Hacker Newsnew | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submitlogin

Nazi Germany built it's regime through direct control of the media and censorship of anyone or any idea that challenged their ideology.

I'm not sure propaganda that ignores the power of propaganda is a great idea.



Making media != direct control of the media


Nazi Party == direct control of the media.

Both our statements are true.

What is the ultimate point of burning books? Does it represent the manufacture of media or the control of it?


I don’t quite follow- could you spell out your argument?


This film is an attempt to ignore the economic causes of the war and entirely pin them on the population of Germany. This film mostly seeks to reduce the power of American public participation and labor organization by inferring that anyone who engages in the necessary steps to achieve them must be a type of "proto Nazi" to be ignored or feared.


Dunno. My takeaway was that race baiting and religious bigotry aren’t good for the country, no matter if the party of your choice is the one doing it.


Ah, but how exactly did the Nazis reach that point when they didn't have that capability? Perhaps... the things in the video?

Compare: "This video on pulling weeds is useless, because after the tree has grown it has a mighty root-system."


There hasn't been great scholarship on the buildup of Fascism - or at least there are some big missing pieces.

So many records were destroyed, and until very recently, propaganda was still sacrosanct.

In Communist countries, Fascism had to be Capitalist reaction to working class solidarity. In Western Countries, there was more freedom, but there was a strong stigma against any analysis that violated Atlanticist principals. Hannah Arendt's "Eichmann in Jerusalem" raised too much controversy for claiming Eichmann was just a joiner, not hateful.

Until recently it wasn't just propaganda, but a basic human decency not to ask certain questions too loudly while the survivors of the Holocaust were still alive, and their persecutors lived unpunished.

For example, there's little willingness (in the West) to discuss the role Russian emigres played in supporting Fascism? They were obviously being opportunistic, as were Ukrainians and Finns.

I learned very recently that in late November 1918, weeks after World War I ended, the British told the Germans they could expand Eastward, rearming if necessary, to prevent the Bolsheviks from advancing.

The Germans had already disarmed, and no longer had functional militaries. But they were able to raise self-sustained militias that moved into parts of Poland and Lithuania.

Later on, Nazi propaganda played up this fact, while Allied propgandists chose to ignore it. It likely had a role in convincing Germans they had a "natural" claim to East Europe.

Looking at the news, the German army recently held marches in these places, as a sign of support for NATO against the Russians.


> Ah, but how exactly did the Nazis reach that point when they didn't have that capability?

The economic crises of the 20s and 30s. This is very well documented.

> Perhaps... the things in the video?

Speeches on street corners? I find that notion absurd. I find the presentation incredibly ignorant and manipulative.


You find the idea that nazis increased their effective political power by giving speeches... absurd? Really? Why?


These days there is social media. Controlled by whom? A handful of billionaires.


We’ve gone from CCP control of the media spigot to pro-US regime billionaires controlling it. One step forward and another step back.


I mean, the previous administration famously pulled strings across Twitter and Facebook to demote right wing media outlets on those platforms. This kind of crap isn’t new, and needs to stop.


Not what happened, not in the same universe


That didn't happen. In fact Trump was President when Joe Biden was supposedly doing this according to Musk's Twittergate campaign, which was pure propaganda. (The right's explanation of this, when they even bother, was that the government was a bunch of deep state leftists.)


https://www.dailywire.com/news/biden-admin-pressured-fb-to-s...

https://judiciary.house.gov/media/press-releases/google-admi...

I don’t know if anyone will accept those sources. They’re the first two I found when looking for it. It could be misleading. The daily wire is obviously incentivized to report bad things about the Biden admin. But, I remember reading similar reports from a variety of sources a few years back, and could probably track those down if it’s helpful.


The Daily Wire and Jim Jordan? Good grief.


I mean, no they didn't and these kind of lies need to stop.


What has this to do with one another? This video doesn't advocate for censorship of the media.


The public square is a recognized American institution for political change and messaging. The first amendment covers way more than freedom of the press. This video, to me, seems to deride it.


> This video, to me, seems to deride it.

I don't see any derision of the first amendment or of the public square (not sure which you were referring to as "it" in your last sentence). When we exercise our freedom of expression, we have zero guarantee that we will be listened to, believed, or respected.

The derision I see in this video is directed at visceral belief in whoever is shouting in the public square, especially when their message is so clearly divisive. The discussion between the Freemason and the naturalized citizen is itself a fine example of free expression in the public square.




Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: