they recognize no qualitative—i.e.,nmoral and spiritual—standards, exceptnin terms of the conduciveness—or nonconduciveness—ofnan action or idea tonbring about a desired material transformation.nThe changes they envisage arenseen as possible only through brute forcenand can be effected only through theirnimpact upon the prevalent mode of productionnand upon the economically dominantnclass.nIhese Marxist commonplaces arenrelevant in that they show the true distancenbetween Masonic pyramids and socialistnfunctionalism. Billington correctlynobserves that the socialists sacrificednthe depth and “interiority” of the secretnInsanity RevisitednRolf Hochhuth: A German LovenStory; Little, Brown & Co.; Boston.nby Juliana Geran PilonnIDlatantly inaccurate as it may be toncall a love story “German” whose malenprotagonist is Polish, the reason is clear:nthe subject of this unusual true-lifennovel is in fact the German reaction tonthe unhappy affair between a POW laborer,nStasiek Zasada, and the beautifulnFrau Pauline Krop, whose husband wasnaway fighting for the Fiihrer. It is thenresponse of Pauline’s fellow villagers,nset against the larger historical andnpsychological context of the SecondnWorld War, the emotional chemistrynof the Prussian aggressor as such, thatnHochhuth has taken upon himself tonanalyze. The result is a difficult, unsettlingnaccount of barbarism still terrifying,ndecades later, for its enormity. Tonunderscore the cruelty of the sentencenfacing Pauline’s Polish lover, who mustnbe hanged for their brief moment of tenderness,nthe author succeeds in keepingnDr. Pilon is the author of Notes fromnthe Other Side of Night.nsociety for the homogeneous solidaritynof a mass movement. Even more to thenpoint, they degraded Judeo-Christiannfaith in historical redemption to a fictitiousnmaterial law. In place of hope fornan ultimate divine reckoning in history,nthey left us with the certainty of the triumphnof favored economic forces. Dispensingnwith the appeal to the individualnsoul, they prepared for their victory bynmobilizing faceless masses. Thus thenarchitectonic change that Billingtonnperceives in the political developmentnfrom Masonry to socialism betrays anneven deeper alteration. It is the furtherndisfigurement and vulgarization of religiousnlegend: the defilement of one ofnthe seminal myths of our civilization. Dnthe reader in suspense: though all alongnthe denouement is known, one cannotnhelp wishing to undo the past. Is it reallynpossible that an innocent young man willnbe murdered in cold blood for havingnmade love to a woman who is just asndesperately infatuated with him? AnShakespearean romance fit for legendnand iambic pentameter ends up as justnanother episode in the peculiarly nazi-nGerman cacophony of sadism.nOne might argue that in contrast tonthe tragedy of the millions who perishednin gas chambers, and that of the manyntortured and raped children, this storynis hardly the most shocking, hardly anparadigmatic specimen to dissect for andiagnostic autopsy of the German horror.nAfter all, Zasada knew the risksnof having an affair: he had been dulynwarned, he took a chance and succumbednto his instincts. How many infantsnperished merely for having beenncircumcised, for having been born innthe wrong corner of the earth.” Hownmany women were gassed for lightingntheir candles on the wrong Sabbath.?nYet, on reflection, this love affair isnquite a useful analytic tool, for it clearlynhighlights the contradictory, outrightnnnidiotic mindset of the nazi leadershipnwhich was nevertheless capable of elicitingnthe obedience of perfectly ordinarynand (alas …) law-abiding citizens.nConsider the irrationality at issuenhere: the law which declared that a foi^neign POW who committed adulterynwith a German woman should be punishednby hanging was changed on Julyn5, 1941 (shortly after Pauline’s lovenaffair) not only to allow the male offendernto go free, but also to make itnpossible for him to obtain a Germannpassport! (And why not, indeed? Couldna man whom a German woman hadnfound attractive be really all that “inferior”?)nFor some reason—or, rather,nin spite of all reason—those POW’s whonhad been captured before July 5, 1941ncontinued to be subject to the originalnlaw. The absurdity was clear even tonthe executioners themselves—if not,nperhaps, to their leaders. One of themnaddresses a colleague:nIt’s even crazier than that, Karl. Itnisn’t just that a Pole who’s been workingnhere for years gets hanged whilenanother earns himself a passport forndoing the same thing because he onlynarrived here yesterday. Don’t you see?nThe new Pole can only earn a passportnby doing what the old one has to swingnfor. That’s worse than crazy—it’s annunholy mess!nTheir reaction? Less than heroic: “thisnseemed so abnormal that they treatednthemselves to an unauthorized midmorningnschnapps from the officenbottle.”nJhlitler’s motives for passing thenoriginal law and then for both repealingnit and applying it in a mindless, contradictorynfashion should be kept distinct,ntherefore, from the forces that movednthe underlings who carried out hisnwishes. Yet both played an indispensablenrole:nBlind and insensate homicidal mania,na fundamental impulse common tonHitler and a handful of his closestnMarch/April 1981n