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

261–270 of 600 posts

Re: George Orwell’s 1940 Review of Mein Kampf

#261

Post by Pamar »

schroeding wrote: post #151
zozbot234 wrote: post #39

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

(Second-hand) Anecdata: My Grandpa was born in '39, was 6 when the war ended and lived very close to a big city / region that was bombed regularly by the Allies from '42-'45. He was old enough to remember this and the (light) fighting when the Americans arrived. After the war, he and the local kids played with live guns that the German soldiers just threw away. They used a Flak (anti aircraft cannon) as a carousel, p…

Did you know anything about role preferences (if any)?

I mean: would children prefer to be Allies (because they won) or Germans (because, well, they were Germans)...

Re: George Orwell’s 1940 Review of Mein Kampf

#262

Post by watwut »

sillysaurusx wrote: post #112
zozbot234 wrote: post #39

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

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…

None of the things you mentioned is like war, like not at all. They are fantasies designed to be as pleasant as possible.

Re: George Orwell’s 1940 Review of Mein Kampf

#263

Post by MomoXenosaga »

inglor_cz wrote: post #169
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…

It is well that war is so terrible, otherwise we should grow too fond of it. Robert E. Lee There definitely seem to be combatants that enjoy at least some aspects of war. If you look at the historical military literature, including poetry, it is not all just negative. It is true that with increasing industrialization of war during the last 150 years, the overall tenor has changed.

Look how they re-enact the civil war. Nobody wants the historical truth of dying from cholera in a Confederate stockade or burning down farms in Georgia with crying families in the background. Humans are really good at cognitive dissonance.

Re: George Orwell’s 1940 Review of Mein Kampf

#264

Post by 8jef »

inglor_cz wrote: post #169
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…

It is well that war is so terrible, otherwise we should grow too fond of it. Robert E. Lee There definitely seem to be combatants that enjoy at least some aspects of war. If you look at the historical military literature, including poetry, it is not all just negative. It is true that with increasing industrialization of war during the last 150 years, the overall tenor has changed.

War is a way for mindless and aggressive men to do whatever they really crave (which is escaping from a state of victimhood), without much justification and little immediate consequences to themselves, mostly under cover of patriotism. To kill and rape for fun and pleasure, and hopefully die fast, absolutely ecstatic.

To such men, please note: life never really ends, and you and your offspring gets eternally impacted by all miserable and soulless destruction of life's beauty you may have caused, inflicting more hardship and perpetuating novel state of misery upon flocks of others.

Re: George Orwell’s 1940 Review of Mein Kampf

#265

Post by scifibestfi »

claytongulick wrote: post #131
shrimp_emoji wrote: post #31

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> aspiring elites who viewed themselves as oppressed losers out of a misguided sense of entitlement. Yep, sounds like the disaffected white males who kill others or themselves in droves, despite often having better conditions than (less aspirant/entitled) non-white males.

If you honestly reflect on your comment, do you see anything wrong with it? When I read it, I got very angry at what I perceive to be pointed racism. But I'd like to try to step away from that and instead of lashing out, to understand your perspective more. Would you mind explaining your thinking a bit more?

It's just racism. You're not missing anything; there's nothing more to it.

Re: George Orwell’s 1940 Review of Mein Kampf

#266

Post by bobochan »

Retric wrote: post #210
pohl wrote: post #173

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm with you in the abstract, but where I live there's toxic culture around sports that made it unpalatable for me as a kid. Back then what turned me off was belligerent parents on the sidelines yelling at the children, but the symptoms actually go way beyond that one little thing. (Conflating excellence with dominance is another example.)

I have noticed team sports tend to be vastly more toxic than solo sports. Climbing for example has a wildly different atmosphere. Just listen to the crowd in this or read the YouTube comments, people are supportive when several women have disappointing results. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SfhGW6Bwyks People will complain about the route setting or camerawork not the athletes, that’s a shocking amount of empathy I…

One of my favorite sports memories was going to my son's first big cross-country running meet. There were hundreds of kids lined up for the race and parents lined the course to cheer them on. The crowds clapped loudly for the leaders, it died down for the long stretch of mid-pack runners, and then grew to a roar for the kids working their hardest at the back of the pack. Everyone there seemed to understand how hard it is to get started in endurance sports, but also how transformative they can be to a kid's confidence, especially if they have not felt welcome or successful in team sports.

Re: George Orwell’s 1940 Review of Mein Kampf

#267

Post by rhizome31 »

alex_sf wrote: post #171
likeclockwork wrote: post #163

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I guess you appreciate any opportunity to restate your beliefs. I was just suggesting that offering war as a solution to the problem of already being at war is pretty circular.

I appreciate an opportunity to provide clarity when it seems like a point was missed. Whether it's circular or not isn't a meaningful property when bombs are dropping. In that spirit of providing clarity: what is your answer to the un-translated question I asked? > What exactly is your solution to the sort of naked aggression by Hitler in WW2? Is war not a solution to that problem?

> What exactly is your solution to the sort of naked aggression by Hitler in WW2? Is war not a solution to that problem?

With a 70–85 million death toll, I find it hard to describe it as a success. Saying there was no other choice seems fair but calling it a solution seems a bit far-fetched.

Re: George Orwell’s 1940 Review of Mein Kampf

#268

Post by Xeronate »

whoopdedo wrote: post #154
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…

The answer to this is sports. War is competition through violence. When you remove the violence you get peaceful competition. It satisfies the tribal urge to fight things different than you, but also encourages healthy behaviors. Respect for your opponent. Accepting loss. Recognizing your weaknesses and working to improve them.

Sports are better, but I think encouraging competition and tribal urges are a waste of time in general. Better to encourage collaboration and self expression.

Re: George Orwell’s 1940 Review of Mein Kampf

#269

Post by helge9210 »

MichaelMoser123 wrote: post #240

Orwell omitted a few details: Hitler never had a majority in the Reichstag/german parliament - he benefited from the enmity between the Social democrats and the Communist. I mean a popular front, like in France of 1936 would have stopped them. The German soial dems and communist were mortal enemies, because the social dems shot a lot of communists in the aftermath of the Kapp putsch. Also Hitler had the massive suppo…

> he benefited from the enmity between the Social democrats and the Communist

To support Hitler Stalin ordered German Communists to not join forces with Social Democrats.

Re: George Orwell’s 1940 Review of Mein Kampf

#270

Post by magicalist »

alex_sf wrote: post #196
kwhitefoot wrote: post #190

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> wealthy societies where everything is taken care of. Which ones would they be? The one that I live most of my time in, Norway, does not seem to have growing discontent, yet it is quite definitely closer to "everything is taken care of" than others, such as the UK, where "growing discontent" seems to be a thing. So unless you can name those that "You often see" I don't think the idea can be taken seriously.

> The one that I live most of my time in, Norway, does not seem to have growing discontent The mass shooting and terrorism rate there increasing seems like a reasonable counter to that idea. Along with steady suicide rates despite massively increasing spending on it.

> The mass shooting

singular

> and terrorism rate there increasing

er, no?

> Along with steady suicide rates

So not growing, then.

I don't think anyone's going to argue Norway has solved society but let's not twist things to try to fit someone's off the cuff head canon.

Post reply on HN