Have been you to google “Carl Jung and Nazism”—and I’m not suggesting that you just do—you’d discover yourself hip-deep within the costs that Jung was an anti-Semite and a Nazi sympathizer. Many websites condemn or exonerate him; many others celebrate him as a blood and soil Aryan hero. It may be nauseatingly difficult at occasions to inform these accounts aside. What to make of this controversy? What’s the evidence introduced in opposition to the famed Swiss psychiatrist and onetime shut buddy, student, and colleague of Sigmund Freud?
Reality be instructed, it doesn’t look good for Jung. In contrast to Nietzsche, whose work was deliberately bastardized by Nazis, startning along with his personal sister, Jung needn’t be taken out of contextual content to be learn as anti-Semitic. There is no such thing as a irony at work in his 1934 paper The State of Psychotherapy At this time, during which he marvels at National Socialism as a “formidable phenomenon,” and writes, “the ‘Aryan’ unconscious has a excessiveer potential than the Jewish.” That is solely one of many least objectionready of such statements, as historian Andrew Samuels demonstrates.
One Jungian defender admits in an essay collection referred to as Lingering Shadows that Jung had been “unconsciously infected by Nazi concepts.” In response, psychologist John Conger asks, “Why not then say that he was unconsciously infected by anti-Semitic concepts as nicely?”—nicely earlier than the Nazis got here to power. He had expressed such ideas way back to 1918. Just like the philosopher Martin Heidegger, Jung was accused of trading on his professionalfessional associations during the 30s to primarytain his status, and switching on his Jewish colleagues whereas they had been purged.
But his biographer Deirdre Bair claims Jung’s title was used to endorse persecution without his condespatched. Jung was incensed, “not least,” Mark Vernon writes at The Guardian, “as a result of he was actually combating to maintain German psychotherapy open to Jewish individuals.” Bair additionally reveals that Jung was “concerned in two plots to oust Hitler, essentially by having a leading physician declare the Führer mad. Each got here to nothing.” And in contrast to Heidegger, Jung sturdyly denounced anti-Semitic views during the struggle. He “professionaltected Jewish analysts,” writes Conger, “and helped refugees.” He additionally labored for the OSS, precursor to the CIA, during the struggle.
His recruiter Allen Dulles wrote of Jung’s “deep antipathy to what Nazism and Fascism stood for.” Dulles additionally cryptically remarked, “No one will probably ever understand how a lot Prof. Jung contributed to the allied trigger during the struggle.” These contradictions in Jung’s phrases, character, and actions are puzzling, to say the least. I might not presume to attract any exhausting and quick conclusions from them. They do, however, function the necessary contextual content for Jung’s observations of Adolf Hitler. Nazis of at the moment who reward Jung most frequently achieve this for his supposed characterization of Hitler as “Wotan,” or Odin, a comparison that thrills neo-pagans who, just like the Germans did, use historical European perception systems as garments holders for modern racist nationalism.
In his 1936 essay, “Wotan,” Jung describes the previous god as a pressure all its personal, a “personification of psystylish forces” that moved via the German people “in direction of the tip of the Weimar Republic”—via the “thousands of unemployed,” who by 1933 “marched of their hundreds of thousands.” Wotan, Jung writes, “is the god of storm and frenzy, the unleasher of passions and the lust of battle; extraover he’s a superlative magician and artist in illusion who’s versed in all secrets and techniques of an occult nature.” In personifying the “German psyche” as a furious god, Jung goes as far as to jot down, “We who stand outaspect decide the Germans far an excessive amount of as in the event that they had been responsible brokers, however perhaps it might be close toer the reality to treat them additionally as victims.”
“One hopes,” writes Per Brask, “evidently in opposition to hope, that Jung didn’t intend” his statements “as an argument of redemption for the Germans.” Whatever his intentions, his mystical racialization of the unconscious in “Wotan” accorded perfectly nicely with the theories of Alfred Rosenberg, “Hitler’s chief ideologist.” Like eachfactor about Jung, the situation is complicated. In a 1938 interview, published by Omniguide Magazineazine in 1942, Jung repeated many of those disturbing concepts, comparing the German worship of Hitler to the Jewish need for a Messiah, a “characteristic of people with an inferiority complex.” He describes Hitler’s power as a type of “magazineic.” However that power solely exists, he says, as a result of “Hitler listens and obeys….”
His Voice is nothing other than his personal unconscious, into which the German people have professionaljected their very own selves; that’s, the unconscious of seventy-eight million Germans. That’s what makes him powerful. Without the German people he could be nothing.
Jung’s observations are bombastic, however they aren’t flattering. The people could also be possessed, however it’s their will, he says, that the Nazi chief enacts, not his personal. “The true chief,” says Jung, “is all the time led.” He goes on to color a good darkisher picture, having shutly noticed Hitler and Mussolini together in Berlin:
In comparison with Mussolini, Hitler made upon me the impression of a type of scaffolding of wooden covered with material, an automaton with a masks, like a robotic or a masks of a robotic. During the entire performance he never laughed; it was as if he had been in a nasty humor, sulking. He confirmed no human signal.
His expression was that of an inhumanly single-minded purposiveness, with no humorousness. He appeared as if he may be a double of an actual person, and that Hitler the person would possibly perhaps be hiding inside like an appendix, and deliberately so hiding so as to not disturb the mechanism.
With Hitler you don’t really feel that you’re with a person. You might be with a medicine man, a type of spiritual vessel, a demi-deity, and even wagerter, a delusion. With Hitler you’re scared. you’d never be capable to discuss to that man; as a result of there’s no person there. He isn’t a person, however a collective. He isn’t an individual, however an entire nation. I take it to be literally true that he has no personal buddy. How will you discuss intimately with a nation?
Learn the full interview right here. Jung goes on to further discuss the German resurgence of the cult of Wotan, the “parallel between the Biblical triadvert… and the Third Reich,” and other peculiarly Jungian formulations. Of Jung’s analysis, interviewer H.R. Knickerbocker concludes, “this psychiatric explanation of the Nazi names and symbols might sound to a layman fantastic, however can anyfactor be as fantastic because the naked information concerning the Nazi Party and its Fuehrer? Ensure there’s far more to be defined in them than could be defined by merely nameing them gangsters.”
Be aware: An earlier version of this put up appeared on our website in 2017.
Related Content:
George Orwell Critiques Mein Kampf: “He Envisages a Horrible Mindmuch less Empire” (1940)
Carl Jung Gives an Introduction to His Psychological Thought in a 3‑Hour Interview (1957)
How Carl Jung Impressed the Creation of Alcoholics Anonymous
Josh Jones is a author and musician primarily based in Durham, NC. Follow him at @jdmagness
