📖 22 Cells in Nuremberg: In the Nazi Mind

Today, the memory of the Nazis and their crimes are all things that we can recall clearly. The most infamous Nazis' names; Hermann Göring, Heinrich Himmerl, Martin Bormann, and Adolf Hitler have been burned clearly in each generations' memory since the evils of the Holocaust. As a result, they have been tabooed by modern society and regarded as examples of the utmost human evil. In spite of this, I argue that we have not understood the Nazis in an altogether truthful light. Of course, this is not a defense of their heinous actions–the mass murder of more than 6 million innocent Jews–but a critique of the modern understanding that we have of them. The question that I'd like to ask here is, have we really considered what the Nazis were thinking? Mass genocide aside, what psychology drove the German High Command to war and destruction? The layman's answer primarily lies in insanity. After all, there is no way that a obese Göring, drug-addicted Hitler, and clairvoyant Himmler could've possibly been sane enough to sponsor such a regime of hate for nearly twenty years–right? Ultimately, this is the exact assumption that American psychiatrist, Douglas Kelley, attempted to answer during his hours of observation on the Nazi war criminals imprisoned in Nuremberg. After the collapse of the Großdeutsches Reich in 1945 due to the advances of the Soviet Union and the Western Allies, many high ranking Nazis were captured or willingly surrendered. The popular consensus after hearing about this news? Execution. What we think of today as normal–being to prosecute leaders or to imprison them after a war has been won–is only a modern conception. In fact, the only reason this was popularized was because of the Nazi treatment in the Nuremberg Trials. Prior to this, the only recourse for a war was execution. However, because the Allies decided that such precedent would only spark further conflicts, they decided to uphold their victory to a higher standard. As such, in 1945, the United States, United Kingdom, France, and the Soviet Union, decided to take international law to the next level in creating an international tribunal to judge the legality of the Nazi's war crimes and breaking of international peace. Before this could begin, however, the United States Army and Allied High Command wanted a psychiatrist to first diagnose–but not treat–the Nazi High Command, now imprisoned in Ash Can–the Nuremberg prison holding the war criminals to see if they truly were the insane monsters that everyone thought that they were. This psychiatrist was Lieutenant Colonel Douglas Kelley and his conclusion was more than shocking; it was unprecedented. The book opens by starting with an examination of the environment of the world the Nazis lived in when the party and high party leadership first began to coalesce. It was the aftermath of the First World War, an era that was still quite preeminent in the German mind. After all, they had lost a war that they believed they were ordained to win. It was also a catastrophic war because of its casualties; 2.7 million because either indirectly or directly as a result of the war. Another reason was the vivid hunger the Germans had seen Peoples' moral standards and culture have changed, of course, in part due to the Second World War and its numerous ramifications, but the world that the Nazis inhabited, alongside their indoctrinated masses, remains remarkably comparable and similar to the modern day. In fact, this is exactly what Douglas Kelley in "22 Cells in Nuremberg" wanted to explain. The very point of the matter was that, the Nazis, were not much more different than the people of today and therein lies the great paradox that most people struggle to grasp with; how could a sane person ever condone the murder of millions? Kelley answers this question by going over the traits that made the Nazis who they were. The book begins with a background of the Weimar Republic after the First World War (1914-1918). He states that the Nazis were creatures of their environment–like everyone else–but that the Nazis were more so the arbiters of their environment more than anyone else. He also, importantly, notes that many of the Nazis were great egotists who believed they themselves were infallible. The best and most well-known example was Hermann Göring. The commander of the German airforce during the war, the Luftwaffe, he seemed to command a heightened sense of belief. Albeit not a fanatic like others, highly confident in himself. Even at Nuremberg, for example, when all odds were against him due to emerging proof of the genocide he oversaw as the Reichsmarschall of Germany (the highest office a person could hold in Germany's "civilian" government), he continued to have an unwavering and confident attitude himself to the point of arrogance until the hours before his suicide by cynaide capsule. As such, Kelley emphasizes that the real differences between the horrors of Nazism and that of the normal person were not so significant, being power and egotism. Ultimately, Kelley demonstrates how, because of factors such as this, the Nazis were able to convince the rest of Germany–restless after the humiliating loss at Versailles–to blame the Jews (already a historically oppressed minority). Ultimately, I found this book to have radically altered my understanding of the Second World War and the racially motivated promises of Nazism. Clearly, Kelley's book spells out to us that we are not different from the Nazis in any significant psychological ways–which makes the threat of authoritarianism in the modern day ever more serious–but that's not all that it has done for me. Really, I believe Kelley's book is a warning of what's to come and now, it's more important than ever to know what the threat is before we return to extremism. Philosophy This book ultimately deals a major blow to the ideas of power that we have today because it signifies no person could ever handle it; egotism and extremism will inevitably rise in any circumstance, even if a nation has been incapacitated from the inside out after a devastating war. As such, Kelley's book has demonstrated the deadly effects of the poison of egotism that continue to infect humanity today. With the rise of extremists like the Alternative für Deutschland (which itself can be regarded as an ideological descendant of the Nazis), and others around the world due to religious, social, or economic factors, the status quo is clearly untenable and bound to collapse as it did during the Second World War. This is noted by a quote from the film adaptation of Nuremberg which states, "The first nation the Nazis invaded was their own." In exposing the problem of humanity, Douglas Kelley has demonstrated how guaranteeing freedoms, democracy, and rights has become and has always been infinitely difficult. So, as social philosophers and thinkers of this generation, what alternatives do we have? The first thing to answer is the question of the problem. What is the issue at hand? The answers presented by Kelley are 1) egotism, 2) power, and 3) authoritarianism and the factors that ultimately culminate in it. Therefore, one of our prime objectives ought to extend to resolving these issues. Ultimately, the core of these issues is the primal nature for competition. Egoists exist because they believe they themselves are the best one way or another. Power-hungry autocrats exist because they wish to exercise their control over the population; their sole objective to rise and dominate all else. Authoritarianism exists because of a combination of the previous two factors: egotism and power. The answer therefore lies in stopping all competition since any competition inevitably culminates in a mass struggle by one against all. After all, this is the story of corporate America and modern day capitalism/communism/what have you. Therefore, as an addition to the communist and socialist world, I offer a radical change in education. Why education? Prima facie, education simply informs you about the world through the sciences, history, language arts, etc. However, deeper down, education is the first environment in which a child with barely functioning sentience learns about the nature of the world through instruction of mentors and the nature of the school environment. Therefore, subconsciously or consciously, schools are the places in which we develop thoughts of competition. Having said this, it is clear that education must be "solved". My solution will focus on two comprehensive approaches. To take down the toxic school environment that ultimately culminates in competition and inevitable human authoritarianism, we need a radical new understanding of social life. Stripped down, social life just means a system of relationships based upon three categories: positive, neutral, or negative. The solution can only be found in taking down all categories. Doing so requires a new way of language and thought. This can be found in a logic based language. In a purely logic based language, of course with caveats to ensure that words still have meaning themselves and so and so forth, we take out emotion. Since language permeates through reality itself and the thoughts of those who speak it, banishing the emotional side of language gives us a practically perfect reality in which people communicate through factually correct statements. Since statements cannot inherently be antagonistic, the logical system can eliminate the positive/neutral/negative relationships that culminate in competition. The second solution is in education itself. At school, educators teach children about the world around them. This includes the lecturing of history. For example, children often have to list, verbatim, reasons of why a nation beat another during a conflict. Reasons often include technological supremacy or determination. Another example is mathematics itself. Note that we often refer to numbers that are larger in value as "greater" and numbers that are not, "lesser". English has also taught us these lessons with words of "weakness" projecting visions of defeat instead of potential, as it should. This ultimately demonstrates how education has continued to perpetuate the myth of competition in children through education as children begin to subconsciously relate advantages to success and life and weakness to death and failure in all categories in life. Since they have an understanding of failure (which often means the collapse of a nation/society), they have a natural and primal nature to seek success and prevail over others through the accumulation of advantages over time. The solution is to defeat this talk of advantage. We can do this through a radical new change in education paradigms and how we discuss collapse/failure together by removing it altogether or changing their definitions. This is because advantages/disadvantages have inherently contributed to thoughts of victory/defeat. Therefore, it is our role to reshape that thought and change the fundamental definitions. Ultimately, through these two approaches to egotism, power, and authoritarianism, I believe that humanity will be able to prevent totalitarianism in the future without the risks of democracy, socialism, or Stalinism through a fundamental paradigm shift in our language and in our education.

今天,我们对纳粹及其罪行的记忆依然清晰。赫尔曼·戈林、海因里希·希姆莱、马丁·鲍曼和阿道夫·希特勒——这些最臭名昭著的纳粹分子的名字,自大屠杀的罪恶发生以来,已经清晰地烙印在每一代人的记忆中。因此,他们被现代社会所禁忌化,被视为人类邪恶之极致的典型。 尽管如此,我认为我们并没有以一种完全真实的视角去理解纳粹。当然,这并不是为他们那令人发指的行为——屠杀超过六百万无辜犹太人——进行辩护,而是对我们现代人对他们的理解方式提出批评。我在这里想提出的问题是:我们是否真正思考过纳粹当时是怎么想的?撇开大规模种族灭绝不谈,究竟是什么样的心理驱使德国最高统帅部走向战争与毁灭? 普通人给出的答案,主要归结为"疯狂"。毕竟,肥胖的戈林、吸毒成瘾的希特勒、以及自称有超自然预知能力的希姆莱,怎么可能神志清醒地维系这样一个仇恨政权长达近二十年之久——不是吗?而这恰恰正是美国精神病学家道格拉斯·凯利试图回答的假设——他在纽伦堡对被关押的纳粹战犯进行了数小时的观察。 1945年,随着苏联和西方盟军的推进,大德意志帝国("Großdeutsches Reich")崩溃,许多纳粹高级官员被俘或主动投降。人们听闻这一消息后,普遍的共识是什么?处决。 我们今天认为理所当然的做法——即在战争胜利后起诉领导人,或将其监禁——其实只是一种现代观念。事实上,这种做法之所以流行开来,正是因为纳粹在纽伦堡审判中所受到的待遇。在此之前,战争的唯一结局便是处决。然而,由于盟国认为这种先例只会引发进一步的冲突,他们决定以更高的标准来维护自己的胜利。 因此,1945年,美国、英国、法国和苏联决定将国际法推向一个新的高度,成立一个国际法庭,来审判纳粹战争罪行以及破坏国际和平行为的合法性。 然而,在此之前,美国陆军和盟军最高统帅部希望先由一名精神病学家对被关押在"Ash Can"(纽伦堡关押战犯的监狱)的纳粹最高统帅部成员进行诊断——但不进行治疗——以确认他们是否真如众人所想的那样,是丧失理智的怪物。 这位精神病学家便是道格拉斯·凯利中校,而他的结论远不止令人震惊——它是史无前例的。 本书开篇考察了纳粹党及其高层领导人最初凝聚成形时,他们所生活的世界的环境背景。 那是第一次世界大战之后的时代,这场战争在德国人的心中依然占据着极为重要的位置。毕竟,他们输掉了一场他们自认为注定要赢得的战争。这场战争同样是一场灾难性的战争,因为其伤亡惨重——270万人因战争的直接或间接后果而丧生。另一个原因,则是德国人所亲历的刻骨铭心的饥饿。 当然,人们的道德标准与文化在一定程度上因第二次世界大战及其诸多后续影响而发生了改变,但纳粹及其被灌输洗脑的民众所处的那个世界,与今天的世界相比,依然惊人地相似、可比。 事实上,这正是道格拉斯·凯利在《纽伦堡的22间牢房》一书中想要阐明的核心问题。问题的关键在于:纳粹与今天的人们并没有本质上的不同——而这正是大多数人难以理解的巨大悖论所在:一个神志清醒的人,怎么可能容忍对数百万人的屠杀? 凯利通过梳理造就纳粹之所以为纳粹的种种特质,来回答这一问题。本书首先介绍了第一次世界大战(1914-1918年)之后魏玛共和国的历史背景。他指出,纳粹和所有人一样,是其所处环境的产物——但与其他人相比,纳粹更是这个环境的主导者和塑造者。他还特别指出,许多纳粹分子都是极度自负的利己主义者,坚信自己不可能犯错。 其中最典型、也最广为人知的例子便是赫尔曼·戈林。作为战争期间德国空军(Luftwaffe)的最高指挥官,他表现出一种异常强烈的自信。尽管不像其他人那样狂热,但他对自己极度自信。即便是在纽伦堡审判中,随着他作为德国"帝国元帅"(Reichsmarschall,德国"文职"政府中所能担任的最高职务)所主导的种族灭绝罪行证据不断浮现、他大势已去之时,他依然保持着毫不动摇、甚至可以说是傲慢的自信姿态,直到他服氰化物胶囊自杀前的最后几个小时。 由此,凯利强调,纳粹主义的种种恐怖行径与普通人之间的真正差异,其实并没有那么显著——权力欲和自负才是关键所在。最终,凯利展示了正是由于这类因素,纳粹才得以说服因凡尔赛条约的屈辱失败而心怀不满的德国民众,将罪责归咎于犹太人——一个早已在历史上长期遭受压迫的少数群体。 总而言之,我发现这本书从根本上改变了我对第二次世界大战以及纳粹主义种族主义承诺的理解。凯利的书清楚地向我们表明,我们与纳粹在心理层面上并没有任何本质性的不同——这使得当代威权主义的威胁愈发严峻——但这并非这本书带给我的全部。实际上,我认为凯利的这本书是对未来的一种警示,而如今,在我们重蹈极端主义覆辙之前,认清这种威胁的本质,比以往任何时候都更加重要。 哲学思考 这本书最终对我们当今关于权力的种种观念造成了重大打击,因为它表明:没有任何人能够真正驾驭权力;无论在何种情形下,自负与极端主义都必然会滋生蔓延——即便一个国家在经历一场毁灭性战争之后已经从内到外遭受重创。 凯利的这本书由此揭示了自负这一"毒药"至今仍在持续危害人类的致命影响。随着德国"另类选择党"(其本身可被视为纳粹意识形态的继承者)等极端主义势力的崛起,以及世界各地因宗教、社会或经济因素而出现的其他类似势力,现状显然难以为继,正如二战期间的局面一样,终将走向崩溃。电影版《纽伦堡》中的一句台词恰好点明了这一点:"纳粹入侵的第一个国家,是他们自己的国家。" 在揭示人性问题的过程中,道格拉斯·凯利也展示了保障自由、民主与权利,如今是——而且一直都是——一件极其艰难的事情。 那么,作为这一代的社会哲学家和思想者,我们又有哪些替代方案呢? 首先要回答的是问题本身是什么。当下面临的核心问题是什么?凯利给出的答案是:一、自负;二、权力;三、威权主义及最终导致其形成的种种因素。 因此,我们的首要目标之一,理应是致力于解决这些问题。而这些问题的核心,归根结底在于人类原始的竞争天性。利己主义者之所以存在,是因为他们坚信自己在某方面是最优秀的。渴求权力的独裁者之所以存在,是因为他们希望对民众施加控制,其唯一目标便是崛起并压倒一切。威权主义之所以存在,则是前述两种因素——自负与权力——共同作用的结果。 因此,答案就在于终止一切竞争,因为任何竞争最终都必然演变为一方对抗所有人的大规模斗争。毕竟,这正是美国企业界以及当今资本主义/共产主义/或其他任何主义的真实写照。因此,作为对共产主义与社会主义世界的补充,我提出一项关于教育的激进变革方案。 为什么是教育?表面上看,教育不过是通过科学、历史、语言艺术等学科向人们传授关于世界的知识。然而,深入来看,教育其实是一个几乎尚未形成完整心智的孩子,通过导师的教导以及学校环境本身的性质,第一次了解这个世界运行方式的场所。 因此,无论是在潜意识层面还是有意识层面,学校正是我们形成竞争观念的地方。基于此,教育显然是一个必须被"解决"的问题。 我的解决方案将围绕两个综合性的方法展开。 第一,要瓦解那种最终导致竞争、并进而不可避免地引发人类威权主义的有毒校园环境,我们需要对社会生活形成一种全新的、根本性的理解。剥离表象来看,社会生活不过是一套建立在三种类别之上的关系体系:积极、中立、或消极。而解决方案只能是彻底消除这三种类别。要做到这一点,需要一种全新的语言与思维方式,而这可以通过一种以逻辑为基础的语言来实现。在一种纯粹基于逻辑的语言中——当然需要附加一定的限定条件,以确保词语本身依然具有意义等等——我们将情感成分剔除出去。由于语言渗透于现实本身以及使用者的思想之中,剔除语言中的情感成分,便能为我们创造出一种近乎完美的现实:人们通过在事实上正确的陈述来进行交流。由于陈述本身内在地不具有对抗性,这种逻辑体系便能够消除那些最终导致竞争的积极/中立/消极关系。 第二个解决方案则在于教育本身。在学校里,教育者向孩子们传授关于周围世界的知识,其中包括历史的讲授。例如,孩子们常常需要逐字逐句地列举某个国家在冲突中战胜另一个国家的原因,而这些原因往往包括技术优势或坚定的决心。另一个例子是数学本身:我们常常将数值较大的数字称为"较大",而数值较小的数字称为"较小"。英语也同样通过诸如"weakness"(软弱)这样的词语教会了我们类似的观念——这类词唤起的是失败的图景,而非本应代表的潜力。这最终表明,教育一直在通过其自身的方式,持续在孩子心中延续竞争这一"神话":孩子们逐渐在潜意识中,将"优势"与生活中各个层面的成功联系在一起,而将"劣势"与死亡和失败联系在一起。由于他们已经理解了失败的含义(这往往意味着一个国家/社会的崩溃),他们便自然而然地、出于本能地渴望获得成功,并希望通过长期积累优势来超越他人、战胜他人。解决之道在于打破这种关于"优势"的话语体系。我们可以通过对教育范式进行根本性的变革,以及改变我们讨论"崩溃/失败"这一话题的方式来实现这一点——无论是将其彻底移除,还是重新定义其内涵。这是因为"优势/劣势"这一概念本身,从根本上助长了"胜利/失败"的观念。因此,重塑这种观念、并改变其根本定义,正是我们的责任所在。 最终,我相信,通过这两种针对自负、权力与威权主义的应对方法,人类将能够在未来防止极权主义的重现,而无需承担民主制度、社会主义或斯大林主义所带来的种种风险——这一切都将通过我们语言与教育中一次根本性的范式转变来实现。