A few days ago I saved an excerpt of a group's discussion on Hitler as an artist - which led to questions on who underwrote his rise to power. It brought up some interesting points, and I thought some answers might be of interest to my general readership.
Here is that excerpt:
From the top, despite any early avocations in life - painter, artist, shells around his head and the smell of mustard gas in the morning - (all that) consolidated the man's spirit.
There is nothing that focuses one's attention more on what is important in life than incoming fire. Trust me.
And the uncontested record is that (Hitler) volunteered to be exposed to that fire. A similarly uncontested record is that he tried to avoid military service -- which is the rational human response. Duty may call but you can try to get out of hearing distance.
So what do we have here? An intelligent person with artistic talent honed in fire.
What we are missing about him in a serious sense is his dark underbelly - who was financing him, who was he beholding to. If there is neither of the above, sorry, but his career is incomprehensible.
On the web there are more than a few reference to his Jewish financing. Alquids and Irving refer to it. The Zionist backers and bankers are all over his unofficial and anecdotal biography.
Simple as this, any random "you" on this mailing list, go run for dog catcher. Try it. If I were missing three fingers I could count all such winning candidates in the last ten years on both hands.
Power as always is beholding to moneyed interests. Money is power. It is used to promote popular surrogates.
Hitler was a surrogate as he came to power by democratic means. Some person or persons had to be financing him.
Do not believe me. Join a political party and pay the average due. Estimate the cost of the parties and speeches you are invited to attend. Ask how in the world you could get a better return on your investment. The larger the political party you join the greater the return on the investment.
Let us start looking at Hitler and the NSDAP in real terms, not as stereotypes.
The Alquids site tries to undercut Zionism by connecting it to Hitler. The man was not only human but a human politician and ex-artist. And we also read that he practiced his stage presence in a mirror.
We are talking about a man flexible enough to fit the role required and to take on obligations in return for financing.
It is time to stop treating this person as being in charge until we can establish he was in charge. Churchill's financial obligations establish he was not in charge. Hitler's finances are not established.
But please do not insult my intelligence by presuming that anyone who writes a Mein Kampf can take over a nation. <end>
So naturally I asked Ernst Zundel for further information, since he has spent decades reading up on the matter and interviewing people who knew Hitler personally.
Here is what he supplied:
Hitler refused to serve the Austro-Hungarian Empire because he felt, and stated, that that system was utterly corrupt, bowing to every Balkanese minority demand at the drop of a hat, caving in to every minority threat of a Czech, a Serb, or a Hungarian rabble rouser. He made a deliberate and conscious choice to leave Austria for that reason.
When World War I came, the historical record shows that he willingly and enthusiastically joined the German (i.e. the Bavarian) Army. He served with distinction and was decorated with the coveted Iron Cross.
As to Hitler's financing, there are very good books and sources for this part of Hitler's life. A former medical doctor with the Bundeswehr, Dr. Georg Franz Willing, who studied National Socialism and wrote three books on the National Socialist Party's development, financing and evolution, spells it all out in detail.
It must be understood that Hitler obtained the money he needed by means not even comprehensible today. Vast numbers and classes of people were frightened out of their wits with the looming Communization from the East, frightened by revolutionary "Soviets" in different cities and provinces of Germany who had unleashed civil war-like conditions, where houses of opponents were burned and people were beaten and shot to death. In Munich, crazed Jewish intellectuals seized dozens of aristocratic and upper crust hostages and shot them in cold blood, when their demands were not met.
There were millions - almost 15 million - totally or partially unemployed Germans, most of them with solid skills, training and army discipline instilled in them. They were the unpaid political soldiers and army of Adolf Hitler, with which he put an end to the corruption, decline and despair - and came to power legally. Bolshevism and Bolsheviks, with all their attendant brutality, acted like shills or cowboys to drive the German populace, rich and poor, into Hitler's corral. They, in turn, financed his party and election campaigns.
Early financing came from the pockets of the founders, from idealistic small shop keepers etc.; later from attendees at speeches and rallies where buckets were passed around for collections.
There is a chapter in one of Willing's books where Hitler spoke to an audience of approximately 5,000 people in the "Zirkus Krone", a facility commonly used for revival type gatherings. Tables were set up with buckets of iron wedding bands, and Party supporters would exchange their golden wedding bands for iron ones. These donated wedding bands were turned into cash to pay the rent for offices and secretaries in the beginning.
Also, one of the early financiers of considerable substance was the wife of a famous German piano maker who helped finance the Party newspaper.
The German industrialist Hugenberg financed the Party for a time with millions, especially between election campaigns, allowing Goebbels to have the first pressing of excerpts of Hitler's speeches on 50,000 gramophone records, which were then sent free of charge by mail to the middle and upper crust of the German elite, the media, and influential people in industry, education, church leaders and the medical establishment, which additionally brought in many substantial industrial supporters.
Only in the final phase of the struggle for power did the Zionists put out feelers for Hitler and move in with their money. Jewish money came from non-Zionist Jewish banks like Warburg, Bleichröder and others, obviously in an attempt to influence, or favorably dispose, Hitler to these Jewish financial interests.
It seems that Hitler let them exercise their age-old practice and allowed them to deceive themselves in their wishful thinking that he could be bought, as others had been bought. Why should he not have taken their, or anybody's, money? It never did influence his policies or Party's platform. Would it have been better if he had let himself be bought?
History records that as early as 1934, the Nuremberg Race Laws were promulgated, which effectively ended Jewish control of Germany - a control which had crept in during the previous 100 years in Germany.
Today's Americans do not think or act like the 1930s Germans. Zionism was an insignificant political movement then. It only assumed prominence during and after World War II. The German-Jewish elite were integrationist, not Zionist. You cannot compare the polyglot, multi-racial US scene with what Hitler's pool of voters and supporters were like in those years.
To say that he was not a dictator of the mold of Stalin is, of course, correct. That there were constituencies within the Third Reich he had to take into account - like the churches, the Army officers' clique, the Junkers, heavy industry, organized labor etc., is true. He made concessions to their interests. That is what makes him a modern Western leader who came to power by evolution - not in a bloody Soviet-style revolution that killed and destroyed all other powerful constituencies in the state during and after the struggle for power.
Churchill was bought. Hitler was not. The "Jewish financing" is a red herring! The reality is that Hitler effectively checkmated Jewish power in Germany - and in the rest of Europe. <end>
Thought for the Day:
"After two months of daily fare on NATO bombing, some folks can not identify the NATO logo? No. Rather the Hakenkreuz shuts off their minds."
(Letter to the Zundelsite)