apologist – Observations and Misunderstandings

Hitler was an interesting character. Strange opening statement I admit but I got your attention. I imagine he was quite the complex chap. I was thinking about him today, not nostalgically just thinking. We learn about Hitler in school and then in regular programmes or cultural references. Ultimately we alway learn about him as being evil personified. This isn’t me about to defend the man, he was responsible for the suffering of millions, but beyond him being a vegetarian and nature lover we never hear much else about his character than he was evil. We’ve created this monster who we hear had no redeemable qualities, even the vegetarian nature lover doesn’t get talked about because it would conflict with the desired narrative.

It’s strange, I feel that I can’t say anything except for bad things about him otherwise I must be an apologist for all his atrocities. And why would I feel the need to defend such a man. I’m not though because to do such a thing would be an attempt to humanise him and this is exactly what people aim not to do. I don’t know what good things he did in his life or what kind of person he was before whatever series of traumatic events happened that led him on this path, but i doubt he wasn’t born evil. We have dehumanised him to such an extent that he is seen as offering nothing positive but he was followed and loved by a nation, they weren’t all just scared of him or manipulated. People wanted to follow him and did. There is a very powerful narrative we follow surrounding him.

This could go for countless despots, I’m sure Stalin loved and cared for his grandchildren. I’m sure Pol Pot once held a woman in his arms that he loved and who loved him back. I’m sure even Pinochet laughed at a joke once. And let’s not forget Hitler taking a walk in a meadow, picking flowers, watching deer romp and coming home to a tofu steak. The point is not one of defence because these were abhorrent men but more of the complex nature of narratives and the human condition. It’s strange to think of people who have committed such crimes as having humanity but they weren’t total evil one hundred percent of the time. These are extremes but it’s always interesting to step back from an idea and see the long formation of a particular narrative surrounding it.

Contemporary morality is an interesting beast. I was just discussing Tin Tin and looking at the chronological order of his stories, and while I enjoyed them as I child I have forgotten most now. In the process of this I discovered that his first story was about him traveling to the Soviet Union to take on some corrupt Soviets officials. Hergé it turns out wrote his Tin Tin stories for the children’s section of a conservative newspaper called Le Vingtième Siècle which at the time was attempting to gently align itself with the Nationalist cause, something far more shady and unsavoury than current versions despite all the protestations – although time will tell. Hergé himself was traditionally right wing and after the war was accused of being a collaborator for his participation in a nationalist newspaper in Belgium while under Nazi occupation. His first story was directly and intentionally anti-Communist, with his second even more controversial as he sends Tin Tin to The Congo.

There have been many calls to limit the production of this second story with it’s racist caricatures and stereotypes, not to mention the Belgian history of imperialism and genocide in the Congo only decades earlier. Looking at other stories of his it is likely his interactions with Native Americans would be politically incorrect, and most likely racist by modern standards and don’t even get me started on the horrors committed towards the Scots when Tin Tin goes north. The problem though is whether we should ban these stories. Were his trip to the Congo to be produced now there is no doubt it would be written with racist intentions and should be viewed and dealt with accordingly. Banned, I don’t know, because you enter a minefield of grey areas of hate speech and freedom of speech, but definitely a productive reaction would be necessary. Now it would be the same story with the same images, and it was written by someone with nationalistic and racially surperior ideals but the idea of banning it horrifies me. Perhaps I’m being an apologist for the times, as anti-fascism is not a new thing, but intentional or unintentional racism was arguably more commonplace now than then. The truth is we have no idea how people in the future will judge us for what appears normal and acceptable now as abhorrent in one hundred years. Winston Churchill is admired by many but he was a racist imperialist. The reality is many people were, and that isn’t an excuse because racism in any form is disgusting but Tin Tin was a man of his time. In many ways it is a fascinating historical document. Our morality is debatable, contemporary morality is evolving at ever faster rates, Tin Tin may have been a racist but he had a cool dog and a mate named after a fish, I’ll resist the temptation to throw him in the fireplace of time just yet.

Tag: apologist

Hitler The Humane

Tin Tin the Racist