ᛋ 𝐍𝐒-𝐋𝐈𝐓𝐄𝐑𝐀𝐓𝐔𝐑 ᛋ

𝐎𝐧 𝐭𝐡𝐞 𝐍𝐚𝐭𝐮𝐫𝐚𝐥 𝐖𝐢𝐥𝐥 𝐭𝐨 𝐋𝐢𝐯𝐞 𝐨𝐟 𝐭𝐡𝐞 𝐆𝐞𝐫𝐦𝐚𝐧𝐬

It should be emphasized from the outset that we are in no way advocating the teaching of history as it existed in the liberal pre-war period. Rather, in our criticisms of the November system, we must not forget that the gentlemen history teachers of the Wilhelmine era also achieved very little with their “objective” view of history, except insofar as they stubbornly pursued the simplest method of intellectual drill and essentially confined themselves to stringing together dates in an almost endless fashion, having these memorized, and then living under the illusion that they had thereby imparted to the youth an understanding of the history of their people. To this rote memorization of arbitrarily strung-together historical dates—driven into every young person to the point of bright despair—there was added, as a complement, an equally unpleasant kind of historical instruction that may be described as “dynastic-patriotic.” This took the form, in a Byzantinized and corrupted manner, of hollow phrases and flattery directed at crowned heads. Neither the mere memorization of historical dates, nor the recounting of “patriotic,” so-called “true events” of princes and potentates dripping with supposed human sentiment, has anything to do with the conception of history which, from the standpoint of National Socialism, alone is capable of educating the young person into a nationalist fanatic and a socialist fighter. [...] The National Socialist worldview is nothing less and nothing greater than the will of the German people, cast in its purest form, to lead and shape a life in accordance with their nature. This will is underpinned by centuries of struggle. Often in German history, it seemed as if this will had vanished. But time and again, it erupted like a volcano. This will is eternal and therefore marked by providence. What is great is always born of pain. This pain and this struggle, however, still find scarce justification in history books today. But in the legends and songs of our people, they are anchored; there the path is charted, unaffected by the intellectual manipulation of so-called historiography. Alongside these blood-red traditions, all rote learning and all dynastic patriotism disappear, for they have nothing to say to us today. Only in connection with the blood-soaked, tearful history of our people can the full, overarching grandeur of our National Socialist worldview be understood. And only in this way can we, on our evenings at home, around the solstices fires, and at the campfires on the German heath, tell young Germans the great two-thousand-year tragedy of our people and its struggles, and make it a lived experience. The blood in young hearts must once again beat and sing with the battle cries of two millennia past, and must look around to an immense energy of will, directed toward not surrendering the German struggle for their natural way of life to the retinue of the ancient, eternal enemies of German nationality, who still do not rest, regardless of the means, to destroy this will. Our history teachers, instead of mere repositories of historical dates and instead of ridiculous drill sergeants, should be the prophets and heralds of this will and desire, and our professors should finally systematically adapt their historical research, their seminars, and their doctoral dissertations to these demands, for our history is written in blood and therefore cannot be grasped solely through abstract reason. A youth that knows the history and mission of its people, that knows the struggles of its ancestors and sees the enemies, also has the unyielding will and the toughness to write the history of the people as the natural will to live demands.

Source: "Vom artgemäßen Lebenswillen der Deutschen" Wille und Macht. Jarhgang 2, Heft 18, Sept. Deutscher Jugendverlag Berlin 1934 p.1 𝔊𝔬𝔱𝔱𝔤𝔩ä𝔲𝔟𝔦𝔤𝔨𝔢𝔦𝔱

𝐀 𝐏𝐡𝐢𝐥𝐨𝐬𝐨𝐩𝐡𝐲 𝐨𝐟 𝐑𝐚𝐜𝐞

Since the division of German science, based on medieval Christian values, into a fundamentally mutually exclusive natural science and a humanities discipline, unfortunately still hasn't been overcome, it is a significant event when a first "philosophy of race" that meets the standards of both the natural and humanities sciences appears. Along with Fritz Lenz's pamphlet "Race as a Value Principle" from 1917, Siegfried Blaas's work, "The Idea of ​​Race: A biological and philosophical foundation." is likely the most substantial foundation to date for establishing a genetic philosophy based on the heritability of the "I," the "genos." Thirdly, Rüdiger von Steinbach's excellent book "The Victory of Life—Is the Meaning of the World?" with its "philosophy of rhythm," which ultimately also amounts to a genetic philosophy, should be mentioned. Such a genetic philosophy has become a necessary task the moment the "absolute spontaneity" of an "intelligible I" in Kant's sense is called into question by the fact of the hereditary causality of the spiritual. The central problems addressed from this new standpoint are therefore the mind-body problem and the problem of freedom (free will). After discussing the two fundamental tenets of racial theory: 1. The descent of humans from animal ancestors (theory of descent) 2. The heritability of body and soul. Blaas turns, in the "metaphysical" part of his book, first to the mind-body problem. After rejecting "common materialism" (Büchner-Haeckel) as an explanation for the relationship between body and mind, Blaas also dismisses the "ontological mechanism," because "then the world as a whole would be nothing more than the zone of penetration and the field of action of primordial building blocks." According to Blaas, such a "dead world" would be "the most terrible and unbearable thing imaginable" for our sensibilities. However, it could be argued against this that truth need not necessarily conform to what is agreeable to our feelings. Blaas, in this sense a vitalist, although he distances himself from Driesch, bases his theory on the characteristic of the "spontaneity" of the living (not to be confused with the spontaneity of the "self") and consequently builds a "doctrine of all life." [...] Blaas asks: “What, in fact, is this uncanny ‘ghost from the fourth dimension’?” For: “One thing is quite clear: if the inherent laws of cultural life and its essential determination can truly be proven to originate from a supernatural realm of ideas, then race becomes a completely incidental aspect of humanity.” (p. 291.) In contrast, the motto of racial philosophy is Adolf Hitler's statement from "Mein Kampf," p. 315: "Without human beings, there are no human ideas in this world; therefore, the idea as such is always conditioned by the existence of human beings and thus by all the laws that created the conditions for this existence. And not only that! Certain ideas are even bound to certain human beings." In summary, Blaas concludes: “The objective spirit,” as a sum of spirit-formed, inter-individual, and supra-subjectively significant constructs of meaning, is without independent being and life; it is, in itself, without essence; it is a product of individual human souls.” (p. 312.) The consequence for the philosophy of history then follows naturally from this position: “Real history is first and foremost racial history and then intellectual (or even idea) history.” (p. 317.) Such a view cannot be described as “mechanistic.” That is only possible as long as race itself is considered something devoid of spirit. However, by demonstrating the unity of body and mind, as well as the heritability of the spiritual and thus of the spiritual-racial, one can no longer speak of mechanical laws, but must speak of laws of life and being. This real existence, however, justifies the necessity of a genetic or racial philosophy.

Source: "Eine Philosophie der Rasse" Nationalsozialistische Monatshefte. Heft 161, Jahrgang 15. Franz Eher Nachf Verlag München 1944 p.79 𝔊𝔬𝔱𝔱𝔤𝔩ä𝔲𝔟𝔦𝔤𝔨𝔢𝔦𝔱

𝐓𝐡𝐞𝐨𝐫𝐲 𝐨𝐟 𝐄𝐯𝐨𝐥𝐮𝐭𝐢𝐨𝐧 𝐚𝐧𝐝 𝐌𝐨𝐝𝐞𝐫𝐧 𝐁𝐢𝐨𝐥𝐨𝐠𝐲

Medieval mystical modes of thought disappeared from research; biology became a genuine natural science. The victory of the theory of evolution was complete and final. Today, the genetic view of life seems self-evident to us, and we have almost forgotten what a bitter and vicious campaign the denominations and reactionaries waged against the theory of evolution, and which they are attempting to wage again today wherever they can. With the turn of the century began the magnificent development of genetics. While it initially stood alone alongside the theory of evolution, at least in certain subfields, today it has merged with it. The theory of evolution and genetics form an inseparable unity, having fused into a general, comprehensive genetics, which, as a modern natural science, tackles the problems of development with the cleanest methodology and tackles them successfully! Given this state of affairs, given the now very intensive genetic permeation of all biological work, it is astonishing when one asks in circles that are further removed from biology what they imagine by the theory of evolution, the theory of ancestry, etc., what they have heard about it and what significance they attribute to it for the present day. At a time when a brilliant government is using a core idea of ​​the theory of evolution, namely the selection of the best and most useful, i.e., what we biologically call Darwinism, to save our people from biological extinction, the cry rings out: Darwinism?...That's just Western liberalism! That's just mechanism and materialism, that belongs to the system of Marxism. Those who take up such claims—and we know where they come from—are likely quite unaware of the complete lack of basis in these supposed connections. No one has demonstrated why biological Darwinism, the aristocratic principle of natural selection, is related to materialism or even Marxism! Then one hears: "The theory of evolution itself—that's just ape theory!" Then the names of Darwin and Haeckel are mentioned, and with a smug smile, it's declared: "That's all been refuted long ago." Here one becomes aware that a historical and extensive, predominantly orthodox propaganda has managed to present internal discussions about special questions of developmental history as fundamental, thereby characterizing the theory of evolution as at least an unproven hypothesis. [...] However, let it now be stated: Within biology, the fundamental correctness of the theory of evolution is no longer up for debate, especially in circles disparagingly referred to as "conventional school biology" and slandered as materialistic. As things stand, this would be grotesque. We biologists in the National Socialist state certainly have more pressing matters to attend to at present. [...] We would better turn to our objective work, and it is the task of this essay to give an overview of what stands before us as the all-pervading edifice of the theory of evolution. Our task is furthermore to characterize this theory of evolution in its biological significance to the National Socialist state.

Source: "Abstammungslehre und moderne Biologie" Nationalsozialistische Monatshefte Heft 79, Jahrgang 7, October. Franz Eher Nachf Verlag München 1936 p.2 𝔊𝔬𝔱𝔱𝔤𝔩ä𝔲𝔟𝔦𝔤𝔨𝔢𝔦𝔱

𝐓𝐡𝐞 𝐒𝐭𝐚𝐟𝐟 𝐨𝐟 𝐀𝐬𝐜𝐥𝐞𝐩𝐢𝐮𝐬 𝐚𝐧𝐝 𝐭𝐡𝐞 𝐌𝐚𝐧 𝐑𝐮𝐧𝐞

During the period in which the Norse symbols originated—according to recent research, this even extends back to the Middle Stone Age—the snake is entirely absent. It appears relatively late to our ancestors, and its path, once it emerges in the Hallstatt period around 600 BCE, can easily be traced back to the Danube region and from there to Asia Minor. However, wherever it appears in Central Europe, whether among Germanic, Illyrian, or Celtic peoples, it is the explicit symbol of death. As such, we find it on cinerary urns and on the Alemannic funerary trees. Even in Germanic mythology, it plays only a life-destroying role. Consider the Midgard Serpent, or recall Nidhogg, the dragon who sits beneath the world tree Yggdrasil, surrounded by snakes and adders, and who, together with them, gnaws at the root of the world tree to destroy it. Even outside our cultural sphere, the snake is the symbol of death as soon as we come to Aryan peoples. The situation was different in the cultures of Asia Minor. While in South Babylon, where Semitic influence is relatively late, the snake was initially considered an evil spirit, this changed as it traveled further west and north into Babylon. Here, the snake acquired a new attribute: that of wisdom. And with this, it appears in the Old Testament, the Jewish tribal saga that originated during the Jewish exile to Babylon, in order to finally awaken a sense of national identity among the Jews. Until then, they had lacked this sense of national identity, as, until the time of their exile, they, as nomads, knew no higher, lasting bond than that of their tribe. We also find the snake in the Cretan-Minoan cultural sphere around 1600 BCE. Here, it is the companion of a goddess. Many figurines of this goddess, or her priestesses, have survived, their attire indicating that this was a decidedly non-Nordic phenomenon. In Egypt, the snake was known as a divine symbol from an early period. In northern Western Asia, we finally find the snake as an attendant of the moon goddess. And with this, the snake gained its connection to healing. The moon goddess was also the goddess of women's health, naturally because of menstruation. Looking in this context at the Temple in Jerusalem, we find bronze snakes there as late as Hezekiah's time (around 715 BCE), which were venerated as bringing health. In the legend of the Israelites' journey through the desert, however, the staff joins the snake. Moses hangs a metal snake from it. The Staff of Asclepius was complete. In Hezekiah's time, the Dipylonian style prevailed in Greece. During its later period, Greece lost its northern orientation. Gods from Asia Minor invaded. Athena, the wise goddess from Asia Minor, emerged, and her attribute, long before the owl, was the snake, which she later had to relinquish to Asclepius, or Aesculapius. It remained associated with this demigod until the collapse of classical antiquity. Thus, it disappeared from the public consciousness for 1000 years. Only about 150 years ago was this symbol of the Near East revived and established itself as a symbol of healing. Contrary to some beliefs, the Staff of Asclepius is not traditional in our cultural sphere. The SA, Hitler Youth, and Reich Labor Service health services, along with German pharmacists, therefore chose a new symbol: the Manrune. The associations had every right to do so. At a time when so much that is alien disappears into the junk room of the obsolete, never to resurface, we need not hesitate to embrace venerable traditions dating back 150 to 200 years. The new, yet ancient, symbol for the aforementioned associations, the Manrune, is one of the few symbols we can trace uninterruptedly back to our Neolithic period, not on funerary urns, but on everyday vessels. The new symbol is simply called the Manrune because it appears as a rune in the Futhark, the Germanic alphabet.

Source: "Aeskulapstab und Manrune" Der Schulungsbrief. Jahrgang VI, Folge 2, February. Franz Eher Nachf Verlag Berlin 1939 p.32 𝔊𝔬𝔱𝔱𝔤𝔩ä𝔲𝔟𝔦𝔤𝔨𝔢𝔦𝔱

𝐇𝐞𝐢𝐧𝐫𝐢𝐜𝐡 𝐇𝐢𝐦𝐦𝐥𝐞𝐫'𝐬 𝐩𝐥𝐚𝐧 𝐭𝐨 𝐫𝐞𝐩𝐚𝐭𝐫𝐢𝐚𝐭𝐞 𝐞𝐭𝐡𝐧𝐢𝐜 𝐆𝐞𝐫𝐦𝐚𝐧𝐬 𝐟𝐫𝐨𝐦 𝐀𝐦𝐞𝐫𝐢𝐜𝐚 𝐚𝐧𝐝 𝐀𝐟𝐫𝐢𝐜𝐚 𝐚𝐟𝐭𝐞𝐫 𝐭𝐡𝐞 𝐰𝐚𝐫

1. Over the course of decades, perhaps centuries, Germans from all tribes and regions have emigrated overseas, initially recruited by agents, but later by Germans who were already there. While they have mostly retained their language, they are completely separated from their motherland in national and, above all, political terms, and especially from Adolf Hitler's Greater German Reich. It is our task to bring every person of German blood who has any value back to the German Reich to settle the lands it has conquered. 2. This task can be accomplished in the same way that Germans were brought out of Germany through personal recruitment: every single family must be brought back through personal ties. 3. The task of collecting addresses must be entrusted to the VDA (Association of Germans Abroad), since only through these entirely apolitical means can the majority of the politically corrupted ethnic Germans be brought back. If this collection were carried out by the party, it would mean that we would fail to register millions of Germans abroad—especially in America, where we have no real power—and thus fail to encourage their return. 4. I instruct the Gau offices for civic affairs to support this work of the new unified VDA association in every way, without, however, taking the party's position to the forefront in any way. 5. The organization and work will be as follows: The VDA will establish a research center for Germans abroad in each Gau. However, this center will not be called "Research Center for Germans Abroad," as in Hanover, for example, but rather "Research Center for Lower Saxony Abroad," while the same center in Pomerania will be called "Research Center for Pomerania Abroad." The research centers will be grouped into working groups at specific points, corresponding to the regional sections, with the sole task of exchanging addresses and not of creating a new central registry. The research centers in East Hanover, Hanover-South Brunswick, and Oldenburg will therefore be combined to form the "Working Group of Lower Saxony Abroad." I have commissioned a study of the organization of the various regional associations of men familiar with ethnic German culture in America. Führer-Hauptquartier, April 23, 1942

Source: BArch NS 19/1467 "Über die Rückholung der Volksdeutschen aus Amerika und Afrika nach dem Kriege." p.5-7 𝔊𝔬𝔱𝔱𝔤𝔩ä𝔲𝔟𝔦𝔤𝔨𝔢𝔦𝔱

𝐁𝐥𝐨𝐨𝐝 𝐚𝐧𝐝 𝐑𝐚𝐜𝐞 𝐚𝐬 𝐋𝐚𝐰𝐬 𝐨𝐟 𝐋𝐢𝐟𝐞

To safeguard the power of blood, the foundation of a meaningful human existence, for our people, and to entrust the leadership and care of our people only to members of our own kind, the NSDAP program demands: Point 4: "Only those who are members of the German people can be citizens. Only those of German blood can be members of the German people, regardless of religious affiliation. No Jew can therefore be a member of the German people." Point 5: "Those who are not citizens should only live in Germany as guests and must be subject to alien laws." Point 6: “The right to determine the leadership and laws of the state may only belong to the citizen. Therefore, we demand that every public office, regardless of its nature, whether in the Reich, state, or municipality, may only be held by citizens. We oppose the corrupt parliamentary system of filling positions solely based on party affiliation, without regard for character or ability.” Germanic customs that have survived to this day reveal that our ancestors already understood the value of pure blood. They practiced careful racial selection. They allowed only descendants who possessed health and full strength to fulfill the duties of farming and land ownership to enter the line of succession. By thus protecting their blood from the transmission of diseased hereditary traits, they ensured the strength and health of our people. Only when racial mixing, as a result of the false doctrine that all who bear a human face are equal, was no longer considered a transgression against divine law, were the racial hygiene measures of our ancestors forgotten. It was forgotten that the eternal life of a people is grounded in race and the health of its blood. In his book "Mein Kampf," the Führer emphasized the necessity of racial hygiene, stressing that it was a half-measure to allow incurably ill people the constant possibility of contaminating the rest of the healthy population. This, he argued, would be a form of humanity that, in order to spare one person a single victim, would allow a hundred others to perish. The demand that defective individuals be prevented from procreating other, equally defective offspring was a demand of the clearest reason and, if implemented systematically, would represent the most humane act of humankind. It would spare millions of unfortunate people undeserved suffering and, consequently, lead to an overall increase in health. Point 24 of the party program also emphatically called for the improvement of public health. Based on these ideas, the Reich government enacted the "Law for the Prevention of Hereditarily Diseased Offspring" on July 14, 1933. National Socialism does not consider the individual human being to be the measure of all things. The nation, the community, its happiness, health, and well-being are considered the highest and most desirable. However, the nation is not a sum of individuals, but rather the living stream of blood that flows from generation to generation, encompassing all its bearers as human beings of the same blood within a community. This stream of blood is to be and remain pure for all time. A person's character, everything that shapes them both outwardly and inwardly, is rooted in their blood. They receive their predispositions and their nature through their blood. Their genetic makeup determines their destiny.

Source: "Blut und Rasse als Lebensgesetze" Der Schulungsbrief. Mensch und Gemeinschaft. Sonderdruck 3: Der Reichsorganisationsleiter - Hauptschulungsamt der NSDAP. Franz Eher Nachf Verlag Berlin 1942 p.3 𝔊𝔬𝔱𝔱𝔤𝔩ä𝔲𝔟𝔦𝔤𝔨𝔢𝔦𝔱

𝐆𝐞𝐫𝐦𝐚𝐧𝐲

It was a long road the German people had to travel to reach the Greater German Reich on March 13, 1938. Their yearning for this Reich is as old as their history. What their best sons dreamed of has become reality. Walther von der Vogelweide (1170–1230), a son of the Tyrolean mountains, did not sing a hymn of praise to German loyalty and the German way in his first national anthem for nothing. Ulrich von Hutten (1488–1523) did not fight in vain. The seeds of faithful devotion for the resurrection of the fatherland, sown in great wars and in daily work, have sprouted. Ernst Moritz Arndt's words, "To be one people is the religion of our time," which he once proclaimed as a proclamation of the path to liberation for the fatherland, enslaved and torn apart by Napoleon, have become the lifeblood of every German. The legend of the slumbering emperor in the Kyffhäuser, who will return once the ravens of German discord have been driven away by the eagles of the Reich, speaks of this German longing, to which the song of all Germans, which Hoffmann von Fallersleben gave us and which is our national anthem today, also belongs. It served as a guiding principle (1871) in the founding of the Second German Reich, an act of Bismarck. The heroism of the World War and the struggle of Adolf Hitler are just as vivid witnesses to its influence as the creation of the Greater German Reich and the future-oriented work of all its most beautiful expression in our time. Before that, however, lies more than a millennium of German history, stretching back to the first unification of Germanic tribes into a German people and a German state. This period encompasses the greatness of Germanic tribal dukes and the deeds of German emperors of the Middle Ages, leading from the first Reich, the Holy Roman Empire of the German Nation, through the still-smaller German Empire, to Adolf Hitler's Greater German Reich. Germanic history reaches back millennia further. It is equally German history, for it lays the foundation; for the Germanic peoples are the blood ancestors of the Germans. Our German history does not begin with Charlemagne, but with the megalithic tombs of the heath, as Alfred Rosenberg once said. If we want to fully understand our German history, however, we must look back to our Germanic ancestors, to their achievements, their way of life, and their spirit. For time and again, and in all areas—ethnic, intellectual, and political—the Germanic blood heritage has proven to be a decisive force within our people. Despite all the external influences on the political and cultural life of Germany, the Germanic element has repeatedly asserted itself with elemental force within the German people. Germanic customs still live on today in many forms. Our flag proudly displays the symbol of our Germanic ancestors. On farmsteads, runes and sacred symbols are still displayed, as they have been for millennia. In rural traditions, the customs and practices of our ancestors still live on, even if often under different names and with different meanings, and not always recognized as Germanic. National Socialism called to the soul of our people and once again made the values ​​and virtues to which it owes its past the foundation of our national order. Adolf Hitler cleared the way for our true nature, which had been buried under the influence of false doctrines. And the German people understood him, remembering the great commonality that unites all Germans beyond profession and creed. It reflected on its heritage, in which we all, belonging to the German people, share: The Nordic blood, which once developed its vitality in the harsh environment of the North, bequeathed its virtues and creative power to us as the legacy of the Nordic race. The blood of the Nordic race, with varying proportions from related European races, constitutes the German people.

Source: "Deutschland" Der Schulungsbrief. Unser Reich. Sonderdruck 4: Der Reichsorganisationsleiter - Hauptschulungsamt der NSDAP. Franz Eher Nachf Verlag Berlin 1942 p.8 𝔊𝔬𝔱𝔱𝔤𝔩ä𝔲𝔟𝔦𝔤𝔨𝔢𝔦𝔱

𝐇𝐢𝐭𝐥𝐞𝐫 𝐨𝐧 𝐫𝐚𝐜𝐢𝐚𝐥 𝐡𝐢𝐞𝐫𝐚𝐫𝐜𝐡𝐲 𝐢𝐧 𝐬𝐭𝐚𝐭𝐞-𝐛𝐮𝐢𝐥𝐝𝐢𝐧𝐠

It is part of the nature of this Nordic racial core, this Nordic race in general, that suddenly, seized by a wandering instinct, it sets out individually but also as a whole and now somehow wants to subjugate the world, often failing, but often also achieving success. This is the beginning of state formation. The state is in itself the enemy of a race, because the state is not the organization of a race, but it is the organization of some races under the leadership of a race. Therefore, the moment the state race, i.e. the race that formed the state, becomes weak, the individual racial nuclei immediately strive not towards each other, but apart. At this moment, differentiation immediately begins to occur, and then - I would like to say - primal instincts begin to come to life, which are completely different from one another. The fight of all against all begins, and at such a moment racial hostility suddenly comes to life under a wide variety of concepts because people are naturally no longer aware of it and can no longer be aware of it. What we sometimes call the struggle of the proletariat is not a social struggle, but rather the struggle of a particular race that is now trying to become free again. If this racial struggle takes on anarchist characteristics, it is because these racial nuclei do not have the organizational aspects of the current state at all, but because these racial nuclei would no longer exist, like rabbits or something else. They would form a race, but they do not have a state-forming power. Therefore, in Russia too, pure Slavism constantly tends towards stubborn nihilism, i.e. towards negating every form of government and every organization in which it sees a violation of individual rights, which for them actually do not extend beyond the family and clan. Therefore, in Russia in particular, a state, i.e. a larger community and thus a people, could only be maintained if these individual instincts were suppressed or eliminated using barbaric means. Whether it was Tsarism or now Bolshevism is completely irrelevant; The methods are the same, but there may be individual differences in the objectives.

Source: BArch NS 6/777 Ansprache des Führers an die Feldmarschälle und Generale am 27. 1. 1944 in der Wolfsschanze p.47-49 𝔊𝔬𝔱𝔱𝔤𝔩ä𝔲𝔟𝔦𝔤𝔨𝔢𝔦𝔱

𝐒𝐞𝐥𝐞𝐜𝐭𝐢𝐨𝐧 𝐚𝐧𝐝 𝐄𝐥𝐢𝐦𝐢𝐧𝐚𝐭𝐢𝐨𝐧

Selection and elimination are processes that have been effective in Nature as well as in human society since the beginning and that represent popular concepts in both the natural and social sciences. Selection of the capable and elimination of the harmful is the timeless catchphrase. As clear and self-evident as they sound, however, very different ideas are associated with them. Ideas that change not only from age to age, from race to race, but also from people to people, from generation to generation, indeed from class to class and from person to person. In democracy and liberalism, there is no standard for this at all, because every party, every professional group, every ideological community, indeed every association and every braggart had its own standard for success and failure and used all its influence to operate with it against the others. In Marxism, this standard is the stubbornness of the materialist sentiment and the reliability of the class struggle. In reactionary conservatism, it is the aptitude for backward developments and the willingness to tolerate them; in capitalism, finally, the ability to make money in general. We all witnessed how these fundamental characteristics of political groups could manifest themselves in their purest form and in manifold overlaps on the soil of November Germany. It was a futile undertaking at that time to establish or even apply an absolute standard of competence. It was even more difficult to deal with the vermin, because Jewish literature had indeed succeeded in politically pitting Christian charity against the strength and sound national sentiment of the people. National Socialism must also rebuild here from the ground up. Its firmly established goals, derived from the people, from their happiness, greatness, and eternity, provide the prerequisite for unambiguous German standards for selection and elimination. The people, with their millions of individual expressions of life that change from day to day, are already in a constantly flowing, self-regulating process of selection and elimination. The capable rise above them and some fall back into the masses, the incapable sink from the upper classes to the lower. What cannot be accomplished in an individual life unfolds relentlessly in the generational cycle. Talents are indeed hereditary, but the other qualities that enable a talent to achieve greatness, such as discipline and character, have been lacking in many an inherited talent, thus sealing the fate of the family. This process of self-regulating selection and elimination in all branches of human life and of nature in general is larger than life. We can perhaps discern its tendencies, perhaps even its laws, but there is nothing to regulate there. Everyone is the architect of their own fortune, and they should remain so. This process of automatic selection and elimination in all branches of human life and nature in general is larger than life. We can perhaps discern its tendencies, maybe even its laws, but there is nothing to regulate there. Everyone is the architect of their own fortune, and they should remain so. Education as a whole can certainly increase the nation's awareness of health, performance, and strength by nurturing and cultivating these qualities in each individual, but education is always dependent on the substance that is present and malleable for this purpose. [...] It will incorporate selection and elimination according to the needs of the National Socialist movement and its conception of national life. A healthy national consciousness does not seek to restrict natural selection and elimination through weak laws, nor beyond the limitations imposed by civilization. The artificial selection and elimination that is our task is not to oppose natural selection, but to support it.

Source: "Anslefe und Ansmerze" Wille und Macht Jahragang 2, Heft 10, May. Deutscher Jugendverlag Berlin 1934 p.6 𝔊𝔬𝔱𝔱𝔤𝔩ä𝔲𝔟𝔦𝔤𝔨𝔢𝔦𝔱

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