In this picture, a political leader, Mussolini, is perhaps trying to persuade the people of the need to go to war. He was a strong, domineering character yet fundamentally he was like many other men. But because of his ambition he acquired different priorities, both good and bad. Consequently his mental agenda was different. Due to his all-powerful position, his whims could become national policies and practices. His Definition of Human Being might be 'let the strongest man lead and the rest follow'.
Another, more effectively ruthless leader was Adolf Hitler. He faced the same political, economic and international difficulties and sought to solve them by dictatorship and irresistable power. He crushed German political opposition, annihilated the Jews whom he accused of manipulating the economy, and began to take over neighbouring countries by military invasion. When he delivered his infamous speeches what was uppermost in his mind? How did he square his morality with his immoral thoughts and actions?
Hitler, like Mussolini, did much good in his own country and succeeded to the extent he did by raising Germany out of poverty, but he failed to appreciate that only humantrue values could prevail whereas dictatorship was bound to fail, as it always had, because one dominant conscious Machine-mind cannot represent a whole peoples' thinking, and the whole people will not long wholeheartedly follow false doctrines.
Hitler was the product of a severely oppressed childhood and an unpromising early adulthood which nevertheless conspired to raise him to power, power which he eventually assumed as of right, aided particularly by his gift for fervent oratory. He wanted to benefit the German people but well knew that this required iron ruthlessness if it were to be accomplished. In this way, war and the holocaust could be justified, particularly by a supreme leader who could remain personally aloof from their horrors.
That the terrible events of the Nazi era were ordered meant that those orders had to be carried out. The gross inhumanities which the personal nightmares and vanities of a sick mind could justify became the public duties of his obedient henchmen who would explain their bloody actions as necessary to an overall plan for good.
The German people, at least vaguely aware of all this but swayed by fervent patriotism, were for a long time willing to remain in a state of denial. In this way individual minds may be conditioned to the point where true morality can be overridden and obscured.
Make no mistake, in their circumstances you or I could have done just as the Nazi Germans did. And given the same traumatic childhood and later background, many of us could have ended up as Hitler himself, driven as he was by the sequence of events which he had initiated and which brought him to his doom.
In a humantrue society dictatorship could not happen. Individuals would not consent to gather in crowds and be harangued. There would be no politics. There would be no Machine, consequently no weapons or readiness for war. Rather than be grouped into separate nations represented by single leaders, the people would be represented by their individual selves, supraconsciously united in common acceptance of the humantrue moral code. Whatever that code told them was right to do the people would do, and whatever it told them was wrong to do, they would not do. Such is a true Definition of Human Being.
Pt.VII REALISATION
DECIDING THE CONSTITUTION
Original Chapter
42 Definition of Human Being
Subchapters
42a St Peters Square
42b Keeping Order
42c Autoprogress
42d Hierarchical Pyramids
42e The Great Depression
42f Reform
42g Dictatorship
42h Inverting the Pyramid
42j Community
42k Moral Guide
Next Chapters
43 Code of Individual Behaviour
44 Framework of Life
Back to Home Page INDEX.htm