Hitler’s Revolution: A Review

Hitler’s RevolutionBy John Tiffany. The famous reign of Adolf Hitler occurred over a half-century ago, but he remains as popular as ever. And new books on the great leader keep coming out. Like Jesus, thousands of books have been written about Hitler. Biographies have been written by everyone from Alan Bullock to John Toland to Kevin Williams, in every significant language. Most of them are hostile to the man—a testimony to the power of Jewish propaganda.

The best new volume manages to be “politically incorrect” but historically correct. It is by Richard Tedor, an Illinois native who has contributed to TBR. The title is Hitler’s Revolution: Ideology, Social Programs, Foreign Affairs (HR), available from TBR Books. A translator and researcher, Tedor specializes in German foreign policy and war propaganda during the National Socialist era.

The goal of HR is a modest one: to contribute to understanding the axioms of the German people under National Socialism by exploring the spirit of the epoch in which they lived. Tedor was fortunate in being able to draw on previously classified Russian archives, recently released British secret papers and sources in the German language not available in English.

While we might think of Hitler and his movement as “right wing,” in fact National Socialism owes much to liberalism—paleoliberalism, that is. Until it became corrupted, liberalism fought for the rights of the common man—a philosophy carried over into National Socialism. However, as Hitler declared in an April 1939 address: “This state came into being, and all states come into being, through overcoming interests of pure personal will and individual selfishness. Democracy steers recklessly toward placing the individual in the center of everything. In the long run it is impossible to escape the crisis such a conflict will produce.”

As for a congressional or parliamentary form of government, the damaging influence of it soon becomes apparent. The participation of the people exists only on paper. Politicians make a career out of getting re-elected, and focus not on the welfare of the people and of the state but on certain financial circles standing behind them. (HR 14)

Hitler, an uneducated “ordinary” man, out of natural intuition and despite the opposition of experts, cut out high finance. Since the only available collateral for his money was the technical aptitude and great industriousness of the German people, technology and labor became his “gold,” and like magic this system eliminated all unemployment, as Tedor notes Soviet diplomat Kristyan Rakovsky commenting in 1938.

Hitler was the opposite of warlike. In 1936, although Germany was in a position to implement a massive rearmament program, Hitler did not assign priority to the manufacturing of military hardware. Instead, he focused on things like housing construction and improving conditions for the working man.

But Hitler was forced by Polish hostility (and Poland’s allies) to go to war. On September 1, 1939, the German invasion of Poland began. By the next day, Hitler arranged through his foreign minister to England an offer to withdraw his army from Poland and to compensate the Poles for damages, if London would mediate the Danzig Corridor dispute. Prime Minister Chamberlain’s response belies the claim he was a peacenik: He declared war on Germany the next day.

Lord Halifax (Edward Wood) stated, “Now we have forced Hitler to war.”

Had England been willing to cooperate with Germany, Europe’s supremacy in the world would have been undisputed. Instead, the continent’s role as pioneer and steward of civilization was thrown away by Britain’s rulers, controlled by Jews.

Meanwhile things were not going well in Russia, to say the least, with the Jewish Bolsheviks running wild. As many as 8 million people were arrested in 1937 and 1938 alone, of whom less than 15 percent ever went home. The rest, we can be sure, were tortured and/or worked and starved to death. This was a real holocaust, and deserves far more attention than the phony “holocaust” of the “6 million Jews.” Genocide was planned and executed not only for Russia but also for Germany.

While external enemies were bad enough, what really undermined Hitler’s efforts to achieve a better world for us all were the internal turncoats—especially the reactionary German/Prussian nobility, who did not care that their plots would destroy the fatherland and stab in the back the patriotic men fighting at the front.

Major subverters included Carl Goerdeler, baron von Weizsaecker, Ewald von Kleist-Schmenzin, Erich Kordt and chief of military intelligence Adm. Wilhelm Canaris. (220) We might add that all the leading generals were in on the plotting or connived at it: Walter von Brauchitsch, the commander-in-chief, Gerd von Rundstedt, Ludwig Beck, Carl-Heinrich von Stuelpnagel, Erwin von Witzleben, commander of the Berlin garrison, and Graf Helldorf, chief of Berlin police, among others. (219)

Nor did they scruple to kill Hitler with a bomb, though these Keystone Kop-like conspirators had no idea what they would do next or what government they might put in place once Hitler was gone; nor did the Allies offer them anything other than unconditional surrender, the same crummy deal they offered Hitler.

In analyzing why Germany lost the war, we must weigh the flagrant disregard of Hitler’s orders, misleading intelligence he received and true intelligence withheld from him, and the militarily useless troop movements carried out without his knowledge, as Tedor notes. Yet establishment historians blame Hitler for the catastrophe.

The much-maligned leader of National Socialist Germany saw the duty of government as to foster, never restrict, the creative energy of the nation and expedite its progress.

Buy the book here.

Related Articles