The Battle of Binary Oppositions

Adolf Hitler came into power during a time when the people he was leading desperately needed a source of hope. The country of Germany was in shambles, and his words provoked citizens to feel as if a difference could be made. Many were rather enchanted by his words—spoken or written—and followed his messages clearly. Hitler is one of the best examples when discussing how the use of rhetoric can lead to power, and Kenneth Burke explains this idea well in The Rhetoric of Hitler’s “Battle.”

In his essay, Burke explains that the German people had nothing uniting them except for the distress and anguish felt amongst them due to there losses in World War I. Burke believes that it was Hitler’s ideas and messages, his “medicinal rhetoric” that “cured” the German people and gave them something to unite over; moving against the Jews of Germany (195).  Hitler presented his philosophy that the Aryans and the Jews were to be opposing forces, and that the “villainous Jew” would “seduce” the Aryan people. This philosophy gave the Germans something to grasp, something to unite over, despite the fact that reading these ideas today may seem completely absurd.

Burke also explains that Hitler’s book Mein Kampf was a symbol for the German people. Hitler created symbols to get his ideas across in a way that was easy to understand and easy to spread. Hitler took anything that could been seen as remotely negative and placed the blame on the Jews so that only the good could reflect from the Aryans. Once Hitler established this binary opposition, he had given the Germans something to unite over: a common enemy. Burke explains that once that seed had been planted, the follow-through was the easy part. He says “Once Hitler has thus essentialized his enemy, all “proof” is henceforth automatic” (Burke, 194).

Looking at Hitler’s leadership from Burke’s point of view makes me wonder if we could ever found ourselves in a similar position at some point in the future. Or have we seen such an instance already? Are there leaders in the world establishing ideas simply off the creating dissonance about another group of people? Is it happening somewhere distant or could it be happening here in the U.S.? 

African Americans were harmed and killed in the U.S. because Whites believed Blacks shouldn't have the same rights. The LGBTQ community is struggling to have their voices heard before another young teen loses their life. ISIS has made it clear that they believe American involvement in the U.S. is unacceptable and they are willing to end any life to make that message heard. 

The idea of dueling binary oppositions is not something we are unfamiliar with throughout history and even presently in our society. But is it possible for a leader with strong rhetorical skill to step up, present a philosophy and then have others lose their lives because of it?

           

-Chelsea