The aryan man is superior culturally, they are the founders of civilization Sieg Heil

[Naofumi]

In Mein Kampf Hitler divided mankind into three categories - founders of culture, bearers of culture, and destroyers of culture. His argument was that only Aryans were the founders of culture and it was the European (and American) influence of Japan that allowed for their own progress.

"Since the Jew - for reasons that I shall deal with immediately - never had a civilization of his own, he has always been furnished by others with a basis for his intellectual work. His intellect has always developed by the use of those cultural achievements which he has found ready-to-hand around him."

"That is why the Jewish people, despite intellectual powers with which they are apparently endowed, have not a culture, certainly not a culture of their own. The culture which the Jew enjoys today is the product of the work of others and this product is debased in the hands of the Jew.

"...we must bear in mind the essential fact that there has never been any Jewish art and consequently that nothing of this kind exists today." - this remark is in relation to his belief that Jews do not have a culture of their own.

"No. The Jews have not the creative abilities which are necessary to the founding of a civilization; for in them there is not, and never has been, the spirit of idealism which is an absolutely necessary element in the higher development of mankind. Therefore Jewish intellect will never be constructive but always destructive."

Karl Marx, On the Jewish Question - Marx characterizes the Jews of Europe as not having a real religious culture, but instead focusing their social integrity on materialism.
Martin Luther, On Jews and Their Lies - Many of Hitler's "remedies" were prescribed by Luther in this book.
While Nietzsche was vocally anti-fascist, his writings (especially The Will to Power) were popular among Nazis, who saw his conception of the "ubermensch" as an alternative to the Jewish "untermensch."
Kant and Hegel also characterized the Jews as irredeemable and a social and economic drain on Europe. John Weiss (Ideology of Death) does a good job of tracing anti-semitism through philosophical and religious texts in Europe leading up to the war, and has interesting things to say about Kant and Hegel.
I do think, however, that Hitler's ideas about Jews were less a philosophical conclusion and more a reflection of a broader culture of self-destructive fantasy in Germany after WWII. Sigfried Kracauer discussed this in From Caligari to Hitler.

The German people, or Volk, were, he believed, a single ethnicity
with unique and singular self-interests. They were-indisputably
responsible for many of the greatest achievements in Western history. They
were among the leading lights in music, literature, architecture, science,
and technology. They were great warriors, and great nation-builders. They
were, in large part, the driving force behind Western civilization itself. All
this is true and undeniable, and Hitler is justly proud of his heritage. Equally
is he outraged at the indignities suffered by this great people in then-recent
decades-culminating in the disastrous humiliation ofWWI and the Treaty
of Versailles. He seeks, above all, to remedy these injustices and restore
greatness to the German people. To do this, he needs to identify both their
primary opponents and the defective political ideologies and structures that
bind them. Then he undertakes to outline a new socio-political system that
can carry them forward to a higher and rightful destiny. He accomplishes
all this, and more.
Finally, in its fourth aspect, Mein Kampf is a kind of blueprint for action.
It describes the evolution and aims of National Socialism and the NSDAP,
or Nazi Party, in compelling detail. Hitler naturally wants his new
movement to succeed in assuming power in Germany and in a future
German Reich. But this is no theoretical analysis. Hitler is nothing if not
pragmatic. He has concrete goals and precise means of achieving them. He
has nothing but disdain for the geistigen Waffen, the intellectual weapons,
of the impotent intelligentsia. He demands results, and success. By all
accounts, he achieved both.

Born on 20 April 1 889 in present-day
Austria, Hitler grew up as a citizen of the multi-ethnic state known as the
Austro-Hungarian Empire. This diverse amalgamation was formed in 1867,
with the union of the Austrian and Hungarian monarchies; thus does Hitler
refer to the state as the "Double Monarchy." Throughout its 50-year history,
it was always a loose conjunction of many ethnicities, and never a truly
unified state. The ethnic Germans in it were a minority, and had to struggle
to promote their own interests. This fact caused Hitler no end of distress;
he explicitly felt more attachment to the broader German Volk than to the
multi-ethnic state into which he was born.
As a youth, his interests tended toward the arts, painting, and history. This
led to conflict with his obstinate father, who envisioned a safe, comfortable,
bureaucratic career for his son. But his father's death on 3 January 1903,
when Adolf was 13, allowed the young man to determine his own future.
Two years later he moved to Vienna, scraping by with manual labor jobs to
survive. In late 1907, his mother died. At the age of 1 8, he then applied to
enter the Viennese arts academy in painting, but was diverted to architecture.
He worked and studied for two more years, eventually becoming skilled
enough to work fulltime as a draftsman and painter of watercolors.
All the while, he studied the mass of humanity around him. He read the
various writings and publications of the political parties. He observed the
workings of the press. He watched how unions functioned. He sat in on
Parliament. He followed events in neighboring Germany. And he became
intrigued by the comings and goings of one particular Viennese minority:
the Jews.
Gradually he became convinced that the two dominant threats to
German well-being were Marxism-a Jewish form of communism-and
the international capitalist Jews. The problems were compounded by the
fundamentally inept workings of a representative democracy that tried to
serve diverse ethnicities. In the end, the fine and noble concept of
democracy became nothing other than a "Jewish democracy," working for
the best interests of Jews instead of Austrians or Germans.
Upon turning 23 in 1912, Hitler went to Munich. It was his first extended
contact with German culture, and he found it invigorating. He lived there
for two years, until the outbreak of WWI in July 1914. Thrilled at the
opportunity to defend the German homeland, he enlisted, serving on the
Western front in Belgium. After more than 2 years of service, he was lightly
wounded in October 1916 and sent back to Germany, spending some time
in a reserve battalion in Munich. Appalled at both the role of Jews there and
the negative public attitude, he returned to the front in March 1917.

By this time, the war had been dragging on for some two and a half
years. It had effectively become a stalemate. Even the looming entrance of
the Americans into the war-President Wilson would call for war the next
month, and US troops would soon follow-would have little near-term
effect. As Hitler explains, however, the Germans actually had reasons for
optimism by late 1917. The Central Powers (primarily Germany and
Austria-Hungary) had inflicted a decisive defeat on Italy in the Battle of
Caporetto, and the Russians had pulled out of the war after the Bolshevik
revolution, thus freeing up German troops for the Western front. Hitler
recalls that his compatriots "looked forward with confidence" to the spring
of 1918, when they anticipated final victory.
NOVEMBER REVOLUTION, AND A NEW MOVEMENT
But things would tum out differently. German dissatisfaction with the
prolonged war effort was being fanned by Jewish activists calling for mass
demonstrations, strikes, and even revolution against the Kaiser. In late
January 1918 there was a large munitions strike. Various workers' actions
and riots followed for months afterward. The Western front held, but
Germany was weakening internally.
In mid-October of 1918, the German front near Ypres, Belgium was hit with
mustard gas. Hitler's eyes were badly affected, and he was sent to a military
hospital in Pasewalk, north of Berlin. In late October, a minor naval revolt in
Kiel began to spread to the wider population. Two major Jewish-led parties, the
Social Democrats (SPD) and the Independent Social Democratic Party (USPD),
agitated for the Kaiser to abdicate-which he did, on November 9. Jewish
activists in Berlin and Munich then declared independent "soviet" states; for a
detailed discussion of these events, see Dalton (2014). Germany formally
capitulated on November 11. After the dust had settled, a new 'Weimar'
government was formed, one that was notably sympathetic to Jewish interests.
Hearing about the revolution from his hospital bed, Hitler was
devastated. All the effort and sacrifices made at the front had proven
worthless. Jewish agitators in the homeland had succeeded in whipping up
local dissatisfaction to the point that the Kaiser was driven from power.
The revolutionaries then assumed power and immediately surrendered to
the enemy. This was the infamous "stab in the back" that would haunt
German nationalists for years to come. And it was the triggering event that
caused Hitler to enter politics.

 

[Naofumi]

In September 1919, working for the government, he was assigned to
follow and report on a little-known group called the Deutsche
Arbeiterpartei, or German Workers' Party (OAP). He ended up joining the
group, and quickly assumed a leadership role. By early 1920, Hitler's
speeches were drawing hundreds or even thousands of people. On February
24, he announced that the party would henceforth be known as the National
Socialist German Workers' Party, or NSDAP-'Nazi,' in the parlance of
its detractors. It is with this "first great mass meeting" that Hitler closes
volume one of his book.
The new movement grew rapidly. Hitler formalized his leadership in
July 1921. A series of stormy and occasionally violent public events
occurred in the following months. In November 1 922, ideological
compatriot Mussolini took power in Italy, which served to bolster both
National Socialist efforts domestically and their international reputation.
It was on November 21 that the New York Times printed its first major
article on Hitler: "New Popular Idol Rises in Bavaria." Calling the Nazis
"violently anti-Semitic" and "reactionary" but "well disciplined," the NYT
viewed them as "potentially dangerous, though not for the immediate
future." Indeed-it would not be for another 10 years that they would
assume power in Germany.
Soon thereafter, other events would favor the National Socialists. France
had occupied the Ruhr valley in January 1923, claiming a violation of
Versailles; this was taken as a grave insult to German sovereignty. It was
also at this time that the infamous German hyperinflation took hold, wiping
out the savings of ordinary Germans and forcing them to haul around
bushels of cash for even the smallest purchases. By the end of the year,
Germany was in a full-blown financial crisis. This led Hitler and the
NSDAP leadership to plan for a revolutionary take-over of Munich on 9
November 1923.
This attempted 'putsch,' or coup, would fail. In a brief shoot-out, 16
Nazis and four policemen were killed. Hitler and the other leaders were
arrested within days, put on trial in February 1924, and sentenced to light
prison terms. In all, Hitler spent some 13 months in confinement, obtaining
release in December of that year. It was during this time that he dictated
what would become volume one of his book.
Hitler reportedly wanted to call his new book, "Four and a Half Years
of Struggle against Lies, Stupidity, and Cowardice." The publisher adroitly
suggested a shorter title: "My Struggle," or Mein Kampf It would initially
be published in July of 1925.

 

[Naofumi]

Hitler then began a second, shorter volume to complete his program.
This appeared in December of 1926. The next year, the two volumes were
slightly revised and combined into one work. This 1927 'second edition'
of Mein Kampf, published when Hitler was 3 8 years old, is the version used
in the present translation.
CHAPTER SYNOPSES
It will be useful at this point to provide a very brief summary of the
main themes of each of the 27 chapters in the book.
VOLUME ONE
Chapter 1: In My Parents' House. Hitler's early life. Relationship with
parents. Early education. Interest in history and art. Budding nationalism.
Covers birth in 1 889 to mother's death in late 1 907, when Hitler was 1 8
years old.
Chapter 2: Years of Study and Suffering in Vienna. Time alone in
Vienna. Marxism and international Jewry as main threats. Assessment and
critique of Viennese government. Life of the working class. Study of the
Social Democratic party, and its Jewish influence. Role of unions.
Burgeoning anti-Semitism. Study of the destructive role of Marxism.
Chapter 3: General Political Reflections from my Time in Vienna.
Observations on Austrian politics and representative democracy. Failings of
multi-ethnic states. Critique of Western democracy. Failings of 'majority rule.'
Demise of the pan-German movement. Unfortunate conflict with the Catholic
Church. Anti-Semitism and religion. Covers period up to age 23 (1912).
Chapter 4: Munich. Moves to Munich. Critique of German alliances. Four
possible paths of German policy. Population growth, and the need for land.
Need for alliance with England. Initial discussion of the role of Aryans.
Marxism as mortal foe. Covers up to mid-1914.
Chapter 5: The World War. Outbreak of World War One. Hitler enlists,
at age 25. "Baptism by fire."
Chapter 6: War Propaganda. Role and need for propaganda. Effective
use by England; failure by Germany.
Chapter 7: The Revolution. Course of the Great War. Wounded in late
1 9 1 6. Jews and negative attitudes rampant in Munich. Munitions strike in
early 1918. Poisoned by mustard gas in October 1 9 1 8, at age 29. November
Revolution.

 

[Naofumi]

Chapter 8: The Beginning of my Political Activity. Postwar time in
Munich. Need for a new party. Negative role of global capitalism.
Chapter 9: The 'German Workers' Party.' Encounters German Workers'
Party (OAP). Early meetings. Joins OAP, as member #7, at age 30.
Chapter 10: Causes of the Collapse. Analysis of the collapse of the
German Empire in 1918. Dominance of international capitalism. Effect of
the press on the masses. Jewish control of press. Combating the syphilis
epidemic. Cultural decay in modern art. Ineffective parliament. The army
as a source of discipline.
Chapter 11: Nation and Race. Detailed racial theory. Nature strives to
improve species. Racial mixing between 'higher' and 'lower' types yields
physical, moral, and cultural decay. Aryans as true founders of civilization.
Aryan tendency for self-sacrifice. Aryan versus Jew. Jews as parasites. Fake
Jewish 'religion.' Extended examination of"the way ofJewry"-historical,
sociological, political. Marxist worldview. Jewish subversion of
democracy. Ill-effects of racial impurity.
Chapter 12: The First Period of Development of the NSDAP. Evolution
of OAP. ·Extended discussion of the need to nationalize the masses. How
to organize a party. Gaining publicity. Second major meeting in October
1919. Growing success. Rejection of 'intellectual' weapons. First truly
mass meeting in February 1920. Transition to NSDAP.
VOLUME TWO
Chapter 1: Worldview and Party. Corruption of democracy. Concept of
'folkish.' Transforming ideals into practice. Marxism pushes race equality.
State must serve racial function: to promote the best.
Chapter 2: The State. Three conventional concepts of state. State as means
to end: advancing human race. Must maintain racial integrity. Strong minorities
end up ruling. Racial mixing leads to decay. State must promote healthy
children. Basic eugenic theory. Folkish education, for physical, mental, and
moral strength. Promote willpower, determination, responsibility. Meritocracy.
Chapter 3: Subjects and Citizens. Citizenship based on race. Three
classes: citizen, subject, foreigner.
Chapter 4: Personality and the Folkish Concept of the State.
Aristocratic principle. Value of the individual. Marxism promotes mass
thinking. Government rule by the best individuals, not majority.
Chapter 5: Worldview and Organization. Need for an uncompromising
worldview. Need for decisive leadership. 25-point NSDAP program is
unshakable. Only NSDAP is truly folkish.

 

[Naofumi]

Chapter 8: The Beginning of my Political Activity. Postwar time in
Munich. Need for a new party. Negative role of global capitalism.
Chapter 9: The 'German Workers' Party.' Encounters German Workers'
Party (OAP). Early meetings. Joins OAP, as member #7, at age 30.
Chapter 10: Causes of the Collapse. Analysis of the collapse of the
German Empire in 1918. Dominance of international capitalism. Effect of
the press on the masses. Jewish control of press. Combating the syphilis
epidemic. Cultural decay in modern art. Ineffective parliament. The army
as a source of discipline.
Chapter 11: Nation and Race. Detailed racial theory. Nature strives to
improve species. Racial mixing between 'higher' and 'lower' types yields
physical, moral, and cultural decay. Aryans as true founders of civilization.
Aryan tendency for self-sacrifice. Aryan versus Jew. Jews as parasites. Fake
Jewish 'religion.' Extended examination of"the way ofJewry"-historical,
sociological, political. Marxist worldview. Jewish subversion of
democracy. Ill-effects of racial impurity.
Chapter 12: The First Period of Development of the NSDAP. Evolution
of OAP. ·Extended discussion of the need to nationalize the masses. How
to organize a party. Gaining publicity. Second major meeting in October
1919. Growing success. Rejection of 'intellectual' weapons. First truly
mass meeting in February 1920. Transition to NSDAP.
VOLUME TWO
Chapter 1: Worldview and Party. Corruption of democracy. Concept of
'folkish.' Transforming ideals into practice. Marxism pushes race equality.
State must serve racial function: to promote the best.
Chapter 2: The State. Three conventional concepts of state. State as means
to end: advancing human race. Must maintain racial integrity. Strong minorities
end up ruling. Racial mixing leads to decay. State must promote healthy
children. Basic eugenic theory. Folkish education, for physical, mental, and
moral strength. Promote willpower, determination, responsibility. Meritocracy.
Chapter 3: Subjects and Citizens. Citizenship based on race. Three
classes: citizen, subject, foreigner.
Chapter 4: Personality and the Folkish Concept of the State.
Aristocratic principle. Value of the individual. Marxism promotes mass
thinking. Government rule by the best individuals, not majority.
Chapter 5: Worldview and Organization. Need for an uncompromising
worldview. Need for decisive leadership. 25-point NSDAP program is
unshakable. Only NSDAP is truly folkish.

 

[Naofumi]

RACIAL THEORY
Mein Kampf contains numerous references to 'blood' (Blut) and 'race'
(Rasse). This is always portrayed in the worst possible terms, as some kind
of demonic, hate-filled, blind racism. But we must first realize that such
talk was commonplace in the early 201h century; Hitler's terminology,
though odd-sounding today, was actually quite conventional at the time.
Not being a scientist, and few having much understanding of genetics at
the time, it is understandable that he would employ such widely-used terms.
Therefore, a literal interpretation of such words is misleading. In modem
terminology, Hitler's 'race' is better viewed as 'ethnicity. ' He was more an
ethnicist than a racist. His call for justice for the "German race" is really
on behalf of ethnic Germans-the Volk. Thus understood, his view is much
less threatening than commonly portrayed. Yes, he viewed ethnic Germans
as superior. Yes, he wanted the best for his people. Yes, he was not much
interested in the welfare of minorities or other nationalities. This is hardly
a sin. Many people around the world today fight for precisely such things,
for their own ethnicities. And they are right to do so.
Even today, it is reasonable and appropriate to discuss issues of race. It is a
relevant term in biological taxonomy, indicating the highest-level sub-grouping
within the species Homo sapiens. By some accounts, there are three races:
White/Caucasian, Black/Negroid, and Mongoloid/ Asian. Within each race, we
have the various ethnicities--0fwhich there are some 5,000 worldwide.
By this measure, Hitler cared little about race. He made a few dismissive
comments about Blacks, but nothing that wasn't standard at the time. He
actually admired certain people of the Asian race, especially the Japanese.

But his primary concern was among the various White ethnicities. He
sought a position of strength and influence for ethnic Germans; he sought
alliances with ethnic Britons; and he sought to oppose ethnic Jews. He was
an ethnicist, not a racist.
Then there is Hitler's infamous talk of' Aryan.' Apart from passing mention
elsewhere in the book, it is discussed in detail only in chapter 1 1 . While there
is no talk of any 'superman'-no reference to Nietzsche's Obermensch, for
example-it is clear that Hitler views the Aryan as the highest human type,
the greatest ethnicity, mover and creator of civilization. Notably, he never
defines Aryan. Rather, we learn only what the Aryan is not: he is not Black,
not Oriental, and certainly not Jewish. The Jew is the anti-Aryan, his dark and
corrupting counterpart. The Aryan builds, the Jew destroys. The Aryan
produces, the Jew consumes. The Aryan is idealistic, the Jew materialistic.
In the end, the Aryan is distinguished not by his superior intelligence,
nor his great creativity, but mainly by his altruism: the Aryan is a self
sacrificing person, more willing than any others to work on behalf of
society. Thus he builds civilization and culture, and spreads it to the world.
Non-Aryans, to the extent that they have a culture, get it from the Aryans,
even as they customize it to their own needs. But the original source and
sustainer is the self-sacrificing Aryan.
The word 'Aryan' has an interesting origin, incidentally, and it has
nothing to do with Hitler or the Germans. It comes from the Sanskrit arya,
meaning 'noble.' It originally referred to the people and language that moved
into India from the north, around 1 500 BC. In the Indian caste system, the
Aryans became the Brahmans-the highest and noblest caste. It was they
who cultivated the Sanskrit language, and ultimately developed Indian
culture. And a final point of interest: Those immigrants from the north came
from the region that is known today as the Iranian plateau. In fact, the word
'Iran' derives directly from 'Aryan'; the Iranians were the original Aryans.
Not being a scholar of ancient history, and having no Internet at hand,
Hitler knew little of all this. He simply picked up on prior German and
European usage. In fact, talk of Aryans as a superior race predated Hitler
by several decades. It was a main theme of Frenchman Arthur de
Gobineau's book Essay on the Inequality of the Human Races, of 1 855.
And it was prominent in Briton-turned-German author Houston
Chamberlain's book Foundations of the Nineteenth Century, published in
1 899. By the time Hitler cited the term, it was old hat.

 

[Naofumi]

ON RELIGION
Among other calumnies, Hitler is often portrayed as a godless atheist, a
devil worshipper, the antichrist, or some kind of maniacal pagan. In fact
he was none of these.
Rather, Hitler was broadly supportive of Christianity. He called it "the
Religion of Love," and referred to Jesus, indirectly, as its "sublime founder"
(volume 1 , chapter 8). He argued that the masses are not and cannot be
philosophical; their ethics must come from traditional religious sources.
And he believed in separation of church and state: "political parties have
no right to meddle in religious questions" (chapter 1 0). In chapter 1 1 , he
condemned the Jews because they mock religion, and portray ethics and
morality as "antiquated sentiment."
His view on God is quite intriguing. Frequently he refers to a kind of
cosmic deity or divine power, but in a variety of unconventional terms. We
find many references, for example, to Schicksal-fate or destiny. In chapter
5 we read of the "Goddess of Destiny" (Schicksalgottin ). in chapter 7 he
writes of "Providence" ( Vorsehung), "Doom" or "Fate" ( Verhangnis ), and
"the Lord" (Herrn). Elsewhere we find reference to "Chance" (Zufall) and
''the eternal Creator".(ewigen Schop/er). Volume one closes with a reference
to "the Goddess of Inexorable Vengeance" (die Gottin der unerbittlichen
Rache). These are not mere metaphors. It seems to be a kind ofrecognition
of higher powers in the cosmos, but not those of traditional religions.
In the end, Hitler was most appalled by crude materialism: the quest for
money and material power. This view has no concept of idealism, no notion
of spirituality, no vision of higher powers in the universe. Materialism was
the essence of both Marxism and capitalism-and both were embodied in
the Jew. That's why these things are the mortal enemy of anyone seeking
higher aims in life.
Hitler himself was no fan of religious dogma, but seems to have
envisioned a future that moved toward a new kind of spirituality, one aligned
with the workings of nature. We may perhaps best view him as a 'spiritual
but not religious' sort of person-a view that is notably widespread today.
ON THE JEWS
If nothing else, Hitler is inevitably depicted as a confessed anti-Semite
and Jew-hater. We should be clear: this is absolutely true. There are many

 

[Naofumi]

lies spread about Hitler, but this is not one of them. The key is understanding
why he held this view.
In the second half of chapter 2, he describes in striking detail his gradual
discovery of the role and effect of Jews in society. He recalls that, as a
youth, he had known only one Jewish boy, but had no particular feelings
toward him one way or the other. He hadn't even heard them discussed
much until his mid-teens, and then only in a vaguely negative political
context. When he moved to Vienna at age 15, he encountered a city of 2
million that was 1 0 percent Jewish. At first, he barely noticed them. When
he did, he viewed them as representatives of a rather strange religion, but
since he was generally tolerant of religious diversity, he gave them little
thought. He was initially put off by the "anti-Semitic" press. As he says,
"on grounds of human tolerance, I opposed the idea that [the Jew] should
be attacked because he had a different faith."
But then Hitler began to pay attention to the mainstream press. They
were informative and liberal, but yet often flamboyant and garish. They
seemed anxious to curry favor with the corrupt monarchy. And they were
uniformly critical of the German Kaiser and his people. He noticed that
some of the anti-Semitic papers were actually more skeptical of Viennese
authority, and more open-minded regarding the Germans. At the same time,
he realized that the Jews were more numerous than he previously believed.
In fact, certain districts of Vienna were 50 percent Jewish, or more. And
they all seemed to endorse a strange ideology: Zionism.
Furthermore, they were visually and physically repellent. Their black
caftans and braided hair locks looked comical. They had their own odd
concept of 'cleanliness': "That they were not water-lovers was obvious
upon first glance." They smelled bad: "The odor of those people in caftans
often made me sick to my stomach." This was topped off by "the unkempt
clothes and the generally ignoble appearance." All in all, a sorry sight.
Worst of all, hidden away inside, was their "moral rot." Jews seemed to
be involved in all manner of shady, unethical, and illegal activities. Hitler
began to study the situation in more detail. "The fact was that 90 percent
of all the filthy literature, artistic trash, and theatrical idiocy had to be
charged to the account of a people who formed scarcely one percent of the
nation. This fact could not be denied." Pornography, lewd art and theater,
prostitution, human trafficking . . . all could be tied to the Jews.
The famed mainstream Viennese press, Hitler discovered, was almost
completely a Jewish enterprise. Jewish writers repeatedly praised Jewish
actors, authors, and businessmen. People, events, and policies favorable to

 

[Naofumi]

Jews were lauded, and those that were disadvantageous were condemned.
Even the dominant political party, the Social Democrats, was found to be
led by Jews. Upon this realization, says Hitler, "the scales fell from my
eyes." The whole pattern came together: a Jewish press supporting a Jewish
political system, even as other Jews profited from the moral corruption of
the people. Profit and power at all cost; lies and deceit without
compunction; and an utter lack of concern for fairness, democracy, human
welfare, or even human decency. "I gradually came to hate them," he said.
Considered globally, the situation was even worse. Marx.ism-the
product of a Jew, Karl Marx-was promulgated by Jews in Europe and
around the world. It sought to dominate and control both human and natural
realms. It sought to level all social differences, thereby subverting the
natural order in which the truly best people rightly flourish. In essence, it
was a teaching and a means by which Jews could ruthlessly assume control
of entire nations. Once that happened, thousands or even millions of natives
would die. The 1 9 1 7 Bolshevik Revolution in Russia was proof enough.
In other parts of Europe, the dominant ideology was capitalism. Here,
money ruled. Here, the bankers and corporate moguls dictated even to
kings. Markets must be opened, international trade promoted, and loans
used to extract wealth from the masses. And when these titans of capital
were investigated, they were found to be, more often than not, Jews.
For Hitler, these realizations were devastating. The recognition of the
insidious role of the Jews was "the greatest inner revolution that I had yet
experienced." Indeed: "From being a soft-hearted cosmopolitan, I became
an out-and-out anti-Semite." No hidden views here.
Hitler's conversion to anti-Semitism was remarkable. In contrast to the
common view, it was neither arbitrary nor irrational. He was not a born
Jew-hater. It was a step-by-step process, taken over a long period of time,
and based on actual data and observations about the real world. His was a
rational anti-Semitism. Any person of dignity and self-respect, anyone with
a concern for human life, anyone committed to the integrity of the natural
world, will of necessity be an anti-Semite. In their ruthless pursuit of their
own self-interest, Jews become the enemy of all mankind. Anyone not
recognizing this fact-and acting accordingly-is a fool.
The modem person today winces at such talk. "A monster! " we say.
"Hate speech!" "The devil!" And yet, these are not rational responses. The
modem man is conditioned to say such things. We must be objective here.
Hitler was not inventing facts. His observations were largely true, even if
he had no access to formal data or statistics. Jews did dominate in Vienna,

 

[Naofumi]

and even more so in Germany. Consider the following numbers, cited by
orthodox researcher Sarah Gordon (1984: 8-1 5):
The reader may be surprised to learn that Jews were never a
large percentage of the total German population; at no time
did they exceed 1 .09 percent of the population during the
years 1 87 1 to 1933 . . . [In spite of this, Jews] were
overrepresented in business, commerce, and public and
private service . . . Within the fields ofbusiness and commerce,
Jews . . . represented 25 percent of all individuals employed in
retail business and handled 25 percent of total sales . . . ; they
owned 41 percent of iron and scrap iron firms and 57 percent
of other metal businesses .. . . Jews were [also] prominent in
private banking under both Jewish and non-Jewish ownership
or control. They were especially visible in private banking in
Berlin, which in 1923 had 150 private (versus state) Jewish
banks, as opposed to only 1 1 private non-Jewish banks . . . .
This trend held true in the academic and cultural spheres as well: "Jews
were overrepresented among university professors and students between
1 870 and 1933 . . . . [A]lmost 19 percent of the instructors in Germany were
of Jewish origin . . . . Jews were also highly active in the theater, the arts,
film, and journalism. For example, in 193 1 , 50 percent of the 234 theater
directors in Germany were Jewish, and in Berlin the number was 80
percent. . . " Hitler was not imaging things.
Furthermore, Jews did in fact curry favor with the monarchy when it
was in their interest, but they were quick to revolt if that could yield a
greater gain. Jewish Marxists had succeeded in Russia, and were prominent
in the November Revolution in Germany, making them responsible, in part,
for Germany's defeat in WWI. In sum, Jews were eager to profit by any
means possible: war, corruption, immorality, exploitation, deception. And
they were, for the most part, fanatical Zionists: committed to creating a
Jewish state in Palestine, and willing to do whatever it took to achieve this.
The facts are what they are. We can pretend they don't exist, but then
we only deceive ourselves. Worse: we surrender our future to ruthless Jews,
who are only too happy to manipulate and exploit. A nation's failure to
appreciate the profound importance of 'the Jewish Question' can only lead
to its downfall. Chapter 1 1 of the first volume includes a lengthy and
detailed analysis of precisely this situation.

 

[Naofumi]

What to do? For Hitler, there was only one logical conclusion: Drive
them out. This meant pushing them out of society, out of the economy, and
restoring control of the media and government to non-Jews. It meant
creating a Judenrein, or Jew-free, society, one that was free from internal
and external manipulation by Jewish interests. This, in fact, was Hitler's
conclusion years before he began Mein Kampf In late 1 9 1 9, as he was just
becoming acquainted with the DAP party, he wrote a letter to one of his
officers regarding how to respond to the Jewish question. This striking early
letter concludes as follows:
Rational anti-Semitism . . . must lead to a systematic and legal
struggle against, and eradication of, the privileges the Jews
enjoy over the other foreigners living among us (Alien
Laws). Its final objective, however, must be the total
removal of all Jews (die Entfernung der Juden uberhaupt)
from our midst. Both objectives can only be achieved by a
government of national strength, never by a government of
national impotence. (in Maser 1974: 2 1 5)
His view did not change in Mein Kampf, nor evidently anytime later in
his life. His solution was always the same: drive them out. Total removal.
Ruthlessly if necessary, but out they must go.
Here is an important point, however: With one minor exception, Hitler
never called for killing the Jews. Though his terminology shifted over time,
his words always referred to some form of removal. Jews should be
"deported," "expelled," "rooted out." Their role and their power in the
German Reich must be "destroyed" or "liquidated." But explicit words like
'killing,' 'shooting, ' 'murder,' 'gassing,' virtually never appear in his
speeches, writings, or even private conversations. Even the hostile
commentator Ian Kershaw had to admit as much, at least regarding the
public addresses: "An explicit call to murder [Jews] can be found in
no ... speech" ( 1 998: 650). Kershaw fails to inform the reader, though, that
the same holds for Hitler's writings and conversations.
The one exception is at the very end of Mein Kampf There were about
600,000 Jews in Germany at the start of WWI, a war that ended in the
deaths of over 2 million Germans. Hitler argues that killing "12 or 1 5
thousand Hebrew corrupters" at the start of the war, by the same poison
gas that fell on the German troops in the battlefield, would have spared a
million lives and led to German victory. Not all the Jews, or even most of

 

[Naofumi]

them; just one or two percent would have sufficed, to subvert their
pernicious aims. But this seems to be his last such reference, in any
documented writing or speech. In a sense, this exception proves the rule:
If Hitler had wanted to speak of killing the Jews, he surely would have.
Since we find no such talk after 1925-even during the war-we must
assume that he in fact never intended their deaths.
The two most contentious words that Hitler used regarding the Jews
were ausrotten and vernichten. English sources always translate these as
intent to "exterminate," "destroy," or "annihilate" the Jews; but this is
another deception. None of his actual words demands mass killing-or
even any killing at all. If the Jews have been driven out of Germany, they
have indeed been 'exterminated' (lit. 'driven beyond the border'). If their
control over the economy has been terminated, their power has indeed been
'annihilated,' or 'brought to nothing.' If Jewish society has been removed,
it may rightly be said to have been 'destroyed' (lit. 'un-built' or
'deconstructed'). Hitler's tough talk was never any different than that of
any world leader when confronting a mortal enemy. President Obama often
spoke of "destroying" the "cancer" of the Islamic State, but no one accused
him of attempted genocide.
Thus, we find no talk of mass murder, extermination camps, genocide,
or anything like this in Mein Kampf Hitler's opponents search in vain for
signs of an impending 'Holocaust. ' The reader is invited to do the same. It
is simply not there-much to the chagrin of his critics.
From all this, it should be clear that Hitler had only one real enemy in
the Jews. He was not some all-purpose hater of humanity. He disliked the
French, respected the British and Americans, and sympathized with the
Russians, but didn't hate them. Even the lesser races were never a target of
contempt, but rather, if anything, pity. Today we are under the impression
that, in 1940, the entire world quivered at the thought of a Nazi takeover.
But this was never more than trumped-up propaganda.
In short, unless you were a Jew, you had nothing to fear. Whites had nothing
to fear-unless they allowed themselves to be ruled by Jewish Marxists or
Jewish capitalists. Hispanics, Blacks, and Orientals, though of lower status,
had nothing to fear. France and England had nothing to fear-until they
declared war on Germany. America never had anything to fear-until
Roosevelt and his Jewish advisors made the unwise decision to harass Germany
and Japan into conflict. It was always and only the Jews who were his enemy.
From the Jewish perspective, of course, this is the ultimate evil: a man
who seeks to destroy Jewish power, confiscate their obscene wealth, and

 

[Naofumi]

create a Jew-free society. Should he succeed, and should his new society
flourish, it would mean catastrophe for Jews worldwide. People everywhere
would see the pernicious result of Jewish control. People everywhere might
also attempt to regain their own self-determination, drive out their own
Jews, and create their own flourishing society. And that would be the end
of Jewish power globally. For the Jews, this is a nightmare scenario. Thus
they use all their might to oppose it.
This is why Mein Kampf is so dangerous.
IDTLER'S LEGACY
Hitler had a great and noble vision for his German people. He
desperately wanted them to assume their rightful place in the world, and
to set an example for all those who aspired to something better than a
crude material existence. By contrast, the social vision of virtually every
other world leader pales to insignificance. The ideals of Bush, Blair,
Cameron, Sarkozy, Hollande, Merkel, Obama, Trump . . . these are bad
jokes, at best. But this is what we must expect, given their obeisance to
Jewish interests.
Hitler had concrete goals in mind for his nation, and concrete plans to
get there. He faced three fundamental challenges: (1) to restore the
economy, (2) to achieve security and independence by becoming a world
power, and (3) to create an idealistic, uplifting, and sustainable German
society. He put his plan into action as soon as he came to power in 1 933.
And it worked. It worked so well that a beleaguered, beaten-down, hyper
inflated, emasculated German nation rose up to become a world power with
astonishing speed. Consider: After just three years, Hitler's Germany had
conquered inflation, driven down unemployment, and put industry back to
work-all in the midst of a global depression. After six years, it was a world
power. After eight years, his nation was so powerful that it took the
combined effort of virtually the rest of the world to defeat it.
The first two aspects of his plan were attained. But the rest of the world,
driven by Jewish hatred, jealousy, and spite, could not bear this, and so
they sought to crush him and his German nation-which they did. The real
tragedy of Hitler's story is that he never had time to tackle his third great
challenge: to create a flourishing German society. Sadly, we will never
know the long-term consequences of National Socialism, or whether a truly
great society could have been constructed.

 

[Naofumi]

But what about the Holocaust? What about the death camps and gas
chambers? Isn't this the terrible, inevitable outcome of Hitler's warped vision?
Here we have perhaps the greatest deception of all. In order to show the
world the horrible outcome of a potent anti-Semitism, a tale of monumental
human disaster had to be constructed. Once constructed, it then had to be
promoted and sustained. The undeniable and tragic death of several
hundred thousand Jews-which included many deaths by old age, disease,
injury, suicide, and in combat situations-would have to become "6
million." Tough talk against Jews, aimed at driving them out of Germany,
would have to become "euphemisms for mass murder." Rooms designed
to disinfest clothing and bedding against disease-carrying lice would have
to become "homicidal gas chambers." Hundreds of thousands of Jewish
bodies would have to be burned down to ash, and then made to completely
vanish. Transit camps constructed to move Jews out of the Reich
Treblinka, Belzec, Sobibor-would have to become "extermination camps"
designed for mass-murder; and with diesel engine exhaust, no less. And a
forced labor camp in which thousands of Jews died from typhus
Auschwitz-would have to become "the greatest death camp of all time."
Clearly there is much more to be said here. For those interested readers,
sources such as Dalton (2014b, 2015) or Rudolf (201 1) are recommended.
Suffice to say that the Holocaust, as commonly portrayed, is an
unsubstantiated, unwarranted, and unjustified exaggeration of epic
proportions. Nearly every aspect of the story crumbles as soon as it is put
to the test. The alleged horror of the Holocaust becomes, in the end, a story
of the dismantling and expulsion of one particular minority community that
held disproportionate power in a nation that did not want them, and that
bore disproportionate guilt for that nation's misfortunes. That they
themselves should have suffered as a result is unsurprising.
READING MEIN KAMPF
Two final things should be kept in mind by any contemporary reader of
this book. First, the obvious point: the writer did not know the fature. It is
very difficult for us, knowing history, to imagine these words being written
by a 38-year-old leader of a minor political party who could not have known
what was to come. Hitler had visions, ideas, expectations-which turned
out to be stunningly accurate. His powers of perception and foresight were
astonishing. And yet for him, at the time, they were just thoughts of a

 

[Naofumi]

possible future. He believed that his NSDAP party would grow to dominate
Germany-and it did. He believed that he could restore greatness to a
shattered nation-and he did. Conflict with Russia, France, and England;
tackling the 'Jewish Question'; a reinvigorated cultural and spiritual life-
all these came about, more or less as he anticipated. And the engine behind
these events was just as he envisioned: sheer force of will, by a single man.
Did he foresee a world united against him? The loss of some 4 million
German lives? His own premature death? Apparently not. But surely he
must have known that such things were possible. In a world of perpetual
struggle, no victories are guaranteed. Success is always ephemeral. Striving
for greatness always entails great risk. And yet the alternative is worse-
to sink into a miasmatic existence, a placid and tepid peace, in which the
global capitalists or communists invade the body politic and drain it of all
higher and nobler aims.
Mein Kampf is a remarkable anticipation of things to come. Hitler's
vision and worldview were realized more quickly than even he could have
thought possible. This is tangible proof of the power of ideas to remake the
world, when accompanied by a sense of greatness and higher purpose. Such
things are utterly lacking in the world today, and thus they seem strange,
odd, and even frightening to us. We forget that, for much of our history,
they were the very means by which nations and cultures thrived.
The second point is this: The parallels to the present day are striking.
Jewish domination of German society in the 1 920s mirrors that of the
United States, England, and Canada today. The tactics of AIPAC, the role
of the Jewish Lobby, the sad state of media and entertainment industries,
cowardice in corporate leadership, widespread moral decay, environmental
degradation, manipulations of global capitalists and stock-market traders
all these have their counterparts in pre-Nazi Germany.
Hitler surely would have been appalled at the world of today. In America,
he would find Jewish leadership in all major media organizations and film
studios; Jewish money decisive in all national political races; and an
American Supreme Court with three Jews, out of nine justices. Germany
today wilts under the so-called leadership of the Judenknecht Merkel, who
allows that once-great nation to be flooded with a mass of foreign ethnicities,
even as she pays monumental Holocaust reparations to the Israeli state. And
most all European nations readily sign up to fight Israel's wars in the Middle
East and around the world. Malaysian leader Mahathir Mohamad was surely
correct when he said, "Today Jews rule the world by proxy; they get others
to fight and die for them." Again, just as Hitler had predicted-the demise

 

[Naofumi]

of National Socialism would mean the triumph of a Jewish-inspired
worldview.
It seems hopeless. And yet, to a young Adolf Hitler in 1920 's Germany,
things also seemed hopeless. But he knew that, with a bold vision and true
force of will, that things could change-and quickly. Thus has it always
been so. The future is fixed only to those who cannot envision something
better, something higher, something greater. Even in the worst of times,
true visionaries have always emerged. It has happened in the past, and it
will happen again.
Mein Kampf is one man's assessment of history and vision for the future.
It is blunt; it is harsh; it is unapologetic. It does not comply with contemporary
standards of politeness, objectivity, and political correctness. It sounds
offensive to sensitive modem ears. But the book is undeniably important. It
is more consequential than perhaps any other political work in history. It
deserves to be read, in a clear and unbiased translation. And each reader will
then be free to determine its ultimate value and meaning for themselves.

 

[Naofumi]

highest in the scale of attainment; but now that the big city had enlarged
his outlook, he looked upon the state official as the highest of all. With the
tenacity of one whom misery and suffering had already made 'old' while
still young, the 1 7-year-old stuck to his new project. He became a civil
servant. He was about 23 years old, I think, when he achieved his life's
dream. Thus he was able to fulfill the promise he had made as a poor boy,
to not return to his native village until he was a success.
He achieved his goal. But back in the village, there was no one who
remembered him as a little boy, and the village itself had become strange
to him.
Finally, when he was 56 years old, he retired. But he couldn't bear to
be idle for even a single day. On the outskirts of the small market town of
Lambach, in Upper Austria, he bought a farm and tilled it himself. Thus,
at the end of a long and hard-working career, he came back to the life that
his father had led.
1.1 THE YOUNG RINGLEADER
It was at this time that I first began to have ideals of my own. I spent a
good deal of time playing out in the open, on the long road from school,
and mixing up with some of the roughest boys, which caused my mother
many anxious moments. This made me something quite the opposite of a
stay-at-home. I gave scarcely any serious thought to the question of
choosing a vocation in life; but I certainly had no interest in the kind of
career that my father had followed.
I think that an inborn talent for speaking now began to develop in me,
during the more or less strenuous arguments with my friends. I became a
youthful ringleader, one who learned quickly at school but was rather
difficult to manage. In my free time, I practiced singing in the choir of the
monastery church at Lambach. I was well-situated to be emotionally
impressed again and again by the magnificent splendor of the church
ceremonies. It was natural for me to look upon the Abbot as representing
the highest human ideal worth striving for, just as the humble village priest
had appeared to my father in his day.
For awhile at least, that was this case. But my father didn't appreciate
my oratorical gifts as beneficial for a career, and so he naturally couldn't
understand my youthful ideas. This internal conflict made him feel
somewhat concerned.

As it happened, my short-lived yearnings soon gave way to hopes that
were better suited to my temperament. Browsing through my father's
books, I happened to come across some publications that dealt with military
subjects. One of these was a popular history of the Franco-German War of
1 870-7 1 . It consisted of two volumes of an illustrated periodical dating
from those years. These became my favorite reading. Soon that great and
heroic conflict began to dominate my thinking. And from that time on, I
became more and more enthusiastic about everything that was at all
connected with war or military affairs.
But this story had a special significance for me on other grounds, too.
For the first time, and as yet in only quite a vague way, I began to think: Is
there a difference-and if so, what is it-between the Germans who fought
that war and the other Germans? Why didn't Austria also take part in it?
Why didn't my father and all the others fight in that struggle?
Are we not the same as other Germans?
Do we not all belong together? That was the first time that this problem
began to agitate my brain. And from the conclusions that I reached, I was
forced to accept the fact-though with a secret envy-that not all Germans
had the good luck to belong to Bismarck's Reich.
This was something that I couldn't understand.
1.2 'CHOICE' OF PROFESSION
It was decided that I should study.
Considering my whole personality, and especially my temperament,
my father decided that the classical subjects studied at the Gymnasium were
not suited to my natural talents. He thought that the Realschule would suit
me better. My obvious talent for drawing confirmed this for him; in his
opinion, drawing was a neglected subject in the Austrian Gymnasium.
Another likely factor was the memory of his own hard road, and this
contributed to him looking upon classical studies as unpractical;
accordingly, he set little value on them. At the back of his mind, he believed
that his son should also become a government official. Indeed, he had
decided on that career for me.
Due to the difficulties through which he had to struggle in his own case,
he overestimated what he had achieved. His success was exclusively the
result of his own indefatigable effort and energy. The characteristic pride

 

[Naofumi]

of the self-made man led him to the idea that his son should follow the
same calling-and if possible, to rise even higher. Moreover, this idea was
strengthened by the consideration that the results of his own life's work
put him in a position to aid his son's advancement in the same career.
It was simply inconceivable to him that I might reject that which had
meant everything in life to him. My father's decision was simple, definite,
and clear. In his eyes, it was something to be taken for granted. A man of
such a nature, who had become domineering by reason of his own hard
struggles, could not think of allowing inexperienced and irresponsible
young men to choose their own careers.
To act in such a way, where the future of his own son was concerned,
would have been a grave and reprehensible weakness in the exercise of
parental authority and responsibility; it was something utterly incompatible
with his characteristic sense of duty.
And yet tlligs had to tum out differently.
1.3 NEVER A CIVIL SERVANT . . .
For the first time in my life-I was then 1 1 years old-I felt myself
forced into open opposition. No matter how hard and determined my father
might be about putting his own plans and opinions into action, I was no
less obstinate in rejecting an idea that didn't appeal to me at all.
I wouldn't become a civil servant.
Neither persuasion nor 'serious' warnings could break down that
opposition. I would not, on any account, become a state official. All the
attempts that my father made to arouse in me a love for that profession, by
envisioning his own career for me, had only the opposite effect. It nauseated
me to think that one day I might be chained to an office desk, and that I
couldn't control my own time but would be forced to spend the whole of
my life filling out forms.
One can imagine what kind of thoughts such a prospect aroused in the
mind of a young man who was by no means 'good' in the usual sense of
that term!
The ridiculously easy school tasks that we were given made it possible
for me to spend far more time outdoors than at home. Today-when my
political opponents pry into my life with diligent scrutiny, as far back as
the days of my boyhood, so as to finally be able to prove what dirty tricks

 

[Naofumi]

How it happened, I cannot exactly say now. But one day it became
clear to me that I would be a painter-I mean an artist. It was a fact that I
had an aptitude for drawing. It was even one of the reasons why my father
had sent me to the Realschule. But he had never thought of having that
talent developed in such a way that I could become a professional painter.
Quite the contrary. When, as a result of my renewed refusal to adopt his
preferred plan, my father asked me for the first time what I myself really
wished to be, my resolve expressed itself almost automatically. For a
moment my father was speechless.
"A painter? An artist?"
He wondered whether I was sane. He thought that he might not have
heard me right, or misunderstood me. But when I explained my ideas to
him, and he saw how seriously I took them, he opposed it with all the
determination of his nature. His decision was very fundamental; any
consideration of my own natural abilities was out of the question.
"An artist, no, not as long as I live, never." But seeing as I had inherited
much of my father's obstinacy-besides having other qualities of my
own-my reply was equally forceful. Except that it stated something quite
the contrary.
At that point, our struggle became a stalemate. Father would not
abandon his 'Never,' and I became all the more firm in my 'Nevertheless. '
48
CHAPTER I
Naturally, the consequences were unpleasant. The old gentleman was
bitterly annoyed; and indeed so was I, although I really loved him. My
father forbade me to entertain any hopes of taking up the art of painting as
a profession. I went a step further and declared that I would not study
anything else. With such declarations, the situation became ever more
strained, so that the old man irrevocably decided to assert his parental
authority at all costs. That led me to adopt an attitude of circumspect
silence, but I put my threat into action. I thought that once it became clear
to my father that I was making no progress at the Realschule, he would be
forced to allow me to follow my dream-for better or worse.
1.5 THE YOUNG NATIONALIST
I don't know whether I calculated rightly or not. My failure to make
progress in school was obvious. I studied just the subjects that appealed to
me, especially those that I thought I might need later as a painter. What
didn't appear to have any importance, or what didn't otherwise appeal to
me, I completely sabotaged. My school reports of that time were always in
the extremes of good or bad, according to the subject. In one column my
evaluation read 'very good' or 'excellent. ' In another it read 'average' or
even 'below average. ' By far my best subjects were geography and, even
more so, general history. These were my two favorite subjects, and I led
the class in them.
When I look back over so many years and try to judge the results of
that experience, I find two very significant facts standing out clearly:
First, I became a nationalist.
Second, I learned to understand and grasp the true meaning of history.
1.6 THE GERMAN OSTMARK
The old Austria was a multi-national state.
In those days, at least the citizens of the German Reich, taken through
and through, couldn't understand what that fact meant in the everyday life
of the people within such a state. After the magnificent triumphant march
of the victorious armies in the Franco-German War, the Germans in the
Reich became steadily more and more estranged from the Germans beyond
their frontiers-partly because they didn't wish to appreciate the true value
49
MEIN KAMPF
of those other Germans, and partly because they were incapable of doing
so. The degenerate dynasty was often confused with the people, who were
at root healthy.
The Germans of the Reich didn't realize that if the Austrian Germans
had not been of the best blood, they could never have given their
characteristic stamp to an empire of 52 million-such that the erroneous
idea arose that Austria was a German state. This error led to dire
consequences. But all the same, it was a magnificent testimony to the
character of the 10 million Germans in the Ostmark.6 Only very few of the
Germans in the Reich itself had an idea of the bitter struggle that those
Eastern Germans had to carry on daily for the preservation of their German
language, schools, and character.
Only today-when a tragic fate has tom several millions of our
kinsfolk away from the Reich and forced them to live under foreign rule,
dreaming of that common fatherland towards which all their yearnings are
directed, and struggling to maintain the right to use their mother tongue
only now have the wider circles come to realize what it means to fight for
one's people. Today perhaps there are some who can assess the greatness
of that German spirit that animated the Reich's old Ostmark. It enabled
those people, left entirely on their own, to defend the Reich against the East
for several centuries. They also were able to secure the boundaries of the
German language through a guerilla war of attrition, at a time when the
Reich was more interested in colonies than in protecting its own flesh and
blood at its very doorstep.
1.7 THE STRUGGLE FOR GERMANISM
In this battle over the language of old Austria, there were, as in every
such struggle, three groups: the fighters, the slackers, and the traitors.
The sifting process began at school. And it is worth noting that the
language-war was waged in perhaps its bitterest form in school; this was
the nursery where the seeds had to be watered that were to spring up and
form the coming generation. The tactical objective of the fight was to win
over the child, and it was to the child that the first rallying cry was addressed:

 

[Naofumi]

It was during this time that my eyes were opened to two dangers, the
names of which I had scarcely known before. I had no idea whatsoever of
their terrible significance for the existence of the German people. These
two dangers were Marxism and Jewry.
For many people, the name of Vienna signifies innocent pleasure, a
festive place for happy people. For me, unfortunately, it's a living memory
of the saddest period in my life.
Even today, the mention of that city arouses in me only gloomy
thoughts. Five years of poverty in that Phaecian town. 1 Five years in which
I had to earn my daily bread-first as a casual laborer and then as a painter
of little trifles. And a meager morsel it was indeed, insufficient to calm my
constant hunger. That hunger was my faithful guardian, one that never left
me and took part in everything I did. Every book that I bought meant
renewed hunger, and every visit to the opera meant the intrusion of that
inhospitable companion in the days to follow. I was always struggling with
my unsympathetic friend. Even so, it was during that time that I learned
more than ever before. Apart from my architectural studies and rare visits
to the opera-for which I had to go hungry-I had no other pleasure in life
except my books.
I read a great deal then, and I thought deeply about what I read. All
my free time after work was devoted exclusively to study. Thus within a
few years, I was able to acquire a stock of knowledge that I find useful even to this day

 

[Naofumi]

But even more than that:
During those years, a view of life and a definite worldview took shape
in my mind. These became the granite foundation of my conduct at that
time. Since then, I have extended that foundation only very little, and I
have changed nothing in it.
On the contrary.
I am firmly convinced today that, generally speaking, it is in youth that
men lay the essential groundwork of their creative thought, wherever that
creative thought exists. I distinguish between the wisdom of age-which
can only arise from the greater profundity and foresight that are based on
the experiences of a long life-and the creative genius of youth. The latter
blossoms out in thought and ideas with inexhaustible fertility, without being
immediately useful, because of their very exuberance. These ideas furnish
the building materials and plans for the future. And it is from them that age
takes the stones and constructs the building-unless the so-called wisdom
of age smothers the creative genius of youth.
2.3 REMOVAL OF PETTY-BOURGEOIS BLINDERS
The life that I previously led at home with my parents differed little
from that of everyone else. I looked forward to the next day without worry,
and there was no such thing as a social problem to be faced.
Those with whom I passed my younger days belonged to the small
bourgeois class. It was therefore a world that had very little contact with
the world of genuine manual laborers. For, though at first this may appear
surprising, the gulf that separates that class-which is by no means
economically well-off-from the manual laboring class is often deeper than
people think. The reason for this division, which we may almost call
enmity, lies in the fear that dominates a social group that has risen only
slightly above the level of the manual laborer-a fear that it may fall back
into its old condition, or at least be again classed with the laborers.
Moreover, there is something repulsive in remembering the cultural
indigence of that lower class and their rough manners with one another.
Those who are only on the first rung of the social ladder find it unbearable
to be forced into contact with the cultural level and standard ofliving from
which they have risen.
Consequently, the higher classes feel less constraint in their dealings
with the lowest class of men than would be possible for the 'up-starts. '
60
CHAPTER 2
For by the word 'up-start' I mean everyone who has raised himself
through his own efforts to a social level higher than that to which he
formerly belonged.
Ultimately this struggle, which is often hard, destroys all sympathy.
Our own fight for existence kills our feeling for the misery of those who
have been left behind.
From this point of view, fate was kind to me. Circumstances forced me
to return to that world of poverty and economic insecurity that my father
had raised himself from in his early days. The blinders of a narrow petty
bourgeois education were tom from my eyes. Now for the first time, I
learned to know men; and I learned to distinguish between empty
appearances or brutal manners and the real inner nature of the person.
2.4 VIENNA'S SOCIAL CONFLICTS
At the beginning of the century, Vienna was, socially speaking, one of
the most backward cities in Europe.
Dazzling riches and loathsome poverty were intermingled in violent
contrast. In the center and inner city, one felt the pulse of an empire of 52
million, one with all the perilous charm of a state of multiple nationalities.
The dazzling splendor of the Court acted like a magnet on the wealth and
intelligence of the whole empire. And this attraction was further
strengthened by the centralizing power of the Habsburg Monarchy.
This centralizing policy was necessary in order to hold together that
hodge-podge of mixed nationalities. But as a result, there was an
extraordinary concentration of high officials in the city, which served as
both a metropolis and the imperial residence.
But Vienna was not merely the political and intellectual center of the
Danube Monarchy; it was also the commercial center. Besides the large
group of ranking military officers, state officials, artists, and scientists,
there was the still larger mass of workers. Abject poverty confronted the
wealth of the aristocracy and the merchant class, face to face. Thousands
of unemployed loitered in front of the palaces on the Ring Strasse; and
beneath this Via Triumphalis of old Austria, the homeless huddled together
in the murk and filth of the canals.
There was hardly any other German city in which the social question
could be studied better than in Vienna. But here I must warn against the
illusion that this problem can be 'studied' from the top down. The man who
6 1
MEIN KAMPF
has never been in the clutches of that crushing viper can never know what
its poison is. An attempt to study it in any other way will result only in
superficial talk and sentimental delusions. Both are harmful-the first
because it can never go to the root of the question, the second because it
completely evades the question.
I don't know which is worse: to ignore social distress, as do the
majority of those who have been favored by fortune and those who have
risen in the social scale through their own routine labor, or the equally
arrogant and often tactlessness displayed by people who make a fad of
being charitable and who claim to 'feel for the people. ' In any case, such
people sin more than they can imagine. Consequently, and to their own
astonishment, they find that the ' social conscience' on which they pride
themselves never produces any results; rather, it often causes resentment.
And then they talk of the ingratitude of the people.
Such people are slow to learn that there is no place for merely social
activities, and that there can be no expectation of gratitude. Here there's no
question of distributing favors; it's essentially a matter of restoring justice.
I was protected against the temptation to study the social question this
way, for the simple reason that I was forced to live in poverty. Therefore it
was not a question of studying the problem objectively, but rather one of
testing its effects on me. Though the guinea pig survived the experiment,
this is not evidence that it was harmless.
When I try today to recall the succession of impressions I received at
that time, I find that I can only do so approximately. Here I will describe
only the more essential impressions and those that personally affected me
the most. And I will mention the few lessons that I learned from this
experience.
2.5 THE LABORER
At that time, it was generally not very difficult to find a job because I
sought work not as a skilled tradesman but as a so-called laborer-ready
to take any job that turned up by chance, just for the sake of earning my
daily bread.
Thus I found myself in the same situation as all those emigrants who
shake the dust of Europe from their feet, and with iron determination lay
the foundations of a new existence in the New World, and earn for
themselves a new home. Liberated from all the paralyzing prejudices of

 

[Fantasea]

 

[Naofumi]

class and position, environment and tradition, they take any service that
opens its doors to them-accepting any work that comes their way, and
filled more and more with the idea that honest work never disgraced
anyone, no matter what it may be. And so I was resolved to leap into this
new world with both feet, fighting my way ahead.
I soon found out that some kind of work was always available. But I
also learned that it could just as quickly and easily be lost.
The uncertainty of earning my daily livelihood soon became the darkest
feature of this new life.
The skilled worker was not so frequently thrown into the streets as the
unskilled worker; yet the former was by no means protected against the
same fate. Though he may not have to face unemployment due to a lack of
demand, the lock-out and the strike had the same effect.
Here the element of insecurity in earning one's daily bread was the
bitterest aspect of the whole social-economic system itself.
The country boy who migrates to the big city is attracted by what has
been described as easy work-which it may actually be-and fewer working
hours. He is especially dazzled by the glimmer of the big cities. Accustomed
to earning a steady wage, he has been taught not to quit his former job until
a new one is at least in sight. As there is a great scarcity of agricultural labor,
the chance of long unemployment in the country is very small.
It's a mistake to presume that the boy who leaves the countryside for
the city is less solid than those who stay at home to work on the land. On
the contrary, experience shows that those who are healthier and more
vigorous emigrate, and not the reverse. Among these people, I include not
merely those who emigrate to America, but also the young rural farmhand
who leaves his native village and migrates to the big city, where he will be
a stranger. He is ready to take the risk of an uncertain fate. Typically he
comes to town with little money in his pocket. For the first few days, he is
not discouraged if he's not lucky enough to find work. But ifhe finds a job
and then soon loses it, the situation is much worse. To find new work,
especially in winter, is often difficult and indeed sometimes impossible.
2.6 FATE OF THE WORKER
For the first few weeks, life is still bearable. He receives his
unemployment money from his trade union and thus is able to carry on.
But when the last of his own money is gone and his union stops paying due
6 3
MEIN KAMPF
to prolonged unemployment, then comes the real distress. He now walks
the streets, hungry. Often he pawns or sells the last of his belongings. His
clothes become shabby. And with the increasing poverty of his outward
appearance, he descends to a lower social level-mixing with a class of
people that poison his mind, in addition to his physical suffering. He then
has nowhere to sleep, and if that happens in winter-which is very often
the case-he is in dire straits. Finally he gets work. But the old story repeats
itself. For a second time, the same thing happens. Then a third time-by
now, probably much worse. Little by little, he becomes indifferent to this
permanent insecurity. Finally he gets used to the repetition.
Thus even a man who is normally hard-working grows careless in his
whole attitude towards life. Gradually he becomes a tool in the hands of
unscrupulous people, who exploit him for the sake of their own advantage.
He has been so frequently unemployed, through no fault of his own, that
he now doesn't care if the strike in which he joins is for securing his
economic rights, or aimed at the destruction of the State, the social order,
or even culture in general. He dislikes going on strike, yet he joins it
anyway, out of sheer indifference.
I saw this process occur before my eyes thousands of times. And the
longer I observed it, the more I came to hate that mammoth city that
greedily attracts men to its heart, in order to mercilessly crush them in the
end.
When they arrived, they still belonged to their own people; if they
stayed, that tie was broken.
I, too, was so thrown about by life in the metropolis that I experienced
the workings of this fate myself, and felt its effects on my own soul. One
thing stood out clearly before my eyes: It was the sudden changes from
work to idleness, and vice versa, that mattered. The constant fluctuations
in earnings and spending finally destroyed the sense of thrift for many
people, and also the habit of controlling spending in an intelligent way.
One's body gradually adapts to eating well in good times and going hungry
in bad.
Indeed, hunger destroys one's sense ofnormal spending in good times,
when one is again employed. The reason for this is that the suffering that
the unemployed worker has to
endure must be psychologically
compensated for by a persistent mental mirage in which he imagines
himself eating well once again. And this dream turns into such an obsession
that it becomes a morbid impulse to toss off all self-restraint when work
and wages come again. Therefore, the moment new work is found, he loses
64
CHAPTER 2
control and begins spending like there's no tomorrow. This upsets even the
small weekly budget, because spending becomes irrational. When such a
thing first happens, earnings will last for perhaps five days instead of seven.
Later on, they last for only three days. If the habit persists, earnings will
last for scarcely a day. And finally they will disappear in a night.
Often there are wife and children at home. And in many cases, it
happens that they, too, are affected by such a way of life-especially if the
husband is good to them and wants to do the best he can for them, and loves
them in his own way. Then the week's earnings are spent within two or
three days. The family eats and drinks together as long as the money lasts,
but at the end of the week they go hungry. Then the wife wanders around
the neighborhood, borrows a little, and runs up small debts with the
shopkeepers in an effort to reach the end of the week. Their midday meal
is meager, and often nonexistent. They wait for the coming payday, talking
and making plans; and while they are hungry, they dream of the happiness
to come.
And so the little children become acquainted with misery early in their
lives.
But the evil culminates when the husband goes his own way from the
beginning and the wife protests, simply out of love for the children. Then
there are quarrels and bad feelings. The husband starts to drink, and
becomes estranged from his wife. He now gets drunk every Saturday.
Fighting for her own existence and that of the children, the wife nags him,
from factory to tavern, in order to get a few pennies from him on payday.
Then when he finally comes home-maybe on Sunday or even Monday,
having spent his last cent-pathetic scenes follow, ones that cry out for
God's mercy.
I have actually experienced this hundreds of times. At first I was
disgusted and indignant. Later, I came to recognize the whole tragedy of
their misfortune, and to understand the profound causes of it. They were
the unhappy victims of bad conditions.
Housing conditions were very bad at that time. Viennese manual
laborers lived in appalling misery. Even today, I shudder to think of the
miserable dens in which people lived, the night shelters and the slums, and
all the sordid scenes of garbage, repulsive filth, and worse.
Just imagine what will happen one day, when masses of freed slaves
come forth from these dens of misery, swooping down on their
unsuspecting fellow men!
For this other world is indeed unsuspecting.

 

[Naofumi]

They have mindlessly allowed these things to go on, without caring
and even without suspecting that, sooner or later, destiny will take its
vengeance-unless it is appeased in time.
Today I earnestly thank Providence for having sent me to such a school.
There, I couldn't refuse to take an interest in matters that did not please
me. This school soon taught me a profound lesson.
In order not to despair completely of the people with whom I lived, I
had to separate the outward appearances of their lives from the reasons why
they developed that way. Then I could bear everything without
discouragement. Those who emerged from all this misfortune and misery,
from this filth and outward degradation, were not human beings as such,
but rather the deplorable results of deplorable laws. In my own life, similar
hardships prevented me from giving way to a pitying sentimentality at the
sight of these degraded products of this process of development.
No, this is not the way to understand these things.
2.7 THE PATH TO IMPROVEMENT
Even in those days, I already saw that there was a two-fold method by
alone which conditions could be improved:
First: Create better fundamental conditions of social development by
establishing a profound feeling for social responsibilities. Second: Combine
this feeling with a ruthless determination to prune away all incurable tumors.
Just as Nature focuses her greatest attention not on the maintenance of
what already exists, but on the selective breeding of offspring, so it is in
human life. Life is less a matter of artificially improving the existing
generation-which, owing to human characteristics, is impossible 99
percent of the time-and more a matter of securing from the very start a
better road for future development.
During my struggle for existence in Vienna, I clearly perceived that
the aim of all social activity must never be merely charitable relief, which
is ridiculous and useless. Rather, it must be a means of finding a way to
eliminate the fundamental deficiencies in our economic and cultural life
deficiencies that necessarily bring about the degradation of the individual,
or at least lead him towards such degradation.
The difficulty of employing every means, even the most drastic, against
those who endanger the state is largely due to an attitude of uncertainty in
deciding upon the inner motives and causes of this contemporary phenomenon.

 

[Naofumi]

This uncertainty is grounded exclusively in the sense of guilt that each
individual feels for having permitted this tragedy of degradation. That
feeling paralyzes every effort at making a firm decision to act. Because
they vacillate, these people are timid and half-hearted in putting into effect
even the measures that are indispensable for self-preservation.
When the individual is no longer burdened by his own sense of guilt,
then and only then will he have that inner strength and outer force to
ruthlessly cut out the parasite growth, and to root out the weeds.
But because the Austrian State had almost no sense of social· rights or
social legislation, its inability to combat these evil tumors was obvious.
2.8 LACK OF 'NATIONAL PRIDE'
I don't know what appalled me more at that time: the economic misery
of those who were then my companions, their crude customs and morals,
or the low level of their intellectual development.
Our bourgeoisie often rise up in moral indignation upon hearing from
the mouth of some pitiable tramp that it is all the same to him whether he
be a German or not, and that he will find himself at home wherever he can
get enough to keep himself together.
They protest sternly against such a lack of 'national pride,' and strongly
express their horror at such sentiments.
But how many people really ask themselves, why it is that their own
sentiments are better?
How many of them understand that their natural pride in being
members of a favored nation arises from the many occasions they have
encountered that remind them of the greatness of the Fatherland, and of the
nation in all spheres of artistic and cultural life?
How many of them realize that pride in the Fatherland is largely
dependent on knowledge of its greatness in all those spheres?
Do our bourgeois circles ever think what a ridiculously meager share
'the people' have in that knowledge that is a necessary prerequisite for the
feeling of pride in one's fatherland?
It cannot be objected here that in other countries similar conditions exist,
and that nevertheless the working classes in those countries have remained
patriotic. Even if that were so, it would be no excuse for our negligent
attitude. But it is not so. What we call 'chauvinistic' education-in the case
of the French people, for example-is only the extreme emphasis on the