Ten Economic Policies To Unite A Nation

29 May


Regular readers will be well aware of my excoriating views on the practice of usury — the making of gain (profit) from money; the unnatural “birth of money from money”.

In this, I happily find myself to be in esteemed company.

With all the forefathers of Western thought and jurisprudence (Plato, Aristotle, Cato, Cicero, Seneca, Plutarch, et al).

With the religious divines of all times and places (Buddha, Moses, Vashishtha, Jesus, Mohammed, Aquinas, Luther, and many more).

And … with Adolf Hitler.

(Do I have your attention now?)

I have no doubt that very few, if any, Australian readers would know that the central plank in the economic policy platform of The National Socialist German Workers’ Party, was the abolition of usury.

That following the devastating impacts of losing World War I, the crushingly punitive war reparations imposed by the Treaty of Versailles, and the resultant hyperinflation of the Weimar Republic, the economic policies introduced by the NSDA on coming to power inspired what is arguably the greatest, and most rapid economic transformation of a nation in modern history.

Or that — if we choose to first set aside our conditioned prejudices, and consider the matter with cool impartiality — we will discover that many of us would support precisely the same economic policies, in response to the economic challenges of our own times.

Before we get to those policies, let us first consider the following commentary/introduction by Pedert Gottfried in “The Program of the NSDA”, The National Socialist German Workers’ Party and its General Conceptions, translated by E.T.S. Digdale, Fritz Eher Verlag, Munich, 1932.

Read without prejudice.

I have included underlines for emphasis:

Adolf Hitler prints the Party Program’s two main points in leaded type: “The Common Interest Before Self: The Spirit of the Program” and, Abolition of the Thralldom of Interest: The Core of National Socialism.” Once these two points are achieved, it means a victory of the approaching universalist ordering of society in the true state over the present-day separation of state, nation and economics under the corrupting influence of the individualist theory of society as now constructed.

The sham state of today, oppressing the working classes and protecting the pirated gains of bankers and stock exchange speculators, is the area for reckless private enrichment and for the lowest political profiteering; it gives no thought to its people, and provides no high moral bond of union. The power of money, most ruthless of all powers, holds absolute control, and exercises corrupting, destroying influence on state, nation, society, morals, drama, literature and on all matters of morality, less easy to estimate.

Break down the thralldom of interest” is our war cry. What do we mean by thralldom of interest? The landowner is under this thralldom, who has to raise loans to finance his farming operations, loans at such high interest as almost to eat up the results of his labor or who is forced to make debts and to drag the mortgages after him like so much weight of lead.

So is the worker producing in shops and factories for a pittance, whilst the shareholder draws dividends and bonuses which he has not worked for. So is the earning middle class, whose work goes almost entirely to pay the interest on bank overdrafts.

Thralldom of interest is the real expression for the antagonisms, capital versus labor, blood versus money, creative work versus exploitation. The necessity of breaking this thralldom is of such vast importance for our nation and our race, that on it alone depends our nation’s hope of rising up from its shame and slavery; in fact, the hope of recovering happiness, prosperity and civilization through out the world. It is the pivot on which everything turns; it is far more than a mere necessity of financial policy. Whilst its principles and consequences bite deep into political and economic life, it is a leading question for economic study, and thus affects every single individual and demands a decision from each one: Service to the nation or unlimited private enrichment. It means a solution of the Social Question.

Our financial principle: Finance shall exist for the benefit of the state; the financial magnates shall not form a state within the state. Hence our aim to break the thralldom of interest.

Relief of the state, and hence of the nation, from its indebtedness to the great financial houses, which lend on interest.

Nationalization of the Reichsbank [central bank] and the issuing houses [commercial banks], which lend on interest.

Provision of money for all great public objects (waterpower, railroads etc), not by means of loans, but by granting non-interest bearing state bonds or without using ready money.

Introduction of a fixed standard of currency on a secured basis.

Creation of a national bank of business development for granting non-interest bearing loans.

Fundamental remodeling of the system of taxation on social-economic principles. Relief of the consumer from the burden of indirect taxation, and of the producer from crippling taxation.

Wanton printing of bank notes, without creating new values, means inflation. We all lived through it. But the correct conclusion is that an issue of non-interest-bearing bonds by the state cannot produce inflation if new values are at the same time created.

The fact that today great economic enterprises cannot be set on foot without recourse to loans is sheer lunacy. Here is where reasonable use of the state’s right to produce money which might produce most beneficial results.

Let it be clearly understood, gentle reader, that my statement of agreement with the above is just that.

Agreement with the above. In particular, with the underlined passages.

Hence, a polite request.

Please do not insult my intelligence, and more importantly, your own, by falsely conflating my agreement with the above, with any contrived notion or implication that this somehow also constitutes an approval — tacit, or otherwise — of any other words (much less, actions) of the German state of the 1930’s – 1940’s.

I have one observation to make in that regard.

And it is this.

It is entirely possible — indeed, it is exceedingly common — for a person (and by extension, a nation) to be right in principle, but wrong in practice.

Which is why I condemn the (a)moral code, cherished by power-hungry sociopaths of all stations in life, which asserts that “the Ends justify the Means”.


It may now be of interest to the discerning reader, to consider thoughtfully and without prejudice the first of the economic policy demands listed in the NSDA’s 25 point “Program” of 1932 (underline added):

Therefore we demand:

11. That all unearned income, and all income that does not arise from work, be abolished.

Breaking the Bondage of Interest

12. Since every war imposes on the people fearful sacrifices in blood and treasure, all personal profit arising from the war must be regarded as treason to the people. We therefore demand the total confiscation of all war profits.

13. We demand the nationalization of all trusts.

14. We demand profit-sharing in large industries.

15. We demand a generous increase in old-age pensions.

16. We demand the creation and maintenance of a sound middle-class, the immediate communalization of large stores which will be rented cheaply to small tradespeople, and the strongest consideration must be given to ensure that small traders shall deliver the supplies needed by the State, the provinces and municipalities.

17. We demand an agrarian reform in accordance with our national requirements, and the enactment of a law to expropriate the owners without compensation of any land needed for the common purpose. The abolition of ground rents, and the prohibition of all speculation in land.

18. We demand that ruthless war be waged against those who work to the injury of the common welfare. Traitors, usurers, profiteers, etc., are to be punished with death, regardless of creed or race.

20. In order to make it possible for every capable and industrious German to obtain higher education, and thus the opportunity to reach into positions of leadership, the State must assume the responsibility of organizing thoroughly the entire cultural system of the people. The curricula of all educational establishments shall be adapted to practical life. The conception of the State Idea (science of citizenship) must be taught in the schools from the very beginning. We demand that specially talented children of poor parents, whatever their station or occupation, be educated at the expense of the State.

21. The State has the duty to help raise the standard of national health by providing maternity welfare centers, by prohibiting juvenile labor, by increasing physical fitness through the introduction of compulsory games and gymnastics, and by the greatest possible encouragement of associations concerned with the physical education of the young.

Would you be inclined to support any of these economic policies, here in our own times?

7 Responses to “Ten Economic Policies To Unite A Nation”

  1. mick May 29, 2013 at 9:16 am #

    Who are you Blissful? You need to get real and stop ranting.

    “stock exchange speculators”??? Don’t you think average Australians own shares these days?

    And so on………..

    All you need to say is that the well off need to pay their proportion of tax which nourishes the whole. That is the problem. The rich with their influence and paid politicians of all persuasion in their pockets simply change governments when they do not get their way. So governments learn who their political master is, and it ain’t the people who voted for them.

    Eventually it all comes down to the apathy of the public who are disconnected from politics because they don’t trust the political agenda and because they feel powerless to effect change. So we get one dirtbag government after the other playing the same tune in different octaves. Enjoy it Blissful. We are the problem and the big end of town has simply harnessed public apathy to give us all what we truly deserve.

  2. Paul May 29, 2013 at 9:18 am #

    I knew. It does make one reconsider the dynamics that ended as WW II

    • The Blissful Ignoramus May 29, 2013 at 9:42 am #

      Indeed Paul. That in itself is a fruitful (and surprising) subject area for research.

    • Kevin Moore May 29, 2013 at 11:59 am #

      As Germany became a stumbling block, so today Syria is hindering the takeover of Iran and Rothschilds aim of total world ownership.

      “……Some researchers are pointing out that Iran is one of only three countries left in the world whose central bank is not under Rothschild control. Before 9-11 there were reportedly seven: Afghanistan, Iraq, Sudan, Libya, Cuba, North Korea and Iran. By 2003, however, Afghanistan and Iraq were swallowed up by the Rothschild octopus, and by 2011 Sudan and Libya were also gone. In Libya, a Rothschild bank was established in Benghazi while the country was still at war……?

      From “The Protocols of the Learned Elders of Zion” excerpt from Protocol 3. “Today I tell you that our goal is only a few steps off. There remains a small space to cross and the whole long path we have trodden is ready now to close its cycle of the SYMBOLIC SNAKE, by which we symbolise our people.”

  3. Kevin Moore May 29, 2013 at 11:41 am #

    To expound on Adolph Hitlers views of the prevailing financial system –

    “When I first heard Gottfried Feder’s lecture on ‘The Abolition of the Interest Servitude’, I understood immediately that here was a truth of transcendental importance for the future of the German people…….The struggle against international finance capital and loan-capital has become one of the most important points in the programme on which the German nation has based its fight for economic freedom and independence.” [Mein Kampf, page 124]

    In regard to the Jewish religions teachings, Hitler wrote –

    “…..The Jew himself is the best example of the kind of product which this religious training evolves. His life is of this world only and his mentality is as foreign to the true spirit of Christianity as his character was foreign to the great Founder of the new creed two thousand years ago. And the Founder of Christianity made no secret indeed of His estimation of the Jewish people. When He found it nescessary He drove those enemies of the human race out of the Temple of God; because then, as always, they used religion as a means of advancing their commercial interests. But at that time Christ was nailed to the Cross for His attitude towards the Jews; whereas our modern Christians enter into party politics and when elections are being held they debase themselves to beg for Jewish votes. They even enter into political intrigues with the atheistic Jewish parties against the interest of their own Christian nation.” [Mein Kampf, page 174]

    My view is that Germany’s defence after war had been declared against the nation should have been done by “putting on all the armour of God, for you to be able to stand against the wiles of the devil.” [ Ephesians 6:11 ] Not a physical defence, but a Spiritual defence.

    • The Blissful Ignoramus May 29, 2013 at 1:42 pm #

      Thanks Kevin. That first quote in particular is quite enlightening, from an historical perspective. It helps further to put the actions of the time into a broader context.

      FWIW, I’ve just finished reading Michael Hoffman’s “Usury In Christendom: The Mortal Sin that Was, and Now Is Not” (2013). It provides a wealth of historical references, and (I think) a most compelling and long-overdue, balanced and objective focus on the failures of Churchianity, that have given rise to the predations of usury (by “Christians”, in particular) from the time of the Renaissance. From “one bad seed grows…”, etc.

      Personally, I think it of utmost importance to very carefully separate our considerations of the practice of usury, from finger-pointing at any person/grouping in particular. The practice is all pervasive, and as Hoffman shows, “Christians” are as much (if not, arguably, more) to blame for its rise and rise, as any other group we might care to identify.

      I also agree with your final sentence 🙂 Hence my idea for, as it were, “walking away” from the (money) system, by creating a new one.

  4. Kevin Moore May 29, 2013 at 12:39 pm #

    “Adolf Hitler prints the Party Program’s two main points in leaded type: “The Common Interest Before Self: The Spirit of the Program”

    “In the German language we have a word which admirably expresses this underlying spirit of all work: It is Pflichterfullung, which means the service of the common weal before the consideration of ones own interests.”……………..”The renunciation of ones own life for the sake of the community is the crowning significance of the idea of all sacrifice.” [Mein Kampf, p.169]

Comments are closed.

%d bloggers like this: