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

461–470 of 600 posts

Re: George Orwell’s 1940 Review of Mein Kampf

#461

Post by harry8 »

simonebrunozzi wrote: post #312
notRobot wrote: post #216

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Any recommendations for other writings and analyses by Orwell?

- Christopher Hitchens (possibly THE biggest expert on Orwell in the late 20th century, and a great intellectual IMHO) on "Why Orwell Matters" + Q&A (2002) [0]. - Why I write [1] [0]: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3I-FfrkGiWQ [1]: https://www.orwellfoundation.com/the-orwell-foundation/orwel...

Counterpoint: Christopher Hitchens was an expert on sophistry in the manner of a champion high school debater and doesn't deserve the reflected glory of being noted as "the" Orwell expert. Orwell was rather more courageous, incisive, intelligent, subtle, humane and kind. Hitchens is not in the same intellectual league let alone the same ballpark. Hitchens sucessfully hitched his wagon to Orwell's intellectual greatness for popularity and debating points but when you scratch the surface there seems to be less there than we'd like.

Everyone has the right to a different opinion than me on Hitchens and I think my politics are probably closer to (late stage) Hitchens than Orwell and I think I'm surely no more a great intellectual than Hitchens. Orwell really was a great intellectual, this is clear to me even if I think he was wrong about a bunch of stuff. Where I agree with Hitchens it remains lightweight by comparison.

Re: George Orwell’s 1940 Review of Mein Kampf

#462

Post by fredgrott »

int_19h wrote: post #447
smackeyacky wrote: post #425

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The US is the only place where the word "Socialism" isn't used properly. The rest of the world understands it perfectly well.

Not really, no. Most of Europe isn't using it properly, either - those "democratic socialist" parties aren't socialist.

to add to that look at what the letters USSR and DDR stood for...

IN case no one remembers

United Socialist Soviet Republic

Deutsch Democratic Republic

both not word plays on Democracy but word plays on social theory and what stateless means.

Re: George Orwell’s 1940 Review of Mein Kampf

#463

Post by lostlogin »

pukexxr wrote: post #455
lostlogin wrote: post #356

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Reading the comments below the article (generally a bad idea) show that a paragraph of the article seems to have been ‘redacted’. Sources are quoted but I don’t see a reason for the change. “I should like to put it on record that I have never been able to dislike Hitler. Ever since he came to power - till then, like nearly everyone, I had been deceived into thinking that he did not matter - I have reflected that I wo…

>>Sources are quoted but I don’t see a reason for the change. Redacted [by who?] If this was removed by Orwell then it isn't for you to see a reason or not. If removed by the editors of the abve site, then I'd agree that that's a questionable choice; at any rate an ellipsis would be called for.

Have a read of the comments, the essay seems to vary depending on where you read it.

Re: George Orwell’s 1940 Review of Mein Kampf

#464

Post by GekkePrutser »

avodonosov wrote: post #460
helloworld11 wrote: post #414

>Probably, in Hitler's own mind, the Russo-German Pact represents no more than an alteration of time-table. The plan laid down in Mein Kampf was to smash Russia first, with the implied intention of smashing England afterwards. Now, as it has turned out, England has got to be dealt with first, because Russia was the more easily bribed of the two. But Russia's turn will come when England is out of the picture—that, no…

You mean Hitler really turned to Russia after he defeated England?

After he gave up on conquering Britain, which is kinda 'out of the picture' I guess

Re: George Orwell’s 1940 Review of Mein Kampf

#465

Post by [deleted] »

avodonosov wrote: post #460
helloworld11 wrote: post #414

>Probably, in Hitler's own mind, the Russo-German Pact represents no more than an alteration of time-table. The plan laid down in Mein Kampf was to smash Russia first, with the implied intention of smashing England afterwards. Now, as it has turned out, England has got to be dealt with first, because Russia was the more easily bribed of the two. But Russia's turn will come when England is out of the picture—that, no…

You mean Hitler really turned to Russia after he defeated England?

[deleted]

Re: George Orwell’s 1940 Review of Mein Kampf

#466

Post by int_19h »

fredgrott wrote: post #462
int_19h wrote: post #447

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Not really, no. Most of Europe isn't using it properly, either - those "democratic socialist" parties aren't socialist.

to add to that look at what the letters USSR and DDR stood for... IN case no one remembers United Socialist Soviet Republic Deutsch Democratic Republic both not word plays on Democracy but word plays on social theory and what stateless means.

USSR is the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics.

I'm not sure what you mean by "word plays on social theory and what stateless means". Both are perfectly descriptive labels; they just lie.

Re: George Orwell’s 1940 Review of Mein Kampf

#467

Post by avodonosov »

GekkePrutser wrote: post #464
avodonosov wrote: post #460

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You mean Hitler really turned to Russia after he defeated England?

After he gave up on conquering Britain, which is kinda 'out of the picture' I guess

Had he attempted to conquer Britan before turning to Russia?

Re: George Orwell’s 1940 Review of Mein Kampf

#468

Post by lovecg »

avodonosov wrote: post #467
GekkePrutser wrote: post #464

Earlier quoted context omitted.

After he gave up on conquering Britain, which is kinda 'out of the picture' I guess

Had he attempted to conquer Britan before turning to Russia?

The Battle of Britain is generally accepted to have had a peace treaty with Britain as a (failed) strategic objective, thus putting it “out of the picture”.

Re: George Orwell’s 1940 Review of Mein Kampf

#469

Post by nl »

alex_sf wrote: post #382
magicalist wrote: post #270

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> 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.

While I do love the quote line-by-line format, you are splitting up sentences and completely changing my post, which is, at least, in bad faith. > singular ... er, no? Mass shooting and terrorism _rate_. Are you familiar with the concept of a rate? Also, 'mass shooting' is very much not singular, unless you have an exceptionally short memory. > So not growing, then. You are, again, changing what I wrote. Here, let me…

> The mass shooting and terrorism rate there increasing

There have been 4 "mass shootings" in Norway[1]

One in 1988 (4 deaths) - perpetrator was insane, with no motive

One in 2011 (77 killed) - perpetrator was a Neo-Nazi terrorist

One in 2021 (5 killed) - perpetrator was insane, with no motive

One in 2022 (2 killed) - perpetrator was an Islamic terrorist

The rate per year there is so low that any real attempt to measure the rate is lost in random variations. I think it's fair to say the rate is higher over the last 20 years than the previous 20 but beyond that is difficult.

And I don't think you can draw any substantive conclusions from that.

> Along with steady suicide rates despite massively increasing spending on it.

Suicide rates have declined substantially since the 1990s.

"From 1990 to 2000 the suicide rate declined and stabilized at the levels that we have today. In 2020, the suicide rate was 12.3 per 100 000 inhabitants. This is 25 per cent lower than in 1990 when the rate was 16.4 per 100,000 inhabitants"

It is now roughly the same as most Western countries, and much lower than Finland or in Eastern Europe, Russia, China or Japan.

One could argue that shows Norway has been successful in reducing suicide and that ~10/100,000 people is a floor.

[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Category:Mass_shootings_in_Nor...

[2] https://www.fhi.no/en/op/hin/mental-health/suicide/

Re: George Orwell’s 1940 Review of Mein Kampf

#470

Post by nl »

avodonosov wrote: post #467
GekkePrutser wrote: post #464

Earlier quoted context omitted.

After he gave up on conquering Britain, which is kinda 'out of the picture' I guess

Had he attempted to conquer Britan before turning to Russia?

His plan certainly was to, and his generals told him it would happen.

Operation Sealion (the German invasion of Britain) was planned for September 1940[1]. The German invasion of Russia[2] commenced June 1941.

Note that Orwell was writing this in March 1940, before it was clear that Britain would win the Battle of Britain (the airwar that was supposed to destroy the British airforce in preparation for invasion) and Germany would be unable to invade. His whole quote is worth reading:

Probably, in Hitler’s own mind, the Russo-German Pact represents no more than an alteration of time-table. The plan laid down in Mein Kampf was to smash Russia first, with the implied intention of smashing England afterwards. Now, as it has turned out, England has got to be dealt with first, because Russia was the more easily bribed of the two. But Russia’s turn will come when England is out of the picture—that, no doubt, is how Hitler sees it. Whether it will turn out that way is of course a different question.

[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operation_Sea_Lion

[2] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operation_Barbarossa

Post reply on HN