We have been re-reading in recent days the diplomatic interactions between Herr Hitler and the British, just prior to the commencement of World War II. Of course, hindsight is always 20-20 vision. Things seem so obvious, clear, and plain now.
The numerous interactions with Hitler amongst the British leadership were grounded in a grand presumption: Hitler, it was assumed, shared the same basic mindset as all European leaders. Much of the interaction at top diplomatic levels reinforced the British conclusion that Hitler was "one of us". He was a man who could be reasoned with on universal common ground. Progressivist, pacifist ideology spurred them all on in a willing suspension of disbelief.
. . . A procession of progressive notables went to sound [Hitler] out in 1936. Arnold Toynbee pronounced him "sincere" and passed on his offer to send troops to defend Singapore. Lloyd George was much impressed by "the greatest German of the age." Lansbury was delighted to find Hitler "a total abstainer, non-smoker [and] vegetarian [who] likes children and old people," and wrote fulsomely of his desire for peace . . . . Hitler was adroit at playing up to such wishful thinking. [Robert Tombs, The English and Their History (New York: Alfred A. Knopf, 2015), p. 684.]Tombs goes on to describe the interactions between Chamberlain and Lord Halifax with Hitler and makes this striking observation: both men "were incapable of drawing the unpalatable conclusion--Hitler inhabited an alien mental and moral universe in which it was possible to want war, not peace."
It is easy in hindsight to see the folly of England's leaders in the 1930's. Yet the same puerile naive politicians afflict us in our own day. Consider the modern parallel to Nazi ideology: Islam. Hitler had told the world plainly what he really wanted in Mein Kampf. Few took him seriously, exhibiting a mixture of ignorance and condescension towards him. Many, many Western leaders, politicians, talking heads, and members of the Commentariat in our day have adopted precisely the same mien towards Islamic ideology and Islamic nations and towards dictator' like the North Korean leader Kim Jong-Un. All the talk about Holy War is not to be taken seriously. Scratch any Islamic leader and underneath you will find someone who has the same value system as us, blah, blah.
The working assumption of crass idiots like Barack Obama is that all the talk of Armageddon and the final eschatological battle with infidels and the subjugation of all men to the sword of Allah is nothing more than empty posturing--of exactly the same ilk that Western politicians display when they are running for office. No-one takes all their promises and pledges or threats seriously; once elected, moderating compromises follow. Islamic leaders and nations are precisely the same. Turkey and Saudi Arabia are offered as classic examples.
In reality, the spirit of Neville Chamberlain is much more common in our day than many understand. One just has to reflect for a short moment on the "deal" offered Iran by President Obama as a prime example. It is Chamberlainesque in its mien and mentality. Yet it is also "pure Obama". Arrogant, superior, condescending, and excessively naive. Progressive ideology blinded the politicians of England in the 1930's. The same ideology blinds Western political leaders today in their dealings with Islamic nations and movements.
They operate in an unreal, fantasy world. But reality always bites eventually.
No comments:
Post a Comment