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

They Thought They Were Free (1955)

press.uchicago.edu

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

191–200 of 545 posts

Re: They Thought They Were Free (1955)

#191

Post by iwontberude »

bix6 wrote: post #170
themgt wrote: post #109

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The number of different national and international situations that get compared to Nazi Germany seems to reflect a paucity of historical imagination and desire to collapse every conflict into an manichaean analogy with modern civilization's foundational battle of good vs. evil. It might make at least as much sense to compare to Erdoğan's Turkey, Orban's Hungary, Syria's Assad and al-Julani, Chile with Allende and Pin…

> Whereas the Nazi Germany analogy ends with near-inevitable wave function collapse into "start shooting Nazis" Does it? I haven’t thought about shooting anyone. I would like to see more widespread awareness, protesting, and a general strike.

If the oligarchs saw Trump unable to break a general strike and it was destroying the economy, maybe they would let an opposition take hold.

Thanks for the downvotes

Re: They Thought They Were Free (1955)

#192

Post by non_aligned »

I think this is interesting, but perhaps for reasons other than intended. I think it shows the formation of the post-war mythology that Germans used to explain to themselves how their family members or parents were good people, and did not deserve any punishment, despite the involvement in the most genocidal movement in modern history.

When you read these accounts, it always feels like no one had any agency or knowledge what's going on, that Hitler was basically a lone wolf who installed himself in power against the wishes of the nation, that had some outlandish ideas that no good German believed in, and that then he and a small band of his supporters somehow forced everyone to comply.

And to be clear, it was a totalitarian state, but it also wasn't North Korea and no Soviet Union. If nothing else, you could always leave. Many countries wouldn't take fleeing Jews, but as a dissenting German, you'd be welcomed with open hands almost everywhere.

So yes, of course there were people who hated the regime, and just decided they didn't want to or couldn't rock the boat. But a significant portion of the population approved of what was happening. Hitler was wildly popular. Millions of people enthusiastically bought into what he was selling. Germany perceived itself as a wounded lion after WWI. They felt they had a rightful claim on their "living space". And antisemitism in Europe needed no marketing. Tellingly, purges of Jews continued even after the war in the Soviet sphere of influence.

My point is, for every person who genuinely had no choice, there were ten who definitely had it, who more or less approved what was happening, and who would have been proud of it had Germany won the war.

Re: They Thought They Were Free (1955)

#193

Post by foldr »

csomar wrote: post #17
Hilift wrote: post #7

No, they noticed. 90 years ago, 2/3 of the world's books were in Germany. They were educated and literate and knew what they were doing and what was happening. Germans were acutely aware of the reality of the day to day situation and their previous history in WW1.

[flagged]

> Hitler did well by the Germans

This could only possibly be true if, like the Nazis, you exclude Jews, Gypsies, gays, disabled people, women who value their sexual and reproductive freedom, etc. etc. from the category ‘German’.

And even then it’s still not true, as others in the thread have pointed out.

It’s disturbingly frequently that I see this weird nudge nudge wink wink kinda-sorta Nazi apologism from high karma accounts here. I’m willing to believe that there aren’t fundamentally bad intentions behind it and that it stems mainly from some kind of reflexive contrarianism, but boy is it weird and disturbing.

Re: They Thought They Were Free (1955)

#194

Post by estearum »

ethical_source wrote: post #150
estearum wrote: post #69

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"They came for..." in this comment refers to "the marketplace of ideas built a brief consensus against..." The "they came for..." in the famous poem, and in reference to today's Trump administration, refers to "the government utilized state power to advance or suppress certain ideas." These are not the same at all. A few specific bullets: * Universities (especially private ones) are allowed to have ideological biases…

> Universities (especially private ones) are allowed to have ideological biases Universities as private associations can have whatever biases they want. What they can't do is take public money earmarked for promoting debate and discovery and use it to promulgate a particular ideology, discriminate on the basis of immutable protected characteristics, or do other things contrary to public policy. If they want the money…

What federal money gets sent to universities with the earmark “promote debate and discovery?”

The vast majority of federal money is given to universities to execute research contracts.

It is simply not true that if you receive any federal money your institution cannot have biases or opinions. What would that even mean in practice? They cannot use federal money specifically for political activities, but merely receiving public funding does not relieve you of your First Amendment rights.

If anything, the reality is the opposite of what you suggest: your contracted money cannot be threatened on the basis of your institution’s (protected) biases or opinions.

Re public health: The government itself has a First Amendment right to speak with and request action from private organizations, and those organizations have a First Amendment right to accept or decline those requests. Vullo absolutely did not find the government has no ability to request action, it said it has no ability to coerce action.

As it relates to COVID, we don’t need to speculate: this is the exact question that was asked in Murthy vs Missouri. SCOTUS found lack of standing because the “censorship” in question pre-dated the “coercion” in question. Private platforms are absolutely allowed to create and enforce content policies!

You cannot infer “the platforms were coerced” from the following set of facts:

1. The platforms made and enforced policies prior to government requests

2. The government made requests

3. Some of those requests were satisfied and others were declined

4. There was no punishment or threatened punishment for decline

5. The platforms said they were not coerced

That’s what SCOTUS and IMO any reasonable person would find.

Re: They Thought They Were Free (1955)

#195

Post by throw0101c »

Archelaos wrote: post #74
HK-NC wrote: post #39

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Wasnt Germany better off in the decades following WW2 than the British that defeated them?

East Germany definitly never was. And even West Germany was considerably behind the UK in per capita GDP in US$ after WW2.[1] It had catched up at around 1970. Since 1970 the two were roughly equivalent: some years one was ahead some years the other.[2] However, Germany is now considerably ahead of the UK in terms of per capita GDP measuered in PPP (ie. adjusted to local prices: aprox. 20% now, or 10 to 15 years (dep…

> East Germany definitly never was. And even West Germany was considerably behind the UK in per capita GDP in US$ after WW2.[1]

Germany was behind the UK even before WW2. Just the UK outproduced Germany in (e.g.) aircraft production, and that was even before the US got involved.

Adam Tooze wrote an entire book on the subject:

* https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Wages_of_Destruction

Re: They Thought They Were Free (1955)

#196

Post by JackFr »

jackstraw42 wrote: post #41
HK-NC wrote: post #39

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Wasnt Germany better off in the decades following WW2 than the British that defeated them?

The Allies defeated Germany, not the British.

From June 4, 1940 to June 22, 1941 Britain faced Hitler alone.

Re: They Thought They Were Free (1955)

#197

Post by 1oooqooq »

throwawaymaths wrote: post #160
heresie-dabord wrote: post #25

> They Thought They Were Free: The Germans, 1933-45 by Milton Mayer, published by the University of Chicago Press. ©1955, 1966, 2017 by the University of Chicago. Such books will no longer be published if universities are not free. And if freedom begins to disappear, even those who believe themselves safely conformist are not safe... https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/First_They_Came

Universities will not be safe from government meddling until they comprehensively stop taking money from the government first . Until such a point, they run the real risk of censorship and becoming the agents of the very thing that they are warning about.

you're historically wrong.

monasteries were financialy independent. when the "government changed" and the new rulers had no use for the church, all of them were raided and plundered.

it's very dangerous to have resources and not be politically positioned. you become a target more than a fortress. it's the one thing preppers don't get.

universities are facing the same problem as monasteries faced. they are huge bags of money already. excluding the UCs they are already rich and take government money more for the associations than the actual money.

Re: They Thought They Were Free (1955)

#198

Post by nathan_compton »

csomar wrote: post #17
Hilift wrote: post #7

No, they noticed. 90 years ago, 2/3 of the world's books were in Germany. They were educated and literate and knew what they were doing and what was happening. Germans were acutely aware of the reality of the day to day situation and their previous history in WW1.

[flagged]

"Hitler did well by the Germans" is a weird way to describe taking over a state by violence and propaganda and then leading it into a humiliating military defeat and committing some of the most morally repugnant acts in recent history in its name, but ok, I guess.

Re: They Thought They Were Free (1955)

#199

Post by phony-account »

kQq9oHeAz6wLLS wrote: post #152
api wrote: post #136

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Some of it reminds me of the CCP, which I think is openly considered a model by some neo-authoritarians. Ubiquitous mass surveillance, social credit, and state capitalism with heavy control though regulatory pressure. I assume we will eventually see party men installed on boards of major companies, especially in media, tech, and entertainment. The “tech right” is a major player here and a lot of those folks idolize C…

I would also remind the short of memory that during covid, the states with the most draconian restrictions were mostly left-leaning, and many were loathe to give up that control. Control of the people comes from all sides. The end result is the same, but the methods are different, intended to make people happy to be controlled.

> I would also remind the short of memory that during covid, the states with the most draconian restrictions were mostly left-leaning, and many were loathe to give up that control. Control of the people comes from all sides

This depiction of Covid restrictions (restrictions that were actually relatively permissive given the seriousness of the disease and the unknown nature of the virus at the time) as though they were an authoritarian power grab by malevolent politicians instead of a health policy, is part of the problem.

Maybe if people had been willing to accept a small curtailment of their personal desires for a short time for the sake of the common good, rather than framing it as a dictatorial punishment,we wouldn’t be in the mess we’re heading into now.

Re: They Thought They Were Free (1955)

#200

Post by throaway5445454 »

username332211 wrote: post #149
moomin wrote: post #100

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It’s something of a red herring. Britain got the largest slice of the Marshall Plan money, they just wasted it on things like trying to maintain the Empire. One thing you’d learn from the book is Germany definitely wasn’t in a good shape in 55.

Apart from the Suez crisis and the Rhodesian embargo was there any serious British attempt to maintain the empire after the second World War?

Mau Mau, Malaya, Kenya
Post reply on HN