|
1. ....Putting aside
fine phrases we shall speak of the significance of each
thought: by comparisons and deductions we shall throw light
upon surrounding facts.
2. What I am about to
set forth, then, is our system from the two points of view,
that of ourselves and that of the GOYIM [i.e., non-Jews].
3.
It must be noted that men with bad instincts are more in
number than the good, and therefore the best results in
governing them are attained by violence and terrorisation,
and not by academic discussions. Every man aims
at power, everyone would like to become a dictator if only
he could, and rare indeed are the men who would not be
willing to sacrifice the welfare of all for the sake of
securing their own welfare.
4. What has restrained
the beasts of prey who are called men? What has served for
their guidance hitherto?
5.
In the beginnings of the structure of society, they were
subjected to brutal and blind force; afterwards - to Law,
which is the same force, only disguised. I draw the
conclusion that by the law of nature, right lies in
force.
6. Political
freedom is an idea but not a fact. This idea one must know
how to apply whenever it appears necessary with this bait of
an idea to attract the masses of the people to one's party
for the purpose of crushing another who is in authority.
This task is rendered easier if the opponent has himself
been infected with the idea of freedom, SO-CALLED
LIBERALISM, and, for the sake of an idea, is willing to
yield some of his power. It is precisely here that the
triumph of our theory appears; the slackened reins of
government are immediately, by the law of life, caught up
and gathered together by a new hand, because the blind might
of the nation cannot for one single day exist without
guidance, and the new authority merely fits into the place
of the old already weakened by liberalism.
GOLD
7. In our day the
power which has replaced that of the rulers who were liberal
is the power of Gold. Time was when Faith ruled. The
idea of freedom is impossible of realization because no one
knows how to use it with moderation. It is enough to hand
over a people to self-government for a certain length of
time for that people to be turned into a disorganized mob.
From that moment on we get internecine strife which soon
develops into battles between classes, in the midst of which
States burn down and their importance is reduced to that of
a heap of ashes.
8. Whether a State
exhausts itself in its own convulsions, whether its internal
discord brings it under the power of external foes - in any
case it can be accounted irretrievably lost: IT IS IN OUR
POWER. The despotism of Capital, which is entirely in our
hands, reaches out to it a straw that the State,
willy-nilly, must take hold of: if not - it goes to the
bottom.
9. Should anyone of a
liberal mind say that such reflections as the above are
immoral, I would put the following questions: If every State
has two foes and if in regard to the external foe it is
allowed and not considered immoral to use every manner and
art of conflict, as for example to keep the enemy in
ignorance of plans of attack and defence, to attack him by
night or in superior numbers, then in what way can the same
means in regard to a worse foe,
the destroyer of the structure of society and the
commonweal, be called immoral and not permissible?
10. Is it possible for
any sound logical mind to hope with any success to guide
crowds by the aid of reasonable counsels and arguments, when
any objection or contradiction, senseless though it may be,
can be made and when such objection may find more favor with
the people, whose powers of reasoning are superficial?
Men in masses and the men of the masses, being guided solely
by petty passions, paltry beliefs, traditions and
sentimental theorems, fall a prey to party dissension,
which hinders any kind of agreement even on the basis of
a perfectly reasonable argument. Every resolution of a crowd
depends upon a chance or packed majority, which, in its
ignorance of political secrets, puts forth some ridiculous
resolution that lays in the administration a seed of
anarchy.
11.
The political has nothing in common with the moral.
The ruler who is governed by the moral is not a
skilled politician, and is therefore unstable on his throne.
He who wishes to rule must have recourse both to cunning and
to make-believe. Great national qualities, like frankness
and honesty, are vices in politics, for they bring down
rulers from their thrones more effectively and more
certainly than the most powerful enemy. Such qualities must
be the attributes of the kingdoms of the GOYIM, but we must
in no wise be guided by them.
|