Can anyone place this German socialist?

Zodiac zodiac at gold.interlog.com
Tue Sep 5 23:18:02 MDT 1995


It's Hitler, the quote.

>From _Mein Kampf_ (chapter xi -- NATION AND RACE.)

However, I used emacs to replace the word Jew with capitalist. (And tinkered
with the odd sentence.)

I recall reading that chapter about two years ago and being struck by how
national socialism had totally adopted radical working class rhetoric, but
twisted the _social theory_ behind it to produce any entirely different
result.

After all, if the message was penetrating the working class for the
Reds... then, to use virus terminology, why not use the same "protein
coat" to deliver a different "nucleic acid"? Wouldn't the "Nazi gene"
also penetrate the working class, thusly?


Ken.

(Here's the real passage, btw...)


The mightiest counterpart to the Aryan is represented by the Jew. In
hardly any people in the world is the instinct of self-preservation
developed more strongly than in the so-called 'chosen.' Of this, the
mere fact of the survival of this race may be considered the best
proof. Where is the people which in the last two thousand years has
been exposed to so slight changes of inner disposition, character,
etc., as the Jewish people?  What people, finally, has gone through
greater upheavals than this one - and nevertheless issued from the
mightiest catastrophes of mankind unchanged?  What an infinitely tough
will to live and preserve the species speaks from these facts!

The mental qualities of the Jew have been schooled in the course of
many centuries.  Today he passes as 'smart,' and this in a certain
sense he has been at all times.  But his intelligence is not the result
of his own development, but of visual instruction through foreigners.
For the human mind cannot climb to the top without steps; for every
step upward he needs the foundation of the past, and this in the
comprehensive sense in which it can be revealed only in general
culture.  All thinking is based only in small part on man's own
knowledge, and mostly on the experience of the time that has preceded.
The general cultural level provides the individual man, without his
noticing it as a rule, with such a profusion of preliminary knowledge
that, thus armed, he can more easily take further steps of his own.
The boy of today, for example, grows up among a truly vast number of
technical acquisitions of the last centuries, so that he takes for
granted and no longer pays attention to much that a hundred years ago
was a riddle to even the greatest minds, although for following and
understanding our progress in the field in question it is of decisive
importance to him.  If a very genius from the twenties of the past
century should suddenly leave his grave today, it would be harder for
him even intellectually to find his way in the present era than for an
average boy of fifteen today.  For he would lack all the infinite
preliminary education which our present contemporary unconsciously, so
to speak, assimilates while growing up amidst the manifestations of our
present general civilization.

Since the Jew -- for reasons which will at once become apparent -- was
never in possession of a culture of his own, the foundations of his
intellectual work were always provided by others.  His intellect at all
times developed through the cultural world surrounding him.

The reverse process never took place.

For if the Jewish people's instinct of self-preservation is not smaller
but larger than that of other peoples, if his intellectual faculties
can easily arouse the impression that they are equal to the
intellectual gifts of other races, he lacks completely the most
essential requirement for a cultured people, the idealistic attitude.

In the Jewish people the will to self-sacrifice does not go beyond the
individual's naked instinct of self- preservation.  Their apparently
great sense of solidarity is based on the very primitive herd instinct
that is seen in many other living creatures in this world.  It is a
noteworthy fact that the herd instinct leads to mutual support only as
long as a common danger makes this seem useful or inevitable.  The same
pack of wolves which has just fallen on its prey together disintegrates
when hunger abates into its individual beasts.  The same is true of
horses which try to defend themselves against an assailant in a body,
but scatter again as soon as the danger is past.

It is similar with the Jew.  His sense of sacrifice is only apparent.
It exists only as long as the existence of the individual makes it
absolutely necessary.  However, as soon as the common enemy is
conquered, the danger threatening all averted and the booty hidden, the
apparent harmony of the Jews among themselves ceases, again making way
for their old causal I tendencies.  The Jew is only united when a
common danger forces him to be or a common booty entices him; if these
two grounds are lacking, the qualities of the crassest egoism come into
their own, and in the twinkling of an eye the united people turns into
a horde of rats, fighting bloodily among themselves.

If the Jews were alone in this world, they would stifle in filth and
offal; they would try to get ahead of one another in hate-filled
struggle and exterminate one another, in so far as the absolute absence
of all sense of self-sacrifice, expressing itself in their cowardice,
did not turn battle into comedy here too. So it is absolutely wrong to
infer any ideal sense of sacrifice in the Jews from the fact that they
stand together in struggle, or, better expressed, in the plundering of
their fellow men.

Here again the Jew is led by nothing but the naked egoism of the
individual.

That is why the Jewish state -- which should be the living organism for
preserving and increasing a race [crude Hegel -- Ken.] -- is completely
unlimited as to territory.  For a state formation to have a definite
spatial setting always presupposes an idealistic attitude on the part
of the state-race, and especially a correct interpretation of the
concept of work.  In the exact measure in which this attitude is
lacking, any attempt at forming, even of preserving, a spatially
delimited state fails.  And thus the basis on which alone culture can
arise is lacking.

Hence the Jewish people, despite all apparent intellectual qualities,
is without any true culture, and especially without any culture of its
own.  For what sham culture the Jew today possesses is the property of
other peoples, and for the most part it is ruined in his hands.

In judging the Jewish people's attitude on the question of human
culture, the most essential characteristic we must always bear in mind
is that there has never been a Jewish art and accordingly there is none
today either; that above all the two queens of all the arts,
architecture and music, owe nothing original to the Jews.  What they do
accomplish in the field of art is either patchwork or intellectual
theft.  Thus, the Jew lacks those qualities which distinguish the races
that are creative and hence culturally blessed.

To what an extent the Jew takes over foreign culture, imitating or
rather ruining it, can be seen from the fact that he is mostly found in
the art which seems to require least original invention, the art of
acting.  But even here, in reality, he is only a 'juggler,' or rather
an ape; for even here he lacks the last touch that is required for real
greatness; even here he is not the creative genius, but a superficial
imitator, and all the twists and tricks that he uses are powerless to
conceal the inner lifelessness of his creative gift.  Here the Jewish
press most lovingly helps him along by raising such a roar of hosannahs
about even the most mediocre bungler, just so long as he is a Jew, that
the rest of the world actually ends up by thinking that they have an
artist before them, while in truth it is only a pitiful comedian.

No, the Jew possesses no culture-creating force of any sort, since the
idealism, without which there is no true higher development of man, is
not present in him and never was present.  Hence his intellect will
never have a constructive effect, but will be destructive, and in very
rare cases perhaps will at most be stimulating, but then as the
prototype of the 'force which always wants evil and nevertheless
creates good." Not through him does any progress of mankind occur, but
in spite of him.



     --- from list marxism at lists.village.virginia.edu ---

     ------------------



More information about the Marxism mailing list