Author Topic: National Socialists were socialists  (Read 4190 times)

Zea_mays

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 563
    • View Profile
Re: National Socialists were socialists
« Reply #15 on: January 30, 2022, 04:55:40 am »
Summary and commentary:
In this chapter, Hitler and Wagener discuss the foreign policy goal of a Socialist federation of nations, with the hope that National Socialist Germany will serve as a shining example that could convince even democratic nations to eventually adopt Socialism.

Hitler also criticizes Oswald Spengler (he says he will strive against the "decline" predicted by Spengler, but Hitler advocates for regressing towards an ancient pre-Renaissance ideal of Socialism, whereas Spengler's "West" seems clearly post-Renaissance. Further, from reading a brief summary of Spengler's work, it seems like his view of history is "progressive" in the development of cultures, but Hitler is clearly "regressive" and also says he wants to dismantle the post-Renaissance order and radically replace it. In other words, Hitler is anti-Spengler, but from a leftist perspective, not a rightist Western-preservationist perspective.)

Hitler also mentions that industrialization is present almost exclusively in nations with "Nordic" elements. However, Hitler strongly criticizes industrialization and the slavery it entails. So, Hitler's desire to harness the "Nordic" character is a practical matter to redirect their talent away from their "natural" selfish-individualism and inventiveness towards strengthening the power of a National Socialist state.

This "Nordic" character is in contrast to the "Slavic" character, who have allowed themselves to become slaves to Judeo-Bolshevism. However, all the worst aspects of Communism were not developed by Russians or Slavs themselves, but by Jews, and then accepted by the Slavic peoples where Communism has prevailed.

Hitler also predicts an interesting three-front future Cold War between a future National Socialist EU, the US, and Communist nations. Hitler (correctly) predicts the heavily-industrialized US will eventually take over the UK's throne as a global military power, and Hitler thinks he needs an alliance with England and other future-EU nations to have the power for National Socialism to be triumphant over the internationalist-industrialist US bloc and the internationalist (false) Socialist USSR bloc.
Quote
In the next section Wagener summarizes six postulates on foreign policy at which he had arrived by the early 1930s: [...] (2) collaboration with Italy would be a mistake, since it would nourish the belief in the Soviet Union that the Nazis were mere fascists, [...] (3) in order to make possible an ideological rapprochement with the Soviet Union, Nazi plans for a "social economy" should be emphasized; [...] (5) by means of economic agreements and collaboration, Germany's neighbors in Central Europe should be won over to a federation that could serve as a bridge between East and West by means of which socialist conciliation could take place.
[...]
When he had finished, Wagener recounts, Hitler calmly responded as follows.

“I did not take the road of politics to smooth the way for international socialism, much less to preach a new, socialist religion. I am not made to be the founder of a religion, I am not one and have no desire to be one. Rather, I am a politician. I bring to the German Volk national socialism, the political doctrine of the Volk community, the solidarity of all who are part of the German Volk and who are ready and willing to feel themselves an inextricable but co-responsible particle of the totality of the Volk, having responsibility for it.

A Volk in the current political sense has ceased to be a racial unit, a racially pure community. The great migrations of world history, the military expeditions, the times of enemy occupation, and also, of course, the admixture that became ever more frequent as the result of international trade relations, have seen to it that all sorts of races and racial mixtures live side by side within the borders of any state.

Nevertheless, most nations—the United States of America forming the most notable exception—are the structures within certain areas where either the old tribal system has survived or a community has come into being over time that was consolidated into a Volk, possessing its own style, its own language, its own attitudes on ethics and morality, and its own culture. Such groups of people who feel that they belong together continue to unite under economic, political, and even purely geographic influences, and these groups rightly designate themselves a Volk. In this same way, America will in time turn into one Volk.
[...]
Our movement has adopted the mission of enabling the German Volk to change the Weimar constitution, so that it will correspond to the essence and will of the Volk. And this essence of the German Volk is socialist in the most profound sense. Any Volk community is, in the last analysis, always socialist.

Earlier, you mentioned the situation of the Jews in Soviet Russia. You call the Jew’s participation in the Bolshevik Revolution ‘midwifery’. Let us make no mistake! Thanks to the Jews, socialist movements all over the world have turned into mechanisms of battle against the organic development of the peoples! Their influence on nations is not constructive but destructive. They love the socialist idea, not for the sake of the idea, but for the possibility of using the concept to win over the disconnected masses to the struggle against the indigenous Volk leadership. Since, on the basis of the Biblical promise made to him, the Jew strives for power within all peoples, the indigenous leadership in every nation is his enemy! But when it has successfully been removed by a revolution, then the Jews do not actually introduce genuine socialism as they have promised—because it would wrest power from their hands again. Rather, they established the rule of the proletariat—or, as happened in Weimar, the rule of the revolutionaries—and they themselves take over the safeguarding of the attainments of the revolution and the representation of the proletariat.

The Jew is not a socialist! Once before he nailed to the cross the great Creator of the concept of socialist redemption! He will do so again whenever he can! For he is an individualist, an economic liberalist, an egotist—yes, he is a parasitic creature. In Russia, the Jews succeeded in directing the will to freedom of oppressed Slavic peoples against allegedly alien rulers. But then, themselves alien, they set themselves in the former rulers’ place. They still occupy it, and I have no reason to believe that the Slavs are making any attempts to oust them again. But as long as that is not the case, a National-Socialist Germany cannot enter into alliances with Russia. Rather, I see Jewry’s determination to use Russia as a springboard from which to direct the removal of the existing order in other nations as well! For the organization of the Comintern is purely Jewish!

That is why it becomes necessary to strengthen the peoples of Europe and all the world against this germ of destruction ...
[...]
... I have no doubt that gradually, but with absolute certainty, a socialist reorganization will take place in all democratic countries. Except in Russia! There the herd will be increasingly governed with the whip.
[...]
The international element of the communist movement that emanates from Russia is not really Russian, or Slavic; it is Jewish. And we must not make the mistake of believing that it is supported by a Russian-Slavic idea, which might even have some creative content. The current activities of the Comintern members are purely destructive.

There also exists a constructive international socialist idea. But it is altogether different. For, look here, once nations have begun to carry out a socialist and socio-economic reorganization within their own borders, the time is ripe for the totality of nations—that is, all the peoples and states—to give up fighting each other for power and supremacy, enslavement and exploitation, according to liberal principles—that is, acting according to imperialist principles. Then, even among them the time has come for giving consideration to pride of place, communal spirit, even ‘socialism.’ What first occurred on a small scale within the individual nations will then take place among the worldwide community of nations. Even the smallest of them will enjoy equal rights, even the have-nots will be able to share in the goods and the surplus of the elite’s international property. That is socialism of the nations! But it is quite different from the international socialism of a Marx or a Lenin!
[...]
But first, there will have to be national socialism. Otherwise the peoples and their governments are not ready for the socialism of nations. It is not possible to be liberal in one’s own country and demand socialism among nations. Education about and firm belief in national socialism must precede that change. But if we do not succeed in taking this road, we will either be given a world empire headed by a single state—the strongest, the most powerful, which will, in the end, have to resort to military methods to secure and maintain its power—or end up with international Bolshevism, which can equally be nothing but despotism. The first goal is obviously being striven for at present by North America, while Russia aims at the latter. Perhaps neither of them yet realizes what is happening. But, as I said: If we do not succeed in paving the way for the socialism of nations, then one or another of these two must set in!
[...]
The international powers that are at work to penetrate the unanimity of the national bodies, the states, the nations, to dissolve and undermine them, are therefore contrary to nature and hostile to the divine order. ... Such organizations can, at times, be stronger than the states! And herein lies their danger! Not only for the individual state, but especially for the possibility of creating the great socialist community of nations.

So, if we pursue the goal of such a community of nations—and it must, as I said, be pursued, and it will be the final goal of human politics on this earth—then we must first reconstruct the independence and autonomy of the nations, even the smallest, and drive the large international organizations back to their purely technical sphere of operations, eliminating every last possibility of their influence on governments and governmental organizations. This is a further basic perception.
[...]
I cannot believe that the civilized nations of the world are so blind that they will lacerate each other to smooth the way for Bolshevism. The contrary is essential: coalition, by groups, into confederacies of states, into families of nations, perhaps even here and there into federal states.
[...]
It is all the more important that we work at a coalition. And on that point I will tell you over and over again: without England it is not possible! England has the necessary power. We bring along only the idea and the will. I cannot imagine that England will not decide to climb down from its pedestal of arrogance and imperialism, which has been made outmoded by history, and to extend its hand to a community of nations. ...”
[...]
Hitler raised his voice for the final words. It was a last, and without a doubt a final, rejection of the policies I had proposed. But this rejection was at once so impressive and so convincing that, after long internal struggle, I decided to bow to it. Only two goals remained absolute for me: to smooth the way to the East, using economic negotiations and treaties that would avoid and make unnecessary armed confrontation; and the realization at the earliest possible moment of a socio-economic reorganization that might prompt even Russia to imitation and abandonment of its Bolshevik ideology.
Otto Wagener. (written in 1946, first published in German in 1978). Hitler: Memoirs of a Confidant. Edited by Henry Ashby Turner, Jr., translated by Ruth Hein (1985). Page 165-174.
https://archive.org/details/wagenerhitlermemoirsofaconfidant/page/n207/mode/2up

Note that last sentence. Rauschning (a rightist anti-Hitlerist) said Hitler expressed the same sentiment that Bolshevism will be forced to imitate and transform into a sort of National Socialism!!! Once again, this would make no sense if National Socialism was not a genuinely leftist Socialist ideology. I would recommend reading the passages from Rauschning again, as these are the strongest quotes I have seen about Hitler unambiguously stressing the leftism of his Socialism:
https://trueleft.createaforum.com/true-left-vs-false-left/national-socialists-were-socialists/msg10718/#msg10718