trillion dollar national debt as toonmuch of a good thing, but, just asnhe expected, those buying Tbillsnare hopeful that the governmentnwill survive to pay interest.nGovernment debts to Americansnbecome more problematic, however,nwhen the debtor governmentnis not our own but a foreignnone, especially an unpopular foreignnregime which prohibits freenenterprise among its own citizens.nIndeed in Endless EnemiesnJonathan Kwitny, a reporter fornthe Wall Street Journal, showsnhow American investments andnloans abroad have often artificiallynstrengthened the positionnof authoritarian socialists. Suchnan analysis neatly turns on itsnhead the usual leftist complaintnthat American foreign policy isnbad because it impedes thenWASTE OF MONEYnMisunderstanding NazismnSaul Friedlander: Reflectionsnof Nazism: An Essay onnKitsch and Death; Harper & ROW;nNew York.nWhy is it that intellectualsncontinue to brood over thenextinct totalitarianism of nazismnwhile ignoriijig or applauding itsnvirulent twin, communism? InnReflections of Nazism, SaulnFriedlander, professor of historynat Tel Aviv University, offers yetnanother erudite analysis of nationalnsocialism by exploring then”new discourse” appearing innrecent film, fiction, and scholarship.nHis study fails like manynbefore it because of its blindnessnto the modernist and secularistncontinuities between GermannNational Socialism ( a label rarelynused by Friedlander and hisncolleagues) and internationalnMarxism.nemergence of socialism. Americannforeign policy fails, thisnstudy contends, because itncreates the felse dilemma of U.S.sponsorednsocialism vs. Sovietsponsorednsocialism. Free-marketncapitalism, Kwitny finds, is preciselynwhat many Americannbankers, corporate executives,nand diplomats seem unwilling tonexport. The ironic result hasnbeen widespread hostility againstnAmerica for propping up decidedlynun-American economiesnand governments.nArguably Kwitny underestimatesnthe role of communistnaggression in world affairs.nNonetheless, his carefully researchednbook raises seriousnquestions for Wall Street investors,nFo^y Bottom strategists, andnaverage American voters. DnFriedlander locates, perceptivelynenough, a fusion in nazismnof love for superficial harmonynand of attraction to the Void. Thenkitsch aesthetic of “homelyncottages” is thus united with “thenunfathomable world of myths…nthe lights of the apocalypse.” InnFriedlander’s view, this combinationncreated a “certain kind ofnreligiosity” which is “pre- andnantimodern.” Nazism is in thisnrespect “unlike Marxism, whichnreaches out to the society ofntomorrow.” Even under Stalin,nFriedlander avers, communistsnhave never “venerated oppressionnand propagated apocalypticnvisions.” (Characteristically,nFriedlander counterposes “thenStalinist hell” with “the capitalistnjungle.” Let the beasts of thenAmerican “jungle” stop protectingnIsrael and subsidizing itsnramshackle socialist economynfor even a month and Israelinacademicians will forget aboutnsophisticated essays on nazismnand will start learning a fewnTarzanyeUs.)nBut above all Hitler was anmodernist Utopian, not a “premodemnor antimodern” thinker.nAs Friedlander himself admits.nHitler was the leader of “revolutionarynmodernization” in Germany’snindustry, and he spentnmany hours contemplating hisnmodel of the futurist imperialncapital. The view that Hitler’sn”model of future society is only anreflection of the past” is simplynnot true. The invocations of then”pure Aryan race” had little to donwith real German history. Asntheir passion for eugenics reveals,nnational socialists, likenMarxists, wanted a “new man.”nWhat Friedlander and othernleftists apparently find mostndistasteful about nazi utopianlsmnis that it was the brainchild not ofnanother intellectual like themselvesnbut of 3.petit bourgeois,n”an eternal adolescent: gauche,nsprung from modest circumstances,nnever at ease in hisnpolished shoes.” “The dictatorshipnof the proletariat” is annelegant concept, fit for symposiumndiscussion, but, please,nlet us have nothing to do withnwallpaper hangers. At this pointnone sees clearly how correctnErnst Nolte was in The ThreenFaces of Fascism when he linkednnazism and Marxism as fundamentallynsimilar because of theirnshared “refusal of transcendence.”nThis illuminating thesis,nbrushed aside as “too vaguelynphrased” by Friedlander, explainsnwhy apocalypse assumesnits modernist significance innboth Marxism and national socialism.nIn Christianity, the endnof the world is the inevitablenprelude to New Jerusalem. Thenold world must pass away beforenthe new heaven and earth cannappear. The totalitarian visionnpromises instead a terrestrialnUtopia, nazi or communist, ornannihilation. The goal is ideologicalnsupremacy or nothing.nThe nihilism in communismnhas so far been less visible tonworld view than that in nazismnbecause, unlike nazism, it hasnFREE with this coupon:n1984 and The Modern MindnPlease rush me your colorful review of ThenCenter on Religion & Society, The IngersollnPrizes in Literature and the Humanities, and thenother exciting programs of The RockfordnInstitute.nNamenAddressnCitynState_ Zip-nnnThe Rockford Instituten934 North Main StreetnRockford, Illinois 61103ni29nJanuary 1985n