But Then It Was Too Late

Guest Author Uncategorized

This is from the always worth reading Kaye Lee at The Australian Independent Media – I hope she will forgive me for reblogging without her express permission (and I note that several Pubkateers have commented already).

(Image Credit: Daily Fumes)

An excerpt from They Thought They Were Free – The Germans, 1933-45 by Milton Mayer:

What no one seemed to notice was the ever widening gap, after 1933, between the government and the people. Just think how very wide this gap was to begin with, here in Germany. And it became always wider. You know, it doesn’t make people close to their government to be told that this is a people’s government, a true democracy, or to be enrolled in civilian defense, or even to vote. All this has little, really nothing, to do with knowing one is governing.

What happened here was the gradual habituation of the people, little by little, to being governed by surprise; to receiving decisions deliberated in secret; to believing that the situation was so complicated that the government had to act on information which the people could not understand, or so dangerous that, even if the people could understand it, it could not be released because of national security. And their sense of identification with Hitler, their trust in him, made it easier to widen this gap and reassured those who would otherwise have worried about it.

This separation of government from people, this widening of the gap, took place so gradually and so insensibly, each step disguised (perhaps not even intentionally) as a temporary emergency measure or associated with true patriotic allegiance or with real social purposes. And all the crises and reforms (real reforms, too) so occupied the people that they did not see the slow motion underneath, of the whole process of government growing remoter and remoter.

The dictatorship, and the whole process of its coming into being, was above all diverting. It provided an excuse not to think for people who did not want to think anyway. I do not speak of your ‘little men,’ your baker and so on; I speak of my colleagues and myself, learned men, mind you. Most of us did not want to think about fundamental things and never had. There was no need to. Nazism gave us some dreadful, fundamental things to think about—we were decent people—and kept us so busy with continuous changes and ‘crises’ and so fascinated, yes, fascinated, by the machinations of the ‘national enemies,’ without and within, that we had no time to think about these dreadful things that were growing, little by little, all around us. Unconsciously, I suppose, we were grateful. Who wants to think?

To live in this process is absolutely not to be able to notice it—please try to believe me—unless one has a much greater degree of political awareness, acuity, than most of us had ever had occasion to develop. Each step was so small, so inconsequential, so well explained or, on occasion, ‘regretted,’ that, unless one were detached from the whole process from the beginning, unless one understood what the whole thing was in principle, what all these ‘little measures’ that no ‘patriotic German’ could resent must some day lead to, one no more saw it developing from day to day than a farmer in his field sees the corn growing. One day it is over his head.

How is this to be avoided, among ordinary men, even highly educated ordinary men? Frankly, I do not know. I do not see, even now. Many, many times since it all happened I have pondered that pair of great maxims, Principiis obsta and Finem respice—‘Resist the beginnings’ and ‘Consider the end.’ But one must foresee the end in order to resist, or even see, the beginnings. One must foresee the end clearly and certainly and how is this to be done, by ordinary men or even by extraordinary men? Things might have. And everyone counts on that might.

Your ‘little men,’ your Nazi friends, were not against National Socialism in principle. Men like me, who were, are the greater offenders, not because we knew better (that would be too much to say) but because we sensed better. Pastor Niemöller spoke for the thousands and thousands of men like me when he spoke (too modestly of himself) and said that, when the Nazis attacked the Communists, he was a little uneasy, but, after all, he was not a Communist, and so he did nothing; and then they attacked the Socialists, and he was a little uneasier, but, still, he was not a Socialist, and he did nothing; and then the schools, the press, the Jews, and so on, and he was always uneasier, but still he did nothing. And then they attacked the Church, and he was a Churchman, and he did something—but then it was too late.

You see, one doesn’t see exactly where or how to move. Believe me, this is true. Each act, each occasion, is worse than the last, but only a little worse. You wait for the next and the next. You wait for one great shocking occasion, thinking that others, when such a shock comes, will join with you in resisting somehow. You don’t want to act, or even talk, alone; you don’t want to ‘go out of your way to make trouble.’ Why not?—Well, you are not in the habit of doing it. And it is not just fear, fear of standing alone, that restrains you; it is also genuine uncertainty.

Uncertainty is a very important factor, and, instead of decreasing as time goes on, it grows. Outside, in the streets, in the general community, ‘everyone’ is happy. One hears no protest, and certainly sees none. You know, in France or Italy there would be slogans against the government painted on walls and fences; in Germany, outside the great cities, perhaps, there is not even this. In the university community, in your own community, you speak privately to your colleagues, some of whom certainly feel as you do; but what do they say? They say, ‘It’s not so bad’ or ‘You’re seeing things’ or ‘You’re an alarmist.’

And you are an alarmist. You are saying that this must lead to this, and you can’t prove it. These are the beginnings, yes; but how do you know for sure when you don’t know the end, and how do you know, or even surmise, the end? On the one hand, your enemies, the law, the regime, the Party, intimidate you. On the other, your colleagues pooh-pooh you as pessimistic or even neurotic. You are left with your close friends, who are, naturally, people who have always thought as you have.

Now, in small gatherings of your oldest friends, you feel that you are talking to yourselves, that you are isolated from the reality of things. This weakens your confidence still further and serves as a further deterrent to—to what? It is clearer all the time that, if you are going to do anything, you must make an occasion to do it, and then you are obviously a troublemaker. So you wait, and you wait.

But the one great shocking occasion, when tens or hundreds or thousands will join with you, never comes. That’s the difficulty. If the last and worst act of the whole regime had come immediately after the first and smallest, thousands, yes, millions would have been sufficiently shocked—if, let us say, the gassing of the Jews in ’43 had come immediately after the ‘German Firm’ stickers on the windows of non-Jewish shops in ’33. But of course this isn’t the way it happens. In between come all the hundreds of little steps, some of them imperceptible, each of them preparing you not to be shocked by the next. Step C is not so much worse than Step B, and, if you did not make a stand at Step B, why should you at Step C? And so on to Step D.

And one day, too late, your principles, if you were ever sensible of them, all rush in upon you. The burden of self-deception has grown too heavy, and some minor incident, in my case my little boy, hardly more than a baby, saying ‘Jewish swine,’ collapses it all at once, and you see that everything, everything, has changed and changed completely under your nose. The world you live in—your nation, your people—is not the world you were born in at all. The forms are all there, all untouched, all reassuring, the houses, the shops, the jobs, the mealtimes, the visits, the concerts, the cinema, the holidays. But the spirit, which you never noticed because you made the lifelong mistake of identifying it with the forms, is changed. Now you live in a world of hate and fear, and the people who hate and fear do not even know it themselves; when everyone is transformed, no one is transformed. Now you live in a system which rules without responsibility even to God. The system itself could not have intended this in the beginning, but in order to sustain itself it was compelled to go all the way.

You have gone almost all the way yourself. Life is a continuing process, a flow, not a succession of acts and events at all. It has flowed to a new level, carrying you with it, without any effort on your part. On this new level you live, you have been living more comfortably every day, with new morals, new principles. You have accepted things you would not have accepted five years ago, a year ago, things that your father, even in Germany, could not have imagined.

Suddenly it all comes down, all at once. You see what you are, what you have done, or, more accurately, what you haven’t done (for that was all that was required of most of us: that we do nothing). You remember those early meetings of your department in the university when, if one had stood, others would have stood, perhaps, but no one stood. A small matter, a matter of hiring this man or that, and you hired this one rather than that. You remember everything now, and your heart breaks. Too late. You are compromised beyond repair.

Note: Thanks to mars08 for this chilling reminder

958 thoughts on “But Then It Was Too Late”

  1. “Vagaries of the climate”, Barnaby is carefully avoiding the AGW words, even after the presenter asked about the Qld areas that have been in drought for12 of the last 15 years.

  2. Gracious. Richo has just gone full jihad against the poisonous Leprechaun AND the board.

  5. Fiona

    Deary me PLUS link.

    That’s disgusting. Not because of the cartoon itself, but because of the caption.

    Why is Julie Bishop caricatured as a skun cat? And then the question answered about a way to deal with dead cat skin?

    I seriously don’t get it. It’s just an extension of the demeaning shit Julia Gillard had to put up with – that had no meaning either.

    Other than blatant sexism.

  6. kezza2

    The book 101 Uses For a Dead Cat is hilarious. What is wrong with a riff on that ?

  8. Mark Simkin excelling himself on behalf of his masters tonite. I expect him & Uhlmann at least to one day have moved into the Australian by some process similar to osmosis.

  11. kaffeeklatscher

    The book 101 Uses For a Dead Cat is hilarious.

    Agree.

    What is wrong with a riff on that ?

    I see. A woman is regarded as feline. Hilarious.

    Can’t they come up with something better than that?

  12. Regarding the questions about busted farmers who have received “assistance” for the drought.
    It is well known but never spoken about that during times of drought Banks keep farmers going on the smell of an oily rag, only to force them out when times improve and they can recoup their loans. They keep them going for two reasons, one is that a desperate farmer is cheaper than a paid manager and secondly there is not that good a market for farms sold when the drought is still going.
    For the last decade or two there has been another reason to keep farmers going, drought relief. It has become so predictable that the banks rely on it to get some of their money back, plus like the first home owners grant does for housing, drought relief causes upward pressure on values of farm land and so providing bigger cheques for mortgagors, receivers in bankruptcy, and the other vultures who feed off broke farmers.
    Drought relief is for bankers, corporate farmers and the like, small family farms will see very little of it.

  13. Kezza,
    One of Ms Julie Bishop’s trademark insulting gestures in Parliament is the cat claw accompanied by the “appropriate” facial expression.

    Perhaps if she’d prefer not to be depicted as a feline she should stop acting like one?

  17. Fiona
    February 26, 2014 at 7:59 PM
    Enough already, everyone.

    Certain comments are about to be deleted.

    I think they have been.

    See you next week.

  18. Kezza,
    They were deleted just after I made that comment.

    On the matter of the transcript, I am awaiting permission.

    Have a wonderfully pampered weekend.

  19. The thing that strikes me is that Morrison had to get an army general to run OSB. One would think that an admiral would be the more appropriate choice as nearly all the operations are on water? Could it be that there were no naval personnel willing to be subverted to the LNP’s political will? Obviously, they had Campbell lined up pre-election as the previously useful patsy.

  20. The Guardian gives more details of the PNG police report, which seems very different to all the eye-witness accounts we have seen.
    Asylum seeker Reza Barati died from ‘multiple head injuries’, PNG police say
    Police report states Barati’s death could have been caused by a “heavy object” during rioting at Manus Island detention centre
    http://www.theguardian.com/world/2014/feb/26/asylum-seeker-reza-barati-died-from-multiple-head-injuries-png-police-say

  21. Cheers Fiona

    Hope you succeed with the permission because it is well and truly still a ‘live’ subject.

    I’ve taken the “pampering” well and truly on board.

    Guess we’ll see what happens. Or how long it lasts. Three years separation is not to be sneezed at, in terms of good behaviour.

    LOL.

  22. I believe this is Conroy’s wife.

    Conroy looks on

    Yes, maybe a couple of bastards that some Labor supporters believe these two to be is what is needed to deal with this mob,

  23. I saw a petition on the Labor Facebook page to support the ABC- I didn’t sign in my opinion the time to support their ABC is when they resume impartial reporting. I see no evidence of this at present.
    I am outraged at the Faux indignation regarding Senator Conroy’s comments. The general accepted the post – under whatever conditions imposed- if he didn’t agree with the job or the operation he would not have. Being closely questioned is par for the course – I thought this guy was a soldier – used to dodging bullets etc.. and he goes to water over words?.

  24. Abbott has his eyes fixed on Paula Benson’s cleavage. Yuck! What a sleaze. And this is our PM.

  27. As much as I like some of the descriptions of the Bishops, it is not playing fair, using sexism to attack them.

    There is plenty to find in what they are, see and do, to keep one occupied.

    I did not like such name calling for Gillard. I like it less for members of this government.,

    They are failing, not because they are women, but because they do not have the skills to do the job.

    Lets not seek to their level.

  28. Fed Up,
    For the purposes of this comment, I shall focus on the two Bishops.

    To my mind the Senior Bishop condemned herself for whatever treatment she gets by standing under those disgusting posters on the day of the Convoy of No Confidence’s protest in Canberra.

    The Junior Bishop (1) uses her repertoire of sneaky bullying schoolgirl tricks in the HoR to denigrate her opponents, especially female ones, (2) has no sense of cultural appropriateness regarding her attire when representing Australia overseas, and (3) seems quite content to portray herself as the willing hand”maiden” to three leaders of her Party.

    By contrast, I cannot think of anything Ms Gillard did that warranted the misogynistic treatment (from men AND women) she received throughout her Prime Ministership – yet she clearly had and has the respect (and friendship, maybe even affection) of many world leaders – something neither of the Bishops nor, gaia help us, Our Dear Leader will ever have.

    As ye sow, so shall ye reap.

    For what it’s worth, I make no claim to represent the views of other posters here.

  29. Hang about!

    I guess what I have not have seen me will not …

    What is going on here!

  31. Julie Bishop and Bronwyn Bishop thought it was a great joke to denigrate Julia Gillard. I see any name calling, ctriticism, lampooning etc of thse two people as just desserts. If they can dish it out then they can cop it back. No-one ever says criticism of a male politician by another male is ‘sexist’. but if a woman dares to make an umcomplimentary remark about a female politician the screams of ‘sexist’ are deafening. Is this just more sexism? Women can’t criticise, men can?

  33. Leone,

    It must be time the patrons as you say.

    If our The Canberra Times I shall certainly do so.

  36. Mr Conroy might look pensive in that collage of photos, but he has one great consolation. He will be home with the attractive and vivacious Ms Benson tonight. Mr Abbott will allegedly be at the Police barracks in Barton!

  39. A comment from Malcolm Fraser on the Conroy/Campbell thing.

    Where are we if we get to a position where people in uniform cannot be criticised because of the uniform, there are too many precedents— Malcolm Fraser (@MalcolmFraser12) February 26, 2014

  40. Ducky,
    There was a touch of somewhat willing stuff from all sides – nothing seriously over the top or even very interesting, but with potential to get tricky.

    So, as moi seems to be the only moderator around at the moment, moi flexed moi’s claws. Everyone seems to have retained their equanimity.

    I HATE this keyboard.

    Goodnight.

  41. Allow me to say something in my defence – I don’t enjoy personal attacks, on me or on others. Tonight was not the first time a certain person has had a go at me. She is the reason I rarely bother going over the road any more. If this person is going to post here then I won’t be here as much as i’d like to be. Deletiing posts is all very well, that’s OK if the mods think it needs to happen. But if it is to be done on the say-so of one person who (thank heavens) rarely posts, does so only to attack and seems to have a whole beehive in her bonnet then that’s not fair.

    Goodnight.

  42. leonetwo
    February 26, 2014 at 9:24 PM
    “Julie Bishop and Bronwyn Bishop thought it was a great joke to denigrate Julia Gillard. I see any name calling, ctriticism, lampooning etc of thse two people as just desserts”.

    Well, I don’t. I think it just feeds into a never-ending loop.

    “If they can dish it out then they can cop it back”.

    Meh.

    “No-one ever says criticism of a male politician by another male is ‘sexist,”

    Because it’s not. Male on male criticism is about ideas, not gender specific.

    “but if a woman dares to make an uncomplimentary remark about a female politician the screams of ‘sexist’ are deafening.”

    Are you seriously defending criticism of a female politician because of what she looks like, or what she wears, or her make-up, and/or jewellery?

    “Is this just more sexism? Women can’t criticise, men can?”

    Only because you make it so. If you criticise JBish because of her ideas, go for it. But if all you want to do is criticise her because of her appearance, and that’s a measure of her intellectual capacity, then that’s sexist.

    So, yes, men can criticise all they like, as long as they don’t criticise on the basis of appearance, but purely on ideas.

    If you can’t cope with that, leonetwo and others, then you shouldn’t be pontificating to others about how they should comment.

    I mean, comments on a particular photo, captured at an unflattering angle, is quite patently ridiculous, as if it portrays the summation of that person. Those thoughts are precisely what sells tabloid mags.

    Give us a break.

  43. When I say

    “Give us a break”

    I acknowledge you are a superior intellect, leonetwo

    And I listen to you, I take your ideas on board, I respect your research and analysis. And it’s not because I know what you look like that I accept it, it’s because I have grown to know you over the years, and I appreciate your abilities.

    And that’s why I curse you sometimes, because I don’t expect the type of tabloid response you give, every now and then.

    Sure, I have those moments in time when I want to say irrelevant stuff about our public figures, but I stop myself, and I don’t (apart from calling Tony Abbott a dickhead frequently, but he’s easy meat and has been for 10 years or more – and he’s no intellect).

    Keep up your good work.

  44. Oh dear

    I just saw your whinge @ 10:43, leonetwo.

    The old “this place isn’t big enough for the two of us” ultimatum.

    Never fear, I won’t be posting again for a while, quite a long while.

    So, go for it sister, the world’s your oyster.

  45. Possum continuing his polling efforts…
    http://www.brisbanetimes.com.au/queensland/newman-government-on-the-receiving-end-of-another-bad-poll-20140225-33ft8.html

    Newman government on the receiving end of another bad poll
    February 26, 2014 – 12:01AM
    Amy Remeikis
    State political reporter

    The Newman government could be headed for the political wilderness if a new poll is replicated across the state.

    The ReachTEL poll of Treasurer Tim Nicholls’s seat of Clayfield, commissioned by the Electrical Trades Union, shows a swing of 14 per cent against the LNP.

    While the poll surveyed just 711 residents and carries an error margin on both sides of 3.7 per cent, it comes just days after a 17.2 per cent swing against the government in the Redcliffe byelection.

    Mr Nicholls would retain his seat, but a statewide 14 per cent swing would see the Newman government lose 39 seats, including the Premier’s seat of Ashgrove, relegating the LNP to a one-term government.
    Advertisement

    Political pundits, such as Paul Williams, believes the actual swing will be closer to 10 per cent come election day, expected to be early next year.

    http://images.brisbanetimes.com.au/file/2014/02/25/5199199/CEPU%2520-%2520Clayfield%2520-%252024%2520February%25202014%2520%281%29.pdf?rand=1393319750629

  46. Blimey, Kezza, have you ever made a comment on a blog that could be considered to add value to whatever is the main topic of conversation at that time?

    Just about every contribution I have seen from you seems to be designed to take a shot at another contributors thoughts and opinions on some particular individual or policy position that you pick out to have a personal rant on.

    Can you just give some thought to being a bit more tolerant of other peoples opinions and add some constructive thoughts and ideas of your own to a particular conversation or subject that is being discussed on this or other blog.

    There are no BAD people posting here. Just people that resent hypocrisy of the highest order that we all observe every day since and even prior, to the change of government.

    If you have something positive to contribute here, then you are more than welcome. If all you want to do is slag off at good people to satisfy some need to make you feel good by putting others down, then there’s the door and you won’t be missed!

  47. scorpio

    Have you ever actually read what I’ve written rather than automatically been affronted/offended?

    Okay, there are no BAD people here. I’m not BAD either. So I fit in, too.

    But, whatever. Feel free to slag off at me, as a lot of you GOOD people who don’t do BAD things do.

    It works both ways, dontcha know.

    As I just said to leonetwo, I won’t be back for many a long day, so enjoy yourself in your exclusive conclave.

Comments are closed.