Adolf
Hitler on the devil going to church.
[PHOTO
SOURCE: http://www.azquotes.com/quote/551226]
|
BERLIN, RHEINMETALL-BORSIG WORKS
SPEECH OF DECEMBER 10, 1940
Nowadays
I do not speak very often. In the first place I have little time for speaking,
and in the second place I believe that this is a time for action rather than
speech. We are involved in a conflict in which more than the victory of only
one country or the other is at stake; it is rather a war of two opposing
worlds. I shall try to give you, as far as possible in the time at my disposal,
an insight into the essential reasons underlying this conflict. I shall,
however, confine myself to Western Europe only. The peoples who are primarily
affected - 85 million Germans, 46 million Britishers, 45 million Italians, and
about 37 million Frenchmen -are the cores of the States who were or still are
opposed in war. If I make a comparison between the living conditions of these
peoples the following facts become evident:
Forty-six
million Britishers dominate and govern approximately 16 million square miles of
the surface of the earth. Thirty-seven million Frenchmen dominate and govern a
combined area of approximately 4 million square miles. Forty-five million
Italians possess, taking into consideration only those territories in any way
capable of being utilized, an area of scarcely 190,000 square miles.
Eighty-five million Germans possess as their living space scarcely 232,000
square miles. That is to say: 85 million Germans own only 232,000 square miles
on which they must live their lives and 46 million Britishers possess 16
million square miles.
Now,
my fellow-countrymen, this world has not been so divided up by providence or
Almighty God. This allocation has been made by man himself. The land was
parcelled out for the most part during the last 300 years, that is, during the
period in which, unfortunately, the German people were helpless and torn by
internal dissension. Split up into hundreds of small states in consequence of
the Treaty of Muenster at the end of the Thirty Years' War, our people
frittered away their entire strength in internal strife.... While during this
period the Germans, notwithstanding their particular ability among the people of
Western Europe, dissipated their powers in vain internal struggles, the
division of the world proceeded beyond their borders. It was not by treaties or
by binding agreements, but exclusively by the use of force that Britain forged
her gigantic Empire.
The
second people that failed to receive their fair share in this distribution,
namely the Italians, experienced and suffered a similar fate. Torn by internal
conflicts, devoid of unity, split up into numerous small states, this people
also dissipated all their energy in internal strife. Nor was Italy able to
obtain even the natural position in the Mediterranean which was her due.
Thus
in comparison with others, these two powerful peoples have received much less
than their fair share. The objection might be raised: Is this really of
decisive importance?
My
fellow-countrymen, man does not exist on theories and phrases, on declarations
or on systems of political philosophy; he lives on what he can gain from the
soil by his own labor in the form of food and raw materials. This is what he
can eat, this is what he can use for manufacture and production. If a man's own
living conditions offer him too little, his life will be wretched. We see that
within the countries themselves, fruitful areas afford better living conditions
than poor barren lands. In the one case there are flourishing villages; in the
other poverty-stricken communities. A man may live in a stony desert or in a
fruitful land of plenty. This handicap can never be fully overcome by theories,
nor even by the will to work.
We
see that the primary cause for the existing tensions lies in the unfair
distribution of the riches of the earth. And it is only natural that evolution
follows the same rule in the larger framework as it does in the case of individuals.
Just as the tension existing between rich and poor within a country must be
compensated for either by reason or often if reason fails, by force, so in the
life of a nation one cannot claim everything and leave nothing to others....
The
great task which I set myself in internal affairs was to bring reason to bear
on the problems, to eliminate dangerous tensions by invoking the common sense
of all, to bridge the gulf between excessive riches and excessive poverty. I
recognized, of course, that such processes cannot be consummated overnight. It
is always preferable to bring together widely separated classes gradually and
by the exercise of reason, rather than to resort to a solution based on force.
. .
Therefore,
the right to live is at the same time a just claim to the soil which alone is
the source of life. When unreasonableness threatened to choke their
development, nations fought for this sacred claim. No other course was open to
them and they realized that even bloodshed and sacrifice are better than the
gradual extinction of a nation. Thus, at the beginning of our National
Socialist Revolution in 1933, we set forth two demands. The first of these was
the unification of our people, for without this unification it would not have
been possible to mobilize the forces required to formulate and, particularly,
to secure Germany's essential claims. . . .
For
us, therefore, national unity was one of the essential conditions if we were to
co-ordinate the powers inherent in the German nation properly, to make the
German people conscious of their own greatness, realize their strength,
recognize and present their vital claims, and seek national unity by an appeal
to reason.
I
know that I have not been successful everywhere. For nearly fifteen years of my
struggle I was the target of two opposing sides. One side reproached me: 'You
want to drag us who belong to the intelligentsia and to the upper classes down
to the level of the others. That is impossible. We are educated people. In
addition to that, we are wealthy and cultured. We cannot accept this.'
These
people were incapable of listening to reason; even today there are some who
cannot be converted. However, on the whole the number of those who realize that
the lack of unity in our national structure would sooner or later lead to the
destruction of all classes has become greater and greater.
I
also met with opposition from the other side. They said: 'We have our class
consciousness.' However, I was obliged to take the stand that in the existing
situation we could not afford to make experiments. It certainly would have been
simple to eliminate the intelligentsia. Such a process could be carried out at
once. But we would have to wait fifty or perhaps a hundred years for the gap to
refill - and such a period would mean the destruction of the nation. For how
can our people, its 360 per square mile, exist at all if they do not employ
every ounce of brain power and physical strength to wrest from their soil what
they need? This distinguishes us from the others. In Canada, for example, there
are 2.6 persons per square mile; in other countries perhaps 16, 18, 20 or 26
persons. Well, my fellow-countrymen, no matter how stupidly one managed one's
affairs in such a country, a decent living would still be possible.
Here
in Germany, however, there are 360 persons per square mile. The others cannot
manage with 26 persons per square mile, but we must manage with 360. This is
the task we face. That is why I expressed this view in 1933: 'We must solve
these problems and, therefore, we shall solve them.' Of course that was not
easy; everything could not be done immediately. Human beings are the product of
their education, and, unfortunately, this begins practically at birth. Infants
are clothed in different ways. After this has been going on for centuries,
someone suddenly comes along and says: - 'I want to unwrap the child and remove
all its clothing so that I may discover its true nature' - which is, of course,
the same in every case. You have only created the difference by the external
wrappings; underneath these they are all alike.
However,
it is not so easy to do this. Everyone resists being unwrapped. Everyone wishes
to retain the habits he has acquired through his upbringing. But we will carry
out our task just the same. We have enormous patience. I know that what has
been done for three, four, or five centuries cannot be undone in two, three, or
five years. The decisive point is to make a start....
It
has been a tremendous task. The establishment of a German community was the
first item on the program in 1933. The second item was the elimination of
foreign oppression as expressed in the Treaty of Versailles, which also
prevented our attaining national unity, forbade large sections of our people to
unite, and robbed us of our possessions in the world, our German colonies.
The
second item on the program was, therefore, the struggle against Versailles. No
one can say that I express this opinion for the first time today. I expressed
it, my fellowcountrymen, in the days following the Great War when, still a
soldier, I made my first appearance in the political arena. My first address
was a speech against the collapse, against the Treaty of Versailles, and for
the re-establishment of a powerful German Reich. That was the beginning of my
work. What I have brought about since then does not represent a new aim but the
oldest aim. It is the primary reason for the conflict in which we find
ourselves today. The rest of the world did not want our inner unity, because
they knew that, once it was achieved, the vital claim of our masses could be
realized. They wanted to maintain the Dictate of Versailles in which they saw a
second peace of Westphalia. However, there is still another reason. I have
stated that the world was unequally divided. American observers and Englishmen
have found a wonderful expression for this fact: They say there are two kinds
of peoples - the 'haves' and the 'have-nots.' We, the British, are the 'haves.'
It is a fact that we possess sixteen million square miles. And we Americans are
also 'haves,' and so are we Frenchmen. The others - they are simply the
'have-nots.' He who has nothing receives nothing. He shall remain what he is.
He who has is not willing to share it.
All
my life I have been a 'have-not.' At home I was a 'have-not.' I regard myself
as belonging to them and have always fought exclusively for them. I defended
them and, therefore, I stand before the world as their representative. I shall
never recognize the claim of the others to that which they have taken by force.
Under no circumstances can I acknowledge this claim with regard to that which
has been taken from us. It is interesting to examine the life of these rich
people. In this Anglo-French world there exists, as it were, democracy, which
means the rule of the people by the people. Now the people must possess some
means of giving expression to their thoughts or their wishes. Examining this
problem more closely, we see that the people themselves have originally no
convictions of their own. Their convictions are formed, of course, just as
everywhere else. The decisive question is who enlightens the people, who
educates them? In those countries, it is actually capital that rules; that is,
nothing more than a clique of a few hundred men who possess untold wealth and,
as a consequence of the peculiar structure of their national life, are more or
less independent and free. They say: 'Here we have liberty.' By this they mean,
above all, an uncontrolled economy, and by an uncontrolled economy, the freedom
not only to acquire capital but to make absolutely free use of it. That means
freedom from national control or control by the people both in the acquisition
of capital and in its employment. This is really what they mean when they speak
of liberty. These capitalists create their own press and then speak of the
'freedom of the press.'
In
reality, every one of the newspapers has a master, and in every case this
master is the capitalist, the owner. This master, not the editor, is the one
who directs the policy of the paper. If the editor tries to write other than
what suits the master, he is ousted the next day. This press, which is the
absolutely submissive and characterless slave of the owners, molds public
opinion. Public opinion thus mobilized by them is, in its turn, split up into
political parties. The difference between these parties is as small as it
formerly was in Germany. You know them, of course - the old parties. They were
always one and the same. In Britain matters are usually so arranged that
families are divided up, one member being a conservative, another a liberal,
and a third belonging to the labor party. Actually, all three sit together as
members of the family, decide upon their common attitude and determine it. A
further point is that the 'elected people' actually form a community which
operates and controls all these organizations. For this reason, the opposition
in England is really always the same, for on all essential matters in which the
opposition has to make itself felt, the parties are always in agreement. They
have one and the same conviction and through the medium of the press mold
public opinion along corresponding lines. One might well believe that in these
countries of liberty and riches, the people must possess an unlimited degree of
prosperity. But no! On the contrary, it is precisely in these countries that
the distress of the masses is greater than anywhere else. Such is the case in
'rich Britain.'
She
controls sixteen million square miles. In India, for example, a hundred million
colonial workers with a wretched standard of living must labor for her. One
might think, perhaps, that at least in England itself every person must have
his share of these riches. By no means! In that country class distinction is
the crassest imaginable. There is poverty - incredible poverty - on the one
side, and equally incredible wealth on the other. They have not solved a single
problem. The workmen of that country which possesses more than one-sixth of the
globe and of the world's natural resources dwell in misery, and the masses of
the people are poorly clad.. In a country which ought to have more than enough
bread and every sort of fruit, we find millions of the lower classes who have
not even enough to fill their stomachs, and go about hungry. A nation which
could provide work for the whole world must acknowledge the fact that it cannot
even abolish unemployment at home. For decades this rich Britain has had two
and a half million unemployed; rich America, ten to thirteen millions, year
after year; France, six, seven, and eight hundred thousand. Well, my
fellow-countrymen - what then are we to say about ourselves?
It
is self-evident that where this democracy rules, the people as such are not
taken into consideration at all. The only thing that matters is the existence
of a few hundred gigantic capitalists who own all the factories and their stock
and, through them, control the people. The masses of the people do not interest
them in the least. They are interested in them just as were our bourgeois parties
in former times - only when elections are being held, when they need votes.
Otherwise, the life of the masses is a matter of complete indifference to them.
To
this must be added the difference in education. Is it not ludicrous to hear a
member of the British Labor Party - who, of course, as a member of the
Opposition is officially paid by the government - say: 'When the war is over,
we will do something in social respects'?
It
is the members of Parliament who are the directors of the business concerns -
just as used to be the case with us. But we have abolished all that. A member
of the Reichstag cannot belong to a Board of Directors, except as a purely
honorary member. He is prohibited from accepting any emolument, financial or otherwise.
This is not the case in other countries.
They
reply: 'That is why our form of government is sacred to us.' I can well believe
it, for that form of government certainly pays very well.. But whether it is
sacred to the mass of the people as well is another matter.
The
people as a whole definitely suffer. I do not consider it possible in the long
run for one man to work and toil for a whole year in return for ridiculous
wages, while another jumps into an express train once a year and pockets
enormous sums. Such conditions are a disgrace. On the other hand, we National
Socialists equally oppose the theory that all men are equals. Today, when a man
of genius makes some astounding invention and enormously benefits his country
by his brains, we pay him his due, for he has really accomplished something and
been of use to his country. However, we hope to make it impossible for idle
drones to inhabit this country.
I
could continue to cite examples indefinitely. The fact remains that two worlds
are face to face with one another. Our opponents are quite right when they say:
'Nothing can reconcile us to the National Socialist world.' How could a
narrow-minded capitalist ever agree to my principles? It would be easier for
the Devil to go to church and cross himself with holy water than for these
people to comprehend the ideas which are accepted facts to us today. But we
have solved our problems.
To
take another instance where we are condemned: They claim to be fighting for the
maintenance of the gold standard as the currency basis. That I can well
believe, for the gold is in their hands. We, too, once had gold, but it was
stolen and extorted from us. When I came to power, it was not malice which made
me abandon the gold standard. Germany simply had no gold left. Consequently,
quitting the gold standard presented no difficulties, for it is always easy to
part with what one does not have. We had no gold. We had no foreign exchange.
They had all been stolen and extorted from us during the previous fifteen
years. But, my fellow countrymen, I did not regret it, for we have constructed
our economic system on a wholly different basis. In our eyes, gold is not of
value in itself. It is only an agent by which nations can be suppressed and
dominated.
When
I took over the government, I had only one hope on which to build, namely, the
efficiency and ability of the German nation and the German workingman; the
intelligence of our inventors, engineers, technicians, chemists, and so forth.
I built on the strength which animates our economic system. One simple question
faced me: Are we to perish because we have no gold; am I to believe in a
phantom which spells our destruction? I championed the opposite opinion: Even
though we have no gold, we have capacity for work.
The
German capacity for work is our gold and our capital, and with this gold I can
compete successfully with any power in the world. We want to live in houses
which have to be built. Hence, the workers must build them, and the raw
materials required must be procured by work. My whole economic system has been
built up on the conception of work. We have solved our problems while,
amazingly enough, the capitalist countries and their currencies have suffered
bankruptcy.
Sterling
can find no market today. Throw it at any one and he will step aside to avoid
being hit. But our Reichsmark, which is backed by no gold, has remained stable.
Why? It has no gold cover; it is backed by you and by your work. You have
helped me to keep the mark stable. German currency, with no gold coverage, is
worth more today than gold itself. It signifies unceasing production. This we
owe to the German farmer, who has worked from daybreak till nightfall. This we
owe to the German worker, who has given us his whole strength. The whole
problem has been solved in one instant, as if by magic.
My
dear friends, if I had stated publicly eight or nine years ago: 'In seven or
eight years the problem of how to provide work for the unemployed will be
solved, and the problem then will be where to find workers,' I should have
harmed my cause. Every one would have declared: 'The man is mad. It is useless
to talk to him, much less to support him. Nobody should vote for him. He is a
fantastic creature.' Today, however, all this has come true. Today, the only
question for us is where to find workers. That, my fellow countrymen, is the
blessing which work brings.
Work
alone can create new work; money cannot create work. Work alone can create
values, values with which to reward those who work. The work of one man makes it
possible for another to live and continue to work. And when we have mobilized
the working capacity of our people to its utmost, each individual worker will
receive more and more of the world's goods.
We
have incorporated seven million unemployed into our economic system; we have
transformed another six millions from part-time into full-time workers; we are
even working overtime. And all this is paid for in cash in Reichsmarks which
maintained their value in peacetime. In wartime we had to ration its purchasing
capacity, not in order to devalue it, but simply to earmark a portion of our
industry for war production to guide us to victory in the struggle for the
future of Germany.
My
fellow-countrymen, we are also building a world here, a world of mutual work, a
world of mutual effort, and a world of mutual anxieties and mutual duties. It
did not surprise me that other countries started rationing only after two,
three, five, and seven months, and in some cases only after a year. Believe me,
in all these countries, this was not due to chance but to policy. Many a German
may have been surprised that food cards appeared on the first morning of the
war. Yet, there are, of course, two sides to this food card system. Some people
may say: 'Wouldn't it be better to exclude this or that commodity from
rationing? What use are a few grams of coffee when nobody gets much anyway?
Without rationing, at least a few would get more.' Now that is exactly what we
want to avoid. We want to avoid one person having more of the most vital
commodities than another. There are other things - a valuable painting, for
instance. Not everybody is in a position to buy a Titian, even if he had the
money. Because Titian painted only a few pictures, only a few can afford his
work. This or that man can buy one if he has enough money. He spends it, and it
circulates through the country. But in the case of food, everybody must be
served alike.
The
other countries waited to see how things would develop. The question was asked:
'Will meat be rationed?' That was the first sounding of a warning. In other
words: 'If you are a capitalist, cover your requirements, buy yourself a
refrigerator and hoard up a few sides of bacon.'
'Shall
we ration coffee? There are two opinions as to whether it should be rationed or
not. It might be possible that in the end those who think that coffee should be
rationed might triumph.' They devote four whole weeks to the discussion and
everybody who has a spark of egotism - as they have in the democracies - says
to himself: 'Aha, so coffee is to be rationed in the near future; let us hoard
it.' Then, when the supplies are exhausting themselves, it is at last rationed.
It
was just this that we wanted to avoid. That is why in order to ensure equal
distribution, we have had to impose certain restrictions from the very start.
And we are not well disposed toward those who do not observe regulations.
One
thing is certain, my fellow-countrymen: All in all, we have today a state with
a different economic and political orientation from that of the Western
democracies.
Well,
it must now be made possible for the British worker to travel. It is remarkable
that they should at last hit upon the idea that traveling should be something
not for millionaires alone, but for the people too. In this country, the
problem was solved some time ago. In the other countries - as is shown by their
whole economic structure - the selfishness of a relatively small stratum rules
under the mask of democracy. This stratum is neither checked nor controlled by
anyone.
It
is therefore understandable if an Englishman says: 'We do not want our world to
be subject to any sort of collapse.' Quite so. The English know full well that
their Empire is not menaced by us. But they say quite truthfully: 'If the ideas
that are popular in Germany are not completely eliminated, they might become
popular among our own people, and that is the danger. We do not want this.' It
would do no harm if they did become popular there, but these people are just as
narrow-minded as many once were in Germany. In this respect they prefer to
remain bound to their conservative methods. They do not wish to depart from
them, and do not conceal the fact.
They
say, 'The German methods do not suit us at all.'
And
what are these methods? You know, my comrades, that I have destroyed nothing in
Germany. I have always proceeded very carefully, because I believe - as I have
already said - that we cannot afford to wreck anything. I am proud that the
Revolution of 1933 was brought to pass without breaking a single windowpane.
Nevertheless, we have wrought enormous changes.
I
wish to put before you a few basic facts: The first is that in the capitalistic
democratic world the most important principle of economy is that the people
exist for trade and industry, and that these in turn exist for capital. We have
reversed this principle by making capital exist for trade and industry, and
trade and industry exist for the people. In other words, the people come first.
Everything else is but a means to this end. When an economic system is not
capable of feeding and clothing a people, then it is bad, regardless of whether
a few hundred people say: 'As far as I am concerned it is good, excellent; my
dividends are splendid.'
However,
the dividends do not interest me at all. Here we have drawn the line. They may
then retort: 'Well, look here, that is just what we mean. You jeopardize
liberty.'
Yes,
certainly, we jeopardize the liberty to profiteer at the expense of the
community, and, if necessary, we even abolish it. British capitalists, to
mention only one instance, can pocket dividends of 76, 80, 95, 140, and even
160 per cent from their armament industry. Naturally they say: 'If the German
methods grow apace and should prove victorious, this sort of thing will stop.'
They
are perfectly right. I should never tolerate such a state of affairs. In my
eyes, a 6 per cent dividend is sufficient. Even from this 6 per cent we deduct
one-half and, as for the rest, we must have definite proof that it is invested
in the interest of the country as a whole. In other words, no individual has
the right to dispose arbitrarily of money which ought to be invested for the
good of the country. If he disposes of it sensibly, well and good; if not, the
National Socialist state will intervene.
To
take another instance, besides dividends there are the so-called directors'
fees. You probably have no idea how appallingly active a board of directors is.
Once a year its members have to make a journey. They have to go to the station,
get into a first-class compartment and travel to some place or other. They
arrive at an appointed office at about 10 or 11 A.M. There they must listen to
a report. When the report has been read, they must listen to a few comments on
it. They may be kept in their seats until 1 P.M. or even 2. Shortly after 2
o'clock they rise from their chairs and set out on their homeward journey,
again, of course, traveling first class. It is hardly surprising that they
claim 3,000, 4,000, or even 5,000 as compensation for this: Our directors
formerly did the same - for what a lot of time it costs them! Such effort had
to be made worth while! Of course, we have got rid of all this nonsense, which
was merely veiled profiteering and even bribery.
In
Germany, the people, without any doubt, decide their existence. They determine
the principles of their government. In fact it has been possible in this
country to incorporate many of the broad masses into the National Socialist
party, that gigantic organization embracing millions and having millions of
officials drawn from the people themselves. This principle is extended to the
highest ranks.
For
the first time in German history, we have a state which has absolutely
abolished all social prejudices in regard to political appointments as well as in
private life. I myself am the best proof of this. Just imagine: I am not even a
lawyer, and yet I am your Leader!
It
is not only in ordinary life that we have succeeded in appointing the best
among the people for every position. We have Reichsstatthalters who were
formerly agricultural laborers or locksmiths. Yes, we have even succeeded in
breaking down prejudice in a place where it was most deep-seated -in the
fighting forces. Thousands of officers are being promoted from the ranks today.
We have done away with prejudice. We have generals who were ordinary soldiers
and noncommissioned officers twenty-two and twenty-three years ago. In this
instance, too, we have overcome all social obstacles. Thus, we are building up
our life for the future.
As
you know we have countless schools, national political educational
establishments, Adolf Hitler schools, and so on. To these schools we send
gifted children of the broad masses, children of working men, farmers' sons
whose parents could never have afforded a higher education for their children.
We take them in gradually. They are educated here, sent to the Ordensburgen, to
the Party, later to take their place in the State where they will some day fill
the highest posts....
Opposed
to this there stands a completely different world. In the world the highest
ideal is the struggle for wealth, for capital, for family possessions, for
personal egoism; everything else is merely a means to such ends. Two worlds
confront each other today. We know perfectly well that if we are defeated in
this war it would not only be the end of our National Socialist work of
reconstruction, but the end of the German people as a whole. For without its
powers of coordination, the German people would starve. Today the masses dependent
on us number 120 or 130 millions, of which 85 millions alone are our own
people. We remain ever aware of this fact.
On
the other hand, that other world says: 'If we lose, our world-wide capitalistic
system will collapse. For it is we who save hoarded gold. It is lying in our
cellars and will lose its value. If the idea that work is the decisive factor
spreads abroad, what will happen to us? We shall have bought our gold in vain.
Our whole claim to world dominion can then no longer be maintained. The people
will do away with their dynasties of high finance. They will present their
social claims, and the whole world system will be overthrown.'
I
can well understand that they declare: 'Let us prevent this at all costs; it
must be prevented.' They can see exactly how our nation has been reconstructed.
You see it clearly. For instance, there we see a state ruled by a numerically
small upper class. They send their sons to their own schools, to Eton. We have
Adolf Hitler schools or national political educational establishments. On the
one hand, the sons of plutocrats, financial magnates; on the other, the
children of the people. Etonians and Harrovians exclusively in leading
positions over there; in this country, men of the people in charge of the
State.
These
are the two worlds. I grant that one of the two must succumb. Yes, one or the
other. But if we were to succumb, the German people would succumb with us. If
the other were to succumb, I am convinced that the nations will become free for
the first time. We are not fighting individual Englishmen or Frenchmen. We have
nothing against them. For years I proclaimed this as the aim of my foreign
policy. We demanded nothing of them, nothing at all. When they started the war
they could not say: 'We are doing so because the Germans asked this or that of
us.' They said, on the contrary: 'We are declaring war on you because the
German system of Government does not suit us; because we fear it might spread
to our own people.' For that reason they are carrying on this war. They wanted
to blast the German nation back to the time of Versailles, to the indescribable
misery of those days. But they have made a great mistake.
If
in this war everything points to the fact that gold is fighting against work,
capitalism against peoples, and reaction against the progress of humanity, then
work, the peoples, and progress will be victorious. Even the support of the
Jewish race will not avail the others.
I
have seen all this coming for years. What did I ask of the other world? Nothing
but the right for Germans to reunite and the restoration of all that had been
taken from them - nothing which would have meant a loss to the other nations.
How often have I stretched out my hand to them? Ever since I came into power. I
had not the slightest wish to rearm.
For
what do armaments mean? They absorb so much labor. It was I who regarded work
as being of decisive importance, who wished to employ the working capacity of
Germany for other plans. I think the news is already out that, after all, I
have some fairly important plans in my mind, vast and splendid plans for my
people. It is my ambition to make the German people rich and to make the German
homeland beautiful. I want the standard of living of the individual raised. I
want us to have the most beautiful and the finest civilization. I should like
the theater - in fact, the whole of German civilization - to benefit all the
people and not to exist only for the upper ten thousand, as is the case in
England.
The
plans which we had in mind were tremendous, and I needed workers in order to
realize them. Armament only deprives me of workers. I made proposals to limit
armaments. I was ridiculed. The only answer I received was 'No.' I proposed the
limitation of certain types of armament. That was refused. I proposed that
airplanes should be altogether eliminated from warfare. That also was refused.
I suggested that bombers should be limited. That was refused. They said: 'That
is just how we wish to force our regime upon you.'
I
am not a man who does things by halves. If it becomes necessary for me to
defend myself, I defend myself with unlimited zeal. When I saw that the same
old warmongers of the World War in Britain were mobilizing once more against
the great new German revival, I realized that this struggle would have to be
fought once more, that the other side did not want peace.
It
was quite obvious: Who was I before the Great War? An unknown, nameless
individual. What was I during the war? A quite inconspicuous, ordinary soldier.
I was in no way responsible for the Great War. However, who are the rulers of
Britain today? They are the same people who were warmongering before the Great
War, the same Churchill who was the vilest agitator among them during the Great
War; Chamberlain, who recently died and who at that time agitated in exactly
the same way. It was the whole gang, members of the same group, who believe
that they can annihilate nations with the blast of the trumpets of Jericho.
The
old spirits have once more come to life, and it is against them that I have
armed the German people. I, too, had convictions: I myself served as a soldier
during the Great War and know what it means to be fired at by others without
being able to shoot back. I know what it means not to have any ammunition or to
have too little, what it means always to be beaten by the other side. I gained
my wholehearted faith in the German people and in the future. during those
years, from my knowledge of the German soldier, of the ordinary man in the
trenches. He was the great hero in my opinion. Of course, the other classes
also did everything they could. But there was a difference.
The
Germany of that time certainly seemed quite a tolerable country to anybody
living at home amid wealth and luxury. One could have his share of everything,
of culture, of the pleasures of life, and so on. He could enjoy German art and
many other things; he could travel through the German countryside; he could
visit German towns and so forth. What more could he wish for? Naturally, he
defended it all.
On
the other hand, however, there was the ordinary common soldier. This
unimportant proletarian, who scarcely had sufficient to eat, who always had to
slave for his existence, nevertheless fought at the front like a hero for four
long years. It was in him that I placed my trust, and it is with his help that
I won back confidence in myself. When the others had lost their faith in
Germany, I regained mine, never losing sight of the ordinary man in the street.
I knew that Germany could not perish.
Germany
will not perish so long as she possesses such men. I have also seen how these
combatants, these soldiers again and again faced an enemy who could annihilate
them simply by his superior material. I was not of the opinion at that time
that the British were personally superior to us. Only a madman can say that I
have ever had any inferiority complex with respect to the British. I have never
had any such feeling of inferiority.
The
problem of the individual German against the individual Englishman did not
present itself at all at that time. Even at that time they went whining round
the whole world until they found support. This time I was determined to make
preparations throughout the world to extend our position, and secondly, to arm
at home in such a manner that the German soldier would no longer be obliged to
stand alone at the front, exposed to superior forces.
The
trouble has come. I did everything humanly possible - going almost to the point
of self-abasement - to avoid it. I repeatedly made offers to the British. I had
discussions with their diplomats here and entreated them to be sensible. But it
was all in vain. They wanted war, and they made no secret of it. For seven
years Churchill had been saying: 'I want war.' Now he has got it.
It
was regrettable to me that nations whom I wished to bring together and who, in
my opinion, could have cooperated to such good purpose, should now be at war
with one another. But these gentlemen are aiming at destroying the National
Socialist State, at disrupting the German people and dividing them again into
their component parts. Such were the war aims they proclaimed in the past and
such are their war aims today. However, this time they will be surprised, and I
believe that they have already had a foretaste of it.
There
are among you, my fellow-countrymen, many old soldiers who went through the
Great War and who know perfectly well what space and time mean. Many of you
fought in the East during that war, and all the names which you read about in
1939 were still quite familiar to you. Perhaps many of you marched in bad
weather or under the burning sun at that time. The roads were endless. And how
desperate was the struggle for every inch of ground. How much blood it cost
merely to advance slowly, mile by mile. Think of the pace at which we covered
these distances this time. Eighteen days, and the state which wished to cut us
to pieces at the gates of Berlin was crushed.
Then
came the British attack on Norway. As a matter of fact, I was told by those
Englishmen who always know everything that we had slept through the winter. One
great statesman even assured me that I had missed the bus. Yet we arrived just
in time to get into it before the British. We had suddenly reawakened. In a few
days we made sure of this. We took Norwegian positions as far north as
Kirkenes, and I need not tell you that no one will take the soil on which a
German soldier stands.
And
then they wanted to be cleverer and speedier in the West - in Holland and
Belgium. It led to an offensive that many, especially among our older men,
envisaged with fear and anxiety. I am perfectly well aware of what many were
thinking at that time. They had experienced the Great War on the Western Front,
all the battles in Flanders, in Artois, and around Verdun. They all imagined:
'Today the Maginot line is there. How can it be taken? Above all, how much
blood will it cost; what sacrifices will it call for; how long will it take?'
Within six weeks this campaign too, had been concluded.
Belgium,
Holland, and France were vanquished; the Channel Coast was occupied; our
batteries were brought into position there and our bases established. Of these
positions, too, do I say: 'No power in the world can drive us out of this
region against our will.'
'And
now my fellow-countrymen, let us think of the sacrifices. For the individual,
they are very great. The woman who has lost her husband has lost her all, and
the same is true of the child that has lost its father. The mother who has
sacrificed her child, and the betrothed or the sweetheart who have been parted
from loved ones never to see them again have all made great sacrifices.
However, if we add all these losses together and compare them with the
sacrifices of the Great War, then - however great they may be for the
individual - they are incomparably small. Consider that we have not nearly so
many dead as Germany had in 1870-71 in the struggle against France. We have
broken the ring encircling Germany by these sacrifices. The number of wounded
is also extremely small, merely a fraction of what was expected.
For
all this, our thanks are due to our magnificent army, inspired by a new spirit
and into which the spirit of our national community has also penetrated. The
army now really knows for what it is fighting. We owe thanks to our soldiers
for their tremendous achievements. But the German soldier gives thanks to you,
the munitions workers, for forging the weapons for his use. For this is the
first time that he has gone into battle without feeling that he was inferior to
the enemy in numbers or that his weapons were of poorer quality. Our weapons
were better in every respect.
That
is your doing; the result of your workmanship, of your industry, your capacity,
your devotion. Millions of German families still have their breadwinners today
and will have them in the future, innumerable fathers and mothers still have
their sons - and their thanks are due to you, my munitions workers. You have
forged for them the weapons with which they were able to go forward to victory,
weapons which today give them so much confidence that everyone knows we are not
only the best soldiers in the world but that we also have the best weapons in
the world. Not only is this true today; it will be more so in the future.
That
is the difference between today and the Great War. But not only that. Above
all, this time the German soldier is not short of ammunition. I do not know, my
fellow countrymen, but it may be that when exact calculations are made after
the war, people will perhaps say: 'Sir, you were a spendthrift. You had
ammunition made which was never used. It is still lying about.' Yes, my
fellow-countrymen, I have had ammunition made because I went through the Great
War, because I wished to avoid what happened then and because shells are
replaceable and bombs are replaceable but men are not.
And
thus the problem of ammunition in this struggle was no problem at all; perhaps
only a supply problem. When the struggle was over we had scarcely used a
month's production. Today we are armed for any eventuality, whatever Britain
may do. Every week that passes Britain will be dealt heavier blows, and if she
wishes to set foot anywhere on the Continent she will find us ready once more.
I know that we are not out of practice. I hope that the British have also
forgotten nothing.
As
far as the war in the air is concerned, this too, I hoped to avert. We accepted
it. We shall fight it to the finish. I did not want it. I always struggled
against it. We did not wage such a war during the whole of the Polish campaign.
I did not allow any night attacks to be carried out. In London they said: 'Yes,
because you couldn't fly by night.'
In
the meantime, they have noticed whether we can fly by night or not. Naturally,
it is not possible to aim so well at night and I wanted to attack military
objects only, to attack at the front only, to fight against soldiers, not
against women and children. That is why we refrained from night attacks. We did
not use this method in France. We carried out no night attacks from the air.
When we attacked Paris, only the munitions factories were our objectives. Our
airmen aimed with wonderful precision. Anybody who saw it could convince
himself of that.
Then
it occurred to that great strategist, Churchill, to commence unrestricted war
from the air by night. He began it in Freiburg im Breisgau and has continued
it. Not one munitions plant has been demolished. Yet according to British news
reports, the one in which we are at present assembled is nothing but a mass of
craters. They have not even caused a single munitions factory to cease
production. On the other hand, they have unfortunately hit many families,
helpless women and children. Hospitals have been one of their favorite
objectives. Why? It is inexplainable. You yourselves, here in Berlin, know how
often they have bombed our hospitals.
Very
well, I waited for a month, because I thought that after the conclusion of the
campaign in France the British would give up this method of warfare. I was
mistaken. I waited for a second month and a third month. If bombs were to be
dropped I could not assume the responsibility before the German people of
allowing my own countrymen to be destroyed while sparing foreigners. Now, this
war, too, had to be fought to its end. And it is being fought; fought with all
the determination, with all the materials, with all the means and all the
courage at our disposal. The time for the decisive conflict will arrive. You
may be sure it will take place. However, I should like to tell these gentlemen
one thing: It is we who shall determine the time for it. And on this point I am
cautious. We might perhaps have been able to attack in the West during the
autumn of last year, but I wanted to wait for good weather. And I think it was
worth while waiting.
We
ourselves are so convinced that our weapons will be successful that we can
allow ourselves time. The German people will certainly hold out. I believe that
they will be grateful to me if I bide my time and thus save them untold
sacrifices.
It
is one of the characteristics of the National Socialist State that even in
warfare, at times when it is not absolutely necessary, it is sparing of human
life. After all, the lives of our fellow-citizens are at stake.
In
the campaign in Poland we forbade many attacks or rapid advances, because we
were convinced that a week or a fortnight later the problem would solve itself.
We
have gained many great successes without sacrificing a single man. That was
also the case in the West. It must remain so in the future. We have no desire
to gain any successes or to make any attacks for the sake of prestige. We never
wish to act except in accordance with sober military principles. What has to
happen must happen. We wish to avoid everything else. As for the rest, all of
us hope that reason will again be victorious and peace will return. The world
must realize one thing, however: Neither military force, economic pressure, nor
the time factor will ever force Germany to surrender. Whatever else may happen,
Germany will be the victor in this struggle.
I
am not the man to give up, to my own disadvantage, a struggle already begun. I
have proved this by my life in the past and I shall prove to those gentlemen -
whose knowledge of my life until now has been gathered from the emigre' press -
that I have remained unchanged in this respect.
When
I began my political career, I declared to my supporters - they were then only
a small number of soldiers and workers - 'There is no such word as capitulation
in your vocabulary or mine.'
I
do not desire war, but when it is forced upon me I shall wage it as long as I
have breath in my body. And I can wage it today, because I know that the whole
German nation is behind me. I am the guardian of its future and I act
accordingly.
I
could have made my own life much more easy. I have been fighting for twenty
years, and I have assumed the burden of all these anxieties and of this
never-ceasing work, convinced that it must be done for the German people. My
own life and my own health are of no importance. I know that, above all, the
German Army, every man and every officer of it, supports me in the same spirit.
All those fools who imagined that there could ever be any disruption here have
forgotten that the Third Reich is not the same as the Second. The German people
stand behind me to a man. And at this point I thank, above all, the German
workman and the German peasant. They made it possible for me to prepare for
this struggle and to create, as far as armaments were concerned, the necessary
conditions for resistance. They also provide me with the possibility of
continuing the war, however long it may last.
I
also give special thanks to the women of Germany-to those numberless women, who
must now perform part of the heavy work of men, who have adapted themselves to
their war duties with devotion and fanaticism and who are replacing men in so
many positions. I thank you all - you who are making this personal sacrifice,
who are bearing the many restrictions that are necessary. I thank you in the
name of all those who represent the German people today and who will be the
German people of the future.
This
struggle is not a struggle for the present but primarily a struggle for the
future. I stated on September 3, 1939, that time would not conquer us, that no
economic difficulties would bring us to our knees, and that we could still less
be defeated by force of arms. The morale of the German people guarantees this.
The
German people will be richly rewarded in the future for all that they are
doing. When we have won this war it will not have been won by a few
industrialists or millionaires, or by a few capitalists or aristocrats, or by a
few bourgeois, or by anyone else.
Workers,
you must look upon me as your guarantor. I was born a son of the people; I have
spent all my life struggling for the German people, and when this hardest
struggle of my life is over there will be new tasks for the German people.
We
have already projected great plans. All of our plans have but one aim: to
develop still further the great German State, to make that great German nation
more and more conscious of its existence and, at the same time, to give it
everything which makes life worth living.
We
have decided to break down to an ever-increasing degree the barriers preventing
individuals from developing their faculties and from attaining their just due.
We are firmly determined to build up a social state which must and shall be a
model of perfection in every sphere of life....
When
this war is ended, Germany will set to work in earnest. A great 'Awake!' will
sound throughout the country. Then the German nation will stop manufacturing
cannon and will embark on peaceful occupations and the new work of
reconstruction for the millions. Then we shall show the world for the first
time who is the real master, capitalism or work. Out of this work will grow the
great German Reich of which great poets have dreamed. It will be the Germany to
which every one of her sons will cling with fanatical devotion, because she
will provide a home even for the poorest. She will teach everyone the meaning
of life.
Should
anyone say to me: 'These are mere fantastic dreams, mere visions,' I can only
reply that when I set out on my course in 1919 as an unknown, nameless soldier
I built my hopes of the future upon a most vivid imagination. Yet all has come
true.
What
I am planning or aiming at today is nothing compared to what I have already
accomplished and achieved. It will be achieved sooner and more definitely than
everything already achieved. The road from an unknown and nameless person to
Fuehrer of the German nation was harder than will be the way from Fuehrer of
the German nation to creator of the coming peace.
INTERNET SOURCE: http://www.hitler.org/speeches/12-10-40.html
No comments:
Post a Comment