On the first shabbat of the year, swastikas appeared in Melbourne. Between you and me, I haven’t been my chatty self since then. At some point on or around January 5, I was struck by confusion, then silence.
Whereof one cannot speak, thereof one must be silent is good advice. It’s not much use to the reporter. On January 5, I set off to the beach for Crikey to document the ethno-nationalist rise. Still, you never heard a word from me.
You heard about it, though. You heard the thing condemned. Not even Murdoch press had the stomach for a homemade SS helmet worn in Melbourne’s Jewish heart. Scott Morrison himself addressed those demanding what they claimed were sensible immigration policies. Reference to “sensible immigration policies” wouldn’t have been my first choice of reproach in this case, but, I am not prime minister.
I am, however a local. My neighbourhood is the neighbourhood of the world’s largest population of Holocaust survivors outside Israel. I’m neither Jewish nor a death camp survivor so I will not say that I know the pain a swastika can produce. I will say that when it was painted on a children’s playground by a synagogue and stuck to the front of a Jewish old folks’ home on my bus-route on the first shabbat of the year, I found I had nothing much to say.
I have nothing much to say about the rally. I spoke with several people on the side opposed to fantasy Sudanese violence and none of them said a thing that sounded true. I asked a woman from Balwyn North to state her profession and she answered, “concerned mum”. I asked her to state her reason for attending, she said, “We want the Australian way of life back as it was.”
Another man used the same words. I asked her him explain his use of the majestic plural, and “we” referred me to back to speaker, Blair Cottrell. “Blair actually stated this was nothing to do with racism.” I asked him if she didn’t think young Blair, who has declared his faith in Hitler and Hitler’s memoir, might not be a touch on the Nazi side. He said that I had bought the lies of a corrupt corporate media.
In sum, it was the sort of conversation you’d have with a real-life Pepe the Frog. You tell the fascist they’re a fascist and they deny it with a joke. I have read in online glossaries that this is known as “hiding power-level”, but who knows what they’re calling it now The only thing to know is the trick of fascist deception.
The extremists are the counter-protesters beyond the police. The Nazi gestures are a joke to make fun of the extremists. The date of the peaceful, non-racist protest was held 100 years to the day after the formation of the German Workers’ Party as a joke.
This joke is hardly new. I believe that Goebbels wrote it. It proceeds: “Knock Knock. Who’s There? It’s literally Hitler. Which is to say, the hallucination of a mind warped by corrupt elites; political correctness gone mad.
I had not yet gone mad. I was saved by Walter Benjamin, a German Jewish intellectual whose eventual suicide at 48 was not his own madness, but that of the Nazi regime. Benjamin understood that Hitler was a show. His function was deception. Fascism is deception and an aesthetic victory over reality. Leni Riefenstahl’s films; shiny boots; speeches praising total war. These are all attempts to pull a mass of people into order with the deception that they’ll soon be free.
When you know just a little about Goebbels and the very bad jokes he wrote for Hitler, you can see that “literally Hitler” is a bad but effective joke. As repellent as it was listening to a Nazi telling me the darnedest things, it didn’t shut me up. It didn’t shut up the counter protestors, either, who were largely old hands. They’d heard the Nazi joke before. What did shut me up was the shock that no one else seemed to remember it.
Frankly, I blame Mike Carlton. The guy owes me for every word I haven’t written in three months. I was sorting out my notes and my digital recordings to finish my report and I thought, “I’ll just have a look on the socials.” Carlton had declared that these Nazis weren’t real Nazis but, “fat, white, bogan, sub-IQ males desperate for a root.” Alan Sunderland, ABC’s head of editorial policy more or less, agreed.
Notwithstanding the relative care taken by many in media at the time of the rally not to pull some “No True Nazi” act of snobbery, this ignorance reappeared. The failure to get the bad joke and to identify precisely with the antisemitic lies the Nazi tells about the powerful ruling class Jew, Australian media and Australia’s media figures began to fulfil the fantasy written for them by fascists.
The articles about Pauline Hanson’s idiocy. The claims that Fraser Anning couldn’t spell. The constant, devastating barrage of “Nazis are just fat white bogans who never read immersive novels” has not ceased. Not even for Christchurch.
It is a conscious choice not to name the twits still feeding this fiction in every outlet that they can. It is my hope that with a little patience, those younger than Sunderland and Carlton can learn to fear the image of the Reichstag as the Reichstag itself. It is on the advice of Crikey’s Shakira Hussein, who accompanied me to the rally, that I urge all protests to answer the Nazis only with an egg. The challenge to Nazi grammar is nowhere near as potent as the lowest obscenity.
The sign of Shoah was painted on a playground. Those who lived in its shadow woke up to find it on their front door. 51 souls are dead. We’ve been telling Australia’s best-known ethno-nationalist that she’s not as bright as we are for 23 years and her mob of liars are on the rise.
It’s not a crime to forget the title of a book. It’s a crime to forget how power instrumentalises our snobbery.
Welcome back aitch, you have been much missed on my screen.
Bloody champion to see you too, STH
Well said.
Well said.
Please add my welcome back, you’ve been missed Helen. Thanks for your work today. Every point hit home. On Carlton, reading his auto bio explained for me why he is up himself and doesn’t get it. Like Hillary “deplorables” Clinton. The elitism of fascism has so much in common with other snobbery. It’s always reassuring to piss downstream on those losers on the mudflats.
One of your best Helen.
A warm welcome back, Helen! I’ve greatly missed your column. I’m also glad that you spent some time thinking and researching about this topic. (There’s probably no topic I wouldn’t say that about, but I think this topic is uh… topical, and am glad you chose to explore it.)
I didn’t quite understand your intro and framing though. You say you were disturbed enough that you couldn’t write on this topic (fair enough) so you claim you couldn’t write on anything else while you were researching it?
I’m sorry but I don’t believe that: I can believe you mightn’t have wanted to, but not that you couldn’t. As you said, you’re not a survivor of some systematic fascistic trauma. This is undoubtedly a topic of genuine concern for you, but do you claim to be so personally invested that it’s crippling you?
If so, then why now? As you know, I lost my wife to tragedy last year: it didn’t cripple my ability to write on any topics, though it certainly killed my desire to write on some. What you claimed made no sense to me. It read as though you were claiming added authority from what you had written by an appeal to what you hadn’t.
But did you even need to frame it that way?
To find out, I stripped that argument away in my mind, and then looked at what you had left. Here’s the sense I made of it:
1. It’s hard to say anything sensible about people putting a reasonable-seeming face on collective unreason;
2. This collective, tribal unreason is also intrinsically menacing, which makes laughing it off dangerous;
3. Nevertheless it’s also farcical which makes engaging it with reason futile;
4. In response, you favour incessant humiliation of its activism, as opposed to debate of its ideas, or the parody of the people who hold them;
5. You’re also concerned that if popular media tries to make reasonable people feel superior to unreasonable, menacing people, it will also make them needlessly complacent.
Actually, I think that’s a pretty sensible position, except that I have the following concerns:
1. I think the parodies are inevitable, intrinsically preferable to that violent clashes that protest without humour often devolves into, and also desirable because — in principle at least — they’ll deter others from the seduction of ethno-nationalistic entitlement. You mightn’t be able to parody zealots out of enjoying the privilege that can come from whipping up unreasonable positions with fellow zealots, but you can certainly help strip them of potential future followers;
2. I’m also concerned that systematised, incessant humiliation is fundamentally a bullying tactic. I’m not saying that makes it wrong in this instance: the means are sometimes effective (e.g. Sn Anning certainly didn’t come out of it looking good), and I’d be happy for you to argue that there are no other effective means (which you didn’t really argue, but you might try.) However, if you advocate it then you need to sign up to the position that you believe sometimes socially normative bullying is both excusable and desirable, and hold that you can decide when it is, how much to use it and where to draw the line (and if you argue that, I’d love to see it);
3. Thank you for the links, but I confess that I was appalled to read Mike Carlton’s twitter feed. A number of Crikey’s journalists are now self-proclaimed post-twitterati, but as I don’t read YouTwitFace I have no idea who’s using what. However, Cartlon’s disappointingly unprofessional behaviour aside, I considered the ‘who is and who is not a Nazi’ debate to be pointless and missing a far better point that Prof Marcia Langton brought up in the same feed: as a cultural identity, Nazism is nearly impossible to define; it’s the political stance of fascism that’s the real issue, and that’s graduated but objectively evaluable. In any case, I think referencing that appalling pile of post-journalistic crap did neither your argument nor your own professional credibility any favours.
Regardless, it’s a good topic, Helen, and I share your concern. Like you I have no answers I’m confident with: fascism seems to me a primate behaviour rather than a cultural one, so it may not admit a simple cultural solution. If it is a primate behaviour then its key triggers may be environmental/economic, and the cultural triggers might be merely symptoms. But I don’t know: I’d love to see a longitudinal metastudy on it.
In any case, I’m glad you’re thinking about it, appreciated your thoughts and would welcome more of them. However at this point I felt that you had no answers I’d be comfortable in using.
Thank Christ for that. Razer’s back and nailing it again.