pynchon-l-digest V2 #1662

[jbor]

----------
>From: Doug Millison <millison at online-journalist.com>

> rj:
>>The line of argument goes something like
>>this: establish a connection between a company (eg IBM), a political figure
>>or family (eg the Bushes), or indeed a critic (eg Paul de Man) or literary
>>interpretation, and Nazism, and in that way you will discredit them for all
>>perpetuity.
>
>
> Actualy, there's no need for anyone to "establish a connection" (if
> by that you mean, create a connection that wasn't obvious, or somehow
> construct a connection through rhetorical or literary-critical
> argument) here -- in the case of IBM, it was the company itself that
> entered into a business agreement with the Nazis, for profit, a
> matter of historical record.

By the same method of argument one could note that the Allied Governments
entered into a political agreement with the Nazis (at Munich on 29.9.38,
say), for mutual benefit, a matter of historical record. Does it follow that
the current British or French governments are still culpable for this
"agreement"? The United States government's choice to remain neutral until
8.12.41 was similarly an "agreement" in this sense imo.

The historical or "factual" component of Black's book is little more than a
disclosure that the Nazis purchased and used IBM equipment, as far as I can
make out. I'm not quite sure how this makes the company (certainly now, but
even then) liable for the war crimes which were committed.

I'm not a fan of Microsoft or Bill Gates and am not trying to defend them by
the way. I just don't think that it's logical (or effective) to try to
"tarnish today's company with its past" -- as Eric put it for example. By
all means critique the unethical or illegal business practices which
Microsoft engages in, or the crappy products themselves, or Gates' haircut
and his self-satisfied nerdism; but tarring IBM (or, indeed, Bush) with some
far-fetched "Nazi past" isn't something which seems to have them worried nor
does it really appear to have cut the mustard with the public at large.

As far as Pynchon goes, I would imagine that if something like this was his
tactic or purpose then Wernher von Braun's sponsorship by Disneycorp would
have been a prime target. The Disney name drips with scorn at every mention
in Pynchon's texts, but the overwhelming focus there is on the racist
stereotypes which were peddled as children's cartoons, rather than on the
very visible "Nazi connection" that those programs which featured von Braun
might evoke.

Anyway, thanks for your response.

best