"Two Little Hitlers"

Remember the Elvis Costello song, Two Little Hitlers? It was from his album, Armed Forces, a 1979 release that offered a chilling prediction of coming fascism in the Anglo world. Because of industrial decay and Thatcherism in the late seventies, the Brits saw this coming before we Americans did. Anyway, I was thinking of the line in that song, "Two little Hitlers will fight it out until, One little Hitler does the other one's will," when reading an article by John Cooper called "The Narcissistic Roots of Fascism." Here is the article:

Based on his study of other countries, Lawrence Britt's 14 characteristics typical of Fascism can be used at the governmental level as a checklist to assess the extent to which any nation, ours or others, has descended into the
morass:

- Powerful and Continuing Nationalism;
- Disdain for the Recognition of Human Rights;
- Identification of Enemies/Scapegoats as a Unifying Cause;
- Supremacy of the Military;
- Rampant Sexism;
- Controlled Mass Media;
- Obsession with National Security;
- Intertwining of Religion and Government;
- Protection of Corporate Power;
- Supression of Labor's Power;
- Disdain for Intellectuals and the Arts;
- Obsession with Crime and Punishment;
- Rampant Cronyism and Corruption;
- Fraudulent Elections.

Useful as these criteria may be for assessing national status, they fail to account for how a nation's citizenry comes to allow its country to adopt such an 'ethic'. Nationally, Fascism embodies the supremacy of the state over the wants or needs of its individual citizens. In the ideal of Fascist leaders, the citizenry voluntarily subjugates its well-being to the welfare of the state and its ruling class in a gesture that objectively would seem almost altruistic: surrendering their individuality for the good of the whole. How are the governmental characteristics cited above consistent, or at odds, with typical behaviors of ordinary citizens at the individual, personal level?

At risk of sounding like old fogeys, some my age-cohort sense changes over the last decade or two in the behavior of many of our countrymen, changes that reflect not voluntary subjugation of individuals to the general good, but rather an appropriation and defense of personal perogative and entitlement regardless of their effect on others. At first these expropriations of personal privilege seem trivial:

from little rudenesses, incivilities and discourtesies like entering a lecture or performance late, disrupting the field of view of other attendees;

little cheats presumed to harm no one such as detecting but not correcting a favorable arithmetic error in a bill;

to more problematic activities such as obstructing a narrow sidewalk, walking two or more abreast, bowling oncomers into the shrubbery or off the curb;

or running red lights or stop signs, when no one is coming.

Gentle readers are invited to compile their own lists limited only by their experience or imagination: doing for your own benefit whatever you think you can get away with, regardless of its impact, potential or actual, on others.

I suspect most of us were brought up to think ill of such behaviors, to avoid them ourselves or at least to feel guilty when we realize we've engaged in them. So if they are becoming more prevalent, why? What's happened that more and more of our compatriots' upbringing is either lacking or fails to inhibit their problematic behaviors? Where are the inhibitors in our culture that once circumscribed our propensity for our most egregious behaviors within limits not readily violated?

One contributor is easily perceived in commercials viewed daily, if not hourly, on much of commercial TV. Try this experiment: watch a advertisement NOT from the point of view of a potential consumer but as a critic of the social behavior of its participants. Keep track of the fraction of commercials viewed, four to eight per break, that display duplicity, deceit, deception, dishonesty, gulling the innocent or ignorant, up to outright stupidity and unwarranted violence. Quite apart from the question why any thoughtful person would wish to purchase goods or services represented by such reprehensible behaviors, what do merchants imagine is the draw of such vignettes? I suppose some are deemed humorous but I recall, after viewing violent cowboy films as a child, my acting out the tough and ruthless, violent and vengeful behavior of the characters on my chums. Is the constant barrage of unseemly, unethical, insensitive behavior in commercials in effect condoning, if not actively encouraging, the same in impressionable youth of whatever chronological age?

In his film "Fanny and Alexander", Bergman has the latter utter what has to be for a youth one of the most unbelievable flashes of insight in all literature; in response to his stern father's demand, "Why do you lie?": "To gain advantage." Consider the little cheats, the little lies, the little deceits and betrayals above. Aren't they each and all the product of a will to co-opt some personal advantage at the expense of others: The supreme importance of self over and above all consideration of the rights or welfare of others?

Although Britt's characteristics of Fascism are easily found in numerous international venues, I think they are merely symptoms of an underlying pathology, present in both personal and national behaviors: narcissism, a fundamental attribute of sociopathic, psychopathic behavior from the interpersonal to the international. At the personal level socio- and psycho-paths behave as though their personal interests were the prime, if not the only, consideration governing their behavior. At the international level, most "failed states", our own included, justify any level of treachery toward, or atrocity against, other nations or peoples, even their own, in terms of the overarching importance of the "national interests".

But truly whose are these "national interests"? What is the connection between states' and personal behavior? No state is ever a discrete, integral entity unto itself. Each is directed, ultimately, by individuals, or collections of individuals, who deem themselves the state or its representative: L'Etat c'est moi! Aren't 'national interests' in fact those of the individual or individuals, or their clients, deemed to represent the nation?

Narcissistic behavior by nations results from uncontrolled narcissistic impulses on behalf of, or by, nations' leaders or representatives. A nation that breeds, trains, rewards or sustains narcissism, that selects or elects narcissists as its representatives or leadership, will inevitably display international behaviors consistent with the primacy of self-interest, whether personal or national, over the welfare of others, of the community of nations as a whole. The general weal is not well served by a million, or a billion, points of greed.

What can we individuals do to minimize the predominance and effect of narcissism? Nationally, little, it might seem on the basis of the most recent election. Individually, a first step might be to interdict and counteract one's own personal narcissistic impulses; when you catch yourself taking advantage of others for personal gain, stop and reconsider. A second, potentially more problematic, step might be actively to resist, refuse to cooperate with, perhaps even interdict other's narcissisms. For one example boycott products associated with repellant behavior, corporate or commercial. Let others know that rampant self-service, putting others' welfare and well-being at risk for their own benefit, is personally, socially and fiscally unacceptable. Beyond these measures, continue to encourage and support those moral and ethical leaders, clerical or secular, who put the welfare of the truly needy before the grimy ambitions of nationalistic politicians and lobbyists for entrenched interests.

A bumperstick seen in some areas of the country - Partnership for an Idiot-Free America - might well be adapted to read: Partnership for a Narcissism-Free America.

© Copyright 2004 by AxisofLogic.com

The editors of the Signs of the Times commented on this article recently with the following:

We have long thought that psychopathology was an important issue. See our article on the question. We have also traced the connections between psychopathy and the capitalist system. While the author of the above piece identifies the problem and is able to suggest an individual response, we do not think that he gets to the root of the problem.

What is the root? It is esoteric and relates to the fundamental nature of life on this planet, the very existence of our reality rooted in the mixture of creative and entropic forces. A close reading of our reality will demonstrate that it is the entropic force that rules. We are moving towards a crisis of great proportions in every area of our existence. We have created a society where the needs of a few at the top of the hierarchy override the needs of the majority, and here we are not talking of a majority such as the one Bush claims as his mandate, a simple majority of 50% plus one. We are speaking of the needs of perhaps a few million that override the needs of the other 6 billion people on the planet.

Clearly such a situation is not just.Does anyone care? Yes, there are a few. But the excuse that you normally hear is that the world is not fair and has never been fair. Is not this belief, certainly rooted in an objective view of things as they are and as they ever have been throughout recorded history, a clear expression of the fact that ours is a world of entropy.

But rather than follow through their thinking and recognise the consequences of this admission, people turn towards those few good things that do exist in the world totell us that "it isn't all bad". Of course it isn't all bad if we use the criteria that such people use. But does that change the fundamental nature of the world? For entropy to be the reigning force does not mean that the creative force is unable to find expression whatsoever; it simply means that the entropic force is the dominant force, it is the determinant force in deciding the direction towards which life is headed in our world.

Chaos, disorder, injustice, hatred, war, famine, disease, and upheaval. These are the traits of entropy.

The esoteric lesson, to come back to Mr. Cooper's suggestions on how to fight the growing narcissism, is that we can not change the fundamental character of this world. We can only change ourselves. We do this, not to change the world, but to manifest the force of creation in this world. Let is look more closely at Mr. Cooper's two proposals. Here is the first:

Individually, a first step might be to interdict and counteract one's own
personal narcissistic impulses; when you catch yourself taking advantage of others forpersonal gain, stop and reconsider.

Cooper's first proposal, taken in its deeper, esoteric meaning, is the work on the self, the work to rid oneself of the programs instilled within us by our socialisation and education. It is the combat against our Personality, the impermanent part of ourselves comprised of many conflicting impulses and desires. The Tradition calls these the "little 'I's". They stand as a wall around the permanent part of ourselves, the real 'I', that part of us that connects to the Creative force. The small 'I's are so loud, busy, and demanding that we remain lost in their chatter as they push and pull us in myriad directions throughout the day and prevent the Creative force from becoming manifest.

It is also called the "Predator's Mind" because it is the manifestation of the predator that we each have within us, that part that seeks to take "advantage of others for personal gain", as Cooper so aptly puts it. It is the manifestation of the entropic force within us all. When we identify with these desires, we become the manifestation of the entropic force in the world.

As it takes a conscious choice to go against our programmes, and thus there are few people in the world who have made this choice, it is no surprise that the world is at it is. It is the simple reflection on the large scale of the behaviours of billions of individuals in their lives on the local scale.

Learning to see ourselves as a collection of programmes is not easy, learning to identify those moments when we are taking advantage of others is not easy. There is always a little voice, one of the small 'I's, to tell us that we are justified in our thoughts and our actions. The Predator's Mind is sophisticated, clever, and cunning, able to set up subtle traps. To see oneself objectively, one needs a network of trusted individuals who are engaged in the same battle with their own Personalities, who have successfully identified these programmes in themselves so that they are able to see them in others. Such a group can hold the mirror up to you, can help you see yourself as you are. Of course the predator within will scream and scheme and do everything to convince you that the image you are seeing is not the complete picture. It will find fault with those who hold the mirror. As no one is free from contradictions, it is easy for the predator to turn the criticism back upon them, to focus upon the weaknesses of others in order to deflect the Truth about yourself.

Therefore, the first suggestion offered by the author is no mean feat. It is a difficult battle waged against one's own mind, the impermanent part of one's own mind, in favour of the real 'I'. Once, however, a small piece of one's true self has been brought to light, it can serve as an enclosure to pursue the battle, a safe ground from which to watch the activities of the predator within. While the fight still continues with the inner forces of entropy, one can then begin to do battle with the external forces, as is suggested by Cooper in his second proposal:

A second, potentially more problematic, step might be actively to resist, refuse to cooperate with, perhaps even interdict other's narcissisms.

Such a process is already defined in esoteric work. We call this process the struggle against the petty tyrant or the battle against the "general law", that is, the manifestations of entropy in others.

To put it bluntly, most relationships are feeding relationships. We are in them for what we get from the other person. In some rare cases, this feeding may be explicit and well-understood between the two parties. There is a contract of sorts. Most of the time, however, the feeding is hidden under the illusion of giving, of "just wanting to help", of "just wanting you to be happy", of "just wanting things to be the way they were", etc. The truth is that we all lie to ourselves about the fundamental character of our relations with our friends, family, and significant others.

When one begins to seek to change the nature of these relationships, a funny thing happens. The people around us get upset. They get upset because we are cutting off their supply of food, that is, of the energy that we have been giving to them or that has been sucked out from us. When we begin to change ourselves, we change the dynamic of every one of our relationships. The people around us turn into petty tyrants, they begin to demand that we turn back on the food supply. Sometimes they do this in very explicit ways, other times, it is done with great subtlety, and it is only later when we realise we have been drained that we can see that it was done. It may take long reflection to understand the how's and why's.

Refusing to cooperate with the petty tyrant can lead to one's life being overturned in an instant as the true character of our relationships with others becomes evident. People who claim to love you for yourself, who claim to want only your happiness, refuse to accept changes that bring us closer to our true selves, that make us truly happy, because in refusing to cooperate with the petty tyrant, with the narcissism identified by Cooper, we are going against the very fabric of our reality. We are saying "No" to the very nature of our world and, therefore, to their own nature.

To question the natural of the world and to begin to live differently is in a very
real way "unnatural".Is it any wonder people who take up such work are labeled as "troubled" by their family and friends, that they are accused of "cultic" behaviour?Such accusations are manifestations of the general law, but it is impossible to reason with those around you for they are committed to a different way of living. For them to admit that your path is correct, even if only for you, is to admit that there is a possibility their choices are not what they seem.

Mr. Cooper's proposals are an open door towards a radical change in the lives of those who would seek to put them into practice. The trouble is that without the deeper understanding of the laws of our world, such action is doomed to failure. One who lacks the deeper, esoteric understanding is calling upon his head the reaction of the basic forces of this reality. Esoteric work gives one the understanding of how to deal with these forces by offering the knowledge of the roots of the problem.One can only escape with the help of a group, guided by those who have successfully gone before and found the pathway to true freedom.

If the terms "creativity" and "entropy" are not clear, you can substitute Service to Others (STO) and Service to Self (STS), if you want.

What is clear, though, is that to effectively fight fascism in the world, we need to fight the fascist in ourselves. More on that in another post. Until then here is another song off Armed Forces:

Goon Squad

Mother, Father, I'm here in the zoo
I can't come home 'cause I've grown up too soon
I got my sentence
I got my command
They said they'd make me major if I met all their demands

I could be a corp'ral into corp'ral punishment
Or the gen'ral manager of a large establishment
They pat some good boys on the back and put some to the rod
But I never thought they'd put me in the

Goon squad
They've come to look you over and they're giving you the eye
Goon squad
They want you to come out to play
You'd better say goodbye

Some grow just like their dads
And some grow up too tall
Some go drinking with the lads
Some don't grow up at all

And you must find the proper place
For everything you see
But you'll never get to make a lampshade out of me

I could join a chain of males or be the missing (a) link
Looking for a lucky girl to put me in the pink
They pat some good boys on the back and put some to the rod
But I never thought they'd put me in the

Good squad ....

Mother, Father, I'm doing so well
I'm making such progress now that you can hardly tell
I fit in a little dedication
With one eye on the clock
They caught you under medication
You could be in for a shock

Thinking up the alibis that ev'ryone's forgotten
Just another mummy's boy gone to rotten
They pat some good boys on the back and put some to the rod
But I never thought they'd put me in the

Goon squad....