With so much history out there, I'm looking for specific recommendations on reading material of how people maintained their hope and acted to make the world better.
Also I need that link where Robear talks about the effects of a modern battleship firing on a 1600s galleon.
TL:DR - floating matchsticks?
Yes. 
I recall it was in the context of the usual Civ old vs new tech units. I suspect it was one of the threads whose index was lost during a site upgrade.
I really like Yasha Mounk on this. He writes a column on this for Slate and really gets in the weeds on how authoritarianism happens. He also has a podcast - The Good Fight - where he brings experts on the subject and they talk about where we are, how bad things are, how does it compare to other times, etc.
His podcast, strangely, is the most uplifting thing to me, because it provides much needed historical perspective about the current world as compared to pre-WW2, the Soviet Union and other examples of non-democratic movements. In many ways the US is in good shape according to many of his guests precisely because it’s so hard to consolidate power in the US. I find this fairly persuasive.
But he also makes a strong case, as do many of his guests, that faith in democracy as an ideal is flagging and so we’re more vulnerable than ever should Trump get focused or should someone else come along later and follow his playbook.
I haven't listened to him, but I've been reading The Rise and Fall of the Third Reich lately specifically because of all the clamor that we're heading down the same path that led to Nazi Germany, so I wanted to learn more about what led to that. As best I can tell, while there are parallels, I'd lean toward agreeing with what you've said about Mounk's views, and now think there is some hyperbole on the left with regard to how close we are to being a fascist regime. True, the Nazis ended up in power despite repeatedly struggling to get more than 39% of the popular vote, which surprised me, but aside from that there are a lot of differences that don't make these situations directly comparable.
First and foremost, much of the German populace back then was apathetic or hostile toward the existing Weimar Republic government, partly because they were still so accustomed to dictatorial rule, and partly because of their perception that the Republic had screwed over Germany by accepting the Allies' harsh terms to end WWI. This, along with the ensuing Great Depression, made it easier for them to accept losing freedom than I think would be the case in the US today.
Hitler ultimately took over Germany as part of a coalition between two parties. He was given the position of Chancellor but was given only two seats in the German cabinet for his party members. Other parties thought this lack of cabinet support would hold him in check, but he was able to bypass them by convincing the aging 86-year-old president Hindenburg to grant him more authoritative powers to initiate 'quick wins' to improve the German economy, and things snowballed from there. Maybe there are some executive order comparisons in how that went down, but I don't see a way in which a party could successfully institute sweeping changes of the same nature here, not without the judicial system putting a stop to it.
Additionally, the political violence used by the Nazis to intimidate and murder opposition wouldn't fly here...I think it would just inflame tensions and even cause some Republicans to second-guess their support. And of course, there's the minor point that Trump's political cunning and oratory isn't on Hitler's level, nor does he seem to have any sort of vision of the world he wants, aside from wanting to keep out illegal immigrants at all costs.
I'm not saying that a regime like this in the US could never happen, but I no longer think it's as imminent as some do. I think it's more likely to happen piecemeal, if at all. I'm starting to think a Civil War is more likely, but even that's probably still unlikely as long as politics aren't at the forefront of most people's concerns.
The Rise and Fall of the Third Reich is currently part of the 'Prime Reading' program that makes it free (ebook version) for Amazon Prime members, if anyone is interested.
DSGamer wrote:I really like Yasha Mounk on this. He writes a column on this for Slate and really gets in the weeds on how authoritarianism happens. He also has a podcast - The Good Fight - where he brings experts on the subject and they talk about where we are, how bad things are, how does it compare to other times, etc.
His podcast, strangely, is the most uplifting thing to me, because it provides much needed historical perspective about the current world as compared to pre-WW2, the Soviet Union and other examples of non-democratic movements. In many ways the US is in good shape according to many of his guests precisely because it’s so hard to consolidate power in the US. I find this fairly persuasive.
But he also makes a strong case, as do many of his guests, that faith in democracy as an ideal is flagging and so we’re more vulnerable than ever should Trump get focused or should someone else come along later and follow his playbook.
I haven't listened to him, but I've been reading The Rise and Fall of the Third Reich lately specifically because of all the clamor that we're heading down the same path that led to Nazi Germany, so I wanted to learn more about what led to that. As best I can tell, while there are parallels, I'd lean toward agreeing with what you've said about Mounk's views, and now think there is some hyperbole on the left with regard to how close we are to being a fascist regime. True, the Nazis ended up in power despite repeatedly struggling to get more than 39% of the popular vote, which surprised me, but aside from that there are a lot of differences that don't make these situations directly comparable.
That's actually 100% happening right now. The GOP lacks a popular mandate, so they're trying things like voter suppression to remain in power.
First and foremost, much of the German populace back then was apathetic or hostile toward the existing Weimar Republic government, partly because they were still so accustomed to dictatorial rule, and partly because of their perception that the Republic had screwed over Germany by accepting the Allies' harsh terms to end WWI. This, along with the ensuing Great Depression, made it easier for them to accept losing freedom than I think would be the case in the US today.
The American public is very hostile to the governing class right now. Each party is historically unpopular. There's no Great Depression, but the recovery from the 2008 recession in red states has been a lot slower for the average American.
Hitler ultimately took over Germany as part of a coalition between two parties. He was given the position of Chancellor but was given only two seats in the German cabinet for his party members. Other parties thought this lack of cabinet support would hold him in check, but he was able to bypass them by convincing the aging 86-year-old president Hindenburg to grant him more authoritative powers to initiate 'quick wins' to improve the German economy, and things snowballed from there. Maybe there are some executive order comparisons in how that went down, but I don't see a way in which a party could successfully institute sweeping changes of the same nature here, not without the judicial system putting a stop to it.
That's where things diverge a lot for me. The American system doesn't lend itself well to sweeping changes. And Trump is a crazy person who cares more about personal vendettas than a specific program. His authoritarian leanings are every bit as scary to me. He just lacks the followthrough.
That said, the Republican party is currently a form of a coalition government. Which rank and file conservative leaders tolerating Trump because they think they can control him. It feels super familiar to me in that regard.
Additionally, the political violence used by the Nazis to intimidate and murder opposition wouldn't fly here...I think it would just inflame tensions and even cause some Republicans to second-guess their support. And of course, there's the minor point that Trump's political cunning and oratory isn't on Hitler's level, nor does he seem to have any sort of vision of the world he wants, aside from wanting to keep out illegal immigrants at all costs.
This, to me, is what I worry most about in terms of a tipping point. In reading, "In the Garden of Beasts" it's really clear that part of what happened in Germany is that they had a number of freelancing paramilitary organizations that the government thought they could control, but couldn't. And they either used them or turned a blind eye as they committed violence on an increasingly regular basis. And over time that violence was normalized. When the mass murder machine cranked up they had millions of willing participants ready to carry out the program.
I think that's what freaked me out the most about Charlottesville and the president's response. I could see the direct line between the government implicitly sanctioning violence and how that violence could become normalized. Reading the book I'm reading has only further solidified that worry.
When you look at all the "Blue Lives Matter" stuff the last couple of years as well as the extremist gun culture it's really not hard to imagine a scenario where millions of Americans decide to take the law into their own hands and a sympathetic government agrees to look the other way.
I'm not saying that a regime like this in the US could never happen, but I no longer think it's as imminent as some do. I think it's more likely to happen piecemeal, if at all. I'm starting to think a Civil War is more likely, but even that's probably still unlikely as long as politics aren't at the forefront of most people's concerns.
The Rise and Fall of the Third Reich is currently part of the 'Prime Reading' program that makes it free (ebook version) for Amazon Prime members, if anyone is interested.
Thanks for the heads up.
I'm actually reading a wonderful book called Devil in the Grove right now, which I'm finding heartening, if only because if Thurgood Marshall could live through 1949 while literally fighting the KKK in court, the least I can do is keep my head up.
This looks like a great suggestion. Adding it to my list.
Whatever happens here will not be a direct repeat of the past. It will contain elements specific to the current socio-political situation. I think what worries people is not a direct descent into fascism so much as a move away from the status quo into the unknown. The assumption of most of us is that that would be materially worse for us than what we have now.
The problem is that there is a large contingent of radical Republicans - I hesitate to say "Conservatives", because in this they are indeed radical - who argue that the system is so broken, so corrupt, so incompetent, that the functional failure of government, of policing, of services, of civil society, is *required* to "clean the slate" and (magic occurs here) create something new and better out of the ashes. And because they have a basement full of plastic cans of freeze dried food, water and ammo, and a rack of ARs in a safe, they figure they'll be the ones left over after the dust settles to start up their tax-free, no freeloaders, Christian utopia.
These people are the ones electing Representatives and even Senators who want to actively start this process. So my guess is that our falling apart will more resemble Germany in the 20's at first. But our strong hand that will propose to save us could be quite different from traditional Fascism. Who knows?
The reasonable fear is that of having to try to live through that kind of upheaval, with the inevitable suffering, economic if not actually violent in nature. We could simply have a lot of years of failed government while the politicians posture and fight and the economy tanks, and that would be very unpleasant. And with each year moving that way, we also increase the chance of serious violent upheavals like we saw in the 60's, and periodically before that. We have a better chance of war, or of constant domestic terrorism to a degree we've not seen before. There are many possibilities, none of them good, and that's what is scary, since normally the job of the ship of state is to sail us away from them into calm waters.
The American public is very hostile to the governing class right now. Each party is historically unpopular. There's no Great Depression, but the recovery from the 2008 recession in red states has been a lot slower for the average American.
I agree with most of what you said, but wanted to clarify my assertion a bit here. I agree that the American public are hostile to the powers-that-be today, but I don't think they're hostile toward the architecture or ideal of the American government. The problem, as Americans see it, is that the government is being run poorly because of 'the other side', or because politicians are corrupt, or because courts are misinterpreting the Constitution. With the Constitution being considered a sacred document by many on the right, I believe a majority would actively resist an attempt to coerce the USA into a dictatorship even if the dictator was someone on their side. Even Rush Limbaugh apparently commented last week that he was concerned about how Trump was sounding like a dictator with his demands that the NFL do something about the anthem kneeling. That's not something I ever expected to hear.
I think all this is different than it was in Germany, where the very idea of a republic was something many people were uncertain about. Many then were willing, if not outright eager, to trade the republic for an authoritarian government that was more what they were used to.
I think the US could eventually end up in a fascist state, but only if it happens constitutionally, with all branches of government controlled by the 'strong hand', as Robear put it. I don't see that happening during Trump's tenure, though it's possible seeds could be planted.
I see your point and I think you're largely right. Largely. I think Robear might also be right, though, unfortunately. That there is a significant number of people who believe in blowing the whole thing up, with a magical handwave about how you replace all the structures in place that make sure (most of us) get clean drinking water, food, energy, etc.
I feel like this thread has gone off the rails a bit.
It has. We got a bit in the weeds there about where we currently are, etc. Sorry about that.
It's so hard to discuss this stuff without despair. Sorry for the derail, if it was mine.
On the Reich history side, I just grabbed the audiobook of Bonhoeffer by Eric Metaxas off Hoopla. On top of the value of the historical example, I'm also using my library, and I find some value in using and supporting my library as an institution.
Dietrich Bonhoeffer was a Lutheran minister who opposed Hitler and was martyred for it, so be warned that it'll get both religious and dark.
Nicholas Stargardt's The German War is another good book on the Germans during WWII, particularly in explaining how average Germans supported the war. There' also a lot of detail about when they learned about and how they reacted to Nazi atrocities.
Ursula K Le Guin's 2014 speech at National Book Awards
Books aren’t just commodities; the profit motive is often in conflict with the aims of art. We live in capitalism, its power seems inescapable – but then, so did the divine right of kings. Any human power can be resisted and changed by human beings. Resistance and change often begin in art. Very often in our art, the art of words.
That's really beautiful
And thanks for the suggestion of Devil in the Grove. I'm only about 15% into it but it ties well to the idea of how do you put one foot in front of the other when the odds are more than stacked against you. Even in the opening pages highlights why it's still important to try. In the 1940s --- not the 60s --- Thurgood Marshall and his team earn not guilty verdicts in Tennessee from an all white jury for 25 separate black men. It's still harrowing but it can be worth trying.
I also read Kim Stanley Robinson's Pacific Edge this year and found it really helpful. Pull quote:
Utopia is the process of making a better world, the name for one path history can take, a dynamic, tumultuous, agonizing process, with no end. Struggle forever.
The book as a whole really ennobled the struggle to put in the hard work in local governance and community organization.
I haven't had a chance to watch these yet but it seems at least some might be relevant.
Including to find for myself at least:
Ted Talks to restore your faith in humanity
I also read Kim Stanley Robinson's Pacific Edge this year and found it really helpful. Pull quote:
Utopia is the process of making a better world, the name for one path history can take, a dynamic, tumultuous, agonizing process, with no end. Struggle forever.The book as a whole really ennobled the struggle to put in the hard work in local governance and community organization.
That's how I try to visit it. My youth was built on a level of complacency about assumptions of never-ending progress. I realize now that the arc of the universe doesn't naturally bend towards justice, it's chaos, and you've got to put the work in for a better world.
Also, I just got your location joke, and laughed out loud in my apartment.
Also, I just got your location joke, and laughed out loud in my apartment.
Stolen from the Daily Show's recent week of Chicago filming.
Mentioned it in the book recommendations, but I think it's relevant here as well. Worth taking a look at Mike Duncan's (of The History of Rome Podcast and Revolutions Podcast fame) The Storm Before the Storm, which chronicles the buildup to the fall of the Roman Republic (i.e. the happenings before Caesar and Pompey and the Empire take the stage). Very easy to read and a lot of parallels to goings on here in the US.
Election results tonight are pretty good if you’re a liberal.
Election results tonight are pretty good if you’re a liberal.
On his Revolutions podcast feed, Mike Duncan posted a recording of a book tour event. On the parallels between the US republic and the Roman republic he specifically mentioned how eternal comeuppance was a major issue during the late Roman republic. When the major political actors care only about winning short-term battles against their opponents, tradition or law be damned, it undermines the trust people have in the system and thus the Republic itself. See: McConnell refusing to allow a hearing on Garland, or ignoring illegal collusion with the Russians.
It made me rethink how I want the Democrats to react to the destructive GOP behavior. Frustrating and damaging in the short term as it might be, it might be better in the longer term to keep acting as the adult in the room. Even if that means collaborating with a party of irrational, fundamentalist, racist cronies. And maybe it's better to not push the limits of executive power like Obama did, understandable as it might have been seeing the insane opposition by the Republicans.
Finished Devil in the Grove today. I'm still processing. It's a harrowing read with a nearly overwhelming list of injustices.
It's also a story of some people trying to create change when it seems impossible and a few (too few) individuals changing themselves as an outcome.
Thanks again for the suggestion
Glad you enjoyed it, I found it to be an absolutely enthralling read.
I added it to my goodreads list. it sounds like something I should checkout.
Timothy Snyder talks about his book "Black Earth: The Holocaust as History and Warning" and the interesting new theses he presents in it.
Pages