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

141–150 of 252 posts

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

#141

Post by hyp0 »

scrollaway wrote: post #49
ehmorris wrote: post #7

If you guys know a lot about the period, I just transcribed it on Genius and I'd appreciate some help annotating it: http://history.genius.com/George-orwell-review-of-mein-kampf... (full disclosure I work at Genius.)

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.

NYT used to do similar - workaround is to adblock the specific JS script, or just disable JS altogether when on that site.

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

#142

Post by drjesusphd »

lutusp wrote: post #135
Bootvis wrote: post #132

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

So are you saying that when climate change happens, if it's as bad as many scientists fear, then modern US conservatives will take up the mantle of "largest genocide in history"?

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

#143

Post by drjesusphd »

lutusp wrote: post #135
Bootvis wrote: post #132

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

> but in politics the outcome is all that matters, not the intent

And where is this written as Canon?

Politics is also performed with imperfect predictions of the future. If policies pursued in good faith result in the death of millions, the people implementing them are not as responsible as those for whom death is the policy.

Now, if their intent was to starve the masses to further their goals, you would have a point.

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

#144

Post by lutusp »

drjesusphd wrote: post #143
lutusp wrote: post #135

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

> but in politics the outcome is all that matters, not the intent And where is this written as Canon? Politics is also performed with imperfect predictions of the future. If policies pursued in good faith result in the death of millions, the people implementing them are not as responsible as those for whom death is the policy. Now, if their intent was to starve the masses to further their goals, you would have a poin…

>> but in politics the outcome is all that matters, not the intent

> And where is this written as Canon?

In the minds of the survivors.

> If policies pursued in good faith result in the death of millions, the people implementing them are not as responsible as those for whom death is the policy.

History doesn't see it that way. People don't see it that way. Hitler and Stalin are equally reviled, even though Hitler's genocide was intentional and Stalin's was a side effect of "good intentions" -- a Communist revolution.

> Now, if their intent was to starve the masses to further their goals, you would have a point.

Like Mao and Pol Pot? Both were able to explain their programs as "for the good of the people", and both pursued their programs long after their effect was perfectly clear.

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

#145

Post by lutusp »

drjesusphd wrote: post #142
lutusp wrote: post #135

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

So are you saying that when climate change happens, if it's as bad as many scientists fear, then modern US conservatives will take up the mantle of "largest genocide in history"?

I doubt they'll volunteer for that label. Maybe they'll be viewed as the Catholic Church is now viewed with respect to the trial of Galileo in 1633.

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

#146

Post by nl »

adventured wrote: post #81
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…

It's amazing to me that, in all likelihood, had Hitler decided to call it quits earlier, the world would have sat back and allowed him to keep some of his conquests (eg Denmark, Norway or Belgium). Today it would be unthinkable to allow a large nation to invade Belgium with no counter international military response.

Given the tensions between the Walloons and Flemings I can imagine circumstances in which an invasion could occur.

It's pretty unlikely, but there are numerous examples of a larger power intervening in another country in support of a particular ethnic group.

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

#147

Post by cmdkeen »

gaius wrote: post #134
mtdewcmu wrote: post #40

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

He did fight Great Britain alone (well, the Dominions as well) for over a year once France was occupied and before the invasion of Russia. Britain couldn't have defeated Germany on her own but she also wasn't going to be defeated. Even leaving aside the Battle of Britain Germany had no way to invade the UK - some of the plans to defeat Operation Sealion (the planned German invasion) were pretty effective, like setting the English channel on fire.

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

#148

Post by rangibaby »

paul_f wrote: post #24

This is a great reminder that at one time Hitler was not the caricature of pure evil that he is now. He was real and nobody knew what the future held. Amazing snapshot into that time.

http://www.rotten.com/library/history/nazi/

The mistake often made in describing the crimes and actions of the Third Reich is to somehow dehumanize them, turn all the players into demons and monsters, the same techniques used by the Nazis themselves to target and exterminate Jews and other undesirables. To dehumanize Nazis is to turn them into archetypes as opposed to functioning humans; it sets us up to be "surprised" again when traits of the Nazis show up elsewhere, in other places, at a lessened level but with the same misguided goals and logic behind them.

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

#149

Post by josephlord »

vixen99 wrote: post #124
Intermernet wrote: post #99

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I agree with you that this argument has little to do with conservatism vs. liberalism, but to state "Conservatism doesn't send people to concentration camps" is ignoring some glaring realities, unless you want to be really selective about the definition of a concentration camp. Is Gitmo a concentration camp? How about Manus Island? Azouli Prison? These "detention centers" are full of people put there by both conserva…

You should detail the logical relationships between theses and people acting on them because -isms don't send anyone anywhere, people do. To say they do without offering a road map is loose thinking.

Stalinism???

More seriously the claim was xxxism doesn't send people to concentration camps, this was responded to by counter examples. This is a perfectly reasonable response and disproof of the claim that xxxism doesn't send people to concentration camps. It was not a standalone claim that xxxism leads to concentration camps which may need to be supported as you wish.

I know the ideology wasn't xxx but exactly what it is isn't important to the point I was making.

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

#150

Post by reitanqild »

lisper wrote: post #86
orionblastar wrote: post #71

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Correct me if I am wrong, but conservatism doesn't have the social programs that Hitler had. Conservatism doesn't send people to concentration camps and then mass murder them. I think this thread has reached a Godwin level. Both may be right-wing but: Hitler supported abortion, gun control, big government, and other things the conservatives claim to be against. To simply say conservatives = Hitler because both are ri…

> Conservatism doesn't send people to concentration camps Doesn't it? http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Guantanamo_Bay_detention_camp http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Extraordinary_rendition http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gaza_Strip http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Incarceration_in_the_United_Sta...

Last I checked Gaza were nothing like a concentration camp, and calling it that is an offense to anyone who experienced any real one.

When did foreign journalists have access to ccs? When did ccs have markets in broad daylight? Where is forced labour? (I didn't mention starvation etc because those ones are contested but still.)

I literally don't like to bring this up as it isually brings downvotes but letting people frame something this important, -no.

Post reply on HN