Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

H. G. Wells’ interview with Stalin (1934)

newstatesman.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

81–90 of 141 posts

Re: H. G. Wells’ interview with Stalin (1934)

#81

Post by tinco »

firstOrder wrote: post #77
tinco wrote: post #75

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Don't be naieve, you tell me that a band of hunter gatherers would hesitate to kill/oppress another tribe if they were strapped for resources? "According to you", the entire world lived in a system where everyone was picking daisies and being sweet to each other prior to 10,000 years ago? Also, how is communism like how people lived prior to 10,000 years ago?

What resources does a highly migratory hunter-gatherer band actually have to take? The whole point is there is no surplus production. Also, how exactly would one band of hunter gatherers continually oppress another band of hunter gatherers over a period of time? It's not really possible, for a variety of reasons. How is communism like how people lived 10,000+ years ago? Communism is how all people lived 10,000+ years…

> What resources does a highly migratory hunter-gatherer band actually have to take?

Food.

> how exactly would one band of hunter gatherers continually oppress another band of hunter gatherers over a period of time?

They wouldn't, they'd just kill them before the need arises. But if they really wanted to, out of greed or laziness, they'd do what humans have done for thousands of years. Establish a hierarchy based on power and violence, and extort taxes.

Re: H. G. Wells’ interview with Stalin (1934)

#82

Post by dllthomas »

Tycho wrote: post #51
alyxr wrote: post #35

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> What are these elementary requirements Food, water, housing, clothing, healthcare, education. The list is long, but basic. I'm sure you can come up with the rest. > and aren't they now satisfied? Not for the vast majority of people living in the vast majority of countries. Even in your own, I'm sure imperialist country, huge masses of the population are in want.

Well, let's see, I live in the UK. We have running, clean water in every part of the country, I've never heard of any problems relating to people going thirsty or becoming ill from the supply. Likewise with food, I haven't heard of anyone actually starving, and while you could conceivably run out of money to buy food, there's a safety net of food banks. Clothing is very cheap - for a day's wages you could buy enough…

"I've never heard of any problems relating to people going thirsty or becoming ill from the supply."

I've definitely heard of people becoming ill from the supply of water in the UK. The story of the map that showed cholera to be water borne (not airborne as previously believed) is a fascinating anecdote in the history of epidemiology. Of course, that was in 1854, so not terribly relevant to current conditions (I hope!)...

Re: H. G. Wells’ interview with Stalin (1934)

#83

Post by firstOrder »

tinco wrote: post #81
firstOrder wrote: post #77

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What resources does a highly migratory hunter-gatherer band actually have to take? The whole point is there is no surplus production. Also, how exactly would one band of hunter gatherers continually oppress another band of hunter gatherers over a period of time? It's not really possible, for a variety of reasons. How is communism like how people lived 10,000+ years ago? Communism is how all people lived 10,000+ years…

> What resources does a highly migratory hunter-gatherer band actually have to take? Food. > how exactly would one band of hunter gatherers continually oppress another band of hunter gatherers over a period of time? They wouldn't, they'd just kill them before the need arises. But if they really wanted to, out of greed or laziness, they'd do what humans have done for thousands of years. Establish a hierarchy based on…

You need surplus to establish a hierarchy. A migratory hunter-gatherer band has no surplus - people collect enough food to feed themselves, their children, and perhaps some older people, and that's it.

Once there is a hierarchy with taxes and such you no longer have a migratory hunter-gatherer band. So you're talking about what happened during the agricultural revolution 10,000 years ago. I am talking about what happened before that.

Re: H. G. Wells’ interview with Stalin (1934)

#84

Post by dllthomas »

Tycho wrote: post #51
alyxr wrote: post #35

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> What are these elementary requirements Food, water, housing, clothing, healthcare, education. The list is long, but basic. I'm sure you can come up with the rest. > and aren't they now satisfied? Not for the vast majority of people living in the vast majority of countries. Even in your own, I'm sure imperialist country, huge masses of the population are in want.

Well, let's see, I live in the UK. We have running, clean water in every part of the country, I've never heard of any problems relating to people going thirsty or becoming ill from the supply. Likewise with food, I haven't heard of anyone actually starving, and while you could conceivably run out of money to buy food, there's a safety net of food banks. Clothing is very cheap - for a day's wages you could buy enough…

"of course the vast reams of learning material available for free on the internet (access to which is provided in public libraries)."

While there's doubtless more information available on the internet these days, I just want to drop in this reminder that there is also learning material in the books housed in most of those libraries.

Re: H. G. Wells’ interview with Stalin (1934)

#85

Post by tinco »

firstOrder wrote: post #83
tinco wrote: post #81

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> What resources does a highly migratory hunter-gatherer band actually have to take? Food. > how exactly would one band of hunter gatherers continually oppress another band of hunter gatherers over a period of time? They wouldn't, they'd just kill them before the need arises. But if they really wanted to, out of greed or laziness, they'd do what humans have done for thousands of years. Establish a hierarchy based on…

You need surplus to establish a hierarchy. A migratory hunter-gatherer band has no surplus - people collect enough food to feed themselves, their children, and perhaps some older people, and that's it. Once there is a hierarchy with taxes and such you no longer have a migratory hunter-gatherer band. So you're talking about what happened during the agricultural revolution 10,000 years ago. I am talking about what happ…

You don't need a surplus to establish a hierarchy, you need a deficit. Deficit creates the need for structuring. If you're in a band and you can't get enough food to survive, there's going to be some tough decisions to be made. Who gets a cut and who doesn't is decided by those in power.

Besides that, I don't think it's absolutely necessary for a hunter gatherer band to be migrationary, that's only when a tribe becomes too big and exploits its territory faster than the territory can recover.

Re: H. G. Wells’ interview with Stalin (1934)

#86

Post by krick »

listic wrote: post #8

Very interesting. Was it ever translated into Russian? I wouldn't be too surprised to learn that it wasn't.

Are you kidding? Of course it was! Simply searching for "уэллс сталин" in google would reveal it. Here, http://www.situation.ru/app/j_art_1202.htm

But, anyway, I'm interested which one should be considered closer to the original one. Obviously Wells published it the first time in English. But AFAIK Stalin didn't speak English and I can't find if Wells actually spoke Russian. And in some places of the interview I was actually interested in how exactly Stalin phrased it.

Re: H. G. Wells’ interview with Stalin (1934)

#87

Post by jamesbritt »

tinco wrote: post #73
jamesbritt wrote: post #60

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's telling when some of the most challenging interviews are done by Jon Stewart, the host of a comedy show. Sort of embarrassing: http://m.nydailynews.com/1.1761108

What does that link to? If I click that link I get redirected to a page about bunnies and a woman in a bikini.

Shit. I posted my comment from my phone, so it was a "mobile link" (what crap) to an article headlined Jon Stewart’s ‘Daily Show’ was President Obama’s toughest interview: Jay Carney

http://www.nydailynews.com/news/politics/jon-stewart-daily-s...

I'm sorry about that.

Yet another newspaper that doesn't understand the Web. That first link still works if I try it from my phone browser, but on my desktop it redirects to the main page.

Who in the world decided this was a good idea?

Re: H. G. Wells’ interview with Stalin (1934)

#88

Post by fludlight »

dang wrote: post #46

All: this article is on-topic for one reason: it is historically interesting. Predictable ideological tangents are not interesting. Please keep them out of this thread and off HN altogether. If it isn't clear whether a comment counts as a predictable ideological tangent, err on the side of assuming it does. I know it sounds arbitrary to declare what's "interesting", but (a) the term has developed a specialized meanin…

Since HN seems to have an interest in Soviet history, I would recommend Darkness at Noon by Koestler and Khrushchev: The Years in Power by Medvedev.

Re: H. G. Wells’ interview with Stalin (1934)

#89

Post by wrongc0ntinent »

steve_benjamins wrote: post #24

Fascinating how important the questions of class and revolution are in this conversation (from both Stalin and Wells). Equally interesting is how theoretical and ideological the answers are. Great read!

>>Equally interesting is how theoretical and ideological the answers are.I picked up an interesting fact awhile ago, I don't have sources for you, but: Slavoj Žižek has (had?) a portrait of Stalin in his home, not as a sign of admiration, but as a reminder of how problematic ideologies are.

Re: H. G. Wells’ interview with Stalin (1934)

#90

Post by timcederman »

dang wrote: post #46

All: this article is on-topic for one reason: it is historically interesting. Predictable ideological tangents are not interesting. Please keep them out of this thread and off HN altogether. If it isn't clear whether a comment counts as a predictable ideological tangent, err on the side of assuming it does. I know it sounds arbitrary to declare what's "interesting", but (a) the term has developed a specialized meanin…

Also interesting which I found out the other week - Stalin's granddaughter in her early 40s lives in Portland (and looks very much like a local). http://translate.google.com/translate?sl=auto&tl=en&js=y&pre...
Post reply on HN