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

George Orwell’s 1940 Review of Mein Kampf

gutenberg.net.au

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

251–260 of 600 posts

Re: George Orwell’s 1940 Review of Mein Kampf

#251

Post by etempleton »

ProjectArcturis wrote: post #202
dcolkitt wrote: post #32

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The counterpoint is that regional support for the Nazis generally indicates the opposite. Their weakest electoral performance was in the West and South, which generally was the wealthiest and most liberal part of Germany. By contrast their base of support was the Prussian hinterlands which was already the most militaristic part of the country to begin with, as well as having a weak region economy. I think it’s under-…

Yes, the Nazi appeal was largely a response to the absolutely crazy things that had happened to Germany between 1914 and 1933. Losing a world war, and all the death and humiliation and privation that entails (The winter of 1916 was known as the Turnip Winter, because of food shortages, and that was barely halfway through the war!). Hyperinflation, where an egg might cost a billion marks. Then a Depression! And all th…

It is always a poor choice to humiliate your opponent after defeating them. You either completely annihilate them or help them back up.

Re: George Orwell’s 1940 Review of Mein Kampf

#253

Post by mbg721 »

nabla9 wrote: post #199
mbg721 wrote: post #181

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Was Hitler particularly good at that, or did he just have a desperate audience? The usual downfall that people point to with autocratic governments is that their leaders think they're in touch with their citizens but are really a million miles away.

He was at least good at it. His chief propagandist Joseph Goebbels was really good. Goebbels made propaganda that was way subtler than Hitlers. Nazi cinema created expensive movies under Goebbels until the end. Nobody sees them today but they are very subtle and clever in a way they build a sentiment. Not at all like the short clips they show you. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kolberg_(film) https://en.wikipedia.org/…

I appreciate the added perspective; the Anglospheric view is often either "Look at those monsters, we would never do that" or "If only the German language had the concept of humor, they wouldn't have taken that guy seriously."

Re: George Orwell’s 1940 Review of Mein Kampf

#254

Post by scarier »

landryraccoon wrote: post #134
sillysaurusx wrote: post #112

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Eh, war is simply fun. It’s appealing to males in particular, and our testosterone tends to lock in the intoxication. There’s a reason that Battlefield is one of the most successful gaming franchises of all time, and that it’s very hard to find any videogame that doesn’t involve some kind of warfare. (There are dozens of wonderful counter examples: Minecraft, celeste, undertale, sim city, stardew valley. But for ever…

> Eh, war is simply fun. Well an idealized version of war that’s designed to glorify it could be fun. Is actual war fun? Is the Ukraine war fun? I doubt it’s fun for any of the participants. It’s not fun for Ukrainian soldiers, it’s not fun for Russian soldiers, and it’s not fun for Russian or Ukrainian civilians. Maybe it’s fun for some onlookers that like to cheer and spectate, but I would argue that speaks more to…

Experiences in war vary greatly, and feelings about them are complicated and conflicted. I've met many people who genuinely seemed to enjoy it. This article nails it: https://www.esquire.com/news-politics/news/a28718/why-men-lo...

Re: George Orwell’s 1940 Review of Mein Kampf

#255

Post by Andrew_nenakhov »

euroderf wrote: post #26
superb-owl wrote: post #9

> Hitler, because in his own joyless mind he feels it with exceptional strength, knows that human beings don’t only want comfort, safety, short working-hours, hygiene, birth-control and, in general, common sense; they also, at least intermittently, want struggle and self-sacrifice This fact has been the downfall of every utopian ideology, and ignoring creates a vacuum that fascist regimes readily fill. I wonder what…

By all means check out the film The Tenth Victim.

I've actually seen it, and even read Shekley stories it was based on. How is it relevant?

Re: George Orwell’s 1940 Review of Mein Kampf

#256

Post by chriscappuccio »

alex_sf wrote: post #60
tomkat0789 wrote: post #30

I think he highlights some fundamentally toxic aspects of human nature with this bit: “The Socialist who finds his children playing with soldiers is usually upset, but he is never able to think of a substitute for the tin soldiers; tin pacifists somehow won’t do.” The engineer in me wishes we could substitute the soldiers with construction workers or something, but I can’t deny enjoying war games growing up. These da…

I don't understand why that's toxic. Striving, struggle, and violence are critical for any living thing to survive. Short of reaching post-scarcity, this can't change. If we define toxic as harmful, then violence is the opposite. It's the only reason we have civilization.

Post-scarcity is not (ever going to be) reality

Re: George Orwell’s 1940 Review of Mein Kampf

#257

Post by notch656a »

scarier wrote: post #254
landryraccoon wrote: post #134

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Eh, war is simply fun. Well an idealized version of war that’s designed to glorify it could be fun. Is actual war fun? Is the Ukraine war fun? I doubt it’s fun for any of the participants. It’s not fun for Ukrainian soldiers, it’s not fun for Russian soldiers, and it’s not fun for Russian or Ukrainian civilians. Maybe it’s fun for some onlookers that like to cheer and spectate, but I would argue that speaks more to…

Experiences in war vary greatly, and feelings about them are complicated and conflicted. I've met many people who genuinely seemed to enjoy it. This article nails it: https://www.esquire.com/news-politics/news/a28718/why-men-lo...

"There is no hunting like the hunting of man, and those who have hunted armed men long enough and liked it, never care for anything else thereafter." --Hemingway

Re: George Orwell’s 1940 Review of Mein Kampf

#258

Post by watwut »

zozbot234 wrote: post #39
tomkat0789 wrote: post #30

I think he highlights some fundamentally toxic aspects of human nature with this bit: “The Socialist who finds his children playing with soldiers is usually upset, but he is never able to think of a substitute for the tin soldiers; tin pacifists somehow won’t do.” The engineer in me wishes we could substitute the soldiers with construction workers or something, but I can’t deny enjoying war games growing up. These da…

Kids just don't know any better. I would imagine that those who actually spent some of their childhood in a war zone would have a very different perspective. What's toxic is when grownups end up glorifying war or thinking of it as a solution to hard problems.

The people who started and promoted and wanted WWI experienced WWI - either as soldiers or as kids. The young ones glorified army and wanted to prove themselves.

Wars don't make people peaceful. Instead, they normalize violence, hate and desperation.

Re: George Orwell’s 1940 Review of Mein Kampf

#259

Post by Andrew_nenakhov »

gvv wrote: post #239
rr808 wrote: post #68

Does anyone know why Hitler hated Stalin and communism so much? The article alludes to how Russia was always the main target, and he was friends with industrialists, but I've never seen a good reason why.

He probably saw what happened during the Holodomor

He'd either not care, or actively cheer for it. More Lebensraum!!
Post reply on HN