Queen performs fascist salute

[Sibotic]

A lot of "adults" aren't really adults. For example, an "adult" might be playing chess, discovers that they're losing, and instead of playing normally, they flip over the chess board and throw a fit.

If they're losing, then playing normally is losing. In a chess context, this effectively means that it's a problem. The rest needn't matter. At the same time, the parallel between age or otherwise and state power doesn't seem to work out, Hitler's position was very much different to that of an adolescent being discussed, which is presupposed to be a low one separated from power and the established Order. In any case, saying 'Hitler was an immature adult' seems a bit petty, has Hitler been mean to you or much.

In addition, the quoted section reads like a hamfisted attack on the proletariat being revolutionary. Well, whatever.

Unless the problem is with their conduct later on in the war, rather than their starting it and so on, which of course followed a jail term, being positioned as effectively unemployed (they would later alter this image somewhat to 'unemployable' in addition), etc., which are all one would think legitimate complaints and don't constitute 'losing' because they haven't fought yet, in any case they did eventually win, which isn't the same as just using time to rise into a position - which is just reactive rather than substantive. There's also a certain line where communists and such are seeking power, so who are the mature people not seeking power and why do we care what generally happened to them in the war. Hitler's rise didn't necessarily take 'long,' nor were they obsessed with 'power,' the people in which they often had issue with, nor were they isolated in their views, and in this analogy it seems that the 'mature' adults are the German Jews who occasionally were at fisticuffs with the Nazis, who achieved little and lost. Like, where were these 'powerless' mature adults, the German government before Hitler, in the universities (somewhat weakened later perchance), the people who imprisoned Hitler, or. Evidently, Hitler didn't just have 'weapons,' they were in charge of a state, which is different. What might seem 'petty' in such a context in the 1930s is stuff which isn't just straightforwardly serving the ruling class or opposed to the workers, and that's surely the least of the problems and doesn't much represent the others favourably. As said, though, Hitler evidently might not have liked the universities.

[cyu]

Let's say there was a secret manual that allowed you to control other people's minds - or at least be convincing enough that you practically controlled their minds. If you read this secret manual, what would you do with that power? Would you say different people would use that power to do different things? What kind of a person would use it for genocide? What might other types of personalities do with that power?

Similarly, someone who finds a stash of guns might use their newfound power for different things. What type of person would use them in attempted genocide? What might other types of personalities do with that power?

This applies to many things. What if you were able to use predator drones? White phosphorus? What if you inherited Fox News? What if you were appointed the head of the NSA or CIA?