On Pain

Quote:  Pain is one of them. It is the most difficult in a series of trial one is accustomed to call life. And examination dealing with pain is no doubt unpopular get it is not only revealing in its own right, but it can also shed light on a series of questions preoccupying us at the present. Pain is one of the keys to unlock mad innermost beings as well as the world. Whenever one approaches the point where man proves himself to be equal or superior to pain, one gain access to the sources of his power and the secret hidden behind his domination. 

Interpretation: Here I believe Jungar is introducing how pain is associated to life. He makes the claim that in each and everyone of our lives we will experience some sort of pain, and it is one of the most unpopular experiences a human Being will had to deal with in life. The type of pain a person can handle and the type of pain a person experiences sheds light on who the person really is. Pain is a motivating factor in what shapes a person into who they sometimes become. When a person can overcome the pain they experience, whether it be mental, emotional or physical they seem to believe they have gained more control over life. 

Why I chose it: I chose this because it an great introduction to the tone pain sets in life. In another  Leh 300 class I am currently taking, we discuss the lives of soldiers after war. I find that the soldiers who fought in any war, whether it was WW2, Vietnam or the Middle East and survived it without any actual physical harm done to them feel a sense of strength  knowing they overcame such a painful experiencelike war. Pain does two things: but fear in your heart or makes you stronger. I think out of all our experiences at humans. Pain has the most dealings into who we are what we become.

Conformity and obedience is not a real solution to pain because it does not stop pain from occurring but it only decreases the likelihood of pain happening to you.

NAZISM

The following passage: Then, gentlemen, not you will be the ones to deliver the verdict over us, but that verdict will be given by the eternal judgment of history, which will speak out against the accusation that has been made against us. I know what your judgment will be. But that other court will not ask us: Have you committed high treason or not? That court will judge us, their quartermaster-general of the old army, its officers and soldiers, who as Germans wanted only the best for their people and Fatherland, who fought and who were willing to die. You might just as well find us guilty a thousand times, but the goddess of the eternal court of history will smile and tear up the motions of the state's attorney and the judgment of this court: for she finds us not guilty.

My interpretation: here in his conclusion paragraph I find his words and use of words very clever. We see here that Hitler believes although the German people, although the world believes that Hitler has done something wrong, has done something to betrayed Germany he is claiming that he was only doing the best for Germany. Hitler believes that he was tearing Marxism away from Germany to build it a new. he believes in order to build Germany to the best of this potential it had to slay Marxism. During this time of this speech Hitler believed even though the people of the court deemed him guilty and in his mind he believed that history, future history will see him as someone who try to change a world to do something great. He may see that him leading Germany may be one of the greatest profound steps Germany has ever seen in finding grand leadership for its nation. It's quite simple really, Hitler thought that he was doing the right thing and that the current courts didn't understand his purpose to crush Marxism and great something greater than himself. 

Max Weber: Politics as a Vocation

Following paragraph, "To take a stand, to be passionate--ira et studium--is the politician's element, and above all the element of the political leader. His conduct is subject to quite a different, indeed, exactly the opposite, principle of responsibility from that of the civil servant. The honor of the civil servant is vested in his ability to execute conscientiously the order of the superior authorities, exactly as if the order agreed with his own conviction. This holds even if the order appears wrong to him and if, despite the civil servant's remonstrances, the authority insists on the order. Without this moral discipline and self-denial, in the highest sense, the whole apparatus would fall to pieces. The honor of the political leader, of the leading statesman, however, lies precisely in an exclusive personal responsibility for what he does, a responsibility he cannot and must not reject or transfer. It is in the nature of officials of high moral standing to be poor politicians, and above all, in the political sense of the word, to be irresponsible politicians. In this sense, they are politicians of low moral standing, such as we unfortunately have had again and again in leading positions. This is what we have called Beamtenherrschaft [civil-service rule], and truly no spot soils the honor of our officialdom if we reveal what is politically wrong with the system from the standpoint of success. But let us return once more to the types of political figures. Since the time of the constitutional state, and definitely since democracy has been established, the 'demagogue' has been the typical political leader in the Occident."

In this paragraph, Weber is clarifying the role of a politician compared to a civil servant.  The job of the civil servant is to pass down the orders given by his superiors exactly as they are given. Even if the civil servant does not agree with the orders, he must execute them as is.  This differs from the role of the political leader in that the actions of the political leader are a direct result of his personal opinion. Decisions in this role come from a more moral responsibility rather than just dictating commands given by an authority figure. Weber believes that those who possess high moral standards make poor politicians and those with low morals are the ones who often hold the leadership positions. Weber reminds us that since the creation of democracy, the Western world has been fond of putting leaders of a “demagogic” personality into office.  The Western world’s use of written and spoken word emphasizes this personality and rationalizes why the political leader is viewed in this way.

Weimar Republic

Article 48
If a state (8) does not fulfil the obligations laid upon it by the Reich constitution or the Reich laws, the Reich President may use armed force to cause it to oblige.In case public safety is seriously threatened or disturbed, the Reich President may take the measures necessary to reestablish law and order, if necessary using armed force. In the pursuit of this aim he may suspend the civil rights described in articles 114, 115, 117, 118, 123, 124 and 154, partially or entirely.The Reich President has to inform Reichstag immediately about all measures undertaken which are based on paragraphs 1 and 2 of this article. The measures have to be suspended immediately if Reichstag demands so.If danger is imminent, the state government may, for their specific territory, implement steps as described in paragraph 2. These steps have to be suspended if so demanded by the Reich President or the Reichstag. Further details are provided by Reich law.

Article 48 gives the president the power to suspend civil liberties in times of crisis. we see this means that in a country's time of crisis the president has absolute control over civil liberties. I do not believe civil liberties should be suspended. These freedoms are what people in general are or should be in this case simply entitled too. I believe this is so much power for president to have. This is a perfect example as to why the idea of "checks and balance" is very important.


Article 161: “In order to maintain health and the ability to work, in order to protect motherhood and to prevent economic consequences of age, weakness and to protect against the vicissitudes of life the Reich establishes a comprehensive system of insurances, based on the critical contribution of the insured.”

Here in article 161, we see that the Constitution is saying that the need for health insurance is not just a privilege but a right. They believe (which I totally agree with) in order to maintain a society, to protect motherhood, working community every citizen needs access to health care for the country to run as a whole. I definitely believe that this right is important because maintaining good health is necessary. In the United States billions of dollars are spent every year due to the effects of lack of healthcare. If health-insurance was a government right, less people would be sick, less people would be on disability income andin response more people will be working and healthy.

German Revolution and Spartcus: Luxemburg Quote

LUXEMBURG QUOTE: Social democracy is simply the embodiment of the modern proletariat's class struggle, a struggle which is driven by a consciousness of its own historic consequences. The masses are in reality their own leaders, dialectically creating their own development process. The more that social democracy develops, grows, and becomes stronger, the more the enlightened masses of workers will take their own destinies, the leadership of their movement, and the determination of its direction into their own hands. And as the entire social democracy movement is only the conscious advance guard of the proletarian class movement, which in the words of the Communist Manifesto represent in every single moment of the struggle the permanent interests of liberation and the partial group interests of the workforce vis à vis the interests of the movement as whole, so within the social democracy its leaders are the more powerful, the more influential, the more clearly and consciously they make themselves merely the mouthpiece of the will and striving of the enlightened masses, merely the agents of the objective laws of the class movement. (“The Political Leader of the German Working Classes, Collected Works 2, 280)

In the above quote, Luxemburg is stating that social democracy is not what really represents the working class and the fight for social change is the historical foundation for the working class. The working class are the masses because the working class are in true control of the functions of the current economy. It's seems here Luxemburg perceives social democracy as a benefit for their class when when run by a specific group in power it doesn't allow the working class to take control of their struggles. She goes on to say that social democracy is not necessarily the a powerful protective instrument consciously aware of the needs of the working class when handled by a certain clique, but it needs to be handled by the true masses in order to start a revolutionary change.

Kracauer's: Democratic Values vs Authoritarian pre Nazi Films Essay

Later theorist have rejected Kracauer's suggestion that films made per Nazi period reject authoritarian and promote democratic values and it is Kracauer's suggestion that I agree with. Lets take a quick look at the three films we have watched (The Blue Angel, 'M' and The Cabinet of Dr. Caligari). The Blue Angel is about a young attractive free spirited woman named Lola working at a night club. At the club she dresses provocatively and is sort of a shared woman among the other men of the nightclub. Rath ends up going crazy because of the jealousy created in his love for Lola and through rejection and humiliation he dies. This 1930s film reflects democratic values because during this time in history the woman's role was to stay home and mind children. They had no say and were treated in submissive roles.  But here we see Lola represents all of that the typical woman is not at this time, independent, strong willed, doesn't seem to have any children and works for her own money. She represents a change, a free democratic society. In the 'M' we see the same democratic values when we see the town is looking for the child murderer. The city intensifies their search for the murderer and so the city's criminal bosses get together and organize an underground manhunt for the child murderer through beggars. When they find Beckert, instead of taking him into the police they actually have their own secret underground "trial" to convict him for his crimes. The police sort of rescue him in time. Here we see a society rejecting authority when the community decides to take the law into their own hands to punish the villain. And lastly, we have The Cabinet of Dr. Caligari which was a difficult film to interpret. I see this film as huge film marking one of films greatest form of silent horror expression. It went against all other films of its time. Because of the I see it representing democratic values because it shows free reign of expression.

'M'

1)One of the reasons the author gives for the lack of success of many of the child murders found in cinema is based on a few things one being so graphic dramatization of the child murders. I notice in both films Nightmare on Elm Street and 'M' (1931) were such a wide success because we do not see graphic dramatization of the murders of the children in the films. I also believe that children murder in cinema has such a lack of success because seeing the rate, butchering and the killing of young girls or delinquent boys is emotionally unappealing to the viewer.

2) The two films I have sampled that I have chose from the reading is Lovely Bones and darkness falls. In Lovely Bones, a young girl named Susie is murdered by a man named George Harvey. Just as in the movie 'M' we do not see Susie actually being murdered but we see symbolism of her murder when we see Harvey wiping off blood and mud off himself in his bathroom. Harvey is never actually caught for Susie's murder but we can save the universe punished him when he accidentally died at the end. In 'M' we also do not see the actual murder of the young girl but we see her balloon floating away into the telephone wire symbolizing her death. In 'M' we do see the murderer punished as well but not by the universe but by the citizens of the town. In contrast, in the Lovely Bones we see the family of the victim Susie getting closure at the end but in 'M' we see no evidence of the victim's mothers receiving any sort closure for the death of their children. 

Darkness Falls is the quiet opposite to me. This movie is more of a horror movie. It is an unrealistic movie that can not be identified with anything realistic like in lovely bones and 'M'. The widow was hung to death for the assumed murder of two towns children. She did not even kill the children because after her death the children were found. She comes back to haunt young children but her spirit is killed by a huge light source (the town lighthouse ). In all three movies we see the villain being punished for their crimes but we never actually see the villain murdering its victims but each movie shows symbolism that the young children were murdered.