In WHY ARE EVIL POLITICAL SYSTEMS SO ATTRACTIVE? — PART 1, we decided to study what might motivate us to support a vile political system, to become advocates for the most insistent busybodies. At the outset I suggested that our motivation depends upon the type of political system. Here we will consider fascism.
How Does Fascism Justify Busybodyism?
What was one of the things that King Solomon tried to find happiness?
Ecclesiastes 2:7-8 New American Standard Bible (NASB)
7 I bought male and female slaves and I had homeborn slaves. Also I possessed flocks and herds larger than all who preceded me in Jerusalem. 8 Also, I collected for myself silver and gold and the treasure of kings and provinces. I provided for myself male and female singers and the pleasures of men—many concubines.
Solomon made people his property and objects for his entertainment. In his day slavery was so common Solomon probably did not think much about it. In fact, in this passage Solomon just speaks of his slaves to demonstrate the scope of his wealth and his pleasures. Wealth and pleasure he foolishly tried to enjoy without God.
What has that got to do with fascism? What was the rationale anyone in his time had for owning slaves? Study history. It quickly becomes fairly obvious that the better people — the aristocrats — have almost always believed they have a special right to own common people. After all, there is nothing special about the common people. Those people just too common. Supposedly, they don’t know how to take care of themselves, and their caretaker has to have some reward for providing them proper guidance.
In the 20th Century, fascists such as Benito Mussolini and Adolf Hitler updated the concept of slavery. Hitler justified forming German society into classes based upon the “science” of race and eugenics. Instead of private owners, Hitler put his government in charge of the slave class, at least those slaves he did not decide to exterminate. Still, the fascists hearkened back to the past. The word “facism” comes from the “Latin fasces “bundle of rods containing an axe with the blade projecting” (see fasces).
EVERY elevation of the type “man,” has hitherto been the work of an aristocratic society and so it will always be—a society believing in a long scale of gradations of rank and differences of worth among human beings, and requiring slavery in some form or other. Without the PATHOS OF DISTANCE, such as grows out of the incarnated difference of classes, out of the constant out-looking and down-looking of the ruling caste on subordinates and instruments, and out of their equally constant practice of obeying and commanding, of keeping down and keeping at a distance—that other more mysterious pathos could never have arisen, the longing for an ever new widening of distance within the soul itself, the formation of ever higher, rarer, further, more extended, more comprehensive states, in short, just the elevation of the type “man,” the continued “self-surmounting of man,” to use a moral formula in a supermoral sense. To be sure, one must not resign oneself to any humanitarian illusions about the history of the origin of an aristocratic society (that is to say, of the preliminary condition for the elevation of the type “man”): the truth is hard. Let us acknowledge unprejudicedly how every higher civilization hitherto has ORIGINATED! Men with a still natural nature, barbarians in every terrible sense of the word, men of prey, still in possession of unbroken strength of will and desire for power, threw themselves upon weaker, more moral, more peaceful races (perhaps trading or cattle-rearing communities), or upon old mellow civilizations in which the final vital force was flickering out in brilliant fireworks of wit and depravity. At the commencement, the noble caste was always the barbarian caste: their superiority did not consist first of all in their physical, but in their psychical power—they were more COMPLETE men (which at every point also implies the same as “more complete beasts”). (from here)
More complete beasts? Seems like kind of a strange way for supermen (overmen is the term Nietzsche used) to view themselves, but Nietzsche strove to put himself beyond the idea of good and evil. What exactly he mean by beyond the idea of good and evil? Not sure, but Nietzsche, who saw himself a free spirit, had no problem enslaving those he saw as fit for nothing else.
Nietzsche saw egalitarianism as the path to mediocrity. He hated and denied the notion of equality. Nietzsche believed in elevating the overman or superman. Thus, because fascist ideologies tend to emphasize racial purity (see Fascism and ideology), many praised Nietzsche’s work.
Is all that still fuzzy around the edges? Consider again that Satan often poses as a beautiful angel. The proponents of that which is evil, because what they want is so repugnant and ugly, usually avoid clearly describing their full intentions. Thus, the Nazis exterminated people by the millions quietly.
To Be Posted
- How Does Communism Justify Busybodyism?
- What Wisdom Does The Bible Offer Busybodies?