Comment by jmyeet | Hacker News Reader

Comment by jmyeet | Hacker News Reader

Parent Full thread

> Do you know why Hitler blamed the Jewish people and had them separated out?

Yes, Hitler did blood libel [1], a tradition continued by Donald Trump [2].

> He blamed the Jewish Bolshevik revolutions in Germany for causing Germany to lose World War 1

Are you arguing Hitler was right? Or that it was a useful tool and a lie? Because you've blamed the Communists for WW2. Multiple times. This makes me think you've been hiding your power level and I'm usually pretty good at spotting that. I should've recognized it from blaming the Communism. It's specifically "cultural Bolshevism" [3]. That too has been recycled today as "cultural Marxism" [4]

> Bolshevism is born out of Marxism and is essentially communist. The "headquarters" of communism was Comintern in Russia. Many of the leaders of the Bolshevist movement in Russia and elsewhere were Jewish. Marxism also comes from Karl Marx, who was Jewish.

I get it now [5].

> We didn't put Saddam Hussein in power and he was never our puppet,

He was our foil against Iran. We gave him weapons to fuel the death count of the Iraq-Iran war. We didn't care when he used nerve gas on the Kurds. All of that is established historical fact.

> I guess you'll never believe any of this

No, I don't buy into neo-Nazi conspiracy theories. You are correct.

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

[2]: https://www.axios.com/2023/12/30/trump-poisoning-the-blood-r...

[3]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cultural_Bolshevism

[4]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cultural_Marxism_conspiracy_th...

[5]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/White_power_skinhead

Racism was clearly an important aspect of Hitler's motivations and there is an important reason why. The reason racism is important, is because of communism. It would be outrageous to simply discard communism as if it was irrelevant, when these revolutions necessarily inflame these qualities in a society.

Communist revolution was not simply some kind of economic restructuring demand from workers. It is about eradicating religion and revolutionizing culture which in old countries is often tied to the culture of a genetic line of people. That is how inflammatory these Marxist revolutions are, that they bring rise to voices who want to reinvigorate a race and defend religion.

Marxist movements tend to redefine multiple angles of a people's identity. That's why there were also many similarities in Japan's fight against communism and its racial attributes. That's why you also see racial and religious qualities in the US rejection of Marxist tampering in culture today, though they are vastly overstated. Basically information moves so fast now, it's easier for people to see how dumb Marxism is if they weren't indoctrinated young, so plenty of reasonable people reject it without needing religious or racial angles fueling it. Despite that, it still spreads.

I do blame communists for World War 2, in combination with the power imbalances and massive opportunities that industrialization surfaced. Germany and Japan both believed they had larger potential in that environment, but communism gave them the legitimate enemy they needed to justify expanding. Essentially, global communism is about controlling all the resources and leveraging them, so any country that wants to survive outside of communism has to race for resources.

This isn't a neo-Nazi conspiracy theory, it's just history. It's a matter of history that there was an intention to expand communism globally. Look up Comintern if you've never heard of it, which advocated for world communism.

Religion and race are absolutely useless gobshite whose only physically observed function is making people kill each other, coming from this throughly capitalist person.

It's funny you say Marxism is something thats hard to imbibe unless indoctrinated from childhood, why did you leave out religion from this, marxism is merely a faulty economic system. Religion is a fundamentally wrong and violently wrong system thst encompasses the entire universe. Religion is precisely what is the first and most fundamental thing that comes to mind ehich absolutely requires brainwashing from childhood to consistently propagate.

Think of it in evolutionary terms. There is physical evolution, but there's also mental evolution, moral evolution, legal evolution and so on.

We also see education as being useful, yet education seems to not teach many critical things which we often leave up to parents. Yet, many parents do not fully teach essential morals or lessons. It wasn't that long ago that the only real kind of formal education was a sort of religious education.

Religion in a way, carries forward crystallized values that people felt were important enough. You can look at all the religions around the world and identify the various elements of how those people behave. Is the way they behave useful, logically?

Not everyone is a scientist or a computer programmer, many people do not invest heavily in their minds. We might think that religion only served a purpose 500+ years ago, because it was an inverted solution to a surveillance state, letting people police themselves from within their own minds when external surveillance apparatus was basically not sufficiently viable.

I would argue some, but not all religions, still offer value as they bring forward crystallized behaviors that serve an actual purpose.

We've all seen how easy it is for people to get manipulated, become violent, etc. That seems to happen even if they aren't religious. So, if the people who are most susceptible to manipulations are pre-manipulated into a positive format that encourages them away from violence, that doesn't sound useless.

It's true that religion has been involved in many wars, but not all of those wars were for religious ends, even if religion was used. If religion wasn't used, it might have been something else. Societal structures and law enforcement have advanced a lot since then.

No, stop trying to pull out of your bs. You said communism is something that can only exist if indoctrinated into in childhood, in a comment where you whined about religions feeling "threatened" while pointedly ignoring the elephant in the room. Just answer me a simple question in a Yes or a No. Does religion survive if it isn't indoctrinated into as a kid?

Why not, if religion wasn't available, we'd wrest one major weapon away from warmongers. They will have to search much harder to galvanize large groups of people to fight for nonsense reasons over. If they didn't have this strong identity ready made on a platter to tap into, things become much harder.

Religion is simply not worth the baggage, it posits and requires faith in the infinitely wrong. Values can be taught without religion, you don't need to be a scientist to have values. Everyone has values including atheists. I see no reason why we can't simply teach values minus religion. I don't see atheists who believe in the American constitution as a good system have by virtue of atheism any less support for it, as an example. For the tiny amount of good you may find religions have provided, on the scale of balance the bloodshed and negativity it has caused are simple far worse and not worth it. And even if you think in terms of some values religions might impart, its also again counterproductive. Almost all religions are very karen and nosy often violently so about lgbtq, so much for the values side of the equation. If a religion might be good for values, such a religion at least hasn't yet emerged.

That's not what I said.

Personally, I think you're lost in the very kind of generalizations and lack of precision that you seem to hate. You're becoming what you complain against. If you think people living that way is something to be eradicated, which you seem to, why have you become it in your own way? Is it because you're human and just as susceptible to these mistakes as anyone else?

Where did I say anything about eradication? I asked you an extremely simple question. Do you think religion survives without being indoctrinated into during childhood? Yes or No? You mentioned religion a lot and said communism doesn't survive if it hasn't been indoctrinated into, which may be correct but you ignored the elephant in the room right then and there in your own message: religion. I am not asking if you think religion is good or not. I asked a very simple question, does it survive without childhood indoctrination or does it not?

You are also making up crap about wanting "eradication" which I never wrote or said about. I simply stated facts about the vast ills religion has given us and very little to almost non-existent good. I showed you how religion is unrelated at best and an active hindrance to capitalism.

I simply gave a bunch of neutral facts. You seem for some reason unwilling to respond to any of it and falsely accuse me of "hate".

>Essentially, global communism is about controlling all the resources and leveraging them, so any country that wants to survive outside of communism has to race for resources.

I hate communism but why faslely single it out, global any group or system will want to control resources as much as possible. You seem extremely stupid to the point of believing nazism was about opposing communism fundamentally rather than antisemitism and racialism.

Again as an avowed capitalist, race is the opposite of good capitalism. I will gladly trade with anyone of any race.

Well, first you'd have to make a decent argument for why it shouldn't be singled out. You're having an immediate rejection of the idea, but why? Have you been configured to feel that?

I'm not arguing that racist motivations and beliefs didn't already exist, but the Bolsheviks were a very real cultural, economic and religious existential threat to German identity which massively amplified the validity and appeal of something like the Nazi party.

Are you arguing that's not true at all? I think that would be ahistorical.

Why would I be configured for anything, its common sense, any large powerful entity will be the same. If you think only communism attempts to control the world why is America playing oil games by invading venezuela?

It may have been a religious threat but that is not an existential threat. What do you think happens if suppose most Germans stopped believing in those fairy tales? Do they combust and die? Capitalism literally has no use for religion and nationalism. They are completely out of scope of capitalism, it is at best neutral about them, and in practice religion and nationalism are a hindrance to practicing free trade.

Of course nazis hated commies just as nazis hated any other alternative source of power, but that was hardly their main animating reason for the genocides. I don't need any "brainwashing" to know what nazis openly and proudly said about Jews and Slavs. Or what are you going to say, Poles were also "commies" which is why Germany attacked them? I think the nazi motivation part of your shtick is so beyond mentally ill it's not even worth bothering with.

I think you're a little too emotionally invested and it's preventing you from making a coherent argument.

Even if I explained the actual reasons for Venezuela, it doesn't seem like you legitimately want to know. You can be addicted to curiosity or you can be addicted to opinion, but it's hard to be both.

No you haven't explained shit for Venezuela. If you did you forgot to reply it to me, I see you have written it to someone else. There is nothing emotional about the simple fact that you are positing some utterly brain dead moronic crap out of your ass that basically goes against what nazis themselves proudly proclaimed and then whining and claiming "incoherence" instead of responding to any point.

Again its completely fucking irrelevant if you think its for a good cause or bad cause, you simply said communism wants to hoard and control everything for itself starving others.

We all know the real reason Venezuela was attacked for. Capitalism, communism it does not matter what system, anything powerful enough will want to control all resources for itself. I hate communism, I hate nazism but you give the stupidest non-reasons against it factors which are shared in any powerful system and not unique to it.

So, you think China is building the largest military in history because of "communism". Do you recognize Chinese people as warriors? Can you remember any pro-war Chinese folklore? Communism is a relatively new flavor in their culture.

And what exactly do you think China can't reproduce in 100 years?

I'm not necessarily saying that, only that it's not an unreasonable concern given the history. Venezuela (a communist country) with Chinese ties, was going to invade Guyana before we captured Maduro. Cambodia, a country with communist remnants and Chinese ties was attacking Thailand. China has a long-standing threat to take Taiwan. It already took Tibet and helped try to take communist control of Korea.

Do you think if you were Japan, South Korea or any of those other countries, you would be sitting comfy on the belief that China has good intentions for them?

So, no, I am not _certain_ that is what China is doing with its military build up. Only that, I see it as a possibility that we can't sleep on.

Your argument about whether Chinese people are pro war isn't as relevant in a country like China as it might be in some democracy, but even in democracies war still occurs even if the population is anti-war. In China, it's just even less relevant, because they have strict social control. You could say the relevance has other angles, like more of the population has to be dedicated to enforcement and repression which takes some of that capacity away from military duties.

China can definitely reproduce a lot of technologies, but if they confirm again that they are a critical threat then there is a lot more we can do to slow their progress if necessary.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com