Authority rests on popularity, force and tradition. In general it should not be forgotten that the highest aim of human existence is not a preservation of a state, let alone a government, but the preservation of the species. There can be no such thing as state authority as an end to itself, for if there were, every tyranny in the world would be unassailable and sacred. If, by the instrument of governmental power, a nationality is led towards its destruction, then rebellion is not only the right of every member of such a people - it is his duty. And the question - when is this the case? - is decided not by theoretical dissection, but by force - and results.
The state has nothing to do with any definite economic conception or development. The realisation was increasingly lost that the success of commerce, technology and industry was only possible on the basis of a strong state. Many circles went so far as to put forward the conviction that the state owed its very existence to these phenomena, that the state primarily represented an economic institution, that it could be governed according to economic requirements. But it is not a collection of economic contracting parties in a definite delimited living space for the fulfillment of economic tasks, but the organisation of a community of physical and psychologically similar living beings for the better facilitation of the maintenance of their species. This and nothing else is the aim and meaning of a state. The state itself does not create a specific cultural level; it can only preserve the race which conditions this level. The present-day state, for example, may very well simulate its existence as a formal mechanism for a certain length of time, but the racial poisoning of our national body creates a cultural decline which even now is terrifyingly manifest. The state is a means to an end. Its end is the preservation and advancement of as a community pf physically and psychologically homogeneous creatures. This preservation comprises first, existence as a race and thereby it permits the free development of all the forces dormant in this race. Of them a part will always primarily serve the preservation of physical life, and only the remaining part the promotion of a further spiritual development. Actually the one always creates the precondition for the other. The state as a vessel has meaning only if it can preserve and protect the race as its content.
The best state constitution and state form is that which with the most unquestioned certainty, raises the best minds in the national community to leading position and influence. From the smallest community cell to the highest leadership of the entire Reich, the state must have the personality principle anchored in its organisation. There must be no majority decisions, but only responsible persons, and the word 'council' must be restored to its original meaning. Surely every man will have advisers by his side, but the decision will be made by one man. Even then it will not be possible to dispense with those corporations which today we designate as parliaments. But their councillors will then actually give council; responsibility however, can and may be borne only by one man, and therefore only he may possess the authority and right to command. Parliaments are necessary because in them, personalities to which specially responsible tasks can later be entrusted have an opportunity to arise. This gives the following picture: The folkish state, from the township up to Reich leadership, has no representative body which decides anything by the majority, but only advisory bodies which stand at the side of the elected leader, receiving there share of work from him, and in turn if necessary assuming unlimited responsibility in certain fields, just as on a larger scale the leader or chairman of the various corporations himself possesses. As a matter of principle, the folkish state does not tolerate asking advise or opinions in special matters - say of an economic nature - of men who, on the basis of their education and activity, can understand nothing of the subject. Therefore it divides its representative bodies from the start into political and professional chambers. In order to guarantee a profitable co-operation between the two, a special senate of the elite always stands over them. In no chamber and in no senate does a vote ever take place. They are working institutions and not voting machines. The individual member has an advisory, but never a determining, voice. The latter is the exclusive privilege of the responsible chairman.
This principle - absolute responsibility unconditionally combined absolute authority - will gradually breed an elite of leaders such as today, in this era of irresponsible parliamentarianism, is utterly inconceivable. Thus the political form of a nation will be brought into agreement with that law to which it owes its greatness. As regards the possibility of putting these ideas into practice, I beg you not to forget that the parliamentary principle of democratic majority rule has by no means always dominated mankind, but on the contrary is to be found only in brief periods of history, which are always epochs of the decay of peoples and states. But it should not be believed that such a transformation can be accomplished by purely theoretical measures from above, since logically it may not even stop at the state constitution, but must permeate all other legislation, and indeed all civil life. Such a fundamental change can and will only take place through a movement which is constructed in the spirit of these ideas and hence bears the future state within itself.
The material interests of man can always thrive best as long as they remain in the shadow of heroic virtues; but as soon as they attempt to enter the primary sphere of existence, they destroy the basis of their own existence. Not material qualities but ideal virtues alone make possible the formation of a state. Only under their protection can economic life flourish, until with the collapse of the pure state-forming faculties the economy collapses too. What, in reality, are the state-forming forces? The ability and will of the individual to sacrifice himself for the totality. That these virtues have nothing at all to do with economics can be seen from the simple realisation that man never sacrifices himself for the latter, or, in other words: a man does not die for business, but only for ideals.
The selection of leadership of those to whom Nature has given special gifts is primarily accomplished by the hard struggle for existence. Many break and perish, thus showing that they are not destined for the ultimate, and in the end only a few appear to be chosen. In the fields of thought, artistic creation, even in fact of economic life, this selective process is going on today. Only political life has today completely turned away from this most natural principle. The principle of the value of the majority appears decisive, and from that high place begins to poison all life; that is, in reality to dissolve it.
Care must be taken not to underestimate the force of an idea. We are not simple enough to believe that it could ever be possible to bring about a perfect era. But this relieves no one of the obligation to combat recognised errors, to overcome weaknesses and strive for the ideal harsh reality of its own accord will create only too many limitations. For that very reason however, man must try to serve the ultimate goal, and failures must not deter him, any more than he can abandon a system of justice merely because mistakes creep into it, or any more than a medicament is discarded because there will always be sickness in spite of it. Therefore it is really necessary to confront the master book-keepers of the present material republic by faith in an ideal Reich.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)