h2g2 The Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy: Earth Edition

I'm currently watching this film on TV. For those how do not know, it is a film about a bunch of liberal grad. students who have a guest over every Sunday evening for a meal. One night however, the guest fails to turn up, and the guy who goes to pick her up breaks down on the way back. He is helped out by a guy and the grad. students invite him in for dinner. As heated debate occurs over the dinner; it's revealed that the guest is anti-semetic, as well as a war veteran. He challenges the grad. students, threatening them with mock-violence, and ends up being stabbed (rather ironically) by the Jew. They bury him in the garden, and after much arguing decide that inviting a guest that has *questionable morals* to dinner each Sunday and testing them, will be a good idea. The winner walks out alive, and the loser gets poisoned.

Now, originally, when I watched this film, I thought they were onto a winner. Two years later, I am appalled by the stuck-up characters; so obsessed with their own political correctness that they fail to see that what they are doing is the height of facism. What right has anyone to poison someone because they believe that they are ridding the world of a potential evil force? Because they are *making the world a better place*?

Hitler was the best and most prominent example used; if you could get into a time machine, go back, and kill Hitler, and spare the world of the Nazi regime...would you do it? And how far would you take this idea if you could? Do you think you have the right to make that decision?

Discuss!!

Nope, I wouldn't. Who knows how the world would have turned out, without WWII? The world wars saw the beginnings of real international co-operation. No WWII, The League of Nations is never more than a paper tiger, therefore no UN. All the men being called up meant women had to do traditional 'male' roles- none of that, no beings of female equality. Too many variables, I wouldn't like to be responsible for fxcking up the future, thank you very much. The way it is now, it's someone else's fault.

It's partially a rant against the facade of liberalism...the characters in the film turn so easily into facists; under the miscomprehension that they are making the world a better place...

...which of course was all Hitler thought he was doing!!!

I prefer the anti-semetic guy. He walks in and disrupts their little lives; pushes their face up against the pane of life...and they kill him.

Fantastic!

I think I caught a few minutes of it on the sci-fi channel- but I was tired and drunk, and went to bed next time I encounter it, I'll make a point of watching it.

Hitler went a bit potty. If he wasn't there then who better knew what they were doing would have posed a greater threat.

Indeed. The situation in Germany was ripe for a dictator. Without Hitler, we may have ended up with a compentent one.

Or perhaps Germany's economical structure would have collapsed furthur, and they would have been forced to ask the Western world for help. A Jewish Prime Minister could have been put into power...and the Holocaust would never have happened.

A million possibilities.

But lets not focus on the Hitler aspect. What about other *dangerous* people...?

Dangerous in what way? Politically, just mad bxstxrds, or what?

Thomas Hamilton, before he went nuts in a school, sure. That way, no dead brats, and no stupid rules that say sportsmen can't have handguns . WInner all 'round, as far as I'm concerned. Others might think the handgun ban was a good thing. If I'm the one with the time machine tho', then I'll have that one please.

Pol Pot...

So you all consider yourselves blessed with the right to knock off anyone you choose if you don't agree with them? Are you sure?

I'd have a go at "knocking off" someone who was actively trying to kill *me*...

Considering the situation in Europe at the time, a Hitler or Hitler-equivalent was destined to take that place in history. Dictatorshps were all the rage on the continent, and you simply weren't a fashionable empire without one.

What was the name of the movie?

Duh, it's only the name of the conversation. Nevermind me, I'll go be completely oblivious somewhere else.

"So you all consider yourselves blessed with the right to knock off anyone you choose if you don't agree with them? Are you sure?"

Look at it this way. You have the chance to kill Hitler and you say no because "morally, I can't kill someone". Effectively, you then have to take responsibility for the 7 million or so victims of his regime.

Best to shoot the Austrian with the bad hair and Chaplin 'tache, really.

Wasn't that Arnie in "Raw Deal" or somesuch...?

Book recommendation: Stephen Fry: "Making History"

A nice little well constructed novel about a guy who makes sure Hitler was never born... and then has to deal with the consequences.

BEWARE, if you haven't read the book and have any intention of doing so, the following constitutes...




SPOILERS:::::::::::::

Hero meets physicist who has a machine that can infinitesimally alter the past, and coincidentally a girlfriend who's a biologist who has access to a new chemical which makes men sterile, permanently. So hero, an expert on Hitler, uses the prof's machine to locate the village where Hitler was born, and poisons the well with the sterility agent.... and wakes up in a world where Hitler never existed.

And then has to deal with the knowledge that there are no more Jews in Europe, because Rudolph Gloder, a good looking, charismatic dictator, exploited Jewish ingenuity for just long enough, then discovered the sterility agent and administered it to all the Jews. No gas chambers, no extermination camps - and no more Jews, at all. And a Europe dominated by a Germany which developed nuclear weapons first.

Good book, even if the ending is a bit sickly...

H.

"That way, no dead brats, and no stupid rules that say sportsmen can't have handguns."

Kerravon, I don't want to get moderated by saying what I really want to, so I will draw breath and respond to this statement.

First of all the phrase "no dead brats" is about as insensitive as you can get. What happened at Dunblane was every parent's nightmare. I only hope none of them see your posting.

If the price for banning hand guns, then ban away. A few guys don't get to let off their bang bangs at the weekend - big deal.

I knew a guy who had to hand in his collection of handguns after the law was changed. I also know for a fact that he was of questionable sanity, and during the 80's and 90's used to frequently walk around with a concealed pistol in the hope that someone could attack him so he could do a 'Charles Bronson'. I was particularly pleased this person was disarmed by the law. He was an accident waiting to happen.

I am also pleased that this law remains in force so angry juveniles such as yourself don't get a chance to go near them.

The good news is that you obviously have access to the internet. This means that if you enter the term 'penis enlargement' into any search engine, you may find a solution to your obvious problems.

That's not the question! If you met someone that had opposing views to yours, would you make the decision to knock them off, because you feel they might be a *danger*?

This is similar to the button question (posed by Matholwch or Alji in the God thread, I think, appypollyloggies if it was someone else.)i.e. if you had a button that made everyone think the way you wanted, would you press it?
No way, to both questions. Opposing views is what I want people to have, it's not my responsibility to snuff anyone. If I hadn't met with opposing views I would not have the views I do now, which I like, as opposed to my 16 year old views which I now think were slighly feeble.
I love to shout at newspapers, throw darts at photographs, conduct imaginary debates with ideological enemies...
(Nurse! the screens...)