The Scientific Origins of National Socialism by Daniel Gasman

Author:Daniel Gasman [Gasman, Daniel]
Language: eng
Format: epub
Tags: Communism; Post-Communism & Socialism, Political Science, General, Political Ideologies
ISBN: 9781351474542
Google: UxwuDwAAQBAJ
Goodreads: 35864877
Publisher: Routledge
Published: 2004-05-20T00:00:00+00:00

Chapter Four

Monism, the Corporative State and Eugenics

THE modern theory of the totalitarian fasciststate was adumbrated by the political and social ideology advanced by Haeckel and his followers. Its major assumptions and proposals were in all important respects identical with the political and social program of later twentieth-century National Socialism. It was, in fact, the unique political contribution of the Haeckelian Monists to bring together for the first time into one unified theory, under the auspices of science, the idea of the organically constituted corporative and racial state, of authoritarian state power, and of eugenics as a means of strengthening the political and social structure of Germany.1

As in most areas of Monist policy and belief it was Haeckel once again who set down the broad principles upon which his followers were able to elaborate a more complete program of social and political action. In an important and influential address, ‘Ueber Arbeitstheilung in Natur- und Menschenleben,’2 delivered in Berlin in December of 1868, and in his Natürliche Schöpfungsgeschichte, published in the same year, Haeckel provided the theoretical basis for the Monist political program. A society’s level of culture, he argued, stood in direct relation to the extent of the division of labor in society. Primitive societies were characterized by little division of labor, but in modern, advanced civilization there was a steadily increasing ‘differentiation’ of tasks.3 In fact, the enormous productivity and diversity of modern life could be traced to the division of labor itself. In the organization of society men fell naturally into their various occupations, classes, and estates. Their abilities determined their social rank and, given the free operation of natural laws, the actual place a man held in society was a true reflection of his talents. ‘It is natural and necessary that the progressive division of labor constantly furthers mankind, and urges every individual branch of human activity into new discoveries and improvements. Thus progress itself universally depends on differentiation.’4

Clearly, Haeckel’s strong defense and glorification of the division of labor was, in reality, an attack on both bourgeois liberal and socialist conceptions of society. His position implied opposition to the egalitarian individualism of the ideology of the French Revolution and to the Marxian theory of class conflict. Since men, according to Haeckel, were unequal, it appeared to him to be natural for them to participate in society only to the extent of their abilities and to carry out their work in a cooperative and harmonious way for the benefit of the entire community. In place of individual and natural rights and the competition and movement of free and equal individuals, Haeckel stressed the importance of the bonds of community and the mutual obligation of every individual to society.5 In the same way, he wrote, in which the ‘old Golden Rule of morals’ has characterized ‘narrow personal relations,’so too should it become the ‘norm within the state’ and ‘guide the conduct of the different social classes to each other.’6 For Haeckel, therefore, the division of labor was an accurate reflection

Download

Copyright Disclaimer:
This site does not store any files on its server. We only index and link to content provided by other sites. Please contact the content providers to delete copyright contents if any and email us, we'll remove relevant links or contents immediately.