RyanX
The Living Force
I want to thank Approaching Infinity for his article here that does a great job of introducing this book and the topics therein:
Ponerology 101: Psychopathy at Nuremburg
I found a copy of this book through the library here and just finished reading it last week. I must say, that reading Political Ponerology is a useful primer to this book, just because it ties up many of the ideas that Gilbert tries to express in a verbose and technical manner. That being said, I think Gilbert's descriptions of the high-ranking Nazi personalities and the observations of how they interacted socially, are priceless when it comes to understanding just how a pathocracy functions. I'll try to relay what I recall of this book from memory, since I've had to return it to the library already.
The book starts off with a description of historical background in Nazi Germany and how some of the latent psychological tenancies in the population paved the way for Hitler's and the Nazis' brand of pathology. Gilbert describes what was known about Hitler's upbringing and his pathological tenancies as a young man. He then goes on to describe his escapades with the National Socialists and their rise to power.
Gilbert places a big emphasis on what he calls the "authoritarian culture lag", which is his description of what he considers the reason behind the revolutionary activity in Germany (and in other revolutions past and present). The idea here is that when a society transitions from autocratic authoritarian government to democracy, there is still a large chunk of the population that is stuck in authoritarian mode and does not grasp the concept of self-government. It is this transition period that is most dangerous as this tends to be when people will condone horribly immoral leadership that offers them the safety of an authoritarian regime to satisfy some deep seated sense of security.
Based on what I've read of Ponerology, I question whether this adequately explains all cases where a nation plunges in a totalitarian dictatorship. It certainly fits the context of Europe during those times, but what about the shift to fascism in American today from an otherwise seemingly democratic culture? This is where I think Lobeczewski's concept of pathocracy fits the facts better than Gilbert's "authoritarian culture lag". Gilberts seems to be somewhat stuck in the ideological web of his times and interpreting the facts through this lens.
The next part of the book deals with a handful of high ranking Nazis who he was able to spend time with under observation. Gilbert was a psychologist in the Nuremberg prison where these Nazis were held and spent about a years time with them before they were either executed or turned loose. What amazed me from Gilbert's description is how efficiently the Nazi leadership was structured around the aim of carrying out the greatest possible destruction. Hitler really did have an uncanny ability to utilize his people in this way. This isn't entirely surprising for those who've read Political Ponerology.
Gilbert describes a handful of high ranking Nazis: Hermann Goering as the brute narcissist driven only by the chance to hurt others and self glory; Rudolf Hess as the near complete paranoid schizophrenic with a mystical bent; Hans Frank, the lawyer and then governor of Poland, who went through a religious conversion in prison, attempting to atone his sins for making a pact with the devil; Franz von Papen, the morally weak diplomat who chose abdication over resistance after the Nazis shot his own personal assistants; Joachim von Ribbentrop, the wanna-be aristocrat, who became the sycophantic yes-man for Hitler throughout his tenure; Wilhelm Keitel, the technocrat and morally weak general who relayed Hitler's demands to the military to march all over Europe; Rudolf Höss, the psychopathic administrator of Auschwitz under Himmler, who oversaw the death of sometimes 8000 people per day — enabling more mass murder than any man in history. All of these individuals were picked by Hitler (the exception being Höss, who was picked directly by Himmler) based on their various pathological strengths and moral weaknesses. As AI mentions in his article, it's a shame that they weren't able to study these men over a longer time period and learn more of the intimate details about what made them, and the Nazi regime, tick.
The final section of the book talks about Gilbert's own interpretation of the psycho-dyanmics involved in the Nazi leadership as well as within the whole of German society. One can tell from reading this that he is describing a lot of the same features of pathocracy that Lobeczewski does, although in the psychological jargon of his time. Gilbert comes to express the notion that nations are not so much shaped by individual personalities directly, that is until one of those personalities becomes a dictator. At that point, a nation is directly shaped the individual pathologies of the dictator. Gilbert interprets the factors leading up to dictatorial take-over as being mostly social stresses that weaken the moral resolve of otherwise average people. He doesn't quite see the slow chipping away by psychopaths making inroads to the positions of leadership as a factor in the overall ponerogenesis of a nation.
Overall, I'd have to say this is a useful book for those who want to dive deeper into the understanding of pathocracy or have an interest in this period of German history.
Ponerology 101: Psychopathy at Nuremburg
I found a copy of this book through the library here and just finished reading it last week. I must say, that reading Political Ponerology is a useful primer to this book, just because it ties up many of the ideas that Gilbert tries to express in a verbose and technical manner. That being said, I think Gilbert's descriptions of the high-ranking Nazi personalities and the observations of how they interacted socially, are priceless when it comes to understanding just how a pathocracy functions. I'll try to relay what I recall of this book from memory, since I've had to return it to the library already.
The book starts off with a description of historical background in Nazi Germany and how some of the latent psychological tenancies in the population paved the way for Hitler's and the Nazis' brand of pathology. Gilbert describes what was known about Hitler's upbringing and his pathological tenancies as a young man. He then goes on to describe his escapades with the National Socialists and their rise to power.
Gilbert places a big emphasis on what he calls the "authoritarian culture lag", which is his description of what he considers the reason behind the revolutionary activity in Germany (and in other revolutions past and present). The idea here is that when a society transitions from autocratic authoritarian government to democracy, there is still a large chunk of the population that is stuck in authoritarian mode and does not grasp the concept of self-government. It is this transition period that is most dangerous as this tends to be when people will condone horribly immoral leadership that offers them the safety of an authoritarian regime to satisfy some deep seated sense of security.
Based on what I've read of Ponerology, I question whether this adequately explains all cases where a nation plunges in a totalitarian dictatorship. It certainly fits the context of Europe during those times, but what about the shift to fascism in American today from an otherwise seemingly democratic culture? This is where I think Lobeczewski's concept of pathocracy fits the facts better than Gilbert's "authoritarian culture lag". Gilberts seems to be somewhat stuck in the ideological web of his times and interpreting the facts through this lens.
The next part of the book deals with a handful of high ranking Nazis who he was able to spend time with under observation. Gilbert was a psychologist in the Nuremberg prison where these Nazis were held and spent about a years time with them before they were either executed or turned loose. What amazed me from Gilbert's description is how efficiently the Nazi leadership was structured around the aim of carrying out the greatest possible destruction. Hitler really did have an uncanny ability to utilize his people in this way. This isn't entirely surprising for those who've read Political Ponerology.
Gilbert describes a handful of high ranking Nazis: Hermann Goering as the brute narcissist driven only by the chance to hurt others and self glory; Rudolf Hess as the near complete paranoid schizophrenic with a mystical bent; Hans Frank, the lawyer and then governor of Poland, who went through a religious conversion in prison, attempting to atone his sins for making a pact with the devil; Franz von Papen, the morally weak diplomat who chose abdication over resistance after the Nazis shot his own personal assistants; Joachim von Ribbentrop, the wanna-be aristocrat, who became the sycophantic yes-man for Hitler throughout his tenure; Wilhelm Keitel, the technocrat and morally weak general who relayed Hitler's demands to the military to march all over Europe; Rudolf Höss, the psychopathic administrator of Auschwitz under Himmler, who oversaw the death of sometimes 8000 people per day — enabling more mass murder than any man in history. All of these individuals were picked by Hitler (the exception being Höss, who was picked directly by Himmler) based on their various pathological strengths and moral weaknesses. As AI mentions in his article, it's a shame that they weren't able to study these men over a longer time period and learn more of the intimate details about what made them, and the Nazi regime, tick.
The final section of the book talks about Gilbert's own interpretation of the psycho-dyanmics involved in the Nazi leadership as well as within the whole of German society. One can tell from reading this that he is describing a lot of the same features of pathocracy that Lobeczewski does, although in the psychological jargon of his time. Gilbert comes to express the notion that nations are not so much shaped by individual personalities directly, that is until one of those personalities becomes a dictator. At that point, a nation is directly shaped the individual pathologies of the dictator. Gilbert interprets the factors leading up to dictatorial take-over as being mostly social stresses that weaken the moral resolve of otherwise average people. He doesn't quite see the slow chipping away by psychopaths making inroads to the positions of leadership as a factor in the overall ponerogenesis of a nation.
Overall, I'd have to say this is a useful book for those who want to dive deeper into the understanding of pathocracy or have an interest in this period of German history.
