Even in Mein Kampf, which we've seemed to dismiss as mostly propaganda before, Hitler expresses similar left-wing criticisms of Marxist Socialism, consistent with all the other quotes that have been posted. Although, being a work of propaganda, he is obviously not as explicit in how firmly leftist he is, compared to the quotes from private conversations.
Commentary: Hitler criticizes Marxism for not being a radical opposition to capitalism and Western Civilization, and that, even if it wanted to, it does not have the ideological ability to overthrow Western Civilization to replace it with something meaningful!
Even if Marxism were a thousandfold capable of taking over the economic life as we now have it and maintaining it in operation under Marxist direction, such an achievement would prove nothing; because, on the basis of its own principles, Marxism would never be able to create something which could supplant what exists to-day.
And Marxism itself has furnished the proof that it cannot do this. Not only has it been unable anywhere to create a cultural or economic system of its own; but it was not even able to develop, according to its own principles, the civilization and economic system it found ready at hand. It has had to make compromises, by way of a return to the principle of personality, just as it cannot dispense with that principle in its own organization.
The racial Weltanschauung is fundamentally distinguished from the Marxist by reason of the fact that the former recognizes the significance of race and therefore also personal worth and has made these the pillars of its structure. These are the most important factors of its Weltanschauung.
If the National Socialist Movement should fail to understand the fundamental importance of this essential principle, if it should merely varnish the external appearance of the present State and adopt the majority principle, it would really do nothing more than compete with Marxism on its own ground. For that reason it would not nave the right to call itself a Weltanschauung, If the social programme of the movement consisted in eliminating personality and putting the multitude in its place, then National Socialism would be corrupted with the poison of Marxism, just as our national-bourgeois parties are.
Adolf Hitler (1925-1926).
Mein Kampf. Translation by James Murphy (1939). Page 374.
https://archive.org/details/in.ernet.dli.2015.526617/page/n375/mode/2upAgain, Marxism is not actually a radical opponent of rightism (i.e. the bourgeois establishment, which Hitler had mentioned in previous speeches represents mainstream conservatism):
Thus the Marxist doctrine is the concentrated extract of the mentality which underlies the general concept of life today. For this reason alone it is out of the question and even ridiculous to think that what is called our bourgeois world can put up any effective fight against Marxism. For this bourgeois world is permeated with all those same poisons and its conception of life in general differs from Marxism only in degree and in the character of the persons who hold it. The bourgeois world is Marxist but believes in the possibility of a certain group of people — that is to say, the bourgeoisie — being able to dominate the world, while Marxism itself systematically aims at delivering the world into the hands of the Jews.
Adolf Hitler (1925-1926).
Mein Kampf. Translation by James Murphy (1939). Page 321.
https://archive.org/details/in.ernet.dli.2015.526617/page/n323/mode/2upCommentary:
Hitler acknowledging the National Socialist party foremost had appeal to leftists!The fact that millions of our people yearn at heart for a radical change in our present conditions is proved by the profound discontent which exists among them. This feeling is manifested in a thousand ways. Some express it in a form of discouragement and despair. Others show it in resentment and anger and indignation. Among some the profound discontent calls forth an attitude of indifference, while it urges others to violent manifestations of wrath. Another indication of this feeling may be seen on the one hand in the attitude of those who abstain from voting at elections and, on the other, in the large numbers of those who side with the fanatical extremists of the left wing.
To these latter people our young movement had to appeal first of all.
[...]
Looked at from the purely political point of view, the situation in 1918 was as follows: A nation had been torn into two parts. One part, which was by far the smaller of the two, contained the intellectual classes of the nation, from which all those employed in physical labour were excluded. On the surface these intellectual classes appeared to be national-minded, but that word meant nothing else to them except a very vague and feeble concept of the duty to defend what they called the interests of the State, which in turn seemed identical with those of the dynastic regime.
[...]
Over against this class stood the broad masses of manual labourers who were organized in movements with a more or less radically Marxist tendency. These organized masses were firmly determined to break any kind of intellectual resistance by the use of brute force. They had no nationalist tendencies whatsoever and deliberately repudiated the idea of advancing the interests of the nation as such. On the contrary, they promoted the interests of die foreign oppressor. Numerically this class embraced the majority of the population and, what is more important, included all those elements of the nation without whose collaboration a national resurgence was not only a practical impossibility but was even inconceivable.
Adolf Hitler (1925-1926).
Mein Kampf. Translation by James Murphy (1939). Page 277-278.
https://archive.org/details/in.ernet.dli.2015.526617/page/n279/mode/2upSummary: Communist parties gave orders to their followers to attend National Socialist meetings and disrupt them, but what ended up happening is that the Communists ended up joining the National Socialist party instead! In fact, the Communists were losing so many members that they had to change their tactics and forbid their members from attending further NS speeches!
Appeals were then made to the ‘class-conscious proletariat’ to attend our meetings in masses and strike with the clinched hand of the proletarian at the representatives of a ‘monarchist and reactionary agitation.’
Our meetings suddenly became packed with work-people fully three-quarters of an hour before the proceedings were scheduled to begin. These gatherings resembled a powder cask ready to explode at any moment; and the fuse was conveniently at hand. But matters always turned out differently. People came as enemies and left, not perhaps prepared to join us, yet in a reflective mood and disposed critically to examine the correctness of their own doctrine. Gradually as time went on my three-hour lectures resulted in supporters and opponents becoming united in one single enthusiastic group of people. Every signal for the breaking-up of the meeting failed.
[...]
Yet when, after two, three and even eight meetings, it was realized that to break up these gatherings was easier said than done and that every meeting resulted in a decisive weakening of the red fighting forces, then suddenly the other pass-word was introduced: ‘Proletarians, comrades and comradesses, avoid meetings of the National Socialist agitators.’
The same eternally alternating tactics were also to be observed in the Red Press. Soon they tried to silence us but discovered the uselessness of such an attempt. After that they swung round to the opposite tactics. Daily ‘reference’ was made to us solely for the purpose of absolutely ridiculing us in the eyes of the working-classes. After a time these gentlemen must have felt that no harm was being done to us but that, on the contrary, we were reaping an advantage in that people were asking themselves why so much space was being devoted to a subject which was supposed to be so ludicrous. People became curious.
Adolf Hitler (1925-1926).
Mein Kampf. Translation by James Murphy (1939). Page 402.
https://archive.org/details/in.ernet.dli.2015.526617/page/n403/mode/2upSee also the previous post about "Beefsteak Nazis"--i.e. a joke about just many many National Socialists were former Communists:
https://trueleft.createaforum.com/true-left-vs-false-left/national-socialists-were-socialists/msg10637/#msg10637The members of our Movement are not recruited from circles which are habitually indifferent to public affairs, but mostly from among men who hold more or less extreme views. Such being the case, it is only natural that their understanding of foreign politics should suffer from the prejudice and inadequate knowledge of those circles to which they were formerly attached by political and ideological ties. And this is true not merely of the men who came to us from the Left.
Adolf Hitler (1925-1926).
Mein Kampf. Translation by James Murphy (1939). Page 522.
https://archive.org/details/in.ernet.dli.2015.526617/page/n523/mode/2upHitler admits social justice warriors are Aryans. Or, rather, that desire for social justice is an innate "racial" quality of Aryans. Communism and other forms of False Leftism claim to fulfill social justice in order to herd people away from REAL solutions.
The Jew artfully enkindled that innate yearning for social justice which is a typical Aryan characteristic. Once that yearning became alive it was transformed into hatred against those in more fortunate circumstances of life. The next stage was to give a precise philosophical aspect to the struggle for the elimination of social wrongs. And thus the Marxist doctrine was invented.
By presenting this doctrine as part and parcel of a just revindication of social rights, the Jew propagated the doctrine all the more effectively. But at the same time he provoked the opposition of decent people who refused to admit these demands which, because of the form and pseudo-philosophical trimmings in which they arc presented, seemed fundamentally unjust and impossible for realization.
Adolf Hitler (1925-1926).
Mein Kampf. Translation by James Murphy (1939). Page 268.
https://archive.org/details/in.ernet.dli.2015.526617/page/n269/mode/2up----
In his youth Hitler was attracted to the Socialism of the mainstream Social Democratic Party. However, he realized they did not sincerely believe their Socialist principles, and Hitler set out to make a movement that honestly did believe in Socialism.
Accordingly I had no feeling of antipathy towards the actual policy of the Social Democrats. That its avowed purpose was to raise the level of the working classes--which in my ignorance I then foolishly believed--was a further reason why I should speak in favour of Social Democracy rather than against it. But the features that contributed most to estrange me from the Social Democratic movement was its conservation of Germanism in Austria, its lamentable cocotting with the Slav 'comrades,' who received these approaches favourably as long as any practical advantages were forthcoming but otherwise maintained a haughty reserve, thus giving the importunate mendicants the sort of answer their behaviour deserved.
And so at the age of seventeen the word 'Marxism' was very little known to me, while I looked on 'Social Democracy' and 'Socialism' as synonymous expressions. It was only as the result of a sudden blow from the rough hand of Fate that my eyes were opened to the nature of this unparalleled system for duping the public.
[...]
On my way I noticed the Arbeiterszeitung (The Workman's Journal) in a tobacco shop. This was the chief press-organ of the old Austrian Social Democracy. ... I brought it home with me and spent the whole evening reading it, despite the steadily-mounting rage provoked by this ceaseless outpouring of falsehoods.
I now found that in the social democratic daily papers I could study the inner character of this politico-philosophic system much better than in all their theoretical literature.
For there was a striking discrepancy between the two. In the literary effusions which dealt with the theory of Social Democracy there was a display of high-sounding phraseology about liberty and human dignity and beauty, all promulgated with an air of profound wisdom and prophetic assurance; a meticulously-woven glitter of words, to dazzle and mislead the reader. On the other hand the daily Press inculcated this new doctrine of human redemption in the most brutal fashion. No means were too base, provided they could be exploited in the campaign of slander. These journalists were real virtuosos in the art of twisting facts and presenting them in a deceptive form.
[...]
If Social Democracy should be opposed by a more truthful teaching, then, even though the struggle be of the bitterest kind, this truthful teaching will finally prevail, provided it be enforced with equal ruthlessness.
[...]
I am thankful now for the ordeal which I had to go through at that time; for it was the means of bringing me to think kindly again of my own people, inasmuch as the experience enabled me to distinguish between the false leaders and the victims who have been led astray.
We must took upon the latter simply as victims.
Adolf Hitler (1925-1926).
Mein Kampf. Translation by James Murphy (1939). Page 44-50.
https://archive.org/details/in.ernet.dli.2015.526617/page/n45/mode/2upHitler then studied further and realized why the Social Democratic Party and Marxist Socialism had become derailed from their ostensible Socialist goals:
I gradually discovered that the Social Democratic Press was predominantly controlled by Jews. But I did not attach special importance to this circumstance, for the same state of affairs existed also in other newspapers. But there was one striking fact in this connection. It was that there was not a single newspaper with which Jews were connected that could be spoken of as National, in the meaning that my education and convictions attached to that word.
Making an effort to overcome my natural reluctance, I tried to read articles of this nature published in the Marxist Press; but in doing so my aversion increased all the more. And then I set about learning something of the people who wrote and published this mischievous stuff. From the publisher downwards, all of them were Jews. I recalled to mind the names of the public leaders of Marxism, and then I realized that most of them belonged to the Chosen Race — the Social Democratic representatives in the Imperial Cabinet as well as the secretaries of the Trades Unions and the street agitators. Everywhere the same sinister picture presented itself. I shall never forget the row of names — Austerlitz, David, Adler, Ellenbogen, and others. One fact became quite evident to me. It was that this alien race held in its hands the leadership of that Social Democratic Party with whose minor representatives I had been disputing for months past. I was happy at last to know for certain that the Jew is not a German.
Thus I finally discovered the evil spirits leading our people astray. The sojourn in Vienna for one year had proved long enough to convince me that no worker is so rooted in his preconceived notions that he will not surrender them in face of better and clearer arguments and explanations. Gradually I became an expert in the doctrine of the Marxists and used this knowledge as an instrument to drive home my own firm convictions. I was successful in nearly every case. The great masses can be rescued, but a lot of time and a large share of human patience must be devoted to such work.
[...]
Urged by my own daily experiences, I now began to investigate more thoroughly the sources of the Marxist teaching itself. Its effects were well known to me in detail. As a result of careful observation, its daily progress had become obvious to me. And one needed only a little imagination in order to be able to forecast the consequences which must result from it. The only question now was: Did the founders foresee the effects of their work in the form which those effects have shown themselves today, or were the founders themselves the victims of an error? To my mind both alternatives were possible.
If the second question must be answered in the affirmative, then It was the duty of every thinking person to oppose this sinister movement with a view to preventing it from producing its worst results.
[...]
And so I began to gather information about the authors of this teaching, with a view to studying the principles of the movement. The fact that I attained my object sooner than I could have anticipated was due to the deeper insight into the Jewish question which I then gained, my knowledge of this question being hitherto rather superficial. This newly acquired knowledge alone enabled me to make a practical comparison between the real content and the theoretical pretentiousness of the teaching laid down by the apostolic founders of Social Democracy; because I now understood the language of the Jew. I realized that the Jew uses language for the purpose of dissimulating his thought or at least veiling it, so that his real aim cannot be discovered by what he says but rather by reading between the lines. This knowledge was the occasion of the greatest inner revolution that I had yet experienced. From being a soft-hearted cosmopolitan I became an out-and-out anti-Semite.
Adolf Hitler (1925-1926).
Mein Kampf. Translation by James Murphy (1939). Page 60-65.
https://archive.org/details/in.ernet.dli.2015.526617/page/n63/mode/2upIncredible isn't it? Even in a work of propaganda like Mein Kampf, Hitler has no problem admitting his Socialist roots and his desire to manifest a Socialist movement which is able to actually accomplish the social justice goals which Marxist Socialism claims to want, but never will be able to fulfill (both due to flawed ideological foundations and control of its political movements by the very same elites who will have to be toppled to achieve actual Socialist social justice). If Hitler was a far-rightist trying to build a far-rightist movement, why would he so clearly outline his plan to manifest a more honest form of Socialism???
Again, see the previous excerpt about how the Social Democratic Party was indeed very Socialist and not just a mainstream liberal party or something:
https://trueleft.createaforum.com/true-left-vs-false-left/national-socialists-were-socialists/msg10639/#msg10639And see the quote from Heiden about how he argues Hitler didn't want to join the Social Democratic Party ("Majority Socialist" party) because he thought it was TOO RIGHTIST. Presumably Heiden had read Mein Kampf, so he may have been summarizing Hitler's attitude displayed in the quotes above.
https://trueleft.createaforum.com/true-left-vs-false-left/national-socialists-were-socialists/msg10639/#msg10639See also the April 12, 1922, speech in Munich, where Hitler explains in further detail about how Communism doesn't actually topple the financial elites.
https://trueleft.createaforum.com/true-left-vs-false-left/national-socialists-were-socialists/msg10614/#msg10614
Home
Search
Login
Register