Mein Kampf by Adolf Hitler

As regards the second point, it may be said that the more profound cause of the fecklessness
of the bourgeois parties must be attributed to the fact that the most active and upright
section of our people had lost their lives in the war. Apart from that, the bourgeois parties,
which may be considered as the only political formations that stood by the old State, were
convinced that they ought to defend their principles only by intellectual ways and means,
since the use of physical force was permitted only to the State. That outlook was a sign of the
weakness and decadence which had been gradually developing. And it was also senseless at
a period when there was a political adversary who had long ago abandoned that standpoint
and, instead of this, had openly declared that he meant to attain his political ends by force
whenever that became possible. When Marxism emerged in the world of bourgeois
democracy, as a consequence of that democracy itself, the appeal sent out by the bourgeois
democracy to fight Marxism with intellectual weapons was a piece of folly for which a terrible
expiation had to be made later on. For Marxism always professed the doctrine that the use of
arms was a matter which had to be judged from the standpoint of expediency and that
success justified the use of arms.
This idea was proved correct during the days from November 7 to 10, 1918. The Marxists did
not then bother themselves in the least about parliament or democracy, but they gave the
death blow to both by turning loose their horde of criminals to shoot and raise hell.
When the Revolution was over the bourgeois parties changed the title of their firm and
suddenly reappeared, the heroic leaders emerging from dark cellars or more lightsome
storehouses where they had sought refuge. But, just as happens in the case of all
representatives of antiquated institutions, they had not forgotten their errors or learned
anything new. Their political programme was grounded in the past, even though they
themselves had become reconciled to the new regime. Their aim was to secure a share in the
new establishment, and so they continued the use of words as their sole weapon.
Therefore after the Revolution the bourgeois parties also capitulated to the street in a
miserable fashion.
When the law for the Protection of the Republic was introduced the majority was not at first
in favour of it. But, confronted with two hundred thousand Marxists demonstrating in the
streets, the bourgeois 'statesmen' were so terror-stricken that they voted for the Law against
their wills, for the edifying reason that otherwise they feared they might get their heads
smashed by the enraged masses on leaving the Reichstag.
And so the new State developed along its own course, as if there had been no national
opposition at all.
The only organizations which at that time had the strength and courage to face Marxism and
its enraged masses were first of all the volunteer corps, and subsequently the organizations
for self-defence, the civic guards and finally the associations formed by the demobilized
soldiers of the old Army.
But the existence of these bodies did not appreciably change the course of German history;
and that for the following causes:
As the so-called national parties were without influence, because they had no force which
could effectively demonstrate in the street, the Leagues of Defence could not exercise any
influence because they had no political idea and especially because they had no definite
political aim in view.
The success which Marxism once attained was due to perfect co-operation between political
purposes and ruthless force. What deprived nationalist Germany of all practical hopes of
shaping German development was the lack of a determined co-operation between brute force
and political aims wisely chosen.
Whatever may have been the aspirations of the 'national' parties, they had no force
whatsoever to fight for these aspirations, least of all in the streets.
The Defense Leagues had force at their disposal. They were masters of the street and of the
State, but they lacked political ideas and aims on behalf of which their forces might have