11 Comments

Why is it that former WWII AXIS nations are the quickest to embrace totalitarian responses to this "pandemic"? Austria, Germany, Italy.... hmmm (Japan and Finland don't count... AXIS allies for strategic rather than ideological reasons.)

Expand full comment
author
Jan 11, 2022·edited Jan 11, 2022Author

Re cm27874, specifically: I do hail from such a country originally (albeit 'that other' one), and I share your worries. Curiously enough, when I bring up these lunacies over dinner, my spouse, by now, merely retorts, 'perhaps it [fascism] is in their DNA', which may or may not be true, and it certainly leaves open the door for a fascinating discussion about 'nature vs. nurture', isn't it?

I'd like to make a somewhat bigger point, though, as strange as this might sound.

Do put aside 'nature' (genes) vs. 'nurture' (epigenetics) for a moment and consider this:

Historically speaking, the 20th century is typically perceived as a bloody and dark period of human history, with the main course of carnage to have occurred during 'that other 30 Years' War' (1914-45). These decades of bloodshed, inaugurated by what George Kennan famously labelled 'the seminal catastrophe' of the century (WW1), almost organically-inevitably led to the emergence of the totalitarianisms of the time (Bolshevism, Fascism, National Socialism).

Of course, this is Eurocentric (to certain degrees), but this isn't the point I'm trying to make. With the end of WW2, so the story goes, 'humanity', after staring into the abyss, turned a corner, things improved, and here we are.

So, to make this rather strange string of words into a more coherent comment: if one dares to venture beyond the Transatlanticist-Western biases, I think the post-1945 world may be characterised as follows:

* the majority of 'wars' after 1945 were fought against the population of what used to be called the '2nd' and '3rd worlds', i.e., they were class-and-race wars, couched in cozy terminology and served the interestes of (mainly) US-led Western corporations.

* the commemorative emphases, ad nauseam, on esp. the cruelties of WW2 obscures the massive population losses incurred in 'the global south' after 1945, for which mainly western countries bear the main responsibility.

So far, so well known, I suppose.

Yet, I'd argue that the core of what I just tried to formulate, however crudely, is this: the world after 1945 is quite a different one than the one that existed before WW2. Yet, most historical accounts will tell you that nice story I outlined above.

Still, I didn't paraphrase Nietzsche's staring-into-the-abyss piece for nothing: in fighting one kind of totalitarianism (autocratic governance, irrespective of its ideological extremity and bent), the Collective West--and here I mean the part that self-identifies as 'free world'--absorbed the main tenets of totalitarianism.

I guess what I'm saying is this: there were notable differences in state power and aspiration before WW1 and WW2, which do no longer existe afterwards. In other words: the role and range of government--in particular in 'the West'--is markedly different after 1945: government is bigger, much more intrusive, and way less responsive to expressions of popular attitudes and opinions.

This is something that characterises all 'western-style' governments, hence it's no surprise that they all mirror each other in their actions.

To sum this up: the period from 1914-45 witnessed a fundamental transformation of the relationship between the nation, its people(s), and its government, which are still-ongoing. All governments and their bureaucracies have become much more authoritarian in nature, hence to me it's hardly surprising that we're all finding outselves in these dire straits now.

Thus, WW1, WW2, and the Cold War were the catalysts that transformed governments into the behemoths they still are, and continue to be, by means of absorbing a good deal of totalitarian attitudes, 'mores', and ways of doing business.

There you have it: in fighting totalitarianism (of one or the other kind), totalitarianism has crept into the hearts, minds, and body politics of its self-declared adversaries.

Any thoughts?

Expand full comment
Jan 11, 2022Liked by epimetheus

WWI can be seen as a family feud among the offspring and extended family of Queen Victoria.

It ended finally when all available men of fighting age were casualties. The monarchs were then sidelined... But it left an open wound across the continent. WWII was a resumption of the festering conflict, but now with a more efficient and ravenous killing machine that dined on civilians and soldiers. While blood flowed in Europe and Asia, America invented the modern administrative state on its invasion-proof soil. It then teamed with post-war Britian to evangelize this "rule of the bureaucrats" during the reconstruction. The administrative state must grow, or die. It now regulates agriculture, commerce, travel, and worst of all, public health. The administrative state upped the power-grab game in its response to Covid. Now we are left with the mess it created.

Expand full comment

I am not sure if the WWs and the Cold War should be regarded as catalysts. Maybe they just delayed processes that would otherwise have manifested earlier. We are bad at heeding Solschenizyn's advice, and looking at the dividing line between good and evil in our own hearts. In times of war (even if that war is cold), there is usually some society-level narrative about good and evil (where both sides regard themselves as good). In times of peace the system turns on itself. The only antidote I can think of is religion, in the sense of common agreement that there is something outside and above us: there is a God, and it is not me (don't worry, atheists, generical agreement is sufficient).

Expand full comment

Well, I guess that's what you'd expect. But what the hell is going on with France?? Maybe it's just Macron's personal megalomania, and they'll boot him out of office in a few months' time. Or not. But anyway, France is the country that actually shocked me the most in all of this.

Expand full comment
Jan 10, 2022·edited Jan 10, 2022

That's a good question. You can even see it in North America, the strongest enthusiasm for draconian covid restrictions comes from a province whose leaders once sympathised with the Axis and even helped Nazi collaborators flee France after the war.

Sadly, the rest of Canada is mostly following Quebec's lead this time around. Will they continue to do so when Quebec requires vaccine passes in grocery stores? It's already on the table.

Expand full comment

I'm German, and it worries me as well.

Expand full comment

American here, but lived in Bayern for years. Germans were always very kind and good to me and my family. But I did note a ready acceptance of the administrative authorities. The Einwohner Einmeldungsampt (forgive my spelling) always pissed me off!

Expand full comment
author

As an expat in now three countries over the past 11+ years (add my wife's experiences in yet another country), I can totally relate to this.

Curiously enough, these authorities are virtually the same everwhere (even though I've been told it's even far, far worse if, say, you'd like bring a spouse and/or kids from a country outside the EU/EEC and associated countries like the US or Canada into 'Europe').

I hope you, BigE, haven't lost your good spirits, though.

Expand full comment

Thank you.

Expand full comment

I have been following this societal regression with astonishment for the last two years and here we are: a new class of untermenschen is being created in front of everyone’s eyes an almost nobody blinks. Such a shocking development especially since it’s happening on the same floor with much talk of human rights and democracy values etc.

Expand full comment