I see more and more parallels between the Obama administration and that of Engelbert Dollfuss who preceded Hitler and who, along with his successor Schuschnigg, prepared the way for the invasion of Hitler and the NAZIfication of Austria. Dollfuss and Schuschnigg were viewed as moderates. They feverishly crushed the left (which was far more to the left than the American left) and established a dictatorship. I do not think that Obama, in his wildest dreams, would ever want to establish a dictatorship. Far from it.
But, Obama is so unwilling, so unable to respond with strength to the extreme right in the United States that he is, perhaps unwittingly moving further and further to the right himself. I believe Obama sees himself as a moderate (as did Dollfuss initially), but Obama does not seem to stand up strongly enough for moderation. He is abandoning commitments to civil rights issues -- to privacy issues and to the promise that no one is above the law -- in order to appease the right.
I admit that I see history through the prism of my knowledge of German history, but we need to keep that history in mind as we go through this terrible economic period which is so similar to the period that preceded WWII.
I quote from Wikipedia:
Dollfuss became Chancellor on May 20, 1932 as head of a coalition government, with the pressing goal of tackling the problems of the Great Depression, in a state (post-Versailles Austria) that was economically disadvantaged by the loss of a large part of the former Austro-Hungarian empire's manufacturing industry situated in Bohemia and Moravia. Much of Austria-Hungary's industry had been situated in the areas that were separated into Czechoslovakia and Yugoslavia with the Treaty of Versailles, and thus this manufacturing power was lost to Austria after World War I. Dollfuss's majority in Parliament was marginal (he had only a one-vote majority).
Dollfuss as dictator of Austria
In March 1933, an argument arose over irregularities in the voting procedure. The president of the National Council (the lower house) resigned to be able to cast a vote as a parliament member. As a consequence the two vice presidents, belonging to other parties, resigned as well to be able to vote. As a consequence, the parliament could not conclude the session due to formal reasons. Dollfuss took the resignation of all three presidents as a pretext to declare that the National Council had become unworkable, and advised President Wilhelm Miklas to issue a decree adjourning it indefinitely. When the National Council wanted to reconvene days after the resignation of the three presidents, Dollfuss barred entrance to parliament by police force, effectively eliminating democracy in Austria. From that point onwards he governed as dictator by emergency decree with absolute power.
One motive of Dollfuss' actions was that with Adolf Hitler becoming German Chancellor in 1933, it looked increasingly likely that the Austrian National Socialists (DNSAP) would gain a significant minority in future elections. On the other hand, the Soviet Union's influence in Europe had increased throughout the 1920s and early 1930s. Dollfuss thus banned the DNSAP in June 1933 and the communists later on. Under the banner of Christian Social Party, he later on established a one-party dictatorship rule largely modelled after fascism in Italy, banning all other Austrian parties including the Social Democrats.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Engelbert_Dollfuss
Obama needs to fight against extremes on both sides. Generally, for leaders in his situation it is easier to crush the left than the right. (Of course, the situations are quite different because the left in Austria and Germany was more militant that is the left in the U.S -- at least so far and hopefully in the future.) In crushing the left, leaders tend to go too far because it is so easy and makes them look strong at a time when the nation calls for strong leadership.
During the Bush administration, frustrated left-thinking Americans read books and wrote. Now that the right-wingers are frustrated, they are buying guns and ammunition (which they have the right to do). The problem with that is that the left (and I am using that term in a relative sense because Keith Olbermann is hardly really "left-wing" in the traditional European sense), is just so easy to beat up. Taking on the right is harder. Obama, wishing to unite the nation for common goals is more likely to compromise the issues dear to the left because it's just easier.
See also http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kurt_Schuschnigg
See also the very interesting book, The Lost City in which John Gunther tells the story of the events in Austria in the early 1930s from the perspective of an American reporter in Vienna, Austria. The writing is not the greatest. The first chapters are a bit slow to get into, and there are a lot of cultural references that may confuse the American reader. In addition, Gunther introduces a lot of important characters and resolving the issues of so many characters is maybe overly complex for such a novel. --
Nevertheless, the book is well worth reading because the parallels to our country and our time are just uncanny right down to the financial fraud, the bank failures and the cover-up and complicity of politicians.
Printer-friendly format
Email this thread to a friend
Bookmark this thread
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
