The Rehabilitated German

In the previous post, we’ve learned how Nazi ideology persists all the way through today and becomes visible as a form of exclusionist collectivism that can be summed up by the German term völkisch, which means Volk-related. In order to grok the thinking patterns behind this, we need to scrutinize the part of the modern German populace that appears to be opposed those on the völkisch side – and ultimately find out what these opposing groups actually have in common: The German Left and the German Establishment, the Mitte.

Rehab for Krauts

Original photo by blu-news.org – Pegida Demonstration in Dresden am 05.01.2015, CC BY-SA 2.0, https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?curid=37967995

The most notorious motto which was picked up by PEGIDA and other groups of concerned citizens dates back to the final days of the Socialist GDR, German Democratic Republic: »Wir sind das Volk!«, we are the people. This motto, back then as well as today, evokes the spirit of what bonds together all true Germans, which means everyone who is genuinely considered so under the völkisch idea. Chanting it means to voice out against what is considered to be a corrupt elite under secret foreign rule.

How does the left counter this? Clearly by rejecting the völkisch idea? Unfortunately, nothing is further from the truth. Instead they say »Ihr seid nicht das Volk!«, you are not the people, which leaves only one possible conclusion: We are the people, not you. We are the true Volk. You are the Bad Germans, the Nazis, yet we are the Good Germans. The Rehabilitated Germans.

The idea of rehabilitation is what unites the establishment, Mitte, with the left. The modern German consensus is nazifrei, free of Nazis: Cleansing society from those who appear like echoes from the past. Clearly, nazifrei must be a noble and reasonable thing? Let us remember what makes up the idea of Volksverrat from the teaser: High treason is any act which is directed against the ideology of the proper Germans, and this also to do with those who are explicitly not German.

And yet, these political currents of proper and rehabilitated Germans differ in every other regard. Their interrelationship is antagonistic and the objects of their projections, the refugees, are the same, only the nature of the projection differs fundamentally. In either case, refugees are much less perceived as sentient human beings, but much rather like a homogeneous mass. In case of the proper Germans, refugees are like a calamity, which becomes apparent through the choice of words for the what is perceived not as a crisis to those who have fled, but to the Germans themselves: Flüchtlingswelle, refugee wave. To the rehabilitated Germans, on the other hand, the misery of the refugees is the production material for complacency and a better global reputation. Even more importantly, it is a weapon used to create a bad conscience in those who live elsewhere in Europe and dare to harbor fewer of the refugees.

So it becomes clear there is a common German ideology that remains untouched by both time and political positions as long as they are German. Being German seems to be inextricably tied to collectives and to an ideology, but not to the actual well-being or needs of people. Friedrich Engels wrote in a letter to Franz Mehring in 1893:

Ideology is a process accomplished by the so-called thinker. Consciously, it is true, but with a false consciousness. The real motive forces impelling him remain unknown to him; otherwise it simply would not be an ideological process. Hence he imagines false or apparent motives.

In other words, the self-reproducing powers of ideologies stem from the fact that they are driven by motives unrecognized by their advocates.

Volksverrat Today

As we’ve learned in the teaser, Volksverrat served as a means to hunt and fight those who were considered enemy to the Nazi’s idea of the German people. Attacking this idea was automatically treated like trying to topple the state. This means that the state and this idea, this ideology had become the very same thing under Nazi rule. If selfless human acts are considered detrimental to this ideology, it is fair to consider it not only to be the worst possible set of ideas for any truly human being, it makes studying and opposing it an act of humanity.

We could stop here if we are able to rule out the circumstances that led to the Nazi rule could ever repeat. It is evident this isn’t the case. We also have to understand whether and how it is limited to a subset of people, like the German people, including those of modern day Germany. In order to understand the Nazi ideology, we need to dismantle it and trace back its roots, and how it persists beyond its peak at which the German people mass-murdered millions of human beings – not as an act of war, but much rather as a rationalized requirement for the same ideology that made Germans murder political opposition, Volksverräter.

Influx and Regress

Following the events that led to the mass-emigration of the Syrian populace, contemporary Germany became the safe haven of choice for a majority of people who were fleeing certain death. This also gave rise to a popular German movement of self-dubbed concerned citizens who are pushing an agenda to strictly limit the influx of refugees and forcefully send back those who have already arrived. While the concerned citizens don’t publicly ask for the eradication of refugees, the umbrella movement PEGIDA (Patriotic Europeans against the Islamization of the Occident) quickly developed popular terminology to use against political opposition against their own agenda: Gutmenschen and Volksverräter. The former is usually used against non-members of the political establishment and roughly translates to a polemic version of philanthropist. Politicians, who are considered solely to be servants to the native German people, consequently become Volksverräter, criminals committing the most severe of crimes.

The parallel use of the two terms, Gutmensch and Volksverräter, hints at their connection. To proponents of the underlying ideology, they can almost be used interchangeably. Being a philanthropist and a traitor to the people is essentially the same thing to them, just like to the Nazis. Clearly however, there are important differences. Neither does contemporary Germany live under Nazi rule, nor do the concerned citizens follow a closed worldview that is as elaborate as the one of WWII Germany. Simply put, the concerned citizens might have a more than questionable opinion that is rightfully opposed by others, but calling them Nazis is not only wrong but plays down the crimes against humanity committed by Germans in the 30s and 40s. Even the horrible crimes committed by some concerned citizens that include burning down refugee shelters or even attacking and killing refugees in some cases is still negligible in contrast to the industrialized murder of millions that could be carried out without noteworthy resistance. And yet, the mob expresses hatred against strangers, even if they have just fled terror and certain death, losing everything on their way to Germany. Those who deserve compassion and help are confronted by a collective that tries to blame all individual misery on the only people in even greater misery.

However, concerned citizens are a minority. To fully understand the origins of Volksverrat, we need to look at how the German left and the mainstream are handling PEGIDA, concerned citizens and refugees.