Readings on Fascism and National Socialism Part 7

The Fuhrer Principle

The second pillar of the n.a.z.i state is the Fuhrer, the infallible leader, to whom his followers owe absolute obedience. The Fuhrer principle envisages government of the state by a hierarchy of leaders, each of whom owes unconditional allegiance to his immediate superior and at the same time is the absolute leader in his own particular sphere of jurisdiction.

One of the best expositions of the n.a.z.i concept of the Fuhrer principle is given by Huber in his _Const.i.tutional Law of the Greater German Reich_ (doc.u.ment 1, _post_ p. 155):

The Fuhrer-Reich of the [German] people is founded on the recognition that the true will of the people cannot be disclosed through parliamentary votes and plebiscites but that the will of the people in its pure and uncorrupted form can only be expressed through the Fuhrer. Thus a distinction must be drawn between the supposed will of the people in a parliamentary democracy, which merely reflects the conflict of the various social interests, and the true will of the people in the Fuhrer-state, in which the collective will of the real political unit is manifested ...

The Fuhrer is the bearer of the people's will; he is independent of all groups, a.s.sociations, and interests, but he is bound by laws which are inherent in the nature of his people. In this twofold condition: independence of all factional interests but unconditional dependence on the people, is reflected the true nature of the Fuhrer principle. Thus the Fuhrer has nothing in common with the functionary, the agent, or the exponent who exercises a mandate delegated to him and who is bound to the will of those who appoint him. The Fuhrer is no "representative" of a particular group whose wishes he must carry out. He is no "organ" of the state in the sense of a mere executive agent.

He is rather himself the bearer of the collective will of the people. In his will the will of the people is realized.

He transforms the mere feelings of the people into a conscious will ... Thus it is possible for him, in the name of the true will of the people which he serves, to go against the subjective opinions and convictions of single individuals within the people if these are not in accord with the objective destiny of the people ... He shapes the collective will of the people within himself and he embodies the political unity and entirety of the people in opposition to individual interests ...

But the Fuhrer, even as the bearer of the people's will, is not arbitrary and free of all responsibility. His will is not the subjective, individual will of a single man, but the collective national will is embodied within him in all its objective, historical greatness ... Such a collective will is not a fiction, as is the collective will of the democracies, but it is a political reality which finds its expression in the Fuhrer. The people's collective will has its foundation in the political idea which is given to a people. It is present in the people, but the Fuhrer raises it to consciousness and discloses it ...

In the Fuhrer are manifested also the natural laws inherent in the people: It is he who makes them into a code governing all national activity. In disclosing these natural laws he sets up the great ends which are to be attained and draws up the plans for the utilization of all national powers in the achievement of the common goals. Through his planning and directing he gives the national life its true purpose and value. This directing and planning activity is especially manifested in the lawgiving power which lies in the Fuhrer's hand. The great change in significance which the law has undergone is characterized therein that it no longer sets up the limits of social life, as in liberalistic times, but that it drafts the plans and the aims of the nation's actions ...

The Fuhrer principle rests upon unlimited authority but not upon mere outward force. It has often been said, but it must constantly be repeated, that the Fuhrer principle has nothing in common with arbitrary bureaucracy and represents no system of brutal force, but that it can only be maintained by mutual loyalty which must find its expression in a free relation. The Fuhrer-order depends upon the responsibility of the following, just as it counts on the responsibility and loyalty of the Fuhrer to his mission and to his following ... There is no greater responsibility than that upon which the Fuhrer principle is grounded.[46]

The nature of the plebiscites which are held from time to time in a National Socialist state, Huber points out, cannot be understood from a democratic standpoint. Their purpose is not to give the people an opportunity to decide some issue but rather to express their unity behind a decision which the Fuhrer, in his capacity as the bearer of the people's will, has already made:

That the will of the people is embodied in the Fuhrer does not exclude the possibility that the Fuhrer can summon all members of the people to a plebiscite on a certain question.

In this "asking of the people" the Fuhrer does not, of course, surrender his decisive power to the voters. The purpose of the plebiscite is not to let the people act in the Fuhrer's place or to replace the Fuhrer's decision with the result of the plebiscite. Its purpose is rather to give the whole people an opportunity to demonstrate and proclaim its support of an aim announced by the Fuhrer. It is intended to solidify the unity and agreement between the objective people's will embodied in the Fuhrer and the living, subjective conviction of the people as it exists in the individual members ... This approval of the Fuhrer's decision is even more clear and effective if the plebiscite is concerned with an aim which has already been realized rather than with a mere intention.[47]

Huber states that the Reichstag elections in the Third Reich have the same character as the plebiscites. The list of delegates is made up by the Fuhrer and its approval by the people represents an expression of renewed and continued faith in him. The Reichstag no longer has any governing or lawgiving powers but acts merely as a sounding board for the Fuhrer:

It would be impossible for a law to be introduced and acted upon in the Reichstag which had not originated with the Fuhrer or, at least, received his approval. The procedure is similar to that of the plebiscite: The lawgiving power does not rest in the Reichstag; it merely proclaims through its decision its agreement with the will of the Fuhrer, who is the lawgiver of the German people.[48]

Huber also shows how the position of the Fuhrer developed from the n.a.z.i Party movement:

The office of the Fuhrer developed out of the National Socialist movement. It was originally not a state office; this fact can never be disregarded if one is to understand the present legal and political position of the Fuhrer. The office of the Fuhrer first took root in the structure of the Reich when the Fuhrer took over the powers of the Chancelor, and then when he a.s.sumed the position of the Chief of State.

But his primary significance is always as leader of the movement; he has absorbed within himself the two highest offices of the political leadership of the Reich and has created thereby the new office of "Fuhrer of the people and the Reich." That is not a superficial grouping together of various offices, functions, and powers ... It is not a union of offices but a unity of office. The Fuhrer does not unite the old offices of Chancelor and President side by side within himself, but he fills a new, unified office.[49]

The Fuhrer unites in himself all the sovereign authority of the Reich; all public authority in the state as well as in the movement is derived from the authority of the Fuhrer.

We must speak not of the state's authority but of the Fuhrer's authority if we wish to designate the character of the political authority within the Reich correctly. The state does not hold political authority as an impersonal unit but receives it from the Fuhrer as the executor of the national will. The authority of the Fuhrer is complete and all-embracing; it unites in itself all the means of political direction; it extends into all fields of national life; it embraces the entire people, which is bound to the Fuhrer in loyalty and obedience. The authority of the Fuhrer is not limited by checks and controls, by special autonomous bodies or individual rights, but it is free and independent, all-inclusive and unlimited. It is not, however, self-seeking or arbitrary and its ties are within itself. It is derived from the people; that is, it is entrusted to the Fuhrer by the people. It exists for the people and has its justification in the people; it is free of all outward ties because it is in its innermost nature firmly bound up with the fate, the welfare, the mission, and the honor of the people.[50]

Neesse, in his _The National Socialist German Workers Party--An Attempt at Legal Interpretation_, emphasizes the importance of complete control by the party leadership over all branches of the government. He says there must be no division of power in the n.a.z.i state to interfere with the leader's freedom of action. Thus the Fuhrer becomes the administrative head, the lawgiver, and the highest authority of justice in one person. This does not mean that he stands above the law. "The Fuhrer may be outwardly independent, but inwardly he obeys the same laws as those he leads."[51]

The _leadership_ (_Fuhrung_) in the n.a.z.i state is not to be compared with the _government_ or _administration_ in a democracy:

_Fuhrung_ is not, like government, the highest organ of the state, which has grown out of the order of the state, but it receives its legitimation, its call, and its mission from the people ...[52]

The people cannot as a rule announce its will by means of majority votes but only through its embodiment in one man, or in a few men. The principle of the _ident.i.ty_ of the ruler and those who are ruled, of the government and those who are governed has been very forcibly represented as the principle of democracy. But this ident.i.ty ... becomes mechanistic and superficial if one seeks to establish it in the theory that the people are at once the governors and the governed ... A true organic ident.i.ty is only possible when the great ma.s.s of the people recognizes its embodiment in one man and feels itself to be one nature with him ... Most of the people will never exercise their governing powers but only wish to be governed justly and well ... National Socialist _Fuhrung_ sees no value in trying to please a majority of the people, but its every action is dictated by service to the welfare of the people, even though a majority would not approve it. The mission of the _Fuhrung_ is received from the people, but the fulfilment of this mission and the exercise of power are free and must be free, for however surely and forcefully a healthy people may be able to make decisions in the larger issues of its destiny, its decisions in all smaller matters are confused and uncertain.

For this reason, _Fuhrung_ must be free in the performance of its task ... The Fuhrer does not stand for himself alone and can be understood not of himself, but only from the idea of a work to be accomplished ... Both the Fuhrer and his following are subject to the idea which they serve; both are of the same substance, the same spirit, and the same blood.

The despot knows only subjects whom he uses or, at best, for whom he cares. But the first consideration of the Fuhrer is not his own advantage nor even, at bottom, the welfare of the people, but only service to the mission, the idea, and the purpose to which Fuhrer and following alike are consecrated.[53]

The supreme position of Adolf Hitler as Fuhrer of the Reich, which Huber and Neesse emphasize in the preceding quotations, is also stressed in the statements of high n.a.z.i officials. For example, Dr.

Frick, the German Minister of the Interior, in an article ent.i.tled "Germany as a Unitary State," which is included in a book called _Germany Speaks_, published in London in 1938, states:

The unity of the party and the state finds its highest realization in the person of the Leader and Chancelor who ... combines the offices of President and Chancelor. He is the leader of the National Socialist Party, the political head of the state and the supreme commander of the defense forces.[54]

It is interesting to note that, notwithstanding the generally recognized view as expressed in the preceding citations that the authority of the Fuhrer is supreme, Hitler found it necessary in April 1942 to ask the Reichstag to confirm his power to be able at any time, if necessary, to urge any German to fulfil his obligations by all means which appear to the Fuhrer appropriate in the interests of the successful prosecution of the war.[55] (The text of the resolution adopted by the Reichstag is included as doc.u.ment 5, _post_ p. 183.)

Great emphasis is placed by the n.a.z.i leaders on the infallibility of the Fuhrer and the duty of obedience of the German people. In a speech on June 12, 1935, for instance, Robert Ley, director of the party organization, said, "Germany must obey like a well-trained soldier: the Fuhrer, Adolf Hitler, is always right." Developing the same idea, Ley wrote in an article in the _Angriff_ on April 9, 1942 (doc.u.ment 6, _post_ p. 184): "Right is what serves my people; wrong is what damages it. I am born a German and have, therefore, only one holy mission: work for my people and take care of it." And with reference to the position of Hitler, Ley wrote:

The National Socialist Party is. .h.i.tler, and Hitler is the party. The National Socialists believe in Hitler, who embodies their will. Therefore our conscience is clearly and exactly defined. Only what Adolf Hitler, our Fuhrer, commands, allows, or does not allow is our conscience. _We have no understanding for him who hides behind an anonymous conscience, behind G.o.d, whom everybody conceives according to his own wishes._

These ideas of the Fuhrer's infallibility and the duty of obedience are so fundamental in fact that they are incorporated as the first two commandments for party members. These are set forth in the _Organisationsbuch der NSDAP_ (_n.a.z.i Party Organization Book_) for 1940, page 7 (doc.u.ment 7, _post_ p. 186). The first commandment is "The Fuhrer is always right!" and the second is "Never go against discipline!"

In view of the importance attached to the Fuhrer principle by the n.a.z.is, it is only natural that youth should be intensively indoctrinated with this idea. Neesse points out that one of the most important tasks of the party is the formation of a "select group" or elite which will form the leaders of the future:

A party such as the NSDAP, which is responsible to history for the future of the German Reich, cannot content itself with the hope for future leaders but must create a strain of strong and true personalities which should offer the constantly renewed possibility of replacing leaders whenever it is necessary.[56]

Beck, in his work _Education in the Third Reich_, also insists that a respect for the Fuhrer principle be inculcated in youth:

The educational value of the Hitler Youth is to be found in this community spirit which cannot be taught but can only be experienced ... But this cultivation of the community spirit through the experience of the community must, in order to avoid any conception of individual equality which is inconsistent with the German view of life, be based upon inward and outward recognition of the Fuhrer principle ...

In the Hitler Youth, the young German should learn by experience that there are no theoretical equal rights of the individual but only a natural and unconditional subordination to leadership.[57]

German writers often pretend that the Fuhrer principle does not necessarily result in the establishment of a dictatorship but that it permits the embodiment of the will of the people in its leaders and the realization of the popular will much more efficiently than is possible in democratic states. Such an argument, for example, is presented by Dr. Paul Ritterbusch in _Demokratie und Diktatur_ (_Democracy and Dictatorship_), published in 1939. Professor Ritterbusch claims that Communism leads to a dictatorial system but that the n.a.z.i movement is much closer to the ideals of true democracy.

The real nature of National Socialism, however, cannot be understood from the standpoint of the "pluralistic-party state." It does not represent a dictatorship of one party and a suppression of all others but rather an expression of the will and the character of the whole national community in and through one great party which has resolved all internal discords and oppositions within itself. The Fuhrer of this great movement is at once the leader and the expression of the national will. Freed from the enervating effects of internal strife, the movement under the guiding hand of the Fuhrer can bring the whole of the national community to its fullest expression and highest development.

The highest authority, however, Hitler himself, has left no doubt as to the nature of n.a.z.i Party leaders. In a speech delivered at the Sportpalast in Berlin on April 8, 1933, he said:

When our opponents say: "It is easy for you: you are a dictator"--We answer them, "No, gentlemen, you are wrong; there is no single dictator, but ten thousand, each in his own place." And even the highest authority in the hierarchy has itself only one wish, never to transgress against the supreme authority to which it, too, is responsible. We have in our movement developed this loyalty in following the leader, this blind obedience of which all the others know nothing and which gave to us the power to surmount everything.[58]

As has been indicated above, the Fuhrer principle applies not only to the Fuhrer of the Reich, Adolf Hitler, but to all the subordinate leaders of the party and the government apparatus. With respect to this aspect of the Fuhrer principle, Huber (doc.u.ment 1, _post_ p.

155), says:

The ranks of the public services are regarded as forces organized on the living principle of leadership and following: The authority of command exercised in the labor service, the military service, and the civil service is Fuhrer-authority ... It has been said of the military and civil services that true leadership is not represented in their organization on the principles of command and obedience. In reality there can be no political leadership which does not have recourse to command and force as the means for the accomplishment of its ends. Command and force do not, of course, const.i.tute the true nature of leadership, but as a means they are indispensable elements of every fully developed Fuhrer-order.[59]

The Fuhrer principle is officially recognized by the party, and the party interpretation thereof is set forth in the _Party Organization Book_ (doc.u.ment 7 and charts 1 and 1-A, _post_ pp. 186, 488, 489).

There are also included herein, as charts 2 and 2-A and 3 and 3-A (_post_ pp. 490, 491, 492, 493), photostatic copies and translations of two charts from _Der nationalsozialistische Staat_ (_The National Socialist State_) by Dr. Walther Gehl, published in 1935. These charts clearly show the concentration of authority in the Fuhrer and the subordinate relation of the minor leaders in both the state and the party.

The Party: Leadership by an Elite Cla.s.s

_1. Functions of the Party_

The third pillar of the n.a.z.i state, the link between _Volk_ and Fuhrer, is the n.a.z.i Party. According to n.a.z.i ideology, all authority within the nation is derived ultimately from the people, but it is the party through which the people expresses itself. In _Rechtseinrichtungen und Rechtsaufgaben der Bewegung_ (_Legal Organization and Legal Functions of the Movement_) (doc.u.ment 8, _post_ p. 204), published in 1939, Otto Gauweiler states:

The will of the German people finds its expression in the party as the political organization of the people. It represents the political conception, the political conscience, and the political will. It is the expression and the organ of the people's creative will to life. It comprises a select part of the German people for "only the best Germans should be party members" ... The inner organization of the party must therefore bring the national life which is concentrated within itself to manifestation and development in all the fields of national endeavor in which the party is represented.[60]

Gauweiler defines the relationship of the party to the state in the following terms:

The party stands above and beside the state as the wielder of an authority derived from the people with its own sovereign powers and its own sphere of sovereignty ... The legal position of the party is therefore that of a completely sovereign authority whose legal supremacy and self-sufficiency rest upon the original independent political authority which the Fuhrer and the movement have attained as a result of their historical achievements.[61]

Neesse states that "It will be the task of National Socialism to lead back the German people to an organic structure which proceeds from a recognition of the differences in the characters and possibilities of human beings without permitting this recognition to lead to a cleavage of the people into two camps."[62] This task is the responsibility of the party. Although it has become the only political party in Germany, the party does not desire to identify itself with the state. It does not wish to dominate the state or to serve it. It works beside it and cooperates with it. In this respect, n.a.z.i Germany is distinguished from the other one-party states of Europe: "In the one-party state of Russia, the party rules over the state; in the one-party state of Italy, the party serves the state; but in the one-party state of Germany, the party neither serves the state nor rules over it directly but works and struggles together with it for the community of the people."[63] Neesse contends that the party derives its legal basis from the law inherent in the living organism of the German _Volk_:

The inner law of the NSDAP is none other than the inner law of the German people. The party arises from the people; it has formed an organization which crystallizes about itself the feelings of the people, which seemed buried, and the strength of the people, which seemed lost.[64]