I was struck by this reflection on the history of philosophy, made by Adolf Hitler, who read voraciously when young and especially during his prison time in the 1920s:
“In the Great Hall of the Linz Library are the busts of Kant, Schopenhauer and Nietzsche, the greatest of our thinkers, in comparison with whom the British, the French and the Americans have nothing to offer. His complete refutation of the teachings which were a heritage from the Middle Ages, 
and of the dogmatic philosophy of the Church, is the greatest of the services which Kant has rendered to us. It is on the foundation of Kant’s theory of knowledge that Schopenhauer built the edifice of his philosophy, and it is Schopenhauer who annihilated the pragmatism of Hegel. I carried Schopenhauer’s works with me throughout the whole of the first World War. From him I learned a great deal. Schopenhauer’s pessimism, which springs partly, I think, from his own line of philosophical thought and partly from subjective feeling and the experiences of his own personal life, has been far surpassed by Nietzsche.”[1]
Was Hitler a deep thinker or a dabbler? Were his readings of the great thinkers strong or shallow, accurate or axe-grinding? Good questions, especially since he was primarily a politician and one whose theory and practice were so destructive.
But to put those questions in perspective. Can one even imagine a contemporary American politician saying:
“In the Great Hall of the Boston Library are the busts of Locke, Mill, and Rand, the greatest of our thinkers. The theory of rights is the greatest service Locke has rendered us, as the West transitioned from the Renaissance to the Enlightenment. Mill is the strongest antidote to the pragmatism of Dewey, and I carried Mill’s works with me throughout my military service in Iraq … [etc.]”?
As tempting as it is to dismiss Hitler as a crazed buffoon, one should never underestimate one’s enemies.
Source:
[1] Hitler’s Table Talk, 1941-1944, His Private Conversations. Translated by Norman Cameron and R. H. Stevens. Introduced and with a new Preface by H. R. Trevor-Roper. New York: Enigma Books, 2000, p. 720.
I definitely do not think he was a dabbler. I think he was a product of German philosophic thought. He was able to cash in on the ideas that were already in the culture. I do not like it when people dismiss Nazism as backwater barbarians. Even though their ideas ultimately led to barbarism. They were educated into barbarism by their philosophers, PHd philosophers.
I agree, Sherie.
I agree with Sherie.
There is a tendency today to assume that all Fascists were and are uneducated fools. This is driven, in part, by the sight of skinheads at latter day Nazi Rallies and aided by pseudo scientific attempts to link political thought to intelligence – such as Adorno’s F scale et al. The crude Racism in the films of Goebbels and Der Sturmer provide further evidence. This kind of simplistic reductionism obviously has an appeal to certain people. Rather than just saying you’re wrong you can simultaneously assert your superiority. What better way to sneer at Himmler than to remind everyone he was a pig farmer.
The reality is that Fascists in Germany and Italy could draw support from all sections of society. Whilst there is much to disagree with in the book Hitler’s Willing Executioners it does capture the fact that there was a large measure of intellectual support for Nazism. Mussolini was a magazine editor and peer of Lenin. It’s actually quite insulting to Germans to assume that the crude racism of Streicher was what brought the party to power rather than more subtle but still racist propaganda.
The problem with this lazy thinking is that it leads people to thinking that the skinhead with a swastika is a serious threat and by going on counter-demonstrations they can prevent fascist takeover. The reality is that totalitarianism won’t be the same next time:
I find it very annoying that the people the National Socialists were against are given a free pass, assumed to be totally innocent. The way in which homosexuals and Jews were destroying Germany and its culture by 1933 is glossed over. The humiliating enslavement of Germany at Versailles is ignored. And we see it happening even worse in today’s Germany. Merkel is destroying Germany. I’d say that Germany needs another Hitler.
And now a real Nazi shows up — if Roger W. Smith is your real name. You don’t give any arguments for your repulsive claims, Mr. Smith. Do you have some, or are you only a hater?
Merkel is surely destroying Germany through her encouragement of mass replacement level population movements into Germany. You would also need to look at the Stalinism that the Germans faced and with which the allies disgracefully allied.
Behold the power of ideas (even outdated, unscientific, ignorant, flimsy, illogical, and dangerous ones) to infect the mind. We’re all brainwashed. Yet some ideas are so unreasoned, so destructive, and so hateful that they pose a threat to humanity. Were Hitler (or someone like him – cough) to return and get back to their bigoted warmongering, we could well end up in WW3. Total warfare in the 21st century should be seen as unthinkable because the capabilities of our weaponry are becoming such that we could potentially all but sterilize the planet. Value life. This is perhaps the only idea that will see us through the century.
The one fact, and central aspect, concerning the German development of philosophy, is that all prominent German philosophers — nay all European and American philosophers as well — are all male. This obvious fact is always ignored.
There is no logical way to obtain 100% competence from 50% of the population. Consequently, Western Philosophy has never figured out how to compensate or even outrun the flaws throughout its development — flaws that are inherently tied to its own prescribed limitations. Women will need the time ands space to reinvent the “academy” such that their own views are incorporated. Then, perhaps, the world will survive.
Dear Diane:
Can you list, say, the top three women’s “own views” that would enable the world to survive?
Thank you.
Diane,
The whole of Enlightenment philosophy is feminine in its nature. As well as Christianity, which gave birth to it. The story of the modern West is the triumph of absolute feminism. Compare the modern west to ancient Rome for instance, and you may say see some stark differences.