Aryans and Russians—Necessity of the mailed fist in
Russia—Deterioration of soil.
What we need is a collective view of people’s wish to live and
manner of living.
We must distinguish between the Fascist popular movement
and the popular movement in Russia. The Fascist movement is
a spontaneous return to the traditions of ancient Rome. The
Russian movement has an essential tendency towards anarchy.
By instinct, the Russian does not incline towards a higher
form of society. Certain peoples can live in such a way that
with them a collection of family units does not make a whole;
and although Russia has set up a social system which, judged
by Western standards, qualifies for the designation ‘State’, it
is not, in fact, a system which is either congenial or natural to her.
It is true that, in a sense, every product of human culture,
every work gifted with beauty can be born only of the effect of
the constraint which we call education.
The Aryan peoples are peoples who are particularly active.
A man like Krümel works from morning to night; such-and-such another person never stops thinking. In the same way, the Italian is as diligent as an ant (bienenfleissig).
In the eyes of the Russian, the principal support of civilisation is vodka. His ideal
consists in never doing anything but the indispensable.
Our conception of work (work, and then more of it!) is one that he submits to as if it were a real curse. It is doubtful whether anything at all can be done in Russia
without the help of the Orthodox priest. It’s the priest who has
been able to reconcile the Russian to the fatal necessity of work
— by promising him more happiness in another world.
The Russian will never make up his mind to work except
under compulsion from outside, for he is incapable of organising
himself. And if, despite everything, he is apt to have organisation thrust upon him, that is thanks to the drop of Aryan blood in his veins. It’s only because of this drop that the Russian people has created something and possesses an organised State,
It takes energy to rule Russia. The corollary is that, the tougher a country’s régime, the more appropriate it is that equity and justice should be practised there.
The horse that is not kept constantly under control forgets in the wink of an eye
the rudiments of training that have been inculcated into it. In
the same way, with the Russian, there is an instinctive force that
invariably leads him back to the state of nature. People sometimes quote the case of the horses that escaped from a ranch in America, and by some ten years later had formed huge herds of wild horses. It is so easy for an animal to go back to its origins!
For the Russian, the return to the state of nature is a return to
primitive forms of life. The family exists, the female looks after
her children, like the female of the hare, with all the feelings
of a mother. But the Russian doesn’t want anything more. His
reaction against the constraint of the organised State (which is
always a constraint, since it limits the liberty of the individual) is
brutal and savage, like all feminine reactions. When he collapses
and should yield, the Russian bursts into lamentations. This will
to return to the state of nature is exhibited in his revolutions.
For the Russian, the typical form of revolution is nihilism.
I think there’s still petroleum in thousands of places. As for
coal, we know we’re reducing the natural reserves, and that in
so doing we are creating gaps in the sub-soil. But as for
petroleum, it may be that the lakes from which we are drawing
are constantly renewed from invisible reservoirs.
Without doubt, man is the most dangerous microbe imaginable. He exploits the ground beneath his feet without ever asking whether he is disposing thus of products that would perhaps be indispensable to the life of other regions. If one examined the problem closely, one would probably find here the origin of the catastrophes that occur periodically in the earth’s surface.’
Hitler’s Table Talk 1941-1944. English translation copyright © 1953
by Weidenfeld and Nicolson