The three greatest monsters of the mid 20th Century were, in order, Mao, Stalin, Hitler. Win, Place, and Show. The Communists called themselves International Socialists. The Nazis called themselves National or Revolutionary Socialists. The mini monsters like Pol Pot, Allende, Castro were Communists. Killed far more people than the right. They killed relatively few people to obtain power.,the real mass killing began after they were in power.
I feel that last point is often under appreciated. Now and again I hear people equivocating between e.g. the Holocaust or Holodomor and dropping nuclear bombs on Japan and it baffles me that people think killing during an active war is the same as killing after you have won and are now in the ruling phase.
If they even had ethics class in the first place, it probably consisted of the essentially anti-ethics that gets pushed these days. I used to teach data science ethics and almost everything you read in the field was "You should lie or omit things from your analysis and reports if it would make people think badly about some groups." It was shocking.
One thing to keep in mind is they all thought they were the "good guys". They were true believers in the "ism" Hitler really and truly beloved that ridding the world of Jews and others he considered Untermensch would make the world a better place. Stalin was a real communist, not some crazy guy pretending to be one. The Romans believed in the Roman Empire. They had a some really bad Emperors but also a period of what they called the 7 good Emperors. The great tragedy of Russia is they never had that. HItler believed in Germany and the Volk. Stalin wanted to make Russia a great power. Neither of them cared much about the German or Russian people. One of Hitler's last statements (supposedly) was that the German People had failed him. I.e. It was all their fault. They all believe in the "ism". And yes the Muslims believe too. The Mafia knows they are the bad guys. That's why they called it "Our Thing". They know they are the bad guys so to speak but they chose that life. For the money or the power or both. But they aren't trying to persuade anyone they are the good guys.
True Believers can't be persuaded that they are wrong. You cant' persuade someone that they belong to the wrong religion. You can't convince an atheist there is a God or a deeply religious person there isn't. When people change beliefs it's an internal thing usually caused by some crisis.
People forget that when Japan decided to surrender it was on a vote of 4/4 with the Emperor deciding. After the massive fire-bombings, two A-Bombs, starvation. The vote was still 4 to 4. Not 8-0, not 7-1, not 6-2, not 5-3. 4-4. And elements in the Japanese military attempted a rebellion to keep the war going.
There was an interview with Akira Kurosawa shortly before he died. He spent most of WW II doing propaganda films. Near the end he got drafted so speak and given a long bamboo (?) spear. Told to go down to the beaches when the American's invaded and try to kill at least one of them with the spear. Interviewer asked him what did he think would happen? Kurosawa replied that he would have certainly been killed and probably wouldn't have been able to kill anyone. He said something like they had machine guns, grenades, mortars, flame throwers, etc. He had a wooden spear. Interviewer asked him, knowing all that would he have done it, gone down to the beach. Kurosawa replied: Of course, it would have been my duty.
Historian Eric Hobsbawm when asked if he would sign for another 10 mio deaths in exchange for the communist utopia he answered YES. Ideology is a bug, a bad one.
When I had an office in Beijing and my US client came to look for some local speciality paper vendors. On day 5, the day most are impacted by their first visit to the city's awful air, he was negotiating with a supplier and he badgered the supplier about the air quality. In 2015 it was as bad as it has ever been. The Chinese man ignored the question, but on the 5th or 6th iteration of the question the Chinese supplier looked at him and said "40 years ago life expectancy was 45 years because of starvation and malnutrition, now I can die at 85 of lung cancer. It's a good trade. The Chinese supplier smiled and exited the meeting.
What cripples the comparison is that very few people would support the mercantilist policies of the British Raj. In contrast, a concerning number of individuals still genuinely advocate for the policies of Mao's China.
So you do engage with communists (and, presumably, Nazis) when they say something worth discussing. Occasionally they do so—otherwise their ideologies would have much less appeal. (Their appeal is indicated by the large numbers of people who have embraced them. It would be a mistake for a social commenter to ignore them completely.)
And the comment below by Daniele is to the point, touche.
The amount and narrative power of these True Believers in Mao’s “Democratic Dictatorship” is astounding once one opens this Chinese Coffin of Communism to see the worms feasting on this corpse.
This is a timely post, Bryan, because in a few days I will be posting on my Substack a compendious resource of the Communist Coffin’s content so dutifully praised and promoted by what I term the Trio of Tyranny Lovers, Matthew Ehret, Cynthia Chung and Jeff Brown all of whom hold the CCP from Mao to Xi as the model for a more perfect government compared to the horrible U.S. or its democratic similars.
The three greatest monsters of the mid 20th Century were, in order, Mao, Stalin, Hitler. Win, Place, and Show. The Communists called themselves International Socialists. The Nazis called themselves National or Revolutionary Socialists. The mini monsters like Pol Pot, Allende, Castro were Communists. Killed far more people than the right. They killed relatively few people to obtain power.,the real mass killing began after they were in power.
I feel that last point is often under appreciated. Now and again I hear people equivocating between e.g. the Holocaust or Holodomor and dropping nuclear bombs on Japan and it baffles me that people think killing during an active war is the same as killing after you have won and are now in the ruling phase.
Sounds like they skipped ethics class.
If they even had ethics class in the first place, it probably consisted of the essentially anti-ethics that gets pushed these days. I used to teach data science ethics and almost everything you read in the field was "You should lie or omit things from your analysis and reports if it would make people think badly about some groups." It was shocking.
One thing to keep in mind is they all thought they were the "good guys". They were true believers in the "ism" Hitler really and truly beloved that ridding the world of Jews and others he considered Untermensch would make the world a better place. Stalin was a real communist, not some crazy guy pretending to be one. The Romans believed in the Roman Empire. They had a some really bad Emperors but also a period of what they called the 7 good Emperors. The great tragedy of Russia is they never had that. HItler believed in Germany and the Volk. Stalin wanted to make Russia a great power. Neither of them cared much about the German or Russian people. One of Hitler's last statements (supposedly) was that the German People had failed him. I.e. It was all their fault. They all believe in the "ism". And yes the Muslims believe too. The Mafia knows they are the bad guys. That's why they called it "Our Thing". They know they are the bad guys so to speak but they chose that life. For the money or the power or both. But they aren't trying to persuade anyone they are the good guys.
True Believers can't be persuaded that they are wrong. You cant' persuade someone that they belong to the wrong religion. You can't convince an atheist there is a God or a deeply religious person there isn't. When people change beliefs it's an internal thing usually caused by some crisis.
People forget that when Japan decided to surrender it was on a vote of 4/4 with the Emperor deciding. After the massive fire-bombings, two A-Bombs, starvation. The vote was still 4 to 4. Not 8-0, not 7-1, not 6-2, not 5-3. 4-4. And elements in the Japanese military attempted a rebellion to keep the war going.
There was an interview with Akira Kurosawa shortly before he died. He spent most of WW II doing propaganda films. Near the end he got drafted so speak and given a long bamboo (?) spear. Told to go down to the beaches when the American's invaded and try to kill at least one of them with the spear. Interviewer asked him what did he think would happen? Kurosawa replied that he would have certainly been killed and probably wouldn't have been able to kill anyone. He said something like they had machine guns, grenades, mortars, flame throwers, etc. He had a wooden spear. Interviewer asked him, knowing all that would he have done it, gone down to the beach. Kurosawa replied: Of course, it would have been my duty.
Something to think about.
Historian Eric Hobsbawm when asked if he would sign for another 10 mio deaths in exchange for the communist utopia he answered YES. Ideology is a bug, a bad one.
I wonder if Eric Hobsbawn would have so enthusiastic if he was to be the first one to die.
When I had an office in Beijing and my US client came to look for some local speciality paper vendors. On day 5, the day most are impacted by their first visit to the city's awful air, he was negotiating with a supplier and he badgered the supplier about the air quality. In 2015 it was as bad as it has ever been. The Chinese man ignored the question, but on the 5th or 6th iteration of the question the Chinese supplier looked at him and said "40 years ago life expectancy was 45 years because of starvation and malnutrition, now I can die at 85 of lung cancer. It's a good trade. The Chinese supplier smiled and exited the meeting.
What cripples the comparison is that very few people would support the mercantilist policies of the British Raj. In contrast, a concerning number of individuals still genuinely advocate for the policies of Mao's China.
So you do engage with communists (and, presumably, Nazis) when they say something worth discussing. Occasionally they do so—otherwise their ideologies would have much less appeal. (Their appeal is indicated by the large numbers of people who have embraced them. It would be a mistake for a social commenter to ignore them completely.)
A commonly repeated lie is worth discussing just as an exceptionally ugly person might have the most remarkable looks in a room.
Good riposte, Brian, as usual.
And the comment below by Daniele is to the point, touche.
The amount and narrative power of these True Believers in Mao’s “Democratic Dictatorship” is astounding once one opens this Chinese Coffin of Communism to see the worms feasting on this corpse.
This is a timely post, Bryan, because in a few days I will be posting on my Substack a compendious resource of the Communist Coffin’s content so dutifully praised and promoted by what I term the Trio of Tyranny Lovers, Matthew Ehret, Cynthia Chung and Jeff Brown all of whom hold the CCP from Mao to Xi as the model for a more perfect government compared to the horrible U.S. or its democratic similars.