EUropean Economic Community: “Berlin 1942, Bildeberg’s, Tri-Lateral Commission and the New World Order”

#AceWorldNews says when researching articles related to the European Union of EEC as it was known back in 1942. I came across this interesting pamphlet, and it related to structure of the EEC. It was originally a Europaische WirtschaftsGemeinschaft and has been translated.  

Coat of arms of Berlin. Español: Escudo de Ber...

Coat of arms of Berlin. Español: Escudo de Berlín. Eesti: Berliini vapp. Français : Blason de Berlin. Polski: Herb Berlina. Svenska: Berlins vapen. (Photo credit: Wikipedia)

EUropean Economic Community

 Von:

ReichsWirtschaftMinister u. President der Deutschen ReichsBank Funk;

Professor Dr. Jecht, Berlin; Professor Dr. Woermann, Halle;

Dr. Reithinger, Berlin; MinisterialDirektor Dr. Benning, Berlin;

Gesandter Dr. Clodius, Berlin, und GauWirtschaftsBerater Professor

Dr. Hunke, Berlin

Mit einer EinFuhrung von:

GauWirtschaftsBerater Professor Dr. Heinrich Hunke

President des Vereins Berliner Kaufleute und Industrieller

HerausGeGeben von dem

Verein Berliner Kaufleute und der Wirtschafts – HochSchule

Und Industrieller Berlin

Published

BERLIN 1942

Second edition 1943

  • Haude & Spenesche VerlagsBuchHandlung Max Paschke

——————————————————————————————————————————

To assist non Germans, reading the above, certain letters have been capitalised for convenience ONLY

Being the FIRST of a series of Pamphlets being published on the internet Greg Lance-Watkins, who has overseen this project for “The Silent Majority” over the last few years would like to thank ALL those who have helped in tracking down the original full text in German, and the short term acquisition thereof, for photocopying., Also for the lengthy process of accurate translation and independent checking of the translation work.

<

The original copy is available for inspection at Glance Back Books in Chepstow.

The European Economic Community

  • Mr. Funk, the Reich’s Economic Minister and President of the German Reichsbank
  • Professor Dr. Jecht, Berlin
  • Professor Dr. Woermann, Halle
  • Dr. Reithinger, Berlin, Ministerial Director
  • Dr. Beisiegel, Berlin
  • Secretary of State Königs, Berlin
  • Director Dr. Benning, Berlin
  • Ambassador Dr. Clodius, Berlin and Economics Committee Advisor
  • Professor Dr. Hunke, Berlin

With an introduction by:

  •  Economics Committee Advisor, Professor Dr. Heinrich Hunke, President of the Society of Berlin Industry and Commerce

 Issued by:

  •  The Society of Berlin Industry and Commerce and the Berlin School of Economics

 Second Revised Edition (Berlin 1943)

  •  Haude and Spenersche Publishing House Max Paschke

 Preface to the First and Second Edition:

 This text contains the lectures presented under the title “The European Economic Community” by the Society of Berlin Industry and Commerce at the start of 1942 in conjunction with the Economic Advisor to the Berlin Committee of the NSDAP and The Chamber of Trade and Industry. The order of lectures was as follows:

  •  Walter Funk, Reichs Economic Minister and President of the Reichsbank:
“The Economic Face of Europe” 
  •  Dr. Horst Jecht, Professor at The Berlin School of Economics:
“Developments towards the European Economic Community”
“European Agriculture”
  • Dr. Anton Reithinger, Director of the Economics Department of I.G. Farbenindustrie A.G., Berlin:

“The European Industrial Economy”

  • Dr. Philipp Beisiegel, Ministerial Director of the Reich’s Labour Ministry:

“The Deployment of Labour in Europe”

  • Gustav Koenigs, Secretary of State, Berlin:

“Questions About European Transport”

  • Dr. Bernhard Benning, Director of the Reich’s Credit Company, Berlin:

“Questions About Europe’s Currency”

  • Dr. Carl Clodius, Ambassador of the Foreign Office:

“European Trade and Economic Agreements’’

  • Professor Dr. Heinrich Hunke, Economic Committee Advisor of the NSDAP, President of Germany’s Economic Publicity Agency and the Berlin Society of Industry and Commerce:

“The Basic Question: Europe – Geographical Concept or Political Fact?”

The lectures met with considerable interest and very strong agreement. On account of this, we feel we should make them available to a wider circle of people.

Berlin, September 1942

  •  The Society of Berlin’s Trade and Industry – The President: Professor Dr. Heinrich Hunke, Advisor to the Economics Committee
  •  The Berlin School of Economics – The Rector: Dr. Edwin Fels, Professor of Geography

 Including Reinhard Heydrich’s 1942 Reichs Plan for The Domination of EUrope – published in Berlin in 1942 believed to have been November.

Potsdamer Platz, Berlin, 1945. On the left the...

Potsdamer Platz, Berlin, 1945. On the left the Columbushaus, on the right the ruin of Hotel Fürstenhof. Canadian soldiers in the jeep. (Photo credit: Wikipedia)

ALSO – details of the Berlin Conference of 1944 Titled ‘How Will Germany Dominate The Peace, When It Loses The War.’ & details of the massive amounts of cash moved out of Germany during the war to safeguard the future of German domination against the economic collapse of losing the Second World War against EUropean Union. AND connections with organisations like The Bilderbergers, Council for Foreign relations, Tri Lateral Commission and other arms of the New World Order.

  •  Introduction – by Professor Dr. Heinrich Hunke, Economic Committee Adviser to the NSDAP, President of Germany’s Economic Publicity Agency

 

Enlargement of the European Union (animation) ...

Enlargement of the European Union (animation) European Community European Union (Photo credit: Wikipedia)

Around the end of 1939, most of Europe was either consciously or unconsciously under the influence of the economic concept of England. Over recent years, however, it has been swept out of European countries, politically, militarily and economically. Politically the three-power pact has given honour once again to the ancient figures of life, people and room. It has also established a natural order and a neighbourly way of co-existing as the ideal of the new order. The foundation of English economics, which is the basis of the balance of powers, has been militarily destroyed. And economically, a change has come about following the political and military development, the shape of which is easy to describe, but whose final significance is very difficult to evaluate. I can only repeat, that the changing order that is happening now has to be ranked as one of the greatest economic revolutions in history. It signifies a reversion of the economy of Europe to a time before the English concept of building an overseas Europe, i.e. an awareness of one’s own country.

The Discussion so far and its Results:

NSADPDiscussions about questions relating to Europe started as the power of the NSADP grew. At the Congress of Europe in Rome from 14th to 20th November 1932, Alfred Rosenberg developed, for the first time in front of an international forum, thoughts and ideas that have moved us since. No one, who fights for a new economic order in Europe, can ignore these perceptions and conclusions. The economic and political wheel was set in motion, when the NSDAP declared the militarisation of the German economy. It is to the credit of the journal ‘Germany’s Economy’ that it first seized these questions in 1932, kept on bringing them up and stuck doggedly to those original perceptions. The idea of German economic self- sufficiency in the new political sense and the German economic militarisation are synonymous with this journal. Besides this, Daitz, the ambassador, has earned the special credit of being the first to have related German economic history to the present time. Part II of his selected speeches and essays, which appeared in 1938 under the title ‘Germany and the European Economy’, summarizes his concepts formed between 1932 and 1938. The Italian, Carlo Scarfoglio, delivered with his book ‘England and the Continental Mainland’, a decisive historical contribution to the consciousness of the European continent. Meanwhile German and Italian economic policy drew the political consequences from the historical lessons that were learnt during the blockade and learnt again during the sanctions. The speech made in Munich in 1939 by the leader of the Reich’s farmers, R. Walther Darre, at the 6th Great Lecture at the Commission of Economic Policy of the NSDAP, takes a special place in the discussion at that time. Its theme was “The market order of the National-Socialist agricultural policy – setting the pace for a new foreign trade order.”

 While our leader maintained the hope of reaching a peaceful agreement with England, the route for European economic unity remained problematic. The end of 1939 was a decisive point and it was natural that the years 1940-1941 heralded the new economic and political order. The writer, in particular, developed and extended in speech and writing the intellectual fund of the new economic policy, which has been translated into most languages, so that today everywhere the great constructive texts are known. These contexts revolve around the following issues:

  1.  Theory about the Reich and the European economy.
  1. The historic, cultural, and economic significance of the German economic order.

  1. The foundations of the future economic relationships between the states.

  1. The nature of the European economic community.

On 25th June 1940 the Reich’s Economic Minister, Funk, publicised in his official capacity his thoughts, which underlined the development so far and thus gave them state sanction. In October, the journal ‘German Economy’ summarised for the first time the principles of European co-operation, the fundamental principles of German foreign trade, Germany’s export economy and ways and means of promoting export. It did so in a popular review “About A New Europe”, providing an overview of the important problem of European economic fusion. Around the end of 1940 the Berlin historian Fritz Rorig finally outlined in his book “Hanseatic Essence” the historical foundations of the greatest economic and political achievement by the Germans.

I am clear in my mind that total clarity is to be found in the principle questions: The necessity is recognised for a political order for the economic co-operation of the people. The nature of the new order which is: awareness of tradition, using up one’s own economic resources, long term economic agreements and fair relations, is affirmed. The economic inter-dependence is underlined by fate. The economic unity of Europe is thus evident.

 Economic Practice:

  1.  Even practical economic life has increasingly allowed entry to new thoughts. I am able to see the decisive steps in the start and realisation of the following points:
  2.  In the increasing payment traffic through Berlin.
  3.  In the exchange of experiences in various areas of economic life. Thereto belong also the statements of ministers and business people, the calls made by special advisers and the collective tackling of important tasks relating to the economy. Even the specialist is surprised, once he has taken the trouble to put together all the connections. Today they are already legion.
  4.  In the signing of long term economic agreements between the Reich and the other European states, which the public is aware of. There can be no doubt that such agreements are those of the future.
  5.  Of course, that cannot prevent unclear points and new problems from arising, which become evident at the time when the situation is reviewed.

ECC Problems Related to the Economic Community of Continental Europe

 These unclear points primarily relate to the concept of economic direction, the extent of solidarity and neighbourly attitude, the development of one’s own powers, the care to maintain the standard of living and the question of raw material purchase from foreign countries. It is natural that one or another issue will take priority of interest, depending on the set of conditions that prevail. It should be attempted at this point to give a reply, albeit a summary one.

 There can be no doubt that the concept of direction of the economy, or rather its leadership, is as novel as it is revolutionary. Its classification is all the more important, as the fate and consequence of European co-operation depend principally on a new consistent form of economic understanding. The Anglo-Saxon view of economics is dead: consequently, even the so-called ‘classical’ national economy is no longer classical, but it has survived. So what it comes down to is that a new understanding arises to do with ideology and terminology, which represents a sound basis for agreement and co-operation. Relating to this, one must point out the following in detail:

 Economic direction is not a momentary emergency solution, instead it forms the core of new theory and practice. First of all, it takes the place of individual egotism and the automatic autonomy of the Anglo-Saxon precept.

 Economic direction is not identical to the tendencies of a centrally planned economy. It does not seek to cancel the individual or to administer through the state operators.

 Economic direction really means the following: the new instruction of the creative and constructive power of the individual in relation to the whole system; the creation of a consistent economic view and an attitude towards the economy; the selection of important tasks through political leadership and the state’s final decision on all questions about economic power. Beyond this, the economy is free and responsible to itself.

The degree of solidarity of the individual economies and their neighbourly attitude is characterised by three guidelines:

Firstly, it is limited in regard to its own economic development by the recognition that the utilisation of individual resources represents not only a requirement of the new economic precept, but is the very foundation for economic activity. The European economic community has no interest in leaving any abilities or possibilities unutilised.

Secondly, it contains the obligation that, because of Europe’s freedom, consideration is given firstly to continental Europe regarding any matter related to economic activity. Not only should the shared fate of the European people be emphasized, but the fact should also be stressed that the supplementation of the European economies beyond their borders is possible and sought after.

Thirdly, it must be maintained that, above all else, the spirit of the individual economies may not be allowed to go against the spirit of neighbourly co-operation.

The question of developing one’s own powers refers to the problem of monocultures, of industrialisation of the agrarian south-east and the awakening of new needs.

An answer can easily be given to the first question. Monocultures are the result of the same economic precept that made the world market price the determining factor in the economy. According to that precept, people and land are the vestiges of some by-gone age. Europe is well on the way to destroying these mono-cultures with initiatives ranging from land improvements and growing new crops to discovering new local resources. All these have the same aim, which is to develop the economy and broaden its basis. Germany and the whole of Europe can only greet these efforts with gratitude.

The industrialisation of the south-east poses a particular problem regarding these questions. As I am unable to handle this problem – like all other problems – here in a comprehensive and exhaustive manner, because the industrialisation of economies is theoretically a difficult problem, I can only say as follows:

Just as it is in the nature of things that each country will strive to utilise its available resources for its own production, so will there will be a knock-on effect for other economic partners.

If, as is the case in the South-east European countries, there is heavy over-population in the countryside, then there are only three possibilities to solve it: itinerant workers, a permanent emigration and an ‘intensivisation’ of the local economy, a term correctly created by Dr. Ilgner for the problem of industrialisation. Itinerant workers can only form a part solution. Besides, it only applies to agricultural and construction workers and gone on for ages. Permanent emigration from Europe is just as false as impossible. There just remains the intensivisation of the economies of south-east Europe as the way to self-help.

 The economies should make it possible for an independent life according to the modern economic view. The intensivisation of their economies therefore is right for the time.

The old features of industrialisation, which evolved from the price collapses in countries with agriculture and raw materials, have to now belong to the past. Europe is a communal living area. Only through a joint development of economies – and not through independence from one another – can protection against crises be achieved.

The tasks that have to be solved in Europe are so big that the powers needed to do so have to be released by an intensivisation of the individual economies. This can be easily done by employing the workers that have been liberated in new branches of the economy.

Without affecting the difficult questions of purchasing power, it can be regarded as proven that the joint work to build up Germany’s and the   south-eastern states’ in the area of industrialisation lies in the direction of the intensivation of interest of the whole continent.

One important and until now completely overlooked task in this regard exists and that is the awakening of new needs in the south-eastern countries. It is because, in those countries, wealth has grown and will gradually continue to grow, as a result of the reliable purchase of agricultural products and available raw materials at adequate price levels. According to the principle in economics that giving equals taking, peoples’ living habits there will have to change, otherwise one day the process will come to a halt. Germany’s ability to absorb the products from the south-east is practically infinite, whereas creating a demand for German goods there is not only a matter for economic intensivation but also one of modifying the people so they consume more. This task is of such importance that it has to be considered from the very outset, so that the south-eastern European economies are elevated after the war.

Equally important as the industrialisation of south-east Europe is the question of the standard of living in the north. Their economic development and high standard of living, which underpin their lives though all economic conditions, should not be mistaken. This standard of living has grown considerably during the 19th century and around the time of the world war due to free trade, so that various circles view world economic events with particular concern. From a German viewpoint, only the following points can be made:

Firstly, a higher standard of living is also the aim of the German government. The German people not only understand this well, but also through its fight wants to ensure European civilisation and culture. This fight will benefit the whole of Europe, and with it the north.

Secondly, despite being connected successfully to England and its economic system (one should not ignore the countless economic troughs that feature there), the economies of the north whose fate and greatness are very closely linked to Germany.

Thirdly, the northern states’ difficulties are going through a temporary phase of adjustment. In the long term, this will bring about a lasting advancement, rather than destruction, for their economies’ foundations.

Maintaining a high standard of living is not an insoluble problem. To finish, I now come to the problem of purchasing raw materials from overseas markets. A leading south-east European economist once wrote about this principal question: “Unlike the war, we were in the following situation: in order to import raw materials from overseas countries, we bought goods from west European countries with foreign exchange. In the area of continental Europe there is no gold. Everything had to pass through the system of clearing – goods sold against goods. We have no product that can be sold to North or South America. That means that the leading nations are obliged to acquire and distribute to us the raw materials that we need. The leading nations of Europe can supply, with its capacity, enough products to overseas countries with which to acquire raw materials. The one question is whether exchange will ever happen… Even before the new order is introduced, and without even joining in with the Axis powers, we stand in solidarity outside Europe with its traffic of goods…”

We can only agree with this view, leaving the matter open, as the Reich’s Economic Minister Funk described, how large the direct sources of help will be and whether raw material acquisition from overseas will take place through the system of clearing or free flow of currency. With the introduction of the multi-lateral clearing system, on a practical level there is no change from the pre-war time. As this learned person said, “All the benefits of the method of paying are regained from the system of free currency.” Nor can it be realised – contrary to him – that this system of clearing through Berlin should function without those countries outside the European system. But the decisive factor is the way in which the continent is bound to Germany and Italy by one fate.

Since 1940, therefore, we are faced with an unparalleled economic and political revolution. The problems created for us are large but can be solved. Their solution will give Europe the peace it yearns for and will bring a great era of joint development. It is worth fighting and working for this, in the future. …………………………………

The following discourses should contribute to helping us to broaden and deepen our understanding of the tasks and nature of the European economic community.

 

Enhanced by Zemanta

#aceworldnews, #berlin, #berlin-society-of-industry, #england, #european-economic-community, #european-union, #german, #germany, #heinrich-hunke, #reinhard-heydrich