The significance of this racial value of a people will, however, only be completely effective if this quality is recognized, duly valued, and appreciated by a people. Peoples that do not understand this value, or for lack of natural instinct no longer feel it, then begin immediately to lose it.
[Again cultural, not racial. However, everything else is true – and the loss of “power of the culture” leads to catastrophic consequences – up to the disappearance of the nature in question from the face of the Earth]
The decline of the nation is the result of the process which begins as an under-appreciation of one’s own cultural value in comparison to that of foreign peoples.
[In modern terms, multiculturism kills the nation. Plain and simple, cut and dry, loud and clear. And very true]
As soon as a nation no longer values the cultural expression of the life of its own soul, or, God forbid, begins to be ashamed of it and turn to foreign ways of life, it renounces its cultural power.
Such a nation will be torn, uncertain in its assessment of the world and of its pronouncements; it will lose the recognition of and feel for its own expediencies, and instead descend into the confusion of international perceptions and views and the cultural chaos that springs from them.
[That’s precisely the disaster that is happening with just about all Western nations. Looks like Adolf Hitler did have some clairvoyance capabilities]
The end, then, is the loss of a certain uniform racial value and thus the final decay.
[Again, cultural, not racial. And not just a decay, but the ultimate disappearance of a nation]
Therefore, every existing racial value of a nation is ineffective – if not downright endangered – if the nation in question does not consciously remember it and cultivate it with the utmost diligence, base its collective hopes in the first place upon it, and build on it.
[Again, cultural – not racial. Everything else is true and correct, of course]
For this reason, the internationalist disposition [i.e. multiculturalism] must be viewed as the deadly enemy of the [cultural] value [of a nation]. Instead, the commitment to one’s own people’s [cultural] value must be in line with and determine the collective life and behavior of a nation.
[100% true and correct]
Majorities have never given humanity inventions. The individual person is always the instigator of human progress.
[Very true. Hence the need to identify and nurture the most productive individuals in a nation. Regardless of their race, by the way as race has nothing to do with creative abilities]
As soon as a nation makes the majority the ruler of public life – in other words, institutes today’s western concept of democracy – it destroys not only the significance of individual thought but blocks the effectiveness of personal qualities. It prevents through the formal construct of its life the emergence and work of individual creative persons.
[In Hitler’s time – and for a few more decades – this was not the case. Churchill, Roosevelt, de Gaulle, Adenauer, Margaret Thatcher, JFK, Ronald Reagan – they all came to power in very much Western democracies.
However, if applied to today’s world (after the end of the Cold War), this statement appears to be true and correct. Clinton, both father and son Bush, Obama, Trump, Cameron, May, Johnson, Olland, Merkel – these are all mediocrities (to put it mildly). And it looks like Western democracies finally got to the point where they, indeed, do not allow any gifted and creative individual to come to power]
The task of a Western political leader is not to produce brilliant plans or ideas to be implemented with the support of the existing administrative apparatus, but to assemble the particular majorities necessary for the execution of certain intentions. [i.e. achievement of personal objectives of politicians driven usually by cardinal sins of greed and pride]
[This statement appears to be very true. Consequently, even the most crucial problems remain unsolved and no quantum leap has happened in 20 years – after the West won the Cold War. And things are rapidly getting worse, not better
Looks like the times of peace produce a highly negative influence on the quality of leadership – and possibly of the whole political and government systems]
Every decision actually reached is the result of countless compromises, which are evident in the character and content of the decision.
[Which all but ensures that the best (optimal) decisions are never made if they miraculously are, they are never implemented in the optimal way. It appears that the modern Western democratic system is designed more to prevent something negative from happening than to make something positive happen.
In other words, it is fundamentally risk-averse that sooner or later will lead to the collapse of the whole system under the weight of problems that it is fundamentally incapable of solving. To put it bluntly, modern Western democratic system is hopelessly politically impotent]
If one were to compare the German Army, which is based on the highest degree of individual authority and responsibility, with our democratic civilian institutions [of Weimar Republic], in terms of the results of their respective leadership training, one would be appalled.
On the one side is an organization made up of capable men who are as courageous as they are ready to accept responsibility, and on the other are unaccountable incompetents [impotents].
[That’s why it is no surprise that after he obtained dictatorial power in Germany, Adolf Hitler in record time transformed the democratic Weimar Republic into a totalitarian Führerstaat based on the omnipresent Army-style Führerprinzip
Which, on the one hand, resulted both in genuinely miraculous achievements in civilian life (political, economic, social, etc.), and in no less miraculous victories on the battlefields of Europe, Africa and the Soviet Union
But on the other led to colossal blunders which ultimately resulted in a defeat in the Second Great War, demise of the Third Reich and Hitler’s suicide in the Führerbunker]
Just as internationalism [multiculturism] damages and thereby weakens the existing racial [cultural] value, and just as [parliamentary] democracy destroys personal qualities, so pacifism disables the natural powers of a people’s self-preservation.
Therefore, the task of all truly great legislators and statesmen of this world was never the limited preparation for a war but rather the unlimited inner development and education of a people, so that its future, according to all human reasoning, appears secured.
Then wars… lose their character of individual more-or-less-violent surprises and arrange themselves into a natural – even self-evident – system within the thorough, well-founded, long-lasting development of a people.
[An honest announcement that Nazi Germany will plan for, prepare for and initiate colonial wars to acquire the Lebensraum in the East as these wars are vital tools for achieving the fundamental objectives of the Third Reich]
The state has become a purely formal mechanism that appears to politicians and government bureaucrats as an end in itself. They no longer feel the need to align themselves with the interests of a given people at all. People and state have become two separate concepts
[No surprise here – every system (including the government at any level) – sooner or later starts working for itself. And thus from time to time needs to be radically reengineered. And that’s exactly what Adolf Hitler did]
Thus, for those who feel called to educate a people, it is their task to learn from history and to apply their knowledge practically without regard to the understanding, comprehension, ignorance, or even repudiation of the masses.
[It is important to study history, no doubt about that. However, a competent leader must also be well-educated in economics, political science, sociology and social psychology. Unfortunately, Adolf Hitler was very poorly educated in all these sciences – which led to colossal blunders and catastrophic results]
The greatness of a man is all the more significant the greater his courage to use his superior insight in opposition to the generally prevailing but ruinous view – to lead to overall victory. His victory will appear all the greater the stronger the opposition that had to be overcome and the more hopeless the fight seemed initially.
“Freedom and bread” is the simplest and in reality the greatest foreign-policy rallying cry that exists for a people. The freedom to organize and regulate the life of a people according to its own interests, and the bread that this people needs to live.
[Now that’s the national-sociopath speaking. In reality, freedom is probably the greatest human delusion. Consequently, the foreign policy is not about freedom at all but about skillful utilization (and manipulation) of all available external resources to generate the maximum possible amount of aggregate value – financial, functional, emotional and spiritual for the nation in question.
In other words, about satisfying to the maximum extent possible (politics is the art of the possible) the aggregate needs of the population in question – financial, functional, emotional and spiritual.
Likewise, domestic policy (which should be properly coordinated with foreign to maximize synergy) is all about skillful utilization (and manipulation) of all available external resources to generate the maximum possible amount of aggregate value – financial, functional, emotional and spiritual for the nation in question.]
The critic never wants to weaken the impact of his critique by submitting proposals that could themselves be subject to criticism.
[Not if one subscribes to the idea of constructive criticism – which many (if not the most) critics do]
Healing the body politic of a profound and serious sickness does not [always] involve finding a prescription that is completely nontoxic; rather, it is not uncommon to counteract one poison with another.
In order to eliminate circumstances that are recognized as deadly, one must have the courage to push through and implement decisions that also harbor inherent dangers.
[Which sometimes makes the cure worse than the original disease – at least in some aspects. And that’s exactly what happened to the Third Reich – in several aspects it turned out to be worse than the Bolshevist Soviet Union – the existential threat to the Western Civilization]
That which is lacking in the probability of success must be made up for in the energy of the execution.
So only one question must be asked: whether a situation demands a certain decision or not. If such a decision is assessed and recognized as unquestionably necessary, then it must be implemented with the most brutal ruthlessness and greatest application of strength, even if every time the final result itself will be unsatisfactory or in need of improvement or perhaps even have a very low probability of success.
[Makes complete sense]
Wherever our success ends, that will always be the starting point of a new battle.
That’s the way it is in our highly imperfect world.
I am a German nationalist. That means I am openly committed to my Volkstum [ethnic community]. All of my thoughts and actions belong to it. I am a socialist. I see before me no class or rank, but rather a community of people who are connected by blood, united by language, and subject to the same collective fate.
[A perfect definition of a national-socialist]
The National Socialist movement, which I lead today, sees as its goal the internal and external liberation of our people.
[No that’s a blatant lie. In reality the Nazis wanted to become the master of all other nations, making the latter their servants at best or slaves at worst. Or exterminate them altogether, like the Jews]
It wishes to preserve the [cultural] essence of this people and, through the systematic support of its best individuals and best virtues, raise it to a higher level.
[Cultural essence as perceived by the Nazis. Unfortunately, these perceptions often were grossly incorrect]
It fights for the necessary [living] space, because it represents this people’s right to exist.
[No. It does it to enslave and subsequently exploit other nations. Brutal colonialism, plain and simple]
The foreign policy of the bourgeois world is in truth always only focused on borders, whereas the National Socialist movement, in contrast, will pursue a policy focused on space.
[Which in practical terms means no respect for established borders whatsoever]
The National Socialist movement… will always allow its foreign policy to be determined by the need to secure the necessary space for our people.
[Which means staring colonial wars for the acquisition of additional Lebensraum whenever and wherever the Nazis deem necessary]
The ethnic state, in contrast, could under absolutely no circumstances annex Poles with the intention of turning them into Germans one day. It would instead have to decide either to isolate these alien racial elements in order to prevent the repeated contamination of one’s own people’s blood, or it would have to immediately remove them entirely, transferring the land and territory that thus became free to members of one’s own ethnic community.
[American-style reservations or European-style ethnic cleansing. Brutal, destructive, ruthless and even murderous colonialism. Cut and dry, loud and clear, plain and simple. The reality of German occupation turned out to be significantly different though]
The principal stronghold of a truly Christian worldview—Germany
[An interesting statement from one who did not like Christianity much – to put it mildly]
Due to the character of the Austrian state, a considerable number of surrounding states viewed the breakup of Austria as the goal of their national policy.
[One of these nations was Serbia. One of Serbia’s de-facto leaders – Colonel Dimitrijevic (“Apis”). In 1903 he personally organized and executed the coup against King Alexander and his wife Draga Mašin that resulted in their murders.
Ten years later he used his own secret organization – Black Hand – and a Bosnian terrorist organization Young Bosnia (set up by Black Hand) to assassinate Archduke Franz Ferdinand of Austria with a specific objective of triggering the pan-European war.
The war which was supposed to result (and did result) in the dissolution of Austro-Hungarian Empire and formation of a Greater Serbia (which later became Yugoslavia)
Such a bold operation could not have been accomplished without the support of Russia whose ambassador was the most powerful politician in Serbia (little could have been done without his consent).
Consequently, Dimitrijevic and his co-conspirators secured the support of powerful Russian government officials who had their own reason to ignite the European war. So in reality it was not Germany, but Serbia and Russia who were responsible for the outbreak of the First World War – Germany was forced into the war]
Austria itself would in reality have had very little defensive strength to resist such a general war of aggression. The only thing that sustained Austria was the strong ally [Germany] upon which it was able to lean. This was very well known in Russia as well as in Serbia and Romania.
[Consequently, these leaders knew perfectly well that any attempt to destroy Austria would automatically trigger war with Germany. And still they went ahead with their plan. Which proves beyond the reasonable doubt that from the very beginning Russia and Serbia planned to ignite a war with Germany – and did conscientiously ignite it]
By the turn of the century, the significance of the enemies Austria created for Germany outweighed many times over the possible military assistance that Austria itself might ever be able to provide Germany.
[Sounds just about right]