The founding values of the Ba’ath Party

“When the Arab Baath Party emerged and when its ideology began to spread and become complete through interaction with events and struggle, its most important idea from the outset, evolutionism, and the most important thing in evolutionism, as has known the Baath Party since the first years and since the first writings, is truthfulness, frankness and morality.

With this quality the Baath Party was able to find its way to the hearts of the people until it spread throughout most of the Arab regions, from a beginning of extreme simplicity and modesty through a long history that has become an integral part of the history of our nation. How did this party have degenerate and how did it come to present an image which so sharply contrasts with those distinctive qualities, the image of artifice, and methods based on manoeuvring and distorition of facts, through fabrication, lying deceit and the use of everything except truthfulness, frankness, the respect of principles, and the respect of the people? The people will never accept such methods even though they were subjected by force to them for a short period of time”- Michel Aflaq


“We have the preoccupations of converting the society from a feudalist and capitalist society into a socialist society.”- Gamal Abdel Nasser

“The journalist went on to question King Feisal on the possibility of further fighting in Yemen and he replied: ‘We do not want any fighting and I believe that the President has internal problems which would prevent him from fighting.’

What are these problems? Of course we have preoccupations and problems. He once says preoccupations and another time he says problems, in an attempt at slander at our internal situation. We have the preoccupations of converting the society from a feudalist and capitalist society into a socialist society in which sufficiency and justice prevail. We have the preoccupations of development and construction. What has been achieved in these 14 years was not to be achieved in 50 years. The budget rose from L.E. 200 million to L.E. 1100 million, the national income rose from L.E. 800 million to L.E. 1800 million, production rose from L.E. 1800 million to L.E. 3500 million. We have schools for all the people, we have equal opportunities, we have social justice for all the sons of the nation and equal opportunities for all the sons of the nation. We do not have a minority which obtains everything for itself and a majority which takes almost nothing. We raise production, increase the national income and provide every person in our country with honourable work; the resources of the country are for all its sons; we liberate the individual from economic and social exploitation after having destroyed the alliance of feudalism and capitalism.

These are the preoccupations existing in our county. But if he means the question of the stooge Moslem Brotherhood, then this is another question.

When I went to Jeddah in August and before talking with King Feisal, I told him that I would like to give him an idea about the situation in our country lest the Moslem Brotherhood should have made him understand that they could change anything or take action; I knew that they had taken money from him and I knew that he prolonged the talks on the basis or assumption that the Moslem Brotherhood might change the situation in a month or two or three, and I should like to assure him that all the Brothers are quiet now and that there isn’t a noise out of even one of them. I also told him that Saudi Arabia gave money to Said Ramadan and that Zaghiul Abdel Rahman said in his confessions when he came here and gave himself up that L.E. 250 thousand were paid to Said Ramadan and the Abu El Fath brothers abroad to work against our regime.

If he means the hired Ikhwan (the outlawed Moslem Brothers) then he knows from their conspiracies were financed. He knows they were paid by the Baghdad Pact, by Saudi Arabia and by Arab reactionaries. The people concerned with the affairs of the Brothers abroad sold themselves to anyone from whom they could take money- to every enemy of Egypt. They became true hirelings of the reactionaries and imperialism.

The brothers were never an issue: they were rounded up in ten minutes. Ours is an open and free country. We have freedom, we have criticism, we have self-criticism. Ours is not a closed reactionary country where a person can be executed without anybody knowing about it. When we arrest anyone we announce it and whoever stands trial is tried openly and the proceedings are published by the press. Ours is an open society for all the world’s press to write about.”


NACAZAI talks about the revolutionary potential of America

“The USA, the epicenter of imperialism, fortress of world Zionism and the exterminationist settler-colonialist project, whose creation and maintenance entails the greatest systematic crimes in world history, is not a valid nation, but a project whose very existence negates the alienable rights of usurped people.

We argue that it is incapable, under any circumstances, of being a consolidated socialist and anti-imperialist unit.

Going clear back to the savage attacks by the petty bourgeoisise journalist John Reed and the original Communist Party of the United States of America, the supposed ‘revolutionary heyday’ of socialism and anti-imperialism in the US, against Marcus Garvey and others who defended the principle of race-first and nation-first policies with regards to colonial subjects and descendents of the African slave trade, there has never been nor ever will be a legitimate ‘multi-cultural’ communist or anti-imperialist party within its boundaries or contaminated with the idea of a progressive American project.

White the much longer and complicated circumstances of the USA, in a number of ways, make the solution to the dismantling of the USA and the creation of the various socialist and national democratic projects of its usurped people more difficult to assess than the clear solution of the Arab-Zionist conflict, i.e. the total liquidation of the Jewish project of Palestine in favor of the eternal Arab character, the non-recognition of the USA still looms as the only just, thorough and plausible solution.

While we fully affirm and recognize the rights of progressive and anti-imperialist regimes to attempt to build normalizaed relations with the USA as part of an overall policy to end embargos and sanctions against their people, we ask the international communist and anti-imperialist forces to correct their delusional belief of the capability of the ‘multi-cultural’ proletariat to form a socialist USA, regardless of what this or that revolutionary leader or party stated in the past.

The First Nations people of America and all of its oppressed ethnic groups will always negate ‘multicultural’ America in favor of the right to self-determination and self -preservation, rightfully so.

Americanization of the world is the number one enemy of freedom-loving people everywhere, and this Americanization is more than a product of modern imperialism, but being much older and institutional, goes clear back to the origins of the rape and genocide of the First Nations peoples’ and hundreds of millions of enslaves African compatriots, eternally incompatible with socialist construction and anti-imperialism, regardless of the economic and social changes which emerge through the centuries.”


Deng Xiaoping talks about how to be a real Ally

“We should embark on all these political, economic and cultural undertakings right away. In doing so we should adhere to one principle, namely, to consult with the minority nationality people. If they agree, we go ahead; if they agree with only a part, we do only a part; if they agree with the major portion, we do the major portion; if they agree with everything, we do everything. We definitely need their consent; we need the consent of most of them, particularly of people from the upper strata; if the upper strata do not consent to our plan, we should give it up, for only their consent counts. Why? Because, owing to historical, political and economic peculiarities, the upper strata hold the chief sway in minority nationality areas. Progressive forces are weak there and exert little influence. In future, however, when the progressive forces expand, they will exert a very great influence, although they do not have a decisive bearing at present. For now we should do everything through the upper strata. We should do more to persuade them, consult them frequently and unite with them, guiding and helping them to progress step by step. If we fail in our work among the upper strata, all our efforts will come to nothing. Some of our comrades are wont to take radical measures, thinking they can do better without the help of people from the upper strata. As a matter of fact, they will not be able to do a better job but a worse job; they will not be able to do things more rapidly but more slowly, for they will meet with obstinate resistance. If our work among the upper strata is done well, so that they keep making progress and fully co-operating with us, then with their help we can do our work more smoothly. Some comrades are worried that if they do it this way, they might lose their class stand, not understanding that class stand is manifested differently there. What is the correct class stand? It is at present not launching class struggle, instead achieving unity among the nationalities. That is the correct class stand. Of course, we are not depending completely on the upper strata; we are seeking their help in order gradually to promote our work in all fields.”

(Source: )

Deng Xiaoping talk about minorities in China

“At present we are not certain about the exact number of minority nationalities in the southwest. According to the latest reports from Yunnan, there are more than 70 names of nationalities in that province. It is said that the Miao nationality in Guizhou has over one hundred branches. In fact, some of them do not belong to the Miao nationality. For instance, the Dong people used to be believed to belong to the Miao nationality, when in fact, the two have different languages and histories and they themselves hate to be lumped together. From this we can see that we do not know the first think about the subject of minority nationalities, let alone a good working knowledge. Of course, after two or three years of work we may gain a clearer understanding of each individual nationality and we may be able to clarify questions that have long remained a mystery.

Historically, China’s minority nationalities have been estranged to a high degree from the Han nationality. As a result of our work done in the past and particularly over the past six months, this state of affairs has been changing gradually, but we still cannot say that we have cleared up this estrangement. Only after a long time through examining the facts will we be able to put an end to the historical estrangement between the minority nationalities and the Han nationality caused by Han chauvinism. We will have to make efforts for a long period of time before we can eliminate this estrangement. We should convince the various minority nationality people that, politically, all nationalities within China’s boundaries are truly equal, that their living standards can be improved and that their cultural level can be raised. By culture we mean mainly culture of each nationality. Unless we succeed in these three aspects of work, it will be impossible to iron out this historical estrangement or rift. The People’s Republic of China is a multi-national country and only by ending this national estrangement and enlisting the concerted efforts of the various nationalities can we form a truly great, happy family of the Chinese nation. The conditions are present for eliminating this estrangement. The policy of Han chauvinism adopted by the reactionary regimes of the past deepened the national estrangement, but the nationality policy stipulated in the Common Programme, adopted at the Political Consultative Conference, will certainly end this estrangement and bring about a great unity of the various nationalities.

I should like to make a few remarks on the Tibetan nationality in Xikang. In the past the Tibetan and Han nationalities were very estranged. However, after our army entered the southwest, and especially after we proclaimed the policy concerning the liberation of Tibet and put forth the ten terms, great changes have taken place. How did they fare in the past? In the old days the reactionary regimes in Xikang caused the local Tibetans to suffer a great deal. After we entered Xikang, the first thing we did was announce the nationality policy stipulated in the Common Programme. At the same time our troops’ fine conduct found expression in some concrete matters; for instance, through observing the Three Main Rules of Discipline and the Eight Points for Attention, respecting the Tibetan people’s customs, habits and religious beliefs, quartering in no lamaseries, etc., they won the trust of our Tibetan compatriots. The Tibetan people said that our troops were so good that even in a heavy rain they would neither enter nor live in their houses unless invited. This is the result of carrying out correct policies. Didn’t rulers of the past proclaim good policies? The problem is they never put their policies into effect. For us, once we have formulated policies, we mean to have them carried out. As regards the ten terms we put forth, some representative figures in Tibet find them a bit too magnanimous. That is how we mean them to be. We are not deceiving anybody. Therefore, these policies have made a powerful impression on them that should not be underestimated, because they are in accord with their requirements and the requirements for the unity of all nationalities.

In minority nationality areas in the southwest our Party did some work in the past that produced good results. During the Long March, the Red Army scattered the seeds of revolution in all the areas it passed through, including Yunnan and Guizhou. Even in Xikang some revolutionary influence was felt. When the Red Army troops marched northward, they did some things in violation of the rules of discipline for the sake of their survival. They were starving and had no choice. Now we should express our gratitude to the people, explaining to them that in those days they had to shoulder the burden of the nationwide revolution and that they had done everything in their power to preserve the Red Army. At the same time, we should apologize to them for anything we did wrong. When we went to Tibet, some Tibetans told us quite frankly that they were displeased when we ate all their grain. Now they understand this and are delighted with their own liberation.

With our past work plus our current work we are quite capable of solving the several-thousand-year-old problem of estrangement from the minority nationalities and uniting all our nationalities. Marxism-Leninism can help solve the problem of nationalities throughout the world. In China, Mao Zedong Thought — the integration of the theory of Marxism-Leninism with the practice of the Chinese revolution — can also help solve this problem. So long as we truly act in accordance with the Common Programme and so long as we sincerely assist the minority nationalities in political, economic and cultural fields, we can solve the problem satisfactorily. If we throw off Han chauvinism, the minority nationalities will forsake their narrow nationalism in return. We should not ask the minority nationalities to abolish their nationalism before we honestly abolish Han chauvinism. Once these two isms are abolished, unity will result.

Since our entry into the southwest, we have arrived at a general understanding: the question of minority nationalities in the southwest is complicated and it must be solved properly. This involves work in various fields, yet we know very little about things here, so we must adopt a careful attitude and from the outset work to harmonize relations with the nationalities. We should try hard to dispel the misgivings of the various minority nationalities concerning the People’s Liberation Army and eliminate the estrangement between different nationalities. In handling the affairs relating to minority nationalities, we should not act blindly and go there rashly to carry out reform, raise proposals and propagate the nationality policy. In practical work we should strictly observe rules of discipline and not encroach upon their interests in the slightest. In collecting public grain we should also take their practical difficulties into account, ensuring above all that the amount never exceeds the burden imposed on them in the past, instead keeping it below this level. We have decided that because of the past deep estrangement between the minority nationalities and the Han nationality and the complicated nature of the situation, no force from the outside shall be used to wage or create a so-called class struggle within the minority nationalities or attempt to carry out reform of any sort. All reforms within the minority nationalities should be carried out through internal forces. Reform is necessary, however, for without it the minority nationalities cannot eliminate poverty, which will make it impossible for them to do away with backwardness, but reform must not be carried out until conditions within the minority nationalities are ripe for it.

At present, our central task concerning the nationalities is to work for unity and end estrangement. Where no trouble crops up and estrangement begins to disappear and unity begins to grow, there the work can be considered well done and good results achieved. If we become impetuous, trying to get quick results in procuring grain and organizing the masses, as we have been doing in the Han nationality areas, troubles are bound to crop up. In the past, people in other areas experienced troubles. An important cause was their impetuosity. Many of our comrades have learned that they must not be impetuous and that it does not matter if they proceed a bit slowly. Slowness does not give rise to errors; impetuosity does. In handling other matters we should be neither impetuous nor proceed slowly, but in handling this matter, we should not be afraid of going slowly. Of course, we still need to work; we cannot go to sleep for fear of becoming impetuous. We should work on a sound basis and advance after acquiring a clear understanding of the situation. As the basis for unity becomes stronger, our work will move forward. Some of our comrades have good intentions, but unfortunately they are impetuous in their work. Therefore, leaders should always guard against impetuosity. At present an important principle for working in minority nationality areas is to brook no trouble or failure. Even if ninety-nine out of a hundred cadres do well and only one cadre makes a mistake, he can still spoil our efforts. With this in mind, we should only dispatch a few selected cadres to minority nationality areas. They should thoroughly understand the nationality policy and ardently wish to make a success in their activities among the minority nationalities. No one can be permitted to make mistakes. This is a must. The reason no trouble has come up so far in the southwest with regard to the question of minority nationalities is that we have been working on a sound basis, which is in itself an accomplishment.

Have we done enough work so far, then? A number of new problems have now cropped up, requiring us to do more work to avoid trouble. For instance, the Common Programme stipulates that regional national autonomy be introduced in areas where different minority nationalities live together. When the Common Programme was proclaimed, the minority nationalities rejoiced and asked us when and how autonomy was to be introduced. They want it to be materialized. If we fail to do so in six months or even in twelve months, they will lose faith in our policies. We must solve this politically significant problem. Our Party encountered such a problem before. For instance, we have had such an experience in Inner Mongolia and in the northern part of the Shaanxi-Gansu-Ningxia Border Region. However, we have no experience in the vast new liberated areas, and it is a new problem for many of our cadres. We must now set about solving this problem, because the demands from the minority nationalities are pressing. In Xikang some representative figures are even thinking of using the name “Bod government” when regional national autonomy is implemented. We have not yet reached an agreement on this matter, but we are determined to adopt a name they like better. In Xikang the names of many places have been given by Han people. Even though we are used to these names, that does not mean the people there are. This is only a problem of names, other problems are more complicated. For instance, eastern Xikang used to be divided into counties, some of which have been in existence for ten to twenty years. When regional national autonomy is introduced, should we keep these counties? From a long-term point of view, it would be good to retain the counties; moreover, we are accustomed to them. But will the local people agree? Our principle is: if they do not agree, the original division should be abolished and a new division made. Furthermore, how do we solve the problems among the minority nationalities when adopting regional national autonomy? In the past some minority nationalities entangled themselves in bitter feud, with one nationality attacking another, followed by retaliating attacks. This was instigated primarily by the reactionary ruling class, which pursued Han chauvinism; it was used by chauvinists from large nationalities to dominate small and weak nationalities. However, the minority nationalities themselves also had many problems involving their gain and loss. We should study these problems soberly and persuade them to unite and stop fighting each other. Should we dispatch cadres to help exercise regional national autonomy? Sending them there is a must, but we should send only a few selected ones who can truly help them. We should consult with the local people to determine in what capacity these cadres should be dispatched. This will be a difficult assignment for our comrades, so we should see that those who are sent have first straightened out their thinking, and we should only dispatch comrades who are willing to work there. All these problems have to do with our policies relating to the exercise of regional national autonomy.

To introduce regional national autonomy in the southwest, we should begin in eastern Xikang, for conditions there are ripe for this. First, compatriots of the Tibetan nationality are concentrated there; second, we had some experience there in this regard; third, after our troops arrived there, they established good relations with the compatriots of the Tibetan nationality; and fourth, there is a progressive organization called the Dongzang Democratic Youth League, with more than one hundred members. With these conditions present, we can start work there at once. This is a major project. If it is made a success, it may lend a direct impetus to Tibet. In other places we should work to create the necessary conditions for introducing regional national autonomy and we cannot just pay lip service to it. In some localities a democratic coalition government of the local nationalities may be established first. For instance, regional national autonomy should be exercised in the Daliang and Xiaoliang mountain areas where people of the Yi nationality live together, but conditions there are not yet ripe, so for the time being it is more suitable to establish a democratic coalition government of the local nationality in these areas. This will be good to them. The same can be applied in Yunnan and Guizhou provinces. Under a coalition government we can also introduce national autonomy in a small area by establishing a township where people of one minority nationality live together, for instance. The minority nationalities have the political right to be masters of their own affairs.

For the benefit of economic development, we have to get started right now. In Xikang, for instance, a number of problems have cropped up in this field. We first face the problem of grain supplies. At present we have only 3,000 to 4,000 people working there and we have borrowed 350 tons of grain. Some progressive people from the upper strata have given us much help. They are not only lending grain to us but have also set a fair price. However, this cannot go on for a long time, because the masses of the minority nationalities cannot bear such a heavy burden. We are also confronted with other economic problems in the areas of the market, trade, banking and so on. If these problems are not solved, the political foundation will be shaken. Regional national autonomy will be only nominal if we fail to manage economic affairs well. The minority nationalities want to benefit from regional autonomy, so if the economic problems are not solved, trouble will ensue. Chairman Mao has laid down two principles concerning Tibet: first, introducing regional national autonomy; and second, after entering Tibet, not depending on local people for grain supplies. If we follow these two principles, we can solve the Tibetan issue and become united with the Tibetan people to consolidate national defence. These principles are applicable to all minority nationality areas. Politics is based on the economy. Can we do without a solid economic base? No, we cannot if we just give the minority nationalities a nominal regional national autonomy while consuming all their grain. We have established this principle to be applied in the minority nationality areas, that is, policies enforced in Han nationality areas in different fields of endeavour, including economic policies, cannot be applied mechanically to minority nationality areas. We must distinguish among those that can be applied, those that must first be revised, and those that cannot be applied. We should formulate a different set of policies for minority nationality areas if we want to serve the minority nationalities wholeheartedly. For instance, if we can help solve the problem of salt for the minority nationality people in Guizhou, most of whom live in the mountains, we are sure to win their support. Also, Xikang has no highways at present, so we should make proper arrangements for the following: facilitating the minority nationalities’ economic exchange with the interior, determining the kind of goods that should be brought in, the way of moving their products out and the prices of the products, and making sure that they have some profits to gain. When doing business with them, we shall follow the principle of exchange at equal value, occasionally, however, letting them profit at our expense. In our effort to help the minority nationalities develop their economies, a very important link is trade, and our economic work there should be based on trade. We should assist the minority nationalities in organizing their own business activities, which we cannot monopolize. In doing business, we should see to it that they are not subjected to exploitation by middlemen at any stage. In this way their economies will be enlivened and their living standards will improve. Right now the key is first to enable them to profit from business activities and then help them develop their agriculture, industry, animal husbandry, commerce and so on.

In the realm of culture, too, we have much work to do. We should try to help raise the cultural level of the minority nationalities as quickly as possible. We should promote educational undertakings in minority nationality areas, encouraging people to set up schools there. For now we should hold some training courses, focusing on explaining the nationality policy. The main obstacle to operating schools is the lack of teachers, not of funds or anything else. To remedy the shortage of talented people in the southwest, we have to establish a nationalities institute without delay in order to enrol some young people for advanced studies. Related to culture and education is the question of public health. Work in this field is also very important in minority nationality areas, where medicine is badly needed. At present, cultural work should centre primarily on public health work, which has a significant role to play.

We should embark on all these political, economic and cultural undertakings right away. In doing so we should adhere to one principle, namely, to consult with the minority nationality people. If they agree, we go ahead; if they agree with only a part, we do only a part; if they agree with the major portion, we do the major portion; if they agree with everything, we do everything. We definitely need their consent; we need the consent of most of them, particularly of people from the upper strata; if the upper strata do not consent to our plan, we should give it up, for only their consent counts. Why? Because, owing to historical, political and economic peculiarities, the upper strata hold the chief sway in minority nationality areas. Progressive forces are weak there and exert little influence. In future, however, when the progressive forces expand, they will exert a very great influence, although they do not have a decisive bearing at present. For now we should do everything through the upper strata. We should do more to persuade them, consult them frequently and unite with them, guiding and helping them to progress step by step. If we fail in our work among the upper strata, all our efforts will come to nothing. Some of our comrades are wont to take radical measures, thinking they can do better without the help of people from the upper strata. As a matter of fact, they will not be able to do a better job but a worse job; they will not be able to do things more rapidly but more slowly, for they will meet with obstinate resistance. If our work among the upper strata is done well, so that they keep making progress and fully co-operating with us, then with their help we can do our work more smoothly. Some comrades are worried that if they do it this way, they might lose their class stand, not understanding that class stand is manifested differently there. What is the correct class stand? It is at present not launching class struggle, instead achieving unity among the nationalities. That is the correct class stand. Of course, we are not depending completely on the upper strata; we are seeking their help in order gradually to promote our work in all fields.

By the way, some special problems should be solved in the light of actual conditions. For example, we decided not to carry out rent reduction and agrarian reform in minority nationality areas, but the Miao people in Guizhou have demanded rent reduction and agrarian reform and their need is more urgent than that of the Han people. Why? We find it quite natural since there are only a few landlords among the Miao nationality in Guizhou. Most of the Miao people till land owned by Han people; moreover, it is located on mountain slopes. Their demand is reasonable. If we do not allow rent reduction and agrarian reform, it will be a manifestation of Han chauvinism and it will mean we have not taken into account their immediate interests. On the other hand, it is not likely that the few landlords from the upper strata of the Miao nationality will consent to their demand. Therefore, we have made a specific stipulation that rent reduction and agrarian reform can be conducted where the land tilled by Miao people belongs to Han landlords, but not where the land belongs to Miao landlords, and in this case the matter should be settled by the Miao people themselves step by step through consultation. That is to say, rent reduction and agrarian reform are not to be totally ruled out in minority nationality areas; in some areas we should still implement them, but on one condition: the demand must come from the great majority and not just from a few people, and the matter is not decided by people from the outside, but by the native people themselves. Also, we should consider ways and means for instituting regional national autonomy and establishing a coalition government in minority nationality areas. We could hold different types of conferences of representatives, since this has yielded substantial results in the interior. Through conferences of representatives we could solicit opinions and discuss and study problems, so as to avoid making decisions subjectively. Sometimes we may proceed from good intentions but reach incorrect decisions. Even if the decisions are correct, we may still meet opposition if we do not have the consent of the people concerned. Conversely, we will have their support even if some decisions are imperfect, because we have won their consent.

Lastly, I should like to discuss the question of our attitude towards work. Our working method should be as I have just mentioned, that is, to consult with the people concerning all matters and to solve problems through conferences of representatives. Our attitude towards work is to seek truth from facts and to be honest. Recently we came to realize that we should also be honest in respecting the customs and habits of the minority nationalities. We should take the initiative to explain clearly to them that because our customs and habits are different from theirs, we are likely to create misunderstandings and violate taboos, offending them without our realizing it. We do want to learn about some of their customs and habits, but we cannot do it overnight, because this is not something to be imposed on people, and so we have to ask them to forgive us for any faux-pas. This is also being honest. In this way we can easily win their sympathy. In all our political, economic and cultural work we should adopt this attitude.

The delegation sent by the Central Government to visit the southwest will surely be of enormous help to us. You have studied and learned much more about the minority nationalities than we have. Especially when you go down there and come into contact with concrete matters, you will discover many problems. We sincerely hope that you comrades will examine all kinds of problems and make suggestions. Even a one-sided view is better than none. At present, we are in urgent need of suggestions. I hope you comrades will not hesitate to let local comrades know whatever strikes you. It is quite likely that some comrades at the lower levels are subjective, so you may be rebuffed, or local comrades may pay no attention to the problems you point out or hold differing views on these problems, and it is more likely that their views are wrong. When this happens, take no offence. You can write to us or to comrades working in the provincial governments. The matter can be solved reasonably in the end. If some of your opinions happen to be incorrect, we shall also let you know. In this way, with your help, I am sure we can solve the most complicated and most important issue in the southwest — establishing unity among nationalities, or at least laying a very good foundation for this goal.

(Source: )

Alfred Rosenberg talks about finance capitalism and national-socialism

The following is a very good article written by Alfred Rosenberg that outlines how national-socialism and the majority of national-socialists viewed capitalism of the western model, it wasn’t even the left of the party, the national-socialists were both left and right at the same time, it was a socialism that combined both the left and the right and combated the class struggle through the state and the nation.

So check out this piece, it’s really interesting and provides a really hidden view of the national-socialists of Germany at that time, it’s a view that doesn’t really get out much and shows that there was a lot of variety within the German parties at that time.

History isn’t simple, it takes a lot of resources to study and isn’t as simple as calling someone a fascist or a communist.

The article is right here-

“Nationalism pertains mainly to foreign policy while socialism is the domestic complement. Corresponding manifestations are the army and the police. We want to bring together the two currents that splash around the middle, the strongly nationalist movement and the strongly socialist movement purged of Marxism. Therefore National-Socialism distinguishes itself from the religion of the Second Reich- from National-Liberalism- which is distinguished on the one side by unlimited exploitation, on the other by charity. On one side the ladle of finance scoops away small savings; on the other side nursing homes and hospitals appear. This is most evident today in America, where exploitation has already become a condition that is encouraged. The stock-jobber who has robbed a people for 60 years, in the 65th year builds a hospital for his victims”- Alfred Rosenberg

What is Fascism? The beginning of a discussion about what it means to be a Fascist.

“The foundation of Fascism is the conception of the State, its character, its duty, and its aim. Fascism conceives of the State as an absolute, in comparison with which all individuals or groups are relative, only to be conceived of in their relation to the State. The conception of the Liberal State is not that of a directing force, guiding the play and development, both material and spiritual, of a collective body, but merely a force limited to the function of recording results: on the other hand, the Fascist State is itself conscious and has itself a will and a personality- thus it may be called the ‘ethnic’ State.”

(Source- What is Fascism by Benito Mussolini)

“There’s nothing more hypocritical than a well-fed citizen protesting against the working class idea of class struggle. You made it through the winter all snug and comfortable. Your very person is provocative of class struggle. What gives you the right to puff yourself up, all swelled with the pride of national responsibility, against the struggle of the working class? For almost 60 years, has the middle-class State really been anything other than an organized one-class State which out of compelling historical necessity, itself gave rise to the working class concept of class struggle? Didn’t you pay the price of this one-class State on November 9, 1918? And aren’t you at this very moment busily exploiting the people’s despair of the insanity of Marxism in order to re-establish the same old reactionary middle-class nonsense as before?”

(Source- 10 Questions for National Socialists by Dr. Joseph Goebbels)

“Are you monarchists or republicans?

Neither one nor the other. Because:

1.) The question of the organizational structure of a State is a very minor one today. A people wasting away under the terms of the Treaty of Versailles has other things to worry about than the question of monarchy versus republic.

2.) The people will be able to settle this question once and for all only when they have their liberty.

But in principle we say:

A good republic is better than a bad monarchy, and a good monarchy is better than a bad republic. Both forms of government have their merits and their disadvantages. Weighing them against each other is the concern of a people facing the rest of the world in liberty.”

(Source- 10 Questions for National Socialists by Dr. Joseph Goebbels)

“It is not enough to defeat Communism. We must also fight for the rights of the workers. They have a right to bread and a fight to honor, we must fight against the oligarchic parties, creating national workers organizations which can gain their rights within the framework of the state and not against the state.

We permit no one to try raising on Romanian soil another flag, save that of our national history. No matter how the workers’ class may be, we do not tolerate that it rise up against the country or that it make common cause with foreign movements outside our borders. No one will admit that for your bread you lay waste and band over into the bands of a foreign people of bankers and usurers, everything that for two millennia the sweat of a people of workers and brave ones has saved. Your rights, yes- but within the rights of your people.”

(Source- For my Legionaries by Corneliu Zelea Codreanu)

“I believe in the one and undivided Romanian State, from Dniester to the Tisa,. the holder of all Romanians and only of Romanians, lover of work, honor and in fear of God, concerned about the country and its people; giver of equal rights, both civil and political, to men and to women; protector of the family, paying its public servants. At that time we had not heard of Adolf Hitler and German National Socialism and workers on the basis of the number of children and the work performed, quality and quantity; and in a State, supporter of social harmony through minimizing of class differences; and in addition to salaries, nationalizing factories (the property of all workers) and distributing the land among all the ploughmen.”

(Source- For my Legionaries by Corneliu Zelea Codreanu)

“The Zionists declare interest in the Orient, yet energetically safeguard themselves against going to Palestine as pioneers of Europe. A leading writer even openly said that the Zionists would Fight alongside the ranks of the wakening Asiatic peoples. From the fire of all burning thorn bushes and from the nights of solitude only one cry resounds to them: Asia. Zionism, it is asserted, is only a partial idea of pan Asiaticism. At the same time a spiritual and political link passes over to the idea of Red Bolshevism. The Zionist, Holitscher, discovered the inner parallels between Moscow and Zion, while the Zionist, F. Kohn, declared that- from the patriarchs- a single line extends up to Karl Marx, to Rosa Luxembourg, and to all Jewish Bolsheviks who have served the cause of freedom.

This Zionism proclaims its wish to found a Jewish state. A desire may quite honorably exist among a few leaders for some final redemption to build a pyramid of life on the soil of the Jewish nation. Building such a state results in a vertical structure in deference and contrast to the horizontal layering of former existence. Regarded from the primordial aspect, this Jewish infection is alien to our national feeling and to the ideas of state of the European peoples.”

(Source- Myth of the Twentieth Century by Alfred Rosenberg)

Kim Il Sung speaks directly to SJW’s and their bad manners

“Today our functionaries have become so insolent that they show no respect for their seniors. They have been allowed to fall into such a  habit, whereas Communists naturally have a higher moral sense than any other people, and hold their revolutionary seniors in high esteem.

In our People’s Army a vigorous struggle has been waged to uphold the revolutionary traditions and, as a result, most of the people who had taken part in revolutionary activities have become either regimental or divisional commanders.

If we had not organized the People’s Army with old revolutionary cadres as its core, what would have been the outcome of the last war? It would have been impossible for us to defeat the enemy and win a great victory under such difficult conditions.

During our retreat certain foreigners predicted that most of our army units, trapped by enemy encirclement, would not be able to get back. But we were firmly convinced that all of them would manage to come back. In fact, they all did return, with the exception of the dead. The foreigners were greatly impressed at this and said there were few armies like ours in the world. How did this come about? The explanation is that our army cadres were comrades who in the past had taken part in guerrilla warfare or in local revolutionary movements. That is precisely why our army is strong.

Ten years have passed now since our Party was founded. Therefore, the Party members should naturally be educated in the history of our Party. If our functionaries are not educated in the revolutionary history of our country, they will be unable to carry forward our fine revolutionary traditions, nor will they be able to realize which direction to take in the struggle, or sow enthusiasm and creative initiative in their revolutionary activities.”

Kim Il Sung talks about Internationalism and Nationalism

“In connection with the problem of establishing Juche I think it necessary to touch on internationalism and patriotism.

Internationalism and patriotism are inseparably linked with each other. You must know the love of Korean Communists for their country does not go against the internationalism of the working class but conforms fully with it. To love Korea is just as good as to love the Soviet Union and the socialist camp and, likewise, to love the Soviet Union and the socialist camp means precisely loving Korea. They constitute a complete whole. For the great cause of the working class has no frontiers and our revolutionary cause is a part of the international revolutionary cause of the working class throughout the world. The one supreme goal of the working class of all countries is to build a communist society. The different, if any, lies only in the fact that certain countries do this earlier and others later.

It would be wrong to advocate patriotism alone and neglect internationalist solidarity. For the victory of the Korean revolution and for the great cause of the international working class, we would strengthen solidarity with the Soviet people, our liberator and helper, and with the peoples of all the socialist countries. This is our sacred internationalist duty. The Soviet people, on their part, are doing all they can to consolidate solidarity not only with the countries of the socialist camp but also with the working class of the whole world, both for the communist construction in their country and for the victory of world revolution.

Thus, patriotism and internationalism are inseparable. He who does not love his own country cannot be loyal to internationalism, and he who is unfaithful to internationalism cannot be faithful to his own country and people. A true patriot is precisely an internationalist and vice versa.”

(Source: Kim Il Sung- Selected Works, Volume 1, P. 593)

Liberalism is the Death of Nations: by Arthur Moeller van den Bruck

“When the World War broke out, the western newspapers blazed with the headline: la liberte est en jeu! This misled world opinion. The particular cause became a general cause and acquired a halo. What our enemies sought was not liberty but power. Anyone who had examined the question with an open mind would have bade the discovery that in liberal countries political freedom is not enjoyed by the people, who on the contrary are carefully shepherded by certain ruling classes. What these ruling classes mean by liberty, is freedom and scope for their own intrigues. This they attain by means of parliamentism which secures them power under cover of the constitution and so-called representation of the people. Such is the specious mask which liberalism wears when it shouts ‘liberty’: the mask it wore at the outbreak of the War. This was the first betrayal.

When our enemies were not able to break our resistance in the first clash of arms, they then proceeded to decoy the German people. They trotted out the idea of progress, which is so easily confused with the idea of liberty. If the nations had been compared in respect of their achievement, Germany would ahve come brilliantly out of the comparison, and the western powers would have been put to shame. But from the standpoint of parliamentary institutions Germany could be made to appear behind the times. The German people were assured that they were oppressed under their constitution. Pacifist and anti-military questions were dragged into the foreground-since no one could pretend that we were suffering economically- and foreign politics were skilfully confused with domestic affairs, with the German constitution and even the Prussian suffrage. Our enemies had too bad a conscience to touch, except with the utmost caution, on the question of the origin of the War. They obscured the real causa causans- their policy of encirclement- with the irrelevent and accidental facts of the actual declaration of war, and they ignored as far as possible that their Russian ally bore the responsibility for the first mobilization. Their eloquence grew greater when they pointed out, as one war-year succeeded another and the end was not yet in sight, that Germany would be the greatest sufferer by a prolongation of the War. The intoxicating message reached us in the solemn words from the White House: ‘There must be Peace without Victory.’

This message reached a people who had not wanted the War and who did not realize that their whole future was at stake. The German people were not at one on the question of their War aims, which we could only formulate as the War progressed, whereas our enemies had all along been clear about their, and had reached secret understandings amongst themselves and spoke openly to their public, treating their aims as self-evident. The conduct of Germany demonstrated at every turn how uttery unprepared she was for this War, the guilt of which has been laid at her door. She now saw the opportunity of regaining that peace in which she had been before so well content. ‘Peace without Victory’ sounded acceptable to a people who with an heroic constancy and a quiet sense of duty had hitherto endured the privation, suffering and sacrifice that had been heaped upon it. They welcomed the idea with that innate credulity and good faith which makes us always ready to accept what our advisers-outside advisers in this case-recommend as the wise thing, bit it never so unwise.

The senseless war would retrospectively acquire a meaning if it lead to a reconciliation of the nations which would accord to each nation its due and would rob none. Our German democrats and the liberal elements in the nation were the first to be lured by this snare, and thus the way was paved for those intrigues which led to our overtures for peace in 1917. This same credulity offered fruitful soil to Northcliffe’s propoganda, which was directed to all malcontents, traitors and revolutionaries, to all would-be socialist, progressive, parliamentarian elements: liberals all, but now not merely over-credulous liberals, but criminal liberals. Credulity and treachery prepared the ground for the events of 1918 and 1919: these things inevitably brought about the Insurrection, the conditions of the Armistice, the surrender of the battle fleet, the decoying away of our mercantile marine; and the most grevious of our deceptions: that we had only to confess ourselves guilty of the outbreak of the War to win for ourselves by this easy lie more favourable peace conditions. That was the second betrayal.

A little time passed before the Founder of Peace himself stood revealed as the liberal that he was. The words ‘Peace without Victory’ were spoken before our peace overtures of 1917. When we had once been guided into the path our enemies wished us to take, these words were never repeated to us. Still less were they fulfilled after our collapse in 1918, when our enemies had reached their goal. Today it is almost a matter of indifference whether Wilson ever believed his own words, or whether he only pronounced them at a moment when he throught those powers to whom he wished success would prove unable to achieve for themselves a ‘Peace with Victory.’ But no. It is not a matter of indifference, because it involves the whole liberal attitude of mind. It is peculiarly characteristic of the liberal to indulge in mental reservations; retrospectively to formulate his goal when he has ascertained what he is likely to be able to attain. ”

(Source: )