Hitler Sets His Hand to the Plough

Source: Germany’s Hitler (Chapter XII) – by Heinz A. Heinz

“Nothing of importance in life is merely given to man. Everything must be struggled for. Thus the uplifting of a nation does not come lightly, by chance or fate, but must be the outcome of effort.”–Adolf Hitler.

For fifteen years Hitler had directed his Movement; during the whole length of this period had he, in thousands of meetings and assemblies, sought to inculcate the masses with his ideas. At length the German people had come to look to him for their resuscitation, for their salvation from the menace of Bolshevism, and they trusted that once in power he could, and would, make good his promises.

When Hitler came to power he did, indeed, proceed at once to carry out the purposes and promises of a programme conceived so many years before. We have seen him working it out, point by point, boiling it down, pinning it down under twenty-five “Headings” in Anton Drexler’s little Wohnzimmer (living-room) while Frau Drexler gets the frugal supper. We have seen him submitting it point by point to the Munich public in the Hofbräusaal, when hundreds of dissentient beer mugs were hurled at his head. We have seen him pacing up and down his narrow room at Landsberg pouring out the whys and wherefores of it all to Rudolf Hess, who rattles as hard as he can go on the typewriter to get the teeming content of this energetic brain into some sort of literary order.

And now, after fifteen years of struggle, he saw himself at long length on the threshold of achievement.

Together with Hitler two other National-Socialists were included in the new Cabinet, Herr Wilhelm Frick as Minister of the Interior, and Captain Hermann Goering as Minister without Portfolio, and Commissary for Air.

With the coming of this new Government, and the setting aside of the old duality as between Prussia and the rest of the Reich, was the basis laid for a universal German policy, and for the elimination of all elements inimical to German life.

In his first address to the people the Chancellor called for a sense of national discipline. He asked for four years in which to make good the blunders of the post-War administrators, in which to re-erect the State, in which to cope with the problem of unemployment; in which to redeem German peasantry from its misery and help-lessness.

In the night of February 27th-28th, 1933, the Communists set fire to the Reichstag. A few days previously a raid on the catacombs of the Karl Liebknecht House in Berlin had brought to light a great quantity of material which proved beyond cavil that the forces of Bolshevism were girding themselves for a mass offensive in Germany. The Chancellor replied by draconian measures to ensure the safety of the State.

On the evening before the great elections of March, on the “Day of the Awakened Nation,” the Chancellor addressed the entire people by means of the radio. The result of his speech was to renew in every heart in Germany the will to succeed, the passion for freedom, the sense of nationality. Everywhere bells were pealed, bonfires were ignited on the hills, flags bedecked the streets in every town and village–as Horst Wessel, indeed, had predicted in his song!

The National-Socialists brought off a complete and overwhelming victory on March 5th with a return of 17 300 000 votes, and a win of two hundred and eighty- eight seats in the Reichstag. Adolf Hitler, who headed the voting list, entered the Parliament House, himself, for the first time. The Government could count on a majority of 52 per cent. These results at the poll inducted the “National-Socialist Revolution”– perhaps the most bloodless Revolution known in history. The National-Socialists, everywhere, “took over.”

In Munich the Minister President Held boasted that were Hitler to send a Reichs Commissary thither, he would have him arrested on the frontier. When, however, on March 9th, the Reichs Commissary, in the person of General Ritter von Epp, duly appeared, the Minister President immediately climbed down and withdrew from the scene of action.

Herr Esser, who took part in these proceedings, told me how minutely and exactly all had been arranged beforehand. Everything went by clockwork, according to plan, without the least confusion or miscarriage. “As a matter of fact,” he said, “we had been prepared for a good deal more opposition, Held had been so full of threats and fulminations.”

The opening of the Reichstag on March 21st was an act symbolising the unity of the entire German people. Not less historically significant was the hand-clasp exchanged between the aged and revered General Field Marshal von Hindenburg and the new young Chancellor, Adolf Hitler. The dignity of immemorial tradition extended a welcome to the younger generation straining towards a new and happier future… .

At the first session of the new Reichstag an “Enabling Bill” was passed whereby Hitler was made absolute Dictator for a period of four years. The purpose of this was to free him from the shackles and delays of parliamentary procedure in bringing his programme into immediate action. We shall see in a subsequent chapter how, and to what first ends, he availed himself of this measure.

Another important step towards the general weaving together of all the aspects of government was the appointment everywhere of new Reichstatthalter, i.e. of Provincial Premiers. These, Hitler suggested, should be nominated by the President. The Chancellor himself is Reichstatthalter for Prussia in order personally to bind that country and the whole Reich together. The duties of these Provincial Premiers, as they may be called, are numerous and important.

In April came the law which would recapture for those of German birth and extraction the majority of representation in the learned professions and in official life. This law, bearing heavily as it did upon the Jews, makes exception in their case for all those who had fought for Germany in the War, and for those whose fathers and sons had so fallen.

Then came ordinances to regulate school matters. In no direction more than in this is the new spirit and bent of National Socialism to be discerned. The High Schools were overcrowded. Their overflow to the Universities had to be facilitated. At the same time Hitler resolved to check the superfluity of girls seeking facilities for the higher education.

An entire book could be written of Hitler’s theory of education; on his estimate of the place and function of woman in the State; and on the great youth movement resultant from both, known in Germany as Hitlerjugend. He says the most important thing for girls is the right training of the body, next that of character, and third that of the intellect. A striking proof of the self-sacrificing enthusiasm and unanimity with which such data are accepted by the female intelligentsia in Germany to-day has, for instance, been afforded by the willingness of the University women of Heidelberg largely to forgo, at Hitler’s behest, and in favour of men, the learned professional careers to which they had looked forward.

To those who imagine that Hitler has set back the clock five hundred years for German womanhood there is this to be answered: If German girls do not retire from competitive life with men, there will be neither work nor food for either in another few decades. A country with a dense and growing population and no colonies, must narrowly restrict its labour market, in the learned professions as well as in the trades. Again, there is no parallel to be drawn between the type of woman and the numbers of women frequenting the Universities in England and America to those in Germany. The German Universities–and their name is legion–were swarming with women. Some went thither for the purposes of serious study. For those who do not go thither for the purposes of serious study, it is obvious enough that the quicker they are driven home again the better.

In May the German Labour Front took the place of the old system of Trade Unions. It would require many pages to give an adequate idea of this reorganisation in Germany of the relationships between employer and employee. The idea underlying it was typical of the “Socialism” in Hitler’s programme.

By the time summer had come round, most of the previously existing separate (and highly antagonistic) political parties in the State had ceased to exist. The Social Democrats were suppressed, and for the most part the rest extinguished themselves. A law was passed forbidding the formation of fresh parties. The public were relieved at last to be free of the veritable pest of so many parties and groups, and the Gordian knot of German disunity was cut at one blow.

Then came the organisation of the air, both for purposes of ordinary communication and for defence. This Ministry was confided to General Goering.

The lot of the ordinary man in the street, the everyday person, claimed its share of the Chancellor’s attention. A law was passed, which, among other things, aimed at making life easier for the weak and unfit, for those impoverished by the War, for War widows and orphans.

Hitler looks to early and healthy marriage, State aid for struggling young families, to assist in stamping out many of those social abominations which St. Paul says should not even be named among Christians, but which have been more hideously rife in the world since the Great War than at any previous period.

Severe measures were enacted to put down immorality, and further, a law was framed with the object of preventing unfit children coming into the world.

Hitler’s much discussed Law for the Prevention of Hereditarily Diseased Offspring, passed on July 14th, 1933, is based upon the German policy of “regeneration”(These particulars are taken from an article published by the Deutscher Akademischer Austauschdienst, in News in Brief Vol. 2, No. I, page 5.), which aims at promoting the propagation of valuable, innately healthy children, while preventing an offspring of hereditarily diseased persons in so far as those descendants are likely to be of inferior quality. Considering the fact that the average ratio of children of healthy families to diseased families is from 1 to 2 to 5 to 7, the necessity of such a policy seems clear.

The following statements, taken from the Zentralblatt für Reichsversicherung und Reichsversorgung (Central Gazette for Federal Insurance and Pensions), show to what extent the German people is affected by hereditarily diseased persons, in the sense of the law, their number being estimated at 400 000 (one-half of them innately feeble-minded). On the average, each diseased person costs the community which sends him to an institution, RM. 1 482 per annum. Since insane persons live in institutions 7 ½ years on the average, they require an expenditure of RM. 11,600. It is a conservative calculation that the German communities have to spend more than 170 millions of marks a year on their insane alone.

“ This does not include the expenditures for diseased children a part of whom are attending auxiliary schools. Every pupil of an auxiliary school is costing the Government RM. 573 per annum, compared to a maximum of 230 for a healthy pupil. For the whole of the Reich the expenditures for auxiliary schools amount to about 40 millions of RM. per annum. Direct expenditures on hereditarily diseased persons in the Reich, states and communities, amount to at least 350 million RM. a year in all. We have to add to that sum all of the expenditures made by charitable organisations and institutions, by churches and by private persons; also the costs of execution which amount to about 100 million RM. a year. Some institutions, where insane criminals are kept, show quotas of RM. 20 a day for every inmate. The significance of such figures will seem the more evident if we realise that many healthy, industrious families cannot afford a quarter of that sum as a daily expenditure for their entire household.”

One can gather from all this how far-seeing the law is which provides for the sterilisation of the hereditarily defective when so far as medical science can predict, only further severe bodily or mental abnormality is to be anticipated. The absence of the birth of those unfitted for life relieves those upon whom their subsistence would depend from indescribable suffering and unremitting sacrifice.

In spite of all that has been written and said to the contrary the action of the Chancellor in unifying the Protestant sects of Germany has had no anti-Christian significance. “The rock bed foundation of the German Evangelical Church,” says the Instrument which achieves this purpose, “is the Gospel of Jesus Christ, as witnessed for us in the Sacred Scriptures, and as enlightened afresh by the Confession of the Reformation.”

The Chancellor sought by a Concordat with Rome to define the relationships and rights of the Catholic Church and the State respectively, so as to secure smooth working in both spheres.

The Party Day in Nuremberg, 1933, witnessed such a demonstration of loyalty to Adolf Hitler as had never yet been seen. For the first time the Party Day had become a State function and had developed into an assembly of the nation.

Hitler can never lay stress enough on the importance of the agricultural classes, of the plough-driving peasant. Upon them, and upon him, is built the superstructure of the State. Agriculture is the source of the country’s strength.

All the great cities would soon be nothing but arid deserts of bricks and mortar where they not to receive, year after year, an influx of fresh healthy life from the country. On the other hand, this migration to the towns, if carried too far, is a curse in itself against which the National-Socialist theory of the State sedulously sets its face. Hitler envisages for the future not a gathering of the population into endless great cities, but their re-establishment, right down to the roots, in their native soil. National Socialism has already achieved a great deal, and with much success, in this direction.

The law touching hereditary farmland seeks to relieve the small farmer of many of the uncertainties and troubles which have hitherto weighed him down. His land is to be inalienable and no longer the easy prey of the financial speculator.

On Saturday, October 14th, 1933, Hitler withdrew his country from the League of Nations. There should have been no occasion in this for the universal amazement it has caused. Adolf Hitler had announced his intention of taking this step some months before. Not before Germany has parity of rights does it concern her at all to waste time over disarmament conferences which forever come to nothing.

On the same day President von Hindenburg dissolved the Reichstag, since, in consequence of the dissolution of all parties except the National-Socialists, this now had become a mere Rump.

The new electors fully confirmed all former National-Socialist gains, and went far beyond. The result of these, held in November, was a victory for Adolf Hitler which even his most ardent adherents had hardly dared hope. From a voting population of 43 millions, 40½ millions supported the National-Socialist regime. Six hundred and sixty-one Members returned to the Reichstag. It meant that 95 per cent of the German people had firmly taken their stand behind Hitler.

This result was their thanks to him for all that he had hitherto done for them.

There would be little purpose in giving a description of all the measures since undertaken by Hitler for the reconstruction of Germany, these being generally known. It would moreover require at least a volume for the purpose, even if the most important only were taken into consideration.

The foregoing brief resume has concerned itself with little but the political aspect of things. In the following chapter some attempt will be made to show what all this meant translated into everyday terms, brought to bear on the everyday life of the German citizen.

Was Hitler Really a Dictator

Source: https://www.wintersonnenwende.com/scriptorium/english/archives/dictator/dictator00.html

by Friedrich Christian, Prince of Schaumburg-Lippe

Written in 1977. Published: Kritik: Die Stimme des Volkes, Issue 86;
Nordwind-Verlag © 1994.
Translated by Victor Diodon and published here by kind permission of the copyright owner.
Translation © 1998 by
The Scriptorium.

  1. Introduction
  2. The masses readily become a hangman…
  3. The „dictator“
  4. The fatal lack of understanding of human nature
  5. „Denazification Certificate trade“and self-deception
  1. The system of slander
  2. Slander: psychological genocide!
  3. Art, culture and social innovations
  4. The eternal ethical laws of nature
  5. A word to the slanderers themselves
  6. Conclusion
  7. Epilogue

Part 1 – Introduction

The American sociologist Robert S. Lynd said: „It is easier to believe a lie one has heard a hundred times than a truth one has never heard before.“

Since the beginning of this century, one campaign of lies after the other has been aimed at us Germans. No matter how often the great many untruths were refuted – it became clear that, unfortunately, it is much more profitable to spread lies than to stand up for the truth, especially if the liar had also been the victor in a war.

A country where it is dangerous to voice the truth is on the wrong path. In any case, I personally prefer to live in a country where it is advantageous to tell the truth.

But as the French author Marquis de Vauvenargues put it in his Maximes et Réflexiones: „Only few people are strong enough to tell the truth and to hear it.“

When I write in order to help truth to victory it is frequently inevitable that this involves criticism. The two are often inseparable, and sometimes people are unintentionally hurt in the process.

There is no revolution, movement, organization or other association, no matter how good, which does not incorporate both „right“ and „wrong“, just as there are natural and indispensable opposites in evidence everywhere.

In Adolf Hitler’s Movement as well, there was both light and shadow, and – a universal constant – people with strong as well as with weak points. Only a genius can really assess them both, see them for what they are, and employ them in accordance with their talents.

If I learned from Dr. Goebbels, or even from Hitler himself, which of the crucial men in the Party Vanguard were not „all right“, then for the sake of truth this must not be hushed up even if the men in question had other merits to point to, without which they could not have risen to leading positions. It is a matter of calling attention to the morally upstanding, decent, honest colleagues and comrades-in-arms, even if doing so should draw criticism down on me for also shedding light on unpleasant matters in the process.

First and foremost, the issue is not individual persons – it is truth for the German people as a whole.

I will try to describe the leading men through their actions and behavior, even if the incidents are frequently relatively trivial ones. I have chosen them for events as typically human as possible, which render the person and thus his thoughts and actions easier to understand.

In their fundamental character, the German people are so decent that they have frequently been taken in by their enemies simply because they would not have thought them capable of evil – simply could not think it possible.

One judges others based on one’s self – that’s how it has always been, and that’s how it continues to be with those who slander our nation! In instances where they themselves stepped into the scene – in revolutions and wars – they were particularly cruel and inhuman. It was never the people as a whole, always the „movers and shakers“, the floor leaders. Just recall, for example, the French Revolution, the extermination of the Indians, the battle against the Boers, the Great Revolution of the Chinese and the Russians, the subjugation of India, etc.

We Germans differ from almost all of the major powers on our globe primarily in that we have never provoked revolutions or instigated civil wars in foreign countries, in other words on an international basis, and never tried to wear down other peoples through large-scale international campaigns of incitement.

I do not, of course, count those „Germans“ who participated in the international anti-German incitement as members of our people! They who exploited the war in order to divide our people by mendacious propaganda and to play each side against the other, are the branded ones of our age.

In the course of my interrogation by the Chief Prosecutor in the Palace of Justice at Nuremberg, this prosecutor claimed that the Germans living abroad must all be counted as part of the „fifth column“ – that is, agents of Hitler, for the purpose of revolutionizing the world – and that this mighty organization had been under the control of Dr. Goebbels.

I told him that such an organization (as had in fact existed for decades, only against Germany) would be incredibly expensive. The indispensable buying-up of the press of foreign nations in itself would require gigantic sums of cash. He agreed with this statement. I then explained that I knew exactly how large the Reich Ministry of Propaganda’s budget for foreign propaganda had been, at a time when foreign propaganda had still been possible – approximately until 1943. The largest annual budgetary allocation ever had been one million Reichsmark. This had to cover lecture tours, the tours of the great symphony orchestras and theatre companies, as well as those of the great performing artists. On top of this, there were also expenses for sports events and – „on the side „, so to speak – subsidies for newspapers of importance for cultural advertising. Altogether, therefore, it was a ridiculous, a paltry sum, just barely better than nothing at all.

Further, I remarked that Hitler himself had strictly forbidden the NSDAP to engage in any and all propaganda activities abroad, the only exception being Germans from the Reich temporarily residing abroad. I witnessed an instance once when Hitler angrily told a leading Party man that National-Socialism was not an „export article“ and he himself no human panacea for the world’s woes, and that his sole concern was to help the German people!

What the enemies of Germany accused us of in those days is what they themselves did to our detriment on a much greater scale, and with funds no doubt a thousand times greater than the budget of our Ministry of Propaganda.

The British believed a great deal of what the then famous Lord Haw-Haw told them over the air – but that did next to nothing to detract from their composure as a nation.

The Germans, on the other hand, could not believe what they saw refuted by everyday life – but as of March 1945, they began to flag in their composure as a nation. And this process is still ongoing.

It is my wish that this booklet may help to revive and strengthen in our people the sense that the defiled and much-maligned generation of our fathers did their best in the struggle for Germany’s future, true to good old tradition, and holds the honorable position that is its due in the history of our people.

Friedrich Christian, Prince of Schaumburg-Lippe

Part 2 – The masses readily become a hangman…

The Frenchman Gustave le Bon (1841-1931) was one of the foremost psychologists. He knew a great deal about the nature of human reactions, and so I will quote him at the outset: „It does not take much to turn the broad masses into a hangman, but just as little to make them a martyr.“

We will have to recall le Bon a number of times yet, since for a long time now our people have been at the mercy of a cruel enemy of whom they still know next to nothing. If for no other reason than that, we must finally put our cards on the table, so that we Germans – all of us – will not slowly but surely become dehumanized by never-ending calumny.

Without wanting to admit it, our nation became a martyr long ago, perhaps precisely because it does not have what it takes to become a hangman. The Germans have always been too trusting, too decent and too honest, but most of all: too frank and open – especially when times were good for them. Then they have to virtually broadcast their good fortune. And that had unforeseeable consequences, as there is nothing more suited to arousing enmity in others. Soon there were those who turned this essentially harmless fact into the basis for a large-scale political racket: the world-wide slandering of our nation.

Le Bon writes „…that in intellectual terms, the masses are always subordinate to the person who stands alone. In terms of emotions and the actions brought about by them, however, they may be better or worse. It all depends on the kind of influence the masses are under.“

In times of misfortune we Germans have always tended to look for the blame within ourselves. This throws the gates of opportunity wide open to slander.

Le Bon: „A person’s nimbus always vanishes in the moment of failure. The hero whom the masses cheered yesterday will be reviled by them tomorrow if fate strikes him down. The greater the nimbus, the greater the backlash. The masses then regard the fallen hero as the likes of themselves and take revenge for the fact that they once submitted to superiority which they now no longer acknowledge. When Robespierre had his colleagues and a great number of his contemporaries beheaded, he possessed an incredible nimbus. A shift in only a few voices immediately deprived him of this nimbus, and the masses dogged his heels to the guillotine with as many curses as they had hurled at his victims the day before. The faithful always vent their fury by smashing the icons of their former gods.

„Misfortune rapidly cancels any nimbus. It can also be worn down, however, by discussion; that takes longer – but it is a more certain way. A nimbus discussed is no longer a nimbus. Idols and men who understood how to preserve their halo have never tolerated discussion. He that wants to be admired by the crowds must keep them at a distance.“

Witnessing as I now do a fourth epoch of German history, I feel that I have seen an unusually great deal and certainly am in a position to compare. I hope that my readers will not consider it presumptuous of me to suggest that, in terms of this period of time, I am one of the very few people who are able, and entitled, to recount events from personal experience – and to judge them.

Now you will perhaps say: if that is so, then why are you speaking up only now, more than fourty years later?

For two reasons:

a) because I still believed that others were far more suited to this task, since their positions of particular responsibility ought to have afforded them greater insight, and

b) because I simply could not believe that one and the same people could be so terribly different. Unfortunately I have had to realize that it is no longer a matter of one and the same people. If it were, then a great many things would be different today in the German sphere of influence – better for everyone.

Therefore I feel that it is my duty to take up my pen in order to record what I have personally learned and seen, and make what testimony my personal experience enables me to make with a clear conscience, against the slanderers and for our people – for the sake of the truth.

I lived in the days of the monarchy, the son of a governing Prince. As a child I saw what close, honest and loyal ties our people had to our family, and vice versa, our family to the people. The clearest proof of this was the fact that only a few days before my eldest brother’s abdication the Schaumburg-Lippean Landtag unanimously requested its sovereign not to step down. At that time the SPD (Social Democratic Party of Germany) was the strongest party in Parliament! But the pressures exerted by the Emperor and the government of the Reich were too great, and our state too small, for continued independent statehood to be possible. National defence was given up, and the military as well as the provincial police forces withdrew. But I felt such solidarity with our citizens of Schaumburg-Lippe that I managed, with only my wife to help me, to carry out and win a petition for a referendum, so that the Landtag had to break off its almost completed negotiations with Prussia, and Schaumburg-Lippe remained a Free State until after 1945.

In the mid-1930s Hitler strove to put the Reich Reform into effect. This entailed amalgamating the small states with the large in order to render administration much cheaper and more efficient, thus strengthening the unity of the Reich. I asked to speak to him and recounted what I had successfully done for our Schaumburg-Lippe in 1928. He was so enthusiastic about it that he immediately summoned the Reich Minister of the Interior, stated verbatim: „This young Prince is the best democrat of us all, we must help him!“, and ordered a prompt review of whether the sovereignty of Schaumburg-Lippe could be maintained.

Only a short time later, Hitler personally informed me that my homeland would remain a Free State, in other words, independent within the Reich. And our citizens of Schaumburg-Lippe were very happy. Hitler had made an exception to his Reich Reform, an exception to his own principle – was that dictatorship? I think it is rather the exact opposite.

Events such as this one, even if it was of no particular political import except for the little State and its citizens themselves, were never mentioned in Hitler’s favor after 1945.

Part 3 – The „Dictator“

What kind of people were those who started the world-wide campaign of slander, and continue to disseminate lies to this very day? One can only begin to understand this matter if one asks: what is needed in order to slander someone on such a large scale? Unfortunately the answer can only be: a great deal of money, and unscrupulousness without compare.

People with a great deal of money and unscrupulousness can never live in their own homeland for very long. They would soon become known, attract attention, and get into trouble. Why should these people carry out their activities in exactly the place where they could most easily be watched?

No, such activities are the work of people who wanted to (or had to) leave their homeland for political reasons and who take revenge on the people of their native land by vilifying them whom they had to leave behind and whom they secretly envy. They suddenly discover that their old homeland wasn’t really their home. And then they are free of any second thoughts.

The more they run down the land of their birth abroad, in conversation and soon in the press as well, the more they realize that such a „policy“ can be lucrative, perhaps even very much so! It is just a matter of finding those who also have an interest in defaming the people from which they come.

Who was, and continues to be, the most sensitive towards German export trade? Without a doubt it is England and the United States, and in earlier days, France as well. Therefore there was no place where anti-German propaganda could be as profitably accommodated and even sold as in England and the United States. It is self-evident that of these two nations, the United States were and are much more attractive in this context. Only in the United States is there enough money available for such endeavours, only in the United States are there experts in worldwide operations of this sort, and only in the United States can one find the absolutely unscrupulous profiteers necessary for such an enterprise. And there are probably more emigrants in the USA than anywhere else in the world. Added to this is the fact that, especially since the Second World War, we Germans accord grotesquely inflated importance to anything and everything that comes to us from the United States.

In qualification I must add that those Americans with whom the Germans are so taken are generally those who have next to no connections with those social circles which have had prominence ever since the United States were founded – in other words, those to whom the United States owes her meteoric rise and hence her power and status in the global community.

Thanks to several trips to the States, I am very familiar with these conservative social circles of the South – and I hold them in high regard. They have nothing in common with the Roosevelts and the Kennedys, the Schlesingers, the Kissingers and the Rockefellers – no matter how wealthy these are, and how successful they have long been in their own way.

Wasn’t it General Eisenhower who spent a fortune in buying up one of the most perfidious anti-German hate publications, and then distributed it to the senior members of the United States Army?

The last time I visited with some very conservative Americans near Lake Erie, a highly respected newspaper publisher said in his table talk at a luncheon given in honour of the famous Mr. Krips and myself:

„My dear Prince, when you have returned home again, tell your German fellow-countrymen that we Americans never had anything against the Germans. We never hated them – not even in war. But if your Germans continue to sit placidly by while being defamed so horribly, if they continue to do nothing to refute all those lies and to silence the liars, if, in short, they continue to do nothing to preserve the German nation’s honour, then soon the Germans will no longer have a friend in the world!!!“

On the occasion of this same visit, a particularly popular minister, the head of a large parish – a former army chaplain in Nuremberg at the time of my detention there by the International Military Tribunal – invited me to give the sermon in his large, splendid church the following Sunday. When I asked which topic I would speak on – for in order to be able to speak in English without notes I would have to prepare – he said: „The topic I have announced is: ‘The Injustice of Nuremberg’.“ I would have spoken on this topic only with the consent of my country’s Embassy. He, the minister, had had to witness the hanging of our comrades in the Palace of Justice at Nuremberg, and had always been against the injustice perpetrated there. His family was originally from Germany. –

In the Nuremberg Palace of Justice, as I was being led to the interrogation room, a tall Negro from the guards spoke to me on the sly, and said: „You, Prince – you’re a slave and I’m a slave – we’ve got to stick together!“

We understood that it was not „the Americans“ who were to blame, but rather a very specific kind of American citizen. These were emigrants to a man, most of them of Jewish extraction and many of these from Germany. Many of them worked as interrogators etc. in the offices of the IMT. The slanderers came and went freely there. When lies take on an official character, they can very easily turn into verdicts – even death sentences! Let’s quote le Bon one last time:

„The nature of crimes committed by the mob is clear.

„A typical example is the murder of du Launay, the warden of the Bastille. After the capture of this fortress, the warden was attacked from all sides by the furious crowd surrounding him. Hang him, they shriek, behead him, or tie him to the tail of a horse! In his struggles to free himself, the warden accidentally kicks one of those closest to him. Immediately someone suggests – and the crowd cheers the suggestion – that the kicked man should cut the warden’s throat.

„This man, an unemployed cook who had come to the Bastille half out of mere curiosity to see what was going on there, thinks, because this is the general public opinion, that this deed would be patriotic, and even believes he deserves a medal for killing a monster. He is handed a sabre, with which he slashes at the warden’s bare throat. But since the sabre is blunt and will not cut, he now draws a small black-handled knife from his pocket and (since as cook he knows how to cut meat) finishes the job successfully.“

The sum total of the victims of the Inquisition in Spain, Italy and France, of the British Revolution, the French Revolution and the Russian Revolution, as well as of the Marxist uprisings in Czechoslovakia, Hungary, Austria and Germany in the days of the Weimar Republic can only be roughly estimated – but it may be assumed to exceed nine million. If we add to this all those Germans – men, women and children – who were killed by the various occupation forces in Italy, Poland, Rumania, Czechoslovakia, Hungary, the entire Reich territory etc., then this additional figure probably makes up far more than another 600,000.

After the armistice had been concluded, more than 10,000 mostly very young men from the Waffen-SS were killed without any trial, for no other reason than that they had their blood group tattooed on their arm, so that in case of injury the correct medical supplies could be used without delay. The „Chief Justice of the Waffen-SS and Police“ already told me in Nuremberg, where I met him, that their number in fact probably exceeded the 50,000 mark. The testimony of this Chief Justice, Dr. Reinecke, at the IMT at Nuremberg was so damning for the victors that the Nuremberg Trial was suspended, until the order to proceed came from the United States. Unfortunately there were not enough Reineckes in Nuremberg, otherwise that great trial and the many others following in its wake could never have been carried out, since they were based to a considerable extent on the so-called incriminating evidence provided by German traitors only intent on saving their own skin.

Sometimes, when we were taken to be interrogated in Nuremberg, we happened to catch a glimpse of some of these „gentlemen“; they were former officials and diplomats who had at one time sworn allegiance to Adolf Hitler and had always been oh-so-eager to prove their „loyalty“.

From several statements that Hitler made in the small circle of his closest friends, I know that he attached extraordinarily great value to a sworn oath. It was inconceivable to him that German officials or soldiers could break their oath. That is also why he would never have forced anyone to swear an oath. Furthermore, it was always made very clear to everyone that an oath sworn to the Führer was always also synonymous with an oath sworn to the Reich. So anyone who later deliberately broke his oath to the Führer also at the same time broke the oath he had sworn to the German Reich. This corresponded to the tradition of the former oath sworn to „the Kaiser and the German Empire“.

There were also security reasons for not wanting to bind the validity of an oath to only one human life. Those who broke their oaths thus also betrayed the Reich, and in my opinion that has a great deal to do with the division of Germany. It is time for all Germans to remember this, and to take steps against the defamation of our people from this point of view as well.

And with this we have reached the heart of the problem, for the worldwide defamation of all things German did not by any means begin only in Hitler’s time. It is not true that he, his Party, his plans and actions were what gave rise to it. The truth is that the defamation of the German Empire and people already began when the Idea of a unified Germany, inspired by Otto von Bismarck with the Prussian virtues of integrity, honesty, modesty etc., offered all German people a tremendous opportunity. The more the slanderers concentrated their hatred on the Emperor and his Princes – and later on Adolf Hitler and his Movement – the more it became their great and single goal to shatter the Reich and to strip the German people of all power.

The methodology of their slander shows this clearly time and again. Why else would these very same groups never so much as bat an eyelash when other nations, other political powers, other people do things much, much worse than the worst that has ever been imputed to our people?!

The history of the Germans contains nothing even remotely comparable to the Inquisition, the British and the French Revolutions, the Russian revolutions and all that was done to us Germans by certain victorious powers after the armistice – at which point I must stress that in my opinion even these victorious powers are not the ones to blame; rather, the guilty party is almost always that more or less anonymous power that fights its battles exclusively by means of calumny and incitement, and has done so for more than a century!

This is the power that works systematically, never for one country and from one country, but always internationally. The boundless abuses of democracy that take place in a great many nations on earth afford that international gang of agitators and calumniators every opportunity to terrorize large parts of the world’s population, to the point where soon there will no longer be any individual nations, just „mankind as a mass“ which will let itself be sold off at will.

Because our people were so good and capable and highly esteemed, they have been at the top of the slander hit list for decades. Europe without the German Reich is no longer „the Occident“, but that is exactly what increasingly materialistic mankind needs.

„It is possible that the German may yet be swept from the world’s stage; for he has all the qualities necessary for attaining Heaven, but not a single one for asserting himself on Earth, and all the nations hate him like the Evil One hates Good. But if they should ever really succeed in driving him out, conditions will ensue that will make them wish that they could dig him out of his grave again, even if it be with their bare and bleeding fingers.“

Hebbel, Diaries, January 4, 1860

And that brings me to Hitler the „dictator“. Today, thanks to enemy propaganda, he is considered the prototype of a dictator, an „autocrat“. A dictatorship, wrote the Bertelsmann Encyclopaedia after 1945, may be exercised by one individual or by a group (party dictatorship):

„In accordance with its origins, which are to be found in the Roman Republic, a dictatorship is a valid form of government as a means of eliminating certain crises (war, civil war). Its duration is thus temporary and its implementation is bound by certain rules….

„In recent history, dictatorships are closely tied to the establishment of modern-day constitutions. In the British Revolution of 1642-49 as well as in the French of 1789-99, the originally liberal popular movements ended in dictatorships, which in these cases were exercised, not by individuals, but by certain groups, and not as authorized delegates, but high-handedly and with reference to religious motives or the right of popular sovereignty. In these cases as well, the dictatorships were originally regarded as a temporary measure for the establishment of a new ruling class and the eradication of the old, corrupt generation, but ended up as absolute dictatorship under a Cromwell or a Napoleon.

„…the fact is frequently overlooked that even modern Criminal Codes recognize temporary dictatorship as emergency measure. The Weimar Constitution (§ 48) is an example of this, also the Enabling Act….

„…a type of state in which the exercise of supreme authority is concentrated in one organ of the state – (e.g.) in the case of the Third Reich, initially in the State Cabinet, later in the Head of State; in the case of the Soviet Union, in the Parliament – in which a separation of powers is enacted for organizational reasons, although the principle of a restriction of power is not put into effect;….

„…Dictatorship is always totalitarian, but rarely absolute in modern times; rather, constitutional dictatorship predominates.“

If in Hitler’s case one could even speak of a „dictatorship“, then in my opinion only of a constitutional dictatorship, since especially in important matters he never acted entirely on his own; on the contrary, in by far the most cases his actions were guided by pertinent laws and by agreement with the government of the Reich. It is known that in particularly pregnant cases (e.g. the Saarland, succession of Hindenburg, Enabling Act), he let the people themselves decide, and then acted according to the wishes they had expressed – either by plebiscite or through the Reichstag.

There is no doubt that he could have gained power in the Reichstag in 1933 even without a vote. But he subordinated himself and his government to the decision of the old Reichstag, and he received the vote of many a one who, like Theodor Heuss (later to become Federal President) and Federal Chancellor Adenauer, no doubt had good intentions and voted for Hitler without being a member of the NSDAP.

Hitler himself never felt that he had the power of a dictator. The comment he once made during the war – „…if one of us has the power of a dictator, then it’s Roosevelt, he has a much greater say in his country than I have in mine…“ – says a lot, I think. And he considered Stalin to be far more powerful than even Roosevelt.

When Hitler moved into the Reich Presidential Palace, he ordered some architectural improvements. What bothered him the most was Hindenburg’s terribly old-fashioned bathroom. He had the facilities modernized, and without running up a noteworthy bill for it. The Auditor-General’s Office then told him that he would have to pay for the renovations himself and, furthermore, that he had not been authorized to effect the changes. – Hitler offered his opinion that the ancient bathroom facilities would have had to be replaced one way or another, and further, that surely the Führer and Chancellor of the Reich ought to be able to make an independent decision on the fate of an old bathtub so as not to waste the state’s time. As far as I know, he then proceeded to pay the bill out of his personal funds. The Palace was, after all, state property.

This happened at about the same time that Hitler showed my wife and myself his bedroom, on our own request. It was a dark and somewhat plainly furnished room with a somewhat old-fashioned bed that could not have been very comfortable. On the wall above it hung a picture of his mother, which he had had painted, probably from a photograph. He said that it was a good likeness and one of his very few keepsakes from his family; it was very dear to him and not a day went by that he wasn’t glad to have it. This rather spartan room was definitely no setting for excesses and debauchery such as unscrupulous profiteers have imputed to Hitler.

In the years from 1922 to 1935 my wife and I frequently visited him in his private residence, the so-called New Reich Chancellery, often at least one or two evenings a week. The residence was roomy but impersonal. He didn’t like it. Company gathered at a large, low, round table, in easy or regular chairs, was served tea and biscuits and small sandwiches.

It is often claimed today that he never let others get a word in edgeways. In truth it was quite the opposite. He asked the others to speak, to recount events from their lives etc. He made jokes to liven up the conversation and to get others to join in. Only when all this failed and the others finally insisted that he should speak himself, as this would be much more interesting in many ways – then he would relent, and could talk for hours. And I must say that this was often a great experience, for this man had already lived a most interesting life. Speaking retrospectively, he viewed everything with incredible objectivity and, hence, amazing modesty.

I know that many will not believe me – but these are facts and I can’t change them. I am not writing in order to do someone a favour, but rather to serve the purpose of truth. Can I help never having met the evil Hitler? Should I invent a worse man? Whom would that serve? Certainly not my people, and in the long run not our enemies either.

I was personally acquainted with a great many well-known and even famous artists, politicians, statesmen, several reigning monarchs – I could almost say, „around the world“. I was friends with many of them – just as good friends as with many completely unknown labourers, farmers and soldiers. But – in my opinion there was never another man even remotely like Adolf Hitler.

It is very difficult to write about this without being laughed at or even suspected; but if I want to be completely honest – and that is my only aim, anything else would be not only pointless, but also evil – then I must say that he was certainly a most extraordinary person. I have often asked myself whether this man can even be compared with other people, or whether he must be considered from a completely different perspective.

In a large old villa outside the gates of Vienna, overlooking the vineyards of the Kahlenberg, there is a cosy wine cellar where the higher-ranking American officers liked to get together of an evening after the Second World War. One might call it a tavern, with designs painted among the timberwork all round.

The proprietess, beautiful Princess Wittgenstein, showed me in and asked me to give a critical opinion on the paintings, and only afterwards to read the calligraphic inscriptions between them. I looked closely at everything and then said, without knowing anything further about it: „It seems to me that the artist had a feeling for architecture, especially for certain laws of nature, such as the ‘golden section’, since all of it goes together so well.“ – „That’s very interesting,“ said the Princess, „and now read the inscriptions.“

I read – and I cannot recall it verbatim, but the essence of it is still perfectly clear in my mind: „I know that my life will be an exceptional, an extraordinary one, but its end will be a catastrophe!“ – The Princess, who was by no means a National-Socialist, then told me: „That was painted and written by an apprentice. Even the words, astonishing as they are, are his and his alone. And this is the receipted bill that I found among the old papers and which confirms that all work was done by a painter’s apprentice by the name of Adolf Hitler.“

These were ornaments, words and thoughts that have not the slightest bit to do with violence – they were the expression of a very deep emotional life or, to call it what it truly was: it was an element of the Faustian (Faustian: searching, striving, brilliant) in this man who ever remained an enigma.

Once, when a conversation between him and Dr. Goebbels happened to end up in a dispute about the „Faustian“ quality in the German as a type, Hitler grew very solemn and almost melancholy, as I had never seen him before. A statement of Dr. Goebbels’ came to mind: „Sometimes he’s uncanny – as if he weren’t of this world – and strangely enough, that’s when he is the most fascinating. I’ll never completely understand him – he is more than just a person. There is nobody who has studied him like I have. But who takes the time to really get to know this man – who? Who knows anything of his outstanding qualities, of his modesty towards fate – who even suspects any of it? No-one! If they realized that he does not wish to become their idol, not even their god, but that he lives solely for his mission that is not entirely ‘of this world’ – then they would fear him, because they do not understand the reality.“

I have done my utmost to repeat Goebbels’ words as accurately as possible from memory, and did not write them down until they were as vivid to me again as though I had heard him speak them then and there. Of course, the fact that in those days this topic interested me like no other, helped considerably.

In his Foundations of the Nineteenth Century, vol. 1, chapter „The Heirs“, Sir Houston Chamberlain wrote: „Asceticism increases the intellectual capacities and culminates, when carried out with absolute consistency, in the complete conquest of the senses; these may then continue, so to speak, as material for the imagination, to serve the mystical devotion of a Saint Theresa or the mystical metaphysics of the author of Chandogya; from that time forth they are senses rendered subject to will, elevated and purified by the power of the mind, and this the Hindoo teacher expresses when he writes: ‘the man of understanding is already in his lifetime bodiless.’“

Elsewhere, Chamberlain wrote about this same topic: „The greatness of every extraordinary man lies not in that which he wanted to do, but in that which he had to do.“ What compelled the young painter’s apprentice, Hitler, to inscribe those words amongst the decorations in the cellar bar of the Villa Kahlenberg? It would have been pointless to do that if he had not had to. Only a higher power could have given him the courage and determination for it. That he, the young Hitler, was the one who did that work is expressly confirmed on the bill by his master.

And these thoughts, which are so to the point in the case in question, draw attention to the fact that every true genius at least approximates to being a universal genius.

I myself witnessed how Hitler dominated in purely technical discussions with leading men of the Mercedes-Benz factory, in other words, was absolutely superior to an elite of engineers.

I also witnessed how, in a conversation with the Italian Minister of Justice who had attempted to precisely describe the Parthenon, Hitler disputed his architectural details. The point at issue was that Hitler had pointed out the mathematical perfection of the Parthenon’s beauty, whereas the Minister would not concede it. Finally, Hitler asked me to bring him a sketch pad, ruler, and pencils – he declined an eraser.

A short time later he interrupted his conversation with the Minister in order to make a very rapid but detailed sketch of the Parthenon – off the top of his head, without any aids and completely without prior preparation, since nobody could have known that the conversation with the Italian would lead to this topic. When the sketch was finished, an encyclopedia was procured, in which the Parthenon’s dimensions were given. Once converted to metric, they were identical with those indicated on Hitler’s sketch. And then it was an easy matter for Hitler to prove to the Italian Minister the way in which the law of nature known as the „golden section“ finds expression in the beauty of that glorious structure, the Parthenon.

In terms of business or politics I was certainly nothing special to Hitler. But in social terms, I believe, he liked us, my first wife Alexandra Countess of Castell-Rüdenhausen and myself, very much – until others kept us at a distance from him. –

Part 4 – The fatal lack of understanding of human nature

I was not in Munich very frequently. One day, however, when I had business there, I happened to walk past the „Brown House“. At that moment Hitler came out into the street, without any sort of escort or guard. He saw me, greeted me, and asked if I would like to come along. He was going to take a look at the building under construction next door; some alterations were necessary there. I was pleased, and accompanied him gladly.

On the construction site we met a few workers, who treated him as though he were one of them – just particularly popular. His relations with people on the whole always struck me as of a very special kind. Oswald Spengler, about whom he did not like to speak, wrote the following about this matter at the end of volume 1 of his Decline of the West:

„The final issue to which Faustian wisdom tends – though it is only in the highest moments that it has seen it – is the dissolution of all knowledge into a vast system of morphological relationships. Dynamics and Analysis are in respect of meaning, form-language and substance, identical with Romanesque ornament, Gothic cathedrals, Christian-German dogma and the dynastic state. One and the same world-feeling speaks in all of them. They were born with, and they aged with, the Faustian Culture, and they present that Culture in the world of day and space as a historical drama. The uniting of the several scientific aspects into one will bear all the marks of the great art of counterpoint. An infinitesimal music of the boundless world-space – that is the deep unresting longing of this soul, as the orderly statuesque and Euclidean Cosmos was the satisfaction of the Classical. That – formulated by a logical necessity of Faustian reason as a dynamic-imperative causality, then developed into a dictatorial, hard-working, world-transforming science – is the grand legacy of the Faustian soul to the souls of Cultures yet to be, a bequest of immensely transcendent forms that the heirs will possibly ignore. And then, weary after its striving, the Western science returns to its spiritual home.“

Near the end of the Second World War there was an excellent book available by Kurt Pfister, about Emperor Friedrich II of Hohenstaufen, who in his own time was already called „transformer of the world“. I knew that Hitler had liked and devoted a great deal of thought to this book. In 1945 my wife bought it for me – literally with her last few pennies – in order to send it to me at the prison camp. Since we prisoners there were forced to live in conditions that were in every respect beneath human dignity, she had to smuggle it into the camp at great personal risk. And I could only read it in secret. As she well knew, it was to be of decisive importance to me. Years later, she told me that she had noticed so many parallels in the book and that she had known that these would help me a great deal in clinging to life. And that was indeed how it was. There really are parallels, not only in political matters – the Reich Idea of the Occident – but also in purely human matters.

Bosshart once wrote: „A genius has something of the instinct of migratory birds.“ – It is quite meaningless if some then counter: „Yes, but Hitler resulted in the greatest catastrophe!“ We humans are obviously not meant to know why we live, and what stands behind us. Perhaps knowing would only drive us insane. Our mission results from our duty, and our duty has its origin in the ethical laws inherent in nature. These are evident for each of us to see, within us and all around us. And the miracles of nature should be an incentive for us to choose the right way – that of the eternal order of nature.

There is a tendency today to be nothing short of criminally easygoing in passing judgement on even the most brilliant persons. People lie and cheat, not even for the sake of ideals, but for money. It is impossible to sink any lower. Ebb tide has reached its lowest point, it is high time for it to turn and rush over the foulness it has revealed, to wash all the filth onto the land where it may burn up in the sunshine and leave the water clear enough again so that, at least where we stand, we may see the bottom again.

It was not criticism and scientific analyses that helped me to recognize the person that Hitler was, it was the observation of his thought processes. I was so fortunate as to be able to see him without business obligations and without any prejudices. In terms of personal background I was probably his most extreme opposite. Each of us admitted that to the other with perfect frankness. This fact was probably the key to later understanding, which was mutual as well. I was interesting to him because of my background, namely because, as he told me later, he had discovered a revolutionary within me. I was an enigma to him at first – as he was to me. The trust he had in me developed in a way that was typical for him: it was based on his observation of how well my marriage worked. It was exactly what he had not expected from a person of my background.

He was always happy to see marriages that worked. I think that had something to do with the loving relationship he had had with his mother. Whenever he saw an unhappy marriage amongst his friends or comrades, he would not rest until he had reconciled the couple. The Goebbels marriage was a case in point. I witnessed many instances of this and sometimes, in my opinion, the couple in question were not at all worth the energy that the Head of State expended on them. In the case of the Goebbels’s, however, it was a blessing that he did so. The human element was always more important to him than the political – or perhaps it would be more accurate to say that things political carried only as much weight with him as seemed to be warranted by the human element.

And this brings us to his lack of knowledge of human nature. On a qualifying note I must add that the term „knowledge of human nature“ is perhaps not quite correct, or at least needs an explanation. He knew very well how to tell a loyal person from a disloyal one, an industrious one from a lazy one, an honest from a dishonest, etc. But there were qualities to him that distracted him from the objective assessment of people. For example, in the case of persons who had stood loyally by him during hard times, he tended to be overly ready to overlook and to forgive objectionable qualities and actions that arose or occurred later on.

One of the most striking cases in this context was the Gauleiter of Central Franconia, Julius Streicher, who behaved in an increasingly reprehensible and, ultimately, a downright scandalous manner. Hitler frequently called him to account, and even removed him entirely from the political arena, only to rehabilitate him, as it were, years later – something that none of us, not even Dr. Goebbels, could make sense of. After all, Julius Streicher had long carried on a campaign of anti-Semitism by means of his publication „Der Stürmer“ – a campaign which not only no longer had any resemblance to the official stance of the NSDAP but, beyond that, misrepresented all of us.

Goebbels repeatedly urged that Hitler should ban the „Stürmer“, but a long time of grave mistakes went by before his requests met with success. A man like Streicher should have been punished with particular severity, exactly because he was one of the first and foremost Party members and had used to be a loyal follower of Hitler’s. He was indeed removed from his position as Gauleiter, but that was not enough.

The matter of Dr. Robert Ley, the head of the German Labour Front (Deutsche Arbeitsfront, DAF), was no better. As early as 1929, when I personally told Hitler that Ley had cheated me and a number of others out of our money and had thus left us in very bad circumstances, Hitler answered: „I never advised you to lend Ley money – I deal only with Ley the Gauleiter, not with Ley the businessman – I’m sorry, I can’t help you!“ I objected: „But I only trusted Ley because I assumed that a Gauleiter is not a rascal.“ Hitler replied that he was not in a position to check up on the private lives of all his subordinates. „Just look at the other parties – each of the major parties has several Leys in its leadership – it’s bad, but very difficult to change, and the change can only be brought about gradually. I promise you I will keep an eye on Ley – but you’ll have to see about recovering your money yourself.“ I only succeeded to a small extent, years later.

The third case which I witnessed myself was that of Alfred Rosenberg, a man from the Baltic who had become Chief of the Foreign Affairs Office of the NSDAP. He carried on Baltic politics on his own initiative and to the detriment of Adolf Hitler’s German politics. Some of his policies were not at all in accord with Hitler’s. How could someone from the Baltic shape German foreign policy, anyhow?

In the „Time of Struggle“, in other words before 1933, Rosenberg had been editor-in-chief of the Völkischer Beobachter, the largest of the party newspapers. During the war he served as „Reich Commissioner for the Occupied Eastern Territories“ and was thus responsible for the horrible mistakes perpetrated on the Ukrainians, who had been so well inclined towards us.

Dr. Goebbels told me at that time that he had reason to believe that Rosenberg was a Russian spy – his girlfriend most certainly was. During the war Goebbels was very concerned that no connection whatsoever should develop between the staff of the Foreign Department of his own Ministry, and the so-called „Rosenberg Office“.

Rosenberg, on the other hand, cultivated the closest ties possible to Martin Bormann, who at first held the position of Chief of Staff under the „Deputy Führer“, Rudolf Hess. It is remarkable that on the occasion of Hess’ mission to England, Hess’ politically utterly insignificant adjutant was arrested, while Hess’ politically most prominent Chief of Staff, Martin Bormann, was called in to the Reich Chancellery and promoted to Chief of the „Party Chancellery of the Führer and Chancellor of the Reich“ – headquartered even in the Reich Chancellery! From 1943 to 1945, „Reich Leader“ Bormann was the most powerful man in Germany, second only to Hitler. I know this from bitter personal experience as well as from Dr. Goebbels.

In early 1945 Goebbels, in my presence, described Bormann Bormann and Hitler’s personal physician, Professor Morell, as „the criminals in the Reich Chancellery“. As far as I know, Bormann also had relations with the Soviet Union dating back to earlier days, but, as Dr. Goebbels put it, those relations were „all the wrong ones.“

To the best of my knowledge, Professor Morell admitted at the International Military Tribunal in Nuremberg that he had intended to kill Hitler. I am more inclined to believe, however, that with the injections he gave him, he attempted to make him the obedient pawn of a certain clique of leading politicians.

The fact that Hitler installed Martin Bormann, of all people (besides Goebbels), in the Reich government under Dönitz was, in my opinion, part of Hitler’s last great plan: an alliance with the Soviet Union against the United States. Virtually five minutes before midnight, Hitler had still telegraphed the army group Kesselring: „Hold out at all costs, negotiations with the Russians against the Americans are pending.“

I am certain that such an alliance would instantaneously have created a totally different political scene. It would have been child’s play for Germans and Russians, united, to bring all of Europe under their control. At the very least there would still be a German Reich today, and no slander of our people – nobody would dare any such thing.

Germany – Europe – would be the dominant power on earth today – the Third Reich could have assumed the legacy of the First Reich, and International Capitalism would have been finished. Goebbels must still have had some grounds for hope, else he would not have spent almost an hour on the telephone to Marshal Shukov shortly before his death.

This shows clearly that the selfsame Hitler who in the course of the war had made four extremely fair peace offers to the enemy and had not even received a response, still found the resolve even at the last minute to turn completely about and attempt the extreme opposite. That was probably what he meant when he said in his last great address to the German people, that he hoped the people would understand if he were forced to take a most extraordinary chance.

In wartime, logically, too much depends on the enemy and his attitude and actions for someone to be able to assess one’s own statesmen objectively and accurately. There is no doubt that Hitler, once private first class, was also a genius in his capacity as commander. None of his numerous Generals, many of whom were themselves of great talent and experience, ever disputed that, and many were full of admiration for him. In this context as well, he had a great deal of knowledge that he could never have learned. I don’t know how often I heard Generals say about him: „Where did he get all the prerequisites for this? Is it only instinct, or something more?“

Hitler hated being lauded, and did not at all enjoy being idolized, as it were. But political propaganda wanted to use him as advertisement, and he could not dispute the importance of such advertising to the dissemination of his Idea of National-Socialism. Lao-tse said – and I think this is eminently apropos to Hitler: „The wise man puts his own self last – and see: it comes to the fore. He gives up his own self – and see: it is preserved.“

And indeed, those people whom he helped without having to help them, ultimately proved to be his undoing. In this respect his fate is that of all truly great men. As Friedrich Nietzsche wrote to his sister in 1885: „It seems to me that even with the best of intentions a person may do immeasurable harm if he is presumptuous enough to try to be of service to those whose spirit and will is hidden from him.“

There can be no doubt whatsoever that Hitler did the German people and the Reich an inordinate amount of good. No serious and fair critic can help but see and admit that. It would be both pointless and harmful to all involved to deny it.

Part 5 – „Denazification Certificate trade“ and self-deception

His idea of the fusion of nationalism and Socialism was doubtless a new and very good one. In this way he succeeded in balancing the major conflicts among the people as a whole and hence in bringing about an internal peace such as remains unparalleled in any nation on earth either both before and since. This unique condition lasted from approximately 1933 to the 1936 Olympics. From that point on, a change began to creep in which became clearly apparent only much later, towards the end of the war.

The first trigger was the removal of the SA from power, a process which began on June 30, 1934. It was a crucial blow against the National-Socialist Revolution. I got the first taste of this on the evening of June 30, 1934. My wife Alexandra and I were visiting the Goebbels’ when Hitler, just arrived at Berlin, told us in detail how this fateful day had passed for him. He knew that I was a Troop Commander with the SA and one of three aides to the Senior Troop Commander of the SA Unit Berlin-Brandenburg, albeit only pro forma – excused from SA service to discharge my duties as ministerial aide.

In the course of conversation that distressing day, Hitler suddenly asked me: „Where were you today, anyway – your superior, Senior Troop Commander Ernst, was caught while attempting to escape – and has been executed!“ I replied that I had been doing my work at the Ministry, as usual. „You were lucky. If you had been taken along with Ernst, I doubt I could have saved you.“ This statement was like a bucket of ice-water in my face. My wife was outraged as well; she never forgave him for this answer.

There can be no doubt that he was correct in taking severe measures against Röhm and the corrupt members of the higher-up SA leadership, and especially in taking these measures personally and at great risk to himself. But he should never have suffered his SA – the backbone of the Revolution, which he had trained to function with fantastic self-discipline – to be politically wiped out. In permitting this to happen, he put the Revolution at the mercy of very different powers – and that was the beginning of the end.

Among those executed – and unjustly so – were two of my closest friends: Troop Commander Schneidhuber and Brigadier General Baron von Wechmar.

Of course we, more than anyone else, asked ourselves for years why Hitler had acted as he had. Three factors had pushed him to it: the Party (later under the influence of Bormann), the Reichsführer SS Heinrich Himmler, who was in the process of establishing his own power base, and the former Chief of Staff of the SA, Hermann Göring, who believed that he would now be able to build up a National-Socialist air force as the focal point of domestic power.

Around 5 pm on June 30, 1934, when Adolf Hitler arrived from Munich at Tempelhof, a company of the Luftwaffe air force was assembled to salute the Führer for the first time. This was meant to surprise and please Hitler. But Hitler’s face darkened, he all but ignored the Luftwaffe, and Goebbels was furious.

In the morning that same day, I had sat in my office on Wilhelm Square, waiting for my Minister, when Göring had suddenly come in. He greeted me, went directly to the large window, drummed against the glass with his fingers, and said, without looking at me: „Do you know what’s going on?“ I answered that I knew next to nothing. Then he said – and it made almost no sense to me at the time: „Chief of Staff Röhm is being executed today.“ Röhm, also a Reich Minister, shot himself, and rightly so, for as Chief of Staff of the SA he was utterly impossible, as well as a depraved character and hence a traitor. The Wehrmacht seems to me to have served in a double game.

The elimination of the SA automatically resulted in the neglect of the „old guard“ of the NSDAP, since most of the members of the „old guard“ had also been members of the SA for many years. Thus, June 30, 1934 slowly but surely led to the shut-down of the Revolution, which from that point on took place largely in private, so to speak.

And thus the path was cleared for all those who wished to join the Party as soon as they possibly could in order to profit somehow from the external success of this state and this people. The real National-Socialists scornfully called these people „the Nazis“. With them and through them, the Party grew more and more bureaucratic. The „old fighters“ no longer felt comfortable with it and retreated into the SA or the „old guard“.

We perceived this to be all the more tragic because now the years came where the actual process of reconstruction and development could begin; for Hitler had created order, the people were as happy and as united as never before, industry was booming, export trade flourished, and at the center of it all was the German worker, both „of muscle“ and „of intellect“ – respected, and with a cheerful heart.

What do people strive for who live a free and happy life and take well-deserved pride in their and their nation’s progress? A family, a home, and children! This is how it has been everywhere and at all times. A look at the statistics of the 1930s proves more clearly than any election results that the German people were very content at that time, and counted on a long time of peace. Anyone who claims that there was any considerable popular resistance against Adolf Hitler and his government before 1944 either lacks even the most basic understanding of those days – or is a contemptible liar!

In 1945-46 millions of Germans believed that only lies could save them. Day in, day out, the enemy served them clever and cunning falsehoods, either directly or in a roundabout way. This was also the origin of the atrocious „Persil note“ racket, the denazification certificate scam by means of which millions „saved“ themselves at the expense of the truth and the honour of the entire nation.

I doubt that there is any other place on earth where lies as numerous and as imaginative have been dreamed up as in post-war Germany – especially in West Germany. Since more or less all the Germans had supported the National-Socialist Reich in one way or another, especially during wartime, post-1945 reconstruction was quite inconceivable without these more than 90% of the people.

No doubt all those who provided the professional as well as the political know-how required for the reconstruction of the new state had previously acquired and applied their abilities under Hitler’s regime. It is thus in no way an exaggeration to say that the courage, the determination, the team spirit and most of all the faith in Germany – all those qualities without which Germany could never have been resurrected from its rubble – had their origins in exactly that Germany that was henceforth to be so dreadfully calumniated.

We owe the reconstruction of Germany to a German people who had lived through the Thirties and who thus provided the consequent attitude towards nation and state, to life in general and to the mind-set resulting from it. If today’s new generation were faced with the same task as the Hitler generation had faced between 1945 and 1952, the reconstruction efforts would be a sorry sight indeed. It is impossible to achieve something truly essential for one’s nation and state in the absence of great and eternal ideals!

The first Federal Chancellor of post-war days, Dr. Konrad Adenauer – a close personal acquaintance of mine from my student days – was himself part of this. Under Hitler’s regime he had made extraordinary efforts to regain the position of Mayor of a major German city (Cologne). Hitler did not doubt Adenauer’s abilities, but he felt that because of his attitude in the days of Rhenish separatism he could not assign him such a privileged position now. He did, however, decree that Dr. Adenauer should receive an annual pension of 40,000 Reichsmark. Reich Minister Dr. Lammers told me this after the war. He had seen Hitler personally about this matter and was thus the best possible witness.

No doubt Federal Chancellor Dr. Adenauer as well as his successor Dr. Kurt Georg Kiesinger – who had served as liaison between Reich Foreign Minister von Ribbentrop and Reich Minister of Propaganda Dr. Goebbels – both knew enough of how things had really been, to be able to publicly counter the slander aimed at the German people – but they were careful not to do any such thing!

The „Persil notes“, those denazification certificates, were the prerequisite for the army of slanderers. Through them, a situation was created where the events of the past were not clarified on a basis of conviction or of loyalty to people and state and for the sake of peace with the former enemy powers; rather, an atmosphere of million-fold fears regarding dependence on the enemy powers and the apparent hopelessness with respect to a peace agreement gave rise to a generalized, demoralizing complex of lies that strained any real attempts at German foreign relations to the utmost and thus rendered internal peace impossible for both ethical and moral reasons.

And the more the real contemporaneous witnesses die off, the less chance there is for this nation to find its way back to the whole truth about itself.

But for as long as a nation is burdened down like that – rightly or wrongly -, it cannot possibly be a free agent in its decision-making process, its politics, or ultimately in its life as a whole. For as long as the burden remains, it will be blackmailed by other nations – and the internal blackmail amongst the people themselves will also continue.

And what did the post-war governments of West Germany do about this? The wrongest thing they could possibly have done! They tried to beg and buy the honor of their people. But bowing and scraping, and payments rendered in hopes of appeasement, only ever exacerbate such a situation – they never remedy it, for every half-way sensible person in other countries cannot help but reason that anyone who bows and scrapes and pays up like that, has got to have a tremendously guilty conscience!

And when we say today: „What we are charged with isn’t true at all – the greatest part of it, at least, is a total lie!“, then the response we get is: „If that’s the case – as we suspected it to be from the start, by the way – then you Germans of today are such a bad lot that we can’t respect you at all anymore, because you’re too cowardly to tell the truth and restore your honor – merely to safeguard your export trade!“

Mankind did itself a poor service indeed when it tried to crush a people, a state and most of all a Revolution which, with the proper support, could have done everyone a world of good. Today even more than in the 1920s, the nations of the highly civilized Western world suffer from standing in the service of unbridled materialism and hence of Capitalism, and they suffer from having lost the ability to think naturally, and from having thus lost themselves in ever more devastating excesses and lack of moderation. For decades these nations have been deceiving themselves while in fact offering themselves up for their total destruction. The governments have long been acting in accordance with the teachings of Emile Coue, in the true style of self-persuasion, effusively lauding our happy and fortunate lifestyle over and over again in spite of what reality tells them and in the face of the most glaring evidence to the contrary, and praising that progress which in the end will be our undoing.

During the worst of the bombing of Berlin I was able to leave all the furnishings which I had been able to salvage from my gutted house, standing in the street, completely unguarded, for eight days and nights without a single item being stolen. These furnishings included many valuable antique pieces of furniture, carpets and paintings. And this was by no means an exceptional case, but rather the rule in that nation and time now sneered at as „Hitler’s Germany“!

Even in wartime, Reich Minister Dr. Goebbels and I were able to go for walks in Central Berlin, on Wilhelm Street and Unter den Linden, without ever meeting even one person who gave us anything but a friendly greeting.

In February 1945, in the staff headquarters of the „Feldherrnhalle“, I saw four young soldiers crying with helpless rage because they had been caught trying without permission to sneak to the Front, to finally get their chance to fight for Germany. –

For me, one of the most devastating and at the same time one of the greatest experiences was Christmas Eve 1945, when we, some 6,000 captured National-Socialists, surrounded by watchtowers manned by guards with machine-guns, suddenly and without prior arrangement began to sing the song „I Pray to the Power of Love“. All the American officers and many thousands of Germans gathered to see and hear us and to join in – and the American camp commander, a front-line officer, had tears in his eyes.

At the Nuremberg Palace of Justice, an Army General threw himself from the third floor down to the stone-paved corridor of the ground floor. There, in the central square of the great prison, he lay dead on the ground before our very eyes. It was not long before some of the men in their cells began to sing, and more and ever more joined in, until all of us – the imprisoned National-Socialists and the non-National-Socialists and even some foreigners – sang along, and the enormous vaults resounded with that song that had used to pass our lips so easily, and now came from the heart and soul one last time: „To you, Adolf Hitler, we pledged —!“ Among the singers were soldiers, officers, Generals, professors, clergymen, lawyers, judges, physicians etc., of whom dozens already knew that they would be hanged – because none of them were what the Ignorant Ones of then and now claim they were.

US infantry, armed to the teeth, arrived in droves, Allied tanks surrounded the prison, while night descended on that „prison of honor“.

Part 6 – The system of slander

Certainly, all these are only small and isolated excerpts. They are just what I am able to recount from personal experience. But nevertheless – or perhaps, because of that – it shows, I think, what the people were really like before and right after May 8, 1945. From my own experience alone, I could give many more, similar accounts that show our people and all who belonged to it in a much better light than almost all of those who participated in the post-war incitement and slander have ever shown them.

A single individual may commit a crime. Abominable child-murderers are handled with kid gloves nowadays. One of the worst ever, Jürgen Bartsch, was even permitted to get married in prison, complete with a minister’s services, with wedding feast, guests and champagne.

But a nation of 60 million souls, plucked out of the midst of its peaceful Revolution, its labours of reconstruction, its sense of community and contentment attained at long last, and forced more or less anonymously into a Second World War – such a nation must be cursed as „criminal“ for decades, must remain fair game for slander and blackmail whenever someone feels like making some more enormous profits – a nation to whom all of mankind has owed an immense debt of gratitude for a millennium and even longer!!! No – things cannot go on like that! They must not! It does not benefit anyone in all the world – except the riffraff scoundrels who perpetuate the process.

It seems there is not a single bad trait that has not been alleged against our people at one time or another. This fact alone is proof that these allegations are mainly lies, for a people with none other than bad qualities does not exist, never has existed, is not provided for in the order of this world, and would not fit in.

As early as the 1920s and 1930s, we tried to find out which circles all this malice and mendacity originate in. We soon found that there is a method behind it. We noticed that the attacks are generally directed against individual persons, specifically against particular traits or characteristics of those persons; traits or characteristics which often were or are not even in fact present, but which are imputed to these people because doing so seems to be the only way to attack them.

For example, it was claimed that Adolf Hitler was a Czech. This trick was so successful that even the German President, Field Marshal von Hindenburg, was convinced of the truth of this assertion right until the day he first met Hitler. It was not until conversation had progressed for some time that Hindenburg began to wonder, and finally asked Hitler outright. The matter was cleared up easily enough: there is a town called Braunau in Czechoslovakia as well as in Upper Austria. The latter was Adolf Hitler’s birthplace, but he was simply called „a Czech by birth“. The town of Braunau in the so-called „Land of Braunau“ is called Broumov in Czech, and always numbered many Germans among its population of 8,000. Braunau in Upper Austria, on the other hand, has a population of more than 12,000, and is an ancient German town. Even if Hitler had been born in Broumov he could very well have been of German descent, especially as there is nothing at all Czech about his name, which sounds typically Austrian. For decades now, however, this one downright absurd lie has done a great deal of harm to Hitler’s reputation as well as to that of the German people, who allegedly sold themselves to „a Czech“.

About three years ago, a major German daily, the Wiesbadener Kurier, published a front-page article and photograph claiming that during the Second World War the government of the German Reich had offered a bounty of 60,000 marks for the sinking of the huge British passenger ship „Queen Mary“. I was outraged at such a lie and demanded to be told where this report had originated. The Wiesbadener Kurier informed me that the report had come from the BBC (British Broadcasting Corporation), via the dpa (German Press Agency). I asked the highest officer of the Federal Marine, the chief officer in the Department of the Navy in the Federal Ministry of the Armed Forces, as well as Grand Admiral Dönitz to comment on this claim. All three assured me in writing that the German Navy had never offered monetary rewards for any purpose. All three officers rejected this report as outright fabrication.

I did not need any better proof than that. I informed the Wiesbadener Kurier of these findings and asked the editorial staff to immediately print a retraction in the same conspicuous place they had accorded their initial story, and to publish the truth. They told me that they would be willing to publish my statement as a letter to the editor, on my own responsibility. They themselves, however, would not take any action in the matter, since the report had originated with the BBC and had come to them via dpa.

In the course of a trip abroad, a high-ranking German diplomat once told me and my wife in great detail how terribly he had been made to suffer under Hitler’s tyranny until, in a specified year, he had determined to emigrate and, thank God, had thus been spared the worst. We did not believe him, and later my wife and I calculated how old the man would have been at the time he had allegedly had to suffer so terribly under Hitler’s regime: he had been about six years old at the time! –

Once, in the second half of the war, I had been called to report to the Chief of Staff of the SA in the Reich Chancellery, and was asked to wait in the adjutancy. I was in the midst of a conversation with the Head of the Adjutancy, SA Gruppenführer Girgensohn, when a good-looking officer came in and was greeted enthusiastically by the Gruppenführer. The officer was introduced to me and I learned that even before 1933, when he was a young officer in the German army, he had been reprimanded for marching, in uniform and with a swastika flag, at the head of an SA demonstration. When this officer was speaking to the Chief of Staff while I still had to wait, I learned that he was designated for a position in the Adjutancy because he was considered to be the most National-Socialist of the younger officers!

This was Count Stauffenberg, who later attempted to kill Hitler with a bomb in his quarters „Wolfsschanze“. As we know, Hitler survived, but several high-ranking officers and civilians were injured or killed. Hitler arranged for the Chief of Police, General Dr. Martin, Head of the SS Unit for Central Franconia, to convey his (Hitler’s) condolences to Count Stauffenberg’s widow or mother – I think it was his mother – and had her presented with a huge bouquet of flowers. And since there was a great deal of outrage amongst the people against Count Stauffenberg, Hitler even ordered a guard for the protection of the family. Dr. Martin later recounted this to me in great detail in the prison camp of Hersbruck.

Enemy propaganda during and campaigns of slander after the war chose the SA as their preferential target – that organization, of all possible choices, whose members were trained to be exceptionally self-disciplined and which turned millions of men from the working class, and particularly Social-Democrats and Communists, from enemies into friends and comrades through personal conviction and sacrifice and personal moral decency. I can say this quite freely, because I witnessed it myself for years. I know that with the exception of a vanishingly few fellow-travellers, spies and agents provocateurs planted by the enemy, the SA had practically nothing at all to do with the 1938 persecution of the Jews. And those who were proved to have had a part in it were punished with especial severity, on Hitler’s express orders.

The exemplary nature of the SA was brought home to me most vividly at the NSDAP Party Convention in Nuremberg in 1929. Hitler was in the Hall of the Cultural Association, giving his programmatic address to some 1,500 members of the Party and the SA, when suddenly we heard a tremendous uproar outside. Only a few minutes later we saw the great heavy door being burst open with brute force. Most of the people in the auditorium stood up to see what was going on behind them. Hitler called out, with striking calm: „Party comrades – what’s happening back there isn’t nearly as important as what I have to say up here. Please sit down again, listen to me and leave all the rest to our SA.“

And indeed everyone resumed their seats and Hitler continued his address as though nothing had happened. Those who had forced their way into the Hall were several hundred Communists, under the leadership of the infamous criminal Max Hölz; as they themselves couldn’t proclaim loudly enough, they had come from Berlin with the express purpose of turning the entire NSDAP Party Convention „into one huge blood-bath“! But the SA formed an impenetrable wall against them, so solid that all the Communists were slowly but surely crowded out of the Hall, and ultimately out of the building altogether.

It would have been easy enough to beat these Communists to a pulp – except that the SA was forbidden to do so. They had to let themselves be punched – and the only recourse open to them was to muster up even more resolution to crowd the enemy out. – Following this incident, Hitler sent his Dr. Goebbels to drive through the streets of Nuremberg in order to reinforce to the SA everywhere that such self-discipline was absolutely essential. There was one casualty and several wounded – albeit only in the ranks of the SA!

At the funeral of Herbert Norkus, the Hitler Youth murdered by the Marxists in Berlin in 1932, I witnessed how the Communists perching close by on a wall threw large and heavy rocks at us, especially at Dr. Goebbels and those accompanying him. Goebbels gritted his teeth and whispered to us: „Stand still, don’t so much as blink an eye, don’t let them provoke you!“ Each of us passed the message on to the next. Everyone acted accordingly: if they had not, the situation would have degenerated into a massive blood-bath. Afterwards, when we marched off through the Reddest part of Berlin, singing our battle songs, many of the Communists joined us, and marched and sang along with us.

In political as well as spiritual terms, Hitler’s Revolution was a comprehensive one, if not one of the greatest – and unique in its degree of discipline. That was the key by which it gained power. It was the factor that set it most clearly apart from its rivals. That is why the slander of our German past is nowhere as brutal as where it attempts to deny this discipline, to erase it from the memory of us Germans. Such discipline has as its prerequisite an unsurpassably strong faith – and the slanderers are well aware of this. Such a faith could easily rise again, even without any Hitler or National-Socialism – simply based on the legitimacy of nature, for example.

When Count Helldorf, Chief of Police of Greater Berlin, reported in detail to the Gauleiter of Greater Berlin after the so-called „Kristallnacht“, I happened to witness their conversation without their knowledge.

Count Helldorf reported that only very few Party members had participated in the ransacking of Jewish stores and the mistreatment of Jews. And most of these few had only done so because they had been incited to it, namely by Communists disguised as SA-men. Goebbels’ answer was: „Helldorf – I tell you, one of these days this madness will cost us a million dead soldiers!“

It is not true that Hitler wanted the „Kristallnacht“ to happen. On the contrary; he and Goebbels repeatedly made some very long and heated telephone calls that night in attempts to forestall any acts of violence, abuse or plundering. I know this from a gentleman from the Press Department of the Reich Ministry of Propaganda who was on duty at the telephone switchboard that night and listened in on these calls out of understandable curiosity. He took some notes, recording what he heard.

Apart from this evidence, there can certainly be no doubt that Hitler, Goebbels, Göring etc. were at least smart enough to know that it would be downright suicidal to make an arch-enemy of world Jewry – especially if there is nothing one needs as badly as a long and stable time of peace. It is impossible to carry out a revolution in wartime! And the Revolution was everything to Hitler – meant to save the German people as well as the Reich! It had originated in the terrible consequences of the First World War, and in the protest against these consequences. Risking a new war right in the midst of the realization of this Revolution would have been begging for trouble. But his foremost aim was to achieve his goals without the danger of war! A man such as Julius Streicher certainly thought differently on this matter, but one can blame neither the Party nor the people, and least of all Adolf Hitler, for that.

Institutions are worth only as much as the people that represent them. One who wants to write history must not judge people by actions, but rather the actions by the people. The more that materialism has come to be established, the less attention has been paid to the people – and the more to their „achievements“. Anyone who wants to judge actions by the people, however, must personally know the people in question and must have experienced them from the perspective of an independent observer. He must not try to judge on the basis of an intent or of political tactics, but solely for the purpose of doing justice to the truth!

The pre-war, wartime and most of all the post-war vilification of the German people and their past has as little to do with truth as it has to do with honor – it served, and continues to serve, the exclusive purpose of preparation for a Third World War, in the event that it should once again turn out that the German nation has not been broken forever.

Part 7 – Slander: psychological genocide!

In this particular context, the problem of „the extermination of Jews in concentration camps“ is the most devastating in every respect, and for everyone involved – regardless of which side they took or take.

During my imprisonment right after the war, I was thrown together with many men who had been interned in the various major German concentration camps in the course of the last years of the war. I got them to tell me as much about it as possible. In fact, not one of them was ever able to confirm that even a single person had ever been gassed in any of the concentration camps of that time. That the bodies of victims of the epidemics which had broken out near the end were burned because they could not be buried, and that this practice still continued even after the Allied Occupation Forces had taken control – that was a self-evident necessity for reasons of hygiene alone. Near the end of the war, not even the greatest and most heroic efforts sufficed to provide medication, rations, etc. – In the meantime it has long been proven that in the camp of Dachau, for example, there were never any facilities for the gassing of human beings.

Official statistics show that a maximum of 3.7% of the total number of Jews – that is, the total of all nations – were missing at the time in question. Jews emigrated not only from Germany, but from the Balkans, France, Greece and Italy as well.

During the war, when the Americans landed in Casablanca, 5,000 Jews from the city of Marrakech alone left Morocco. Why should a great many more Jews not also have fled from the much larger cities in Morocco – such as Casablanca, Rabat, Tangiers, etc. – just as from the other Arab countries?

How many Jews were clever enough not to register as Jews per se in the countries where they settled, eg. in Czechoslovakia, in Poland, Hungary, Rumania, etc.? And the number of Jews that disappeared or „went underground“ in the Soviet Union is given as exceeding the one million mark.

Why does it upset today’s opinion-makers so badly when it turns out that not eight million, but barely half-a-million Jews are missing for the time period in question? Shouldn’t it be reason to rejoice that fewer are missing? Even the number of Jews who were able to flee to the United States via neutral countries during and after the war, both from Germany and from German-occupied areas, must have been great, for there were many more Jews in the United States after the war than there had been before.

Of course it is horrible when people are killed. But if one counts one group, one must also count the others. It won’t to do accuse Germany because she lost the war and can barely even defend herself, while hushing up almost everything that the other side ought to account for!

Why is it possible the world over to spend decades talking with impunity about six million allegedly gassed Jews – while at the same time the world public never hears a word about what was done to our already helpless Germany in the last days of the war, and later, after conclusion of the armistice? Why does the world still not know how many tens of thousands of German SS-soldiers were shot for the sole reason that they had their blood group tattooed beneath their arm (so that in case of injury they could be given the proper blood transfusion without delay)?

Why is it hushed up to this day what an inconceivably horrible blood-bath the British and American bomber planes visited on the hospital city of Dresden, exactly at the time when the great numbers of fleeing Silesian refugees were passing through that already overcrowded city? Hundreds of thousands of poor civilians who had never fired a single shot were murdered in cold blood in Dresden.

Why is the world kept in the dark about the dreadful death suffered by the Germans in Prague, where German soldiers were strung up along the streets and set on fire like torches, where tens of thousands, mostly barefoot, were spat on and beaten and hunted across stretches of broken glass? Why are there never any reports about what American Negro soldiers in Aschaffenburg did to the 300 German girls who were stationed there as army news service assistants?

Why have there been decades of nothing but silence about the countless and, as a rule, particularly brutal tortures which thousands of German soldiers, officers and even civilians were subjected to – after the war! – by the Allied Occupation Forces? This is something that comes to my mind frequently nowadays, whenever I read the outraged reports in today’s Federal German press about torture allegedly taking place in Chile, Spain or Greece – as though like things never happened in the so-called „democratic“ nations of the Western world!

Why was it possible, just recently, for the Pope to speak of „a criminal Germany of the past“ when at the same time he has spent almost a decade now, passively watching his Church wage civil war against the Protestants in Northern Ireland – a very criminal war indeed, ever expanding in scope and now spreading even to the British island?

Were the wars in Korea and Vietnam not a great deal more brutal than the battles fought by the Germans in the Second World War?

Vilification is only ever aimed at the Germans, and almost always by exactly the same circles. For the biggest business on earth has always been war! Not for the warring parties, but for those that supply the arms – and the most evil weapon has ever been slander.

The German Reich not only did not want war, it staked everything for a lasting peace. The war was forced on it. And exactly those same circles that managed to do so, have ensured that the war never ends. The global campaign of vilification is nothing other than part of the state of war that still persists, and that is why the German government cannot simply defend itself against it. Many very weighty and decisive treaties, particularly the „Treaty of Germany“, render the Federal Republic of Germany dependent on the victorious powers. Beyond that, she has also entered voluntarily into obligations she could only meet as a sovereign state. But Germany can only have either its present state of dependence, or sovereign status. Trying to function under both at the same time is a fatal combination.

A confident and self-confident German people would give their government the backing it needs in order to take the appropriate and long-overdue steps for becoming more than just a follower of orders given by the USA, and for obtaining a peace treaty at long last. Dependents, on the other hand, can never negotiate freely.

However, the prerequisite for the necessary yet sorely lacking self-confidence of our people – in the East as well as in the West – is the absolute truth about the people’s past, their fate, their „self“. And regardless how bitter, how awful this truth were, it would in any case be a fate, a destiny for us, inconceivable perhaps but nevertheless a progression in the clearly perceptible natural order of this world.

Unfortunately, for as long as the majority of the Germans bury their heads in the sand for the sake of perpetuating their own creature comforts, our path will continue to spiral steadily downwards, especially in spiritual terms, and ultimately that means complete destruction. These people have already sunk so low that they are prepared to relinquish their right to the truth about themselves, and thus thoughtlessly choose those who spread the least unpleasant lies and whitewash.

A nation that lets itself be trained to take an interest in nothing beyond its television programme will one day also readily give up any and all social interaction, its statehood as a whole, the once great regard accorded to it by the world, and ultimately even its future generations. We do not need to look to politics for proof of this; the evidence stares us in the face even in everyday life:

a) a people known especially in the 1930s for their cleanliness in every sense of that term have turned into a shockingly dirty „consumer society“. The percentage of young people who never brush their teeth and of those who never even take a bath has already exceeded 12%;

b) syphilis, almost eradicated during the 1930s, is again so widespread that it poses a threat to the people’s very existence;

c) the number of violent crimes is steadily on the increase; within the framework of internationally organized terrorist conspiracies, acts of terrorism are able nowadays to blackmail entire nations and their people and to force them to their knees within a very few days, for example by means of the complete cut-off of water or electricity or through bacterial warfare.

It is certainly possible to simultaneously impose a regime of programmatic anarchy on the key nations of Europe within the space of two or three days. Even a large-scale attempt at any such thing would result in utter chaos. Every politically conscious person in western Europe as well as the United States, and especially in the Soviet Union, is fully aware of this.

Many foreigners still place their hopes in the German people – but they are deluding themselves, for the nation of the 1930s, the nation of brave endurance in wartime, is long gone. Its self-confidence had been destroyed, and with it its spiritual strength. That self-confidence that was able to weather world wars and could even muster up the strength afterwards to bring about the „Economic Miracle“ – that self-confidence has been eroded by the treacherous, downright satanic campaign of calumny waged against it by its real enemies, who never yet wore a uniform in honour. Along with the truth, honour died as well, and along with honour, so did the love that once informed this nation.

Of course there are a few million Germans left who know what is at stake – but they, too, largely lack the necessary strength. The lie is too crafty, too all-encompassing, and simply incomprehensible to the German mind. This is a fact which in itself should already speak eloquently for our people but which, I think, has never been considered.

That German people and German politicians have managed for thirty years to let themselves be blackmailed by foreign countries, much to the detriment of their own nation and state – blackmailed into paying out billions upon billions in „reparations“, into giving away huge portions of the German nation without having even so much as a peace treaty – that has been possible only because the continuous and still increasing slander has instilled in them such a guilty conscience that they are willing to do anything and everything just to „atone“, to „make reparations“, without even having a clear and objective conception of what really happened.

Some few hundred Germans – „fanatics of justice“, and true Socialists – for whom their own people have always been the essence of their striving, have not sat back idly, but tried despite all imaginable difficulties to ascertain the absolute truth. They have determined indisputable facts which in and of themselves already ought to suffice to instill a deep mistrust of the main of the other lies. These people know about the legions of false witnesses, about countless deceitful testimonies, innumerable instances of blackmail, great numbers of suicides, massive bribes, forgeries, perjuries, etc.

We know today that by far the majority of the allegations aimed at our people – in the context of two world wars, the Imperial, Weimar and Hitler days – are complete fabrications or at the very least gross exaggerations.

Part 8 – Art, culture and social innovations

Those engaging in this campaign of calumny are experts at attaining great results with crafty little tricks. Hundreds of millions of people around the globe know Adolf Hitler only as a monster with a whip in his hand, a grimly scowling face and a great dark strand of hair across his forehead. Anyone who knows only this image must assume that what he is faced with is a bloodthirsty, bellicose and very unpleasant man who could very well be the instigator of heinous crimes.

I have already said that I knew Adolf Hitler since 1928, and between 1933 and 1935 I was frequently with him, sometimes every day, and usually quite privately, often from 9 pm to about 2 am. That was the quiet part of his day, which he liked to spend in the company of close friends. In 1936 and 1937 I only saw him infrequently, hardly ever in the time before the outbreak of the war, and not at all anymore during wartime.

I can only state that I never once saw Hitler with a whip in his hand. As well, I never saw him with a strand of hair across his forehead, except perhaps accidentally in the course of a vigorous speech. His hair was without exception very neat, perfectly cut and combed. I did – very rarely – see him scowl, understandably enough at times when he was angry about something. When it happened in the presence of ladies, he would immediately apologize to them afterwards.

One very pronounced characteristic of his, however, is never mentioned nowadays, and was not very well known even then: his striking sense of humour.

No-one knew Hitler as well as Dr. Goebbels did. Whenever he had to take an unpleasant bit of news to Hitler, he would always bring along a few really good jokes, which had the effect of soothing and very efficacious medicine on Hitler. It must also be said that Dr. Goebbels had a flair for telling these jokes.

Two years ago I was very surprised to read that the great comedian Karl Valentin was being celebrated in Munich as „victim of Nazi persecution“. I wrote the Valentin Society that Hitler had been a particularly enthusiastic fan of Valentin’s and, in the small circle of his closest friends, had on several occasions recited the most popular Valentin skits – from memory, and very well at that. I think Hitler would have let Valentin get away with anything and everything. The claim that he persecuted him politically is, in my opinion, an outrageous lie.

One of the descendants of the famous singer Leo Slezak – his son, I think – claimed after the war that Slezak had had to suffer terribly under Hitler. Even Margarete Slezak, doubtless a great artist, had had a hard time of it during the Hitler regime, it was claimed. The fact is that Hitler numbered the Slezaks among his personal friends. I met Margarete dozens of times at Hitler’s place, and in every instance the two of them had a good and cheerful time together; old Slezak himself was never anything but admired for his great voice, his acting talent and his humanity.

Hitler knew that Slezak’s mother was one of the daughters of the banker Wertheim, in other words, of Jewish extraction. At age 59, Slezak gave up his position as singer with the State Opera – expressly „on his own request“, as he himself stated in the encyclopedia „Who’s Who“. He was brilliantly successful to the end, in America as well as especially at the Wagner and Mozart Festivals in Bayreuth and Salzburg. After the war I repeatedly visited his daughter, Margarete Slezak, in her beautiful house in Egern on the Tegernsee; she was still a great follower of Hitler’s, and made no secret of it.

In the course of the last twenty years, many well-known actors and actresses, especially those coming from the motion-picture industry, have written more or less political memoirs. I knew most of them personally, and so I know quite well what they thought of Hitler and Goebbels „in those days“, and what they invented „afterwards“ so as to ingratiate themselves with the regime of today just as they did very successfully back then with Hitler and the Reich Minister responsible for theatre and film.

I was already familiar with the methods these people used, from what I had observed during the 1920s and from 1930 to 1932. In their memoirs several of them seem to have confused their experiences in the 1920s with those of the 1930s, for in my opinion they were treated far too well in the 1930s. With respect to several of the „ladies“ from this field I can only say that their fawning was downright shameless. Often we literally took to our heels when we saw them converging on the Ministry, there to gush once again most effusively about how enraptured they were with Hitler and Goebbels and what a blessing National-Socialism was for the entire people.

But if Hitler wanted the German motion picture industry to become known and popular outside Germany – for up until then it was quite unknown – then he had to come to an arrangement with these people. Their pushiness was not in itself reason enough to dispense with good actresses.

There were also modest and decent artists, however, who made great careers for themselves even if they were politically, let’s say, uncomfortable. I know of several brilliant actors who made no secret of the fact that they were Communists. They were among the most respected ones to the end, their views notwithstanding. Heinrich George, Eugen Klöpfer, Emil Jannings, Werner Kraus, Mathias Wiemann, Gustav Gründgens, Alexander Golling – apart from the singers, these were for the most part not National-Socialists, and some of them were even known as opponents.

Hitler and Goebbels were in full agreement: actors must not be assessed in political terms, else real, good theatre as such will die out – and this, in turn, is something one cannot do to the people. The people come first! And to this day I believe that that was the right attitude to take.

One thing is for certain: politicians understand „theatre“ better than actors understand politics. And no doubt that is how it has been at all times and in all nations.

In any case, none of the actors as such had the slightest grounds for discontent. They were extremely successful, they were very popular not only at home but some of them even abroad, and theatre, just like the German movies, was more popular and respected than it has ever been again since. German movies did not attain world-wide significance until Hitler’s time. One of the last movies made in the Third Reich, „Kolberg“, was still a big hit abroad many years after the war. But it was rarely shown in Germany during the war, and not at all afterwards!

German broadcasting gained such prestige in the world that Germany was given the chairmanship of the World Broadcasting Association. German symphony orchestras also enjoyed unprecedented international popularity.

German sports did not attain world-wide importance until Hitler’s day, which was most evident at the Berlin Olympics. German jurisprudence gained such world-wide prestige under Hitler that a world conference of judges was moved to Germany. The Chairman of this conference, and host, so to speak, was Dr. Roland Freisler, who later was made a very particular target of by the slanderers of Germany and all things German.

German locomotives, German automobiles, German ships came to be greatly admired abroad, and bought, ie. ordered, worldwide. German physicians began to play a leading international role. Foreign experts came from all parts of the world to look at and copy Hitler’s Autobahn superhighways.

The organization of German agriculture, as well as the German solution to the problem of labour unions – in the shape of the „German Labour Front“ (DAF, Deutsche Arbeitsfront), which Hitler himself was reluctant to call „National-Socialist Labour Front“ – soon also came to be internationally regarded as exemplary.

After the war, when the Americans had the organization, structure and functional abilities of the „National-Socialist People’s Welfare Organization“ (NSV) and the „Winter Relief Organization“ (WHW) explained to them, they said – and I know this from eye-witnesses – that there was no other organization in the world as efficient and outstanding as these.

I cannot conclude this list without mentioning Arno Breker, one of the greatest artists of that epoch. Wide sections of the art-conscious population abroad practically idolized him, even though, as is commonly known, he was commissioned by Hitler personally, as were Count Plettenberg and Josef Thorak. Great artists from almost every country eagerly flocked to Germany.

And when Hitler then built up a fleet by means of which the German working man could see the world and come to know and honour other peoples, thus building bridges of understanding from one person to another – that was when he unconsciously touched a sore spot with his enemies and slanderers, for this was something that should not and must not be. The organization „Strength Through Joy“ (Kraft durch Freude, KdF) was by far the greatest of all social measures introduced by the Third Reich. It alone was already a Revolution of the true form of Socialism – independent of financial means. Time and again one could see thousands of men and women from all social strata of the German nation visiting Madeira and other „paradises“ on earth – and that was a great innovation for all of mankind in those days!

The only institution with which the German Reich sorely failed to excite admiration was its armed forces, which, due to imposed necessity, were much too small for such a large and significant nation. The navy was in dire need of at least five times the existing number of submarines, at least ten times as many transport ships of all kinds, at least twice as many warships of various kinds, as well as a number of surprises.

The air force was in even worse a shape than the navy. In fact, it barely existed at all. At least 3,000 fighter planes of various kinds were needed.

To expand and train the army, navy and air force on such a scale was very costly and, according to the experts, would require five to eight years’ time! Hitler was fully aware of all this, and so this alone means that it was completely out of the question for him to want war. Since the traitors also knew this, the matter of who started the war is quite clear, as is the fact that the entire campaign of slander and calumny was directed exclusively by those who wanted to eradicate „Made in Germany“ once and for all. Five to eight years – that meant that the Reich could not be fully armed before 1946 at the earliest!

But Hitler not only needed time for the armed forces, he also needed a great deal more time for the internal consolidation of the Reich. In this context he wanted at least ten to twelve more years – which means that the desired state of armament of the German armed forces would not be attained at any time prior to 1950! Hitler was of the opinion that at such a time there would no longer even be any danger of war, for he would surely have achieved an alliance with England long before that time, especially since he had renounced any and all colonial claims for the German Reich. Who else but him would have done any such thing back then?

Does anyone really believe that the German Reich could have concluded a naval treaty with England, treaties with Italy, Rumania and Japan, and even with the Soviet Union, if even one of the lies being spread around had been the truth? Never!

Does anyone believe that the two major Churches prayed for Hitler and his government for twelve whole years – and not only within Germany! – because deep down they really believed that he and his government were diabolical? I think this theory may safely be dismissed as out of the question.

From 1932 on I was personally acquainted with the papal nuncio Orsenigo, who for many years was a most respected ambassador of the Holy See to Berlin. Whenever he spoke about Hitler it was always in an appreciative, sometimes even an admiring vein. I never once knew him to voice anything negative. I was also well acquainted with Ambassadors Alfieri (Italy) and Frölicher (Switzerland), the Irish Ambassador, who remained supportive to the very end, as well as the Ambassadors of Japan (Oshima), Spain, Hungary, Romania and Bulgaria.

It goes without saying that all these gentlemen listened to foreign radio broadcasts as well as to the German ones, in order to compare them. That was their privilege. In this way they regularly learned what new accusations the slanderers aimed at Germany. It was their right to demand pertinent information from the governments they were accredited to, and so they were always well-informed. They were also free to send informed members of their staff back to their countries of origin, for purposes of reporting there.

Not one of the many foreign diplomats whom I met in Berlin in the course of more than ten years considered Hitler’s regime to be „criminal“. They voiced criticism wherever they felt that something needed to be remedied – and it was their right as well as their duty to do so. But all of them without exception admired the German national community as Hitler’s greatest achievement. All of them acknowledged that Hitler preserved not only Germany but all of Europe from Communism. And many of them admired Hitler as a very brilliant man whose existence was a blessing, and not only for Germany.

I particularly remember the English diplomat Sir Ivon Kirkpatrick. We were personal friends of his and his family’s. Once he even attended a meeting of the NSDAP which was being held in the Reddest part of Berlin, and at which I was the sole speaker. When he congratulated me afterwards, he remarked that it was a great pity that only very few of the foreigners who came to Germany so full of curiosity had the chance to witness such a meeting. It was only at this meeting, he said, that he had fully realized that what was happening in Germany was a primarily Socialist revolution which – adapted, of course, to reflect individual situations – could be of immense benefit to all nations!

On the occasion of a party which Kirkpatrick gave at his home for his friends, he took me aside to ask me to tell my Minister in his name the next day (which was the day before Dr. Goebbels left for Egypt) that when he was in Egypt he should bear in mind that a very brilliant statesman had already been known to fail disastrously when he followed up on his war in Egypt by also invading Russia! I passed this message on to Dr. Goebbels – he did not answer, but I will never forget the way he looked at me.

No doubt Kirkpatrick meant well. After the war he served as a high-ranking Commissioner of the Queen in the British-occupied part of the Reich. During Kirkpatrick’s time in Berlin, the British Ambassador was Henderson. Unlike me, Hitler considered him a friend.

One evening when we were at the home of Chief of Staff Lutze, the host’s dachshund walked past us, and Henderson said: „You see, my dear Prince, this animal has typically German characteristics – a big mouth and a long tail.“ I answered: „And as far as I am aware, the dog typical for England is the bulldog – he bites from below, Your Excellency.“

I only mention these two brief episodes because I witnessed them myself and because they showed me how fundamentally different were the attitudes of those two Englishmen, who were both with the British Embassy at that time and who both played significant parts afterwards.

I especially liked to visit Ambassador Fran‡ois Poncet at the French Embassy. Hitler regarded him as a „particularly intelligent and tactful man“. From many private remarks I had gathered the impression that Fran‡ois Poncet was more kindly disposed towards the Germans than von Ribbentrop would have liked. Ribbentrop banked on Henderson. History has proven that the exact opposite would have been correct. But I could not possibly have interfered, especially since in 1929-30 Alfred Rosenberg had brought about my expulsion from the Party – and Hitler’s signature had been forged towards this end – because Baron Lersner and I had suggested to Hitler that he should review his position towards France and try to obtain an alliance with the French. Hitler acted on this suggestion, and Rosenberg told him that Baron Lersner was not fully Aryan. Rosenberg’s outrageous behaviour did not come to light until 1936, when Hitler declared that he had never heard of my being expelled from the Party, and after all, if he had known, he would not have continued to confide in me for years afterwards.

I only mention this because it shows how many dangers to Hitler and his struggle lurked within the Party’s leadership, and that it is insane to call him a dictator. If only he had been one, probably everything would have turned out fine, especially since he never intended to remain in the Party vanguard forever. I repeatedly heard him say, „As soon as I have finished laying the foundations of the Reich, I am going to step down and devote myself to the elaboration of our ideology.“ This is yet another factor which shows that he never wanted a war.

Part 9 – The eternal ethical laws of nature

„So why are you saying all this only now?“, many a reader will probably ask. The answer is, first, because there were many others who had, and have, much more evidence at their disposal, and who, further, held much higher ranks than I did – yet who lacked my personal relationship with Hitler, which was probably unique. The only one to personally describe Hitler accurately did not live in Berlin. He is a great artist, but was never active in politics – Dr. Hans Severus Ziegler, General Director of the Thuringian Theatres. His book tells the truth – and that is the highest praise one can give a book nowadays.

Several of the formerly high-ranking Party or state officials have tried to lend the truth a voice. They have produced many a good book. But the fact that someone dealt with Hitler only in the line of business is a hindrance. There would never have been any National-Socialism without Hitler. Since Hitler did exist, National-Socialism necessarily also had to come about, and because both finally existed after a long, hard struggle, the community of the German people developed. Only someone who can write about Hitler, about the human element, can ever write accurately about that time. I was very fortunate to know him only in those days when he was still completely his true self, free of all those pressures that came from outside once it had become profitable to have a part in the Revolution.

I knew Hitler the revolutionary statesman, who was as yet identical with Hitler the human being. And my second piece of good fortune was that I could feel quite independent of him – I needed him neither for a salary nor for rank, and least of all for social advantages. He knew that, and discussed it with me himself. That is why I dare to say: I knew Hitler. And that is why I feel obliged to write these lines, for in my opinion, having such knowledge also entails the obligation to pass it on to the people and most of all to posterity. Our nation has a right to every single word of the truth that will at long last help it return to a healthy state of self-confidence. And I feel that any German government must agree when I say: only the truth can help us – amongst ourselves as well as outwardly!

„The belief in original sin is what created the true original sin. Christianity has preached the evil of human nature for so long that it has become evil in fact.“

Coudenhove-Kalergi, in Held und Heiliger

The German Reich still exists – but only the truth will make it live again, for the power of truth is never more apparent than in the time of greatest need.

The concerns about the future of our Germany are legion. The greatest, however, is that of the decline of our people, as is already shockingly manifest in several respects. The root of this development is the fact that a proud nation has been stripped of its self-confidence. This nation is as yet able to exist, but not to fight for its existence. That such a fact is exploited to the limit by the enemies of this nation, is self-evident.

Where honour has lost its value, there can be no trust. Where trust is a thing of the past, there can be no friendship, and no camaraderie. Man slowly but surely becomes a predatory animal. Whether the state „treats“ criminals or punishes them is all the same: their numbers are frighteningly on the increase, even if they are less openly apparent. By the example of several great peoples throughout history we can see that this has ever been the same development that ultimately terminates a life of indulgence and excesses in dreadful self-destruction. In all cases, the destruction of national self-confidence was the start of this process, for anyone who has lost confidence in himself can no longer have confidence in anyone else, and one who can trust no-one is already lost.

As yet we could save our people if we could ignore parties, denominations, class and rank and could simply see ourselves and each other as Germans beginning a new life together by returning to the absolute truth, first within ourselves and then outwardly. We ask our governments to help us in this. The past must remain past – but with honesty, with unconditional and absolute truth! Truth is the prerequisite for honour. Truth plus honour results in loyalty – and these three together combine to form the most essential of all ideals: true love. The eternal ethical legitimacy of nature has decreed it so – and it does not require our agreement or consent.

Truth is one of mankind’s greatest ideals. It stands in a relationship of interdependence with the other great ideals: loyalty, love, and justice. All of them are part of the eternal ethical laws of nature. Hence they are inalienable and indivisible. One cannot and must not say: truth, justice – yes! But not for Hitler, because he was an awful criminal, he was to blame for everything.

Today the law puts particular emphasis on considering, treating and judging a criminal as a person. That is a great point of view! It incorporates the complete and total acknowledgement of the eternal ethical laws of nature! The very changeable concepts of „good“ and „evil“ – „angel“ and „devil“, „divine“ and „satanic“ – are based more on Church precepts than on religious principles, and least of all on truly natural fundamentals of order.

It has taken almost two thousand years until now people are gradually beginning to see Christ as a unique individual, not more and not less. Anyone who wants to abolish „devils“ must also do away with „angels“, and for this reason: for the sake of the „real person“, the human being whose soul in particular plays a great, mysterious, essential role and hence has a mission and a profound responsibility as part of the eternal order of this world.

Times when Germans in Germany were called „criminals“ while Frenchmen in France or Englishmen in England were celebrated as heroes for exactly the same reasons – such times must never come again. Instead of the extremely variable concepts of „good“ and „evil“ we must think in terms of „right“ and „wrong“ – „responsible“ versus „irresponsible“ human behaviour – within the framework of the eternal order of nature, so that mankind may finally break free of that vicious circle that Diderot described when he wrote: „Evil is whatever brings more detriment than advantage for one’s interests – and good is what brings more advantage than detriment.“

„Nature knows neither good nor evil; human opinion is what made the distinction.“

Sextus Empiricus

No doubt one of the greatest dangers to mankind is that craving for status that motivates the international seizure of power, for it is the most devastating violation of the natural law of diversity. All internationality ultimately has a negative effect on the freedom of natural unity. Not only that: it is also the best prerequisite for anonymity in politics. And that is the basis for the greatest crimes, all the more so because so-called technological progress increasingly offers such a development all the means for its further expansion.

It is downright grotesque for an international power, which today is globally active with the assistance of a large-scale computer network, to dare to slander as „dictator“ some statesman not bound by the international system, just because he attempts in all honesty to act in a direct relationship with the nation and people entrusted to him, without the interposition of machines without conscience!

But it is exactly these international powers which wage the concentrated war of slander against defeated Germany with ever-increasing intensity. Such a large-scale offensive of lies and deceit, practicable only from out of the dark of anonymity, has only been possible since mankind is ruled by relatively few overlords under the influence of the international powers.

At the International Military Tribunal (IMT) in Nuremberg between 1945 and 1949, people were condemned who certainly wanted only the best for their people, and acted as they did for this reason. They all were part of their nation’s great process of reconstruction, and the last thing they wanted was war; yet they perceived themselves to be under attack, and so – albeit much too late – they decided on total war… after their enemies had already launched the same, much earlier.

The entire Nuremberg Trial was a tragedy for both sides, because our opponents were not France, England, Russia, America etc., but rather the sum total of the international power dominating these nations. Countless most sincere conversations with high-ranking officers from such nations have shown me time and again that it was indeed so. None of those nations wanted war with Germany – and the Reich more than any other wanted to coexist in peaceful community with them for as long as possible. Not least of all, Hitler and his work was admired by the people of most nations and even by the most prominent of their politicians, such as Winston Churchill, Pierre Laval, etc.

Who was it who created the first, and to this day the most significant, of all Internationals? The International of the Proletariat? Karl Marx! He was the man who truly wanted to conquer the world, not for one nation and even less for all people, but solely and expressly for the proletariat, at everyone else’s expense. He himself wrote that he was prepared, if necessary, to annihilate the entire middle class! And during the great Russian Revolution his followers acted accordingly – they butchered millions! Why have the historians and politicians of virtually every nation on earth refrained from publicly denouncing Karl Marx as dictator? Isn’t the International of the Proletariat by far the greatest thrust towards world dictatorship to date?

The great Revolution during the First World War in Russia did not emanate primarily from the Russians any more than the revolts of the Marxists in Germany during the Twenties emanated primarily from the Germans, or those in Austria from the Austrians, those in Hungary from the Hungarians, those in Spain from the Spanish or those in Italy from the Italians – and all of them together cost Europe several million dead. The goal was the same everywhere: the ‘dictatorship of the proletariat’! They assumed the role of dictator wherever brute force offered any opportunity, regardless which country served as playground: the likes of Trotsky, Adler, Luxemburg, Liebknecht, Radek, etc., and at the vanguard of them all – Karl Marx!

Let us not forget that in 1919, on the orders of the Jew Eisner, some 300 hostages – mostly men who had earned merit in the defense of their country – were slaughtered in the square of the Royal Seat in Munich, without even so much as a court verdict. And let us not forget that Rosa Luxemburg’s and Karl Liebknecht’s uprisings in Berlin, Hannover and Hamburg, in Saxony, Hesse and the Ruhr region totalled far more than 50,000 dead, or that the Revolt of 1936, instigated by the dictatorship of the proletariat and initially a great danger to Spain’s very existence, cost the Spanish more than half a million dead.

Among the participants in the Red International in those days were Togliatti, Hemingway, Willy Brandt and many other leading Marxists from various countries; some of them are politically very active in Germany today. Those who instigated the blood-bath in order to seize the reins of dictatorial power were almost never people native to the country itself, but aliens, legitimized – so to speak – by the „International of the Proletariat“ which, according to Karl Marx, intended the annihilation of the entire middle class, if necessary.

Who dares deny that the idea of the „dictatorship of the proletariat“ has triggered countless, sometimes most bloody revolutions around the world, and created numerous dictatorships? The total must also include those revolutions which provoked natural counterforces and, accordingly, counter-revolutions.

This is the context within which one must view the two world wars. Both cases were a matter of the triggering of the Marxist World Revolution and the corresponding reactions. It is no wonder that enemy propaganda and slander did not begin only with Hitler and his rise to power, but rather already in the time of Emperor Wilhelm II. We may discern from this that said efforts were directed primarily neither at the Emperor nor at Hitler, but at the German nation and the German people. If this were not so, then the gigantic program of anti-German calumny would be quite incomprehensible, and useless to our enemies, today – 32 years after Hitler’s death!

In the view of the leading Marxists, the dictatorship of the proletariat – by its very character, and due to the nature of the people, both pro and con – had no greater enemy than the German Reich. The first and foremost concern of this dictatorship of the proletariat, therefore, is to destroy this German empire, to eliminate it once and for all, or at the very least to reduce it to an impotent state construct of third rank at best.

Marxism cannot be considered a democratic nor even a Socialist movement; Marx and its other loyal champions proclaimed it, aptly and significantly enough, as the dictatorship of the proletariat, and it has been repeatedly celebrated as such. However, a revolution that fights exclusively for only a particular sector of the population and seeks to eliminate the other sectors to achieve its end – such a revolution is the worst possible enemy of the people as a whole, ie. of the truly Socialist community. Anyone who calls such a revolution „Socialist“ or „democratic“ deceives his own people!

It is vital to understand this, for the Marxists have gained their position of power on the strength of this main ideological pillar. By means of their Godesberg Program they even gained additional „middle class“ support, specifically from those who still retain a touch of true Socialism – that kind which addresses the natural unity of a people.

If Hitler wanted to save the German people and nation from the desperate situation of the Twenties, he had to find a way that every German could follow. He had to create a party in which all Germans – without any differences, simply as Germans – could feel comfortable. Such a party could not have gained power by means of violence. Bloodshed may win victories, but not social community. Bloodshed may produce fear, but not true comradeship – it may gain an alliance, but never true unity and wholeness. Hitler understood this clearly from the start, and repeatedly stressed it to others.

The logical consequence of this was his self-sacrificial bearing at the Feldherrnhalle, where his Party did not shoot back when the police opened fire. Hitler, Hess, Göring and General Ludendorff strode resolutely and without hesitation into the volley. There were fourteen dead and many injured – the latter included Göring. In a symbolical sense this march became of utmost significance to the Revolution. Hitler’s bearing and that of his men during those minutes remained an example to the millions that came later, who must not let themselves be provoked under any circumstances. Not letting oneself be provoked heightens one’s self-discipline and faith. The one effects the other. Nothing else creates such a bond of comradeship. Nothing else is quite as impressive to one’s adversaries. Many former opponents gave me confirmation of this in the prison camp after the war.

In 1932 I was just a common SA-man. My wife and I were driving through Hangelar near Bonn, when the district head of the KPD [Communist Party of Germany] took a shot at me from his house. The bullet struck the door beside me, just about ten inches from my head. I waived my right at criminal prosecution, and Hitler thanked me for it.

At Christmas, 1933, Dr. Goebbels ordered a gigantic table piled with gifts to be set up in the Reddest part of Greater Berlin, along one of the main streets in the Communist district. National-Socialist and Communist families alike were given Christmas gifts. In the course of this very touching hour, one of the leading Communists arrived. He had just been released from prison, even though he had committed a number of violent crimes. I saw him coming, since he had been driven from the prison right up to the table of gifts, where he met his family and his circle of friends and comrades – as well as his greatest adversary, Dr. Goebbels, and his men. To this day I number these minutes among the most wonderful of my life.

„This Christmas could not have been better“, said Dr. Goebbels, and he was right. – Incidentally, it was the Russians who saw to it at the IMT in Nuremberg in 1946 that the SA as a whole was acquitted, and thus was not counted as one of the so-called „criminal organizations“.

Where else has there ever been a nation of 70 million souls, on the highest level of civilization and culture, which gave 98% of its election vote to one single man? Nowhere! „For me there are no more opponents among the people,“ Adolf Hitler said in my presence when he was asked whether he knew the missing 2%.

During the Berlin Olympics of 1936 I heard Hitler say that, no matter how sad it was, we would have to try to stem the flood of medals for the German athletes somewhat – else it would come to be embarrassing towards our foreign guests.

That man was truly no dictator – but the slanderers have always tried to portray him as such. And it is in human nature to believe evil rather than good, falsehood rather than truth – especially if they think that they will profit more by this; a belief which always proves mistaken in the long term, however.

Certainly Adolf Hitler never wanted the war. On the contrary, he had hoped for a very long time of peace. All his real interests could be realized only in peacetime. Among those who slander him and the entire German people to this day, there are and were next to none who really knew him personally, as independent person, as free agent, long enough to be able to judge fairly.

His plans for post-war times were enormous in scale and scope – ranging from the eradication of cancer to the giant power plants he wanted to build in the Sahara, together with the African nations, in order to harness solar energy. „It’s not necessary to be allied or bound to everyone – it’s much easier to help everyone without international ties“; that was his opinion. Immensely interesting plans were already on the drawing board. All of us wanted peace as soon as possible. Hitler made offers of peace four or five times and received – no answer at all! In light of all this, can one really call him guilty, criminal – a dictator?

You, the reader, can decide for yourself; but you must understand that falsehood is always to everyone’s detriment. Of all things, the past in particular ought to be perfectly clear to one who views it, like a precious diamond, and just as natural and immutable.

Part 10 – A word to the slanderers themselves

And now, a word to the slanderers themselves. A word from the pen of Friedrich Nietzsche, perhaps one of the most prominent, courageous and profound of all philosophers:

„And this is the tale of Zarathustra’s conversation with the fire-dog: The earth (he said) has a skin; and this skin has diseases. One of these diseases, for example, is called ‘Man’. And another of these diseases is called ‘the fire-dog’: men have told many lies and been told many lies about him.

„To fathom this secret I fared across the sea: and I have seen truth naked, truly! barefoot to the neck.

„Now I know all about the fire-dog; and also about all the revolutionary and subversive devils which not only old women fear.

„‘Up with you, fire-dog, up from your depth!’ I cried, ‘and confess how deep that depth is! Where does it come from, that which you snort up?

„‘You drink deeply from the sea: your bitter eloquence betrays that! Truly, for a dog of the depths you take your food too much from the surface!

„‘At the best, I hold you to be the earth’s ventriloquist: and when I have heard subversive and revolutionary devils speak, I have always found them like you: bitter, lying, and superficial.

„‘You understand how to bellow and how to darken the air with ashes! You are the greatest braggart and have sufficiently learned the art of making mud boil.

„‘Where you are there must always be mud around and much that is spongy, hollow, and compressed: it wants to be freed.

„‘Freedom’, you all most like to bellow: but I have unlearned belief in „great events“ wherever there is much bellowing and smoke about them.

„‘And believe me, friend Infernal-racket! The greatest events – they are not our noisiest but our stillest hours.

„‘The world revolves, not around the inventors of new noises, but around the inventors of new values; it revolves inaudibly.’“

Part 11 – Conclusion

Immensely much could still be said about this topic. I have restricted myself, on the whole, to things I know from personal experience. My intent was not to settle scores with former opponents; we have no need of that. My intent was twofold:

a) to establish how abominable and base a barrage of lies has been aimed at us Germans for decades; and

b) to point out who does this, and why.

The circles which have instigated and perpetuated the world-wide slander of our nation for decades now are themselves in every way the extreme opposite of us Germans. They are more or less an imitation of their prophet Karl Marx. They give themselves away ever more clearly by no longer trying to destroy only us Germans with their lies, but other nations as well. The Chileans, the Spanish, the South Africans and the Arabs are but a few examples. They, too, the slanderers accuse of heinous crimes, they too are placed at the receiving end of continual hate-mongering carried out on an international level and even by means of international organizations.

Anyone who comes to know them through their methods knows that their lies are only a means towards their end in the struggle for world power. For if it were otherwise, they would have the courage to slander the great powers as well: Russia, China and the United States. But not a hair of their heads is ever touched! What all do these states have on their conscience even only with respect to their own nations, their own people? Not a word is written about that. There are even attempts to forge spiritual alliances against us with these nations – which endeavour has succeeded all too well in the case of the United States. I just recall the disgusting hate-propaganda that a certain General Eisenhower ordered distributed in immense quantities to his officers near the end of the Second World War!

And who still recalls that the Poles indulged in such unspeakably atrocious excesses in Germany in 1945 that some of the Russian troops saw fit to protect the Germans from these Poles? What prompts the slanderers to keep silent about the fate of the Jews in the Soviet Union as well as in the States? In 1961, in Buffalo, USA, I saw one of the largest synagogues in the city, which had burned down and, it seemed, was not being rebuilt. I asked numerous respected Americans what that meant. They shrugged their shoulders and laughed a little maliciously, and that was all. I then asked deliberately: „When is it going to be rebuilt?“ The answer: „We don’t know if it’s going to be rebuilt!“

Even though the incitement and hate-mongering against our nation and its history is carried on by far the most vigorously and most disgustingly in the United States, I do not think that most of the people are prepared to believe everything they hear.

Those criminal slanderers who incite the entire world against our German nation and its history, and act in a similar manner towards very specific other nations as well, do not, however, voice even the slightest objection when international Capitalism / Marxism promotes a process which in the long run will most certainly destroy the whole of all life on earth. I only need to mention that horrible topic, „disposal of radioactive waste“.

No-one knows what to do with this deadly waste-material, of which there is more and more every day. Because storage on the ocean floor has already proven much too dangerous, the only possibility considered to be still an option is to deposit it in particularly deep ocean trenches, where this waste will not become active for another 10,000 years – we hope. But if the amount of waste that has already accumulated gets out of hand in even only 1,000 years, then this should more than suffice to utterly destroy all life on this planet in a very brief period of time indeed!

My question: who are those international dictators, unprecedentedly thoughtless and callous, irresponsible and unscrupulous, who dare to continue producing radioactive waste even though they know full well that the enormous dangers to all life grow more and more monstrous with each new barrel that is sunk, and can never be stopped?

Anyone who tolerates that, who does not speak out against it, who does not denounce those dictators of economy and finance as by far the worst criminals of all time and all nations – God knows, such a person does not have the slightest right to criticize things past.

Those who calumniate us Germans and our history were and continue to be the ones truly at the root of the great wars – and they are at the same time the ones who pave the way for that Dictatorship of World Capital which I have particularly stressed.

Thus, the circle closes, and what seemed so incomprehensible at first becomes quite clear.

And exactly for this reason, that now we know what at best we could sense then, I must take this opportunity to remember those tens of thousands, and probably even hundreds of thousands, of good German men and women who, since May 8, 1945, have slowly died an agonizing death because their love of home and Fatherland, their decency and their loyalty to their people and their nation simply could not bear all these base lies and deception. I saw many of them already slowly begin to die of this spiritual agony in the prison camp – and not a few of them, out of their bottomless despair, ended their own lives.

I know that I was born a German so as to live and do my duty as a German. That is in accordance with the eternal order of this world we live in. He that deliberately acts against this order, can only be a traitor, a scoundrel! He harms everyone else. No philosophy, no religion, no mathematics can ever be stronger than the eternal ethical legitimacy of nature!

„This above all: to thine own self be true!
And it must follow, as the night the day,
Thou canst not then be false to any man.“

Shakespeare, Hamlet I,3 (Polonius)

Part 12 – Epilogue

Whether it makes sense or not – it is an undeniable fact, proven anew day in, day out, that Adolf Hitler is the best-known person in the world today, second only to Jesus Christ. Particularly in the most powerful nations, he is – politically speaking – still very much alive, for time and again, the world over, he is repeatedly quoted and continually referred to and described. Magazines, books, movies, radio, television, parliaments and countless speakers from all nations continue, 31 years after his death, to seize every possible opportunity to exploit this man and to profit from him. The most glaring example of this which I myself witnessed must be mentioned:

In a speech which I gave in Ulm/Donau, I attempted to establish that there can never be absolutely rigid judgements in politics. The more natural any given teaching is, the more human discipline is required of its adherents. Hence, the more sacrifices must be made, the smaller the number of true followers, fighters and faithful.

I said: „Let no-one believe that everyone who once wore the Brown Shirt is my friend today. On the contrary – in this matter I am particularly discriminating, because I know that the number of National-Socialists decreased, the more rapidly the numbers of Party members grew! If someone today points out a Federal Minister or party leader who used to hold a position in the NSDAP, I could not care less, for I know that he could never have ben a National-Socialist. He just ‘acted the part’ – and so he will just ‘act the part’ all his life.“

In closing, I said: „It was a very bad thing that both Ribbentrop and Bormann, for example – two profoundly different men – were not National-Socialists. The wrong political attitude is in itself disastrous, but to fake the positive political attitude and then to abuse and betray it, that is catastrophic.“

In this context I mentioned that I had seen Bormann in the train station of Buchloe after the war, in 1948 or 1949. This remark caused an uproar, and a leading German magazine asked me for an interview. I agreed, on the condition that I would first be given a clear answer to the following question, which was of paramount interest to me at the time: „Am I correct in the assumption that the official account of Hitler’s death is partly untrue? By ‘partly’ I mean ‘to a considerable degree’.“

The magazine’s editorial staff withdrew for a brief conference, and then declared that it was in fact so, the official account was incorrect in some vital respects. I responded that it was quite incomprehensible to me why such a prominent magazine would then forfeit the great credit of publication, and keep silent for years. Their answer was: „All in good time, dear Prince!“…

This interview has remained in my mind as exceptionally revealing and interesting. And that is also a reason for my writing this booklet, even though it strikes me as somewhat incomplete an attempt at the interpretation of Adolf Hitler’s personality.

And just at this time, quite unexpectedly, I have received what is probably the most interesting and valuable supplement imaginable: Adolf Hitler’s last recorded statements shortly before the end of the war – some notes, unknown to date.

The reader will no doubt wonder whether these notes are genuine. Naturally, we too considered this point frequently and earnestly. I can only say this: the writing is Hitler’s style, the statements are doubtless his own thoughts, the mood of those days is singularly brought to life, and the notes were released by a reliable and trustworthy source – for the sake of the truth, and only for its sake!

Adolf Hitler’s expositions* affected me, who knew him well until 1936, like a profession by the soon to be departed. With perfect candor he tells how he saw matters – and exactly that is of paramount importance for us to know, for:

„The concealment of truth brings evil!“
Friedrich Nietzsche

*KRITIK issue no. 70: Adolf Hitler – ein Leben für Deutschland und Europa.

Adolf Hitler – speech at the opening ceremonies for work on the subway at the Goetheplatz – 22.05.1938

Munich, May 22, 1938

Within the past five years, a series of construction projects has been undertaken in Munich and now that some of these projects have already been completed, on this day we commence a new project. I am certain it is the greatest yet for the expansion and beautification of this city.

The task which we have resolved to undertake is one that has been around for generations. Already prior to the War, people were aware that Munich’s railroad facilities were not only disgraceful but also could not keep up to the demands of technological advance. However, there was a shortage of power to arrive at a true solution for the problem. At the time, this was due to the disintegration of the Reich and to the eternal bickering in the parliaments of the Lander.

The question of an underground for Munich was already on the table in times of peace. Following the War, the issue was raised again, and a superficial plan was drawn up. In order to preserve the old Munich and the Munich of the times of King Louis I, it is necessary to arrive at a solution which keeps at least part of the traffic off the streets. Therefore, there is only one possible way to go, the way under the earth.

As soon as the amount of traffic has doubled or tripled, the streets in the inner part of the city will no longer suffice to handle this massive flow of traffic.

However, the flow of traffic will not only triple or quadruple but, let me assure you, it will increase by a factor of six or eight. Today it is our obligation to anticipate this development and its consequences instead of waiting until a catastrophe occurs and it will have become impossible to master the problem.

The men before us did not have the force of character to take this realization seriously and to implement the measures necessary for its resolution. However, today, the maxim of the National Socialist Movement applies to this issue as well: never to capitulate in face of difficulties! Acknowledging the exponential growth of the flow of traffic demands us to take timely precautions today that shall allow us to smoothly channel the flow of traffic in the future. Here this shall be done in an uncommonly generous fashion.

At this point, I would like to thank the gentlemen of the Reichsbahn, and especially its brilliant chief Dr. Dorpmuller, for not broaching this problem with half-hearted attempts at resolution, but rather seeking a real solution for a real problem and ensuring its implementation.

Therefore, the city receives an exemplary net of suburban fast trains linking the surrounding areas with the center. In a few years, it will be possible to remove the streetcars from the city center and hence to make the streets calmer than is the case today. I would like to point out right away that, of course, some streets will be tumultuous in the next few years. Other big cities have had to go through this, too! Wherever there are subways, there is noise for an initial period. However, once construction is complete, the noise will disappear, and you will not hear a thing. In this or that street, where the underground will be built, there will be some noise for about a year. But one has to take that upon oneself to have peace for the next five hundred or thousand years. Nevertheless, I am convinced that the humor of our Munich people will help them over the initial period.

Besides that, we experienced something similar when we laid the foundation for the Haus der Deutschen Kunst and 1,600 cement pillars had to be driven into the earth. At the time, it was as noisy there as it will be noisy here in a moment.

Some may have shaken their heads back then, and certainly there were some particularly annoyed by the commotion, but 1 believe that there is not one man among Munich’s citizens today who is not proud of his Haus der Deutschen Kunst.

We have now determined to find a generous solution for the traffic problems of the city of Munich. And you should know me well enough by now: whatever we begin, we will finish.

At the latest in five or six years, this task will be accomplished. Munich then will call an exemplary rapid mass transportation system its own as well as enormous railroad constructions surrounding the great new central railroad station. The same thing will happen in Berlin. I hope that both cities will enter into a noble competition of the kind where each attempts to outdo the other in realizing the necessity of the problems posed. The resolution of the traffic problems is the first step toward the resolution of other major problems facing us in Berlin, Munich, and Hamburg.

The second reason is the following: up to now it has been customary for everyone in Germany to build how and where he liked. This caused the disharmony in the overall design of German cities. Do you think a Ludwigstrasse would ever have been constructed had it been up to the citizens and other institutions of Munich? Great architectural solutions can only come about through a central plan, and this is the way it will be once again today.

All architectural projects, be it those of the Reich, of the Lander or communities, of insurance companies or private buildings, will be placed under one single central planning authority. This will be done in due consideration of aesthetic conditions and exigencies, of the needs of the cities and of traffic flow.

And this is how it will be done in this city.

In addition, there will be a plan to secure those culturally important buildings which are essential in defining Munich’s character as a city of the arts.

Here, too, the maxim applies: idleness rusts the mind. When you review the new projects, you must admit efforts are being made constantly to improve the physical appearance of the city.

Thirdly, we wish to resolve these problems in the spirit of our times, a spirit of concern for the future of our German Volk. 1 desire that these construction projects we are undertaking today will be considered magnificent for centuries to come. A few statistics reveal that our ancestors also shared these concerns for magnificence: when the boulevard ‘Unter den Linden’ was built in the 17th century, Berlin had less than 40,000 inhabitants. And when the Ludwigstrasse was built, Munich had scarcely 70,000 inhabitants. Today Munich has a population of more than 800,000 and Berlin has more than 4,500,000. Nobody shall dare to come up to me to say that the new streets we are building are too wide.

The tasks we have to solve today simply cannot be of too grandiose a nature.

As a National Socialist I have from the very first day divorced myself from the bourgeois and sluggish attitude of, “Yes, this street has to be constructed, but we shall leave that to our children.” I have always followed the one maxim that says: there is no such thing as a problem requiring resolution which we do not resolve ourselves.

In just a few years’ time, a new Berlin will have become a metropolis synonymous with the German Reich and its leadership, and a new Hamburg a metropolis synonymous with German trade. A new Nuremberg will come into being, symbolizing the festive spirit of the National Socialist Movement. A new Munich will come into being as the great city of German art and as the capital of our Party, of the National Socialist Uprising.

I have taken great care to choose four cities at once so that no one can claim receiving special treatment. No, everyone has to say to himself: if the others can bear it, so can we. Whoever feels himself unfairly burdened by the constant noise of piledrivers or the like, to him all I can say is: “My dear friend, it would sound entirely different if you had to stand next to it or had to work down there. If thousands of German workers can bear it, so can you!” It will take five years, perhaps six, and no more than one year per street, and then the great feat shall be accomplished, a feat of which generations to come will be proud and which will place the great creations in our great and beautiful city in an even more favorable light.

Now as we begin this enormous work, we realize time and again that all this is only possible because the concentrated force of seventy-five million people stands behind it. It is not Berlin building Berlin, not Hamburg building Hamburg, not Munich building Munich, not Nuremberg building Nuremberg, but rather Germany building its cities-its beautiful, proud, and magnificent cities! And that is why once again our thoughts turn to our Germany to which we loyally pledge our life and soul. In this spirit, let us begin our work!

Adolf Hitler – two speeches in Berlin, 1 May 1938

Adolf Hitler – address the German youth in the Olympic Stadium

Berlin, May 1, 1938

My Youth! My German Boys and Girls!

You have the great fortune to live in an age of which the German nation shall never have to be ashamed. In your youth you have witnessed the rise of our Volk. Your young hearts were set aglow and became impassioned by the historic events of these last weeks and months which stood under the spell of the reunion of the German Volk. This outward development was, my boys and girls, only the outcome of an inward development in our German Volk reflecting its union. And today we celebrate the day of this union of our Volk!

For centuries, our Volk was torn and at odds with itself, and hence it was incapacitated in its outside dealings; it was unhappy, lacking means of defense and a sense of honor. Ever since the victory of the Movement, under the banner of which you stand today, the inner union of the German people has been accomplished. And now Providence allows us to reap the fruits of our labor: Greater Germany! This union did not come about as a matter of coincidence, but rather as the result of the National Socialist Movement’s systematic education of our Volk. The Movement has absolved this Volk from its division into a wild agglomeration of parties, classes, confessions, and ranks and has made an entity of it. And this educational process begins at an age where the individual’s views are not yet encumbered by prejudice.

Our youth is the building block of our Reich! You are Greater Germany! For it is in you that the German Volksgemeinschaft constitutes itself. At the fore of the Reich there stands a Fuhrer; at the fore of the Reich there stands a Volk; and at the fore of this one Volk stands our German youth! Seeing you here, my belief in Germany’s future becomes boundless and unshakeable! For I know that you will fulfill all our expectations! So on this May Day, I greet you in our new great Germany! For you are our springtime! Through you shall and must be accomplished what has been fought for by generations throughout the centuries:

Deutschland!

Adolf Hitler – speech in the Lustgarten

Berlin, May 1, 1938

Earlier there were people who declared, “An end to the battle! Never again war!”-while internally they let the battle rage on. I know that motto, “Never again war.” It is my own motto as well. It is to that end that I made Germany strong once more and had it stand on its own feet.

However, in order to remain so strong and steadfast, so that no tumult abroad can endanger peace at home, it is necessary to end that fight for all time which otherwise will prevent us from making our strength felt abroad.

Not “never again war” should be our motto, but rather “never again civil war! Never again class struggle! Never again internal fighting and discord!” I have acted in accordance with these realizations-and you, my Volksgenossen, see the results before you. In a few years, we resolved those problems which were earlier held to defy resolution. So once again we celebrate the first of May and this time it is the occasion of particularly great rejoicing. Six and a half million Germans have joined us within the borders of our holy Reich. And they, too, are listening at this hour, as far south as the Karawanken, and they are happy that they now form part of our great community as well. Now we must take these new lands of the Reich into our strong community. They are to sense that they have become part of a meaningful order. We take pride in this order and through it we shall master all problems in the shortest time possible. This will bring about the same bloom there that we have already witnessed in the Old Reich.

Hence, I appeal to you on this first of May: do not dwell on what might still separate us, but rather be happy about what we have already achieved. Focus on what we already have in common! No Volk is born within five years’ time, and neither is a state constructed in five years’ time. However, we have placed the cornerstone and it is this occasion that we now celebrate on this first of May.

Ours was the conviction; ours is the will! What remains to be accomplished will he accomplished if only the advocates of our great ideal are courageous and reliable and unerringly follow the path laid before them! Today we celebrate the day of this ideal, the day of the German Volksgemeinschaft and hence the day of German labor in which we all take such great pride in the cities as well as in the countryside. Once every year we wish to rejoice in that for which this day was created in the first place as the celebration of the German Volksgemeinschaft.

Deutschland – Sieg Heil!

The Hitler Trial

Originally published under the title: „Der Hitlerprozeß“ – by Karl Richard Ganzer

Whoever views the history of the Weimar Republic and its countless effort to preserve its existence will find that in the struggle against its domestic enemies it again and again resorted with noticeable clumsiness to measures that in the end benefited these enemies. It struck at its opponent – but it hit him so that he only became harder, more tenacious, more insubordinate and burst the old fronts with a new defiance. The republic perished, because it did not summon up the courage for ultimate decisions. When it was still young, it indeed mocked Imperial Germany – but it allowed itself to be saved by counterrevolutionary troops. When it believed itself to be in its peak years, but was already very aged, it removed the shirts from the charging opposition – but it did not find the courage to totally exterminate the opponents. There is not one of its measures that did not suffer from the worst of all political evils, half-measures. And there is not more precise proof for the lack of political instinct than the fact that this always the same failure, this always the same indecisiveness, this always the same half-measure could continue to thrive despite all bad experiences through the fifteen long years – to the deserved end.

One must also view the Hitler trial in the context of the system’s extraordinary inner insecurity in order to grasp it in its full significance. For indeed, on November 9th the rulers had triumphed at the Feldherrnhalle with salvos of fire. And indeed, after this bloody victory the system powers from all camps – from the red and black and bourgeois – came together in a unified front of loudly stressed confidence, but actually just poorly concealed fear. But as self-serving as they again and again confirmed their own glory, as permanently as the National Socialist movement seemed to be mashed and shot up: a single force, the decisive force in all history’s conflicts, escaped the clever and all too selfcertain deliberations of the „victors”: the folk.

For now the new political idea, which had proven for the first time that one could also die for it, sprang like a river of fire into the hearts of countless people who were waiting, hesitating, unbelieving. The folkish movement experienced an upsurge in Bavaria like never before. And opinions were henceforth sharply divided. November 9th had already, in the middle of the great despair of these hours, let one experience how quickly a folk can transform itself, if a great example stirs the slumbering courage and the hidden defiance. In the following weeks as well, the excitement did not abate. Quite the opposite: the more arrogantly the „victors” of November 9th bragged in their statesmen speeches and the louder their sympathetic press attested their great statesmanship, the more hostile the mood of the masses in broad circles became. An intensive leaflet struggle, combated by the police only unsuccessfully, put the government under the heaviest bombardment for months. The government itself brought up its heaviest guns with its official dispatches, press declarations and large wall posters. A generous influencing of public opinion against the imprisoned leaders of the revolt set in – already many weeks before the trial, which was supposed to clarify the question of guilt unbiased. But while the confidential memos of Kahr, Lossow and Speisser, in which the gentlemen put the blood guilt of November 9th on National Socialism and elevated themselves into heaven as innocents and made the rounds, spreading poison, in the loyal newspaper offices, in the circles of „good society” and in all circles of influence and rank, the folk outside remained true in a moving way. Undeterred, Hitler’s soldiers sang their old song: „Hitler spirit in the heart must not perish, Storm Troop Hitler will soon be resurrected!” And even the children, enchanted by the name Hitler in a strange way, found a new version for their counting verses: one, two three, Hitler will be free” [„Eins, zwei drei, der Hitler, der wird frei…”]

Could one employ police against this? And what did the base agitation publications of the white-blue reactionary, with which one flooded the land, miss here through miscalculation? Say those infamous pamphlets in white-blue jacket, which an anonymous „Veni Vidi” had written and proved with an introduction, which was ingratiating like a bad sermon and in the process dripping with hidden insults? Hitler was portrayed as the typical ambitious man from lowly origins who had been made megalomaniac through flattery; one of the dead of the Feldherrnhalle, Scheubner-Richrer, was defamed as an adventurous political swindler who from the background fatefully guided the decisions of a hesitant Hitler; Ludendorff was described as the great Prussian militarist who had only come to Bavaria in order to prepare a new war – there was nobody who was not attacked by the poisonous spite of this hidden writer.

Nonetheless: what did such insults count? They just pulled the front of the reliable closer together and incited them to even greater passion in their own struggle. For it was felt clearly enough that no moral, and hence no political, energies stood behind a government that recruited witnesses of the inferior quality of such slanderers.

The first hour of the „victory“‘, after all, had already proven how unsure and inwardly unstable this government was, how it allowed itself to be ruled by such dangerous half-measures even in its most objective decisions. Already in the night of November of 8th it had boldly banned the NSDAP, the Bund Oberland and the Reichskriegsflagge, and thereby believed it had broken forever the revolutionary movement; but now these organizations had expanded beyond their own independence and merged together into the „Deutschen Kampfbund”, which was its own legal body: but one had forgotten to ban the one who had actually carried the revolt! Should the folk gain confidence in a government that in hours of decision loses its nerve so much that it only knows the language of the machinegun and in its other measures commits half-measure after half-measure? Could the folk continue to give its agreement to a system that accuses its shot down opponent of hostility to the constitution a hundred times on one day and today smashes his organization – but on the next day assures that it would allow him to enter the parliaments unhindered, if he just wishes it. True to parliamentarian error, the Reich Chancellor back then announced that the ban of the political parties merely prohibited the outward activity and the organizational union of those who belonged to the banned political parties; it „did not hinder giving expression to political views through election of certain representatives for parliamentary bodies.” The opponent who had just stood on the whipping-post as the enemy of all enemies — he could march along in the same republic, if he just put up a parliamentary appearance…. The folk has an unerring feeling for the inner strength of an institution that makes political decisions.

I hit just like the Bavarian, so did the government of Ebert-Stresemann as well reveal in its decisions the evil of half-measures, which the healthy sense of the folk never forgives. The „traitors” had to make all that much greater an impression, who, even if they had failed, had nonetheless always let be surmised that history-shaping energies stood behind their will!

It was no wonder that, in the face of this background of pitiful uncertainty, even more energetic plans that the system rallied to found no echo. Even though the Weimar Republic took action against rebelling communists and Seeckt’s emergency decrees had preserved makeshift order, it could still be sensed behind it that there existed nowhere a firmly founded authority under Ebert’s rule. Even the sole positive accomplishment of those months, the creation of the Rentenmark [currency], was not able to bestow any superiority on the system; for one knew everywhere that the plans for the security of the totally shaken currency had been worked out by the politicians of the opposite and not by system big-shots such as perhaps Hilferding.

The Bavarian government as well found little support when it strove to demonstrate its security and systemization of its political conceptions with great enterprises. It was quickly proven that after as before the innermost striving of the ruling white-blue regionalism aimed at a loosening of the Reich. Then the suspicion of the National Socialist influenced masses only became greater.

The Hitler revolt had smashed the Reich threatening plans of the separatist reaction. But now it cloaked its old goal in constitutional forms: a few weeks before the court was supposed to decide whether Hitler had committed high treason, the Bavarian presented a renewed attack against the Reich’s unity in a great memo. It demanded that the governmental sovereignty of the individual states be re-established to the full extent; the Reich’s right of sovereignty had to be restricted; even military sovereignty has to be greatly loosened; hence the Bavarian provincial commander should be named and removed only with the consent of the Bavarian government; even „a temporary dispatch of Bavarian troop elements to a non-Bavarian location (!) may only take place with the consent of the Bavarian government”; hence Bavarian troops were to be obligated to the Bavarian government in addition to the Reich government; and if the Weimar Constitution with incomprehensible generosity allowed the individual states to conclude state treaties with other states, leastwise with the Reich’s consent, then this Reich destroying memo wants to allow the Reich the meaningful right of a mere protest, with which nobody concerns himself… Eighteen young Germans had died at the Feldherrnhalle for the winning of a single, solidly unified Reich. But Hitler and his friends had stood up for the strengthening of the Reich in a time of utmost urgency, they sat behind the walls of the Landsberg fortress and waited for the verdict about their „high treason”. But while one treated these rebels for the power and the glory of the Reich like state criminals, one pushed forward wedge after wedge against the Reich structure oneself…

The Hitler trial prepares itself in such a situation, in the middle of a time filled with great tensions, amidst excitement, lack of clarity, in a city that is filled with political guerrilla warfare with leaflet, poster and press work, but also in a city in which the accused have at their disposal almost no public means of defence against the pubic attacks of the officials and the pro-system press. For weeks, the masses wait for the scheduling of the beginning of the trial. For weeks they are stalled, comforted, fed uncertain answers to burning questions. For weeks a breathless tension lies over Munich, because each asks how far Kahr wants to still expand his regimen of ban; whether the official influencing of public opinion, of the witnesses, yes, of the court would not finally cease; how the rulers would probably behave in a painful questioning of the witnesses.

For weeks such questions hang in the air unanswered. Then the arming news suddenly comes that Kahr and Lossow with him have resigned from their offices.

A few days after that the trial begins: „Against Hitler and associates for high treason and abetting high treason”.

For a long time it had been a main concern of the Bavarian government whether one would be able to protect the trial against disruptions: so correctly did one assess the folk mood, which viewed the case as the act of a dead paragraph judiciary. After long hesitation, one had nonetheless chosen Munich as the trial site. The court was supposed to convene in the same infantry school whose ensigns had marched under the swastika flag on November 8 to the Bürgerbräukeller. The ensigns’ dining hall has been transformed into the courtroom.

A few days before the beginning of the trial large posters hang everywhere in the city. They announce the security measures, which the government deems necessary in order to avoid surprises. One reads the sentences with concern and pedantry.

A whole part of the city around the infantry school is put under special law: assemblies of three (!) or more people is forbidden here. Photographing or filming is forbidden here. Peddling, even newspapers, is forbidden. No political assemblies may be held in the halls in this district; but since the largest halls of Munich lie here – Löwenbräu, Arzbergerkeller, Augustinerkeller and Zirkus Krone – the political assemblies relating to the events in the trial are largely prevented. Furthermore, the whole quarter is under the strictest police observation. All motor traffic is blocked. Violations are punishable with prison. And when on the first day of the trial the residents along the Blutenburgstrasse look out their windows, they even discover that the square in front of the infantry school is barricaded with bard-wire and chevaux de frise like in wartime. Narrow passages are left open, they are guarded by armed sentries. The sparse visitors who are admitted to the trial, even the reporters, even the women, wait inside the building for a painful body search for weapons…

Munich, the city with the calmest populace, is amazed…

Already many weeks before the beginning of the trial a brisk rush for the available press cards had set in. Special attention had been aroused by the participation of the foreign press: it was obvious that it did not view the case as a purely legal every or as merely an internal Bavarian matter, rather as a sign of crisis that should provide insight into the inner strength of the Weimar Republic. The press was so strongly represented that only a few rows of chairs remained free for the other visitors.

The defendants, with one sole exception, wore civilian clothes, even the old General Quartermaster of the old army. The press noticed uniformly that Adolf Hitler looked around in the courtyard with interest: they had looked forward all too much to seeing a crushed sinner in order to not be amazed now to find him with the free certainty of the attacker. The press of the left feels it a provocation that he wears the Iron Cross First Class; but the bourgeois press from the Kahr camp, moved, remains silent that one drags the bravest soldiers, proven leaders, before the judge. And certainly, it is also not an easy office for the chief judge to now have to try these defendants by the same procedure that is also the exact same for chicken thieves. The report with the customary „here”, these ten „traitors” – Adolf Hitler, „author in Munich”, the victor of Tannenberg, Ludendorff the highest judge in Bavaria, Pöhner, the high Bavarian administrative official Frick, the general staff member Kriebel, the front officers Brückner, Wagner, Weber, Röhm, Pernet… They let the banality of this naming pour over them – and then the prosecutor reads the indictment. In whose first sentences two paragraphs resound like a symbol: „The behaviour of the accused constitutes a crime of high treason according to § 81 No. 2 and § 47 of the Reich Legal Code…”

The reading of the indictment lasts one and one- quarter hours: it is so detailed, it expresses the events under indictment down to the smallest detail. Often it rises to sharply pointed, dramatic portrayals; then it again carefully arranges its accusations together point by point – in the most painstaking effort not to forget a single offense from the plenitude of suspicions. It teams with names and details, with quotes and testimonies, it reveals an amazing effort in the gathering of material – what it lacks, so that it remains poor and meager despite its extensive contents, is something very essential: the understanding for the tremendous necessities of the political situation and the unnameable tensions out of which the deed of November 9th took place. This indictment is down to the smallest detail thought out legalistically. But that beyond legal systems there exists a life full of elemental conflicts, this it excludes from its deliberations. That the people of the year 1923 hunger and from their distress shout like crazy for some kind of solution, it does not figure in. That foreign claws tear at unprotected German borders, it leaves unspoken. That the threat of the end has grinned over Germany since the ruinous day when the masters of the new German conditions smashed a fighting army and defiled a proud Hag; that shame and rage glowed in proud hearts for years until a decision flamed up from these fires, has no room in the cool logic of these legal doctrines. When the accused could still fight out there for their image of a new Reich, their enemies were the many powers of German decay. Now, in this hall, they find themselves before a new enemy: their opponent is the paragraph with its claim to regulate according to rigid law life, in which since ancient times only the creative passions of great men of deeds are valid.

But when then in the afternoon Adolf Hitler states his position on the indictment, with his words he draws precisely the worlds into the field of vision of which the prosecutor’s indictment did not have the vaguest idea. With a single blow, the impressions have transformed themselves: no longer the pale shadow of paragraphs and pandects, rather the swaying words of the political shaper dominate in the hall.

Adolf Hitler begins with great calm. But already his first sentence points to a historical tension, which almost nobody in Germany feels yet and in which nonetheless the fate of this republic lies most innately determined: „It seems amazing that a human being who for almost six years was accustomed to blind obedience now suddenly comes into conflict with the state and its constitution…”. The decisive problem of the whole post-war period has here in a single sentence been thrust into a bright light: that the prevailing condition of Weimar remains so tremendously distant from a genuine state that it must trigger the rebellion of all truly creative people. Where in Germany did there exist a more passionate will for state and power and clear folk structure than in Adolf Hitler? And where did there exist worse insults and slanders of these highest values of a community than among the Weimar mighty, who had the audacity to cloak themselves with the claims of any genuine state despite their secret hostility toward the state? It was not otherwise: the will for genuine state power and strong public order lived from the start on only among those whom one dragged before the court as national rebels and dangerous desperados. The powers, however, who set themselves up us judges, had never known the creative passion, the strict breeding, the lofty discipline from which the „rebels’’ drew their formative energies. They had become great through treason against the state; they lived from continued dissolution of all order; they practiced an ongoing subversion of the community idea. If there existed anywhere in Germany these eternally same values, which were always necessary for the establishment of a state, then solely among the outlawed opposition, which had never accepted the decay. It was no wonder that already just this basic position gave the accused Adolf Hitler immeasurable superiority over the passionless world of the paragraph. It was nonetheless surprising, however, how he immediately exploited this inner superiority for an attack of historical rank. He has just spoken for a few minutes when the fact began to show itself that made this trial become one of the most memorable political trials: namely that the accused who were called to account by a doubtful political system rose up to become merciless accusers against the same system and to encounter it with such blows that looking back it loses the moral foundations for its indictment. The speech with which Adolf Hitler is supposed to defend himself becomes a dismissal without pity.

Will he crawl to the cross and disavow his struggle, which, after all, has failed? That is what the wise men in all camps hoped. But each sentence of this speech becomes a grip on the decisive leverage points of German distress; and beyond that, each sentence becomes an attack against the sources of the great decline.

„I came to Vienna as a seventeen-year-old human being and learned to study and observe three important questions there: the social question, the race problem and finally the Marxist movement. I left Vienna as an absolute anti-Semite, as mortal enemy of the whole Marxist world-view, as pan-German in my political thinking.

„The Marxist movement is a life question of the German nation. By Marxism, I mean a doctrine that in principle rejects the value of personality, which replaces energy with mass and hence has a destructive effect on all of cultural life… Germany’s future means the destruction of Marxism. Either this race tuberculosis thrives and then Germany dies off, or it is expelled from the folk body, then Germany will thrive…”.

„The German revolution (of 1918) was a revolution and hence successful high treason [against the state], which, after all, is known to be not punishable…. What happened in 1918 in Germany, however, was not high treason, rather betrayal of country, which can never be forgiven. For us, that was a vile crime against the German folk, a stab in the back of the German nation…”

The blows struck home. The Marxist press will howl in a wild chorus. A flow of insults on the following day will be the answer, arrogant, impertinent, with the screaming shamelessness of the exposed. The reporters in the hall jot down the insults for the next day’s lead article: „November criminals around Ludendorff, big mouth Hitler, politically bankrupt people, criminal dilettantes…” But the Führer continues to speak.

He portrays the rise of the party from the band of the first seven unknown men. He reports about the creation of the first S.A.: „For the man who is willing to fight with intellectual weapons, we have intellect, for the others, the fist.” He glows with rekindled shame over the pitiful bearing of the system politicians in the Ruhr struggle. And he finally comes to speak about Bavaria as well and the national movement under the protection of the Bavarian government authorities: for the first time, the name Kahr is mentioned. Hitler’s first sentence about him is a verdict: „I became acquainted with Mr. Kahr in 1920. He made the impression on me that he was an honourable official, but that was all.” And after a clear portrayal of the highly tense situation in late summer 1923. including all the essential threads, an equally annihilating verdict over Lossow comes out: “A military commander in an army with only seven divisions. Whoever has one division in hand and rebels against his chief, must be determined to take it to the end, or he is a common mutineer and rebel.”

The relationship of the forces which in autumn 1923 wrestled for the fate of Bavaria and Reich, is very sharply outlined. And now the direction of the thrust also becomes visible: for the first time, he refers to the separatist threat, in which Bavaria tottered for months: The struggle such as Dr. von Kahr wages, is a crime, unless one is determined from the first minute on to integrate oneself into the German national uprising… The path of looking around for foreign help is for every German the most shameless one that exists… Lossow thought in the Ruhr struggle that there were two possibilities: either to dress the resistance in an energetic form, or, if the thing collapsed, each individual state must see how it got through; that would naturally lead to the Reich ‘s disintegration. Back then, I was very moved inwardly by that; for my position is: rather be hanged, if Germany turns Bolshevik, than to perish under French saber rule.”

They must have been fearful minutes when Hitler spoke about these dangers. And the listeners, moved, again and again felt from his words the desperate struggle that back then had to have been waged for the decisions of the triumvirate Kahr-Lossow-Seisser: how Hitler again and again made attempts to push them back from the Reich threatening plans; how at each discussion he struggled anew for the shared German solution; and how he finally thought he could believe that the three gentlemen were in full agreement with his own direction of will. From the words with which he portrayed the final result of these conferences, from these bitter, disappointed, accusing words, one senses the feeling of salvation that obviously prevailed within him when the unity of views seemed achieved: „The fact was: Lossow, Kahr and Seisser had the same goal as we, namely to eliminate the Reich government in its present international and parliamentarian orientation and to replace it with an anti-parliamentarian government. If indeed our whole enterprise would have been high treason, then Lossow, Seisser and Kahr must have been committing high treason with us the whole time, since during all these months nothing else was discussed than that for which we now sit in the defendant’s chair…”.

A movement of amazement passes through the hall. What consequences will these words have?

Initially, they had no other consequences than that they revealed the direction of the second thrust that the accused planned to make in this trial. If the one line of their offensive defence aimed at Bavarian separatism, then this second one followed the daring, yes, adventurous sounding idea of forcing the accusers themselves onto the defendant’s seat. The plan is unique. Again and again, Hitler presents it to the court:

„We did not threaten in the Bürgerbräukeller, rather I reminded the gentlemen what they had promised us the whole time, and they offered to draw the consequences, whereby, however, I foresaw that they would go to prison with us, if the thing fails – an opinion, however, that I must correct today… It is impossible that I committed high treason, for that could not lie in the events of November 8th, rather in all the negotiating and bearing of the previous months – and then I am amazed that those who did the same thing as I do not sit next to me… If we committed high treason, then Kahr, Lossow, Seisser and an endless number of others did the same thing. I deny any guilt, as long as my company is not supplemented with those gentlemen who helped prepare things down to the most minute detail!”

The attack continues. A barrage of reprimands, refutations, facts flies at the opponent and covers him. Bit by bit, it has smashed his carefully constructed positions into pieces. The hardest will, the boldest intellect from the front of attackers has already on the first day whipped the charge forward, and the companions only have to make sure to catch up with the charging ardour. The attack had been launched from a quite unfavourable basis. But now it has already penetrated deep into the enemy zone. Overwhelmed, the observers follow the unaccustomed collision. Their feelings are already leaning toward the leader of the charge, who now at the conclusion of his attack signal declares in triumphant defiance:

„I feel myself as best German who has wanted the best for the German folk.”

It is not possible to subject the justification speeches of the other defendants to a thorough examination. Decisive is that the companions as well without exception charged behind the Führer. Decisive is furthermore the courage of the thinking that dominated them all uniformly. Seldom has the court seen a similar loyalty to one’s own deed, which has nonetheless suddenly been declared a crime: not one who does not declare that he would repeat this „crime” at any hour, because Germany demands that from him. Seldom as well did a group of defendants confront its judges in a similar competition for the responsibility: Adolf Hitler had already declared in his speech that he as leader demanded sole responsibility. Now his companions claimed responsibility for their own decisions with the same passion. There are no requests for forgiveness. There is only the attack in the same front.

Again and again, both lines of attack in this battle also become visible: the attack against the not accused fellow traitors Kahr, Lossow and Seisser, and the attack against the diverse regionalist tendencies in Bavarian politics.

Most of the accused had for years already played a leading role in Bavarian post-war politics – some as high officials of the state, others as officers, still others as leaders of paramilitary formations, which, after all, since the days of the local militias had also always worked very closely with the political groups around Kahr. Their testimony then put a spotlight on the background of previous Bavarian politics; and again and again they let it be seen that these politics – exactly like the action of the defendants themselves – had been glaringly directed against the Weimar constitution: yes, after all. only the common front against the Weimar system had brought the National Socialist opposition into a unified front with the Bavarian government men. But now that Weimar had the upper hand in the conflict with Hitler, the Bavarian „battle companions” had defected to the victorious camp. How shameful for them and their political honour the memories of the joint actions against Weimar, the „misfortune” of yesterday, the „legal power” of today, is now put to them from all sides – by men, who after November 9th did not crawl in homage before the Weimar presidential seat, rather who remained true to the old political conviction and the old oaths and manly words.

Pöhner, Bavarian judiciary official, for years in close political contact with Kahr, testifies: „I learned to highly value Kahr, since he, like I, was of the opinion that what had played out in November 1918 had been a crime… I was (on November 8th) very pleased that somebody had finally been found who possessed the courage to pull along with himself the gentlemen who long already planned what the new government in the Reich had long since decided… I do not hide my whole political position. If what you accuse me of is high treason — I have been engaged in this business for five years already!

And a defence attorney, who asks him whether Kahr in the year 1920 and again in 1922 had taken very illegal paths in order to come to power, receives the answer with laughter: „Yes, I was there, after all!”

Lieutenant-Colonel Kriebel jumps to his side as he relates the same matter, where Kahr had ensured himself leadership in Bavaria: „Back then I earned my state coupe spurs.” But Kriebel passes a different verdict over the time when Kahr, in possession of power, began to switch to „legal” circumstances: that „Kahr is a man of the open backdoor, who does not draw the final consequences from a decision.” And at the conclusion of his examination, quite agitated: „I feel no kind of regret to have helped, I am proud that I have done it, because I have long already loathing for men who have spoken with the mouth to do something, but who have never done something”.

Robert Wagner, First Lieutenant in the Reichswehr, also attests of General Lossow that he has done nothing other than the struggle against the Weimar constitution, to which he had sworn an oath, and which he brushed aside in a coup d’état manner when he had his own division swear allegiance to Bavaria: „General Seeckt called Lossow’s action a breach of oath… But we saw in Lossow the new Yorck.”

Exactly so docs Frick remember Kahr’s very illegal political past, who does not fit his present sudden loyalty at all: „During the Kapp revolt I got close to Kahr, who on March 13th and 14th played an outstanding role…”.

All of them then also go into extensive presentations about the days immediately before November 8th. when one conference followed the other and each ended with the realization that Kahr, Lossow and Seisser wanted to push their already long made break with Berlin to a violent confrontation as soon as the desired opportunity to strike just presented itself. When the examination of the defendants has ended, there can no longer be any doubt that the three winners of November 9th have been hard hit in their present assurances of loyalty: that their loyalty to the constitution, which they now put on display so sedulously, did not always inspire them; that even a few months ago they were totally one with the accused in hostility against the constitution, for whose benefit they now level their indictment. The day’s media waits with suspense, since the most important counterparts of the defendants, the gentlemen Kahr, Lossow and Seisser, must present themselves to the court as witnesses. This expectation becomes all the livelier when one of the defending attorneys summaries the result of the previous proceedings and then in the process also refers to the various secret negotiations that the trial has already brought with it. After all, the public had always been excluded, when „state security” appeared to be threatened by the testimony. But it had again and again been guessed that often enough an incrimination of the three Bavarian government men was connected to these testimonies. Now on the day when witness examination begins, the defence hurls its attacking statement at the court: „These witnesses, who appear as crown witnesses against the accused, were the wire-pullers of the whole enterprise, so that it is impossible that the people who instigated the whole enterprise now appear as witnesses against those who carried out the enterprise”.

Here the plan is very sharply outlined, according to which the accused led the great campaign for their justification and for smashing the opponent’s positions.

But now the examination of the defendants has made yet another main question pops up, which makes the public hold its breath: each of the defendants had in his testimony also supported the thrust against Reich threatening Bavarian separatism introduced by Adolf Hitler.

Ludendorff wielded the sharpest weapon in this struggle, when he referred to the again and again appearing machinations of the politicized clergy – to the lurking spider in the separatist web that spread itself out in Germany. It had been forgotten all too quickly, after all, how closely the Centrum had since its existence stood in one front with all Reich threatening forces. And in the confusion of the post-war period it had also been relatively little noted that the leading Centrum prelates and leading men of the clergy led Bavarian Folk Party had again and again in very incriminating negotiations become involved with the French and with separatists, with conspirators for a new Rhine Federation and with proponents of a Catholic Danube monarchy. Ludendorff pulls these dark plans into the light, presents in broad outline their history since Bismarck’s days, shows how they become alive again since the November revolt. All the questionable figures of the separatist underworld in Bavaria are conjured up – the Bothmers and Leoprechtings, the Fuchs and Machhaus, the French agent Richert and the French emissary Dard, who let his money flow through all possible dark channels. Kahr’s politics are outlined: he spoke „of strong states in a strong Reich, while I had spoken of healthy states in a strong Reich.” The whole dangerousness of this position pops up when the general brands the words of the „temporary separation of Bavaria from the Reich”: „I have always viewed the idea of a temporary separation of Bavaria from the Reich as high treason.” But the great question about the wire-pullers and beneficiaries of such politics always stands above it. And this question always finds the answer in an old historical realization: „The creation of a powerless Germany was the result of ultra-Catholic politics such as they put in an appearance at the Reich foundation and then during the world war”.

The general presents example after example. The signal terrifies the separatist and politicized clerical front. From the Cardinal’s palace in Munich to the smallest chapel residence, from Rome to San Francisco, the ecclesia militans feels hit at a nerve. Its press howls…

This is how the attack unfolds across the broadest front through the defendants when witness examination finally begins. The court had already questioned many witnesses about a series of details. Then the day came on which the examination of the main witnesses Kahr, Lossow and Seisser will start.

What typifies the testimonies of the three gentlemen is initially an amazing agreement in the testimonies down to individual formulations. One clearly recognizes that shared discussions have preceded, in which the statements were coordinated. Whether it is about the controversial scenes in the Bürgerbräukeller, where Lossow, according to his testimony and that of his companions, claims to have issued the motto „comedy games”; where the talk is about the measures of the witnesses immediately after the Bürgerbräukeller assembly; where the inner stand on the enterprises is put to question at all: in all these statements the testimonies of the three gentlemen betray a careful common revision. Nobody can claim that the gentlemen faced the examination unbiased, all the less so, since Kahr namely again and again tries contrary to trial regulations to read his testimony from a brought along memorandum.

But even aside from such individual questions, the gentlemen show a noticeable agreement in the great political line of their presentations. The position of the back then ruling circles on National Socialism itself downright appears in them.

Above all, it is conspicuous that with amazing boldness they equate their own mortal person with the eternity of the state. Lossow, aggressively: „If Kahr and the bearers of the state’s power sectors are with all means made despicable, that is not directed against our person, rather against the state idea and the authority of the state. Not Kahr and his companions are injured here, rather the state… Who gave the order to fire at the Feldherrnhalle? I can answer the question exactly: the state gave the order!”

Kahr also gives himself airs: „My activity was devoted above all to Bavarian interests, the preservation of state authority and the establishment of the idea of state power. Only the state and state power may be master in the land and one clearly hears behind that his old self-conscious claim: „But state power is embodied in we!”

Seisser confirms this claim: „Kahr wanted to gather the patriotic forces under his own command, under „unconditional subordination to state authority.”

But they all forget that in November 1923 any state authority was already long smashed to pieces and that any national order and all faith in the folk could only be maintained through the work of the defendants, whom one now endeavoured with all means to portray as criminals against the state.

Kahr’s, Lossow’s and Seisser’s second claim went that they had indeed wanted to form a new government in the Reich, but naturally only in a totally legal way. While the defendants again and again portrayed and through witnesses proved that the three gentlemen as well must have thought of a violent advance and always instructed the Kampfbund [fighting federation] in this sense, the three gentlemen now claimed that they had always endeavoured for a totally peaceful change of the government in the Reich. A confusing shift of all previously valid political concepts hence then set in: if one had spoken of a „march to Berlin” in 1923, one now explained that as totally harmless, that it was just about a soft „pressure on Berlin” or even just a „spiritual rejuvenation”; if one had had speakers from the most diverse associations in 1923 speak all through the land without contradiction of the necessity of a national „dictatorship” and again and again affirmed this demand, one made these clear and hard words harmless in that one speaks of a „directorship” that was supposed to be formed back then; if Lossow had declared himself ready for any coup d’état, if it just offered a chance of success, he now defines this clearly violent term with soft formulations, which completely conform to the parliamentarian feelings of the Weimar world and could not offend even the most loyal Republican. No concept remains unblurred during the testimonies of the three gentlemen, no shared plan of 1923 unaltered.

For an endless flood of insults and accusation forms the third trait in the examination of the three main prosecution witnesses. Each according to the temperament of the three gentlemen, they pounce more or less vigorously upon the defendants. Kahr weighs his utterances most carefully: he gladly conceals himself in the cloak of contempt put on display, when he, for example, instead of immediately answering one of Hitler’s questions, turns to the chief judge as a mediator or even merely addresses the speaker’s podium. Seisser formulates his attacks sharply, cleverly concealed, but in a dialectic so insulting that the Führer once mutters the word „shamelessness”. Lossow, however, rages around cursing in the courtroom as if he were passing time in a barracks courtyard dressing down a company of recruits. Already during his extensive speak he had coarsely insulted: „I noticed that Hitler lacked the sense of reality, the measure for what is useful and achievable… I often declared that Hitler is not capable of leadership of a dictatorship. But I agreed that he could be the political drummer… Hitler is fixated on the word brutality, I have never heard the word sentimentality from him.” And when the general must in cross examination answer to even very sensitive questions, he quickly falls into such agitation that he totally loses his nerves. Agitated, biting, barking, he throws his answers at the defence, rattling his spurs he runs back and forth in front of the witness seat, each answer, instead of remaining objective, is seasoned with a raging after-taste. In this mood he then encounters Hitler as well, who at various important problems – the question of dictatorship or directorate, about violent march or peaceful „pressure”, about Lossow’s participation in the preparations for the universally planned „coup d’état” – intervenes in the examination with sharply outlined questions. When Hitler attempts to correct that shameful accusation that he broke his word of honour on November 8th, it comes to a clash that has become famous.

Hitler, with concise statement: „November 8th was the execution of a long-discussed plan.”

Lossow: „Seisser has raised the objection right from the start: ‘Between us stands your breech of word of honour.’ You have replied: ‘Forgive me, it is in the interest of the fatherland.”‘

Hitler, outraged by the ongoing insults, in sharp attack: „Was that the sentimental or the brutal Hitler, who requested forgiveness?”

Lossow, totally uncontrolled: „That was neither the sentimental nor the brutal Hitler, rather the Hitler with the guilty conscience!”

Hitler, quite agitated: „I need no guilty conscience in regard to breech of word of honour, such as of which Mr. von Lossow accuses me, all the less so, as the only one who broke his word of honour was Mr. Von Lossow, and indeed on May 1st!”

Lossow storms to the door and slams it closed behind him menacingly. The trial is adjourned, because the witness has through his illegal departure removed himself from examination…

The trial escalates to such dramatic scenes several times. Specifically, there are clashes when the public is supposed to be excluded again. That occurs regularly, when the further testimony will in all probability prove things that incriminate the witnesses Kahr, Lossow and Seisser. Regarding the question what was the nature of the enterprise that they themselves planned, nothing has hence been publicly determined through the trial.

Kahr’s examination as well has not provided any decisive open answers here. If Lossow had provided a unique example of the attempt with which one could behave so crudely in front of a court, then Kahr presented the equally unique role of a man who in a hardly conceivable manner refused all dangerous answers at all. As soon as he encountered the question of the background to November 9th’which proved that he himself and his cronies were most intimately entangled in the anti-republican plans, he held ready the same pitiful answer – dozens of times, with an amazing courage for (light: I cannot remember – or: I am bound by official secrets – or: I am not allowed to say. Dozens of times, tricky questions pelt down on him, and dozens of times, he refuses to reply – an unprecedented image of a lost human being, with lowered head, regrettable victim of his own inadequacies, trembling down to his deepest soul with the feverish wish to just as quickly as possible escape this torture. When his examination has ended the world knows that here a man who once felt himself to be the called representative of the state has collapsed in a humiliating manner with all his great claims…

But this is not the place to deal with the details of the lines of questions to which the witness examination was devoted. Already before the announcement of the verdict, as the decisive result of the trial, the fact came out, which, after all, after an almost ten-year long struggle then experienced the same historical justification, that namely inner right, the greater moral weight, the great historical courage for decision and for responsibility stood solely on the side of the accused. The representatives of the accusing state had, perhaps with the most honest intentions, defended an inwardly rotten world. Kahr’s pitiful fall was a symbol of that, and Lossow’s noisy trump playing was only the sign of the weakness of an order that was not firm enough within itself in order to fend off an attack with calm certainty. At any rate, the action-readiness of the defendants showed that the instinct for history-shaping values was more alive in them than in the called representatives of state authority. The courageous have always triumphed over the hesitant, straightforwardness over evasion, the man over the bureaucrat.

Above all, the trial had clarified that the many honour slighting accusations against the Führer and his companions were defamation. It furthermore clarified that the three main accusers had for months in eternal hesitation discussed with the defendants anti-constitutional plans, which the defendants alone in their own way had the courage to achieve. It finally clarified that the actual plans of the three government men were probably aimed at different and highly dangerous final goals than the decisions of the „rebels”; but the final disclosures about precisely this question, the most interesting one of the whole trial, do not lie in the protocols of the public, rather only of the closed proceedings. When witness examination is closed and when the prosecution and defence have tested themselves with sharp juristic weapons, the historical result stands firm: the enterprise of November 8th and 9th had to come given the situation back then, it was the release of a tension that had become unbearable, the daring incision into the centre of a ravaging fever that convulsed the body of the German folk. An unspeakable confusion had dominated the period before November 9th, chaos, plans, dissatisfaction, projects, violent, talk. An energetic will intervened sharply into this turmoil – and the tangled, drifting, dangerous forces of unrest and sickness already arranged themselves.

So November 9th had brought clarity in any case. As the day of the announcement of the verdict approached, the historically so decisive question does not aim so much at the degree of punishment. It is different: which of the opposing forces will preserve for the future the ability to transform the experiences and knowledge of the year 1923, and the decisions of the trial, into creative impulses for future political formations?

The last days of the trial have provided the answer to this question to every awaken and believing human being. On the 19th day of trial, the prosecutor in an extensive speech gives the basis for the requested punishment. On the 24th day of the trial, Adolf Hitler in his closing speech once more summarizes for himself and his friends realization and obligation. In the speeches, both opposing historical worlds encounter each other, which will still struggle for ten more years for the final result.

The prosecutor’s feelings are conflicting. As a human being, he does not deny how deeply the defendants have moved him in their purity, their affirmation and their national passion. Sometimes it seems as if he wants to affirm his goal with an unconditional Yes. But the office suffocates the moved human being, to represent the prosecution for the state, in a tangle of paragraphs and doctrines, which give no room for human affirmation. Indeed, he admits what was the decisive impulse for the defendants’ deed: „Certainly, what happened in November 1918 was a crime of high treason”; and this confession is amazing. Nonetheless, he believes that he should protect the Weimar state: „The Weimar constitution forms the foundation of the Reich. Opposition against the constitution, even if it may appear justified for national reasons, must never lead to one trying to change or eliminate the constitution by force.” This speech is dominated by the dangerous doctrine that any political system, insofar as it simply possesses outer power, is also good and God given, inviolable and unalterable. A rigid formalism forbids any rebellion, even it is being ever so necessary for the life of the folk. The bond to a dead constitutional regulation appears more obligating than the burning faith in the future of the nation, which feels this constitutional regulation to be a rope around all its limbs. The prosecutor formulates his demand quite sharply to affirm every right of even an unhealthy governmental condition insofar as it is simply outwardly covered by a constitution: „It is a dangerous illusion, which has formed in the world of ideas of the nationalist activist circles, that everything that happens out of patriotism and in the interest of the national cause is also simply allowed, even if one thereby still so very much violates valid laws and the legal order.” The naked consequence is clear: „legal order” stands above the well- being of the folk, even if it would be exploited by a Bolshevik regime…

In contrast, it will remain eternally memorable how Adolf Hitler countered this cool doctrine with a new political faith. His speech is attuned to a mighty chord: a condition is only good and just, if it serves the folk; a constitution may be legally ever so good: but if it harms the folk, every rebellion against it is sacred right and even more sacred obligation. At the hour when he and his political work were supposed to be smashed, he preached more fervently and compelling than ever before the inalienable right of a betrayed folk for a creative national revolution.

He stands before the count as an accused. But every word that he speaks into the hall, into the open hearts of moved human beings, becomes an indictment, which passes its verdicts on the strength of historical right. The Germany of the November crime is surrendered to his lashing will.

Has the revolt of 1918 benefited the German folk? Has it through construction and daring formation legalized the fact that it emerged through high treason? The answer, which the speaker draws from an observation of the German present, paints apocalyptic images:

„The failure of the new masters in the economic sphere is so horrible that the masses are driven onto the streets: the soldiers, who are supposed to fire into the masses, however, do not want to constantly shoot at the folk… What all did the revolution prophesize politically? One heard about the folks’ right of self- determination, about the League of Nations, about the self-government of the folk. And what came? A world peace on our field of corpses… Self-determination for every Negro tribe, but Germany does not count as a Negro tribe. We have become the pariah in this world. What else are our government organs than the executive organs of our external tyrants? Can anybody say the revolution has succeeded, while the object of the revolution, Germany, perishes?”

Imploring the words, compelling the voice, the hall listens as if enchanted. For weeks, jurists have calculated here brooding, but now suddenly all the distress and the energy, the inexhaustible treasure of faith and the fate of all German desperation are conjured up in this somber room. The files no longer rustle, diligent pens no longer write thick volumes of protocols, fate itself reckons now through this mouth about the rise and the fall of this struggling folk, whose deepest energies have become awake in these raging words that have the courage to examine, to elevate and to pitilessly reject. He fetches them, the destroyers of German authority, who have done their work since the November betrayal, and his speech threatens:

„The young soldiers stand up, who went to their deaths in Flanders with the German national anthem on their lips, and call: You are at fault that we lie here as victims of your crimes. Then the expellees come, who had been driven out, and accuse… Our proud ships lie on the bottom of the sea and accuse those who helped to destroy the pride of a sixty million folk…”

Yes, he makes himself the executor of the humbled living Germans and the betrayed German dead, and stands large like a judge before the countenance of the nation:

„I accuse Ebert, Scheidemann and comrades of treason against the nation and of high treason. I accuse them, because they destroyed a seventy million folk.”

The words swing over listening Germany like the ring of alarm-bells, like a threat that one day the end will dawn for the powers of German decline a different one than the one they themselves are determined to prepare for the leader of the coming uprising.

For that he has been bestowed the leadership office of the German nation, he knows even at the hour when one will send him behind prison walls. And that more stands behind his claim than a vain personal wish, namely the mission of fate and necessity itself, he affirms with bold freedom: „I take the standpoint that the bird must sing, because it is a bird. And a man who has been born for politics must engage in politics, whether he is free or in prison, sits on silken seat or must be satisfied with a hard bench. The fate of his folk will move him from the earliest morning until late into the night. Whoever has been born to be a dictator, which not be pushed back, rather he wants to, he will, himself push forward… Whoever feels called to govern a folk does not have the right to say: if you want me or fetch me, I will go along. Me has the duty to do it.”

Unforgettable words! The world had expected the imploring gestures of a humbled and broken man, but now it must experience that this persecuted man more masterfully than ever reaches for the leadership of the folk; that his will for power has only become greater. An unbounded certainty resonates in his words: „In my eyes it would be pitiful to plead for something of which I know that posterity will give it to me anyway… What stood before my eyes was from the first day on was to become a thousand times more than a [government] minister. I wanted to become the destroyer of Marxism. And I will fulfil this task!”

For a long time now, this speech has no longer been a speech of justification. It has become a stern affirmation, and now it totally soars to the blaze of a prophecy, devout, unerringly certain in the validity of the proclaimed word:

„The deed of November 8th has not failed. It would have failed, if a mother had come to me and had said: You also have my child on your conscience. But I may assure you: no mother came. Quite the opposite, thousands of others have come and have joined our ranks. That is the visible sign of the success of November 8th, that in its aftermath the youth has arisen like a flood and joins together. That is the greatest gain of November 8th, that it is has not led to depression, rather has contributed to greatly enthusing the folk. I believe that the hour will come when the masses who today stand on the street with our swastika flag will unite with those who on November 9th fired upon us. I believe that the blood will not eternally separate us… The army that we have formed grows faster from day to day, from hour to hour. Precisely in these days I have the proud hope that the hour will one day come when these wild throngs become battalions, the battalions regiments, the regiments divisions, that the old cockades will be pulled out of the dirt, and that the old flags will again flatter up front, that then reconciliation comes at the eternal final judgment of God, to which we are willing to step. Then, from our bones and from our graves, the voice of the court will speak which alone is called on to judge us. For not you, my sirs, pronounce the verdict over us, the eternal court of history pronounces the verdict… That court will judge us, the General Quartermaster of the old army, his officers and soldiers, who as Germans wanted the best for their folk and fatherland, who want to fight and die You may pronounce us guilty a thousand times, the goddess of the eternal court of history will laughingly tear up the prosecutor’s request and the court’s verdict: for she acquits us!”

When the court pronounces the verdict the following day, the republic has apparently triumphed over the captured high traitors. Adolf Hitler, together with Weber, Kriebel and Pöhner, is sentenced to five years imprisonment. But while the chief judge reads aloud the verdict in the hall, outside on the streets, watched by police lines, thousands and thousands wait for the opportunity to perhaps see one of the convicted men, so that they can cheer him: cheer like only an enflamed folk cheers a victor. The hearts of thousands burn brightly. Each of them carries on his faith. Each of them is an invincible force of loyalty and affirmation. Each of them is an incalculable threat to the condemning republic.

Then one led the „high traitors” to the fortress at Lech. And the victors were happy that the bearers of German unrest would supposedly for years be shut off from the only places where they could have an effect. But again, the calculation proved itself wrong. For while the system now proceeded, with all tricks and all terror, to put into effect the Dawes Plan, the new pariah pact that one had tried to force upon the folk with golden talk, in Landsberg a tenacious will forged new weapons. But behind the walls, a restless prisoner walks up and down and dictates a book. A time will come when the system realizes with horror that this book represents a most dangerous weapon: that here the weapons are stockpiled that will smash all old walls; that here the foundation stones are hewn from which one day a new order will rise over Germany. They still mock and revile, the powers of right and left, the reds and the blacks [conservative Catholic Centrum] and the masters of big business. But with a solemn ardour, in the solitude of his cell, an imprisoned man pieces together the plan that will one day smash the rotten and shape the new. Like from the trumpets of Jericho, it echoes in the Jew related world: Victory, victory, the enemy has been destroyed. But the traders have never known that danger still threatens, if just one single brave heart carries its faith forward like a flag.

Hitler, the Workless and the Needy

Source: Germany’s Hitler (Chapter XIII) – by Heinz A. Heinz

In the autumn of his first year as Chancellor Adolf Hitler issued what was at once an order and an announcement, “This winter no one must starve or freeze in Germany.“

Lots of people scarcely took the words for sober earnest, they saw no possibility of them being made good. Indeed how should this state of things be realised; the burdens and deprivations of the late War still weighed heavily on all the world; never had it been possible hitherto that people should neither starve nor freeze to death in winter!

One might safely say that such an ideal never would have been practicable, had not a man directed affairs in Germany who knew how to bring into the sphere of practical politics that simple Christian charity one to another which the churches have been preaching throughout the ages.

Hitler’s motto had long been “Love your neighbour more than yourself. Be ready, always, for the least of your own, to sacrifice your belongings and your life.“ It is known, of course, that Hitler accepts no income from his Chancellorship, but directs that this money should go towards the relief of unemployment. It may not equally well be known that during the winter 1933-34, when the sales of his book had reached the peak, the whole of this increment was also ear-marked for the poor.

The Germans have a special gift for organisation. Hence it seemed eminently practical to organise the “Winter Relief Work” (Winterhilfswerk) by means of the Party machine. It was extraordinary to see how everybody took advantage of this to bring his own personal sacrifice and exertions into line with the Führer’s design and behest. No fewer than one and a half million people of position and influence threw themselves whole-heartedly into this great effort, to say nothing of the rank and file who also did their utmost and of those who willingly gave their mite.

The scope of this, the biggest philanthropic effort ever made at one time by one people, was so all-embracing that, enlisting as it did the co-operation of great and small alike, it would require three times as much space at our command merely to outline it. Some idea of it, however, we must endeavour to convey for several reasons, first, to show—if it really should need showing— how and why it is that Hitler holds the trust and love of the German people as a whole; and, second, to claim for him that he lost no time at all after coming to power, in proceeding to make good the promises of his Party programme.

(Since the bulk of this book is, after all, to be limited, it may be that but little space will remain for even the slightest sketch of what more—in a dozen directions— Adolf Hitler has already done under this second heading. Every one of the social enterprises he has undertaken for the amelioration of living conditions and lack-of-outlook in Germany would require a chapter in itself.)

In no smallest village in Germany, nay, in no poorest cot is something not done, something not spared, to aid this nation-wide work. During the first five years of the National Socialist regime approximately 2 310 000 000 marks were devoted to it in this way. Not, by any means, that the Winterhilfsarbeit (Winter-aid-work) could merely be appraised in terms of money. Nor could it be measured in terms of material comfort. Its value for the union and solidarity of the reawakened German spirit was above all these.

Given, then, this fount of money, let us very briefly enumerate the numerous channels into which its flow was directed.

Adolf Hitler called upon everyone who had a job of any sort, big or small, to set aside weekly or monthly some small saving for the poor. It was a request, not an order, for Hitler knew well enough that very many people were in no position to spare a single pfennig. All who possibly can, come forward with their “bit“ for the “Battle with Hunger and Cold.“ The directors of the whole enterprise set it an excellent example, and the rank and file willingly prove their Socialism in response.

Every Sunday during the winter hundreds and thousands of collectors are to be seen selling tags in the street to the same end.

Through this source alone enormous sums are gathered in, and very often other results come from these tag days. Case after case occurs of their leading to employment for the unemployed. For instance, in the Harz Mountains in Thuringia there are little towns whose inhabitants live by glass blowing. In 1933 unemployment was rife among them. So, the directors of the Winter-Aid thought it a good thing to have tags made of glass and gave this welcome order throughout the district. It resulted in months of work for three thousand poor glass workers in Thuringia.

The whole „brain wave „ was so much appreciated by the public that when these glass tags appeared upon the streets there was a rush for them. In three days over twenty-five million were sold out! Could any better proof be adduced than this of how truly National Socialism concerns itself with the needs of even the smallest of the German workers?

Dr. Goebbels, one of the most genial and versatile of the men round Hitler, did not fail to bring his bright wits to bear upon the problems of the Winter-Aid. He it was who conceived the idea of the „Eintopfgericht“ —the One-Pot-Dinner. Every German, especially every one blessed with a decent share of this world’s goods, is invited throughout the winter on the first Sunday of every month to restrict his main meal to extremely modest (financial) limits, to not more than about 6d., but to give over to a collector who would call for it next day the money which would otherwise have been laid out to furnish the table in the ordinary way. It is as if an Englishman saved what he would have spent on his „cut from-the-joint and two vegs.“ (to say nothing of sweets and coffee), and gave it away and contented himself with—what shall we say?—one good old plate of hash or soup instead, and nothing but that soup.

All the restaurants and hotels are advised to offer on their menus for that first Sunday nothing but this one-dish-dinner, but to charge for it according to usual table d’hôte or á la carte meals. The difference, of course, is to be handed over for the Winter-Aid. The success of this original idea is enormous. Like one man the whole people takes it up.

On every such Sunday over five million marks come to hand this way. Again, in this instance the good of it is not confined to mere material things. The poor see the Better-off willingly depriving themselves to help them, and the impression it makes is of the best for the conception of „national-socialism.“ Dr. Goebbels hit on the happy slogan : „Don’t spend : deny yourself.“ This goes even further. When a rich man gets up from a well-spread table, and gives something to the poor, it is good, but it is not a sacrifice. The sacrifice comes in when a man contents himself with a poor meal instead of a better one, for the sake of giving something away to the man who never feeds well.

Then again—here is a splendid notion! Very often during the winter there is to be heard a cheerful bugling in the streets, and there is to be seen a truckload of soldiers slowly tooling by blowing for all they were worth. What is this? Why—rummage collecting for the needy.

Whenever a hand waves, or a door opens, or someone beckons from window or corner, the truck hastens up, a couple of men leap down and run to obey the summons.

Most people have something they can do without for the Winter-Aid. Here it is an old sofa—quickly handled and bestowed,—here a sewing maching—swung up atop, —here chairs needing mending, here a bundle of clothes, here oddments for repairs of all sorts, here crockery, here spare pots or pans—up and down the streets goes the truck, fanfaronading everywhere, and loading up cheerfully and dexterously like a furniture van !

Workrooms were opened for necessitous girls and women, where these second-hand things can be made over, in return for groceries and shoes.

The happiest Christmas Germany had celebrated for many a long year was the first Christmas of Hitler’s Chancellorship. It was the first Christmas after these so-called heathen Nazis had come to power. Up to this time Christmas in Germany had largely been a purely family affair. The tens of thousands of those who had no family, no relatives, no home, perhaps, merely looked on from afar.

Such a thing as this had to be put a stop to in the National Socialist State. On every Christmas Eve since 1933 the Party sets up, at its own expense, great Christmas trees before many of the church doors, and in many of the open spaces in the cities. These are all aglitter with frost, and burning candles. Tables are spread beneath them. And bands play the immemorial hymns and carols of the season. Speeches are made calling upon those who are keeping up the feast at home, to remember their poorest brethren without, and to show them the good comradeship and brotherliness which is the very essence of National Socialism. This exhortation is closing everywhere with the carol „Stille Nacht, Heilige Nacht.“

Then comes the crush—the rush—the stampede to the tables where hundreds of good folk force their way to lay their gifts and offerings and contributions and goodies for the poor. Mountains of these things pile up until there isn’t an inch of room left to bestow a single gift more. Even the ground under the table and all round is cluttered with presents. When the donors have really done, and are ready to go back home again, these things are distributed to the lonely and the hungry and the friendless who gladly come forward to receive them. In ways like this National Socialism sought to prove itself not merely a political creed but a practical befriending of the people.

The Winter-Aid is signally supported by peasants, tradespeople and all sorts of industries, whose carts and waggons are daily to be seen in long rows at the doors of the offices of the Organisation, unloading goods and comestibles for the poor. No end of vouchers are issued by means of which the poor can obtain the necessaries of existence without having to expend money. So far as statistics can give any idea of what this amounts to— and statistics take no account of the Christmas presents —the following figures tell their own tale :

During the first five years of National Socialism the Winter Relief Work expended:

Coals, about

11 465 000 tons

Potatoes

64 000 000 cwt.

Vegetables

1 000 000 cwt.

Flour

5 000 000 cwt.

Bread

900 000 cwt.

Tinned Goods

850 000 cwt.

Shoes

9 410 000 pairs

Cloth

14 586 000 metres

Garments

2 666 000

Wood

9 700 000 cwt.

Vouchers

163 065 000 marks

The foodstuffs are not always distributed uncooked, but prepared in common kitchens, so that for the equivalent of an English twopence a hungry man can come by a real good meal. In Munich (Population c. 750 000) alone daily portions are served from fifteen great communal kitchens to no less than three thousand poor people. Over eight million of casual labourers, widows, orphans and unemployed are supported through these efforts of the people as a whole.

It is a tough struggle to do it. But it was the wish of the Führer that this great work should be put in hand, that no one in Germany should starve or freeze, and everyone rejoices to help in its fulfilment. While everywhere else in Europe the melancholy spectacle is only too often to be witnessed of hunger marchers parading the streets, of the workless and the despairing losing all patience and breaking out into strife and bitter class hatred, in Germany at least Adolf Hitler has united everyone in an unparalleled gesture of fraternal charity.

MOTHER AND CHILD

The winter 1933-34 passed. But the gigantic machinery of its Aid work remained, and Hitler, who could know no rest until he had given every possible demonstration of what National Socialism meant translated into terms of every-day life—Hitler looked round for the next immediate use to which it could be put.

He was already grappling with the problem of unemployment, and now he turned from the consideration of the father of the family, to that of the mother. This matter of maternity and infant welfare had long been comprised in the Party programme under the heading: “It is the duty of the State to ensure the health of the people through due care bestowed upon mothers and children.“

So work was immediately set on foot to relieve the terrible burdens weighing so heavily upon the poorer families of the land, and especially upon the toiling housewives. The War and its long subsequent list of privations and bitter hardships had told on this most helpless and defenceless portion of the community as heavily as on every other. This new movement in aid of womankind was at once a recognition of the bravery and suffering of the women of the terrible years gone by, and a beacon of hope for the nameless regiment of brave and struggling women of the present time.

First of all the „Mother-and-Child“ Movement undertakes to unearth hidden and secret misery (in order to relieve it), to explore special areas of distress, and to do away with red tape and mistaken economies. The whole thing is to turn upon the personal and individual touch. First the mother of the family is to be supported and helped and then every one of those dependent upon her. The Mother-and-Child work sets itself very few limits.

Needless to say, here again the scope of the enterprise is so wide only the briefest description of it can be given.

The greatest necessity—that of nourishment—calls for the first attention. Better food is to be provided, and sufficient milk for the children. Then comes the question of clothing and adequate laundry facilities. Women with big families swarming round them all day are to receive daily outside help.

The work of the „Arbeitsplatzhilfe“ —roughly translated „The Job Finding Agency” — concerns itself largely with placing out the elder children of these numerous broods in suitable posts as soon as they are fit to earn, and help themselves. The hitherto earning mothers of these families are to be enabled at once to leave factory or business and return home where their duty and their most important work obviously lies. The man it is who must be enabled to go out and work and keep the home.

Through the „Wohnungshilfe „ (Dwelling-house Aid), a mighty attempt has been made to sweep away the slums and miserable areas in great cities. Either such dwellings as already exist have been improved and repaired, or entirely pulled down and rebuilt. Property owners who allow their houses to fall into bad condition, are called to account for it. The unsocial attitude of those who decline to let where there are children is sharply corrected.

The Mother-and-Child Aid looks to it that poor families should have at least what furniture is barely necessary, especially beds. A special activity has been set on foot all through Germany whose slogan is “To each child his own bed.“ And these beds are collected from charitable donors in the same way as similar collections are made from house to house in the winter by the truckloads of trumpet-blowing soldiers.

Another branch of this work is to provide at least four weeks’ country holiday or convalescence for mothers who stand in special need of rest and recuperation. The children are meantime to be cared for in kindergarten. For that short space, at least, the mother is to be wholly free. The home during the interval, is to be kept going by means of the „Frauenarbeitsdienst“ —the organisation which provides women’s work of this kind for just these purposes, so that the husband and father can go on having his meals as usual, without universal domestic upset, just because the main prop and stay of it all— the wife and mother—has had to go away.

During the first five years of the Hitler regime nearly three hundred thousand women were enabled to take a country holiday. Within the same time over three million children were also sent to the country.

Then there are schools for mothers; many of these are run by doctors who make it their business to impart all sorts of essential information about food and health in general to these poor women. They can always resort to medical advice without fear or hesitation, since nothing is more important to a nation than its mothers, its children and its health.

All these measures, these undertakings, these departures and these immediate practicalities spring from the text laid down in Mein Kampf, the text is ruthlessly worked out in the life story of the Führer himself, „Social work must be tackled from below, not from above.“

UNEMPLOYMENT

“We hold it to be the
prime duty of the State to
see that the citizen can
secure means of livelihood.“

Here, once more, we have one of the most important statements of Party undertakings. Hitler has held it of primary importance to combat unemployment by every permissible means devisable by ingenuity and ardent purpose.

This nation-wide struggle postulated immense govern-mental preparations. It could not be tackled piecemeal and by temporary measures. The whole reconstruction was to be built up after Hitler’s own scheme and recommendations, schemes which embraced every sphere of industry, of private and public life. Not a struggle merely, but indeed a mighty campaign against unemployment was launched in Germany. Within few years the victory was obtained over decades-long misery and ever-recurring industrial crises. Every man in the country had to bear his part in this gigantic enterprise. The victory meant nothing less than a stable recovery of industry. A strong State is the guarantor of steady business. Every possible means had been co-ordinated to this end.

The State provided the sinews of war for this struggle, but the German people themselves have also subscribed many millions of marks for the promotion of national industry. In 1933 the Government set aside 4,3 milliards (4 300 000 000 R.M.), in 1934 about 5 milliards to finance schemes of work for the unemployed.

Vast plans were put in hand for the making of canals, for the building of power plants. Nearly all the greater rivers of Germany were harnessed to some productive purpose. By the expenditure of one hundred million marks, one million workmen could be kept employed for an entire month. The work on the Weser, and on the Dortmund-Ems Canal kept twenty thousand men in work for years. Another gigantic canal, begun in 1933, provided work for 1 510 000 days. In the same district between Hanover and Magdeburg one hundred and ten square miles are being brought into cultivation which have hitherto been mere waste or swamp.

In order to secure more land for husbandry in Schleswig-Holstein, two great dams are being con-structed across the Eider River. Thousands are thereby supporting themselves, and a plain of 225 square miles will be reclaimed. The enterprise can well be compared with that of Signor Mussolini on the Pontine Marshes.

The German Government offered to meet 40 per cent of the cost to everyone who built a house or who proposed to carry out reparations and improvements. The result of this step is scarcely to be believed. The building trade, hitherto at a very low ebb, looked up and went ahead surprisingly. And consequently so have all the allied industries. Factories are at work day and night. Since the spring of 1934 not a single skilled man in the building trade was out of work. This flourishing state of affairs repercussed on the machine industry and gave work to again another ten thousand men.

Hitler, himself an ardent motor mechanic, has found the way for a vast revival in the motor-car industry by entirely abolishing the tax. The number of cars on the road doubled in 1933, and is growing continually.

The most important attack on unemployment, how-ever, was delivered when the building of immense new arterial roads was planned on the direct initiative of the Führer. This constitutes the biggest thing ever done yet in this direction. From four to five thousand miles of auto-roads are projected to be built in six directions right across the country. Two will run from north to south, one from Kiel via Hamburg, Bremen, the Schwarzwald to Basle, the other from East Prussia via Berlin and Munich to Vienna. Three of these great roads will run from east to west, one from Frankfurt-Oder, and the other from Breslau to the Rhineland, and one from Saarbrücken via Salzburg to Vienna. This last one is to be called the Nibelungen Road. The sixth of the whole series will run from Hamburg to Breslau. All these roads are being built on the most modern lines.

They are practically all on one grade and in no way interrupted by crossings. Other roads are carried over by bridges. The entire plan requires many years to carry out. The Government has earmarked over two milliards of marks a year towards it. Whole armies of men find employment on it. The project is a proud one, for it not only resembles the great engineering feats of the Romans, but promises to change the face of the entire country for coming generations.

WORK CAMPS

The idea of the Work Camp (which was originally envisaged on volunteer lines, students alone being obliged to attend) also proposed fruitful means of combating unemployment. Over one thousand camps, mostly situated in the country, keep going over two hundred thousand young people at the age of eighteen. Most of them put in no more than half a year of work-service and are then free to take employment elsewhere. They go forth, furnished with certificates, to places awaiting them. Plans have been constructed whereby such an army of workers can be employed for twenty years. The produce so raised will value two milliards of marks a year, and many thousands of new peasant homesteads will be created.

Naturally the work done in these camps is of a supplementary order and is not allowed to compete in the open market with work turned out under ordinary conditions outside. Nor is such work undertaken which could as well be performed by private enterprise. It is the aim and object of these camps to promote facilities for other people, i.e. by the reclamation or improvement of waste land upon which settlements can be founded. The making of new roads, of course, opened up new ground for such a purpose. The settlement building itself is never undertaken by camp workers. The latter confine themselves to forestry, projects of land reclamation from the sea, canals, irrigation and particularly all undertakings which have for their aim the prevention of catastrophic happenings, forest fires, burst dykes, floods and so forth.

All this has proved of great practical utility. The young people in the Work Champs are well trained in the use of their various tools and implements, spades, pikes, shovels, etc., and can be quickly mustered and detailed for a job. Once on the occasion of a huge land-slide on the Saale (a river in Central Germany), a serious disaster was only averted by the immediate mobilisation of young navvies from the nearest Work Camp, who immediately set to work to set things to rights. Many a village has been saved from extinction by fire by the exertions of such organised workers, and immense consequent misery avoided.

The campers themselves are willing and devoted enough. Each man knows that his work benefits the community at large, and that he is therefore carrying out the fundamental principles of National Socialism. Hitler’s worthy pronouncement, „There is only one nobility, the nobility of work,“ sustains these labourers through the heat and the toil of the longest day.

Life in a Labour Camp is not in the least modelled on the military plan. The workers rise at five in summer, and at six in winter. Half an hour’s exercise or sport precedes tubbing and breakfast. Then comes parade and the hoisting of the camp flag for the day. This resembles the Swastika Flag only instead of the hooked cross in the white circle it displays a spade and a couple of ears of wheat. The whole is symbolic and recalls Frederick the Great’s fine saying: „He who toils to make two ears of wheat grow where there was only one before, does more for his country than a general who wins a redoubtable victory.“

After this parade the workers betake themselves to their various employments; the volunteers down tools at the end of a seven-hours’ spell. Then comes a wash, and the midday meal eaten, naturally, in common. The food is good and everyone can have as much as he requires. An hour and a half’s “knock-off“ ensues. The afternoon is taken up by a couple of hours of sport, and an hour’s instruction in civics. The evening is passed in singing songs, and in reading aloud, etc. etc. Two or three evenings a week each man can call his own up to ten o’clock. Tattoo is at ten: everyone must then be in quarters.

The Work Camp brings all classes together. The student is set just the same jobs as anyone else. The hope is that thirty years hence there will be no more intellectuals or officials in Germany who have not passed through the school of manual work side by side with the everyday workman.