From Judgment at Nuremburg to Sleight of Hand

Posted by Buck68 on May 1st, 2011 filed in Uncategorized

by Buck68™, May 1st 2011
©2011 by Buck68™, all rites re-served. Each use whatsoever requires prior written permission from the author [email: abuck68@yahoo.com]

It was a coincidence. While I was news surfing the internet with one eye i was watching the classic movie, Judgment at Nuremburg [1961], with the other. Thus i just happened upon Charles M. Blow’s opinion article in the NYT, “Silliness and Sleight of Hand” [see url].

http://www.nytimes.com/2011/04/30/opinion/30blow.html?_r=2&hp

I read Charles Blow’s article as Chief Justice Spencer Tracy rendered the Court’s verdict on the 4 Nazi judges in the movie climax [see youtube excerpt url]

And then, over the next 2 hours, I reread Mr Blow’s opinions about Sleight of Hand, and reviews and excerpts from Judgment at Nuremburg. I heartily recommend considering and comparing the content of… both… repeatedly.

Now I’ll struggle through …my questions, my thoughts, as they cut to the heart of what has become of America, and what we ‘stand for’ in ‘crisis of survival’, to paraphrase Judge Spencer Tracy.

This url’s cast of characters may assist you as I compare the movie’s portrayal of the rationalizations of 4 Nazi judges …to Mr Blow’s content. In so doing, I will make the presumption that Mr Blow writes honestly and says what he means.

http://law2.umkc.edu/faculty/projects/ftrials/nuremberg/judgmentatnuremberg.html

The first Nazi judge [actor Werner Klemperer] not only asserted his moral and legal right to enforce Nazi law, but practically pointed out the Nazis had common cause with the West against Bolshevism. What was this judge asserting? He did not cite Nazi laws, nor justify them even in part. Basically, he asserted he was “right” by the authority of… himself…and …those who agreed with him. Right in his own mind…and certainly, ‘passionate’ about it. By extension, Nazi Germany was ‘right’ in its own eyes and because any nation has the authority to make its own laws. Do Mr. Blow’s opinions – in their certainty, tone, and generalizations about individuals and group from his 16 references – mirror the pattern of righteous judgment of Klemperer’s judge? What’s the rational message here? If Mr Blow’s assertions are ‘right’ because Mr Blow is right in his own mind … then so is Klemperer’s character. Unfortunately, then so are those whom Mr Blow labels today. Rationally, can a person declare himself ‘right in his own mind’ and judge others? If so, then humanity is amoral, and our human condition is the obvious: the natural chaos of Survival of the Fittest. Along the spectrum of human conflict – from war to election to taking…when we win, they sit down and shut up while we redistribute whatever we want. Natural selection.

The second Nazi judge claimed his “faith in The Law” as his defense. How could he be guilty if he were only following a judge’s highest calling – to render verdicts solely according to law? This judge mirror’s Mr Blow’s use of references to legitimize his judgments in his article today. Where is the evidence that these references are… accurate …or moral? What constitutes ‘evidence’? Is the judgment of whatever a person feels ‘passionately’ about, ‘evidence’? Again, if that judge’s judgments are therefore protected by the law…then there is no injustice, no tyranny, no slavery… as long as we follow the letter of the law. So today, Mr Blow uses some laws to condemn others… just as others he uses as examples, use some laws to condemn Mr Blow’s… side. So, rationally, here we have everyone making or interpreting ‘the law’ to use it to judge “them”. Practically, what’s different between ‘right in my own mind’, and ‘i interpret this law to mean…whatever to convict you’? The authority [me] and the judged [you] enjoy the same …relationship.

The third judge rose to make his [final statement] and… was unable to bring himself to speak. If you will – ‘the Silent Majority’. Or, me, whenever I ‘don’t have the time’ or am ‘too busy’. So. If I am too busy, or unavailable, or just doing the paperwork, or just living my life… how can i be guilty of what ‘they’ did? Here Mr. Blow, and those on Mr. Blow’s List … have common cause about ‘us people’. What is it? Simply, ‘you must feel, think, say, do…what i tell you …or you …any time, any where i say …are …”inappropriate”. Inappropriate means i can feel, think, say, or DO to YOU… whatever I feel right about. Or, ‘have’ those on My Side… do it to you. Like the “feebleminded” in the movie, untermenschen in Nazi Germany. Or, 3/5ths person count in our original Constitution. Or, “fetal tissue” in our law today. If the law itself is ‘supreme’, then whosoever writes it, or interprets it, is …the survivor of the Fittest. I just ‘make a label’, name it bad, pin it on you, and viola…you… ‘are that way’ ! You… are now a ‘thing’, not a person. Or, ‘you’ the person do not have rights. Only special groups I label, get group rights…i give them in writing…or not.

Bert Lancaster played the fourth and last judge, based loosely on Judge Franz Schlegelberger. Here was a man who agonized over what he had done – perhaps in each case he tried. While his attorney was attacking a prosecution witness – he alone stood up and declared he was “aware”. He alone asked, “are we going to do this… again”? In the days since Nuremburg – in these United States – have we “done this again”? Turn on ‘the news’ and listen to your favorite channel. Favorite newscaster. Favorite pundit. Favorite commentator. Who does NOT ‘attack’ ‘them’ …daily? Who does NOT use …passion? Who does NOT … blame ‘them’? Who does NOT do… what Mr Blow does in his article …all 16 ways he covers it? And more? Or…changes his channel to whatever ‘entertains’ him and ‘just moves on’? Do not… listen to you, to dis-cover if you… too …have done stuff like this. Then, you too would be… ‘aware’.

In the movie Spencer Tracy climaxes only once, at the end. We, here, today, are so excited we climax as fast as we can, daily, Celebrating Diversity.

Spencer Tracy the Chief Judge, sentences each of the 4 Nazi judges. He applies only one principle: “are you responsible” in your role, in the charge of participating in a “system” of immorality covered by law?

Spencer Tracy sentences each judge… to the same sentence of life imprisonment.

Spencer Tracy sentences them despite … well, watch the movie and see for your self if all the excuses and mitigations of ‘them’ or ‘then’ … are any different than ‘us’ and ‘now’.

Compare to today? What type of judges are needed to uphold ‘social justice’ for ‘special people’? ‘Empathy’ on the Supreme Court? To interpret conflicted international, national, state, or individual legal relationships – to ignore or sue or incarcerate or parole – using whatever laws to enforce …or not? Amidst 27 czars, various warlike engagings, and dividing ourselves … we have destroyed our heritage and enslaved our descendents.

Today, we are SEPARATED. Our ver dict is …in. What is “exceptional” …about Natural Selection? What is new … about re-form?

Spencer Tracy’s judge asked [paraphrasing], “what do you stand for”, especially when your survival is at stake?
Today’s stimulated responses – from those on Mr Blow’s side, Mr Blow’s opposites, all the nice silent folks, or the few ‘concerned’ – compare favorably to those 4 judges in the movie.

“Spencer Tracy’s judge, however, defined for all and each individual human being, for all time, two truths:
1] A legal argument can be logical, but “”nothing on God’s earth can make it right”". My comment: this is why men… supplant God.
2] When things ‘go bad’, the ‘best’ of us claim, as Lancaster’s judge did, some form of “”i never knew it would come to that”". We try to deny responsibility. Spencer Tracy’s response: “”it came to that the first time you sentenced a man to death for it.”" My comments. The moral ‘slippery slope’ … has 1 step – the first. That first step includes denial or avoidance.”