The primary task of the national economy as a whole is to adequately meet the three fundamental needs of all members of the nation—food, housing, and clothing—and, beyond that, to satisfy all cultural and civilizational needs in accordance with the prevailing level of technology and income conditions. The economy as a whole is a serving component within the total organism of the nation; in the best sense, it is a service to the people for the greatness and welfare of the nation. A nation's economy is not an end in itself; it does not exist to enrich individual business leaders at the expense of their officials, salaried employees, and workers, nor—even less—does it exist to serve as an object of exploitation for international high finance.

During the era of liberalism, the organic management of the economy was dismantled, and a fierce power struggle developed between the state and the economic sector. This power struggle can lead to one of two outcomes: either purely materialist-capitalist interests triumph over the state—and thus over the population—through policies driven by interest and usury; or political authorities seize control of the entire economic apparatus—as in socialism—whereupon the state itself transforms into an economic machine, sinking to the level of an institution of forced labor, as seen in Russia. National Socialism unequivocally assigns the state primacy over the economy; for the state—as the representative and guardian of the nation’s power, honor, and prestige, and as the expander of the Reich—must not engage directly in productive economic activity. To do so would risk entangling it all too quickly in the vested interests of specific economic sectors, thereby compromising its ability to freely safeguard the common good. Consequently, regarding the relationship between state and economy, two principles arise: first, the state’s right to oversee the economy; and second, the state’s right to intervene—through police, administrative, and fiscal (tax) measures—whenever the overarching interests of the state so require. [...] National Socialism recognizes private property in principle and places it under state protection. However, it ties the right of ownership to moral obligations toward the national community. National Socialism also recognizes the right of inheritance, as it regards the family as the most important unit of the state.

[...] a new development in economic life has emerged: the so-called economic chambers. These are composed of independent men who have a genuine personal interest in the economy or whose livelihoods depend upon it. The task of these economic chambers is to examine and monitor the significance of individual economic sectors, acting in the spirit and service of the public interest. A particularly important function of these chambers will be the cultivation of the domestic market and the careful supervision of foreign trade. The economic chambers are united within the Reich Economic Council, which safeguards the general interests of the entire nation against the special demands and interests of individual economic sectors.

The State Secretary, conveying the greetings of Reich Minister of Economics and Reichsbank President Walther Funk to the assembly, began by emphasizing that when the Führer—at the outset of his struggle—demanded the primacy of politics and an economy directed by political leadership and oriented toward the common good, and when he coined the concepts of "Blood and Soil," the "right to work," and the "national community," he was misunderstood and ridiculed by many. Yet today, the economy of the Greater German Reich rests upon this very foundation. National Socialist economic theory had revived the concept of the national economy and restored its original meaning. Since 1933, Germany has possessed an economy rooted in the people and committed to their welfare, guided by the nation's vital necessities; its objective is the common good.

War economy is the planned maximum use of the national economy in the service of national defense

Upon the outbreak of war, National Socialist Germany had no need for such a roundabout approach to increasing production and restricting consumption. For the most part, two legislative measures sufficed to secure the necessary wartime effects within our economy: the Decree on the Provisional Safeguarding of the German People's Vital Needs of August 27, 1939, and the War Economy Decree of September 4, 1939. Consequently, war finance in Germany no longer had to perform a steering function—as was the case in England, for example—but merely had to raise the funds required for waging war. Raising the funds themselves was, of course, not a problem, as the state could procure the necessary resources in any event; the decisive factor was simply the method of raising them. For this reason, the state levies war taxes primarily on income and only secondarily on consumption—specifically, solely on the consumption of luxury goods. Beyond fiscal considerations, these war taxes are also indispensable from an economic standpoint: by siphoning off excess purchasing power, they curb non-essential consumption, thereby facilitating the management and equitable distribution of consumer goods. Our people’s struggle for survival demands sacrifices. The German economy is prepared to make this sacrifice; it also recognizes that wartime leaves no room for a fundamental restructuring of our tax legislation, even if such a process entails certain hardships. However, regarding all tax-related measures, it was essential to ensure that the productive capacity of the national economy and the individual citizen's willingness to save were both preserved. Under the protection of a rigorous wage and price policy—and with the assurance that the currency and purchasing power remained secure—the German people could focus on their most important task: work. Work had always been the watchword for the German economy; indeed, as State Secretary Landfried emphasized, it was no exaggeration to say that, in wartime, productivity was a factor that would decide the outcome of the war.

The development and utilization of our domestic raw material sources to achieve raw-material independence is one of the principles of National Socialist economic policy, which retains its validity during and after the war.

Above all, the Führer—and the German Labour Front acting on his behalf—has instilled in the hearts of all working people the conviction that, following this war, a social undertaking of the greatest magnitude will be realized in Germany. Even before the outbreak of the war, our German socialism was already in the process of eradicating the liberalist and capitalist system within the sphere of influence of Greater Germany. Adolf Hitler’s new social order took its place. This development will continue after the war ends, and all the necessary domestic prerequisites for this are already being established.

The German Labor Front and its leader, Dr. Ley, as the Führer himself explained in a speech to the German people during the war, created the conditions for internal German reconstruction in peacetime. Now during the war, social work, which the German Labor Front provided with ever new impulses in accordance with the Führer's order of October 1934, has become a cornerstone of our war economy. What has been done to preserve and promote the health of our working people is incomparable. Even during the war, when there was a general shortage of doctors, company medical care did not decrease, but rather increased in scope.

The social work led by the German Labor Front, and practically realized in the enterprises on its initiative, is today concentrated entirely on measures that are directly necessary for maintaining labor power and the will to perform, for upholding work discipline, preserving the health of the people, and increasing productive output.

On May 2, new National Socialist Model Enterprises will again be designated. These enterprises, and others that performed extremely valuable in-house social work during the 1941/42 War Production Effort, are living proof of our long-repeated assertion that careful and correct leadership of people and social work within the enterprise simultaneously promotes the work result — the production output — indeed, that it is an indispensable prerequisite for today's enormous demands of war production, despite various hardships and sometimes difficult conditions. If, simultaneously and independently of these National Socialist Model Enterprises, some firms are also newly honored as 'War Model Enterprise' and granted the distinction of pinning the War Merit Cross to the factory banner, this too reflects the close bond between our production sites and the present freedom struggle of the German people. No enterprise can become a Model Enterprise in wartime unless, alongside outstanding social work, it also delivers first-class output for our armaments.

Most recently, Dr. Ley expressed these principles once again in a directive of January 26, 1942, in a new War Organization Plan of the German Labor Front: "The entire work of all offices is to be aligned with this unified goal, and the remaining staff are to be fully deployed for these war-necessary tasks."

“I grew up hating my German identity. I just didn’t want to be German. I never want any children to feel like that anymore."

The Left: We would NEVER use A.I. for political campaigns

The right:

Hitler at the Polish border in 1939

Aleister Crowley, the world’s most notorious ѕаtаnіst, was living in Berlіn during the rise of паzіѕm. He even wrote for German media and tried to get in Hitler's ear. So, was Hіtler a secret ѕatanіѕt? Well, Crowley actually admitted in his own journals that he was working with іntellіgence agencіeѕ, playing a character to make the паzіѕ look bad from the inside. In this two-part series, I’m proving that Crowley basically invented the cartoonish 'ѕatаnіc паzі' trope we see in movies today. I call them 'Aleister Crowley пazіѕ', the historical blueprint for what people now call a 'wіgnаt' or a ѕkіnheаd. With ideologies on the rise today, it's time to break down this myth to prove that the real паzіѕ were nothing like the characterѕ you grew up seeing in the movies, and that the trope is nothing more than a subversіve character made up by Crowley himself.