A Very Brief History of Dream Interpretation

 This is part six from a forthcoming book called Collected Essays: Volume Two.

************************

A Very Brief History of Dream Interpretation

Dreams are not such a central part of our culture anymore, but they were a lot more central to previous cultures and to aboriginal cultures. Although they are not as central, dreams do not fail to baffle us with their bizarre, non-linear and jarring imagery. This essay will offer a very brief history of dream interpretation by looking at ancient Greece, medieval Europe, Sigmund Freud and contemporary neuroscience. It is a predominantly Eurocentric history and does not look at aboriginal cultures or the orient.

This essay will start by looking at ancient Greece. The Greeks made a distinction between significant and insignificant dreams, the former being caused by hopes, fears and digestion. On the other hand, significant dreams were symbolic interpretations and visitations by gods, ghosts and friends. Indeed, people often thought that dreams were divine interventions. The Greeks were often visited by Asclepius, a divinity with healing powers. People talked to mystical gurus who interpreted dreams and gave medical advice, diagnoses and cures. Religious devotees would have a significant dream and then practice incubation or ritual sleep in a sanctuary. Certain objects might encourage the communication, such as ritual bathing, animal sacrifice or sleeping on animal skin. The Greek religious culture allowed people to believe in the apparent truth of these dreams (Kamil 2014).

            The main book that dealt with dream interpretation was The Interpretation of Dreams by Artemidorus, otherwise known as Oneirocrtitica, and it is the only book on dream interpretation that has survived antiquity. Dreams from antiquity contain numerous references to horrible punishments such as crucifixion, castration, having sex with Artemis and turning into a river god. Indeed, the book by Artemidorus contains numerous references to these things. Artemidorus’ book also contains references to having sex with mothers, which influenced Sigmund Freud centuries later (Hall 2020). Artemidorus was a resident of Ephesus and set out to write a theoretical guide to dreams, which were important in antiquity, as people thought that they prophesised the future. Artemidorous classified dreams as ‘enhypnia’ and ‘oneiroi,’ the former being non-predictive dreams which recycle what has happened during the day and the latter being predictive dreams which require interpretation. Dealing with predictive dreams required skill, experience and a well-developed set of interpretive tools. Artemidorus made wide historical research, extensive travel and classified and arranged his material. However, he emphasised the importance of direct experience rather than text-book learning. Dreams that occurred after incubation in a temple were classed as God-sent. Otherwise, if they occurred elsewhere, they were products of the mind and did not come from the external source. Artemidorus used numerology, puns, wordplay and analogies, but he thought that it was important to recollect dreams as much as possible. He thought that it was important for the dream-interpreter to have as much information about the dreamer’s background, status, present circumstances and his medical and psychological condition. Dreams can have different significances and different outcomes depending on whether the dreamer is a man or a woman, slave or free, rich or poor or healthy or sick. Artemidorus discusses about 1,400 dreams in his book (Hammond 2020).

            Artemidorus was an example of ancient dream theory, but this essay will now look at representations of dreams in ancient fiction. One of the most striking representations of dreams in antiquity occurs in The Odyssey by Homer. It would be classed as a ‘significant’ dream, as it is predictive of the future. Penelope waits for Odysseus to turn up and she is attended by fifty suitors. She dreams that an eagle kills fifty geese. Later on, Odysseus kills the fifty suitors, so the dream turns out to be prophetic and a wish-fulfilment. The bird tells the following to Penelope in the dream: ‘This is not a dream but a happy reality which you shall see fulfilled. Then geese were your suitors and I was the eagle. I am your husband, home again and ready to inflict a gruesome fate on every man among them’ (Homer 1991, p. 304). Odysseus later says: ‘Odysseus himself […] will make it come true […] there is not one will escape his destined death’ (p. 305). It is a prophetic dream and it is representative and metaphorical. However, the eagle spells out what will happen in a very direct way.

            This essay will now briefly look at what some of the ancient philosophers said about dreams. A philosopher who occasionally mentioned dreams was Heraclitus. He likened our normal waking life to sleep and urged ‘to wake up to a higher understanding’ (Waterfield, p. 33). It is only a select elite that manage to apprehend the underlying nature of things, which he calls ‘the logos.’ Although Heraclitus might seem to be disparaging of dreams in that sentence, there are some fragments where he says that dreams have great insight. These are some of his fragments: ‘Even a soul submerged in sleep is hard at work and helps make something of the world’ (Heraclitus 2003, p. 57). He also says: ‘The waking have one world in common. Sleepers, meanwhile, turn aside, each into a darkness of his own’ (p. 63). Waking life is something that we all share, but the dream world is something that only makes sense to a particular individual.

            This brief history will now look at the medieval ages. Similarly, the medieval era also has its own classic dream interpretation book, which was Somniale Daniels. This was a dream manual that circulated during the medieval period and the Renaissance and it was the most popular manual during this period. It was structured through dream symbols and their concise explanations (Cappozzo 2020, p. 1). It consisted of a list of symbols arranged in alphabetical order and interpreted as portending something good or evil for the dreamer (p. 1). Key terms in the text corresponded to the subject of a dream (p. 1). It transcended all classes in society, as everyone consulted the manual. Indeed, Latin and vernacular versions existed (p. 3), but the vernacular version was more secular and the Latin version was more ecclesiastical (p. 12). These were some of the prophesies that the manual made: ‘To see a storm means profit’ (p. 28), ‘To see snakes means damaging the enemy’ (p. 28), ‘To see snakes means damaging the enemy (p. 28), ‘To see blood means envy’ (p. 27), ‘To laugh in a dream means sadness’ (p. 27), ‘To hear an organ playing means being aware of a friend’ (p. 26), ‘To own a garden means happiness’ (p. 24). The medieval ages, like antiquity, saw dreams as messages that portended the future. Also, like the ancients, dreams were a lot more central to their culture than they are in ours.

             The medieval ages were dominated by Christianity. As such, this essay will now explore religious interpretations of dreams during this period. Indeed, dreams were seen as divine interventions (Kunzel 2002, p. 215). Dreams were seen as an active communication between the dreamer and another world. This is what Gregory the Great said about dreams: ‘The voice of God is indeed heard in dreams, when with a tranquil mind there is quiet from the action of this world and in this silence of mind divine precepts are perceived’ (Wellesley 2018). However, a small group of clergymen, mainly monks, had a monopoly on recording dreams in writing (Kunzel, p. 216). For medieval religious writers, dreams exhibit traces of Judeo-Christian traditions (216). In addition to this, the medieval clergy believed that supernatural powers could intervene through dreams (p. 216). They did this because according to the clergy God would send angels to people through dreams, but the devil also sent demons (p. 216). There was little notion that dreams came from people themselves, but the ancients did entertain this notion (p. 216). However, like the ancients, the medieval period did think that dreams contained predictions (p. 216). Additionally, the medieval clergy stressed that dreams had to be interpreted through Christian doctrine (Keskiaho 2015). For instance, Pope Hadrian I interpreted Charlamagne’s dream, who was king of the Franks. However, since his dream did not correspond to biblical imagery, it was interpreted as being illusionary. Gregory the Great thought that dreams had to be interpreted through spiritual judgement. Although dreams were not an integral part of theology, it was used heavily in the imagery of the period (Keskiaho 2015).

            This essay will explore how dreams were classified by the medieval clergy. According to Macobius, there are five types of dreams – the enigmatic dream, the prophetic dream, the oracular dream, the nightmare and the apparition. The enigmatic dream is difficult to interpret, the oracular dream is when the priest or pious person clearly reveals what will transpire and what action to take or to avoid. The prophetic dream shows event that will come true. Finally, nightmares are unimportant apparitions that arise due to stress (Wellesley 2018). Additionally, dreams were also classed as a temporary state between earthly life and judgement in heaven: ‘[A] temporary state of the disembodied soul as it awaits resurrection of the body at the last judgement’. Writers in the Old Testament spoke about death being a kind of sleep (Collins 2019). Dreams were classified into these five categories, but they were also classed as a transitory state between earthly and divine worlds.

            Dreams were largely seen as divine interventions in antiquity and the medieval period, although this was especially the case in the medieval period. However, Sigmund Freud constructed an atheistic belief system with psychoanalysis in the late 19^th and early 20^th centuries. Dreams were a crucial part of his system and he devoted an entire book to the subject with The Interpretation of Dreams (1900). For Freud, dreaming is the unconscious at work, as it transforms the latent content into the manifest content. The dream circumvents repression and censorship and reveals what we really think and wish. Dreams also involve ‘condensation’; that is, they take a number of elements and combine them into one whole. They also involve ‘displacement,’ as they represent seemingly insignificant things. Dreams might be about something, but the dream shows that it is about something else. Emotions are associated with one idea and it detached from that idea and attached to another one. Dreams also perform a ‘secondary revision,’ which are more logical (Freud Museum London year).

            This essay will now look at segments from The Interpretation of Dreams. Freud says in the book that, although dreams might seem incomprehensible, they lend themselves to interpretation (1999, p. 79). For Freud, dreams do possess meaning and that ‘a scientific method of dream interpretation is possible’ (p. 80). He interpreted thousands of dreams in an allegedly scientific manner (p. 80). Freud, echoing antiquity, thinks that dreams represent wish fulfilments (p. 98). Everything said and spoken in dreams are reproductions of words and allusions to events retained in the dream thoughts (p. 238). Crucially, for Freud, he thinks that dreams come from the unconscious (p. 361), but that these unconscious thoughts are repressed and manifest themselves in our dreams (p. 404). For Freud, the unconscious is ‘the question of psychology’ (p. 404), as it is ‘the basis for the life of the psyche (p. 405). We are conscious during our waking life, but the unconscious comes into being whilst we are asleep (p. 405). Dreams are the way they are because they are ‘unconscious thinking.’ However, the unconscious is also active during the day, but it is mediated by the conscious mind (p. 405). Dreams seem to enact unconscious fantasies and probably arise due to repressed sexual impulses (p. 405). Freud says the following about this: ‘[Dreams are an] expression for impulses which are hampered by resistance by day, but are able to draw reinforcement from deep sources of excitation by night’ (p. 406). Dreams reproduce the ‘dream wish’ and help us to ‘rediscover’ the unconscious (p. 406). These theories claim that dreams occur due to psychological activity and, unlike earlier periods, Freud attributes none of this to supernatural intervention. Whilst all this is very interesting, it is not backed up by empirical investigation. Karl Popper claimed that Freud’s theories were pseudo-science (Okasha 2002, p. 12), as he made claims that could not be falsified, and his ideas are no longer influential in psychology (Yeung 2021).

            Indeed, there is no proof of Freud’s claims in neuroscience. According to neuroscience, dreams occur due to brain plasticity and REM sleep. Brain plasticity occurs when neurons interconnect and find new partners. They constantly change and neurons pass on different information to each other. Like plastic, the brain assumes new shapes and changes. The brain includes eighty-six billion neurons and 0.2 quadrillion connections, which rewire every moment of our lives. Neuroscience used to think that different parts of the brain were predetermined to perform certain functions. However, recent discoveries now show that the brain is assigned a task, which is passed on to the back of the brain, the visual cortex. The visual cortex is active at night, when neurons in the visual cortex overpower the senses. During sleep, we experience REM sleep for ninety minutes, which stands for Rapid Eye Movement, and this is when dreams usually occur. Some dreams can occur during non-REM sleep, but these dreams are usually abstract and are less vivid. REM sleep is triggered by a set of neurons that pump activity into the visual cortex.  Circuitry in the brain paralyses the muscles in the body during REM sleep, so that the brain can stimulate visual experience without moving the body. Neuroscientists think that dreams occur so as to prevent the other senses from taking over the visual cortex when it is unused (Eagleton and Vaughn 2020).

             This essay will now examine how REM and brain plasticity cause dreams. Dreaming is caused when a small group of cells are switched on and they execrate a chemical called ‘acetylcholine.’ This chemical activates the higher parts of the brain and they generate meaningless images. These meaningless images are made from ‘noisy’ signals that are sent up from the brain. This is later counteracted by another group of cells which execrate two chemicals called noradrenaline and serotine, which switch off the cholinergic activation. The frontal lobe of the brain, which is above the eyes, contain a large fibre-pathway which transmit a chemical called ‘dopamine.’ This is passed on from the middle part of the brain to the higher parts. Damage to this pathway makes dreaming impossible, but it leaves the REM cycle unaffected. Chemical stimulation of the dopamine pathway leads to a massive increase in the frequency and vividness of dreams without having an effect on the frequency and intensity of REM sleep (Solms 1999). Dreams that occur during REM sleep are often bizarre and have something to do with personal concerns. The dreams are often similar to psychotic experiences, since they involve false beliefs and distorted sensory perceptions. Indeed, dream reports are often similar to reports of people experiencing psychosis (Munt 2017). All these discoveries debunked Freud’s speculations. Although Freud saw dreams as profoundly meaningful, they are now seen as meaningless. For Freud, dreams could explain all of our underlying problems and motivations. Now they are largely seen as meaningless images that arise due to psychological processes. Indeed, they are seen as no different from the beliefs of psychotics.

            Dreams were a central part of Greek culture. They distinguished between significant and insignificant dreams and they claimed that the former were prophetic. People often consulted gurus who interpreted significant dreams. Artemidorus wrote an entire book that interpreted dreams and it was very popular during antiquity. Dreams feature in ancient fiction, notably in The Odyssey by Homer. The story features a prophetic wish-fulfilment, which was a common feature of ancient dream interpretation. Heraclitus was an ancient Greek philosopher who included dreams in his writings. For him, people were constantly asleep and that a few enlightened individuals could access reason, ‘the logos.’ He also mentioned in one of his fragments that individuals enter their own private world whilst we all share the same world in our waking life. The most important book of dream interpretation in the medieval period was Somniale Daniels, which was a manual that contained symbols. Although dreams were not a central part of medieval theology, they were a central part of Medieval culture. Dreams were seen as divine interventions, as people thought that either God or the devil sent messengers that appeared in our dreams. Freud constructed an atheistic doctrine with psychoanalysis and dreams were a crucial part of it. For Freud, dreams reveal the unconscious mind that permeates all our thoughts and actions. Freud thought that dreams could be scientifically analysed and understood. Although he was an atheist, Freud echoed the ancients and the medieval period, as he did think that dreams were wish fulfilments. Freud was a major 20^th century figure, but none of his speculations have been confirmed by empirical investigations in neuroscience. According the neuroscience, dreams are caused by brain plasticity and Rapid Eye Movement. Neurons overpower the visual cortex and this activity causes dreams. Transmission of the chemical ‘dopamine’ is also crucial to dreaming. Reports of dreams are highly similar to the behaviour of psychotics, as they are deluded, their senses are disorganised and they experience hallucinations. Although dreams were very meaningful to antiquity, the medieval period and to Freud, they are now seen as meaningless images which are caused by cerebral activity. Even so, they still never fail to bemuse us with their bizarre images. Although they are not as prevalent in our culture, they do often appear in cinema and literature and the arts continue to use them as a source of inspiration.

Words Cited

            Cappozzo, Valerio. (2020) ‘The Transmission of the Somniale Daniels, from Latin to Vernacular Italian.’ In Translat Library. Vol. 2: No. 1.

Collins, Christopher. (2019) ‘Poetics of the Medieval Dream.’ In Creative Commons. Available from: https://hcommons.org/deposits/item/hc:23871/

Eagleman, David and Vaughn, Don. (2020) ‘Why do we Dream? A New Theory on How it Protects Our Brains.’ In Time. Available from: https://time.com/5925206/why-do-we-dream/

Freud, Sigmund. (1999) The Interpretation of Dreams. Originally published in 1900. Translated by Joyce Crick. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

            Hall, Edith. (2020) ‘Sex on the Brain.’ In Times Literary Supplement. Available from: https://www.the-tls.co.uk/articles/artemidorus-interpretation-of-dreams-review/

            Hammond, Martin. (2020) ‘Artemidorus on Dreams.’ In Classics for All. Available from: https://classicsforall.org.uk/reading-room/ad-familiares/artemidorus-dreams

            Heraclitus. (2003) Fragments. Translated by Brooks Haxton. London: Penguin.

Homer. (1991) The Odyssey. Translated by E. V. Rieu. London: Penguin.

            Kamil, Miriam. (2014) ‘Dreams and Prophecy in Ancient Greece.’ In Ancient Origins. Available from: https://www.ancient-origins.net/myths-legends-europe/dreams-and-prophecy-ancient-greece-002107

Keskiaho, Jess. (2015) ‘Images and the Images of Dreams in the Early Middle Ages.’ In Cambridge Blog. Available from: http://www.cambridgeblog.org/2015/07/images-and-the-images-of-dreams-in-the-early-middle-ages/

Kunzel, Rudi. (2002) ‘Medieval Dreams: A Sample of Historical and Psychoanalytical Criticism.’ In Psychoanlyticsche Perspectieven. 20:2, p. 215-233.

Mutz, Julian. (2017) ‘Exploring the Neural Correlates of Dream Phenomenology and Altered States of Consciousness During Sleep.’ In Neuroscience of Consciousness. Volume 2017, Issue 1.

Okasha, Samir. (2002) Philosophy of Science: A Very Short Introduction. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

Solms, Mark. (1999) ‘The Interpretation of Dreams and the Neurosciences.’ In Freud’s Traumdeutung.

Unknown author. (2018) ‘The Dream Work.’ In Freud Museum London. Available from: https://www.freud.org.uk/education/resources/the-interpretation-of-dreams/the-dreamwork/#:~:text=The%20dream%2Dwork%20is%20the,wishes%20to%20get%20past%20censorship.

Water, Robin. (2000) The First Philosophers: The Presocratics and the Sophists. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

Wellesley, Mary. (2018) ‘Dream Visions.’ In British Library. Available from: https://www.bl.uk/medieval-literature/articles/dream-visions

             Yeung, Andy Wai Kan. (2021) ‘Is the Influence of Freud Declining in Psychology and Psychiatry? A Bibliometric Analysis.’ In Frontiers in Psychology. Vol. 18.

The 1950s and the 1990s: Prosperous Complacency

Part five of a forthcoming book called Collected Essays.

****************

The 1950s and 1990s were prosperous but complacent decades, as they assumed that prosperity would continue indefinitely. The economic structures of both decades were drastically different. In the 50s it was statist and interventionist whereas the 90s encouraged privatisation and deregulation in the economy. British Prime Minister Harold Macmillan claimed that ‘you have never had it so good,’ but he was also preoccupied as to how Britain could maintain full employment, high wages and economic growth without unleashing inflation. Also, Britain did not modernise sufficiently well and this would create problems in subsequent decades. Countercultural movements emerged which satirised complacency in British society. Meanwhile, the 1990s produced unheralded levels of growth, as globalisation was starting to bring third world countries out of poverty. Governments increased financial deregulation, which was perceived as prudent. Like the 1950s, it was assumed that prosperity would continue indefinitely, but this was shattered with the financial crisis of 2008. It was also assumed that liberal values could be exported to countries in the middle east, but these ideas were undone by the invasion of Iraq. Like the 50s, the 1990s also produced acerbic satire which mocked the self-righteousness of political movements. This essay will examine how the 1950s and the 1990s were complacent decades which created problems.

The 1950s were a period of unprecedented prosperity for Great Britain – and, indeed, for much of the western world. Harold Macmillan claimed that ‘we have never had it so good’ [1]. The Labour government had previously achieved full employment, economic growth and increased production after the war. However, the Conservatives lifted rations, consumerism increased and the coal and steel industries boomed, which resulted in economic growth of 2.2% in 1958 [2]. Macmillan had always been on the left of the Conservative party and had been scarred by the unemployment of the 1920s and 30s. Unlike most of the Labour Party, he did believe that individual enterprise was necessary to create wealth and redistribute it to the needy. However, he believed in government intervention to manage consumer demand and therefore maintain high employment. He made this particular speech because he was worried that the unprecedented full employment could cause prices to spiral and affect employment [3]. Nonetheless, employment had exceeded the targets set by Keynes and Beveridge.

The boom of the 50s was unlike the economic booms of the 80s, 90s and 00s, as British industry was exporting more. Indeed, this was the last economic boom that depended on manufacturing. Up to the 1950s, Britain was an industrial powerhouse and made up a quarter of the world’s exports. Now, however, it makes up 2% of the world’s exports. It made up a third of the nation’s output and employed 40% of the workforce. Later economic booms were over-reliant on overinflated financial services [4].

After the Second World War, governments made a concerted effort not to return to the poverty and inequality of the 20s and 30s. As such, they created ‘welfare states,’ which had largely mollified poverty. Macmillan continued a policy of full employment, building several factories in poor towns. Macmillan encouraged investment by encouraging car manufacturers to expand their facilities away from the West Midlands and into less industrialised locations such as Merseyside [5]. Also, the Conservative government had an excellent record on housing, having built on average 300,00 houses per year in this period. The Conservatives acknowledged the advantage of the mixed economy and recognised that, if they built more social housing, that it would also encourage investment in the private sector [6]. However, child poverty and elderly poverty had increased and wages were rising in ways that adversely affected lower ones. As such, poverty had increased, relative to the prosperity of the time. However, higher life expectancy rates meant that elderly people struggled with their pensions. Coupled with rises in inflation, this meant that a quarter of elderly people needed National Assistance [7]. Beveridge’s other target – the complete elimination of poverty – had not been achieved completely.

The post-war economic recovery was statist and the economy at the time was much more interventionist. The ‘consensus’ that emerged after the war encouraged greater intervention in the economy to incentivise investment and planning. Public spending went up under Macmillan, which caused health secretary Enoch Powell to rail against the Conservative government's policies. Powell wanted to bring inflation down at all costs, but the economic orthodoxy of the day was different. However, Macmillan did introduce a mildly deflationary package – in other words, he brought public spending down – to protect pound reserves. However, Macmillan contravened the quantity theory of money when he stated: ‘[Inflation is not caused by] a control of the money supply,’ which was seen by Roy Harrod ‘as an antiquated doctrine’ [8]. The Conservative government thought that unemployment and stagnation were worse prospects than mild inflation. However, by 1959 inflation went down to 1%, its lowest rate since the war. Hence, Powell’s prescriptions seemed nonsensical, as Britain was at its most prosperous, there was economic growth and the generous benefits, pensions and housing had created a fairer and more generous society. According to Sandbrook, monetarist historians had overlooked how the Conservative governments from 1951 until 1964 were determined to stop the unemployment and class divisions of the 1920s and 30s [9].

The economic ruin bequeathed by the ‘laissez-faire’ model of the 1920s and 30s gave rise to ideas such as planning, which were assiduously implemented by the Labour Party through rationing. There were central boards which encouraged investment, which was a form of ‘planning.’ Throughout the 40s, 50s and 60s, Governments increasingly set long term targets. Institutions were established to reach these targets, such as the Economic Planning Board [10]. However, long-term plans were also set for social welfare, such as the NHS Plan of 1962, Local Health and Welfare Plan of 1963 and the Housing Plan of 1965 [11].

The economic prosperity of the 1950s posed a conundrum for the Labour Party, as it had achieved most of the aims of its 1945 manifesto [12] and the Conservatives claimed that they could run the welfare state more efficiently [13]. Many people in the rank-and-file of the Labour Party thought that they might never return to power ever again [14]. As such, this led to a lot of revisionism within the party, most notably with Anthony Crosland’s influential book The Future of Socialism (1956). He claimed that the economic problem that the Labour Party were trying to overcome had been solved [15]. It had achieved full employment and social welfare whilst other objectives such as the abolition of private property and increasing the power of the working classes had become irrelevant [16]. He wanted Labour to drop its commitment to socialist controls – that is, controls that plan industry or ration its goods. Industry could be directed in the right direction to increase profits and full employment, but it did not have to control it, as this denied free choice and it created a needlessly large bureaucracy to enforce it [17]. He claimed that nationalisation was no longer a panacea. He revisited this theme in a speech in 1973: ‘Nationalisation...does not in itself engender greater equality, more jobs in the regions, higher investment or industrial democracy’ [18]. The classical central tenet of socialism – that the community must own the means of production – had to be dropped. Instead of pining for greater public ownership, Crosland urged the Labour Party to focus on improved public services and the elimination of poverty. The objectives of social welfare were to relieve distress and suffering, not to achieve social equality [19]. It must provide greater equality of opportunity and, in this regard, the Conservatives did not go far enough. In order to provide greater equality of opportunity, Labour must abolish grammar schools, abolish the eleven-plus and increase comprehensive education. Inequality was wasteful, as it prevented social mobility. Additionally, Crosland wanted to place strong emphasis on liberty and the good life: ‘[the socialist] in whose blood there should always be a trace of the anarchist and the libertarian, and not too much of the prig and the prude.’ (20)

However, both parties were complacent, as British industry did not modernise sufficiently well. After the Second World War, debt stood at 225% of GDP [21]. However, subsequent Labour and Conservative governments brought the debt down. Although borrowing had increased, there had been budget surpluses and growth which allowed the government to pay back some of its net debt. Growth averaged 3% and inflation averaged 3.57% between 1951-64. By 1964, the debt had been reduced to 110% of GDP [22]. However, the most pressing issue was innovation in British industry, as it was not exploiting new technological advances. Productivity in British industry was high in the early 1900s, but other countries caught up in the 1960s and took over by the 1970s. This was not reversed even until the end of the twentieth century and Britain continues to have a productivity gap with The United States and Europe [23]. Robert Skidelsky writes as to how British industry throughout the 1950s and into the 1960s expected to keep living off the empire. The Conservative governments from the period, he claimed, did not try to modernise. Additionally, British industries were under no pressure to modernise their plants or upskill their managers or workers [24]. Despite the prosperity of the 1950s, this would spiral out of control in the 1950s and 60s. Labour governments tried to implement an ‘Industrial Plan’ where they tried to re-organise industry. This was finally discredited when Tony Benn wanted to create worker co-operatives for Britain’s decaying industries [25]. By the 1970s, companies such as British Leylands and Ferranti were making enormous losses caused by mismanagement. After the Oil Crisis, the Labour government started the National Enterprise Board, which was meant to modernise British industry under the direction of the government. The NEB had to deal with more companies in trouble, but no improvement occurred [26]. Statism and interventionism had been discredited.

On the other hand, the Labour Party governments of 1964-70 and 1974-79 have been described as ‘Croslandite.’ However, Crosland later admitted that he overlooked in his seminal text as to how the Labour Party could generate economic growth [27]. Indeed, he was initially pleased as to how the welfare state had quelled capitalism through greater union laws and regulations, as free-for-all capitalism had been quelled by the mixed economy [28]. However, some people claim that the post-war consensus – high taxes and regulations – ended up stifling the British economy [29]. Some people claim that its emphasis on the public sector – 49.7% of GDP went towards public spending in 1975 [30] - stifled entrepreneurial initiative [29]. Of course, the oil shock was the death knell to Croslandite social democracy [31]. Unlike their mentor, Kenyensians were later very inflexible as to how to tackle inflation [32]. As such, governments across Europe, decided to prioritise low inflation over full employment [32]. Monetarism emerged as the de rigeur economic theory, which is the theory that the amount of money that circulates in the economy should be proportional to the amount of goods. Availability of money goes up, which increases economic growth. However, an increase in the supply increases demand, so companies put prices to meet this demand, which leads to inflation. Hence, monetarists urge central banks to control the supply of money. Also, monetarists lower interests rates because this brings the cost of borrowing down and people can borrow to invest more, which also leads to economic growth [33]. This economic theory replaced statist Keynesianism as the prevalent economic doctrine. However, several thinkers and politicians of the 1950s did not foresee how they could preserve the statism of the day. Indeed, it was assumed that the prosperity would go on forever [34], but it unravelled quickly.

Certain political and economic political attitudes were complacent in the 50s. However, there were cultural movements in the 1950s which were indicative of new changes and actively satirised complacency. The first countercultural movement in the 1950s were the Angry Young Men. However, the 1950s were largely a conservative, family-oriented culture [35]. The Conservative governments from 1951 until 1964 were ‘paternalistic,’ meaning that they were meant to look after and protect its citizens [36]. Despite this, Britain was becoming less deferential to institutions like the monarchy [37]. The Angry Young Men were the first countercultural movement that reacted against this. The movement was manifold, but it was partly political and religious. Its most famous exponent was Kingsley Amis, who published Lucky Jim in 1956. Amis satirised the deference that was prevalent in British culture. His novel covers a university in Great Britain and its protagonist is forced to participate in its pomp and circumstance to gain acceptance. The novel actively satirised British institutions and pretensions. It sold very well and it was controversial. As well as satirising British society and its institutions, it also criticised Britain's attraction to continental modernism and the avant-garde [38]. Meanwhile, Colin Wilson popularised existentialism with his book The Outsider (1956). The book appealed to the counterculture, as it glorified the idea of the ‘outsider’ in art. Wilson represented the more religious strand in the movement, as he later wrote a book entitled Religion and the Rebel (1957). His book mixed a plethora of disparate writers and thinkers, but it helped bring contemporaneous continental philosophy to a British audience. Crucially, Wilson came from a working class background and had never been to university, which signified the rise of equal opportunities [39].

The tail-end of the 1950s also witnessed the nascent beginnings of Britain’s satire boom. Beyond the Fringe – comprised of Peter Cook, Dudley Moore, Alan Bennet and Jonathan Miller – created sketches which satirised toffs and in many ways prefigured Monty Python. In an iconic moment, Beyond the Fringe performed in a theatre with then-prime minister Harold Macmillan in the audience and Peter Cook walked up to Macmillan and impersonated him in his presence [40]. Beyond the Fringe and the Angry Young Men segued into the decadence, radicalism and anarchism of the 1960s. However, much of the satire of both movements was rather soft. Peter Cook claimed that the real target of his satire was ‘complacency’ and that they were not interested in tearing down patriotism or morality [41]. Indeed, Sandbrook writes that the impact of the programme has been exaggerated and that only a small fragment of society saw the programme when it was broadcast [42].

The 1990s resemble the 1950s in many ways, as it also was a period of prosperity and economic growth. The children of the 50s generation, the ‘baby boomers,’ came to power. Bill Clinton and Tony Blair rebelled against the statist paternalism of the 1950s and accepted the Thatcher/Reagan settlement [43]. Globalisation had generated high levels of economic growth and wealth. The collapse of communism appeared to confirm that liberal democracy had won the battle of ideas. This also solidified laissez-faire, which had made a come-back after the stagflation of the 1970s [44]. Europe had also enjoyed its longest period of peace. As such, history appeared to have reached a plateau, which led Francis Fukuyama to theorise about the ‘end of history.’ Several ideas had been tried and tested, but liberal democracy had won the battle of ideas. Fukuyama did not claim that there would no longer be historical events, rather he claimed that ideology had expired and that liberal democracy had mollified political extremes [45]. Fukuyama was a Hegelian conservative and Hegel was a thinker who believed that political ideas were theses and antitheses which produced syntheses. In other words, history has a purpose. Moments in history and political ideas are all parts which add up to produce events. Certain political events end when they have achieved their purpose, such as the Roman Empire [46]. According to Fukuyama, liberal democracy had won the battle of ideas and history had culminated, which led to the kind of perpetual peace envisaged by Kant. This was a universal, liberal and co-operative federation of states. Kant claimed that wars occur when individuals self-interestedly disregard justice. Republics, united by international law, would subscribe to a universal doctrine of rights. Also, national barriers had to be overcome and nations would have to co-operate [47]. The world in the 1990s was starting to resemble this ideal. This global liberalism was Fukuyama’s notion of historical culmination whereas for Marx it was communism [45].

Like the Kenynesian statism of the 1950s, there was also some complacency in the 1990s. There were unusually high levels of economic growth and it was assumed that it would keep growing. In the USA, the economy grew on average by 4%, 1.7 million workers were added to the workforce, the average income grew by 10% and the poverty rate fell to an all-time low of 10% in 2000 [48]. Clinton and Blair took financial deregulation further. Bill Clinton signed the ‘Financial Services Modernisation’ Act in 1999, which was welcomed by most people and was not seen as reckless [48]. British Labour chancellor Gordon Brown even spoke about ‘the end of boom and bust,’ [49] which suggested that economic growth would extend exponentially without a single recession. Brown also deregulated the banks from the oversight of the Bank of England [50]. There were some doom-mongers who claimed that this laissez-faire attitude would result in a global financial meltdown, but these were a minority. Roy Jenkins had been a Labour chancellor in the 1960s and proposed Keynesian solutions to generate full employment as leader of the SDP. However, he sensed that the financial deregulation could cause a giant economic depression that mirrored 1929 [51]. Similarly, John Gray wrote a book called False Dawn: The Delusions of Global Capitalism (1998) in which he claimed that laissez-faire was hubristic, debt-prone, created higher crime, broke up families, created greater atomisation and that it would soon lead to a meltdown [52].

However, laissez-faire globalisation was winning the argument in the 1990s whilst the left appeared to have lost it completely. Globalisation had brought countries in Africa and south east Asia out of poverty and starvation [53]. The left was beating the same tired drum, arguing against globalisation and for greater protectionism. Noam Chomsky sold less books during this period [54] and a figure like Tony Benn became completely estranged from the Labour party [55]. Labour embraced globalisation and rebranded itself as ‘New Labour.’

The unprecedented wealth also led western countries to believe that they should export western values and laissez-faire economics to third-world countries. ‘Neo-conservatism’ and ‘liberal interventionism’ became fashionable buzzwords during this period [56]. British Foreign Secretary Robin Cooke spoke about an ‘ethical’ foreign policy [57]. George W. Bush was elected in 2000. His vice-president Dick Chaney and his secretary of state Donald Rumsfield were branded as ‘neo-conservatives.’ Neo-conservatism advocates free market capitalism and an interventionist foreign policy which exports this form of capitalism. Paul Wolfowitz promoted the invasion of Iraq [58].

Like the 1950s, complacency towards the economy and foreign policy soon started to generate problems. George Bush took financial deregulation further [59]. This led to the biggest bust in economic history, which meant that governments bailed out banks with state money and accrued large deficits. Gordon Brown and Barack Obama spent money on the economy and bailed out ailing companies [60]. Liberal interventionism, which had been solidified by successful interventions in Bosnia and Sierra Leon and genocides in Rwanda, also led to chaos. The invasion of Iraq led to to Sunni/Shia sectarian battles and a failed state [61]. Also, a power vacuum led to the rise of ISIS and to a nascent Islamic caliphate across Iraq and Syria [62].

Like the 1950s, Hollywood films from the 1990s reflect the economic boom. Many films – such as Forrest Gump (1994) – recreate a sense of economic freedom and a sense of optimism. Like the British satire boom of the 1950s, there was a lot of satire, which became more hard-edged and biting. It may have been reflecting the prevalent complaceny. Bret Easton Ellis published his novel American Psycho in 1991, which mordantly satirised the vapid consumerism and individualism of the day. Programs such as The Simpsons attacked sacred cows and everyone was on the brunt of their attacks – conservatives, liberals, leftists, etc. South Park took this iconoclasm further. Both programs were controversial when they were first released. In the early 90s and late 90s, schoolchildren who wore t-shirts of both programs were sent home [63].

The 1950s were a prosperous but complacent decade. Conservative governments did not modernise industry. The Labour Party’s revisionist theories were too complacent, as they took economic growth for granted. The prosperity of the era had made some of the ideals of the Labour movement redundant. As such, it placed greater emphasis on greater social mobility and equality of opportunity. However, many of the assumptions, such as state planning and intervention, had been dropped by the 1970s. The boom of the 1950s was created primarily by manufacturing, but mismanagement ran most British industries to the ground by the 1970s. Many people assumed that the prosperity of the 1950s would continue indefinitely – many people thought the same about the prosperity of the 1990s – but proved illusory. Similarly, many assumptions of the 1990s were complacent. Governments increased financial deregulation and it was not seen as imprudent. Indeed, British chancellor Gordon Brown hubristically claimed that the era of boom and bust was over. The whole world was prospering in the 1990s and this led Francis Fukuyama to claim that the ‘end of history’ had been reached. Fukuyama believed that history had reached an apotheosis, that ideology had died and that liberal democracy had won the battle of ideas. As such, the world was starting to resemble Kant’s ideal of a universal republic. However, this was also a complacent assumption to espouse, as there were several conflicts in Kosovo, Rwanda and Sierra Leon. Subsequently, a shadow banking system almost brought the world economy down and governments had to bail out the banks. Foreign policy ideas from the 1990s were also equally hubristic, as they assumed that western values could be exported and imposed on other cultures, but the invasion of Iraq tarnished these ideas. Finally, the satire of the 1990s, like the satire of the 50s, also acerbically critiqued the complacency of the era. The 1950s and 1990s were similar decades in that they were prosperous, but they also naively assumed that this prosperity would continue.

Notes

1. Martin Evans. 2010. Harold Macmillan’s ‘Never Had it So Good’ Speech Followed the 1950s Boom. [Online] The Guardian. Available from: https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/politics/8145390/Harold-Macmillans-never-had-it-so-good-speech-followed-the-1950s-boom.html

2. 2016. UK GDP Since 1955. [Online] The Guardian. Available from: https://www.theguardian.com/news/datablog/2009/nov/25/gdp-uk-1948-growth-economy

3. Dominic Sandbrook. 2005. Never Had it So Good: A History of Britain from Suez to The Beatles, p. 79-80. London: Abacus.

4. Robert Skidelsky. 2013. Meeting Our Makers: Britain’s Long Industrial Decline. [Online] New Statesman. Available from: https://www.newstatesman.com/culture/culture/2013/01/meeting-our-makers-britain%E2%80%99s-long-industrial-decline

5. Brian Marren. 2012. Class, Culture and Community, p. 93. Ed. Anne Baldwin, Chris Ellis, Stephen Ethbridge, Keith Laybourne, Neil Pye.

6. Andrew Gimson. 2013. How Macmillan Built 300,000 Houses Per Year. [Online] Conservative Home Available from :https://www.conservativehome.com/thetorydiary/2013/10/how-macmillan-built-300000-houses-a-year.html

7. Ian Gazely, Hector Guiterrez Rufrancos, Andrew Newell, Kevin Reynolds and Rebecca Searle. 2016. The Poor and the Poorest Fifty Years On: Evidence from British Household Expenditure Surveys of the 1950s and 1960s, p. 16. Journal of the Royal Statistical Society: Series A.

8. Never Had it So Good, p. 86

9. Never Had it so Good, p. 91.

10. Glen O’Hara. 2002. British Economic and Social Planning: 1959-1970, p. 5. UCL PHD Thesis. London: London University.

11. British Economic and Social Planning: 1959-1970, p. 1.

12. Chris Mullin. 2016. Citizen Clem: The Unparalleled Achievement of Labour Under Attlee. [Online] The Guardian. Available from: https://www.theguardian.com/books/2016/sep/01/citizen-clem-by-john-bew-review-labour-clement-atlee

13. Alan Clark. 1999. The Tories: Conservatives and the Nation State, 1922-1997, p. 268. Phoenix: London.

14. Andrew Thorpe. 1997. A History of the Labour Party, p. 5 Palgrave: London.

15. Geoffrey Foote. 1985. The Labour Party’s Political Thought: A History, p. 212. Croom Helm, London.

16. The Labour Party’s Political Thought: A History, p. 214.

17. p. 216

18. Speech from 1973. Available from: Quizlet.com

19. p. 216

20. p. 219

21. Robert Neild. 2012. The National Debt in Perspective. [Online] Royal Economic Society. Available from: http://www.res.org.uk/view/article5jan12Correspondence.html

22. Perri 6. 2014. Getting Government Debt Down: Lessons from Anthropology of Economic Management in British Post-War Governments. Political Studies Association Conflict, p. 15. 14-16.

23. Stephen Broadberry. Britain’s Twentieth Century Productivity Performance in International Perspective, p. 29. National Institute of Economic and Social Research: University of Birmingham.

24 and 25. Meeting Our Makers: Britain’s Long Industrial Decline.

26. Geoffrey Owen. 2009. Industrial Policy in Twentieth Century Britain, p. 56. Ed. Richard Cooper and Peter Lyth. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

27. Diamond, Patrick. 2016. The Crosland Legacy: Lessons for the British Left. [Online] SPERI. Available from: http://speri.dept.shef.ac.uk/2016/09/28/the-crosland-legacy-lessons-for-the-british-left/

28. The Labour Party’s Historical Thought: A History, p. 212.

29. Colin Tahin. 1992. Two Decades in British Politics: Essays to Mark Twenty-One Years of the Politics Association, 1969-90, p. 236. Ed. Bill Jones and Lynton Robins. Manchester: Manchester University Press.

30. Simon Rodgers. 2010. Historic Government Spending by Area: Get the Data Back to 1948. [Online] The Guardian. Available from: https://www.theguardian.com/news/datablog/2010/oct/18/historic-government-spending-area

31. Jonathan Derbyshire. 2010. The Social Democracy of Fear. [Online] New Statesman. Available from: https://www.newstatesman.com/blogs/the-staggers/2010/09/social-democracy-gray-ralph

32. Robert Skidelsky. 2010. Keynes: A Very Short Introduction. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

33. Monetarism. [Online] Investopedia. Available from: https://www.investopedia.com/terms/m/monetarism.asp

34. Never Had it so Good, p. 100.

35. Cherish Watton. 2016. The Politics of Affluence in 1950s and 1960s Britain. [Online] History to the Public. Available from: http://historytothepublic.org/capitalising-on-affluence/

36. 2017. A Brief History of One-Nation Conservatism. [Online] The Economist. Available from: http://historytothepublic.org/capitalising-on-affluence/

37. Pat Thane. 2010. Unequal Britain: Equalities in Britain Since 1945. [Online] History and Policy. Available from: http://www.historyandpolicy.org/policy-papers/papers/unequal-britain-equalities-in-britain-since-1945

38. Never Had it So Good, p. 154.

39. Never Had it So Good, p. 164.

40. Andy Parsons. Andy Parsons on Peter Cook: The Pure Filth that Inspired my Career. [Online] The Guardian. Available from: https://www.theguardian.com/stage/2015/may/06/andy-parsons-on-peter-cook-the-pure-filth-that-inspired-my-career

41. Never Had it So Good, p. 593.

42. Never Had it So Good, p. 591.

43. John Kampfner. 2008. Margaret Thatcher, Inspiration to New Labour. [Online] The Daily Telegraph. Available from: https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/newstopics/themargaretthatcheryears/1895878/Margaret-Thatcher-inspiration-to-New-Labour.html

44. Ravi Kanbur. 2016. The End of Laissez-Faire, the End of History and the Structure of Scientific Revolutions. DOI. 59-51, 35-46.

45. Eliane Glaser. 2014. Bring Back Ideology: Fukuyama’s ‘End of History’ 25 Years On. [Online] The Guardian. Available from: https://www.theguardian.com/books/2014/mar/21/bring-back-ideology-fukuyama-end-history-25-years-on

46. Peter Singer. 2001. Hegel: A Very Short Introduction, p. 14. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

47. Roger Scruton. 2001. Kant: A Very Short Introduction, p. 126-127. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

48. Kurt Anderson. 2015. The Best Decade? The 1990s, Obviously. [Online] The New York Times. Available from: https://www.nytimes.com/2015/02/08/opinion/sunday/the-best-decade-ever-the-1990s-obviously.html

49. Deborah Summers. 2008. No Return to Boom and Bust: What Brown Said When he was Chancellor. [Online] The Guardian. Available from: https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2008/sep/11/gordonbrown.economy

50. William Keegan. 2012. Bank Regulation Leads to Disaster: Shout it from the Rooftops. [Online] The Guardian. Available from: https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2008/sep/11/gordonbrown.economy

51. John Campbell. 2014. Roy Jenkins: A Well-Rounded Life, p. 619. London: Vintage Books.

52. John Gray. 1998. False Dawn: The Delusions of Global Capitalism. London: Granta.

53. Alassane D. Ouattara. 1997. The Challenges of Globalisation for Africa. [Online] International Monetary Fund. Available from: https://www.imf.org/en/News/Articles/2015/09/28/04/53/sp052197

54. Chris Lee. 2006. Chomsky Book Sales Skyrocket. [Online] LA Times. Available from: http://articles.latimes.com/2006/sep/23/entertainment/et-chomsky23

55. Chris Mullin. 2011. Tony Benn: A Biography. [Online] New Statesman. Available from: https://www.newstatesman.com/culture/2011/07/tony-benn-biography-labour

56. S. McGlinchey. 2010. Neo-Conservatism and American Foreign Policy. Politkon: The IAPSS: Journal of Political Science. 16 (1).

57. Robin Cook. 1997. Robin Cook’s Speech on the Government’s Ethical Foreign Policy. [Online] The Guardian. Available from: https://www.theguardian.com/world/1997/may/12/indonesia.ethicalforeignpolicy

58. Stephen Faris. 2016. Paul Wolfowitz in the Wilderness. [Online] Politico. Available from: https://www.politico.eu/article/paul-wolfowitz-world-bank-president-us-defense-secretary-interview/

59. Mark Landler and Sheryl Gay Stolberg. 2008. Bush Can Share the Blame for Financial Crisis. [Online] The New York Times. Available from: https://www.nytimes.com/2008/09/20/business/worldbusiness/20iht-prexy.4.16321064.html?mtrref=www.google.co.uk&mtrref=www.nytimes.com&gwh=73A959E0CB4BEC9FDC4971B866AA9FA6&gwt=pay

60. Jon Swaine. Gordon Brown Hails £500 Billion Bank Rescue Plan. [Online] The Daily Telegraph. Available from: https://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/financialcrisis/3157728/Gordon-Brown-hails-500-billion-bank-rescue-plan.html

61. 2016. Sectarianism and Conflict: Legacies of the Iraq-Iran War. [Online] Journal of Middle Eastern Politics and Policy. Available from: http://jmepp.hkspublications.org/2016/04/02/iran-iraq-legacies/

62. Dilly Hussain. 2015. ISIS: The Unintended Consequences of the US-led War on Iraq. [Online] Foreign Policy Journal. Available from: https://www.foreignpolicyjournal.com/2015/03/23/isis-the-unintended-consequences-of-the-us-led-war-on-iraq/

63. Dennis Lim. 1998. Television: Lowbrow and Proud of it. [Online] The Independent. Available from: https://www.independent.co.uk/arts-entertainment/television-lowbrow-and-proud-of-it-1153256.html

The history of dreams

Jazz and democracy

This is part two of a forthcoming book called 'Collected Essays.'

*******************

It is often stressed how jazz is inherently democratic. Indeed, Michelle Obama stated: 'There is no better example of democracy than a jazz ensemble' (Thompson 2014). It is the purpose of this essay to interrogate this relationship. It will analyse how jazz is democratic by looking at its formal features. Following this examination of form, it will look at the political implications of the genre. It will look at how jazz started in a country that granted its citizens special constitutional freedoms. Duke Ellington:

Put it this way, jazz is a good barometer of freedom. In its beginnings, the United States spawned certain ideals of freedom and independence through which, eventually, jazz evolved, and the music is so free that many people say it is the only unhampered, unhindered expression of complete freedom yet provided in this country (Ellington 1973).

Having established why this is the case, this essay will explore how jazz is censored by totalitarian regimes. It will explore how jazz aligns itself with the resistance, which campaigns for the democratic process. It will do so by looking at its history in Nazi Germany and the USSR. This essay will argue that jazz is inherently democratic because it places special emphasis on improvisation, which this essay will liken to freedom of expression. At the same time, a jazz ensemble places strong emphasis on co-operation and for these reasons it resembles a liberal democracy. It believes in freedom, the individual, human rights and civic responsibility.

Although it has these implications, it would be useful to clarify what jazz is in the first place. Totalitarian regimes that clamp down on jazz often struggle to define it (Benz 1998). Jazz can be either rigidly composed or entirely improvised and it involves either a group or solo improvisation. The music is often based on certain keys and thematic melodies. It sometimes follows them very rigidly, other times very loosely. In its most extreme variations, there are no adherence to tonal or melodic rules whatsoever.

There is a sense, going by this description alone, that it has a strong emphasis on freedom. Two more terms that need to be defined are 'freedom' and 'democracy.' When defining freedom, this essay will turn to Leviathan (1651) by Thomas Hobbes. Hobbes makes a distinction between 'freedom' and 'liberty': 'A free man is he, that in those things, which by his strength and wit is able to do, is not hindered to doe what he has a will to do. (…) Whereas liberty is: all actions which men doe in common-wealths, for feare of the law, are actions which the doers are at liberty to omit' (p. 146, 1651). Freedom involves acting completely without restraint. In other words, it is acting, as Hobbes would term, within 'the state of nature.' Liberty, meanwhile, involves acting within the parameters of the law as prescribed by any given society. It involves all the actions you are at liberty to do within those parameters. Jazz could be said to be a music borne of freedom, since it was created by an oppressed minority who were not at liberty to express themselves. Formally, meanwhile, it could be said to conform to Hobbes' definition of liberty. The musicians sign a social contract, in the same way that the citizens of Hobbes' commonwealth did. They can express themselves, but at the same time they all have roles and responsibilities. Meanwhile, free jazz conforms to Hobbes' definition of freedom. This essay will soon liken free jazz to anarchism. Anarchism is an ideology that is wholly opposed to the law. It wants to return to a primordial 'state of a nature,' which Hobbes believed led to a perpetual state of war and which needed a strong autocrat to control. Free jazz in many ways is a manifestation of that 'state of nature,' since the musicians do not need to adhere to musical rules.

These are the definition of freedom that this essay will work with, but what about democracy? 'Demos' means people whilst 'kratos' means power/rule. A democracy is therefore a government which has been elected by a group of people. A liberal democracy has a belief in the individual, who is moral and rational enough to decide for himself. It also a belief in reason and progress. Growth and development are the natural condition of mankind and the politics of compromise must be used to attain it. Society is consensual and there has to be a desire for order and co-operation, not disorder and conflict. There is, finally, a belief in shared power and a suspicion of concentrated power, be it in individuals, groups or governments (Museum of Australian Democracy 2013). Jazz also shares this belief in shared power, whilst retaining its belief in the individual. Dave Brubeck: 'Jazz is about the only form of art existing today in which there is freedom of the individual without the loss of group contact' (p. 176, 2003). As Dave Brubeck correctly identifies, jazz is both individual and collective. Inevitably, we end up fetishising individual performers to the detriment of the collective. This also happens in liberal democracies, where individual politicians are praised or disparaged for achievements made by groups of people. As regards the other definitions of liberal democracy, each member of a jazz band has moral and rational worth. Each member is usually rewarded with his own solo and he uses his reason to improvise it. It also depends on his moral worth, since each member of the band must respect the rights of the other members. The members must back the soloist and play in the appropriate key and metre. Jazz also shares a belief in reason and progress, since it has usually aligned itself with progressive movements. As this essay will soon examine, many jazz musicians supported the civil rights movement. Jazz also has a belief in consent and shared power. Power is equally distributed, since all members are given the opportunity to solo. Jazz is also inclusive, since anyone can play it. Although it was created by the black community in the USA, it has flourished in all parts of the world. It is particularly popular in Latin America (Meredith 2007) and Eastern Europe (Lerski 2009), for instance. It also been embedded into the folkloric music of all cultures.

It is clear that jazz conforms to these definitions of freedom and liberal democracy. Having gauged how jazz conforms to these definitions, this essay will start by examining how the formal features of jazz are democratic and why these formal features rankle dictators and autocrats. It will also compare it with political ideologies. Jazz appears to be an expression of freedom. At the same time, the player usually improvises within a certain key. The political implications of this are that, within the context of a piece, the player is at liberty to play whatever he wants. In more structured jazz, such as dixieland and bebob, a solo usually must bear a stronger resemblance to the main tonal centre and to the main melody. This is to some degree similar to free speech in a democracy. A citizen is at liberty to say and do whatever he wants as long as his words and actions comply with the law. When the jazz improviser expresses himself within these constraints, he is also respecting the needs of his fellow performers. There is a sense of civic responsibility to this, since he is responding to the notes and chords that they are playing. These forms of jazz are more structured and conform to the definition of a liberal democracy. Meanwhile, free jazz is analogous to anarchy. The musicians do not have to play in key and they often actively avoid it. It is equivalent to a lawless society, where each musician can express himself in any way he likes. The performers do not need to respond to one another, however they can if they if they feel like it. Since there are no rules, the results are often arbitrary. Anarchist societies want to optimise individual freedom as much as possible – and so does free jazz. Anarchism has historically aligned itself with radical forms of resistance and also opposed the Soviet Union (Yaroslansky 1937). As this essay will later examine, free jazz in particular was excessively monitored by the Soviet authorities. As this paragraph has demonstrated, jazz is formally radical. This is another reason why it is proscribed. Even in its earliest incarnations, such as dixieland and rag-time, it was radically different from other forms of music. It employed dissonance and discords. This is why, alongside modernist art, it is usually considered degenerate by these regimes. It is an affront to classicism, which many dictators do their utmost to uphold. It is also an affront to popular taste, which many dictators try their utmost to exploit and control.

These are formal features that this essay has identified and, above all else, they signify the commitment that the genre has to freedom. Thelonious Monk stated that 'jazz is freedom' (Jazz Online 2014) Due to its improvisatory character, it has these associations. However, totalitarian regimes also clamp down on it for other reasons. Certain genres of music have certain formal components that make them particularly interesting. However, music has always had socio-economic implications. Musical genres are, for better or worse, often associated with certain demographics. Jazz in particular has always been associated with counter-cultures. The reason for this is that jazz is not only an expression of freedom for those who perform it, it also elicits a sense of freedom from its consumers. This is another reason why it has democratic credentials. This essay will now ascertain how jazz elicits these emotions by examining a passage from Jean-Paul Sartre's Nausea (1938). Sartre's definition of freedom stresses that individuals must make make their own rational and moral choices in a Godless universe bereft of meaning. Like jazz, this is a viewpoint that has chimed with counter-cultural movements. In his novel Nausea, the character Roquetin experiences pangs of nausea and throughout the majority of the novel feels maudlin. However, he enjoys moments of exultation when listening to jazz:

I am in the music. Globes of fire revolve in the mirrors; rings of smoke encircle them and spin around, veiling and unveiling the hard smile of the light. (…) That movement of my arm unfolded like a majestic theme, it glided along the song of the negress; it seemed to me that it was dancing (p. 38, 1938).

There is, more than anything, also a loss of control here. He loses control of his arm and it moves of its own accord. The music appears to elicit a sense of abandon. This is antithetical to totalitarian regimes, as they want to control every aspect of life, including the emotions of individuals. Interestingly, Roquetin is disdainful towards classical music. Classical music is much more rigid and formalised. Although totalitarian regimes do proscribe avant-garde classicism, they do their utmost to uphold pure classicism. The prime example of this is the Nazi's fetishisation of Richard Wagner. Roquetin writes: 'And the concert halls are overflowing with humiliated, injured people who close their eyes and try to turn their pale faces into receiving aerials. […] The mugs' (p. 246). Going by Roquetin's descriptions, jazz music also elicits freer emotions from its consumers. Classical music forces the listener to concentrate in a much more focused way. As Sartre writes, its listeners often have 'aerials' at the ready. As Sartre's novel demonstrates, jazz elicits a sense of abandon from the consumer. A soloist's improvisation signifies his individual freedom and the jazz aficionado also expresses his individual freedom when listening to a piece of jazz music. Such emotions generally reach this their apex with jazz. As the character in Nausea states, more composed music such as classical music does not elicit the same emotions from him.

These are the emotions that jazz often elicits from the listener. The character in Sartre's novel is a middle-class historian. However, in its origins jazz was not positively regarded and was considered primitive folk music (Philipp 2009). Like other forms of popular art, many people argued that jazz was not art at all. An article called 'Jazz Must Go' argued this case in 1921 (Philipp). Jazz was even considered a backward form of expression by middle-class black people, despite the virtuosity and creativity that was obviously present in the music. It was only until the civil rights movement that this demographic started to feel proud of jazz (Philipp). During this period, there were claims that the music was being appropriated by white people. There were claims that black musicians were being financially exploited. Malcolm X writes the following in his autobiography:

I've seen black musicians at a jam session – a whole lot of difference. The white musician can jam if he's got some sheet music in front of him... But that black musician, he picks up his horn and starts blowing some sounds that he never thought of before. He improvises, he creates (p. 78, 1965).

There is a sense that, starting from its origins, that jazz was music created by the oppressed. However, even though it was created by minority groups, it was played by both white and black musicians. From its beginnings, it could be played by any race, creed or class. As white people were part of a higher economic strata, they often exploited the musicians who created it. This reifies how jazz often goes underground and aligns itself with fringe causes. Once black citizens started to gain rights, jazz swiftly aligned itself with the civil rights movement. In the 1960s, several of the frontrunners of free jazz, such as John Coltrane and Charles Mingus, supported the movement (Wright-Mendoza 2015). Coltrane performed in Alabama during the height of the civil rights movement and shared Malcolm X's views on pan-Africanism (Wright-Mendoza). Meanwhile, Norman Granz, modern jazz impresario and founder of Verve Records, defied segregation laws by refusing to have 'coloured' and 'white' seats at his concerts (Wright-Mendoza). Jazz also aligns itself with progressive movements in democratic countries. Yet despite Malcolm X's claim that black musicians were more adept at this form of music, from its origins jazz had a universalist belief system. And yet, despite its formal complexity, it was lambasted for being tawdry.

It is ironic how jazz, for all its intrinsic sophistication, has been characterised as 'crude.' Yet many of its detractors – often censors and racists – characterise it as such. This essay will now turn to the history of its repression in totalitarian regimes. It will first evaluate its history in Nazi Germany before turning looking at its history in the USSR. Jazz was particularly popular in the Weimar republic. During the First World War, Germany was economically blockaded. Thus, Jazz became known in Germany around 1919. Rations were lifted, which led to a 'jazz rage.' This was before the advent of bebop, which was a more cerebral form of jazz. The genre at this point was centred around dance. It reached a peak between 1924 and 1928 and it was so popular that it led to a 'Jazz fashion.' Its reception in Germany was similar to its reception in the USA, with many German orchestras regarding it as noise. It was only until the advent of symphonic jazz that the musical cognoscenti recognised its merits. The world-wide economic depression of the late 1920s led to a declining interest in jazz (Benz).

Nonetheless, jazz continued to be an integral part of German culture. Nazi ideology harboured a strong dislike of the genre. This essay will look at how the Nazis came to classify the genre and why it repelled them on ideological and racial grounds. The Nazis defied jazz because it was a music of free expression, consent and equal rights. For this reason alone, it sought to regulate it. However, it also sought to taxonomise it because it was an Afro-American type of music with strong links to the Jewish community. In 1928, Bernd Polster wrote an article which attacked the genre: 'The fundamentals of jazz are the syncopation and rhythmic aspects of the Negro. Their modernisation is the work of New York Jews. […] So jazz is Negro music seen through the eyes of the Jews' (p. 9, 1989) From a purely formal perspective, its syncopation and dissonant nature were enough to guarantee its proscription. The Nazis railed against all forms of modernism and 'degenerate' art. Because jazz is associated with minority groups, this highlights how tolerant it is of diversity. This contravenes the social homogeneity that the Nazis wanted to impose on people and its desire to control every sphere of human interest. Although the Nazis were influenced by more suspect aspects of Enlightenment thought, such as eugenics, jazz espouses universalist Enlightenment values. Although nominally an Afro-American form of music, it is open to all people and cultures. It is universalist and cosmopolitan. This is opposed to the nationalism of the Nazis, as well as its belief in the inherent superiority of certain races. Of course, the prime reason why it is an affront to Nazi ideology is due to the latter reason.
As this essay has stated, the Nazis tried to classify all aspects of culture. Having examined why jazz rankled them on ideological grounds, this essay will now examine how they tried to censor it. All culture was subject was to Nazification. This process was called 'Gleischaltung' (co-ordination) and music had to conform to the 'Nazi ideal.' (Treuman 2015) Special emphasis was placed on the racial provenance of jazz and it was classed as 'Negermusik' – Negro Music (Benz). When the Nazis first seized power, jazz was occasionally played on the radio. By 1935, it was completely prohibited (Benz). Initially, the Nazis struggled to classify it because they struggled to define it in the first place. Goebbels, as minister of propaganda, called it 'American nigger kike music' (Transpontine 2008). This radical classification of the genre struggled to gain traction because swing music was especially popular. As such, the Nazis tried subtler ways to regulate jazz. The tenor saxophonist Trevor Skvorecky lived in Germany at the time and described some of the regulations in his novel The Bass Saxophone (1967). These were some of the regulations he recalls seeing enforced:

'Pieces in foxtrot rhythm (so-called swing) are not to exceed 20% of the repertoires of light orchestras and dance bands. […] In this so-called jazz type repertoire, preference is to be given to compositions in a major key and to lyrics expressing joy in life rather than Jewishly gloomy lyrics […] So-called jazz compositions may contain at most 10% syncopation; the remainder must consist of a natural legato movement devoid of the hysterical rhythmic reverses characteristic of the barbarian races and conductive to dark instincts alien to the German people (so-called riffs) […] All light orchestras and dance bands are advised to restrict the use of saxophones of all keys and to substitute for them the violin-cello, the viola or possibly a suitable folk instrument.' (p. 9, Skoverky 1967).

These regulations try their utmost to suppress the existence of swing without outlawing it completely. Existing features of jazz – such as syncopation and instruments such as saxophones – are quelled as much as possible. Although racial aspects are proscribed, these regulations try their utmost to uphold folkloric traditions. This emphasises their nationalism and their desire to root out interloping foreign cultures. It is also evidence as to how their far-reaching totalitarianism had to make concessions to popular taste.

Eventually, swing music was encouraged. This essay will now examine in what ways the Nazis used swing for propagandist purposes. Swing consisted of largely of set arrangements performed by a big band. This constricted improvisation, which was considered primitive and backward. Musicians such as Benny Goodman and Glenn Miller came to be tolerated by the Nazis for a short period. It was considered an acceptable 'white' replacement for atonal primitive noise. So much so that swing music was even played at the Berlin Olympics (Benz). However, swing music would enjoy its greatest resurgence during the Second World War. Because the Nazis concentrated more on war time efforts, they neglected their regulatory controls on culture and jazz reached a new peak between 1941 and 1945 (Benz). Many soldiers simply wanted to relax and listen to music after coming back from the turbulence of war. By 1944, Goebbels started to see jazz as a strong propagandistic tool (Benz) and he wanted to take 'swing to the enemy' (Dickson 2014). Goebbels wanted to re-write existing swing songs by replacing them with anti-Semitic, anti-Roosevelt and anti-Churchillian lyrics. This was done to 'instil fear into the heart of the enemy' (Dickson). Some of the songs included the following lyrics: 'Another war, another profit, another Jewish business trick. Another season, another reason for makin' whopee' (Dickson). Although several of these oldies were politically incorrect and salacious, none of them were especially anti-Semitic! Eventually, Goebbels recruited a band, with salaries paid for by the government. The groups were led by a singer called Ludz Templin, who was obsessed with American culture. When bombing raids failed, the Nazis turned to, in their own words, 'syncopated anti-Semitism.' The group was allowed to listen to American broadcasts, which had been made illegal in Germany. This allowed them to keep up to speed with trends in American music. They listened to American songs and 'rearranged them to suit Nazi dogma' (Dickson). Ultimately, the Nazis still despised jazz for all the reasons already propounded by this essay. They used it as an affront to the values of Western Europe and the US, by taking their culture and inverting it. In many ways, it was a subversion of values celebrating freedom, plurality, democracy, the individual, consent, etc. It took a type of music that actively celebrated such values and substituted it with lyrics that claimed that the whole of western society was controlled by greedy Jews, or other crude racial stereotypes.

This was the extent to which the Nazis endorsed jazz. This essay will now at look how they dealt with protesters who aligned themselves with it. As this essay has previously stated, in totalitarian regimes jazz usually aligns itself with the resistance. The Nazis were especially brutal and methodical in dealing with dissent. As this essay has explored, musical genres are often associated with certain demographics. This essay explored the impact that jazz has on the listener and it also pinpointed that jazz is associated with counter-cultures. In the Weimar republic jazz was the most popular form of music and it still remained in the popular consciousness, even by the 1940s. The Swing Kids was a youth movement that danced to swing records (Holocaust Memorial Day 2012). By 1936 the Nazis had closed all youth groups and forced all young people to join Hitler Youth. Once the Swing Kids started, they chose non-violent ways to defy the Nazis (Holocaust Memorial Day). They held dance festivals and played banned jazz and swing. In these festivals, they chanted 'swing heil' as opposed to 'heil Hitler' and openly mocked Nazi ideals, activities and symbols (Holocaust Memorial Day). They grew their hair long and adopted American and English fashions (Subculture). They were pacifists and did not want to take part in military service. Aside from this, the movement was largely apolitical and were more concerned with culture and fashion (Subculture). The Gestapo started to use violence to suppress their activities. As society was heavily regulated and streets were constantly patrolled, the events held by the movement were clandestine affairs. In 18 August 1941, there was a brutal police crackdown. Their leaders were deported to concentration camps. They cut their hair and some of the members were sent back home and were closely monitored. As a result, the movement became more politicised. They stoked up their political campaign by distributing anti-fascist propaganda. In January 1942, Himmler wrote to Heydrich urging him to clamp down on the leaders of the movement. They were sent to concentration camps, where they were subjected to beatings and forced labour. Clubs were raided and participants were sent off to camps (Subculture). By this point, the movement had been entirely depleted. It is worth noting that this was one of the few resistance movements that emerged – and it chose to align itself with jazz. Swing Kids was initially a non-political movement and they only became politicised once the Nazis started to repress them. They were free-spirited and obviously could not find a release for their energy in the heavily controlled Nazi regime. Obviously, the regime was heavily censorious and conformist. As the analysis of Nausea demonstrated, jazz tends to provoke a sense of exultation and release from the listener. Although it was not a political gesture, they chose to organise a movement precisely for this reason. However, the Nazis suppressed the movement for one of the many reasons that they suppressed jazz – it was an expression of individual freedom.

Ultimately, the Nazi assault on jazz proved to be unsuccessful. This was because their terminology was too lax. The Nazis were more successful in proscribing modern classical music and any type of music made by Jews. All of these musicians either fled Germany or were sent to gas chambers (Treuman). Such music was easier to define. Twelve-tone music, for example, was systematically organised. It also depended on state grants, whereas jazz was privately organised by individuals.

Of course, like Nazi Germany, the Soviet Union was a totalitarian society in that it sought to control all human enterprise. This essay will now turn to an assessment of jazz in the Soviet Union. Throughout the existence of the USSR, jazz stood alongside movements that campaigned for the democratic process. As stated earlier, jazz evinces strong Enlightenment values. Like Nazi Germany, the USSR pursued some of the most sinister currents in Enlightenment thought. However, some of the most benign currents, which it assiduously and dogmatically pursued, were its belief in equality and social justice. It would eventually systematically violate these core values. The values that jazz held – cosmopolitanism, universalism, freedom of expression and a belief in the individual – were actively proscribed by the Soviets. As well as disliking its individualistic streak, it strongly disliked its cosmopolitan streak. It meant that it was a form of capitalistic American culture that was seeping into their own. As such, the Soviets wanted art to conform to Soviet ideals. Apart from the era of the New Economic Plan, artists were forced to conform to state propaganda. An example of this would be the 'Socialist Realism' of the Stalinist period. The cultural policy of the 'Iron Fist' demanded that all culture follow this mantra, which was defined by Joseph Stalin (Lerski 2009). Most art, let alone jazz, was considered bourgeois. Vladmir Lenin made the following pronouncement about music: 'I can't listen to music too often. It affects your nerves, makes you want to say stupid things and stroke the heads of people who could create such beauty in this vile hell' (p. 217, Marcus 1989). This phrase is indicative of the strong distaste that the Soviets have towards 'beauty' and it is also indicative of the distaste they had towards the therapeutic and conciliatory aspects of music. It is almost as if the world is riven with economic inequality and to pretend otherwise is to engage in wishful thinking. The Soviets wanted all art to conform to their particular view of aesthetics, which was communitarian. Of course, improvisation is the core element behind jazz and, as this essay has established, it is a manifestation of individual freedom and creative expression, both of which were anathema to the Soviet regime (Vanhellemont 2009). Jazz was banned, ultimately, because it suggested freedom and the Soviets wanted to create a homogeneous society (Koktobel Jazz Party 2014). Initially, a debate raged as to whether jazz was symbolic of the black struggle against racial oppression in the USA, or whether it was merely an expression of 'bourgeois individualism' (Culshaw 2006). Maxim Gorky wrote an essay in 1928 called 'On the Music of the Gross,' where he claimed that jazz was a symbol of the seedy side of capitalism (Lee 1983). The latter argument won and the existence of jazz in the USSR was soon in jeopardy.

Because of its founding principles, the USSR did not take kindly to jazz. It would soon clamp down on it. Initially, jazz was popular and officially tolerated before Stalin's cultural repression. During Lenin's rule, the pianist Leopold Leopold Teplitsky was sent to the USA to study jazz techniques (Lee). Under Stalin's Iron Fist, laws were passed that prohibited anyone from playing or importing jazz records. After collectivisation in 1932 and the purges of 1936, jazz was rehabilitated. 'Fox and trot' lessons were offered to workers. Interest in jazz rose during WWII and, as in Nazi Germany, regulations were relaxed after officials diverted their attention to the war. During the Cold War, the Soviets revamped their propaganda campaign, with American music singled out as being 'part of a capitalist plot to take over the world.' In 1947, the Soviet Union started a large propaganda campaign called 'Anti-Cosmopolitanism.' This campaign argued that western culture had 'degenerated' and that the Soviet Union had nothing to learn from the west. Jazz bands fell foul of this campaign (Vanhellemont). Public use of the word jazz was forbidden, saxophones were confiscated and hundreds of musicians were sent to concentration camps. Jazz musicians formed bands in gulags (Lee). Like the Nazis, the Soviets soon sought to sanitise jazz and a 'Jazz Orchestra' was established. Its intention was to add symphonic music to the 'vulgar' pop music of the west. They tried to remove syncopation and improvisation. The music that this band played could scarcely be called jazz – it was, really, big band music (Vanhellemont). The attempt to make jazz more 'European' and 'Soviet,' via symphonic touches, was an attempt to make it more standardised and rigid. By shedding its improvisatory nature, it was shedding those features which made it a hallmark of 'bourgeois individualism.' Also, adding symphonic touches was also an attempt to make the music more 'Russian.' There is, after all, a strong history of Russian symphonic music and there is such a thing as a Russian 'style' in the classical tradition.

Through the remainder of its existence, the USSR remained sceptical of jazz. During the late 1950s and early 1960s, the most revolutionary style in the west was experimental or 'avant-garde' jazz. This essay has likened this style to anarchism. The Soviet tried to regulate jazz, by adding symphonic touches. Free jazz is impossible to regulate because there is no underlying structure. It epitomises all the elements that repulsed the Soviets and takes them to extremes. The swing bands that played Glenn Miller arrangements were state-sponsored, whereas the avant-garde was pushed underground. Experimental jazz was banned by the Soviets. In the 1980s, KGB agents would stealthily wander into venues playing such music and switch the electricity off (Culshaw). Additionally, free jazz, with its screechy timbres, exemplifies all of the aspects of modernism and 'degenerate art' that the Soviet and the Nazis sought to proscribe.

As the years wore on, the Soviet Union stagnated culturally and economically and some tame attempts were made at liberalising it. Despite some political obstacles, culture thrived in Poland (Lerski 2009). Only certain genres were allowed to flourish, especially those with folk rhythms and without syncopation. During the Stalinist period, jazz was outlawed altogether. Jazz went underground and could only be played at private gatherings. Whereas Polish filmmakers and composers had to conform to the dictates of Socialist Realism, jazz performers increasingly went underground and swapped records clandestinely (p. 6, Brooke 2015). Film, particularly of the serious variety, depends heavily on state funding. As such, it was a medium that was used to promote Socialist Realist propaganda. Likewise, classical music also depends on grants – as this essay demonstrated, the Nazis also found it a lot easier to regulate. Jazz, meanwhile, is usually organised privately and made at the discretion of a group of individuals. As such, it has parallels with the American amendment granting its citizens rights to free assembly. Jazz has a grassroots quality that is a lot more difficult to control. Indeed, in the Soviet Union free jazz thrived in remote areas far away from centralised bureaucracies, such as Lithuania (Mitropolsky 2011). Because of this grassroots, democratic and anti-authoritarian streak, Polish filmmakers often sought to integrate jazz into their films to criticise the regime (Brooke). In 1956, more liberal elements entered the Communist party in Poland (Lerski). A magazine was founded called Jazz, which issued daring polemics against the regime. In the late 1950s, musicians in the Soviet Union were exposed to American jazz, the music grew in sophistication and an avant-garde scene soon emerged. Momentum grew when Dave Brubeck visited the Soviet Union in the late 1950s (Lerki). Despite the cosmopolitan nature of jazz, the scene in Soviet Union could only become more technical by familiarising itself with the advances made in the USA. Jazz scenes soon evolved throughout the Soviet Union, but the more radical and experimental ones were usually ostracised.

The form of jazz resembles a liberal democracy. As Dave Brubeck identified, it allows for both free expression and consensual activity. Jazz also originated in a society that granted its citizens constitutional rights that prioritised free expression and free assembly. Just as anarchist societies have no rules or regulations of any sort, pure free jazz has no rules. This is why this essay likened free jazz to anarchism. Jazz usually aligns itself with progressive causes, such as the civil rights movement. For these reasons, totalitarian regimes try to root it out. It is centred around improvisation, which is contrary to the pathological control that totalitarian regimes try to exert. For these reasons, they often ban jazz altogether, with the Soviet Union even banning the saxophone. Jazz has always been at the forefront of new musical developments. As such, it also rankles these regimes, who condemn it as 'degenerate.' These regimes often try to uphold pure classicism, with the Soviets delineating it as 'Socialist Realism.' Even when some laws and economic policies were eventually liberalised, the Soviets still banned experimental jazz, which has usually been at the forefront of the 'avant-garde.' As an analysis of Nausea demonstrated, Jazz also provokes a sense of release and abandon from the listener. This is why it also aligns itself with the counter-culture, which rankles totalitarian regimes because they want to keep society controlled and homogenised. The 'Swing Kids' in Nazi Germany exemplifies this. Jazz was created by black musicians at a time of racial inequality and it was created in the midst of oppression. Malcolm X claimed that white business people often exploited them financially. Like blues, it has been associated with an oppressed underclass. It has been continuously associated with these classes, even in Nazi Germany and the USSR. This was one reason why the Soviets briefly considered approving it, but they soon discarded this idea. Because it is associated with Afro-Americans, and because it has connections with the Jewish intelligentsia, it was proscribed by the Nazis. Although it was created by a racial underclass, jazz has a universalist and cosmopolitan belief system and can be played by anyone in any place. This riled both the Nazis and the USSR, since the former was a nationalistic creed and the latter launched a campaign against 'cosmopolitanism' and economic globalisation. These are the reasons why jazz is intrinsically democratic and these are the reasons why totalitarian belief systems root it out.

Works Cited

Benson, Bruce (2009) The Improvisation of Musical Dialogue: A Phenomenology of Music. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Benz, Jill. (1998) Jazz in Germany 1919 – 1945. [Online] Return 2 Style. Available from: http://www.return2style.de/swingaring/amijazz3.htm.

Brooke, Michael. (2015) Sounds of the Underground. Sight and Sound. January, p. 6.

Culshaw, Peter. (2006) How Jazz Survived the Soviets. [Online] The Daily Telegraph. Available from: http://www.telegraph.co.uk/culture/music/rockandjazzmusic/3656544/How-jazz-survived-the-Soviets.html

Dickson, Andrew. (2014) Spring Time for Hitler: How the Nazis Fought the Allies with Jazz. [Online] The Guardian. Available from: https://www.theguardian.com/stage/2014/sep/16/propaganda-swing-nazi-jazz

Ellington, Duke. (1973) Music is my Mistress. New York: Da Capo Press.

Hobbes, Thomas. (1651) Leviathan. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Lee, Andrea. (1983) An American Sound. [Online] The New York Times. Available from: http://www.nytimes.com/1983/04/17/books/an-american-sound.html

Lerski, Cezary. (2009) Polish Jazz – Freedom at Last. [Online] Culture.Pl. Available from: http://culture.pl/en/article/polish-jazz-freedom-at-last

Marcus, Greil. (2001) Lipstick Traces: A Secret History of the Twentieth Century. London: Faber and Faber.

Meridith, Bill. (2007) Latin Jazz: The Jazz Tinge. [Online.] Jazz Times. Available from: https://jazztimes.com/features/latin-jazz-the-latin-tinge/

Mitropolsky, Mikhail. (2011) Red & Hot: The Fate of New Jazz in Russia. [Online] Furious. Available from: http://www.furious.com/perfect/russianjazz.html

Monk, Thelonious. (2014). Great Quotes – Thelonious Monk. [Online] Jazz Online. Available from: https://jazzonline.gr/jazznews/others/item/756-great-quotes-%E2%80%94-thelonious-monk.html?format=html&lang=en

Philipp, Zola. (2015) The Social Effects of Jazz. In York Review. 6.1

Polster, Bernd. (1998) Swing Heil – Jazz im Nationalsozialismus. Berlin: Transit Buchverlag.

Sartre, Jean-Paul. (1938) Nausea. London: Penguin.

Skvorecky, Joseph. (1967). The Bass Saxophone. London: ECCO Press.

Thomson, Marcus. (2014) Wesley Watkins Uses Jazz to Teach Democracy. [Online] Oakland Magazine. Available from: http://www.oaklandmagazine.com/Oakland-Magazine/September-2014/Wesley-Watkins-Uses-Jazz-to-Teach-Democracy/

Transpontine. (2008) Nazis and Jazz. [Online] History is Made at Night. Available from: http://history-is-made-at-night.blogspot.co.uk/2008/01/nazis-and-jazz.html

Treuman, C. N. (2015) Music in Nazi Germany. [Online] The History Learning Site. Available from: http://www.historylearningsite.co.uk/nazi-germany/music-in-nazi-germany/ Available from: http://moadoph.gov.au/democracy/defining-democracy/

Unknown author (2013). Defining Democracy. [Online] Museum of Australian Democracy.

Unknown author. (2012). Case Study: Swing Kids. [Online] Holocaust Memorial Day 2012. Available from: https://web.archive.org/web/20110817231332/http://hmd.org.uk/resources/education/case-study-swing-kids

Unknown author. (2017) Swing Kids. [Online] Subculture. Available from: http://subcultureslist.com/swing-kids/

Unknown author. (2007) Jazz Music in the Soviet Union. [Online] Master and Margarita. Available from: http://www.masterandmargarita.eu/en/09context/muziekjazz.html

Unknown author. (2014) Communism vs. Jazz. [Online] Koktebel Jazz Party. Available from: http://en.koktebel-jazz.ru/about_jazz/20140501/1013175535.html

Wright-Mendoza, Jessie. (2015) How Jazz and the Civil Rights Movement Came Together in the 1960s. [Online] Blank on Blank. Available from: http://blankonblank.org/2015/05/jazz-civil-rights-movement/

X, Malcolm. (1965) The Autobiography of Malcolm X. London: Penguin.

Yaroslansky, E. (1937) History of Anarchism in Russia. New York: International Publishers of New York.