Rudolf Jung’s “National Socialism”

The “Das Kapital” of National Socialism… kind of

Slightly over a year ago, I began work on translation of Rudolf Jung’s 1922 work National Socialism: Its Foundations, Development, and Goals, the first book which sought to offer a full, systematic exposition of the entire breadth of the National Socialist ideological worldview. I can now announce that the translation is complete – it can be downloaded directly from WordPress using this link: Jung – National Socialism – Its Foundations, Development, and Goals (2nd ed., 1922)

Alternatively, I’ve also uploaded a copy for access via the Internet Archive.

One of the first articles I ever posted on this blog was a profile of Jung, so I won’t go into too much detail about his personal background here. People who are interested in knowing more about Jung’s life can read that article, or they can read the introduction I included within the translation. The book itself is significant for a number of reasons. Primarily this is because, as mentioned, it constituted the first genuine attempt by a member of the National Socialist movement to actually set out the theoretical aspects of National Socialist doctrine on any kind of comprehensive, intellectual level. Articles or pamphlets had been written on NS ideology in the past, but nothing of the range or scope (or length) of Jung’s book. Jung’s ambition was to be the ‘Karl Marx’ of National Socialism, and his stated hope to those who knew him was that his book would serve as the movement’s Das Kapital. Some historians tend to be fairly dismissive of this aspiration, claiming that Jung’s book is intellectually shallow in comparison with Marx’s works. While it’s true that Jung’s book isn’t on the same level as Kapital (for one thing, Kapital comprises three pretty dense volumes of critique and theory – National Socialism is a pamphlet by comparison), I don’t think the dismissive attitude affected by some writers is really warranted. There are interesting historical arguments in National Socialism, some thought-provoking analyses of capitalist economics and property relations (a good chunk of the book is focused on outlining the bases of NS economic theory, particularly issues relating to land ownership), and Jung’s book is (at least in my opinion) far more readable than Marx’s. The intellectual foundations of Jung’s work are solid enough for their purpose, even if they don’t have quite the grandeur that the author may have hoped for or intended. In any event, now that the book is available in English, readers will be able to make such assessments for themselves.

Inter-State NS Conference. Salzburg, 1920. Front row, l-r: Rudolf Jung, Alfred Brunner, Walter Riehl, Anton Drexler, Hans Knirsch.

The other major reason why Jung’s book is so important is due to the fact that it is technically “pre-Hitlerian” in terms of its content and perspective. The first edition of National Socialism appeared in 1919, before anyone outside of Munich had really heard of Hitler (and even within Munich’s völkisch circles he was not yet really well-known at that time). Even when the second edition – the edition which I have translated – appeared in 1922, Hitler was still just one leader among many within the National Socialist milieu. By 1922 Hitler had grown to be well-respected and influential within the movement, but he was not yet its infallible Führer, and he was still roughly a year away from being widely acknowledged as such. National Socialists in 1922 (especially those from the Sudetenland, where National Socialism had been born almost two decades before) were not afraid to disagree with Hitler. They were not afraid to criticize him, either. Hitler’s own personal views had not yet permeated the ideology to the extent that major questions of theory or strategy were being determined chiefly from Munich – Jung at that time was arguably the more dominant figure within the movement. His book is not just one of the earliest and most complete explorations of the NS theory and worldview, it is the earliest and most complete exploration of the original strand of National Socialist thought, before it was subsumed by the tide of Hitler’s rising prestige and personality.

The second (1922) and third (1923) editions of Jung’s book.

As stated, my translation is of the 1922 second edition of Jung’s book. Unfortunately I have never been able to acquire a copy of the original 1919 first edition, although I own a small collection of additional works by Jung and by the pre-Hitlerian and Sudeten-Austrian National Socialists. During the course of the translation I frequently compared the content of the second and third editions, and the differences between the two are fairly interesting. While much of the content in each is the same, the third edition has been very specifically rewritten in various places to reflect a much more overtly ‘Hitlerist’ perspective. Between the publishing of the two editions Hitler’s status had risen meteorically within the movement, and by 1923 he had essentially attained the status of Führer, going from just the (rather troublesome) leader of National Socialism’s Munich branch to the most dominant and influential NS personality within every German-speaking territory. The older parties in Austria, Silesia, and the Sudetenland had consequently bent the knee and accepted the leadership of Hitler and the NSDAP over their own organizations, hailing him as “Our Reichsdeutsche Führer!” at an Inter-State Congress in Vienna. The third edition reflects these changes fairly explicitly – the book is now dedicated to Hitler, several chapters have been rewritten to focus around the NSDAP (which is barely mentioned at all in the 2nd edition), the principle of Führerprinzip is much more explicitly stated, and so on. The third edition could thus be seen as representing the ideological transition from pre-Hitlerian National Socialism to Hitlerism. At some point in the future I will probably look at translating it as well – it would form a useful supplement to this translation, and to the translations some of the other works from this period which I’ve made so far.

16 thoughts on “Rudolf Jung’s “National Socialism”

  1. Bogumil,

    I thought I should let you that I just began reading your English translation of Rudolf Jung’s book. To be honest, although I have read the original German text from the Third Edition, I was never able to read the Second Edition prior to your English translation. It is clear to me that, upon looking through the first few Chapters, the Second Edition reflected a different side of Pan-Germanic Socialism that continues to be obscure to most people.

    My hope is that I will be able to set aside some time to read the Second Edition in English, figuring out what sets this version apart from the Third Edition. By finishing the English translation, I will be revisiting this ARPLAN Blog post to give you my insight about the English translation and determine for ourselves what can be said about this particular book.

    With that being said, I am kind of curious about what happened to the original First Edition. Is it possible that the First Edition never achieved a widespread circulation as the Second or Third Editions?


    • Yes, one issue seems to be that the print run of the first edition was more limited. It was published in Troppau, Czechoslovakia by the DNSAP’s own publishing house, at a time when I think there were still paper shortages. The anti-NS attitude of the Czech state, followed by decades of Soviet rule, probably didn’t serve as much of an incentive for people to preserve that kind of material either, honestly.

      The second and third editions by contrast were published by Ernst Boepple’s Deutscher Volksverlag in Munich, and seem to have been put out in larger numbers, especially in Germany and Austria. I’ve seen Jung’s book advertised in the back of NS publications through to at least the early ’30s, which probably helps explain why it’s so easy to find original copies of the third edition especially. The second edition is a little trickier to locate, but copies do show up with online sellers occasionally.

      Apologies for not responding to your latest email btw, I’ve been flat out editing Jung’s book. It’s why there were no articles last month.

  2. Bogumil,

    I understand that you were preoccupied with the editing of Rudolf Jung’s book. The effort was totally worth it because there are similar ideas in Jung’s book that were later espoused by economists in the Soviet Union, PRC, and the Eastern Bloc countries. What they and Jung were missing is a distinctly Socialist conception of finance that cannot be sustained with a Liberal Capitalist conception of finance.

    Not only do we know that there were other strands of National Socialism, some of which were not even Hitlerist to begin with, I am also impressed by the fact that Jung described some economic proposals therein which are favorable to my own research. While you were finishing the edits to the English translation, I had made significant progress in the articulations of Socialistic forms of finance and banking, abolishment of rents and mortgages, and minimized Taxation to contexts related to their “educational effect,” to quote what you wrote in page 160 of the translation, where “the high cost discourages their overuse and so acts as a deterrent to indulgence and addiction in the population.” Again, I am impressed by the level of work that you and I had done over the past month.

    For “Reciprocal-Reserve Banking,” I described the basis behind a distinctly Socialistic form of banking where we can negate the need for Interest and found new ways where the banks can be repurposed to facilitate economic planning

    In “Taxation and the Work-Standard” Parts II and III, I correctly concluded that the US Taxation System (and by extension, most Western European Taxation Systems) is a product of World Wars I and II and an inefficient one at that. It is no wonder why there have been decades of these piecemeal attempts at “reforming” Taxation when it is far more practical to phase them out in favor of a different model of finance conducive to Socialism.

    Part II (

    Part III (

    Moreover, I also figured out that the “market” as we understand it in the economic sense, can exist in Planned/Command Economies just as a “command” can also exist in Market/Mixed Economies. I am fully convinced that Rudolf Jung was alluding to this consideration when he stated the “private sector” can still exist in a Socialist Planned/Command Economy. The “market” within the Planned/Command Economy resembles a Tournament of jousting knights as opposed to how the manner of operation under Liberal Capitalism, which is a 19th century Social Darwinist perception of life that is antithetical to the interests of any Socialist nation.

    It makes sense for me to arrive at this same conclusion within my own research because this “command” within the Market/Mixed Economy is not the “market.” In fact, there really is no true “market” to speak of under a so-called Market/Mixed Economy. It is basically the Liberal Capitalist conception of finance imposing a zero-sum game under the Incentives of Supply and Demand where somebody gains everything and somebody else loses everything. The significance became apparent to me in an ongoing five-part Blog post about what defines a Planned/Command Economy.

    The posts in question are Parts I, II, III and IV “The Commanding Heights of Powerball Gambits,” with Part V not yet complete. The posts which opened my eyes to the existence of a “market” (as Jung himself had described it) within the Planned/Command Economy are in Parts II and III.

    Part II: (

    Part III: (


  3. Hey man you should reach out to some of the nationalist/dissident publishers to get this out physical. Antelope Hill, Arktos, Third Reich Books, Black House Publishing, Imperium Press and others have published stuff like this. It would be really cool to have this physical, and you could get a bit of pocket money back for your translating grind.

    Thanks for the translation king, also for the info you’ve given me on reddit. Much appreciated always.

    • Thanks, appreciate it. Someone did voice an interest in publishing it at one point, but that would be contingent on me being able to keep the free PDF version online. Getting Jung’s book to a wider audience has been a long-term goal of mine, so I want to be able to ensure it stays as accessible as possible. Seeing an English version in print would be a trip, though.

  4. Hello.

    Thank you for translating this book! This will hopefully be an informative and interesting read.

    However I must say, I’m particularly interested in a translation of the third edition as well, having both would provide an interestingly nuanced historical perspective from Jung in regards to how he viewed his own work.

    Being able to compare the two editions as an English reader would be wonderful. I feel compelled to push for this project, because now I feel it’s only half complete that the second edition is available in English.

    Good job!

    • Thankyou. I will definitely translate it at some point. After over a year of working on the same book, though, I need a break, so I want to look at doing something else for my next big project – either a book by a member of Otto Strasser’s Black Front, or a work by one of Germany’s nationalist Social-Democrats. I’ll probably look at picking up the third edition sometime next year – it shouldn’t take as long as the second edition, since a lot of the text is the same, so that should cut down on a lot of the work involved.

  5. Bogumil,

    I had just completed my reading of your English translation to the Second Edition of Rudolf Jung’s “Der nationale Sozialismus.” Let me begin by saying that I am extremely impressed by your level of dedication in pursuing a counterfactual history of National Socialism, which I will continue to refer to as “Pan-Germanic Socialism” from now on. Rudolf Jung was not a Revisionist nor was he a Dogmatist, Dogmatism and Revisionism being the two biggest problems which continue to plague all Socialisms within these United States of America and around the world. Reading the English translation of the Second Edition has casted everything I know about National Socialism in an ironic light, when compared against the original German of the Third Edition.

    As stated in my earlier comments in this ARPLAN post, some of Jung’s economic ideas do in fact have actual equivalents in the histories of the Soviet Union, Eastern Bloc countries and PRC. In fact, there are even striking parallels to true all-American Socialism, “Hamiltonian Federalist Socialism.” It is highly ironic because the Soviets, CMEA/Warsaw Pact and PRC were all Marxist-Leninist regimes while the Federalist Party was led by a Jew named Alexander Hamilton. After spending the past ten years of my life corresponding and socializing with both Marxist and non-Marxist Socialists, I am convinced that Rudolf Jung would not be too much of a stranger in the presence of any other Socialism besides Pan-Germanic Socialism. To quote page 2, only “the courageous, the driven, the selfless” will dare to write a review such as this one.

    Jung’s arguments about Cooperatives throughout the book had been conveyed from the same premises as Vladimir Lenin’s own arguments in favor of Cooperatives in the Soviet Union. Lenin argued in “On Cooperation” that Cooperatives are an essential economic organization tool to accommodate anyone who are not yet convinced of Socialist economics. Link: (

    Another argument from Jung which reminds me of another similar parallel to those described by Lenin is the favorable description of Guilds in the First Reich, the fact that they were the ones who orchestrated that “journeyman-bakers of Colmar once began a decade-long strike in 1445 because they were denied their usual place in the Corpus Christi procession” from page 16. This is an important passage because the Catholic Church historically maintained a strong presence within the political affairs of the German Reich and the Electoral College at the Reichstag, up to and including the coronation of the Kaiser by the Pope. Hamilton was clearly aware of this when he advocated for the American Electoral College, insisting that the American Volksgemeinschaften, not His Holiness at the Chair of St. Peter, should be the ones coronating the next President of the United States. It is evident to me that Jung was trying to make similar arguments comparable to those which Lenin had made in “A Talk With Defenders of Economism.” Link: (

    There is no doubt in my mind that the next logical arguments from Jung, had he been given a given a high-ranking position within the Reich Ministry of Economics, would be to advocate for a true Planned/Command Economy where economic governance is delineated between the Reich, the Provinces and the Municipalities. The result is tantamount to the kind of Hamiltonian Federalist Socialism which I had developed from Hamilton’s own ideas in The Federalist Papers while rejecting the ones written by Thomas Jefferson’s protégé, James Madison. I am referring to Federalist Papers No. 30-No. 36, all of which were deconstructed for Part I of “Taxation and the Work-Standard.” Link: (

    It is clear to me that Jung opposed the Jeffersonian Woodrow Wilson, even though Jung himself did not realize that what he called “international Jewry” and “Jewish world domination” in that one infamous Chapter (‘The Jewish Spirit. The Jewish Pursuit of World Supremacy’) is really Liberal Capitalism and the Empire of Liberty, the contemporary “Liberal International Economic Order” (LIEO) that is recently weakened by COVID-19. I know this because Jefferson himself was very adamant about Liberal Capitalism someday taking over the world back in the American Revolutionary War during the late 18th century, which Hamilton and the Federalists would later oppose as part of their support for Venezuela’s Bolivarian Federalism (an obscure fact never mentioned in American history textbooks). And I have also begun to investigate the Anti-Jeffersonian foreign policy views of Gore Vidal after realizing that some of his stances bear a striking resemblance to those advocated by the old Federalists.
    The advocacy of a “People’s Army” and a “People’s State” is too far off from the Maoist advocacy for the People’s Liberation Army and the People’s Republic of China, which explains why somebody once argued that “Maoism is a ‘Chinese National Socialism.’” I would not be surprised if Pan-Germanic Socialism’s true Intent was to create a “People’s Reich of Greater Germany.” To advocate for a People’s Army and the People’s State in the National Socialist sense is like talking about that Prussian command culture described by Chairman Mao in “Combat Liberalism.” Link: (

    Speaking of which, I would also not be surprised if Pan-Germanic Socialism advocates for the kind of Autarky that defines North Korean “Juche” (which means ‘Self-Sufficiency’). That conception of freedom within the DPRK is about as National Socialist as their “Songun Policy.”

    And lastly, the advocacy of a functioning Council Democracy serves as a good precursor to Democratic Centralism. Here in America, Council Democracy has been advocated by people like Hannah Arendt and Russell Kirk between the 1950s and 1970s in opposition to the Parliamentary Democracy of Jeffersonianism. A functioning Council Democracy eventually includes a “Federal Electoral College” existing as part of a “Federal Congress of Councils” elected by a politically and economically proactive electorate inclusive of all citizens contributing Arbeit (Work) and generating Geld (Money) as vocational civil servants in a Planned/Command Economy.

    What I have just described here are passages in the English translation which stood out to me the most, Bogumil. It may not seem like it whenever somebody reads the translation for the first time because one must pursue a committed effort to live out one’s own personal life in a “more Prussian or more Bolshevist” manner. It entails abandoning all Liberal Capitalist conceptions of political and economic life in favor of more Socialistic conceptions whenever and wherever they can be found and striving to be self-aware of one’s own Authentic Dasein. That was a reason why Jung had described Pan-Germanic Socialism as a meditative journey involving a “return to the German spirit, to the German essence,” which continues unabated long after 1933, long after 1945. Our journey to understand Pan-Germanic Socialism, what political scientists call “National Socialism,” does not end with this English translation. It is only the beginning.

    Jung buttressed this fact clearly in the book’s Conclusion: “Our meditations have now reached their end. We would like to voice the hope that we did not promise too much within the Foreword. // We are of the conviction that our Volk can only recover and attain renewed international standing under the banner of German Socialism, that Socialism which we have referred to simply as ‘the German essence.’”


  6. Buonasera, scusate per il fatto che Vi scriva in italiano e per la prossima richiesta, ma sono ‘costretto’ a farla qui perché non ho trovato nessun indirizzo mail: potrei porVi alcune domande sulla politica sociale del Terzo Reich e circa alcune richieste di pubblicazioni di autori?

    • I don’t post my email address on the blog in order to avoid spam emails. If you use the Contact Form on this page, the message you write will go through to my email – feel free to contact me there.

  7. Hello!

    I wanted to check if you would allow me to produce an ebook version of this work in the .epub format, as pdf is much harder to read on mobile devices and other readers. So far, I have ‘converted’ your introduction and bits of the first chapter as a test. The only issue is that there is no ideal way of including footnotes in epubs without impacting the reading experience, so personally I would leave them out (tell me if you disagree). You could think of it as an abridged version intended for reading “on the go”.

    Thank you for doing this translation 🙂

    • Sure, go ahead. Would be ideal if you could find a way to keep the footnotes (maybe just list them at the end of the document?), but if it’s not workable, that’s fine. Maybe just include a note that it’s an abridged version and provide a link back to the blog.

  8. Bogumil, che tu sappia, ci sono opere in inglese (od eventualmente in francese e/o spagnolo) di Rudolf Jung? In italiano non c’è niente.

    • I’m afraid that, so far as I can see, I’m the only person who has really translated any of his writings from German into English:

      It’s possible that others might have translated some of his writing into French or Spanish, but if they have I haven’t encountered it before.

      I have some other writing by Jung (a couple of books, and a number of different articles) which I will look at translating at some point, so there will be more writing by him on the blog eventually.

      • Scrissi un altro commento sotto l’ultimo post, perché non avevo visto questa risposta. Stai parlando del testo sulla “Socializzazione”?

Leave a Reply