Live data from Hacker News

George Orwell’s 1940 Review of Mein Kampf

gutenberg.net.au

361–370 of 600 posts

Re: George Orwell’s 1940 Review of Mein Kampf

#361
post #35

> Hitler, because in his own joyless mind he feels it with exceptional strength, knows that human beings don’t only want comfort, safety, short working-hours, hygiene, birth-control and, in general, common sense; they also, at least intermittently, want struggle and self-sacrifice This fact has been the downfall of every utopian ideology, and ignoring creates a vacuum that fascist regimes readily fill. I wonder what…

it might be a start to actually archieve "comfort, safety, short working-hours, hygiene, birth-control and, in general, common sense" for all. Then we can see if they still want struggle and self-sacrifice. There may be some dispositions of the human mind that are susceptible to this sort of thing, but for now, I find it somewhat remarkable that this supposed need for struggle and self sacrifice is almost always empl…

Yes - comfortable people saying that comfort isn't enough for people; they'll still just complain, kill each other and die. Without ever having tried giving people comfort, that will always sound like a rationalization. It's an excuse comfortable people use to excuse everything from the wealth and income gap between US blacks and whites to silencing complaints about UI changes on software projects.

It's a statement that people don't actually want what they say they want, all they want is attention and drama. The logical way to respond is by not acknowledging anything they say, and enforcing the behavior that you want to see, by force if necessary.

The real problem is that improvements in general comfort are difficult, and require lots of force to be organized and applied in a rational way. It's easier just to insure that you and your friends stay comfortable, and to silence or redirect elements that may intrude on that comfort. Ultimately, though, the failure mode on that is catastrophic. Once discontent overwhelms the institutions created to suppress it, the institutions shrink or convert while the discontent grows. Very soon, the discontent becomes the new, young establishment, and if you haven't joined yet, you're now the problem that the new institutions are intended to eliminate.

Re: George Orwell’s 1940 Review of Mein Kampf

#362

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think I agree with you. I don't think that the integrity of elections and democracy are the main point of this essay. Orwell wrote a lot about authoritarianism, and as you say, "communism" was the prime example at the time. What he hints at here is not only the fragility of democracy. It's about the fragility of civilization. It's about the "will to power" as defined by Nietzsche, and the power of belief systems, a…

I must disagree. Orwell is not the bible, or an if-by-whiskey politician. Everybody reads him differently because they're combining hearsay, random quotes and attributions. If you read Orwell's essays or articles directly, he's extremely clear and unambiguous. The fact that people think Orwell agrees with them despite having polar opposite views is a testament to people's laziness, not Orwell's interpretability. On c…

> The fact that people think Orwell agrees with them despite having polar opposite views is a testament to people's laziness, not Orwell's interpretability.

This is common and always amuses me. My favorite is Adam Smith, beloved of the most demonstrably ardent self-described “capitalists” who would be shocked and repulsed by what he actually wrote.

Sometimes this property is considered a feature, not a bug, in particular by Marxists and religious leaders, and doubtless by many more.

As it happens I really love Eric Blair’s writing even when I disagree with him.

Re: George Orwell’s 1940 Review of Mein Kampf

#363
post #303

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You mean that 55% of pro Nazi votes, and thus a majority, were male? And that the NSDAP had, at least when the election was free, nowhere near a majority, so a vast majority of women actually voted against them? Well, I think because women just didn't like em that much.

At least 80% of German women voted for Henlein and SdP in 1938 long after Hitler had been in power and known for what he was. "Women just didn't like em that much" is pure fantasy.

Henlein's SdP, the Nazi-aligned party of the German minority in Chekoslovakia, got 90% of the vote of that minority in the last elections before the Sudetenland was absorbed by Naz-Germany in 1938. All German women never did vote for the SdP, basically becaise the SdP was a party in Chekoslovakia and not Germany. Also, by 1938, elections were no longer free and thus are a bad baseline.

So, as a matter of fact, the only German women that ever voted for the SdP / Henlein were part of the German minority. And even there, women voted less for SdP than the overall German community did.

That a German minority would be largely in favor joining Germany is propably not a big surprise, is it? And as said, even then women voted less for the SdP.

So please stop posting unsubstantiated claims.

Re: George Orwell’s 1940 Review of Mein Kampf

#364

> "Whereas Socialism, and even capitalism in a more grudging way, have said to people ‘I offer you a good time,’ Hitler has said to them ‘I offer you struggle, danger and death,’ and as a result a whole nation flings itself at his feet. Perhaps later on they will get sick of it and change their minds, as at the end of the last war." I think there's been a profound change in popular thinking on this since the end of W…

sending the young people off to die in wars

This does of course happen, but one shouldn't underestimate people's own enthusiasm for fighting. A lifetime of peaceful toil is immiserating to many, and toil in the service economic competition is destructive of liberty and leisure.

Re: George Orwell’s 1940 Review of Mein Kampf

#365

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Why can't people struggle and self-sacrifice for utopia?

they did in the Soviet Union very admirably.

And in the US, which gave the world May Day (a day to remember the fight for worker's rights.) Sadly, it gave the US (the country that ruthlessly crushed and salted the fields of the organizations that fought for worker's rights) "Law Day," where we celebrate obeying the law.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Law_Day_(United_States)

Re: George Orwell’s 1940 Review of Mein Kampf

#366
post #101
post #25

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Many modern political problems stem from people needing something to struggle for and other people fighting against it. Reminds me of the lines in Fight Club: "We have no Great War. No Great Depression. Our Great War's a spiritual war. Our Great Depression is our lives." I'm not sure if that precise quote is in the book, but it's certainly in the movie and it echoes your sentiment and those above.

And the saying “Good times create weak men”. And it’s true. You often see a growing discontent among wealthy societies where everything is taken care of. People need purpose in what they do and “my purpose is to fight for the survival of my country” is a pretty compelling one to many people.

> “Good times create weak men”

Convert it to any form of observable, measurable phenomena, and you will see it doesn't make any sence.

How do we measure 'strength' of a man - perhaps military success? Then best fighters should come from background of poverty and deprivation - is that true? Medieval knights and samurai were the best of their time, did they recruit recruit starving peasans? No, they were a social class and were offered the best training and considerable social cloud. Commanders and officers where basically a nobility.

Well, perhaps those social institutions didn't recruit the best, what about sports - if this statement was actually true, we should find best MMA fighters in places where they encounter tought times, like Russia or Somalia. Does that match observation - do they win all the MMA championships or something? It doesn't.

Maybe 'strong men' means being morally upstanding and doing what's right, even when it is going to cost you? If this were true, we'd expect to see less corruption and fewer crimes in communities that are poorer, right? Does that sound like the world we live in?

Bad times only create bad things - they create uneducated, malnurished, and psycologically damanged people, and they lead to violence. Anything good that ever happens, happens in spite of them, not because of them.

Re: George Orwell’s 1940 Review of Mein Kampf

#367
post #130

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…

Post-ww1 pacifism didn't do much good to France.

And building a military machine didn't do much good for Germany.

Re: George Orwell’s 1940 Review of Mein Kampf

#368
post #331

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Good times create weak men They give you strong science, economy and as a byproduct strong military. > You often see a growing discontent among wealthy societies where everything is taken care of. Like in Sri-Lanka, what a decadent society.

When the wheels fall off (Sri Lanka does have a history of stability long ago) it’s hard to get them back on. Sri Lanka’s problems go back decades.

The fallen off wheels create bad times, which create all these stong men, ready to slap the wheels right back on, right?

Re: George Orwell’s 1940 Review of Mein Kampf

#369
post #213

> "Whereas Socialism, and even capitalism in a more grudging way, have said to people ‘I offer you a good time,’ Hitler has said to them ‘I offer you struggle, danger and death,’ and as a result a whole nation flings itself at his feet. Perhaps later on they will get sick of it and change their minds, as at the end of the last war." I think there's been a profound change in popular thinking on this since the end of W…

It’s possible that MAD is wearing off as more conventional war emerges because no one believes the other side will dare use them… so it’s almost as if they are not there or a threat.

MAD is also not as simple as generally described in the popular press. Power Transition theory is a school of thought that has some interesting ideas about the emergence of conflict and fits into a social physics type analysis.

Re: George Orwell’s 1940 Review of Mein Kampf

#370
post #253
post #199

Earlier quoted context omitted.

He was at least good at it. His chief propagandist Joseph Goebbels was really good. Goebbels made propaganda that was way subtler than Hitlers. Nazi cinema created expensive movies under Goebbels until the end. Nobody sees them today but they are very subtle and clever in a way they build a sentiment. Not at all like the short clips they show you. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kolberg_(film) https://en.wikipedia.org/…

I appreciate the added perspective; the Anglospheric view is often either "Look at those monsters, we would never do that" or "If only the German language had the concept of humor, they wouldn't have taken that guy seriously."

If you want to see a American movie that has similar feel to the Nazi wartime propaganda movies, watch "Acto of Valor" (2012) https://www.imdb.com/title/tt1591479/ It's Navy Seal action movie, and not a very good movie (propaganda rarely is) but it has the "dark undertone" where individuals, enemies, heroism, duty and sacrifice are presented in the same way as it was in the Nazi propaganda.
Post reply on HN