Thursday, February 19, 2015

Hitler, the group dynamic, and the common enemy.

Burke handles criticizing Mein Kampf in a very objective and methodical manner. This feat is somewhat impressive considering the negative emotional attachment people have to Hitler and Nazis in general. He examined Hitler's quest to control Eastern Europe through the eyes of a rhetorician and skilled orator and finds that Hitler's success depended upon his ability to scapegoat everyone but the Aryans and set up a binary opposition of qualities amongst his group and their “opponents”. Burke argued that this piece of the scheme's puzzle was the most crucial to set down right. This idea of unification, both geographically and ideologically, is what sets movements going forward. Burke even fittingly quotes Hitler in his essay: “the efficiency of the truly national leader consists primarily in preventing the division of the attention of a people, and always in concentrating it on a single enemy.” (Burke, 193)

Burke also mentions that Hitler was helped out by the fact that Germany was economically struggling before his reign. The people were desperate for an answer and Hitler answered their questions convincingly enough to rally a nation of poor (and as a result, gullible) around a common enemy. In effect, Burke mentions that Hitler's antisemitism was ramped up to complete this image of a binary opposition where there was none, the definition of the illogical practice of scapegoating.


Furthermore, as it relates to the term heteroglossia, Hitler's reign and style of warmongering unified not only Germany, but did so by unifying the enemy in the eyes of his German people. Hitler wanted to limit the number of voices/opponents in order to hype up the power of the non-Aryans in the eyes of his own Germans. By making the Jews seem like this big, bad unified force, their “threat” was taken more seriously throughout Eastern Europe, effectively making the “problem” seem big enough for Germany to do something about it on a national, genocidal scale.  

2 comments:

  1. Hello! I think that something important that you had mentioned was how Hitler had taken advantage of Germany's situation to create a scapegoat in the Jewish people. Creating the binary opposition between Hitler's Germany and the Jewish people was the impetus of the entirety of WWII. It's seen as a horrible add on, but it united people together in a twisted way to hurt others.

    ReplyDelete
  2. I thought that it was interesting when you talked about the binary opposition Hitler created. It made me think of Derrida's concept of being defined as what we are as much as we are defined as what we are not. Hitler did these two things simultaneously, creating a sense of othering for both parties that played right into his hand.

    ReplyDelete

Note: Only a member of this blog may post a comment.