Click on the Picture
to read the Book
What Adolph really
wrote in "Mein Kampf" about:
"There are some truths that stand out so
openly on the roadsides of life, as it were, that every passer-by may see them.
Yet, because of their very obviousness, the general run of people disregard such
truths or at least they do not make them the object of any conscious knowledge.
People are so bind to some of the simplest facts in every day life that they are
highly surprised when somebody calls attention to what everybody ought to know.
Examples of the Columbus Egg lie around us in hundreds of thousands; but
observers like Columbus are rare. Walking about in the garden of nature,
most men have the self conceit to think that they know everything; yet almost
all are blind to one of the outstanding principles that nature employs in her
work. This principle may be called the inner isolation which characterizes
each and every living species on this earth. Even a superficial glance is
sufficient to show that all the innumerable forms in which the life urge of
nature manifests itself are subject to a fundamental law - one may call it an
iron law of nature - which compels the various species to keep within the
definite limits of their own life forms when propagating and multiplying their
kind. Each animal mates only with one of his own species. The titmouse
cohabits only with the titmouse, the finch with the finch, the stork with the
stork, the field mouse with the field mouse, the wolf with the she wolf, etc.
Deviations from this law take place only in exceptional circumstances.
This happens especially under the compulsion of captivity, or when some other
obstacles makes procreative intercourse impossible between individuals of the
same species. But then nature abhors such intercourse with all her might;
and her protest is most clearly demonstrated by the fact that the hybrid is
either sterile or the fecundity of its descendants is limited. In most
cases hybrids and their progeny are denied the ordinary powers of resistance to
disease or the natural means of defence against outer attack. Such
dispensation of nature is quite logical. Every crossing between two breeds
which are not quite equal results in a product which holds an intermediate place
between the levels of the two parents. This means that the offspring will
indeed be superior to the parent which stands in the biologically lower order of
being, but not so high as the higher parent. For this reason it must
eventually succumb in any struggle against the higher species. Such mating
contradicts the will of nature towards the selective improvement of life in
general. The favourable preliminary to this improvement is not to mate
individuals of higher and lower orders of being but rather to allow the complete
triumph of the higher order. The stronger must dominate and not mate with
the weaker, which would signify the sacrifice of its own higher nature.
Only the born weakling can look upon this principle as cruel, and if he does so
it is merely because he is of a feebler nature and narrower mind; for if such a
law did not direct the process of evolution then the higher development of
organic life would not be conceivable at all. This urge for the
maintenance of the unmixed breed, which is a phenomenon that prevails throughout
the whole of the natural world, results not only in the sharply defined outward
distinction between one species and another but also in the internal similarity
of characteristic qualities which are peculiar to each breed or species.
The fox remain always a fox, the goose remains a goose and the tiger will retain
the character of a tiger. The only difference that can exist within the
species must be in the various degrees of structural strength and active power,
in the intelligence, efficiency, endurance, etc., with which the individual
specimens are endowed. It would be impossible to find a fox which has a
kindly and protective disposition towards geese, just as no cat exists which has
a friendly disposition towards mice. That is why the struggle between the
various species does not arise from a feeling of mutual antipathy but rather
from hunger and love. In both cases nature looks on calmly and is even
pleased with what happens. The struggle for the daily livelihood leaves
behind in the ruck everything that is weak or diseased or wavering; while the
fight of the male to possess the female gives to the stronger the right, or at
least the possibility, to propagate its kind. And this struggle is a means
of furthering the health and powers of resistance in the species. Thus it
is one of the causes underlying the process of development towards a higher
quality of being. If the case were different the progressive process would
cease and even retrogression might set in. Since the inferior always outnumber
the superior, the former would always increase more rapidly if they possessed
the same capacities for survival and for the procreation of their kind; and the
final consequence would be that the best in quality would be forced to recede
into the background. Therefore a corrective measure in favour of the
better quality must intervene. Nature supplies this by establishing
rigorous conditions of life, to which the weaker will have to submit and will
thereby be numerically restricted; but even that portion which survives cannot
indiscriminately multiply, for here a new and rigorous selection takes place,
according to strength and health. If nature does not wish that weaker
individuals should mate with the stronger, she wishes even less that a superior
race should intermingle with an inferior one; because in such a case all her
efforts, throughout hundreds of thousands of years, to establish an evolutionary
higher stage of being, may thus be rendered futile." - Page
238...
"But it remained for the Jews, with their
unqualified capacity for falsehood, and their fighting comrades, the Marxists,
to impute responsibility for the downfall (of the German nation
after WW I) precisely to the man who alone had shown a superhuman will
and energy in his effort to prevent the catastrophe which he had foreseen and to
save the nation from that hour of complete overthrow and shame. By placing
responsibility for the loss of the world war on the shoulders of Ludendorff they
took away the weapon of moral right from the only adversary dangerous enough to
be likely to succeed in bringing the betrayers of the Fatherland to Justice.
All this was inspired by the principle - which is quite true in itself - that in
the big lie there is always a certain force of credibility; because the broad
masses of a nation are always more easily corrupted in the deeper strata of
their emotional nature than consciously or voluntarily, and thus in the
primitive simplicity of their minds they more readily fall victims to the big
lie than the small lie, since they themselves often tell small lies in little
matters but would be ashamed to resort to large-scale falsehood. It would
never come into their heads to fabricate colossal untruths, and they would not
believe that others could have the impudence to distort the truth so infamously.
Even though the facts which prove this to be so may be brought clearly to their
minds, they will still doubt and waver and will continue to think that there may
be some other explanation. For the grossly impudent lie always leaves
traces behind it, even after it has been nailed down, a fact which is known to
all expert liars in this world and to all who conspire together in the art of
lying. These people know only too well how to use falsehood for the basest
purposes.
From time immemorial, however, the Jews have known
better than any others how falsehood and calumny can be exploited. Is not
their very existence founded on one great lie, namely, that they are a religious
community, whereas in reality they are a race? And what a race! One
of the greatest thinkers that mankind has produced has branded the Jews for all
time with a statement which is profoundly and exactly true. He (Schopenhauer)
called the Jew - 'The Great Master of Lies.' Those who
do not realize the truth of that statement, or do not wish to believe it, will
never be able to lend a hand in helping Truth to prevail." - Page
198...
"In journalistic circles it is a pleasing
custom to speak of the Press as a 'Great Power' within the State. As a
matter of fact its importance is immense. One cannot easily overestimate
it, for the Press continues the work of education even in adult life.
Generally, readers of the Press can be classified into three groups:
First, those who
believe everything they read;
Second, those who
no longer believe anything;
Thirdly, those who
critically examine what they read and form their judgements accordingly.
Numerically, the first group is by far the strongest,
being composed of the broad masses of the people. Intellectually, it forms
the simplest portion of the nation. It cannot be classified according to
occupation but only into grades of intelligence. Under this category come
all those who have not been born to think for themselves or who have not learnt
to do so and who, partly through incompetence and partly through ignorance,
believe everything that is set before them in print. To these we must add
that type of lazy individual who, although capable of thinking for himself, out
of sheer laziness gratefully absorbs everything that others have thought over,
modestly believing this to have been thoroughly done. The influence which
the Press has on all these people is therefore enormous; for after all they
constitute the broad masses of a nation. But somehow they are not in a
position or are not willing personally to sift what is being served up to them;
so that their whole attitude towards daily problems is almost solely the result
of extraneous influence. All this can be advantageous where public
enlightenment is of a serious and truthful character, but great harm is done
when scoundrels and liars take a hand at this work.
The second group is numerically smaller, being partly
composed of those who were formerly in the first group and after a series of
bitter disappointments are now prepared to believe nothing of what they see in
print. They hate all newspapers. Either they do not read them at all
or they become exceptionally annoyed at their contents, which they hold to be
nothing but a congeries of lies and misstatements. These people are
difficult to handle; for they will always be sceptical of the truth.
Consequently, they are useless for any form of positive work.
The third group is easily the smallest, being composed
of real intellectuals whom natural aptitude and education have taught to think
for themselves and who in all things try to form their own judgements, while at
the same time carefully sifting what they read. They will not read any
newspaper without using their own intelligence to collaborate with that of the
writer and naturally this does not set writers an easy task. Journalists
appreciate this type of reader only with a certain amount of reservation.
Hence the trash that newspapers are capable of serving
up is of little danger - much less of importance - to the members of this third
group of readers. In the majority of cases these readers have learnt to
regard every journalist as fundamentally a rogue who sometimes speaks the truth.
Most unfortunately, the value of these readers lies in their intelligence and
not in their numerical strength, an unhappy state of affairs in a period where
wisdom counts for nothing and majorities for everything. Nowadays, when
the voting papers of the masses are the deciding factor, the decision lies in
the hands of the numerically strongest group; that is to say the first group,
the crowd of simpletons and the credulous.
It is an all-important interest of the State and a
national duty to prevent these people from falling into the hands of false,
ignorant or even evil-minded teachers ... Particular attention should be paid to
the Press; for its influence on these people is by far the strongest and most
penetrating of all; since its effect is not transitory but continual. Its
immense significance lies in the uniform and persistent repetition of its
teaching." - Page 205...
Regarding the Press in his days he wrote:
" ... The Jews were too clever to allow a
simultaneous attack to be made on the whole of their Press. No one section
functioned as cover for the other. While the Marxist newspaper, in the
most despicable manner possible, reviled everything that was sacred, furiously
attacked the State and Government and incited certain classes of the community
against each other, the bourgeois democratic papers, also in Jewish hands, knew
how to camouflage themselves as model examples of objectivity. They
studiously avoided harsh language, knowing well that blockheads are capable of
judgement only by external appearances and never able to penetrate to the real
depth and meaning of anything. They measure the worth of an object by its
exterior and not by its content ..."
"It is just for our intellectual demi-monde that
the Jew writes those papers which he calls his 'intellectual' Press ... While
studiously avoiding all forms of expression that might strike the reader as
crude, the poison is injected from other vials into the hearts of the clientele.
The effervescent tone and the fine phraseology lull the readers into believing
that a love for knowledge and moral principle is the sole driving force that
determines the policy of such papers, whereas in reality these features
represent a cunning way of disarming any opposition that might be directed
against the Jews and their Press." - Page 208...
"Now, the truth is that the State in itself has
nothing whatsoever to do with any definite economic concept or a definite
economic development. It does not arise from a compact made between
contracting parties, within a certain delimited territory, for the purpose of
serving economic ends. The State is a community of living beings who have
kindred physical and spiritual natures, organized for the purpose of assuring
the conservation of their own kind and to help towards fulfilling those ends
which Providence has assigned to that particular race or racial branch. Therein,
and therein alone, lie the purpose and meaning of a State. Economic
activity is one of the many auxiliary means which are necessary for the
attainment of those aims. But economic activity is never the origin or
purpose of a State, except where a State has been originally founded on a
false and unnatural basis. And this alone explains why a State as such
does not necessarily need a certain delimited territory as a condition of its
establishment. This condition becomes a necessary pre-requisite only among
those people who would provide and assure subsistence for their kinsfolk through
their own industry, which means that they are ready to carry on the struggle for
existence by means of their own work. People who can sneak their way, like
parasites, into the human body politic and make others work for them under
various pretences can form a State without possessing any definite delimited
territory. This is chiefly applicable to that parasitic nation which,
particularly at the present time, preys upon the honest portion of mankind; I
mean the Jews.
The Jewish State has never been delimited in space.
It has been spread all over the world, without any frontiers whatsoever, and has
always been constituted from the membership of one race exclusively. That
is why the Jews have always formed a State within a State. One of the most
ingenious tricks ever devised has been that of sailing the Jewish ship-of-state
under the flag of Religion and thus securing that tolerance which Aryans are
always ready to grant to different religious faiths. But the Mosaic Law is
really nothing else than the doctrine of the preservation of the Jewish race.
Therefore this Law takes in all spheres of sociological, political and economic
science which have a bearing on the main end in view.
The instinct for the preservation of one's own species
is the primary cause that leads to the formation of human communities.
Hence the State is a racial organism, and not an economic organization.
The difference between the two is so great as to be incomprehensible to our
contemporary so-called 'statesmen'. That is why they like to believe that
the State may be constituted as an economic structure, whereas the truth is that
it has always resulted from the exercise of those qualities which are part of
the will to preserve the species and the race. But these qualities always
exist and operate through the heroic virtues and have nothing to do with
commercial egoism; for the conservation of the species always presupposes that
the individual is ready to sacrifice himself ... The qualities which are
employed for the foundation and preservation of a State have accordingly little
or nothing to do with the economic situation. And this is conspicuously
demonstrated by the fact that the inner strength of a State only very rarely
coincides with what is called its economic expansion. On the contrary,
there are numerous examples to show that a period of prosperity indicates the
approaching decline of a State. If it were correct to attribute the
foundation of human communities to economic forces, then the power of the State
as such would be at its heighest pitch during periods of economic prosperity and
vice versa ...
A State has never arisen from commercial causes for the
purpose of peacefully serving commercial ends; but States have always arisen
from the instinct to maintain the racial group, whether this instinct manifests
itself in the heroic sphere or in the sphere of cunning and chicanery ...
Our clever 'statesmen' ... never understood that as
soon as a man is called upon to struggle for purely material causes he will
avoid death as best he can; for death and the enjoyment of the material fruits
of a victory are quite incompatible concepts. The frailest woman will
become a heroine when the life of her own child is at stake. And only the will
to save the race and native land or the State, which offers protection to the
race, has in all ages been the urge which has forced men to face the weapons of
their enemies." - Page 136...
"The Jew offers the most striking contrast to
the Aryan. There is probably no other people in the world who have so
developed the instinct of self-preservation as the so-called 'chosen' people.
The best proof of this statement is found in the simple fact that this race
still exists. Where can another people be found that in the course of the
last two thousand years has undergone so few changes in mental outlook and
character as the Jewish people? And yet what other peoples has taken such
a constant part in the great revolutions? But even after having passed
through the most gigantic catastrophes that have overwhelmed mankind, the Jew
remains the same as ever. What an infinitely tenacious will-to-live, to
preserve one's kind, is demonstrated by that fact. The intellectual
faculties of the Jew have been trained through thousands of years ... His
intellectual powers, however, are not the result of an inner evolution but
rather have been shaped by the object lessons which the Jew has received from
others. The human spirit cannot climb upwards without taking successive
steps. For every step upwards it needs the foundation of what has been
constructed before - the past - which, in the comprehensive sense here employed,
can have been laid only in a general civilization ... 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.
The process has never been the reverse.
For, though among the Jews the instinct of
self-preservation has not been weaker but has been much stronger than among
other peoples, and though the impression may easily be created that the
intellectual powers of the Jew are at least equal to those of other races, the
Jews completely lack the most essential pre-requisite of a cultural people,
namely the idealistic spirit. With the Jewish people the readiness for
sacrifice does not extend beyond the simple instinct of individual preservation.
In their case the feeling of racial solidarity which they apparently manifest is
nothing but a very primitive gregarious instinct, similar to that which may be
found among other organisms in this world. It is a remarkable fact that
this herd instinct brings individuals together for mutual protection only as
long as there is a common danger which makes mutual assistance expedient or
inevitable. The same pack of wolves which a moment ago joined together in
a common attack on their victim will dissolve into individual wolves as soon as
their hunger has been satisfied. This is also true of horses, which unite
to defend themselves against any aggressor but separate the moment the danger is
over.
It is much the same with the Jew. His spirit of
sacrifice is only apparent. It manifests itself only so long as the
existence of the individual makes this a matter of absolute necessity. But
as soon as the common foe is conquered and the danger which threatened the
individual Jews is overcome and the prey secured, then the apparent harmony
disappears and the original conditions set in again. Jews act in concord
only when a common danger threatens them or a common prey attracts them.
Where these two motives no longer exist then the most brutal egotism appears and
these people who before had lived together in unity will turn into a swarm of
rats that bitterly fight against each other.
If the Jews were the only people in the world they
would be wallowing in filth and mire and would exploit one another and try to
exterminate one another in a bitter struggle, except in so far as their utter
lack of the ideal of sacrifice, which shows itself in their cowardly spirit,
would prevent this struggle from developing.
Therefore it would be a complete mistake to interpret
the mutual help which the Jews render one another ... as the expression of a
certain idealistic spirit of sacrifice ...
To what extent the Jews appropriates the civilization
built up by others - or rather corrupts it, to speak more accurately - is
indicated by the fact that he cultivates chiefly the art which calls for the
smallest amount of original invention, namely the dramatic art. And even
here he is nothing better than a juggler; ...
Even here, therefore, he is not a creative genius but
rather a superficial imitator who, in spite of all his retouching and tricks,
cannot disguise the fact that there is no inner vitality in the shape he gives
his products. At this junction the Jewish Press comes in and renders
friendly assistance by shouting hosannas over the head of the most ordinary
bungler of a Jew, until the rest of the world is stampeded into thinking that
the object of so much praise must really be an artist, whereas in reality he may
be nothing more that a low class mimic ...
He is and remains a parasite, a sponger who, like
a pernicious bacillus, spreads over wider and wider areas according as some
favourable area attracts him. The effect produced by his presence is also
like that of a vampire; for wherever he establishes himself the people who grant
him hospitality are bound to be bled to death sooner or later.
Thus the Jew has at all times lived in States that have
belonged to other races and within the organization of those States he has
formed a State of his own, which is, however, hidden behind the mask of a
'religious community', as long as external circumstances do not make it
advisable for this community to declare its true nature. As soon as the
Jew feels himself sufficiently established in his position to be able to hold it
without disguise, he lifts the mask and suddenly appears in the character which
so many did not formerly believed or wish to see: namely that of the Jew ...
He is obliged to conceal his own particular character
and mode of life that he may be allowed to continue his existence as a parasite
among the nations. The greater the intelligence of the individual Jew, the
better will he succeed in deceiving others. His success in this line may
even go so far that the people who grant him hospitality may be led to believe
that the Jew among them is a genuine Frenchman, for instance, or Englishman, or
German or Italian, who just happens to belong to a religious denomination which
is different from that prevailing in those countries ...
... in order to incur the enmity of the Jew it is not
necessary to show any open hostility towards him. It is quite sufficient
if one be considered capable of opposing the Jew sometime in the future or using
his abilities and character to enhance the power and position of a nation which
the Jew finds hostile to him ...
When the Zionists try to make the rest of the world
believe that the new national consciousness of the Jews will be satisfied by the
establishment of a Jewish State in Palestine, the Jews thereby adopt another
means to dupe the simple-minded Gentile. They have not the slightest
intention of building up a Jewish State in Palestine so as to live in it.
What they are really aiming at is to establish a central organization for their
international swindling and cheating. As a sovereign State, this cannot be
controlled by any of the other states. Therefore it can serve as a refuge
for swindlers who have been found out and at the same time a high school for the
training of other swindlers." - Page 251...