ᛋ 𝐍𝐒-𝐋𝐈𝐓𝐄𝐑𝐀𝐓𝐔𝐑 ᛋ

𝐍𝐚𝐭𝐢𝐨𝐧𝐚𝐥 𝐒𝐨𝐜𝐢𝐚𝐥𝐢𝐬𝐦 𝐚𝐧𝐝 𝐒𝐜𝐢𝐞𝐧𝐜𝐞

Ten years ago, Germany underwent a revolution of immense proportions. This has apparently been forgotten by all those who are surprised that during this period there were discussions, disputes, and tensions in certain areas of our intellectual life, and that, despite all goodwill on all sides, some of these tensions persist to this day. As is well known, the relationship of the new era to science is among these much-discussed questions, and both within the party and in the circles of science and research themselves, the difficulties of a final and complete settlement of these lively debates have been lamented and not infrequently regarded as a sign of incompetence—unjustly, however. For it may be regrettable that the world of the new political will and the tradition-steeped old world of German science did not immediately and smoothly find their final, internal relationship with one another—but it is not surprising. A brief look back at the years of decisive intellectual upheaval reveals that, as a result of a tragic historical development, National Socialism and science necessarily clashed in a way that initially feigned a genuine internal antagonism and inevitably required a certain degree of development before their respective positions could be fully clarified. Today, we have come considerably closer to this goal. Nevertheless, a review of the initial conflict seems useful. It can only promote progress if the remembrance of yesterday's differences does not deepen old divisions or reopen scarred wounds, but rather, on the contrary, facilitates their overcoming through a clear recognition of historical facts and deepens the understanding on both sides of the shared tasks. Even well-intentioned vagueness is harmful and promotes clarity, even if it appears harsh; on this point, the National Socialist and the German scientist are in agreement. [...] Looking back at the turn of the century, we see two fundamentally different groups of people working under the same resonant name of "science," groups who should actually be in sharpest opposition to one another, because they historically embody characters of irreconcilable stances: one is the type of the esteemed German scholar, still bearing the aura of his origins in the struggles for freedom and breakthroughs of Western science, and the other is the figure of the industrious intellectual of the new liberal intellectual movement, which found its model and culmination in Jewish scientific activity. Here, in reality, stood two worlds in profound inner conflict, worlds that essentially had nothing in common; and it is one of the tragic aspects of our intellectual history that this contrast was not recognized, but rather diligently concealed in bourgeois glorification of "science" per se. [...] If the curious concern occasionally arises that National Socialism might reject certain subjects as objects of scientific research, this is a grotesque misapprehension of its fundamental ideological stance. Rather, from its very inception, the movement consciously and emphatically embraced the bold, expansive, and profound drive of the Germanic spirit, which, from the moment of its emergence in history, strove to recognize and comprehend this world in all its heights and depths, from the mysteries of the farthest stars to the riddles within the human heart. For this Faustian spirit, there is no subject and no question that does not entice its knowledge. Its thirst for knowledge is utterly boundless and unconditional; it desires not just to know a little, but ideally to know everything. Even the passionate emphasis on our Völkisch and national principles does not change this stance. In the past, there have occasionally been political disputes about the direction of scientific endeavors, both past and present.

Source: "Nationalsozialismus und Wissenschaft" Nationalsozialistische Monatshefte. Heft 154, Jahrgang 14, January.. Franz Eher Nachf Verlag München 1943 p.4 𝔊𝔬𝔱𝔱𝔤𝔩ä𝔲𝔟𝔦𝔤𝔨𝔢𝔦𝔱

𝐏𝐞𝐫𝐬𝐨𝐧𝐚𝐥𝐢𝐭𝐲 𝐚𝐧𝐝 𝐭𝐡𝐞 𝐕ö𝐥𝐤𝐢𝐬𝐜𝐡 𝐒𝐭𝐚𝐭𝐞 𝐂𝐨𝐧𝐜𝐞𝐩𝐭 Ｐａｒｔ （２／２） Hitler puts the argument between the two opposing concepts of the mass principle vs the personality principle. Marxism destroys individual leadership, leading to both cultural and economic decay. The recognition of (the racial) personality in state, the priority of the best lead aiding in higher culture and national welfare.

Marxism represents the most striking phase of the Jewish attempt to eliminate the dominant significance of personality in every sphere of human life, and to replace it by the numbers of the mass. In politics, this corresponds to the parliamentary form of government. We can observe its disastrous effects everywhere, from the smallest municipalities up to the highest leadership of the Reich. And in economics, we see the trade union movement, which doesn't serve the real interests of the employees but rather the destructive aims of international world Jewry. To the same degree that the principle of personality is excluded from the economy and replaced with the influence and activities of the masses, that which should be for the service and benefit of the entire community will gradually deteriorate. All shop committees–which, instead of caring for the interests of the employees, strive to influence production–serve the same destructive purpose. They damage the general productive system and consequently, in reality, injure the individual. In the long run, it’s impossible to satisfy needs merely by theoretical phrases; this happens only through the goods of daily life. Ultimately, the system must create the conviction that the national community serves the interests of the individual. It’s irrelevant whether or not Marxism, on the basis of its mass theory, can prove itself capable of taking over and developing the present economic system. Criticism regarding the correctness or incorrectness of this principle can’t be tested by asking if it can administer the existing order, but only by proving that it can create a higher culture. Even if Marxism were a thousand-times capable of taking over the present economy and guiding its operation, this activity would prove nothing. This is because, on the basis of its own principles, it could never create something like that which it overtakes today. And Marxism itself has supplied practical proof of this. Not only has it been unable anywhere to create a culture of its own, but it hasn’t even been able to sustain existing ones, according to its own principles. Rather, after a short time, it has had to make compromises and return to the principle of personality; even in its own organization, it can’t dispense with it. The folkish worldview is fundamentally distinguished from the Marxist by the fact that the former recognizes the value of race and therefore also of personality, and thus has made the individual a pillar of its structure. These are the factors that support its world conception. If the National Socialist movement failed to understand the fundamental importance of this essential principle, and if instead it merely adjusted the external appearance of the present State and adopted the mass principle, then it would really do nothing more than compete with Marxism; for that reason, it wouldn’t have the right to call itself a worldview. If the movement's social program consisted only in eliminating personality and putting the masses in its place, then National Socialism would be corrupted with the poison of Marxism, just as our bourgeois parties are. The folkish State must ensure its citizens’ welfare by recognizing the importance of the value of personality under all circumstances, and thus secure the highest possible individual participation by maximizing productive efficiency in all fields. Hence the folkish State must mercilessly expunge the parliamentarian principle of majority rule–that is, of mass rule– from all leading political circles, and in its place, guarantee the right of personality.

Source: Mein Kampf, "Persönlichkeit und völkischer Staatsgedanke" Vol. 2 (Dalton) p.502-504 𝔊𝔬𝔱𝔱𝔤𝔩ä𝔲𝔟𝔦𝔤𝔨𝔢𝔦𝔱

𝐏𝐞𝐫𝐬𝐨𝐧𝐚𝐥𝐢𝐭𝐲 𝐚𝐧𝐝 𝐭𝐡𝐞 𝐕ö𝐥𝐤𝐢𝐬𝐜𝐡 𝐒𝐭𝐚𝐭𝐞 𝐂𝐨𝐧𝐜𝐞𝐩𝐭 Ｐａｒｔ （１／２） In Mein Kampf, Hitler lays out the Völkisch concept of the state in National Socialism as something built on the biological reality of race. At the same time, Hitler asserts that there is too inequality within races and thus individuals are unequal in their ability and value advocating for aristocracy in state organization.

If the principal task of the National Socialist folkish State is to educate and preserve the bearers of the State, it won’t suffice to promote those racial elements per se, educate them, and finally train them for practical life. Rather, the State must also adapt its own organization to meet this task. It would be absurd to appraise a man's worth by his race, and at the same time to make war against the Marxist principle that all men are equal, while being unwilling to draw the ultimate consequences. The ultimate consequence of the significance of blood, which is to say, of a racial foundation in general, is that we must apply this principle to the individual. In general, I must evaluate the worth of peoples differently on the basis of their race, and the same applies to individual men within their national community. The realization that people are not equal transfers to the individual man in the sense that one head is not equal to another because, here too, the constituent elements of the same blood vary in a thousand subtle details, though they are equal in broad outline. The first consequence of this fact is, I should say, also the cruder one–namely, the attempt to promote the best racial elements within the national community, and ·especially that they should be encouraged to increase. This task is cruder because it can be recognized and carried out almost mechanically. It’s much more difficult to select from among a whole multitude of people those who are intellectually and spiritually the most valuable, and to assign them influence that not only corresponds to their superior minds, but above all is beneficial to the nation. This sifting according to capacity and ability cannot be effected mechanically, but rather is a task that can be accomplished only through the ongoing struggle of daily life. A worldview that rejects the democratic mass ideal and aims at giving this world to the best people–that is, to the highest humanity–must also apply that same aristocratic principle to the individuals within the nation. It must ensure that positions of leadership and highest influence are given to the best minds. Hence it’s based not on the idea of the majority, but on that of personality. Anyone who believes today that a folkish National Socialist State should distinguish itself from other states only mechanically, through the better construction of its economic life–thanks to a better balance between rich and poor, or by extending economic power to the broader masses, or by a fairer wage through elimination of large differences in pay-understands only the most superficial features of the matter, and hasn’t the faintest idea of what we mean by our worldview. All these features just mentioned couldn’t in the least guarantee us a lasting existence, and certainly would be no claim to greatness. A nation that could content itself with superficial reforms wouldn’t have the slightest chance of success in the general struggle among nations.

Source: Mein Kampf, "Persönlichkeit und völkischer Staatsgedanke" Vol. 2 (Dalton) p.497-498 𝔊𝔬𝔱𝔱𝔤𝔩ä𝔲𝔟𝔦𝔤𝔨𝔢𝔦𝔱

𝐓𝐡𝐞 𝐓𝐰𝐞𝐥𝐯𝐞 𝐋𝐢𝐠𝐡𝐭-𝐬𝐚𝐲𝐢𝐧𝐠𝐬 𝐨𝐟 𝐭𝐡𝐞 𝐒𝐒 Himmler's order to the SS-Command declared that a set of candle lighting verses ought to be said while celebrating Yuletide in the SS:

1.) May the evergreen tree be a symbol of our faith in law and meaning in the world and the triumph of the good and the strong. 2.) May it shine for our ancestors, from whom we inherited life and land, as a profound obligation to our grandchildren. 3.) May it shine for our clan. Within it, we cultivate order and civility, upon which the life of our people rests. 4.) May it shine upon the sanctuary of marriage. May the spouses, loving, fighting, and sacrificing, be the creators of the eternal life of our people. 5.) May it shine for our children, the guarantors of our people's immortality. 6.) May it shine upon our German (Norwegian) people, so that they may fulfill the meaning and purpose of their existence in the community of nations. 7.) We light this for our fellow countrymen who live far from home and who, at this hour, are with us in thought across land and sea. 8.) Let us light a flame for our heroes who fell on countless battlefields, so that our people may live. 9.) Proclaim our loyalty to the movement, which is the constant awakening of the good forces of our blood toward a better tomorrow. 10.) Burn a flame for our Schutzstaffel, in which we SS men stand in obedience and loyalty as a sworn community for the Reich and the future of Europe. 11.) Let us light a flame for the Führer, who is our model for a life of discipline, obedience, and selfless dedication to our people. 12.) Complete the tree's radiant wreath. In the abundance of light, we commemorate the Reich. The Reich is the great order into which our national existence is integrated, the crown of our combative life for all time.

Source: BArch NS 19/2240 Lichtsprüche der SS p.80-82 𝔊𝔬𝔱𝔱𝔤𝔩ä𝔲𝔟𝔦𝔤𝔨𝔢𝔦𝔱

𝐉𝐞𝐰𝐢𝐬𝐡 𝐄𝐱𝐩𝐮𝐥𝐬𝐢𝐨𝐧𝐬 𝐢𝐧 𝐖𝐨𝐫𝐥𝐝 𝐇𝐢𝐬𝐭𝐨𝐫𝐲

Significantly, Jewish history begins with an expulsion of the Jews; for none other than the patriarch Abraham, through his loan of Sara to Pharaoh (Genesis 12:13ff.), and later repeatedly to the Philistine king Abimelech (Genesis 20:12ff.), which both times effortlessly brought him immense wealth, caused the first expulsion of the Jews from Egypt. And his son Isaac, when he had become "a great man" in Philistine lands and established himself as a state within a state, had to endure the second expulsion of the Jews (Genesis 26:13ff.). The later so-called Exodus from Egypt, which, as the original text of the Bible proves, was in reality the first major and radical expulsion of the Jews in world history, is well known in its reasons and course. The radical nature of this expulsion is evident from the fact that it remains unforgettable to the Jewish community even today, and that a Jewish woman like Rahel von Varnhagen could still say, barely 100 years ago: "I, a refugee from Egypt." When, after the migration to Canaan, Judaism had established itself within a few centuries in all the trading and cultural centers of the ancient world and appropriated the wealth of the nations, there were indeed no expulsions of Jews, but there were repeated major Jewish riots in the Assyrian-Babylonian and later in the Persian, Syrian, and Greek cultural spheres. It was only on Roman soil that another expulsion of Jews occurred, when in 141 BCE a Jewish embassy arrived in Rome and, together with fellow Jews already living there, sought to undermine and Judaize ancient Roman customs. Much too late, the emperors Tiberius in 19 CE and Claudius in 49 CE attempted to weaken the power of Judaism in Rome, which had become overwhelming, through partial expulsions. Both expulsion decrees had only temporary success and both emperors paid for them with their lives, for even then Judah was considered the "invisible father" of many crimes. Larger, bloody riots with temporary expulsions of Jews also occurred at that time in Alexandria, Syria, and Babylonia; in the latter country, however, embittered by the bloodsucking practices of the Jews, extermination was preferred to expulsion, and thus, in the year 68 CE alone, some 50,000 Jews are said to have perished in Seleucia. When the Jewish people as a whole rose up against Rome in the 2nd century CE, following devastating defeats in Cyrene, Egypt, and Syria, there was another radical expulsion of the Jews, this time from Cyprus, where they had massacred the entire native population of 240,000 people (Dio Cassius, Book 68, Chapter 32). Jews were subsequently forbidden from entering the island in perpetuity. [...] Looking back at this nearly three-thousand-year history of Jewish expulsions, this recurring theme in world history, we know that antiquity failed to grasp the essence of the Jewish problem; it merely opposed Jews as a repulsive, arrogant, bloodsucking race, whose already disguised global aims and systematic world organization, facilitated by the Diaspora, were only vaguely understood. The situation was not much different in the Middle Ages, which, due to the dominance of the Christian ideal of racial neutrality, was even less able to penetrate to the core of the Jewish problem and contented itself with haphazardly shuffling the "holy people" back and forth between state and state, between city and city. Only in more recent times, with men like Paul de Lagarde, Houston Stewart Chamberlain, Fritsch, and above all National Socialism, did the supposed enigma of Judaism unravel, reveal the secret of its supposedly supernatural "eternity" and global position, tear away its hypocritically displayed mask of a harmless religious community, and recognize the Jewish problem as a racial issue.

Source: "Judenausweisungen in der Weltgeschichte" Der Schulungsbrief. Jahrgang VI, Folge 4, April. Franz Eher Nachf Verlag Berlin 1939 p.30 𝔊𝔬𝔱𝔱𝔤𝔩ä𝔲𝔟𝔦𝔤𝔨𝔢𝔦𝔱

𝐒𝐭𝐫𝐮𝐠𝐠𝐥𝐞 𝐚𝐧𝐝 𝐈𝐧𝐰𝐚𝐫𝐝𝐧𝐞𝐬𝐬

Today begins one of those epochs in which world history must be rewritten. The old images of humanity's past have faded, the outlines of the personalities involved appear distorted, their inner drives misinterpreted, their entire essence mostly misunderstood. A young, yet ancient, sense of life strives for expression; a worldview is born and begins, with determination, to grapple with old forms, hallowed customs, and inherited content. No longer historically, but fundamentally. Not in a few special areas, but everywhere. Not just at the treetops, but also at the roots. And the sign of our times is: a turning away from the boundless absolute. That is, a turning away from a value transcending all experience, the organic, which the isolated self once set for itself in order to bring about a superhuman unity of the souls of all, peacefully or violently. One such ultimate goal was once the "Christianization of the world" and its redemption through the returning Christ. Another goal appeared as the dream of the "humanization of humanity." Both ideals have been buried in the bloody chaos and rebirth of the World War experience, even though right now each is finding an increasingly fanatical priesthood and followers. These are processes of ossification, no longer living life; a faith that has died in the soul cannot be resurrected from the dead. Humanity, the universal Church, and the self-important ego, detached from blood ties, are no longer absolute values ​​for us, but rather dubious, indeed in some cases completely fragile, statutes of a polarity-less rape of nature in favor of abstractions. The 19th century's flight to Darwinism and positivism was the first great, purely bestial protest against the ideals of powers that had become devoid of life and air, powers that had once swept over us from Syria and Asia Minor and prepared the ground for spiritual degeneration. Disregarded by Christianity and Humanitas, which had become blurred in the universe, was the stream of blood-red, real life that rushed through the veins of all genuine national strength and every culture; or else the blood was dehumanized into a chemical formula and thereby "explained.” Today, however, an entire generation is beginning to suspect that values ​​are created and preserved only where the law of blood still determines human thought and action, whether consciously or unconsciously. At a subconscious level, humankind, in culture and life, fulfills the dictates of blood, as it were, in a dreamlike state, "naturally perceptive," as a fortunate term aptly describes the essence of this harmony between nature and civilization. Until civilization, in fulfilling all subconscious activity, becomes the content of consciousness and instruction, increasingly rational, and at a later stage, gives rise not to creative tension, but rather to conflict. Thus, reason and intellect distance themselves from race and species; detached from the bonds of blood and lineage, the individual falls prey to absolute, imaginative mental constructs, becomes increasingly detached from its natural environment, and mixes with hostile blood. And in this incest, personality, people, race, and civilization then die. No one who disregarded the religion of blood has escaped this revenge of blood: neither the Indians nor the Persians nor the Greeks nor the Romans. Nor will Nordic Europe escape this revenge if it does not repent and turn away from spiritually empty, nebulous constructs, bloodless absolute ideas, and begin once again to listen trustingly to the spilled spring of its own lifeblood and its values.

Source: "Kampf und Innerlickkeit" Nationalsozialistische Monatshefte. Heft 159, Jahrgang 14, Sept/Oct. Franz Eher Nachf Verlag München 1943 p.99 𝔊𝔬𝔱𝔱𝔤𝔩ä𝔲𝔟𝔦𝔤𝔨𝔢𝔦𝔱

𝐀𝐧𝐢𝐦𝐚𝐥 𝐖𝐞𝐥𝐟𝐚𝐫𝐞 𝐢𝐧 𝐭𝐡𝐞 𝐓𝐡𝐢𝐫𝐝 𝐑𝐞𝐢𝐜𝐡 Ｐａｒｔ （２／２） Years later (1938), the NSDAP still expanded on the need for animal welfare and its importance towards not only animals, but also the German people.

Five years have passed since the German Federal Law enacted the Animal Protection Act on November 24, 1938. It was published in the Federal Law Gazette, Part I, 1933, page 897, and came into force on February 1, 1934. The fifth anniversary of this momentous legislative achievement is therefore an occasion to commemorate it and bring it to the public's attention! Throughout history, great men have championed the protection of animals. "Whoever is equally against an animal will have no heart for its own kind," said Frederick the Great. "Cruelty to animals is one of the defining vices of a base and ignoble people," Alexander von Humboldt — "Animal abusers deserve corporal punishment," Otto von Bismarck — "Children learn kindness or cruelty from animals," Friedrich Fröbel. The realization has repeatedly taken hold that educating people about animal welfare, that is, showing consideration for the beings under their care, is an important cultural task that forms a bridge to the noblest humanity. Animal welfare is one of the most important means of moral education. The development of a person into an animal lover reveals the level of a people's culture. While previously animals were merely considered property and the penal provisions for animal cruelty were correspondingly inadequate, National Socialism, with its old ideology, The materialistic-liberal view has been thoroughly broken. It cannot be praised enough that the leading men of our present-day Germany have unequivocally committed themselves to animal welfare, and the German people are grateful that they have given such decisive and lasting expression to the recognition of the necessity of animal welfare and its care through the enactment of the Animal Welfare Act (and other important regulations) as had never happened before. [...] Everyone should be aware of their obligation to animals and demonstrate through their actions that they are prepared to contribute to spreading the idea of ​​animal welfare among the population by joining the Reich Animal Protection League and its branches.

Source: "Fünf Jahre Reichstierschutzgesetz" Der Führer: das Hauptorgan der NSDAP Gau Baden; der badische Staatsanzeiger 24.11.1938 p.5 𝔊𝔬𝔱𝔱𝔤𝔩ä𝔲𝔟𝔦𝔤𝔨𝔢𝔦𝔱

𝐀𝐧𝐢𝐦𝐚𝐥 𝐖𝐞𝐥𝐟𝐚𝐫𝐞 𝐢𝐧 𝐭𝐡𝐞 𝐓𝐡𝐢𝐫𝐝 𝐑𝐞𝐢𝐜𝐡 Ｐａｒｔ （１／２） You may have heard of the animal protection laws in National Socialist Germany, but have you truly looked through the original documents surrounding it? In 1933, Hitler gave the Tierschutzgesetz order to fight against animal cruelty. Here is a partial transcription of the order:

Section I Cruelty to Animals § 1 (1) It is prohibited to torture or cruelly mistreat an animal unnecessarily. (2) A person tortures an animal if they cause it prolonged or repeated significant pain or suffering. Torture is unnecessary if it serves no reasonable, justifiable purpose. A person mistreats an animal if they cause it significant pain; mistreatment is cruel if it stems from a callous disposition. Section II Regulations for the Protection of Animals § 2 It is prohibited to: 1. Neglect an animal in its keeping, care, housing, or transport in such a way that it suffers considerable pain or injury; 2. Unnecessarily use an animal for work that obviously exceeds its strength, causes it considerable pain, or that it is unable to perform due to its condition; 3. Use an animal for training, filming, exhibitions, or similar events insofar as these involve considerable pain or injury to the animal; 4. Sell or acquire a frail, sick, aborted, or old domestic animal for which continued life is a torment, for any purpose other than its immediate, painless killing; 5. Abandon one's own domestic animal in order to get rid of it; 6. Train or test dogs for aggression on live cats, foxes, or other animals; 7. To cut the ears or tail of a puppy older than two weeks. Cutting is permitted if performed under anesthesia; 8. To dock a horse's tail. Cutting is permitted if performed by a veterinarian under anesthesia to correct a vice or disease of the tailhead; 9. To perform a painful procedure on an animal improperly or without anesthesia. Castration is considered a painful procedure in horses, cattle and pigs older than three months, and sexually mature rams and goats. Anesthesia is not required if the pain associated with the procedure is only minor, or if anesthesia is generally omitted in the same or similar procedures on humans, or if, in the individual case, anesthesia does not appear feasible according to veterinary judgment; 10. To kill a fur-bearing animal kept on a farm other than under anesthesia or otherwise painlessly; 11. To force-feed poultry by force-feeding (with noodles); 12. Tearing out or cutting off the legs of live frogs.

Source: BArch R 43-II/740 Tierschutzgesetz. Vom 24. November 1933 p.7-8 𝔊𝔬𝔱𝔱𝔤𝔩ä𝔲𝔟𝔦𝔤𝔨𝔢𝔦𝔱

𝐍𝐚𝐭𝐢𝐨𝐧𝐚𝐥 𝐒𝐨𝐜𝐢𝐚𝐥𝐢𝐬𝐦 𝐚𝐬 𝐭𝐡𝐞 𝐞𝐱𝐜𝐥𝐮𝐬𝐢𝐯𝐞𝐥𝐲 𝐆𝐞𝐫𝐦𝐚𝐧𝐢𝐜 𝐞𝐱𝐩𝐫𝐞𝐬𝐬𝐢𝐨𝐧 In Adolf Hitler's 1942 order at the Führerhauptquartier, he clarified that National Socialism corresponds with the Germanic essence rather than it being an inherently Pan-European/International framework:

In the cultivation of international relations by Party offices, it must never be forgotten that the foundations and insights of the National Socialist worldview correspond to the essence of German blood and therefore cannot be transferred to other ethnic groups. The coexistence of nations requires mutual, tactful consideration of their inherent characteristics. The NSDAP and its organizations therefore have no European or global mission to fulfill. The field of foreign policy is not suitable for experiments or personal ambitions. Only objective considerations, within the framework of overall German foreign policy, may be decisive in establishing international relations.

[1] A few years prior, Chief Ideologue of the NSDAP Alfred Rosenberg on 1939, gave a speech regarding the rebirth of Europe which again clarifies that National Socialism in its own influence shall remain in the borders of it's Volkstum:

In a speech I recently delivered to diplomats and the world press in Berlin, I emphasized that National Socialism, contrary to many claims, as a directly German national idea, does not seek to spread to other peoples. Rather, we believe that what we call, in a positive sense, the National Socialist worldview, represents a truly original response of the German people in the 20th century to the fate of our time, just as Fascism represents the uniquely Italian response. We are therefore not universalist in the sense that we now wish to impose the ideas and expressions of our movement on other nations, as democracies still strive to do today. Quite the contrary: with regard to such possibilities of development, our movement is careful not to transform itself into an international "National Socialist" alliance that would then have to decide, like a church council, what constitutes true and what does not. The judgment on such a question is ours alone; no movement from any other country should call itself National Socialism, since we naturally have no influence on its worldview and forms of expression.

[2] It makes perfect sense why throughout all of the ideological training from National Socialist Germany that history and concepts are to be viewed through a Germanic lens to only serve the health of Germanic people. Source: [1] BArch R 43-II/1400a Reichsverfügungsblatt, Ausgabe A, Folge 45/42 (München, 11. November 1942), S. 133–134. Verfügung V 19/42 des Führers vom 4. November 1942: „Außenpolitische und zwischenstaatliche Betätigung der NSDAP" p.192-193 [2] RG 242, T454, Roll 8 Neugeburt Europas als werdende Geschichte. Rede von Reichsleiter Alfred Rosenberg an der Universität Halle am 18. April 1939 p.1138-1140 𝔊𝔬𝔱𝔱𝔤𝔩ä𝔲𝔟𝔦𝔤𝔨𝔢𝔦𝔱

𝐆𝐞𝐫𝐦𝐚𝐧𝐢𝐜 𝐖𝐨𝐦𝐞𝐧'𝐬 𝐂𝐮𝐥𝐭𝐮𝐫𝐞 𝐚𝐧𝐝 𝐎𝐮𝐫 𝐓𝐢𝐦𝐞

Are the ways of life and thought found in ancient traditions even applicable to the present day, and what do they teach us? A man's mindset, his appreciation of masculinity, is strongly influenced by the culture in which he lives and which he has created. The ancient Germanic man was combative; he lived surrounded by enemies and dangers; courage was his highest virtue, and fame and honor his greatest possessions. In the time of the Gothic king Theodoric, cultural refinement was left to women, and even in the early Middle Ages, intellectual education was considered effeminate and pious. In our times, there seems to be a shift away from the overvaluation of intellectual professions and intellectual training in favor of valuing practical activity and a healthy balance of body and mind. Woman is inherently determined by Nature; motherhood is her destiny, her life's purpose; every historical development must halt before this immutable, natural fact. Woman will share in man's responsibilities, her emotional and intellectual capacities will develop and intensify, perhaps even becoming dominant in some women—but her motherhood remains the ultimate foundation of her being, to which she is inextricably bound; from this center, life and warmth radiate into her being, like the sacred fire of the hearth, of which she is the guardian, warming and enlivening the house, of which she is the center. Our examination of pre-Christian Germanic women's lives must therefore focus primarily on their marriages. [...] All these statements, as well as the narratives, demonstrate that a woman's healthy resourcefulness was highly valued by men. One quality that is so often discussed and written about today remains unmentioned: her maternal instincts; indeed, it can be argued that this word has no place at all in the Eddic poems and the sagas. Ancient Germanic culture was a thoroughly unified and nature-oriented culture. It was based on the healthy cooperation of man and woman, meaning that each contributed their given strength to their shared work. The maternal qualities of women, while perhaps not very prominent, were nonetheless natural and inseparable from their very being. This resourcefulness of women was certainly perceived and recognized as beneficial, especially since the times continually demanded individual self-assertion. Everything connected with life was considered a woman's sphere of activity. Often, in his absence, the husband would entrust her with the management of the farm, in addition to caring for the children, and widows also managed the farm independently. [...] Can a similar unity be attributed to our culture? Do we women, extending far beyond our own district, participate in the cultural work of men, sustaining and promoting it, contributing soul and warmth to transpersonal matters? For we must project onto the national community the attitude that the Germanic woman demonstrated to her clan. That the downfall of our ancient state was brought about by a one-sidedly intellectually oriented way of life, by the over-mechanization and technologization of labor, by the overestimation of material values ​​and the underestimation of ideal ones, by the increasing alienation from nature and the exploitation of its powers, is now generally acknowledged. The realization that a culture borne solely by men, that is, by only one half of the population, lacks balance and cannot be self-contained, has not yet gained such widespread acceptance. The old state was based on the economy as its essential foundation, that is, on a rational social order. Despite the Weimar Constitution and the individual rights won through struggle, women's power had no vital impact within it, because this rational, unnatural order contradicts the very essence of womanhood. The new state is built on the people, on the family.

Source: "Vorgeschichte und Gegenwart Germanisches Frauentum und unsere Zeit" Der Schulungsbrief. Jahrgang IV, Folge 3, March. Franz Eher Nachf Verlag Berlin 1937 p.9 𝔊𝔬𝔱𝔱𝔤𝔩ä𝔲𝔟𝔦𝔤𝔨𝔢𝔦𝔱

𝐕ö𝐥𝐤𝐢𝐬𝐜𝐡 𝐨𝐫 𝐃𝐞𝐧𝐨𝐦𝐢𝐧𝐚𝐭𝐢𝐨𝐧𝐚𝐥 𝐈𝐧𝐭𝐞𝐫𝐩𝐫𝐞𝐭𝐚𝐭𝐢𝐨𝐧 𝐨𝐟 𝐇𝐢𝐬𝐭𝐨𝐫𝐲?

In recent years, all sorts of images of Germanic religion have been created on the fringes and outside of serious research. These images were often nothing more than clever pseudo-intellectual distortions that served solely to provide denominational apologetics with the tools for the systematic devaluation of the religious life of our ancestors. Here, we need only recall the book published in 1935 by Dr. Konrad Algermissen, a leading official of Catholic Action, who, lacking any scholarly responsibility or qualifications, nevertheless wished to have the decisive word on the question of "Germanicness and Christianity." Representatives of the Protestant Church also placed themselves at the service of apologetics, treating the ancient Germanic religious history, which was previously little known to them, primarily from the perspectives of "fear of demons," "human sacrifice," and "the need for redemption," in such a way that any talk of scientific findings was out of the question. For them, too, the real task was to make the supposed lack of value of our ancestral heritage plausible and popular through a few key statements, using a less crude methodology—that is, supposedly seriously and with a connection to the subject matter. However, these denominational Germanic studies, as represented by Dörries, Rückert, Baetke, Witte, Schmidt, and others, also failed to produce any scientific results. For any serious research, one must possess the necessary inner prerequisites as a researcher, that inner connection and love for the subject which alone can bring it to life. Denominational research, however, approached the legacy of our distant ancestors—a legacy dear to every Völkisch researcher—not with inner connection, but with hostile tactics. [...] From this perspective, it must also be understood that today we demand and are witnessing a tightening of the researcher's obligation to the nation, and that in the field of historical research we make the distinction, inherent in both origin and intention, between a Völkisch-based and, for example, a denominational or even liberal approach to history. Therefore, a Völkisch-based religious study must also reject a denominational Germanic studies as an undertaking that, in the vast field of Nordic-Indo-European religious history, can only lead to distortions and obscurations. No one should resent us for being vigilant over our great task and for being imbued with the conviction that the highest values ​​of our people lie within themselves and can and must be brought to light through often arduous dissection. However, it cannot be the role of German research to monitor the research methods and results of other countries in the same way. Here, we merely take careful note and gladly allow each country and people to pursue their own research methods. The situation is different, however, when works by foreign researchers, especially those from related countries, are published in German. Then we feel compelled to respond, consider our position, and offer our answer with objective openness and in the spirit of scholarly integrity. [...] This Nordic-Indo-European history of faith needs its time to mature just as much as the present work, which must therefore be seen as a fruit of that era in which global understanding and relationship were sought without a Völkisch-based ethos. Because every major research project needs time—and Jan de Vries's work is a major one—every such work, especially in a time of transition like ours, finds itself in the unfortunate position of having to address a different audience than the one the author implicitly assumed. A work from yesterday for today, however, is a work between eras. And today, a clear decision must be made: either a Völkisch or a denominational view of history and evaluation of life.

Source: "Zwischen völkischer und konfessioneller Geschichtsbetrachtung" Nationalsozialistische Monatshefte Heft 90, Jahrgang 8, September. Franz Eher Nachf Verlag München 1937 p.59 𝔊𝔬𝔱𝔱𝔤𝔩ä𝔲𝔟𝔦𝔤𝔨𝔢𝔦𝔱

𝐇𝐨𝐰 𝐝𝐨𝐞𝐬 𝐄𝐮𝐫𝐨𝐩𝐞 𝐚𝐜𝐡𝐢𝐞𝐯𝐞 𝐢𝐭𝐬 𝐞𝐜𝐨𝐧𝐨𝐦𝐢𝐜 𝐟𝐫𝐞𝐞𝐝𝐨𝐦 𝐚𝐧𝐝 𝐢𝐧𝐝𝐞𝐩𝐞𝐧𝐝𝐞𝐧𝐜𝐞?

The age of capitalism has developed the so-called global economic system. The essence of capitalism is the progressive concentration of the world's economic power—money, raw materials, and means of production in the hands of a few today, Jewish-American. All national and individual economies have become increasingly dependent on the capitalist world center. The system of the so-called global division of labor, through which each country produces only one or two products profitably, but not essential to its survival (e.g., flower bulbs in the Netherlands!) makes countries even less free and even more dependent on the global market. Any disruption of the system anywhere in the world (a bank crash in New York, a crop failure in Australia, etc.) invariably affects the entire world. As the disruptions to the capitalist system became increasingly frequent and unavoidable, the world lurched from one economic crisis to the next, with all the bitter consequences of mass unemployment, currency devaluation, the ruin of the peasantry, and so on. Even before and during this war, Germany attempted, along with its neighbors, to break free from the dependence on the global capitalist economic system, to make its currency independent of Jewish gold, to utilize raw materials domestically and within Europe as much as possible, and to produce all essential goods itself. Other countries, such as France, had already attempted similar things, but without success. It is evident that individual medium-sized and smaller countries cannot extricate themselves from life-threatening insecurity and dependence on their own. Germany therefore advocated from the outset the concept of "Lebensraum". Neighboring countries that are geographically, historically, and culturally connected together form a living space – sometimes also referred to as a "Greater Area." Within this habitable and expansive region, all essential agricultural and industrial products are manufactured, and raw material and sales markets exist in a natural, complementary relationship. Europe is such a natural habitable and expansive region, which, as the war has proven, is free from foreign exploitation and insensitive to the crises of the global economy, capable of meeting its own needs and thus laying the foundation for economic recovery and general prosperity. The social crisis of our century is a consequence of capitalism and its irresponsible system of exploitation. Only through capitalism could the worker become a propertyless proletarian. Only where there are exploiters, there are also the exploited, the socially disenfranchised and therefore dissatisfied. Marxist Jewish Bolshevism takes advantage of this discontent by inciting workers everywhere to insurrection and revolution along the Bolshevik model. The goal of Bolshevism is not the social betterment of the workers, but the equal disenfranchisement of everyone and the eradication of the previous leadership element of the people. Bolshevism is not, as it always pretends, the enemy of capitalism but rather the natural son of it. He translates the social misery of capitalism into general mass enslavement. As Europe frees itself from the shackles of the capitalist world economy following the model and example of Germany, the first and most important prerequisite for solving the social question is at the same time met. The only important thing is that capitalism as an attitude and system is also internally overcome within the European living space and larger area, and that socialist thinking and action take its place. Through honest and true socialism, similar to what Germany has implemented, [...] Only a socialist Europe is internally immune to Jewish world Bolshevism.

Source: BArch NS 31/440 "Wie erlangt Europa seine wirtschaftliche Freiheit und Unabhängigkeit?" and "Wie begegnet Europa der Gefahr der inneren Bolschewisierung?" EUROPA IN AUFBAU UND ABWEHR, SS-Hauptamt 𝔊𝔬𝔱𝔱𝔤𝔩ä𝔲𝔟𝔦𝔤𝔨𝔢𝔦𝔱

𝐓𝐡𝐞 𝐂𝐚𝐬𝐞 𝐟𝐨𝐫 𝐭𝐡𝐞 𝐃𝐢𝐠𝐧𝐢𝐭𝐲 𝐨𝐟 𝐇𝐨𝐧𝐨𝐫𝐢𝐧𝐠 𝐭𝐡𝐞 𝐃𝐞𝐚𝐝

On a lonely heath, between dark juniper and yellow broom, far from all noise and traffic, lie those enormous, moss-covered stone blocks, the burial monuments of a bygone era. Locally, they were called megalithic tombs, and this term conjured up the image of a vast age. A decidedly vague, indefinite idea, which took it for granted that people once lived for whom piling up these masses of stone posed no difficulty, and whose towering stature necessitated these gigantic graves. A quiet solemnity emanates from these sites; they are so very different from the burial customs of our modern cemeteries. They have outlasted the settlements of their builders, and many of today’s more recent burial sites have already vanished into obscurity, while these ancient megalithic tombs will continue to endure for generations yet to come. A sense dawns on later descendants gazing at these millennia-old tomb colossi, that honoring the dead was once a deeper experience, a far greater part of the general worldview, and a far greater expression of customs and the rhythm of annual festivals. Care, concern beyond death, and the desire and action to honor the dead according to human standards, to dedicate to them a preeminent place among the living—all this is what the burial culture of our ancient past strives for. Thus, in the graves of the Neolithic period, we often find grave goods of jewelry and weapons in lavish abundance, and the stone blocks of these proud burial shrines are fitted together with admirable precision, demonstrating a practiced builder's sense and great skill. Examples include the Denghoog on the island of Sylt, where twelve blocks enclose a chamber approximately six meters long. Among the most beautiful groups of megalithic tombs are the "Seven Stone Houses" near Fallingbostel in the Lüneburg Heath, where Dr. Jakob-Friesen recently undertook restoration work to reveal the original character of this ancient burial culture. Considering that the capstone of one of these tombs has the imposing dimensions of 4.9 meters in length and 4.6 meters in width, and that the Stone Age lacked both modern technology and developed roads for transporting such masses, one can appreciate how essential the veneration of the dead was to the people of that time. Professor Hahne writes the following in his book, Honoring the Dead in the Old North: "For the Nordic people, honoring the dead has been an essential part of their own honor since ancient times! The universal human fear and aversion to the dead has long been governed by the awareness that a fellow human being does not become something evil or bad when they die. Indeed, on the contrary, they seem to be elevated, lifted up to better, or at least freer, more active states of existence." Therefore, in both ancient and more recent times, descendants gathered at the Denghoog for the Thing. During the Bronze Age, the strikingly massive burial mounds were emphasized for their significance as memorials and sites of sacred rites. [...] The numerous finds of entire urn cemeteries prove that the sheer number of people did not always allow for a uniformly monumental design of their final resting places. However, it is precisely the simplicity of these graves that may have particularly inspired the imagination of their descendants, allowing them to envision their ancestors in forms of existence that deeply moved the Germanic soul. In higher realms, the dead were therefore not conceived of in the sense of the Christian heaven, which has no connection to the earth, but rather as firmly rooted to the ground, on or in a mountain of their homeland, looking far and wide and protecting the lands of their descendants.

Source: "Verfall und Würde der Totenehrung" Wille und Macht. Jahrgang 6, Heft 22, November. Franz Eher Nachf Verlag Berlin 1938 p.15 𝔊𝔬𝔱𝔱𝔤𝔩ä𝔲𝔟𝔦𝔤𝔨𝔢𝔦𝔱

𝐓𝐡𝐞 𝐮𝐧𝐬𝐩𝐨𝐤𝐞𝐧 𝐩𝐬𝐲𝐜𝐡𝐨𝐥𝐨𝐠𝐲 𝐛𝐞𝐡𝐢𝐧𝐝 𝐭𝐡𝐞 𝐉𝐞𝐰𝐢𝐬𝐡 𝐐𝐮𝐞𝐬𝐭𝐢𝐨𝐧

Today we are inundated with many works on the Jewish question, but apart from the purely amateurish ones even the more serious of them hardly have anything more than a statistical character. However, the spiritual and especially the religious and ideological side of the problem is almost completely ignored. As necessary as it is to carefully observe the goings-on of world Jewry, the ideological side of the problem must by no means be ignored. It is important to remove Judaism from Germany not only physically but also psychologically. Although the church could not forget that the Jews had killed Jesus and had not accepted his teachings, there was and is no fundamental hostility. The Jews’ behavior was excused as “obstinacy.” The church that emerged on the basis of Judaism adopted the holy writings of the Jews as the so-called Old Testament and thus, by and large, the religious and spiritual ideas of Judaism. Because the Old Testament is (along with the Talmud) a work in which (apart from other influences) the Jewish racial soul is largely reflected. Church dogmatics and preaching throughout the centuries have their models and examples, among others. repeatedly taken from the Old Testament, yes, the fiction of the “chosen people” of the Jews is also maintained for the Nordic-Germanic people, and so the racist dangerousness of the Jews is trivialized in the eyes of not only the German people and the racial question is obscured. Not least through the church, the ground was prepared on which the Jews' emancipation could then be built and (also through the Jewish mission) the path of racist degeneration and the power of Judaism could be followed. The evidence of the influence of the Jewish spirit, which was transmitted through the church, is definitely part of the Jewish question. Furthermore, it is not correct to claim that the Jews became what they are today as a result of the dispersion that began with the destruction of the Temple in the year 70 (and later with the suppression of the Bar Kochba rebellion), which the denominational side even sees as God's punishment for rejecting Christ. This is contrasted with the unanimous testimony of the entire ancient world, which proves that long before the year 70 the Jews possessed the same characteristics as the Jews of our day. In addition, there was a large Jewish diaspora even before Jesus.

Source: "Zur Judenfrage" Nationalsozialistische Monatshefte Heft 101, Jahrgang 9, July. Franz Eher Nachf Verlag München 1938 p.57 𝔊𝔬𝔱𝔱𝔤𝔩ä𝔲𝔟𝔦𝔤𝔨𝔢𝔦𝔱

𝐖𝐡𝐚𝐭 𝐀𝐫𝐞 𝐖𝐞 𝐅𝐢𝐠𝐡𝐭𝐢𝐧𝐠 𝐅𝐨𝐫?

Only the National Socialist worldview secures for us a life in accordance with our nature. Only it guarantees the freedom and the greatness of our people. Therefore, especially in times of the hardest struggle, it is continually necessary to make clear to oneself the most important essential features of this our worldview and to draw strength from it for the further struggle. We National Socialists believe in a divine world order as a meaningful order into which we must fit ourselves, which we must uphold through struggle and creation. From this belief also arose what we perceive as the defining characteristic of Nordic humanity, which found expression both in the Midgard concept of the Germans and, for example, in the cosmos concept of the Greeks. We believe that the races and peoples are also members of this divine order of creation and that they have their specific tasks within this order. The clearer a people can recognize its task, the purer and richer it unfolds the abilities inherent in it, the greater will be its contribution to ensuring the meaningful order of the whole. We believe that man, as a self-conscious spiritual being, has been given by the Creator of the Worlds the task of creating forms of life and tasks of life, that is, a civilization that signifies something higher than the mere satisfaction of the lowest life needs. We therefore believe in the task of the elevation of humanity. Our struggle ultimately serves this task and it must be relentless against everything that stands in opposition to this task, for the meaningful fulfillment of precisely this task depends on the fact that the most highly developed, most creative, and most capable race retains decisive influence over the life orders of the peoples of the earth. Let us not forget that with the threat to our people and to Germanism in general, the primordial homeland of the race is threatened, which has hitherto proven itself to be the chosen one: the primordial homeland and the still most strongly flowing source of the Nordic race. The belief in the divine world order and the elevation of humanity is an expression of our worldview, but not yet this worldview itself. Our belief is the most powerful drive for all our actions and conduct. But a truly clear ideological stance and thus ultimately also a strengthening of belief can only be achieved if belief does not come into contradiction with knowledge, with scientific conviction. As Germanic people, we must have the certainty that our belief, when tested in action, proves itself to be viable and stands in harmony with the organic laws of existence.

Source: Wofür Kämpfen Wir? Personal-Amt des Heeres. Elsnerdruck Verlag Berlin. 1944 p.67 𝔊𝔬𝔱𝔱𝔤𝔩ä𝔲𝔟𝔦𝔤𝔨𝔢𝔦𝔱

𝐑𝐚𝐜𝐞 𝐚𝐧𝐝 𝐒𝐩𝐞𝐜𝐢𝐞𝐬 𝐅𝐨𝐫𝐦𝐚𝐭𝐢𝐨𝐧 𝐓𝐡𝐫𝐨𝐮𝐠𝐡 𝐇𝐞𝐫𝐞𝐝𝐢𝐭𝐲, 𝐒𝐞𝐥𝐞𝐜𝐭𝐢𝐨𝐧, 𝐚𝐧𝐝 𝐁𝐫𝐞𝐞𝐝𝐢𝐧𝐠

The diversity of living beings that surrounds us in nature appears full of riddles. The abundance of animals and plants in the forests, waters, fields, and meadows, with their countless hereditarily diverse forms, breeds, species, genera, and families, is bewildering. It is all too easy for man, upon seeing this vibrant diversity, to dream of a "community of life" that embraces the creatures of free nature in divine harmony, while only in humankind does the brutal struggle for existence prevail. However, just as in the coexistence of nations the more productive, more prolific, more industrious, and better-governed people ultimately triumphs, so too in the development of the living beings surrounding us is everything geared towards the highest possible success in mastering the struggle for existence. Selection is a fundamental law of nature. Humankind owes its development to the perpetual selection of intellectually gifted and dexterously skilled primitive humans, and their selective breeding, a process that has been increasing since the Tertiary period. Thus, even those primitive human beings of our own early period, who overcame their animal fear of fire more than 500,000 years ago, formed a remarkable selection among their remaining, still animalistic, conspecifics. The moment when such an early human, due to an innate, somewhat higher intelligence, carried a burning stump—perhaps from a steppe fire or lightning strike—to their dwelling and used the fire there to roast food or for warmth, represented one of the most decisive advances in the genetic development of humankind. With it, inexhaustible resources opened up to a certain genetically superior group of early humans, paving the way for their later domination of the earth, while other, genetically less fortunate human tribes, who were not granted these genetic traits, still cling to that fireless precursor even today (like the indigenous people of the Sunda Islands). The selection that occurs in the wild and gives rise to the diversity of races and species can only take place if a genetically diverse starting material is present. Selection and breeding are therefore dependent on a continuous supply of genetic mutations. The interactions between the newly emerging genetic mutations on the one hand and the environment that selects and breeds them on the other are of particular interest for species and race formation. Natural science, especially genetics research and biology of the last decade, has provided us with highly important new results on this question, which have extraordinarily enriched our understanding of the origin of races and species in general, and of the differences between living beings. [...] Compared to the vast periods of our Earth's history, the time when a primitive urchin first broke away from the realm of other animals and surpassed them through certain characteristics and functions not typical of animals, vanishes as a small episode in the overall development of life. We must not be deceived by the alleged 5700 years of world history as reported in the Jewish Bible, but must trust in natural science, which has broadened our view to 2,000,000,000 years of Earth's historical past, which can be traced back through countless facts and evidence.

Source: "Rassen- und Artbildung durch Erbänderung, Auslese und Züchtung" Nationalsozialistische Monatshefte Heft 137, Jahrgang 12, August. Franz Eher Nachf Verlag München 1941 p.27 𝔊𝔬𝔱𝔱𝔤𝔩ä𝔲𝔟𝔦𝔤𝔨𝔢𝔦𝔱

𝐎𝐧 𝐭𝐡𝐞 𝐒𝐒 𝐚𝐧𝐝 𝐭𝐡𝐞 𝐋𝐞𝐛𝐞𝐧𝐬𝐛𝐨𝐫𝐧 Ｐａｒｔ （３／３） An essay on the Lebensborn written for the Race and settlements office on 1937 expands on the overall concept of it.

The current population policy situation in Germany demands that all those responsible and appointed for this purpose sustainably promote the racially and hereditarily valuable offspring. Because: the German future stands and falls with the German child. Naturally, the solution to this question begins with marriage counseling, especially through information about the right choice of spouse. It is a God-given law that the value of every person rests in themselves, in the talents inherited from their parents and ancestors. You can't make a child a valuable person just through education; This is why the National Socialist state has the need for selection and the obligation not to pay any special attention to offspring that are racially and genetically valuable. The “Lebensborn” association has particularly stood out through practical work in this area. As a founding member of the Reichsführer-SS, his consciously combative and selective attitude towards contemporary population policy issues is a given. [...] The fact that the Schutzstaffel specifically focused on the racially and genetically valuable large family is already evident from the concept of the kinship community, but the National Socialist state also cared for children born out of wedlock and illegitimate children, provided they were racially and genetically valuable. [...] Thus, the "Lebensborn" movement, for its part, fights for the preservation of the national community by maintaining and promoting every offspring of pure blood, for the recognition of every valuable illegitimate mother, for the promotion of early marriage, and for the protection of valuable large families. Its struggle is directed against undermined liberal-bourgeois and church-dogmatic views, against the fundamental denigration of the illegitimate mother and her child, and for the integration of the valuable illegitimate child into the national community, to which everyone of pure blood belongs with equal rights and obligations.

Source: BArch NS 2/276 Aufsatz über den ‘Lebensborn p.152 𝔊𝔬𝔱𝔱𝔤𝔩ä𝔲𝔟𝔦𝔤𝔨𝔢𝔦𝔱

𝐎𝐧 𝐭𝐡𝐞 𝐒𝐒 𝐚𝐧𝐝 𝐭𝐡𝐞 𝐋𝐞𝐛𝐞𝐧𝐬𝐛𝐨𝐫𝐧 Ｐａｒｔ （２／３） What was it's uses and purpose after this, you may ask? Himmler issued a circular to all SS-Leaders answering this:

As early as my letter of December 13, 1934, I pointed out to all SS officers that we have all fought in vain if we do not add the victory of births of good blood to our political victory. The question of many children is not a private matter for the individual, but a duty to one's ancestors and to our people. The SS took the first step long ago with the engagement and marriage order of December 1931. However, the establishment of good marriages is pointless if they do not produce numerous offspring. I expect the SS, and especially the SS leadership corps, to lead by example in this regard as well. Four children are required as the minimum number for a good and healthy marriage. If unfortunate circumstances prevent a marriage from producing its own children, every SS officer should adopt racially and genetically valuable children and raise them in the spirit of National Socialism, providing them with an education appropriate to their abilities. For the selection and allocation of suitable children, the SS leadership has access to the "Lebensborn" association, which is under my personal direction, integrated into the SS Main Office for Refugees and Security (R.u.S.), and whose tasks are: 1) To support racially and genetically valuable, large families. 2) To place and care for racially and genetically valuable expectant mothers who, after careful examination of their own family and the father's family by the SS Main Office for Refugees and Security, are expected to give birth to children of equal value. 3) To care for these children. 4) To care for the mothers of the children. It is a matter of honor for all full-time SS officers to become members of the "Lebensborn" association. Applications for membership should be submitted by September 23, 1936. The contribution amount for full-time SS officers from the rank of Hauptsturmführer (captain) upwards is specified in the attached contribution tables. [...] I expect non-full-time SS officers, as well as all SS men, to join the "Lebensborn" association as members, if they are in any way able, with a contribution commensurate with their income, and thus support this work in a spirit of camaraderie, thereby practically realizing the idea of ​​the SS community in this area. Unit commanders are to inform both the SS officers and SS men under their command of this order in an appropriate manner. Unit commanders are to personally recruit members for the "Lebensborn" association.

Source: BArch NS 2/276 Reichsführer SS 'An alle SS-Führer' Nürnberg, den 13.September 1936 p.12-14 𝔊𝔬𝔱𝔱𝔤𝔩ä𝔲𝔟𝔦𝔤𝔨𝔢𝔦𝔱

𝐎𝐧 𝐭𝐡𝐞 𝐒𝐒 𝐚𝐧𝐝 𝐭𝐡𝐞 𝐋𝐞𝐛𝐞𝐧𝐬𝐛𝐨𝐫𝐧 Ｐａｒｔ （１／３） The Lebensborn was a project which later become integrated into the SS to promote birthrate of real genetic quality and adoption of good quality children. Himmler wrote in 1936 on this integration:

As part of measures to promote the procreation of numerous genetically healthy offspring from the ranks of SS families, a cooperation agreement has been established between the SS and the "Lebensborn" association. This association's purpose is: 1.) to support families with large families deemed genetically valuable, 2.) to house and care for expectant mothers who, after careful examination of their own family and the family of the father by the SS Race and Settlement Main Office, are deemed likely to give birth to genetically valuable children, 3.) to care for these children, 4.) to care for the mothers of the children. The association has established its first facility in Steinhöring near Munich, a home for expectant mothers that also serves as a maternity hospital. Based on the agreements reached, the association has made this facility primarily available to the SS. Details regarding costs, length of stay, and admission requirements can be found in the information leaflet, which can be obtained from the SS Race and Settlement Main Office. All SS members, especially those whose wives or fiancées may later require a stay at a maternity or nursing home, are requested to be informed of this so that they can apply for admission in a timely manner, taking the information leaflet into account.

[1] The Lebensborn's ideological education came specifically from the SS:

The Reichsführer-SS decided today that, contrary to his previous order, the ideological indoctrination at Lebensborn should not be conducted by the SS Race and Settlement Main Office, but by the SS Main Office. According to the Reichsführer-SS, the SS Main Office must be responsible for all training. I have informed both Lebensborn and SS-Gruppenführer Berger of this decision.

[2] Source: [1] BArch NS 2/276 Zusammenarbeit zwischen Schutzstaffel und Verein "Lebensborn" e.V. p.8 [2] BArch NS 2/1089 An den Chef des Rasse- und Siedlungshauptamtes-SS SS-Gruppenführer Hofmann p.10 𝔊𝔬𝔱𝔱𝔤𝔩ä𝔲𝔟𝔦𝔤𝔨𝔢𝔦𝔱

𝐃𝐢𝐝 𝐡𝐚𝐯𝐢𝐧𝐠 𝐦𝐮𝐥𝐭𝐢𝐩𝐥𝐞 𝐒𝐒 𝐝𝐢𝐯𝐢𝐬𝐢𝐨𝐧𝐬 𝐝𝐞𝐛𝐮𝐧𝐤 𝐭𝐡𝐞 𝐢𝐝𝐞𝐚 𝐨𝐟 𝐭𝐡𝐞 𝐍𝐒𝐃𝐀𝐏'𝐬 𝐛𝐞𝐥𝐢𝐞𝐟 𝐢𝐧 𝐫𝐚𝐜𝐢𝐚𝐥 𝐩𝐮𝐫𝐢𝐭𝐲? Many opponents of National Socialism love to point out this fact to discredit the orders on racial purity and maintenance of Germanic blood to the attribution of the NSDAP not being seriously racially conscious. However, using this talking point would be to ignore the SS directives to maintain ideological purity in the Germanic units above all the other foreign units. Major general of the SS Lothar Debes writes in a directive to the native German SS unit "Frundsberg" that it was a tactical matter to not make those who did not conform to the (relaxed) racial selection of the SS feel inferior for the sake of the war:

Given that the SS, according to the will of the Reichsführer-SS, represents a select group of Nordic-minded men and has always been a champion of racial thinking, this topic is of particular importance. [...] The company commander is free to determine the allocation of the material. It is a matter of tact to avoid inducing feelings of inferiority in men whose appearance, due to the wartime relaxation of selection criteria, does not necessarily conform to the SS's Nordic ideal. Ultimately, what matters to us is always character and performance, not appearance.

[1] Additionally, another SS directive on ideological training repeats the same thing and adds that the racial question be taught with great sensitivity to foreign people as opposed to Germans who fit the ideal:

The third main topic, addressing the problems of race and nation, is to be handled in such a way as to prevent feelings of inferiority from being instilled in men who do not conform to our racial ideal. Furthermore, it must be taken into account that we currently have men in our ranks who, due to their ethnicity or upbringing in a different ethnic group, are still unfamiliar with the National Socialist perspective on the racial question. These men must be introduced to the National Socialist position on the racial problem and the resulting value judgments with great sensitivity and skill.

[2] The SS still believed and maintained racial purity of the Nordic-Germanic element in the Germanic Schutzstaffel. The foreign volunteers were not actual "SS-men" but men serving under the direction of the SS. Source: [1] BArch RS 3-10/1 SS-Division, Schulungsthema 'SS-Mann und Blutsfrage,' 22.06.1943 p.92 [2] BArch RS 5/897 SS-Nachr.Ausb.u.Ers.Rgt., Weltanschauliche Schulung, Nürnberg, 06.08.1943 p.14 𝔊𝔬𝔱𝔱𝔤𝔩ä𝔲𝔟𝔦𝔤𝔨𝔢𝔦𝔱