Excerpts from Léon Degrelle and Prince Friedrich Christian of Schaumburg-Lippe Addressed to the Youth of Europe

Messages to the Youth of Europe: Prince Friedrich Christian & Léon Degrelle
Translated and edited by Alexander Jacob
Uthwita Press, 2024

Léon Degrelle (1906–1994) began his career in Belgium as a Catholic journalist who worked for the conservative Catholic periodical Christus Rex. In 1935 he founded the populist Rexist Party, morphed from Christus Rex, which was increasingly influenced by Italian Fascist doctrines. When the Germans invaded Belgium in 1940, the Rexists were mostly in favor of the German presence in Belgium, even though they had earlier advertised a position of neutrality in the war. Consequently, along with various Communist groups, Rexists too were arrested in May 1940 as anti-national elements and imprisoned first in Belgium and later in France. Degrelle was spared extreme persecution on account of the belief of the French that he may be useful in providing them information regarding Hitler. When he was freed in July 1940, Degrelle tended towards an increasing devotion to National Socialist ideals. Finally, when the Germans undertook their invasion of Russia in June 1941, he volunteered, as a mere corporal, in the German army in its fight against Communism.

Degrelle demonstrated extraordinary courage during the war and was decorated with the Iron Cross in 1942. Degrelle’s ‘Légion Wallonie’ was also transformed into the Wallonie Division of the SS in June 1943 but only after Degrelle had signed an agreement with Himmler that the Walloons, whose autonomy he had earlier insisted on, would eventually be incorporated into the Germanic Reich.[1] With the liberation of Belgium in September 1944, the Rexist Party was banned and, at the end of the Second World War, many of its members were imprisoned or executed.

However, Degrelle had, in January 1944, been promoted Hauptsturmführer and decorated in Berlin by Hitler with the Knight’s Cross of the Iron Cross. In April 1944 he was promoted Sturmbannführer and in August of that year received, again directly from Hitler, the Knight’s Cross of the Iron Cross with Oak Leaves. In November 1944, he was named Volksführer der Wallonen by Hitler.

At the end of the war, in April 1945, Degrelle — whose SS Division Wallonie had been fighting in Pomerania in February 1945 — managed to get away to Norway, where he found a Heinkel jet in Oslo in which he was able to fly to Spain. In Spain he succeeded in obtaining protection from persecution by Franco’s government largely because the Belgian Foreign Minister Paul-Henri Spaak and Franco were not able to agree on the conditions under which Degrelle would be extradited to Belgium.

During his ‘retirement,’ Degrelle maintained contact with other SS officers like Otto Skorzeny (1908–1975) and also supported several neo-Fascist movements and nationalists like Jean-Marie Le Pen.

Degrelle wrote several works before, during, and after the Second World War. In Spain he wrote, among other works, a detailed account of the Soviet campaign, La Campagne de Russie 1941–1945 (1949), Hitler pour mille ans (1969) and an unfinished series of works on Hitler called Le Siècle d’Hitler of which nine volumes were planned but only five have been published. Degrelle’s accounts of Germany’s Russian campaign in the first two works are indeed worthy contributions to the war literature of the last century.

The present pamphlet, written in 1992, is addressed to the young people of Europe focuses on the political dishonesty and terrorist tactics of the so-called democracy established at the end of the war by the Anglo-American victors as well as on the ruthless greed of the hyper-capitalism which they seek to impose on the world. In this context, Degrelle particularly points to the duplicities of the Americans during the First Gulf War and the Yugoslav Wars. In Russia, the fall of Communism has created a new field of operations for the international drug mafia which threatens to corrupt European society in tandem with the corporate representatives of American capitalism. The essential challenge facing the European youth today is to recognize and surmount the false attractions of the predominantly urban world of capitalism. This it can do only by returning to the virtues of a society based essentially on a strong agrarian foundation. At the same time, it must also master the technology of the present and future if it wishes to constitute a new elite that, unlike the technocrats of the present-day, will be able to bring about not only the unification of Europe but also its spiritual elevation and ennoblement.

*   *   *

From Léon Degrelle, An Appeal to Young Europeans (1992):

Ch. I – Against the democratic jokers

We also were twenty years old once. Our days will not return. But our minds, our hearts, are still vibrating with ideas and spiritual impetuses which no doubt inflame you still, you, our young European comrades of today.

Fervent nationalists, we stirred the soul of our fatherland to the depths of its conscience. We wished to remove it from the political swamps in which it suffocated, give it faith in its mission, reestablish order in its institutions, reestablish social justice in an indissoluble collaboration of the classes and, above all, realize the revolution of souls that would free men from an invading materialism.

Then, in June 1941, sounding from bell-tower to bell-tower, the hour of great European possibilities rang out.

A simple soldier, then corporal, then sergeant, then officer, then commander of the 28th Division of the Waffen SS Wallonie, I had, like hundreds of thousands of volunteers of our old continent, helped, on the Eastern Front, in the creation, little understood in the beginning but inevitable, of a Europe federating the diverse but complementary forces of our fatherlands. They were at that time threatened with death by Soviet Communism determined, since 1917, to pass under its whip all the peoples of the world.

To be sure, in the beginning, we, the non-German combatants, were all very different from one country to another: the Spanish from the Norwegians, the French from the Bosnians, the Dutch from the Estonians. But quickly the hardships, the sufferings, brought us together. Then it sealed our unity.

Friendship, but diversity. Europe breathed in us. After the torment, each of our fatherlands, proud of the honor of its arms and the sacrifice of its dead, would have caused the personality of its people to radiate and be magnified in the bouquet of our reunited civilizations.

Defeated, covering our drums, we saw our nascent Europe of 1942 shriveled after 1945 in banality and mediocrity, delivering itself desperately – without even guessing its ephemeral fragility – to a furious need to have fun.

The latter tarnished its soul. It disintegrated its moral and spiritual characteristics.

Tomorrow everything will have to be recreated.

*   *   *

For this devotion to our fatherlands and to the Europe that will federate them we, the old men of the Second World War, paid a terribly high cost. We were bruised, we received a thousand blows, experienced streams of bitterness. They dragged us  through the mud. Our most senior people were assassinated. We were hunted everywhere with a demoniacal rage. But our faith has remained intact. Not only that but, in enduring that, we do not regret anything. In spite of our aged bodies, if the opportunity to raise our flags were to return, we will march to our duty without impetuosity, with the same vigor, the same pleasure and the same unshakeable resolution.

If we must still champ at the bit at present buried in an exile as interminable as it is cruel, we remain, we will remain, dear comrades of Europe, your companions until our last breath.

*   *   *

To tell the truth, you too do not have an easy life today. In every country, busy and servile judges, cackling, gurgling, pursue you with their skirts fluttering. They reinvent the civil code and the penal code every day to discover – democratically, of course! – new pretexts allowing them to trap you in their jails, and to overwhelm under inscrutable fines those who do not agree to piously kiss the feet of the sacrosanct virago that is their worthless ‘democracy.’

In fact, the entire acrobatic system of parliamentarism rests on the maintenance of its rituals. In this brigandry of voting somnambulists, hundreds of members of parliament are elected, or re-elected, only by supporting themselves on a preliminary polling of millions, of hundreds of millions, or even billions, who ensure the survival and the financial conditioning of their electoral machinery.

The crowds, bored, believe less and less in these farces where one must give a lot in order to get a little.

Tracked down to their cottages, the troop of politicians – this is seen everywhere – begin to bark. They debate about thorns. One votes increasingly less because one no longer believes, anywhere, these flashy shows.

One does not bray with the asses any more; in the new freed states of the east, in Poland, which should still be surprised about its very recent ‘democratic’ gift, 65 percent of the public did not go to vote! The same in Hungary! As for Lebanon, the voters said they were on strike! In 1992 France, only 18 percent of the voters – Socialists – constituted by themselves the official base of the government. It is, besides, the son of a Ukrainian Jew[2] flanked by the son of another Jew extracted from the Polish ghettos who have granted themselves the responsibility of ensuring the happiness of a stupefied France.

*   *   *

These good-for-nothings with crooked intellects defend with an almost ridiculous fury their increasingly shaky power.

But if you dare to tell them to their face that their governmental teams are papered with false invoices and fed on extortions covered in the blood of hemophiliacs, that, in Belgium notably, a Socialist ex-prime minister called Cools,[3] with a too greedy paw, caused himself to be shot by a hitman of one of his ministerial colleagues specialized in rackets, you will be considered straightaway as a ‘fascist criminal.’

To remark that nine-tenths of the members of parliament, unknown and incompetent, do not serve any purpose except to pocket sumptuous emoluments makes you an intolerable killjoy.

The opponents who denounce the sterility of the prattle of the assemblies with three hundred, four hundred, or five hundred heads (most often empty) are forbidden all constructive access to the television, thus to the huge meetings where they could enlighten the cheated public.

In order to defend their democratic virginity in front of the stupid masses, the governmental intriguers pompously decorating their paunches with big official blue, white and red ribbons stir up hordes of multiracial and multi-colored parasites who have come chaotically from their burnt deserts!

*   *   *

Everywhere politically, socially, economically, morally, it is a mess; 68 percent of the French, according to the last press surveys, say that they are sickened.

Every country is overburdened with crazy taxes that kill every desire to create something new.

Twenty thousand irresponsible and haughty functionaries, that nobody elected, deck with their impotence the shaky semi-Europe of an autocratic Common Market, tossed around in repeated crises, choked fully by the orders of the trade-union potentates wielding demagogic firecrackers.

Only rotten eggs can be laid there.

A braggart, the Common Market drags piteously behind its tomfoolery sixteen million unemployed people who are beyond help.

You, young boys, young girls of real Europe, you wish to substitute for this waste and this ruinous swindle a union of healthy states, under the authority of a true leader, loved, respected and chosen freely by the people.

It will be socially just and racially protected.

It alone will put an end to the arbitrary domination, the persecutions and the bickering of usurpers who are not worth even the water that they drink and who have profited from the defeat of 1945 to boast and lie every day, to make the nations stupid and tame them.

*   *   *

But, to tamper with the omnipotence of the ‘democratic’ pashas, brewing intrigues in their mound of snail-shells, is to play with dynamite. Often you must have had it up to here to have to brave so many spongers and vagabonds. That does not matter, you have to confront, with an unshakeable constancy, and never forget yourself. The people should know that our doctrine – responsibility, endurance, the cleanliness and competence of a strong power, intelligent cooperation of the classes, exaltation of the fundamental virtues of the society – is necessary. Life is not worth anything unless it is directed towards perfection and towards greatness. We believe in the scintillation of the stars.

The manhunt that you experience at the end of this century, the tortures that you must endure, we, your elders, have known just like you, or even perhaps more than you. We also were deprived many times of the use of public liberties. Our courage could have been blunted. Even though a million Belgians, for example, had chosen Rexism and, in 1936, thirty-three members of parliament and senators had, under my banner, been democratically elected under universal suffrage, we were never able to use a single time, from 1936 to 1940, the official radio which was at the disposition of all the parties haunting the parliamentary house!

Such was, already before the Second World War, the imbecile intolerance and the intellectual exclusion in the ‘democracies’!

Even at that time we were pariahs because we wished to substitute for a corrupt, anarchic and ruinous regime a clean, strong and popular state.

And also because – the worst crime! – we refused to be accomplices in the unleashing of a “useless and imbecile” (dixit Spaak)[4] Second World War, the one which the firebrands of Marxism and of International Jewry, supported by a stateless hyper-capitalism with canine appetites, imposed, through hatred and fear, on Europe in September 1939.

*   *   *

We had to confront this enormous civil war, especially when Communism set out towards our Western countries determined to convert the bloodied Europe of 1940–1941 into its select repast.

We fought hard, offered for terrible years our youth and our blood. We knew the cold, hunger and interminable sufferings in the frozen expanses of the Eastern Front. Several millions of combat comrades fell. Thousands of others, after so many sacrifices, endured for years the horrors of prisons in their own fatherlands.

The crooks of that which is called ‘democracy’ often speak to the duped of the cruelties of that time. And take great care to have their adversaries suffer them!

In cruelties it is indeed the USSR, the very dear ally, who, beating all records, had perpetrated them since 1917, in dozens of millions, on its own soil!

The English, the first comers from the Atlantic, and the American newcomers had tried their hand by massacring, in the new USA, more than four million Indians (200,000 survivors out of 5 million) in order to extirpate this race through this enormous genocide. It is they, besides, who had also branded several million Blacks in order to stamp their slavery on their skin.

They had inaugurated, in Europe and Asia, between 1941 and 1945, their unique war tactic of the twentieth century: terrorism, massacring hundreds of thousands of civilians in their gigantic bombings in Hamburg, Cologne, Berlin, Dresden, and then in Hiroshima and Nagasaki.

It is they too who, after 8 May, 1945, delivered to the tyranny of the Soviets, for close to fifty years, the hundreds of millions of our compatriots of the east!

It is they again who, in 1945 and 1946, caused a million German prisoners to perish of hunger in their camps in the Reich and France when their depots overflowed with deliberately unused food.

It is they, finally, who, after the war, permitted several million fleeing civilians, Prussians, Silesians, Germans, Sudeten folk, to be exterminated in the course of a terribly savage ‘ethnic cleansing’!

The Americans, the English – and their Russian friends recently whitewashed in the laundromat! – may denounce the racism of the Serbs murdering the civilian populations of Croatia and Bosnia in order to possess ‘racially purged’ territories again, but it is only the mathematical repetition of the exterminations that the ‘democracies’ had deployed during the genocide of more than four million Indians, and then, after the Second World War, on the lands confiscated from the German state! One knows at present the horrible figures: nearly 2,280,000 refugees from the Reich perished on their way to exile, dying of hunger or murdered by the Soviets and their henchmen; 80,000 others disappeared; more than a million survivors were deported to Siberia. The historian Jacques de Launay has narrated in detail these abominations in his famous book, La Grande Débâcle.[5]

One understands that, in Croatia and Bosnia, in 1992, the Americans and the English – the Russians keeping a low profile! – reacted against the Yugoslav conquerors only by resorting to denial. What the Serbs did they and their dear Soviet allies had done several times and on a large scale, or had allowed to happen! Their hypocritical tears were those of old crocodiles. The Serbs, by emptying the lands that they invaded of their civilian populations, in 1992, had been only their humble imitators!

Stalin, Churchill, Roosevelt had been their masters, their master-killers, of the first half of the twentieth century.

---

Prince Friedrich Christian of Schaumburg-Lippe (1906-83) was the youngest son of Prince Georg of Schaumburg-Lippe and Princess Marie-Anne of Saxe-Altenburg. Appalled at the quick abdications of the German princes during the German Revolution of 1918-19, and the compromises entered into by the latter, Friedrich Christian, like his brother Prince Stephan, decided to join the National Socialist Party and became a member of it officially in 1929. In fact, ten members in all of the royal house of Schaumburg-Lippe joined the party.[6]

Hitler appointed most of the royal adherents of National Socialism to the SA (Sturmabteilung) since he wished to include in it members of all sections of German society. Friedrich Christian espoused the leftist, socialist cause and considered the National Socialist party to be the ‘true heirs of the old nobility’ since he believed that it had a closer contact with the people.[7] He worked closely with Dr. Joseph Goebbels in the newly created Ministry of Public Education and Propaganda and became his adjutant in April 1933.

During the war, Hitler grew increasingly suspicious of the aristocratic members in his party, whom he feared for their potentially dangerous international contacts. Through Goebbels’ personal mediation, however, Friedrich Christian was able to retain his position, although he resigned from the SA in July 1944.

After the war Friedrich Christian was interned in the Soviet occupation zone until 1948 and cleared in the Denazification process in 1950. He was also brought in to the Nuremberg trials in 1947 to testify in some of the trials of high-ranking war criminals.

Even after the war, Friedrich Christian remained loyal to the principles of National Socialism and published several works during and after the Third Reich. These include [Where Were the Aristocrats?] (Berlin, 1934); Deutsche Sozialisten am Werk. Ein sozialistisches Bekenntnis deutscher Männer [German Socialists at Work] (Berlin, 1935); the autobiographical Zwischen Krone und Kerker [Between the Crown and Prison] (Wiesbaden, 1952); a biography of Goebbels, “Dr. G.” Ein Porträt des Propagandaministers (Wiesbaden, 1964); and War Hitler ein Diktator? [Was Hitler a Dictator?] (Kathagen, 1976).

The present speech focuses on the harm done to the German people after the war by various forms of enemy propaganda whose ulterior aim is to sustain the unnatural materialism of Marxism for the benefit of international Capitalism. Exposing the harmful artificiality of the attractions of the present world the prince exhorts his youthful audience to develop instead a socialism that corresponds to their own nature as Germans and to Nature in general.

---

From Prince Friedrich Christian of Schaumburg-Lippe’s 1967 speech at the University of Marburg, “If I were 18 today”:

Today as an 18 year-old I would be of the opinion that I am standing along with my generation at the beginning of a new epoch of German history. And that for the future of my people the best of the history of my fatherland is indeed good enough. One who must and wishes to begin anew needs, much more than anybody else, experiences and models. And indeed not from anywhere but from his own treasure-chest!

But what does one do? German youth of today should not have toy soldiers. No German ones at any rate. One only needs to look into the toy shops to know in what direction the wind is blowing. For boys, these shops  offer masses of Indians and American soldiers and knights from the Middle Ages.

For German girls, ‘sex dolls’ and negro dolls are recommended in German shops.

It has already become hard to buy the world-famous German fairy tale and saga books for our children. Grimm’s, Hauff’s and Andersen’s fairy tales, the Nibelung sagas, the Amelungen sagas, the Grail narrative, and so many others. But, on the other hand, countless books about Indians and gangster stories are to be had.

Has it not struck you yet, you 18-year-old of today, that for years now the illustrated magazines in Germany present whenever they can reports of royal weddings? Certain families are admired as if they still had something to say — as if they are still reigning. But the spirit that fills the other pages of the same papers is a very different one. It is much rather the spirit of those people by whom these very families were once driven away. How do you explain that, you 18-year-old? As a distraction strategy? Then perhaps you may be right.

Our families have for many centuries represented the state. For me it has always and under the most diverse circumstances been something taken for granted to respect the state as such fully and completely. To the state means to insult the people. That was always my conception. Monarchy, republic and others are different forms of the state, state-forms, and as such less significant than the state itself. The relationship of the citizen to the state-form can change and be different — but not to the state as such, unless the citizen is an anarchist. The attitude of the state to its citizens thinking and acting in this way must naturally be a corresponding one. The greatest of the kings of Prussia was proud, as is well-known, to call himself ‘the first servant of the state.’¹⁵

If I were an 18-year-old today I would certainly think in this way — but the state would perhaps welcome this attitude of mine but not understand it. Many of my fellow citizens would reprimand me as a reactionary for that reason.

Without a respectful attitude towards the state an orderly society is not possible. The people and the state together form the foundation of the nation. Serving the state is the most integral way of serving the people.

But all that presupposes that the state is conducted in a corresponding manner, and politics is there to take care of that.

The leadership of the state is a matter of individual responsibility and not of anonymous strategy.

One who thinks that he has to lead his state with computer- and market-research proves thereby that he lacks the consciousness of responsibility, the civil courage for this highest task. He is not worthy of the trust of his people, which can never be established solely through expressions of one’s opinions and machines. Indeed, in decisive phases of the life of the community it is not a matter of the recognition and realization of a status but of dynamic forces of very changeable and at least initially incalculable intensity.

One who thinks he is capable of leading men by leaving men out as much as possible is inhuman and, therewith, a great danger for mankind. We are approaching an epoch in which this problem is for the first time in the history of mankind becoming eminently significant. The Marxist-materialist view that is currently still ruling the thinking of the masses is, in this connection, a great danger for mankind.

For us Germans — the people of poets and thinkers — therefore the general egalitarianism and disrespect of models, of the heroic, of geniuses, originating from Marx is especially dangerous.

Daily life in Western Europe is today determined by Marxist-materialistic thought — on Sundays and holidays one borrows for oneself the remains of the glory of those ages that one was once ready to throw overboard. How would a thinking youth of today understand that? It is indeed inconceivable.

It would be good to be clear on the fact that the cultured nations of the Western world are for the most part ruled not by old men but by very old men. And that at a time when everything pushes forward to a new and better order, because the old is completely opposed to progress.

No wonder that all parties vie for the favor of the youth in a striking manner even though it would of course be thinkable that a youth that is revolutionary in the best sense of the word generally would not wish to have anything more to do with parties of either the old or new style.

For this youth is far too removed from Kaiser Wilhelm — and Ebert[9] and Thälmann[10] — and Hitler — yes, even from Adenauer — to be able to connect with any of them. If it has the capacity to recognize the situation, it will rip the masks from all the reactionaries from the Left to the Right with joyful youthful vigor — and proceed from the only basis that was always and is under all circumstances the natural one: One’s own people. Then it will wipe away therewith also the long moth-eaten concepts of ‘left’ and ‘right’ and ‘center’ and ‘conservative’ and ‘liberal,’ etc. because in this modern world only the people as a whole — as a community — can exist. The questions that will have to be decided tomorrow are always about the entire people — and not about individual parties. So much more will every people have to establish themselves among other peoples so that thereby mankind as a whole can also be helped.

If I were 18 years old today, I would be able to easily determine that those of more or less the same age have similar views in any context. And indeed, significantly, not only in Germany – East and West – but also in other countries. And these views are not really related to what is called politics today, which is only political strategy. These views are directed more or less consciously against the older age groups. And, interestingly, not on account of their past but on account of their present.

Today as an 18-year-old I would have the feeling of living in a straitjacket. A condition that is so much more oppressive in that — considered from a purely materialistic point of view — I feel well or even very well, or too well, in this straitjacket. This straitjacket is the present-day order. In every context. In good as well as bad. It is precisely that which Communism needs in order to make me an anarchist. But, on the other hand, I bristle in a way that is quite understandable. However, nobody helps me here. That which the others offer me as help is always, grotesquely, the straitjacket itself, that is, the system of wealth Which is basically not a social order at all because it lost its sovereignty — through the victory of materialism.

I feel this social order as a straitjacket because I am through it captured by a system that abuses my life. I am in this system not a man but a number. That corresponds to the purely materialistic view of the masses and their dictators. I cannot in any way live as I wish to. The more people gabble about freedom the more illusory is the latter. In every context I become a consumer, a consumer of mass products. Of more or less artificially produced food that harms our health. Of the breathing of air that is corrupted, just like the water that I drink. Of objects of enjoyment of the most diverse sorts which I am recruited to through a state-subsidized advertising even though they are addictive, me of my decision over my own body, and are more or less poisonous. Nobody protects me from life in nerve-destroying noise, in senseless restlessness, in the maze of clauses, forms, jurisdictions. Nowhere and never can I be through my own will where I would like to be – after 25 years even my corpse can be dislodged from the cemetery. My whole life long the state takes a major part of the income of my work, of that for which I wear out my body and soul, to finance things which I will perhaps never experience and which, in some circumstances, even entirely contradict my convictions, my life, the actual interests of my family. I am the slave of a confection that is not dictated by natural taste and Nature-given necessities but by the sale of goods and which I must accept even if it would turn me into a clown. Even opinion has been turned into a consumer product. Nobody tells me where it has been fabricated. Its only advantage is that it is cheap. Since all obtain the same opinion automatically it is extremely strenuous and even dangerous to complain about it. Hundreds of millions of men could in this way have one opinion – if that were not so, they would have none – but they must have one and indeed a certain one – so that they may demand that which is offered. A Satanic circle – in the ‘free world.’ In every context: Earlier the supply was directed to the demand – today the demand is oriented to the supply.

If a person breaks out of this circle – for example, in politics – then he is called a ‘radical’ and that is supposed to mean: Against everybody. In truth it means: Against all who hold on to the old order because they fear a better one – or already consider it as no longer possible.

If I were 18 and thus had my life before me, this condition would infuriate me much more than now. I would recognize that my enemies are the enemies of my existence and that of my relatives and my people. That it is not at all a question of different opinions, of social estates or class differences, of social questions in the traditional sense, of religious faiths, labor unions, parties – but of existing or not existing. Henceforth, to be a Socialist means to preserve men from their biological annihilation. That lends politics an entirely different visage. In this way the Socialist becomes that which he originally wished to be – the enemy of Capitalism – thus, against the abuse of capital. For this battle neither capitalist trade unions nor capitalist churches are suited. They are basically to blame for the fact that it has reached this point. They should have confronted this development of the materialistic worldview at the right time instead of becoming Capitalists themselves.

I can very well understand that an 18-year-old of today inwardly rebels – perhaps without fully knowing why – against this old social order that stands so seriously in contradiction to life. There are for him indeed only two possibilities: Either to become a slave of progress and think in a correspondingly materialistic manner and subject himself to Capitalism for better or for worse. That means in the final analysis: To help to bring about the downfall of mankind and the destruction of Nature on this earth. Or: to raise anti-matter against materialism and return to Nature and its eternally valid values. In this way to give man once again the dignity that gives him primacy above matter so that he may become the master of progress and lead back the latter to the service of mankind.

Only the second way corresponds to the character of the youth. And only the youth can actually follow it. But that should not happen in a vague way but must be well prepared and considered in the best way. For, nothing would be more disastrous for all than to stamp out the last vestiges of a once-good social order before the better new order is visible. One should be very careful to push forward from a void – for that would necessarily lead to a void – namely, anarchy.

Some of the concepts that were always good – because they correspond to Nature – remain acknowledged: Mother, family, one’s people. And these are not to be separated from: Love, loyalty and faith. If these remain unshakably firm as guarantors of a new social order, then duty, truth and justice are produced by themselves.

Then it would be superfluous to praise ‘success’ – instead of performance. And to idolize ‘freedom’ which remains a phantom so long as it is possible only for the benefit of some but for the disadvantage of others.

In this way would I – if I were an 18-year-old – try to develop a Socialism along with like-minded people that would be so modern – so completely different from the Marxist – that nobody could fail to personally participate in it. I am certain that a major part of the German working youth are waiting to overhaul with such Nature-compatible and thus healthy ideas a world that is reactionary to the core. I am certain that the German youth, if they write such ideas on their banner, would elicit the greatest interest among the youth of all cultivated nations and find many comrades. I am certain that our youth has it in them to develop in such an evolutionary world of ideas – to develop it themselves and to disseminate it with an enthusiasm that would do honor to the German name.

That is not a matter or a task of a party – but of a popular movement. Its avant-garde can – and therefore must – be only the youth.

Let this talk be a call to that. Let destiny take its course!

The more you respect the state as such, the more it can and will be you. Do everything out of love for the people, out of loyalty to Germany, and in a belief in the victory of the good!

The situation is serious. Nobody in the world – however powerful he may be – can in the long run act against Nature. Not Capitalism, and its hangers-on. Their opponents indeed proceed not just from their intelligence but from their experience. The day is approaching when the greatest injustice will be discovered and judged. This time the people whom one wished to annihilate in the Second World War will not stand as the accused but count among the prosecutors. This time industrious, decent people will not sit in the dock but exploiters. This time it will not be a matter of business but about justice and honor. This time – and that is the point – one will not proceed from philosophical and religious platitudes but from the facts of natural science. Thus from that which could not be more logical and exact and clean than it is. From the proof of God itself, who stands much higher than all religions. In this way – only in this way – can one say: ‘It is so’ and judge correspondingly.

But the way thereto is not easy for any of us. We must take care not to commit injustice. Especially the older generations are still so rooted in the belief in which they grew up that it is hard for them, in spite of all doubts, to free it from all the ballast of human accretions. To free it to such an extent that in reality only that remains which can stand up by all means even to the scrutiny of the most modern researches. Thus, to leave as remainder only that which, exactly like the natural sciences, is anchored in the eternal laws of Nature.

Thereby there will be no miracle necessary any more as proof of a theology. For Nature is overabundant in the really miraculous! It offers mankind much much more of incomparable beauty, of things ordered in an exemplary way, things that are actually all-powerful, and truly noble. Either the divine apparition to men is everywhere – or nowhere. Everywhere it is present only in Nature. There where man cannot yet disfigure, or corrupt it.

By allowing jazz music to be played in Christian churches one does not lead the youth to the Nature of God – but systematically away from it. By selling the host [11] in automatic machines and defending contraceptive pills one does not come closer to the laws of Nature but in ever greater contradiction to them. One should wish to do service, and not earn money, with the faith of men.

---

[1]See Martin Conway, Degrelle: Les années de collaboration 1940-1944, Ottignies, 1994, pp.206ff.

[2] Pierre Bérégovoy (1925-1993), whose father was Ukrainian, was Prime Minister of France from April 1992 to March 1993.

^[3] André Cools (1927-1991) was a Walloon Parti socialist and Deputy Prime Minister of Belgium from 1969 to 1972. His assassination was probably directed by a rival from his own party.

^[4] Paul-Henri Spaak (1899-1972) was a Belgian Socialist politician who served as Foreign Minister under van Zeeland in 1936. He was Prime Minister of Belgium between 1938 and 1939 and, from 1940, served as Foreign Minister in the Belgian government in exile in London. At the outbreak of the war he advocated Belgian neutrality with regard to the developments in Germany and France.

^[5] Jacques de Launay, La Grande Débacle, 1944-1945, Paris: Albin Michel, 1985.

^[6] Petropoulos, J. (2006). Royals and the Reich: The Princes von Hessen in Nazi Germany. New York: Oxford University Press, p. 100.

^[7] Gossman, L. (2009). Brownshirt Princess: A Study of the “Nazi Conscience,” Cambridge: OpenBook Publishers, p. 69.

^[8] King Frederick the Great (1712-1786) regularly referred to himself in this manner.

^[9] Friedrich Ebert (1871-1925) was a Social Democrat who served as the first president of Germany from 1919 to 1925.

^[10] Ernst Thälmann (1886-1944) was leader of the Communist Party of Germany during the Weimar Republic. He was arrested by the Gestapo in 1933 and held in solitary confinement until 1944, when he was shot on Hitler’s orders.

^[11] The sacramental bread used in the Christian Eucharist.