Adolf Hitler-Life for Germany and Europe-Part 2-Thies Christophersen

That was politics of a will to live. Churchill, on the other hand, led the English people onto a suicidal path into the abyss when he rejected the agreement I offered…


Back to Part 1 <<<

Translated into English from:



[*comments by translator]


By Grand Admiral Dönitz

German men and women, soldiers of the German Military!

Our Führer Adolf Hitler has fallen. The German people bow in deepest grief and awe. At an early stage, he recognized the terrible danger of Bolshevism and consecrated his life to a fight it. At the end of this struggle and his aboveboard life, his heroic death transpires in the capital of the German Reich. His life was but one sole service to Germany. His commitment in the fight against the Bolshevik storm was beyond Germany for Europe and the entire cultural world.

The Führer has chosen me as his successor. Conscious of the responsibility, I take over the leadership of the German people in this fateful hour. My first duty is to save the German people from annihilation by the advancing Bolshevik enemy. Only for this goal the military battle continues. As far as and as long as the achievement of this goal is obstructed by the British and Americans, we will also have to defend ourselves against them and fight on. The Anglo-Americans then no longer continue the war for their own peoples but only for the spreading of Bolshevism in Europe.

What the German people accomplished on the battle field in this war, and endured at home, is historically unique. In the coming time of our people’s hardship, I will strive to create bearable living conditions for our brave men, women, and children, as far as this is within my power.

For all of this, I need your help! Give me your trust because your path is also my path! Maintain order and discipline in town and country! Everyone do your duty in your situation! Only then will we be able to mitigate the suffering that the coming time will bring each one of us and prevent a collapse. If we do all that our strength can give, God will not leave us after so much suffering and sacrifice.

(From: Kieler Zeitung, Wednesday, May 2, 1945) BERLIN 1945, Führer Headquarters


* * * *




Last Talks 

“Churchill sees himself as a Pitt. What presumption! Pitt was just 34 years old in 1793. It’s a pity Churchill is an old man who has just enough strength to slavishly obey the paralytic Roosevelt’s orders.

Alone the purely external circumstances have nothing in common. In order to make comparisons, a projection into the conditions of an epoch must always be made. From England’s point of view, Pitt had to refuse every agreement with Napoleon. With this stubborn position, he pushed open doors to the role that the English could achieve as rulers in the 19th century.

That was politics of a will to live. Churchill, on the other hand, led the English people onto a suicidal path into the abyss when he rejected the agreement I have offered. He was mistaken, especially characteristic for the old General Staff, who are planning a new war according to the rules and experiences of the previous one. But successful theses of bygone eras can’t just simply be copied.

The reality of today that has changed the face of the world is the existence of two colossi, the United States of America and the Soviet Union. The England of the great Pitt kept the world in balance by preventing any hegemony in Europe.

The reality of the present should have led Churchill to agree to the unification of Europe in order to secure the political balance of the twentieth-century.

At the beginning of the war, I endeavored to act as if the British leader was capable and in a position to grasp such Greater Europe Politics. And even a Churchill may have recognized this in enlightened moments, but he was already too deeply entrenched as mercenary to the Jew. I have done everything I can to spare British pride and postponed all final decisions in the West. (See also Dunkirk.)

The genius of Pitt showed itself in meeting the requirements of his time with realistic and yet farsighted politics, a statesmanship that once established the unique rise of the kingdom of the British isles and aided England in the last century to world domination. Churchill, who stubbornly imitates the externals of this policy, commits an almost monstrous stupidity. The world has not stopped since the days of the great Pitt. Even if the pace of the changes in the last century appears relatively slow, the World War, however, has accelerated the change, and the present war hands us the bill.

From the standpoint of pure power politics, only Europe counted in the last century. The Asian empires had fallen into a death-like sleep, the New World was little more than an appendage to Europe, and no one could foresee the fate of the thirteen English colonies that had just become self-reliant. Thirteen – I’m certainly not superstitious, but in the case of the United States, one can become so! This new state, with a population of barely four million people, is bloating up tremendously in only one hundred years and becomes a world power at the beginning of our century.

In the decisive thirties, the world situation is fundamentally different from that of Napoleon and Pitt. The continent, exhausted by the great material battles of the World War, had lost its supreme position, though Europe remained one of the political centers – but only one of many. It, furthermore, increasingly forfeited importance. To the same magnitude rose the significance of the United States and the Asiatic Bolshevik colossus, and not last also the Empire of the Rising Sun.

A second Pitt, in place of the Jewified, semi-American drunkard, if Providence had granted it to degenerated England, would have had to seize the opportunity instead to rewrite the old-fashioned policy of European equilibrium to a world format. Instead of fanning the flames of hatred, envy and enmity and perpetuating competitive struggles, London would have let the unification of Europe at least take place, if not promote and drive it ahead. With a united Europe as an ally, Britain could have played the referee in all world trade.

England had the opportunity to still end the war in the beginning of 1941. Its spirit of resistance and courage had been proved by the British people in aerial combat over London. The failure of the Italian divisions in North Africa could have let the setback in northern France be forgotten. I think the old England of a Pitt would have seized upon these chances of peace. The Jews and their accomplices, Churchill [*Jew] and Roosevelt (Jew Rosenfeld), would not allow this.

Peace in the spring of 1941 was the last opportunity to keep Americans out of European affairs. Under the leadership of the Reich, Europe would soon have become a united expanse once the Jewish influence was first of all removed. France and Italy, each defeated by a German force on the battlefield, would have escaped with a black eye and would have had to renounce Big-Power Politics.

Of course, they should renounce their claims in North Africa and the Middle East, thereby opening the way for the new Europe to a far-sighted friendship policy with Islam. England, relieved of all worries in Europe, could devote herself entirely to her empire. And the Reich could have gotten its teeth into its true life mission without the danger of a two-front war and fulfill the calling of National Socialism and my life: the annihilation of Bolshevism and, at the same time, securing the indispensable living space in the East for the future of our people.

The laws of nature embody a logic that does not necessarily have to coincide with that of humans’ nature. Ready for compromises with England, we were even willing to help guarantee the British Empire.

England could choose freely. No one forced it to throw itself into this war. London had not only prescribed itself to the war but has deliberately instigated it. The Poles, left alone and without being incited by the Anglo-French warmongers, the tools of the Jews, would have never committed Hara-kiri. Even once the madness had begun, London repeatedly had the opportunity to pull its head out of the noose, be it after the annihilation of Poland or after the defeat of France.

Certainly not a particularly glamorous retreat; but, after all, the British have never been picky in their means. Nothing was easier than blaming failures on its allies for a second time, as they did, together with Paris in May of 1940, on Belgium. We would have always helped the English to the best of our ability to save face. Still, at the beginning of 1941, after the first successes in Africa and the regained prestige of weaponry, the opportunity was favorable to pull out of the affair and to settle with a compromise peace.

Why is it that Churchill has unconditionally subjugated his country to the dictates of the Jewish-American allies, who in reality show themselves to be much more greedy than their worst enemies? The England of our day is not waging its own war. It is making war that its hate-filled allies have forced upon it.

We Germans, however, had no other choice. At the moment when the world realized that I was willing and determined to unite all Germans in one empire, to give the greater Germany independence and power and fight for and secure living space for the German people, the enemies were of one opinion. This war was already inevitable for us because the only way to prevent it would have been to renounce the most basic rights of life for the German people.

For the German people, a status of pseudo-sovereignty is unthinkable. This may be bearable for the Swiss or Swedes, who can be fobbed with externals whenever they can fill their pockets. However, the Weimar Republic had resigned itself to this, and its Jewish-bred government clique clearly felt at home at the domestic bank of the League of Nations in Geneva. Of this kind of ambition, however, the Third Reich knows itself to be free!

Thus the Germans were condemned to war. The only thing we could still determine was the election of the most favorable moment. But there was no way back for us. Our enemies are not only targeting our National Socialist ideology, blaming it for shaping the abilities of the German people to perfection, but everything German in general. They want our radical annihilation. There is no doubt about that. We can not be grateful enough to our enemies for their openness.

“Old Fritz” [*friendly nickname for Frederick the Great of Prussia who reigned 1740-1786] was constantly on the brink of disaster during the Seven-Year War. At the end of his strength, he decided during the winter of 1762 to poison himself on a specific day, should he have failed in turning the disastrous war. And three days before the deadline, the Czarina unexpectedly dies, and miraculously, everything turns in his favor. Like Great Frederick, we face a coalition of powerful enemies, alone. But coalitions are also a human design, held by the will of a few individuals.

A Churchill may disappear and everything could change. With his departure, perhaps an elite of England would realize that they are standing before an abyss, put there by the abandonment of Europe to Bolshevism, and there might be a sudden awakening – those English for whom we ultimately also fought, and who could be the beneficiaries of the fruits of our victory.

We can still seize the victory in a last effort. May we have the time for this last test of strength! For us it’s all about just living on. The mere fact that the German people can continue to exist in independence means already a victory for us. This alone is enough to justify this war because then it was not a useless war. The war as such was inevitable. In reality, the enemies of the National Socialist Reich have been pushing for it since 1933.”


* * * *


“Only a people firmly rooted in their soil will flower to perfection. A man must never alienate himself from the ground where he was fortunate enough to be born. He may only temporarily go abroad, always with the thought of return in his soul. The English, who were forced to become colonizers, and they were great colonizers, generally followed this rule.

For continental peoples, it seems to me necessary that they spread only to where the geographical connection to the conquered territories is secured.

This need for rooting in the soil is especially peculiar to the continental peoples, and I believe that it is especially true for the Germans. This undoubtedly explains why we have never had any real inclination for overseas colonies. From antiquity, as well as from the history of modern times, it can be seen that in the long run overseas enterprises contributed only to the impoverishment of the nations that had agreed to it. All of them exhausted their powers in it. All of them ultimately succumbed to the pressure of the forces that they themselves had called up or awakened, as compensatory justice. Would there be a better example than the Hellenes?

What applies to the ancient Greek is also true for today and the Europeans. No doubt, the memory of one’s own values is a necessity for the peoples. Anyone who takes the trouble to study a sufficiently long period of time will find a confirmation of this assessment in the facts.

Spain, France and finally also England bled to death in these colonial enterprises and lost their life vitality. The continents that Spain and England brought to life, that they newly created from the bottom up, lead today a distinctive life of their own. They barely remember their origin and only in empty phrases. Yet they are artificial entities lacking in tradition, soul and culture, nothing but arbitrary structures.

One can speak of a successful new settlement in those virtually empty continents. That’s the case with the United States of America and Australia. Achievements? Why not! But only in material terms. These, too, are artificial constructions, soulless creations. One cannot tell whether they got stuck in childhood or have already become old folks.

In the continents that were already inhabited, the failure was even more obvious. Here the Whites were only able to impose themselves by force, and their influence on the essence of the inhabitants remained virtually nil. The Hindus remained Hindus, the Chinese remained Chinese, the Muslims remained Muslims. There were no profound changes, even less in the realm of religion than in others, despite the tremendous efforts made by Christian missions. Quite rare are cases of true conversion, where sincerity must still be proved; in that case they were then pronounced fools.

But after all, the Whites have brought one thing to these peoples, namely the worst that they could bring them, the heaviest scourge of humanity: materialism, fanaticism, alcoholism and Syphilis. For the rest, these nations remain true to themselves in everything that was theirs, and where they were superior to us. What was imposed by force showed even worse results. Common sense would have to discourage such attempts if one knows from the outset that they are in vain.

The colonizers can boast of only one success: they have aroused hatred everywhere; the hatred that drives all those peoples, whose own lives we have disturbed, to chase us away. It almost seems as though their awakening serves only this one purpose.

Tell me if colonization has increased the number of Christians in the world! Where are the mass conversions, the way they succeed with Islam? In Asia and Africa I see only tiny spots as little islands of Christianity here and there, and these only more by name.

This is the whole success of the admired Christian mission, whose broadcasters see themselves as the only heirs of the divine truth. If the colonial policy does not correspond to a German inclination, this alone justifies the fact that the empire can not feel solidarity with those countries that pursue a policy of subjugating foreign peoples, and Germany must not come up with any ideas under any circumstances, to lend its support to the colonizers. We wanted to proclaim Europe a Monroe doctrine applicable to Europe: “Europe to the Europeans”. But that must also mean that Europeans are not to interfere in the affairs of other continents.

The fate of the descendants of British convicts in Australia leaves us cold. If their vitality is not enough to increase the population density to the desired extent, then they should not count on us. I have no objection to the vast emptiness of their part of the earth attracting the overflowing fertility of Asia. They might work this out with each other. However, that’s not our concern.”

“A race that wants to keep itself pure, proves its vitality and will to live.” It just seems normal to me that everyone has his racial pride, and that does by far not mean that he disregards the others. I never thought that either Chinese or Japanese are racially inferior; both belong to ancient cultures, and I openly admit that their tradition is superior to ours. They have every reason to be proud of it, just as we are proud of the culture we belong to. I even believe that the more they persist in their racial pride, the easier it will be for me to communicate with the Chinese and Japanese.

In principle, the German did not know a pride based on his race. This can be seen by the last three centuries of internal divisions by religious wars, the influences of the West, and the effect of Christianity. For Christianity is not a belief in God born of the Germanic character, but a forced religion that contradicts the German nature.

Racial pride is, if it makes itself felt in the German and even takes aggressive forms, only a compensatory response to the inferiority feelings of many Germans. Of course, that does not apply to the Prussians. Since Frederick the Great, they have acquired the quiet superiority of those who do not need to display their self-confidence. As has been proven, these special qualities enabled the Prussians to bring about the unification of Germany. National Socialism has given this proud superiority to all Germans that up to now was the sole property of the Prussians.

The Austrians, like the Prussians, also have national pride in their blood. This is because during the centuries they were never under alien rule but, on the contrary, they commanded other peoples who obediently conducted themselves. The German-Austrians gained their experience in the management of ruling and power, and this is the reason for their worldliness that no one disputes.

National Socialism, like in a melting pot, will let all the peculiarities of the German soul come into being, in purity. A type of modern German will emerge from it: hardworking, conscientious, confident, but simple, proud not of what he is as an individual, but of his affiliation with the great community to where the world will pay its admiration. This German sense of superiority does not require a feeling of contempt for others.

We have deliberately overstated this feeling at times because we considered it necessary in the beginning as a driving force to bring the Germans onto the right path, as soon as possible. Well, exaggeration into one direction almost always results in a reaction from the other side. That lies in the nature of things.

But all that does not happen overnight. It takes time. Frederick the Great is the actual creator of the Prussian type. It took two or three generations to make the Prussian lifestyle a trait inherent in every Prussian.”


* * * *


“It is our doom in this war that it has been far too early for Germany at the same time as it has been too late.” From an armor point of view, it would have been to our advantage if it had begun one year earlier, to make the decision to do so in 1938, and not have it imposed on me in 1939, as the war was inevitable in any case. But it was not my fault if the English and French accepted all my conditions in Munich.

But in terms of our moral armor, it was too early. I have not had time to train people for my politics. It would have taken me twenty years to mature a new National Socialist elite, a selection of young people who had grown up in our teaching from childhood. It is the tragedy of the Germans that we never have enough time. We are always rushed by circumstances.

And when we are under so much time pressure, it’s because we lack space. The Russians in their endless distances can afford to wait and see. Time works for them. But it works against us. And even if Providence had given me a long life to lead Germany to that place in the sun that befits the German people, I am firmly convinced that the opponents would not have allowed it. They would have tried to destroy us before Germany, solidified by unanimous believe, became invincible.

In absence of an elite that we envisioned, we had to content ourselves with the available human material. The result is accordingly! As a consequence of the fact that the intellectual conception did not agree with the practically possible realization, the war policy of a revolutionary state such as the Third Reich, necessarily became the policy of a reactionary bourgeoisie.

Our generals and diplomats, with few exceptions, are men of yesterday who lead the war and practice politics of a passed era. This is as true for the sincere as well as for the others. Some fail because of inability or lack of enthusiasm, others sabotage intentionally.

Our politics regarding France were complete nonsense. We should have never worked together with them. That was good for France but bad for us. Abetz [*German Ambassador to Vichy France] thought he was wise nine times over when he made himself the harbinger of a policy of mutual understanding and pushed our own policy towards France aside. In the illusion of acting preemptively on the events, he was actually limping behind them. He envisioned a France of Napoleon, that is, a French nation that knows how to grasp and appreciate the obligatory values of magnanimous treatment of the vanquished. He overlooked the facts and did not realize that France had a different face in this century.”


* * * *


“After the defeat of the empire, until the rise of nationalist aspirations in Asia, Africa, and perhaps South America, there will be only two equal powers in the world that can stand against each other: the United States and Soviet Russia. Because of the laws of history and the geographic positions of these two colossi, it is destiny for them to measure their strength, be it militarily, economically or ideologically; and for this same reason, both powers must be the enemies of an independent Europe.

If America fails to struggle through to reach a somewhat less naïve-childish conception of life than its present-day morality, based on pure mass psychosis and so-called Christian science, then it is questionable how long this continent will remain under white supremacy. It will then turn out that this clay colossus, after a rocket-like ascent, was only capable to bring about its self-destruction.

What chance for the yellow race in the face of such a decline! Legally and historically, it would have exactly the same rights, or, strictly speaking, just as few rights to invade this continent as the Europeans did in the sixteenth century.

Their daily growing undernourished masses give them the right of the famished to satisfy their hunger. And that is the only right that history recognizes, under the prerequisite that this right has the power on its side.”


* * * *


“The most difficult decision in this war was for me the order to attack Russia.”I had always argued that Germany must not wage a two-front war, and no one should doubt that I, more than anyone, studied and thought through Napoleon’s experiences in Russia. But why then this war against Russia and why at the time appointed by me?

There was no hope for us to end the war in the West with an invasion of the English island. That country, led by ignorant people, would have resisted a sincere peace agreement and recognition of our leadership role in Europe, as long as a power, in its core anti-German, remained unbeaten in Europe. Their desire was a war that had to drag itself to infinity; a war where the Americans were increasingly involved in the background.

The heavy-weight human and material potential of the United States, the incessantly progressive growth of military technology and new weapons, with the enemy as well as with us, the threatening proximity of the English coast, all this forced us to try to prevent with all means possible, a long-lasting war.

Time – again and again it’s the time – just worked against us to a mounting degree. The only way to still crumble the English and force them to peace, was to deprive them of the hope of opposing us as an equal opponent on the Continent, and that was by annihilating the Red Army. We had no choice but to wipe out the factor Russia from the European field of force. There was another reason for this as well: the danger latent from the mere existence of Bolshevism. The attack on us from that center had to happen almost inevitably one day.

Our only chance of winning against Russia was to stave off their attack, for a defensive war against the Soviet Union was out of the question. Under no circumstances were we to allow the Red Army to take advantage of our terrain: our highways for the onslaught of the red tanks and our railroads for their troop and material transports. We could beat the Bolsheviks in their forests, swamps and bogs, if we made the decision in time to act, but never on our land with open space for their traffic.

Why 1941? Because it was important not to wait any longer than necessary, all the less as our opponents in the West incessantly increased their power. Incidentally, Stalin did not remain idle either. Time worked against us on both fronts. The question here, therefore, is not ‘Why on the 22nd of June?’ but ‘Why not sooner?’

Without the difficulties caused by the Italians with their idiotic Greek campaign, I would have attacked the Russians a few weeks earlier. The point was to keep the Russians in place for a long time, and it has been my constant concern over the last few weeks that Stalin could preempt us.

There was one more reason: the Russians had the raw materials that were indispensable to us. Despite their contractual obligations, they delayed their deliveries to us, and one day they could have totally stopped. What they did not want to deliver to us in good will, we had to obtain ourselves from those towns and areas.

I made this decision immediately after Molotov’s November visit to Berlin, for from that moment on I knew that sooner or later Stalin would cave in and join the Allied camp. Should I continue to wait to be better prepared? No, because that’s how we would have betrayed the law of action. Definitely not, because we would have had to pay dearly for the uncertainty of delay. For we would have had to yield to the Bolshevik blackmail attempts regarding Finland, Romania, Bulgaria and Turkey. And that was not up for discussion for me.

It was incompatible with the mission of the Third Reich as defender and protector of the West to sacrifice the friendly countries on the altar of Bolshevism. Such behavior was dishonorable, and we would have been punished for it even more one day. It would have been a miserable miscalculation, both morally and militarily. Whatever we did, one way or the other, the war against Russia remained inevitable, and we were at most in danger of having to lead it later under much less favorable conditions.

On the very day of Molotov’s departure, I therefore ordered military preparations to settle the bill with Russia at the beginning of the first good weather.

>>>To Part 3

Translated from German into English by

Adolf Hitler-Life for Germany and Europe-Thies Christophersen-34pg-1


Der Auschwitz Betrug_Christopersen_78S

This entry was posted in Adolf Hitler, Axis-WW2, Ethnic cleansing-Säuberung Deutscher, Genocide, Nationalsozializmus, Revisionists, Thies Christophersen, Whites - Weisse. Bookmark the permalink.