“To focus exclusively or mainly on the Jews (no matter how nefarious their distortions) is an exercise either in reductionism, ignorance, or dishonesty.”
15th October 1941, evening
Remedies against inflation—The example of Frederick the Great—The economists make a mess of everything.
In 1933, the Reich had eighty-three million marks’ worth of foreign currency. The day after the seizure of power, I was called upon to deliver immediately sixty-four millions. I pleaded that I knew nothing about the whole business, and asked time to reflect.
At that point, one must intervene. Even to Schacht, I had to begin by explaining this elementary truth: that the essential cause of the stability of our currency was to be sought for in our concentration camps. The currency remains stable when the speculators are put under lock and key. I also had to make Schacht understand that excess profits must be removed from economic circulation.
I do not entertain the illusion that I can pay for everything out of my available funds. Simply, I’ve read a lot, and I’ve known how to profit by the experience of events in the past. Frederick the Great, already, had gradually withdrawn his devaluated thalers from circulation, and had thus re-established the value of his currency.
All these things are simple and natural. The only thing is, one mustn’t let the Jew stick his nose in. The basis of Jewish commercial policy is to make matters incomprehensible for a normal brain. People go into ecstasies of confidence before the science of the great economists. Anyone who doesn’t understand is taxed with ignorance! At bottom, the only object of all these notions is to throw everything into confusion.
The very simple ideas that happen to be mine have nowadays penetrated into the flesh and blood of millions. Only the professors don’t understand that the value of money depends on the goods behind that money.
One day I received some workers in the great hall at Obersalzberg, to give them an informal lecture on money. The good chaps understood me very well, and rewarded me with a storm of applause.
To give people money is solely a problem of making paper. The whole question is to know whether the workers are producing goods to match the paper that’s made. If work does not increase, so that production remains at the same level, the extra money they get won’t enable them to buy more things than they bought before with less money.
Obviously, that theory couldn’t have provided the material for a learned dissertation. For a distinguished economist, the thing is, no matter what you’re talking about, to pour out ideas in complicated meanderings and to use terms of Sibylline incomprehensibility.
21st October 1941, midday
Prophetic sense of Julian the Apostate—The Aryan origin of Jesus—Distortion of Christ’s ideas—The Road to Damascus—Roman tolerance—Materialism and the Jewish religion—Christian problem—The mobilisation of the slaves—St. Paul and Karl Marx—Final solution.
When one thinks of the opinions held concerning Christianity by our best minds a hundred, two hundred years ago, one is ashamed to realise how little we have since evolved. I didn’t know that Julian the Apostate had passed judgment with such clear-sightedness on Christianity and Christians. You should read what he says on the subject.
Originally, Christianity was merely an incarnation of Bohshevism the destroyer. Nevertheless, the Galilean, who later was called the Christ, intended something quite different. He must be regarded as a popular leader who took up His position against Jewry. Galilee was a colony where the Romans had probably installed Gallic legionaries, and it’s certain that Jesus was not a Jew. The Jews, by the way, regarded him as the son of a whore—of a whore and a Roman soldier.
The decisive falsification of Jesus’s doctrine was the work of St. Paul. He gave himself to this work with subtlety and for purposes of personal exploitation. For the Galilean’s object was to liberate his country from Jewish oppression. He set himself against Jewish capitalism, and that’s why the Jews liquidated him.
Paul of Tarsus (his name was Saul, before the road to Damascus) was one of those who persecuted Jesus most savagely. When he learnt that Jesus’s supporters let their throats be cut for His ideas, he realised that, by making intelligent use of the Galilean’s teaching, it would be possible to overthrow this Roman State which the Jews hated. It’s in this context that we must understand the famous “illumination”. Think of it, the Romans were daring to confiscate the most sacred thing the Jews possessed, the gold piled up in their temples! At that time, as now, money was their god.
On the road to Damascus, St. Paul discovered that he could succeed in ruining the Roman State by causing the principle to triumph of the equality of all men before a single God—and by putting beyond the reach of the laws his private notions, which he alleged to be divinely inspired. If, into the bargain, one succeeded in imposing one man as the representative on earth of the only God, that man would possess boundless power.
The ancient world had its gods and served them. But the priests interposed between the gods and men were servants of the State, for the gods protected the City. In short, they were the emanation of a power that the people had created. For that society, the idea of an only god was unthinkable. In this sphere, the Romans were tolerance itself. The idea of a universal god could seem to them only a mild form of madness—for, if three peoples fight one another, each invoking the same god, this means that, at any rate, two of them are praying in vain.
Nobody was more tolerant than the Romans. Every man could pray to the god of his choice, and a place was even reserved in the temples for the unknown god. Moreover, every man prayed as he chose, and had the right to proclaim his preferences.
St. Paul knew how to exploit this state of affairs in order to conduct his struggle against the Roman State. Nothing has changed; the method has remained sound. Under cover of a pretended religious instruction, the priests continue to incite the faithful against the State.
The religious ideas of the Romans are common to all Aryan peoples. The Jew, on the other hand, worshipped and continues to worship, then and now, nothing but the golden calf. The Jewish religion is devoid of all metaphysics and has no foundation but the most repulsive materialism. That’s proved even in the concrete representation they have of the Beyond—which for them is identified with Abraham’s bosom.
It’s since St. Paul’s time that the Jews have manifested themselves as a religious community, for until then they were only a racial community. St. Paul was the first man to take account of the possible advantages of using a religion as a means of propaganda. If the Jew has succeeded in destroying the Roman Empire, that’s because St. Paul transformed a local movement of Aryan opposition to Jewry into a supra-temporal religion, which postulates the equality of all men amongst themselves, and their obedience to an only god. This is what caused the death of the Roman Empire.
Raphael’s studio on Saul predicating in Athens
It’s striking to observe that Christian ideas, despite all St. Paul’s efforts, had no success in Athens. The philosophy of the Greeks was so much superior to this poverty-stricken rubbish that the Athenians burst out laughing when they listened to the apostle’s teaching. But in Rome St. Paul found the ground prepared for him. His egalitarian theories had what was needed to win over a mass composed of innumerable uprooted people.
Nevertheless, the Roman slave was not at all what the expression encourages us to imagine to-day. In actual fact, the people concerned were prisoners of war (as we understand the term nowadays), of whom many had been freed and had the possibility of becoming citizens—and it was St. Paul who introduced this degrading overtone into the modern idea of Roman slaves.
Think of the numerous Germanic people whom Rome welcomed. Arminius himself, the first architect of our liberty, wasn’t he a Roman knight, and his brother a dignitary of the State? By reason of these contacts, renewed throughout the centuries, the population of Rome had ended by acquiring a great esteem for the Germanic peoples. It’s clear that there was a preference in Rome for fair-haired women, to such a point that many Roman women dyed their hair. Thus Germanic blood constantly regenerated Roman society.
The Jew, on the other hand, was despised in Rome. Whilst Roman society proved hostile to the new doctrine, Christianity in its pure state stirred the population to revolt. Rome was Bolshevised, and Bolshevism produced exactly the same results in Rome as later in Russia.
It was only later, under the influence of the Germanic spirit, that Christianity gradually lost its openly Bolshevistic character. It became, to a certain degree, tolerable. To-day, when Christianity is tottering, the Jew restores to pride of place Christianity in its Bolshevistic form.
The Jew believed he could renew the experiment. To-day as once before, the object is to destroy nations by vitiating their racial integrity. It’s not by chance that the Jews, in Russia, have systematically deported hundreds of thousands of men, delivering the women, whom the men were compelled to leave behind, to males imported from other regions. They practised on a vast scale the mixture of races.
In the old days, as now—destruction of art and civilisation. The Bolsheviks of their day, what didn’t they destroy in Rome, in Greece and elsewhere? They’ve behaved in the same way amongst us and in Russia.
One must compare the art and civilisation of the Romans—their temples, their houses—with the art and civilisation represented at the same period by the abject rabble of the catacombs.
In the old days, the destruction of the libraries. Isn’t that what happened in Russia? The result: a frightful levelling-down.
Didn’t the world see, carried on right into the Middle Ages, the same old system of martyrs, tortures, faggots? Of old, it was in the name of Christianity. To-day, it’s in the name of Bolshevism. Yesterday, the instigator was Saul: the instigator to-day, Mardochai. Saul has changed into St. Paul, and Mardochai into Karl Marx.
By exterminating this pest, we shall do humanity a service of which our soldiers can have no idea.
25th October 1941, evening
SPECIAL GUESTS: REICHSFUEHRER SS HIMMLER AND SS GENERAL HEYDRIGH
Jews responsible for two world wars—How past civilisations are effaced—Christianity and Bolshevism, aim at destruction—The Catholic Church thrives on sin—Accounts to be settled.
From the rostrum of the Reichstag I prophesied to Jewry that, in the event of war’s proving inevitable, the Jew would disappear from Europe. That race of criminals has on its conscience the two million dead of the First World War, and now already hundreds of thousands more. Let nobody tell me that all the same we can’t park them in the marshy parts of Russia! Who’s worrying about our troops? It’s not a bad idea, by the way, that public rumour attributes to us a plan to exterminate the Jews. Terror is a salutary thing.
The book that contains the reflections of the Emperor Julian should be circulated in millions. What wonderful intelligence, what discernment, all the wisdom of antiquity! It’s extraordinary.
With what clairvoyance the authors of the eighteenth, and especially those of the past, century criticised Christianity and passed judgment on the evolution of the Churches! People only retain from the past what they want to find there. As seen by the Bolshevik, the history of the Tsars seems like a blood-bath. But what is that, compared with the crimes of Bolshevism?
There exists a history of the world, compiled by Rotteck, a liberal of the ‘forties, in which facts are considered from the point of view of the period; antiquity is resolutely neglected. We, too, shall re-write history, from the racial point of view. Starting with isolated examples, we shall proceed to a complete revision.
It will be a question, not only of studying the sources, but of giving facts a logical link. There are certain facts that can’t be satisfactorily explained by the usual methods. So we must take another attitude as our point of departure. As long as students of biology believed in spontaneous generation, it was impossible to explain the presence of microbes.
* * *
What a certificate of mental poverty it was for Christianity that it destroyed the libraries of the ancient world! Graeco-Roman thought was made to seem like the teachings of the Devil. Christianity set itself systematically to destroy ancient culture. What came to us was passed down by chance, or else it was a product of Roman liberal writers. Perhaps we are entirely ignorant of humanity’s most precious spiritual treasures.
Who can know what was there? The Papacy was faithful to these tactics even during recorded history. How did people behave, during the age of the great explorations, towards the spiritual riches of Central America? In our parts of the world, the Jews would have immediately eliminated Schopenhauer, Nietzsche and Kant.
If the Bolsheviks had dominion over us for two hundred years, what works of our past would be handed on to posterity? Our great men would fall into oblivion, or else they’d be presented to future generations as criminals and bandits.
Methods of persuasion of a moral order are not an effective weapon against those who despise the truth—when we have to do with priests, for example, of a Church who know that everything about it is based on lies, and who live by it. They think me a spoil-sport when I rise up in their midst; indeed, I am going to spoil their little games.
Most white nationalists believe it’s enough to read Kevin MacDonald’s third book of his trilogy on Jewry. But the first book presents the roots of Judaism in a way that the secondary branches can later be grasped. I won’t add excerpts of MacDonald’s A People That Shall Dwell Alone, only a paragraph:
This project attempts to develop an understanding of Judaism based on modern social and biological sciences. It is, broadly speaking, a successor to the late-19th-century effort to develop a Wissenschaft des Judentums—a scientific understanding of Judaism. The fundamental paradigm derives from evolutionary biology, but there will also be a major role for the theory and data derived from several years of psychology, including especially the social psychology of group behavior.
See the prologue of the third book: here. Written when MacDonald finished his trilogy, it’s the best introduction to his whole trilogy that I know.
5th November 1941, evening
Caesar’s soldiers were vegetarians—Progress of the Germanic race—Racial doctrine camouflaged as religion—Peculiarities of the Jewish mind.
There is an interesting document, dating from the time of Caesar, which indicates that the soldiers of that time lived on a vegetarian diet. According to the same source, it was only in times of shortage that soldiers had recourse to meat. It’s known that the ancient philosophers already regarded the change from black gruel to bread as a sign of decadence. The Vikings would not have undertaken their now legendary expeditions it they’d depended on a meat diet, for they had no method of preserving meat. The fact that the smallest military unit was the section is explained by the fact that each man had a mill for grain. The purveyor of vitamins was the onion.
I changed my ideas on how to interpret our mythology the day I went for a walk in the forests where tradition invites us to lay the scene for it. In these forests one meets only idiots, whilst all around, on the plain of the Rhine, one meets the finest specimens of humanity. I realised that the Germanic conquerors had driven the aboriginals into the mountainy bush in order to settle in their place on the fertile lands.
To-day we’re renewing that tradition. The Germanic race is gaining more and more. The number of Germanics has considerably increased in the last two thousand years, and it’s undeniable that the race is getting better-looking. It’s enough to see the children.
Fifty years ago, in the Crimea, nearly half the soil was still in German hands. Basically, the population consisted firstly of the Germanic element, of Gothic origin; then of Tartars, Armenians, Jews; and Russians absolutely last. We must dig our roots into this soil.
From a social point of view, the sickest communities of the New Europe are: first, Hungary, then Italy. In England, the masses are unaware of the state of servitude in which they live. But it’s a class that ought to be ruled, for it’s racially inferior. And England couldn’t live if its ruling class were to disappear.
The Jew totally lacks any interest in things of the spirit. If he has pretended in Germany to have a bent for literature and the arts, that’s only out of snobbery, or from a liking for speculation. He has no feeling for art, and no sensibility. Except in the regions where they live in groups, the Jews are said to have reached a very high cultural level! Take Nuremberg, for example: for four hundred years—that is to say, until 1838— it hadn’t a single Jew in its population. Result: a situation in the first rank of German cultural life.
With the Aryan, the belief in the Beyond often takes a quite childish form; but this belief does represent an effort towards a deepening of things. The man who doesn’t believe in the Beyond has no understanding of religion. The great trick of Jewry was to insinuate itself fraudulently amongst the religions with a religion like Judaism, which in reality is not a religion. Simply, the Jew has put a religious camouflage over his racial doctrine. Everything he undertakes is built on this lie.
The Jew can take the credit for having corrupted the Graeco-Roman world. Previously words were used to express thoughts; he used words to invent the art of disguising thoughts. Lies are his strength, his weapon in the struggle. The Jew is said to be gifted. His only gift is that of juggling with other people’s property and swindling each and everyone. Suppose I find by chance a picture that I believe to be a Titian. I tell the owner what I think of it, and I offer him a price. In a similar case, the Jew begins by declaring that the picture is valueless, he buys it for a song and sells it at a profit of 5000 per cent. To persuade people that a thing which has value, has none, and vice versa—that’s not a sign of intelligence. They can’t even overcome the smallest economic crisis!
The Jew has a talent for bringing confusion into the simplest matters, for getting everything muddled up. Thus comes the moment when nobody understands anything more about the question at issue. To tell you something utterly insignificant, the Jew drowns you in a flood of words. You try to analyse what he said, and you realise it’s all wind. The Jew makes use of words to stultify his neighbours. And that’s why people make them professors.
The law of life is: “God helps him who helps himself!” It’s so simple that everybody is convinced of it, and nobody would pay to learn it. But the Jew succeeds in getting himself re-warded for his meaningless glibness. Stop following what he says, for a moment, and at once his whole scaffolding collapses.
I’ve always said, the Jews are the most diabolic creatures in existence, and at the same time the stupidest. They can’t produce a musician, or a thinker. No art, nothing, less than nothing. They’re liars, forgers, crooks. They owe their success only to the stupidity of their victims.
If the Jew weren’t kept presentable by the Aryan, he’d be so dirty he couldn’t open his eyes. We can live without the Jews, but they couldn’t live without us. When the Europeans realise that, they’ll all become simultaneously aware of the solidarity that binds them together. The Jew prevents this solidarity. He owes his livelihood to the fact that this solidarity does not exist.
19th November 1941
Stupidity of the bourgeois parties—Misplaced pity for the bourgeoisie—No room for the lukewarm in the Party.
Above all, it was essential that the Party should not allow itself to be overrun by the bourgeois. I took care, by applying appropriate methods, to welcome nobody into it but truly fanatical Germans, ready to sacrifice their private interests to the interests of the public.
This snivelling in which some of the bourgeois are indulging nowadays, on the pretext that the Jews have to clear out of Germany, is just typical of these holier-than-thou’s. Did they weep when every year hundreds of thousands of Germans had to emigrate, from inability to find a livelihood on our own soil? These Germans had no kinsfolk in various parts of the world; they were left to their own mercies, they went off into the unknown. Nothing of that sort for the Jews, who have uncles, nephews, cousins everywhere. In the circumstances, the pity shown by our bourgeois is particularly out of place.
The Party cannot drag dead weights with it, it can do nothing with the lukewarm. If there are any such amongst us, let them be expelled! To those who hold in their hands the destinies of the country, it can be a matter of indifference that not all the bourgeois are behind them; but they must have this certainty—that the Party forms a buttress as solid as granite to support their power.
Night of 1st December 1941
German women married to Jews — “Decent” Jews — The Jews and the Fourth Commandment—The preservation of the race.
Walter Hewel questioned whether it was right to reproach a woman for not having taken the decision, after 1933, to obtain a divorce from a Jewish husband. He questioned, incidentally, whether the desire to obtain a divorce in such circumstances did not rather betoken a conformism that, from a humane point of view, was not very creditable.
G.D. interposed that the fact that a German woman had been capable of marrying a Jew was the proof of a lack of racial instinct on her part, and that one could infer from this fact that she had ceased to form a part of the community. The Fuehrer interrupted: Don’t say that. Ten years ago, our intellectual class hadn’t the least idea of what a Jew is.
Obviously, our racial laws demand great strictness on the part of the individual. But to judge of their value, one mustn’t let oneself be guided by particular cases. It is necessary to bear in mind that in acting as I do I am avoiding innumerable conflicts for the future.
I’m convinced that there are Jews in Germany who’ve behaved correctly—in the sense that they’ve invariably refrained from doing injury to the German idea. It’s difficult to estimate how many of them there are, but what I also know is that none of them has entered into conflict with his co-racialists in order to defend the German idea against them. I remember a Jewess who wrote against Eisner in the Bayrischer Kurier. But it wasn’t in the interests of Germany that she became Eisner’s adversary, but for reasons of opportunism. She drew attention to the fact that, if people persevered in Eisner’s path, it might call down reprisals on the Jews. It’s the same tune as in the Fourth Commandment. As soon as the Jews lay down an ethical principle, it’s with the object of some personal gain!
Probably many Jews are not aware of the destructive power they represent. Now, he who destroys life is himself risking death. That’s the secret of what is happening to the Jews. Whose fault is it when a cat devours a mouse? The fault of the mouse, who has never done any harm to a cat?
This destructive rôle of the Jew has in a way a providential explanation. If nature wanted the Jew to be the ferment that causes peoples to decay, thus providing these peoples with an opportunity for a healthy reaction, in that case people like St. Paul and Trotsky are, from our point of view, the most valuable.
By the fact of their presence, they provoke the defensive reaction of the attacked organism. Dietrich Eckart once told me that in all his life he had known just one good Jew: Otto Weininger, who killed himself on the day when he realised that the Jew lives upon the decay of peoples.
It is remarkable that the half-caste Jew, to the second or third generation, has a tendency to start flirting again with pure Jews. But from the seventh generation onwards, it seems the purity of the Aryan blood is restored. In the long run nature eliminates the noxious elements.
Miguel Hidalgo y Costilla (1753-1811), the father of the independence of Mexico, was ethnically Jewish.
All 19th century paintings of Hidalgo are fake—all of them! All were based on an original portrait of a Belgian priest who posed for the painter because nobody had taken the trouble to draw a portrait of the real, historical Hidalgo while he was alive. When his memory was elevated to the status of father of the independence of a new nation, the man was long dead. The new nation badly needed a noble face to honor and they resorted to fake portraits.
Original spoken reports describe Hidalgo not like the Aryan of noblest features that appears in the portraits, but with a hooked nose. The overwhelming majority of Mexicans ignore that the Catholic priest Hidalgo was the son of Jewish conversos!
Here in Mexico City this day is a sacred holiday celebrating the Day of Independence from Spain. The streets are empty. The very few remaining criollos and the massive mestizos are in their homes.
Hidalgo’s war cry was “¡Mueran los gachupines!” (“Death to the Spaniards!”). It is so sad that these few criollos ignore, or don’t care the least bit, that the kike Hidalgo killed many civilian Iberian whites. Instead, they still regard him as a “hero.”
14th December 1941, evening
Pan-Germanic supporters and the Austrian Christian Socialists—Schönerer and Lueger—Anti-Semitism in Vienna.
Lueger, who had belonged to the Pan-Germanist movement, went over to the Christian-Social party, for he thought that anti-Semitism was the only means of saving the State. Now, in Vienna, anti-Semitism could never have any foundation but a religious one. From the point of view of race, about 50 per cent of the population of Vienna was not German. The number of Jews, amongst a million eight hundred thousand inhabitants, was close on three hundred thousand. But the Czechs of Vienna were anti-Semitic. Lueger succeeded in filling thirty-six of the hundred and forty-eight seats of the Vienna Municipal Council with anti-Semites.
When I arrived in Vienna, I was a fanatical opponent of Lueger. As a Pan-German, and as a supporter of Schönerer, I was accordingly an enemy of the Christian-Socials. Yet in the course of my stay in Vienna I couldn’t help acquiring a feeling of great respect for Lueger personally. It was at the City Hall that I first heard him speak. I had to wage a battle with myself on that occasion, for I was filled with the resolve to detest Lueger, and I couldn’t refrain from admiring him. He was an extraordinary orator.