Blog 7: Freedom and Myths

Source:

Cassirer, Ernst. “The Myth of the State.” Sources of European History Since 1900. Ed. Marvin Perry, Matthew Berg, and James Krukones. Boston: Wadsworth, 2011. 280-282. Print.

Summary:

Cassirer begins by announcing new theoretical problems, new questions with new answers, and, “most alarming”, a new power: the power of mythical thought, which seemed to have won a victory over rational thought in modern political systems.  He says that there is a “deep chasm between two different fields,” with the political following different rules than the theoretical, ignoring rational and scientific thought.  Cassirer comments that the myths of his day are not products of imagination, but “artificial things fabricated by very skillful and cunning artisans.” He compares these myths to manufactured modern weapons.

Cassirer then calls this new totalitarian experience a regression to “savage life,” referring to the people as “marionettes in a puppet show.”  He then discusses freedom, arguing that man’s natural instincts do not lead someone to strive for freedom.  Finally, he states that philosophy cannot destroy political myths, but it can help us understand them.  “In order to fight an enemy you must know him.”

My Opinion:

When Cassirer talks about the lack of rationality in the politics of his day (particularly Nazi Germany), it made me wonder about our politics today?  Are we led more by myth or rational thought?  In all honesty, I think I would have to lean more towards myth.  We don’t listen to speeches for content; we rely on sound bites and negative ads to make our decisions.  We don’t take the time to understand the system; we generally go along with what the government does because we don’t care to find out our options for helping change things.  We might complain about the actions of political leaders, but usually only after the media tells us we should complain.  So we are surrounded by two myths: the political myth, and the media myth.  Sometimes they work hand in hand, and sometimes they are at odds with one another, and we just get swept along with their opinions, never forming our own original political thoughts.

I’m going to put the following quote (even though it is a bit long) because it really struck me and caused me to think:

“Freedom is not a natural inheritance of man. In order to possess it we have to create it.  If man were to simply follow his natural instincts he would not strive for freedom; he would rather choose dependence.  Obviously it is much easier to depend upon others that to think, to judge, and to decide for himself.  That accounts for the fact that both in individual and in political life freedom is so often regarded much more as a burden than a privilege.  Under extremely difficult conditions man tries to cast off this burden.  Here the totalitarian state and the political myths step in.  The new political parties promise, at least, an escape from the dilemma.  They suppress and destroy the very sense of freedom: but at the same time, they relieve men from all personal responsibility.”

This quote made me wonder: how often do I look for freedom, and how often am I much more content with dependence?  I have been raised on rhetoric of the freedom of our country, and how blessed I am to be in it.  Certainly, especially compared to Nazi Germany, we do have a lot of freedoms in our country.  But do I take advantage of them?  Or do I depend on others to tell me what to do, because it is easier?  Even as I am writing this, a little part of me is thinking, “This is exhausting thinking about all this stuff.  It’s easier to just do what you’re told.”  That frightens me.  Would I be prepared to resist, and not just complain, if a really repressive government came into power here?