Origins of Nazi Violence by Traverso

Table of Contents

Book Summary
Critical Review
Conclusion
Works cited

Origins of the Nazi violence is an attempt by the author to offer an explanation on one of the most horrendous events of the twentieth century i.e. the Holocaust. Generally speaking the book is quite analytical and draws on several schools of thought. It then uses these previous philosophies to come up with its own explanations. The paper shall look at the general message in the book, how the author presented his arguments and failures or triumphs inherent in this piece of literature.

Book Summary

In an attempt to understand the Nazi violence, Traverso first looks at previous explanations on the subject. Some philosophers assert that Nazism was created as some form of rejection of liberalism. Others claim that this was a problem distinct to Germany especially after several historical injustices; on the other hand, others claim that it came from oppositions to violence against the German people especially the Bolshevik scenario. The author carefully counters all these school thoughts by bringing out their weaknesses. He then proceeds to postulate his own assertion; that the violence was a reflection of the goings on in the larger western society. He further claims that all the depictions in the war can be traced back to occurrences and values held as far back as the eighteenth century. Therefore, contrary to popular belief, Nazism was not a deviation from the norm or a horrible mistake in western society; instead it should be regarded as symptomatic depiction of deeper western liberal ideologies.

In order to support these assertions, the author utilizes a series of examples that occurred right around that time. For instance, he draws on similarities between the holocaust and prevailing economic theories of the day. (Traverso, 90) For instance the disregard for human life and un-emotive killings was derived from the common practice of ignoring most of the needs of low class workers in the twentieth century. Additionally, there are enormous similarities between colonization of foreign lands and concepts of Aryan German supremacy. Numerous cultural factors in Europe were responsible for what culminated as Nazism.

Critical Review

The author has definitely put in tremendous work and effort in unraveling the Holocaust and Nazi Germany in general. In order to trace the roots of any extreme historical phenomenon, it is always critical for one to understand both the social and economic environment of the episode. One ought not to do this in isolation as all countries heavily interact with one another and values are frequently replicated across varying locations. The writer to this book was constantly aware of this notion and that was the reason why he was able to draw on various economic and historical ideologies and practices throughout western society. It is not a simple task to make analyses from such a broad array of thoughts and principles, but Enzo Traverso has intelligently and comprehensively carried this out.

His thesis statement can be stated as follows: Nazi violence was a typical and inevitable depiction of liberal European/ western thought. The author has done a good job of advancing arguments and presenting evidence that supports this thesis statement. First he looked at the prevalent forms of violence in the larger western society. The creation of prisons and prioritization of punishment as a means for restoring discipline was critical in shaping Nazi ideology as Nazism also propagated maintenance of punishment. The prison system was a characteristic of the French revolution and therefore a distinct aspect of western society. In citing this example, the author clearly supports his thesis statement by depicting how the punishment of the Jews and other undesirables could be likened to punishment as carried out in the prevailing criminal justice system.

Secondly, Traverso (65) further brings in the concept of industrialized killing as another example to advance his thesis. In this regard, the industrial revolution created a system in which laborers were isolated from the intense bureaucratic systems of the time. Consequently, any actions were performed only as a direct result of instructions from the powers at hand and not as direct choices made by these individuals. What this implies is that laborers were freed from responsibility for wrongdoings. It was therefore logical for Nazi Germany to depict this kind of dehumanization albeit in the extreme. German executioners were only deemed as part of the larger ideological machinery and they had no say in determining what was wrong or right. This was why most of these workers were not bound by moral principles as it was not their preserve to gauge the ethicality of their actions. Furthermore, some tools were created for this very purpose of industrializing killings. For instance, the utilization of guillotine was essential in making mass murder a sequential process much like industrial systems. In this regard, the author triumphs in bringing out how western pathologies like industrialization played a critical role in creating the Nazi violence.

Militarized mobilization was another tool that the author used in bringing out his argument. He states that all wars fought by many western nations had been characterized by the distinct military traits. For instance, the emphasis on obeying ones superiors and the intense discipline within most concentration camps have indicated that there are indeed elements borrowed from western depictions of violence. In the latter societies, most workers felt like they were in a military like situation since most of them merely carried out their duties without having any strong connection to their work. Similarly, Nazi executioners were in the same predicament. There were simply considered as agents for the Nazi cause.

Enzo Traverso also utilizes the colonization of Africa as another critical illustration of what was going on in western society. He is able to carefully demonstrate in a very thought provoking way how ingredients from colonization were instrumental in shaping Nazi ideology. The idea of racial preeminence was not a new one in Europe. In fact, most colonialists felt that they were entitled to domination of indigenous cultures such as those ones in Africa owing the fact that they were civilized. These thoughts were further supported by Darwinian principles which propagated survival of fit beings. Consequently, western imperialists assumed that they had the right to exercise power over other individuals without having to resort to peaceful means. Darwins theory also informed European colonization because it propagated extermination of inferior species so as to provide adequate room for utilization of the earths scarce resources. Imperialists therefore felt that they had either to expand and exterminate other inferior populations in order to enjoy scarce resources or die. Violence was a common form of domination in Africa and it should therefore not come as a surprise that citizens of Nazi Germany held the same beliefs. Once again, the author has carefully interwoven three very distinct theories i.e. Darwinism, colonialism and Nazism to advance his thesis and thus offered a convincing explanation for his initial assertions. (Traverso, 45)

As it can be seen the author is quite convincing in providing linkages and historical evidence for his assertions. His employment of broad ideologies which would not seem related in any way is quite admirable.

However, the author seems to be stuck between a rock and a hard place owing to the fact that not everything that occurred in the Holocaust was a consequence of western pathologies of violence. For instance, it is difficult to understand why Nazism cropped up in Germany alone and not in any other country. There must have been some events that occurred in this country alone and not in any other part of the world. In other words, it would have been enriching for this author if he accepted that there were some traditional explanations of the Holocaust that still held water until today. For instance Anti Bolshevism is a plausible argument for what occurred in this early twentieth century Germany. Traverso stubbornly refuses to advance this argument and boldly opposes assertions made by philosophers such as Nolte. In this regard, he believes that it was the combination of all the negative elements of European society such as racism and anti-humanism that eventually led to the appalling conditions in the Holocaust. Therefore, even though he states earlier in the book that he opposes anti-Bolshevism, he still ends up acknowledging why this was a critical factor in contributing towards the uniqueness within the latter country more so because it led to the existence of genocide at that time. (Paxton, 46)

It should be noted that the author was not completely overwhelmed by this dilemma of choosing western ideologies over internal political struggles in Germany because he is able to come out of it by proposing a merger between two important ideologies i.e. intolerance and antisocialism. Traverso explains that Germany was at a point in history when its middle class lived in the fear of the underclass and they felt that socialism would greatly empower this class and thus lead to their demise. The author further adds that this fear was complicated by racism. The convergence of these two issues was what explains the extreme effects that occurred in no other European country expect Germany. This implies that the author has managed to carefully merge internal dynamics in Germany and external forces especially from the general western society. In doing this, he has offered an in depth explanation into the Nazi Holocaust. However, he has deviated slightly from his thesis by supporting anti-Semitic explanations on the violence as this was a distinct German issue. (Spiegelman, 24)

While Traversos explanations are quite convincing, one cannot help but see some of the problems inherent in formation of a radically new explanation to the depiction of violence in Nazi Germany. Before looking at the book, as a reader, one can expect that the publication will unravel the triggers of the Nazi violence. In other words, the title hints that the author is going to provide a range of new insights and analyses into this historical tragedy. Also, one expects that the reader may review past theories and concepts but still endorse his own. While Traverso (160) did a relatively good job of achieving this, he still fell short of my expectations when I realized that most of the explanations he supported had been put out before. The Nazi violence has attracted a lot of literary review more so in social studies. Consequently, any author who intends on writing such a book is supposed to inject new perspectives on the matter and should avoid at all costs trying to replicate ideas held on the matter. As one goes through this book, there are familiar views held by sociologists like Arendt and Bauman and the author should have put in more effort in refining these views.

When one picks up such a title, one also expects the author to discuss possible triggers to all the different forms of violence in Nazi Germany. While Traverso did a very good job of explaining why the Jews were killed in an industrial like manner since he asserts that the concept was derived from the guillotine which emerged from the French revolution, he still does not convince readers why a huge percentage of the Jews and other undesirables were killed through individual interactions. In other words, not all the Jews died out of an industrial like killing operation since slightly over thirty nine percent of them were killed by one-on-one shootings. Also, there were other Jews who died as a result of neglect in the ghettos. Most of them did not have access to food and other basic requirements. They therefore succumbed to curable or preventable illnesses and died. These types of deaths have not been properly explained by the author and if he had done so then the book would have been more thorough or comprehensive.

A reader who has not read the book would also expect that such a title would endorse only those explanations that have more similarities than differences with the Nazi violence. For instance, Traverso frequently uses explanations put forward by Taylor on production where he asserts that economic efficiency is achieved through proper time management. The problem with this comparison is that the major purpose of Taylors principles was to reinforce economic efficiency. On the other hand, Nazism had the opposite effect on the economy as precedence was given to the needs of workers rather than to the needs of production. In fact, many historical books have cited instances in which the Nazi criticized capitalism and its effects on the masses. Hitlers party won a lot of support owing to the fact that it opposed economic exploitation of workers and treatment of people unfairly if they did not own property. Anti capitalism in the Third Reich was so rife that it was difficult to place production first. By using Taylors arguments on economic efficiency, the author is ignoring a very obvious part of Nazi Germany which was largely anti capitalist. (Paxton, 15)

Generally speaking though, the author has made huge generalizations both about early twentieth century Germany and western states in general. Whenever such assertions have been made in a book, then it is quite likely that those explanations will be questioned in the future and this may lead to heavy criticisms on the book. For instance, he makes it appear as though all western nations held the concepts of Darwinism and imperialism yet it is a known fact that numerous western nations did not all colonize other nations. One therefore wonders whether this was the best approach to assessment of such a system.

There is also a hint of irony in the book because its synopsis holds the view that the holocaust was a depiction of typical modern European values. In other words, the author believes that modernity was indeed characterized by all the negative elements that led to the Holocaust such as imperialism, colonialism and others. However, other sociologists do not consider such elements as real depictions of modernity. (Paxton, 103) Instead, they assert that these are deviations from its very real essence. Therefore while Traverso seeks to oppose the assertion that Nazism was a deviation from the norm, what he uses to compare Germany with is still not societys understanding of true modernity since civilized societies must look down upon violence in any form. One therefore doubts this authors assertions especially because his main assumption is questionable. In fact, if there are any readers with objections to this book, then it is likely that most of them may have issues trying to understand why this sociologist would choose to paint western societies in such a negative light.

Nonetheless, no piece of literature is ever without its flaws, consequently, one cannot write off all the originality that is synonymous to The Origins of Nazi violence. The writer presents his arguments in a systematic manner but for readers to fully understand it, then they must possess a background in sociology and social theories, history as well as political philosophies. In other words, this reading is not for those who are experiencing their first brush with philosophy as they could get lost in the vast sea of terminologies used by this author.

As one goes through the book, the synopsis frequently echoes in most of his points and even the conclusion that he makes is quite in line with previous assertions put out by the author. Each chapter is an attempt at bringing together various western depictions of violence and how these culminated into the Holocaust. Therefore, the author has done a thorough job in gluing together different pieces of evidences to support his starting arguments or his thesis statement. It is very clear that he has a rich knowledge of the subject matter and that his experience on this subject enables him to make such a bold declaration at the start of the book and then follow it through with plausible scientific or historic evidence.

One cannot accuse the author of been biased because he has not endorsed/ opposed any theory without explaining why he did so. For instance, he looks at the common theory of Nazism as a reaction to Bolshevik violence and then explains why this theory no longer holds water. He also nullifies such explanations using a series of historical sources which in the end only go to show how Nazism was a symptom of the norm in Europe rather than a deviation as held by previous philosophers. It is therefore difficult to reject these arguments because so many concepts have been cited to back them up. For instance, he uses eugenics, industrialization, anti-Semitism, anticommunism, mass murders after the first world war, slavery etc. All these concepts were prevalent in western societies and they were also depicted in Nazi Germany.

However, as stated earlier, the author placed too much emphasis on one form of violence i.e. mass murders and pays very little attention to one on one killings or death from hunger in Jewish isolation points. The author may have done this in order to render greater strength to his main assertions. Since a vast part of the book contains generalization and refers to holistic societies rather than specific individuals, then trying to bring in other forms of death such as personal killings would deviate from mass theories. However, this has greatly affected the overall outcome of the book because those familiar with the Holocaust would need insights on over fifty percent of the deaths that occurred through these other types of violence. (Levi and Rothberg, 15)

Conclusion

Generally speaking though, my expectations for the book were met, I was convinced by the authors main assertion since he first examined what had been done on the subject matter and then offered his take on it. His use of material and evidence throughout shows just how dedicated the author was to this piece of work. This is the major strength of the book. However, it major weakness lies in the fact that the author made wide assumptions on western societies and the concept of modernity in general. Also, his overemphasis on mass violence without looking into individual violence in Nazi Germany is another flaw. Lastly, it would have been better if the author also offered insights into Germany as a specific nation and not just Germany as part of the European continent.