THE NEW REICH

Evening Star, Issue 23373, 16 September 1939, Page 3

THE NEW REICH

WHAT GERMANY WANTS The German Reich of to-morrow is no longer but a dream to the National Socialist leaders, wrote J. Emlyn Williams from Berlin to the ‘ Christian Science Monitor ’ recently. it has assumed concrete shape in many statements during the past few months. Gone are the days when Germany’s inequality among the nations was the chief theme. Nowadays, youth is being imbued with the idea of a new empire based upon that which was “ German ” in the Middle Ages. But, while the former Holy Roman Empire ami the new Reich-to-be bear certain geographic resemblance, the ideas underlying them differ very widely. The former was a kind of earlier League of Nations, an attempt to establish European peace on a nmversalistic basis, in which the various component' States were largely independent except for their allegiance to the Emperor, and enjoyed a very large measure of freedom. Such was the structure of medieval society that however great the difference between, e,g., France and Bohemia it was visualised as a single unit both religiously and politically. There was in those days no idea of the nationalism which later developed, nor of the type of racialism which has in later years become a part of the ideology of certain European States. The true successor of this Empire was the Austro-Hungarian Empire which disappeared in 1918, which with all its faults was based upon a universalistic tolerant, andl federalists basis. THE PRUSSIAN MODEL, The new Third Reich which has claimed its place in Europe follows the Prussian rather than the Austrian model, aiming at a centralised State based upon militarism, in which the ideas of Hegel and Marx have triumphed over Locke and Rousseau, and in which the striving for a social equally is based upon a militant democracy. Here, say the National Socialists, is the leadership of the new Europe, whereas for four centuries Europe was governed by the ideology of the western democracies which occupy the fringe of this continent, now the guiding hand is at the centre. One of their first tasks is to rid Europe of the doctrines of the French Revolution, particularly that of the equality of mankind. “ With the emancipation of the Jews.” Dr Alfred Rosenberg, the cultural inspirer of the National Socialist Party, recently declared, “ began the betrayal of Europe and the emancipation of the coloured! people which to-day is fundamentally admitted, and is already symbolised through the appointment of Secretaries of State who are of the coloured races. This is a new step which, if it has further political conseqilences, must lead to the decline of a very great civilisation.” This doctrine of equality in his view was a mistake of the _ “ spirit of the ago” (Zeitgeist) when it was proclaimed, hut to-day to accept it as the basis of culture is a relapse of the most terrible sort. RELIEF IN INEQUALITY. The logical consequence of this viewpoint is naturally the belief in a scale of inequality among the races of the world The norm by which such inequality is to be measured appears to be the Aryans, These have been responsible for the civilisation of the European continent and presumably will soon come into their own again. The new developments, in different branches of knowledge are called to the aid of the new theory. “ Contrary to former interpretations of history,” Dr Rosenberg declared in the same address, “ race science and pre-history have proved to-day that the land of birth of the Aryan peoples is Europe and that the migrations, from Central and North Europe have been southeast and south-west, and with them the establishment of civilisations.” The ideas underlying both tho new Reich and the Holy (Roman Empire have this in common, that the social unit is conceived as being much larger than in tho so-called liberal epoch. To the democracies —the heirs of the French Revolution—the unit of society is the individual, but not in either of tho German Empires. In the nineteenth century, the great cry was “the greatest happiness of the •greatest number.” In the Middle Ages the individual was powerless, having significance only as the holder of an office—emperor, duke, bishop. If not, he was important in society only as a member of a family or guild. In the same way, tho National Socialist sees the value of the individual to the extent that he is a member of an institution contributing to the glory of the ’great State-idea “ Deutschland.” The big unit has returned to politics; in fact, the methods and conceptions of “big business” are inherent inthe National Socialist conception of things to-day. The difference between tlm democratic and totalitarian States in their approach to international problems of to-day makes common understanding difficult. They differ both in the ideals and in the methods of achieving them.