tive. Marxists interpreted Nazism as thenlast gasp of capitalism, anti-Germannpolemicists condemned it as endemicnto German character, and others saw itnas exaggerated nationalism.nThere are many reasons for studyingnNazi Germany 40 years after its demise.nOne is that many post-WorldnWar II societies, as unstable as WeimarnGermany, are tempted by totalitariannmovements. Like Germany,nmany of the new countries achievednnational identity fairly late in worldnhistory, and only with great difficulty.nThe ruling elites had simultaneouslynto build nations, to build states, and tonsatisfy economic needs raised by medianexposure to the more affluent world.nThere existed what political scientistsnrefer to as “systemic overload.” Massnunemployment and staggering inflationnhave persisted. The break withntradition—i.e., extended family, ruralnenvironment, numerous psychic supportsnand certitudes—means no refugenfor many. The onslaught of modernitynwith its appeal to reason andnscience, its secularity, and its pluralismnof alternatives is confusing andndisorienting. Emerging societies arenespecially vulnerable to panaceas.nRegimes not unlike German NationalnSocialism have appeared in numerousndecolonized regions. Althoughnthey never label themselvesnNazi or fascist, they possess the relevantncharacteristics. They centernaround an all-powerful charismaticnleader who claims to personify thennation and who cites a litany of wrongsndue to some foreign demonology.nThey purport to blend nationalismnwith socialism, promising the evolutionnof a “new man” and social justice.nThey stress the temporary necessity ofnthe cult of violence. They engage innmassive regimentation, tolerate onenofficial political party, eliminate autonomousninterest groups, and controlnthe media. They ruthlessly eliminatentheir enemies and suspected enemies.nThey control politics, economics, andnculture. They have so far failed to actnon the Nazi scale of evil more becausenof their lack of technological sophisticationnthan because of their intent.nThe Marxist-Christian syncretismnlabeled Liberation Theology has beennespecially attractive to certain elites innThird World societies. Christianity,nbeing an incarnational religion, is richnin syncretism. As it moved from itsnJewish origin, it borrowed from thencultures it encountered. Quite early itnexplained its mysteries in the languagenof Greek philosophy. Later it co-optednRoman legal and bureaucratic structures.nBut syncretism has its limits;nthere is always the temptation to linknChristianity with the latest fad. A mixturenmight be conjured that ceases tonbe Christian. If, as the Reformersncharged, the Renaissance Church wasnmore pagan than Christian, Ericksennsuggests that the Nazi theologians werenmore Nazi than Christian. Today thenlatest exercise in syncretism —nLiberation Theology—is subjected tona similar charge.nMost clergy are genuinely concernednabout improving the lot of thenpoor. Often they have led shelterednlives and are genuinely shocked byntheir first confrontation with poverty.nThe most prominent liberation theologiansncome from the traditional rulingnclass and were educated abroad. Assumingnaffluence to be the naturalncondition of man, they are appalled bynwhat they see in the Third World.nThey rarely understand the culturalnroots of wealth that have been uncoverednby Max Weber, Edward Banfield,nand Lucien Pye: a cohesive familynsystem, a view of work as vocation,ndiscipline, a willingness to sacrificentoday for future gratification, and angeneral honesty. Societies lackingnthese cultural underpinnings arendoomed to poverty despite the slogansnand ideologies spewed by the rulingnpoliticians, Oblivious of this persuasivencultural interpretation, the liberationntheologians instead embrace thenLeninist theory of imperialism, whichnblames the successful for Third Worldnpoverty and encourages a spirit of secularnguilt.nThe liberation theologians have embracednthe cult of the relevant. Christianitynmust adapt to modernity. Thisntime the church must not oppose inevitablenrevolution. It must accommodatenchange and become progressive.nIts traditional concern with the transcendent,nthe spiritual, and individualntransformation is but obscurantism.nThe mystery and mysticism must benrejected or directed toward a mundanenobjective. There must be quick resultsnin this world.nIt is difficult to forgive, or presumento forgive, Ericksen’s Nazi theologians.nTheir apology for a pagan, totalitariannideology is a scandal to Christiannbelievers. To mitigate their guilt,nhowever, it might be noted that Hitiernrepresented a “first.” There was nonprecedent to warn them in their naivete.nItaly’s fascism was littie more thanntraditional authoritarianism and vastlyndifferent from German National Socialism.nThe Germans had to learnnthrough error and through other peoples’nsuffering. (Little did they suspectnthat Hitler was literal in espousing hisnFinal Solution.) In contrast, the liberationntheologians can look back on anvariety of Marxist-Leninist experiments.nThey can see clearly the regimentation,nthe Gulags, the persecutionnof religious communities, thenmass emigrations, and the economicnchaos. Future generations may not benany kinder to Boff, Gutierrez, andnCardenal than we are to Kittel, Althaus,nand Hirsh.nBOOKS IN BRIEF-FROM PARIS TO PRETORIAnInternational Social Science: The UNESCO Experience by Peter Lengyel, New Brunswick,nNJ: Transaction; $9.95. An Australian economist with UNESCO for 30 years tells hownideology and mismanagement gradually destroyed the agency’s social science program.nDispensations: The Future of South Ah-ica as South Africans See It by Richard JohnnNeuhaus, Grand Rapids, MI: William B. Eerdmans; $16.95. By interviewing key figuresnfrom across the South African spectrum—from Afrikaner conservatives to Xhosa and Zulunradicals—Neuhaus paints a much more complete picture of a troubled land than is usuallynoffered in the American media.nThird World Ideology and Western Reality: Manufacturing Political Myth by Carlos Rangelnwith foreword by Jean-Francois Revel, New Brunswick, NJ: Transaction Books; $19.95. Annimportant contribution to the North/South debate by a prominent Venezuelan journalist.nRangel portrays Third Worlder ideology as nothing more than a “socialism of last resort”nwhose emotional appeal is as strong among disaffected Westerners as it is among Third Worldnrevoluhonaries.nnnSEPTEMBER 19861 35n