Hitler’s position at this time was complicated. He was still virtually unknown in most of Germany. The main Berlin newspapers ignored him and his party. They didn’t even report on the riotous Deutscher Tag at Coburg, whose resonance was confined to south Germany. Hitler had very few funders outside of Bavaria, with the notable exception of the Ruhr industrial baron Fritz Thyssen, who contributed substantially in the course of 1923. That said, within the non-particularist Bavarian right wing nationalist milieu, Hitler now enjoyed a commanding position. He was well known in Munich, which Thomas Mann described in a 1923 letter to the American journal The Dial as ‘the city of Hitler’. His speeches drew large and ecstatic crowds. Karl Alexander von Müller, who heard him speak for the first time at the Löwenbräukeller in late January 1923, describes the ‘burning core of hypnotic mass excitement’ created by the flags, the relentless marching music and the short warm-up speeches by lesser party figures before the man himself appeared amid a flurry of salutes. Hitler would then be interrupted at almost every sentence by tempestuous applause, before departing for his next engagement.
Over the next few months, the tempo of Nazi events and activities increased. There were in excess of 20,000 NSDAP members at the start of 1923, and that figure more than doubled over the next ten months to 55,000; the SA nearly quadrupled from around 1,000 men to almost 4,000 during the same period. Hitler himself was so prominent that the NSDAP was widely known as the ‘Hitler-Movement’, the term under which his activities were now recorded by the Bavarian police. He had become a cult figure. The Völkischer Beobachter became a daily paper in February 1923, giving preferential treatment to the printing of Hitler’s speeches. Two months later, it began marking the Führer’s birthday, an honour not accorded any other Nazi leader. He had long given up the humble role of drummer. Hitler spoke once again of the need for a dictator. The German people, he claimed, ‘are waiting today for the man who calls out to them: Germany, rise up [and] march’. There was no doubt from the context and rhetoric that he planned to play that role himself. His followers styled him not merely the leader of the national movement but Germany’s saviour and future leader. The Oberführer of the SA, Hermann Goring, acclaimed him at his birthday rally on 20 April 1923 as the ‘beloved Fuhrer of the German freedom movement’. Alfred Rosenberg described him simply as ‘Germany’s leader [Führer]’.
Conscious of his tenuous position within the Catholic Bavarian mainstream, Hitler continued to try to build bridges to the Church, or at least to its adherents. ‘We want,’ Hitler pledged, ‘to see a state based on true Christianity. To be a Christian does not mean a cowardly turning of the cheek, but to be a struggler for justice and a fighter against all forms of injustice.’ The NSDAP did succeed in making some inroads among Catholic students at the university and the peasantry and in winning over quite a few clerics, including for a while Cardinal Faulhaber, but for the most part Hitler made little headway.
There are two things we might comment on in this passage.
First, we are living in a world of soft totalitarianism. We can already imagine a National Socialist party in Europe today that could recruit thousands of members! That would not even be possible in the US, despite its hypocrisy in claiming that its amendments allow citizens both free speech and freedom of association (in reality, Uncle Sam allows neither, as we saw a few years ago in Charlottesville).
The other issue is this saying that true Christianity doesn’t turn the other cheek but fights injustice. While a hundred years ago it was possible to use this kind of rhetoric in the more conservative sectors of Bavarian society, today it is impossible. The mainstream Christian churches follow the zeitgeist of our century, without exception. I am not criticising Hitler’s use of this rhetoric. But under the circumstances, post-1945 National Socialism must reinvent itself.
12 replies on “Hitler, 39”
Hitler was basically a leader for the German masses similarily to how the leaders of the Third Estate of France led the French/Parisian masses against the monarchy & then against the descendants of the historic Frankish/Norman population of predominantly Nordic race.
Its funny then how the German masses going against the Jews & Non-Germans during the days of NS Germany is widely documented & expressed in every form of media but the genocide faced by the Nordic racial minority during the Reign of Terror & the French Revolution is hardly ever documented outside of Nordic circles or shown in various forms of media.
Even white nationalists rarely mention the genocide faced by the Nordic racial minority during the French Revolution (except the late William Pierce and Arthur Kemp, whom nationalists rarely read).
Nordicist circles back in the early 20th Century did mention it & so did Guenther. It was the catalyst that launched the Nordicist Movement back then & why there was a effort during the 20th Century to preserve the Nordic racial makeup of North America & Europe.
Now Nordicism is an insignificant movement overshadowed by White Nationalism which cares more about hating on Blacks/Brown people than actually working to unite the “White” race because the “White” race is really just a mixture of different European races piggybacking off the success of the Nordic race. They are not a race in any sense of the word.
The Nordic movement does not need to hate on brown people; it just needs to revive its racial spirit & use that spirit to encourage the increase the birthrate of Nordics so they can compete for their place on this planet like the rest of humanity. It is a humane movement at heart.
I was unaware of this…
There are French history books written about it by Ludwig Woltmann, Ludwig Schemann & Georges Vacher de Lapouge. Houston Chamberlain may have mentioned it too during the late 1800s to early 1900s. Guenther mentioned it in Die Nordische Gedanke when he wrote about the misunderstandings of the Nordic Movement.
I say it for the umpteenth time: contemporary American white nationalism is charlatanism. We must return to the classics of racialism.
“The Nordic movement does not need to hate on brown people”
Thanks for what I have learned here, the Nordic movement fundamental principle is to raise the birthrate of those who are mostly pure Nordids.
Brown/black and orientals have no scope within the movement.
I am sick of seeing all the anti natalist sentiment within the population, especially of those Nordids.
In the mean time, the population of negroes and orientals has exploded to unprecedented levels; only possible thanks to Judeo Christian teachings and influence.
What a mad, filthy world we are leading to.
I do believe that we have to hate the coloureds to the point of wishing for their extinction, precisely in this era.
Just for the record I don’t plan on ever having children. I understand just how unproductive & parasitic my kind is & i do not want to plsy any part in their reproduction. I resolve myself to solitude as a result.
But I think it is important to heed Guenthers word on race relations which was paraphrased in my last comment.
I know. I studied the classical & medieval world & its racial elements so I understand that classical racialism has to do with the Nordic race & its significant spiritual influence which gave rise to what is known as “Western civilization” which is why the selection of the Nordic race is highly desirable within the context of Western civilization.
Without the Nordic race there is no Western civilization & no way for the West to be saved from the Judeo-Christian & antiwhite ideology that currently defines the West.
Have you tried to discuss the issue, say, on Counter-Currents (who despise Nordicism)?
Most WN sites are not open minded to listen to the issues facing the Nordic race. You are the only Nordicist I am aware of & figured you are open minded & intelligent enough to listen to the issues at hand.