The story

What was Hitler's attitude towards the Aryans of India?

What was Hitler's attitude towards the Aryans of India?

We are searching data for your request:

Forums and discussions:
Manuals and reference books:
Data from registers:
Wait the end of the search in all databases.
Upon completion, a link will appear to access the found materials.

Considering some of the questions/questioners that have cropped up recently on this site, what was the Nazi attitude towards India and specifically the Aryans of India? Did Hitler consider them to be just as superior as the Nordic race? Did this perhaps motivate his support of the Indian National Army during WW2?

Hitler did not consider Indians to be Aryans at all. Instead, he believed them to be barbaric Asians who did not deserve to enjoy freedom as a country. He wanted India to remain subjugated under the British (he said this openly in his book) permanently. He pointedly refused Bose's request to withdraw this statement in his only meeting with Bose. As for support for the Indian National Army, it was more Bose's determination and excellent relations with senior officers of the Abwehr (Nazi Germany's intelligence agency) that forced Hitler to deal with the issue of Indian independence. Even then he refused to issue an open declaration in support of India[1]. And Bose, it must be said, returned this subtle hostility. For example, after Germany's surrender, Bose profusely thanked the Germans for their help, but did not forget to add that Germany had been let down by its leaders in both the world wars[2].

Hitler was an Chameleon opportunist who used the word "Aryan", in different contexts to supplement his political ideologies, which were mainly to conquer Europe, and the systematic eradication of Jews.

The Earliest definition of Aryan, given out by the Nazis, was a race of people belonging to "Indo-European tribes" and the five European sub-races Nordic, Mediterranean, Dinaric, Alpine, and East Baltic, of which the Nordic heritage was inherently considered superior, and of course predominantly recurring among the German race.

However, as time passed,he managed to change the description to better suit his current political needs. Here are some instances, where he twisted this "Aryan" term…

  • 1) The Slavic race, was clearly an Indo-European tribe, and has its origins in eastern and central Europe. But because he happened to declare war on the Slavs for more lebansraum , he considered Slavs not to be Aryan, describing them as "having dangerous Jewish and Asiatic influences"[Ref1]

    He also went to the extent of classifying them under the sub-human race (untermenchen), and hence evading the Geneva convention.

  • 2) The Independant State of Croatia, is Nazi Germany's ally. But they were also a predominantly a southern Slavic people. But that notion was rejected, and the idea that the croatians were descendants of German goths, was hereby enforced. [Ref2]
  • 3) The single most suffered people, by means of genocide , were the Romanis or Gypsies, who clearly spoke Indo-European languages, and they were also found to contain Indian roots.[Ref3] . So even by the definition of Aryan , these Indo-European people were not spared.
  • 4) The Japanese people are inherently in no way Aryan, but since they were Hitler's allies, they were granted the status of being Honorary Aryans.

So Sum it all up, my conclusion is

Aryan = Germany and its allies.

Non Aryan = Rest of the World.

The Most famous opinion of Hitler on India written in his book "Mein Kempf", was that Indians are not capable of self rule, and he would rather see the Indians under British rule than anyone else.

So i seriously doubt, he considered the Indians as Aryans since, Aryans were a superior race capable of ruling the world, but according to him, Indians were not even capable of self-rule,


Ref 1 = André Mineau. Operation Barbarossa: Ideology and Ethics Against Human Dignity. Rodopi, 2004. Pp. 34-36.

Ref 2 = Rich, Norman (1974). Hitler's War Aims: the Establishment of the New Order, p. 276-7. W. W. Norton & Company Inc., New York.

Ref 3 = Kenrick, Donald (2007). Historical Dictionary of the Gypsies (Romanies) (2nd ed.). Scarecrow Press. p. xxxvii. "The Gypsies, or Romanies, are an ethnic group that arrived in Europe around the 14th century. Scholars argue about when and how they left India, but it is generally accepted that they did emigrate from northern India sometime between the 6th and 11th centuries, then crossed the Middle East and came into Europe."

How did the Nazis construct an Aryan identity?

Adolf Hitler, the leader of the Nazi Party, argued that the Germans was superior to all other races. Hitler became obsessed with 'racial purity' and used the word 'Aryan' to describe his idea of a 'pure German race' or Herrenvolk. The 'Aryan race' had a duty to control the world.
The Nazis believed that the Aryans had the most "pure blood" of all the people on earth. The ideal Aryan had pale skin, blond hair and blue eyes.
Non-Aryans came to be seen as impure and even evil. Hitler believed that Aryan superiority was being threatened particularly by the Jews. Therefore, a hierarchy of 'races' was created with the Aryans at the top and with Jews, Gypsies and black people at the bottom. These 'inferior' people were seen as a threat to the purity and strength of the German nation.

The term Aryan originally meant something completely different. Its origin started in the Vedic period by Indo-Iranian people in India. The word was a self-designation and ethnic label that referred to the noble class from the Āryāvarta parts of India. The Nazis, however, linked the word 'Aryan' with the German word 'Ehre', which means 'honour' and therefore, used 'Aryan' to depict their image of 'the honourable people'.

This vivid poster from the September 1930 Reichstag election summarizes Nazi ideology in a single image. A Nazi sword kills a snake, the blade passing through a red Star of David. The red words coming from the snake are: usury, Versailles, unemployment, war guilt lie, Marxism, Bolshevism, lies and betrayal, inflation, Locarno, Dawes Pact, Young Plan, corruption, Barmat, Kutistker, Sklarek [the last three Jews involved in major financial scandals], prostitution, terror, civil war. Source:

The use of propaganda
The Nazi totalitarian government had total control over men, women, youth, newspapers, radio, art, books, music, universities, schools, police, army, law courts and religion. In other words, they controlled every aspect of life in Germany. Furthermore, Joseph Goebbels, one of Hitler's most devoted associates, was elected as the Reich Minister of Propoganda from 1933 - 1945.
To control every part of every German's life, the Nazi Party had to persuade people to believe that Hitler had the answers to all their problems. The Nazi Party used terror, on the one hand, and propaganda on the other.
The Nazi Party used propaganda to influence the German people's thoughts and opinions. Propoganda was used to bring most Germans together for the common goal - to stand together against the enemies of the Nazi Party.

The propoganda unit also set their sights on the youth of Germany. For example schools, universities and churches were indoctrinated with Nazi teachings. Furthermore, the importance of the role of women in the indoctrination of children was recognised and women were encouraged to have more children. In 1933 Hitler set up the "Hitler Youth" or "Hitlerjugend", an organisation aiming to train and educate the male youth with Nazi principles and ideologies. Young boys were trained and prepared to use weapons - clearly preparing for what was to come.

What is progaganda?

  • Propaganda is persuasive communication which influences beliefs, opinions and emotions.
  • Propaganda may be true or false, but it is always deliberately used to influence people.
  • Propaganda does not stand up to criticism.
  • Propaganda appeals to the heart or emotions, not to the mind or reason.

Propaganda in our world today
Propaganda was not just something that Hitler used. It is widely used in our society today.
Mass communication makes propaganda more sophisticated. Propoganda is used on television, radio and in popular magazines, as well as by methodology of politicians.
In this context, it is important to learn that one must think critically from an educated basis. Ideally, in a democratic society we should all have the opportunity to from our own opinions and be able to respect others' opinions as it could be seen as a learning opportunity.

Examples, in an American context, of how Language could be used as form of Propoganda as it changes the impact of information received:

  • The War Department was changed to The Department of Defense in the 1940s
  • In the 1980s, the MX-Missile was renamed "The Peacekeeper"
  • During wartime, civilian casualties are called 'collateral damage' and murder is called 'liquidation'
  • Traumatised soldiers were called 'shell shocked'. This has been changed to 'combat fatigue' and then to 'post traumatic stress disorder' - a phrase that has nothing to do with the harsh reality of war at all.

What is anti-Semitism?
Anti-Semitism is the hatred of Jews. Although many people believe that Anti-Semitism originated in Nazi-Germany, hatred of Jewish Communities existed well before the 1930's. Jews were often used as a scapegoat when things went wrong - they were blamed for no reason.
The Nazis said that Jews were inferior and undesirable. Propaganda was used in schools and at rallies, on the radio, in posters, films and newspapers to increase Anti-Semitism and make people believe that 'The Jews are our misfortune.'
The Nazis stereotyped Jews. That means that they created a simplistic, false impression of Jews. Hitler gave the following instructions to Goebbels, his Propaganda Minister:

". bring up the Jewish question again and again and again, unceasingly. Every emotional aversion, however slight, must be exploited ruthlessly”¦the emotional aversion to Jews is to be heightened by all possible means". - Adolf Hitler

Every issue of the weekly newspaper, Der StÁ¼rmer repeated on its front page in large letters the slogans:


In additon the newspapers favourite was ‘race defilement’. Look at this quote from the newspaper:

"Moreover the Jew has in his veins a large element of Negro blood his frizzy hair, his wolf lips, the colour of his eyeballs proves this as effectually as the insatiable sexual greed which hesitates at no crime and finds its supremest triumph in the brutal defilement of women of another race. This bestial lust obsesses even a barely mature Jew boy”¦" - Der StÁ¼rmer, August 1945

Children's books and school books were used to influence children against the Jews. It is easier to get the message across to younger children than to adults. For example, in one book, a Jew was depicted as a 'poison mushroom'. Children know that poison mushrooms are harmful, and they associated poison mushrooms with Jewish people.
The Nazis required Jews to wear a yellow Star of David made of fabric and stitched to their clothing.

Creating 'Aryans'
One of the Nazi aims was the creation of a Master Race. This meant encouraging people with "pure blood" (in other words, those with blond hair and blue eyes) to have more children. In 1935 the leader of the Schutzstaffeln (SS), Heinrich Himmler, created a project called the Lebensborn, which means 'spring of life'. The aim of the project was to give young 'racially pure' girls the opportunity to give birth in secret. Such 'pure' girls could come to these Lebensborn centres to create a baby with one of the SS officers. They could also have the baby at the Lebensborn centre. The children would then be taken away from their mothers and given to the SS, who took charge of their education and upbringing. Many of these children grew up never knowing their biological parents.
The Lebensborn policy went even further during World War II. In the countries that Germany occupied, the SS would kidnap children who had blonde hair and blue eyes, and take them to the Lebensborn centres. There, they were forced to reject their background and to accept the Nazi teachings. Some were told that their parents had abandoned them. In the end, most of them were however taken to German concentration or death camps, where they were killed. Others were adopted by SS families. This process was known as Germanisation.

Diverse group

As I have noted in my book, Desi Hoop Dreams: Pickup Basketball and the Making of Asian American Masculinity (New York University Press, 2016), South Asian Americans come from various nations, various diasporic locations (such as the Indo-Guyanese, Trinidadians, and from Africa), a wide spectrum of religious backgrounds, and many ethnic groups, while speaking multiple languages and dialects.

In addition, people hailing from south Asia and its many diasporic locations have not migrated to the United States at the same time and do not all share the same capital, social status, and access to resources and wealth. For example, the team Maryland Five Pillars won several championships during my period of research this team was made up of high-ranking professional Muslims and Hindus who were Indian American.

The team Sand Brothaz in Atlanta contained Sikh Americans, a Lebanese American, and Muslim South Asian Americans—all communities who faced the brunt of post-9/11 racial violence. The main team I competed with, team Atlanta Outkasts, was composed of mostly lower-middle-class young Muslim Pakistani Americans who did not have a traditional college degree.

What Was Hitler’s Connection With The Indian Culture?

Was Hitler inspired by Vedic traditions while formulating his racial theory?

Adolf Hitler is a figure of fascination and undying curiosity for many Indians. We can easily find his autobiography, “Mein Kamph”, in one of the public libraries and local bookstores. Interest of Indians in knowing about a cruel and arrogant mind contributed to his popularity in the subcontinent.

It is ironical that “The Diary Of A Young Girl Anne Frank” and Hitler’s autobiography share the same space in a library along with other great names like Mahatma Gandhi and Benjamin Franklin. Sheer ignorance has resulted in a perpetrator of violence and its victim sharing a common place.

The term “Hitler” is often used in India to refer to “a very strict teacher or relative” but it does not adequately depict the atrocities committed by him. Thus, we are emotionally, socially and physically disconnected from the torments of Hitler’s Nazi regime. We only regard him as a charismatic but evil soul that had enormous impact on the history of the world.

Hitler, however, borrowed a few concepts from Hindu Vedic traditions and made it an enormous part of his racial ideologies and programmes.

The concept of “Aryan race”

The idea of an Aryan race developed in late nineteenth and mid-twentieth century. It suggested that people who spoke Indo-European languages belong to the same Aryan race. Thus, this idea turned a linguistic group into a mythical race made up of strong warrior-like men and beautiful fertile women. It is often considered as a distinctive sub-race of Caucasians.

It is derived from the Sanskrit word ārya (Devanāgarī: आर्य), which means “honourable, respectable, noble”. Hitler lifted various Vedic thoughts and ideas and modified them to suit his corrupt and perverted interests and aspirations.

Was Hitler inspired by Caste System in India?

Hitler’s desire to establish a New Order seems to have been inspired by India’s caste system. It consists of a pyramid like social hierarchy based on birth rather than conduct. He placed Nordics on the top of this list as he considered them as most desirable.

According to Hitler, people belonging to Nordic race are the only racially pure descendants of Aryan race. They are well-built, tall, blue-eyed and blond-haired. They belong to the master race and have the authority to rule the world and subjugate and exterminate people of low race like Jews.

Read More: 7 Facts In Favour Of The Theory That China Has Intentionally Spread Coronavirus In The World

Indians are Untermensch

Hitler had little or no respect for the present-day Indians and considered them as untermensch (sub-human) along with Jews. He believed that India served as a mixing ground for Aryans and non-Aryans. Indians were unable to maintain their racial purity and hence deserved no respect.

They were only half-Aryans and could not be compared to pure blooded Nordics whom he considered as the best of mankind. He expressed his contempt towards Indians for mixing with filthy and uncivilized Mongoloids and Negroids.

He often used very racist and demeaning words for Indians. Despite his general dislike for Brits, he believed that Indians were unfit for self-rule and never supported India’s nationalist movements.

In 1930s, he spoke of the Indian freedom struggle as a rebellion of the “lower Indian race against the superior English Nordic race”. He believed that Britishers were free to use violence to suppress any actions of resistance as they belonged to superior Nordic race.

“Inferior Asiatic jugglers”, was the term used by Hitler himself, during his meeting with Viceroy Lord Halifax.

He considered the two hundred year old British rule of India as an exemplary example of rule of dominant race over low and inferior race. He wanted German rule in East to resemble British regime in India.

Resemblance between Hakencruez and Indian Swastika

The swastika or sauwastika is a geometrical figure and a religious symbol used commonly by Indians, Sri Lankans, Chinese, Japanese and various other South East Asians. Swastika was first used by the people of Indus Valley Civilisation. It is used as a symbol of auspiciousness, divinity, spirituality and good luck.

In the Western world, Nazi Germans used Swastika to devise ‘Hakencruz’ which became an emblem of the Aryan race.

As a result of the bloodbath that accompanied World War 2 and the systematic holocaust of Jews, many Europeans regard Swastika as the poignant reminder of the large-scale genocide committed by Hitler and his Nazi party. For Nazis, swastika was the symbol of the “creating and effecting life” (das Symbol des schaffenden, wirkenden Lebens) .

In his 1925 work Mein Kampf, Adolf Hitler writes that:

“I myself, meanwhile, after innumerable attempts, had laid down a final form a flag with a red background, a white disk, and a black Hakenkreuz in the middle. After long trials I also found a definite proportion between the size of the flag and the size of the white disk, as well as the shape and thickness of the Hakenkreuz.”

Thus, Hitler did engage with Indic Culture in his lifetime filled with gruesome memories of killings of World War 2. His ideas seem to have been inspired by Vedism. Despite of this fact, his remarks on Indian people are severely disparaging and trivialising.

Nazi Germany’s Fascination With Ancient India: The Case Of Heinrich Himmler

More than 65 years after the fall of the Third Reich, Nazi Germany remains an obsession with millions of people around the world.

Adolf Hitler remains one of the most prominent historical figure from the 20th century, evoking both disgust and fascination. While other totalitarian regimes -- including Fascist Italy and imperial Japan -- have faded in the public's fascination, Nazi Germany still exerts a powerful hold on many for a variety of reasons.

Among the most interesting and perplexing aspects of the Nazi regime was its connection to India and Hinduism. Indeed, Hitler took the most prominent symbol of ancient India -- the swastika -- as his own.

The link between Nazi Germany and ancient India, however, goes deeper than the swastika symbol. The Nazis venerated the notion of a &ldquopure, noble Aryan race,&rdquo who are believed to have invaded India thousands of years ago and established a society based on a rigid social structure, or castes.

While scholars in India and Europe have rejected the notion of an &ldquoAryan race, the myths and legends of ancient Vedic-Hindu India have imparted a tremendous influence on Germany.

Perhaps the most fervent Nazi adherent to Indian Hindu traditions was Heinrich Himmler, one of the most brutal members of the senior command.

Himmler, responsible for the deaths of millions of Jews as architect of the Holocaust, was a highly complex and fascinating man. He was also obsessed with India and Hinduism.

International Business Times spoke with an expert on German history to explore Himmler and Hinduism.

Mathias Tietke is a German author, editor and yoga enthusiast. His books include &ldquoYoga in the Third Reich. Concepts, Contrasts, Consequences.&rdquo

IB TIMES: Heinrich Himmler was reportedly fascinated by Hinduism and ancient Indian culture and had read the Bhagavad Gita, among other classic Indian texts. How and when was he introduced to Indian culture? Was it prior to his joining the Nazi party, or afterward?

TIETKE: As early as 1925, when Himmler was only 24 years old and had joined the SS, and just two years after Adolf Hitler's beer hall putsch, Himmler wrote: Kshatriyakaste, that is how we need to be. This is the salvation.

[&ldquoKshatriyakaste&rdquo referred to the military and ruling elite of the Vedic-Hindu social system of ancient India.]

Himmler was deeply influenced by the Indologist, yoga scholar and SS Capt. Jakob Wilhelm Hauer of the University of Tübingen in Germany and the Italian philosopher Baron Julius Evola.

Himmler had a keen interest in the Rigveda and the Bhagavad Gita. According to his personal massage therapist, Felix Kersten, Himmler carried a copy of the Bhagavad Gita in his pocket from 1941 until his death four years later. The book was a translation by the German theosophist, Dr. Franz Hartmann.

IB TIMES: Germany's fascination with India and its culture started in the 19th century, no? That is, long before the advent of the Nazis?

TIETKE: Yes, that's true. The fascination with and admiration of Indian culture can be found as early as the 19th century in the writings of pro-Aryan and anti-Semitic German philosophers and theosophists -- always in relation to Indian classical texts.

In 1844, the German philosopher Friedrich Wilhelm Joseph Schelling highlighted in his lectures the same passage from the fourth chapter of the Bhagavad Gita, which 100 years later would fascinate Himmler &ndash so much so that he dictated this passage to his massage therapist. This passage emphasizes that a person's identity does not have to be defined by one's actions -- that is, even if they commit evil acts, they can still remain untainted and unaffected by ones&rsquo own actions.

Moreover, in 1851, the German philosopher Arthur Schopenhauer raved about the enthusiastic spirit of the Vedas and the Upanishads, citing that his spirit is washed clean of all his early inoculated Jewish superstitions.

IB TIMES: Is it true Himmler could read and speak Sanskrit fluently? Where and how did he learn such a difficult foreign language?

TIETKE: Himmler read translations of Indian texts from well-known German and Austrian Indologists. However, there is no evidence that he had mastered or read the original Sanskrit editions.

IB TIMES: As Reichsführer of the SS, Chief of the German Police, Minister of the Interior and head of Gestapo and the Einsatzgruppen killing squads, Himmler was responsible for the murders of millions of people. How did he reconcile such brutality with the tenets of Hinduism, which is a generally peaceful philosophy?

TIETKE: Himmler had clear preferences with some of the scriptures of Hinduism. One was his interest in the Rig Veda, which in some places is imbued with much violence.

The other was the Bhagavad Gita, which he greatly admired and appreciated. Himmler particularly referred to Krishna's instructions on satisfying one's duty on the battlefield and not to identify with such actions.

In a poem written by Himmler, which I discovered in the Federal Archive in Koblenz, he tells stories about the holy life [that] unfolds itself on deadly born.

For the period after the war, the Reichsführer-SS Himmler was already planning a retreat. He recommended that there should be sour milk and brown bread as physical food for his men and the Bhagavad Gita as spiritual nourishment and as the subject for meditation.

IB TIMES: Aside from millions of Jews, Himmler was also responsible for the mass murder of up to half-million Roma (Gypsies). Did he not realize that the Roma are of Indian descent themselves?

TIETKE: Himmler even killed his own comrades or SS officers, if, in his view, it served the supposedly higher cause, i.e., the ideology of National Socialism.

Himmler was not really sympathetic so much to the complexities Indian culture, but rather to the ideal of the Kshatriya [warrior caste of India] and to the ideals of purity.

IB TIMES: The Bhagavad Gita is partially about the adventures of Arjuna, the world's greatest warrior. Did Himmler fantasize that he was a 20th-century version of Arjuna &ldquofighting for the glory of the Aryans&rdquo?

TIETKE: Yes, I think so and there are such statements to confirm this. In fact, in an effort to explain his murderous violence, Himmler told his massage therapist Kersten that it would naturally be more pleasant to deal with the flower beds, instead of the sweepings pile and the garbage disposal of the state-- but without that garbage collection, the flower beds would not flourish.&rdquo

IB TIMES: Did Himmler view Hitler as his &ldquogod&rdquo Krishna &ndash like a reincarnation of the deity?

TIETKE: Yes, there were statements by Himmler in which he described Hitler as incarnation of a great shining light, as a predestined karma of the Germanic world. Indeed, Himmler equated Hitler with Krishna.

In the Bhagavad Gita, Krishna declared that he will always be reborn when the peoples' sense of right and truth disappeared and injustice ruled the world. Himmler commented that this verse related directly to Hitler.

IB TIMES: Did Himmler envision the SS as a modern version of the ancient Kshatriya Hindu warrior caste?

TIETKE: Absolutely. Himmler conceived of the SS as a kind of &ldquospiritual&rdquo order. He demanded loyalty, moral integrity, and also required that his men never acted from base motives.

However, he also required his men to have a pure conscience -- inwardly cold, sober and willing to kill for a higher purpose.

IB TIMES: Discuss Himmler&rsquos fascination with yoga and what he sought to gain from the practice.

TIETKE: What Himmler had sought and found in yoga was legitimacy, relieving his conscience and overcoming his doubts.
The concept of purity is found both in the writings of yoga as well as in the ideology of National Socialism --- that is, the idea that one has to detach oneself from such concepts as &ldquogood&rdquo and &ldquobad.&rdquo

This was conveyed to me in 1997 in a weekend seminar in my training as a yoga teacher: Three days of the seminar were based around the Bhagavad Gita. In fact, according to the assertions of speaker, it was the &ldquokarma&rdquo [fate, deeds] of the Jews to be destroyed, and it was the &ldquodharma&rdquo [nature, order] of the Wehrmacht and the SS, to wage war. I did not agree with these assertions.

IB TIMES: Did Himmler (and other top Nazis) use the Bhagavad Gita as a kind of a &ldquoblueprint&rdquo for the Holocaust and World War II?

TIETKE: The Bhagavad Gita was for Himmler and also for top Nazi ideologue Alfred Rosenberg an important source of inspiration and legitimacy. They could refer to an ancient and sacred text to which British-German philosopher Houston Stewart Chamberlain and German philosopher Friedrich Nietzsche had already referred to.

In their comments they wrote of the &ldquoAryan race&rdquo and the &ldquoAryan belief&rdquo (Chamberlain) and about the superman (Übermensch), the [lower-caste] Sudras as the servant race and the degenerates of all caste and about the eject materials in perpetuity (Nietzsche).

IB TIMES: During World War II, there was a community of Indian nationalists living in Berlin. The most prominent of these was Subhash Chandra Bose, who met with many top Nazi officials, including Himmler, Joachim von Ribbentrop, Hermann Goering and Hitler himself. Is it true that Himmler was genuinely interested in helping Bose achieving independence for India (whereas most of the other German leaders only used Bose in a ploy to stoke anti-British sentiments in India)?

TIETKE: I did not find any signs of Himmler having a genuine interest in the independence struggles of India. However, Himmler agreed with Bose's requests to allow for participation in a police training course of selected Indian soldiers in Germany.
Since Bose was fascinated by the Nazi police force, including the SS and the Gestapo, whilst in Berlin in July 1942, he asked Himmler personally to train Indians accordingly.

One year earlier, Nazi propaganda minister Josef Goebbels wrote in his diary: Bose is in the Indian question currently, the best horse in our barn.

The Origin and History of the Aryans of Ancient India

This article presents the divergent opinions and pros and cons of Aryan invasion from different perspectives. However, it requires further improvement, order and clarity. Hence, please consider this as a work in progress, and not the final version. We have several other essays on this subject. Please check the links at the end of this essay

There is a consensus opinion among many historians that the Aryans were a heterogeneous group of people who lived in different parts of the ancient world in the area comprising Mediterranean, parts of Europe, central Asia and north western India. There is also an established opinion in the academic circles that the ancestors of "some" Indians, Persians, Germans, Greeks, Romans, and the Celts were Aryans, who worshipped different gods and goddesses, used fire in their rituals and spoke many languages, which have evolved into the present day Indo European languages.

The Indo Iranian group of Aryans settled in Iran and parts of north western India. Although they seemed to have shared a common ancestry, they parted their ways in matters of language and religion.

However, there is a divergence of opinion among various scholars as to the original homeland of Aryans, which is summarized below. Indian historians who deal with the subject fall broadly into two categories: those who suggest that the Indian origin of the Aryans and those who support the non-Indian origin of Aryans. Neither side has come up with convincing evidence or argument so far.

Historian Propose Homeland of Aryans
Max Mueller Central Asia
B.G.Tilak Arctic Region
A.C.Dass Sapta Sindhu or the Punjab region
Swami Dayanand Saraswathi Tibet
Nehring Southern Russia
Pokorny A wide area located in Russia between Weser and Vistula and up to White Russia and Volhynia
Brandenstein Kirghiz steppe
Nazi/German Scholars Germany
Morgan Western Siberia
Jairazbhoy West of Caspian Sea
Prof. MacDonnel Eastern Europe
Dr. Giles Austria and Hungary
Dr. Subhash Kak and others India

There is also a divergence of opinion among those who support the Aryan invasion theory with regard to their subsequent expansion in the Indian subcontinent.

According to one school of thought the Aryans came in hordes and first settled in northwestern India, from where they migrated gradually towards the Gangetic valley, north eastern India and southern India.

According to some, they probably came in two or more waves and colonized the land. There is no evidence to suggest that they occupied the land forcibly and even if they did it must have been on a limited scale. As they migrated towards the east, they had to deal with more powerful and organized native communities and established political powers, whom they could not conquer politically. So their expansion into the subcontinent beyond the Sapta Sindhu region must have happened peacefully through the migration of families of wandering priests and sages rather than through political conquest.

The ruling classes in these regions were drawn to Vedic religion but not completely. So some compromise on the part of both sides and some integration of religious practices took place. This is evident from the fact that regions comprising of present day UP, Bihar, Bengal, Orissa, parts of MP, all of southern India and western India were not thoroughly Aryanized and that the basic character of Vedic religion underwent dramatic changes during the post Rigvedic period. Historically these areas also witnessed the predominance of non-Vedic faiths and sectarian movements like Saivism, Shaktism and Vaishnavism.

The last view that India itself might be the original land of the Aryans has been gaining ground as circumstantial evidence and genetic studies do not confirm the Aryan invasion theory as proposed by the British and other European scholars. Historically, India was known as Aryavarta, meaning the land of the Aryans. This was not a mere coincidence. No other country, land, or region was historically known by that name. The ancestors of Aryans might have come from Africa or Central Asia, but the Aryan culture was distinctly indigenous and derived from the Kshatriya clans of the Vedic civilization. The Buddha was a Kshatriya, a person of noble birth. His followers often addressed him as Aryaputra, meaning the son of an Arya. So was Mahavira. They were remnants of the ancient wisdom which the Kshatriyas preached through the Upanishads, and which was at times in variance with the ritual knowledge of the Vedas (karmakanda) practiced by the Brahmanas.

The Aryans were men of the original Indian nobility. The Rajputs of today and other warrior groups, are their descendants. They originally worshipped Brahma, Indra, Varuna, Soma, Mitra, etc., who were Kshatriya gods (Brihadaranyaka Upanishad), who were subsequently relegated to a secondary position in the Hindu pantheon as rulers of directions (dikpalas). It is not a coincidence that the only major temple of Brahma is found in Rajaputana and he lost his popular appeal. By the time of the Nandas and Mauryas (who came from lower castes), the Vedic Kshatriyas lost their power and disappeared, but left their mark as symbols of authority and nobility. In India, until recent times, men of higher castes, landlords and those who occupied positions of authority were customarily addressed as Arya. In native literature, speeches, correspondence and letter writing it was used as the equivalent of "respected Sir." Its corrupt form in Telugu, the second largest native language after Hindi, is "ayya," which is used even today as a mark of respect to address elderly people, fatherly figures and men of authority.

Thus, by usage and by custom we have clear evidence that India had a very deep and historic connection with the concept of Arya, a tradition which most likely originated in memory of an ancient group of people who inhabited the region and wielded considerable influence, power and authority before they were superseded by other political and feudal groups.

It has to be remembered that India has always been, as it is now, a heterogeneous society where people belonging to difference races, religions, languages and backgrounds coexisted.

They came to India in the remote past from different parts of the world, from Africa, Mediterranean, Europe, central Asia, Russia, China and probably Arctic region by land and by sea.

While there was an inward migration into the subcontinent, there was also probably some outward migration towards the east, north and west and even to some islands in the Pacific and Australia.

For example, contrary to the popular opinion, the people of Andhra Pradesh were immigrants from different regions within the subcontinent as well from regions outside India. The invading armies of Sakas, Pahlavas, Persians and Kushanas settled in various parts of the country and became an integral part of native communities. So it is incorrect to divide the Indian population merely into two or three groups. It is also incorrect to classify Telugu as a purely Dravidian language. In fact, it has elements of both Indo-European and Dravidian languages. Its most literary form, which, Sri Krishna Devaraya, the king of Vijayanagara, famously considered the best of the native tongues, is very close to Sanskrit both grammatically and syntactically.

The Indus people knew how to build ports or trade merchandise by rivers and sea, using boats. They knew how to chart their course through dangerous seas using the position of the stars and the movements of the sun and the moon. It is wrong to assume that the Aryans introduced an organized religion or an advanced civilization in the Indian subcontinent in the backdrop of an inferior civilization.

In conclusion we may say that the Aryan migration, if there was one, was part of a series of migrations of different nomadic communities and races that came either peacefully or through force to the Indian subcontinent by land or by sea during the early human migrations between 10000 BCE - 5000 BCE before the Sindhu Saraswathi civilization reached its peak and settled there. Over time those communities created a rich tapestry of social, religious and cultural diversity that is peculiarly and uniquely Indian.

A Misreading of Darwinism

Hitler believed that the engine of history was war, and that conflict helped the strong survive and rise to the top and killed off the weak. He thought this was how the world should be, and allowed this to affect him in several ways. The government of Nazi Germany was filled with overlapping bodies, and Hitler possibly let them fight amongst themselves believing the stronger would always win. Hitler also believed that Germany should create its new empire in a major war, believing the superior Aryan Germans would defeat the lesser races in a Darwinian conflict. War was necessary and glorious.

What was Hitler's attitude towards the Aryans of India? - History

Adolf Hitler
Speech of April 12, 1921

After the War, production had begun again and it was thought that better times were coming. Frederick the Great after the Seven Years War had, as the result of superhuman efforts, left Prussia without a penny of debt: at the end of the World War, Germany was burdened with her own debt of some 7 or 8 milliards of marks and beyond that was faced with the debts of "the rest of the world" - "the so-called reparations." The product of Germany's work thus belonged, not to the nation, but to her foreign creditors: "it was carried endlessly in trains for territories beyond our frontiers." Every worker had to support another worker, the product of whose labor was commandeered by the foreigner. "The German people after twenty-five or thirty years, in consequence of the fact that it will never be able to pay all that is demanded of it, will have so gigantic a sum still owing that practically it will be forced to produce more than it does today." What will the end be? and the answer to that question is "Pledging of our land, enslavement of our labor-strength. Therefore, in the economic sphere, November 1918 was in truth no achievement, but it was the beginning of our collapse." And in the political sphere we lost first our military prerogatives, and with that loss went the real sovereignty of our State, and then our financial independence, for there remained always the Reparations Commission so that "practically we have no longer a politically independent German Reich, we are already a colony of the outside world. We have contributed to this because so far as possible we humiliated ourselves morally, we positively destroyed our own honor and helped to befoul, to besmirch, and to deny everything which we previously held as sacred." If it be objected that the Revolution has won for us gains in social life: "they must be extraordinarily secret, these social gains - so secret that one never sees them in practical life - they must just run like a fluid through our German atmosphere. Some one may say 'Well, there is the eight-hour day!' And was a collapse necessary to gain that? And will the eight-hour day be rendered any more secure through our becoming practically the bailiff and the drudge of the other peoples?" One of these days France will say: "You cannot meet your obligations, you must work more." So this achievement of the Revolution is put in question first of all by the Revolution.

"Then some one has said: 'Since the Revolution the people has gained "Rights." The people governs.' Strange! The people has now been ruling three years and no one has in practice once asked its opinion. Treaties were signed which will hold us down for centuries: and who has signed the treaties? The people? No! Governments which one fine day presented themselves as Governments. And at their election the people had nothing to do save to consider the question: there they are already, whether I elect them or not. If we elect them, then they are there through our election. But since we are a self-governing people, we must elect the folk in order that they may be elected to govern us.

"Then it was said, 'Freedom has come to us through the Revolution.' Another of those things that one cannot see very easily! It is of course true that one can walk down the street, the individual can go into his workshop and he can go out again: here and there he can go to a meeting. In a word, the individual has liberties. But in general, if he is wise, he will keep his mouth shut. For if in former times extraordinary care was taken that no one should let slip anything which could be treated as lèse-majesté, now a man must take much greater care that he doesn't say anything which might represent an insult to the majesty of a member of Parliament."

And if we ask who was responsible for our misfortune, then we must inquire who profited by our collapse. And the answer to that question is the "Banks and Stock Exchanges are more flourishing than ever before." We were told that capitalism would be destroyed, and when we ventured to remind one or other of these "famous statesmen" and said "Don't forget that Jews too have capital," then the answer will now be destroyed, the whole people will now be free. We are not fighting Jewish or Christian capitalism, we are fighting every capitalism: we are making the people completely free."

"Christian capitalism" is already as good as destroyed, the international Jewish Stock Exchange capital gains in proportion as the other loses ground. It is only the international Stock Exchange and loan-capital, the so-called "supra-state capital," which has profited from the collapse of our economic life, "the capital which receives its character from the single supra-state nation which is itself national to the core, which fancies itself to be above all other nations, which places itself above other nations and which already rules over them.

"The international Stock Exchange capital would be unthinkable, it would never have come, without its founders the supra-national, because intensely national, Jews. "

"The Jew has not grown poorer: he gradually gets bloated, and, if you don't believe me, I would ask you to go to one of our health-resorts there you will find two sorts of visitors: the German who goes there, perhaps for the first time for a long while, to breathe a little fresh air and to recover his health, and the Jew who goes there to lose his fat. And if you go out to our mountains, whom do you find there in fine brand-new yellow boots with splendid rucksacks in which there is generally nothing that would really be of any use? And why are they there? They go up to the hotel, usually no further than the train can take them: where the train stops, they stop too. And then they sit about somewhere within a mile from the hotel, like blow-flies round a corpse.

"These are not, you may be sure, our working classes: neither those working with the mind, nor with the body. With their worn clothes they leave the hotel on one side and go on climbing: they would not feel comfortable coming into this perfumed atmosphere in suits which date from 1913 or 1914. No, assuredly the Jew has suffered no privations. "

"While now in Soviet Russia the millions are ruined and are dying, Chicherin - and with him a staff of over 200 Soviet Jews - travels by express train through Europe, visits the cabarets, watches naked dancers perform for his pleasure, lives in the finest hotels, and does himself better than the millions whom once you thought you must fight as 'bourgeois.' The 400 Soviet Commissars of Jewish nationality - they do not suffer the thousands upon thousands of sub-Commissars - they do not suffer. No! all the treasures which the 'proletarian' in his madness took from the 'bourgeoisie' in order to fight so-called capitalism - they have all gone into their hands. Once the worker appropriated the purse of the landed proprietor who gave him work, he took the rings, the diamonds and rejoiced that he had now got the treasures which before only the 'bourgeoisie' possessed. But in his hands they are dead things - they are veritable death-gold. They are no profit to him. He is banished into his wilderness and one cannot feed oneself on diamonds. For a morsel of bread he gives millions in objects of value. But the bread is in the hands of the State Central Organization and this is in the hands of the Jews: so everything, everything that the common man thought that he was winning for himself, flows back again to his seducers.

"And now, my dear fellow-countrymen, do you believe that these men, who with us are going the same way, will end the Revolution? They do not wish the end of the Revolution, for they do not need it. For them the Revolution is milk and honey.

"And further they cannot end the Revolution. For if one or another amongst the leaders were really not seducer but seduced, and today, driven by the inner voice of horror at his crime, were to step before the masses and make his declaration: 'We have all deceived ourselves: we believed that we could lead you out of misery, but we have in fact led you into a misery which your children and your children's children must still bear' - he cannot say that, he dare not say that, he would on the public square or in the public meeting be torn in pieces."

But amongst the masses there begins to flow a new stream - a stream of opposition. "It is the recognition of the facts which is already in pursuit of this system, it already is hunting the system down it will one day scourge the masses into action and carry the masses along with it. And these leaders, they see that behind them the anti-Semitic wave grows and grows and when the masses once recognize the facts, that is the end of these leaders."

And thus the Left is forced more and more to turn to Bolshevism. "In Bolshevism they see today the sole, the last possibility of preserving the present state of affairs. They realize quite accurately that the people is beaten so long as Brain and Hand can be kept apart. For alone neither Brain nor Hand can really oppose them. So long therefore as the Socialist idea is coined only by men who see in it a means for disintegrating a nation, so long can they rest in peace."

"But it will be a sorry day for them when this Socialist idea is grasped by a Movement which unites with it the highest Nationalist pride, with Nationalist defiance, and thus places the Nation's Brain, its intellectual workers, on this ground. Then this system will break up, and there would remain only one single means of salvation for its supporters: vis. to bring the catastrophe upon us before their own ruin, to destroy the Nation's Brain, to bring it to the scaffold - to introduce Bolshevism."

"So the Left neither can nor will help. On the contrary, their first lie compels them constantly to resort to new lies. There remains then the Right. And this party of the Right meant well, but it cannot do what it would because up to the present time it has failed to recognize a whole series of elementary principles.

"In the first place the Right still fails to recognize the danger. These gentlemen still persist in believing that it is a question of being elected to a Landtag or of posts as minister or secretaries. They think that the decision of a people's destiny would mean at worst nothing more than some damage to their so-called bourgeois-economic existence. They have never grasped the fact that this decision threatens their heads. They have never yet understood that it is not necessary to be an enemy of the Jew for him to drag you one day on the Russian model to the scaffold. They do not see that it is quite enough to have a head on your shoulders and not to be a Jew: that will secure the scaffold for you.

In consequence their whole action today is so petty, so limited, so hesitating and pusillanimous. They would like to - but they can never decide on any great deed, because they fail to realize the greatness of the whole period.

"And then there is another fundamental error: they have never got it clear in their own minds that there is a difference or how great a difference there is between the conception 'National' and the word 'dynastic' or 'monarchistic.' They do not understand that today it is more than ever necessary in our thoughts as Nationalists to avoid anything which might perhaps cause the individual to think that the National Idea was identical with petty everyday political views. They ought day by day to din into the ears of the masses: 'We want to bury all the petty differences and to bring out into the light the big things, the things we have in common which bind us to one another. That should weld and fuse together those who have still a German heart and a love for their people in the fight against the common hereditary foe of all Aryans. How afterward we divide up this State, friends - we have no wish to dispute over that! The form of a State results from the essential character of a people, results from necessities which are so elementary and powerful that in time every individual will realize them without any disputation when once all Germany is united and free.'

"And finally they all fail to understand that we must on principle free ourselves from any class standpoint. It is of course very easy to call out to those on the Left, 'You must not be proletarians, leave your class-madness,' while you yourselves continue to call yourself 'bourgeois.' They should learn that in a single State there is only one supreme citizen-right, one supreme citizen-honor, and that is the right and the honor of honest work. They should further learn that the social idea must be the essential foundation for any State, otherwise no State can permanently endure.

"Certainly a government needs power, it needs strength. It must, I might almost say, with brutal ruthlessness press through the ideas which it has recognized to be right, trusting to the actual authority of its strength in the State. But even with the most ruthless brutality it can ultimately prevail only if what it seeks to restore does truly correspond to the welfare of a whole people.

"That the so-called enlightened absolutism of a Frederick the Great was possible depended solely on the fact that, though this man could undoubtedly have decided 'arbitrarily' the destiny - for good or ill - of his so-called 'subject,' he did not do so, but made his decisions influenced and supported by one thought alone, the welfare of his Prussian people. it was this fact only that led the people to tolerate willingly, nay joyfully, the dictatorship of the great king.

"And the Right has further completely forgotten that democracy is fundamentally no German: it is Jewish. It has completely forgotten that this Jewish democracy with its majority decisions has always been without exception only a means towards the destruction of any existing Aryan leadership. The Right does not understand that directly every small question of profit or loss is regularly put before so-called 'public opinion,' he who knows how most skillfully to make this 'public opinion' serve his own interests becomes forthwith master in the State. And that can be achieved by the man who can lie most artfully, most infamously and in the last resort he is not the German, he is, in Schopenauer's words, 'the great master in the art of lying' - the Jew.

"And finally it has been forgotten that the condition which must precede every act is the will and the courage to speak the truth - and that we do not see today either in the Right or in the Left.

"There are only two possibilities in Germany do not imagine that the people will forever go with the middle party, the party of compromises one day it will turn to those who have most consistently foretold the coming ruin and have sought to dissociate themselves from it. And that party is either the Left: and then God help us! for it will lead us to complete destruction - to Bolshevism, or else it is a party of the Right which at the last, when the people is in utter despair, when it has lost all its spirit and has no longer any faith in anything, is determined for its part ruthlessly to seize the reins of power - that is the beginning of resistance of which I spoke a few minutes ago. Here, too, there can be no compromise - there are only two possibilities: either victory of the Aryan or annihilation of the Aryan and the victory of the Jew.

"It is from the recognition of this fact, from recognizing it, I would say, in utter, dead earnestness, that there resulted the formation of our Movement. There are two principles which, when we founded the Movement, we engraved upon our hearts: first, to base it on the most sober recognition of the facts and second, to proclaim these facts with the most ruthless sincerity.

"And this recognition of the facts discloses at once a whole series of the most important fundamental principles which must guide this young Movement which, we hope, is destined one day for greatness:

"1. 'National' and 'social' are two identical conceptions. It was only the Jew who succeeded, through falsifying the social idea and turning it into Marxism, not only in divorcing the social idea from the national, but in actually representing them as utterly contradictory. That aim he has in fact achieved. At the founding of this Movement we formed the decision that we would give expression to this idea of ours of the identity of the two conceptions: despite all warnings, on the basis of what we had come to believe, on the basis of the sincerity of our will, we christened it 'National Socialist.' We said to ourselves that to be 'national' means above everything to act with a boundless and all-embracing love for the people and, if necessary, eve to die for it. And similarly to be 'social' means so to build up the State and the community of the people that every individual acts in the interest of the community of the people and must be to such an extent convinced of the goodness, of the honorable straightforwardness of this community of the people as to be ready to die for it.

"2. And then we said to ourselves: there are no such things as classes: they cannot be. Class means caste and caste means race. If there are castes in India, well and good there it is possible, for there were formerly Aryans and dark aborigines. So it was in Egypt and Rome. But with us in Germany where everyone who is a German at all has the same blood, has the same eyes, and speaks the same language, here there can be no class, here there can be only a single people and beyond that nothing else. Certainly, we recognize, just as anyone must recognize, that there are different 'occupations' and 'professions' [Stände] - there is the Stand of the watchmakers, the Stand of the common laborers, the Stand of the painters or technicians, the Stand of the engineers, officials, etc. Stände there can be. But in the struggles which these Stände have amongst themselves for the equalization of their economic conditions, the conflict and the division must never be so great as to sunder the ties of race.

"And if you say 'But there must after all be a difference between honest creators and those who do nothing at all' - certainly there must! That is the difference which lies in the performance of the conscientious work of the individual. Work must be the great connecting link, but at the same time the great factor which separates one man from another. The drone is the foe of us all. But the creators - it matters not whether they are brain workers or workers with the hand - they are the nobility of our State, they are the German people!

"We understand under the term 'work' exclusively that activity which not only profits the individual but in no way harms the community, nay rather which contributes to for the community.

"3. And in the third place it was clear to us that this particular view is based on an impulse which springs from our race and from our blood. We said to ourselves that race differs from race and, further, that each race in accordance with its fundamental demands shows externally certain specific tendencies, and these tendencies can perhaps be most clearly traced in their relation to the conception of work. The Aryan regards work as the foundation for the maintenance of the community of the people amongst its members. The Jew regards work as the means to the exploitation of other peoples. The Jew never works as a productive creator without the great aim of becoming the master. He works unproductively, using and enjoying other people's work. And thus we understand the iron sentence which Mommsen once uttered: 'The Jews is the ferment of decomposition in peoples,' that means that the Jew destroys and must destroy because he completely lacks the conception of an activity which builds up the life of the community. And therefore it is beside the point whether the individual Jew is 'decent' or not. In himself he carries those characteristics which Nature has given him, and he cannot ever rid himself of those characteristics. And to us he is harmful. Whether he harms us consciously or unconsciously, that is not our affair. We have consciously to concern ourselves for the welfare of our own people.

"4. And fourthly we were further persuaded that economic prosperity is inseparable from political freedom and that therefore that house of lies, 'Internationalism,' must immediately collapse. We recognized that freedom can eternally be only a consequence of power and that the source of power is the will. Consequently the will to power must be strengthened in a people with passionate ardor. And thus we realized, fifthly that

"5. We as National Socialists and members of the German Workers' Party - a Party pledge to work - must be on principle the most fanatical Nationalists. We realized that the State can be for our people a paradise only if the people can hold sway therein freely as in a paradise: we realized that a slave state still never be a paradise, but only - always and for all time - a hell or a colony.

"6. And then sixthly we grasped the fact that power in the last resort is possible only where there is strength, and that strength lies not in the dead weight of numbers but solely in energy. Even the smallest minority can achieve a might result if it is inspired by the most fiery, the most passionate will to act. World history has always been made by minorities. And lastly

"7. If one has realized a truth, that truth is valueless so long as there is lacking the indomitable will to turn this realization into action!

"These were the foundations of our Movement - the truths on which it was based and which demonstrated its necessity.

"For three years we have sought to realize these fundamental ideas. And of course a fight is and remains a fight. Stroking in very truth will not carry one far. Today the German people has been beaten by a quite other world, while in its domestic life it has lost all spirit no longer has it any faith. But how will you give this people once more firm ground beneath its feet save by the passionate insistence on one definite, great, clear goal?

"thus we were the first to declare that this peace treaty was a crime. Then folk abused us as 'agitators.' We were the first to protest against the failure to present this treaty to the people before it was signed. Again we were called on the masses of the people not to surrender their arms, for the surrender of one's arms would be nothing less than the beginning of enslavement. We were called, no, we were cried down as, 'agitators.' We were the first to say that this meant the loss of Upper Silesia. So it was, and still they called us 'agitators.' We declared at that time that compliance in the question of Upper Silesia must have as its consequence the awakening of a passionate greed which would demand the occupation of the Ruhr. We were cried down ceaselessly, again and again. And because we opposed the mad financial policy which today will lead to our collapse, what was it that we were called repeatedly once more? 'Agitators.' And today?

"And finally we were also the first to point the people on any large scale to a danger which insinuated itself into our midst - a danger which millions failed to realize and which will nonetheless lead us all into ruin - the Jewish danger. And today people are saying yet again that we were 'agitators.'

"I would like here to appeal to a greater than I, Count Lerchenfeld. He said in the last session of the Landtag that his felling 'as a man and a Christian prevented him from being an anti-Semite. I say: my feeling as a Christian points me to my Lord and Saviour as a fighter. It points me to the Man who once in loneliness, surrounded only by a few followers, recognized these Jews for what they were and summoned men to the fight against them and who, God's truth! was greatest not as sufferer but as fighter. In boundless love as a Christian and as a man I read through that passage which tells us how the Lord at last rose in His might and seized the scourge to drive out of the Temple the brood of vipers and of adders. How terrific was His fight for the world against the Jewish poison. Today, after two thousand years, with deepest emotion I recognize more profoundly than ever before the fact that it was for this that He had to shed His blood upon the Cross. As a Christian I have not duty to allow myself be cheated, but I have the duty to be a fighter for truth and justice. And as a man I have the duty to see to it that human society does not suffer the same catastrophic collapse as did the civilization of the ancient world some two thousand years ago - a civilization which was driven to its ruin through this same Jewish people.

"Then indeed when Rome collapsed there were endless streams of new German bands flowing into the Empire from the North but, if Germany collapses today, who is there to come after us? German blood upon this earth is on the way to gradual exhaustion unless we pull ourselves together and make ourselves free!

"And if there is anything which could demonstrate that we are acting rightly, it is the distress which daily grows. For as a Christian I have also a duty to my own people. And when I look on my people I see it work and work and toil and labor, and at the end of the week it has only for its wage wretchedness and misery. When I go out in the morning and see these men standing in their queues and look into their pinched faces, then I believe I would be no Christian, but a very devil, if I felt no pity for them, if I did not, as did our Lord two thousand years ago, turn against those by whom today this poor people is plundered and exploited.

"And through the distress there is no doubt that the people has been aroused. Externally perhaps apathetic, but within there is ferment. And many may say, 'It is an accursed crime to stir up passions in the people.' And then I say to myself: Passion is already stirred through the rising tide of distress, and one day this passion will break out in one way or another: and now I would ask those who today call us 'agitators': 'What then have you to give to the people as a faith to which it might cling?'

"Nothing at all, for you yourselves have no faith in your own prescriptions.

"That is the mightiest thing which our Movement must create: for these widespread, seeking and straying masses a new Faith which will not fail them in this hour of confusion, to which they can pledge themselves, on which they can build so that they may at least find once again a place which may bring calm to their hearts."

And so we National Socialists consciously draw a line beneath the foreign policy tendency of our pre-War period. We take up where we broke off six hundred years ago. We stop the endless German movement to the south and west, and turn our gaze toward the land in the east. At long last we break of the colonial and commercial policy of the pre-War period and shift to the soil policy of the future.

If we speak of soil in Europe today, we can primarily have in mind only Russia and her vassal border states.
Here Fate itself seems desirous of giving us a sign. By handing P ussia to Bolshevism, it robbed the Russian nation of that intelligentsia which previously brought about and guaranteed its existence as a state. For the organization of a Russian state formation was not the result of the political abilities of the Slavs in Russia, but only a wonderful example of the state-forming efficacity of the German element in an inferior race. Numerous mighty empires on earth have been created in this way. Lower nations led by Germanic organizers and overlords have more than once grown to be mighty state formations and have endured as long as the racial nudeus of the creative state race maintained itself. For centuries Russia drew nourishment from this Germanic nucleus of its upper leading strata. Today it can be regarded as almost totally exterminated and extinguished. It has been replaced by the Jew. Impossible as it is for the Russian by himself to shake off the yoke of the Jew by his own resources, it is equally impossible for the Jew to maintain the mighty empire forever. He himself is no element of organization, but a ferment of decomposition. The Persian I empire in the east is ripe for collapse. And the end of Jewish rule in Russia will also be the end of Russia as a state. We have been chosen by Fate as witnesses of a catastrophe which will be the mightiest confirmation of the soundness of the folkish theory.

Our task, the mission of the National Socialist movement, is to bring our own people to such political insight that they will not see their goal for the future in the breath-taking sensation of a new Alexander's conquest, but in the industrious work of the German plow, to which the sword need only give soil. . . .
Never forget that the rulers of present-day Russia are common blood-stained criminals that they are the scum of humanity which, favored by circumstances, overran a great state in a tragic hour, slaughtered and wiped out thousands of her leading ir.telligentsia in wild blood lust, and now for almost ten years have been carrying on the most cruel and tyrannical regime of all time. Furthermore, do not forget that these rulers belong to a race which combines, in a rare mixture, bestial cruelty and an inconceivable gift for lying, and which today more than ever is conscious of a mission to impose its bloody oppression on the whole world. Do not forget that the international Jew who completely dominates Russia today regards Germany, not as an ally, but as a state destined to the same fate. And you do not make pacts with anyone whose sole interest is the destruction of his partner. Above all, you do not make them with elements to whom no pact would be sacred, since they do not live in this world as representatives of honor and sincerity, but as champions of deceit, lies, theft, plunder, and rapine. If a man believes that he can enter into profitable connections with parasites, he is like a tree trying to conclude for its own profit an agreement with a mistletoe.

2. The danger to which Russia succumbed is always present for Germany. Only a bourgeois simpleton is capable of imagining that Bolshevism has been exorcised. With his superficial thinking he has no idea that this is an instinctive process that is, the striving of the Jewish people for world domination, a process which is just as natural as the urge of the Anglo-Saxon to seize domination of the earth. And just as the Anglo-Saxon pursues this course in his own way and carries on the fight with his own weapons, likewise the Jew. He goes his way, the way of sneaking in among the nations and boring from within, and he fights with his weapons, with lies and slander, poison and corruption, intensifying the struggle to the point of bloodily exterminating his hated foes. In Russian Bolshevism we must see the attempt undertaken by the Jews in the twentieth century to achieve world domination. Just as in other epochs they strove to reach the same goal by other, though inwardly related processes. Their endeavor lies profoundly rooted in their essential nature. No more than another nation renounces of its own accord the pursuit of its impulse for the expansion of its power and way of life, but is compelled by outward circumstances or else succumbs to impotence due to the symptoms of old age, does the Jew break off his road to world dictatorship out of voluntary renunciation, or because he represses his eternal urge. He, too, will either be thrown back in his course by forces lying outside himself, or all his striving for world domination will be ended by his own dying out. But the impotence of nations, their own death from old age, arises from the abandonment of their blood purity. And this is a thing that the Jew preserves better than any other people on earth. And so he advances on his fatal road until another force comes forth to oppose him, and in a mighty struggle hurls the heaven-stormer back to Lucifer.

Germany is today the next great war aim of Bolshevism. It requires all the force of a young missionary idea to raise our people up again, to free them from the snares of this international serpent, and to stop the inner contamination of our blood, in order that the forces of the nation thus set free can be thrown in to safeguard our nationality, and thus can prevent a repetition of the recent catastrophes down to the most distant future. If we pursue this aim, it is sheer lunacy to ally ourselves with a power whose master is the mortal enemy of our future. How can we expect to free our own people from the fetters of this poisonous embrace if we walk right into it? How shall we explain Bolshevism to the German worker as an accursed crime against humanity if we ally ourselves with the organizations of this spawn of hell, thus recognizing it in the larger sense? By what right shall we condemn a member of the broad masses for his sympathy with an outlook if the very leaders of the state choose the representatives of this outlook for allies?

The fight against Jewish world Bolshevization requires a clear attitude toward Soviet Russia. thou cannot drive out the Devil with Beelsebub.
If today even folkish circles rave about an alliance with Russia, they should just look around them in Germany and see whose support they find in their efforts. Or have folkish men lately begun to view an activity as beneficial to the German people which is recommended and promoted by the international Marxist press? Since when do folkish men fight with armor held out to them by a Jewish squire?

There is one main charge that could be raised against the old German Reich with regard to its alliance policy: not, however, that it failed to maintain good relations with Russia, but only that it ruined its relations with everyone by continuous shilly-shallying, in the pathological weakness of trying to preserve world peace at any price.

I openly confess that even in the pre-War period I would have thought it sounder if Germany, renouncing her senseless colonial policy and renouncing her merchant marine and war fleet, had concluded an alliance with England against Russia, thus passing from a feeble global policy to a determined European policy of territorial acquisition on the continent.

I have not forgotten the insolent threat which the pan-Slavic Russia of that time dared to address to Germany I have not forgotten the constant practice mobilizations, whose sole purpose was an affront to Germany I cannot forget the mood of public opinion in Russia, which outdid itself in hateful outbursts against our people and our Reich I cannot forget the big Russian newspapers, which were always more enthusiastic about France than about us.

But in spite of all that, before the War there would still have been a second way: we could have propped ourselves on Russia and turned against England.

Today conditions are different. If before the War we could have choked down every possible sentiment and gone with Russia, today it is no longer possible. The hand of the world clock has moved forward since then, and is loudly striking the hour in which the destiny of our nation must be decided in one way or another. The process of consolidation in which the great states of the earth are involved at the moment is for us the last warning signal to stop and search our hearts, to lead our people out of the dream world back to hard reality, and show them the way to the future which alone will lead the old Reich to a new golden age. . . .

Hitler Film Reveals India's Nazi Fascination

When word spread this month that Bollywood planned a movie called "Dear Friend Hitler," screenwriter Nalin Singh was genuinely shocked it stirred even a small controversy.

The media expressed disdain, Jewish groups were horrified and his lead actor - though a bit baffled by the reaction - quit.

While such a response would seem, if anything, understated in much of the world, Singh had reason to believe his film would not generate even a ripple of scandal in India.

Here, Hitler is not viewed as the personification of evil, but with an attitude of morally ambiguous fascination. He is seen as a management guru - akin to Machiavelli or Sun Tzu - by business students, and an object of wonder by people craving order amid the chaos of India.

"Indians still have a curiosity about Hitler. The Western audience has seen a lot of films on Hitler, but there was no Hindi film on him," says Singh, explaining the choice of subject for his first film, which he hopes will be made by the end of the year.

Without a major role in World War II, India does not have the intense feelings toward the Nazis that many other nations have. In Bollywood movies, characters routinely call each other "Hitler" as a minor insult, referring to a nagging wife or annoying boss.

Trending News

But Indians also have a strange fascination with the Nazi dictator, whose brutal dictatorship and slaughter of 6 million Jews has made his name synonymous with the devil in the West.

A few years ago a restaurant named Hitler's Cross opened in the suburbs of Mumbai complete with posters of the dictator and swastikas for decor. Protests from Jewish groups forced the owners to change the name to The Cross Cafe.

A home furnishings company was forced to withdraw a line of bedspreads called NAZI amid similar complaints.

"Mein Kampf," Hitler's semi-autobiographical book outlining his anti-Semitic ideology, sells thousands of copies a year in the upmarket, air-conditioned bookstores of New Delhi.

The book, free of copyright in India, is printed by over half a dozen publishers. It is even a staple amid the small stack of top-selling books hawked by young boys at traffic lights in India's cities.

The book once helped inspire India's far right Hindu politicians, who often expressed open admiration for Hitler, but it is now appealing to a new generation of less political readers.

"It's basically the young crowd. The rebellious," says Anuj Bahri, who runs Bahrisons, a popular book store in New Delhi's posh Khan Market.

"It's a constant seller and sells one, two copies a day," he says, adding that part of the draw for its young readership seems to lie in the fact that Hitler "defied the whole world and challenged the whole world."

Sociologist Ashish Nandy says a confluence of reasons explains why Indians are drawn to both the man and the book.

For some readers, modern India is a country in chaos and, there is a "certain admiration" for Hitler and his extreme authoritarianism.

There is also India's colonial inheritance when "every enemy of Britain was a friend of India and at least potentially a good person," he says, adding that among today's young readers "there is kind a vague sense that it's about a person who gave a tough time to the Brits."

Tarun Singhal, a management student at New Delhi's prestigious Indian Institute of Technology, who first read the book as a young undergraduate, says for him the book is uplifting.

"(It) serves as a reminder that nothing is unachievable," he said, adding that he is able to separate that message from the book's pervasive anti-Semitic ideology.

India's interest in Hitler, mirrors Nazi Germany's in India as the home of the purportedly pure Aryan race - which formed the basis of the Nazis' notions of racial supremacy. The Nazis also co-opted the ancient Hindu symbol of the swastika for the Nazi Party flag and arm bands.

When news about the Indian film on Hitler came out earlier this month, it might have been a step too far.

The title is a reference to two letters written by Indian independence leader Mohandas Gandhi to Hitler.

The first written in 1939 asked the Nazi leader to help prevent a "war which may reduce humanity to the savage state."

India's tiny Jewish community condemned the film as insensitive and the lead actor Anupam Kher dropped out saying he didn't want to upset anyone.

"It's very hurtful," says Jonathan Solomon of the India Jewish Federation, of the film's title. "The Jews in India were not the victims of anti-Semitism or the Holocaust, but we feel for our brother Jews and this is very hurtful to Jews all over the world."

But Singh is determined to see his script - which he says juxtaposes the personality of the German dictator against India's Gandhi - on celluloid and has the support of the film's producers. If he's able to persuade Kher to return to the project or find a replacement, the film should be ready by the end of the year, he says.

"It's misleading to say our film is glorifying Hitler," he says, adding that he just wants to make an "authentic" film for the Hindi film audiences.

First published on July 2, 2010 / 2:33 AM

© 2010 The Associated Press. All Rights Reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.

Hitler in Power

This reading is available in several formats. Choose the version you wish to read using the dropdown below.

Adolf Hitler talks to a young girl during his campaign for president of Germany in 1932. Hitler lost to incumbent Paul von Hindenburg.

In April 1932, Paul von Hindenburg, at the age of 84, remained president by defeating Hitler and his other challengers. He began his new term in office that spring by naming a new chancellor—Franz von Papen, a close friend and member of the Center Party. Papen ran the country for the rest of the year. When he failed to end the depression, another of Hindenburg’s friends, General Kurt von Schleicher, who belonged to no party, took over in December. He was also unable to bring about a recovery and was forced to resign.

Hindenburg and his advisors were all conservatives who represented wealthy landowners, industrialists, and other powerful people. As the depression persisted, their popular support was shrinking. So in January of 1933, they decided to make a deal with Hitler. He had the popularity they lacked, and they had the power he needed. They also agreed on a number of points, including a fierce opposition to communism, hostility to democracy, and eagerness for Lebensraum—additional land for the German Volk.

Hindenburg’s advisors believed that the responsibility of being in power would make Hitler moderate his views. They convinced themselves that they were wise enough and powerful enough to “control” Hitler. Also, they were certain that he, too, would fail to end the depression. And when he failed, they would step in to save the nation. Hitler fooled them all.

On January 30, 1933, Hitler was sworn in as chancellor of Germany. Because the Nazi Party did not control a majority of the Reichstag, they joined with the German National People’s Party to form a coalition government—that is, one run by multiple political parties, usually with different but overlapping agendas. Nevertheless, Hitler accepted the appointment as if he had been named emperor of Germany and ignored the wishes of the other party. He and his fellow Nazis boasted that they would soon restore the nation and the “Aryan race” to greatness by ending so-called “Jewish racial domination” and eliminating the Communist threat. The result would be a “third Reich” (Reich is the German word for “empire”). The Nazis considered the Holy Roman Empire (952–1806) the “first Reich” and the empire established after the unification of the German states in 1871 the “second.” Hitler was confident that his Third Reich would be the greatest of all, and it would last a thousand years.

Hitler en el Poder

Adolf Hitler habla con una jovencita durante su campaña a la presidencia de Alemania en 1932. Hitler perdió ante el presidente de turno, Paul von Hindenburg.

Adolf Hitler habla con una jovencita durante su campaña a la presidencia de Alemania en 1932. Hitler perdió ante el presidente de turno, Paul von Hindenburg.

En abril de 1932, Paul von Hindenburg, a la edad de 84 años, permaneció en la presidencia al derrotar a Hitler y a los otros contendientes. En la primavera de ese año, empezó su nuevo periodo presidencial nombrando a un nuevo canciller: Franz von Papen, amigo cercano y miembro del Partido de Centro. Papen dirigió el país por el resto del año. Cuando no pudo poner fin a la depresión, otro de los amigos de Hindenburg, el general Kurt von Schleicher, quien no pertenecía a ningún partido, relevó a Papen en diciembre. Él tampoco pudo lograr la recuperación y fue obligado a renunciar.

Hindenburg y sus asesores eran conservadores que representaban adinerados terratenientes, empresarios industriales y otras personas poderosas. Como la depresión persistía, su apoyo popular se fue reduciendo. Por tanto, en enero de 1933, decidieron hacer un trato con Hitler, quien tenía la popularidad que a ellos les faltaba, pero necesitaba el poder que ellos tenían. También acordaron algunos puntos, entre ellos, una oposición feroz al comunismo, hostilidad con la democracia y entusiasmo por el Lebensraum (espacio vital), terrenos adicionales para el Volk (pueblo) alemán.

Los asesores de Hindenburg creían que la responsabilidad de estar en el poder haría que Hitler moderara sus posturas se convencieron de que eran lo suficientemente sabios y poderosos como para “controlar” a Hitler. Además, estaban seguros de que él tampoco podría poner fin a la depresión y, cuando fallara, ellos intervendrían para salvar a la nación. No obstante, Hitler los engañó a todos.

El 30 de enero de 1933, Hitler fue declarado canciller de Alemania. Como el Partido Nazi no controlaba la mayoría del Reichstag, se unió con el Partido Nacional del Pueblo Alemán para formar una coalición de gobierno, es decir, uno solo dirigido por múltiples partidos políticos, normalmente con programas diferentes pero con puntos en común. No obstante, Hitler aceptó el nombramiento como si hubiera sido proclamado emperador de Alemania e ignoró los deseos del otro partido. Él y sus copartidarios nazis hacían alarde de que pronto restablecerían la nación y la “raza aria” a su grandeza poniendo fin a la llamada “dominación racial judía” y eliminando la amenaza comunista. El resultado sería un “Tercer Reich” (Reich es la palabra alemana para referirse a “imperio”). Los nazis consideraban que el Sacro Imperio Romano (952–1806) era el “Primer Reich” y que el imperio establecido después de la unificación de los estados alemanes en 1871, era el “segundo”. Hitler confiaba en que su Tercer Reich sería el más grande de todos y que duraría mil años.

Adolf Hitler talks to a young girl during his campaign for president of Germany in 1932. Hitler lost to incumbent Paul von Hindenburg.

In April 1932, Paul von Hindenburg, at the age of 84, remained president by defeating Hitler and his other challengers. He began his new term in office that spring by naming a new chancellor—Franz von Papen, a close friend and member of the Centre Party. Papen ran the country for the rest of the year. When he failed to end the depression, another of Hindenburg’s friends, General Kurt von Schleicher, who belonged to no party, took over in December. He was also unable to bring about a recovery and was forced to resign.

Hindenburg and his advisors were all conservatives who represented wealthy landowners, industrialists, and other powerful people. As the depression persisted, their popular support was shrinking. So in January of 1933, they decided to make a deal with Hitler. He had the popularity they lacked, and they had the power he needed. They also agreed on a number of points, including a fierce opposition to communism, hostility to democracy, and eagerness for Lebensraum—additional land for the German Volk.

Hindenburg’s advisors believed that the responsibility of being in power would make Hitler moderate his views. They convinced themselves that they were wise enough and powerful enough to “control” Hitler. Also, they were certain that he, too, would fail to end the depression. And when he failed, they would step in to save the nation. Hitler fooled them all.

On January 30, 1933, Hitler was sworn in as chancellor of Germany. Because the Nazi Party did not control a majority of the Reichstag, they joined with the German National People’s Party to form a coalition government—that is, one run by multiple political parties, usually with different but overlapping agendas. Nevertheless, Hitler accepted the appointment as if he had been named emperor of Germany and ignored the wishes of the other party. He and his fellow Nazis boasted that they would soon restore the nation and the “Aryan race” to greatness by ending so-called “Jewish racial domination” and eliminating the Communist threat. The result would be a “third Reich” (Reich is the German word for “empire”). The Nazis considered the Holy Roman Empire (952–1806) the “first Reich” and the empire established after the unification of the German states in 1871 the “second.” Hitler was confident that his Third Reich would be the greatest of all, and it would last a thousand years.


  1. Weddell

    what an abstract mentality

  2. Ackley

    I think he is wrong. I propose to discuss it.

  3. Woolsey

    I am sorry, that has interfered... At me a similar situation. Write here or in PM.

  4. Salhford

    She was visited by the remarkable thought

  5. Mezizil

    Sorry to interfere, but, in my opinion, this topic is no longer relevant.

  6. Brycen

    I am very grateful to you for information.It's very useful.

Write a message