filepile/hitler · Datasets at Hugging Face

text string
I have already tried to contribute towards bringing about a good understanding in Europe and I have often given, especially to the British people and their Government, assurance of how ardently we wish for a sincere and cordial cooperation with them
I admit that on one point there is a wide difference between the views of the British Foreign Secretary and our views; and here it seems to me that this is a gap which cannot be filled up
Mr
Eden declares that under no circumstances does the British Government wish to see Europe torn into two halves
Unfortunately, this desire for unity has not hitherto been declared or listened to
And now the desire is an illusion
For the fact is that the division into two halves, not only of Europe but also of the whole world, is an accomplished fact
It is to be regretted that the British Government did not adopt its present attitude at an earlier date, that under all circumstances a division of Europe must be avoided; for then the Treaty of Versailles would not have been entered into
This Treaty brought in the first division of Europe, namely a division of the nations into victors on the one side and vanquished on the other, the latter nations being outlawed
Through this division of Europe nobody suffered more than the German people
That this division was wiped out, so far as concerns Germany, is essentially due to the National Socialist Revolution and this brings some credit to myself
THE COMMUNIST THREAT The second division has been brought about by the proclamation of the Bolshevik doctrine, an integral feature of which is that they do not confine it to one nation but try to impose it on all the nations
Here it is not a question of a special form of national life in Russia but of the Bolshevik demand for a world revolution
If Mr
Eden does not look at Bolshevism as we look at it, that may have something to do with the position of Great Britain and also with some happenings that are unknown to us
But I believe that nobody will question the sincerity of our opinions on this matter, for they are not based merely on abstract theory
For Mr
Eden Bolshevism is perhaps a thing which has its seat in Moscow, but for us in Germany this Bolshevism is a pestilence against which we have had to struggle at the cost of much bloodshed
It is a pestilence which tried to turn our country into the same kind of desert as is now the case in Spain; for the habit of murdering hostages began here, in the form in which we now see it in Spain
National Socialism did not try to come to grips with Bolshevism in Russia, but the Jewish international Bolsheviks in Moscow have tried to introduce their system into Germany and are still trying to do so
Against this attempt we have waged a bitter struggle, not only in defense of our own civilization but in defense of European civilization as a whole
In January and February of the year 1933, when the last decisive struggle against this barbarism was being fought out in Germany, had Germany been defeated in that struggle and had the Bolshevik field of destruction and death extended over Central Europe, then perhaps a different opinion would have arisen on the banks of the Thames as to the nature of this terrible menace to humanity
For since it is said that England must be defended on the frontier of the Rhine she would then have found herself in close contact with that harmless democratic world of Moscow, whose innocence they are always trying to impress upon us
Here I should like to state the following once again: -- The teaching of Bolshevism is that there must be a world revolution, which would mean world-destruction
If such a doctrine were accepted and given equal rights with other teachings in Europe, this would mean that Europe would be delivered over to it
If other nations want to be on good terms with this peril, that does not affect Germany's position
As far as Germany itself is concerned, let there be no doubts on the following points: -- (1) We look on Bolshevism as a world peril for which there must be no toleration
(2) We use every means in our power to keep this peril away from our people
(3) And we are trying to make the German people immune to this peril as far as possible
It is in accordance with this attitude of ours that we should avoid close contact with the carriers of these poisonous bacilli
And that is also the reason why we do not want to have any closer relations with them beyond the necessary political and commercial relations; for if we went beyond these we might thereby run the risk of closing the eyes of our people to the danger itself
I consider Bolshevism the most malignant poison that can be given to a people
And therefore I do not want my own people to come into contact with this teaching
As a citizen of this nation I myself shall not do what I should have to condemn my fellow-citizens for doing
I demand from every German workman that he shall not have any relations with these international mischief-makers and he shall never see me clinking glasses or rubbing shoulders with them
Moreover, any further treaty connections with the present Bolshevik Russia would be completely worthless for us
It is out of the question to think that National Socialist Germany should ever be bound to protect Bolshevism or that we, on our side, should ever agree to accept the assistance of a Bolshevik State
For I fear that the moment any nation should agree to accept such assistance, it would thereby seal its own doom
I must also say here that I do not accept the opinion which holds that in the moment of peril the League of nations could come to the rescue of the member States and hold them up by the arms, as it were
No, I don't believe that
Mr
Eden stated in his last address that deeds and not speeches are what matters
On that point I should like to call attention to the fact that up to now the outstanding feature of the League of Nations has been talk rather than action
There was one exception and in that case it would probably have been better to have been content with talk
In this one case, as might have been foreseen, action was fruitless
Hence, just as I have been forced by economic circumstances to depend on our own resources principally for the maintenance of my people, so also I have been forced in the political sphere
And we ourselves are not to blame for that
Three times I have made concrete offers for armament restriction or at least armament limitation
These offers were rejected
In this connection I may recall the fact that the greatest offer which I then made was that Germany and France together should reduce their standing armies to 300,000 men; that Germany, Great Britain and France, should bring down their air force to parity and that Germany and Great Britain should conclude a naval agreement
Only the last offer was accepted and it was the only contribution in the world to a real limitation of armaments
The other German proposals were either flatly refused or were answered by the conclusion of those alliances which gave Central Europe to Soviet Russia as the field of play for its gigantic forces
Mr
Eden speaks of German armaments and expects a limitation of these armaments
We ourselves proposed this limitation long ago
But it had no effect because, instead of accepting our proposal, treaties were made whereby the greatest military power in the world was, according to the terms of the treaties and in fact, introduced into Central Europe
In speaking of armaments it would be well to mention in the first instance the armaments possessed by that Power which sets the standard for the armaments of all others
Mr
Eden believes that in the future all States should possess only the armament which is necessary for their defense
I do not know whether and how far Mr
Eden has sounded Moscow on the question of carrying that excellent idea into effect, and I do not know what assurances they have given from that quarter
I think however that I ought to put forward one point in this connection
It is quite clear that the measure of a country's defensive armament should be in proportion to the dangers which threaten that country
Each nation has the right to judge this for itself, and it alone has the right
If therefore Great Britain today decides for herself on the extent of her armaments everybody in Germany will understand her action; for we can only think of London alone as being competent to decide on what is necessary for the protection of the British Empire
On the other hand I should like to insist that the estimate of our protective needs, and thus of the armament that is necessary for the defense of our people, is within our own competency and can be decided only in Berlin
I believe that the general recognition of these principles will not render conditions more difficult but will help to release tension
Anyhow Germany is pleased at having found friends in Italy and Japan who hold the same views as ourselves and we should be still more pleased if these convictions were widespread in Europe
Therefore nobody welcomed more cordially than we did the manifest lessening of tension in the Mediterranean, brought about by the Anglo-Italian agreement
We believe that this will first of all lead to an understanding which may put a stop to, or at least limit, the catastrophe from which poor Spain is suffering
Germany has no interests in that country except the care of those commercial relations which Mr
Eden himself declares to be so important and useful
An attempt has been made to connect Germany's sympathy for Nationalist Spain with some sort of colonial claims against countries which have taken no colonies from her
Our sympathies with General Franco and his Government are in the first place of a general nature and, secondly, they arise from a hope that the consolidation of a real National Spain may lead to a strengthening of economic possibilities in Europe
We are ready to do everything which in any way may contribute towards the restoration of order in Spain
But I think that the following considerations should not be left out of account: During the last hundred years a number of new nations have been created in Europe which formerly, because of their disunion and weakness, were of only small economic importance and of no political importance at all
Through the establishment of these new States new tensions have naturally arisen
True statesmanship however must face realities and not shirk them
The Italian nation and the new Italian State are realities
The German nation and the German Reich are likewise realities
And for my my own fellow citizens I should like to state that the Polish nation and the Polish State have also become realities
Also in the Balkans nations have reawakened and have built their own States
The people who belong to those States want to live and they will live
The unreasonable division of the world into nations that have and nations that have not will not remove or solve that problem, no more than the internal social problems of the nations can be simply solved through more or less clever phrases
For thousands of years the nations asserted their vital claims by the use of power
If in our time some other institution is to take the place of this power for the purpose or regulating relations between the peoples, then it must take account of natural vital claims and decide accordingly
It it is the task of the League of Nations only to guarantee the existing state of the world and to safeguard it for all time, then we might just as well entrust it with the task of regulating the ebb and flow of the tides or directing the Gulf Stream into a definite course for the future
But the League of Nations will not be able to do the one or the other
The continuance of its existence will in the long run depend on the extent to which it realize that the necessary reforms which concern international relations must be carefully considered and put into practice
GERMAN COLONIAL EMPIRE The German people once built up a colonial Empire without robbing anyone and without violating any treaty
And they did so without any war
That colonial Empire was taken away from us
And the grounds on which it was sought to excuse this act are not tenable
First: It was said that the natives did not want to belong to Germany
Who asked them if they wished to belong to some other Power? And when were these natives ever asked if they had been contented with the Power that formerly ruled them? Second: It is stated that the colonies were not administered properly by the Germans
Now, Germany had these colonies only for a few decades
Great sacrifices were made in building them up and they were in a process of development which would would have led to quite different results than in 1914
But anyhow the colonies had been so developed by us that other people considered it worth while to engage in a sanguinary struggle for the purpose of taking them from us
Third: It is said that they are of no real value
If that is the case then they can be of no value to other States also

I have already tried to contribute towards bringing about a good understanding in Europe and I have often given, especially to the British people and their Government, assurance of how ardently we wish for a sincere and cordial cooperation with them

I admit that on one point there is a wide difference between the views of the British Foreign Secretary and our views; and here it seems to me that this is a gap which cannot be filled up

Mr

Eden declares that under no circumstances does the British Government wish to see Europe torn into two halves

Unfortunately, this desire for unity has not hitherto been declared or listened to

And now the desire is an illusion

For the fact is that the division into two halves, not only of Europe but also of the whole world, is an accomplished fact

It is to be regretted that the British Government did not adopt its present attitude at an earlier date, that under all circumstances a division of Europe must be avoided; for then the Treaty of Versailles would not have been entered into

This Treaty brought in the first division of Europe, namely a division of the nations into victors on the one side and vanquished on the other, the latter nations being outlawed

Through this division of Europe nobody suffered more than the German people

That this division was wiped out, so far as concerns Germany, is essentially due to the National Socialist Revolution and this brings some credit to myself

THE COMMUNIST THREAT The second division has been brought about by the proclamation of the Bolshevik doctrine, an integral feature of which is that they do not confine it to one nation but try to impose it on all the nations

Here it is not a question of a special form of national life in Russia but of the Bolshevik demand for a world revolution

If Mr

Eden does not look at Bolshevism as we look at it, that may have something to do with the position of Great Britain and also with some happenings that are unknown to us

But I believe that nobody will question the sincerity of our opinions on this matter, for they are not based merely on abstract theory

For Mr

Eden Bolshevism is perhaps a thing which has its seat in Moscow, but for us in Germany this Bolshevism is a pestilence against which we have had to struggle at the cost of much bloodshed

It is a pestilence which tried to turn our country into the same kind of desert as is now the case in Spain; for the habit of murdering hostages began here, in the form in which we now see it in Spain

National Socialism did not try to come to grips with Bolshevism in Russia, but the Jewish international Bolsheviks in Moscow have tried to introduce their system into Germany and are still trying to do so

Against this attempt we have waged a bitter struggle, not only in defense of our own civilization but in defense of European civilization as a whole

In January and February of the year 1933, when the last decisive struggle against this barbarism was being fought out in Germany, had Germany been defeated in that struggle and had the Bolshevik field of destruction and death extended over Central Europe, then perhaps a different opinion would have arisen on the banks of the Thames as to the nature of this terrible menace to humanity

For since it is said that England must be defended on the frontier of the Rhine she would then have found herself in close contact with that harmless democratic world of Moscow, whose innocence they are always trying to impress upon us

Here I should like to state the following once again: -- The teaching of Bolshevism is that there must be a world revolution, which would mean world-destruction

If such a doctrine were accepted and given equal rights with other teachings in Europe, this would mean that Europe would be delivered over to it

If other nations want to be on good terms with this peril, that does not affect Germany's position

As far as Germany itself is concerned, let there be no doubts on the following points: -- (1) We look on Bolshevism as a world peril for which there must be no toleration

(2) We use every means in our power to keep this peril away from our people

(3) And we are trying to make the German people immune to this peril as far as possible

It is in accordance with this attitude of ours that we should avoid close contact with the carriers of these poisonous bacilli

And that is also the reason why we do not want to have any closer relations with them beyond the necessary political and commercial relations; for if we went beyond these we might thereby run the risk of closing the eyes of our people to the danger itself

I consider Bolshevism the most malignant poison that can be given to a people

And therefore I do not want my own people to come into contact with this teaching

As a citizen of this nation I myself shall not do what I should have to condemn my fellow-citizens for doing

I demand from every German workman that he shall not have any relations with these international mischief-makers and he shall never see me clinking glasses or rubbing shoulders with them

Moreover, any further treaty connections with the present Bolshevik Russia would be completely worthless for us

It is out of the question to think that National Socialist Germany should ever be bound to protect Bolshevism or that we, on our side, should ever agree to accept the assistance of a Bolshevik State

For I fear that the moment any nation should agree to accept such assistance, it would thereby seal its own doom

I must also say here that I do not accept the opinion which holds that in the moment of peril the League of nations could come to the rescue of the member States and hold them up by the arms, as it were

No, I don't believe that

Mr

Eden stated in his last address that deeds and not speeches are what matters

On that point I should like to call attention to the fact that up to now the outstanding feature of the League of Nations has been talk rather than action

There was one exception and in that case it would probably have been better to have been content with talk

In this one case, as might have been foreseen, action was fruitless

Hence, just as I have been forced by economic circumstances to depend on our own resources principally for the maintenance of my people, so also I have been forced in the political sphere

And we ourselves are not to blame for that

Three times I have made concrete offers for armament restriction or at least armament limitation

These offers were rejected

In this connection I may recall the fact that the greatest offer which I then made was that Germany and France together should reduce their standing armies to 300,000 men; that Germany, Great Britain and France, should bring down their air force to parity and that Germany and Great Britain should conclude a naval agreement

Only the last offer was accepted and it was the only contribution in the world to a real limitation of armaments

The other German proposals were either flatly refused or were answered by the conclusion of those alliances which gave Central Europe to Soviet Russia as the field of play for its gigantic forces

Mr

Eden speaks of German armaments and expects a limitation of these armaments

We ourselves proposed this limitation long ago

But it had no effect because, instead of accepting our proposal, treaties were made whereby the greatest military power in the world was, according to the terms of the treaties and in fact, introduced into Central Europe

In speaking of armaments it would be well to mention in the first instance the armaments possessed by that Power which sets the standard for the armaments of all others

Mr

Eden believes that in the future all States should possess only the armament which is necessary for their defense

I do not know whether and how far Mr

Eden has sounded Moscow on the question of carrying that excellent idea into effect, and I do not know what assurances they have given from that quarter

I think however that I ought to put forward one point in this connection

It is quite clear that the measure of a country's defensive armament should be in proportion to the dangers which threaten that country

Each nation has the right to judge this for itself, and it alone has the right

If therefore Great Britain today decides for herself on the extent of her armaments everybody in Germany will understand her action; for we can only think of London alone as being competent to decide on what is necessary for the protection of the British Empire

On the other hand I should like to insist that the estimate of our protective needs, and thus of the armament that is necessary for the defense of our people, is within our own competency and can be decided only in Berlin

I believe that the general recognition of these principles will not render conditions more difficult but will help to release tension

Anyhow Germany is pleased at having found friends in Italy and Japan who hold the same views as ourselves and we should be still more pleased if these convictions were widespread in Europe

Therefore nobody welcomed more cordially than we did the manifest lessening of tension in the Mediterranean, brought about by the Anglo-Italian agreement

We believe that this will first of all lead to an understanding which may put a stop to, or at least limit, the catastrophe from which poor Spain is suffering

Germany has no interests in that country except the care of those commercial relations which Mr

Eden himself declares to be so important and useful

An attempt has been made to connect Germany's sympathy for Nationalist Spain with some sort of colonial claims against countries which have taken no colonies from her

Our sympathies with General Franco and his Government are in the first place of a general nature and, secondly, they arise from a hope that the consolidation of a real National Spain may lead to a strengthening of economic possibilities in Europe

We are ready to do everything which in any way may contribute towards the restoration of order in Spain

But I think that the following considerations should not be left out of account: During the last hundred years a number of new nations have been created in Europe which formerly, because of their disunion and weakness, were of only small economic importance and of no political importance at all

Through the establishment of these new States new tensions have naturally arisen

True statesmanship however must face realities and not shirk them

The Italian nation and the new Italian State are realities

The German nation and the German Reich are likewise realities

And for my my own fellow citizens I should like to state that the Polish nation and the Polish State have also become realities

Also in the Balkans nations have reawakened and have built their own States

The people who belong to those States want to live and they will live

The unreasonable division of the world into nations that have and nations that have not will not remove or solve that problem, no more than the internal social problems of the nations can be simply solved through more or less clever phrases

For thousands of years the nations asserted their vital claims by the use of power

If in our time some other institution is to take the place of this power for the purpose or regulating relations between the peoples, then it must take account of natural vital claims and decide accordingly

It it is the task of the League of Nations only to guarantee the existing state of the world and to safeguard it for all time, then we might just as well entrust it with the task of regulating the ebb and flow of the tides or directing the Gulf Stream into a definite course for the future

But the League of Nations will not be able to do the one or the other

The continuance of its existence will in the long run depend on the extent to which it realize that the necessary reforms which concern international relations must be carefully considered and put into practice

GERMAN COLONIAL EMPIRE The German people once built up a colonial Empire without robbing anyone and without violating any treaty

And they did so without any war

That colonial Empire was taken away from us

And the grounds on which it was sought to excuse this act are not tenable

First: It was said that the natives did not want to belong to Germany

Who asked them if they wished to belong to some other Power? And when were these natives ever asked if they had been contented with the Power that formerly ruled them? Second: It is stated that the colonies were not administered properly by the Germans

Now, Germany had these colonies only for a few decades

Great sacrifices were made in building them up and they were in a process of development which would would have led to quite different results than in 1914

But anyhow the colonies had been so developed by us that other people considered it worth while to engage in a sanguinary struggle for the purpose of taking them from us

Third: It is said that they are of no real value

If that is the case then they can be of no value to other States also