Karl Haushofer, The Third Reich and the Occult: Reality and Fiction

Karl Haushofer, The Third Reich and the Occult: Reality and Fiction

Historical The formation of geopolitics as a political science is inextricably linked with the name of the German geographer and sociologist Karl Haushofer. He is rightfully considered one of the founders of the continental European school of geopolitics. Geopolitics is now studied in universities, but for a long time it was considered by political scientists as a “fascist” science.

This is due to the fact that the German school of geopolitics (founded by Ratzel), the brightest representative of which was K. Haushofer, was practically destroyed after World War II, under the slogan of denazification, as “providing justification for Nazi military expansion.” In the West, Haushofer was hailed as “Hitler’s teacher” and almost the main ideological inspirer of National Socialism, even though he was never a member of the NSDAP and only met the Fuhrer a few times.

The Office of the US General Counsel stated in September 1945 that “Haushofer was Hitler's intellectual godfather. It was Haushofer, not Hess, who wrote Mein Kampf... Geopolitics was not just an academic theory. It was an energetic plan to conquer central Eurasia and dominate the world.".

The German émigré publication Neue Weltbühne proclaimed from Paris back in January 1940: “Everything that Hitler has achieved or wants to achieve in the future... is the program of the geopolitician Karl Haushofer; he thinks, plans and recommends; Hitler obeys" [2].

Some fans of sensations went even further - they began to claim that Haushofer taught Hitler secret occult sciences. Allegedly, not only was he "trained" in magical societies and was a member of the Thule Society (which he was never actually a member of), but he also founded the secret society "Vril". The figure of Haushofer thus began to be surrounded in such near-fantasy literature with a sort of mystical aura of a powerful Nazi puppeteer wielding supernatural powers.

In 1962, the German political scientist Karl Dietrich Bracher, in his classic study Die nationalsozialistische Machtergreifung, first tried not to go to extremes (although he did not always succeed) and, pointing out the close connection between Haushofer and Deputy Fuhrer Rudolf Hess, nevertheless rejected both an overly simplified view of the direct line of influence of Haushofer on Hitler [4].

However, there is still no consensus among historians on this issue.

Where is the truth? Who really was Karl Haushofer? Was he really Hitler's inspiration and involved in the occult?

In this material, the author will try to dispel some legends regarding the personality of the German scientist.

Geopolitical concepts of Karl Haushofer

Karl Haushofer was born on August 27, 1869 in Munich in the family of Professor Max Haushofer. He chose a military career, serving in the Bavarian corps and then as a teacher at a military academy. In 1896, Karl married Martha Meyer-Doss, who came from a half-Jewish family [3].

In 1908 he was appointed military attaché to Japan. For Japanese society, it was a time of post-war euphoria caused by the victorious war with Russia, a time of plans to build a “Great Japan”, including the Kuril Islands and Sakhalin, Manchuria, part of mainland China, Taiwan, the countries of Southeast Asia up to Australia, many islands of the Pacific Ocean [5].

Acquaintance with the spiritual world of the Japanese made a great impression on Haushofer, and upon returning to Germany he began working on a book about Japan. It was published in 1913 under the title "Dai Nihon". His first work received positive reviews and prompted the author to write a dissertation [3].

Soldier and geopolitician Karl Haushofer (1869–1946) with his wife Martha and sons
Soldier and geopolitician Karl Haushofer (1869–1946) with his wife Martha and sons

The First World War interrupted his scientific career. K. Haushofer goes into the army and takes part in battles on the Western and Eastern fronts. At the end of the war, he retired with the rank of general and received the position of privatdozent of geography at the University of Munich [3].

The scientist’s subsequent works were also devoted to Japanese and Far Eastern issues in general: “The Japanese Empire in its Geographical Development” and “Geopolitics of the Pacific Ocean”. Then Haushofer begins to comprehend the geopolitical situation in the world as a whole and publishes the works “World Politics Today”, “Status Quo and the Renewal of Life”, “Geopolitics of Panideas” [5].

In 1927, Karl Haushofer published a major work, “Borders in their Geographical and Political Significance,” in which he appears as a follower of Ratzel. For him, the concept of the state as a living organism is the final truth, and the main task is the creation of a holistic doctrine about the living organs of this organism - the borders of the state. Haushofer, on 230 pages, analyzes in detail the scientific literature on this topic (works of F. Ratzel, O. Maul, R. Sieger, E. Schene, J. Bryce, G. Taylor, F. Turner, D. Uehara, etc.), considers boundaries from the point of view of their geographical, biogeographical, psychological, historical and political essence [5].

In 1931, Haushofer’s next major work, Panideas in Geopolitics, was published, in which he substantiates the essence of practical geopolitics (today we would say “geostrategy”) as the implementation of large-scale foreign policy concepts - panideas. Panideas, according to Haushofer, are proclaimed by entire nations, cover large areas and have global political significance [5].

Haushofer put forward the idea of ​​“pan-regions” - large spaces into which the world is divided according to the “meridional” principle, with the center of each region in the northern hemisphere and the periphery in the southern. Haushofer identified four pan-regions - America, centered in the United States, Europe - Middle East - Africa, centered in Germany, East Asia and the Pacific, centered in Japan, Russia - Russian Plain and Siberia, Persia and India.

It is worth noting that Haushofer was a very erudite person and studied the works of his compatriots, as well as the Englishman Mackinder (and his Hartland idea), the Swede Kjellen, the Frenchman Vidal de la Blache, the American Mahan and other geopoliticians. He did not ignore Russian scientists, especially the works of the publicist and sociologist N. Ya. Danilevsky. Thus, Haushofer included the projects of Pan-Slavists, Pan-Germanists, Pan-Islamists, Sun Yat-sen, N. Ya. Danilevsky, and the Monroe Doctrine as typical panideas.

Haushofer defined geopolitics as “the study of the connections of political processes with the earth” and as “an art capable of guiding practical politics.” He called on geopoliticians to teach the people to “think geopolitically” and politicians to “act geopolitically.”

According to K. Haushofer, the difference between political geography and geopolitics was that when considering the problem of space and state, “political geography considers the state from the point of view of space, and geopolitics considers space from the point of view of the state.” Moreover, he believed, “geopolitics prepares instruments for political action and directives for political life in general.” The goal of geopolitics, according to Haushofer, should be to predict the expected global political development in the future and identify its main features [3].

In his most famous geostrategic work, “The Continental Bloc” (1940), which was written in the context of the rapprochement between Germany and the USSR, Haushofer wrote that the time had come to implement the panidea that was deadly for the Anglo-American alliance - to create a continental bloc: Central Europe - Eurasia - Japan, which is actually a Heartland, dominating the World Island (Eurasia and Africa) and at the same time dividing it into spheres of influence.

Haushofer, Hitler and Nazism

Assessing the post-war structure of Europe, K. Haushofer came closer in his positions to “revolutionary conservatism” on the issue of understanding the essence of the Versailles system, considering it “the continuation of the war by other means.” The created system of the “new order,” in his opinion, was unfair, since it violated the principle established by nature of the natural distribution of space between countries, creating in its place a bloc of buffer states that did not allow Germany to realize vital growth [3].

K. Haushofer considered the problem of living space one of the most important issues of geopolitical science as a whole. In the article “Fundamentals, Essence and Goals of Geopolitics,” published in 1928 in the collection “Elements of Geopolitics,” he emphasized that this young science, if understood correctly, was one of the most effective means of fighting for a fair distribution of living space on Earth [6] .

It is because of this that for decades in Western and especially Soviet literature, Karl Haushofer was portrayed as the fascist theorist who gave Adolf Hitler the idea of ​​​​the “conquest of Lebensraum.” And now in historical and journalistic literature one can quite often find statements that Haushofer was an “influential adviser to Hitler.” Moreover, he is credited with almost participating in the compilation of Mein Kampf [7].

Let's try to figure out how true this is.

First of all, it should be noted that Haushofer's influence on Hitler and the National Socialist ideology is greatly exaggerated. Even such proponents of Haushofer's significant influence on Hitler as historian Holger G. Herwig admit that “Haushofer's influence on Hitler is difficult to determine. They had fewer than a dozen meetings, mostly public. Contrary to popular belief, Haushofer did not say a word about Mein Kampf; he refused to review it in his journal Zeitschrift für Geopolitik, since it had “little to do with geopolitics” [2].

Haushofer was introduced to Hitler by the professor's student, Rudolf Hess, who later became Deputy Fuhrer in the Nazi Party. It was Hess who brought Haushofer's ideas to Hitler's attention [7]. At the same time, one should not overestimate the degree of influence of Hess himself on Hitler - it was very relative [6].

Julius Schaub, Hitler's adjutant, recalling the Fuhrer's attitude towards Haushofer, clearly pointed out that rumors about the influence of Haushofer's ideas on Hitler were clearly exaggerated. In total, from 1922 to 1938, Hitler and Haushofer met no more than ten times. The Fuhrer never considered the professor of geopolitics a National Socialist, although he found that some of his theses could be used for the tasks of the NSDAP. Since he knew about the “Jewish origin” of Haushofer’s wife, he always treated the professor of geopolitics with “some caution” [1].

Being a patriot, Haushofer, of course, tried to influence German policy in order to direct it in the right direction, but it is one thing to “try to influence”, quite another to “exert a key influence”. Hitler, apparently, was familiar with geopolitical theories - one can assume that when making his decisions in 1940-1941, he could be guided by the principle: “Who owns Eastern Europe, dominates the Heartland; whoever rules the Heartland rules the World Island; whoever rules the World Island dominates the world” [8].

But this formula for world domination does not belong to Haushofer (the Soviet historian V.I. Dashichev, for example, mistakenly attributes it to the German thinker), but to the English thinker Sir Halford J. Mackinder. It is he who owns the theory of Hartland, which acts as the “citadel of the World Island.”

There is reason to assert that it was thanks to the efforts of K. Haushofer that Hitler became acquainted with F. Ratzel’s “Political Geography” and subsequently used some of his theses in “Mein Kampf” [3]. At the same time, Hitler throughout his life refused to acknowledge any intellectual debt to the Munich geographer; Neither the name "Haushofer" nor the term "geopolitics" are mentioned in his most important works and public appearances.[2]

When Haushofer’s patron Rudolf Hess flew to England, Hitler decided to take out all his anger “on the professor who had intermarried with the Jews” [1]. From the memoirs of W. Schellenberg it is known that Haushofer was involved in the investigation in connection with Hess’s flight.

Nazi Germany's ideas for world conquest under Adolf Hitler were very different from Haushofer's. In particular, Haushofer advocated the Germany-Russia-Japan bloc and was opposed to the invasion of the Soviet Union. He wrote like this:

“...We, in fact, based on the work of the Englishman H. Mackinder, are promoting throughout the world the idea that only a strong connection between states along the Germany-Russia-Japan axis will allow us all to rise and become invulnerable to the “anaconda” methods of the Anglo-Saxon peace" [9].

Most leaders of the National Socialist Party held diametrically opposed views on other countries than Haushofer himself. The “world system” he proposed was not taken into account by anyone [1].

K. Haushofer spoke out for the creation of a complex system of geopolitical alliances, warned against adventuristic aggression against the East and predicted that the German army would be defeated “if it tried to swallow the vast lands of Russia.” As American authors Palmer and Perkins note, for such “sedition” Haushofer ended up in the Dachau concentration camp [10].

The famous German specialist on the history of Nazism G. J. Jacobsen, in his two-volume work “Karl Haushofer: Life and Work,” noted Haushofer’s cooling towards Nazism from the mid-1930s and his subsequent removal from active political activity. The contradiction between the concept of the Euro-Asian continental bloc of K. Haushofer and Hitler’s policy, which reached its climax in aggression against the USSR, according to Jacobsen, is a clear example of the originality of his ideas, their difference from Nazi political practice [3].

Another historian F. Ebeling in the study “Geopolitics: Karl Haushofer and his doctrine of space. 1919–1945” stated the difference between geopolitical and Nazi approaches to resolving foreign policy problems. The first was based on a strategy of geopolitical alliances as opposed to Hitler's adventurist line.

Ebeling focuses on the tragic fate of K. Haushofer, which turns out to be inseparable from the collapse of German geopolitics. The author believes that the difference in the use of means between geopolitics, based on the tactics of state agreements, and the Nazi foreign policy concept, based on the strategy of war, does not allow them to be identified.

Thus, claims that Haushofer was "Hitler's teacher" and the main inspirer of Nazism appear to be unfounded.

Thule Society and the Occult

The topic of the occult and its role in Nazi Germany continues to be quite popular in literature. Thus, in historical fiction, journalism and very dubious historical literature dedicated to the “occult Reich,” Karl Haushofer appears as the “highest initiate” of the Thule society and perhaps the main magician of the Third Reich.

A significant part of such information about Haushofer is taken from the book “The Morning of the Magicians” by French writers Jacques Bergier and Louis Pauvel. It tells colorful stories that Haushofer “was a member of the Luminous Lodge, a secret Buddhist society in Japan and the Thule Society. Not at all as a geopolitician, but as a student of the Eastern Mysteries, Haushofer proclaimed the need for a “return to the origins” of the human race in Central Asia” [11].

Historian Nicholas-Goodrick Clarke, who has examined the role of the occult in Nazi ideology, notes that such claims are false because there is no evidence of Haushofer's connection to the Thule Society.[11]

The founder of the Thule Society, Rudolf von Sebottendorff, in his book “Before Hitler Came” (Bevor Hitler kam: Urkundlich aus der Frühzeit der Nationalsozialistischen Bewegung), which was published in Russian, never mentions Karl Haushofer.

If you believe the “science fiction historians,” then Professor Karl Haushofer continued the work begun by Dietrich Eckart, that is, Hitler’s initiation into the “secret sciences.” Haushofer allegedly belonged to a group of “seekers of truth” that formed around George Ivanovich Gurdjieff, who in literature appears not only as an agent of the Russian secret police, but also as a teacher of the young Dalai Lama [1]. Subsequently, Haushofer allegedly creates the esoteric society "Vril", inspired by Tibetan mysticism.

At the same time, as historian Andrei Vasilchenko rightly notes, there is in fact no historical evidence that Haushofer was ever in Tibet [1].

For the most part, all the “evidence” of Haushofer’s participation in secret esoteric societies is very dubious and has a very distant relationship to history.

However, the topic of occultism in the Third Reich is a topic for a separate article.


To summarize, it should be noted that Karl Haushofer was a multifaceted person: geographer, journalist, professor, poet, soldier, teacher, writer, creator of the geopolitical doctrine about the need to create a continental bloc or axis: Berlin - Moscow - Tokyo. His career took place during the most fateful period in German history.

Haushofer's relationship with the Nazi regime was controversial.

On the one hand, he considered it an important task to unite all Germans within the framework of the German state, and therefore the bloodless annexation of Austria and the Sudetenland achieved by Hitler by the end of 1938 seemed to him the height of geopolitical art.

On the other hand, he understood that if Germany, acting alone, continued to expand its living space in Europe, this would lead to war with the leading European powers.

Haushofer shared Bismarck's thoughts about the inadmissibility of a war on two fronts for Germany - in the West and in the East, for this reason he tried to influence the leadership of the Third Reich so that it would build its policy on a scientific geopolitical basis and take steps to create a continental bloc Berlin - Moscow - Tokyo. However, Hitler disdained the professor's ideas.

After Hess's famous flight to Great Britain, Haushofer's already not very significant influence on German politics fell seriously. In May 1941, immediately after this flight, Haushofer was detained on suspicion of complicity in its organization and interrogated. They could not bring any serious charges against him, but relations with the regime were completely ruined.

Another blow of fate for Karl Haushofer was the investigation of the plot to assassinate Hitler on July 20, 1944. His son Albrecht was well acquainted with many of its participants and probably knew about their plans. For several months he managed to hide. In the summer of 1944, unable to find Albrecht Haushofer, the Gestapo arrested his father. K. Haushofer spent about a month in the Dachau concentration camp. Haushofer Jr. was arrested by the Gestapo just before Christmas, and on the night of April 22-23, 1945, when fighting was already going on in Berlin, Albrecht, along with a group of other prisoners, was shot [12].

On March 10, 1946, Karl Haushofer and his wife committed suicide. The reason for committing suicide was a summons to the Nuremberg Tribunal to testify. The reasons, naturally, were of a deeper nature.

Germany, of which Haushofer was a patriot, was once again defeated and humiliated. Geopolitics, to which the scientist’s entire life was devoted, did not live up to the hopes placed on it and was no longer needed by anyone. Son Albrecht, whose abilities Karl Haushofer admired, died in the dungeons of the Gestapo.

Thus, K. Haushofer lost almost everything that was dear to him, and charges of collaborating with the Nazis and, possibly, imprisonment awaited him [12].

Haushofer's suicide marked the symbolic completion of the final stage in the development of the German school of classical geopolitics.

Использованная литература:
[1]. Vasilchenko A.V. The gloomy genius of the Third Reich. Karl Haushofer. – M.: Veche, 2013.
[2]. Holger H. Herwig (1999): Geopolitik: Haushofer, Hitler and lebensraum, Journal of Strategic Studies, 22:2–3, 218–241.
[3]. Artamoshin S.V. Ideological origins of National Socialism. – Bryansk: BSU Publishing House, 2002.
[4]. See Karl Dietrich Bracher, et al., Die nationalsozialistische Machtergreifung. Studien zur Errichtung des totalitären Herrschaftssystems in Deutschland 1933/34 (Cologne and Opladen: Westdeutscher 1962) p. 226.
[5]. Isaev B. A. Geopolitics: Textbook. Ed. 2nd, corrected and supplemented - St. Petersburg: Peter. 2016.
[6]. Rukavitsyn P. M. German school of classical geopolitics: stages of evolution and contribution to the development of science.
[7]. Haushofer K. About geopolitics. Works of different years // M.: Mysl, 2016.
[8]. Mackinder HJ Democratic ideals and reality. London, 1919.
[9]. Quote from: Salfetnikov D. A. Geopolitics: history and modernity: textbook. manual / D. A. Salfetnikov. – Krasnodar: KubSAU, 2018.
[10]. Palmer N.D., Perkins H.S. International Relations. The World Community in Transition. Third Edition. Boston, 1969. P. 43.
[eleven]. Goodrick-Clark N. Occult roots of Nazism: Secret Aryan cults and their influence on Nazi ideology. – St. Petersburg: Eurasia, 11.
[12]. Rukavitsyn P. M. German classical geopolitics during the period of fascist dictatorship
31 comment
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must sign in.
  1. -5
    April 4 2024 07: 12
    The article should not be made into a hodgepodge. Occultism separately, geopolitics separately.

    In Russia, geopolitics appeared precisely in Soviet times at the end of the 20s, and its prominent representative was Prof. A. Narochnitsky. So there is no need to lie either.
    The USSR successfully pursued its geopolitics in practice.....this is known.

    But modern “achievements”, which amounted to the division of one’s own country, are also well known.
    It seems that the author is also an occultist, because to him the geopolitical reality of Russia is “horseradish in the village” ...
  2. -2
    April 4 2024 07: 16
    When talking about Hitler's religious beliefs, one might be misled into thinking that he was an occultist. In fact, he considered himself a Christian. He was baptized into Catholicism. In his early career he believed that Jesus Christ was not a Jew, but a great Aryan fighting against Jewish materialism. In 1922 he generally stated that Jesus was blue-eyed and of German descent. His entire “Christian” faith was built around Nazi ideology. At the same time, he fought against paganism and the return of the pagan gods Odin and Thor as suggested by Himler.
    1. +2
      April 4 2024 07: 55
      Well, in Nazi Germany, a mishmash of various cults and theories flourished, accepted as the basis of ideology and the foundation of building a nation and society. For example, the theory of “Eternal Ice” by Hans Hörbiger was accepted as one of the foundations for the creation of the world....
      1. -2
        April 4 2024 08: 08
        This is worth remembering for those who propagate that Russia needs at least some kind of ideology. Who knows what kind of ideological hodgepodge some ideologists can push through. There are plenty of examples with the ideology of “Ukrainianism”.
      2. +1
        April 4 2024 08: 34
        Well, yes, the theory of “eternal ice” is still nonsense... The same nonsense as the theory of “flat Earth” or “hollow Earth”. I read Morning of the Magicians. The book is good.
        Well, Thule, most likely, was a really existing sunken land, a bridge connecting Europe and North America through Iceland. It is possible that the last 6 Pleistocene ice ages --- Bibersky, Danube, Günz, Mindel, Rissky and Würm-Wisconsin - arose precisely because of the rise of Thule above sea level, and the transformation of the Arctic Ocean into an internal one, and stopped when Thule sank again. Thule has nothing to do with Atlantis; Atlantis has a completely different story.
  3. +5
    April 4 2024 07: 49
    Many thanks to the Author for this interesting and tragic story.
    This is completely new material for me, in my opinion, very high quality and well presented.
  4. -1
    April 4 2024 08: 17
    creation of a continental block or axis: Berlin – Moscow – Tokyo.

    Yes, the chance was missed. Alas!
    1. +4
      April 4 2024 15: 55
      Quote: Grossvater
      creation of a continental block or axis: Berlin – Moscow – Tokyo.

      Yes, the chance was missed. Alas!

      There was no chance, due to the insurmountable gap in the ideology and nature of the political expansion of the alleged participants in this axis.
      1. 0
        April 4 2024 22: 33
        The chance was very real
        1. 0
          April 4 2024 23: 01
          Quote from solar
          The chance was very real

          The signing of the Pact did not take place due to excessive counter-demands from the USSR, which turned out to be unacceptable for Germany

          It seems like they didn't make a deal. But why ? Because this was not just a division of spheres of influence serving economic interests. The conditions of the USSR were unacceptable, most likely due to fears of further support for leftist forces in the disputed regions. The USSR insisted on further negotiations, but at some point on the other side they realized that any agreement over time would not be in their favor.
          The USSR was simply denied the right to have zones of influence, but decided not to state this at the diplomatic level yet, because then the inevitability of war would be obvious.
          1. 0
            April 4 2024 23: 11
            The USSR was simply denied the right to have zones of influence

            The Molotov-Ribbentrop Treaty is precisely about the division of spheres of influence.
            There is no gap in ideology. The demands were simply excessive and conflicted with other participants. The Germans generally viewed it as quite real.
            1. 0
              April 4 2024 23: 51
              Quote from solar

              The Molotov-Ribbentrop Treaty is precisely about the division of spheres of influence.
              There is no gap in ideology. The demands were simply excessive and conflicted with other participants.

              Molotov-Ribbentrop Treaty - about non-aggression, and not about the division of spheres of influence. The secret additional protocol on such a division was simply intended to gain time to prepare for war, which was inevitable, and both sides understood this. This is the same simulacrum of an international treaty, as was the subsequent promise not to expand NATO to the east.
              There was a chasm in ideology. In Germany and Japan, it was assumed that the controlled territories would be subordinated to their national interests, and in the case of the USSR, subordination to class interests was assumed, no matter how they were understood then.
              1. 0
                April 5 2024 08: 10
                Secret additional protocol on such a division

                Classic agreement on the division of spheres of influence
                in the case of the USSR, subordination to class interests was assumed

                The creation of a system of dependent socialist states fully met the national interests of the USSR.
                1. 0
                  April 5 2024 08: 51
                  Quote from solar

                  The creation of a system of dependent socialist states fully met the national interests of the USSR.

                  The USSR had no national interests. There were interests in spreading the socialist system in other countries. To this end, efforts have been made in their national interests. Factories and power plants were built, and huge funds were poured in. One Aswan High Damоit.
                  1. 0
                    April 5 2024 10: 20
                    The USSR had no national interests.

                    Well, it really wasn’t. Residents of Kaliningrad, for example, do not agree with you.
                2. 0
                  April 5 2024 09: 06
                  Quote from solar

                  Classic agreement on the division of spheres of influence

                  In fact, the essence is not in the form of the agreement, but in the real intention to comply with this agreement. This intention can only be ensured by a real interest in its terms, and not by the form of the document. The non-aggression pact was easily violated as soon as there was no longer a need for it, despite all its formality and signing in front of newsreel lenses. At the same time, unspoken, behind-the-scenes agreements can be observed for decades if they are secured by the interests and strategic plans of the agreeing parties.
                  1. 0
                    April 5 2024 09: 23
                    In fact, the essence is not in the form of the agreement, but in the real intention to comply with this agreement.

                    This can be said about any agreement; moreover, the situation may change.
                    The USSR and Germany actually negotiated on the accession of the USSR to the Axis, that is, they hoped that there was a real possibility of concluding it.
                    And only a month after it became clear that the agreement would not be signed, Hitler accepted the Barbarossa plan for implementation.
                    1. 0
                      April 5 2024 10: 11
                      Quote from solar
                      the situation may change.

                      Will the USSR abandon communist ideology? wink
                      Quote from solar
                      actually negotiated the accession of the USSR to the Axis, that is, they hoped that there was a real possibility of concluding it.

                      And maybe they were just stalling for time.
                      Quote from solar
                      And only a month after it became clear that the agreement would not be signed, Hitler accepted the Barbarossa plan for implementation.

                      When it became clear that the USSR would not abandon the concept of unlimited ideological expansion. At the same time, a non-aggression pact was signed.
                      Once again, there was no chance of an alliance, due to fundamental differences in the ideology and concept of development of the USSR and the Axis countries.
                      1. 0
                        April 5 2024 10: 24
                        Will the USSR abandon communist ideology?

                        The USSR did not abandon this ideology in an alliance with royal power and capitalism-imperialism. Although it would seem, where is the king and where is communism?
                        And in this case, there would be no problems in this regard, if only this were the problem.
                      2. 0
                        April 5 2024 10: 35
                        Quote from solar

                        The USSR did not abandon this ideology in an alliance with royal power and capitalism-imperialism.

                        What union? Situational, during an already ongoing war with a common enemy, who declared this war on the allies even earlier than the USSR. As soon as the war ended, he ceased to exist.
                        This once again shows that real alliances are determined by the consistent strategic and conceptual interests of the parties. In the pre-war period, there were no such conditions for the USSR and the Axis countries.
                      3. 0
                        April 5 2024 10: 58
                        Situational or not, further events show.
                        Read about why this union did not work out. There's nothing about ideology there.
                      4. 0
                        April 5 2024 11: 09
                        Quote from solar
                        Situational or not, further events show.
                        Read about why this union did not work out. There's nothing about ideology there.

                        Some decisions are made based on a situation where it is obvious that it will not last long.
                        I've read about the reasons. In diplomacy, as a rule, insurmountable contradictions are not indicated, because it is an instrument of the “art of the possible.”
                      5. 0
                        April 5 2024 11: 18
                        This is the afterthought speaking in you. What would further history look like if the USSR nevertheless divided its spheres of influence, joined the Axis and Hitler did not start the war in 1941, but directed efforts and resources to redistribute the colonies?
                      6. 0
                        April 5 2024 11: 28
                        Quote from solar
                        This is the afterthought speaking in you. What would further history look like if the USSR nevertheless divided its spheres of influence, joined the Axis and Hitler did not start the war in 1941, but directed efforts and resources to redistribute the colonies?

                        Hitler already started the war in 1939, and the USSR could not divide the spheres of influence, because it did not recognize the borders of these spheres. Because the very principle of “influence” in the USSR was different - not control of living space, but the spread of a different state system, in which relations of competition between countries are replaced by relations of planned cooperation.
            2. 0
              April 5 2024 00: 30
              No gap in ideology

              Those. Have you now equated the Nazi ideology of the Third Reich with the communist ideology of the USSR? Did I understand correctly?
              1. 0
                April 5 2024 08: 13
                And if I wrote that the USA, England and the USSR were allies, do you think this would mean that I equated communist ideology with royalty and capitalism?
                1. 0
                  April 5 2024 13: 43
                  Why are you changing concepts? After all, they wrote about the absence of a gap in ideology, and not about the fact that the USSR and the Third Reich were allies. Which, by the way, would also be a lie.
  5. +1
    April 4 2024 17: 49
    Very well written article. It's clear and very easy to understand.
  6. +1
    April 5 2024 07: 54
    Of course, Mr. Haushofer was one of the people who created fascism as an ideology, his influence on Hitler was enormous, and the consequences of the implementation of his ideas are monstrous. Wow, he met Hitler “only a few times”!! Are there many people who meet several times with the head of a considerable state? Amazing argument))
    The method of analogies used by Haushofer is from the childhood of science. He may have read a lot, but he didn’t master the scientific method of cognition, and he pushed his “scientific” work quite hard... In general, if you are not a scientist, but want to appear to be one, the method of analogies is for you. States are living organisms! And he stopped his nonsense, focusing first on jackals, then on fleas, then on eels. Guys, this is not science at all)
    The most vile of all this “theory” was the concept of living space. That is, if Germany has a large population, advanced science and industry, then it “has the right” to seize as much “living space” as it needs. If this is not a complete and final justification for wars of conquest, in particular Hitler’s, then what is it?
    Yes, Haushofer understood that Russia would choke his “living organism” and die in agony, for which he ended up in Dachau (it worked out great, rightly so!) but justifying and praising the colonial expansion of the West in general and Germany’s seizure of its neighbors in particular makes him a direct accomplice the Fuhrer, with all his murders of millions and concentration camps, one of which he had the opportunity to examine himself.
    The author’s motives for justifying this ghoul are not at all clear to me.
    But it is clear why the author inserted Thule and mysticism into the article. Mysticism is “ridiculous”, which means that Haushofer’s accusations of Nazism and the creation of Hitler’s motivation are also absurd...
    1. +1
      April 5 2024 14: 03
      I agree completely. Personally, I am also disgusted by the use of the term “scientist” in the title of such figures, whose methodology of work is frozen at the level of the 17th century. And equally incomprehensible is the author’s absolutely uncritical defense of his very dubious activities and the role of its results in the formation of Nazi and, more broadly, fascist ideology.
      1. +2
        April 6 2024 12: 55
        For some reason the author “excuses” Haushofer. How dirty lawyers excuse their dirty clients. Like “he’s not that much of a killer” and everything else in the same style. I personally am very interested in the author’s motivation. Have you paid? Who? Do you think so yourself? Amazing...