Thoughts on Voegelin: Hitler and the Germans

[Pedro Alonso Lopez]

Ok here is my thoughts on a book I think anybody interested in fascism should check out and how it can occur taking from a philosophical perspective:

By the way my lecturer wrote the introduction for the translation of this and he is a priest so there are some references to God, he asks us to substitute it with spirit or simple some kind of humanism etc.

Voegelins main aim was to question the role of the German people both individually and collectively in making possible the National Socialist tyranny and its terrors. He openly shows the continued link of people in public serice roles since the 3rd Reich. He also sets out to diminish the myth of Hitler hence the title: Hitler and the Germans.

He claims a mastering of the past is above all a problem of the present. The specific problem Voegelin focuses on is a form of spiritual decline he calls stupidity understood as the radical refusal to actualise one's particapation in the transcendant. Voegelins answer to the fundamental stupidity is to put ones own will at the centre of the universe and that such dedivinisation leads all to quickly to dehumanization.

Once the type of 'idiotes' as Heraclitus calls them reach a critical mass both in the elite and among the public voters a Hitler figure could be seen as a representative of their shared radical stupidity.

Voegelin is critisizing a world history idea closed off from an awareness of spiritual failure on the part of the elite to actualize their essential human capacity for particapating in the timeless.

Well thats it, any thoughts, criticisms?

[redstar2000]

The specific problem Voegelin focuses on is a form of spiritual decline he calls stupidity understood as the radical refusal to actualise one's participation in the transcendent.

In other words, people decline to participate in the fraud of religion.

As a godsucker, he would naturally think that was "stupid".


Voegelin's answer to the fundamental stupidity is to put one's own will at the centre of the universe and that such dedivinisation leads all too quickly to dehumanization.

I think you mucked this up. Voegelin was saying that the German "loss of faith" (or "dedivinisation" -- what a word!) leads to putting one's own will at the center of the universe and that "leads all too quickly to dehumanization".

In other words, by abandoning "God's Will", the Germans put their own will in its place...and that's "why" they were such bastards.

Utter bollocks, of course.


...a Hitler figure could be seen as a representative of their shared radical stupidity.

Or, having abandoned the "real God", they "made an idol" and "worshiped it". (Sound familiar?)


Voegelin is criticizing a world history idea closed off from an awareness of spiritual failure on the part of the elite to actualize their essential human capacity for participating in the timeless.

Voegelin cloaks his intellectual nudity in garments made of large words.

But he's still naked...and kind of ugly at that.

There are an enormous number of scholarly and highly reliable studies on the rise of Nazism; any one of which has more insight into the whole matter than Voegelin.

What is it, Geist, with you and this fraud?

:redstar2000:

The Redstar2000 Papers (http://www.redstar2000papers.fightcapitalism.net)
A site about communist ideas

[Pedro Alonso Lopez]

Sorry Redstar but he dosent mean God as such, well he does and obviously I disagree but he means the kind of thing that means you use to guide your life, for example sombody who is spiritual will say God, a Marxist would put his faith in man etc.

You are pretty much missing his point, and I pointed out that my lecturer as a priest with obvious sympathies towards God and Voegelin asked us if we didnt believe in God to substitute the word.

By the way Voegelin's lectures in the sixties were considered some of greatest ever on the topic.

This is important because for one he lived in nazi germany and two many of his associates sat around afterwords haven never left and once it was considered negative only began to criticise nazism.

Show your highly scholarly studies so Redstar...

I find it amusing that you cannot accept anybodies thoughts because thye have a religious tint. Im an atheist and I take their points on other aspects of thinking.

Plus this is taken from a philosophical point of view, maybe you dont suit this kind of analysis as you assume when he talks about the transcendant etc. he means God when basically he is talking about the human condition.

By the way have you ever read Schopenhauer?

[Pedro Alonso Lopez]

The specific problem Voegelin focuses on is a form of spiritual decline he calls stupidity understood as the radical refusal to actualise one's participation in the transcendent.

In other words, people decline to participate in the fraud of religion.

He means not God as such but the eternal struggle of mankind in general to realise the neccesity of man as one rather than being above each other etc. alluding the idea of race which he also has a great essay on.

Voegelin never mentions people who are unreligious are stupid, Redstar has read that into it because of his view of Voegelin anyway but just for the rest of you.





Voegelin's answer to the fundamental stupidity is to put one's own will at the centre of the universe and that such dedivinisation leads all too quickly to dehumanization.

I think you mucked this up. Voegelin was saying that the German "loss of faith" (or "dedivinisation" -- what a word!) leads to putting one's own will at the center of the universe and that "leads all too quickly to dehumanization".

In other words, by abandoning "God's Will", the Germans put their own will in its place...and that's "why" they were such bastards.

Utter bollocks, of course.

Um, sure Redstar thats exactly what he meant. Way to play on words. Gold star for that one. :P

What he means since redstar dosent understand it is that when man loses his sense of diviness and what he means here is the whole notion of man he becomes less human. There is an essential spirit of humanity and when we lose that we become less human.




...a Hitler figure could be seen as a representative of their shared radical stupidity.

Or, having abandoned the "real God", they "made an idol" and "worshiped it". (Sound familiar?)

Ok this is just fucked up redstar, thats a blatent attempt at mis-reading. Dont ever look into philology.





Voegelin is criticizing a world history idea closed off from an awareness of spiritual failure on the part of the elite to actualize their essential human capacity for participating in the timeless.

Voegelin cloaks his intellectual nudity in garments made of large words.

They arent his words. They are Brenden Purcells but hey whatever. Do you not understand it, it is clouded in philosophical terms thats true but its a philosophy forum, I reckon a lot of people understand the way it works. Most philosophers like to use big words, get over it.

[Trissy]

The specific problem Voegelin focuses on is a form of spiritual decline he calls stupidity understood as the radical refusal to actualise one's particapation in the transcendant. Voegelins answer to the fundamental stupidity is to put ones own will at the centre of the universe and that such dedivinisation leads all to quickly to dehumanization

He means not God as such but the eternal struggle of mankind in general to realise the neccesity of man as one rather than being above each other etc. alluding the idea of race which he also has a great essay on.

Okay...I think I understand what he's saying but if I'm wrong then feel free to correct me. The only way this worries me as such is that it seems completely opposed to Existentialism. Sartre and Camus held views about living in the absence of divine meaning and man's existence being as unnecessary as that of the the objects around us. This being the case each of us ourselves becomes the driving force of our own lives (or 'centre of the universe'). Is Voegelin saying that through rejecting man's neccesity (whether religious or not) we give rise to people like Hitler? I'd be inclined to disagree with him slightly in that I can see how it could lead to such events but I think it requires a lot of bad faith as well...

Hitler talked about the destiny of the German people which is in itself an act of bad faith, and the willingness of many to go along with Hitler's plans without questioning them ('we were just following orders' or the German people being 'under Hitler's spell') seems to point to some realisation of our freedom by leaders and a continuing desire to reject of freedom and be lead by the masses. I can see how an increasingly secular society may also help this happen but I still feel bad faith lies at the heart of it.


Voegelin is critisizing a world history idea closed off from an awareness of spiritual failure on the part of the elite to actualize their essential human capacity for particapating in the timeless

Okay I'm not sure I quite understand this. It seems quite Hegelian or Kantian, and as such I've never been able to read them. If it's a key point then would you mind breaking it down into simpler language for us lesser mortals? I was fine until 'participating in the timeless' was mentioned, at which point I began to wonder what 'the timeless' refers to and then my mind imploded...

[redstar2000]

This is important because for one he lived in nazi Germany and two, many of his associates sat around afterwords having never left and once it was considered negative only began to criticise Nazism.

No, he did not actually "live" in Nazi Germany...he lived in Austria and left shortly before or shortly after that country was incorporated into Nazi Germany (1938). Of course, he had many opportunities to observe the rise of Nazism in Austria...and he was actually a minor civil servant of some kind under the clerical fascist Dollfuss...which apparently did not bother him.

It's quite true that a lot of "big names" in Germany's academic elite had no problem "adjusting" to the Nazi regime...Heidegger being perhaps the most (in)famous.

On the other hand, my impression is that very large numbers of German and German-Jewish academics fled the Reich from 1933 onwards.

All of whom, of course, were highly critical of Nazism before anyone even know who Voegelin was.


Show your highly scholarly studies so Redstar...

You want a booklist?

Here's the easy way: go to the German History section of your local public library and look for titles that suggest concern with the origins or rise of Nazism as well as titles that suggest concern with the history and roots of German anti-semitism. Pick out three or four that look interesting.

Follow the bibliography of the one that seems to make the most sense...look for the books that it cites (you may have to move on to a university library to do that).

After a decade or so, you will have some very clear ideas of why and how fascism took root in Germany as well as why it took the particular form we know as Nazism.

It's a long and complicated story...and has nothing at all to do with "dedivinisation".


I find it amusing that you cannot accept anybody's thoughts because they have a religious tint.

Come on! Voegelin doesn't have a "religious tint" to his "thoughts"...he's a godsucker to the core! Some of his "fans" may try to play down his dependence on revelation in order to enhance his intellectual "respectability"...but in so doing they simply undermine Voegelin's integrity. I suspect the reason they do it is because they want to "subvert" secular thought by "smuggling" in a religious view in secular disguise.

It doesn't fool me and shouldn't fool you.


What he means since redstar doesn't understand it is that when man loses his sense of divineness and what he means here is the whole notion of man he becomes less human.

I understand exactly what that means: a "sense of divineness" is just another word for faith.

Trissy wrote...


I was fine until 'participating in the timeless' was mentioned, at which point I began to wonder what 'the timeless' refers to and then my mind imploded...

Voegelin apparently had ambitions to be regarded as "more" than just another superstitious hack...thus the use of words like "dedivinisation" and "the timeless".

There's only one entity that is "timeless" and "He" looks like an old man with a white beard and lives up in the sky.

:redstar2000:

The Redstar2000 Papers (http://www.redstar2000papers.fightcapitalism.net)
A site about communist ideas

[redstar2000]

An additional point occurred to me (and apparently was overlooked by Voegelin). The Nazi appeal of "Deutschtum" -- "Germandom" -- if not "timeless" certainly partook of an aspect of that concept: the appeal to "something" that has existed for "a very long time" and will exist "indefinitely into the future".

Sort of an ersatz (German word) eternity.

:redstar2000:

The Redstar2000 Papers (http://www.redstar2000papers.fightcapitalism.net)
A site about communist ideas

[Pedro Alonso Lopez]

Hey Redstar, some good points. For one I never knew he lived in Austria or perhaps I did and in my head managed to subvert it with Germany over time, I hope I didnt write it in my exam.

On the idea that I should go to the library and look up the causes of why it happened I must stress I am putting forward one of the few philosophical works on it, thats why I picked it and why its not in the history forum. Plus I am studying at the moment so it fresh if you know what I mean, I am not a fan of Voegelin, he is just a number of philosophers I am looking into at the moment.

Voegelins works are generally full of religious dodginess but have a look at this work if you get a chance, it really dosent come into that much hence my use of the word tint. I'm looking at this work alone not the body of texts that is Voegelins collective works which actually aint that big.

The timeless in meant to stand for man's eternal quest, for example in the Gorgai Plato talks of the immortal implications of rhetoric, on my course this was tied in with Voegelin and of course propaghanda, the point was that the sophistry of Plato's day and power politics had reached its darkest stage in Nazi Germany by removing mans duty as such to the rest of humanity to particapate in the timeless. Its a difficult conept I think, a very vague term but still useful in at least trying to understand from the perspective I view the world on how it happened.