NetNews Usenet Archive 1992 #18/NN_1992_18.iso/spool/misc/headline/5819

Internet Message Format | 1992-08-21 | 5.8 KB

Xref: sparky misc.headlines:5819 alt.activism:15229 talk.politics.misc:41116
Newsgroups: misc.headlines,alt.activism,talk.politics.misc
Path: sparky!uunet!cis.ohio-state.edu!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!sol.ctr.columbia.edu!news.unomaha.edu!cwis.unomaha.edu!trajan
From: [e-mail] (Stephen McIntyre)
Subject: Re: WORLD GOVERNMENT
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
Sender: [e-mail] (UNO Network News Server)
Organization: University of Nebraska at Omaha
References: <[e-mail]>
Date: Fri, 21 Aug 1992 19:45:43 GMT
Lines: 108

> [e-mail]  writes:
>
> >sm> Stephen McIntyre
>
> >sm> Citizens become more susceptable to propaganda precisely because they lack
> >sm> a good education.
>
> >gs--> Gary Strand
>
> >gs]   Actually, intellectuals are no less susceptible to propaganda than
> >gs]   the "un-washed masses". Hitler enjoyed considerable support among the
> >gs]   German intellectual elite, and when one reads what American
> >gs]   intellectuals wrote about Stalin during the 1930s, it's pretty obvious
> >gs]   that merely being "educated" is no safeguard against totalitarians
> >gs]   and their lies.
>
> Much of what you are saying depends on your definition of the "German
>      intellectual elite", because of course many Germans who did not
>      agree with the propaganda put forth by Hitler, including a
>      large number of the "intellectual elite", left the country.  And
>      of course, "merely being educated" isn't a safeguard against
>      propaganda; I never said that it was (read the above.)
>
>
> >rc--> Robin Collins (or is it Frank?)
>
> >rc] How do you explain the fact that one of the most educated and sophisticated
> >rc] populations in the world at the time, was victim to propaganda despite
> >rc] its education (Germany, 1930s).
> >rc] In this context, how would you suggest that such a decline into barbarism
> >rc] might be prevented?
>
> *****
>
> >rc] Well Gary, it looks like you thought the same thought as I did (although
> >rc] earlier).
> >rc] I am very interested in what happened in Germany and in particular,
> >rc] what happened to  educated intellectuals who were duped by
> >rc] nazi propaganda.
>
> >rc] I have a feeling it had a lot to do with POWER, with feelings of
> >rc] alienation in addition to the propaganda (and more so than propaganda.)
> >rc] Look at some of the intellectuals who fell for fascism: GB Shaw to some
> >rc] extent, Ezra Pound, James Joyce and many others.
>
> >rc] This worship of power, including today's talk of "empowerment",
> >rc] may be the problem in terms of suspension of critical thinking.
> >rc] Fundamentalism is a good example, perhaps, and is not all that dissimilar
> >rc] to totalitarianism. Some extremely intelligent people have been
> >rc] fundamentalists, or dogmatists. Such is fuel for fascism.
> >rc] I think some of the libertarians are right in this area of thought (and
> >rc] which is why people like Chomsky call themselves libertarian socialists,
> >rc] I suspect.)
>
> >rc] Any thoughts?
>
> Gary had adressed this issue in another post for "World Government," as
>      does Robin now.  I'm running out of time to post, so I'll make this
>      short.  Perhaps the biggest reason for the attraction of Germans
>      (including the "intellectual elite") to Hitler was because of the
>      misery caused by the depression of that era.  People's spirits,
>      as well as their homes, were broken-- they were a tired nation.
>      Any hope offered to them was considered good, even if the man
>      offering the hope was a tyrant.
>
> I'd keep going, but I must leave.  I'll return tomorrow or Thursday to
>      address this issue further.  Until then, ta-ta.
>

I'm back and ready to go.  To consider the case of the Weimar Republic,
     we must look back long before Hitler came to power; that is,
     around 1918.  After a serious revolution (which brought the
     Social Democrats to power) and the fleeing of the kaiser,
     Germany adopted a new constitution at Weimar.  This document
     provided for a president, a chancellor, and national referendums
     (any Ross Perot supporters out there?).  The constitution also
     provided for several guarenteed rights, such as personal
     liberty and the right to labor.

But the Constitution also had several inherent weaknesses.  For instance,
     it allowed for a multitude of parties by not adopting a "winner
     take all" system.  Also, the document carried Article 231, which
     recognized Germany's guilt for WW I (a bad stigma to carry for
     so young a government.)

However, it was not just the Constitution that would spell trouble
     for the newly formed German Republic.  Along with having to
     carry a "defeatist" label, they also had to put up with competition
     from both monarchists and Communists.  They also had to rule
     during a time of economic chaos (some may observe that during the
     years 1923-1928, the German economy was doing well-- which it
     was, only because of the loans from other nations they received.)
     Lastly, they tried to lead a nation that held to the ideal
     of a strong German nation, where the state was to take precedence
     over the individual.

Perhaps the largest problem faced by the Weimar Republic was the
     restlessness and insecurity of the middle classes.  Fearing
     that they might be dragged down to the lower classes because
     of rising inflation and recession, and fearing the rise of the
     Communists, the middle classes were slowly becoming more
     discontent.  This discontent would later play into the hands
     of a party whose only rise was due to discontent-- the Nazis.

Well, I've run out of time again.  Perhaps I'll be able to write more later.
     Until then-- so long.

Stephen @Trajan