The Nizkor Project: Remembering the Holocaust (Shoah)

Shofar FTP Archive File: people/h/hitler.adolf//oss-papers/text/oss-sb-langer-01

00011325.gif page 1


To:    Dr. William L. Langer

From: Walter C. Langer

Subject:  _Analysis of Hitler's Speech of April 26, 1942_

               I have worked over Hitler's speech of April 26, 
1942 in considerable detail with several of my colleagues. 
We are agreed that the speech is rather atypical for Hitler. 
It lacks the effusiveness to which we have become 
accustomed. There are no emotional outbursts and few 
vituperations. Much of the cockiness is gone and there is 
no mention of the superiority of German arms or equipment, 
sufficiency of food or raw materials and no claims of 
victory in the near future. The speaker gives the impression 
of being on the defensive and appears as a modest, cautious 
and even apologetic individual. He admits that there is and 
has been dissension in Germany and "requests" that power 
be granted him to deal with such dissension summarily. 
All this seems extremely foreign to the speaker in view 
of his past performances.

A careful analysis of the speech reveals that it is one of 
the most calculated that he has ever given. Every sentence 
has a direct bearing on the central theme and every lie 
and distortion is designed to serve a practical end rather 
than to induce a pleasant or satisfactory feeling in the 
listener. It is only after a careful study of the speech 
as a whole that its

00011326.gif  page 2

_Page 2 - Langer Memorandum_

underlying purpose becomes clear. This primary purpose, 
from a psychoanalytic point of view, is to lay the 
foundations for a peace offer in the not too distant future.

 To the casual reader or listener this purpose is not 
immediately obvious. On the contrary, the casual 
listener is inclined to conclude that the German morale 
is cracking and that Germany is in a bad way. 
Unquestionably, there is some dissension within 
Germany and some discontent with the progress of 
the war and particularly with the failure of the Russian 
campaign. There may be another reason which is even 
more telling, which we will consider later on. Why does 
Hitler speak of this dissension so openly? This is a 
double-edged technique the Nazis adopted early last Fall.       
On the one hand, it is designed to throw dust into the eyes 
of the people in the democracies in order to weaken their 
war effort by creating the impression that the war is 
almost over and there is no sense in exerting themselves 
or sacrificing too many of their liberties or luxuries. This 
is the old technique of lulling their opponents into inactivity. 
On the other hand, it is their modern technique of whipping 
the Germans into making a still greater war effort. Hitler 
and Goebbels both initiated this technique last Fall in 
speeches and writings in which superhuman efforts were 
demanded from the people on the grounds that if Germany 
wins it wins everything, but if it loses they can expect 
no mercy - the German nation would be annihilated and 
even Versailles

00011327.gif  page 3

_Page 3 - Langer Memorandum_

would be generous in comparison with the peace which 
would follow this war. Therefore, whether they liked it 
or not, or whether they were in sympathy with the war or 
not, they were all in it now and they would all be judged 
together. This is the typical "partners in crime" code and 
their only hope of salvation in the future was to stick 
together and shoot it out to a successful conclusion. The 
result is that when the leaders now want greater effort, 
they talk about how badly things are going in order to 
arouse the fear of failure in the population.

It is possible that this section of the speech has still 
another purpose. It seems that Hitler goes out of his way 
to create the impression that he is not the ruthless 
individual of the past but a modest, honest, open, dutiful 
and law-abiding leader whose personal integrity is above 
question. His only concern is for the welfare of his people 
and the future of Germany. At heart he is really a peace-
loving individual who has madeevery [sic] effort to spare 
his people the horrors of war, but since war was forced 
on him they must have complete faith in his leadership 
and share the sacrifices and observe their duties until 
he can restore peace to them. In other words, he avoids 
the gangster role and assumes the role off the benign 
lender to whom harsh measures are unpleasant but 
necessary in the interests of his people. It is logical 
to suppose that this new role is adopted now in order 
to make his future peace overtures more acceptable 
to the peoples of the United Nations.

00011328.gif page 4

_Page 4 - Langer Memorandum_

The long historical introduction concerning the British 
Empire was construed by us as material for the Fifth 
Columnists abroad. The general theme is that England 
is not strong now and never was strong; that her Empire 
was built up by cunning rather than by might. By means 
of her position she was able to utilize the disrupted 
state of Europe, a condition which she did not create, 
and turn it to her own advantage. The success of her 
theory of "balance of power" depends upon keeping 
European states fighting among themselves. England's 
entry into the last war was designed to maintain this 
condition on the Continent in order that her position in 
the world could be preserved. She lacked the power to 
accomplish this in the last war and would have failed 
completely if she had not called the United States into 
the war at the eleventh hour to help her.

Even the last war sealed the doom of England. Instead of 
recognizing the inevitability of changes due to the 
evolutionary process, England was striving to maintain 
an earlier stage of development which was no longer 
tenable. The result was that on the one hand she wasted 
so much of her might in achieving victory in the last war 
that she has incapacitated herself for future challenges 
(Fuerhengskrieg in the transcription should probably read 
Pyrrhuskrieg"). On the other hand, by calling to the United 
States for help she raised that country to a dominant 
position on world affairs - a position which England 
herself could not combat.

00011329.gif  page 5

_Page 5 - Langer Memorandum_

This historical approach, designed to prove that England is 
on the skids and cannot hope to maintain her present position, 
is not new in Nazi propaganda. Such arguments were frequently 
advanced in 1940 and it is interesting to note that they were 
dropped when their peace overtures, after the collapse of 
France, had failed. It is now resurrected and reinforced by 
additional evidence to show that Europe is no longer divided 
against itself. On the contrary, it has reached an unbelievable 
state of unification in which Germans, Italians, Slovakians, 
Rumanians, Hungarians, Finns, Lithuanians, Letts, and even 
Belgians, French, Ukrainians, etc., fight side by side in 
combating an external and common danger. Against such 
an array of unified power, England's "balance of power" 
theory is ineffectual. Even if, with the help of the United 
States, she should happen to win she would win nothing, 
while if she loses she will lose everything. Her only hope 
of salvation, therefore, is to face the reality of the 
situation and work with this unified Europe rather than 
against it.

According to Hitler the factor which brought about this 
final unification of Europe was the recognition of the 
dangers inherent in the Jewish-Bolshevist combine 
which seeks to enslave the world. This section of the 
speech seems to be directive material for the Fifth 
Columnists in this country as well as in England. 
Capitalism and democracy are the Jews' stepping-stones 
to the enslavement of the people. By cultivating distrust and

00011330.gif  page 6

_Page 6 - Langer Memorandum_

corruption they pave the way to anarchy and Bolshevism, 
etc. Roosevelt is a madman who has surrounded himself 
with Jewish advisers and is under their domination. We 
should get out of the war against Germany, which has 
never harmed us or intended to harm us, and clean our 
own house, etc. This is excellent material for a 
"whispering campaign" in the democracies.

It is important to note that in all of this material there 
is not a word against the English or the American people 
themselves. On the contrary, he even has a word of praise. 
The campaign is designed to wean the people from their 
leaders by fostering suspicion and distrust in their abilities 
and motives. Churchill is referred to a cynical drunkard, 
while Roosevelt is a sick madman. They are greedy for 
power and fame and care not a whit for the interests of 
their people. They are not fit to rule great nations.

Contrast with this situation the one existing in Germany. 
Even as Hitler gives the speech, the German people with 
unanimous acclaim vote their leader unlimited power over 
the life and death of every German irrespective of their 
hard-earned rights. They are so thoroughly convinced of 
his sincerity, integrity and vision that they are willing to 
subordinate even the judiciary to his wishes and interpretations 
of what is best for Germany and the future of the German 
people. As he looks about him, Hitler sees nothing but honest 
and upright subordinates who will make history. They, as 
the leaders of the New Order, form a strange contrast to 
the leaders of the

Home ·  Site Map ·  What's New? ·  Search Nizkor

© The Nizkor Project, 1991-2012

This site is intended for educational purposes to teach about the Holocaust and to combat hatred. Any statements or excerpts found on this site are for educational purposes only.

As part of these educational purposes, Nizkor may include on this website materials, such as excerpts from the writings of racists and antisemites. Far from approving these writings, Nizkor condemns them and provides them so that its readers can learn the nature and extent of hate and antisemitic discourse. Nizkor urges the readers of these pages to condemn racist and hate speech in all of its forms and manifestations.