Gazing Into the Abyss: Trying to Understand the Nazi Worldview

Photo from Wikimedia Commons

In Jesus and the Powers, Tom Wright and I give considerable attention to the dangers of the totalitarianism typified by the Nazis and how Christians are called, within the precincts of their own consciences, to resist ideologies of terror and autocracy.

We like to imagine that if we lived in Germany in the 1930s that we would not have followed the masses in either enthusiasm for or complicity with the Nazi regime. But would we have been so allergic to it or actively opposed to it? Would we have been indifferent to the Nazis and their schemes all together? Tough questions to ask!

Nazism was seductive precisely because it promised an immediate fix to parliamentary gridlock, an end to economic chaos, and a refusal to bow to the crushing indemnities and humiliating conditions imposed upon Germany by the western powers after the First World War. For many Germans, the Nazi party was an alternative and perhaps even the answer to the trauma, divisions, and poverty after the First World War.

Nazism was not an alien political doctrine that appeared out of nowhere. Nazism succeeded because it embodied what people either believed or wanted to believe. Nazism was an incredibly eclectic worldview, combining Darwinian science, pseudo-sciences like eugenics, incorporating some aspects of Lutheranism, elements of the philosophy of Nietzsche, the music of Wagner, Nordic mythology, anti-Jewish conspiracy theories, numerology, idealized masculinity, nationalism, militarism, anti-communism, and belief in the magical power of ancient artefacts – it had something for everyone!

Nazism appeared to be scientific, spiritual, progressive, and effective, the new type of civilization the world needed. As a philosophy, Nazism was internally consistent to the point that it appeared self-evident to many people, which is precisely why it attracted supporters from all over Europe.

This is why many political philosophers and political theologians have spent so much time studying Nazi Germany and Stalinist Russia, because we want to understand how a totalitarian movement “works,” how does it seduces and succeeds? How can people participate in a sadist regime where it’s main mode of discourse is terror? We like to think that the Nazi leaders were either monsters or mad. But that probably says more about our sense of horror at the Nazis but does not really explain them.

But let’s be honest, it’s hard to understand the evil of the Nazis, we cannot imagine the rationality for it. But to prevent it one must understand it, which means we must engage in the unpleasant task of trying to get inside the head of the Nazis, into their mentality, look upon their brutality and banality, even if such a gaze burns our eyes.

---

To read further, consider joining the “Aviary” by taking out a paid subscription, only $7 per month or $75 per year, supports me in my ministry and scholarship, and gets you 3-4 posts per week on biblical studies, Christianity and gender relationships, cultural commentary, book reviews, previews of my forthcoming books, and some cool videos.

Hannah Arendt, a Jewish-American political theorist and philosopher, offered her own theory as to why the Nazis were able to come to power in Germany when they did and how they did.

Arendt’s thesis was that totalitarianism, as exemplified by the Nazi regime, thrived on the destruction of individuality and the erosion of moral and political norms.

She argued that the Nazis were able to rise to power due to a combination of factors, including:

Loss of Political Pluralism: The collapse of traditional political institutions and the failure of established parties to address social and economic crises created a vacuum that allowed extremist movements like the Nazis to gain power.

Mass Mobilization: The Nazis were successful in mobilizing support from various segments of society, bringing the elites and masses together, by appealing to nationalist sentiments, amplifying grievances, exploiting economic hardships, scapegoating minority groups like Jews and Communists, and narrating dreams of a utopian society.

Failures of Democracy: Arendt argued that the weaknesses of democratic institutions and the failure of the Weimar Republic to effectively govern and address social discord paved the way for the rise of the Nazis.

Ideologies of Struggle: The Nazis were fascinated with the idea that all of nature, even human nature, is a competition between the weak and the strong; the strong rise and dominate, while the weak submit and die off. One must struggle as a people to be the apex predator who dominates everything and everyone before you.

Arendt noted the attraction that people had towards the morbidity of evil and were willing to participate in the banality of evil. By the "the banality of evil" she meant how ordinary people could commit horrific acts of violence and cruelty under totalitarian regimes like the Nazis as if they were carrying out the most ordinary task.

For Arendt, this banality of evil was embodied in Adolf Eichmann, one of the main architects of the Jewish Holocaust. She wrote: "The trouble with Eichmann was precisely that so many were like him, and that the many were neither perverted nor sadistic, that they were, and still are, terribly and terrifyingly normal." It’s scary because it displays how one can approve and participate in evil deeds as if one was going about their normal business.

If you want to delve deeper into this, read the episode from The Rest is History, about the rise of the Nazis in Power - very good.