|
Edgar Allen Ho posted:Hilariously the nazis are kinda I think a lot of people misunderstand Eco's point of ur-Fascism because that one quote (from the 8th of his 14 points) gets applied to any scenario where an enemy exists and has both strengths (the demonstrable capacity to kill millions upon millions of people) and weaknesses (that they were led by morons and doomed to failure). Having simultaneous strengths and weaknesses is true of any group that exists, so, of course, people can invoke the Eco chamber on literally anyone who has an "enemy" at all. But Eco's point is made as a continuum, where each point leads into the next. It's not just that the fascist's enemy is both strong and weak, it's that the fascist is enslaved to the simultaneous strength and weakness of his enemy. American/British capitalists and Soviet communists looked at Hitler and assessed his relative strengths and weaknesses, and it led England specifically to conclude that, even while the Nazis were a great military threat, assassination plots against Hitler were no longer worthwhile. Fascists cannot, by their ideology, do this. Mainly because there is no actual person to look at as the enemy. Because they need a great enemy to define themselves against, they must invent one. In reality, there was no great Jewish puppetmaster controlling both Moscow and London, but such a force had to exist, because all of Germany's problems: military defeats, economic malaise, the sense of lost masculinity that comes from middle age: they all were the enemy's fault. And thus, the enemy becomes effectively omnipotent, because it is to blame for every defeat, humiliation, and sense of inadequacy the middle class is feeling—these things, as Eco points out in features 6-8, being the fuel of Fascism's appeal. Perhaps the enemy of the ur-Fascist has the same name as a real person or organization (Rothschild, Rockefeller, Soros), but the Enemy is bigger and more influential than anyone could possibly be. At the same time, the enemy, as the outgroup, has to be inferior to the natural superiority of the fascist. They must be weak where the fascist is strong, stupid where the fascist is smart, and cowardly where the fascist is brave. The enemy is inferior, and inferior is despicable to the fascist. Because Fascism doesn't allow self-critique, every American soldier is definitionally stupid and every Soviet soldier is universally cowardly. When these assumptions encountered reality, the Nazis were inevitably blindsided, and so they had to retreat further into the former delusion: they were cheating somehow. They were financed by Jewish gold hordes or the Soviets were willing to sacrifice soldiers without value for human life, and so their enemies became even more cartoonish and contradictory in the imagination. It's not just that the Nazis misjudged their enemies—Stalin and the American press both gravely misjudged Hitler due to ideological blinders—but that they cannot ever accurately judge them. It's easy for any ideology, particularly authoritarian ones, to fall into a trap similar to the one described above. Any enemy you have has both strengths and weaknesses, and someone can fall down the Prester Jane hole and turn to paranoid predictions of millions of Trumpers rising up from the January 6th insurrection, swarming like termites from a rotten log and ending liberal democracy forever, or they can write off Trump as a dullard who was "never a real threat" because his efforts were so lazy and amateurish, with both sides facing a wild swing when their predictions, whether in November 2016 or January 2020, are unsettled. But non-Fascist ideologies can allow someone to critique their own overconfident predictions and biases and more accurately assess the danger their ideology is in. Fascists cannot, not without undermining the fundamental precepts of Fascism, and so they must always see their enemy as simultaneously powerful, as the source of all the humiliations and indignities that made them fascists in the first place, and weak, as the naturally inferior foe of the superior fascist.
|
#
?
Jul 16, 2021 15:35
|
|
but real. Cartoonish villain buffoons who were also actual threats, and killed millions upon millions of people.
|
|
| # ? May 30, 2024 19:15 |
|
|
Nessus posted:It seems like a reasonable guess that there would have been an authoritarian swing in Germany, but I think on some level this absolves Hitler, or even makes him some sort of rear end-backwards good guy. You could have had some dude who was the second coming of Bismarck, who just punches France in the mouth, carves a chunk off of Poland, etc. and WWII would have been completely different, or indeed not "WWII" at all. My intention is not to give Hitler any reverse props, he was bad. Just thinking about some kind of alternate history, and how Hitler didn't seize power by some magic, he was given power by people. The way things actually played out was certainly one of the worst ways it could have gone for everyone involved (that being the whole world).
|
|
#
?
Jul 16, 2021 15:37
|
|
|
Has anyone done an alternate history book where the allies didn't go out of their way to humiliate and bankrupt Germany in the treaty of Versailles?
|
|
#
?
Jul 16, 2021 15:47
|
|
|
Azhais posted:Has anyone done an alternate history book where the allies didn't go out of their way to humiliate and bankrupt Germany in the treaty of Versailles? Nessus posted:It seems like a reasonable guess that there would have been an authoritarian swing in Germany, but I think on some level this absolves Hitler, or even makes him some sort of rear end-backwards good guy. You could have had some dude who was the second coming of Bismarck, who just punches France in the mouth, carves a chunk off of Poland, etc. and WWII would have been completely different, or indeed not "WWII" at all. You could also have the socialists take power and completely avoid the whole genocide and world war thing.
|
|
#
?
Jul 16, 2021 15:56
|
|
|
Azhais posted:Has anyone done an alternate history book where the allies didn't go out of their way to humiliate and bankrupt Germany in the treaty of Versailles? That’s just a normal history book.
|
|
#
?
Jul 16, 2021 16:00
|
|
|
Precambrian posted:I think a lot of people misunderstand Eco's point of ur-Fascism because that one quote (from the 8th of his 14 points) gets applied to any scenario where an enemy exists and has both strengths (the demonstrable capacity to kill millions upon millions of people) and weaknesses (that they were led by morons and doomed to failure). Having simultaneous strengths and weaknesses is true of any group that exists, so, of course, people can invoke the Eco chamber on literally anyone who has an "enemy" at all. a good post
|
|
#
?
Jul 16, 2021 16:01
|
|
|
Alhazred posted:Hitler finds another problem he can blame on the jews and becomes dictator. Sorry to say but the interwar-style socialists, nor communists, do not have that stellar records on *not* committing genocide when they rise to power.
|
|
#
?
Jul 16, 2021 16:29
|
|
|
Alhazred posted:Hitler finds another problem he can blame on the jews and becomes dictator. That would require liberals not siding with however protected their interests. In that instance genocide was always the preferred outcome
|
|
#
?
Jul 16, 2021 16:31
|
|
|
Carthag Tuek posted:a good post
|
|
#
?
Jul 16, 2021 16:37
|
|
|
Azhais posted:Has anyone done an alternate history book where the allies didn't go out of their way to humiliate and bankrupt Germany in the treaty of Versailles? The notion that the 1919 treaty of versailles inevitably led to ww2 is kind of German propaganda. The treaty was in many ways the exact opposite of the one from 1871 that Germany imposed on France; return of Alsace/Lorraine and an indemnity that was calculated to be roughly equal to amount France was required pay to Germany. The only difference was France promptly paid the amount ahead of schedule, whereas the Weimar Republic sabotaged their own economy rather than repay the indemnity, and ended up being largely let off the hook for the indemnity. (Essentially the Americans lent money to the Weimar Republic to pay off the indemnity and then the Weimar Republic simply defaulted on the debt).
|
|
#
?
Jul 16, 2021 16:48
|
|
|
Der Kyhe posted:Sorry to say but the interwar-style socialists, nor communists, do not have that stellar records on *not* committing genocide when they rise to power.
|
|
#
?
Jul 16, 2021 17:00
|
|
|
Lol just an oppsie really
|
|
#
?
Jul 16, 2021 17:26
|
|
|
Angry Salami posted:I mean, it's not like there's a particularly good taxonomic definition of fish either. But temperaments of food are insane and old fashioned, you say. Throw out dated temperaments of food and youre just looking to fast. Really tasty satisfying meats can be replaced with less satisfying ones and you will be in a relative fast. If you had to eat beaver burgers and alligator nuggets instead of beef and chicken, are you making out as well or have you cut some amount of worldly enjoyment out of your day? Alligator nuggets and fried fish are actually really good so they've kind of failed but noone is really gonna go complain to the church that actually this fried fish thing is loving awesome. You can have my beaver burgers though.
|
|
#
?
Jul 16, 2021 18:30
|
|
|
Nessus posted:There was also an attitude among the KPD of "After Hitler, our turn" which for some reason doesn't come up a whole lot. Now to be fair to those guys, in like 1931 the only 'Fascist' government around was Mussolini's, and Mussolini hadn't even really gotten rolling outside of Italy - you cannot blame the people of 1931 for not knowing what would happen in 15 years, any more than we could blame ourselves for not predicting the eventual results of a double Juggalo presidency. I think we could blame them for choosing a guy that had tried a coup d'etat and written a book about how evil the jews were.
|
|
#
?
Jul 16, 2021 19:27
|
|
|
Alhazred posted:I think we could blame them for choosing a guy that had tried a coup d'etat and written a book about how evil the jews were. ...And Gandhi approved apartheid as long as it left Indians out of it, he actually on a couple of occasions helped the British government against the locals. Against history if leaving the hindsight out of it, everything gets muddy, and usually there is no clear distinction of good and bad during the time you have to make the initial selection.
|
|
#
?
Jul 16, 2021 19:42
|
|
|
zedprime posted:You can have my beaver burgers though. Batman certainly won't
|
|
#
?
Jul 16, 2021 19:47
|
|
|
Der Kyhe posted:...And Gandhi approved apartheid as long as it left Indians out of it, he actually on a couple of occasions helped the British government against the locals. Hitler had tried to overthrown the government and openly talked about persecuting jews. That's not muddy, that's two red loving flags and not only ones either.
|
|
#
?
Jul 16, 2021 20:05
|
|
|
Alhazred posted:Hitler had tried to overthrown the government and openly talked about persecuting jews. That's not muddy, that's two red loving flags and not only ones either. Yes, Hitler was a bad person and we know it now, but wasn't "fermenting a revolution" in the Weimar republic more or less a hobby for all of the radical politicians and their movements, and they almost always were hinged on the "hate the group X"? EDIT: I mean "the other side" did this https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/German_Revolution_of_1918%E2%80%931919 so it wasn't exactly news for the Weimar that some political party is trying to coup them. So those two red flags are real, obviously, but would not have been such obvious because Weimar wasn't exactly a stable country or government to begin with. Der Kyhe has a new favorite as of 20:11 on Jul 16, 2021 |
|
#
?
Jul 16, 2021 20:06
|
|
|
The difference is that the "other side" were killed: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Spartacist_uprising
|
|
#
?
Jul 16, 2021 20:35
|
|
|
Yes, they were unsuccessful. But against this you should probably see why the red flags were ignored, since they were nothing out of the ordinary, and the whole country had been going through an economic catastrophe unseen or unheard of before. EDIT: If you choose to not understand the context of how the loving Nazis got their power over the entire loving Germany in just about 10 years, then you choose to not understand how they will be coming back. So far, I have not seen too many attempts on the former, or actions to do the latter from the people who should know better. I am looking at you, democrat party of the USA. And yes, there were nazi-bashing antifa's and popular movement against them even in the 30's Weimar. But that did not work. Der Kyhe has a new favorite as of 21:12 on Jul 16, 2021 |
|
#
?
Jul 16, 2021 20:44
|
|
|
The res flags were ignored because they were perfectly fine with fascism because it wasn’t a threat to them like the alternatives and the same is true now. It’s pretty easy to say that without dealing into Nazi apologizing like you seem to be trying to do
|
|
#
?
Jul 16, 2021 21:19
|
|
|
CharlestheHammer posted:It’s pretty easy to say that without dealing into Nazi apologizing like you seem to be trying to do Exactly which one of these posts is defending Nazis? I have, and still am, saying that the fascism does not spread because people want to do that particularly, but because they offer an alternative, however ridiculous it is. The people who own something never vote against their own interest's or risk losing any of it how meager they may be. If the people in power choose to ignore these signals and only cater to their own, leaving out the less-than middle classes, while forcefully condemning or suppressing any social movements towards the working and lower class, they end up with fascist/nazis because people in general do not want to lose things or believes they have. It is even easier if you have someone to blame for the lower class losing their income or livelihood; Nazis used Jews, Russia uses "outsiders", China is using "non-natives" and USA is using immigrants. This has always been the way the fascists move.
|
|
#
?
Jul 16, 2021 21:35
|
|
|
You keep trying to frame it as no one could see it coming and he was just like everyone else. That’s apologizing my dude. They saw it coming, they just didn’t particulary care all that much
|
|
#
?
Jul 16, 2021 21:37
|
|
|
So in short, go gently caress yourself telling me I am an Nazi apologist.
|
|
#
?
Jul 16, 2021 21:38
|
|
|
https://twitter.com/poorlyagedstuff/status/1415846767439011840?s=21
|
|
#
?
Jul 16, 2021 23:03
|
|
|
Der Kyhe posted:Yes, they were unsuccessful. I don't think anyone here is confused as to why the red flags were ignored, but ignoring red flags isn't the same thing as the people of Germany not having any idea what they were getting themselves into with Hitler. I would, in fact, suggest the opposite.
|
|
#
?
Jul 16, 2021 23:05
|
|
|
A huge, huge amount of people were convinced, or convinced themselves, that Hitler was talking a big game but would tack towards the center once he actually had to run a country.
|
|
#
?
Jul 16, 2021 23:16
|
|
|
Yes, and Soviet Union being an ally did not make them a county on the "good" side: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Military_occupations_by_the_Soviet_Union The difference between Stalin and Germany was that the Soviets mostly killed their own. So loving ban me for being a Nazi Apologist which I am not; the war wasn't as clear cut poo poo as your American propaganda made it to be. Stalin was another one, but fortunately had a stroke before he could order his troops to take the rest of the Europe. This was the full left; Nazis were the full right.
|
|
#
?
Jul 17, 2021 00:11
|
|
|
Do you want to post a historically fun fact about this plan to take over Europe?
|
|
#
?
Jul 17, 2021 00:17
|
|
|
Der Kyhe posted:
gently caress off
|
|
#
?
Jul 17, 2021 00:22
|
|
|
Don’t listen to them, I think you can dig yourself out of this
|
|
#
?
Jul 17, 2021 00:25
|
|
|
Der Kyhe posted:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6H14a0B0HMY So this is what you're up to these days, Mr Spicer
|
|
#
?
Jul 17, 2021 00:32
|
|
|
Ensign Expendable posted:Do you want to post a historically fun fact about this plan to take over Europe? https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Qtb4uow940c
|
|
#
?
Jul 17, 2021 00:38
|
|
|
canyoneer posted:https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6H14a0B0HMY someone find the clip of the journalist who reacts to that whole thing with her eyes
|
|
#
?
Jul 17, 2021 01:14
|
|
|
Here’s a fun fact, the brits actually cancelled a plan to kill Hitler because they were worried that he’d be replaced with someone more competent that would drag out what was left of WW2. Now drop this whole slapfight and accusing each other of being nazi apologists/“umm actually”ing hitler stuff in ways that have me  before I start dropping probations around.
|
|
#
?
Jul 17, 2021 01:31
|
|
|
Ugly In The Morning posted:Here’s a fun fact, the brits actually cancelled a plan to kill Hitler because they were worried that he’d be replaced with someone more competent that would drag out what was left of WW2. which makes sense, by this point the combination of failure and medication had rendered him completely irrational. as i like saying, the performance enhancing qualities of gigantic qualities of morphine, amphetamine and bull cum were somewhat overstated.
|
|
#
?
Jul 17, 2021 01:35
|
|
|
I do wonder, though... if Hitler had died, what would the chain of succession look like? Was whoever in the wings have been an actually competent leader or, like many autocrats, did Hitler keep potential successors weak and divided, moved in and out of favor as jealousy and insecurity, not to mention, wild loving whims made the "in" and "out" positions shuffle around him? Does anyone with more knowledge of the Nazi Party know? I bet it changed a lot, especially in the later years of the war, but I think the one thing that could be worse for the Nazi Party's leadership than Hitler would be Himmler and, I dunno, Goring or whoever else thought they were next in line duking it out in the middle of a global war.
|
|
#
?
Jul 17, 2021 01:49
|
|
|
Precambrian posted:I do wonder, though... if Hitler had died, what would the chain of succession look like? Was whoever in the wings have been an actually competent leader It was Goring.
|
|
#
?
Jul 17, 2021 01:52
|
|
|
Precambrian posted:I do wonder, though... if Hitler had died, what would the chain of succession look like? Was whoever in the wings have been an actually competent leader or, like many autocrats, did Hitler keep potential successors weak and divided, moved in and out of favor as jealousy and insecurity, not to mention, wild loving whims made the "in" and "out" positions shuffle around him? when they were swearing loyalty oaths and poo poo to the reich they weren't kidding. there were assassination attempts, you've probably heard of some - rommel gave it a go and hosed it up, hitler let him eat a bullet rather than endure the bad PR. but i genuinely don't know how well any hypothetical coup would go because passionate nazis genuinely do love their führer and most of them were just "we're losing the war now and you're loving it up" rather than any sincere desire to seize the state and do better.
|
|
#
?
Jul 17, 2021 01:53
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 30, 2024 19:15 |
|
|
Der Kyhe posted:So in short, go gently caress yourself telling me I am an Nazi apologist. ah, looks like that you haven't seen the new rules. explaining why something happened is the same as approving it. there was a thread in qcs and everything
|
|
#
?
Jul 17, 2021 13:43
|
|
