I'd have to do some research, but we know that Hitler first became a major
political figure during the Weimar Republic phase of German history, about 1918
to 1933. It was a time of war reparation payments by Germany, of political and
economic instability, and of hyperinflation. German banks and other powerful
institutions would not have liked paying reparations nor extreme inflation and
would have supported someone who could provide a measure of stability. Hitler,
who had been building his power base throughout much of the 1920's appeared to
be able to do that by the early 1930's. It's likely that he had the support of
the banks and other powerful corporate interests at the time. And of course
corporate interests and banks would have benefited enormously as Germany became
a powerful war machine during the 1930's.
Ed
----- Original Message -----
From: D & N
To: RE-DESIGNING WORK, INCOME DISTRIBUTION,EDUCATION
Sent: Saturday, February 04, 2012 7:29 PM
Subject: Re: [Futurework] FW: Tribes?
In light of the recent "Truthout" article sent by Ed (What Happened to
Canada?) coupled with the article "The Scary Danger of Meat (Even for Those Who
Don't Eat It)", I have to wonder who it was that was pulling Hitler's strings.
It really makes little sense that someone beginning a career from the point
Hitler began (and in the military) that he could rise to the position of power
he did without an external aid of financial and power backing; perhaps even
implantation of ideas. We have seen Obama as a puppet and although I consider
Harper to be a lapdog, I quite certain he too is just a pawn of someone or
something much more insanely powerful than he wishes he could be.
So, any ideason which bankers were doing what back then?
D.
On 04/02/2012 12:02 PM, Ray Harrell wrote:
My source is Michael H. Kater and the Twisted Muse, Musicians and Their
Music in the Third Reich; Oxford Press. 1997 pgs. 3-14. He's written a
second excellent book called "Composers of the Nazi Era, Eight Portraits";
Oxford, 2000. These are just two of several stereotype breaking books about
this time that throw a more revealing [and disturbing for the present] light on
this time in history. I would also offer Father Leo F. Lefebure's
"Revelation, The Religions, and Violence" Orbis, 2000, pgs. 10-13, for a look
at the "justification" that I drew attention to. Lefebure is quite blunt
about it.
There are things that are said and affects that come from what are done.
American Indians are experts in having benign theories put forward about the
cause and effect of things as we watched our property stolen, our children
murdered and our culture dispersed. The cause was economic but you find
almost none of that in the writings. Rarely are Americans as direct as
Senator Dawes [see below] or Ron Paul. Usually they cover their venal
duplicity up with words. The issue is one of simple truth as all of the
stories come to light as we get distance from the events.
It's true that the Wehrmacht formed a structural basis for what was
essentially a military doctrine. But I would argue that no Jews were going to
be in that military. Kater hints at and I smell the old positivist
professional pattern of supporting one group over another - breaking the
original social contracts that make diverse societies possible. Hitler's
group got the jobs that were given up by Jewish musicians, Intellectuals etc.
[A good book on this is Donald Schön's chapter two in "The Reflective
Practitioner." Schön both documents the fall of Technical Rationality in
Positivist thought and the history that led to the professional hierarchy in
government and schools that still exists on this list.]
In the section of the first chapter of the Twisted Muse entitled "music,
economics and political opportunism" Kater makes the point that the Jews were
not replaced with idiots or incompetents and that even Hitler didn't tolerate
opportunistic dilettantes who tried to use him to further their drivel through
a dedication of their efforts. (Pgs 12-13) Kater is not doing a political
tract but a work of history in a specialty. He more than makes the point that
the stereotypes of the Reich are just that. But seeing things as they are
[and not simply as they were justified] is the work of history.
I find the pursuit of the truth of things to be the best way for me to
understand how things got the way they are. And my lack of a comfortable
retirement at seventy guarantees that an advancing rigidity will do nothing but
make my family incapable of supporting ourselves in a rapidly changing
environment.
I'm constantly running into Russians from the Soviet Union who poke holes
in the Western propaganda about the "fat, stupid women" of the Soviet Union as
well as their musicians. Can one imagine Anna Netrebko in all of that? How
about the complete flood of great and beautiful opera singers taking American
jobs at our Metropolitan Opera? With all of the Madison Avenue and Right
Wing tripe about the inferiority of Communist anythings how can we justify
Valery Gergiev? A gift of a God they don't believe in because they are
"scientists?" I am told that the billionaire Koch brothers of Koch Industries
self identify as "men of science."
If we don't know how we got here with an accurate history then how can we
know who we are and what our purpose is? Kater makes the point that
Hitler's build up was forbidden by the earlier treaties from WWI. Eventually
he ignored them but for some time he hid them under various pretenses. Much as
he hid the convenience of getting rid of competitors until the Allied armies
marched into the camps. It is not generally known that America's mega-highway
system was developed by an Army General President Ike who wanted roads that
tanks could move through quickly. There are highway sections in New York
above the George Washington Bridge, that are many feet thick for that very
reason. Of course the private sector benefitted from all of these as it
always does and it usually figures out a way to take credit for it with an
"official story."
But thanks for the comment. I agree about your comment about the purpose
of the Wehrmacht. The Wehrmacht was his church and his instrument of change.
But the underlying principles were economic. I don't agree about the
effect of the loss of a highly skilled minority who had taken a large portion
of professional jobs and whose affect had circumvented many of the typical
cultural ploys that make cultures able to lie to themselves. The Vienna
Circle was outrageous in their aggressive and even hostile language about
intellectual pursuits and science and I would add, for political and economic
purposes in the academies of the day. There is always the psychological
response of "reaction formation" to such things. Not unlike the books on
treason put out by American political operatives today. Such language is so
hostile that it makes the murder of the leader of the Vienna Circle not seem so
surprising. That root of violent language was exercised in scientific
circles for personal gain prior to WWII. Before that it was Catholic Church
paranoia about protestants and pagans. The same thing is happening today.
If you look at each specific you can explain them away. The murdered Guard
at the Holocaust museum. The dead children who were killed performing the
Broadway show "Annie" in a liberal church in Knoxville Tennessee. Congress
woman Gabby Gifford in Arizona, etc., etc. But if you feel the whole of
things there is something that lies beneath it all. I would say this
uncivilized response is basically self interest and more than ever personal
profit. I've quoted this so often I would think the list would have it
memorized. After they wrote this they banned our religion for 95 years. No
longer making a complaint. Just pointing out a pattern. In the European
Union today the garbage is about the Romany. Tomorrow it will be someone else
but it will always be "for profit." "Nothing personal, just business."
REH
"The head chief told us that there was not a family in that whole nation
that had not a home of its own. There was not a pauper in that nation, and the
nation did not owe a dollar. It built its own capitol, in which we had this
examination, and it built its schools and its hospitals. Yet the defect of the
system was apparent. They have got as far as they can go, because they own
their land in common. It is Henry George's system, and under that there is no
enterprise to make your home any better than that of your neighbors. There is
no selfishness, which is at the bottom of civilization. Till this people will
consent to give up their lands, and divide them among their citizens so that
each can own the land he cultivates, they will not make much more progress."
(36)
(36) 1900, pp. 25-32; Lake Mohonk Conference, Report, 1904, pp 5-6;
Department of the Interior, Annual Report, 1900, pp. 655-735.
From: Keith Hudson [mailto:[email protected]]
Sent: Saturday, February 04, 2012 5:24 AM
To: RE-DESIGNING WORK, INCOME DISTRIBUTION, EDUCATION; Ray Harrell
Subject: Re: [Futurework] Tribes?
At 08:28 04/02/2012, REH wrote:
I didn't like the Bell Curve much. It didn't make educational sense to
me. At present I'm reviewing the Reflective Practitioner Books for my class
at JTS and a new book on Walter Benjamin and Aesthetics by S. Brent Plate.
I'm also finding the economic basis for so much that has gone wrong including
the genocides. I don't find society interesting these days.
Today seems very dangerous along those lines.
Hitler achieved full employment by taking out the Jews.
Keith replies:
Not so. He took out the Jews all right, but this had nothing to do with
full employment. The latter was achieved by massive armaments production and
building large-scale infrastructure (autobahns, etc) paid for by the printing
of as many Reichsmarks as necessary by a pliable central banker, Hjalmar
Schacht. (He was acquitted at the Nuremberg Trials instead of being hanged like
the rest and, as is so often the way with many bankers, enjoyed many more
prosperous years [by way of highly-paid lectures and consultations by countries
wanting to set up central banks of their own].)
Keith
Americans don't seem to know much about the Jewish content of much of
the great intellectual work that was being done in Austria and Germany at the
beginning of the 20th century. As I study the Vienna Circle, Walter Benjamin
and so many, I'm just stunned at the depth of such a small group of people.
I see the same kind of 1930s nonsense applied to the black community here
that has come from the absolute dregs of the 1950s to being represented in
leadership positions in every major aspect of the nation's life, even without
Obama. This can't be laid at the feet of Affirmative Action. It's too
competence oriented. Blacks are taking white jobs for the same reason
Asians are taking white jobs. They are doing them better and they network
with each other to help each other succeed. That was a large part of Hitler's
complaint as well about the Jews. Can you imagine the gun toting yahoos here
being able to do anything serious in the modern world other than menial factory
widget jobs? How far up the ladder would these people like the Koch brothers
climb if they hadn't started at the top with the requisite capital to begin
with?
I'm moving further and further away from Cable and the pulp press. I
still like the professor types like Krugman, but I made myself clear as to what
I think of the concept that the lower 98 percent of the nation constitutes a
tribe ala Brooks/Murray. I feel the same way about "Indian" Tribes. "Tribe"
is a term the government uses to de-nationalize cultures that go back ten
thousand years. Long before the world according to the Yonega was created.
It's in their book! I have very little patience for rigid, ignorant, bigotry
given my health and limited time.
How's your married life:>))
REH
From: [email protected] [
mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of de Bivort Lawrence
Sent: Saturday, February 04, 2012 3:54 AM
To: RE-DESIGNING WORK, INCOME DISTRIBUTION, EDUCATION
Cc: Steve & Edith Kurtz; Mike Hollinshead
Subject: Re: [Futurework] Tribes?
Many thanks for the heads up on this book, Ray. I just ordered it.
I read the Bell Curve some time ago, but not his Real Education. Any
thoughts?
Cheers,
Lawry
On Feb 1, 2012, at 12:50 AM, Ray Harrell wrote:
When they don't like you they call you a Tribe. But if you're dumb you
call yourself one. If you're proud and desire a future, you call yourself
and your people a Nation. REH
<image001.gif>
January 30, 2012
The Great Divorce
By DAVID BROOKS
I'll be shocked if there's another book this year as important as Charles
Murray's "Coming Apart." I'll be shocked if there's another book that so
compellingly describes the most important trends in American society.
Murray's basic argument is not new, that America is dividing into a
two-caste society. What's impressive is the incredible data he produces to
illustrate that trend and deepen our understanding of it.
His story starts in 1963. There was a gap between rich and poor then, but
it wasn't that big. A house in an upper-crust suburb cost only twice as much as
the average new American home. The tippy-top luxury car, the Cadillac Eldorado
Biarritz, cost about $47,000 in 2010 dollars. That's pricey, but nowhere near
the price of the top luxury cars today.
More important, the income gaps did not lead to big behavior gaps. Roughly
98 percent of men between the ages of 30 and 49 were in the labor force, upper
class and lower class alike. Only about 3 percent of white kids were born
outside of marriage. The rates were similar, upper class and lower class.
Since then, America has polarized. The word "class" doesn't even capture
the divide Murray describes. You might say the country has bifurcated into
different social tribes, with a tenuous common culture linking them.
The upper tribe is now segregated from the lower tribe. In 1963, rich
people who lived on the Upper East Side of Manhattan lived close to members of
the middle class. Most adult Manhattanites who lived south of 96th Street back
then hadn't even completed high school. Today, almost all of Manhattan south of
96th Street is an upper-tribe enclave.
Today, Murray demonstrates, there is an archipelago of affluent enclaves
clustered around the coastal cities, Chicago, Dallas and so on. If you're born
into one of them, you will probably go to college with people from one of the
enclaves; you'll marry someone from one of the enclaves; you'll go off and live
in one of the enclaves.
Worse, there are vast behavioral gaps between the educated upper tribe (20
percent of the country) and the lower tribe (30 percent of the country). This
is where Murray is at his best, and he's mostly using data on white Americans,
so the effects of race and other complicating factors don't come into play.
Roughly 7 percent of the white kids in the upper tribe are born out of
wedlock, compared with roughly 45 percent of the kids in the lower tribe. In
the upper tribe, nearly every man aged 30 to 49 is in the labor force. In the
lower tribe, men in their prime working ages have been steadily dropping out of
the labor force, in good times and bad.
People in the lower tribe are much less likely to get married, less likely
to go to church, less likely to be active in their communities, more likely to
watch TV excessively, more likely to be obese.
Murray's story contradicts the ideologies of both parties. Republicans
claim that America is threatened by a decadent cultural elite that corrupts
regular Americans, who love God, country and traditional values. That story is
false. The cultural elites live more conservative, traditionalist lives than
the cultural masses.
Democrats claim America is threatened by the financial elite, who hog
society's resources. But that's a distraction. The real social gap is between
the top 20 percent and the lower 30 percent. The liberal members of the upper
tribe latch onto this top 1 percent narrative because it excuses them from the
central role they themselves are playing in driving inequality and unfairness.
It's wrong to describe an America in which the salt of the earth common
people are preyed upon by this or that nefarious elite. It's wrong to tell the
familiar underdog morality tale in which the problems of the masses are caused
by the elites.
The truth is, members of the upper tribe have made themselves phenomenally
productive. They may mimic bohemian manners, but they have returned to 1950s
traditionalist values and practices. They have low divorce rates, arduous work
ethics and strict codes to regulate their kids.
Members of the lower tribe work hard and dream big, but are more removed
from traditional bourgeois norms. They live in disorganized, postmodern
neighborhoods in which it is much harder to be self-disciplined and productive.
I doubt Murray would agree, but we need a National Service Program. We need
a program that would force members of the upper tribe and the lower tribe to
live together, if only for a few years. We need a program in which people from
both tribes work together to spread out the values, practices and institutions
that lead to achievement.
If we could jam the tribes together, we'd have a better elite and a better
mass.
_______________________________________________
Futurework mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.uwaterloo.ca/mailman/listinfo/futurework
No virus found in this message.
Checked by AVG - www.avg.com
Version: 2012.0.1913 / Virus Database: 2112/4784 - Release Date: 02/03/12
_______________________________________________
Futurework mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.uwaterloo.ca/mailman/listinfo/futurework
Keith Hudson, Saltford, England http://allisstatus.wordpress.com
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
No virus found in this message.
Checked by AVG - www.avg.com
Version: 2012.0.1913 / Virus Database: 2112/4788 - Release Date: 02/04/12
_______________________________________________
Futurework mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.uwaterloo.ca/mailman/listinfo/futurework
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
_______________________________________________
Futurework mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.uwaterloo.ca/mailman/listinfo/futurework
_______________________________________________
Futurework mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.uwaterloo.ca/mailman/listinfo/futurework
