Kennan is writing this at some point during the Second World War so he, like the reader, is still being left in the dark about the Comintern’s ultimate fate.
"Our Struggle": What If Hitler Had Been a Communist?
- Thread starter The Red
- Start date
Kennan is writing this at some point during the Second World War so he, like the reader, is still being left in the dark about the Comintern’s ultimate fate.
Wow ITTL, it's gonna be fun for Marxists reading Marx to find out The German Ideology is in pretty much direct opposition to The German Ideology.
Kennan is writing this at some point during the Second World War so he, like the reader, is still being left in the dark about the Comintern’s ultimate fate.
Lol,thanks.
This part though,is it supposed to be postwar or?
Although it could be several rump rogue states,the implication is that they remain somewhat relevant(as opposed to,North Korea)
Uh, Red literally said in the post you quoted that the passage is from the Second World War.
Kennan is writing during ww2. The quote about dialogues with socialist states is from an earlier post where the historian is Geoffrey Corbett, who we don't know when was writing. (The real life Corbett died in the 1930s but he wasn't too old so in an atl he could be writing in the 60s easily)
Yeah that was kinda deliberately vague as well, I didn’t want readers to know the eventual outcome to make things a bit more interesting.
Kennan was an ideologue IOTL, and quite probably ITTL as well. I recommend John Gaddis: Strategies of Containment, which is very good on the various schools of thought within the US foreign policy establishment. He wrote a 2011 biography of Kennan which I haven't read.
Decent analysis of the former: http://www.kevincmurphy.com/gaddis.html
Yeah it is pretty good. Getting some clues is one thing but TLs that keep having parts in the future spoil major event and conclusions quickly annoy me into giving up on them.
That's probably going to be the plot of one of TTLs Indiana Jones movies.
Yes! And Himmler or a similar quack tries to 'prove' that the ancient Germans were proto-Communists and lived in a socialist utopia. Before they were corrupted by the evil Romans and Christians. This is proof that the German people are destined to lead the international Communist revolution under the inspired leadership of the Great Helmsman Kamerad Hitler.
I wouldn’t say that German Ideology is “distinctively” German, more that it originates from the conditions present in pre-revolution German society which the KPD claim to have resolved. As @Cregan notes the name could be considered as a subtle criticism of the Soviet Union whereas “Industrialised Countries That Aren’t The Soviet Union” would have been too overt.
It’s less overtly racist than that but more patronising. Essentially the colonised peoples suffer under capitalism but they’re just victims who need the European Socialists to fight for them.
Basically how the communists treated the workers. The unenlightened proletariot who needs the workers to save him. And the colonies are basically agrarian, so it fits well into that narrative.
I'm not too surprised that Hitler Thought has such a strong nationalist element to it. It's rather hard for me to think of a successful socialist revolution that didn't somewhat adopt such nation-focused rhetoric, although there are those who argue that the October Revolution is the exception. And that then gets into a whole debate about how much of a mass movement that was along with the Russian Civil War and other stuff that I'm not qualified to talk about.
From the citation of the Soviets as compromisers and Germany trying to distinguish itself from them, I'm guessing that either the Soviets and Germans aren't allies in the war to come or, if they are, the Soviets are seen by Kennan as the weak-link in the chain. Ironic since Stalin was seen as such even IOTL when it came to separate peaces and the like. The extent of American neutrality's a good question to ask; an explicitly socialist Germany trying to conquer Europe is going to worry a whole other crowd who were more isolation IOTL, but how much to actually get intervention to be popular? Japan may still be viewed as the problem and Hitler's Germany ITTL is less likely to weaken the ties with the Chinese that was built before his rise as they eventually did IOTL.
Hitler may feel more kinship with the likes of Mao, not just because both grate under Stalin/Moscow's need to control everything. All depends really.
From the citation of the Soviets as compromisers and Germany trying to distinguish itself from them, I'm guessing that either the Soviets and Germans aren't allies in the war to come or, if they are, the Soviets are seen by Kennan as the weak-link in the chain. Ironic since Stalin was seen as such even IOTL when it came to separate peaces and the like. The extent of American neutrality's a good question to ask; an explicitly socialist Germany trying to conquer Europe is going to worry a whole other crowd who were more isolation IOTL, but how much to actually get intervention to be popular? Japan may still be viewed as the problem and Hitler's Germany ITTL is less likely to weaken the ties with the Chinese that was built before his rise as they eventually did IOTL.
Hitler may feel more kinship with the likes of Mao, not just because both grate under Stalin/Moscow's need to control everything. All depends really.
Chapter XLIX
"Language is much closer to film than painting is."
~ Sergei Eisenstein
~ Sergei Eisenstein
There are few in the world of film who would dispute the fact that Fritz Lang’s Metropolis is the most ambitious, and arguably the most controversial, ever made. The fact that the movie almost never saw the light of day has only served to increase the mysterious aura that surrounds it, whilst the future work of its creator has led some to argue that it should never have been saved at all.
Fritz Lang was already well regarded in Europe prior to the release of Metropolis, as was his wife and creative partner Thea Von Harbou. Together the pair had already enjoyed a great deal of success with Dr Mabuse, the Gambler and The Nibelungs, both of which had led to the couple being regarded as leading lights in the expressionist film movement. It was a success which the pair intended to build upon, and to do so they cast their gaze across the Atlantic Ocean.
The glamour and and grandeur of New York City would act as the inspiration when Lang and Von Harbou first journeyed to the city in 1924. The German artistic world was thriving in the instability of the initial years of the Weimar Republic however in the United States the pair found a city in the centre of what would later be described as the “Roaring Twenties.” New York was the epicentre of a vast, booming, economy, a land of seemingly immeasurable wealth and splendour to match. It was the home of an ever growing wealth elite that seemed a million miles removed from the a continent struggling to rebuild from the ravages of the First World War, and equally indifferent to the packed slums full of workers who worked endlessly to maintain their places of leisure.
The notion of a contrasted and conflicted full city of wealth and poverty was the story Lang and Von Harbour wanted to tell, combining the dystopian societies of H. G. Wells’ The Time Machine and Jack London’s The Iron Heel with the contemporary setting of New York as its template. Metropolis was born.
Von Harbou began to write the screenplay shortly after the couple had returned to Germany. The German economy was slowly recovering from disastrous hyperinflation and whilst the rich recovered their wealth fairly quickly, many formerly middle class individuals found themselves in the working class jobs of their fathers to get by, whilst the plight of the average worker was made worse by a coalition of the right-wing parties driving down wages and workers rights in the name of economic growth. It was in this atmosphere of division and resentment that the film grew out of. The German film giant UFA, impressed by Lang’s previous success, were keen to take on the project despite the large budget required. At the time Metropolis was the most expensive movie ever made, the vision of a futuristic city that could come alive amidst elaborate sets and props, a cast of over 300 and another 40,000 extras would bring Lang and Von Harbou’s vision to life but the studio would not see the benefit.
UFA had already been suffering from serious debt prior to beginning production on Metropolis and as the project began to experience delays almost from the outset due to Lang’s notorious perfectionism increasingly became a sinkhole for the company’s remaining capital. The shoot that had begun in May 1925 was still not finished in July 1926 when UFA was forced to declare bankruptcy and had to be bailed out by the powerful press magnate, Alfred Hugenberg.
Hugenberg was already the owner of several newspapers and radio stations in Germany and was eager to take control of UFA to expand his media empire and to promote his own political views and those of the far-right German National People’s Party, which he also led. Metropolis, the tale of an evil industrialist and an oppressed working class, was not part of this vision. It was primarily for this reason that Hugenberg ordered the film scrapped, although the spiralling cost also provided an excellent motivation for a studio that was being ordered to cut costs across the board. Metropolis, which had been forced to stop shooting for several months, now seemed doomed to never be completed.
It would be Fritz Lang’s perfectionist drive that would ultimately save the film. Determined to finish what they now considered to be their opus, an embittered Lang and Von Harbou bought the unfinished film from UFA at an administrative cost. Hugenberg reportedly found it amusing, the idea of getting his money returned by a left-wing director who was too egotistical to let his half-finished film rot away in a warehouse owned by the sort of man the film had set out to attack.
Lang had bigger plans of course, borrowing money and favours from individual investors, production was restarted in earnest in the final months of 1927 until he could convince another studio to take the film. With the threat of being closed down again at any moment, a more austere script had to be created by Von Harbou based on the existing footage and what Langs small crew of friends could accomplish. It was a rewrite that was clearly affected by Lang and Von Harbou’s experiences at UFA, with a plot that far more to say about what should really happen to those who ran the city of Metropolis.
Lang and Von Harbou almost bankrupted in their efforts, having to construct sets in their spare time and having to pay the actors out of their own pockets, many of whom were unable to reprise their roles due to binding contracts with UFA. Allegedly the lead actress, Brigitte Helm, had to put up the couple in her mother’s house for several weeks at a time. In the Summer of 1928, Nero-Film AG agreed to cover the costs for the rest of the film and pay off Lang’s outstanding debts the basis that they would control the films rights and distribution. Penniless and at his wits end, Lang agreed. Post-production finally began in the Autumn of that year.
The film was finally released in early 1929, heavily rewritten and with many actors inadvertently disappearing half way through the film on the basis of flimsy reasoning. In spite of these difficulties, the impressive sets, the unrivalled special effects and the powerful message of workers rising up against a powerful elite both excited and resonated with mass audiences whilst also receiving significant critical acclaim. The image of a glittering paradise above maintained by the slave conditions below would be one that would stick in many people’s minds.
The message the film emphasises throughout is one of venom towards the upper classes of society, personified by the evil Joh Fredersen as portrayed by Alfred Abel and his plot to kidnap the leader of the workers who toil in the underground city, Brigitte Helm’s almost angelic Maria. It is a message that becomes all the more pronounced when, having kidnapped Maria, Fredersen replicates her likeness using an advanced robot named the “Maschinenmensch” (Machine Man), who is then sent down to prevent the workers from improving their lot by dazzling them with seductive dances before ordering them to work longer hours for the good of their cause. Rotwang, the jealous inventor of the Maschinenmensch who Fredersen refuses to pay, makes his own journey down to the underground city, where he reveals the false Maria as an impostor.
The workers, momentarily distracted from their hedonistic activities, see “Maria” respond to Rotwang’s revelation by picking him up with one arm and attempting to strangle him to death. Realising that the mad scientist was correct, the workers turn on the machine, tying it to a hastily assembled bonfire and setting it alight.
Fredersen arrives with a large contingent of armed men from the upper city, he has been alerted to the destruction of the Maschinenmensch and now intends to crush the workers once and for all. He orders the soldiers to fire on the gathered men, women and children, only for the men to pause in horror at the sight unveiling before their eyes. The metallic Maschinenmensch, emerging from the flames.
The robot is burned at the stake, only to appear in metal form to kill Fredersen after realising pain of its own existence. With UFA claiming to have disposed of the original Maschinenmensch costume, and with the film’s limited budget unable to cover the further costs of reproducing a suit that could resemble the original and also move with ease, Lang instead turned to Russian filmmaker Ladislas Starevich. Starevich’s stop motion puppet of the Maschinenmensch emerging from the flames to kill Fredersen. For many, the slow mechanical creep the robotic puppet does as it walks out of the flames and towards Fredersen is the most memorable of the film.
To underline the message, the film ends with Rotwang and workers agreeing to work together for better society as revolution breaks out across the city. An ending card declares:
“WE MUST UNITE AGAINST THOSE WHO WOULD TURN US INTO MACHINES”
Metropolis remained prolific in German cinemas by late October, when it was renewed for an even longer run.
~ German Expression: A Retrospective by Mark Hellman
---
The picture is from the original Metropolis, with Brigitte Helm as the "False Maria".
Last edited:
Great stuff.
Having seen the original Metropolis, it's interesting to see how this one is different. Certainly… how to put it? More unequivocal. None of that "mediator" stuff, and the good-bourgeois protagonist appears to have vanished. More like "the hand should beat the [redacted] out of the head". No wonder it's an inflammatory message.
Having seen the original Metropolis, it's interesting to see how this one is different. Certainly… how to put it? More unequivocal. None of that "mediator" stuff, and the good-bourgeois protagonist appears to have vanished. More like "the hand should beat the [redacted] out of the head". No wonder it's an inflammatory message.