JKR accused of 'quoting hitler'

I don't even understand the question, "do you include Hitler in that?" Is the poster asking whether JKR considers that Hitler was illiberal, fundamentalist, totalitarian and a terrorist? Of course he was all of those things, surely nobody could expect JKR to think otherwise.

Wow that's quite the thread. Ask a stupid question and get an answer that makes you uncomfortable. Turning it back on her is their only line of defence, but only serves to proves her point. She's a clever woman.

Thanks DialSquare

The text

J.K. Rowling @jk_rowling. Sep 11
If you believe free speech is for you but not your political opponents, you're illiberal.

If no contrary evidence could change your beliefs, you're a fundamentalist.

If you believe the state should punish those with contrary views, you're a totalitarian.

If you believe political opponents should be punished with violence or death, you're a terrorist.

ציפי לביא @tzippylavi. Sep 11
Do you include Hitler in that?

J.K. Rowling. @jk_rowling Sep 11
Replying to @tzippylavi
Many who scream 'fascist' at opponents fully endorse his methods.

''The very first essential for success is a perpetually constant and regular employment of violence."
Adolf Hitler
Mein Kampf.

God they are thick. Or dishonest. Or both more likely.

Taken from Nitter

https://nitter.poast.org/jk_rowling/status/1966268674580631675#m

This, basically.

Sorry, can someone link to the post she replied to? I'm rubbish at finding things in Twitter.

Thanks in advance!

BadAmbassador · Today 08:41

How can this possibly be misinterpreted? She could not be more clear

Ah, I see your error here. You have made the mistake of thinking that they are reasonable, rational and above all, honest. They are none of those.

I've been collecting examples of 'repurposed GC arguments', it's definitely A Thing. I call it 'mirroring', or if I'm feeling less polite, 'parroting'.

So far I have:
CGs are the real flat earthers
'you lot have been lied to'
'Suffragettes fought for women not to be defined by their sex'
'cognitive dissonance' in GCs
and now
'institutional capture'

This one is a humdinger, implying that Helen Joyce is the GC Dentons:
in mainstream media interviews, Sex Matters’ spokespeople typically sound much more reasonable, sticking to whichever talking points are most likely to get the public on board.
It’s an effective strategy.
And it is a deliberate strategy, as candidly laid out by Joyce at a 2024 conference hosted by Genspect – one of the co-authors of the NHS England letter mentioned above.
from Behind the ruling: how ‘Sex Matters’ is shaping UK policy on trans rights

'Memes instead of minds' is brilliant. Sadly accurate.

PS - The Denton's Document, for anyone who hasn't encountered it yet:
DENTON’S DOCUMENT – THE GENDER COLLECTION

If Rowling hadn't answered the question, that would also be wrong: controversial Harry Potter author refuses to break silence on Naziism and trans rights

I want this on a poster. With a 'motivational' picture.

Hitler is a bit like farts, in online discussion terms. If you mention him, you're literally as bad as him. You smelt it, you dealt it.

It seems a weirdly pseudo religious belief, bit like mention the devil and he will appear.

Taking GC’s words, tossing them into a blender, cranking it to ‘apocalypse’, and then responding to this ‘mangled smoothie

Genius. And I'm totally imagining it!

This is exactly what they are trying to do.

They underestimate her at every turn.

Notes for TRAs:

Taking GC’s words, tossing them into a blender, cranking it to ‘apocalypse’, and then responding to this ‘mangled smoothie’ rather than what was said within the context it was said, is not ‘truth telling’.

The rule book that you follow containing ‘universal truths’ about what can and can’t be said isn’t universal. Many haven’t seen it, don’t agree with it, or simply don’t follow it. That’s OK.

"I would argue we should be reading and studying these texts."

It's the idea that if you read them and relate them to anything current that isn't of the same magnitude, you're reducing the significance of the holocaust, rather than using it to prevent a repetition of the same significance.

It means you'll never learn or prevent anything.

We have an Irish Man who demonstrates the point well.

Her opinion of the human race would be very interesting.

Given all the original controversy and backlash in the US through writing a book on witchcraft, the global adoration of her fans, and now the spectacularly awful picking apart of her every word in order to find a letter that doesn't look right.

Seeing human beings so much in the raw would be rather shocking. It could easily send a less stable person right round the twist.

I would argue we should be reading and studying these texts. Part of all our education should be understanding how humanity reached these lows before and whether we went through to overthrow it.

Social media is a gift to those who would subvert democratic norms. We need to be educated about those risks too.

That's easy: they don't possess logic.

There's nothing wrong with reading Mein Kampf - any more than there's anything wrong with reading any other book, written by any other person. Those who don't learn from history are doomed to repeat it and all that.

The only issue I'd have is if someone was profiting from selling it TBH, and even then, only profiting - covering expenses, with an aim of education rather than indoctrination I don't see the issue with.

Words and ideas are just words and ideas, expose yourself to as many as possible. It was the wronguns that were into the whole forbidden literature and book-burning after all.

Once you can get someone “learning”about history and politics through in-group memes, you can misinform them through over-simplification and repetition.

Mind you, that applies to just about everybody these days. Conservative election strategist Isaac Levido was quoted as saying the best counter to tax law changes targeting wealthy people is circulating a meme of a dog saying ‘tax is bad’. Apparently that worked for the Australian conservatives at the time. Social media dumbs down most public discourse.

Hitler was a genius at political manipulation and for reflecting and directing the collective mood. Hitler's words and 'Mein Kampf' are important words and text in the context of understanding political thought in the 20C...given we are at a similar type of junction/fork in the road. That she recognises the subtlties of the situation is a credit to her. That others are not so well read or educated and do not understand the relevence is not her fault.

Nope. They are verboten texts. We are not allowed to examine them and critically analyse them or use them as warnings.

This then gives them special status and means lots of people will seek them out purely because of their verboten status.

Honestly, these people who think banning everything solves the worlds problems need to get out more.

I was starting out agreeing with this: Aren’t all these people just extremely bad at reading comprehension but as the thread has gone on, I’m ending up here:

If someone asks a question about Hitler, responding mentioning and quoting Hitler, in a way that condemns violence, should not be controversial... to anyone in good faith, at least. Sadly, JKR is not dealing with good faith actors.

I’m still baffled why quoting Hitler to demonstrate how political violence is harmful as it only serves authoritarian leaders to attain and hold power is minimising the holocaust and is antisemitic. Genuinely baffled.

Are we never to quote from texts written by Hitler or Stalin or Pol Pot even to highlight the dangers in their thinking?

And given she wrote a blockbuster children’s book series on that very theme, it’s not surprising she’s researched it thoroughly.

The PP who quipped that many TRAs have memes instead of brains does have a serious point. Once you can get someone “learning”about history and politics through in-group memes, you can misinform them through over-simplification and repetition.