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

George Orwell's review of Mein Kampf (1940)

docs.google.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

131–140 of 252 posts

Re: George Orwell's review of Mein Kampf (1940)

#131

Post by gaius »

chatmasta wrote: post #63
krick wrote: post #48

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Bearing in mind that this "caricature of pure evil" image is basically result of propaganda of the winning side of WW2 it's only natural that it wasn't the case before he lost his war. Far more interesting about this article is the fact how much it was known about what the future held. Sure, Orwell might be somewhat above average in questions of history and politics, but still I'd say it is pretty surprising that he…

> "Bearing in mind that this "caricature of pure evil" image is basically result of propaganda of the winning side of WW2" I'm not sure that any propaganda is necessary to convince 99.9% of people that the instigator of the largest genocide in human history is, in fact, a "caricature of pure evil."

Consider that modern day fascists are (rightly) reviled by modern mainstream society, yet communists are tolerated. There are even communists being voted into various parliaments and no-one bats an eyelid. Aren't you curious as to why this is, given Stalin, Mao, Pol Pot, the Kim family, even Castro?

Re: George Orwell's review of Mein Kampf (1940)

#132

Post by Bootvis »

andr3w321 wrote: post #110
Russell91 wrote: post #84

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yea, Mao Ze Dong wasn't the same thing though. It's estimated as many as 60 million people died in China from hunger. Many others died from the civil war (Cultural Revolution). There may have been some genocide but the term doesn't apply as well as in Germany/Russia.

Yes but people were dying from hunger as a direct result of the policies that Mao implemented http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Great_Chinese_Famine He is largely responsible for these deaths even if he didn't personally exterminate them.

But presumably there was a different intent behind Mao's actions. It seems to me that the goal of central planning was prosperity, not death.

Re: George Orwell's review of Mein Kampf (1940)

#133

Post by mikeyouse »

everydaypanos wrote: post #130
mikeyouse wrote: post #59

From a timing perspective, this was published in March, 1940. Some other noteworthy events with their dates: * Germany invades Poland (September, 1939) * Britain, France, Canada, Australia and New Zealand declare war on Germany (September, 1939) * Soviets invade Poland, which is later split (October, 1939) * Nazis begin euthanasia of ill and disabled in Germany (October, 1939) * Soviets attack Finland (November, 1939…

How did Italians take Greece? This was a great moment for the West because Mussolini invaded Greece from the North and he was repelled. The first moment where the Axis forces showed weakness-it showed that Hitler's forces where just humans and that resistance is possible-organized well it could mean victory.

Very good point, I was merely glancing at a timeline and listing the interesting bits and I must've changed some wording with Greece. The Italians definitely didn't "take" Greece, but they had invaded by October 1940 and were subsequently repelled a few months later.

Hitler actually blamed Mussolini's "idiotic campaign in Greece" for his failure in securing major victories against the USSR, so we definitely have much to thank the Greek army for.

Re: George Orwell's review of Mein Kampf (1940)

#134

Post by gaius »

mtdewcmu wrote: post #40
PythonicAlpha wrote: post #9

"Those who cannot learn from history are doomed to repeat it." George Santayana Somebody asked, why this document is so high up-voted. I would say, we can't up-vote it enough, when we have the chance to learn from history and especially from the dark sides of history and from people like George Orwell. Chance is very big, that a new era of darkness could fall on humanity, if we don't stop it at the right time (and no…

I actually don't foresee another Hitler rising, because the first Hitler ruined it for all future Hitlers. I think what was most damning was the manner in which Germany lost the war. If I thought it was mainly Hitler's values and racism, I would not feel as safe. Hitler bet big on war and he lost in spectacular fashion. I think he forever associated that style of leadership with catastrophe.

If Hitler had managed to fight England and Russia separately, he could easily have won. That's the true lesson here.

Re: George Orwell's review of Mein Kampf (1940)

#135

Post by lutusp »

Bootvis wrote: post #132
andr3w321 wrote: post #110

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yes but people were dying from hunger as a direct result of the policies that Mao implemented http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Great_Chinese_Famine He is largely responsible for these deaths even if he didn't personally exterminate them.

But presumably there was a different intent behind Mao's actions. It seems to me that the goal of central planning was prosperity, not death.

Yes, true, but in politics the outcome is all that matters, not the intent. As has often been said, the road to hell is paved with good intentions.

Re: George Orwell's review of Mein Kampf (1940)

#136

Post by gaius »

maaku wrote: post #33
Theodores wrote: post #19

Has anyone here actually read Mein Kampf? Doing so is probably banned in Germany and I am not sure what there is other than kiddie porn or some al-qaeda training manual that you totally would not want in your browsing history. There could come a time when no living person has read Mein Kampf and nobody would know first hand why it is wrong.

Yes, I have (yay protection of free speech!) and it is dreadfully boring. It is amazing though how it pretty much spells out exactly what he would end up doing once he took power, in all the horrid detail, and yet some politicians of the time believed that simple appeasement would work... As someone else here said, the lesson is that crazy people sometimes mean what they say, even when it sounds totally crazy.

It's like here in the UK millions of people voted Lib Dem without reading the Orange Book, then were surprised that they're actually to the right of the Tories.

Re: George Orwell's review of Mein Kampf (1940)

#137

Post by anon4 »

ehmorris wrote: post #70
scrollaway wrote: post #49

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Unrelated to the matter but since you work at genius, can you talk to the geniuses (sic) who thought that hijacking text highlight was a good idea? A lot of us speed readers use text highlight to read along. It is easier on the eyes and the brain. So please don't hijack it.

For technical reasons: we want to allow users to annotate arbitrary segments of text, so what better (or other) way is there than adding an annotate button to highlighted text? For philosophical reasons: genius is about annotating text, and as a result, about close reading. We'd rather optimize for a close read than a speed read.

Maybe not exactly rule 1 of web design (also applies to ui design in general), but pretty close:

DO NOT fuck with basic functionality.

Re: George Orwell's review of Mein Kampf (1940)

#140

Post by reitzensteinm »

mikeyouse wrote: post #59

From a timing perspective, this was published in March, 1940. Some other noteworthy events with their dates: * Germany invades Poland (September, 1939) * Britain, France, Canada, Australia and New Zealand declare war on Germany (September, 1939) * Soviets invade Poland, which is later split (October, 1939) * Nazis begin euthanasia of ill and disabled in Germany (October, 1939) * Soviets attack Finland (November, 1939…

The "euthanasia" actually began in September 1939. October was when the law was passed, which was backdated to September 1st.

This isn't just to be pedantic, I'm currently reading The Third Reich trilogy by Richard J. Evans, and this is an instance of the Nazi emphasis on appearing as though they had a legal basis for their actions, even well into the dictatorship. It's one of the most bizarre parts of the story to me.

The euthanasia was attempted to be done in secret, so under what circumstance the backdating (or even the existence) of the law could possibly have been useful is beyond me. Under Nazi victory, those involved were safe from prosecution, and in case of defeat, the law could not have saved them.

It's like something straight out of the movie Brazil, though not being fiction and having resulted in the death and suffering of countless real people makes not possible to enjoy the insanity of the situation.

I highly recommend the books, though I don't exactly have a weak stomach, and many parts were quite difficult for me. It reminded me quite a bit of Robert Fisk's The Great War for Civilisation, which was also extremely long and dense with suffering.

Post reply on HN