After interesting digressions (see recent posts), Poul Anderson's Murder Bound gets back on track with Yamamura's investigation of a man overboard:
"'- He was born in Oslo. His father was a tavern keeper, not very successful. Maybe that was what turned him fascist. When the Germans came, they soon found the Benrud's inn was one of the few places they were welcome. Naturally, this made the family still more isolated and dependent on the Nazis. So young Herman was ripe for a Gestapo offer that he be trained to do important secret service work for the 'lawful Quisling government.'" (iv, pp. 36-37)
All too plausible. After a successful invasion, what is the "lawful government"? Sooner or later, de facto becomes de jure. British monarchs are listed as "since the Conquest" and our present Constitution with its constitutional monarchy is a Revolutionary Settlement! - although you wouldn't know it. But Benrud is dealing with the Ge-sta-po, "Secret State Police"!
As I understand it, the class basis of fascism is the petite bourgeoisie, self-employed shop keepers and small businessmen, threatened alike by big capital and by organized labor. One fascist theory to account for (alleged) unity between millionaires and revolutionaries is that both of these apparent opposites are in fact Jewish. When I challenged a man marching with the British National Party by telling him that, if he works for a living, then he should seek common cause with his fellow workers irrespective of race or nationality, he replied, "Been reading your Jew papers, have you? Been reading your Jew papers?" A genuine Nazi.
As I often say near the end of a month, this might be the last post until next month, tomorrow. Have a good weekend.
15 comments:
Kaor, Paul!
And if Norway had been invaded and occupied by the USSR (as Stalin tried to do with Finland), people like Herman would have gotten similar offers from the NKVD/KGB.
I am skeptical of grandiose notions of "workers unity." At least as many workers will be conservatives or libertarians as "leftist" (Marxist, anti Marxist socialists, or "woke"). And this National Party marcher you met was a genuine BONEHEAD. Jews can be just as politically diverse as anyone else (there are conservative Jews as well as leftists).
Sean
Sean,
You are right about workers' political diversity. I have learned to my cost that we should never assume agreement but must, where appropriate, propagate whatever views we hold.
Paul.
Sean,
ONE argument is that, although workers are divided by differences of opinion, they have common material interests which they can come to realize through collective experience and practice. For example, they begin to question the role of the press when it misrepresents their particular struggles. When they receive unexpected solidarity, they are more likely to give solidarity in future. Etc.
Paul.
Sean,
I think that "bonehead" is too weak a condemnation. That insidious Jewish conspiracy theory did great harm and must be seriously opposed whenever it shows up. The fact that it keeps showing up, despite the horrors previously unleashed, is evidence enough that there is something very wrong with the way things are right now.
Ideas can fade away. Pharaonic zoomorphism does not re-emerge. So let's send racism the same way, into the permanently deleted file of history.
Paul.
Kaor, Paul!!
Freedom of speech/propagation includes the risk of conservatives propagandizing to you! (Smiles)
And not all "workers," however you define the word, will agree on the solutions to the problems they may face. So I see different kinds of "solidarity" arising.
Well, my mother hated cussing, and it rubbed off on me. Hence the use of such terms as "bonehead"! And I would put moronic hatred of Jews as being caused, ultimately, by how FLAWED human beings are (yes, the dreaded Original Sin pops up again!).
Never heard of "Pharaonic zoomorphism before. Something to look up!
Sean
Sean,
I just meant that the ancient Egyptians worshiped gods in the form of animals: zoomorphic instead of anthropomorphic. But there you are. It is an idea that is long gone.
I welcome the opportunity to read conservative propaganda and learn from it. Obviously, we mainly think about ways to argue against ideas that we disagree with but that should make us consider the ideas seriously, not just dismiss them quickly.
Of course, we can only hope to persuade a majority - never everyone! - but we should be presenting ideas that fit with people's experience while also hopefully showing them a way forward. Left groups that insisted, e.g., that a general strike and a mass movement to transform society were imminent have gone to the wall because those things were not imminent. A left group that claimed that it was taking over the British Labour Party has been expelled from that Party. Western Maoists are no longer around - except, apparently, for one crazed household in London! People that insisted that economic crisis would happen in the Western countries but not in the USSR were certainly proved wrong. That oppressive regime bankrupted itself by stockpiling nuclear weapons instead of dismantling them - or, preferably, never building them in the first place.
There have been societies where people of different religious traditions lived in harmony so that can happen again.
I am commenting at greater length than usual because I am slightly unwell today and am going to stay home and take it easy so there might be more blogging. Big activities are planned for later in the week so I want to be ready for them. Apart from social activities, there is a need to overcome the division between Leavers and Remainers - and "Dealers" and "No Dealers"! - which sours every other issue that comes up.
Paul.
On second thoughts, I might not feel up to reading a text closely enough to post about it. Right now, I am relaxing by rereading Stieg Larsson. If I find any interesting comparisons etc, then I will, of course, post.
Kaor, Paul!
I should have realized that what you meant by "pharaonic zoomorphism" were the animal headed gods of the pagan Egyptians.
But I think some Hindus still portray their gods in animal forms.
I agree with your second paragraph. Admittedly with the caveat that I don't think anyone can convince me socialism can work--for the reason that it has never worked where it has been tried.
I can never, frankly, agree with leftist ideas--because it always boils down to them advocating replacing a free exchange of goods and services by consenting buyers and sellers with the STATE taking over. It doesn't matter if they call it a "cooperative" system, it still comes down to using the coercive powers of the state to regulate the outcomes of economic decisions. And I argue that ending or limiting economic freedom inevitably has to include crushing personal and political liberty.
Even if Lenin and Stalin had been content with "socialism in one country," the USSR still would have failed because state control of the economy simply does NOT work. And the mere existence of a vastly more successful free enterprise oriented West was a threat and a challenge to the USSR. Which in turn would have encouraged Soviet aggression.
I agree it should be possible for societies with many religions to live together in relative harmony. I have my STRONG doubts that will be possible in places where Islam is dominant.
Sean
Kaor, Paul!
I forgot to add that had I been British, I would have been one of those "Leavers," advocating that the UK should leave the EU. Even more, that the UK should leave it cold turkey, without bothering about a "deal." After all, as a member of the WTO the UK and Europe would still carry out financial and trading relationships according to WTO rules.
Sean
Sean,
That sounds easy but it is not seen that way by many people here.
Paul.
Kaor, Paul!
I know, but my point was that a UK leaving the EU would NOT mean the end of financial and trading relationships with the rest of Europe. Anyone who claims that is simply wrong.
Btw, I have read of how the new PM, Boris Johnson, has advised the Queen to prorogue Parliament, so he can get ON with getting the UK out of the EU. Which the Queen has done.
Sean
Sean,
Bojo says that that is not his reason although it obviously is. Confusion reigns.
Paul.
Kaor, Paul!
Yes, the OFFICIAL excuse for proroguing Parliament was not because of Brexit, but we all know what was the actual reason for the prorogation!
Sean
Sean,
But I don't see why it can't be said.
Paul.
Kaor, Paul!
I can only conclude Boris Johnson thought it would be easier to use the prorogation of Parliament for extricating the UK from the EU if he did not SAY that was why he asked the Queen to do that.
Sean
Post a Comment