Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Who Goes Nazi? (1941)

harpers.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

11–20 of 132 posts

Re: Who Goes Nazi? (1941)

#11

Post by seiji »

batz wrote: post #5

The essence of any totalitarian strategy is to seize some resources, invent a necessarily preposterous myth, then in exchange for demonstrating belief in the myth, re-distribute the resources arbitrarily among a minority of people who are easily replaceable and know it. The secret is to then reward people from the majority for denouncing and replacing members of the minority for not being zealous enough, so that they…

seize some resources, invent a necessarily preposterous myth, then in exchange for demonstrating belief in the myth, re-distribute the resources arbitrarily among a minority of people who are easily replaceable and know it.

Startups?

how these assholes seize power. It's through charismatic promises of future rewards

Startups.

Re: Who Goes Nazi? (1941)

#13

Post by arethuza »

tcbawo wrote: post #9

This article is especially interesting, given it was written before the the US entered the war and before the full extent of Nazi atrocities was known. I'm reminded of C.S Lewis's speech about the Inner Ring (1944): http://www.mit.edu/~hooman/ideas/the_inner_ring.htm

I wonder what would have happened if Hitler (who apparently didn't give the matter much thought) hadn't declared war on the US?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/German_declaration_of_war_agai...

Re: Who Goes Nazi? (1941)

#14

Post by wildmusings »

cstross wrote: post #8
batz wrote: post #5

The essence of any totalitarian strategy is to seize some resources, invent a necessarily preposterous myth, then in exchange for demonstrating belief in the myth, re-distribute the resources arbitrarily among a minority of people who are easily replaceable and know it. The secret is to then reward people from the majority for denouncing and replacing members of the minority for not being zealous enough, so that they…

how feminism annexed academia ... why Occupy failed but why BLM could grow exponentially No axes to grind here, hmm? (Hint: there's a huge difference between civil rights movements -- those demanding equal respect -- and the fulminations of the privileged who think life's a zero-sum game and anyone else making up ground means that they're losing out. Alas, you don't seem to get it.)

Typically it's the critiques of liberalism and capitalism that treat life as zero-sum. The capitalist defense of inequality is that the world isn't zero-sum. Because people can do extraordinarily well for themselves by creating value for others, they do, and we are all better off.

The 60s civil rights movement was a classically liberal movement. They were demanding equal treatment under the law. "Civil rights" movements today are usually asking for special treatment. (edit: Just to clarify, I'm referring specifically to the US for this last point)

Re: Who Goes Nazi? (1941)

#15

Post by wildmusings »

seiji wrote: post #11
batz wrote: post #5

The essence of any totalitarian strategy is to seize some resources, invent a necessarily preposterous myth, then in exchange for demonstrating belief in the myth, re-distribute the resources arbitrarily among a minority of people who are easily replaceable and know it. The secret is to then reward people from the majority for denouncing and replacing members of the minority for not being zealous enough, so that they…

seize some resources, invent a necessarily preposterous myth, then in exchange for demonstrating belief in the myth, re-distribute the resources arbitrarily among a minority of people who are easily replaceable and know it. Startups? how these assholes seize power. It's through charismatic promises of future rewards Startups.

Yes, but the difference is that a business's success requires continual voluntary mutually-beneficial exchanges (aka sales). And before they make a profit, they're only risking money that's theirs to risk. None of these things are true about politics, which is fundamentally about control of coercive power.

Re: Who Goes Nazi? (1941)

#16

Post by neffy »

arethuza wrote: post #13
tcbawo wrote: post #9

This article is especially interesting, given it was written before the the US entered the war and before the full extent of Nazi atrocities was known. I'm reminded of C.S Lewis's speech about the Inner Ring (1944): http://www.mit.edu/~hooman/ideas/the_inner_ring.htm

I wonder what would have happened if Hitler (who apparently didn't give the matter much thought) hadn't declared war on the US? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/German_declaration_of_war_agai...

The US would have been spared the embarrassment of not having declared war on the Nazi's, when they did eventually enter the war a few months later. The US was ramping up to enter WW2 long before the end of 1941.

Re: Who Goes Nazi? (1941)

#17

Post by wildmusings »

tdeck wrote: post #6
batz wrote: post #5

The essence of any totalitarian strategy is to seize some resources, invent a necessarily preposterous myth, then in exchange for demonstrating belief in the myth, re-distribute the resources arbitrarily among a minority of people who are easily replaceable and know it. The secret is to then reward people from the majority for denouncing and replacing members of the minority for not being zealous enough, so that they…

What would the resource be in the case of BLM?

The myth is easier to identify: that there's campaign of murder by police officers targeting blacks. It's part of the broader myth that minorities in the US are being kept down by the powers that be.

When you see it as just part of the broader identity politics movement, it's easier to identify the resources: moral vindication and reassigned blame for their troubles, handouts from other people's pockets, and discrimination against the perceived oppressor group ("affirmative action").

Re: Who Goes Nazi? (1941)

#18

Post by Stratoscope »

batz wrote: post #5

The essence of any totalitarian strategy is to seize some resources, invent a necessarily preposterous myth, then in exchange for demonstrating belief in the myth, re-distribute the resources arbitrarily among a minority of people who are easily replaceable and know it. The secret is to then reward people from the majority for denouncing and replacing members of the minority for not being zealous enough, so that they…

I heard a vivid example of one of those myths on the radio about 12 years ago. I was listening to shortwave radio in my car on the way to work and happened to tune in the news from the Voice of Korea, North Korea's English language service beamed to North America.

I remember the newsman's exact words to this day:

"Scientists are studying the brain of Respected Comrade Kim Jong-il, because the Respected Comrade is capable of feats of mental power beyond the ability of ordinary human beings."

Re: Who Goes Nazi? (1941)

#19

Post by lumberjack »

I think to better understand why people are attracted to Fascism it is better to read about the rise of Mussolini than about the rise of Nazism.

Mussolini essentially was going to make Italy "great again". He was a former socialist but not an internationalist. While communists promised economic justice, fascists promised a better prouder more powerful nation.

Today you expect wealthy people to be economically liberal but in those days many were attracted by the premises of fascism.

There also this classic: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ICng-KRxXJ8

A teacher creates a fascist movement to show his students how they can be duped into one.

Re: Who Goes Nazi? (1941)

#20

Post by woodruffw »

Very thought provoking.

In spirit, it reminds me of The True Believer [1], published about a decade later. Take Nazism and replace it with any other movement of discontent (just or unjust), and you have a general critique of mass movements a la Hoffer.

[1]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_True_Believer

Post reply on HN