The position of science and technology in Nazi Germany was completely determined by party instructions and the political atmosphere established in the country.On May 1,1934,Bernhard Rust was appointed Reichs- und preußischen Minister für Wissenschaft, Erziehung und Volksbildung (Reich Minister of Science, Education and Culture).The significance of fundamental science was not understood by the leaders of Nazi Germany.The scientific world of Germany retained the mentality characteristic of the previous era,when German science occupied one of the leading places in the world both in the field of theory and its applied sections. Among scientists who valued scientific contacts that allowed for a fruitful exchange of opinions,there was no desire to participate in the development of weapons, inevitably associated with secrecy.Simultaneously, in addition to the moral rejection of party ideology, they were guided by the fear of becoming dependent on the dictates of an administration ignorant of science, which would inevitably deprive them of their freedom in choosing research topics, and under certain conditions, their personal freedom.Science and technology in the Soviet Union served as an important part of national politics, practices, and identity.Soviet scientists won acclaim in several fields, most notably nuclear physics, chemistry and astronomy, marked by a highly developed pure science and innovation at the theoretical level, though interpretation and application fell short.Already in 1920s,certain fields of scientific research were labeled "bourgeois" and "idealist" by the Communist Party.All research, including natural sciences, was to be founded on the philosophy of dialectical materialism.Humanities and social sciences were additionally tested for strict accordance with historical materialism.In addition to that, the party continued declaring various new theories "pseudo-scientific." Both Hitler and Stalin bent the truths to their own twisted purposes and entangled objectivity and subjectivity.Even today, there are people who seek to rewrite history and purport untruths to suit their own agendas and vested interests.

I found this to be a fascinating and disturbing read. I am interested in the World War II era and dictators, so I requested this read. Hitler and Stalin were two of the most brutal dictators in history, and they abused science for their own political and personal agendas. The writer does an excellent job of examining how Hitler and Stalin manipulated scientific knowledge and research in Nazi Germany and Soviet Russia.

This well-written and researched book offers a new perspective on the history of science and totalitatianism.

I wanted to like this book so badly. The rise of conspiracies and the history behind groups of people who promote nonsense are fascinating. But this book was dull and read more like someone writing a thesis. It felt more like name dropping than actually coherent argument. I do think it's time for more of this kind of collection, where we can try to follow how people come to think odd ideas.

As a science teacher, I love explaining how science can be purposefully misunderstood and used to defend things, this book is full of examples.

This is interesting because it not only explores the odd theories which underpinned propaganda, it also investigates how believing such ideas came to be so accepted. All the more terrifying is the idea of how modern communication and social media practices could be used to share such misinformation. A very interesting book.

Cataloging a truly ridiculous list of racist, ideological nonsensical ideas, this is literally a laughable collection of pseudo-science. It is genuinely hard to pick a favourite bit of nonsense, as there were just too many absurd possibilities. Perhaps the Nazi belief in the non-existence of stars was particularly egregious? Apparently, there are enormous icebergs in space and what we think of as stars are just reflections of distant suns in those cosmic icebergs.

Astonishingly Hitler’s disdain for ‘Jewish’ science was so extreme, that he was happily prepared to ban aspects of Atomic physics, even though it had militarily disastrous implications for him. It is hard to think of a purer form of ideological madness.

Russia was no better. Stalin and his cronies insisted on banning any science that questioned the absoluteness of matter, as that could be seen as challenging the very foundations of the Soviet Union. So much the worse for relativity, or any aspects of Science that could be accused of involving subjectivity.

Equally bizarre was the first soviet criminal code of 1919 and its deliberate refusal to use the worlds ‘guilt’ or ‘crime’ or ‘punishment.’ This was because criminality is a product of bourgeois capitalism, so obviously the USSR would not need those concepts. That optimism didn’t last long.

This historical parts of this book were fascinating and often presented with an engaging wry humour which made those parts of the book enjoyable. If the book had only focused on Stalin and Hitler (as the title implies) then this would have been a good book.

But scattered throughout the book was content which actually amounted to a totally different book, attacking modern Woke ideas and showing how they shared the same ideological madness which underlay Nazi and Soviet views.

Maybe its interesting to know that some of the University of Sheffield’s current policies bear an uncanny resemblance to passages from Mein Kampf (10%) or that the imposition of Maori Physics into the New Zealand Science Curriculum mirrors aspects of Soviet Science (28%)? But I wasn’t expecting, or particularly desiring, to read yet another book about modern wokedom. Its sad to hear that modern Russia has got such serious problems with HIV denial that it had to pass a law in 2019 to ban such denial. But how are events in 2019 supposed to be relevant to what the book claims to be about: ie Stalin and Hitler?

And when it comes to the modern woke issues, some of the author’s opinions and interpretations were arguably simplistic. For example, we heard that Auckland University insists on free speech in theory but criticises its practical expression (21%). That may be the author’s interpretation of what is happening, but woke universities typically claim to be defending free speech as long as it causes no harm. Thus, speeches promoting terrorism are banned… and so also are un-woke speeches which are alleged to cause psychological harm. So, the issue is not necessarily free speech itself, it is the interpretation of ‘harm’. These kinds of subtleties need to be explored and explained, if the book is to be properly fair to those being criticised.

On a different matter I also didn’t see the need for the swearing that occasionally cropped up in the text.

I started off liking this book and thinking that it was going to be an obvious 5 star review. By the end I felt so disappointed that I had to argue myself up to give it 2 stars. I think it would have been better to separate the book’s content into two separate books: one on Hitler and Stalin and a different book on Modern Wokedom and its parallels to the totalitarian dictators.

These are comments on an ARC (Advanced Review Copy) version of the text, read digitally in October 2023.

A fascinating and in depth look at how politics has shaped science in two twentieth century dictatorships. I wish, however, that the author had left his personal opinions of Stalin Communism and modern US Democrats (who do not all think math is a form of white supremacy) out of this book.