Tears welled from a place so deep that the breath caught in my chest and my heart heaved upward. There was a moment of contemplation of stepping away, stopping the scene to allow the body to calm, but the mind forced forward wishing to know just how she was to die.
Enlightenment is man’s emergence from his self-incurred immaturity. ~ Kant
Kant writes that this source of immaturity is not so much lack of understanding, but the courage to use it. His words echoed in my head tonight as I watched Sophie Scholl.
Laziness and cowardice are the reasons why such a large proportion of men, even when nature has long emancipated them from alien guidance (naturaliter maiorennes), nevertheless gladly remain immature for life. ~ Kant
Sophie Scholl was neither lazy nor a coward. I knew nothing of the her story, or that of “The White Rose” , until tonight’s viewing of Sophie Scholl. It was rather last minute, so you can imagine the chill when they flashed the date at the end – February, 22 1943 – in a few days it shall be 70 years since the execution of this young woman who dared to stand up to the Nazi’s for her convictions, for her conscience.
For it is very harmful to propagate prejudices, because they finally avenge themselves on the very people who first encouraged them (or whose predecessors did so). Thus a public can only achieve enlightenment slowly. A revolution may well put an end to autocratic despotism and to rapacious or power-seeking oppression, but it will never produce a true reform in ways of thinking. Instead, new prejudices, like the ones they replaced, will serve as a leash to control the great unthinking mass.
I think of Kant’s words and grapple with the power that Hitler was able to have over the masses. What allowed such control? Sadly, Americans are not well versed on World History unless that is an area of study at University. I do not know enough of the power structure of the German government pre-Hitler to address it in historical context.
As credits rolled naming many more from “The White Rose” who paid dearly for speaking out against the Nazi regime, I couldn’t help but wonder what is the good of philosophy if it cannot prevent such atrocities. Despite all our knowledge, our understanding of freedom, there are still small factions around this globe that are without freedom as society. Perhaps Rousseau was not so far off when he wrote:
It likewise follows that moral inequality, authorised by any right that is merely positive, clashes with natural right, as often as it does not combine in the same proportion with physical inequality: a distinction which sufficiently determines, what we are able to think in that respect of that kind of inequality which obtains in all civilised nations, since it is evidently against the law of nature that infancy should command old age, folly conduct wisdom, and a handful of men should be ready to choke with superfluities, while the famished multitude want the commonest necessaries of life.
Rousseau seems extreme in his discourse that man is no longer free once removed from nature. Yet the freedom Kant promises seems false if we obtain freedom via embracing our enlightenment.
Sophie Scholl was enlightened and acted upon that knowledge freely because of her conscience. Her freedom was not her own, however, for to speak out was to defy her government. Perhaps it now comes down to what it is to be free, to have freedom … but not now, it is 2AM ~


kateshrewsday
/ 2013/02/18This looks like an amazing film and such a perennial issue, Angela. Thanks for highlighting it: I shall be finding a copy to watch.
angela
/ 2013/02/19You’re welcome, Kate…it really is quite a stirring film.
Andra Watkins
/ 2013/02/18I remember this movie vividly, and its been a while since I’ve seen it. The final scenes will always stay with me.
angela
/ 2013/02/19I thought it best not to explore the ending for that was an ongoing thought whilst watching, Andra, how would they be executed. I was aghast. It haunts me, especially the brother’s call out. ~ a
peculiaritiesandreticences
/ 2013/02/18I knew about Sophie Scholl but have never seen the movie. What she did took such courage I can’t even find the words for it.
When Roger Waters toured last year, he paid tribute to her at intermission, along with other victims of World War II and other wars (including his own father, who was killed at Anzio). I made a point of taking a picture of his tribute to her.
angela
/ 2013/02/19You must watch this film, Mark, it is very well done.
peculiaritiesandreticences
/ 2013/02/19I’ve heard that. I would love to. Besides, I’ve been a World War II history buff for a long time.
peculiaritiesandreticences
/ 2013/02/19I just sent you the photo of .Roger Waters’s tribute to Sophie Scholl. Thought you’d like to see it.
angela
/ 2013/02/19Thank you so much, Mark. I got it – haunting after that film — watch it soon, seriously!
peculiaritiesandreticences
/ 2013/02/20I plan to.
Mark Kerstetter
/ 2013/02/20In thinking about how to respond in 800 words to these texts by Kant, Rousseau and Marx, “freedom” seems to be the key word. But I’ve been trying to figure out what freedom is all my life. It is said that we have it in our country, and certainly we do, if you compare America to a dictatorship. There is a provisional sense of the word in which it only makes sense in relation to this, that or many constraints. But freedom as a stable condition of life is impossible to grasp.
The Motherwell text is fascinating to think about in the orbit of these questions. It is your genius to share it, and I thank you for that. I can’t help but think, when I read it, that the general state of artistic consciousness today – when compared to the time of Motherwell’s text – is one of tremendous lassitude. I’m reminded of the profound disappointment of Isamu Noguchi, who believed that abstract art had the power to heal and educate society in many ways, and although he kept working he had to face the perpetual fact of the middle class contempt and working class lack of interest that Motherwell mentions. We contemporary artists see the extraordinary efforts and accomplishments of the modern artists of the past 200 hundred years and yet, continuing in our isolation, feel to some extent buried by it. The result, it seems to me, is a great deal of inconsequential work – work that is deliberately facile. And a certain momentary freedom of the mind in the individual, and the “freedom” that comes from owning one’s house rather than paying rent to the “Man” are the only forms of freedom we can really taste. (sorry about my use of the “we” – thinking out loud, here)
angela
/ 2013/02/20Will I just be terrible if I DO NOT write the 800 words? If we get the ‘big snow’, which affords me a few extra hours off of work, perhaps for the challenge it will happen. Frankly, each time I think about it, it seems such a stretch, as Kant’s piece assigned seems so far removed from Rousseau and Marx. It seems more fitting to read other Kant pieces that I keep stumbling upon that delve more into the overlapping philosophy of “freedom”. That said, I need to re-read his commentary… sigh ~
Very glad that you found the Motherwell of interest for you came to mind when I started to read it knowing if we were in a cafe, you would be able to expound upon some of the finer points! Is it not amazing, though, how it overlaps what we have been studying? That said, I had no idea that Motherwell was first a philosophy major who then went on for art history. I have had “Writings of Robert Motherwell” (complete steal found out used bookshop!) forever but just started to skim yesterday – so glad! It seems he was a huge fan of Camus and Kierkegaard…obviously quite inspired by Marx as well.
PS ~ read this post today and think you will enjoy if you’ve not read it already ~ http://www.guardian.co.uk/books/booksblog/2013/feb/18/unread-unreadable-books?CMP=twt_gu