Adolf Hitler War Speeches


Translation of the multi-volume Third Reich original Der großdeutsche Freiheitskampf. It contains Adolf Hitler’s war era speeches from August 27, 1939 to March 15, 1942.

Categories: , , Tag:


Softcover. Each volume has 57 to 60 pages. Complete Set of All Twelve Volumes – only $95.00.


In a serious time, the German folk today celebrates its Heroes Remembrance Day. With greater right than in the last 20 years, it can step before the mental eyes of those who, as brave soldiers of our folk, once sacrificed their life for the future of the nation, the greatness and entirety of the Reich. What for years were only the pale slogans of a posterity become unworthy, is today the proud gratitude of an equal present. After the unprecedented triumphant advance in the east, the soldiers of the divisions of the field army, the crews of our ships, the warriors of our Luftwaffe are now ready to protect the Reich from the old enemies of the west. In the same consciousness of duty and in the same obedience, loyal to command like the soldiers of the great war. Behind them, however, now stands a homeland, cleansed of the elements of decay as well as of the forces of fragmentation. For the first time in our history, the whole German folk steps before the countenance of the Almighty in order to ask him to bless its struggle for existence.

This struggle of the soldier is difficult. If life for its assertion, insofar as we survey nature and have gained insight into its governing, again and again demands sacrifice in order to bear new life, and inflicts pain in order to heal wounds, then the soldier is the first representative of life in this struggle, for he represents in every age that best selection of the folks who through his risk of life and – if necessary – through his sacrifice of life, enables and secures the life of the rest of the fellow world and thus of the surrounding world. He thus steps, in the hours in which Providence weights the worth of folks, before the divine court of the Almighty.

In it, the nations are weighed and either found too light and hence erased from the book of life and of history or seen as worthy enough in order to carry new life. But only who himself had opportunity to face the worst distress in the struggle, who himself saw death sweep around him in years of effort, knows how to measure the greatness of the action of the soldier, to appreciate the whole weight of his sacrifice. From the instinct for self-preservation, mankind has hence found valid yardsticks for the valuation of those who were ready to sacrifice themselves in order to preserve the life of the community. Against the repulsive egoist, it sets the idealist, and if it despises the one as coward, then it thanks all the more so from unconscious realization the sacrifice made by the other. It glorifies him to hero and thereby elevates him from the average of indifferent manifestations.

No folk, however, has more right to celebrate its heroes than the German!

In the most difficult geopolitical situation, our folk’s existence could again and again be secured only through the heroic action of its men. If we have been leading a historical life, existence for 2,000 years, then only because, in these 2,000 years, men have again and again been ready to risk their own life for this totality and, if necessary, to sacrifice it. Each of these heroes, however, did not give his life in the opinion to thereby be able to free later generations from the same duty. All the achievements of the past, they would have been in vain, if, in a single generation of the future, the strength for the same sacrifice were lacking. For a folk’s life resembles a chain without end only so long as a link does not break in one generation and then the course of development ceases. Hence nobody has the right to celebrate heroes, who is not himself capable of a similar orientation. Nobody should speak of tradition, who does not, through his own life and his life action, increase this tradition. This principle is valid for the folk just as much as for its statesmen. For the soldiers no less so than the generals. From the consecrated halls of this building, in which we find ourselves here, there speak to us the witnesses of an incomparable, glorious past. It was won and sealed with the blood of countless German heroes. We would possess no right to enter this hall than with the sacred decision in the heart to be no less valiant than the bearers of these weapons, field decorations and uniforms were before us. The life risk of the individual musketeer in the Seven Years War was no less difficult than the one was that, already a thousand years earlier, made the German warriors fight for the protection of the German land from the hordes of the east. But it was also no easier than the one demanded from us today. The strength of decisions, the daring, bold courage of the great statesmen and army commanders of the past, were no lesser achievements than are expected from us today. But then as well, the great statesmen and army commanders were loved by the gods only because they often dared and demanded the seemingly impossible. Hardly one of the great battles in our folk’s history and, above all, Prussia’s history, carried its finish already visibly predetermined at the beginning. Many a deed, which, seen numerically and materially, would have apparently had to lead to victory, became a defeat as a result of the lacking spirit of the bearer, and many another, which according to all human calculations could only lead to annihilation, found its entry into history as most glorious victory. The secret of the miracle of life will never reveal and disclose itself to the pale theoretician. He always misses as the mightiest formative force of existence what he himself lacks the most, the strength of will in the daring of the comprehension and the persistent execution of the decisions.

So we assemble today for the remembrance day of our heroes with the feeling of a new inner dignity. Not with lowered head, rather proudly elevated gaze, do we greet them in the consciousness of the equality of birth, of equal achievements and, if necessary, in the willingness to bear the same sacrifices. We also fight for what they once fought for. What was high enough for them, if necessary, to die for it, should find us ready at any hour for the same deed. The faith, however, that inspired them, has only further strengthened itself in all of us. Whatever the life and fate of the individual may be, above all stands the existence and the future of the totality. And here, something else elevates up above past times: Unlocked for all of us is that for which, in earlier periods, so many had to fight still unconsciously: the German folk! To be allowed to live in its community is our highest earthy happiness. To belong to it, is our pride, to defend it in unconditional loyalty in times of distress, our fanatical defiance. The greater the dangers around us may be, all the more precious seems to us the treasure of this our community. All the more important, however, is also the realization that the strongest force of German life assertion lies in its unlocking and promotion. If the other world of the plutocratic democracies declares the wildest fight precisely against National Socialist Germany and pronounces its destruction as supreme world goal, then this thereby only confirms to us what we know anyway: that namely the idea of the National Socialist folk community makes the German folk especially dangerous, because invincible, in the eyes of our opponents as well. Beyond classes and professions, occupations, denominations and all other confusions of life, there arises the social unity of German human beings without regard for profession and origin, based on blood, joined together through a thousand year life. The world wishes our dissolution. Our reply can only be the renewed oath to the greatest community of all times. Its goal is German fragmentation. Our affirmation of faith: German unity. Its hope is the success of capitalist interests. Our will is the victory of the National Socialist folk community!

Five years ago today, universal compulsory military service was proclaimed!

In an almost five year long laborious work, National Socialism has redeemed the German folk from the condition of tragic desperation, in a unique historical work again pulled together the nation’s conscience and banished the pitiful spirits of defeatist capitulation, created the general political preconditions for rearmament. Nonetheless, for years I was ready to extend my hand to the world for a real agreement. It rejected the idea of a reconciliation of folks on the basis of equal rights.

As National Socialist and as soldier, I have in my life always held high the principle to secure my folk’s right either in peace or – if necessary – to force it in combat.

As the leader of the nation, as chancellor of the Reich and as Supreme Commander of the German Wehrmacht, I hence live with still only one single task: Day and night, to think of victory and to struggle, to work and to fight for it, and, if necessary, to not spare my life as well in the realization that this time the German future will be decided for centuries.

As former soldier of the great war, however, I have only one single humble request to direct to Providence: may it let all us of share the mercy to conclude in honor the last chapter of the great struggle of folks for our German folk. Then the spirits of our fallen comrades will rise from their graves and thank all those who, through their courage and their loyalty, now make good what a single shameful hour once sinned against them and against our folk.

Our affirmation on this day should hence be the solemn oath:

The war forced upon the Greater German Reich by France’s and England’s capitalist rulers must become the most glorious victory in German history!



For, my delegates, what is Europe? There is no geographic definition of our continent, rather only an ethnic and cultural one.

The Urals are not the border of this continent, rather always that line, which separates the bibliography of the west from that of the east.

There was a time when Europe was that Greek peninsula into which Nordic tribes had advanced, in order, from there, to ignite for the first time a light, which since then has slowly, but steadily, began to lighten the world of human beings. And when these Greeks resisted the invasion by the Persian conquerors, they defended not only their narrower homeland, which was Greece, rather that concept, which today is called Europe.

And then Europe wandered from Hellas to Rome.

Roman thought and Roman statecraft combined with Greek spirit and Greek culture. A world empire was created, which even today still has not been matched in its significance and reproductive energy, let alone surpassed. But when the Roman legions defended Italy against Carthage’s African assault in three difficult wars and finally won victory, it was again not Rome, for which they fought, rather the Europe of back then encompassing the Greco-Roman world.

The next invasion against this heroic soil of new human culture came from the expanses of the east. A terrible storm of culture-lacking hordes poured out of Asia’s interior, deep into the heart of the present-day European continent, burning, scorching and murdering as genuine scourges of the Lord.

It the Battle on the Catalaunian Fields, Romans and Germanic men stood up for the first time together in a struggle of fate of immense significance for a culture which, emanating from the Greeks, through the Romans, now drew Germanic man as well under its spell.

Europe had grown. Out of Hellas and Rome emerged the occident, and its defense was now for many centuries not just the task of the Romans, rather, above all, also the task of Germanic man. But to the same degree to which the occident was illuminated by Greek culture, filled with the impression of the mighty legacies of the Roman Empire, expanded its space through Germanic colonization, that concept, which we call Europe, spread spatially. Quite regardless, whether a German Kaiser repulsed the invasions from the east on the Unstrut or on the Lechfeld, or Africa was pushed out of Spain in long fighting, it was always a struggle of the evolving Europe against a surrounding world alien to it in its deepest essence. If Rome once won its immortal credit for the creation and defense of this continent, then Germanic man as well now took over the defense and protection of a family of folks, which among themselves, in political form and goal, may be ever so differentiated: in overall image, however, still, in terms of blood and culturee, in part the same, in part self-supplementing unit.

And from this Europe came not just a settlement of other continents, rather an intellectual and cultural fertilization that only that person becomes aware of, who is willing to seek the truth, instead of denying it.

Hence England did not cultivate the continent, rather splinters of the Germanic ethnicity, as Anglo-Saxons and Normans, drew to this island and enabled it a development that is certainly unique. Likewise, America did not discover Europe, rather the reverse. And everything that America did not draw from Europe, may indeed appear admirable to a Jewized mixed-race, but Europe sees it in only a sign of decay in art and cultural life bearing, the legacy of Jewish or Negro blood infusion.



What brought Germany down back then, were the lies of our opponents. They were the lies of the same men who also lie again today, because, after all, they are the same war mongers, for Mr. Churchill and comrades, after all, already back then participated in the war. That far, things have remained the same, after all. Only something has changed: Back then, Mr. Churchill agitated for war, and there was a weak government in Germany. Today, Mr. Churchill again agitates for war, but there is now a different government in Germany! For the government of today, after all, faced the English back then. And it hence does not have more respect than one needs to have for any other soldier, but also not the slightest feeling of inferiority, rather, quite the opposite, the feeling of superiority.

The lies were the same as today. – With what did England go to war back then? One said back then: First, Great Britain fights for the freedom of the little nations. We then later saw how England treated the freedom of these little nations, how little, above all, these so-called statesmen concerned themselves with the freedom of these little nations, how they suppressed minorities, mistreated folks and they also do this today, after all, insofar as it corresponds to their goals and fits their program. Then one said: England fights for justice! England, however, had for 300 years already fought for justice and received as reward for it from the dear Lord roughly 40 million square kilometers on earth and, furthermore, 480 million people to rule over. So does God reward the folks who fight “only for justice”! Especially the folks, who fight for the “self-determination of the others”; for England, after all, back then also fought for the right of self-determination. One declared: The British soldier does not go to the field for any selfish interests at all. He fights for the right of self-determination of the folks. – One could have then expected that immediately after the war England, leastwise in its own world empire, England would proclaim self-determination. But one spared oneself that or one saved oneself for the next war!

And then England fought back then for “civilization”, but that exists only in England. Only in the English mining regions does civilization exist, only in the English slums does civilization exist, in Whitechapel and in the other quarters of mass misery and of decay!

And furthermore, back then – and also since then – England goes to the field for “humanity”. But one first loaded humanity into shells as gunpowder. But one may also fight with poor weapons, after all, if one just fights for a noble, lofty goal. And England has always done that!

And one went a step farther. One declared back then: We English do not fight against the German folk at all, quite the opposite, the German folk, we English love it; we, the Churchills, the Chamberlains etc., we do not fight against the German folk. We all only fight against the regime suppressing the German folk. For we English have only one task: to free Germany from its regime in order to make the German folk happy. And for this purpose, we English fight above all for it that the German folk is relieved of the burdens of its militarism. It should become free, it could go so far that it no longer needs to bear any weapons. And if it should ever itself have a wish, then we want to go a step farther. We want to prevent it from ever again being able to bear weapons, in order to make it completely free, the German folk. And one declared it is furthermore a mean trick, if one claims of us English that we had, say, anything against German commerce in the whole world. Quite the opposite, we want to secure freedom of trade in the whole world. We hence also have nothing against the German merchant marine. That is also a lie – declared Mr. Churchill back then. And one further declared that it is an even more infamous defamation, if, say, one wants to ascribe to the English as war goal that they had designs on the German colonies, a mean trick to even just think such a thing. So did one declare 1914, 1915, 1916, 1917 and even still in 1918.

One went a step farther. One did not fight for victory at all, one fought for a peace of agreement, a peace of reconciliation, above all, for a peace of equality of rights. And this peace, it should then enable it that in the future one would be able to renounce armaments at all. For one also fought against war, after all. England waged war – so did one say – in order to finally eradicate war. England has always only waged war, after all, in order to eradicate war, namely the war of those upon whom war is waged, the resistance of those attacked. One hence declared there could be no talk that, say, it was the goal of British war policy to fetch war reparations from the German folk, rather, quite the opposite, one strove for a peace without reparations, and as crowning of this peace then, after a general disarmament, an eternal league of nations.

And then the great second Woodrow Wilson summed all that up in 14 points and then later supplemented it with another three points, those famous points, in which we were assured we first did not have to fear being treated, say, unfairly, that we had to lay down our arms only in trust in the word of England and of the other allies, in order to then be accepted into a genuine community of folks, in which there would no longer be victors and vanquished, in which only right should rule. One promised us that only then would the colonies be fairly distributed, that all legal claims and justified claims to colonies would find their consideration etc.. And all that was then supposed to find its final crowning in the League of Nations, the final consecration, the league of all nations. And war was thereby then supposed to be definitively eliminated from this world, and now an eternal peace should come.

And that was all understood, after all, from the English standpoint. If somebody has conquered 40 million square kilometers with approximately 46 million people, if, with these 46 million people, one has subjugated 480 million others, then it is understandable, after all, if the person affected now has the wish that now peace should finally prevail. For 300 years, we have waged war against the war. For 300 years, we have enriched ourselves. For 300 years, we have subjugated land after land, knocked down folk after folk. But now we have the world, and now there should be peace! – That is understandable. It was hence also understandable that one now really wanted to carry out in the League of Nations a kind of sterilization of the now set in condition.

But, after all, everything then turned out differently. Today an English minister stands up and says with tears in his eyes: Oh, how gladly would we have nonetheless come to an agreement with Germany, if only we could have trust in the word of German governments.

Exactly the same thing lies on my tongue! Oh, how gladly would we have nonetheless come to an agreement with an Englishman, if only we could have trust in the word of his leadership! For when has a folk ever more been vilely lied to and swindled and deceived than in the last two decades the German folk by English statesmen!

Where was the promised freedom of folks?

Where was justice back then?

Where was the self-determination of folks?

Where was the renunciation of contributions and war reparations etc.?

Where was the promised regulation of the colonial problem?

Where was the solemn declaration that one did not want to take away from Germany its colonies?

Where was the sacred assurance than one did not have the intention of burdening us with unbearable burdens? Where, finally, were the assurances that we would be accepted as nation with equal rights into the lap of this so-called League of Nations?

Where was the assurance that a general disarmament would take place?

Nothing but lies!

One has taken our colonies away from us, one has destroyed our trade, one has stolen our military fleet, one has torn away from us millions of Germans, one allowed them to be mistreated, one has plundered our folk, one has burdened us with contributions and burdens that we would not have been able to pay off in a hundred years. One has plunged us into deepest misery. And from this misery has come the National Socialist movement.

One should not act today as if one wanted to open, say, for a Germany that was not National Socialist, as if one wanted to open for it, say, the golden British heart. The Germany that we once knew was, God knows, anything else but National Socialist; it was democratic, it was cosmopolitan, it believed blindly in the assurances of British statesmen. This Germany had trust back then, it disarmed itself, it dishonored itself. And it was only deceived! And from the distress that came from it, our movement has come! And from the greatest breach of word of all times, a Spa came and later a Versailles, that treaty of shame; for you know it, my old comrades, how precisely from this spot I portrayed to you hundreds and hundreds of times, point by point. Over 400 articles, in each of these articles is and was partially an insult, partially a rape of a great nation. The result of it was then this time of misery and of desperation, in it as well the time of inflation, of the theft of all savings, of the theft of all life possibilities, the time of great unemployment, of the slow starvation of our folk, the time of tremendous suicides in Germany. For back then, this Germany had more suicides in two years than Americans who fell over the course of the war in the west.

From this great distress has arisen our movement, and it has hence had to make difficult decisions from the first day on.

And one of these decisions was the revolt of November 8/9, 1923. This decision seemingly failed back then, only, Germany’s rescue has first really come from these sacrifices. 16 dead! Just that millions have been pulled up by them. The National Socialist movement began its triumphant march through Germany back then.

And since then, Germany has become a world power – through our movement! Certainly, it was understandable that the old enemy would stir again at the moment, when we should have overcome the consequences of the defeats.

There are without a doubt two kinds of England. We not want to be unfair here. In England as well, there are numerous people for whom this whole hypocritical bearing is inwardly hated, who have nothing to do with it. Only they are either silenced there or they are speechless. Decisive for us is that we have never found these Englishmen, for whom we ourselves have searched for years. You know how I have endeavored for almost two years to struggle for agreement and for agreement with England. Our whole goal setting was a single limitation of German policy in the sense of the enabling of the achievement of an agreement with England; likewise an agreement with France. What all did we not write off here, what did we not renounce! One thing, however, was self-evident: A German government cannot pronounce a renunciation of life! And the National Socialist government does not think at all about pronouncing a renunciation of life! Quite the opposite, we have come, after all, out of protest against the previous renunciation of life by our democratic world. I do not think at all about pronouncing a renunciation of life, rather, quite the opposite, I will succeed with the life and the security of the German folk and Reich!

I have never presumed to butt into, say, British or French interests. If an Englishman exists today who now stands up and says: We are responsible for the fate of the folks of Central Europe, we are responsible for the fate of the folks of Eastern Europe, then I can only say to this gentleman: Precisely so could we declare, we are responsible for the folks in Palestine, for the fate of the folks in Egypt, for the fate of the folks, for all I care, in India.

If an Englishman says: Our border lies on the Rhine, and the next comes and says: Our border lies on the Vistula, then I can only say to him: See to it, sir, that you get back to the River Thames, otherwise we will help you to find your real borders!

Present day Germany, at any rate, is willing and determined to secure its borders and to protect its living space. It is the space that the English have not cultivated, rather we! We have gone nowhere the English had already brought culture.

If Lord Halifax now declares in his speech of yesterday that he stands up for the arts and culture, and for that purpose Germany must be destroyed, then we can only say: Sir, we already had culture when you still had no idea of culture. And in the last six years, more has been accomplished in Germany than in the last 100 years in England! And whither we have previously gone, we did not find there cultural monuments of British culture apostles, rather the cultural monuments of Germans. I have sought in vain in Prague, or Poland, or Graudenz, or in Thorn, or in Danzig, or in Vienna, to find British cultural monuments. Perhaps these British cultural monuments stand in Egypt or in India…

… This new Germany, as you all know, possesses no war goal at all against England or France. I took a stand on this in my last speech as well, when I offered my hand to England and France for the last time. If one now nonetheless attacks us, then that can have nothing to do with, say, the question of Austria or the Czech land or Poland, for, after all, generally one immediately very quickly forgot the questions according to need. And besides, the case of Poland, after all, shows how little England in itself is interested in the existence of states, for otherwise, after all, it would have had to declare war on Soviet Russia as well, since Poland, after all, was roughly halved. But the English say: No, that is no longer the decisive thing at all now, we now have another war goal again. First, it was Poland’s freedom, then – then it was Nazism, then it was again the guarantees for the future. Now it will be something else. They will simply wage war, as long as, above all, they find somebody who is willing to wage war with them, this means, who is willing to let himself as well be sacrificed for them. The reasons are the old slogans. If one namely declares that one now wants to stand up for freedom, for freedom overall and in particular, then Great Britain, after all, could give the world a wonderful example in that it finally bestows full freedom upon its own nationalities.

How noble would this British crusade then immediately look, if it had been introduced with the proclamation of freedom for the 350 million Indians or if it had been introduced with the proclamation of independence, of free right of plebiscite, for all other British colonies! How glorious would this British crusade then look, and how gladly would we then bow before such an England! Initially, however, we see how this England itself suppresses hundreds of millions of people, how this same England has looked on as numerous millions of Germans have been suppressed. It hence does not move us in the least, if today a British minister exclaims with crying eyes that England has only idealistic goals, no selfish ones at all. Britain has never yet had them. – I already said that Britain has never yet fought for selfish goals, rather the dear Lord has in the execution of the fighting only then bestowed upon England the regions and the people as reward for fighting unselfishly. Hence if they now declare again that they possess no selfish goals, then this is ridiculous. That does not move us, and the German folk can really only be amazed that barely 20 years after such a huge world swindle one can still serve up the same swindle.

Or, if one says that one stands up for culture. England as culture creator is a factor for itself. We have few traces of a real British cultural creative activity in other lands. England’s cultural activity is limited almost exclusively to the British motherland itself and to those regions that are practically subjugated to this British motherland. Otherwise we can see nothing of a cultural activity. We Germans do not need to let ourselves be taken in by the English in the sphere of culture at all. Our music, our literature, our architecture, our painting, our sculpture can absolutely compare itself with the English and the English arts. Still, I believe one individual –well, let us say: Beethoven – has musically accomplished more than all Englishmen of the past and present together. And the nurturing of this culture, we also look after that better than the English can at all.



England has for 300 years pursued the goal of preventing Europe’s economic consolidation, just as France sought for many centuries to prevent Germany’s consolidation.

If now today a Mr. Chamberlain appears as preacher and proclaims his pious war aims to the surrounding world, then I can only say: Your own history contradicts you, Mister Chamberlain. For 300 years, your statesmen have at the outbreak of war always talked like you, Mr. Chamberlain, today talk. They have always only fought for God and for religion. They have never had a material goal. But precisely because Englishmen never fight for a material goal, the dear Lord has then so richly rewarded them materially. That England also appeared only as fighter for truth, for justice, the champion of all virtues, God has not forgotten that of the English. For that, they have been richly blessed. They have in 300 years subjugated 40 million square kilometers of the earth, everything naturally not, say, out of egoism, not, say, our of earthly desire for dominance or for wealth of for pleasure, no, quite the opposite, one did all that only as God’s mission and for the sake of good and dear religion. Admittedly, England did not even want to be God’s fighter alone, rather it has always invited others to participate in this noble conflict. It did not exactly strive to bear the chief burden, rather, for works so pleasing to God, one can also always seek fellow fighters.

It does this today as well. And, as said, this has been richly rewarded for England. 40 million square kilometers, and English history is a single succession of rapes, of extortion, of tyrannical mistreatment, of suppression, of looting. There are things that would actually be unthinkable in any other state and in any other folk. One has waged war for everything. One waged war in order to expand trade. One waged war in order to cause others to smoke opium. But one also waged war, if necessary, to gain gold mines, to get rule over diamond mines. They were always material goals, but always naturally embellished as noble and ideal. The last war as well, it was waged only for ideal goals. That one on the side also nonetheless pocketed the German colonies, God wanted it so again. That one took away our fleet, that one cashed in the German foreign assets, those are just accompanying manifestations in this noble conflict for sacred religion.

If Mr. Chamberlain today walks around with the Bible and preaches his war aims, then this seems to me as if the devil approaches a poor soul with a prayer book. And in the process, now that is no longer really original. That is worn out, nobody believes that of him anymore, after all. I believe he himself doubts himself.

Besides: Each folk burns its finger only once. The children followed the Pied Piper of Hameln only once, and the German folk an apostle of international folk fraternization and agreement etc. also only once!

There I praise Mister Churchill. He only says openly what old Mister Chamberlain thinks and hopes only in silence. He says it: Our goal is Germany’s dissolution. Our goal is Germany’s destruction. Our goal is the extermination, if possible, of the German folk. We want to beat Germany.

That, believe me, that I welcome. And French generals as well, they say it quite openly, what it is about. I believe that we can also more easily come to an agreement so. Why then only fight with these lying slogans? What not talk openly? We prefer it so. We know exactly what goal they have, whether or not Mr. Chamberlain comes with the Bible, whether or not he acts pious, whether he speaks the truth or whether he lies. We know the goal, it is the Germany of 1648 that hovers before them, the goal – that dissolves and tears apart Germany…

…Every attempt to come to an agreement with England was totally pointless. These here were people who seemed impossible to still be removed from their stupid, crazy ideology, prejudice and obstinacy. That the world had changed fundamentally since the time of their great queen Victoria, these people were not at all aware of this. That, in the final analysis, Germany did not threaten their empire, rather that this Empire could be maintained only if it found a closer connection to Europe, they were not aware of this. Quite the opposite, they fought against Europe at every opportunity. And here, above all, the man, whom I have already mentioned a few times: Churchill. Any attempt to even just approach this man with the idea of an agreement was thwarted by his stubborn: “I want to have a war.” Nothing at all was to be discussed with this man, and around him stood that clique of Duff Cooper – therefore, it is sad, if one just names the names, they are, after all, really such zeroes! It is interesting, after all, how they themselves, if a man comes anywhere, like now Wavell, are immediately thrown out. But that does not matter. They are fragile eggs: wherever they fall, they somehow remain lying again for a time. They have simply been continuously lying in lime for too long – and this damages, seen in centuries, generations, families, also individual human beings. I also do not want to speak of the Jews in the process – they are our old opponents anyway, they have experienced us through the thwarting of their plans, and they rightly hate us, just like we hate them. It is clear to us that this war, after all, could only end with that either the Germanic folks are exterminated or Jewry disappears from Europe. I already pronounced it on September 1, 1939 in the German Reichstag – and I guard myself against premature prophecies -, that this war will not end like the Jews imagine, namely that the European Aryan folks are exterminated, rather that the result of this war will the annihilation of Jewry. For the first time, others will not bleed, rather, for the first time, this time the genuine old Jewish law will be applied: An eye for an eye, a tooth for a tooth!

And the farther this struggle spreads, all the more – this may be said to World Jewry – will anti-Semitism spread with this struggle. It will find its nourishment in every prison camp, it will find its nourishment in every family that is enlightened, why, in the final analysis, it had to make its sacrifice. And the hour will come, when the worst world enemy of all time will have again played out his role, at least for a millennium.

With England, this attempt was in vain, what all I also did, how often I also extended my hand, whatever I also offered them – to my real deepest chagrin…



But now it is interesting to observe the life of these rich. In the English-French world, there exists a so-called democracy. You know, after all, this democracy distinguishes by the following: It means that it is supposedly the rule of the folk. Well, the folk, after all, must possess some kind of possibility to give expression to its thoughts or its wishes. If one looks at this problem more closely, then one can ascertain that the folk in itself primarily has no conviction at all there, rather naturally has the conviction presented to it, like everywhere, by the way. And the decision is now: Who determines this conviction of a folk? Who enlightens a folk? Who forms a folk? In these lands, capital actually rules, this means, it is a band of a few hundred people, in the final analysis, who are in possession of vast fortunes and as a result of the unique construction of state life there are more or less totally independent and free. For it is said, “we have freedom here”, and they mean by that, above all, “free economy”. And by free economy, they again mean the freedom to not just acquire capital, to be free in the acquisition of capital from any governmental, this means folkish, supervision, but also to be free in the use of capital from any governmental or folkish supervision. That is, in reality, the concept of their freedom.

And this capital then, it initially creates for itself a press. They talk about the freedom of the press. In reality, each of these newspapers has a master. And this master is in each case the money-giver, thus the owner. And this master now directs the inner picture of this newspaper, not the editor. If he wants today to write something different than fits the master, then he is kicked out the next day. This press then, which is the absolutely servile, unscrupulous lackey of its owner, this press then models public opinion. And the public opinion mobilized by the press is again divided into parties. These parties differentiate themselves from each other as they previously differentiated themselves from each other among us. You know them, after all, the old parties. It was always one and the same thing. Usually, even in these lands, it is so that the families are divided up; one is conservative, the other is liberal, and a third, in England, he is with the Labor Party. In reality, all three family members get together annually and direct very precisely their further bearing, set it down. Additionally, the chosen folk, after all, is a community everywhere and now actually moves and directs all these organizations. Hence nothing comes out of it, even given an opposition. The opposition is actually always the same, and in all basic things, where an opposition would have to make itself noticeable, they are always one and the same, there they have a conviction. These parties with this press, they form public opinion.

Now one would have to think that, above all, in these lands of freedom and wealth, an unprecedented prosperity for the folk would have to exist. But it is the opposite. In these lands, the distress of the broad masses is greater than anywhere else. There is this wealthy England, 40 million square kilometers are controlled by it, hundreds of millions of colonial workers with a pitiful living standard, in India, for example, must be active for it. One would have to think then, in this England itself, there actually everyone would have to be a shareholder in this wealth. Quite the opposite, in these lands, the class difference is the greatest that one can imagine. Poverty, inconceivable poverty, on the one hand, and, on the other, just as inconceivable wealth. They have not solved one problem. These are lands that possess the treasures of the earth, and their workers, they house in pitiful holes; lands that possess the natural resources of the world, and the mass broad is miserably clothed; lands that could have more than enough bread and all other fruits, and millions in their lower strata do not have enough to fill their stomachs, run around starved. People who, on the one hand, could manage to provide with world with work must experience that they cannot eliminate unemployment even in their own land. This rich England has for decades now had 2 ½ million unemployed. This rich America 10 to 13 million year after year. This France 6, 7, 800,000. Yes, my folk comrades, what then do we first want to say about ourselves? But it is also understandable. In these lands of so-called democracy, the folk is not put at the center point of observation at all. What is decisive, is exclusively the existence of these few makers of democracy, this hence means the existence of these few hundred gigantic capitalists, who are in possession of their assets, all their stocks, and who, in the final analysis, exclusively direct these folks. The broad mass does not interest them in the least. It interests them, just like previously our bourgeois parties, only at election time, then they need its votes. Otherwise they are totally indifferent to the life of the broad mass.

Additionally, there is the difference of education. Is it not downright funny, if we now hear that an English Labor Party, which, furthermore, as opposition, is officially paid by he government, if an English Labor Party man says: “When the war comes to an end, then we also want to do a few things in social regard. Above all, then the English worker as well should be able to travel.” – This is splendid, that they now come up with the idea that travelling should exist not only for millionaires, rather also for the folk.

But we already solved that among us some time ago, these problems.

No, you believe it, in these states, this is shown by their whole economic structure, in the final analysis, the egoism of a relatively very small stratum rules there under the clock of democracy. And this stratum is corrected and controlled by nobody. And it is understandable, if an Englishman hence says: “We do not want our world to somehow perish.” They are right. They know quite well: Their empire is not threatened by us at all. But they rightly say: “If these ideas, which are becoming popular in Germany, are not eliminated and exterminated, then they will also come over our folk. And that is the dangerous thing, we do not wish that.” It would harm them, if it were to come. But they are so narrow-minded, just like so many were also narrow-minded among us. They simply live in the area of their conservative former practice. They do not want to distance themselves from it. They do not hide it. They say: “All these methods do not suit us.”

And what kind of methods are they then? Yes, you know, my comrades, I have smashed nothing in Germany, after all. I have always proceeded very carefully, because, as said, I believe that we cannot allow ourselves at all to lay something in ruins. It was my pride that the revolution of 1933 went off without a broken windowpane. But, nonetheless, we have brought about huge changes.

I want to state just a few basic views: Initially, there is the first view: In this world of capitalist democracies, the most important economic principle goes: The folk exists for the economy, and the economy exists for capital. – And we have reserved this principle, namely: Capital exists for the economy, and the economy exists for the folk. This means in other words: The primary thing is the folk, everything else is only means to an end. That is the purpose. If an economy does not manage to nourish a folk, to clothe it etc., then it is bad, quite regardless of whether a few hundred people say: “but for me, it is good, splendid, my dividends are great.” I admit that. Dividends do not interest me in the least. I do not doubt that this is impossible in our state. Yes, it must not be. We have drawn boundaries here. One says immediately: “Yes, you see, that is simply it. You terrorize freedom.” Yes, we terrorize it, if freedom comes at the expense of the community. Then we eliminate it.

These people have the possibility – I wish to give you just one example – to draw from their armaments industry 76%, 80%, 95%, 140%, 160% dividends. Yes, naturally, they say, if these methods spread, this will cease. They are completely right there, I will not tolerate that. I believe that 6% are sufficient. And of this 6%, we again take away half. And of the rest, we must know the proof that it is again invested in the interest of the folk community. This hence means that the individual does not have the right to administer totally free what must be invested in the interest of the folk community. If he personally controls it reasonably, it is fine. If he does not administer it reasonably, then the National Socialist state intervenes.

Or another example: Aside from these dividends, there are then the so-called board of director fees. Perhaps you do not know at all how fertile the activity of a board of directors is. One must take a trip once a year and go to the train station. One must sit in the first class section and travel to somewhere. And then one must go into a restaurant, around 10:00 or 11:00, accordingly, and then a report is read aloud there. And one must then listen. And when the report has been read aloud, then one must listen, while a few people say something about it, and this can naturally even last over the mealtime, it can become 1:00 or 2:00, and after 2:00, one must stand up again, and one must then make one’s return trip again. One must travel back, travel back first class! And probably everybody has the right to demand as compensation each year so 60,000 or 80,000 or 100,000 Marks – that is also how it was among us previously. For he apparently misses a lot, after all, and besides, the effort must also be paid for.

This nonsense, we have simply eliminated among us, however. And it had only been a concealment of profits, nothing more at all. And, above all, it was a means of bribery. For the delegates are board of directors members.

That also existed among us. We have eliminated that. No delegate may be a board of directors member, unless totally uncompensated. Any kind of payment is excluded, excluded in any form. In these lands, it simply is not. They now say: “yes, for us, that is a sacred state.” I admit it, it also gets itself paid for it. But whether this state is also sacred for the folks, that is something else. I believe, it is harmful to the folks. I believe one cannot maintain that, that a person toils and works for a whole year and then receives a downright ridiculous wage in comparison, and another person, he sits himself down in a meeting and cashes in a huge salary for it. Those are impossible conditions.

We National Socialists also oppose any leveling on the other hand. If today somebody through his genius invents something momentous, produces through his mental work a huge benefit, then we are generous. That is work then. The man then benefits our folk community. But to live as drone in this folk community, we must gradually make that impossible.

And see, I can expand this to infinity. But those are two worlds, which confront each other, and they are completely right in England, if they say: “we can never reconcile with the world”. How can such a capitalist reconcile himself with my principles! Sooner can the devil enter the church and receive consecrated water, than they can deal with ideas that are self-evident for us today.

But in exchange, we have also solved our problems, after all. My folk comrades, one will also, for example, reproach us. One says: “We fight for the preservation of the gold standard of currency.” I understand that. They have the gold. We also had gold once. Once then stole it from us and extorted it from us. When I came to power, I had no maliciousness, when I abolished the gold standard. There was namely no gold there. It was also not difficult for me to carry out this abolition. If one has nothing, then one can easily part from what one does not have. We had no gold. We had no money. One had extorted everything from us over the course of fifteen years.

But now, my folk comrades, I was also not unhappy about it. We have a totally different economic view. According to our view, gold is no asset at all, rather only a factor for suppression, this means, more accurately, for the domination of the folks. When I came to power, I possessed only one hope upon which I built, that was the proficiency, the ability of the German folk, of the German worker and the intelligence of our inventors, of our engineers, of our technicians, of our chemists etc., also the skill of countless organizers of our economy. I counted on that. I stood before a simple problem: Should we collapse then, perish, because we have no gold? Should I cling to an insanity that destroys us?

I represented the other view: If we have no gold, then we have a work force. And the German work force, that is our gold, and that is our capital. And with that gold, I defeat any other power in the world. For what do people live from then? Do they live, say, from ducats, which one gives them? They love from foodstuffs, which the peasant must create. Hence work must create that. They clothe themselves in fabrics, which must be fabricated. Hence the worker must fabricate them. They want to live in residences, which must be built. Hence the worker must build them. And the material for that and the raw materials must be created through work. I have built my whole economy only on the concept of work. And we have solved our problems. And the miraculous thing, my folk comrades, is that the capitalist lands have been wrecked in their currencies. One cannot sell the pound in the world today. If one throws it at somebody, then he steps aside so that he is not hit by it. And our mark, behind which no gold stands, it has remained stabile. You helped me to keep the mark stabile. The currency without gold is today more valuable than gold, for it is fluid production. This is owed to the German peasant, who has worked from early to late. And this is to be ascribed to the German worker, who put his whole energy into it.

And now the whole problem has been solves as if by magic.

If, my dear friends, I had publicly declared eight or nine years ago: In six, seven years the problem will no longer be: how do we reduce unemployment, rather the problem will then be: where do we get the work force?, if I had said that, it would have hurt me very much back then. For one would have declared: “He is crazy, one cannot go along with him at all, one cannot vote for him, he is a dreamer.” But this has today become reality. Today there is only one question among us: Where is the work force?

That, my folk comrades, is the blessing of work. Only work creates new work. Money does not create work, only work creates new work. Work creates assets, which reward people, who themselves want to work again. What the one creates, gives the other the prerequisite for his life and thus to his productivity. And if we organize our folk’s work force to the maximum, then more and more life goods will come to the individual. For the fact is that we integrated these seven millions unemployed into the economic process, that we turned another six million from part-time to full-time workers, and we have even come to overtime and that all that is paid with a Reichmark, which, as long as peace lasted, retained its value and which we only now in war ration, not because it loses value, rather because we now had to convert a portion of production to war production, in order to thereby be able to successfully survive the struggle for the German future.

That, my folk comrades, is also a world, which we have built here; a world of shared work, a work of shared exertions, but also a world of shared cares, shared duties.

I was not surprised that, in these other lands, one began with rationing only after two, after three, after five, after seven months, in part, after a year. Believe it, that is no coincidence. In all these lands, that is calculation. Perhaps many a German wondered that the ration stamps came already on the first day of the struggle in the morning. Yes, my folk comrades, this whole ration stamp system naturally has two sides. One will say: “Would it not be smarter, one would do without it in one or the other area? My God, you allot – what does this mean anyway – you allot only so many grams coffee. Nobody gets much. Otherwise at least some would get something.” – I admit that. That is precisely what we want to avoid. We simply want to avoid that, in the most important thing that belongs to life, the one has more than the other. There are other things: A valuable painting. Not everybody can buy himself a Tizian, even if he had the money, because Tizian did not paint so many paintings. Hence one can give that to one or the other, he should pay for it. He then gives out his money again in this manner and it then circulates again in a short time among mankind. But what is necessary to eat, there each has the same life claim. In the other states, one waited there. One first wrote: “Should meat be rationed?” That is the first warning shot. This hence means, if you have capital, stock up, buy yourself a refrigerator and store up some cracklings of ham. “Or should one ration coffee?” Two different views exist here, whether or not one should ration. But it would not be precluded that, in the end, the view triumphs that one should also ration coffee. This is written so for four weeks. Anybody who has some brains in his head – and this is naturally the case among the democrats – he says: “Hello, what, so coffee will soon be affected; hence buy coffee.” And then one rations. That means, when there is no longer anything there.

We want to avoid that. Hence we have now in this war right from the start undertaken these restrictions uniformly for all. And we do not take it lightly, if somebody transgresses against it.

But the one thing is sure, my folk comrades: If we take everything together, then we have here today a state that, economically and politically, is oriented differently than the western democracies. In this state, the folk determines existence without doubt. The folk determines in this state the guidelines of its leadership. For it has actually become possible in this state to first integrate the broad mass to the broadest extent into the party, this gigantic organization, which begins from below and encompasses millions of people, which has millions of functionaries. Those are all people from the folk. And it builds upward. There exists for the first time in our own German history a state, which has basically eliminated all social prejudices in filling positions. Not, say, now in civil life. I am myself, after all, the final document of this. I am not even a jurist – think what this means! – , nonetheless, I am your leader. Not only in life in general have we managed this, that people now come into all positions who come from the folk – Reich Regents, who were previously agricultural workers, who were who previously machinists – no, we have even made this breakthrough in the state, where the breakthrough seemed the most difficult, in the Wehrmacht as well. Thousands of officers are being promoted and have emerged from the enlisted ranks. Here, too, we have eliminated all inhibitions. Today we have generals who, 22, 23 years ago, were common solders, non-commissioned officers. We have overcome all inhibitions of social nature here.


Insofar as Germany’s position toward America is concerned, the following is to be said:

First. Germany is perhaps the only great power that has ever possessed a colony or other politically engaged itself in neither the North nor the South American continent, other than through the emigration of many millions of Germans and their cooperation, from which the American continent, in particular, the United States of America, however, only drew a benefit.

Second. The German Reich, in the whole history of the emergence and existence of the United States, never taken a politically rejecting or even hostile stance, but indeed, with the blood of many of its sons, helped to defend the United States.

Third. The German Reich has never participated in a war against the United States itself, but the United States indeed brought war to Germany in the year 1917, and indeed for reasons, which have been completely clarified by a board, which the present-day President Roosevelt had himself employed for the examination of this question.

Precisely this investigating committee for the clarification of the reasons for America’s entry into the war has proven beyond any doubt that these reasons for the American war entry in 1917 laid exclusively in the area of the capitalist interests of a few small groups, that Germany itself, however, had no intention to get into a conflict with America.

Otherwise as well, there are no conflicts between the American and the German folk, be they of territorial or political nature, which could somehow touch the interests or even the existence of the United States. The difference in forms of government had always existed. But it cannot be drawn in at all as a reason for hostilities in the life of folks, as long as a form of government does not strive, outside of its own naturally given sphere, to intervene into others.

America is a republic led by a president with great authoritarian power. Germany was once a monarchy led by a conditional authority, later an authoritarian democracy, today a republic led by a strong authority. Between both states lies an ocean. The divergences between capitalist America and Bolshevist Russia would have to, if these concepts had something genuine within themselves at all, be fundamentally greater than between an America led by a president and a Germany led by a Führer.

But it is a fact that both historical conflicts between Germany and the United States, even if inspired by the same force, were nonetheless fanned exclusively by two men in the USA, namely by President Woodrow Wilson and by Franklin Roosevelt. History itself has pronounced the verdict over Wilson. His name remains linked to one the vilest breaches of faith of all times. The consequences of his breach of faith were the derangement of the life of the folks not only among the so-called defeated, rather also among the victors themselves. The dictate of Versailles, made possible solely through his breach of faith, ripped apart states, destroyed cultures and ruined the economy of all.

We know today that behind Wilson stood a society of interested financiers, who made use of this paralytic professor in order to lead America into the war, from which they hoped for increased business.

That the German folk had once believed this man, it had to pay for that with the collapse of its political and economic existence.

What is then the reason that, after such bitter experiences, a president of the United States is again found, who sees his sole task anew in letting wars arise and, above all, escalating the hostility toward Germany to the outbreak of war?

National Socialism came to power in Germany in the same year in which Roosevelt was elected president of the United States. It is now important to examine the motives, which must be viewed as the cause for the present-day development:

Initially, the personal side:

I understand only too well that a world-wide gulf exists between the life view and stance of President Roosevelt and my own.

Roosevelt comes from a very wealthy family, belonged from the start to that class of people, for whom birth and origin, in the democracies, pave life’s path and hence secure ascent.

I myself was only the child of a small and poor family and had to win my path under unspeakable effort through wok and industriousness.

When the World War came, Roosevelt, in a position under Wilson’s shadow, experienced the war from the sphere of the money-earner. He hence knows only the pleasant consequences of the conflict of folks and states, which result for those who make business there, where others bleed.

In this whole period, my own life again laid on the exact opposite side. I did not belong to those who made history or even business, rather only to those who carried out orders.

A simple soldier, I endeavored in these four years before the enemy to fulfill my duty and naturally returned from the war just as poor as I had entered it in the autumn of 1914. I hence shared my fate with that of millions, Mr. Roosevelt his with that of the so-called upper ten thousand. While Mr. Roosevelt after the war already tried his abilities in financial speculations, in order to draw personal benefit from the inflation, this means, the misery of the others, I still laid, like many other hundreds of thousands, in the field hospital.

And when Mr. Roosevelt finally entered the career of the normal, business experienced, economically established, due to origin patronized politician, I fought as nameless unknown for the resurrection of a folk, upon which the worst injustice in its whole history had been inflicted.

Two life paths! When Franklin Roosevelt stepped to the peak of the United States, he was the candidate of a thoroughly capitalist party, which made use of him. And when I became Chancellor of the German Reich, I was the leader of a folk movement, which I myself had created.

The forces, which carried Roosevelt, were the forces, which I, on the basis of the fate of my folk and of my most sacred inner conviction, fought. The “brain trust”, which the new American president had to make use of, consisted of members of the same folk, which we combated in Germany as a parasitic manifestation of mankind and began to remove from public life.

And nonetheless we both had something in common:

Franklin Roosevelt took over a state with an economy collapsed as a result of democratic influences, and I stepped to the top of a Reich, which, likewise thanks to democracy, found itself before total ruin.

The United States possessed 13 million unemployed, Germany 7 million, but also another 7 million short-term employed.

In both states, public finances were disarranged, the decline of general economic life seemed hardly still stoppable.

At this moment, a development now begins in the United States and in the German Reich, which will make it easy for posterity to pass a final verdict over the correctness of the theories. While in the German Reich, under National Socialist leadership, in a few years a tremendous ascent of life, of economy, of culture, of art etc. sets in, President Roosevelt did not manage to bring about even the slightest improvements in his own land.

But how much easier would this work have to be in the United States, in which barely 15 people live on a square kilometer as opposed to 140 in Germany.

If it does not succeed in this land to bring about an economic blossoming, then this is only connected to either the ill will of a ruling leadership or to a total inability of the summoned human being.

In the same period, President Roosevelt has increased the state debt of his land to the most astronomical, devalued the dollar, put the economy into even more disorder, and maintained the unemployment figure.

But this is not surprising, if one considers that the spirits, which this man summoned for his support, or better, summoned him, belong to those elements who, as Jews, can posses an interest only in disarrangement and never in order! While we in National Socialist Germany combated speculation, it experienced an amazing blossoming under the Roosevelt era. The legislation of the New Deal of this man was false and hence the biggest mistake that a man ever suffered. There is no doubt about it, that a continuation of this economic policy in times of peace sooner or later, despite all his dialectic skill, would have brought down this president. In European states, he would have certainly found his end before a state court due to willful waste of the national fortune, before a civil court, however, due to negligent business conduct, hardly escaped prison.

Many, and also prominent, Americans also possess this verdict or, better, realization.

An ominous opposition was brewing over the head of this man. It made him surmise that only diversion of the attention of public opinion from his domestic policy to foreign could bring rescue. It is interesting to study in this connection the reports of the Polish emissary Potocki from Washington, which again and again point out that Roosevelt was very much ware of the threat of the collapse of his whole economic house of cards, and hence, under all circumstances, needed a foreign affairs diversion.

He was reinforced in this by the circle of Jews surrounding him, who, out of Old Testament thirst for revenge, believed to see in the United States the instrument in order to prepare with it a second Purim European nations becoming ever more anti-Semitic. It was the Jew in his whole satanic vileness who gathered around this man, and to which, however, this man also grasped. So the influence of the American president begins to increasingly have an effect in the sense of creating conflicts or deepening existing conflicts, in any case, however, to prevent that conflicts find a peaceful solution. For years, this man has just the one sole wish, that somewhere in the world a fight breaks out, best in Europe, which gives him the opportunity to establish, through obligation of the American economy to one of both quarreling parties, an entanglement of political interests, which could be suited to slowly bring America closer to such a conflict and thereby divert attention from his failed economic policy in the interior to the outside.

His concerted action becomes especially brusque in this sense against the German Reich. From the year 1937 on, a number of speeches sets in, among them, an especially vile one on October 5, 1937 in Chicago, in which this man systematically begins to incite the American public against Germany. He threatens with the establishment of a kind of quarantine against the so-called authoritarian states.

In the execution of these now constantly escalating hate and agitation speeches by President Roosevelt, he summons, after new insulting statements, the American ambassador in Berlin to Washington. Since then, both states are still linked to each other only through agents.

From November 1930 on, he systematically and intentionally begins to sabotage any possibility for a European pacification policy. In the process, he feigns interest in peace, but threatens any state that is ready to engage in a policy of peaceful agreement with blocking of loans, with economic reprisals, with cancellation of loans etc.. The reports of the Polish ambassadors in Washington, London, Paris and Brussels provide a shocking insight here.

In January 1939, this man begins to intensify his agitation campaign and threatens before the congress to proceed with all measures against the authoritarian states expect with war.

While he continuously claims that other states try to interfere into American affairs and boasts of the preservation of the Monroe Doctrine, he begins since March 1939 to butt into intra-European matters that are no business at all of the president of the United States. First, he does not understand these problems, and second, even if he were to understand them and grasp the historical circumstances, he would have just as little right to concern himself with the Central Europe region as, say, the German chief of state has a right to judge or even take a position on the conditions in a state of the USA.