“What is peddled about nowadays as Philosophy, especially that of NS (National Socialism), but has nothing to do with the inner truth and greatness of that movement (namely the encounter between global technology and modern humanity) is nothing but fishing in that troubled sea of values and totalities.”

-Martin Heidegger, Introduction to Metaphysics, ca. 1953

Following Hannah Arendt and Martin Heidegger’s reasoning to their logical conclusions, I eventually arrived at the determination that there are certain historical facts which we are not being told. Some have yet to be fully translated into English, their existences unknown to everyday people. Others are far more obscure and therefore in need of context. The problem with investigating Pan-Germanic Socialism from a Socialistic perspective is that there have been so many distortions of its whatness and thatness. The sources of these distortions vary because there is no one group or ideology to blame here. The people who distorted Pan-Germanic Socialism are:

1. The Hitlerists who, by means of the Führerprinzip, had created a Cult of Personality around Adolf Hitler. Anyone can attack Pan-Germanic Socialism with Hitlerism by professing that the Holocaust was a fabrication and/or support the conspiracy theory that Hitler escaped the Berlin Führerbunker in 1945. To support either claim is to condone the belief that Hitlerism is inseparable from Pan-Germanic Socialism.
2. The Soviets, who were betrayed by the Hitlerists because of Operation Barbarossa. Their sentiments have gone to become normalized by the rest of the Eastern Bloc and the various Socialist and Communist movements around the world since the Cold War. Anyone can attack Pan-Germanic Socialism by masquerading these grievances under the banner of “Anti-Fascism,” thereby supporting the claim that Hitlerism is inseparable from Pan-Germanic Socialism. East Germany inherited this outlook.
3. The Jeffersonians, who in their determination to create Thomas Jefferson’s “Empire of Liberty” as the Liberal International Economic Order (LIEO), perpetuated Adolf Hitler’s Cult of Personality in order to justify the Empire of Liberty. The result is the creation of a false dialectic for the American people. These United States will be forced into choosing between Jeffersonian Isolationism and Jeffersonian Internationalism, the Jeffersonian Democrats and the Jeffersonian Republicans in the Democratic-Republican Party. West Germany inherited this outlook.
4. The Strasserists, who are adherents of the brothers Gregor and Otto, have had their own motivations prior to the Night of the Long Knives. They were trying to claim Pan-Germanic Socialism for themselves, preventing anyone from understanding the true origins of Pan-Germanic Socialism. While they are not as successful as the Hitlerists or the Soviets, their legacy nevertheless constitute as another distraction. Their distortion of Pan-Germanic Socialism reduces it into being another variation of “Distributism” (in the vein of Hillaire Belloc and Gilbert Keith Chesterton).
5. The Catholic Church are hostile toward Pan-Germanic Socialism, except the clergy and religious are not always going to be fully understand why, beyond whatever the Hitlerists, Jeffersonians, Soviets and Strasserists wanted the laity to tell them. So much of the Church’s attention is being constantly redirected at Pope Pius XII and the Holocaust, preventing the Church from being able to comprehend the true origins of Pan-Germanic Socialism. Worse, the Church is still treated as being complicit in the Cult of Personality by allegedly allowing Hitler to ‘escape’ the Führerbunker by some conspiracy theorists.
6. Similar to the Catholic Church, the Jewish people have never been able to fully comprehend the whatness and thatness of Pan-Germanic Socialism. Most have chosen to play along with whatever was told to them by the Hitlerists, Jeffersonians, Soviets, Strasserists and Catholics. Gentiles should remember that there are overlooked possibilities where Zionism could have chosen Italian Fascism, National Bolshevism, Marxism-Leninism, or even Jewish Socialism. Zionism did not have to embrace Neoliberalism in the manner that the Israeli government had done in the Jewish Totality’s name.

Hitlerists, Soviets, Jeffersonians, Strasserists, the Catholic Church, the Israeli government. It is difficult to imagine all six of them as “Allies” against Pan-Germanic Socialism. Even in a world where Pan-Germanic Socialism and the Third Reich survived past 1945, whatever alignments those six had against Pan-Germanic Socialism and the Third Reich will eventually dissolve in the ensuing Cold War. Is this an illogical or unrealistic interpretation of the 20^th century? Or is there anything in the historical record of the 20^th century that would support my arguments?

Even as an American, I can immediately argue with full certainty that the Hitlerists and Strasserists are more likely to realign themselves with the Jeffersonians if the Third Reich and Pan-Germanic Socialism survived past 1945.

Hitlerism + Strasserism ≥ Jeffersonianism

For Hitlerism, I know that Adolf Hitler’s admiration of the US has him splitting the Union into two political traditions, Jeffersonianism and Hamiltonianism. It is extremely suspicious for him to have specifically deemed Jeffersonianism as being more aligned with his own Weltanschauung than Hamiltonianism. It is ironic because Jeffersonianism is the American Unity of Opposites between Liberalism and Capitalism, Internationalism and Isolationism embodied by these Democrats and Republicans from the Democratic-Republican Party. As far as the Hitlerists were concerned, Hitler’s decrees are above the law: If Hitler states that “Alexander Hamilton cannot be a ‘National Socialist’ because he is a Jew,” his authority is final and will never be questioned by anyone under the Führerprinzip. Period. End of story.

For Strasserism, the Strasser brothers are notorious for their appeals to Producerism–the other half of Consumerism, their flawed conflation of the Jews with Liberal Capitalism, the refusal to acknowledge the contradictions of the 25-Points Points of the NSDAP and failure to recognize why some Jews were sincerely opposed to Liberal Capitalism and even wanted Zionism to be defined by another ideology. This is ironic because I have long suspected that the Strasserists intended Pan-Germanic Socialism to be defined by another ideology that I suspect to be the Distributism of Chesterton and Belloc, which also operated on similar parameters of thought. Like Chesterton and Belloc, the Strasser brothers are best understood as byproducts of a pre-1945 Pop Culture conflating all Jews with Liberal Capitalism.

When the Jeffersonians, Hitlerists and Strasserists are reinterpreted as enemies of Pan-Germanic Socialism, hidden within Pan-Germanic Socialism’s metaphysical framework is the contradictory notion that the Soviets are more likely to realign themselves with the Catholic Ultramontanes and the Jewish Zionists.

Ultramontanism + Zionism ≥ Sovietism

There is a misunderstood and confusing relationship that Pan-Germanic Socialism has had with the Catholic Church, the Jews, and the Slavic peoples. These contradictions can only exist in a part of the German-speaking world where the Class Struggle is driven by Man vs. Machine (as opposed to Proletariat vs. Bourgeoisie). There is no indication that this was occurring Germany, Austria, Prussia, Poland or even Switzerland. None of those countries were able to have the conditions conducive for the creation of Pan-Germanic Socialism in 1885. Thus, the primordial point of origin for Pan-Germanic Socialism is a country where Germans and Jews are the minorities, a Slavic people is the majority, sectarian conflicts are brewing among the Roman Catholics and Protestants, and the Class Struggle is at risk of being misinterpreted along tribal and sectarian lines in the Middle Eastern sense.

Where else is anyone going to find such a place within the German-speaking world, especially in the late 19th century? The same place in the German-speaking world where it is still socially acceptable in the 21^st century to identify oneself as a “National Socialist,” register a “National Socialist Party” to run for office and have one’s intentions be interpreted by the local population as being “Social Democrat” or “Democratic Socialist.”  What kind of country would consider National Socialism as being Social Democracy or Democratic Socialism? I am of course referring to Czechia, the “Czech Republic.”

Is it too much of a coincidence for Pan-Germanic Socialism to have specifically originated in Czechia? My readings of Rudolf Jung’s Der nationale Sozialismus (2^nd Edition) are supportive of my conclusions that Pan-Germanic Socialism (“National Socialism”) had to have originated as a Social Democratic movement of trade unionists engaging in the Class Struggle in 19^th century Czechia. If there is any hope left for Pan-Germanic Socialism to redeem itself, it must always reject Hitlerism, Strasserism and Jeffersonianism by simultaneously striving to seek peace with the Catholics, Jews, and Slavs.

“In his private papers, [Oswald] Spengler’s criticism of [Adolf Hitler] and [Hitlerism] is understandably more personal and more biting than that which he dared to set forth in ‘Hour of Decision’. He condemns [Hitlerist] terrorism and its aim of perpetuating totalitarian rule. ‘Only through continuous murder [can] the domination over the Germans be maintained.’ He lambasts Hitler’s personality as ‘a lot of talk, incapable, externally shallow, internally empty.’ Spengler denies that the Führer can ever become a competent statesman: ‘Who has grown up in the dumb and dirty atmosphere of agitation–public meetings and editing, is once and for all spoiled in being a statesman.’ The Antisemitism of [Hitlerist] ideology is psychoanalyzed as compensating for an innate sense of inferiority. ‘And how much envy of the capability of other people in view of one’s own lack of it lies hidden in Antisemitism!’ Moreover, the persecution of German Jewry is a self-inflicted wound on German society. ‘When one would rather destroy business and scholarship than see Jews in them, one is an ideologue, i.e., a danger for the nation. Idiotic.’”

-De John Farrenkopf, Prophet of Decline:
Spengler on World History and Politics, ca. 2001

Furthermore, the significance of Oswald Spengler in relation to Rudolf Jung is peculiar regarding the Second and Third Editions of Der nationale Sozialismus. The Third Edition, which I had read in the original German, is notorious for having been rewritten and revised by Hitlerists. Entire passages were framed to fit a pro-Hitlerist narrative.

The Second Edition, which was recently translated into English earlier this year, is significantly different from the later Third Edition. Reading the Second Edition, including the English translation from this year, lends far greater credence to my suspicions that the Third Edition was a grotesque distortion of Pan-Germanic Socialism. The Second Edition its also supportive of the aforementioned passage from Farrenkopf’s Prophet of Decline. Prussian Socialism is its own Socialism, independent of Pan-Germanic Socialism.

Categories: Politics

Tags: ARPLAN, Carl Jung, Council Democracy, Czechia, Hannah Arendt, Martin Heidegger, Oswald Spengler, Pan-Germanic Socialism, Philosophy, Politics, Psychology, Rudolf Jung