Talk:Miguel Serrano
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
[edit] NOT BELIEVABLE CLAIMS; NEEDS CITATIONS
This article is in need of citations and also revisions. As it stands, it seems almost like a PR piece for this guy. Further, claims that this SELF-PROFESSED NAZI met with and befriended, among others, Herman Hesse (opposed to nazism), Carl Jung, Nehru, Indira Gandhi, and the Dalai Lama, cannot be believed, at least without citations. I find it nearly impossible believe that the Dalai Lama would have met with this man and befriended him, especially when he had many more pressing concerns at the time; if he did, I would like to know what exactly was involved in this "friendship". Jung and Hesse I can accept as he seems to have written a book with/about them; however, I would greatly appreciate a clarification as to the nature of their friendship, especially a clarification as to how Hesse fell in with this guy (Jung, I believe, may have had Nazi sympathies, so I don't have as many problems with their association). The others need some references. Stonehouse 20:54, 18 August 2006 (UTC)
- Serrano describes his association with the Dalai Lama (as well as Nehru, Indira Gandhi, Jung and Hesse) in this interview (second question). A photo of the two (taken in 1992) can be seen here. Citation could also be made to page 177 of Goodrick-Clarke's Black Sun. Serrano gives his reflections on Hesse's association to anti-Nazism in his introduction to C.G. Jung and Hermann Hesse. —Morning star 02:10, 30 August 2006 (UTC)
Apparently Stonehouse is working under some ideological and mass-media-suggested preconceptions that people capable of sympathy to the Hitlerian philosophy are somehow inevitably antisocial, unsuccessful, unspiritual, unaccomplished, unrefined and otherwise culturally retarded. Miguel Serrano, a man of high spiritual aspirations, wide social and international success, and authentic high culture, obviously contradicts Stonehouse's pre-programmed ideological, mass-media-suggested preconceptions. Serrano's intellect and sincere spirituality endeared him greatly to the geniuses Hesse and Jung (in addition to Nehru, Indira Gandhi, the Dalai Lama, etc.) and all one has to do is examine Serrano's book, C.G. Jung and Hermann Hesse: A Record of Two Friendships to see an actual photograph of Serrano and Hesse joyfully posing together. Hesse (and Jung) were both immediately impressed and touched by Serrano's great intellectual power, intense, honest soul-searching and sensitivity to non-modern values (the very non-modern values Serrano was to find embodied in the National Socialist Aryan Imperium). In fact, Hesse and Serrano were on such intimate terms that Hesse told Serrano that "now I have only friends who are younger than myself" (quite a compliment to Serrano) and, after Hermann's death, Ninon Hesse wrote to Serrano: "It's a comfort to me to know how much you loved and still love him" (Oct. 21, 1962). So perhaps Stonehouse should not waste the time of others with his empty concerns and unthinking enslavement to modernist-liberalist dogmatic blindness. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 205.188.116.201 (talk • contribs) 18:43, 18 October 2006 (UTC)
Stonehouse's original comment is not without merit. Neither is the unsigned reply without merit, unfortunately: any mind is capable of entertaining the most bizarre beliefs. But I think Stonehouse's point is this: it would be very nice to have some third-party verification of Serrano's claims. If there is no third-party verification or corroboration, then that needs to be noted too. After all, we are all aware, are we not, that self-aggrandizement amongst people in any sphere of public life is hardly unknown. Moreover, these friendships and acquaintanceships need to be located in time in comparison to the devlopment of Serrano's beliefs - and of course, it would be useful to know to what extent his famous friends were aware of Serrano's beliefs. Hi There 18:12, 29 November 2006 (UTC)
- I was comparing the claims made here about Jung's view on Hitler with the Jung article. I don't think they're compatible. The linked interview with Serrano says "C. G. Jung compared Adolf Hitler with Mohammed in an interview given before the war." If anyone has a reference to the interview (if it exists), rather than to Serrano's statement about it, that would be informative. (FWIW, I think anyone who believes what Serrano professes to believe according to this article has a mind so open that all his wits have blown away... nonsense is nonsense.) --Alvestrand 20:49, 4 January 2007 (UTC)
[edit] JUNG'S WORDS ON HITLER: SOURCE OF SERRANO'S SPECULATIONS
In several interviews and articles of the interwar period Jung analyzed Hitler as "possessed" by the collective Aryan unconscious:
"Hitler is a spiritual vessel, a demi-divinity; even better, a myth. Mussolini is a man."
"Hitler seemed like the 'double' of a real person, as if Hitler the man might be hiding inside like an appendix, and deliberately so concealed in order not to disturb the mechanism ... You know you could never talk to this man; because there is nobody there ... It is not an individual; it is an entire nation."
"His voice is that of at least 78 million Germans. He must shout, even in private conversation ... The voice he hears is that of the collective unconscious of his race."
Source: C.G. Jung Speaking: Interviews and Encounters, edited by William McGuire and R.F.C. Hull (London: Thames and Hudson, 1978), pp. 91-93, 115-135, 136-40. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 172.149.176.173 (talk) 17:01, 13 February 2007 (UTC).
Well I've looked at the photo of the DL & Serrano and it doesn't seem to prove that they were bosom buddies. It looks more like the DL is greeting a guy in a crowd. Besides which, even if Serrano and the DL knew each other, or were even 'friends' does that sanctify Serrano's beliefs? How much did the DL know of Serrano's beliefs? Does the DL anywhere agree that the Jews are the servants of the Demiurge? That they need to be killed or that Hitler was an avatar of a divine being? I don't think so. I would also like to more about Serrano's relationship with Jung and Hesse and how it CHANGED as the War carried on. The issue of their supposed links with Nazism is at best contested. Hesse was outlawed by Hitler and Jung's opinion changed. He freely admitted he had made a mistake about Hitler in the early years. It has to be remembered that a lot of people were wrong about Hitler (including most of the leaders of the democratic nations who regarded Stalin as the real enemy) until it was too late. A few out-of-context remarks about Hitler by Jung doesn't cut it, I'm afraid. A 'myth' representing his people doesn't mean Hitler was a good guy if the people he represents are also expressing something negative. Serrano sounds like a nut, I'm afraid, and forgive me for saying so but the guy who suggests that pro-Nazi people are actually rather splendid and anyone who assumes they aren't are small-minded needs to put his name to his words. There is NOTHING to recommend Nazism to the world. Its spirituality is corrupt, its racial politics obscene and it has been responsible for the deaths of over 65-85 million people (which I would term 'antisocial', wouldn't you?). Fascist ideas are not spiritual. True spirituality does not advocate the slaughtering of people of different races, sexualities or other political, religious or ideological persuasions. ThePeg 22:55, 3 February 2007 (UTC)
[edit] NPOV?
I'm not particularly concerned about the claims Serrano has made about who were his friends. What is more important is that, as Stonehouse says, this reads like a PR piece. It is very sympathetic to Serrano and his beliefs, and it is not neutral by any stretch of the imagination. Nor is there any indication that Serrano's ideas might be a bit out of the mainstream and that he might be considered a nutter by some; it might be considered that this makes the article straightforward reporting, but I think that there needs to be some balance, with the inclusion of critical opinions of his ideas. Iain1917 08:30, 10 January 2007 (UTC)
- I would tend to agree that this article doesn't say it describes a belief that is nonsense (as I do about a lot of other articles on wikipedia). However, just stating my opinion would be bad WP:OR - if someone finds a reference for a critique of Serrano, we can incorporate stuff stated there as WP:V verifiable statements, but just stating what's obvious to me isn't the Right Thing. --Alvestrand 15:41, 10 January 2007 (UTC)
That's exactly what I mean. I'm not asking that Serrano's beliefs be characterised as nonsense, because that would be as POV as the current article. However, I do feel that the article is unbalanced because it does not provide an alternative voice, which can be interpreted as suggesting that the ideas are correct because there isn't an alternative perspective. It might be done simply by providing links to pages about critics or opponents. At the moment, it is Serrano's world that is being presented. Iain1917 13:36, 18 January 2007 (UTC)
It reads less like a PR piece and more like a love letter. The general tone of the piece is completely biased and clearly geared at portraying Serrano in a positive light. that alone should mandate a rewrite. whats distressing about it isn't the lack of an alternative perspective, but the fact that his philosophical, racial and political views are presented as fact (as opposed to his views). most of the ideas espoused in this article are not widely accepted by historians, scientists etc. Most of them (hyperboria and the Aryans as a pure Germanic master race included) are quantifiably false. so there is no need to search out specific criticisms of serrano. Even the facts listed in the "early life" section are completely unprovable, and most likely uncorroborated. neutrality can't be maintained by allowing obviously false or questionable material to be presented as probable or true. even if that information is offset with criticism. 24.185.239.254 05:33, 31 March 2007 (UTC)