Don't Be a Sucker (1943) [video]
For perspective, we now have masked agents roaming the streets kidnapping people in broad daylight. In the United States. Think about how fast this came.
EDIT: Why not have a conversation instead of downvoting. What did I say is wrong?
The people defined immigration laws through democracy. Following democracy means following the immigration laws that were defined through democracy, not following what you'd like the law to be.
The opposition of "Rule of Law" is "Rule of Men". If we don't follow the immigration laws defined democratically, it means, by definition, that we would be following some other rules defined arbitrarily by rulers outside of the democratic process. That is very dangerous, because following the democratically defined laws is the Schelling point that typically maintains cohesion of a polity. What incentives do your political opponents have for maintaining cohesion if you simply defect on your theoretical obligations to follow the law that was voted on? Can you really say that doing that would not create more and more division?
The opposition of "Rule of Law" is "Rule of Men". If we don't follow the immigration laws defined democratically
We are advocating for the rule of law to be applied to everyone, not just people who "look foreign".
The problem isn't that immigration law is being enforced. The problem is the manner in which it is being enforced. Someone breaking the law is not a justification for whatever you want to be done to them. Someone breaking the law is not an excuse to violate other people's constitutional/natural rights by association. And the law not being enforced for a long time is not an excuse to eliminate what little accountability there was for people tasked with enforcing the laws. I hope some day you will realize these things.
Keep in mind it was the tech elite that helped elect Trump. Some of them are here and will see this. Lets see how long until this post is flagged...
Trump somehow contributed to that radicalization (he is not the sole responsible for it though). I think many who support him don't see it that way, and instead interpret his actions as some sort of cheat codes for progress that cut through a lot of bullshit. I am skeptic of his agenda.
I am, however, also cautious about many of the leftist ideas, specially in the last decade. If made to chose though, I would definitely go left.
I think I'm an orphan of a deceased left that doesn't exist anymore. A left that cares more about things like education and healthcare than about how they look on social media. I don't see much value in discussing leaders (this comment is a rare exception) or amplifying partisan narratives.
If made to chose though, I would definitely go left.
This is part of the problem I think. Many people (dare I say everyone) doesn't fit neatly in a left vs right. On certain topics, definitely, but not like a sports team.
So why do we just assume this from someone having a R or a D on their voter card or who they voted for last time?
Your second paragraph is implying that the half of Americans who voted for Trump are "bad Americans". That seems to be sowing the division that your first paragraph warns against (even if it is a reason to dislike Trump).
I don't think either democrats or republicans can claim the moral high ground about sowing division.
Can you show that the arrests are unlawful? Or else what exactly is your basis for the use of the term "kidnapping"?
https://fox4kc.com/news/federal-judge-rules-ice-arrests-at-l...
If someone breaks the law ICE or otherwise, there should be enforcement and justice.
https://www.govinfo.gov/content/pkg/PLAW-104publ208/pdf/PLAW...
Not only that but most people don't approve of his immigration policy.
https://www.economist.com/interactive/trump-approval-tracker
He is going against the will of the people with unpopular policies
We need to stop being divided. For perspective, here's a political talking point framed in the most partisan way possible. Edit: why am I being downvoted?
The US always has failings, but this message is something we can be proud of.
It started off, in the early-50s, with things like "Remember, Freedom of the Press is one of the most important Freedoms." and "Remember, Freedoms come not from humans, but from nature/God itself."
Then it slowly morphed into "Remember, we practice security so we can defend our liberties: every security breach harms our liberty."
Then is quickly morphed into "Please don't have classified conversations in the carpool."
Yes, it's anti-Nazi but it's still has very obvious problems.
I guess the confusion is because in Western societies people are used to the doublespeak of only calling something propaganda when it is done by the "other side". The other side is "spreading the narrative" you are "reporting facts".
You use different words to describe the same thing. Like the good guys are "rebels" and the bad guys are "terrorists".
There is nothing wrong with propaganda. It can be used for good or bad. Just don't start falling for your own one.
information, especially of a biased or misleading nature, used to promote a particular cause, doctrine, or point of view.
Which I think most people consider bad. If the information is true and not misleading, it would be considered educational or informational.
It's the original "no true Scotsman": there the broad definition (Scotsman=person from Scotland) is used to argue for the narrow definition ("real" Scotsman=good and upstanding person from Scotland)
The current connotation to me seems a result of propaganda from authoritarian states (nazis in germany, communists in the old communist bloc) and the presupposition that the propaganda they pushed was misleading and/or false.
Of course you're going to get nationalism-tinged anti-fascist propaganda from the US Dept. of the Army in 1945.
There are large voting blocs who need to hear and comprehend the message of this film that happens to be propaganda, right now.
Propaganda is really interesting in the way it carries a narrative. It's like a good movie, gives you an idea about what you're going to watch, and then slowly flows to the places you expected it to go to, but it does it in unique and interesting way.
There is certainly something innate in the human mind that loves these predictive narratives.
I'm not sure propaganda that ignores the power of propaganda is a great idea.
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.
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.
Compare: "This video on pulling weeds is useless, because after the tree has grown it has a mighty root-system."
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.
The guy in the internet comment section or the Youtube talking head, subtly peddling inequality under the law under the guise of carrot and stick government policy games, he's the real evil. Because letting him guide you at every turn is what incrementally builds the cultural, ideological, political and procedural situation in which it's possible for the "comic book evil" type things to be possible.
A high percentage of people completely lack what Carl Sagan would call a "Baloney detection kit", and the current purveyors of baloney like it that way. That's why they're anti-science and anti-education.
I suspect we're seeing WWII anti-Nazi propaganda being promoted all over social media in an attempt to shock people into a moment of introspection. Someone watching this propaganda piece today doesn't even have to make substitutions. The man on a street-corner ranting about immigrants could be a talking head on certain current "news" programs. However, the shock relies on the viewer's perception of Nazi's as irredeemably evil.
Humans forget, and that happens pretty reliably when something passes out of living memory. There are precious few people left with first-hand memories of Nazi evil or who can remember fighting Hitler. For most living people, Nazi's are just comic-book and Hollywood villains. Comparing oneself to the people in this propaganda reel today undoubtedly has less impact than it did fifty years ago, and that impact will continue to fade. Society in certain countries is now clearly at the stage where painful lessons need to be relearned.
I suspect we're seeing WWII anti-Nazi propaganda being promoted all over social media in an attempt to shock people into a moment of introspection. Someone watching this propaganda piece today doesn't even have to make substitutions. The man on a street-corner ranting about immigrants could be a talking head on certain current "news" programs. However, the shock relies on the viewer's perception of Nazi's as irredeemably evil.
Anti-Nazi propaganda from WWII has been a staple of American and broader Anglosphere culture for the entirety of my life; and so has the counter-phenomenon of people deliberately using Nazi symbols to be shocking or provocative.
Anyway, at the time this film was produced by the US government, legal immigration from foreign countries to the US had been heavily curtailed for a generation by the https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Immigration_Act_of_1924, and immigration would not be liberalized until another generation later in the 1960s.
But in reality, these are very subtle. Understanding that what you are experiencing is a failure or what you are building is feature bloat is extremely hard. These aren't obvious moments. I call these micro signals. The skill is in fact developing the thinking muscle to pick on these micro signals and act on them.
Probably most of the "self help" fall in this category - very obvious when reading, but will fail to identify in reality. Internalizing is about understanding how these would manifest in reality (and be aware that these will be very very tiny signals)
We must never let ourselves be divided by race or by color or religion. Because, in this country we all belong to minority groups. I was born in Hungary, you are <unclear>. These are minorities. And then you belong to other minority groups too. You are a farmer, you have blue eyes, you go to the Methodist church, your right to belong to these minorities is a precious thing. You have a right to be what you are and to say what you think. Because here we have personal freedom. We have liberty. And these are not just fancy words. This is a practical and priceless way of living. But we must work at it. We must guard everyone's liberties. Or we can lose our own. If we allow any minority to lose it's freedom by persecution or by prejudice, we are threatening our own freedom.
I don't think anyone sees it this way anymore. We are much more "zero-sum," both right and left.
We are much more "zero-sum," both right and left.
To drive the point home, the current crop of Republicans wouldn't take kindly to an immigrant SJW college professor like the character in the film preaching to them about liberal values.
Then again, he is Hungarian like Viktor Orbán, so maybe that would get him in the door.
https://npr.org/2025/05/29/nx-s1-5399682/hungary-trump-vikto...
Whether criticism will improve anything, or just annoy people, is another story.
There's not likely to be any 'Have you no sense of decency, sir, at long last?' moment in the current environment, so God help us all.
Some things are zero-sum, and maybe American politics has changed in a way that makes it zero-sum. But that's what it is.
Grateful HN is a quality “feed” - way better than all the algorithmic feeds..
If something as curated as HN existed & appealed to the masses - even if it was ad funded! - we could live in a different world.
History repeats itself.
I agree with OP, this video shows how easy it can be a sucker. There are two parts to it, one is being the sucker, the other is the specific content and time.
OP is pointing out that the sucker is in every echo chamber because these chambers get filtered to only allow extreme viewpoints thrive.
And what happens if you see this content constantly? Not only to adults but also to teenagers?
If you get a chance to see a silent film in the theater with live music, don't pass up that chance! I recently went to see "The General" (1926) with semi-improvised music by pianist Ben Model,[1] and (obviously) recommend the experience.
The firm was produced back in 1945, but we still hearing similar if not exact same racist and xenophobic talk points today across many countries of different backgrounds. This alone is telling.
People don't really care about good or evil, truth or lies, but the message, the story telling, whether someone can make it flip the switches inside their heads, make them subscribe. If you can flip their switches in the exact right way, they'll be your utility.
It turns out, we are, unmistakably, suckers. Just with different arrangement of switches.
I stopped believing good intentions long ago.
Organisms on this planet require resource to survive, but resource is limited. The nature is fundamentally a zero-sum game so that's what everything tends to fall back to when hard time comes. This is so predictable, played again and again, like we're cogs in a machine. Well, maybe we really are.
https://archive.org/details/ArmyTalkOrientationFactSheet64-F...
It was said to have been produced in 1945, and Paramount Pictures allowed showings for the public "without profit" in 1946. 21st century sources describe a 1943 production and 1947 release instead of 1945 and 1946.