Did Hitler lose the Second World War on purpose? part 4

It looks like I still have to provide additional arguments for the claim of the title. I naturally do not expect that I would this time manage to convince the hypothetical readers of this blog, but I can try to reformulate the argument. After all, repeating a claim does make it finally the truth. Did Hitler or Goebbels say something like that? Anyway, we know it from teaching students, repetition does work.

            Let us be precise: I do not claim that high Nazis wanted Germany to lose the war, the claim is only of Hitler. Indeed, Goebbels wrote into his diary: “Ünsere Ende wird das Ende des Universums sein!” and then he murdered his family and himself. Tegtmeier (E.R. Carmin, Das Schwarze Reich p. 159) says that Karl Haushofer thought the same before murdering his wife and committing a suicide. Some Nazis believed there was some future for the universe even if Germany lost. Himmler tried to escape and ate cyanide only after being captured. A few high Nazis escaped. Yet, the question is what Sebottendorf and Hitler thought about Germany.

            Concerning Sebottendorf I see no reason to assume he was so worried about the future of Germany. Sebottendorf died in 1945, Tegtmeier informs that his body was found from the Black Sea. Maybe he killed himself, maybe he was killed. It may well be because he knew too much, even that he knew too much of the Thule Society, but it does not follow that he necessarily wanted Germany to win the war. He spent a lot of time in Turkey in Masonic and crypto-Jewish circles. These Masonic and Messianic people were most probably mainly interested in the Young Turk revolution and the question of Palestine. The chosen way Jews would return to Palestine was that Turkey lost Palestine to England and England was forced to sign the Balfour Declaration. It is quite possible that other known members of the Thule Society did believe all Thule lore or the Aryan destiny, but those beliefs were from the German order and go back to Lanz von Liebenfels and Guido von List, not to “von” Sebottendorf. The members joined an Aryan secret society and we can assume they felt Aryan. (Though, the highly anti-Semitic Thule did have Jewish members, like Erik Jan Hanussen. Maybe it was a bit like the highly anti-Semitic The Unz Review, where the site owner and many writers are Jewish. But Hanussen was assassinated by the SA in 1933.)

            But this is not the way Hitler joined Nazis. Hitler was sent to DAP by German army intelligence. Tegtmeier p. 82 tells that Hauptmann Mayr, who sent Hitler to DAP, wrote in his opinion of young Hitler: “Die Frage nach den Zukunft des deutschen Volkes habe für Hitler damals überhaupt keine Rolle gespielt.” (The source is Toland.) Reigtmeier also refers to Hermann Rauschning, who wrote a quote from Hitler: “Ihr wisst nichts von mir, meine Parteigenossen haben keine Ahnung von den Träumen, die mich bewegen, und von dem grandiosen Gebäude, dessen Grundmauer zumindest stehen werden, wenn ich sterbe… Was hier vor sich geht, ist mehr als das Heraufziehen einer neuen Religion.” (Tegtmeier p. 19) Hitler was building a religion, something much more than Germany, and more than the Aryan destiny. He was trying to start the new era, create the new man, and establish the new world order.  

            Hitler, therefore, had some far-reaching dreams, maybe even plans. There were other schemers with far-reaching plans in this time. There was the Masonic-Jewish plan of restoring Jews to Palestine. It is maybe not good to start by asking if Hitler lost the Second World War on purpose, let’s start by asking a simple question: did any country participating the First World War join the war with the purpose of losing it? Obviously, I suggest three candidates: Serbia, Russia and Turkey.

            Serbia is a rather clear case. Terrorist organization (or a school boys secret society) Black Hand assassinated the Archduke, but they got guns and training from Serbian intelligence. Serbian intelligence must have understood that the provocation will lead to an ultimatum from Austria and Serbia will lose a war with Austria. They also must have understood that Russia will come to support Serbia, so there were guarantees. They also must have understood that Germany will join the war on Austria’s side, and that Russia would not have given guarantees if Russians did not know that England and France will also join the war on the Entente side. It must be so, intelligence officers seldom are total idiots. Thus, Serbian intelligence started a war on purpose and in the first stage of the war Serbia would lose. After the war Yugoslavia was created from parts of Austria-Hungary. It would make some sense for Serbia, wanting independence and the creation of a Larger Serbia, to start the war if it could trust that the outcome of the war would be as if came to be. The outcome was rather obvious, assuming that the Entente included England, France, Russia and the USA, Italy added there as a bonus, but this would naturally imply that the Entente had a script ready for the world war.

            Russia is less certain, but during Bismarck’s time Russia and Germany had been in friendly relations, not unsurprisingly as the monarchs of these countries were related. In 1905 Trotsky made a revolution in Russia. Trotsky/Bronstein did have some American banker supporters. These bankers also gave a loan to Japan for the Japanese-Russian war, which was the main reason Japanese believed in the real existence of the Elders of Zion of the Protocols, and that one of the elders was Jacob Schiff.

            After the revolution of 1905 Russian Tsar had to share the power with the State Duma. Duma was never controlled by Communists. Indeed, when the war started in 1914 the Fourth Duma was lead by Octobrists. Yet, the political situation was unclear and it is hard to say if the Tsar, the Fourth Duma, or anybody governed the country. What is clear is that Freemason Kerensky was rising to power. The Tsar abdicated in 1917 and the provisional government was lead by Kerensky.

            Every case when Freemasons are mentioned deserves some attention. I once read (found it from the web) an article explaining how political Freemasonry was fast organized in Russia during the provisional government. It disorganized the army so that if could not respond to the Bolshevik takeover. Bolsheviks could not have taken over the army by themselves, so this political Freemasonry gave power to Bolsheviks. Bolsheviks, like Trotsky in 1905, got some support from Zionist bankers. I think this scenario is very probable.  

            Why there was the first revolution of 1917? The reason was supposed to be that Russia was losing the war, but at that time Russia actually just had defeated Austrian army and was pushing to the west. I see here a pattern where the first revolution of 1905, supported by Trotsky’s banker backers, who had financed Japan’s war against Russia, gained enough power in order to get Russia into a war and used this war in order to create a new revolution which finally removed the Tsar and gave Communists what they wanted, or rather, gave the bankers what they wanted, until Stalin pushed Trotsky out. After Stalin did such an unexpected move, Hitler was lifted to power to have a war against Stalin, and in 1948 Stalin approved the creation of Israel and allowed it to get weapons from Czechoslovakia.

            In Turkey Young Turks, a party with Masonic and Dönmeh origins, made a revolution in 1907 and got some power in the resulting democracy. Young Turks split in two fractions and the one in power decided to join Germany in the world war. The result was that England and France were in war with Turkey and England got Palestine as a mandate. I see here a similar pattern: Freemasonry connected people got some power through a revolution. Young Turks extended their power and then joined a war which Turkey would lose. Turkey lost Palestine in the war. Zionists had asked the Ottoman emperor to allow Jews to establish a home country in Palestine, but the request had been declined.

            Considering this history of the First World War, is it so outrageous to propose that Hitler lost the war on purpose? Obviously there was going on some game behind the curtains and one of the main goals was to get Palestine for Jews.

            Let us return to Hitler. What did Hitler intend to do? A religion of some kind?

            He did explain that he wanted a new man, new era, and a new world order. The idea was quite similar to the ideal society in Platon’s republic. Platon had on the top a philosopher king. This philosopher king had to cheat the people every now and then, for the good of the society. Hitler naturally fitted this role, and after Hitler there would have been some other Führer. Platon has a special soldier caste. Soldiers did not marry randomly, the spouses were picked up by superiors. Soldiers had a special religion of gods and astrological beliefs. Hitler has his SS men. They were of the purest Aryan race, so a racial caste in a way. SS men also did not select spouses randomly, the choice of a wife was to be approved, and there were special breeding institutes. The goal was to bring to life the new man. SS men had their own religion, which included a temple, esoteric rites and beliefs. Platon’s Republic’s had two castes for ordinary people: artisans/merchants and peasants. Hitler also thought of two classes or castes. These castes in both Platon and Hitler’s visions are not strict: it was possible to move from one caste to another, but the idea was to have order maintained. Platon’s republic does not mention slaves, but all antique societies had slaves. Hitler’s new world order also included a slave caste, foreign workers, mainly Slavs. Though the plans were not elaborated, there were such ideas as driving Slavs of their land and reducing their numbers by separating men and women in labor camps.

            So, this is a good match: Hitler’s plans for the ideal society seem to follow Platon’s Republic. Hitler’s new world order does resemble Platon’s ideal society much more than it resembles what we imagine modern democracy is: we think there are no real castes, more like classes, and the leaders are elected by free elections.

            Our naive belief in living in a democracy may not always be so accurate. It is possible that in some nominally democratic countries there is a government, which cheats the people for a higher purpose: it may e.g. make some false flag attacks if a war is needed. It may be that the elections are basically decided by the deep-pocketed donators, who may have some goals. There may even be in some country an ethnic group of people, who form the elite and believe that they are superior in some, like cognitive, sense, and who may believe that they apply to themselves eugenic rules that increase the intelligence. In some democratic societies there may be a lower working class of foreigners, even from different ethnic origins.

            Thus, a real democracy may resemble Platon’s ideal society much more than it resembles the mythical democracy. A Communistic society also resembles Platon’s system to a certain extent: there is the dictator, who sometimes lies; the party, which forms the elite: the ordinary people – often divided into two or more classes; and some people in Gulags. These observations may not be so surprising considering that democracy was the system installed by Freemasons and Communist copied much of leftist revolutionary Freemasonry. The thinkers of such movements did read Platon’s Republic.  

            Platon also explained how the society structure can change: the ideal kingdom becomes corrupted if the king is not good for his job, then the aristocracy (the elite, originally the soldier elite) takes over and the society form becomes an oligarchy. Rich common people rebel against the oligarchy and are given more rights. The society becomes ruled by rich citizens, like in Capitalism. Then the proletariat demands equal rights and we get to a democracy, the second worst of all society forms. Finally the soldiers (now disconnected of the aristocratic officer elite) make a military coup and we get to a tyranny. It is to be understood that other transitions do not happen: the common people may try to rebel against the king or aristocracy, but such rebels lose as officers are in the opposing side.

            Platon does not explain how it would be possible to move from tyranny back to the ideal society. He did try to change a tyranny into an ideal society, but it failed. Clearly, there is needed the end of the era, usually including a major war. First the old world must be destroyed and then, in the new era, the original order can be restored. This is order from chaos and restoration of the natural order. Thus, Hitler correctly thought of the new era. These eras do not repeat in exactly the same way, there is development, development through a spiral process: first by corruption, then a war, and then a new order. The human also develops in this process, thus it creates the new man.

            We can see the corruption process in the French revolution of 1789. As a starting point the kingdom had corrupted. Or maybe it had not, but some people thought so. Enlightened nobles had joined Freemasonry and they wanted to change the society. In this case there was no oligarchy-step. A democracy was first created, but it soon corrupted to a Jacobite tyranny. Napoleon rose as the new king and he nominated his relatives and officers as the new elite.

            This example is not any coincidence, because Freemasons, especially Illuminati, had read Platon’s Republic. Platon’s Republic does mention secret brotherhoods as a way of hiding the goals: “With a view to concealment we will establish secret brotherhoods and political clubs.” The tale of the magic ring in the Republic means a secret society: in order to do bad and appear to be doing good, it is necessary to create secret society. Reading Platon, political thinkers of the 18th century established secret societies for changing the society order in the way Platon explains it can change, and it worked.

            If we really want to go to the roots of this all, Platonism had developed into neo-Platonism in Rome around the time of Jesus. Today many call this neo-Platonism with the mane middle-Platonism. It included astrology. Indeed, the main invention of neo-Platonists was horoscope astrology. This “science”, together with Gnosticism formed the core of the esoteric teachings that the Christian Church tried to suppress. They survived in the Islamic world and in Jewish messianic and magical texts. Since the Renaissance these forbidden texts surfaced in Europe in esoteric and alchemistic circles.       

            But in a sense, the big push was the supernova of 1604. Kepler observed the new star, and he also saw Halley’s Comet of 1607. Tycho Brahe had seen an earlier supernova of 1572. These observations, together with the results of Copernicus and Galileo, started the scientific revolution, which basically, was against the Catholic Church. Some Lutherian, maybe Iohan Andreae, wrote the Rosicrucian manifestos (1614-1617). For Rosicrucians the new stars in the sky meant a new era, but they also waited for the new astrological era of Aquarius. Some of the first scientists in England were Rosicrucians and so esoteric societies become connected with the scientific revolution.

           Whether these early Rosicrucians/alchemists created Freemasonry, as later Masonic Rosicrucians claimed, or if Freemasonry developed from practical Masonry because Leon Templo presented the plans of the Temple of Solomon to Charles II of England (as the Lost Tribes of Israel were found in North America), is unclear. What is clear is that since the beginning of the 18th century Freemasonry existed and in the middle 18th century it become revolutionary and for the next hundred years Masons created revolutions and independence wars. Already from the beginning there was some connection with Masonry and Jewish Messianism and Masons wanted to restore Jews to Palestine. That was a big plan lasting for one hundred years. At the end of the plan Jews had to be pushed to Palestine by force. For that was needed Germany, but it was not – and could not – be in the plans that Germany would win the Second World War. There had to be a person in the leadership of Nazi Germany, who would realize the plan. Hitler fits to that role, no other high Nazi fits to the role. Masons did have the way of infiltrating their opponent’s organizations and directing them to bloody actions, which caused the defeat of these organizations. A classical example is the P2 lodge, which infiltrated Red Army terrorists, took over the leadership and turned the terrorists to murderous actions instead of earlier softer methods. The Red Army lost its popular support. Let us notice that before Hitler, indeed since the Napoleonic wars, there had been German anti-Masonic activity. After Hitler lost the war, all such activity disappeared. There is no resistance to the new world order in Germany any more. Why should one assume apriori that this was not planned? It is the same Masonic modus operande.

            Eliminating all alternatives, whatever remains, however improbable it may sound, must be the solution. Sherlock Holmes.