Of Collaborators and Careerists
Careerism has its own moralism, serving as an anesthetic against competing moral claims.
The announcement of the death of David Greenglass has got me thinking a lot about collaborators. Though much of twentieth-century history could not be written without some discussion of collaborators — from Vichy to Stalinism to the Dirty Wars to McCarthyism — the topic hardly gets a mention in the great texts of political theory. Eichmann in Jerusalem being the sole exception.
In my first book on fear, I tried to open a preliminary discussion of the topic. That discussion drew from a wide range of twentieth-century experiences, in Europe, Latin America, the US, and elsewhere, as well as from my reading of Eichmann and Montesquieu’s Persian Letters.
Reading over what I wrote, I’d say I failed. I was so intent on breaking apart the conventional understanding of the collaborator as someone who aids and abets a foreign enemy that I wound up broadening the category too much. So intent was I, also, on breaking apart the three-legged stool of perpetrator-victim-bystander — where was the collaborator in all this, I wondered — that I wound up conflating low-level perpetrators with collaborators; I now think there’s an important difference there.