Quack, Quack

Introduction

Quack, Quack! was written by Leonard Woolf in 1935 and expresses his views on fascism, so-called "intellectuals," and the state of governments in Europe at that time. In it he condemns intellectuals such as Carlyle and Sprenger for their influence on Hitler and Mussolini and their respective governments. Woolf places himself in opposition of Hitler and Mussolini by criticizing their fascist governments and their policies directly, but also through his criticisms of Carlyle's writings and stances on religion and racism. It can be determined that he aligns himself more with the views of John Stuart Mill and Adam Smith, and his economic ideas are inferred to be close to Mill's socialist leanings. Woolf specifically attacks the language and religion of fascist intellectual quacks.

Carlyle - Fascism

Carlyle:

Thomas Carlyle was a Scottish economist who came from a very strict Calvinist upbringing. The Scottish Enlightenment emphasized that people were capable of using reason to improve their conditions, and that people should not accept authority simply because that authority has claimed power and knowledge. Carlyle, however, did not agree with these ideals. Carlyle tended towards the Calvinist side of his upbringing, as it's focal points were the absolute power of God, predestination, as well as the concept that people were born with sin.

Although Carlyle gave up on his religious faith early in life, the Calvinist ideals are evident in his later works.

Carlyle was a strong believer in the necessity of heroes, kings, and strong leaders. This stemmed from God's position as the figurehead in Calvinism. Carlyle and Galton were inspired by Darwinism, driving them to push for eugenics oriented policies in order to create a race of heroes. They felt that the weak needed to be sacrificed to create and preserve the strong. Carlyle's belief in a strong leader is further demonstrated by his support of Governor Eyre throughout the Jamaica Committee's (comprised of intellectuals such as Mill, Darwin) inquiries into what happened during the Morant Bay rebellion. Governor Eyre effected a massive slaughter of Jamaican natives, entirely due to paranoia that they were plotting to revolt against his government. Furthermore, he had George Goron, a local leader, tried and hanged with very little evidence of participating in the imagined rebellion. Carlyle was in full support of Eyre's measures, even forming a committee against the Jamaica Committee.

Predestination, the idea that God long ago decided that people's fates, whether to be slaves or to be kings or inbetween, translated into Carlyle's ideals most clearly in his positions Africans needed white people to enslave them or they would not work and that common people needed their intellectual betters to help them plan their lives. In his controversial work on what he called the "negro question," Carlyle asserted that Africans were inherently lazy savages who would never advance their place in society. Therefore, he stated, white people were doing them a favor in enslaving Africans. White people were saving Africans from their own supposed genetic failures. In Calvinism, those predestined to a life of inferiority could only be saved by accepting the will of God. For Carlyle, Africans could only be saved by accepting the will of whites.

Calvinism's concept of people being born with sin is harder to find in Carlyle's later work, but can most likely be found in his blind hatred for the Jewish race.

• Scottish Calvinist
• believed in the necessity of Heroes and hero worship
• blamed the Jewish people for social problems without providing any real evidence
• conducted experiments to prove Jewish inferiority and drew conclusions from assumed ideas
• used hatred and bias to unite
• believed that lesser people needed guidance from their superiors to stay human, if not they would degenerate to animals

• feudalism- few rule, against democracy
• backed Gov. Eyre
• "proto-fascist... [advocated] compulsory military drilling, the reinstatement of servitude/serfdom for blacks and other "servant" races" [1]
• philosophies closer to romanticism than Calvinism
• accused by Woolf of sadism and simple hatred

Smith/Mill branch

John Stuart Mill was a utlitarian economist whose "greatest happiness principle" closely resembled the Christian Golden Rule. The greatest happiness principle held that people would engage in the actions that provided the greatest happiness to the greatest amount of people. It definedthe sympathetic nature of humans, and also the potential of humans for improvement. Human potential, for Adam Smith, who can be placed on the same thought-branch as Mill, increased as rationality increased. Both Smith and Mill believed in the potential for humans to improve, and Smith articulated that improvement required rational thought. The two can also be classified as analytical egalitarians, believing all men equal. As such, they are often aligned with Christian evangelicals, although they do not share all of the same beliefs. The greatest happiness principle and equality of man are the main similarities. Mill "secularized" Christianity in that he did not take their belief that all men are equal because they are created in the image of God, he believed all men began with the same resources and differences between men came from "division of labor" (Smith's definition). But because of Mill's belief that there is no difference between the "street porter and the philosopher" (Smith's comparison), he became engaged in a debate with Carlyle over Carlyle's essay on the Negro Question. Their debate was published in Fraser's magazine. Carlyle laid down arguments that subjugated blacks to a bestial status, while Mill believed that this was impossible. Smith and Mill defined humanity by man's ability to speak and to trade. Humans that spoke were not beasts, and language indicated civilization. Mill also opposed Carlyle in the Governor Eyre controversy. Governor Eyre had control of Jamaica and put down a rebellion of natives in an excessively violent manner, ending in executions. Mill was a member of the Jamaica Committee, whose purpose was to convict Governor Eyre for his racist actions. Carlyle defended Governor Eyre, based on his previous assertions made in the Negro Question.

Summary:

• Greatest Happiness Principle, Golden Rule of Christianity
• Humans are sympathetic
• Humans have potential for improvement
• Potential increases in proportion with rationality
• "Secularized" Christianity, all men created equal but not in the image of God
• No initial difference between street porter and philosopher, division of labor provides variation
• Mill was a member of the Jamaica Committee, condemning racism of Governor Eyre
• Carlyle v. Mill debates over Negro Question

Woolf's oppostion to Carlyle

Woolf on Fascism

Unlike the Fascists themselves (Hitler in Mein Kampf, Mussolini in The Doctrine of Fascism), Woolf clearly defines his understanding of what Fascism is. He focuses on two main distinguishing characteristics. Fascism, Woolf states, is a form of government which relies upon an all-powerful leader at the head of a party or group that is just as strong. In Germany, this was Hitler and the Nazis. In Italy, it was Mussolini and his Fascists. Fascism is further defined by the requirement that the common people give up on their rational thought, that they blindly accept the word of the party.

Woolf presents the idea that Fascism is run exactly like a savage tribe was organized. He points out that it is bred into man's savage nature to look for the simplest, and coincidentally least rational, solution to a problem. Magic and hero worship were the primary solutions to any problem. In a primitive tribe, when it did not rain for several days, the people turned to their chief and his mystics to make it rain and save them. There was, of course, no basis for this solution, except that the chief and the mystics claimed that they had the power. If they were unable to perform, the tribe had two choices of what to think. First, they could be rational and assume that the chief, and no chief, had no power at all over the weather. Second, they could simply and illogically decide that their chief was just too old or missing too many teeth, kill the chief, and ask the new chief to make it rain. Invariably, tribes would choose the latter option.

Fascism, of course, relies on the same principle. When the miseries of World War I were too much for people to handle, they turned to the quacking of the Fascists to lead them out of poverty and despair. They were quick to dispose of the old government for a new one which promised them better lives and brighter futures, without any thought whatsoever. The question one must then examine is, how did the fascists convince the masses that they were their saviors?

As Woolf points out, they did it by doing what quacks do best, they quacked. Woolf goes into depth about how the German writer Keyserlinger writes his treatises. He uses very many complicated words, without really elucidating any point.

What Woolf says about Fascism:

• relies on charismatic, emotional, passionate leader
• requires that people give up on rational thought and blindly accept the word of the state
• depends on people's primal urges

• appropriation of religious facade- Christianity thinly veils primal "magic" and hero-worship
• racism for no reason- make conclusions about Jews
• language of so-called intellectuals (such as Sprenger and Keyserling) marks them as quacks
• dictatorships of Mussolini and Hitler- like oligarchy
• "divine" rulers- like hero-worship
• divinity of king or dictator is primal, to make the people feel better

Woolf's agreements with Smith/Mill

In Quack, Quack! Woolf makes his opposition of Carlyle and like-minded "intellectuals" clear, and if his arguments can be examined further, comparisons can be made between Woolf, and Smith and Mill. Just as Smith articulated the hypothesis of no-difference between the "street porter and the philosopher," so does Woolf distrust "intellectuals." Levy and Peart also question scholars and their motivations, operating under the assumption that division of labor is the only difference among men. Woolf's distrust of intellectuals stems from his mockery of their language. He especially criticizes the writings of Keyserling and Sprenger. He accuses them of intellectual quackery, saying that their writing looks impressive to the unintelligent, but intelligent people see it for the quackery it is. Language indicates humanity to Woolf, as it does to Smith and Mill. Civilization is the way to combat quackery, according to Woolf, and civilization requires language and above all, reason and rational thought. Woolf also notes that civilizations "ebb" and change over time, supporting a belief in human potential. However, Woolf takes a more pessimistic view and sees human potential to destroy society and descend back into savagery after civilizations are raised. Science and literature are both distorted by intellectuals, who are considered quacks in Woolf's view, and this is why civilization begins its downturn. Smith and Mill would agree that rationality and science are keys to human improvement. Woolf is against the use of Jews as scapegoats, and this can be attributed to a belief similar to Smith and Mill's belief in the equality of all men. Hitler's persecution of Jews, which could have taken inspiration from Galton's "experiments" and suspect conclusions on Jewish intelligence in the 1880's, seems to Woolf to lead society back into savagery because it does include rational thought, but rather it is arbitrary and used for the government's purposes. Mill's Jamaica Committee opposed persecution of blacks in Jamaica, just as Woolf opposed persecution of Jews. Woolf also uses the Governor Eyre controversy to mock Carlyle and show Carlyle's illogical hate.

Summary:

• Distrust of intellectual "philosophers"
• Rationality and language civilizes
• Motivations of philosophers
• Civilizations change over time, sees descent into savagery
• Opposed racism and use of race to create scapegoats
• Mocks Carlyle, opposes Governor Eyre's actions

References

• Levy, David M. 2001. How the dismal science got its name. Ann Arbor, MI: University of Michigan Press.

• Peart, Sandra J., and David M. Levy. 2005. The "vanity of the philosopher". Ann Arbor, MI: University of Michigan Press.

• Woolf, Leonard. 1935. Quack, quack!.

• http://cepa.newschool.edu/het/

• http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Calvinism