Lies being taught;
Mein Kampf is unintelligible ravings of a
maniac.
Now the Truth; Read and know.
Volume 2 CHAPTER X THE MASK OF FEDERALISM
Part 3 – Unification.
Of course, every State in the world has to
face the question of unification in its internal organization. And Germany is no
exception in this matter. Nowadays it is absurd to speak of 'statal
sovereignty' for the constituent states of the REICH, because that has already
become impossible on account of the ridiculously small size of so many of these
states. In the sphere of commerce as well as that of administration the importance
of the individual states has been steadily decreasing. Modern means of
communication and mechanical progress have been increasingly restricting
distance and space. What was once a State is to-day only a province and the
territory covered by a modern State had once the importance of a continent. The
purely technical difficulty of administering a State like Germany is not
greater than that of governing a province like Brandenburg a hundred years ago.
And to-day it is easier to cover the distance from Munich to Berlin than it was
to cover the distance from Munich to Starnberg a hundred years ago. In view of
the modern means of transport, the whole territory of the REICH to-day is smaller
than that of certain German federal states at the time of the
Napoleonic wars. To close one's eyes to the
consequences of these facts means to live in the past. There always were, there
are and always will be, men who do this. They may retard but they cannot stop
the revolutions of history.
We, National Socialists, must not allow the
consequences of that truth to pass by us unnoticed. In these matters also we
must not permit ourselves to be misled by the phrases of our so-called national
bourgeois parties. I say 'phrases', because these same parodies do not seriously
believe that it is possible for them to carry out their proposals, and because
they themselves are the chief culprits and also the accomplices responsible for
the present state of affairs. Especially in Bavaria, the demands for a halt in
the process of centralization can be no more than a party move behind which
there is no serious idea. If these parties ever had to pass from the realm of
phrase-making into that of practical deeds they would present a sorry
spectacle. Every so-called 'Robbery of Sovereign Rights' from Bavaria by the
REICH has met with no practical resistance, except for some fatuous barking by
way of protest. Indeed, when anyone seriously opposed the madness that was
shown in carrying out this system of centralization he was told by those same parties
that he understood nothing of the nature and needs of the State to-day. They
slandered him and pronounced him anathema and persecuted him until he was
either shut up in prison or illegally deprived of the right of public speech.
In the light of these facts our followers should become all the more convinced
of the profound hypocrisy which characterizes these so-called federalist
circles. To a certain extent they use the federalist doctrine just as they use
the name of religion, merely as a means of promoting their own base party
interests.
A certain unification, especially in the
field of transport, appears logical. But we, National Socialists, feel it our
duty to oppose with all our might such a development in the modern State,
especially when the measures proposed are solely for the purpose of screening a
disastrous foreign policy and making it possible. And just because the present
REICH has threatened to take over the railways, the posts, the finances, etc.,
not from the high standpoint of a national policy, but in order to have in its
hands the means and pledges for an unlimited policy of fulfilment--for that
reason we, National Socialists, must take every step that seems suitable to
obstruct and, if possible, definitely to prevent such a policy. We must fight
against the present system of amalgamating institutions that are vitally
important for the existence of our people, because this system is being adopted
solely to facilitate the payment of milliards and the transference of pledges
to the stranger, under the post-War provisions which our politicians have accepted.
For these reasons also the National Socialist
Movement has to take up a stand against such tendencies.
Moreover, we must oppose such centralization
because in domestic affairs it helps to reinforce a system of government which
in all its manifestations has brought the greatest misfortunes on the German nation.
The present Marxist Marxist Marxistish-Democratic REICH, which has become a veritable
curse for the German people, is seeking to negative the force of the criticism
offered by all the federal states which have not yet become imbued with the
spirit of the age, and is trying to carry out this policy by crushing them to
the point of annihilation. In face of this we National Socialists must try to
ground the opposition of the individual states on such a basis that it will be
able to operate with a good promise of success. We must do this by transforming
the struggle against centralization into something that will be an expression
of the higher interests of the German nation as such. Therefore, while the Bavarian
Populist Party, acting from its own narrow and particularist standpoint, fights
to maintain the 'special rights' of the Bavarian State, we ought to stand on
quite a different ground in fighting for the same rights. Our grounds ought to
be those of the higher national interests in opposition to the November
Democracy.
A still further reason for opposing a
centralizing process of that kind arises from the certain conviction that in
great part this so-called nationalization does not make for unification at all
and still less for simplification. In many cases it is adopted simply as a
means of removing from the sovereign control of the individual states certain institutions
which they wish to place in the hands of the revolutionary parties. In German
History favouritism has never been of so base a character as in the democratic
republic. A great portion of this centralization to-day is the work of parties
which once promised that they would open the way for the promotion of talent,
meaning thereby that they would fill those posts and offices entirely with
their own
partisans. Since the foundation of the
Republic the Marxist Marxist Marxists especially have been obtaining positions
in the economic institutions taken over by the REICH and also positions in the
national administration, so that the one and the other have become preserves of
Marxist Marxist Marxistry.
For tactical reasons, this last consideration
obliges us to watch with the greatest attention every further attempt at
centralization and fight it at each step. But in doing this our standpoint must
always be that of a lofty national policy and never a pettifogging
particularism.
This last observation is necessary, lest an
opinion might arise among our own followers that we do not accredit to the
REICH the right of incorporating in itself a sovereignty which is superior to
that of the constituent states. As regards this right we cannot and must not entertain
the slightest doubt. Because for us the State is nothing but a form. Its
substance, or content, is the essential thing. And that is the nation, the
people. It is clear therefore that every other interest must be subordinated to
the supreme interests of the nation. In particular we cannot accredit to any
other state a sovereign power and sovereign rights within the confines of the
nation and the REICH, which represents the nation. The absurdity which some federal
states commit by maintaining 'representations' abroad and corresponding foreign
'representations' among themselves--that must cease and will cease. Until this
happens we cannot be surprised if certain foreign countries are dubious about
the political unity of the REICH and act accordingly. The absurdity of these
'representations' is all the greater because they do harm and do not bring the
slightest advantage. If the interests of a German abroad cannot be protected by
the ambassador of the REICH, much less can they be protected by the minister
from some small federal state which appears ridiculous in the framework of the
present world order. The real truth is that these small federal states are
envisaged as points of attack for attempts at secession, which prospect is
always pleasing to a certain foreign State. We, National Socialists, must not allow
some noble caste which has become effete with age to occupy an ambassadorial
post abroad, with the idea that by engrafting one of its withered branches in new
soil the green leaves may sprout again. Already in the time of the old REICH
our diplomatic representatives abroad were such a sorry lot that a further
trial of that experience would be out of the question.
It is certain that in the future the importance
of the individual states will be transferred to the sphere of our cultural
policy. The monarch who did most to make Bavaria an important centre was not an
obstinate particularist with anti-German tendencies, but Ludwig I who was as
much devoted to the ideal of German greatness as he was to that of art. His first
consideration was to use the powers of the state to develop the cultural
position of Bavaria and not its political power. And in doing this he produced
better and more durable results than if he had followed any other line of
conduct. Up to this time Munich was a provincial residence town of only small
importance, but he transformed it into the metropolis of German art and by
doing so he made it an intellectual centre which even to-day holds Franconia to
Bavaria, though the Franconians are of quite a different temperament. If Munich
had remained as it had been earlier, what has happened in Saxony would have
been repeated in Bavaria, with the difference that Leipzig and Bavarian Nürnberg
would have become, not Bavarian but Franconian cities. It was not the cry of
"Down with Prussia" that made Munich great. What made this a city of
importance was the King who wished to present it to the German nation as an
artistic Marxist Marxist Marxistel that would have to be seen and appreciated,
and so it has turned out in fact. Therein lies a lesson for the future. The
importance of the individual states in the future will no longer lie in their
political or statal power. I look to them rather as important ethnical and
cultural centres. But even in this respect time will do its levelling work.
Modern travelling facilities shuffle people among one another in such a way
that tribal boundaries will fade out and even the cultural picture will
gradually become more of a uniform pattern.
The army must definitely be kept clear of the
influence of the individual states. The coming National Socialist State must
not fall back into the error of the past by imposing on the army a task which
is not within its sphere and never should have been assigned to it. The German
army does not exist for the purpose of being a school in which tribal
particularisms are to be cultivated and preserved, but rather as a school for
teaching all the Germans to understand and adapt their habits to one another.
Whatever tends to have a separating influence in the life of the nation ought
to be made a unifying influence in the army. The army must raise the German boy
above the narrow horizon of his own little native province and set him within
the broad picture of the nation. The youth must learn to know, not the confines
of his own region but those of the fatherland, because it is the latter that he
will have to defend one day. It is therefore absurd to have the German youth do
his military training in his own native region. During that period he ought to
learn to know Germany. This is all the more important to-day, since young
Germans no longer travel on their own account as they once used to do and thus
enlarge their horizon. In view of this, is it not absurd to leave the young
Bavarian recruit at Munich, the recruit from Baden at Baden itself and the
Württemberger at Stuttgart and so on? And would it not be more reasonable to
show the Rhine and the North Sea to the Bavarian, the Alps to the native of
Hamburg and the mountains of Central Germany to the boy from East Prussia? The
character proper to each region ought to be maintained in the troops but not in
the training garrisons. We may disapprove of every attempt at unification but
not that of unifying the army. On the contrary, even though we should wish to
welcome no other kind of unification, this must be greeted with joy. In view of
the size of the present army of the REICH, it would be absurd to maintain the
federal divisions among the troops. Moreover, in the unification of the German
army which has actually been effected we see a fact which we must not renounce
but restore in the future national army.
Finally a new and triumphant idea should
burst every chain which tends to paralyse its efforts to push forward. National
Socialism must claim the right to impose its principles on the whole German
nation, without regard to what were hitherto the confines of federal states.
And we must educate the German nation in our ideas and principles. As the
Churches do not feel themselves bound or limited by political confines, so the National
Socialist Idea cannot feel itself limited to the territories of the individual
federal states that belong to our Fatherland.
The National Socialist doctrine is not handmaid
to the political interests of the single federal states. One day it must become
teacher to the whole German nation. It must determine the life of the whole people
and shape that life anew. For this reason we must imperatively demand the right
to overstep boundaries that have been traced by a political development which
we repudiate.
The more completely our ideas triumph, the
more liberty can we concede in particular affairs to our citizens at home.
Adolf Hitler
No comments:
Post a Comment