Coffee Space

Review of the Reviews

In the Wikipedia ‘Reception’ section are the following reviews and my replies:

The miniseries received mixed reviews but was nominated for seven Emmy Awards and won two. It received a nomination as “Outstanding Miniseries” and Peter O’Toole was nominated for an Emmy in the supporting actor in a TV movie or miniseries category. The miniseries won a Primetime Emmy Award for Art Direction and John Douglas Smith won the Emmy Award for “Outstanding Sound Editing For A Miniseries, Movie Or A Special” as Supervising Sound Editor.

For its time, I think it was not too bad at all. I’m glad that the people of 2003 could review the film sensibly and realise the merits it had. I think if it were released today, that people could not be so objective in their review.

The New York Times said: “The filmmakers worked so hard to be tasteful and responsible that they robbed their film of suspense, drama and passion”, but commented positively on the performances of Peter O’Toole, Julianna Margulies, and Liev Schreiber.

The film Oppenheimer released in 2023 was an example of accuracy to the point of disappointment. The subject was extremely interesting, but yet it was almost robbed of all elements of suspense. There was the nuclear weapons testing that was underwhelming, the discussions with Albert Einstein that were boring, and other events long forgotten. It had good actors and a good director, it could have been more.

This film on the other hand was accurate enough, but yet has suspense, an interesting story, twists and turns. Despite knowing how history went and having a rough idea of Hitler’s rise, I found myself captivated by a few points:

• The story of his abusive upbringing, and the fundamental want to be recognised. The usual “artwork rejected” story is raised, but something always irked me about how true that may be. I think that there was a want to portray him and a “angry little man” to prevent idealisation.
• The side story where he held is poor niece captive, who originally was enticed by the life he lead and soon become depressed by the lack of freedom it provided. In the end with no other option, she took the only remaining option.
• Multiple times, he found himself in opposition to a larger group, but was successfully able to negotiate and progress up the chain. I can’t recall anything similar within my lifetime, but I suspect the conditions were ripe in post-WWI Germany. You had a power vacuum, a people who were angry and unhappy, an economy in shatters - a terrible time indeed.
• Possibly the most tragic aspect is that there were so many opportunities to stop him rising to power. I paused a moment to think about whether there were any people in modern times who were similar, particularly in British politics. I would argue that the current Prime Minister, Keir Starmer, is the closest we have come in recent times. He destroys all decent within his own party, takes bribes from rich interests, uses the systems in his control to enact his will - I just hope it ends there.
• There is a sense of irony that almost all of the people that helped Hitler on his rise to power were “thrown under the bus” - or more accurately they were killed. This seems to be a common theme of dictators, i.e. Mao and Stalin. I think it’s because as the dictator rises to power they must transition themselves into a god-like status, and those who knew them prior break this illusion and themselves have difficulty in implementing it mentally. You see the likes of Nigel Farage and Donald Trump be very selective about who’s around them, but I think the key difference there is that it is some perceive betrayal instead of a god-like illusion.

David Wiegand of the San Francisco Chronicle gave it a positive review, praising Carlyle’s performance as “brilliant”.

The main actor left me wanting more, but I couldn’t quite put my finger on it. I think he struggled in likeness and voice in the beginning, but by the end he was much closer to replicating Hitler. I think the least convincing part was his anger, Hitler shouting was really quite something, whereas the main actor were more softly spoken.

The German magazine Der Spiegel called the film a “soap opera” and “flat melodrama with invented key scenes - Hitler for stupid people.”

Some of the history was boring, some of it lost, some of it re-written by biased writers. I don’t doubt their review is technically correct, but I think the mini-series is “correct enough” without becoming boring.

Next Dictator

For the next dictator, i.e. with an ambition for world domination, I think we have a few candidates:

Xi Jinping would be one candidate, with an endless term limit and completely centralised power. I think there are a few things holding him back:

• An ineffective military - Despite their outward projections, they repeatedly fail to demonstrate effective military capabilities. It could be argued that they would only need one method to work well, but it is unclear where this would come from.
• A poor economy - Games of world domination are expensive and China’s economy is very much in trouble. I don’t think China could afford to fund anything but a short war, as they would almost definitely struggle to import food and maintain their crop yields. If you wanted to defeat China, you would only need to starve them out. The destruction of some key resources and with such a large population, they could not continue operating for long.

Vladimir Putin would be another candidate, again with an endless term limit and already engaged in expansion operations of the old Soviet era. I think there are a few things holding him back also:

• Element of surprise gone - Every Country on the planet is now very cautious of Russia. Prior to the Ukraine invasion this was less so, but now all neighbours are prepared to defend, and if required attack Russia. Where the West had previously become complacent, they have strengthened their resilience to threats and attacks from Russia.
• Military ineffectiveness shown - Russia’s military is above China’s simply for the fact it is well tested, but it is clear that their hardware is seriously aged and that they were not ready for a modern war in Ukraine. On paper it should have been a “quick special operation”, but has instead been a multi-year fuck-up.
• Economy in war-mode - Russia’s economy is in war mode, which is great for doing war, but terrible for growth. When they open their economy back to the rest of the world, it will be a fraction of what it once was. They would be heavily dependant on rich allies, and they might not have those sorts of friends. Worst still, those willing to invest may come for their share of meat, and Russia itself could be sliced away to nothing.

Donald Trump would by many people’s standards be another candidate, even recently threatening to join Canada and Greenland into the United States. I hope I do not have to eat these words, but I find this wrong for the following reasons:

• Strategic bullshit - I will argue this to the death, Trump has mastered strategic bullshit. He is not yet in power at the time of writing, but he already has the whole world wrapped around his little finger. China stopped an EV plant in Mexico because Trump promised double duty on those imports when he got in. Greenland are preparing for a potential invasion in Greenland, a location that would be strategically important to Russia. Trump pointed out the poor economy of Canada since Justin Trudeau took office, and now he has resigned. I wish the man could help with the UK government…
• History - People like to forget that Trump was already in power before. Whilst the transition of power to Biden wasn’t ideal (for reasons I think were out of his control), he didn’t just have his political opponents shot and the military assume control, as Hitler did. I think the history of a person is a strong indicator of their future.
• Too old - Probably the largest factor is that he is too old for dreams of world domination. It’s a young man’s game, not a man that has a very real chance of not being able to see out his full term (thanks McDonalds). I think Trump thinks about one of my favourite Greek proverbs: “society grows great when old men plant trees whose shade they know they shall never sit in”, and I believe this is what he does.

I think that all of the previously mentioned people are too old. Putin really made a mistake, I believe he believed it really would be a short war in Ukraine given his other annexes. Little did he think that the West would have the bollocks to stand up to him by using Ukraine as a proxy. He’s now in too deep to back out without losing face. If Putin cannot resolve the Ukraine conflict before his death, it could end much like the USSR did after Chernobyl.

I think the most likely candidate for the next dictator is more likely to be a young person, and I don’t really see it.

The Prime Minister Keir Starmer worries me on a daily basis, but he is too cowardly and shaped by the rules that defined him in his definitive years. That’s not to say that he could not do a lot of damage, but at least there should still be a UK left after he is done with it.

Touch wood, I think we are safe for now from serious dictator threats.

How to Stop The Next Hitler?

It’s not at all clear to me. After WWII, Germany made anti-Semitism a crime and the UK did not. I think anti-Semitism is far more of a problem in certain German groups than it is in the UK. I know people who would be considered far-right (and far-left of course), I don’t think they have a problem with Jews at all - perhaps the complete opposite.

The reason I think the far-right does not have an issue with Jews is because firstly it was never really a taboo in the UK and people discussed it previously, but secondly I think the far-right can see a greater threat - the Muslim ideology. We saw in China how the Uyghur Muslims were silently rounded up into concentration camps, where re-education, organ harvesting, labour camps and permanent imprisonment occurs. There was little fan-fair in the Western world to this, and yet the likes of Hamas draw many tears. I cry for those who did not bring about their situation, and who do not have a voice.

In the UK, we are reaching a cross-roads which is bringing about an impossible situation, for the following reasons:

• I can factually state that there is an issue with integrating Islam into the UK. They are over represented in almost all crime and build out isolated communities. Muslims vote on religious lines, something imported from their Countries of origin. They believe that Islam is above the laws of the land and have implemented their own courts within the UK.
• An increasingly growing percentage of the native indigenous population recognise there is a big problem, but only one serious part in the UK actually campaign based on this (partially). The Reform Party under the leadership of Nigel Farage is a new party, and therefore not particularly stable. There is the possibility of a person taking advantage of this instability, although they would struggle to overthrow Nigel Farage as he is a brand within his own right.
• The two main parties, Labour and Conservative, and completely unable to tackle the problem. They were complicit in covering up the Muslim rape grooming gangs wherein thousands of indigenous girls were tortured and abused, covered up by police, local authorities and high-level government - who to this day refuse an independent investigation as people actively in parliament would be in trouble. Worse still, because Muslims make up a large block of active voters, career politicians such as Jess Phillips, who held her seat by just 700 votes against a Muslim candidate, are directly incentivized to campaign on behalf of issues of active voters.
• Labour have just introduced new rules meaning that the voting age had been dropped from 18 to 16, with them automatically being added to the voter register, which is typically a Labour supporting population due to recurring promises to remove University fees, despite it never being done. Additionally they want to drop the requirement for ID, meaning that any sort of voting security is done away with. The belief is that illegal immigrants will also be able to vote for Labour, who promise to give them amnesty for their crime of illegal entry into the UK.
• New laws regarding Islamaphobia are being drafted, making it even more difficult to criticise Islam, despite “hate speech” already being used to quiet any criticism. A person was recently warned by police that after writing to their MP about their political concerns, that they were ‘dangerously close’ to committing an offence. Even political discussions had in pubs could now land you in hot water, where ministers want pub owners to be forced to report.

As you may imagine, there is a hatred stirring against Muslims in the UK. There has so far been zero outlet or justice perceived, and like a pressure cooker the danger continues to grow. A Hitler-esque figure could very possibly take control over this sentiment. The way to stop it is simple, there needs to be open discussion and transparency, but it is not in the best interest of authorities to do so.

I do provide one warning to authorities and politicians, and it’s this: Peasants were given the right to vote not because the government or Royal Family became more liberal, but because they needed to squash the continuous cycles of uprisings. The Royal Family put the government in the way of themselves and the people as a protective barrier, but it only worked when the people believed they had some ability to affect change. If you are stupid enough to break this illusion, the heads will begin to roll as they once did.