Der Stürmer

The official blog of the site "Der Stürmer" – http://der-stuermer.org

Month: January, 2018

The Day of the Aryan Awakening

Source of the text: How Hitler Consolidated Power in Germany and Launched A Social Revolution by general Leon Degrellé

We have the power. Now our gigantic work begins.“

Those were Hitler’s words on the night of January 30, 1933, as cheering crowds surged past him, for five long hours, beneath the windows of the Chancellery in Berlin.

His political struggle had lasted 14 years. He himself was 43, that is, physically and intellectually at the peak of his powers. He had won over millions of Germans and organized them into Germany’s largest and most dynamic political party, a party girded by a human rampart of hundreds of thousands of storm troopers, three fourths of them members of the working class. He had been extremely shrewd. All but toying with his adversaries, Hitler had, one after another, vanquished them all.

Standing there at the window, his arm raised to the delirious throng, he must have known a feeling of triumph. But he seemed almost torpid, absorbed, as if lost in another world.

It was a world far removed from the delirium in the street, a world of 65 million citizens who loved him or hated him, but all of whom, from that night on, had become his responsibility. And as he knew – as almost all Germans knew at the of January 1933 – that this was a crushing, an almost desperate responsibility.

Seventy years later, few people understand the crisis Germany faced at that time. Today, it’s easy to assume that Germans have always been well-fed and even plump. But the Germans Hitler inherited were virtual skeletons.

During the preceding years, a score of „democratic“ governments had come and gone, often in utter confusion. Instead of alleviating the people’s misery, they had increased it, due to their own instability: it was impossible for them to pursue any given plan for more than a year or two. Germany had arrived at a dead end. In just a few years there had been 224,000 suicides – a horrifying figure, bespeaking a state of misery even more horrifying.

By the beginning of 1933, the misery of the German people was virtually universal. At least six million unemployed and hungry workers roamed aimlessly through the streets, receiving a pitiful unemployment benefit of less than 42 marks per month. Many of those out of work had families to feed, so that altogether some 20 million Germans, a third of the country’s population, were reduced to trying to survive on about 40 pfennigs per person per day.

Unemployment benefits, moreover, were limited to a period of six months. After that came only the meager misery allowance dispensed by the welfare offices.

Notwithstanding the gross inadequacy of this assistance, by trying to save the six million unemployed from total destruction, even for just six months, both the state and local branches of the German government saw themselves brought to ruin: in 1932 alone such aid had swallowed up four billion marks, 57 percent of the total tax revenues of the federal government and the regional states. A good many German municipalities were bankrupt.

Those still lucky enough to have some kind of job were not much better off. Workers and employees had taken a cut of 25 percent in their wages and salaries. Twenty-one percent of them were earning between 100 and 250 marks per month; 69.2 percent of them, in January of 1933, were being paid less than 1,200 marks annually. No more than about 100,000 Germans, it was estimated, were able to live without financial worries.

During the three years before Hitler came to power, total earnings had fallen by more than half, from 23 billion marks to 11 billion. The average per capita income had dropped from 1,187 marks in 1929 to 627 marks, a scarcely tolerable level, in 1932. By January 1933, when Hitler took office, 90 percent of the German people were destitute.

No one escaped the strangling effects of the unemployment. The intellectuals were hit as hard as the working class. Of the 135,000 university graduates, 60 percent were without jobs. Only a tiny minority was receiving unemployment benefits.

„The others,“ wrote one foreign observer, Marcel Laloire (in his book New Germany), „are dependent on their parents or are sleeping in flophouses. In the daytime they can be seen on the boulevards of Berlin wearing signs on their backs to the effect that they will accept any kind of work.“

But there was no longer any kind of work.

The same drastic fall-off had hit Germany’s cottage industry, which comprised some four million workers. Its turnover had declined 55 percent, with total sales plunging from 22 billion to 10 billion marks.

Hardest hit of all were construction workers; 90 percent of them were unemployed.

Farmers, too, had been ruined, crushed by losses amounting to 12 billion marks. Many had been forced to mortgage their homes and their land. In 1932 just the interest on the loans they had incurred due to the crash was equivalent to 20 percent of the value of the agricultural production of the entire country. Those who were no longer able to meet the interest payments saw their farms auctioned off in legal proceedings: in the years 1931-1932, 17,157 farms – with a combined total area of 462,485 hectares – were liquidated in this way.

The „democracy“ of Germany’s „Weimar Republic“ (1918 – 1933) had proven utterly ineffective in addressing such flagrant wrongs as this impoverishment of millions of farm workers, even though they were the nation’s most stable and hardest working citizens. Plundered, dispossessed, abandoned: small wonder they heeded Hitler’s call.

Their situation on January 30, 1933, was tragic. Like the rest of Germany’s working class, they had been betrayed by their political leaders, reduced to the alternatives of miserable wages, paltry and uncertain benefit payments, or the outright humiliation of begging.

Germany’s industries, once renowned everywhere in the world, were no longer prosperous, despite the millions of marks in gratuities that the financial magnates felt obliged to pour into the coffers of the parties in power before each election in order to secure their cooperation. For 14 years the well-blinkered conservatives and Christian democrats of the political center had been feeding at the trough just as greedily as their adversaries of the left.

Nor did the bribing of the political parties make them any more capable of coping with the exactions ordered by the Treaty of Versailles. France, in 1923, had effectively seized Germany by the throat with her occupation of the Ruhr industrial region, and in six months had brought the Weimar government to pitiable capitulation. But then, disunited, despising one another, how could these political birds of passage have offered resistance? In just a few months in 1923, seven German governments came and went in swift succession. They had no choice but to submit to the humiliation of Allied control, as well as to the separatist intrigues fomented by Poincaré’s paid agents.

The substantial tariffs imposed on the sale of German goods abroad had sharply curtailed the nation’s ability to export her products. Under obligation to pay gigantic sums to their conquerors, the Germans had paid out billions upon billions. Then, bled dry, they were forced to seek recourse to enormous loans from abroad, from the United States in particular.

This indebtedness had completed their destruction and, in 1929, precipitated Germany into a terrifying financial crisis.

The big industrialists, for all their fat bribes to the politicians, now found themselves impotent: their factories empty, their workers now living as virtual vagrants, haggard of face, in the dismal nearby working-class districts.

Thousands of German factories lay silent, their smokestacks like a forest of dead trees. Many had gone under. Those which survived were operating on a limited basis. Germany’s gross industrial production had fallen by half: from seven billion marks in 1920 to three and a half billion in 1932.

The automobile industry provides a perfect example. Germany’s production in 1932 was proportionately only one twelfth that of the United States, and only one fourth that of France: 682,376 cars in Germany (one for each 100 inhabitants) as against 1,855,174 cars in France, even though the latter’s population was 20 million less than Germany’s.

Germany had experienced a similar collapse in exports. Her trade surplus had fallen from 2.872 billion marks in 1931 to only 667 millions in 1932 – nearly a 75 percent drop.

Overwhelmed by the cessation of payments and the number of current accounts in the red, even Germany’s central bank was disintegrating. Harried by demands for repayment of the foreign loans, on the day of Hitler’s accession to power the Reichsbank had in all only 83 million marks in foreign currency, 64 million of which had already been committed for disbursement on the following day.

The astronomical foreign debt, an amount exceeding that of the country’s total exports for three years, was like a lead weight on the back of every German. And there was no possibility of turning to Germany’s domestic financial resources for a solution: banking activities had come virtually to a standstill. That left only taxes.

Unfortunately, tax revenues had also fallen sharply. From nine billion marks in 1930, total revenue from taxes had fallen to 7.8 billion in 1931, and then to 6.65 billion in 1932 (with unemployment payments alone taking four billion of that amount).

The financial debt burden of regional and local authorities, amounting to billions, had likewise accumulated at a fearful pace. Beset as they were by millions of citizens in need, the municipalities alone owed 6.542 billion in 1928, an amount that had increased to 11.295 billion by 1932. Of this total, 1.668 billion was owed in short-term loans.

Any hope of paying off these deficits with new taxes was no longer even imaginable. Taxes had already been increased 45 percent from 1925 to 1931. During the years 1931-1932, under Chancellor Brüning, a Germany of unemployed workers and industrialists with half-dead factories had been hit with 23 „emergency“ decrees. This multiple overtaxing, moreover, had proven to be completely useless, as the „International Bank of Payments“ had clearly foreseen. The agency confirmed in a statement that the tax burden in Germany was already so enormous that it could not be further increased.

And so, in one pan of the financial scales: 19 billion in foreign debt plus the same amount in domestic debt. In the other, the Reichsbank’s 83 million marks in foreign currency. It was as if the average German, owing his banker a debt of 6,000 marks, had less than 14 marks in his pocket to pay it.

One inevitable consequence of this ever-increasing misery and uncertainty about the future was an abrupt decline in the birthrate. When your household savings are wiped out, and when you fear even greater calamities in the days ahead, you do not risk adding to the number of your dependents.

In those days the birth rate was a reliable barometer of a country’s prosperity. A child is a joy, unless you have nothing but a crust of bread to put in its little hand. And that’s just the way it was with hundreds of thousands of German families in 1932.

In 1905, during the reign of Kaiser Wilhelm II, the birthrate had been 33.4 per one thousand. In 1921 it was only 25.9, and in 1924 it was down to 15.1. By the of 1932, it had fallen to just 14.7 per one thousand.

It reached that figure, moreover, thanks only to the higher birth rate in rural areas. In the fifty largest cities of the Reich, there were more deaths than births. In 45 percent of working-class families, there were no births at all in the latter years. The fall in the birthrate was most pronounced in Berlin, which had less than one child per family and only 9.1 births per one thousand. Deaths exceeded the number of new births by 60 percent.

In contrast to the birthrate, politicians were flourishing as never before – about the only thing in Germany that was in those disastrous times. From 1919 to 1932, Germany had seen no less than 23 governments come and go, averaging a new one about every seven months. As any sensible person realizes, such constant upheaval in a country’s political leadership negates its power and authority. No one would imagine that any effective work could be carried out in a typical industrial enterprise if the board of directors, the management, management methods, and key personnel were all replaced every eight months. Failure would be certain.

Yet the Reich wasn’t a factory of 100 or 200 workers, but a nation of 65 million citizens crushed under the imposed burdens of the Treaty of Versailles, by industrial stagnation, by frightful unemployment, and by a gut-wrenching misery shared by the entire people.

The many cabinet ministers who followed each other in swift succession for thirteen years – due to petty parliamentary squabbles, partisan demands, and personal ambitions – were unable to achieve anything other than the certain collapse of their chaotic regime of rival parties.

Germany’s situation was further aggravated by the unrestrained competition of the 25 regional states, which split up governmental authority into units often in direct opposition to Berlin, thereby incessantly sabotaging what limited power the central Reich government had at that time.

Even at the beginning of the First World War (1914-1918), the German Reich included four distinct kingdoms (Prussia, Bavaria, Wurttemberg and Saxony), each with its own sovereign, army, flag, titles of nobility, and Great Cross in particolored enamel. In addition, there were six grand duchies, five duchies, seven principalities, and three free cities.

Each regional state had its own separate government with parliament, prime minister and cabinet. Altogether they presented a lineup of 59 ministers who, added to the eleven Reich ministers and the 42 senators of the Free Cities, gave the Germans a collection of 112 ministers, each of whom viewed the other with a jaundiced eye at best.

In addition, there were between two and three thousand deputies – representing dozens of rival political parties – in the legislatures of the Reich, the 22 states and the three Free Cities.

In the Reichstag elections of November 1932 – held just months before Hitler become Chancellor – there were no less than 37 different political parties competing, with a total of 7,000 candidates (14 of them by proxy), all of them frantically seeking a piece of the parliamentary pie. It was most strange: the more discredited the party system became, the more democratic champions there were to be seen gesturing and jostling in their eagerness to climb aboard the gravy train.

Honest, dishonest, or piratical, these 112 cabinet ministers and thousands of legislative deputies had converted Germany into a country that was ungovernable. It is incontestable that, by January of 1933, the „system“ politicians had become completely discredited. Their successors would inherit a country in economic, social and political ruins.

Today, more than half a century later, in an era when so many are living in abundance, it is hard to believe that the Germany of January 1933 had fallen so low. But for anyone who studies the archives and the relevant documents of that time, there can be no doubt. Not a single figure cited here is invented. By January 1933, Germany was down and bleeding to death.

All the previous chancellors who had undertaken to get Germany back on her feet – including Brüning, Papen and Shleiher – had failed. Only a genius or, as some believed, a madman, could revive a nation that had fallen into such a state of complete disarray.

When President Franklin Roosevelt was called upon at that same time to resolve a similar crisis in the United States, he had at his disposal immense reserves of gold. Hitler, standing silently at the chancellery window on that evening of January 30, 1933, knew that, on the contrary, his nation’s treasury was empty. No great benefactor would appear to help him out. The elderly Reich President, Paul von Hindenburg, had given him a work sheet of appalling figures of indebtedness.

Hitler knew that he would be starting from zero. From less than zero. But he was also confident of his strength of will to create Germany anew – politically, socially, financially, and economically. Now legally and officially in power, he was sure that he could quickly convert that cipher into a Germany more powerful than ever before.

„It will be the pride of my life,“ Hitler said upon becoming Chancellor, „if I can say at the end of my days that I won back the German worker and restored him to his rightful place in the Reich.“ He meant that he intended not merely to put men back to work, but to make sure that the worker acquired not just rights, but prestige as well, within the national community.

The objective, then, was far greater than merely sing six million unemployed back to work. It was to achieve a total revolution.

„The people,“ Hitler declared, „were not put here on earth for the sake of the economy, and the economy doesn’t exist for the sake of capital. On the contrary, capital is meant to serve the economy, and the economy in turn to serve the people.“

The Social Revolution

It took several years for a stable social structure to emerge from the French Revolution. The Soviets needed even more time: five years after the Bolshevik revolution of 1917, hundreds of thousands of Russians were still dying of hunger and disease. In Germany, by contrast, the great machinery was in motion within months, with organization and accomplishment quickly meshing together.

The single task of constructing a national highway system that was without parallel in the world might have occupied a government for years. First, the problem had to be studied and assessed. Then, with due consideration for the needs of the population and the economy, the highway system had to be carefully planned it all its particulars.

As usual, Hitler had been remarkably farsighted. The concrete highways would be 24 meters in width. They would be spanned by hundreds of bridges and overpasses. To make sure that the entire Autobahn network would be in harmony with the landscape, a great deal of natural rock would be utilized. The artistically planned roadways would come together and diverge as if they were large-scale works of art. The necessary service stations and motor inns would be thoughtfully integrated into the overall scheme, each facility built in harmony with the local landscape and architectural style.

The original plan called for 7,000 kilometers of roadway. This projection would later be increased to 10,000, and then, after Austria was reunited with Germany, to 11,000 kilometers.

The financial boldness equalled the technical vision. These expressways were toll free, which seemed foolhardy to conservative financiers. But the savings in time and labor, and the dramatic increase in traffic, brought increased tax revenues, notably from gasoline.

Germany was thus building for herself not only a vast highway network, but an avenue to economic prosperity.

These greatly expanded transport facilities encouraged the development of hundreds of new business enterprises along the new expressways. By eliminating congestion on secondary roads, the new highways stimulated travel by hundreds of thousands of tourists, and with it increased tourism commerce.

Even the wages paid out to the men who built the Reichsautobahn network brought considerable indirect benefits. First, they allowed a drastic cut in payments of unemployment benefits, or 25 percent of the total paid in wages. Second, the many workers employed in constructing the expressways – 100,000, and later 150,000 – spent much of the additional 75 percent, which in turn generated increased tax revenues.

Hitler’s plan to build thousands of low-cost homes also demanded a vast mobilization of manpower. He had envisioned housing that would be attractive, cozy, and affordable for millions of ordinary German working-class families. He had no intention of continuing to tolerate, as his predecessors had, cramped, ugly „rabbit warren“ housing for the German people. The great barracks-like housing projects on the outskirts of factory towns, packed with cramped families, disgusted him.

The greater part of the houses he would build were single story, detached dwellings, with small yards where children could romp, wives could grow vegetable and flower gardens, while the bread-winners could read their newspapers in peace after the day’s work. These single-family homes were built to conform to the architectural styles of the various German regions, retaining as much as possible the charming local variants.

Wherever there was no practical alternative to building large apartment complexes, Hitler saw to it that the individual apartments were spacious, airy and enhanced by surrounding lawns and gardens where the children could play safely.

The new housing was, of course, built in conformity with the highest standards of public health, a consideration notoriously neglected in previous working-class projects.

Generous loans, amortizable in ten years, were granted to newly married couples so they could buy their own homes. At the birth of each child, a fourth of the debt was cancelled. Four children, at the normal rate of a new arrival every two and a half years, sufficed to cancel the entire loan debt.

Even before the year 1933 had ended, Hitler had succeeded in building 202,119 housing units. Within four years he would provide the German people with nearly a million and a half (1,458,128) new dwellings!

Moreover, workers would no longer be exploited as they had been. A month’s rent for a worker could not exceed 26 marks, or about an eighth of the average wage then. Employees with more substantial salaries paid monthly rents of up to 45 marks maximum.

Equally effective social measures were taken in behalf of farmers, who had the lowest incomes. In 1933 alone 17,611 new farm houses were built, each of them surrounded by a parcel of land one thousand square meters in size. Within three years, Hitler would build 91,000 such farmhouses. The rental for such dwellings could not legally exceed a modest share of the farmer’s income. This unprecedented owment of land and housing was only one feature of a revolution that soon dramatically improved the living standards of the Reich’s rural population.

The great work of national construction rolled along. An additional 100,000 workers quickly found employment in repairing the nation’s secondary roads. Many more were hired to work on canals, dams, drainage and irrigation projects, helping to make fertile some of nation’s most barren regions.

Everywhere industry was hiring again, with some firms – like Krupp, IG Farben and the large automobile manufacturers – taking on new workers on a very large scale. As the country became more prosperous, car sales increased by more than 80,000 units in 1933 alone. Employment in the auto industry doubled. Germany was gearing up for full production, with private industry leading the way.

The new government lavished every assistance on the private sector, the chief factor in employment as well as production. Hitler almost immediately made available 500 million marks in credits to private business.

This start-up assistance given to German industry would repay itself many times over. Soon enough, another two billion marks would be loaned to the most enterprising companies. Nearly half would go into new wages and salaries, saving the treasury an estimated three hundred million marks in unemployment benefits. Added to the hundreds of millions in tax receipts spurred by the business recovery, the state quickly recovered its investment, and more.

Hitler’s entire economic policy would be based on the following equation: risk large sums to undertake great public works and to spur the renewal and modernization of industry, then later recover the billions invested through invisible and painless tax revenues. It didn’t take long for Germany to see the results of Hitler’s recovery formula.

Economic recovery, as important as it was, nevertheless wasn’t Hitler’s only objective. As he strived to restore full employment, Hitler never lost sight of his goal of creating a organization powerful enough to stand up to capitalist owners and managers, who had shown little concern for the health and welfare of the entire national community.

One of the first labor reforms to benefit the German workers was the establishment of annual paid vacation. The Socialist French Popular Front, in 1936, would make a show of having invented the concept of paid vacation, and stingily at that, only one week per year. But Adolf Hitler originated the idea, and two or three times as generously, from the first month of his coming to power in 1933.

Every factory employee from then on would have the legal right to a paid vacation. Until then, in Germany paid holidays where they applied at all did not exceed four or five days, and nearly half the younger workers had no leave entitlement at all. Hitler, on the other hand, favored the younger workers. Vacations were not handed out blindly, and the youngest workers were granted time off more generously. It was a humane action; a young person has more need of rest and fresh air for the development of his strength and vigor just coming into maturity. Basic vacation time was twelve days, and then from age 25 on it went up to 18 days. After ten years with the company, workers got 21 days, three times what the French socialists would grant the workers of their country in 1936.

These figures may have been surpassed in the more than half a century since then, but in 1933 they far exceeded European norms. As for overtime hours, they no longer were paid, as they were everywhere else in Europe at that time, at just the regular hourly rate. The work day itself had been reduced to a tolerable norm of eight hours, since the forty-hour week as well, in Europe, was first initiated by Hitler. And beyond that legal limit, each additional hour had to be paid at a considerably increased rate. As another innovation, work breaks were made longer; two hours every day in order to let the worker relax and to make use of the playing fields that the large industries were required to provide.

Dismissal of an employee was no longer left as before the sole discretion of the employer. In that era, workers’ rights to job security were non-existent. Hitler saw to it that those rights were strictly spelled out. The employer had to announce any dismissal four weeks in advance. The employee then had a period of up to two months in which to lodge a protest. The dismissal could also be annulled by the Honor of Work Tribunal. What was the Honor of Work Tribunal? Also called the Tribunal of Social Honor, it was the third of the three great elements or layers of protection and defense that were to the benefit of every German worker. The first was the Council of Trust. The second was the Labor Commission.

The Council of Trust was charged with attending to the establishment and the development of a real community spirit between management and labor. „In any business enterprise“, the Reich law stated, „the employer and head of the enterprise, the employees and workers, personnel of the enterprise, shall work jointly towards the goal of the enterprise and the common good of the nation.“

Neither would any longer be the victim of the other-not the worker facing the arbitrariness of the employer nor the employer facing the blackmail of strikes for political purposes. Article 35 of the Reich labor law stated that: „Every member of an Aryan enterprise community shall assume the responsibilities required by his position in the said common enterprise.“ In other words, at the head of the company or the enterprise would be a living, breathing executive in charge, not a moneybags with unconditional power. „The interest of the community may require that an incapable or unworthy employer be relieved of his duties“

The employer would no longer be inaccessible and all-powerful, authoritatively determining the conditions of hiring and firing his staff. He, too, would be subject to the workshop regulations, which he would have to respect, exactly as the least of his employees. The law conferred honor and responsibility on the employer only insofar as he merited it.

Every business enterprise of 20 or more persons was to have its „Council of Trust“. The two to ten members of this council would be chosen from among the staff by the head of the enterprise. The ordinance of application of 10 March 1934 of the above law further stated: „The staff shall be called upon to decide for or against the established list in a secret vote, and all salaried employees, including apprentices of 21 years of age or older, will take part in the vote. Voting shall be done by putting a number before the names of the candidates in order of preference, or by striking out certain names.“

In contrast to the business councils of the preceding régime, the Council of Trust was no longer an instrument of class, but one of teamwork of the classes, composed of delegates of the staff as well as the head of the enterprise. The one could no longer act without the other. Compelled to coordinate their interests, though formerly rivals, they would now cooperate to establish by mutual consent the regulations which were to determine working conditions.

Every 30th of April, on the eve of the great national labor holiday, council duties ceased and the councils were renewed, pruning out conservatism or petrifaction and cutting short the arrogance of dignitaries who might have thought themselves beyond criticism.

It was up to the enterprise itself to pay a salary to members of the Council of Trust, just as if they were employed in the work area, and „to assume all costs resulting from the regular fulfillment of the duties of the Council“.

The second agency that would ensure the orderly development of the new German social system was the institution of the „Workers’ Commissioners“. They would essentially be conciliators and arbitrators. When gears were grinding, they were the ones who would have to apply the grease. They would see to it that the Councils of trust were functioning harmoniously to ensure that regulations of a given business enterprise were being carried out to the letter.

They were divided among 13 large districts covering the territory of the Reich. As arbitrators they were not dependent upon either owners or workers. They had total independence in the field. They were appointed by the state, which represented both the interests of everyone in the enterprise and the interests of society at large.

In order that their decisions should never be unfounded or arbitrary, they had to rely on the advice of a „Consulting Council of Experts“ which consisted of 18 members selected from various sections of the economy in a representation of sorts of the interests of each territorial district.

To ensure still further the objectivity of their arbitration decisions, a third agency was superimposed on the Councils of Trust and the 13 Commissioners, the Tribunal of Social Honor.

Thus from 1933 on, the German worker had a system of justice at his disposal that was created especially for him and would adjudicate all grave infractions of the social duties based on the idea of the Aryan enterprise community. Examples of these violations of social honor are cases where the employer, abusing his power, displayed ill will towards his staff or impugned the honor of his subordinates, cases where staff members threatened work harmony by spiteful agitation; the publication by members of the Council of confidential information regarding the enterprise which they became cognizant of in the course of discharging their duties. Thirteen „Tribunes of Social Honor“ were established, corresponding with the thirteen commissions.

The presiding judge was not a fanatic; he was a career judge who rose above disputes. Meanwhile the enterprise involved was not left out of the proceedings; the judge was seconded by two assistant judges, one representing the management, another a member of the Council of Trust.

This tribunal, the same as any other court of law, had the means of enforcing its decisions. But there were nuances. Decisions could be limited in mild cases to a remonstrance. They could also hit the guilty party with fines of up to 10,000 marks. Other very special sanctions were provided for that were precisely adapted to the social circumstances; change of employment, dismissal of the head of the enterprise or his agent who had failed in his duty. In case of a contested decision, the legal dispute could always be taken up to a Supreme Court seated in Berlin-a fourth level of protection.

This was only the end of 1933, and already the first effects could be felt. The factories and shops large and small were reformed or transformed in conformity with the strictest standards of cleanliness and hygiene; the interior areas, so often dilapidated, opened to light; playing fields constructed; rest areas made available where one could converse at one’s ease and relax during rest periods; employee cafeterias; proper dressing rooms.

With time, that is to say in three years, those achievements would take on dimensions never before imagined; more than 2,000 factories refitted and beautified; 23,000 work premises modernized; 800 buildings designed exclusively for meetings; 1,200 playing fields; 13,000 sanitary facilities with running water; 17,000 cafeterias. Eight hundred departmental inspectors and 17,300 local inspectors would foster and closely and continuously supervise these renovations and installations.

The large industrial establishments moreover had been given the obligation of preparing areas not only suitable for sports activities of all minds, but provided with swimming pools as well. Germany had come a long way from the sinks for washing one’s face and the dead tired workers, grown old before their time, crammed into squalid courtyards during work breaks.

In order to ensure the natural development of the working class, physical education courses were instituted for the younger workers; 8,000 such were organized. Technical training would be equally emphasized, with the creation of hundreds of work schools, technical courses and examinations of professional competence, and competitive examinations for the best workers for which large prizes were awarded.

To rejuvenate young and old alike, Hitler ordered that a gigantic vacation organization for workers be set up. Hundreds of thousands of workers would be able every summer to relax on and at the sea. Magnificent cruise ships would be built. Special trains would carry vacationers to the mountains and to the seashore. The locomotives that hauled the innumerable worker-tourists in just a few years of travel in Germany would log a distance equivalent to fifty-four times around the world!

The cost of these popular excursions was nearly insignificant, thanks to greatly reduced rates authorized by the Reichsbank.

The National Labor Service

Hitler created the National Labor Service not only to alleviate unemployment, but to bring together, in absolute equality, and in the same uniform, both the sons of millionaires and the sons of the poorest families for several months’ common labor and living.

All performed the same work, all were subject to the same discipline; they enjoyed the same pleasures and benefited from the same physical and moral development. At the same construction sites and in the same barracks, Germans became conscious of what they had in common, grew to understand one another, and discarded their old prejudices of class and caste.

After a hitch in the National Labor Service, a young worker knew that the rich man’s son was not a pampered monster, while the young lad of wealthy family knew that the worker’s son had no less honor than a nobleman or an heir to riches; they had lived and worked together as comrades. Social hatred was vanishing, and a socially united people was being born.

From the first months of 1933, his accomplishments were public fact, for all to see. Before end of the year, unemployment in Germany had fallen from more than 6,000,000 to 3,374,000. Thus, 2,627,000 jobs had been created since the previous February, when Hitler began his „gigantic task!“ A simple question: Who in Europe ever achieved similar results in so short a time?

Not without reason were the swastika banners waving proudly throughout the working-class districts where, just a year ago, they had been unceremoniously torn down.

Advertisements

High Finance

Part I


„Under the pressure of international finance the atmosphere in Europe became very congested. Instead of using the huge money resources for cultural purposes, the international banking houses urged unlimited armaments of European States, and sometime deliberately precipitated military adventures. In this connection it is of interest to recall a statement of Israel Zangwill, the well-known Zionist leader, to the effect that it was Mr. Jacob Schiff who financed ‘the Japanese War against Russia,’ (See Israel Zangwill’s „The Problems of the Jewish Race,“ p. 14, The Judaic Publishing Company, New York). as well as another statement, that of Mr. George Kennan, revealing the fact that it was the same banker who financed the revolution among Russian war prisoners in Japan (Compare the report on a Socialist meeting held in Carnegie Hall on March 23, 1917, to celebrate the Russian Revolution, as recorded in the New York Times, March 24, 1917). Immense munition plants, such as Krupp and Szkoda, Poutiloff, and Manfred Weiss, Deutsch & Son, and Schneider, were all controlled directly or indirectly by high finance, forming part of the interlocking system. Nor should it be forgotten that the same group of cosmopolitan bankers invariably have given their support to varioius enterprises which helped the Central Powers to further their imperialistic plans. Thus, soon after the annexation of Bosnia and Herzegovina, when the Dual Monarchy began her war preparations against Italy, it was this bankers’ group which loaned 300 million kronen for the expansion of the Austrian navy, with the result that the new battleships were christened by one part of the European press as „Rothschild dreadnaughts.“ (The World at the Cross Roads, Boris Brasol, pp. 11- 12).


„Thanks to the terrible power of our International Banks, we have forced the Christians into wars without number. Wars have a special value for Jews, since Christians massacre each other and make more room for us Jews. Wars are the Jews’ Harvest: The Jew banks grow fat on Christian wars. Over 100-million Christians have been swept off the face of the earth by wars, and the end is not yet.“ (Rabbi Reichorn, speaking at the funeral of Grand Rabbi Simeon Ben-Iudah, 1869, Henry Ford also noted that:It was a Jew who said, ‘Wars are the Jews’ harvest’; but no harvest is so rich as civil wars.’ The International Jew: The World’s Foremost Problem, Vol. III, p. 180).


„I fear the Jewish banks with their craftiness and tortuous tricks will entirely control the exuberant riches of America. And use it to systematically corrupt modern civilization. The Jews will not hesitate to plunge the whole of Christendom into wars and chaos that the earth should become their inheritance.“ (Bismarck)


„…the main purveyors of funds for the revolution, however, were neither the crackpot Russian millionaires nor the armed bandits of Lenin. The ‘real’ money primarily came from certain British and American circles which for a long time past had lent their support to the Russian revolutionary cause…The important part played by the wealthy American Jewish Banker, Jacob Schiff, in the events in Russia…is no longer a secret.“ (Red Symphony, p. 252)


„Mr. Lawton, in one remark, throws a sidelight on the moving forces behind the revolution, which might suggest to him further investigation as to the origin of what has become a world movement. That movement cannot any longer be shrouded by superficial talk of the severity of the Russian regime, which is so favorite an excuse among our Socialists for the most atrocious action, of the Bolsheviks, who did not come into power till six months after Tsardom was ended: I wish to emphasize the paramount role which the power of money played in bringing about the Revolution. And here it may not be out of place to mention that well documented works have recently been published in France proving that neither Robespiere nor Danton were isolated figures upon the revolutionary stage, but that both were puppets of financial backers…

When the first revolution broke out Lenin was in Zurich, where he was financially helped by an old Swiss merchant, who later went to Russia to live as a permanent guest of the Revolution, and some time afterwards disappeared. If Lenin had not obeyed the orders of his pay-masters how long would he have remained in the land of the living?“ (The Patriot; The Secret Powers Behind Revolution, by Vicomte Léon De Poncins, pp. 168-169).


The influence of the Jews at the present time is more noticeable than ever. That they are at the head of European capitalism, we are all aware…In politics many of the Jews are in the front rank…That their excessive wealth, used as it has been, acts as a solvent influence in modern society cannot be questioned…But while on the one hand the Jews are thus beyond dispute the leaders of the plutocracy of Europe…another section of the same race (people) from the leaders of that revolutionary propaganda which is making way against that very capitalist class, representing their own fellow Jews. Jews, more than any other men…are acting as the leaders in the revolutionary movement which I have endeavored to trace.“ (Nineteenth Century, January, 1881, pp. 10-11, art. by H.M. Hyndman, entitled The Dawn of a Revolutionary Epoch).


„Some years ago a Jewish financier was reproached for pouring millions of dollars into Soviet Russia. ‘Have you,’ he tersely retorted, ‘ever visualized in your mind what would happen to our brethren in Russia should – God forbid – the Soviet regime collapse? the retaliatory measures would be terrible, apart form the outbursts of the avengeful populace.’ The fact remains that in Russia anti-Semitism obtains now in the same degree as in the Czarist days with the sole difference that now it is driven underground, which aggravates the malady.“ (The Patriot).


The constant wars which followed William’s accession had compelled the king to borrow large sums from the London merchants (Jews). Out of these loans sprang, first the National Debt, which was destined to grow, eventually by leaps and bounds, from less than a million of pounds up to so many hundred millions, that all thought of ever paying it is now given up. The second result was the organization of a company for the management of this colossal debt, the Bank of England.“ (D.H. Montgomery, The Leading Facts of English History, (1893) 2nd Edition, p. 288).


„The financial career of the Rothchilds is the key to the history of the Jewish Banking in the nineteenth century…The plan adopted by him of establishing branches in the more important European capitals, over which he placed his sons, was followed by other Jewish banking-houses…the influence of Jews on Banking…was due to the preliminary advantage given to them by their international position.“ (The Jewish Encyclopedia (1902), Vol. II, p. 492-93) {The other Jewish families that adopted the Rothschild plan of establishing local banking branches in European cities include: The Lazards, Sterns, Speyers, Seligmans, Warburgs and Leob families}.


„It was the Jews who first permitted kings to maintain costly armies of mercenaries. In Spain, it was largely the part of Jewish finance that allowed the king to defeat the Arabs.“ (Abram Leon, The Jewish Question, p. 166)


„Give me control of the money of a country and I care not who makes her laws.“ (Meyer Rothschild).


„The Rothschilds introduced the rule of money into European politics. The Rothschilds were the servants of money who undertook the reconstruction of the world as an image of money and its functions. Money and the employment of wealth have become the law of European life; we no longer have nations, but economic provinces.“ (New York Times, Professor Wilhelm, a German historian, July 8, 1937).


„Dear Sirs: A. Mr. John Sherman has written us from a town in Ohio, U.S.A., as to the profits that may be made in the National Banking business under a recent act of your Congress (National Bank Act of 1863), a copy of which act accompanied his letter. Apparently this act has been drawn upon the plan formulated here last summer by the British Bankers Association and by that Association recommended to our American friends as one that if enacted into law, would prove highly profitable to the banking fraternity throughout the world. Mr. Sherman declares that there has never before been such an opportunity for capitalists to accumulate money, as that presented by this act and that the old plan, of State Banks is so unpopular, that the new scheme will, by contrast, be most favorably regarded, notwithstanding the fact that it gives the national Banks an almost absolute control of the National finance. ‘The few who can understand the system,’ he says ‘will either be so interested in its profits, or so dependent on its favors, that there will be no opposition from that class, while on the other hand, the great body of people, mentally incapable of comprehending the tremendous advantages that capital derives from the system, will bear its burdens without even suspecting that the system is inimical to their interests.’ Please advise us fully as to this matter and also state whether or not you will be of assistance to us, if we conclude to establish a National Bank in the City of New York…Awaiting your reply, we are.“ (Rothschild Brothers. London, June 25, 1863. Famous Quotes On Money).

In reply to the above letter Messrs. Ikelheimer, Morton and Vandergould replied: Dear Sirs: ‘We beg to acknowledge receipt of your letter of June 25th, in which you refer to a communication received from Honorable John Sherman, of Ohio, with reference to the advantages, and profits, of an American investment under the provisions of the National Banking Act.

Mr. Sherman possesses, in a marked degree, the distinguishing characteristics of a successful financier. His temperament is such that whatever his feelings may be they never cause him to lose sight of the main chance. He is young, shrewd and ambitious. He has fixed his eyes upon the Presidency of the United States and already is a member of Congress (he has financial ambitions too). He rightfully thinks he has everything to gain by being friendly with men, and institutions, having large financial resources, and which at times are not too particular in their methods, either of obtaining government aid, or protecting themselves against unfriendly legislation…Requesting that you will regard this as strictly confidential, Most respectfully yours, Ikelheimer, Morton and Vandergould.“ (Pawns In The Game, William Guy Carr, pp. 55-57).


„If you will look back at every war in Europe during the nineteenth century, you will see that they always ended with the establishment of a ‘balance of power.’ With every re-shuffling there was a balance of power in a new grouping around the House of Rothschild in England, France, or Austria. They grouped nations so that if any king got out of line, a war would break out and the war would be decided by which way the financing went. Researching the debt positions of the warring nations will usually indicate who was to be punished.“ (Economist Sturat Crane).


„The Jews…are at the root of regicide, they own the periodical press, they have in their hands the financial markets, the people as a whole fall into financial slavery to them…“ (The Siege, p. 38)


„For the last one hundred and fifty years, the history of the House of Rothschild has been to an amazing degree the backstage history of Western Europe…Because of their success in making loans not to individuals but to nations, they reaped huge profits…Someone once said that the wealth of Rothschild consists of the bankruptcy of nations.“ (Frederic Morton, The Rothschilds)


„The fact that: The house of Rothschild made its money in the great crashes of history and the great wars of history, the very periods when others lost their money, is beyond question.“ (E.C. Knuth, The Empire of the City)


„Under this roof are the heads of the family of Rothschild — a name famous in every capital of Europe and every division of the globe. If you like, we shall divide the United States into two parts, one for you, James [Rothschild], and one for you, Lionel [Rothschild]. Napoleon will do exactly and all that I shall advise him.“ (Reported to have been the comments of Disraeli at the marriage of Lionel Rothschild’s daughter, Leonora, to her cousin, Alphonse, son of James Rothschild of Paris).


„Slavery is likely to be abolished by the war power and chattel slavery destroyed. This, I and my [Jewish] European friends are glad of, for slavery is but the owning of labor and carries with it the care of the laborers, while the European plan, led by England, is that capital shall control labor by controlling wages. This can be done by controlling the money. The great debt that capitalists will see to it is made out of the war, must be used as a means to control the volume of money. To accomplish this, the bonds must be used as a banking basis. We are now awaiting for the Secretary of the Treasury to make his recommendation to Congress. It will not do to allow the greenback, as it is called, to circulate as money any length of time, as we cannot control that.“ (Hazard Circular, issued by the Rothschild controlled Bank of England, 1862).

Dr. David Duke – True Civil Rights

Dr. David Duke shows in this video how White people have lost their rights in the United States.“ Affirmative Action“ and „Diversity Programs“ are nothing more than nice sounding monikers for racial discrimination.

Dr. Duke also shows how Slavery is used to justify discrimination against White people when the historical fact is that less than 1 percent of White people every had slaves. There is actually more likelihood of an African American have direct ancestors who owned Black slaves than a White person having a direct ancestor who owned slaves. Dr. Duke shows how racially discrimination programs against better-qualified Whites represent the REAL RACISM going on in America, and it is against European Americans.

Caricatures from “Der Stürmer” – translated in English and colourized!

Unknown Date – Part 2

A Closer Look at the Enemy

Source: Free Speech October 1998 Volume IV, Number 10

by Dr. William Pierce

You know, this world we live in is a complicated place. Behind every phenomenon we observe there are many forces at work, some of them obvious and some not so obvious. Trying to separate what’s important from what’s not important can be a confusing task. Every week when we discuss on this program what’s happening in the world around us, and I try to explain events so that listeners can have a clear understanding of them, I must simplify the world. Clarity requires simplification. Understanding demands simplification. A useful explanation requires separating the important things from those which are less important and focusing first on the former. If I tried to explain every phenomenon in the world in complete detail, leaving out nothing, I would succeed only in confusing everyone, especially myself.

So if we want to understand the world we must simplify it. But we must be careful not to oversimplify, or our explanations lose their value. Occasionally my listeners accuse me of oversimplifying, or they are aware of some factor which I have not discussed in detail, and they suspect that I have left it out deliberately because it would contradict some theory of mine.

Here’s an old example of the way oversimplification can lead to confusion: After the Bolshevik takeover of Russia early in this century, many anti-communists in America spread the word that a majority of the Bolshevik leaders were not Russians but were Jews, and they warned Americans that there also were many Jewish communists in America who posed a danger of subversion. This was back in the days before the exposure of the Rosenbergs and other communist-Jewish spies and conspirators in America. The Jewish media countered this warning with a deliberate campaign of confusion. They said, “Oh, you used to accuse of us being international bankers and capitalists and of subverting nations with our money. Now you accuse us of being international communists and of being a threat to capitalism. So which is it? Are we capitalists or are we communists? It can’t be both, so make up your mind.” This response was supposed to make their accusers look foolish, and with much of the public the trick worked.

Of course, the truth of the matter is that Jews are both capitalists and communists — and neither. They are, first and last, Jews, and that really says it all, if one understands what a Jew is. The average Gentile thinks that a communist must be someone who is a believer in communist ideology, and a capitalist must be someone who is a believer in the ideology of free enterprise. It doesn’t occur to him that for many Jews ideology is not something that one actually believes; it is simply a tool which one uses for deceiving non-Jews. The aim always is to acquire wealth and power, and whether one uses capitalist methods and ideology or communist methods and ideology for this purpose depends upon the situation. Regardless of the methods one uses, one remains a Jew. That’s what is important.

And of course, most of the people who were trying to warn their fellow Americans about the dangers represented by the Jews in their midst didn’t try to explain that, because most Americans simply wouldn’t have understood; it would have been too complicated for them. So the anti-communists simply said: “Watch out! The Jews are communists or are sympathetic to the communists.” And that was an oversimplification of the truth.

Here’s a more recent example: I have warned Americans that Bill Clinton is a puppet of the Jews, an obedient tool of the Jews, and I have pointed out the fact that most of the important appointments he has made as President have gone to Jews: two Supreme Court justices, his entire foreign policy and national security team, and so on. And I have stated that the Jewish media got him elected in 1992 and then reelected in 1996.

And so now some people have asked me, “Well, if Clinton is an obedient tool of the Jews, why are they now trying to destroy him? Why are some of the people who are in the forefront of those now pulling Clinton down Jews? Why would a Jewess, Monica Lewinsky, turn on him? Don’t you know that some of Ken Starr’s associates are Jews? Didn’t you notice that one of Clinton’s most important attackers is Connecticut’s Jewish Senator Joseph Lieberman? It has been the Jewish media, like the New York Times, the Wall Street Journal, and the Washington Post, which have exposed Clinton’s lies and other crimes. So how can you say that he is a puppet of the Jews? It doesn’t make sense.”

But of course, it does make sense — if one doesn’t try to oversimplify. I don’t want to spend too much time on this because I’ve already covered much of the ground in earlier broadcasts, but I’ll try to add a few more details, so that the picture is still simple, still clear, but not overly simple. The basic facts are these: First, the Jews control the mass media — or more accurately, they are the most powerful of the conscious elites in the media world; they wield more control over the media than any other coherent and self-conscious group. And because of this media control they are able to exercise a determining influence on the electoral process: in other words, through their media control they are able to control the politics of a mass democracy, where everyone, even the most easily manipulated elements of the population, has an equal vote.

Second, Bill Clinton is a talented but utterly corrupt man. He is a typical child of the 1960s. He grew up believing that the world owed him something. He grew up believing that he was entitled to whatever he could grab. And he grew up cynical. He grew up during a period when the Jews were turning American society on its head, when Jews were breaking all of the rules and getting away with it. Bill Clinton noticed this and learned from it. And Bill Clinton grew up with a talent for manipulating people, a talent for lying to people and getting them to believe him. This suited him perfectly for a career in politics.

And the Jews noticed Bill Clinton. They saw him as potentially very useful to them. He is exactly the sort of man they always are on the lookout for: corrupt but charming; someone who can attract votes but who understands which side his bread is buttered on. They supported him with their media and with their money. Without their support he wouldn’t have gotten into the White House. And Bill Clinton reciprocated. He gave them whatever they wanted. He appointed them to every high position in the government, and he pushed their policies and programs. On all of this the record is clear. So why are they abandoning, even attacking, their good friend Bill Clinton now?

Well of course, he never really was their friend: he was their useful tool. And he has become a badly damaged tool as a consequence of his own personal weaknesses. The Jews did not set out to destroy him. He did that himself. Remember, Ken Starr was ready to throw in the towel and give up on investigating Clinton three years ago. If anyone besides Clinton deserves credit for his downfall it is Paula Jones. When Paula Jones sued Clinton for sexual harassment she opened the Pandora’s box from which the affair with Monica Lewinsky eventually came to light. Remember, the Jewish media tried hard not to notice Paula Jones. That Paula eventually was noticed by the public resulted from several factors beyond the control of the Jewish media bosses.

And that’s one of those little complications we must deal with in the real world. Despite all their media power and all their money, the Jews are not able to control everything all the time. Sometimes the Jews are compelled by circumstances just like the rest of us. They also have their vulnerabilities.

Paula Jones opened a Pandora’s box that the Jews would have preferred to keep closed. But once the box was open, they had to decide what to do about Clinton. On the one hand, they have Al Gore waiting in the wings, and Al Gore is just as corrupt as Bill Clinton, just as willing a tool. But on the other hand, Gore simply doesn’t have Clinton’s talents. He’ll do what the Jews tell him, but he won’t be able to charm the voters as effectively as Clinton could. They’d like to keep Clinton, but he’s become a bit of a tar baby. And so we have had an opportunity to see another of the world’s little complications, and that is that not even the Jews are always in complete agreement about the best way to proceed.

The Jews don’t want to become too closely identified with Clinton’s corrupt image. Looking a little further ahead than the mass of Gentile voters who still think Clinton should stay in the White House, the Jews understand that it will not be helpful for them to have a very close historical association with the Clinton administration. They don’t want Clinton to be thought of as their man, because they have a suspicion that despite his present popularity his historical image will be very bad indeed. For some of them that is the primary consideration, and they’d like to see Clinton go quickly and then muddle through with Al Gore as best they can. Other Jews are still fascinated by Clinton’s approval ratings and his ability to charm the lemmings. They don’t want to trade him in for Al Gore no matter how much tar rubs off on them. And of course, they also have the consideration that if they all abandon him simultaneously and all begin attacking him, he conceivably could turn on them and lash out at them. Better to keep him mindful that despite the fact that some of them are pulling him down, if he wants to stay out of prison he’d better keep obeying orders. So there are complications in life even for the Jews.

I’ll give you one more example of the subtleties that one must deal with in trying to understand the role of the Jews in our society. Last week one of the most powerful Jewish organizations, the Anti-Defamation League of B’nai B’rith — the ADL — held a huge press conference at the National Press Club in Washington and simultaneous press conferences in a number of cities around the country, and they announced that I am the most dangerous man in America. Really: I am the most dangerous man in America! And the organization I head, the National Alliance, is the most dangerous organization in America. Really: not the Mafia, not what’s left of the Communist Party, not some violent and well armed militia group, not Louis Farrakhan and the Black Muslims, but the National Alliance.

Well, I long ago decided that any insult from the Devil is a compliment, but still there are some troubling aspects to what the Anti-Defamation League has done, and I’ll share them with you, because they can help us understand better the way the Jews operate. When the ADL held its press conferences last week it handed out press releases to the reporters and politicians. The press release began with a statement by the top ADL commissar, Abraham Foxman, saying, “The National Alliance is an alliance of bigots and bombers thriving on hate,” and then it listed a long series of violent crimes and terrorist acts the ADL claims are “linked to the National Alliance and its propaganda.” The list begins:

1992-1995, Midwest: Authorities say the Aryan Republican Army, a white supremacist gang that required members to read The Turner Diaries, committed 22 bank robberies and bombings.

April 19, 1995, Oklahoma City: The bombing of the Murrah Federal Building is eerily reminiscent of a fictional bombing scene in The Turner Diaries, of which Timothy McVeigh was a devotee.

December 1995, Fayetteville, NC: Two soldiers stationed at Fort Bragg, who were avowed neo-Nazis and reportedly read National Alliance propaganda, murdered an African-American couple.

Et cetera. There’s a lot more to the ADL’s press release, but you get the idea: I and the other members of the National Alliance are bomb-throwers and bank robbers “linked” to 22 bank robberies and bombings in the Midwest, to the Oklahoma City bombing, to the shooting of a Black drug dealer and his girlfriend in North Carolina, and to lots of other things. Now, as a matter of fact, neither I nor anyone else in the National Alliance had ever heard of the Aryan Republican Army and its 22 bank robberies and bombings, or of Timothy McVeigh, or of the soldiers at Fort Bragg who shot the Black drug dealer, until we saw these people on television news programs, like everyone else.

But we are “linked” to them, says the ADL. How? Did some of these folks listen to one of my American Dissident Voices broadcasts? Probably. At least, I wouldn’t be surprised. Did some of them read my 1978 novel, The Turner Diaries? Probably. At least, I’ve seen evidence to indicate that Timothy McVeigh did, although I don’t know about any of the others. There are a quarter of a million copies of the book in circulation, and probably a half-million readers altogether — including, no doubt, Abraham Foxman and a number of his associates in the ADL.

So that’s how I and the National Alliance are “linked” to bombings, bank robberies, and murders. Very clever. So then, it’s fair to say that the Catholic Church is “linked” to Mafia operations, and that the Automobile Association of America — the AAA — is “linked” to drunk driving, and that the folks who publish various editions of the Bible are “linked” to the crimes committed by people who quote the Bible as they take an ax to their wives or blow away a neighbor with a shotgun.

“The National Alliance is an alliance of bombers and bigots,” says Abraham Foxman. I am not aware of a single instance of a bombing committed by a National Alliance member — although a couple of years ago a former member in Florida had a pipe bomb he was trying to build blow up in his face. He wasn’t a member of the National Alliance at the time, and he didn’t actually bomb anything except himself — but that’s enough for Abraham Foxman and the ADL to describe the National Alliance as an organization of “bombers and bigots.”

You know, every organization which recruits from the public will occasionally recruit a member who has had or will have a problem with the law, but here’s something to remember: the Democratic Party has a much higher percentage of lawbreakers among its members than does the National Alliance. We don’t tolerate criminal activity, but the head of the Democratic Party seems to thrive on it — at least he did before Ken Starr got on his case.

Abe Foxman and the ADL seem to thrive on criminal activity too. Five years ago, in April 1993, search warrants were executed on the Los Angeles and San Francisco offices of the ADL, and police seized hundreds of confidential police files which had been stolen by the ADL. Some of these police files were from investigations of anti-apartheid groups in the United States, and the ADL had given copies to the South African government in return for access to confidential South African police files on anti-Israel groups in South Africa. A lot of the people whose names were in those confidential police files the ADL had stolen sued the ADL for invasion of privacy, and that’s still working its way through the courts.

But here’s the really interesting part of all this: newspapers and other media took the ADL’s press release last week as gospel, and they printed big excerpts from it. It’s been in newspapers all over the country. You’ve probably seen some of these stories yourself. With one exception none of these newspapers even bothered to check with me first; they didn’t call me up and ask me if the ADL’s allegations were true or if I had any comment on them; they just ran sensational stories with headlines like “National Alliance linked to bombings and murders.” And of course, they said nothing about the ADL’s criminal activities or its links to the government of Israel. And many of these newspapers aren’t even owned or edited by Jews. But they all follow the party line. They know that the ADL is an official Jewish organization, and therefore it cannot be criticized, and nothing it says can be questioned. That would be like questioning the “Holocaust,” heaven forbid!

That’s a little frightening, don’t you think? So here’s one of those complications about the way the Jews wield their power. They don’t have to own everything in order to have things go their way. A newspaper editor or a television station owner doesn’t have to be Jewish in order to slavishly follow the Jewish party line. The Jews own enough of the media — they hold enough of the policy-making positions — so that no one, or almost no one, wants to cross them. When an institution becomes corrupt — and that, unfortunately, is the case with our mass media, just as with our political system — the Jews can count on using their power to make things go their way. They thrive on corruption. The ADL thrives on corruption. The ADL could not exist in an uncorrupted society.

Finally, here’s one other little complication in understanding the role of the Jews. I know and you know individual Jews who are not involved in any political or media activity, individual Jews who simply earn a living and go about their business and don’t pay much attention to what the ADL is doing. And so I often have people write to me and ask me why I am so hard on the Jews. They remind me that there are lots of evil people in our society, even in the media, who are not Jews. They remind me that Rupert Murdoch and Ted Turner aren’t Jews, that Stalin wasn’t a Jew, and that Lenin was only part Jewish. And that’s true enough. And that’s why we won’t be able to dispense with the gallows even when we have no more Jews.

But the people who are focusing on the complications that many of the world’s evildoers aren’t Jews and that many Jews are not involved in sinister activities — these people are failing to see the forest because of the trees. When I speak about the role of the Jews in the world today or in the past I do simplify the world. I do simplify the facts, because my aim is for people to see the forest, to understand the forest, at least in rough outline, before they spend too much time studying the individual trees.

And the forest I want people to see, the big picture I want them to understand, even though it is a simplified picture, is this: Without Jews there would have been no Bolshevik Revolution and subsequent selective murder of two generations of the best and brightest of the Russians. Without Jews as an organized community pushing “multiculturalism” and “diversity” and open borders and racial mixing in the United States, White Americans would not now be facing the prospect of becoming a minority in their own country in the near future. It is the Jewish presence as a whole and its effect on our society that we must understand first, before we start trying to understand all of the complicating details.

© 1998 National Vanguard Books · Box 330 · Hillsboro ·WV 24946 · USA

National-Socialist Racial Thought

WALTER GROSS
Head of the Reich Bureau for Enlightenment on Population Policy and Racial Welfare

Of all the measures introduced in the new Germany those bearing on National Socialist racial policy caused the greatest stir internationally, for here was a State setting its feet upon paths hitherto almost untrodden and leading through untouched preserves, whose aims were in many respects liable to clash with established Liberal views. Relevant legislation served to corroborate and achieve these aims and it was no wonder, therefore, that – in the beginning at least – this particular phase of National Socialist reconstruction met with universal misunderstanding and prejudice. We are happy meanwhile to be able to discern that other nations have come to realise that Germany is, indeed, taking to new paths, but they are right ones and are necessary and, more than that, Germany is in many respects blazing a trail for others; mention need only be made of our law for the prevention of the transmission of hereditary diseases (Sterilisation Law) which has been followed in Norway, Sweden, Denmark and Finland by similar laws or draft proposals. However, no one will wholly understand or sympathise with our legislation who is not wholly familiar with the fundamental change in the philosophical conception. of life which has come with National Socialism in the light of history.

Whereas formerly, and more especially under the powerful influence of Marxist teachings, the development and decline of States and civilisations was attributed to economic or purely political causes, we see to-day the determining role played by the human being in sustaining and shaping economy, the State, culture, politics, art and intellectual thought. We have come to feel that the protection and preservation of the people who, after all, are originally responsible for the achievements of the State and culture, is the chief factor in retaining these achievements; for good blood and the strength that comes from good blood is given a people only once and if allowed to degenerate cannot be regenerated as one would rebuild a city or restore devastated lands. Thus, wise statesmanship will place the preservation of the biological, that is, racial energy of its people before its political and economic concerns. The endless series of past empires and civilisations which have flourished and declined forcefully remind us how inexorable are the consequences of ignoring this truth.

History and the study of the science of population show that there are three biological stages which inevitably lead to the destruction of the vitality of a people and with it the destruction of the foundations of the State and culture as such. These three stages are:

A decreasing population,
An increase of the hereditary unfit,
The promiscuous mingling of races.

In these respects, Germany’s position in 1933 was alarming. A declining birth-rate among the fitter inhabitants and unrestrained propagation among the hereditarily unfit, the mentally deficient, imbeciles and hereditary criminals, etc., had led, for instance, to a state of affairs in which the increase of the healthier section of the population in the past 70 years was only 50 per cent., while the unhealthy and, in fact, those only fit to live in asylums, had multiplied ninefold in the same time, or 450 per cent. The care of the latter costs the working population of Germany the not inconsiderable sum of 1 billion reichsmarks yearly, while the entire administrative costs of the Reich, Provinces and Communes amount to 713 million reichsmarks. It was, therefore, an act of self-preservation which caused the National Socialist State to promulgate the Law to prevent the transmission of hereditary disease. It was a measure taken in self-defence and much more besides. For a large portion of the hereditary unfit had brought children into the world in ignorance of the consequences of their own afflictions, and many – those still possessed of a sense of responsibility – were horrified at seeing the “sins of the fathers” visited upon their children. To this unfortunate category the National Socialist State lends a helping hand in freeing them from possible mental torment. Sterilisation relieves their conscience of the frightful burden of causing further pain and suffering to innocent beings.

It is frequently claimed abroad in circles hostile to Germany that the politically undesirable are hauled up for sterilisation. Anyone versed in German Law and the thoroughness and precautions attendant on the whole procedure knows full well the absurdity of such allegations and that no one can be sterilised simply on request or as a result of political pressure. The law for the prevention of the transmission of hereditary disease is only applicable in acknowledged cases of physical and mental deficiency such as congenital idiocy, schizophrenia, manic-depressive insanity, hereditary epilepsy, chronic St. Vitus dance, hereditary blindness, deafness and serious bodily defects; in addition, it applies to chronic inebriates. The procedure in regard to the act of sterilisation can take place upon application being lodged with the special Court of Heredity by the person concerned, his relatives, a local physician or such official persons as are connected with matters of public health. The competent Court, which is composed of an officiating judge, a medical officer and a doctor, decides whether sterilisation is called for or not. If the applicant or person under consideration does not agree with the decision of the Court, an appeal may be lodged with the Higher Court which has a similar composition as the Lower Court, although the individuals are never the same. The decision of the Court of Appeal is final. Even then the operation may be avoided by taking life-long sojourn – or at least for as long as the faculty of procreation exists – in a private home, provided such sojourn entails no costs for the Government. This clause was included in order that possible adherents of the Catholic faith who might have conscientious objections on the grounds of the Papal encyclical be given the opportunity of observing their religious tenets at all costs.

These measures of the National Socialist State, despite their broadmindedness, have been attacked mainly for political or dogmatic reasons. Such criticism is based on a number of objections which appear unfounded and extravagant. They may be summarised in three groups.

The first arises purely from the individualist standpoint which resents any intrusion into the life of the individual. According to its advocates, the individual has the right to be without children if he prefers or, despite obvious hereditary afflictions, procreate at will, or indeed, by transcending all frontiers and racial barriers, to contract marriage to his own taste. Fundamentally, that is, any restriction on the life of the individual demanded by the collective interests of the community is categorically rejected. Obviously, such an attitude must be deplored in every State since, if applied in all spheres, it would render communal and State institutions, both economic and cultural, impossible.

Civilisation is only possible through the individual becoming part of the whole and just as collective authority in the interests of all limits the egoism of the individual by, say, taxation laws or measures to combat epidemics, etc., it similarly has the right to implement such measures for the benefit of the community as are scientifically proved expedient in the way of population policy or eugenics. The need for such action prevailed in Germany.

The second set of objections is mainly based on humanitarian grounds. It is argued, for instance, that the act of sterilisation represents such a weighty sacrifice for the person concerned that society should only accept it if made voluntarily. But it is not humane that among civilised peoples the standard of living of that section of the population which is fit and able to work is lowered by burdening it with the excessive levies necessary for the maintenance of and keeping within its midst the hereditarily diseased who, despite these heavy costs, can never be healed of their ailments. After all, the healthy members of the race are also entitled to a share of compassion and humane considerations.

Nor is it justifiable to argue that sterilisation will not do away with the possible recurrence of similar cases. In arguing thus one might just as well refrain from putting out a fire because another might happen to break out elsewhere at some other time. Incidentally, sterilisation is and remains a humane duty to the individual. How great is the mental agony of a person suffering from some hereditary disease in the pitiful knowledge that not only he himself is incurable but that his children frequently begotten in ignorance of the complications of his own trouble, are doomed to a similar or worse fate. Timely sterilisation rids the hereditarily unfit of such mental torment.

Other objectors insist that the operation should only be performed with the consent of the individual. It is foolish, however, to want acquiescence from a human being who has no command over his morbid instincts or of one who is to be prevented from procreation for the very reason that he is suffering from some mental debility.

Everywhere in organised society, justice and morals are bound to interfere with personal liberty to a greater or lesser extent, even with that of the healthy individual. If an epidemic breaks out endangering the welfare of the community everyone, whether he wants to or not,

must be vaccinated; similarly, just as the doctor takes preventive measures on this score, the specialist in the sphere of hereditary transmission, both medical and legal, backed by the knowledge of biological necessities must, if called upon, take upon his shoulders the responsibility which the individual patient is unable to bear.

A third and last group fears lest the suggestion of a biological stratification of society or the racial classification of humanity should lead to serious conflicts. As to this, it may be said that racial peculiarities are natural and any social or human system of differentiation will last only so long as it is in harmony with natural phenomena. Why, the very knowledge and acknowledgment of the social claims of the race, of racial hygiene, and its practical application, is calculated to limit, even prevent wars. For war, even if successful, signifies biologically an irretrievable loss of the best hereditary tendencies. Since National Socialist Germany frankly thinks along biological lines she wants nothing but peace. The National Socialist idea of State is the most peaceful conceivable, for it of all others sees its duty in the preservation of the pure racial continuity of its people. Nothing but sheer want of sense could accuse the new Germany of hankering after war. For we are only too well aware what irreparable damage has been done and how heavy has been the toll taken of our people in the way of hereditary values through centuries of retrogressive selection, declining birth-rate and, finally, through the frightful decimation of the flower of our manhood in the War. If we need peace and quiet for the political and economic regeneration of our people tried almost beyond endurance, we need it doubly so to effect the reconstruction and vital racial aspirations of our population policy directed along biological lines, for nothing could be more disastrous than war with its ruthless destruction of the best and consequent indirect preferential selection of the less valuable.

Even a victorious war is biologically a loss. The true statesman is aware of this and will never take to the sword except as a last necessity. Here it becomes manifest that the national-racial principle – contrary to the aims maliciously attributed to it – is in itself the surest guarantee for a policy fundamentally peaceful.

Most open to misinterpretation are National Socialist views on the relations between the various races of the world. It has been questioned whether the fundamental racial principles of the new world theory must not breed condescension, even contempt of people of different race. Quite the contrary; these very principles offer the very best guarantee for mutual tolerance and for the peaceful co-operation of all.

We appreciate the fact that those of another race are different from us. This scientific truth is the basis, the justification and, at the same time, the obligation of every racial policy without which a restoration of Europe in our day is no longer practicable. Whether that other race is “better” or “worse” is not possible for us to judge. For this would demand that we transcend our own racial limitations for the duration of the verdict and take on a superhuman, even divine, attitude from which alone an “impersonal” verdict could be formed on the value or lack of such of the many living forms of inexhaustible Nature. But we of all people are too conscious of the inseparable ties of the blood and our own race to attempt to aspire to such an ultra-racial standpoint, even in the abstract.

History, science and life itself tell us in a thousand ways that the human beings inhabiting the earth are anything but alike; that, moreover, the greater races are not only physically but especially spiritually and intellectually different from each other. Yesterday one passed this fact by, and in attempting to unify political, economic, cultural and religious standards for all nations of the earth, one was sinning against Nature, violating the natural attributes of various racial and national groups for the sake of a false principle. To-day we bow to the racial differences existing in the world. We want every type of being to find that form of self-expression most fitted to its own particular requirements.

The racial principles of National Socialism are, therefore, the surest guarantee for respecting the integrity of other nations. It is incompatible with our ideas to think of incorporating other nationalities in a Germany built up as a result of conquests, as they would always remain – because of their alien blood and spirit – a foreign body within the German State. Such foolhardy thoughts may be indulged in by a world which has as its goal economic power or purely territorial expansion of its frontiers, but never by a statesman thinking along organic, racial lines whose main care is the preservation of the greatness and along with it the essential unity of his people held together by the ties of blood relationship.

For this reason, we have nothing in common with chauvinism and imperialism because we would extend to other races peopling the earth the same privileges we claim for ourselves: the right to fashion our lives and our own particular world according to the requirements of our own nature.

And if National Socialism would wish to see the unrestricted mixing of blood avoided for the individual, there is nothing in this to suggest contempt. After all, we Germans ourselves, viewed ethnologically, are a mixture. The National Socialist demand is only that the claims of the blood and the laws of biology should be more closely observed in future.

Here again our standpoint is not so very far removed from that of other people with a sound mental outlook. The American Immigration Laws, for instance, are based on definite racial discrimination. The Europeans and the inhabitants of India, the Pacific Islands, etc., have instinctively held aloof from a mingling of the blood, and both sides genuinely regard any transgression as very bad form. Nevertheless, this natural attitude in no way detracts from the possibility of close co-operation and friendly intercourse. And, speaking on behalf of the new Germany, let me once more emphasise:

We do not wish our people to intermarry with those of alien race since through such mingling of the blood the best and characteristic qualities of both races are lost. But we will always have a ready welcome for any guests who wish to visit us whether of kindred or foreign civilisation, and our racial views only lead us to a fuller appreciation of their essential peculiarities in the same way as we would want our own peculiarities respected.

On the basis of this reasoning, the National Socialist State was bound to object to the imperialistic designs of the Jewish people on German soil. Thus it is purely an internal concern of the German people who could no longer tolerate the domination – a result of political errors in the past – of an alien race having neither sympathy nor understanding for them. During the political regimes of the past the Jews had managed to obtain an increasing hold on politics, art, culture and commerce. Since 1910, as many as 13 of them had immigrated every day into Germany from the East. Thus Berlin had –

32.2 per cent. Jewish chemists
47.9 ” “ doctors (60 per cent, panel doctors)
50.2 ” “ lawyers
8.5 ” “ newspaper editors
14.2 ” “ producers and stage managers
37.5 ” “ dentists

No people on earth with a vestige of pride in itself and its national honour will be willing to put up with such domination of the key professions by members of a completely alien race. At the same time, the Jews were a determining factor in those political parties which were against any reconstruction on national lines. As to the so-called State Party, for instance, 28.6 per cent. of its parliamentary members were Jews, and in the Social Democratic Party the figure was 11.9 per cent. It is of some political significance that the founders of the German Communist Party, a branch of the Moscow Comintern, that destructive force, were Karl Liebknecht and Rosa Luxemburg, both Jews.

This predominance of alien influence foreign to the German nature in politics, science and things cultural, provided the objective for the law for the restoration of professionalism in the Civil Service and what has since come to be known as the Nuremberg Laws. The Jews in Germany constitute a group of aliens who can expect to enjoy the hospitality of the country just like the members of other races. But no Frenchman would wish to have his leading offices of State occupied by Englishmen, and no Englishman would want to see the key positions in the politics, art and culture of his country occupied by, say, Japanese. Who then can reasonably object to the Germans removing the Jews from the prominent positions in their country? As to the higher percentage of crime which is an additional factor of importance in judging the Jewish question in Germany, it may be mentioned that the majority are immigrants from Eastern Europe, whose cultural and moral ideas could never be in harmony with those of the German people. The Nuremberg Laws, therefore, exclude members of the Jewish race from obtaining Reich citizenship. Persons of mixed parentage – some 300,000 in all – can become citizens of the Reich, but are excluded from holding office in the Civil Service, the Army and the medical and legal professions. Exemptions are possible as provided for in the Laws. The regulation forbidding marriage between a Jew and a German and making illicit intercourse liable to punishment was designed primarily with a view to preventing the birth of further individuals of mixed blood whose fate is a sorry one everywhere in the world, because they are neither one thing nor the other. For those already in existence a distinction is made between those having two Jewish grandparents and those with only one. The former require the approval of the authorities for contracting marriage with someone of German or allied blood. The latter may not marry a Jew or a member of the former category. They may only marry people of German blood and their children are exempt from the restrictive regulations (Army Laws and the Law for the restoration of professionalism in the Civil Service, etc.). In short, their children become full members of the German community.

These measures were necessary because we realised that a nation or a people can only preserve its culture and its intellectual individuality by keeping the blood pure. It has been said that “every race is a divine inspiration” – a shaft incidentally aimed at the racial policy. We would re-join, however, “just because every race is a divine inspiration, the foremost task of civilisation is to keep that inspiration pure and reject the least contribution towards detracting from its purity.”

Memorabilia: Mark Weber on Revisionism and Politics

by Mark Weber

German-American Historian Mark Weber talks about the need of revisionism and the role it plays on dogmatic history “made” by the State.

Patton Assassinated to Suppress His Criticism of Post-War Policy

Source: http://www.renegadetribune.com/patton-assassinated-suppress-criticism-post-war-policy/

By Russ Winter

Before his death in 1999, an OSS special agent openly talked about his role in incapacitating Gen. George S. Patton (1885-1945) via a staged automobile fender bender on Dec. 9, 1945. Using the pandemonium of the traffic collision as a distraction, agent Douglas DeWitt Bazata sniped Patton in the neck with a specially made gun firing a non-piercing bolt. Patton survived the incident with a dislocation of a vertebrae and never knew what hit him.

The government assassin first publicly confessed his guilt in the plot decades ago in front of a journalist at an OSS reunion dinner in D.C. Later, Bazata also confessed his role to author Robert K. Wilcox, who wrote the book “Target Patton.” Wilcox’s cousin and researcher Tim Wilcox discusses the circumstances in the video below. Bazata was an active special agent and assassin during and after WWII.

Major Gen. William J. Donovan, head of the OSS

The assassin recounted that OSS Chief William Donovan had personally ordered the killing on the grounds that Patton had “gone crazy” and was becoming a major threat to American national interests.

A newspaper that also carried an interview claimed that it had “a professional analyst subject Bazata’s interview to the rigors of a content analysis using a Psychological Stress Evaluator (P.S.E.) His report: Bazata gives no evidence of lying.” More details can be gleaned in this article.

On Dec. 9, 1945, a truck swerved in front of Patton’s limo. It was driven by a corporal who then disappeared. Patton survived with a dislocation of vertebrae from Bazata’s weapon and was taken to a hospital in more distant Heidelberg rather than in nearby Mannheim.

As Patton was recovering, he held a press conference and declared he was going home. Then, he was injected or poisoned in the hospital and died suddenly on Dec. 21, 1945. There is a backstory that NKVD agents got to him, but that wouldn’t have been necessary.

Bazata claimed that he knows who killed him, and that Patton was killed by a dose of cyanide in the hospital. No autopsy was done, which is highly suspicious. Bazata went on to say that he met an unidentified man whom he knew only as a “Pole” (Polish extraction), who was also ordered to kill Patton.

Several official reports were produced regarding the exact circumstances of the very strange traffic accident said to be responsible for his death, but all of these reports have completely disappeared from U.S. government files. The medical reports disappeared, and archival records are strangely scrubbed.

Weak link in story? Patton stopped en route at a Roman ruin located on a hill along the roadside. Bazata put a jam into the window of Patton’s auto that would leave a four inch gap for a shot to the target. There are very few images of the limo online and now no accident reports either. However this one is of interest. It shows a white colored tag sticking out of the window, door area where Patton was seated. The window itself is blurry, but you can see some interior detail. Was this window indeed partially open – thus confirming Bazata’s claim?

Plenty of Motive for Assassination: George Patton’s Interpretive Framework

Patton had planned to write his memoirs, illustrating that eastern Europe was tossed to the Soviet Union. The reason for the hit on Patton were his views put forth on Oct. 22, 1945, in a long letter to Maj. Gen. James G. Harbord. Once the powers that be realized Patton would retire and be outspoken, the plan was put into place. This “car accident” took place shortly before his scheduled departure home, and he had narrowly escaped death twice before under very strange circumstances.

In the letter, Patton had bitterly condemned the Morgenthau policy; Eisenhower’s pusillanimous behavior in the face of Jewish demands; the strong pro-Soviet bias in the press; and the politicization, corruption, degradation and the demoralization of the U.S. Army, from this bad policy. He saw this as a deliberate goal of America’s enemies.

I have been just as furious as you at the compilation of lies which the communist and Semitic elements of our government have leveled against me and practically every other commander. In my opinion it is a deliberate attempt to alienate the soldier vote from the commanders, because the communists know that soldiers are not communistic, and they fear what eleven million votes (of veterans) would do.”

In his letter to Harbord, Patton also revealed his own plans to fight an “all-out offensive” against those who were destroying the morale and integrity of the Army and endangering America’s future by not opposing the growing Soviet might.

It is my present thought … that when I finish this job, which will be around the first of the year, I shall resign, not retire, because if I retire I will still have a gag in my mouth … I should not start a limited counterattack, which would be contrary to my military theories, but should wait until I can start an all-out offensive …”

Several months before the end of the war, Patton recognized the fearful danger to the West posed by the Soviet Union, and he had disagreed bitterly with the orders given to him in April and May, 1945 to hold back his army and wait for the Red Army to occupy vast stretches of German, Czech, Rumanian, Hungarian and Yugoslav territory, which the Americans could have easily taken instead.

The most notorious incident allegedly happened toward the end of May, when an English-speaking Russian brigadier general arrived at Patton’s headquarters to demand that some river boats on the Danube that had contained Germans who had surrendered to the Third Army be returned to the Russians. Patton opened a drawer, pulled out a pistol, slammed it down on his desk and raged, “Goddamnit! Get this son-of-a-bitch out of here! Who in hell let him in? Don’t let any more Russian bastards into this headquarters.”

On July 21, he wrote to Beatrice, “We have destroyed what could have been a good race and we [are] about to replace them with Mongolian savages. Now the horrors of peace, pacifism and unions will have unlimited sway. I wish I were young enough to fight in the next one [war]. It would be real fun killing Mongols …. It is hell to be old and passé and know it.”

Then, he was highly critical of the post-war occupation policy in Germany.

The noise against me is only the means by which the Jews and Communists are attempting and with good success to implement a further dismemberment of Germany. I think that if I resigned as I threatened to do yesterday, it would simply discredit me to no purpose.

We promised the Europeans freedom. It would be worse than dishonorable not to see that they have it. This might mean war with the Russians, but what of it? They have no air force, and their gasoline and ammunition supplies are low. I’ve seen their miserable supply trains; mostly wagons drawn by beaten up old horses or oxen. I’ll say this; the Third Army alone and with damned few casualties, could lick what is left of the Russians in six weeks. You mark my words. Don’t ever forget them. Someday we will have to fight them and it will take six years and cost us six million lives. [As quoted in the book “The Unknown Patton” (1983) by Charles M. Province, p. 100]

Other notable quotes illustrate his frame mind.

No one gives a damn how well Bavaria is run. All they are interested in now is how well it is ruined. [Letter to Beatrice (29 September 1945), published in “The Patton Papers” (1996), edited by Martin Blumenson]

Evidently the virus started by Morgenthau and Baruch of a Semitic revenge against all Germans is still working. Harrison (a U.S. State Department official) and his associates indicate that they feel German civilians should be removed from houses for the purpose of housing Displaced Persons. There are two errors in this assumption. First, when we remove an individual German we punish an individual German, while the punishment is – not intended for the individual but for the race. Furthermore, it is against my Anglo-Saxon conscience to remove a person from a house, which is a punishment, without due process of law.

There were also running conflicts about the treatment of Axis POWs. Patton was countering abuses. Additionally Patton was furious that Americans from POW facilities in Soviet hands had not been immediately returned per agreement.

With great reluctance and only after repeated promptings from Eisenhower, he had thrown German families out of their homes to make room for more than a million DPs, but he balked when ordered to begin blowing up German factories in accord with the infamous Morgenthau Plan to destroy Germany’s economic base forever.

In his diary he wrote:

I doubted the expediency of blowing up factories, because the ends for which the factories are being blown up – that is, preventing Germany from preparing for war – can be equally well attained through the destruction of their machinery, while the buildings can be used to house thousands of homeless persons.

In a letter to his wife of September 14, 1945, he wrote:

I am frankly opposed to this war criminal stuff. It is not cricket and is Semitic. I am also opposed to sending POW’s to work as slaves in foreign lands (i.e., the Soviet Union’s Gulags), where many will be starved to death. I have been at Frankfurt for a civil government conference. If what we are doing (to the Germans) is ‘Liberty, then give me death.’ I can’t see how Americans can sink so low. It is Semitic, and I am sure of it.

On July 21, 1945:

Berlin gave me the blues. We have destroyed what could have been a good race, and we are about to replace them with Mongolian savages. And all Europe will be communist. It’s said that for the first week after they took it (Berlin), all women who ran were shot and those who did not were raped. I could have taken it (instead of the Soviets) had I been allowed.

On August 31 he wrote:

Actually, the Germans are the only decent people left in Europe. It’s a choice between them and the Russians. I prefer the Germans.

And on September 2:

What we are doing is to destroy the only semi-modern state in Europe, so that Russia can swallow the whole.

Morgenthauists and media monopolists had decided that Patton was incorrigible and must be discredited. So they began a non-stop hounding of him in the press, accusing him of being “soft on Nazis”, Patton’s response:

There is a very apparent Semitic influence in the press. They are trying to do two things: first, implement communism, and second, see that all businessmen of German ancestry and non-Jewish antecedents are thrown out of their jobs.

Caricatures from “Der Stürmer” – translated in English and colourized!

Unknown Date – Part 1

Why Communism and Capitalism Are Actually the Same Thing

Source: http://www.renegadetribune.com/communism-capitalism-actually-thing/

By Willally

In my article ‘The High Culture of the Germanic Peoples‘ I already mentioned the Jewish myth of patriarchy (i.e. the theory that Capitalism was invented by the Indo-Europeans). There I also explained why this is only a deception to deflect the guilt away from the Jews. For those who have not read it, I quote myself here:

[…] even Jewish scholars admit that usury was invented in the Semitic kingdom of Sumer[15], the same kingdom which invented the first crucified deity[16]. The currency of this kingdom was the Shekel, dedicated to the crucified goddess Inanna[17], who went through a passion and resurrected. Shekel is, as we know, the Jewish name for money to this day.

In contrast to that, Indo-European civilizations were so averse to usury and swindles that even paying taxes was regarded as a sign of slavery and they knew only the reverse of taxation, that is, the government handed over goods to the citizens from time to time[18].These taboos against usury were so stark that they persisted throughout most of European history.

The privatizing of common goods, the exclusion of women from social life, the heritability of privileges, and the extortion of usury, those evils came to Europe from the Orient, through three ways:

  • A Jewish religion called Christianity, which hates Nature and Beauty.
  • Roman law, intended for forcing the life together of total strangers in cities.
  • Classical Greco-Roman culture, developed by narcissistic elites, wanting to justify their cosmopolitan fetishes.

Some kind of proto-capitalism was indeed spreading itself in antiquity, but this was a gradual process during many thousands of years. This Capitalist trend came from the Orient, with its epicenter in the Semitic kingdoms around ancient Israel, and the Indo-Europeans were not their bearers but another victim of it.

This Oriental capitalism profited from race-mixed societies and multicultural empires, finding its most powerful expression in Christianity. This bedded the seeds for a world subjugated by a few ‘chosen ones’, where autochthonous cultures are replaced with Consumerism and the sacredness of life with machines.

Our Jewish patriarchs look forward with all means to make ancient history confusing and inaccessible to the masses, while deferring the guilt of these developments to White people.

Now the purpose of this short essay is to explain in the most concise form possible why Communism is a swindle in order to foster Jewish Capitalism.

As his favorite student (Margaret Mead) pondered about the subject of his dissertation, Franz Boas gave her not only a subject, but actually told her what her work should demonstrate before she had even begun to research! She should demonstrate that among the primitive peoples there was some kind of Communism with no private property, no sexual roles and no violence whatsoever. Needless to say, all revisions of her work demonstrated she had falsified information and even invented parts of her accounts.

Later anthropologists who visited the same islands of Samoa, found nowhere such Communist arrangement of society and to this day, no-one has ever found a society with those characteristics.

This example is illustrative of the methods used in academia when it comes to ideologically loaded subjects. We know, for example, that Karl Marx envisioned with his Ancient Communism also a secular version of ‘the fall of man from paradise’. This Ancient Communism was some kind of paradise, supposedly lost by the arrival of warrior nomads, and only when humanity unites itself again into a universal, global community, with no private property, then salvation can be found.

This international Communism looks in practice no different from Capitalism, where a few Oligarchs have concentrated so many riches that the rest of humanity have no private property anymore (the destruction of all social classes) while an insatiable market has removed all national barriers (internationalism) with its expansion.

The essence of Capitalism has actually always been ‘the war of classes’ and ‘internationalism’ (the same banner-words of Communism). The war of classes means that the poor are being constantly exploited because of their belonging to another class, while the rich identify with rich people of other countries, allying with them in order to make the market into an international business.

Such a war of classes didn’t exist among our ancestors because all members of the society identified themselves as a race or folk, regardless of their position, thus the goal of this war of classes, as proposed by Marx, is clearly to destroy that cohesion and separate the world into people with property and the rest who have neither property, nor culture, nor ancestry.

It seems that the last thing Marx wanted was a world separated into races and sub-races, as it is natural. Many Communists believe to this day that the source of Capitalism and economic oppression is ‘racism’, something totally absurd and preposterous because almost without exception all evils like the slave trade, colonialism, etc. have been predestined by a expanding market and alimented by greediness.

It is only as an afterthought when unscrupulous elites justify their enterprises in the name of religion, human rights or global justice. A good example is the conquest of Mexico, led in the name of a universalist religion of love (Christianity), and Hernan Cortez didn’t seem very racist when he begot many sons among the Aztec Indians (who later became nobles!) and he must have believed White culture is superior when he decided to spend the rest of his life among the Aztecs with little contact with European culture or other White people.

Racial consciousness, or the desire to live among Whites, would never lead to miscegenation or economic dependence from non-Whites. I have never encountered a National Socialist who loves living in a country where the majority are poor non-Whites.

When different races want to exchange goods without mixing, the only way is actually to respect each other’s sovereignty, in contrast to the holy duty of conversion, mandatory for someone who believes in universal equality and universal solidarity.

Thus, when modern communists blame racism as the source of economic oppression, while promoting internationalism as the solution, it is no different than the Spanish priests who condemned the lot of the Indians, while converting them into the church, which financed and ideologically justified their enslavement.

In this context is important to mention that one of the greatest insights of Hitler was the realization that with all promises of universal brotherhood and peace there always came some kind of Versailles Treaty. This Versailles Treaty can be evident or it can be a hidden one, for example in the ever-raising rates of usury we unknowingly pay in everything we buy. The central point remains always the same: Universalism leads to the concentration of riches and the reduction of humanity into destitute tribute payers.

***

Continuing with how Communism would look in practice: ‘The rule of the proletariat’ would mean that a racially mixed humanity, without property, believes through propaganda that they rule (just as modern democracy), and they are so culturally impoverished that they don’t even know of the existence of these Oligarchs.

Another interesting parallel between Marx’s ideal world and modern Capitalism is consumerism. Marx promoted a materialistic view of morality and culture. Only when every person in this planet could afford to buy anything they wished, could we talk about fairness. This resembles of course the situation today, where we have destroyed all Nature and all culture (real wealth as opposed to artificial wealth) just to produce en masse all kinds of useless, ugly and unnecessary things, which only calm a few seconds the addictive impulse of consume, as promoted by capitalistic corporations.

Karl Marx had also a linear vision of time in which the flow of history led irrevocably to a Communist world-government. This linear conception of history is, of course, the same we find in the Old and New Testaments, and a global rule of Communism reminds us of a global rule of Christ as also prophesied in the Bible.

It is interesting, though, that the Bible puts this global rule of the Jewish god as a preamble to the intentional destruction of our world by this same god. In an ironic way, it seems that the Jewish prophets got it right when they connected globalism with the total destruction of our environment and life.

The essence of life is differentiation and separation, first into species and then into races, as a mechanism which makes sure no life forms overwhelms this planet. We could fairly say that an artificial ideology that attempts to unite all humanity is the antithesis of life.