CHAPTER TWELVE The First Phase of the Development of the National Socialist German Workers’ Party
If, at the end of the first part of this book, I describe the initial phase of our movement’s development and briefly mention a series of issues related to that first stage, I do not intend to undertake a dissertation on its ideological aims; for they are so grand that they can only be addressed in a special volume. Therefore, in the second part, I will address its programmatic foundations in depth, attempting to sketch a picture of what we understand by the concept of “State.” By “we,” I refer to the hundreds of thousands of people who, deep down, yearn for the same thing, but are unable to put into words what deeply preoccupies their imagination. Indeed, what is remarkable about all great reforms is that the champion of the idea is always one, while its supporters are millions. Their aspiration has often been, for centuries, a fervent desire of hundreds of thousands, until the day comes when the man appears who proclaims this collective desire and, embodying a new life, leads the old longing to victory.
The fact that millions of people today feel an inner desire for a radical change in existing conditions proves the deep disappointment that prevails among them.
Witnesses to this deep discontent are undoubtedly those who remain indifferent during the electoral contests, as well as the many who are inclined to join the fanatical ranks of the far left. And it is precisely to these people that our young movement must, above all, address itself.
The problem of the reconstruction of Germany’s political power is, of course, a fundamental question that affects the recovery of our instinct for national preservation, and this is because experience shows that any foreign policy of preparatory action, as well as the valorization of a State, depend to a lesser extent on the available war elements than on the capacity for moral resistance, already demonstrated or
Simply assumed, of a nation. The importance a country acquires as an ally is assessed by the notable presence of a vibrant spirit of national preservation and heroism to the point of sacrifice, and not by the simple material possession of inanimate warlike elements, for an alliance is not made with weapons, but with men. That is why the English people will always be considered the most valuable ally in the world, as long as their government and the will to act of their masses can be expected to provide that energy and tenacity capable of bringing the struggle begun to a victorious conclusion, using all means and without limits of time or sacrifice. In this case, the war potential at the time in relation to that of other states is irrelevant.
A young movement that sets itself the goal of rebuilding a German state with its own sovereignty must concentrate its entire activity on the task of winning the support of the masses. From a purely military point of view, it will be easy to understand, especially for an officer, that a foreign war cannot be carried out with battalions of students, but that in addition to the minds of a people, its fists are also needed. Nor should it be lost sight of that a national defense based exclusively on the so-called thinking circles would lead to depriving the nation of an irreplaceable asset. The young German intellectual generation that fell on the plains of Flanders in the autumn of 1914 must have been greatly missed afterward. They had therefore been the nation’s elite, and their loss could not be compensated for throughout the war. Not only is the struggle impossible when the battalions launching the attack lack the working class in their ranks, but technical training without the spontaneous internal cohesion of the national organization is also utopian.
*
* *
That is why, as early as 1919, we were convinced that the new movement must first achieve the nationalization of the masses as its main objective. From this, a series of tactical postulates arose: 1. No social sacrifice will be too great when it comes to winning the masses over to the task of national resurgence. This means that a movement that aspires to
The reincorporation of the German worker into the heart of the German people must not stop at economic sacrifices, as long as these do not threaten the autonomy and preservation of the national economy. 2. The national education of the great masses can be carried out
only indirectly, through social improvement, since only through this can those economic conditions be created that allow the individual to participate in the cultural heritage of the nation.
3. The nationalization of the masses can never be achieved through half-baked procedures or by simply adhering to a so-called objective point of view; such nationalization is only possible through an intolerant and fanatically biased approach to the goal pursued. The great mass of a people is not made up of professors or diplomats. Whoever intends to win the masses must know the key that will open the door to their hearts. That key is not called objectivity, that is, weakness, but will and strength.
4. Success in the task of winning the popular vote depends on simultaneously achieving the elimination of the enemies of these ideals, alongside the positive struggle for one’s own ideals. At all times, the people regard resolute action against a political adversary as proof of their own rights, and conversely, they view the refrain from annihilating the enemy as a sign of insecurity in that right, or even the absence of it.
The great masses are merely a part of Nature, and their mentality cannot comprehend the mutual handshake between men who claim to pursue opposing goals. What the masses want is the triumph of the strong and the destruction of the weak or their unconditional submission.
5. The incorporation of a group that has become a social class into the national community, or simply into the State, does not occur through the lowering of the existing upper classes, but through the exaltation of the lower echelons. Nor can the upper classes be the agents of this process; that is reserved only for the lower classes fighting for their right to equality. The current bourgeoisie did not become part of the State through the work of the nobility, but through its own efforts and its own leadership.
The greatest obstacle to the rapprochement of today’s workers with the national community lies not in the representation of their corporate interests, but in the hostile attitude toward the nation and the homeland of their international leaders. Guided by a fanatically national orientation in political matters and those affecting the interests of the people, the same trade union associations could—ignoring local controversies of a purely economic nature—turn millions of workers into invaluable assets of the nationality.
A movement of opinion that honestly aspires to reincorporate the German worker into the bosom of his people, tearing him away from the utopia of internationalism, must first vigorously rebel against the criterion that dominates, particularly in the spheres of industrial employers, and which consists in understanding under the concept of “national community” an unconditional submission, from the economic point of view, of the worker to the employer, apart from the fact that they believe they see an aggression against the community in any claim, however justified, that the worker makes, looking after his vital economic interests.
Undoubtedly, the worker attacks the spirit of a true national community when, relying on his power, he makes disruptive demands, contrary to the public good and the stability of the national economy; in the same way, the employer is no less of an attack on that community when, through inhumane means and selfish exploitation, he abuses the national labor force, making millions at the expense of the worker’s sweat.
The source from which our nascent movement must recruit its followers will therefore be, first and foremost, the working class. The mission of our movement in this regard will be to tear the German worker from the utopia of internationalism, free him from his social misery, and redeem him from the sad cultural environment in which he lives, transforming him into a valuable factor of unity, animated by national sentiments and an equally national will among our people as a whole.
Furthermore, our goal is not to reverse the structure of the nationalist field of opinion, but rather to win over the anti-national field. This perspective is fundamentally essential to the tactical action of our entire movement.
6th This unilateral criterion of ours, but precisely for that reason, clearly defined, must also be revealed in the propaganda of the movement, apart from the fact that it is indispensable for reasons of propaganda itself.
Propaganda must respond in form and substance to the cultural level of the masses, and the effectiveness of its methods must be judged solely by their success. In a popular assembly, the best speaker is not the one who spiritually approaches the audience from the thinking class, but rather the one who knows how to conquer the soul of the crowd.
7. The goal of a political reform movement will never be achieved through purely informative dissemination or by influencing the dominant powers, but only through the assumption of political power. However, a coup d’état cannot be considered successful simply because revolutionaries seize power, but only when the realization of the aims and objectives embodied by such a revolutionary action results in greater well-being for the nation than under the previous regime; something that, of course, cannot be said of the “German Revolution,” as the bandit coup carried out in the autumn of 1918 came to be called.
But if the conquest of political power is a prerequisite for putting reform into practice, it is logical that a movement motivated by such aims should be considered, from the very beginning of its existence, as a mass movement and not as a “literary tea” club or a provincial circle of political chatter.
8. The new movement is anti-parliamentary in character and by the nature of its organization; that is to say, in general, as well as within its own structure, it rejects the principle of decision by majority, a principle that degrades the Führer to the condition of a mere executor of the will and opinions of others. In small and large ways, our movement embodies the principle of the Führer’s absolute authority, which, in turn, presupposes a supreme notion of responsibility.
It is one of the highest tasks of the movement to make this principle the determining norm, not only within its own ranks, but also in the mechanism of the entire State.
Whoever becomes Führer will have to bear, along with his unlimited supreme authority, the burden of the greatest and heaviest of responsibilities.
9. Our movement does not see its purpose in the restoration of a particular form of government in opposition to some other. But in the
Establishment of those fundamental principles without which neither monarchy nor republic can count on a guaranteed existence. Its intention is not to found a monarchy or consolidate a republic, but rather to create a Germanic state.
10. The question of the internal organization of the movement is a matter of convention, not of principle. The best organization is not that which interposes a cumbersome intermediary system between the leadership of the movement and its followers, but rather that which uses the least complicated mechanism; for it must not be forgotten that the task of organization consists of transmitting to a group of people a certain idea—which first arose in the mind of a single person—and, in turn, ensuring its practical application.
The following guidelines prevailed regarding the internal organization of the movement: a) Concentration of all work first in a single location: Munich. Formation of a community of loyal followers, and then, improvement of the school of future propagators of the idea. Acquisition of the necessary authority through major and notable political successes at the headquarters. b) Formation of local groups in other cities immediately after the authority of the central leadership in Munich had been established. c) Just as an army without leaders, regardless of its structure, is ineffective, so too is a political organization useless without its respective Führer.
To be the Führer requires ability, not just fortitude, without forgetting, however, that greater importance must be given to strength of will and action than to genius per se. The ideal, then, will be a combination of the qualities of ability, determination, and perseverance.
11. The future of a movement depends on the fanaticism, if you will, on the intolerance with which its followers uphold their cause as the only just one and impose it over other movements of a similar nature.
It is a serious error to believe that the potential of a movement increases through the effect of merging with another analogous movement. Certainly, any expansion in this order signifies numerical growth, giving the superficial observer the impression that the power of the movement itself has also been strengthened; but the truth is that this is the seed of a weakening that will soon become apparent.
The magnitude of any powerful organization that embodies an idea lies in the religious fanaticism and intolerance with which that organization, deeply convinced of the justice of its cause, imposes itself on other currents of opinion. If an idea is fundamentally just and, armed with this, begins its struggle, it will be invincible in the world: any persecution will only increase its inner strength.
The greatness of Christianity was not due to compromises with more or less similar philosophical currents of antiquity, but to the unbreakable fanaticism with which it proclaimed and upheld its own doctrine.
12. The followers of our movement must not fear the hatred and vociferations of the enemies of our nationality and our ideology; on the contrary, they should rather crave them. Lies and slander are manifestations of this hatred. He who is not slandered and denigrated by the Jewish press is not a true German, nor is he a true National Socialist.
The best measure of the value of his judgment, the sincerity of his conviction, and the integrity of his character is the degree of aversion with which he is fought by the mortal enemy of our people.
13. Our movement is obliged to foster respect for personality by every means. It must not be forgotten that the value of all human beings lies in the value of personality; that every idea and every action are the fruit of a person’s creative capacity; and that, finally, admiration for the greatness of personality represents not only a tribute of recognition for it, but also a bond that unites those who feel gratitude toward it.
Personality is irreplaceable.
*
* *
Nothing had caused us more suffering, in the early stages of our movement’s formation, than the fact that our names were unknown and unimportant to public opinion, a fact that certainly cast doubt on the possibility of our success. Indeed, public opinion knew nothing about us, nor did anyone in Munich, except for our few followers and their friends, know of the existence of our party or even its name.
It was therefore essential to finally break out of the narrow circle and win new followers, trying at all costs to spread the name of our movement.
Once a month, and later every two weeks, we organized “assemblies.” The invitations were typed and sometimes handwritten. I still remember how, in those early days, I personally distributed eighty of these invitations to the respective homes, and I also remember how we waited that night for the “popular masses” who were supposed to come… An hour late, the “president” finally decided to open the “assembly.” Once again, there were only seven of us, the usual seven.
Thanks to small fundraising efforts in our circle of poor devils, we managed to gather the necessary funds to announce a meeting through an advertisement in the then independent newspaper “Münchener Beobachter.” The meeting was to be held at the “Hofbräuhaus Köller” in Munich. At 7:00 p.m., 111 people were present. The meeting was opened. A Munich professor gave the first speech, and then I was to speak in public for the first time. I spoke for thirty minutes, and those who had previously felt instinctively,
It was proven by reality; he had the conditions to speak.
By the end of my speech, the audience in the cramped hall was electrified, and their enthusiasm was first manifested by the fact that my appeal to the generosity of those present resulted in a collection of 300 marks.
The then party chairman, Mr. Harrer, was a journalist by profession and, as such, undoubtedly a man of broad understanding. But, as a party leader, he suffered from the very serious defect of not knowing how to speak to the masses. Meticulous and precise, as in his professional work, he nevertheless lacked the necessary spiritual breadth, perhaps precisely because of this lack of oratorical talent. Mr. Drexler, chairman of the Munich regional group at the time, was a simple worker, also incapable of public speaking, and certainly not a soldier.
He had not served in the army, nor had he been a combatant during the war, so he, weak and indecisive by nature, lacked the only school capable of forging manly spirits from pusillanimous characters. Neither of them were men of the stature of those who carry in their hearts not only faith but also courage.
fanatical in the triumph of a cause, but, animated by unwavering energy and even brutal inexorability, if necessary, they are capable of overcoming the obstacles that could hinder the triumph of the new idea. To this end, only men could lend themselves who, mentally and physically, had acquired those military virtues that we could perhaps condense in these terms: the agility of a greyhound, the resistance of leather, and the hardness of Krupp steel. At that time, I was still an active soldier with almost six years of service, so that circle must have considered me at first as something close to their core. The words “it is not possible” or “it will be impossible,” “one should not risk it,” “it is still very dangerous,” etc., did not apply to that group.
The case was naturally dangerous. Certainly, the Marxist defrauders of the people must have hated beyond measure a movement whose clear purpose was to win over that social sector that until then had been exclusively at the service of the international parties of Marxist Jews and stockbrokers. Of course, the very name “German Workers’ Party” was a provocation.
Throughout the winter of 1919-1920, it was a constant struggle for me to consolidate the confidence in the will to win that would animate the young movement and increase it to that fanaticism that, converted into faith, would later be capable of moving mountains.
Meanwhile, the number of those attending our meetings had grown to over 200, and the success was brilliant, both externally and financially. A fortnight later, the number had risen to over 400.
*
* *
I can never sufficiently warn our young movement about the danger of falling into the trap of the so-called “silent workers.” These people are not only cowards, but also incapable and lazy. Every person who is aware of something, who realizes a latent danger, and who sees the possibility of remedying it, necessarily has the obligation to publicly take a frank stand against the evil, seeking its cure, rather than limiting themselves to acting “silently.”
Most of the “silent workers” give themselves pretensions of knowledge,
God knows what!
None of them knows anything, yet they try to sophisticate the entire world with their artifices; they are lazy, but through their vaunted “silent” work, they create the impression of enormous and diligent activity. In short, they are liars and political hustlers who detest the honest work of others.
Even the simplest agitator who has the courage to defend his cause openly and manfully before his adversaries in the tavern, works more than a thousand of those hypocrites, liars and perfidious people.
*
* *
At the beginning of 1920, I persuaded the party to organize the first rally. The party chairman, Mr. Harrer, felt he could not support my initiative regarding the timing and, as a respectable and honorable man, decided to step down. Anton Drexler was my successor; I had personally reserved the responsibility of organizing the propaganda, and I resolutely set to work.
The date for the first major popular assembly of our movement, which was still largely unknown until then, was set for February 4th of that year. I led the preparations myself.
Red was the chosen color; it was the most provocative and the one that would naturally most outrage and irritate our detractors, making us unmistakable in their eyes for another reason.
The assembly was scheduled to open at 7:30 p.m. Fifteen minutes beforehand, I entered the hall of the Hofbräuhaus, located on Munich Square. My heart leaped with joy, as the enormous building was practically packed with more than 2,000 people. More than half the hall seemed to be occupied by communists and independents.
I spoke after the first speaker. A few minutes later, interruptions were frequent; violent scenes were taking place at the back of the room. A group of my faithful comrades from the war and a few other followers clashed with the troublemakers, and only gradually was order restored. I continued speaking. Half an hour later,
Then, applause began to overpower the shouts and angry exclamations, and finally, as I outlined the 25 points of our program, I stood before a hall packed with individuals united by a new conviction, a new faith, and a new will. The fire was lit whose flames will one day forge the sword that will restore freedom to the German Siegfried and restore the life of the German nation.
And alongside the resurgence that she saw coming, the goddess of vengeance rose up inexorably against the perjury of November 9, 1918.
Slowly the room emptied. The movement was taking its course.
