Ominous Parallels

[musenji]

I just finished Peikoff's book, the Ominous Parallels. I want to process it in some fashion, and I thought here might be a good place to do it. So I'm going to try, from memory, to reconstruct as much of his argument as I can. It'll be a bit disorganized at first, I'm sure. My goal is to make it organized.

What I want to know is, is this an accurate representation of his arguments? I am sure I've left key things out. It's very possible I've gotten some things wrong. I want this to be a place to discuss the book, to hash out the ideas. I welcome any comments from people who have read the book and believe they have a firm grasp on a germane aspect of the content. (no pun intended)

Recommendations for further reading on the subject are welcome as well. (By further reading I mean good books about pre-WWII Germany, Hitler, etc etc.)

Without further ado:

******

One of the major premises of the book is that ideas matter. Philosophy is what shapes the path of a society, from the politics it will create, all the way down to little "side comments" that people make. Another premise is that most people are not explicitly philosophical. Another is that man needs ideas to guide his life, and will use them one way or another. From these premises comes the sub-conclusion that the majority of people in society, not being explicitly philosophical, but needing ideas to function, absorb the ideas of those around them and those who came before them--said ideas being traceable to key thinkers in history.

Nazi Germany was an atrocity the kind of which the world had never seen. The level of violation of humanity in the society, and concentration camps in particular, is simply shocking. The common understanding is that the Nazis were all just very racist. But how did they get to be so racist? Why did Nazism rise in Germany, and not some other country? Many explanations have been given. The one I remember learning most prominently in school is that Germany was basically screwed over by the post-WWI treaties. Iirc, Peikoff rejects this as an explanation on the grounds that similar things happened to other countries. I learned in school that Hitler really did help the economy for a while. Peikoff argues that the appearance of improvement was false, that the economy was based on inflation and other unsound economic measures.

His main thesis regarding the rise of Nazism, as I understand it, is that what made Nazism possible was philosophy. "Weimar" (Post-WWI) Germany had a culture based very strongly in a certain type of philosophy, from metaphysics, to epistemology, to ethics, to aesthetics...and the whole of this philosophy paved the way for Nazism. Specifically, the philosophy came (at the root) from Plato and (more specifically and directly) from Kant, a "descendant" of Plato.

Metaphysically, the belief was that the world is not a primary. Mind--consciousness--is the primary which creates reality. Or, reality in fact is a mystical realm outside of the senses, of which this world is a mere reflection.

Epistemologically, the belief was that truth was not known by reason. Rather, it is mystical and the province of faith. Plato started the trend--as reason is based in the senses, it is only a mystical insight which can truly see into the nature of things. I don't remember if there was a method attributed of verifying the veracity of someone's mystical claim, but apparently Plato's grand state was to be ruled by a leader who was endowed with this insight. Kant put forth the idea that the reality we perceive is merely a construct of the mind, and not "things as they are". Things as they are can't be known by us because we have to perceive them through the senses and a set of pre-made constructs. This idea divorces man from reality and renders reason, if not inoperable, "untrustworthy". Kant said he had to rein back reason to make room for faith. Peikoff draws heavy connections with Hitler, quoting Hitler as being very pro-faith (of course, faith in himself). He also made note of a contradiction existing in the minds of the German public, whereby they could believe absolutely in the Fuhrer's statements, and believe absolutely in later statements which contradicted the formers.

Ethically, the belief was that man is not a sovereign individual. He is an accessory, a cell of the national body, a tool for the hand of the state. Selfishness was decried very virulently, by Hitler and the pre-Hitler culture. Willingness to sacrifice for the state was paramount.

Aesthetically, the culture was that of modernism, abstract expressionism. It was a culture of "hate" toward man, toward his ability to reason, and a total lack of belief in man's competence to direct his life. The result was visual art that depicted an unintelligible horror of color, music that shocked with atonal dissonance, novel characters who were misanthropes that learned in the end to stop believing in anything (nihilism). Science was teaching man that the universe cannot be truly known.

All of this Weimar culture was praised as the highest of intellectual achievement. It was regarded as the exponent of reason. It still is--I checked the wikipedia entry on Weimar culture, and within the first few paragraphs is a glowing summary of the "intellectual achievements" of the era, and it lines up directly with Peikoff's assertions about what the culture consisted of AND how people felt and feel about it. (This was the only direct fact checking I've done so far. At many points in the book I thought, in response to some assertion he made, "Wait, really? I should check this for veracity."

I have no particular reason to distrust Peikoff--I assume this is actually a healthy and normal thing to do, checking facts--only I've never felt quite as driven to check them, and to make sure I understand the arguments, as I have with this book. "Parallels" has challenged me to realize that philosophy really does matter, and that we really could be heading in the same direction. Which brings me to a last note.

Peikoff argues that the same kind of culture, the same attitudes about metaphysica, epistemology, ethics, and aesthetics, are affecting American culture today, and as that philosophy is the soil of politics, we are bound to be headed down the same road (and he draws some parallels between the advancement of laws in this country, and what happened in Weimar Germany). We will need to explicitly change the country's philosophy to one of reality, reason, rational self-interest--if we wish to avoid the same fate. America has become "anti-intellectual" because the "common people" still carry the remnants of the ideas of the Enlightenment. But if a conscious rebirth is not forthcoming, eventually those remnants will wear away and we will be left with the perfect Fuhrer fertilizer.

****

[musenji]

Shoot, I was pretty tired last night and put this in the wrong forum. Could a mod move it to wherever it is most appropriate?