Faşizmin Kitle Ruhu Anlayışı

by Wilhelm Reich, Bertan Onaran (Translator)

Yapıtın günümüzde de taşıdığı önem yadsınamaz. Örgütlü faşist hareketlerinin kökenindeki insanın kişilik yapısı hiç değişmemiştir, bugün de toplumsal çatışmalara bu kişilik yapısı egemendir. Dünyamızın kararlıklara gömülüp can vermesini istemiyorsak, bütün dikkatimizi söz konusu yıkıma yol açabilecek kişilik yapısına çevirmemiz faşizmin kitle ruhu anlayışını çok iyi anlamamız gerekir.

Genres: Psychology, Politics, Nonfiction, Philosophy, History, Psychoanalysis, Sociology

413 pages, Paperback

First published January 1, 1933

About the author

Wilhelm Reich (24 March 1897 – 3 November 1957) was a Jewish Austrian-American doctor of medicine, psychiatrist/psychoanalyst and a member of the second generation of analysts after Sigmund Freud. Author of several influential books, he became one of the most radical figures in the history of psychiatry.

Reich was a respected analyst for much of his life, focusing on character structure, rather than on individual neurotic symptoms. He promoted adolescent sexuality, the availability of contraceptives and abortion, and the importance for women of economic independence. Synthesizing material from psychoanalysis, cultural anthropology, economics, sociology, and ethics, his work influenced writers such as Alexander Lowen, Fritz Perls, Paul Goodman, Saul Bellow, Norman Mailer, A. S. Neill, and William Burroughs.

He was also a controversial figure, who came to be viewed by the psychoanalytic establishment as having gone astray or as having succumbed to mental illness. His work on the link between human sexuality and neuroses emphasized "orgastic potency" as the foremost criterion for psycho-physical health. He said he had discovered a form of energy, which he called "orgone," that permeated the atmosphere and all living matter, and he built "orgone accumulators," which his patients sat inside to harness the energy for its reputed health benefits. It was this work, in particular, that cemented the rift between Reich and the psychoanalytic establishment.

Reich, of Jewish descent and a communist, was living in Germany when Adolf Hitler came to power. He fled to Scandinavia in 1933 and subsequently to the United States in 1939. In 1947, following a series of critical articles about orgone and his political views in The New Republic and Harper's, the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) began an investigation into his claims, winning an injunction against the interstate sale of orgone accumulators. Charged with contempt of court for violating the injunction, Reich conducted his own defense, which involved sending the judge all his books to read, and arguing that a court was no place to decide matters of science. He was sentenced to two years in prison, and in August 1956, several tons of his publications were burned by the FDA. He died of heart failure in jail just over a year later, days before he was due to apply for parole.

Reviews

[Francesc · Rating 3 out of 5]

Wilhelm Reich es un controvertido filósofo austríaco de origen judío.
La primera mitad del ensayo ha sido la más interesante para mi porque se enfoca en el fascismo y en los principios que provocaron su auge.
La segunda mitad se centra más en el comunismo, el socialismo y en la teoría del trabajo.

Reich fue alumno de Freud y psicoanalista y, por tanto, fundamenta su base en las teorías freudianas, sobre todo, en las sexuales tales como el complejo de Edipo. El Psicoanálisis ya era controvertido en 1930 y fundamentar tus tesis en él no es el mejor punto de partida, pero, aun así, hay ideas interesantes.

Al ser un ensayo que ha sufrido varias revisiones a lo largo del tiempo, hay partes del libro de los años 30 y otros que se escribieron después de la caída del nazismo y, a veces, es un poco confuso.

Las reflexiones de Reich son complicadas y erráticas. No es un ensayo fácil de procesar y hay partes realmente exigentes a nivel mental.

---------------------------

Wilhelm Reich is a controversial Austrian philosopher of Jewish origin.
The first half of the essay was the most interesting for me because it focuses on fascism and the principles that led to its rise.
The second half focuses more on communism, socialism and labour theory.

Reich was a student of Freud's and a psychoanalyst, and therefore bases his work on Freudian theories, especially sexual theories such as the Oedipus complex. Psychoanalysis was already controversial in 1930 and basing your thesis on it is not the best starting point, but there are still interesting ideas.

As an essay that has undergone several revisions over time, there are parts of the book from the 1930s and others that were written after the fall of Nazism, and at times it is a bit confusing.

Reich's reflections are complicated and erratic. It is not an easy essay to process and there are some really mentally demanding parts.

[Vik · Rating 5 out of 5]

A wonderful book. Through his Freudian-Marxist anlaysis, Reich shows how the sadistic character of race ideology is an extreme expression of patriarchal and opressive family structure. As he puts it, 'fascist mentality is the mentality of the subjugated "little man" who craves authority and rebels against it at the same time'.

[Stuart Bramhall · Rating 5 out of 5]

With the recent rise of the New Right (viz the Tea Bag and Patriot movement), Wilhelm Reich proves himself as much of a prophet of Marx. Writing in 1933, during the rise of Hitler, he predicts the failure of the Left to engage the working class - without a total transformation in their organizing strategy. He also predicts the steady creep of western democracy towards greater and greater authoritarianism - accompanied by a steady increase in the passive, non-voting majority of the population.

He offers the first convincing sociological analysis I've seen of the allure of fascism and reactionary politics for low income workers - which he bases in the authoritarian family structures they grow up in. In Reich's view, the way in which western society raises their children totally undermines their confidence (as they reach adulthood) in their ability to manage their own feelings and lives. Reich's definition of "freedom" is the ability and esponsibility for each individual to shape his own personal, occupational and social existence in a rational way. He also asserts that there is nothing more terrifying to the average person than the responsibility entailed in this level of freedom.

As Reich outlines, the reactionary right knows exactly how to appeal to these unconscious fears and anxieties - by creating even more rigid and authoritarian structures that provide immediate, but only temporary relief, from these inner anxieties.

He is also extremely critical of leftists and progressives for wasting their time trying to engage the working poor about political and economic injustice without first addressing their innate fear of freedom and social responsibility. Given the current disarray in the progressive movement, I think we should have heeded Reich's advice decades ago.

By Dr Stuart Jeanne Bramhall, author of THE MOST REVOLUTIONARY ACT: MEMOIR OF AN AMERICAN REFUGEE

[Tosh · Rating 3 out of 5]

I often wonder if I am a fascist, and I know people who for sure hate Fascism to their very bone, yet I believe that they are fascists in their heart. In fact I wonder if Fascism is somewhat in our DNA. I often think the family trait, the love of animals, and a sense of order is somehow tied in to Fascism. And especially with the family we feel with other living beings. The need to belong to some social group. Isn't it better to join than be apart? Isn't our very sexual need is to be with someone? is Fascism connected to our sexuality. These are all open questions and I don't have an answer to any of this. I am just wondering...

[Emiliya Bozhilova · Rating 2 out of 5]

"Фашисткият манталитет е манталитетьт на незначителния, поробен, зависим от авторитети и същевременно бунтовен "малък човек".”

Райх е един от психоаналитиците, напуснали Европа, бягайки от фашизма. Не, не е бил евреин, а просто интелигентен, макар и чалнат, австриец. Омразата му е продиктувана от две основни разклонения в убежденията му:
✔️ фройдизмът, отричащ механистичното тълкуване на човешкото поведение и постъпки и открехнал кутията на Пандора у всеки, наречена на “подсъзнание”; и
✔️ марксизмът с неговата икономическа класова теория, даваща път на преките производители на материалните блага.

Съчетанието у Райх е втрещяващо, защото двете теории са взаимноотричащи се. Но кой, ако не един психиатър, ще успее да съчетае несъчетаемото?

Полезните наблюдения на Райх са, че фашизмът не идва от нищото и никого от масите хора не е “заблудил”. Масите не са били “жертва” на измама, а съвсем доброволен участник. Фашистката идеология е толкова успешна, именно защото много нейни елементи са в синхрон с тогавашни масови представи и ценности. Те са в спектъра на крайния консерватизъм и крайното дясно, и плътно в сферата в реакционерството. Реакционерство в личния живот (безусловен авторитарен патриархат, безусловно следване на авторитети като църква, родителска воля, пълна власт на съпруг над съпруга, която е единствено машина за възпроизводство, обществено мнение и т.н) е неразривна предпоставка за реакционерство в обществения живот (както и обратното). И тъй като фашизмът е реакционерство, гарнирано с биологичната мистика на расовата теория, то намира естествен радушен прием именно у крайно консервативните членове на масовите слоеве от обществото. Това са обикновени, аполитични хора, блюстителите на крайния морал (на това, което техните авторитети са им набили безкритично в главата като морал). Тези хора са целевата аудитория на и марксизма, който обаче те не приемат и отхвърлят като “развращаване”, защото икономическите им затруднения са едва на второ място в личния им светоглед, а на първо място е диктатът на психически нагласи, които са много по-мрачни, по-ирационални даже от механистичния марксизъм, и водят до фрустрация и реакционерство.

Проблемът е, че Райх буквално се е олял с марксистките си постановки, които - в интерес на истината - громи като механистични (неотчитащи психиката) и превърнали се в догма без връзка с реалността (говорим за 30-те години, когато е започнал да пише книгата). Затова подробностите са на неразбираем от днешна гледна точка език, освен за заклети експерти по марксистка терминология. Залитанията из дебрите на фройдизма за щяло и не щяло също идват в повече и говорят за вътрешните отклонения на самия автор, които избиват на по-късен етап от живота му.

В същината си свидетелство на очевидец на епохата, книгата е предимно остаряла, с няколко истински точни и ценни наблюдения.

2,5⭐️

[Spasa Vidljinović]

Jedna najkontroverznijih ličnosti u svetu nauke dvadesetog veka je sigurno Vilhelm Rajh. Oštro, po najosetljivijim delovima sistema je napao i građansko društvo i fašizam, kasnije i komuniste, koji su ga izbacili iz stranke. Emigrirao je u Ameriku, gde je i umro u bolnici pod ne baš razjašnjenim okolnostima

Masovna psihologija fašizma je je zamišljena kao knjiga koja treba da rasvetli priču o fašizmu iz jednog neočekivanog ugla. Težište teme je na psihologiji gomile i potisnutoj seksualnosti. Nisam niti psiholog, niti psihijatar da bih stručno objašnjavao neke od teoretskih tvrđenja, kamoli rasprave sa drugim naučnicima koje je u kraćim crtama navodio u knjizi. Ono što mi je zanimljivo posebno bilo je malograđanština koju kritikuje kroz prizmu patrijarhalnog uređenja i kroz psihoanalitičku identifikaciju. Možda je prenaglašena uloga seksualnosti, kao i za mnoge psihoanalitičare, ali i sam navodi da se time ne može sve objasniti.

Kritikuje i komuniste i partije leve orijentacije zbog potcenjivanja psihološkog u komunikaciji sa biračima. To široko polje, su prema Rajhovim rečima, crkva i nacisti upotrebili da bi doprli i do najneutralnijih i potpuno nezainteresovanih građana pred izbore 1933. U knjizi su date i brojke, tabele koje statistički opisuju stanje o kojem autor piše.

Ovo je jedan drugi ugao o psihološkim aspektima uspona nacizma. Uz Jungovo objašnjenje ovog fenomena, otkriva nevidljive mehanizme širenja mračnih ideologija.

[Arthur Maurer · Rating 5 out of 5]

An incredibly important, but seemingly forgotten book--and one that is of pressing importance to a world in which what Reich would term "political irrationalism" is again getting out of hand, particularly with the rise of Trump in the U.S. and the far-right in Europe. To begin with, Reich starts with the premise that Fascism is not limited to one specific place or time in history, i.e. to Italy or Germany in the 20th century's first half; rather it is a natural though hideous outgrowth of the irrationality of any society, embedded in the mass character structure through the suppression of sexuality and the inherent father-dominated family in any patriarchal society. Repression of natural sexuality, Reich suggests, leads to a neurotic authoritarianism and a mystical, irrational way of thinking that opens the way for Fascism when the social fabric, or hierarchy, threatens to be torn apart. From this angle, one can see that Fascism is merely a radical expression of the dark elements of a preexisting social neurosis that has its roots in the development of patriarchy and the nation-state.

Religion and religious-based morality, of course, play large roles in the repression of sexuality and the maintenance of an authoritarian social structure, in that they teach people to regard their sexual impulses as sinful at the same time as they teach the worship of a grand father figure. This is replicated first in the family unit, where the father acts as the unquestioned authoritarian head of the household, secondly in the economic structure of capitalism, and thirdly in the hierarchical social structure. The sexual guilt feelings and the undermining of self-confidence, especially confidence in one's ability to govern oneself, lead to authority worship and irrational ideas such as duty, honor, courage, and self-control--which politicians use to justify all manner of destruction. The struggle to control one's sexual impulses in the face of this repression, Reich suggests, creates the reactionary psychological structure and obedience to authority. Mysticism, in the form of religion or nationalism (which many would say is a type of religion) or militarism or what have you, then becomes an outlet for the repressed sexual feelings. The passionate shouting of "Sieg Heil" (or "Trump! Trump! Trump!"), then, might be seen as a replacement for the orgasm, while imperialistic war could be seen as a replacement for a mass orgy.

In this authoritarian framework, the family is treated as a "nation in miniature," which leads to the identification of the nation with the family unit. This explains in large party why authoritarian political parties often praise "family values," in that the authoritarian family unit is the very basis for the authoritarian state--and the state's continued existence relies upon this microcosmic authoritarian unit. Hence why nationalists often refer to their home country as "motherland" or "fatherland." In terms of explaining the class structure, one can see this at work in the worship of and identification with the ruling classes by the lower classes--or else the identification with such abstractions as "the nation" or "God," as opposed to class consciousness. This infects the workplace as well, in that this neurosis teaches the worker to be obedient to his or her superiors out of a sense of duty, no matter how he or she may be exploited and mistreated. The formation of unions and other forms of workers' self-management is obviously a threat to such a model and completely at odds with the nature of capitalism and wage slavery.

Fascism, Reich argues, is the political expression of the authoritarian family unit. The Führer is a father figure, a sort of "savior" in the vein of Christ, while the nation-state (which is also identified with this Führer) becomes a sort of mother figure to be worshipped. In many ways, worship of the nation takes place of religion, though as Reich explains religion worked hand-in-hand with both Mussolini's Italy and the Third Reich as a means of controlling the masses and maintaining the rigid hierarchy. Reich shares a commonly held view that Fascism emerges when the petit-bourgeois class (or lower-middle class) finds itself slipping and becoming "proletarianized;" however, he goes a step further by explaining this as a middle-class revulsion at "proletarian values," which it equates with "filthy" natural sexuality. According to this psychoanalysis, Hitler himself is a prime example, himself having been born into a petit-bourgeois family with a strict father figure and then having lapsed into poverty. Ashamed at his poverty and of the proletarians he had to associate with because of his position, his natural reaction was, well, reactionary politics.

Reich goes on, too, to explain how the repression of sexuality leads to racism, by way of projection. The slave owner, for instance, justifies enslaving blacks because he believes them to be inherently childish but also intensely sexual creatures who would rape if freed--specifically rape white women. Sexual repression leads to a neurotic character structure that allows an in-group to ostracize and/or exterminate an out-group on the basis of projected sexual fears. Hence the Nazis' painting of Jews and Bolsheviks as corrupt and immoral sexual influences "poisoning" the nation's racial purity. The Fascist's own sexual perversions as a result of his upbringing are projected onto the racial other, and the Bolshevik or Jew is painted as a sexual threat, a rapist, a pervert. The national "body," equated with the female body, is seen as under threat by "outsiders."

The exploitation of these preexisting elements explains not only the swift rise of Fascism in Italy and Germany but also the failure of workers' self-management in the Soviet Union and its eventual perversion into Stalinism and totalitarian dictatorship. The problem, Reich explains, had nothing to do with economics and everything to do with the mass character structure. He argues that the workers in the Soviet Union were not psychologically ready for the self-management and social responsibility implied by a stateless society, owing to the authoritarian social structure of Tzarist Russia to which they were accustomed. This set the stage for Stalin the politician to assume authority, and so the "dictatorship of the proletariat" never dissolved into a stateless society; instead, the masses succumbed to a personality cult and a nationalist fervor on par with Nazi Germany. The power of this analysis cannot be underestimated; it shows that the failure of communism in Soviet Union (and subsequently in China and elsewhere) had nothing to do with communism itself or its goals and everything to do with the reactionary character structure of the masses and the unreadiness for self-management. Thus began the slide into totalitarianism. This failure, as Reich states, should be no concession of defeat to reactionaries; rather, it simply shows how strong a hold reactionary forces have on the masses as a result of their upbringing; rather, it shows that this sickness must be addressed if any progress towards a more egalitarian society is to be made.

Although his thought is steeped in Marx and Freud, not to mention that he was a former member of the Communist Party in Austria (he was kicked out, incidentally, because of this very book), Reich veers away from the conclusions of both Freud and many of the communist parties of the day. Rather than embracing any ideology or party politics, Reich argues that the way to a more equitable and free society lies exactly outside of political activity and politicians, through what he terms "work-democracy." In essence, he begins with the same premises and aims for the same type of society as socialists and communists do: he sees capitalist societies as inherently repressive--capitalism being merely a more advanced type of feudalism--and he aims for a stateless, egalitarian society in which the class system and hierarchies cease to exist, in which the workers own and control the means of production, and in which an organic "from each according to his ability, to each according to his needs" system of organization prevails; where he differs, however, is that he believes this cannot be imposed through ideology or by force, which more often than not lead to dictatorship, but that it must rather develop organically through a greater sense of social responsibility in the masses and the eradication of what he sees as the "social sickness" of authoritarian society--namely that imposed through sexual repression and the patriarchal family unit, which leads the masses to neglect their own responsibility for their freedom and leave it up to politicians to decide the organization of their lives.

Reich's ideas are not without flaws. His theory of orgones, which is only briefly discussed in this book, has widely been discredited as pseudoscientific--and for good reason. Also, given the book's age, his theories on homosexuality leave much to be desired in the way of progressive thinking. One also wishes he were a little less vague with regards to his ideas on "work-democracy." That said, his superb dissection of Fascism and his theories of sexual repression a tool of political repression alone make this worth the read.

Although Reich's ideas on sexuality were major catalysts for the sexual revolution across the West in the 60s, we are still clearly a long way off from Reich's ideal of a "work-democracy." With the gutting out of the American Left by Reaganism and Neoliberalism and the turning of socialism into a scare-word, it will take time to reverse these damages. Watching the madness of the current presidential race and the rise of politicians like Trump, one can see that the forces of irrationalism are as strong as ever and that true democracy is a long way off yet. Still, as more and more people open their eyes to the repressive nature of capitalism and the state and to the failings of both, there is a great deal to be taken from this book, so that the mistakes of the past are not repeated.

[Cultured-Thug · Rating 3 out of 5]

When speaking on "Fascism" Reich seems to mean traditional authoritarian structures. He critiques this form of authoritarianism through the Marxist/Freudian lens. Reich believes mankind has been turned into mindless machines suppressing sexual urges through thousands of years of authoritarian rule (priests, kings, dictators, politicians..etc) According to Reich, the only way to undo this authoritarian cycle is to sexualize women & children/destroy the nuclear family/ kill all forms 'mysticism' and become international instead of national. In Reich's mind, the answer to the ills of 'authoritarianism' is his own form of authoritarianism called "Work-Democracy" Where technocrats
(only of the Marxian and Freudian mold) would make the necessary decisions including that of whose speech and criticism is allowed and whose is not.

Overall "The Mass Psychology of Fascism" is a well written book, with interesting if not down right odd ideas and interpretations of Authoritarian structure. Unfortunately, he often grossly simplifies and even invents at times his own meanings as to what the Fascist movements of the early 1900's were about and how they come about. He is limited by his Freudian upbringing as everything always goes back to the issue of childhood sexualization. He is also very vague as to the details of how a "Work Democratic" society would actual function and look like.

[Scot · Rating 5 out of 5]

One of the best, and likely most important books I have ever read. I took my time, because it felt important to really sit with Reich's words and understand the importance of the message.

Writing near the end of WWII and having Hitler and Mussolini as case studies served as the catalyst for this work, but was not the only focus of analysis. In addition to European fascism, he took a close look at Russia post-revolution and how the best intentions led to the same old collapse into an autocratic mess. He included some shots on America at the time for our persistent racism, and did not stay focused on simply traditional fascism.

Ultimately, the conclusion as I read it, is that it is not simply charismatic, psychopathic leaders that lead us to fascism, they are just a byproduct of a society that is highly irrational and an "emotional plague." Through centuries of sexual repression, class-ism, political demagoguery, and allowing comfort to prevent us from truly being free we have become more mechanical and ultimately manipulable.

Our hope lies in Love, Work and Knowledge. If we aspire to this and cast off irrationalism, false mysticism, and politics, we can break through this mechanical trap we have been caught in and strive to be more truly human.

Highly recommended for anyone interested in sociology, sexual freedom, the structure and functions of fascism, the failure of the Russian revolution, and so much more.

[Jake · Rating 4 out of 5]

I wanted to read some Reich since I first read about him in Kerouac and Burroughs and Robert Anton Wilson. He was as weird as I expected. He made me think about some things in totally new ways which was fun. Sometimes it felt outdated and dry or just too nutty (cosmic orgone, etc). So I alternated between 5 stars and 2 stars. I liked the idea of fascism being made possible because of the psychological sickness of the masses. Irrationality, sexual repression, a patriarchal society, and mysticism prepare the people for the fear and madness needed to support a Hitler or Stalin (or even a not-quite so fascist G. W. Bush). Reich first published this under the Hitler regime and they wanted to kill him for it. The German Communists told him that if they took over Germany they would kill him for it. He emigrated to America where his books were burned and he died in prison. He's a bit of a pseudo-scientist, but is pretty original thinker. The gist of it is: stop trying to fix politics, it's irrational, just fix yourself and don't mess up your kids.

[Eric Phetteplace · Rating 3 out of 5]

good for the synthesis of Marx and Freud, a simpler predecessor to Deleuze & Guattari. bad for the rampant assumptions: 1) sexual repression during childhood is the root of all evils 2) people are innately good 3) there is an objective rationality which is evident to all once their illusions are stripped away. None of these are sufficiently defended, and Reich makes the typical mistake of overestimating the importance of his own discoveries.

[Brian Coltin · Rating 2 out of 5]

There is a thin line between genius and madness. This book has one foot set firmly on each side of that line.

[Phil · Rating 4 out of 5]

Very interesting read, especially bearing in mind that it was written in the middle of WW2 when Fascism was not just still a strong political force across Europe but a real threat. While I'm not sure I buy (or even fully understand) his theories of sex economics (the orgasmotrom and orgone theories - and its related accumulator don't appear in this book particularly), his analysis of not only the rise of fascism, but authoritarian regimes in general are fascinating: he pays particular attention to Stalinism alongside the Nazis. His theories aren't particularly pleasant to hear either, basically saying that long years of subjugation have left almost all humans mentally and emotionally unable to rule themselves. The long chapter entitled "The Masses and the State" is best disection of the insidious rise of authoritarian dictatorships that I've read.



"Not much is accomplished solely by hating the State. Nor with Nudist Colonies. The Problem is deeper and more serious."



"The 'revolutionary proletariat' flies into the arms of a political party or trade union, which does not burden them with any responsibility and imbues them with the illusion that they are the 'leading class'. This does not alter the fact that this 'leading class' is not in a position to assume responsibility and that it even goes so far as to practise racial hatred, as in America, where unions of white workers deny membership to black workers,"

[imaculata form · Rating 4 out of 5]

In der Tat sträubt er sich gegen die Erfassung der Struktur und Dynamik der Ideologie, indem er sie als „Psychologie", die unmarxistisch sei, abtut, und überlässt die Handhabung des subjektiven Faktors, des sogenannten „Seelenlebens" in der Geschichte, dem metaphysischen Idealismus der politischen Reaktion, den Gentile und Rosenberg, die den „Geist" und die „Seele" allein Geschichte machen lassen, womit sie merkwürdigerweise sogar Erfolg haben. Die Vernachlässigung dieser Seite des historischen Materialismus ist ein Vorgehen, das Marx seinerzeit prinzipiell schon am Materialismus des 18. Jahrhunderts kritisierte. Dem Vulgärmarxisten ist die Psychologie an sich ein von vornherein metaphysisches System und er denkt nicht daran, den metaphysischen Charakter der bürgerlichen Psychologie von ihren materialistischen Grundelementen, die die bürgerliche psychologische Forschung erbringt und die wir weiterentwickeln müssen, zu trennen. Er verwirft, statt produktive Kritik zu üben, und fühlt sich als Materialist, wenn er Tatsachen wie „Trieb", „Bedürfnis" oder „seelischer Prozess" als „idealistisch" verwirft. Er gerät dadurch in grösste Schwierigkeiten und erntet nur Misserfolge, weil er gezwungen ist, in der politischen Praxis unausgesetzt praktische Psychologie zu betreiben, von den Bedürfnissen der Massen, von revolutionärem Bewusstsein, vom Streikwillen etc. zu sprechen. Je mehr er nun die Psychologie leugnet, desto mehr betreibt er selbst metaphysischen Psychologismus und schlimmeres, wie öden Coueismus, etwa indem er eine historische Situation aus der „Hitlerpsychose" erklärt oder die Massen tröstet, sie sollten doch auf ihn vertrauen, es gehe trotz alledem vorwärts, die Revolution lasse sich nicht niederringen u.s.f. Er versinkt schliesslich darin, illusionär Mut einzupumpen, ohne in Wirklichkeit etwas sachliches zur Situation zu sagen, ohne zu begreifen, was vorgegangen ist. Dass es für die Bourgeoisie nie eine ausweglose Situation gibt, dass eine scharfe ökonomische Krise ebensogut zum Sozialismus wie in die Barbarei führen kann, muss ihm als Problem ein Buch mit sieben Siegeln bleiben. Statt aus der Wirklichkeit Gedanken und Tat abzuleiten, formmt er die Wirklichkeit in der Phantasie so um, wie es seinen Wünschen entspricht.

[Paula Kirman · Rating 4 out of 5]

A very deep analysis of what leads the average person to fascism. He links a lot of his theory to his "sex-economy" beliefs so it helped that I have already read a couple of this books on that topic. This was first written in 1932 just as Nazism was rising, and much of it still holds up well.

[Ilgımsu]

bir daha asla ama ASLA bu kitabı elime almak istemiyorum

[Durakov · Rating 3 out of 5]

Let me say off the bat that Reich deserves much praise for his contributions to the history of psychology and revolutionary thought. Right away, he correctly identifies ideology as a material force "inasmuch as a social ideology changes man's [sic, though I have a feeling this is the typically unfair translation of "Menschen", i.e. "people"] psychic structure, it has not only reproduced itself in man but, what is more significant, has become an active force, a material power in man, who in turn has become concretely changed and, as a consequence thereof, acts in a different and contradictory way."

From this basic premise, he very astutely observes that, without consideration of the material force of ideology, the "logic" of fascism makes no coherent sense. In Reich's view, like with Sartre's antisemite, the radical wastes their time trying to argue the "facts" with a fascist, since that is not primarily what determines their position. Not to say there aren't many political economic factors at play: he locates the authoritarian impulse as most at home with the entrepreneurial petit bourgeois, the church, and, at an even deeper level, with the patriarchal family, which is both an economic unit and also the factory that produces mysticism and incoherent, authoritarian ideas. Reich also recognized the fundamental links between authoritarian principles and the ideal of racial purity, calling the latter the "axis" of Nazi thought.

All this is to be highly commended. Reich deserves special praise for attempting throughout his life to plug in the discovery of the unconscious into a revolutionary machine. Reich was the first analyst to raise Freud's initial hope that the lessons of analysis should not be reserved for the wealthy, but must be brought to the average worker in public clinics to the status of a basic principle. And he took it much further, holding that mass-analysis was responsible for freeing humanity from their psychic shackles in the same historical process as communism would free us from our social ones. The reader may be surprised to find that, in the second half of the book, Reich spends at least as much time critiquing Russian statecraft from 1917-1940s as he does with German authoritarianism, and that's because he courageously courted stigma and assassination by openly denouncing the failure of the Soviet state to give as sufficient attention to the worker's psychic and emotional freedom as they did to economic or political freedom. He should be celebrated for all that.

But, in some ways, this is one of the weakest Reich books I've read, and it took me a lot longer since huge chunks of it are better said elsewhere. It's way too long, for one. I think he could have cut a good 100 pages without losing much, especially since it's bulked up with unnecessary digressions and personal remarks. It's much too unfocused and broad. If you want a basic critique of historical materialism from a sex-economic perspective, you'd be better off with Sex-Pol: Essays 1929-1934; if you were looking for an introduction to Reich's orgasmic theory and a critique of "sex moralism," I'd recommend The Sexual Revolution: Toward a Self-governing Character Structure over this. Reich's critiques of sex education and the leftist exclusion of psychoanalysis/psychology are much more grounded than large portions of this book. The original contributions of this book are concentrated in the beginning 100-150 pages and then only scattered throughout afterwards.

But my biggest critique also happens to be the most essential one since it concerns Reich's conceptual apparatus as a whole, and that's that the whole thing relies on a positivist dogma around "man's biophysical structure." Namely, Reich's orgasmic doctrine that posits eros as an non-contradictory, positive element in human biology. The caricatures are not wrong! In Reich's perfect world, we would basically be fucking a lot. Not that there's something wrong with that, but he raises this to the level of biological necessity, and I just can't follow him there. It should be said too that there is nothing particularly psychoanalytical about this move, which makes Reich both an incredible but also only partly psychoanalytic figure. His great psychoanalytic insights are only accidentally reached without much reference to his biological essentialism. You don't need to believe that humans contain "orgone" energy to recognize that both religious and fascist leaders rely on exploiting the repressed sexual passions of their audience through, for example, guiding them to a release without orgasm.

Reich is essentially a vitalist, so your appreciation of his underlying assumptions, and therefore also many of his conclusions, will depend on your tolerance for long analogies of the human structure with plants, animals, and the like, all treated as having an "essential" "necessary" movement, which we can only recognize and take heed of. The more he goes into the orgone theory, the further he gets from his best insights. In these moments, Reich is basically a Fourierist: he believes there is an absolute, unchanging essence of the human's biology that has been corrupted or misshapen by millennia of rigid, authoritarian, sex-negative civilization. Our task is to recognize this structure and reorganize work places and society to fit its "natural" composition.

Reich is endlessly fascinating and tragic. He was doubtlessly wrong about the orgones, but, on the basis of a false (and unfortunately, given his topic here, somewhat "mystical") foundation, he was able to arrive at some wonderful insights into the frustrated sexuality of the authoritarian personality, its embeddedness in everyday life (it never comes from "the outside" to corrupt), and the connections between racist "purity" and the repressions of psycho-sexual "purity."

[Eli Bishop · Rating 3 out of 5]

(This is an old review that I wrote in 2002 and thought that I had copied here, but hadn't. I haven't read Reich since then so I'm not sure what I would think now.)

As you may know, Reich was a student of Freud who's now known as a colorful crackpot (or, in California, a genius) who believed sexual life-energy could cure cancer, change the weather, etc. He was also a crusading anti-fascist and anti-Stalinist, and he thought dangerous politics were a side effect of unconscious contradictions in society; this book makes a pretty good case for that. But it's also disorganized, repetitive, and self-righteous, and in general it gives the impression of someone who found it very easy to convince himself he had "proved" things. I think this is partly due to the way he went back and revised the book in the '40s (I've never read the original edition) to get rid of some Communist bits and put in more orgone theory; this results in some strange choices such as always saying "sex-economic" when he means "revolutionary." And I'm not sure I trust his retrospective view of the progressive movement in Germany, when he claims that he managed to turn an audience of 1,000 lower-middle-class Christians away from the Church just by explaining that sexual taboos were reactionary. (Of course I may be biased because he believes that not only religion, but fairy tales and detective stories and really anything "irrational," are nothing but fascist bullshit getting in the way of "mental hygiene." For a guy who said he was all about release, he's got pretty strict ideas about where people should find comfort.)

The main theme of the book still seems true: when people grow up cramped and dishonest and afraid of pleasure, they're likely to support horrible leaders without understanding why.

Anyway, besides being an interesting and frustrating read, this was a particularly good used copy to have found, because it came with a whole lot of handwritten margin notes by a mysterious Irish woman who was apparently reading it in Seattle some time in the last 30 years. Besides trying to apply Reich to her surroundings and enthusiastically underlining about 50% of the book, she was also gathering thoughts for a study of an Irish revolutionary about whom she had mixed feelings. There are a lot of pages where this reader's notes are more interesting than Reich's writing, and certainly more practical. Among my favorites: "'Liberalism lays stress upon its ethics for the purpose of holding in suppression the "monster in man"': You can visibly see this in the deadness + lack of spontaneity in certain political groups. The unattractiveness + rigidity of facial expression." "'Hitler speaks of his mother with great sentimentality': As do most Irish men. But do they love the real person or the myth." "'Employees of aristocratic families ... often appear as caricatures of the people whom they serve': My aunt Louise." "There is no day more empty than the day following an election for the average vol[unteer] worker. What do you have???" "Sadism: 'She doesn't know where she stands w. me. That's the way it should be!'" "To say good-bye to mysticism. I am resistant. Who is it that said 'Walk softly. I have only my dreams?' Does it really do so much damage? ... Beauty of Irene's face at Mass. But it doesn't work for everyone. Didn't for my mom." "'We have to designate as non-work that activity that is detrimental to the life process': Would running a bar be non-work?" Thanks, whoever you are; I hope you figured out what you were trying to figure out.

[Micah · Rating 2 out of 5]

"Every effort must be made and all means employed to guard future generations against the influence of the biologic rigidity of the old generation."

There is a lot of value here, if you're fascinated by Reich like I am, it's a must-read. Of course character structure is as important as class - or even more important! Especially in his diagnoses, Reich is onto something: don't concepts like "emotional plague" and "mechanized culture" describe something real? Don't generations of patriarchy and sexual repression have a great impact?

Somehow it's all too simple though, and sometimes tedious to read. Fascism can't just be the result of anxieties around sex, even if that's an important element. There's little analysis of racism here! I can't share Reich's optimism that it's possible to liberate a natural, spontaneous biologic core that is rational and can do away with the conflicts of politics.

[Niko · Rating 4 out of 5]

The most clear and concise analysis of the psychological side of fascism that I have ever read. Reich’s analysis influenced dozens of other thinkers who very rarely credit him.

[Esteban del Mal · Rating 5 out of 5]

Fascism through a Freudian and Marxist lens.

[Jörg Schumacher · Rating 3 out of 5]

Zu diesem Buch kann ich nur zwei Meinungen haben:
Erstens: Eine sozialistische Kampfschrift der 30er Jahre des letzten Jahrhunderts, die heute nicht mehr relevant ist.
Zweitens: Der Verlag nimmt für dieses Buch in Anspruch: "Eine Kritik des Faschismus läßt sich ohne Wilhelm Reichs Massenpsychologie des Faschismus nicht mehr denken." Dies bezieht sich auf die 1970 aus dem Nachlaß neu kompilierte Ausgabe. Das Buch leidet an seiner Entstehungsgeschichte, Wilhelm Reich verfasste dieses Buch, das eigendlich eine Sammlung eigenständiger Essays ist, ursprünglich im Jahr 1933, die Grundlage dieser Ausgabe ist die dritte erweiterte Auflage von 1942, die aber erst 1946 in dieser Form in den USA in englischer Übersetzung erschienen ist.
Dadurch unterscheidet sich die Betrachtung in einigen Teilen erheblich, je nachdem ob unter dem Eindruck des Todeskampfs der Weimarer Republik oder während des Krieges entstanden. Auch der Blick auf die Aufgaben der Nachkriegszeit sind noch vom Eindruck des Kriegsendes 1918 bestimmt, da Reich beim Verfassen weder die Auswirkungen des Bombenkrieges, noch der Atombombe vorhersehen konnte.
Besonders die älteren Teile des Buches sind noch von einer starken sozialistischen Prägung und vor dem Bruch mit der Bewegung entstanden, während die späteren Teile, die in den USA geschrieben sind, den Abstand zum Sozialismus und die Anerkennung des demokratischen Versuches der USA erkennen läßt.
Ein Problem ist, dass Wilhelm Reich mit seiner Forschung immer am Rande des wissenschaftlichen und gesellschaftlichen Etablisments stand, und seine Arbeit mit dem Verbot seiner Bücher und seinem Tod im amerikanischen Gefängnis entgültig desavouiert und in den Bereich der Esoterik verschoben wurde.
Nach all diesen Schwierigkeiten verwundert es nicht, dass beim Lesen meist ein "Ja, aber..." in meinem Kopf ertönt. Wenn dieser innere Zensor einmal zum Schweigen gebracht wurde, stellt sich aber die Frage, warum wir heute noch immer mit der autoritären Sehnsucht vieler Menschen zu tun haben, warum jahrzehntelange Erziehung keine Immunität gegen rechte Parolen hervorbringt, warum die Menschheit wieder besseres Wissen Ungerechtigkeit, Kriege und Klimawandel als unvermeidliche Bestandteile des Lebens zu akzeptieren scheint. Und Reich bietet auf diese Frage eine Antwort. Die Menschen sind, nach seiner Auffassung, durch Jahrtausende von lebensfeindlicher Erziehung charakterlich erstarrt und lassen sich daher lieber in Unmündigkeit halten als Verantwortung für ihr Leben und die Zukunft zu übernehmen. Der einzige Weg aus dieser Misere ist aus seiner Sicht den Menschen die Verantwortung zu übertragen und ihnen von Seiten der Anführer nicht einen Staat und eine Hierarchie anzubieten, in dem sie die Verantwortung abgeben dürfen, den in einem solchen System ist immer die Gefahr gegeben, dass der/diejenige, die die schönsten Lügen verbreitet von den Menschenmassen zur Macht getragen werden.
Reich behauptet, das es sich bei dieser Betrachtung nicht um seine Meinung, sondern ein naturgesetzliche Beobachtung handele. Dies zu überprüfen ist allerdings schwierig, weil seine wissenschaftliche Arbeit, auf die er sich immer wieder bezieht, auf dem Scheiterhaufen der FDA landete (s.o.).
Es bleibt bei mir der Eindruck, dass ein erheblicher Teil seiner Beobachtungen sehr stimmig ist, der Wert des Buches aber fast vollständig davon abhängt, ob ich seiner wissenschaftlichen Arbeit folge. Da ich nur interessierter Laie bin, bräuchte ich für die Entscheidung die Arbeit anderer Wissenschaftler, die seine Arbeiten überprüft hätten, aber leider wurde diese Entscheidung nicht von Forschern, sondern von Juristen übernommen. So bleibt nur, zuzusehen wie die Menschen in vielen Ländern wieder auf autoritäre System zusteuern.
Das Buch ist sicherlich spannend, wenn ein Interesse an Reichs Arbeit besteht, und mensch sich weiter mit seiner Arbeit beschäftigen möchte, wenn es um ein Verständnis der Bedrohung durch den Faschismus im 21. Jahrhundert geht, gibt es - leider aus gegebenem Anlass - viele andere deutlich zugänglichere Werke.

[Krishnanunni · Rating 3 out of 5]

I have mixed feelings about Wilhelm Reich's controversial book. On one hand it is a work of genius, having been able to anticipate and make pretty accurate predictions about Fascism and how it works, but on the other hand it reads like Psychobabble. I would reiterate the comment that some other reviewers have made; That you don't need to venture far more than quarter way across the book before things begin to sound ridiculous.

If you were to ask for the summary of the book it would be this -

The patriarchal family, is a purely ideological choice. In addition to producing a tightly-knit family, which results in a certain mode of agricultural production, the family also leads to sexual negation through systematized shame and guilt which is the foundation of Christian morality, and the society as we see now. Reich opines that Fascist mass psychology is just a byproduct of this sexual negation.

[miguel · Rating 5 out of 5]

I found myself reading this book a second time after 2 years. Second time reading it and I learned a lot of new things that I must have missed the first time around. This was such a hard read and I'm certain I will be reading it a third time. I gave it 5 stars because to me, it quite literally lists why fascism occurs and how it plays out as a mass movement. One must remember that it starts from within, all the work you put into yourself and how you grew up will determine how your brain will adapt to the world. The author is very good at stressing that fascism is within us all and it takes ourselves to determine if we are to embrace fascism or to eliminate it.

[Maide Karzaoğlu · Rating 3 out of 5]

Faşizmin kitle psikolojisini Erich Fromm’dan daha iyi analiz edebilen yoktur herhalde… Reich bu kitabında çok ağır bir Marksist Freudyen toplumsal bir analize girmiş ve yer yer kendini tekrarlayarak aşırı yoğun, içinden çıkılmaz bir karmaşaya imza atmış. Sanki yazarken bile kafası çok dağınıkmış ve yer yer zorlamaya, oldurmaya, politikleştirmeye çalışmış hissiyatı verdi. İktisadi faşizmin günümüz Türkiye’sine yatkınlığı da inanılmaz düşündürdü…

[Нона · Rating 5 out of 5]

"El núcleo de la política cultural de la reacción política es la cuestión sexual. Por consiguiente, el núcleo de la política cultural revolucionaria debe pasar a ser igualmente la cuestión sexual."

[Miloš · Rating 5 out of 5]

"Rasni teoretičari koji se pozivaju na biologijski zakon, previđaju da je rasno uzgajanje životinja veštački proizvod". (103)

[Don · Rating 3 out of 5]

Reich confronts the thorny problem of why so many people working people in the turbulent opening decades of the 20th century sided with the elite interests that were oppressing them against people from their own social and economic background in the intense class struggles of that epoch. In Germany at that time the mass of the working class was supporting either the Communist or the Social Democratic party, but a significant and growing segment chose to back the reactionary tide which eventually brought Hitler and the Nazis to power. Why did they do that?

Mainstream Marxist theory had located human consciousness in the matrix of social and economic forces which were locked in conflict as a consequence of the tensions within the capitalist system. But Reich challenged this view by pointing out that it predicted the alignment of the subaltern classes with the left, leaving only the groups whose interests were bound up with the survival of capitalism to take their place on the right side of the political spectrum. Yet a residue of conservatism existed across the whole of the working class, and in some sub-sets was in sufficiently strong concentration to tip that group into the side supporting violent reaction.

His own work as a psychoanalyst working with working class youth led him to the conclusion that this came about because of the repression of the sexuality of young people through the institution of the patriarchal family. Sex was drenched in the torment of guilt and revulsion even as it was engaged in with obsessive commitment by these young people. The patriarchy had stamped parental disapproval into the earliest genital fumblings of the infant child and ever after the sense that the censorious figure of the father being ever present was carried into adolescent and adult life.

Sex itself became ridden with practise that mixed pain and domination into its acts and frequently produced an inability to experience orgasm. This was crucial for Reich. He viewed the orgasm as a release of psychical energies which, in being trapped within the individual had become the source of the tension and frustrations which produced neurosis. Orgasm allowed a resetting of the animal organism and a return to a state of healthy balance.

Most of these theories were a development of ideas which had already been expressed by Freud and his followers. Reich broke with them with his belief that action to address the suffering of individuals required more than the forms of talking therapies that were at the heart of psychoanalysis. Psychic health required the defeat of the patriarchy and that in turn meant challenging the structure of the society which had come to rest on this ancient form of power. Reich advocated a political response to sexual misery and this meant standing alongside the sections of the working class that were mounting the most militant challenge to capitalism.

The Mass Psychology of Fascism is best understood as an account of Reich’s work to establish his work within the German working class movement during the time of the rise and triumph of Hitlerism. He first worked as a member of the Communist Party but fell foul of the intolerance of its Stalinist leadership to the ideas of the avant garde. Isolated from the association with the working class that he sought, Reich worked to establish his own ‘sex-pol’ movement to work for the sexual liberation of the masses. On being driven into exile by Hitler’s rise Reich took his vision to the Unitd States. Over there he became the centre of a cult and his ideas drifted into a mystical search for the orgasmic energy which he came to believe lay at the heart of all things. There then followed the crankery of the ‘orgone’ and the apparatus he designed which was supposed to put his patients in touch with this cosmic force. Reich ended his days defending himself against criminal charges against alleged fraud.

Reich’s story can be read with a proper amount of appreciation for a radical thinker who recognised that the oppression of the mass of people was not solely based on the exploitation of their labour power, but stretched more deeply into the social forces which work to produced human beings with subordination programmed into their essence. The tragedy was that the Communist movement, affected by the isolation of the revolution which had commenced in Russia in 1917, turned its back on any association with the radicalism that had been brought into its ranks by visionaries who identified with its original aspiration in the realm of human freedom. It was not only Reich who was suffered as a consequence of the severance of his movement from communism, but communism which was diminished by repudiation of Reich and others like him.

[Alex · Rating 4 out of 5]

First written in Germany in 1932 as Hitler was coming to power, then revised in the US in 1944, this is a classic study of the characteristics of fascist movement. Reich, a former Marxist from the Frankfurt School, emphasizes that fascism is not unique to Germany or Japan or Italy, but is instead "the basic emotional attitude of the suppressed man of our authoritarian machine civilization and its mechanistic-mystical conception of life."

In other words it's not enough to blame Hitler or the Nazis or any political party for the rise of fascism, we have to understand why millions of people have been, and continue to be, drawn to the movement (its mass character is what distinguishes fascism from simple authoritarianism). Finding its base in the Middle Classes, fascist movement feeds upon authoritarian patriarchal structures in society, especially the father-dominated family, which prepares children to obey and even revere a harsh "leader."

But what was most interesting to me about this book is the politics of sexuality. Reich as a psychiatrist observed that the repression of sexuality in society, especially from a young age, prepares people for lifetimes of neurotic self-hatred as some of their most basic and healthy life functions become embedded with deep shame and guilt. I would add, sexual assault and child abuse add much fuel to this fire. Reich stresses that children and adolescents and women are perpetually denied control over their sexual feelings and bodies, which is what gives the patriarchal father so much power in the family, and therefore the repression of masses of people becomes the seed that grows authoritarian/fascist political movements.

(I will write more on this train of thought in my review of Yes Means Yes!)

There's a lot more in this book. Reich also dissects the Soviet Union and tries to explain why worker's self-management breaking down led to dictatorship and state capitalism. He also quotes at length from Nazi and Soviet propaganda to illustrate his points. Finally, I need to point out that a fair portion of this book is spent on Reich's ideas of the "orgone", which he believed was the fundamental component of life, work, love, and knowledge. He's been accused of pseudoscience, but if you look at it from a spiritual point of view, it doesn't matter what you call that force inside each of us which strives for freedom, the point is to unleash it.

"Freedom does not have to be achieved - it is spontaneously present in every life function. It is the elimination of all obstacles to freedom that has to be achieved."

[Tom Schulte · Rating 3 out of 5]

I was drawn to read this book as one of my efforts to understand the MAGA movement. I feel the focus should be on the supporting GOP and its electorate, more so on Trump the individual, to understand and react. Reich analyzed and documented the rise of Hitler, the Nazi party, and it's voting supporters and emphasizes a similar point of view. From the section heading "FUHRER AND MASS STRUCTURE":

If, at some future date, the history of social processes would allow the reactionary historian time to indulge in speculations on Germany’s past, he would be sure to perceive in Hitler’s success in the years between 1928 and 1933 the proof that a great man makes history only inasmuch as he inflames the masses with ‘his idea’. In fact, National Socialist propaganda was built upon this ‘fuhrer ideology’. To the same limited extent to which the propagandists of National Socialism understood the mechanics of their success, they were able to comprehend the historical basis of the National Socialist movement. This is very well illustrated by an article published at that time entitled ‘Christianity and National Socialism’, written by the National Socialist Wilhelm Stapel. He stated: ‘For the very reason that National Socialism i s an elementary movement, it cannot be gotten at with “arguments”. Arguments would be effective only if the movement had gained its power by argumentation.’

In keeping with this peculiarity the rally speeches of the National Socialists were very conspicuous for their skillfulness in operating upon the emotions of the individuals in the masses and of avoiding relevant arguments as much as possible. In various passages in his book Mein Kampf Hitler stresses that true mass psychological tactics dispense with argumentation and keep the masses’ attention fixed on the ‘great final goal’ at all times.

Because of length restrictions on this platform, my full review is on my blog.