SCHWEIGER INTERVIEW

-

Mr Schweiger we would like to interview you about your
economic theories… I can guarantee we won’t pass it on to
state prosecution or anywhere else…

-

That wouldn’t matter!

-

Of course… but aren’t there proceedings against you at the
moment?

-

Yes, in Klagenfurt.

-

Why?

-

Paragraph 3, the Nationalist Socialist Prohibition Act

-

And why specifically?

-

Because of three books.

-

Three books?

-

Yes, Keeping Face, National manifesto for Germany and
Europe and The myth Waffen SS

-

And when is it?

-

Well, Dr Schaller is my defence and the trial will be in January

-

In Klagenfurt? Maybe I’ll go…

-

It’s been on-going. Will be interesting…

-

It’s only about these texts?

-

Yes, it’s about the principles and that’s why it’s particularly
interesting because Dr Schaller also defended my colleagues
in Wels.

-

I know.

-

And they were exonerated.

-

I know, I just meant to say that.

-

That’s important of course, because they had the same
charges…

-

I know, I wasn’t at the trial myself but I wanted to go
unfortunately I didn’t have the time. But after someone told
me that charges were pressed against the group because
they used extracts from your book.

-

Yes I know.

 Schweiger Interview

2

-

And said that was the NSDAP problem.

-

Jawohl.

-

But you know what they’re like.

-

I’m not taking that seriously…

-

But how many times were there charges pressed against you
already>

-

Four times and I was locked up four times.

-

Four times?

-

Yes, I was locked up four times.

-

Was that in the nineties?

-

The first arrest was in 1959, the second 1962 in South Tyrol
and the third one was on 1989 because of my text The right
for truth.

-

I remember that.

-

That was that pensioner-story, and then the book Evolution
and Knowledge in 1996.

-

How much did you get for Evolution and Knowledge?

-

I got two years, six months conditionally, which I served.

-

You had to serve that at your age? I’m sorry but that’s…

-

Of course! I was in detention three times. When it’s about
questions like that age doesn’t matter.

-

Could you maybe tell my colleagues a bit about your
biography? It’s quite exciting. I must say it’s always interested
my because you were part of it right from the beginning.

-

Right from the beginning.

-

That’s what I mean. Biography now? Could we do that very
briefly?

-

Of course, it’s quite simple really… hang on a second…

-

I checked online but there’s nothing specific.

-

I always have to have things close by because of my foot
problems, always have to order everything immediately.

-

Of course… But that they charge you now, that’s really
something…

-

Yeah, but you know, I’m not taking it seriously… look, this my
medal, winter ’41 in Russia.

-

This one?

-

This one. That’s the one, the frozen order is what it was called.

 Schweiger Interview

3

-

That’s the medal for winter 41 in Russia

-

And I always have it here, because I tell myself don’t worry,
winter ’41 in Russia…

-

…was cold…

-

…at minus 35…

-

Where were you in Russia?

-

South Section.

-

Were you always part of the Leibstandarte SS?

-

Yes, always.

-

You were at the SS Junkerschule Bad Tölz?

-

Braunschweig.

-

Braunschweig.

-

Braunschweig, the first one.

-

When did you join them?

-

At 17, right after grammar school.

-

You still finished that, didn’t you?

-

At the Leibstandarte, after my first injury, they had their own
‘Abitur’ courses and that’s what I did.

-

While you were wounded?

-

At the recovery company in Dresden with the pioneers. The SS
wasn’t in Dresden, that was the B bataillion and from there we
got into the different divisions. I got into the Leibstandarte, in
July.

-

And before that you were in the Junkerverband?

-

It was the same as in the army, first you were Junker, then
Oberjunker…

-

First Fahnenjunker.

-

Well in the army it was called Fahenjunker, then was the
Oberjunker training and then you were promoted an officer.

-

You were company commander?

-

Vice company commander.

-

Till the end?

-

Till the end. I was still badly wounded at the Plattensee.

-

That’s what Grubelnik told me, because he said he had made
an amazing documentary with you about your end of the war.
He was completely amazed…

 Schweiger Interview

4

-

That was still different times then, when the Russians pushed
through to Hungary when I was still at the sickbay, then we
were in action again and gave them a big hello there, that was
a difficult operation.

-

That’s where you were wounded again?

-

No, from there I went via the sickbay back to the hospital at
home which was pushed forward to Schladming because of
the Russians and then I was in the sickbay again there and
that’s were the Americans already were and arrested us in the
hospital.

-

Where were you then? Gleisenbach?

-

Altheim, Upper Austria, that was a terrible camp.

-

How long were you there for?

-

We were there and then from Altheim we got to Ebensee.

-

Into the old concentration camp?

-

Yes, that’s where we were locked up and as soon as I was
better again I bunked it. Then I was a year and a half or so
clandestinely in the mountains, living with farmers and so on
and when they released my rank then I slowly…

-

Then you were legal again.

-

Yes then I was legal again, and then I was with the HB, the
Heimkehrer und Betreuungsstelle.

-

HHB

-

Heimkehrer Hilfs-und Betreungsstelle. That was the first
phase... hang on a second, here I have an exact copy of my
CV.

-

And in 49’ the VDU was founded and you were a part o fit in
Styria right away.

-

Right from the beginning, I founded it here. In Styria we were
always forerunners.

-

That’s a known fact.

-

Hang on, I have a CV here then you can save some of your
writing…

-

I have a written one… and when charges are pressed, are
they searching your house as well?

-

As well, yes. And the day before yesterday the person
responsible for me from the Protection of the Constitution was
here, they come every 6 weeks.

-

What’s that?

 Schweiger Interview

5

-

That’s where they check if I’m still the same old incorrigible…

-

And someone comes by for that? I’ve never heard that before!

-

He calls me, ’Mr Schweiger I have to chat to you about a few
things’ and then we sit together and talk openly. By know he’s
realised that we’re right, more or less.

-

But that’s crazy, that someone comes by every six weeks… is
that a judicial order?

-

No, it depends, but they appear every six to eight week’s I’d
say.

-

I’ve never heard that before! I mean I’ve also had my troubles
with those guys, but that they do such things, that they just
come by…

-

I’m not taking that seriously.

-

Yes but it’s still incredible.

-

Legally speaking yes, but we don’t have any rights…

-

But there must be some legal principle, a paragraph regarding
police surveillance…

-

At the very moment you declare to be politically right and so
appear politically suspicious nationalist socialist, there is no
law- you’re fair game…

-

But I had always thought…

-

I’m not taking that seriously, I’m prepared.

-

I suppose you have a routine by now.

-

I don’t take it seriously.

-

So, HHB was first and then?

-

HHB was the Heimkehrer Hilfs-und Betreungsstelle.. That’s
what we founded in 47’ because those who returned were
badly prosecuted and we fought back fort he first time.

-

And everything tat’s happened in Styria with Soucek…

-

That was… first was Soucek, that was the Hilfsbetreuung for
the Nazis and out of this organisation that we were part of we
formed the HHB, which then was activated accordingly when
soldiers returned from Russia and Yugoslavia.

-

Those were all the prisoners of war.

-

Yes, and we looked after them, because we were all involved
and helped each other and within a short timespan we had a
pretty strong organisation in Austria. And Ltd Rudel from
Argentina was a symbol figure. He was there as well then
when we had our first march, 6000 man strong.

 Schweiger Interview

6

-

Where was that?

-

In Graubad, Upper Styria, that’s when we really started.

-

In 49’? or 47’?

-

That was already in 48’, before the VdU, still.

-

But then came the VdU?

-

Yes, the VdU came out of the HHB.

-

Directly out of it?

-

You could say that. The HHB still existed… all the people from
the squad then became functionaries in the VdU.

-

In Styria or overall?

-

All over Austria, but in the Russian zone it wasn’t possible, we
were all illegals there, but in the western zones, where the
English and the Americans occupied it was possible.

-

…and the French…

-

That’s where we could already get organised in 49’, which
wasn’t possible in the Russian Zone.

-

But there was also a VdU there.

-

But only later. There were illegals there and handed out flyers
and so on… but in Vienna there was. In Vienna everything
could be official, but only in the Western zones.

-

But thee were troubles from the beginning with Kraus and
Reimann and so on

-

Well, Kraus and Reimann, that was our so-called concentration
camp faction. Kraus proved himself as freedom fighter,
otherwise we wouldn’t have been approved…to neutralise! All
those people were actually right-wing and so the VdU was not
allowed at election. That’s why we called it VdU, that was the
party, and WdU was the election party. There were two
different legal bases…

-

And Kraus sacrificed himself basically.

-

He did, he even withdrew his mandate in the National
Assembly for it, but at some point it’s just becoming
impossible with people whose ideas lie somewhere completely
different…

-

Of course.

-

Then we founded the FPÖ.

-

In 56’?

-

Yes.

 Schweiger Interview

-

And you were the chairman in Styria.

-

I was. And chairman in policy matters.

-

And then you were charged in 59’, what happened?

-

Yes, I held speeches in Germany and Austria and because of
that I was charged with re-engagement with nationalist
socialist activities.

-

And why in specific? Were you arrested?

-

Back then if you acknowledged you were part of the German
people it was re-engagement with nationalist socialist
activities.

-

And were you arrested?

-

I was detained, yes. In Graz.

-

How long?

-

About three months.

-

Three months? For speeches?

-

Exactly.

-

Then I have to ask something else here.

-

Is he ok with it?

-

No, we said we’d record it and translate later because only
speaks very little German. Otherwise I have to start speaking
in three languages and that’s too exhausting for everyone. I
hope it’s ok for you to do it like that.

-

Absolutely, I understand.

-

It’s easier like that you know?

-

Of course, you just want to gain an overview.

-

Yes, and then I pass it on… So you left the FPÖ in 67’.

-

I left the FPÖ when Peter wanted to introduce his so-called
liberal line.

-

When was that? In the mid-60s?

-

No that was already on 63’.

-

Sorry, but you’d also said something about South Tyrol.

-

Yes, we were also in action there..

-

I know what happened in South Tyrol…

-

We planted a bomb in a hotel- I was a pioneer after all. I
almost split South Tyrol, but it didn’t happen.

7

 Schweiger Interview

8

-

You’ll find this funny, a few from my family also know some of
those guys. My dad was good friends with a few of them…
with Hartum.

-

Yes, he was still in Germany back then.

-

Yes, but by know he’s become professor of law. I’m just saying
because you did that at the hotel back then…

-

Yes that’s when they got me, but it wasn’t for long. For the
South Tyrol thing the trial was in Graz but we were
exonerated. South Tyrol was a different topic back then.

-

I know, that was very different in the public. I did a lot of
research on it and it’s so interesting that it is perceived
completely different in the public now.

-

It had a different value and that’s also why the judges… they
had to be careful, because they would basically have gone
against public opinion had they charged us.

-

So you were only detained briefly for that.

-

Only briefly. It was detention and then trial, but at the trial we
were exonerated.

-

You were exonerated with everyone else. Who else was there?

-

Burger.

-

But he wasn’t with the NDP then?

-

No, that was later.

-

I never understood why the NDP was founded.

-

The principles of the FPÖ had changed, let’s say, and the
financing part had spoken against part of the organisation.
Engineer Reintaler was a high-ranking SS offices and state
secretary in the ministry of agriculture in Berlin, so he was of
course publicly attacked. I was his right hand and so the
industrialists said ‘if Schweiger continues to help in deciding
FPÖ principles we stop financing.’ So I said to Reintaler ‘look,
I’m leaving the party so that we’ll continue to be paid’ and
Peter was the trusted ally of the industrialists and when he
pushed the liberalisation of the FPÖ we simply founded an
opposition party, the VU, or the NDP.

-

The NDP was founded in 67’?

-

Something like that.

-

And you were functionary?

-

Of course, and I wrote Burger the program, which was also
prohibited then.

 Schweiger Interview

9

-

But that was only later, because the NDP remained
unchallenged for quite some time. It only really started all in
1980 with the presidential candidature.

-

Correct.

-

And AntiFa and so on, that was pretty wild for some time…
but otherwise the NDP was never that noticeable…

-

Basically it was all about squad formation. The NDP was not a
traditional party, but a squad, but without a leading squad it
just doesn’t work for long. But I have to differentiate between
a leader and a functionary. They said the functionaries could
never push through a national movement, only a leader
personality.

-

But you always remained interested in squad formation.

-

Always, within the VdU and the FPÖ already. That’s why I
never tried to get a mandate either, because I always said
that if I want to structure by worldview like that I can’t become
engaged in daily politics.

-

Of course, that’s only corrupting. But you really participated in
everything.

-

Everything you can imagine.

-

And the NDP was dissolved in 1988 and since then you’re
basically without at organisation.

-

Exactly.

-

A freelance ideologue.

-

That’s what I am. Then I still wrote some books and was
charged a few timed for my books. And my lectures. I was
about in Germany a lot.

-

Hang on, the charges for the books, we should write those
down.

-

The first trial regarding the Right to Truth, that one about the
millions was…

-

92’ was the trial ...

-

… was 89’

-

89’, sorry..

-

Then the second trial regarding the book Evolution and
Knowledge was in Leoben 1996.

-

The second was 1996, and there’s another one now coming,
another trial. I just said that there is another trail in the
waiting just now, so that he has it all. I just wanted to... I’m
getting confused by translating... what I found really

 Schweiger Interview

10

interesting was your speech in Dortmund in September. The
only thing I wondered was that Küssel... let’s not talk about
Küssel.
-

Küssel in my opinion really is a victim. If I’m locked up for ten
years... That he has a different mentality to mine is...

-

You know the way I see him is that he is quite the loudmouth
on the one hand, and on the other hand he enjoys
dramatizing himself into the whole thing, I have to admit that.
If I get in front of a camera with big speeches known that that
is illegal that’s simply not the best way to do politics.

-

Well, the outgoing type I’d say, but I’d sign everything he
says. The way he says it is where we differ.

-

I watched both speeches online and both are clear in content,
but with Küssler I always have the impression that he hasn’t
learned anything, he still churns out those phrases…

-

Let’s say he’s an outgoing propagandist…

-

An agitator.

-

But in the end that’s part of the political fight. It’s not just that
a lot of basic objective formal worldviews should be
pronounced, but you also have to live a belligerent element…

-

I have another question there. Were you at the 89’ Irving
speech? At the Bach Hotel.

-

When Irving spoke in Leoben for the first time I was already
imprisoned, in 89’ and based on that lecture charges were
pressed against him. My wife was there to see if he couldn’t
somehow intervene, get me a release, and he tried but of
course that had the opposite effect…

-

Why?

-

Because with his 6million story he was also a man who was
strongly attacked…

-

I’m only asking because I met a press photographer who
showed me pictures of the Irving event in the Park Hotel
Schönbrunn and I was surprised that you weren’t on any of
these photos… you were occupied so to speak… I just thought
that everyone else was there…

-

Unfortunately when they arrested Irving he didn’t stand up for
the cause, at the interview he almost apologised to the Jews.
It was a disappointment how he did it… as engaged as he
was, especially as an English citizen who was in far less
danger as us… that he tried to get out… but it was his
lawyer’s fault, he acted tactically of course, he said…

-

What was his name?

 Schweiger Interview

11

-

I don’t remember, but when I saw him on TV I said he’s a
hindrance, he just…

-

But you know what lawyers are like in Austria.

-

You can’t throw them all in the same pot, there are those and
those, Dr Schaller, who called me today…

-

Dr Schaller’s problem is that he’s already very old. I heard
that they made this ‘Lex Schaller’ especially for him, so he is
only allowed to continue old cases I think.

-

He can still take my case because we got the charges in
December. Had it been January I couldn’t have taken it on
anymore.

-

I didn’t know that until recently tat you weren’t allowed to
take on more cases from a certain age and when I asked they
told me that that’s because of Schaller, only because of him.
Apparently that was the solution. I’m only surprised that you
don’t have any problems with Schaller as ex-communist.

-

He wasn’t communist.

-

But he was in the National Liga.

-

He was. They had good and bad ones. Walter Gruber was
there in Steyr with Slavik, who was also active in the
Heimkehrerbewegung. And in Vienna Truber was national but
because of the global political development he said the west
is bringing us down and we need different tactics. It was
purely tactics, inside he is purely national.

-

I just started to research the National Liga because it s an
interesting phenomenon and that’s how I got to Schaller. But
it’s a pity, there are several files that I tried to get to but there
isn’t anything left. There is the paper, the Nationaler
Beobachter, you can look at in the National Library but
otherwise there’s little about it. And you know I’m so
interested because it’s funny that people always say all the
Nazis went into the FPÖ and nobody ever talks about what
happened in the SPÖ and the ÖVP and even the KPÖ…

-

That was when things changed…

-

They simply had the best life insurance with that when the
Russians were here.

-

That was the problem. The occupation powers definitely
influenced that, But our strategic principles in the Nationale
Liga were absolutely clear. Of course our opponents said the
theses you defend have already been defended before, we
just reformulated them…

-

Of course…

 Schweiger Interview

12

-

It’s the same situation today…like in 1929, 30’, 31’.

-

He’s talking about the economy, the political situation.

-

The development is so interesting, because we’re getting
further and further away from it. So when we strategically look
at it, WWII was lost from our perspective, but we won
ideologically. Bolshevism crashed at the height of ist power.

-

Well, that wasn’t their peak anymore...

-

But the USSR was a nuclear power, like the USA.

-

Well it already was a fallen giant then…

-

Yes, their ideology was wrong, because they didn’t consider
the reality of the peoples in the USSR.

-

You’re right there. We can see that now with all those national
conflicts…

-

Of course, and capitalism is on the best way to inflict that on
itself too, I mean what can the winning powers do…

-

That’s exactly what we want to know from you.

-

We’ll analyse that later once and for all.

-

We wanted to talk to you because we wanted to write a piece
on the crisis and how Austria… and they told us that if we
want to talk to someone who can judge that strategically then
it’s you. That’s why I respect you, because you really think
further than other people in your scene. You’re a kind of
pioneer. I don’t want to flatter you… but we thought that if we
wanted to really know something it’s better to talk to you than
with some kind of FPÖ Burschenschafter. At least you’re
strategic. I don’t want any big revelations from you, I want
you to tell us how you imagine the situation, how it may
develop, what you think is necessary to be done. Do you think
the FPÖ is a solution or the German NPD?

-

There’s this saying, when the priest talks at the grave he often
says it’s all just a transition. And what we have today within
the nationalist, in the NDP in Germany or the FPÖ here, it’s all
just a transitions. The time when we can push through our
principles in real politics, if we can, is yet to come…

-

When?

-

That’s the question. It’s terrible that strategic thinking just
isn’t dominant. We have a world situation today like we’ve
never had in history. That’s also a question that’s absolutely
decisive for England for example.

-

We’re talking about the general relationship between England
and the United States... I just tried to explain to him the most

 Schweiger Interview

13

important points, he’s recording but just so he knows what it’s
about so he can ask questions.
-

Of course. Would you like to drink something?

-

Do you want to drink something?

-

I’m ok, it’s fine thank you

-

I just had a coke…

-

Wine?

-

Wine? I have to drive… do you want a glass of wine?

-

I’ll have a glass of wine, yes.

-

Can I help you with something?

-

It’s ok, thanks…

-

Your dog is lovely.

-

Your dog is really lovely.

-

He’s a cuddly one… the wine is directly from the vintner.

-

It’s from... directly from the peasant , the wine...

-

Austrian Wine?

-

Austrian Wine, yes.

-

Do you want wine too?

-

I’m not drinking, thank you. Just water…

-

This dog is a good friend for him, eh?

-

He really is... It’s nice, a nice dog.

-

Did you say he was sitting there for the photograph
afterwards?

-

Yeah...

-

Lovely house, great site

-

What’s this? It’s a Lebensrune...isn’t it? And does it have a
special function?

-

My wife gave it to me for my 60th Birthday.

-

Oh, I thought it was a historical reminder…

-

It is, it’s a present from my wife…

-

I thought it was maybe a present from the NS-era…

-

No, no…

-

Are you keeping well? Is your health good?

-

Whether you’re still healthy…

 Schweiger Interview

14

-

Overall yes, but my leg isn’t…

-

How old are you? 87?

-

85.

-

Sorry, I didn’t mean to make you older…

-

Hopefully I’m still here at 87.

-

Sure, you’re still in good shape. I was all surprised when I saw
the videos…

-

Is the wine local?

-

It’s local wine yeah, not from here from the valley, though,
from Lower Austria...

-

I should have gone with him to help. Does he just live
here on his own now?

-

Yes.

-

How long have you lived here?

-

How long have you lived here?

-

50 years.

-

Wow that’s long!

-

Beautiful views…

-

It’s good wine.

-

It’s natural you know, no chemicals, nothing mixed, just pure
wine. Let’s talk about the economy. I’d be interested in that
because I listened to your speech in Dortmund and it was
pretty interesting about the national debt crisis and so on.
That you even talk about that, that’s pretty rare in national
circles. When I listen to what the FPÖ says and Mölzer and so
just stupid blah…

-

Not strategic.

-

Well, its annoying because you can’t see at all where it’s
going. I mean, let’s talk about the real situation, and if that
doesn’t happen then it’s hard to do something about it. And
that’s my question to you: how do you see the financial
crisis?... How he sees the financial crisis and how he wants to
interact.

-

I just want to say beforehand that I’ve talked about money
politics for decades…

-

I just have to translate a bit so he gets an introduction: His
main theme since decades is talking about the politics of
money.

-

I also wrote several texts about it.

 Schweiger Interview

15

-

He has made several writings about this.

-

I already wrote Money and World Politics in 1984 for example.

-

It’s about money and world politics and he wrote it already in
1984.

-

And everything that happened now is in there.

-

You envisaged the crisis?

-

Of course, if you followed developments closely it was obvious
because the developments 1929-1933 were identical
concerning the over-running of shares, the artificial
appreciation of shares and the crash thereafter...

-

The speculations...

-

Yes. And we have the same situation today...

-

He says the situation is in fact the same as in 1929 with a lot
of speculation and with the money crisis and everything going
on. It’s the same situation... Do you read the Spiegel as well?

-

Yes, I prepared this issue for our chat, I knew what we were
going to talk about. That’s the Spiegel from13th October.

-

Spiegel from 13th October, Spiegel writes:

-

Spiegel writes on page 22 ‘black autumn’ instead of ‘Black
Friday,’ and they write: ’There is a small note on the door,
which only contains one sentence: We will stop payments for
now. Everyone knew what that meant. Immediately queues
formed on payday, the 13th July 31’, in front of the National
bank. Nobody had expected it would ever come this far. The
second biggest bank in Germany was in default. The news
spread quickly and people panicked.’ Now they draw a
comparison to the present: ‘Soon customers storm the
Viennese banks, the Kommerzbank, the Wiener Bank, the
Dresdner Bank, the Sparkasse to rescue their savings. Around
noon no bank could withstand the pressure any longer. They
locked the entrance.’ And then they say: ‘Queues in front of
the counters. The images of 1931 were burnt into the
German’s collective imagination. They stand for the economic
crisis that started in 1929, put millions of people out of work
and finally ended in the Nazi takeover.’ That’s the decisive
historical question, Adolf Hitler didn’t just coincidentally…

-

We’re talking about the crisis 1929, how Hitler came to power.

-

It’s exactly the same situation, with different signs...

-

Well, the signs really are quite different. Don’t forget that the
NSDAP was a mass party, or with mass support anyways...

-

...it became one.

 Schweiger Interview

16

-

Between 1929 and 1933. Ok, the Nazi party became a mass
party between 1929 and 1933.

-

1928 the NSDAP only had 3% of votes and based on these
developments it jumped to 42%.

-

But then back to 32%.

-

No, there was only a little loss, and then were the big elections
of 1933, in spring 1933, that’s when the NSDAP got 42% and
the second nationalist party 2% so there was an absolute
majority.

-

The Reichsdeutsche Partei.

-

Then there was an absolute majority in the Reichstag.

-

But 3.5% can also be a lot, it’s all relative... but today they
don’t have 3.5%

-

I wouldn’t say that.

-

Well, let’s first talk about objective factors and then about
your subjective one. Of course the subjective factor is
different. Let’s first talk objectively about a comparison
between 29’ and today.

-

It’s the same situation.

-

He says it’s the same situation as in 1929.

-

Back then the stock market and today the credit crunch. But
the method of speculation was the same, and Sim, that
auditor, explained that it was the same forces causing it, he
says that it was the Jews back then and today and then he had
to apologise or they would have locked him up.

-

No, he said something different, he said that managers today
are treated like the Jews, didn’t he?

-

Well, yes, but he explained that 1929 the Jews provoked this
bankruptcy and it’s the same forced today.

-

So, a German economy expert said in 1929 Jews provoked the
crisis and it’s the same forces that provoked it today.

-

It’s the same system. Money capital is doubtlessly 90% in
Jewish hands.

-

Money capital is 90% in the hand of Jews.

-

And with that they control the media and can produce public
opinion.

-

I wouldn’t see things that simply, but…

-

Look, little Austria is at the periphery here, but Germany and
England…

 Schweiger Interview

17

-

But, you see, from what I see working in the media it’s not like
some Jew comes up and says…

-

It’s all in the background! You don’t see that! The Jew is far too
intelligent for that.

-

Well, the Standard has a Jew as editor-in chief.

-

Bronner, of course, but their methods work quite differently
with money capital. Nobody dares saying anything there
anymore. If they did they would be starved with capital the
next day, obviously. And it’s even worse in Germany, if I look
at the FAZ, Zeit or the Süddeutsche. Even the Spiegel. All the
bigger weeklies of a higher standard, they are all financially
dependent.

-

But this dependence has different forms. As a journalist you’re
also dependent when they tell you what you have to write,
otherwise you have to look for a new job.

-

It was the same with Mosley. They said if he has those views
they won’t pay him anymore to starve his as a fascist…

-

I read that.

-

They blackmailed him.

-

We’re talking about Mosley, the British fascist leader.

-

Who? Ah, Mosley, Oswald Mosley.

-

I can sort of see what you mean, but I still don’t think it’s that
easy.

-

They’re far too intelligent to be open. The would never openly
get involved or take sides, that’s all done under wraps.

-

But don’t forget that newspapers are there to make money.

-

Obviously. It’s not their fault, it’s their nature. If I think
biologically evolutionary, it’s not the Jew’s fault that he’s been
a speculator throughout history, already in the bible with
Joseph and Egypt and so on…

-

But that speculation is certainly collected with the way
Christianity has treated the Jews und excluded them from
certain profession and so on.

-

But that was only later.

-

Still, it was a reaction.

-

Yes, anyways, the intelligence he has comes from…

-

We’re talking about Jews now.

-

It isn’t a settled people but nomadic.

 Schweiger Interview

18

-

So Jews are not a people who is settled down, but they are
nomads.

-

They are the only intellectual nomads, all the others are
agricultural nomads.

-

He is the only intellectual nomad, the Jew, is the only
intellectual nomad.

-

And essentially that’s how he survives. He always took certain
positions within other cultures to do with monetary politics,
from Egypt until today. All the great politicians, all the German
kings employed them even Charles the Great. All the German
emperors had court Jews who were finance Jews. Even in
England, they even made politics there. Politics was 1--%
Rothschild.

-

He says it was also in England after Waterloo for example it
was the Rothschilds. Rothschild you know, the Jewish banking
family.

-

They made monetary politics. The London banks weigh up
gold and bills. Every day there’s a half hour meeting chaired
by Rothschild.

-

Still?

-

Well, his successor…

-

Until today they make in London the equary between paper
money and gold ... and das ist... this is arranged by Jews ...
That’s every day? I didn’t know that!

-

Every single day! I mentioned that somewhere already...
Strategically they developed a refinement that is
unimaginable to us settled people, but as nomads it’s their
fight for survival.

-

So you would suggest that Jews have to be excluded from the
monetary circulation, right?

-

I’ll get to that. I mean we have the same situation today as in
1929, how did we get to that? With exactly the same methods.

-

The method to make this crisis was the same as 1929.

-

Exactly the same, because when I can influence the press… I
mean, who chose Obama, just to go off course briefly, Obama
obviously has a certain function.

-

Who made Obama? What is his function?

-

He’s the best too imaginable for capital.

-

He is he best tool for capital, Obama.

 Schweiger Interview

19

-

Secondly, multiculturally Obama poses a symbol figure. The
Obama case goes much deeper than just the financial
question, he’s a specific case.

-

Because of racism and all?

-

Everything! The colour element is made a symbol, in Europe
too. If you read our papers, I mean, the way they talked about
Obama, as if he were...

-

The Messiah.

-

Exactly. I can do everything through the media. I can make the
greatest idiot into a genius.

-

Which doesn’t happen rarely, as you can see with Busch. Such
an idiot... But now we have the housing bubble, just to get
back on topic, like we did two years ago. And that it would all
crash eventually was obvious. And part of the crisis is also
that there are worlds speculated with that don’t even exist.

-

Look, the news on Channel 1 said yesterday that the US
national debt is $11 trillion! $11 trillion!!!

-

The national debt oft he USA is 11 trillion dollars...

-

And if I keep calculating, they pay almost a trillion in annual
interest, how will they ever manage?!

-

So, if you think of interest, there is another trillion you have to
pay per year in interest.

-

Completely hopeless! I mean, normally we’d already have the
Third World War. WWII happened because of the index
currency Hitler introduced. It was the same situation. WWII
was a war of capital, of the order of money, and not ideology.
First was Roosevelt and this fixed value that an ounce of gold
is $35. Then was the Bretton Wood Act in 44’, and what then?
The relation gold-dollar has changed so dramatically that you
can’t even talk about a Bretton wood connection anymore. No
one can say anymore how many dollar bills are in circulation…

-

Well, considering Latin America, they say that about every
third bill is forged, all within circulation…

-

This is money question is central.

-

He says the central question is that of money politics.

-

And Hitler was enemy number 1, because he solved this
question as the first statesman to do so.

-

Hitler was the first politician who solved this problem. Could
you explain that?

-

Sure, it’s important. You have to try to translate that of
course… just tell me and we stay chronological.

 Schweiger Interview

20

-

That’s fine, I just have to ask because my English colleagues
have different prerequisites than us.

-

Of course. It’s a hot topic for the Englishman, It was quite
tragic for England. Hitler had the great vision of Germanic
unity.

-

He’s actually from Scotland, that’s very important to him.

-

Of course!

-

He said that the decisive thing that Hitler did was money
politics, you know and for you as an Englishman, you know, or
Scotsman...We talked about Hitler and the plan for Britain.

-

There was this situation, we should briefly talk about WWII
chronologically, because it still has ripple effects.

-

He takes WWII in a chronological order, because it’s still
effective.

-

You have to consider the guarantees England and France gave
to Poland even though they knew after Versailles and St
Germaine that the borders between Germany and Poland were
unsustainable. Millions of Germans were oppressed in the
Polish state. Silesia, West Prussia and so on, all that produced
tension continuing on after Versailles. Lloyd George first was
against that, he said Versailles meant WWII. So when England
and France gave the guaranty to Poland, they knew that a
confrontation between Germany and Poland was inevitable.
And since Moscow is accessible since 91’ we have this
declaration of guaranty from England and France in Stalin’s
speech, which he accentuated in his speech before making
the non-aggression pact with Germany, 1939…

-

In September I think.

-

Yes in September. And he explained that a confrontation
between Germany and Poland was inevitable, because Poland
would become more aggressive through the guaranty by
England and France. Therefore the war Germany-FranceEngland was unavoidable, because of the declaration of
guaranty. And then [Stalin] said correctly that Russia would
become a military power because all the western powers,
including Germany, were fighting. That was thought through
realistically by Stalin.

-

Stalin was a real politician.

-

Absolutely. And concurrently there was Dunkirk, so Hitler had
the great vision that England must realise it has to face
Bolshevism just like Germany did. And then, if we jump ahead,
after Poland, nothing happened for three quarters of a year
and there were discussion between England and Germany
regarding a ceasefire and a peace treaty. But Churchill wanted

 Schweiger Interview

21

Germany to accept the gold currency. That was of course
rejected by Berlin, otherwise they would have fallen into the
trap of capitalism. And that was the tragic. Rudolf Hess,
Hitler’s deputy even flew to England.
-

And you think there’s a connection?

-

Of course! They were ready. From Finland we knew that Stalin
had already prepared 220 divisions ready to attack. Militarily it
was clear.

-

Yes, but I just recently read they were terribly prepared.

-

That’s untrue, they were far superior, even as paratroops.
They had three times as many tanks as we did. They were
extremely powerful. I was there in 41’. If Ivan, as we used to
say, had started marching, because Stalin gave the order to
attack in July 41, and we did on 22nd July, so we got into the
way of the Red Army. That was the tragic for Stalin. And that’s
how the war was prolonged in a way that the Red Army gained
power again. That was through the American support, they
gave two year’s worth of provisions, 15 000 tanks and antiaircraft systems to the Bolsheviks. To avoid this tragic Hitler
left those 23 000 expedition soldiers unscathed at Dunkirk.
The hope was that the war on two fronts wouldn’t have to be
led, because Hitler knew that this would be an unbelievable
challenge, a danger. This has to be seen from a strategic point
of view of course, and only ten we get to monetary politics. It
was all interlinked. That’s the starting point, if you think that
that was the politics back then because of the introduction of
the index currency in 1933. We’ll get back to that with the
alternatives that we have today.

-

Can you define what index currency is?

-

Yes, the amount of money circulating was given out in relation
to the volume of production, so to the GDP. The slogan was
‘Work is money,’ meaning that the value of production covers
the amount of money. So, the regulation of money circulation
was covered through economic capacity.

-

… and not by gold.

-

The decisive thing is, I have to have an ideological
understanding what money is. For Germany it was a circular
function that had to serve the people, not a question of power.

-

And for the English and the Americans money was a question
of power?

-

Of course. English politics was Wall Street politics and so it
was the jumping board for Wall Street politics in Europe.
Roosevelt knew exactly if the war continued Europe would be
crumbling. Strategically that was obvious and it was the tragic

 Schweiger Interview

22

between Germany and England, it was a question of monetary
politics.
-

But the German index currency was not convertible of course,
internationally?!

-

Of course not, that was the decisive thing. The speculative
intervention on the stock market wasn’t possible for the
Reichsmark because it wasn’t convertible. The money had to
stay in the country of course. There was even something like
trial money, because there was the thesis that the saving of
money disrupts the amount of it circulating so that was
punished. The banks thus had a distributing function and
could never charge more than 2% interest for savings. Money
had to function of activating the economy.

-

But how did international exchange work then?

-

Through compensation, goods for goods. Everything we
imported was covered through export, German machinery,
chemistry…

-

But you still had to convert that into a currency.

-

That was done relationally, there was to absolute conversion.
It was simply decided that for this or that amount of steel you
get this or that… Lots of states were dependent on Germany
industry for its quality. They may have had the raw materials
but were dependent on German know-how. So, compensation
in the international exchange of goods was the precondition to
keep money in the country. China does exactly today what
Hitler did, exactly the same. The Yuen isn’t convertible. The
English and Americans always say the Chinese have to align
their banks with the dollar but the Chinese just laugh at them.
The have a national currency and that’s it. They do exactly the
same as in the Third Reich.

-

But they also trade in dollars.

-

They have almost $2 billion in reserve, but that’s because
Americans don’t want to work anymore today and 40% of
daily goods in the US are shipped from China. There are 30 to
40 trading ships daily to the US and on the way back all they
carry is packaging. China has its dollar reserves and if they
present that to the US today, the US is bankrupt tomorrow.
The Japanese also have $800 billion reserve.

-

So they could crash the system.

-

Russia has $500 billion reserves, so basically the dollar is long
gone and can only be upheld militarily with the Pentagon.

-

But you’re saying that’s all simply political decision-making.

-

Of course, otherwise we’d already have WWIII.

 Schweiger Interview

23

-

Between whom?

-

It’s coming anyways, primarily between China and the US. The
third possibility is Russia, if you think what they’re doing to
Putin just now. It’s unbelievable what’s all fabricated in the
media against Russia. They just want to avoid that…
unfortunately England has to participate together with the US.
America’s biggest fear is a union between Germany and
Russia, because Russia has the biggest reserves of raw
material worldwide and the oligarchy is cashing out… Yeltsin
that idiot…

-

They cash in.

-

They do and ‘bad Putin’ ruined it for them. That’s why they
see him as bad because they took the speculation business
from their hands, even though they still have billions, I mean,
just think of Excelsior Football Club, what’s it called…

-

Chelsea?

-

I mean that Jew…

-

Abramovich.

-

That’s the one. He’s just throwing 150, 200 million at them. I
read an article about him. He didn’t have anything in 1991,
was married three times. They talked about his life. At his first
divorce his wife didn’t get anything, at the second one a few
years later his wife got $1m and now at his third one his wife
wants $50m. And he didn’t have anything in1991, just
imagine!

-

But it’s like that in all those eastern countries, that so-called
new bourgeoisie was formed incredibly quickly, everywhere…
and it’s extremely corrupt.

-

That’s the Jewish world. Speculation is his talent, for Jews
that’s ideal, nothing better could happen to them. The fall of
the USSR was the greatest speculation business for the
oligarchs. And Berezovsky thought he’s get Putin from Moscow
to Petersburg at Yeltsin’s side, because Yeltsin drinks 2l of
vodka every day and he’s gonna be gone so. They needed a
man they could have in tight grip. Berezovsky got Putin, who
was deputy mayor in Moscow I think, thinking that they’ll have
him in his grip because he was always so quiet. But they
miscalculated with Putin.

-

But how do you explain then that Putin set back those
Oligarchs?

-

He was really clever there. Kornikovsky, that master criminal,
he gave him 10 years in Siberia and our media writes that
with Putin Russia isn’t even a legal state anymore, simply
locking up poor Kornikovsky… but that he committed huge

 Schweiger Interview

24

fraud and gained billions through oil speculation isn’t
mentioned. They say he is prosecuted because he’s Jewish.
-

But he did set back those oligarchs…

-

That was the only thing he could do. When our media started
to attack Putin I said ‘now he’s doing it right,’ because he no
longer did what they expected him to.

-

So you see Putin as a positive figure?

-

Absolutely. Strategically Medvedev and Putin are the best
team at the moment, because they managed to re-nationalise
Russia…

-

You mean they re-awakened national consciousness?

-

Yes, instead of Bolshevism. That’s of fundamental importance
to us, because in the global situation the formation of camps
is not considered. The global confrontation happening now
isn’t comparable with that of the interwar years and WWII
anymore. The development of population politics worldwide is
the greatest danger for stability and the biological calling of
the afro-Asian world is so gigantic that the white race sooner
or later… we have to see it like that: I think China is the first
world power now, because China has caught up financially,
and they have 1.3 billion inhabitants with a productivity that’s
not comparable to that of the Africans… and discipline. They
racially homogenous, and the need lebensraum. China has
22% of the world population but only 6% of farmland. The only
plain China can take as the necessary farmland…

-

…is Siberia.

-

South Siberia. A hundred years ago South Siberia, with its 150
square km, was Chinese anyways. We’ve already had the first
battles in 1970/1971. When that conflict happened, Adenauer
had already been to the Kremlin, in 55’, and the Kremlin
leader told him during a walk in the Kremlin gardens that their
trauma is called China. Even though they were both
communist international, but they’re biologically diverse.

-

So you’re saying there’s gonna be a conflict between Russia
and China.

-

Of course, that’s natural law. And for us Russia is the most
important glacis against Asia.

-

So a strategic union between Russia and Germany would be
necessary.

-

There’s no other solution. I mean, Sarkozy in France now
makes his politics as a Hungarian Jew, he does what the US
wants, but before, Chirac was anti-American and we could talk
about an axis Berlin-Paris-Moscow. Today we can only talk of

 Schweiger Interview

25

Berlin-Moscow and not Paris-Moscow, but Sarkozy probably
won’t be there forever… someone new is gonna come along
who’ll get the strategy better. Sarkozy is a pure… a man
who…
-

Let’s stick with Russia-China for now. So you said that thanks
to Putin Russia has re-gained national consciousness… and
what was the second point?

-

That he understood not to be undermined in monetary
questions. He has enormous reserves, raw materials… He
can’t be blackmailed, so he is Europe’s only chance for now,
Berlin-Moscow. Do you know Axis Berlin Moscow the book?

-

I don’t.

-

I’ll give it to you. So, those are the strategic problems we’ll
encounter and that’s why I think that the official camp
formations of our parties are narrow-minded, because they
don’t think biologically about the natural law. The decisive
question is the maintenance of our people and the whole
white race. Today it’s all about greater racial decisions, not
national ones.

-

You mean yellow, white, black.

-

Exactly, I mean the blacks don’t stand a chance, even though
the biological expansion in Africa is incredible. Did you read
those stats? There’s an institute in Hannover, some private
firm…

-

But that’s the case in lots of Third World countries, in Latin
America you also have population growth…

-

…and they looked at population growth in 1960, 2005 and
how it will continue until 2015. Africa had 380m inhabitants in
1960, now, in 2005, 890m, and based on that it will be 1.5
billion by 2050. Imagine that, and we send them provisions!

-

What’s crazy is that the continent can never maintain 1.5m.

-

We support them, we feed them, the nigger has…

-

Well, you have to consider that even though we feed them,
the EU among others also destroyed their subsistence.

-

That’s the other question, but biologically speaking the black
man always thinks in the present. If he’s got a full stomach
and is potent he’ll make children. That’s in his nature, it’s not
his fault. So he’s continually multiplying but can’t feed himself
because of his means to maintain these masses. Biologically
speaking it’s incredible. We have a moral responsibility
because of our international, multicultural slogans for the
hungry nigger children, but… it’s all made emotional from
those multicultural ones and realistically it’s pure suicide of

 Schweiger Interview

26

the white race in Europe. It’s all connected, whether you
strategically analyse the biological or the economic political
situation you always reach the same point.
-

But if I continue your idea of the great white race then
national conflict in Europe loses any meaning.

-

Exactly, they’re meaningless.

-

But historically speaking I mean, you can’t just switch those
off.

-

I’m convinced that changes in political behaviour were always
provoked by necessity, never by rationality. That means there
will be a crisis for the white race in Europe, and then there will
be political consequences. And that’s where England comes
in, because it still has that connection to Wall Street politics to
fulfil and it finally has to look towards the European mainland.
Whether I say England, Scotland or Ireland, it’s all one white
race. It’s about existence and that’s where I get back to WWII.
Back then we had 100 000 in the Waffen SS, 60 000 were
German and 30 000 from Europe, primarily from Denmark,
Norway…

-

Lativia as well I just found out. So, from the beginning there
was a greater Europe?

-

Yes, considering that history…

-

But there was still conflict, because in most countries only a
minority was in the SS.

-

Yes but the 300 000 men from the other Germanic countries
were voluntaries, there were also French legions.

-

And Spanish ones…

-

No, not with the SS. But back then we already knew. At the
Junkerschule Braunschweig our ideology teacher, a great man
who had assisted Professor Lorenz at Königsberg University,
already said back then that the war he have to go through
concerns Europe, the whole white race.

-

The white race on the whole? But without the US…

-

Without the US, the US has its own role. I mean, it’s a
conglomerate, but its’ not a people, and even more so today.
The symbol today is called Obama. It’s kind of good that it got
this far, basically it’s only the real consequence of the racial
mixture that happens over there. It’s logical of course that the
whites are challenged there. McCain pronounced that far too
little of course, strategically speaking.

-

Let’s stay in Europe for now. You were talking about the SS
and I’ve heard before that it’s not always possible to openly
talk in ‘soldier jargon,’ so instead of SS it’s called military

 Schweiger Interview

27

volunteers. And because I’ve followed the scene for a long
time I realised that there are specific word-codes to say
certain things. That’s completely legitimate of course,
because if you talk openly you have or may have a problem…
-

But it’s a mistake to veil that…

-

Of course, but you know exactly that it exists, that the
weirdest word constructions are formulated. If someone’s in
prison he becomes a prosecuted confessor of Germanity and
such word monsters of the like where I wonder why that can’t
be said more comprehensibly. But it’s a fact that that’s often a
forced practice and that those word covers are often simply
engrained now. I remember exactly for example that people of
your generation or even Burschenschafter use synonyms for
SS like European Army of Volunteers, or European Volunteer
Section and so on and they all always contain ‘European’ so it
seems pretty important in the reprocessing of SS history…
was that a topic back then?

-

Absolutely. At the Junkerschule it was a big topic. The
difference between the Officer’s school in the Wehrmacht and
the Waffen SS Junkerschule was that our first subject was
ideology, then only tactics. In the Wehrmacht in the officer’s
school the first subject was tactics, only after 20 July 44’, after
Stauffenberg attack the first subject became ideology even
there. But only from 44’.

-

So basically it was free from politics before?

-

Indeed. I think the NSDAP was very conscious of that.

-

They wanted to keep the army from politicisation.

-

Of course, and that worked out well too.

-

Excuse me… the toilet?

-

She would like to know where the loo is.

-

I’ll show you.

-

Fucking racist… he’s a fucking racist.

-

But it’s interesting

-

Bits and pieces that he’s telling me, yeah it’s fine

-

But you see that’s why I cannot translate all the time, because
you know it’s also very hard to keep him at one thing

-

It’s a wonderful view.

-

We’re just admiring your view… Do you still have that pub in
Mürzzuschlag? Die Post?

-

No, not since ages. My wife who died three years ago, she
worked there right until the end.

 Schweiger Interview

28

-

In the hotel? That also belonged to you, didn’t it?

-

Of course, but the CA divested it because we had lots of
events there.

-

How did that happen?

-

The CA used to be my bank, and I had a 20-year mortgage,
that they suddenly waned within eight days, so I tried to
refinance with the Deutsche Bank but the National bank,
which still had to approve all transfers of 15 000 Schilling back
then, didn’t allow the transfer, because they wanted to harm
me.

-

So you couldn’t keep the hotel?

-

Yes. Luckily I still had other property I could sell, but I lost an
enormous amount.

-

Did you build the hotel?

-

Yes.

-

I remember I passed it at some point and it still said Althof
Schweiger, could that be right?

-

That was probably mine, yes…

-

That was a while ago. And you also had Die Post in
Mürzzuschlag?

-

We had a lease on that one and the Hirschenhof in Spital and
then the Erzherzog Johann, that was ours and we had to sell it
during this… prosecution.

-

So it was purely political?

-

Absolutely, it was.

-

And when?

-

In… 74’.

-

And it happened over night? And you weren’t in default or
anything?

-

Of course I wasn’t. I always paid on time. They used they
contrast when I brought it up, because it said that if the
lender’s circumstances change the bank can legally terminate
the agreement within eight days. And the changes were my
political activities. I had meetings with Burger in Germany and
Austria about cultural defense.

-

And did you have conferences there too?

-

Of course, that was the main reason, but they circumscribed
that and didn’t use it as the cause. They only said something
about the change in circumstances…

 Schweiger Interview

29

-

Unbelievable!

-

It was, I lost millions, but I continued. I still bought the hotel in
Spital. I had some pretty good earnings from the 60h
woodland and 120 000 square meters building plot in the best
location. I had enormous property value, but still, when they
cancel your mortgage like that…

-

And then the CA took over the hotel?

-

At first, and then they passed it on… Dr Hubner had it for a
while.

-

The old one?

-

Yes, I knew him very well, he was alright.

-

I knew him too, the one with the white hair? I was at his a few
times, it was really nice.

-

Yea, Hubner was quite something.

-

Definitely, but now, his nephew…

-

And his two daughters…!

-

But his nephew… he’s Strache’s lawyer, the worst lawyer I’ve
ever seen, terrible. I inherited everything and I don’t even
know why…

-

Hubner’s two daughters didn’t really look after the place…
[Phone rings]

-

Doesn’t matter, all thos old family stories. The last thing I still
want to say is that I last saw Hubner at Burger’s funeral. He
greeted me and I still knew him, because I always stayed at
his when I met with Honsik… that was in 92’ I think, and
everyone was there… but enough of that, it just started to
become interesting with economics, we got to an exciting
point so to speak… those greater racial problems you were
saying, and that biologically the US doesn’t count because it
is a decadent… would you use the word decadent?

-

Absolutely, I’m convinced that the American power loss is
biological. The white race is diminishing and I just read that
the coloured will be in the majority from 2042. The white
power race is diminishing and Obama can build on what the
white power race created economically and militarily, but he
can’t do anything with it, because the clique he’s with is no
power race, there’s no use…It’s not a prejudice, it’s nature.
They never had to be productive because their African
Lebensraum provided for them. I’m not making any moral
judgements here, biological behaviour of every race is
dependent on their lebensraum.

-

But what about the Latinos?

 Schweiger Interview

30

-

Well, they’re a mix between Indians, Spanish and Portuguese,
they’re their own mixture. There’s a tension there in Central
and South America because the Indians lived in the mountains
and were organised by the white race, but the whites become
fewer and fewer now and, interestingly, the archetypal race of
the Indians increases. And Latinos acknowledge their Indian
heritage, not their Spanish one.

-

Partially. You might be interested in this: In Mexico for
example there are strong political groups that say the whole
conquest of the whites was a Jewish conspiracy.

-

Really? I’ve ever heard that before!

-

They even have a swastika symbol, because on many Aztec
temples the Aztecs also used the swastika as a symbol. You
can see quite a lot of that on their pyramids.

-

Like in India…

-

And they say that the whole conquest was a Jewish conspiracy
and it’s necessary to revise it all into a pre-Columbian
America that doesn’t start with the white but the Indio race.
It’s a pretty popular ideology.

-

Well, it’s becoming stronger and stronger, because the
proliferation of the coloured favours that, while the white
race… it’s a problem of speculation too. Every race has its
place of origin and if it leaves it, it becomes subordinate to a
new natural law in its new place. Take antiquity for example, it
was a purely northern achievement considering the creative.
When I’m in the Greek national museum today all that
beautiful creation in sculpture…those are the most Nordic
people you can imagine. Even in architecture… but then with
Alexander the Great’s march East everything mixed with the
leading classes and a new type developed and the Nordic
element became weaker and weaker.

-

The same then counts for the Romans I guess.

-

Of course, that was the same, the Romans were originally
Nordic as well, but their Lebensraum was very different. The
Mediterranean isn’t a challenge so the self-control ruling in the
North that mobilised power wasn’t needed in the South. And
when we had our ideology classes in the Junkernschule, there
was also an image of race that was judged by outer
appearance. So before you became Oberjunker, or officer,
there was a legal requirement for a commission to come from
the Rassenhauptamt to categorise you. And out of 25 there
were always 25 or so that didn’t match the Nordic
appearance, they got a lower SS number, I’ll never forget that.

-

So they didn’t get into the SS then?

 Schweiger Interview

31

-

They did. They were officers like everyone else, but within the
Waffen SS there was also a political SS and they couldn’t get
into that. But he could be an officer.

-

And what did that depend on?

-

On colour. It was structured in a way that the Germanic
element was dominant, so the North or South German
element were one and the Western and Eastern one the other.

-

And the latter was the slave element?

-

No, simply not adhering to the ideal type that existed for the
SS man. But now we found out through electro microscopy
and genetics that you can differentiate a phenotype and a
genotype. And you can be Nordic as a genotype but not as a
phenotype. I find that quite consoling because it’s the
biological, analytic explanation for the appearance of the
German people for example. There is that Nordic type, blonde,
blue eyes and a slim face, and even though someone may not
look like that he can still be Nordic genetically.

-

But the ideal back then was the Nordic type?

-

In appearance, yes, but not necessarily in behaviour. In the SS
appearance was still important of course because there was
no gene technology! We only have electro microscopy since
65’.

-

So you were measured? Or how was it decided?

-

You were measured, your body index, build, and so on.

-

And that’s how it was decided? I suppose it would be more
precise today.

-

Exactly.

-

Let’s return to the strategic and monetary questions, they’re
really quite interesting. We had this conflict in the USA talking
about Obama, so let’s talk about Europe now. If there would
bean alliance Moscow-Berlin, that would mean that Russians
belong to the same race.

-

Of course. Of 148m Russians, 100-110m are Slavic. The rest,
towards the Ural is of course strongly Asian because the
Mongolian peoples are close by, but the main part of Russia,
the European part of Russia is largely Slavic and in that
element the Germanic influence is very strong, historically
speaking. I’ll never forget when we got there in 41’ to the
South and in the villages there were so many blond and blueeyed people that we said ‘hang on, tat’s more frequent here
than at home.’ And Russian history is based on the Vikings
and the Normans.

-

Nowogrod.

 Schweiger Interview

32

-

Exactly, and the Ruriks that led Russia 850-1580, they were
purely Germanic. And that’s the heritage from the last
migration period. We were very surprised when we were there
in the south, in Crimea, and the Goths and the Vandals had all
been there. When I was first wounded and in the sickbay, in
Sherzon, I went to a church that was a museum, because the
Bolsheviks always used churches in one way or another… and
this particular one was a Gothic museum, and could see the
tombstones outside with the swastikas and inside the had
vitrines that exhibited gothic cultural achievements, very
interesting… we were so surprised back then, the Russians…

-

But basically it was Ukraine where you were…

-

But it was all one system back then.

-

But the Ukraine is its own nation again…

-

Yes, but even today the Germanic part there is still relatively
big, independent from their national identification. From a
racial point of view…

-

I have to ask, what about the idea that Slavs are sub-humans?

-

That was never the official line, that’s all complete nonsense.
It’s only a phrase that people used who wanted to be 150%
correct and deducted everything from appearances. That was
definitely a mistake and not the official line. It was emotional
outburtsts that and they were never generally relevant. I think
Rosenberg’s Myth of the 20th Century is… Rosenberg came
from somewhere east…

-

Yes, he was Estonian, or born in Talinn at least.

-

Yes, he would never write that.

-

But officially the war is presented as a war of extinction
because the Slavs were an racially inferior… that’s what kids
learn in school. I just wanted to tell you that, but you’re saying
that’s all not true.

-

That was never the case officially, the Waffen SS had Bosnian
and Hungarian divisions, they even carried our runes!

-

Maybe there was a shortage of manpower? It could have been
a strategic concept.

-

Absolutely not, we were a European army and it was clear that
Europe has three main races.

-

Well, my source is Höhne’s Waffen SS, you that book, right?
It’s from the 60s so not the newest, but he writes that nonGermans were recruited to the Waffen SS because they had to
fill the ranks so to speak.

-

That’s rubbish.

 Schweiger Interview

33

-

I’m just telling you what he writes. You say that was never the
plan.

-

No, the challenge was different. The European volunteers
declared from the beginning that they would fight against
Bolshevism. They were never employed in the West. The
European volunteers were there in the fight against
Bolshevism.

-

Were there any from England or Scotland or France?

-

Very, very few. But there were the French…

-

They had two divisions.

-

Charlemagne, and what was the other one called? But
Charlemagne was only put together relatively late, wasn’t it?

-

Yes, only during the war with the Bolsheviks… but I want to
know now what the other one was called… there were
definitely two French divisions… here we have a picture of the
Bosnians marching.

-

How many were they? Many? These are volunteers from
Bosnia

-

Ah right, ok...

-

SS voluntaries... was that a whole division?

-

Yes…

-

Were those the Skander… or those were the Kosovans, what
were they called? Skanderberg?

-

They fought against the Bolsheviks as muslims… they fought
more for religious reasons.

-

Did you fight in the Balkans too?

-

No, only ever in Russia.

-

And in Germany? I just recently checked, they had horrific
losses!

-

Well, in the SS we had the worst losses.

-

And especially in the Leibstandarte. Where was your division
in the end?

-

Plattensee. Setterich was my commander; he was the general
of the Leibstandarte. (Shows something)

-

Where do you get something like that from?

-

I got it from one of my comrades?

-

Back then?

-

No, just recently, I got it for Christmas.

 Schweiger Interview

34

-

That’s a lovely present for you, really lovely!

-

Herr Schweiger...with Adolf Hitler?

-

Did you ever meet Hitler personally?

-

I’ve only seen him. The first time I saw him at the Nuremberg
Ralley 1938, when the Hitlerjugend Austria reported in the
stadion and Hitler came by and greeted us. The second time
was in Russia, or the Ukraine, at the military airbase. When I
left the sickbay and was to return to the front with the U52 the
Führer was at the airport, in 41’.

-

Did you speak to him?

-

No. We wore those camo jackets and stood together, eight or
ten men from my division, and waited for the U52 and the
Führer saw that SS guys stood there and said ‘I know you’re
from the Leibstandarte.’ He had a nice throaty voice. That was
our closest encounter.

-

Unlike Kristoffersen who told me that he went hiking as a
teenager and suddenly a huge convertible stopped next to
him with three people when he was lying under a tree to get
some rest somewhere near Bayreuth. And Hitler was at a
festival near there and they got chatting when the Führer got
out the car and started talking to him… he was quite
something, always quoted poems… but never mind, let’s stick
to world politics we don’t want to keep you busy all too long…
so, you’re saying that an alliance between Germany and
Russia isn’t avoidable?

-

Exactly. It’s a precondition for the survival Russia’s and
German’s and the rest of Europe. Who else could so it? Spain,
Italy, Portugal, Greece? There’s only Germany, France,
England…

-

And the Scandinavian countries…

-

But they only have small populations and geographically and
historically they’re also different… But we had a lot of the in
the Waffen SS, Norwegians, Danes and Swedes… and a lot of
people from Flanders…

-

But they’re from Belgium…

-

And the Wallonians, Dekrell, Leon Dekrell was a great guy…

-

That was the one in Spain, right?

-

Yes, they were looking for him in Belgium… But it’s interesting
with the Flanders and the Wallonians…

-

That’s exactly my question about your theory. You’re saying
it’s all about the greater racial questions. But within that
greater race there are national conflicts like Flanders

 Schweiger Interview

35

Wallonians, or Scots, English and Irish… or the conflict in
South Tyrol…I mean, I’m Tyrolean and I know a bit about that,
and however Mr Strache imagines that it will all be sorted with
the EU… what I’m getting at is that within this greater race
there are a lot of national conflicts, how can those be
resolved?
-

I would call them emotional tensions. There are hardly any
conflicts with political and economic causes… Realistically I
can’t envisage a war of power like we had in the 18th, 19th and
20th centuries, because the global situation has changed. In
Ireland, Scotland and Ireland for example I see great racial
potential bit it has to be directed towards Europe… I’m
convinced that today’s global challenges will get England as
the second strongest nation to unite itself with the strongest
one…

-

But what about all the national conflicts?

-

Like what?

-

Ireland.

-

That’s a confessional issue…

-

Basque country.

-

Well that… neither the Irish nor the Basque questions are
issues of power, but of locality. The Spanish and the French
element within the Basques has to be differentiated… and
they are in the South of France and the North of Spain… I
think they are their own people, but not their own power. Of
course they want cultural autonomy, but that’s just normal
within our own genetic judgements. Of course there are
various basic tensions within the races in Europe. Even within
Germany. When I go to Friesland or Nordrhein-Westfalen or to
Bavaria we have tribally specific mental differences… Austria
is far more homogenous in comparison than tensions between
Prussians and Bavarians for example…

-

But there are the Vorarlbergers in Austria…

-

Yes, but the Bavarians are 10m people and the Vorarlbergers…

-

300 000. But let’s talk about the greater race. Let’s say in the
future we’ll have a European Alliance with Germany as its
leader…

-

I’m not saying that.

-

But it’s obvious with Germany as the strongest industrial
power and so on…

-

But still, we have to be a bit sensitive regarding word choice
here… if I say today that Germany is leading Europe we
already get into trouble again. The idea of the Reich, I mean

 Schweiger Interview

36

there’s only one people that had that, from Heinrich to
Bismarck’s Second Reich and Hitler’s Third Reich, but it always
had European dimensions, always regarding the whole of
Europe and so the idea of the Reich was never nationalist as
such. Even in our time when the national was especially
strong in the Third Reich the biological thinking of a greater
Europe was dominant… So the idea of nationalist leadership
within a Reich that other peoples have to subordinate to is
psychologically ludicrous today. We could never unite Europe
like that…
-

So you think it’s absolutely necessary that Europe is united.

-

Absolutely, that’s a question of survival, especially in
consideration of the Asian mobilisation, which is far
underestimated today… it’s of a dimension like never seen
before in the history of Europe.

-

And with such speed as well.

-

Yesm through technical innovation. The world has gotten so
small, what used to be huge distances just aren’t a challenge
anymore nowadays.

-

Yes, it’s scary to think of China…

-

I have a book about it by the former boss of the German army
who went to China for three months in 1980, and he was told
there that they’ll only need another 20 to 25 years to catch
up… and they did.

-

And you think the Chinese will want to expand as well?

-

Absolutely. They’re very clever. They always smile, but when I
watched the Beijing Olympics on TV, what they did in the
stadium reminded me of the games in 36’, in Chinese of
course. It was such a precise expression of national culture,
when they talked about their 3000-year-old traditions at the
opening they had such wonderful national dominance. And
when I see the Chinese regiments marching, I always have to
think of the Leibstandarte. They have this strong expression
from which you recognise that they are ready to commit to
their cause, even die for it.

-

So you’re saying they’re perfect?

-

Yes, because physiognomy is of importance. I can look relaxed
today when I’m marching or I’m serious and goal-oriented.
They’re goal-oriented as soldiers, which isn’t comparable to
Europe.

-

You mean they’re better?

-

Of course.

 Schweiger Interview

37

-

And you think China wants to expand? Let’s just briefly
consider all the nations like China, the US and so on to gain an
overview and then we can be more specific… So, first is
China.

-

It’s the first superpower, biologically and technically. And
900m of 1.3billion Chinese are still peasants. They have a
natural power that we don’t consider because we don’t think
biologically anymore. But the law of nature is stronger than
ideology.

-

But where would they expand to? South Siberia?

-

That’s the only option, there’s no other direction. In the next
few years tensions between Japan and China will ease…

-

And the Taiwan conflict is also dying down…

-

Yes, Taiwan is done. But when the Japanese emperor went to
China, imagine the symbolic significance of that, the first time
in 2000 years. The relationship between Tokyo and Beijing has
become extremely unified in the last 2 to 3 years. I’m
convinced that there’s something going on behind the
scenes… China needs Lebensraum and Japan needs
Lebensraum. Japan with take East Siberia and China South
Siberia.

-

As agricultural land, basically?

-

Yes, they need fertile ground.

-

But Siberia is not exactly known for its fertility…

-

South Siberia is incredibly fertile and East Siberia has large
areas of forests, the biggest in the world. The amazon
dwindles in comparison to that. We’re talking about
dimensions that we can’t even imagine in our small Central
European thinking, it’s a completely different world!

-

So if China expands to Siberia, that means…

-

War, of course! A war between the yellow and the white race
is inevitable, completely irrelevant of any moral thought. It’s a
question of racial assertiveness. The Chinese were never
international communists, Mao was a farmer’s son and he
announced in the paper in 1923 that he was looking for brave
men for a communist revolution…

-

And in 1926 the Chinese Communist Party was more or less
massacred and Mao started from scratch…

-

Of course, Mao was relentless, but he was a peasant, not an
industrial worker but a peasant and that’s what makes the
difference. China’s whole development was national and
agrarian, not international.

 Schweiger Interview

38

-

From a Marxist perspective it wasn’t anything but the
catching up on the bourgeois revolution, economically
speaking. Away with feudalism and an improvement of
working conditions and that only worked with the collective
for a certain time. In a country like that you have to be
collectively organised because the only think you have is
manpower…So, we’ve done China, let’s move on to Russia.

-

Russia is a geographic power, considering raw materials and
size. Considering population not so much…

-

So they’re forced into an alliance?

-

Of course, and Putin knows. Two years ago Putin was in
Germany at the Bundestag and told the German parliament to
stop having such big complexes- he had to tell them in Berlin,
in German. Putin was in Dresden for 8 years with the KGB, in
the special division for economic espionage of Western
Germany, so he knows its industry and economic production.

-

But that’s were I think there’s a problem. Especially after the
war there are big resentments between Russian and
Germany…

-

There are no resentments. Obviously Putin has to present the
victory of 45’ as a national victory…

-

Well that’s one of those ideological things done to unite the
community…

-

Exactly, but the Russian people greatly appreciate the German
in his performance capability. The psychological moment
between Germans and Russians is much closer than between
Germans and the French, because there’s still relatively much
Germanic blood in Russians, to use this taboo word…

-

We’ve spoken about this… what about Germany?

-

I think Germany is… well, we lost the war so our awareness for
power has been demoralised, but the performance capability
of the working people still gives Germany great respect. Not
the German politicians in Berlin gains that respect, but the
German engineer, the German worker, their performance
capability. This is often disregarded, but when all the German
cities and streets were in ruin in 1945 and the industry
completely bombed everything was rebuilt within such a short
time, even though we had such substantial losses, about
14m… 6.5m soldiers fell in action, 3m in prisoner of war
camps – we lost 6.5m men of the highest performing
generation. Then we lost 2.5 with the expulsions from the
east… then there were the bombings… so we had incredible
casualties and still rebuilt everything, those were enormous
efforts…

 Schweiger Interview

39

-

Even though we have to add that… an economist once
explained to me that the rebuilding in 45’ of course also was a
great advantage, because they got far more modern
machinery and produced much faster than those of the
competitors like England and France. The Germans and the
Austrians had an enormous advantage, because English car
manufacturers still worked with machinery from the 1920s
while VW had new ones. From a capitalist point of view, they
certainly made good business despite everything that
happened…

-

What lacked, though, were the people. What am I to do with
capital if I don’t have performance capability?! But people still
had those capabilities, capital is only a means to an end.

-

I’m just saying, they definitely had an advantage in
manufacturing…

-

Maybe in the continuing development, yes, but the fact there
even were enough people left after those enormous losses
that I just recounted, and that they managed to rebuild
everything is a gigantic effort. Especially what women
contributed back then is far too often disregarded…

-

Especially because they did most of the work… and where
does Austria stand in relation to Germany?

-

Austria is German.

-

Well, yes, but it’s an independent state…

-

That’s true, but when Austria joined the EU and I went across
to Bavaria for the first time without having to show my
passport I said that this is the reunion of Austria and Germany,
no matter what is said about it. Austria can’t be separated
from Germany. 40% of our exports go to Germany. If the
German economy fails…

-

There’s already signals that it may…

-

Of course, but they have different reasons.

-

Yes, but I can’t really see how all that can be resolved. You
presume that…Let’s say we have this conflict between the
white race and the yellow race, the blacks don’t count in this
instance, unless…

-

Yes, they almost starve to death…

-

But there may also be crusades..

-

They’d need weapons for that…

-

But how do you imagine this squabble of all the little nations
is going to be resolved?

 Schweiger Interview

40

-

I think Kohl just got it right. There will be a Europe of home
countries… Not one European state, that wouldn’t work
because the idiosyncrasies of the national mentalities are too
big. But coordination in the most important areas like
production, industry, economy, social services can be
generalised across the roman, Nordic or Slavic mentalities.
There are certain processes in everyday life that can me
coordinated on a European level. We’ll still talk about the
question of money capital, because I think that the Euro could
fulfil an important function if it is valued correctly.

-

Like in the Third Reich?

-

Exactly. As long as the Euro status convertible the Dollar or
the Wall Street can devalue it, but if I make it an index
currency, Europe will be a power that can’t be speculatively
undermined. And that can even be achieved through the
Central Bank, it’s simply a question of money capital. I only
have to adjust the amount of money to economic productivity.
Of course there will have to be differentiations made, because
the Portuguese or the Spaniard won’t have the same
performance capability as the Central European, Germanic or
even the Romanic regions. The Central Bank could base the
amount of money in circulation on the GDP. The money
circulating has to be adjusted to the product in circulation. So,
if productivity is stronger there is more money and if it’s
weaker… there are calculations how much money per annum
in in circulation. I also used statistics in my book Money and
world capital. I worked out statistically how money and
productivity relate and there was always 12 to 14 times more
money circulating, it’s easy to calculate: money in circulation
relates to the GDP, so if we take a number, say 100m…

-

It has to circulate 10 times.

-

Exactly, and then there’s no danger of inflation. There was no
inflation in the Third Reich, because the money in circulation
always corresponded with economic production,

-

So there was no inflation?

-

It’s only inflation if the buying power of money weakens, but
when economic productivity is in harmony with the amount of
money circulating, I can increase the money while the buying
power stays the same.

-

But it’s still necessary to have formal price caps, otherwise
the capitalists would…

-

Of course, that would develop automatically out of that
scheme, but one thing is certain: the only chance to create a
natural relation between the amount of money circulating and

 Schweiger Interview

41

productivity is monetary politics. I have to give money a
serving function. Today it is used as a means of power.
-

Look, a squirrel! And he’s feeding birds here too in the
Winter… the money question is central of course, but how can
the Central Bank be forced to do something about it?

-

That’s a question of politics. I think that necessity has an
important function. Changes in society and human
understanding only ever come from necessity, not reason. I’m
convinced Europe will be challenged by Asia, and thee
problems are going to find a solution, because people will
want to look for one, whether it’s socially economically,
militarily. Europe has to be armed… it’s natural law.

-

So you’re saying that Europe is going to defend Siberia?

-

Of course.

-

But what would be the consequences? Let’s stick to money
politics. I must admit I haven’t read your book… but,
principally, we have this crisis at the moment and, as far as I
understand as someone who doesn’t know much about
economics, the problem is in the fact that people deal with
values that don’t exist, or, in the housing crisis, thing were
valued that don’t even exist.

-

There was manipulation, but they never name those who
manipulate strangely enough…

-

I’m not sure, but I think that idiosyncrasies are already in the
system…

-

Look, how did Black Friday 1929 happen? The media raised
the value of shares of some companies. Their value climbed
and climbed and suddenly the media wrote that the company
is worthless and shares plummeted. When they were at their
lowest the speculators bought the up and the whole industry.
And it was the same today with the mortgages…

-

It always happens in every financial crisis that devaluation
and revaluation takes place…

-

Yes. But in a capitalist crisis… someone owns that money, the
problem is the anonymity of the capital, I mean, who creates
it? It’s nothing by itself and it gains its value through
productivity, but if I manipulate the productivity of the
economy I am manipulating people’s behaviour with the
media. And that’s what happens. It happened in 1929, and
they did the same with the housing market. In the states
millions of people built houses without even having the money
to pay the interest. They got 100% or 120% of their house
financed and over night all that was cut.

 Schweiger Interview

42

-

But you have to consider that in the US, at least in the
Southern States, houses aren’t houses but wooden huts, so
sometimes there is a speculation of values that never existed
in the first place. Why do you think they have all those
hurricane catastrophes and so on, their huts really are just
four wooden boards pieced together with a roof on top. Of
course there are also people who live in real houses but they
don’t have to take a mortgage.

-

The whole American economy is primarily built on credit,
much more than here.

-

Of course it’s much stronger, but now according to the Spiegel
we have the next crisis waiting, the one with the credit cards,
because they also gave those away and people don’t make
their repayments.

-

The special thing about those speculations with property was
the media, I mean, who are they, who advertised those
things? First they create a public opinion. They provoke those
things, they don’t just develop. The media basically has power
over public behaviour, speculation etc. … and they are
dependent on particular cliques… and people behave
according to what they want. Just imagine, our banks, those
idiots, jumped onto this wave as well and said, amazing, we
buy those property mortgages and speculate… of course they
first made their billions, but when the values sank they
couldn’t finance it anymore. The US enabled these
speculations at our banks, and they’re especially strong in
Germany is well…

-

Especially in Germany, it was crazy! But of course, if we say
we concentrate on the indexical value now we need extreme
political changes for this to happen, because certain people
would lose a lot if that happened.

-

And that would be a good thing.

-

I agree, but the basic problem is how to get there.

-

Through atmospheric developments, I mean, the effects of the
crisis are only at the beginning. It’s the development of a
completely new atmosphere, you just have to follow how the
American economy is being judged now. The US now is the big
sinner which had all the power and now…

-

…is in crisis.

-

I already knew back then what US politics would provoke and
that it’s going to filter into the political consciousness so that
there will be consequences. One thing is certain, if we imagine
that Germany had to put down 400 billion to secure the banks,
and Austria 100 billion, which is more than what Germany put
down per capita, it’s basically only the beginning the

 Schweiger Interview

43

explosion of the bubble and what else can still explode we’ll
only find out in the years to come… Now things still can be
secured somehow with some sort of provisions. Nobody knows
exactly because banks can still be secretive, they don’t
declare those sort of things. I mean, the only one who said
something here was Treichl, who said I’m gonna have to take
3.5billion credit and the others…
-

But what annoys me about that is that in the same instance
he says they have earning of 1.7 billion from this…

-

It’s obscene. At some point all that is going to be ad absurdum
and then we have to wonder whether we have political
leadership or do we…

-

I understand when someone in Germany who receives
unemployment benefits of €300 is angry if he says what those
people get, and that’s something that increasingly becomes
stronger in Germany…

-

Here as well…

-

But with a delay of 3-4 years as usual. In Germany you can
clearly see growing dissatisfaction, the NDP has increasing
supporters, as does the far left, they use that extremely well.
Here, less so…

-

But interestingly, you know, I’m good friends with Otto Vogt,
the NPD chairman and he is of course… he studied political
science but he just doesn’t have any charisma, that ‘s the
problem. He works analytically, is politically concise, but he
doesn’t have the right rhetoric…

-

But I’ve heard he also has some troubles now because of that
Kemmner story…

-

That’s in Thüringen, a completed overrated story that’s not
gonna cost him his position… but the question isn’t if he’ll
stay or not, there’s simply nobody there who has this leader
charisma. I was there quite a bit and lectured where all the
NPD member attended, in Mecklenburg-Vorpommern and
Saxony , and they just don’t have the right charisma a real
leader must have…

-

That’s true, but the other problem with the NPD is that they
can’t decide whether they are a serious political party or have
their boys march… and that creates a problem in their own
public display, not just how the media presents them…

-

Well, this wave of Nazi bullies is past I think…

-

That certainly wasn’t the case on 1 May…

-

There are some toughies within the union comradeships…

 Schweiger Interview

44

-

But in those free comradeships there are people like Wacht
that I consider to be highly intelligent, I really do. Even a
political opponent can’t deny that.

-

I’m in close contact with him.

-

He also doesn’t have charisma, but he knows what he’s
talking about and how to become organised, he can partly get
more done than the whole NDP… in the NPD there are people,
like in the Mecklenburg Assembly, where you can only think
‘oh dear!’ But you know those people better than I do…

-

I do.

-

Partly they just made bad personnel choices, or they’re just so
clumsy…

-

But you can’t produce those things, they have to develop.
There are also locations where the NPD has people like Holger
Apfel in Saxony or Pasteur in Mecklenburg-Vorpommern, they
are local…

-

Greats?!

-

That word is already wrong. They are good organisers and
instigators, but no leader who could affect the whole group
with their personality. There is no one like that in the NPD and
I’m calling the whole process in Germany a fermentation
where the right leader will develop at the right moment. And if
not, evolution made its judgement about us Germans and
Europeans and we’re at the end. It’s natural law. Nowadays
we’re talking so much about evolution and genetics, but we
don’t transfer these scientific results to politics.

-

How do you see the Austrian situation then? Don’t tell me
Strache is the great leader…

-

Well, he has the advantage of being the best type out of all
party leaders in appearance, and he’s also made progress
with his argumentation compared to the past, he only slips in
reference to the past when he things he has to say something
against national socialism…

-

I didn’t even want to discuss that with you, he just seems like
a transferable picture to me with so much zeitgeist and with
being so modern and in gossip columns…

-

Well in Vienna, the NDP…the FPÖ did those things to be more
xenophobe… especially in the worker districts where workers
say ‘my party, the reds, betrayed me.’

-

Live in social housing, and the things I see every day… just
imagine, 40% of the people in my neighbourhood are foreign,
and otherwise only pensioners. I’m one of the youngest there,
so you can see where the conflicts lie…

 Schweiger Interview

45

-

And Strache can use that.

-

Not from me…

-

Doesn’t matter, but he does with a large number of voters.
The reason he is doing so well in Vienna is the thing with the
foreigners. There are a few sentences he has to say and
people respond with ‘bravo, he’s right.’ He never had to
ideologically convince anyone, he only needs to use emotions
because the socialists are so stupid. They have a new
secretary now who tries to do something about the foreigner
issue, but I don’t think he’ll manage.

-

It’s true, even though Vienna is an extremely well organised
city. From an organisational perspective, Vienna is in
incredible good shape. I travelled to lots of places around the
world and you’ll hardly find a city anywhere else that is
managed as effectively as Vienna. If you need a new passport
you get it in two days. That’s quite something. Nobody can
deny that this is solid management…The problem is that
Strache is kind of a softie and he doesn’t seem to have any
ideology…

-

No, he purely works with tactics… the simplest thing he can
work with is the immigration question, it’s the most effective
thing he can play on. But he’s also right, because this
alienation process is becoming unbearable and it means he
has a political focus that can easily be formulated and doesn’t
require much intelligence, only emotions…

-

And it’s always effective.

-

Of course, that’s the great chance he has in Vienna. I’m
convinced he will have the second biggest party in Vienna.

-

I think so too, but do you think the FPÖ has a chance in the
future by keeping this line?

-

That’s a relative question. If we talk about the current
strategic position then it certainly doesn’t. Those decisions
come from Germany, I don’t expect anything from Austria
there…

-

You mean all those greater political decisions.

-

Exactly, whatever we do in Austria… I mean… we can step
them on the foot, but that’s about it.

-

But as former member and co-founder of the FPÖ do you vote
for them?

-

I did.

-

But what’s your stance towards the party in general?

-

I’m completely neutral towards it.

 Schweiger Interview

46

-

So it isn’t your party?

-

I don’t have a party.

-

But would you see the FPÖ as a national or nationalist party?

-

No.

-

How do you see it then?

-

What can I say? They’re national as far as they represent the
people as far as the immigration question goes at least…

-

So you also think of the self-consciousness of the party,
because by rejecting immigrants they also create an identity.

-

Of course, and in that respect it’s national.

-

But they don’t have an ideological basis as such?

-

Their ideology is basically the same as during Haider’s times
when it constantly changed between here and there.

-

And I don’t even have to ask what you thought about Haider…

-

Well, Haider’s destiny…

-

If I drive with an alcohol level of 1.8 through the night…

-

There are strong doubts about that.

-

This is one of the things where I agree 100% with Vroch who
strongly argued against all those conspiracies on his webpage
with reasonable arguments. And the way he puts it I think
that’s right, I mean, everyone knew that he was drinking a
lot…

-

But apparently…

-

That’s rubbish, believe me, he was drinking. I shad enough
contact with him. And he also abused other substances I was
told, and not entirely legal ones… I simply ended in the way
he used to live.

-

Haider was a special case. On the one hand he was a talented
speaker, quick-witted in interviews…

-

And he had a certain kind of charm.

-

He had a positive presence as a person, but he was an egotist
who didn’t do anything for the whole…

-

A completely incontrollable element…

-

Yes, but he had political talent he could play with.

-

Did you know him personally?

-

No, I never had anything to do with him. God, when Haider
was chairman we had long left the party…

 Schweiger Interview

47

-

Of course, that doesn’t match at all… but here’s something I
don’t understand. Everyone talks about the financial crisis,
but the FPÖ doesn’t say anything…

-

They don’t have any kind of concept! But you have to consider
their dimension as well… Monetary politics can never be
tackled starting in Austria, you need something of at least the
size of Germany, at least in economic power. You can’t
separate economic potency from monetary politics. If I want to
change something in monetary politics have to be in power. In
that sense, Austria can only partake intellectually in circles
where you know they think about this… but they are also
more over there than here…the real change has to be in
Germany.

-

Sure, but that doesn’t keep Austria from thinking about it.

-

True, but only thinking about it without the political
consequences doesn’t work. There always have to be two
sides. Political thoughts I can have around a round table, even
here…

-

And they could realise it then. It’s a question of power.

-

Of course. You can work with them intellectually and explain
the unexplained. Each and every single one can contribute to
that. I also tackle those explanations…

-

And is there any resonance?

-

Only within the squad. I lectured in front of a thousand young
people and I’m happy to see that the young in Germany are
waking up. I mean our generation have almost all joined the
Great Army, I’m one of the few who’s still active in that way…

-

And still is mentally there!

-

But the young are waking up. They instinctively feel that
something’s not right. That’s the start to change.

-

Also intellectually? There’s no point in 500 idiots who don’t
get it…

-

There are some who have a talent for leadership and logical
explanations. But I have to distinguish between the broader
changes that can actively lead to political change or just
prepare it, and I think that today we have the possibility to
mentally prepare. That’s what’s realistic at the moment and I
think there’s good resonance for that with the young.

-

Yes I saw that as well when I watched your speech in Germany
online.

-

There were a thousand you people there, lots of good guys. I
look at them, what types they are and that seemed thoroughly
positive. Generally I think that it’s a lot better in Germany

 Schweiger Interview

48

now, a lot less drinking and they’re extremely careful. I few
years ago…
-

The time of primitive protests is long gone, even in Berlin
there are some good squads that are quite disciplined, and in
Mecklenburg and Thüringen… They also work in the long run.

-

Absolutely.

-

Not as heated as with Küssel for example…

-

They have a different dimension…

-

And think about things like monetary politics.

-

They think about it, definitely.

-

And pass on that knowledge?

-

That was one of the main topics of my talk, the relationship
Germany-Russia and monetary politics, and I have to say the
young are greedy for that knowledge and in the discussion.
You can see from the way they ask questions that they
understood. They’re moved by these questions. It really
happens out there.

-

And was there a qualitative jump too?

-

Yes.

-

Within the camaraderie largely…

-

That’s right, but also NDP they started to look at these things
strategically, I don’t know if you were…

-

I mostly check in the internet…

-

They always send me their last two issues and they were a lot
better, strategically. They even start to tackle the issue
Germany-Russia.

-

So you feel like you’re not just calling out in the desert, but
that you have some resonance?

-

Definitely.

-

And I take it you think this is partly due to your work?

-

It’s a constant exchange…

-

But you really are the only one I know who tackles those
economic questions. And I have great respect from you for
that because there are a lot of things I don’t even understand.
And you are one of very few in your scene who, as far as I
could follow it publicly, consequently tackled those topics over
the last twenty to thirty years. There are very few in Germany
and Austria I think who still do anything similar, and if, only
like Frank Schwert…

 Schweiger Interview

49

-

That’s different again, they formulate things differently.

-

Still… You think it has more impact now?!

-

Yes, because the people are ready. You can only expect a
response from the people when there’s a certain ripeness on
an emotional level, not an intellectual one.

-

But you largely speak for the squads, so not directly to the
people but to those who then will speak to them, those who
have to popularise things.

-

Exactly. I couldn’t do it otherwise at my age. If you want to
speak to the masses these days, you need…

-

…technology and everything. But I think it’s important that
you said that everything is connected to crisis, because
objective relations become ripe…

-

You can also see that on the media here. I get the papers
every day and keep the clippings, they’re all over there. I have
my office downstairs on the lower ground but with my joint
problems I walk as little as possible so I collect them all here.
I’d need someone who…

-

Like an archivist?

-

Yes. When I look at these clippings, there are thousands,
there’s some kind of chronology. You can see there’s a leading
thread that runs through those developments over decades. I
can prove that because I have been collecting the Spiegel up
in the attic for years, and our papers, Die Presse,FAZ… I
largely use the headlines.

-

They’re becoming increasingly catastrophic.

-

You can watch closely how that tendency develops, even
though those journalists always have to go with the zeitgeist.

-

Just imagine, if someone is economics editor he has a comfy
job. He’s sitting in front of his AP monitor all day and copies
and edits and three times a week he attends a press
conference where he gets lots of food and drinks. Otherwise
there’s not much to do for him. Of course it depends, but
generally speaking economic editors aren’t the cleverest of
people.

-

They only have to register events.

-

And edit press releases

-

And they hardly have their own ideology; they’re strategic
tools. If they had their own worldviews, they wouldn’t sit
there.

-

Of course, one excludes the other there. But that’s the case in
many jobs, if you have an ideology you can’t do certain jobs.

 Schweiger Interview

50

But you shouldn’t underestimate that conservative worldview
that it’s relatively comfy to sit in a warm office all day without
having anything to do but edit press releases and going to
press conferences. Who would start a conflict for that?!
-

It’s always a question of money. People like that earn a living
with that and if they don’t please those who pay them
anymore they’re gone. They will always remain servile spirits.

-

There is also something like statutes, they differ from paper to
paper, but there are always options to defend yourself in the
content of your writing.

-

But that’s relative…

-

Of course….let’s get back to Strache. The FPÖ doesn’t have
much power?

-

No, everything’s in a state of flux. It’s good that they’re there,
I have to be realistic about that. The immigration question
would never have gained the same importance in the public.
They achieved that, so I an acknowledged the FPÖ’s activities
and Strache’s mediocre argumentation. At least he’s
emotional in those questions, he plays on emotions with the
immigration question. And the BZÖ will probably only survive
in Carinthia, Westenthaler is too…

-

That clique just wants to have a career. They’re happy to have
their mandates in the national council, that’s it. I wouldn’t
even see them within the national camp, not even broadly
speaking. Maybe historically, but otherwise completely bland.
That was obvious when BZÖ still was in the old government.
All they wanted was their positions, their MPs and secretaries.
Their corruption was legendary. They were all those weird
figures that happened to come to the top and then they were
gone again and that was it. I think the FPÖ is better than that.
What do you think about Burschenschaft elements in the FPÖ?

-

What can I say? Those things can’t be generalised, but when
that guy Graf formulates things so poorly just to become third
president and even goes as far as to say none of his family
was with the NSDAP just to ‘create the right atmosphere’…
that doesn’t have anything to do anymore with an Olymp’s
behaviour. Of course it can’t be generalised, there are those
and others in the Burschenschaften. There are good members,
but not among those who are most politically active…

-

But they try to work with the squads. Burschenschaften
always were an essential part of the Austrian right, whether in
South Tyrol or…

-

That’s in the past now.

-

But they are in the FPÖ, Vilimsky and so on…

 Schweiger Interview

51

-

Yes, but what are they doing? From a Burschenschafter with
academic qualifications I’d expect other things than the
constant blah they produce.

-

You’re talking about people like Mölzer?

-

Yes, it’s hopeless.

-

Did you see the story with Mölzer the same? That story about
his European… now we’re getting back to Europe by the way,
with this strange fraction in the European Parliament, where
Honsik and so on then complained because the Meisser and
the Brenner border weren’t acknowledged. Do you that’s such
a big problem?

-

That recognition question there is just a symbolism… Mölzer
better be quiet, he’s not going to change anything. It’s some
extra work that he could definitely save on. To protest against
the European compromise is nonsense, but that’s where
national consciousness is lacking. I excuse those people
because they’re a product of re-education…

-

That’s also what you say about Mölzer then…

-

Yes. I don’t expect them to make brave, idiosyncratic
comments, because they want to have a career, which they
can only do nowadays if they adjust to the zeitgeist. People
who nowadays are brave enough to h=go against the grain
are rare…

-

And that phenomenon is especially strong in the FPÖ…I’ve
always been interested in the Burschenschaften because they
were the classics of the Austrian right. The Burschenschaften
took on an early role pretty early on…

-

Those were different times…

-

Of course, but the Burschenschaften played an especially big
role in the squads, is that important? Küssel is
Burschenschafter, Honsik is Burschenschafter- you are one of
the few in a leading position who isn’t…one of the very few,
right?

-

I couldn’t, because I wasn’t allowed to continue studying. I
wanted to, but it wasn’t possible as SS leader.

-

You were also banned from University?

-

Of course, the SS was excluded there, and I was especially
because of all my activities. I was never someone to stay
quiet. I remained active immediately after 45’ and that was
my sin…

-

But you didn’t buckle like so many others.

 Schweiger Interview

52

-

No, I would never do that. I’ll never forget how my father, who
was a national socialist through and through, when he did said
that the most important thing you can say for yourself is to
stay true to your beliefs. And he’s absolutely right. If I look
back now at my age and I would have made such tactic moves
that would have affected me quite badly. But as I am I’m free
within.

-

So you’re also not worried about your trial in Klagenfurt.

-

Ha! Schaller just recently called me about how things went in
Wels and I said ‘Herbert, I’m looking forward to the trial.’

-

But they are revising the case now.

-

That’s tragic.

-

Well, the state prosecution made a nullity appeal and they’re
thinking now what to do as a reaction.

-

Schaller didn’t mention…

-

I have that information from press circles. As soon as they
were acquitted they basically swore to do something about
it…I know that doesn’t look good…

-

It’s not a good situation, because an acquittal by jury is an
acquittal by jury. They’d have to change the law…

-

You’ll laugh, but I won €50 because I bet with a colleague that
they would be acquitted, and you know why? Never in my life
have I seen such rubbish charges. It was completely crazy,
unreal. I’m not a friend of the PFJ at all and I know they’re not
especially nice people, but those charges… I read 20 page of
the document and it’s simply comical, unreal! It contains your
ten points and I thought if they don’t have anything else than
some flags and one person told the other…

-

Well, the main point were those foundations of service, the
rest was just decoration…

-

But the PFJ surprised me in two things. Firstly, that they dare
doing something like that and secondly, what really surprised
me was that it was the first time that I watched a group like
that that continued after their leader was prohibited to do so,
or that they even worked harder. I was surprised, because
with Küssel and Honsik… when the bosses were gone the
group was as well. Without a central figure of identity…The
ideological connection wasn’t hat strong…

-

But that’s different in Upper Austria.

-

Indeed. That’s why you should tell Schaller that I really
admired that they didn’t fall apart but grew stronger and
formed a strong public visibility. I would definitely take that
as a sign of new quality, new qualitative political work, bettern

 Schweiger Interview

53

than in the FPÖ. I don’t agree with them, nut they clearly
learned the qualitative aspect of things.
-

Absolutely.

-

Another point is the AFP. They’ve made plenty of experience
with those things, so if they don’t know how to deal with such
proceedings I don’y know who would.

-

The AFP only ever react. Take their paper for example, they
only ever comment…

-

Six months too late!

-

I’ve never seen any kind of creative attacks on their side.

-

Well, they had to become extremely careful with the
prohibition laws…

-

But if I found an ideological union it also as to be productive.

-

Yes, with their publications the AFP gives the impression of a
happy pensioner’s club- where should we go tomorrow kind of
things… and then they have figures like Rehak…

-

Forget it, I mean he wasn’t with Kreisky for nothing… he is uite
intelligent though.

-

And a good sense of humour.

-

I chatted to him a few times in the past and realised he’s still
a Marxist.

-

Yes, he’s a Neo-Marxist… But within that he still writes an
article in Mölzer’s book about that Strache affair: ‘the small
socialist party AFP.’ The bad big socialists destroy all the
efforts of the small AFP and I’m thinking he really must have
some definition problems… who ever presents the AFP as
socialist… that’s giving them a bad reputation! But within the
PFJ there’s a definite improvement, and I’m excited to see
what comes next.

-

Well, those boys like Banjet and so on, they are definitely
mentally capable despite their young age, and they are much
better trained rhetorically. The have the capability to translate
their aims rhetorically, and that’s decisive, because a political
party can only ever exist through talking and not flyers and
newspapers. In those aspects they are the best developed
compared to other groups…

-

Do you remember back when the FAPO was discovered and
Küssel’s guys were in court, that was miserable…

-

That harmed everything.

 Schweiger Interview

54

-

They were incredibly stupid people, who even made a drama
out of their situation, embarrassing! Now there really is much
more quality… I’m sure they won’t be charged…

-

Schaller isn’t so sure about that…

-

The only thing that could still hamper that is Schaller himself,
because he has the tendency to annoy the jury with his
talking until they have enough. I still thought that was a
possibility…

-

The charges themselves were of course almost the same as I
have in Klagenfurt. I went to see the judge twice there and
told them what I think of their charges…He was quite insecure
because he realised I’m not taking it seriously…I asked him if
he had a family and he said he had two kids and I told him
that what he stands for is endangering his children in the
future because what he has to stand for is sick… I know
judges have to do that what they have to do but with those
charges it’s just incredible…

-

Is it a jury trial in Klagenfurt?

-

Of course.

-

Could I call you in January about the trial? Maybe I’ll attend.

-

Of course, I know I’ll be in the offensive then

-

You are used to it I guess… but as the AFP didn’t do their part
you have to be good in the next trial so nobody takes your
place. I’ve been observing the scene for 20 years now and the
PFJ is a great qualitative change… up until now, if you moved
something everything collapsed and that’s definitely not the
case with them. They’re better than that.

-

Because they have ideological unity.

-

They were educated in the right way and apparently that was
not the case, or too little the case, with the others…

-

The mental directions were too little. Those who mentally still
have ideological motivation is more resistant and more selfassured in his expression… Ideology is central, everything else
that is only based in daily politics is being questioned at the
first hurdle and retrieves. It’s almost a religious question that
ideology, in fact, it’s a kind of religion…

-

Are you religious?

-

No, I mean I am religious but without confession. I think
religion is necessary but I’m for the here and now and not the
afterlife. I am ideologically religious I would say, but
realistically so.

 Schweiger Interview

55

-

The now and not the after life, basically. That’s quite similar to
Jewish beliefs isn’t it?!

-

No, they’re focused on the afterlife…

-

But also on the here and now.

-

Pragmatically speaking maybe, but their basic thesis, with
Yahweh, Sinai and all the revelations they do focus on the
afterlife…

-

But they share that with Christianity.

-

Sure , all those revelatory religions, the Jewish, Christian and
Muslim Faith have an ideology that goes back two and a half
thousand years.

-

What’s your opinion on the conflict with Islam?

-

That’s very hard to judge objectively. Islam is a world that’s so
far behind considering human enlightenment. Religion and
reality, which then feeds into politics, can’t be separated
there. The more I know the less I believe and their knowledge
is still more or less medieval. That’s why they still believe
accordingly, while the problem in Europe is that faith has been
undermined to a large extent by the scientific enlightenment. I
wouldn’t want to be a theologian today, poor souls who have
to stand for something that can’t be in agreement anymore
with evolution. Schönborn really embarrassed himself there
with his sermon in the US.

-

What Schönborn does is of course completely crazy. But as
you talk about the conflict in the European and Russian
region, Huntington and others talk about the conflict
Christianity and Islam, or the First against the Third World.
They see it as a religious conflict.

-

They say religious, I say racial. Huntington is a Jew of course,
but an intelligent one, and he names that danger for Europe
because it’s questioning its religion. Psychologically he’s right,
but Christianity can’t be modernised anymore. Dogma is
dogma and it’s intellectually medieval.

-

But Islam can still be modernised. As you say it’s still waiting
for an enlightenment.

-

But not scientifically. Islam has its whole enlightenment in its
revelations. The problem for the Europeans is that they
psychologically undermined their faith with real science. Either
I have genetics or behavioural science and evolution or God
and the creation. They can’t simply be connected. Of course
they’re trying to build bridges but it’s simply not possible. You
can either have the creator or evolution and natural law, they
can’t be combined. You can’t reverse natural sciences, which
undermines the dogma of course. It can’t be stopped.

 Schweiger Interview

56

-

It’s the natural law of things, especially when we think of the
progress made in the last 50 years in genetics and so on.
Those are things that undermine faith, and when Schönborn
came along with his creationism I thought he went a bit crazy.
It’s stupid to try and promote something like Catholicism. One
of the stupidest things is to take everything from the bible
literally.

-

Concerning faith and his position as cardinal he is right, but he
has to deal with the fact that there will be resistance from the
opposition. There was an authority of the Church in the thirties
when they had a unity with the conservative government and
basically could help in the decision-making process, whether
with Dollfuß or Schuschnigg. It’s ridiculous to think what’s left
from that…

-

I still remember when I was a child in Tyrol and the priest in
the village was an authority. He could decide everything and
now everyone’s laughing at him.

-

That’s the problem the Church has. I wouldn’t want to be a
priest or a theologian in education, trying to teach Christianity.
I feel sorry for those who are. In private they must be thinking
about this, they’re all quite intelligent. They must be
wondering if they can still defend views like that, and if it still
matches their personal ideologies…

-

I always wonder if they really believe.

-

They have to! Of course they have doubts as well though.
They can’t ignore scientific enlightenment, they’re too
intelligent for that. But at the end of the day, they are still
priests or theologians.

-

I have my difficulties with such irrational people. Sometimes
there’s nothing more irrational than the Catholic Church.

-

That’s faith. On my tombstone, we have a family grave in my
hometown, I have runes and an inscription that ascribes death
an organisational and not a frightening function. Nowadays
the Church is living of the fear of death, because people don’t
know what happens after so they stay in the Church in case
heaven exists. It’s all too human, but that’s the Church’s
strong point, the fear of death.

-

Before we finish now because we don’t want to tire you out,
let’s go back to monetary politics. So, at the moment we have
the economic crisis and you think that we’ll find a solution
that grow out of necessity.

-

Exactly, or else we don’t have the strength for renewal and
evolution spoke its word, as I said before.

 Schweiger Interview

57

-

So, if I understood correctly, either it happens out of a natural
or organic necessity that’s rooted in the situation, within
something inevitable, or everything stays as it is and
collapses.

-

Yes, even though there are other problems related to this as
well. Power politics, biological questions, the development of
the global population, all those things we talked about can
influence this self-preservation. The need for self-preservation
is dominant in humans and primarily works on a subconscious
level, so the mobilisation is unconsciously not consciously. It is
mobilising or has to be mobilised.

-

And how is racial instinct, as you call it, related to that?

-

We’ll see. Either we have the creational power for renewal and
something new will come into being, or we’ll be pushed from
power.

-

I was quite surprised by your view that it’s necessary to move
away from the Great German Reich idea to achieve that… or
one has to get over it.

-

You can’t see this anymore as the end goal today but within a
greater sense of global politics and the preservation of the
white race. Only that will help the preservation of the nation.
My national preservation only works within the preservation of
the white race. Only one people my itself would be
overwhelmed within the global political situation, they
wouldn’t make it.

-

But I saw a speech only by Küssler in Jena from last year and
he said something completely different. I don’t want to debate
Küssler now, but he has those paroles of Arian resistance, that
it’s completely wrong because it would mix the differences
between different peoples.

-

Why?

-

I’m only repeating what Küssel said, don’t ask me what’s
happening in his brain.

-

He’s thinking about the national in a narrow sense, and he’s
right. But this is toppled by the dimensions of global politics so
it all happens on a greater scale today. I’m sure that, if Adolf
Hitler were still alive today, he would talk about very different
scales than he did in the 20s. It’s a different time now. Of
course Küssel is right in saying that national traditions and so
on suffer if we talk of Arian unity, but it’s not possible
anymore nowadays to uphold national power, based on what
we discussed earlier.

-

He doesn’t mean it in a bad way.

 Schweiger Interview

58

-

I know, he means well. Starting from a nationalist point of
view isn’t realistic anymore. Realistic is what’s possible in a
power political sense. I can wish for whatever I like, even
landing on Mars because it’s great to live there. But I have to
create the daily prerequisites for it to make it a reality. I have
to acknowledge reality. And the realities of power politics and
relations have changed.

-

I have to ask something else there. One aspect of change is
mass immigration, because we have an immigrant population
of about 20% in Central Europe, depending on the country.
What’s your position towards them? What can be done with
them? Intermixing is not an option, racially speaking, right? Or
does it depend where they’re from?

-

20% Asians?

-

No, I’m talking about immigrants in general, Turks and so on.

-

You have to differentiate. Turks are Central Asian, so far away
from the European genetically. The intermixing within Europe,
as it has happened over centuries results in relational genes
that can be harmonised. But when other elements exist from a
greater racial perspective there will be tension and no
possibility for harmonisation. Of course those that are already
here can’t be underestimated…

-

Africans?

-

Africans, because there is no genetic compromise.

-

African and Chinese live 3000km apart…

-

But the number is still small enough that genetic mutation
isn’t possible. That’s why arguments to stop immigration are
more important than what we should do with those that are
already here. If we had something to say I’d say ‘Here’s $20
000. Go back to your country and build a new existence.’
That’s a humane approach…

-

Humane! But you say they have to go?

-

Absolutely, no question.

-

No matter who?

-

Only those that create greater racial tension.

-

According to skin colour then… Turks for example.

-

Of course.

-

But there are European Turks too.

-

Yes, but the principal Turk is from Asia.

-

And Bosnians or Serbs?

 Schweiger Interview

59

-

No, they could stay, Slavic elements could stay.

-

So Slavic…African, Asian, Arab…

-

There are great genetic differences in mentality and they can
hardly be dealt with, but anything in the European region can
be harmonised. The greater European self-assertion is of
importance here, because the challenge is definitely given by
Asia. And certain reservations between European nations will
become irrelevant…

-

So, if you stand together and the opponent is so obvious that
small conflicts are redundant.

-

Yes… I have my own way of working… I always write down
buzzwords because I want to write a book about ideology. And
I wrote down ‘thank you for the existence of China, because it
forces us to be confident and to find a joint solution to the
problem. It’s a serious opponent that requires serious action.
Top or flop.’ It’s a positive challenge, because it tests our
decadence.

-

I get that, but I’m unsure about racial theory, because the
genetic differences between races are very small according to
gene technology.

-

If I start from here I can also say we’re close to the Orang-utan
because we’re 98% similar genetically. It’s about the fine
details… I could say, if an African lives in Schleswig-Holstein
he’ll be white in the next generation, but that won’t work. We
know that habitat had a great influence on racial form that
took 20-30,000 years to consolidate. It’s also a question of
where the sun is in relation to us, and so on. It’s no
coincidence that certain races developed in certain habitats,
it’s dependent on geography and the cosmic. So, if an African
race would settle here now it would take another 25 000 years
for them to adjust. I’m just saying this because you argued
that the genetic question isn’t that differentiated. It is within
the final 2% that exist between us and Orang-utans and
chimpanzees.

-

There’s a lot of history in between too.

-

Of course, between black people and Asian people, there are
always fine differences.

-

So, scientifically speaking you’re racist.

-

I am a racist within its meaning in relation to genetics.
Genetics is a science, and if I accept genetics as a science and
evolution as a natural fact I am racist. That’s how it also
developed that there are different races… I know, opponents
always say ‘that’s racism,’ and I say ‘that’s obvious within that
process.’

 Schweiger Interview

60

-

I can see you don’t have a problem with that.

-

I can say confidently I am a believer in racial theory.

-

And would you consider yourself as national socialist?

-

Absolutely.

-

Without any problems?

-

No problems whatsoever.

-

There’s always the question whether that’s illegal or not…

-

I’m someone who is a national socialist.

-

That’s different again.

-

Well, you see those fine differences in language… You can
interpret that either way, but I’m convinced that today
requires a different national socialism than after WWI.

-

So you distance yourself from the nostalgia but not from
content. You’re someone who renews things, can I say that, is
that how you see yourself?

-

Yes. If I wanted to repeat what happened in the 20s I’ll fail in
achieving what I want- the biological preservation of my
people, because methods have a temporal limit. There are
realisations that are valid over long time periods and there are
definitely theoretical principles that were as valid in the Third
Reich as they are today. But in relation to methods it’s a
different world today that can’t be compared to the interwar
years. China was a colony then. Today it’s the first world
power. Things have changed completely.

-

There was also the fall of the British Empire.

-

Of course. The British Empire was Hitler’s illusion, he said that
it’s a Germanic achievement and has to be maintained.
Churchill’s politics ruined it…

-

What about this renewal? It seems the continuation of
strategy and tactics is important to you.

-

Today we have different markers of power, and economic
knowledge that didn’t exist back then. We had so many
changed intellectually and in power politics. If we decide on
the preservation of our people and race, we also have to
calculate power opportunities to see what measures are in
place to preserve my people and the white race. The markers
for that a very different today.

-

That’s true.

-

Sorry, can I use your bathroom?

-

He’s looking for the toilet.

 Schweiger Interview

61

-

Of course.

-

We’ll have to leave soon now.

-

It was a great conversation.

-

It’s very interesting talking to you.

-

For me too. It’s enriching to see that you thing about strategy,
because you’re still active and I can’t do that much anymore…

-

I think those geo-political changes are obvious. We live in a
very different world now compared to when I was young or
became political. That was in the 70s and it was so different
with the Vietnam War… It’s unimaginable now. There were
still so many colonies, and the downfall of communism. The
whole world completely changed, geopolitically speaking. And
those things also has enormous effects on Austria. The
country became extremely modern, not necessarily in a good
way. It adjusted to certain European standards and a lot has
been changed there.

-

And those changes happen faster and faster.

-

You also think so? The carousel is going faster and faster. As I
said, if someone had told me ten years ago that China would
be the next superpower I’d say they’re crazy, because I
imagined the Chinese in blue overalls digging for water in
rural communes.

-

What’s happening there is gigantic and yet hardly ever
considered. I respect the power that’s there.

-

Of course that’s only possible with this particular form of
government.

-

It wouldn’t work with a democracy in the European sense. It
was the only possible way to mobilise China’s powers, it’s
enviable. It’s a completely different dimension. If things
happen as they do in China much bigger habitats are
necessary because of the mobility of the human race. And out
of 1.3 billion Chinese, 92% are Han-Chinese, they are
incredibly homogenous…

-

But someone who travelled through China told me that they
are the unfriendliest people you can imagine. They are hostile
against foreigners and so distant that you could starve in front
of them and they wouldn’t care.

-

That’s because they are genetically absolutist. It’s their
strength as well because they have internal unity. As I keep
saying, that’s always underestimated.

-

And I understand that this is coming over to us from Siberia.

 Schweiger Interview

62

-

It can’t be stopped, it’s biological law. A people growing like
the Chinese must expand.

-

Yes, and to return to money again, the Chinese boom and the
relative strength of the Euro also affects the American crisis.
In the end, the US is like the USSR, only has military power
and is on the ground financially.

-

Worse than the USSR, because they have racial differences
within. They’re not a people. They’ll be able to hold power on
their continent but otherwise it will end, it’s the beginning of
the end.

-

I know Latin America quite well and in Mexico and elsewhere
you should never speak English or pretend you’re American.
Austrian or German is no problem, but they hate the
Americans, no matter where. It’s a hatred from below.

-

Because they were ruled and exploited.

-

Attacked and everything! That anger was the first thing I’ve
learned about there. Never speak English. It can be very
dangerous, because they’re poor and want to get something
from you. As soon as they know you’re not American it’s ok.

-

Despite the opposition in Latin America, with Chavez and so
on, the US will remain a military and economic power in the
region for some time. Globally, though it’s the beginning of
the end. Afghanistan and Iraq were such an embarrassment!
For years they believed they had to mix things up there, but
they have no chance against the religious states.

-

Especially considering the motivation of groups like the
Taliban.

-

Simply the human effort they make. If I kill myself for my faith
and my people, that’s an incredible faith.

-

And what are you supposed to do against them? If you shoot
them they don’t care…

-

Those are processes we can’t relate to with our human
understanding…

-

But I understand the resistance because of all the arrogance
of US power, because they seem to think they have to spread
their ‘culture’ everywhere. It’s imperialist and cultural
imperialism, hat’s why there’s local conflict then.

-

Such face and sacrifice can’t be compared with the material
strength. That’s what faith does. It’s power.

-

Mr Obama won’t be able to solve the Iraq and Afghanistan
problem…

 Schweiger Interview

63

-

He’s just a tool, and we’ll find out in the next few years what
for. I had $650m for his campaign- where from?

-

Private sponsorship they said.

-

Private donations… if I get $50-60m in private donations that’s
already a lot…

-

I also want to know what’s going to happen…

-

He can only do what those in the background want him to.
Basically it doesn’t matter who’s president, because it’s the
others who make politics… But he’s the best tool because he’s
coloured and has rhetoric talent for someone coloured. In his
argumentation he can certainly move things, especially
because all the coloured and mixed people in the US are
increasing so he has resonance. But in real political terms –
what is he going to do?

-

He can only manage their demise… well, we’ll be leaving now
anyways.

-

It was a pleasure.

-

We are slowly going now...

-

Can we take a photograph?

-

She would like to take a photograph over there, where the
light is good.

-

Could you ask herr Schweiger if he knows a
photogarpher called Leni Riefenstahl?

-

What is with Leni Riefenstahl?

-

Does he remember?

-

Do you know Leni Riefenstahl?

-

Of course, she was ingenious.

-

Yes, yes, the berlin games she did, i saw photographs
from there.

-

Berlin 36’ yes. She also took pictures of the Rechsparteitag.

-

Did she take your photograph?

-

She asks if she took your photo as well?... But she was much
older! Even though she photographed for a long time. She
lived until 102.

-

She was in Africa in the end.

-

She took pictures of that tribe…

-

So, pull the chair in, your elbows on the table... Do me
a favour please and just switch off the backlight.

 Schweiger Interview

64

-

This one?

-

Yeah, the ones on the wall ... the other one ... that’s
great! Thank you.

-

He still wanted to know when you joined the SS/

-

At 17.

-

How long was the Junkerschule?

-

A year, but you were selected beforehand, that was pretty
though.

-

With sports and so on?

-

Yes, and ideology and other things...

-

And you were a pioneer?

-

Yes, sturmpioneer, those that had it the hardest.

-

How often were you wounded?

-

Three times, a granade here, a shot in the knee that went in
here and out there- that was at the Plattensee- and here on
my foot, a graze.

-

When did you join the SS?

-

April 1941.

-

There must have been many losses.

-

We had the most.

-

So you went out front and cleared the way?

-

Yes, cleaning up the mines and fighting the tanks, that’s what
the pioneers did.

-

And you were alwaus south oft he USSR?

-

Always.

-

Mannstein was there too... Where are you from again?

-

From here. Neuberg, that’s 20km from here.

-

Should I have any more questions I’ll give you a call. And I’ll
let you know when their article was published and we’ll send
you a copy if you like.

-

Definitely.

-

And I’ll call you in January. I’d be interested in the trial.

-

I still have to note down your address.

-

Look outside, she still needs a portrait.

-

He must have taken his picture taken a 1000 times.

 Schweiger Interview

-

We’ll send you the article if that’s alright.

-

Would it be ok if we did a picture outside? With Bärli?

65