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

471–480 of 545 posts

Re: They Thought They Were Free (1955)

#471

Post by aidenn0 »

api wrote: post #136
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…

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 think the US has been spiraling toward authoritarianism since 9/11 personally. This did not start yesterday or with the most recent election, nor is it exclusively the result of the right or the Republican Party. A lot of people to the left have also abandoned liberalism and ideas like free speech. There’s been a broad based shift away from liberalism and individualism and toward collectivism, which always leads toward totalitarianism.

On small example: The president openly ordering targeted killings started under Bush and was broadened to include US citizens under Obama.

Of course the dangerous concentration of power in the executive branch has been something the US has contended with on and off over the years. If you read The Federalist Papers, it seems clear to me that the architects of our government did not envision congress steadily abrogating its power; the expectation was rather that it would be jealously guarded by those it was granted to.

Re: They Thought They Were Free (1955)

#472

Post by silexia »

nathan_compton wrote: post #430
silexia wrote: post #351

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The system you describe is majority rule, which often abuses minority rights. It is better to have a constitutional democracy with very limited government powers.

Isn't it quite difficult to know what is better, even if the question weren't subjective? It is very hard to conduct randomized controlled and double blinded trials on forms of government. I don't think people can even agree on how to measure how good a government is.

Korea is that trial. As is China vs Taiwan and Hong Kong pre China takeover.

Re: They Thought They Were Free (1955)

#473

Post by GuB-42 »

throwawaymaths wrote: post #393
GuB-42 wrote: post #275

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This kind of reasoning works for private companies, not for the government. It is true that if you are accepting money from Coca Cola, it will limit your ability to do work that goes against the interests of Coca Cola. To be independent, just stop accepting money from them. But it only works because Coca Cola can't do much against an independent group. Of course, you need to be careful, which typically means hiring a…

by that argument coca cola can certainly hire goons to come get you. how far do you want to take your strawman?

But they won't, because the government won't let them. Even Coca Cola is not above the law.

But government hired goons (aka the police) are the law. In free countries, their role is limited to things like making sure that you won't be bothered by Coca Cola goons, but in less free countries, they are going to hit you for saying things the government doesn't want you to say.

Re: They Thought They Were Free (1955)

#474

Post by herval »

Jensson wrote: post #466
herval wrote: post #268

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Some individuals from the previous administration asking a donor to do something is not exactly the same thing as the president FORCING someone to do it and demanding bribes or else they’ll impose fines on the business (which he then proceeds to do anyway, eg with Nvidia) You’re quite literally a character from the book in this post, if you think they’re equivalent (your argument is verbatim what one of the nazis int…

They were making large overreaches and censorship, thinking anything else also makes you a person from this book. This report was written when Biden was still in power, it details how they did pressure companies to censor material and not just friendly suggestions: https://judiciary.house.gov/media/press-releases/weaponizati... Authoritarianism getting dialed up and voters having less power is bipartisan, this cannot…

So you think “both sides are the same” and that democrats “ramping up republicans” legitimizes what the government is currently doing, all based on a report by the judiciary that’s controlled by the current administration?

Re: They Thought They Were Free (1955)

#475

Post by anigbrowl »

theptip wrote: post #455
anigbrowl wrote: post #402

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Ask your conservative friends what they think of Mark Milley and his successor.

What do you think about him?

One of the best CJCS in decades, with high intellectual and military accomplishments.

But that's not the point. The point is that dropping his name will serve as an interesting litmus test for what your friends actually believe, because Trump has made it very clear that he hates the guy.

Re: They Thought They Were Free (1955)

#476

Post by anigbrowl »

DrewADesign wrote: post #412
anigbrowl wrote: post #399

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Afghanistan

Would you consider the US military presence in Afghanistan comparable to it's presence in the US? How about knowledge of the landscape, ability to understand local cultures, having local contacts, having working transportation routes, resources in place, and the fact that none of the people fighting back are going to be backed by foreign governments? These two scenarios are incomparable.

They're absolutely comparable, notwithstanding their being different. One could just as well argue that it was a lot easier for the military to do drone strikes or call in CAS on the Taliban with zero risk of political blowback. You remind me of someone who was seriously arguing with me in 2004, telling me the Iraq war would not turn into a quagmire because Iraq was arid desert whereas Vietnam was semi-tropical and forested.

Re: They Thought They Were Free (1955)

#477

Post by anigbrowl »

qcnguy wrote: post #443
anigbrowl wrote: post #399

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Afghanistan

The Taliban lost immediately and was suppressed indefinitely until the US decided to leave. It's a good demonstration of how well the US military can suppress even decentralized and suicidally fanatical movements for as long as it wants.

Suppressing them didn't cause them to stop fighting, though. In every guerrilla war the conventional army is nominally in charge, and generally never loses any sort of pitched battle. The whole military theory of guerilla warfare is to avoid shootouts in favor of hitting the enemy and running away.

Re: They Thought They Were Free (1955)

#478

Post by DrewADesign »

anigbrowl wrote: post #476
DrewADesign wrote: post #412

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Would you consider the US military presence in Afghanistan comparable to it's presence in the US? How about knowledge of the landscape, ability to understand local cultures, having local contacts, having working transportation routes, resources in place, and the fact that none of the people fighting back are going to be backed by foreign governments? These two scenarios are incomparable.

They're absolutely comparable, notwithstanding their being different. One could just as well argue that it was a lot easier for the military to do drone strikes or call in CAS on the Taliban with zero risk of political blowback. You remind me of someone who was seriously arguing with me in 2004, telling me the Iraq war would not turn into a quagmire because Iraq was arid desert whereas Vietnam was semi-tropical and f…

You didn’t counter anything I said. You just said I was wrong and presented a couple of strawmen.

Re: They Thought They Were Free (1955)

#479

Post by DrewADesign »

I-M-S wrote: post #463
DrewADesign wrote: post #412

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Would you consider the US military presence in Afghanistan comparable to it's presence in the US? How about knowledge of the landscape, ability to understand local cultures, having local contacts, having working transportation routes, resources in place, and the fact that none of the people fighting back are going to be backed by foreign governments? These two scenarios are incomparable.

True, but it goes the other way around as well - the Taliban had absolutely no way to infiltrate the ranks and do damage to the military operations from within.

Was that a significant problem during the civil war?

Re: They Thought They Were Free (1955)

#480

Post by defrost »

DrewADesign wrote: post #478
anigbrowl wrote: post #476

Earlier quoted context omitted.

They're absolutely comparable, notwithstanding their being different. One could just as well argue that it was a lot easier for the military to do drone strikes or call in CAS on the Taliban with zero risk of political blowback. You remind me of someone who was seriously arguing with me in 2004, telling me the Iraq war would not turn into a quagmire because Iraq was arid desert whereas Vietnam was semi-tropical and f…

You didn’t counter anything I said. You just said I was wrong and presented a couple of strawmen.

Something you didn't say, something significant, is the US military is made up of US soldiers.

A good many of those soldiers will have "Patriot Sympathies" (of many kinds).

This will lead to a great deal of information leakage, "lost" equipment going to militias, sabotage, etc.

Regardless of oaths to US military, an innate sense of duty to some personal ideal of USA will over weigh for a significant number, and a good percentage of those will remain embedded, organized, and difficult to root out.

They will also exist in various numbers from the lowliest boot to the highest general.

Post reply on HN