XPost: or.politics, rec.arts.movies.current-films, alt.politics.europe   
   XPost: sac.politics   
   From: mars1933@hotmail.com   
      
    "We stand for the maintenance of private property...We shall protect   
   free enterprise as the  most expedient, or rather the sole possible   
   economic order." - Adolf Hitler   
      
        Here are some quotes from Hitler's speech on January 27, 1932, at   
   Dusseldorf:   
      
    IF TODAY the National Socialist Movement is regarded amongst   
   widespread circles in Germany as being hostile to our business life, I   
   believe the reason for this view is to be found in the fact that we   
   adopted towards the events which determined the development leading to   
   our present position an attitude which differed from that of all the   
   other organizations which are of any importance in our public life.   
   Even now our outlook differs in many points from that of our   
   opponents....   
      
    There are indeed especially two other closely related factors which   
   we can time and again trace in periods of national decline: the one is   
   that for the conception of the value of personality there is   
   substituted a levelling idea of the supremacy of mere numbers -   
   democracy - and the other is the negation of the value of a people,   
   the denial of any difference in the inborn capacity, the achievement,   
   etc., of individual peoples. Thus both factors condition one another   
   or at least influence each other in the course of their development.   
   Internationalism and democracy are inseparable conceptions. It is but   
   logical that democracy, which within a people denies the special value   
   of the individual and puts in its place a value which represents the   
   sum of all individualities - a purely numerical value - should proceed   
   in precisely the same way in the life of peoples and should in that   
   sphere result in internationalism. Broadly it is maintained: peoples   
   have no inborn values, but, at the most, there can be admitted perhaps   
   temporary differences in education. Between Negroes, Aryans,   
   Mongolians, and Redskins there is no essential difference in value...   
      
    Let no one say that the picture produced as a first impression of   
   human civilization is the impression of its achievement as a whole.   
   This whole edifice of civilization is in its foundations and in all   
   its stones nothing else than the result of the creative capacity, the   
   achievement, the intelligence, the industry, of individuals: in its   
   greatest triumphs it represents the great crowning achievement of   
   individual God-favored geniuses, in its average accomplishment the   
   achievement of men of average capacity, and in its sum doubtless the   
   result of the use of human labor-force in order to turn to account the   
   creations of genius and of talent. So it is only natural that when the   
   capable intelligences of a nation, which are always in a minority, are   
   regarded only as of the same value as all the rest, then genius,   
   capacity, the value of personality are slowly subjected to the   
   majority and this process is then falsely named the rule of the   
   people. For this is not rule of the people, but in reality the rule of   
   stupidity, of mediocrity, of half-heartedness, of cowardice, of   
   weakness, and of inadequacy....   
      
   I may cite an example: you maintain, gentlemen, that German business   
   life must be constructed on a basis of private property. Now such a   
   conception as that of private property you can defend only if in some   
   way or another it appears to have a logical foundation. This   
   conception must deduce its ethical justification from an insight into   
   the necessity which Nature dictates. It cannot simply be upheld by   
   saying: 'It has always been so and therefore it must continue to be   
   so.' For in periods of great upheavals within States, of movements of   
   peoples and changes in thought, institutions and systems cannot remain   
   untouched because they have previously been preserved without change.   
   It is the characteristic feature of all really great revolutionary   
   epochs in the history of mankind that they pay astonishingly little   
   regard for forms which are hallowed only by age or which are   
   apparently only so consecrated. It is thus necessary to give such   
   foundations to traditional forms which are to be preserved that they   
   can be regarded as absolutely essential, as logical and right. And   
   then I am bound to say that private property can be morally and   
   ethically justified only if I admit that men's achievements are   
   different. Only on that basis can I assert: since men's achievements   
   are different, the results of those achievements are also different.   
   But if the results of those achievements are different, then it is   
   reasonable to leave to men the administration of those results to a   
   corresponding degree. It would not be logical to entrust the   
   administration of the result of an achievement which was bound up with   
   a personality either to the next best but less capable person or to a   
   community which, through the mere fact that it had not performed the   
   achievement, has proved that it is not capable of administering the   
   result of that achievement. Thus it must be admitted that in the   
   economic sphere, from the start, in all branches men are not of equal   
   value or of equal importance. And once this is admitted it is madness   
   to say: in the economic sphere there are undoubtedly differences in   
   value, but that is not true in the political sphere. IT IS ABSURD TO   
   BUILD UP ECONOMIC LIFE ON THE CONCEPTIONS OF ACHIEVEMENT, OF THE VALUE   
   OF PERSONALITY, AND THEREFORE IN PRACTICE ON THE AUTHORITY OF   
   PERSONALITY, BUT IN THE POLITICAL SPHERE TO DENY THE AUTHORITY OF   
   PERSONALITY AND TO THRUST INTO ITS PLACE THE LAW OF THE GREATER NUMBER   
   - DEMOCRACY. In that case there must slowly arise a cleavage between   
   the economic and the political point of view, and to bridge that   
   cleavage an attempt will be made to assimilate the former to the   
   latter - indeed the attempt has been made, for this cleavage has not   
   remained bare, pale theory. The conception of the equality of values   
   has already, not only in politics but in economics also, been raised   
   to a system, and that not merely in abstract theory: no! this economic   
   system is alive in gigantic organizations and it has already today   
   inspired a State which rules over immense areas.   
   But I cannot regard it as possible that the life of a people should in   
   the long run be based upon two fundamental conceptions. If the view is   
   right that there are differences in human achievement, then it must   
   also be true that the value of men in respect of the production of   
   certain achievements is different It is then absurd to allow this   
   principle to hold good only In one sphere - the sphere of economic   
   life and its leadership - and to refuse to acknowledge its validity in   
   the sphere of the whole life-struggle of a people - the sphere of   
   politics. Rather the logical course is that if I recognize without   
   qualification in the economic sphere the fact of special achievements   
      
   [continued in next message]   
      
   --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05   
    * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)