What is the reason why the so-called great people in history turned into persecutors when they gained power over people and why were they often persecuted, if they were looking for new ways of thinking, as artists, writers, painters, composers and founders of religions? Why have the great people in world history caused so much harm? Where is the problem? How can it be solved? These questions I want to answer in this book.
The book wants to arrange easy readable fundamental history-knowledge, confirm this knowledge with quotations, show connections and come to conclusions.
The whole misery of world history is actually due to the fact, that those who have decisively shaped this history, the rulers, dictators, ideologists and also the founders of religions, had not been great enough to do something truely good, i.e. they had not been great enough that one could come to them, that one would have wanted to have them. They do not appear liberating but rather oppressive. You had to have them ... and that's where the problem starts!
Our situation on this planet is apparently determined by an impersonal rather than by chance working fate-power, on which we have only little influence. Admittedly, I believe that right action and righteousness reward us with a good feeling and that vice-versa bad actions let us feel bad, but we see time and time again that good people can have a bad fate and that the evil ones do very well. Fate is the combined acting of natural forces to which everyone is subject. Fate apparently does not reward the good or punish the evil; it works independently, beyond good and evil, simply inexplicably, fateful, accidental. It can invade us from cheerful heaven with illnesses, accidents and catastrophes. The coincidence or nature, whatever you wish to call this force, dominates many aspects of our life. However, much earthly suffering does not come from nature:
> Persecution, wars, dictatorship, poverty and ignorance are not unavoidable natural phenomena; they are the result of human thinking and action and can be prevented by human beings too.
We are not here to suffer senselessly, but to live happily. This includes freedom from fear as well as need and freedom from persecution and unjust rule.
Already from my school-knowledge of history I became aware:
> The whole misery of world history is actually due to the fact, that those who have decisively shaped this history, the rulers, dictators, ideologists and also the founders of religions, had not been great enough to do something truely good, i.e. they had not been great enough that "one could come to them", that "one would have wanted to have them". They don't appear liberating but rather oppressive. You had to have them ... and that's where the problem starts!
They did not want the responsible, freethinking citizen, because they wanted to rule and dominate. To achieve this goal all means were right for them. They had to deceive, lie and cheat, in order to appear more important than they actually were. They even did not allow being limited and controlled. That contradicted their excessive self-consciousness. They wanted to gain the unrestricted and uncontrolled dictatorship. They wanted to be great and important although they were not. The well-being of their subjects did not really matter to them.
Man is a problem and therefore the history of the Homo sapiens is no history of salvation, but a history of utmost horror. Above all the so-called "Great men" are the problem. Approximately one hundred people had shaped ninety percent of the political history decisively. Therefore, I consider biographies the core of world-history and therefore I will explain the problem chiefly through the use of biographies. These few people had been the cause of almost all manmade plights. The most essential reasons why "great people" had become persecutors are the following:
>"Strong people" strive for power. In the "ideal" case they seek unrestricted and uncontrolled dictatorship. Power probably seems to be desirable, because it promises advantages in life: more freedom, more self-realisation, more possibilities with the other sex and therefore with reproduction. One can obtain women or things that the less mighty are denied of. One can enjoy wealth and prestige.
>"Strong people" have a special ability to feel important and chosen and to consider others inferior. Power allowed them to deal with these "inferiors" accordingly, namely to segregate them, to persecute them, to deprive them of their rights and to exterminate them.
> Because they may have been "strong", but not great, they felt oppressive. They always needed somebody on whom they could pick on. Because they felt tyrannically, they met with resistance; because of this resistance, they began to persecute their opponents.
> During their development, "strong men / women" must go through a mad and dark spiritual world. I call this "fight-war-death-phase. However, most never went through a recognisable development. During this period thoughts of fight, war and death dominate the brain decisively. That must have something to do with the structure of the human brain. Therefore the times they had shaped decisively, had been crazy and dark.
> Mighty people, who have persecuted, no longer want to give up their power anymore, because in the state of powerlessness they fear the revenge of their persecuted "enemies".
One could harbour the suspicion, that the "Great ones" considered themselves all the greater, the more terrible and comprehensive the tragedy was, which they brought upon their blind obeying followers and their opponents.
I deliberately put the words "great" and "strong" into quotation marks, because it usually had not been really great and strong, but "half-strong" people, who enslaved their fellow countrymen and their enemies. They had been too weak to control themselves, they hardly invested any time and strength into their own development and realised their strength usually only outwardly, "in opposition to their environment." They actually did not understand the whole problem at all, which they themselves had been.
> Strong is somebody, who can stay with himself and cares for his own business.
> "Half strong" men and their intolerant philosophies are the central problem of world history.
In this book I have tried to shed light on the subject above all with biographies: From two sides, because "strong men" had not only been persecutors and tyrants, but they were persecuted too.
In history there had been classic pairs of persecutors and persecuted people. Usually a powerful sovereign had been the persecutor and a freethinker had been the persecuted.
- Alexander and his court-historian Callisthenes;
- Caesar and Brutus or also Cato; Cicero;.
- Clemens VIII and Giordano Bruno,
- Duke Karl Eugene and Schiller;
- Hitler and the siblings Scholl, Dietrich Bonheoffer, Klaus von Stauffenberg, Thomas Mann, Georg Elser and others, who did not want to bear the tyranny.
Whereas those on the one hand, as soon as they had the power, became persecutors, the others, mostly spiritually awake and creative people, lived through a difficult development on their way of self-fulfilment. They had to go through a dark spiritual world and caused a tug-of-war with their fellow citizens. Therefore, they often felt persecuted, rejected, misunderstood and misjudged. They had been harassed (Giordano Bruno), humiliated (Jesus), rejected (Cezanne).
Many great artists had been by no means successful during their lifetime (Franz Schubert). Many turned to the alcohol (Turner, Toulouse-Lautrec), many have fallen into mental derangement (Nietzsche, Hölderlin), and many took their own lives (Van Gogh, Kleist). They have spent most of their lives trying to find their place in a world that was apparently not designed for them. In the bourgeois world, they had failed. After their death, they were celebrated. How should one explain these facts?
Some often had to endure mischief, refusal and persecution during their lifetimes, because on the contrary to the common people, they did not want to bow to a dictator but wanted to think freely and differently. They were rebellious, because they themselves were strong. It was difficult for them simply to come to terms with the given circumstances and to subordinate.
> Every "strong man" is a big problem in the first place, a problem for himself and a problem for his fellowmen. and this problem will occur again and again.
As long as he is not yet great enough and as long as he is oriented towards the outside world, a "strong man" appears dictatorial and oppressive on others. In this way, he triggers a correspondingly negative reaction.
The danger now is that he misinterprets these rejecting reactions, that he feels persecuted and threatened and that he strikes back with all the means at his disposal. This could cost millions of lives, if he already has managed to come to power. Think of Stalin's persecution-mania and of the reckless persecutions of all the dictators. See further below! In fact, they themselves are the problem, others only react on this problem. They themselves, on the other hand, are not guilty of being who they are, but through their fellow citizens their behaviour can be steered and controlled.
> A strong man must not necessarily cause a huge disaster.
The most important qualities he needs so that he does not cause a catastrophe, are self-control, self-knowledge and the knowledge of this problem - that I would like to deliver here - perseverance in a lonely way of live and an enlightened environment that puts him in his place.
He, who cannot ignore any rejection, any teasing, any offense, has not understood the nature of life.
He is pre-determined to cause great calamity and should not get the...