And people who have difficulty reconciling these “first a Nazi, then a respected member of the institutional Left” cases – of which there are many – are suffering the cognitive dissonance which comes from misunderstanding the early radical-political appeal of parties like the National Socialists. Although Reichel-Dolmatoff having participated in the Hitlerite purge known as “the Night of the Long Knives” argues against him being an active or witting part of the Nazi left wing… Still, 1937 is remarkably early for an ex-Nazi to have undergone the red-washing process & joined the anti-fascist Left. I actually find it harder to *not* see a political aspect to his whatever-the-hell-it-was.

At a guess, I think he’s already redeemed himself. Except, of course, in the minds of those “civilised” people who seem to believe that being on the wrong side once taints one forevermore. People who tell a harrowing tale of erring and repenting, ending with what looks suspiciously like a rhetorical question.

Is it possible revisionist history is being applied here?

Reading this blog several thoughts were quickly summoned:

1.) The lucifer effect (Zimbardo’s work) and/or what David Eagleman/ other neuroscientists call syndrome E
2.) In 1936 (year of crisis) he was 24 without a completely formed frontal lobe.
3.) To go from that high of a position and then have a “crisis”, then instantly join the other side, probably just means some metacognition and morality kicked in…
4.) Having traveled extensively in South America and engaged in many native ceremonies, I am completely aware of how certain medicines can take a wrecking ball through previously held schema.
5.) I wish he was a live today to tell of his transformation…

Although this information is extremely dark and interesting, people can change and are largely a product or their environment. This does not taint his work for me; to me it shows the awesome ability of humans to transcend a dark past and create a meaningful future.