Understanding Hitler

by Max Hadden

30 August 2004

It doesn't both me anymore when the ignorant lemmings bash Hitler and the Third Reich on countless internet websites, but when unwarranted criticism of National Socialism and its leaders appear on VNN, then I must speak out, as Ernst Zundel once said, for those Germans who can't defend themselves. The author of the recent article "A Weak Message Forecasts Future Failure" makes the true but rather obvious observations that an organization that has no strong message or corrupt leaders isn't going to be successful. The author then proceeds to criticize Hitler as well as the "weak" message of National Socialism. Neither of these criticisms contain any merit and the very fact that they were made indicates either a lack of knowledge or anti-German prejudice, or perhaps both. However, I am not as paranoid as some so-called leaders in the struggle for the plight of the White race who see COINTELPRO operations behind every criticism of the White Nationalist movement or its important historical figures. Valid criticisms of any White leaders or organizations should and can be made as long as they are based on verifiable facts.

National Socialism A "Weak" Message?

In an amazing example of irony the author stated that Commander George Lincoln Rockwell's American Nazi Party was the most successful racial organization in American history, but then goes on to proclaim that "Americans fought against Germans because Hitler's National Socialist message was weak!" So if Commander Rockwell's message was strong, and it was a National Socialist message, then how could Hitler's National Socialist message be weak? This is obviously a false belief. First off, let's discuss what Commander Rockwell said as to what makes a strong message. In a lecture recorded in a secret gathering held in Dallas, Texas, of pro-White supporters (I can't locate this on the internet as digital audio for download, but the CD is available here). Commander Rockwell says that the problem with all the other political parties except for National Socialism is that their messages were aimed at people's brains instead of their hearts. In other words, since the masses of people will not study and have the attention span of a cat, the best or strongest message is always an emotional one, not an intellectual one. And the most emotional subjects always revolve around family, friends, and loved ones, which ultimately leads to the entire race as extended family. This is the heart of National Socialism. Along with fundamental policies that naturally emerge from National Socialist philosophy -- such as Germany should be ruled by Germans, not Jews. Just like America and every other formerly White nation should be run by Whites, not by Jews.

And where did Commander Rockwell learn this idea about emotional rather than intellectual messages? "The people in their overwhelming majority are so feminine by nature and attitude that sober reasoning determines their thoughts and actions far less than emotion and feeling." Mein Kampf, vol. 1, ch. 6: 'War Propaganda.'

Something I'd heard once before, but didn't believe it until I heard it stated in another way by Ernst Zundel (http://www.zundelsite.org/radio/5th_estate.ram), was that the Germans had higher average IQ's than most other Europeans and this is why they could comprehend more easily the various details and gems of wisdom that were expressed in Mein Kampf. As Herr Zundel pointed out, Germany had a higher percentage of Nobel Prize winners than any other country at the time of the rise of the NSP. The Germans were voracious readers on the whole which would seem quite natural since, thanks to Gutenberg, they were the first to produce and distribute printed material on a mass scale. If one examines the leadership of NS, for example in a biographical profiles booklet put out by the Third Reich in 1938, one discovers an exceptionally high rate of men with doctorates. From the table of contents, out of 26 leaders, 10 of them have doctorates (Goebbels, Frick, Guertner, Frank, Dorpmueller, Ohnesorge, Lammers, Meissner, Seyss-Inquart, and Ley).

Incidentally, another claim that the author of the article in question tries to make was that Hitler was corrupted or essentially bought off by the "German rich" and points to Count von Stauffenberg. I will go into more detail about a particular incident of the war the author relates that makes Hitler appear incompetent later, but suffice it to say that the political profiles booklet demonstrates that many of the "German rich" were on Hitler's side as opposed to the oddball out, von Stauffenberg. Some rich German NS leaders were; Joachim von Ribbentrop, Baron Constantin von Neurath, Count Schwerin von Krosigk, and Baldur von Schirach (and possibly a few others are part of the upper class rich who simply do not have patents of nobility). Others wealthy aristocrats such as Prince August Wilhelm were prominent National Socialists as well, but there's no time to mention them all.

One National Socialist agenda item was decreasing class strife. Class division is inevitable given the natural biological separation of people of any race into occupations requiring varying levels of IQ, but class conflict is not inevitable and was greatly reduced if not entirely eliminated in NS Germany.

Another point about reading and comprehension is in order too. I agree that there's a lot of verbiage in Mein Kampf that was intended to put things in the proper historical perspective for the ignorant that makes for dry reading, but at the same time, one can find in it a gold mine of wisdom over a comprehensive list of subjects that are explained in a matter of a few sentences quite clearly and with flawless logic. As for example, what Hitler has to say about conscription (which I'll leave to the interested reader to figure out). For a humorous anecdote about reading comprehension I'm always reminded of that brilliantly made comedy "A Fish Called Wanda" where the dialogue was something like, "Monkeys read Nietsche too, Otto, they just don't understand it."

Why Did the Americans Fight the Germans?

The author's statement, "Americans fought against Germans because Hitler's National Socialist message was weak!", assumes that American masses had heard Hitler's message in one way or another -- which is completely incorrect. The Jews had a stranglehold on the mass media just as they do today. If one understands the basic reality that no one hears a pro-White message anywhere in the mass media or hears the truth about the Jews, then one knows that the situation was no different in 1930's America when there was no internet. In fact the only German-Americans who knew the truth were those who received letters from their relatives in NS Germany or who had visited the country. For a real explanation as to why White Americans fought the Germans one only has to listen to what Commander Rockwell said in the first part of his (Brown University speech). Rockwell actually helped sink some German U-boats for which he hated himself for and tried to make amends the rest of his life. Briefly, Rockwell said that the reason that he enlisted is because he believed all the lies he had been told that Hitler wanted to take over America and even the entire world.

Here's where some valid criticism of Hitler and the National Socialists can really be made, maybe. Why didn't Hitler travel the world, or have Goebbels or others do so, to make absolutely certain that the British, French, and American people heard the ideology of National Socialism? Speaking limited English or French was an obvious barrier, although surely there were others who could speak just as eloquently in the proper language? Goebbels did address the French in person once that I'm aware of, but only during the so-called "occupation government" of the pro-National Socialist French leader Henri-Phillipe Pétain.

One can speculate that the Jewish FDR (Dutch name Rosenveldt) and his Jewish Communist sympathizer buddies (Frankfurter, Morgenthau, White, et al) would not have been allowed to continue in office waging a secret war against the Germans if the NS message had been heard and all the Jews been put on a boat to Madagascar or somewhere. FDR also provoked the Japanese unnecessarily (the Germans were ignorant of this and were more surprised that the Japs attacked Pearl Harbor than the politicians in our American government were). By default, a war with the Axis power of Japan, which also wanted to defeat Jewish Communism, meant war with Germany. The fact was that by 1939 war with Poland was inevitable, not because of the Germans, but because of the Poles and their Jews (http://www.cwporter.com/letter13.htm). Perhaps if the leaders in France, Britain, and America had known of the Jewish problem as explained by National Socialists, they wouldn't have fought, as Commander Rockwell once commented, on the wrong side.

In fact, so frightened were the Jews that the Americans would learn that they'd made a mistake fighting Germany and the disastrous war had been caused by Jews everywhere that the U.S. had a policy of non-fraternization with German civilians that General George S. Patton bitterly (rebuked). Patton couldn't understand the policy and felt it would be good for the Germans to talk to the Americans, since Germans were so ignorant (haha) about Americans and all. In reality it was for what the Germans would tell the ignorant Americans that the gag order was levied. Patton eventually realized, just as Commander Rockwell did, that Americans fought the wrong enemy. After a visit to ruined Berlin, he wrote his wife on July 21, 1945: "Berlin gave me the blues. We have destroyed what could have been a good race, and we are about to replace them with Mongolian savages. And all Europe will be communist."

The answer to why the Americans fought is simple: National Socialism never reached the ears of the American people who were lied into a war against Germany by the Jews in America. This brings up something -- one particularly pro-German American skinhead once told me that he was more pissed off at the so-called "greatest generation" of Americans than he was at Jews and Africans. It was they who fought against and defeated the pro-White pro-European civilization and culture bearers of the world that eventually led to the abominable state of chaos that we are in today. If he had his way, the skin told me, every American veteran of the Second World War would be hanged or even worse. I tried to tell the young lad that it wasn't their fault. They were lied to and didn't know about the treacherous pro-Communist Jew in the White House and could only see Pearl Harbor and the "evil Axis" powers through a Jewish lens. False beliefs result in incorrect decisions.

The Incident At Dunkirk

The author next makes the accusation that Hitler made a mistake and let the British escape at Dunkirk. Of course, this is understandable given that so many history books are written by Jewish professors or pro-Marxist Americans. Recall that this was very early on in the war, May of 1940, and France and England had declared war on Germany less than a year earlier. The Germans were horrified at the thought of fighting their racial brothers. Race is the foundation of NS philosophy. Because he was a pro-White humanitarian, Hitler let the British go at Dunkirk. Ribbentrop's representative at the Fuhrer's headquarters... left on record the comment: "Hitler personally intervened to allow the British to escape. He was convinced that to destroy their army would be to force them to fight to the bitter end." (http://www.spartacus.schoolnet.co.uk/2WWdunkirk.htm)

Not only was this fact confirmed by a rich German supporter of Hitler, von Ribbentrop, but also by one of the alleged possible co-conspirators in the so-called "July Plot" to assassinate Hitler, Guenther Blumentritt. Referring to the German Western Offensive that involved Dunkirk, Blumentritt said of Hitler, "He then astonished us by speaking with admiration of the British Empire, of the necessity for its existence, and of the civilization that Britain had brought into the world. He remarked, with a shrug of the shoulders, that the creation of its Empire had been achieved by means that were often harsh, but 'where there is planing, there are shavings flying'. He compared the British Empire with the Catholic Church - saying they were both essential elements of stability in the world. He said that all he wanted from Britain was that she should acknowledge Germany's position on the Continent. The return of Germany's lost colonies would be desirable but not essential, and he would even offer to support Britain with troops if she should be involved in any difficulties anywhere. He remarked that the colonies were primarily a matter of prestige, since they could not be held in war, and few Germans could settle in the tropics. He concluded by saying that his aim was to make peace with Britain on a basis that she would regard as compatible with her honour to accept." (http://www.spartacus.schoolnet.co.uk/GERblumentritt.htm)

Hitler did the right thing at Dunkirk. The Germans in May of 1940 were still desperately hoping that a diplomatic peace could be arranged with both Britain and France. In fact, it was in that month that the great "Prisoner of Peace", Rudolf Hess, the Reich Minister and Deputy of the Fuehrer as leader of the National Socialist Party flew on his ill-received flight to Scotland to negotiate peace with England. It is documented that Hitler made at least 6 offers for peace between Oct. 6, 1939, and July 19, 1940, that were all rejected by the so-called "flat-footed bastard of a drunken old cigar-smoking Jew" Winston Churchill. Note: The comment about Churchill is from anti-Nazi British propaganda. Any serious devastation of forces at Dunkirk would have given the British no choice but to become vindictive and fight the Germans to the bitter end out of spite and for vengeance. Unfortunately, Hitler did not know that Churchill, who had really been the one corrupted by the "rich" (as detailed by David Irving), was hell bent on destroying the enemies of the Jews.

Now as everyone agrees that the victors write the history, it is not at all surprising then that pro-British and pro-American authors even if they are not Jewish will continue to slander Hitler and demonize the "Nazis" for whatever they can to justify their destruction of Germany and National Socialism. Even David Irving, who has done a remarkable job at exposing realities about Germany under Hitler, laces his writings with pro-British rhetoric and propaganda. I don't know whether David Irving is Jewish as has been claimed or not, but I would agree with Carlos Porter that he is inconsistent on many issues and appears to be two-faced if not actually schizophrenic. So in this "Hitler bashing" vein we will also find scores of accusations, whether true or false, about how it was Hitler's fault that the Germans lost at Stalingrad, or whatever.

The fact is that if you get a half dozen generals in the same room together, you're going to have arguments about military strategy. And hindsight being 20/20, today it's obvious what the correct decisions were. Even if General Erwin Rommel -- who is regarded as possibly the greatest military genius that ever lived even in America's most prestigious military colleges -- were to be present at all military strategy meetings, that wouldn't guarantee the right decision nor a successful outcome. In fact, Rommel is still best known mainly not for his campaign successes but for his one biggest military blunder -- the supply problem. But was it really a blunder? http://www.geocities.com/kkh_khan/SupplyinAfrica.html More anti-German propaganda? You decide.

Once more I will propose what I consider a valid question, if not criticism, of the Third Reich. The Germans proved their superior intelligence once again during the Second World War with the brilliant creation of the Messerschmitt 262 (Me 262), the first jet-powered aircraft to enter combat. However, the question still remains whether or not Hitler is to blame for the insistence on its use as a bomber rather than a fighter. If he had not done so, could the Germans have put a stop, or at least a huge dent, in the Allied bombing of so many civilian targets, thereby saving the lives of hundreds of thousands of innocent Germans as well as dampening any plot to assassinate him? You see this was the main reason several German leaders became hostile to Hitler: because of the suffering of the German people under Allied bombing raids. Of course, if the Allies had not been attacking Germany, the Jewish Bolsheviks would have been defeated and we wouldn't be talking about it today, but that's not what happened. I even find myself criticizing this "what if" question for the following reason: even if Hitler had requested as many Me 262's were to be built as designed asap, that doesn't mean that the same production problems that plagued the jet engines would have been somehow miraculously avoided, and such a delay would still have cost the Germans many civilian casualties as did happen. Again, hindsight is 20/20 and this game can be played for hours.

Whom To Believe?

A comment from this writer was the following, "It's funny how racists swear up and down that Ernst Röhm was a homosexual, never even entertaining the idea that Hitler and gang might have concocted that story, whilst telling nonracial Whites that the Holocaust was a hoax. If one is thought to be a hoax, or at least an exaggeration, why can't the other?" This an improper analogy if one was ever written. Or a strange straw man, if you prefer. For one thing, "Hitler and gang" are not the only source of information about Röhm's homosexuality. A British journalist named Sefton Delmer is quite vocal about the fact that Röhm was gay (http://www.heretical.com/miscella/rohm.html)

To answer the general question, Why believe Hitler? Very simple: because the entire NS movement was based on telling the truth and doing the right thing. Sure, Germans are humans and tell little white lies now and then, but it wasn't policy. When it comes to serious issues, the National Socialists wrote the teachers edition on the book about truth and justice. Tell me the name of even one political party that even comes close to explaining the true nature of reality as much as the National Socialists did. The Germans said the races weren't equal, they aren't. They said the Jews were a problem, they are. So if they say Röhm was a homosexual, your best odds are that he was. The Germans did not frame people, the Jewish secret police in Soviet Russia did.

The author also goes on to state that, "Röhm preferred the strategy of mobilizing Whites in other White countries rather than using the German Army (like Hitler). Instead of mobilizing the German military, Röhm would have mobilized the White masses." In the videotaped interview of former Waffen SS man Hans Von der Heide by revisionist historian Michael Hoffman, Herr Von der Heide remarked that he and the other soldiers thought of their military as the first NATO or the first United Nations force because they were fighting shoulder to shoulder with men from nearly all of the nations in Europe, including France and Britain. (Here.)

The author also assumes that the masses could be mobilized from afar by National Socialist propaganda, but as I mentioned before in my valid criticism of the Third Reich, this was in most cases impossible because of the Jewish control or influence in many countries. This is why the all volunteer Waffen SS from various nations that were previously not Axis, or even anti-Axis (like France), only joined AFTER they came to be ruled by the Germans. Note: Some nations, like Finland, had first hand knowledge of Jewish Communism and so immediately signed onto the Axis.

The fact that the so-called Holocaust is a hoax is a separate issue. It always amazes me how the same people who want someone to have a fair trial -- the innocent until proven guilty crowd -- have no qualms with throwing out Aristotle's scientific method when it comes to accusations of mass murder against the "Nazis." When one examines the exterminationist theories of the Holocaust, it's quite obvious they don't hold water. Here were a bunch of dead people at the end of the war and the Jews, Communists, and criminals claimed the "Nazis" killed them in various ways. The scientific method would demand that it's not up to the disbelievers to prove the Germans didn't kill them intentionally (proving a negative), but it's up to the proponents of the accusation to prove that their deaths could not have been caused by anything else. That is, the deaths were not caused by diseases or lack of food and water, but a deliberate plan of extermination. This they can not prove because it's simply not true. Rather, most assume the Germans are guilty of murder -- while actually they were only guilty of throwing out the Jews.

To continue a little bit longer on the Holohoax which is an extremely important issue -- an American doctor, whose name escapes me right now, volunteered for the Red Cross and visited Buchenwald at the end of the war when people were dying at the rate of 500 per day. He testified at the 1985 Zundel trial in Canada (video title The Great Holocaust Trial, available here http://www.revisionisthistory.org) that the deaths he saw were not due to deliberate extermination but disease and starvation. Further, Ditlieb Felderer remarked in his interview with Hoffman that the letters from the commanders at Meidenek concentration camp said things such as, "We are all dying here! Didn't you get my order for Zyklon-B? People are dying here!" And what he meant was that the typhus epidemic was raging in the camp and everyone, including the German guards, were dying and needed the gas for fumigating beds, clothing, luggage, etc. to exterminate lice.

Politics and History

As an example of how easy it is to blast leadership for incompetence, let's look at America for a minute. So the Founding Fathers in their infinite wisdom made it a requirement that the President of the United States be at least thirty five years old. This is in fact a very good idea as men who are younger, although they are not as naive and do not feel as invincible as when they were teenagers, still aren't mature enough yet, or have the necessary experience in life even in their twenties, to handle their obligation to the people as President of the United States. Some might say that we should have similar arguments, or perhaps detailed requirements, on who is allowed to post articles on the internet. Nevertheless, however brilliant these men were, they ignored the sagely advice of Ben Franklin when he was railing about the Jews and the need to keep them out of America entirely. Now should we then say that many of these men (Jefferson, Hamilton, et al) were therefore incompetent because we have the evidence today of all the destruction to our society that the Jews have wrought? That's pretty unfair in my opinion. As is bashing Hitler.

The author also bashes Hitler saying he wasn't a great orator and was too feminine in "The Triumph of the Will." First off, it was a documentary of the Party celebrating an anniversary. It was not intended as propagandist rhetoric to persuade anyone of the righteousness of National Socialism. It was party about the Party for christsakes. Hitler was a great orator, no one with any grasp of history will deny that. He was persuasive, as the Jews like to say, but what they also say is he lied about Jews, which is a lie. The reason that he was such a great orator wasn't practice, it was because he saw the world clearly and had the passion and courage to stand up for his race. Many of us who have this same comprehension of reality and the nerve might also be great orators, but most will not. I have given more than one pro-White lecture in rooms packed full of people, and I've also been accosted by those loser ARA folks, but I can't hold a candle to Hitler, Goebbels, or our own Commander Rockwell. The feminine remark was tasteless in my opinion as was the "stupid little mustache" comment. Here's a man, Adolf Hitler, who loved and died for his people and only wanted the best for them, and some pro-White Americans continue to talk nasty about him. Great.

When it comes to understanding people or what's important as far as politics or political propaganda, most Americans are like virgins trying to write a sex manual. But the National Socialists were not. They were pros. The real experts, not at all like the charlatan "experts" which our media is so fond of trotting out to further Jewish agendas. As Commander Rockwell said, people who've suffered through all the American political bullshit and have found their way to NS theory are the graduate students when it comes to politics. Personally, I found this to be the case after I first began my studies years ago. The NS philosophers I met ran circles around me easily and I always ended up putting my foot in my mouth and saying stupid things because I was so ignorant. In fact, I know one particular elderly gentlemen whom I'll probably never match in ability to grasp all of the comprehensive issues National Socialism encompasses and handles effectively.


Let go of your hate for Adolf Hitler. Maybe visit http://www.fuhrerbunker.com/ and get a coffee mug. There is enough blame for the White race's plight to go around. Further, if you haven't seen the movie "The Eternal Jew" (Der Ewige Jude) wherein the Jews are compared to rats, you might like it.

National Socialism contains many strong messages to attract the masses. It contains emotional truths concerning love for one's family that tug at the heartstrings and are life affirming. It is the cure for the lack of vision and hope that have lead to despair, drugs, anti-social behavior and suicide that plague White youth today. The message of Whites running their own country and not letting the Jews have their way is more important today than any other issue as American lemmings continue to march to the beat of Jewish drums advocating war against Islam. Just because a message promotes love your own race, as National Socialism does, doesn't mean that it promotes a weak philosophy of loving your enemies, or letting the Jews skate.

As Ernst Zundel said, the people need a rallying point for their cause. That person was Adolf Hitler and his National Socialism, but more importantly, it still can be and should be for those of us who still carry his message. To chime in with Jews and Marxists in Hitler or NS bashing is to make our message more difficult to believe. We don't have to always see eye to eye, but we should always fight back to back. I'll give der Fuehrer the last words -- this is taken from a speech Hitler made in 1941 when the invasion of Russia was about to take place: "When this, the biggest front line in history, now begins its advance it does so not just to provide the means of ending for all time this great war, or to defend those countries currently concerned, but for the salvation of our entire European civilization and culture. German soldiers! You are thus entering upon a harsh and demanding fight-because the fate of Europe, the future of the German Reich, the existence of our nation now rest on your hands alone. May the Lord God help us all in this struggle."

Amen and Heil Hitler!

Sieg Heil!


Back to VNN Main Page