Meeting of the Minds, July 10, 2017

   At a meeting of Wise Guys on July 10, Roger drew attention to an excerpt from Mein Kampf, wherein Hitler discussed the effectiveness of propaganda as when directed at the masses. With profound disrespect for the common man, Hitler claimed that the intellectual level of propaganda must be adjusted to those with the most limited intelligence among them. As a consequence, he suggested that effective propaganda must be limited to a very few points and must harp on these slogans until the last member of the public understands. In essence Hitler with his sense of superiority, detested the masses, and yet was wedded to populism, in order to achieve dominance and control of his country.

   Both Hitler and Trump embraced populism as their political doctrine. Populism is defined as the political strategy of favoring and aligning oneself with the common man against the so-called elite. The elite are better educated and exhibit a broad acceptance of others. It is believed that the common man frequently lacks education. They fear foreigners and immigrants, who threaten to rob them of their traditional and expected rights. The embrace of populism is a cynical move designed to set group against another to gain political advantage. In so doing, they side with the greater numbers for their support, whether they are Nazi’s or Trumpists.

   The similarities between Hitler and Trump are numerous. Both ruled by a cult of personality. Both demanded and thrived on adulation and above all loyalty.  Trump demanded loyalty of Comey, and when he could not be assured of the Attorney General’s devotion, went on to fire him. Hitler too demanded absolute loyalty demanding that his troops swear allegiance to him alone, to worship him, and in so doing setting God aside. The belt buckle of the Wehrmacht (the army) is inscribed with the words, Gott Mit Uns, (God is with us) whereas the SS (Hitler’s personal army) belt buckle exhibits the words, Meine Ehye  heibt treure(My honor is loyalty).

    In addition to demanding loyalty, Hitler and Trump were nearly identical in their psychological features. Malignant narcissism was common to both. Both Hitler and Trump felt themselves to be superior human beings. As was true of Hitler, Trump claimed that he was more capable than the generals in leading the armed forces. Similarly, Hitler contended that he was a better artist and architects that the professionals.

  In 1943 Walter Langer wrote a secret psychological report on Hitler for the OSS. In his book The Mind of Adolph Hitler, published in 1972, he reported his findings for the general public. First, he called attention to the fact that Hitler believed that he could never be mistaken, since what he said was invariably historical. He felt that his actions were commanded by Providence and that he would always be immortal to the German people. Finally, he believed that he was the greatest orator of all time and that his power as a speaker lay in his ability to sense what an audience wanted to hear and thus thereby arouse the emotions of the crowd. The same could be said of Trump, who speaks extemporaneously, thus being better able to judge the temper of the crowd and to interact with the crowd as he spoke.

   In order to please the masses, Hitler always appealed to the dramatic. His annual rallies at Nuremburg were invariably huge, involving thousands of people. At the 1934 rally 700,000 people attended. Hitler arrived in Nuremburg by airplane, descending from the sky like a god. He announced himself by walking in dramatically from the rear, guarded by SA and SS.  One could not avoid the impression that he was exceptional or even divine. Hitler’s entrance calls to mind the appearance of Trump at the Republican Party convention, when he appeared enveloped in a cloud of smoke. Both men sought to lead the country as god-like figures, honored and admired for their charismatic personalities.

     So what are we to make of the similarities and differences of Trump and Hitler? Hitler was a populists, a narcissists and sociopath. The same could be said of Trump. The big difference between Trump and Hitler is the difference between their backgrounds. Hitler had a political background, was born of a middle class family, and was Non-German. He needed to magnify his perception of himself and proclaim loudly his adopted Germanic bonafides. It was only through adulation that he could overcome his ordinary background. Trump was a businessman and entertainer and was born of a wealthy family. He saw himself as born superior, with no question of his American credentials. Trump gauged success by wealth and notoriety and Hitler by support of an adoring public. In essence we are dealing with nearly identical men, who operated under radically different systems. Hopefully, the American system will modulate the actions of Trump, so as not to duplicate Germany under Hitler.

   We recall the remark of Jefferson, when   referring to slavery, but cannot resist the urge to apply the same to both Hitler and Trump:

I tremble for my country when I reflect that God is just; that his justice cannot sleep forever.

Posted by Arthur  Banner

Thirsters Communication

*THIRSTER SEMINAR - WHITE MORTALITY - PETER MILLER  JULY 20th 2017

Dear Thirsters in Residence:

On Thursday July 20th, Thirster Peter Miller will lead a seminar on

Increasing White Mortality from "Diseases of Despair", 1998 - 2017.

In 2015, Case and Deaton (see link below) noted in US data that mortality

among US non-Hispanic whites from drug and alcohol overdoses, suicides, and

alcohol-related liver disease, rose strikingly, particularly for those in

middle age with not more than high school education.  Meanwhile, mortality

from blacks and Hispanics continued their historic fall, as did mortality in

Europe.  This finding drew a great deal of commentary.  Recently Case and

Deaton presented an expanded version of this paper to a Brookings

Institution conference, showing that (a) this finding is remarkably

consistent by gender, region, residence, etc., and (b) this mortality from

"diseases of despair" is sufficient to cause an increase in white mortality

generally.  This finding does not seem to be attributable to concomitant

patterns of income distribution.   While the reason is not clear, they

suggest a direction to look for a clearer answer.   It seems likely that

issues of employment, income, culture, religion, politics, and other factors

are probably relevant to the discussion.  In this seminar, I'd like to

discuss possible factors involved, and implications for policy and future

directions.

TO PARTICIPATE IN THE SEMINAR:  Please read the excerpts from Case and

Deaton's latest paper that is available for download using the Dropbox link

below (and the whole paper, if you have time).  If you can't get to it,

you're obviously welcome to attend, but I'd like to limit the first 45

minutes or so of the Seminar to those who've read the paper.  After that,

we'll open the discussion to those who haven't done the reading.  I look

forward to seeing you.

Link to the Case and Deaton info:

https://www.dropbox.com/s/gu8hmarlcgfe00g/White%20Mortality%20Seminar%20-%20Peter%20Miller%207-20-17.pdf?dl=0

UPCOMING PRESENTATIONS AND DISCUSSION TOPICS:

        July 27th - Update on the Afghan Agony - Zaher Wahab

THIRSTER MEETING LOCATION:  MCMENAMINS BROADWAY PUB, 1504 NE BROADWAY (AT NE

15TH AVE), PORTLAND, OR 97232.

related to culture.

John Dougherty

Co-Coordinator

Semper Sitiens

_________________________

Meeting of the Minds,June 5, 2017

.

   The subject for the day’s discussion was identity. What is identity and what accounts for our fascination with it?  In essence, identity is a metaphysical concept related to our very existence. We tend to be obsessed with ourselves, whether it is as individuals, or as members of a group such as a family, a religion or a nation. The differences between these forms of identity are important with major existential consequences. .

   Our personal identity is formed at a young age as influenced by our families.  As we grow older we are affected by the jobs we hold and group identities such the schools we attend, the religions we practice, and finally the nations we inhabit. Global identity is defined as what it means to be a citizen of the world. This type of identity is the most complex and both broaden us as individuals and at the same time threatens our sense of self.  The resolution of these conflicts determine whether we are content with ourselves and whether we seek peace or war

.

    Earl opened the discussion with a consideration of a New York Times Opinion piece authored by John Brodies, who considered personal and group identities as the motivation for the shootings of republican legislators at a baseball practice in Virginia. The notion that the group we identify with is good and other groups are bad is instilled in our psyches and is responsible for intergroup rivalry and war.

   There was then a brief discussion as to what constitutes personal and group identity and is identity stable over time. This brought us to a discussion of Jewishness.  The fact that Judaism is both a religion and an ethnic designation help us to understand identity.  Judaism has been assumed to be a firmly held identity, rooted in the myth of the Abrahamic covenant. The covenant established the Jews as a group chosen by God to receive the land of Israel and His eternal blessings. Nothing was required in return. However, since the holocaust many Jews have felt that God went back on his word and thus they lost faith in the covenant and in God himself.  Nonetheless Jewish identity persists and is rooted in traditions and cultural factors rather than divine belief.

   Our discussions then proceeded to recall how Durkheim applied the concept of religion as a contribution to our group identities.  Durkheim, who was a sociologist and atheist, posited that man invented religion to provide the cohesion of society.  Society in turn was charged with preserving religion.  In his book Elementary Forms of Religious Life, published in 1912, Durkheim looked back to primitive societies to uncover the source of religion. He described how totemism was used to cement the society. Since the totems were unique to each society, people prayed to the totems and were willing to sacrifice their lives to preserve them. With the diminishment of religion, the notion of an object representing society persisted. Thus the flag became a secular stand-in for a religious symbol. Importantly, men were willing to risk their lives to protect the flag.

    The discussion then went on to globalization as a force in our society.  All do not agree upon the meaning of globalization. To some it means free trade and to others types of world government, such as the League of Nations or the United Nations. John Lennon went further and suggested that we could imagine a totally unified world, with no governmental or ethnic barriers.  

Imagine there's no countries
It isn't hard to do
Nothing to kill or die for
And no religion too
Imagine all the people living life in peace, you

You may say I'm a dreamer
But I'm not the only one
I hope some day you'll join us
And the world will be as one

   Lennon thus described a notion of globalism that was an earthly paradise, in his words a dream. Lennon’s notion of globalism is perpetual love and peace. Despite the inspiring lyrics, globalism is a mixed blessing.  It leads to greater understanding amongst peoples and yet it asserts a destabilizing effect on individual societies. In our case, open borders and free immigration is a threat to some parts of our population but not to others, thus creating a rent in our national psyche. Immigration does not represent a threat to the coastal elites who can tolerate less skilled workers. On the contrary, the workers in the Midwest, who are well paid but unskilled are threatened by immigrants willing to work at their jobs at lower wages. This situation nurtures an authoritarian approach to unification. Trump, who understood this dynamic, was willing to sacrifice the stability and meaning of the country for his own political and personal gain. It has also been observed that globalization may lead to interference in other nations national elections.  Russia used cyber attacks to alter voting patterns to favor he election of candidates favorable to their regime. Globalization is a mixed blessing, both benefiting and threatening all societies,

   Ultimately the discussion was centered around the concept of how to talk to people we do not know or like. We agreed that we must not demean such people and assume that they are a source of evil.  Insightful guidance can be found in Ruth Bader Ginsburg’s book “ In My Own Words” where she revealed the secret to a happy marriage, viz.  Be deaf.  A more artful bit of advice can be found in Luke 6:27-31:

But I say to you who hear, love your enemies, do good to those who hate you, bless those who curse you, pray for those who mistreat you. Whoever hits you on the cheek, offer him the other also other also; and whoever takes away your coat, do not withhold your shirt from him either. Give to everyone who asks of you, and whoever takes away what is yours, do not demand it back. And just as you want people to treat you, treat them in the same way.

Posted by Arthur Banner