Throughout history, propaganda and censorship have been instrumental in capitalism and in government. Manipulative strategies have been used by the third reich and American Eagle alike. Scapegoating, through techniques like transfer and pinpointing, has always been there on the personal level and on the grander level, and its popularity will remain. Scapegoating is used because propaganda that promotes fear and blame towards a weakened minority will find more success in control than propaganda that doesn’t choose a target.
To provide context, Adolf Hitler rose to power in a Germany and in a world that were already filled with antisemitism. In fact, even the United States of America was dripping with it. Henry Ford, celebrated american automobile …show more content…
Confidence in the regime was made stronger by the belief that supporters were simply better, more respectable people than those who opposed the regime, as was apparently so in the case of Hans Hubermann. Hans painted over slanderous graffiti on the door of a Jewish shop, and public perception of him was immediately changed. In Death’s own words, “Hans was lucky that they didn’t revoke his membership application officially.” (pg. 124) It seems that calling Hans’ act of charity despicable allowed the preservers of the status quo the moral high ground, so of course they would continue to call it despicable. The German’s weren’t just accepting of the racist ideals they were made to hold fast to; they were very welcoming to them, as it allowed them to revel in their false …show more content…
This is therefore proof that Hitler didn’t strengthen antisemitism’s hold just because of his own prejudices (though he was surely not lacking in those); he did it to cash in on the benefits that giving the German people something to hate would reward him with. His decision to blame minorities on suffering increased Germany’s sense of racial and national superiority and pride, and their patriotism helped him greatly, because for every doubtful German there was, there were even more uber-patriots. Frau Diller, a shop-owner in Molching, was on the vitriolic jingoist end of that spectrum. “...her shop lived for the Third Reich… she was known to… donate the money to the Nazi Party. On the wall behind her... was a framed photo of the Führer. If you walked into her shop and didn’t say ‘heil Hitler,’ you wouldn’t be served.” (pg. 35) When a person like Frau Diller exists in a neighborhood, it is impossible for there to not be pro-Nazi, anti-semitic flavors in the air. Having citizens that, with just a little push, took to heart and furthered their agenda was of clear benefit to the Reich. The previously-emphasized importance of community is quite controllable when the most hateful and influential among the citizens also has propaganda stick quickest to them. Frau Diller was clearly the type of person who wants someone to blame, and her shop put her in a position of influence. Frau Diller is not the only one of
To provide context, Adolf Hitler rose to power in a Germany and in a world that were already filled with antisemitism. In fact, even the United States of America was dripping with it. Henry Ford, celebrated american automobile …show more content…
Confidence in the regime was made stronger by the belief that supporters were simply better, more respectable people than those who opposed the regime, as was apparently so in the case of Hans Hubermann. Hans painted over slanderous graffiti on the door of a Jewish shop, and public perception of him was immediately changed. In Death’s own words, “Hans was lucky that they didn’t revoke his membership application officially.” (pg. 124) It seems that calling Hans’ act of charity despicable allowed the preservers of the status quo the moral high ground, so of course they would continue to call it despicable. The German’s weren’t just accepting of the racist ideals they were made to hold fast to; they were very welcoming to them, as it allowed them to revel in their false …show more content…
This is therefore proof that Hitler didn’t strengthen antisemitism’s hold just because of his own prejudices (though he was surely not lacking in those); he did it to cash in on the benefits that giving the German people something to hate would reward him with. His decision to blame minorities on suffering increased Germany’s sense of racial and national superiority and pride, and their patriotism helped him greatly, because for every doubtful German there was, there were even more uber-patriots. Frau Diller, a shop-owner in Molching, was on the vitriolic jingoist end of that spectrum. “...her shop lived for the Third Reich… she was known to… donate the money to the Nazi Party. On the wall behind her... was a framed photo of the Führer. If you walked into her shop and didn’t say ‘heil Hitler,’ you wouldn’t be served.” (pg. 35) When a person like Frau Diller exists in a neighborhood, it is impossible for there to not be pro-Nazi, anti-semitic flavors in the air. Having citizens that, with just a little push, took to heart and furthered their agenda was of clear benefit to the Reich. The previously-emphasized importance of community is quite controllable when the most hateful and influential among the citizens also has propaganda stick quickest to them. Frau Diller was clearly the type of person who wants someone to blame, and her shop put her in a position of influence. Frau Diller is not the only one of