How Hitler fought in the First World War. Corporal Hitler during the First World War

Adolf Hitler went down in history as the man who started the Second World War. As a personality, the future founder and central figure of National Socialism, the founder of the totalitarian dictatorship of the Third Reich and the Fuhrer of Germany was largely formed during the First World War.
What was Adolf Hitler's war like at that time when he was not the Supreme Commander-in-Chief, but one of many soldiers of the First World War?

Adolf before World War I

Having failed in the first round at the Vienna Academy of Fine Arts, Adolf Hitler began what we today call “escape from the army”: he changed addresses, moved from place to place, in every possible way evading conscription. Austrian army. He did not want to serve side by side with Jews, Czechs and representatives of other nationalities, whom he would later declare “subhumans.” In May 1913, Hitler moved from Vienna to Munich. He made money by selling his paintings and making custom signs and posters. The Austrian police, meanwhile, were looking for him as a “dodger.” In the end, he even had to undergo an examination in Salzburg, and the commission declared the future Fuhrer unfit for military service.

Adolf – volunteer

When World War I began, Hitler was 25 years old. In his own words, he was very happy about the news of the start of the war. He immediately submitted an application to the King of Bavaria with a request to serve in the Bavarian army, and received in response an invitation to appear in any Bavarian regiment. Hitler began his service in the 6th reserve battalion of the 2nd Bavarian Infantry Regiment No. 16, which consisted of volunteers. On October 8, Hitler swore allegiance to the King of Bavaria and Emperor Franz Joseph.

Adolf at war

Adolf Hitler began the war on the Western Front in October 1914. He took part in the Battle of Ysère and the battles of Ypres. Apparently he fought very well, since on November 1, 1914 he was awarded the rank of corporal. Hitler was transferred as a liaison to the regimental headquarters.

In 1914, Corporal Hitler took part in positional battles in French Flanders, in 1915 he fought at Nave Chapelle and Arras, and in 1916 in the Battle of the Somme. Was injured. From the hospital he returned to his regiment. In 1917 - again Flanders and Upper Alsace, the battles of Arras, Artois. In 1918, Hitler took part in the spring offensive in France, in the battles of Soissons and Reims, the Marne and Champagne. He distinguished himself in delivering reports to artillery positions in very difficult conditions and saved German infantry from shelling by their own artillery. On October 15, 1918, he was gassed near La Montaigne. As a result of severe defeat nervous system temporarily lost his sight. He was treated first in a field hospital, and then in the psychiatric ward of the Prussian rear infirmary in Lasewalk. It was here, in the hospital, that Adolf Hitler learned about the surrender of Germany and the overthrow of the Kaiser. According to his own recollections, the news of surrender was the most severe shock in Hitler's life.

Adolf Awards

Corporal Hitler was, apparently, a brave soldier. In December 1914 he was awarded the Iron Cross, 2nd class. In September 1917 - Cross with swords for military merit, III degree. In May 1918, he received a regimental diploma for outstanding bravery, and then received a decoration for wounds. In July 1918, Hitler was awarded the Iron Cross, First Class.

Comrades in arms about Adolf

According to numerous testimonies, Corporal Hitler fought bravely and skillfully. Hitler's colleague in the 16th Bavarian Infantry Regiment named Meyer, recalling Hitler's courage, also recalls the testimony of another colleague, Schleehuber. He described Hitler as “a good soldier and an impeccable comrade.” According to Schleehuber, he never saw Hitler “in any way experiencing discomfort from service or avoiding danger,” nor did he hear “anything negative” about him during his time in the division.

All this is further confirmation of a simple fact: a track record in itself says absolutely nothing about a person.

On the same topic:

How Hitler fought in World War I How Adolf Hitler fought in World War I How the Russian army fought in the First World War in France and the Balkans Who dragged Russia into World War I

Participation in wars: World War I. The Second World War
Participation in battles:

(Adolf Hitler) Fuhrer of the National Socialist German Workers' Party since 1921, Reich Chancellor of National Socialist Germany since 1933, Reich Chancellor and Fuhrer of Germany since 1934, Commander-in-Chief (Supreme) of the German Armed Forces in World War II

Adolf Gitler born in Braunau am Inn, Austria, in the family of a customs official. Adolf's father Alois Hitler was illegitimate, and at first bore his mother's surname Schicklgruber, then taking the surname of his mother's husband - Hitler (according to another version, Gutler).

Young Hitler studied poorly and never received a school leaving certificate. Twice Hitler tried in vain to enter the Vienna Academy of Arts. After the death of his mother, Hitler finally moved to Vienna, hoping to earn a living. From 1909 to 1913 he lived very poorly, earning some money by designing posters, advertising cards, etc.

In 1913 Adolf Gitler fled to Munich to escape conscription. The following year, he finally went to the medical examination, but was declared unfit for service. After the start First World War Hitler was drawn to the army, and he volunteered for the 16th Bavarian Reserve Infantry Regiment.

Military service turned a gloomy young man into a convinced militarist and nationalist. Hitler received the rank of corporal, he participated in hostilities and was awarded military decorations four times. After the defeat of Germany, Hitler did not leave the regiment, but remained in it until 1920, acting as a political informant. In September 1919, Hitler joined the German Workers' Party (DAP) in Munich, and in 1920 he left the army to devote himself entirely to work in the party's propaganda department.

This was a time of deep crisis in Germany. The war, payments and indemnities to the victors led to hyperinflation and impoverishment of the population. Fearing the strengthening of the communists, the authorities were tolerant of the strengthening of revanchist organizations. Taking stock of the situation, Hitler transformed the German Workers' Party into the National Socialist German Workers' Party (NSDAP). In July 1921, Hitler was elected chairman of this party.

On November 8-9, 1923, Hitler led the Munich Beer Hall Putsch, a daring attempt to seize power in Bavaria. The putsch was suppressed, Hitler was arrested and sentenced to 5 years in prison for treason. Hitler served only 9 months, during which he wrote his book “My Struggle” (“Mein Kampf”), where he outlined the political philosophy of Nazism. In his work, Hitler declared war on communists and Jews, pathetic liberals, and the restoration of a racially pure Germany. He wrote about Germany, which would rise and dominate the whole world, subjugate peoples and states, and conquer “living space” for colonization in the east.

With the global economic crisis of 1929 and the subsequent depression, a new time had come for the Nazi Party. The Nazis became the second largest faction in the Reichstag. In parallel with parliamentary and political work, the party had paramilitary assault troops (SA), which were engaged in the physical destruction of political opponents. In January 1933, President Hindenburg appointed Hitler as Chancellor and within a year he achieved the establishment of the Nazi dictatorship in Germany.

Hitler used the arson of the Reichstag building to prohibit the activities of the Communist Party and arrest its leaders. In March, the Emergency Powers Act was passed, which gave Hitler 4 years of unlimited dictatorial power. All political parties, except NSDAP, were gradually dispersed. Figures of the Nazi Party forced Jews out of government institutions and placed government structures under the direct control of the Party.

On June 30, 1934, Hitler purged his own ranks ( "Night of the Long Knives"), physically destroying his competitors and people who could be dangerous to him, in particular, Ernst Röhm, who stood at the origins of the NSDAP and brought Hitler into the party. On August 30, 1934, Hindenburg died, and Hitler assumed the functions of president, taking the title of “Führer” - the supreme leader of the Third Reich.

The Fuhrer replaced the SA assault troops with SS security departments, placing Heinrich Himmler at their head. Together with the Gestapo political secret police, the SS created a system of concentration camps where political opponents, Jews and other “undesirable” elements were “deported.” In 1935, Hitler introduced the so-called. Nuremberg racial laws, which deprived people of Jewish origin of German citizenship.

The world community ignored Nazi Germany's demonstrative violations of the Treaty of Versailles. Hitler freely armed the country. With the technical and educational support of the USSR, tank and air force, the army was motorized and equipped with the latest weapons. March 7, 1936 Adolf Gitler sent troops into the Rhineland demilitarized region and began construction of 16 thousand fortifications along the 500 km border with the Netherlands, Belgium, Luxembourg and France, which went 35-100 km deep.

Great Britain and France pushed the German war machine to advance to the east. In 1935, Great Britain signed a naval pact with Germany. In 1936, Hitler entered into an alliance with Benito Mussolini, the fascist head of Italy. On March 11, 1938, he brought a 200,000-strong army into Austria, which captured the entire country by March 13. In September 1938, with the consent of Britain and France, Czechoslovakia was divided, Germany annexed its western part (more developed).

In March 1939, Hitler demanded from Lithuania "Memel Corridor". Continued political games with the Soviet Union. On August 23, 1939, the USSR and Germany signed a non-aggression pact (Molotov-Ribbentrop Pact), which contained a secret protocol on the division of Poland and spheres of influence in Eastern Europe. On September 1, Germany attacked Poland. Western countries declared war on Germany, and World War II began.

Poland had already fallen within a month. Until June 1940, the Scandinavian countries were occupied. France held out for two weeks: from May 25 to June 5. England managed to repel the attack.

In April 1941, German troops captured Yugoslavia and Greece.

On June 22, 1941, Germany attacked the USSR. In December 1941, Hitler's troops were stopped near Moscow. In 1942, the Germans managed to advance to the Volga. On December 7, 1941, the United States declared war on Japan and Germany.

The years of World War II became a tragedy for millions of people, for nations that became victims of genocide. In Germany alone, more than 6 million Jews died in concentration camps. Hitler planned the complete extermination of the nations of Jews and Gypsies.

In 1943 Soviet Union turned the tide of the war. A second front was opened in Western Europe.

In June (according to other sources, July 20), 1944, a group of conspiratorial officers led by Claus von Stauffenberg, seeing the futility of further struggle, attempted to assassinate Hitler. They planted a briefcase with a bomb in the room where the meeting was taking place. Hitler miraculously survived, but suffered serious concussion and moral trauma.

IN recent months wars Adolf Gitler led the remnants of the troops from headquarters, which was located in a fortified underground bunker. When Soviet troops captured Berlin, Hitler hastily married his mistress Eva Braun, after which the young couple committed suicide. The dictator's body was never identified.

So often I was sad about my, as it seemed to me, late appearance on earth and saw an undeserved blow of fate in the fact that I would have to live my whole life among “silence and order.” As you can see, from a young age I was no longer a “pacifist,” and all attempts to educate me in the spirit of pacifism were in vain.

The Boer War flashed hope to me like lightning.

From morning to evening I devoured newspapers, following all the telegrams and reports, and I was happy just because I was able to follow this heroic struggle at least from afar.

The Russo-Japanese War found me a more mature person. I followed these events even more closely. In this war, I took a certain side and, moreover, for national reasons. In discussions related to Russian-Japanese war, I immediately took the side of the Japanese. In the defeat of Russia, I also began to see the defeat of the Austrian Slavs.

Many years later. What had once seemed to me like putrefactive agony was now beginning to seem to me like the calm before the storm. Already during my stay in Vienna, a suffocating atmosphere prevailed in the Balkans, which predicted a thunderstorm. More than once, individual lightning flashes appeared and flared up there, which, however, quickly disappeared, again giving way to impenetrable darkness. But then the first Balkan war broke out and with it the first gusts of wind reached a nervous Europe. The period of time immediately following the first Balkan war was extremely painful. Everyone had a feeling of an approaching catastrophe; the whole earth seemed to be hot and thirsty for the first drop of rain. People were full of melancholy expectation and said to themselves: let the sky finally take pity, let fate quickly send those events that are inevitable anyway. And finally, the first bright lightning illuminated the earth. A thunderstorm began, and the mighty peals of thunder mixed with the roar of cannons on the fields of the world war.

When the first news of the murder of Archduke Franz Ferdinand came to Munich (I was sitting at home and through the window I heard the first insufficiently accurate information about this murder), I was at first gripped by anxiety whether he had been killed by German students, who were indignant at the heir's systematic work on Slavicization of the Austrian state. From my point of view, it would not be surprising that German students would want to free the German people from this internal enemy. It is easy to imagine what the consequences would have been if the assassination of the Archduke had been of this nature. As a result, we would have a whole wave of persecution, which would of course be recognized as “justified” and “fair” by the whole world. But when I learned the name of the alleged murderer, when I was told that the murderer was undoubtedly a Serb, I was seized with a quiet horror at the way inscrutable fate had taken revenge on the Archduke.

One of the most prominent friends of the Slavs fell victim at the hands of Slavic fanatics.

Anyone who has closely followed the relationship between Austria and Serbia in recent years could no longer doubt for a minute that events would develop uncontrollably.

Now the Viennese government is often showered with reproaches for the ultimatum it sent to Serbia. But these reproaches are completely unfair. Any government in the world in a similar situation would do the same. On its eastern border, Austria had an inexorable enemy who made provocations more and more often and who could not calm down until a favorable situation led to the defeat of the Austro-Hungarian monarchy. In Austria there was every reason to assume that the blow against it would be delayed at most until the death of the old emperor; but there was also reason to assume that by this moment the monarchy would generally have lost the ability to offer any serious resistance. During recent years This monarchy was personified to such an extent by the decrepit Franz Joseph that in the eyes of the broad masses the death of this emperor inevitably had to be presented as the death of the most moribund Austrian state. One of the most cunning tricks of Slavic policy was that it deliberately sowed the idea that the “prosperity” of Austria was entirely due to the wisdom of its monarch. The Viennese court circles fell into the bait of this flattery all the more easily because this assessment did not at all correspond to the actual merits of Franz Joseph. The Viennese court did not understand at all that mockery was hidden in this flattery. At court they did not understand, and perhaps did not want to understand, what more destiny monarchies are associated with the state mind of this, as they then put it, “the wisest of monarchs,” the more catastrophic the position of the monarchy will become when one fine day merciless death knocks on Franz Joseph’s door.

Was it even possible then to imagine Austria without this old emperor?

Will the tragedy that once befell Maria Theresa then immediately repeat itself?

No, the reproaches directed against the Viennese government for the fact that in 1914 it went to war, which, as others think, could have been avoided, are completely unfair. No, war could no longer be avoided; it could be delayed for a maximum of one or two years. But this was the curse of German and Austrian diplomacy, that it still tried to delay the inevitable clash and was finally forced to take the fight at the most unfavorable moment. There is no doubt that if the war had been delayed for another short period, then Germany and Austria would have had to fight at an even more unfavorable moment.

No, the fact is that whoever did not want this war should have had the courage to draw the necessary conclusions. And these conclusions could only consist of sacrificing Austria. War would have come in this case, but it would not have been a war of all against Germany alone. But in this case, the division of Austria would be inevitable. Germany would then have a choice: either take part in the division, or return from the division empty-handed.

Those who now grumble and scold the most about the situation in which the war began, those who are now so wise in hindsight - it was they who in the summer of 1914 pushed Germany most into this fatal war.

For many decades, German Social Democracy carried out the most vile persecution of Russia. On the other hand, the center party, based on religious motives, contributed most of all to making Austria the starting point of German politics. Now we have to pay for the consequences of this madness. We reap what we sow. It was impossible to avoid what happened under any circumstances. The fault of the German government was that, in the pursuit of maintaining peace, it missed the most favorable moment for the outbreak of war. The fault of the German government is that, in pursuit of peace, it adopted the policy of alliance with Austria, became bogged down in this policy and, in the end, became the victim of a coalition that opposed its determination towards war to our chimerical dream of preserving peace.

If the Viennese government had then given its ultimatum a different, milder form, it still would not have changed anything. The most that could happen is that the indignation of the people would immediately sweep away the Viennese government itself. For in the eyes of the broad masses of the people, the tone of the Vienna ultimatum was still too soft, and not at all too sharp. Anyone who still tries to deny this today is either a forgetful idle talker or simply a conscious liar.

God have mercy, isn’t it clear that the war of 1914 was by no means imposed on the masses, that the masses, on the contrary, longed for this fight!

The masses finally wanted some kind of resolution. Only this mood explains the fact that two million people - adults and youth - hastened to voluntarily appear under the banner in full readiness to give their last drop of blood to defend their homeland.

I myself experienced an extraordinary uplift these days. The difficult moods are gone. I am not at all ashamed to admit that, carried away by a wave of powerful enthusiasm, I fell to my knees and from the depths of my heart thanked the Lord God for giving me the happiness of living at such a time.

A struggle for freedom began of such strength and scope that the world had never known before. As soon as the events that began took the course that they inevitably had to take, it became clear to the broadest masses that it was no longer about Serbia or even Austria, that the fate of the German nation itself was now being decided.

After many years now in last time the eyes of the people were opened to their own future. The mood was extremely high, but at the same time serious. The people realized that their fate was being decided. That is why the national upsurge was deep and lasting. This seriousness of mood was quite consistent with the circumstances, although at the first moment no one had any idea how incredibly long the beginning war would last. The dream was very common that by winter we would finish the job and return to peaceful work with renewed vigor.

What you want, you believe. The vast majority of people have long been tired of the state of eternal anxiety. This explains the fact that no one wanted to believe in the possibility of a peaceful solution to the Austro-Serbian conflict, and everyone around hoped that war would finally break out. My personal mood was the same.

As soon as I heard in Munich about the assassination attempt on the Austrian Archduke, two thoughts pierced my mind: firstly, that war had now become inevitable, and secondly, that under the circumstances the Habsburg state would be forced to remain loyal to Germany. My greatest fear in former times was that Germany would be plunged into war in the final analysis because of Austria, and yet Austria would remain on the sidelines. It could have happened that the conflict would not have started directly because of Austria, and then the Habsburg government, based on domestic policy would probably try to hide in the bushes. And even if the government itself decided to remain loyal to Germany, the Slavic majority of the state would still sabotage this decision; it would rather smash the entire state into pieces than allow the Habsburgs to remain loyal to Germany. In July 1914, events fortunately developed in such a way that such a danger was eliminated. Willy-nilly, the old Austrian state had to get involved in the war.

My own position was quite clear. From my point of view, the struggle did not begin over whether Austria would receive this or that satisfaction from Serbia. In my opinion, the war was fought because of the very existence of Germany. It was a question of whether or not to be a German nation; it was about our freedom and our future. The state created by Bismarck now had to draw its sword. Young Germany had to prove anew that it was worthy of those conquests that were bought in the heroic struggle of our fathers in the era of the battles of Weissenburg, Sedan and Paris. If in the coming battles our people rise to the occasion, then Germany will finally occupy the most prominent place among the great powers. Then and only then will Germany become an indestructible stronghold of peace, and our children will not have to be malnourished because of the phantom of “eternal peace.”

How many times in your teenage years I dreamed that the time would finally come when I could prove with deeds that my devotion to national ideals was not an empty phrase. It often seemed to me almost a sin that I shouted “Hurray”, without, perhaps, having the internal right to do so. In my opinion, only those who have at least once experienced themselves at the front, where no one has time for jokes anymore, and where the inexorable hand of fate carefully weighs the sincerity of each individual person and entire nations, have the moral right to shout “Hurray.” My heart was filled with proud joy that now, finally, I would be able to test myself. How many times have I sung in a loud voice “Deutschland uber alee”, so many times from the depths of my heart I have shouted “Long live!” and “hurray!” Now I considered it my direct responsibility to the Almighty and to people to prove in practice that I was sincere to the end. I had long ago decided for myself that as soon as the war came (and that it would come, I was absolutely sure of that), I would put the books aside. I knew that with the beginning of the war my place would be where my inner voice would tell me.

I left Austria primarily for political reasons. The same political considerations required that now that the war had begun, I should take my place at the front. I did not go to the front to fight for the Habsburg state, but at any moment I was ready to give my life for my people and for the state that personifies their destinies.

On August 3, 1914, I submitted an application to His Majesty King Ludwig III with a request to accept me as a volunteer in one of the Bavarian regiments. His Majesty's office certainly had a lot of trouble these days; I was all the more delighted when the very next day I received an answer to my petition. I remember, with trembling hands, I opened the envelope and with trepidation read the resolution to satisfy my request. There were no limits to the delight and feeling of gratitude. A few days later I put on a uniform, which I then had to wear for almost 6 years in a row.

Now for me, as for every German, the greatest and unforgettable era of earthly existence has begun. The entire past receded into the tenth plane compared to the events of these unprecedented battles. Now, as we mark the first tenth anniversary of these great events, I remember these days with great sorrow, but also with great pride. I am happy and proud that fate was merciful to me, that I was given the opportunity to participate in the great heroic struggle of my people.

I vividly remember, as if it were only yesterday, how I first appeared among my dear comrades in military uniform, then how our detachment marched for the first time, then our military exercises and, finally, the day we were sent to the front.

Like many others, at that time I was oppressed by only one painful thought: will we be late? This thought really haunted me. Reveling in every news of a new victory of German arms, I at the same time secretly suffered from the thought that I personally would be too late to report to the front. Indeed, with each new news of victory, the danger of being late became more real.

Finally the longed-for day arrived when we left Munich to go where duty called us. For the last time I looked at the banks of the Rhine and said goodbye to our great river, which all the sons of our people now stood in defense of. No, we will not allow the ancient enemy to desecrate the waters of this river? The morning fog cleared, the sun came out and illuminated the surroundings, and then the great old song “Wacht am Rhein” burst out from everyone’s hearts. Every single person on our long endless train sang. My heart was fluttering like a caught bird.

Then I remember a damp, cold night in Flanders. We walk in silence. As soon as dawn begins, we hear the first iron “greeting”. A shell bursts with a crash above our heads; fragments fall very close and explode the wet ground. Before the cloud from the shell had time to dissipate, the first loud “hurray” was heard from two hundred throats, serving as an answer to the first messenger of death. Then a continuous crash and roar, noise and howl begins around us, and we all feverishly rush forward towards the enemy and through a short time We meet chest to chest with the enemy in a potato field. Behind us, a song is heard from afar, then it is heard closer and closer. The melody jumps from one company to another. And at the moment when it seems that death is very close to us, the native song reaches us, we also turn on and loudly, victoriously rushes: “Deutschland, Deutschland uber ales.”

Four days later we returned to our original position. Now even our gait has become different, 16-year-old boys have turned into adults.

The volunteers of our regiment may not have yet learned how to fight properly, but they already knew how to die, like real old soldiers.

That was the beginning.

Then it went on month after month and year after year. The horrors of everyday battles replaced the romance of the early days. The first delights gradually cooled down. The joyful uplift was replaced by a feeling of fear of death. The time had come when everyone had to hesitate between the dictates of duty and the instinct of self-preservation. I also had to go through these moods. Always, when death wandered very close, something began to protest in me. This “something” tried to convince the weak body that the “mind” required him to give up the fight. In fact, it was not intelligence, but, alas, it was only cowardice. It was she who, under various pretexts, embarrassed each of us. Sometimes the hesitations were extremely painful, and only with difficulty did they overcome the last remnants of conscience. The louder the voice became, calling for caution, the more seductively it whispered thoughts of rest and peace into the ears, the more decisively I had to fight with myself, then finally the voice of duty prevailed. In the winter of 1915/16, I personally managed to finally overcome these sentiments within myself. The will has won. In the first days I went into the attack in an enthusiastic mood, with jokes and laughter. Now I went into battle with calm determination. But it was precisely this last mood that could only be lasting. Now I was able to meet the most severe trials of fate, without fear that my head or nerves would refuse to serve.

The young volunteer turned into an old seasoned soldier.

This change occurred not in me alone, but in the entire army. She emerged from the eternal battles matured and stronger. Those who were unable to withstand these tests were broken by the events.

Only now could it be truly possible to judge the qualities of our army; only now, after two, three years, during which the army went from one battle to another, all the time fighting against superior enemy forces, enduring hunger and all kinds of hardships, only now did we see what the priceless qualities of this one-of-a-kind army were.

Centuries and millennia will pass and humanity, remembering the greatest examples of heroism, will still not be able to ignore the heroism of the German armies in the world war. The further these times go into the past, the brighter the images of our immortal warriors shine for us, showing examples of fearlessness. As long as the Germans live on our land, they will remember with pride that these fighters were the sons of our people.

At that time I was a soldier and did not want to get involved in politics. Yes, this was not a time for politics. Even now I am convinced that the last unskilled worker in those days brought much greater benefit to the state and fatherland than any, say, “parliamentarian.” I have never hated these talkers more than during the war, when every decent person who had something in his soul went to the front and fought with the enemy and, in any case, did not engage in oratory in the rear. I simply hated all these “politicians” and, if it were up to me, we would put shovels in their hands and form them into a “parliamentary” battalion of unskilled workers; let them then debate among themselves as much as their heart desires - at least they would not cause harm and would not outrage honest people.

So at that time I didn’t want to hear about politics; however, it was still necessary to speak out about certain topical issues, since it was about problems that interested the entire nation and were especially closely related to us soldiers.

At that time, two things internally upset me.

One part of the press, immediately after our first victories, began gradually and, perhaps, even imperceptibly for many, to pour a little bitterness into the general cup of popular upsurge. This was done under the guise of a certain goodwill and even a certain concern. This press began to express its doubts that our people, you see, are celebrating their first victories too noisily.

And what? Instead of taking these gentlemen by their long ears and shutting their throats so that they would not dare to offend the struggling people, instead they began to widely talk about the fact that indeed our enthusiasm is “excessive”, makes an inappropriate impression, etc.

People did not understand at all that if enthusiasm now wavered, it would not be possible to evoke it again at will. On the contrary, the rapture of victory had to be maintained with all our might. Was it really possible to win a war that required the greatest effort of all the spiritual forces of the nation if there were no power of enthusiasm?

I knew the psyche of the broad masses too well not to understand how inappropriate all so-called “aesthetic” considerations were here. From my point of view, you would have to be crazy not to do everything possible to further inflame passions - to the boiling point. But that people wanted to further reduce their enthusiasm, I simply could not understand.

Secondly, I was extremely upset by the position that we took at that time in relation to Marxism. From my point of view, this proved that people do not have the slightest idea of ​​​​the destructive effect of this plague. We seemed to seriously believe that the statement “we have no more parties” actually had some influence on Marxists.

We did not understand that in this case it was not a question of a party at all, but of a doctrine entirely aimed at the destruction of all humanity. Why, we haven’t heard this “we” in our over-Jewish universities. But it is known that many of our high-ranking officials are very little interested in books, and what they did not hear at the university does not exist for them at all. The biggest revolutions in science pass completely without a trace for these “heads”, which, by the way, explains the fact that most of our government agencies often lags behind private enterprises. Some exceptions here only confirm the rule.

In the days of August 1914, to identify the German worker with Marxism was an unheard-of absurdity. In the August days, the German worker had just escaped the clutches of this plague. Otherwise, he would have been generally unable to take part in the general struggle. And what? It was precisely at this time that “we” were stupid enough to believe that Marxism had now become a “national” movement. This profound consideration is only proven once again by the fact that our high rulers never took the trouble to become seriously acquainted with Marxist teaching, otherwise such an absurd thought could not have occurred to them.

In the July days of 1914, gentlemen Marxists, who set themselves the goal of exterminating all non-Jewish nation states, were horrified to see that the German workers, whom they had hitherto held in their clutches, had now seen the light and were moving more and more decisively to the side of their fatherland every day. Within just a few days, the spell of Social Democracy melted away, the vile deception of the people was dispelled into dust. A gang of Jewish leaders remained lonely and abandoned, as if not a small trace remained of their 60-year-old anti-people agitation. It was a difficult moment for the deceivers. But as soon as these leaders realized the danger that threatened them, they immediately put on a new mask of lies and began to pretend that they sympathized with the national upsurge.

It would seem that this is where the moment has come - to decisively put pressure on this entire lying company of poisoners of the people's consciousness. It was then that it was necessary to deal with them without further words, without paying the slightest attention to the crying and lamentations. The bogeyman of international solidarity in August 1914 completely disappeared from the minds of the German working class. Just a few weeks later, American shrapnel began to send such impressive “brotherly greetings” to our workers that the last vestiges of internationalism began to evaporate. Now that the German worker had again returned to the national path, the government, which correctly understood its tasks, was obliged to mercilessly exterminate those who incited the workers against the nation.

If at the front we could sacrifice our best sons, then it was not at all a sin to put an end to these insects in the rear.

Instead of all this, His Majesty Emperor Wilhelm personally extended his hand to these criminals and thereby gave this gang of insidious murderers the opportunity to take a breath and wait for “better” days.

The snake could continue its evil work. Now she acted, of course, much more carefully, but that is why she became even more dangerous. Honest simpletons dreamed of civil peace, and meanwhile these insidious criminals were preparing a civil war.

At that time I was extremely concerned that the authorities had taken such a terrible half-hearted position; but that the consequences of this would, in turn, be even more terrible, I could not do that then

It was clear as day what needed to be done then. It was necessary to immediately lock up all the leaders of this movement. It was necessary to immediately condemn them and free the nation from them. It was necessary to immediately use military force in the most decisive manner and exterminate this plague once and for all. The parties had to be dissolved, the Reichstag had to be called to order with the help of bayonets, and it was best to completely abolish it immediately. If the republic now considers itself the right to dissolve entire parties, then during the war this could have been resorted to with much greater justification. After all, then for our people the question was at stake - to be or not to be!

Of course, then the following question would immediately arise: is it even possible to fight with a sword against certain ideas. Is it even possible to use brute force against one or another “worldview?”

I asked myself this question more than once at that time.

Thinking through this question on the basis of historical analogies associated with the persecution of religions, I came to the following conclusions.

Defeating certain ideas and ideas by force of arms (no matter how true or false these ideas are) is only possible if the weapons themselves are in the hands of people who also represent an attractive idea and are bearers of an entire worldview.

The use of one naked force, unless there is some great idea behind it, will never lead to the destruction of another idea and will not deprive it of the opportunity to spread. There is only one exception to this rule: if it comes to the complete destruction of every single bearer of this idea, to the complete physical extermination of those who could continue the tradition further. But this in turn mostly means complete disappearance the whole state organism for a very long time, sometimes forever. Such bloody extermination mostly falls on the best part of the people, because persecution, which does not have a big idea behind it, will cause protest from precisely the best part of the sons of the people. Those persecutions that, in the eyes of the best part of the people, are morally unjustified, lead precisely to the fact that the persecuted ideas become the property of new segments of the population. The feeling of opposition among many is caused by the mere fact that they cannot calmly see how a certain idea is persecuted through naked violence.

In these cases, the number of supporters of a given idea grows in direct proportion to the persecution that falls on it. In order to destroy such a new teaching without a trace, it is sometimes necessary to carry out such merciless persecution that this state risks losing its most valuable people. This state of affairs avenges itself in that such “internal” cleansing turns out to be achievable only at the cost of complete weakening of society. And if the persecuted idea has already managed to capture a more or less extensive circle of supporters, then even such the most merciless persecution will ultimately prove useless.

We all know that childhood especially exposed to danger. At this age, physical death is very common. As you mature, the body's resistance becomes stronger. And only with the onset of old age should he again give way to a new young life. The same can be said, with certain modifications, about the life of ideas.

Almost all attempts to destroy this or that teaching with the help of naked violence without a specific ideological basis that would stand behind the violence ended in failure and often led to directly opposite results.

But the primary prerequisite for the success of a campaign conducted by force is, in any case, systematicity and perseverance. It is possible to defeat this or that teaching by force only if this force is first of all applied over a long period of time with equal persistence. But as soon as hesitation begins, as soon as persecution begins to alternate with gentleness and vice versa, we can say for sure that the teaching that is subject to destruction will not only recover from persecution, but will even grow stronger as a result of it. As soon as the wave of persecution subsides, new indignation will rise over the suffering suffered, and this will only recruit new supporters into the ranks of the persecuted doctrine. His old supporters will become even more steeled in their hatred of the persecutors, the breakaway supporters, after eliminating the danger of persecution, will return to their old sympathies, etc. The main prerequisite for the success of persecution is thus their continuous, persistent application. But persistence in this area can only be the result of ideological conviction. That violence which does not spring from a firm ideological conviction will certainly be unsure of itself and will experience hesitation. Such violence will never have enough constancy and stability. Only the worldview in which people fanatically believe gives such constancy. Such persistence depends, of course, on the energy and brutal determination of the person in charge of the operation. The outcome of the matter therefore to a certain extent also depends on the personal qualities of the leader.

In addition, the following must be kept in mind.

About every worldview (be it religious or political origin- it can sometimes be difficult to draw a line here) we can say that it is not so much fighting to destroy the enemy’s ideological base as to implement its own ideas. But thanks to this, the struggle takes on an offensive rather than a defensive character. The goal of the struggle is easily established here: this goal will be achieved when one’s own idea wins. It is much more difficult to say that the enemy’s idea has already been completely defeated and victory over it is finally guaranteed. Establishing the moment when exactly this last goal can be considered achieved is always very difficult. For this reason alone, the offensive struggle for one’s own worldview will always be waged more systematically and on a larger scale than a defensive struggle. In this area, as in all areas, offensive tactics have all the advantages over defensive ones. But a violent struggle waged against certain ideas will certainly have the character of a defensive struggle only until the sword itself becomes the bearer, herald and propagandist of a new ideological teaching.

As a result, we can say this:

Any attempt to overcome a certain idea by force of arms will fail, unless the struggle against the said idea itself takes the form of an offensive struggle for a new worldview. Only in this case, if another worldview is fully ideologically opposed to one worldview, will violence play a decisive role and benefit the side that is able to apply it with maximum ruthlessness and duration.

But this is precisely what has been missing so far in the struggle that was waged against Marxism. That is why this struggle did not lead to success.

This also explains the fact that Bismarck’s exceptional law against the socialists ultimately did not lead to the goal and could not lead to it. Bismarck also lacked the platform of a new worldview, for the triumph of which the entire struggle could be waged. This role could not be played by more than liquid slogans: “silence and order”, “authority of the state”, etc. Only unprincipled officials and stupid “idealists” would believe that people would go to their death in the name of such, so to speak, slogans.

To successfully carry out the campaign launched by Bismarck, there was not enough ideological support for this entire campaign. That is why Bismarck was forced to make the very implementation of his legislation against the socialists dependent on that institution, which itself was already a product of the Marxist way of thinking. Bismarck was forced to make bourgeois democracy the judge in his dispute with the Marxists, but this meant letting the goat into the garden.

All this logically followed from the fact that in the struggle against Marxism there was no other opposing idea that would have the same attractive force. The result of Bismarck's entire campaign against the socialists was nothing but disappointment.

Well, at the beginning of the World War, was the situation different in this regard? Unfortunately no!

The more I thought at that time about the need for a sharp and decisive struggle by the government against social democracy as the embodiment of modern Marxism, the clearer it became to me that we did not have any ideological replacement for this teaching. What could we then give to the masses in order to break social democracy? We did not have any movement capable of leading the enormous masses of workers who had just, to a greater or lesser extent, freed themselves from the influence of their Marxist leaders. It is absolutely absurd and more than stupid to think that an international fanatic, who has just left the ranks of one class party, will immediately agree to join the ranks of another, also class, but bourgeois party. No matter how unpleasant it may be for various organizations to hear, we have to say that our bourgeois politicians also fully defend the class character of organizations - only not of others, but of their own. Whoever dares to deny this fact is not only insolent, but also a stupid liar.

Beware in general of considering the broad masses more stupid than they really are. In political matters, correct instinct often means more than reason. It may be objected to us that the internationalist sentiments of the masses prove the exact opposite and refute our opinion about the true instincts of the people. To this we will object that democratic pacifism is no less absurd, and yet the bearers of this “teaching” are usually representatives of the propertied classes. As long as millions of bourgeois continue to read and pray for democratic newspapers every morning, it is not becoming for representatives of our propertied classes to laugh at the stupidity of their “comrades.” In the end, both the workers and these bourgeois have more or less the same ideological “food” - both of them feed on crap.

It is very harmful to deny the facts that exist. It is impossible to deny the fact that in the class struggle it is not just about ideological problems. This is often stated, especially in the election campaign, but it nevertheless has nothing to do with the truth. The class prejudices of one part of our people, the top-down attitude towards the manual worker - all these, unfortunately, are real facts, and not at all the fantasies of lunatics.

Unfortunately, our intelligentsia does not even think about how it happened that we were unable to avoid the consolidation of Marxism. She thinks even less about the fact that since our wonderful order failed to prevent Marxism from strengthening, it will not be so easy to make up for what was lost and uproot it. All this does not speak in favor of the great thinking abilities of our intelligentsia.

Bourgeois (as they call themselves) parties will never be able to simply win over the “proletarian” masses into their camp. For here two worlds confront each other, partly separated artificially, and partly naturally. The relationship between these two worlds can only be a relationship of struggle. Victory in this struggle would inevitably go to the younger party, that is, in this case, Marxism.

It was, of course, possible to begin the struggle against Social Democracy in 1914; but until a serious ideological replacement for this movement was actually found, this struggle could not have solid ground and was not able to give good results. Here we had a huge gap.

I formed this opinion long before the war. And that is why I could not decide to join any of the already existing parties. The events of the World War further strengthened my opinion that there is no way to truly carry out a struggle against Social Democracy until we can oppose it with a movement that would represent something more than an ordinary “parliamentary” party.

Among my close comrades, I have spoken out in this sense more than once.

It was in connection with this that my first thought arose to someday get involved in politics.

This gave me a reason to talk more than once in small circles of friends that after the end of the war I would try to become a speaker, maintaining my old profession.

I thought about this all the time and, as it turned out, not in vain.

CHAPTER VI
WAR PROPAGANDA

Having begun to delve deeper into all political issues, I could not help but stop my attention on the problems of military propaganda. In propaganda in general, I saw a tool that Marxist-socialist organizations use masterfully. I have long been convinced that the correct use of these weapons is a real art and that the bourgeois parties are almost completely incapable of using these weapons. Only the Christian Social Movement, especially in the era of Lueger, was still able to use the means of propaganda with some virtuosity, which ensured some of its successes.

But it was only during the World War that it became quite clear what gigantic results could be achieved by properly directed propaganda. Unfortunately, here too it was necessary to study the matter using examples of the activities of the other side, because Germany’s work in this area was more than modest. We almost completely lacked any kind of educational work. This immediately caught the eye of every soldier. For me, this was just another reason to think more deeply about propaganda issues.

There was often more than enough leisure for reflection. The enemy gave us practical lessons at every step.

The enemy exploited this weakness of ours with unheard-of dexterity and truly brilliant calculation. I learned an infinite amount from these examples of enemy military propaganda. Those who were supposed to be in charge of this least of all thought about the excellent work of the enemy. On the one hand, our superiors considered themselves too smart to learn anything from others, and on the other hand, they simply lacked good will.

Did we have any propaganda at all?

Unfortunately, I have to answer this question in the negative. Everything that was undertaken in this direction was so wrong and useless from the very beginning that it could not bring any benefit, and often brought direct harm.

Our “propaganda” was unsuitable in form and in essence was completely at odds with the psychology of the soldier. The more we looked at the production of propaganda in our country, the more we became convinced of this.

What is propaganda - a goal or a means? Already in this first simple question our superiors did not understand at all.

In fact, propaganda is a means and therefore should be considered only from the point of view of the end. That is why the form of propaganda must follow from the goal, serve it, and be determined by it. It is also clear that, depending on general needs, the goal can change and propaganda must also change accordingly. The goal that stood before us in the world war, for the achievement of which we waged an inhuman struggle, was the noblest goal that has ever stood before people. We fought for the freedom and independence of our people, for a secure piece of bread, for our future, for the honor of the nation. Contrary to statements to the contrary, the honor of a nation is something that really exists. Peoples who do not want to defend their honor will sooner or later lose their freedom and independence, which, in the end, will only be fair, because worthless generations, deprived of honor, do not deserve to enjoy the benefits of freedom. He who wants to remain a cowardly slave cannot have honor, because because of it he will inevitably have to come into conflict with one or another hostile force.

Participation in the First World War instilled in Hitler that craving for military organization, which later, after the defeat of Germany, he restored in unofficial armed structures. In the photograph, Hitler participates in the ceremony of consecrating the standards of the party paramilitary organizations (in this case, the NSKK).

The German people were engaged in a struggle for human existence, and the purpose of our war propaganda should have been to support this struggle and promote our victory.

When the peoples on our planet are fighting for their existence, when their destinies are being decided in the battles of nations, then all considerations about humanity, aesthetics, etc., of course, disappear. After all, all these concepts were not taken out of thin air, but stem from a person’s imagination and are associated with his ideas. When a person parts with this world, the above-mentioned concepts also disappear, for they are not generated by nature itself, but only by man. The bearers of these concepts are only a few peoples or, better said, a few races. Concepts such as humanity or aesthetics will disappear if those races that are the creators and bearers of them disappear.

That is why, since one or another people is forced to enter into a direct struggle for its very existence in this world, all such concepts immediately acquire only a subordinate meaning. Since these concepts run counter to the instinct of self-preservation of the people, who now have to wage such a bloody struggle, they should no longer play any decisive role in determining the forms of the struggle.

Moltke already said regarding humanity that during war the most humane thing is to deal with the enemy as quickly as possible. The more mercilessly we fight, the sooner the war will end. The faster we deal with the enemy, the less suffering he suffers. This is the only form of humanity available in times of war.

When in such things they begin to chatter about aesthetics, etc., then we have to answer only this way: since questions about the very existence of a people come to the fore, this frees us from any considerations about beauty. The ugliest thing that can happen in human life, this is the yoke of slavery. Or do our decadents find, perhaps, very “aesthetic” the fate that has befallen our people now? There is no need to argue with the Jewish gentlemen, who in most cases are the inventors of this fiction about aesthetics.

But if these considerations of humanity and beauty cease to play a real role in the struggle of peoples, then it is clear that they can no longer serve as a scale of propaganda.

During the war, propaganda had to be a means to an end. The goal was to fight for the existence of the German people. The criterion of our military propaganda could thus be determined only by the above-mentioned goal. The most brutal form of struggle was humane if it ensured a faster victory. Any form of struggle had to be considered “beautiful” if it only helped the nation win the battle for freedom and its dignity.

In such a life-and-death struggle, this was the only correct criterion for military propaganda.

If at least some clarity in these matters prevailed in the so-called decisive authorities, our propaganda would never be characterized by uncertainty in matters of form. For propaganda is the same weapon of struggle, and in the hands of an expert in this matter, it is the most terrible of weapons.

Another crucial question was this: to whom should propaganda address itself? Towards the educated intelligentsia or the vast mass of poorly educated people.

It was clear to us that propaganda must always appeal only to the masses.

For the intelligentsia, or for those who are now called intellectuals, what is needed is not propaganda, but scientific knowledge. Just as a poster in itself is not art, propaganda in its content is not a science. The entire art of a poster comes down to the ability of its author to attract the attention of the crowd to it with the help of colors and shapes.

At a poster exhibition, the only important thing is that the poster is visual and attracts due attention. The more a poster achieves this goal, the more skillfully it is made. Anyone who wants to study the issues of art itself cannot limit himself to studying only posters; it is not enough for him to simply walk through a poster exhibition. Such a person must be required to engage in a thorough study of art and be able to delve into individual major works of art.

The same can be said to a certain extent regarding propaganda.

The task of propaganda is not to provide a scientific education to a few individuals, but to influence the masses, to make certain important, albeit few, facts, events, and necessities about which the masses had no idea until now, accessible to their understanding. .

The whole art here should consist in making the masses believe: such and such a fact really exists, such and such a necessity is really inevitable, such and such a conclusion is really correct, etc. You must learn to do this simple, but also great thing yourself. in the best, most perfect way. And so, just as in our example with the poster, propaganda should influence more the feeling and only to a very small extent the so-called reason. The point is to focus the attention of the masses on one or more major necessities, and not at all to provide scientific justification for individuals who already have some training.

All propaganda must be accessible to the masses; its level must proceed from the measure of understanding characteristic of the most backward individuals among those on whom it wants to influence. Than to more propaganda appeals to people, the more elementary its ideological level should be. And since we are talking about propaganda during a war in which literally the entire nation is drawn in, it is clear that propaganda should be as simple as possible.

The less so-called scientific ballast in our propaganda, the more it appeals exclusively to the feeling of the crowd, the greater the success will be. And only success can in this case measure the correctness or incorrectness of a given propaganda statement. And in any case, not with how satisfied individual scientists or individual young people who received an “aesthetic” education are with the production of propaganda.

The art of propaganda lies in correctly understanding the sensory world of the broad masses; only this makes it possible to make this or that idea accessible to the masses in a psychologically understandable form. This is the only way to find the way to the hearts of millions. The fact that our overly smart authorities did not even understand this once again speaks of the incredible mental inertia of this layer.

But if you understand what has been said correctly, then the next lesson follows.

It is wrong to give too much versatility to propaganda (which is appropriate, perhaps, when it comes to scientific teaching of a subject).

The receptivity of the masses is very limited, their circle of understanding is narrow, but their forgetfulness is very great. For this reason alone, any propaganda, if it wants to be successful, must be limited to only a few points and present these points briefly, clearly, understandably, in the form of easily remembered slogans, repeating all this until there can no longer be any doubt about it. that even the most retarded of the listeners probably learned what we wanted. As soon as we abandon this principle and try to make our propaganda multifaceted, its influence will immediately begin to dissipate, because the broad masses will not be able to either digest or remember all the material. Thus, the result will be weakened, and perhaps even lost.

Thus, the wider the audience we want to influence, the more carefully we must keep these psychological motives in mind.

For example, it was completely wrong that German and Austrian propaganda in humorous leaflets always tried to present the enemy in a funny way. This was wrong because at the very first meeting with a real enemy, our soldier received a completely different idea of ​​him than was portrayed in the press. The result was enormous harm. Our soldier felt deceived; he stopped believing in everything else about our press. It began to seem to him that the press was deceiving him in everything. Of course, this could not in any way strengthen the will to fight and temper our soldier. On the contrary, our soldier fell into despair.

The war propaganda of the British and Americans, on the contrary, was completely correct from a psychological point of view. The British and Americans portrayed the Germans as barbarians and Huns; by this they prepared their soldier for any horrors of war.

Thanks to this, the English soldier never felt deceived by his press. With us, the situation was just the opposite. Eventually our soldier began to count; that our entire press is “a complete deception.” This was the result of the fact that the work of propaganda was given into the hands of donkeys or simply “capable fellows”, without realizing that the most brilliant experts in human psychology had to be assigned to such work.

A complete misunderstanding of soldier psychology led to German war propaganda becoming a model of what not to do.

Meanwhile, we could learn a lot in this regard from the enemy. It was only necessary without prejudice and with with open eyes to observe how for four and a half years, without relaxing his efforts for a single minute, the enemy tirelessly hit the same point with enormous success.

But worst of all we understood what is the primary prerequisite for any successful propaganda activity, namely, that all propaganda must in principle be painted in subjective colors. In this regard, our propaganda - and, moreover, on the initiative from above - sinned so much from the very first days of the war that we truly have to ask ourselves: really, were these things explained by stupidity alone!?

What would we say, for example, about a poster that was supposed to advertise one particular type of soap, but which would at the same time convey to the masses the idea that other types of soap are quite good?

At best, we would only shake our heads at such “objectivity.”

The task of propaganda is, for example, not to scrupulously weigh how fair the positions of all parties participating in the war are, but to prove its own exclusive rightness. The task of military propaganda is to continually prove its own rightness, and not at all to seek objective truth and doctrinally present this truth to the masses, even in cases where this turns out to be to the advantage of the enemy.

It was a huge fundamental mistake to pose the question of who was responsible for the war in such a way that it was not Germany alone that was to blame, but also other countries. No, we had to tirelessly propagate the idea that the blame lies entirely and exclusively with our opponents. This had to be done even if it was not true. Meanwhile. Germany was not actually to blame for starting the war.

What happened as a result of this half-heartedness?

After all, millions of people are not made up of diplomats or professional lawyers. The people do not consist of people who are always able to reason sensibly. The masses of the people consist of people who often hesitate, children of nature who are easily inclined to fall into doubt, move from one extreme to another, etc. As soon as we have allowed even a shadow of doubt that we are right, this has already created a whole center of doubts and hesitations . The masses are no longer able to decide where the enemy’s wrongness ends and where our own wrongness begins. In this case, our masses become distrustful, especially when we are dealing with an enemy who, far from repeating such a stupid mistake, but systematically hits one point and, without any hesitation, puts all the responsibility on us. What is it surprising if in the end our own people begin to believe hostile propaganda more than our own? This misfortune becomes all the more bitter when it comes to the people, who are already easily hypnotized by “objectivity.” After all, we Germans are already accustomed to thinking most of all about how not to cause any injustice to the enemy. We are disposed to think this way even in cases where the danger is very great, when it comes directly to the destruction of our people and our state.

There is no need that those at the top did not understand it that way.

The soul of the people is distinguished in many respects by feminine traits. The arguments of sober reason have less effect on her than the arguments of feeling.

People's feelings are not complex, they are very simple and monotonous. There is no room for particularly subtle differentiation here. People say “yes” or “no”; he loves or hates. Truth or lie! Right or wrong! People talk straightforwardly. He has no half-heartedness.

English propaganda understood all this in the most ingenious way, understood it and took it into account. The British truly had no half-heartedness; their propaganda could not sow any doubts.

English propaganda perfectly understood the primitiveness of the feelings of the broad masses. Brilliant evidence of this is the English propaganda regarding the “German horrors.” In this way, the British simply brilliantly created the preconditions for the steadfastness of their troops on the fronts even in the moments of the most severe English defeats. The British achieved equally excellent results for themselves with their tireless propaganda of the idea that the Germans alone were the culprits of the war. In order for this blatant lie to be believed, it was necessary to propagate it in the most one-sided, rude, persistent way. Only in this way could the feelings of the broad masses of the people be influenced, and only in this way could the British ensure that this lie was believed.

How effective this propaganda turned out to be can be seen from the fact that this opinion not only remained in the enemy camp for four whole years, but also penetrated among our own people.

It is not surprising that fate did not promise such success for our propaganda. Already the internal duality of our propaganda contained within itself the germ of impotence. The very content of our propaganda made it unlikely from the very beginning that such propaganda would make the proper impression on our masses. Only soulless dummies could imagine that with the help of such pacifist water we could inspire people to die in the fight for our cause.

As a result, such unfortunate “propaganda” turned out to be not only useless, but also downright harmful.

Even if the content of our propaganda were absolutely brilliant, it still could not succeed if the main, central premise is forgotten: all propaganda must necessarily be limited to only a few ideas, but repeat them endlessly. Constancy and perseverance are the main prerequisite for success here, as in many other things in this world.

It is precisely in the field of propaganda that one can least of all listen to aesthetes or jaded intellectuals. The first cannot be obeyed because then in a short time both the content and form of propaganda will turn out to be adapted not to the needs of the masses, but to the needs of narrow circles of armchair politicians. It is dangerous to listen to the voice of the latter simply because, being themselves deprived of healthy feelings, they are constantly looking for new thrills. These gentlemen get bored with everything in no time. They are constantly looking for variety and are completely incapable of thinking even for a minute about how a simple, artless crowd feels. These gentlemen are always the first critics. They do not like the current propaganda either in content or form. Everything seems too outdated, too formulaic to them. They are all looking for something new, something versatile. This kind of criticism is a real scourge; at every step it prevents truly successful propaganda that would be able to win over the genuine masses. As soon as the organization of propaganda, its content, its form begin to conform to these jaded intellectuals, all propaganda will blur and lose all attractive power.

Serious propaganda exists not to satisfy the need of jaded intellectuals for interesting variety, but to convince, first of all, the broad masses of the people. The masses, in their inertia, always need a significant period of time before they even pay attention to one or another issue. In order for the memory of the masses to assimilate even a completely simple concept, it is necessary to repeat it in front of the masses thousands and thousands of times.

Approaching the masses from completely different angles, we must under no circumstances change the content of our propaganda and must lead it to the same conclusion each time. We can and must propagate our slogan from a variety of angles. Its correctness can also be illuminated in different ways. But the result must always be the same, and the slogan must invariably be repeated at the end of every speech, every article, etc. Only in this case will our propaganda have a truly uniform and united effect.

Only if we adhere to this in the most consistent manner with endurance and perseverance will we, over time, see that success begins to increase, and only then will we be able to see what amazing, what truly grandiose results such propaganda produces.

And in this regard, the propaganda of the opponents was exemplary. It was carried out with exceptional persistence and exemplary tirelessness. It was dedicated to only a few, few, but important ideas and was intended exclusively for the broad masses. Throughout the war, the enemy, without respite, introduced the same ideas into the masses in the same form. He never began to change his propaganda even in the slightest, for he was convinced that its effect was excellent. At the beginning of the war, it seemed that this propaganda was downright insane in its impudence, then it began to produce only a somewhat unpleasant impression, and in the end, everyone believed it. Four and a half years later, a revolution broke out in Germany, and so what? This revolution borrowed almost all its slogans from the arsenal of military propaganda of our opponents.

One more thing was well understood in England: that the success of propaganda largely depends on its mass application; The British spared no money on propaganda, remembering that the costs would be covered a hundredfold.

In England, propaganda was considered a weapon of the first rank. Meanwhile, here in Germany, propaganda became an occupation for unemployed politicians and for all those sad-looking knights who were looking for warm places in the rear.

This explains the fact that the results of our military propaganda were zero.

CHAPTER VII
REVOLUTION

The military propaganda of the opponents began in our camp already in 1915. Since 1916 it has become more and more intense, and by the beginning of 1918 it is already directly inundating us. At every step one could feel the negative influences of this soul-fishing. Our army gradually learned to think the way the enemy wanted it.

Our measures to combat this propaganda turned out to be worthless.

The then head of the army had both the desire and determination to fight against this propaganda wherever it appeared at the front. But, alas, he lacked the appropriate tool for this. And from a psychological point of view, countermeasures should not have come from the command itself. In order for our counter-propaganda to have its effect, it had to come from home. After all, it was for this house, because it was for our fatherland that the soldiers at the front performed miracles of heroism and went to any hardship for almost four years.

And what actually turned out to be? How did our homeland respond, how did our home respond to all this outrageous propaganda of our opponents?

Related information.

On August 1, 1914, the First World War began. Hitler was delighted by the news of the war. He immediately applied to Ludwig III for permission to serve in the Bavarian army. The very next day he was asked to report to any Bavarian regiment. He chose the 16th Bavarian Reserve Regiment.

In April 1916, he met Charlotte Lobjoie, who, according to some, gave birth to his son Jean Loret. Wounded in the left thigh by a grenade fragment near Le Bargur in the first Battle of the Somme. I ended up in the Red Cross hospital in Beelitsa. Upon leaving the hospital he returned to the regiment

October 15, 1918 - gas poisoning near La Montaigne as a result of the explosion of a chemical shell near it. Eye damage. Temporary loss of vision. Treatment in the Bavarian field hospital in Udenard, then in the Prussian rear hospital in Pasewalk. While being treated in the hospital, he learned about the surrender of Germany and the overthrow of the Kaiser, which became a great shock for him.

Hitler considered the defeat in the war of the German Empire and the November Revolution of 1918 to be the product of traitors who “stabbed in the back” the victorious German army.

November revolution - revolution in November 1918 in the German Empire, one of the reasons for which was the increase in social tension and disorder economic life, which were symptoms of Germany approaching defeat in the First World War. The revolution led to the establishment of a parliamentary democracy in Germany known as the Weimar Republic.

The legend of the stab in the back is a conspiracy theory spread by representatives of the German military high command and shifting the blame for the country's defeat in the First World War to social democracy. According to this legend, the German army emerged undefeated from the battlefields of the World War, but was “stabbed in the back” by opposition “rootless” civilians at home. At the same time, anti-Semites linked the “internal” and “external” enemies of the empire with the Jewish conspiracy.

After the war, Hitler had not yet decided whether he would be an architect or a politician. At the same time, he gave his works to the prominent artist Max Zeper for evaluation. He handed over the paintings to Ferdinand Steger for imprisonment. Steger wrote: “...an absolutely extraordinary talent.”

What is happening in Germany is the same leapfrog as in Russia. The fight against Bolshevik power. (Hitler against them). He speaks openly about anti-Semitism, which allows him to get into the German Workers' Party, which later became the NSDAP.

For disrupting a speech by a Bavarian politician, Hitler was sentenced to three months in prison, but he served only a month in Munich's Stadelheim prison - from June 26 to July 27, 1922. On January 27, 1923, Hitler held the first NSDAP congress;

On the morning of November 9, Hitler and Ludendorff, at the head of a 3,000-strong column of stormtroopers, moved towards the Ministry of Defense, but on Residenzstrasse their path was blocked by a police detachment that opened fire. Carrying away the dead and wounded, the Nazis and their supporters fled the streets. This episode went down in German history under the name “Beer Hall Putsch.”

In February - March 1924, the trial of the leaders of the coup took place. Only Hitler and several of his associates were in the dock. The court sentenced Hitler for high treason to 5 years in prison and a fine of 200 gold marks. Hitler served his sentence in Landsberg prison. However, after 9 months, on December 20, 1924, he was released.

After prison begins to tremble left hand and left leg. Due to poor diets, abdominal pain, hoarseness and malaise in the voice - surgery to remove polyps. He convinces himself that he will die and writes a political will. A sick person meets the war, suspicion and heart disease appear... He makes decisions quickly, but after Stalingrad he calms down, gets worse, swollen eyes, crooked back, trembles again left-hand side, vision deteriorates. Sometimes I agree with my colleagues, sometimes I don’t.

Coming to power, elections, arson...

From 1925-1931 he had a love affair with Geli, after her death he became a vegetarian.

1929 - acquaintance with Eva, but there is Gelya: during the day - Eva, in the evening and at night - Gelya, after death Eva is the final lover.

If you believe the archives of the Nazi intelligence services, they tried to kill Hitler 17 to 20 times. True, the writer Will Berthold, who once worked as a reporter at the Nuremberg trials, believes that there were at least 42 attempts on the life of the Nazi leader. However, recent data indicate that they tried to take Hitler’s life at least fifty times.

The most famous conspiracy was that on July 20, 1944, a conspiracy was organized against Hitler, the purpose of which was his physical elimination and the conclusion of peace with the advancing Allied forces. The bomb killed 4 people, but Hitler survived. After the assassination attempt, he was unable to stand on his feet all day, as more than 100 fragments were removed from them. In addition, he had a dislocation right hand, the hair on the back of the head is singed and the eardrums are damaged. I became temporarily deaf in my right ear. He ordered the execution of the conspirators to be turned into humiliating torture, filmed and photographed. Subsequently, I personally watched this film.

According to witnesses from among the service personnel, even the day before, Hitler gave the order to deliver cans of gasoline from the garage (to destroy the bodies). On April 30, after lunch, Hitler said goodbye to people from his inner circle and, shaking their hands, together with Eva Braun, retired to his apartment, from where the sound of a shot was soon heard. Shortly after 15:15, his servant and his aide-de-camp entered the Fuehrer's apartment. Dead Hitler sat on the sofa; a blood stain was spreading on his temple. Eva Braun lay nearby, with no visible external injuries. People wrapped Hitler's body in a soldier's blanket and carried it out into the garden of the Reich Chancellery; after him they carried out Eve’s body. The corpses were placed near the entrance to the bunker, doused with gasoline and burned.

There are a number of conspiracy theories claiming that Hitler did not commit suicide, but escaped. According to the most popular version, the Fuhrer and Eva Braun, leaving doubles in their place, disappeared into South America, where they lived happily under false names until old age. The photo allegedly shows 75-year-old Hitler on his deathbed.