Hitler’s religion based on hylozoics

Main Page Updated on 4/19/19

[Consider adding filters for YouTube videos using an element/ad blocker, it should help speed up the loading times. It’s probably a good idea to save a html copy of this page in the event the site gets taken down.]


[DisclaimerThe Present Immigration CrisisRecruitment MethodTable of ContentsAssessing reliability of Table Talks (via Martin Bormann)Assessing reliability of Otto Wagener’s memoirsAssessing Hermann Rauschning]

Pinned sections:
Rienzi [updated on 4/16/19; magnetism, Churchill’s testimony on Rudolf Hess’ closeness, Genius (dubious types), Mustafa Kemal Ataturk (addressing claims from FDR and Jordan Peterson), Comparison with Julian, Blavatsky, etc. (Hitler and drugs), Musical Affinity, Senses over Reason/Knowledge, Odic force, Hess’ testimony for Hitler’s walking habits and sense of humor, Verdi’s Aïda]
Sparta (updated on 4/3/19; Rousseau, Not Fascism: Franco)
Hitler’s formulations on the λόγος, meaning of life, and the “will of god” (updated on 4/19/19)
Reforming the Christian religion (updated on 3/25/19; Elihu-Eugene K. Bird comparison under Dispelling the pacifist portrayal of Jesus, Christ not a Jew)
Proof of German cultural creative ability (updated on 3/7/19)
Fate (updated on 4/5/19)
The Racial Aspect (updated on 1/24/19)

Newly added sections: Assessing Hermann Rauschning [WIP], Assessing Albert Speer [WIP], Assessing Bormann-Diktate,
Hitler’s affinity with animals
,
Buddhism, Churchill and Pilate, Qualifications for leadership, Not an Occultist (Debunking the ✡Erik Jan Hanussen myth, Calling Otto Strasser’s reliability into question, Myths involving Haushofer and Hess), Assessing the Oera Linda Book [WIP]

Updates/Updated sections: Lord of the Worlds, Testimony from philosemites, sourced Bormann Letter quotations, Hylozoics (Pythagoras), Monism (Ernst Haeckel), Assessing Franklin D. Roosevelt (Four Freedoms), Mutual respect between Stalin and Hitler, Not a satanist (De Gaulle), Greece, Morgenthau Plan (Cordell Hull), Alfred Rosenberg’s Errors, Examining Laurency’s condemnations of Hitler’s inner circle (✡Erhard Milch’s qualifications and possible defeatism), Hammarskjöld, Healthy mind in a healthy body, Justifications for Anti-Semitism (indictment of Jewess ✡Taylor Caldwell, Hitler helping blacks find jobs)

To be added:
-Cordell Hull’s testimony, Harry Hopkins’ testimony
-Oera Linda Book study


Henry T. Laurency (kl2_1):
1Hylozoics is the world view formulated by Pythagoras.
2Esoterics is any world view and life view based exclusively on facts received from the planetary hierarchy.

[I have good reason to proceed with the claim that Hitler’s ideology was not merely another subset of esoterics, but a direct continuation of the Pythagorean tradition, in accordance with the Copernican revolution, Adam Weishaupt’s movement, etc.]

Laurency (L3e17):
All truly great guides in mankind were either members or disciples of the planetary hierarchy, and the truths they proclaimed were always obvious to those possessed of common sense.

Hitler, Table Talk (Jochmann), October 21-22, 1941:
If I were to assess my work, I must first emphasize: that I succeeded in helping the idea of race as the basis of life triumph against a world of ignorance, and secondly: that I made culture the mainstay of German greatness.

Warning!

Laurency (L3e5):
2And there is a phenomenon akin to religious obsession that has landed many people in mental hospitals. Quite apart from the fact that none too few people have made themselves important because of a theoretical learning they have received for nothing and therefore think they are “on the path”, this almost ineradicable conceit that always confuses learning with wisdom. Much learning does not in the least indicate a higher stage of development.

Mein Kampf:
Otherwise, only a confused jumble of chaotic notions will result from all reading, and this jumble is not merely useless, but it also tends to make the unfortunate possessor of it conceited, for he seriously considers himself a well-educated person and thinks that he understands something of life. He believes that he has acquired knowledge, whereas the truth is that every increase in such ‘knowledge’ draws him more and more away from real life, until he finally ends up in some sanatorium or takes to politics and becomes a member of parliament.

[How was it that Hitler was able to enunciate this concept?]


Disclaimer

Everything on this site can be considered WIP. Not everything on this site should be taken as esoteric. This is mainly a massive quotes compilation and probably will remain that way to encourage inquiry. I conceived this blog in December 2017 in order to bring about a reconciliation between Hitler’s beliefs and Pythagorean notions. At the time of this writing, I’ve spent 1 year working on this project. By linking up Hitler with the highest truths, I realize I am taking a tremendous risk. But if the gamble pays off, the results will be unprecedented, a major game changer, for the first time in a millennia.

I am neither a nationalist (one-sided nationalism has proven harmful in numerous cases plus I’ve been rendered rootless due to losing my sense of identity and the lack of contact with people. I’m simply incapable of identifying with anything thanks to the thorough devastation Judaism has wrought upon me! Why would I go so far to rehabilitate one man?) nor a revisionist (a revisionist starts off from the erroneous standpoint that history is still viable, valid, sacred, etc. it’s just that the ruling powers that got it all wrong and they’ve made a mockery of it) nor a National Socialist (an adherent of Hitler’s decrepit movement who merely views it as an expression of race or immediate resolution of political problems, as a preserver of tradition, or as a means of opportunism. Suffice it to say, it was a way of life that is not suited for everyone).

As such, I am strictly a Hitlerist. Only in Hitler can I live, can I conceive of a rational meaning and purpose in this world. The only thing I seek is to bring the genuine Hitler back to Germany, even if it meant becoming his nemesis in the long run.

A key thing to keep in mind: the most rational form of anti-Semitism is always gigantic and ideological (think Wagner), not opportunistic and petty (Strindberg). Objective and detached, not sentimental and biased.

Most historians, regardless of their disposition, can be considered the modern equivalent of priests. What I’ve done is taken the primary/secondary sources and extracted them out of the typical narrative framework, chiefly to get to the point and secondly, to demonstrate that one does not need to be a certified professional/academic with peer-reviewed work or a scholarship to arrive at a correct assessment of Hitler.

Laurency (ps3):
17The creditable, although on the whole unsuccessful, attempts made by Carlyle and Emerson to rehabilitate their heroes show the disadvantage of using historical personages, who have already been besmirched by the biographies of moralists.

Normally, this would be a futile endeavor, if Hitler was just another Stalin, Mussolini, or Nero. But Hitler is indisputably the linchpin of history (a collection of myths and legends, a gigantic fiction construct) and the measure of all evil. That’s what makes him and him alone suitable for this task. He is the perfect weapon in this respect. Break history and it ushers in the rehabilitation of all wrongly victimized and misunderstood great men, as well as a critical re-examination of history, a large-scale historical inquiry.
If there was a declaration of war I would identify with my site, it would be: the great men’s revenge is at hand! (not against the people, but against the puppeteers who won over the masses.)

Hylozoism, interpreted in a modern sense, is taken to mean that plants, animals, and inanimate matter share the same kind of consciousness with human beings. This is just as distorted as modern pantheism. (Regrettably, my site address was poorly conceived at the time of it’s conception, but changing it now would render all existing urls obsolete.) Instead, I subscribe to the view that everything comes from one material, as well as the view that there is no difference between matter and “spirit”, what is deemed “immaterial” is still matter. I draw a distinction between the oft-touted supernatural conception and the superphysical phenomenon/reality.

Laurency (kl2_3):
In newspapers you may still meet with such expressions as the “supernatural”. Is it impossible for people to grasp that there cannot exist anything supernatural [above/beyond natural laws] but that there exists an unknown, unexplored reality?

Hitler, Mein Kampf:
The real truth is that, not only has man failed to overcome Nature in any sphere whatsoever but that at best he has merely succeeded in getting hold of and lifting a tiny corner of the enormous veil which she has spread over her eternal mysteries and secret.

My goal is to penetrate deeply into Hitler’s mind, further than anyone else in the world has gone. I wish to do full justice to his views. Whether they were right or wrong is irrelevant. My thorough study and research points me to the conclusion that Hitler was absolutely consistent and unchanging in all of his beliefs, only reluctantly changing his views when it became necessary. It wasn’t all propaganda (which is really just an euphemism for lying) designed for German audiences. He believed it himself. Hitler is not the man most people think he was. That includes his modern admirers and devotees. His beliefs shaped his decisions and actions, they are precisely what enabled to him sustain the war. They are what made him virtually unassailable. And I’m firmly convinced he can be resurrected through his beliefs.

Laurency (ps3):
17If you have a dramatic turn you can work out an ideal type, to whom you attribute the qualities you wish to acquire. This ideal character is put into all conceivable situations, so that the hero is given opportunities of displaying his abilities, in which you allow yourself to be filled with admiration, devotion, worship. There will be authors to give mankind masterpieces of these kinds, which will be counted among the true devotional books.

Most people view Hitler’s worldview as a purely racial doctrine. These people are mistaken. Certainly race played a vital role in his worldview, I’m not trying to downplay it’s significance. But to stop at the race aspect of National Socialism is to ignore what Hitler was attempting to do with the German people. He was clearly trying to wean them off of Christianity and their dependency on reassurances based in humanitarian notions to confer onto them a new worthy faith.

I conceived this site chiefly to function as a school for future leaders, calculated to enable a rapid assimilation of fundamental yet still comprehensible facts in a short period and activate the German’s “Coming Man”/Messiah and similar individuals for their tasks. What I want to do is re-supply National Socialism with a resuscitated esoteric (made comprehensible) component which I feel has largely fallen into neglect with the untimely demise of it’s leader. This system I propose is not mysticism (emotionalism, or beliefs absolutized by emotion, an emotionally driven outlook of life) and does not represent such a subversion.

At present, there are a handful of contemporary or post-WW2 “esoteric” interpretations of National Socialism, such as Savitri Devi (Hinduism), Miguel Serrano (quasi-gnosticism), David Myatt (Numinous Way), Julius Evola (who conflicted with Himmler and the SS), Matt Koehl (New Order), various pagan & christian sects. Carl Jung and the paintings from the degenerate artist Franz Stuck are often brought up. What does any of this have to do with emancipating Germany or systematically delivering stewardship of Europe’s resources to the German people? Generally speaking, almost all of these systems are lacking a firm foundation.

Myatt even proposed that NS be adapted for the whole species! Blatantly disregarding Hitler’s insistence that NS was not an export article; say for instance, Hitler had said the Japanese had no need for a NS revolution if they avoided too much of the Western/American export. But at the very least, Myatt recognized that Hitler’s achievements were not grounded in emotionalism or in the “religious” sense (dead religion). If there’s one statement of his that I can concur with, it’d be his declaration that:

The only significant and important esoteric groups which now exist are those which, understanding the cosmic importance of Adolf Hitler. . . .

My intention is to ruthlessly sweep aside all this rubbish and confer onto Hitler’s genuine followers (who are but really a few, tiny minority among the mass of reactionaries, opportunists, subversives, pseudo-revolutionaries, desperate physicalists, and status quo seekers) a worthy foundation by tracing his religion to it’s roots. Most people would rather fit Hitler into their mold or on a distant pedestal than conform to his views. That’s the true test. As soon as something he adhered to disagrees with their preconceived notions and their sentimental regard for traditions, they disown him, declare that he was wrong or misguided, or turn against him.

The very first question every self-proclaimed National Socialist should be asking themselves: was Hitler mistaken about the German people? Did he overestimate their potential? If you have not asked this question even once then are you just a blind believer? Isn’t it dangerous to put your faith in someone you know virtually nothing about? If Hitler said something you didn’t agree with, are you going to drop him then and there or say that he was wrong about this or that? The point of this site is to separate the loyalists from the opportunists, reactionaries, and power-hungry individuals.

Rousseau:
Social Contract
As, before putting up a large building, the architect surveys and sounds the site to see if it will bear the weight, the wise legislator does not begin by laying down laws good in themselves, but by investigating the fitness of the people, for which they are destined, to receive them.

Hitler, Memoirs of a Confidant, p.g. 211:
Thank God the overwhelming mass of the German Volk has a finely attuned sense for who counts himself among the Volk and who distances himself from it.
Hitler, November 8, 1943 speech:
Thank God, the German Volk, as I have come to know it in its mass of different individuals, is strong and thoroughly healthy.

Luke 6:44 Each tree is recognized by its own fruit. People do not pick figs from thornbushes, or grapes from briers.

Savitri was undoubtedly the most devoted (I also make an exception for George Lincoln Rockwell, who was an agnostic and similarly genuine as seen in his correspondence with Savitri) but what is devotion but blinding? She mingled National Socialism with fatalistic expectations (i.e. Kali Yuga, Kalki, Eternal Return). See The Coming Man. Also, oriental conceptions are unsuitable for an Western audience. Unfortunately, she, despite being a Greek, allowed herself to be swayed by sentimentality and Hindu notions (which are presently distorted. Notably, Savitri made an appeal to Hindus in the aptly titled work A Warning to the Hindus). On the other hand, she correctly recognized that the organized religions were decaying if not already dead and had ceased to be viablefor consciousness development.

Due to my unfortunate Christian upbringing, I have had a heavy reliance on quotations. Naturally, I’ve memorized the basic gist of all of these ideas, through a process of selective reading. Gradually, I’ll attempt to provide more of my own formulations.
I was also not afforded the opportunity to learn the German language so my custom translations (derived from translation software, websites, and dictionaries) aren’t very good. The English translation by Cameron and Stevens are placeholder, to be eventually replaced with English translations of the original German version provided by Werner Jochmann and Heinrich Heim (and Henry Picker, when available).

Hitler’s Table Talks hasn’t been debunked, it’s only the English translation which has fallen under scrutiny lately. Mistranslations, interpolations, omitted context, mispellings, etc. abound in the aforementioned English translation, but that does not nullify it or the original’s value. Besides, the German version of the Table Talk is largely intact. My article on Martin Bormann [WIP] should demonstrate his reliability and importance to Hitler quite plainly. It is out of the question to think Bormann would go out of his way to deliberately distort Hitler’s representation. Of course, I owe much to Hermann Giesler’s insight into Bormann’s loyalty and trustworthiness. Giesler also seems to have been the only one in Hitler’s inner circle who knew who Hitler had wanted as his successor: Hans-Ulrich Rudel.

What would Hitler’s enemies gain by representing him as a humanist and an enthusiast of science, possessed of common sense? Because that is exactly how the Table Talks portray him.

It is hoped that someone who truly sees the bigger picture and meets the qualifications for system building will build upon my presentation. I’m hardly qualified for this task and I lack the prerequisite organizational talent, as I am not a German. Just an anomaly.

The Present Immigration Crisis

Laurency (L4e2):
This implicit belief that a level of culture once attained is a gain for mankind that is guaranteed for all time to come is one of countless proofs of how little mankind has learnt from history. The whole of culture can be swept away in just one generation.
Hitler, Table Talk (Cameron & Stevens), May 31, 1942:
The example of Wilhelm II shows how one bad monarch can destroy a dynasty. In the same way, those who wish to play their parts in history must understand that one single bad generation can cause the ruin of a whole people.

Hitler, May 26, 1944, Platterhof hotel talk:
Translated by Carlos W. Porter, hosted by Carolyn Yeager
There is no tolerance in nature. Nature, if I take tolerance as a human concept, is the most intolerant thing that exists. It destroys everything that is unfit for life.
Laurency (ps2):
2In contrast to Darwin, esoterics maintains that biological “struggle for existence” is certainly not a necessary factor of evolution, but what is unfit for life is rejected in accordance with nature’s order.

Hitler, Table Talk (Cameron & Stevens), December 28-29, 1941:
It’s a mistake to think that man should be guided by his greed. Nature spontaneously eliminates all that has no gift for life. Man, alone amongst the living creatures, tries to deny the laws of nature.

Hitler, Table Talk (Cameron & Stevens), January 25-26, 1942:
Wars pass by. The only things that exist are the works of human genius.

Apollonius of Tyana:
For things that violate nature can hardly come to be; and they anyhow quickly pass to destruction, even if they do come to existence.

Matthew 15:13 Every plant that my heavenly Father has not planted will be pulled up by the roots.

Laurency (L3e18):
10The cultural decay of our times demonstrates that our old culture is unfit to live. Primitive clans have been allowed to incarnate in the West to pull down what remains after the destruction wrought by the great war (1914–1945).

[What has Western civilization produced? Intolerant democracies, exploitation of natural resources, deforestration, industrialization, social inequalities, slavery, racism, colonialism, capitalism, etc. Hitler distinguished between Western civilization and Western culture (the inheritance of the works produced by great men).]

Hitler, Table Talk (Cameron & Stevens), January 25-26, 1942:

Wars pass by. The only things that exist are the works of human genius.

Laurency (L3e18):
11Such incarnating clans as are on the lower levels of the stage of civilization are in no position to estimate the values of our traditional culture. They perform a necessary purging work without which the new values could not assert themselves.
Laurency (L4e2):
3During the growth period of a culture, the portion of barbarian clans decreases and the portion of civilizational clans increases. Maturity is attained when clans of people at the stages of culture and humanity incarnate. It should be added that historians do not know yet that such cultures have existed.
Laurency (L3e18):
12The new clans by no means have an easy task, since they become the targets of spiteful attacks from those representing the old forms and also from the barbarians who want to run riot.
Laurency (kl1_5):
Their lot is not an easy one. They are looked on as dreamers and utopists. Often they act destructively, since they realize the necessity of liberating mankind from its fictional systems.
Mein Kampf:
As so often happens in the course of history, the main difficulty is not to establish a new order of things, but to clear the ground for its establishment.
Prejudices and egotistic interests join together in forming a common front against the new idea and in trying by every means to prevent its triumph, because it is disagreeable to them or threatens their existence.
That is why the protagonist of the new idea is, unfortunately, in spite of his desire for constructive work, compelled to wage a destructive battle first, in order to abolish the existing state of affairs.

[How was it that Hitler was able to enunciate this concept?]


Table of Contents:

1. ★Sparta
2. ★The Racial Aspect [WIP]
Highlights: Climate, Accounts of Arabic dignity and hospitality, Concerning Marriages, Untermensch (atheism and moralism), Mediterranean racial nuclei
3. Rienzi
Highlights: Odic force, Mustafa Kemal Ataturk, Comparison with Julian, Blavatsky, etc., Hitler’s Mission, Hitler comments on ✡Einstein’s theories, Genius, Hitler’s sense of humor
4a. Monism (Ernst Haeckel)
Highlights: affinity with the Copernicans, Darwin’s merits and mistakes, Refuting Kant
4b. Hylozoics (Pythagoras)
Highlights: Alfred Rosenberg’s Errors
4c. Hylozoics (Pre-Socratic)
Highlights: Anthony M. Ludovici, Giordano Bruno
4d. Monism (Hanns Hörbiger)
Highlights: Kepler, Nostradamus, Hitler’s magnet comparisons, Atlantis, German Christian prophecies, Assessing the Oera Linda Book, Space (Wernher von Braun, Against the space war)
5. Hitler’s Maxims
Highlights: God helps those who help themselves ( , Haeckel), Lord of the Worlds
Healthy mind in a healthy body (Thales of Miletus, Juvenal), ★Hitler formulates on Fate
The gods love those who demand the impossible ( , Moltke)
Struggle is the father of all things (Herakleitos, Clausewitz)
The gods first strike with blindness (Sophocles, later attributed to Euripides)
Xenophanes
Nietzsche, Nietzsche and Hitler as Perspective Thinkers
Schopenhauer
Frederick the Great
The masses are but a part of Nature herself
6. Eckart & ✡Weininger
7. Justifications for Anti-Semitism
Highlights: Antiochus Epiphanes, ★Augoeides
8. Reincarnation
Highlights: Himmler’s speech, ★Know thyself
9. The Jew
Highlights: Strindberg, Protocols of Zion, The Jew is the ferment of decomposition (Mommsen)
10. Julian’s philosophy
Highlights: ★Hitler’s formulations on the λόγος, meaning of life, and the “will of god”, Goethe, Platon
Testimony from philosemites
11. Rousseau
Highlights: Systems of government, National culture, winning over Communists & the masses & the intelligentsia & Protestants, ★Bismarck’s view on democracy (reply to Leadbeater and occultists), Liberty, India, Russia, Mutual respect between Stalin and Hitler
Differences between Hitler/Trump
12. Change
Highlights: Herakleitos, ★Proof of German cultural creative ability, Hitler and Goethe on Art, climate’s effect on a people’s development (comparing Indians and ancient Germans), Jews as the great masters of the lie (Schopenhauer), risks of German mysticism and philosophy
13. Bolshevism compared with Christianity
Highlights: M. H.’s assessment of the Russian Revolution

14. What Hitler wasn’t (Introduction)
[Statements on religion compared to American Founding Fathers and Weishaupt]
14a. Not a Christian
Highlights: Comparison with Martin Luther’s letter concerning missionaries, Seyss-Inquart, eugenics, abortion
14b. Not a Pagan
14c. Not a Pantheist
14d. Not a satanist [WIP]
Highlights: Assessing History
Assessing Franklin D. Roosevelt
Assessing Winston Churchill, Morgenthau Plan, Churchill and Pilate
Examining Laurency’s condemnations of Hitler’s inner circle
Hitler against world government
14e. Not an Occultist
Debunking the ✡Erik Jan Hanussen myth, Calling Otto Strasser’s reliability into question

15. Britain
Highlights: Hitler rejects Spengler’s predictions, industrialization is anti-cultural, English-German translation controversy
16. Greece
17. The Coming Man
Highlights: ★Reforming the Christian religion, Johannes Müller-Elmau, Christ not a Jew, Humanists on Virtue, Christ sent to liberate Galileans from the Jews, Hitler’s practical application of passages from the Bible (Matthew 5:29-30), Dispelling the pacifist portrayal of Jesus
18. Indictment of all-pervasive pro-American/Jewish or anti-German sentiment in the occult community
The Essene Jesus myth
Quasi-Rosicrucians and Jews
19. Examining Various Errors
20. Endgame

Epitaph


Recruitment Method

Hitler, Mein Kampf:
By unceasingly recruiting the ecclesiastical dignitaries from the lower classes of the people, the Church is enabled not only to maintain the contact of instinctive understanding with the masses of the population, but also to assure itself of always being able to draw upon that fund of energy which is present only among the lower classes.

Hitler, Table Talk (Cameron & Stevens), November 2, 1941:
The Catholic Church makes it a principle to recruit its clergy from all classes of society, without any discrimination. A simple cowherd can become a cardinal. That’s why the Church remains militant.

Goethe:
Italian Journey
I have made the acquaintance of many other good and sound people among the clergy. There are plenty of them about but, because of some priestly mistrust, they avoid each other.

✡Manly P. Hall:
And if a word is to be said for bringing in the clergy, it might be that the theologian planner who will be truly useful will be one who acquires at least some knowledge of the science of biology.

Laurency ():
1Only mentalists are able to comprehend (let alone understand) the esoteric knowledge system. What has harmed the Theosophical Society is its proselytizing and its admitting emotionalists instead of only mentalists with a philosophical and scientific training.

[“Mentalist” being the recommended term to substitute “occultist”. Here’s a quote to illustrate this transition.]

Esoteric Buddhism by A. P. Sinnett, p.g. 125-126:
Spirituality, in the [mental] sense, has little or nothing to do with feeling devout; it has to with the capacity of the mind for assimilating knowledge at the fountain-head of knowledge itself—of absolute knowledge—instead of by the circuitous and laborious process of ratiocination.

[]

David Irving:
Hitler’s War
‘He doesn’t care a straw for the intelligentsia,’ Walther Hewel, his Landsberg prison companion, had written on December 14, 1924. ‘They always raise a thousand objections to every decision. The intellectuals he needs will come to him of their own accord, and they will become his leaders.’

Hitler, Memoirs of a Confidant, p.g. 188:
There is no one we can depend on except the middle class, the workers, and the farmers. Granted, they constitute the mass of the Volk. But we can carry out our plan only with the support of the intelligentsia. And they are the others. That is the dilemma we face. If we proceed with the masses against the intelligentsia, then, whether we wish it or not, our program will degenerate into Bolshevik forms. But if we try our luck with the intelligentsia, the idea will be boycotted and sabotaged.

Hitler, Table Talk (Cameron & Stevens), November 2, 1941:
If one neglected to appeal to the masses, one’s choice would be rather too much confined to intellectuals. We would lack brute strength. Brute strength consists of the peasant and worker, for the insecurity of their daily life keeps them close to the state of nature. Give them brains into the bargain, and you turn them into incomparable men of action. Above all, we must not allow our élite to become an exclusive society.

[Hence why I am bringing down these lofty concepts, only insofar as it is relevant to the struggle, to the masses. From my experience, the mentalists (the recommended term to supplant “occultists”) can’t be relied upon. Fossilized intellectuals shut off from the people. Truly giant heads on small bodies! There is a risk in casting pearls, of course, a risk of this project degenerating into a mass-movement. But that’s why I have no central organization to offer here. Also, the two quotes below are for advanced readers.]

Lars Adelskogh (Fke 9.6):
1But then he must not forget that everything also has a force or energy aspect. It is not enough to develop higher kinds of consciousness, to perceive and understand more and more. It is precisely equally important to develop higher kinds of will and ability, higher kinds of skill in action. For only then you will be able to realize what you have understood. Realization is in the motion or power aspect.

Hitler, Table Talk, January 27, 1942 (Jochmann):
The people have now one-sidedly grown/further-bred themselves towards intellectualism, forgetting what the energy [Tatkraft] means for the nation’s life. To maintain a social order, it is important to have not only a head, but also a fist, otherwise one day the power, divorced from the mind, will smash your head. The process of mind versus power is always decided in favor of power.
Das Volk hat nun einseitig nach dem Intellektualismus sich weitergezüchtet, und es hat dabei vergessen, was für das Leben der Nation die Tatkraft bedeutet.
Zur Erhaltung einer Gesellschaftsordnung ist wichtig, daß man nicht nur einen Kopf, sondern auch eine Faust hat, sonst kommt eines Tages die vom Geist getrennte Kraft und zerschlägt den Kopf. Immer wird der Prozeß Geist gegen Kraft zugunsten der Kraft entschieden.
Die Gesellschaftsschicht, die nur Kopf ist, sieht sich durch eine Art schlechtes Gewissen belastet. Wenn wirklich Revolutionen kommen, wagt sie nicht hervorzutreten, sie setzt auf den Geldsack und ist feige. Ich habe das reine Gewissen gehabt.

[The masses are but a part of Nature herself.]


Among Hitler’s justifications for his actions was his private philosophy of nature.
Both in public speeches and private conversation he would repeatedly refer to this philosophy, his purpose being to convince his listeners that this philosophy represented the final truth about life.
He took such principles as the struggle for existence, the survival of the fittest and strongest, for the law of nature, and considered them a “higher imperative” which should also rule in the community life of men.

— Otto Dietrich

Like so many ‘world improvers’ before and after him, Hitler, too, was convinced that he had discovered and grasped what historians and philosophers had sought for millennia – the ‘eternal course of history’. Since early on he came to see himself as a political genius, as someone who had lifted the veil of history and discovered the final truth, the draft for a ‘monumental history of mankind’ he wrote at the start of the political career is of extraordinary history.

— Werner Maser

Peace can only come by a natural order. The order presupposes that the nations intertwine [in einander], so that the more Befähigteren [capable, gifted, suitable, competent, fit] will lead. The subordinate thereby receives more than he can achieve from his own. This order is destroyed by Jewry. The beastliness, the wretchedness, the stupidity helps it to victory.

— Hitler, Table Talk (Jochmann), February 17, 1942


1. Sparta

Hitler, Table Talk (Cameron & Stevens), November 5, 1941:
In the times when the population was too numerous, people emigrated. It wasn’t necessarily whole tribes that took their departure. In Sparta six thousand Greeks ruled three hundred and forty-five thousand helots. They came as conquerors, and they took everything.

Hitler, May 26, 1944, Platterhof hotel talk:
Translated by Carlos W. Porter, hosted by Carolyn Yeager
. . . [also] Mediterranean racial nuclei, with a still-European base race in it all, a pre-historical [prehistoric] race which we are no longer able to identify specifically, but which is there, it was already there among the Greeks; the Helots of the Spartans consisted of them.

Hitler, Table Talk (Cameron & Stevens), August 10-11, 1941:
Europe is not a geographic entity, it’s a racial entity. We understand now why the Chinese shut themselves up behind a wall to protect themselves against the eternal attacks of the Mongols. One could sometimes wish that a huge wall might protect the new territories of the East against the masses of Central Asia; but that’s contrary to the teachings of history. The fact is that a too great feeling of security provokes, in the long run, a relaxation of forces. I think the best wall will always be a wall of human breasts!

Plutarch:
Moralia
When someone else wished to know why Sparta was without walls, [Agesilaus the Great] pointed to the citizens in full armour and said, “These are the Spartans’ walls.”
[Agesilaus] used to say that the young men were the walls of Sparta, and the points of their spears its boundaries.

Zweites Buch:
The rule of six thousand Spartans over three hundred and fifty thousand Helots was only thinkable in consequence of the high racial value of the Spartans. But this was the result of a systematic race preservation; thus Sparta must be regarded as the first [völkisch] State.
Zweites Buch (German translation):
Die Herrschaft der 6000 Spartaner über 3 1/2 Hundertausend Heloten war nur denkbar infolge des rassischen Hochwertes der Spartaner. Dieser aber war das Ergebnis einer planmäßigen Rasseerhaltung, so daß wir im spartanischen Staat den ersten völkischen zu sehen haben.

[The English translation rendered völkisch as Folkish, but that’s unsuitable, reasons for which are explained in Mein Kampf: A Translation Controversy, by Michael Ford, on p.g. 35, under the title “German Race References Explained”.]

Hitler, Memoirs of a Confidant, p.g. 40:
In antiquity, the Spartan constitution was the only one that required and enforced a healthy selection.
Die spartanische Verfassung war in der Antike die einzige, die eine gesunde Auslese gefördert und erzwungen hat.

Hitler, Table Talk (Cameron & Stevens), January 27, 1942:
If one systematically encourages the selection of the fittest, the time will come when talents will again be, in a sort of way, the privilege of an élite. I got this impression especially strongly on the occasion of the launching of the Tirpitz. The workers gathered for that ceremony gave an extraordinary impression of nobility.

Hitler, The Artist Within the Warlord, p.g. 180:
Translated by Wilhelm Kriessmann, Ph.D and Carolyn Yeager
We have to create a new aristocracy, a value and rank order based on character, courage and steadiness. One sentence of Nietzsche’s I identify with: What today can prove if one be of value or not?–that he is steadfast.

Hitler, Table Talk (Cameron & Stevens), November 2, 1941:
Above all, we must not allow our élite to become an exclusive society.

Nietzsche:
On the Genealogy of Morality, p.g. 18
The moral judgements of the warrior aristocracy are founded on a powerful bodily constitution, a flourishing health, without forgetting what is necessary to the maintenance of that overflowing vigour: war, adventure, hunting, dancing, games and physical exercises and, in general, everything implied by a robust, free and joyful activity.

Speer:
Inside the Third Reich
Hitler believed that the culture of the Greeks had reached the peak of perfection in every field. Their view of life, he said, as expressed in their architecture, had been “fresh and healthy.”

[See Hitler’s September 6, 1938 speech.]

Reinhold Hanisch:
He was a particular admirer of the structure of the Greek state, where scholars and philosophers exerted a strong influence, a thing we should have emulated. That had been the epoch of philosophy, but in our technical age philosophy was badly neglected. He asserted that it would be easier to combat misery if there were more philosophy.

Speer:
Inside the Third Reich
One day a photograph of a beautiful woman swimmer stirred him to enthusiastic reflections:
“What splendid bodies you can see today. It is only in our century that young people have once again approached Hellenistic ideals through sports. How the body was neglected in earlier centuries. In this respect our times differ from all previous cultural epochs since antiquity.”

Laurency (wm18.24):
3The known esoteric orders have always been imitated in the intention of fighting them and leading people astray. Nowadays, no such orders are needed since the knowledge of reality has been allowed to become exoteric. Any mystery-cult still going on is deception pure and simple.

Hitler, September 6, 1938 speech:
Therefore we do not have halls for cults, but halls for the Volk. Nor do we have places for worship, but places for assembly and squares for marches. We do not have cult sites, but sports arenas and play areas. And it is because of this that our assembly halls are not bathed in the mystical twilight of cult sites but rather are places of brightness and light of a beautiful and practical nature.

Mein Kampf:
What is known as the Gymnasium to-day is a positive insult to the Greek institution. Our system of education entirely loses sight of the fact that, in the long run, a healthy mind can exist only in a healthy body. This statement applies with few exceptions, particularly to the broad masses of the nation.

[See Healthy mind in a healthy body.]

Hitler, Memoirs of a Confidant, p.g. 142-143:
First of all, they require a healthy body! It is the precondition within which a healthy mind can develop. Greek culture, Greek philosophy would be unthinkable if special care of the body and even of its symmetry and beauty had not been at the heart of it. Degenerates have no high culture, they are not creatively elevated in their thoughts and in their actions.

Ernst Haeckel:
The Wonders of Life
The ancient Spartans owed a good deal of their famous bravery, their bodily strength and beauty, as well as their mental energy and capacity, to the old custom of doing away with new-born children who were born weakly or crippled. We find the same custom to-day among many savage races.

Laurency (L3e11):
2Mormons, for instance, are in great error when asserting that it is their duty to see to it that “souls” are given opportunities to incarnate. There are already too many in incarnation. It is not even desirable that so many incarnate, and if mankind cannot learn the art of birth control, then life must find other expedients to counteract this madness: by sterility, infant mortality, new children’s diseases, etc.

Hitler, Memoirs of a Confidant, p.g. 217:
Actually, in time the party should become a community of the best, the most dedicated, the ideologically pure. That was my aim. It was to be what the Masonic lodge is for British and American–let’s not mince words, for universal–democracy: an ‘order.’
But the way the political situation in Germany is shaping up, that can be hardly be done. Perhaps it will have to be a long-term goal.

Laurency (L4e4.14):
3For the prevention of misunderstandings it should be pointed out that religious orders or orders that are more of a social nature should not be confused with esoteric knowledge orders.
The adepts of the latter only make a promise of never divulging anything about their order or the secret knowledge they have been given, of never abusing knowledge or power, of never taking any interest in the “affairs of others” (thus curiosity of any kind is banned), of never harming anyone, but of helping where they can.
Obligation to obey is precluded. Everyone is responsible himself for everything. All work in the service of the order is voluntary, all tasks or duties are determined as voluntary, self-assumed, and on the individuals’ own initiatives.

Mein Kampf:
General education should be on cultural lines. It ought to be founded more on classical studies and should aim at providing only the groundwork for specialised instruction later on in the various practical sciences.

☭Otto Strasser:
Hitler and I, p.g. 214-215
Hitler explained that it would be the duty of Germany’s leaders in the years to come to organize the Reich on Spartan lines to prepare her for the hegemony of Europe.
Hitler: ‘The German people alone will be a people of warriors; the other nations will be helots, working for the Teuton warrior caste. Our sword will guarantee their peace, and will be the recompense for their labour.’

Hitler, Table Talk (Cameron & Stevens), February 17, 1942:
Peace can result only from a natural order. The condition of this order is that there is a hierarchy amongst nations. The most capable nations must necessarily take the lead. In this order, the subordinate nations get the greater profit, being protected by the more capable nations.

[The testimony of Germany’s internal enemy Otto Strasser in this respect is certainly above suspicion. Whereas most critics linked up Hitler’s movement with Fascism (which is a superficial compatibility at best), Strasser, as an early party member and ideologue and also an critical observer, was situated close enough to Hitler to identify the ideology. He explicitly called it “Spartan Germany.”]

Mein Kampf:
Aryan tribes, often almost ridiculously small in number, subjugated foreign peoples and, stimulated by the conditions of life which their new country offered them (fertility, the nature of the climate, etc.), and profiting also by the abundance of manual labour furnished them by the inferior race, they developed intellectual and organising faculties which had hitherto been dormant in themselves.
Mein Kampf:
If [the pre-Christian Germans] had come to the fairer climate of the South, with no previous culture whatsoever, and if they had acquired the necessary human material—that is to say, men of an inferior race—to serve them as tools in performing necessary labours, the cultural faculty dormant in them would have blossomed forth in splendour as happened in the case of the Greeks, for example.

Hitler, Table Talk (Cameron & Stevens), February 17, 1942:
It is Jewry that always destroys this order. It constantly provokes the revolt of the weak against the strong, of bestiality against intelligence, of quantity against quality.
Hitler, Table Talk (Cameron & Stevens), November 5, 1941:
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.

Nikola Tesla:
My Inventions
Peace can only come as a natural consequence of universal enlightenment and merging of races, and we are still far from this blissful realization, because few indeed, will admit the reality that God made man in His image in which case all earth men are alike. There is in fact but one race, of many colors.

Laurency (L5e21.24):
3Also different races and nationalities involving different racial instincts entail risks for the parties and their children, risks that are unnecessarily great. Mixture of races is always a mistake. It conflicts with the “natural order”.

Rousseau:
Social Contract
But although aristocracy doesn’t demand all the virtues needed by popular government, it demands others that are all its own; for instance, moderation on the part of the rich and contentment on the part of the poor. Note that I am not demanding the abolition of the rich/poor divide, because it seems that thorough-going equality would be out of place; they didn’t have it even at Sparta.

Laurency (kr5):
15There cannot be such a thing as a classless society. The simplest intellect should suffice to see that. Russia and Yugoslavia have even had to admit as much in practice.

Molotov:
Is it true that after XIXth Congress Stalin said we had built a military-industrial dictatorship instead of socialism? He said something else. In private conversation [Stalin] confessed that we no longer had a dictatorship of the proletariat. He didn’t state this firmly, but he said it. Only to me.

Laurency (kr5):
16Belonging to a class is the natural order of things, is determined by the individual’s qualities and abilities, his quality, capacity, and calibre, quite independently of his opportunities of upbringing and education.

[The Pythagorean has emphatically stressed throughout his works that “classes are the natural order of things”, especially in the Philosopher’s Stone series.]

Leadbeater:
The Hidden Side of Christian Festivals
Further, [Bismarck] said that if we ourselves served the true inner Government of the world we must know that it is the very opposite of all democratic theories, and that therefore it is Germany, and not England, who is fighting for the ideals of the hierarchical Government.

Mein Kampf:
Any new movement which is really beneficial to human progress will always have to begin its constructive work at the level at which the last stones of the structure have been laid. It need not blush to utilise those truths which have already been established, for all human culture, as well as man himself, is only the result of one long line of development, where each generation has contributed its share in the building of the whole structure.
The meaning and purpose of revolutions cannot be to tear down the whole building, but to take away what has not been well fitted into it or is unsuitable, and to fill in the gap thus caused, after which the main construction of the building will be carried on. Only thus will it be possible to talk of human progress, for otherwise the world would never be free of chaos, since each generation would feel entitled to reject the past, and to destroy all the work of the past, as the necessary preliminary to any new work of its own.

Rousseau:
Social Contract
Government had, in its infancy, no regular and constant form. The want of experience and philosophy prevented men from seeing any but present inconveniences, and they thought of providing against others only as they presented themselves. In spite of the endeavours of the wisest legislators, the political state remained imperfect, because it was little more than the work of chance; and, as it had begun ill, though time revealed its defects and suggested remedies, the original faults were never repaired. It was continually being patched up, when the first task should have been to get the site cleared and all the old materials removed, as was done by Lycurgus at Sparta, if a stable and lasting edifice was to be erected.

Luke 5:36-39 He told them this parable: “No one tears a piece out of a new garment to patch an old one. Otherwise, they will have torn the new garment, and the patch from the new will not match the old.
And no one pours new wine into old wineskins. Otherwise, the new wine will burst the skins; the wine will run out and the wineskins will be ruined. No, new wine must be poured into new wineskins.
And no one after drinking old wine wants the new, for they say, ‘The old is better.’”

Hitler and I (Otto Strasser’s memoirs), p.g. 214-215:
Hitler: ‘Nevertheless, the idea of one nation called upon to rule the others is rooted in the mind of every great men. Germany is called upon to succeed where others have failed.’

Ambassador William Dodd:
In the Garden of Beasts
In the back of [Hitler’s] mind is the old German idea of dominating Europe through warfare.

Laurency (L5e22):
3Every nation consider itself chosen, and they are all wrong. It is quite another matter that every nation has been assigned a task, a “historic mission” (which it generally fails to achieve).

Weishaupt:
Diogenes’ Lamp
Wherever principles, wherever character and uniformity can be discovered both in convictions and in deeds, there you will find a type of greatness simultaneously, for there is a concordance and planning; and whenever planning exists, wherever theory marches in step with execution, there you will also find an appearance of perfection and wisdom.
The result of this is that even where people have undeniable weaknesses, when they strive to achieve wealth, admiration, or power, they can still display a degree of reason and prior reflection offended by nothing but the lowliness of the thing for which they exert so much reason.
Moralists thus may have very good reasons for finding fault with people’s addiction to conquest, but they will not have grounds to deny the fact that even the people engaged in the activities they so hate remain capable of behaving in a manner that shows true greatness of mind and kindles admiration. In another world, in a different context, the art of war might appear harmful or unnecessary; but we will have to concede, for as long as the current order of things persists, that a great conqueror and military commander can be an extraordinary person.

Oera Linda:
Hail to all true Frisians
When they fully understood this, the most courageous among them began to clank their chains, which grieved the princes. The princes are proud and warlike; there is therefore some virtue in their hearts. They consulted together and bestowed some of their superfluity; but the cowardly hypocritical priests could not suffer this.

[Hence, the praise Hitler had for Stalin despite his criminality.]

Mein Kampf:
It is not the business of the men who wish to liberate our German nation from the conditions is in which it now exists to burden their brains with thinking how excellent it would be if this or that had never occurred. They must strive to find ways and means of abolishing what actually exists.
A philosophy of life which is inspired by a fanatical spirit of intolerance can only be set aside by a doctrine that is advanced in an equally ardent spirit and fought for with as determined a will and which is itself a new idea, pure and absolutely sincere.
Each one of us today may regret the fact that the advent of Christianity was the first occasion on which spiritual terror was introduced into the much freer ancient world, but the fact cannot be denied that ever since then, the world has been pervaded and dominated by this kind of coercion and that violence is broken only by violence and terrorism by terrorism.
Only then can a new regime be created by means of constructive work.

Hitler, May 26, 1944, Platterhof hotel talk:
Translated by Carlos W. Porter, hosted by Carolyn Yeager
I have recognised that one must also anchor this principle in the reconstruction of a strong German State; good and correct knowledge is not enough as the basis of the new education, but also the willingness to intolerantly destroy those who resist or will not accept it.

Hitler and I (Otto Strasser’s memoirs), p.g. 213-215:
☭Strasser: Unity was the only thing that could have saved Greece, and unity is the only thing that can save Europe. A good National-Socialist must be a European; he must contribute to European solidarity.
Hitler: There is no solidarity in Europe; there is only submission. Sparta failed because she lacked a tyrant, and because she was governed by a clique of incapable aristocrats.

[Rudolf Hess attempted to explain to Eugene K. Bird how a profound lack of censorship caused the Roman empire’s downfall: too much pleasure and too much degeneration. See Nero.]

Hitler, Table Talk (Cameron & Stevens), April 11, 1942:
Slacken the reins of authority, give more liberty to the individual, and you are driving the people along the road to decadence.
Hitler, Table Talk (Cameron & Stevens), August 29, 1942:
The social State as such can be maintained only by a rule of iron; take away the laws, and the fabric falls immediately to pieces.

Philostratus:
“What then,” said the emperor, “did you think of the reign of Nero?”
And Apollonius answered: “Nero perhaps understood how to tune a lyre, but he disgraced the empire both by letting the strings go too slack and by drawing them too tight.”

Hitler, May 3, 1940 speech:
Even the most expert and most worthy of peoples can fail in their struggle for survival if the discrepancy of their numbers is too great and too obvious in view of the tasks faced and especially, of the forces of the environment. Antiquity furnishes us with two great, tragic examples: Sparta and Hellas. They were both doomed to failure in the end because the world in which they lived was numerically so superior to them that even the most successful of struggles was bound to tax their forces beyond measure.

Hitler, May 4, 1923 speech:
You would think that a “statesman” who was a failure would disappear for ever. But in a parliamentary state he merely goes back to the end of the line and waits for another turn. And when he reaches the front of the line, he is back in power. Even the ancient republics with their rigid conception of the state were ruled by a dictator in times of national emergency. When the lives of nations are at risk, national and provincial parliaments are useless; only giants can save the nation.

Nikola Tesla:
My Inventions
No league or parliamentary act of any kind will ever prevent such a calamity. These are only new devices for putting the weak at the mercy of the strong.

Hermann Giesler, The Artist Within the Warlord, p.g. 49:
Translated by Wilhelm Kriessmann, Ph.D and Carolyn Yeager
“And did not a slight possibility of peace still exist, even though a vague one, which I might have obstructed by a pitiless defeat of the Dunkirk army?”
Hitler was deliberating on rational grounds as he was so often doing in the past years; he did not think only as a German – he thought as a European. He truly thought in a sense of a higher humanity, which he wanted to be realized within ethnically based unified societies (Volksgemeinschaften).

[According to Eugene K. Bird, Rudolf Hess was likewise certain that Hitler deliberately held back and was still holding out for a chance to negotiate peace with England.]

Hitler, March 21, 1943:
Speech in Lichthof of the Zeughaus for the Heroes’ Memorial Day
Instead, it will increasingly strive to realize, in the service of the national interest everywhere, a true Volksgemeinschaft as the highest ideal. All the more so after the war, the German National Socialist state, which pursued this goal from the beginning, will tirelessly work for the realization of a program that will ultimately lead to a complete elimination of class differences and to the creation of a true socialist community.

Jacob Burckhardt:
Force and Freedom: Reflections on History
The only unique and irreplaceable human being, however, is the man of exceptional intellectual or moral power whose activity is directed to a general aim, i.e. a whole nation, a whole civilization, humanity itself.
From this point, a further definition, though not an explanation, of greatness is given by the words-unique, irreplaceable.
It might be said here in parenthesis that there is something like greatness even among nations, and further, that there is a partial or momentary greatness in which an individual entirely forgets himself and his own existence for the sake of a general aim. Such a man at such a moment seems sublime.

[Hans Gunther classified Jacob Burckhardt as belonging to the Dinaric race.]

Laurency (L5e23):
5The black lodge has twelve chiefs. The assertion that they cannot co-operate is a serious error. They know as well as the planetary hierarchy that co-operation is a prerequisite of efficient results.

Matthew 12:25-26 Every kingdom divided against itself will be laid waste, and every city or household divided against itself will not stand. If Satan drives out Satan, he is divided against himself. How then can his kingdom stand?

Laurency (L5e23):
6Therefore, what reveals the difference between good and evil is not unity. Instead it is universality. The unity that benefits life is universal and does not exclude anybody.

[It’d be naive to take “does not exclude anybody” as absolute. Weishaupt recognized the subversion represented by Jews and certain pagan missionaries and forbade them from being recruited. Another example is furnished by the quasi-Rosicrucian infiltration of Freemasonry. Wöllner was responsible for securing the Peace of Westphalia (which Hitler considered “the foundation of the permanent weakness of modern Germany”) and for granting rights and state protection for Jewry.
There is almost no point allowing anti-nationalists to join without converting them first. And even here, they must belong to the community and be recognized by the healthiest elements of a people. The apostle Paul acknowledged this principle of exclusion (2 Cor. 6:14) – which was often drastically applied to the point of even refusing to eat with such people (1 Cor. 5:11) – as did the ancient Egyptians (Genesis 43:32), ancient Jews (John 4:9), the ancient Persians (their radical expulsion of lepers which even extended to animals), etc.]

Philostratus:
The Life of Apollonius
Thereupon Thespesion as if anxious to drop the subject, put some questions to Apollonius, about the scourging in Sparta, and asked if the Lacedaemonians were smitten with rods in public.
Thespesion: “And yet it seems to me that it would be more humane to sacrifice one or two of them than to enforce as they do a policy of exclusion against all foreigners.”
Apollonius: “Let us not assail, O Thespesion, the law-giver Lycurgus; but we must understand him, and then we shall see that his prohibition to strangers to settle in Sparta and live there was not inspired on his part by mere boorish exclusiveness, but by a desire to keep the institutions of Sparta in their original purity by preventing outsiders from mingling in her life.”

[Not exclusion for the sake of exclusion itself, but for preservation.]

Hitler, October 8, 1935 speech:
Hence we are once more appealing to the Germans. And we are not miserly regarding the outcome of this project. We do not exclude anyone! We are fighting with the Communists here, and we will beat them into the ground if necessary. But should they say, “I’m hungry”- fine, then let them have something to eat. We are not fighting them in order to kill them, but in order to preserve our Volk from madness. But if they come to their senses and return to their Volk, they shall be welcomed with open arms. We rejoice in every person who has found the way to his community. We are just as resolved to defend this community as we are generous in winning over members for this community.

Julian:
Letter 22, To Atarbius
I affirm by the gods that I do not wish the Galilaeans to be either put to death or unjustly beaten, or to suffer any other injury; but nevertheless I do assert absolutely that the god-fearing must be preferred to them. For through the folly of the Galilaeans almost everything has been overturned, whereas through the grace of the gods are we all preserved. Wherefore we ought to honour the gods and the god-fearing, both men and cities.

Not Fascism

http://orwell.ru/library/articles/As_I_Please/english/efasc

Hitler, November 22, 1937 speech:
Today a new [German] state is being established, the unique feature of which is that it sees its foundation not in Christianity and not in a concept of state; rather, it places its primary emphasis on the self-contained Volksgemeinschaft.

Laurency (L3e18):
3What “ideals” have characterized European politics? Mussolini was bent on reviving the ancient Roman Empire at the cost of helpless, small nations.

Hitler, Table Talk (Cameron & Stevens), July 5, 1941:
The Fascist movement is a spontaneous return to the traditions of ancient Rome.

Hermann Giesler, The Artist Within the Warlord, p.g. 31:
Translated by Wilhelm Kriessmann, Ph.D and Carolyn Yeager
At first, he [Hitler] thought that the decision [Mussolini’s] to attack Greece had its roots in the reminiscing of their Roman empire, but today he knows of the intentions of the sly Ciano.

Leni Riefenstahl:
On the subject of Mussolini and Italy, he accused himself on making the unforgivable mistake of esteeming Italy as highly as he did the Duce. ‘As an Italian, Mussolini is an exception. His qualities are far above average, while the Italians as a rule wage only wars that they lose. for their Alpine troops none of them can fight; they are just like the other Balkan nations, apart from the courageous Greeks.

Goebbels (Diaries), February 6, 1942:
One might almost say that fascism has reacted upon the creative life of the Italian people somewhat like sterilization. It is, after all, nothing like National Socialism. While the latter goes deep down to the roots, fascism is only a superficial thing.
That is regrettable, but one must recognize it clearly. National Socialism is really a way of life [eine Weltanschauung]. It always begins at the beginning and lays new foundations for life. That’s why our task is so difficult, but also so beautiful, and the goal ahead is well worth our best effort.

Goebbels (Diaries), December 13, 1942:
The Italians are extremely lax in the treatment of Jews. They protect the Italian Jews both in Tunis and in occupied France and won’t permit their being drafted for work or compelled to wear the Star of David. This shows once again that Fascism does not really dare to get down to fundamentals, but is very superficial regarding most important problems. The Jewish question is causing us a lot of trouble. Everywhere, even among our allies, the Jews have friends to help them, which is a proof that they are still playing an important role even in the Axis camp.

Rousseau:
Social Contract
Government had, in its infancy, no regular and constant form. The want of experience and philosophy prevented men from seeing any but present inconveniences, and they thought of providing against others only as they presented themselves. In spite of the endeavours of the wisest legislators, the political state remained imperfect, because it was little more than the work of chance; and, as it had begun ill, though time revealed its defects and suggested remedies, the original faults were never repaired. It was continually being patched up, when the first task should have been to get the site cleared and all the old materials removed, as was done by Lycurgus at Sparta, if a stable and lasting edifice was to be erected.

Hitler, Table Talk (Picker), July 7, 1942:
Auf General Jodls Einwurf, dass das englische Pfund dabei sicher auch eine Rolle spiele und England vielleicht auf diese Weise eine Zweite Front aufrichten wolle, wies der Chef darauf hin, dass man das derzeitige System in Spanish kleinesfalls mit dem nationalsozialistischen oder mit dem faschistichen gleichsezten dürfe.
On General Jodl’s objection that the British pound certainly plays a role in this, and that England might perhaps want to establish a second front in this way, the Boss pointed out that the current system in Spain should under no circumstances be treated as National Socialist or Fascist.
Hitler, Table Talk (Cameron & Stevens), July 7, 1942:
One must be careful not to put the Franco régime on the same level as National Socialism or Fascism.

[This should demonstrate sufficiently that the English translators were not entirely unfaithful to the original German table talks. This was an easy opportunity to tamper with Hitler’s statement and misrepresent NatSoc and Fascism as promoting reactionary conservatism.]

2. The Racial Aspect

Weishaupt:
The question has arisen: Why cannot all people form one nation, speak one language, live under one set of laws, and have one set of morals and one religion? When I think of the great variety in people’s ways of thinking, basic convictions and tastes, I cannot help but be amazed that seven or eight people can assemble under the same roof, lock themselves into the same ring of walls, and unite in a single family!

Hitler, Table Talk (Jochmann), October 21-22, 1941:

If I were to assess my work, I must first emphasize: that I succeeded in helping the idea of race as the basis of life triumph against a world of ignorance, and secondly: that I made culture the mainstay of German greatness.
Wenn ich mein Werk bewerten will, so muß ich herausstellen als erstes: daß es mir gelungen ist, dem Rasse-Gedanken als der Grundlage des Lebens gegen eine Welt von Unverstand zum Sieg verholfen zu haben, als zweites: daß ich die Kultur zur tragenden Kraft der deutschen Herrschaft mache.

Mein Kampf:
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 its 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 house-mouse with the house-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 obstacle makes procreative intercourse impossible between individuals of the same species.
Nature abhors such irregular 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.

Laurency (L5e21.24):
3Also different races and nationalities involving different racial instincts entail risks for the parties and their children, risks that are unnecessarily great. Mixture of races is always a mistake. It conflicts with the “natural order”.
Laurency (l5_21):
3Även olika ras- och nationstillhörighet med olika rasinstinkter medför onödigt stor risk för egen del och barnens. Rasblandning är alltid ett misstag. Det strider mot “naturens ordning”.

Memoirs of a Confidant, p.g. 143:
But if one takes racial mixtures, no matter of what kind, one can never know what racial traits will predominate at times when it counts, and especially when decisions have to be made. The work of a mongrel will always give evidence of both the races whose blood he bears. If you confer a responsible and prominent position on him, you will find that the unconscious struggle his discordant blood wages within him will be expressed in all his endeavors, in his judgments and in his decisions.

Nietzsche:
On the Genealogy of Morality, Translated by Carol Diethe
Man, in an age of disintegration in which the races are mixed, who has in his body the legacy of diverse origins, which is to say contradictory and often not even only contradictory drives and standards of valuation, which fight each other and seldom give each other peace, – such a man of late cultures and refracted lights will, on average, be a weaker man: his most fundamental desire is that the war, which he is, should finally have an end; happiness appears to him, in accordance with a tranquillizing medicine and way of thought (for example, the Epicurean or the Christian), principally to be the happiness of rest, of being undisturbed, of repleteness, of being finally at one, as the ‘Sabbath of Sabbaths’, to speak with the holy rhetorician Augustine, who was himself such a man.

Hitler, Table Talk (Cameron & Stevens), November 11, 1941:
Such examples should open the eyes of all reasonable people and be a warning of the menace that half-castes can be. A complete assimilation of foreign blood is not possible, and the characteristics of the foreign race inevitably continue to reappear.

Hitler’s Letters and Notes, p.g 284:
The Germanic Revolution
Miscegenation with inferior types means lowering the level of the whole [last word illegible]

Mein Kampf:
In short, the results of miscegenation are always the following:
(a) The level of the superior race becomes lowered;
(b) physical and mental degeneration sets in, thus leading slowly but steadily towards a progressive drying up of the vital sap.

Plato, Critias (✝Benjamin Jowett):
By such reflections and by the continuance in them of a divine nature, the qualities which we have described grew and increased among them; but when the divine portion began to fade away, and became diluted too often and too much with the mortal admixture, and the human nature got the upper hand, they then, being unable to bear their fortune, behaved unseemly, and to him who had an eye to see grew visibly debased, for they were losing the fairest of their precious gifts; but to those who had no eye to see the true happiness, they appeared glorious and blessed at the very time when they were full of avarice and unrighteous power.

[A comparison with Thomas Taylor’s translation of Critias will reveal that the two translations are quite different. Why did the Christian theologian Jowett translate it the way he did?]

Hitler, Mein Kampf:
The Aryan neglected to maintain his own racial stock unmixed and therewith lost the right to live in the paradise which he himself had created. He became submerged in the racial mixture and gradually lost his cultural creativeness, until he finally grew, not only mentally but also physically, more like the aborigines whom he had subjected rather than his own ancestors.

✡Benjamin Disraeli:
What would be the consequence on the great Anglo-Saxon republic, for example, were its citizens to secede from their sound principle of reserve, and mingle with their negro and coloured populations? In the course of time they would become so deteriorated that their states would probably be reconquered and regained by the aborigines whom they have expelled and who would then be their superiors.

Hitler’s Letters and Notes, p.g 283:
The Germanic Revolution

confused and muddled – (Lord Disraeli) Basic Race Law –

Hitler, April 26, 1942 speech:
When understanding and reason have apparently been silenced in international life, then this does not necessarily mean that there is not a rational will somewhere, even if from the outside only stupidity and stubbornness can be discerned as causes. The British Jew, Lord Disraeli, once said that the racial question is the key to world history. We National Socialists have been raised in this belief. By devoting ourselves to the essence of the racial question, we have obtained clarification of many events that would otherwise appear to defy understanding.

SS-Hauptamt, Rassenpolitik:
Yet the Jews are one of the most racially conscious peoples. The laws of the Old Testament and the Talmud strongly prohibit marriage with Gentiles. Leading Jews have always stressed the importance of race and racial purity. Even the Soviet Union, otherwise opposed to race, had passed measures to protect Jewish blood. The most familiar statement comes from the Jew Benjamin Disraeli (originally d’Israeli, later Lord Beaconsfeld), the longtime British prime minister:

No man will treat with indifference the principle of race. It is the key of history, and why history is often so confused is that it has been written by men who were ignorant of this principle and all the knowledge it involves. As one who may become a statesman and assist in governing mankind, it is necessary that you should not be insensible to it; whether you encounter its influence in communities or in individuals, its qualities must ever be taken into account.” (Endymion)

H. S. Chamberlain:
Race and purity of blood are what constitute a type, and nowhere has this type been more carefully preserved than among the Jews. I remember once calling upon a distinguished Jewish gentleman. Mr. D’Israeli, as he was then, had just left him. “What did you talk about?” I asked at haphazard. “Oh,” said my host, “the usual thing — the Race.”

Plato:
Republic
Citizens, we shall say to them in our tale, you are brothers, yet God has framed you differently.
Some of you have the power of command, and in the composition of these he has mingled gold, wherefore also they have the greatest honor; others he has made of silver, to be auxiliaries; others again who are to be husbandmen and craftsmen he has composed of brass and iron; and the species will generally be preserved in the children. But as all are of the same original stock, a golden parent will sometimes have a silver son, or a silver parent a golden son.
And God proclaims as a first principle to the rulers, and above all else, that there is nothing which they should so anxiously guard, or of which they are to be such good guardians, as of the purity of the race. They should observe what elements mingle in their offspring;

Iamblichus:
Life of Pythagoras
Conceiving, however, that the first attention which should be paid to men, is that which takes place through the senses; as when some one perceives beautiful figures and forms, or hears beautiful rhythms and melodies, [Pythagoras] established that to be the first erudition which subsists through music, and also through certain melodies and rhythms, from which the remedies of human manners and passions are obtained, together with those harmonies of the powers of the soul which it possessed from the first.

Hitler’s Letters and Notes, p.g 284:
The Germanic Revolution

Racial purity the highest law.

Hitler, Table Talk (Cameron & Stevens), July 5, 1942:
If nowadays we do not find the same splendid pride of race which distinguished the Grecian and Roman eras, it is because in the fourth century these Jewish-Christians systematically destroyed all the monuments of these ancient civilisations. It was they, too, who destroyed the library at Alexandria.

Laurency (wm1):
8It is strange that scholars may aver that they know everything about what the ancients taught when they know that the hundreds of thousands of manuscripts lodged in the library at Alexandria were destroyed and that Christian fanatics during the fourth and fifth centuries destroyed systematically all older manuscripts they could lay hands on, regarding them as the delusions of the devil. The learned know practically nothing of what the ancients knew. There was scarcely a manuscript left from the time before 400 C.E., and just the little that was buried or chanced to be outside the dominion of the fanatics was saved.

Hitler, Table Talk (Cameron & Stevens), October 25, 1941:
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. “If thou desirest to live, thou shalt not expose thyself unto temptation.” … 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?

Hitler, Table Talk (Cameron & Stevens), February 17, 1942:
The gods, for the Romans, were familiar images. It is somewhat difficult to know whether they had any exact idea of the Beyond. For them, eternal life was personified in living beings, and it consisted in a perpetual renewal. Those were conceptions fairly close to those which were current amongst the Japanese and Chinese at the time when the Swastika made its appearance amongst them.

Laurency (L4e2):
3Through birth and common blood we share in the entire human race, and this sharing makes us human beings.

Marcus Aurelius:
Meditations, Book II
What links one human being to all humans: not blood, or birth [seed], but mind. And… that an individual’s mind is God and of God.
Ὅταν δυσφορῇς ἐπί τινι, ἐπελάθου τοῦ, ὅτι πάντα κατὰ τὴν τῶν ὅλων φύσιν γίνεται, καὶ τοῦ, ὅτι τὸ ἁμαρτανόμενον ἀλλότριον, καὶ ἐπὶ τούτοις τοῦ, ὅτι πᾶν τὸ γινόμενον οὕτως ἀεὶ ἐγίνετο καὶ γενήσεται καὶ νῦν πανταχοῦ γίνεται: τοῦ, ὅση ἡ συγγένεια ἀνθρώπου πρὸς πᾶν τὸ ἀνθρώπειον γένος: οὐ γὰρ αἱματίουσπερματίου, ἀλλὰ νοῦ κοινωνία. ἐπελάθου δὲ καὶ τοῦ, ὅτι ὁ ἑκάστου νοῦς θεὸς καὶ ἐκεῖθεν ἐρρύηκεν: τοῦ, ὅτι οὐδὲν ἴδιον οὐδενός, ἀλλὰ καὶ τὸ τεκνίον καὶ τὸ σωμάτιον καὶ αὐτὸ τὸ ψυχάριον ἐκεῖθεν ἐλήλυθεν: τοῦ, ὅτι πάνθ̓ ὑπόληψις: τοῦ, ὅτι τὸ παρὸν μόνον ἕκαστος ζῇ καὶ τοῦτο ἀποβάλλει.

Marcus Aurelius:
Meditations, Book II
I have recognized that the wrongdoer has a nature related to my own—not of the same blood or birth [seed], but the same mind, and possessing a share of the divine.
ἐγὼ δὲ τεθεωρηκὼς τὴν φύσιν τοῦ ἀγαθοῦ ὅτι καλόν, καὶ τοῦ κακοῦ ὅτι αἰσχρόν, καὶ τὴν αὐτοῦ τοῦ ἁμαρτάνοντος φύσιν ὅτι μοι συγγενής, οὐχὶ αἵματοςσπέρματος τοῦ αὐτοῦ, ἀλλὰ νοῦ καὶ θείας ἀπομοίρας μέτοχος, οὔτε βλαβῆναι ὑπό τινος αὐτῶν δύναμαι: αἰσχρῷ γάρ με οὐδεὶς περιβαλεῖ: οὔτε ὀργίζεσθαι τῷ συγγενεῖ δύναμαι οὔτε ἀπέχθεσθαι αὐτῷ.


Climate

Julian:
Against the Galileans
Come, tell me why it is that the Celts and the Germans are fierce, while the Hellenes and Romans are, generally speaking, inclined to political life and humane, though at the same time unyielding and warlike?

Hippocrates of Kos:
On Airs, Waters, and Places
Such as inhabit a country which is mountainous, rugged, elevated, and well watered, and where the changes of the seasons are very great, are likely to have great variety of shapes among them, and to be naturally of an enterprising and warlike disposition; and such persons are apt to have no little of the savage and ferocious in their nature;

Julian:
Misopogon
Therefore do not be surprised if I now feel towards you as I do, for I am more uncivilised than [Cato], and more fierce and headstrong in proportion as the Celts are more so than the Romans. He was born in Rome and was nurtured among the Roman citizens till he was on the threshold of old age.
But as for me, I had to do with Celts and Germans and the Hercynian forest from the moment that I was reckoned a grown man, and I have by now spent a long time there, like some huntsman who associates with and is entangled among wild beasts. There I met with temperaments that know not how to pay court or flatter, but only how to behave simply and frankly to all men alike.

Hitler’s Letters and Notes, p.g 283:

Half knowledge equivalent to human arrogance – pride etc.
Stupidity but also weakness or cruelty

Seneca:
On the Happy Life
You understand without my mentioning it that an unbroken calm and freedom ensue, when we have driven away all those things which either excite us or alarm us: for in the place of sensual pleasures and those slight perishable matters which are connected with the basest crimes, we thus gain an immense, unchangeable, equable joy, together with peace, calmness and greatness of mind, and kindliness: for all savageness is a sign of weakness.

Julian:
Against the Galileans
Why the Egyptians are more intelligent and more given to crafts, and the Syrians unwarlike and effeminate, but at the same time intelligent, hot-tempered, vain and quick to learn?

Velleius Paterculus:
But the Germans, who with their great ferocity combine great craft, to an extent scarcely credible to one who has had no experience with them, and are a race born to lying, by trumping up a series of fictitious lawsuits, now provoking one another to disputes, and now expressing their gratitude that Roman justice was settling these disputes, that their own barbarous nature was being softened down by this new and hitherto unknown method, and that quarrels which were usually settled by arms were now being ended by law, brought Quintilius to such a complete degree of negligence, that he came to look upon himself as a city praetor administering justice in the forum, and not a general in command of an army in the heart of Germany.

The Initiate in the Dark Cycle, p.g. 41-42:
The Indian possesses an inherited capacity for comprehending metaphysical thought, without making the least attempt to put it into practice in the world of facts. In the east there has always been the latent desire for the search after Truth on the part of the individual only, side by side with a totally different point of view with regard to business, in which the exercise of chicanery is practically taken for granted.
The climate making physical pleasures all but impossible, these latter become almost purely mental, and often consist in the sheer delight of outwitting others, especially since British law-courts have become established in India. Even the poorest are prepared to gamble by going to law, in the childish hope of getting the better of someone.

Hitler, Mein Kampf:
The kind of existence which he leads, forces the Jew to the systematic use of falsehood, just as naturally as the inhabitants of northern climates are forced to wear warm clothes.

Mein Kampf:
It is, therefore, outrageously unjust to speak of the pre-Christian Germans as uncivilised barbarians, for such they never were. But the severity of the climate that prevailed in the northern regions which they inhabited, imposed conditions of life which hampered a free development of their creative faculties. If they had come to the fairer climate of the South, with no previous culture whatsoever, and if they had acquired the necessary human material—that is to say, men of an inferior race—to serve them as tools in performing necessary labours, the cultural faculty dormant in them would have blossomed forth in splendour as happened in the case of the Greeks, for example.

Julian:
Against the Galileans
Therefore, if he did ordain that even as our languages are confounded and do not harmonise with one another, so too should it be with the political constitutions of the nations, then it was not by a special, isolated decree that he gave these constitutions their essential characteristics, or framed us also to match this lack of agreement.
For different natures must first have existed in all those things that among the nations were to be differentiated. This at any rate is seen if one observes how very different in their bodies are the Germans and Scythians from the Libyans and Ethiopians. Can this also be due to a bare decree, and does not the climate or the country have a joint influence with the gods in determining what sort of complexion they have?

Hippocrates of Kos:
On Airs, Waters, and Places
But such as dwell in places which are low-lying, abounding in meadows and ill ventilated, and who have a larger proportion of hot than of cold winds, and who make use of warm waters- these are not likely to be of large stature nor well proportioned, but are of a broad make, fleshy, and have black hair; and they are rather of a dark than of a light complexion, and are less likely to be phlegmatic than bilious; courage and laborious enterprise are not naturally in them, but may be engendered in them by means of their institutions.

Strabo:
Geography
In fact, the various arrangements [of a country] are not the result of premeditation, any more than the diversities of nations or languages ; they all depend on circumstances and chance. Arts, forms of government, and modes of life, arising from certain [internal] springs, flourish under whatever climate they may be situated; climate, however, has its influence, and therefore while some peculiarites are due to the nature of the country, others are the result of institutions and education. It is not owing to the nature of the country, but rather to their education, that the Athenians cultivate eloquence, while the Lacedaemonians do not; nor yet the Thebans, who are nearer still.
Neither are the Babylonians and Egyptians philosophers by nature, but by reason of their institutions and education. In like manner the excellence of horses, oxen, and other animals, results not alone from the places where they dwell, but also from their breeding. Posidonius confounds all these distinctions.

[Concerning environment, see Hitler Youth Manual (1938), p.g. 26-27]

Hitler, Table Talk (Cameron & Stevens), July 5, 1941:
It is true that, in a sense, every product of human culture, every work gifted with beauty can be born only of the effect of the constraint which we call education.

Mein Kampf:
The born delinquent will always remain a delinquent, but numerous people who show only a certain tendency to commit criminal acts may become useful members of the community if rightly trained; whereas, on the other hand, weak and unstable characters may easily become evil elements if the system of education is bad.

Plato:
The Republic
And may we not say, Adeimantus, that the most gifted minds, when they are ill-educated, become pre-eminently bad? Do not great crimes and the spirit of pure evil spring out of a fulness of nature ruined by education rather than from any inferiority, whereas weak natures are scarcely capable of any very great good or very great evil?

Laurency (kl1_7.14):
2If knowledge of law and social ability were school subjects instead of Christian religion, then young people would learn to live with others without friction instead of imbibing worthless religious fictionalism.

Hitler, Table Talk, April 4, 1942 (Trevor-Roper):
Our compatriots forget too easily that the Jews have accomplices all over the world, and that no beings have greater powers of resistance as regards adaptation to climate. Jews can prosper anywhere, even in Lapland and Siberia.

Goebbels (Diaries), May 30, 1942:
Germans are involved in subversive movements only if the Jews tempt them. Therefore one must liquidate (liquidieren) the Jewish danger, cost it what it will. Given how few Jews can in reality adjust themselves to Western European life, one sees that, where they are led back into the ghetto, they quickly revert to form. West European civilization represents only an external coat of paint to them. There is also the Jewish essence, which works with a dangerous brutality and vindictiveness. Therefore the Führer does not at all wish that the Jews should be evacuated (evakuiert) to Siberia. There, under the harshest living conditions, they would undoubtedly develop again a strong life-element. He would much prefer to resettle (aussiedeln) them in central Africa. There they would live in a climate that would certainly not make them strong and resistant. In any case, it is the Führer’s goal to make Western Europe completely Jew-free. Here they may no longer have their homeland.

Suetonius:
[Tiberius] suppressed all foreign religions, and the Egyptian and Jewish rites, obliging those who practised that kind of superstition, to burn their vestments, and all their sacred utensils. He distributed the Jewish youths, under the pretence of military service, among the provinces noted for an unhealthy climate; and dismissed from the city all the rest of that nation as well as those who were proselytes to that religion, under pain of slavery for life, unless they complied.


Necessity of Laws

Julian:
Against the Galileans
As for men’s laws, it is evident that men have established them to correspond with their own natural dispositions; that is to say, constitutional and humane laws were established by those in whom a humane disposition had been fostered above all else, savage and inhuman laws by those in whom there lurked and was inherent the contrary disposition. For lawgivers have succeeded in adding but little by their discipline to the natural characters and aptitudes of men.

Strabo:
The Geography, Book XVI, Chapter II
This is according to nature, and common both to Greeks and barbarians. For, as members of a civil community, they live according to a common law; otherwise it would be impossible for the mass to execute any one thing in concert (in which consists a civil state), or to live in a social state at all.

Laurency ():
The so-called ten commandments are no commandments of god. There must be commandments for the less rational people to go by, since without laws no community can exist.

Table Talk, October 24, 1941 (Trevor-Roper):
The Ten Commandments are a code of living to which there’s no refutation. These precepts correspond to irrefragable needs of the human soul; they’re inspired by the best religious spirit, and the Churches here support themselves on a solid foundation.

Laurency ():
The Jewish commandments (the Decalogue of Moses) are no “divine commandments”. In all forgotten cultures they were self-evident knowledge: not to murder, steal, deceive, slander, etc.

Julian:
Against the Galileans
Now except for the command “Thou shalt not worship other gods,” and “Remember the sabbath day,” what nation is there, I ask in the name of the gods, which does not think that it ought to keep the other commandments? So much so that penalties have been ordained against those who transgress them, sometimes more severe, and sometimes similar to those enacted by Moses, though they are sometimes more humane.

Strabo:
The Geography, Book XVI, Chapter II
Law is twofold, divine and human. The ancients regarded and respected divine, in preference to human, law; in those times, therefore, the number of persons was very great who consulted oracles, and, being desirous of obtaining the advice of Jupiter, hurried to Dodona, “ to hear the answer of Jove from the lofty oak.

Hitler, Table Talk (Cameron & Stevens), October 21, 1941:
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 an 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.

Julian:
Against the Galileans
Therefore, as I said, unless for every nation separately some presiding national god (and under him an angel, a demon, a hero, and a peculiar order of spirits which obey and work for the higher powers) established the differences in our laws and characters, you must demonstrate to me how these differences arose by some other agency. Moreover, it is not sufficient to say, “God spake and it was so.” For the natures of things that are created ought to harmonise with the commands of God.

Julian:
Against the Galileans
But why need I go over their several characteristics, or describe the love of liberty and lack of discipline of the Germans, the docility and tameness of the Syrians, the Persians, the Parthians, and in short of all the barbarians in the East and the South, and of all nations who possess and are contented with a somewhat despotic form of government?
Now if these differences that are greater and more important came about without the aid of a greater and more divine providence, why do we vainly trouble ourselves about and worship one who takes no thought for us?

Julian:
Against the Galileans
But that from the beginning God cared only for the Jews and that He chose them out as his portion, has been clearly asserted not only by Moses and Jesus but by Paul as well; though in Paul’s case this is strange. For according to circumstances he keeps changing his views about God, as the polypus changes its colours to match the rocks, and now he insists that the Jews alone are God’s portion, and then again, when he is trying to persuade the Hellenes to take sides with him, he says: ‘Do not think that he is the God of Jews only, but also of Gentiles: yea of Gentiles also.’

Rosenberg:
Simultaneously, the mollusklike soliciting: ‘For albeit I am free of everyone, still have I made myself into the servant of everyone, so that I may win many of them. To the Jews I have come as a Jew, so that I win the Jews. To those who are under the law, I have become as under the law, so that I gain those who are under the law. To those who are without laws, I have become as without law. Nevertheless I am not without law before god, but I am the law of Christ, so that I win those who are without law. To the weak I have become like a weak man, so that I win the weak. I am all things to all men, so that I everywhere make some blessed.’

Julian:
Against the Galileans
And yet the wretched Eusebius will have it that poems in hexameters are to be found even among [the Hebrews], and sets up a claim that the study of logic exists among the Hebrews, since he has heard among the Hellenes the word they use for logic.

Hitler, Table Talk (Cameron & Stevens), October 21, 1941:
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.

Rosenberg:
From the Pharisee Paul slips out unconsciously a universal Jewish admission: What kind of advantage have the Jews, or of what use is circumcision? In truth, very much. First, to them is confided what god has spoken. But that many do not believe in this, what does it matter? Should their lack of faith cancel god’s faith? Nothing could be further from the truth. (Romans III.)

Julian:
Letter 20, To High-priest Theodorus
For I saw that those whose minds were turned to the doctrines of the Jewish religion are so ardent in their belief that they would choose to die for it, and to endure utter want and starvation rather than taste pork or any animal that has been strangled or had the life squeezed out of it; whereas we are in such a state of apathy about religious matters that we have forgotten the customs of our forefathers, and therefore we actually do not know whether any such rule has ever been prescribed.

Seneca:
When, meanwhile, the customs of that most accursed nation have gained such strength that they have been now received in all lands, the conquered have given laws to the conquerors… For those, however, know the cause of their rites, whilst the greater part of the people know not why they perform theirs.

Mein Kampf:
The only question now was, ‘Did the founders foresee the effects of their work in the form which it was eventually to assume, or were the founders themselves the victims of an error?’ To my mind both, alternatives were possible.

[Either Eusebius tampered with Paul’s writings or we must acknowledge that Paul, even if he really had good intentions, was still given over to his racial instinct and thereby unconsciously serving his people.]

Julian:
Against the Galileans
Therefore it is fair to ask of Paul why God, if he was not the God of the Jews only but also of the Gentiles, sent the blessed gift of prophecy to the Jews in abundance and gave them Moses and the oil of anointing, and the prophets and the law and the incredible and monstrous elements in their myths? For you hear them crying aloud: “Man did eat angels’ food.” And finally God sent unto them Jesus also, but unto us no prophet, no oil of anointing, no teacher, no herald to announce his love for man which should one day, though late, reach even unto us also.
Nay he even looked on for myriads, or if you prefer, for thousands of years, while men in extreme ignorance served idols, as you call them, from where the sun rises to where he sets, yes and from North to South, save only that little tribe which less than two thousand years before had settled in one part of Palestine. For if he is the God of all of us alike, and the creator of all, why did he neglect us?

Martin Luther:
The Jews and their lies
For one dare not regard God as so cruel that he would punish his own people so long, so terribly, so unmercifully, and in addition keep silent, comforting them neither with words nor with deeds, and fixing no time limit and no end to it. Who would have faith, hope, or love toward such a God?

Julian:
Against the Galileans
For if there is anyone who does not discern a reason for these differences among the nations, but rather declaims that all this so befell spontaneously, how, I ask, can he still believe that the universe is administered by a providence?

Julian:
Against the Galileans
It is therefore clear that the creative gods received from their father their creative power and so begat on earth all living things that are mortal. For if there were to be no difference between the heavens and mankind and animals too, by Zeus, and all the way down to the very tribe of creeping things and the little fish that swim in the sea, then there would have had to be one and the same creator for them all.
But if there is a great gulf fixed between immortals and mortals, and this cannot become greater by addition or less by subtraction, nor can it be mixed with what is mortal and subject to fate, it follows that one set of gods were the creative cause of mortals, and another of immortals.

[So we see how polygenism and polytheism were inseparably connected in antiquity and how a systematic attack on this was made by early proto-Bolshevik Christianity.]

Plato:
Republic
Citizens, we shall say to them in our tale, you are brothers, yet God has framed you differently.
Some of you have the power of command, and in the composition of these he has mingled gold, wherefore also they have the greatest honor; others he has made of silver, to be auxiliaries; others again who are to be husbandmen and craftsmen he has composed of brass and iron; and the species will generally be preserved in the children. But as all are of the same original stock, a golden parent will sometimes have a silver son, or a silver parent a golden son.

Renan:
Nature has made a race of workers, the Chinese race, who have wonderful manual dexterity and almost no sense of honor… A race of tillers of the soil, the Negro; treat him with kindness and humanity, and all will be as it should; a race of masters and soldiers, the European race. Reduce this noble race to working in the ergastulum like Negroes and Chinese, and they rebel… But the life at which our workers rebel would make a Chinese or a fellah happy, as they are not military creatures in the least. Let each one do what he is made for, and all will be well.

Plato:
Republic
And God proclaims as a first principle to the rulers, and above all else, that there is nothing which they should so anxiously guard, or of which they are to be such good guardians, as of the purity of the race. They should observe what elements mingle in their offspring; for if the son of a golden or silver parent has an admixture of brass and iron, then nature orders a transposition of ranks, and the eye of the ruler must not be pitiful toward the child because he has to descend in the scale and become a husbandman or artisan, just as there may be sons of artisans who having an admixture of gold or silver in them are raised to honor, and become guardians or auxiliaries.
For an oracle says that when a man of brass or iron guards the State, it will be destroyed.
Such is the tale; is there any possibility of making our citizens believe in it?
Not in the present generation, he replied; there is no way of accomplishing this; but their sons may be made to believe in the tale, and their sons’ sons, and posterity after them.
I see the difficulty, I replied; yet the fostering of such a belief will make them care more for the city and for one another.

Platon:
Critias
Now different gods had their allotments in different places which they set in order. Hephaestus and Athene, who were brother and sister, and sprang from the same father, having a common nature, and being united also in the love of philosophy and art, both obtained as their common portion this land, which was naturally adapted for wisdom and virtue; and there they implanted brave children of the soil, and put into their minds the order of government; their names are preserved, but their actions have disappeared by reason of the destruction of those who received the tradition, and the lapse of ages.

Akhenaten:
Great Hymn to the Aten
The lands of Khor and Kush, and the land of Egypt: you set every man in his place, you allot their needs, every one of them according to his diet, and his lifetime is counted out. Tongues are separate in speech, and their characters as well; their skins are different, for you differentiate the foreigners.

Hermes Trismegistus:
Corpus Hermeticum
The dead will far outnumber the living; and the survivors will be known for Egyptians by their tongue alone, but in their actions they will seem to be men of another race.

Hitler, Mein Kampf:
It is not, however, by the tie of language, but exclusively by the tie of blood that the members of a race are bound together, and the Jew himself knows this better than any other, seeing that he attaches so little importance to the preservation of his own language while at the same time he strives his utmost to keep his blood free from intermixture with that of other races.

✡Disraeli:
Well, these are races; men and bodies of men influenced in their conduct by their particular organization, and which must enter into all the calculations of a statesman. But what do they mean by the Latin race? Language and religion do not make a race – there is only one thing which makes a race, and that is blood.

Julian:
Against the Galileans
And yet among mankind the difference between the customs and the political constitutions of the nations is in every way greater than the difference in their language. What Hellene, for instance, ever tells us that a man ought to marry his sister or his daughter or his mother? Yet in Persia this is accounted virtuous.


Concerning Marriages

Laurency (kl1_9.31):
1How different would not marriages be if the contracting parties had some knowledge of mankind’s various stages of development and understood that by human love is meant physical, emotional, and mental attraction?
The ancients expressed that understanding in the wisdom saying: “Birds of a feather flock together”. Children grown up under similar social and cultural conditions have the best prospects of understanding each other.
The better possibilities man and wife have of understanding everything in their life together, the better prospects of a happy marriage they have. The greater the differences between them in world view and life view, in their outlook on all human problems, the greater is the risk of disharmony in marriage.
How many have understood that ancient experience of life?
Modern marriages bear witness, like almost everything else, to the democracy of our times with its total disorientation.

https://www.phrases.org.uk/meanings/birds-of-a-feather-flock-together.html

The phrase also appears in ✝Benjamin Jowett‘s 1856 translation of Plato’s Republic. Clearly, if it were present in the original Greek text then, at around 380BC, Plato’s work would be a much earlier reference to it. What appears in Jowett’s version is:

Men of my age flock together; we are birds of a feather, as the old proverb says.

Hitler, Table Talk (Cameron & Stevens), April 24, 1942:
The history of the German Princes proves, generally speaking, that the most successful marriages are not those which are founded solely on reasons of expediency. In all human activities only that which is true has any chance of survival, and it is therefore only natural that a marriage inspired by sincere mutual love should be the union with the best chance of happy success. Such a marriage constitutes a guarantee for the manner in which the children will be brought up, and this is a guarantee of inestimable value for the future of the German people.

Memoirs of a Confidant, p.g. 143:
And the second point is that someone who is expected to do original, creative work must have been raised in an atmosphere of harmony. Where young children are compelled to watch as their parents constantly bicker, insult each other, and even cheat on each other, there even a young person cannot grow up with the inner harmony required to bring about the balance of the evil and good urges that lie dormant in every human being. He, too, is handi-capped. He, too, will be a cripple all his life. He, too, is easily prone to becoming a scoundrel.
Do not, therefore, give a responsible position to anyone of whom it is known that his parents are not living in a happy reunion, let alone that they are divorced.

Plato:
The Republic
And our philosopher follows the same analogy–he is like a plant which, having proper nurture, must necessarily grow and mature into all virtue, but, if sown and planted in an alien soil, becomes the most noxious of all weeds, unless he be preserved by some divine power.

Memoirs of a Confidant, p.g. 223:
For in the eyes of the divine world order, the first purpose of marriage is, looking at it very primitively, the joining of two cells in order to create new cells for the purpose of preserving the construction and expansion of the divine creation. The higher the development of an organism, the greater is the added task of rearing, educating, and promoting the new, young being, so that it may fulfill the mission in the world, in the universe, of which it is capable. And its task arises from inheritance, upbringing, education, awakening in its inherent ethical, moral, and decent powers; it may also arise because it is ordained or determined by a vocation.

Plato:
The Republic
Then clearly the next thing will be to make matrimony sacred in the highest degree, and what is most beneficial will be deemed sacred?
Exactly.
And how can marriages be made most beneficial?–that is a question which I put to you, because I see in your house dogs for hunting, and of the nobler sort of birds not a few. Now, I beseech you, do tell me, have you ever attended to their pairing and breeding?
In what particulars?
Why, in the first place, although they are all of a good sort, are not some better than others?
True.
And do you breed from them all indifferently, or do you take care to breed from the best only?
From the best.
And do you take the oldest or the youngest, or only those of ripe age?
I choose only those of ripe age.
And if care was not taken in the breeding, your dogs and birds would greatly deteriorate?
Certainly.
And the same of horses and animals in general?
Undoubtedly.
Good heavens! my dear friend, I said, what consummate skill will our rulers need if the same principle holds of the human species!

Strabo:
Geography
In like manner the excellence of horses, oxen, and other animals, results not alone from the places where they dwell, but also from their breeding.

Campanella:
The City of the Sun
A Poetical Dialogue between a Grandmaster of the Knights Hospitallers and a Genoese Sea-Captain, his guest
Capt: Love is foremost in attending to the charge of the race. He sees that men and women are so joined together, that they bring forth the best offspring. Indeed, they laugh at us who exhibit a studious care for our breed of horses and dogs, but neglect the breeding of human beings. Thus the education of the children is under his rule.

Mein Kampf:
The Weltanschauung which bases the State on the racial idea must finally succeed in bringing about a nobler era, in which men will no longer pay exclusive attention to breeding and rearing pedigree dogs, horses and cats, but will endeavour to improve the breed of the human race itself. That will be an era of self-restraint and renunciation for one class of people, while the others will give their gifts and make their sacrifices joyfully.
That such a mentality may be possible cannot be denied in a world where hundreds and thousands accept the principle of celibacy of their own free will, without being obliged or pledged to do so by anything except an ecclesiastical precept.
Why should it not be possible to induce people to make this sacrifice if, instead of such a precept, they were simply told that they ought to put an end to the original sin of racial corruption which is steadily being committed from one generation to another.

Laurency (L3e11):
2Mormons, for instance, are in great error when asserting that it is their duty to see to it that “souls” are given opportunities to incarnate. There are already too many in incarnation. It is not even desirable that so many incarnate, and if mankind cannot learn the art of birth control, then life must find other expedients to counteract this madness: by sterility, infant mortality, new children’s diseases, etc.

Laurency ():
1Sex life is part of normal human life. Condemnation of the pertaining functions on religious grounds is the biggest mistake of the Church (the Catholic Church in particular). Celibacy is against nature. Its practice stunts normal organs. Monastic life in the Middle Ages is the actual cause of the sexual licence of our times, a deplorable reaction even if a normal one. The one extreme turns into its opposite. This phenomenon will soon pass when those who were celibates during several incarnations have had other experiences.

H. S. Chamberlain:
In the fifth book of Moses (Deuteronomy vi. 5) are to be found words similar to these quoted from Christ’s sayings (from Matthew xxii. 37), but — we must look at the context! Before the commandment to love (to our mind a peculiar conception — to love by command) stands as the first and most important commandment (verse 2), “Thou shalt fear the Lord, thy God, to keep all his statutes and his commandments”; the commandment to love is only one among other commandments which the Jew shall observe and immediately after it comes the reward for this love (verse 10 ff.). “I shall give thee great and goodly cities, which thou buildedst not, and houses full of all good things which thou filledst not, and wells digged which thou diggedst not, vineyards and olive-trees, which thou plantedst not, &c.” That kind of love may be compared to the love which underlies so many marriages at the present day!

Mein Kampf:
This Judaising of our spiritual life and mammonising of our natural instinct for procreation will sooner or later work havoc with our whole posterity. Instead of strong, healthy children, the product of natural feelings, we shall see miserable specimens of humanity resulting from economic calculation, for economic considerations are becoming more and more the foundation and the sole preliminary condition of marriage while love looks for an outlet elsewhere. Here as elsewhere, one may defy Nature for a certain period of time, but sooner or later she will take her inevitable revenge, and when man realises this truth, it is often too late.
Our own nobility furnishes an example of the devastating consequences that result from a persistent refusal to recognise the primary conditions necessary for normal wedlock. Here we are face to face with the results of procreation which is, on the one hand, determined by social pressure and, on the other, by financial considerations. The one leads to inherited debility, and the other to adulteration of the blood-strain; for all the Jewish daughters of the department store proprietors are looked upon as eligible mates to co-operate in propagating his lordship’s stock, and the stock certainly looks it. All this leads to absolute degeneration.
Nowadays our bourgeoisie is making efforts to follow in the same path. Theirs will be a similar fate.

Hitler, Table Talk (Cameron & Stevens), March 1, 1942:
Marriage, as it is practised in bourgeoise society, is generally a thing against nature. But a meeting between two beings who complete one another, who are made for one another, borders already, in my conception, upon a miracle.

✡Theodor Herzl:
Those who really wished to see the Jews disappear through intermixture with other nations, can only hope to see it come about in one way. The Jews must previously acquire economic power sufficiently great to overcome the old social prejudice against them. An example is provided by the aristocracy, among which the greatest proportion of intermarriage occurs. The old nobility has itself refurbished with Jewish money, and in the process Jewish families are absorbed. But what form would this phenomenon assume in the middle classes, where (the Jews being a bourgeois people) the Jewish question is mainly concentrated?

Mein Kampf:
Even as late as the time of Frederick the Great nobody looked upon the Jews as other than a ‘foreign’ people, and Goethe rose up in revolt against the failure legally to prohibit marriage between Christians and Jews. Goethe was certainly no reactionary and no timeserver; through him there spoke the voice of the blood and the voice of reason. Notwithstanding the disgraceful happenings taking place in Court circles, the people recognised instinctively that the Jew was the foreign body in their own flesh and their attitude towards him was dictated by recognition of that fact.

https://books.google.com/books?id=QPSsDAAAQBAJ&pg=PT14
https://books.google.com/books?id=v2vs5lED6b4C&pg=PA5

https://hitlerianhylozoics.wordpress.com/islam/#marriage


Nietzsche:
On the Genealogy of Morality, Translated by Carol Diethe
Man, in an age of disintegration in which the races are mixed, who has in his body the legacy of diverse origins, which is to say contradictory and often not even only contradictory drives and standards of valuation, which fight each other and seldom give each other peace, – such a man of late cultures and refracted lights will, on average, be a weaker man: his most fundamental desire is that the war, which he is, should finally have an end; happiness appears to him, in accordance with a tranquillizing medicine and way of thought (for example, the Epicurean or the Christian), principally to be the happiness of rest, of being undisturbed, of repleteness, of being finally at one, as the ‘Sabbath of Sabbaths’, to speak with the holy rhetorician Augustine, who was himself such a man.

Memoirs of a Confidant, p.g. 143:
But if one takes racial mixtures, no matter of what kind, one can never know what racial traits will predominate at times when it counts, and especially when decisions have to be made. The work of a mongrel will always give evidence of both the races whose blood he bears. If you confer a responsible and prominent position on him, you will find that the unconscious struggle his discordant blood wages within him will be expressed in all his endeavors, in his judgments and in his decisions.
Lenin furnishes the best example of this. His father was a Slavic high-school principal with a Western European education. His mother was a Tartar with an Asiatic cast of mind.
The whole Bolshevik Revolution seems like the struggle in Lenin’s blood: the struggle between the Asiatic will to destruction and the European will to culture. So do not confer important tasks upon any racial half-breed, not even one who has a mixture of East and West.

[Lenin’s father has been described as a sort of restraint on Lenin’s impulses. The wiki cites from four historians on this matter: “his behaviour became erratic and confrontational and he renounced his belief in God.” The lack of respect for his parents coupled with the unrestrained urge to assert himself resulted in him succumbing to his Jewishness. From a Jewish perspective, the death of his father must have been liberating. Historian Christopher Read backs up Hitler’s assertion: Slavonic and Tartar, with Jewish and Western European influences.]

https://books.google.com/books?id=frDGHIxc4EUC&printsec=frontcover#v=snippet&q=One%20of%20Maria%20Alexandrovna’s%20problems&f=false

Maxim Gorky:
Transcribed by David Walters

…Listening to Beethoven’s sonatas played by Isai Dobrowein at the home of Y. P. Peshkova in Moscow one evening, Lenin remarked:

“I know of nothing better than the Appassionata and could listen to it every day. What astonishing, superhuman music! It always makes me proud, perhaps naively so, to think that people can work such miracles!”

Wrinkling up his eyes, he smiled rather sadly, adding:

“But I can’t listen to music very often, it affects my nerves. I want to say sweet, silly things and pat the heads of people who, living in a filthy hell, can create such beauty. One can’t pat anyone on the head nowadays, they might bite your hand off. They ought to be beaten on the head, beaten mercilessly, although ideally we are against doing any violence to people. Hm-what a hellishly difficult job!”

[Observe how Hitler doesn’t explicitly identify Slavs with cultural debasement. See Untermensch. Even when he declares that he doesn’t believe in a Slav culture, he simply means when a Jewish head was on top of it. The wiki erroneously links this up with the absurd notion that the Germans wanted to kill the Slavic populations: “Hitler considered the Slavs to be inferior, because the Bolshevik Revolution had put the Jews in power over the mass of Slavs, who were, by his own definition, incapable of ruling themselves but were instead being ruled by Jewish masters.”
When asked why he didn’t reciprocate with the Soviets in a discussion he had with Otto Strasser, which was alluded to by Kurt Ludecke (not something he had merely read about in Strasser’s memoirs. Ludecke’s memoirs were published in 1938, Strasser’s in 1940), Hitler replied:]

Hitler and I (Otto Strasser’s memoirs), p.g. 108:
The Nordic race has the right to dominate the world, and that right will be the guiding principle of our foreign policy. That is why any alliance with Russia, a Slav-Tartar body surmounted by a Jewish head, is out of the question. I knew those Slavs in my own country! When a German head dominated them, Germany could make common cause with them, as it did in Bismarck’s time. Today it would be a crime.’

Mein Kampf:
The spirit of Bismarck is evoked in defence of a policy which is as stupid as it is impossible, and is in the highest degree detrimental to the German people.
They say that Bismarck attached great importance to the maintenance of good relations with Russia. To a certain extent, that is true, but they quite forget to add that he laid equal stress on the importance of good relations with Italy, for example. Indeed, the same Herr von Bismarck once concluded an alliance with Italy so that he might more easily settle accounts with Austria.
Why is this policy not continued to-day? The answer will be to the effect that the Italy of to-day is not the Italy of that time.
Well then, honourable sirs, permit me to remind you that the Russia of today is no longer the Russia of that time. Bismarck never dreamt of laying down a political course of action which, from the tactical point of view, was to hold good for all time. He was too much the master of the hour to bind himself in that way.
The question, therefore, ought not to be what did Bismarck do then, but rather what would he do to-day.

Hitler, Memoirs of a Confidant, p.g. 169:
The international element of the communist movement that emanates from Russia is not really Russian, or Slavic; it is Jewish. And we must not make the mistake of believing that it is supported by a Russian-Slavic idea, which might even have some creative content. The current activities of the Comintern members are purely destructive.

Hitler, Table Talk (Cameron & Stevens), June 24, 1943:
The whole blossoming of our music in Vienna is not due to the town; such things do not spring from their environment, but from the genius of a race. Really creative music is composed partly of inspiration and partly of a sense of composition. The inspiration is of Slavonic origin, the art of composition is of Germanic. It is when these two mingle in one man that the master of genius appears.
In Bach’s music it is the composition which is marvellous, and he certainly had no drop of Slav blood in his veins. As regards Beethoven, on the other hand, one glance at his head shows that he comes of a different race. It is not pure chance that the British have never produced a composer of genius; it is because they are a pure Germanic race.

Hitler, November 8, 1939 speech:
Or when they say that they stand up for culture: England as the creator of culture is a chapter in its own right. The English cannot tell us Germans anything about culture: our music, our poetry, our architecture, our paintings, our sculptures, can more than stand a comparison to the English arts. I believe that a single German, let us say, Beethoven, achieved more in the realm of music than all Englishmen of the past and present together! And we take care of this culture better than the English are capable of doing.

[Coudenhove-Kalergi also furnishes an example of the Asiatic will to destruction.]

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Richard_von_Coudenhove-Kalergi#Pan-European_political_activist
[Coudenhove-Kalergi] believed that individualism and socialism would learn to cooperate instead of compete, and urged that capitalism and communism cross-fertilise each other just as the Protestant Reformation had spurred the Catholic Church to regenerate itself.[17]

Hitler, Memoirs of a Confidant, p.g. 170:
It is not possible to be liberal in one’s own country and demand socialism among nations.

Laurency ():
1The work of Luther was a serious mistake. The Christian Church was facing its definitive dissolution. The scathing satires of Erasmus Roterodamus on the priesthood and religious matters of the time were appreciated even in clerical circles.
2Then Luther appeared and “roused the souls”. This also brought religious fanaticism to life. Upon the reformation of the Protestants followed the Catholic reaction with persecutions of heretics, religious wars, inquisition, and jesuitism. Luther delayed development five hundred years.

[Kalergi was promoting a perpetual interchange between capitalism and communism, with the view of keeping mankind enslaved.]

Hitler, Zweites Buch:
According to the conception of that everybody’s bastard, Coudenhove, this Pan Europe would one day play the same role vis-à-vis the American Union, or a nationally awakened China that was formerly played by the old Austrian State vis-à-vis Germany or Russia.

✡Coudenhove-Kalergi:
The man of the future will be a mongrel. Today’s races and classes will disappear owing to the disappearing of space, time, and prejudice. The Eurasian-Negroid race of the future, similar in its outward appearance to the ancient Egyptians, will replace the diversity of peoples with a diversity of individuals.
Der Mensch der fernen Zukunft wird Mischling sein. Die heutigen Rassen und Kasten werden der zunehmen-den Überwindung von Raum, Zeit und Vorurteil zum Opfer fallen. Die eurasisch-negroide Zukunftsrasse, äußerlich der altägyptischen ähnlich, wird die Vielfalt der Völker durch eine Vielfalt der Persönlichkeiten ersetzen.

Mein Kampf:
If it be denied that races differ from one another in their cultural creative ability, then this same erroneous notion must necessarily influence our estimation of the value of the individual. The assumption that all races are alike leads to the assumption that nations and individuals are equal to one another.

Mein Kampf:
The Jewish doctrine of Marxism repudiates the aristocratic principle of Nature and substitutes for the eternal right of might and strength, the dead weight of sheer numbers. Thus it denies the individual worth of the human personality, disputes the teaching that nationality and race are of primary significance, and by doing this deprives Man of the very foundations of his existence and civilisation.

Hitler, Table Talk (Cameron & Stevens), November 11, 1941:
Our people therefore is only harming itself if it accepts halfcastes into the Wehrmacht, and thus admits them to a position of equality with pure-blooded Germans. We cannot accept the responsibility of burdening our blood-stream with the addition of further foreign elements. Exceptions in favour of half-castes must therefore be reduced to a minimum.

Hitler’s Letters and Notes, p.g 283:
The Germanic Revolution

1. The Bible – Monumental History of Mankind – 2. Viewpoints –
Idealism – Materialism
Nothing without cause – History is made by men – 2 human types
Workers and drones – Builders and destroyers – Children of God and Men

Hitler, Table Talk (Jochmann), February 22, 1942:
Everything has a cause, nothing comes by accident. The cause of these diseases is a racial nucleus that is so devastating in the blood mixture that it makes people uncertain/unsafe. Physical illnesses have probably also come into being from the fact that different blood groups have come together.
Alles hat eine Ursache, nichts kommt durch Zufall. Die Ursache dieser Erkrankungen ist ein Rassekern, der in der Blutmischung so verheerend wirkt, daß er die Menschen unsicher macht. Wahrscheinlich sind auch physische Erkrankungen schon daraus entstanden, daß in sich verschiedene Blutgruppen zusammengekommen sind.

[The latter two sentences have been omitted from the English translation.]

Bolshevism: From Moses to Lenin
Were [the Jew] really interested in comradeship, he has had the longest and most abundant opportunity for it. Jehovah’s command to him to make no alliances with foreign peoples, but, on the contrary, to devour one after the other, went straight to his heart (Exodus 34:12; Deuteronomy 7:16).

✡Maimonides:
Mishneh Torah, Kings and Wars 5:5
It is a Positive Commandment to obliterate Amalek, as it says, “erase the memory of Amalek” (Deut. 28:19). It is a Positive Commandment to perpetually remember their wicked deeds and their ambush in order to arouse our enmity against them, as it says, “remember what Amalek did to you” (Deut. 25:17). By Tradition we have learned that “remember” means by speech, “do not forget” (Deut. 25:19) – in one’s heart; for it is forbidden to forget their enmity and hatred.

Laurency (kl1_1):
4Everything man is irritated by strengthens these complexes. He recalls imagined wrongs and gets annoyed once more. Many people in this manner develop emotional and mental ulcers and, finally, even boils and cancer tumours, etc. in their organisms. Seventy-five per cent of all disease depend on uncontrolled consciousness. Irritations affect nerves, cells (including blood corpuscles), etc.

Diodorus Siculus:
Historical Library
Those too that were thus expelled seated themselves about Jerusalem, and being afterwards embodied into one nation, called the nation of the Jews, their hatred of all other men descended with their blood to posterity. Hence they made strange laws, entirely different from those of other nations. In consequence of this, they will neither eat nor drink with any one of a different nation, nor wish him any prosperity.

Platon, Critias (✝Benjamin Jowett):
But when the divine portion began to fade away, and became diluted too often and too much with the mortal admixture, and the human nature got the upper hand,

Genesis 6:2-4 LXX
And it came to pass when men began to be numerous upon the earth, and daughters were born to them, that the sons of God having seen the daughters of men that they were beautiful, took to themselves wives of all whom they chose.
And the Lord God said, My Spirit shall certainly not remain among these men for ever, because they are flesh,

Hermes Trismegistus:
Corpus Hermeticum
The gods will return from earth to heaven; Egypt will be forsaken, and the land which was once the home of religion will be left desolate, bereft of the presence of its deities. This land and region will be filled with foreigners; not only will men neglect the service of the gods, but, what is harder still, there will be enacted so-called laws by which religion and piety and worship of the gods will be forbidden, and a penalty prescribed. And Egypt will be occupied by Scythians or Indians or by some such race from the barbarian countries thereabout. In that day will our most holy land, this land of shrines and temples, be filled with funerals and corpses.

Genesis 6:5 LXX
5Now the [Nephilim] were upon the earth in those days; and after that when the sons of God were wont to go in to the daughters of men, they bore children to them, those were the giants of old, the men of renown.

[Robert Baker Girdlestone argued in 1871 the word comes from the Hiphil causative stem, implying that the nephilim are to be perceived as “those that cause others to fall down“.]

Mein Kampf:
If we divide mankind into three categories—founders of culture, champions of culture, and destroyers of culture—the Aryan alone can be considered as representing the first category.

Laurency ():
5The word “Occidental” is perhaps not exact, but should be supplanted by “Aryan”, since mentality has been the gift of the Aryan (white) race to mankind. Of course by “Aryan” is not meant the idiotization of the term attempted by Hitler and his gang, but the fifth root-race with its five subraces: Indian, Arabic, Iranian, Celtic, and Teutonic.

Gerda Bormann to Martin Bormann:
24. 2. 1945

My darling Daddy,

I will now give you the report I promised you on Kreisleiter Stredele’s speech. It was not a long speech–he spoke for barely an hour–but it contained all the problems we feel strongly about…
He divided mankind into three groups–the peasants with their roots deep in the soil, the nomadic dwellers in the steppes, and the commercially minded parasites. The first group was composed of ourselves, the Japanese and the Chinese; only the man with his roots deeply in the soil, he said, possessed real culture, for he alone realised the responsibilities of his heritage and he alone knew that his labours would bear fruit for his children and grandchildren.
His whole being was devoted to the dual concept–the sowing and the harvest. The same principle applied equally to the peasant owner of inherited land and to the industrialist who had a community of workmen dependent upon him.

Untermensch

https://third-reich-books.com/product/the-subhuman/ (see Excerpt)

https://germanpropaganda.org/der-untermensch/ (features readable German text of the book without the misleading narrative and unreliable English captions)

[In the German publication Der Untermensch (1942), there is no explicit mention of Russians or Slavs in an inferior racial sense.]

untermensch-009-e1388526053411
Women of this kind should become the mother of Europe.
untermensch-008a-e1388523655363
Fate protects us from this type!

Nietzsche:
By birth, Socrates belonged to the lowest class: Socrates was plebeian. We are told, and can see in sculptures of him, how ugly he was. But ugliness, in itself ban objection, is among the Greeks almost a refutation. Was Socrates a Greek at all? Ugliness is often enough the expression of a development that has been crossed, thwarted in some way. Or it appears as declining development. The anthropological criminologists tell us that the typical criminal is ugly: monstrum in fronte, monstrum in animo [monstrous in appearance, monstrous in spirit].

Mein Kampf:
There must be a certain balance between mind and body. A degenerate body is not more beautiful because it houses a radiant spirit.

Mein Kampf:
Whoever ignores or despises the laws of race really deprives himself of the happiness to which he believes he can attain. For he places an obstacle in the victorious path of the superior race and, by so doing, he interferes with a prerequisite condition of all human progress. Loaded with the burden of human sentiment, he falls back to the level of a helpless animal.

Laurency (L3e5):
The moralists fall below the limit of the human. Such people have placed themselves beyond the pale and could be safely left to their fate. The laws of destiny and of reaping will teach them something different in due course of time.

Laurency (wm9):
1According to the moralists, man is made up of faults and failings. To this it may be said that, if so, they are factors of development, since man nevertheless develops. And the esoterician might add that if they really are faults and failings (and not, as they generally are, the products of other people’s wrong views), then they are necessary experiences.

Laurency ():
8Anyone who wishes to hurt belongs to the majority of harmers and gloaters and is found on such a low level of development that everything he thinks, feels, says or does falls below the line of the human.

Hitler’s Letters and Notes, p.g 284:
The Germanic Revolution

The ‘educated man’, i.e. the man who has been spoon-fed with
knowledge substitutes the idea of humanity and hence
becomes ‘cruel’ in the end.

Hitler, Table Talk, October 14, 1941 (Cameron & Stevens):
An educated man retains the sense of the mysteries of nature and bows before the unknowable. An uneducated man, on the other hand, runs the risk of going over to atheism (which is a return to the state of the animal) as soon as he perceives that the State, in sheer opportunism, is making use of false ideas in the matter of religion, whilst in other fields it bases everything on pure science.

Hitler, Table Talk, September 27-28, 1941 (Cameron & Stevens):
By considering what Bolshevism has made of man, one realises that the foundation of all education should be respect—respect towards Providence (or the unknown, or Nature, or whatever name one chooses). Secondly, the respect that youth owes to maturity. If this respect is lacking, a man falls below the level of the animal. His intelligence, when it ceases to be controlled, turns him into a monster.

Goebbels (Diaries), May 13, 1943:
The intellectual does not have the natural means of resisting the Jewish peril because his instincts have been badly blunted. Because of this fact the nations with a high standard of civilization are exposed to this peril first and foremost. In nature life always takes measures against parasites; in the life of nations that is not always the case. From this fact the Jewish peril actually stems.

Hitler, Mein Kampf:
[The Jew] can live among other nations and States only as long as he succeeds in persuading them that the Jews are not a distinct people, but the representatives of a religious faith who thus constitute a ‘religious community,’ though this is of a peculiar character.

Tacitus:
Germania
For my own part, I agree with those who think that the tribes of Germany are free from all taint of inter-marriages with foreign nations, and that they appear as a distinct, unmixed race, like none but themselves. Hence, too, the same physical peculiarities throughout so vast a population.

Hitler’s Letters and Notes, p.g 286:
The Germanic Revolution

The Bible teaches
2. Facts

I.) All the nations in the Bible (cultures of Asia Minor, Mesopotamia,
Palestine, Egypt)
have been destroyed
by it (i.e. by race…
One nation has escaped: the Jews. Why?

II.) All nations have their own states –
Except for the Jews.

This means: the other nations (Aryans) had their own ‘states’ and
could not save themselves
the Jew had no state of his own and saved himself
nevertheless.

Seems incomprehensible at first sight only – why?

Hitler, April 12, 1922 speech:
He works unproductively using and enjoying other people’s work. And thus we understand the iron sentence which Mommsen once uttered: ‘The Jew is the ferment of decomposition in peoples,’ that means that the Jew destroys and must destroy because he completely lacks the conception of an activity which builds up the life of the community. And therefore it is beside the point whether the individual Jew is ‘decent’ or not. In himself he carries those characteristics which Nature has given him, and he cannot ever rid himself of those characteristics. And to us he is harmful. Whether he harms us consciously or unconsciously, that is not our affair. We have consciously to concern ourselves for the welfare of our own people.

Mein Kampf:
With the Jewish people the spirit of self-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.

Laurency (L5e21.24):
Certainly individuals of the same esoteric group may be found incarnated in different races. But then this implies for the esoterician that marriage between two such individuals in that particular incarnation would be a mistake. They have been given other tasks than marrying each other.
Laurency (l5_21):
Visst kan man återfinna individer tillhörande samma esoteriska grupp inkarnerade i olika raser. Men det betyder för esoterikern, att äktenskap mellan dessa just den inkarnationen vore ett misstag. De ha fått andra uppgifter än att gifta sig med varandra.

The Initiate in the Dark Cycle, p.g. 41-42:
[See L5e16 for Laurency’s explanation of The Initiate‘s sequel.]
During that winter, David, Viola and I would often sit over the fire discussing a variety of subjects, or David would tell us of his experiences in India. I have always been puzzled about the psychology of the Indian race.
“Why is it,” I asked, “that the Indians have these wonderful philosophies, and yet seem to be so shifty and squalid in many ways?”
His explanation was very illuminating. Each race, he told us, has its particular limitation, and no man can entirely escape his race-influence, which is apt to affect his unconscious even when he least suspects it.

Hitler, August 15, 1920 speech:

  • He lives as a race amongst other races, in a state within others states. And we can see very precisely that when a race does not possess certain traits which must be hereditary, it not only cannot create a state but must act as a destroyer, no matter if a given individual is good or evil.
  • One can almost say that the Jew cannot help it because everything stems from his race. He cannot do anything about it and, besides, it doesn’t matter whether he is good or bad for he must act according to the laws of his race, just as do members of our people. A Jew is everywhere a Jew; consciously or unconsciously, he resolutely represents the interests of his race.
  • And in all these things we must understand that there are no good or evil Jews. Here everyone works exactly according to the instincts of his race, because the race, or should we say, the nation and its character, as the Jew himself explains, lies in blood, and this blood is forcing everyone to act according to these principles, whether he is the leading mind in a party that calls itself democratic, or calls itself socialist, or a man of science, literature, or just an ordinary exploiter. He is a Jew; he works aglow with one thought: How do I get my people to become the Master Race.

Laurency (ps1):
1Man is neither “good” nor “evil”. He is, at his present stage of development, an undeveloped being with primitive instincts, egoistic interests, and unreal world views and life views.

Laurency (wm1.71):
7To “god” there is no good or evil creature, just individuals on various levels of development. The saying in the Gospel novel attributed to Christos, “none is good save one, that is, god”, was a gnostic saying. Christos would never have expressed himself thus. Goodness is unity.

✝Origen:
nor does [Celsus] see how great is the injury done to religion from accepting the statement that before God there is no difference between a man and an ant or a bee, but proceeds to add, that “if men appear to be superior to irrational animals on this account, that they have built cities, and make use of a political constitution, and forms of government, and sovereignties, this is to say nothing to the purpose, for ants and bees do the same.
Bees, indeed, have a sovereign, who has followers and attendants; and there occur among them wars and victories, and slaughterings of the vanquished, and cities and suburbs, and a succession of labours, and judgments passed upon the idle and the wicked; for the drones are driven away and punished.

Hitler, Table Talk (Cameron & Stevens), November 16, 1941:
Society should preserve itself from such elements. Animals who live in the social state have their outlaws. They reject them.

Hitler, Memoirs of a Confidant, p.g. 166:
In nature, we see the same thing in a flock of sheep, for example, or among a herd of deer. If foreign animals stray into the community, they are attacked and expelled. Nature knows nothing of what we call humanitarianism and socialism. With brutal ruthlessness, the one who does not belong to the community is chased away from the herd, even out of the herd’s territory, or it is simply massacred.

[Needless to say, mainstream historians typically quote these kind of passages out of context or mistranslate them, to serve as ammunition for their narratives.]

Hitler, Memoirs of a Confidant, p.g. 145:
Of course it is not appropriate for humankind to act like animals. We cannot simply eliminate what is sick and weak, abandoning it as wild animals do, killing it as the bees do with their drones. Whatever has entered human society must somehow be placed in the service of this society and cared for. But Providence has allowed us to find the means to prevent–or at least to limit–the sickly and the weak from entering human society in the first place.

Hitler, Memoirs of a Confidant, p.g. 213:
And three, there are the racially degenerate who, if they had any property, would have joined the Democratic Party. As it is, they look on themselves as unappreciated geniuses, as neglected, and as pariahs; therefore, they have become nihilists and criminals. . . . The last group consists of the dregs that can be found everywhere in life. It need not itself be to blame for its degeneracy. It can be the victim of other’s fault, even of the fathers. But it is of no use to the struggle for reconstruction. It can only destroy, demolish. Later on, we will have to see how this group can be incorporated and possibly restored to the community after all. Solving our problem of acquiring the right to property through work can win them all back. For this problem represents the solution of the socialist question and at the same time the redemption of those who feel eternally damned.

The Initiate in the New World, p.g. 26:
“Each Adept will have his own little characteristics and mannerisms, as well as the characteristics of his race and nationality.
Look at some of these Indian Swamis who have still a fair way to go before they reach Adeptship- externally they are as calm as tortoises; they’ll sit for hours in a chair without moving. But that astonishing calm lies in the race, not in the individual. It is a species of oriental indolence and not necessarily mind – concentration.


Accounts of Arabic dignity and hospitality

The Initiate in the New World, p.g. 26:
Why, I know an Adept who sometimes fidgets with his watch – chain and dangles his legs over the side of a chair and behaves almost like a schoolboy. And why not? Only vain people are always thinking of their dignity- unless it happens to be a racial characteristic, as with the Arabs. A woman once said to me, talking of that very man: ‘I’m sure he can’t be an Adept- no Adept would ever do anything in bad taste.’

Hanna Reitsch:
Throughout, the Arabs’ faces remained inscrutable. But they never seemed at a loss when I asked a question which no one understood, never seemed bored, never wavered from the ceremonial which the hour required. The Arabs are famous for their patience and their unfathomable reserve, but it was something more than those qualities which I experienced that day: it was the Sacredness of Hospitality, universal and absolute, and my hosts would rather have died than abuse it. When I realised this, I felt ashamed of my fears.

✡Henry Morgenthau III:
The party were all ushered into two well-illuminated rooms with cushion-covered divans and fine carpets on the walls. Some twenty-four Arab men sat cross-legged on the divans. They were discussing the effect the new railroad would have on their principal business, soap exports, when there would be larger shipments than could be transported by camel.
The Arabs spoke with great pride of their lineage. “They looked, indeed, with their intelligent faces and dignified bearing, like men bred of good stock.” One man claimed to have evidence that his family had resided in Nablus for five hundred years; another “traced his lineage back to the prophet Mohammed. . . .
Nothing could have been more gracious or hospitable than their manner toward us.” More to the point, Morgenthau believed he had been granted a brief, if carefully orchestrated, glimpse of how Arab men conduct themselves on their own turf.
On April 21 Morgenthau wrote Wise that these experiences had been “the most delightful … I have ever had in my life.”

Dean Acheson:
The Amir, striking in white burnoose and golden circlet, which heightened his swarthy complexion, with black, pointed beard and mustache topped by a thin hooked nose and piercing dark eyes, gave a sinister impression, relieved from time to time by a shy smile. Hollywood would have cast him as a dark and mysterious shiek. But his manner, like his brother’s, was composed and dignified, hands hidden in flowing sleeves and voice solemn and never excited.

Dean Acheson:
He spoke of the high regard his father, King Ibn Saud, had for the late President, whom he had met on a destroyer in the Red Sea when the President was returning from Yalta shortly before his death.

[Indeed, those who would point out Hitler’s acquaintance with the Grand Mufti must also acknowledge FDR and Churchill’s relationship with the anti-Semitic King Ibn Saud.]

Grace Tully:
En route home, the Boss stopped aboard the cruiser Quincy in Great Bitter Lake (which is a link in the Suez Canal waterway) for a meeting with King Farouk of Egypt and Ibn Saud, the great old warrior King of Saudi Arabia.
Ibn Saud was one of a number of world figures whom F.D.R. had always wanted to meet. He had been fascinated by what he had read of Saudi Arabia and greatly interested in what was even then a “bold new program” of bringing American technical skill to a relatively primitive country.
It was a meeting which did not fall short of expectations—at least as far as the President was concerned—and he told me after his return how impressed he had been with the evident character and statesmanlike wisdom of the Arabian monarch.
Cordell Hull:
The President himself was drawn to the powerful personality of King Ibn Saud, and looked forward eagerly to making his personal acquaintance.

Winston Churchill:
King Ibn Saud made a striking impression. My admiration for him was deep, because of his unfailing loyalty to us. He was always at his best in the darkest hours. He was now over seventy, but had lost none of his warrior vigour.

https://www.alaraby.co.uk/english/comment/2017/6/27/when-franklin-d-roosevelt-met-ibn-saud-1

Harry Hopkins:
I know perfectly well that all of you here in Britain are determined to go on fighting to hold the Middle East at all costs and that it’s difficult for you to understand the American attitude. But you have got to remember that we in the United States just simply do not understand your problems in the Middle East, and the interests of the Moslem world, and the interrelationship of your problems in Egypt and India. That is largely due to the fact that we have insufficient information on these subjects. The President himself has never been given a comprehensive explanation of the broad strategy of the Middle East campaign. The whole thing has been dealt with on a piecemeal basis, with attention being focused on Ethiopia, or Libya, or Syria or whatever happened to be the scene of local operations at the moment.”

[American meddling at it’s finest.]


Hitler, Memoirs of a Confidant, p.g. 211:
Now I come to the Democrats. Once more, a racial stratum: the Jews and the artificial Jews. For every single Democrat of this party orientation is actually nothing but an artificial Jew.
This party, which has absolutely no right to be called ‘democratic,’ has international connections and international interests. It exploits the label of democracy to conceal the lack of any national idea. The concept ‘Volk’ is something these people despise, something they consider either petty bourgeois or chauvinist, even militaristic. All these three characteristics are attacked and contemptuously rejected by the Democratic Party. And yet, they are only slogans they themselves have invented for whatever they, in their spiritual and moral decay, lack and therefore attack. They speak of themselves as Europeans and cosmopolitans, they claim Goethe for themselves. Actually, they seem to me nothing more than a stinking abscess within the Volk, living off the work and diligence of the Volk, as it were. They exploit for their own aims and ends the achievements of the Volk in every sphere.
Most of them are half-castes, to the second or third degree, mixed not only with Jews, but also with every possible bloodline of other nations and continents.

Hitler, Table Talk (Cameron & Stevens), December 1, 1941:
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.

Mein Kampf:
Nature generally takes certain measures to correct the effect which racial inter-breeding produces. She is not much in favour of the mongrel. The earlier products of interbreeding have to suffer bitterly, especially the third, fourth and fifth generations.
Not only are they deprived of the higher qualities that belonged to the parents who participated in the first crossing, but they also lack definite willpower and vigorous vital energies, owing to the lack of harmony in the quality of their blood.

Hitler, Table Talk (Cameron & Stevens), July 1, 1942:
Freiherr von Liebig has always been regarded as an ardent nationalist, and it was as such that he was brought to my attention. When I met him, however, I was repelled by the fellow’s undeniable Jewish appearance. I was nevertheless repeatedly assured that in the family tree of the Freiherr, which went very far back, there was no vestige of non-Aryan ancestry. And now, by pure chance, we have found out that one of the Freiherr’s ancestors, born at Frankfurt-On-Main in 1616, was a pure, hundred per cent Jew! And so, although more than three hundred years separate the present Freiherr from his Jewish ancestor, and although with this one exception all his ancestors were pure Aryans, he nevertheless has all the unmistakable racial characteristics of the Jew.
This confirms the opinion I have already expressed when speaking about the Englishman, Cripps, that all half-caste families—even if they have but a minute quantity of Jewish blood in their veins—produce regularly, generation by generation, at least one pure Jew. Roosevelt affords the best possible proof of the truth of this opinion.

Hitler, Memoirs of a Confidant, p.g. 211:
But they dominate the banking system and the corporate and trust system, they control the best and most immediate connections to foreign countries, and they prove their contempt for Germans by constantly pointing out how the British do it and what the Americans consider to be right, and what is bad, inferior, proletarian, and simply ‘typically German’ about the Germans. And they unconditionally cling to Jewish leadership.
Thank God the overwhelming mass of the German Volk has a finely attuned sense for who counts himself among the Volk and who distances himself from it.
Hitler, November 8, 1943 speech:
Thank God, the German Volk, as I have come to know it in its mass of different individuals, is strong and thoroughly healthy.

Luke 6:44 Each tree is recognized by its own fruit. People do not pick figs from thornbushes, or grapes from briers.

Julian:
Letter 10, To Eutherius
I am alive, and have been saved by the gods. Therefore offer sacrifices to them on my behalf, as thank-offerings. Your sacrifice will be not for one man only, but for the whole body of Hellenes2.

2. In the fourth century this word has lost some of its national meaning, and is used of pagans as opposed to Christians, especially by Julian. The sophists of that period called themselves and all students of rhetoric “Hellenes.”

Hitler, Memoirs of a Confidant, p.g. 211:
That is why this party has no support whatever among the people. It has such support only outside the Volk. On the basis of this realization, the grand master of these aliens also decided to change their name. Nowadays they call themselves the State Party. This change is quite in line with their thinking. For as far as they are concerned, the state is not the organization for the self-administration of a people, but simply a management which, for reasons of economic prosperity, seeks to conclude pacts consolidating interests with other managements. They pursue this aim with greater zeal than they devote to concern about their own followers, their joys and sorrows, their high points and their future.

Hitler, Triumph of the Will:
It is our nation’s greatest misery that moved us, united us in struggle, and made us fight strong, and all of those who have not suffered with me the very same misery and suffering among their own people cannot comprehend what we feel. To them, it is confusing and incomprehensible that this assembly would bring hundreds of thousands together and make them endure great misery, suffering and privation as a simple order of the State. They can only think that such a thing could only be possible at the command order of the State. They are gravely mistaken. It is not the State that orders us; but it is we who order the State! It is not the State that created us, it is we who created the State!

Henry T. Laurency ():
The state is no god and lacks the right to order people to think in a certain way. The individual does not exist for the state, but the state exists for the individual. Nations that fight those axioms are in the power of the black lodge.

Hitler, Table Talk (Cameron & Stevens), August 20, 1942:
I know of a comedian, Pallenberg by name, who was a typical Jew intellectual. He salted his money away in a Jew bank in Holland; now that he has, of course, lost it all, he is violently anti-Semitic!
Laurency (kr5):
The Church, the enemy of freedom, began fighting for freedom when it had lost power itself. Typical!

Hitler, Memoirs of a Confidant, p.g. 211:
But some of the sons of these men, the young people, are nevertheless influenced by national events and turn with loathing from their fathers. School, sports, and youth movements bring them into contact with the sons of German-thinking parents. In this way, an exodus soon makes itself felt.

Mein Kampf:
Although these qualities were disappearing more and more in the younger generation, owing to the all-pervading influence of the big city, yet among the younger generation also, there were many who were fundamentally sound and who were able to maintain themselves uncontaminated amid the sordid surroundings of their everyday existence.

Hitler, Memoirs of a Confidant, p.g. 211:
The party leaders therefore applied their mechanical thinking to seeking a means to offer the young people similar advantages as are available, for example, in the SA or the Stahlhelm or the Rotfront. So they assumed financing and leadership of the Reichsbanner Black, Red, Gold along with the whole Order of Young Germany.

Hitler, Memoirs of a Confidant, p.g. 212:
Now I come to the Social Democrats. That is where we find the great mass of the decent, striving, industrious German Volk from all tribes and levels. These are the people I have taken so much to my heart, whom I love, with whom I feel at one, closely united down to the last fiber; to them I have given my life and my strength, my work, my will, my hope, and my faith! . . . . In the Social Democratic Party, the racially purest and best German people live side by side. Unfortunately, as I said, under the wrong leaders. But that is not their fault!

Mein Kampf:
This probing into books and newspapers and the study of the teachings of Social Democracy reawakened my love for my own people, and thus what at first seemed an impassable gulf became the occasion of a closer affection.
Having once understood the working of the colossal system for poisoning the popular mind, only a fool could blame the victims of it. During the years that followed I became more independent, and as I did so, I became better able to understand the inner cause of the success achieved by this Social Democratic gospel.

Laurency (kl1_9):
15The planetary hierarchy emphatically asserts that the esoterician runs a great risk of falling a victim to “imperil” (mental self-poisoning). All too easily he is seized with disgust before a mankind that “understands nothing” and largely makes nothing but blunders. Thereby he becomes unfit for life, unable to help. He must overcome the irritation that too easily ensues when he constantly faces the absence of perception and understanding in the life-ignorant, the solid resistance to all his strivings, the “excuses of the unwilling”.

Laurency (wm9):
2There is a risk that the esoterician reacts wrongly to evil in the world. 44-self M. calls this risk “imperil”. Therein lies uncertainty about the future; discontent with the behaviour of other people; criticism of all kinds of things (political, social, etc., measures) he can do nothing about; a general sense of discontent (depression, despair) coupled with a sense of knowing everything better than others; which all results in a negative attitude.

Hitler’s Letters and Notes, p.g 284:
The Germanic Revolution

Nature is never cruel
Cruelty is – delight in
pointless suffering
Useless during the struggle –

Hitler, May 26, 1944, Platterhof hotel talk:
Translated by Carlos W. Porter, hosted by Carolyn Yeager
Nature already eliminates, in the [illegible] struggle the damaged and the weak. Bitches immediately push weak puppies, who want to suck, away from themselves. Why? We do not know. But she allows it to die – cruelly, as we human beings believe – in reality, however, [such perishing is] full of profound insight.

Hitler, Memoirs of a Confidant, p.g. 166:
In nature, we see the same thing in a flock of sheep, for example, or among a herd of deer. If foreign animals stray into the community, they are attacked and expelled. Nature knows nothing of what we call humanitarianism and socialism. With brutal ruthlessness, the one who does not belong to the community is chased away from the herd, even out of the herd’s territory, or it is simply massacred.

Mein Kampf:
In regard to the part played by humane feeling, Moltke said that in time of war the essential thing is to get a decision as quickly as possible and that the most ruthless methods of fighting are, at the same time, the most humane.

Apollonius:
The Life of Apollonius
For there are two kinds of tyrants; the one kind put their victims to death without trial, the other after they have been brought before a court of law. The former kind resemble the more passionate and prompt of wild beasts, the other kind resemble the gentle and more lethargic ones.
That both kinds are cruel is clear to everybody who takes Nero as an example of the impetuous disposition which does not trouble about legal forms, Tiberius, on the other hand of the tardy and lurking nature; for the former destroyed his victims before they had any suspicion of what was coming, and the other after he had tortured them with long drawn-out terror.
For myself I consider those crueler who make a pretense of legal trial, and of getting a verdict pronounced in accordance with the laws; for in reality they set them at defiance, and bring in the same verdict as they would have done without any real trial, giving the name of law to the mere postponement of their own spleen.

Nikola Tesla:
Witness, in illustration, the prohibition movement. A drastic, if not unconstitutional, measure is now being put through in this country to prevent the consumption of alcohol and yet it is a positive fact that coffee, tea, tobacco, chewing gum and other stimulants, which are freely indulged in even at the tender age, are vastly more injurious to the national body, judging from the number of those who succumb. . . . But it should not be overlooked that all these are great eliminators assisting Nature, as they do, in upholding her stern but just law of the survival of the fittest. Eager reformers should also be mindful of the eternal perversity of mankind which makes the indifferent “laissez-faire” by far preferable to enforced restraint.

Hitler’s Letters and Notes, p.g 284:
The Germanic Revolution

Privilege through strength the basis of all Nature
The prerequisite of the world’s existence.

Hitler, November 12, 1944 speech:
Insofar as the Almighty opened our eyes in order to grant us insight into the laws of His rule, in accordance with the limited capabilities of us human beings, we recognize the incorruptible justice which gives life as a final reward only to those who are willing and ready to give a life for a life. Whether man agrees to or rejects this harsh law makes absolutely no difference. Man cannot change it; whoever tries to withdraw from this struggle for life does not erase the law but only the basis of his own existence.

Mein Kampf:
But such a preservation goes hand-in-hand with the inexorable law that it is the strongest and the best who must triumph and that they have the right to endure. He who would live must fight. He who does not wish to fight in this world, where permanent struggle is the law of life, has not the right to exist. Such a saying may sound hard; but, after all, that is how the matter really stands.

Mein Kampf:
Of course, to settle accounts with the Marxists on a scale which would be of genuine historical and universal importance could not be effected along lines laid down by some secret council or according to a plan concocted in the worn-out brain of some cabinet minister. It would have to be in accordance with the eternal laws of life on this Earth which are, and will remains those of a ceaseless struggle for existence.

Laurency (kl1_9):
2Life is struggle, for it is an eternal conflict between those who want to develop and those who fight evolution (consciousness development). Life is struggle, for all life is subject to the law of change and ignorant man is opposed to change if it does not, at least apparently, satisfy his egoism. Life is struggle for all want more than they need and those desires are always satisfied at the expense of others.

Rousseau:
Social Contract
There are indeed times in the history of States when, just as some kinds of illness turn men’s heads and make them forget the past, periods of violence and revolutions do to peoples what these crises do to individuals: horror of the past takes the place of forgetfulness, and the State, set on fire by civil wars, is born again, so to speak, from its ashes, and takes on anew, fresh from the jaws of death, the vigour of youth. Such were Sparta at the time of Lycurgus, Rome after the Tarquins, and, in modern times, Holland and Switzerland after the expulsion of the tyrants. But such events are rare; they are exceptions, the cause of which is always to be found in the particular constitution of the State concerned.

Mein Kampf:
It must be remembered, that in many instances a hardy and healthy nation has emerged from the ordeal of bloody civil war, while from peace conditions which had been artificially maintained there often resulted a state of national putrescence that reeked to heaven.

Hitler, The Artist Within the Warlord, p.g. 108:
Translated by Wilhelm Kriessmann, Ph.D and Carolyn Yeager
“A new, strong and historical order always arises from struggle and war, or–we always have to be aware of that danger–chaos, splitting up of ethnic entities, degeneration of nations, rigor, loss and decline.”

Ambassador William Dodd:
In the Garden of Beasts
[Hitler] has definitely said on a number of occasions that a people survives by fighting and dies as a consequence of peaceful policies.

Hitler, May 26, 1944, Platterhof hotel talk:
Translated by Carlos W. Porter, hosted by Carolyn Yeager
When one regards the German people from this point of view, as purely biological, then we see a union of peoples with the same language, consolidated through the circuitous route of State-formation – that is perhaps the decisive thing here – but of various racial origins; a Nordic racial nucleus, but Alpine elements are present as well, [also] Mediterranean racial nuclei, with a still-European base race in it all, a pre-historical [prehistoric] race which we are no longer able to identify specifically, but which is there, it was already there among the Greeks; the Helots of the Spartans consisted of them.

[See Table Talk (Cameron & Stevens) entries November 5, 1941, February 17, 1942]

https://carolynyeager.net/comment/reply/3221/4513

Wallis Warfield, Duchess of Windsor:
The heart has its reasons
I could not take my eyes off Hitler. He was dressed in his brown Party uniform. His face had a pasty pallor, and under his mustache his lips were fixed in a kind of mirthless grimace. Yet at close quarters he gave one the feeling of great inner force. His hands were long and slim, a musician’s hands,

Hitler, Table Talk (Cameron & Stevens), June 24, 1943:
The whole blossoming of our music in Vienna is not due to the town; such things do not spring from their environment, but from the genius of a race. Really creative music is composed partly of inspiration and partly of a sense of composition. The inspiration is of Slavonic origin, the art of composition is of Germanic. It is when these two mingle in one man that the master of genius appears.
In Bach’s music it is the composition which is marvellous, and he certainly had no drop of Slav blood in his veins. As regards Beethoven, on the other hand, one glance at his head shows that he comes of a different race. It is not pure chance that the British have never produced a composer of genius; it is because they are a pure Germanic race.

Hitler, November 8, 1939 speech:
Or when they say that they stand up for culture: England as the creator of culture is a chapter in its own right. The English cannot tell us Germans anything about culture: our music, our poetry, our architecture, our paintings, our sculptures, can more than stand a comparison to the English arts. I believe that a single German, let us say, Beethoven, achieved more in the realm of music than all Englishmen of the past and present together! And we take care of this culture better than the English are capable of doing.

Henriette von Schirach:
http://www.spiegel.de/spiegel/print/d-14325460.html
I am a Mediterranean man,” [Hitler] confessed in a silent voice. “When the dreadful war is finally over, I will draw and paint in the Albanian mountains like many German artists before me.”

Hitler (attributed):
They know that Benito Mussolini is constructing a colossal empire which will put the Roman Empire in the shade. We shall put up … for his victories. Mussolini is a typical representative of our Alpine race which, in everything it does, has its eye on eternity.
Suetonius:
[Nero] had a longing for immortality and undying fame, though it was ill-regulated.

Leni Riefenstahl:
On the subject of Mussolini and Italy, he accused himself on making the unforgivable mistake of esteeming Italy as highly as he did the Duce. ‘As an Italian, Mussolini is an exception. His qualities are far above average, while the Italians as a rule wage only wars that they lose. Except for their Alpine troops none of them can fight; they are just like the other Balkan nations, apart from the courageous Greeks.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alpine_race#History
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Unmasked:_Two_Confidential_Interviews_with_Hitler_in_1931#Authenticity
https://books.google.com/books?id=HXJKAAAAIAAJ&focus=searchwithinvolume&q=alpine

Hitler, Table Talk (Cameron & Stevens), July 7, 1942:
The real protagonists of culture, both in the thousand years before Christ and in the thousand years after Him, were the peoples of the Mediterranean. This may appear improbable to us to-day, because we are apt to judge these people from present-day appearances. But that is a great mistake.

Hitler’s Letters and Notes, p.g 286:
The Germanic Revolution

Causes of the Decline (Negrification of the Mediterranean)

✡Gerald Menuhin:
Following on Coudenhove-Kalergi’s vison of “the Eurasian-Negroid race of the future” (1925), Hitler, in an open letter to Graf Soden-Fraunhofen printed in the Völkischer Beobachterof November 8, 1929, predicted that, ‘They want to transform our people economically and spiritually into white negroes. That is the goal of the Jewish race which rules over Germany today.” (Cited in Hitlers Kontrahenten in der NSDAP, Werner Bräuninger, 2004, p. 106)

Hitler, Zweites Buch:
According to the conception of that everybody’s bastard, Coudenhove, this Pan Europe would one day play the same role vis-à-vis the American Union, or a nationally awakened China that was formerly played by the old Austrian State vis-à-vis Germany or Russia.

✡Heinz Weichardt:
Today, sixty years later and observing the precipitous decline of a typical multiracial and multicultural society, I am forced to conclude that it was exactly the racial and cultural unity of the Third Reich which enabled its people to survive the monstrous assault of their enemies and to arise again from the ashes of their nation. The present effort to destroy by all means this unity through the planned influx of millions of the unwashed garbage of the Third World and systematic destruction of all traditions in the mind of the present generation shows that Germany’s eternal enemies fully agree with me on this point.

Robert Ley:
Interview with Lothrop Stoddard
“But behind both those principles is a third which is even more fundamental. This is what we call the Gemeinschaft — the organic unity of a people, founded on identity of blood. Germany is fortunate in being racially united. That is the ultimate secret of our harmonious strength.”

3. Rienzi

Special Impulse

Mein Kampf:
Just as in our daily life the so-called man of genius needs a particular occasion, and sometimes needs a special stimulus to bring his genius to light, so too, in the life of the peoples the race that has genius in it needs the occasion and stimulus to give that genius expression.
In the monotony and routine of everyday life even persons of significance seem just like the others and do not rise beyond the average level of their fellow-men, but as soon as such men find themselves in a special situation which disconcerts and unbalances the others, the humble person of apparently common qualities reveals traits of genius often to the amazement of those who have hitherto known him in the petty round of everyday life. That is the reason why a prophet is seldom honoured in his own country.
War offers an excellent occasion for observing this phenomenon. In times of distress, when the others despair, apparently harmless, boys suddenly spring up and become heroes, full of determination, undaunted in the presence of Death and manifesting wonderful powers of calm reflection in such circumstances. If such an hour of trial did not come, nobody would have thought that the soul of a hero lurked in the body of that beardless youth. A special impulse is, almost always necessary to bring a man of genius into the foreground.
The sledge-hammer of Fate, which strikes down the one so easily, suddenly finds the counter-impact of steel when it strikes at the other, and, after the common shell of everyday life is broken, the core that lay hidden is displayed to the eyes of an astonished world. This surrounding world then grows perverse and will not believe that what had seemed so like itself is really of that different quality so suddenly displayed.
This is a process which is repeated probably every time a man of outstanding significance appears.

[In Chapter 5 of his memoirs, Tesla describes how a snowball rolling down a hill transitioned into an avalanche and how this made a strong impression on him.]

Plato:
Phaedo
And yet what is the feeling of lovers when they recognize a lyre, or a garment, or anything else which the beloved has been in the habit of using? Do not they, from knowing the lyre, form in the mind’s eye an image of the youth to whom the lyre belongs? And this sort of thing, he said, is recollection, and is most commonly a process of recovering that which has been forgotten through time and inattention.

Laurency ():
2In a previous incarnation, Goethe was a Greek sculptor, a disciple of Praxiteles. This explains his keen interest in Greek art. Even the replicas of it he saw in Italy roused his remembrance, which enabled him to visualize the Greek originals in those replicas. Also he correctly realized that Greek art was exemplary and was the acme of human art.

Karl Viëtor:
Goethe The Poet, p.g. 83
Greek architecture he saw with his own eyes at Paestum, journeying there twice from Naples to see the famous Doric temples. This memory was “the last and grandest idea” which he took with him from Italy. On his Sicilian journey he also saw the temples at Agrigentum. We must realize how little this is compared to what we know of Greek art and architecture today. Classical archaeology made its greatest finds only in the nineteenth century. . . . But to Goethe what he was able to see in Italy was a great abundance, and he called it “an unfathomable abyss of art.”

Goethe:
To Zelter, January 21, 1826
I feel I must tell you about some pieces of sculpture, which have lately arrived at my house, and on the value of which I now reckon. When in Rome, I lived in the Corso, opposite to Count Rondanini, who possessed, among other splendid works of Art, the face, the mask of a Medusa; it was larger than life-size, of white marble, and conspicuous for its excellence. We artists and connaisseurs often went to see it, nay, I actually had a good cast of this same work in my room. I have now had to dispense with the sight of it for forty years, as with much besides that is great and beautiful; it never petrified one, but informed one’s feeling for Art with grand and glorious life. . . .
Yet from one point of view it renews in me a painful feeling, for I cannot but reflect, that in those days, when I did not sufficiently understand the value of such treasures, they stood before my eyes, while now that I am to a certain extent able to appreciate them, I am separated from them by wide chasms.

Mein Kampf:
I am firmly convinced to-day that, generally speaking, it is in youth that men lay the essential groundwork of their creative thought, wherever that creative thought exists. I make a distinction between the wisdom of age—which can only arise from the greater profundity and foresight that are based on the experiences of a long life—and the creative genius of youth, which blossoms out in thought and ideas with inexhaustible fertility, without being able to digest these immediately, because of their very superabundance.

Hitler, Table Talk (Cameron & Stevens), April 25, 1942:
It is not only the younger men in their early thirties who are capable of brilliant exploits—some have shone even earlier in life, as, for example, Napoleon and Alexander, who was but twenty years of age—but that very often it is in their sixties and even their seventies that many men accomplish their greatest achievements.

Nikola Tesla:
My Inventions
In attempting to give a connected and faithful account of my activities in this story of my life, I must dwell, however reluctantly, on the impressions of my youth and the circumstances and events which have been instrumental in determining my career. Our first endeavours are purely instinctive promptings of an imagination vivid and undisciplined. As we grow older reason asserts itself and we become more and more systematic and designing. But those early impulses, though not immediately productive, are of the greatest moment and may shape our very destinies. Indeed, I feel now that had I understood and cultivated instead of suppressing them, I would have added substantial value to my bequest to the world. But not until I had attained manhood did I realise that I was an inventor.

Mein Kampf:
Though an inventor, for example, does not establish his fame until the very day on which he completes his invention, it would be a mistake to believe that the creative genius did not become alive in him until that moment. From the very hour of his birth the spark of genius is alive within the man who has been endowed with the real creative faculty. True genius is an innate quality. It can never be the result of education or training. As I have stated already, this holds good not merely of the individual, but also of the race. Those peoples who manifest creative ability in certain periods of their history have always been fundamentally creative. It belongs to their very nature, even though this fact may escape the eyes of the superficial observer.

[See Genius.]

Interview with Ian Stevenson

Q: Most of the subjects you’ve studied hail from cultures that accept reincarnation, like Indian Hindus. Could people in a culture more hostile to reincarnation repress past-life memories?
A: That certainly happens. Still, there are cases in North America. Parents sometimes write me and say, “My child is now 12 years old. I wish I knew about you when he was 2 or 3. He said he was an airline pilot, and we told him to stop telling lies and now he doesn’t remember anything.” That’s a fairly common opening. We found that 40 percent of people even in India suppress their children. It’s not that they disbelieve them. It’s that they have various ideas, one that it’s harmful to remember a previous life. Sometimes, they object to the content of what the child is saying. The child might show snobbishness. He’ll say, “I was, am, Brahmin and won’t eat your polluted food. I have to have food cooked by a Brahmin.”

[Looking into one’s past incarnations can dig up past hatreds and harmful complexes. The Indians demonstrate discretion by taking this into account.]


[Here’s a fascinating and thorough study of the Rienzi experience from Ben Novak, the author of the book Hitler and Abductive Logic. It’s rare and refreshing to find historians who are open-minded enough to give fair treatment to the historical source material without strictly ending up in the revisionist camp. In the aforementioned book, he often refers to Einstein’s life as an example for his arguments and also regularly quotes from Konrad Heiden. Hardly a “Nazi” sympathizer.
Mr. Novak points out how historians (with the peculiar exceptions of Joachim Köhler and Brigitte Hamann, who took the Rienzi experience seriously and gave it a fairer treatment) have typically downplayed the significance of this momentous occasion, some even going so far as to dismiss Kubizek’s reliability. “The first approach consists of ignoring Kubizek’s account of the Rienzi experience by simply omitting any mention of it“, citing books from Alan Bullock, William L. Shirer, and Karl Dietrich Bracher.
That should come as no surprise, seeing how they pass on the interpretation of other historians in a monotonous, unbroken circle. Dig up any history book, check their resources/notes, and you’ll be hard pressed to find any that rely on primary/secondary sources.]

Laurency (L4e7):

1But since that idea could not be fit into the speculative systems of the ruling ignorance, it could not be correct. Better then to pass it by without mention of it.

[Here it might be worth mentioning how the revisionist David Irving managed to procure live interviews with surviving Germans who only opened themselves up to him (a testament to his trustworthiness at the time) for his work and how his work is interspersed with references to primary/secondary sources. Irving was also one of the few historians to pay homage to the Rienzi experience.
Novak also points out how there are also historians who make a passing mention without dwelling on the subject. In William Gillespie’s forward to his book Dietrich Eckart (hosted on a white nationalist site, this is not meant to be an endorsement of white nationalism), Gillespie cites 10 examples of Eckart being sidelined by mainstream historians. Just a passing mention or short summary!
Curiously, historians Frederic Spotts and Ian Kershaw made concessions to Kubizek’s testimony. The former affirmed that there was a factual merit for Kubizek’s claim while the latter observed that the characteristics ascribed to Hitler by Kubizek were consistent with the man that he would later become. Both Spotts and Kershaw point out how Kubizek was insistent that it had really happened after Jetzinger voiced his skepticism.]

Frederic Spotts:
Hitler and the Power of Aesthetics
Yet, paradoxically, it is one story – albeit minus the book’s overwrought verbiage – that is anchored in fact. One fact is that the opera was actually performed at the local opera house beginning in January 1905.

[Apparently, historians such as Joachim Fest and Werner Maser adopted the Jesuit Franz Jetzinger’s moralistic criticism of Kubizek; a Jesuit is hardly a trustworthy person. His deep hatred for Hitler and his role as a Social Democratic politician should have ruled out his testimony altogether. Fest regards the scene as “exaggerated and retouched” and attempts to discredit Kubizek by ascribing to him an intention to rehabilitate Hitler.]

Laurency (L4e4.14):
2Perfect as well are the psychological methods applied by the Jesuit Order. The obligation to obey is fundamental. Only in extremely rare cases does a Jesuit succeed in liberating himself from the complexes inoculated into him. When he has undergone the treatment, he is the perfect robot, a flexible tool in the hands of those in control.

Laurency (L4e4.14):
3For the prevention of misunderstandings it should be pointed out that religious orders or orders that are more of a social nature should not be confused with esoteric knowledge orders. . . . [In the latter, the] obligation to obey is precluded. Everyone is responsible himself for everything. All work in the service of the order is voluntary, all tasks or duties are determined as voluntary, self-assumed, and on the individuals’ own initiatives.

Heinrich Himmler:
The Jesuit lies for a purpose. He says anything whatever with a beaming face and knows that he is deceiving you. The Jesuit therefore is lying and knows it; he does not forget for a moment that he is lying.

[In recent times, mainstream historians have attempted to dismiss the event as an outright fantasy on the basis of an obscure study conducted by a Jonas Karlsson, which was published in the July 2012 issue of Wagner Journal, without, of course, providing an excerpt for the reader’s examination. Instead, we are merely told that this Karlsson had established that there were only five performances of Rienzi in the early 1905 and that Hitler and Kubizek could not have attended it together.
The wiki pursues the same narrative, citing his study without providing any excerpts, but acknowledges that it’s “known that Hitler possessed the original manuscript of the opera, which he had requested and been given as a fiftieth birthday present in 1939.”
Needless to say, Rienzi’s impact on Hitler has been corroborated by various Hitler intimates and table talk attendees, not least of all by court historian’s favorite Albert Speer. Since they regard Speer as trustworthy, nowadays they argue that either Hitler attended it alone or he lied to Ley (the article overlooks that Hitler had told it to Ley, not Speer). In a January 15, 1951 diary entry, Speer would go on to describe Hitler entering into a trance while visiting Landestheater. It is said that this was where he first watched Rienzi.]


Testimony

Hermann Giesler:
He also told us stories from his youth: In this small theater I experienced for the first time an opera, it was, ‘Rienzi’.
Er erzählte uns auch Begebenheiten aus seiner Jugendzeit: In diesem kleinen Theater erlebte ich zum erstenmal eine Oper, es war ,Rienzi’.

Speer (Diaries), February 7, 1948:
Summer of 1938
Amused, Hitler watched Ley’s reaction, enjoying his obvious embarrassment. Then he suddenly became very serious and offered in explanation:
“You know, Ley, it isn’t by chance that I have the Party Rallies open with the overture to Rienzi. It’s not just a musical question. At the age of twenty-four this man, an innkeeper’s son, persuaded the Roman people to drive out the corrupt Senate by reminding them of the magnificent past of the Roman Empire. Listening to this blessed music as a young man in the theater at Linz, I had the vision that I too must someday succeed in uniting the German Empire and making it great once more.”

[So here we have Hitler announcing his viewing of Rienzi to Ley before Kubizek mentions it to him a year later. Future biographers of Hitler can find a parallel in Hitler’s preference for Verdi’s Aïda.]

Speer (Diaries), February 7, 1948:
Summer of 1938
We were sitting with Robert Ley, the organization chief of the Party, in the salon of Winifred Wagner’s guest house in Bayreuth. Ley was trying to convince Hitler that the music of a contemporary composer should be used for the ceremonial opening of the Party Rallies in Nuremberg. The National Socialist ideology must also be expressed in musical terms, he contended. It seemed that he had gone ahead and commissioned such a piece from several composers. Hitler and Winifred Wagner remained skeptical, but Ley clung to his idea.

Irving:
Hitler’s War, p.g. 191
Robert Ley, the Labour Front leader, tormented Hitler in a different way. In Winifred Wagner’s exquisite drawing room he proposed that at the coming Nuremberg Rally they should dispense with the customary fanfare from Verdi’s Aïda and play instead a little piece which he, Ley, had composed for the occasion. He modestly played a gramophone record of the fanfare. After the last fearsome strains died away, Hitler tersely announced: ‘We’ll stick to Aïda!’

[Unfortunately, Irving neglected to supply sources for this particular page of his book. He brought it up in the context of Hitler’s July 1939 visit to Bayreuth. That Speer was being ambiguous about the compositions Ley had in mind is likewise regrettable.]

Kubizek:
The Verdi operas we saw together were The Masked Ball, Trovatore, Rigoletto and La Traviata, but Aïda was the only one which he liked at all.

Kubizek:
The Young Hitler I Knew, Chapter 10
In 1939, shortly before war broke out, when I, for the first time visited Bayreuth as the guest of the Reichs Chancellor, I thought I would please my host by reminding him of that nocturnal hour on the Freinberg, so I told Adolf Hitler what I remembered of it, assuming that the enormous multitude of impressions and events which had filled these past decades would have pushed into the background the experience of a seventeen year old youth. But after a few words I sensed that he vividly recalled that hour and had retained all its details in his memory. He was visibly pleased that my account confirmed his own recollections.

[Kubizek’s description matches other accounts of Hitler’s excellent memory. As for Kubizek’s memory, Brigette Hamann maintained that despite his clumsiness with dates (citing examples of inaccuracies) and his obvious attempts to distance himself from anti-Semitism, he was generally reliable.]

Memoirs of a Confidant, p.g. 216-218:
Wagener: “You probably attach less value to Rienzi.”
Hitler: “But why? It’s a special favorite of mine! [Ger. Den liebe ich besonders!] Why did you think so?”
Wagener: “I thought it might make you uncomfortable to be in the audience while the stage action shows a man–particularly a man of the people, who has risen to be the leader of his people–in the end nevertheless falling victim to the intrigues of those around him.”
Hitler [giving an odd laugh]: “On the contrary, perhaps I always see the mistakes that can be made–so as to avoid them later on.”
Wagener: “Rienzi was betrayed by the conservatives, by the aristocracy, by the important owners of land and industry, to whom he had extended the hand of friendship.”
Hitler: “But he did not have the backing of a party of his own.”

[So there you have it, confirmation of Rienzi’s importance to Hitler from his two chief architects and a reliable intimate.]

Kubizek:
Listening to Wagner meant to him, not a simple visit to the theatre, but the opportunity of being transported into that extraordinary state which Wagner’s music produced in him, that trance, that escape into a mystical dream world which he needed in order to endure the tensions of his turbulent nature.

Jacob Burckhardt:
Force and Freedom: Reflections on History
Further, we discover in ourselves a feeling of the most spurious kind, namely a need to submit and wonder, a craving to drug ourselves with some seemingly majestic impression, and to give our imaginations full play.1

1. This only holds good for the great men of politics and war. Those of the intellectual world (poets, artists, philosophers) are often persistently refused recognition during their lifetime.

Edward Bulwer-Lytton:
Rienzi
Verily, a man who becomes great is often but made so by a kind of sorcery in his own soul—a Pythia which prophesies that he shall be great—and so renders the life one effort to fulfil the warning! Is this folly?—it were so, if all things stopped at the grave!

Hitler, Table Talk (Cameron & Stevens), January 25-26, 1942:
When I hear Wagner, it seems to me that I hear rhythms of a bygone world. I imagine to myself that one day science will discover, in the waves set in motion by the Rheingold, secret mutual relations connected with the order of the world. The observation of the world perceived by the senses precedes the knowledge given by exact science as well as by philosophy. It’s in as far as percipient awareness approaches truth that it has value.

[Henry Picker, commenting on this Table Talk entry, remarked at the end:]

And in “Rienzi”, [Richard Wagner] had so timelessly portrayed the Roman tribunes of the people that Hitler – as he told us – by a Rienzi performance in Linz came for the first time the idea to become such a Volk tribune or politician.
Und er hatte im »Rienzi« den römischen Volkstribunen so zeitlos dargestellt, dass Hitler – wie er uns sagte – bei einer Rienzi-Aufführung in Linz erstmals der Gedanke kam, auch so ein Volkstribun oder Politiker zu werden.

Hans Severus Ziegler:
Adolf Hitler, aus dem Erleben dargestellt
[temporary translation: that the sixteen-year-old Hitler saw from the standing room and that immediately won the youth for the music of Wagner as well as for the entire saga and legends. From then on, the young Hitler together with his friend in the floor space of his home theater conquered almost all works, u. a. also the »Rienzi«. The figure of the Roman tribune]
die der sechzehnjährige Hitler vom Stehplatz aus erlebte und die den Jüngling sofort für die Musik Wagners wie für den gesamten Sagenstoff und Sagenkreis gewann. Von da ab hat sich der junge Hitler gemeinsam mit seinem Freund im Stehparkett seines Heimattheaters fast alle Werke, u. a. auch den »Rienzi« erobert. Die Gestalt des römischen Volkstribuns


Kubizek:
The Young Hitler I Knew, Chapter 10
I was also present when Adolf Hitler retold this sequel to the performance of Rienzi in Linz to Frau Wagner, at whose home we were both guests. Thus my own memory was doubly confirmed. The words with which Hitler concluded his story to Frau Wagner are also unforgettable for me. He said solemnly, “In that hour it began.”

[In her book Winifried Wagner, Brigette Hamann states:
“Later it was important to Hitler to be looked on as Rienzi reincarnate. Among the Kubizek family his alleged statement, ‘I want to become a people’s tribune,’ was passed on.”]

cdd65fa3aee7872d200889b76c754adf.jpg

Paula Hitler:
June 5, 1946 interview
This extraordinary interest for music, especially for Wagner and Listz, remained with him for all his life. Particularly strong was even at that time already his interest for the theatre and especially for the opera. I can remember that he was visiting the opera house 13 times to hear “Die Gotterdammerung”.

[Needless to say, Wagner’s influence on Hitler and his deep relationship with the Wagner family is widely attested and acknowledged by all serious interpreters. So instead, I’ll focus on Hess’ relationship with Hitler.]

Kubizek:
Also, through this visit I was able to confirm an impression I had that the closer to the Chancellor a person stood, the more he had been told about me. Rudolf Hess and Frau Winifred Wagner were the most fully informed about Hitler’s youth and, consequently, about me.

Winston Churchill:
The Grand Alliance
[Rudolf Hess] knew and was capable of understanding Hitler’s inner mind—his hatred of Soviet Russia, his lust to destroy Bolshevism, his admiration for Britain and earnest wish to be friends with the British Empire, his contempt for most other countries. No one knew Hitler better or saw him more often in his unguarded moments.

[Hess was less forthcoming about whether he had known about Operation Barbarossa before he flew off. He at least admitted that knew about Hitler’s antagonism towards the Soviets. Churchill was genuinely surprised that Hess did not know or disclose the impending attack on Russia. He also had the impression that Stalin was deeply interested in the subject.]

Kubizek:
I had the feeling that, in a real, human way, Rudolf Hess was much closer to Hitler than many others and I was glad about this.

[Rudolf Hess informed Eugene K. Bird that there had been times where he felt close to Hitler, but he also added: very seldom.]


Kubizek’s account

[To start off with the inquiry into how Rienzi impacted Hitler, one must first open up the German version of Kubizek’s memoirs (beginning on p.g. 123, under the header DIE VISION), since the English translations have come down to us abridged, although mostly intact). At the start of the chapter, Kubizek mentions that the clear starry sky and it’s grandeur (the way he described it could almost be called a religious conviction) was a contributing factor to his strong impression of that event; his summary of Rienzi’s plot coupled with dialogue excerpts. Savitri Devi and David Irving paid full homage to the experience, but refrained from exploring it.]

Savitri Devi:
The Lightning and the Sun, p.g. 349
In August Kubizek’s biography of him as a young man, there is a passage too significant for me not to quote it nearly in extenso. It is the description of a walk to the Freienberg (a hill overlooking Linz) in the middle of the night, just after the future Führer and his friend had attended together, at the Opera, a performance of Richard Wagner’s “Rienzi.”

[I’ve made proper adjustments to the English translation, which I’ve distinguished with italics below.]

Kubizek:
The Young Hitler I Knew, Chapter 10
Now we were in the theatre, burning with enthusiasm, and living breathlessly through Rienzi’s rise to be the Tribune of the people of Rome and his subsequent downfall. When at last it was over, it was past midnight. My friend, his hands thrust into his coat pockets, silent and withdrawn, strode through the streets and out of the city.
Usually, after an artistic experience that had moved him, he would start talking straight away, sharply criticizing the performance, but after Rienzi he remained quiet a long while. This surprised me, and I asked him what he thought of it. He threw me a strange, almost hostile glance. “Be silent!” [Ger. “Schweig!“] he said brusquely.

The Initiate in the Dark Cycle, p.g. 75-76:
During our meal, a crowd of young hikers, flushed and laughing poured into the garden and settled themselves at a table a little way off.
“Don’t you suffer rather from this kind of thing, especially at week-ends?” Viola inquired of David; “isn’t it a bit disruptive to your work?”
“They don’t trouble me from that point of view,” he returned, “and as a matter of fact…” He broke off, and for quite a while contemplated the noisy, chattering group in ruminative silence.
“As a matter of fact–what?” Viola prompted him at last.
“Don’t interrupt,” I adjured her, “can’t you see he’s sensing them up?”

Reinhold Hanisch:
We often went to the scenic railway in the Prater, where we could hear the organ play “Tannhaüser [sic].” Hitler listened quietly and explained the action to us. Once he grabbed my hand excitedly and said, “That’s the passage! Do you hear? That’s the passage!”
On our way home he tried to explain the opera to us and sang some passages. In his excited way he could only hum a few tones and fidget with his arms. But he could describe the scenes very well, and what the music meant.

[Although Hanisch is generally unreliable, considering how his account was published posthumously in a foreign newspaper. He also deferred to the hostile Jewish journalist Konrad Heiden and attempted to discredit Hitler as a politician (notably, Hanisch has been described as a fervent anti-Semite who had a falling out with Hitler due to Hitler taking the side of his Jewish business acquaintances Josef Neumann and Siegfried Löffner), it’s still an early possible glimpse and a consistent portrayal of Hitler’s passionate excitability over subjects that interested him. Other subjects which particularly excited him were the history of the Catholic Church and the Paris Opera.]

Kubizek:
Yet one day he came to me full of excitement and showed me a book about witch trials, and another time about the Inquisition. But however worked up he got about the events described in these books, he never drew any political conclusions from them.
Riefenstahl:
He enthused about a topic that seemed very close to his heart – the history of the Catholic Church, almost going into ecstasies when he talked about this subject.

[Also refer to section Fate for Hess’ testimony on Hitler’s aloofness, which matches Kubizek’s account.]

Kubizek:
The Young Hitler I Knew, Chapter 10
The cold, damp mist lay oppressively over the narrow streets. Our solitary steps resounded on the pavement. Adolf took the road that led up to the Freinberg. Without speaking a word, he strode forward. He looked almost sinister, and paler than ever. His turned-up coat collar increased this impression.
I wanted to ask him, “Where are you going?” But his pallid face looked so forbidding that I suppressed the question.
As if propelled by an invisible force, Adolf climbed up to the top of the Freinberg. And only now did I realize that we were no longer in solitude and darkness, for the stars shone brilliantly above us.

[From another instance of Kubizek’s book, we find a similar description of Hitler almost being compelled into Nature.]

Kubizek:
When the sun shone brightly in the streets and a fresh, revivifying wind brought the smell of the woods into the town, an irresistible force drove him out of the narrow, stuffy streets into the woods and fields.

The Initiate in the Dark Cycle, p.g. 75-76:
“Correct,” said David, “I was. I’ve been realizing for some time now that these hikers who pour out of the cities in search of beauty are one of the few hopeful signs of the age.”
We glanced at him interrogatively, and he went on in an undertone:
They’re the sort of young egos who are being influenced by National Devas [High spiritual Beings helping to direct the evolution of different nations and races toward a specific end] to get into closer touch with nature and its purer vibrations. They don’t know it, of course, but that’s neither here nor there.”

The Initiate in the Dark Cycle, p.g. 75-76:
Some of the more refined are kind of led to definite centres, magnetized by Initiates centuries ago, and now guarded by Devas, some more, and some less powerful. Later, they will learn to visit these centres consciously.”

Julian:
But now consider our teaching in comparison with this of yours. Our writers say that the creator is the common father and king of all things, but that the other functions have been assigned by him to national gods of the peoples and gods that protect the cities; every one of whom administers his own department in accordance with his own nature.

The Initiate in the Dark Cycle, p.g. 77:
“Devas of this kind [National Devas] are restricted to the centres they guard.”

[Needless to say, traces of this teaching can be found in chapter 10 of the Book of Daniel. The Babylonian/Persian/Roman genii was distorted into the concept of angels.]

The Initiate in the Dark Cycle, p.g. 77:
It was a glorious Sunday morning, and the three of us climbed the hill and sat down by the dew-pond. From the plain below came the distant sound of church bells, undulating on the breeze; and overhead a skylark trilled its monotonous though joyous song.
“Our friend the Deva hovering over the hill, as usual, “David remarked after a long silence.
“I thought so,” from Viola. “I’ve seldom felt such a marvelous atmosphere.”
You often find these National Devas in places overlooking a wide expanse like this,” David pursued.

The Initiate in the Dark Cycle, p.g. 77:
“Both Wagner and Swinburne were overshadowed by Devas,” [David] informed us, “and Wagner’s Deva still helps to maintain the Wagner tradition, by detailing off his subordinates to inspire those who perform that great composer’s music. Needless to say, Devas of this kind are not restricted to any one country.”
“I suppose you’d call those International Devas as opposed to National ones,” I observed.

Kubizek:
Listening to Wagner meant to him, not a simple visit to the theatre, but the opportunity of being transported into that extraordinary state which Wagner’s music produced in him, that trance, that escape into a mystical dream world which he needed in order to endure the tensions of his turbulent nature.
Hitler, Table Talk (Cameron & Stevens), January 25-26, 1942:
When I hear Wagner, it seems to me that I hear rhythms of a bygone world. I imagine to myself that one day science will discover, in the waves set in motion by the Rheingold, secret mutual relations connected with the order of the world.

Laurency (L4e6):
7Wagner accepted Schopenhauer’s theory that life was filled with suffering to the breaking point. Wagner’s own theory was that music should mirror reality, and since life was disharmony, music should be so as well: only so much harmony and melody was to be included as made life bearable.
8Modern music with its disharmonies works at destroying an important “sense of truth” in the individual. . . . So-called musical culture has ever since Beethoven increasingly with-drawn from harmony.

[It’s worth noting that Wagner modeled his Rienzi opera off of Edward George Bulwer-Lytton’s book of the same name. In esoteric literature, Bulwer-Lytton is regarded as a genuine Rosicrucian. Perhaps this would explain why Wagner, despite basing his music on Schopenhauer’s pessimistic view of life, would be considered inspired. Furthermore, Rienzi was one of his earlier operas (written between July 1838 and November 1840), before he came across Schopenhauer’s works (1850-1861).]

Speer (Diaries), November 22, 1949:
My distaste for big cities, for the type of person they produced, and even my incomprehension of the amusements of my fellow students, together with my passion for rowing, hiking, and mountain climbing—all this was part and parcel of the romantic protest against civilization. I regarded Hitler above all as the preserver of the world of the nineteenth century against that disturbing metropolitan world which I feared lay in the future of all of us. Viewed in that light, I might actually have been waiting for Hitler. Moreover—and this justifies him even more—he communicated to me a strength that raised me far above the limits of my potentialities. If this is so, then I cannot say he led me away from myself: on the contrary, through him I first found a heightened identity.

Hitler, Table Talk (Cameron & Stevens), June 15, 1943:
It is perfectly true that we are a people of romantics, quite different from the Americans, for example, who see nothing beyond their sky-scrapers. Our romanticism has its origins in the intense appreciation of nature that is inherent in us Germans.

Speer:
Inside the Third Reich
We also sought “closeness with nature” on trips with our folding boats. In those days this sport was still new; the streams were not filled with craft of all kinds as they are today. In perfect quiet we floated down the rivers, and in the evenings we could pitch our tent at the most beautiful spot we could find. This leisurely hiking and boating gave us some of that happiness that had been a matter of course to our forefathers. Even my father had taken a tour on foot and in horse carriages from Munich to Naples in 1885. Later, when he would drive through all of Europe in his car, he used to speak of that tour as the finest travel experience he had ever had.
Many of our generation sought such contact with nature. This was not merely a romantic protest against the narrowness of middle-class life. We were also escaping from the demands of a world growing increasingly complicated. We felt that the world around us was out of balance. In nature, in the mountains and the river valleys, the harmony of Creation could still be felt. The more virginal the mountains, the lonelier the river valleys, the more they drew us. I did not, however, belong to any youth movement, for the group quality of these movements would have negated the very isolation we were seeking.

[Eugene K. Bird considered Rudolf Hess’ view on mountains to be significant enough to jot down. Hess informed him that he loved the mountains and recalled taking mountain walking-tours with his wife, specifically he was a member of an Austrian foot-touring club and went on hikes for up to three days.]

The Initiate in the Dark Cycle, p.g. 77:
A picnic party had appeared on the brow of the hill, talking and laughing with considerable vulgarity.
“Is our Deva aware of them at all, do you suppose?” my wife asked as they drew nearer.
“Not of this lot, I should think; they’re far too crude and low-geared!”


Nikola Tesla:
My Inventions
To what an extent imagination played a part in my early life I may illustrate by another odd experience. Like most children I was fond of jumping and developed an intense desire to support myself in the air. Occasionally a strong wind richly charged with oxygen blew from the mountains rendering my body as light as cork and then I would leap and float in space for a long time. It was a delightful sensation and my disappointment was keen when later I undeceived myself.

Nikola Tesla:
My Inventions
While in Paris, in 1883, a prominent French manufacturer sent me an invitation to a shooting expedition which I accepted. I had been long confined to the factory and the fresh air had a wonderfully invigorating effect on me.

[From another instance of Kubizek’s book, we find a similar description of Hitler almost being compelled into Nature.]

Kubizek:
When the sun shone brightly in the streets and a fresh, revivifying wind brought the smell of the woods into the town, an irresistible force drove him out of the narrow, stuffy streets into the woods and fields.

Mein Kampf:
After this the meeting broke up and everyone hurried to get outside, one to his glass of beer, one to a cafe, and others simply into the fresh air. Out into the fresh air! That was also my one desire.

Mein Kampf:
To-day, when my political opponents pry into my life, as far back as the days of my boyhood, with diligent scrutiny so as finally to be able to prove what disreputable tricks this Hitler was, accustomed to play in his young day, I thank Heaven that I can look back on those happy days and find the memory of them helpful. The fields and the woods were then the terrain on which all disputes were fought out. Even attendance at the Realschule could not alter my way of spending my time.

[And so we have sufficient corroboration of how Hitler spent his youth.]

Speer:
Inside the Third Reich
During the holidays my future wife and I with a few fellow students frequently went on tramps from shelter to shelter in the Austrian Alps.
Hard climbs gave us the sense of real achievement. Sometimes, with characteristic obstinacy, I managed to convince my fellow hikers not to give up a tour we had started on, even in the worst weather-in spite of storms, icy rains, and cold, although mists spoiled the view from the peak when we finally reached it. Often, from the mountain tops, we looked down upon a deep gray layer of cloud over the distant plain. Down there lived what to our minds were wretched people; we thought we stood high above them in every sense. Young and rather arrogant, we were convinced that only the finest people went into the mountains. When we returned from the peaks to the normal life of the lowlands, I was quite confused for a while by the bustle of the cities.

Hitler, Table Talk (Cameron & Stevens), November 5, 1941:
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.

Hippocrates of Kos:
On Airs, Waters, and Places
Such as inhabit a country which is mountainous, rugged, elevated, and well watered, and where the changes of the seasons are very great, are likely to have great variety of shapes among them, and to be naturally of an enterprising and warlike disposition; and such persons are apt to have no little of the savage and ferocious in their nature;

Mein Kampf:
The impression which I often get, especially of those so-called religious reformers whose creed is grounded on ancient Germanic customs, is that they are the missionaries and protégés of those forces which do not wish to see a national revival taking place in Germany. All their activities tend to turn the attention of the people away from the necessity of fighting together in a common cause against the common enemy, namely the Jew. Moreover, that kind of preaching induces the people to use up their energies, not in fighting for the common cause, but in absurd and ruinous religious controversies within their own ranks.

Hitler, Memoirs of a Confidant, p.g. 279:
Of course, if we wanted to lead these young people up a mountain merely to sing the same kind of stupid songs women and men sing in the churches to this day, and if we then wished to worship these fires in the same way old people worship carved wooden figures and painted pictures or even fake relics in those same churches–then those people would be right who say: it would be better to let the children go to the enclosed houses of God; at least they won’t catch cold.

Hitler, Memoirs of a Confidant, p.g. 223-224:
None of the religions of antiquity, no Negroid idolatry, not even the most primitive sects of the Mohammedan, Indian, or Chinese religions has created so many gods and auxilary deities as the Roman Church. And yet their choirs join in singing from the Book of Moses: ‘Thou shalt have no other gods before me.’ But let’s drop it; it’s too stupid.

Laurency (kr7):
4The missionaries accuse the poor heathen of worshipping horrible idols in their temples, but forget that certain Christians worship the Virgin Mary and innumerable images of saints as well as icons in their temples. They do not suspect that the Indian statues are highly “magnetized”, as a result of which the emotional worshippers devoutly contemplating the symbols of various cosmic energies receive a longed-for physical-etheric and emotional stimulation.

[It might be worth mentioning the prevalence of Virgin Mary statues and other relics emerging unscathed in the wake of natural disasters. The Catholics erroneously attribute these to their arbitrary concept of god.]

The Initiate in the Dark Cycle, p.g. 75-76:
Some of the more refined are kind of led to definite centres, magnetized by Initiates centuries ago, and now guarded by Devas, some more, and some less powerful. Later, they will learn to visit these centres consciously.”

Justinus Kerner:
Seeress of Prevorst (Justinus Kerner)
Even that disclosing of the spirit, in the presence of stones and metals, and the suscepetibility to magnetic influences, are found chiefly in men living according to nature – Highlanders. . . . It is also certain, that these mountaineers are peculiarly sensible to magnetic influences, amongst the evidences of which are their susceptibility to sympathetic remedies, and their power of discovering springs by means of the divining rod.

William Gilbert:
Thales, as Aristotle writes, De Anima, Bk. I., deemed the loadstone to be endowed with a soul of some sort, because it had the power of moving and drawing iron towards it. Anaxagoras also held the same view. In the Timæus of Plato there is an idle fancy about the efficacy of the stone of Hercules.

The Initiate in the Dark Cycle, p.g. 76:
Later on these Devas will be able to influence the race still more, because the response to their vibrations will become greater and greater. What with less promiscuity and one thing and another, a certain proportion of the race will become so sensitive that they’ll actually be able to see the Devas and communicate with them.
Matthew 5:8 Blessed are the pure in heart, for they will see God.

Hitler, Table Talk (Cameron & Stevens), October 24, 1941:
Whoever sees God only in an oak or in a tabernacle, instead of seeing Him everywhere, is not truly pious. He remains attached to appearances—and when the sky thunders and the lightning strikes, he trembles simply from fear of being struck as a punishment for the sin he’s just committed.

Tacitus:
The Germans do not, however, deem it consistent with the divine majesty to imprison their gods within walls or represent them with anything like human features. Their holy places are the woods and groves, and they call by the name of god that hidden presence which is seen only by the eye of reverence.

Herodotus:
The customs which I know the Persians to observe are the following: they have no images of the gods, no temples nor altars, and consider the use of them a sign of folly. This comes, I think, from their not believing the gods to have the same nature with men, as the Greeks imagine. Their wont, however, is to ascend the summits of the loftiest mountains, and there to offer sacrifice to Jupiter, which is the name they give to the whole circuit of the firmament.


The Initiate in the Dark Cycle, p.g. 75-76:
Some of the more refined are kind of led to definite centres, magnetized by Initiates centuries ago, and now guarded by Devas, some more, and some less powerful. Later, they will learn to visit these centres consciously.”

Karl Viëtor:
Goethe The Poet, p.g. 284
In what way could [Goethe] be more useful to the world than by keeping himself productive? It was for the sake of this supremely important occupation that he shut himself from his world as often as it was necessary. For its sake he endeavored to avoid experiences which would disturb the tranquility of his mind and mood. . . . Just as there are men whose moral feeling is so highly developed that the slightest deviation from the true and the good causes them severe torment, so Goethe’s feeling for the beauty of the human form was developed to the most refined sensitivity. In that form he revered the highest achievement of the creative God-Nature.

Dag Hammarskjöld:
Waymarks/Markings
It is not enough daily to place oneself under God. What is required is to be only under God: every disruption opens the door for the daydream, the careless talk, the hidden boasting, the little slanders — all the little henchmen of the urge to destruction.
Laurency (kl2_3):
6Dag Hammarskjöld, in his latest incarnation, was not aware of his discipleship. He never came into contact with esoterics, which would have awakened his latent knowledge. That stage of the mystic to which he attained was not his proper one. It was quite sufficient, however, to enable him to carry out his mission.

Kubizek:
There was always a certain element in his personality into which he would allow nobody to penetrate. He had his inscrutable secrets, and in many respects always remained a riddle to me. But there was one key that opened the door to much that would have remained hidden: his enthusiasm for beauty.

Hitler, Table Talk (Cameron & Stevens), February 20-21, 1942:
If we consider the ancient Greeks (who were Germanics), we find in them a beauty much superior to the beauty such as is widespread to-day—and I mean also beauty in the realm of thought as much as in the realm of forms. To realise this, it’s enough to compare a head of Zeus or of Pallas Athene with that of a crusader or a saint!
Rosenberg (Memoirs):
That I know even though in the course of the years I heard only two or three pertinent remarks. Once he told me: Look at the head of Zeus! What nobility and exaltation there are in those features!
Goebbels (Diaries), April 8, 1941:
What a difference between the benevolent, smiling Zeus and the pain-wracked, crucified Christ.
Hitler, Table Talk (Cameron & Stevens), December 23-24, 1941:
The Jew was able to say to himself: “These Germans, who accept perverse pictures of the crucified Christ, are capable of swallowing other horrors, too, if one can persuade them that these horrors are beautiful!”

Goethe:
Italian Journey
In the Palazzo Giustiniani there stands a statue of Minerva which I admire very highly. . . . We had been standing for a long time looking at the statue when the wife of the custodian told us that it had once been a sacred image. The inglesi, she said, who belong to the same religious cult, still come to worship it and kiss one of its hands. (One hand, indeed, is white, while all the rest of the statue is a brownish colour.)
She went on to say that a lady of this religious persuasion had been here recently, thrown herself on her knees and worshipped it. She herself, being a Christian, had found this behaviour so funny that she had run out lest she should burst out laughing.
Seeing that I could not tear myself away from the statue either, she asked me if I had a sweetheart whom it resembled. Worship and love were the only things the good woman understood; disinterested admiration for a noble work of art, brotherly reverence for another human spirit were utterly beyond her ken.

which-christ.jpg

Left: From Hitler’s Martin Luther Memorial Church. Note the dignified representation, with his head held up high. Right: From the inverted Cathedral Church of St. John the Divine, by Churchill’s granddaughter Edwina Sandys.

Karl Viëtor:
Goethe The Poet, p.g. 284
Disfigurations such as those caused by suffering and death made the strongest impression upon him, which then would paralyze him for a long time. “Distaste for everything pathological seems to increase more and more with the years” (to Karl August, February 25, 1821).
When Ottilie [von Goethe, Goethe’s daughter-in-law] took a fall and her face was disfigured by her injuries, Goethe was unwilling to see her in that state. He apologized for his behavior by saying that he could never get rid of such impressions.

[In chapter 8 of his book Religious Attitudes of the Indo-Europeans, Hans F. K. Gunther lists as the last of the great Indo-Europeans: Thomas Jefferson, Wilhelm von Humboldt (Schiller’s friend), Alexis de Tocqueville (Count Arthur Gobineau’s friend), John Stuart Mill, Herbert Spencer.
Gunther argued that “the freedom of the individual was the highest good” to each of these men. Elsewhere Nietzsche, Giordano Bruno, and several others receive a honorary mention while the poet Paul Ernst (1866-1937) is extolled as a man of caliber.]

Gunther:
Religious Attitudes of the Indo-Europeans
The poet [Paul Ernst] saw in Marxism a “path leading to a more terrible slavery than the world had ever known” (pp. 289-290). He expressed the view that today a man who wishes to avoid the embraces of such slavery, must so adapt his life that he must place himself as far as possible beyond contemporary society, and must remain completely isolated from contemporary influences.

August Kubizek:
Greater even than his fear of being infected by the moral and political decadence of the ruling classes, was his fear of becoming a proletarian. Undoubtedly he lived like one, but he did not want to become one. Perhaps what drove him to his intensive studies was his instinctive feeling that only a thorough education could save him from descending to the level of the masses.

Bolshevism: From Moses to Lenin
“My God,” he immediately resumed, “one cannot blame [Luther]. A lot has happened in the last four hundred years. But there is one thing to remember: popular instinct was more alert then than nowadays. All along the line mistrust of the Jews was quite firm. Luther was a man of the people, the son of simple folk. His predilection of many years toward the Jews is a bit misleading; one must take into account a certain naivete, a lack of worldliness, the result of his stay in the cloister. The same rule seems to have applied here as elsewhere: too much studying ruined his vision.

Weishaupt:
Diogenes’ Lamp
That mistakes occurred cannot be denied, that I erred exquisitely, that I was simple enough to imagine human beings better, less self-serving, and more receptive for that which is good and great than they in fact are, and as I unfortunately have experienced them only too well in the course of this matter.

Otto Wagener, Memoirs of a Confidant, p.g. 126:
No doubt this point was one of Hitler’s great weaknesses. He did not see through any scheming–not Göring’s and not others’. He had grown up in too small a world, he had spent too long with people like himself, and he had used his time too exclusively for learning and reading in the scientific and specialized literature to even begin to suspect in life its malevolence, its weaknesses, its falseness, and its devilry. He remained naive about people.

[I think it’d be better to say Hitler remained so completely devoted to the German people, that he could not have expected them to act contrary to his wishes. The The description ‘naive’, which is defined as a lack of experience, doesn’t quite cut it.]

Memoirs of a Confidant, p.g. 126:
The means by which Napoleon secured his power, the era of Peter the Great and subsequently of the two Catherines: he absorbed all that and saw the same daggers and the same methods directed against himself–although on the other hand, he did not think anyone capable of such behavior. It was precisely this that made him unsure and suspicious.

Mein Kampf:
The question, What can a man do? is never asked, but rather, what has he learned? ‘Educated’ people look upon any imbecile who is plastered with a number of academic certificates as being superior to the ablest young fellow who lacks these precious documents. I could therefore easily imagine how this ‘educated’ world would receive me and I was wrong only in so far as I then believed men to be for the most part better than they proved to be in the cold light of reality.

Kubizek:
But then why did [Hitler] not try to escape from his loneliness, to make friends and find stimulus in serious, intelligent and progressive company? Why did he always remain the lone wolf, who avoided any contact with people, although he was passionately interested in all human affairs?
How easy it would have been for him, with his obvious talents, to win himself a place in those social circles in Vienna which held themselves aloof from the general decadence, from which he would not only have gained new insight and enlightenment, but which would have wrought a change in his lonely life. There were many more thoroughly decent people in Vienna than the other kind, though they were less in evidence. So he had no reason to avoid people on moral grounds.

[I believe Kubizek has covered sufficiently for the exoteric aspect. Hess and Wagener suspected that Hitler’s sense of superiority to his contemporaries and the masses could have been why he kept himself aloof. Now let’s hear from the possible esoteric side of things.]

The Initiate in the Dark Cycle, p.g. 49:
“Would it be a legitimate question to ask why you had to leave America?” I inquired tentatively. . . .
“There are several reasons, my son—reasons partly connected with group-Karma, partly with the tainted magnetism of large cities—especially in the United States–and partly connected with my own development.”
He folded his arms across his chest, and looked down at me benignly.
“When you wrote the preface to that first book of yours, you said that some of the Adepts lived in and traveled about the world like ordinary mortals. True; but what you omitted to say was that from time to time it becomes absolutely necessary for them to go into retirement, in order to counteract the wear and tear on their physical and subtler bodies resulting from contact with their fellow-creatures. To be quite frank, psychic conditions in America are so turbulent and disintegrating at the present time, that my Chief put his foot down and refused to let me remain there any longer.”

Mein Kampf:
Although these qualities were disappearing more and more in the younger generation, owing to the all-pervading influence of the big city, yet among the younger generation also, there were many who were fundamentally sound and who were able to maintain themselves uncontaminated amid the sordid surroundings of their everyday existence.

Lars Adelskogh:
The Explanation
8We are more telepathic than we suspect. Much of what we think are our own feelings and thoughts are suggestions from without. They are more for evil than for good: the unprovoked depression you feel in the throngs of a big city is one instance.

[Curiously, one of the subjects Eugene K. Bird chose to write down in his talks with Rudolf Hess was telepathy. Hess believed it was very rare, but it actually seems to be fairly common. Hess observed how it happened among animals, which is in agreement with Lars Adelskogh’s assessment of herd behavior and certain animal instincts. Hess posed a remarkably similar question as the one written by Goebbels below, asking, “why not between humans?”]

Goebbels (Diaries), December 29, 1939:
Man believes that he alone has intelligence, a soul, and the power of speech. Has not the animal these things? Just because we, with our dull senses, cannot recognise them, it does not prove that they are not there.

Hitler, Table Talk (Cameron & Stevens), August 20, 1942:
American civilisation is of a purely mechanised nature. Without mechanisation, America would disintegrate more swiftly than India. Actually, in America the European has reverted to becoming a nomad.

[Hess was under the impression that it was healthier to live in the mountains. Hitler disagreed.]

Hitler, Table Talk (Cameron & Stevens), August 12, 1942:
It is not correct to say that life in the mountains is good for everybody. I am thinking of Frau Endres and of my own sister Elli, who came to us from Austria. If Elli spends six weeks on end in Obersalzberg, she has to go to Nauheim for a cure!

Hitler, Table Talk (Cameron & Stevens), February 17, 1942:
But it’s a disaster when a city-dwelling poet sets himself to sing of the beauties of mountains. People who really belong to them don’t lend themselves to dramatic presentation. Their songs are heard amongst themselves.

Giselher Wirsing:
The American is a city-dweller, a metropolitan; he is, even when he lives in the countryside. The eternal pursuit after the success, that the Puritanism has lowered so deeply in the American psyche, has scarcely at all given rise to a relationship with nature, as the European and East Asian cultures have grown.
Hitler, Table Talk (Cameron & Stevens), June 15, 1943:
It is perfectly true that we are a people of romantics, quite different from the Americans, for example, who see nothing beyond their sky-scrapers. Our romanticism has its origins in the intense appreciation of nature that is inherent in us Germans.

Cordell Hull:
Democracy is not a static structure, like a cathedral or a skyscraper.

Jacob Burckhardt:
Force and Freedom: Reflections on History
Creations that are unquestionably great and splendid-epics, folk-songs and folk-music-seem to stand in no need of the instrumentality of great individuals; their work is done by a whole people, which we imagine ad hoc to have been in a particularly happy, unspoilt state of culture.
Yet this substitution is actually due to the defects of historical records. The epic bard whose name we no longer know or know only in a collective sense was very great at the moment at which he gave imperishable form to one offshoot of the saga of his people.
At that moment he was the magic embodiment of the spirit of that people, a thing that is only possible to very finely constituted men.
And thus folk-song and folk-music can only be created by very exceptional individuals and only at great moments when the concentrated spirit of a people speaks through them. Otherwise the song would not endure.

Gunther:
The Racial Elements of European History
The gift for music, above all for song, is particularly pronounced. The predominantly Dinaric Alpine district is where German folk-songs most flourish.

[Notably, Hans Gunther classified Jacob Burckhardt as belonging to the Dinaric race.]

Hitler, Mein Kampf:
The great protagonists are those who fight for their ideas and ideals despite the fact that they receive no recognition at the hands of their contemporaries. They are the men whose memories will be enshrined in the hearts of future generations.
It seems then as if each individual felt it his duty to make retrospective atonement for the wrong which great men have suffered at the hands of their contemporaries. Their lives and their work are then studied with touching and grateful admiration.
Especially in dark days of distress, such men have the power of healing broken hearts and of raising the despairing spirit of a people. To this group belong not only the genuinely great statesmen but all the great reformers as well. Besides Frederick the Great we have men such as Martin Luther and Richard Wagner.


Leadbeater:
The Hidden Side of Christian Festivals
We may be thankful [Prince Bismarck] has not survived till the present, for his plans were far wiser than those of the men who have followed him. Long ago Madame Blavatsky explained to us that he had considerable occult knowledge, and that before the war with France in 1870 he had travelled physically to certain points to the north, the south, the east, and the west of France, and had there cast spells of some sort, or made magnetic centres, with the object of preventing effective resistance to the German armies. Certainly the French collapse at the time was so complete and unexpected that it seemed to need some unusual explanation.

[Or perhaps Leadbeater was simply unwilling to concede military superiority to the Germans and this is merely a manifestation of arrogant British patriotism. The implication is that Bismarck met the qualifications for initiation into a knowledge order yet there is hardly anything that suggests his familiarity with esoterics or that he adopted a suitable way of life. If such were the case, I’d wager that Bismarck merely conferred with the National Devas of that country and persuaded them to defer to Germany instead of France (in it’s decline). Certainly an oath to represent hierarchical ideals would have more appeal to the gods than the short-sighted prayers of the democratic-minded. Perhaps the biblical Balaam represents a similar invocation, which was distorted into a pro-Jewish narrative.]

Numbers 22:41
The next morning Balak took Balaam up to Bamoth Baal, and from there he could see the outskirts of the Israelite camp.
Numbers 23:9
From the rocky peaks I see them,
from the heights I view them.
I see a people who live apart
and do not consider themselves one of the nations
.
Numbers 23:13-14
Then Balak said to him, “Come with me to another place where you can see them; you will not see them all but only the outskirts of their camp. And from there, curse them for me.” So he took him to the field of Zophim on the top of Pisgah, and there he built seven altars and offered a bull and a ram on each altar.
Numbers 23:24
The people rise like a lioness;
they rouse themselves like a lion
that does not rest till it devours its prey
and drinks the blood of its victims
.”
Numbers 24:8
They devour hostile nations
and break their bones in pieces;

[This Balaam was undoubtedly an anti-Semite. It doesn’t take an anti-Semite to see that he is treated with the utmost contempt throughout the Bible.]


The Initiate in the Dark Cycle, p.g. 75-76:
“Yes, but what’s their object–I mean, of the centres?” I asked.
“Why, to train the advanced types of the race. You see, the psycho-spiritual atmosphere of magnetized spots is so strong that it acts as a great stimulus to the higher faculties. When these faculties have been sufficiently developed, then at any rate a portion of the race will be prepared for the coming of the Lord Maitreya at the end of the century.”

Hitler, Table Talk (Cameron & Stevens), February 9, 1942:
Those rainy days at Berchtesgaden, what a blessing they were! No violent exercise, no excursions, no sun-baths—a little repose! There’s nothing lovelier in the world than a mountain landscape. There was a time when I could have wept for grief on having to leave Berchtesgaden.

Hitler, Table Talk (Cameron & Stevens), January 2-3, 1942:
When I go to Obersalzberg, I’m not drawn there merely by the beauty of the landscape. I feel myself far from petty things, and my imagination is stimulated. When I study a problem elsewhere, I see it less clearly, I’m submerged by the details. By night, at the Berghof, I often remain for hours with my eyes open, contemplating from my bed the mountains lit up by the moon. It’s at such moments that brightness enters my mind.
During my first electoral campaign, the question was how to win seats. Only the parties that had a certain importance had any hopes of doing so. I had no original formula for the campaign. I went up to Obersalzberg. At four o’clock in the morning I was already awake, and I realised at once what I had to do. That same day I composed a whole series of posters. I decided to overwhelm the adversary under the weight of his own arguments. And what weapons he supplied us with!
All my great decisions were taken at Obersalzberg. That’s where I conceived the offensive of May 1940 and the attack on Russia.

Hitler, Table Talk (Cameron & Stevens), February 17, 1942:
Wahnfried, as in Wagner’s lifetime, is a lived-in house. It still has all its brilliance, and continues to give the effect of a lover. Goethe’s house gives the impression of a dead thing. And how one understands that in the room where he died he should have asked for light—always more light! Schiller’s house can still move one by the picture it gives of the penury in which the poet lived. All these thoughts occurred to me whilst I was reflecting what might become of my house at Obersalzberg.

[Also, there’s testimony from Speer and Heinz Linge concerning the Obersalzberg’s effect on Hitler. US President JFK may have been influenced by the surroundings as well, being prompted to write down things he would not have normally said (despite his preexisting sympathies for Hitler and the Hitler Youth), according to those who knew him.]

Prelude to Leadership:
Introduction by Hugh Sidey, Edited by JFK secretary Deirdre Henderson
Then Kennedy is on to Berchtesgaden and a look at Hitler’s bombed-out mountain chalet and then an ascent to Hitler’s Eagle’s Nest [Kehlsteinhaus] among the mountain peaks.
The final entry in Kennedy’s journal is the most mystifying. He writes that after visiting these two places one could easily understand “how within a few years Hitler will emerge from the hatred that surrounds him now as one of the most significant figures who ever lived.” His choice of words is careful-significant, not greatest-suggesting he was in some manner trying to view the scene with cosmic detachment, perhaps as a historian. There is a misty quality about these lines that makes them seem removed from the squalor nearby. Is Kennedy just drifting and dreaming?
Whatever, the judgment is bizarre. Had he not heard of the death chambers yet? It is hard to believe. Perhaps Kennedy was just not thinking or writing clearly, or writing to himself in some mysterious way for future reference. Reporters can take license in their private pages.
Yet, Kennedy’s final journal line, “Hitler had in him the stuff of which Legends are made,” while certainly true, gives no hint that Kennedy sees that the legend is one of a monster. In my time around Kennedy I never heard anything like this.

The Initiate in the Dark Cycle, p.g. 75-76:
“So I take it these hikers are a kind of prelude to great idealism,” I suggested, “forerunners, as it were, of a new type?”
“Yes, you wait a few years and you’ll see how it’ll develop. Already there’s a reaction from all that post-war gloom and license, and we’re beginning to see signs of much cleaner living and greater self-control.”

Hitler, Mein Kampf:
Indeed, it may be asserted that such a concentrated effort to preserve the independence of the State is usually succeeded by a certain easing of tension or is counterbalanced by a sudden blossoming forth of the hitherto neglected cultural spirit of the nation.
Thus Greece flourished during the great Periclean era after the miseries she had suffered during the Persian Wars, and the Roman Republic turned its energies to the cultivation of a higher civilisation when it was freed from the stress and troubles of the Punic Wars.


Stoicism

Hitler, Table Talk (Cameron & Stevens), July 11-12, 1941:
I think the man who contemplates the universe with his eyes wide open is the man with the greatest amount of natural piety: not in the religious sense, but in the sense of an intimate harmony with things.

Laurency (L3e18):
3Ritual and ceremony were the attempts of ignorance to mimic the conformity to law and finality of the processes of nature, not understanding the energies that must have their effects on the matter aspect as well as the consciousness aspect to achieve the intended results.

Julian:
The philosophers bid us imitate the gods so far as we can, and they teach us that this imitation consists in the contemplation of realities. And that this sort of study is remote from passion and is indeed based on freedom from passion, is, I suppose, evident, even without my saying it. In proportion then as we, having been assigned to the contemplation of realities, attain to freedom from passion, in so far do we become like God.
Oera Linda:
Hail to all true Frisians
Although they knew that Jessos had taught that men should regulate and control their passions, they taught that men should stifle their passions, and that the perfection of humanity consisted in being as unfeeling as the cold stones.

Laurency ():
2The knowledge of the laws of reincarnation and of sowing and reaping formed the basis of the principle of being constantly prepared for the worst blows of fate, losing friends, possessions, honour, life, being deceived, being abandoned by everybody. By meditating daily on all these conceivable possibilities, the Stoic steeled himself and preserved his total unconcern, a “divine indifference” to whatever happened to him.

Laurency (kr7):
9Concentration is the keeping of attention on a certain thing.
Meditation implies a concentrated analysis of all relations pertaining to this subject-matter.
Contemplation entails the isolation of the problem until one begins to see the idea and can concentrate attention on that single point.
If activity then ceases, there is a risk of falling asleep or into ordinary trance. If activity can be kept up long enough, illumination comes and the individual will find what he has been seeking.

Laurency ():
3This [“divine indifference”] was the negative attitude. The positive attitude consisted in the principle of always being obliging and helpful.

✝Jerome:
[Pythagoras] said that true philosophy was a meditation on death; that its daily struggle was to draw forth the soul from the prison of the body into liberty: that our learning was recollection, and many other things which Plato works out in his dialogues, especially in the Phædo and Timæus.

Laurency ():
10Finally the individual learns, like the Spartan and the fakir, indifference to physical pain, and like the Stoic, unconcern about all the shifts of life and people’s behaviour. In so doing he learns how to control, and set himself free from dependence of, everything that had held him captive in physical life.

[Views which were misinterpreted by early Christians and quasi-gnostics, leading to the erroneous beliefs that matter is evil, the physical body is a burden, man must escape from the material world, Nature must be subdued, etc.]

Plato:
The Republic
Then this must be our notion of the just man, that even when he is in poverty or sickness, or any other seeming misfortune, all things will in the end work together for good to him in life and death: for the gods have a care of any one whose desire is to become just and to be like God, as far as man can attain the divine likeness, by the pursuit of virtue? Yes, he said; if he is like God he will surely not be neglected by him.

Romans 8:28 And we know that in all things God works for the good of those who love him, who have been called according to his purpose.
Romans 8:38-39 For I am convinced that neither death nor life, neither angels nor demons, neither the present nor the future, nor any powers, neither height nor depth, nor anything else in all creation, will be able to separate us from the love of God that is in Christ Jesus our Lord.

[Undoubtedly, either Paul or Eusebius borrowed heavily from the Stoics, who themselves were influenced by Plato. This was calculated to help establish Christianity’s credibility and can be rightfully called cultural appropriation. They were accused of this by Plotinus and Julian. But does Christianity confer a similar emotional stability as the Stoic training? Such was Julian’s proposal in his essay against the Christians.
“Now this would be a clear proof: Choose out children from among you all and train and educate them in your scriptures, and if when they come to manhood they prove to have nobler qualities than slaves, then you may believe that I am talking nonsense and am suffering from spleen.”
Certainly not. The modern idea of undergoing a trial from god stems from distortion of reverence, the “fear of god”, which does not inspire virtue. I would even venture to ask if this notion of god testing people was even remotely Christian.]

☭Otto Strasser:
Hitler and I, p.g. 219-220
‘God tries those He loves.’ The Christian precept reminds us that a menace can be a means of salvation; that it can awaken, in individuals and in nations alike, vital forces that in periods of satiety, materialism, and nihilism may have seemed to be dead. Hitler the racialist and Stalin the Marxist have never felt or understood the moral law of such a revival.

Hitler, September 13, 1937 speech:
In our case, the accuracy of a wise saying can be said to have been proven true: there are times when Providence demonstrates the deepest love it has for its creatures in an act of punishment!

[I would argue that Strasser the moralist never felt or understood the moral law of such a revival. His memoirs is littered with bitter disputes and criticisms. Hitler could no longer tolerate the issues he frequently raised with Rosenberg and Streicher and scolded him for it.]


Kubizek:
The Young Hitler I Knew, Chapter 10
Adolf stood in front of me; and now he gripped both my hands and held them tight. He had never made such a gesture before. I felt from the grasp of his hands how deeply moved he was. His eyes were feverish with excitement. The words did not come smoothly from his mouth as they usually did, but rather erupted, hoarse and raucous. From his voice I could tell even more how much this experience had shaken him.
Gradually his speech loosened, and the words flowed more freely. Never before and never again have I heard Adolf Hitler speak as he did in that hour, as we stood there alone under the stars, as though we were the only creatures in the world.

The Initiate in the Dark Cycle, p.g. 12:
In a chair alone by the fire in the little oak-paneled room set aside for meditation, sat Chris; but the ineffable smile with which she greeted me was not hers, and although the voice was hers, the inflections and choice of word were different.
Her lips spoke the words gently and lovingly: “Greetings, my son…” and her hand held mine for a moment before motioning me to be seated–with a gesture that was also not hers.
And then I realized that she had done what only initiates of an advanced degree can do–she had consciously stepped aside, and temporarily yielded up her body to her Master.

Leni Riefenstahl (Memoirs), p.g. 107:
After dinner we all went outdoors, most of us strolling towards the sea, but Hitler waited a while, then asked me to accompany him, which I thought a little strange, but I didn’t want to be impolite by refusing. Again the two adjutants trailed at a short distance. Hitler was entirely relaxed; he talked about his private life and about things that greatly interested him, especially architecture and music.
He spoke about Wagner, about King Ludwig of Bavaria, and about Bayreuth, but after a while he suddenly changed his expression and his voice. With great passion he declared: ‘More than anything else I am filled with my political mission. I feel that I have been called to save Germany – I cannot and must not refuse this calling.’
This is the other Hitler, I thought, the one I saw at the Sports Palace.

Sumner Welles:
The Time For Decision
[Hitler] was dignified, both in speech and in movement. His voice, in conversation, was low and well-modulated. It had only once during our conversation of an hour and a half the raucous stridency which is always heard in his speeches, and it was only at that moment that his features lost their composure. . . .
He said: “I am fully aware that the Allied powers believe a distinction can be made between National Socialism and the German people. There was never a greater mistake. The German people to-day are united as one man and I have the support of every German. I can see no hope for the establishment of any lasting peace until the will of England and France to destroy Germany is itself destroyed. I feel that there is no way by which the will to destroy Germany can itself be destroyed except through a complete German victory. I believe that German might is such as to make the triumph of Germany inevitable, but, if not, we will all go down together.”
And here he added the extraordinary phrase: “Whether that be for better or for worse.”
He paused a moment and then said textually, rapidly, and in high and raucous pitch: “I did not want this war. It has been forced upon me against my will. It is a waste of my time. My life should have been spent in constructing and not in destroying.”

[Curiously, even Otto Strasser acknowledged Hitler’s alter-ego.]

☭Otto Strasser:
Hitler and I, p.g. 66
A clairvoyant, face-to-face with his public, goes into a trance. That is his moment of real greatness, the moment when he is most genuinely himself. He believes what he says; carried away by a mystic force, he cannot doubt the genuineness of his mission.
But when Adolf is in a normal state it is a different matter. He cannot be straightforward and natural; he never ceases from watching himself and playing a conscious part.

[At the 7m37s mark, observe Hitler suddenly cutting off as he says “And we know…” Then he abruptly finishes off the speech with a bombastic declaration. There was no indication that someone was signaling him to wrap up the speech. The clip is taken from The Triumph of the Will. Also, Hitler is said to have evaded several assassination attempts by ending his speeches earlier than usual.]

Laurency ():
7We should not be content with the mere information that a certain philosopher was an initiate. Most orders had seven degrees (some of them ten, three of which were preparatory). And those who did not rise above the third degree did not know much. They did not even know that there were higher degrees.
Laurency (L3e1):
5It should therefore be noted that the mere fact that someone was an initiate of an esoteric knowledge order does not necessarily imply that he was particularly acquainted with esoterics. If you do not know the degree the initiate had attained it is impossible to determine the extent of his esoteric knowledge.

[This video features one of his best passionate speech moments and a glimpse into his oratory. Observe how he adheres to his own writing by gauging the faces of his hearers before proceeding. Also note the involuntary spasm at 0:42.]

Traudl Junge:
It wasn’t what Hitler said that was important to me, but the way he said it and how he expressed his essential nature.

Bormann Letters, p.g. 26:
Gerda Bormann to Martin Bormann
There is a world of difference between his speaking, and his proclamation being read by someone else. It isn’t only what he says, but the sound of his voice and the inflexion he gives it.

Hans Frank:
His vocal organ sometimes sounded hoarse and switched strangely with drastic contrasts in volume. Sentences that began calmly would suddenly leap impressively in tone at a certain word or when they came to their conclusion.

George Ward Price:
The susceptibility of the Chancellor’s mind to psychic influences is shown in his public oratory. At the outset of a speech his delivery is sometimes slow and halting. Only as the spiritual atmosphere engendered by a great audience takes possession of his mind does he develop that eloquence which acts on the German nation like a spell. For he responds to this metaphysical contact in such a way that each member of the multitude feels bound to him by an individual link of sympathy.

Goebbels (Diaries), April 27, 1942:
After a brief introduction by Goering the Fuehrer spoke. He was in good form, even though he spoke somewhat haltingly at first. He told me after his speech that he was rather numb. The terrific exertions both of a physical and spiritual nature which he had to make during the winter have taken their toll after all.
Soon, however, he is fired with enthusiasm. His initial hesitation is overcome. His somewhat rapid manner of speaking, which makes him rather hard to understand during the first passages, soon ceases, and now he gives the German people and the world a report on the past winter that has a truly shattering effect.

Kurt Ludecke:
When the man stepped forward on the platform, there was almost no applause. He stood silent for a moment. Then he began to speak, quietly and ingratiatingly at first. Before long his voice had risen to a hoarse shriek that gave an extraordinary effect of an intensity of feeling. There were many high-pitched, rasping notes—Reventlow had told me that his throat had been affected by war-gas—but despite its strident tone, his diction had a distinctly Austrian turn, softer and pleasanter than the German.

[Baroness Elizabeth von Guttenberg, who was opposed to Hitler, likewise describes him in her memoir Holding the Stirrup as being devoid of personality until he began to speak, and then suddenly behaved as if he had been taken over by an entity. She also described the audience as if they had been infected. This is how it appeared to Germans who had not been affected by Hitler’s oratory.]

Baroness Elizabeth von Guttenberg:

…Indeed controlled by a diabolic power. [Stauffenberg] was sure at last in his own mind that in the assassination of Hitler he would be removing a creature actually possessed, body and soul, by the devil.

[Whether this really was the case or not, we will be obliged to admit that there was an undeniable superphysical aspect to Hitler’s influence over the German people. This was not the robotized kind of collectivism found in communism. It was a completely organic unity and a much needed one for a people who were long unable to be reconciled in their differences.]


Mein Kampf:
An orator receives continuous guidance from the people before whom he speaks. This helps him to correct the direction of his speech; for he can always gauge, by the faces of his hearers, how far they follow and understand him, and whether his words are producing the desired effect.

Wagener, Memoirs of a Confidant, p.g. 179:
Finally, however, there was also something highly fascinating in his manner of speaking, perhaps even something hypnotic to some listeners. Men who were easily influenced would turn off their own thinking apparatus while they listened, so that they acted under a psychological compulsion, which they might not be in any position to understand themselves.
How strong this power of suggestion was I was able to observe on one occasion when Hitler attended an SA athletic meet. He followed the various events with burning interest and the determination to see extraordinary feats. What happened is almost inconceivable. From the moment Hitler entered the stadium and was greeted with universal cheering, men who at other times were given to average performances began to improve their speed in the hundred-meter dash, increase their distance in the javelin throw, and in the relay race, in swimming, and even in sharpshooting attain scores that approached top international records and on occasion even topped them. These performers were simply under the spell of Hitler’s personality. During the competitions he himself strained forward and visibly concentrated mentally and physically. When each event was finished, he collapsed, seemingly exhausted, for a few moments. [ . . . ]
Whenever he addressed large meetings–always improvising and speaking without the preparation we normally assume–he lost three or four pounds. His only preparation consisted of a quarter of an hour or so of mental concentration on the intended topic.

Hitler, Table Talk (Cameron & Stevens), July 8, 1942:
Whenever I have to make a speech of great importance I am always soaking wet at the end, and I find I have lost four or six pounds in weight. And in Bavaria, where, in addition to my usual mineral water, local custom insists that I drink two or three bottles of beer, I lose as much as eight pounds. This loss of weight is not, I think, injurious to health.

[A consistent report!]

Memoirs of a Confidant, p.g. 180:
“While I work”–by this phrase he meant making speeches, participating in discussions, attending rallies, as well as his presence at some sports event, for example, or a military demonstration–“I gather renewed strength from the glowing eyes, the applause, and the enthusiasm of my listeners, the audience, the entire mass, and I concentrate it in myself for the sole purpose for which I happen to be present or which I am pursuing.”
That is why some people, quite understandably, say that there is something uncanny, dynamic, in his personality. Occasionally, this trait is also called despotically overpowering. But such an opinion can only be formed only by people who attempt to determine his nature on the basis of outward behavior. Furthermore, it is absolutely wrong and misguided to try to label this sort of thing diabolical.

Kurt Ludecke:
The wave of indignation that surged through the land reached its climax in a huge mass demonstration of protest in Munich on 11 August 1922. . . .
This was the greatest mass demonstration Munich had ever seen. It was one of incalculable historical importance, for on that day a little-known figure stepped into the light as a recognized public speaker of extraordinary power. . . .
I was close enough to see Hitler’s face, watch every change in his expression, hear every word he said. . . .
Presently my critical faculty was swept away. Leaning from the tribune as if he were trying to impel his inner self into the consciousness of all these thousands, he was holding the masses, and me with them, under a hypnotic spell by the sheer force of his conviction.
He urged the revival of German honour and manhood with a blast of words that seemed to cleanse. “Bavaria is now the most German land in Germany!” he shouted, to roaring applause. Then, plunging into sarcasm, he indicted the leaders in Berlin as ‘November Criminals,’ daring to put into words thoughts that Germans were now almost afraid to think and certainly to voice.
It was clear that Hitler was feeling the exaltation of the emotional response now surging up toward him from his thousands of hearers. His voice rising to passionate climaxes, he finished his speech with in anthem of hate against the ‘Novemberlings’ and a pledge of undying love for the Fatherland. “Germany must be free!” was his final defiant slogan.
Then two last words that were like the sting of a lash:
“Deutschland Erwache!”
Awake, Germany! There was thunderous applause. Then the masses took a solemn oath ‘to save Germany in Bavaria from Bolshevism.’
I do not know how to describe the emotions that swept over me as I heard this man. His words were like a scourge. When he spoke of the disgrace of Germany, I felt ready to spring on any enemy. His appeal to German manhood was like a call to arms, the gospel he preached a sacred truth. He seemed another Luther. I forgot everything but the man; then, glancing round, I saw that his magnetism was holding these thousands as one.
Of course I was ripe for this experience. I was a man of thirty-two, weary of disgust and disillusionment, a wanderer seeking a cause; a patriot without a channel for his patriotism, a yearner after the heroic without a hero. The intense will of the man, the passion of his sincerity seemed to flow from him into me. I experienced an exaltation that could be likened only to religious conversion. I felt sure that no one who had heard Hitler that afternoon could doubt that he was the man of destiny, the vitalizing force in the future of Germany.

Leni Riefenstahl (Memoirs), p.g. 101:
When I returned to Berlin after touring with The Blue Light, the city was filled with posters announcing that Adolf Hitler would be giving a speech at the Berlin Sports Palace. On the spur of the moment I decided to attend. I think it was late February 1932. I had never before been to a political rally.
The Sports Palace was so mobbed that it was hard to find a seat. Finally I managed to squeeze in among people so excited and noisy that already I regretted coming; but it was almost impossible to leave, for the crowds blocked the exits. At last, after a brass band played march after march.
Hitler appeared, very late. The spectators jumped from their seats, shouting wildly for several minutes: ‘Heil, Heil, Heil!’
I was too far away to see Hitler’s face but, after the shouts died down, I heard his voice: ‘Fellow Germans!’ That very same instant I had an almost apocalyptic vision that I was never able to forget. It seemed as if the earth’s surface were spreading out in front of me, like a hemisphere that suddenly splits apart in the middle, spewing out an enormous jet of water, so powerful that it touched the sky and shook the earth. I felt quite paralysed. Although there was a great deal in his speech that I didn’t understand, I was still fascinated, and I sensed that the audience were in bondage to this man.

Odic force

[The Odic force receives extensive coverage in Otto Wagener’s memoirs, on pages 35-38 and 103-104.]

Memoir of a Confidant, p.g. 34:
Thoughtfully [Hitler] asked, “Can you explain why it is that one feels strengthened, refreshed, revived when one has spent time with young people? It is as if they imparted to us an invisible strength, which is transferred from them to us like an aura.”

[Otto Wagener had given a great deal of thought to this question and explained to Hitler the theory of Odic force developed by Baron Karl von Reichenbach.]

Memoir of a Confidant, p.g. 35:
“If he is with young people, who can’t possibly use up their excess, a purely mechanical process sets in whereby the excess force flows in the direction where it is needed.”
At this, Hitler grasped my arm and looked at me as if he were facing a glittering Christmas tree.
“And so he absorbs until he is filled,” I continued. “He works with the other’s strength, and he develops a yearning to be near such sources of power. But something happens to the other person as well, just as unconsciously and with precisely the same effect. For the healthy young body gives off its excess of force only to those who are worthy, only to people who are equally healthy and to those who know how to do something creative with the transferred force.”
At that, Hitler, deeply excited, interrupted me to say, “That is why a baby cries and resists when his grandmother wants to keep hugging him; he doesn’t want to pass his powers on to a dying person. And the only reason the grandmother picks up the baby is that she wants to draw to herself the child’s excess force. Unconsciously, of course, on her part as well as the child’s.
Wagener, it’s as though scales fall from one’s eyes when one hears this theory for the first time. I must read the writings of this Reichenbach.”

Memoir of a Confidant, p.g. 36:
Wagener: “The secret of the Free Corps spirit, as I came to know it in the Baltic and outside Thorn, or the secret of the elite shock troops during the war was without a doubt that volunteers joined only that leader whom they felt drawn to as a model and a human being–“
Hitler: “Drawn to! That’s the key word. The differentiation in the waves, or whatever we imagine the means of transmission to be, either evokes sympathy–which is to say, a correspondence of feeling–or antipathy–which is to say, rejection–or no feeling at all. Then one remains indifferent.”

Laurency ():
2An “esoterician” without love will have many enemies. People instinctively feel they are seen through, and they never forgive that. In contrast, if there is love and thus understanding, they mostly overlook the eccentric’s baroque life view, unless the magnetic radiation from his aura is so strong that its vibrations affect other people and in many cases reinforce the worst and most easily activated traits in them.

Blavatsky:
Isis Unveiled
But, when one who is himself physically diseased, attempts healing, he not only fails of that, but often imparts his illness to his patient, and robs him of what strength he may have. The decrepit King David reinforced his failing vigor with the healthy magnetism of the young Abishag [1 Kings 1:1-4]; and the medical works tell us of an aged lady of Bath, England, who broke down the constitutions of two maids in succession, in the same way.
The old sages, and Paracelsus also, removed disease by applying a healthy organism to the afflicted part, and in the works of the above-said fire-philosopher, their theory is boldly and categorically set forth.

Luke 8:43-46
And a woman was there who had been subject to bleeding for twelve years, but no one could heal her. She came up behind him and touched the edge of his cloak, and immediately her bleeding stopped.
“Who touched me?” Jesus asked.
When they all denied it, Peter said, “Master, the people are crowding and pressing against you.”
But Jesus said, “Someone touched me; I know that power has gone out from me.”

[It begs the question of whether Jesus was really sent to deliver the sick and diseased from their affliction. Wouldn’t he have been interfering with Nature’s process of elimination to heal these people? Wouldn’t he have been willingly depriving himself of his vigor? (He may have made a few exceptions such as in this case) Who are the lost sheep? Certainly not the sickly and diseased who thrive at the expense of healthier, sound people who have greater potential for contribution to the community. In this connection, the eugenic principles laid down in Matthew 5:29-30 might be mentioned.]

Nikola Tesla:
My Inventions
Everybody understands, of course, that if one becomes deaf, has his eyesight weakened, or his limbs injured, the chances for his continued existence are lessened. But this is also true, and perhaps more so, of certain defects in the brain which deprive the automaton, more or less, of that vital quality and cause it to rush into destruction.

Hitler, August 15, 1920 speech:
And we can see very precisely that when a race does not possess certain traits which must be hereditary, it not only cannot create a state but must act as a destroyer, no matter if a given individual is good or evil.

Nikola Tesla:
My Inventions
A very sensitive and observant being, with his highly developed mechanism all intact, and acting with precision in obedience to the changing conditions of the environment, is endowed with a transcending mechanical sense, enabling him to evade perils too subtle to be directly perceived.
When he comes in contact with others whose controlling organs are radically faulty, that sense asserts itself and he feels the “cosmic” pain.
The truth of this has been borne out in hundreds of instances and I am inviting other students of nature to devote attention to this subject, believing that through combined and systematic effort results of incalculable value to the world will be attained.

[It’d explain the unusual circumstances pertaining to the failed assassination attempts on Hitler’s life, although it doesn’t necessarily explain incidents which don’t involve hostile parties.]

Heinrich Hoffmann:
Had Hitler, in a moment of inexplicable intuition, not cut short his speech, he would undoubtedly have fallen a victim to the plot – and the greater part of the assembled company with him. . . . A watchmaker named Elser was arrested. . . . A day or two later I was talking about it to Hitler.
‘I had a most extraordinary feeling,’ he said, ‘and I don’t myself know how or why – but I felt compelled to leave the cellar just as quickly as I could.’

[What’s admirable about this Elser fella is that he almost single-handedly achieved what a whole motley crew of conspirators and moralists set themselves to do years later.]

George Ward Price:
His own awareness of a psychic sense would seem to be indicated by one of the stories he tells of his experiences in the war.
“I was eating my dinner in a trench with several comrades,” he says. “Suddenly a voice seemed to be saying to me, ‘Get up and go over there.’It was so clear and insistent that I obeyed automatically, as if it had been a military order. I rose at once to my feet and walked twenty yards along the trench, carrying my dinner in its tin-can with me. Then I sat down to go on eating, my mind being once more at rest.
Hardly had I done so when a flash and deafening report came from the part of the trench I had just left. A stray shell had burst over the group in which I had been sitting, and every member or it was killed.”

Hitler, Table Talk (Cameron & Stevens), February 3-4, 1942:
I’ve been lucky that I never had an accident while travelling. You know the story of the Hound of the Baskervilles. On a sinister, stormy night I was going to Bayreuth through the Fichtelgebirge. I’d just been saying to Maurice: “Look out on the bend!” I’d scarcely spoken when a huge black dog hurled itself on our car. The collision knocked it into the distance. For a long time we could still hear it howling in the night.

[G. Ward Price describes another similar incident where Hitler was taking a flight in a plane. Hitler describes his flight experiences in a January 9-10, 1942 table talk entry. There he also indicates the origin for his admiration for Stuka pilots. No doubt that he wanted Hans-Ulrich Rudel as his successor. On a side note, the mainstream narrative tries to represent Churchill as risking his own life in the war, but how does that stack up against the risk of constant flights? According to Eugene K. Bird, Rudolf Hess made some observations about airports and flights versus trains.]


[If the world can be considered an animal or a living organism, then from a higher perspective, natural disasters and wars and strife are means of purification.]

The Initiate in the Dark Cycle, p.g. 51:
But he still had something of profound interest to tell me. “During this Dark Cycle,” he went on after a pause, “the Planetary Logos, or Earth spirit, is throwing off and transmuting poisons just as at times human bodies throw off and transmute poisons.

Proclus:
In the next place it must be shown why the greatest of destructions are through the predominance of fire and water, and not through that of the other elements. . . . You may also say, that the remaining two elements are more adapted to us. For we are pedestrious, and allied to earth; and as we are on all sides comprehended by air, in which we live, and which we respire, it is evident that our bodies are of a kindred nature with it. Hence these elements, as being more allied to, are less destructive of us; but the others, which are contrary to these, bring with them more violent destructions.

[See Atlantis.]

Hitler, May 26, 1944, Platterhof hotel talk:
Translated by Carlos W. Porter, hosted by Carolyn Yeager
Man is nothing more than a small bacteria or little bacillus on such a planet.

The Initiate in the Dark Cycle, p.g. 51:
The result is a disturbance in the collective astral or emotional body of mankind; and those who have not acquired control give themselves up to promiscuity, alcoholism or even criminal activities. This is what is happening now [1939-1943?], and on such a large scale that it naturally affects the race and its development.

Musical Affinity

Hanfstaengl:
Where all our conservative politicians and speakers were failing abysmally to establish any contact with the ordinary people, this self-made man, Hitler, was clearly succeeding in presenting a non-Communist programme to exactly those people whose support we needed.

Rosenberg (Memoirs):
In 1925, when [Hitler] asked me to take over the management of the Folkish Observer, he also discussed Ludendorff’s dabbling in politics during the past year. He claimed that Ludendorff had to fail politically because he was unmusical. He, on the other hand, as a musically sensitive person, understood men better, and also would be better able to lead them. I never forgot these words, remembered them often, and was reminded of them quite forcefully during some of the terrible hours of 1945.

Wallis Warfield, Duchess of Windsor:
The heart has its reasons
I could not take my eyes off Hitler. He was dressed in his brown Party uniform. His face had a pasty pallor, and under his mustache his lips were fixed in a kind of mirthless grimace. Yet at close quarters he gave one the feeling of great inner force. His hands were long and slim, a musician’s hands,

Hanfstaengl:
The gestures which had so impressed me the first evening I saw [Hitler] were as varied and flexible as his arguments. They were not, as in other speakers, stereotyped movements to find some employment for his hands, but an integral part of his method of exposition.
The most striking, in contrast to the dull slamming of the fist into the palm of the other hand of so many orators, was a soaring upward movement of the arm, which seemed to leave infinite possibilities piercing the air. It had something of the quality of a really great orchestral conductor who instead of just hammering out the downward beat, suggests the existence of hidden rhythms and meaning with the upward flick of his baton.
To continue the musical metaphor, the first two-thirds of Hitler’s speeches were in march time, growing increasingly quicker and leading up to the last third which was primarily rhapsodic.

Rosenberg (Memoirs):
What Hitler wanted to say is that only a musical person can really feel the vibrations of a people’s soul, and thus find the right words to influence it, so that he alone before all others, can take the proper steps to lead it politically.

☭Otto Strasser:
Hitler and I, p.g. 62
Hitler responds to the vibration of the human heart with the delicacy of a seismograph, or perhaps of a wireless receiving set, enabling him, with a certainty with which no conscious gift could endow him, to act as a loudspeaker proclaiming the most secret desires, the least admissible instincts, the sufferings and personal revolts of a whole nation.

[Strasser claimed to be impartial in his assessment, but gives way to an outright denial of Hitler’s creativity, making his moralism quite clear.]

Enrst Hanfstaengl:
What most people forget in their judgement of Hitler’s character is that his simply did not fit into the four classifications of personality laid down by Albrecht Dürer: the sanguine, the melancholy, the choleric and the phlegmatic. His characteristics were those of a medium, who absorbed and gave expression, by induction and osmosis, to the fears, ambitions and emotions of the whole German nation.

Rosenberg (memoirs):
He was not at all like the representatives of other parties. Where the latter appealed to the interests of their listeners, who all belonged to a certain definite group, by promising to press their interests before all others, Hitler invariably spoke for the absent ones. In other words, before an audience of Red workers he spoke about the need for a healthy farmers’ class, or he defended the German officers. Facing officers he criticised the attitude of the intelligentsia which had ignored the workingman and left him to his fate. The time for self-criticism had come, he would say, and the way from man to man had to be found despite all obstacles.

Hanfstaengl:
I had by this time heard a number of his public speeches and was beginning to understand the pattern of their appeal. The first secret lay in his choice of words. Every generation develops its own vocabulary of catchwords and phrases, and these date thoughts and utterances. My own father talked like a contemporary of Bismarck, the people of my own age bore the stamp of Wilhelm II, but Hitler had caught the casual camaraderie of the trenches, and without stooping to slang, except for special effects, managed to talk like a member of his audience. In describing the difficulties of the housewife without enough money to buy the buy the food her family needed in the Viktualien Market he would produce just the phrases she would have used herself to describe her difficulties, if she had been able to formulate them. Where other national orators gave the painful impression of talking down to their audience, he had his priceless gift of expressing exactly their own thoughts.

Winterhilfswerk 1936 speech
[Regrettably, the translated YouTube video for this speech was taken down, presumably for it’s sympathetic music. I have transcribed the relevant portion below.]

0:39 Do not tell me: “Ah! But it’s always a nuisance, these meetings.” You have never been hungry, otherwise you would know how annoying the hunger is. You read, my compatriots, perhaps in the newspaper, a woman has committed suicide with two or three children. My dear compatriots, they are not the worst of men, and secondly, that is not an easy decision. You don’t give away easily about 10 pfennigs, so then you know what it means when others have to give up their lives.
1:34 And if another person says again: “You know, I would be very happy to give something, but my stomach, this Sunday stew, I always have difficulties and so on, it’s displeasing and I do not understand it at all. I give 10 Pfennigs, but you would eventually…”
No, my dear friend, we have set all this on purpose; not only this Sunday stew that you don’t understand has brought in about 30 million marks, and you can not even calculate how many millions of people we could give a hot lunch, and how many little kids we could keep alive with that, that you may not absorb into your mind, my compatriot.

George Ward Price:
It is certain that this disciplined restraint of human instincts implies no lack of human sympathy. One of the most striking features of Hitler’s personality is his faculty for putting himself in harmony with others. Men of most varying characters alike receive, in contact with him, the conviction that there is some special bond between them. His mind, like that of many great leaders in the past, has a strong psychic strain. I have been told that the Austro-German borderland where he was born is known, like the Scottish Highlands, to be prolific of people with this gift of intuition.

Laurency ():
2An “esoterician” without love will have many enemies. People instinctively feel they are seen through, and they never forgive that. In contrast, if there is love and thus understanding, they mostly overlook the eccentric’s baroque life view, unless the magnetic radiation from his aura is so strong that its vibrations affect other people and in many cases reinforce the worst and most easily activated traits in them.

Apollonius of Tyana:
As for myself, I am acquainted with more than other human beings, for I know all things, and what I know, I know partly for good men, partly for wise ones, partly for myself, partly for the gods, but for tyrants nothing.
John 2:24-25 But Jesus would not entrust himself to them, for he knew all people. He did not need any testimony about mankind, for he knew what was in each person.

August Kubizek:
Hitler was full of deep understanding and sympathy. He took a most touching interest in me. Without my telling him, he knew exactly how I felt. How often this helped me in difficult times! He always knew what I needed and what I wanted. However intensely he was occupied with himself he would always have time for the affairs of those people in whom he was interested. It was not by chance that he was the one who persuaded my father to let me study music and thereby influenced my life in a decisive way. Rather, this was the outcome of his general attitude of sharing in all the things that were of concern to me. Sometimes I had a feeling that he was living my life as well as his own. Thus, I have drawn the portrait of the young Hitler as well as I can from memory.

George Ward Price:
For he responds to this metaphysical contact in such a way that each member of the multitude feels bound to him by an individual link of sympathy.

Weishaupt:
In contrast, there is another type of woe which is incomparably more sensitive. No one experiences it more than the man who cares more for others than for himself, whose emotion is too warm for virtue and human welfare – the man who can realize naught in this world of his compassionate heart’s demands, of what his better convictions tell him about the way the world and humanity ought to be.

Kubizek:
As far back as the beginning of our friendship, when I could still only visualise my future in the dusty, upholsterer’s workshop, Adolf, though nearly a year younger than I, had made it abundantly clear to me that I ought to become a musician. Having put this idea into my head, he never gave up his efforts to persuade me. He comforted me when I despaired, he bolstered up my self-confidence when I was in danger of losing it, he praised, he criticised, he was occasionally rude and violent and railed at me furiously, but he never lost sight of the goal which he had set for me; and if sometimes we had such furious rows that I believed it was the end of everything, we would enthusiastically renew our friendship after a concert performance in which I had taken part. By God, nobody on earth, not even my mother who loved me so much and knew me so well, was as capable of bringing my secret desires into the open and making them come true as my friend, although he had never had any systematic musical training.


Senses over Reason/Knowledge

Kubizek:
The Young Hitler I Knew, Chapter 10
I cannot repeat every word that my friend uttered. I was struck by something strange, which I had never noticed before, even when he had talked to me in moments of the greatest excitement. It was as if another Self [Ger. anderes Ich] spoke out of his body, and moved him as much as it did me. It wasn’t at all a case of a speaker being carried away by his own words.

[Wagener reports next on a talk he had with Hitler at the Elephant Hotel in Weimar during one of their political trips. When he warned that Hitler ran the risk of misunderstandings by speaking in conversational fashion about important matters, he recalls drawing the following reply.]

Hitler, Memoirs of a Confidant, p.g. 150-151:
Actually, I’m now and then aware that is it not I who is speaking, but that something speaks through me. On such occasions, I frequently feel as if there were a mistake in human logic or as if it had limits of which it is not aware. Now and then ideas, concepts, views occur to me that I have read nowhere, heard nowhere, and never before thought, nor can I justify them by logic, and they do not even seem to me capable of being logically justified.”

[Comparison with Julian, Blavatsky, etc.]

Nikola Tesla:
My Inventions
But instinct is something which transcends knowledge. We have, undoubtedly, certain finer fibers that enable us to perceive truths when logical deduction, or any other willful effort of the brain, is futile.

Hitler, Table Talk (Cameron & Stevens), January 25-26, 1942:
The observation of the world perceived by the senses precedes the knowledge given by exact science as well as by philosophy

Iamblichus:
Life of Pythagoras
Conceiving, however, that the first attention which should be paid to men, is that which takes place through the senses; as when some one perceives beautiful figures and forms, or hears beautiful rhythms and melodies, [Pythagoras] established that to be the first erudition which subsists through music, and also through certain melodies and rhythms, from which the remedies of human manners and passions are obtained, together with those harmonies of the powers of the soul which it possessed from the first.

Rosenberg:
In the Phaedon [96c], for example, Platon relates that Sokrates had admitted that he possessed no aptitude for investigation of organic events. The true nature of things for Sokrates therefore consisted ultimately not in their investigation by observation, but in our thinking about them. One should not ruin one’s eyes by viewing things to excess. If man wishes to discover whether the earth is flat or round then it does not suit him to carry on research. Rather, he should ask: What does reason say of this? Is it rational to conceive the earth as the centre of the universe?
While Platon certainly invented this passage, it fits the same Sokrates who turned his gaze away from a racially beautiful Greece in order to talk of a universal abstract mankind, a brotherhood of the good.

Plato:
Republic
And God proclaims as a first principle to the rulers, and above all else, that there is nothing which they should so anxiously guard, or of which they are to be such good guardians, as of the purity of the race. They should observe what elements mingle in their offspring;

Julian:
Now that the human race possesses its knowledge of God by nature and not from teaching is proved to us first of all by the universal yearning for the divine that is in all men whether private persons or communities, whether considered as individuals or as races.
Hitler, Table Talk, July 11-12, 1941 (Cameron & Stevens):
Man has discovered in nature the wonderful notion of that all-mighty being whose law he worships. Fundamentally in everyone there is the feeling for this all-mighty, which we call God (that is to say, the dominion of natural laws throughout the whole universe).
Hitler, Memoirs of a Confidant, p.g. 279:
For a healthy mind can develop only in a healthy body, and it is only in the freedom of nature that a human being can also open himself to a higher morality and a higher ethic. The consciousness of the growing young man and young woman absorbs those ethical bases that distinguish them from animals and that mark the individual and, over time, the entire Volk with its racial characteristics.

Clement of Alexandria:
Stromata
There are also among the Germans those called sacred women, who, by inspecting the whirlpools of rivers and the eddies, and observing the noises of streams, presage and predict future events. These did not allow the men to fight against Caesar till the new moon shone.
Tacitus:
More than this, they believe that there resides in women an element of holiness and prophecy, and so they do not scorn to ask their advice or lightly disregard their replies. In the reign of the deified Vespasian we saw Veleda long honoured by many Germans as a divinity, whilst even earlier they showed a similar reverence for Aurinia and others, a reverence untouched by flattery or any pretence of turning women into goddesses.
Haeckel:
As civilization advanced, this ideal value of sexual love was more appreciated, and woman held in higher honor, especially among the Teutonic races; she is the inspiring source of the highest achievements of art and poetry.

[While discussing Martin Bormann’s possible treachery with Eugene K. Bird, Hess remarked that women had intuition on these matters (people’s trustworthiness). He said they are often able to judge men better than other men can themselves. To add my own input into this matter: As female suffrage gains more triumphs, modern women will have to maintain vigilance and closely safeguard their maternal instincts to avoid losing their intuition.]

Laurency (kl1_9.23):
1The ideas (the exact knowledge of reality) are in the “world of Platonic ideas”, the causal world. That is why “there is nothing new” under the sun. They are, however, no such ideas as paralyze action, as many mental ideas are. They are energies. And anyone who has experienced a causal idea has got the plan for a new work that he must execute. Otherwise there is a risk that these energies find other outlets.
2Those who ambitiously claim priorities should contemplate the fact that all reality ideas are received from the planetary hierarchy, directly or indirectly. It certainly is not everybody’s lot to discover Platonic ideas, the only true reality ideas. Only he is able to do so who has reached up to perspective thinking (47:5), who is approaching the causal stage with rapid strides.


[See Nietzsche and Hitler as Perspective Thinkers.]

Laurency (kl2_8):
36A pronounced character of this type was Nietzsche. He had liberated himself from slavish dependence on principle thinking, being the first step towards emancipation from the concrete form-thinking of mentalism.
37In work after work he went against his fundamental problems to extract new viewpoints from them. His contribution was mainly negative and critical because he lacked the basic facts of the esoteric knowledge, which are necessary to a correct conception of existence, its meaning and goal.
Laurency ():
10Many people have wondered how Nietzsche, who had the stage of the saint behind him, could become that confused in his “moral orientation”, expressed better: conception of right.

[Shouldn’t confuse this developmental stage with the Christian concept of saint.]

Laurency (kl2_8):
2Christian mysticism, Islamic sufism, Hindu bhakti yoga all lead to the highest emotional stage (48:2), the stage of the saint.
4Regrettably, the Catholic Church has combined the ideal of the saint with irrelevant motives: obedience to the Church and its ritual, demonstration of religious zeal, the most strict observation of the taboos of moralism, asceticism, celibacy, flagellation, etc.

4728461_hitler-inspecting-germania-model_620.jpg

Mein Kampf:
From early youth I endeavoured to read books in the right way and I was fortunate in having a good memory and intelligence to assist me. From that point of view my sojourn in Vienna was particularly useful and profitable. My daily experiences were a constant stimulus to study the most diverse problems from new angles.
Hitler, Table Talk, February 6, 1942 (Cameron & Stevens):
I’ve examined this problem in all its aspects, turned it round in all directions.

Kubizek:
He never came to the end of his problems. His profound earnestness never ceased to attack new problems, and if he did not find any in the present, he would brood at home for hours over his books and burrow into the problems of the past. This extraordinary earnestness was his most striking quality.
Laurency (kl2_8):
11“We never get anything finished” because it only grows and widens until it embraces everything.

Haeckel:
The Riddle of the Universe
Much more care and time must be devoted than has been done hitherto to corporal exercise, to gymnastics and swimming; but it is especially important to have walks in common every week, and journeys on foot during the holidays. The lesson in observation which they obtain in this way is invaluable.

Kubizek:
Walking was the only exercise that really appealed to Adolf. He walked always and everywhere and, even in my workshop and in my room, he would stride up and down. I recall him always on the go. He could walk for hours without getting tired. We used to explore the surroundings of Linz in all directions.

[When Eugene K. Bird posed the question “What was your most lasting memory of Hitler?”, Rudolf Hess recalled seeing Hitler striding backwards and forwards in his large room while dictating orders and letters. As he discussed these matters, Hitler simultaneously exercised.]

Sumner Welles:
The Time For Decision
[Hitler] seemed in excellent physical condition and in good training.

Memory “Genius”

Hans-Ulrich Rudel:
Stuka Pilot, Chapter 13, p.g. 166-167
For two days I bask in the sun on the terrace of the Berchtesgadener Hotel, inhaling the glorious mountain air of home. Now gradually I relax. Two days later I stand in the presence of the Führer in the magnificent Berghof. He knows the whole story of the last fortnight down to the minutest detail and expresses his joy that the fates have been so kind, that we were able to achieve so much.

Christa Schroeder:
I was always amazed at how precisely he could describe any geographical region or speak about art history or hold forth on very complicated technical matters. In the same way he could describe with amazing detail how theatres, churches, monasteries and castles were built. The Oberbürgermeister of Munich, with whom Hitler enjoyed discussing the expansion and beautification of the city, related how surprised he was when Hitler recalled the minute details of a conversation they had had months previously. Hitler had reproached him: ‘Six months ago I told you I wanted it done this way!’ and then repeated word for word their conversation, a fact confirmed by architects Speer and Giesler post-war.

Laurency (L3e5):
2Much learning does not in the least indicate a higher stage of development. There are countless “memory geniuses” at the stage of civilization.

[Elsewhere, Laurency cited the Jew and possible humanist Georg Brandes’ initial impressions of people as an example of how high intelligence was a superficial way to gauge people.]

Laurency (kl1_7):

As long as memory geniuses are regarded as shining lights of intelligence, those who have acquired perspective consciousness will never be estimated at their true value.

[Hence the Hitler apologist should refrain from stressing Hitler’s excellent memory and high intelligence as a merit, as he unwittingly places an obstacle in Hitler’s rehabilitation. It is very much the same case with vegetarianism; it has no merit in itself, especially considering how people who devote themselves to this lifestyle to an excessive degree (vegans) are typically condescending with a sense of superiority and are prone to turn brutally dogmatic in enforcing this way of life on others. Competence and conduct are more important than intelligence and asceticism.]


Laurency (kr5.26):
11They showed that they had attained the perspective thinking of the stage of humanity, which facilitates contact with the world of ideas.

Laurency (kl1_1):
3At the stage of humanity, after the individual has not just acquired the knowledge of reality and life but has also strived to reactualize and reactivate the emotional attraction of the stage of the saint, the object of his meditation will no longer be an elemental but the contact with his Augoeides.

[See Augoeides.]

Kubizek:
The Young Hitler I Knew, Chapter 10
I cannot repeat every word that my friend uttered. I was struck by something strange, which I had never noticed before, even when he had talked to me in moments of the greatest excitement. It was as if another Self [Ger. anderes Ich] spoke out of his body, and moved him as much as it did me. It wasn’t at all a case of a speaker being carried away by his own words.
Laurency (wm8.13):
1Man’s ability to contact Augoeides brings about incredible changes in his first self affecting every atom of his etheric envelope and organism. He becomes like “another human being.

Laurency (wm8.13):
Under the influence of Augoeides, the monad is as though lifted up above its true level of development, to sink down to it again when the contact is broken. Only when man has attained the stage of humanity, and has been firmly attached to the “ideals”, can he be accepted as a disciple of the planetary hierarchy.

[The question is, did Hitler adhere to the ideals he often stressed in Mein Kampf?]

Mein Kampf:

It is an essential aspect of human evolution that the individual should be imbued with the spirit of sacrifice in favour of the common weal that he: should not be influenced by the morbid notions of those who pretend to know better than Nature and who have the impudence to criticise her decrees. It is just at those junctures when the idealistic attitude threatens to disappear that we notice a weakening of this force which is a necessary constituent in the founding and maintenance of the community and is therefore a necessary condition of civilisation.

It is of the utmost importance to insist again and again that idealism is not merely a superfluous manifestation of sentiment but rather something which has been, is and always will be, a necessary precondition of human civilization; it is even out of this that the very idea of the word ‘Human’ arises.

We may safely say that man does not live merely to serve higher ideals, but that these ideals, in their turn, furnish the necessary conditions of his existence as a human being. And thus the circle is closed.

The völkisch belief holds that humanity must have its ideals, because ideals are a necessary condition of human existence itself.

Laurency (kl1_1):
2Through “the constant prayer” the mystic is living in, an elemental is formed by these devotional energies, and there arises a reciprocal relation which the mystic takes for “a relation to god”.
3At the stage of humanity, the “constant prayer” is superseded by a continuous “soul contact”, which is resumed whenever attention must not be occupied with other tasks in the worlds of man.

[Recall that Laurency has referred to Jahwe as an elemental.]


Laurency (kl1_9.23):
2Those at the stage of civilization who “think in the democratic way” either deny the existence of Platonic ideas or believe they are as capable of discovering them as anybody else. They do not suspect the degree of their life ignorance. But they demonstrate it before the “initiated” when trying to impress the injudicious masses.

Comparison with Julian, Blavatsky, etc.

Hitler, Memoirs of a Confidant, p.g. 150-151:
“Actually, I’m now and then aware that is it not I who is speaking, but that something speaks through me. On such occasions, I frequently feel as if there were a mistake in human logic or as if it had limits of which it is not aware. Now and then ideas, concepts, views occur to me that I have read nowhere, heard nowhere, and never before thought, nor can I justify them by logic, and they do not even seem to me capable of being logically justified.”

Emperor Julian:
Hymn to King Helios
What I am now about to say I consider to be of the greatest importance for all things “That breathe and move upon the earth” [Iliad 17. 447.] and have a share in existence and a reasoning soul and intelligence, but above all others it is of importance to myself. For I am a follower of King Helios. And of this fact I possess within me, known to myself alone, proofs more certain than I can give. But this at least I am permitted to say without sacrilege, that from my childhood an extraordinary longing for the rays of the god penetrated deep into my soul; and from my earliest years my mind was so completely swayed by the light that illumines the heavens that not only did I desire to gaze intently at the sun, but whenever I walked abroad in the night season, when the firmament was clear and cloudless, I abandoned all else without exception and gave myself up to the beauties of the heavens; nor did I understand what anyone might say to me, nor heed what I was doing myself. I was considered to be over-curious about these matters and to pay too much attention to them, and people went so far as to regard me as an astrologer when my beard had only just begun to grow.
And yet, I call heaven to witness, never had a book on this subject come into my hands; nor did I as yet even know what that science was. But why do I mention this, when I have more important things to tell, if I should relate how, in those days, I thought about the gods? However let that darkness be buried in oblivion. But let what I have said bear witness to this fact, that the heavenly light shone all about me, and that it roused and urged me on to its contemplation, so that even then I recognised of myself that the movement of the moon was in the opposite direction to the universe, though as yet I had met no one of those who are wise in these matters.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Houston_Stewart_Chamberlain#Evangelist_of_Race
Chamberlain later recalled: “The starlight exerted an indescribable influence on me. The stars seemed closer to me, more gentle, more worthy of trust, and more sympathetic – for that is the only word which describes my feelings – than any of the people around me in school. For the stars, I experienced true friendship”.

August Kubizek:
His love of nature was pronounced, but in a very personal way. Unlike other subjects, nature never attracted him as a matter for study; I hardly ever remember seeing him with a book on the subject. Here was the limit of his thirst for knowledge.

Laurency (L3e5.11):
1Blavatsky’s two major works, Isis Unveiled and The Secret Doctrine, are studded with quotations from books and manuscripts in libraries all over the world.
2Having examined the quotations, scholars state that most of them have been taken from existing works, and so they think that Blavatsky read them. She never set foot in a library.
She said to her niece: “You are very green if you think that I actually know and understand all the things I write. How many times am I to repeat to you and your mother that the things I write are dictated to me; that sometimes I see manuscripts, numbers and words before my eyes of which I never knew anything?”
3The quotation is from Olcott’s Old Diary Leaves:
“She wrote me that it [Isis Unveiled, recently begun] was to be a book on the history and philosophy of the Eastern Schools… She said she was writing about things she had never studied and making quotations from books she had never read in all her life.”
Olcott goes on to say: “She worked on no fixed plan, but ideas came streaming through her mind…”
Moreover: “Whence did she get this knowledge?… she had not learnt it at all, whether from one source or another; but when she needed it she had it.”
Many people testified later how they had opportunities to observe her writing at her desk and how she (as Olcott wrote) “would suddenly stop, look out into space with the vacant eye of the clairvoyant seer, shorten her vision as though to look at something held invisible in the air before her, and begin copying on her paper what she saw.”

[Praise for Blavatsky from numerous highly respected and influential individuals.]

Speer (Diaries), January 15, 1951:
At the Landestheater, we got out of the car and entered the large auditorium, which probably dated back to the beginning of the eighteenth century. The place was neglected; the plush upholstery of the seats was torn and tattered, the curtain dust-covered. But Hitler seemed untroubled.
With visible emotion he showed us the cheap seat in the top gallery from which he had first seen Lohengrin, Rienzi, and other operas, and then indicated by a slight gesture that he wanted to be alone. For some time he gazed dreamily into space, his eyes absent, his features slack.
Meanwhile we stood around somewhat embarrassed; nobody dared to move, and it must have been more than five minutes before Hitler returned to reality.

Otto Wagener, Memoirs of a Confidant, p.g. 3-4:
From the first moment, his eyes caught and held me. They were clear and large, trained on me calmly and with self-assurance. His gaze came, not from the pupil, but from a much deeper source–I felt as if it came from the infinite. It was impossible to read anything in these eyes. But they spoke, they wanted to speak. They did not ask, they talked.

Fridolin von Spaun:
Suddenly I noticed Hitler’s eyes resting on me. He was indeed observing me. And that was one of the most curious moments in my life. I had the feeling that he was searching somehow – the gaze which at first rested completely on me suddenly went straight through me and into an unknown distance. It was so strange. And the long gaze which he had given me convinced me completely that he was a man of honourable intentions. I can only say that I’m glad that I saw Hitler’s beautiful side. Surely there must have been dark sides, but I saw his wonderful side, and nobody can take that away from me.

[This NYT article by a Herbert Mitgang belittles the mesmerizing effect of Hitler’s eyes and attempts to explain it away with Hitler’s known use of the drug Kola Dallmann. There are a number of errors that need to be addressed here. First, it doesn’t specify that the “party functionary who had been a pharmacist said that Hitler also took belladonna” was the dissident Otto Strasser, who was by no means on good terms with Hitler. Second, it omits that Strasser was merely speculating about the possibility that Hitler may have borrowed Belladonna from his niece, who was a singer (it was common at the time for singers and actresses to take it). He also observed that Geli had similar eyes, but he completely overlooks that Hitler’s mother had those exact same eyes! Third, the only proposed link between the use of Kola Dallmann and it’s alleged effect on Hitler’s eyes was the speculation that the two aforementioned substances “produce a reciprocal effect”.]

Mustafa Kemal Ataturk

Wallis Warfield, Duchess of Windsor:
The heart has its reasons
I could not take my eyes off Hitler. He was dressed in his brown Party uniform. His face had a pasty pallor, and under his mustache his lips were fixed in a kind of mirthless grimace. Yet at close quarters he gave one the feeling of great inner force. His hands were long and slim, a musician’s hands, and his eyes were truly extraordinary intense, unblinking, magnetic, burning with the same peculiar fire I had earlier seen in the eyes of Kemal Atatürk.

Hitler, Table Talk (Cameron & Stevens), January 22, 1942:
We’ve lost some of our Germanics! The Berbers of North Africa, the Kurds of Asia Minor. One of them was Kemal Ataturk, who had nothing to do with his compatriots, from the racial point of view.

Hitler, Table Talk (Cameron & Stevens), April 2, 1942:
The reason why political assassination continues to be so formidable in the Balkans is that nowadays the population is still impressed by the idea that, by shedding blood, one is avenging oneself. That’s why Kemal Pasha acted wisely, immediately after the seizure of power, by proclaiming a new capital. Thus control by the police could be exercised effectively.

Hitler, May 4, 1941 speech:
Turkey was our ally in the World War. The unfortunate outcome of this struggle
weighed Turkey down as much as it did us. The great, ingenious creator of young Turkey was the first to set a wonderful example for the uplifting of those allies who had been forsaken by fortune and had suffered a terrible fate. While Turkey maintained independence in its decision-making, thanks to the realistic attitude of its state leadership, Yugoslavia became the victim of British intrigues

Laurency (wm9):
The esoterician helps in the way he is able to (in politics, in society, science, technology, education, etc.) without caring for the idiology of the man needing help. Perhaps it helps us to understand this if we are informed that Mustafa Kemal, Franklin D. Roosevelt (link), Winston Churchill (link), and Dag Hammarskjöld (were unbeknownst to themselves) disciples of the planetary hierarchy.

Hanfstaengl:
[Hitler] compared the separatist movement and religious particularity of the Bavarian Catholics with the comradeship of the front-line soldier who never asked a wounded comrade his religion before he sprang to help him. He dwelt at length on patriotism and national pride and quoted approvingly the rôle of Kemal Ataturk in Turkey and the example of Mussolini, who had marched on Rome three weeks earlier.

Mein Kampf:
As long as there was no lack of leadership in the higher circles, the people fulfilled their duty and obligations to an overwhelming extent. Whether
Protestant pastor or Catholic priest
, each did his very utmost to help our powers of resistance to hold out, not only in the trenches, but also, and to an even greater degree, at home.

Hitler, November 8, 1941:
It will be a great relief for Europe not only if this [Soviet] danger disappears, but also if the fertility of this soil benefits all of Europe. This is a gigantic task posed to us. However, I am so much a materialist that I regard it as far more important than worrying about what religions are predominant in what countries.

Mein Kampf:
As regards the future of the world, it does not matter which of the two triumphs, the Catholic or the Protestant faith, but it does matter whether Aryan humanity survives or perishes. Yet the two Christian denominations are not contending against the destroyer of Aryan humanity, but are trying to destroy one another.

[Many occultists will demand for an explanation of why Hitler didn’t concern himself with the higher loftier teachings or pay homage to great writers like Homer, Plato, or Blavatsky. I would refer them to Aristotle’s treatise on the matter aspect, Francis Bacon’s preference for Democritus (Bacon is considered a genuine Rosicrucian in esoterics), and Thomas Jefferson’s interest in the Epicureans. Aristotle and Bacon were initiates, but it seems unlikely that Jefferson was re-acquainted with esoterics.]

Laurency (L4e7):
1Francis Bacon rightly considered Demokritos to be the only one of the ancient philosophers possessed of common sense. Bacon passed over Pythagoras and Platon because their teachings had never been understood correctly and such as those teachings were presented in the history of philosophy they were without reality. Bacon made an exception for Demokritos in this respect because Demokritos gave mankind the atomic theory (albeit veiled) as a lasting result. That was the only thing left standing of the speculations of philosophy up to his time.

Francis Bacon:
And therefore the natural philosophy of Democritus and some others, (who did not suppose a mind or reason in the frame of things, but attributed the form thereof, able to maintain itself, to infinite essays or proofs of nature, which they term fortune,) seemeth to me, as far as I can judge by the recital and fragments which remain unto us, in particularities of physical causes, more real and better inquired than that of Aristotle and Plato; whereof both intermingled final cruises, the one as a part of theology, and the other as a part of logic, which were the favourite studies respectively of both those persons.

Hitler, Table Talk (Cameron & Stevens), November 11, 1941:
I know nothing of the Other World, and I have the honesty to admit it. Other people know more about it than I do, and I’m incapable of proving that they’re mistaken.

[The occultists and mystics are seeking an easy escape from this world and have adopted an apathetic attitude towards world affairs. Not Hitler. The aforementioned individuals concerned themselves strictly with the matter aspect for the immediate relief of human suffering. They did not delve into subjects they were not ready for. Or knowing such things would be of no use to the community they opted to confine themselves to subjects which were generally within reach. They understood that consciousness requires a material basis. You can’t build a foundation on the abstract (typical of the Orient and Western philosophers). The Orient already has it’s wise men and well-established religions. The Middle East has Islam, adapted to the Arabs. It’s the West that is badly in need of a formulation. “Henry T. Laurency”, Leadbeater, and Alan Watts are just three examples of people who have endeavored to make the Eastern concepts comprehensible to the Westerner without becoming endeared to the terminology and symbolism.]

Goebbels, Is It Pagan? speech:
We’re very earthly-minded. It’s not our duty to worry about the afterlife, but rather about this world. We therefore want to clearly distinguish these two spheres from one another. We’re a political party, so we provide a better existence on earth, while the church sees to it that our people go to heaven.

Speer:
Hitler said that the conquering Arabs, because of their racial inferiority, would in the long run have been unable to contend with the harsher climate and conditions of the country. They could not have kept down the more vigorous natives, so that ultimately not Arabs but Islamized Germans could have stood at the head of this Mohammedan Empire.

[As such, whether Christianity or Islam prevails over the world is irrelevant, as long as the Aryan humanists are the ones to shape it. Marxism must be thwarted. Now contrast Hitler’s attitude towards religion with the partiality, exclusivity, and intolerance demonstrated by democratic-minded leaders.]

Winston Churchill:
Reply to Hitler, House of Commons, November 6, 1938
I have always said that if Great Britain were defeated in war I hoped we should find a Hitler to lead us back to our rightful position among the nations. I am sorry, however, that he has not been mellowed by the great success that has attended him. The whole world would rejoice to see the Hitler of peace and tolerance, and nothing would adorn his name in world history so much as acts of magnanimity and of mercy and of pity to the forlorn and friendless, to the weak and poor.

Franklin D. Roosevelt:
We bring no charge against the German race, as such, for we cannot believe that God has eternally condemned any race of humanity. For we know in our own land how many good men and women of German ancestry have proved loyal, freedom-loving, peace-loving citizens. There is going to be stern punishment for all those in Germany directly responsible for this agony of mankind.

Robert E. Sherwood:
Roosevelt and Hopkins
Immeasurably stronger were the racial and religious groups who favored extreme isolationism. I do not believe that the German Americans should be included among these for the great majority of them were appalled by what Hitler had done to the land of their forefathers and those who joined or even tolerated the German-American Bund were fortunately few in number.

Hermann Giesler, The Artist Within the Warlord, p.g. 226-227:
Translated by Wilhelm Kriessmann, Ph.D and Carolyn Yeager
They [the people at Yalta] talked about peace-loving nations, meaning only their own, chatted about the highest ideals for mankind and sacred duties, about a secured and lasting peace and a life free of worries and misery for all people and nations; everything will be good, peaceful and glorious as soon as Germany is shattered.

Franklin D. Roosevelt:
The German people are not going to be enslaved — because the United Nations do not traffic in human slavery.

Laurency (kr5):
6What condemns the Soviet system is partly its inhumanity, its barbarous contempt of the individual’s divine right to integrity, partly it tyranny of opinion. It is sheer parody that this power is allowed to take part in the United Nations work for mankind just in order to destroy this very work, this power more terrible than that of the Catholic Church in the Middle Ages, this power the aim of which is to wipe out all nations, to make all men slaves physically and spiritually, and by its satanic methods to try to stifle every endeavour to find and proclaim the truth.

Harry Hopkins:
March 15, 1943
Poland will want her original boundaries as they existed prior to the war. The President said that, after all, the big powers would have to decide what Poland should have and that he, the President, did not intend to go to the Peace Conference and bargain with Poland or the other small states; as far as Poland is concerned, the important thing is to set it up in a way that will help maintain the peace of the world.
The President said he thought we should make some arrangement to move the Prussians out of East Prussia the same way the Greeks were moved out of Turkey after the last war; while this is a harsh procedure, it is the only way to maintain peace and that, in any circumstances, the Prussians cannot be trusted.

The Initiate in the New World, p.g. 96-97:
“The type of peace that obtains today, as all of you know without the telling, is merely the cessation of fighting- the peace of the letter but not of the spirit [2 Corinthians 3:6].
Laurency (L3e18):
6The same state of affairs is seen between nations, a permanent cease-fire with a constant threat of war.

[The peace obtained by treaties, negotiations, and compromises deals a death blow to the nation in the long run.]

Lars Adelskogh (Fke10):
15Many pacifists hold that killing people is an absolute evil that can be tolerated under no circumstances. Attack and defence are equally reprehensible. Thus a nation must unresistingly accept the aggression of other states. The one essential thing is that“human lives are not lost” (as if they could be so!). The nation in question has to put up with occupation, terror, the introduction of ideologies that are hostile to life and knowledge, all of which hampers evolution.

Mein Kampf:
It must be remembered, that in many instances a hardy and healthy nation has emerged from the ordeal of bloody civil war, while from peace conditions which had been artificially maintained there often resulted a state of national putrescence that reeked to heaven.

Rousseau:
Social Contract
There are indeed times in the history of States when, just as some kinds of illness turn men’s heads and make them forget the past, periods of violence and revolutions do to peoples what these crises do to individuals: horror of the past takes the place of forgetfulness, and the State, set on fire by civil wars, is born again, so to speak, from its ashes, and takes on anew, fresh from the jaws of death, the vigour of youth. Such were Sparta at the time of Lycurgus, Rome after the Tarquins, and, in modern times, Holland and Switzerland after the expulsion of the tyrants. But such events are rare; they are exceptions, the cause of which is always to be found in the particular constitution of the State concerned.

Franklin D. Roosevelt:
But it will be necessary for them to earn their way back into the fellowship of peace-loving and law-abiding nations. And, in their climb up that steep road, we shall certainly see to it that they are not encumbered by having to carry guns. They will be relieved of that burden—we hope, forever.—
Winston Churchill:
We need not fear that the task of holding these new lines will be too heavy for Poland, or that it will bring about another German revenge, or that it will, to use a conventional phrase, sow the seeds of future wars. We intend to take steps far more drastic and effective than those that followed the last war, because we know much more about this business, so as to render all offensive action by Germany utterly impossible for generations to come.

Hitler, Table Talk, February 6, 1942 (Cameron & Stevens):
I do not believe in the idealism of one people paying an eternal debt to others. As soon as everybody in England is convinced that the war can only be run at a loss, it’s certain that there won’t be anyone left there who feels inclined to carry on with it.

[Here the English translation is misleading, makes it seem as if Hitler was repudiating idealism (“I don’t believe in idealism”), which definitely isn’t the case in the original German. I’ve amended a suitable translation from Jochmann in italics.]

Julian:
But now answer me this. Is it better to be free continuously and during two thousand whole years to rule over the greater part of the earth and the sea, or to be enslaved and to live in obedience to the will of others? No man is so lacking in self-respect as to choose the latter by preference.

[This argument from the sophist Jordan Peterson is the most absurd thing I’ve ever listened to.]

Senator Robert A. Taft:
I question whether the hanging of those, who, however despicable, were the leaders of the German people, will ever discourage the making of aggressive war, for no one makes aggressive war unless he expects to win.

Julian:
Again, will anyone think that victory in war is less desirable than defeat? Who is so stupid?

Franklin D. Roosevelt:
But I should be false to the very foundations of my religious and political convictions, if I should ever relinquish the hope—and even the faith—that in all people, without exception, there lives some instinct for truth, some attraction toward justice, and some passion for peace—buried as they may be in the German case under a brutal regime.

Nikola Tesla:
My Inventions
Everybody understands, of course, that if one becomes deaf, has his eyesight weakened, or his limbs injured, the chances for his continued existence are lessened. But this is also true, and perhaps more so, of certain defects in the brain which deprive the automaton, more or less, of that vital quality and cause it to rush into destruction.

Dag Hammarskjöld

http://national-socialist-worldview.blogspot.com/2017/08/two-know-it-alls-debate-national.html

[Hadding Scott doubts that Wagener’s memoir, or the memoir attributed to Wagener, is accurate. He draws the reader’s attention to the following quote: “It is not until the individual nations are socialist that they can address themselves to international socialism.” He argues that this is not consistent with other statements, stating that “Hitler’s attitude toward foreign relations as a great competition for survival did not favor such a concept as ‘international socialism.'” The quote Mr. Hadding brings up is typically quoted abridged on quote sites (which are generally unsourced or unreliable) and it must be read in full context.]

Hitler, Memoirs of a Confidant, p.g. 287:
…the large and all-encompassing Volk community, which is the alpha and omega of true socialism. After all, that’s exactly why we call ourselves National Socialists! We want to start by implementing socialism in our nation, among our Volk! It is not until the individual nations are socialist that they can address themselves to international socialism. Here, too, you see again how National Socialism differs from international Marxism and from communism. Now I have something quite different in mind, which I’ve borrowed from the Roman educational system.

Hitler, Memoirs of a Confidant, p.g. 170:
But first, there will have to be national socialism. Otherwise the peoples and their governments are not ready for the socialism of nations. It is not possible to be liberal in one’s own country and demand socialism among nations. Education about and firm belief in national socialism must precede that change.

Otto Wagener, Memoirs of a Confidant, p.g. 114:
It is generally believed that competitors must be totally hostile to each other and constantly at each other’s throats. I hold the reverse to be true. We are accustomed to believe that struggle is necessary for that which is healthier and stronger–in this case, better–to prevail. That is said to be the case in the animal kingdom and the vegetable kingdom. And it cannot be otherwise, the belief holds, among men and in men’s work.
I often talked with Hitler about this question. He was radically committed to that view. Even applied to economics, he saw in the struggle for assertion of self and for preeminence the surest guarantee for progress and the general weal.
Clearly he had conflicting feelings. He was a socialist and determined to remain one. But his inner attachment to nature led him time and again to observe and acknowledge as a law of nature the struggle for existence, the struggle to defeat the other.

[This would have actually been a golden opportunity to represent Hitler as a strictly peaceful man, if that was Wagener’s intention. That he refrained from doing so and even distinguished between his views and Hitler’s should demonstrate his reliability sufficiently.]

Laurency (L3e18):
3What “ideals” have characterized European politics? Mussolini was bent on reviving the ancient Roman Empire at the cost of helpless, small nations. French culture had to be the dominant one, and the security of France had to outweigh all other considerations. British imperialism in the past has exceeded that of other nations.
Cordell Hull:
Instead, [De Gaulle’s] own dictatorial attitude, coupled with his adventures in the political field, inevitably inspired the thought that he was trying to develop a political standing that would make him the next ruler of France.

Laurency (L4e2):
5There are innumerable examples of how the ideas of nationalism have idiotized people. One example of how such ideas can be used to separate nations from each other is so-called purism in language. Its advocates want to purge their language of all international words to assert its national character.

Hitler, Table Talk (Cameron & Stevens), March 7, 1942:
The linguists who recommend these Germanisations are deadly enemies of the German language. If we followed them in that path, we’d soon be unable to express our thoughts with precision, and our language would be poorer and poorer in vowels. . . . Let’s be glad we have a vocabulary rich enough to introduce infinite gradations into our thought.
And let’s gratefully accept the foreign words that have entered our language, if only for their sonorousness.
What would happen if we expelled from the German language all the words of foreign origin that it has assimilated?
First of all, we wouldn’t know exactly where to stop. Secondly, we’d be stupidly sacrificing the extra enrichments we owe to our predecessors.

Laurency (L4e2):
5They do not realize that, if they succeed in this, they will make it more difficult for all future generations to come in a living contact with the rest of mankind. They have not managed to perceive that development goes in the direction of increased “internationalization”.

Bolshevism: From Moses to Lenin
“One who really feels international has as much regard for the rest of the world as he does for his own nation. Were our so-called international swarms really like that – fine. But I fear that they are secretly more concerned with the attitude of the rest of the world toward themselves than with their own attitude toward the world. Internationalism requires basically good intentions. But the Jew fundamentally and completely lacks these. He hasn’t the remotest idea of classifying himself with the rest of humanity.

Jacob Burckhardt:
Force and Freedom: Reflections on History
We must grant the nineteenth century a special faculty for appreciating greatness of all times and kinds. For by the exchange and interconnection of all our literatures, by the increase of traffic, by the spread of European humanity over all the oceans, by the expansion and deepening of all our studies, our culture has attained a high degree of general receptivity, which is its essential characteristic. We have a standpoint for everything and strive to do justice even to the things that seem to us most strange and terrible.
Former times had one or few standpoints; in particular, only a national or a religious one. Islam had regard to itself alone. For a thousand years, the Middle Ages looked upon classical antiquity as the devil’s own. Now, on the other hand, our historical judgment is carrying out a great general revision of all famous men and things of the past.

Hitler, Table Talk (Cameron & Stevens), March 7, 1942:
Only writers of genius can have the right to modify the language. In the past generation, I can think of practically nobody but Schopenhauer who could have dared to do such a thing.
Laurency ():
4One of the few who were in a position to judge the reliability of this [historical source] material was Nietzsche as a philologist, and his account of his own field of research should have caused people to reflect.

Hitler, Table Talk (Jochmann), February 17, 1942:
Peace can only come by a natural order. The order presupposes that the nations intertwine [in einander], so that the more Befähigteren [capable, gifted, suitable, competent, fit] will lead.
Hermann Giesler, The Artist Within the Warlord, p.g. 107-108:
Translated by Wilhelm Kriessmann, Ph.D and Carolyn Yeager
Logically, that would lead to a league of Germanic states–not too closely knitted, but within a wise boundary–because England, for instance, is not Europe oriented, but worldwide. . . . Also, the Mediterranean states will remain outside that Germanic League, but still belonging to the New Europe.

Hitler, Table Talk (Cameron & Stevens), April 5, 1942:
After their first conflict with the Russians, the Finns applied to me, proposing that their country should become a German protectorate. I don’t regret having rejected this offer. As a matter of fact, the heroic attitude of this people, which has spent a hundred of the six hundred years of its history in fighting, deserves the greatest respect. It is infinitely better to have this people of heroes as allies than to incorporate it in the Germanic Reich—which, in any case, would not fail to provoke complications in the long run. The Finns cover one of our flanks, Turkey covers the other. That’s an ideal solution for me as far as our political protective system is concerned.

Hitler, Table Talk, August 2, 1941 (Cameron & Stevens):
It’s important that we should shape Germany in such a way that whoever comes to visit us may be cured of his prejudices concerning us. I don’t want to force National Socialism on anybody. If I’m told that some countries want to remain democrats—very well, they must remain democrats at all costs!

Hitler, Table Talk, May 20, 1942 (Cameron & Stevens):
I am firmly opposed to any attempt to export National Socialism. If other countries are determined to preserve their democratic systems and thus rush to their ruin, so much the better for us.

Herodotus:
Megabyzus spoke next, and advised the setting up of an oligarchy:- “Let the enemies of the Persians be ruled by democracies; but let us choose out from the citizens a certain number of the worthiest, and put the government into their hands. For thus both we ourselves shall be among the governors, and power being entrusted to the best men, it is likely that the best counsels will prevail in the state.”


[Unfortunately, the United Nations was not conceived with good intentions (see UN Charter Article 53 and Article 107), but unbeknownst to the militant founders of the UN, there seem to be higher powers working to turn it into an instrument for the good.
Secretary of State Cordell Hull is acclaimed as “the underlying force and architect in the creation of the United Nations, drafting, along with his staff, the United Nations Charter in mid-1943.” In his memoirs, he candidly took credit for this role, also mentioning the Nobel Peace Prize he received. He also actively agitated for war and I cannot even conceal my disgust for his overall pacifistic worldview. Yet I question how much he was really involved.
In the first place, the wiki is utterly devoid of sources pertaining to his role in shaping the UN charter (not that it means much, since it’s considered a widely known fact on most websites). Secondly, it becomes increasingly clear that Hull was being largely sidelined up until the the aftermath of Yalta Conference. I suspect FDR might have given him somewhat undue credit, possibly to deter attention from Jewish members of Hull’s staff, if there were any.]

Laurency (kl2_3.39):
6An esoterician must in his heart always be among the opposition, since those who are in power always abuse it. That does not hinder him from being in power. But in that case he is there in order to try to prevent the tendency to abuse power in legislation and execution. Such an old initiate was, unbeknownst to himself, Dag Hammarskjöld.

https://spartacus-educational.com/COLDhammarskjold.htm
Although he was not a member of any political party, Hammarskjold joined the government and served in the foreign ministry. He favoured international economic cooperation and played an important role in the development of the Council of Europe and the Organization of European Economic Cooperation. He was also involved in the implementation of the Marshall Plan. However, he strongly resisted pressure for Sweden to join the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO).

Laurency (L3e8):
19In his memoirs, Herbert Tingsten finds that Dag Hammarskjöld was an enigma, that he was great as a man but scarcely as an international statesman because of his “conscious indistinctness”. Tingsten disregards the fact that this was the only possible attitude in the political chaos of the United Nations Organization. It is unjust to criticize him for conscious and unconscious indistinctness in general terms. He stood out as the most clear-sighted man in many situations.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Herbert_Tingsten
Tingsten was an early opponent of Nazism, which he warned against during the early 1930s, as well as of the threat of Communism. During his time as executive editor of Dagens Nyheter, Tingsten argued for Swedish membership in NATO. He also supported Israel.

[Hammarskjöld consistently opposed Israel and paid a price for it.]

Laurency (kl2_3):
6Dag Hammarskjöld, in his latest incarnation, was not aware of his discipleship. He never came into contact with esoterics, which would have awakened his latent knowledge. That stage of the mystic to which he attained was not his proper one. It was quite sufficient, however, to enable him to carry out his mission.

Laurency (L5e21):
A very good reaping is required to be born into a family that may provide the individual with a predisposed brain and let him grow up in an environment that affords him opportunities of mentalizing the brain and receiving facts of reality and rational ideas even in childhood.
Such a child was, to cite a well-known example, Dag Hammarskjöld. An amusing anecdote may be told here: Dag’s father, Hjalmar Hammarskjöld, who was in succession professor, governor, prime minister, etc. stated of his son: “If I had had a brain such as Dag has, I had gone far.”
Julian:
Hymn to King Helios
Now for my part I envy the good fortune of any man to whom the god has granted to inherit a body built of the seed of holy and inspired ancestors, so that he can unlock the treasures of wisdom; nor do I despise that lot with which I was myself endowed by the god Helios, that I should be born of a house that rules and governs the world in my time. . . .
Now far the best thing is when anyone has the fortune to have inherited the service of the god, even before the third generation, from a long and unbroken line of ancestors;


Kubizek:
The Young Hitler I Knew, Chapter 10
I cannot repeat every word that my friend uttered. I was struck by something strange, which I had never noticed before, even when he had talked to me in moments of the greatest excitement. It was as if another Self spoke out of his body, and moved him as much as it did me. It wasn’t at all a case of a speaker being carried away by his own words.

Hitler, Table Talk (Cameron & Stevens), March 27, 1942:
I’m thinking of Ebert—who had come to the meeting in the Treptow park with the intention of opposing the munitions strike. He began by making a few concessions to the crowd, in the hope of getting himself heard—but he was quickly overcome by the crowd’s enthusiasm, with the result that he himself had to preach the very strike he had intended to torpedo. In an affair of this nature, every negotiator, every speaker runs the same danger. I’ve experienced it myself at Weimar in 1926, and I’ve seen with what precautions, and how artfully, one must proceed when one intends to tell the public the opposite of what it expects from you.

New York Times, November 21, 1922:
https://www.snopes.com/fact-check/1922-new-york-times-hitler/
A sophisticated politician credited Hitler with peculiar political cleverness for laying emphasis and over-emphasis on anti-Semitism, saying: “You can’t expect the masses to understand or appreciate your finer real aims. You must feed the masses with cruder morsels and ideas like anti-Semitism. It would be politically all wrong to tell them the truth about where you really are leading them.”

Heinrich Hoffmann:
The breakfast went with a swing. Although Hitler never touched alcohol, he was in complete harmony with the spirit of the gathering and showed himself to be a charming and witty conversationalist. When he was asked to make a speech, he refused, however. ‘I must have a crowd when I speak,’ he declared. ‘In a small, intimate circle I never know what to say. I should only disappoint you all, and that is a thing I should hate to do. As a speaker either at a family gathering or a funeral, I’m no use at all.’

[Whereas Churchill did not hesitate to employ his oratory skills in giving ✡Morgenthau a verbal thrashing in front of several witnesses.]

The Initiate in the New World, p.g. 12:
A Swami I once met told me that in a previous incarnation I had been a great orator. Maybe that is true, may be not; but suppose it were true, and I still possessed great oratorical faculties, would it be fitting for me to arouse your emotions with great orations instead of merely talking to you as I do? If the latter method suffices why employ the former? By so doing shouldn’t I only be reminding you that I could do something which you can’t do? Most people, when they acquire a particular virtue, are inclined to flaunt it in the faces of those who have not yet acquired it.

Luke 11:11-13
11 “Which of you fathers, if your son asks for a fish, will give him a snake instead? [Or if he asks for bread, will give him a stone?]
12 Or if he asks for an egg, will give him a scorpion?
13 If you then, though you are evil, know how to give good gifts to your children, how much more will your Father in heaven give the Holy Spirit to those who ask him!”

Intuition

WIP –

Laurency (ps2.33):
2Intuitions lie beyond the possible experience of the normal individual, surpass everything he can imagine about intuition. The word intuition has been idiotized to term freak, vagary, emotional impulse faintly mingled with the lowest kind of mental vibrations. In the cultural individual, intuitions occur a few times during his life, making epochs in it.

Kubizek:
The Young Hitler I Knew, Chapter 10
I rather felt as though he himself listened with astonishment and emotion to what burst forth from him with elementary force. I will not attempt to interpret this phenomenon, but it was a state of complete ecstasy and rapture, in which he transferred the character of Rienzi, without even mentioning him as a model or example, with visionary power to the plane of his own ambitions. But it was more than a cheap adaptation.
Indeed, the impact of the opera was rather a sheer external impulse which compelled him to speak. Like flood waters breaking their dikes, his words burst forth from him. He conjured up in grandiose, inspiring pictures his own future and that of his people.
Hitherto I had been convinced that my friend wanted to become an artist, a painter, or perhaps an architect. Now this was no longer the case. Now he aspired to something higher, which I could not yet fully grasp. It rather surprised me, as I thought that the vocation of the artist was for him the highest, most desirable goal.
But now he was talking of a mandate which, one day, he would receive from the people, to lead them out of servitude to the heights of freedom.
It was an unknown youth who spoke to me in that strange hour. He spoke of a special mission which one day would be entrusted to him, and I, his only listener, could hardly understand what he meant. Many years had to pass before I realized the significance of this enraptured hour for my friend.
His words were followed by silence.

[Hitler’s belief in a mission is almost universally attested by his associates.]

Hitler’s Mission

Nicolaus von Below:
German troops were retreating on all fronts. Confidence in victory had evaporated: only the belief that Hitler would find the way out remained unbroken. This certainty increased his concept of mission. He could not believe that all the efforts, the enormous causalities in the air raids and the sacrifices at the front were in vain. In the autumn of 1943 I observed how Hitler was filled with a profound sense of mission, and even seemed to expect a miracle.

Hermann Giesler, The Artist Within the Warlord, p.g. 221:
Translated by Wilhelm Kriessmann, Ph.D and Carolyn Yeager
When he said we will win the war regardless of all the problems, he was very much convinced of it–even though he fully recognized the reality contradicted it. And that conviction had its roots in his unshakable belief in his mission.

Rosenberg (Memoirs):
He became more and more convinced that Providence had entrusted him with a mission. This became noticeable upon his return from his incarceration in the Landsberg, and grew ever more evident after the Machtübernahme, until, toward the end of the war, it assumed positively painful proportions.

Heinz Linge:
I am convinced, however, that when he emphasised repeatedly for propaganda purposes that he had been ‘selected by Providence’ for a great, unique, historical mission, he did actually believe it. Rudolf Hess once told me that just before the seizure of power, Hitler, Hess, Heinrich Hoffmann and Julius Schaub were all nearly killed in Hitler’s Mercedes due to an error by a lorry driver. Hitler was injured in the face and shoulder but with great composure calmed his co-passengers, still paralysed with shock, with the observation that Providence would not allow him to be killed since he still had a great mission to fulfil.

Otto Dietrich:
He claimed to have a sixth sense for the highest good of his people and an inner receiving apparatus which kept abreast of the highest racial ideals.

Nicolaus von Below:
He spoke a great deal about his ideal of the European State in which it would be his objective to fight Jews and Communists and to destroy their influence in the world in every respect. He believed firmly that Providence had given him this task. He had an astonishing ‘sixth sense’ for events, and it was disturbing now to observe how his contact with reality was tending to slip away.

Heinrich Hoffmann:
Hitler firmly believed that he had been chosen by Fate to lead the German people to hitherto undreamed of heights; and his rise to power, the great success he achieved immediately after his assumption of power, only strengthened this belief, not only in Hitler himself, but also in his adherents.
When in his speeches he referred to Providence, he did not do so simply to achieve rhetorical effect; he really believed what he said, and this conviction could not but be strengthened by the truly miraculous manner in which he was again and again preserved.

Rosenberg (Memoirs):
This conviction that, as Bismarck had once been chosen to unite the northern Germans in one Reich, so he was chosen to bring the southern Germans (Austrians) into this Reich, was certainly deep-rooted in him.

☭Otto Strasser:
Hitler and I, p.g. 66
A clairvoyant, face-to-face with his public, goes into a trance. That is his moment of real greatness, the moment when he is most genuinely himself. He believes what he says; carried away by a mystic force, he cannot doubt the genuineness of his mission.
But when Adolf is in a normal state it is a different matter. He cannot be straightforward and natural; he never ceases from watching himself and playing a conscious part.

Erich von Manstein:
The will for victory which gives a commander the strength to see a grave crisis through is something very different from Hitler’s will, which in the last analysis stemmed from a belief in his own ‘mission’. Such a belief inevitably makes a man impervious to reason and leads him to think that his own will can operate even beyond the limits of hard reality – whether these consist in the presence of far superior enemy forces, in the conditions of space and time, or merely in the fact that the enemy also happens to have a will of his own.

Traudl Junge:
Indeed, he used to say: ‘I am an instrument of fate, and must tread the path on which a higher Providence has set me.’


Kubizek:
The Young Hitler I Knew, Chapter 10
We descended into the town. The clock struck three. We parted in front of my house. Adolf shook hands with me, and I was astonished to see that he did not go in the direction of his home, but turned again towards the mountains.
“Where are you going now?” I asked him, surprised. He replied briefly, “I want to be alone.”

Luke 6:12 One of those days Jesus went out to a mountainside to pray, and spent the night praying to God.
Matthew 14:23 He went up on a mountainside by himself to pray. Later that night, he was there alone,
John 6:15 Jesus… withdrew again to a mountain by himself.

Bolshevism: From Moses to Lenin
The Hebrews were so firmly convinced of the non-Jewish ancestry of Christ that they counted him among the especially hated Samaritans (John 8:48): “Aren’t we right in saying that you are a Samaritan and demon-possessed?”

John 4:19 “Sir,” the woman said, “I can see that you are a prophet. Our ancestors worshiped on this mountain, but you Jews claim that the place where we must worship is in Jerusalem.”

http://www.anthonymludovici.com/mw_int.htm
✡Oscar Levy:
I belong to a race whose members, when they wanted to know anything, went into the desert and not to the lecture-room, and you, dear Mr Ludovici, told me yourself that, after a book of Nietzsche’s had once fallen into your hands, you found no rest or peace until you had gone to Germany, learnt German, and thought and meditated there — in the solitude of a foreign country — on Nietzsche’s teaching until you understood it.


Genius

Hitler’s Letters and Notes, p.g 284:
The Germanic Revolution

The man of genius in tune with nature does not try to test this law
which also informs his own ideas about the world
but performs all his actions in accordance
with it.

Hitler, June 27, 1937 speech:
As weak as the individual may ultimately be in his character and actions as a whole, when compared to Almighty Providence and its will, he becomes just as infinitely strong the instant he acts in accordance with this Providence. Then there will rain upon him the power that has distinguished all great phenomena of this world.

Laurency (kl2_3):
6When you see how easily people lose their balance and become nutty out of sheer self-importance at even the most trifling homage of the public, you almost congratulate the geniuses for having been unappreciated. Perhaps that, too, was the intention of destiny, and not mere bad reaping. The greatest genius is an idiot whenever he thinks himself important. True geniuses are true channels of higher forces. Any “self” turns into a hindrance.

Laurency ():
2All egocentrics are the victims of self-formed illusions. Typical examples were Nietzsche and Strindberg. They idiotized all ideas they could contact. When the individual is a self-centred self instead of sensing that he is a tool, this breeds emotional illusions of the individual’s own mental sovereignty.

Laurency (wm8.13):
5Most people consider themselves important, always in some respect (often in many respects), consider they understand, know, and can do things. The esoterician knows, however, that he does not know, understand, or can do it. That is why he is a fit channel for those who know and can do. His entire previous education has had just one purpose: to give him the opportunity to receive whatever his Augoeides wants to use him for.

Nietzsche:
Most men are obviously in the world accidentally; no necessity of a higher kind is seen in them. They work at this and that, their talents are average. How strange! The manner in which they live shows that they think very little of themselves: they merely esteem themselves in so far as they waste their energy on trifles (whether these be mean or frivolous desires, or the trashy concerns of their everyday calling).

Hitler, Table Talk, February 27, 1942 (Jochmann/Picker):

I am here by virtue of a higher force, if I am necessary [for] something.

Apart from being too cruel to me, this glorified Church. I have never yet found pleasure in maltreating others, even though I recognize that without violence it is not possible to assert oneself. Life is only given to the one who fights most strongly. The law of life is to defend yourself! [Es wird nur dem das Leben gegeben, der am stärksten darum ficht. Das Gesetz des Lebens heißt: Verteidige dich!] The time we live, it is the appearance of the collapse of this matter [dieser Sache]. It can last a hundred [100] or two [200] hundred years. I am sorry that, like Moses, I can only see the promised land from afar. We are growing into a sunny, truly tolerant worldview: Man should be able to develop the abilities given him by God. We must only prevent a new, even greater lie from arising: the Jewish Bolshevik world must break!

[“New Atheist” Richard C. Carrier’s narrative is overall misleading, especially when he claims that Hitler was looking forward to “the expediency of his own Nazi-enforced Social Darwinism” rather than the decline of Christianity, by rendering the translation as “the collapse of this idea“. The laws of life cannot be annulled, not even by “god”, and Hitler himself would never have repudiated the laws which form the basis of his philosophy. Also, Mr. Carrier is dead wrong when he claims that “the anti-Christian sentiment exhibited throughout the Genoud/Cameron & Stevens version is largely lacking in the German”. The German versions are arguably more anti-Christian. More on table talks authenticity.]

Memoirs of a Confidant, p.g. 150-151:
Hitler: “Just the other day I attended a private lecture on Einstein’s theory of relativity. I did not understand all of it. And it would be strange if a one-hour lecture could explain to a layman everything that scientists have thought about and studied for decades, until one special mind succeeded in bringing clarity into these tangled problems. [See Goebbels (Diaries), May 12, 1943]
But I did absorb one idea: that the principal significance of Einstein’s theory lies in the recognition–no, in the proof–that our human thinking machine has its limits but that beyond it other means–in this case, higher mathematics–allow thinking–or rather, calculations–leading to precise results that once again lie in the realm of human consciousness and in part were recognized as facts and known before, but which cannot be arrived at by logical bridges.
In past times, science would probably have rejected the possibility of the existence of things that were not logically provable and would have banished them to the realm of mysticism or religious faith. But when the existence of such things was demonstrated beyond any doubt, science saw itself confronted by a riddle. At that, Einstein, with an unprecedented achievement of thought and calculation, turned to dimensions other than those that are conceivable to three-dimensional man and that were common in science for such purposes, to find the method to demonstrate proof for what until that time seemed unfathomable.
Thus, as it was explained to me and as I understood it, I owe to Einstein the scientific proof that there are things which, recognized by man’s senses, nevertheless cannot be understood and justified, though they are true and could form the basis for a new way of thinking, perhaps even of a new conception of the world.
In future, I will know how to console myself when some perception comes to my mind to which I am lacking a logical bridge. I shall nevertheless have the courage to build on it.”
Wagener: I objected that such a course might well be very dangerous. Especially considering that he would have to take the responsibility for others, for a great movement, perhaps one day even for a whole people, surely major decisions could not be based purely on intuition. For the human senses are so incomplete that their perceptions, to the extent that they could not be proven, could be deceptive.
“But I do not,” Hitler continued, his eyes glowing, “receive such perceptions through the human senses at all! If it were that sort of perception, it would be amenable to logical proof. And if it were not, it would undoubtedly be false. Rather, in such cases I feel as if I were taking my perceptions from that super-dimensional world Einstein has looked into, not with his eyes or conscious mind, but with his mathematics.”
“But do you know whether such a perception comes from the beyond or through the agency of the human senses within this world?”
“I do know each time, without question. But I don’t always take that fully into account. That is also why sometimes I heedlessly pass over such transcendetal inspirations. In general, at such moments I have a sensation like an inner vibration, as if I were being touched by an invisible charge. Whenever I have seized the impulse, what I said or did as result of that feeling always turned out to be correct. Whenever I have let it go, almost invariably it turned out later that it would have been right to follow the inner voice.”
“I believe,” I interrupted Hitler, “that you are not the only one to whom this happens. All human beings, more or less, have this faculty. Some say that they are having a good day or a lucid moment. The merchant has a lucky hand. The gambler insists that somehow he felt he should risk a larger bet. Folk wisdom suggests that it is always best to act on one’s first thought. But most of the time we do not hold on to it–”
“–and damnable logic intervenes!” Hitler continued my sentence, “and human reflection! And then one works up a view or an opinion that is marvelously proven and justified, and we let ourselves be influenced by others who lack any divine spark – and in the meantime, the chance passes and we hit our heads in exasperation and say, ‘if only you’d followed your first impulse!”

[Surprisingly, Hitler imbibed some ideas from Einstein. Thus, Hitler did not adopt Hoerbiger’s theory to “snub” him.]

Mein Kampf:
Though an inventor, for example, does not establish his fame until the very day on which he completes his invention, it would be a mistake to believe that the creative genius did not become alive in him until that moment. From the very hour of his birth the spark of genius is alive within the man who has been endowed with the real creative faculty. True genius is an innate quality. It can never be the result of education or training. As I have stated already, this holds good not merely of the individual, but also of the race. Those peoples who manifest creative ability in certain periods of their history have always been fundamentally creative. It belongs to their very nature, even though this fact may escape the eyes of the superficial observer.

Job 32:7-9
I thought, ‘Age should speak;
advanced years should teach wisdom.’
But it is the spirit in a person,
the breath of the Almighty, that gives them understanding.
It is not only the old who are wise,
not only the aged who understand what is right.

Laurency (L5e5):
9The assertion of Marx that physical factors are the only active forces in social development evidences his ignorance of life. Emotional illusions and mental fictions are far more powerful than physical factors.

Fritz Lenz:
Ploetz recognized as unsatisfactory from the very beginning the Marxist doctrine of historical materialism – a doctrine which, biologically speaking, derived from the principle of the omnipotence of the environment. The recognition that not all evil is determined by the environment, and that the roots of most evil lie instead in hereditary defects, became the motivating force in racial hygiene.

[Assessing Marxism]

Leslie Edge:
When [Herbert von Karajan] returned I asked him about it. He said that you don’t need any faith to believe in God, because there are plenty of signs available of His existence. Mozart wrote a symphony as a child. Heredity cannot account for this.

Goebbels:
Michael
Mozart did not need a program for his music.
He played and sang with the divine ease of a child.

[Or consider the widely attested case of a five year old Einstein receiving a compass as a gift and having his interest piqued.]

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Johann_Wolfgang_von_Goethe#Influence
The Serbian inventor and electrical engineer Nikola Tesla was heavily influenced by Goethe’s Faust, his favorite poem, and had actually memorized the entire text. It was while reciting a certain verse that he was struck with the epiphany that would lead to the idea of the rotating magnetic field and ultimately, alternating current.

https://www.teslasautobiography.com/my_later_endeavors.html

Heinz Linge:
Once I asked Hitler why he did not get married. He gave me a lecture on the destructive influence of women on great men and pointed out that, insofar as this question touched on the propaganda angle, he was anxious to appear to be the statesman who dedicated all his strength to the German people.
To Otto Wagener, a former general staff officer and SA chief of staff from 1929 to 1932, who as leader of the NSDAP Political Economy Department was always close to Hitler’s person, Hitler had explained:
If I should be called upon to lead Germany out of despair, if I should succeed in becoming the hero of the German people, then the people should not be burdened with a son of mine. You see, where a great personality has emerged from nowhere and rises to magnificent heights, whether in the arts, science or as a statesman, the son has never been anything near what the father was. The children either slip back or fade into anonymity. Where is the son of Goethe, of Schiller, of Beethoven? What would Siegfried Wagner have become if, apart from being his father’s son and inheriting Bayreuth, he had not had his mother Cosima as well as his equally significant life’s companion Winifred with him? Or take Kant, or Napoleon. A son of mine would only be a burden and accordingly an unhappy person or a danger.

Otto Ernst Remer:
Interview conducted by Stephanie Schoeman, translated by Mark Weber
He didn’t want any children. Hitler thought of himself as a representative of the nation, and he rejected anything in his personal life that was inconsistent with that image. He always thought of himself as a statesman and he accordingly made very sure that his image was completely consistent with what the people expected of him.

Traudl Junge:
Once, when we were talking about weddings and marriage again, I asked, ‘My Führer, why haven’t you married her?’ I knew how much he liked arranging marriages, after all. His answer was rather surprising.
‘I wouldn’t make a good father, and I think it would be irresponsible to start a family when I can’t devote enough time to my wife. And anyway I don’t want children of my own. I think the offspring of men of genius usually have a very hard time of it. People expect them to be just like their famous progenitor, and won’t forgive them for being only average. And in fact most of them are feeble-minded.’

Riefenstahl (Memoirs), p.g. 178-179:
Trying to change the subject, I asked Hitler, ‘How did you spend Christmas Eve?’ There was sadness in his voice: ‘I had my chauffeur drive me around aimlessly, along highways and through villages, until I became tired.’ I looked at him, amazed. ‘I do that every Christmas Eve.’ After a pause: ‘I have no family and I am lonely.’
‘Why don’t you get married?’
‘Because it would be irresponsible of me to bind a woman in marriage. What would she get from me? She would have to be alone most of the time. My love belongs wholly and only to my nation – and if I had children, what would become of them if fate should turn against me? I would then not have a single friend left, and my children would be bound to suffer humiliation and perhaps even die of starvation.’

Wallis Warfield, Duchess of Windsor:
The heart has its reasons
Once or twice I felt those eyes turned in my direction. But when I tried to meet their gaze, the lids drooped, and I found myself confronted by a mask. I decided that Hitler did not care for women.

Riefenstahl (Memoirs), p.g. 107:
With great passion he declared: ‘More than anything else I am filled with my political mission. I feel that I have been called to save Germany – I cannot and must not refuse this calling.’
This is the other Hitler, I thought, the one I saw at the Sports Palace.
It was dark, and I couldn’t see the men behind us now. We walked silently, side by side until, after a long silence, he halted, looked at me, slowly put his arms around me, and drew me to him. I had certainly not wished for such a development. He stared at me in some excitement but when he noticed my lack of response he instantly let go and turned away. Then I saw him raise his hands beseechingly: ‘How can I love a woman until I have completed my task?’ Bewildered, I made no reply and, still without exchanging a word, we walked back to the inn; there, somewhat distantly, he said, ‘Good night.’ I felt that I had offended him and regretted that I had come in the first place.

Otto Wagener, Memoirs of a Confidant, p.g. 222-223:
That evening, his depression was evident. No conversation developed. He alternated between staring at the paper and silent brooding. Only very late did he ask some terse questions and make small talk. Until he finally seemed to get hold of himself and said:
“It turns out that women play a larger role in a man’s life than we are inclined to suppose when we are not deprived of their presence. It is true that I have overcome the urge to physically possess a woman. But the value I placed on the loving hand of a female being who was close to my heart, and how much the constant solicitude she shed on me meant to me–that I am learning only now, when they are lost to me. The greatest void, a yawning emptiness, though, comes over me in the mornings, when I sit down to my breakfast, or when I return home at noon or in the evening and find myself essentially alone–quite, quite alone.
And yet, my sister is there, as she has always been, trying to replace what Geli was to me. But there’s no getting around it, Geli was even more to me than that. Her cheerful laughter always gave me hearty pleasure, her harmless chatter filled me with joy. Even when she sat quietly by my side working a crossword puzzle, I was enveloped in a feeling of well-being that has now given way to a chilly sense of loneliness.”
Hitler paused again, and when he resumed, it was as if he were talking to himself.
“Until now, I still had ties to the world–apparently I still had them, though I was unaware of it. Now everything has been taken from me. Now I am altogether free, inwardly and outwardly. Perhaps it was meant to be this way. Now I belong only to the German Volk and to my mission. But poor Geli! She had to sacrifice herself for this.”
As he spoke, his features took on such a deeply human expression of sorrow and pity that one quite forgot the genius in him and saw only Adolf Hitler the man.

Eric Von Manstein:
Lost Victories
Hitler opened the talks – as I have already reported in the chapter on Stalingrad – with an unqualified admission of his exclusive responsibility for the fate of Sixth Army, which had met its tragic end a few days previously.
At the time I had the impression that he was deeply affected by this tragedy, not just because it amounted to a blatant failure of his own leadership, but also because he was deeply depressed in a purely personal sense by the fate of the soldiers who, out of faith in him, had fought to the last with such courage and devotion to duty.
Yet later on I came to doubt whether Hitler had any place whatever in his heart for the soldiers who put such boundless trust in him and remained true to him till the end. By then I wondered if he did not regard all of them – from field-marshal down to private soldier – as mere tools of his war aims.
Be that as it may, this gesture of Hitler’s in assuming immediate and unqualified responsibility for Stalingrad struck a chivalrous note. Whether deliberately or unconsciously, he had thus shown considerable psychological skill in the way he opened our discussion. He always did have a masterly knack of adapting his manner to his interlocutor.

[Hitler’s sense of responsibility cannot be denied. See Hitler’s stance on abortion.]

Laurency (kl2_3):
3Regrettably, geniuses seldom have children possessing the same genius. This can have many causes. Old antagonisms, bad reaping for both parties, competition about the place, in which someone has the right of priority, also old friendship between individuals. The individual must develop his brain on his own. Children of a genius have no use for ingenious brains if they are unable to utilize the opportunities. Either they lack the requisite latent ability or they have no opportunity to develop it. Genius is not hereditary, only the brain potential, which must be utilized by a child having a latent genius.

Julian:
Hymn to King Helios
Now for my part I envy the good fortune of any man to whom the god has granted to inherit a body built of the seed of holy and inspired ancestors, so that he can unlock the treasures of wisdom; nor do I despise that lot with which I was myself endowed by the god Helios, that I should be born of a house that rules and governs the world in my time. . . .
Now far the best thing is when anyone has the fortune to have inherited the service of the god, even before the third generation, from a long and unbroken line of ancestors;

Laurency (L5e21):
A very good reaping is required to be born into a family that may provide the individual with a predisposed brain and let him grow up in an environment that affords him opportunities of mentalizing the brain and receiving facts of reality and rational ideas even in childhood.
Such a child was, to cite a well-known example, Dag Hammarskjöld. An amusing anecdote may be told here: Dag’s father, Hjalmar Hammarskjöld, who was in succession professor, governor, prime minister, etc. stated of his son: “If I had had a brain such as Dag has, I had gone far.”

Voltaire:
Philosophical Dictionary: Genius
Among the Romans, the word “genius” was not used to express a rare talent, as with us: the term for that quality was ingenium. We use the word “genius” indifferently in speaking of the tutelar demon of a town of antiquity, or an artist, or a musician. The term “genius” seems to have been intended to designate not great talents generally, but those into which invention enters. Invention, above everything, appeared a gift from the gods — this ingenium, quasi ingenitum, a kind of divine inspiration. Now an artist, however perfect he may be in his profession, if he have no invention, if he be not original, is not considered a genius. He is only inspired by the artists his predecessors, even when he surpasses them.

Luke 6:40 The student is not above the teacher, but everyone who is fully trained will be like their teacher.

Mein Kampf:
No pupil can take the place of the master in completing a great picture which he has left unfinished; and just in the same way no substitute can take the place of the great poet or thinker, the great statesman or the great general, for their activity lies in the realm of artistic creative ability which can never be mechanically acquired, because it is an innate and divine gift.

Laurency (L3e5):
5K.H., at that time still a 45-self, explained to his newly accepted disciple C. W. Leadbeater that the teacher does not tell his disciple what to do but that the disciple must find this out himself. Otherwise the disciple would reap the good sowing of his obedience only, but not that of his work.
The “uninitiated” have often demurred to this right method. They have argued that in the present emergency, when mankind is faced with the danger of its total annihilation, such a method could be suspended. The times would not permit of the application of this method. It would be too risky to let the disciple make mistakes. That method was what caused the failure of theosophy.
The principle that disciples (being ignorant of the plan and incapable of implementing it) are to be entrusted with such important assignments may be in accord with the law of reaping and the law of self-realization, but the disciple should renounce this good sowing, and he certainly does so gladly, if in that case the work can be perfected. Otherwise there is but a minimal prospect of success at the present stage of mankind’s development.

Dietrich Eckart:
To be a genius means to use the soul, to strive for the divine, to escape from the mean; and even if this cannot be totally achieved, there will be no space for the opposite of good. It does not prevent the genius to portray also the wretchedness of being in all shapes and colors, being the great artist, that he is; but he does this as an observer, not taking part, sine ira et studio [“without anger and fondness” or “without hate and zealousness”], his heart remains pure.

Chamberlain:
Christ Not A Jew
Few things let us see so deeply into the divine heart of Christ as His attitude towards the Jewish religious ordinances. He observed them, but without zeal and without laying any stress upon them; at best they are but a vessel, which, holding nothing, would remain empty; and as soon as an ordinance bars His road, He breaks it without the least scruple, but at the same time calmly and without anger: for what has all this to do with religion? . . . .
In this connection consider too how Christ uses Holy Scripture. He speaks of it with reverence but without fanaticism. It is indeed very remarkable how He makes Scripture serve His purpose; over it too He feels Himself “Lord” and transforms it, when necessary, into its opposite.

Edward Bulwer-Lytton:
Rienzi
At length, as the solemn and holy music began to swell through the edifice, preluding the celebration of the mass, the Tribune stepped forth, and the hush of the music was increased by the universal and dead silence of the audience. His height, his air, his countenance, were such as always command the attention of crowds; and at this time they received every adjunct from the interest of the occasion, and that peculiar look of intent yet suppressed fervour, which is, perhaps, the sole gift of the eloquent that Nature alone can give.

Laurency (L4e6):
13Esoterics alone can put an end to the irremediable mania for speculation of life-ignorance,because esoterics teaches that in all worlds there is one reality valid for everybody: the permanent reality of the general idea. Add to this individual character, which sees something unique. But – and this is the important thing – this which is individual and unique never bursts the limits of what is general, which remains universally valid. This should not be very hard to comprehend.

Rudolf Hess, August 14, 1934:
The “simple understanding” of the genius is able to see the essential and the obvious.

Laurency (L4e5):
3Genius requires more than mastery of the form. Content is the main thing. The notion of “destructive genius” is a contradiction in terms. The essence of genius at least contains the divination of the ideals, the instinctive understanding of what is fit for life and life-promoting. Those in whom this divination has never been born or in whom it has been devastated do not belong to the stage of culture and are no true geniuses.
Strindberg, for example, is not one of those. He is a typical representative of a literary current that is totally disoriented and has not even a minimal understanding of culture.

✡Otto Weininger:
The reason why madness overtakes so many men of genius is that for many the burden becomes too heavy, the task of bearing the whole world on the shoulders, like Atlas, intolerable for the smaller, but never for the really mighty minds. But the higher a man mounts, the greater may be his fall; all genius is a conquering of chaos, mystery, and darkness, and if it degenerates and goes to pieces, the ruin is greater in proportion to the success. The genius which runs to madness is no longer genius; it has chosen happiness instead of morality.

Nietzsche:
On the Genealogy of Morality, Translated by Carol Diethe
Man, in an age of disintegration in which the races are mixed, who has in his body the legacy of diverse origins, which is to say contradictory and often not even only contradictory drives and standards of valuation, which fight each other and seldom give each other peace, – such a man of late cultures and refracted lights will, on average, be a weaker man: his most fundamental desire is that the war, which he is, should finally have an end; happiness appears to him, in accordance with a tranquillizing medicine and way of thought (for example, the Epicurean or the Christian), principally to be the happiness of rest, of being undisturbed, of repleteness, of being finally at one, as the ‘Sabbath of Sabbaths’, to speak with the holy rhetorician Augustine, who was himself such a man.

Laurency (L5e1):
8Rousseau’s view that “our thinking is dependent on emotion” is correct at lower stages of development. But only when physical life is controlled by emotion, and emotion by reason is the individual an integrated human being. Goethe arrived at that clear idea, but not Rousseau.

Rosenberg:
The Track of the Jew
It is good to differentiate, in the case of the cold intellect of the Jewish personality, between two factors: between rational motivations and those of a more sentimental nature. To the former belong the clear pursuit of personal as well as national interests and the evaluation of these in the entry into the politics of states; to the latter the passion of hatred against other nations that often burns through these calculations.

Laurency (L4e1):
3In KofR 1.28.5, will–desire is juxtaposed with will–motive, which caused one reader to make the remark that motives exist at the emotional stage as well. It is evident that you cannot express yourself clearly enough. Therefore, it is better to distinguish emotional and mental motives. Everything mental can be dragged down into emotionality, so that at the present stage of mankind’s development pure mentality scarcely makes up one per cent of the content of consciousness. It tells us quite a lot that Schopenhauer did not descry any difference between mentality and emotionality. Feeling is mentalized emotionality, and its truth value or reality value is determined by whatever desire finds desirable.

Kubizek:
I have seen with what absolute dedication, even as early as that, he gave himself to the people whom he loved. Only in this people could he live. He knew nothing other than this people.
Savitri:
The Lightning and the Sun
Adolf Hitler’s leading emotion is obviously his “love beyond all measure” for Germany and all that is German. “He lived in the German people; nothing counted for him, save they.” These words, describing the future ruler’s feelings already in early youth, are true at all stages of his life. And his main intellectual, or rather, spiritual, feature, is perhaps that inborn, baffling intuition of history in the broadest sense of the word — of history as our planet’s destiny, — which lifts him straight above all politicians, generals and actual kings, to the level of the great Seers, and gives his whole career that extraordinary, “dream-like” [Traumhaft] character of which Hans Grimm so appropriately speaks. The originality of his genius lies in the fact that he lived his German patriotism from a cosmic point of view, giving both Germany and the history of our times their true significance in the light of not merely human but cosmic evolution.

Jacob Burckhardt:
Force and Freedom: Reflections on History
The only unique and irreplaceable human being, however, is the man of exceptional intellectual or moral power whose activity is directed to a general aim, i.e. a whole nation, a whole civilization, humanity itself.
From this point, a further definition, though not an explanation, of greatness is given by the words-unique, irreplaceable.
It might be said here in parenthesis that there is something like greatness even among nations, and further, that there is a partial or momentary greatness in which an individual entirely forgets himself and his own existence for the sake of a general aim. Such a man at such a moment seems sublime.

[Hans Gunther classified Jacob Burckhardt as belonging to the Dinaric race.]

✡Otto Weininger (footnote):
Zola was a typical case of a person absolutely without trace of the Jewish qualities, and, therefore, a philosemite. The greatest geniuses, on the other hand, have nearly always been antisemites (Tacitus, Pascal, Voltaire, Herder, Goethe, Kant, Jean Paul, Schopenhauer, Grillparzer, Wagner); this comes about from the fact as geniuses they have something of everything in their natures, and so can understand Judaism.

[Kant is the furthest thing from a genius. Goethe and Schiller kept their distance from Jean Paul, although Herder appreciated him. According to Nietzsche, Pascal was ruined by his Christianity. Schopenhauer demonstrated lucid clarity, but was hostile to life. In spite of their differences and their ups and downs, their shared merit is that they were all conscious of the Jewish menace. The second part of Weininger’s footnote is remarkably accurate.]

Laurency ():
2Goethe quite realized that Schopenhauer was a man of considerable intellectual capacity, but not that he was a genius. In contrast, Schopenhauer was fully aware of Goethe’s greatness.

Laurency (L4e5.31):
2Schiller’s first impression of Goethe appears from his statement: “It is interesting how he apprehends and reproduces everything in his own characteristic, individual way, unlike how others apprehend it. He considers the form too much where I consider the soul. But his greatness is in his all-roundness and endeavour to explore everything and make it a whole.”

Hitler, July 28, 1922 speech:
Voltaire, as well as Roussea, together with our German Fichte and many another – they are all without exception united in their recognition that the Jew is not only a foreign element differing in his essential character, which is utterly harmful to the nature of the Aryan, but that the Jewish people in itself stands against us as our deadly foe and so will stand against us always and for all time.

Wallis Warfield, Duchess of Windsor:
The heart has its reasons
Still under the aegis of the flamboyant Dr. Ley, David and I went on to Dresden, Nuremberg, Stuttgart, and Munich, looking into workers’ houses, hospitals, and youth camps.
On the way, we met many leading Nazis, among them Heinrich Himmler, boss of the Gestapo, whose bespectacled meekness would have seemed more befitting a minor civil servant, a clerk caught up in politics. Rudolph Hess, who was then being pointed out as Hitler’s Heir Apparent, was a different sort—charming of manner and good-looking. Goebbels, the clubfooted mastermind of the Nazi propaganda mills, impressed me as the cleverest of the lot—a tiny, wispy gnome with an enormous skull. His wife was the prettiest woman I saw in Germany, a blonde, with enormous blue eyes and a flair for clothes. Seen together, they reminded me of Beauty and the Beast.
I had never before been thrown in with such a strange, ill-assorted company of men. They both repelled and fascinated. Having read about them in the press, and knowing something of their individual reputations, I had the curious sensation of wandering about the vast backstage of an opera house, watching a cast assemble for a Wagnerian opera.

Prof. Dr. Turkkaya Ataöv:
http://aaargh.vho.org/fran/livres7/HitlerArmenien.pdf
Hitler was surrounded by the disreputable Streicher, the mediocre pseudo- “philosopher” Rosenberg, “Putzi” Hanfstaengl with a shallow mind, the ruthless Roehm who organized the first Nazi squads, the drunkard Eckert, the “free slanderer” Strasser, the colourless police officer Frick, the doggedly loyal Hess, the neurotic Goebbbels, the former flying ace Goering, the terroristic Himmler and the intriguing Bormann. Such were the men around the Fuehrer- a misshapen mixing of misfits.

Hanfstaengl:
On the other hand, I had not liked the look of those immediate supporters I had seen. Rosenberg and the people round him seemed to me distinctly dubious types. Then an aphorism of Nietzsche floated into my mind and provided consolation: “The first followers of a movement do not prove anything against it.”

Speer (Diaries), August 16, 1956:
I can scarcely assess the role of [Konstantin von] Neurath in German foreign policy. But in the midst of the many dubious creatures, the numerous condottiere types, who peopled Hitler’s court, he certainly seemed like a figure from another world.

Laurency (L5e7):
3An “axiom” of would-be-wisdom, which biographers seldom fail to enounce to reveal their lack of judgement, is that “geniuses generally show a notoriously bad judgement in their choice of company”. Geniuses never have the opportunity of choosing the people they consort with. They must be happy if anyone cares about them at all. The people they associate with are mostly eccentrics of dubious reliability.
Laurency (L5e17):
10Many people have wondered at Blavatsky’s choice of friends and associates many of whom turned “apostates” and made their own contributions to the chronicle of scandals when their hopes of being taught the methods of becoming magicians themselves were dashed.

Memoirs of a Confidant, p.g. 177:
It is difficult to find outstanding men who are selfless enough to work without knowing what can be gained by it, what can be accomplished in the future; men willing to meditate, to discover and invent, without expecting that their achievement will ultimately find recognition and application in their former profession; men willing to give up their assured high income in order to live in penury in Munich and to travel all through Germany like hunted animals, without any reward other than the inner satisfaction of an altruistic martyr.

Edward Bulwer-Lytton:
Rienzi
With Rienzi were traders and artificers, who were willing to enjoy the fruits of liberty, but not to labour at the soil; who demanded, in return for empty shouts, peace and riches; and who expected that one man was to effect in a day what would be cheaply purchased by the struggle of a generation.

Kurt Ludecke:
But it would be wrong to give the impression that in 1933 there were no fine men in high positions in the Nazi Government and in the Party. There were many of great competence and idealism, comprising much of the best blood and virtue in Germany. They were not dominant, however. Tragically, Hitler had been caught in his own machine: at the climax of its development it had as leaders its most articulate but by no means its noblest personalities, and he was obliged to fill important posts with mediocre and even contemptible figures who were not representative of the best type of German.

Goebbels (Diaries), May 9, 1943:
This talk made us realize anew how extremely rare are men of real caliber. If you have to fill two posts of decisive importance in public life you can search with a lantern and won’t find anybody.

Hitler, Table Talk, (Cameron & Stevens), December 28-29, 1941:
How many times I’ve heard it said in the Party that a new man should be found for such-and-such a post. Unfortunately I could only reply: “But by whom will you replace the present holder?”
I’m always ready to replace an inadequate man by another with better qualifications. In fact, whatever may be said about the bonds of loyalty, it’s the quality of the man who assumes responsibilities that’s finally decisive.
Of one thing there is no doubt, that Streicher has never been replaced. Despite all his weaknesses, he’s a man who has spirit. If we wish to tell the truth, we must recognise that, without Julius Streicher, Nuremberg would never have been won over to National Socialism. He put himself under my orders at a time when others were hesitating to do so, and he completely conquered the city of our Rallies. That’s an unforgettable service.
More than once Dietrich Eckart told me that Streicher was a school-teacher, and a lunatic, to boot, from many points of view. He always added that one could not hope for the triumph of National Socialism without giving one’s support to men like Streicher. Despite everything, Eckart was very fond of him.

Otto Wagener, Memoirs of a Confidant, p.g. 126:
Once, when I told him that we should try to attract the best minds, the great personalities, in order to have their assistance in the awesome task whose fulfillment Providence might demand of us, he replied, “Too many cooks spoil the broth. These best minds, these great personalities, all have their own individual attitudes, their own will and their own aims.
In this I side with Ptolemy–I think it was the First or the Second–who was once asked how he managed to prevail and deal with all the opponents with whom he had to reckon. At the time he was out walking and passed a poppy field. He took his whip or his riding crop and slashed off the heads of the poppies that rose above the otherwise very evenly grown field. ‘That,’ he said to his questioner, ‘is how I do it.’ By the way, I once found the same anecdote told somewhere about the Eastern Roman Emperor Septimius Severus.”

Memoirs of a Confidant, p.g. 176:
So it came about quite naturally that truly outstanding men did not tarry long in Hitler’s entourage and that inevitably he found himself surrounded by simpletons, mindless scum, and flatterers whose vanity was satisfied only by a sojourn among giants, being shown as often as possible with Hitler in the photographs the ubiquitous and commercially very adept Hoffmann manufactured in assembly-line fashion.

[Now contrast with FDR apologists.]

Raymond Moley:
Ernest K. Lindley, the best historian of the Roosevelt regime to date, has pointed out that “Mr. Roosevelt did not recruit his professorial advisers to provide him with a point of view; he drew them to him because their point of view was akin to his own.”

Grace Tully:
F.D.R., my boss, Chapter 7
Twelve years in the White House, extending through a period of deep domestic crisis and through the greatest war in world history, meant that Franklin Roosevelt enlisted and acquired an extensive and varied group of official associates.
Some of them served from the beginning to the end of the Roosevelt era; others walked across the stage only briefly. It was a “play” of spectacular and dramatic action and most of the supporting cast had histrionic talent. Most of them sensed and demonstrated an intellectual compatibility with the Boss; most of them were sincere, able and thoroughly loyal to the President.
A few were misfits whose intellectual insincerity or frustrated selfishness resulted in their being dropped from the “big time” cast.
As far as I know none of either category were Rasputins with evil designs on the American way of life although the amateur detectives in opposition quarters were always “finding” hobgoblins behind the White House woodwork.
Judging by some of the memoirs of post-Roosevelt days a few of those who trod the boards longest built up a dream world about their own influence and importance. If the leading man were here to comment he probably would be more amused than angry. He saw most of them better than they could see themselves and he knew who was calling the cues.
Vanity to the point of self-delusion may not be becoming but it is a human trait and long exposure to the spotlights of fame can distort one’s vision.

[Naturally, the political dissidents who broke with FDR are represented as egotists whilst the opposition circles are essentially represented as “conspiracy theorists”. It says a lot about how readily FDR was willing to discard subordinates who wouldn’t get along with him. Secretary of State Hull was largely sidelined.]

Hitler’s sense of humor

Hitler, Table Talk (Cameron & Stevens), January 3-4, 1942:
How could I have been successful without that dose of optimism which has never left me, and without that faith that moves mountains?
A sense of humour and a propensity for laughter are qualities that are indispensable to a unit. On the eve of our setting out for the battle of the Somme, we laughed and made jokes all night.
Young people are optimists by nature. That’s an inclination that should be encouraged. One must have faith in life.

Laurency (L5e16):
12As you know it is an esoteric axiom that anyone who lacks a sense of humour is not ripe for esoterics. Humour liberates us from conceit, self-importance, vulnerability, talking about ourselves. Hand in hand with sense of humour goes general cheerfulness. An esoterician is no member of the association for the long face of ridiculous solemnity. He tries to set himself free from that childishness which most adults demonstrate, especially when they believe themselves clever.

Carl Jung:
In comparison with Mussolini, Hitler made upon me the impression of a sort of scaffolding, of wood covered with cloth, an automaton with a mask, like a robot, or a mask of a robot. During the whole performance he never laughed; it was as though he were in a bad humor, sulking. He showed no human sign.
His expression was that of an inhumanly single-minded purposiveness, with no sense of humor.

[Coincidentally, Goethe has been described similarly.]

Karl Viëtor:
Goethe The Poet, p.g. 281
The impression which Goethe made in conversation has been described by many visitors. Those he did not know he met at first with a rather stiff dignity. . . . It is obvious that this was a mask by which the famous man sought to protect himself from importunate curiosity. If the visitor did not succeed in penetrating this reserve and arousing the interest of the great man, the mask was not laid aside. . . . Goethe liked to have fun with his intimates and friends, and would indulge in intentional or hypochondriac paradoxes, defending sophistically and ironically the most contrary views. If the others showed them selves unskilled or inadequate in the understanding of his writings, he would tease and twit them. Then he might deride them, saying, “You poor things, if you were only not so stupid!”

Kubizek:
I have often been asked, and even by Rudolf Hess, who once invited me to visit him in Linz, whether Adolf, when I knew him, had any sense of humour. One feels the lack of it, people of his entourage said. After all, he was an Austrian and should have had his share of the famous Austrian sense of humour. Certainly one’s impression of Hitler, especially after a short and superficial acquaintance, was that of a deeply serious man.

[Rudolf Hess told Eugene K. Bird that Hitler would be warm and friendly to whomever he wished but was cold and distant to those he didn’t know intimately.]

Friedrich Christian Prince of Schaumburg-Lippe:
It is often claimed today that he never let others get a word in edgeways. In truth it was quite the opposite. He asked the others to speak, to recount events from their lives etc. He made jokes to liven up the conversation and to get others to join in. Only when all this failed and the others finally insisted that he should speak himself, as this would be much more interesting in many ways – then he would relent, and could talk for hours. And I must say that this was often a great experience, for this man had already lived a most interesting life. Speaking retrospectively, he viewed everything with incredible objectivity and, hence, amazing modesty.

Rochus Misch:
I cannot state for a fact that Hitler had a sense of humour. I never heard him laugh out loud. That may be because I did not know him until after the war began. The Old Campaigners told me that the warlord Hitler was a quite different personality to the pre-war Hitler. ‘The boss’ himself had a small fund of jokes, which he liked to bring out from time to time. He was very fond of telling Blondi, his Alsatian bitch: ‘Now Blondi, what do young women do?’ Blondi would then lay on her back with her legs up.

Kubizek:
His humour was usually aimed at people in his immediate circle, in other words a sphere in which problems no longer existed for him. For this reason his grim and sour humour was often mixed with irony, but always an irony with friendly intent. Thus, he saw me once at a concert where I was playing the trumpet. He got enormous amusement out of imitating me and insisted that with my blown-out cheeks I looked like one of Rubens’ angels.

Otto Ernst Remer:
Interview conducted by Stephanie Schoeman, translated by Mark Weber
Hermann Geisler, Hitler’s architect, wrote a book about Hitler. [This is Ein anderer Hitler, a memoir]. It’s a fantastic book that you ought to read. He [the author] was a really great guy, and he could imitate very well, especially Robert Ley [head of the Reich Labor Service]. And Hitler knew this. Hitler would urge him to imitate Ley’s way of speaking. And he would [humorously] say: “My Führer, I can’t do that, he’ll put me in a concentration camp.” “Ah, go ahead,” Hitler would jokingly say, “I’ll get you back out again.” And that’s what Hitler was like. And he would imitate Ley. [Remer imitates the imitation of Ley.] And Hitler would laugh so hard that tears came to his eyes.

[The Ley act was also referenced by Traudl Junge and Speer. Typically, all four WW2 leaders (Hitler, Churchill, FDR, Stalin) have been represented as possessing a sense of humour, with Hitler receiving the least attention. Perhaps it may be necessary to differentiate between kinds of humor. What distinguishes Jewish comedians from non-Jewish comedians?]

4a. Monism (Ernst Haeckel)

✝Wessel Dietrich Eilert:

There will be a religion that will join everyone except the Jews, who will show their old [stubbornness, obstinacy]. In the Rhine there is a church that is built by the will of all the peoples.
From there, where the next big war will explode, it is what the people are supposed to believe. All the confessions will be compatible.
Germany will receive a new king and then will follow a lucky time.

(original German version)
Am Rhein steht eine Kirche, da bauen alle Völker dran. Von dort wird nach dem Kriege ausgehen, was die Völker glauben sollen. Alle Konfessionen werden sich vereinigen, nur die Juden werden ihre alte Hartnäckigkeit zeigen.

[Alternatively, it could be interpreted to mean that in the aftermath of a world war, the people will finally settle on a religion grounded in common sense. What makes this “prophecy” so peculiar is that it singles out the Jews as dissidents whereas most “prophecies” scarcely mention them. Note that there has never been a time where the Christian sects have been united of their own will. It has always been by coercion. Refer to section German Christian prophecies.]

Laurency (ps2):
[Hylozoics] gives a rational content to the gnostic trinitism, to Leibniz’ monadology, to Spinoza’s pantheism, to Schopenhauer’s idea of omnipotent blind will as the primordial force, to Hartmann’s idea of the unconscious, to Spencer’s and Bergson’s idea of evolution.

Otto Dietrich:
[Hitler’s] evolutionary views on natural selection and survival of the fittest coincided with the ideas of Darwin and Haeckel. Nevertheless, Hitler was no atheist.

[The expression Social Darwinism is inappropriate, as this notion is not a merit of Darwin.]

Laurency (L4e7):
2Biologists have given prominence only to Darwin, who presented facts about the origin of species. Before Darwin, however, Spencer explained in a splendid way the universality of the law of evolution, its validity in all spheres of life.

Haeckel:
It is to the great English philosopher, Herbert Spencer, that we owe the founding of this monistic ethics on a basis of evolution. It shows that the feeling of duty does not rest on an illusory “categorical imperative,” but on the solid ground of social instinct, as we find in the case of all social animals. It regards as the highest aim of all morality the re-establishment of a sound harmony between egoism and altruism, between self-love and the love of one’s neighbor.

Haeckel:
As for Goethe, I have, in my General Morphology, shown his historical importance in connection with the theory of evolution and the system of monism. With all his versatile occupations, this great genius found time to devote to the morphological study of organisms, and to establish his comprehensive biological theories on this empirical basis. His discovery of the metamorphosis of plants and his vertebral theory of the skull justify us in classifying him as one of the chief forerunners of Darwin.

[Geologist Charles Lyell and Botanist Alexander Braun likewise preceded Darwin.]

✝Eric Voegelin:
Hitler and the Germans, p.g. 124
Hitler’s ideas on religion were those of a relatively primitive monism, approximately corresponding to Haeckel’s Welträtsel at the turn of the century.

[Atheistic dogmatists have managed to sneak into the wiki article for “Nazi book burnings” the claim that the National Socialists burned the works of Haeckel and Darwin. This article argues that Haeckel’s works wasn’t banned from Germany. Other sources indicate that the Ernst Haeckel Society, which split off from the banned Monist League and distanced itself from it, had secured approval and patronage from a Gauleiter. One thing is certain: Darwin wasn’t banned, as much as militant atheists who’ve been playing hot potato with Hitler’s religious beliefs would like people to believe.]

Hitler, Table Talk, February 20-21, 1942 (Cameron & Stevens):

The observatory I’ll have built at Linz, on the Pöstlingberg, I can see it in my mind. A façade of quite classical purity. I’ll have the pagan temple razed to the ground, and the observatory will take its place. Thus, in future, thousands of excursionists will make a pilgrimage there every Sunday. They’ll thus have access to the greatness of our universe. The pediment will bear this motto: “The heavens proclaim the glory of the everlasting”. It will be our way of giving men a religious spirit, of teaching them humility—but without the priests.
The building of my observatory will cost about twelve millions. The great planetarium by itself is worth two millions. Ptolemy’s one is less expensive. For Ptolemy, the earth was the centre of the world. That changed with Copernicus. To-day we know that our solar system is merely a solar system amongst many others. What could we do better than allow the greatest possible number of people like us to become aware of these marvels?
In any case, we can be grateful to Providence, which causes us to live to-day rather than three hundred years ago. At every street-corner, in those days, there was a blazing stake. What a debt we owe to the men who had the courage—the first to do so—to rebel against lies and intolerance. . . .
To open the eyes of simple people, there’s no better method of instruction than the picture. Put a small telescope in a village, and you destroy a world of superstitions.

1280px-Poestlingberg_20050429.jpg

✝Voegelin:
Hitler and the Germans, p.g. 125
Hitler planned a great observatory and planetarium as the center of the architectural layout in the reconstruction of Linz, which he regarded as his hometown. And he then informed us regarding this center, and how he planned it and about its meaning. So, take now, as a counterpart to these very elucidations of Hitler on the function of the planetarium as substitute for the Church, a passage from Ernst Haeckel’s Welträtsel about the monistic church and its program. Haeckel considered his monism to be a new religion—just as Comte did with his positivism—that would have to supersede Christianity.
And he said:

The religious service of the Sunday, which will continue as the ancient day of rest, of edification and relaxation that follows the six workdays of the working week, will undergo an essential improvement in the monistic church. The mystical belief in supernatural miracles will be replaced by clear knowledge of the true miracles of nature. [It seems one is listening to Hitler speaking.] The temples of God as places of devotion will not be adorned with images of saints and crucifixes, but with richly artistic representations from the inexhaustible realms of beauty of natural and human life. Between the high columns of the Gothic cathedrals [which he obviously intends to take over], which have climbing plants winding around them, slender palms and tree-ferns, graceful banana trees and bamboos, will remind us of the creative powers of the tropics. In great aquaria below the church windows, delightful jellyfish and siphonophores, brightly colored corals and starfish, will elucidate the art-forms of marine life. In place of the high altar there will be a statue of Urania, which will represent the omnipotence of the law of matter through the movements of the planets.

Mein Kampf:
Man must realize that a fundamental law of necessity reigns throughout the whole realm of Nature and that his existence is subject to the law of eternal struggle and strife. He will then feel that there cannot be a separate law for mankind in a universe in which planets and suns follow their orbits, where moons and planets trace their destined paths, where the strong are always the masters of the weak and where the latter must obey or be destroyed.

[You’ll discover a remarkably similar conception in Campanella’s City of the Sun. Observe how, unlike Darwin, Hitler begins from the movement of planetary bodies and how this leads into the latter notion of the strong triumphing over the weak. A loftier conception.]

Martin Bormann, June 6, 1942:
We must open the eyes of mankind to the fact that in addition to our unimportant Earth there exist countless other bodies in the universe, many of them surrounded, like the sun, by planets and these again by smaller bodies, the moons. The force which moves all these bodies in the universe, in accordance with natural law, is what we call the Almighty or God.

Timothy W. Ryback:
Hitler’s Private Library, Chapter 6
Traudl Junge, one of Hitler’s longtime secretaries, was present for many of these extended musings on man, nature, religion, and God. When I visited her in her Munich apartment in the summer of 2002, she confirmed Hitler’s preoccupation with matters of the spirit, not only in his monologues but also in his nighttime readings. Though she refused to ascribe to Hitler a particular spiritual conviction —”How can we know what another person truly believes?”—she was certain he believed in the existence of a deeper force that moved the world as evidenced in the laws of nature, of the presence of a deeper intelligence, or, as he himself said, of a “creative force” that gave shape and meaning to the world.

Hitler, Table Talk (Cameron & Stevens), October 24, 1941:
The Russians were entitled to attack their priests, but they had no right to assail the idea of a supreme force. It’s a fact that we’re feeble creatures, and that a creative force exists. To seek to deny it is folly. In that case, it’s better to believe something false than not to believe anything at all.
Laurency (L4e4):
11Just as it is better to be a skeptic than to have an erroneous conception, so it is better not to know anything than to believe in lies.

[Although being an agnostic is probably more sound than being either religious or atheistic, it’s not a permanently tenable position in the long run.]

Haeckel:
Monism as Connecting Religion and Science
Ever more clearly are we compelled by reflection to recognise that God is not to be placed over against the material world as an external being, but must be placed as a “divine power” or “moving spirit” within the cosmos itself.
Ever clearer does it become that all the wonderful phenomena of nature around us, organic as well as inorganic, are only various products of one and the same original force, various combinations of one and the same primitive matter. Ever more irresistibly is it borne in upon us that even the human soul is but an insignificant part of the all-embracing “world-soul”; just as the human body is only a small individual fraction of the great organised physical world.

It makes one sad to think that the Fuehrer is so tremendously interested in the tasks and researches of science, and yet our research men and scientists do not realize this because they don’t know it.

– Goebbels (Diaries), May 12, 1943

Hitler, Table Talk, Oct. 24, 1941 (Jochmann):
Science is just at another great stage, the question arises whether there is any substantial difference between the organic and the inorganic in nature. We have bodies in front of us, and we do not know whether we should reckon them to be organic or inorganic.

Laurency (ps2):
10In order to arrive at a correct conception of matter science must make two discoveries: that energy has a material nature; and that invisible matter, which is beyond the matter at present accessible by instruments, is matter still.

Haeckel:
The Riddle of the Universe
The invention of photography and photometry, and especially of spectral analysis (in 1860 by Bunsen and Kirchoff), introduced physics and chemistry into astronomy and led to cosmological conclusions of the utmost importance. It was now made perfectly clear that matter is the same throughout the universe, and that its physical and chemical properties in the most distant stars do not differ from those of the earth under our feet.

Lars Adelskogh (Fke1):
5Science has begun to discover the consciousness aspect of existence, hitherto much ignored. Tompkins and Bird have given many examples of “green intelligence” in their book, The Secret Life of Plants. Dr Rupert Sheldrake has gone even farther in his book, A New Science of Life. In it, he suggests that all forms of nature, organic and inorganic (so-called lifeless), are preceded by and constructed from invisible morphogenetic fields that act intelligently and in a manner aiming at wholeness. This idea is in harmony with hylozoics.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Plant_perception_(paranormal)
Botanist ✡Arthur Galston and physiologist Clifford L. Slayman who investigated Backster’s claims wrote:

There is no objective scientific evidence for the existence of such complex behaviour in plants. The recent spate of popular literature on “plant consciousness” appears to have been triggered by “experiments” with a lie detector, subsequently reported and embellished in a book called The Secret Life of Plants. Unfortunately, when scientists in the discipline of plant physiology attempted to repeat the experiments, using either identical or improved equipment, the results were uniformly negative. Further investigation has shown that the original observations probably arose from defective measuring procedures.[1]

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rupert_Sheldrake#Sheldrake_and_Steven_Rose
[During 1987 and 1988 Sheldrake contributed several pieces to The Guardian’s “Body and Soul” column. In one of these, he wrote that the idea that “memories were stored in our brains” was “only a theory” and “despite decades of research, the phenomenon of memory remains mysterious”.[108] This provoked a response by Professor ✡Steven Rose, a neuroscientist from the Open University, who criticised Sheldrake for being “a researcher trained in another discipline” (botany) for not “respect[ing] the data collected by neuroscientists before begin[ning] to offer us alternative explanations”, and accused Sheldrake of “ignoring or denying” “massive evidence”, and arguing that “neuroscience over the past two decades has shown that memories are stored in specific changes in brain cells”.]

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_Maddox#The_Sheldrake_editorial_1981

Lars Adelskogh (Fke1):
4Bacteria are organisms. It is clear all the same that the borderline between organic and inorganic matter does not set a bound for life itself.

Hitler, Table Talk, Oct. 14, 1941 (Jochmann):

It is only necessary to prove that the inorganic and the organic in nature overflow into one another without a border! Once the knowledge of the universe spreads, when the majority of people realize that the stars are not luminaries, but worlds, perhaps inhabited worlds, like ours, then the doctrine of Christianity is convicted of absurdity.
Es braucht nur noch der Nachweis geführt zu werden, daß das Anorganische und das Organische in der Natur ohne Grenze ineinander überfließen!

Hitler, Table Talk, Oct. 24, 1941 (Jochmann):

From a material point of view, the universe consists of the same matter, whether it be the earth, the sun, or other stars. Imagining that organic life is only on one of these worlds has become impossible today!

Materiell betrachtet besteht für uns das Universum aus gleichen Stoffen, mag es sich nun um die Erde, um die Sonne oder um andere Sterne handeln. Sich einbilden, daß nur auf einer dieser Welten organisches Leben ist, ist heute unmöglich geworden!

Haeckel:
The Riddle of the Universe
By the spectral analysis of Bunsen and Kirchhoff (1860) we have found, not only that the millions of bodies, which fill the infinity of space, are of the same material as our own sun and earth, but also that they are in various stages of evolution; we have obtained by its aid information as to the movements and distances of the stars, which the telescope would never have given us.

Hitler, September 6, 1938 speech:
Nuremberg, Culture Convention
And in this manner the cultural evolution of a Volk resembles that of the Milky Way. Amongst countless pale stars a few suns radiate. However, all suns and planets are made of the same one matter, and all of them observe the same laws. The entire cultural work of a Volk must not only be geared toward fulfillment of one mission, but this mission must also be pursued in one spirit. National Socialism is a cool and highly-reasoned approach to reality based upon the greatest of scientific knowledge and its spiritual expression.

So the cultural path of a Volk resembles the Milky Way of the skies. From myriads of vorhandenen pale bodies, shine individual bright suns. However, planets and suns consist of one matter and obey the same laws:

So gleicht der kulturelle Weg eines Volkes der Milchstraße des Firmaments. Aus Myriaden von vorhandenen blassen Körpern leuchten einzelne helle Sonnen. Allein Planeten und Sonnen bestehen aus einer Substanz und gehorchen den gleichen Gesetzen: Die gesamte kulturelle Arbeit eines Volkes hat nicht nur nach einem Auftrag zu erfolgen, sondern in einem Geist stattzufinden.

[From what I can tell, this may be the only known instance where Hitler gave indication of his monism in a public speech. The German transcript can be found here and the only audio recording I could find on the Internet matches it verbatim. It’s highly probable that Hitler did say this in a speech. The recording begins with “Wir bemühen uns daher auch nicht, dem internationalen Judentum etwa die deutsche Kunst und Kultur schmackhaft zu machen.”]

Haeckel:
The Wonders of Life
All things in the world are in perpetual motion. The universe is a perpetuum mobile. There is no real rest anywhere; it is always only apparent or relative. Heat itself, which constantly changes, is merely motion. In the eternal play of cosmic bodies countless suns and planets rush hither and thither in infinite space.

WIP –

https://hitlerianhylozoics.wordpress.com/thales-of-miletus/

Genesis 1:2 LXX
But the earth was unsightly and unfurnished, and darkness was over the deep, and the Spirit of God moved over the water.
Quran 21:30
Have those who disbelieved not considered that the heavens and the earth were a joined entity, and We separated them and made from water every living thing? Then will they not believe?
Cicero:
Thales of Miletus, who was the first person to investigate these matters, said that water was the first principle of things, but that god was the mind that moulded all things out of water.
Aristotle:
Certain thinkers say that soul is intermingled in the whole universe, and it is perhaps for that reason that Thales came to the opinion that all things are full of gods.

Julian:
Against the Galileans
But whether that spirit was ungenerated or had been generated he does not make at all clear. In all this, you observe, Moses does not say that the deep was created by God, or the darkness or the waters. And yet, after saying concerning light that God ordered it to be, and it was, surely he ought to have gone on to speak of night also, and the deep and the waters. But of them he says not a word to imply that they were not already existing at all, though he often mentions them. Furthermore, he does not mention the birth or creation of the angels or in what manner they were brought into being, but deals only with the heavenly and earthly bodies. It follows that, “according to Moses”, God is the creator of nothing that is incorporeal, but is only the disposer of matter that already existed. For the words, “And the earth was invisible and without form” can only mean that he regards the wet and dry substance as the original matter and that he introduces God as the disposer of this matter.

Aristotle:
Thales, the founder of this type of philosophy, says the principle is water (for which reason he declared that the earth rests on water),
Aristotle:
Others say the earth rests upon water. This, indeed, is the oldest theory that has been preserved, and is attributed to Thales of Miletus.

John Burnet:
We shall see that Anaximander made some remarkable discoveries in marine biology, which the researches of the nineteenth century have confirmed (§ 22), and even Xenophanes supported one of his theories by referring to the fossils and petrifactions of such widely separated places as Malta, Paros, and Syracuse (§ 59). This is enough to show that the theory, so commonly held by the earlier philosophers, that the earth had been originally in a moist state, was not purely mythological in origin, but based on biological and palaeontological observations.

Refuting Kant

Laurency (L5e1):
1The much-vaunted Kant, Fichte, Schelling, and Hegel were no initiates. Kant was the most acute and profound of them.

Hitler, Table Talk (Cameron & Stevens), May 19, 1944:
In the Great Hall of the Linz Library are the busts of Kant, Schopenhauer and Nietzsche, the greatest of our thinkers, in comparison with whom the British, the French and the Americans have nothing to offer. His complete refutation of the teachings which were a heritage from the Middle Ages, and of the dogmatic philosophy of the Church, is the greatest of the services which Kant has rendered to us. It is on the foundation of Kant’s theory of knowledge that Schopenhauer built the edifice of his philosophy, and it is Schopenhauer who annihilated the pragmatism of Hegel. I carried Schopenhauer’s works with me throughout the whole of the first World War. From him I learned a great deal. Schopenhauer’s pessimism, which springs partly, I think, from his own line of philosophical thought and partly from subjective feeling and the experiences of his own personal life, has been far surpassed by Nietzsche.

Schopenhauer:
But this degenerate, barbarous state of philosophy which, in the present day, emboldens every tyro to hold forth at random upon subjects that have puzzled the greatest minds, is precisely a consequence still remaining of the impunity with which thanks to the connivance of our professors of philosophy that audacious scribbler, Hegel, has been allowed to flood the market with his monstrous vagaries and so to pass for the greatest of all philosophers for the last thirty years in Germany. Every one of course now thinks himself entitled to serve up confidently any thing that may happen to come into his sparrow’s brain.
Therefore, as I have said, the gentlemen of the philosophical trade are anxious before all things to obliterate Kant’s philosophy, in order to be able to return to the muddy canal of the old dogmatism and to talk at random to their hearts content upon the favourite subjects which are specially recommended to them: just as if nothing had happened and neither a Kant nor a Critical Philosophy had ever come into the world.1

1. For Kant has disclosed the dreadful truth, that philosophy must be quite a different thing from Jewish mythology. [Add to 3rd ed.]

Haeckel:
The Wonders of Life
I agree entirely with the excellent criticism of Kant which Albert Lange gives in his History of Materialism (vol. ii.); but I am unable to follow him when he transfers his idealism from practical to theoretical questions, and urges the erroneous theory of knowledge derived from it in opposition to monism and realism. It is true that, as Lange says:

Kant did not lack the sense for the conception of this intelligible world (as an imaginative world); but his whole education and the period in which his mental life developed prevented him from indulging it. As he was denied the liberty of giving a noble form, free from all medieval distortion, to the vast structure of his ideas, his positive philosophy was never fully developed.

[Kant’s one merit was the attack on the medieval Christian dogma and the shifting of philosophy away from Judeocentrism (i.e. monogenism: Adam and Eve), but he could not completely divorce himself from it.]

Laurency (kr5):
2Kant is proof that this hylozoics has been misunderstood completely. Thinking himself able to judge everything, he pronounced his oft-quoted judgement displaying his actual ignorance: “hylozoism would be the death of all natural philosophy”. On the contrary, it furthers research. The assertion that it excludes a mechanical explanation of nature is erroneous. The laws of nature are fundamental.
Kant:
Metaphysical Foundations
On the law of interia (next to that of the permanence of substance) the possibility of a natural science proper entirely rests. The opposite of the first, and therefore the death of all natural philosophy, would be hylozoism.

https://books.google.com/books?id=rY1mCwAAQBAJ&pg=PA282
The possibility of a natural science proper rests entirely on the law of inertia (along with the law of the permanence of substance). Hylozoism [= ‘the thesis that matter itself is alive’] is the opposite of this, and is therefore the death of all natural philosophy!

Laurency (L5e1):
1But what is the good of the greatest mental genius without esoteric facts? [Kant] produced nothing but fictions. Fichte was an acute subjectivist who went totally astray. Schelling and Hegel were eclectics who lived on mishmash of the ideas of other men and beyond that produced illusions and fictions.

Schopenhauer:
The great infirmity of the Kantian system at this point – early demonstrated, as I have stated – is confirmation of the beautiful Indian proverb “No lotus without a stem.” The fallacious derivation of the thing in itself is the stem here, yet indeed only the mode of derivation, not the recognition of a thing in itself with respect to the given phenomenon. It was in the latter manner that Fichte misunderstood the issue. He could only do this because it was not a matter of truth for him, but of attention, for the promotion of his personal goals. Accordingly, he was sufficiently bold and thoughtless to deny the thing in itself entirely and to set forth a system in which not merely the formal element in presentation, as with Kant, but also the material element, the whole of its content, was supposedly derived from a priori from the subject.

Laurency (L4e7.11.1):
1To the esoterician it is obvious that Kant also was a dogmaticist and a skeptic (least of all a critic), for he denied knowledge of the “thing in itself” (the matter aspect). His religion within the limits of human knowledge is a manifestation of traditional religiousness as a “substitute” for the lost knowledge of “god”, a psychological need. His analyses are an irremediable confusion which no one has managed to disentangle.

Haeckel:
The Wonders of Life
The great regard which the critical philosophy of Immanuel Kant obtained during the nineteenth century has recently been increased in the various schools of philosophy.
As is known, Kant aflfirmed that only a part of our knowledge is empirical, or a posteriori—that is, derived from experience; and that the rest of our knowledge (as, for instance, mathematical axioms) is a priori—that is to say, reached by the deductions of pure reason, independently of experience. This error led to the further statement that the foundations of science are metaphysical, and that, though man can attain a certain knowledge of phenomena by the innate forms of space and time, he cannot grasp the “thing in itself” that lies behind them. The purely speculative metaphysics which was built up on Kant’s apriorism, and which found its extreme representative in Hegel, came at length to reject the empirical method altogether, and insisted that all knowledge is obtained by pure reason, independently of experience.
Kant’s chief error, which proved so injurious to the whole of subsequent philosophy, lay in the absence of any physiological and phylogenetic base to his theory of knowledge; this was only provided sixty years after his death by Darwin’s reform of the science of evolution, and by the discoveries of cerebral physiologists.

✝Thomas Aquinas:
But the very fact that intellect is above sense is a reasonable proof that there are some incorporeal things comprehensible by the intellect alone.

Laurency (L3e3):
Reason is part of mentality, and “pure” reason is reason devoid of content, thus quite meaningless. That is a lesson we should have learnt from Kant.

Rosenberg:
The emergence of a sharply defined consciousness must be seen to have constituted the first alienation of the heroic primitive man from his creative, natural state with its feeling of awe and reverence. This natural state is represented by the primitivists as alone being true life, and as having been corrupted by purely rational ideas and concepts. The conscious intellect is, as it is propounded, only a formal tool, and is thus devoid of content. Once it is enthroned as a legislating sovereign, it signifies the end of a culture, and as a proof — overlooked by the vitalists — of racial poisoning. It is quite unnecessary that reason and purpose be inimical to spirit. We have seen how, in contrast to peoples of the Semitic type, the attitudes of soul, will and reason of the Nordics toward the universe were essentially in harmony. We are not, therefore, concerned with the abstraction of primitive man, to whom one might justifiably assign a confidence in worldly existence, but with a clearly defined racial character.

Laurency ():
1Characteristic of the stage of civilization is the reign of subjectivism. Reason becomes sovereign and proclaims, without knowledge of reality, the dictatorship of reason. Without knowledge of the laws of life, however, reason is arbitrariness. Subjectivism is that principle of arbitrariness which must lead to lawlessness, formlessness, and chaos. Aesthetics is as divorced from reality, as disoriented, as the rest of philosophy. That sense of beauty which is uncorrupted by art theories sees the degeneration of art in our times as just one more confirmation of the esoteric axiom saying that the prerequisites of understanding the essence of art exist only at the stage of culture.

Schopenhauer:
This is why I have said that genius consists in the objectivity of the intellect. Nevertheless an absolutely objective and therefore perfectly pure intellect is as impossible as an absolutely pure tone; the latter because air cannot assume vibrations on its own, but instead must be impelled somehow, the former because an intellect cannot exist for itself but instead can only appear as a tool of a will or (to speak realistically) a brain is possible only as a part of an organism. An irrational, indeed blind will that manifests itself as an organism is the basis and root of every intellect, hence the inadequacy of every person and the characteristics of foolishness and wrongness without which there can be no human beings.

Nietzsche:
Socrates’ decadence is suggested not only by the admitted wantonness and anarchy of his instincts, but also by the overdevelopment of his logical ability and his characteristic thwarted sarcasm. Nor should we forget those auditory hallucinations which, as “the daimonion of Socrates,” have been given a religious interpretation.

Rosenberg:
In the Phaedon [96c], for example, Platon relates that Sokrates had admitted that he possessed no aptitude for investigation of organic events. The true nature of things for Sokrates therefore consisted ultimately not in their investigation by observation, but in our thinking about them. One should not ruin one’s eyes by viewing things to excess. If man wishes to discover whether the earth is flat or round then it does not suit him to carry on research. Rather, he should ask: What does reason say of this? Is it rational to conceive the earth as the centre of the universe? While Platon certainly invented this passage, it fits the same Sokrates who turned his gaze away from a racially beautiful Greece in order to talk of a universal abstract mankind, a brotherhood of the good. Here he turned away from the sun of observation to look at the shadows of dogma. … Logic is the science of god, said Hegel. These words are an affront to a truly Nordic religion. It is the antithesis of all that is truly German and all that was truly Greek. These words are truly Socratic.

Plato, Phaedo
Socrates: When I was young, Cebes, I was tremendously eager for the kind of wisdom which they call investigation of nature. . . . I investigated the phenomena of heaven and earth until finally I made up my mind that I was by nature totally unfitted for this kind of investigation.

Hegel:
The Science of Logic
the exposition of God as he is in his eternal essence before the creation of nature and finite mind.

Haeckel:
The Riddle of the Universe
We must even grant that this essence of substance becomes more mysterious and enigmatic the deeper we penetrate into the knowledge of its attributes, matter and energy, and the more thoroughly we study its countless phenomenal forms and their evolution. We do not know the “thing in itself” that lies behind these knowable phenomena. But why trouble about this enigmatic “thing in itself” when we have no means of investigating it, when we do not even clearly know whether it exists or not? Let us, then, leave the fruitless brooding over this ideal phantom to the “pure metaphysician,” and let us instead, as “real physicists,” rejoice in the immense progress which has been actually made by our monistic philosophy of nature.

[Of course, Kant, Hegel, and Fichte are not completely without merit. As astute Germans, they were conscious of the Jewish menace. Schelling assisted Goethe in shaping his monistic views.]

Hegel:
Where there is universal enmity, there is nothing left save physical dependence, an animal existence which can be assured only at the expense of all other existence, and which the Jews took as their fief.

Fichte:
… A powerful, hostilely disposed nation is infiltrating almost every country in Europe. This nation is in a state of perpetual war with all these countries, severely afflicting their citizenry. I am referring to the Jewish Nation [das Judentum]. I believe, and hope to demonstrate subsequently, that the Jewish Nation is so dreadful not because it is isolated and closely knit, but rather because it is founded on the hatred of mankind.

Alfred Rosenberg’s Errors

[It’s a well-established fact that Hitler sharply criticized Rosenberg’s publication.]

Rosenberg:
Der Mythus
At the high point of philosophical problem solving, we find the Upanishads, Platon and Kant who, in spite of profound differences of approach, arrive at identical answers concerning the ideality of space, time and causality.

Laurency (L4e7.11.1):
2It is often seen that people untutored in philosophy place Kant on the same footing as Platon. In so doing they demonstrate that they have understood neither Platon nor Kant. Platon is an esoterician also when writing exoterically. Kant is a physicalist, which many people seem to have difficulty in realizing. Kant was totally unable to understand Platon. An irremediable lack of clarity about these things still seems to be prevalent among philosophers.

Rosenberg:
Der Mythus
This near eastern African underworld is revealed most vividly in the historically attested figure of Pythagoras. He is said to have travelled throughout Babylonia and to India. He himself is described as a Pelasgian, and he did in fact practice his mysteries in Asia Minor, joined by ecstatic mystical women. He was unable to gain credence in Greece proper. Aristoteles and Heraclitos referred to him derogatorily, and were plainly resentful of his mathematical cabalism. Aristoteles said that Pythagoras’ fame was based on his appropriation of alien spiritual values. This was also the opinion of Heraclitos, who said that Pythagoras had woven together a false art and charlatanry from various writings. A pretence at universal knowledge, said the Hellenic sage, does not instruct the spirit. So Pythagoras moved to the west, to southern Italy, where, like some ancient blend of Rudolf Steiner and Annie Besant, he set up his school of mysteries complete with priestesses.

Laurency (L4e7.6):
3Even if unessential it is nevertheless interesting from a psychological point of view to note that philosophers in their accounts treat of Platon and Pythagoras in the order here mentioned. However, Platon received his knowledge from Pythagoras who lived 400 years before. Ignorance or sloppiness?

[Incidentally, Laurency had plenty of criticism for Steiner and Besant. It must be remembered that Aristotle was constructing an exoteric system in order to satiate the sophists so his representation of the beliefs held by pre-Socratic philosophers is from a purely physicalist standpoint. This can be seen in his treatment of Thales’ view that the earth rests on water and Xenophanes’ view of the sea being the origin of all water.]

Laurency ():
1Aristoteles tried to construct a “realistic” fiction system, which was bound to prove untenable sooner or later.
1Aristoteles thought that the only way of checking speculation was to construct a
system of thought that corresponded to the normal individual’s ability to comprehend. That only the esoterician has been able to understand him correctly is another matter.
2At all events, Aristoteles’ metaphysics was an attempt at stopping the sophists’ analyses, dissolving all concepts, by offering the normal individual a system
intended to satisfy his need of an explanation of existence, the unexplored. Aristoteles failed, of course.

Proclus:
But such as pertain to the theory of animals, are distinguished by Plato according to all final causes and concauses, but by Aristotle are scarcely, and but in few instances, surveyed according to form. For his discussion for the most part stops at matter [the matter aspect]; and making his exposition of things that have a natural subsistence from this, he shows to us that he deserts the doctrine of his preceptor. And thus much concerning these particulars.

John Burnet:
Early Greek Philosophy
Herakleitos, who is not partial to him, says that Pythagoras had pursued scientific investigation further than other men. Herodotos called Pythagoras “by no means the weakest sophist of the Hellenes,” a title which at this date does not imply the slightest disparagement, but does imply scientific studies.
Aristotle said that Pythagoras at first busied himself with mathematics and numbers, though he adds that later he did not renounce the miracle-mongering of Pherekydes.

[Keep in mind that Burnet is an exoteric interpreter.]

Laurency (kr5):
5To understand Platon, especially his doctrine of ideas and remembrance anew, one must know the Pythagorean world view on which his authorship was based.

Rousseau:
Social Contract
As, before putting up a large building, the architect surveys and sounds the site to see if it will bear the weight, the wise legislator does not begin by laying down laws good in themselves, but by investigating the fitness of the people, for which they are destined, to receive them.
Plato refused to legislate for the Arcadians and the Cyrenæans, because he knew that both peoples were rich and could not put up with equality; and good laws and bad men were found together in Crete, because Minos had inflicted discipline on a people already burdened with vice.

[It’s worth reading up on Plato’s possible though indirect allusion to the Jews via his assessment of the Egyptians and Phoenicians. – Caution: Alt-Right site]

Laurency (kl2_1.1):
1In the history of philosophy it is said of Pythagoras that he studied in Egypt and several other countries and acquired his knowledge there. . . . Interchange is always fruitful. However, such journeys are not undertaken in order to acquire knowledge like the learned do who copy each other and earlier presentations. Pythagoras wanted to examine the various knowledge systems in relation to the respective national characters in order to find the method best suited to Greek mentality. The formulation he gave to esoterics was quite different from earlier presentations.

Laurency (kr1.4):
8Pythagoras realized that the Greeks had the prerequisites for comprehending objective reality, for scientific method, and for systematic thinking. Cultivating the consciousness aspect, as the Orientals do, before the foundation for understanding material reality has been laid, results in subjectivism and in a life of unbridled imagination.
It is to Pythagoras we owe most of our fundamental reality concepts, which today’s conceptual analysts (being ignorant of reality) are so busy trying to discard, thereby making a comprehension of reality definitively impossible.

Laurency (kl2_1.1):
2He created no symbolism but a formulation of the exact reality concepts, necessary for mankind as fundaments of exact research into reality. By hylozoics, or spiritual materialism, Pythagoras did away with the opposition of spirit and matter, clarifying that spirit is the same as the consciousness of matter. This was a totally new mode of presentation which he had not copied from anybody. It was the first time that the knowledge was presented in this way. Thereby the foundations were laid for research, for scientific treatment of esoterics. Pythagoras is the first scientist in the Western sense, the founder of exact science. How long it will be before science sees and recognizes this is quite irrelevant.

[John Burnet makes a compelling case for ancient Greek originality in his Early Greek Philosophy. Keep in mind that Burnet is an exoteric interpreter.]

Laurency (kr1.4):
8Pythagoras, with his doctrine of monads, and Demokritos, with his exoteric atomic theory, can be considered the first two scientists in the Western sense. They realized that the matter aspect is the necessary basis of a scientific approach. Without this basis there will be no accuracy in exploring the nature of things and their relationships. There are no controllable limits to individual consciousness, but it has a tendency to drown in the ocean of consciousness.

4b. Hylozoics (Pythagoras)

Hitler, Table Talk, Oct. 14, 1941 (Jochmann):

It is only necessary to prove that the inorganic and the organic in nature overflow into one another without a border! Once the knowledge of the universe spreads, when the majority of people realize that the stars are not luminaries, but worlds, perhaps inhabited worlds, like ours, then the doctrine of Christianity is convicted of absurdity [Voegelin: having in this case obviously treated Christian doctrine as a picture of Genesis understood in a completely fundamentalist way].

Es braucht nur noch der Nachweis geführt zu werden, daß das Anorganische und das Organische in der Natur ohne Grenze ineinander überfließen! Wenn erst einmal das Wissen um das Universum sich verbreitet, wenn der Großteil der Menschen sich klar darüber wird, daß die Sterne nicht Leuchtkörper sind, sondern Welten, vielleicht belebte Welten, wie die unsere, dann wird die Lehre des Christentums völlig ad absurdum geführt.

[People overlook the last part of this statement and it’s significance. This is not merely another scientific theory Hitler was interested in. It directly precipitates Christianity’s definitive dissolution, a declaration which finds it’s origin in the 19th century.]

Voegelin:
Hitler and the Germans, p.g. 125
[Alan] Bullock, who reproduces this passage, remarks about it that the vocabulary here is completely Haeckel’s, in accordance with the nineteenth-century belief in science, which must take the place of religious superstition…

Hitler, Memoirs of a Confidant, p.g. 313:
And the churches offer up creation myths that may, by the way they are presented, have been convincing to the simple Volk of an earlier day. But the thinking man of the modern age must consign them to the realm of tall tales, though we do enjoy telling them over and over to our children. Even today, the child finds it altogether plausible that on the first day of Creation, in the darkness of the void, God’s voice resounded in thunder: ‘Let there be light!’ For time and again, if his father or the child himself turns on the light by flipping the electric switch, he thinks, ‘That’s the way God did it in the beginning.’

Voegelin:
Hitler and the Germans, p.g. 125
That now is the same attitude as Khrushchev’s, for example, who on the occasion of the Sputnik expeditions repeatedly explained what a deep metaphysical significance the achievement of the Russian astronauts had. For the Russian astronauts had flown through space and found out that up there, there is no heaven. Thus Christianity is finished off. Found out on repeated occasions. So the whole affair plays itself out at this level.

Placita Philosophorum, Chapter XIII:
WHAT IS THE ESSENCE OF THE STARS, AND HOW THEY ARE COMPOSED.
Heraclides and the Pythagoreans, that every star is a world in an infinite ether, and itself encompasseth air, earth, and ether; this opinion is current among the followers of Orpheus, for they suppose that each of the stars does make a world. Epicurus condemns none of these opinions, for he embraces any thing that is possible.

Mein Kampf:
The pacifist-humanitarian idea may indeed become an excellent one when the most superior type of manhood will have succeeded in subjugating the world to such an extent that this type is then sole master of the earth. This idea could have an injurious effect only in the measure in which its application became difficult and finally impossible.
So, first of all, the fight, and then pacifism. If it were otherwise, it would mean that mankind has already passed the zenith of its development, and accordingly, the end would not be the supremacy of some moral ideal, but degeneration into barbarism and consequent chaos.
People may laugh at this statement, but our planet moved through space for millions of years, uninhabited by men, and at some future date may easily begin to do so again, if men should forget that wherever they have reached a superior level of existence, it was not as a result of following the ideas of crazy visionaries but by acknowledging and rigorously observing the iron laws of Nature.

Laurency (wm10.24.1):
All members of higher kingdoms are collaborators in the processes of manifestation, and those people who want to reach higher must also try to fill a post. We reach the higher by serving the lower. We are all links in a chain from the lowest to the highest world. To know one’s post in life and to fill it is our task in life. Our qualities and abilities, our understanding of life, indicate our level. We always have use for them in some way in the relations of life where life has put us. The greatest individuals pass through life unnoticed.

Mein Kampf:
The progress of mankind may be compared to the process of ascending an infinite ladder. One does not reach the higher level without first having climbed the lower rungs. The Aryan therefore had to take that road which his sense of reality pointed out to him and not that which the modern pacifist dreams of. The path of reality is, however, difficult and hard to tread; yet it is the only one which finally leads to the goal where the others envisage mankind in their dreams. But the real truth is that those dreamers help only to lead man away from his goal rather than towards it.

Weishaupt:
Because of their primary disposition, all humans are inclined to take the first path and simply directly for their goal. Whenever possible, we all will, on the strength of our own inertia, prefer the easy way to the difficult, the immediate to the delayed, the present to the future. If ever we cease doing so, we do it because experience has taught us this route will harm us and will not lead to the goal, but will fact take us further away from it.

John 10:1-3
“Very truly I tell you Pharisees, anyone who does not enter the sheep pen by the gate, but climbs in by some other way, is a thief and a robber. The one who enters by the gate is the shepherd of the sheep. The gatekeeper opens the gate for him, and the sheep listen to his voice. He calls his own sheep by name and leads them out.

Dietrich Eckart:
Something intangible in the masses has already long since, after all, disavowed the shameful belief that life exists only for fun, this genuinely Jewish desire plague; ‘heaven on earth’ no longer really draws, and were it also only because, despite all promises, it draws ever farther into the distance. The great suspicion has secretly arisen against the great lie. Countless languish, no, gnash teeth for the truth. But whoever believes there of being able to gain it without a sufficient feeling of strength and courage of affirmation, thoroughly deceives himself.

Laurency ():
6At the stage of civilization, that man reaches farthest who, abandoning all the fictions of belief, lives but to help and serve without claims and expectations. In so doing he awakens higher emotionality to show him the path. The egoist’s religion is self-deception.

Weishaupt:
If humanity’s purpose is the development of its higher powers, if human beings have to suffer through many an evil and deprivation for the purpose of achieving this end; if the greatness of our minds can only be demonstrated by our steadfast endurance of these evils, and considers them to be just so many means to this end: – then this world is not for Caesar alone. This world is for every human being, without exceptions. And plentiful material would exist for every human being’s mental development; for those who steadfastly endure trouble would be behaving more reasonably and better than the weaklings who desert their posts to avoid its effects.

Marcus Aurelius:
Because to be drawn toward what is wrong and self-indulgent, toward anger and fear and pain, is to revolt against nature. And for the mind to complain about anything that happens is to desert its post. It was created to show reverence—respect for the divine—no less than to act justly. That too is an element of coexistence and a prerequisite for justice.

Hitler, Table Talk (Jochmann), September 27-28, 1941:
At the beginning of all education must be reverence: reverence for Providence, the inscrutable, of natureor whatever you want to call itbeginning with the respect that youth has for old age/maturity.
An dem, was der Bolschewismus aus den Menschen gemacht hat, sieht man, daß doch am Anfang aller Erziehung die Ehrfurcht stehen muß: Ehrfurcht vor der Vorsehung, dem Unerforschlichen, der Natur – oder wie man es nennen will -, beginnend mit der Ehrfurcht, welche die Jugend dem Alter entgegenzubringen hat.

Quran, Surah Al-Isra 17:23-24
And your Lord has decreed that you not worship except Him, and to parents, good treatment. Whether one or both of them reach old age [while] with you, say not to them [so much as], “uff,” and do not repel them but speak to them a noble word. And lower to them the wing of humility out of mercy and say, “My Lord, have mercy upon them as they brought me up [when I was] small.”

Iamblichus:
For it was rightly said by the Pythagoreans, that man is an animal [so far as pertains to his irrational part,] naturally insolent, and various, according to impulses, desires, and the rest of the passions. He requires therefore a transcendent inspection and government of this kind, from which a certain castigation and order may be derived.
Hence they thought that every one being conscious of the variety of his nature, should never be forgetful of piety towards, and the worship of divinity; but should always place him before the eye of the mind, as inspecting and diligently observing the conduct of mankind. But after divinity and the dæmoniacal nature, they thought that every one should pay the greatest attention to his parents and the laws, and should be obedient to them, not feignedly, but faithfully.

Laurency (kl1_7):

31Modern upbringing avoids fostering reverence for our parents. But that feeling is of great value for the children. It is a noble quality, necessary to reach the stage of culture.

Tacitus:
Proselytes to Jewry adopt the same practices, and the very first lesson they learn is to despise the gods, shed all feelings of patriotism, and consider parents, children and brothers as readily expendable.

Laurency (kl1_7):
21Anyone who has not learnt to obey acquires disrespect and contempt for anything of the nature of authority and law and is by that alone a potential law-breaker. “Modern” upbringing leads in its consequences to social disruption. The old system of upbringing, using hard treatment to inculcate the concepts of right on the young, was an appeal to violence conflicting with the true conception of right that is in the law of freedom. The best way of teaching concepts of right to young people is to use loving authority: to be kind, consistent, firm, and to appeal to the children’s own judgement.

The Golden Verses of Pythagoras:
Translated by Florence M. Firth, 1904

1. First worship the Immortal Gods, as they are established and ordained by the Law.
2. Reverence the Oath, and next the Heroes, full of goodness and light.
3. Honour likewise the Terrestrial Dæmons by rendering them the worship lawfully due to them.
4. Honour likewise thy parents, and those most nearly related to thee.

Diogenes Laertius:
Lives of Eminent Philosophers
[Solon’s] counsel to men in general is stated by Apollodorus in his work on the Philosophic Sects as follows: … Learn to obey before you command. … Honour the gods, reverence parents.

Hitler, May 1, 1937 speech:
For nearly six years I was a soldier and never voiced a contradiction, but instead simply obeyed orders at all times. Today Fate has made me the one who gives orders.
And this I must demand of every German: you, too, must be able to obey; otherwise you will never be deserving or worthy of giving orders yourself! That is the prerequisite!
It is thus we shall train our Volk and pass over the stubbornness or stupidity of the individual: bend or break-one or the other! We cannot tolerate that this authority, which is the authority of the German Volk, be attacked from any other quarter.

The Mother

“When your mother has grown older,
When her dear, faithful eyes
no longer see life as they once did,
When her feet, grown tired,
No longer want to carry her as she walks –

Then lend her your arm in support,
Escort her with happy pleasure.
The hour will come when, weeping, you
Must accompany her on her final walk.

And if she asks you something,
Then give her an answer.
And if she asks again, then speak!
And if she asks yet again, respond to her,
Not impatiently, but with gentle calm.

And if she cannot understand you properly
Explain all to her happily.
The hour will come, the bitter hour,
When her mouth asks for nothing more.”

Adolf Hitler, 1923.

Iamblichus:
And universally, they thought it necessary to believe, that nothing is a greater evil than anarchy; since the human race is not naturally adapted to be saved, when no one rules over it.

4c. Hylozoics (Pre-Socratic)

Anthony M. Ludovici:
Hitler and Nietzsche*
But no matter how the dispute on these points may ultimately be decided, it seems fairly obvious that there must be a strong Nietzschean influence in National Socialism, if only because of the powerful breath of pre-Socratic Hellenism which has prevailed in Germany ever since the NSDAP seized the reins of government.
For the sake of those readers who are not quite clear regarding this association of Nietzscheism with pre-Socratic values, perhaps it would be as well to point out that, according to Nietzsche, the history of mankind falls, as it were, into two halves – the period preceding Socrates, during which the public estimate of a man was always based upon his biological worth, and the period following Socrates, during which the public estimate of a man always tended to neglect or ignore his biological worth.

*Hosted on a white nationalist site. This is not meant to be an endorsement of white nationalism.

[Ludovici was evidently familiar with Nietzsche’s life, being a robust translator and commentator of his various works. Indeed, Nietzsche may have had a profound influence on Hitler, although not to the extent Hitler’s opponents claim.]

Ludovici:
Hitler and the Third Reich
For to-day the sound in health and mind are the honoured of the German nation and, as the guarantors of a desirable posterity, are granted many privileges. Although to us over here this cannot help seeming slightly odd, it is, of course, the most elementary wisdom.
Among the principal measures framed to secure a healthier generation, I would refer to the Law of July 14, 1933, to Prevent the Transmission of Hereditary Diseases. By means of this law it became possible through sterilisation to prevent men and women suffering from certain hereditary diseases specified in the law from having progeny. Such diseases are congenital feeble-mindedness, certain mental diseases such as schizophrenia and manic depression, hereditary epilepsy, blindness, deaf-mutism and severe malformations.

Laurency (kr5):
10The pre-Sokratean philosophers were all hylozoicians. Even of their alleged wisdom nothing more is left than a few meagre utterances, and that fact alone should have enjoined caution in assessing them.
11Those wise men possessed knowledge of reality that the scientists of today still lack. It is typical of the traditional lack of judgement that they are put forward as examples of the “first attempts at thinking”. And this in spite of the allegation that the following is known about them:

12They taught that the fixed stars are suns; that the planets revolve round the sun, shine with reflected light, and have once been liquid masses that have detached themselves from the sun.

They described the periods of revolution of the sun and the moon, predicted eclipses of the sun and the moon.

They knew that the earth is round, gave the correct figures concerning its size.

They had views on the most fundamental concepts and the most difficult problems, for example, mechanical or final causes of processes in nature.

[See Early Greek Philosophy by John Burnet and The Refutation Of All Heresies by Hippolytus for an exoteric overview on this matter.]

Placita Philosophorum, Chapter XIII:
Thales believes that they are globes of earth set on fire.

Hitler, May 26, 1944, Platterhof hotel talk:
Translated by Carlos W. Porter, hosted by Carolyn Yeager
But there was a time when men were so far developed in their ability to perceive, that when they recognised that the lights in the firmament were moving lights, they were convinced that everything stood still, the Earth (which already in the ancient age was recognised as a globe by the Greeks) stands and the moving lights meant that the Earth was the centre of the world. This Ptolomean system was a world view. It was incorrect, but it was an incredible step forward for humanity as compared to the stupid primitive manners of observation, let’s say, that of any Negro tribe living today. Then one day, over the course of centuries, a new, better science gains an insight, and this Ptolomean system of an Aristotle was overthrown by the genius of a Copernicus, wherein a new picture of the world arose.

Hitler, Table Talk, February 20-21, 1942 (Cameron & Stevens):
It was a great step forward, in the days of Ptolemy, to say that the earth was a sphere and that the stars gravitated around it. Since then there has been continual progress along the same path. Copernicus first. Copernicus, in his turn, has been largely left behind, and things will always be so. In our time, Hörbiger has made another step forward. . . . At present, science claims that the moon is a projection into space of a fragment of the earth, and that the earth is an emanation of the sun. The real question is whether the earth came from the sun or whether it has a tendency to approach it.

Ernst Haeckel:
The Riddle of the Universe
Sun-worship (solarium or hediotheism) seems to the modern scientist to be the best of all forms of theism, and the one which may be most easily reconciled with modern monism. For modern Astrophysics and geogeny have taught us that the earth is a fragment detached from the sun, and that it will eventually return to the bosom of its parent.

[Hitler frequently praises Ptolemy and Copernicus in these conversations, despite Ptolemy’s conception being erroneous. This is reminscient of Galileo’s praise.]

SS-Hauptamt, Rassenpolitik:
The 15th and 16th centuries during the Middle Ages were a period when the Nordic spirit found characteristic expression in Copernicus’s teaching that the earth revolved around the sun. The earth, which formerly was thought to be the center of the universe, became a small planet that was just as subject to the harmony of eternal laws as the course of the stars.

Hitler, Table Talk, June 2, 1942 (Cameron & Stevens):
We all know with what immense difficulty the theory of Copernicus triumphed over that of Ptolemy, and what great effects it had on the life of the world. For with the Ptolemaic theory collapsed a world upon which the whole philosophy of the Church was founded. At the time, it required great courage to declare oneself in favour of the Copernican theory and to take the consequences, for the Church defended itself without mercy. Which is understandable, of course, for the more bigoted a man or an organisation is, the more shattering becomes the impact of the revelation of their errors and, with it, the destruction of the whole basis of their thought.

Bolshevism: From Moses to Lenin
Giordano Bruno called the Jews ‘such a pestilential, leprous, and publicly dangerous race that they deserved to be rooted out and destroyed even before their birth.’ [Spacio della Bestis Trionfante (1584)] This genial philosopher was burned at the stake. For his heresy? Opponents of the Church were swarming in Italy during his time, yet he, the most impartial of them, was seized.

https://it.wikipedia.org/wiki/Spaccio_de_la_bestia_trionfante
In the third dialogue, where the religion of the ancient Egyptians is praised, it contrasts those cults with that of “excrements of dead and inanimate things” [21], with allusion to the cult of relics in Christianity. [39] The Jews then, are “convicts for excrement of Egypt” [21], that is carriers of a culture now corrupted.
21. Sofia: dialogue III, part II

https://books.google.com/books?id=K6nQOjxzHUEC&printsec=frontcover#v=onepage&q=excrement&f=false
Bruno is harsh in his criticism of the Jews, whom he calls the “excrement of Egypt.”

Laurency (L5e5):
29The power of the church rests upon the dogma of sin and forgiveness of sins. That dogma is the biggest lie of the church and makes people indifferent to their development. Since all people are thought to be irremediable and they are all guaranteed forgiveness in beforehand for all conceivable misdeeds, nobody needs to strive to improve.

Hitler, Table Talk, October 25, 1941 (Cameron & Stevens):
In Catholic regions life is more endurable, for the priest himself succumbs more easily to human weaknesses. So he permits his flock not to dramatise sin. How would the Church earn her living, if not by the sins of the faithful? She declares herself satisfied if one goes to confession. Indulgence, at a tariff, supplies the Church with her daily bread.

https://historyforatheists.com/2017/05/giordano-bruno-gaspar-schoppes-account-of-his-condemnation/
[In Tim O’Neill’s translation of Gaspar Schoppe’s Macchiavellizatio, Qua Unitorum Animos Dissociare Nitentibus Respondetur, one will note that “Absolutely no Lutheran or Calvinist, unless he reoffended or publicly induced to sin, was in any way judged in Rome, and by no means sentenced to death.” The scholar Alberto A. Martinez has also contributed to translating Bruno’s writings.

[Bruno’s heresy evidently did not threaten to undermine the Church’s theological foundation, but rather threatened the Jewish political hold on the Church. It’s worth noting that O’Neill rejects the notion that Bruno was ever a scientific humanist, which is a terrible mistake.]

Earnest Sevier Cox:
Teutonic Unity
[The Church] burned Bruno, charging him with “heresy” because he had discovered and set forth the teaching of the great Greek philosopher, Pythagoras, “The Father of the Copernican theory”, through the enlightened Arabs, by spreading the doctrines of Pythagoras and other early teachers, were ushering in the era of modern civilization.
Dr. Johann von Leers:
To Earnest Sevier Cox, May 21, 1955
“I think the fundamental ideas of your book should be made public and spread, either by openly publishing it or by founding a society to spread these ideas in selected and active groups of the Teutonic Nations.”
[I’m] “surprise[d] that more or less all what [sic] was the central idea of our thinking and indoctrination I find again in the book of an American writer.”

Laurency (kr5.16.3):
Cusanus and Bruno, Galilei and Copernicus were able to stand out as breakers of new ground because all four had gained possession of Pythagorean manuscripts dealing with astronomy, physics, and other matters. In these writings they learned about the heliocentric solar system, the cosmos as being filled with solar systems, etc.

Laurency (kr5
6What more [the Pythagoreans] taught is partly hinted at in the works of the subsequent esoteric (so-called pre-Sokratean) philosophers.
7Copernicus, Galilei, and Giordano Bruno, among others, had access to copies of these Pythagorean manuscripts.

Laurency (kl2_8):
Cusanus, Galilei, Bruno, and Copernicus had all got opportunities to read Pythagorean manuscripts.

K. H. (attributed), The Mahatma Letters to A. P. Sinnett, Letter No. 1:
William Gilbert of Colchester — Queen Elisabeth’s physician — died poisoned, only because — this real founder of Experimental Science in England — has had the audacity of anticipating Galileo; of pointing out Copernican’s fallacy as to the “third movement,” which was gravely alleged to account for the parallelism of the Earth’s axis of rotation!

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/William_Gilbert_(astronomer)
[He is remembered today largely for his book De Magnete (1600), and is credited as one of the originators of the term “electricity”. He is regarded by some as the father of electrical engineering or electricity and magnetism.]

William Gilbert:
Thales, as Aristotle writes, De Anima, Bk. I., deemed the loadstone to be endowed with a soul of some sort, because it had the power of moving and drawing iron towards it. Anaxagoras also held the same view.

Hitler, Table Talk, February 20-21, 1942 (Cameron & Stevens):
In their fight against the Church, the Russians are purely negative. We, on the other hand, should practise the cult of the heroes who enabled humanity to pull itself out of the rut of error. Kepler lived at Linz, and that’s why I chose Linz as the place for our observatory. His mother was accused of witchcraft and was tortured several times by the Inquisition.

[It’s now undeniable that Hitler was going to build a planetarium in Linz. It’s interesting to read why he decided to construct it there. The incident involving Kepler’s mother is a good example of the frightening literalism of that period.]

Hermann Giesler, Ein Anderer Hitler:

In der Hofmitte des rechten Institutes sehen Sie den Zentralraum mit der Kuppel des Planetariums vor. Die Kirche selbst steht frei, ihr Rang bleibt durch die räumliche Anordnung gewahrt. In den Giebel-Architrav zwischen den Türmen soll eingemeißelt werden: ,Die Himmel rühmen des Ewigen Ehre‘.

Hitler, Table Talk, December 28-29, 1941 (Jochmann):

Wenn ich in Linz eine Sternwarte baue, dann setze ich das Wort hinauf: Die Himmel rühmen des Ewigen Ehre!

Hitler, Table Talk, February 20-21, 1942 (Jochmann):

Als Überschrift kann ich mir nur das denken: Die Himmel rühmen des Ewigen Ehre! Wir erziehen die Menschen damit allerdings zu einer Religiosität, aber zu einer pfaffenfeindlichen, wir erziehen sie zur Demut.

[Incidentally, Wernher von Braun’s gravestone is marked with Psalm 19.]

image038_1.jpg

[Photo taken by WW2 Gravestone.]

Quran, Surah Al-Isra 17:44
The seven heavens and the earth, and all beings therein, declare his glory: there is not a thing but celebrates his praise; And yet ye understand not how they declare his glory!

[Mohammed evidently attempted to give a rational content to Jewish-Christian passages.]

Hitler, Table Talk, December 28-29, 1941 (Cameron & Stevens):
The great tragedy for man is that he understands the mechanism of things, but the things themselves remain an enigma to him. We are capable of distinguishing the component parts of a molecule. But when it’s a question of explaining the why of a thing, words fail us. And that’s what leads men to conceive of the existence of a superior power.

Laurency (ps1.35):
21Science, however, cannot answer the questions of What? and Why?, only that of How?. Natural science is a generalization of experience. Subsequent investigation is always necessary. The purpose of science is, starting from the empirically given reality, to discover and formulate those exact laws which make prediction possible.

Hitler, Table Talk, July 11-12, 1941 (Cameron & Stevens):
But a simple storm is enough—and everything collapses like a pack of cards! In any case, we shall learn to become familiar with the laws by which life is governed, and acquaintance with the laws of nature will guide us on the path of progress. As for the why of these laws, we shall never know anything about it. A thing is so, and our understanding cannot conceive of other schemes. Man has discovered in nature the wonderful notion of that all-mighty being whose law he worships. Fundamentally in everyone there is the feeling for this all-mighty, which we call God [Martin Bormann’s addition: that is to say, the dominion of natural laws throughout the whole universe].

[See section Reincarnation for a follow-up to this.]

Haeckel:
The Riddle of the Universe
For man is not distinguished from [the animals] by a special kind of soul, or by any peculiar and exclusive psychic function, but only by a higher degree of psychic activity, a superior stage of development. In particular, consciousness—the function of the association of ideas, thought, and reason—has reached a higher level in many men (by no means in all) than in most of the animals. Yet this difference is far from being so great as is popularly supposed; and it is much slighter in every respect than the corresponding difference between the higher and the lower animal souls, or even the difference between the highest and the lowest stages of the human soul itself.

Hitler, November 22, 1937 speech:
At the bottom of our hearts, we National Socialists are religious. For the space of many millenniums, a uniform concept of God did not exist. Yet it is the most brilliant and most sublime notion of mankind, that which distinguishes him most from animals, that he not only views a phenomenon from without, but always poses the question of why and how. This entire world, a world so clear-cut in its external manifestation, is just as unclear to us in its purpose. And here mankind has bowed down in humility before the conviction that it is confronted by an incredible power, an Omnipotence, which is so incredible and so deep that we men are unable to fathom it. That is a good thing! For it can serve to comfort people in bad times; it avoids that superficiality and sense of superiority that misleads man to believe that he-but a tiny bacillus on this earth, in this universe-rules the world, and that he lays down the laws of Nature which he can at best but study. It is, therefore, our desire that our Volk remains humble and truly believes in a God.

Hitler, May 26, 1944, Platterhof hotel talk:
Translated by Carlos W. Porter, hosted by Carolyn Yeager
There is no tolerance in nature. Nature, if I take tolerance as a human concept, is the most intolerant thing that exists. It destroys everything that is unfit for life. Whatever is not willing to defend itself, or unable to do so, is destroyed, and we are only a speck of dust in this nature. Man is nothing more than a small bacteria or little bacillus on such a planet. When a creature attempts to escape these laws, it doesn’t change the laws, rather, it ends its existence.

Laurency (ps2):
2Esoterics agrees with biological science in asserting that species are changeable, that new species arise from older ones through transformation, that all forms of life have an inner continuity and a common, natural origin, in the last resort through spontaneous generation (generatio spontanea, or aequivoca), the natural transition from the mineral kingdom to the vegetable kingdom. “Acquired qualities” are inherited through the predispositions that made their acquisition possible. In contrast to Darwin, esoterics maintains that biological “struggle for existence” is certainly not a necessary factor of evolution, but what is unfit for life is rejected in accordance with nature’s order.

Hitler, Memoirs of a Confidant, p.g. 40:
What seems to me incontestable first of all, is the fact that collectivist solutions cannot lead us to our goal. Everywhere in life only a process of selection can prevail. Among the animals, among plants, wherever observations have been made, basically the stronger, the better survives. The simpler life forms have no written constitution. Selection therefore runs a natural course. As Darwin correctly proved: the choice is not made by some agency–nature chooses. That is election.

Lars Adelskogh (Fke12):
8Hylozoics teaches, in sharp contrast to Darwin’s theory of evolution, that man existed before the mammals and therefore cannot have ascended from them. From what has been said above it should be evident that physical man is an evolutionary line of its own, clearly separated from the rest of organic life.

Hitler, Table Talk (Cameron & Stevens), January 25-26, 1942:
Where do we acquire the right to believe that man has not always been what he is now? The study of nature teaches us that, in the animal kingdom just as much as in the vegetable kingdom, variations have occurred. They’ve occurred within the species, but none of these variations has an importance comparable with that which separates man from the monkey—assuming that this transformation really took place.

Hitler, Table Talk (Jochmann), January 25-26, 1942:
[WIP translation] From where do we take the right to believe that man has not always been what he is today? The glimpse into nature teaches us that variations and further development occur in the kingdoms of plants and animals, but nowhere a development of the length of the leap, appears within a species that the human being would have to have done, he was supposed to have trained from a monkey-like condition to that, what is he!
Woher nehmen wir das Recht, zu glauben, der Mensch sei nicht von Uranfängen das gewesen, was er heut’ ist? Der Blick in die Natur lehrt uns, daß im Bereich der Pflanzen und Tiere Veränderungen und Weiterbildungen Vorkommen, aber nirgends zeigt sich innerhalb einer Gattung eine Entwicklung von der Weite des Sprunges, den der Mensch gemacht haben müßte, sollte er sich aus einem affenartigen Zustand zu dem, was er ist, fortgebildet haben!

Blavatsky:
The Secret Doctrine
Moreover, a German scientific work is mentioned in a footnote on the same page. It says that a Hanoverian scientist had recently published a Book entitled “Ueber die Auflosung der Arten durch Naturliche Zucht-wahl,” in which he shows, with great ingenuity, that Darwin was wholly mistaken in tracing man back to the ape. On the contrary, he maintains that it is the ape which is evolved from man.
He shows that, in the beginning, mankind were morally and physically the types and prototypes of our present Race, and of our human dignity, by their beauty of form, regularity of feature, cranial development, nobility of sentiments, heroic impulses, and grandeur of ideal conception…
The Book is copiously illustrated with diagrams, tables, etc. It asserts that the gradual debasement and degradation of man, morally and physically, can be readily traced throughout the ethnological transformation down to our time.
And, as one portion has already degenerated into apes, so the civilized man of the present day will at last, under the action of the inevitable law of necessity, be also succeeded by like descendants….
But though the apes descend from man, it is certainly not the fact that the human Monad, which has once reached the level of humanity, ever incarnates again in the form of an animal.

✡Benjamin Disraeli:
What would be the consequence on the great Anglo-Saxon republic, for example, were its citizens to secede from their sound principle of reserve, and mingle with their negro and coloured populations? In the course of time they would become so deteriorated that their states would probably be reconquered and regained by the aborigines whom they have expelled and who would then be their superiors.

Haeckel:
The Riddle of the Universe
Consequently, the so-called “history of the world”—that is, the brief period of a few thousand years which measures the duration of civilization—is an evanescently short episode in the long course of organic evolution, just as this, in turn, is merely a small portion of the history of our planetary system; and as our mother-earth is a mere speck in the sunbeam in the illimitable universe, so man himself is but a tiny grain of protoplasm in the perishable framework of organic nature.
Nothing seems to me better adapted than this magnificent cosmological perspective to give us the proper standard and the broad outlook which we need in the solution of the vast enigmas that surround us. It not only clearly indicates the true place of man in nature, but it dissipates the prevalent illusion of man’s supreme importance, and the arrogance with which he sets himself apart from the illimitable universe, and exalts himself to the position of its most valuable element. This boundless presumption of conceited man has misled him into making himself “the image of God,” claiming an “eternal life” for his ephemeral personality, and imagining that he possesses unlimited “freedom of will.”

Otto Dietrich (Memoirs):
[Hitler] spoke of human beings as “planetary bacilli” and was a passionate adherent of Hörbiger’s Universal Ice Theory.

4d. Monism (Hanns Hörbiger)

The Fuehrer showed that he had read about and studied all these problems. There is hardly a fact, hardly a theory, hardly a date, that he doesn’t know and that he isn’t able to cite from memory.

– Goebbels (Diaries), May 12, 1943

Peter Padfield:
Heinrich Himmler, July 23, 1938, To SS-Oberführer Dr. Otto Wacker
One strong criticism labelling the doctrine regrettable for Germany’s scientific prestige was sent to Himmler from the German Ministry of Education and Science. He reacted angrily, demanding that the Ministry reject ‘this priggish line of high-school professors’. He himself stood for free research in every form, ‘therefore also for free research into the Welteislehre’. He intended to support this free research warmly: ‘and find myself here in the best company, since the Führer and Chancellor of the German Reich, Adolf Hitler, has also been a convinced adherent for a long time of this despised doctrine ….’

Hitler, Table Talk, February 20-21, 1942 (Cameron & Stevens):
In our time, Hörbiger has made another step forward. …
For me there is no doubt that the satellite planets are attracted by the planets, just as the latter are themselves attracted by a fixed point, the sun. Since there is no such thing as a vacuum, it is possible that the planets’ speed of rotation and movement may grow slower. Thus it is not impossible, for example, that Mars may one day be a satellite of the Earth.
Hörbiger considers a point of detail in all this. He declares that the element which we call water is in reality merely melted ice (instead of ice’s being frozen water): what is found in the universe is ice, and not water. This theory amounted to a revolution, and everybody rebelled against Hörbiger.

Brigette Hamann:
Hitler’s Vienna (Brigette Nagel, Die Welteislehre)
Hermann Giesler, the architect working on the Linz project, remembered Hitler’s words: Think of the immediate past, when a quarter of a million people froze – perhaps I’m biased – we’ll see. But the sentence alone, ‘Ice is not frozen water, water is melted ice,’ deserves at least to be considered.
“Und denken Sie an die jüngste Vergangenheit, die eine Viermillionen-Front im Frost erstarren ließ – vielleicht bin ich zu befangen – wir werdent schen. Allein der Satz: ‘Eis ist nicht gefrorenes Wasser, sondern Wasser ist geschmolzenes Eis’ verdient zumindest eine Darstellung.”

[It’s interesting to read how Hörbiger conceived his theory:

By his own account, Hörbiger was observing the Moon when he was struck by the notion that the brightness and roughness of its surface was due to ice. Shortly after, he experienced a dream in which he was floating in space watching the swinging of a pendulum which grew longer and longer until it broke. “I knew that Newton had been wrong and that the sun’s gravitational pull ceases to exist at three times the distance of Neptune,” he concluded.

Rosenberg:
In the Phaedon [96c], for example, Platon relates that Sokrates had admitted that he possessed no aptitude for investigation of organic events. The true nature of things for Sokrates therefore consisted ultimately not in their investigation by observation, but in our thinking about them. One should not ruin one’s eyes by viewing things to excess. If man wishes to discover whether the earth is flat or round then it does not suit him to carry on research. Rather, he should ask: What does reason say of this? Is it rational to conceive the earth as the centre of the universe?

Plato, Phaedo
Socrates: When I was young, Cebes, I was tremendously eager for the kind of wisdom which they call investigation of nature. . . . I investigated the phenomena of heaven and earth until finally I made up my mind that I was by nature totally unfitted for this kind of investigation.

[It’s worth pointing out that Flat Earth adherents insinuate that you can determine that the earth is flat by observation, but the great trick of this doctrine is to make people turn away from simple observation (i.e. the sun rises and sets, some places are perpetually in light/darkness, round moon, telescopes, macrocosm/microcosm) and experiments (i.e. weather balloons) by inventing myriads of logic arguments and making people think about them, pretty much all of these arguments can easily be debunked with a photo or a video. Typically, these adherents represent Copernicus as a Jesuit (without ever expounding on this claim!), revising history itself with a quibble.]

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Johann_Wolfgang_von_Goethe#Influence
[The Serbian inventor and electrical engineer Nikola Tesla was heavily influenced by Goethe’s Faust, his favorite poem, and had actually memorized the entire text. It was while reciting a certain verse that he was struck with the epiphany that would lead to the idea of the rotating magnetic field and ultimately, alternating current.]
https://www.teslasautobiography.com/my_later_endeavors.html

Nikola Tesla:
My Inventions
On one occasion I came across a novel entitled Abafi (the Son of Aba), a Serbian translation of a well known Hungarian writer, Josika. This work somehow awakened my dormant powers of will and I began to practice self-control.

https://books.google.com/books?id=cYQUAwAAQBAJ&pg=PA62#v=onepage&q&f=false
[“I believe that it was by divine ordinance that I obtained by chance that which previously I could not reach by any pains; I believe that so much the more readily because I had always prayed to God to let my plan succeed, if Copernicus had told the truth.”
On July 19, 1595–he preserved his great day forever by recording the date–the thought came to him: “If, for the sizes and the relations of the six heavenly paths assumed by Copernicus, five figures possessing certain distinguishing characteristics could be discovered among the remaining infinitely many, then everything would go as desired.”]

https://books.google.com/books?id=jGhZDwAAQBAJ&pg=PT147#v=onepage&q&f=false

[What was Hörbiger’s idea but a recurrence to the first principle of the pre-Socratic philosophers? Wiki: “According to his ideas, ice was the basic substance of all cosmic processes, and ice moons, ice planets, and the ‘global ether’ (also made of ice) had determined the entire development of the universe.”]

William Gilbert:
Thales, as Aristotle writes, De Anima, Bk. I., deemed the loadstone to be endowed with a soul of some sort, because it had the power of moving and drawing iron towards it. Anaxagoras also held the same view.
In the Timæus of Plato there is an idle fancy about the efficacy of the stone of Hercules.
For he says that “all flowings of water, likewise the fallings of thunderbolts, and the things which are held wonderful in the attraction of Amber, and of the Herculean stone, are such that in all these there is never any attraction; but since there is no vacuum, the particles drive one another mutually around, and when they are dispersed and congregated together, they all pass, each to its proper seat, but with changed places; and it is forsooth, on account of these intercomplicated affections that the effects seem to arouse the wonder in him who has rightly investigated them.”

Aristotle:
Thales, too, to judge from what is recorded about him, seems to have held soul to be a motive force, since he said that the magnet has a soul in it because it moves the iron.

Laurency ():
3Most of what the historians know of earlier philosophers comes via Aristoteles. He had a habit of reporting in his own way what he did not use himself.

Diogenes Laertius:
Aristotle and Hippias affirm that, arguing from the magnet and from amber, he attributed a soul or life even to inanimate objects.
Nietzsche:
What is Diogenes Laertius? Nobody would lose a word over the philistine physiognomy of this scribbler if he were not by accident the clumsy watchman guarding treasures whose value he does not know. He is the night watchman of the history of Greek philosophy: one cannot enter it without obtaining the key from him.

Laurency (L3e2):
3“Soul” and “spirit” were hylozoic terms that both denoted consciousness in general. Philosophers have fantasized in the clouds on such sayings of the ancients as “everything is ensouled” or “the magnet has a soul, for it attracts iron”. In their usual naïveté the exoterists then thought that the “soul of everything” meant that the same kind of soul or consciousness was present in all things.
The souls of the stone, of the plant, of the beast, and of man were placed on a par, and then they could indulge in an orgy of roaring laughter at such superstition. The same old story: ignorance taking the throne of wisdom.
But were the Bostromian philosophers much smarter? At philosophical seminars they could assert that the chairs they were sitting on had “self-consciousness”, for Boström said so.

Laurency (L4e7.19):
1Natural philosopher Otto Caspari is one of the philosophers they have passed over with silence, just like Fechner. Fechner made propaganda for the theory of psycho-physical parallelism for which Wundt later got the credit. Fechner was ignored for he was “unscientific” enough to speak of “mineral souls, plant souls, animal souls, human souls, and star souls”. That was an idea that passed the power of understanding of professional philosophers. Caspari shared the same destiny, since he, too, launched an esoteric (Platonic) idea. He subscribed to Haeckel’s basic idea of a common family tree of all organisms.

Nostradamus

Nostradamus:
Quatrain 03-35
From the very depths of the West of Europe,
A young child will be born of poor people,
He who by his tongue will seduce a great troop:
His fame will increase towards the realm of the East.

[The Jews seem to take great care in putting Nostradamus on the pedestal, but always insinuating it in a misleading context, such as representing the prophecies as if they have already occurred (as seen here) or they’ll make loose connections between similar sounding words. It just amounts to guesswork.
Much has been made of the word Hister, which only signifies the Danube.

But my son, lest I venture too far for your future perception, be aware that men of letters shall make grand and usually boastful claims about the way I interpreted the world, before the worldwide conflagration which is to bring so many catastrophes and such revolutions that scarcely any lands will not be covered by water, and this will last until all has perished save history and geography themselves.

– Nostradamus

It is often claimed that Nostradamus was Jewish yet this could be an instance of cultural appropriation, the Jews have tried the same thing with Goethe. Similarly, Cagliostro was said to be a Jew. Nonetheless, there are lesser known passages which are remarkably uncanny.]

Nostradamus:
Quatrain 03-58
Near the Rhine from the Noric mountains [98% Austria]
Will be born a great one of people come too late,
One who will defend Sarmatia and the Pannonians,
One will not know what will have become of him.

Carl Jung:
[The Germans] came up out of the Danube valley too late, and founded the beginnings of their nation long after the French and the English were well on their way to nationhood. They got too late to the scramble [for colonies] and for the foundation of empire. Then, when they did get together and made a united nation, they looked around them and saw the British, the French, and others with rich colonies and all the equipment of grown-up nations, and they became jealous, resentful, like a younger brother whose older brothers have taken the lion’s share of the inheritance.

[Alternatively, it could mean that someone great arises from the people, this man who comes too late in a struggle. This can still apply to Hitler.]

Hitler, Table Talk (Cameron & Stevens), October 26-27, 1941:
If the British Empire collapsed to-day, it would be thanks to our arms, but we’d get no benefit, for we wouldn’t be the heirs. Russia would take India, Japan would take Eastern Asia, the United States would take Canada. I couldn’t even prevent the Americans from gaining a firm hold in Africa.

[Were the Germans jealous or were the French and English unwilling to give them a place in the political sphere? Other “prophecies” mentioning Hitler include St. Odile, Mitar Tarabich, Seer of Waldviertel, and Seeress of Prague. The one attributed to St. Odile is undoubtedly a modern rendition. Tarabich seems to have an air of authenticity, but Voja Antonić claimed most of these “prophecies” were invented.]

[In Hitler’s Private Library, Timothy W. Ryback testifies to discovering “a monograph on the prophecies of Nostradamus” and “an interpretation of the prophecies of Nostradamus.” He points out how a book titled The Prophecies of Nostradamus by Carl Loog was found in Hitler’s bunker, and he provides a detailed description of Loog’s interpretation of the following quatrain. Ryback states that it’s uncertain if Hitler had read this particular quatrain or Loog’s interpretation of it.]

Nostradamus:
Quatrain 03-57
Seven times will you see the British nation change,
Steeped in blood in 290 years:
Free not at all its support Germanic.
Aries doubt his “Bastarnian” pole.

[In L3e17, Laurency provides a formulation on astrology in which he distinguishes between different kinds of astrology, the esoteric astrology remaining largely unknown and the exoteric ones being distorted or incomplete. There he singles out Nostradamus as an exception to the charlatans.]

Laurency (L3e17):
4No wonder modern astrologers reject it all as superstition of the grossest kind. And the general public – that forum of “common sense” – cannot too eagerly ridicule something it believes it has seen through, cannot too much wonder at such injudiciousness.
5We have not been informed whether the astrologers who lived in the Greco-Roman antiquity or in medieval times were reincarnated astrologers of Chaldea. If they were, however, it is certain that they did not have opportunities of remembering anew the learning they once possessed, because (except for Nostradamus) they displayed no knowledge of esoteric astrology.
At any event, being a reincarnation of a medieval astrologer is no guarantee of understanding true astrology. Rather, we have reason to presume that such ones again fall prey to the degenerate astrology they learnt in the middle ages.
True, what you have once learnt remains in your subconscious and expresses itself as instinct and interest. But until you have picked up again the old facts you learnt, you do not know those facts. You cannot draw them forth from your subconscious, even though psycho-analysts believe something of the sort. They are brought to life only through a renewed contact with the same facts.

Goethe:
Faust
Fly! Upwards! Into Space, flung wide!
Isn’t this book, with secrets crammed,
From Nostradamus’ very hand,
Enough to be my guide?
When I know the starry road,
And Nature, you instruct me,
My soul’s power, you shall flow,
As spirits can with spirits be.

[Notably, Blavatsky made an allusion to a fulfilled Nostradamus prophecy in Isis Unveiled.]

“In twice two hundred years, the Bear
The Crescent will assail;
But if the Cock and Bull unite,
The Bear will not prevail.
In twice ten years again —
Let Islam know and fear —
The Cross shall stand, the Crescent wane,
Dissolve, and disappear.”

In just twice two hundred years from the date of that prophecy, we had the Crimean war, during which the alliance of the Gallic Cock and English Bull interfered with the political designs of the Russian Bear. In 1856 the war was ended, and Turkey, or the Crescent, closely escaped destruction. In the present year (1876) the most unexpected events of a political character have just taken place, and twice ten years have elapsed since peace was proclaimed. Everything seems to bid fair for a fulfilment of the old prophecy; the future will tell whether the Moslem Crescent, which seems, indeed, to be waning, will irrevocably “wane, dissolve, and disappear,” as the outcome of the present troubles.

[Bear in mind that Nostradamus was still under Catholicism’s sway (or wrote as he did in order to avoid being accused of being heretic). So his expectation of a great monarch as well as “the world’s end” still follows Catholic “prophetic” tradition. His astronomical calculations should be divorced from all this fatalistic rubbish. There may also have been anti-Islamic bias on his part, in conformity to the Catholic Church’s position.]

Heinrich Hoffmann:
Once – after Hitler had come to power – someone in our intimate circle started to talk about the centuries, the prophecies of the famous astrologer, Nostradamus. Hitler was very interested, and told one of his officials to get the books for him from the State Library, but on no account to say for whom he was getting them. As it was, a deposit of three thousand marks had to be put down before the Library would give him the books.
In the prophecies mention is made of a mighty mountain, over which a great eagle is sweeping, and Hitler compared the mountain to Germany and the eagle to himself. He went through the prophecies sentence by sentence, and said that although he could not claim that they all had direct bearing on himself, he did feel that they constituted an inexplicable phenomenon; and in this connection, he quoted Hamlet: ‘There are more things in Heaven and earth …’

Nostradamus:
Quatrain ?

Hitler, February 24, 1940 speech:
I have often told you: I am nothing other than a magnet which, in constantly passing over the German nation, extracts the steel from within this nation.

Hitler, Table Talk (Jochmann), February 4, 1942:
During the struggle for power, I’ve always said I’m making the party so hard that it becomes a magnet that takes away all the iron when you drag it over the land. In a few years we would have everything that is man in us, whereby the number does not matter at all.
Während des Kampfes um die Macht habe ich mir immer gesagt, ich mache die Partei so hart, daß sie ein Magnet wird, der alles Eisen an sich reißt, wenn man ihn über das Land zieht. In wenigen Jahren würden wir alles, was Mann ist, in uns haben, wobei es auf die Zahl gar nicht ankommt.

Hermann Giesler, The Artist Within the Warlord, p.g. 108:
Translated by Wilhelm Kriessmann, Ph.D and Carolyn Yeager
“Let me say it a little differently: the swastika flag flies right now as our national symbol. It will one day be a Germanic symbol and Germany the magnetic power field. That power field will draw in and win over all those who sense the aura of the time.”

David Irving:
Hitler’s War
Twenty years later, in a secret speech to his generals on January 27, 1944, Hitler himself outlined the pseudo-Darwinian process he had hit upon to select Germany’s new ruling class:

When we were quite small and unimportant I often told my followers that if this manifesto is preached year after year, in thousands of speeches across the nation, it is bound to act like a magnet: gradually one steel filing after another will detach itself from the public and cling to this magnet. . . .

Hitler, May 3, 1940 speech:
For it is emigration above all which, like a magnet, draws the active element out of a race, a Volk, and leaves behind only the weak, the cowardly, the meek. And if such a state of affairs is allowed to persist over the centuries, then a formerly important people will slowly but surely lose its steel and turn into a weak, a cowardly mass of men, willing to accept any fate.

Hitler, Table Talk (Jochmann), January 3-4, 1942:
The SS should not be too large, then you can keep them at a level that is unmatched. Like a magnet, the troupe must attract all those who belong to it, it must become completely out of itself.
Die SS darf nicht zu groß werden, dann kann man sie in einer Höhe halten, die unerreicht ist. Wie ein Magnet muß die Truppe alle anziehen, die zu ihr gehören, sie muß ganz aus sich heraus werden.

Laurency (L3e17):
6The allegation that it is possible by astrology to predict the destinies of people or future events on the basis of the “positions and movements of the stars” demonstrates a complete ignorance of what astrology is. By dint of constant repetition, however, such talk has penetrated the thinking of the public that it is hardly worthwhile informing it about the true state of affairs.

Heinrich Hoffmann:
In principle, Hitler rejected astrology. He admitted that the juxtaposition of the stars might well have some influence on the fate of mankind, but he felt that the interpretation of the cause and effect had not been scientifically mastered; he appeared to be an exponent of the exact sciences, but this did not prevent him from being, in many respects, a superstitious man.
Often, when he was hesitant over some decision, he would take a coin and toss for it; and though he would laugh at his own stupidity in appealing thus to Fate, he was always obviously delighted when the toss fell the way he hoped it would.

[One must take into account Hoffmann’s decadency, as he was described as “a Bohemian held fast in the fetters of all bad habits”, although his claim about the coin toss is corroborated.]

Otto Dietrich:
Sometimes, when his restlessness drove him on, he would decide between two destinations by tossing a coin — leaving the decision to chance, or if you will, to the hand of fate. Once the decision was made it was unalterable. This was, by the way, the only concession Hitler made to superstition. Contrary to widespread opinion, he would have nothing to do with astrology or any kind of occultism.

[The NS weren’t superstitious occultists as they’ve been represented in mainstream speculation. Spiritualism and Theosophy emerged in America (incidentally, these first took root in New York, which would later become a capital of money power), Freemasonry in either Britain or Scotland.]

Goebbels (Diaries), April 28, 1942:
In the United States astrologists are at work to prophesy an early end for the Fuehrer. We know that type of work as we have often done it ourselves. We shall take up our astrological propaganda again as soon as possible. I expect quite a little of it, especially in the United States and England.

Goebbels (Diaries), May 19, 1942:
Bemdt handed in a plan for occultist propaganda to be carried on by us. We are really getting somewhere. The Americans and English fall easily for that type of propaganda. We are therefore pressing into our service all star witnesses for occult prophecy. Nostradamus must once again submit to being quoted.

Goebbels (Diaries),March 29, 1945:
Some voluminous material has been submitted to me intended to initiate astrological or spiritualistic propaganda; it includes the so-called horoscope of the German Republic of 9 November 1918 and also the Führer’s horoscope. The two horoscopes are in striking agreement. I can understand why the Führer has forbidden people to concern themselves with such uncontrollable matters. . . . For me these astrological prophecies are of no significance whatever. I intend, however, to use them in anonymous camouflaged public propaganda since, in these critical times, most people will snatch at any straw.

Hitler, Table Talk (Cameron & Stevens), July 19, 1942:
The horoscope, in which the Anglo-Saxons in particular have great faith, is another swindle whose significance must not be under-estimated. Just think of the trouble given to the British General Staff by the publication by a well-known astrologer of a horoscope foretelling final victory in this war for Germany! All the newspapers in Britain had to dig out all the false prophecies previously published by this eminent quack and reprint them, before public anxiety could be pacified!

Atlantis

Vi2TT_GVhZm1-Pr3Lc8DSMzW5RuvpWbN-jKmOkd7kTQ.jpg
Illustration by Rocío Espín Piñar

Hitler, Table Talk, January 25-26, 1942 (Cameron & Stevens):
Legend cannot be extracted from the void, it couldn’t be a purely gratuitous figment. Nothing prevents us from supposing—and I believe, even, that it would be to our interest to do so—that mythology is a reflection of things that have existed and of which humanity has retained a vague memory. In all the human traditions, whether oral or written, one finds mention of a huge cosmic disaster. What the Bible tells on the subject is not peculiar to the Jews, but was certainly borrowed by them from the Babylonians and Assyrians. In the Nordic legend we read of a struggle between giants and gods.
In my view, the thing is explicable only by the hypothesis of a disaster that completely destroyed a humanity which already possessed a high degree of civilisation. The fragments of our prehistory are perhaps merely reproductions of objects belonging to a more distant past, and it’s by means of these, doubtless, that the road to civilisation was discovered anew.
What is there to prove to us that the stone axe we re-discover in our parts was really an invention of those who used it? It seems to me more likely that this object is a reproduction in stone of an axe that previously existed in some other material. What proof have we, by the way, that beside objects made of stone there were not similar objects made of metal? The life of bronze is limited, and that would explain that in certain earthy deposits one finds only objects made of stone.

[By “giants and gods”, perhaps Hitler is also alluding to the subject covered in the aptly named chapter from Bellamy’s Moons, Myths, and Man.]

Laurency (L3e17):
1The facts to be found in the canonical scriptures of the Jews, the Old Testament of the Christians, derive their origin from Jewish young men who were educated in Mesopotamian temples and had access to the pertaining archives. The copies that those Jews brought with them when the people were allowed to return to Palestine were duly revised, using the potential of perception existing, and the result is regarded as the holy words of Jahweh. Their story of the Flood is told there. This was the tidal wave that swept the then existing continents, as the last remnant of Atlantis sank into the sea in the year 9564 before the current era. Not much remained after that terrible devastation of the cultures flourishing at the time. What archaeologists excavate are the products of recent times.

Bellamy:
Moons, Myths, and Man
The Theosophists, we should not omit to mention, say that the island of ‘Poseidonis’, the last remnant of the giant island or continent of Atlantis, was swallowed up by the sea in the year 9564 B.C. Whatever we may think of their ways of arriving at their revelations, we cannot help recognizing a certain element of originality in them. The name of Poseidonis would seem to be an echo of Plato’s tale. There the gods divided all the Earth into lots. The island of Atlantis fell to the share of Poseidon.

Hitler, Table Talk, October 21-22, 1941 (Cameron & Stevens):
The ornamental theme which we call Germano-Nordic is found all over the earth’s surface, both in South America and in the Northern countries. According to a Greek legend, there is a civilisation known as “pre-lunar”, and we can see in the legend an allusion to the empire of the lands of Atlantis that sank into the ocean.

Hitler, Table Talk, October 21-22, 1941 (Jochmann):
Das, was man bei uns die germanisch-nordischen Urformen nennt, das Schling-Ornament in seinen verschiedenen Ausgestaltungen, findet sich über den ganzen Erdkreis verbreitet, in Südamerika wie im Norden. In einer griechischen Quelle ist von Vor-Mond-Menschen die Rede, worin wir eine Anspielung auf das Weltreich der Atlantis zu sehen haben, das der Mondkatastrophe zum Opfer gefallen ist.

[Refer to the citations provided by the Zionist Jew ✡Immanuel Velikovsky, without reading too much into his narrative.]

✡Manly P. Hall:
From a careful consideration of Plato’s description of Atlantis it is evident that the story should not be regarded as wholly historical but rather as both allegorical and historical. Origen, Porphyry, Proclus, Iamblichus, and Syrianus realized that the story concealed a profound philosophical mystery, but they disagreed as to the actual interpretation.

Laurency (ps3.20):
8By means of historical facts acquired and, partly, their own oral traditions, they constructed a history of the Jews. The writings of their prophets were their own adaptations of what they had picked up from various sources during their captivity. A by no means insignificant portion of it was of remarkable antiquity, excerpts from Atlantean records.

Ignatius Donnelly:
The history of Atlantis is the key of the Greek mythology. There can be no question that these gods of Greece were human beings. The tendency to attach divine attributes to great earthly rulers is one deeply implanted inhuman nature. The savages who killed Captain Cook firmly believed that he was immortal, that he was yet alive, and would return to punish them. The highly civilized Romans made gods out of their dead emperors. Dr.Livingstone mentions that on one occasion, after talking to a Bushman for some time about the Deity, he found that the savage thought he was speaking of Sekomi, the principal chief of the district.

✡Manly P. Hall:
The same author [Ignatius Donnelly] sustains his views by noting that the deities of the Greek pantheon were nor looked upon as creators of the universe but rather as regents set over it by its more ancient original fabricators. The Garden of Eden from which humanity was driven by a flaming sword is perhaps an allusion to the earthly paradise supposedly located west of the Pillars of Hercules and destroyed by volcanic cataclysms. The Deluge legend may be traced also to the Atlantean inundation, during which a “world” was destroyed by water.

✡Manly P. Hall:
Either the initiated Plato used the Atlantis allegory to achieve two widely different ends or else the accounts preserved by the Egyptian priests were tampered with to perpetuate the secret doctrine. This does not mean to imply that Atlantis is purely mythological, but it overcomes the most serious obstacle to acceptance of the Atlantis theory, namely, the fantastic accounts of its origin, size, appearance, and date of destruction–9600 B.C.

Laurency (L5e22):
4We must be content if the lists of kings and notices of battles and conclusions of peace handed down from ancient times give exact dates. Much more exactitude than that is not to be had.

Laurency (kr3):
7The tidal wave that at the destruction of Atlantis finally swept over the remaining continents was distorted in Jewish writings into the so-called flood.

Hitler was fond of ideas with cosmic sweep.

– Otto Dietrich

I once possessed a work on the origins of the human race. I used to think a lot about such matters, and I must say that if one examines the old traditions, the tales and legends, from close up, one arrives at unexpected conclusions.

– Hitler, Table Talk (Cameron & Stevens), January 25-26, 1942

Hitler, Table Talk (Cameron & Stevens), January 25-26, 1942:
Moreover, there’s no proof that the civilisation that existed before the disaster flourished precisely in our regions. Three-quarters of the earth are covered by water, and only an eighth of the earth’s surface is in practice accessible. Who knows what discoveries would be made if we could explore the ground that is at present covered by the waters?

I’m quite well inclined to accept the cosmic theories of Hörbiger. It’s not impossible, in fact, that ten thousand years before our era there was a clash between the earth and the moon that gave the moon its present orbit. It’s likewise possible that the earth attracted to it the atmosphere which was that of the moon, and that this radically transformed the conditions of life on our planet.
One can imagine that, before this accident, man could live at any altitude—for the simple reason that he was not subject to the constraint of atmospheric pressure.

One may also imagine that, the earth having opened, water rushed into the breach thus formed, and explosions followed, and then diluvian torrents of rain—from which human couples could escape only by taking refuge in very high regions.

It seems to me that these questions will be capable of solution on the day when a man will intuitively establish the connection between these facts, thus teaching exact science the path to follow. Otherwise we shall never raise the veil between our present world and that which preceded us.

https://info-buddhism.com/Nazis-of-Tibet-A-Twentieth-Century-Myth_Engelhardt.html
https://studybuddhism.com/en/advanced-studies/history-culture/shambhala/the-nazi-connection-with-shambhala-and-tibet
https://tricycle.org/magazine/hitler-and-himalayas-ss-mission-tibet-1938-39

Platon:
Laws
What do you think of ancient traditions about deluges and destructions of mankind, and the preservation of a remnant? ’Every one believes in them.’ Then let us suppose the world to have been destroyed by a deluge.

Laurency (L4e1):
5Also readers are quick to give their opinions on the basis of too few facts. They do not know that when the decision to submerge the continent had been made, “all the good people” were warned, were asked to emigrate and go to upland regions, and also were assisted in this.

http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/flood-myths.html

Goebbels (Diaries), February 27, 1945:
[Hitler] says to me, for instance, that it is essential to work for one’s people but that there is a limit to what men can do. Who knows when the moon may not crash into the earth and this whole planet go up in flame and ashes. Nevertheless, he says, it must be our mission to do our duty to the last.

✝Origen:
Celsus, however, says that it is only “the course of mortal things which, according to the appointed cycles, must always be the same in the past, present, and future;” whereas the majority of the Stoics maintain that this is the case not only with the course of mortal, but also with that of immortal things, and of those whom they regard as gods. For after the conflagration of the world, which has taken place countless times in the past, and will happen countless times in the future, there has been, and will be, the same arrangement of all things from the beginning to the end.

Platon:
Timaeus
There have been, and will be again, many destructions of mankind arising out of many causes; the greatest have been brought about by the agencies of fire and water, and other lesser ones by innumerable other causes.
There is a story, which even you have preserved, that once upon a time Paethon, the son of Helios, having yoked the steeds in his father’s chariot, because he was not able to drive them in the path of his father, burnt up all that was upon the earth, and was himself destroyed by a thunderbolt.
Now this has the form of a myth, but really signifies a declination of the bodies moving in the heavens around the earth, and a great conflagration of things upon the earth, which recurs after long intervals; at such times those who live upon the mountains and in dry and lofty places are more liable to destruction than those who dwell by rivers or on the seashore. And from this calamity the Nile, who is our never-failing saviour, delivers and preserves us.
When, on the other hand, the gods purge the earth with a deluge of water, the survivors in your country are herdsmen and shepherds who dwell on the mountains, but those who, like you, live in cities are carried by the rivers into the sea. Whereas in this land, neither then nor at any other time, does the water come down from above on the fields, having always a tendency to come up from below; for which reason the traditions preserved here are the most ancient.

Ovid, Metamorphoses:
When the horses feel the reins lying across their backs, after he has thrown them down, they veer off course and run unchecked through unknown regions of the air. Wherever their momentum takes them there they run, lawlessly, striking against the fixed stars in deep space and hurrying the chariot along remote tracks. Now they climb to the heights of heaven, now rush headlong down its precipitous slope, sweeping a course nearer to the earth.
The Moon, amazed, sees her brother’s horses running below her own, and the boiling clouds smoke. The earth bursts into flame, in the highest regions first, opens in deep fissures and all its moisture dries up. The meadows turn white, the trees are consumed with all their leaves, and the scorched corn makes its own destruction. But I am bemoaning the lesser things. Great cities are destroyed with all their walls, and the flames reduce whole nations with all their peoples to ashes. The woodlands burn, with the hills.
Mount Athos is on fire, Cilician Taurus, Tmolous, Oete and Ida, dry now once covered with fountains, and Helicon home of the Muses, and Haemus not yet linked with King Oeagrius’s name. Etna blazes with immense redoubled flames, the twin peaks of Parnassus, Eryx, Cynthus, Othrys, Rhodope fated at last to lose its snow, Mimas and Dindyma, Mycale and Cithaeron, ancient in rites. Its chilly climate cannot save Scythia. The Caucasus burn, and Ossa along with Pindus, and Olympos greater than either, and the lofty Alps and cloud-capped Apennines.
Then, truly, Phaethon sees the whole earth on fire. He cannot bear the violent heat, and he breathes the air as if from a deep furnace. He feels his chariot glowing white. He can no longer stand the ash and sparks flung out, and is enveloped in dense, hot smoke. He does not know where he is, or where he is going, swept along by the will of the winged horses.

Proclus:
The fable respecting Phaeton, however, requires a manifold discussion. For in the first place, it is necessary to consider it historically; in the second place, physically; and in the third place, philosophically.
History therefore says, that Phaeton was the offspring of the Sun, and of Clymene the daughter of Ocean, and that driving the chariot of his father, he deviated from the proper track. That Jupiter also fearing for the safety of the universe, destroyed him by thunder; but he being blasted by thunder, fell about Eridanus. The fire likewise proceeding from him burnt every thing that was nourished by the earth: and his sisters, the Heliades, lamented his fall. And such is the historical account of the fable.
It is, however, necessary to admit that a conflagration took place; for the whole narration is introduced for the sake of this; and, also, that the cause of it is neither an impossibility, nor a certain thing which may easily happen.
But it will be impossible if some one fancies that the Sun at one time drives his own chariot, and at another time being changed ceases to drive it, and commits his proper employment to another.
And it will be among the number of things which may be easily accomplished, if it is supposed that this Phaeton was a comet, which being dissolved produced an intolerable dryness from vehement heat. For this supposition is generally adopted. Porphyry therefore says, that certain signs may be assumed from the motion of comets. For when this motion is towards the southern parts, it is indicative of tempests, towards the north, of dryness from excessive heat, towards the east, of pestilence, and towards the west, of fertility. The disappearance likewise of the comet, is said to be the destruction by thunder.

✡Carl Sagan:
Of all the materials imagined to fall from comets, the most enduring-both in folklore and in science-have been, oddly, germs, the causative agents of disease. The worldwide association of comets with pestilence is striking, transcending cultural differences, and it is tempting to consider whether comets might in fact and not just in fancy be the carriers of epidemics.

Herodotus:
Thus far I have spoken on the authority of the Egyptians and their priests. They declare that from their first king to this last-mentioned monarch, the priest of Vulcan, was a period of three hundred and forty-one generations; such, at least, they say, was the number both of their kings, and of their high-priests, during this interval. Now three hundred generations of men make ten thousand years, three generations filling up the century; and the remaining forty-one generations make thirteen hundred and forty years. Thus the whole number of years is eleven thousand, three hundred and forty; in which entire space, they said, no god had ever appeared in a human form; nothing of this kind had happened either under the former or under the later Egyptian kings. The sun, however, had within this period of time, on four several occasions, moved from his wonted course, twice rising where he now sets, and twice setting where he now rises. Egypt was in no degree affected by these changes; the productions of the land, and of the river, remained the same; nor was there anything unusual either in the diseases or the deaths.

Platon:
Statesman
Of the portents recorded in ancient tales many did happen and will happen again. Such an one is the portent connected with the tale of the quarrel between Atreus and Thyestes. You have doubtless heard of it and remember what is said to have taken place. I mean the change in the rising and setting of the sun and the other heavenly bodies, how in those times they used to set in the quarter where they now rise, and used to rise where they now set, but the god at the time of the quarrel, you recall, changed all that to the present system as a testimony in favor of Atreus.

✡Joshua 10:13 LXX
And the sun and the moon stood still; and the sun stood still in the midst of heaven; it did not proceed to set till the end of one day. And there was not such a day either before or after, so that God should hearken to a man, because the Lord fought on the side of Israel.

Platon:
Statesman
In the fullness of time, when the change was to take place, and the earth-born race had all perished, and every soul had completed its proper cycle of births and been sown in the earth her appointed number of times, the pilot of the universe let the helm go, and retired to his place of view; and then Fate and innate desire reversed the motion of the world. Then also all the inferior deities who share the rule of the supreme power, being informed of what was happening, let go the parts of the world which were under their control.

Das Lied von der Linde:
Translated by Liberator Germaniae of Skadi Forum
For the misery‘s only glimmer of hope
Of a better day is infinitely distant.
“Saviour, send the one whom you have to send!“
Resounds fearfully from man’s breast.
When the Earth suddenly changes its course
,
Does a new glimmer of hope arise?
“Everything is lost!”, will resound here,
“Everything is rescued”, Vienna will already be singing.

Mein Kampf:
But, on the other hand, nothing affords better proof of the vital forces of a people and the consequent guarantee of its right to exist than that one day, through a happy decree of Destiny, a man arises who is capable of liberating his people from some great oppression, or of wiping out some bitter distress, or of calming the national soul which had been tormented through is sense of insecurity, and thus fulfilling what had long been the universal yearning of the people.

Julian:
Now that the human race possesses its knowledge of God by nature and not from teaching is proved to us first of all by the universal yearning for the divine that is in all men whether private persons or communities, whether considered as individuals or as races.

Diogenes Laertius:
Being asked “What is the divine?”, Thales replied, “That which has neither beginning nor end.”

[Probably the feeling for the infinite, for eternity.]

Rudolf Hess (attributed):
Was it an accident that Hitler came? I do not think so. I believe that a Providence watches over the nations and that when a task is to be fulfilled in the world, this Providence sends the right man at the right time to fulfill and thus save the nation from downfall.

Laurency (wm1):
13The basic error of theologians of all ages is that they have refused to see that god realizes his will through man and that he seeks to express his love through man. It is in the human kingdom that the will and love of god must be realized, and man realizes this by becoming an instrument of god among men. Without men god is not able to achieve anything for mankind.

Seneca:
To Lucilius, Letter 41
If you see a man who is unterrified in the midst of dangers, untouched by desires, happy in adversity, peaceful amid the storm, who looks down upon men from a higher plane, and views the gods on a footing of equality, will not a feeling of reverence for him steal over you, will you not say:

This quality is too great and too lofty to be regarded as resembling this petty body in which it dwells? A divine power has descended upon that man.

Heinz Linge:
One of the excursions to the front took us to Smolensk, another to Zaporozhe, where there was a dramatic incident. While Hitler was in conference with his generals, the airfield where our aircraft were parked came under Russian attack, with the result that part of it was captured. The report came as a shock for us and in confusion, lacking any experience of the front, we waited anxiously to see how Hitler would handle the situation. We had the report passed to him at once. It amazed us to see that he could hardly be bothered with it, this report which had hurled us all into a state of near panic. Issuing a few pithy instructions as to how the problem was to be cleared up, he quietly resumed his conference. If the Russians had got wind of Hitler’s presence this affair would probably have turned out rather differently.

Thomas Taylor:
Virtuous, therefore, is the man who relieves the corporeal wants of others, who wipes away the tear of sorrow, and gives agony repose; but more virtuous he, who, by disseminating wisdom, expels ignorance from the soul, and thus benefits the immortal part of man; for it may indeed be truly said, that he who has not even a knowledge of common things is a brute among men; that he who has an accurate knowledge of human concerns alone, is a man among brutes; but, that he who knows all that can be known by intellectual energy, is a god among men.

✡Manly P. Hall:
An ancient philosopher once said: “He who has not even a knowledge of common things is a brute among men. He who has an accurate knowledge of human concerns alone is a man among brutes. But he who knows all that can be known by intellectual energy, is a God among men.”
Man’s status in the natural world is determined, therefore, by the quality of his thinking. He whose mind is enslaved to his bestial instincts is philosophically not superior to the brute-, he whose rational faculties ponder human affairs is a man; and he whose intellect is elevated to the consideration of divine realities is already a demigod, for his being partakes of the luminosity with which his reason has brought him into proximity.

Ragnarök (Nordic myth):
At last the time draws near when the existing universe must perish and the gods must succumb before higher powers. This period is called in the ancient myths the Dissolution or Destin? (rok) of the gods or rulers (ragna, genitive plural of regin); a later form is ragnarøkkr, the Darkness of the Gods. The gods themselves have foreknowledge of its coming, which is foreshadowed by many signs.

Laurency (L3e18):
7Life forms are necessary to consciousness development. However, as soon as the self has learnt what it can learn in that form, the time has come to dissolve it, since otherwise it would become a hindrance to further development.
8As seen from the matter aspect, development is transformation: the replacement of old forms for new ones, which are more expedient in enabling consciousness development. Sentimental ignorance has always regarded this destructive side of existence as demoniacal. It is, however, charitable, a necessary condition of a richer life.
The corresponding is true of thought-forms, cultural forms, etc. When they have taught mankind what they have to offer, they must be annihilated. When this happens, however, mankind goes out of its senses, screaming that the end of the world is near.

Celsus:
The belief has spread among [the Christians], from a misunderstanding of the accounts of these occurrences, that after lengthened cycles of time, and the returns and conjunctions of planets, conflagrations and floods are wont to happen, and because after the last flood, which took place in the time of Deucalion, the lapse of time, agreeably to the vicissitude of all things, requires a conflagration and this made them give utterance to the erroneous opinion that God will descend, bringing fire like a torturer.

✝The Sibylline Oracles:
And then in his anger the immortal God who dwells on high shall hurl from the sky a fiery bolt on the head of the unholy: and summer shall change to winter in that day.

https://craterhunter.wordpress.com/comets-and-the-bronze-age-collapse/

Laurency (L3e18):
9So it always happens when a civilization and culture that is unfit for life must be annihilated to prepare the way for a more viable one. Man sees his own short time only, and does not know why but, being a wiseacre, he believes that he can judge the phenomena of life.
He comprehends nothing, and the sooner he sees it the better, for then he will avoid forming idiotic ideas that will just hinder his further development.
10The cultural decay of our times demonstrates that our old culture is unfit to live. Primitive clans have been allowed to incarnate in the West to pull down what remains after the destruction wrought by the great war (1914–1945).
11Such incarnating clans as are on the lower levels of the stage of civilization are in no position to estimate the values of our traditional culture. They perform a necessary purging work without which the new values could not assert themselves. This demolition may be deplored, and many people there are who watch this work of destruction with sorrow and regret. It is hard to descry the new, tentative efforts at a fresh growth, which will take its time to strike root but, when this is done, will soon enough demonstrate its viability in one area after another.
The geniuses of the new age, particularly within the seventh department, will make their contribution when time is ripe for a new culture and the work of construction can be begun. It cannot be said to reach its full efflorescence until about a thousand years hence.
12The new clans by no means have an easy task, since they become the targets of spiteful attacks from those representing the old forms and also from the barbarians who want to run riot.

Mein Kampf:
As so often happens in the course of history, the main difficulty is not to establish a new order of things, but to clear the ground for its establishment.
Prejudices and egotistic interests join together in forming a common front against the new idea and in trying by every means to prevent its triumph, because it is disagreeable to them or threatens their existence.
That is why the protagonist of the new idea is, unfortunately, in spite of his desire for constructive work, compelled to wage a destructive battle first, in order to abolish the existing state of affairs.

Laurency (L4e2):
1Then individuals at higher stages are temporarily shut off from incarnation and clans at the stage of barbarism incarnate in their thousands. What ensues then is a period of the “dictatorship of the proletariat” in all spheres of life, not merely in politics. And that is the end of that culture.
3During the growth period of a culture, the portion of barbarian clans decreases and the portion of civilizational clans increases. Maturity is attained when clans of people at the stages of culture and humanity incarnate. It should be added that historians do not know yet that such cultures have existed. Now and then a group or circle of geniuses incarnate, and then such phenomena are produced as the Greek culture, the triumphs of painting and architecture during the Italian Renaissance, glory days of literary art such as in Goethe’s Weimar, or the rise of musical culture in Mozart’s and Beethoven’s Vienna.

Hitler, Mein Kampf:
Political freedom is a prerequisite condition for the existence, or rather the growth, of culture. Accordingly, no sacrifice can be too great when there is a question of securing the political freedom of a nation. The sacrifices which have to be made in the sphere of general culture, in favour of an intensive strengthening of the military power of the State will be richly rewarded later on.
Indeed, it may be asserted that such a concentrated effort to preserve the independence of the State is usually succeeded by a certain easing of tension or is counterbalanced by a sudden blossoming forth of the hitherto neglected cultural spirit of the nation.
Thus Greece flourished during the great Periclean era after the miseries she had suffered during the Persian Wars, and the Roman Republic turned its energies to the cultivation of a higher civilisation when it was freed from the stress and troubles of the Punic Wars.
Of course, it is not to be expected that a parliamentary majority of cowardly and stupid people would ever be capable of deciding on such a resolute policy entailing the absolute subordination of all other national interests to the one sole task of preparing for a future conflict of arms which would result in establishing the security of the State.

Otto Wagner:
Modern Architecture
When earth-shaking events raged through a country, art stood still; when the people through their strength gained authority and respect and finally freedom, art always put forth a new flowering. Great social changes have always given birth to new styles.

Proclus:
In the next place it must be shown why the greatest of destructions are through the predominance of fire and water, and not through that of the other elements. Fire, therefore, has an efficacious and productive order in the elements, is sufficiently able to proceed through all other things, and is naturally adapted to divide them. But water, is indeed moved with greater facility than earth, yet is more difficultly passive than air. And by its facility of motion, indeed, it is able to operate; but through being passive with difficulty, it is not affected by violence, nor becomes imbecile when dissipated, like air; so that it reasonably follows, that violent, and the greatest destructions are effected by deluges and conflagrations.
You may also say, that the remaining two elements are more adapted to us. For we are pedestrious, and allied to earth; and as we are on all sides comprehended by air, in which we live, and which we respire, it is evident that our bodies are of a kindred nature with it. Hence these elements, as being more allied to, are less destructive of us; but the others, which are contrary to these, bring with them more violent destructions.

Platon:
Timaeus
The fact is, that wherever the extremity of winter frost or of summer sun does not prevent, mankind exist, sometimes in greater, sometimes in lesser numbers. And whatever happened either in your country or in ours, or in any other region of which we are informed — if there were any actions noble or great or in any other way remarkable, they have all been written down by us of old, and are preserved in our temples. Whereas just when you and other nations are beginning to be provided with letters and the other requisites of civilized life, after the usual interval, the stream from heaven, like a pestilence, comes pouring down, and leaves only those of you who are destitute of letters and education; and so you have to begin all over again like children, and know nothing of what happened in ancient times, either among us or among yourselves.

Sepp Wudy (Zwiesel, Germany):
It [the war] will be bad, and the later-born ones will have to learn writing and reading anew.

Ragnarök (Nordic myth):
Then come three other years, like one long winter; everywhere the snow drifts into heaps, the sun yields no warmth, and biting winds blow from all quarters. That winter is known as Fimbul Winter (the Great Winter).

Johannes Friede:
During this time, men, deprived of the power of light, will fall into a slumber-like sleep from which many will not awaken, especially those who have no spark of spiritual life. When the sun will again rise and emerge, earth will be covered with a blanket of ashes like snow in winter, except that the ashes will have the color of sulfur. Damp fog will ascend from the ground, illuminated by igneous gases.

✝The Sibylline Oracles:
For a dark mist shall hide the boundless world,
East, west, and south, and north. And then shall flow
A mighty stream of burning fire from heaven
And every place consume, earth, ocean vast,
And gleaming sea, and lakes and rivers, springs,
And cruel Hades and the heavenly sky.

http://www.j-lorber.de/proph/seher/kugelbeer.htm
Franz Kugelbeer (1922):
Die Erde ist ein Leichenfeld wie eine Wüste. Die Menschen kommen ganz erschrocken aus den Häusern. Die Leichen werden auf Wägen gesammelt und in Massengräbern beerdigt. Es fahren weder Eisenbahnen noch Schiffe, noch Autos in der ersten Zeit. Die Fabriken liegen still, das rasende Tempo früherer Zeit hat aufgehört.

Benediktinerpater Ellerhorst (1923):
Die Erde liegt verlassen da wie ein riesiger Friedhof. Verschreckt kommen Menschen aus den Häusern. Die Toten werden zusammengelesen und in Massengräbern beigesetzt. Auf den Straßen ist es still, und in Fabriken arbeitet keine Maschine, weil niemand da ist.
Die Güter werden unter die Überlebenden verteilt. Man begibt sich in die am stärksten entvölkerten Gebiete. Die Leute kommen von den Bergen herunter, um in den Ebenen zu leben, wo die Arbeit nicht so schwer ist. Die Engel stehen den Menschen mit Rat und Tat bei.

Laurency (L4e1):
5Also readers are quick to give their opinions on the basis of too few facts. They do not know that when the decision to submerge the continent had been made, “all the good people” were warned, were asked to emigrate and go to upland regions, and also were assisted in this.

Plato:
Laws
After the great destruction we may imagine that the earth was a desert, in which there were a herd or two of oxen and a few goats, hardly enough to support those who tended them; while of politics and governments the survivors would know nothing. And out of this state of things have arisen arts and laws, and a great deal of virtue and a great deal of vice; little by little the world has come to be what it is. At first, the few inhabitants would have had a natural fear of descending into the plains; although they would want to have intercourse with one another, they would have a difficulty in getting about, having lost the arts, and having no means of extracting metals from the earth, or of felling timber; for even if they had saved any tools, these would soon have been worn out, and they could get no more until the art of metallurgy had been again revived.

[It is uncanny. I don’t suppose all of these German prophets had access to Plato’s writings at the time.]

German Christian prophecies

✝Wessel Dietrich Eilert:

There will be a religion that will join everyone except the Jews, who will show their old [stubbornness, obstinacy]. In the Rhine there is a church that is built by the will of all the peoples.
From there, where the next big war will explode, it is what the people are supposed to believe. All the confessions will be compatible.
Germany will receive a new king and then will follow a lucky time.

(original German version)
Am Rhein steht eine Kirche, da bauen alle Völker dran. Von dort wird nach dem Kriege ausgehen, was die Völker glauben sollen. Alle Konfessionen werden sich vereinigen, nur die Juden werden ihre alte Hartnäckigkeit zeigen.

[From a superficial reading, Eilert seems to be a typical Christian propagandist following a traditional narrative. He was also wrong about the war starting in the year 1850, although the future is never set in stone.
But when you factor in how the border between Austria and Germany has produced seers, mystics, dreamers, then it becomes plausible that there is some metaphysical significance to his prophecy, despite it’s Christian orientation and form of expression. As such, the Birch Tree and the lesser known Linden Tree prophecies are not purely a human product.]

Goebbels:
Being a prophet is a thankless task. Things always exceed what we prophesy. Things are on the move, transforming the prejudices, obscurities, and complexities of the past with a hard, but orderly hand. How can we even begin to say what tomorrow will bring when we can hardly understand what is happening today!

[Incidentally, Goebbels styled himself as a prophet after the Yalta Conference.]

Seer of Waldviertel (Austria):
As dictated to Wolfgang Johannes Bekh
This man, who the Germans name their Emperor at the end of the war, has still been listening to Hitler speaking when he was a school boy.

Wessel Dietrich Eilert:
Germany
Austria will be spared, in fact, it will be a quite good place there.

Das Lied von der Linde:
Translated by Liberator Germaniae of Skadi Forum

“Everything is lost!”, will resound here,
“Everything is rescued”, Vienna will already be singing.

For yea, the strong hero will hail from the East [Austria],
Bringing new order to a confused world.
White flowers surrounding the heart of the lord,
Willingly the valiant will follow his call.

All troublemakers will be scattered to the winds,
He will give German law to the German Empire,
Foreigner of colour, unwelcome guest,
Flee the field you have not ploughed
.

[It is uncanny. It does not seem to be entirely based in Catholic tradition, as the last batch of text suggests. Consider the following testimony of Hitler as a seer.]

“I have been told that the Austro-German borderland where he was born is known, like the Scottish Highlands, to be prolific of people with this gift of intuition.” (G. Ward Price)

“His mind, nurtured by the other-worldness of the Alpine scenery round his mountain retreat of Berchtesgaden, runs to visions; and I have heard his intimates say that, even in cabinet meetings when vital questions of policy are being discussed, he is dreaming–thinking of the light that never was on sea or land, the consecration and the poet’s dream. South Germany has always produced dreamers and romantics, like the Swan-king Ludwig of Bavaria.” (Degrelle)

“His eyes—inherited from his mother—were large, melancholy and thoughtful. To a very large extent this boy lived within himself. What dreams he dreamed I do not know.” (✡Eduard Bloch)

“His body does not suggest strength. The outstanding characteristic of his physiognomy is its dreamy look. I was especially struck by that when I saw pictures taken of him during the Czechoslovakian crisis; there was in his eyes the look of a seer.” (Carl Jung)

Kubizek:
I have seen with what absolute dedication, even as early as that, he gave himself to the people whom he loved. Only in this people could he live. He knew nothing other than this people.
Savitri:
The Lightning and the Sun
Adolf Hitler’s leading emotion is obviously his “love beyond all measure” for Germany and all that is German. “He lived in the German people; nothing counted for him, save they.” These words, describing the future ruler’s feelings already in early youth, are true at all stages of his life. And his main intellectual, or rather, spiritual, feature, is perhaps that inborn, baffling intuition of history in the broadest sense of the word — of history as our planet’s destiny, — which lifts him straight above all politicians, generals and actual kings, to the level of the great Seers, and gives his whole career that extraordinary, “dream-like” [Traumhaft] character of which Hans Grimm so appropriately speaks. The originality of his genius lies in the fact that he lived his German patriotism from a cosmic point of view, giving both Germany and the history of our times their true significance in the light of not merely human but cosmic evolution.

H. S. Bellamy:
Moons, Myths, and Man
Rev. 18:1, 21, 10
The ‘city’ in the above passage is called ‘Babylon’, which was not its real name. It is, rather, a general expression for any great power against which the Jewish authors of that time felt a spite. Many details, of course, might refer to the historical Babylon, the power, the splendour, the over-bearing demeanor, the corruption (or, rather, the over-refined culture, if seen with other than Jewish eyes).
The Babylon of Revelation XVII and XVIII stands for Atlantis.
The apocalyptic Babylon must have been the great emporium of a seafaring nation of astounding wealth, situated in a key-position on the shore of a suitable sea, a ‘mediterranean’ sea in the most literal sense of the word – and not three hundred miles from a shallow gulf.

[I used to concur with Thomas Jefferson that the book of Revelation was a monstrously impious book of lunacy, but there does seem to be much symbolism of cosmological significance embedded into the narrative. Hoerbiger’s theory could be used to finally neutralize the literal interpretation of the book of Revelation which has caused so much hysteria and paranoia.]

Johannes Friede:
Of mankind there will be more dead than there have been casualties in all wars. In the abodes of the children of light, the Book of Revelations will be read, and in the palaces of the Church they will await the arrival of the great comet. On the seventh day after the return of light, earth will have absorbed the ashes and formed such a fertility as has not been experienced ever before.

[Bellamy often distinguishes between the symbolic, the historical, and the mythical/apocalyptical, such as with Canaan and Tyre.]

Bellamy:
Moons, Myths, and Man
We find what is possibly a reference to some Hesperidean country in the Bible, Numbers XIII. The spies sent out by Moses into the country of ‘Canaan’ – which shows several definite Atlantis traits – returned with, among other things, a cluster of ‘grapes’ so heavy that two men had to carry it between them on a staff.

https://catyswindall.wordpress.com/2013/09/15/was-the-fruit-in-the-promise-land-abnormally-large/

Bellamy:
Moons, Myths, and Man
Such grapes do not exist, but if, instead, we say that they carried a bunch of bananas – a fruit for which there were no word in Hebrew – the story becomes quite credible. The mythical Canaan, then, was not identical with the country the Jews conquered and settled under Joshua.
The banana, one of the oldest cultivated plants, would naturally point to Atlantis. As long as we cannot prove Jewish missions to the far west, however, we must accept the view that the author of Numbers XIII drew upon the reports of some other people, possibly the primitive Phoenicians, and used them for the adornment of the annals of his own nation.

Assessing the Oera Linda Book

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Oera_Linda_Book

[The mainstream narrative insists that François Haverschmidt was the author of this book. The profound scarcity of detail on this author’s life and and his mostly untranslated works obliges readers to believe in the testimony of a Goffe Jensma. Admittedly the book does seem rather convenient, but the mainstream shearers overlook the excellent ethics contained within the book’s narrative. If it were intended to be a “hoax to fool some nationalist Frisians and orthodox Christians”, then the author at least had a good grasp of idealism. There is also a possible anti-Semitic indictment of the Jews (priests and princes) which will make it just as dependable as the Protocols of Zion.
We are also introduced to sensationalist authors (in this case a Robert Scrutton) who, despite making the work more accessible, linked it up with unrelated theories (incidentally, Alfred Watkins, whose theory was conceived from observation, with cautious reserve, received a similar treatment at the hands of a John Michell. Like Hoerbiger, Watkins has been described as an amateur. I don’t endorse his theory at the present time). According to the wiki:
“Following Scrutton’s example, English language accounts of the Oera Linda Book tend to place it within the New Age or alternate history genres, and do not associate it with National Socialism, as is the case in Germany.”]

Laurency ():
2When a disciple of the planetary hierarchy comes forward with a work, at first the black ones do everything to hinder its distribution. When this no longer succeeds, some ambitious person is inspired to publish something similar, which has a misleading effect, is widely spread, praised, and accepted.

[In time, I will be providing excerpts from the work that catch my attention.]

Oera Linda:
Hail to all true Frisians
In the olden times, the Slavonic race knew nothing of liberty. They were brought under the yoke like oxen. They were driven into the bowels of the earth to dig metals, and had to build houses of stone as dwelling-places for princes and priests. Of all that they did nothing came to themselves, everything must serve to enrich and make more powerful the priests and the princes, and to satisfy them. Under this treatment they grew gray and old before their time, and died without any enjoyment; although the earth produces abundantly for the good of all her children.

Mein Kampf:
It is certain that the first stages of human civilisation were not based so much on the use of tame animals as on the employment of human beings who were members of an inferior race.
Only after subjugated races were employed as slaves was a similar fate allotted to animals, and not vice versa, as some people would have us believe.
At first it was the conquered enemy who had to draw the plough and only afterwards did the ox and horse take his place. Nobody but puling pacifists can consider this fact a sign of human degradation.

Oera Linda:
Hail to all true Frisians
But our runaways and exiles came through Twiskland to their boundaries, and our sailors came to their harbours. From them they heard of liberty, of justice, and laws, without which men cannot exist. This was all absorbed by the unhappy people like dew into an arid soil. When they fully understood this, the most courageous among them began to clank their chains, which grieved the princes. The princes are proud and warlike; there is therefore some virtue in their hearts.

Laurency ():
There must be commandments for the less rational people to go by, since without laws no community can exist.

[See necessity of laws.]

Oera Linda:
Hail to all true Frisians
While the doctrine of Jessos was thus spreading over the earth, the false priests went to the land of his birth to make his death known. They said they were his friends, and they pretended to show great sorrow by tearing their clothes and shaving their heads. They went to live in caves in the mountains, but in them they had hid all their treasures, and they made in them images of Jessos. They gave these statues to simple people, and at last they said that Jessos was a god, that he had declared this himself to them, and that all those who followed his doctrine should enter his kingdom hereafter, where all was joy and happiness.

Laurency (L5e23):
2When war broke out between peoples of different religions, the black élite were always there to try to take over the secret archives at the conquest of temples. Perhaps they contained new facts. In any case they were not be known by the “uninitiated”. In general, the conquerors were disappointed, since such valuables had long before been taken away to “inaccessible” places. The archeologists of the future will, “when the time is right”, make many astounding discoveries.

Oera Linda:
Hail to all true Frisians
Because they knew that he was opposed to the rich, they announced everywhere that poverty, suffering, and humility were the door by which to enter into his kingdom, and that those who had suffered the most on earth should enjoy the greatest happiness there.

Oera Linda:
Hail to all true Frisians
In order to make the people believe that they did as they preached, they pretended to outward poverty; and that they had overcome all sensual feelings, they took no wives. But if any young girl had made a false step, it was quickly forgiven; the weak, they said, were to be assisted, and to save their souls men must give largely to the Church. Acting in this way, they had wives and children without households, and were rich without working; but the people grew poorer and more miserable than they had ever been before. This doctrine, which requires the priests to possess no further knowledge than to speak deceitfully, and to pretend to be pious while acting unjustly, spreads from east to west, and will come to our land also.

1 Peter 2:12 Live such good lives among the pagans that, though they accuse you of doing wrong, they may see your good deeds.

2 Clement 13:1-4 For the Gentiles, when they hear from our mouth the oracles of God, admire them as beautiful and weighty; but afterwards perceiving our deeds, that they are not worthy of the words that we say, they turn thereafter to blasphemy, saying that the matter is but fable and deceit.
But when they see that we do not only not love those that hate us, but do not even love those that love us, they turn us to ridicule, and the name is blasphemed.

Space (Wernher von Braun)

[Transcript. This is merely hosted on a site about ufos. I am not linking to it as an endorsement of “ufology”.
It’s worth noting that Rosin is a surname given to Germans and Jews. She also never names the Jew. Ronald Bernard (probable Jew) likewise never names them, although he does invoke the Protocols. US politician Patrick Little does name the Jew, but his solidarity with nationalism is in suspect.

https://steemit.com/whistleblower/@mayb/i-just-quit-working-for-dutch-whistleblower-ronald-bernard-here-s-why

https://blindlight.org/index.php/blindlight/item/1293-among-other-things-transparency-becoming-an-issue-with-patrick-little
https://thezog.info (under Irish / Jewish Ethnic Domination)]

Carol Rosin:
What was most interesting to me was a repetitive sentence that [Von Braun] said to me over and over again during the approximately four years that I had the opportunity to work with him. He said the strategy that was being used to educate the public and decision makers was to use scare tactics… That was how we identify an enemy.
The strategy that Wernher Von Braun taught me was that first the Russians are going to be considered to be the enemy. In fact, in 1974, they were the enemy, the identified enemy. We were told that they had “killer satellites”. We were told that they were coming to get us and control us – that they were “Commies.”
Then terrorists would be identified, and that was soon to follow. We heard a lot about terrorism. Then we were going to identify third-world country “crazies.” We now call them Nations of Concern. But he said that would be the third enemy against whom we would build space-based weapons.
The next enemy was asteroids. Now, at this point he kind of chuckled the first time he said it. Asteroids- against asteroids we are going to build space-based weapons.

And the funniest one of all was what he called aliens, extraterrestrials. That would be the final scare. And over and over and over during the four years that I knew him and was giving speeches for him, he would bring up that last card. “And remember Carol, the last card is the alien card. We are going to have to build space-based weapons against aliens and all of it is a lie.”

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_War_of_the_Worlds_(radio_drama)

[At 12 minutes 20 seconds, excerpt from President Ronald Reagan’s speech about extraterrestrial threats.]

https://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/the-pentagons-new-wonder-weapons-for-world-dominion_us_59b6b113e4b036fd85ccc3d6
https://truthout.org/audio/weaponizing-space-means-opening-the-heavens-to-war/ [note the surname Grossman plus it’s acknowledged that he’s a Jewish writer]
https://www.google.com/search?q=space+war&client=firefox-b-1-ab&tbm=nws&source=lnt&tbs=qdr:d&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwi6_emj1J_dAhXrGTQIHZ1aD7kQpwUIHg&biw=1128&bih=687&dpr=1
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_Space_Force

Otto Skorzeny:
For better or worse, Speer had to admit what everyone knows today; the Fuehrer recognized the revolutionary significance of the V-2 and after a conversation with Wernher von Braun declared, “This young scholar has produced a rocket that upsets all known ballistic laws. I am convinced that the young scientist is right when he says that in his opinion more powerful rockets would be capable of exploring the space surrounding the earth and perhaps even several planets in our solar system. We will have von Braun to thank for the uncovering of many great secrets.”

Mein Kampf:
Hence the folk concept of the world is in profound accord with Nature’s will; because it restores the free play of the forces which will lead the race through stages of sustained reciprocal education towards a higher type, until finally the best portion of mankind will possess the earth and will be free to work in every domain all over the world and even reach spheres that lie outside the earth. We all feel that in the distant future many may be faced with problems which can be solved only by a superior race of human beings, a race destined to become master of all the other peoples and which will have at its disposal the means and resources of the whole world.

Lars Adelskogh (Fk312.6):
18When, in a still more distant future, mankind has reached the cultural as well as humanist stages, then also those walls have come down which we have raised between us and the surrounding, living solar system. Our globe can then be received as a full member of the “family of sacred planets”. (In the ancient esoteric writings the other planets of our solar system are called sacred, since hatred is there an unknown phenomenon, no powers of evil exist, and vegetables, animals, and men have not been clothed in organic forms, those envelopes of suffering.)

Plotinus:
This earth of ours is full of varied life-forms and of immortal beings; to the very heavens it is crowded. And the stars, those of the upper and the under spheres, moving in their ordered path, fellow-travellers with the universe, how can they be less than gods? Surely they must be morally good: what could prevent them? All that occasions vice here below is unknown there evil of body, perturbed and perturbing.

Cusanus:
It may be conjectured that in the area of the sun there exist solar beings, bright and enlightened denizens, and by nature more spiritual than such as may inhabit the moon – who are possibly lunatics – whilst those on earth are more gross and material.

Julian:
What need have I to summon Hellenes and Hebrews as witnesses of this? There exists no man who does not stretch out his hands towards the heavens when he prays; and whether he swears by one god or several, if he has any notion at all of the divine, he turns heavenward. And it was very natural that men should feel thus.
For since they observed that in what concerns the heavenly bodies there is no increase or diminution or mutability, and that they do not suffer any unregulated influence, but their movement is harmonious and their arrangement in concert; and that the illuminations of the moon are regulated, and that the risings and settings of the sun are regularly defined, and always at regularly defined seasons, they naturally conceived that the heaven is a god and the throne of a god.
For a being of that sort, since it is not subject to increase by addition, or to diminution by subtraction, and is stationed beyond all change due to alteration and mutability, is free from decay and generation, and inasmuch as it is immortal by nature and indestructible, it is pure from every sort of stain. Eternal and ever in movement, as we see, it travels in a circuit about the great Creator, whether it be impelled by a nobler and more divine soul that dwells therein, just as, I mean, our bodies are by the soul in us, or having received its motion from God Himself, it wheels in its boundless circuit, in an unceasing and eternal career.

Celsus:
The first point relating to the Jews which is fitted to excite wonder, is that they should worship the heaven and the angels who dwell therein, and yet pass by and neglect its most venerable and powerful parts, as the sun, the moon, and the other heavenly bodies, both fixed stars and planets, as if it were possible that ‘the whole’ could be God, and yet its parts not divine…

Plotinus:
Still more unreasonably: There are men, bound to human bodies and subject to desire, grief, anger, who think so generously of their own faculty that they declare themselves in contact with the Intelligible World, but deny that the sun possesses a similar faculty less subject to influence, to disorder, to change; they deny that it is any wiser than we, the late born, hindered by so many cheats on the way towards truth.
Their own soul, the soul of the least of mankind, they declare deathless, divine; but the entire heavens and the stars within the heavens have had no communion with the Immortal Principle, though these are far purer and lovelier than their own souls

Mein Kampf:
The real truth is, that not only has man failed to overcome Nature in any sphere whatsoever, but that at best he has merely succeeded in getting hold of and lifting a tiny corner of the enormous veil which she has spread over her eternal mysteries and secrets.

Skorzeny:
Wernher von Braun and his young co-workers had great plans and were, so to speak, “far-seeing.” Very far even. At the beginning of 1944 von Braun made statements which might have come from the fantastic novels in the style of Jules Verne or what one today calls science fiction – but it was no more than anticipation of what he later realized. It is known that his idea of a multi-stage rocket – derived from the V-2 – made it possible to launch satellites and reach and explore the moon. The history of aerospace owes him a great deal.

Speer:
There was only one point on which [Hitler] pressed me, when we were alone again. “Weren’t you mistaken? You say this young man is thirty one? I would have thought him even younger!” He thought it astonishing that so young a man could already have helped to bring about a technical breakthrough which would change the face of the future. From then on he would sometimes expatiate on his thesis that in our century people squandered the best years of their lives on useless things. In past eras an Alexander the Great had conquered a vast empire at the age of twenty-three and Napoleon had won his brilliant victories at thirty. In connection with this he would often allude, as if casually, to Wernher von Braun, who at so young an age had created a technical marvel at Peenemiinde.

Mein Kampf:
On the contrary, I am firmly convinced to-day that, generally speaking, it is in youth that men lay the essential groundwork of their creative thought, wherever that creative thought exists. I make a distinction between the wisdom of age—which can only arise from the greater profundity and foresight that are based on the experiences of a long life—and the creative genius of youth, which blossoms out in thought and ideas with inexhaustible fertility, without being able to digest these immediately, because of their very superabundance.

5. Hitler’s Maxims

God helps those who help themselves

Haeckel:
The Wonders of Life
It was not until the second half of the nineteenth century that a sound knowledge of the physiological functions and environment of the organism induced people once more to have a concern for bodily culture. All that modern hygiene now does for the public health, especially the improvement of the dwellings and food of the poorer classes, the prevention of disease by healthier habits, baths, athletics, etc., can be traced to the monistic teaching or reason, and is altogether opposed to the Christian belief in Providence and the dualism connected therewith.

The maxim of modern hygiene is: God helps those who help themselves.

Hitler, to Bertrand de Jouvenel, February 1936:
People have said that I owe my success to the fact that I have created a mystique… or more simply that I have been lucky. Well, I will tell you what has carried me to where I am. Our political problems appeared complicated. The German people did not comprehend them. In these conditions they preferred to leave it to the professional politicians to get them out of this confused mess. I, on the other hand, simplified the problems. I reduced them to the simplest terms. The masses realized this and they have followed me. Thus the class struggle, this famous class struggle! It is an absurdity, the class struggle, and I denounced the absurdity, and the people understood me! I made an appeal to reason. It was heard by the German people!

George Ward Price:
[Hitler’s] temperament is too individualistic to spare those who work under him. “He does not believe in helping people out of difficulties,” said a close collaborator. “It is only when one of his subordinates is on the point of being overwhelmed by his work or responsibilities that he will come to his aid. Even then he does no more than lift the man’s chin above the surface so that he can struggle for himself.”

Hitler, Table Talk (Cameron & Stevens), October 21-22, 1941:
I wish to be a builder. A war-leader is what I am against my own will. If I apply my mind to military problems, that’s because for the moment I know that nobody would succeed better at this than I can. In the same way, I don’t interfere in the activity of my colleagues when I have the feeling that they are performing their task as well as I could perform it myself.

Hitler, November 6, 1938 speech:
If today at times in foreign countries Parliamentarians or politicians venture to maintain that Germany has not kept her treaties, then we can give as our answer to these men: the greatest breach of a treaty that ever was practiced on the German people. Every promise which had been made to Germany in the Fourteen Points – those promises on the faith of which Germany had laid down her arms – was afterwards broken. In 1932 Germany was faced with final collapse. The German Reich and people both seemed lost. And then came the German resurrection.

It began with a change of faith. While all the German parties before us believed in forces and ideals which lay outside of the German Reich and outside of our people, we National Socialists have resolutely championed belief in our own people, starting from that watchword of eternal validity: God helps only those who are prepared and determined to help themselves.

In the place of all those international factors – Democracy, the Conscience of Peoples, the Conscience of the World, the League of Nations, and the like – we have set a single factor – our own people.

Sie begann mit einer Umwandlung des Glaubens. Während alle deutschen Parteien vor uns an Kräfte und Ideale glaubten, die außerhalb des Reiches und unseres Volkes lagen, haben wir Nationalsozialisten unentwegt den Glauben an unser eigenes Volk gefördert, ausgehend von der ewig gültigen Parole, daß Gott nur denen hilft, die bereit und entschlossen sind, sich selbst zu helfen. Wir haben an die Stelle all jener internationalen Faktoren – Demokratie, Völkergewissen, Weltgewissen, Völkerbund usw. – einen einzigen Faktor gestellt: unser eigenes Volk!

Hitler, February 24, 1941 speech:
And when a Frenchman said that the aim was really to annihilate 20 million Germans, that was by no means mere imagination. It was entirely possible to calculate the time when the German nation would actually number 20 or 30 million less. This enslavement-disastrous even from the purely economic point of view-was now opposed by the Germans, divided into two great camps. Their points of view were completely different; but both placed their hopes in international ideals. The more intellectually inclined camp said: “We believe in a world-conscience, in world justice. We believe in the League of Nations at Geneva.” The others were more proletarian and said: “We believe in international solidarity,” and things of that sort. But they all believed in something outside their own people-were ever ready to take refuge in the hope that others would come and help them.

The conception of the new Movement, whose fundamentals can be expressed in a single sentence: “The Lord helps those who help themselves,” opposed this. That is not only a very pious phrase, but a very just one.

For one cannot assume that God exists to help people who are too cowardly and too lazy to help themselves and think that God exists only to make up for the weakness of mankind. He does not exist for that purpose. He has always, at all times, blessed only those who were prepared to fight their own battles.

Demgegenüber vertrat die neue Bewegung eine Erkenntnis, die im Grunde genommen in einem einzigen Sat zusammenzufassen ist. “Hilf dir selbst, dann hilft dir Gott.” Das ist nicht nur ein sehr frommer, sondern auch sehr gerechter Satz, weil man ja gar nicht annehmen kann, daß der liebe Gott dazu da sei, Menschen zu helfen, die zu feige oder zu faul sind, sich selbst zu helfen, daß also der liebe Gott eine Art Schwächeersag für die Menschheit sei. Dazu ist er nicht da. Er hat zu allen Zeiten nur den gesegnet, der bereit war, sich selber zu wehren.

Hitler, April 1, 1939 speech:
Now we have found a new economic system, a system which is this: Capital is the power of labor and the coverage of money lies in our production. We have founded a system based on the most sincere foundation there is, namely: Form your life yourself! Work for your existence! Help yourself and God will help you! Within a few years we have wrenched Germany from despair. But the world did not help us.

Hitler, October 3, 1941 speech:
If you are walking down the street and have any doubts whether you should give something again, then turn your gaze sideways. Perhaps you will see somebody who has sacrificed far more for Germany than you have. Only if the German Volk forms a community of sacrifice can we hope and expect that Providence will stand by us in the future, too.
The Lord God has never helped the lazy person. Nor does He help the coward. He will never help him who is not ready to help himself. Here the principle applies: Volk, help yourself, then the Lord God will not refuse you His assistance either.

Der Herrgott hat noch niemals einem Faulen geholfen, er hilft auch keinem Feigen, er hilft auf keinem Fall dem, der sich nicht selber helfen will. Hier gilt der Grundsatz, Volk hilf dir selbst, dann wird der Herrgott dir seine Hilfe nicht verweigern.

Hitler, September 6, 1938 speech:
We are proud of you! All of Germany loves you! For you are not merely bearers of the spade, but rather you have become bearers of the shield for our Reich and Volk! You represent the most noble of slogans known to us: “God helps those who help themselves!”

In euch repräsentiert sich uns das erhabenste Motto, das wir kennen: ,Mensch, hilf dir selbst, dann hilft dir auch Gott!

Hitler, March 20, 1936 speech:
Hence today, my German Volk, I call upon you: stand behind me with your faith! Be the source of my power and my faith. Do not forget: he who does not abandon his principles in this world will not be abandoned by the Almighty either! The Almighty will always help those who help themselves; He will always show them the way to their rights, their freedom and thus to their future.

Heute nun, mein deutsches Volk, rufe ich dich auf, tritt du jetzt mit deinem Glauben hinter mich! Sei du jetzt die Quelle meiner Kraft und meines Glaubens. Vergiß nicht, wer sich selbst auf dieser Welt nicht preisgibt, den wird auch der Allmächtige nicht verlassen! Wer sich selbst hilft, den wird auch der Allmächtige immer helfen, dem wird er den Weg weisen zu seinem Recht, zu seiner Freiheit und damit zu seiner Zukunft.

Hitler, January 1, 1941 speech:
I know every single one of you will do his duty. The Lord God will not abandon those who, with a valiant heart, are determined to help themselves in view of the threats of the whole world.

Hitler, September 3, 1939 speech:
Beyond this, we all know: as long as the German Volk has stood united in its history, it has never yet been vanquished! Only the dissent of the year 1918 led to collapse. Thus, whoever now believes he can sin against this unity cannot expect anything other than his destruction as an enemy of the nation. If our Volk fulfills its highest duty in this respect, then the Lord Almighty will stand by. He has always bestowed His blessings on him who was determined to help himself! The laws necessary for the defense and security of the Reich are being decreed, the men responsible for their implementation and compliance with them are being appointed. I myself go to the front on this day.

Hitler, November 14, 1940 speech:

And in these long years I have made the relentless decision to carry out these dreams from my people, and instead, to introduce the icy reason, namely the realization that the dear God helps him who helps himself, and also, that one has nothing to await from the other world, besides, one helps himself.

Und ich habe in diesen langen Jahren den unerbittlichen Entschluß gefaßt, diese Träume aus meinem Volk hinauszubringen und an Stelle dessen die eiskalte Vernunft einzuführen, nämlich die Erkenntnis, daß der liebe Gott demjenigen hilft, der sich selber hilft, und daß man von der anderen Welt auch nichts zu erwarten hat, außerdem man hilft sich selbst. Ich bin auch bereit, alles zu tun, was man tun kann.

[In a January 30, 1940 speech, Hitler says something very similar to the above speech, except he does not mention god. “We have put a different type of hope in the place of that previous hope: the hope of the only help that exists in this world, help through one’s own power.” He says that in the place of the democratic hopes came “the faith in our German people, in the mobilization of its eternal inner values”.]

Hitler, October 15, 1940 speech:

In addition to this comes my deep inner devoutness, which tells me that the Lord God always helps him who helps himself, that He is always on the side of the person who is active, who is diligent and who is brave, who takes up the battle with Destiny herself. He also gets the blessing of Providence.

The Lord God never lets him fall, who also does not fall himself. Only if one believes that he can abandon himself to Providence, that he can laze around, then he brings it to nothing; or if he believes that he can rely on Providence and may be a coward himself, then no one shall save him again. That is my conviction.

Es kommt noch dazu meine tiefinnere Gläubigkeit, die mir sagt, daß der Herrgott immer dem hilft, der sieh selber hilft, daß er immer auf der Seite desjenigen steht, der tätig ist, der fleißig ist und der tapfer ist, der den Kampf mit dem Schicksal selber aufnimmt. Der bekommt auch dann den Segen der Vorsehung. Der Herrgott läßt den nie fallen, der auch sich selber nicht fallen läßt. Nur wenn einer glaubt, daß er sich auf die Vorsehung verlassen kann, selber faulenzen kann, dann bringt er es zu nichts, oder wenn er glaubt, daß er sich auf die Vorsehung verlassen kann und selber feig sein darf, dann wird ihn auch niemand mehr erretten. Das ist meine Überzeugung.

[I believe this was the first time Hitler explicitly linked up the axiom with his religion. Observe how he indicates similarly in his later speeches. We can see how consistently he adhered to these views in his private conversations.]

Hitler, July 5, 1944 speech:
Perhaps I am not what they call a sanctimonious hypocrite or pious. I am not that. But deep in my heart, I am a religious man; that is, I believe that the man who, in accordance with the natural laws created by God, bravely fights and never capitulates in this world-that this man will not be abandoned by the Lawgiver. Instead, he will in the end receive the blessings of Providence.

Hitler, November 8, 1943 speech:
Finally, I would like to say something to those people who keep talking to me about religion: I am also religious, profoundly religious on the inside, and I believe that Providence weighs human beings. Those who do not pass the trials imposed by Providence, who are broken by them, are not destined by Providence for greater things. It is a natural necessity that only the strong remain after this selection.

Lord of the Worlds

Hitler, March 11, 1945 speech:
If a great nation like the German one, with a history of nearly two thousand years, never allows the belief in success to be taken from it, but instead fanatically does its duty, no matter whether the times ahead are good or bad, then the Lord Almighty will in the end not deny it His blessings.
In history, that alone falls which is judged to be too light. The God of the worlds will help only him who is determined to help himself.

Es fällt in der Geschichte nur, was als zu leicht befunden wird, und der Gott der Welten hilft nur dem, der sich selbst zu helfen entschlossen ist!

Hitler, May 30, 1942 speech:
It is necessary that this fundamental insight should rule whoever is himself compelled, in the sight of the almighty creator of these worlds to take his place at the court that will decide about the goodness or weakness of men. [Quoted in Schramm, 493.]

Hitler, Table Talk (Cameron & Stevens), December 28-29, 1941:
The almighty being that made the worlds has certainly granted to each being that he should be motivated by awareness of his function.

Hitler, December 11, 1941 speech:
Our enemies should not deceive themselves. In the two thousand years of the history known to us, our German Volk has never been more unified and united than it is today.
The Lord of the worlds has done so many great things for us in the last years that we bow in gratitude before Providence, which has permitted us to be members of such a great Volk.

Der Herr der Welten hat so Großes in den letzten Jahren an uns getan, daß wir in Dankbarkeit uns vor einer Vorsehung verneigen, die uns gestattet hat, Angehörige eines so großen Volkes sein zu dürfen.

Quran, Surah Al-Fatihah 1:2
[All] praise is [due] to Allah, Lord of the worlds

Bhagavad Gita 10:2-3
Translated by Sri Swami Sivananda
Neither the hosts of the gods nor the great sages know My origin; for, in every way I am the source of all the gods and the great sages. He who knows Me as unborn and beginningless, as the great Lord of the worlds, he, among mortals, is undeluded; he is liberated from all sins.

Quran, Surah Ar-Ra’d 13:11
Indeed, Allah will not change the condition of a people until they change what is in themselves.

Laurency (L3e2.24):

Help yourself, and god will help you is an ancient esoteric symbol, which says that in so far as the individual strives for development, in so far can he receive the material energies that facilitate his efforts. Because such is the Law: “Be done to you as you want.” In so far as our striving harmonizes with the laws of life they effect development.

Hitler, October 5, 1938 speech:
A commandment reigns above all of us: no one in this world will help us, if we do not help ourselves. This program of self-help is both a proud one and a manly one. It is quite different from those of my predecessors who ran around all over the place, one minute begging at the gates of Versailles, then in Geneva, Lausanne, or at some other conferences. It is with greater pride that we Germans solve our own problems and help ourselves today!

„Über uns allen aber steht das Gebot: Niemand in der Welt wird uns helfen. außer wir helfen uns selbst! Dieses Programm der Selbsthilfe ist ein ebenso stolzes wie männliches Programm. Es ist ein anderes als das meiner Vorgänger, die fortgesetzt in der Welt herumliefen, herumbettelnd bald in Versailles und dann in Genf und dann in Lausanne oder sonstwo bei irgendwelchen Konferenzen [!]. Es ist schon stolzer, daß wir Deutsche heute entschlossen unsere Probleme selbst lösen und uns auch selbst helfen!

Hitler, Table Talk, February 27, 1942 (Jochmann):
Many times, even in the past, a realization already dawns on the higher laws of the world: Help yourself, then God will help you! This is the idea that man is the smith of his happiness or his misfortune.

Manches Mal dämmert auch in der Vergangenheit schon eine Erkenntnis durch von der höheren Gesetzmäßigkeit der Welt: Hilf dir selbst, dann hilft dir Gott! Das ist die Ahnung, daß der Mensch der Schmied seines Glücks oder seines Unglücks ist.

Laurency (L5e6.10):
11Everybody is the architect of his own fortune or misfortune. We have made ourselves what we are. We shall be what we make ourselves. Everything that happens to us is our own doing. Nothing can befall us which we have not deserved. We attract powers, influences, people according to the thoughts and desires we cherish. We transform ourselves into likeness to the thoughts we think.

[Also see L3e17.4.2]

The Golden Verses of Pythagoras:
Translated by Florence M. Firth, 1904
Thou wilt likewise know, that men draw upon themselves their own misfortunes voluntarily, and of their own free choice. Unhappy that they are! They neither see nor understand that their good is near them. Few know how to deliver themselves out of their misfortunes.

[It should be noted that innumerable Christian websites identify this ancient Greek axiom as being antithetical to Christianity. None of the arguments presented for it as a Christian teaching on the wiki are valid; five verses are from the Old Testament (spurious Jewish “wisdom”), two verses come from Paul (who was hardly qualified to formulate on Jesus’ teachings and it’s possible that his writings were tampered with, as Marcion suspected), and the rendering given for Matthew 5:3-4 is obviously distorted.]

http://articles.latimes.com/2000/sep/11/news/cl-18991

“God helps those who help themselves” is an ancient proverb that shows up in the literature of many cultures, including a 1736 edition of Benjamin Franklin’s “Poor Richard’s Almanac.” But it does not appear in the Bible and suggests a spiritual self-reliance inconsistent with Christianity, said David Kinnaman, vice president of the Barna Research Group.

Yet when asked to comment on the statement “The Bible teaches that God helps those who help themselves,” 75% of the 1,002 survey respondents agreed.

Kinnaman estimated that more than 30 faiths were represented in the random telephone sampling of U.S. adults, including Christians, Jews, Buddhists, Baha’is and Muslims. Atheists also were represented.

Hitler, Table Talk, November 5, 1941 (Jochmann):
The theory of life means: to do something for you to have something, and: to value only what helps to live.
Die Theorie des Lebens heißt: Schaffe dir etwas, damit du etwas hast, und: Wert hat nur das, was zum Leben hilft.
[Hitler (Cameron & Stevens): It’s so simple that everybody is convinced of it, and nobody would pay to learn it. But the Jew succeeds in getting himself rewarded for his meaningless glibness. Stop following what he says, for a moment, and at once the whole scaffolding collapses.]

Seneca:
How much better it is to pursue the right path and to bring yourself to the point where only what is honourable is satisfying to you.

Hitler, May 26, 1944, Platterhof hotel talk:
Translated by Carlos W. Porter, hosted by Carolyn Yeager
I have recognised that one must also anchor this principle in the reconstruction of a strong German State; good and correct knowledge is not enough as the basis of the new education, but also the willingness to intolerantly destroy those who resist or will not accept it.

Laurency (L4e3.12):
1One of these was Muhammad, who took on himself the task of trying to set mankind free from the monstrous Satanism of “sin as a crime against an infinite being” and the totally distorted idea of the trinity of life. This was successful, but instead Muhammad’s doctrine of the deity as inconceivable to human reason was distorted into fatalism.

Hitler, Table Talk (Cameron & Stevens), July 11-12, 1941:
In the ancient world, the relations between men and gods were founded on an instinctive respect. It was a world enlightened by the idea of tolerance. Christianity was the first creed in the world to exterminate its adversaries in the name of love. Its key-note is intolerance. Without Christianity, we should not have had Islam.

Laurency (L4e4):
1The Church is the stronghold of intolerance. They still do not seem to have realized that intolerance is an inseparable part of a religion based on inflexible dogmatics. According to this dogmatics any other view is an error and must be fought against.

Hitler, Table Talk, April 1942 (Cameron & Stevens):
The idea of human solidarity was imposed on men by force, and can be maintained only by the same means.

Mein KampfL:
Each one of us to-day may regret the fact that the advent of Christianity was the first occasion on which spiritual terror was introduced into the much freer ancient world, but the fact cannot be denied that ever since then the world is pervaded and dominated by this kind of coercion and that violence is broken only by violence and terror by terror. Only then can a new regime be created by means of constructive work.

Laurency (L4e4):
2[The churches] allege that recently also Buddhists have become militant. If so, it is not surprising. Against religions as aggressive as all forms of monotheism (Judaism, Christianity, and Islam), which preach the “only truth” and force their views on others as soon as they get into power, they have no other choice but self-defence.

Mein Kampf:
Every Weltanschauung, whether religious or political (and it is sometimes difficult to say where the one ends and the other begins) fights not so much for the negative destruction of the opposing ideology, as for the positive realisation of its own ideology.
Thus its struggle consists in attack rather than in defence. It has the advantage of knowing where its objective lies, as this objective represents the realisation of its own ideals. Inversely, it is difficult to say, when the negative aim for the destruction of a hostile doctrine is reached and secured.
For this reason alone a Weltanschauung which is of an aggressive character is more definite in plan and more powerful and decisive in action than a Weltanschauung which takes up a merely defensive attitude.

Healthy mind in a healthy body

Mein Kampf:
What is known as the Gymnasium to-day is a positive insult to the Greek institution. Our system of education entirely loses sight of the fact that, in the long run, a healthy mind can exist only in a healthy body. This statement applies with few exceptions, particularly to the broad masses of the nation.

Hitler, September 11, 1937 speech:
In place of a youth that was formerly raised on pleasure, today a youth is growing up who will be raised on forbearance and sacrifice, and above all raised to breed a healthy, robust body, for as you know, we believe that without such a body, even a healthy spirit cannot rule the nation for any length of time.

Hitler, Memoirs of a Confidant, p.g. 142-143:
Knowledge and ability require other bases than this pseudo-brilliant intellect. First of all, they require a healthy body! It is the precondition within which a healthy mind can develop. Greek culture, Greek philosophy would be unthinkable if special care of the body and even of its symmetry and beauty had not been at the heart of it. Degenerates have no high culture, they are not creatively elevated in their thoughts and in their actions.

George Sylvester Viereck:
1923 interview with Adolf Hitler
“What,” I continued my cross-examination, “are the fundamental planks of your platform?”
We believe in a healthy mind in a healthy body. The body politic must be sound if the soul is to be healthy. Moral and physical health are synonymous.”

Hitler, Memoirs of a Confidant, p.g. 279:
The mission of the Hitler Youth is neither religious nor racial, nor is it philosophical, political, or economic. It is entirely natural: the young people should be led back to nature, they should recognize nature as the giver of life and energy. And they should strengthen and develop their bodies outdoors, making themselves well and keeping themselves well. For a healthy mind can develop only in a healthy body, and it is only in the freedom of nature that a human being can also open himself to a higher morality and a higher ethic. The consciousness of the growing young man and young woman absorbs those ethical bases that distinguish them from animals and that mark the individual and, over time, the entire Volk with its racial characteristics.

Rudolf Hess:
I have been reading about the problems of youth. You know, with all the criticism that was levelled at von Schirach and his Hitler Jugend, it is forgotten that he did a fantastic thing with Germany’s young. He kept them busy, he kept them out of trouble. In those years we did not have to concern ourselves with the worry of youths taking drugs, getting involved in crime, and sexual permissiveness. We did not have burning of national flags and draft cards. We had a healthy youth with healthy minds, all pulling together under one flag to build a nation. That is what we need today, we need to get them back on the right track.

[Text in italics was omitted from the quote site.]

Mein Kampf:
What has made the Greek ideal of beauty immortal is the wonderful union of a splendid physical beauty with nobility of mind and spirit. Moltke’s saying, that, in the long run, fortune favours only the efficient, certainly holds good for the relationship between body and spirit. A mind which is sound generally dwells in a body that is sound.
Diogenes Laertius:
Being asked “What man is happy?”, Thales replied, “He who has a healthy body, a resourceful mind and a docile nature.”
Thales tells us to remember friends, whether present or absent; not to pride ourselves upon outward appearance, but to study to be beautiful in character.

Juvenal:
Satire X
Then you might pray for a sound mind in a healthy body.
Ask for a heart filled with courage, without fear of death,
That regards long life as among the least of nature’s gifts,
That can endure any hardship, to which anger is unknown,
That desires nothing,

Hitler, Table Talk, February 17, 1942 (Jochmann):

A dwarf with nothing but knowledge fears the power. Instead of saying that the basis of knowledge must be a healthy body, he rejects the power. Nature adapts to the habits of life, and if the world were to be passed on to the German professor for a few centuries, then after a million years loud cretins would walk around us: giant heads on an inadequate body!
Ein Zwerg mit nichts als Wissen fürchtet die Kraft. Statt sich zu sagen, die Basis des Wissens muß ein gesunder Körper sein, lehnt er die Kraft ab. Die Natur paßt sich den Lebensgepflogenheiten an, und würde die Welt auf einige Jahrhunderte dem deutschen Professor überantwortet, so würden nach einer Million Jahren lauter Kretins bei uns herum wandeln: Riesenköpfe auf einem Nichts von Körper!

Laurency (L4e4):
10The fundamental deficiency of religious conviction (religious belief) is the absence of a tenable basis of knowledge, which must always consist of facts. The so-called facts on which the different confessions are based are so-called historic facts. An examination of the reliability of such facts makes it clear that they are insufficient. Therefore, the only basis of knowledge must be either objective facts that everybody can ascertain and so are universally valid or bases accepted by common sense.

Laurency ():
10The only possible form of government is an organization of society where dictatorship, democracy, and [socialism] have been combined into a higher synthesis. This presupposes that the ruling power is a true élite in contact with the planetary hierarchy or at least having a knowledge of reality.

Mein Kampf:
For me, and for all genuine National Socialists, there is only one slogan: People and Fatherland.
Hitler, September 6, 1938 speech:
You represent the most noble of slogans known to us: “God helps those who help themselves!”
Goebbels, October 16, 1928:
What does Christianity mean today? National Socialism is a religion. All we lack is a religious genius capable of uprooting outmoded religious practices and putting new ones in their place. We lack traditions and ritual. One day soon National Socialism will be the religion of all Germans.
Hitler, March 25, 1938 speech:
The National Socialist idea extends far beyond the borders of a small Germany. We certainly have no desire for proselytes in foreign peoples. But no one can prevent the National Socialist doctrine from becoming the creed of all Germans!
Hitler, March 25, 1938 speech:
And then one day there came the hour when one had to make the decision before one’s own conscience, before one’s own Volk, and before an eternal God who created the peoples. And I made this decision two weeks ago, and it could not have been any different! For when people become deaf to every precept of justice, the individual must take the law into his own hands! For then he must recall that ancient creed: “God helps him who helps himself!” And God has helped us!
Und da kommt dann eines Tages die Stunde, in der man sich entscheiden muß vor seinem Gewissen, vor seinem eigenen Volk und vor einem ewigen Gott, der die Völker geschaffen hat. Und ich habe diese Entscheidung vor vierzehn Tagen nun getroffen, und sie konnte nicht anders lauten! Denn wenn die Menschen taub sind gegen jedes Gebot der Gerechtigkeit, dann muß der einzelne sich das Recht selber nehmen! Dann muß er zum alten Glaubenssatz zurückkehren: Hilf dir selbst, dann hilft dir Gott! Und Gott hat uns geholfen!
Hitler, September 1, 1939 speech:
This struggle was governed by only one creed: faith in this Volk! There is one word which I have never known and this word is: capitulation! If some now believe that we are facing hard times, then I would like to ask them to bear in mind that once a Prussian king with a ludicrously small state faced off a far more powerful coalition. And three battles later he stood victorious in the end, for he possessed that strong, believing heart, the kind which we need in these times as well. I would like to assure the world around us of one thing: there shall never ever be another November 1918 in German history! Since I myself stand ever ready to lay down my life for my Volk and Germany, I demand the same of everyone else! Whoever believes he can oppose this national commandment shall fall! We will have nothing to do with traitors! And all of us pledge ourselves to the one ancient principle: it is of no importance if we ourselves live-as long as our Volk lives, as long as Germany lives! This is essential.
Hitler, April 27, 1923 speech:
A people which is not prepared to protect itself is a people without character. We must recover for our people as one of its most elementary principles the recognition of the fact that a man is truly man only if he defends and protects himself, that a people deserves that name only if in case of necessity it is prepared as a people to enter the lists. That is not militarism, that is self-preservation.
Hitler, October 3, 1941 speech:
Here the principle applies: Volk, help yourself, then the Lord God will not refuse you His assistance either.
Hitler, Sportpalast February 10, 1933 speech:
We can summarize our fifth item in a single realization: The fundamentals of our life are founded on values which no one can take away from us except we ourselves; they are founded on our own flesh and blood and willpower and in our soil. Volk und Erde – those are the two roots from which we will draw our strength and upon which we propose to base our resolves.
Hitler, February 24, 1941 speech:
The conception of the new Movement, whose fundamentals can be expressed in a single sentence: “The Lord helps those who help themselves,” opposed this.

Robert Ley:
Interview with Lothrop Stoddard
“But behind both those principles is a third which is even more fundamental. This is what we call the Gemeinschaft — the organic unity of a people, founded on identity of blood. Germany is fortunate in being racially united. That is the ultimate secret of our harmonious strength.”

✡Heinz Weichardt:
Today, sixty years later and observing the precipitous decline of a typical multiracial and multicultural society, I am forced to conclude that it was exactly the racial and cultural unity of the Third Reich which enabled its people to survive the monstrous assault of their enemies and to arise again from the ashes of their nation.

Laurency (L3e1.12):
13The religious schools overemphasize the ‘help from above’; the others, the individual’s own self-realization.

Laurency (L4e4.37):
6Man has to develop his consciousness, and he does so by being active, not by being passive. The English proverb, “where there’s a will, there’s a way”, is in full agreement with the law of life. No helpless beings will enter the “kingdom of heaven” (the fifth natural kingdom), only heroes, winners, and conquerors. Man has eventually won an ever freer will: a heritage that carries obligations and should be taken care of.

Hitler, September 14, 1936 speech:
Every fault can be overcome, and its manifestations are easier to eliminate than pessimism and its consequences. Let him beware who has no faith. He is committing a sin against the meaning of life as a whole. He is of no use for anything, and his existence will be nothing but a burden to his Volk.

Quran 5:5
And whoever denies the faith – his work has become worthless, and he, in the Hereafter, will be among the losers.

Laurency (L3e1.12):
However, as long as there is still a lingering tendency to ask God to do all that you have to do, a tendency to trust something else than your own divine self and the law of life, your own striving after realization, so long will the most destructive tendency be strengthened, passed on through countless incarnations, that is: the tendency to dependence on another power. As long as the Christian religion is mainly a perverse sentimentality falsifying life, so long religious teachings of all kinds will have a strange power to vitalize the subconscious false tendencies.

Quran, Surah Al-‘Ankabut 29:69
And those who strive for Us – We will surely guide them to Our ways. And indeed, Allah is with the doers of good.

Fate

Laurency (L4e4.37):
6By their talk about “god’s guidance in man’s life”, about “submission to the will of god” and many similar expressions the quietists have led people seriously astray. They have sought a comfortable way out of the difficulties of life. But the law of life is called self-realization. “God” does not guide men. He has other things to do. Man has to solve by himself the problems that life poses to him. Not even man’s supervisor, Augoeides, takes an interest in such problems. Certainly there is something that could be said to have a certain similarity to “god’s guidance”. But that power manifests itself in circumstances turning out in such a way that man can see what course he should take. To become dependent on the “voice” makes him passive and so unfit for life.

Hitler, Memoirs of a Confidant, p.g. 61:
Fate works its own way with us. We are only its tools. Granted, not from lack of will power. There is that kind, also. But we are not among them. It is precisely with our will that we are the tools of fate. But when we do want something that may not suit fate–or, to put it more precisely, Providence–we run into resistance and do not attain our goal. It is a great talent to recognize such resistance and come to the proper decision: either to overcome it by attack or to obey fate’s sign and step aside in order to search for another path.

Laurency (kl1_9):
6The complaint about misspent lives bears testimony to ignorance of life. Besides, what do the fictionalists mean by such talk? Not to have had “success” in life! Not to have won power, wealth, fame? Not to have had success in their undertakings? We must say, however, that the lack of success they complain about in most cases actually is true success for them. Because to have success in foolish strivings and to increase one’s opportunities to abuse favours means to sow bad sowing.

Rosenberg (Memoirs):
In his speeches Hitler frequently referred to Providence and the Almighty. I am certain that he was inwardly convinced of a fate predestined in its general outlines, but preferred not to formulate what parts compulsion and free will played.

Hans Frank (Memoirs):

Speaking of the Almighty in beautiful words, he raised himself inwardly to his own creation. He paid homage, for example, to the ancient Greek idea of a fate intrinsically superior even to the divine beings.

Indem er vom Allmächtigen zwar in schönen Worten redete, erhob er sich selbst innerlich zu einem eigenen Schöpfungsrang. Er huldigte in etwa der antikgriechischen Vorstellung, wonach das Schicksal an sich eine dem göttlichen Wesen gegen-über selbst entscheidende höherrangige Position einnehme.

[The sensationalist and absurd claim that Hitler was Jewish doesn’t undermine Hans Frank’s testimony on Hitler’s beliefs. As Giesler reveals, it was a popular thing to invent preposterous stories about Hitler at that time. Even the reputable surgeon Sauerbruch seems to have jumped the bandwagon.]

Haeckel:
The Riddle of the Universe
Even the ancient Greeks recognized ananke, the blind heimarmene, the fate “that rules gods and men,” as the supreme principle of the universe.
Christianity replaced it by a conscious Providence, which is not blind, but sees, and which governs the world in patriarchal fashion.

Hitler, Memoirs of a Confidant, p.g. 111:
Remember Faust! A Faustian will, a Faustian grasp of nature and its powers, the possibilities of technology and the German genius-these must be the authentic signs of a resurging new epoch.

Goethe:
Conversations of Goethe with Eckermann
To make an epoch in the world, two conditions are notoriously essential,—a good head, and a great inheritance. Napoleon inherited the French Revolution; Frederick the Great, the Silesian War; Luther, the darkness of the Popes; and I, the errors of the Newtonian theory. The present generation has no conception of what I have accomplished in this matter, but posterity will grant that I have by no means come into a bad inheritance!
Haeckel:
The Wonders of Life
Some of the remarks in this connection that Eckermann has left us from his conversations with Goethe must be taken very carefully. Generally speaking, this source is not reliable; many of the observations that the mediocre Eckermann puts into the mouth of the great Goethe are quite inconsistent with his character, and are more or less perverted.

Friedrich Christian, Prince of Schaumburg-Lippe:
Once, when a conversation between him and Dr. Goebbels happened to end up in a dispute about the “Faustian” quality in the German as a type, Hitler grew very solemn and almost melancholy, as I had never seen him before. A statement of Dr. Goebbels’ came to mind:

“Sometimes he’s uncanny – as if he weren’t of this world – and strangely enough, that’s when he is the most fascinating. I’ll never completely understand him – he is more than just a person. There is nobody who has studied him like I have. But who takes the time to really get to know this man – who? Who knows anything of his outstanding qualities, of his modesty towards fate – who even suspects any of it? No-one! If they realized that he does not wish to become their idol, not even their god, but that he lives solely for his mission that is not entirely ‘of this world’ – then they would fear him, because they do not understand the reality.”

I have done my utmost to repeat Goebbels’ words as accurately as possible from memory, and did not write them down until they were as vivid to me again as though I had heard him speak them then and there. Of course, the fact that in those days this topic interested me like no other, helped considerably.

Speer:
Interview with Playboy, June 1971
There was an ultimate coldness about Hitler. I never met anyone else with whom I felt this sense of something missing, this impression that at the core of his being there was just a deadness.

[According to Eugene K. Bird (in Chapter 31 of his book The Loneliest Man in the World), Rudolf Hess had 100% affirmed Speer’s statement (although he had reservations about the interview being featured in a magazine with naked people, finding it disturbing*). Hess had sensed this coldness as well, discussing it with Speer on one occasion and both agreed that there was only a certain point of familiarity you could reach with Hitler, beyond that there was something like an invisible wall. This is rather consistent with Kubizek’s portrayal.]

Kubizek:
There was always a certain element in his personality into which he would allow nobody to penetrate. He had his inscrutable secrets, and in many respects always remained a riddle to me. But there was one key that opened the door to much that would have remained hidden: his enthusiasm for beauty.

*Rudolf Hess later bemoaned such a lack of censorship in America and said that it would lead to America’s decline. Specifically, he wondered how anyone could even get the gist of Speer’s statements with such distracting imagery. He probably would’ve concurred with Hitler’s table talk statement: “Slacken the reins of authority, give more liberty to the individual, and you are driving the people along the road to decadence.”

Hitler, Table Talk (Cameron & Stevens), September 25-26, 1941:
I suppose that some people are clutching their heads with both hands to find an answer to this question: “How can the Fuehrer destroy a city like St. Petersburg?” Plainly I belong by nature to quite another species. I would prefer not to see anyone suffer, not to do harm to anyone. But when I realise that the species is in danger, then in my case sentiment gives way to the coldest reason. I become uniquely aware of the sacrifices that the future will demand, to make up for the sacrifices that one hesitates to allow to-day.

Kubizek:
At home, Adolf started on a lecture on his newly acquired impressions, with a cold objectivity as though it were a question of his attitude towards the fight against tuberculosis, or towards cremation. I was amazed that he could speak about it without any inner emotion.

Otto Wagener, Memoirs of a Confidant, p.g. 222-223:
That evening, his depression was evident. No conversation developed. He alternated between staring at the paper and silent brooding. Only very late did he ask some terse questions and make small talk. Until he finally seemed to get hold of himself and said:
“It turns out that women play a larger role in a man’s life than we are inclined to suppose when we are not deprived of their presence. It is true that I have overcome the urge to physically possess a woman. But the value I placed on the loving hand of a female being who was close to my heart, and how much the constant solicitude she shed on me meant to me–that I am learning only now, when they are lost to me. The greatest void, a yawning emptiness, though, comes over me in the mornings, when I sit down to my breakfast, or when I return home at noon or in the evening and find myself essentially alone–quite, quite alone.
And yet, my sister is there, as she has always been, trying to replace what Geli was to me. But there’s no getting around it, Geli was even more to me than that. Her cheerful laughter always gave me hearty pleasure, her harmless chatter filled me with joy. Even when she sat quietly by my side working a crossword puzzle, I was enveloped in a feeling of well-being that has now given way to a chilly sense of loneliness.”
Hitler paused again, and when he resumed, it was as if he were talking to himself.
“Until now, I still had ties to the world–apparently I still had them, though I was unaware of it. Now everything has been taken from me. Now I am altogether free, inwardly and outwardly. Perhaps it was meant to be this way. Now I belong only to the German Volk and to my mission. But poor Geli! She had to sacrifice herself for this.”
As he spoke, his features took on such a deeply human expression of sorrow and pity that one quite forgot the genius in him and saw only Adolf Hitler the man.

The gods love those who demand the impossible

George Ward Price:
As further evidence that it was not diplomatic bluff which inspired Herr Hitler’s proposals of disarmament and twenty-five years’ peace with every nation ‘whose frontiers marched with those of Germany, I may quote parts of a letter which he addressed to Viscount Rothermere on May 3, 1935, expressing his views on war as an instrument of national policy. They are as follows:

We have in German a fine proverb: ‘The gods love and bless those who seem to strive for the impossible.’ That is a divinity in which I believe.

Mein Kampf:
While the ability of the politician consists in mastering the art of the possible, the founder of a political system belongs to those who are said to please the gods only because they wish for and demand the impossible. They will always have to renounce contemporary fame, but if their ideas be immortal, posterity will acclaim them.

Hitler, April 26, 1942 speech:
If I speak to you today in the name of this true youth of Europe and therefore of a younger world, then I do this with the sentiment of a man who, for a sacred mission, has left behind him the most difficult struggle of his life. Further, I speak to you as the commander of armies. They are mastering a fate that is the most difficult trial, the kind which Providence only imposes on those who are destined for the greatest things. If the gods love only those who demand the impossible of them, then the Lord will correspondingly give His blessing only to him who remains steadfast in face of the impossible.

Hitler, July 5, 1944 speech:
The tasks which I set are tremendous. But always think of the old saying: the gods love him who demands the impossible of them. If we accomplish the impossible, then we will surely receive the approval of Providence.

Ernst Hanfstaengl:
Back in 1923, when I probably stood at my nearest to Hitler, he once outlined the appeal he was trying to make, the appeal which brought him to power, only for the ideals to be corrupted by the power which destroyed him:
“… It was Count Moltke who said that one must demand the impossible in order to achieve the possible. Any ideal must appear to a certain extent unrealizable, if it is not to be profaned by the trivia of reality.”

Struggle is the father of all things

Man has become great through perpetual struggle. In perpetual peace his greatness must decline.

– Hitler, Mein Kampf

Plato:
Theaetetus
Hearing of enormous landed proprietors of ten thousand acres and more, our philosopher deems this to be a trifle, because he has been accustomed to think of the whole earth; and when they sing the praises of family, and say that some one is a gentleman because he can show seven generations of wealthy ancestors, he thinks that their sentiments only betray a dull and narrow vision in those who utter them, and who are not educated enough to look at the whole, nor to consider that every man has had thousands and ten thousands of progenitors, and among them have been rich and poor, kings and slaves, Hellenes and barbarians, innumerable.

Herakleitos:

War is the father of all and king of all, who manifested some as gods and some as men, who made some slaves and some freemen.

Voegelin:
Hitler and the Germans, p.g. 140-141
[Percy Ernst] Schramm is an impartial researcher of sources and so in this volume of the Table Talks he also presents Hitler’s speech of May 30, 1942, given to the young officers of the German Wehrmacht. It contained nothing new. Hitler said the same on other occasions, but it is very nicely concentrated; and the speech, I believe, has not been published up to now. Let me read out the beginning of this speech, and we will then analyze in detail what is going on. I must once again deal with the analysis of language. So, Hitler addresses these young officers:

My young comrades!
A deeply serious sentence of a great military philosopher enunciates that struggle, and thereby war, is the father of all things. Whoever casts an eye on nature, as it is, will find this sentence confirmed as valid for all living things and for all events, not only on this earth, but far beyond it. The entire universe seems to be ruled by just this one idea, that an eternal selection takes place in which the stronger in the end maintains life and the right to live, and the weaker falls. One will say that nature is therefore cruel and merciless, but the other will grasp that nature is thus only obeying an iron law of logic. . . .
It is necessary that this fundamental insight should rule whoever is himself compelled, in the sight of the almighty creator of these worlds to take his place at the court that will decide about the goodness or weakness of men. [Quoted in Schramm, 493.]

You will be able to guess that the great military philosopher was Heraclitus. Note the “great” military philosopher.
[After this, Voegelin presents his meandering speculations on the assumption that Hitler had never read the philosophers and had rather imbibed the ideas from monuments.]
Perhaps it is partly due to the spirit of the place. I am happy every time I cross
over Munich’s Maximilian Street to the splendid figures that stand there on pedestals. One of these figures has on its pedestal the inscription “Schelling, the great philosopher.” So, perhaps this is how Hitler came across the great military philosopher Heraclitus.

Mein Kampf:
If it be objected that here we are concerned not with the petty problems of everyday life, but principally with fundamental truths and questions of dogma, the only way of answering that objection is to ask the question, ‘Do you feel that Providence least called you to proclaim the Truth to the world?’
If so, then go and do it, but you ought to have the courage to do it directly and not use some political party as your mouthpiece, for this, too, would be false. In the place of something that now exists and is bad, put something else that is better and will last into the future.

Hitler, January 18, 1927 speech:
We are not pacifists, for we know that the father of all things is combat and struggle. We see that race is of supreme importance to the life of our nation as well as character, the basis of which must be responsibility toward our People. We are absolutely convinced that every decision requires responsibility. That is why we are at odds with the entire world, that is why we are considered subversive and why we are prohibited from speaking, and why we are silenced, because we want to restore the health of our entire German nation and to cure it from this cursed sickness of fragmentation.

Hitler, April 2, 1928 speech:
The basis for all development is the creative urge of the individual, not the vote of majorities. The genius of the individual is decisive, not the spirit of the masses. All life is bound up in three theses: struggle is the father of all things, virtue lies in blood, leadership is primary and decisive. Here “blood” symbolizes the principle of race and “leadership” the principle of personality. “Struggle” is the mechanism by which position in the hierarchy is determined.

Mein Kampf:
The movement ought to educate its adherents on the principle that struggle must not be considered a necessary evil, but as something desirable in itself. Therefore, they must not be afraid of the hostility which their adversaries manifest towards them, but they must take it as a necessary condition on which their own right to existence is based. They must not try to avoid being hated by those who are the enemies of our people and our Weltanschauung, but must welcome such hatred.

[In his book Hitler’s Ethic, p.g. 183, German theologian ✝Richard Weikart mentions how in 1928, Hitler stated that “Clausewitz is right to say, ‘The father of all things is struggle.'”]

David Irving:
Hitler’s War, p.g. 113
Clausewitz was right,’ [Hitler] exulted to his adjutants upon leaving another military display in East Prussia [in August 1938]: ‘War is the father of all things.’ This was Hitler’s favourite quotation. He repeated it in his secret speeches on May 20, 1942, on January 27, 1944, again on June 22, 1944, and in his war conference of January 9, 1945 – when even his most ardent followers had long grown tired of Hitler’s war.

Hitler, Table Talk, October 10, 1941 (Jochmann):
War has returned to the original form of its existence: in place of international war, the territorial war is once again taking place. Originally, war was nothing more than a fight for the feeding ground. Today it is again about the natural resources. According to the will of creation, they belong to the one who fights hardest for them.

Robert Ley:
Pesthauch der Welt, 1944
All natural life is eternal battle, and battle is the father of all things. Battle, however, is possible only between two opposing poles and powers. Mankind has named these battling worlds “good” and “evil,” “God” and “Satan,” “noble” and “crude,” “construction and destruction,” “life” or “death.” These are all ways of saying that nature is a constant process of coming and going, a constant transformation of forces and materials. Science has a chemical and physical law that says: Nothing perishes; everything is constantly changing. Whatever we call it, whether we use the words of science or say it in a more primitive way, the eternal, inescapable law is that life means battle, that battle comes from competing energies, and that something new comes from their meeting.

Laurency (ps2):
2In contrast to Darwin, esoterics maintains that biological “struggle for existence” is certainly not a necessary factor of evolution, but what is unfit for life is rejected in accordance with nature’s order.

[Otto Wagener also understood this concept and he also portrays Hitler as having taken the social aspect into consideration. It becomes increasingly apparent that Wagener did not put his own words and beliefs into Hitler’s mouth. He points out on numerous occassions where he differs in opinion. As such, Wagener’s testimony is just as reliable as Giesler’s.]

Otto Wagener, Memoirs of a Confidant, p.g. 114:
It is generally believed that competitors must be totally hostile to each other and constantly at each other’s throats. I hold the reverse to be true. We are accustomed to believe that struggle is necessary for that which is healthier and stronger–in this case, better–to prevail. That is said to be the case in the animal kingdom and the vegetable kingdom. And it cannot be otherwise, the belief holds, among men and in men’s work.
I often talked with Hitler about this question. He was radically committed to that view. Even applied to economics, he saw in the struggle for assertion of self and for preeminence the surest guarantee for progress and the general weal.
Clearly he had conflicting feelings. He was a socialist and determined to remain one. But his inner attachment to nature led him time and again to observe and acknowledge as a law of nature the struggle for existence, the struggle to defeat the other.

Ambassador William Dodd:
In the Garden of Beasts
[Hitler] has definitely said on a number of occasions that a people survives by fighting and dies as a consequence of peaceful policies.

The gods first strike with blindness

Mein Kampf:
The execution of history’s decree was carried out in thousands of ways. The fact that great numbers of people went about blindfolded amid the manifest signs of dissolution only proved that the gods had decreed the destruction of Austria.

Hitler, July 28, 1922 speech:
He [the Jew] knows the old parties. They are easily satisfied. Only endow them with a few seats as ministers or with similar posts and they are ready to go along with you. And in especial he knows one thing: they are so innocently stupid. In their case the truth of the old saying is proved afresh every day: ‘Those whom the gods wish to destroy, they first strike with blindness.’ They have been struck with blindness: therefore it follows that the gods wish to destroy them. Only look at these parties and their leaders, Stresemann and the rest of them. They are indeed not dangerous. They never go to the roots of the evil: they all still think that with forbearance, with humanity, with accommodation they can fight a battle which has not its equal in this world. Through gentleness they think that they must demonstrate to the enemy of the Left that they are ready for appeasement so as to stay the deadly cancerous ulcer through a policy of moderation. No! A thousand times No! Here there are only two possibilities: either victory or defeat!

Hitler, January 30, 1940 speech:
Further I read that I have succumbed to deep despair and sadness as I had expected us to build two U-boats every day, while we were turning out only two every week. To this I can only say: it is not good to have one’s war reports and especially one’s radio broadcasts authored by members of a people which has not fought for several thousands of years. For after all, the last documented battle involving the Maccabees is slowly losing its instructive value for military history.
When I turn to look at this foreign propaganda, my belief in our victory grows to the immeasurable! For this propaganda I experienced once before. For nearly fifteen years, this propaganda was directed against us. My Old Party Comrades, you remember this propaganda! There are the same words, the same phrases-yes-when we look more closely we see the same heads speaking the same dialects.
I finished off these people as a lonely, unknown man who gathered but a handful of people about him. Throughout fifteen years I finished off these people. And today Germany is the greatest world power. It is not as though age as such results in wisdom. No more are the blind restored to sight by old age. Whoever was afflicted with blindness before remains so today. Whoever is afflicted with blindness will be cursed by the gods.

Hitler, May 4, 1941 speech:
It is the training of our corps of leaders, which is beyond comparison, the great expertise of our soldiers, the superiority of our equipment, the quality of our ammunition, as well as the ice-cold valor of the individual man which allowed us to secure this historic and truly decisive success with so little sacrifice, and this at the same time as the two allied Axis powers were also able to destroy the so-called success of the British forces in just a few weeks. For we cannot separate the activities of the German Africa Corps, connected with the name of General Rommel, and of the Italian forces in the struggle for Cyrenaica, from the operations on the Balkans. One of the most amateurish (stumperhaft) of strategists has lost two theaters of war in one blow. That this man, whom any other people would have court-martialed, arouses new admiration as prime minister in his country is not a sign of that greatness demonstrated by Roman senators in antiquity toward their defeated military commanders, but instead it is evidence of the eternal blindness with which the gods strike those whom they wish to destroy.

Hitler, April 26, 1942 speech:
No matter with what great hypocritical friendship its archcapitalists welcome the Bolshevik statesmen, no matter how tenderly its archbishops embrace the bloody beasts of Bolshevik atheism, the more they resort to lies, hypocrisy, and fraud in order to cover morally for the unnatural coalition with this empire before their own people and the rest of mankind, the less they will be in a position actually to deceive the perceptive people, in order to prevent the natural evolution of an inevitable historical development. There is a wise saying dating from antiquity, namely that the gods first blind those whom they have destined to damnation.

[The English translator of this speech suggested that it should actually be “the gods first drive insane“. But the following historical account and narration justifies the blindness aspect and also provides a glimpse into the Roman view of fate.]

Velleius Paterculus:
This was disclosed to Varus through Segestes, a loyal man of that race and of illustrious name, who also demanded that the conspirators be put in chains. But fate now dominated the plans of Varus and had blindfolded the eyes of his mind. Indeed, it is usually the case that heaven perverts the judgement of the man whose fortune it means to reverse, and brings it to pass — and this is the wretched part of it — that that which happens by chance seems to be deserved, and accident passes over into culpability. And so Quintilius refused to believe the story, and insisted upon judging the apparent friendship of the Germans toward him by the standard of his merit.

https://www.roger-pearse.com/weblog/2015/10/31/is-those-whom-the-gods-wish-to-destroy-they-first-make-mad-a-classical-quotation/

[Thus, the saying as we have it probably comes down corrupted. Hitler’s usage of the maxim is proper. See Hitler’s formulation on
Fate.]

Hitler, January 1, 1941 speech:
We who live the history of this time cannot but help feel that the workings of Providence are stronger than the intentions and the will of individuals. The gods not only strike him with blindness whom they wish to destroy, but they also help him whom Providence calls upon to strive for goals far from his original desire.

Hitler, Memoirs of a Confidant, p.g. 152-153:
Charles V’s intentions also differed from what actually happened, or Luther’s, or even Robespierre, or Napoleon. If these men had not followed their intuitions, the events that would have taken place might have been much more catastrophic for mankind. But that is the sphere of Providence, the sight of which is refused us.

Hitler, September 13, 1937 speech:
How often we dwell on the question of what would have happened to Germany if Fate had granted us a swift and easy victory in 1914. What we were all striving for at that time with hearts aglow would presumably–seen from a higher vantage point–have been but a misfortune for our Volk. That victory would probably have had extremely grievous consequences. For in the inner sphere, it in particular would have prevented us from gaining the knowledge that today allows us to look back in horror at the path on which that Germany of the past was already making its way. The perceptive few who were preaching caution had lapsed into ridiculousness.
The State, grounded only in the external military means of power which bore it up, would sooner or later have become the annihilator of its own existence and its own means of existence, wholly ignorant of the meaning of the blood-related sources of the Volkskraft! Phenomena such as we have had an opportunity to observe in many other countries after their supposed victory would have descended upon us. Instead of being jerked back from the brink of destruction by a disruption of a catastrophic nature, we would all the more surely have gradually succumbed to the insidious poisons of inner decay of the Volk! In our case, the accuracy of a wise saying can be said to have been proven true: there are times when Providence demonstrates the deepest love it has for its creatures in an act of punishment!

Xenophanes

Xenophanes:
Yes, and if oxen and horses or lions had hands, and could paint with their hands, and produce works of art as men do, horses would paint the forms of the gods like horses, and oxen like oxen, and make their bodies in the image of their several kinds.

[Was this said in jest or was it a deeply serious enunciation?]

Hitler, Table Talk, November 20, 1941 (Jochmann):

Statements by the Führer:
1. If the Christian concept of God were correct, then the ants would have to conceive of God as an ant, “just as every animal would conceive of God, i.e. Providence, the laws of nature, in its own form.” (latter portion translated by ✝Richard Weikart)

Wenn die christliche Gottesvorstellung richtig wäre, dann müßten sich die Ameisen Gott als Ameise vorstellen, wie überhaupt jedes Her dann Gott, das heißt die Vorsehung, das Naturgesetz, in seiner Gestalt!

[I would wager that Hitler has went completely beyond Xenophanes’ formulation by making use of colonial species over herd animals for his example. Just as he has done with Goethe’s attempted rationalization of the Logos symbol.]

Hitler, Table Talk (Cameron & Stevens), August 29, 1942:
Man is not endowed by nature with the herd instinct, and it is only by the most rigorous methods that he can be induced to join the herd. He has the same urge as the dog, the rabbit and the hare, to couple up with one other being as a separate entity. The social State as such can be maintained only by a rule of iron; take away the laws, and the fabric falls immediately to pieces.
Hitler, Table Talk (Cameron & Stevens), September 17, 1941:
One cannot change rabbits into bees or ants. These insects have the faculty of living in a state of society—but rabbits haven’t.

Xenophanes:
Ethiopians say that their gods are flat-nosed and dark, Thracians that theirs are blue-eyes and redhaired.

Laurency (kr5):
18When Xenophanes in his symbolic language explains that the universe is god and that the deity is spherical, he gives some esoteric facts. The cosmos is a sphere, or globe, in primordial matter, which is truly unlimited space. At the same time the cosmos is the cosmic collective consciousness which is the highest deity. No wonder that he sharply criticized anthropomorphism!

Nietzsche

65f939aa-770c-11e2-8569-00144feabdc0.jpg

Nietzsche is the only non-Jewish, the only pagan ethicist in Europe.

– Count Richard N. Coudenhove Kalergi

Hitler, January 30, 1942 speech:
Providence gives the final and the supreme reward only to those who can handle blows of fortune. At the time, I suffered the first severe blow on a larger scale in the movement. It was overcome a few years later. The men who were close to me at the time know how much work and strength of nerve this cost us. But I have also preserved this boundless faith, in my person as well, that nothing, no matter what, would ever be able to throw me out of the saddle, would shake me up anymore. Whoever thinks he can frighten me somehow or surprise me is wrong. I have always taken to heart the words of a great German philosopher: “A blow that does not knock a strong man over, only makes him stronger!

Hitler, November 8, 1942 speech:
I said once before that a great philosopher once said that a man who is not knocked down by a blow is made stronger by the blow. The storm, which failed to knock us down last winter, has only made us stronger.

Hitler, April 26, 1942 speech:
I also know another commandment. It says that man must give an added push to what the gods have destined to fall. So now what has to happen will happen. When understanding and reason have apparently been silenced in international life, then this does not necessarily mean that there is not a rational will somewhere, even if from the outside only stupidity and stubbornness can be discerned as causes.

Goebbels (Diaries), p.g. 97 (re-check year):
A united protestant church is not at all in our interest. Kerrl is taking completely the wrong tack there. Now he intends to establish a religious Arndt-League in Wittenberg. When something is falling, one should give it a push, Herr Kerrl! The Führer is very sceptical about the possibility of finding a substitute for the churches, and rightly so. That will be the task of some future reformer, which the Führer in no way feels himself to be. The problems he wants to solve are purely political. The battle with the churches is unavoidable, but it will certainly last a long time.

Nietzsche:
Zarathustra
O my brothers, am I then cruel? But I say: What falls, that shall one also push! Everything of today – it falls, it decays; who would preserve it! But I – I wish also to push it!

Matthew 10:34
Do not suppose that I have come to bring peace to the earth. I did not come to bring peace, but a sword.
Luke 12:49
I came to cast fire upon the earth, and what will I if it was already lit?

[The phrase and what will I if it was already lit? Is a Greek idiom roughly equivalent to the English and what I wouldn’t give if it were so or and how I wish it were so.]

[In Kurt Eggers’ Der Scheiterhaufen: Worte großer Ketzer, the maxims of Nietzsche are listed immediately after Julian’s, on p.g. 20-22.]

Hitler, The Artist Within the Warlord, p.g. 180:
Translated by Wilhelm Kriessmann, Ph.D and Carolyn Yeager
“We have to create a new aristocracy, a value and rank order based on character, courage and steadiness. One sentence of Nietzsche’s I identify with: What today can prove if one be of value or not?–that he is steadfast.”

[Riefenstahl claimed in her memoirs (both German and English) that Hitler didn’t have much use for Nietzsche. Prior to this discourse, she had previously mentioned Nietzsche to Goebbels, saying “I especially love his language, and above all his poetry.” (she may have inserted her own views of Nietzsche into Hitler’s dialogue). Subsequently, she spins an amusing tale that’s obviously invented. It was popular to embellish absurdities about the NatSocs after WW2 i.e. Hans Frank, Sauerbruch (see The Artist Within the Warlord, p.g. 125 for an excerpt of Giesler’s memoirs, translated into English).

Whether the story comes from her or the publisher, this shows that, in this regard, her testimony about Nietzsche can be treated as unreliable.]

From her memoirs, p.g. 130:

riefenstahl, goebbels myth.png

[This depiction of the stoic and likeable Goebbels as a sobbing, pleading, sentimental nervous wreck/madman is rather unbecoming and unjust.
In his memoirs, Hans Baur recounts what Frau Goebbels said to him: “I knew quite well, of course, that my husband – who was surrounded with attractive women – didn’t take his obligation of marital fidelity very seriously. Perhaps it was the fault of the women; they certainly flung themselves at his head.”
Perhaps it was Riefenstahl who approached Goebbels.
An account from mischling Emil Maurice is practically identical with Sauerbruch’s concoction.]

Heinrich Hoffmann:
One day my friend, ✡Emil Maurice, one of the oldest Party members, who had been Hitler’s chauffeur for many years, came to me pale, agitated and in a great state. Still quivering under the influence of his experience, he told how he had dropped in to see Geli, a perfectly innocent visit, during which they had laughed and joked and chatted as one always did when one was with Geli.

Suddenly, Hitler had come in. ‘Never in my life have I seen him in such a state,’ said Maurice. Livid with rage and indignation Hitler had raved at him; and there had ensued a scene so terrible, that Maurice seriously thought that Hitler meant to shoot him on the spot.

[The reader, if well-informed, would understand that Maurice hadn’t yet been dismissed from service and outed as a Jew.]

Riefenstahl (Memoirs), p.g. 178:
‘If one “gives”,’ Hitler went on, ‘one must also “take”, and I take what I need from books. I have a great deal to catch up on. In my youth I did not have the wherewithal or the opportunity to obtain an adequate education. Nowadays I read one or two books every night, even if I go to bed very late.’
I asked, ‘And who is your favourite author?’
His reply was unhesitating, ‘Schopenhauer – he was my teacher.’
‘Not Nietzsche?’ I threw in.
He smiled and said: ‘No, I can’t do very much with Nietzsche. He’s more of an artist than a philosopher. He doesn’t have a crystal-clear mind like Schopenhauer.’ I was surprised, for Hitler was generally said to be a Nietzsche follower.
He added, ‘Naturally I admire Nietzsche as a genius. He writes perhaps the most beautiful language to be found in German literature today. But he is not my model.’

Laurency (L4e1.3):
3Philosopher [presumably Gustav Theodor] Fechner had an opportunity of meeting that most recent incarnation of Pythagoras. And when Fechner asked him which philosophy best agreed with reality, the reply he received was: that of Schopenhauer. Every esoterician will certainly concur in that judgement.

[In his book Hitler’s Religion (p.g. 16), German theologian ✝Richard Weikart mentions a conversation between Hitler and Goebbels (recorded in a May 13, 1943 entry of Goebbels’ diaries) concerning German philosophers (Kant, Hegel, Schopenhauer, Nietzsche). According to Weikart, Hitler said something along the lines of, “Despite his rich mind and wit, however, Schopenhauer was too pessimistic.” Weikart adds: Hitler suggested that if Schopenhauer really believed the world was so horrible, he should have ended his own misery.]

Hitler, Table Talk (Cameron & Stevens), September 23, 1941:
There are some who say the world is evil, and that they wish to depart from this life. For my part, I like the world!

Schopenhauer:
These three religions are neither monotheistic nor polytheistic, nor are they even pantheistic, Buddhism, at any rate, is not; since Buddha did not look upon a world sunk in sin and suffering, whose tenants, all subject to death, only subsist for a short time by devouring each other, as a manifestation of God.

[Subsequently, Hitler follows up with the assertion that Nietzsche was the “more realistic and more consistent one“. From his observations of the suffering in life, Nietzsche had deduced the “demand for an elevated and intensified life“. And so Hitler declared: “Thus Nietzsche is naturally much closer to our viewpoint than Schopenhauer.”

Unfortunately, the German version of Goebbels diaries remains inaccessible to me so I haven’t been able to verify it for myself. I couldn’t find this statement in the English translation of Goebbels 1942-1943 diaries, which seems abridged. But below, you’ll find a remarkably similar outline. I’ve amended in the proper translation (Jochmann) in italics.]

Hitler, Table Talk (Cameron & Stevens), May 19, 1944:
Schopenhauer’s pessimism, which springs partly, I think, from his own line of philosophical thought and partly from subjective feeling and the experiences of his own personal life, Nietzsche then overcame in a unique way [Ger. überwand Nietzsche dann in einzigartiger Weise].

James 1:27
Religion that God our Father accepts as pure and faultless is this: to look after orphans and widows in their distress and to keep oneself from being polluted by the world.

[True charity is to tend after orphans and widows in their suffering without succumbing to it and it’s contagion.]

Laurency (kr5):
2Schopenhauer was the first one to demonstrate that up to then no philosopher had succeeded in making morality a science or in establishing any tenable grounds for claiming that there are absolute or objective norms. His disciple, Nietzsche, went a step further, asserting that traditional moral attitudes were useless in life, not to say hostile to life.

[See section Dispelling the pacifist portrayal of Jesus for Nietzsche’s rejection of pity ethics.]

Kubizek:
As for philosophical works, he always had his Schopenhauer by him, later Nietzsche, too. Yet I knew little about these,for he regarded these philosophers as, so to speak, his own personal affair – private property which he would not share with anybody.

Otto Dietrich:
From his nationalistic point of view Schiller was much to be preferred to the universalist and cosmopolitan Goethe. I never heard Hitler say a word about Goethe. On his visit to Weimar Hitler almost always paid a brief call upon Frau Foerster-Nietzsche, the sister of Nietzsche. But from the works of Nietzsche Hitler culled only the cult of personality and the doctrine of the superman; he was not interested in other aspects of the philosopher’s writings.

[Dietrich’s claims here are debatable. See the section Goethe. Evidently he was not as much of a confidant as Wagener. Notably, Riefenstahl’s conversation with Hitler was supposed to have taken place around Christmas Eve 1935.]

Speer (Diaries), May 13, 1949:
In 1934 I accompanied him to Weimar, where he paid a respectful call on Nietzsche’s sister. In greeting her he performed the most formal of bows and handed her a gigantic bouquet of flowers, which his servant immediately had to take from her again, because it was too huge for the lady to handle and obviously embarrassed her. In her living room Hitler employed ceremonious forms of address that I recall to this day with amazement and amusement.
“Most gracious and respected madam,” he began, “what a pleasure to have the privilege of finding you in the best of health in your esteemed home. Along with expression of my unchanging reverence for you and your estimable brother, permit me likewise to transmit to you on the occasion of this visit a modest gift in die form of an annex contributed by me to this home so linked with a great tradition.” Hardly knowing what to say, Elizabeth Forster-Nietzsche offered us seats.

Ernst Hanfstaengl:
Hitler paid lip-service to the fusion of the old and the new, as for the time being he knew he must, but for the connoisseur there was a fresh note in his speech. I was standing with Hess not twenty feet away from him. “Now it is the heroic Weltansehauung which will illuminate the ideals of Germany’s future. …” I pulled myself together with a start. What was this? Where had I read that before? This was not Schopenhauer, who had been Hitler’s philosophical god in the old Dietrich Eckart days. No, this was new. It was Nietzsche.
I thought back only a few months earlier to a visit he had paid during one of the election campaigns, while travelling from Weimar to Berlin, to the Villa Silberblick, where Nietzsche had died and where his widowed sister, aged 86, still lived. The rest of us had waited outside, for nearly an hour and a half.
Hitler had gone in carrying his whip, but, to my astonishment, came tripping out with a slim little turn-of-the-century cane dangling from his fingers: “What a marvellous old lady,” he said to me. “What vivacity and intelligence. A real personality. Look, she has given me her brother’s last walking-stick as a souvenir, a great compliment. You should have been there, Hanfstaengl” – which was his form of evasion when he had excluded me from anything.
The episode had clearly caused a deeper impression than the immediate involvement in the election campaign had permitted me to appreciate. Hitler’s mind was a deep-running river. You could never tell when something it had absorbed would bob to the surface again. From that day at Potsdam the Nietzschian catch-phrases began to appear more frequently – Wille zur Macht, Herrenvolk, Sklavenmoral – the fight for the heroic life, against formal dead-weight education, Christian philosophy and ethics based on compassion.

Coudenhove-Kalergi:
The heroic religion and ethics of the North is expressed in the Edda and in the Philosophy of European and Japanese chivalry, and experienced their resurrection in the teaching of Nietzsche. Their highest virtues are courage and energy, their ideal is the Fight and the hero Siegfried.

Coudenhove-Kalergi:
In the Middle Ages, Europe was a spiritual and cultural province of Asia. It was dominated by the Asian religion of Christ. Asia was its religious culture, its mystical mood, its monarchical form of government and the dualism of popes and emperors, monks and knights. Only with the emancipation of Europe from Christianity, which began in the Renaissance and Reformation, continued in the Enlightenment, and culminated in Nietzsche – Europe came back to herself and separated spiritually from Asia.

Laurency ():
4One of the few who were in a position to judge the reliability of this [historical source] material was Nietzsche as a philologist, and his account of his own field of research should have caused people to reflect.
Exoteric historians cannot account even for contemporary events the enormous material at their disposal notwithstanding. They are able to ascertain: this is what it reads in certain documents, the “shot went off” on that day, etc.
If anyone can extract something real from bulletins and abstracts, then he is probably a telepath.

Hitler, The Artist Within the Warlord, p.g. 180:
Translated by Wilhelm Kriessmann, Ph.D and Carolyn Yeager
We have to create a new aristocracy, a value and rank order based on character, courage and steadiness. One sentence of Nietzsche’s I identify with: What today can prove if one be of value or not?–that he is steadfast.”

Georges Sorel:
We know with what force Nietzsche praised the values constructed by the masters, by a superior class of warriors who, in their expeditions, enjoying to the full freedom from all social constraint, return to the simplicity of mind of a wild beast, become once more triumphant monsters who continually bring to mind ‘the superb blond beast, prowling in search of prey and bloodshed’ in whom ‘a basis of hidden bestiality needs from time to time an outlet’. To understand this thesis properly, we must not attach too much importance to formulas which have at times been intentionally exaggerated, but should examine the historical facts; the author tells us that he has in mind ‘the aristocracy of Rome, Arabia, Germany and Japan, the Homeric heroes, the Scandinavian Vikings’.
It is chiefly the Homeric heroes that we must have in mind in order to understand what Nietzsche wished to make clear to his contemporaries. We must remember that he had been professor of Greek at the University of Basle and that his reputation began with a book devoted to the glorification of the Hellenic genius (L’Origine de la trage´die). He observes that, even at the period of their highest culture, the Greeks still preserved a memory of their former character as masters: ‘Our daring’, said Pericles, ‘has traced a path over earth and sea, raising everywhere imperishable monuments both of good and evil.’ It was of the heroes of Greek legend and history that Nietzsche was thinking when he speaks of ‘that audacity of noble races, that mad, absurd and spontaneous audacity . . . their indifference and contempt for all security of the body, for life, for comfort’. Does not ‘the terrible gaiety and the profound joy which [the heroes] tasted in destruction, in all the pleasures of victory and of cruelty’ apply particularly to Achilles? [On the Genealogy of Morality, p.g. 25]
It was certainly to the model of classical Greece that Nietzsche alluded when he writes: ‘The moral judgements of the warrior aristocracy are founded on a powerful bodily constitution, a flourishing health, without forgetting what is necessary to the maintenance of that overflowing vigour: war, adventure, hunting, dancing, games and physical exercises and, in general, everything implied by a robust, free and joyful activity.’ [On the Genealogy of Morality, p.g. 18]
That very ancient figure, the Achaean ideal celebrated by Homer, is not simply a memory; it has reappeared several times in the world. ‘During the Renaissance there was a superb reawakening of the classical ideal, of the aristocratic valuation of things’; and, after the Revolution, ‘the most prodigious and unexpected event came to pass: the antique ideal stood in person and with unwonted splendour before the eyes and the conscience of humanity . . . [Then] appeared Napoleon, a unique and belated example though he was.’ [On the Genealogy of Morality, p.g. 35-6]

Anthony M. Ludovici:
Hitler and Nietzsche
But no matter how the dispute on these points may ultimately be decided, it seems fairly obvious that there must be a strong Nietzschean influence in National Socialism, if only because of the powerful breath of pre-Socratic Hellenism which has prevailed in Germany ever since the NSDAP seized the reins of government.
For the sake of those readers who are not quite clear regarding this association of Nietzscheism with pre-Socratic values, perhaps it would be as well to point out that, according to Nietzsche, the history of mankind falls, as it were, into two halves – the period preceding Socrates, during which the public estimate of a man was always based upon his biological worth, and the period following Socrates, during which the public estimate of a man always tended to neglect or ignore his biological worth.

Nietzsche and Hitler as Perspective Thinkers

Laurency (L5e4):
11The mental consciousnesses of the stage of humanity still remain to be acquired, however. They are of two kinds: perspective thinking (47:5) and system thinking (47:4). We can have an intimation of what this means, although only incompletely of course, by studying Nietzsche and Goethe. The former went around, so to speak, his study subject in work upon work, scrutinizing it from many angles. Goethe saw everything from that synthesis of unity which surveys it all.

Laurency (kl2_8):
36A pronounced character of this type was Nietzsche. He had liberated himself from slavish dependence on principle thinking, being the first step towards emancipation from the concrete form-thinking of mentalism.
37In work after work he went against his fundamental problems to extract new viewpoints from them. His contribution was mainly negative and critical because he lacked the basic facts of the esoteric knowledge, which are necessary to a correct conception of existence, its meaning and goal.

Mein Kampf:
From early youth I endeavoured to read books in the right way and I was fortunate in having a good memory and intelligence to assist me. From that point of view my sojourn in Vienna was particularly useful and profitable. My daily experiences were a constant stimulus to study the most diverse problems from new angles.

Hitler, Table Talk, February 6, 1942 (Cameron & Stevens):
I do not believe in the idealism of one people paying an eternal debt to others. As soon as everybody in England is convinced that the war can only be run at a loss, it’s certain that there won’t be anyone left there who feels inclined to carry on with it. I’ve examined this problem in all its aspects, turned it round in all directions. If I add up the results we’ve already achieved, I consider that we are in an exceptionally favourable situation. For the first time, we have on our side a first-rate military Power, Japan.

[Here the English translation is misleading, makes it seem as if Hitler was repudiating idealism (“I don’t believe in idealism”), which definitely isn’t the case in the original German. I’ve amended a suitable translation from Jochmann in italics.]

Kubizek:
He never came to the end of his problems. His profound earnestness never ceased to attack new problems, and if he did not find any in the present, he would brood at home for hours over his books and burrow into the problems of the past. This extraordinary earnestness was his most striking quality.

Gandhi:
We have to be up and doing every moment of our lives, and go forward in our sadhana. We have to live and move and have our being in Ahimsa even as Hitler does in Himsa. It is the faith and perseverance and single-mindedness with which he has perfected his weapons of destruction that commands my admiration. That he uses them as a monster is immaterial for our purpose. We have to bring to bear the same single-mindedness and perseverance in evolving our Ahimsa. Hitler is awake all the twenty-four hours of the day in perfecting his sadhana [Savitri Devi: the work for which their deeper nature has appointed them: their life’s dedication]. He wins because he pays the price. His inventions surprise his enemies. But it is his single-minded devotion to his purpose that should be the object of our admiration and emulation. Although he works all his waking hours, his intellect is unclouded and unerring. Are our intellects unclouded and unerring?

Haeckel:
The Riddle of the Universe
Much more care and time must be devoted than has been done hitherto to corporal exercise, to gymnastics and swimming; but it is especially important to have walks in common every week, and journeys on foot during the holidays. The lesson in observation which they obtain in this way is invaluable.

Kubizek:
Walking was the only exercise that really appealed to Adolf. He walked always and everywhere and, even in my workshop and in my room, he would stride up and down. I recall him always on the go. He could walk for hours without getting tired. We used to explore the surroundings of Linz in all directions.

Laurency (kr5.26):
11In textbooks, French popular philosophy is usually mentioned in connection with German humanism, revolution of another kind. Lessing, Herder, Schiller, and Goethe were initiated [genuine] Rosicrucians representing a sovereign point of view quite different even from the professional philosophers (Kant, etc.), who were still dealing with the principle thinking of the stage of civilization. They showed that they had attained the perspective thinking of the stage of humanity, which facilitates contact with the world of ideas. Just as in ancient Greece, it was these humanists, pyramids in the Sahara of German culture, who made their age a time of new brilliance in European history.
Laurency ():
5✡Lessing did not go high in degrees either, which is clear from his statement that when unable to grasp the symbols he voluntarily desisted from trying to comprehend them and preferred to leave that matter to god.

Laurency (kl2_8):
9Perspective thinking is seen already in the paradox, which makes two opposites abolish, illustrate, determine one another. That is the first step beyond principle thinking, which is absolute and constantly gets stuck on contradictions.
10Perspective consciousness implies the ability to see anything from all viewpoints and positions, to constantly widen perspectives, constantly higher, a widening horizon.
11“We never get anything finished” because it only grows and widens until it embraces everything.
12Perspective consciousness walks around, so to speak, the object it is looking at, scrutinizing its various aspects, being aware of the fact that it is the same object but that reason sees the same thing from a variety of viewpoints, dividing into pieces what is unified. Therefore, the same thing can appear totally different, as though it were not the same thing. A perspective idea can require a long essay to be dissolved into its components. Nietzsche may be taken as the typical example of a perspective thinker. In work upon work he was concerned with the same problems and proposed different solutions in each.


Laurency ():
10Many people have wondered how Nietzsche, who had the stage of the saint behind him, could become that confused in his “moral orientation”, expressed better: conception of right.
The explanation is that he saw the perverseness of moralism (the expression of latent hatred) and of people’s moral judgements, but in his enormous hypersensitivity overreacted to it so as to accept the reckless contempt of everything that the ignorance of life had erroneously mixed up with moralism.
Haeckel:
The Wonders of Life
The precepts of Christian charity which the gospels rightly place in the very foreground of morality, were not first discovered by Christ, but they were successfully urged by him and his followers at a time when refined selfishness threatened the Roman civilization with decay. These natural principles of sympathy and altruism had arisen thousands of years before in human society, and are even found among all the higher animals that live a social life. They have their first roots in the sexual reproduction of the lower animals, the sexual love and the care of the young on which the maintenance of the species depends. Hence the modern prophets of pure egoism, Friedrich Nietzsche, Max Stirner, etc., commit a biological error when they would substitute their morality of the strong for universal charity, and when they ridicule sympathy as a weakness of character or an ethical blunder of Christianity.

[This article examines some of Nietzsche’s popular sayings and is considerably less harsh in it’s treatment. Although it does invoke a Jewish scholar: Robert Solomon.]

Rosenberg:
That Nietzsche became insane, is symbolic. An enormous blocked up will to creation forged a path like a storm flood. The same will, inwardly broken long before, could no longer attain shape. An era, enslaved for generations, understood in its powerlessness only the subjective side of the great will and vital experience of Friedrich Nietzsche. It falsified the deepest struggle for personality into a cry for the unleashing of all instincts.

✡Otto Weininger:
The reason why madness overtakes so many men of genius is that for many the burden becomes too heavy, the task of bearing the whole world on the shoulders, like Atlas, intolerable for the smaller, but never for the really mighty minds. But the higher a man mounts, the greater may be his fall; all genius is a conquering of chaos, mystery, and darkness, and if it degenerates and goes to pieces, the ruin is greater in proportion to the success. The genius which runs to madness is no longer genius; it has chosen happiness instead of morality.

Laurency (L4e5):
3The notion of “destructive genius” is a contradiction in terms. The essence of genius at least contains the divination of the ideals, the instinctive understanding of what is fit for life and life-promoting. Those in whom this divination has never been born or in whom it has been devastated do not belong to the stage of culture and are no true geniuses.

Savitri:
Never mind how bloody the final crash may be! Never mind what old treasures may perish for ever in the redeeming conflagration! The sooner it comes, the better. We are waiting for it — and for the following glory — confident in the divinely established cyclic Law that governs all manifestations of existence in Time: the law of Eternal Return.
Laurency (kr2):
8Herakleitos tried to hint at the eternal uniqueness of everything when he said that you can never descend twice into exactly the same river. This demolishes Nietzsche’s fantasies about the “eternal return” to exactly the same. It is impossible, because everything is unique.

[It’s worth pointing out that the Jew Oscar Levy tried to dissuade Anthony Ludovici from unveiling the actual core teachings of Nietzsche. It really must be asked why Jews have monopolized Nietzsche’s translations (i.e. Levy, Kaufmann), as he does occasionally indict the Jews and even addresses the racial aspect.

The Jew Paul Rée seems to have corrupted Nietzsche even further, drawing him away from Wagner.]

Schopenhauer

Laurency (wm9):
1It is not easy to acquire lacking qualities. It is therefore psychologically wrong (unfair) to demand that esotericians should live as they teach. That is no excuse but certainly an explanation. It was this insight which made philosopher Schopenhauer write: “I have certainly learnt what a saint is, but I am not a saint myself.” With the absurd demand that we should be able to live as we teach, there would be no teachers and no progress would be made.
2When judging and assessing people we must never start from an absolutized ideal of perfection. An individual may be a genius even if in many respects he is mediocre, he may be a “saint” in spite of many failings.
You must not, as one writer does, call Copernicus a coward, Kepler a hypochondriac, Galilei a proudly cantankerous neurotic. Those are subjective judgements, passed without understanding of the situations those people were in.
We have no right whatsoever to pass such judgements, for we know too little about man, and everyone has the right to be such as he is, with all his limitation (protected from moral judgements), when he does not transgress the limit of the rights of others.

[Terry Melanson furnishes an excellent modern example of this brand of moralism. Despite his excellent contributions in the field of researching the Illuminati, he condemned Weishuapt as a coward, citing the American Founding Fathers as an example of what to emulate, while omitting Jefferson’s keen observation that if Weishaupt had been based in America, he wouldn’t have needed secrecy and concealment.]

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Arthur_Schopenhauer#Influence
[Emphasis added by me]
His “friend” Bertrand Russell had a low opinion on the philosopher, and attacked him in his famous History of Western Philosophy for hypocritically praising asceticism yet not acting upon it.[147]
As a teenager, ✡Ludwig Wittgenstein adopted Schopenhauer’s epistemological idealism. However, after his study of the philosophy of mathematics, he rejected epistemological idealism for Gottlob Frege’s conceptual realism. In later years, Wittgenstein was highly dismissive of Schopenhauer, describing him as an ultimately shallow thinker: “Schopenhauer has quite a crude mind … where real depth starts, his comes to an end.”

Laurency (L3e8):
19In his memoirs, Herbert Tingsten finds that Dag Hammarskjöld was an enigma, that he was great as a man but scarcely as an international statesman because of his “conscious indistinctness”. Tingsten disregards the fact that this was the only possible attitude in the political chaos of the United Nations Organization. It is unjust to criticize him for conscious and unconscious indistinctness in general terms. He stood out as the most clear-sighted man in many situations.

Laurency (kl2_10):
21One is surprised and happy at the same time when meeting with such an understanding of Schopenhauer as is expressed in the following statement, trying to explain the contradiction of life and teaching.
22“He had to pay a terribly high price” for his independence of current opinions, of the suggestions of the masses, of the compromises of power, for his intellectual independence, his reckless sincerity: “isolation, misanthropy, pride, an almost pathological self-esteem, because only in this form could he assert himself against the iciness and hostility surrounding him. He paid the price, however, without batting an eyelid, and he gained that dignity, that deep earnest, that passionate objectivity which is the hallmark of intellectual life.”

Rosenberg:
Comparisons are often made between a man and his teachings. We frequently discover glaring contrasts between the two. It is true enough that this man [Schopenhauer], who in all seriousness regarded himself as the founder of a religion and preached denial of the world, lived a seemingly comfortable life as an established patrician. He was afflicted with a grotesque anxiety about his health and well being. Because of an unpleasant dream and out of fear of cholera, he left Berlin. He lived in Frankfurt on the ground floor of a house so he could save himself quickly in case of fire. When visiting, he always carried his own drinking glass with him so that he did not expose himself to the dangers of infections from dirty cups. Here, his own will makes its appearance with a vehemence amounting almost to sickliness. Schopenhauer was possessed by an almost demonic fear of death. He was also possessed by a brutal egoism and filled with a fury when anyone opposed him. He was, at the same time, a worldwide intellect in whose inspired insight and illumination of spirit thousands of spiritual revelations were captured. He had an amazing insight into many problems and wrote in a German style of splendour, colour and clarity as only a few among the very great can.

I dream of a state of affairs in which every man would know that he lives and dies for the preservation of the species. It’s our duty to encourage that idea: let the man who distinguishes himself in the service of the species be thought worthy of the highest honours.

– Hitler, Table Talk (Cameron & Stevens), December 13, 1941

✡Manly P. Hall:
Life–the manifestation of the blind will to live–[Schopenhauer] viewed as a misfortune, claiming that the true philosopher was one who, recognizing the wisdom of death, resisted the inherent urge to reproduce his kind.

✝Jerome:
Pythagoras taught, accordingly, that he had himself been originally Euphorbus, and then Callides, thirdly Hermotimus, fourthly Pyrrhus, and lastly Pythagoras; and that those things which had existed, after certain revolutions of time, came into being again; so that nothing in the world should be thought of as new. He said that true philosophy was a meditation on death; that its daily struggle was to draw forth the soul from the prison of the body into liberty: that our learning was recollection, and many other things which Plato works out in his dialogues, especially in the Phædo and Timæus.

Porphyry:
When he [Plotinus] was on the point of death, Eustochius told us, as Eustochius had been staying at Puteoli and was late in coming to him he said, “I have been waiting a long time for you.’’ Then he said, “Try to bring back the god in us to the divine in the All!” and, as a snake crept under the bed on which he was lying and disappeared into a hole in the wall, he breathed his last.

Laurency (ps3):
8You “serve god” by trying to reach and arouse the god who still slumbers in the individual.

Hitler, Memoirs of a Confidant, p.g. 40:
What seems to me incontestable first of all, is the fact that collectivist solutions cannot lead us to our goal. Everywhere in life only a process of selection can prevail. Among the animals, among plants, wherever observations have been made, basically the stronger, the better survives. The simpler life forms have no written constitution. Selection therefore runs a natural course. As Darwin correctly proved: the choice is not made by some agency–nature chooses. That is election. But the animals and other forms of life have a further process of self-selection. Weaklings, runts, sick individuals are cast out of their communities by the healthy ones; some of them are even killed, disposed of. That is the will of nature. What is healthy abhors that which is sick, the productive abhors the life of the drone, purposeful striving abhors indifferent depravity.

Hitler, Table Talk, February 17, 1942 (Cameron & Stevens):
It is Jewry that always destroys this order. It constantly provokes the revolt of the weak against the strong, of bestiality against intelligence, of quantity against quality.

Schopenhauer:
For it is not the individual that nature cares for, but only the species; and in all seriousness she urges the preservation of the species, since she provides for this so lavishly through the immense surplus of the seed and the great strength of the fructifying impulse. The individual, on the contrary, has no value for nature, and can have none, for infinite time, infinite space, and the infinite number of possible individuals therein are her kingdom. Therefore nature is always ready to let the individual fall, and the individual is accordingly not only exposed to destruction in a thousand ways from the most insignificant accidents, but is even destined for this and is led towards it by nature herself, from the moment that individual has served the maintenance of the species.

Hitler, Table Talk (Cameron & Stevens), November 16, 1941:
Society should preserve itself from such elements. Animals who live in the social state have their outlaws. They reject them.

Hitler, Memoirs of a Confidant, p.g. 166:
In nature, we see the same thing in a flock of sheep, for example, or among a herd of deer. If foreign animals stray into the community, they are attacked and expelled. Nature knows nothing of what we call humanitarianism and socialism. With brutal ruthlessness, the one who does not belong to the community is chased away from the herd, even out of the herd’s territory, or it is simply massacred.

Robert Hermann Schomburgk, Von Mensch und Tier, p.g. 110:
Nature doesn’t recognize sentimentality. If an animal is driven out, it is meant to be. In most cases, a sick animal will leave its herd of its own will. Animals understand how to die without making a fuss. The inner natural instinct teaches them that their individual lives are meaningless, but that their deaths can be useful to the community, that their death serves the species. This is so because sick or weak animals can bring the downfall of the entire herd. As in a chain, which is also only as strong as its weakest link, the weakest member of an animal community must always be at least strong enough to meet fully all the demands of nature.

[See practical interpretation of Matthew 5:29-30.]

Dag Hammarskjöld:
Waymarks/Markings
It is better that one dies for the people than that the whole people perish [John 11:50].
“Who has this great power to see clearly into himself without tergiversation, and act thence, will come to his destiny.” [Confucius: The Great Digest & Unwobbling
Pivot, translation and commentary by Ezra Pound]

[Commentary by Bernhard Erling: Under what circumstances, however, is it better that one person dies rather than the whole people perish? . . . . As DH interprets the citation he is not saying that the one person may be made a sacrifice by others, but an individual who sees clearly that such an offering can be of great benefit to others can offer himself/herself. This must be done unequivocally (without tergiversation [the misspelling, “tergivisation,” in DH’s Swedish text comes from Pound]).]

Mein Kampf:
The sacrifice of the individual existence is necessary in order to assure the conservation of the race. Hence it is that the most essential condition for the establishment and maintenance of a State is a certain feeling of solidarity, grounded in an identity of character and race and in a readiness to defend these at all costs.

Hitler, Table Talk, December 1-2, 1941 (Cameron & Stevens):
If I can accept a divine Commandment, it’s this one: “Thou, shalt preserve the species.”
The life of the individual must not be set at too high a price. If the individual were important in the eyes of nature, nature would take care to preserve him. Amongst the millions of eggs a fly lays, very few are hatched out—and yet the race of flies thrives.

Frederick the Great

[In his book Hitler’s Religion, German theologian Richard Weikart mentions a conversation between Hitler and Bormann where he remarked that he was “especially interested in Frederick the Great’s books, Briefe über die Religion (Letters on Religion) and Theologische Streitschriften (Theological Polemics).” These books had been offered to him by Bormann.]

http://www.spiegel.de/spiegel/print/d-46162991.html
2. 7.1942, abends
Beim Abendessen sprach der Chef Herrn Reichsleiter Bormann auf Bücher an, die er von ihm zur Durchsicht erhalten hatte. Insbesondere hätten ihn die Zitat-Zusammenstellungen aus Friedrichs des Großen “Briefe über die Religion” und seinen “Theologischen Streitschriften” interessiert. Es sei eine wirklich wertvolle Tat, wenn man diese Schriften allen Deutschen – insbesondere aber allen führenden Leuten, voran Admiralen, Generalen und so weiter – zugänglich mache. Denn aus ihnen ergebe sich, daß er – der Chef – nicht mit “ketzerischen” Gedanken allein dastehe, sondern sich in der besten Gesellschaft eines der größten deutschen Männer befände…

Hitler, Table Talk, August 20, 1942 (Cameron & Stevens):
The saying that God favours the big battalions is not without significance. Without the requisite force, nothing can be accomplished. To think otherwise is to try to make a virtue out of necessity; if this were not so, the smaller peoples of the world would not have been the victims of oppression throughout history. It was only because they anticipated war in the West, which would give them the chance swiftly to seize the Baltic States, that the Russians stopped the war with Finland. The history of war can furnish not one single instance in which victory has gone to the markedly weaker of the combatants. The nearest approach to it is the case of Frederick the Great, who had luck in defeating, by superior skill, adversaries who were numerically slightly superior.

Hitler, Table Talk, August 26, 1942 (Cameron & Stevens):
The greatest victories in the history of the world have always been the result of a mighty effort. Life consists of the overcoming of a series of crises, which one man survives and the other does not. In 1918 victory was as nearly in our grasp as it was in that of our adversaries. It was a battle of nerves. No one has a monopoly of success. Frederick the Great is the nearest thing to an exception. To what should one ascribe his success—foolhardiness or what? Frankly, I do not know. The cards were stacked against him, and Prussia was a miserably poor little State. Nevertheless he ventured forth with incredible temerity; on what, I wonder, did he base his faith in victory?

Hitler, Memoirs of a Confidant, p.g. 61:
There is no such thing as a political general. In such a case, he is either a bad general or a bad politician. Napoleon and Frederick the Great are the exceptions in that prove the rule. And even Napoleon floundered, since in the end the soldier in him ran away with him, causing him to lose sight of the political measure of the facts.

Hitler, Table Talk (Cameron & Stevens), March 31, 1942:
Frederick who, at the most difficult moments of his life, and when he had to take the hardest decisions, never forgot that things are called upon to endure. In similar cases, Napoleon capitulated. It’s therefore obvious that, to bring his life’s work to a successful conclusion, Frederick the Great could always rely on sturdier collaborators than Napoleon could. When Napoleon set the interests of his family clique above all, Frederick the Great looked around him for men, and, at need, trained them himself.

Hitler, Table Talk (Cameron & Stevens), March 31, 1942:
Despite all Napoleon’s genius, Frederick the Great was the most outstanding man of the eighteenth century. When seeking to find a solution for essential problems concerning the conduct of affairs of State, he refrained from all illogicality. It must be recognised that in this field his father, Frederick-William, that buffalo of a man, had given him a solid and complete training.

Goebbels (Diaries), February 27, 1945:
We must be as Frederick the Great was and act as he did. The Führer agrees with me entirely when I say to him that it should be our ambition to ensure that, should a similar great crisis arise in Germany, say in 150 years’ time, our grandchildren may look back on us as a heroic example of steadfastness.
The stoic philosophical attitude to people and events adopted by the Führer today is very reminiscent of Frederick the Great. He says to me, for instance, that it is essential to work for one’s people but that there is a limit to what men can do. Who knows when the moon may not crash into the earth and this whole planet go up in flame and ashes. Nevertheless, he says, it must be our mission to do our duty to the last.
In these matters the Führer too is a stoic and a complete disciple of Frederick the Great whom, consciously and unconsciously, he emulates. That must be a model and an example to us all. How gladly would we wholeheartedly copy this model and example.
If only Goring was not so completely out of line. He is no National-Socialist but a sybarite and certainly no disciple of Frederick the Great. In contrast what a fine imposing impression is made by Dönitz. As the Führer told me he is the best man in his whole arm of the service. Look at the invariably gratifying results he has achieved with the Navy.

Nicolaus von Below:
[Hitler] reminded them of how Frederick the Great, in the darkest hours of his war, had stood alone and triumphed: then, as now, the enemy alliance would founder as a result of this imminent offensive.

Heinz Linge:
I noticed that Hitler no longer spoke of victory, and if nobody else was about he would talk of us ‘having to keep this struggle going to the death’. Looking at the portrait of Frederick the Great, Hitler said one night:
‘In the winter of 1762 he was ready to give up and take poison if he did not succeed in changing his fortunes in war. The unexpected death of the Russian tsarina, Elizabeth, put a stop to his thoughts of suicide.’
There never was any such thing as a totally hopeless situation in history, and we could claim it as a victory if we succeeded ‘in simply surviving’ with an independent existence. I never repeated anywhere what I heard issue from Hitler’s lips in the first weeks and months of 1945. Hitler knew this, and in the nighttime hours gave me a vision of a past, present and future which I, rooted in realities of a quite different structure, misunderstood in astonishment.

Franz Hartmann:
[Frederic the Great] often had spells of great moral depression and brooded over his regrets for the past.

Goebbels (Diaries), February 27, 1945:
I told him that I had recently been reading Carlyle’s book on Frederick the Great. The Führer knows the book very well himself. I repeated certain passages from the book to him and they affected him very deeply. That is how we must be and that is how we will be. If someone like Goring dances totally out of line, then he must be called to order. Bemedalled idiots and vain perfumed coxcombs have no place in our war leadership. Either they must mend their ways or be eliminated.

Goebbels (Diaries), March 11, 1945:
I pay a visit of several hours to the Führer in the evening. The Führer gives me an extraordinarily assured and resolute impression and physically he seems in the best of form. I hand him one of the copies I still possess of Carlyle’s Frederick the Great which gives him great pleasure. He emphasizes that the great prototypes are the men on whom we must model ourselves today and that Frederick the Great was the most exceptional personality of them all. It must be our ambition to set an example today on which later generations can model themselves in similar crises and times of stress, just as today we must take our cue from the heroes of past history.

Laurency (ps3):
17The creditable, although on the whole unsuccessful, attempts made by Carlyle and Emerson to rehabilitate their heroes show the disadvantage of using historical personages, who have already been besmirched by the biographies of moralists.

Hitler, Mein Kampf:
The great protagonists are those who fight for their ideas and ideals despite the fact that they receive no recognition at the hands of their contemporaries. They are the men whose memories will be enshrined in the hearts of future generations.
It seems then as if each individual felt it his duty to make retrospective atonement for the wrong which great men have suffered at the hands of their contemporaries. Their lives and their work are then studied with touching and grateful admiration.
Especially in dark days of distress, such men have the power of healing broken hearts and of raising the despairing spirit of a people. To this group belong not only the genuinely great statesmen but all the great reformers as well. Besides Frederick the Great we have men such as Martin Luther and Richard Wagner.

Hitler, Table Talk (Cameron & Stevens), May 3, 1942:
As there can never be absolute security against fanatics and idealists on official occasions, I always make a point of standing quietly upright in my car, and this method has again and again proved the truth of the proverb that the world belongs to the brave.

David Irving:
Hitler’s War, A Test of Endurance
‘This Stalin is obviously also a great man,’ [Hitler] told his baffled generals. ‘To claim anything else would not make sense. Historians of the future will have to set out from the fact that today’s events are governed by the collision or collusion of great, towering personalities whose paths cross like this only once in many centuries.’

Hitler and his Generals: Military Conferences 1942-1945, p.g. 533

The Führer’s Speech to Division Commanders, December 12, 1944, at Adlerhorst

It is very clear, gentlemen, that such a conflict is now progressing like a grand historical struggle, with its ups and downs. Anyone who believes that the great epochs of world history are nothing but a series of successes has never understood history, or has perhaps not even read it properly; it is very clear that success and failure come and go. In the end, the one who gains the laurels of victory is not just the more capable one, but, most importantly–and I want to emphasize this–(the boldest). The building of states–no matter whether it is the Roman Empire, the British Empire or Prussia – has always been achieved by toughness, stubbornness and durability. Not so much by a single blaze of genius or a burst of energy that flares up once and then vanishes, but much more by stubborn tenacity, which is the greatest help in overcoming all crises. Rome couldn’t have been imagined without the Second Punic War. England would not be imaginable if crises hadn’t been overcome within England itself. Prussia would be unimaginable without the Seven Years’ War. And the greatness of the leading personalities, as well as of the people themselves, wasn’t born in times of fortune but is always confirmed in times of ill fortune. People who can endure good luck are quite common. People who don’t become weak when faced with bad luck are rare. (There are) few people (of this kind). History has always awarded success to these few.

David Irving:
Hitler’s War
Christa Schroeder wrote in a private letter on April 21, 1939:

Luther strove for a Reformation but this has been misunderstood, because reformation is not a once-only affair but a process of constant renovation – not just marking time but keeping up with the developments of the age.

Hitler, The Artist Within the Warlord, p.g. 93-94:
Translated by Wilhelm Kriessmann, Ph.D and Carolyn Yeager
“‘We generals can judge the military situation much better.’ That’s how they were stubbornly thinking. Way back, a military personality once gave me the advice that, from an army general upwards, obedience decreases, and any order is subject to a personal critique. I often had the same experience.”

Memoirs of a Confidant, p.g. 126:
Once, when I told him that we should try to attract the best minds, the great personalities, in order to have their assistance in the awesome task whose fulfillment Providence might demand of us, he replied, “Too many cooks spoil the broth. These best minds, these great personalities, all have their own individual attitudes, their own will and their own aims. In this I side with Ptolemy–I think it was the First or the Second–who was once asked how he managed to prevail and deal with all the opponents with whom he had to reckon. At the time he was out walking and passed a poppy field.
He took his whip or his riding crop and slashed off the heads of the poppies that rose above the otherwise very evenly grown field. ‘That,’ he said to his questioner, ‘is how I do it.’ By the way, I once found the same anecdote told somewhere about the Eastern Roman Emperor Septimius Severus.”

Hitler, November 12, 1944 speech:
Nations and, above all, their statesmen, generals, and soldiers always find it easy to tolerate days of happiness and visible successes. What is remarkable about the great men of world history, as well as nations destined for great things, is their steadfastness in days of trouble, their confidence at times when their situation appears hopeless, their defiance and courage when they suffer setbacks.

Hitler, November 8, 1943 speech:
The greatest heroes in world history have always had to remain steadfast even under the greatest strains. Anybody can bear sunshine. But when the weather is bad and a storm is raging, then it will show who is a strong character and who is a weakling. When things get difficult, then you can tell who is truly a man, who does not lose his nerve in such hours, but instead remains determined and steadfast, and never thinks of capitulation.

Goebbels (Diaries), May 9, 1943:
This talk made us realize anew how extremely rare are men of real caliber. If you have to fill two posts of decisive importance in public life you can search with a lantern and won’t find anybody.

Henry Crabb Robinson:
Among [Weishaupt’s] sayings, one was delivered with peculiar emphasis: “One of my tests of character is what a man says about principle. A weak man is always talking of acting on principle. An able man does always the right thing at the right moment, and therein he shows himself to be able.”

Heinz Linge:
The Elser case was something special for him without a doubt. Since the Nuremberg trials we have come to understand how the lives of people in Hitler’s Germany counted for very little. This can be confirmed by reading the death sentences from that time. Thus we have a mystery how Elser, whom Hitler ought to have wanted dead, stayed alive almost to the end when the men and women around Graf von Stauffenberg in 1944 were hanged like cattle. Workers who went through thick and thin to ‘follow the mismanaged nobility’ were also lost to Hitler in principle, while Thälmann the German communist leader and Elser were for him ‘men of character’ in whom he saw much to be admired. It seems to me that this aspect of his personality lacks research.

[Mainstream narratives attribute Elser’s death to an alleged order from Hitler, based on a letter attributed to Gestapo chief Heinrich Müller. There’s undoubtedly something more to Elser’s death than we’re being told. They pin the blame on the Germans, as usual, while the actual culprits, perhaps a Allied bombing raids, get off scot-free.]

https://www.scrapbookpages.com/DachauScrapbook/ElserExecution.html

The masses are but a part of Nature herself

August Kubizek:
Adolf Hitler: Mein Jungendfreund, p.g. 33

It was true that, as he told me, he had once eagerly botanised during his school days, and a herbarium had been created. Such work, like a collection of butterflies, or the gathering of minerals, was more the result of his youthful zeal than a peculiar disposition. [It was] not the individual in nature [that] interested him. He took Nature much more as a whole. He called it the “Outside”.

Zwar hatte er, wie er mir erzählte, während seiner Schulzeit einmal eifrig botanisiert und sich ein Herbarium angelegt, doch entsprang solche Beschäftigung ebenso wie die Anlage einer Schmetterlingsammlung oder das Sammeln von Mineralien mehr seinem jugendlichen Eifer als einer besonderen Veranlagung.
Nicht das einzelne in der Natur interessierte ihn. Er nahm die Natur vielmehr als ein Ganzes. Er nannte es das „Draußen”.

Mein Kampf:
The masses are but a part of Nature herself. Their feeling is such that they cannot understand mutual handshakings between men who are declared enemies. Their wish is to see the stronger side win and the weaker wiped out, or subjected unconditionally to the will of the stronger.

Dietrich Eckart:
For decades left defenseless as booty for the Jewish spirit, the crowd finally only felt it in the ruling power, power in itself, and went with the liar, yes, had to follow him, because only where strength shows itself does hope thrive, but aside from it nothing else was still present to which the stability needing folk would have been able to cling.

Goebbels (Diaries), May 13, 1943:
The situation in Croatia can by no means be regarded as having been settled by the last purge; it continues to be strained. More than 13,000 rebels were killed, among them a great many intellectuals. The fight against European unification through the Axis Powers is for the most part carried on by intellectuals. The broad masses of the people, on the whole, are uninterested in this struggle.

Hitler, Table Talk (Cameron & Stevens), November 5, 1941:
The great mass of the people is, on the whole, a passive element. On the one hand, the idealists represent the positive force. The criminals, on the other hand, represent the negative element. If I tolerated the preservation of criminals, at a time when the best of us are being killed at the front, I should destroy the balance of forces to the detriment of the nation’s healthy element. That would be the triumph of the rabble.

Rosenberg:
The Track of the Jew
The masses thrown out of balance who must have an answer to everything that soothes them follow them to their own ruin. This spirit which leads the troops of anarchy diplomatically and brutally at the same time, conscious of its goal, is the religious, economic, political and national spirit of fundamental intolerance that has developed from a racial foundation; it knows only universalism of religion (that is, the rule of the Jewish god), Communism (that is, slave states), world revolution (civil war in all forms) and the internationalism of all Jews (that is, their world-rule).

Laurency ():
6The weapon of the black lodge is chaos. The effect depends on the fact that this power works in all groups and all idiologies. Chaos is brought about as indifference, fear, uncertainty, and insecurity are instilled in mankind. This chaos is then exploited by individuals who are greedy for power and glory, are of domineering nature, individuals existing in all nations without exception. The nations must come to understand the necessity of replacing such persons with other leaders in whom the will to unity is the basis for their thought and action; that is to say, no party leaders who cause division.

Bolshevism: From Moses to Lenin
Our leadership can be truly strong, however, only if it is based completely in our people; only if it concerns itself with the welfare of the least among them just as much as with that of the wealthiest of them; only if, in the firm conviction of its own worth, it bars every alien influence from the beginning; only if it is not merely national, but is also social, down to its very bones. No matter what others may say, I assert this: a time will come when all the elite nations of the world will have such a leadership; and then everyone will be astonished to see that, instead of grating on one another as has previously been the case, they will treat one another with respect and consideration.

Mein Kampf:
Once it is understood that the restoration of Germany is a question of reawakening the will to political self-preservation we shall see quite clearly that it will not be enough to win over those elements that are already national-minded but that the deliberately anti-national masses must be converted to believe in the national ideals. A young movement that aims at re-establishing a German State with full sovereign powers will therefore have to make the task of winning over the broad masses a special objective of its plan of campaign.

Laurency (ps1):
8The will to unity is not least the will to a national culture. Such a culture must emerge from that collective self-reliance and self-determination which the will to unity fosters in a nation.
9To create a culture man must first find Man. Culture is impossible before he is discovered. For man is always the measure of culture. Man creates his culture himself. Nobody else does him that service. Where man is not naturally respected as a man – because just as a man he is above, superior to, everything else – there the human is absent, the conditions of the human are absent, and thus the conditions of culture are absent.

Mein Kampf:
Apart from all this, an idea can never subject to its own sway those conditions which are necessary for the existence and development of mankind; for the idea itself has come only from man. Without man there would be no human idea in this world. The idea as such is therefore always dependent on the existence of man and consequently is dependent on those laws which furnish the conditions of his existence.
Not only that. Certain ideas are even confined to certain people. This holds true with regard to those ideas, in particular, which have not their roots in objective scientific truth, but in the world of feeling.
In other words, to use a phrase which is current to-day and which well and clearly expresses this truth: They reflect an inner experience.

Dietrich Eckart:
Now the things indeed lie so that the masses begin to distrust the Jew as well, but they will not turn away from him until another, a higher energy flows toward them, that spiritual one, in whose steadfastness the great crooked one finds his master.

Laurency ():
The teachers and disciples of the planetary hierarchy will incarnate, appear in the open, and will quite naturally become the leading figures in all domains of human life. They will not assert themselves by force, but people will quite simply turn to those who have the greatest capacity, represent the clearest thought, and in action demonstrate that they are inspired by the noblest motives. These elder brothers will present us with a mass of knowledge of such transforming power that all human views, sciences, ways of living, working, and relating will be literally revolutionized.

Hitler, Memoirs of a Confidant, p.g. 170:
But here, too, I carry within me the conviction — and I see myself as a trailblazer — that humanity will find the right way. For the peoples and their states are natural creations, divinely ordained, they are associations of men, all of whom are created by God and therefore stand side by side, with equal rights, judged only for the totality, each according to his abilities and achievements for the totality.
The international powers that are at work to penetrate the unanimity of the national bodies, the states, the nations, to dissolve and undermine them, are therefore contrary to nature and hostile to the divine order. Among them are primarily Jews, but next in line are the Catholic church, the internationally oriented trade unions, international communism, the major international trusts [corporations and banking], and many more. Such organizations can, at times, be stronger than the states! And herein lies their danger! Not only for the individual state, but especially for the possibility of creating the great socialist community of nations.
So, if we pursue the goal of such a community of nations — and it must, as I said, be pursued, and it will be the final goal of human politics on this earth — then we must first reconstruct the independence and autonomy of the nations, even the smallest, and drive the large international organizations back to their purely technical sphere of operations, eliminating every last possibility of their influence on governments and governmental organizations. This is a further basic perception.

Mein Kampf:
Our era is entirely preoccupied with little things which are to no purpose, or rather it is entirely preoccupied in the service of money. Therefore it is not to be wondered at if, with the worship of such an idol, the sense of heroism should entirely disappear.

Weishaupt:
It is no longer a wonder, then, that money remains this day the world’s idol and greatest driving force; that all human activity revolves around this point; that the desire to enrich oneself is so irresistibly attractive to people that poverty appears the worst of all evils to rich and poor alike.
Wealth protects you from every future and present lack. It lets people enjoy all possible goods; in this way it puts the Lowest and the Highest into the same class; it gives every human a degree of independence and even influence and power; it creates positions of honor and high standing. Everything that people can seek and desire down here is united in the possession of money.

Mein Kampf:
It may be that money has become the one power that governs life to-day, yet a time will come when men will again bow to higher gods. Much that we have to-day owes its existence to the desire for money and property, but there is very little among all this which would leave the world poorer by its absence.

Frederick the Great:
It is true that all this Asiatic luxury, this refinement of good cheer, indulgence, and effeminacy, is not essential to our survival and that we could live with more simplicity and frugality than we do; but why should we renounce the pleasures of life when we could enjoy them? True philosophy, I feel, is that which allows the use and condemns the abuse; one ought to know how to do without everything without renouncing anything.

Franz Hartmann:
[Frederic the Great] was a good-hearted but weak-minded man, whose strength had been to a certain extent exhausted by too much sensual enjoyment.

Weishaupt:
He too will want to enjoy, and Nature will not spread the wealth of her treasures before his eyes in vain. He will not spurn even the sensory pleasures. The wise man, too, will strive to improve his outer condition. Power and wealth, influence, applause, and honor, will in his estimation not be lowly things worthy of contempt. But he will not crave and make use of them as an end, but rather as a means. He will convince himself that these rivers will flow into an ocean in the end, or else endanger all land. That these ends themselves are means to a higher end. Wise and perfect people will therefore do and want everything that less perfect people want and do, but they will not want anything to an excessive degree. No other people know as precisely where the boundary lies between pleasure and pain. By forming themselves for eternity, wise people will become not useless for this world. In all their actions there will be an independent spirit, a quite different independent manner, but the main thing will be the same. For there nothing will be calculated on the basis of vivaciousness and mere appearance; everything will be calculated for reality and the long term. Wise people will enjoy, for the purpose of enjoying eternally. No one will understand as well as they do, the art of enjoying everything.

Platon:
Critias
For many generations, as long as the divine nature lasted in them, they were obedient to the laws, and well-affectioned towards the god, whose seed they were; for they possessed true and in every way great spirits, uniting gentleness with wisdom in the various chances of life, and in their intercourse with one another. They despised everything but virtue, caring little for their present state of life, and thinking lightly of the possession of gold and other property, which seemed only a burden to them; neither were they intoxicated by luxury; nor did wealth deprive them of their self-control; but they were sober, and saw clearly that all these goods are increased by virtue and friendship with one another, whereas by too great regard and respect for them, they are lost and friendship with them.

Hitler, May 4, 1941 speech:
A spirit has come to life in this country, the like of which the world has never encountered before! A believing feeling of community has taken hold of our Volk! No power on earth can ever again tear from us what we secured, after having followed the wrong track full of inner struggle, and what makes us proud before other people. In the age of the Jewishcapitalist craze for gold, position, and class, the National Socialist people’s state stands like a monument of social justice and lucid reason. It will not only outlast this war, but the coming millennium!

✡Albert Pike:
Either there never was any such thing as a “plan,” and the word is nonsense, or the Universe exists in conformity to a plan. The word never meant, and never can mean, any other thing than that which the Universe exhibits. So with the word “purpose;” so with the word “Providence.” They mean nothing, or else only what the Universe proves.

Weishaupt:
Diogenes’ Lamp
Three opinions are possible here. The world is either changing purely for the worse, or its changes are for the good of the whole, or, finally, the world has no Plan whatsoever and there are no ultimate common good or evil consequences, but rather Evil alternates with Good and Good alternates with Evil without any higher intention or planning. – Should, or can, it be of no consequence which one we claim to be true? Can a person who assumes the first concept act in the same way as one convinced of the truth of the second? If that is impossible, then this question is not speculative but rather one pivotal for humanity’s happiness and fate, a practical, most important question that will create a revolution in thought and deed and eliminate a great deal of obstacles impeding our morality and being considered insurmountable after so many failed attempts.

Aurelius:
Meditations
Fatal necessity, and inescapable order. Or benevolent Providence. Or confusion—random and undirected. If it’s an inescapable necessity, why resist it? If it’s Providence, and admits of being worshipped, then try to be worthy of God’s aid. If it’s confusion and anarchy, then be grateful that on this raging sea you have a mind to guide you.

Weishaupt:
Diogenes’ Lamp
If people could succeed in making the thought of their continuing existence their soul’s ruling idea; if they had enough strength of mind to rise above the sway and power of all present impressions, with the aid of this idea – what different creatures these people would become, what a gathering-place of delight this Earth would be, if this manner of thinking would only become the primary one for all humanity? For people of this type there would be no discontent. All would reliably and assuredly obtain that which they sought.

For what do all human beings seek? – An unimpeded activity of the mind, and an associated, pain-free life. – To this end they require that no evil exists; that nothing is bad, contrary to their purposes, or superfluous; that no person misuses another; that all hurry to one another’s aid; that people believe that even their suffering serves a purpose; and that they even believe no one be happier than themselves. But all these things are only achievable for people who think of themselves as beings destined to endure.

For what, then, is the greatest crime in the world, that awakens so much displeasure in all people? – Let us be honest, and admit that it is when we think that we are not getting what we believe we have earned. The world is not falling into line with our arrangements and desires, and not taking the path indicated by our passions and prejudices. But who is telling us to want to conceive of things that are unable to conceive of? What is fairer: that the part arranges itself to suit the whole, or that the whole arrange itself to suit the part? What would become of the world, what would become of ourselves, if everyone were lord and master of creation?

If all human beings have the right to have this particular desire, whose desires should be satisfied? – The wishes of all humans? Or the wishes of a few of nature’s special favorites? The former is simply impossible, and the latter would be dreadful and unjust. There must, therefore, be a middle road. And it can only exist in everyone’s becoming that which, and as much as, he or she is capable of becoming, without causing people with equal rights to suffer; that there be a happiness for individuals which is compatible with the happiness of all.

But this happiness will become possible for everyone as soon as they all learn to feel more sensitive to pleasure and less sensitive to displeasure. That will happen as soon as all the maliciousness, ugliness and pointlessness of so many things are eliminated. They will be eliminated as soon as someone comes up with a plan for the world whose purpose is the highest development of all beings to whom all occurences serve as means. This highest development, however, can only succeed if humans are beings destined to endure; the opposite of all this will occur as soon as one thinks about one’s destruction.

6. Dietrich Eckart & ✡Otto Weininger

Hundreds of thousands of people know this name, but nothing more about it than it was somehow involved with the Movement. And yet Dietrich Eckart was the first who, after the Novemeber 9, 1918 collapse, courageously faced the ‘November criminals’ and their gang. Out of a German poet sprang a folkish pioneer and forerunner of National Socialism.
– Albert Reich

✡Otto Weininger:
Jews, then, do not live as free, self-governing individuals, choosing between virtue and vice in the Aryan fashion. They are a mere collection of similar individuals each cast in the same mould, the whole forming as it were a continuous plasmodium. The Antisemite has often thought of this as a defensive and aggressive union, and has formulated the conception of a Jewish “solidarity.” There is deep confusion here.
When some accusation is made against some unknown member of the Jewish race, all Jews secretly take the part of the accused, and wish, hope for, and seek to establish his innocence. But it must not be thought that they are interesting themselves more in the fate of the individual Jew than they would do in the case of an individual Christian. It is the menace to Judaism in general, the fear that the shameful shadow may do harm to Judaism as a whole, which is the origin of the apparent feeling of sympathy.

Dietrich Eckart:
The Earth-Centered Jew Lacks a Soul
To the Jew Weininger his own nation is like an invisible cohesive web of slime fungus (plasmodium), existing since time immemorial and spread over the entire earth; and this expansionism, as he correctly observes (without, of course, proving it), is an essential component of the idea, of the nature of Judaism. This immediately becomes clear if we again regard the Jewish people as the embodiment of world-affirmation. Without it, nothing of a terrestrial character, and thus no nation, is conceivable. Hence, the Jew, the only consistent and consequently the only viable yea-sayer to the world, must be found wherever other men bear in themselves—if only in the tiniest degree—a compulsion to overcome the world. The Jew represents the still necessary counterweight to them; otherwise that urgent craving would be fulfilled immediately and thereby would not usher in the salvation of the world (since the Jewish people would still remain in existence), but would destroy it in a different way through the elimination of the spiritual power without which it cannot exist either. I will discuss this idea more fully later on; here I wish merely to demonstrate that the world could not exist if the Jews were living by themselves. This is why an old prophecy proclaims that the end of the world will arrive on the day when the Jews will have established the state of Palestine . . .

Savitri:
The Lightning and the Sun
It is — or was, for a very long time — a wide-spread belief among Christians that, when the Jews become once more the masters of Palestine, their “promised Land,” the “end of the world” — i.e., the end of the present Time-cycle, — will not be far away. The Mohammedans behold, they too, in that same event, one of the tokens announcing the advent of the long-awaited “Mahdi.” Thanks to England’s steadily pro-Jewish policy, the Jews have, in Palestine, since 1938, a State of their own. If the collective belief of many generations of men, both in the West and in the Near East, corresponds to any reality (and collective beliefs of that nature generally do, to some extent), then the great end must be drawing night.

✝La Civiltà Cattolica, Series XIV, Vol. VII, Fascicule 961, 23 October 1890:
Suetonius handed down its memory in his Lives of the 12 Caesars: Percrebuerat Oriente toto vetus et constans opinio, esse in fatis, ut eo tempore Judei profecti rerum potirentur. [In the entire East had spread the old and consistent opinion that it had been prophesied that at that time the Jews would come forth and would possess the power.]
And, in his historiography, Tacitus corroborated this: Pluribus persuasio inerat, antiquis sacerdotum literis contineri eo ipso tempore fore ut valesceret Oriens, profectique Judei rerum potirentur. [Many held the opinion that it was contained in the ancient writings of the priests that this was the time when the East would become strong and the Jews would come forth and possess the power.]

http://www.livius.org/articles/religion/messiah/messianic-claimant-14-vespasian/

✡Otto Weininger:
I must, however, make clear what I mean by Judaism; I mean neither a race nor a people nor a recognised creed. I think of it as a tendency of the mind, as a psychological constitution which is a possibility for all mankind, but which has become actual in the most conspicuous fashion only amongst the Jews. Antisemitism itself will confirm my point of view.

NSDAP Programme:
24. We demand freedom for all religious denominations in the State, provided they do not threaten its existence not offend the moral feelings of the German race.
The Party, as such, stands for positive Christianity, but does not commit itself to any particular denomination. It combats the Jewish-materialistic spirit within and without us, and is convinced that our nation can achieve permanent health only from within on the basis of the principle: The common interest before self-interest.

Robert Ley:
Have we really done all we can to drive the Jew and his world, his spirit and his deviltry, from our midst? Many people think that it is enough to physically remove the Jew, and that if we do not see him any longer, and if we see the yellow star less often, the Jewish problem in Germany will be solved. What more could be done about the Jews? To do more would be to take the Jew too seriously, to fight against windmills. Our hatred of the Jews would make us ridiculous Don Quixotes. Enough is enough. These Germans are mistaken, for their opinion only proves that they understand the Jewish problem either superficially, or not at all. Is it enough to destroy the louse, but leave brood alive? Is it enough to free ourselves of the pest, yet deal with others who are still infested with the pest? The brood that we leave alive is the Jewish world, the Jewish mentality, the Jewish spirit, that still surrounds us, that follows us everywhere. And we still find infested neighbors in Europe, above all among our enemies, and in particular with Bolshevism.

Hitler, Table Talk (Cameron & Stevens), December 1, 1941:
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 decent 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.

Hitler, Table Talk, December 1, 1941 (Jochmann):
Dietrich Eckart once told me he had known only one decent Jew Otto Weininger, who had taken his life when he realized that the Jew lives from the disintegration of other nationalities.
Dietrich Eckart hat mir einmal gesagt, er habe nur einen anständigen Juden
kennengelernt, den Otto Weininger, der sich das Leben genommen hat, als er erkannte, daß der Jude von der Zersetzung anderen Volkstums lebt.

Michael H. Kater:
The Twisted Muse: Musicians and Their Music in the Third Reich, p.g. 218
None other than Paul Cossmann arranged a personal meeting between the Fuhrer of the National Socialist Party and [suspected Jew] Pfitzner, who was in a Munich hospital in February 1923, for that hypernationalistic publicist wanted the conservative composer and the reactionary revolutionary to become acquainted. The two men–with Hitler in his shabby trenchcoat at the foot of the bed–conversed about “the future of Germany” and World War I, for which “the Jews alone were responsible.” Otto Weininger was mentioned, whom, according to Pfitzner’s memory, Hitler wished to acknowledge because as a Jew he had, through suicide, “removed himself from this world.”

Dietrich Eckart:
The Earth-Centered Jew Lacks a Soul
From all this it follows that Judaism is part of the organism of mankind just as, let us say, certain bacteria are part of man’s body, and indeed the Jews are as necessary as bacteria. The body contains, as we know, a host of tiny organisms without which it would perish, even though they feed on it. Similarly, mankind needs the Jewish strain in order to preserve its vitality until its earthly mission is fulfilled. In other words, the world-affirmation exemplified by Judaism in its purest form, though disastrous in itself, is a condition of man’s earthly being—as long as men exist—and we cannot even imagine its nonexistence. It will collapse only when all mankind is redeemed.

Hitler, Memoirs of a Confidant, p.g. 185-186:
The financial power of Jewry can be broken only by the creation of a large Jewish state to which all the Jews are deported. But since such a project cannot be undertaken unless the people of the world, without exception, form into a solid, closed union, there is no need to hurry.

[Hitler was not a Zionist.]

Mein Kampf:

It is an essential aspect of human evolution that the individual should be imbued with the spirit of sacrifice in favour of the common weal that he: should not be influenced by the morbid notions of those who pretend to know better than Nature and who have the impudence to criticise her decrees. It is just at those junctures when the idealistic attitude threatens to disappear that we notice a weakening of this force which is a necessary constituent in the founding and maintenance of the community and is therefore a necessary condition of civilisation.

It is of the utmost importance to insist again and again that idealism is not merely a superfluous manifestation of sentiment but rather something which has been, is and always will be, a necessary precondition of human civilization; it is even out of this that the very idea of the word ‘Human’ arises.

We may safely say that man does not live merely to serve higher ideals, but that these ideals, in their turn, furnish the necessary conditions of his existence as a human being. And thus the circle is closed.

The völkisch belief holds that humanity must have its ideals, because ideals are a necessary condition of human existence itself.

Laurency (L5e4.10):
[Before a more detailed examination of Krishnamurti’s teaching is made, an analysis of certain basic principles and factors that are particularly relevant to his attitude is probably necessary. This analysis will clarify: the inevitability of authority, the purpose and importance of society, the necessity of ideals, the meaning of liberation, the validity of the laws of development and self-realization. – L5e4.3.1]
7Krishnamurti wants to do away with ideals. Thus he says that “ideals are nothing but escape from reality” and that “ideals of brotherhood have demonstrated their impotence, since there are hatred and wars”.
8Both statements, typical of the stage of the mystic, are, as being isolated and thus not put into their right contexts, positively erroneous and misleading.

[The Jew Henry C. Samuels devoted a poem to Krishnamurti which is reproduced below (and he follows up with allusions to Psalm 24:4, Psalm 51:10):

The noblest of characters,
That mankind brought forth.
The Path-way
Is just common sense,]

Laurency (L5e4.10):
9Simply because ideals are preached injudiciously, because different ideals belong to different stages of development, because ideals pursued at the stage of culture are inconceivable at the stage of barbarism and seem removed from reality at the stage of civilization, all ideals must be rejected. Our unresponsiveness to ideals that are above our ability to understand and to realize does not in any way demonstrate the impotence of ideals in a general sense.

Dietrich Eckart:
Both directions of the will are important to the maintenance of life… constant world-denial would, so it would seem, redeem the world, but in fact would destroy it as would absolute world-affirmation… it would deprive the world of the mental-spiritual strength without which it could not exist.

Laurency (kr7):
17Consciousness cannot exist without a material basis. The importance of the consciousness aspect increases in each higher material world and the importance of the matter aspect decreases. But it is a mistake to deny the absolute existence of the matter aspect and an even greater one to disregard its significance in the worlds of man. The illusionist philosophy of Shankara is a mental fiction in the world of emotional illusions.

Haeckel:
The Riddle of the Universe

I. The supreme mistake of Christian ethics, and one which runs directly counter to the Golden Rule, is its exaggeration of love of one’s neighbor at the expense of self-love. Christianity attacks and despises egoism on principle. Yet that natural impulse is absolutely indispensable in view of self-preservation; indeed, one may say that even altruism, its apparent opposite, is only an enlightened egoism. Nothing great or elevated has ever taken place without egoism, and without the passion that urges us to great sacrifices. It is only the excesses of the impulse that are injurious.

Rosenberg:
In this struggle, we must fight on the side of Ahura Mazda (just as the Einheriar in Valhalla would fight for Odin against the Fenris Wolf and the Midgard Serpent). Man must not, therefore, withdraw into world renouncing contemplation and asceticism. He must see himself as the struggling bearer of a world preserving idea; he must arouse and arm all the creative powers of the uman soul. Whether as a thinker or an active creator, man must always serve what is highest. Wherever he goes, he serves the creative principle—when he sows and reaps; when he is true to himself; when he considers a handshake as an inviolable oath. The Vendidat epitomises all this in the sublime words: Whoever sows grain, sows saintliness.

7. Justifications for Anti-Semitism

Laurency (wm1.69):
4Jewish history has demonstrated more clearly than any other history that the world’s history is the world’s tribunal. The history of the Jews is the story of repeatedly frustrated hopes because of their defiance of the laws of life, the law of unity in particular.

Mein Kampf:
Nature, the eternal, takes merciless vengeance on those who defy her laws. Therefore, I believe to-day that my conduct is in accordance with the will of the Almighty Creator. In resisting the Jew I am defending the handiwork of the Lord.

[Recall that this was made in the context of Hitler describing the effects and consequences of Marxism.]

Laurency (L5e5):
28“The sin against the holy spirit” meant idiotization of common sense through acceptance of absurdities, contempt of the good, true, and beautiful, as well as conscious opposition to evolution.

Mein Kampf:
Culturally the Jew’s activity consists in poisoning art, literature and the theatre, holding the expressions of national sentiment up to scorn, overturning all concepts of the sublime and beautiful, the worthy and the good, finally dragging the people down to the level of his own low mentality.

Tacitus:
Proselytes to Jewry adopt the same practices, and the very first lesson they learn is to despise the gods, shed all feelings of patriotism, and consider parents, children and brothers as readily expendable.

Laurency (L4e4):
9Christos never uttered the words in the Gospels about the “sin against the holy spirit”. He wanted to set mankind free from the very concept of sin, the invention of the satanists. There is no other “sin” than mistakes as to laws of nature and laws of life, and those mistakes fall under the law of cause and effect, the law of sowing and reaping.

John 9:2-3 “Who sinned, this man or his parents, that he was born blind?” “Neither this man nor his parents sinned,” said Jesus,

[The subsequent statement, “that the works of God might be displayed in him”, would have been interpolated in by theologians and is typically quoted to explain their refusal to inquire, such as C. S. Lewis’ attitude towards homosexuality.]

Laurency (ps3):
6There are laws in everything: laws of nature or laws of matter in the matter aspect of existence; laws of life, or laws of consciousness, in the consciousness aspect.

Laurency (kl1_3):
8“Sin against the holy ghost” is the refusal to recognize the unity of life and the definitive refusal to enter into unity. It implies the individual’s conscious, deliberate resolution, systematically carried out, “to disclaim his humanity”, his share in unity. . . .

✡Otto Weininger:
To defeat Judaism, the Jew must first understand himself and war against himself. So far, the Jew has reached no further than to make and enjoy jokes against his own peculiarities. Unconsciously he respects the Aryan more than himself. Only steady resolution, united to the highest self-respect, can free the Jew from Jewishness. This resolution, be it ever so strong, ever so honourable, can only be understood and carried out by the individual, not by the group. Therefore the Jewish question can only be solved individually; every single Jew must try to solve it in his proper person. There is no other solution to the question and can be no other; Zionism will never succeed in answering it.

Laurency (L5e23):
3There are two categories of soulless people. . . . The second category are those who have gone so far in evil that they cannot long for the good, noble, beautiful, true.
4In “esoteric” literature it has been asserted that soulless people cannot incarnate any more. This is true only of the second category of soulless people, however. . . .
5Thus there are soulless people for whom there is still some hope. They are characterized by their lack of understanding of the necessity of evolution and welfare of everybody. They gladly join organizations which emphasize the welfare of their own groups at the expense of other groups or individuals. Such organizations are characterized by an all-pervading psychosis to which the individual members fall prey.

Plato:
Theaetetus
The unrighteous man is apt to pride himself on his cunning; when others call him rogue, he says to himself: ‘They only mean that I am one who deserves to live, and not a mere burden of the earth.’ But he should reflect that his ignorance makes his condition worse than if he knew. For the penalty of injustice is not death or stripes, but the fatal necessity of becoming more and more unjust.
Two patterns of life are set before him; the one blessed and divine, the other godless and wretched; and he is growing more and more like the one and unlike the other. He does not see that if he continues in his cunning, the place of innocence will not receive him after death. And yet if such a man has the courage to hear the argument out, he often becomes dissatisfied with himself, and has no more strength in him than a child.—But we have digressed enough.
Goebbels:
Der Jude, Der Angriff. Aufsätze aus der Kampfzeit (Munich: Zentralverlag der NSDAP., 1935), pp. 322-324.
The Jew is immunized against all dangers: one may call him a scoundrel, parasite, swindler, profiteer, it all runs off him like water off a raincoat. But call him a Jew and you will be astonished at how he recoils, how injured he is, how he suddenly shrinks back: “I’ve been found out.”

Richard Wagner:
The cultured Jew has taken the most indicible pains to strip off all the obvious tokens of his lower co-religionists: in many a case he has even held it wise to make a Christian baptism wash away the traces of his origin. This zeal, however, has never got so far as to let him reap the hoped-for fruits: it has conducted only to his utter isolation, and to making him the most heartless of all human beings; to such a pitch, that we have been bound to lose even our earlier sympathy for the tragic history of his stock. His connexion with the former comrades in his suffering, which he arrogantly tore asunder, it has stayed impossible for him to replace by a new connexion with that society whereto he has soared up. He stands in correlation with none but those who need his money: and never yet has money thriven to the point of knitting a goodly bond ‘twixt man and man. Alien and apathetic stands the educated Jew in midst of a society he does not understand, with whose tastes and aspirations he does not sympathise, whose history and evolution have always been indifferent to him.

✡Theodor Herzl:
Anti-Semitism increases day by day and hour by hour among the nations; indeed, it is bound to increase, because the causes of its growth continue to exist, and cannot be removed. Its remote cause is our loss of the power of assimilation during the Middle Ages; its immediate cause is our excessive production of mediocre intellects, who cannot find an outlet downwards or upwards – that is to say, no wholesome outlet in either direction.

Bolshevism: From Moses to Lenin
Were [the Jew] really interested in comradeship, he has had the longest and most abundant opportunity for it. Jehovah’s command to him to make no alliances with foreign peoples, but, on the contrary, to devour one after the other, went straight to his heart (Exodus 34:12; Deuteronomy 7:16).

✡Maimonides:
Mishneh Torah, Kings and Wars 5:5
It is a Positive Commandment to obliterate Amalek, as it says, “erase the memory of Amalek” (Deut. 28:19). It is a Positive Commandment to perpetually remember their wicked deeds and their ambush in order to arouse our enmity against them, as it says, “remember what Amalek did to you” (Deut. 25:17). By Tradition we have learned that “remember” means by speech, “do not forget” (Deut. 25:19) – in one’s heart; for it is forbidden to forget their enmity and hatred.

Laurency (kl1_1):
4Everything man is irritated by strengthens these complexes. He recalls imagined wrongs and gets annoyed once more. Many people in this manner develop emotional and mental ulcers and, finally, even boils and cancer tumours, etc. in their organisms. Seventy-five per cent of all disease depend on uncontrolled consciousness. Irritations affect nerves, cells (including blood corpuscles), etc.

Diodorus Siculus:
Historical Library
Those too that were thus expelled seated themselves about Jerusalem, and being afterwards embodied into one nation, called the nation of the Jews, their hatred of all other men descended with their blood to posterity. Hence they made strange laws, entirely different from those of other nations. In consequence of this, they will neither eat nor drink with any one of a different nation, nor wish him any prosperity.

Hitler, Table Talk (Cameron & Stevens), December 28-29, 1941:
The human being does not develop solely through the obligations life imposes on him, but also through the habits that make up the climate of his period.

Talmud, Sanhedrin 39a
The Gemara relates: The emperor said to Rabbi Tanḥum: Come, let us all be one people. Rabbi Tanḥum said: Very well. But we, who are circumcised, cannot become uncircumcised as you are; you all circumcise yourselves and become like us.

1 Maccabees 1:41 LXX
Moreover king Antiochus wrote to his whole kingdom, that all should be one people, And every one should leave his laws: so all the heathen agreed according to the commandment of the king.

✡Maimonides:
Epistle to Yemen
Ever since the time of revelation, every despot or slave that has attained to power, be he violent or ignoble, has made it his first aim and his final purpose to destroy our law, and to vitiate our religion, by means of the sword, by violence, or by brute force, such as Amalek, Sisera, Sennacherib, Nebuchadnezzar, Titus, Hadrian, may their bones be ground to dust, and others like them. This is one of the two classes which attempt to foil the Divine
[Jewish] will. The second class consists of the most intelligent and educated among the nations, such as the Syrians, Persians, and Greeks. These also endeavor to demolish our law and to vitiate it by means of arguments which they invent, and by means of controversies which they institute. They seek to render the [Jewish] Law ineffectual and to wipe out every trace thereof by means of their polemical writings, just as the despots plan to do it with the sword.

Mein Kampf:
For a fight it will have to be, since the first task will not be to build up the idea of the völkisch State, but rather to wipe out the Jewish State which now exists.

Hitler, July 28, 1922 speech:
The backbone of its independence, its own economic life, is to be destroyed, that it may the more surely relapse into the golden fetters of the perpetual interest-slavery of the Jewish race. And this process will end when suddenly out of the masses someone arises who seizes the leadership, finds other comrades and fans into flame the passions which have been held in check and looses them against the deceivers. That is the lurking danger, and the Jew can meet it in one way only – by destroying the hostile national intelligentsia. That is the inevitable ultimate goal of the Jew in his revolution. And this aim he must pursue; he knows well enough his economics brings no blessing: his is no master people: he is an exploiter: the Jews are a people of robbers. He has never founded any civilization, though he has destroyed civilizations by the hundred. He possesses nothing of his own creation to which he can point.

Hitler, Memoirs of a Confidant, p.g. 64:
Nothing upsets Jewry more than a gardener who is intent on keeping his garden neat and healthy. Nothing is more inimical to Jewry than order! It needs the smell of decay, the stench of cadavers, weakness, lack of resistance, submission of the personal self, illness, degeneracy! And wherever it takes root, it continues the process of decomposition! It must! For only under those conditions can it lead it’s parasitic existence. It is not for nothing that time and again the Jews have been driven out of countries where they settled–from Babylonia, from Egypt, from Rome, from England, from the Rhineland, and elsewhere. In each of these a gardener was at work who was incorruptible and loved his people.

Diodorus Siculus:
Historical Library
Antiochus, therefore, abhorring this their contrariety to all other nations, used his utmost endeavour to abrogate their laws. In order to effect this, he sacrificed a large hog at the image of Moses and at the altar of God that stood in the outward court, and sprinkled them with the blood of the sacrifice. He commanded likewise that the sacred books, whereby they were taught to hate all other nations, should be sprinkled with the broth made of the hog’s flesh.

✝Orosius:
But Caligula, since he hated all mankind, and especially the Jews, ignored Philo’s embassy and commanded that all the Jews’ holy places and, above all, the famous sanctuary at Jerusalem be profaned by the gentiles’ sacrifices, be filled with statues and idols, and that he himself be worshipped as a god there.

Diodorus Siculus:
Historical Library
And he extinguished the lamp called by them immortal, which was continually burning in the temple.

https://semiticcontroversies.blogspot.com/2012/05/younger-seneca-great-fire-of-rome-and_08.html
Seneca:
let us forbid the lighting of fires on the Sabbath because the temples of the Gods have been burnt down by the jews and non-jews do not take pleasure in their ashes.

Laurency (L3e3):
5There is individual karma, family, group, class, national, and racial karma. We are responsible for everything we have benefited from and especially from unjust conditions.
6An example of karma: The Jewish racial instinct is in direct opposition to the Law. The Jews have chosen to collect all the gold of the earth. They succeed in this. And every time it will be taken from them until they have learnt their lesson. Those who have derived advantages from that race, those who have persecuted them, must incarnate among them.

Laurency (kl1_9):
8What is taken by violence or trickery will sooner or later be lost. The most well-known historical example is the history of the Jews. They gather all the gold of the Earth subsequently to be deprived of it. They conquered Palestine and lost it in due time. They still claim to possess that country, which is a serious mistake.

Bolshevism: From Moses to Lenin
Every portrayal ridicules for its depravity that general state of affairs which existed for some six hundred years in Palestine, till the Assyrians put an end to the mischief. Can you call that a country? Can’t one accept the Old Testament as the authority on the matter? First we read of the uninterrupted murders and plunderings of the other peoples of Palestine, which, naturally, took many years.

Laurency (L5e22):
2The Jews occupied Palestine in about 1200 B.C.E. and annihilated the original population – men, women, and children. The land which they had robbed from others they lost themselves 1300 years later, which is what happens according to the law of reaping.

Senator Thomas J. Dodd:
Sepember. 25, 1945 letter
You know how I have despised anti-Semitism. You know how strongly I feel toward those who preach intolerance of any kind… Sometimes it seems that the Jews will never learn about these things. They seem intent on bringing new difficulties down on their own heads. I do not like to write about this matter —it is distasteful to me — but I am disturbed about it. (Published JTA 9, October 2007.)

Martin Luther:
The Jews and their lies
They have failed to learn any lesson from the terrible distress that has been theirs for over fourteen hundred years in exile. Nor can they obtain any end or definite terminus of this, as they suppose, by means of the vehement cries and laments to God. If these blows do not help, it is reasonable to assume that our talking and explaining will help even less. Therefore a Christian should be content and not argue with the Jews. But if you have to or want to talk with them, do not say any more than this: “Listen, Jew, are you aware that Jerusalem and your sovereignty, together with your temple and priesthood, have been destroyed for over 1,460 years?” For this year, which we Christians write as the year 1542 since the birth of Christ, is exactly 1,468 years, going on fifteen hundred years, since Vespasian and Titus destroyed Jerusalem and expelled the Jews from the city. Let the Jews bite on this nut and dispute this question as long as they wish. For such ruthless wrath of God is sufficient evidence that they assuredly have erred and gone astray. Even a child can comprehend this. For one dare not regard God as so cruel that he would punish his own people so long, so terribly, so unmercifully, and in addition keep silent, comforting them neither with words nor with deeds, and fixing no time limit and no end to it. Who would have faith, hope, or love toward such a God?

1 Maccabees 1:20-28 LXX
And after that Antiochus had smitten Egypt, he returned again in the hundred forty and third year, and went up against Israel and Jerusalem with a great multitude, And entered proudly into the sanctuary, and took away the golden altar, and the candlestick of light, and all the vessels thereof, And the table of the shewbread, and the pouring vessels, and the vials. And the censers of gold, and the veil, and the crown, and the golden ornaments that were before the temple, all which he pulled off. He took also the silver and the gold, and the precious vessels: also he took the hidden treasures which he found.
And when he had taken all away, he went into his own land, having made a great massacre, and spoken very proudly. Therefore there was a great mourning in Israel, in every place where they were; So that the princes and elders mourned, the virgins and young men were made feeble, and the beauty of women was changed. Every bridegroom took up lamentation, and she that sat in the marriage chamber was in heaviness, The land also was moved for the inhabitants thereof, and all the house of Jacob was covered with confusion.

Cassius Dio:
The entrance to the temple was now laid open to the Romans. The soldiers on account of their superstition would not immediately rush in, but at last, as Titus forced them, they made their way inside. Then the Jews carried on a defence much more vigorous than before, as if they had discovered a rare and unexpected privilege in falling near the temple, while fighting to save it. The populace was stationed in the outer court, the senators on the steps, and the priests in the hall of worship itself. And though they were but a handful fighting against a far superior force they were not subdued until a section of the temple was fired. Then they went to meet death willingly, some letting themselves be pierced by the swords of the Romans, some slaughtering one another, others committing suicide, and others leaping into the blaze. It looked to everybody, and most of all to them, apparently, that so far from being ruin, it was victory and salvation and happiness to perish along with the temple.
Even under these conditions many captives were taken, among them Bargiora, the commander of the enemy: he was the only one punished in the course of the triumphal celebration
.

Diodorus Siculus:
Historical Library
But the king being generous and of a mild disposition, received hostages and pardoned the Jews. He demolished, however, the walls of Jerusalem, and took the tribute that was due.

Polybius:
King Antiochus was a man of ability in the field and daring in design, and showed himself worthy of the royal name, except in regard to his manœuvres at Pelusium.

Philostratus:
After Titus had taken Jerusalem, and when the country all round was filled with corpses, the neighboring races offered him a crown; but he disclaimed any such honor to himself, saying that it was not himself that had accomplished this exploit, but that he had merely lent his arms to God, who had so manifested his wrath; and Apollonius praised his action, for therein he displayed a great deal of judgment and understanding of things human and divine, and it showed great moderation on his part that he refused to be crowned because he had shed blood.

Hitler, August 15, 1920 speech:

First we must examine the Jew’s attitude to work, find out how he perceives the principle of work, and excuse me if I now take a book called The Bible. I am not claiming that all its contents are necessarily true, as we know that Jewry was very liberal in writing it. One thing, however, is certain: it has not been written by an antisemite. It is very important because no antisemite would have been able to write a more terrible indictment against the Jewish race than the Bible, the Old Testament. Let us take a look at a sentence: “By the sweat of thy brow shalt thou eat bread.” [Genesis 3:19] And it says that it was to be a punishment for the Fall of Man.

Because a Jew has written this, true or not is unimportant because it still reflects the opinion which Jewry has about work. For them work is not an obvious ethical duty but at most a means to sustenance. In our eyes, this is not work because in this case any activity serving self-preservation, without regard to fellow men, might be called work. And we know that this work, in the past, consisted of plundering of caravans, and today in planned plundering of indebted farmers, industrialists and workers. The form has changed but the principle is the same. We do not call it work, but robbery.

Work is always the best antidote to attacks on the soul and spirit.

— Goebbels, Diaries, February 11, 1942

Mein Kampf:
A State which is territorially delimited cannot be established or maintained unless the general attitude towards work be a positive one. If this attitude be lacking, then the necessary basis of a civilization is also lacking. That is why the Jewish people, despite the intellectual powers with which they are apparently endowed, have not a culture – certainly not a culture of their own. The culture which the Jew enjoys to-day is the product of the work of others and this product is debased in the hands of the Jew.

https://www.myjewishlearning.com/article/shepherd-consciousness/
The greatest of our early Jewish leaders chose this profession, a livelihood scorned by surrounding cultures. . . . Additionally, the labor is not intensive. Unlike farming, shepherding does not require one to exert a great deal of energy in mundane matters.

Laurency (ps3):
2Physical life dominates the barbaric individual. Any kind of work, any unnecessary exertion, disgusts him and is considered foolish by him. Only urgent physical needs or excited affects cause him to abandon that indolence which to him is happiness and the meaning of life. Typical is his inability to learn from anything but physical experiences. Everything remains to be learnt. The personality is exclusively a product of reaping, since there is no need for particular consideration of consciousness development.

https://hitlerianhylozoics.wordpress.com/drones/

Schiller:
Now man can be opposed to himself in a twofold manner: either as a savage, when his feelings rule over his principles; or as a barbarian, when his principles destroy his feelings. The savage despises art, and acknowledges nature as his despotic ruler; the barbarian laughs at nature, and dishonours it, but he often proceeds in a more contemptible way than the savage, to be the slave of his senses. The cultivated man makes of nature his friend, and honours its friendship, while only bridling its caprice.

Mein Kampf:
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 had previously lived together in unity, will turn into a swarm of rats that fight bitterly 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.

Laurency (ps3):
3For individuals with a repulsive basic tendency of their individual characters it is necessary to have egoistic interests to neutralize their instinctively inflammable hatred, and to have stronger motives the stronger this tendency is.

Mein Kampf:
The intellectual faculties of the Jew have been trained through thousands of years. Today the Jew is looked upon as specially “cunning”; and in a certain sense he has been so throughout the ages. 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.

✡Otto Weininger:
The Jew is not really anti-moral. But, none the less, he does not represent the highest ethical type. He is rather non-moral, neither very good nor very bad, with nothing in him of either the angel or the devil.
Notwithstanding the Book of Job and the story of Eden, it is plain that the conceptions of a Supreme Good and a Supreme Evil are not truly Jewish; I have no wish to enter upon the lengthy and controversial topics of Biblical criticism, but at the least I shall be on sure ground when I say that these conceptions play the least significant part in modern Jewish life. Orthodox or unorthodox, the modern Jew does not concern himself with God and the Devil, with Heaven and Hell.

Rosenberg:
The Jews adopted Ahriman as Satan, and evolved their own entirely unnatural system of racial admixture out of a Persian system devised to preserve racial purity. This was combined with an obligation ridden religious law which was, of course, wholly Jewish.

Mein Kampf:
With the Jewish people the spirit of self-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.

Laurency (ps1):
1Man is neither “good” nor “evil”. He is, at his present stage of development, an undeveloped being with primitive instincts, egoistic interests, and unreal world views and life views.

Laurency (wm1.71):
7To “god” there is no good or evil creature, just individuals on various levels of development. The saying in the Gospel novel attributed to Christos, “none is good save one, that is, god”, was a gnostic saying. Christos would never have expressed himself thus. Goodness is unity.

✝Origen:
nor does [Celsus] see how great is the injury done to religion from accepting the statement that before God there is no difference between a man and an ant or a bee, but proceeds to add, that “if men appear to be superior to irrational animals on this account, that they have built cities, and make use of a political constitution, and forms of government, and sovereignties, this is to say nothing to the purpose, for ants and bees do the same. Bees, indeed, have a sovereign, who has followers and attendants; and there occur among them wars and victories, and slaughterings of the vanquished, and cities and suburbs, and a succession of labours, and judgments passed upon the idle and the wicked; for the drones are driven away and punished.

Hitler, Memoirs of a Confidant, p.g. 145:
Of course it is not appropriate for humankind to act like animals. We cannot simply eliminate what is sick and weak, abandoning it as wild animals do, killing it as the bees do with their drones. Whatever has entered human society must somehow be placed in the service of this society and cared for. But Providence has allowed us to find the means to prevent–or at least to limit–the sickly and the weak from entering human society in the first place.

K. H. (Koot Hoomi):
The Mahatma Letters to A. P. Sinnett, Letter No. 10
The real evil proceeds from human intelligence and its origin rests entirely with reasoning man who dissociates himself from Nature Humanity then alone is the true source of evil. Evil is the exaggeration of good, the progeny of human selfishness and greediness. Think profoundly and you will find that save death — which is no evil but a necessary law, and accidents which will always find their reward in a future life — the origin of every evil whether small or great is in human action, in man whose intelligence makes him the one free agent in Nature.

Aurelius:
Even in irrational beings we see swarms and herds, and nesting, and love not unlike ours. Because they do have souls, and the bonding instinct is found in a developed form—not something we see in plants, or stones, or trees.

Goebbels (Diaries), December 29, 1939:
[Hitler] has little regard for homo sapiens. Man should not feel so superior to animals. He has no reason to. Man believes that he alone has intelligence, a soul, and the power of speech. Has not the animal these things? Just because we, with our dull senses, cannot recognise them, it does not prove that they are not there.

Laurency (kl2_3):
9Good and evil are social concepts.

Julian:
For that the power to distinguish between good and less good is the property of wisdom is evident surely even to the witless; so that the serpent was a benefactor rather than a destroyer of the human race.

Laurency (kr5):
Destiny, which is the will of the deity, leads everything to the deity. Those who do not strive towards the deity of their own accord are sooner or later compelled to do so by the force of circumstances. The evil in existence is a lesser good, necessary to the continuance of the whole, and impels the individual towards the deity.

Laurency (kr5):
To Plotinos the whole of existence was divine, even the physical part of it as perfect as it could be. What we consider to be imperfect is merely a lower stage. Evil is a lesser good. Good becomes evil if it prevents man from acquiring something still higher good. All this is esoterics.

Plotinus:
No: Evil is not in any and every lack; it is in absolute lack. What falls in some degree short of the Good is not Evil; considered in its own kind it might even be perfect, but where there is utter dearth, there we have Essential Evil, void of all share in Good…

Mein Kampf:
Therefore, the Jewish intellect will never be constructive, but always destructive. At best, it may serve as a stimulus in rare cases, but only in the limited meaning of the poet’s [Goethe’s] lines, “The Power which always wills the bad, and always works the good” (Die stets Böse will und stets das Gute schafft.).

✡Otto Weininger:
Perhaps the great merit of Jewishness lies in continually leading Aryan man towards self-consciousness, in warning him to remain what he is. The Aryan should almost be grateful to the Jew. Through the Jew, he comes to know precisely what he must guard himself against: namely, Jewishness as a possibility within himself.

Martin Luther:
Whether or not the government does any thing about it, every individual should take care of himself and his conscience, by keeping before himself such a definition or picture of a Jew!

Nietzsche:
Whoever fights with monsters should see to it that he does not become one himself. And when you stare for a long time into an abyss, the abyss stares back into you.

Laurency (L5e23):
The black lodge knows that its power will end when mankind has realized that the meaning of life is consciousness development. Therefore it tries to direct the attention of mankind to physical interests only, the physical world, material comfort, material possessions, and material undertakings. It is the physical material values that separate humans beings. When the black ones lose their power, the fight for goods and money will end.

Bolshevism: From Moses to Lenin
“‘And I will set the Egyptians against the Egyptians: and they shall fight every one against his brother and every one against his neighbor,'” he ground out. “What hatred, what demonic hatred! That’s not human; what is it?”

Isaiah 19:2 LXX
And the Egyptians shall be stirred up against the Egyptians: and a man shall fight against his brother, and a man against his neighbor, city against city, and law against law.

Protocols of Zion:
PROTOCOL No. 5
For a time perhaps we might be successfully dealt with by a coalition of the “goyim” of all the world: but from this danger we are secured by the discord existing among them whose roots are so deeply seated that they can never now be plucked up. We have set one against another the personal and national reckonings of the GOYIM, religious and race hatreds, which we have fostered into a huge growth in the course of the past twenty centuries. This is the reason why there is not one State which would anywhere receive support if it were to raise its arm, for every one of them must bear in mind that any agreement against us would be unprofitable to itself. We are too strong – there is no evading our power. The nations cannot come to even an inconsiderable private agreement without our secretly having a hand in it.

Laurency (L4e4):
Only through humanism could the free-thinker, by fighting, secure his right to witness to the truth: “Certainly there are cosmic beings. But no one that has even one trait in common with such a loathsome monster as Yahweh.”

Hitler’s Letters and Notes, p.g 240-241:

The Jew as ‘world factor’ = & = Power
Jahwe’s prophecy is only an
expression of this clear objective

✡Samuel Roth:
And yet, except to be used by one class of people as a symbol by which to dominate another, of what use to mankind is this fictitious centralized deity?

Laurency (L4e3):
1Monotheism is a legacy of Judaism with its Yahweh, or Jehovah. The Jews had to have one single god to be sure of the divine promise of their being the peculiar people of god.

✡Samuel Roth:
But chiefly because the Jews themselves, Torah in hand, and the cry Hear Israel, the Lord our God, the Lord is One on their lips, insinuated Monotheism into every nook and cranny of the earth. True or not, the belief that monotheism sprang forth from the racial genius of the Jews has become so common that even the official enemies of the Jews—and some of them, such as G. K. Chesterton and Hillaire Belloc, should know better,—do not trouble to deny it. Their attitude seems to be that it would be much simpler to deny altogether the value of monotheism and create a better repute for the virtues of paganism, than to try to wrest this brass laurel from the crown of Israel.
Of the Jews themselves, however, the attitude of Rabbi David Phillipson is typically cocksure:
“The Hebrews alone of all Semitic peoples reached the stage of pure monotheism through the teachings of their prophets; however, it required centuries of development before every trace of idolatry disappeared even from among them, and before they stood forth as ‘a unique people on earth,’ worshippers of the God, and Him alone.”

Laurency (L4e3):
2Yahweh, or Jehovah, is Bacchus who carried many names: El Sabaoth, El Shaddai, Dionysus (Zeus of Nisa; Nisa was the Egyptian name of Sinai).

Tacitus:
However, the fact that their priests intoned to the flute and cymbals and wore wreaths of ivy, and that a golden vine was found in their temple has led some people to think that they worship Bacchus, who has so enthralled the East. But their cult would be most inappropriate. Bacchus instituted gay and cheerful rites, but the Jewish ritual is preposterous and morbid.

Rosenberg:
The Track of the Jew
Another name for Jesus appears from time to time: Ben Pandera, literally “son of the panther”. This designation is explained in the following manner: in their contact with Greek life the Jew (see, among others, Paul) among the later Greeks was struck by their lasciviousness and nothing repelled him more than the orgies of the Dionysiac sect of the declining ancient world. Now, to Bacchus the panther was an especially sacred animal; the Bacchus worshippers slept on panther skins, the panther was portrayed on Greek coins, etc. So this animal was to the Jew the “obscene” animal, the symbol of lasciviousness in general.

Bolshevism: From Moses to Lenin
“But some time after this glorious Egyptian citizen of the Jewish faith, one hundred and ten years old, had died, the old Pharaoh also passed away and was succeeded by another Pharaoh, who ‘knew not Joseph,’ and, seeing the multitude of Jews, who meanwhile had grown very powerful, he became quite frightened. He feared lest: ‘when there falleth out any war, they join also unto our enemies’ (Exodus 1:6-10); thus he was smarter than Wilhelm II, who hoped for their support. The Jews must work, he decided. In all seriousness, work.

Talmud, Eruvin 53a:8-10
The Gemara explains: What is the meaning of the phrase: “Who knew not Joseph”? It means that he conducted himself like one who did not know Joseph at all.

Robert Ley:
The Jewish grain speculator Joseph reduced the Egyptian people to starvation and misery through his speculation. When they realized that, they saw the Jewish depravity and freed themselves from Jewish rule by putting the Jews in concentration camps and forcing them to work. The Jew swore revenge, incited the lowest elements, and according to the Old Testament killed thousands and thousands of Egyptian children in one night by killing the “first born.”

The Last Romantic by John Hall Wheelock, p.g. 189:
The other author of mine who was perhaps the most difficult, in my editorial days, was ✡Taylor Caldwell. Her books have had a tremendous sale. . . . Janet began throwing her weight around and telling them all that her books sold seven hundred thousand or a million copies, and when she got through talking and boasting about it they would just look at her and say, “Well, your books can’t be any good if they sell that many.” This was an eye-opener to Janet. “They must be utterly lacking in distinction,” one man said to her.

[This hysterical Jewess was called out by George Lincoln Rockwell in Chapter 12 of his book The Nationalist Perspective for denying the involvement of Jews in Communism.]

Laurency (L3e1):
15It is obvious that many of the pertaining prophets unwittingly (seldom consciously) have been the victims of the inspirations of the black lodge, because they always seek to disorient and to lead astray. It is strange that they have always attracted the largest numbers of followers.

Luke 4:26 Woe to you when everyone speaks well of you, for that is how their ancestors treated the false prophets.

Laurency (L5e23):
What has made the Jewish nation a constant tool of the black ones is precisely their physicalist attitude. It is also true that there have always been idealistic Jews who have fought that tendency. Those are not the merit of the nation, however, and cannot therefore be quoted by the nation as examples of its idealism.

✡Otto Weininger:
For these reasons Zionism must remain an impracticable ideal, notwithstanding the fashion in which it has brought together some of the noblest qualities of the Jews. Zionism is the negation of Judaism, for the conception of Judaism involves a worldwide distribution of the Jews. Citizenship is an un-Jewish thing, and there has never been and never will be a true Jewish State.

Hitler, Memoirs of a Confidant, p.g. 143:
The third point is that a person must be racially flawless. Let him be Germanic, or Roman, or Chinese, or a Jew, or an Indian, or a Negro, and so on. I respect all equally. We can work with and count on all of them. Each has his established traits. Depending on what one is looking for, this one or that one is to be preferred for the job in question. It is no different with people than with horses or dogs. Once one has established the proper race for a particular task, one can rest assured that the task will be resolved.

Hitler, Memoirs of a Confidant, p.g. 280:
For among every race, there are assimilationists whom you can no longer distinguish from the race within which they live. Who is to say that a Huguenot has not assimilated in Germany? And the same thing is true for a number of Jews. Conversely, you cannot help but wonder about some Germans who, from an ethical standpoint, seem to belong elsewhere and politically may even be closer to our enemies than they are to their own Volk.
So you see the criterion is quite different from the one these race theorists preach. To the departmental and university examinations–that is, the academic qualifying exams–you must add tests for characterological aptitude, and you should further require certain athletic feats that can be performed only by someone who is in good physical health, who is courageous, enterprising, and self-confident, and who also has the necessary ambition to carry out this feat. In this way, racial weaklings are eliminated quite automatically, no matter what their blood is or what descent they claim.
Should a Jew manage to meet all these requirements, he will also be able to hold his own as a teacher and educator. I know Jewish soldiers and reserve officers who in the war were proper daredevils.

Fichte:
Let the poisonous air of intolerance stay as far from these pages as it is from my heart. The Jew who overcomes the difficult, one may say insurmountable, barriers which lie before him, and attains a love of justice, mankind, and truth–that Jew is a hero and a saint. I do not know whether such Jews ever existed or exist today. I shall believe it as soon as I meet such Jews. But dare you not sell me beautiful appearances for the real thing.

✡Heinz Weichardt:
The international Olympics of 1936 presented a high point in the unrelenting rise of Germany. One had to be there to marvel at the expressions of astonishment on the faces of the guests from all over the world who had been prepared to expect a quite different appearance of a people “groaning under the yoke of Nazi tyranny.”
The joy at the festivities and the show of solidarity and comradeship among the youth from everywhere in the world seemed to herald the coming of a new and peaceful future.
Yet, until this day, the Jewish controlled journaille repeats the stupid story that Hitler left the games in order to avoid shaking hands with America’s top gold medal winner, Jesse Owens, a Negro. They conveniently forget to mention that Owens, like all the other medalists, was invited to a festive dinner at Hitler’s chancellery. This included, of course, also the Jewish girl, ✡Helene Mayer, who won the silver medal in fencing for Germany. They also forget the remarks of another American Negro athlete, who, on his return was asked by a reporter: “Did you meet any nasty Nazis in Germany?” Answer: “No, I only met nice Germans and I didn’t have to ride in the back of the bus, either.

https://news.google.com/newspapers?id=9kxhAAAAIBAJ&sjid=uHQNAAAAIBAJ&pg=6051,1761645&hl=en
https://books.google.com/books?id=e-SvBgAAQBAJ&lpg=PA194

[Robert Robinson, a black person who had experienced racial discrimination in the Soviet Union posed the question, “What caused the sudden rift between black and white youth after years of close friendship”? He wrote in Black on Red:]

To do that I had to trace the cause of racism in America. I explained that many white men had sexual relations with black slave women, producing racially mixed offspring.

Malcolm X:
The reporters would try their utmost to raise some “good” white man whom I couldn’t refute as such. I’ll never forget how one practically lost his voice. He asked me did I feel any white men had ever done anything for the black man in America. I told him, “Yes, I can think of two. Hitler, and Stalin. The black man in America couldn’t get a decent factory job until Hitler put so much pressure on the white man. And then Stalin kept up the pressure–”

[Hans Hauck and Hans Massaquoi both describe how SS officers procured jobs for them in Germany. It was recently pointed out to me that Hitler had acted as a patron to German Africans who had fought for Germany in WW1 and had helped them to find work. Details can be found in the book “Black Germany. The Making and Unmaking of a Diaspora Community, 1884 – 1960″ by Robbie Aitken and Eve Rosenhaft, on p.g. 250.]

In October 1935 Bormann wrote to the Foreign Office informing them that Hitler did not want ‘deserving’ former German colonial Africans (Kolonialneger) to experience unnecessary difficulties in their search for work and in their everyday lives. This was justified with a reference to the fact that many had fought for Germany in the war.68
Bormann sent a confidential note in March 1936 to all Nazi Gauleiter telling them that former colonial subjects deemed deserving of support would receive a written certificate produced by the Foreign Office. This would state that there were no reservations against these individuals finding employment. A later document suggests that these certificates were introduced. The circular, however, was to remain secret lest it be ‘misunderstood’ by rank-and-file party members.69

68. Bormann to Foreign Office, 31 October 1935, BArch R1001 6383, p. 330.
69 Bormann to all Gauleiter, 30 March 1936, BArch NS 6/222, p. 102; DGfE to Foreign
Office (Pol. X), 7 February 1938, BArch R1001 7562, p. 127 (referring to similar
documentation being ready for distribution to six individuals). The certificates were probably based on employment identity cards drafted by the Colonial Department in 1935 for ex-colonial subjects to carry: Draft Identity Card, BArch R1001 7562, p. 105.

[The mainstream narrative blames forced sterilization of the Rhineland Bastards on Goering. The question arises: was Goering a bad influence on Hitler’s policies?]


Laurency (L5e23):
The black ones hold many trumps, especially the common misunderstanding that physical life is the only life there is and that “death” is the end of everything. Those who have an antimetaphysical attitude play unknowingly into the hands of the black ones.

Mein Kampf:
As a matter of fact, the Talmud is not a book that lays down principles according to which the individual should prepare for the life to come. It only furnishes rules for a practical and convenient life in this world.

Laurency ():
It can hardly be claimed that the theologians have too vast knowledge of reality. The “material world” (the physical world) and the “spiritual world” are the only worlds existing to them. When theologians in the manner of Anders Nygren at Lund University deny the existence of superphysical worlds, they concur in Jewish theology according to which there is no other life than physical life.

Mein Kampf:
Here also everything is copied, or rather stolen, for the Jew could not possess any religious institution which had developed out of his own consciousness, seeing that he lacks every kind of idealism, which means that belief in a life beyond this terrestrial existence is foreign to him. In the Aryan mind no religion can ever be imagined unless it embodies the conviction that life in some form of other will continue after death.

Hitler, Table Talk, November 5, 1941 (Cameron & Stevens):
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.

On this first and fundamental lie, the purpose of which is to make people believe that Jewry is not a people, but a religion, other lies are subsequently based.

– Mein Kampf

Dietrich Eckart:
The Earth-Centered Jew Lacks a Soul
This mere trace would have sufficed, or would suffice, to provide the necessary counterweight to the unadulterated yea-saying to the world, as embodied in the Jewish people. For the inner light—and belief in immortality is the inner light—does not need always to shine with the brightest glow in order to produce an effect; it must simply be there, it must not be allowed to be snuffed out, or otherwise mankind would be lost forever to the terrestrial world. Everything takes its own time, however, a fact which is all too often overlooked. The denial of the world needs a still longer time in order to grow so that it will acquire a lasting predominance over affirmation of the world. At this time it seems again to have sunk to a zero point; its opposite, symbolized by the Jewish people, is triumphant as never before. It seems as if the inner light has completely vanished from this earth. But, to anticipate, it merely seems that way. Denial of the world cannot perish because it is part of the soul of mankind and the soul is immortal. Where the idea of the immortal dwells, the longing for the eternal or the withdrawal from temporality must always emerge again; hence a denial of the world will always reappear. And this is the meaning of the non-Jewish peoples: they are the custodians of world-negation, of the idea of the Hereafter, even if they maintain it in the poorest way. Hence, one or another of them can quietly go under, but what really matters lives on in their descendents.

Laurency (L4e3):
An illustration of what ideas of reality are held by historians, historians of religion in particular, is their unwavering dogma of the superior religious instinct of the Israelite race. Actually no other race has had such a strong physicalist orientation, has been so utterly insensitive to superphysical reality.

Eckart:
Let us repeat once more, and again and again, the most important point that has been made up to now: the Jewish religion completely lacks the belief in a supra-sensible Beyond. Indeed, one even gets an almost positive impression that, in the course of time, everything that in the least could foster a belief in an incorporeal life after death was intentionally eliminated. The Jews, with their religion oriented to purely earthly affairs, stand alone in the world! This should not be forgotten for a single moment; it is highly significant.

Schopenhauer:
Parerga and Paralipomena
The Jewish religion proper, as it is presented and taught in Genesis and all historical books up to the end of Chronicles is the coarsest of all religions, because it is the only one which has absolutely no doctrine of immortality, not even a trace of it. Each king, and each hero or prophet, when he died was buried with his fathers, and therewith everything was finished. There is no trace of any existence after death, every thought of the kind being as if purposely banished. For instance, Jehovah’s long eulogy on King Josiah closes with a promise of reward (2 Chron. xxxiv. 28). And hence that he shall not live to see Nebuchadnezzar. But there is no idea of another existence after death, and thereby of a positive reward; instead of this it is a merely negative one to die and to suffer no further sorrow. When Jehovah had sufficiently utilized and tormented his handiwork and plaything, he throws it away on to the dung-heap that is its reward. Precisely because the Jewish religion has no immortality, and consequently knows no punishments after death, Jehovah can threaten the sinner who prospers on earth with nothing else except that he will punish his misdeeds in the persons of his children and children’s children to the fourth generation, as may he seen from Exodus xxxiv. 7 ; and Numbers xiv. 18. This proves the absence of any doctrine of immortality. Similarly a passage in Tobias, iii. 6, where the latter begs Jehovah that he may die. Nothing more, there is no idea of an existence after death. In the Old Testament the reward promised to virtue is to live long on the earth (e.g. Deut v. 16 and 33); in the Veda, on the contrary, it is not to be born again. The contempt in which the Jews always stood among contemporary peoples may in great measure have been based on the poor character of their religion. What the Kohaleth says, ch. iii. v. 19, 20, is the true sentiment of Jewish religion. If sometimes, as in Daniel xii. 2, immortality is indicated, it is as an imported foreign doctrine, as is evident from Daniel i. 4 and 6. In the 2nd Book of Maccabees, ch. vii. , the doctrine of immortality appears plainly as of Babylonian origin. All other religions, those of the Hindoos, as well Brahman as Buddhist, of the Egyptians, Persians, even of the Druids teach immortality, and also, with the exception of the Persian Zendavesta, metempsychosis.

Rosenberg:
The Track of the Jew
✡[Uriel] D’Acosta wrote in his defence a book in which he denied the immortality of the soul since he did not find such a belief in Moses, and since there there was only reference to a corporeal and temporal future. Let it be mentioned here that the Jews’ belief in resurrection is of a completely materialistic sort.

Haeckel:
The dogma of personal immortality owes its great popularity and its high importance to its intimate connection with the teaching of Christianity. This circumstance gave rise to the erroneous and still prevalent belief that the myth is a fundamental element of all the higher religions. That is by no means the case. The higher oriental religions include no belief whatever in the immortality of the soul; it is not found in Buddhism, the religion that dominates thirty per cent, of the entire human race; it is not found in the ancient popular religion of the Chinese, nor in the reformed religion of Confucius which succeeded it; and, what is still more significant, it is not found in the earlier and purer religion of the Jews. Neither in the ” five Mosaic books,’ nor in any of the writings of the Old Testament which were written before the Babylonian Exile, is there any trace of the notion of individual persistence after death.

[Interestingly enough, Ernst Haeckel argues against afterlife being fundamental to religion. Yet he overlooks the falsified state of all Oriental religions and made the tremendous error of classifying Judaism as a religion. Schopenhauer thoroughly refuted the notion of Buddhism being monotheistic/atheistic in On the Will in Nature. Needless to say, he also exposed Judaism as the only monotheistic worldview. Nietzsche likewise refutes the notion in The Antichrist.]

Buddhism

Hitler, Table Talk (Cameron & Stevens), June 5, 1942:
It angers one to think that, while in other parts of the globe religious teaching like that of Confucius, Buddha and Mohammed offers an undeniably broad basis for the religious-minded, Germans should have been duped by a theological exposition devoid of all honest depth.
Cordell Hull:
The President [FDR] remarked that the people of China were constituted very differently from those of Russia and had a philosophy that stabilized and guided them along much broader lines. China, he said, was not really communistic in the same sense as Russia.

Schopenhauer:
These three religions are neither monotheistic nor polytheistic, nor are they even pantheistic, Buddhism, at any rate, is not; since Buddha did not look upon a world sunk in sin and suffering, whose tenants, all subject to death, only subsist for a short time by devouring each other, as a manifestation of God.

Laurency ():
35Traditional Christianity has painted the path to christos, to unity, as a path of suffering. This has strongly influenced Western thought. Also in the Orient, exoteric Buddhism has contributed to the spread of a pessimistic outlook on existence. This pessimism is radically false.

Nietzsche:
In my condemnation of Christianity I surely hope I do no injustice to a related religion with an even larger number of believers: I allude to Buddhism. Both are to be reckoned among the nihilistic religions—they are both decadence religions—but they are separated from each other in a very remarkable way. For the fact that he is able to compare them at all the critic of Christianity is indebted to the scholars of India.
Buddhism is a hundred times as realistic as Christianity
—it is part of its living heritage that it is able to face problems objectively and coolly; it is the product of long centuries of philosophical speculation. The concept, “god”, was already disposed of before it appeared.
Buddhism is the only genuinely positive religion to be encountered in history, and this applies even to its epistemology (which is a strict phenomenalism)—It does not speak of a “struggle with sin”, but, yielding to reality, of the “struggle with suffering”. Sharply differentiating itself from Christianity, it puts the self-deception that lies in moral concepts be hind it; it is, in my phrase, beyond good and evil.
—The two physiological facts upon which it grounds itself and upon which it bestows its chief attention are: first, an excessive sensitiveness to sensation, which manifests itself as a refined susceptibility to pain, and secondly, an extraordinary spirituality, a too protracted concern with concepts and logical procedures, under the influence of which the instinct of personality has yielded to a notion of the “impersonal”. (Both of these states will be familiar to a few of my readers, the objectivists, by experience, as they are to me).

Weishaupt:
The wishes of all humans? Or the wishes of a few of nature’s special favorites? The former is simply impossible, and the latter would be dreadful and unjust. There must, therefore, be a middle road. And it can only exist in everyone’s becoming that which, and as much as, he or she is capable of becoming, without causing people with equal rights to suffer; that there be a happiness for individuals which is compatible with the happiness of all. But this happiness will become possible for everyone as soon as they all learn to feel more sensitive to pleasure and less sensitive to displeasure.

Laurency ():
7One remembers spontaneously Christos’ parable of the enemy who sowed tares. It has gone the same way with almost all religions. They have been idiotized, been made unusable in the service of good. They have counteracted consciousness development, which they were intended to further. Through their intolerance they have preached hatred. In this respect Buddhism is an exception.

[See L3e7.1.10 on Buddhism]

Laurency (kl2_3):
The first presentations of esoterics give an impression of helplessness and planlessness. Much could have been left unsaid and much should have been said which remained unsaid. You hardly wonder that the intelligentsia refused to study such vague teachings. Not even Winston Churchill, who nevertheless was a former initiate, knew how to understand Sinnett’s Esoteric Buddhism.

[According to various articles, Winston Churchill served as the War Correspondent to India’s second oldest English newspaper The Pioneer, which had Alfred Percy Sinnett as its editor. Laurency declared Sinnett (with his methodical and systematic way of presenting things) to be qualified for formulating esoterics and found it regrettable that Sinnett wasn’t entrusted with the task which was invariably given to Blavatsky, as he states succinctly in L3e5.11:10 and in L5e17:11-14.]

WIP –

Augoeides

Hermes Trismegistus:
Corpus Hermeticum
O Egypt, Egypt, of thy religion nothing will remain but an empty tale, which thine own children in time to come will not believe; nothing will be left but graven words, and only the stones will tell of thy piety. And in that day men will be weary of life, and they will cease to think the universe worthy of reverent wonder and worship. And so religion, the greatest of all blessings, – for there is nothing, nor has been, nor ever shall be, that can be deemed a greater boon, – will be threatened with destruction; men will think it a burden, and will come to scorn it.
They will no longer love this world around us, this incomparable work of God, this glorious structure which he has built, this sum of good made up of many diverse forms, this instrument whereby the will of God operates in that which he has made, ungrudgingly favoring man’s welfare; this combination and accumulation of all the manifold things that call forth the veneration, praise, and love of the beholder.
Darkness will be preferred to light, and death will be thought more profitable than life; no one will raise his eyes to heaven; the pious will be deemed insane, the impious wise; the madman will be thought a brave man, and the wicked will be esteemed as good.
As for the soul, and the belief that it is immortal by nature, or may hope to attain to immortality, as I have taught you, – all this they will mock, and even persuade themselves that it is false.
No word of reverence or piety, no utterance worthy of heaven, will be heard or believed.
And so the gods will depart from mankind, – a grievous thing! – and only evil angels will remain, who will mingle with men, and drive the poor wretches into all manner of reckless crime, into wars, and robberies, and frauds, and all things hostile to the nature of the soul.

✡Coudenhove-Kalergi:
The man of the future will be a mongrel. Today’s races and classes will disappear owing to the disappearing of space, time, and prejudice. The Eurasian-Negroid race of the future, similar in its outward appearance to the ancient Egyptians, will replace the diversity of peoples with a diversity of individuals.
Der Mensch der fernen Zukunft wird Mischling sein. Die heutigen Rassen und Kasten werden der zunehmen-den Überwindung von Raum, Zeit und Vorurteil zum Opfer fallen. Die eurasisch-negroide Zukunftsrasse, äußerlich der altägyptischen ähnlich, wird die Vielfalt der Völker durch eine Vielfalt der Persönlichkeiten ersetzen.

✡Gerald Menuhin:
Following on Coudenhove-Kalergi’s vison of “the Eurasian-Negroid race of the future” (1925), Hitler, in an open letter to Graf Soden-Fraunhofen printed in the Völkischer Beobachterof November 8, 1929, predicted that, ‘They want to transform our people economically and spiritually into white negroes. That is the goal of the Jewish race which rules over Germany today.” (Cited in Hitlers Kontrahenten in der NSDAP, Werner Bräuninger, 2004, p. 106)

Hitler, Zweites Buch:
According to the conception of that everybody’s bastard, Coudenhove, this Pan Europe would one day play the same role vis-à-vis the American Union, or a nationally awakened China that was formerly played by the old Austrian State vis-à-vis Germany or Russia.

Protocols of Zion:
PROTOCOL No. 1
4. What has restrained the beasts of prey who are called men? What has served for their guidance hitherto?

Laurency (wm8.24):
8What would man be without his Augoeides? An intelligent beast of prey on this planet of sorrow. Without the Augoeides mankind would be embroiled in a war of all against all, filled with hatred of all and everyone, totally disoriented in reality, without understanding of the law of development and the law of self-realization, without longing for higher reason, and without compassion for other living creatures.

Laurency (wm8.23):
12We understand why the knowledge of Augoeides was not given out to a mankind that worries about everything, that desires everything and demands everything, that finds everything unjust, that sees everything as proof of lack of love, that finds life unbearable, unsupportable, that feels sorry for itself. For such a mankind it is better to know nothing of Augoeides. It is fortunate that most people doubt his existence.

Weishaupt:
It is the prospect of a better future alone that gives our minds this strength.
Anyone who thinks or speaks otherwise does not recognize his heart’s secret
workings. … None of this is speculation. What I am writing here comes from the innermost basis of my soul. Perhaps circumstance and necessity have enabled me to experience the benefits of such principles more than other people have.
In the times when people were slandering me, clamoring about me, denying me, and misjudging me, when so many who did not even know me like village dogs began to howl in chorus as soon as one of them started to howl, and even today when they still do not seem to tire of it, I have indeed felt most deeply the injustice that has been my fate.
And yet it seemed bearable to me, because I could say to myself that there is a God who knows you better than these people do. They are judging you on the basis of their understanding and their interests. A time will come when they will fall silent and be ashamed at what they do. It may come here and now, or it may occur elsewhere.

Seneca:
To Lucilius, Letter 41
You are doing an excellent thing, one which will be wholesome for you, if, as you write me, you are persisting in your effort to attain sound understanding; it is foolish to pray for this when you can acquire it from yourself. We do not need to uplift our hands towards heaven, or to beg the keeper of a temple to let us approach his idol’s ear, as if in this way our prayers were more likely to be heard. God is near you, he is with you, he is within you.
This is what I mean, Lucilius: a holy spirit indwells within us, one who marks our good and bad deeds, and is our guardian. As we treat this spirit, so are we treated by it. Indeed, no man can be good without the help of God. Can one rise superior to fortune unless God helps him to rise? He it is that gives noble and upright counsel.

In each good man
A god doth dwell, but what god know we not.

Laurency (L3e2):
7If all are gods (potentially or actually), it is meaningless to use the word “god” without explanation.
8In the esoteric sense, man’s god to whom he turns with his “prayers” is in fact his Augoeides, even though he knows nothing about him. Also occultists appear to have overlooked this fact, although it has been explicitly clarified by several members of the planetary hierarchy. Every man has his Augoeides who represents the deity to him, and that alone should have made them reflect on and see the individual’s potential divinity. People do not know what they do when they violate the divine in other people. They slander each other, and their Augoeides know everything thought about their protégés and who thought it.

Plato:
Timaeus
I have often remarked that there are three kinds of soul located within us, having each of them motions, and I must now repeat in the fewest words possible, that one part, if remaining inactive and ceasing from its natural motion, must necessarily become very weak, but that which is trained and exercised, very strong. Wherefore we should take care that the movements of the different parts of the soul should be in due proportion.

And we should consider that God gave the sovereign part of the human soul to be the divinity of each one, being that part which, as we say, dwells at the top of the body, inasmuch as we are a plant not of an earthly but of a heavenly growth, raises us from earth to our kindred who are in heaven. And in this we say truly; for the divine power suspended the head and root of us from that place where the generation of the soul first began, and thus made the whole body upright.
When a man is always occupied with the cravings of desire and ambition, and is eagerly striving to satisfy them, all his thoughts must be mortal, and, as far as it is possible altogether to become such, he must be mortal every whit, because he has cherished his mortal part.
But he who has been earnest in the love of knowledge and of true wisdom, and has exercised his intellect more than any other part of him, must have thoughts immortal and divine, if he attain truth, and in so far as human nature is capable of sharing in immortality, he must altogether be immortal; and since he is ever cherishing the divine power, and has the divinity within him in perfect order, he will be perfectly happy.
Now there is only one way of taking care of things, and this is to give to each the food and motion which are natural to it. And the motions which are naturally akin to the divine principle within us are the thoughts and revolutions of the universe. These each man should follow, and correct the courses of the head which were corrupted at our birth, and by learning the harmonies and revolutions of the universe, should assimilate the thinking being to the thought, renewing his original nature, and having assimilated them should attain to that perfect life which the gods have set before mankind, both for the present and the future.

Laurency (wm8.13):
1Man’s ability to contact Augoeides brings about incredible changes in his first self affecting every atom of his etheric envelope and organism. He becomes like “another human being”.

Laurency (wm8.13):
Under the influence of Augoeides, the monad is as though lifted up above its true level of development, to sink down to it again when the contact is broken. Only when man has attained the stage of humanity, and has been firmly attached to the “ideals”, can he be accepted as a disciple of the planetary hierarchy.

Julian:
For the spirit that comes to men from the gods is present but seldom and in few, and it is not easy for every man to share in it or at every time.

Weishaupt:
Diogenes’ Lamp
There are moments in which my mind dares to take a bolder flight above humanity’s usual way of thinking. In such moments, I entertain the belief that I have discovered a different and better system of things. I, together with others, appear to myself to be destined for greater things than wallowing down here with those of my kind, piling up idiocy upon idiocy and error upon error, only to putrefy and disappear forever.
In such moments, I believe that I have discovered how the present moment arises from the past, and how a series of incalculable consequences arises from the present and presses forward towards a common goal. In seeing myself at such a height and gazing in all directions – how utterly different do all things appear to me? How small all the greatness down below now becomes. As I soar higher and higher, one unknown country after another appears before me. My horizons expand I rise, and I breathe more freely. For my confessions and cares remain below, in the depths where their objects lie.
These moments are the happiest of my life. Here is where I become aware of how much a certain spirit of mind can accomplish, and thus how crucial it is that it be genuine and the best. At such times, I do not just comprehend certain higher teachings, I believe that I feel them. Their object lies before me and penetrates my being, and I feel the existence of a God and the necessity of my continuing existence, as much as I feel that I myself exist. When I am in this mood, nothing seems wiser and more reasonable than this system of things. I can rejoice in my fate and convince myself that this path is the only one leading to my happiness.
But alas! I think like this only for moments at a time. And then my mind sinks from its higher flight back down to Earth. I become flesh and blood and am no better than others, think and act just like them, and marvel and quake before things I had just convinced myself were inane. – That is the nature of humanity! That is how much we need the outlook of the future, to diminish our conceit, to feel ourselves weak, small, and imperfect. For nothing is more unbearable and impetuous than a person who is too pleased with himself.

Hans-Ulrich Rudel:
For the first time something comes over me, a feeling in the pit of my stomach: a feeling I never have again until years later when I am crawling home in an aircraft riddled by enemy bullets and serious loss of blood has sapped all my physical strength. This “something” is a dark intuition that despite everything the human factor is the criterion of war and the will of the individual the secret of victory.

Laurency (wm8.26):
4Augoeides is that “spirit of truth” Christos spoke of. What Christos said verbatim was very little known to the gnostic legend-writers one hundred years afterwards. They used the general, “popular” gnostic expressions, which led to a total distortion of the gnostic symbols. That Augoeides would guide the disciple (who was an initiate) to the truth was an expression of the gnostic insight that Augoeides is able to help efficiently only when that need of worship which is in emotional devotion has been eliminated. When Christos, according to the gnostic legend, said of the children that their angels always behold the face of the heavenly father, he thereby referred to the Augoeides, wanted to intimate their existence and the fact that they are counted among the planetary hierarchy. Only in our times has it become possible for esotericians to elucidate the true function of the Augoeides.

Laurency (wm8.13):
2By and large it may be said that our good thoughts come from Augoeides (our soul); the bad thoughts, from the subconscious of our past incarnations or from the swamp of the emotional world.

[Not to be confused for one’s conscience.]

Laurency ():
3The hypothesis of the “voice of conscience” is also refuted by the fact that there has not been anything true that has not been denied, nor anything rational that has not been silenced, nor anything absurd that has not been accepted, nor any kind of iniquity that has not been approved of, nor any kind of cruelty that has not been commended; by this voice of conscience.

Laurency (wm8.12):
6Add to this the fact that so many other “voices” want to claim the attention in the physical, emotional, and mental worlds. Many people make the mistake of listening to false voices.
Many there are who impersonate our Augoeides:

“You listened unto voices from far away,
and deep into the wood they led you astray.”

J. Keller and Hanns Andersen:
Der Jude als Verbrecher
E. Wulffen numbers among the most noteworthy peculiarities of the imposter: vanity, pleasure-seeking, capacity for auto-suggestion, vivid fantasy, presence of mind which rescues him even in dangerous situations, and boundless dishonesty. He describes the imposter in the following words:
“For it is the deceiving, obliging demeanor, the open, honest eyes, the charming kindliness, the fine-sounding manner of speech, the nimble movements, the entire appearance with its enchanting and fascinating sense of certainty, the tasteful attire, at times even a costume in the shape of a uniform, the formal dress of a diplomat or the garments of a priest.”
It is now easy to understand why so many Jews are to be found among imposters: their intellectual versatility, adaptability, their inborn aptitude for the art of pretence, their talent for imitation and copying (note the many Jewish actors and performers), not least of all their unscrupulousness, dishonesty, and the lack of a sense of right – all these are characteristics which they have in common with imposters.
When the Jew appears today as a “Russian,” tomorrow as a “Pole,” then as a “Swede,” as a “Spaniard,” and as a “German” – this is political imposture which all of Jewry has developed over centuries into a high art of public deception. The Jew plays roles and deceives on principle, professionally, as a rule, not as an exception. That is the most important weapon of his existence and in his struggle for power.

Seneca:
If you see a man who is unterrified in the midst of dangers, untouched by desires, happy in adversity, peaceful amid the storm, who looks down upon men from a higher plane, and views the gods on a footing of equality, will not a feeling of reverence for him steal over you, will you not say:

This quality is too great and too lofty to be regarded as resembling this petty body in which it dwells? A divine power has descended upon that man.

[Is this not how the Germans viewed Hitler? See Heinz Linge’s With Hitler to the End, Chapter 16 for examples.]

Heinz Linge:
One of the excursions to the front took us to Smolensk, another to Zaporozhe, where there was a dramatic incident. While Hitler was in conference with his generals, the airfield where our aircraft were parked came under Russian attack, with the result that part of it was captured. The report came as a shock for us and in confusion, lacking any experience of the front, we waited anxiously to see how Hitler would handle the situation. We had the report passed to him at once. It amazed us to see that he could hardly be bothered with it, this report which had hurled us all into a state of near panic. Issuing a few pithy instructions as to how the problem was to be cleared up, he quietly resumed his conference. If the Russians had got wind of Hitler’s presence this affair would probably have turned out rather differently.

[The greatest mistake is to declare only a Moses, Jesus, or Mohammed divine and as the only intermediaries for the rest of humanity. Observe how throughout the Old Testament, “Moses” never once denies the existence of other gods, he only forbids worshiping them.]

Exodus 22:28 LXX
Thou shalt not revile the gods, nor speak ill of the ruler of thy people.

[It’s an interesting thing how the Greek people attributed divine status to Homer, Pythagoras, Plato, Iamblichus, Apollonius, etc. Can this really be condemned as idolatry if there was a time where Jews were instructed to reverence their leaders? The pagan accounts make it clear that there was a statue of Moses in the Jewish temple and that he was revered as a godsent man who delivered them from their afflictions in their desert wanderings.
In John 10:33-36, when the Jews interpreted Jesus’ declaration to mean that he was god, Jesus counters their accusation with Psalm 82:6. He is saying, how can you condemn me for my declaration when others among you have been declared similarly?]

8. Reincarnation

Adam Weishaupt:
Pythagoras oder Betrachtungen über die geheime Welt und RegierungsKunst, p.g. 187-189
I hope to find the reason here, and I ask my readers, who are concerned with a closer examination and knowledge of themselves, to pay attention to this part of my writing, above all others. I shall at present prove that all the faults which still persist, the falsity which lies in our virtues, is the result of ignorance and inertia; That all modern men, even the most enlightened and active of all modern men, are still ignorant and sluggish; That all the situations and incidents of the world are designed to reduce this ignorance and inertia; That this is the thread upon which a pragmatic world and human history must be followed; That this is the point of view from which all the world events are arranged, which gives the most comforting conviction of the great truth; That the spirits are the ultimate end of creation; That the whole material Nature is subordinate to it, and is governed by these laws; That the plan of creation, so far as we can discover it, is no other than the highest development and formation of the spiritual forces; That this plan would only have begun without completing any one, if our mind were not of such a nature that its duration extends over the duration of this life.
In order to prove all this, I proceed from a fact which the most explicit doubter can not deny. – Who is weaker or more ignorant than a newborn child? This is the beginning of our enlightenment and strength. All men, who are still, who are yet to be, begin from this goal. Even Caesar and Frederick the Great, Pythagoras and Socrates, Leibniz and Newton, were not stronger and more enlightened at the time of their first appearance than the child which is born of this moment.

[Such an unprecedented declaration given by Dr. Weishaupt! It matches the above formulations. A pity it remains mostly untranslated. I am still making my exhaustive, lifelong inquiry into whether Hitler was representing “god”, but I now know for a fact that Dr. Weishaupt was in contact with the deity.]

Interview with Ian Stevenson

Q: If reincarnation were widely accepted, how would it change the world?
A: It would lessen guilt on the part of parents. They wouldn’t have as much of a burden that, whatever goes wrong with a child is all their fault, either through genes or mishandling during the child’s infancy. People themselves would have to take more responsibility for their own destinies. . . . I don’t expect any great moral transformation. On my first trip to India I met a respected Indian monk, a swami. I told him I had come out to see what evidence there was in India for reincarnation. He remained silent for a long, long time. Then he said, “We here in India regard it as a fact that people are reborn, but, you see, it doesn’t make a difference because we have just as many rogues and villains in India as you have in the West.”

Laurency (L4e4.37):
3Where the Hindus are concerned, it is their superstitious belief in the transmigration of souls (the doctrine that man can be reborn as an animal) and the fatalism of their doctrine of karma that have counteracted self-realization (striving after unity). Both doctrines have had a paralysing effect on their initiative in acting. They dare not act for fear of mistakes: violating the retribution of fate by seeking to alleviate suffering and need. By not “making any new karma” they hope to be finally born into a higher caste.

[It should be noted that Hindu apologists contend against this interpretation of Hindu karma, arguing that it is a Western if not global misconception.]

Weishaupt:
Diogenes’ Lamp
If people could succeed in making the thought of their continuing existence their soul’s ruling idea; if they had enough strength of mind to rise above the sway and power of all present impressions, with the aid of this idea – what different creatures these people would become, what a gathering-place of delight this Earth would be, if this manner of thinking would only become the primary one for all humanity? For people of this type there would be no discontent. All would reliably and assuredly obtain that which they sought.

✡Albert Pike:
All men who deserve to live, desire to survive their funerals, and to live afterward in the good that they have done mankind, rather than in the fading characters written in men’s memories. Most men desire to leave some work behind them that may outlast their own day and brief generation. That is an instinctive impulse, given by God, and often found in the rudest human heart; the surest proof of the soul’s immortality, and of the fundamental difference between man and the wisest brutes.

✡Otto Weininger:
How can phenomena of that kind explain the belief in the continuity of their lives after death held so firmly by Goethe or Bach, or the desire for immortality which speaks to us in Beethoven’s last sonatas?
The desire for the persistence of the conscious self must spring from sources mightier than these feeble rationalistic guesses.
The deeper source of the belief depends on the relation of a man to his own past. Our consciousness and vision of the past is the strongest ground for our desire to be conscious in the future. The man who values his past, who holds his mental life in greater respect than his corporeal life, is not willing to give up his consciousness at death.
And so this organic primary desire for immortality is strongest in men of genius, in the men whose pasts are richest. This connection between the desire for
immortality and memory receives strong support from what is related by those who have been rescued from sudden death. . . .
But it is quite wrong to ascribe the sudden appearance of religion in so many people who are fatally ill, to a desire to make sure of their future state. It is extremely superficial to assume that the doctrine of hell can for the first time assume such an importance to the dying as to make them afraid to pass away “with a lie on their lips.”10
The important point is this: Why do men who have lived throughout a lying life feel towards the end a sudden desire for truth? And why are others so horrified, although they do not believe in punishment in the next world, when they hear of a man dying with a lie on his lips or with an unrepented action? And why have both the hardness of heart until the end and the death-bed repentance appealed so forcibly to the imagination of poets? The discussion as to the “euthanasia” of atheists, which was so popular in the eighteenth century, is more than a mere historical curiosity as F. A. Lange considered it.

10. I venture to remind readers how often at the approach of death those who have been occupied with purely scientific matters have turned to religious problems, e.g., Newton, Gauss, Riemann, Weber.

If one says, “this world is evil, I’m throwing my life away” – I like [the world]!

– Hitler, Table Talk (Jochmann), September 23, 1941

Heinrich Himmler, June 9, 1942 speech:
Today at Heydrich’s funeral I intentionally expressed in my oration from my deepest conviction a belief in God, a belief in fate, in the ancient one as I called him – that is the old Germanic word: Wralda.
We shall once again have to find a new scale of values for our people: the scale of the macrocosm and the microcosm, the starry sky above us and the world in us, the world that we see in the microscope.

Hitler, Table Talk (Cameron & Stevens), January 25-26, 1942:
The notion that the cosmos is infinite in all senses should be expressed in an accessible fashion. It is infinite in the sense of the infinitely great as well as in the sense of the infinitely small. It would have been a mistake at the beginning of the positivist era to picture space as limited by the bounds perceived by the instruments. We should reason in the same fashion to-day, despite the progress made in methods of measurement—and that applies both on the microscopic and also on the macroscopic scale. Seen in the microscope, a microbe acquires gigantic proportions. In this direction, too, there is no end.

Hitler, Table Talk (Cameron & Stevens), December 1-2, 1941:
If we had more powerful microscopes, we would discover new worlds. In the absolute, moreover, nothing is either great or small. Things are big or little by the standard one selects. What is certain, in any case, is that one cannot change anything in all that.
Hitler, Memoirs of a Confidant, p.g. 152-153:
We can and may only view ourselves as the tools of Providence, some of us more, some less. And no one has the right to evade the task that has been set for him.

Hitler, Table Talk (Cameron & Stevens), October 24, 1941:
In the depths of his heart, each man is aware of his puniness. The microscope has taught us that we are hemmed in not only by the infinitely great, but also by the infinitely small—macrocosm and microcosm. To such large considerations are added particular things that are brought to our attention by natural observation: that certain hygienic practices are good for a man—fasting, for example.

Himmler, June 9, 1942 speech:
The essence of these megalomaniacs, these Christians who talk of men ruling this world, must stop and be put back in its proper proportion. Man is nothing special at all. He is an insignificant part of this earth.

Himmler, June 9, 1942 speech:
If a big thunderstorm comes, he can do nothing about it. He cannot even predict it.

Hitler, Table Talk (Cameron & Stevens), October 24, 1941:
When one says that God provokes the lightning, that’s true in a sense; but what is certain is that God does not direct the thunderbolt, as the Church claims. The Church’s explanation of natural phenomena is an abuse, for the Church has ulterior interests. True piety is the characteristic of the being who is aware of his weakness and ignorance. Whoever sees God only in an oak or in a tabernacle, instead of seeing Him everywhere, is not truly pious. He remains attached to appearances—and when the sky thunders and the lightning strikes, he trembles simply from fear of being struck as a punishment for the sin he’s just committed.

Laurency (kr1):

1An eminent modern scientist answered the question whether mankind has as yet succeeded in exploring one per cent of reality: “No, not even one ten thousandth of one per cent”.
2That is, not even one millionth! One certainly has respect for such a scientist. Nobody makes a greater impression than he who realizes man’s immense ignorance about life. For it is obvious to anyone who has assimilated what theology, philosophy, and science tell us about reality that the conclusions they can draw are mere hypotheses (a euphemism for guesswork and supposition!)

Himmler, June 9, 1942 speech:
He has no idea how a fly is constructed – however unpleasant, it is a miracle – or how a blossom is constructed.

Hitler, Table Talk (Cameron & Stevens), December 28-29, 1941:
The great tragedy for man is that he understands the mechanism of things, but the things themselves remain an enigma to him. We are capable of distinguishing the component parts of a molecule. But when it’s a question of explaining the why of a thing, words fail us. And that’s what leads men to conceive of the existence of a superior power.

Know thyself

Himmler, June 9, 1942 speech:
He must once again look with deep reverence into this world. Then he will acquire the right sense of proportion about what is above us, about how we are woven into this cycle.

Karl Viëtor:
Goethe The Poet, p.g. 262
The first, or ethnic, religion depends upon what is above us. All so-called pagan religions belong to this group. They occur at the stage where mankind first free itself from the fear held by primitive peoples.

Julian:
What need have I to summon Hellenes and Hebrews as witnesses of this? There exists no man who does not stretch out his hands towards the heavens when he prays; and whether he swears by one god or several, if he has any notion at all of the divine, he turns heavenward. And it was very natural that men should feel thus.

✡Albert Pike:
“The Eternal,” says the Bereshith Rabba to Genesis, “called forth Abraham and his posterity out of the dominion of the stars; by nature, the Israelite was a servant to the stars, and born under their influence, as are the heathen; but by virtue of the law given on Mount Sinai, he became liberated from this degrading servitude.” The Arabs had a similar legend.
The Prophet Amos explicitly asserts that the Israelites, in the desert, worshipped, not Jehovah, but Moloch, or a Star-God, equivalent to Saturn.

Kurt Eggers:
Der Scheiterhaufen. Worte großer Ketzer
Do you really believe, sir, hand on heart, that heaven concerns itself with the quarrels, exchanges of words and bloody actions, which we street urchins engage in among ourselves? Do you believe that I, if I take a stroll in my garden at Sans-souci and trample an anthill, have even the slightest thought that my path takes me right over tiny creatures, which bustle about and endeavor? Would it not be ridiculous of these animals – provided, they could think – to presume that I knew they were there and now had to take consideration for their existence. No, my friend, free yourself of this self-love, which only deceives you, if according to it heaven is supposed to have nothing further to do than constantly concern itself with your personal well-being. Instead press upon yourself the conviction that nature does not worry about the individual being: but indeed about the whole species: it, the species, may not perish. And our closing words to all this? That a king never has to take note of it, if on a stroll he tramples an anthill, which by coincidence finds itself on his path, that he, looking at the big thing, which puts claim to his full attention and which he frequently cannot even completely keep in sight, does not think of ants nor looks around, whether they crawl around in his gardens and park facilities.

Laurency (L5e7):
5Christians are very amazed when they are told that god, about whom they fantasize so much, the supreme ruler of our planet, does not even know that they exist. He has other things to do than busying himself with those ignorant, selfish creatures.

Martin Bormann, June 6, 1941:
When we National Socialists speak of a belief in God, by God we do not understand, as do naive Christians and their clerical beneficiaries, a manlike being who is sitting around in some corner of the spheres.
The assertion that this world-force can worry about the fate of every individual, every bacillus on earth, and that it can be influenced by so-called prayer or other astonishing things, is based either on a suitable dose of naiveté or on outright commercial effrontery.

Laurency (wm8.25):
1Anyone who has some knowledge of the cosmic organization, the organizations of the solar systems and the planets, sees clearly that all beings in higher worlds have their own special problems and that individual supervision and treatment of human beings (such as religions teach) is an absurdity, that god cannot watch over each particular individual, knowing his desires and needs.

Laurency (kl1_5):
17It should perhaps be pointed out that the planetary hierarchy has always existed in the physical world. Contrary to many people’s assumption, it has not needed to retreat to some heaven from where to observe the path of suffering which mankind has chosen to wander. All the higher worlds exist in the physical world of our planet. The place where the planetary hierarchy resides will remain unknown to incurable curiosity. Suffice it to say that it is absolutely inaccessible to self-invited guests.
It should be noted that the Jews, on returning from Babylon, monopolized the cosmic father of all as well as the king of the planet. The king’s residence (unknown to them) was called the heavenly Jerusalem, and the king himself was given the name of Melchizedek.

Julian:
But now consider our teaching in comparison with this of yours. Our writers say that the creator is the common father and king of all things, but that the other functions have been assigned by him to national gods of the peoples and gods that protect the cities; every one of whom administers his own department in accordance with his own nature.

Diogenes Laertius:
To Thales belongs the proverb “Know thyself,” which Antisthenes in his Successions of Philosophers attributes to Phemonoë, though admitting that it was appropriated by Chilon.
Being asked what is difficult, he replied, “To know oneself.”
“What is easy?” “To give advice to another.”

Laurency (ps3):
1The Delphic Oracle would never, not even in its most profound decline, have given its motto (“know thyself”) that interpretation which ignorant posterity has accepted as obvious: gain wisdom by self-analysis.
Its motto was no exhortation but the sign of recognition among the initiates of the highest mysteries, in which it was taught that only the second self can understand the first self.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Know_thyself
[In Plato’s Charmides, Critias refers to the maxim consistently with the view expressed in the Suda, with Critias saying, “for they imagined that ‘Know Thyself!’ was a piece of advice which the god gave and not his salutation of the worshippers at their first coming in.”
In modern words Critias gives his opinion that ‘Know Thyself!’ was an admonition to those entering the sacred temple to remember or know their place and Critias says, ” ‘know thyself!’ and ‘be temperate!’ are the same.
Notice that when the words of Critias are written, ‘thyself’ and ‘temperate’ are punctuated with exclamation marks in the English translations, as if they were commands.
]

[The latter sentences are a typically misleading formulation, exoteric speculation (misunderstanding Plato), apparently based on a 10th century encyclopedia. Here Plato is explicitly rejecting the notion that it was an admonition.]

Plato:
Charmides
For the purpose of that inscription on the temple, as it seems to me, is to serve as the god’s salutation to those who enter it, instead of “Hail!”—this is a wrong form of greeting, and they should rather exhort one another with the words, “Be temperate!” And thus the god addresses those who are entering his temple in a mode which differs from that of men; such was the intention of the dedicator of the inscription in putting it up, I believe; and that he says to each man who enters, in reality, “Be temperate !”

Laurency (ps3):
3In order to know himself, man must know who he has been, his latent possibilities, the full meaning of his incarnation. Man’s unconscious is his contact with all the worlds of man. These are not known through self-analysis. And he must know them in order to understand himself.
Man is self-blind until he has become Man. Self-knowledge presupposes knowledge of everything else. The last thing he comes to know is himself.

✡Weininger:
Universal comprehension, full consciousness, and perfect timelessness are an ideal condition, ideal even for gifted men; genius is an innate imperative, which never becomes a fully accomplished fact in human beings. Hence it is that a man of genius will be the last man to feel himself in the position to say of himself: “I am a genius.”

Iamblichus:
That which follows after this, we shall no longer discuss generally, but direct our attention particularly to the works resulting from the virtues of Pythagoras. And we shall begin in the first place from the Gods, as it is usual to do, and indeavour to exhibit his piety, and the admirable works which he performed. Let this, therefore, be one specimen of his piety, which also we have before mentioned, that he knew what his soul was, and whence it came into the body, and also its former lives, and that of these things he gave most evident indications.

Chaldean Oracles:
He who knows himself, knows all things in himself, as Zoroaster first asserted, and afterwards Plato in the first Alcibiades.

Gospel of Thomas (quasi-gnostic?):
Jesus said, “He who believes to know the All but not himself falls completely short.”

Gospel of Thomas (quasi-gnostic?):
Jesus said, “If your leaders say to you, ‘Look, the (Father’s) imperial rule is in the sky,’ then the birds of the sky will precede you. If they say to you, ‘It is in the sea,’ then the fish will precede you. Rather, the (Father’s) imperial rule is inside you and outside you. When you know yourselves, then you will be known, and you will understand that you are children of the living Father. But if you do not know yourselves, then you live in poverty, and you are the poverty.”

Laurency ():
2The “know thyself” of the Delphic oracle did not mean that the individual is able to understand himself, or even that this is possible for him. As is the case with all esoteric sayings, also this one has different meanings. One of the most far-reaching meanings is its indication of the all-pervading analogy between the microcosm and the macrocosm; in its hermetic formulation: as above, so below.

Laurency (ps3):
1Not to seek to know yourself but to forget yourself and your comical insignificance is the essential thing.

Mein Kampf:
As soon as the spirit of egotism begins to prevail among a people, then the bonds of the social order break, and man, by seeking his own personal happiness, tumbles out of heaven and falls into hell. Posterity will not remember those who pursued only their own individual interests, but it will praise those heroes who renounced their own happiness.

Hitler, Table Talk (Cameron & Stevens), July 11-12, 1941:
I think the man who contemplates the universe with his eyes wide open is the man with the greatest amount of natural piety: not in the religious sense, but in the sense of an intimate harmony with things.

Himmler, June 9, 1942 speech:
He must once again look with deep reverence into this world. Then he will acquire the right sense of proportion about what is above us, about how we are woven into this cycle.

Bormann Letters, p.g. 55:
Martin Bormann to Manja Behrens, February 21, 1944
We are woven into the eternal pattern of all life, that is, the cycle of Nature, and it cannot be otherwise.

Hitler, Table Talk, September 23, 1941 (Cameron & Stevens):
There are some who say the world is evil, and that they wish to depart from this life. For my part, I like the world! Unless the desire to die is due to a lover’s quarrel, I advise the desperate man to have patience for a year. The consolations will come. But if a human being has any other reason to wish to die than this, then let him die, I’m not stopping him. I merely call attention to the fact that one cannot escape this world entirely. The elements of which our body is made belong to the cycle of Nature; and as for our soul, it’s possible that it might return to limbo [Ger. Reservoir], until it gets an opportunity to reincarnate itself. But it would vex me if everybody wanted to have done with life.

✝Jerome:
I said I had read the doctrines of the Pythagoreans. Let me tell you that Pythagoras was the first to discover the immortality of the soul and its transmigration from one body to another. To this view Virgil gives his adherence in the sixth book of the Æneid in these words:
These, when the wheel full thousand years has turned,
God calls, a long sad line, in Lethe’s stream
To drown the past, and long once more to see
The skies above, and to the flesh return.

Hitler, Table Talk (Cameron & Stevens), December 1, 1941:
One may be repelled by this law of nature which demands that all living things should mutually devour one another. The fly is snapped up by a dragon-fly, which itself is swallowed by a bird, which itself falls victim to a larger bird. This last, as it grows old, becomes a prey to microbes, which end by getting the better of it. These microbes, in their turn, find their predestined ends. If we had more powerful microscopes, we would discover new worlds.

K. H. (Koot Hoomi):
The Mahatma Letters to A. P. Sinnett, Letter No. 10
Nature is destitute of goodness or malice; she follows only immutable laws when she either gives life and joy, or sends suffering [and] death, and destroys what she has created. Nature has an antidote for every poison and her laws a reward for every suffering. The butterfly devoured by a bird becomes that bird, and the little bird killed by an animal goes into a higher form. It is the blind law of necessity and the eternal fitness of things, and hence cannot be called Evil in Nature.

[Not all of the Mahatma Letters comes from K. H. Laurency explores this subject in several entries.]

Hitler, Table Talk, December 1-2, 1941 (Cameron & Stevens):
Even a man who takes his own life returns finally to nature—body, soul and mind. The toad knows nothing of his previous existence as a tadpole, and our own memory serves us no better as regards our own previous state. That’s why I have the feeling that it’s useful to know the laws of nature—for that enables us to obey them. To act otherwise would be to rise in revolt against Heaven.

SS-Hauptamt (Rassenpolitik):
Today we are in the middle of another revolutionary epoch. Revolutionary scientific understandings of genetics and race have found political expression in the National Socialist world view. Once again a world of appearances collapsed, which had concealed from our eyes the true nature of humanity and the connections between body, soul, and spirit. The foundation of the Christian worldview is the doctrine of the separation of body and soul; the soul and spirit belong to a world independent of the physical, free of natural laws, and they are even to a certain degree able to free the human body from its natural setting. It is a major shift when racial theory recognizes the unity of body, soul and spirit and sees them as a whole that follows the eternal laws of nature. A new epoch is coming, one perhaps even more revolutionary than that resulting from Copernicus’s work. Ideas about humanity and peoples that have endured for millennia are collapsing.

Laurency (kr5):
4Earth originates from water, water from air, air from fire. Everything comes from primordial fire and returns to it in an eternal cycle in accordance with imperturbable laws. Some of these are final, others purely mechanical. Everything has a purpose. Everything in the world is governed by perfect wisdom.

Plutarch:
Pythagoras was the first philosopher that called the world κόσμος [kosmos], from the order and beauty of it; for so that word signifies. Thales and his followers say the world is one.

✝Cyril of Alexandria:
Plutarch, who had some fame in his own time, speaks thus about the universe in book 2 of his collection of Theories on Nature: “Pythagoras was the first to name the mass of the universe the ‘Cosmos’, according to the order which rules in it. Thales and those who hold his doctrines profess that the universe is unique;

Proclus:
Being however such, she proceeds from the vivific Goddess [Rhea.] [For according to the Chaldaean oracle] “Immense Nature is suspended from the back of the Goddess;” from whom all life is derived, both that which is intellectual, and that which is inseparable from the subjects of its government. Hence, being suspended from thence, she pervades without impediment through, and inspires all things; so that through her, the most inanimate beings participate of a certain soul, and such things as are corruptible, remain perpetually in the world, being held together by the causes of forms which she contains.

Plotinus:
Now what does this tell us? It tells: that what we know as Nature is a Soul, offspring of a yet earlier Soul of more powerful life;

Marsilio Ficino:
From the Soul of the world, thus, pours forth always a kind of animal spirit, almost an offshoot of the interior life, and this is fire, almost an animal light stretched out towards dimension, a luminous hot spirit and a spark for the generation of all things; a sky, I say, not only surrounding, but also infused in all things and a sky of skies, a breath of the divine spirit in a certain form close to soul; celestial, igneous, luminous, hot, it flies away and expands in the air while it contracts in water and in earth.

Campanella:
Translated by Alberto A. Martinez
Behold, when a man meditates, he extends his thoughts above the Sun, & then higher, & then wanders beyond the sky, & finally conceives the infinite outer worlds, as the Epicureans themselves realized, giving the truth.

Laurency (wm3):
1Every religion has some ideas about the hereafter, and they are all wrong. The Christian teaching of hell is the worst of all false teachings and has caused unnecessary suffering in the emotional world to countless people. The only hell there is exists in the physical world, and it is the work of human beings.

Laurency ():
3The Pythagoreans distinguished between three worlds; the mental, emotional, and physical worlds. The Fathers of the Church, who had heard of this tripartite division, but had no idea of what it stood for, invented “heaven, earth, and hell”, also in connection with the Elysian Fields and Hades of the Greeks.

Rosenberg:
The Track of the Jew
In foreign countries the Jew experienced for the first time something of god as the creator of the universe, of the myths of this creation, of the Fall through sin, of the principles of good and evil, of the immortality of the soul. Here, in its contact with foreign ideas, the Jewish mind showed itself in its characteristic oddity. The images and myths became in its hand anecdotes, the attempt to illustrate an inner experience was interpreted as a material historical fact. The Fall of man, the Sumero-Akkadian symbol for a spiritual event, became a historical narration, the snake was actually nothing but a snake, the apple really an apple, the whole thing an everyday event.

Hitler, Political Testament:
Although a number of these men, including Martin Bormann, Dr Goebbels, and others together with their wives have joined me of their own free will, not wishing to leave the capital under any circumstances and prepared to die with me, I implore them to grant my request that they place the welfare of the nation above their own feelings. By their work and loyal companionship they will remain as close to me after my death as I hope my spirit will continue to dwell among them and accompany them always.

Hitler, Table Talk, February 27, 1942 (Cameron & Stevens):
But I shall feel I’m in my proper place if, after my death, I find myself, together with people like me, on some sort of Olympus. I shall be in the company of the most enlightened spirits of all times.

Heinz Linge:
I often noticed that the surrounding mountains inspired Hitler. He once joked that here he stood ‘above the world’ in an environment comparable to Olympus, legendary mount of the gods, but that alone can never have been the motivation for him to put down his private roots on Obersalzberg.
Often in quieter moments another reason would surface: the memory of his friend and mentor Dietrich Eckart. Here, not far from the ‘little house on the Göll’ in which the Bavarian writer, poet and dramatist had lived prior to his death, Hitler would often reminisce. Frequently he would remind me of the hero Antaios of Greek legend, who created new energy from his contact with the earth. That Hitler did not envisage Obersalzberg as his ‘eternal’ abode is clear from his intention, more often expressed the longer the war went on, to retire eventually to Linz. But as long as he used the Berghof – and he was still calculating in 1944 how he would need it until 1949 – he regarded himself as domiciled there.

Hermann Giesler:
Ein Anderer Hitler, p.g. 197
(placeholder) He had once told me that a Greek mythical figure stood symbolically before his eyes: Antaeus, to whom power always flows when he touches the two. That we believed this power to be found in the eternally renewing and growing body of people in the peasantry had nothing to do with romanticism, or that it had always been so.

Er habe mir schon einmal gesagt, daß ihm eine griechische Sagengestalt symbolhaft vor Augen stehe: Antäus, dem immer wieder Kraft zuströme, wenn er den Beiden berühre. Daß wir diese Kraft in dem ewig sich erneuernden und zuwachsenden Volkskörper gerade im Bauerntum zu finden glaubten, habe nichts mit Romantik zu tun, oder weil dies von jeher so gewesen sei.

Laurency ():
4It is high time it were made clear: C. W. Leadbeater is the only theosophical writer having a scientific way of looking at things, objective and studded with facts… The fact that he sometimes made mistakes does not detract from his importance as an esoteric pedagogue.
Laurency (L3e5.1):
9The first and only one who made esoterics a fully comprehensible mental knowledge
system was Leadbeater. And as a reward for his work he got the silence treatment when he was not scornfully set aside, or slandered.

[Mistakes would include his assessment of the German people in The Hidden Side of Christian Festivals. – https://books.google.com/books?id=CNhIAAAAIAAJ&pg=PA474 It’s interesting to read Bismarck’s conversation with Leadbeater as well as Hitler’s assessment of Bismarck. Leadbeater may have cared more for preserving theosophy’s reputation than for truth. Whereas Laurency distinguishes himself from the theosophists by pointing out their mistakes and errors and in his attack on status quo ideologies.]

Leadbeater:
To Those Who Mourn
In its rarefied matter, in the spiritual body, a man can move hither and thither as he will; if he loves the beauteous landscape of forest and sea and sky, he may visit at his pleasure all earth’s fairest spots; if he loves art he may spend the whole of his time in the contemplation of the masterpieces of all the greatest painters, and may himself produce masterpieces by the exercise of the wonderful magic of his thought-power; if he be a musician, he may pass from one to the other of the world’s chiefest orchestras, he may spend his time in listening to the most celebrated performers, or with the willing aid of the great Angels of music he may himself give forth such strains as are never heard on earth.
Whatever has been his particular delight on earth — his hobby, as we should say — he has now the fullest liberty to devote himself to it entirely and to follow it out to the utmost, provided only that its enjoyment is that of the intellect or of the higher emotions — that its gratification does not necessitate the possession of a physical body.
Thus it will be seen at once that all rational and decent men are infinitely happier after death than before it, for they have ample time not only for pleasure, but for really satisfactory progress along the lines which interest them most.

Virgil:
BkVI:628-678 The Fields of Elysium
Here is the company of those who suffered wounds fighting
for their country: and those who were pure priests, while they lived,
and those who were faithful poets, singers worthy of Apollo,
and those who improved life, with discoveries in Art or Science,
and those who by merit caused others to remember them:
the brows of all these were bound with white headbands.

Leadbeater:
To Those Who Mourn
Are there then none in that world who are unhappy? Yes, for that life is necessarily a sequel to this, and the man is in every respect the same man as he was before he left his body. If his enjoyments in this world were low and coarse, he will find himself unable in that world to gratify his desires. A drunkard will suffer from unquenchable thirst, having no longer a body through which it can be assuaged; the glutton will miss the pleasures of the table; the miser will no longer find gold for his gathering. The man who has yielded himself during earth-life to unworthy passions will find them still gnawing at his vitals. The sensualist still palpitates with cravings that can never now be satisfied; the jealous man is still torn by his jealousy, all the more that he can no longer interfere with the action of its object. Such people as these unquestionably do suffer — but only such as these, only those whose proclivities and passions have been coarse and physical in their nature. And even they have their fate absolutely in their own hands. They have but to conquer these inclinations, and they are at once free from the suffering which such longings entail.

Virgil:
BkVI:724-751 The Transmigration of Souls
Why, when life leaves them at the final hour,
still all of the evil, all the plagues of the flesh, alas,
have not completely vanished, and many things, long hardened
deep within, must of necessity be ingrained, in strange ways.

[What’s interesting to note is that Leadbeater never once referenced the Greeks in his formulation, To Those Who Mourn.]

Laurency (kr5):
5The soul lives on for a while after death. The foolish spend this time in the nether world; the wise, on the Elysian Fields. Everywhere the knowledge of pre-existence and reincarnation (not metempsychosis) shines through.

Heinrich Himmler:
Then, on a different plane, something else must happen: we must once again be rooted in our ancestors and grandchildren, in this eternal chain and eternal sequence.

9. The Jew

Mein Kampf:
One ought to realise that for one Goethe, Nature may bring into existence ten thousand such scribblers who act as the worst kind of germ-carriers in poisoning human soul. It was a terrible thought, and yet one which could not be overlooked, that the greater number of the Jews seemed specially destined by Nature to play this shameful part.

Laurency (L4e5.36):
1Anyone who applies the word “genius” on Strindberg has his own individual criterion of genius. Strindberg must be characterized as the biggest demolisher and corrupter of culture, an apostle of hatred, a poisoner of the public spirit growing. The characters he describes are caricatures, such as they appear when hatred looks at people and enjoys putting the worst construction on them.

[Although August Strindberg was not Jewish, he furnishes an excellent example of what thoroughly Judaized nations regard as cultural. Small wonder that his novel The Red Room was highly acclaimed in Denmark, a country which did the most to help Jews in the 1940s and which has been staunchly pro-Israel. Of course, that doesn’t mean it’s too late for the Danish people, it’s their leaders who are responsible. SS Ideology Vol. I has a section titled “The blood of brothers will remain the victor” which pays homage to the bravery and conduct of the Danes in the Second Schleswig War.

It’d seem Strindberg’s bouts of anti-Semitism merely amounted to literary exploitation (playing on Jewish caricatures) and for personal gain. It’s worth pointing out that Strindberg derived his views of women from the Jew ✡Weininger (I’d add here that I’m only concerned with Weininger’s assessment of the Jewish question). He was also influenced by the Jew ✡Lombroso’s view on criminality.

Notably, Strindberg’s archenemy was Henrik Ibsen, who influenced Dietrich Eckart. Also, the National Socialists had condemned a portrait of Strindberg, by Edvard Munch, as degenerate. Here too, a contrast can be discovered in the life of Munch and his illuminated contemporary Knut Hamsun.

In an April 7, 1925 diary entry, Goebbels comments on director Paul Wegener’s rendition of Strindberg’s Totentanz and Dance of Death (which was under the auspices of the Jew ✡Max Reinhardt), describing these using “Grauenhaft-dämonisch” [Gruesome-demonic]. He adds: “What an unhappy man Strindberg must have been!”]

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/culture/books/biographyandmemoirreviews/9146637/Strindberg-A-Life-by-Sue-Prideaux-review.html
And what a life! Strindberg, naturally, had a dreadful childhood. He was born prematurely at seven months. His father, a middle-class merchant, married beneath him. August’s mother, Nora, a waitress, made no pretence that she wanted him, already having had a favoured son, and he grew up in the full glare of her ferocious religious Pietism (a kind of Calvinism: “Nora knew she would fly up straight to heaven while August would go to Hell”). His father would demand August own up to misdemeanours he hadn’t committed and then beat him for it when, in despair, he eventually capitulated.

Memoirs of a Confidant, p.g. 143:
And the second point is that someone who is expected to do original, creative work must have been raised in an atmosphere of harmony. Where young children are compelled to watch as their parents constantly bicker, insult each other, and even cheat on each other, there even a young person cannot grow up with the inner harmony required to bring about the balance of the evil and good urges that lie dormant in every human being. He, too, is handi-capped. He, too, will be a cripple all his life. He, too, is easily prone to becoming a scoundrel.
Do not, therefore, give a responsible position to anyone of whom it is known that his parents are not living in a happy reunion, let alone that they are divorced.

Robert Green Ingersoll:
To while away the time I read Calvin’s Institutes, a book calculated to produce, in any natural mind, considerable respect for the Devil… The fact is that if you believe in an infinite God, and also in eternal punishment, then you must admit that Edwards and Calvin were absolutely right. There is no escape from their conclusions if you admit their premises. They were infinitely cruel, their premises infinitely absurd, their God infinitely fiendish, and their logic perfect. And yet I have kindness and candor enough to say that Calvin and Edwards were both insane.

Goebbels (Diaries), February 15, 1942:
Seyss-Inquart gave me a survey of the present situation in Holland. . . . The Dutchman is, generally speaking, an unpolitical individual. Calvinism and the materialistic love of good living have made him very individualistic. His character is in many respects quite strange to us. You therefore can’t do very much in Holland with cultural institutions, since the Dutchman is not used to them and, in fact, hardly knows them. His pigheadedness can’t be beaten. Nevertheless I believe that further developments will improve sentiment toward us in the Netherlands. Seyss-Inquart is pursuing a policy of restraint which, though not altogether National Socialistic, is nevertheless purposeful.

Hitler, Table Talk (Cameron & Stevens), February 22, 1942:
I understand that it may be hard for a young Dutchman or a young Norwegian to find himself called upon to form a common unit, within the framework of the Reich, together with men of other Germanic connections. But what is asked of them is no harder than what was asked of the Germanic tribes at the time of the great migrations.

“Strindberg’s anti-Semitism has no comparable prominence or importance, nor does Mr. Meyer argue that it has. Rather, if Strindberg happens to be in conflict with, say, a Jewish publisher, he simply latches on to that anti-Semitism the Christian tradition provided him with. Wagner’s anti-Semitism is ideological and gigantic, Strindberg’s opportunistic and petty.” (NYT article)

“If only Strindberg had been born in a more liberal country than nineteenth-century Sweden, he would surely have received, if not general acclamation, at least the kind of elitist recognition which he had in Denmark…” (Strindberg: A Biography by ✡Michael Meyer, p.g. 191)

[And thus, Strindberg furnishes the best example of how far, how thoroughly, how ignobly the Jewish values can corrupt a human being and make him “twice as much a child of hell” as them.]

Mein Kampf:
The Jew will stop at nothing. His utterly low-down conduct is so appalling that one really cannot be surprised if in the imagination of our people the Jew is pictured as the incarnation of Satan and the symbol of evil.

Weishaupt:
All these people who seem to recognize no greater good than power, wealth, and admiration, who will stop at nothing, sneering at every hazard and obstacle, to gain these things, bringing unending turbulence into their lives to that end – these people are, fundamentally and to a man, sensual and leisurely people.

Bolshevism: From Moses to Lenin
Internationalism requires basically good intentions. But the Jew fundamentally and completely lacks these. He hasn’t the remotest idea of classifying himself with the rest of humanity.

Weishaupt:
All moral infirmities come from underestimating or overestimating one’s own worth. Nothing forgets its common origin so completely; nothing is so arrogant and impertinent, nothing has so much difficulty coming to moral consciousness and a genuine understanding of one’s self, than a person who is only aware of his strengths, before whom everything bends, who only lives among his own kind or people more lowly than he; who never finds out by comparison with Higher and Better things what and how much he still lacks.
Such people, people never repulsed by bad luck, absolutely have to be brought into proximity with such things that they are forced to say to themselves, and admit, that they lose by comparison. These giants must be placed next to a tower, and this tower itself must be built at the foot of a high mountain. He who thinks himself great must be brought into the presence of someone Greater. He before whom all bow must see himself forced to bow to someone Higher.
To this end, morality must acquaint people with objects that make them feel small; it must ask them to fall down in order to stand up the greater; it must confront them, as they are, with what they are capable of becoming, their lifetime versus Eternity, and their fancied splendor versus God and Nature; it must use contrasts to shake their self-confidence; people must experience and become convinced by deed that things exist incomparably stronger and mightier than themselves. This proud king of nature must meet the ten thousand lords mightier than he.

Laurency (L5e23):
Since the black ones are lawless, it is much easier for them to win mankind over to their cause. Human egoism is well provided for and the support is much greater. The black ones also work more intensively, which was suggested by the saying “the children of this world are wiser than the children of light”, an esoterism that has always been misinterpreted.

Weishaupt:
They want to become powerful, rich, and admired – “so they can then sit back and do nothing, enjoy life, and relax. They are active for the purpose of becoming inactive.”

Bolshevism: From Moses to Lenin
His aim is to dominate others in order to extort from them at his leisure.

Weishaupt:
Because it is exactly this that people deem the greatest advantages of power and money, that neither rich people nor powerful people need work but can purchase or force service from others.

Hitler, Mein Kampf:
Our era is entirely preoccupied with little things which are to no purpose, or rather it is entirely preoccupied in the service of money. Therefore it is not to be wondered at if, with the worship of such an idol, the sense of heroism should entirely disappear.

Weishaupt:
It is no longer a wonder, then, that money remains this day the world’s idol and greatest driving force; that all human activity revolves around this point; that the desire to enrich oneself is so irresistibly attractive to people that poverty appears the worst of all evils to rich and poor alike.

Laurency ():
2The most common motives for collecting money are probably fear of poverty and striving for the power that wealth affords.
3Many a miser deceives himself by assuring that he collects money to donate it to charities some time. A typical example of the relation between wealth and so-called charity was the man who prayed to god to be given a million so that he could succour a person in distress with one thousand crowns.

Weishaupt:
Wealth protects you from every future and present lack. It lets people enjoy all possible goods; in this way it puts the Lowest and the Highest into the same class; it gives every human a degree of independence and even influence and power; it creates positions of honor and high standing. Everything that people can seek and desire down here is united in the possession of money.

Mein Kampf:
Simultaneously, the Jew gave himself the air of thirsting after knowledge. He lauded every phase of progress, particularly those phases which led to the ruin of others, for he judges all progress and development from the standpoint of the advantages which these bring to his own people. When it brings him no such advantages, he is the deadly enemy of enlightenment and hates all culture which is real culture as such. All the knowledge which he acquires in the schools of others is exploited by him exclusively in the service of his own race.

Laurency (L5e4):
9Even the agents of the black lodge mostly speak the truth. That is their strength. On certain crucial points, however, they insidiously apply misleading intimations. Or they put known facts and ideas into wrong contexts. The fictions of the mental world are mostly facts put into wrong places.

John F. Kennedy:
As every past generation has had to disenthrall itself from an inheritance of truisms and stereotypes, so in our own time we must move on from the reassuring repetition of stale phrases to a new, difficult, but essential confrontation with reality. For the great enemy of the truth is very often not the lie—deliberate, contrived, and dishonest—but the myth—persistent, persuasive, and unrealistic. Too often we hold fast to the clichés of our forebears. We subject all facts to a prefabricated set of interpretations. We enjoy the comfort of opinion without the discomfort of thought. Mythology distracts us everywhere—in government as in business, in politics as in economics, in foreign affairs as in domestic affairs.

Bolshevism: From Moses to Lenin
“Every time new and promising opportunities for meddling have arisen,” he brought out, “the Jew has been immediately involved. He has demonstrated an uncanny ability to sniff out like a bloodhound anything which was dangerous to him. Having found it, he uses all his cunning to get at it, to divert it, to change its nature, or, at least, to deflect its point from its goal.

Molotov:
Biding their time, they [the Jews] sniff around, stir things up, but are always prepared.

Laurency (L5e23):
Whenever the planetary hierarchy through its disciples undertakes something intended to benefit mankind, such a venture is unfailingly met with a corresponding counter-measure from the black lodge. When the planetary hierarchy founded secret knowledge orders, the black lodge was not late to establish its quasi-orders. It has actually happened that information about plans of the hierarchy has reached the black ones so that they have been able to anticipate the agents of the hierarchy. Because the black ones have everywhere their spies who intensively search for all plans, all knowledge ideas, etc.

Mein Kampf:
In order to incur the enmity of the Jew it is not necessary to show any open hostility towards him; it is sufficient if a man is considered capable of opposing the Jew at some time in the future, or of using his abilities and character to enhance the power and position of a nation which the Jew considers hostile to himself.
The Jew’s instinct, which never fails where these problems have to be dealt with, readily discerns the true mentality of those whom he meets in everyday life and those who are not of a kindred spirit may be sure of being listed among his enemies.
Since the Jew is not the object of aggression, but himself the aggressor, he considers as his enemies not only those who attack him, but also those who may be capable of resisting him.

Laurency (L5e23):
1Members of the planetary hierarchy clearly state that wherever they work in the worlds of man, the black lodge is after them and seeks to destroy whatever they achieve. That is why it is necessary that disciples use their understanding and discernment and that their alertness must never relax. If the black ones have succeeded in picking up some detail of the plans of the planetary hierarchy, they will try to prevent it and to launch projects in idealistic disguise and with duped idealists as a deceptive façade.
2Aspirants to discipleship must always count on being put on their black list. Disciples are opposed in all ways. That aspirant who has been accepted as a disciple need not fear the attacks of the black ones, because the defensive resources of the planetary hierarchy are at his disposal. Anyone who is not assured of this defence, however, is wise not to occupy himself with this issue even in his thoughts or talk about it. To be put on the list of the black ones leads to a life-long struggle against secret enemies.

Bormann Letters, p.g. 193:
Kreisleiter Stredele via Gerda Bormann
The Jews were dangerous, because they were obsessed with a belief that they were destined to rule the world, and because they were held in rigid control by the Talmud and the laws of Moses and the prophets.

Laurency (L4e3):
11The obsession of the Jews with their idée fixe of being a chosen people is of all religious delusions the most frightening one. It makes them feel themselves masters of all nations and legislators for all nations. Hence their aggressiveness and sense of being above all laws.

G. G. Otto:
Despite the fact that he feels so secure, at least for the moment, the Jew is thinking hard about why the awakened peoples of Europe are defending themselves against him. Nothing reveals his uncertainty about the path his laws dictate to world denomination than what we often read in the works of Jewish authors. It is in part this uncertainty that drives the Jews to pursue their goal of world domination more quickly and more consistently.

Laurency ():
1Monotheism is a legacy of Judaism with its Yahweh, or Jehovah. The Jews had to have one single god to be sure of the divine promise of their being the peculiar people of god.

Bolshevism: From Moses to Lenin
Credulously, Luther viewed everything in a rosy light. This became easier for him when, in the middle of the great morass, he came to passages like: ‘Ye will have no permanent existence among the nations, and the soles of thy feet shall find no rest,’ and ‘Ye will be an abomination among all peoples.’ Compassion seized him. “The Jews,’ he thought to himself, ‘have become untrue to their godly doctrine, but they will again find their way home to it.’ It never occurred to him that these direly threatening sermons served only the purpose of holding the Jews to their course.

Laurency (L3e18):
13The planetary hierarchy asserts with vigour that in the struggle between justice and injustice, freedom and slavery, for and against consciousness development, the neutrals side with the enemy, whether they want to see it or not. There is no neutrality where evolution is concerned. He who is not for is against. The aggressive ones regard neutrality as a justification for them. Pacifism does not exist for the planetary hierarchy as long as evolution is being combated. The hierarchy does not betray its own, those who fight the “good struggle” against excessive violence and oppression.

Luther:
Rather we allow them to live freely in our midst despite all their murdering, cursing, blaspheming, lying, and defaming; we protect and shield their synagogues, houses, life, and property. In this way we make them lazy and secure and encourage them to fleece us boldly of our money and goods, as well as to mock and deride us, with a view to finally overcoming us, killing us all for such a great sin, and robbing us of all our property (as they daily pray and hope). Now tell me whether they do not have every reason to be the enemies of us accursed Goyim, to curse us and to strive for our final, complete, and eternal ruin!

Protocols of Zion

Hitler’s Letters and Notes, p.g. 237:

The ‘Elders of Zion’
Objection: ‘not every Jew knows about it’
What the wise man grasps with his mind
the man in the street grasps instinctively.

Goebbels (Diaries), May 13, 1943:
I have devoted exhaustive study to the Protocols of Zion. In the past the objection was always made that they were not suited to present-day propaganda. In reading them now I find that we can use them very well. The Protocols of Zion are as modern today as they were when published for the first time. . . .  At noon I mentioned this to the Fuehrer. He believed the Protocols were absolutely genuine. . . . The Jewish question, in the Fuehrer’s opinion, will play a decisive role in England, . . . In all the world, he said, the Jews are alike. Whether they live in a ghetto of the East or in the bankers’ palaces of the City or Wall Street, they will always pursue the same aims and without previous agreement even use the same means.

Mein Kampf:
The moment a man arises who profoundly understands the distress of his people and, having diagnosed the evil with perfect accuracy, takes measures to cure it; the moment he fixes his aim and chooses the means to reach it then paltry and pettifogging people become all attention and eagerly follow the doings of this man who has thus come before the public eye.
Just like sparrows who are apparently indifferent, but in reality keenly observant of the movements of their more fortunate companion with the morsel of bread, in order that they may snatch it from him if he should momentarily relax his hold, so it is also with the human species.
All that is needed is that one man should strike out on a new road and then a crowd of poltroons will prick up their ears and begin to hope that some trifling gain may lie at the end of that road.
The moment they think they have discovered where the reward is to be reaped they hasten to find another route by which to reach the goal more quickly.
As soon as a new movement is founded and has formulated a definite programme, people of that kind come forward and proclaim that they are fighting for the same cause.
This does not imply that they are honestly ready to join the ranks of such a movement and thus recognise its right of priority. It implies rather that they intend to steal the programme and found a new party.

Hitler, Memoirs of a Confidant, p.g. 70-71:
The Jew’s parasite brain works quickly with its sixth sense. It thinks: if I can no longer engage in my parasitism in its previous form, then I must simply look for some opportunity in the new, the coming form. Until now, it was my highest aim to gain power in the state in order to secure my domination and my way of life. Now, if new forms of government develop, we must simply try to seize power in the newly formed state. Since the new form will be brought about by revolution and the industrialization of the subjugated working masses, it will be simplest to start by assuming leadership during the revolution. Then we will be able to use the revolution to bring about, by straightforward means, both the new state and our new domination: the state of the working masses, whom we command, and which we rule!
It is hard for me to believe the Jew so purposeful and intellectually superior that he actually submitted these considerations so systematically in the councils of the Elders of Zion; that from the first he thought them through in the way he just elaborated—that would be uncanny. But his sixth sense guides him instinctively and unconsciously along the correct path, where, admittedly, consciousness has long since come to him.

Hitler, September 4, 1940 speech:
We want to build up a new state! That is why the others hate us so much today. They
have often said as much. They said: “Yes, their social experiment is very dangerous! If it takes hold, and our own workers come to see this too, then this will be highly disquieting. It costs billions and does not bring any results. It cannot be expressed in terms of profit, nor of dividends. What is the point?! We are not interested in such a development. We welcome everything which serves the material progress of mankind insofar as this progress translates into economic profit. But social experiments, all they are doing there, this can only lead to the awakening of greed in the masses. Then we will have to descend from our pedestal. They cannot expect this of us.”

[Some (such as V. K. Clark, that disciple of Richard C. Carrier, who has carried on a feud with the excellent translator Carolyn Yeager, who has on multiple occasions pointed out Clark’s distortion of facts) would like to misconstrue this statement from Hitler as an outright dismissal of the Protocols’ authenticity. But as the above quotes should sufficiently demonstrate, Hitler was consistently persuaded of it’s authenticity. Here, Hitler is merely showing skepticism for the discourse having been delivered in it’s original form.]

Laurency ():
1During many years Platon (Latinized: Plato) was in a position to listen to Sokrates’ talks with the sophists and others interested in the problems of life. Many of Platon’s dialogues would seem to be reports of such discussions. It is obvious that he improved in a superior way on what he had heard. Unprepared discussions are not as logical as these. No talks are recorded that exactly.

[This article by Randall Bytwerk suggests that the Protocols borrowed heavily from Maurice Joly’s 1864 satire. In any case, it didn’t matter to Hitler and Goebbels whether it was genuine or not.]

https://semiticcontroversies.blogspot.com/2012/07/the-marx-darwin-and-nietzsche-passage.html

Mein Kampf:
How much the whole existence of this people is based on a permanent falsehood is proved in a unique way by ‘The Protocols of the Elders of Zion,’ which are so violently repudiated by the Jews. With groans and moans, the Frankfurter Zeitung repeats again and again that these are forgeries. This alone is evidence in favour of their authenticity. What many Jews unconsciously wish to do is here clearly set forth.
It is not necessary to ask out of what Jewish brain these revelations sprang, but what is of vital interest is that they disclose, with an almost terrifying precision, the mentality and methods of action characteristic of the Jewish people and these writings expound, in all their various aspects, the final aims towards which the Jews are striving. The study of real happenings, however, is the best way of judging the authenticity of these documents.

Protocols of Zion:
PROTOCOL No. 5
The second secret requisite for the success of our government is comprised in the following: To multiply to such an extent national failings, habits, passions, conditions of civil life, that it will be impossible for anyone to know where he is in the resulting chaos, so that the people in consequence will fail to understand one another. This measure will also serve us in another way, namely, to sow discord in all parties, to dislocate all collective forces which are still unwilling to submit to us, and to discourage any kind of personal initiative which might in any degree hinder our affair. There is nothing more dangerous than personal initiative: if it has genius behind it, such initiative can do more than can be done by millions of people among whom we have sown discord.

Mein Kampf:
Simultaneously, the Jew gave himself the air of thirsting after knowledge. He lauded every phase of progress, particularly those phases which led to the ruin of others, for he judges all progress and development from the standpoint of the advantages which these bring to his own people. When it brings him no such advantages, he is the deadly enemy of enlightenment and hates all culture which is real culture as such. All the knowledge which he acquires in the schools of others is exploited by him exclusively in the service of his own race.

Mein Kampf:
Therefore, the Jewish intellect will never be constructive, but always destructive. At best, it may serve as a stimulus in rare cases, but only in the limited meaning of the poet’s [Goethe’s] lines, “The Power which always wills the bad, and always works the good” (Die stets Böse will und stets das Gute schafft.).

Laurency ():
7“Thou hadst no power if it were not given to thee from above.” Those who abuse power sow much bad sowing, which they must reap some time. The guardians of the Law utilize them, however, to serve as agents of destiny, letting those who have sown a bad sowing experience their bad reaping.
Those who abuse power thus are, as Goethe’s Mephisto puts it, “part of that power which ever strives for evil and ever serves good” (in this case the law of reaping). They are, in other words, the scavengers of existence.

Laurency (L5e22):
2The Jews occupied Palestine in about 1200 B.C.E. and annihilated the original population – men, women, and children. The land which they had robbed from others they lost themselves 1300 years later, which is what happens according to the law of reaping.

Mein Kampf:
Moved by my own daily experiences, I now began to investigate more thoroughly the sources of the Marxist teaching itself. Its effects were well known to me in detail, one needed only a little imagination in order to be able to forecast the inevitable consequences.
The only question now was, ‘Did the founders foresee the effects of their work in the form which it was eventually to assume, or were the founders themselves the victims of an error?’
To my mind both, alternatives were possible.
If the second question had to be answered in the affirmative, then it was the duty of every thinking person to push his way into the forefront of this sinister movement with a view to preventing it from producing the worst possible results.
But if it were the first question which had to be answered in the affirmative, then it must be admitted that the original authors of this evil which has infected the nations were devils incarnate, for only the brain of a monster, and not that of a man, could plan an organisation whose activities must finally bring about the collapse of human civilisation and turn this world into a desert waste.

Laurency (wm9):
Mephisto, in Goethe’s Faust, enunciated an esoteric fact when saying that his force was a portion of that power which always desires evil and always creates good. However, the black ones are absolute opponents of evolution and implacable enemies of all those who make a contribution to evolution, so that you are fully justified in regarding them as the enemies of life, the very incarnations of all evil in existence.

Hitler, Table Talk, December 1, 1941 (Jochmann):
I am convinced that there have been Jews among us who have been decent in the sense that they have abstained from any action directed against the Germans. How many there were is hard to say. But none has entered the fight for the Germans against his fellow Jews!

✡Otto Weininger:
I desire at this point again to lay stress on the fact, although it should be self-evident, that, in spite of my low estimate of the Jew, nothing could be further from my intention than to lend the faintest support to any practical or theoretical persecution of Jews. I am dealing with Judaism, in the platonic sense, as an idea. There is no more an absolute Jew than an absolute Christian. I am not speaking against the individual, whom, indeed, if that had been so, I should have wounded grossly and unnecessarily. Watchwords, such as “Buy only from Christians,” have in reality a Jewish taint; they have a meaning only for those who regard the race and not the individual. I have no wish to boycott the Jew, or by any such immoral means to attempt to solve the Jewish question.
Nor will Zionism solve that question; as H. S. Chamberlain has pointed out, since the destruction of the Temple at Jerusalem, Judaism has ceased to be national, and has become a spreading parasite, straggling all over the earth and finding true root nowhere. Before Zionism is possible, the Jew must first conquer Judaism.

http://thubtenchodron.org/2011/06/jew-dalai-lama/

I felt personally challenged by Buddhist meditation, which seemed to make its practitioners calmer, wiser, more capable of dealing with difficult emotions. These were qualities I had not found in myself. In our dialogue, the Tibetans wanted to know the path and the goal of our belief system and how it helps us overcome painful feelings. Until then I had never thought to ask such questions of Judaism. For me, being Jewish was wrapped up in our collective history, my family, my identity. I had never before considered Jewishness as a spiritual path.

Laurency ():
9It is interesting to hear Jews describe how they receive their religious instruction. They are made to read the scriptures, and the rabbis see to it that any attempt at reflection on what is being read is stopped at once. Read, read, read, do not think. It is all crammed up, and then you are through with your study. No arguments about it. Religious problems are not to be discussed. Yahweh (Yhwh) does not allow such things. If his peculiar people violated this command, he would reject them.

Mein Kampf:
The great masses can be rescued, but a lot of time and a great deal of patience must be devoted to such work. A Jew, on the other hand, can never be rescued from his fixed notions. I was then simple enough to attempt to show them the absurdity of their teaching. Within my small circle I talked to them until my throat ached and my voice grew hoarse. I believed that I could finally convince them of the danger inherent in the Marxist nonsense.
But I achieved the very opposite. It seemed to me that a growing insight into the disastrous effects of the Social Democratic doctrine in theory and in practice only served to strengthen their opposition.

Luther:
They have failed to learn any lesson from the terrible distress that has been theirs for over fourteen hundred years in exile. Nor can they obtain any end or definite terminus of this, as they suppose, by means of the vehement cries and laments to God. If these blows do not help, it is reasonable to assume that our talking and explaining will help even less.

Goebbels (Diaries), May 13, 1943:
There is no hope of leading the Jews back into the fold of civilized humanity by exceptional punishments. They will forever remain Jews, just as we are forever members of the Aryan race.

Euphrates the Stoic:
Life of Apollonius
For the Jews have long been in revolt not only against the Romans, but against humanity; and a race that has made its own a life apart and irreconcilable, that cannot share with the rest of mankind in the pleasures of the table nor join in their libations or prayers or sacrifices, are separated from ourselves by a greater gulf than divides us from Susa or Bactra or the more distant Indies. What sense then or reason was there in chastising them for revolting from us, whom we had better have never annexed?

The Jew is the ferment of decomposition

[The Jew] himself is by no means an organising element, but rather a ferment of decomposition.

– Hitler, Mein Kampf

Hitler, April 12, 1922 speech:
The Aryan regards work as the foundation for the maintenance of the community of people amongst it members. The Jew regards work as the means to the exploitation of other peoples. The Jew never works as a productive creator without the great aim of becoming the master. He works unproductively using and enjoying other people’s work. And thus we understand the iron sentence which Mommsen once uttered: ‘The Jew is the ferment of decomposition in peoples,’ that means that the Jew destroys and must destroy because he completely lacks the conception of an activity which builds up the life of the community.

Hitler, Mein Kampf:
I was convinced that the Habsburg State would baulk and hinder every German who might show signs of real greatness, while at the same time it would aid and abet every non-German activity. This conglomerate spectacle of heterogeneous races which the capital of the Dial Monarchy presented, this motley of Czechs, Poles, Hungarians, Ruthenians, Serbs and Croats, etc., and always that bacillus which is the solvent of human society, the Jew, here and there and everywhere—the whole spectacle was repugnant to me. The gigantic city seemed to be the incarnation of racial adulteration.

Hitler, January 30, 1943 speech:
The conspiracy of international capitalism and Bolshevism is not an absurd phenomenon but a natural condition. The driving force in both cases is that race whose hatred has torn mankind to pieces time and again throughout the millennia, corrupted it inside, exploited it economically, and destroyed it politically. International Jewry is “the ferment of the decomposition of people and states” today as in antiquity. Things will remain this way, unless the people find the strength to rid themselves of this germ.

Hitler, January 30, 1944 speech:
The view that it is possible to live together peacefully or obtain a reconciliation between your own interests and those of this ferment of the decomposition of nations is like hoping that the human body will be capable of assimilating the plague bacillus in the long run.

Goebbels:
We have it prophesied a hundred times. If the Jews speak, the people must beware. The Jew is rootless, a ferment of decomposition. Whether he lives as a capitalist or a Bolshevist, his nature remains the same: Ahasver, the eternal destroyer.

Hitler, Table Talk (Cameron & Stevens), December 1, 1941:
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.

Hitler, Table Talk (Cameron & Stevens), February 17, 1942:
The more we render the Jew incapable of harming us, the more we shall protect ourselves from this danger. The Jew plays in nature the rôle of a catalysing element. A people that is rid of its Jews returns spontaneously to the natural order.

Rosenberg:
But in the present world even international bankruptcy is good business, and the racketeer is seen as a useful member of democratic society. The law of the coming Reich will sweep here with an iron broom. It will fulfil the words of Lagarde concerning Jews. He said that one cannot convert plague bacilli, but must render them harmless as quickly as possible.

10. Emperor Julian’s philosophy

[Julian’s philosophyVoltaireRobert Green Ingersoll]

Leon Degrelle:
The Enigma of Hitler
[Hitler] knew Julian the Apostate as if he had been his contemporary.

[This piece is from the introduction by Leon Degrelle (1906- 1994) to the second volume of his uncompleted series of books on Hitler’s life and legacy, which was provisionally titled “The Hitler Century.”]

Hitler, Table Talk, October 21, 1941 (Jochmann):

Führerhauptquartier
21. Oktober 1941, mittags
Bo[rmann]/Fu.109
The boss said, with reference to the book, “The pyre,”110 as follows: If we see how clearly our best men have already recognized the effects of Christianity a hundred or two hundred years ago, it is almost a shame that we are still are not further. I did not know at all how clearly a man like Julian had judged Christians and Christianity. One has to read it once. Christianity was all destructive bolshevism. The Galilean, who was later called Christ, wanted something entirely different. He was a national leader who took a stand against Judaism. Galilee was certainly a colony in which the Romans had settled Gallic legionaries, and Jesus was certainly not a Jew. The Jews also called him a hurensohn, the son of a whore and a Roman soldier.

109 This conversation was recorded and signed by Reichsleiter Martin Bormann himself.

110 The pyre (The Funeral Pile, Burned at the Stake). Words of Great Heretics. Der Scheiterhaufen. Worte großer Ketzer. Edited by Kurt Eggers. Dortmund, 1941.

Hitler, Table Talk, October 25, 1941 (Jochmann):
The book with the sayings of Emperor Julian should be spread in millions: A wonderful insight, ancient wisdom, a recognition, it is fantastic! In general: with what clarity [the authors] of the eighteenth century and, above all, the last century, judged the Christianity and the development which the Church has taken!121

121 This is again the collection of quotations by Kurt Eggers, cf. Note 71.

Hitler, Table Talk, January 27, 1942 (Jochmann):
It would be better to speak of “Constantine the traitor” and of “Julian the faithful,” instead of calling one the Great and the other the apostate. What Christianity has written against Julian is the same Wortgeblödel which has been poured out on us in Jewish literature, while the writings of Julian are pure wisdom. If humanity were to study history, what consequences would arise! To preserve Europe before the repetition of such a crisis will once be celebrated as the merit of fascism and national socialism.

Voltaire:
Philosophical Dictionary
At the present day — after having compared facts, memorials and records, the writings of Julian and those of his enemies — we are compelled to acknowledge that, if he was not partial to Christianity, he was somewhat excusable in hating a sect stained with the blood of all his family; and that although he had been persecuted, imprisoned, exiled, and threatened with death by the Galileans, under the reign of the cruel and sanguinary Constantius, he never persecuted them, but on the contrary even pardoned ten Christian soldiers who had conspired against his life.
His letters are read and admired: “The Galileans,” says he, “under my predecessor, suffered exile and imprisonment; and those who, according to the change of circumstances, were called heretics, were reciprocally massacred in their turn. I have called home their exiles, I have liberated their prisoners, I have restored their property to those who were proscribed, and have compelled them to live in peace; but such is the restless rage of these Galileans that they deplore their inability any longer to devour one another.”
What a letter! What a sentence, dictated by philosophy, against persecuting fanaticism. Ten Christians conspiring against his life, he detects and he pardons them. How extraordinary a man! What dastardly fanatics must those be who attempt to throw disgrace on his memory!

https://www.dropbox.com/s/4p78gtflhoo9jxm/359983566-Kurt-Eggers-SS-Warrior-Poet-Collection.pdf?dl=0
https://archive.org/details/EggersKurtDerScheiterhaufenWorteGrosserKetzer1942110S.Scan

Emperor Julian (Der Scheiterhaufen, p.g. 18-19):

[To Atarbius, 362, Const. or Antioch]
By the gods! It is not my intention that all Christians should be killed and abused. But I find this in order and commend it herewith: that all those who have remained faithful to the faith of their fathers are granted an advantage.
Bei den Göttern! MeinWille ist es nicht, dass alle Christen getötet und misshandelt werden sollen. Das aber finde ich in Ordnung und befehle es hiermit: Dass allen, die dem Glauben ihrer Väter treu geblieben sind, ein Vorzug eingeräumt wird.

[]
Christianity can neither form statesmen, nor instill manly courage or patriotism. – It is just as incapable of it as it’s mother, Judaism!
Das Christentum vermag weder Staatsmänner zu bilden, noch männlichen Mut oder vaterländische Gesinnung einzuflössen. – Es ist dazu ebensowenig in der Lage, wie seine Mutter, das Judentum!

[Against the Galileans]
But if this that I assert is the truth, point out to me among the Hebrews a single general like Alexander or Caesar! You have no such man; let alone the Christians!
Binen Feldherrn, wie Alexander oder einen Cäsar zeigt mir bei den Juden; geschweige denn bei den Christen!

[Against the Galileans]
Now this would be a clear proof: Choose out children from among you all and train and educate them in the “holy scripture”. If they, having become men, prove themselves to be somewhat more efficient than the slaves, then you may regard me as a fool and a madman.
Wählt unter euch Knaben und lasst sie in der “Heiligen Schrift” unterrichten. Wenn sie, Männer geworden, sich auch nur etwas tüchtiger erweisen sollten als die Sklaven, so mögt ihr mich für einen Toren und Verrückten halten.

[To Atarbius, 362, Const. or Antioch]
Almost everything has perished from the foolishness of the Christians. Only the grace of the gods can still bring us salvation.
Durch die Narrheit der Christen ist beinahe alles zugrunde gegangen. Nur die Gnade der Götter kann uns noch Rettung bringen.

[]
Christianity, as a result of its abominable principles of life, is a religion for innkeepers, tax collectors, dancers, and similar rabble.
Das Christentum ist infolge seiner abscheulichen Lebensgrundsätze eine Religion für Schenkwirte, Zöllner, Tänzer und änhliches Gelichter!
[Against the Galileans]
But to tell the truth, you have taken pride in outdoing our vulgarity, (this, I think, is a thing that happens to all nations, and very naturally) and you thought that you must adapt your ways to the lives of the baser sort, shopkeepers, tax-gatherers, dancers and libertines.

[]
One must hate the intelligentsia among you, but pity the simple ones, who, as your followers, have fallen so deeply into ruin that they betrayed the eternal gods and passed over to a dead Jew.

Julian:
Now that the human race possesses its knowledge of God by nature and not from teaching is proved to us first of all by the universal yearning for the divine that is in all men whether private persons or communities, whether considered as individuals or as races.
Hitler, Table Talk, July 11-12, 1941 (Cameron & Stevens):
Man has discovered in nature the wonderful notion of that all-mighty being whose law he worships. Fundamentally in everyone there is the feeling for this all-mighty, which we call God (that is to say, the dominion of natural laws throughout the whole universe).
Hitler, Table Talk, July 11-12, 1941 (Jochmann):
, [hs. Bormann’s Addition: namely, the reign of natural laws throughout the universe.]

Wir werden allenfalls die Gesetze kennenlernen, nach denen sich das Leben der Naturwesenheiten bestimmt; wenn es hoch kommt, werden wir unserem Dasein das Wissen um das Naturgesetz nutzbar machen können; aber warum das Gesetz waltet, erfahren wir nicht. Das versteht sich von selbst: Unser Standort erlaubt uns nicht, in andere Ebenen hineinzusehen.

Dafür hat der Mensch den wunder-schönen Begriff von der Allmacht gefunden, deren Walten er verehrt. Zum Atheismus wollen wir nicht erziehen. In jedem Menschen lebt das Ahnungsvermögen, was das Walten dessen angeht, das man Gott nennt, [hs. Zusatz Bormanns: Nämlich das Walten der Naturgesetze im gesamten Universum.]

Julian:
The philosophers bid us imitate the gods so far as we can, and they teach us that this imitation consists in the contemplation of realities. And that this sort of study is remote from passion and is indeed based on freedom from passion, is, I suppose, evident, even without my saying it. In proportion then as we, having been assigned to the contemplation of realities, attain to freedom from passion, in so far do we become like God.
Hitler, Table Talk (Cameron & Stevens), July 11-12, 1941:
I think the man who contemplates the universe with his eyes wide open is the man with the greatest amount of natural piety: not in the religious sense, but in the sense of an intimate harmony with things.

Logos

Herakleitos:

Though the logos is common, the many live as if they had a wisdom of their own.

Julian:
For all of us, without being taught, have attained to a belief in some sort of divinity, though it is not easy for all men to know the precise truth about it, nor is it possible for those who do know it to tell it to all men.

Xenophanes:
There never was nor will be a man who has certain knowledge about the gods and about all the things I speak of. Even if he should chance to say the complete truth, yet he himself knows not that it is so. But all may have their fancy.

Iamblichus:
It is, however, not easy for a man to know what these are, unless he obtains this knowledge from one who has heard God, or has heard God himself, or procures it through divine art. Hence also, the Pythagoreans were studious of divination.

Laurency (L4e5):
3The essence of genius at least contains the divination of the ideals, the instinctive understanding of what is fit for life and life-promoting. Those in whom this divination has never been born or in whom it has been devastated do not belong to the stage of culture and are no true geniuses.


Mein Kampf:
It is the sacred duty, particularly of those who adopt a patriotic attitude, to see to it that within the framework of their own particular denomination, they do not render mere lip-service to God, but actually fulfil the Will of God and do not allow His handiwork to be debarred, for it was by the Will of God that man was created in a certain image and endowed with certain characteristics and certain faculties. Whoever destroys His work, wages war against God’s creation and God’s will.

Hitler, Memoirs of a Confidant, p.g. 170:
For the peoples and their states are natural creations, divinely ordained, they are associations of men, all of whom are created by God and therefore stand side by side, with equal rights, judged only for the totality, each according to his abilities and achievements for the totality.

Hitler, Memoirs of a Confidant, p.g. 223-224:
If I use the word ‘divine,’ I am not visualizing a god in human form with a long white beard. You know perfectly well what my thinking is on that subject. Somewhere or other Goethe says, ‘ ‘Twould be no kind of god who only moves from the outside, letting the circle of the universe course round his fingertip!’

Hitler, Memoirs of a Confidant, p.g. 172:
There are those poor creatures, bending their knees and wringing their praying hands before carved wooden figures, and those great hypocrites hoodwink them into believing that, thanks to this behavior, their souls will sizzle a few days less in the fires of hell. But the true link to God, the elevated consciousness of being a divine creature–that is driven out of them and forbidden them!
Here is where I see the λόγος of St. John, which Luther unfortunately translated as ‘word.’ Goethe tried to rectify the error with the critical lines: ‘I cannot possibly place such a high value on the word, I must translate it differently,’ and he said: ‘In the beginning was the deed.’
But I say: ‘In the beginning was the urge! And the urge existed from eternity! And the urge was a creation of God, and God himself was this urge.’ And the urge was the spark of life, which resides in us as well. And though it rose to consciousness in man, we pass it by, as Christ already bemoaned.

[See Goethe’s Faust I: Mind/Thought, Power, Deed. Curiously, even Rauschning has his Hitler allude to this passage from Goethe’s Faust.]

Bolshevism: From Moses to Lenin
“Schopenhauer expressed a similar opinion,” I confirmed. “He said that if one wants to understand the Old Testament one must read it in the Greek version [Septuagint, LXX]. There it has an entirely different tone, an entirely different color, with no presentiment of Christianity! Contrasted with the Greek, Luther’s translation seems ‘pious’; also ‘often erroneous, indeed, sometimes intentionally, and delivered throughout in a churchly, edifying tone.’ Luther has permitted himself changes ‘which one could call forgeries’ and so on.”

Mein Kampf:
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.

Hitler, Memoirs of a Confidant, p.g. 224:
For me, God is the Logos of St. John, which has become flesh and lives in the world, interwoven with it and pervading it, conferring on it drives and driving force, and constituting the actual meaning and content of the world.

Hitler, Memoirs of a Confidant, p.g. 115:
Individual striving — yes, individual acquisitiveness — is the driving force that animates the world and the economy and that has engendered all major inventions and discoveries. If we eliminate it, the drive slackens and progress stagnates. But to stand still is to regress.

Hitler, Table Talk (Cameron & Stevens), November 11, 1941:
I don’t dream of imposing my philosophy on a village girl. Although religion does not aim at seeking for the truth, it is a kind of philosophy which can satisfy simple minds, and that does no harm to anyone. Everything is finally a matter of the feeling man has of his own impotence. In itself, this philosophy has nothing pernicious about it. The essential thing, really, is that man should know that salvation consists in the effort that each person makes to understand Providence and accept the laws of nature.

Laurency (L5e7):
72Priests fable about the “will of god”, as if they had access to the consciousness of the planetary ruler in his world (28), as if he “commanded” anything, as if the will of god were a ruthless power.
The will of god is rather what the scientist calls “forces of nature and life”, what the esoterician calls the “individual’s instinctive urge to develop”, his striving after insight and understanding.
What the will of god actually is, his endeavour, his intentions, his tasks in his worlds, is beyond the possible knowledge or understanding of even the planetary hierarchy.

[Assessing reliability of Otto Wagener’s memoirs]

Hitler, Memoirs of a Confidant, p.g. 314:
So if I assume for the sake of argument that Goldzier was somehow correct, it follows that the task assigned to the creatures of the earth is: to consume and pass on earth-electricity. In this connection, I am repeatedly reminded of the Gospel of St. John, which begins with the words, ‘In the beginning was the “Logos”’–which is why I translate it as ‘urge.’ Quite simply, in the beginning was the urge to fulfill this purpose of earthly life.

[Before 1910, Hitler had come across some pamphlets by a Viennese engineer named Hans Goldzier: “Given his name, he might have been a Jew, and perhaps that was why he began writing under the name Th. Newest. I was deeply impressed by Goldzier’s ideas, but subsequently I never heard anything more about him or his theories. I only know that, as an engineer, he was involved in the building of the Simplon Tunnel.”]

Hitler, Memoirs of a Confidant, p.g. 314:
From it, the instinct of self-preservation developed logically, as did the instinct to be fruitful and multiply. They are meant to carry out this task presented by nature, this meaning of all life, as long and as abundantly as possible–that is, to the greatest conceivable extent.

The Initiate in the Dark Cycle , p.g. 64:
“Jealousy with men,” he explained, “began as an instinct to protect the foetus. If a pregnant woman indulges in promiscuity, she injures the unborn child by becoming the recipient of mixed magnetism. Jealousy in its original form was therefore a protection against this contingency, but like many legitimate instincts, it got out of hand and degenerated into an excuse for possessiveness, cruelty and kindred evils, including murder and suicide. Through jealousy thousands of homes were broken up and children were deprived of the benefits of family life.
To counteract all this it was necessary to put forward the ideal of non-jealousy, which in its day was startling and in advance of the times. Yet as all ideals can be distorted and used for selfish purposes, so has this one also been distorted.

Robert Ley:
Everything in nature obeys ancient and unchangeable laws. Nothing happens apart from these natural laws. The laws strive toward harmony and construction. Every natural creature must obey some of these countless laws. It has a mission, thereby obeying its drives, its instincts, and its understanding, if nature has given it that.

Laurency (kl1_2):
10[Jesus] showed them nature, the flowers on the ground, how perfect everything is in its kind, more perfect than any human creation and so because everything in nature unresistingly obeys its own inner law, the law of development.
Apollonius of Tyana:
[The elephant] is docile beyond all others; and when he has once been broken in to serve man, he will put up with anything at the hands of man, and he makes it his business to be tractable and obedient to him, and he loves to eat out of his hands, in the way little dogs do; and when his master approaches he fondles him with his trunk, and he will allow him to thrust his head into his jaws, and he holds them as wide open as his master likes, as we have seen among the nomads.
But of a night the elephant is said to lament his state of slavery, yes by heaven, not by trumpeting in his ordinary way, but by wailing mournfully and piteously. And if a man comes upon him when he is lamenting in this way, the elephant stops his dirge at once as if he were ashamed. Such control, O Damis, has he over himself, and it is his instinctive obedience which actuates him rather than the man who sits upon and directs him.

Martin Bormann, June 6, 1941:
When we National Socialists speak of a belief in God, by God we do not understand, as do naive Christians and their clerical beneficiaries, a manlike being who is sitting around in some corner of the spheres.
The assertion that this world-force can worry about the fate of every individual, every bacillus on earth, and that it can be influenced by so-called prayer or other astonishing things, is based either on a suitable dose of naiveté or on outright commercial effrontery.

Laurency (wm8.25):
1Anyone who has some knowledge of the cosmic organization, the organizations of the solar systems and the planets, sees clearly that all beings in higher worlds have their own special problems and that individual supervision and treatment of human beings (such as religions teach) is an absurdity, that god cannot watch over each particular individual, knowing his desires and needs.

Kurt Eggers:
Der Scheiterhaufen. Worte großer Ketzer
Do you really believe, sir, hand on heart, that heaven concerns itself with the quarrels, exchanges of words and bloody actions, which we street urchins engage in among ourselves? Do you believe that I, if I take a stroll in my garden at Sans-souci and trample an anthill, have even the slightest thought that my path takes me right over tiny creatures, which bustle about and endeavor? Would it not be ridiculous of these animals – provided, they could think – to presume that I knew they were there and now had to take consideration for their existence. No, my friend, free yourself of this self-love, which only deceives you, if according to it heaven is supposed to have nothing further to do than constantly concern itself with your personal well-being. Instead press upon yourself the conviction that nature does not worry about the individual being: but indeed about the whole species: it, the species, may not perish. And our closing words to all this? That a king never has to take note of it, if on a stroll he tramples an anthill, which by coincidence finds itself on his path, that he, looking at the big thing, which puts claim to his full attention and which he frequently cannot even completely keep in sight, does not think of ants nor looks around, whether they crawl around in his gardens and park facilities.

Goethe

Otto Dietrich:
From his nationalistic point of view Schiller was much to be preferred to the universalist and cosmopolitan Goethe. I never heard Hitler say a word about Goethe. On his visit to Weimar Hitler almost always paid a brief call upon Frau Foerster-Nietzsche, the sister of Nietzsche. But from the works of Nietzsche Hitler culled only the cult of personality and the doctrine of the superman; he was not interested in other aspects of the philosopher’s writings.

Otto Dietrich:
He proclaimed a new weltanschauung – but scarcely ever deigned to mention the great thinkers of mankind from Plato to Kant and Goethe. The loftiest truths, the greatest wisdom, the sum of human intellectual labors for centuries, simply did not exist for Hitler unless they happened to fall into line with his nationalistic ideology.

Kubizek:
As for philosophical works, he always had his Schopenhauer by him, later Nietzsche, too. Yet I knew little about these, for he regarded these philosophers as, so to speak, his own personal affair –