Martin Niemöller, and Who First They Came For

David TC

Living in Georgia his entire life, David has a wide variety of hobbies, including theatre, gaming both video and TTRPG, and condemning publicly the very idea that some people have the right to repress others.

You may also like...

21 Responses

  1. Andrew Donaldson
    Ignored
    says:

    Aside from the content of this piece and the discussion that will come of it, I just wanted to say after six years of doing this for OT how it is always good to not only have a commentor take us up on “you can write a whole piece about this” – which too few do – but to deliver an essay like this is impressive, and I thank David for doing do.Report

    • DavidTC in reply to Andrew Donaldson
      Ignored
      says:

      Thanks, and I really do have an essay in my head about how entangled feminism and gay rights have been over a century and a half, and a lot of the recent assertation about trans people versus women’s right are absurdly ahistorical and seem to have an understanding of feminism that stopped in the 1920s, and they even managed to get _that_ wrong.

      The problem is that I almost feel that’s going to require me stepping through the entire history of feminist thought, explaining each wave of it and possibly also all of queer history and everything with it, so it’s rather daunting.

      I am desperately trying to figure out how to break those into pieces. Hopefully shorter than this, which was actually too long by like five paragraphs, but I really felt I needed to be overly sarcastic for a couple of paragraphs at the end just in case people missed the point somehow.Report

    • North in reply to Andrew Donaldson
      Ignored
      says:

      Yes it’s very well done! Good on you DavidTC!Report

  2. Jaybird
    Ignored
    says:

    Oh good! I was wondering about this!

    Thanks for writing it!Report

  3. DavidTC
    Ignored
    says:

    Incidentally, and with the intent of hopefully restricting it to just this thread and not the entire discussion: The lesbian I didn’t mention, because it would dominate the discussion and also she was about a century earlier than when I was talking about, was Susan B Anthony.

    Let’s go, people. Fight me. But Google it first.Report

  4. DensityDuck
    Ignored
    says:

    Would you say that German far-right movements of the time were uniquely persecutive of queer people, relative to the rest of Western Europe and America?Report

    • David TC in reply to DensityDuck
      Ignored
      says:

      The thing is, there was not one German far-right movements. There were multiple ones. Here:

      https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Conservative_Revolution#Currents

      I will try to summarized a very complicated thing I barely understand.

      There were the Young Conservatives, which seemed to just be…anti-modernism in the sense they were anti-democratic and pro-authoritarianism. Often very corporatism, often harken back to Divine Right. Think Peter Thiel and all the other techbros that seem very sure the best system of government is one where someone Really Smart is eternally in charge.

      There were National Revolutionaries, who embraced modernity and just wanted a revolution for some reason, after which they were sure we’d be happy people with modern technology but simple lives. These guys eventually argued _against_ the Na.zis. There’s not really an analog here. Honestly, these guys do not sound too far from modern ‘normal’ conservatives except they were slightly anti-capitalist.

      And there was the group I focused on, the Völkisch, who came up with the base-level horrific part of Na.zi ideology, the idea that German blood belonged to German land, and vis versa, and everyone was not ‘volk’ was the problem. And part of volk was an understanding of gender roles.

      But, anyway, to the question: The far-right didn’t really care about queer people in the 1920s. They were much more into ultra-nationalism and nativism.

      No one actually cared about them. Yes, there were laws against them, laws that at various times and places were implemented or ignored, but no one actually _cared_. Berlin was incredibly gay. You want to be gay in some small German town…well, people would probably pretty strongly suggest you move to Berlin.

      I can’t find any real information about how the rest of the German right felt about this, I suspect logically the Young Conservatives saw that as part of the modernity they despised, but I don’t think they really did anything.

      And same with the rest of the world, who were increasingly seeing queer people as an oddity, not a threat. The acceptance of gay people isn’t a slope, it’s a cycle. Indeed, the entire cycle would cycle, during the Great Depression, going back to presenting queer people as dangerous.

      The Völkisch were _out of cycle_. Like I said, they were a reactionary movement, at least partially in reaction to social rules about gender loosening, which had just sorta hit Germany at the end of WWI.

      The exact same reactionary movement that, once integrated into Na.zism, resulted death camps.

      Like, there’s a hypothetical Germany without the Völkisch, where the left falls to infighting and ultranationalism still takes over and they go to war again because of their war debts, but they _aren’t_ genocidal lunatics. The Völkisch are the thing that makes fascism _fascism_, and not just general totalitarianism.Report

  5. Slade the Leveller
    Ignored
    says:

    “You want to be gay in some small German town…well, people would probably pretty strongly suggest you move to Berlin.”

    I daresay you could substitute nearly any country for Germany and pick that country’s largest city for people to move to. Even now, 100 years after Weimar.Report

  6. Dark Matter
    Ignored
    says:

    Really well written and well done. Good work DavidTC.Report

  7. Dark Matter
    Ignored
    says:

    I think the next question is,

    Is Columbia and Trump’s crackdown of the pro-Palestinians the ‘Canary in the coalmine’ (link at bottom, their answer is “yes”) or is it a lot more reasonable?

    Some of the claims are concerning; Trump is forcing Columbia’s Middle East department to be seriously redone, ergo academic freedom is a problem. However (normally not mentioned) is a prof in this department, one day after 10-7, made posts referring to scenes from the attacks as “awesome” and “stunning” (same link).

    https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2025/mar/29/columbia-middle-east-department-trump-edward-saidReport

    • CJColucci in reply to Dark Matter
      Ignored
      says:

      Is there anyone in the Trump administration who is competent to say, or has any idea, whether there is anything academically wrong with the Department? Disagreements with faculty members’ politics don’t count.Report

      • Dark Matter in reply to CJColucci
        Ignored
        says:

        “Disagreements” is doing a lot of heavy lifting there in the face of published department support for 10-7.

        Presumably there is supposed to be a carful review process where we prove someone who openly supports Hamas is unfit to teach ME politics and history. Clearly that hasn’t happened.

        But this is a process argument where we pretend we don’t know what we know. Same with those protests.

        Calling for Jews to be killed is deep into antisemitism. That’s still true if it’s rephrased into “No Israel, No Jews” or any of it’s equivalents.

        That’s in addition to whether protesters have the “right” to shut down various things to force people to respond to their arguments and do other things that are normally illegal.Report

        • Dark Matter in reply to Dark Matter
          Ignored
          says:

          I have little respect for “process” arguments because we wouldn’t apply them in other situations.

          Example: A professor who was openly a white supremist who publicly made an argument for bringing back slavery as a “solution” to various race issues would instantly be fired without the Feds needing to threaten budgets.

          We wouldn’t have University Presidents claim “it depends” on whether the code of conduct is being broken, nor argue for the first AM and so on. Protesters backing him and his issues would be handled by the police and they wouldn’t be allowed to shut down the university much less threaten black students.

          All of this would, correctly, be handled by the U calling in the cops if need be to enforce things that are normally illegal.Report

          • CJColucci in reply to Dark Matter
            Ignored
            says:

            The word that does the real work is “academically.” I don’t share what you describe, and I haven’t bothered to check, as the political views of members of the Department. Because that’s none of my f*****g business or the f*****g business of the federal government. I assume they have deplorable politics. Academic life is full of people who have deplorable politics, of all stripes. To take your own example, Columbia used to have eminent historians who held almost exactly the views you described. But their scholarship was first-rate and their status was never threatened. Probably because the government didn’t have a problem with that particular set of views back then. Things got a little dicier when the weird political views of certain scholars pissed the government off. I’m sure I don’t have to recite the history of the late 40’s through mid 60’s.
            Whatever the political views of some of the Department members, I have seen nothing from anyone competent to speak — definitely not including anyone in the Trump administration, Chris Rufo, Barrie Weiss, or, to be blunt, you — even suggesting that the Department needs an academic overhaul.Report

            • Dark Matter in reply to CJColucci
              Ignored
              says:

              If they don’t want politics to matter, then they shouldn’t be threatening Jews and insisting that everyone’s politics need to match theirs or they’ll shut down the University.Report

          • David TC in reply to Dark Matter
            Ignored
            says:

            I have little respect for “process” arguments because we wouldn’t apply them in other situations.

            It really boggles the mind how we are in a world where Canary Mission is getting students kicked out of school and deported for writing this op-ed:

            https://www.tuftsdaily.com/article/2024/03/4ftk27sm6jkj

            and you are standing there pretending this is something that would normally get students kicked out of school if it was about anyone but Jews. At least, that is what I understand you are saying.

            When in reality, it wouldn’t get anyone kicked out of school _except_ pro-Palestinian people. Who _are_, in the actual world, getting deported.Report

      • Michael Cain in reply to CJColucci
        Ignored
        says:

        Among the things the administration doesn’t understand is that every department is different. Different research interests across all of topic, framework, etc, shape things. And that pushes into which classes are taught, reading material, and all that. It’s not like Calc I, where they’re teaching language as much as anything, consistent across the needs of math majors, physics majors, engineering majors, history majors, and so on.

        My perception is that the administration wants there to be a single narrative about Middle Eastern history and current politics. No room for variance. Exactly the opposite of what universities are supposed to be.Report

        • Dark Matter in reply to Michael Cain
          Ignored
          says:

          There is a vast difference between “a single narrative” and “a crack down on the idea that ‘No Israel, No Jews’ is acceptable.” Advocating for genocide shouldn’t be funded by US tax dollars.Report

    • Jaybird in reply to Dark Matter
      Ignored
      says:

      I know: Columbia should appeal to the importance of the academy being a place where difficult ideas need to be wrestled with, not smothered.Report

      • Dark Matter in reply to Jaybird
        Ignored
        says:

        If they want that then they need to have police prevent the Protesters from shutting the U down and/or threatening Jews.

        At least then when they have discussions on whether advocating for genocide is a good thing, the U will be able to say they’re only debating things.Report

    • David TC in reply to Dark Matter
      Ignored
      says:

      Is Columbia and Trump’s crackdown of the pro-Palestinians the ‘Canary in the coalmine’ (link at bottom, their answer is “yes”) or is it a lot more reasonable?

      Why are we asking about canaries when the Trump administration has asserted the right to detain people and ship them to foreign gulags without a trial of any sort?

      If they can assert that someone, with no evidence or court proceeding, is not an American citizen and is a gang member, and ship them to an El Salvadorian gulag, then we are actually at fascism, we do not need to argue it is coming. In fact, even if they _aren’t_ allowed to do that, even if the court stops them, it is still fascism. It is just a fascist executive that is very slightly constrained by courts.

      And I frankly could care less watching Columbia actively destroy itself and every single ounce of respect anyone ever held for it. Because, frankly, it never deserved any of that to start with.

      You want to talk about academic freedom, let’s talk about it for the colleges that _don’t_ instantly and cowardly cave.Report

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *