Understanding National Socialism – It’s foundation, what it really stood for, opposed, and why


One People, One Nation, One Leader

National Socialism  was a “Weltanschauung” or ‘world view’ which sought to combine and preserve the racial-ethnic-cultural-spiritual-linguistic solidarity amongst the German people as a unified nation “the Volk” which is intimately bound to it’s own soil. Hence ‘National’.  But ‘Socialist’, as we shall see, was never to be confused with Marxist doctrine, but rather, referred to the true, original, ancient German socialism.  Furthermore, National Socialism was Christian in nature and to its core, based upon principles of ‘Positive Christianity’ with a focus on the family and upon community morals, values, ethics, and standards, through true essentially ‘brotherly love in action and deeds’, not just philosophy, and also not in the spirit of liberal  ‘egalitarianism’ and ‘internationalism’ or Communist universalism. It was about recreating a  Germany for Germans, which put them and their needs above all else, with Germans in control, and with each committed to this, for their own interests, and their collective benefit.  Hence, the words of the German anthem “Deutschland Ueber Alles”, was never about ‘expansionism’ into foreign territory, or an aggressive foreign policy, much less any desire to “take over the world”, but patriotic devotion to the land and the people “Das Volk”, with a desire, if possible, to re-unite the German tribes in a new German Empire. But NOT, however, at the high price of war which Hitler knew too well.

National Socialism was a ‘revolution’ which manifested itself in the wake of World War I and in response to the oppressive dictates of the Treaty of Versailles which had been imposed by the allies, resulting in loss of territory and population, and not long afterwards, an influx of oppressed and terrorized German refugees from the former German territories. It was also a response to the subsequent advent of the liberal-democratic, Marxist-Socialist inspired Weimar Republic, and all of the political, economic, social and cultural ills which befell Germany thereafter.  International interference also led to deep internal political divisions, social chaos and disorder, cultural decay, the impoverishment of the masses to the benefit of the minority, as well as, a general state of powerlessness domestically, in terms of being able to affect change and stability. But also a state of powerlessness internationally, with loss of sovereignty and total inability to assert and protect its sovereignty in a hostile European environment. The world wide anti-Germanism which had started in the late 19th century and was exacerbated by war time atrocity propaganda also still abounded in the world.

This revolution began as a political party and truly grass roots movement, initially with a very small membership of 7 men, but it grew rapidly over 13 years in a very hostile, violence-filled political environment,  influenced by foreign interests, and dominated by Bolshevists, threatening to turn Germany into a Soviet style state. The internal chaos and class struggles left the German people in a desperate state, and it only benefited the international interests, who profited from their misery and powerlessness, while eliminating competition, and furthermore, making Germany ripe for Bolshevik takeover. Average Germans, however, for the most part, were very aware of the realities of the genocide that had taken place in the Soviet Union, and the resulting tyrannical police state, and they wanted no part if it. Trade unions and other organizations had long been instituted and were under the influence and control of the Bolsheviks and were not serving the interests of the workers or the nation as a whole.

Following over a decade of political struggle with a steady growth and a rise in its popularity, combined with distrust and dissatisfaction with the alternatives, which had failed to change anything, National Socialism was finally mandated and realized from 1933 to 1945, as a sovereign national party system within the context of a new (Third) German Empire.  Following the democratic national elections in November 1932, the NSDAP finally achieved a majority, and thus in 1933, the Party Leader (Fuehrer) Adolf Hitler was lawfully and duly appointed Chancellor with a mandate from the people, based upon a well publicized comprehensive plan to rectify the political, economic and social problems, promising “Bread and Work”,  seeking a just a ‘just’ revision of the Versailles Treaty, while maintaining peaceful relations with her Germany’s neighbours.

Adolf Hitler instituted National Socialism as the “political doctrine of the national community” that is the “Volksgemeinschaft”, and NOT for the sake of personal power, goals or ambitions, but rather to represent and do the will of the people.  This meant true “democracy” and can essentially be understood as “government of the people, by the people and for the people” in the American vernacular. The needs of average Germans were put first, ensuring their survival as a nation: a unique and sovereign people with a right to self-determination; able to sustain and preserve itself, and to thrive, free of foreign domination, unjust international dictates,  and free threats to its existence, both foreign and domestic. Hitler was the Party Leader and the National Leader, hence: Der Fuehrer. But he did not set himself above the people, as a dictator, as the court historians and those with hidden agendas claim. He truly represented the people and their interests, and most importantly, he did not make promises which he could not deliver, and was not a hypocritical ‘politician’.

Adolf Hitler had a concrete plan of action which was well publicized and he carried through with it. He was effective, and the fruits of his labours, and those of the NSDAP in organizing the masses to help themselves were soon born, resulting in an ever increasing popularity, in proportion to their increased prosperity and quality of life. Thus, he was loved by the masses, as is evidenced in video footage of so many public gatherings, but of course, not by those with other agendas and selfish interests.  There was no need for other parties with alternate views, doctrines, philosophies, principles, etc.  They were happy and well served. The German people were once again in control of their own destiny, both individually and as nation.  What could be more democratic than that?  And why would those who call themselves “democrats” have any objection?

Most of the small nationalist groups agreed to merge with the NSDAP after the victory of the NSDAP in 1933. The visible expression of absorption of the different groups in the great popular movement was the presentation of the flags of the various national associations and volunteer corps in November 1933.

(Note: the German word for National Socialism is “Nationalsozialismus” and it was abbreviated as NS  and not “Nazi”)

Basic Principles

The basic ideas of National Socialism were pride in the common cultural history and heritage, a healthy shaping of individual personalities while engendering and nurturing a spirit of  national altruism,  as opposed to atomised liberal and libertarian ideas of “individualism” (which have their genesis  in Freemasonry, and which the National Socialist  government always opposed, and later banned).

Compare and Contrast:

National Socialism stood in stark contrast to Marxist-Socialism or Bolshevism which is based upon ‘class warfare’ and the destruction of individualism and social classes, making all equally poor, and subject to a supreme state authority, resulting in the lowest common denominator, without natural inherent rights, and only privileges at best, with the promise of benefits that are usually not forthcoming, or which are unsustainable, and not conducive to creating incentive.  Instead, the motivating factor is fear of the ‘state power’ and the ‘authority of the party’ and it’s leadership, combined with harsh punishment for those who do not “go along to get along”,  often arbitrary, with little or no protection from the whims and mechanisms of the totalitarian police state. The net product is “acquiescence” and not enthusiasm.  Marxist-Socialism also provides no natural incentive for the protection of resources and the environment, lending itself instead to expansionism, and this, is no respecter of neighbouring states, nor other cultures. Furthermore, it is atheistic, without respect for the Creator, the individual, nor beliefs and values of any religious community.

National Socialism was about work and personal  initiative, and taking responsibility, not only for oneself, merely for one’s own benefit, but also for the national community, as well as the environment (ie. the natural habitat and the society), and thereby, ensuring the survival, that is, the health and prosperity of the nation and the society as a whole entity, and not merely the ‘survival of the fittest’ and continuous prosperity of the already prosperous, solely to their own advantage.  It required that people of all classes work together for their common and mutual benefit and interests. The role of the government was merely to facilitate this self-sustaining environment for all members of the nation in which all could live well and prosper, with demand and supply aimed primarily focused on the domestic market, on national, regional and local needs, while producing and consuming what was necessary at home.  This meant that the nation had lesser dependence upon the outside world for trade and commerce, far was more independent within the world, less subject to global markets, corporate and global interests, and without need or incentive to expand, nor to coerce and threaten other nations.

The Freemasonic liberal ideals, by contrast,  engender a “nation of individuals” with each going his own way, with little or no concern for the needs of that national community as a whole; the organic unit from which the individual was first derived and was nurtured, with only a theoretical notion of a trickle down effect to others. And underlying this, the assumption that those who do well, do so rightfully, and will occasionally give a little something back, thereby, legitimizing the power structure of the plutocrats or oligarchs, and the degree of power and influence which they, the few,  maintain over the many.  That is generally thought of as “Free Enterprise” but it is really unbridled Judeo-free-market-capitalism, and thrives in a system of stock market speculation, back-room deals and manipulation, and especially so where the monetary system (creation and control of currency) is in private hands, combined with debt and interest or “usury”, creating a monopoly, such as with the U.S. Federal Reserve. The National Socialists in Germany opposed this by putting strict controls on the central bank and the stock markets, by creating and controlling their own debt and interest free currency based upon the labour the worth of the labour and resulting output of the people, not on Gold, Silver or other commodities, the value of which is subject to speculation.  They also put limits on wages and prices, as well as, reduced imports and exports, and prevented large-scale “big box” retail outlets which could flood the market with cheap imported goods.

Was National Socialism Right-Wing? Or Left-Wing? 

The National Socialist ‘world view’ was neither “right” nor “left” in terms of how most people view the political spectrum, but rather, a “Third Way” and saw itself as a broad-based, popular social nationalist movement,  aimed at involving all classes of the national body for the greater good of the people as a whole, from which all would benefit.

National Socialism expressed its commitment to the German people, contrary to rival systems such as Judeo-Bolshevik-Marxism and Judeo-Freemasonic-Capitalism or “Liberalism”.  It also opposed attempts by self-described International Jewish interests to infiltrate,  take-over and dominate the national ‘body politic’ as had previously been the case, and was the case in other developed nations,  creating an existential threat to sovereign nations and peoples.  Thus, National Socialism  placed a significant focus on the so-called “Jewish Question” in relation to life in Germany especially. That was not at all a distinctly German problem. It was spoken of in many countries, including England and America, and other European countries with solutions sought. Indeed, “Zionist Jews” also acknowledged the problem and even sought cooperation with Germany its goals, for the long-term mutual benefit of both peoples.

It must be noted that Judaism and Freemasonry are intimately linked, and that the Bolshevik-Communist Revolution was financed by the International Bankers of Wall Street,  who happen to call themselves “Jews”, and was fomented by their minions. Thus one should rightly be called Judeo-Bolshevik-Communism, and the other Judeo-Freemasonic-Capitalism. They are two sides of the same coin and both have same net effect of  destruction of sovereign nations, both engender expansionism and globalsim, and both result in exploitation and slavery. Whereas, National Socialism was a true, self-financed, grass roots movement that opposed the aforementioned and thus, they would had no interest in financing a party which promoted a system of governance that could put an end to their monopoly and their global agenda.  Indeed, they would do everything in their power to try and stop it, including defamation, economic war and outright military warfare….and they did.

National Socialism was NOT synonymous with Fascism. There were some similarities but it is really beyond my scope here to go into that in detail. If, however, one is of the belief that Fascism equates to “corporatism”, as Mussolini is often quoted as having said in describing his system of governance, then that was most certainly NOT the case with National Socialism  for all of the reasons already described.  Rather, it was the basic idea that the people are the nation, and the nation is the people, and that their National Socialist leader and party (their government) were a manifestation and reflection of themselves, which expressed and carried out their will, and NOT that of any particular class of people nor any special interest groups.

While Mussolini believed that Fascism could and should be exported, to counter the threat of international communism, the idea that National Socialism as a wholesale organic system could be “exported” to other nations is false.  It was NOT intended for export! National Socialism was designed for the Germans of that time period under the conditions they were living in and the threats they faced. There have been, revolutionary nationalist movements which are in line with the general intent and philosophies of the NSDAP.  In at least one speech, Hitler also said that it was neither feasible nor desirable to try to make Germans out of the Poles or the French.  When war was declared against Germany, he said on several occasions that it was never his intention to wage war, and he lamented that the war was keeping him from his work for the German people (paraphrasing).

In terms of economics, the program of the National Socialists was laid out in a booklet by Gottfried Feder,  the title of which translates roughly to”The Manifest for the Breaking of Interest Slavery“, in which he promoted, amongst other things,  worker profit sharing in  large companies, the expansion of social welfare legislation, an end to land and property (real estate) speculation, and putting department stores under the control of local governments, to best serve the needs of the people.

Unlike Bolshevism, National Socialism did NOT propose to eliminate private enterprise and private ownership of property! But rather, it aimed to protect the general public against the excesses of plutocrats, unrestrained by any sense of patriotic group solidarity.


From the perspective of the National Socialists, “nationalism” meant an appreciation for and a duty to, preserve the nation or Volksgemeinschaft, in all respects, visa vis the “folkish” interests of other nations, as well as, from international interests.  It was not blind,  arrogant or conceited chauvinism, nor a concept of natural or inherent “superiority” over others, and not intended to destroy or exploit others.  It was about the German people being “masters in their own house” with: the right of self-determination; the means and ability to effectively control their nations destiny without interference; while raising up a new social state of the highest culture, with integrity!  National Socialism, therefore, fought AGAINST “internationalism” which destroys nations through rootless and ever changing cosmopolitanism. Internationalism was embodied by liberalism, plutocracy, Bolshevism and International Jewry.


Adolf Hitler himself described National Socialism as “the political doctrine of the national community”.  Nationalism, as he understood it, was the devotion of the individual to his ethnic community”das Volk” and socialism was a responsibility of the individual to the national community. Nationalism and Socialism, thus, at their core, were synonymous and interdependent:  Self-sacrifice for the wider ethnic Volk.  And that was also synonymous with the Christian ideal of loving your neighbour as yourself, and it was firmly rooted in the soil, bound together in labour, through blood, sweat and toil, for oneself and others, creating self-sufficiency and ensuring sovereignty for the nation, including for future generations, through conservation and protection of the natural habitat.


“I understand by Socialism: the highest service to my people, giving up personal gain for the sake of the whole. The benefits of the whole is essential. The concept of nationalism is in the end nothing but love and devotion to my people.” — Adolf Hitler.

“The Jewish manipulated Marxist concept of class struggle stands in the way of national unity” — Adolf Hitler.

“The phrases nationalism and socialism identify contemporary political currents of the age and did not require that new values be created. The lack of sense of community gave way to mutual burning hatred. Today the contrast between bourgeois and proletariat needs to be overcome, because the rise of any nation can only take place under common ideas. We need to close the gap and collect the forces again on a new platform.” — Adolf Hitler.

Dr. Joseph Goebbels on Socialism

“Yes, we call ourselves the Worker’s Party! That’s the first step away from the middle-class State! We call ourselves the Worker’s Party because we want to make work free, because for us, productive work is the driving force of history, because work means more to us than possessions, education, niveau, and a middle-class background do! Marxism, with its destructive theories of peoples and races, is the exact opposite of Socialism. Marxism is the graveyard not only for national peoples but also particularly for the one class that fights whole-heartedly for its realization: the working class.” — Dr. Joseph Goebbels, 1930


Monday April 15, 2013 Spingola Speaks Radio Show – Rodney Martin discussed “National Socialism vs. the Socialism of Leftist Marxism” 
This program addressed the clear difference between National Socialism and the Socialism of Leftist-Marxism. Adolf Hitler and other NSDAP officials addressed this in great detail, however distortions remain today and often National Socialism is confused with Leftist Socialism.   Free Download: spingola_speaksnsvsmarxism.mp3

Rodney referred to the following excerpts from the speech by Adolf Hitler, in the Reichstag, from May 17th, 1933

“First: preventing the impending Communist subversion and constructing a Volksstaat uniting the various interests of the classes and ranks, and maintaining the concept of personal property as the foundation of our culture.

Second: solving the most pressing social problems by leading the army of millions of our pitiful unemployed back to production.

Third: restoring a stable and authoritative leadership of the State, supported by the confidence and will of the nation which will finally again make of this great Volk a legitimate partner to the rest of the world.

Speaking now, conscious of being a German National Socialist, I would like to proclaim on behalf of the National Government and the entire national uprising that, above all, we in this young Germany are filled with the deepest understanding of the same feelings and convictions and the justified demands of the other nations to live. The generation of this young Germany, which until now has come in its lifetime to know only the want, misery and distress of its own Volk, has suffered too dearly from this madness to be capable of contemplating subjecting others to more of the same.

In that we are devoted to our own identity as a Volk in boundless love and faith, we also respect the national rights of other peoples on the basis of a common conviction and desire from the very bottom of our hearts to live with them in peace and friendship.

Thus the concept of Germanization is alien to us. The mentality of the past century, on the basis of which it was believed possible to make Germans of Poles and Frenchmen, is foreign to us, just as we passionately reject any respective attempt in the opposite direction. We view the European nations as a given fact. The French, the Poles, etc. are our neighbors, and we know that no historically conceivable event can change this reality.”

Hitler Interview in 1923

“Why,” I asked Hitler, “do you call yourself a National Socialist, since your party programme is the very antithesis of that commonly accredited to socialism?”

“Socialism,” he retorted, putting down his cup of tea, pugnaciously, “is the science of dealing with the common weal. Communism is not Socialism. Marxism is not Socialism. The Marxians have stolen the term and confused its meaning. I shall take Socialism away from the Socialists.

“Socialism is an ancient Aryan, Germanic institution. Our German ancestors held certain lands in common. They cultivated the idea of the common weal. Marxism has no right to disguise itself as socialism. Socialism, unlike Marxism, does not repudiate private property. Unlike Marxism, it involves no negation of personality, and unlike Marxism, it is patriotic.

“We might have called ourselves the Liberal Party. We chose to call ourselves the National Socialists. We are not internationalists. Our socialism is national. We demand the fulfilment of the just claims of the productive classes by the state on the basis of race solidarity. To us state and race are one.”

“We want a greater Germany uniting all German tribes. But our salvation can start in the smallest corner. Even if we had only 10 acres of land and were determined to defend them with our lives, the 10 acres would become the focus of regeneration. Our workers have two souls: one is German, the other is Marxian. We must arouse the German soul. We must uproot the canker of Marxism. Marxism and Germanism are antitheses.

Excerpted from an edited interview of Adolf Hitler by George Sylvester Viereck which reportedly took place in 1923 and republished in Liberty magazine in July 1932

Suggested Reading / Podcasts:

And there are plenty more related links over there —— >>


This entry was posted in Bolshevism, Communism, Fascism, Germany, Hitler, National Socialism, NSDAP, Weimar and tagged , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , . Bookmark the permalink.

13 Responses to Understanding National Socialism – It’s foundation, what it really stood for, opposed, and why

  1. Markus says:

    The quotes are very good and a slap in the face for all the paytriots, who parrot the Commie-Nazi disinfo!

    Hitler was known as party Führer for a long time, but his official rank became Chancellor and Führer in 1934, when President Hindenburg died and Hitler took over the presidential office by a 95%+ referendum, in addition to the Chancellorship. Hitler wanted to become President for a longer time and actually campaigned against Hindenburg the years before. The President appointed and dismissed all positions in the cabinet, and still does under the Weimar Constitution. He is also the highest representative in foreign affairs. The President can only be appointed or dismissed by referendum. The Chancellor is the head of domestic affairs.

    I like that Hitler uses the term Aryan in context with soil and work, as Aryan really derives from Agrarian and not White Supremacy or even White Nationalism. The “Aryan Race” is really an ancient term for a vegetarian society of noblemen and women, to which Hitler wanted to transform Germany after the war.

    Joseph Goebbels:
    An extended chapter of our talk was devoted by the Führer to the vegetarian question. He believes more than ever that meat-eating is harmful to humanity. Of course he knows that during the war we cannot completely upset our food system. After the war, however, he intends to tackle this problem also. Maybe he is right. Certainly the arguments that he adduces in favor of his standpoint are very compelling.

    Deutschland über Alles, refers to putting Germany as a whole, above the various German states on German lands to end the infighting and brother bickering, plus putting Germany first, “putting her above all” foreign interests. Listening to the entire first verse of Das Deutschlandlied, Germany’s borders are defined, so “über Alles” does not refer to conquering the world:

    Von der Maas bis an die Memel,
    Von der Etsch bis an den Belt.

    So from Lothringen/France/Holland, to Lithuania, to North Italy, to Denmark.

    Since this includes Austria and German speaking Lothringen, it is really more than a national state anthem, it is really the Song of the Germans, regarless of political boundaries.

    • Wonderful insights as always Markus and I really appreciate it. People just have no concept of how divided Germany has been at various times in her history, and what it took to unite the people again, and what a miraculous feat that was to get them all on the same page and to stop being their own worst enemies, as they are again now. Well it is true that Hitler was a vegetarian, and I have heard this story too that he envisioned a “vegetarian society” in the future, but knowing the Germans and their love for Wurs, I think he would have had a revolt on his hand then if he had tried that LOL. Cheers!

      • Markus says:

        It’s true, Wayne. Dictating a vegetarian diet would have caused a Weisswurst-Revolution.

        But, there was a large vegetarian movement in Germany anyways, known as Reformhaus. They still exist to this day, and are somewhat like Whole Foods.

        Hitler was serious about this though:

        “Supposing the prohibition of meat had been an article of faith for National Socialism, it’s certain our movement wouldn’t have succeeded.”

  2. Jim IN Tx says:

    I have learned more about NS from R Martin’s presentations on Spingola than I ever learned at school or anyplace else. He has to be our NS Dr. Hope he keeps it up. I used to be really confused about NS and lefty socialism until I listened to the Spingola show this week. This is the info that needs to get out there.

  3. Wow you’ve been busy lately. Thanks for all of these great articles!

  4. This is an extremely impressive explication of ‘National Socialism’.
    Unfortunately, the animus of ‘socialism ‘ will remain to distort and confuse any American who would appreciate the NS otherwise. It is apparent that in attempting to find a consensual appeal to bond all Germans in his early campaign, Herr Hitler made an unfortunate choice that will forever induce a misconception. How better than ‘socialism’ as a concept to induce national altruism would the simple and evocative term of “Brotherhood” have applied? Clearly, familial appreciation was the heart of Hitler’s idea of national solidarity.

    • Markus says:

      Hi Matt,

      National Solidarism is a term, to describe our ideas, while avoiding “Socialists”, yet it sounds similar and has an equal meaning:

      Among the French far-right, solidarism refers to a tendency which was headed by Jean-Pierre Stirbois and Michel Collinot (French Solidarist Movement). Solidarists support a non-capitalist, non-communist “third way”, and are generally opponents of the influence of both the Soviet Union and the United States.[3] It was recently an influence of the Radical Network. National Front member Roger Holeindre claims to follow this tendency.

      National Solidarist party!

      • I have no opinion on what other individuals or groups do today in terms of trying to emulate the principles of the NSDAP, however, rather than try to hide the word “socialism”, I think the answer lies in education, and also, in simply calling the thieves and imposters what they are “communists” “marxists” and “bolsheviks”. It is THEY who co-opted the term from the Germans (were socialistic by nature, long before Hitler came along) and have perverted it. I personally do not consider myself a National Socialist but only an admirer of what it was, and am also not involved in politics and current affairs. I do not believe it is possible to be a National Socialist today. It was designed in the 1920s by Germans and for the Germans back then, in the circumstances and realities they found themselves facing. One could, at best, only try to produce a reasonable facsimile, as it would have to be modified in a number of ways, relative to the country, their people, demographics, language (s), culture (s), religion or spiritual beliefs, history, etc and relative to their common circumstances and political realities today. Thus, it will never be true National Socialism, nor could it ever be. So, that said, it is probably best, for that reason alone, that other admirers create a new name for whatever they are doing and just acknowledge NS as being the inspiration.

  5. Bruno D. says:

    Great article! Congratulations. Everyone should read this article.

  6. Dietmar says:

    Fantastic article – thank you very much. Essential reading and will hopefully be widely distributed and read, as both it and the ideology it explains deserve.

    There has been a great need for a well-written, clearly-expressed, easy-to-follow exposition of National Socialism and you have provided it here. Very well done!

    NS ideology is so relevant to our times now, with the parallels to Weimar Germany apparent in so many of our rotting countries, not least Canada, the USA and Britain, it it is uncanny.

    • Thank you very much Dietmar! A pleasure to hear from you and I very much appreciate the positive feedback. A friend of mine on Facebook reminded today of this powerful 10 minute video which is also very relevant to this subject and which and sums up the “Third Reich” quite nicely, and I think accurately too, So I will include it hear for those who may not have seen it before. Nochmals, besten Dank und alles Gute! 😉

  7. Ironwrench says:

    ~ Bravo ~
    This is the most fair and even handed description I have read describing National Socialism. Hitler’s National Socialism was for the German people. Marx’s Jewish Bolshevism was against the Russian people and against all people.

Comments are closed.