Lies
being taught;
Mein
Kampf is unintelligible ravings of a maniac.
Now
the Truth; It is the opposite of what press has told
you
CHAPTER XIV; GERMANY'S POLICY IN EASTERN
EUROPE Part 2 –
Defeat Russian communism
To-day we are all convinced of the necessity
of regulating our situation in regard to France; but our success here will be
ineffective in its broad results if the general aims of our foreign policy will
have to stop at that. It can have significance for us only if it serves to
cover our flank in the struggle for that extension of territory which is necessary
for the existence of our people in Europe. For colonial acquisitions will not
solve that question. It can be solved only by the winning of such territory for
the settlement of our people as will extend the area of the motherland and
thereby will not only keep the new settlers in the closest communion with the
land of their origin, but will guarantee to this territorial ensemble the
advantages which arise from the fact that in their expansion over greater
territory the people remain united as a political unit.
The National Movement must not be the
advocate for other nations, but the protagonist for its own nation. Otherwise
it would be something superfluous and, above all, it would have no right to
clamour against the action of the past; for then it would be repeating the
action of the past. The old German policy suffered from the mistake of having
been determined by dynastic considerations. The new German policy must not follow
the sentimentality of cosmopolitan patriotism. Above all, we must not form a
police guard for the famous 'poor small nations'; but we must be the soldiers
of the German nation.
We National Socialists have to go still
further. The right to territory may become a duty when a great nation seems
destined to go under unless its territory be extended. Germany needs that territorial
magnitude which gives it the necessary importance to-day and assures the
existence of its citizens.
Therefore we National Socialists have
purposely drawn a line through the line of conduct followed by pre-War Germany
in foreign policy. We put an end to the perpetual Germanic march towards the
South and West of Europe and turn our eyes towards the lands of the East. We
finally put a stop to the colonial and trade policy of pre-War times and pass
over to the territorial policy of the future.
But when we speak of new territory in Europe
to-day we must principally think of Russia and the border States subject to
her.
Destiny itself seems to wish to point out the
way for us here. In delivering Russia over to Communism, Fate robbed the
Russian people of that intellectual class which had once created the Russian
State and were the guarantee of its existence. For the Russian State was
not organized by the constructive political talent of the Slav element in Russia,
but was much more a marvelous exemplification of the capacity for
State-building possessed by the Germanic element. For centuries Russia owed the
source of its livelihood as a State to the Germanic nucleus of its governing
class. But this nucleus is now almost wholly broken up and abolished. The Marxist
has taken its place. Just as it is impossible for the Russian to shake off the Marxist
yoke by exerting his own powers, so, too, it is impossible for the Marxist to
keep this formidable State in existence for any long period of time. He himself
is by no means an organizing element, but rather a ferment of decomposition.
This colossal Empire in the East is ripe for dissolution. And the end of the Marxist
domination in Russia will also be the end of Russia as a State. We are chosen
by Destiny to be the witnesses of a catastrophe which will afford the strongest
confirmation of the nationalist theory of race.
But it is our task, and it is the mission of
the National Socialist Movement, to develop in our people that political
mentality which will enable them to realize that the aim which they must set to
themselves for the fulfillment of their future must not be some wildly
enthusiastic adventure in the footsteps of Alexander the Great but industrious labor
with the German plough, for which the German sword will provide the soil.
That the Marxist should declare himself
bitterly hostile to such a policy is only quite natural. For the Marxists know
better than any others what the adoption of this line of conduct must mean for
their own future. That fact alone ought to teach all genuine nationalists that
this new orientation is the right and just one. But, unfortunately, the
opposite is the case. Not only among the members of the German-National Party
but also in purely nationalist circles violent opposition is raised against this
Eastern policy. And in connection with that opposition, as in all such cases,
the authority of great names is appealed to. The spirit of Bismarck is evoked
in defence of a policy which is as stupid as it is impossible, and is in the
highest degree detrimental to the interests of the German people. They say that
Bismarck laid great importance on the value of good relations with Russia. To a
certain extent, that is true. But they quite forget to add that he laid equal
stress on the importance of good relations with Italy, for example. Indeed, the
same Herr von Bismarck once concluded an alliance with Italy so that he might
more easily settle accounts with Austria. Why is not this policy now advocated?
They will reply that the Italy of to-day is not the Italy of that time. Good.
But then, honourable sirs, permit me to remind you that the Russia of to-day is
no longer the Russia of that time. Bismarck never laid down a policy which
would be permanently binding under all circumstances and should be adhered to
on principle. He was too much the master of the moment to burden himself with
that kind of obligation. Therefore, the question ought not to be what Bismarck
then did, but rather what he would do to-day. And that question is very easy to
answer. His political sagacity would never allow him to ally himself with a
State that is doomed to disappear.
Moreover, Bismarck looked upon the colonial
and trade policy of his time with mixed feelings, because what he most desired
was to assure the best possibilities of consolidating and internally
strengthening the state system which he himself had created. That was the sole
ground on which he then welcomed the Russian defence in his rear, so as to give
him a free hand for his activities in the West. But what was advantageous then to
Germany would now be detrimental.
As early as 1920-21, when the young movement
began slowly to appear on the political horizon and movements for the
liberation of the German nation were formed here and there, the Party was
approached from various quarters in an attempt to bring it into definite
connection with the liberationist movements in other countries. This was in
line with the plans of the 'League of Oppressed Nations', which had been
advertised in many quarters and was composed principally of representatives of
some of the Balkan States and also of Egypt and India. These always impressed
me as charlatans who gave themselves big airs but had no real background at all.
Not a few Germans, however, especially in the nationalist camp, allowed
themselves to be taken in by these pompous Orientals, and in the person of some
wandering Indian or Egyptian student they believed at once that they were face
to face with a 'representative' of India or Egypt. They did not realize that in
most cases they were dealing with persons who had no backing whatsoever, who
were not authorized by anybody to conclude any sort of agreement whatsoever; so
that the practical result of every negotiation with such individuals was
negative and the time spent in such dealings had to be reckoned as utterly
lost. I was always on my guard against these attempts. Not only that I had something
better to do than to waste weeks in such sterile 'discussions', but also
because I believed that even if one were dealing with genuine representatives
that whole affair would be bound to turn out futile, if not positively harmful.
In peace-time it was already lamentable
enough that the policy of alliances, because it had no active and aggressive
aims in view, ended in a defensive association with antiquated States that had
been pensioned off by the history of the world. The alliance with Austria, as well
as that with Turkey, was not much to be joyful about. While the great military
and industrial States of the earth had come together in a league for purposes
of active aggression, a few old and effete States were collected, and with this
antique bric-à-brac an attempt was made to face an active world coalition.
Germany had to pay dearly for that mistaken foreign policy and yet not dearly
enough to prevent our incorrigible visionaries from falling back into the same
error again. For the attempt to make possible the disarmament of the
all-powerful victorious States through a 'League of Oppressed Nations' is not
only ridiculous but disastrous. It is disastrous because in that way the German
people are again being diverted from real possibilities, which they abandon for
the sake of fruitless hopes and illusions. In reality the German of to-day is
like a drowning man that clutches at any straw which may float beside him. And
one finds people doing this who are otherwise highly educated. Wherever some
will-o'-the-wisp of a fantastic hope appears these people set off immediately
to chase it. Let this be a League of Oppressed Nations, a League of Nations, or
some other fantastic invention, thousands of ingenuous souls will always be
found to believe in it.
I remember well the childish and incomprehensible
hopes which arose suddenly in nationalist circles in the years 1920-21 to the
effect that England was just nearing its downfall in India. A few Asiatic mountebanks,
who put themselves forward as "the champions of Indian Freedom", then
began to peregrinate throughout Europe and succeeded in inspiring otherwise
quite reasonable people with the fixed notion that the British World Empire,
which had its pivot in India, was just about to collapse there. They never
realized that their own wish was the father of all these ideas. Nor did they
stop to think how absurd their wishes were. For inasmuch as they expected the
end of the British Empire and of England's power to follow the collapse of its
dominion over India, they themselves admitted that India was of the most
outstanding importance for England.
Now in all likelihood the deep mysteries of
this most important problem must have been known not only to the
German-National prophets but also to those who had the direction of British
history in their hands. It is right down puerile to suppose that in England
itself the importance of India for the British Empire was not adequately
appreciated. And it is a proof of having learned nothing from the world war and
of thoroughly misunderstanding or knowing nothing about Anglo-Saxon
determination, when they imagine that England could lose India without first
having put forth the last ounce of her strength in the struggle to hold it. Moreover,
it shows how complete is the ignorance prevailing in Germany as to the manner
in which the spirit of England permeates and administers her Empire. England
will never lose India unless she admits racial disruption in the machinery of
her administration (which at present is entirely out of the question in India)
or unless she is overcome by the sword of some powerful enemy. But Indian
risings will never bring this about. We Germans have had sufficient experience
to know how hard it is to coerce England. And, apart from all this, I as a German
would far rather see India under British domination than under that of any
other nation.
The hopes of an epic rising in Egypt were
just as chimerical. The 'Holy War' may bring the pleasing illusion to our
German nincompoops that others are now ready to shed their blood for them.
Indeed, this cowardly speculation is almost always the father of such hopes.
But in reality the illusion would soon be brought to an end under the fusillade
from a few companies of British machine-guns and a hail of British bombs.
A coalition of cripples cannot attack a
powerful State which is determined, if necessary, to shed the last drop of its
blood to maintain its existence.
To-day we must take up the same sort of
attitude also towards Russia. The Russia of to-day, deprived of its Germanic
ruling class, is not a possible ally in the struggle for German liberty,
setting aside entirely the inner designs of its new rulers. From the purely
military viewpoint a Russo-German coalition waging war against Western Europe,
and probably against the whole world on that account, would be catastrophic for
us. The struggle would have to be fought out, not on Russian but on German territory,
without Germany being able to receive from Russia the slightest effective
support. The means of power at the disposal of the present German REICH are so
miserable and so inadequate to the waging of a foreign war that it would be
impossible to defend our frontiers against Western Europe, England included.
And the industrial area of Germany would have to be abandoned undefended to the
concentrated attack of our adversaries. It must be added that between Germany
and Russia there is the Polish State, completely in the hands of the French. In
case Germany and Russia together should wage war against Western Europe, Russia
would have to overthrow Poland before the first Russian soldier could arrive on
the German front. But it is not so much a question of soldiers as of technical
equipment. In this regard we should have our situation in the world war
repeated, but in a more terrible manner. At that time German industry had to be
drained to help our glorious allies, and from the technical side Germany had to
carry on the war almost alone. In this new hypothetical war Russia, as a
technical factor, would count for nothing. We should have practically nothing
to oppose to the general motorization of the world, which in the next war will
make its appearance in an overwhelming and decisive form. In this important
field Germany has not only shamefully lagged behind, but with the little it has
it would have to reinforce Russia, which at the present moment does not possess
a single factory capable of producing a motor gun-wagon. Under such conditions
the presupposed coming struggle would assume the character of sheer slaughter.
The German youth would have to shed more of its blood than it did even in the
world war; for, as always, the honour of fighting will fall on us alone, and
the result would be an inevitable catastrophe. But even admitting that a
miracle were produced and that this war did not end in the total annihilation
of Germany, the final result would be that the German nation would be bled
white, and, surrounded by great military States, its real situation would be in
no way ameliorated.
It is useless to object here that in case of
an alliance with Russia we should not think of an immediate war or that,
anyhow, we should have means of making thorough preparations for war. No. An
alliance which is not for the purpose of waging war has no meaning and no
value. Even though at the moment when an alliance is concluded the prospect of
war is a distant one, still the idea of the situation developing towards war is
the profound reason for entering into an alliance. It is out of the question to
think that the other Powers would be deceived as to the purpose of such an
alliance. A Russo-German coalition would remain either a matter of so much
paper--and in this case it would have no meaning for us--or the letter of the
treaty would be put into practice visibly, and in that case the rest of the
world would be warned. It would be childish to think that in such circumstances
England and France would wait for ten years to give the Russo-German alliance
time to complete its technical preparations. No. The storm would break over Germany
immediately.
Therefore the fact of forming an alliance
with Russia would be the signal for a new war. And the result of that would be
the end of Germany.
To these considerations the following must be
added:
(1) Those who are in power in Russia to-day
have no idea of forming an honourable alliance or of remaining true to it, if
they did.
It must never be forgotten that the present
rulers of Russia are blood-stained criminals, that here we have the dregs of
humanity which, favoured by the circumstances of a tragic moment, overran a great
State, degraded and extirpated millions of educated people out of sheer blood-lust,
and that now for nearly ten years they have ruled with such a savage tyranny as
was never known before. It
must not be forgotten that these rulers belong to a people in whom the most
bestial cruelty is allied with a capacity for artful mendacity and believes
itself to-day more than ever called to impose its sanguinary despotism on the
rest of the world. It must not be forgotten that the international Marxist, who
is to-day the absolute master of Russia, does not look upon Germany as an ally
but as a State condemned to the same doom as Russia. One does not form an
alliance with a partner whose only aim is the destruction of his fellow-partner.
Above all, one does not enter into alliances with people for whom no treaty is
sacred; because they do not move about this earth as men of honour and
sincerity but as the representatives of lies and deception, thievery and
plunder and robbery. The man who thinks that he can bind himself by treaty with
parasites is like the tree that believes it can form a profitable bargain with
the ivy that surrounds it.
(2) The menace to which Russia once succumbed
is hanging steadily over Germany. Only a bourgeois simpleton could imagine
that Communism can be tamed. In his superficial way of thinking he does not
suspect that here we are dealing with a phenomenon that is due to an urge of
the blood: namely, the aspiration of the Marxists to become the despots of the world.
That aspiration is quite as natural as the impulse of the Anglo-Saxon to sit in
the seats of rulership all over the earth. And as the Anglo-Saxon chooses his
own way of reaching those ends and fights for them with his characteristic
weapons, so also does the Marxist. The Marxist wriggles his way in among the
body of the nations and bores them hollow from inside. The weapons with which
he works are lies and calumny, poisonous infection and disintegration, until he
has ruined his hated adversary. In Russian Communism we ought to recognize the
kind of attempt which is being made by the Marxist in the twentieth century to secure
dominion over the world. In other epochs he worked towards the same goal but
with different, though at bottom similar, means. The kind of effort which the Marxists
puts forth springs from the deepest roots in the nature of his being. A people
does not of itself renounce the impulse to increase its stock and power. Only
external circumstances or senile impotence can force them to renounce this
urge. In the same way the Marxists will never spontaneously give up his march
towards the goal of world dictatorship or repress his external urge. He can be
thrown back on his road only by forces that are exterior to him, for his
instinct towards world domination will die out only with himself. Therefore the
Marxists follows the destined road until they are opposed by a force superior
to them.
To-day Germany is the next battlefield for
Russian communism. All the force of a fresh missionary idea is needed to raise
up our nation once more, to rescue it from the coils of the international
serpent and stop the process of corruption which is taking place in the
internal constitution of our blood; so that the forces of our nation, once liberated,
may be employed to preserve our nationality and prevent the repetition of the
recent catastrophe from taking place even in the most distant future. If this
be the goal we set to ourselves it would be folly to ally ourselves with a
country whose master is the mortal enemy of our future. How can we release our
people from this poisonous grip if we accept the same grip ourselves? How can
we teach the German worker that Communism is an infamous crime against humanity
if we ally ourselves with this infernal abortion and recognize its existence as
legitimate. With what right shall we condemn the members of the broad masses
whose sympathies lie with a certain WELTANSCHAUUNG if the rulers of our State
choose the representatives of that WELTANSCHAUUNG as their allies? The struggle
against the Jewish communism of the world demands that we should declare our
position towards Soviet Russia. We cannot cast out the Devil through Beelzebub.
If nationalist circles to-day grow enthusiastic about the idea of an alliance
with communism, then let them look around only in Germany and recognize from
what quarter they are being supported. Do these nationalists believe that a policy
which is recommended and acclaimed by the Marxist international Press can be
beneficial for the German people? Since when has the marxists acted as
shield-bearer for the militant nationalist?
One special reproach which could be made
against the old German REICH with regard to its policy of alliances was that it
spoiled its relations towards all others by continually swinging now this way
and now that way and by its weakness in trying to preserve world peace at all
costs. But one reproach which cannot be made against it is that it did not
continue to maintain good relations with Russia. I admit frankly that before
the War I thought it would have been better if Germany had abandoned her
senseless colonial policy and her naval policy and had joined England in an
alliance against Russia, therewith renouncing her weak world policy for a
determined European policy, with the idea of acquiring new territory on the
Continent. I do not forget the constant insolent threats which Pan-Slavist
Russia made against Germany. I do not forget the continual trial mobilizations,
the sole object of which was to irritate Germany. I cannot forget the tone of public
opinion in Russia which in pre-War days excelled itself in hate-inspired
outbursts against our nation and REICH. Nor can I forget the big Russian Press
which was always more favourable to France than to us.
But, in spite of everything, there was still
a second way possible before the War. We might have won the support of Russia
and turned against England. Circumstances are entirely different to-day. If,
before the War, throwing all sentiment to the winds, we could have marched by the
side of Russia, that is no longer possible for us to-day. Since then the hand
of the world-clock has moved forward. The hour has struck and struck loudly,
when the destiny of our people must be decided one way or another.
If, in view of this great and most important
task placed before it, the National Socialist Movement sets aside all illusions
and takes reason as its sole effective guide the catastrophe of 1918 may turn
out to be an infinite blessing for the future of our nation. From the lesson of
that collapse it may formulate an entirely new orientation for the conduct of its
foreign policy. Internally reinforced through its new WELTANSCHAUUNG, the
German nation may reach a final stabilization of its policy towards the outside
world. It may end by gaining what England has, what even Russia had, and what
France again and again utilized as the ultimate grounds on which she was able
to base correct decisions for her own interests: namely, A Political Testament.
Political Testament of the German Nation ought to lay down the following rules,
which will be always valid for its conduct towards the outside world:
Never permit two Continental Powers to arise
in Europe. Should any attempt be made to organize a second military Power on
the German frontier by the creation of a State which may become a Military
Power, with the prospect of an aggression against Germany in view, such an event
confers on Germany not only the right but the duty to prevent by every means,
including military means, the creation of such a State and to crush it if
created. See to it that the strength of our nation does not rest on colonial
foundations but on those of our own native territory in Europe. Never consider
the REICH secure unless, for centuries to come, it is in a position to give
every descendant of our race a piece of ground and soil that he can call his
own. Never forget that the most sacred of all rights in this world is man's
right to the earth which he wishes to cultivate for himself and that the
holiest of all sacrifices is that of the blood poured out for it.
I should not like to close this chapter
without referring once again to the one sole possibility of alliances that
exists for us in Europe at the present moment. In speaking of the German
alliance problem in the present chapter I mentioned England and Italy as the
only countries with which it would be worth while for us to strive to form a
close alliance and that this alliance would be advantageous. I should like here
to underline again the military importance of such an alliance.
The military consequences of forming this
alliance would be the direct opposite of the consequences of an alliance with
Russia. Most important of all is the fact that a RAPPROCHEMENT with England and
Italy would in no way involve a danger of war. The only Power that could oppose
such an arrangement would be France; and France would not be in a position to make
war. But the alliance should allow to Germany the possibility of making those
preparations in all tranquillity which, within the framework of such a coalition,
might in one way or another be requisite in view of a regulation of accounts
with France. For the full significance of such an alliance lies in the fact
that on its conclusion Germany would no longer be subject to the threat of a
sudden invasion. The coalition against her would disappear automatically; that
is to say, the Entente which brought such disaster to us. Thus France, the
mortal enemy of our people, would be isolated. And even though at first this success
would have only a moral effect, it would be sufficient to give Germany such
liberty of action as we cannot now imagine. For the new Anglo-German-Italian
alliance would hold the political initiative and no longer France.
A further success would be that at one stroke
Germany would be delivered from her unfavourable strategical situation. On the
one side her flank would be strongly protected; and, on the other, the
assurance of being able to import her foodstuffs and raw materials would be a
beneficial result of this new alignment of States. But almost of greater
importance would be the fact that this new League would include States that
possess technical qualities which mutually supplement each other. For the first
time Germany would have allies who would not be as vampires on her economic
body but would contribute their part to complete our technical equipment. And
we must not forget a final fact: namely, that in this case we should not have
allies resembling Turkey and Russia to-day. The greatest World Power on this
earth and a young national State would supply far other elements for a struggle
in Europe than the putrescent carcasses of the States with which Germany was
allied in the last war.
As I have already said, great difficulties
would naturally be made to hinder the conclusion of such an alliance. But was
not the formation of the Entente somewhat more difficult? Where King Edward VII
succeeded partly against interests that were of their nature opposed to his
work we must and will succeed, if the recognition of the necessity of such a development
so inspires us that we shall be able to act with skill and conquer our own
feelings in carrying the policy through. This will be possible when, incited to
action by the miseries of our situation, we shall adopt a definite purpose and
follow it out systematically instead of the defective foreign policy of the
last decades, which never had a fixed purpose in view.
The future goal of our foreign policy ought
not to involve an orientation to the East or the West, but it ought to be an
Eastern policy which will have in view the acquisition of such territory as is necessary
for our German people. To carry out this policy we need that force which the
mortal enemy of our nation, France, now deprives us of by holding us in her
grip and pitilessly robbing us of our strength. Therefore we must stop at no
sacrifice in our effort to destroy the French striving towards hegemony over
Europe. As our natural ally to-day we have every Power on the Continent that
feels France's lust for hegemony in Europe unbearable. No attempt to approach
those Powers ought to appear too difficult for us, and no sacrifice should be
considered too heavy, if the final outcome would be to make it possible for us
to overthrow our bitterest enemy. The minor wounds will be cured by the beneficent
influence of time, once the ground wounds have been cauterized and closed.
Adolf Hitler
Thank you for creating this blog to educate the people. I was in the kid in the 1980s and learned a lot of things about WWI and WWII which I now question. After watching the CIA and the FBI lie and attempt to frame President Trump with in the Russian Collusion Hoax while the mainstream media lied over and over again, I now question everything I was taught.
ReplyDeleteIt seems pretty clear now why certain groups want to ban Mein Kampf. It certainly isn't because the book simply preaches "hate," as Americans are taught to believe. Instead, it is because it adds context to the thinking of Hitler and the German people leading up the WWII. Instead of simply believing that Germans were evil and wanted to "take over the world," the writings in Mein Kampf show that Hitler did not want to take over the entire world.
American students are not taught about the role that Communism/Bolshevism had or the associated Zionist involvement leading up to WWII.