CHAPTER FIVE Ideology and organization
The National Socialist state, whose framework I have attempted to outline in broad strokes, cannot, in essence, be considered as such simply because it recognizes everything indispensable to its existence. Knowing what the National Socialist state should look like is not essential; the problem of its formation is more important. In no way can one expect that today’s militant parties, which are primarily the beneficiaries of the current state, will, of their own accord, resolve to radically change things and spontaneously decide to modify their political views. This still appears somewhat feasible, if one takes into account that the truly leading elements of these parties are Jews, and nothing else.
In attempting to put the ideal vision of a National Socialist state into practice, it is imperative to seek, independently of the powers of current public life, a new force willing and able to undertake the struggle for this ideal. And it is indeed a struggle, and so we consider it here, for the first task is not to create a National Socialist conception of the state, but, above all, to eliminate the existing Jewish conception. In this case, as in many others throughout history, the main obstacle lies not in shaping the new state of affairs, but in the difficulty of paving the way for it. Prejudices and vested interests, forming a tight phalanx, oppose by all means the triumph of an idea they find uncomfortable or threatening.
However unpleasant a nascent doctrine of great and transcendental ideological significance may be to the individual, he will have to apply without hesitation the probe of the most severe criticism as his primary weapon of struggle.
The obvious interest of pseudo-nationalists in stating that they are in no way attempting to engage in negative criticism, but only in constructive work, is proof of their lack of insight into the development of historical processes. Marxism, too, pursued a goal, and it too knows of constructive work (although in its
(in case it is only a question of establishing the despotism of international Jewish finance). But this did not mean that Marxism ceased to exercise its devastating and dissociative criticism for seventy years, until the old monarchical State had to collapse, corroded by that acid that worked incessantly. It was then that Marxism began its so-called “constructive” work.
An emerging ideology must be intolerant and cannot be reduced to playing the role of a simple “party alongside others.” Rather, it must imperatively demand recognition as exclusive and unique, apart from the total transformation—according to its criteria—of public life as a whole. It cannot, therefore, admit the coexistence of any factor representative of the old, prevailing regime.
This intolerance is also characteristic of religions. Christianity, too, was not limited to merely erecting its altar; it was necessarily obliged to proceed with the destruction of pagan altars. Only thanks to this fanatical intolerance could the apodictic faith emerge, whose prerequisite is precisely intolerance.
An ideological conception saturated with an infernal spirit of intolerance can only be broken by an idea that, while pure in principle and absolutely true, is driven by the same spirit of intolerance and sustained by a will no less strong than that which animates it.
Political parties lend themselves to compromise; ideological concepts never do.
Political parties have competitors; ideological concepts assume and proclaim their infallibility.
An ideological conception will bring its principles to triumph only when it brings together, within the ranks of its adherents, the most steadfast and powerful elements of its time and its people, forming them into the phalanx of an organization fit for struggle. But for this to happen, it is necessary that this ideological conception—taking these elements into account—specify within its general world of ideas certain postulates that, due to their precision and appropriate presentation, can serve as a creed for the new human community. While the program of a purely political party is nothing more than a recipe for a successful outcome in the next election, the program of an ideological conception represents the formula for a declaration of war against the established order, against the existing state of affairs—in short, against the dominant criteria of the time.
It is not necessary that each individual fighting for this ideology be fully aware of and fully understand the inner thoughts and political reflections of the movement’s leaders. Just as an army where every soldier was a general would be of little practical use, not precisely because of his rank, but because he possessed the same training and insight as the commander, so too will a political movement, representing an entire ideology, not succeed if it aspires to be anything other than a mere receptacle of “geniuses.” No. This movement also absolutely requires the participation of the common soldier, without whom it is impossible to maintain the cohesion of internal discipline.
It is peculiar to the nature of an organization that it can only survive when an intelligent leadership has at its disposal a vast sector of the masses, more sentimentally than rationally oriented. It would be more difficult, in the long run, to discipline a company of 200 men, all equally trained and intelligent, than one consisting of 190 members with a mentality inferior to that of the remaining 10, who are better educated.
Social democracy knew how to take full advantage of this conclusion. Its organization also encompassed an army of officers and soldiers. The German artisan, discharged from military service, became its soldier, and the Jewish intellectual became its officer.
What our bourgeoisie used to observe with amazement, namely, the fact that only the so-called ignorant masses supported Marxism, was in fact the basic condition that ensured its triumph. Indeed, while the bourgeois parties, with their stratified intellectualism, represented an undisciplined and nullified whole, Marxism formed from its unintelligent human material an army of political soldiers, who followed the Jewish leader with the same blind obedience they had once followed their German officer in the Reich army.
It was never understood that the potential of a political party lies not in the intelligence or spiritual independence of each of its members, but rather in the disciplined obedience with which they subordinate themselves to their leaders. What is decisive is the capacity embodied in the leadership itself. This means, therefore, that to lead an ideology to victory, it must first be transformed into a fighting movement, whose program must logically take into account the human resources at its disposal.
If the National Socialist idea, moving beyond its vaguely defined purpose of today, is to one day achieve brilliant success, it must emphasize certain theses taken from its broader ideological framework. That is why the program of our movement is condensed into twenty-five fundamental points, which, first and foremost, aim to provide the people with a general picture of the aspirations embodied in our struggle. These twenty-five points constitute, so to speak, a political catechism that, on the one hand, aims to win adherents to the cause, and on the other, lends itself to uniting and unifying these adherents, identifying them under the notion of a common duty.
In the case of a political theory that is evidently correct in its general outlines, it is less dangerous to retain a formula, even if it no longer entirely corresponds to reality, than to modify it and thus leave the dogma of the movement, until then considered granite-like, open to public discussion and its reckless consequences. This is impossible while the movement struggles to impose itself. The essential should never be sought in the external formula, but always in the inner meaning, that is, in the substance, which is immutable. In the movement’s own interest, one cannot but hope that it maintains the necessary energy to safeguard that inner meaning, removing all factors that could cause uncertainty in the conviction of its followers and even desertion.
In this, too, the Catholic Church should serve as an example to us, for although its doctrinal framework clashes on many points—and partly unjustifiably so—with the study of the exact sciences and research, it never resigns itself to sacrificing even an iota of the content of its doctrine. It rightly recognized that its strength of resistance does not consist in adapting more or less skillfully to the ever-changing results of scientific research over time, but in an unshakeable adherence to its already expounded dogmas, which are what give the whole its character as a faith. This is why the Catholic Church remains more steadfast today than ever.
The National Socialist German Workers’ Party received, with its program of Twenty-Five Theses, a foundation that must remain unshakeable. Neither now nor in the future is it, nor will it be, the task of the members of our movement to criticize or alter the points of this program; rather, they are obliged to remain loyal to them.
Most of our coreligionists know that the essence of the movement lies less in the dead letter of our principles than in the interpretation that we National Socialists give them.
Our movement owed its name today to the recognition of these truths in its beginnings. The party’s program later emerged from them, and it is in this unanimous recognition that the secret of its dissemination lies.
It is already a consequence of the actions of the National Socialist movement that, today, all kinds of associations, societies, and simple groups, and even “large” parties, claim the right to claim the word “völkisch” (racist). Without our influence, it would never have occurred to any of these organizations to even utter the word; they probably wouldn’t have had the slightest idea of its meaning, and their leaders, in particular, would have been completely unaware of the profound significance this concept contains. Only thanks to the work of the National Socialist German Workers’ Party was the word “völkisch” given substantial meaning, and it subsequently spread to people of all stripes. Above all, our brilliant propaganda campaign has demonstrated the power of racist thinking, to such an extent that other parties, imbued with their desire to gain followers, claim that they too pursue similar goals.
No less dangerous are those who traffic in pseudo-racism, forging fantastic plans that have no basis other than some monomania. At best, these people are nothing more than sterile theorists who often believe they can disguise their spiritual emptiness with a long beard and the ostentatiousness of an extravagant Germanism.
In contrast to all these fruitless attempts, it is worth recalling the period when the young National Socialist movement began its struggle.
