George Orwell's review of Mein Kampf (1940) • Hacker News Board

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

#201

Post by [deleted] » Sun, Aug 17, 2014, 4:46 PM UTC

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.

[deleted]

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

#202

Post by ajuc » Sun, Aug 17, 2014, 4:56 PM UTC

hbbio wrote: post #138

waps wrote: post #108

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Well they pretty much got Crimea, don't they ?

Crimea also has been historically part of Russia/USSR until 1954. (I'm French, just stating)

Kalinigrad was Prussian. L'viv and Vilnius were Polish. Szczecin and Wrocław were German. That was only 80 years ago. 100 years ago there was no Poland, and no USSR.

These cities changed hands every 50 years or less for last few centuries. It's useless to argue about these things.

Basically whole C&E Europe is a huge barrel of powder. If you start to do this stuff (this is MINE because history) the powder will explode.

That's why nobody (except Russia) do it. Even the worst nationalists in Poland don't actually want L'viv or Vilnius. Even though L'viv was a very important city for Polish culture and still 80 years later there are songs about how great a city Lwów was (French wouldn't understand, you only have one city ;) ). It was Polish San Francisco, and we don't want it back.

That's because we know that we are only safe because we're past the WW2 era of petty nationalisms. We've learnt our lesson.

Putin doesn't care - he knows EU is not united enough to react, so he basically replays Hitler 1938 strategy and he goes away with it. French traditionally don't want to die for Danzig(Donetsk this time), they even sell weapons to Putin. Great job, guys.

It's very frustrating to see it in real life and see how useless and clueless western politicians are. Like nobody learnt anything from WW2.

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

#203

Post by randomafrican » Sun, Aug 17, 2014, 4:56 PM UTC

adventured wrote: post #36

BugBrother wrote: post #2

I assume this is posted and up voted now because of the similarities to Putin? Anyway, let me recommend "Down and out in Paris and London". It taught me more about the human condition, and why you want to stamp out poverty and let everyone to be able to have a humane life, than most any book I ever read. Also, imho after learning a bit about Eastern Europe after 1945, I put "Animal farm" along "1984". It is a master…

Putin is almost entirely lacking the cult of personality, the movement, around him that Hitler, Mao, Stalin, Lenin, Fidel, etc. all had. He wasn't a revolutionary, he's primarily a gangster, and historically those are relatively short-lived and weak political types. Putin has more in common with Capone than Hitler, he leads a cult of money and theft. Even Putin's attempts at nationalistic projection have been remarka…

You'd'be surprised by how well his nationalistic projection works nowadays

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

#204

Post by waps » Sun, Aug 17, 2014, 4:58 PM UTC

maxxxxx wrote: post #192

judk wrote: post #58

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's almost as though "left" and "right" are meaningless terms that are just use to split the people into two camps for battle against each other.

It' not "almost as though" but they are meaningless terms (and harmful to political discussion in my view). American politics likes to force every issue into the "liberal" or "conservative" category but reality is much more subtle.

On the other hand, here is the Nazi's public face :

http://www.historyplace.com/worldwar2/riseofhitler/25points....

Read it, then tell me if you still don't understand why these people might get classified as left-wing. They implemented quite a few of these points too, by the way. You can say whatever you want about Nazi's but they are by far the most successful leftist party in history, and quite a few "left-wing" rights today were first implemented by Nazi Germany. Big example : pensions. Scholarships (of the for-the-needy kind, not for-the-really-smart kind). There's many examples.

That said, it is beyond obvious that they are not comparable to today's left wing.

As hard as it is to understand today, the left-wing was very much anti-immigrant in the 1930's. But it's just one of many historical facts that have changed. What I still find hard to believe, is that it's the democrats were the pro-slavery anti-black side of the aisle.

Some choice cuts :

(the first parts are anti-versailles, and some anti-immigration)

  7. We demand that the State shall above all undertake to ensure that every citizen shall have the possibility of living decently and earning a livelihood. If it should not be possible to feed the whole population, then aliens (non-citizens) must be expelled from the Reich.

(8-9 are anti-immigrant)

  10. The first duty of every citizen must be to work mentally or physically. No individual shall do any work that offends against the interest of the community to the benefit of all.

  11. That all unearned income, and all income that does not arise from work, be abolished.

  12. Since every war imposes on the people fearful sacrifices in blood and treasure, all personal profit arising from the war must be regarded as treason to the people. We therefore demand the total confiscation of all war profits.

  13. We demand the nationalization of all trusts.

  14. We demand profit-sharing in large industries.

  15. We demand a generous increase in old-age pensions.

...

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

#205

Post by pdonis » Sun, Aug 17, 2014, 5:15 PM UTC

lisper wrote: post #120

pdonis wrote: post #103

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Last I checked, none of those things were due to conservatives alone, nor have they been any better, on balance, when liberals control the government than when conservatives do. (Israel's methods of dealing with Gaza probably come closest to being "run by conservatives", but even there the same things tend to happen when more moderate Israeli governments are in power.)

Democrat != Liberal. Liberals have not controlled the government in the U.S. (or Israel) for a very long time.

Well, everybody calls them liberals; they even call themselves liberals (when they're not calling themselves progressives, which is an even stronger code word for "left-wing"). If your argument is that they aren't "true" liberals, then who are the "true" liberals?

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

#206

Post by pdonis » Sun, Aug 17, 2014, 5:16 PM UTC

girvo wrote: post #128

pdonis wrote: post #103

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Last I checked, none of those things were due to conservatives alone, nor have they been any better, on balance, when liberals control the government than when conservatives do. (Israel's methods of dealing with Gaza probably come closest to being "run by conservatives", but even there the same things tend to happen when more moderate Israeli governments are in power.)

I'm certainly not an American, but from where I've been standing I haven't seen a liberal in your administration since I've been alive?

See my response to lisper.

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

#207

Post by maxxxxx » Sun, Aug 17, 2014, 5:18 PM UTC

waps wrote: post #204

maxxxxx wrote: post #192

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It' not "almost as though" but they are meaningless terms (and harmful to political discussion in my view). American politics likes to force every issue into the "liberal" or "conservative" category but reality is much more subtle.

On the other hand, here is the Nazi's public face : http://www.historyplace.com/worldwar2/riseofhitler/25points.... Read it, then tell me if you still don't understand why these people might get classified as left-wing. They implemented quite a few of these points too, by the way. You can say whatever you want about Nazi's but they are by far the most successful leftist party in history, and quite a few "left-wing" r…

Sure, they had some left-wing traits. And they had some right wing traits too: The belief that Germany is a special country is pretty similar to today's conservatives belief that the US is exceptional and blessed by God.

My point was that by figuring out whether the Nazis were left or right wing nothing is learned. There are left wing and right wing democracies and there are left and right wing dictatorships. Left wing governments have killed a lot of people and so have right wing governments.

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

#208

Post by pdonis » Sun, Aug 17, 2014, 5:19 PM UTC

Intermernet wrote: post #155

pdonis wrote: post #112

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Ok, so by this definition, Stalin was certainly not left-wing, since he exterminated and enslaved minorities, which you appear to agree is not supportive of social equality. Yet Stalin is used in the same Wikipedia article as an example of left-wing activities. Also, if pacifism is left-wing, then the Obama administration is certainly not left-wing or anything close to it, since he has repeatedly authorized military…

Please note, I'm not arguing your overall point, I agree with it completely. This comment is really just nit-picking over terminology. I'm pretty sure that Stalin has been post-categorized into the "Left-Wing" camp as he stood for "Socialism". That one label is about the only thing about Stalin that could be classified as "Left-Wing". There has been an enormous amount of jostling amongst all "Left-Wing" political par…

> This comment is really just nit-picking over terminology.

I agree that terminology in this area is very, very messed up. That's largely because the terminology has been used as a tool to gain and hold power, rather than as a tool of clear communication--Stalin being an obvious example.

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

#209

Post by pinkyand » Sun, Aug 17, 2014, 5:22 PM UTC

leoc wrote: post #183

reitzensteinm wrote: post #140

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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 m…

I don't think the Nazis felt as secure from internal challenge in Germany during their rule as they appear to have been in retrospect. In any case, whether it was really unnecessary or not, they seem (from the little I've read about this) to have been past masters at controlling potential domestic opposition using the rapier rather than the bludgeon, using a combination of bribery and conciliation, isolation and medi…

>the mysterious absence of Down's Syndrome children in many places these days.

could you please expand ?

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

#210

Post by danabramov » Sun, Aug 17, 2014, 5:26 PM UTC

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.

You can calculate position so it doesn't cover the text.