The time will one day come when people will honour their great dreamers for being decisive men of action. The dreamers developed an image and out of these visions a goal of life was created. While they walked among us as men of science and religion and as philosophers and statesmen, they made the decisions and fabricated the ideas, in various media and in many ways, which ideas shaped our world. The dream of an inventor is the first expression of a spiritual strength. It directs all inner motion in one direction—in the torment of recognition that the inward vision cannot be completely realised. It enhances all spiritual and intellectual energies, and finally gives birth to the creative act around the axis of which a new era rotates like the rotation of the earth on its axis.

Once the Nordic spirit dreamed its dreams on the Mediterranean sea and in Hellas; dreamed of the nearness of the sun and the flight of men far beyond Olympos. This longing created the drama of Ikaros. That spirit died like Ikaros, but one day it would revive to pulsate in another place. Sun maidens and sword maidens were sent through the air by dreaming man who, in storm and all weather, saw the Valkyries hunt above him, and then he himself soared up into the infinitely remote Valhalla.

The age old longing became image in Wieland the Smith, and it died once more in order to reawaken to a new life in Leonardo’s workroom. From the imagery of the poet came a practical transforming will. A strong humanity had seized nature and, with a masterful searching gaze, learned her laws by quietly listening. But it was nevertheless always too early. Four hundred years later those who dreamed of human flight mastered the brittle material. Matter was this time constrained, concentrated purposefully to harnessed energy, the driving motive was found. One day a silver airship flew glittering through the air rapidly and controlled as a realised drama of many millennia.

The forms of realisation were other than as the first dreamers had conceived them, which was a mere technicality and remained temporarily bound. But the spiritually masterful impetus was the eternal, inexplicable goal setting will overcoming earthly gravity.

Once men dreamed of an all seeing and all hearing Being. They called it Zeus. It gazed from the clouds of Olympos over the land, or perhaps as Argus. Only a few were bold enough to demand the same for men. But these few dreamers investigated the essence of the lightning throwing god, and examined the mysteriously unleashed natural forces. One day with the aid of these forces they spoke far apart with one another, linked only by a wire. Then even this wire was no longer necessary. Tall slender towers today send mysterious waves out into the entire world, and these discharge themselves thousands of miles away as song or music. A bold dream again became life and reality.

In the midst of a desert, warriors and conquerors once dreamed of a paradise. This dream of a few was transformed into the labour of millions. From one stream to another trickling water passed through ditches, in well planned lines through the arid desert. As if altered by magical powers, the yellow sand turned green and grain fields rustled, pregnant with heavy fruit. Towns and cities arose, art and science flowered until over this Paradise conjured up by a dreaming human race, dreamless conquerors passed, destroying everything. They consumed the fruits of the land but did not understand the living dream. The canals silted up, the water turned stagnant and ran back into its original river bed from where it streamed back into the shapeless Indian Ocean. The forests were crippled, the wheat fields vanished; in place of the grass there reappeared stone and drifting sand. Men perished or moved on, the cities sank back into the sand, the dust settled over them. Thousands of years later Nordic dreamers dug up the petrified culture from rubble and ashes. Today, the entire picture of the former paradise stands before our eyes as a spent dream which had once produced life, beauty and strength as long as a superior race ruled. It will live again and it will dream again. But as soon as races of a dreamless kind took over and attempted to realise the dream, reality vanished with the dream.

Just as in the land of the two rivers there was a dream of a fruitfulness and power, so a great generation in Hellas dreamed of beauty and life creating Eros. In India and on the Nile men dreamed of discipline and holiness. Germanic men dreamed of the paradise of honour and duty.

Alongside the prophetic dreams there are also destructive dreams. They are just as real and often just as strong as the creative ones. Tales are still heard even today of the small dark peoples in India whose piercing gaze charms snakes and birds, forcing them into the nets of huntsmen. We know of the monstrously strong evil dream of Ignatius Loyola, whose soul destroying breath lies even today over our entire culture. We also know the dream of the black dwarf Alberich who cursed love for the sake of world domination. On Mount Zion a dream was cultivated for centuries, the dream of gold, of power, of lies and hatred. This dream drove the Jews around the entire world, a restless, strong dream. Here it creates reality, there it destroys reality. It is the bearer of evil lives and weaver of visions even today among us. The Jew’s dream, experienced for the first time in all its power three thousand years ago, almost became reality after many aborted attempts in which he misused god and dreamed of world domination. Abandoning love, beauty, honour, the Jew dreamed only of the loveless, the ugly and the honourless, The Jew sought domination and, until 1933, seemed stronger than us. Because we had ceased to search for our dream, and because we had lost our dream, we had even attempted to experience the dream of the Jews. This also caused the German collapse of 1918.

The greatest and most blessed thing in the German life is the mythical, sensitive, yet strong, awakening. The fact is that we have again begun to dream our own primal dreams—not with willed intent but far more spontaneously—in many places simultaneously—all in the same direction. It is again the old, yet new, dream of Meister Eckehart, of Frederick the Great and of Lagarde.

Once, Nordic Vikings sailed into the world. True, they robbed like all other warriors, but they dreamed of honour and state, of ruling and creating. Everywhere they came, images of their individual culture rose; in Kiev, in Palermo, in Brittany, in England. Where an essence alien to their race and dream appeared, the dreamed realities broke; where similar type dreamers lived, a new culture was born.

The dream of an honourable Reich made the ancient German emperors take to the sword against the knights who revolted against them. This dream drove them to distant Rome, to the endless Orient. Their blood trickled away among the ruins of Italy and at the holy sepulchre. Despite this bloodletting they did not experience their dream. The old dream became alive again on Markish sand. But it subsequently declined again and seemed lost and forgotten. Today we have at last begun to dream again.

A seer in the midst of revelry during the second Kaiserreich laid down the Germanic Nordic western dream. Almost single handedly he created racially inherent goals. In his Deutsch Schriften and in various passages from his other great works he wrote:

There has never been a truly German state. The present day state is a hollow shell. Our political life is a farce. Public opinion a cowardly whore ..... That the German Reich is incapable of life, is now clear to every eye ..... We live in the midst of a civil war which provisionally takes its course without direction. Our substitute for the racial state is conducted with the greatest vulgarity by silence and slander ..... We are ill from the necessity of having to do in 1878 what we should have done in 878 ..... The belief in immortality becomes more and more a condition for us under which we can alone maintain life in a Jewish German state which is mistakenly fabricated out of clay and iron. The religious concept of Christianity is false. True religion is the personal relationship to god. True worship is the unconditional present ..... Paul brought the old testament into the church. The truth and the message of the gospels have been overwhelmed. Their doctrine has perished ..... That a national religion is necessary to every nation is revealed by the following considerations. Nations originate not by physical breeding, but by undergoing common historical events. They are subjected to the rule of providence. Therefore, true nations are of divine appointment. They are created ..... to recognise ever anew god’s mission. In doing god’s will his nation may dip into the well which gives eternal youth. To always serve him in our assigned mission means to acquire higher purposes, and with them, a higher life ..... World religion in the singular and national religions in the plural—these are the beginning points of two diametrically opposed camps ..... Nations are ideas of god! catholicism, protestantism, Jewry and Naturalism must be cleared from the field before beginning a new world outlook, so that they are no longer thought of, just as the night lamp is no longer thought of when the morning sun shines over the mountains. The unity of Germany becomes more questionable day by day. There is only one guilt for man, that of not being himself. The great future which I announce and demand, lies still far before us .....

It is not such a long time since this great German dreamer passed from us: Paul de Lagarde died on December 22, 1891. After Meister Eckehart he was perhaps the first who had given verbal expression to the eternal German dream. He was without those ties which still enchained the greater earlier teacher, Eckehart. What motivated German knights thousands of years ago, drove them up to the heights but also into error and guilt, became brilliant consciousness here for the first time. Today the German people begins to dream Eckehart’s and Legarde’s dreams again. But many still have not the courage for this dream. Alien dream visions still often hinder their spiritual effectiveness. For this reason, a modest attempt is undertaken here to lay down what in the two preceding books was represented more analytically as our essence, as an image, insofar as this is permeated by the eternal Nordic Germanic ideas, not in technical details. And where this must be outlined, it is done with the awareness that they could take a completely different appearance if new means of mastery over the earth are found. The flight of Ikaros differed from the building of the zeppelins in nearly everything. However, the will which gave a direction to this effort was a similar one. Moreover, a determined will, grounded on a clear order of rank of values, coupled with organic strength of outlook, will also one day—despite all hindrances—enforce its realisation in all domains.

The values of character, the lines of spiritual life, the colourfulness of symbols run alongside each other, entwine with each other, and result in a man. But only when in complete full blooded abundance, when they themselves are consequences, is that which emanates from one centre—that which lies beyond the empirical—born. This incomprehensible synthesis of the individual consciousness of the peoples, of a community as a whole, forms its Myth. Homeros’s world of the gods was such a Myth, which protected Greece and maintained it even when alien men and their values began to gain power over Hellenic life. The myth of the beauty of Apollo; and the strength of Zeus; of necessity and destiny in the Cosmos; and the human essence mysteriously linked with it. All these things constituted what was Greek influence over thousands of years. Although it only gathered around type breeding strength with Homer.

However, not only a creative dream vision unfolds such enormous strength. It unfolded as well in the vast and destructive strength which emanated from the Jewish parasitical dream of world domination. For over three thousand years he has carried forward the black magic of politics and trade. The current of this impulsive power to acquire gold often arose forsaking love. The children of Jacob operated the golden nets that enchained the great hearted, the tolerantly thinking or the weakened peoples. In Mephistopheles we find such a figure of corrupted power. It is found today in the laws that direct the lords of the grain and diamond exchanges, the World press and the League of Nations. The strength of Nordic spiritual flight has been crippled. The creature of Ahasverasus, earthen heavy, sucks at the lamed muscles. Where any kind of wound is torn open in the body of a nation, the Jewish demon always eats itself into the infected part and, as a parasite, it exploits the weak hours of the great nations of this world. His mentality is not to fight as a hero for enlightened, constructive rule, but to make the world liable to financial interest. This is the direction of this parasite, strong of strong—not to fight but to creep; not to serve values, but to devaluate—these things constitute his law according to which he has moved and from which he can never escape as long as he exists.

In this great, perhaps final, conflict between two souls that are worlds apart, that is where we stand today. This conflict of the German genius with the Jewish demon has been unwillingly described by a half Jew in its essential features. He writes: (Arno Schickedanz: Social parasitism in the life of folks):

The evil demon of Jewry is ..... Phariseeism. It is certainly the bearer of the hope of the Messiah, but simultaneously is the guardian which prevents any Messiah from arriving ..... That is the specific, most dangerous form of Jewish denial of the world ..... The Pharisee actively denies the world. He ensures that, where possible, nothing takes shape, and in so doing he is driven by a demonic emotion. This apparent denial is thus actually a particularly violent kind of world affirmation, but with negative symptoms. The Buddhist would be happy if around him the world fell asleep. The Pharisee would be finished if around him life did not wish to take on shape again and again, for then his life function of denial would no longer find a use ..... They are the spirit which always denies, and with an ecstatic affirmation of a Utopian existence which can never be, conceal the arrival of the Messiah. They would have to hang themselves like Judas, if the latter really came, since they are completely incapable of yea saying.

If one wishes to probe thoroughly into the depths of these admissions and similar confidences which frequently suddenly appear, then everywhere the same result is revealed: Parasitism. In this context the concept will not be grasped as a moral evaluation but as the characterisation of a biological fact, in exactly the same way as we speak of parasitical phenomena in the plant and animal world. The sack crab bores through the posterior of the pocket crab, gradually growing into the latter, sucking out its last life strength. This is an identical process to that in which the Jew penetrates into society through the open wounds in the body of the people, feeding off their racial and creative strength until their decline. In fact, this destructiveness is that active denial of the world of which Schmitz speaks, the concern at the fact that nothing takes shape. The Jew—the Pharisee, the parasite—himself possesses no talent for indigenous growth, no organic shape of the soul and therefore no racial shape. Heretofore only one researcher has alluded to this extraordinarily important point which, according to strictly scientific proof concerning the biological laws operative with the Jewish parasite, finds its closest explanation in that the outward diversity of Jewry does not stand in contradiction to its inner unity but—however remarkable this may sound—as its condition. Schickedanz stressed the very opposite notion in his description of the Jewish antirace. Its parasitic life activity likewise is manifested in a certain blood selection, remaining always the same, always the opposite of the constructive labour of the Nordic race. Conversely, wherever in the world parasitic cells formed, these have always felt themselves drawn to Jewry. This was exactly the case when the scum of Egypt left the land of the Pharaohs along with the Hebrews.

It corresponds to this parasitical devaluation of creative life that the parasite also has his Myth. In the case of Jewry this driving force is like the delusions of grandeur by an insane man. This is the Myth of the chosen. It sounds like mockery that a god could have chosen this antination—whose description Wilhelm Busch and Schopenhauer have already exhaustively provided—as his favourite. However, since the image of god is formed by man, so it is naturally understandable that this god has sought out this people among all others. In this respect it was only good for the Jews that their creative incapacity prevented them from also representing this god bodily. Otherwise the outcry of horror among all Europeans would then certainly have prevented the taking over of Jehovah and his ennoblement by poets and painters from the start.

With these words the most important things about Jewry have been said. From the demon of eternal denial springs the uninterrupted gnawing away at all expressions of the Nordic soul; that inner impossibility to say yes to the greatness of Europe; that everlasting combating of a real cultural form in the service of shapeless anarchism which is only scantily cloaked by prophecies devoid of essence.

Jewish parasitism as a concentrated enormity is thus derived from the Jewish Myth, the domination of the world agreed to by the god Yahweh for the racial cultivation of Ezras. The Talmud of the rabbis has created a common outlook and a blood of unbelievable tenacity. The character of the Jews in their intermediary activity and decomposition of the alien types has remained always constant, from Joseph in Egypt to Rothschild and Rathenau; from Philon by way of David ben Solomon up to Heine. Until 1800 the unscrupulous moral code had first place for the training and breeding of the Jewish type. Without the Talmud and the Schulchan Aruch, Jewry is not conceivable as a totality. After a short epoch, when the Jews also appeared emancipated at the end of the 19th century, the antiracial idea has stepped into the foreground as fully justified, and has made its stamp in the Zionist movement. The Zionists declare interest in the Orient, yet energetically safeguard themselves against going to Palestine as pioneers of Europe. A leading writer even openly said that the Zionists would Fight alongside in the ranks of the wakening Asiatic peoples. From the fire of all burning thorn bushes and from the nights of solitude only one cry resounds to them: Asia. Zionism, it is asserted, is only a partial idea of pan Asiaticism. At the same time a spiritual and political link passes over to the idea of Red Bolshevism. The Zionist, Holitscher, discovered the inner parallels between Moscow and Zion, while the Zionist, F. Kohn, declared that—from the patriarchs—a single line extends up to Karl Marx, to Rosa Luxembourg, and to all Jewish Bolshevists who have served the cause of freedom.

This Zionism proclaims its wish to found a Jewish state. A desire may quite honourably exist among a few leaders for some final redemption to build a pyramid of life on the soil of the Jewish nation. Building such a state results in a vertical structure in deference and contrast to the horizontal layering of former existence. Regarded from the primordial aspect, this Jewish infection is alien to our national feeling and the ideas of state of the European peoples. An attempt to really form an organic community of Jewish farmers, workers, craftsmen, technicians, philosophers, soldiers and statesmen, contradicts the instincts of this antirace. Such an idea is condemned to collapse from the start. If the Jews were really let loose among themselves, they would produce no culture. Orthodox Jews represent the real Jewish essence. They absolutely reject those parts of Zionism that imitate western philosophies of life. They lay claim to a world mission, fighting consciously against the attempt to make out of Israel a nation like any other. Such a thought is dismissed as representing a decline. This logical conduct is regarded as an insight by many Zionists. Their own movement is already regarded in a completely different way than in its first period. Theodor Herzl created orthodox Zionism as a protest against the universal European Zionist Congress in August 1929 in Zurich. A leading Zionist, Martin Buber, established the various viewpoints. There are three fundamental outlooks of the Jewish nation: one says that Israel is less than a nation; the second places Israel on the side of the modern nations; and the third, which is also the view of Buber, reveals Israel as a whole nation which is superior to other nations. In this connection, the authority on Zionist orthodoxy Der Israelit remarked:

This is, in fact, what we have been saying day in, year out, and upon which our position of rejection of modern Zionism is based: that it does not place Israel above the nations.

If the Zionist ideology were fertilised by the ideas of the chosen of Israel—to march with prophetic mission at the head of the peoples—then Buber, the successful mediator of biblical word and idea, understands the supernational task of Israel. He must have learned this from the prophets. We are moved by these words, thus understood to be the central points in the Jews’ program. They are the centre of Zionist thought and activity. We would have reason to fight in Zionism a contradictory idea. The Jewish nation, its world hope and world task, are summed up in this idea.

This world hope of the chosen consists in living off all the nations as a sucking parasite. It consists in allowing Jerusalem to take shape only as an occasional centre of counsel from which instincts, which are thousands of years old, could be strengthened and enlarged through rational planning. Zionism would then be not a state political movement—as some incorrigible European enthusiasts imagine—but an essential movement for the strengthening, particularly, of the horizontal parasiticism of the intellectual and material commission business. The enthusiasm of the Zionist Holitscher for the Russian racial chaos is therefore just as characteristic as the investigation of the Zionist Buber, the pro Asiaticism of the Zionist Hoflich, the united realisation of father Jacob and Rosa Luxembourg, as seen today through the Zionist Fritz Kohn.

The ancient Myth of the chosen people bred a new type of parasiticism with the aid of modern technology and the one world civilisation idea of a world grown soulless.

The power of the Roman church rests on the catholic belief of the representation of god through the pope. All the actions, doctrines and principles of the Vatican and its servants reinforce this Myth. The Myth of the representation of god could recognise no race or nation as a supreme value. Its doctrines of love and humility produced adherents who had to believe as doctrine the pope’s claim that he represented god. In return for this subjection, eternal blessedness is promised. In the essence of the Roman Syrian Jewish Alpine Myth, there lies the denial of personality as the supreme value of the race but also as a result we have the doctrine of universalism, not race, taught to the people. Race, people, and personality were reduced to a means which must serve the representative of god and his world power. Rome, therefore, necessarily does not know any organic spatial politics but only one centre: the Diaspora as community of the faithful. The pope, conscious of his duty toward the Myth, can therefore develop guidelines to strengthen, alternately, the Diaspora through the centre, and the standing of the centre through successes in the Diaspora.

As a world state of faithful souls, Rome is without state territory, and commands power only through a symbol of right to earthly rulership. It is thus freed from all stirrings of will connected with space, blood and soil. Just as the real Jew only sees the pure and impure, the Mohammedans only the faithful and unfaithful, so Rome sees only catholics—whom it exclusively equates with Christians—and noncatholics, who are called pagans. So, in the service of its Myth, the Vatican has to condemn all religious national and class struggles as well as dynastic and economic disputes. It judges disputes purely from the standpoint of whether they bring about the destruction of a noncatholic religion, nation and class, and whether they promise an increase in the total number of catholics—irrespective of race. Whites, blacks and yellows are all welcomed.

It has to fill the faithful with the will to do battle. Rome has, at times, defended the idea of absolute royalty when this was held to be expedient. When world pressure demanded its abandonment, the church declared its support for democracy, but only after the idea had conquered monarchy, and only after popular opinion had already come to support it. They were for throne and altar, and for republic and the stock exchange, provided only that these ideas advanced Roman power. They were chauvinistic to the last degree. Rome preached pacifism as true Christianity, if pacifism would advance Rome’s attempts to control noncatholics. In this connection, it is not at all necessary that the tools of the Vatican—Nuncios, Cardinals, Bishops, and the rest—be known liars and swindlers. On the contrary, many have been personally blameless men. But the Vatican, when evaluating various personalities for promotion, concealed the fact that, for example, a Nuncio came to Paris who could declare without opposition and, in accord with the Institut catholique, that to fight against Frenchmen meant to fight against god. The passionate Belgian, Mercier, whipped up his catholic compatriots to resist the protestant Prussian Barbarians while making certain that the high positions in Germany were occupied by pacifists. It happened that, for example, one Jesuit preached hatred and more hatred in the name of Christianity, whereas the member of the same order in another country rejected hatred as un Christian and demanded humility and subjugation.

Many lies may have been spread in individual cases. These actions related to the Roman Myth as the axis of all events. Roman action is quite logical and is removed from sentimental moralising. For Christianity exists just as little as trade or politics exist as standards of behaviour. The one like the other is merely a means to bind souls in a specific way to the myth of the representative of god on earth. How the current watchwords take their course is a question of expediency. The central myth determines everything else. Its complete victory would mean that a priest caste would rule over a millionfold host of men which, faceless, willless—as a communistically sectioned community—would regard existence as a gift of god, provided through the all powerful medicine man in Rome. In the same way, the Jesuits in Paraguay once attempted to rearrange matters there.

Even today, millions, devoid of will and personality, serve this faceless system, without knowing and grasping why. They are bound nationally, spatially and politically to regard any furtherance of their own interests by Rome as genuine good will on the part of the Vatican. Rome expects to receive such expressions of gratitude despite its self appointed position as guardian of the oppressed, the poor and the downtrodden.

The fact that this Roman policy is often frustrated by other forces, that it often must give way to them outwardly when another supreme value grows greater in souls than the love of Rome, alters nothing in the essence and will of the Vatican, as long as the myth of the representatives of god, and hence of the claim to power over all souls, exists. Only this central recognition makes comprehensible the policy of the Jesuits, cardinals and prelates over the centuries. The priest type has served well the medicine man Myth in church, art, politics, science and education.

The misfortune which has come over the world today has broken many otherwise upright men. Forced outwardly and inwardly to the ground, millions seek support in types which have become rigid. Rome has used this strife of souls to its advantage. Thus the pre Aryan stratum, which, owing to Germanic strength, had once slipped out of Roman discipline, is inclined again to the old beliefs. It agreeably joins in preaching the justification of domination by the magician of Rome over our people.

The same pope who Europe has to thank for the most dishonouring deed of all times, Pius IX, once uttered the words which without doubt are to be regarded as an open exposition of the Roman Myth. On January 18th, 1874—thus on the anniversary of the founding of the German Reich—he declared at an assembly of international pilgrims that Bismarck was the serpent in the paradise of mankind. This serpent seduced Germans into wishing to be more than god himself. Such an overextension of the human self would be followed by a humiliation such as no people had ever before tasted! Only the Eternal one knew whether or not the grain of sand on the mountains of eternal retribution had already been released. This retribution was growing to avalanche proportions and it would rush in a few years at the clay feet of this Reich and transform it into ruins. This Reich, which, like the tower of Babel, had been erected in defiance of god, would pass away to the glory of god.

At this eternal retribution for the purpose of the glorification of god the diplomats dedicated to the Roman Myth worked zealously. They worked as they worked against Karl the Great, Otto I and Ferdinand II. Thus the Centre party in Germany remained completely faithful to itself when it passed over from protection of the throne and the altar to an alliance with the antireligious Marxists, in the manner Bismarck had already predicted in 1887, when he declared in the Reichstag that the Jesuits would one day be the leaders of social democracy. In the service of eternal retribution the centre demanded a brotherhood in arms with the Marxists against protestant Kaiserism. In the days of destiny, 1914, the Vatican spurred on catholic Austrian Hungry in order to profit from a world war, and likewise, in order to overthrow the Russian heretics as well as the state of the Serpent in Paradise (Germany), backed the war effort. In so doing millions of true believing catholics had to be sacrificed. As in every great battle plan, this could not be avoided. The Vatican chose to pursue its political ends instead of helping the faithful.

From these and a thousand other examples, one sees both a symbolic and a real cause. The cause was the outlook of Pius IX, which came from the Roman Myth. The new German Reich must be smashed. This was a view which was likewise clearly shared by Benedict XV when he said that he regretted being only a Frenchman in heart. It is again seen in the writings of the little pastor, Dr. Moenius, who in disputing the existence of Belgian Franc tireurs, joyfully declared that the catholic section of the people in Germany prevented the formation of a Belgian national state.

Thus it was a matter in furthering the collapse of the German Reich, not only of the Jewish money politics and world linked parasitical instinct, but also of an old Roman mythic, a Syrian hither Asiatic striving which is inescapably and firmly established. A staggering admission of this was made at the end of 1924 by the catholic centre organ, Germania, which read,

Whoever wished to seek the fundamental lines in the conduct of the Centre party since 1917 (!) must know that this conduct was determined by the actions of prominent catholics who, in their political intentions and actions, had not fallen away from the fundamental catholic attitude.

What can be established with complete certainty is that they undermined the truly German consciousness of power. The centre leaders served the faceless Roman Myth against the Evangelical heresy, against the Germanic heresy. Further, catholicism in Prussia had existed in a completely different environment from, for instance, that of catholicism in Bavaria. Its work since 1917 could certainly be understood in its depths as an overcoming of the Brandenburg Prussian history psychosis and as an attempt at a return to the thresholds of Medieval Germany.

Every German should understand these facts so that he comprehends what has happened during the last 1,500 years and what is still occurring before his eyes in the contemporary world. In 1917, the open work of disintegration began through the Reichstag when the centre, Democrats and Marxists asserted their resolutions of dissatisfaction. In 1917, Erzberger committed his indiscretion through which Czernin’s letter became known to the Entente. The faithless Emperor Karl, breaking his word, carried on treachery with Poincare. This is described as catholic policy. If Germania asserts another milieu for Prussia which also creates a different conduct of catholic politicians, then, with the first remark, the Nordic environment with conscious national honour is meant. The German Reich of Frederick the Great and Bismarck had to be overcome and, with aid of the allied Jewish money parties, the protestant north was to be disintegrated. In Bavaria, another milieu, a more conservative folkish preserving policy consequently had to be pursued since it was necessary here to protect their own denomination. The policy of unity of the centre and the federalist policy of its scions in Bavaria served both one and the same goal until the victory of Adolf Hitler: That is, the strengthening of Syrian Roman centralism.

The classical philosopher of this pseudofederalism even went so far as to call himself Greater German instead of Greater Roman. The philosopher of this movement and this idea was Constantin Frantz. In his essay Die Religion des Nationalliberalismus, Frantz said that the centre of European unity should be Germany. It was to lead in political, ecclesiastical and educational areas. Its great aim would be to create universalism by reshaping our educational system. This stands in distinction to our nationalistic system of education which was designed to isolate our contact with universalist systems. The Germanic system was designed to understand power. One could not make Germany into a land like France or Italy. The core and the model of a gradually developing European federation should and must be Germany. That is our destiny. The question now arises. Who should determine this destiny? Germany or a foreign master?

Frantz is of the opinion that federalism does not exclude. Rather, it incorporates. It wishes nothing special for itself, but always desires all things for all people. It has nothing of the restricted self satisfaction of nationalism. It is concerned with the whole and with the great. It strives for unity, but only through a free union of the parts established on the basis of intellectual community building. Thus, instead of centralisation, there is far more concentration on a cooperative, independent life cycle in which each component continues to exist in its own right. As a result this system serves the best interests of all.

We have arrived at the fundamental point: The German people is to place itself federally into a totality. And this totality, for which Germany is to be the means for a concentration of governance, signifies the world policy of the Vatican. In other words, Rome will attempt to sponsor a federalist system which it can use to control all of Europe. We must repeat the point we wish to make. Rome’s world policy is served by establishing this European concentration of political power. In other words, the attempt must be made to carry through once again the bloody, unsuccessful experiment of the faceless world church state. We are to represent the experimental vehicle for this. Its success would throw away everything which was acquired by the blood of our best men in our national culture. Rome would write its interdenominational message on our banner—again in the name of god and of love—and, as a result, assume as a gift the power which we ourselves would have given up.

An article in the Germania (in the year 1924) openly spoke of a return to the middle ages. Whoever has understood the Bavarian Concordat recently concluded at that time knows that it signified the first step to extend the successes of the Great catholic Erzberger—so it was said in his funeral address—and to make Bavaria into a springboard for the reconquest of Germany, that is, as a breeding ground for interreligious conflicts.

Back to the middle ages by revolution! A remarkable solution! Pope Pius XI—loyal to the policy of Pius IX—said on May 23, 1923, in the Consistorium, that German catholicism

both amidst the fury of the world war as well as under the present developing conditions has applied its zeal, its energetic activity and its organisational skill to restoring and making good the sad falling away from the Roman church which took place years ago.

That is clear enough. The Bayer Kourier, the organ of the Bavarian centre, however, openly threatened us all in a manner that makes one wonder how those words could have flown away unheard. It wrote on July 5, 1923:

An imminent justice is at work in world history which knows how to punish and to avenge. It has reached the German people, because it will not bend itself to the god ordained authority. This refusal has, for four centuries, brought every conceivable disaster on the German lands.

It again threatens the German nation with disaster if, at the last hour, it does not learn from history. Thus either the German people will be subjected to the decrees of a foreign power, or an avenging justice will wipe it off the face of the earth.

The Augsburg Postzeitung, a leading south German catholic paper, wrote in faithful service of the Roman Myth on March 16, 1924, in a polemic against Ludendorff, that the catholic church:

is the sole religious device, nearly the single apparatus upon earth, which has never subordinated itself to the state ..... Therefore its bonds are more holy than those of any nation. Its orders are higher than those of the state. For those who think in the folkish sense, state or people is the absolute, the highest value and purpose.

Thus here and with pleasing openness, the unbridgeable gulf which lies between German men and the claims to power of an alien Myth is characterised along with its institution. Its centre is found outside Germany. We expressly recognised that state and people possess only a subordinate importance for this centre. Simultaneously, with all distinction, the superior justification of church interests over those of state and people are demanded, that is, the right to commit high treason and betrayal in the name of a higher ideal as compared with one of lower value. The Nordic type is to subject itself to the Roman scheme. The Nordic Myth is to be subject to Roman magic. However, despite this clear assertion, many good German men still do not wish to discuss the powerful interests of the church. However, this problem touches day by day on the life interests of every German. He must decide whether or not he will reject these absurd claims of power by the Roman church. The black catholic press claims to speak for the Roman church. No one is spared when the black press expressly lays claim to the privilege of insight into church power politics.

The policy of Pius XI consequently stands unequivocally under the sign of a new counterreformation whipping up all the instincts of the Inquisition—in order to break Germanic Germany forever. Directly, in his enthronement speech, he made the troubled spirit of the Reformation responsible for all rebellions of the last four centuries. Luther destroyed Christian morals—the debauchery of the then Roman church was thus Christian morality—and placed himself between soul and god. Such a disturbance in its position of acting as spiritual mediator for all men was something the Roman church naturally could not bear. In December, 1929, Pope Pius rejoiced at the decay of protestantism in order to give, a few months later, expression to his official catholic unwillingness to accept the results of the progress of this protestantism. He also boldly characterised protestantism as an insult to the divine stipendiary of the catholic church. In his Christmas message of 1930, the pope called protestantism deceitful, secretive and bold and unashamed. On the 16th of March, 1931, he ascended to the apex of hatred when he dared to describe all noncatholic and protestant confessions as outdated heresy. Since the world is dealing here not with some little inciting chaplain but with the supreme head of all catholics, who is accustomed to choosing his words carefully, then all these outbursts signify nothing other than a deliberate and vicious incitement of over a hundred million people with the purpose of furthering and extending his positions of power. He believed he would gain by encircling protestantism. The true essence of the Kingdom of Christ is revealed. The so called catholic Action, of the folkish disintegrating pacifist policy of the Centre party, was spread by the Roman Episcopate against German Nationalism by the Roman Episcopate in Germany operating through the declarations of bishops against nationalism in general. No German catholic today can shut himself off from the fearful recognition that Roman policy with its clear sighted aim has formed an alliance with the Marxist subhumans and with other external enemies of Germany in order to complete what was not totally successful in November, 1918. The Roman policy sacrifices—for attainment of this goal—the existence and life of the entire present day generation. This is done in order to force compliance on the impoverished heirs of all Germans under its apostleship. This is the western Mission which catholic voices in the centre persist in canonising. They look for the restoration of Latinity with the aid of the coercive threats from France and its allies who are, unfortunately, still hostile to us.

Exactly in this way, the centre press speaks as the leading Christian Social party in Austria. At the beginning of 1921 the principle of the pure national state was described in the periodical Das neue Reich as directly un Christian. One will have to choose! Thus, the speakers at the German catholic congresses at Constance in 1923 came to the erudite conclusion that the greatest heresy of today was the excessive nationalism which had already caused the worst devastation and havoc. So spoke the heads of catholicism—a conclusion which German bishops regurgitate every month.

These admissions—which could be multiplied a thousandfold—are clear and unequivocal. They are shelved, from time to time, since the centre leaders, when it suits their purpose, literally ooze with love of the Fatherland. Occasionally they even are so bold as to declare that the supporting of church power politics was truly German. From this intellectual orientation the blind support of German history results. They ordinarily reject any attempt to create a real German Reich. They never concede the need to create a truly German type for the future under any circumstances.

The so called Holy Roman German empire nation, that structure of an inorganic type, for which hundreds of thousands of Germans shed their blood in vain, is today invested with legendary glory. The middle ages is represented as a time of peace which resulted from the fact that the church determined the destiny of the world. We also need to revere the great figures of the German past and be proud of the personalities which then ruled Europe. Certainly, we are not proud of them as the representatives of church claims to power. But as the representatives of German blood and the German will to power, we do them homage. Heinrich I, who in 925 united the disputing German tribes, rejected anointing by the pope and made the Rhine into Germany’s river. He is regarded by us as the herald of a German Reich. Likewise, Heinrich der Löwe appears as one of the truly great men of our history. Heinrich attempted, with all the strength of a powerful personality, to check the excursions of conquest into Italy. He began the settlement of the east and, as a result, laid a foundation stone for a coming German Reich fostering strong security for the maintenance and protection the German people. This admiration does not prevent us from rejecting the earlier system of the faceless Holy Roman Empire which had to collapse and did so when the other peoples of Europe founded their national states. To wish to live through this destructive Myth again today signifies a crime against the German people. We all struggle to secure a time when these ideas will be regarded as great treachery to the country, as the attempt at the creation of a Bolshevist world republic.

These pronouncements by men bound to the Roman Myth are no accident. They are only a few symptoms among thousands that show the insidiousness of the Roman idea of rule by the church; of love, subjection, slavish obedience and denial of national honour—all in the name of the Representative of Christ. Alongside demonic Jewry, it is the second alien system which must be overcome spiritually and intellectually if an honour conscious German people and a real national culture are to arise.

The essence of the present day world revolution lies in an awakening of racial types—not in Europe alone but over the entire earth. This awakening is the organic countermovement against the last chaotic forerunners of the liberal economic trading imperialism whose looted victims fell from despair into the Bolshevist net in order to complete what Democracy had begun: the elimination of race and folkish consciousness. The situation of the Roman Reich at the appearance of Christianity was similar to the present day situation in the west. The belief in the old gods had vanished. The Nordic ruling stratum had almost died of disintegration and the will of the state was broken. No ideal, type forming, ruled the world. In its place came a thousand enthusiastic teachers from all zones. In the midst of such chaos a religion of love could never have triumphed by itself. In fact, it would have led to the wholesale sacrifice of individuals, to uprisings and revolutions. Such were the aims of saint Paul, who strove for these as his final goal when he gave his hypnotising sermons which were mainly attended by voluptuous women. It triumphed as form, thanks only to the Jewish will and the fanaticism peculiar to it. Paul transferred this lust to rule, this lust for world domination to the overthrowing of the state. Today, the old gods are likewise dead. The Oriental belief in the Emperor by god’s grace has irrevocably vanished. The deification of the state in itself has likewise vanished because it had grown without content into a bloodless schema. Democracy triumphed when the state found itself in a condition of parliamentary decomposition. The rigid churches no longer gave satisfaction to the searchers. An army of sectarians sought inner support with street apostles and tent preachers who seriously studied the ancient Jewish bible in order to prophesy an eternal life here on earth. The faceless idea of internationalism has thus reached a high point: Bolshevism and world trusts are its symbols. They point to the decline of an era such as, in its hypocrisy and dishonour, the history of Europe has never before seen.

Chaos has today been elevated almost to a conscious program point. As the final consequences of a democratically disintegrated era, the unnatural messengers of anarchy announce their presence in all the great cities of the world. The explosive material is present in Berlin just as in New York, Paris, Shanghai and London. As a natural defence against this world danger, a new experience passes like a mysterious fluid over the globe. This idea places concepts such as folk and race instinctively and consciously into the centre of its thinking. It is linked with the organically established supreme values of every nation, around which its feeling evolves, determining the character and the colour of the culture from old. What was partly forgotten, partly neglected, is suddenly grasped as its task by millions: to experience a Myth and to create a type. From out of this type we must build our state and life. But now the question is posed as to who is summoned in the midst of an entire people to draw up and found the architectonics, type forming. With this, a problem is touched upon within the race and the folk: the question of the sexes.

We have seen that behind all religious, moral and artistic values a racially conditioned people stand and that, through unhindered race mixing, all true values are ultimately destroyed, while the individualities of the peoples vanish in a racial chaos, to vegetate away as an uncreative mass or become subservient, intellectually and materially subordinated, to a powerful new race will. However within these world spanning contrasts of races and souls of life there is another polarisation of peoples: the male and the female. If the deepest outward racial and spiritual features, the orientations and structures of values of man and woman in a type conditioned people are also identical, then nature has created a sexual polarity alongside the other polarities of physical and ideological kinds, in order to produce organic tension and creation as the preconditions of all creation. This fundamental insight has a twofold result, namely, that certain peculiarities of male and female—although on different planes and within a different typecast—are nevertheless similar according to the simple eternal laws of the physical structural planes of this world, and also that attempts at elimination of the sexually conditioned tensions must necessarily have a diminishing of creative powers as a consequence. This means that sexual collectivism, such as in the case of situations of miscegenation, will end in the debasement of the people. It also means that race mixing debases the offspring as well.

The opinion must be expressed that the recognition of the fact of sexual polarity as alone maintaining creation, producing and releasing tensions, must be an eternally unshakeable conviction because it has been substantiated a thousandfold. In fact, all truly profound thinkers have been of this opinion. These philosophers have a self evident maturity derived from their conclusions drawn from life. They believe in effect that man is superior to woman in all realms of research, invention, fabrication and creation. The value of woman rests upon the equally important mission of blood preservation and racial propagation.

In times of external catastrophes and inner disintegration, however, feminist man joins with emancipated woman to become the symbol of cultural decline and decay of the state. The speeches by Medea in Euripides’s plays are similar to the tirades of Fräulein Stocker or Miss Pankhurst, without—in spite of the woman’s freedom during the Renaissance, the era of the Sun King, Jacobinism and present day democracy—anything new being revealed other than what Aristoteles expressed in a few words:

Woman is woman by virtue of a certain lack of capability.

The ancient poets recognised this fact when they symbolised destiny as having been embedded in a cosmic law of female beings; the Teutons by the Norns and the Greeks by the Moirai. This lack of capability is the consequence of a nature directed at the vegetative and the subjective. The woman of all times and races lacks the strength of both intuitive and intellectual vision. Everywhere that a mythic shaping of the world, a great epic or drama, or a scientific hypothesis explaining the cosmos has appeared in world history, a man stands behind them as creator. To the ancient Aryan Indian it is the Prajapati, that is, the Master of Creatures, who formed this world, or the Purusha, the man and spirit who created. The Teutons formed heaven and earth from the giant Ymir; and it was the male spirit everywhere which gave birth to a world order against chaos.

Thus everywhere that something typical, and type forming, arises, the man is operative as the creative cause. Two of the greatest male acts of all time are called state and Marriage.

Present day Feminism—without the author wishing it—has found in Bachofen a glorification of its nature, and many unhealthy thinkers have taken his extravagant fantasies—irrespective of their interesting details—concerning matriarchy as true historical facts. However much he and all those related to him are right to claim hetairism as a form of government by women, it is nevertheless unjust to assume that state forms of this form ever existed. Bachofen did not shy away from assuming the existence of matriarchy in some places simply because women occupied high positions. He then expressed himself poetically about this. For example, he even presumes and asserts this for Sparta on grounds of the freedom enjoyed by women within this rough Dorian tribe. In fact, Sparta offered the example of a well disciplined state, and was devoid of any female influence. The kings and the ephors formed the absolute power, the essence of which was the maintenance and expansion of this power through the increase of the Dorian upper stratum with its disciplined outlook. For that sole purpose, women were also required to participate in gymnastic games. Generally, the wearing of golden jewellery was forbidden to them as were decorative hair styles. If woman enjoyed respect among the Teutons, then it was not because there were matriarchal conditions. On the contrary, it was because patriarchy was completely realised. That system alone provided consistency and, as a result of the racial typification of Nordic man, it was linked with the greatest respect for women. Accompanied by that magnanimity was a part of the eternally searching free nature which, in times of crises, can also become a great danger for the whole, as exemplified in the emancipation of the Jews. When that was approved, the idea of the political emancipation of women was recognised in the state legal domain.

The traditional view is that the family forms the cell of the state. This view has grown into a coercive dogma which, in the face of Marxist and Democratic attempts to disintegrate all ideas of the family, has constantly been reinforced. This argument not only clouds the stage for the study of the questions of women’s rights, but it inhibits judgement as a whole as it concerns the nature of the present movement for renewal and of the new state concept of our future.

The state has nowhere been the consequence of a common idea, but the result of an alliance of oriented men conscious of their goal and purpose. The family, having on occasions proved itself as the stronger, and on other occasions the weaker, supporter of state and folkish architectonics, has often even been placed in its service, conscious of its goal. But nowhere was it the most important pillar of a state, or, in other words, of a community based on political and social power.

The first purposeful association that arose anywhere in the world was the warrior clan, or tribe, or horde. It was formed for the purpose of creating a common security against a hostile alien environment. In the subjugation of one tribe by another, the defeated league of warriors was incorporated into the victorious one. Thus the first cell of the purposeful state association arose, existing unconsciously in the idea of a state.

Everything which we describe allegorically about Rome, Sparta, Athens and Potsdam begins with the alliance of warrior men. The bases of the state systems of China, Japan, India, Persia and Egypt also rest upon this primal ground which, under calmer external conditions, received a different kind of character. In its core, however, it always remained an allied league of men, even until the decline of one or the other culture. But decline signified the dissolution of the idea of a male system of training, of a male, type forming, norm.

Egypt passed relatively quickly from the league of men warriors into a technical association which for a long time bore the stamp of the learned scribe and the official. It was then pushed aside incrementally by the league of priests. Egypt has therefore aptly been called a state of officials or scribes. In each case a completely determined technical norm was recognised as the measuring rod of all action. It has had a type breeding effect over thousands of years. The first great cultural achievement of the Nile kingdom was making the land arable and utilising the changes in the soil which resulted from floods. Egypt did not use tribal names. It recognised neither leagues of the sexes nor blood revenge. The family played almost no role at all in the imposing structure of the Egyptian state. This Egyptian concept of the state, as controlled by learned officialdom, has persisted tenaciously over thousands of years. However, this type was trained by the purposeful league of Egyptian technicians, the learned ones, the scribes, who had to give advice concerning regulations of river, land irrigation, atmospheric effects, royal building plans, and so on, in order, through the league of priests, to give religious dedication to the entire activity.

See, there is no social rank which could not be ruled, only the scribe who rules himself

are the emphatic words in the Doctrine of Duaf. Thus the learned technician and the correct, but not incorruptible, clerk bred a state community.

We see something similar take place in China. Here, likewise, the league of warriors was transformed into a society of learned men. After Lao Tse and Confucius had established themselves as classics of the Chinese soul, their teachings on morals and life, in which Confucius completely predominated, became a measure and guiding line for the state life, religion and scientific activity of the Chinese people. For maintenance of the norm, the league of warriors transformed itself into a loosely linked society which found its dominant type in the learned Mandarin. This type ruled the life of China for centuries. There was no high official who had not passed his philosophical examination in the classical teachings of Confucius. This system of training held the Chinese Empire together during times when the purely political union was weakened through wars and revolutions, that is, the league of men, held together by an openly racially conditioned system, lasted through to the present. With China, the entire ancestral cult, naturally, must be considered. That cult cultivated an instinct of solidarity, of belonging together, at least in family belief. Its earthbound nature provided the most permanent way of cementing together ancient China and it still does so even today. The family, seen from the aspect of the wife’s influence, contributed little to nothing to Chinese society and to the nature of the state.

These two somewhat remotely connected examples are also to be found in the kingdoms undoubtedly founded by Aryans. The life style of ancient India was first conditioned by the warrior caste, called the Shatryas. In the ancient songs of the Veda, a courageous warlike spirit is breathed forth. It lasted until the time of post Christian decline. Indeed, even up to the present the Rajputs, the warrior families, were racially an alien, Aryan conditioned, body living in disintegrated India. However, gradually the direction of the people passed over to the Brahmans who finally brought all Indians under their intellectual rule. Secrets and magical rites were the elements, style forming, which were so powerfully implanted that, even today, Brahmanism represents the binding force to which hundreds of millions subordinate themselves. In this respect, it is characteristic that the Brahmans—in contrast, for example, to the Roman popes—have never striven for political power, and yet their authority was so great as to introduce the practice of the burning of widows. This was permitted by the forgery of an ancient text of the Veda. It is a measure which can only be traced back to an authoritarian male society. Nowhere has the power of a compelling, shaping, architectonic idea appeared stronger than in the type of the weaponless, yet ruling, Brahman. The strength, style forming, of its philosophy remained praiseworthy despite the fact that there was an unrestricted, widespread, race denying, doctrine of universal oneness that allowed mixing with the aborigines. Thus miscegenation was promoted, and dark mixed racial types attained high posts.

Another, clearly evident example which proves that men were germ cells of the state and backbone of a life type is offered us by Hellas in its political systems known by the names Sparta and Athens. One merely repeats elemental wisdom if he pauses to describe the power of the league of warriors over Spartan life. In Athens, it was not fundamentally different. Later, when, within men of more insight, the recognition of disintegration occurred during democratisation, one could always fall back on and rely on the male leagues. The members of these associations did not describe themselves as members of a family and clan, but described; themselves as brothers. In Greek life they represented a completely conscious retreat from the bonds of relationships based upon feelings. In Athens the league of youth, the Ephebia, took first place. It is no accident if Aristoteles begins the representation of the Constitution of Athens by mentioning this state youth league. This control by the state signified the attempt, carried out shortly before him by the disintegrating individualistic democracy, to reestablish the original and ancient Greek league of men warriors. In our understanding it signifies nothing other than the introduction of a universal military service for all young, free Athenians. In their 18th year they were put into barracks and identically uniformed. Gymnastic masters and educators strictly watched over the maintenance of discipline, guaranteeing strength and uniformity. This act of despair by the Greek democracy, knowing that the aristocratic Athenian had once arisen from among them, came too late. The strength of Athens decomposed through the subversion by demagogues, sophists, democrats, and women emancipated from femininity, and by race mixing. These things had to bow to a powerful new league of men, the warriors of Alexander the Great. If one looks even deeper, then he will also have to take into consideration the Athenian artist’s guilds, the philosophers’ schools, and, as a male league, one also must not overlook the great role played by the oracle goddesses in Greek life. The latter particularly represent the side, unable to form type, of pre Greek life with its emphasis upon superstition. These and the Dionysos cult are also unquestionably closely connected racially with the subordinated native stratum. The same is true of the later Bakchic cult which grew into a symbol of the late Greek era. Bacchic festivals, hetairai economy and democratic slave emancipation were the disintegrating powers which mitigated against the Greek folkhood, the Athenian state and the Hellenic culture in general.

We can observe a very interesting relationship among state, people, league of men, and family in Rome. The individual in Rome almost ceased to be a personality. His entire service and his whole life belonged to the community. The consciousness of the power and greatness of this community, however, represented in its after effect the pride, indeed, the personal property, of the citizen. If, from the aspect of the state, he was only a number, then individualism was legally unrestricted. Here the family also took its place. It has unquestionably been an enormously important stone in the building of the Roman state. But, as is known, this family was nothing other than a tool of the paterfamilias which disposed permanently over life and limb of all its members. Thus here also, merciless male discipline ruled. The grownup son could only withdraw from the tyranny of the head of the family by entry into the league of men, the Curia, the army. These forces mutually balanced each other, watched over the discipline of state citizens, and created that rigid Roman type which conquered the world. Its laws still determine the norm of western life even today. It must be said here at once that the crassly individualistic, private capitalistic Roman law created Roman strength but—released from its environment of intrinsic type—had a disintegrating effect on the Germanic essence. It must again be eliminated if we wish to recover our health.

The principles of collapsing Rome were taken over by a new league of men aiming at world rulership: the catholic church. Christianity entered into world history, carried by a great personality. At first it was only an emotional movement. Later, it infiltrated the state as a faceless mass movement, but when it had conquered the state the priests began, exactly as in Egypt and India, to control the architecture of thought, to represent themselves as the sole justified mediators between man and god, and to improve history according to its needs. This previously described system has proven to be an enormous disciplining power. It was shaped completely by an extremist league of men whose representatives practised celibacy. Women were, and still are, regarded up to today, only as serving elements. Through the introduction of the Isis Mary cult, account was also taken of the female maternal feeling. Through this concession to the emotional side—beginning with tolerant dedication and ending in religious hysteria, paired with complete exclusion of the female element from the structure of the church—the Roman church system of the league of men has based its capacity for resistance. In this respect, however, it must not be forgotten that the types of the Brahman and the Mandarin are even far older and stronger than the type of the Roman priest.

It is evident that the leaders of the male leagues have everywhere striven to prove that their rulership was willed by god. The Egyptian Pharaoh did this just as did the Brahman, who boldly declared of whoever knew the secrets of the Veda and mastered the sacrificial ceremony that the gods are in his hand.

The idea of divine grace was then taken over in the west by a male league completely different from the Roman priesthood: by the Germanic Knights Order which reached its peak under the Kaisers. The middle ages signifies the tortured attempt to equilibrate monks and knights—these two great types of the league of men—to one another, whereby each one made efforts to be serviceable to the other. In its essence, the Roman system was not Nordic, and the Knights Order of the middle ages was only one side of the struggle for release from it. The Germanic orders and guilds, the city leagues, the Hansa, and so on, appear as forces which made themselves free of the Roman ideas. Protestantism, as an anti Roman orientation of feeling, therefore corresponded to a disposition spread over the whole of Europe. It was, as even Görres admitted, the ethical conscience of Germanic man. However, the Reformation carried no strength, type forming, within it. Rather, it merely prepared the ground for the national ideas which have only begun to unfold their mythic strength in our times. The Roman system of training could only be pushed aside by another type breeding power. This was developed, at first, in the type of the Prussian officer, who, as was proved in 1914, became the type of the German soldier. The Prussian, then the German, army was one of the most splendid examples of the architectonic league of men corresponding to that of the Nordic, for it was built on honour and duty. Therefore, by necessity, it bore a hatred of others.

These observations can be extended at length by choice. The German order of Knights of the Sword, the Templars, the Freemasons’ League, the Jesuit order, the association of Rabbis, the English Club, the German student corporations, the German Freikorps after 1918, the S.A.—Storm Troopers—of the National Socialist German Workers’ Party—these are all eloquent examples of the insurmountable fact that a state, folkish, social or church type, however different their forms may be, go back almost exclusively to a league of men and its training. The woman and the family are added on or excluded. The woman’s capacity for sacrifice forces her into the service of a type. Only the power of another idea releases her from the system of training. Such an idea may use her as an element of disintegration—as in Hellenic democracy, as in late faceless Rome, as in the present day movement of Emancipation—or, in order to make their power of passionate dedication serviceable to a new, type forming, ideal after a revolutionary transition.

The demand for equal political rights for women was the natural consequence of the ideas of the French revolution. These rights were promoted by liberal, so called human rights, philosophies. The emancipation of the Jews followed from the preaching of the insane idea of human equality. So also was the case with the liberation of woman from male slavery. The demand for present day female emancipation was raised in the name of boundless individualism, not in the name of a new synthesis. In the sense of living to the full the movement was then interpreted accordingly by its adherents. As a reinforcement of this demand came the shaping of the social situation through world trade and overindustrialisation. Women were forced to assist their men in the factories in order to maintain the life of the family. The entry of women into the work force lowered the man’s wages. As a result, the period of bachelorhood was unnaturally lengthened. This increased the number of unmarried marriageable women. In turn, this led to the increase of prostitution.

Here, one of its most important tasks awaited the state. However, the state was not equal to the task. It could not cope with industrialisation and proletarianisation. Possibly, the democratic state never could be equal to this task. The workers’ movements were completely justified. They saw in woman a fellow sufferer and made her cause likewise a program point of their efforts.

In 1905, the League for the right of women to vote, founded in 1902, announced the following demands:

admission of women to all responsible community and state posts

admission of women to the practice of law

communal and political voting rights, and so on

This was the program, a deliberate reaching out for control of the state.

If we recall the facts represented at the outset, that in the entire course of world history, every lasting combination of state and social architectonics has been the consequence of the male will and masculine creative power, then it is clear that to concede a fundamental permanent influence of women in the state must be to represent the beginning of evident decay. In this connection it is not a question of good will or positive cooperation, nor of one or another competent—even great—female personality, but of the essence of woman, which, in the last analysis, approaches all questions lyrically or intellectually, never viewing things as a whole. Our feministically democratic humanity, which is so sympathetic to the individual criminal, but forgets the state, the people—in brief—the type, is thus really the breeding ground for all efforts which deny norms or only participate in them emotionally.

It is characteristic of the nature of the protagonists of a women’s state that their attack—in harmony with the entire Marxist and Democratic Jewish press—is directed instinctively against Prussian Militarism, that is, against the disciplining and type creating foundation of our state. This will be true as long as there are cultures, peoples and states. Thus, for example, England is generally praised because it does not experience Continental Militarism (Schirmacher). But up to 1832 the English granted women political, and up to 1835, communal, voting rights in full equality with men. But then, out of very pertinent reasons of experience, it abolished these again. These rights were reintroduced in 1929 under the renewed pressures of democracy. The emancipated are not accustomed to speaking well of Germany and its violations. None of our modern cultural nations is in a position to thank a victorious war fought scarcely a generation ago for its political existence. But every war, every emphasis on the furtherance of militarism, represents a diminishing of the cultural powers and influence of women. The emancipated have no eyes for understanding the fact that every culture for 8,000 years has arisen only under the protection of the sword. All have perished without salvation when the unconditional will to self assertion was no longer present. Just as the man infected with Marxism sees only his class and his fellow believers, so the emancipated see only the woman—not woman and man, sword and spirit, people and state, power and culture. And just as the Mythless and characterless 19th century stood helplessly in the face of Parliamentarianism, Marxism, and all the other disintegrating forces, so today we experience the fragmentising femininism of democratic politicians who see themselves thereby as especially liberal.

This liberality or rather, the weakness, of the male, type forming, power, has encouraged the women’s movement to express what the entire thing is directed at: the conquest of power. The exercise of power is sweet. The woman chases after it as much as the man. That female energies seek an outlet when men are tired is a phenomenon of natural necessity.

An entire literature came into being to provide a basis for this general claim to power. It attempted to prove the absolute equal rank of women. The fact that women gave birth was put forward with refreshing logic as the cause of this fundamental equality.

If one alludes to history as the chief witness for the absence of strength, type forming, in women, then they complain about the violent repression which has hindered them, without noticing that this concession alone is decisive. The greatest male geniuses have often been children of poverty and oppression, but nevertheless they have grown to become rulers and shapers of men. There is more falsehood than truth in the assertion that, historically, women have been oppressed. Even in the gloomy middle ages, noble women enjoyed a better education than the knights who rode out to battle and adventure. They also had leisure enough to study anatomy and astronomy at the household hearth. But never from the midst of these women has there emerged a Walther von der Vogelweide or a Wolfram. There was no Roger Bacon who was hunted through all of Europe by the church. No woman became one of the founders of our science. Woman could not create because she lacked the conceptualisation which is native only to man. There is no magic or power that permits creativity. It is simply a gift given only to man, never women.

Greece gave intellectual freedom to the hetairai, if not to the wife. Nevertheless, apart from the lyrically sexual Sappho, nothing noteworthy happened. This freedom of women was far more a clear sign of Hellenic decline. The Renaissance also gave women equal opportunities with men. Women such as Vittoria Colonna, Lucrezia Borgia, are known only to us, not because of their own deeds, but because of the way they were immortalised by men such as Michael Angelo. Woman has simply failed to produce or create lasting values of genius.

The intrusion of the woman’s movement into the collapsing world of the 19th century has taken place on a broad front. This female liberation program has, by natural necessity, entered into a mutually reinforcing alliance with all other forces of disintegration—with world trade, democracy, Marxism and Parliamentarianism. The enormous industry of woman in all domains has been given only a modest display when deeds and victories were counted. There are only a few significant women: Sonya Kowalewsky; Madame Curie, whose genius suddenly vanished when her husband was run over in a street accident; and a legendary inventress of the sewing machine. Otherwise, although there has been a succession of competent women physicians, art and crafts women, female secretaries, scholars and natural scientists, none has produced synthesis.

The science of emancipation declares that the so called female qualities have been merely called forth due to the thousand year old rule by men. When woman ruled, as had occurred at times, female qualities were formed in the man. Therefore only sex could be evaluated.

This logic is just as typical as it is widespread. Essentially, it springs from the dusty milieu theory, according to which man is nothing other than a product of his environment. This Darwinian white elephant must even today bear the burden of providing the ideological support and scientific backbone of the champions of women’s rights. Two incompatible sequences of thought run alongside one another. On the one side, it belongs to the art of propaganda to call upon male knightliness and sympathy to establish that women have been cheated of their freedom and culture by men. This has led them to demand an alteration in the future.

On the other side, efforts are today made to prove that men generally had mismanaged things, that the century of women approaches, and that in the past there were significant feminist states in which men played the role of obedient house pets. From this we should draw consolation in that the collapse of the male state would not bring chaos in its wake. But, on the contrary, a real culture and a real human state would commence. It is amusing to follow these new writers of history as they proceed. They report, for example, that a Kamshad woman cannot be moved, even by the greatest promises, to wash clothes, repair them or perform other household duties—from which presumably comes the high culture of Kamshadalia. Particular attention has been paid to Egypt. Diodoros and Strabon, as well as Herodotos, have been scoured for evidence to interpret signs of female worship as evidence that Egypt was ruled by women. This is said to be proven by the inscription over the sculptures of King Ramses and his wife on a gate. It is written there:

See what the goddess wife speaks, the royal mother, the mistress of the world.”

They alleged that this proves that the queen stood above the king. The words spoken about the mother are totally ignored. Further, they allege that the male Egyptian principally performed the household tasks while the women ruled. Let us, for a moment, agree. Simply stated, the doctrine fails because we can and have been trying to show that women founded no states. They have not created science. It is merely because they were oppressed?

But simultaneously, naturally, unwillingly, another thing is proved: that women with, or in spite of all, freedom have neither founded nor maintained a state. For Egypt was not a women’s state. From King Menes (approximately 3,400 B.C.) onward, the history of the Egyptian state is the history of men. The first king’s tomb is that of Chent, whose government created the foundation of Egyptian culture. The king is the incarnation of Horus; even after death he can take wives away from husbands, whence he wishes, if his heart is seized by the desire ..... The god, he is called, the great house—Pharaoh.

Royalty finds its rigid limitations in the ceremonial, in the typifying arrangement of law, in the observance of which its divinity is linked. Each of the kings built his own residence according to his capacity; his own sarcophagus, as a memorial. The rhythm of ordinary life was determined by the official, the chamberlain, the technician, or, in short, the scribe. After periods of unrest, Amenehet I struggled toward creative power. The classical period of Egypt had begun. The fact that the Egyptian male state allowed the greatest freedom for women shows that there can, in fact, be rule by women, but not a female state per se. This concept is a contradiction in itself, just as the term men’s state represents a tautology.

Things are not as simple as, nor are they solved by, establishing an equilibrium between a male and a female political system. The establishment of equal rights is not, despite claims to the contrary, a cultural goal worth striving for. A swing of the pendulum away from the formation of a male type does signify a time of degeneracy. The pendulum does not swing over to form a new type; rather it lands in a swamp. Rule by women is an example of absolutely nothing. For a European race—and not only for it—a time of rule by women is a time of decay in the structure of life. With further perpetuation, it signifies the decline of a culture, and of the race.

Even if women have become rulers during the course of European history, through dynastic succession, whether they have ruled well or badly, they did this within, and supported by the existing form of a male state. They have subordinated and adapted themselves to his type, in order after death to once again make room for a man. Ministers, generals and soldiers, represented by women—this would be the prerequisite for a Women’s state.

As monarchy ended in France, women were of necessity brought into positions of influence. The aristocratic lady possessed all the rights of the feudal lords. She could raise troops and collect taxes. Female landed property owners on a large scale had positions on, and voting rights in, the representative bodies of their class. Some, for example, as Madame de Sevigne did, indeed, become peers of France. In the self disintegrating guilds, the female masters could even determine the professional right to vote.

Some ideas of the French Revolution included the liberation of women. Its spokeswomen were the demi monde women, Olympe de Gouges and Theroigne de Mericourt. As long as the revolutionaries fought, women could not use the rights which they had possessed under the old regime. Later, they drew advantage from the Democratic victory. Napoleon was much hated by emancipated women on account of his antifeminist Code Napoleon.

The Americans, who granted women equal rights from the very beginning, are praised for this, but then, this was to be expected. If one studies the history of the United states, then he clearly notices two types of rule by women in American society, despite the fact that it has a male state. The American man still ruthlessly forces his will on society. The ceaseless hunt for the dollar almost exclusively governs his existence. His culture is represented by sport and technology. All paths of art, science and politics stand open to the emancipated woman. Her social position is undoubtedly superior to the male. The consequence of this rule by women in America is the strikingly low cultural level of the nation. A real cultural and vital type will come into existence in America only when the chase after the dollar has been tamed and when the contemporary technological man has begun to think about the nature and aim of existence. Emerson represented the first reflective moment in America. But unfortunately, this was only a moment. In spite of the social predominance of woman, the state is nevertheless, by necessity, masculine. If diplomacy and national defence were also female controlled, then America could not maintain its existence as a state.

The essence of the state can be very different in content, but, from a formal aspect, it must always exercise power. Power is won and maintained in this world only through struggle, in the struggle for life and death. If we are to seriously regard the female demand for political power, then we must assume they can maintain that power with a female army. It is not necessary to discuss this absurdity or the organic impossibility of such a thing. Venereal diseases would rapidly increase in the Army and racial decay through miscegenation would be unavoidable. Even a mixed male female army would become but a huge brothel.

The present day state is accused of dual morality. The fact is, that in the first instance, it created and preserved the family, and not conversely. The fact is that it is the male state, which, for example, lays a duty upon the male party, whether guilty or not, in a divorce to maintain his divorced wife in a manner to which she is accustomed. But one never hears from women who call for equal rights that in the case of unfaithfulness by the wife, they wish to see an identical obligation laid upon her to care for the deceived husband. This would be a completely justified demand if no differences are to exist between the sexes. In actuality though, the campaigners for women’s rights want nothing in their deepest nature more than to be maintained at the expense of the man. In America, things have gone so far that the one sided law of divorce has become entrenched almost everywhere. Beyond this, efforts are made to place a legal obligation upon the man to hand over a fixed percentage of his income to his wife.

Just as the Jews everywhere call for equal rights and by this mean only their own privileges—so the emancipated woman must eventually face the fact she is really not demanding equal rights, but a parasitical life at the expense of male strength. Moreover, she wishes to have social and political privileges. The man of the 19th century infected with liberalism has simply not understood this. The chaos of the present is the revenging angel which punishes liberal man for such forgetfulness.

Today, the awakening individual sees that the god of the ballot paper is an empty scrap of rag without importance. The universal, identical, secret yet direct, voting right is not a magic wand but a tool of disintegration in the hands of folkish hostile demagogues. Is this universal right to vote then to be taken away from women? Yes! But also from men! A folkish state will not undertake to make major decisions through anonymous male and female voting masses. Such decisions will be made by responsible personalities.

Liberalism taught freedom of movement, free trade, parliamentarianism, emancipation of women, equality of men, human equality, equality of the sexes, and so on. In this, it sinned against a natural law that creation only arises through the release of polar conditioned tensions. That is, a high degree of energy is necessary to perform work of any kind. To create culture. Today, in the midst of the collapse of the feminised old world, the German idea demands strength, type forming, restriction, discipline, protection of racial character and a straightforward recognition of the eternal polarity of the sexes.

The cry for equal rights, or more correctly, for the female state, has a very characteristic undercurrent. The demand to be able to create freely in science, law and politics, shows Amazonlike features, that is, tendencies to be competitive with man in decidedly male domains; to appropriate his knowledge, ability and actions, and to imitate his diverse activities in life. But alongside this goes the demand for erotic freedom and the removal of sexual restraints.

The purely individualistic idea, the leading cause of all decadent social and political conditions, also dissolved the strict masculine form of discipline which is natural to all nations. If one were now of the opinion that woman should activate all her powers in order to protect her children from the consequences of dissolution, then what we see is emancipation doing exactly the opposite. Woman demands the right to enjoy erotic freedom within her female sex. Serious minded individual women have certainly opposed this impulsiveness. Nevertheless the erotic revolution has been extensively implanted through the efforts of the campaigners for women’s rights. Now, the liberated, type forming, woman appeared. She seeks the formative power to continue her species. Liberationist Anna Augspurg wrote, A woman who possesses self respect, cannot enter into a legal marriage. This can be regarded as the gospel of the erotic programme. Made bold by a violent emphasis on the value of personality and self determination, crazed women threw away the last protection of their sex and destroyed the last thing which offers them and their children security in life. The emancipated woman responded by demanding that the state assume sole responsibility for the care of her children. What state? Is the state then to become nothing but a welfare institution that will take care of the consequences of unbridled sexuality? Here, there is the denial of the idea of duty on one’s own part when irresponsible demands are made upon others. What we mean to say is that a truly emancipated state does not exist at all. For, without the concept of duty, the survival of a state is inconceivable over the long run. The campaigner for women’s rights curses marriage as legal prostitution, but, if in place of the man, it is the state which pays, how is anything altered in the whole affair?

If man only thought subjectively, that is without relationship to the community, then ultimately he could attempt to justify this. He could go from one woman to another, amusing himself according to his capabilities, with the woman left to foot the bill if she is left pregnant. The necessary consequences of the doctrine of emancipation are of great concern to us. Ruth Bra warned women against the liberated polygamous male who might hit upon the incredible idea of experimenting with a large number of free marriages. Free love would be at an end, and women would prescribe the necessary measure of love’s joys to men.

As is known, other emancipated women have found other ways out. They have experimented with abortion and contraception.

Already, the time draws enticingly near when scientists will succeed in discovering harmless ways to destroy the fetus. A gay outlook for all those who are not obsessed by the rage du nomber.

So wrote the Stocker woman in Mother protection. This longing outcry by a prophetess naturally also has a scientific underlay. As far as abortion is concerned, we offer the opinion that this is only an offence because the state is governed by men. Things would be completely different in a state run by women. Then women would automatically be granted permission to destroy the fetus. Abortions are permitted only as a female right tied to the physical freedom of woman. Liberationists note with pride, that the Swiss canton of Basle already permits abortion. These experts on the liberation of women time and again find themselves, along with their enthusiastic followers, in an agreeable, united front with Democracy and Marxism, all of which aim at the decomposition and destruction of our race. From the right to absolute personal freedom necessarily follows the denial of racial barriers. Our emancipated women lay claim to the right to have sexual intercourse with blacks, Jews, Chinese. Women, as the chosen preservers of the race, can also become the destroyers of all foundations of the folkhood, if permitted to complete their emancipation. These truly emancipated women have disregarded every moral restriction along with the concept of honour and duty. They recognise only the concepts and ideas of development, ratios of power, relayering. But the idea of degeneracy, the necessary counterpart to the idea of development, is almost completely disregarded. They therefore speak little about the fact that with an increasing drive toward a women’s state, female, as well as male, prostitution would proliferate. However, we need not fear greatly that such a thing will happen, but only because men are not psychologically disposed to allow such an abomination to occur.

A powerful group of emancipated women, including Ms. Elbertskirchen, Ms. Meisel Hess, and Ms. Augspurg, naturally opposes prostitution, but not on general moral grounds. Rather, they simply wish to insure lifelong security for other women. How dishonourable the struggle of this group is! This can be seen in the fact that although they will not recognise any marital bonds for themselves, they do lay claim to free love for life.

A preview of conditions in the hypothetical female state is provided in certain centres of our democratically controlled great cities. Delicately tripping dolls in lacquered shoes and lilac stockings, hung with bracelets, with fragile rings on their fingers, with blue eyelids and red lips—these are the types which would become universal in the coming female state. Emancipated women do not look upon all this as decline and decay. They see it as a swing of the pendulum away from the hated men’s state and toward the women’s paradise, as an allegedly necessary historical development. As a result, every difference in value is given up, every bastard, every cretin swollen with pride, can regard himself as a necessary member of human society and lay claim to the right of license and equal rights.

The abortion movement can be described as an act of despair in the face of present day social conditions. It is one thing to promote the decline of the people, and yet another to attack it with passionate will. A state power which sets as its goal the elimination of its children corrupts us all. This signifies total racial and cultural decline. This practice denies the possibility of salvation for women and men, for our entire people.

In the face of present conditions Nordic man is absolutely not to be taken under state protection. On the contrary, he is, in the first place, responsible for the crises in contemporary life. But his guilt lies in a completely different direction from where the emancipated woman seeks it! His crime is that of not having been any longer a complete man. For the same reason woman has frequently ceased to be a woman. The man became devoid of an outlook on the world, of a world view. He has allowed his former religious faith to collapse and his scientific conceptualisation to become shaky. He has also lost his type and style forming power in all domains. Therefore liberated woman reached out for the helm of state as an Amazon. She therefore demanded an erotic anarchy as proof of her emancipation. But she has not emancipated herself from the masculine state. She only betrayed the honour of her own sex and of nature.

With the Oriental peoples, religion linked with prostitution was quite customary. The priests nowhere allowed themselves to be deprived of this satisfaction. The same was likewise true of the pious Babylonian and Egyptian women. Initially they refused enforced prostitution, but eventually they gave in. The history of the goddess Ishtar is instructive. We see in the metamorphosis of this deity the decline of a people. At first she was the maidenly goddess of hunting, indeed, of war. During Hammurabi’s time she was still represented with a beard. Then she was held to be queen of heaven, goddess of love and fertility. Under Phoenician influences she became the protective spirit of religious prostitution. Later, as Astarte, she became the symbol of sexual anarchy. As a result, Babylon was dissolved as a state and as a type; it was finished.

Whoever wishes to avert European decline must release himself from the liberal, disintegrative of the state, view of the world and gather all forces, men and women, each in the allotted sphere, under the watchwords of racial protection, folkish strength and state discipline.

An evaluating judgement of woman has naturally not been made with the preceding observations. However, it represents a decisive insight for the cultivation of a future generation of Germanically conscious men and women that man proceeds in life by inventing, shaping and synthesising in the world; whereas woman proceeds lyrically. If the average man in ordinary life does not always reveal great intellectual architectonics, it remains a fact that great foundations of state, codes of law, organisations, type forming, of the political, military and churchly kind, comprehensive philosophical and creative systems, symphonies, dramas and sacred buildings have all been created by the synthesising masculine spirit. Opposed to this, the woman represents a world which in its beauty and originality, is not inferior to that of the man. It faces his in equal rank. The Amazonlike emancipated woman—as we have seen—is guilty of the crime of making women lose the high respect due her nature. It incorporated the values of the man into her own. This signifies a spiritual disturbance, a demagnetising of the female nature. Similarly, the modern, instead of concerning himself with the architectonics and synthetics of existence, began to worship the idols of humanity, love of mankind, pacifism, the liberation of slaves, and so on. It is also erroneous if one regards all of this as only stages, not as permanent. Despite the liberation of the emancipation movement, woman has not become architectonic but merely intellectual—as Amazon—or purely erotic—as representative of the sexual revolution. In both cases she has forfeited her innermost essence and has still not attained masculinity. The same also holds conversely, for the emancipated man.

From the standpoint of woman; state, code law, science and philosophy could be regarded as something external. What then is the purpose of the existence of forms, schemes or consciousness? Is the spontaneous flow of things, the unconscious in living experience of what is deepest not great and beautiful? Must one always have need of works in order to prove the existence of a soul? And are these forms and works of the man often not born out of an atmosphere of the lyrically feminine which would not have come into existence without the woman?

Life is being and becoming, consciousness and subconsciousness simultaneously. In his eternal becoming, the man seeks to create a being through the formation of ideas and works. These things form the world as an organically architectonic structure. Woman is the eternal guardian of the subconscious.

Translated into present day language, the Germanic Myth says: In the hand and in the nature of woman lies the preservation of our race. A people can still pull itself up out of political servitude, but never again from racial pollution. If the women of a nation give birth to black or Jewish bastards, if the muddy tide of black art passes unhindered over Europe as today, if the Jewish brothel literature comes into homes, if the Syrian of the Kurfürstendamm is also regarded as a folkish comrade and a marriageable man—then such conditions will ensure that Germany—and the whole of Europe—will be populated in its intellectual centres by bastards. With the teaching of erotic rebirth, the Jew of today reaches out—aided by the teachings of the emancipation of women—at the roots of our entire being. Just when an awakening Germany will reach the stage of carrying out a merciless cleansing with an iron broom and with ruthless discipline is uncertain. But, if anywhere, then in the preaching of remaining pure in race, lies the holiest and greatest task of woman today. This means the guarding and preserving of that unconscious, of that still unconcentrated, but particularly original, life. We speak here of the life upon which the substance of art, architectonics and of our racial culture are dependent. Those values which alone make us creative.

But instead of heeding this most important and greatest need of all, many women still listen to the decoying cry of the enemies of our race and folkhood, and are ready in all seriousness—for the sake of ballot paper and parliamentary seats—to declare war unto the death on men. Apparently, so that she will not remain a second class citizen of the state, woman has been incited to work for the right to vote, as if, under the present rule by money, our destiny is actually decided by elections!

Meanwhile, the instinct toward choosing a man is dirtied by open and secret soul and race polluting magazines and books. Woman today brings money into the Jewish stores from whose display windows the glittering decadence of a corrupt time shines forth, while present day liberal and lukewarm man is too weak to stem the entire current. The lyrical passion of woman which, in times of privation, can become just as heroic as the formative will of the man, seems to have been long buried. It is the task of the real woman to clear away this rubble. Emancipation of women from the emancipation of woman is the first demand of a female generation which wishes to save folk and race—the eternally unconscious, the foundation of all culture—from decline.

The age of Victorianism and the dreamy romantic girl’s life are naturally finished once and for all. Woman belongs deeply to the total life of the people. All educational opportunities must remain open to her. Through rhythmical exercises, gymnastics and sport the same care must be given to her physical training as is the case with a man. Nor should any difficulties be created for her in the vocational world under present day social conditions, in which respect the law for the protection of mothers should be more strongly implemented.

Doubtless, however, the efforts of those who would renew our folkdom after breaking up the folkish alien democratic Marxist system, must prepare the way for a social order which no longer forces young women—as is the case today—to stream in droves to the labour markets of life which consume the most important feminine energies. Hence all possibilities for the development of a woman’s energies should remain open to her. But we must be clear on one point: only men must be and remain judges, soldiers, and rulers of state. Today these professions demand more than ever an unlyrical, indeed, tough, attitude, recognising only what corresponds to a type and what is folkish. If we give up here we act forgetfully of our duty toward past and future. The hardest man must still be hard enough for the iron future. When the death penalty is fixed for mocking of race and folk, when the jail awaits those who pollute the race, then we will need nerves of steel and rugged formative powers until what is monstrous—to some—has at last become self evident.

Different souls must not be levelled, equilibrated, but must be regarded as to organic essence, cultivated in their peculiarities. The architectonic and lyricism of existence is a dual chord. Man and woman are the poles producing the electricity of life. The stronger every essence is for itself, the greater the effect of labour, the cultural value and life will of the entire people will be. Whoever arrogates to himself the power to undermine this law must find his decisive enemies in the real man and the real woman. If no one protects himself any longer against racial and sexual chaos, then decline has become irreversible.

In the first book, the highest value of the Teutons has been extensively dealt with. This is served—in a different manner—by the German man and the German woman. But to cultivate it as a life type can and must be the task of the man, of a league of men. We stand in the midst of an enormous process of fermentation. Many personalities and bodies still struggle against the Medieval church and freemasonry but only in an instinctive, negative, defensive fight. They are still disunited because the type of the future must first be worked out and the supreme value of honour has not yet been unconditionally accepted. The great idea emanates from a few, but in order to form others into leaders, these few must tolerate in leading posts only personalities to whom the ideas of honour and duty have become the supreme values. All who give way—from whatever reasons—will ultimately have a harmful effect on the future. Power, soul and racial adjustment must coincide in order to help the coming type. To carry this out is the first and last task of a leader of the German future.

The German Reich, if it is to continue to exist after the revolution of 1933, will be the work of a league of men conscious of their goal. These men must be clear concerning what value is to be regarded as supreme in the coming life of the nation. This highest value, around which all remaining commandment of life must be grouped, must correspond to the innermost essence of the people. For only then will it tolerate the necessary tough discipline. This discipline will last decades. We must bear this discipline gladly. This one single innermost turning point must, however, be completed. From it everything else results.

Out of the dogma of the representation of god, the Papacy created its moral, theoretical and effective practical political power. This mythical based dogma alone determined—until the present day—the types and the history of peoples who number in the millions. Today, this dogma is consciously and ruthlessly rejected and combated. And, through a faith likewise growing to mythical power, it will be replaced by a belief in one’s own soul and race values. The idea of honour—national honour—not Christian love, not freemasonic humanity, not the Roman philosophy.

All the forces which formed our soul had their origins in great personalities. As thinkers, they had the effect of setting an aim; unveiling an essence as poets; type forming, as statesmen. They were all somehow typical dreamers of themselves and of their people.

Goethe did not cultivate a type. Far more he signified a universal enrichment of all existence. Many of his words brought bubbling forth the hidden spiritual sources which otherwise perhaps might have not broken through. This occurred in all domains of life. Goethe represented our essence in Faust. The eternal, which, after every recasting of our soul, is inherent in the new form. As a result, Goethe has become the guardian and the preserver of our disposition. He is a figure such as our people possessed at no previous time. When the times of bitter struggle are finally over, Goethe will once again begin to have a perceptible outward effect. However, in the coming decades he will pass into the background, because to him the power of a idea, type forming, was hateful. In life, as in composing poetry, he did not wish to recognise any dictatorship of an idea. Without such an idea a people never remains a people and will never create a true state. Just as Goethe forbade his son to participate in the German war of liberation and had to leave the smith’s hammer of destiny in the hands of Stein, Scharnhorst and Gneisenau, so would he—if living among us today—not be a leader in the struggle for freedom and for the new shaping of our century. There exists no real greatness without the limitation of sacrifice. This man, infinitely rich of mind, could not concentrate and ruthlessly follow one course.

Jesus also is no former of a type but an enricher of souls. Gregorius the Great, Gregorius VII, Innocentius III, and Bonifacius VIII have allotted the personality of Jesus a place in the Roman league of priests. He became the servant of his slaves for exactly the opposite purpose than he had conceived. Similarly with saint Francis. On the other hand, Mohammed and Confucius were strong type creating powers. They stuck to one goal, outlined paths. Mohammed enforced the following of his teachings, while Confucius, with a more quiet effect, created and preserved Chinese folkhood. In a fundamentally similar way to Mohammed, Ignatius Loyola formed a type. He consciously trod under foot men’s feelings of honour, set a new goal for ideas, revealed exact means and ways and was thus a conscious cultivator of souls. Beyond this, the Jesuit spirit also created a physiognomically determined outward type, so to speak.

We experience a similar phenomenon in the art realm. Here there are personalities who are unique, who do not create a universal style and others, conversely, who live as type forming. A Michael Angelo, for example, has enriched art as only a few have done, but a continuation of his mode of working would lead to chaos. The same may hold of Rembrandt and Leonardo. Raphäel, on the other hand, has proven a great type power, similar to Titian and Greek art.

A related phenomenon is also offered by political life: Alexander gave birth to, and embodied the idea of, world empire. Rome seized upon this idea. The personal name of Caesar then grows into the monarchs’ title of Kaiser and Czar. A type of ruler who was favoured by god arose, linked with the Roman church. Napoleon signified an equally strong revolutionary power like Caesar, but, until the present, this type had only the effect of uprooting. It was not initially type creating. In another way, Luther shattered the alien crust over our life, but neither in a religious nor in the state aspect did he represent a type. He had to liberate our disposition to strike a blow against the rock, in order to free a passage for the spring of life to gush forth. That it took so long—until the great Prussian kings—before a man was found to force the latter into an organic river bed, signified the tragedy of later German history.

In face of the collapse of the German Reich after scarcely 44 years of existence, one final question—apart from those already dealt with at the beginning—now arises: Was a power, type forming, in the state operative in 1870 generally or not? Yes and no. I believe that Bismarck—as far as the consequences of his achievements and their driving force, but not his mode of operation are concerned—will one day be judged like Luther. He belongs among those natures who, gifted with a rarely seen will, can lay their stamp onto an entire epoch, yet create around themselves a desolation, sown with trodden personalities who had failed to unconditionally subordinate themselves. For decades, the complaint has been raised that Bismarck, out of a feeling of his own absolute superiority, regarded all ministries as mere private offices and the ministers as caretakers of his chancellery. However foolishly and unwisely Wilhelm II may have behaved towards Bismarck, and however mediocre his talents may appear from reading his Ereignisse und Gestalten(Happening and Form), a correct picture is nevertheless contained in them. Wilhelm compared Bismarck with an unexpected block of stone in an open field. If one rolled it away, then only worms were to be found under it. That is the symbol of our political history during the past fifty years. The imperial idea of 1871 was only a gazing back at the inwardly dead rule of Kaiserism by the grace of god. At the same time, it was linked in an unruly marriage with chaotic liberalism. Only a Bismarck was still successful in blowing a hot breath of life into this inorganic structure. In the feeling of his irreplaceability, his masterful consciousness of duty was enhanced to admit no successor of independent nature. Germany’s history would not have been essentially altered if Wilhelm I had left Bismarck still in office. Thus, the great man created and carpentered the Reich with one hand and, with the other, cast the firebrand into his own house. No other political power was at hand to avert the fortune.

But alongside Bismarck a personality was at work. We attribute the fact that Germany did not decline to this figure. This man, Moltke, must be thanked for making possible the four and a half years of heroic struggle in the world war. We take this point of reference from Spengler. This creator of the great general staff was the strongest, type forming, power since Frederick the Great. He was not the man to weld the soul of the people by verbal political argument, but it was he who helped to greatly cultivate existing personality values and to form the consciousness of individual responsibility into the prerequisite of all actions. The ratio carried through by Moltke between the responsible general and his chief of staff was the exact counterpart of what Bismarck did in diplomacy. Bismarck had made efforts to make his ministers financially dependent. The direct subordinate was obligated to represent his views with all acuteness, to provide a basis for them and, with opposite commands, to have them made into protocol. This principle, carried out from above to below, was furthered through definitions which all had the single aim of making the German soldier—in spite of the strictest discipline—into a self reliant, thinking and resolutely acting man and fighter. That was the secret of German successes in the world war. In spite of unavoidable human feelings, the type of the German soldier developing from the Prussian officer of Frederick the Great is eloquent proof of the fact that the methods of Graf Moltke are the only path to salvation for the rising Third Reich, if we wish to avoid collapse once again after a liberating revolution of intoxicating joy.

Moltke was a personality of merciless consequentiality. But his dynamism never poured itself out in terrifying outbreaks like that of Luther or Bismarck. He rarely withdrew into equally deep spiritual contrition like the souls of the other two. Nonetheless, Moltke had a compelling effect upon his environment; compelling, not depressing. Germany’s Second Reich was founded on the battlefield. It was created by Bismarck. But it was preserved by the personality and type creating power of Moltke’s genius. After Bismarck, loud nonentities with directionless flattering natures became chancellors of the Reich. These men fluctuated between his teachings and those of the liberalising forces. They led the German people into the net of hostile, goal conscious diplomats. But it also happened that a great number of outstanding generals and soldiers arose from the grey clad German army, such as all the rest of the world could not show. From 1914 to 1918 the real German Reich was not in Germany; it stood at the front on the Falkland Isles, at Tsingtau, in German East Africa, in the Indian Ocean and in the sky over England. Worms sat upon ministerial seats in Germany. They did not know what should be done with the most powerful state in the field.

It was not the fault of the system devised by Moltke, that if before the war the officer type became more and more alienated from the rest of the people, became a caste, and, finally, began to reveal the bad side of a divisiveness which was inorganic for Germany. An officer class based only on honour had to separate itself more and more from unscrupulous traders and stock exchange swindlers. But in order to carry through this separation, abrupt boundaries had to be drawn which seemed humanly unpleasant. They were quite necessary; for the purpose of slandering the Jewish press and selflessly defending Germany, these officers sacrificed themselves on the battlefields. They also shaped those who, from 1914 to 1918, put on the grey uniform of honour for the first time.

Bourgeois and Marxist Germany had become Mythless. It no longer had a supreme value in which it believed, for which it was ready to fight. It wished to conquer the world peacefully by means of trade and to fill its money bags. It had already sunk so low in its trading and usury that it was astonished when this did not please other peoples, when alliances were formed against the danger from German commercial travellers. In August, 1914, the supreme value of the army of Moltke became the highest value of the people. Everything which was still real and great threw aside the philosophy of the trader. It thanked the German soldier for protecting the national idea of honour. Moltke seemed to triumph. Then he was retired by the supreme commander. Instead of now—after many years of lack of concern for the supreme values of our people—seizing the opportunity and hanging upon the gallows that rabble which had spat upon him for years, the Kaiser reached his hand out to the Marxist leaders, rehabilitated those guilty of treason, and set up worms as masters in a state that was fighting for its existence. Later, together with his people, he received the thanks paid out to him by these worms on the 9th of November, 1918.

It is beyond question that it is the Moltke type, during the first period of a future Germany, which will form our league of men—let us call it the German Order. This group must step strongly into the foreground in order to save us in the present chaotic confusion. There is also a need for preachers with Lutherlike natures who hypnotise, and for writers who consciously demagnetise hearts. The Lutherlike leader in the coming Reich must, however, be clear about the fact that he must unconditionally abandon the system of Bismarck after victory. He must transfer the principles of Moltke to politics if he wishes not only to realise himself, but, also, beyond his death, to create a permanent Reich sworn to a highest value. Whatever shape things may take, whether eruptive, or powers creative of form, both must only be of the essence of the Nordic soul. Since the descendants of completely alien races have filtered into Europe, one cannot form a Germanic Reich German Nation. One then hands over the future to the free play of forces in the political realm such as were elevated into principles in the economic sphere after 1871. But then all sacrifices in spirit and blood will have been made in vain. After a short time, the same democracy will come to the helm, and the German war of liberation will be only an episode on the way to decline, not a symbol of a new, yet most passionately striven for, ascent.

A belief, a Myth, is only real when it had grasped the entire man. In the best interests of the future, all political, tactical and propagandist considerations must step back. Frederick The Great’s concept of honour, Moltke’s method of discipline and Bismarck’s sacred will—these are the three powers which, embodied in different personalities in varied mixture, serve only one thing: the honour of the German nation. It is the Myth which must determine the type of the future German. If one has recognised this, then it wil