“But once a revolution has been completed, the Government only represents the people as a whole and is never the champion of individual groups.”
Then, a little further down, about 10 lines from the bottom:
“It is not permissible, therefore, to dismiss the intellect with the catchword of ‘intellectualism.’ Deficient or primitive intellects do not justify us in waging war against intellectualism. And when we complain frequently today about those of us who are 150 percent Nazis, then we mean those intellectuals without a foundation, people who would like to deny the right of existence to scientists of world fame just because they are not Party members.”
Then, on the first line of the next page—Page 49—it says:
“Nor should the objection be made that intellectuals lack the vitality necessary for the leaders of a people. True spirit is so vital that it sacrifices itself for its conviction. The mistaking of brutality for vitality would reveal a worship of force which would be dangerous to a people.”
In the next paragraph he speaks of equality before the law. I read the last few lines:
“They oppose equality before the law, which they criticize as liberal degeneration, whereas in reality it is the prerequisite for any fair judgment. These people suppress that pillar of the State which always—and not only in liberal times—was called justice. Their attacks are directed against the security and freedom of the private sphere of life which the German has won in centuries of hardest struggle.”
In the next paragraph he speaks against Byzantinism; the second sentence reads:
“Great men are not made by propaganda, but rather grow through their deeds and are recognized by history. Even Byzantinism cannot make us believe that these laws do not exist.”
He deals with education in the next paragraph, and I should like to begin with the second sentence: