Sunday, February 21, 2016


I hesitated in publishing this article because comparing something we do not agree with the worst thing we can think of seems like an old trope. The obvious problem is that when the comparison is valid, the logic loses its punch. Still, I felt I must try. It is time to panic and not wait until 2017 after it is too late. I watched an old movie last night, Judgement at Nuremberg (1961). The synopsis of the trial said it was a trial about 4 Nazi judges who used their offices to conduct Nazi sterilization and cleansing policies; however, it was something much greater than that. Anyone with even the slightest interest in history knows the story and has seen the pictures and felt the horror of it. Although this move was supposedly about 4 judges who used their offices to conduct Nazi sterilization and cleansing policies; however, it went much deeper than that. It was about the guilt of the German people, “the man on the street,” which is the same question that the world has been asking millions of time. The truth is that we know the answer but refuse to accept it as if the question has never been asked. The Military Tribunal found the German judges guilty and sentenced them to prison for life, but in a beautifully written way, the script writers made it clear who were actually responsible for the excesses committed by the Hitler regime; it was the German people. The script writer posed the question concerning how an educated population people, just like you and me, could allow this to happen. We all know the political unrest between the left wing and right wing political forces at work during this period of post-war stress. It is my contention that they are exactly the same forces at work in the modern world; thus, I treat these political feelings as being something deeply innate in our being. I believe our political alignment is instinctually related to who we are. It is evolutionary psychology; thus, political operatives using clever argument are able to manipulate these feelings but only to a point unless we allow them to corrupt our human decency. As with the Germans on trial, they did not have good judgement in protecting their country. They were guilty of violating their human values. This election cycle in the United States scares me because I see a clear parallel. Hitler did this by telling the German people something they were instinctually prone to believe. He told them they were different in a special way, just as members of your family are special, and members of your city, state, and country are special. The color of our skin, our way of doing business, our religion, our love for other people as long as they are one of us. We learn this in church; you can go to heaven if you believe to our church but everyone else will go to hell. He would make Germany great again by building walls in the form of geography barriers, which is instinctual; it is theirs and not one else’s country. It is instinctual; we see this in all animals, but in dogs especially because we are close to them. We know that they will fiercely protect their territory, which is why many of us have them in our houses. Hitler would restore Germany to greatness by stopping the mixing of non-Germans with Germans and protect it by buying a big dog, one that can outfight every other dog, which is necessary even if we don’t have the room and cannot afford it. URL: Comments Invited and not moderated

No comments:

Post a Comment