Trait

Trait (pronounced treyt or trey (now rare))

(1) A distinguishing characteristic or quality distinguishing a particular person or thing, especially of one's personal nature.

(2) A pen or pencil stroke (emulated also in software).

(3) A stroke, touch, or strain, as of some quality (now rare).

(4) In biology (and later picked up in psychology), a genetically determined characteristic or condition which is some cases may be influenced by environmental factors.

(5) In programming, languages, those methods which can be used to instance or extend functionality to a class by using the class’s own interface.

1470–1480: From the French trait (line, stroke, feature, tract), from the Middle French trait (line, feature), from the Old French trait (a pulling (literally “something drawn”)), from the Latin tractus (drawing, drawing out, dragging, pulling (an later “line drawn; feature”), from trahō, from the past participle stem of trahere (to drag, pull, draw), ultimately from the primitive Indo-European treg- (to drag, pull) which may have been a variation of dreg (to pull, draw, drag”).  In the late fifteenth century the word was used in the sense of “shot, missiles; a projectile” while the meaning “a stroke in drawing, a short line” emerged in the 1580s, that form still in technical use in graphic art and some image editing software.  The earliest known record of trait being used in English to men “a particular feature or distinguishing quality” dates from 1752.  Like niche, the tradition pronunciation (trey) is now so rare that its use might be counter-productive because it likely only to mislead and the form treyt, once known only in North America, seems now universal.  Such an evolution should not be resisted because English has always worked this way although there will be snobs who cherish trey as a class-identifier however wrong-headed this may be.  Trait is a noun and trait-like is an adjective; the noun plural is traits.

In the biological sciences, a trait refers to any observable characteristic of an organism and that might be physical, physiological, or behavioral and can be something the result entirely of genetic inheritance or a combination of genetic and environmental factors.  Like niche (another word where the US pronunciation seems to have prevailed), trait was borrowed from biology by psychology where it describes enduring patterns of thought, feelings or behavior which tend to be relatively stable despite the influence of external factors but traits in psychology are acknowledged often to be affected by both genetic and environmental factors.  Crucially, the understanding in human psychology notes the significance of the relationship in trait development between external factors and an individual’s reaction to them.  For psychologists, the study of traits often focuses on individual differences and how they contribute to personality and behavior whereas in botany & zoology etc, it’s usually more about what can be generalized about species & sub-species.

The personality traits of some attract much attention.

So, while the essential concept of traits is common between biology and psychology, the focus and application differ. In biology, traits are studied to understand the characteristics of organisms and how they evolve while in psychology traits are studied to understand human personality and behavior.  In general use (and that includes pop-psychology), the word (often in the form “character trait”) is used as a synonym for characteristic, peculiarity, mark, attribute, property etc and is well-understood, nobody confusing a genetic trait (like hair color) with descriptions of behavioral proclivities.  The apparently strange use in computer programming does make sense even though it can be argued that in programming languages there’s really no such thing as genetics (except in the abstract although the simile is useful in things like the change-logs which document changes from version-to-version) and everything is environmental.  However, the idea does work because what it means is that aspects of the language which manifest as particular characteristics of the type will appear also in the function of the software produced, something most apparent when a functional change is obvious such as when object-oriented programming (OOP, which was an example of when the over-used term “paradigm change” was justified) began to become dominant in consumer-level application in the 1990s.

The Personality Inventory for DSM-5 (PID-5) is a 220 item self-rated personality trait assessment scale for adults.  The domains appear in the middle column, with contributed facets (green, left) and non-contributed facets (blue, right).

The notion of personality traits of course underlie much of the content of the American Psychiatric Association's (APA) Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (DSM) and the most notable codification of the approach to personality disorders appeared in the DSM-5 (2013).  Although there have been detail changes in the DSM-5-TR (2022), the structure has been maintained and the revisions were most concerned with ensuring the diagnostic criteria accommodated the not unusual situation of a patient meeting the criteria for a specific personality disorder frequently also satisfying those for other personality disorders.  The emphasis remains on personality disorders being characterized by impairments in personality functioning and pathological personality traits.  The specific personality disorder diagnoses that may be derived from this model include antisocial, avoidant, borderline, narcissistic, obsessive-compulsive, and schizotypal personality disorders but there’s also the diagnosis of “personality disorder—trait specified” (PD-TS) which can be made when a personality disorder is considered present but the criteria for a specific disorder cannot be met.

Borderline

Borderline (pronounced bawr-der-lahyn)

(1) On or near a border or boundary; a border; dividing line; line of demarcation.

(2) Uncertain; indeterminate; debatable; an indeterminate position between two conditions.

(3) Not quite meeting accepted, expected, or average standards.

(4) In psychiatry, as Borderline Personality Disorder, a descriptor of a personality disorder characterized by instability in many areas, as mood, identity, self-image and behavior and often manifested by impulsive actions, suicide attempts, inappropriate anger, or depression. The abbreviation is BPD.

1847: A compound word (also as border-line), created to describe a "strip of land along a frontier" as distinct from the actual line of a border, the construct being border + line.  Border was inherited from the Middle English bordure, from the Old French bordure & bordeure, from border (to border), from bort & bord (a border), of Germanic origin akin and to the Middle High German borte (border, trim) and the German Borte (ribbon, trimming); doublet of bordure.  Line, influenced in Middle English by the Middle French ligne (line), was from the Latin linea, from līneus (flaxen; a flaxen thing) from līnum (flax).  The Middle French ligne was from the Old Danish likna, derived with the inchoative suffix -ne from lig (similar) and was related to the Swedish likna, the English liken and the Middle Low German līkenen.  It replaced galīkōną, an older verb without -n, hence the Old English ġelīcian, the German gleichen and the Gothic galeikōn.  As an adjective meaning "verging on" it is attested from 1903, originally in medical jargon to describe various conditions but from the 1930s, it became most associated with metal health, the diagnosis of the condition Borderline Personality Disorder beginning in 1938 and evolving over several decades.

Borderline Personality Disorder

In clinical psychiatry, although the number of borderline conditions has increased, it’s only the concepts of Borderline Personality Disorder (BPD) and the Schizotypal Personality which are claimed to have adequate diagnostic reliability, the parameters of both first codified in the third edition of the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (DSM-III (1980)).  The fourth edition (DSM-IV-TR (2000)), established the most commonly followed criteria for BPD and in DSM-5 (2013), these were extended to a remarkable sixteen headings in seven (A-G) categories in what appeared to be a kind of clinical mopping-up of symptoms suffered by those not able, for whatever reason, to be diagnosed with something more specific.  Indeed, the all-encompassing taxonomy appears rendered superfluous by Criterion E which seems just about to sum it up.

Criterion A: Moderate or greater impairment in personality functioning; two or more of the following criteria: (1) Identity: Markedly impoverished, poorly developed, or unstable self-image, often associated with excessive self-criticism; chronic feelings of emptiness; dissociative states under stress. (2) Self-direction: Instability in goals, aspirations, values, or career plans. (3) Empathy: Compromised ability to recognize the feelings and needs of others associated with interpersonal hypersensitivity (i.e., prone to feel slighted or insulted); perceptions of others selectively biased toward negative attributes or vulnerabilities. (4) Intimacy: Intense, unstable, and conflicted close relationships, marked by mistrust, neediness, and anxious preoccupation with real or imagined abandonment; close relationships often viewed in extremes of idealization and devaluation and alternating between over-involvement and withdrawal.

Criterion B: Four or more of the following seven pathological personality traits must be present: (5) Emotional liability: Unstable emotional experiences and frequent mood changes; emotions that are easily aroused, intense, and/or out of proportion to events and circumstances. (6) Anxiousness: Intense feelings of nervousness, tenseness, or panic, often in reaction to interpersonal stresses; worry about the negative effects of past unpleasant experiences and future negative possibilities; feeling fearful, apprehensive, or threatened by uncertainty; fears of falling apart or losing control. (7) Separation insecurity: Fears of rejection by and/or separation from significant others, associated with fears of excessive dependency and complete loss of autonomy. (8) Depressivity: Frequent feelings of being down, miserable, and/or hopeless; difficulty recovering from such moods; pessimism about the future; pervasive shame; feelings of inferior self-worth; thoughts of suicide and suicidal behavior. (9) Impulsivity: Acting on the spur of the moment in response to immediate stimuli; acting on a momentary basis without a plan or consideration of outcomes; difficulty establishing or following plans; a sense of urgency and self-harming behavior under emotional distress. (10) Risk-taking: Engagement in dangerous, risky, and potentially self-damaging activities, unnecessarily and without regard to consequences; lack of concern for one’s limitations and denial of the reality of the personal danger. (11) Hostility: Persistent or frequent angry feelings; anger or irritability in response to minor slights and insults.

Criterion C: (12) The impairments in personality functioning and the individual’s personality trait expression are relatively inflexible and pervasive across a broad range of personal and social situations.

Criterion D: (13) The impairments in personality functioning and the individual’s personality trait expression are relatively stable across time with onsets that can be traced back at least to adolescence or early adulthood.

Criterion E: (14) The impairments in personality functioning and the individual’s personality trait expression are not better explained by another mental disorder.

Criterion F: (15) The impairments in personality functioning and the individual’s personality trait expression are not attributable to a substance (eg, a drug of abuse, medication, exposure to a toxin) or a general medical condition (eg, severe head trauma).

Criterion G: (16) The impairments in personality functioning and the individual’s personality trait expression are not better understood as normal for the individual’s developmental stage or the socio-cultural environment.

The wide BPD net cast in DSM-5 pleased the psychiatrists but in recent years, there’s been interest in changing the name of BPD, a movement led not the profession but by those diagnosed with the condition, the creation of pressure-groups now greatly assisted by social media.  The objections seem to be that BPD (1) somehow marginalizes the sufferers in the hierarchy of mental illness, (2) fails to capture the underlying issues and mechanisms involved in producing its symptoms and (3), denigrates and even invalidates the very existence of their condition, the word “borderline” suggesting their symptoms aren’t sufficiently severe to be a “real” condition.  In that sense, the word does have loaded connotations, “borderline” used first by 1930s psychoanalysts to describe patients whose symptoms lay between psychosis and neurosis but to modern lay-persons, a common interpretation is that the condition “borders” on being a “real” illness.  Some even object to “disorder” but most accept it; they’d just prefer to be diagnosed with a more significant, and fashionable, depressive disorder.

Although it seems hardly more respectable, Emotional Intensity Disorder emerged from a survey as the popular choice of patients, beating out Emotional Regulation Disorder, Emotional Dysregulation Disorder, Emotionally Unstable Personality Disorder, Impulsive Personality Disorder & Impulsive-Emotional Dysregulation Disorder.  The clinicians liked Emotional Regulation Disorder but were out-voted.  Unimpressed by either, the committee working on the revision of DSM-5 proposed Borderline Type (which sounds like a sceptical psychiatrist’s casual dismissal of emos), but noted “no decision has yet been made.”

Checkpoint Charlie and the Berlin borderline, 1961-1990 

Konrad Adenauer (1876–1967; FRG Chancellor 1949-1963) at Checkpoint Charlie in 1962; car is a Mercedes-Benz 300d (W189).   The 300 was produced in four generations (W186 1951-1957 & W189 1957-1962) and became known informally as the “300 Adenauer”, the association prompted by the chancellor using six (cabriolets, sedans and a landaulet) 300s during his long term in office.  The 300d is also associated with Pope John XXIII (1881–1963; pope 1958-1963) who was presented with one in 1960 and it served as the official papal vehicle until 1965 when Paul VI (1897-1978; pope 1963-1978) took delivery of a Mercedes-Benz 600; both cars were high-roofed landaulets.

Although the most famous, the crossing point in the Berlin Wall (1961-1989) on the borderline between East and West Berlin and named Checkpoint Charlie (Checkpoint C to the military) was one of three, all known by their designation drawn from the NATO phonetic alphabet, the now forgotten pair being Checkpoint Alpha at Helmstedt and Checkpoint Bravo at Wannsee.  The Soviets (officially) didn't use the NATO designation, instead calling Checkpoint Charlie the КПП Фридрихштрассе (KPP Fridrikhshtrasse (Friedrichstraße Crossing Point)) while the government of the GDR (German Democratic Republic (East Germany)) listed it as the Grenzübergangsstelle (Border Crossing Point) Friedrich-Zimmerstraße.

Checkpoint Charlie, 1963.

In one of the charming coincidences of the Cold War, Checkpoint Charlie was located at the intersection of Friedrichstraße, Zimmerstraße & Mauerstraße (which for historical reasons means "Wall Street").  It became the only well-know crossing point because for reasons of security and administrative convenience, it was the sole designated crossing point (whether for foot or vehicular traffic) for foreigners and members of the three Allied (the France, the UK & the US), (previously occupying) forces stationed in the Federal Republic of Germany (FRG (West Germany)).  The manned structures associated with Checkpoint Charlie were also in a location which lent itself to photography from a number of angles and replicas were built by film studios producing the many productions made during the Cold War.  The Cafe Adler (Eagle Café), adjacent to Checkpoint Charlie was for decades one of West Berlin's tourist hotspots.

Checkpoint Charlie, 1982 showing the larger aluminum building which that year replaced the original wooden hut.

To those accustomed to seeing the gargantuan installations the US military tend to erect wherever they take root, Checkpoint Charlie must have been a surprise, a modest (though enlarged in 1962) and obviously temporary wooden hut was for more than twenty years all that stood on the western side, the little building replaced in 1982 only because it had become so dilapidated it was literally falling down around the guards stationed within and even then, the metal structure which replaced it, while larger, was no more permanent.  However, if people were surprised, it’s doubtful many were disappointed, the compact architecture providing a single point of focus and even in the pre-selfie era at one glance what tourists could take in was evocative of the Cold War cinema with which so many were familiar.

Checkpoint Charlie, 1970.

The attitude of the allied powers reflected their political position that while obviously a line of control, the Berlin Wall was not a legitimate international borderline and thus only small, temporary buildings were required.  To the authorities in the Kremlin and the GDR, whatever some might suggest was the position in international law, the Berlin Wall was a borderline and thus on their side the infrastructure quickly grew to include watchtowers, a military barracks and a multi-lane, enclosed clearing zone in which those wishing to cross could be interrogated and searched.

Checkpoint Charlie, 2020 showing replica “1961” hut and sandbags.

The Berlin Wall “fell” in November 1989 and the checkpoint booth was removed some six months later although, because East and West Germany remained legally separate countries, the checkpoint at the point of the borderline was retained as the designated official crossing-point for foreigners and diplomats an arrangement ended in October 1990 when German reunification was formalized in law.  Checkpoint Charlie has since remained one of Berlin's tourist attractions and, just as some parts of the once demolished wall have been re-created because supply of the real thing wasn’t enough to meet demand, the municipal government soon erected an almost exact replica of the checkpoint as it stood in 1961 although the quality of the construction is said to be rather more robust than the original and it’s expected to enjoy a longer life.  Better to capture the flavor, even the sandbags which gradually were removed during the 1970s are carefully stacked in place.  During the tourist season, selfies are now taken by the thousand.

Alexithymia

Alexithymia (pronounced ey-lek-suh-thahy-mee-uh)

In psychiatry, a range of behaviors associated with certain conditions which manifests as a difficulty in experiencing, processing, expressing and describing emotional responses.

1973: The construct was the Ancient Greek a- (not) + λέξις (léxis) (speaking) + θυμός (thumós) (heart (in the sense of “soul”)) which deconstructs as a- +‎ lexi +‎ -thymia (in a medical context a suffix meaning “one’s state of mind”), alexithymia thus understood as “without words for emotions”.  Alexithymia is a noun and alexithymic & alexithymiac are nouns & adjectives; the noun plural of alexithymia is also alexithymia but alexithymics, the plural of alexithymic is the more common form.

The word alexithymia was in 1973 coined by US based psychiatrists John Nemiah (1918–2009) and Peter Sifneos (1920-2008) to describe a psychological state as well known to the general population as the profession, the former preferring terms “emotionless”, “taciturn”, “feelingless” or “impassive” although alexithymia has meanings which are more specific.  Translated literally as “no words for emotions”, in practice it’s a spectrum condition which references individual degrees of difficulty in recognizing, processing or expressing emotional states or experiences.  Although it appears in both the American Psychiatric Association's (APA) Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (DSM) and the World Health Organization’s (WHO) International Classification of Diseases (ICD), neither class it as either a diagnosable mental disorder or a symptom.  Instead, it should be regarded as a dimensional construct and one distributed normally in the general population.  In other words it’s a personality trait and like all spectrum conditions, it varies in frequency and intensity between individuals.

Alexithymia was first described as a psychological construct characterized by difficulties in identifying, describing, and interpreting one's emotions but it was soon realized individuals less able to recognize and express their own feelings would often have a diminished ability to understand the emotional experiences of others.  Clinically, alexithymia is classified in two sub-groups: (1) Primary (or Trait) Alexithymia is considered more stable and enduring and the evidence suggests there is often a genetic or developmental basis, those with primary alexithymia displaying indications from an early age.  (2) Secondary (or State) Alexithymia is something usually temporary and often associated with specific psychological or medical conditions, noted especially in patients suffering post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD) and depressive illnesses.

Available for both Android and iOS, there are Alexithymia apps and it's possible there are those who wish to increase the extent of at least some aspects of the condition in their own lives, the apps presumably a helpful tool in monitoring progress in either direction.  There must be emos who would like to be more alexithymic. 

The characteristics common to alexithymia include (1) a limited imaginative capacity and “fantasy life”, (2) a difficulty in identifying and describing emotions, (3) thought processes which focus predominately on external events rather than internal emotional experience, (3) a difficulty in distinguishing between emotions and bodily sensations and (4) challenges in understanding (or even recognizing) the emotions of others.  As a spectrum condition, alexithymia greatly can vary in severity, and not all with alexithymia will experience the same symptoms with there being a high instance reported among patients with psychiatric and psychosomatic disorders.  Additionally, it does seem a common feature of neurological disease with most evidence available for patients with traumatic brain injury, stroke, and epilepsy although the numbers may be slanted because of the greater volume of study of those affected and it remains unclear how independent it is from affective disorders such as depression and anxiety, both common in neurological conditions.

A sample from the validation study of the Toronto Alexithymia Scale (TAS-26) (in the Croatian population).

Clinicians have available a number of questionnaires which can be use to assess a patient’s state of alexithymia and these can do more than provide a metric; the limitation of drawing a conclusion from observation alone is that with such an approach it can genuinely be impossible to distinguish between the truly alexithymic and those who have no difficulties in experiencing, processing, expressing and describing emotional responses but for some reason choose not to.  Such behavior can of course induce problems in inter-personal relationships but it’s something distinct from alexithymia and importantly too, it is clinically distinct from psychiatric personality disorders, such as antisocial personality disorder.  However, as a structural view of the DSM over the seventy-odd years would indicate, within psychiatry, mission creep has been a growing phenomenon and the definitional nets tend to be cast wide and wider and it’s not impossible that alexithymia may in some future edition be re-classified as a diagnostic criterion or at least recognized formally as a symptom.  It has for some time been acknowledged the DSM has over those decades documented the reassessment of some aspects of the human condition as mental disorders but what is less discussed is the relationship between cause and effect and there will be examples of both: it would be interesting to try to work out if there’s a pattern in the nature of (1) the changes the DSM has driven compare with (2) those which retrospectively have been codified.

Lindsay Lohan and her lawyer in court, Los Angeles, December 2011,

There may be movement because alexithymia has many of the qualities and attributes which appeal to both academia and the pharmaceutical industry.  The orthodoxy is that it occurs in some 10% of the general population but is disproportionately seen in patients suffering certain mental conditions, notably neuro-developmental disorders; the prevalence among those with autism spectrum disorder (ASD) estimated at anything up to 90%.  What will probably surprise few is that within any sub-group, it is males who are by far the most represented population and there is even the condition normative male alexithymia (NMA) although that describes the behavior and not the catchment, NMA identified also in females.

Reich

Reich (pronounced rahyk or rahykh (German))

(1) With reference to Germany or other Germanic agglomerations, empire; realm; nation.

(2) The German state, especially (as Third Reich) during the Nazi period.

(3) A term used (loosely) of (1) hypothetical resurrections of Nazi Germany or similar states and (2) (constitutionally incorrectly), the so-called “Dönitz government (or administration)” which existed for some three weeks after Hitler’s suicide. 

(4) Humorously (hopefully), a reference to a suburb, town etc with a population in which German influence or names of German origin are prominent; used also by university students when referring to departments of German literature, German history etc. 

(5) As a slur, any empire-like structure, especially one that is imperialist, tyrannical, racist, militarist, authoritarian, despotic etc.

1871: From the German Reich (kingdom, realm, state), from the Middle High German rīche, from the Old High German rīhhi (rich, mighty; realm), from the Proto-West Germanic rīkī, from the Proto-Germanic rīkijaz & rikja (rule), a derivative of rīks (king, ruler), from the Proto-Celtic rīxs and thus related to the Irish rí.  The influences were (1) the primitive Indo-European hereǵ- (to rule), from which is derived also the Latin rēx and (2) the primitive Indo-European root reg (move in a straight line) with derivatives meaning "to direct in a straight line", thus "to lead, rule".  Cognates include the Old Norse riki, the Danish rige & rig, the Dutch rike & rijk, the Old English rice & rich, the Old Frisian rike, the Icelandic ríkur, the Swedish rik, the Gothic reiki, the Don Ringe and the Plautdietsch rikj.  The German adjective reich (rich) is used with an initial lower case and as a suffix is the equivalent of the English -ful, used to form an adjective from a noun with the sense of “rich in”, “full of”.  As a German noun & proper noun, Reich is used with an initial capital.

Reich was first used in English circa 1871 to describe the essentially Prussian creation that was the German Empire which was the a unification of the central European Germanic entities.  It was never intended to include Austria because (1) Otto von Bismarck's (1815-1989; Chancellor of the German Empire 1871-1890) intricate series of inter-locking treaties worked better with Austria as an independent state and (2) he didn't regard them as "sufficiently German" (by which he would have meant "Prussian": Bismarck described Bavarians as "halfway between Austrians and human beings".  At the time, the German Empire was sometimes described simply as “the Reich” with no suggestion of any sense of succession to the Holy Roman Empire.  “Third Reich” was an invention of Nazi propaganda to “invent” the idea of Adolf Hitler (1889-1945; Führer (leader) and German head of government 1933-1945 & head of state 1934-1945) as the inheritor of the mantle of Charlemagne (748–814; (retrospectively) the first Holy Roman Emperor 800-814) and Bismarck.  The word soon captured the imagination of the British Foreign Office, German “Reichism” coming to be viewed as much a threat as anything French had ever been to the long-time British foreign policy of (1) maintaining a balance of power in a Europe in which no one state was dominant ("hegemonic" the later term) and (2) avoid British involvement in land-conflicts on "the continent".

The term "Fourth Reich" had been around for a while when it was co-opted by Edwin Hartrich’s (1913-1995) for his book The Fourth and Richest Reich (MacMillan 1980), a critique both of the modern German state and its influence on the European Economic Community (the EEC (1957) which by 1993 would morph into the European Union (EU).  The term is still sometimes used by those criticizing the German state, the not so subtle implication being Berlin gradually achieving by other means the domination of Europe which the Third Reich attempted by military conquest.  Fourth Reich is also sometimes used, erroneously to describe the two-dozen day “administration” of Grand Admiral Karl Dönitz (1891–1980; German head of state 30 April-23 May 1945) who in Hitler’s will was appointed Reich President (and therefore head of state); the so-called “Flensburg Government”.  That’s wrong and the only difference of opinion between constitutional theorists is whether it was (1) the mere coda to the Third Reich or (2) a charade, the German state ceasing to exist by virtue of events on the ground, a situation the finalization of the surrender arrangements on 8 May merely documented.  The latter view certainly reflects reality and in a legal sense the formal existence of a German state was required to ensure the validity of the surrender and other administrative acts; the consensus is the German state ceased to exist on 8 May 1945.  That the Allied occupying forces allowed the obviously pointless “Dönitz administration” to “function” for some three weeks has been the subject of historical debate.  Some have suggested there were those in London & Washington who contemplated using (at least temporarily) the “Flensburg Government” as a kind of “administrative agent” and it's true Winston Churchill (1875-1965; UK prime-minister 1940-1945 & 1951-1955) did briefly flirt with the idea.  However, what's more plausible was it was so unexpected and no planning (military or political) had been had undertaken to deal with such a thing: "Hitler in his bunker was one thing, an admiral in Flensburg was another".

Hartrich’s thesis was a particular deconstruction of the Wirtschaftswunder (economic miracle), the unexpectedly rapid growth of the economy of the FRG (the Federal Republic of Germany, the old West Germany) in the 1950s and 1960s which produced an unprecedented and widespread prosperity.  There were many inter-acting factors at play during the post-war era but what couldn’t be denied was the performance of the FRG’s economy and Hartrich attributed it to the framework of what came to be called the Marktwirt-schaft market economy with a social conscience), a concept promoted by Professor Ludwig Erhard (1897–1977) while working as a consultant to the Allied occupying forces in the immediate aftermath of the war.  When the FDR was created in 1949, he entered politics, serving as economy minister until 1963 when he became Chancellor (prime-minister).  His time as tenure was troubled (he was more technocrat than politician) but soziale Marktwirtschaft survived his political demise and it continues to underpin the economic model of the modern German state.

Lindsay Lohan on the cover of the German edition of GQ (Gentleman's Quarterly) magazine, August 2010.  Although published in the Fourth Reich, the photo-shoot by photographer Ellen Von Unwerth (b 1954) took place on Malibu Beach, California during June 2010.  Sommerlust is not as exciting as it may sound to English-speaking ears; it translates as “summer pleasure”

Hartrich was a neo-liberal, then a breed just beginning to exert its influence in the Western world, but he also understood that the introduction of untrammelled capitalism to Europe was likely to sow the seeds of its own destruction but he insists the “restoration” of the “…profit motive as the prime mover in German life was a fundamental step…” to economic prosperity and social stability.  Of course the unique circumstances of the time (the introduction of the Deutsche Mark which enjoyed stability under the Bretton Woods system (1944), the outbreak of the Cold War, the recapitalization of industry and the provision of new plant & equipment with which to produce goods to be sold into world markets under the GATT (General Agreement on Tariffs & Trade (1947)) produced conditions which demand attention but the phenomenal growth can’t be denied.  Nor was it denied at the time; within the FRG, even the socialist parties by 1959 agreed to build their platform around “consumer socialism”, a concession Hartrich wryly labelled “capitalism's finest hour”.  The Fourth and Richest Reich was not a piece of economic analysis by an objective analyst and nor did it much dwell on the domestic terrorism which came in the wake of the Wirtschaftswunder, the Baader-Meinhof Group (the Red Army Faction (RAF)) and its ilk discussed as an afterthought in a few pages in an epilogue which included the bizarre suggestion Helmut Schmidt (1918–2015; FRG Chancellor 1974–1982) should be thought a latter-day Bismarck; more than one reviewer couldn’t resist mentioning Hitler himself had once accorded the same honor to the inept Joachim von Ribbentrop (1893–1946; Nazi foreign minister 1938-1945).

The word "Reich" does sometimes confuse non-specialists who equate it with the German state, probably because the Third Reich does cast such a long shadow.  Murdoch journalist Samantha Maiden (b 1972) in a piece discussing references made to the Nazis (rarely a good idea except between consenting experts in the privacy of someone don's study) by a candidate in the 2022 Australian general election wrote:

The history of the nation-state known as the German Reich is commonly divided into three periods: German Empire (1871–1918) Weimar Republic (1918–1933) Nazi Germany (1933–1945).

It's an understandable mistake and the history of the German Reich is commonly divided into three periods but that doesn't include the Weimar Republic.  The point about what the British Foreign Office labelled "Reichism" was exactly what the Weimar Republic (1918-1933) as a "normal" democratic state, was not.  The Reich's three epochs (and there's some retrospectivity in both nomenclature and history) were the Holy Roman Empire (1800-1806), Bismarck's (essentially Prussian) German Empire (1871-1918) & the Nazi Third Reich (1933-1945).  

The First Reich: the Holy Roman Empire, 800-1806

The Holy Roman Empire in the sixteenth century.

The Holy Roman Empire was a multi-ethnic complex of territories in central Europe that developed during the early Middle Ages, the popular identification with Germany because the empire’s largest territory after 962 was the Kingdom of Germany.  On 25 December 800, Pope Leo III (circa 760-816; pope 795-816) crowned Charlemagne (747–814; King of the Franks from 768, King of the Lombards from 774, and Emperor of the Romans (and thus retrospectively Holy Roman Emperor) from 800)) as Emperor, reviving the title more than three centuries after the fall of the Western Roman Empire.  Despite the way much history has been written, it wasn’t until the fifteenth century that “Holy Roman Empire” became a commonly used phrase.

Leo III, involved in sometimes violent disputes with Romans who much preferred both his predecessor and the Byzantine Empress in Constantinople, had his own reasons for wishing to crown Charlemagne as Emperor although it was a choice which would have consequences for hundreds of years.  According to legend, Leo ambushed Charlemagne at Mass on Christmas day, 800 by placing the crown on his head as he knelt at the altar to pray, declaring him Imperator Romanorum (Emperor of the Romans), in one stroke claiming staking the papal right to choose emperors, guaranteeing his personal protection and rejecting any assertion of imperial authority by anyone in Constantinople.  Charlemagne may or may not have been aware of what was to happen but much scholarship suggests he was well aware he was there for a coronation but that he intended to take the crown in his own hands and place it on his head himself.  The implications of the pope’s “trick” he immediately understood but, what’s done is done and can’t be undone and the lesson passed down the years, Napoleon Bonaparte (1769–1821; leader of the French Republic 1799-1804 & Emperor of the French from 1804-1814 & 1815) not repeating the error at his coronation as French Emperor in 1804.

Some historians prefer to date the empire from 962 when Otto I was crowned because continuous existence there began but, scholars generally concur, it’s possible to trace from Charlemagne an evolution of the institutions and principles constituting the empire, describing a gradual assumption of the imperial title and role.  Not all were, at the time, impressed. Voltaire sardonically recorded one of his memorable bon mots, noting the “…agglomeration which was called and which still calls itself the Holy Roman Empire was in no way holy, nor Roman, nor an empire."  The last Holy Roman Emperor, Francis II (1768–1835; Holy Roman Emperor 1792-1806) dissolved the empire on 6 August 1806, after Napoleon's creation of the Confederation of the Rhine.

The Second Reich: the Prussian Hohenzollern dynasty, 1871-1918

German Empire, 1914.

The German Empire existed from the unification of Germany in 1871 until the abdication of Wilhelm II (1859–1941; German Kaiser (Emperor) & King of Prussia 1888-1918) in 1918, when Germany became a federal republic, remembered as the Weimar Republic (1918-1933).  The German Empire consisted of 26 constituent territories, most ruled by royal families.  Although Prussia became one of several kingdoms in the new realm, it contained most of its population and territory and certainly the greatest military power and the one which exercised great influence within the state; a joke at the time was that most countries had an army whereas the Prussian Army had a country.

To a great extent, the Second Reich was the creation of Prince Otto von Bismarck (1815–1898; chancellor of the North German Confederation 1867-1871 and of the German Empire 1871-1890), the politician who dominated European politics in the late nineteenth although his time in office does need to be viewed through sources other than his own memoirs.  After Wilhelm II dismissed Bismarck, without his restraining hand, the empire embarked on a bellicose new course that led ultimately to World War I (1914-1918), Germany’s defeat and the end the reign of the House of Hohenzollern and it was that conflict which wrote finis to the dynastic rule of centuries also of the Romanovs in Russia, the Habsburgs in Austria-Hungary and the Ottomans in Constantinople.  Following the Kaiser’s abdication, the empire collapsed in the November 1918 revolution and the Weimar Republic which followed, though not the axiomatically doomed thing many seem now to assume, was for much of its existence beset by political and economic turmoil.  

The Third Reich: the Nazi dictatorship 1933-1945

Nazi occupied Europe, 1942.

“Nazi Germany” is in English the common name for the period of Nazi rule, 1933-1945.  The first known use of the term “Third Reich” was by German cultural historian Moeller van den Bruck (1876-1925) in his 1923 book Das Dritte Reich (The Third Reich).  Van den Bruck, a devotee of Friedrich Nietzsche (1844–1900) and a pan-German nationalist, wrote not of a defined geographical entity or precise constitutional arrangement.  His work instead explored a conceptualized (if imprecisely described) and idealized state of existence for Germans everywhere, one that would (eventually) fully realize what the First Reich might have evolved into had not mistakes been made, the Second Reich a cul-de-sac rendered impure by the same democratic and liberal ideologies which would doom the Weimar Republic.  Both these, van den Bruck dismissed as stepping stones on the path to an ideal; Germans do seem unusually susceptible to being seduced by ideals.

In the difficult conditions which prevailed in Germany at the time of the book’s publication, it didn’t reach a wide audience, the inaccessibility of his text not suitable for a general readership but, calling for a synthesis of the particularly Prussian traditions of socialism and nationalism and the leadership of a Übermensch (a idea from Nietzsche’s Thus Spoke Zarathustra (1883) which describes a kind of idealized man who probably can come into existence only when a society is worthy of him), his work had obvious appeal to the Nazis.  It was said to have been influential in the embryonic Nazi Party but there’s little to suggest it contributed much beyond an appeal to the purity of race and the idea of the “leader” (Führer) principle, notions already well established in German nationalist traditions.  The style alone might have accounted for this, Das Dritte Reich not an easy read, a trait shared by the dreary and repetitive stuff written by the party “philosopher” Alfred Rosenberg (1893-1946).  After Rosenberg was convicted on all four counts (planning aggressive war, waging aggressive war, war crimes & crimes against humanity) by the IMT (International Military Tribunal) at the first Nuremberg Trial (1945-1946) and sentenced to death by hanging, a joke circulated among the assembled journalists that it would have been fair to add a conviction for “crimes against literature”, a variation on the opinion his fellow defendant Baldur von Schirach (1907-1974; head of the Hitlerjugend (Hitler Youth) 1931-1940 & Gauleiter (district party leader) and Reichsstatthalter (Governor) of Vienna (1940-1945) should also have been indicted for “crimes against poetry”.  Von Schirach though avoided the hangman's noose he deserved.        

A book channeling Nietzsche wasn’t much help for practical politicians needing manifestos, pamphlets and appealing slogans and the only living politician who attracted some approbation from van den Bruck was Benito Mussolini (1883-1945; Duce (leader) & prime minister of Italy 1922-1943).  The admiration certainly didn’t extend to Hitler; unimpressed by his staging of the Munich Beer Hall Putsch (8–9 November 1923), van den Bruck dismissed the future Führer with a unusually brief deconstruction, the sentiment of which was later better expressed by another disillusioned follower: “that ridiculous corporal”.  The term “Third Reich” did however briefly enter the Nazi’s propaganda lexicon and William L Shirer (1904–1993) in his landmark The Rise and Fall of the Third Reich (1960) reported that in the 1932 campaign for the presidency, Hitler in a speech at Berlins's Lustgarten (a place which, again perhaps disappointing some, translates as “pleasure garden”) used the slogan: “In the Third Reich every German girl will find a husband”.  Shirer's book is now dated and some of his conceptual framework has always attracted criticism but it remains a vivid account of the regime's early years, written by an observer who actually was there. 

The official name of the state was Deutsches Reich (German Empire) between 1933-1943 and Großdeutsches Reich (Greater German Empire) between 1943 to 1945 but so much of fascism was fake and depended for its effect on spectacle so the Nazis were attracted to the notion of claiming to be the successor of a German Empire with a thousand year history, their own vision of the Nazi state being millennialist.  After they seized power, the term “Third Reich” occasionally would be invoked and, more curiously, the Nazis for a while even referred to the Weimar Republic as the Zwischenreich (Interim Reich) but as the 1930s unfolded as an almost unbroken series of foreign policy triumphs for Hitler, emphasis soon switched to the present and the future, the pre-Beer Hall Putsch history no longer needed.  It was only after 1945 that the use of “Third Reich” became almost universal although the earlier empires still are almost never spoken of in that way, even in academic circles.

Van den Bruck had anyway been not optimistic and his gloominess proved prescient although his people did chose to walk (to destruction) the path he thought they may fear to tread.  In the introduction to Das Dritte Reich he wrote: “The thought of a Third Empire might well be the most fatal of all the illusions to which they have ever yielded; it would be thoroughly German if they contented themselves with day-dreaming about it. Germany might perish of her Third Empire dream.”  He didn’t live to see the rise and fall of the Third Reich, taking his own life in 1925, a fate probably not unknown among those who read Nietzsche at too impressionable an age and never quite recover.

Wilhelm Reich, Hawkwind and the Orgone Accumulator

Sketch of the orgone accumulator.

Wilhelm Reich (1897-1957) was a US-based, Austrian psychoanalyst with a troubled past who believed sexual repression was the root cause of many social problems.  Some of his many books widely were read within the profession but there was criticism of his tendency towards mono-causality in his analysis, an opinion shared by Sigmund Freud (1856–1939) in his comments about Reich’s 1927 book Die Funktion des Orgasmus (The Function of the Orgasm), a work the author had dedicated to his fellow Austrian.  Freud sent a note of thanks for the personally dedicated copy he’d been sent as a birthday present but, brief and not as effusive in praise Reich as had expected, it was not well-received.  Reich died in prison while serving a sentence imposed for violating an injunction issued to prevent the distribution of a machine he’d invented: the orgone accumulator.

The Space Ritual Alive in Liverpool and London (United Artists UAD 60037/8; referred to usually as Space Ritual) (1973).

The orgone accumulator was an apparently phoney device but one which inspired members of the science fiction (SF) flavored band Hawkwind to write the song Orgone Accumulator which, unusually, was first released on a live recording, Space Ritual, a 1973 double album containing material from their concerts in 1972.  Something of a niche player in the world of 1970s popular music Hawkwind, perhaps improbably, proved more enduring than many, their combination of styles attracting a cult following which endures to this day.

Pugilist

Pugilist (pronounced pyoo-juh-list)

A person who fights with their fists; a boxer, amateur or professional.

1789: From the Latin pugil (boxer, fist-fighter) related to pugnus (a fist), from a suffixed form of the primitive Indo-European roots peuk- (to prick) & pewǵ- (to prick, to punch) and from the Latin root, English picked up the slang term for the journeyman boxer (pug).  Pugil as a descriptor for a boxer was first noted in English in the 1640s but faded from use although in 1962 the pugil stick was introduced by US military as a substitute for rifles in bayonet drills.  Related forms include the noun pugnacity (the act or characteristic of being aggressive or combative), from the Latin pugnacitas, from pugnāx (combative, fond of fighting) and the adjective pugnacious (naturally aggressive or hostile; combative; belligerent; bellicose), from the Latin, a derivative of pugnāx, from pugnō (I fight), from pugnus (a fist).  Pugilist & pugilism are nouns, pugilistic is an adjective and pugilistically and adverb; the noun plural is pugilists.

The heavyweights

Three heavyweights dominated the perception of the sport in the second-half of the twentieth century, Sonny Liston, Muhammad Ali & Mike Tyson.

Sonny Liston (circa 1932-1970).

Sonny Liston was a thug, something no disqualification for success in the  heavyweight ranks and he’d been undisputed world champion for half a decade when first he fought Muhammad Ali.  Ali was a rank outsider rated by the bookies between 7-8:1 yet beat Liston.  To this day it’s not known if there's any truth in the rumors of Liston’s heavy drinking the night before the bout or throwing the fight for money.  Some find the first-round knock-out of Liston in the return match proof of a conspiracy while claim it suggests Ali was the better fighter and Liston’s best years were over although when he died in 1970, even if no longer quite the formidable fighter of his younger years, he was still a world-rated boxer.

Muhammad Ali (1942-2016).

While understandable, it's unfortunate the popular focus on Muhammad Ali’s flair for publicity, prose and politics has drawn attention from just how good a boxer he was.  Ali was fast, technically almost perfect and possessed a physique close to at least equal in height and reach of most of his opponents although his most under-rated trait was the ability to absorb blows yet remain an attacking force late in matches.  In a career interrupted by bans and suspension, Ali fought in the heavyweight division’s golden age, the finest group of the mid-late century, of whom Ali was "the greatest", not because he was indisputably the best ever heavyweight (among the experts there are various top-ten list though he's in them all) but because he influenced his sport and wider culture like no other.

Mike Tyson (b 1966).

The younger Mike Tyson was ferocious and intimidating and he scared men.  Although not tall by the standards of his profession, he was famous for the power and speed of his punch and it’s really easy to believe there’s no one who could have beaten Tyson the younger.  Boxing analysts tend to disagree, being split on the likely result of Liston v Tyson, largely because of Tyson’s technical flaws but almost as one in finding Ali would have beaten Tyson.  Tyson had a difficult, troubled youth and has admitted that had it not been for boxing, things would likely have worked out worse but had his career been better managed, such was his potential, much more could have been achieved.

Amateur pugilist Lindsay Lohan in pugnacious mode.