Skip to content

独裁者的成功之路

独裁者的成功之路

我们翻译这篇文章的理由

“现代人生活在幻觉中,他自以为知道自己想要的东西是什么,而实际上他想要的只不过是别人期望他要的东西。”

——弗洛姆

👇

为什么人们会追捧暴君?

作者:David Livingstone Smith

译者:朱小钊

校对:罗玉池

推荐:泮海伦

策划:罗玉池& 刘小康

Why we love tyrants

为什么人们会追捧暴君?

Psychoanalysis explains how authoritarians energise hatred, self-pity and delusion while promising heaven on Earth

精神分析学解释了独裁统治者如何在激发仇恨、鼓动自怜、制造妄想的同时又能让所有人相信美好的未来终将来临。

Why have people welcomed tyrannical, authoritarian leaders time after time? For millennia, philosophers and political theorists have tried to explain why we willingly participate in our own oppression by submitting to authoritarian leaders. And today, the ominous rise of authoritarian regimes the world over renders this question as pressing as ever.

为什么人们一次又一次地支持残暴专制的领导者?为什么愿意臣服于他们,亲自给自己戴上镣铐?千百年来,哲学家和政治理论家都试图解开这一难题。当今世界,专制政权再次抬头,让解决这一问题更显急迫。

Plato was one of the first and most influential thinkers to address the problem of tyranny. He argued in the Republic, written around 380 BCE, that democratic states are destined to collapse into tyranny. Plato was no fan of democracy, perhaps because it was the Athenian democracy that sentenced his beloved teacher Socrates to death. He believed that democratic forms of government create a licentious and undisciplined populace who are easy prey for smooth-talking politicians skilled in the art of pandering to their desires. In the Gorgias, written around the same time as the Republic, he tells us that such politicians entice the masses with unhealthy promises rather than nourishing the public good. ‘Pastry baking has put on the mask of medicine,’ Plato disparagingly remarks, ‘and pretends to know the foods that are best for the body, so that if a pastry baker and a doctor had to compete in front of children, or in front of men just as foolish as children, to determine which of the two, the doctor or the pastry baker, had expert knowledge of good food and bad, the doctor would die of starvation.’

早期有一批极具影响力的思想家专门研究专制统治的问题,柏拉图便是其中之一。柏拉图于公元前380年左右写成《理想国》,在书中他提到任何民主政体都终将堕入专制统治中。在雅典的民主体制下,柏拉图最敬爱的老师苏格拉底被判死刑,这可能是他反对民主政体的原因。他认为,一个民主政府会培养出漠视规则、不守纪律的群氓,他们容易受到巧言令色的政治家蛊惑,这些政治家往往都深谙取悦人民之道。在《理想国》的同期作品《高尔吉亚篇》中,他警示人们,这种政治家并不主张公共善,而是许以大众虚妄的承诺。他用贬斥的口吻写道:“就像是糕点烘焙业披上医学的外衣,假装自己了解什么是有益健康的食物。如果烘焙师傅和医生要争夺最了解食物优劣的专家称号,而评委是一群儿童或者像儿童一样幼稚的成年人,那医生必败无疑。

Now fast-forward two-and-a-half millennia to the early 20th century, and consider the work of the German sociologist Max Weber. Weber, one of the founders of sociology, developed the concept of ‘charismatic authority’ – a ‘certain quality of an individual personality, by virtue of which he is set apart from ordinary men and treated as endowed with supernatural, superhuman, or at least specifically exceptional powers or qualities’. Charismatic leaders inspire devotion, and are regarded as prophetic figures by their followers. Weber’s insights deepen Plato’s sketchy account. The rising tyrant has a special, almost magical aura. His followers believe that he can work miracles and transform their lives. But how does this happen? What is it that induces otherwise rational people to yield to adopt such dangerously unrealistic views? To explain it, we need to dig deeper.

我们再把时间快进2500年,看看 20世纪早期德国社会学家马克斯·韦伯的作品。作为社会学的奠基人之一,韦伯提出了“魅力型领袖”这一概念。“魅力型领袖”是一种人格特质,具备这一特质的人往往独树一帜,即便不具备超自然或超人般的天赋,也拥有常人眼中某些突出的力量或品质。魅力型领袖鼓励人民勇于奉献,其追随者均奉其为先知。伴随着韦伯对这一问题的深刻洞察,柏拉图的观点也得到了进一步阐释。一位炙手可热的统治者往往拥有独特甚至具有魔力的光环。其追随者相信他能创造奇迹,彻底改变他们的命运。但这种信仰从何而来?是什么诱使一群本应理智的人甘愿臣服并接受如此危险且虚妄的愿景?为了更好地阐释这一问题,我们还需进一步探讨。

At precisely the same time that Weber was developing his theory of charisma in Berlin, Sigmund Freud was wrestling with similar ideas in Vienna. His thinking culminated in the book Group Psychology and the Analysis of the Ego (1921). Group Psychology focuses on the psychological dynamics of followership. It is, like most of Freud’s works, a complicated text, but there are two main themes that stand out. First, Freud argued that those who are attracted to authoritarian leaders idealise them. The leader is seen as an exemplary, heroic human being shorn of every serious flaw. Second, he argued that followers identify with the leader by substituting him for what Freud called the ego ideal. The ego ideal is a mental representation of one’s guiding values. It consists of beliefs about right and wrong, what is obligatory and what is impermissible. It is our moral compass: essentially the same as one’s conscience. In taking the place of their ego ideal, the authoritarian leader becomes the conscience of his followers, and his voice becomes the voice of their conscience. Whatever the leader wills is, by definition, good and right.

当身处柏林的韦伯提出魅力型领袖这一理论的同时,在维也纳的弗洛伊德也提出了类似观点。弗洛伊德的思想集大成于《群体心理学与自我分析》一书。该书重点分析了追随者的心理机制。如同弗洛伊德大多数作品一样,这本书内容繁杂艰深,但仍有两大突出的主题。第一,弗洛伊德认为追随者们神化了专制统治者。在他们看来,这些统治者都是完美无瑕、可奉为圭臬的英雄人物;第二,追随者们会用统治者的形象代替心中的“自我理想”。“自我理想”代表了一个人内心所向往的价值观,包括是非观、责任和禁忌。它是我们的道德标杆,在本质上等同于良知。当专制统治者取代了追随者的“自我理想”之后,便成为了他们的良知,并替他们的良知发声。如此一来,不论统治者有何意志,追随者都会认为是良善的。

Freud’s thesis comports very well with what happened in Hitler’s Germany. Consider the example of Alfons Heck. As a youngster, Heck had been a member of the Hitler Youth. In her book The Nazi Conscience (2003), the historian Claudia Koonz writes that when Heck watched the Gestapo rounding up the Jews in his village for deportation, including his best friend Heinz, he didn’t say to himself: ‘How terrible they are arresting Jews.’ Instead, having absorbed knowledge about the ‘Jewish menace’, he said: ‘What a misfortune Heinz is Jewish.’ As an adult, he recalled: ‘I accepted deportation as just.’

希特勒统治下的德国充分印证了弗洛伊德的观点。以阿尔方斯·赫克为例,他在年轻时就加入了希特勒青年党。历史学家克劳迪娅·昆兹在《纳粹的良心》一书中写道,赫克曾亲眼目睹盖世太保为了驱逐犹太人,在他的村子里大肆追捕,其中包括他最好的朋友海因茨。但他并不认为“逮捕犹太人是可怕的。“相反,由于被灌输犹太人祸害论的想法,他表示:”海因兹是犹太人真是太不幸了。“成年之后,他回忆道:”当时我认为驱逐犹太人是一件正义之事。

The fact that the community of followers has a common identification with the authoritarian leader has another important consequence. The followers identify with one another as parts of a ‘movement’, and they experience themselves as merging into a collective whole. This intoxicating sense of unity, and the subordination of personal self-interest to a greater cause, is a very important component of authoritarian systems. It is found in a great deal of authoritarian rhetoric, as exemplified by the Third Reich. The idea that the individual human being matters only as a vehicle for the race or Volk, and that one’s duty to this greater, transcendent spirit trumps narrow self-interest, was pervasive in Hitler’s Germany. German children were instructed to keep their blood ‘pure’ – that is, to avoid miscegenation. Their blood did not belong to them, they were told, but to the German race – past, present, and future – and through it they would have eternal life.

追随者对专制领导者的认可还会引发另一严重后果。追随者们认为大家都是某项“运动”的一员,并将自己融入到某一集体中,这种振奋人心的集体感以及为宏大事业牺牲个人利益的精神,都是独裁体制的重要组成部分。尤其在纳粹德国时期,这种精神体现在许多宣传言论中,当时德国人普遍认为个体只是民族或人民的载体,有一种更为伟大、超越性的精神凌驾于狭隘的自身利益之上。德国的儿童从小就接受血统“纯净”论的教育:禁止异族通婚。他们的血统从不属于自己,永远属于德国。纯正的德国血统能让他们获得永生。

Participating in authoritarian systems has unmistakably religious overtones. It involves surrendering oneself to a higher power and relinquishing individual ego boundaries, for the sake of purity. It evokes eternal life, rebirth and redemption. The quasi-religious nature of Hitler’s rise been described in The Dark Charisma of Adolf Hitler (2012) by the historian Laurence Rees:

服从于专制体制带有明显的宗教色彩。为了获得所谓的纯净,追随者要服从威权,放弃自我边界。同时,专制统治重提永生,重生和救赎等概念。历史学家劳伦斯·里斯在2012年的纪录片《希特勒的暗黑魅力》中表示,希特勒的崛起在本质上具有浓厚的宗教属性:

The hordes of Germans who travelled – almost as pilgrims – to pay homage to Hitler at his home in Berchtesgaden; the thousands of personal petitions sent to Hitler at the Reich Chancellery; the pseudo-religious iconography of the Nuremberg rallies; the fact that German children were taught that Hitler was ‘sent from God’ and was their ‘faith’ and ‘light’; all this spoke to the fact that Hitler was seen less as a normal politician and more as a prophet touched by the divine.

为了向希特勒表示敬意,成群结队的德国人如朝圣者一般前往贝希特斯加登;总理府收到了数千份寄给希特勒的个人请愿书;纽伦堡集会上再现了伪宗教的图腾;德国儿童接受的教育称希特勒是“上帝的恩赐”,是他们的“信仰”和“光明”。这一切都表明,在德国人民心目中,希特勒不仅仅是一位普通的政治家,更是具有神性的先知。

With this in mind, it is helpful to turn to Freud’s monograph The Future of an Illusion (1927). Although largely concerned with the psychology of religion, it is a mistake to ignore its political context and content. No Jew in ‘Red Vienna’ in 1927 (the year, by the way, of the first of Hitler’s Nuremberg rallies) could fail to be concerned by the rise of political anti-Semitism. Freud told an interviewer less than a year earlier, in 1926:

在了解这些之后,我们就更容易理解弗洛伊德的《幻想之未来》一书。虽然这本书主要是从心理学的角度分析宗教,不过其政治背景和相应内涵仍然不容忽视。1927年,希特勒第一次在纽伦堡举行集会。同年,所有住在“红色维也纳”中的犹太人都对反犹主义在政治领域兴起而深感担忧。一年前,弗洛伊德在接受采访时表示:

My language is German. My culture, my attainments are German. I considered myself German intellectually, until I noticed the growth of anti-Semitic prejudice in Germany and German Austria. Since that time, I prefer to call myself a Jew.

我的母语是德语;我的文化背景,造诣成就都来自德国;在智识层面上,我也是不折不扣的德国人。但我发现反犹主义在德国和德意志奥地利共和国有抬头之势。从那时起,我便更喜欢称自己为犹太人。

One illusion he referred to in the text is the view that ‘the Germanic race is the only one capable of civilisation’.

他在书中提到的一个幻想就是“日耳曼民族是唯一文明的民族”。

At the time, the Austrian political turf was divided between the Right-wing Christian Socialists (whose armed segment, the Heimwehr, or ‘home guard’, was funded by the Italian fascists) and the more Left-leaning Social Democrats (with an armed unit called the Schutzbund).

当时,奥地利政坛主要分为右翼的基督教社会党和左翼的社会民主党。前者是在意大利法西斯主义支持者的资助之下建立起的武装力量“武装党”;后者拥有一支名为“保卫同盟”的军队。

Tensions between the two groups erupted on 15 July 1927, when Leftists staged a massive protest demonstration, beginning as an attempt to occupy the University of Vienna, which was only a few minutes’ walk from Freud’s apartment, and culminating in front of the Palace of Justice, about 20 minutes’ walk away, where the crowd stormed and set fire to the building. The police opened fire on the protesters and, three hours later, 89 of them, and five police, lay dead on the pavement. That day, and the two days that followed, were known as the Schreckentage – the ‘days of horror’. For Viennese intellectuals such as Freud, the menace of authoritarian politics was very close to home.

1927年7月15日,左翼分子策划了一场声势浩大的抗议示威游行,两党之间的冲突一触即发。游行伊始,示威者便占领了维也纳大学,大学距离弗洛伊德的公寓只有几分钟的步行路程。随后,人们聚集在距离弗洛伊德公寓步行20分钟的最高法院门口,人们高声疾呼,并放火焚烧了大楼,游行至此达到高潮。警察向示威人群开枪。经过三个小时的激烈对峙,89名示威者和5名警察丧生。因此7月15-17日被称为 “恐怖时期”。对于弗洛伊德这样的维也纳知识分子来说,独裁政治的威胁已迫在眉睫。

Following in the tradition of the German philosophers Ludwig Feuerbach and Karl Marx, Freud argued that religious beliefs are illusions, yet he has a unique take: what distinguishes illusions from non-illusions, he posits, is not whether they are true or false, but how they come about. Illusions are beliefs that we adopt because we want them to be true. Such beliefs are usually false, but they sometimes turn out to be true. Suppose you buy a lottery ticket because you woke up that morning with a burning conviction that you will win the lottery. And suppose that, coincidentally, you actually do win the lottery. Even though your belief that you would win was a true one, it would still count as a Freudian illusion.

弗洛伊德对于宗教信仰的观点与德国哲学家路德维希·费尔巴哈和卡尔·马克思一脉相承,他们都认为宗教信仰不过是幻想。不过,弗洛伊德在宗教问题上也有独到的观点:幻象与非幻想的区别不在于真假,只是来源不同。幻想是我们希望成真的信念,但这种信念通常都是错误的,即便有时是正确的。比如,你早上醒来时突然十分相信自己会中彩票,于是你就去买了一张彩票,而且碰巧真的中了彩票。虽然你相信自己会中彩票的信念是真实的,但根据弗洛伊德的理论,这依旧属于幻想。

The most compelling illusions qualify as delusions. Delusions are illusions that are both false and highly resistant to rational revision, because of the immense power of the wishes that fuel them. Religious convictions are Freud’s prime examples of delusions. They are, he wrote, ‘fulfillments of the oldest, strongest, and most urgent wishes of mankind. The secret of their strength lies in the strength of these wishes.’

最强烈的幻想便是妄想。妄想是一种错误且极度排斥理性修正的幻想。妄想背后有一股能量巨大的希望在支撑。弗洛伊德认为,坚定的宗教信仰就是一种妄想。他写道:“坚定的宗教信仰实现了人类最古老、强烈且急迫的愿望。这种信仰之所以具有巨大的力量,就在于这些愿望本身拥有巨大能量。

The wishes that underpin religious belief have to do with deliverance from human helplessness. We are vulnerable to the forces of nature, such as disease, natural disasters and ultimately death, and also to the acts of other human beings who can harm us, kill us or treat us unjustly. In recognising our helplessness, Freud thinks, we are thrown back on an infantile prototype: memories of the utter helplessness that we experienced as infants – our complete and appalling dependence on the adults who cared for us (or failed to care for us). Religious people deal with their feelings of helplessness, he suggested, by clinging to the illusion of a powerful, protective deity who will grant them an afterlife.

支撑宗教信仰的愿望与拯救无助的人类有关。人类在疾病、自然灾害、死亡等自然力量面前是脆弱的,甚至在面对伤害、杀害、不公正对待等其他人类行为时,我们也无能无力。弗洛伊德认为,人类在意识到自己无能无力时,就会回到婴儿时期的状态。在婴儿时期,我们都是弱小无助的,我们会极度依赖那些照顾我们的成年人(或者未能很好照顾我们的成年人)。弗洛伊德表示,宗教信徒们为了消除内心的无助感,会选择相信有一个强大的神灵会保护他们,让他们拥有来世。

There are clear links between Freud’s analysis of the religious impulse, and psychological forces at play in the political sphere. Politics is, explicitly, a response to human vulnerability. Our deepest hopes and fears permeate the political arena, and this makes us susceptible to political illusions, which are often clung to with such impassioned tenacity, and so refractory to reasoned argument, that they fit Freud’s characterisation of delusions. From this perspective, authoritarian political systems echo monotheistic religions. Like God himself, the leader is omniscient, omnipotent and omnibenevolent. His words define the horizons of reality. He must be praised and appeased, but never challenged. His enemies are, by definition, in league with the forces of evil.

在弗洛伊德的分析中,宗教的动因和心理力量在政治场域发挥的作用有明显的关联。显然,正是因为人类的脆弱性,政治得以产生。我们心底深处的希望和恐惧渗透在政治领域的方方面面,导致我们很容易受政治幻想所蛊惑。政治幻想往往都慷慨激昂、充满偏执,对理性极度排斥,这些特点都与弗洛伊德所说的妄想不谋而合。从这个角度来看,独裁政体与一神论的宗教非常相似。独裁者就像全知全能全善的上帝,他的话语决定了现实的边界。追随者只能歌功颂德,不允许挑战权威,独裁者的敌人都是邪恶力量。

If religions were only about wish-fulfilling fantasies, they would be all sweetness and light. But they are not. The sweet promise of heaven is meaningful only against the threat of hell, and salvation requires something one needs to be saved from, even at the price of austerity, suffering, and – in the case of religious martyrs – torture and death. The same is true of authoritarian political discourse. It is not all pastry: it is also poison.

如果宗教只是实现愿望的幻想,那它本该是充满甜蜜,光芒万丈的。但事实并非如此。当有堕入地狱的威胁时,升入天堂的美好承诺才有意义。信徒要想获得救赎,就必须有需要获得拯救的理由,有时甚至要经历苦行、磨难、折磨乃至是宗教殉道者那样的死亡考验。独裁统治者的演讲也是如此,提供的不全是糕点,其中也掺杂着毒药。

To address this darker dimension of the authoritarian mindset, I turn to the work of another, less well-known psychoanalyst – Roger Money-Kyrle, who came from an aristocratic English family. He enlisted in the Royal Flying Corps at the age of 18 to fight in the First World War, and was shot down over northern France in 1917, which ended his military career. After the war, he enrolled at the University of Cambridge to study physics and mathematics, but soon switched to philosophy. Like a number of thinkers at Cambridge at the time, Money-Kyrle became interested in psychoanalysis, and travelled to Vienna in 1922 to complete a PhD with the philosopher Moritz Schlick (the leader of the Vienna Circle) and to undergo analysis with Freud. After returning to the United Kingdom in 1926, he earned a second PhD, this time in anthropology, and eventually became a practicing psychoanalyst.

为了解独裁统治思维的黑暗面,我转而研究另一位精神分析学家罗杰·莫内-克尔的作品。罗杰·莫内-克尔出生于英国贵族家庭,知名度较低。为了参加第一次世界大战,他在 18 岁那年加入英国皇家飞行队。1917 年,他在法国北部被敌人击落,就此结束了军旅生涯。战后他进入剑桥大学学习物理学和数学。但不久后他就转而攻读哲学。与剑桥大学很多同期的思想家一样,莫内-克尔对精神分析学也颇感兴趣。为了能跟随哲学家莫里茨·石里克(维也纳学派领导者)攻读博士学位,并同弗洛伊德一起从事研究,他在 1922 年来到维也纳。1926 年重返英国之后,莫内-克尔拿到了人类学博士,这是他的第二个博士学位。最终,他成了一名执业精神分析学家。

In 1932, Money-Kyrle briefly visited Berlin at the invitation of his friend, the diplomat Arthur Yencken (who was later murdered when Nazis planted a time-bomb in his plane). Yencken took him to a Nazi Party rally, at which both Joseph Goebbels and Hitler spoke. Money-Kyrle was fascinated and disturbed by what he saw and heard, and tried to make sense of what went on by examining the speeches and crowd dynamics through a psychoanalytic lens. The outcome was the article ‘The Psychology of Propaganda’ (1941).

1932 年,应外交官朋友亚瑟·内肯的邀请,莫内-克尔短暂访问了柏林。内肯同莫内-克尔一起参加了纳粹党的集会,会上约瑟夫·戈培尔和希特勒发表了讲话(内肯后来被纳粹安装在飞机上的定时炸弹所杀)。眼前的景象让莫内-克尔既着迷又焦虑。为了解德国的现状,他采用精神分析学的方法分析了集会上的演讲以及集会人群的心理状态。最终,他于1941年发表了一篇名为《宣传心理学》的文章。

By the time he visited Germany, Money-Kyrle was strongly under the intellectual influence of the Hungarian-born English psychoanalyst Melanie Klein. Klein held that all human beings are haunted by profound and terrifying fears that she called ‘psychotic anxieties’. She thought that these anxieties, and our responses to them, drive a great deal of human behaviour – for good or for ill. In the Kleinian scheme, there are two primary forms of psychotic anxiety: paranoid anxiety, which is the terror of being persecuted by evil, eternal forces, and depressive anxiety, which is the sense that one is guilty of having destroyed what one loves and values. Klein also described what she called the manic defence, which is a denial of helplessness and dependence on others by delusions of power, grandeur and self-sufficiency, and is expressed in the attitudes of triumph, control and contempt.

访问德国时,莫内-克尔深受匈牙利出生的英国精神分析学家梅兰妮·克莱因影响。克莱因认为,人类都深受一种强烈且令人害怕的恐惧所困扰,她称这种恐惧为“精神焦虑”。在她看来,这种焦虑以及人类在面对这种焦虑时的反应塑造了人类许多行为,无论好坏。根据克莱因的理论,精神焦虑主要有两种表现形式:一种是偏执性焦虑,即担心被魔鬼或某种永恒力量所迫害;另一种是抑郁性焦虑,即因摧毁了自己喜欢的东西和信奉的价值观而感到内疚。克莱因还阐述了她称之为“疯狂防卫”的现象:摆出摇旗呐喊、操纵自如、目空一切的姿态,自命不凡,妄想自己大权在握、实现独立自主,从而否认自身的无助和对他人的依赖。

Money-Kyrle used Klein’s framework to make sense of the power of Nazi rhetoric. He concluded that Hitler and Goebbels induced something like a mass psychosis in their audience, and shaped it for political ends. He wrote:

在克莱因理论框架的指导下,莫内-克尔理解了纳粹宣传演讲的强大力量。他总结道,希特勒和戈培尔的演讲会让听众陷入大规模精神错乱一般的状态,从而达成自己的政治目标。他写道:

[T]he speeches themselves were not particularly impressive. But the crowd was unforgettable. The people seemed gradually to lose their individuality and to become fused into a not very intelligent but immensely powerful monster … [that was] under the complete control of the figure on the rostrum [who] evoked or changed its passions as easily as if they had been notes of some gigantic organ.

演讲本身并没有什么特别令人印象深刻的地方。但是听众却让我记忆犹新。这些人似乎逐渐失去自我,融合成一只愚钝但却极其强大的怪兽。演讲者可以轻易将这只怪兽玩弄于鼓掌之中,激发或改变怪兽的热情,就像演奏巨大管风琴一般。

Observing Hitler and Goebbels in action led Money-Kyrle to the idea that, for political propaganda to work, propagandists must elicit a sense of helplessness in their audience (the poison) and then offer them a magical solution (the pastry). First, they make the audience depressed – to get them to feel that they have lost or destroyed something immensely good and valuable. They have been brought to their knees. They are a laughing stock. They have betrayed the great destiny of the German people. As Money-Kyrle describes it: ‘For 10 minutes we heard of the sufferings of Germany … since the war. The monster seemed to indulge in an orgy of self-pity.’

希特勒和戈培尔的所作所为让莫内-克尔意识到,政治宣传要想奏效,宣传者必须让听众感受到无助(即毒药),紧接着再给他们提供一套神奇的解决方案(即糕点)。首先,他们要让听众深感沮丧,感觉自己丢失或者破坏了某种价值连城的好东西,比如他们已经俯首称臣,沦为笑柄,背离了德国人民的光明前途。正如莫内-克尔所言:“整整十分钟演讲者都在痛陈德国在开战后遭受的损失和磨难。这只怪兽也似乎沉溺于自怜情绪无法自拔。

The second step is to identify some minority or group of outsiders as perpetrators of one’s suffering. They are forces of evil, persecuting us from the outside or consuming us from within. Money-Kyrle wrote:

第二步是将人们目前遭受的苦难归咎于某些少数群体或党外人士。在宣传者口中,这些人是邪恶势力,不是从外部进行迫害,就是在内部进行消耗。莫内-克尔写道:

Then for the next 10 minutes came the most terrific fulminations against Jews and Social-democrats as the sole authors of these sufferings. Self-pity gave place to hate; and the monster seemed on the point of becoming homicidal.

在接下来的十分钟里,演讲者对犹太人和社会民主党人进行了强烈控诉,斥责他们是造成德国陷入深重危机的始作俑者。此时,这只怪兽已不再自怜,而是充满怨恨,杀气腾腾。

The third step is to offer a manic cure for the terrors of helplessness:

第三步是兜售所谓可以治愈无助的灵丹妙药:

[S]elf-pity and hatred were not enough. It was also necessary to drive out fear … So the speakers turned from vituperation to self-praise. From small beginnings, the Party had grown invincible. Each listener felt a part of its omnipotence within himself. He was transported into a new psychosis. The induced melancholia passed into paranoia, and the paranoia into megalomania.

煽动自怜和仇恨的情绪还远远不够,还必须消除人们的恐惧。因此演讲者话锋一转,从谩骂敌人转向自卖自夸。他们描述了纳粹党从星星之火到如今发展壮大的历程。每一个听众都能感受到纳粹党的无所不能,在这过程中他们又不知不觉中‘感染’上了一种新的精神错乱。在演讲者的煽动下,群众从自怜自艾逐渐变成偏执多疑,最终成为了不折不扣的自大狂。

The crescendo of this final, manic phase of Hitler’s performance was an appeal to unity, which Money-Kyrle thought was crucial to the success of authoritarian propaganda, for if ‘he had nothing but thunderbolts to offer, he could hardly have remained the god he is’. Sounding this powerful, positive chord at the conclusion, Hitler promised paradise on Earth; ‘This Paradise, however, was only for true Germans and true Nazis. Everyone outside remained a persecutor, and therefore an object of hate.’

情绪随着演讲逐渐浓烈,并最终在结尾达到高潮,希特勒开始呼吁德国人民团结一心。莫内-克尔认为,这正是独裁宣传成功的关键所在。他说:“如果希特勒不做任何铺垫便直接开始慷慨陈词,他便很难塑造自己神一般的形象。”在慷慨激昂的演讲结尾,希特勒承诺将在这世界上建立天堂。“不过在这个天堂里只有纯正的日耳曼人和真正的纳粹分子。其他人都是迫害者,都是仇恨的对象。

Although inspired by observations of Nazi rhetoric, Money-Kyrle did not mean his analysis to apply only to the Nazis. In the 2016 run-up to the US presidential election, the journalist Gwynn Guilford attended several of Donald Trump’s rallies, and she used notes on her observations to test Money-Kyrle’s thesis. She reported in a fascinating article published in the online magazine Quartz: ‘I went through the many reams of observations I scribbled down reflecting on the Trump rallies. Nearly every paragraph fit Money-Kyrle’s sequence.’

虽然莫内-克尔的观点来源于纳粹的宣传过程,但他并不认为他的分析只适用于纳粹分子。在 2016 年的美国总统大选中,记者格温·吉尔福德参加了几场特朗普的竞选集会。她用自己的观察来检验莫内-克尔理论的正确性。她在Quartz杂志上发表了一篇精彩绝伦的文章,文中写道:“我整理了大量在特朗普集会上记录的笔记。几乎所有的内容都符合莫内-克尔所总结的宣传步骤。

Whether or not the psychoanalytic diagnosis of the appeal of such leaders is correct, some such analysis of the psychological wellsprings of the craving for authoritarian leaders is needed. Understanding the attraction of authoritarian illusions could help to inoculate us against it, and so avoid being led once again into the abyss.

不管对领袖魅力的精神分析诊断是否正确,这类从心理学角度分析独裁统治者为何极具吸引力的分析都不可或缺。只有了解背后的原因,我们才能引以为戒,避免再次堕入无尽的深渊。

原文链接:https://aeon.co/essays/the-omnipotent-victim-how-tyrants-work-up-a-crowds-devotion

👇

取经号推荐

🎬《大独裁者》《辛德勒的名单》《美丽人生》

设置于希特勒统治背景下的电影多如牛毛,其中熠熠闪光的一些直到今天仍能在观影人的心中激起千层浪。

📖《独裁者手册: 为什么坏行为几乎总是好政治》,布鲁诺·德·梅斯奎塔

为什么同样一个人可以在一个国家推行善政却在另一个国家施行最残暴的独裁?在这里,与其说制度是答案还不如说是问题本身。为什么比利时的制度越来越民主,而同一时期,同一领导人的刚果,却越来越独裁?难道是因为利奥波德二世只爱本国人或者有种族歧视?但后来刚果自己“选”出来的领导人并没有做得更好,仍然是一个糟糕的独裁者。在《独裁者手册》这本书里,梅斯奎塔和史密斯研究多年,得出了一个能够相当完美地解释这一政治现象的理论,即:不管是国家、公司还是国际组织,其政治格局不能简单地以“民主”和“独裁”来划分,而必须用民意选民、实际选民、胜利联盟的数字多少来描写。如果胜利联盟的人数很多,那么这个国家就是我们通常所说的民主国家。反过来,如果胜利联盟的人数非常少,那么不管这个国家有没有选举,都是事实上的非民主国家。据此,很容易明白:在刚果,利奥波德二世只需要让少数人高兴就足以维持自己的统治;而在比利时,他必须让很多人满意才行。不得不提,对任何想理解政治的真正运作方式的人来说,《独裁者手册》都是一本必读的书,无论是政治领域的政治还是商业界的政治,无论是在独裁国家还是在民主国家。

📖《饥饿的盛世: 乾隆时代的得与失》,张宏杰

大清社会各个层面都处于他(乾隆皇帝)的强力控制之下:他通过胡萝卜加大棒的手段,杜绝了皇族、外戚干政的可能,使他们只能老老实实地安享俸禄,不敢乱说乱动一下。他以高明的权术和超常的政治恐怖把大臣们牢牢控制在自己的鼓掌之间,以确保君主的意志在任何时候、任何领域都畅通无阻。对于敢反抗的“刁民”,他的态度是一味镇压。在他眼中,皇帝、官员和百姓,是父亲、儿子和孙子的关系。不管父亲如何虐待儿子,儿子也不许有丝毫反抗。因此,老百姓无论被贪官污吏如何压榨剥削,走投无路,也只能听天由命,不得“越级上访”。对于群众聚众抗议,维护自己的权利,他总是视如大敌,一再强调要“严加处置”,甚至“不分首从,即行正法”。对于知识分子,他更如临大敌。他以超级恐怖手段,扫除一切可能危及统治的思想萌芽。乾隆年间仅大的文字狱就出现了一百三十件。三十余年的文字狱运动,如同把整个社会放入一个高压锅进行灭菌处理,完成了从外到里的全面清洁,消灭了一切异端思想萌芽,打造了一个他自认为万代无虞的铁打江山。

👇

关于取经号

回复关键词PDF

下载PDF版本

回复关键词目录

查看取经号目录

微信公众号:取经号

微博:取经号JTW

网站:qujinghao.com

Be First to Comment

发表评论

电子邮件地址不会被公开。 必填项已用*标注