Judgement at Godwinberg

[bcholmes]

So I was in a video store the other day, and saw a rack of DVDs on sale, 2 for $30 (CDN). One of the DVDs I noticed was The Hunting of the President, which I've read about and have been interested in watching. So I plucked it off the shelf. But, hey, I can never buy just one DVD, especially at 2 for $30. So I scanned the wall looking for another title that interested me.

I picked up Judgement at Nuremberg; partially because womzilla had mentioned it recently, and partially because I really enjoyed the mini-series, "Nuremberg". Spencer Tracey, Marlene Dietrich, Colonel Klink. And Maximillian Schell, who gives an Oscar-winner performance as defense attorney Rolfe. The film has a stellar cast.

There's a key sequence near the end, in which defendant Ernst Janning (Burt Lancaster) takes the stand to assert his own guilt and complicity. First, he tries to explain the historical context of Germany. He says:

There was a fever over the land. A fever of disgrace, of indignity, of hunger. We had a democracy, yes, but it was torn by elements within. There was, above all, fear. Fear of today, fear of tomorrow, fear of our neighbors, fear of ourselves. Only when you understand that can you understand what Hitler meant to us. Because he said to us: 'Lift up your heads! Be proud to be German! There are devils among us. Communists, Liberals, Jews, Gypsies! Once the devils will be destroyed, your miseries will be destroyed.' It was the old, old story of the sacrifical lamb. What about us, who knew better? We who knew the words were lies and worse than lies? Why did we sit silent? Why did we participate? Because we loved our country! What difference does it make if a few political extremists lose their rights? What difference does it make if a few racial minorities lose their rights? It is only a passing phase. It is only a stage we are going through. It will be discarded sooner or later. 'The country is in danger.' We will 'march out of the shadows.' 'We will go forward.'

I was impressed by the way the film allowed there to be real uncertainty about what the final decision should be. We are allowed to see the Germans as real people. Sad, and defeated, and feeling real guilt. But at the same time, the film was not afraid to take a clear position. As sentences are handed out, I wanted Janning to be spared, somehow. He was coded, in the film, at every turn, to be an honourable man.

womzilla used this film to illustrate a point about the US election. And I confess that I could not help but think about the state of the US during Janning's speeches. Now, on the Internets, it's unfashionable to use anything associated with Nazi Germany in support of a reasonable argument. Godwin's Law suggests that if certain arguments go on long enough, eventually, someone is going to invoke Hitler, and a common corollary is that the discussion has ceased to be productive once the reference is made.

I've read about people who have said that they became Bush supporters because liberals kept comparing Bush to Hitler. But here's what I think:

• The Bush administration believes that the USA PATRIOT act is a good thing.
• The Bush administration believes that it is okay to hold people indefinitely, without trial or access to legal counsel, so long as we call them something dehumanizing like "enemy combatants"
• The Bush administration believes that it is okay to deport Canadian citizens to places like Syria, so that they can be tortured for information
• The Bush administration wants you to believe that there's something wrong with a Supreme Court that makes precendents that administration disagrees with.
• The Bush administration wants you to believe that torture is an anomaly at Abu Ghraib and hopes that you don't think too hard about what's going on at Guantanamo Bay
• The Bush administration wants you to believe that the Geneva Convention is quaint, and that prisoners of the War on Terror don't fall into the category of prisoners of war.
• The Bush administration wants you to believe that the president isn't required to abide by the law

And that's just the simple stuff. I'll accept that there's disagreement about whether or not Iraq was a war for oil (but I know where I stand). I'll accept that we may disagree that the US actions in the Middle East have fomented hatred beyond anything we've ever seen. We can disagree about whether or not the UN or International Courts are good things. Fine. But those bulleted points are, to my eyes, really truly vile. Vile of a type similar to the early days of Nazi Germany. There. I've said it.

And there's something I've been thinking about for a while, now. Something that has come up on my friends list. Something that relates to the Justin Trudeau eulogy, and to the discussions about bridging the political divide.

Some of the people on my friends list have spoken about how they've felt as Bush supports. One feels like people might think that she was a bigot. One felt like zie couldn't talk to any of the people closest to zir about zir political beliefs. These people seem to think that Bush's stance on gay marriage, his stance on rights of prisoners, or his intention of codifying a narrow form of Christian morality into law aren't big deals. That it's only a passing phase, and that the public will wake up and reject those things.

They support Bush because they think he's better for a country that's afraid. Or because there's some small part of his ideology -- stronger military or whatever -- that makes all that other stuff ignorable.

In Judgement at Nuremberg, the fictional Janning was an honourable and noble man. And from what I know, I think that you people who voted for Bush are honourable in your own way. But let me be very clear: I think that you're complicit in something very, very wrong. And you are not my friends.

Comments

[lovecraftienne.livejournal.com]

Testify!