Triumph of the Will (1935)

I began watching the movie “Triumph of the Will” and contemplated how propaganda reaches people and turn people into giving up their freedom – at this point, Germans didn’t have a choice; they sought Hitler to power who suspended all liberties.  I understand there were other factors attributed to what occurred in Germany but it brings me to think about our freedom and the importance of the US First Amendment.

There have been times, especially during times of war or turmoil, nations and countries like the US which preach and practice freedom and the First Amendment, have taken away individual rights even press rights, opinions, expressions, and freedom proclaiming Acts as laws to abide by – umm this sounds familiar; sounds a lot like Article 48 of Weimar constitution, isn’t this the way Hitler turned Germany into dictatorship?  The US Sedition Acts as well as Amendments to the Espionage Acts gave permission to the government to suspend the First Amendment – it prohibited negative language against the US government, disloyalty to the US government, its flag, its armed forces or that causes others to see the US government in any negative light.  However, it was written that this only applies in times when the US is in war.  Don’t get me wrong, however other people have interpreted this, it was written in order to suppress mob mentality and vigilantism within the public so that they don’t take matters into their own hands.  But this first Sedition Act of 1798 pertained originally to US in war in US soil.  How about US involved in war outside of US?  How come US press is denied information about war that is happening elsewhere in the world by US troops?  Different circumstances, different country, different topic – just gone off tangent trying to point out governments do at times conduct actions negatively of course in the name of “national security”, or hide and omit things from the public which breaches our freedom.

During and after watching the movie, Triumph of the Will (1935), I’ve found myself saying “WOW!” a dozen times both in complete shock and at more times in complete positive awe.  Of course that’s what they propagandized and consciously showed the rest of the world the good image and the notion of “will to power” as Nietzschians proclaim – it worked!  At least on me it did – it’s not just the way Hitler was portrayed in the movie/documentary alone; I felt as though he really had a grand agenda for Germany in a progressive direction.  Perhaps he had, at least in the beginning of his rise to leadership and power, or perhaps the targeting and annihilation of Jews among others was his prime agenda from the get-go, and his show of leadership, charisma along with all the “romantic” things Weber mentions (traditional, bureaucratic and charismatic) in identifying the forms of authority was simply an act by Hitler.  Because Hitler portrayed all that and more in my opinion in this no limit budget propaganda film – of course that’s what he was supposed to portray?

Again I have a dilemma of picking and choosing just a scene or series of scenes to portray – the movie, though-out, is such propaganda that it pulls you to listen, to see further what he has to say.  Look at the scenes in the beginning of the movie – with pomp and circumstance, all those vast number of people, chanting, raising their arms in salute and respect – people loved him!  He was wooed, he was loved and Hitler knew it!  You can see it in his face – he loved it.  And to my surprise, he seemed to appear sincere which showed as he was in power – look at how the economy improved.  It was nationalism – will to power, make Germany great, strengthen, build and become a nation of power!  But then what happened?  The army of young men he amasses soon looked to me as though Hitler was grooming them to be his elite SS and more.  All the while, every speech he makes, the force of his emotions in his speech, like a mock-trial contender doubling his charisma with passionate conviction, he praises with optimism and persuades, you see the captivating faces of the masses in agreement and admiration, although I have to admit, at some points, the younger kids look brain-washed.  And I suppose it was brain-washing; day in and day out you hear the propaganda, you see posters and signs written stating the same and you’re with bunch of others conforming – and I bet, you had better conformed.

He wanted to lead Germany his way, but in the beginning, with the mix of the Communists and the Socialists I assume, he had to correct situations so that his Nazi party did not look to be swaying too Socialistic.  So he did away with the Communists and then the Socialists and banned any other party altogether.  Was Kristallnacht along with other countless tragedies as well as the Holocaust part of his will to power and making Germany a great nation state?  I begin to wonder, did it start out this way?  Did Hitler’s regime begin with this notion to eradicate?  When was the Aryan mentality incorporated?  Or was it his followers like Hermann Goring and propaganda supporters’ like Goebbels insistence?  Was he eventually coerced indirectly by his subordinates’ actions and let continue the massacre in his name?  Or was he just a sadistic lunatic who turned into a mind twisted and warped sicko once in power who saw and plotted the whole thing?  History tells a story; or stories.  Is that the full story or are there other stories?