I started Cohn’s book with a particular interest that grew once I read in the index the name of some movements described. This reading was especially fascinating for me because I found in it a lot of information about historical events that I have yet encountered. My disposition was very favorable because I felt involved in such stories. The very reason for my attitude is that my favorite novel is set in the period in which movements described by Cohn emerged. Reading again about Thomas Muntzer and Anabaptists, in particular, brought me back to strong emotions that I felt during the reading of Q.
However, when I read the Cohn’s conclusions, I felt a bit disturbed because actually I do not agree with the author. Even if I consider quite accurate the description of the different movements, the author’s attempt to compare both Nazism and Communism to these movements does not convince me. It’s my attitude, because of my studies and of my cultural background, to separate these historical experiences in their original means if not in their conclusion. The fact is that I am quite sure that Nazism from the beginning had no real idea of emancipation for all mankind, and this emerges clear in its actual implementation. On the other hand, the basic idea of Communism that is very elder than its more known theorist, Marx, involves a form of emancipation without an Elect population. For what I know, the idea of a single social class that guides humanity beyond Capitalism is historically circumscribed and it is not intended anyway to exclude someone from the world that have to come.