Our first task will not be to build up the idea of the völkisch State, but rather to wipe out the Jewish State which now exists. [For all its obvious deficiencies, Weimar Republic was no Jewish State. The Jewish State will be established only 24 years later – in Palestine]
As so often happens in the course of history, the main difficulty is not to establish a new order of things, but to clear the ground for its establishment.
[Actually, exactly the opposite is true as it is far easier to destroy than to build up. Soviet Union is a prime example. However, under parliamentary democracy clearing the ground is not just difficult but usually impossible. Hence in just about all cases the radical reengineering of State and society can be accomplished only by a totalitarian (and often brutal) dictatorship]
Prejudices and egotistic interests join together in forming a common front against the new idea and in trying by every means to prevent its triumph, because it is disagreeable to them or threatens their existence.
That is why the protagonist of the new idea is, unfortunately, in spite of his desire for constructive work, compelled to wage a destructive battle first, in order to abolish the existing state of affairs.
[Very true – and that’s precisely why the implementation of a radically new idea usually can be done only by a totalitarian dictatorship]
Thus a new Weltanschauung is inevitably intolerant and cannot permit another to exist side by side with it. It ruthlessly demands its recognition as unique and exclusive (and even infallible), and insists upon a complete reformation of public life in all its branches, in accordance with its views. It can never allow the previous state of affairs to continue in existence alongside it [hence it is, indeed, a radical reengineering].
A philosophy of life which is inspired by a fanatical spirit of intolerance can only be set aside by a doctrine that is advanced in an equally ardent spirit and fought for with as determined a will and which is itself a new idea, pure and absolutely sincere.
[Precisely. Hence only the Nazis could have won the existential war with Bolshevism and only Bolsheviks could destroy the Nazi regime. In other words, without the Soviet “cannon fodder” the Allies would have never won World War II]
The advent of Christianity was the first occasion on which spiritual terror was introduced into the much freer ancient world [not the first one but the first successful one], but the fact cannot be denied that ever since then, the world has been pervaded and dominated by this kind of coercion and that violence is broken only by violence and terrorism by terrorism [the latter was obviously true].
A Weltanschauung will never of itself willingly give ground to another. Therefore it can never agree to collaborate in any order of things that it condemns.
[This fundamental principle works very well in domestic affairs. However, in foreign affairs it inevitably leads to disasters as the Weltanschauung in question can not be forced upon all other nations (some are way too powerful to make it happen). And that’s exactly what happened to the Nazis]
On the contrary, it feels obliged to employ every available means in the fight against the old order and the whole world of ideas belonging to that order and to prepare the way for its destruction.
[Again “every available means” – no matter how inhuman or criminal]
These purely destructive tactics, and also the constructive tactics, which must be aggressive in order to carry the new world of ideas to success – both these phases of the struggle call for a body of resolute fighters.
Any new Weltanschauung will be successful in establishing its ideas only if the most courageous and active elements of its epoch and its people are enrolled under its standards and grouped firmly together in a powerful fighting organization. [i.e. paramilitary organizations – first SA, then SS]
To achieve this purpose it is absolutely necessary to select from the general ideology a certain number of ideas which will appeal to such individuals, and which, once they are expressed in a precise and clear-cut form, will serve as articles of faith for a new association of men.
[And that’s exactly what was done for SA by Hans Ulrich Klintzsch and for the SS by Heinrich Himmler]
While the program of the ordinary political party is nothing but the recipe for achieving favorable results at the next general election, the program of a Weltanschauung represents a declaration of war against an existing order of things, against present conditions, in short, against the established Weltanschauung. [in other words, for the radical reengineering of the latter]
The individual soldier [i.e. rank-and-file member of SA or SS] is not initiated into the secrets of our strategic plans, but he is trained to submit to a rigid discipline, to be passionately convinced of the justice and inner might of his cause and to devote himself to it without reserve. [Makes sense]
By its very nature, an organization can exist only if leaders of high intellectual ability are served by a large mass of men who are emotionally devoted to the cause.
[Nazis won to a significant extent because Hitler was a genius at generating a very powerful emotional devotion in his followers]
The strength of a political party never consists in the intelligence and independent spirit of the rank and file of its members, but rather in the spirit of willing obedience with which they follow their intellectual leaders. [Precisely]
What is of decisive importance is the leadership itself. When two bodies of troops are arrayed in mortal combat, victory will not fall to that side in which every soldier has an expert knowledge of the rules of strategy, but rather to that side which has the best leaders and, at the same time, the best disciplined, most blindly obedient and best drilled troops.
[Very true. Hence in the long run, Soviet and Allied leaders turned out to far better than those of the Nazis (as the quality of troops of the former was far inferior to those of the latter). For a very simple reason – they made far fewer colossal strategic blunders]
If the idea of the völkisch State, which is at present an obscure ideal, is one day to attain a clear and definite success, from its vague and vast mass of thought it will have to put forward certain definite principles which of their very nature and content are calculated to attract a broad mass of adherents.
In other words, a group of people that can guarantee that these principles will be fought for. That group of people is the German working-class. That is why the program of the new Movement was condensed into a few fundamental postulates, twenty-five in all. [It worked – and worked very well]
For a doctrine that is actually right in its main features it is less dangerous to retain a formulation which may no longer be quite adequate, instead of trying to improve it and thereby allowing a fundamental principle of the Movement, which had hitherto been considered as solid as granite, to become the subject of a general discussion which may have unfortunate consequences. [Makes complete sense]
This is particularly to be avoided as long as a Movement is still fighting for victory, for would it be possible to inspire people with blind faith in the truth of a doctrine if doubt and uncertainty are encouraged by continual alterations in its external formulation?
[The funny thing is that it is – the Bolsheviks in the Soviet Union proved it beyond the reasonable doubt. However, their circumstances were quite different, so for the Nazis it was most likely true]
Catholic Church stands firmer today than ever before [not true – actually, the opposite is the case]. We may prophesy that, as a fixed star amid fleeting phenomena, it will continue to attract increasing numbers of people who will be the more blindly attached to it the more rapid the rhythm of changing phenomena around it.
[Exactly the opposite happened – Catholic Church membership went into a steep decline way before it started de-facto changing its doctrine]
Whoever really and seriously desires that the völkisch Weltanschauung should triumph must realize that this triumph can be assured only through a militant movement and that this movement must found its strength only on the granite firmness of an impregnable and well-defined program. [Makes sense]
In regard to its formulas it must never make concessions to the Zeitgeist, but must maintain the form that has once and for all been decided upon as the right one – in any case, until victory has crowned its efforts. [If it ain’t broken, don’t fix it]
In its program the NSDAP has been furnished with a basis that must remain unshakable. Thus the members of the Movement, both present and future, must never feel themselves called upon to undertake a critical revision of these postulates, but rather feel themselves obliged to put them into practice as they stand.
Any attempt to carry these theories into effect without the aid of a militant organization [i.e. SA and later SS] would be doomed to failure to-day, as it has failed in the past and must fail in the future.
Just as the fundamental principles of the National Socialist Movement are based on the völkisch idea, völkisch ideas are National Socialist. If National Socialism would triumph it will have to hold firm to this fact unreservedly, and here again it is not only its right, but also its duty, to emphasize most rigidly that any attempt to represent the völkisch idea outside of NSDAP is futile and, in most cases, even fraudulent.
If the reproach should be raised against our Movement that it has ‘monopolized’ the völkisch idea, there is only one answer to give. Not only have we monopolized the völkisch idea but, to all practical intents and purposes, we have created it, for what hitherto existed under this name was not in the least capable of influencing the destiny of our people, since all those ideas lacked a political and coherent formulation.
[Brilliant, just brilliant. A few strokes of the pen (of Rudolf Hess) – and all nationalist ideological competition eliminated. Obliterated. Annihilated]
The NSDAP ought not to be the servant, but rather the master, of public opinion. It must not serve the masses, but dominate them. [Actually, to achieve the former, you must succeed in the latter]
The greatest and most enduring successes in history are mostly those which were least understood at the beginning, because they were in direct opposition to public opinion and the views and wishes of the time.
[Not all of them, of course, but it happened. Christianity is the prime example]
An orator has a distinct advantage over the writer, because receives continuous guidance from the people whom he is addressing. This helps him to correct the trend of his speech, for he can always gauge, by the faces of his hearers, how far they follow and understand him, and whether his words are producing the desired effect.
The writer, on the other hand, does not know his reader at all. Therefore, from the outset, he does not address himself to a definite group of persons which he has before him, but must write in a general way.