They, too, have rights. For the Germany of today not one of them died, not one of them became a cripple, an orphan, or a widow. We owe it to these millions that we build a new Germany!

Enhanced by Zemanta
Share on Facebook
Share

The Nuremberg Laws

Thursday, August 2nd, 2012

From the moment the Nazis came to power in 1933, the Jews of Germany were subjected to a never-ending series of discriminatory laws. There would be, during the twelve years of Hitler‘s Reich, over 400 separate regulations issued against Jews prohibiting everything from performing in a symphony orchestra to owning a pet cat.

In the Reich’s early years, anti-Jewish regulations were drawn up by a Nazi bureaucracy that included both radical and moderate anti-Semites. None of the bureaucrats had any moral qualms about being anti-Semitic. However, the moderates were concerned with foreign reaction and the possible disruptive impact of anti-Jewish prohibitions on Germany’s still-fragile economy.

Of the 503,000 Jews living in Germany in 1933, about 70 percent lived in big cities such as Berlin, Frankfurt and Breslau. Many of the young Jews in these cities married non-Jewish Germans.

A timeless scene in an old Jewish neighborhood of Berlin – a sidewalk sale of Kosher foods – still visible in the early Hitler era. Below: The unceasing anti-Semitism of Der Stürmer newspaper run by radical anti-Semite Julius Streicher, Gauleiter of Nuremberg. Under a sign saying “With the Stürmer against the Jews” is a page display beneath the Nazi slogan “The Jews are our misfortune.”

Although Jews made-up less than one percent of Germany’s overall population of 55 million, Hitler considered them by nature to be the “mortal enemy” of the German people. But within Hitler’s bureaucracy, radical and moderate anti-Semites strongly disagreed as to what legal (or illegal) actions should actually be taken against the Jews. This bureaucratic in-fighting resulted in complete stagnation concerning the development of a coordinated Reich policy of anti-Semitism.

Local Brownshirts, upset by the bureaucratic bungling, often took out their frustrations on local Jews in their neighborhoods, and by mid-1935 there had been a dramatic rise in the number of street incidents.

Ordinary citizens, encouraged in part by Goebbels’ anti-Semitic propaganda, also took part in spontaneous demonstrations. One such incident in the summer of 1935 was recorded by the Bavarian political police:

“There were anti-Jewish demonstrations in the swimming pool in Heigenbrüken. Approximately 15-20 young bathers had demanded the removal of the Jews from the swimming bath by chanting in the park which adjoins the bath…A considerable number of other bathers joined in the chanting so that probably the majority of visitors were demanding the removal of the Jews…The district leader of the NSDAP [Nazi Party] who happened to be in the swimming baths, went to the [pool] supervisor and demanded that he remove the Jews. The supervisor refused the request on the grounds that he was obliged to follow only the instructions of the baths’ administration and moreover, could not easily distinguish the Jews as such. As a result of the supervisor’s statement, there was a slight altercation between him and the [district leader]…In view of this incident, the Spa Association today placed a notice at the entrance to the baths with the inscription: Entry Forbidden to Jews.”

Deputy Führer Rudolf Hess ordered a halt to spontaneous anti-Jewish actions, not out of consideration for the Jews, but to prevent “bringing Party members into conflict with the political police, who consist largely of Party members, and this will be welcomed by Jewry. The political police can in such cases only follow the strict instructions of the Führer in carrying out all measures for maintaining peace and order, so making it possible for the Führer to rebuke at any time allegations of atrocities and boycotts made by Jews abroad.”

By late summer 1935, the street violence and demonstrations had diminished. But the bureaucratic in-fighting only escalated and would soon come to a head at the annual Nuremberg Rally

At this year’s Rally, held from September 9 to 15, a special session of the Nazi Reichstag (Legislature) was scheduled for the last day at which Hitler planned to deliver a major foreign policy speech concerning the League of Nations and Fascist Italy. However, Hitler wound up canceling the speech on short notice upon the advice of his Foreign Minister, Constantin von Neurath.

The abrupt cancellation left a void as to just what the Reichstag would do during its special Nuremberg session. Radical anti-Semites at Nuremberg seized the opportunity and suggested to Hitler that the special session would be an ideal opportunity to announce some kind of big new law concerning the Jews.

Hitler accepted their suggestion and settled on the idea of a law forbidding intermarriage and sexual relations between Jews and Germans, which he knew the radicals had been wanting for some time. On September 14, the night before the Reichstag’s special session, Nazi legal officials presented Hitler with four drafts of the new law. Hitler chose the fourth version, which happened to be the least militant, although he crossed out one important line stating: “This law applies only to full-blooded Jews.”

Around midnight, Hitler told the same legal officials he also wanted an accompanying law concerning Reich citizenship. The officials, scrawling on the back of a hotel food menu, hastily drafted a vaguely worded law which designated Jews as subjects of the Reich. Hitler (a night owl) approved the draft around 2:30 a.m.

At the Reichstag’s special session held later that day at 8 p.m., Hitler delivered a short speech in which he characterized the new laws as an attempt to “achieve the legislative regulation of a problem which, if it breaks down again will then have to be transferred by law to the National Socialist Party for final solution.”

The laws were then read by Reichstag President Hermann Göring as follows:

Reich Citizenship Law of September 15, 1935

I. 1. A subject of the State is a person who belongs to the protective union of the German Reich, and who therefore has particular obligations towards the Reich. 2. The status of subject is acquired in accordance with the provisions of the Reich and State Law of Citizenship.

II. 1. A citizen of the Reich is that subject only who is of German or kindred blood and who, through his conduct, shows that he is both desirous and fit to serve the German people and Reich faithfully.

Law for the Protection of German Blood
and German Honor, September 15, 1935

Entirely convinced that the purity of German blood is essential to the further existence of the German people, and inspired by the uncompromising determination to safeguard the future of the German nation, the Reichstag has unanimously adopted the following law, which is promulgated herewith:

I. 1. Marriages between Jews and citizens of German or kindred blood are forbidden. Marriages concluded in defiance of this law are void, even if, for the purpose of evading this law, they were concluded abroad. 2. Proceedings for annulment may be initiated only by the Public Prosecutor.

II. Sexual relations outside marriage between Jews and nationals of German of kindred blood are forbidden.

III. Jews will not be permitted to employ female citizens of German or kindred blood under 45 years of age as domestic servants.

IV. 1. Jews are forbidden to display the Reich and national flag or the national colors. 2. On the other hand they are permitted to display the Jewish colors. The exercise of this right is protected by the State.

V. 1. A person who acts contrary to the prohibition of Section I will be punished with hard labor. 2. A person who acts contrary to the prohibition of Section II will be punished with imprisonment or with hard labor. 3. A person who acts contrary to the provisions of Sections III or IV will be punished with imprisonment up to a year and with a fine, or with one of these penalties.

VI. The Reich Minister of the Interior in agreement with the Deputy Führer and the Reich Minister of Justice will issue the legal and administrative regulations required for the enforcement and supplementing of this law.

VII. The law will become effective on the day after its promulgation; Section III, however, not until January 1, 1936.

The announcement of the Nuremberg Laws had the unexpected result of generating a lot of confusion and heated debate among Nazi bureaucrats as to how one should define a Jew, given that there had been widespread intermarriage up to this point.

Instructional chart issued to help bureaucrats distinguish Jews from Mischlinge (mixed race persons) and Aryans. The white figures are Aryans; the black figures Jews; and the shaded figures Mischlinge.Below: Athletes on the outskirts of Berlin work out beyond a tall fence and sign saying “Jews are not wanted here.’

As a result, two months later a supplemental Nazi decree was issued which defined a “full Jew” as a person with at least three Jewish grandparents. Those with fewer than three grandparents were designated as Mischlinge (half-breeds), of which there were two degrees: First Degree Mischlinge – a person with two Jewish grandparents; Second Degree Mischlinge – a person with one Jewish grandparent.

The Nazis also issued somewhat complicated instructional charts to help bureaucrats distinguish the various degrees of Jewishness. Generally, the more “full-blooded” a Jew was, the greater the level of discrimination. But much of the confusion remained. In many cases, the necessary genealogical evidence concerning Jewish family backgrounds was simply not available.

As it turned out, about 350,000 Germans could be classified as Mischlinge; with 50,000 having converted to Christianity from Judaism; 210,000 being half-Jews; and 80,000 considered quarter-Jews.

Nazi bureaucrats also disagreed on how strictly the Nuremberg Laws should be enforced. Moderate anti-Semites wanted to protect “that part which is German” concerning valuable civil servants in the government. Radicals, on the other hand, viewed all Mischlinge as carriers of “Jewish influence” and wanted them all dismissed. Much to their dismay, the moderates prevailed, and Mischlinge civil servants and others were allowed to keep their positions for the time being.

Surprisingly, many German Jews reacted to the Nuremberg Laws with a sense of relief, thinking the worst was now over – at least they finally knew where they stood and could get on with their lives even if they had diminished rights. And to some degree they were correct. Over the next few years, the Nazis moved slowly in regard to the Jews. This was the quiet time for Jews in the Third Reich, as Hitler began to focus his attention entirely on diplomatic affairs and military re-armament.

In diplomatic circles, Hitler was struggling to gain credibility. Over the past few years, international observers in Nazi Germany had witnessed an incredible chain of events including: the revolutionary-like seizure of power in January 1933; the mysterious Reichstag fire in February; the anti-Jewish boycott in April; book burnings in May; wild street violence by the Brownshirts; heard rumors of concentration camps; knew about the (already infamous) Gestapo; witnessed the blood purge of June 1934; and observed the emperor-like ascension of Hitler as Führer.

For the Nazis, it was now necessary to refrain from any further actions against the Jews that would serve to undermine Hitler’s credibility on the world stage. The Führer had to present himself as someone who could be taken seriously, not as the leader of an anti-Semitic mob.

The turn of the Jews would come later. Presently, Hitler’s goals were to rebuild the German Army and exploit any opportunity to expand the Reich. Early in 1936, he decided on a dangerous gamble and sent his soldiers marching into the demilitarized portion of Germany known as the Rhineland – the very first territory to be forcibly grabbed by the Nazis.

Enhanced by Zemanta
Share on Facebook
Share

Speakers Form the People’s Soul by Walter Tießler

Thursday, May 24th, 2012

When we consider our speaker system today, we always hear concerns about finding new speakers. One hears the same thing nearly everywhere: relatively few party members are interested in becoming speakers. In part, this is because there was a period when speakers were not treated as well, or their rhetorical abilities and efforts not esteemed as much, as one really should have been able to assume they would be. More than that, however, some party members could be suitable speakers, but lack the courage, the opportunity, or the persistence to become a good speaker. If I am to discuss my own battle experiences in several meetings, I should not neglect the first time I ever spoke in my life.

Tiessler PhotographI, too, was once one of those party members who did not think he could speak. Thus, during the election campaign in May 1924 in my county, I always invited a discussion speaker from our Gau capital to speak. One day, this discussion speaker could not come. It was a meeting of the Bürgerblock leading up to the local election. The Bürgerblock was a coalition of the bourgeois parties, ranging from the German National Party to the Democratic Party. I did not want to speak, but only listen to what was going on. After the speaker of the evening, a Jew, had finished, a young Social Democrat who worked in my factory as a gardener took the floor, and spoke from his heart about the reasons he had become a Social Democrat. He described the conditions of his family: poverty, misery, and hopelessness. As he truly spoke from his heart, members of the German National Party and the Stahlhelm yelled: “don’t get all worked up, little man,” and made other jokes about him.

That really angered me, and without thinking about it much I wrote my name on a sheet of paper and brought it to the front table. Only after I had turned it in did it dawn on me that I would have to give a speech! I was the next discussion speaker.

As I recall my first speech, it went something like this: a young, thin chap with trembling lips passionately and angrily attacked the representatives of the so-called “Bourgeois Block,” and blamed their heartlessness and lack of understanding for the fact that there were Marxists. The result was surprising. Before that, the German Nationalists, and the Stahlhelm in particular, had considered me an ally, while the Social Democrats and communists had seen me as one of their greatest enemies. Now, I suddenly attacked my “comrades” so energetically, and said they were responsible for the success of Marxism. Both inwardly and outwardly, my “comrades” drew back from me, while I got some applause from the SPD and the KPD. This applause gave me the courage to speak during discussions myself rather than request a discussion speaker. Although there were a lot of “ahs” and similar things at the beginning, things got better with time.

Nearly all of the party’s fighting speakers had similar experiences. We did not begin as “good speakers,” but got better only with time. No one today, therefore, should be negatively influenced by others when he begins speaking. Do not lose courage, but work hard at it, and one will find the path to becoming a good speaker.

My next example, which also took place at an enemy meeting, shows how confident a speaker can become over the course of time. It was two or three years later. The so-called “Communist Opposition” was holding meetings all over Germany. In our Gau capital, the Jew Professor Schwarz spoke for the “Communist Opposition.” I sat inconspicuously in one of the back rows with my younger brother. After the Jew Schwarz had finished speaking, representatives of the various Marxists groups proceeded to wash their dirty laundry in public. The atmosphere got more tense and heated. The district leader of the KPD spoke, rejecting in particular the Jew Schwarz’s charge that the KPD and the NSDAP were allies! This district leader was my particular foe in political combat, since he not only appeared as a discussion speaker at various of my meetings, but these meetings also often ended in brawls. In the heat of battle, L. said among other things that one could tell from the Jew Schwarz’s appearance that his ancestors had been Galician horse traders! I shouted “Bravo!” and started clapping, and the whole KPD joined in! As L. left the platform, delighted at the applause, Schwarz said to him: “I’d like to point out to you that you owe that applause to the National Socialist who started it.” L. answered: “No National Socialist would dare show up here!” Since it was my turn to speak, I walked to behind the chair where L. was sitting. I moved his chair aside a bit and said “Excuse me, please!” He looked up at me in annoyance. After I had gone a few steps further, he yelled: “That’s the Nazi! Kill the dog!” The KPD began bellowing that I had to be killed. I knew that only calmness could rescue me. I walked through the howling crowd up to the front table and asked the Jew Schwarz if I should speak or not, yelling to be understood. Schwarz, who thought I might be able to help him out, since the KPD was his enemy, bellowed like a lion that one should listen to an opponent!

I began my remarks by saying: “I stand here as a National Socialist!” That was all I could get out, since the yelling began again. I turned to Schwarz and asked if he wanted things to calm down or not. He said I had only myself to blame. I pointed out to him that he would be the first to get his nose punched. That got him to really try to calm things down. I knew that if I attached the KPD, Schwarz would not be able to save me, so I said that I had asked to speak only because Schwarz had lied when he said that the NSDAP and the KPD were allies! I could only agree with my people’s comrade L. that we were not allies. If Schwarz reproached L. because I applauded him, it was only because, despite our political differences, a German stood by a German when L.’s German blood spoke. I then said that just as we had joined together against the Jew Schwarz in this meeting, I hoped that one day all workers in Germany would take a stand against the Jews. I managed, without anyone’s help, to leave the meeting in one piece.

These experiences as discussion speakers, which we old fighting speakers had countless times, put great demands on us. Not only did we always face a far more numerous foe, but we also knew that these meetings would usually end in some sort of a brawl, which made constant demands on our state of mind. This came to expression not only in examples like those I mention above, but also in the fact that that we had to pay careful attention to every word in these opponents’ meetings to see if there was anything we could use for our purposes. This was particularly true as the opposing speaker reached his conclusion and we attempted to ruin his effectiveness through our heckling.

Today’s speakers do not have such experiences. But our fighting speakers face new tasks, if in other areas. During the period of struggle, for example, it was easy to find material for a speech that would captivate the individual people’s comrades and keep them constantly attentive and enthusiastic. The government of the time gave us enough material to fill up our meetings all by itself. Today, however, it is our task to support constructive work through our speeches, and to uncover the opponent who today does not give discussion speeches, bur rather works through whispering subversion.

But it is still a time of struggle. The opposing worldview is the same as before, which the Führer referred to at the last Reich party rally, although our enemy is now fighting against our people particularly from abroad. As the NSDAP once had to deal with the parties in the Reich, the Reich now had to deal with foreign countries. This will be easier because of the successes of the National Socialist leadership. Nonetheless, we must see as one of our most honorable tasks dealing with this area, and to educate people’s comrades in positive ways about potentially unpopular matters! We can show if we really know something about speaking, and can do something. This part of our efforts will make our work ever a more valuable and indispensable support for our people’s government.

We speakers are the eternal molders of the German people’s soul, and remain what we were from our first days as fighting speakers: the faithful bearers of the National Socialist idea!

Enhanced by Zemanta
Share on Facebook
Share

Hitler Speaks in Munich SPEECH OF APRIL 27, 1923

Monday, May 21st, 2012

 

WHAT we need if we are to have a real People’s State is a land reform…. We do not believe that the mere dividing up of the land can by itself bring any alleviation. The conditions of a nation‘s life can in the last resort be bettered only through the political will to expansion. Therein lies the essential characteristic of a sound reform.

And land [Grund und Boden], we must insist, cannot be made an object for speculation. Private property can be only that which a man has gained for himself, has won through his work. A natural product is not private property, that is national property. Land is thus no object for bargaining.

Further, there must be a reform in our law. Our present law regards only the rights of the individual. It does not regard the protection of the race, the protection of the community of the people. It permits the befouling of the nation’s honor and of the greatness of the nation. A law which is so far removed from the conception of the community of the people is in need of reform.

Further, changes are needed in our system of education. We suffer today from an excess of culture [Ueberbildung] Only knowledge is valued. But wiseacres are the enemies of action. What we need is instinct and will. Most people have lost both through their ‘culture.’ We have, it is true, a highly intellectual class, but it is lacking in energy. If, through our overvaluation of mechanical knowledge, we had not so far removed ourselves from popular sentiment, the Jew would never have found his way to our people so easily as he has done. What we need is the possibility of a continuous succession of intellectual leaders drawn from the people itself.

Clear away the Jews! Our own people has genius enough – we need no Hebrews. If we were to put in their place intelligences drawn from the great body of our people, then we should have recovered the bridge which leads to the community of the people.

AGAIN, WE NEED A REFORM OF THE GERMAN PRESS.

A press which is on principle anti-national cannot be tolerated in Germany. Whoever denies the nation can have no part in it. We must demand that the press shall become the instrument of the national self-education.

FINALLY WE NEED A REFORM IN THE SPHERE OF ART, LITERATURE, AND THE THEATER. The Government must see to it that its people is not poisoned. There is a higher right which is based on the recognition of that which harms a people, and that which harms a people must be done away with.

And after this reform we shall come to recognize the duty of self-preservation. A man who says: ‘I deny that I have a right to defend my personal life’ has thereby denied his right to exist. TO BE A PACIFIST ARGUES A LACK OF CONVICTION, A LACK OF CHARACTER. For the pacifist is indeed ready enough to claim the help of others, but himself declines to defend himself. It is precisely the same with a people. A people which is not prepared to protect itself is a people without character. We must recover for our people as one of its most elementary principles the recognition of the fact that a man is truly man only if he defends and protects himself, that a people deserves that name only if in case of necessity it is prepared as a people to enter the lists. That is not militarism, that is self-preservation.

THEREFORE WE NATIONAL SOCIALISTS STAND FOR COMPULSORY MILITARY SERVICE FOR EVERY MAN. If a State is not worth that – then away with it! Then you must not complain if you are enslaved. But if you believe that you must be free, then you must learn to recognize that no one gives you freedom save only your own sword. What our people needs is not leaders in Parliament, but those who are determined to carry through what they see to be right before God, before the world, and before their own consciences – and to carry that through, if need be, in the teeth of majorities. And if we succeed in raising such leaders from the body of our people, then around them once again a nation will crystallize itself… It is the pride of our Movement to be the force which shall awake the Germany of fighters which yet shall be.

 

Enhanced by Zemanta
Share on Facebook
Share

Political Catholicism, the Enemy of the German People

Friday, May 11th, 2012

While the National Socialist government, despite all efforts of its enemies, continues to build a future for the German people, while its work has succeeded in filling the German people with new hope and joy, winning back for it the world’s respect, while it works hard to heal the wounds inflicted on the German people by a decade of black-red-gold economic mismanagement, an old enemy of the German people is again raising its head:

Understand us carefully here! — We make a basic distinction between religious Catholicism andpolitical Catholicism. We refuse now, as during the System Era, to lump together religious and political Catholicism, particularly since we know that the overwhelming majority of German Catholics have always rejected the evil machinations of Catholic politicians, just as the highest Church dignitaries have done. Pope Leo XIII himself said:

Enhanced by Zemanta
Share on Facebook
Share

MRS. CLARE SHERIDAN, Traveler, Lecturer in NEW YORK WORLD, December 15, 1923

Sunday, April 29th, 2012

“The Communists are Jews, and Russia is being entirely administered by them. They are in every government office, bureau and newspaper. They are driving out the Russians and are responsible for the anti-Semitic feeling which is increasing.”

Enhanced by Zemanta
Share on Facebook
Share

Jewish 90% Democratic Party Voting Record

Wednesday, April 25th, 2012

 

From Jews and American Politics, (an Historical Apologia Which Seems to Be Written for Jews)
by Stephen D. Isaacs, Doubleday & Company, Inc., Garden City, New York, 1977, page 158.
 

In 1964, the Republicans did even worse among the Jews by nominating ultra “Conservative” Barry Goldwater. It did not matter that Goldwater’s father was Jewish (Goldwater was raised as an Episcopalian). To most Jews, conservatism equals anti-Semitism.

Lucy Dawidowicz, the historian, has written that:

The Jewish experience in the Russian and Austro-Hungarian empires established even more emphatically what Jews had learned in Western Europe: that the political right was at best conservative, avowedly Christian and committed to the preservation of ancient privileges; it could, and often did, become reactionary and even anti-Semitic.

Ernest van den Haag put it another way:

“To the Jewish mind, the Gestalt of the rightist requires anti-Semitism no matter whether they are: they ought to be.”

Sixty-Nine percent of all Americans voted against Goldwater; 90 percent of American Jews voted against him.

Yet despite strong reasons to vote against the Democrats, more than eight of every ten Jews cast their ballots against the Republicans’ nominee, Nixon. The real was to come four years later–when many Jews would cry over whether they might be turned to pillars of if they pulled the Republican lever.

 

Enhanced by Zemanta
Share on Facebook
Share

Contemporary Voices of Warning

Monday, April 23rd, 2012

Well-informed observers, both inside and outside of Russia, took note at the time of the crucial Jewish role in Bolshevism. Winston Churchill, for one, warned in an article published in the February 8, 1920, issue of the London Illustrated Sunday Herald that Bolshevism is a “worldwide conspiracy for the overthrow of civilization and for the reconstitution of society on the basis of arrested development, of envious malevolence, and impossible equality.” The eminent British political leader and historian went on to write:

There is no need to exaggerate the part played in the creation of Bolshevism and in the actual bringing about of the Russian Revolution by these international and for the most part atheistical Jews. It is certainly a very great one; it probably outweighs all others. With the notable exception of Lenin, the majority of the leading figures are Jews. Moreover, the principal inspiration and driving power comes from the Jewish leaders. Thus Tchitcherin, a pure Russian, is eclipsed by his nominal subordinate, Litvinoff, and the influence of Russians like Bukharin or Lunacharski cannot be compared with the power of Trotsky, or of Zinovieff, the Dictator of the Red Citadel (Petrograd), or of Krassin or Radek — all Jews. In the Soviet institutions the predominance of Jews is even more astonishing. And the prominent, if not indeed the principal, part in the system of terrorism applied by the Extraordinary Commissions for Combatting Counter-Revolution [the Cheka] has been taken by Jews, and in some notable cases by Jewesses

Needless to say, the most intense passions of revenge have been excited in the breasts of the Russian people.

David R. Francis, United States ambassador in Russia, warned in a January 1918 dispatch to Washington: “The Bolshevik leaders here, most of whom are Jews and 90 percent of whom are returned exiles, care little for Russia or any other country but are internationalists and they are trying to start a worldwide social revolution.”

The Netherlands’ ambassador in Russia, Oudendyke, made much the same point a few months later: “Unless Bolshevism is nipped in the bud immediately, it is bound to spread in one form or another over Europe and the whole world as it is organized and worked by Jews who have no nationality, and whose one object is to destroy for their own ends the existing order of things.”

“The Bolshevik Revolution,” declared a leading American Jewish community paper in 1920, “was largely the product of Jewish thinking, Jewish discontent, Jewish effort to reconstruct.”

As an expression of its radically anti-nationalist character, the fledgling Soviet government issued a decree a few months after taking power that made anti-Semitism a crime in Russia. The new Communist regime thus became the first in the world to severely punish all expressions of anti-Jewish sentiment. Soviet officials apparently regarded such measures as indispensable. Based on careful observation during a lengthy stay in Russia, American-Jewish scholar Frank Golder reported in 1925 that “because so many of the Soviet leaders are Jews anti-Semitism is gaining [in Russia], particularly in the army [and] among the old and new intelligentsia who are being crowded for positions by the sons of Israel.”

Enhanced by Zemanta
Share on Facebook
Share

Is Urban Outfitters Selling a Pro-Nazi Shirt?

Saturday, April 21st, 2012

That’s what the Anti-Defamation League of Philadelphia seems to think. The organization has taken the hipster clothing chain to task for a T-shirt featuring a Star of David design they say is strikingly similar to one that was used to identify Jews by the Nazis during the Holocaust and was embroidered on concentration camp uniforms.

“We find this use of symbolism to be extremely distasteful and offensive, and we are outraged that your company would make this product available to your customers,” said Barry Morrison, the regional director of the ADL in a letter to Urban’s chairman and cheif executive Richard Hayne.

The Kellog shirt is by Dutch label Wood Wood, and retails for $100. So far, Urban has yet to respond to the ADL’s claims and the shirt is still available on their site. [ONTD]

Enhanced by Zemanta
Share on Facebook
Share