Slashdot Mirror
Hitler Quote Controversy In the BSD Community
New submitter Seven Spirals writes: Recently, the FreeBSD folks have removed Fortune with a fairly predictable far right 4chan condemnation. Then last weekend saw a lively debate on NetBSD's current-users mailing list about the inclusion of Hitler quotes in the Fortune database with dozens of posts falling on the left and right. The quotes themselves are fairly tame material probably intended as cautionary. However, the controversy and the reaction of BSD users has been real and very diverse. So far, the result has been to pull Fortune out of FreeBSD and to relocate the quotes into the "offensive" database in NetBSD's case.
...briefly what fortune is in this context (as in, the Unix program, not the magazine, town, or band):
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fortune_(Unix)
Some people enjoy getting trolled, but I refuse to care about something so nonsensical as fortune. Is it stable? Can it be used to run exploits or escalate privileges? If not, then I don't care. For people who care, fork it or overload with -nohitler parameter.
In FreeBSD's Fortune database (a database of quotes that are randomly shown in some areas of the UI for entertainment purposes, such as on login for example), there were quotes from Adolf Hitler (and some of the ones linked in TFS were incredibly sexist). They were finally removed even though there was a code commit to do it 12 years ago that was rolled back. The alt-right was angered by this. The quotes were moved into an extension of the Fortune database where offensive material is contained.
"When information is power, privacy is freedom" - Jah-Wren Ryel
...briefly what fortune is in this context (as in, the Unix program, not the magazine, town, or band):
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fortune_(Unix)
For once I actually knew exactly what it was in reference to. I'm used to most Slashdot articles being like this - "FartKnocker, a new OO programming language that everybody is using, just got a new release" or talking about new tools that do things that other tools already did but somebody didn't think the older tools were cool enough so they wrote completely new ones that don't add any new functionality but work in more complex ways and are much harder to use than the older tools and they just pretend that they are better than the older ones. Also fun are the tools that actually almost nobody has ever used or heard of except for maybe 100 people in the entire world and the Slashdot article just assumes that everybody has not only heard of it, but uses it.
The hacker community has always been full of people with a certain kind of personality. That kind of personality can laugh at Hitler. But hackers are a dying breed. Software development is no longer driven by that "hacker" personality, and the software development community now has to be much more sensitive and respectful of a more diverse population. Which means no more Hitler jokes, or casual swearing, or crude innuendos, or Monty Python references, or etc etc. Oh well, it was fun (for the hackers) while it lasted.
No, you fucking idiot! Nazis were a far-right group from the outset founded by ex-soldiers angry at the Weimar government as scapegoat for loss in the great war where it had been drummed into their heads they would win, like their fathers and fathers fathers. The whole massive upheaval in industrial warfare reaching the frontlines on a continuous basis wasn't considered, they thought they were betrayed. That is the same sentiment that plays into the hatred of "jews" or the modern form "sjw" where everyone else knows what they really mean, and how stupid it all is. Next time they won't get away with killing the innocent, instead now any Nazi imitators will be the very first to die.
Marxist predictions of a revolution in a wealthy capitalistic society failed to materialize; the "proletariat" was enjoying an increasing standard of living in Britain and Germany, where these revolutions were supposed to have occurred, which really upset and confused the devout Marxists.
So, Marxists began to split into factions, which tried to revise or reinterpret Marxist teachings to include nationalism (rather than classism) and to include direct violent upheaval rather than passive waiting. In Italy, there were the rise of the syndicated "unions", or "fascists", where the struggle became between not rich and poor people, but between rich and poor countries. This idea of nationalistic socialism spread to Germany, which added to it the idea that there is a struggle between the races, too.
Why did the Nazis so hate the ? Because the communists were rivals for the Nazis socialist powerbase; all of this stuff is leftism
In Europe, the people on the "right" were the monarchists, who wanted to conserve the old order.
In America, the people on the "right" are the people who want to conserve the ideals of the American Revolution, in the face of the unending onslaught from leftist "progressives"; the "right" are the true Americans, who want a small government whose sole role is to protect the rights of the people (notice, the government doesn't grant rights, but rather protects rights), whereas the leftists want to increase power ever more in the centralized state, and either spread their control to the rest of the world (kind of a communist outlook) or simply nationalize large swaths of society (kind of like the fascists of Italy and Germany).
Either way, the point is that Marxists, Communists, Leninists, Trotskyists, Stalinists, Nazis, Socialists, Progressives, Antifa, etc., are all Leftist political movements.
Can I interest you in a position as a helicopter pilot?
Nobody ever claimed it never happened. Traitors should be treated like Benedict Arnold. Everyone knows his name, and there's no statue to him, just one memorial to a battle he was general in. But traitors from the south got lots of Idols made of them, most on the campaign to oppress Black people, not out of a genuine care for the loser traitor states of America. We don't need memorials worshipping Benedict Arnold to know who he was and what he did. So needing them for traitor terrorists must be about something else. Like White Supremacy.
Learn to love Alaska
/g/ isn't """alt-right"", and to assume anyone who is annoyed with the trend of ignoring or removing history is """alt-right""" is foolish.
https://svnweb.freebsd.org/bas...
XML is like violence. If it doesn't solve the problem, use more.
They are still available to install if someone feels like being edgy, and there was already a defined repository for other offensive material. This is a non issue in my opinion.
A marketing slogan with no actual meaning. How democratic is the DPRK?
Here is a list of quotes that were removed. I am not sure if this is all of them, or just a sample:
"Everlasting peace will come to the world when the last man has slain the last but one." -- Adolph Hitler
"I shall give a propagandist reason for starting the war, no matter whether it is plausible or not. The victor will not be asked afterwards whether he told the truth or not. When starting and waging war it is not right that matters, but victory." -- Adolph Hitler
"Success is the sole earthly judge of right and wrong." -- Adolph Hitler, "Mein Kampf"
"The very first essential for success is a perpetually constant and regular employment of violence." -- Adolph Hitler, "Mein Kampf"
"A highly intelligent man should take a primitive woman. Imagine if on top of everything else, I had a woman who interfered with my work." -- Adolf Hitler
"What luck for the rulers that men do not think." -- Adolph Hitler
The last quote (men do not think) is likely a fabrication. There is no record of Hitler ever actually saying or writing it.
https://svnweb.freebsd.org/bas...
I think it's not exactly sincere Hitler supporters that are the only ones that could think the change a bad idea. I would think pretending those things were never said because we are hurt they were ever said is harmful for the future. Lest we have public figures repeat many of those patterns without recognizing the problem because we bury our heads in the sand at the past when it offends us.
XML is like violence. If it doesn't solve the problem, use more.
What does the 'S' in NSDAP stand for?
It stands for "Something that we say we are, but are not"
The problem is, there is too much of a population who are intellectually unable to understand sarcasm, or understand a cautionary statement when they see it.
For example "In WWII in Germany the Trains Run on Time" This should be a cautionary statement explaining that efficiency at the expense of freedom isn't a good bargain, and that often cruel/evil regimes will strong arm improvements, but at a large cost.
Much of the hate speech that is on Slashdot today, isn't sarcasm, or parody. It is actually hateful speech from hateful people. What a difference 10 years make.
If something is so important that you feel the need to post it on the internet... It probably isn't that important.
% fortune -m 'Joseph Stalin'
%% (fortunes)
A single death is a tragedy, a million deaths is a statistic.
-- Joseph Stalin
%%
Even God cannot change the past.
-- Joseph Stalin
%%
Gaiety is the most outstanding feature of the Soviet Union.
-- Joseph Stalin
%%
In the future, there will be fewer but better Russians.
-- Joseph Stalin
In Soviet Washington the swamp drains you.
When categorize Nazi party as being left or right, rather than compare it to the communists, you could just as well compare the Nazis to the Weimar republic. You can't get consistent answers if you do that.
Personally, I think that labeling parties right/left (or even worse policies as right/left) engenders sloppy thinking and is often, if not usually, a tool for deceptive speech. In the case of labeling 20th century fascist movements as being right/left, you might as well try to categorize apples, grapes, and watermelons into right/left fruits. They are their own kind of thing and such simple binary labeling only serve to obscure what they are, and to obscure the nature of whatever they are being compared to.
The âoesocialistâ part of âoenational socialismâ is only marginally related to traditional socialism. Iâ(TM)m reading Mein Kampf right now and Hitler hated socialists and communists. But he did not care for capitalism either.
National socialism was to exist as an in between, or a right wing, nationalist version of anti-capitalism. It was definitely not a left wing ideology.
It ain't just the hackers...it seems like it is almost everyone these days.
No one has a fucking sense of humor anymore...
Light travels faster than sound. This is why some people appear bright until you hear them speak.........
Nazi stands for national socialist workers' party.
The Nazis were originally socialist, and had a strong socialist faction up until 1934, when the leader of that faction, Ernst Rohm, was murdered on Hitler's order along with many other "leftists". This consolidated Adolf's authority, and made it easier for him to work with German industrialists. All economies are a mixture of socialist and private enterprise, but after 1934, saying Nazi Germany was "socialist" makes as much sense as saying that China is "communist".
They did like to appropriate Socialist language when attempting to market themselves as being a "workers party," "of the people," and so on, as a way to paint themselves themselves as the middle road between the old-gaurd Nationalists upon whom they placed blame for the country's failures and the Communists who they saw as their main rivals to replace the Nationalists. Despite the marketing/rhetoric, nothing they did from a policy or governance standpoint stands out as more Socialist than any other European state of that era. They lied,
all the time, whenever they thought it would benefit them. This was no different.
There are many different flavors of Socialism in the world today, mainstream European Social Democrats, Berners who want to import that model to the U.S., Syndicalists in labor movements, Anarcho-Socialists and Autonomists who end up having a lot in common with Libertarians, and so on. While there are a few State Socialist/Leninist/Maoist hold-outs like Cuba or Vietnam, many countries successfully apply Socialist principles to certain national industries and infrastructure segments where market forces have historically produced bad outcomes, but leave things more or less to individuals/the-market otherwise.
No one before or after has ever used "Socialism" with the same context or connotations as the NSDAP, except people wanting to disingenuously tar Social-Democrats with Nazi associations as an ad-hominem rather than engaging with their ideas.
Dinesh D'Souza wrote an entire book on this subject, called "The Big Lie".
oh, you mean it's not about his extra-marital affairs?
"They were pure niggers." – Noam Chomsky
Movements like the Nazis are more accurately described as authoritarian. Liberal or conservative, pro-labor or pro-management are positions such a party takes for sake of expediency. They had no problem with contradicting themselves; they always fit their position to the occasion. They were "National Socialists" when gaining support from disaffected workers was vital, but as soon as they had their hands on national power immediately violently purged the socialists from their ranks.
There is really one and only one consistent feature of their ideology: Führerprinzip or the leader principle. That basically means leaving the thinking to the higher-ups. If your superior seemed to contradict himself, that wasn't your problem, it was his.
It's always about personalities with authoritarians, and the leader can say or do no wrong.
Post may contain irony: discontinue use if experiencing mood swings, nausea or elevated blood pressure.
The platform plank "kill all the Jews" is not compatible with a small government
Sure it is. You remove police and legal protection from the Jews, thus making your government even smaller.
Post may contain irony: discontinue use if experiencing mood swings, nausea or elevated blood pressure.
Here's the full diff.
He tells you *exactly* how he intends to operate:
*The great masses of people more easily fall victim to a big lie than a small one.
*How fortunate for governments that the people they administer don't think.
*The leader of genius must have the ability to make many opponents appear as if they belong to one category.
*Through clever and constant application of propaganda, people can be made to see paradise as hell, and also the other way round, to consider the most wretched sort of life as paradise.
*I use emotion for the many and reserve reason for the few.
Hitler and the Nazis were stridently anti-intellectual, for the very good reason that people who think critically are very difficult to manipulate. They were very big on feelings: from mawkishly sentimental art to the deliciously transgressive license of a good riot. In fact the rioters only feel liberated; they're actually doing their masters' bidding.
Post may contain irony: discontinue use if experiencing mood swings, nausea or elevated blood pressure.
That is sadly what they believe. "B-b-but it wasn't REAL communism'. Laughable.
Indeed. The last time this came up, I actually spent a little time reading into the policies of Hitler's Nazi Germany and they were a grab bag of left and right policies. Hitler had no problems nationalizing certain industries, especially if they had some vital importance to the military and there were instances where he privatized government services. There was not particular pattern of caring for free market ideals or capitalism just as there wasn't any strong case that he was erecting a Marxist society either. It seemed more like he was just paying enough lip service to any particular ideal in order to consolidate support behind the Nazi party. It was capitalist enough for the business leaders and socialist enough for the union leaders and so everyone fell into line.
I think that people are far too one-dimensional with their classification of governments. Nazi Germany sits rather close to the center in terms of economic right and economic left. I think what people are trying to do (whether consciously or not) is to try to brand the strong authoritarianism of Nazi Germany as some inherent aspect of the economic systems of the left or right. It doesn't really make sense to do so and you can find examples of governments that were far left (Communist China, U.S.S.R., etc.) that were similarly authoritarian in their treatment of their populations as well as governments further to the economic right of Nazi Germany (Chile under Pinochet for example) as well as countless examples of countries falling on both sides of the economic spectrum that are far more liberal (in the non-economic sense) or perhaps less nationalistic.
I suppose you could speculate how Nazi economic philosophy would have morphed if they had been successful, and that might be an interesting line of thought, but based on what they actually did, they were quite centrist. I don't think Hitler really cared as long as his choices helped further his ambitions or the German war effort. Everyone considers them so evil, that just associating them with a group of people you don't like is an effective tactic for debate or political discourse, even if as you mention its incredibly sloppy thinking at best or terribly intellectually dishonest at worst.
I wonder who thought that offensive.
I thought that was XML. Guess Adolf was misquoted. Should probably tell our lead dev.
Carthago delenda est!
DATABASE WOW WOW
The last time this came up, I actually spent a little time reading into the policies of Hitler's Nazi Germany and they were a grab bag of left and right policies ... It seemed more like he was just paying enough lip service to any particular ideal in order to consolidate support behind the Nazi party.
And this is an element of the classical definition of fascism.
The Nazis and Mussolini/Fascists are right wingers. Why do so many Americans not understand this?
Well for some it is because they are educated as to the actual definition of fascism. Fascism adopts ideology from both the political left and the political right. For example it will coopt both the workers and the industrialists and bring them both under the control of the state. If you bother to open a history book you will find that Hitler and Mussolini both did so, both labor and industry had their respective party/state offices that they answered to. Fascism is opportunistic, any idea, left or right, that can help the state consolidate power will be embraced long enough to attain that power. Fascism is about authoritarianism and nationalism, not left or right.
It takes an especially potent form of aliterate ignoramus to think that any of the races of BSD People have thin skin.