Violence as a Struggle Against Weakness

--part1_8a.215628d6.2b09b76a_boundary
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

Professor Jorge M. Roche refines my metaphor "Warfare as Submission" by
suggesting that if my hypothesis is correct, "What we might empirically
expect is that those individuals who are more submissive are also more likely
to be more aggressive than less submissive ones."

It is not possible to "prove" a hypothesis within the space of a
discussion group. However, I wish to demonstrate its plausibility, building
upon my research on Hitler and Nazism.

"Submission" suggests bowing down or giving in to an external locus of
power. Submissive behavior may be the consequence of external forces, may be
internally motivated, or both. Professor Rocha suggests fear, respect, and a
sense of duty as motives that typically generate submissive behavior.

However, one may also suggest a relationship between submissiveness and
a sense of weakness. Let us explore the possible link between a sense of
weakness or passivity, on the one hand, and violence or aggression on the
other.

Diane Gartland notes that we are hesitant to apply terms such as
weakness, impotence, etc., to Hitler because there is a tendency to view him
as an "omnipotently powerful ogre/tyrant/dictator/emperor/king." We also tend
to view the Germans of the Nazi period, because of the havoc and devastation
they wrecked, as a powerful and aggressive people.

To comprehend political violence, it is necessary to understand the
mental world of the perpetrators. One adopts an anthropological perspective,
reconstructing "the native's point of view." My research enters the mental
world of Hitler and culture of Nazism.

Hitler himself posited a relationship between weakness and violence.
Indeed, it is reasonable to suggest that Hitler conceived of the Nazi
movement precisely as the German people's struggle to OVERCOME WEAKNESS AND
SUBMISSIVENESS THROUGH VIOLENCE.

In MEIN KAMP, Hitler stated that people liked the German because he was
"easy to make use of," but respected him little "precisely because of his
weakness of will." In Hitler's view, German education placed too much
emphasis on book learning and not enough on physical training. Consequently,
Germans were "not strong men," rather were "walking encyclopedias."

Hitler's Nazi movement would reverse the trend toward hyper
intellectualism by focusing on the body and physical prowess. Hitler
admonished his German youth: "We ask of you to be hard, and to make
yourselves hard! We cannot use a generation of 'mother's boys,' of spoiled
children."

Hitler feels that for himself and his generation, the situation is
hopeless. The sense of weakness and submission have become too deeply
ingrained:

"We older ones are used up. We are rotten to the marrow. We are
cowardly and sentimental. We are bearing the burden of a humiliating past,
and have in our blood the dull recollection of serfdom and servility."

He therefore focuses his aspiration for change--the development of an
aggressive people-- upon the younger generation:

"But my magnificent youngsters! Are there finer ones anywhere in the
world? Look at these young men and boys! What material! With them I can make
a new-world."

The German sense of humiliation during the rise of Hitler stemmed both
from intrapsychic sources and Germany's position in the world. Hitler
presented himself as that unique leader who was capable of providing a "way
out." Diane Gartland observes that Hitler constituted the "container or
projection of the German peoples' own disabling (perceived) inadequacies and
wish to restore themselves."

The foundational impulse--that which lay at the origin of the Nazi
movement and was the source of all that followed--was the Hitler salute. It
occurred during speeches in auditoriums when listeners--inspired by Hitler's
words and gestures--rose to their feet en masse and yelled, "Heil Hitler." In
this act of "Heiling" Hitler, THE RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN SUBMISSION AND
AGGRESSION (and subsequent willingness to follow Hitler into war)
CRYSTALLIZED.

The German people "Heil" Hitler as the savior who will lead them away
from their degraded sense of being. The act of "Heiling" the leader CONDENSES
THE MOMENT OF SUBMISSION AND THE STRUGGLE AGAINST SUBMISSION (i. e.,
aggression) into one gesture.

In the following passages, Hitler puts forth his conception of
violence--criminal activity--as the vehicle for overcoming passivity,
inertia, and inactivity:

"Every crime in the old sense towers above respectable inactivity. Action may
be negative from the viewpoint of the community. But it is at least action."

"Every deed has its place, even crime. All passivity, all inertia, on the on
the other hand, is senseless and inimical to life."

It thus is plausible to hypothesize that--at least in the Nazi
case--the amount of aggression was directly proportional to the degree to
which individuals experienced themselves as weak. Violence constituted a
struggle against passivity.

With regards,

Richard A. Koenigsberg

Richard Koenigsberg, Ph. D.
Director, Library of Social Science

--part1_8a.215628d6.2b09b76a_boundary
Content-Type: text/html; charset="US-ASCII"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

<HTML>      Professor Jorge M. Roche refines my metaphor "Warfare as Submission" by suggesting that if my hypothesis is correct, "What we might empirically expect is that those individuals who are more submissive are also more likely to be more aggressive than less submissive ones." 
 
      It is not possible to "prove" a hypothesis within the space of a discussion group. However, I wish to demonstrate its plausibility, building upon my research on Hitler and Nazism. 
 
      "Submission" suggests bowing down or giving in to an external locus of power.  Submissive behavior may be the consequence of external forces, may be internally motivated, or both. Professor Rocha suggests fear, respect, and a sense of duty as motives that typically generate submissive behavior. 
 
      However, one may also suggest a relationship between submissiveness and a sense of weakness. Let us explore the possible link between a sense of weakness or passivity, on the one hand, and violence or aggression on the other. 
 
      Diane Gartland notes that we are hesitant to apply terms such as weakness, impotence, etc., to Hitler because there is a tendency to view him as an "omnipotently powerful ogre/tyrant/dictator/emperor/king." We also tend to view the Germans of the Nazi period, because of the havoc and devastation they wrecked, as a powerful and aggressive people. 
 
      To comprehend political violence, it is necessary to understand the mental world of the perpetrators. One adopts an anthropological perspective, reconstructing "the native's point of view." My research enters the mental world of Hitler and culture of Nazism. 
 
      Hitler himself posited a relationship between weakness and violence. Indeed, it is reasonable to suggest that Hitler conceived of the Nazi movement precisely as the German people's struggle to OVERCOME WEAKNESS AND SUBMISSIVENESS THROUGH VIOLENCE. 
 
      In MEIN KAMP, Hitler stated that people liked the German because he was "easy to make use of," but respected him little "precisely because of his weakness of will." In Hitler's view, German education placed too much emphasis on book learning and not enough on physical training. Consequently, Germans were "not strong men," rather were "walking encyclopedias." 
 
     Hitler's Nazi movement would reverse the trend toward hyper intellectualism by focusing on the body and physical prowess. Hitler admonished his German youth: "We ask of you to be hard, and to make yourselves hard! We cannot use a generation of 'mother's boys,' of spoiled children." 
 
      Hitler feels that for himself and his generation, the situation is hopeless.  The sense of weakness and submission have become too deeply ingrained: 
 
      "We older ones are used up. We are rotten to the marrow. We are cowardly and sentimental. We are bearing the burden of a humiliating past, and have in our blood the dull recollection of serfdom and servility." 
 
      He therefore focuses his aspiration for change--the development of an aggressive people-- upon the younger generation: 
 
      "But my magnificent youngsters! Are there finer ones anywhere in the world? Look at these young men and boys! What material! With them I can make a new-world." 
 
      The German sense of humiliation during the rise of Hitler stemmed both from intrapsychic sources and Germany's position in the world. Hitler presented himself as that unique leader who was capable of providing a "way out." Diane Gartland observes that Hitler constituted the "container or projection of the German peoples' own disabling (perceived) inadequacies and wish to restore themselves." 
 
      The foundational impulse--that which lay at the origin of the Nazi movement and was the source of all that followed--was the Hitler salute. It occurred during speeches in auditoriums when listeners--inspired by Hitler's words and gestures--rose to their feet en masse and yelled, "Heil Hitler." In this act of "Heiling" Hitler, THE RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN SUBMISSION AND AGGRESSION (and subsequent willingness to follow Hitler into war) CRYSTALLIZED. 
 
      The German people "Heil" Hitler as the savior who will lead them away from their degraded sense of being. The act of "Heiling" the leader CONDENSES THE MOMENT OF SUBMISSION AND THE STRUGGLE AGAINST SUBMISSION (i. e., aggression) into one gesture. 
 
      In the following passages, Hitler puts forth his conception of violence--criminal activity--as the vehicle for overcoming passivity, inertia, and inactivity: 
 
"Every crime in the old sense towers above respectable inactivity. Action may be negative from the viewpoint of the community. But it is at least action." 
 
"Every deed has its place, even crime. All passivity, all inertia, on the on the other hand, is senseless and inimical to life." 
 
      It thus is plausible to hypothesize that--at least in the Nazi case--the amount of aggression was directly proportional to the degree to which individuals experienced themselves as weak. Violence constituted a struggle against passivity. 
 
With regards, 
 
Richard A. Koenigsberg 
 
Richard Koenigsberg, Ph. D. 
Director, Library of Social Science</HTML>

--part1_8a.215628d6.2b09b76a_boundary--