What Would Heinrich Do?

Heinrich Himmler was the head of the Gestapo during World War II. Most of you know that I'm sure, but I needed to establish the fact just the same.

I peruse many message boards on subjects of interest to me, where questions are asked and experts answer. As a student of history many of the places I frequent address people and events from the past. A favorite is a site about the Second World War.

Most of the questions are rather broad ranged. What were the German aims in the War? Why did they attack Russia? Things like that. Some are speculative. If Hitler hadn't declared war on the United States, how would that have affected the outcome? If the US only fought Japan, how would things have turned out? Some queries are technical: How close were the Nazis to an atomic bomb? What were the fiercest weapons used? Others ask about the specifics in battles. You get the point. There's a wide array of inquiries.

Yet one unusual question the other day stopped me in my mental tracks. It was, What was Heinrich Himmler's management style?

It took me a few minutes to process the query, all of it broken with stilted laughter as I stared at my computer screen. His management style? He was the head of the bloody Gestapo. I suppose it was something along the lines of, you do this or it's the firing squad! 

Was this an honest question or some kind of trolling? I hope it was trolling, high schools seniors just being stupid.

There was an attempt at a serious answer by the way. It basically said Himmler's management style was top down and detail oriented. I label that understatement.

Don't Ask Me

Now, before I start I want to establish that I'm not talking about innocuous questions such as what color to paint a room or what I think about an outfit or a sport or a book. Those are generally matters of taste and I'm happy to leave them at that. But with regard to The Great Questions, questions about how to act or what to do in serious situations, that's what I'm addressing here.

Far too many folks these days begin a presumably serious, introspective discussion with something like, "Be honest, because there's no right or wrong answer."

Here's my painfully honest and arguably harsh response. 

Don't bother me with the damn question then. If you aren't trying to find out what's really, truly, actually right or really, truly, hideously wrong with a venture or outlook then we ain't got nothing to talk about. If there really is no 'wrong' answer then it don't matter what we do. And if there is a right answer, the statement is hypocritical nonsense, if not downright Orwellian, dangerous to our growth and well being as persons. It's as simple as that.

People wonder what's wrong with the world. I can tell you that readily. It comes from answering serious and necessary questions as though there's no right or wrong answer.

Sorry, But There Are Stupid Questions

Here's another log on the fire for you: I give thee another useless phrase, to go with the useless words I've spoken of in this very blog. It is: 'There are no stupid questions'.

To cut straight to the chase, there are indeed stupid questions. To be a bit silly about it, if someone asks, 'Why is the sky blue?" when we're talking about George Washington's Farewell Address, they've asked a stupid question. More practically, when an answer is obvious yet the question is put forth anyway, it's a stupid question. Quite a few of us I suspect have teased friends when they produced that sort of query, the one which begs for the 'Well, duh' response. I know I have been on both sides of that, er, question.

Then too, we've all, most of us, anyway, seen courtroom dramas where one attorney directs a question at whoever is on the stand only to have the opposing lawyer yell something like, "Objection! Irrelevant!", or "Objection! Leading the witness!" at which point the judge will either sustain the objection or overrule it. What is the judge in such instances doing? Essentially this: determining whether the question is stupid or not.

Oh, it could be worse than stupid. It could be evil. But as evil is a form of stupidity I'll take it upon myself to overrule that objection.

Maybe a question has no bearing on the issue at hand. Maybe it's a subterfuge, an attempt to distract or divert attention from what's actually being discussed. Maybe the asker simply doesn't know better. In those last cases we might have to tolerate his question for reasons of charity or decorum. But the question itself is still stupid.

There you have it. Put 'There are no stupid questions' on the fire with 'You can't judge a book by its cover' or phrases such as being for peace or education or freedom. When not in proper context to the issue at hand, a question can be stupid. That's simply it.

Add another to the list

You all know how I've been slowly compiling a list of dumb/useless words and sayings? Well, guess what? I have another.

While driving out to meet some friends for lunch yesterday, I passed a store. Okay, I passed dozens of stores. But one in particular gave me pause. A sign, displayed loudly and proudly in its front window, screamed PRE-SALE IN PROGRESS!

So, then, you're having a sale, correct? A sale right now, this very moment, correct?

Pray, then, it's not really a pre-sale, is it? It isn't a pre-anything, is it? It's an actual we've cut prices and have specials event, isn't it? In other words, A SALE.

Am I the only upset by things like this?