Alfred Rosenberg Quotes

A determined will, grounded on a clear order of rank of values, coupled with organic strength of outlook, will also one day - despite all hindrances - enforce its realisation in all domains.

To destroy images is something every revolution has been able to do.

The greatest and most blessed thing in the Germanic life is the mythical, sensitive, yet strong, awakening. The fact is that we have again begun to dream our own primal dreams.

Thou shalt love God in all things, animals and plants.

Today we see the steady stream from the countryside to the city, deadly for the Volk. The cities swell ever larger, unnerving the Volk and destroying the threads which bind humanity to Nature; they attract adventurers and profiteers of all colours, thereby fostering racial chaos.

The forests were crippled, the wheat fields vanished; in place of the grass there reappeared stone and drifting sand. Men perished and moved on, the cities sank back into the sand, the dust settled over them. Thousands of years later Nordic dreamers dug up the petrified culture from the rubble and ashes. Today, the entire picture of the former paradise stands before our eyes as a spent dream which had once produced life, beauty and strength as long as a superior race ruled. It will live again and it will dream again. But as soon as races of a dreamless kind took over and attempted to realize the dream, reality vanished with the dream.

A nation without a myth drifts aimlessly throughout history. Myth gives purpose and meaning to the civilisation. Myth makes a people a nation, a nation a race, and a race a contributor to the world. Myth shapes the race so that the race may fulfil the potential of its individual. The myth makes us conscious that we are a race, and not merely an arbitrary, purposeless, ill-defined conglomerate of men and women.

Idéologue nazi de poids, Alfred Rosenberg lui-même appelait à soutenir les musulmans et les Arabes : « Il est donc dans l’intérêt de l’Allemagne de renforcer le monde arabe, afin qu’il serve de contrepoids à l’éventuelle montée en puissance de la juiverie internationale

We waged a frontal battle against liberalism, Marxism, Judaism and Freemasonry. In the midst of this decisive struggle against an apparently secure democratic order celebrated as the only progressive democratic order, we have never forgotten that even in this liberal time individual creative personalities, great generals and statesmen, researchers and detectors were at work. We have never forgotten that the European peoples could not begin their history with the year 1789 and its effects, but that the roots of their forces sank far into distant centuries, and ultimately into distant millennia. And in the face of the outrage called the "Great French Revolution", we made a distinction between the fact of the uprising and the intellectual and moral slogans that were partial causes or accompanying phenomena in the course of this uprising. We National Socialists defend ourselves from the outset against the misunderstanding that in the midst of the overturning of the world of thought at the turn of the 19th century we were aiming for a change in the conditions of life and forms of government of the 18th century or even the restoration of much older phenomena in political life.

We know very well that at the end of the eighteenth century the French people had no choice but to either rot or try again in an outrage to save them. The fact that France carried out this survey was undoubtedly still a sign of unbroken vitality, but the slogans that this great wave carried with it, close to our deep conviction, did not serve the strong and good vital forces, but led people to fantastic, far from life ones Ideas to overestimate intellectual constructions, to detach individuals from the given old topsoil and finally due to this alienation of life to the abandonment of the blood, first to a Palestinian parasite people and finally to the introduction of the negro blood, alien and hostile to all Europeans.

My paper has to be very long and complex,” I said. “I shall cite all the great thinkers—Karl Marx, Sigmund Freud.” “What about Adolf Hitler?” “Oh, him. He’s not a thinker. He’s just a ranter and raver.” “There may come a time,” said Pepi, “when people cannot tell the difference.” “Impossible,” I solemnly predicted. “I have read Hitler’s book Mein Kampf and also some works by his colleague Herr Alfred Rosenberg because I am a fair-minded, objective person and I believe one should always hear out all sides before making a decision, and so I can tell you from firsthand knowledge that these men are idiots. Their ideas about how the Jews have poisoned their so-called superior Aryan race and caused all of Germany’s troubles are utter nonsense. No intelligent person could possibly believe them. Hitler is laughable. He will soon disappear.” “Just like all your old boyfriends,” Pepi said with his sly smile.

Today a new faith is stirring: the myth of the blood, that faith that along with blood we are defending the divine nature of man as a whole.

Most people associate the Nazis with book burning. Everyone has seen on television or the Internet the Dantesque images of students throwing hundreds of books into the fire in the streets and squares of German cities in the 1930s. True funeral pyres of Western civilization, they were a barbaric prelude to the burning of human beings, exactly as the German poet Heinrich Heine described in a visionary way. Much less well-known is the meticulous looting carried out by the Nazis in libraries throughout Europe. Prior to my conversation with Albert, I had heard something about it, but was unaware of both the reasons why this massive theft had taken place or of its size. While the theft of a work of art is usually done out of artistic passion or simple greed, what could have driven the Nazis to transport tons of books in train wagons across Europe? And it was not a selective exercise, no—the books were taken in bulk without any sorting. That is, they were removed without prior knowledge of their value. One particularly striking fact explains the Nazi regime’s interest in Jewish books. According to one of its most influential ideologues, Alfred Rosenberg, it was important for future generations to know the enemy after their final defeat. That is why public and private Jewish libraries were ransacked throughout Europe to fill the shelves of the Institut zur Erforschung der Judenfrage, the Institute for Research on the Jewish Question. In the eyes and most delirious dreams of the Nazis, it was a research institute dedicated to studying a people that was doomed to extinction.

The Nazi ideologue Alfred Rosenberg wrote in the early 1920s that Jews had initiated the world war to obtain their state in Palestine. Yet because they were incapable of any of the creative or administrative labor required for statecraft, Rosenberg claimed that what the Jews called a state would really be a power base for their global, nefarious economic operations. In turn, Adolf Hitler wrote in Mein Kampf that a Jewish state, “endowed with sovereign rights and removed from intervention of other states,” would become “a haven for convicted scoundrels and a university for budding crooks.

Race history, such as Francis Parker Yockey’s Imperium or Alfred Rosenberg’s Myth of the Twentieth Century, has always rejected empirical research in exchange for a mythic vision. The world of verifiable facts becomes unimportant because a deeper vital truth lies underneath. As a form of universal history, Afrocentrism follows the same prophetic pattern. As one of its practitioners states, Afrocentrism “takes whatever data are available and squeezes enough truth from them as circumstances will allow” in order to bolster racial identity and self-esteem.85 In doing so, however, it has merely created an inverted image of Western racial pessimism, just as the multiculturalist mirrors the nihilistic precepts of Western cultural pessimism.

NATURE OF THE ENEMY, wartime propaganda. BROADCAST HISTORY: June 16–July 14, 1942, CBS. 30m, Tuesdays at 8:30. PRODUCER-DIRECTOR: Charles Vanda. Nature of the Enemy, though it ran for only a month, was a staunch example of the nature of wartime broadcasting. It spotlighted each week a different Axis leader, dramatizing the record of his “cruelty and treachery.” Among the subjects: Joseph Goebbels, “father of German lies,” and Alfred Rosenberg, “Nazi philosopher” and proponent of “racial purity” as a German right of conquest.

Both Mussolini and Hitler could perceive the space available, and were willing to trim their movements to fit. The space was partly symbolic. The Nazi Party early shaped its identity by staking a claim to the street and fought with communist gangs for control of working-class neighborhoods of Berlin. At issue was not merely a few meters of urban “turf.” The Nazis sought to portray themselves as the most vigorous and effective force against the communists—and, at the same time, to portray the liberal state as incapable of preserving public security. The communists, at the same time, were showing that the Social Democrats were unequipped to deal with an incipient revolutionary situation that needed a fighting vanguard. Polarization was in the interest of both. Fascist violence was neither random nor indiscriminate. It carried a well-calculated set of coded messages: that communist violence was rising, that the democratic state was responding to it ineptly, and that only the fascists were tough enough to save the nation from antinational terrorists. An essential step in the fascist march to acceptance and power was to persuade law-and-order conservatives and members of the middle class to tolerate fascist violence as a harsh necessity in the face of Left provocation. It helped, of course, that many ordinary citizens never feared fascist violence against themselves, because they were reassured that it was reserved for national enemies and “terrorists” who deserved it. Fascists encouraged a distinction between members of the nation who merited protection and outsiders who deserved rough handling. One of the most sensational cases of Nazi violence before power was the murder of a communist laborer of Polish descent in the town of Potempa, in Silesia, by five SA men in August 1932. It became sensational when the killers’ death sentences were commuted, under Nazi pressure, to life imprisonment. Party theorist Alfred Rosenberg took the occasion to underscore the difference between “bourgeois justice,” according to which “one Polish Communist has the same weighting as five Germans, frontsoldiers,” and National Socialist ideology, according to which “one soul does not equal another soul, one person not another.” Indeed, Rosenberg went on, for National Socialism, “there is no ‘law as such.’” The legitimation of violence against a demonized internal enemy brings us close to the heart of fascism. For some, fascist violence was more than useful: it was beautiful. Some war veterans and intellectuals (Marinetti and Ernst Jünger were both) indulged in the aesthetics of violence. Violence often appealed to men too young to have known it in 1914–18 and who felt cheated of their war. It appealed to some women, too. But it is a mistake to regard fascist success as solely the triumph of the D’Annunzian hero. It was the genius of fascism to wager that many an orderly bourgeois (or even bourgeoise) would take some vicarious satisfaction in a carefully selective violence, directed only against “terrorists” and “enemies of the people.” A climate of polarization helped the new fascist catch-all parties sweep up many who became disillusioned with the old deference (“honoratioren”) parties. This was risky, of course. Polarization could send the mass of angry protesters to the Left under certain conditions (as in Russia in 1917). Hitler and Mussolini understood that while Marxism now appealed mainly to blue-collar workers (and not to all of them), fascism was able to appeal more broadly across class lines. In postrevolutionary western Europe, a climate of polarization worked in fascism’s favor.