Andrew James John Mackenzie
an historiography
Contact Me
January, 2012
February, 2012
April, 2012
June, 2012
July, 2012
August, 2012
September, 2012
October, 2012
November, 2012
December, 2012
January, 2013
February, 2013
March, 2013
April, 2013
May, 2013
June, 2013
July, 2013
August, 2013
September, 2013
October, 2013
November, 2013
December, 2013
January, 2014
February, 2014
March, 2014
April, 2014
May, 2014
June, 2014
July, 2014
August, 2014
September, 2014
October, 2014
November, 2014
December, 2014
January, 2015
February, 2015
April, 2015
May, 2015
June, 2015
July, 2015
August, 2015
September, 2015
October, 2015
November, 2015
December, 2015
January, 2016
February, 2016
April, 2016
May, 2016
June, 2016
July, 2016
August, 2016
September, 2016
October, 2016
November, 2016
December, 2016
January, 2017
March, 2017
June, 2017
The Nazis; An Earlier Warning From History

After more than eighty years after the succession of Adolf Hitler in 1933, it is hard to imagine that anyone at the time could have imagined, let alone predicted, the horrors of a National Socialist Germany. Critics there were, opponents there were still many, but for one man to provide a point by point summative warning, that is what it most surprising when reading in the twenty-first century. In the March 1932 edition of The Atlantic, Nicolas Fairweather wrote a stirring indictment concerning the head of the National Socialist German Worker’s Party. His ten point assessment of Hitler makes for fascinating reading, not only because it was so alarmist but that it was also incredibly accurate.

The ten point critique follows in full: 
  1. His violent racial nationalism, which springs from his conviction that the Aryan stocks in general, and the Germans in particular, are a chosen people in whose victorious survival the divine purposes are bound up.
  2. His violent animosity to Marxian Socialism as in essence opposed to his ideal of a nationally minded people and a racial state. ...
  3. His violent hatred of the Jews as the racial enemies of all Aryans, the subtle corrupters of pure Aryan states. These parasites, says Hitler, have made Marxian Socialism, which they invented, the principal tool by which they insinuate themselves into healthy, pure blooded, racial states in order to debase simultaneously the national ideals and the national blood. Destroyers of Aryan civilizations, they remain impotent to create a civilization of their own.
  4. His concern for social betterment ('true Socialism') as a necessary prerequisite to the acceptance of his ideals by the masses.
  5. His contempt for the intelligence of the ordinary man and for a democracy based on faith in his development to higher levels.
  6. His contempt for parliamentary institutions as the organs of such a democracy, which substitutes for the decision of a competent leader the majority vote of the incompetent. A parliament, moreover, says Hitler, is the natural field of operations for the Jewish Socialist enemy.
  7. His insistence on the power of personality and on the entire concentration of authority in the hands of one leader (up to now, himself).
  8. His economic nationalism, with its distrust of international capital and its preference for small, locally controlled business organizations. Hitler fears the banks and all newfangled ideas for controlling credit. He objects to stock companies and stresses the value of personal ownership. In short, he believes in the ruthless subordination of economic interests and economic leaders to racial and national considerations.
  9. His insistence that Germany must acquire more land in Europe as a vital requirement for national expansion and progress (after the present corruption of the national blood and the national ideals has been stopped).
  10. His insistence that France is the archenemy. France, he urges, must be broken before Germany can undertake to conquer land from Russia (the only possible source).
In his assessment of Hitler, Fairweather asserted that he was a man with an utter obsession for German racial purity and the rights to land and dominion to which Germany was entitled. His article makes it perfectly clear that Hitler owed his success to the “weakness of the mass mind” and the delusions of a post war, economically stricken and aspirational German Volk. Fairweather elaborated further, calling Hitler “a genuine demagogue – honest, no doubt, in believing that what he does is for the general good, but a demagogue just the same.” The manner in which this journalist has foreshadowed the looming events of a National Socialist Germany is unparalleled. The article captures the true personality of the man which would personally lead the Third Reich along the road of military belligerence, and, ultimately, towards utter ruin.
Nicolas Fairweather, “Hitler and Hitlerism: A Man of Destiny,” The Atlantic, vol. 149, no. 3, March 1932. Copyright © The Atlantic Monthly Group. All Rights Reserved.
All copyrighted material used in this article or cited by this website is the property of their respective owners and in no way accepts any responsibility for an infringement on one of the above.
<< Back Add New Comment
0 items total
Add New Comment
Please type the confirmation code you see on the image*
Reload image
BlogPhotosCVContact Me