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

501–510 of 600 posts

Re: George Orwell’s 1940 Review of Mein Kampf

#501

Post by EdwardDiego »

adventured wrote: post #458
magpi3 wrote: post #452

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Do you really thing a book like 1984 is "not that deep"?

1984 is a particularly shallow book. It borders on being so simplistic as to cater to a teen equivalent crowd intellectually. It'd be deep for a 12 year old reading it for the first time, maybe. It's a cartoonish dystopia, laughably absurd in structure; although it gets his points across, which is obviously important. Orwell paints the kind of fantasy dystopia one might envision if one knew absolutely nothing about t…

You must be so lonely, being so intellectually superior.

Re: George Orwell’s 1940 Review of Mein Kampf

#502

Post by ixtli »

anigbrowl wrote: post #429
smcl wrote: post #97

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm still shocked that nothing really came of the report that the anti-Corbyn activities within the Labour party. It should've rocked the party to the core and caused heads to roll.

Which means your institution has been captured.

All correct. It’s a real shame because there was a more subtly disconcerting thing where if you look at the Jewish groups Corbyn did spend time with, and compare them to the few Jewish leaders who supported the antisemitism claims … you start to see a picture of what you have to think to be accepted into the halls of government as a Jewish person. It’s disconcerting.

Re: George Orwell’s 1940 Review of Mein Kampf

#503

Post by galaxyLogic »

ProjectArcturis wrote: post #202
dcolkitt wrote: post #32

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The counterpoint is that regional support for the Nazis generally indicates the opposite. Their weakest electoral performance was in the West and South, which generally was the wealthiest and most liberal part of Germany. By contrast their base of support was the Prussian hinterlands which was already the most militaristic part of the country to begin with, as well as having a weak region economy. I think it’s under-…

Yes, the Nazi appeal was largely a response to the absolutely crazy things that had happened to Germany between 1914 and 1933. Losing a world war, and all the death and humiliation and privation that entails (The winter of 1916 was known as the Turnip Winter, because of food shortages, and that was barely halfway through the war!). Hyperinflation, where an egg might cost a billion marks. Then a Depression! And all th…

I'm not sure Germany's condition was very exceptional. (What about Italy?)

It was more that Nazis simply got into power and once they were in power it was no longer a question of whether the average German accepted it or not. And once Nazis were in power they had the propaganda machinery of the state to make people believe them.

It could happen here too, almost did on January 6th. And in Russia, it's a crime to criticize the war.

Re: George Orwell’s 1940 Review of Mein Kampf

#505

Post by cherrycherry98 »

tasty_freeze wrote: post #415
superb-owl wrote: post #9

> 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…

The funny thing is we are facing a deep crisis that will require sacrifice and huge effort, but 50% of the country claims it's a hoax and the other 50% accept the problem but are whistling past the graveyard. I speak, of course, about climate change. We have had a century of millions of people worldwide working ferociously and spending tens of billions of dollars every year to extract coal and oil for profit. To fix…

The insistence that climate solutions involve self sacrifice I believe is a misguided one. I view the transformation to a low carbon future as happening primarily through the existence of natural economic incentives to do so.

People aren't buying electric cars and installing solar panels on their homes out of self sacrifice. Electric vehicles have many desirable features like being very performant, lower maintenance, able to be used as a home battery backup system, refuel/recharge at home, and are cost effective in a high gasoline price world. One of the major selling points of solar panels is the return on investment through lower electricity bills. The fact that both are considered green and makes some feel good that they are helping the planet is merely extra.

In general, sacrifice too often considered the path to virtue. I increasingly believe this to be mistaken. If we want the masses to adopt green technology it must materially improve their lives (superior in features and/or lower in cost). The benefits of being green for climate's sake I fear are too intangible be a significant driving factor in decision making.

Re: George Orwell’s 1940 Review of Mein Kampf

#506

Post by emmelaich »

permo-w wrote: post #478
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…

he is not alone in this feeling. the numbers are no longer on the site, but I remember YouGov [a British polling company] indicated that British people hold Stalin in far more contempt than they do Hitler, even in spite of the far closer proximity and impact of Hitler's crimes. whether that polling can be trusted I do not know, but I do get the feeling that despite genuine hatred for his actions, a lot of people harb…

Contempt is different from personal animosity. I don't know how you can have soft spot or feel personal animus for a long dead historical figure in another country.

This is pretty much independent of whether you would attempt to kill him on meeting, knowing everything about him.

Re: George Orwell’s 1940 Review of Mein Kampf

#507

Post by hellgas00 »

throwaway5752 wrote: post #297
hellgas00 wrote: post #283

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Any group with unpalatable views to the general public don't want to have their views expressed in the open. There isn't some grand parallel to be had here. The meetings in Davos are never televised despite their influence on the masses. Recently the Washington Post Doxxed the LibsOfTikTok account creator, who's only crime was posting the views of socially liberal people on tiktok. Once your uncommon views become mai…

"Any group with unpalatable views to the general public don't want to have their views expressed in the open" I agree. I disagree however with your bigger point. The American far right in particular has gone through great lengths to be hidden. They financial backing is hidden through shell corporations and with protections they fought to carve out with Citizens United. Davos is widely publicized and the press covers…

>Have you even heard of the Council for National Policy?

That's because the council on national policy has minimal influence on American foreign policy. The American nationalist element has minimal power outside of literally Donald Trump and a handfuls of people that have aligned themselves with him after witnessing his success in domestic american politics.

The power of the the Neoconservative/Neoliberal political hegemony in Washington dwarf the influence of any nationalist element because nationalist politics are not match of the interests of international finance and commerce. Simply put many more wealthy individuals benefit from a liberal world order vs the wealthy that benefit from a localized economy. No Empire that I know of has fought to minimize it's influence.

Re: George Orwell’s 1940 Review of Mein Kampf

#508

Post by hellgas00 »

hn_throwaway_99 wrote: post #321
hellgas00 wrote: post #283

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Any group with unpalatable views to the general public don't want to have their views expressed in the open. There isn't some grand parallel to be had here. The meetings in Davos are never televised despite their influence on the masses. Recently the Washington Post Doxxed the LibsOfTikTok account creator, who's only crime was posting the views of socially liberal people on tiktok. Once your uncommon views become mai…

> Recently the Washington Post Doxxed the LibsOfTikTok account creator, who's only crime was posting the views of socially liberal people on tiktok. Puhleeze. Can totally understand the anger at what WaPo did, but I call major bullshit on "who's only crime was posting the views of socially liberal people on tiktok." Libs of TikTok regularly took things egregiously out of context, like I remember watching a post of he…

No man, for any considerable period, can wear one face to himself and another to the multitude, without finally getting bewildered as to which may be the true.

NATHANIEL HAWTHORNE

Re: George Orwell’s 1940 Review of Mein Kampf

#509

Post by dbtc »

notRobot wrote: post #216
rossdavidh wrote: post #186

So, there's a lot to be said about Hitler and fascism and propaganda and all the other fascinating topics Orwell brings up here, but I'd just like to point out how routinely excellent Orwell's analysis is. Of course I mostly see the best bits brought out and dusted off, no doubt he did mediocre stuff as well, but it is worth noticing how often it turns out that Orwell, nearly a century on, still has plenty in his wri…

Any recommendations for other writings and analyses by Orwell?

I highly recommend "On Politics and English."

https://www.orwell.ru/library/essays/politics/english/e_poli...

Re: George Orwell’s 1940 Review of Mein Kampf

#510

Post by tasty_freeze »

cherrycherry98 wrote: post #505
tasty_freeze wrote: post #415

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The funny thing is we are facing a deep crisis that will require sacrifice and huge effort, but 50% of the country claims it's a hoax and the other 50% accept the problem but are whistling past the graveyard. I speak, of course, about climate change. We have had a century of millions of people worldwide working ferociously and spending tens of billions of dollars every year to extract coal and oil for profit. To fix…

The insistence that climate solutions involve self sacrifice I believe is a misguided one. I view the transformation to a low carbon future as happening primarily through the existence of natural economic incentives to do so. People aren't buying electric cars and installing solar panels on their homes out of self sacrifice. Electric vehicles have many desirable features like being very performant, lower maintenance,…

I believe there is not one "silver bullet"; there are a wide variety of actions that must be taken to make a dent. Some are personal, and some are systemic, and both require personal sacrifice.

Here is an example (this is just a cooked up example, not an actual policy recommendation) where the large scale systemic change will require personal sacrifice.

Say a politician or a party says: we must act now. We need to spend two trillion dollars over the next 10 years on upgrading our electrical grid, both for overall capacity and to allow dynamic load balancing over long distances to make solar and wind power more effective. We are going to invest heavily in the private sector to accelerate battery research into production, adding significant battery storage to aid in the short fluctuations as part of that smart grid. To pay for this, we are going to increase the tax rate on capital gains to 24% and set a floor on the price of gasoline at $4/gallon for the foreseeable future. We will accelerate the closure of coal generators which will, in the short term, increase the price of electricity.

The opposing politician or party says: hooey, you don't need to do anything different than you are doing today. As we all know, plants consume CO2 and what little effect CO2 has on the world, it will be only good for crops. Vote for me and your taxes won't go up. The other guy is lying to you because he hates your freedom to burn whatever you want.

Here is the personal sacrifice part: you will have to vote for the guy who is going to raise the taxes and spend the money to address the issue. You will have less money in your pocket at the end of the month, and the benefits won't be seen for decades. All the while the naysayers will undermining work on the problem and spreading lies.

Post reply on HN