It's 1930, not 1970. The US dollar was not the global currency, the British pound had not yet declined that much, the Soviet ruble had no value outside the Soviet Union, and the Chinese yuan was somehow still worth less than the ruble. And anyway you can always trade in the old trusty gold and jewelry if the money isn't worth it.
For the Republic: A History of the Second American Civil War
- Thread starter The Angry Observer
- Start date
While that is true. It doesn't change how the combination of the Civil war in China wrapping up in a early Kuomintang victory, and the US currently in the midst of their second one. The upcoming cold war is gonna see China and the US keep apace with eachother in economic development and relevance
Although it is an interesting theory, at the moment it seems a little too advanced. We don't know if there is going to be a new conflict in China or what is going to happen to the USSR; Maybe Hitler attacks them anyway and leaves them so broken that they are in no mood to fight a Cold War. And the Japanese Empire remains more or less intact and undefeated...
Well speculation is all we can do. Although it was implied in chapter 13 that Chiang was preparing a liberation of Manchuria and Taipei.
Besides that I think events in France may have embolden Hitler to try military operations he didn't in otl. Like the partition of Switzerland or the popular Operation Sea Lion, with French forces to boot. With Uncle Joe letting them bleed eachother dry, before joining in to "liberate the workers of Europe"
All I can say is that Stalin is presently in the midst of his Great Purge, and convinced that France and Germany are going to do exactly as you said, he has even grander designs than OTL.
The question we must ask ourselves, however, is how well will Stalin do without the backbone of American industry to fuel him?
Assuming Hitler attacks the USSR in 1941 as OTL, does this mean the American Civil War will last until then?
I think we would get something in between OTL and the popular theory "Without Lend Lease Stalin has to surrender unconditionally in January 1942 and let Hitler do whatever he wants."
I think we would get something in between OTL and the popular theory "Without Lend Lease Stalin has to surrender unconditionally in January 1942 and let Hitler do whatever he wants."
I sincerely doubt that that's going to happen. With the Western Allies preparing for a showdown, and with Northern France about to turn into an utter nightmare for the fascists, Hitler won't have as easy a time, delaying any invasion plan, if he even gets the opportunity to attack. Hell, Stalin may be the one launching the invasion instead.
Why the last sentence?
I can see the logic behind the rest (Hitler exposing his hand too early by supporting NatCorp makes the rest of Europe not so willing to let him get away with his plans).
But I honestly don't understand why so many people insist on buying the Hitlerian propaganda "Stalin was eager to attack Europe and would have done so if we [the Germans] hadn't launched Barbarossa first as a preemptive strike."
This concept (that Stalin would have launched an invasion of Europe if Hitler had not attacked first) is repeatedly treated on this site as if it were some kind of cosmic law as immutable as the law of gravity or the "balance of power theory"... but it doesn't seem like anyone is able to give an argument for why it would go beyond "well, that's just the way it is!"
Last edited:
Opportunism, largely. If Allied victoy seems likely enough, well, then Stalin stands to gain quite a lot by joining the victorious side, and due to joining late, he'll be in a strong position during the following peace negotiations.
Of course, that's not a guarantee, but I think it likely.
Not well, especially when his chronic paranoia was a cause for the majority of the Soviet Unions problems during the opening stages of Operation Barbarossa.
Although I would be lying if I didn't find the thought of Stalin only realizing the Nazi's have invaded JUST when he is capture by them cathartic.
That question also goes for the Allies as well, since they won't have US backing. Although the earlier rearmament could compensate for this. Especially if events in France embolden Hitler enough to attack Czechoslovakia in
Been caching up, a interesting timeline a lot of interesting repercussions though I must say for the world though Japan I must say it has to be painful given such a good opportunity yet unable to exploit it thanks to Huey's short term policy on oil.
Though on the matter of the USSR and the Republicans, maybe they can provide a solution for each other's contradictions?
By that, the USSR used a lot of American help for their industrialisation including from anti communist big business like Henry Ford, this was likely hindered by the outbreak of civil war but the Republicans help with that.
Why would they? In part to keep the USSR aid flowing but mainly because of the government is mainly made up of conservative figures while it's increasingly radicalised populace I think does not want to settle for the old status quo which must be concerning while the USSR needs to ready to exploit the inevitable war in Europe no matter the cost.
The solution is simple socialism at home or at least enough changes to prevent a possible second revolution and be big tycoon abroad giving it's industrialists supporters a chance to milk the Soviet people dry to pacify them for the rebuilding of the USA in the aftermath.
Though on the matter of the USSR and the Republicans, maybe they can provide a solution for each other's contradictions?
By that, the USSR used a lot of American help for their industrialisation including from anti communist big business like Henry Ford, this was likely hindered by the outbreak of civil war but the Republicans help with that.
Why would they? In part to keep the USSR aid flowing but mainly because of the government is mainly made up of conservative figures while it's increasingly radicalised populace I think does not want to settle for the old status quo which must be concerning while the USSR needs to ready to exploit the inevitable war in Europe no matter the cost.
The solution is simple socialism at home or at least enough changes to prevent a possible second revolution and be big tycoon abroad giving it's industrialists supporters a chance to milk the Soviet people dry to pacify them for the rebuilding of the USA in the aftermath.
Nice vignette! At first I believed it was an exploration of how even though the Republic are unquestionably "the good guys" their actions and campaigns can still harm civilians and result in loyalty to MacArthur. I've always believed such POVs are necessary. Not as part of some "both sides" thing, but to show that war is truly hell and that everyone from every side ends up suffering. But this is good, very good too. Reading that it was a German plane was rather chilling. Is there anything lower than bombing and massacring "your" own people?
Of course given the butterflies here already maybe Stalin still at some point attacks Finland and the allies actually do something, maybe even with Italian assistance and the war with the USSR starts that way, or over the Baltics,.
OTOH, the KMT had surprisingly close ties to Nazi Germany, so, there's that to consider vis-a-vis China.
"The Land of the Free and the Home of the Brave" (Chapter 19)
“The Land of the Free and the Home of the Brave”
“Throughout the nation men and women, forgotten by the machinations of the cosmopolitan elite and under fire by socialist tyranny, look to me alone for guidance and a protection of our natural order. I can do nothing but pledge myself to a new deal for the American people and save the old order.” - Radio address by Douglas MacArthur
MacArthur, making a speech where Congress once sat
MacArthur, making a speech where Congress once sat
The period of American history in which the National-Corporate government dominated the country is universally considered its most painful chapter. This is both due to the enormous physical destruction the country endured and because of how psychologically difficult it has been for many Americans to come to grips with how many of their ancestors or contemporaries enabled, encouraged, or directly supported the regime. “We sit at a crossroads,” mused William Borah sometime in the summer of 1934. “For the foreseeable future, every one of our actions will be judged by how we reacted to these events.” The March on Washington’s greatest success was in creating the illusion of legitimacy for MacArthur. By successfully positioning himself as America’s legitimate authority, Douglas MacArthur was able to keep the allegiance of the military chiefs and other federal enforcers he would depend on during the war. In this way, despite being created out of open insurgency, the Natcorps became widely accepted as, for all practical purposes, America’s government. MacArthur and his backers were able to very quickly mobilize huge masses of manpower and weaponry, which forced President Smith and the hollowed-out War Department to adopt a strategy that remains enormously controversial to this day. The Republic stopped contesting most of America outside of the Great Lakes and Northeast as part of a grand plan to grind down the Natcorp advance, allow the fascists’ idiosyncrasies to catch up with them, and eventually win the war.
In the short term, though, this allowed MacArthur to get away with establishing himself in D.C. and set the terms of the war. The March on Washington was followed by denial and chaos. When MacArthur’s troops, fanning out from Washington, seized towns and installed military governments they put an end to this chaos. Within days, he was able to prop up himself and the Natcorp government as the legitimate authority in the U.S. Smith was held in nigh-unanimous contempt, at the time, for fleeing to Albany like an exile. The nickname “the Rumpublicans” stuck. Where there were not socialist rebellions to justify crackdowns, MacArthur and his allies invented them. Natcorp troops always brought brutality and oppression wherever they went, but early on much of that was directed at undesirables in society. Organized labor and organized crime, the two “Grand Organizations”, as Republican leftists came to call them, were the first targets and their resistance efforts will be covered extensively in the next chapter. Many communities the Natcorps initially encountered looked on as they put an end to the madness of the Hoover and Smith years, and then proceeded to make the “problems” of unions and bootleggers vanish overnight. Washington D.C. based diarist and resistance operative Mary Dothan wrote that while the “conflagration has put a smoke-screen on the country, by all accounts Mac’s men are simply shooting socialists and mob bosses in the head, or otherwise putting them in places where they can, on pain of death, be productive members of society.”
Natcorp troops with machine guns
The apparatus of oppression that has become the Natcorp regime’s hallmark was justified under these terms. Natcorp soldiers quickly brought order to the streets, crushing left-wing agitators and dismantling the mafia. No matter how disorganized, frazzled, and fragile the Natcorp bureaucracy was thanks to constant purges and MacArthur’s own hectic leadership style, this apparatus remained in place, and with it the illusion of the Natcorp state as a continuation of or an heir to the United States. The ruined American economy went ablaze again after the March on Washington. Already, there were many desperate enough to accept radical new solutions, whether that was leftism or rightism. Governor Franklin Roosevelt had pioneered these sentiments before his surprise death, while Senator Huey Long had intended to position himself as a populist hero in the 1936 Presidential election. The Natcorps’ conquering armies, as a result, were met by many people desperate enough to simply give them a chance. MacArthur rescued America from his own mess. The coup was generally interpreted as a favorable development for business, which encouraged spending. Of course, this was founded on lies, and ignored the fact that the deposed President Smith himself was very friendly to business in many contexts. In any event, through early 1934 the American economy saw a “recovery” that tightened MacArthur’s control on the country.
Equally important were simpler, less subtle methods of keeping power. Armed with a host of well respected American icons, such as Nicholas Murray Butler and Henry Ford, the Natcorps’ lies swarmed the airwaves. Their all-star cast was on the radio for most hours of the day, cautiously modifying its message for whatever audience was most likely to be listening. The Republicans were blindsided, and although figures like Roosevelt consistently went out to bat for the cause, they were drowned out. William Randolph Hearst’s media empire, while far from its zenith, further fanned the flames of Natcorp lies (even though many of Hearst’s outlets were based in New York City and therefore liquidated by Republican authorities). Alan Brinkley called it the “original modern disinformation campaign”, and it would serve as a model to the fledgling Nazi German regime across the Atlantic. Leftist rebellions were spun out of little to nothing. The true size of MacArthur’s empire was flagrantly lied about and presumed to cover the western and southern blocs as well. Foreign governments, in the Natcorp propagandists’ telling, were all unified behind MacArthur. The economy was on the mend, too, and the war was always within shooting distance of being won. One consequence of this was the recovery that wasn’t. To some extent or another, the Natcorps’ propaganda was effective in convincing the regime’s subjects that their lives were better off than they actually were.
Tuning into the radio during the 1930's
This is another area of contentious debate for scholars of the Natcorp Era: whether or not Natcorp rule actually benefited its subjects. As with many of history’s more fascinating chapters, the answer is not straightforward. Earlier historians tended to depict the Natcorps as kleptocratic in soul, blatantly defrauding the common American in favor of a small clique of oligarchs. They were kept in line through pathetic lies about Catholicism and socialism. There is certainly truth to this, and there is no question that the Natcorp coup ultimately put America into a state of unprecedented ruin and that its economic recovery was a mirage. However, recent historians have argued that while Natcorp initiatives were enormously harmful for some members of society they benefited many others. During the war, there certainly were many fortunes made, not just thanks to Natcorp looting. Taken altogether these factors made a plurality of people in Natcorp occupied areas (not counting direct warzones like north and eastern Pennsylvania, Ohio, northern Illinois, and Wisconsin) willing to give MacArthur and Nicholas Butler’s promises of class harmony a chance. And that number only grew as the war ground on.
The Natcorp takeover was, as historian Amity Shlaes wrote, “a free-for-all, many oligarchical cliques given unlimited helpings to all the wealth in America.” Overwhelmingly, the original Natcorps were exceedingly wealthy men. After the takeover, they adopted all the pretensions of nobility. These Natcorp elites were probably encouraged by the behavior of their leader. MacArthur had a decades-long army career and was infamous among his peers for his whimsical and flamboyant personality. Aides would recall with wonder and derision his pompous, self-important donning of military regalia and grandiose orations, before he crossed the Rubicon. Following the Pennsylvania campaign, MacArthur fell back to the White House and rarely left. According to one popular story, he spent much of the morning after the coup staring at himself in the mirror. The gravity of his situation seemed to set in by summer of 1934. “We’ve burned our ships,” he said to Eisenhower. “Thankfully, God’s put the wind at our backs.” MacArthur was notoriously difficult to reach for subordinates, which made his grasp on reality debatable and left other regime members to interpret “absolute fucking gobbledygook orders”, as one Republican spy put it. Businessman Prescott Bush, during the war, became one of the wealthiest men in the world thanks to his access to MacArthur. Grand strategy served MacArthur much less well than the field did, and he spent much of his time in the White House, or whisked to various military installations via plane. His daily radio addresses to the American people were typically delivered as a passive monologue on the progress of the war or the economy. These “Fireside addresses” didn’t just consolidate MacArthur’s support, making him much more than the figurehead J. P. Morgan Jr. and his allies had hoped, but also led to a peculiar situation where the common people had a much different image of MacArthur than the reality.
The White House MacArthur dwelled in
With the exception of Hoover, who was the only person that rivaled MacArthur’s power, there was only one Natcorp that had the courage to speak out against their dictator. That was his beleaguered aide, Dwight Eisenhower. In many ways MacArthur’s opposite, the analytical and procedure-oriented Eisenhower was used to cleaning up for his boss. After MacArthur brutalized the Bonus Army, Eisenhower ran interference with the War Department despite being privately furious. Eisenhower was apoplectic after the March on Washington, personally forcing his way into MacArthur’s entourage. The two generals engaged in a shouting match, with Eisenhower blasting MacArthur for his vanity and foolishness. He was perhaps the only man to confront MacArthur and live during the Second American Civil War. Black Jack Pershing, MacArthur’s mentor, and Charles Coughlin, who MacArthur owed much of his dictatorship to, were shown no such mercy. But like so many military leaders, Eisenhower stayed at MacArthur’s side out of a sense of duty and that whatever his faults MacArthur was America’s de facto leader. “That stupid son of a bitch,” fumed Eisenhower to then Major Mark Clark. “He ruined it all. A hundred and fifty years of continuous democracy, and he toppled it in an evening!” Eisenhower’s beliefs, actions, and legacy are still intensely debated. Anna J. Merrit’s book The Eisenhower Myth sums up public opinion best: “There has always been desire to, fairly or not, distance Eisenhower from the Natcorp regime’s legacy as much as possible.” Whatever the case, once the war had exploded around them Eisenhower again served MacArthur loyally and capably. He also criticized his superior when he believed his actions were unsound— and sometimes, MacArthur listened. “He did have a hell of an intellect," admitted Eisenhower. "My God, but he was smart. He had a brain.”
This, perhaps, was one of the reasons why MacArthur feared being deposed early on. He’d always been intended as nothing more than a puppet for the March on Washington’s instigators. He surely knew that during the coup’s early stages, other figureheads like Calvin Coolidge and Smedley Butler were proposed. For the entirety of the war’s first phase, MacArthur kept his talented deputy Hugh Drum in reserve with a small army in D.C., to ensure that there was no counter-March on Washington. But it would not be long before the tables turned and his handlers lost control of him. Some of this was due to his own machinations, such as having Hoover squeeze out enemies. The Director spent the regime’s first days sniffing out homosexuals, consulting nobody but MacArthur and targeting those outside of his orbit. But an even bigger factor was the regime’s own propaganda. “Mac is a brilliant leader,” wrote Dothan, “who, like an alchemist, made gold from a tombstone. He is without the drawbacks of a politician— he is without the noise of debate, the uncertainty of elections, the delay of trials. We march into oblivion under his sturdy hand.”
Eisenhower in formal attire, reporting to the White House
In reality, the Natcorp regime was anything but sturdy. Its ruling clique was constantly divided by a myriad of factions, often at the expense of the war effort. John W. Davis, other than MacArthur and Hoover, was America’s most powerful man by the end of 1934. The former Ambassador, Senator and Presidential candidate was seen as something of an elder statesman by the other regime members. He had held the prized office of Ambassador to Britain under Wilson, and was the regime’s ace of spades for relations with that country. The British never did anything more than tolerate Davis’s overtures, and neither he nor the Natcorps were afforded any kind of legitimacy. “Davis and his entourage are akin to a band of pirates,” said Edward Wood, “that expediency in Canada rather than honour compels us to not put to death.” Davis’ real power in the Natcorp regime didn’t come from Britain, but from the fascist governments in Germany and Italy. Hitler’s Germany, both to fuel its own ambitions in France and Austria and to aid the Natcorp war effort, had rearmed at a pace that very few people previously believed was possible. Davis helped shepherd German engineers and recruits across the Atlantic. Whether or not this was something his efforts actually made a difference in, MacArthur rewarded him all the same. The German and Italian “legionnaires” boosted Davis’s profile but also earned him the jealousy of many of his allies.
The regime’s conservative” “Old Guard” was the faction that coalesced under Morgan. It was composed mostly of business interests and was fiercely suspicious of anything that compromised their profits. This, as we’ll address shortly, compromised the regime’s interests. The Republican armies had survived across the Northeast and Great Lakes, meaning that the only way the Natcorps could triumph was through war. This required mass mobilization, and huge financial commitments— commitments the Old Guard had sponsored the March on Washington to avoid. MacArthur was far more committed to winning the war than he was to lining his puppeteers’ pockets. Prominent members of the Old Guard included Virginia’s powerful Senator Carter Glass, rivaled in southern politics only by Huey Long himself. Glass’s influence was perhaps the deciding factor in many of the members of Congress representing Natcorp territory allying with MacArthur, and he became one of the wealthiest men in the world during the war. Nicholas Murray Butler, the regime’s Vice President, also aligned with the Old Guard and generally functioned as the group’s liaison to MacArthur. It is quite possible that this cold relationship didn’t go hot because of MacArthur’s ego. “He was far too consumed by the way his voice sounded on the radio to give Morgan the time ‘o day,” recalled one soldier stationed near the White House.
J. P. Morgan Jr. with his son
This was the environment that allowed Natcorp bigotry to take hold. It is perhaps the single most disturbing and destructive component of the period. It began paired with the regime’s other initiatives— the Natcorp regime ramped up racial segregation wherever it went. It crushed opportunities for women, whose entry into the political world fifteen years prior was thought to have led to the progressive Democrats’ ascendancy. Earlier historians tended to identify Natcorp fearmongering about homosexuals, Jews, and other minorities as a “distraction” from the regime’s policies. More recent interpretations tend to see Natcorp bigotry as authentic hatred from MacArthur’s subordinates, and his willingness to use it for his own purposes. “MacArthur has never given a rat’s ass about negroes,” said Eisenhower to an aide. Director Hoover, however, saw communist plots in every black organization and the extensive crackdowns in cities like Baltimore only strengthened his own power. And there is no doubt that Hoover’s mad hunt for homosexuals was more than a pretense, driven by a deeply-held neurosis that is still studied to this day.
The racialization of the Natcorp government was encouraged by their overseas backers, which led to the rise of another German favorite: legendary automobile titan Henry Ford, whose role in the propagation of antisemitism in the 1930’s has made him “synonymous with evil,” as one biographer wrote. Hitler considered Ford as the greatest American. While many Natcorp leaders used their newfound power to persecute minority groups, Ford was by far the most notable. He was the architect of the expansive racialist agenda the regime would adopt further into the war. Blaming the war on “international Jewry”, as time passed Ford’s antisemitism became exponentially more vicious. By summer of 1934, his correspondence with Rudolf Hess already employed words like “annihilation”. He laid the groundwork for his plans in public, too, devoting his own war chest to advancing his beliefs in the press and bankrolling racialist organizations. His own radio broadcasts always circled back to the “Jewish problem”. “We see in this war that the international Jew, as distinguished from the common Jew, can shape the minds of nations,” intoned Ford in November of 1934, “and make or break millions of families with the pull of secret levers from the heart of finance. We must confront this problem with courage and honesty— for it has confronted us. Let us be thankful that under General Mac’s wise guidance, we have stood up before our extinction!”
Henry Ford is given the Grand Cross of the German Eagle, the highest Nazi award to a non-German, by German consuls Karl Kapp and Fritz Heiler circa January of 1935.
The backbone of Natcorp support was the white middle class, and continuing to keep their loyalty meant America needed to be stable and prosperous. Reports of communist Yankee hordes only went so far. The issue was that MacArthur could only win through total war, which required sacrifice from business and his subjects alike. By the time 1935 arrived, MacArthur had bills to pay. He needed to pay them without inconveniencing the middle class or business, which proved impossible. Ironically enough, the sheer amount of businesses that opposed the regime for whatever reason gave the Natcorps a limited but prodigious source of income they could dip into. The assets of traitors were blatantly nationalized, giving MacArthur a much needed break during the war’s early stretches. That money got the Natcorp war machine off its feet. But looting could only go so far too. As a despot state widely distrusted outside of Germany and Italy, the Natcorps were unable to secure enough foreign loans to stop the bleeding forever. Taxes were not just something the regime was unwilling to do, but with the federal bureaucracy in shambles (made worse by constant DOJ purges) they were probably unable as well.
Forced labor helped the regime’s position both politically and economically. It got rid of potential troublemakers. It removed the poor from view. And it provided manpower. MacArthur told Hoover to “take however many we need— chiefly from the dumb fools in Ohio and Wisconsin.” Meanwhile, MacArthur satisfied his backers through strictly anti-consumer price controls. “This,” writes Alan Brinkley, “lead to even more massive profits for the wealthiest Natcorps, which in turn propped up the war effort. And it meant collapse for insufficiently huge businesses, and would have destroyed the common America.” MacArthur staved off death with a novel plan that was perhaps the formative moment in the regime’s history. The Bush Plan, named after banker and MacArthur confidante Prescott Bush, proposed a simple solution to the Natcorp price floors and war-related economic fallout: payouts of $10,000 for every family in America. Ford, Davis, and the military also approved. There were, of course, many caveats. Only white families with two married parents, one a working man, and children received benefits. The Natcorp bureaucracy was often so disorganized and corrupt that much of that money was lost along the way. Even so, it was able to relieve the sting for some time, and at least create the illusion of prosperity for some. Morgan was bitterly opposed to the plan, and only assented when he was told by Butler that it could stop socialist uprisings, and even then agreed on the premise that it was a one time measure. Morgan’s fears of MacArthur picking his pocket were short-sighted, however, and what he and the Old Guard footed would eventually be returned to them through the market— the most important consequence of the Bush Plan and Natcorp propaganda around it is that it expanded MacArthur’s base of support and gave him new power independent of business.
Clerks working to distribute Natcorp payouts
Last edited:
Nice look at the various major Natcorp players. Especially glad to get an explanation for why Eisenhower stayed with them.
Well, this foreshadowing is ominous, especially with the kind of plans Ford has.
It has come to my attention that, if I understand correctly, NatCorp's analysis has basically reversed OTL's opinions.
I mean, the episode describe that the contemporary assessment in TTL was "all that persecuting minorities was just a strategy to distract the population from the regime's policies" and that in TTL currently that had been abandoned to move on to "They [ the NatCorps] really hated minorities, damn it, they weren't just pretending!"
When the historiographic analysis that I see in OTL has gone in the opposite direction: at the time it was valued that fascist policies were based on hate, and it is only now that they try to sell us the false idea that that was just a curtain of smoke to distract the population from the economic policies of the regime.
How did this happen?
I mean, the episode describe that the contemporary assessment in TTL was "all that persecuting minorities was just a strategy to distract the population from the regime's policies" and that in TTL currently that had been abandoned to move on to "They [ the NatCorps] really hated minorities, damn it, they weren't just pretending!"
When the historiographic analysis that I see in OTL has gone in the opposite direction: at the time it was valued that fascist policies were based on hate, and it is only now that they try to sell us the false idea that that was just a curtain of smoke to distract the population from the economic policies of the regime.
How did this happen?
As we reach the later stages of the war and its aftermath some of this will clarify itself. That said, ITL historiography generally agrees that MacArthur himself, despite being the nominal head of government, turned over the day-to-day governance to his underlings, demanding only results and caring little for how they were achieved.
The issue is, most of said immediate underlings were all profoundly disturbed men who utilized the opportunity to act without much oversight to build their own vision of the country. Simply put, the only thing Mac gave a shit about was winning the war, and the people around him were given a free hand on the domestic front.
I remember seeing that in several of the previous chapters, I mean MacArthur basically letting his subordinates "do what needs to be done" without giving a damn about anything other than the results they get. Which led him to things like firing generals without caring why they weren't getting the desired results.
The second thing was funny to me because it is a phenomenon that I have observed very often but that for some reason people here ignore when they do not deny it: subordinates can be, and often are, even more fanatic and sadistic than the leader will ever be. .