|
Extracts from History of
ON THE GERMAN CHARACTER Depth of
thought, idealism, cosmopolitan views; a transcendent philosophy which boldly
oversteps (or freely looks over) the separating barriers of finite existence,
familiarity with every human thought and feeling, the desire to traverse the
world-wide realm of ideas in common with the foremost intellects of all
nations and all times. All that has at all times been held to be
characteristic of the Germans and has always been praised as the essence of
German character and breeding. The
simple loyalty of the Germans contrasts remarkably with the lack of chivalry
in the English character. This seems to be due to the fact that in England
physical culture is sought, not in the exercise of noble arms, but in sports
like boxing, swimming, and rowing, sports which undoubtedly have their value,
but which obviously tend to encourage a brutal and purely athletic point of
view, and the single and superficial ambition of getting a first prize.[1] ON THE STATE The state
is a moral community, which is called upon to educate the human race by positive
achievement. Its ultimate object is that a nation should develop in it, a
nation distinguished by a real national character. To achieve this state is
the highest moral duty for nation and individual alike. All private quarrels
must be forgotten when the state is in danger. At the
moment when the state cries out that its very life is at stake, social
selfishness must cease and party hatred be hushed.
The individual must forget his egoism, and feel that he is a member of the
whole body. The most important
possession of a state, its be-all and end-all, is power. He who is not man
enough to look this truth in the face should not meddle in politics. The
state is not physical power as an end in itself, it is power to protect and
promote the higher interests. Power must justify itself by being applied for
the greatest good of mankind. It is the highest moral duty of the state to
increase its power.... Only the
truly great and powerful states ought to exist. Small states are unable to
protect their subjects against external enemies; moreover, they are incapable
of producing genuine patriotism or national pride and are sometimes incapable
of Kultur[2] in great dimensions. ON MONARCHY The will
of the state is, in a monarchy, the expression of the will of one man who
wears the crown by virtue of the historic right of a certain family; with him
the final authority rests. Nothing in a monarchy can be done contrary to the
will of the monarch. In a democracy, plurality, the will of the people,
expresses the will of the state. A monarchy excels any other form of
government, including the democratic, in achieving unity and power in a
nation. It is for this reason that monarchy seems so natural, and that it
makes such an appeal to the popular understanding. We Germans had an
experience of this in the first years of our new empire.[4]
How wonderfully the idea of a united Fatherland was embodied for us in the
person of the venerable Emperor! How much it meant to us that we could feel
once more: "That man
is ON WAR The idea
of perpetual peace is an illusion supported only by those of weak character.
It has always been the weary, spiritless, and exhausted ages which have
played with the dream of perpetual peace. A thousand touching portraits
testify to the sacred power of the love which a righteous war awakes in noble
nations. It is altogether impossible that peace be maintained in a world
bristling with arms, and even God will see to it that war always recurs as a
drastic medicine for the human race. Among great states the greatest
political sin and the most contemptible is feebleness.... War is
elevating because the individual disappears before the great conception of
the state. The devotion of the members of a community to each other is
nowhere so splendidly conspicuous as in war. Modern
wars are not waged for the sake of goods and resources. What is at stake is
the sublime moral good of national honor, which has something in the nature
of unconditional sanctity, and compels the individual to sacrifice himself
for it.... The
grandeur of war lies in the utter annihilation of puny man in the great
conception of the State, and it brings out the full magnificence of the
sacrifice of fellow-countrymen for one another. In war the chaff is winnowed
from the wheat. Those who have lived through 1870 cannot fail to understand Niebuhr's[5]
description of his feelings in 1813, when he speaks of how no one who has
entered into the joy of being bound by a common tie to all his compatriots,
gentle and simple alike, can ever forget how he was uplifted by the love, the
friendliness, and the strength of that mutual sentiment. It is war
which fosters the political idealism which the materialist rejects. What a
disaster for civilization it would be if mankind blotted its heroes from
memory. The heroes of a nation are the figures which rejoice and inspire the
spirit of its youth, and the writers whose words ring like trumpet blasts
become the idols of our boyhood and our early manhood. He who feels no
answering thrill is unworthy to bear arms for his country. To appeal from
this judgment to Christianity would be sheer perversity, for does not the
Bible distinctly say that the ruler shall rule by the sword, and again that
greater love hath no man than to lay down his life for his friend? To Aryan[6] races, who are before all things courageous, the
foolish preaching of everlasting peace has always been in vain. They have
always been man enough to maintain with the sword what they have attained
through the spirit.... ON THE ENGLISH The
hypocritical Englishman, with the Bible in one hand and a pipe of opium[7] in the other, possesses no redeeming qualities.
The nation was an ancient robber-knight, in full armor, lance in hand, on
every one of the world's trade
routes. The
English possess a commercial spirit, a love of money which has killed every
sentiment of honor and every distinction of right and wrong. English
cowardice and sensuality are hidden behind unctuous, theological fine talk
which is to us free-thinking German heretics among all the sins of English
nature the most repugnant. In ON JEWS The Jews
at one time played a necessary role in German history, because of their
ability in the management of money. But now that the Aryans have become
accustomed to the idiosyncrasies of finance, the Jews are no longer
necessary. The international Jew, hidden in the mask of different
nationalities, is a disintegrating influence; he can be of no further use to
the world. It is necessary to speak openly about the Jews, undisturbed by the
fact that the Jewish press befouls what is purely historical truth. [1] Treitschke
is correct in drawing a distinction between English and German sports. The
English prized competitive athletic contests, while the Germans favored group
calisthenics and exercises. Credits:
Heinrich von Treitschke, extracts from History of
Germany in the Nineteenth Century and Historical and Political Writings, ed.
by Louis Snyder, in Documents of German History, (Rutgers University Press,
1958), pp. 259-262. Posted with permission
of Rutgers University Press. |