News for hackers. Stuff that matters.
Re:Charlie Kirk shot at event in Utah by bccdee on Thursday September 11, 2025 @12:42AM (#45207866)
> These aren’t people that would lynch anyone or burn a cross in someone’s yard.

They'd vote for someone who would, though. I'm not being flippant; this is why contemporary American politics is so shockingly polarized.

Republican lawmakers will institute extreme and overtly cruel policies (such as the ongoing crackdown on immigrants, tourists, and permanent residents), and people who are upset by this blame Republican voters regardless of how kind or personable those voters are in person. On the flip side, conspiracism has become so mainstream in the Republican party that many Republicans genuinely believe the Democratic party is responsible for a QAnon-style conspiracy, and they blame Democratic voters for complicity in this.

We certainly don't need another Hitler, but we didn't need the first one either. He rose to power because he won an election: More Germans voted for the Nazis than for any other party. Most of those voters were generally decent people who would never lynch anyone, and yet they elected Hitler anyway. Decent people do terrible things. There's no easy way out of this.

Re:Charlie Kirk shot at event in Utah by orwin on Thursday September 11, 2025 @01:16AM (#45208043)
To be clear: Hitler was not put in power by any election. Von Papen and Hindeberg, under advice from industry leaders, gave him power.

In fact, the Nazi party electoral results were down from the previous election. Both the socialist and communist party were up however, and so the men in power chose Hitler to change that. All of those were killed or politically neutered within 6 months, and honestly, they made their bed.

Re:Charlie Kirk shot at event in Utah by bccdee on Thursday September 11, 2025 @02:11AM (#45208379)
The Nazis and the Communists won enough seats between them in 1932 that it was impossible for Hindenburg to form a government without one or the other. Hitler didn't win a majority, but he won more seats than anyone else, which was enough to ultimately finagle his way to the Chancellorship through broadly legitimate means. I'd call that an electoral victory, albeit a weaselly one.

Of course, then the Reichstag caught fire, and that was about it for Weimar democracy. But up until that point, his political success came off the back of genuine popularity at the ballot box. He only managed to became Chancellor because enough people voted for him.

Re:Charlie Kirk shot at event in Utah by orwin on Thursday September 11, 2025 @02:48AM (#45208583)
He could forma coalition with the Socialists, but they pushed for an agrarian reform that would have taken power away from landlords/landowners in east germany, which was the conservative base of power.

It was a choice: Socialists, Nazis or communist, and as always "Plutot Hitler que le Front Populaire", the extreme center choose fascism. The more thing changes, the more they stay the same.

Re:Charlie Kirk shot at event in Utah by ZeroGravitas on Thursday September 11, 2025 @02:30AM (#45208487)
There were votes involved (and Nazis pointed out after the war that in a First Past the Post system like the UK they had enough votes for total power) but, like Charlie Kirk, Hitler and the Nazis had the backing of the rich and the powerful.

That's why both of them managed to get their message out to so many people. That might then convert to votes, but are the voters that believed the propaganda at fault as much as the people who paid for it, those who created it, and those that spread it?

Re:Charlie Kirk shot at event in Utah by bccdee on Thursday September 11, 2025 @02:40AM (#45208548)
Oh I agree, I don't think the Republican agenda reflects some sort of authentic "will of the people." It's produced as much by propaganda as anything else.

Nevertheless, it's propaganda that many Americans have swallowed, and those people then go on to put Republicans in power year after year. I can't fault Democrats for their bitterness towards Republican voters.

Re:Charlie Kirk shot at event in Utah by d1sxeyes on Thursday September 11, 2025 @03:04AM (#45208684)
I’m not aware of any rigorous modelling that supports what Goering argued though. It’s certainly possible but it’s also not a given by a long shot. FPTP in the UK is not based on the popular vote, it’s essentially the outcome of 650 mini-elections. If Nazi support was efficiently distributed, there’s a good chance they’d have won a strong majority, but if support was focused geographically, they might have ended up with fewer seats.

If you’re aware of any more accurate modelling, I’d be super interested though!

Re:Charlie Kirk shot at event in Utah by jepj57 on Thursday September 11, 2025 @09:16AM (#45211247)
And Democrats will censor speech that doesn't go along with their delusion of the moment, and persecute people for living by their religion.

1984 was supposed to be fiction, not a blueprint.

Re:Charlie Kirk shot at event in Utah by bccdee on Thursday September 11, 2025 @09:26AM (#45211358)
Trump is actively arresting and deporting people for participating in pro-Palestine protests. What are Democrats doing that is even a fraction as censorious?
Re:Charlie Kirk shot at event in Utah by jepj57 on Friday September 12, 2025 @12:02PM (#45223626)
Arresting and deporting illegal aliens or legal aliens, not citizens. Big difference
Re:Charlie Kirk shot at event in Utah by lcnPylGDnU4H9OF on Friday September 12, 2025 @04:13PM (#45226227)
> people

Well, they didn't say citizens.

> for participating in pro-Palestine protests

And you missed their main point.

Your reply doesn't really seem to be in good faith.

Re:Charlie Kirk shot at event in Utah by ImPostingOnHN on Thursday September 11, 2025 @09:37AM (#45211496)
That doesn't really address anything in the post you responded to. Are you sure you replied to the right post? Usually replies address the post they respond to.

If you're intentionally responding to just any post to vent your anger at people who you disagree with (i.e. it wasn't a mistake) then feel free to ignore me.

Re:Charlie Kirk shot at event in Utah by jepj57 on Friday September 12, 2025 @12:03PM (#45223641)
It was a very one-sided post. Just balancing it out with exa.ples in the other direction.
Re:Charlie Kirk shot at event in Utah by ImPostingOnHN on Thursday September 18, 2025 @09:07AM (#45289184)
> "balancing it out"

?

what is that?