tv Richard Weikart The Death of Humanity Hitlers Religion CSPAN October 22, 2018 7:42am-8:01am EDT
weakening of diverse viewpoints. and wrapping up our look from the nonfiction bestseller list. her observation on the political less resistance to the trump presidency. some of these authors have or will be appearing on book tv. you can watch them on a website i teach at california state university staff law. how many books have you written. the death of humanity in the case for life. and then hitler's religion. both of those came out in 2016. let's start with the death of humanity. what is the premise. over the past several
centuries. they cover whole wide range. the culture of death where abortion and euthanasia and such are fairly widely embraced especially among the intellectual leads. when you talk about that sanctity of life. what is the definition of that. i am talking about the idea that every idea an individual has inalienable rights. in the opening of the book we talk about the declaration of independence. all men are created equal. i focus on two of those. and both of those issues. they all have in inalienable rights. the secular thought over the past undermined the idea that
they are equal. and that they have inalienable rights. why do you say that secular thought is undermined that. if you look at the secular thinkers themselves. many of them admit they haven't done that. we sort of has some talking on both sides of her mouth and some ways. others will admit it flat out that no because there is no god and there is nothing transcendent that they just make up their own rates. it doesn't give you any kind of fix morality to go on. includes the right to life. such as abortion and euthanasia and others they will argue that they are not equal to others.
he claims that humans are only valuable if they have certain capacity and usual and usually rationality is one of those that they talk about. they will admit that it goes along with their viewpoint. i show how that spins out in secular thought over the past couple of centuries. by looking at their own works and what they set themselves about these issues. and showing in that many of them admit that this is the implication of their view. many of them actually contradicts themselves. they do think that human life has value. their philosophy claims that doesn't let me give you a great example of this. that really blew me away when i was working on this book. they said quite forthrightly that humans were
insignificant. even call them parasites on this planet. human life has no specific meaning. and he also claimed that morality is just an emotion. just a feeling. but if you look at that personal life. he was a moral absolutist in a lot of ways. a moral absolutist. in a lot of ways. he did believe that there was objective reality. he went to jail for that. and why was he against that. even on the philosophy said it did it. human life doesn't have any transcendent meeting. he could not live -- live that way. you talk about professor eric p anke.
he was a professor of equality number of years ago he gave a talk where he was receiving an award. and at that event. it would be a good thing if 90% of the populations would be of liberated. and then it would give 90%. it's a kind of way that they had percolated into that society. he kind of backed off of it. before he was able to do any damage control. they said that he said this in class. that he wanted 90% of the human population.
he wasn't saying we should do something to actively kill people. what is the effect of the enlightenment and the reformation on our thinking about life. it have a bigger impact in the thinking about the value of human life. even though people in the mainstream enlightenment many of the enlightenment's do believe that there was a fixed morality. live fixed moral laws and stuff. how they took place at the same time. it tended to discard those kind of ideas. i will be more important than leading into that.
one figure for example. a french materialist thinker who wrote a book called me in the machine. so this ends up as seen seen human life as it not been more valuable as anything else in the universe. i see humans as being created in the image of god. and thus having sanctity and value in and of themselves. not instrumental value. they have instrumental value that is for what they can do. with others who are talking about the personhood theory. another book that you had written is hitler's religion. not traditional as we would think of.
i was actually a smorgasbord of religion. the whole cosmo is the same as god. they are very strong position. going back to the romantic movement of the 1790s. it was a pantheist and many certainly interpreted that. there were many other german thinkers it was a very shrewd politician. and part of his politics was to not alienate people who had various religious viewpoints
we need to make sure that we don't alienate people over religion because a prominent they have alienated the catholics by leading at the movement. they go into a tailspin. they are very careful not to alienate people. there were times actually. there were many websites that will permit mode this. it did actually say at one point. that he was christian.
there were times when he did claim to be christian of a more traditional sort. if you give one example. hitler and one of his right hand man were in prison. in 1923 to 24. some of the other inmates had that. they said i have to play a religious hypocrite. he was forthrightly in private dismissing christianity. and the table talks which i discuss intently. some people dismiss the table talks. the english transition is not reliable. and it has been shown to be the case.
it is times when hitler was during world war ii was in his bunker or other places where the headquarters are. he have monologues that he gave to generals and others of his entourage that were around him. and these were recorded by the six secretaries and then now we have them published. the english translations are based on that fraudulent. set of documents. they are not reliable. there is actually two editions of them. they compare pretty closely word for word. they kept diaries at the times. i was one of the first scholars to really use that.
as chancellor. what was the relationship. he knew and that most germans of course were part of the protestant church he tread carefully. it's pretty clear if you look at his actions in relation to the churches. they he was trying to dominate and control him inasmuch as he could. without being too unpopular. it was a very interesting book that he put out recently. called hitler's compromise. we think of it as the dominant theory. he was concerned about popular opinion. he did not want to alienate people but he did want to
under mind the position as much as he could .-dot that he could get away with. especially once the war broke out. he did sort a number of things to make this clear. the chaplains in the military. since they were formed under the nazi. they have to continue to get the chaplains. they get out to the front line. he sent him to the front lines to be killed. this is exactly what hitler was wanting him to do. that was just one kind of example.
all sorts of other ways that they tried to undermine influence in quite a variety of ways. and we've been talking with richard weichert about his books. this is book tv on c-span two. that the voter suppression has. if you believe in america if you believe in democracy just human means in this nation. and you want everybody to vote regardless of what that's what a vibrant democracy looks like. the key areas that were doing this. is gerrymandering. a way where politicians are
able to choose their voters instead of the other way around. they have also gerrymandered that state. it depresses the vote because it demoralizes people. it doesn't make any sense. you also suppress the leadership. it is toxic to american democracy. but unfortunately it has become a basic fixture of politics. if you look at ohio. they did. in a real competitive election. you saw how the legislature
tried to fight back. by trying to impeach the justices in pennsylvania. one of the key cases is wisconsin. it was an extreme partisan gerrymander case. what happened there is after that 2010 election republicans it got together in a hotel room with powerful mapping software and was the kind of data about who lived where so they understood what their possible terms were in ideology. and it took them about four months. the point was to get rid of competitive districts as they could. be to ensure that regardless
of how many votes republicans received they would always get the majority of votes in the state legislature. let's think about that as a democratic principle and how we understand democracy. regardless of how many we will always have the most. the first time that many republicans they have to sign a nondisclosure agreement. just to look at their districts as these maps were going on. so no democrats at all were allowed in the process. it is some really partisan drying. the results in the 2012 election was that they received 52 percent of the vote. and 39 percent of the seats in the state legislature. in subsequent elections it got worse.