4 ms·

People don't spontaneously decide that conducting murder in a concentration camp is a morally acceptable career path. The Nazis succeeded in the first place bec

by Aunche 5y ago

People don't spontaneously decide that conducting murder in a concentration camp is a morally acceptable career path. The Nazis succeeded in the first place because they injected their politics into every aspect of life. Politics-free spaces create additional friction that impedes the rise of radical ideology.

greesil 5y ago
That would be true if there was no difference between seeking equality and justice vs. scapegoating Naziesque goose-stepping grievances. I say this as someone who gets annoyed by politically active coworkers. Not all ideologies are created equally.
- visarga 5y ago
  > seeking equality and justice Equality of outcome or opportunity? That matters. I'd support one but not the other. I lived under Communism until 1989 and I know what equal outcome looks like after decades of having its run. There is no incentive to excel and all the incentives to conform because equality comes before merit. After some time the whole society slides into poverty. What I don't like is to put ideology over humans, meaning to prefer abstractions and reifications over concrete realities and ignore those realities. Fighting for justice on a societal level can often be blind to personal details. It's usually us vs them and personal details don't matter, in that regard it's similar to war, dehumanising their opponents in order to make them legitimate targets.
  - inglor_cz 5y ago
    Hello fellow Eastern European. Yeah, a quest for societal justice can absolutely turn into an egg-breaking rampage with promise of a tasty omelette sometimes in the unspecified glorious future. We have seen it and are a bit sceptical. The USA was spared this particular disaster. Perhaps we could point out the case of the Prohibition or War on Drugs to our American friends? These, too, were/are moral crusades ostensibly led by the noblest of intentions, in practice steamrolling individuals without mercy and giving incentive to rise of brutal criminal organizations.
  - lucian1900 5y ago
    It’s disingenuous to blame all problems our countries had before 89 on socialism, while ignoring the constant blockade and attack from the Western European countries and the US.
    - kortilla 5y ago
      A country the size of the USSR does not need resources from other countries to survive. If communism was effective, the blockades would have been irrelevant.
      - lucian1900 5y ago
        It did however need to protect itself from the constant threat of annihilation by the US. At one point US generals were proposing to preemptively nuke all of the USSR because their own losses would be acceptable. So it didn’t help that a developing economy had to redirect a sizeable portion of its productive power towards defence. Nor did the constant less direct attacks from the US and its allies. Despite all of that, average workers had good conditions even when compared to the US itself.
      - belatw 5y ago
        You’re forgetting that the Nazis utterly ane completely destroyed the USSR, digesting an entire generation of men in every soviet state along with all of their infrastructure and resources. In the end it was the sacrifice USSR which enabled USA and UK (lots of Uniteds here) to claim victory. As a thank you, the west invested considerable resources into rebuilding Germany and Japan while giving the USSR and China the middle finger and immediately treating them like enemies. We really did kick Russia and China while they were down, repeatedly, then spit on them.
        Tycho 5y ago
        what about the part where Russia decided to continue occupying all the countries they’d fought the Nazis out of?
        5y ago
  - greesil 5y ago
    I support equality of outcome. Everyone should be poor. It builds character, and makes for better writers. A nation's progress should only be measured by the literature it generates, and then forces its children to read.
- Aunche 5y ago
  >Not all ideologies are created equally. Then discourage all irrelevant politics from work and give even less leeway to the "bad" ideologies. If democratic means are not sufficient to achieve political results you're happy with, then your fellow citizens are not ready for your interpretation of equality and justice. It is antithetical to leverage corporate resources to force your goal. If you happen to be politically vocal without abusing corporate power, then you'd make little political progress, so whether your ideology is good or bad matters very little. You'd just be creating more polarization either way.
  - pjc50 5y ago
    > is antithetical to leverage corporate resources to force your goal So, overturn citizens united, ban corporate PACs, and all corporate political donations? Or are you just trying to ban one side from leveraging corporate resources?
7952 5y ago
A lot of Nazi's really did believe that they were in the right. That Jew's really were an inhuman invader presenting an existential threat. Of course that is an incredibly fragile idea to hold. There needed to be an institutional structure that tied those views to everyday practical and emotional needs. You hold those views because your power, prestige, money and family safety depended on holding those views. You suck up to you Nazi boss, whos suck's up to his boss in turn, all the way up to Hitler. And weirdly this is how a lot of companies act. Deep down everyone knows that the corporation is a lie. But slowly and surely your words turn into a stream of carefully crafted shibboleth's and cultural references. And you get a promotion and a new car. Your family is safe and your place in the pecking order confirmed. And every few years a new set of words enter the vocabulary that clear out a few oldies and cycle the structure. The problem here is not politics per-se but top-down command structures that allow viewpoints to be weaponized for career promotion.
darkerside 5y ago
There's more truth to this than people want to admit. I would add a nuance that it wasn't just about injecting politics, but a certain brand, with no room for others. If we have politics with tolerance, it's a completely different outcome.

by Aunche 5y ago

greesil 5y ago

That would be true if there was no difference between seeking equality and justice vs. scapegoating Naziesque goose-stepping grievances. I say this as someone who gets annoyed by politically active coworkers. Not all ideologies are created equally.

visarga 5y ago
> seeking equality and justice Equality of outcome or opportunity? That matters. I'd support one but not the other. I lived under Communism until 1989 and I know what equal outcome looks like after decades of having its run. There is no incentive to excel and all the incentives to conform because equality comes before merit. After some time the whole society slides into poverty. What I don't like is to put ideology over humans, meaning to prefer abstractions and reifications over concrete realities and ignore those realities. Fighting for justice on a societal level can often be blind to personal details. It's usually us vs them and personal details don't matter, in that regard it's similar to war, dehumanising their opponents in order to make them legitimate targets.
- inglor_cz 5y ago
  Hello fellow Eastern European. Yeah, a quest for societal justice can absolutely turn into an egg-breaking rampage with promise of a tasty omelette sometimes in the unspecified glorious future. We have seen it and are a bit sceptical. The USA was spared this particular disaster. Perhaps we could point out the case of the Prohibition or War on Drugs to our American friends? These, too, were/are moral crusades ostensibly led by the noblest of intentions, in practice steamrolling individuals without mercy and giving incentive to rise of brutal criminal organizations.
- lucian1900 5y ago
  It’s disingenuous to blame all problems our countries had before 89 on socialism, while ignoring the constant blockade and attack from the Western European countries and the US.
  - kortilla 5y ago
    A country the size of the USSR does not need resources from other countries to survive. If communism was effective, the blockades would have been irrelevant.
    - lucian1900 5y ago
      It did however need to protect itself from the constant threat of annihilation by the US. At one point US generals were proposing to preemptively nuke all of the USSR because their own losses would be acceptable. So it didn’t help that a developing economy had to redirect a sizeable portion of its productive power towards defence. Nor did the constant less direct attacks from the US and its allies. Despite all of that, average workers had good conditions even when compared to the US itself.
    - belatw 5y ago
      You’re forgetting that the Nazis utterly ane completely destroyed the USSR, digesting an entire generation of men in every soviet state along with all of their infrastructure and resources. In the end it was the sacrifice USSR which enabled USA and UK (lots of Uniteds here) to claim victory. As a thank you, the west invested considerable resources into rebuilding Germany and Japan while giving the USSR and China the middle finger and immediately treating them like enemies. We really did kick Russia and China while they were down, repeatedly, then spit on them.
      - Tycho 5y ago
        what about the part where Russia decided to continue occupying all the countries they’d fought the Nazis out of?
        5y ago
- greesil 5y ago
  I support equality of outcome. Everyone should be poor. It builds character, and makes for better writers. A nation's progress should only be measured by the literature it generates, and then forces its children to read.
Aunche 5y ago
>Not all ideologies are created equally. Then discourage all irrelevant politics from work and give even less leeway to the "bad" ideologies. If democratic means are not sufficient to achieve political results you're happy with, then your fellow citizens are not ready for your interpretation of equality and justice. It is antithetical to leverage corporate resources to force your goal. If you happen to be politically vocal without abusing corporate power, then you'd make little political progress, so whether your ideology is good or bad matters very little. You'd just be creating more polarization either way.
- pjc50 5y ago
  > is antithetical to leverage corporate resources to force your goal So, overturn citizens united, ban corporate PACs, and all corporate political donations? Or are you just trying to ban one side from leveraging corporate resources?

7952 5y ago

A lot of Nazi's really did believe that they were in the right. That Jew's really were an inhuman invader presenting an existential threat. Of course that is an incredibly fragile idea to hold. There needed to be an institutional structure that tied those views to everyday practical and emotional needs. You hold those views because your power, prestige, money and family safety depended on holding those views. You suck up to you Nazi boss, whos suck's up to his boss in turn, all the way up to Hitler. And weirdly this is how a lot of companies act. Deep down everyone knows that the corporation is a lie. But slowly and surely your words turn into a stream of carefully crafted shibboleth's and cultural references. And you get a promotion and a new car. Your family is safe and your place in the pecking order confirmed. And every few years a new set of words enter the vocabulary that clear out a few oldies and cycle the structure. The problem here is not politics per-se but top-down command structures that allow viewpoints to be weaponized for career promotion.

darkerside 5y ago

There's more truth to this than people want to admit. I would add a nuance that it wasn't just about injecting politics, but a certain brand, with no room for others. If we have politics with tolerance, it's a completely different outcome.