The EU isn’t quite nazi Germany but it does employ some of the some techniques to advance its power.”
September 11, 1940
In a ‚speech to Czech intellectual workers and journalists’ the Reich Propaganda Minister outlined his vision of ‘the Europe of the future’.(…) At the moment when British power is collapsing we have the opportunity to reorganize Europe on principles corresponding to the social, economic and technical possibilities of the twentieth century.
About a hundred years ago our German Reich went trough a similar process. At that time it was fragmented into just as many larger and smaller parts as Europe is today. This medley of small states was endurable so long as technical facilities, especially those of communications, were not yet so developed that is took too short a time to travel from one small country to another. But the invention of steam power made the old conditions intolerable (…)
In those days too there were elements in the Reich which sought to remedy this state of affairs by negotiation. Those elements were refuted by historical developments, in a way that is not uncommon. History generally operates with harsher laws than those that prevail around the conference table. You may remember the words Bismarck used at that time that German unity would not be brought about by speeches and resolutions but that it must be forged by blood and iron. This statement was much contested then, but history justified it in due course: the unity of the Reich was in fact forged on the battlefield. In the process a whole lot of peculiarities of individual states, prejudices, limitations and parochial ideas were done away with. They had to be overcome, for otherwise the Reich would not have been in a position to achieve unity and enter into the great conflict of European powers. We were only able to achieve political unity because at that time we broke down the barriers that were constricting us (…)
Today the railway is no longer the most modern means of communication: it has been superseded by the aeroplane. A distance that it once took twelve hours to cover by rail can be traversed by a modern aircraft in one or one and a half hours. Technology has brought not only tribes but whole peoples closer together than was once imaginable. Whereas formerly it tool 24 hours to talk from Berlin to Prague indirectly via the press, today it does not take me an extra second. When I speak at this microphone I can be heard at the same moment in Prague, Slovakia, Warsaw, Brussels and The Hague. Whereas it once took twelve hours to travel to Prague by rail, today I can fly there in an hour. In other words, in the course of a century technology has brought peoples closer still to one another. It is certainly no accident that these technical aids have come into being at this particular moment. For there are more people in Europe than there used to be, and their numbers have created quite new problems for European society – problems of food supplies and economic policy as well as those of finance and defense. As these technical achievements are put to use, so the continents are inevitably brought closer together. Meanwhile European peoples are realizing more and more clearly that many of the issues between us are mere family quarrels compared to the great problems that today require to be solved as between continents.
I am firmly convinced that just as today we smile when we look back at the parochial quarrels that divided the German peoples in the 40s and 50s of the last century, so in fifty years’ time future generations will be no less amused at the political disputes that are now going now on in Europe. The ‘dramatic national conflicts’ of many small European states will seem to them no more than family quarrels. I am convinced that in fifty years people will no longer think in terms of countries – may of today’s problems will have faded into obscurity, and there will be little left of them. In those days people will think in terms of continents, and European minds will be filled and swayed by quite different, perhaps much greater problems.
You must on no account think that when we Germans bring about a certain order in Europe we do so for the purpose of stifling individual peoples. In my view a nation’s conception of its own freedom must be harmonized with present-day facts and simple questions of efficiency and purpose. Just as no member of a family has the right to disturb its peace for selfish purposes, in the same way no single European nation can in the long run be allowed to stand in the way of the general process of organization.
It has never been our intention that this new order or reorganization of Europe should be brought about by force. If we with our Greater German outlook have no interest in infringing the economic, cultural or social peculiarities of, say the Bavarians or the Saxons, so it is equally not in out interest to infringe the economic, social or cultural individuality of, say the Czech people. But a clear basis of mutual understanding must be created between the two nations. We must approach each other either as friends or as enemies. And I think you know ell enough from the past experience that the Germans can be terrible enemies, but also very good friends. We reach out our hand to a friend and cooperate with him in a truly loyal spirit, but we can also fight an enemy until he is destroyed.
The people who have adapted or will adapt to this reorganization must ask themselves whether they are doing so with genuine good will and sincerity or whether they are inwardly resisting it. Whichever they do will make no difference to the facts. They may take it as certain that once England is overthrown the Axis powers will not permit any change in the power-political situation of a Europe reorganized in accordance with great political, economic and social ideas. If Britain can do nothing to prevent this, certainly the Czech people cannot. If you have learnt anything from recent history you will know that nothing can or will be changed in the power-political situation as it exists today.
And so, gentlemen – and I am speaking now quite realistically, without any appeal to sentiment – it makes no difference at all whether you approve this state of things or not. Whether or not you welcome it from your hearts, you cannot do anything to alter the facts. Now it is my opinion that when you can do nothing to alter a state of affairs and have to put up with the disadvantages it may no doubt present, it would be foolish not to profit by its advantages as well. Since you have become part of the Reich anyway, I do not see why the Czech people should adopt an attitude of inward opposition to the Reich instead of claiming the advantages it offers (…)
You gentlemen have now seen something of the Reich, and I made a point of allowing you to make this journey before I addressed you. You have seen the Reich in Wartime, and you will have formed some idea of what it can be in peace. Out great nation with its large population, together with Italy, will in practice take over the leadership of Europe. There are no two ways about that. What it means for you is that you are already members of a great Reich which is preparing to reorganize Europe, tearing down the barriers that still separate the European peoples and making it easier for them to come together. Germany intends to put an end to a situation which quite clearly cannot satisfy mankind for long. We are performing here a work of reform which I am convinced will one day be recorded in large letters in the book of European history. Can you imagine what the Reich will actually be like after the war? (…)
Second half of 1940
Daitz attempts to deduce the ‚law’ of different Lebensräume from European history; Britain has played a pernicious role by selfishly preventing Europe from concentrating on its own problems. It is the mission of National Socialism to uphold the new principle of European order.
(…) This European revolution first asserted itself in Germany and Italy, in National Socialism and Fascism. The National Socialist and Fascist revolutions, like the Falangist and others that will follow, are national solutions, parts of the general European revolution. It follows that they have not only national but also European objectives. Their providential leaders, Adolf Hitler and Benito Mussolini, are therefore not only the greatest men of Germany and Italy, but also the greatest Europeans. They are not only the leaders of their national revolutions but also of the European revolution, the reorganization of the European continent of a basis of race and territory. Under Adolf Hitler the first Reich has again arisen with its politico-territorial base in the North and Baltic area, its soldierly life-style and, in foreign affairs, the undertaking that first and foremost and in all circumstances it will pursue the continental policy that has been interrupted for a thousand years. In the same way, the Roman Empire has come to life again under Benito Mussolini in Fascist Rome as their ruler of the Mediterranean are and has indissolubly united with the German Reich to form the axis of European policy based on Lebensräume. Thus the North and Baltic Sea area under German rule and the Mediterranean under Italy combine to give Europe fresh unity and strength. In the economic field, too, alongside the yen, dollar and rupee areas there is now a Reichmark area as a sign of the economic consolidation of the racial Lebensräume and of a better economic order in place of the dying British world economic system. They proclaim a new European morality: that just as the individual cannot with impunity transgress the higher law of the racial community into which he is born, so a people cannot with impunity transgress the higher law of the community to which it belongs by race or violate the political, economic and cultural interest, rights and duties which arise organically from it. The European community of peoples, the common Lebensraum of the white race, demands from each of its people the same discipline that the national community imposes on every one of its citizens. In this way the peoples of Europe must again be Europeanized, so that they once more become citizens of their continent and, thereafter, of the world. Europe for the Europeans!
This letter, written by the IG Farben executives to the Nazi government, is particularly important for several reasons:
- It outlines the plan of the world’s largest chemical/pharmaceutical cartel, IG Farben, for a Europe under its control.
- This letter is a response to the request by the Nazi government to IG Farben for its blueprint for a new economic order in Europe under the IG Farben/Nazi-coalition.
- The date of the letter, July 20, 1940, corresponds with the first phase of WWII, where the IG Farben/Nazi-coalition had conquered central and western Europe in Blitzkriegs. In Summer of 1940, after the conquest of France, it seemed only a question of time until the IG Farben/Nazi-flag would flutter over Europe.
- It is a highly significant fact that the greatest concern of IG Farben in a subjugated Europe was the new regulation of patent law and its control over the chemical/pharmaceutical markets of Europe via patented products.
This document was also part of the Nuremberg War Crimes Tribunals against IG Farben, documented at www.profit-over-life.org
- Notiz für den Herrn Reichsaußenminister (September 1939, in German)
- Aktenvermerk über die Besprechung in Görings Hauptquartier am 19. Juni 1940 (June 20, 1940, in German)
- Gustav Schlotterer über die “Neuordnung Europas” (July 19, 1940, in German)
- Versammlung der AO der NSDAP (July 26, 1940, in German)
- Léon Degrelle: “Le rôle de la Belgique dans la nouvelle Europa” (October 20, 1940, in French)
- Vidkun Quisling: “Denkschrift über die Regelung des Verhältnisses zwischen Norwegen und Deutschland” (October 25, 1940, in German)
- Unterredung zwischen dem Reichsaußenminister Joachim von Ribbentrop und dem Admiral Darlan (May 11, 1941, in German)
- Martin Bormann: “Nationalsozialistische Zielsetzung in Osteuropa” (July 16, 1941, in German)
- Karl Megerle: “Positive Presse- und Propagandathesen” (September 27, 1941, in German)
- Aufzeichnung über die Unterredung zwischen dem Führer und dem Grafen Ciano (October 25, 1941, in German)
- Aufzeichnung über die Unterredung zwischen Reichsmarschall Göring und Marschall Pétain (December 3, 1941, in German)
- Ernst Freiherr von Weizsäcker: Tagebuchauszüge (Dec. 1939 – Nov. 1941, in German)
- Der niederländische Staat in dem neuen Europa (August 1942, in German)
- Baldur von Schirach: Rede anläßlich der Europäischen Jugendtagung in Wien (September 14, 1942, in German)
- Joseph Goebbels: “Das neue Europa” (October 4, 1942, in German)
- Adolf Hitler: “Verfügung” (November 4, 1942, in German)
- Anton Reithinger: Die europäische Wirtschaftskraft bei planvoller Zusammenarbeit (November 13, 1942, in German)
- Werner Frauendienst: “Der innere Neuaufbau des Reiches als Beitrag zur europäischen Ordnung” (1942, in German)
- Arthur Seiß-Inquart: “Zum 10. Jahrestag der Machtübernahme” (January 29, 1943, in German)
- Joseph Goebbels: “Erlaß über die Behandlung der europäischen Völker” (February 15, 1943, in German)
- Franz Alfred Six: “Das Europabild des 20. Jahrhunderts” (March 3, 1943, in German)
- Wipert von Blücher: “Goebbels “Leitsätze” für die Gestaltung eines Neuen Europas” (March 16, 1943, in German)
- Hans Frohwein: “Grundgedanken eines Planes für das neue Europa” (June 7, 1943, in German)
- Notiz betreffend die Gründung eines europäischen Staatenbundes (August 1943, in German)
- Carl Clodius: “Leitsätze zur wirtschaftlichen Neuordnung Europas” (August 20, 1943, in German)
- Notiz für Herrn Reichsaußenminister (November 16, 1943, in German)
- “Entwurf zu einer Denkschrift betreffend die Gründung eines Europäischen Staatenbundes” (Autumn 1943, in German)
- Adolf Hitler: Rede zum 11. Jahrestag der Machtübernahme (January 30, 1944, in German)
- Schlußprotokoll der Arbeitstagung des Arbeitswissenschaftlichen Instituts der Deutschen Arbeitsfront (March 19, 1944, in German)
- Herbert Bäcke: “Das Schicksal der europäischen Landwirtschaft” (Juni 29, 1944, in German)
- Karl Heinz Pfeffer: “Die europäische Besinnung” (October/December 1944, in German)
- Mario Mantovani: “Sull’idea europea. Il nemico numero uno” (May 1940, in Italian)
- Alberto De Stefani: “Il riordinamento e la pacificazione dell’Europa” (October 1941, in Italian)
- Camillo Pellizzi: “L’idea di Europa” (December 1942, in Italian)
- Due lettere di Camillo Pellizzi a Ugoberto Alfassio Grimaldi (August 12 and September 4, 1943, in Italian)
- Carlo Borsani: “Scoperta dell’Europa” (June 18, 1944, in Italian)