People's Community: Volksgemeinschaft
The German National-Socialist concept of the nation state was that of a People's Community (Volksgemeinschaft.) The national community was seen primarily as an organic whole and class conflict was discouraged in place of ‘class cooperation.' The socialist Volksgemeinshaft was a utopian vision of what Germany could evolve into. A society where class divisions would no longer be an issue, but instead the recognition that each German, regardless of their station in life, be that he/she is a rocket scientist or a simple waiter, that each member of that people’s community had an important and altruistic obligation to think of the welfare of their Volk before self-interest. Only then could a new golden age arrive of a higher form of civilisation where poverty and crime would become almost non-existent.
A New Force: Nationalism And Socialism Merged Into A Unified One.
-Speech by Adolf Hitler, 1940
Hitler And The Socialist Dream
New Economic System
"The programme was nothing other than the programme for the establishment of the new German Volkreichs. It were the theses of the national uprising and the basic insight that lay in these theses was that of the two most elementary forces of the time, nationalism and socialism, had to be subjected to a new definition and that from this definition the two theses had to be merged into a unified one. The two thoughts had to be transformed into a single idea and could then be carriers of a new force. A force that could one day make the Reich great, free and powerful again."
Adolf Hitler created a new economic model which allowed for private property and businesses to thrive, but at the same time solved the problem of wealth inequality and poverty. He liberated German workers from the rule of capital over labour as found in the capitalist system, with the rule of labour over capital. In the National-Socialist economic system, capital served the people,
and not the other way around. Thus usury, stock exchange trading and other parasitic profiteering was firmly routed from all German economic life.
In NS Germany women did not have to juggle full-time employment while raising a busy family like in today’s dysfunctional society of broken families and home alone children. The economy was prosperous enough to allow fathers to work while mothers looked after the families. Women worked in NS Germany,
but those with children were encouraged to prioritize and put their families first.
Why the Name “National Socialists”?
“You cannot be a true nationalist without also being a socialist; you others cannot be true socialists without also being nationalists.
To be a nationalist means loving ones own people more than all others, and worker to be sure that it can hold its own among them. If this people to hold its own against the rest of the world, I must wish and work for the health of each member, to see that things go as well as possible for each individual, and therefore the whole. But then I am a socialist!
And I cannot be a socialist without working to be sure that my people can defend itself from attacks by other peoples, and to secure its foundations for life, without working for the greatness of my people, thereby also being a nationalist. The strength and significance of my people is the foundation for the prosperity of the individual.
Therefore, you are National Socialists.”
“I met Hitler not in his headquarters, the Brown House in Munich, but in a private home - the dwelling of a former admiral of the German Navy. We discussed the fate of Germany over teacups.
"Why," I asked Hitler, "do you call yourself a National Socialist, since your party programme is the very antithesis of that commonly accredited to socialism?"
"Socialism," he retorted, putting down his cup of tea, pugnaciously, "is the science of dealing with the common weal. Communism is not Socialism. Marxism is not Socialism. The Marxians have stolen the term and confused its meaning. I shall take Socialism away from the Socialists.
"Socialism is an ancient Aryan, Germanic institution. Our German ancestors held certain lands in common. They cultivated the idea of the common weal. Marxism has no right to disguise itself as socialism. Socialism, unlike Marxism, does not repudiate private property. Unlike Marxism, it involves no negation of personality, and unlike Marxism, it is patriotic.
"We might have called ourselves the Liberal Party. We chose to call ourselves the National Socialists. We are not internationalists. Our socialism is national. We demand the fulfilment of the just claims of the productive classes by the state on the basis of race solidarity. To us state and race are one." [Meaning the state belongs to the people/volk, the state works for the people, it does not rule over them in the sense of being subjects]
G. S. Viereck's 1923 interview with Adolf Hitler
Centre Radical: Not Far-Left Or Far-Right
Many historians make the error of closely comparing National-Socialism to Communism in terms of economical policy, when in fact the two stand wide apart from each other. It is also interesting to note that the Communists claim National-Socialism was not socialism at all, and was in fact the purest form of Capitalism. The Soviet communists however created a false dichotomy for propagandistic reasons for the Soviet masses, and the claim that National-Socialism was the 'last bastion of Capitalism' has no basis in fact. In reality, National-Socialism was neither Capitalist nor Communist, but took natural and healthy elements from each one to form a more "centrist" style of government. The National-Socialist state allowed capitalistic principles, but not at the expense of the Volk.
Businesses were allowed to make profits but those profits were capped.
People were allowed to own their own homes. But they were encouraged not to own more than one property.
The Individual And The Collective
Man is neither hermit nor herd animal, but a little of both, because these traits are not mutually exclusive. He has individualistic traits, but he also has socialistic traits. He is both himself and part of a group. Only National-Socialism recognized this fact, whereas the capitalists would like us to believe that we are only individuals, and the communists are telling us we are only part of a greater collective. According to the ideology of National-Socialism individuality must be limited at the point where it is a detriment to the social good, and that collectivism must be limited where it begins to suffocate the creativity of the individual.
National-Socialism recognized the fact that men are born neither isolated individuals nor members of an ant colony.
The False Doctrine Of Egalitarianism
According to the doctrine of Marxism everyone is equal in worth, and each person has the innate ability to be whatever they desire to be. Be that a brain surgeon, rocket scientist, musical composer, philosopher etc. This ideal is known as egalitarianism. The doctrine that all people are equal and deserve equal rights and opportunities.
While all people most certainly do deserve equal rights and opportunities to better themselves. People are not equal in ability. Some people are destined to be artists or entertainers. While others are more suited to physical work. Some people are born leaders while others are incapable of leadership. But in the Communist system, those with natural talent are hamstrung by those of mediocre ability because of the false doctrine of egalitarianism which states everyone is of equal ability.
In the National-Socialist system of government the best man, or indeed woman, for the job is the person who is the most able and gifted for that particular task.
Class Cooperation Not Class War
To promote better understanding between workers and employers, all labour unions were nationalised into one monolithic body, which in Germany was known as the Deutsche Arbeitsfront (DAF). This organisation was headed by one individual known as the Arbeitsführer (Work Leader) who is, in turn, was responsible to the Führer. Any conflicts or disputes that arose between employers and workers were resolved through mediation between representatives of the DAF and the employer, by an organization set up for that purpose.
When the National-Socialists came to power the Trade Unions were infested with Bolshevik revolutionaries and the regime also wanted to promote class cooperation and not open class warfare and therefore amalgamated all Trade Unions into one.
Strength Through Joy
Hitler was the first political leader in Europe to introduce a 40-hour working week along with paid and subsidised holidays for German workers. All large German factories had swimming pools, theatres, sports and leisure facilities for their employees.
The above resort in Prora was designated for the German people as a vacation spot. One of many the regime had in mind. Unfortunately, war broke out which stalled this holiday project. But the building still stands to this very day and offers a glimpse of what might have been had Germany won the war.
“Kraft durch Freude (German for Strength through Joy, abbreviated KdF) was a large state-operated leisure organization in Nazi Germany. It was a part of the German Labour Front (Deutsche Arbeitsfront, DAF), the national German labour organization at that time. Set up as a tool to promote the advantages of National Socialism to the people, it soon became the world's largest tourism operator of the 1930s.
KdF was supposed to bridge the class divide by making middle-class leisure activities available to the masses. This was underscored by having cruises with passengers of mixed classes and having them, regardless of social status, draw lots for allocation of cabins.”
-Sheldon Emry, In Billions for the Bankers, Debts for the People (1984)
"Germany issued debt-free and interest-free money from 1935 on, which accounts for Germany's startling rise from the depression to a world power in five years. The German government financed its entire operations from 1935 to 1945 without gold, and without debt. It took the entire Capitalist and Communist world to destroy the German revolution, and bring Europe back under the heel of the Bankers."
Fractional Reserve Banking
All modern governments today allow central banks to control each nation's money supply which they then issue into general circulation as debt via electronic loans through the day-to-day credit activities of the banks. Just 3% of all money in circulation is real paper money. The remaining 97% is electronic debt money created by credit cards and loans.
If a nation wishes to trade with other nations they must first allow their economy to be controlled by these banks. Furthermore, private central banks loan money to governments for all of their domestic spending requirements. This government borrowing naturally incurs an interest payment. The government then raises taxes to pay this debt back to the private central banks. With compound interest however, and more government spending and borrowing, the National Debt grows exponentially, and more taxes have to be raised in order to pay back the ever increasing mountain of money owned to these central banks.
If the government financed its own spending by creating its own nationalised bank (both the Bank of England and the US Federal Reserve are privately owned institutions), the National Debt would cease to exist. That would mean all taxes raised could be freed up entirely and used for government spending instead of lining the pockets of the bankers.
The economy goes through cycles of 'boom and bust' over the course of decades. During the boom phase, the economy grows and people are borrowing from the banks to invest in new homes, businesses and the like. Everything is looking rosy. Money is bountiful with credit card companies doing a roaring trade.
Inevitably there is soon 'too much money in circulation' caused by the banks lending more money than they have deposited in their vaults via customers' deposits, and so inflation takes hold and the economy slows down.
Unemployment increases, prices go up, businesses go bust, and the government cuts spending on vital public services. Money is no longer freely available as it once was, and credit card companies are no longer offering easy credit terms.
During austerity more of our taxes goes to pay off the National Debt, and less of our taxes are spent on vital public services. The rich however are well padded to weather any austerity storm, while ordinary working class families, OAPs and the unemployed are hit the hardest.
Every election, the politicians make empty promises, and bamboozle the electorate with doublespeak about economics and inflation leaving voters more confused than ever before.
The opposition party say they will 'borrow money' to invest in people, in businesses, and in technology. While this policy pledge would create a new cycle of growth any borrowed money has to be repaid back at interest, and because banks issue all money into circulation as debt, any borrowing strategy is doomed to failure, because as soon as wealth is created debt increases, because 97% of all money in circulation is debt due to the fractional reserve system of banking.
Under the present system, it is prudent for any government to cut its cloth accordingly and not borrow excessively. However, why should OAPs and children be denied hospital care because of austerity measures? They shouldn't.
If the government controlled its own money supply and issued it into circulation debt free, as wealth is created, a single Pound/Dollar for each Pound/Dollar worth of work or goods produced,
the days of boom and bust and austerity measures would be over for good. People's taxes would decrease, while public spending would increase. The only losers would be the banks!
- Adolf Hitler, quoted in "Hitler's Monetary System," www.rense.com, citing C. C. Veith, Citadels of
"We were not foolish enough to try to make a currency [backed by] gold of which we had none, but for every mark that was issued we required the equivalent of a mark's worth of work done or goods produced...
. . . .we laugh at the time our national financiers held the view that the value of a currency is regulated by the gold and securities lying in the vaults of a state bank."
Chaos (Meador, 1949)
The Spiritual Foundations of The New Europe
Excerpt by Reich Press Chief Dr. Otto Dietrich.
“The basic element in the political concept of National Socialism is that of the national state. It has no ambition to make imperial conquests, but strives after inner collectivity and national concentration. And the clear proof of this is the unprecedented organization by National Socialism of that tremendous return migration of racial Germans, the return of German blood to the Motherland. The political conception of the national state is not directed towards a frittering away of power by outward expansion, but towards rational internal construction and the safeguarding of the national standard of existence. It has enforced the idea that relations between states can be made more permanent if the prospect of the nations is clear and determined and if leadership is responsibly and authoritatively rooted in the nation. The organization of life in our present-day Germany reflects internal national and political determination and externally also shows definite lines of conduct. The ideas and the driving force of National Socialism are directed exclusively towards peace, as long as the indispensable bases of existence and security are guaranteed to our nation of 85 millions living within the heart of Europe. National Socialist Germany has been forced to fight, because the principles of imperialism and world domination of the Anglo-Saxons negate the simplest preliminary conditions for the development of our peace-loving nation. It was for this reason that they declared war on us. Britain is conducting a war of destructive force against constructive organization in the life of nations. The fact that National Socialist Germany has proved itself to be stronger than its aggressor in a war which has been forced upon it, is no proof of the violence of its principles, but only of the strength inherent in its ideal of order. They say: “We are fighting for the democratic way of life. We are fighting for the liberty of living our lives as we wish.”
But National Socialism has no intention of preventing them from doing so. It holds the opinion that every nation should live its own internal life in accordance with its own desires. The crimes they attribute to us are in reality committed by themselves. In no single country in the world does there exist such a great and disgusting intolerance of the mode of living of others as in the Anglo-Saxon countries. This intolerance is carried on hypocritically in the name of liberty, a liberty the real character of which I have already described. Our adversaries maintain that this is a war of democracy against tyranny that makes it necessary either to unmask these political play-actors or else to open the eyes of their public to their true nature.
I may be allowed here to quote a neutral scholar, who a short while ago wrote an article “Hitler and the Democracies.”
He asked the question why the Führer should be an opponent of the democracies, as he was one of the people himself and as president of the most democratic republic in the world was constantly in sincere and direct contact with the people. During his examination this scholar comes to the conclusion that only the modern democracies, France, Britain and America in particular, apparently had something in common with the will of the people. In reality it was only a pretext for party interests and the compensatory business of a few political circles among the upper classes. The mistakes of liberal democracy had already been made by its founders who had introduced into it their own material and utilitarian outlook and economic individualism. All this had been shamefully decorated by the founders of liberal democracy behind a facade of idealism. They themselves had never honestly believed in the catchwords of “Liberty,” “Equality” and “Fraternity,”
which they had invented. In these so-called Western democracies, power was not actually upheld by the people, but a few thousand capitalists. The functioning of democracy merely concealed the selfishness of a small minority living in ease and comfort. These statements hit the nail on the head. One should not always only talk of democracy, but for once answer the question: “What is ‘democracy‘? What does it actually mean?”
If democracy is no more than invisible domination by a few, achieved by means of money and the fabrication of public opinion, then our opponents are right in calling themselves democracies. But if democracy really denotes government by the people, then it is not they, but we, who are the democrats.
We attach no particular value to decorating ourselves with this word that has become so compromised on account of its political past. But if the plutocrats make use of it to camouflage their domination and to deceive the people, then it is necessary to make its meaning perfectly clear. Whoever studies the conception of the National Socialist state in its innermost structure and practical functioning is bound to recognize that it is the most modern government of the people in history.
It demonstrates the principles of responsibility and leadership in the truly national state, in opposition to the anonymous principles of degenerate democracy. It regards the will of the people not as a dead parliamentary majority to be gained by money or financial influence, but recognizes it continually in the permanent and direct alliance with the life of the people itself. The National Socialist Party is, therefore, not a party in the parliamentary sense, but simply and positively the party of the German nation.
It is the great guardian of the social conscience of the nation, it holds its hand on the pulse of the people, it feels its slightest stirrings, its anxieties and its needs, its requirements and its desires, its pleasure and its pain. It is its helper and adviser and the unceasing bearer of its suggestions to the higher authorities. It has entrusted hundreds of thousands of citizens of all professions and classes with political responsibility, thereby providing tens of thousands of politically tested Germans with the opportunity of advancement to leading positions in the Reich.
It has linked the perpetual stream of youth, organically and eternally, with the life of the nation and has created a system for the selection of leaders, which compels future generations to play their uninterrupted and vital part. Tangible shape is thereby given not to the will of a questionable parliamentary majority, but to the true will of the people. By its principles of training, efficiency and selection of leaders, it has given the nation a wonderfully functional system with the rhythm of strength continually renewing itself.
Nearly 2,500 years ago Plato wrote in his “Laws”
that the most excellent constitution of a nation was that which was successful in persuading the masses to submit voluntary and in raising the most intelligent in their midst to leadership. The new principle of national and political leadership developed by the highly gifted leaders of Germany and Italy has made these sublime political concepts reality. When today the messiahs of democracy and the plutocrats talk contemptuously of “dictatorships,”
their intellectual arrogance only conceals the stain of ignorance or the essence of hypocrisy which fears nothing so much as the realization of truth by the awakening of the nations.”
Adolf Hitler Explains Plutocratic Democracy
-Adolf Hitler, Mein Kampf
“The fundamental principle is that the State is not an end in itself but the means to an end. It is the preliminary condition under which alone a higher form of human civilization can be developed, but it is not the source of such a development. This is to be sought exclusively in the actual existence of a race which is endowed with the gift of cultural creativeness.”
The modern system of parliamentary democracy is in reality a polarisation of political consent.
Political parties which fall outside that political consent are inevitably labelled extremist or worse, and prevented from gaining political power by repressive laws. Political parties are banned and prominent activists jailed in so-called democratic countries.
In reality the system of democracy practiced here in the West is an oligarchy
aligned to world plutocracy.
It is anything but democratic and exists to protect the interests of the elite by creating an illusionary system of free and democratic elections.
The Volksgemeinschaft was an organic system of top-down government, where advice travelled upward, and decisions travelled downward.
Leaders were chosen on individual merit alone, and not because of their status, their family background, or how much money the individual had. Ordinary people showing potential for leadership were educated at special Adolf Hitler schools. The government of National-Socialist Germany brought in many thousands of ordinary people into positions of government. Ultimately the folk in NS Germany commanded the state and not the other way around. The state was simply a means to an end and not an end in itself. This system of government is called folk-democracy
and is a true form of meritocracy. Not Fascist dictatorship or tyranny.
Elections were occasionally held in the form of plebiscites for all key laws in the Reich, the states and provinces.
1935 Saarland Plebiscite Returns Region to Germany
“The nation and the government in Germany are one thing. The will of the people is the will of the government and vice versa.
The modern structure of the German State is a higher form of democracy in which, by virtue of the people’s mandate, the government is exercised authoritatively while there is no possibility for parliamentary interference, to obliterate and render ineffective the execution of the nation’s will.”
“On National-Socialist Germany And Her Contribution Towards Peace.” Speech to the representatives of the international press at Geneva on September 28. 1933. German League of Nations Union News Service, PRO, FO 371/16728
“We have modernized and ennobled the concept of democracy. With us it means definitely the rule of the people, in accordance with its origin.”
On National-Socialism, Bolshevism & Democracy (September 10, 1938)
Hitler wanted to create a socialism of nations with National-Socialist Germany as the sole protector and guarantor of free and independent socialist nations in the world.
The Socialism of nations could only have come about two ways:
1. All nations voluntarily submit and join the socialism of nations through internal National-Socialist revolution in each nation.
2. A war of liberation against Capitalism and Communism by a National-Socialist nation in order to bring into existence, guarantee and then secure the socialism of all free and independent nations.
Socialism Of The Nations:
“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 (CAPITALIST IMPERIALISM) — 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…
That is socialism of the nations! But it is quite different from the international socialism of a Marx or a Lenin!"
“If, for example, acting out of a higher discernment, industrial plants decide not to compete with each other, establishing instead a community of interests, each enterprise remains independent in itself. The only change is that each will be integrated into the totality according to a higher plan, taking into account considerations of production and market conditions and according to principles of reason and profitability. So each must give up something of its sovereignty, in the interest of the whole — but consequently also in its own best interest.
It is equally true within a nation that each individual citizen must surrender something of his own sovereignty — what is colloquially spoken of as ‘personal liberty’ –to the organization of self-administration, the state. All rights originate primarily with the people… The Volk, each separate person, however, yields as much as necessary — but not more than necessary — to the state it has created or the government it has established according to its constitution.
“The same thing will happen with the socialism of nations. Each nation remains independent.
It yields to the community, to the organization of self-administration, to the world state only as much of its sovereignty as is necessary to enable the execution of the tasks that are in the interest of all and each separately.”