Exploring the Background Ideology of An Evil Regime

 There has perhaps been more attention given to the various aspects of the Third Reich over the past 80 or so years since World War II, and much research has focused upon military history, the Holocaust, and the personage of Adolf Hitler.  However, one of the lacking areas of research for this period of history is the background of how the National Socialist Party (Nazis) came into existence.  And that raises many questions worthy of research.  For one, what things did influence the evolution of National Socialism?  Secondly, how did those concepts converge to construct a new ideology, and to what degree did the Nazis fully identify with earlier movements?  Finally, when studying the Third Reich, one notices that Hitler and the Nazis actually ended up persecuting people they shared views with - why was that?   These are the questions warranting a need to tackle, and now they will be the focus of this Ph.D. dissertation. 

As with anything else, the important foundational fact in researching this or any other topic is that things do not appear suddenly out of a vacuum - somewhere along the way, there are factors that shape, influence, and contribute to the overall final product.  While some historians have indeed specialized in this aspect of the research - two that come to mind are Richard Weikart and Benjamin Wiker - for the most part it is often shrugged off by academia as being too broad of a topic with the impossibility of narrowing down. This is a problem that is evident at the university level in dealing with faculty.  One faces challenges with this whole thing due to the fact that there are serious barriers to research - one, surprisingly, is the academic institution itself.  This is a major reason why this topic has not been indulged from a more scholarly perspective, although tons of popular literature on topics such as Nazism and the occult are widely available, and the recourse is to often use these sources as a resource to find primary source material, as surprisingly these more "conspiratorial" works so easily dismissed by academics do have a wealth of primary source leads for more in-depth research.  And, in the case of Nazism, it is also important to know German as well, which I do have extensive language study in.  One thing to remember though is to "stay the course" despite garnering opposition, and in time the research will compensate itself. 

In conducting research on these ideological sources, it is admittedly a challenge to sort things out, but in doing so research has been narrowed to four primary areas - occultism, political movements that arose at the end of the 19th century in Germany and Austria, the impact of social Darwinism and also the issue of homosexuality in early Nazi circles, and finally the philosophical views of Nietzsche, Houston Stewart Chamberlain, and Martin Heidegger.  The approach is to treat each of these areas individually, and then see how they converge and intersect in creating what became the National Socialist movement.  The oft-overlooked question, however, would be how the Nazis cherrypicked ideas and then discarded the sources of those ideas when they were no longer convenient.  The jailing, for instance, of Karl Haushofer, the geopolitical professor who more or less gave Hitler the idea of Lebensraum, and the falling from grace of Rudolf von Sebottendorf, the early German occultist who founded the Thule Society, an occultic sect that birthed the National Socialist Party as a political arm.  For a lot of this type of material, German-language sources in the form of correspondence and official government documents is crucial, as the Nazis had a public face that often belied their origins and seemed to contradict them.  Aside from identifying the ideological sources themselves, this is one of the more important factors that merits further examination outside of "conspiratorial" literature as was popular on these topics during the 1970s and 1980s.  

Much scholarship in this area - including some well-meaning professors at the particular university where this dissertation will be submitted - casually dismiss the possibility of an organized National Socialist ideology.  While it is understandable where they are coming from (it is agreed that the Nazis were one of the evilest movements to ever exist), caution must be exercised to avoid being too dismissive of this.  In order for a movement to have success - both good and evil movements - having an organized platform of ideas is crucial.  And, while the Nazis tended to be somewhat utilitarian and opportunistic, they did still manage to craft a very plain ideology that merits some examination, as it also sheds light on the background of the Holocaust and World War II in general.  Therefore, the focus of this research is primarily in the decades prior to the Third Reich - from approximately the 1890s to the 1920s - and focuses on ideological and social history primarily, with some examination of the overarching themes present in the time period as a whole (the conflict between Enlightenment-era rationalism and the rise of interest in alternative religious expressions during the Victorian period in America and Europe, etc.).  In understanding the overarching influences and factors that provided the fertile ground for cultivating a certain ideology, it brings a fuller understanding of what the ideology actually is. 

Therefore, in conclusion, this is a project that entails ideological background, and at times sources will need to be used that fall out of the academic spectrum - meaning popular or "conspiratorial" literature - because this area has honestly been largely ignored until recent years by conventional scholarship. Many of these undiscovered sources conceal a wealth of primary source material (including much in the original language of the culture the topic addresses) that would aid in this study, and therefore cannot be casually dismissed.  Some of these sources may actually contain material that is agreeable to the researcher, but agreement must not supersede empirical evidence.  That is perhaps the most prominent historiographical issue for this specific topic.  However, it must be restated that understanding the background of an ideology of any sort will provide a backdrop for other topics within the same historical context.  

A Little Catching Up

 So, it has been a while since I have been here, as I have been quite busy with many things at this point. As I am writing this, I am getting ready next week to do my final exam essay in the last of what are called my Comp courses - these are comprehensive reading requirements that are divided into four courses for the doctoral program at my university, and they consist of subject areas in early America, modern America, early modern Europe (from the end of the Middle Ages to the French Revolution), and modern Europe (from Napoleon to the 21st century).  These courses are somewhat of a pain in the butt honestly, as each one requires six sets of discussion notes to be prepared over the 8 weeks of the class, and then you post those and respond to two of your classmates and their notes.  The way these are set up is that you have to discuss six sources - two books, two academic journal articles, and two primary sources.  This includes picking out the major research questions, the conclusions the source reaches, and the significance of a particular source to historical discourse.  It is very time-consuming doing those, but thankfully I just completed my last one (24 total over 4 courses!) and I am about done with the Comps then as of next week from this writing.  I then will begin the actual dissertation phase of my program starting on May 15, and for the next year it will be all about the dissertation, and at the end and after a successful defense I will then be able to preface my name with the initials "Dr."  This is a huge deal honestly, and I am so thankful that soon my almost 50+ years of education will soon be completed.  It will be nice finishing that, in all honesty, and then my next role in a classroom will be in front of it teaching.  So, in case any of you missed my pithy, insightful commentary on here, that is the reason why.  I will not be writing as frequently for a while, but I do intend to occasionally conversate with you virtually here.  

Life has been a complex mixture of challenges over the past few months too.  I have been hit with a few financial curve balls over the past few months, and it has been a bit stressful.  Thankfully, the dust has been starting to settle a little now and things are working out.  I also did have my recent six-month medical check-up last month, and that went very well - still have to watch the glucose and tri-gly counts but other than that I am fine.  I also do have a sleep study my doctor ordered coming up, as he wants to test me for sleep apnea, and I do need extensive dental work as well - my teeth, in all honesty, are a mess as I have not been to a dentist in almost 50 years.  I am thinking I will need implants for sure in my mouth, so I will be working toward that too.  I also have been offered a position with a preparatory academy in my home state of West Virginia, and if the background screening for it goes well, I will be starting that in September.  In summary, life has been extremely busy lately, and it looks like it will continue to be so for a while. 

As many of you now know, about two years ago Barbara and I divorced, and a couple of months ago we also got our annulment from the Church as well, thanks in part to our wonderful priest who helped us with the process.  However, Barbara and I are still very good friends, and we will be probably the rest of our lives.  It is a very widespread fallacy that many in society have about divorce - a divorced couple does not have to hate each other, especially if they are Christians to begin with, and if you can still be friends despite the ending of a marriage, it actually shows a high level of spiritual and emotional maturity.  I will not go into a lot of details as to why our marriage ended, but unfortunately it did, yet neither of us really blames each other - the circumstances actually show that we were both victims of the same thing, and we both understand that and are better friends because of it.  Barbara is actually like a sister I never had, and we do still care for and look out for each other as if we were siblings.  That is actually a wonderful thing, and I could not ask for a better friend than her.   While our marriage did not work out, not every aspect of that is bad either, because we do share many good memories and do still talk about them.  And, we have both also moved on with our lives in other areas - more on that at another time.  So, the lesson here is quite essential - divorce is an unfortunate fact of our fallen world, but even in the tragedy of divorce good fruit can be borne, and indeed it has with Barbara and myself. Therefore, do not be quick to judge us or any other divorced couple - like that guy Dhar Mann often says in those inspirational videos he has, you can never judge a book by its cover, as between the covers is an entire story.  I direct this especially toward some of our friends and family who claim to be "religious" - both Barbara and I have known many of the same people over the years, and many of them identify as conservative Evangelical Protestants.  This leads me to a little soapbox I want to stand on for a little bit, as some things need to be said. 

Those of us who are Christians know that our God is righteous and just, but what we tend to forget is that God - and especially incarnate in Jesus Christ - is a God of mercy and grace too.  While this would be a better discussion probably for the SPT blog, I mention it here for a more personal dimension.  Everyone on this earth, regardless of who or what you are, has screwed up on occasion.  We all sin, make bad choices, and at times our judgments are a bit clouded.  All of us with no exceptions.  The big theological term for this is concupiscence, and it is affirmed in Scripture in particular by Romans 3:23 - all have sinned and fallen short of the glory of God.  Even after we are converted and are baptized as Christians, we still war with that, and this is the reason why God has given the gift of supernatural grace - as both Aquinas and Bonaventure teach in their writings, the role of supernatural grace is to elevate, heal, and perfect us.  It isn't the same idea of grace that many of us were wrongly taught as Protestants, that it is simply "unmerited favor" - that definition confuses grace with something else, and that is mercy. Grace helps us grow, but mercy is the supernatural intervention - which we do not often deserve - that sustains us.  So, it is mercy that is an "unmerited favor," not grace.  And how do we receive both? Through our faith in God, in particular the ultimate mercy God gave us - Himself on a cross for our sins.  So, for my Evangelical Protestant friends, that is an important difference you should understand, and at a later time I will do a full teaching on that in my SPT blog.  For now in this context though, it has to do with attitudes both Barbara and I have faced by some of our friends over the years.  That is what I want to talk about now.

Divorce is an unfortunate effect of the Fall that even affects Christians, as we all are in the process of letting supernatural grace do its work to elevate, heal, and perfect us.  However, there is a nasty stigma that surrounds divorce for Christians, and it involves these three faulty ideas:

1. A divorced person is destined for hell

2. A divorced person who remarries commits adultery.

3. A divorced person is apparently not good enough for God.

All three of these ideas are wrong, cruel, and ultimately can harm someone, and Christians in particular need to throw them out.  In all honesty, I used to hold to at least two of these ideas too, but after experiencing a divorce myself, I had to grow up fast.  The fact is, a divorced person who is a Christian does not forfeit God's favor, and there are even times when the divorce is not even the intention of one or either party, but it unfortunately happens.  Now, there is a procedure however to follow in the event of a divorce, and it is basically just common sense and simple.  If you are a Catholic who has divorced, you will also need the marriage annulled.  This can be a scary process, but a caring priest will walk each former spouse through it.  During the annulment process, no remarriage is possible.  Also, a civil divorce is also legal, and is recognized as such by most Christian traditions.  So, before even thinking of moving on, that would have to be in order.  It is not a sin at all for a properly divorced (and in the Catholic context, annulled) person to remarry.  As a matter of fact, if such a person finds one to love like that, it is actually a beautiful thing because we as human beings are made to need the companionship of a soulmate - there is a certain incompleteness one has if they are alone, unless they do have a calling to be celibate.  That is just how we are hard-wired.  If the proper steps are taken, then remarriage is NOT adultery at all, and if the chemistry and true love is there, it is actually a beautiful new beginning for such a person. And, in saying that a divorced person is "not good enough for God," let's also enlighten that too - remember, no one can be good enough for God anyway on their own merits - ain't gonna happen!  But, because of Christ, we are made good as a mercy through his Blood shed for all of our sins.  And, that includes divorced people - if a divorced person still serves God, then they are in a good place and God does not hate them nor does he expect them to be "good enough" for him - he chose them and his love is unconditional. All we have to do is accept that mercy and let God love us as we are.  Then, supernatural grace will be given to us to do the rest.  So, if someone says that a divorced person (or any other sinner for that matter) is "not good enough for God," they are in effect committing heresy, because that is not what God's own words say in his Bible.  So, if you are one of those people who finds it necessary to condemn a divorced person in your church, you better look in the mirror first, because you have in essence become a "church Karen" and probably have issues of your own you are avoiding.  A Christian comedian, Taylor Ransom, portrays such "church Karens" vividly as one of the characters he portrays, and it is worth watching (plus, it is extremely hilarious!).  Any rate, if you are a divorced person who has experienced these attitudes from people, there is encouragement for you - God still loves you, so find your refuge in him, and let him take care of those who attack you. 

I really did not mean to get off on a Bible study here, but I think it needs to be said and some people do need to hear it.  And, I am writing from the heart too, as it is my own experience as well.  After our divorce, I noted already that Barbara and I are still close, and people who we encounter at Mass and elsewhere actually find us to be a true witness of God's grace at work - I am not saying that to brag, but I do love the witness Barbara and I still have with people we come across.  Other couples in a divorced Catholics group I am part of on social media have also been encouraged by my story too, and on occasion I find other spiritually mature people who also have moved past the divorce and are still close friends with their former spouses. Some have remarried other people obviously, but it has also created a beautiful community among them.  That is really something we should take to heart and think about, because it is integral to our spiritual and emotional growth too. 

I am also saddened this past month as well, as I lost one of my oldest and dearest childhood friends.  Sim Taylor and I have known each other since we were in 3rd grade over 44 years ago, and to be honest he was like a brother.  I last talked to him on March 7, and at the time he was going through a lot too - he had issues at his workplace, and a couple of years ago he lost his wife.  Little did I know that would be the last conversation I had with Sim, as the next day while he was at work he had an aneurysm that ruptured in his brain, and it took his life on March 9.  It was really a blow to learn about that, because on average we would talk back and forth at least once a week, and I started noticing a couple of weeks back that I hadn't heard anything out of him for a while.  So, I checked his social media, and his sister had posted that he passed away - that stunned me, as he is the same age as me.  I want to now just share a few memories of Sim with you now, as we go back a long way. 

                                                            Sim and I back in 2016

Sim Taylor was a neighbor of my dad's back in the day.  He and his family - his mom, stepdad, and two sisters - lived in a house a block over on Union Street from Dad's house on Ellis Street in Brunswick, GA.  We met actually in third grade at Burroughs Mollette School in Brunswick, and given we were close neighbors, we later became good friends.  One of the things we both enjoyed was watching a cartoon then called Space Giants.  This was a Japanese science-fiction series that was produced originally in the mid-1960s, and it could be described as something that would happen if Power Rangers were merged with Lost in Space, and it featured as its prime protagonist a huge giant gold robot named Goldar. Although it looks somewhat corny now, back then the local TV station in Jacksonville aired it on weekday afternoons, and for some reason Sim got me watching that.  There were times he would come over and watch it at Dad's house with me, and we would have cookies and chocolate milk as we watched the program.  Recently, I actually found that whole series on DVD and bought it, and it was kind of fun to watch again.  We also attended each other's youth group meetings at churches - Sim's folks went to the Nazarene church near their house, and they had a program for elementary-aged boys called the Caravans, and I went to those meetings with Sim.  I was actually part of another church, Beverly Shores Baptist Church, and also part of that boys' group there called the Royal Ambassadors.  I would on occasion take Sim to those too.  And, of course, like most kids, we formed our own club which we called the "Secret Agents" on Sim's recommendation - neither one of us knew why the hell we called it that, but it sounded cool to two nine-year-old boys.  After leaving and going back to Mom in the summer of that year (1979), I had lost touch with Sim for many years, although my dad would say occasionally that he ran into him and would tell me how he was.  Thanks to social media though, about 10 years ago we were able to get back in touch, and since then we have been close again.  He was an amazing friend.  In the years in between, Sim and I lived our respective lives - I went to college, and Sim got a job at 19 at the local seafood processing plant on St. Simons (the old Sea Pak Foods, now Rich Foods I believe), and he married an older lady while I married at 22 to Barbara, and life went on for both of us.  But, once we got back in touch, it was as if we never stopped talking since 3rd grade together.  He was an amazing guy, and one of my best friends, and I am sure going to miss him.  Rest eternal Bro and will see you again one day. 

So, that concludes our insights for today, and hope to visit again soon.  It has been really busy with my doctoral work and other responsibilities, so I won't be here as frequently, but do plan to check in.  Have a good week everyone and catch you next time.