CHAPTER FOUR Personality and the nationalist conception of the State
An ideology that, rejecting the democratic principle of the masses, strives to consecrate this world to the best peoples, that is, to the superior man, is logically obliged to also recognize the aristocratic precept of selection within each nation, thus guaranteeing the government and maximum influence of the most capable among their respective peoples. This conception is based on the idea of personality, not majority.
He has understood very superficially and knows nothing of what we call an ideology (Weltanschauung) who believes that a National Socialist State is distinguished from other States in the purely mechanical aspect, by the effect of a better structuring of its economic life, that is, by virtue of a more equitable compensation between wealth and poverty or by the more influential role of the great social mass in the economic process of the Nation or, finally, by means of fair wages based on the annulment of a system of too great differences in this order.
All this offers no security of subsistence, much less of grandeur. A people that clings to such truly external reforms will have achieved nothing that guarantees it a vanguard position in the concert of nations. A movement of opinion that sees its task solely in a process of general compensation, even if surely justified, will not succeed in truly carrying out a major reform of the existing state of affairs, and this is due to the simple reason that all its work is ultimately limited to superficial aspects, without being able to give the people that moral framework that would allow them, with a certainty that we might almost call mathematical, to definitively eradicate those defects under which we suffer today.
For a better understanding, it may be helpful to take a look back at the true origins and determining causes of the development of human culture.
The first step that visibly distanced man from the animal world was ingenuity. Surely, the first intelligent measures applied by man in his struggle against animals originally arose from the individual action of particularly gifted individuals.
In those days, personality undoubtedly constituted the starting point for decisions and actions that were later adopted by all humanity as the most natural realities; just as happened with a certain military principle that has become—let’s say—the foundation of all strategy today, and which originally owed its conception to the idea of a single mind, acquiring universal value over the years, and perhaps even millennia, as something perfectly inherent to humankind.
A second initiative came to complement the first; man had learned to put other elements and even living beings at the service of his struggle for existence; and this is how true human creative activity was born, the fruits of which constitute the reality we now experience everywhere. Material inventions, beginning with the use of carved stone as a weapon, leading to the domestication of animals, giving man artificially produced fire, and so on, up to the many astonishing discoveries of our time, allow us to recognize in the individual the representative of all this creative work, and this with all the more clarity, the less distant they are from our time or the more important and transcendental they are. Ultimately, all these inventions contribute to placing man ever more above the level of the animal world, to the point of radically distancing him from it.
The purpose they fulfill is none other, in its deepest sense, than to serve the constant evolution of the human species. Similarly, the work of purely theoretical elucidation, which escapes all measure but is nevertheless an inherent condition of all material discoveries, also appears to be the exclusive product of personality. It is not the masses that invent, nor is it the majority that organizes or thinks; it is always the individual, it is personality, that reveals itself everywhere.
A human community has the characteristics of being well organized if it knows how to foster creative forces in the best possible way.
of man and use them profitably in the service of the community. It must embody the aspiration to place heads above the masses and, consequently, make the latter subordinate to them.
According to this, the organized community is not only not empowered to prevent leaders from emerging from the masses, but, on the contrary, must enter into the mode of its character to encourage and facilitate this revelation. The selection of those leaders occurs above all by virtue of the same hard struggle for life.
The administration of the State, as well as the power represented by the nation’s military organization, are equally governed by the idea of the role played by the figure of personality.
Within the current state of affairs, the idea of personality, with the attribute of authority over subordinates and the obligation of responsibility toward superiors, still subsists in the spirit of the aforementioned institutions. Political life, on the other hand, has completely distanced itself from the observance of this fundamental principle. And just as all human culture constitutes nothing more than the result of the creative activity of personality, the value of the majority principle makes its decisive appearance within the community and above all in government, thus gradually beginning to poison, from the highest spheres, the whole of national life, that is, actually destroying it. The dissociative influence of the Jew on the organism of peoples foreign to his own is ultimately attributable only to his eternal determination to undermine, in the nations that welcomed him, the meaning of personality and to exalt in its place the importance of the masses. Thus, the principle of constructive organization, peculiar to the Aryan race, is replaced by the destructive principle that lives in the Jew, who thus becomes the “ferment of decomposition” of peoples and races and, in a broader sense, the factor of dissolution of human culture.
Marxism represents the epitome of Jewish aspiration with its tendency to nullify the predominant significance of personality and replace it with the number of the masses.
Politically it corresponds to that orientation and manifests itself to us starting from the most intimate cells of the communal administration, up to the highest governmental spheres of the Reich; economically, it embodies the system of a syndicalist movement that does not
serve not only the true interests of the worker, but also the dissociative purposes of international Jewry.
National Socialist ideology must fundamentally differentiate itself from that of Marxism in that it recognizes not only the value of race, but also the significance of personality, both of which constitute the basic pillars of the entire structure of its construction.
The National Socialist State must ensure the well-being of its citizens by recognizing, in all aspects, the significance embodied by personality and thus promoting in every area of human activity that maximum degree of productive capacity which, in turn, allows the individual a maximum degree of benefit.
The best political constitution for a State and its form of government is that which most naturally brings the most qualified members of the national community to positions of preponderant importance and directing influence.
Majority decisions disappear, and only the responsible individual exists. It’s true that alongside every leader there are advisors who provide advice, but the final decision rests with only one person.
As a matter of principle, the National Socialist state does not allow the advice or opinions of individuals who, due to their professional training and type of activity, have no understanding of the matter at hand, to be sought in special matters, for example in economic matters. For this reason, it naturally subdivides its representative bodies into political chambers and professional chambers. To ensure fruitful cooperation between these chambers, there is a permanent senate—as a selection body—to which all chambers are subordinate.
In any House or Senate, a vote will never take place, because they are working organizations, not voting machines. Each member has an advisory vote, but not a decision-making vote, which is solely the natural right of the respective responsible president.
This principle of unrestricted connection between the notion of absolute responsibility, on the one hand, and the notion of absolute authority, on the other, will lead to the gradual formation of a selection of the Führer element, something that today, in the age of irresponsible parliamentarism, is simply inconceivable.
Regarding the possibility of putting these concepts into practice, I ask that we not forget that the parliamentary principle of majority decision-making has not always dominated humanity; on the contrary, it appeared only in very brief periods of history, which always represented periods of decline for peoples and states.
But one should not believe that, by virtue of purely theoretical government measures, it would be feasible to bring about such a transformation, which, logically, could not be limited to the State Constitution alone, but would also have to penetrate all legislation, that is, encompass the entirety of civil life. A revolution of such characteristics only occurs and can occur through a movement founded on the spirit of these renewing ideas, which already embodies within itself the soul of the future State.
Hence, the National Socialist movement must identify itself with such ideas already today and put them into practice within its own organization so that, at the given moment, it will be in a position not only to point out these same guidelines to the government, but also to place at its disposal the already formed body of its ideal type of State.
