This
weekend - February 27th - is the 72nd anniversary, but the
corporate media most likely won't cover it. The generation that
experienced this history firsthand is now largely dead, and only
a few of us dare hear their ghosts.
It started when the government, in the midst of an economic
crisis, received reports of an imminent terrorist attack. A
foreign ideologue had launched feeble attacks on a few famous
buildings, but the media largely ignored his relatively small
efforts. The intelligence services knew, however, that the odds
were he would eventually succeed. (Historians are still arguing
whether or not rogue elements in the intelligence service helped
the terrorist. Some, like Sefton Delmer - a London Daily Express
reporter on the scene - say they certainly did not, while
others, like William Shirer, suggest they did.)
But the warnings of investigators were ignored at the highest
levels, in part because the government was distracted; the man
who claimed to be the nation's leader had not been elected by a
majority vote and the majority of citizens claimed he had no
right to the powers he coveted.
He was a simpleton, some said, a cartoon character of a man
who saw things in black-and-white terms and didn't have the
intellect to understand the subtleties of running a nation in a
complex and internationalist world.
His coarse use of language - reflecting his political roots
in a southernmost state - and his simplistic and
often-inflammatory nationalistic rhetoric offended the
aristocrats, foreign leaders, and the well-educated elite in the
government and media. And, as a young man, he'd joined a secret
society with an occult-sounding name and bizarre initiation
rituals that involved skulls and human bones.
Nonetheless, he knew the terrorist was going to strike
(although he didn't know where or when), and he had already
considered his response. When an aide brought him word that the
nation's most prestigious building was ablaze, he verified it
was the terrorist who had struck and then rushed to the scene
and called a press conference.
"You are now witnessing the beginning of a great epoch in
history," he proclaimed, standing in front of the burned-out
building, surrounded by national media. "This fire," he said,
his voice trembling with emotion, "is the beginning." He used
the occasion - "a sign from God," he called it - to declare an
all-out war on terrorism and its ideological sponsors, a people,
he said, who traced their origins to the Middle East and found
motivation for their evil deeds in their religion.
Two weeks later, the first detention center for terrorists
was built in Oranianberg to hold the first suspected allies of
the infamous terrorist. In a national outburst of patriotism,
the leader's flag was everywhere, even printed large in
newspapers suitable for window display.
Within four weeks of the terrorist attack, the nation's
now-popular leader had pushed through legislation - in the name
of combating terrorism and fighting the philosophy he said
spawned it - that suspended constitutional guarantees of free
speech, privacy, and habeas corpus. Police could now intercept
mail and wiretap phones; suspected terrorists could be
imprisoned without specific charges and without access to their
lawyers; police could sneak into people's homes without warrants
if the cases involved terrorism.
To get his patriotic "Decree on the Protection of People and
State" passed over the objections of concerned legislators and
civil libertarians, he agreed to put a 4-year sunset provision
on it: if the national emergency provoked by the terrorist
attack was over by then, the freedoms and rights would be
returned to the people, and the police agencies would be
re-restrained. Legislators would later say they hadn't had time
to read the bill before voting on it.
Immediately after passage of the anti-terrorism act, his
federal police agencies stepped up their program of arresting
suspicious persons and holding them without access to lawyers or
courts. In the first year only a few hundred were interred, and
those who objected were largely ignored by the mainstream press,
which was afraid to offend and thus lose access to a leader with
such high popularity ratings. Citizens who protested the leader
in public - and there were many - quickly found themselves
confronting the newly empowered police's batons, gas, and jail
cells, or fenced off in protest zones safely out of earshot of
the leader's public speeches. (In the meantime, he was taking
almost daily lessons in public speaking, learning to control his
tonality, gestures, and facial expressions. He became a very
competent orator.)
Within the first months after that terrorist attack, at the
suggestion of a political advisor, he brought a formerly obscure
word into common usage. He wanted to stir a "racial pride" among
his countrymen, so, instead of referring to the nation by its
name, he began to refer to it as "The Homeland," a phrase
publicly promoted in the introduction to a 1934 speech recorded
in Leni Riefenstahl's famous propaganda movie "Triumph Of The
Will." As hoped, people's hearts swelled with pride, and the
beginning of an us-versus-them mentality was sewn. Our land was
"the" homeland, citizens thought: all others were simply foreign
lands. We are the "true people," he suggested, the only ones
worthy of our nation's concern; if bombs fall on others, or
human rights are violated in other nations and it makes our
lives better, it's of little concern to us.
Playing on this new implicitly racial nationalism, and
exploiting a disagreement with the French over his increasing
militarism, he argued that any international body that didn't
act first and foremost in the best interest of his own nation
was neither relevant nor useful. He thus withdrew his country
from the League Of Nations in October, 1933, and then negotiated
a separate naval armaments agreement with Anthony Eden of The
United Kingdom to create a worldwide military ruling elite.
His propaganda minister orchestrated a campaign to ensure the
people that he was a deeply religious man and that his
motivations were rooted in Christianity. He even proclaimed the
need for a revival of the Christian faith across his nation,
what he called a "New Christianity." Every man in his rapidly
growing army wore a belt buckle that declared "Gott Mit Uns" -
God Is With Us - and most of them fervently believed it was
true.
Within a year of the terrorist attack, the nation's leader
determined that the various local police and federal agencies
around the nation were lacking the clear communication and
overall coordinated administration necessary to deal with the
terrorist threat facing the nation, particularly those citizens
who were of Middle Eastern ancestry and thus probably terrorist
and communist sympathizers, and various troublesome
"intellectuals" and "liberals." He proposed a single new
national agency to protect the security of the homeland,
consolidating the actions of dozens of previously independent
police, border, and investigative agencies under a single
leader.
He appointed one of his most trusted associates to be leader
of this new agency, the Central Security Office for the
homeland, and gave it a role in the government equal to the
other major departments.
His assistant who dealt with the press noted that, since the
terrorist attack, "Radio and press are at out disposal." Those
voices questioning the legitimacy of their nation's leader, or
raising questions about his checkered past, had by now faded
from the public's recollection as his central security office
began advertising a program encouraging people to phone in tips
about suspicious neighbors. This program was so successful that
the names of some of the people "denounced" were soon being
broadcast on radio stations. Those denounced often included
opposition politicians and news reporters who dared speak out -
a favorite target of his regime and the media he now controlled
through intimidation and ownership by corporate allies.
To consolidate his power, he concluded that government alone
wasn't enough. He reached out to industry and forged an
alliance, bringing former executives of the nation's largest
corporations into high government positions. A flood of
government money poured into corporate coffers to fight the war
against the Middle Eastern ancestry terrorists lurking within
the homeland, and to prepare for wars overseas. He encouraged
large corporations friendly to him to acquire media outlets and
other industrial concerns across the nation, particularly those
previously owned by suspicious people of Middle Eastern
ancestry. He built powerful alliances with industry; one
corporate ally got the lucrative contract worth millions to
build the first large-scale detention center for enemies of the
state. Soon more would follow. Industry flourished.
He also reached out to the churches, declaring that the
nation had clear Christian roots, that any nation that didn't
openly support religion was morally bankrupt, and that his
administration would openly and proudly provide both moral and
financial support to initiatives based on faith to provide
social services.
In this, he was reaching back to his own embrace of
Christianity, which he noted in an April 12, 1922 speech:
"My feeling as a Christian points me to my Lord and Savior
as a fighter. It points me to the man who once in loneliness,
surrounded only by a few followers ... was greatest not as a
sufferer but as a fighter.
"In boundless love as a Christian and as a man I read
through the passage which tells us how the Lord at last rose
in His might and seized the scourge to drive out of the Temple
the brood of vipers and adders...
"As a Christian ... I have the duty to be a fighter for
truth and justice..."
When he later survived an assassination attempt, he said,
"Now I am completely content. The fact that I left the
Burgerbraukeller earlier than usual is a corroboration of
Providence's intention to let me reach my goal."
Many government functions started with prayer. Every school
day started with prayer and every child heard the wonders of
Christianity and - especially - the Ten Commandments in school.
The leader even ended many of his speeches with a prayer, as he
did in a February 20, 1938 speech before Parliament:
"In this hour I would ask of the Lord God only this: that,
as in the past, so in the years to come He would give His
blessing to our work and our action, to our judgment and our
resolution, that He will safeguard us from all false pride and
from all cowardly servility, that He may grant us to find the
straight path which His Providence has ordained for the German
people, and that He may ever give us the courage to do the
right, never to falter, never to yield before any violence,
before any danger."
But after an interval of peace following the terrorist
attack, voices of dissent again arose within and without the
government. Students had started an active program opposing him
(later known as the White Rose Society), and leaders of nearby
nations were speaking out against his bellicose rhetoric. He
needed a diversion, something to direct people away from the
corporate cronyism being exposed in his own government,
questions of his possibly illegitimate rise to power, his
corruption of religious leaders, and the oft-voiced concerns of
civil libertarians about the people being held in detention
without due process or access to attorneys or family.
With his number two man - a master at manipulating the media
- he began a campaign to convince the people of the nation that
a small, limited war was necessary. Another nation was harboring
many of the suspicious Middle Eastern people, and even though
its connection with the terrorist who had set afire the nation's
most important building was tenuous at best, it held resources
their nation badly needed if they were to have room to live and
maintain their prosperity.
He called a press conference and publicly delivered an
ultimatum to the leader of the other nation, provoking an
international uproar. He claimed the right to strike
preemptively in self-defense, and nations across Europe - at
first - denounced him for it, pointing out that it was a
doctrine only claimed in the past by nations seeking worldwide
empire, like Caesar's Rome or Alexander's Greece.
It took a few months, and intense international debate and
lobbying with European nations, but, after he personally met
with the leader of the United Kingdom, finally a deal was
struck. After the military action began, Prime Minister Neville
Chamberlain told the nervous British people that giving in to
this leader's new first-strike doctrine would bring "peace for
our time." Thus Hitler annexed Austria in a lightning move,
riding a wave of popular support as leaders so often do in times
of war. The Austrian government was unseated and replaced by a
new leadership friendly to Germany, and German corporations
began to take over Austrian resources.
In a speech responding to critics of the invasion, Hitler
said, "Certain foreign newspapers have said that we fell on
Austria with brutal methods. I can only say; even in death they
cannot stop lying. I have in the course of my political struggle
won much love from my people, but when I crossed the former
frontier [into Austria] there met me such a stream of love as I
have never experienced. Not as tyrants have we come, but as
liberators."
To deal with those who dissented from his policies, at the
advice of his politically savvy advisors, he and his handmaidens
in the press began a campaign to equate him and his policies
with patriotism and the nation itself. National unity was
essential, they said, to ensure that the terrorists or their
sponsors didn't think they'd succeeded in splitting the nation
or weakening its will.
Rather than the government being run by multiple parties in a
pluralistic, democratic fashion, one single party sought total
control. Emulating a technique also used by Stalin, but as
ancient as Rome, the Party used the power of its influence on
the government to take over all government functions, hand out
government favors, and reward Party contributors with government
positions and contracts.
In times of war, they said, there could be only "one people,
one nation, and one commander-in-chief" ("Ein Volk, ein Reich,
ein Fuhrer"), and so his advocates in the media began a
nationwide campaign charging that critics of his policies were
attacking the nation itself. You were either with us, or you
were with the terrorists.
It was a simplistic perspective, but that was what would
work, he was told by his Propaganda Minister, Joseph Goebbels:
"The most brilliant propagandist technique will yield no success
unless one fundamental principle is borne in mind constantly -
it must confine itself to a few points and repeat them over and
over."
Those questioning him were labeled "anti-German" or "not good
Germans," and it was suggested they were aiding the enemies of
the state by failing in the patriotic necessity of supporting
the nation's valiant men in uniform. It was one of his most
effective ways to stifle dissent and pit wage-earning people
(from whom most of the army came) against the "intellectuals and
liberals" who were critical of his policies.
Another technique was to "manufacture news," through the use
of paid shills posing as reporters, seducing real reporters with
promises of access to the leader in exchange for favorable
coverage, and thinly veiled threats to those who exposed his
lies. As his Propaganda Minister said, "It is the absolute right
of the State to supervise the formation of public opinion."
Nonetheless, once the "small war" annexation of Austria was
successfully and quickly completed, and peace returned, voices
of opposition were again raised in the Homeland. The
almost-daily release of news bulletins about the dangers of
terrorist communist cells wasn't enough to rouse the populace
and totally suppress dissent. A full-out war was necessary to
divert public attention from the growing rumbles within the
country about disappearing dissidents; violence against
liberals, Jews, and union leaders; and the epidemic of crony
capitalism that was producing empires of wealth in the corporate
sector but threatening the middle class's way of life.
A year later, to the week, Hitler invaded Czechoslovakia.
In the months after that, he claimed that Poland had weapons
of mass destruction (poison gas) and was supporting terrorists
against Germany. Those who doubted that Poland represented a
threat were shouted down or branded as ignorant. Elections were
rigged, run by party hacks. Only loyal Party members were given
passes for admission to public events with the leader, so there
would never be a single newsreel of a heckler, and no doubt in
the minds of the people that the leader enjoyed vast support.
And his support did grow, as Propaganda Minister Goebbels'
dictum bore fruit:
"If you tell a lie big enough and keep repeating it, people
will eventually come to believe it. The lie can be maintained
only for such time as the State can shield the people from the
political, economic and/or military consequences of the lie.
It thus becomes vitally important for the State to use all of
its powers to repress dissent, for the truth is the mortal
enemy of the lie, and thus by extension, the truth is the
greatest enemy of the State."
Within a few months Poland, too, was invaded in a "defensive,
pre-emptive" action. The nation was now fully at war, and all
internal dissent was suppressed in the name of national
security; it was the end of Germany's first experiment with
democracy.
As we conclude this review of history, there are a few
milestones worth remembering.
February 27, 2005, is the 72nd anniversary of Dutch terrorist
Marinus van der Lubbe's successful firebombing of the German
Parliament (Reichstag) building, the terrorist act that
catapulted Hitler to legitimacy and reshaped the German
constitution. By the time of his successful and brief action to
seize Austria, in which almost no German blood was shed, Hitler
was the most beloved and popular leader in the history of his
nation. Hailed around the world, he was later Time magazine's
"Man Of The Year."
Most Americans remember his office for the security of the
homeland, known as the Reichssicherheitshauptamt and its
SchutzStaffel, simply by its most famous agency's initials: the
SS.
We also remember that the Germans developed a new form of
highly violent warfare they named "lightning war" or blitzkrieg,
which, while generating devastating civilian losses, also
produced a highly desirable "shock and awe" among the nation's
leadership according to the authors of the 1996 book "Shock And
Awe" published by the National Defense University Press.
Reflecting on that time, The American Heritage Dictionary
(Houghton Mifflin Company, 1983) left us this definition of the
form of government the German democracy had become through
Hitler's close alliance with the largest German corporations and
his policy of using religion and war as tools to keep power:
"fas-cism (fâsh'iz'em) n. A system of government that
exercises a dictatorship of the extreme right, typically through
the merging of state and business leadership, together with
belligerent nationalism."
Today, as we face financial and political crises, it's useful
to remember that the ravages of the Great Depression hit Germany
and the United States alike. Through the 1930s, however, Hitler
and Roosevelt chose very different courses to bring their
nations back to power and prosperity.
Germany's response was to use government to empower
corporations and reward the society's richest individuals,
privatize much of the commons, stifle dissent, strip people of
constitutional rights, bust up unions, and create an illusion of
prosperity through government debt and continual and
ever-expanding war spending.
America passed minimum wage laws to raise the middle class,
enforced anti-trust laws to diminish the power of corporations,
increased taxes on corporations and the wealthiest individuals,
created Social Security, and became the employer of last resort
through programs to build national infrastructure, promote the
arts, and replant forests.
To the extent that our Constitution is still intact, the
choice is again ours.
Thom Hartmann (www.thomhartmann.com)
lived and worked in Germany during the 1980s, is the Project
Censored Award-winning, best-selling author of over a dozen
books, and is the host of a nationally syndicated daily
progressive talk radio program. This article, in slightly
altered form, was first published in 2003 by CommonDreams.org
and is now also a chapter in Thom's book
What Would Jefferson Do?, published in 2004 by Random
House/Harmony.
###