Quack, Quack

Introduction

Quack, Quack! was written by Leonard Woolf in 1935 and expresses his views on fascism and the current state of governments in Europe. 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 in particular. It can be determined that he aligns himself more with the views of humanity that John Stuart Mill and Adam Smith take, and also with Mill's socialist leanings. Woolf specifically attacks the language and religion of fascist intellectual quacks.

Carlyle - Fascism

Carlyle:

• 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

What Woolfe 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

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 believes in the sympathetic nature of humans, and also in the potential of humans. 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 the same beliefs. 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. 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. Mill also opposed Carlyle in the Governor Eyre controversy. Mill was a member of the Jamaica Committee, whose purpose was to convict Governor Eyre for his racist actions in putting down a rebellion in Jamaica and the executions that followed. Carlyle defended Governor Eyre. Smith and Mill defined humanity by man's ability to speak and to trade. Humans that spoke were not beasts, and language indicated civilization.

Woolf's oppostion to Carlyle

• 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

• distrust of so-called intellectuals

• language indicates humanity- the quack intellectuals distort

• against fascism

• against arbitrary racism and persecution of Jews/blacks

• on the side of the Jamaica Committee, uses the example of Gov. Eyre to mock Carlyle

• human potential to become more civilized (although Woolf's comment is that it isn't becoming more civilized)

• rational thought

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