Increasing hypersensitivity to Nazi anything

[HagarTheHorrible]

https://www.google.co.uk/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=3&cad=rja&uact=8&ved=0ahUKEwilgqObsJvWAhUJLVAKHYbnBSkQqUMINzAC&url=http%3A%2F%2Fnews.sky.com%2Fstory%2Fpaul-hollywood-bake-off-star-devastated-over-nazi-like-costume-photo-11029257&usg=AFQjCNE8RCr2NHr-lo326KX6NTgKkqif7w

 

What is it about the increasingly hypersensitivity of everyone and their dog to anything related to the Nazi's, all in the name of offending somebody.  Some minor celebrity dresses in a spoof Nazi uniform, 13 years ago, to go to a TV comedy themed bash as a character from Allo Allo, linked below,

 

https://www.google.co.uk/imgres?imgurl=http%3A%2F%2Fnostalgiacentral.com%2Fwp-content%2Fuploads%2F2014%2F06%2Falloallo2.jpg&imgrefurl=http%3A%2F%2Fnostalgiacentral.com%2Ftelevision%2Ftv-by-decade%2Ftv-shows-1980s%2Fallo-allo%2F&docid=ceO4K-5w8t7UZM&tbnid=HJQypk0XRGQmQM%3A&vet=10ahUKEwjToa-NuJvWAhUOEVAKHfz2Dxk4yAEQMwgEKAIwAg..i&w=625&h=385&client=firefox-b&bih=622&biw=922&q=allo%20allo%20cast&ved=0ahUKEwjToa-NuJvWAhUOEVAKHfz2Dxk4yAEQMwgEKAIwAg&iact=mrc&uact=8

 

Evidently he's "devastated" at causing offense.  Dressing up in fancy dress Wehrmacht uniforms or as mock Nazis has been a staple of British society since the war.  I suspect it's not because they're all closet Nazis, in much the same way that anyone who plays as the Germans in WW2 themed games is not a "Secret Army" Nazi. ( You have to be a certain age and know your TV and Allo Allo to get that clever reference)

 

Why has everyone, the further we get from the reality of actual events, become so much more craven about being offended or causing offense.  Are people really that thick that they think burglars only go dressed in black and white stripy jumpers, wearing a mask and carrying a bag marked "SWAG" ?

 

It's utterly pathetic.  Before you know it they'll be banning WW2 themed flight sims and games, that show the WW2 German military, as perpetuating Nazi ideology.  God help any of you who become famous or come to the attention of the press.

 

[Bullets]

Careful, you might offend someone with this post Hagar! 

[Thad]

I get offended by all the offense taken by many.

[AndyJWest]

I suspect the 'hypersensitivity', in the UK at least, may be in part due to the fact that it is only 15 months since a member of parliament was murdered by a neo-Nazi. An actual supporter of their genocidal ideology, not someone who enjoys dressing up.  

[Jaws2002]

It's a result of ret@rded education system, that teaches kids they are special flowers ,who's feelings should never be questioned or hurt, combined with constant BS propagated by mainstream media, where everyone, slightly left of Stalin, is called a "right winger' or a "Nazi".  All of a sudden, nobody can make a joke anymore, without some bunch of worthless social warriors getting offended and trying to ruin his life.

  We live in the most pathetic times, where, instead of responsibility, the schools teach students how to cheat their way through life, exploiting all kind of made up subjecting feelings.

 

And the saddest part about this whole politically and media manipulated BS, where you get called a nazi for everything, those who promote this madness are supporting real, actual, nazi thugs  in Ukraine. 

 

We are living in twilight zone.

[BraveSirRobin]

Wow.

[indiaciki]

Does Babin Yar or Ausschwitz-Birkenau ring any bells? Not to mention other places. The Wehrmacht itself called it Vernichtungskrieg (extinction war) in the east.

Edited September 10, 2017 by indiaciki

[Danziger]

I hate to say it but yes it's madness these days. We all need to have mandatory two years military service after high school.

[HagarTheHorrible]

I suspect the 'hypersensitivity', in the UK at least, may be in part due to the fact that it is only 15 months since a member of parliament was murdered by a neo-Nazi. An actual supporter of their genocidal ideology, not someone who enjoys dressing up.

 

"Those who can make you believe absurdities can make you commit atrocities - Voltaire

 

Tyranny is the deliberate removal of nuance - Albert Maysles

 

Linking one nutters actions to some historical era is lazy journalism, even if his extreme views are / were beyond most, normal, people's understanding. I don't want to derail my own thread, as I don't think it's overly relevant, but I was not surprised that it happened, there has been a general dismissal and non representation of a section of society's views, that it drives potential nutters to extremes, that they feel unrepresented, ignored, should surprise no one.

 

The looking down on and belittling people dressing up in fancy dress WW2 German uniforms has been gaining ground for far longer than the death of Joe Cox.

[indiaciki]

You have a point.They all put a blind eye on real out of the closet nazis in Ukraine. It's alarming.

[HagarTheHorrible]

It seems the nuance between mocking something ( fancy dress, silly mustache finger, fascist salute and goose stepping ) and dedicated Nazi apologist has been all but lost to the modern world.

[Sokol1]

Don't let they know that you play computer games who portrait "nazi" planes. 

[CanadaOne]

I hate to say it but yes it's madness these days. We all need to have mandatory two years military service after high school.

It can be mandatory as long as each person has the right to refuse.

[HagarTheHorrible]

You have a point.They all put a blind eye on real out of the closet nazis in Ukraine. It's alarming.

You're absolutely right, but "Nazis" or "fascist" has become a much overused and hackneyed term. It might well conjure up an easy image for the general masses to absorb and latch onto but it is often pathetically wide of the mark and just as likely to be politically motivated, not only that but the reporters or commentators would probably struggle to define what "Nazi" is that sets it apart.

 

In answer to your earlier question, yes I do know about the " final solution" and have visited a concentration camp.

[BraveSirRobin]

Evidently he's "devastated" at causing offense. 

 

Do you have a link to a story reporting on people who were actually offended?  There is no mention of the "offended" in the link you posted.

 

Anywho, we recently had actual Nazis marching in Virginia.  Lots of people were offended.  I hope that doesn't bother you.

Edited September 10, 2017 by BraveSirRobin

[DD_Arthur]

Is this a thread about the failings of the UK's fancy dress hire industry?

[OrLoK]

Ive worn a german uniform to a party before.

 

I removed any insignia with the swastika before i did as i felt although it's fanxy dress i dont want to offened.

 

I would never wear an armband with a swatika on

 

This was back in the 90s when i was a kid (20's)

 

Dress up. Fine. Cause offence. No.

[Danziger]

Do you have a link to a story reporting on people who were actually offended? There is no mention of the "offended" in the link you posted.

 

Anywho, we recently had actual Nazis marching in Virginia. Lots of people were offended. I hope that doesn't bother you.

More like Nazi wannabes...

[BraveSirRobin]

More like Nazi wannabes...

 

What's the difference?

[Danziger]

What's the difference?

I'm pretty sure everyone knows what actual Nazis were around WW2.

 

These modern douchebags probably like to consider themselves Nazis but I wouldn't give them the satisfaction of labeling them as such. They fly confederate and Nazi flags or anything to do with white supremacy. They are basically just some racist white trash people who want to be seen as some kind of legitimate threat.

[BraveSirRobin]

 They fly confederate and Nazi flags or anything to do with white supremacy. They are basically just some racist white trash people who want to be seen as some kind of legitimate threat.

 

I hate to break it to you, but that is how the original Nazis started out.

[Danziger]

I hate to break it to you, but that is how the original Nazis started out.

No not really. Hitler was pretty well funded by some wealthy elites. He took advantage of desperate people convincing them that a certain people were responsible for all of Germany's problems and that he had the answers. The Nazis formed a government, took over a nation and tried to take on the world.

 

These idiots are not capable of anything like that. Yes they hold their little rallies and try to make a stink but they are really just a bunch of ignorant wannabes.

[II/JG17_HerrMurf]

An entire nation discounted their efforts throughout the 30's to their own peril as well. Give these current wannabe's no quarter anywhere.

[Danziger]

I wouldn't give them any quarter. I am only saying I wouldn't call them Nazis or even classify them as real true Nazis because it's exactly what they want. I've personally known a couple of these types. They are just as close to being Nazis as they are to being Confederates. They are ignorant losers and I honestly have no idea how it's still legal for such supremacist hate groups of any type to meet and assemble in public.

[BraveSirRobin]

 They are ignorant losers and I honestly have no idea how it's still legal for such supremacist hate groups of any type to meet and assemble in public.

 

Right.  So we agree that they're Nazis.

[JtD]

I honestly have no idea how it's still legal for such supremacist hate groups of any type to meet and assemble in public.

Because freedom of speech and right of assembly are two of the highest goods we can have in our society. They must not be restricted any further than absolutely necessary. As with everything else, this freedom comes with a price...

 

Fortunately, you have the right to speak up and organize assemblies opposing these losers.

Edited September 11, 2017 by JtD

[Daff]

I can't believe there are people drawing parallels with nazi Germany and the confederacy and then lumping modern day skinheads with confederate soldiers but they aren't good enough to be called nazis Smh think we found the closet nazi

[VBF-12_Stick-95]

I personally do not take offense at emblems in the right setting where they represent historical accuracy, e.g, museums, movies, re-enactments, aircraft skins, etc.  It's all about context.  Outside of these settings, I would question the intent of their use.

[HagarTheHorrible]

I personally do not take offense at emblems in the right setting where they represent historical accuracy, e.g, museums, movies, re-enactments, aircraft skins, etc. It's all about context. Outside of these settings, I would question the intent of their use.

Wouldn't flying a Stuka's, a much vaunted symbol of Nazi power, terror and military might, in a game, for fun not fall outside your "context" of appropriate ? I'm sure you wouldn't agree. I'm also sure if you searched hard enough you could find someone, or a group, who are offended by any representation of German military might, especially in the context of fun, and would like nothing better than to ban it or make those / us pariahs for " ever" having had the temerity to consider otherwise.

 

I fully understand that some countries should be sensitive to the depiction of past events but there has been a long tradition, especially in the UK of dressing up to mock or ridicule our enemies, or fears. Just because not everyone is a Charlie Chaplin should not prevent them from doing so along with the making of models or playing games that recreate or in anyway glorify those events.

 

As a side note, I don't full get the anal attention to historical detail dressing up re- enactment group thing, aithough having attended events where they are present I appreciate their knowledge on the subject and historical education value ( haven't come across Germans just your plain old Romans, Vikings, Pirates etc) I can also,just about, understand why somebody would want to dress in WW2 German kit, and if we're honest the Waffen SS probably had the best kit of that motley bunch ( in the same way that I can understand why German military hardware from WW2 has always been the most popular theme for plastic kits) although i still think they're a bit weird, but " hey ho" each to their own. I certainly don't consider them a threat to the civilized world.

Edited September 11, 2017 by HagarTheHorrible

[Finkeren]

I don't think this is an easy topic to approach, and it's certainly not black-or-white.

 

On the one hand I never see the need to downright ban symbols, names, clothing or anything else. That's kind of ridiculous to me.

 

On the other hand I definitely see the need for limiting free speech for people and organizations calling for violence and oppression of other groups them deem "inferior". 

 

But the judicial question aside: If you dress up as Hitler for fun, you'd better have a damn good joke to go with it (preferably involving pineapples up the bum) or otherwise I won't fault people for thinking, that you're an ***hole who is just being inappropriate for the sake of being inappropriate or worse still: You're actually a really despicable human being who wants to glorify naziism. 

 

Your right to free speech and to dress however you like does not entitle you to be free of criticism of how you choose to use that freedom.

[MineFewer]

I found this very funny. Does that make me a "Nazi"? [disclaimer: I do not condone playing with dead pets]

 

 

 

[unreasonable]

I don't think this is an easy topic to approach, and it's certainly not black-or-white.

 

On the one hand I never see the need to downright ban symbols, names, clothing or anything else. That's kind of ridiculous to me.

 

 On the other hand I definitely see the need for limiting free speech for people and organizations calling for violence and oppression of other groups them deem "inferior". 

 

But the judicial question aside: If you dress up as Hitler for fun, you'd better have a damn good joke to go with it (preferably involving pineapples up the bum) or otherwise I won't fault people for thinking, that you're an ***hole who is just being inappropriate for the sake of being inappropriate or worse still: You're actually a really despicable human being who wants to glorify naziism. 

 

Your right to free speech and to dress however you like does not entitle you to be free of criticism of how you choose to use that freedom.

 

The problem with "the need for limiting free speech for people and organizations calling for violence and oppression of other groups them deem "inferior".  is that many of the people calling for the limiting of free speech to nazis are doing so exactly because they deem nazis to be inferior - morally and sometimes even racially and sexually (toxic white males) - and are quite open about using violence to shut them down.  And where do you draw the line - given that there is at least one major world religion whose texts explicitly call for violence and oppression against those whom it deems inferior. 

 

As to speakers being free of criticism - I agree there should be no such entitlement, since criticism is an exercise of free speech, although shouting someone down is not criticism. The argument is often, however, put slightly differently (not by you in this case) - that speech may be free but that does not mean it has no consequences.  To me this is totalitarian weaseling: if someone is fired from their job for saying things that are entirely legal to express, then freedom of speech has certainly been curtailed; less severely than if the person is lynched by a mob, or assassinated by fanatics, but the effect is similar. People are disinclined to say things if they know they are likely to be punished.  It really does not matter whether the people doing the punishment are the state or other powerful institutions.

 

I have never dressed as a nazi myself, I think it is naff: but I have been abused to my face and called a nazi by a fat middle class English couple when I was dressed in British Army uniform. And that was in 1981 or thereabouts. This nonsense in nothing new.

Edited September 11, 2017 by unreasonable

[Blutaar]

I find it funny that everyone fears the old, long gone nazis but are ok with the actual muslim threat! Its kind of the same ideology, even Hitler and Göbbels agreed that Islam has much in common with the nazi ideology. Hitler himselfs said something like, "if we were muslims we would have ruled the world". Hitler thought that christianity was to blame for the weakness of the germans.

 

Hitler was transcribed as saying: "Had Charles Martel not been victorious at Poitiers [...] then we should in all probability have been converted to Mohammedanism, that cult which glorifies the heroism and which opens up the seventh Heaven to the bold warrior alone. Then the Germanic races would have conquered the world."

 

Hitler said that the Germans would have become heirs to "a religion that believed in spreading the faith by the sword and in subjugating all nations to that faith. Such a creed was perfectly suited to the German temperament."

 

In Hitler's eyes, Christianity was a religion fit only for slaves; he detested its ethics in particular. Its teaching, he declared, was a rebellion against the natural law of selection by struggle and the survival of the fittest. 

—?Extract from Hitler: a Study in Tyranny, by Alan Bullock

 

Hitler's impatience with the churches prompted frequent outbursts of hostility. In early 1937, he was declaring that 'Christianity was ripe for destruction' (Untergang), and that the churches must therefore yield to the 'primacy of the state', railing against 'the most horrible institution imaginable."

—?Extract from Hitler 1936-1945 Nemesis by Ian Kershaw.

 

He was not a practising Christian but had somehow succeeded in masking his own religious scepticism from millions of German voters. Though Hitler has often been portrayed as a neo-pagan, or the centrepiece of a political religion in which he played the Godhead, his views had much more in common with the revolutionary iconoclasm of the Bolshevik enemy. His few private remarks on Christianity betray a profound contempt and indifference... Hitler believed that all religions were now 'decadent'; in Europe it was the 'collapse of Christianity that we are now experiencing'. The reason for the crisis was science. Hitler, like Stalin took a very modern view of the incompatibility of religious and scientific explanation. 

—?Excerpt from The Dictators Hitler's Germany Stalin's Russia by Richard Overy

 

Muslims love Hitler and hate the Jews! Mein Kampf is a bestseller in muslim countrys.

 

Im a german myself and even if i think that not all of the official history is how it really was, only god knows the truth, i still think it is good that we lost ww2 but history is allways written by the victors and "I know that i know nothing". Im just not ok that everything german is bad in these days and all that anti german bs. If you are against the muslim imigration politics, you being called a nazi to silence you. Everyone starts to hate germans again and how this ends this time, we will see. Even leftist germans say things like "bomber harris, do it again" and "germany must die" and such things, im sick of all that. We getting destroyed from the inside by traitors who hate our identity and wish to erradicate us. Im proud of my ancestors and i dont reduce us germans to 12 years of nazism, we have much history to be proud of then these dark times. 

 

Think that im a nazi i dont care, it just proves my point. Being proud of his own hertiage is not a bad thing, a good nation needs a identity to have something in common with each other, thats the reason why there are strong and good nations. Being a human alone is not enough, not in these times, only hypocrites think that. But im glad that this is not only germanys problem, its europes problem and people starting to realise this and will fight for there rights to be free from genocidal ploitics.

 

"Every kingdom divided against itself is laid waste, and no city or house divided against itself will stand." Gott mit uns!

[707shap_Srbin]

Guys, this is falling in a deep of politics again.

[1PL-Husar-1Esk]

We must not have identity - this is one of main goal of European Union - this old idea (taken from Ventotene manifesto - source of EU inspirations) is what German chancellor support. Gender ideology is the tool.i

[Finkeren]

 

The problem with "the need for limiting free speech for people and organizations calling for violence and oppression of other groups them deem "inferior".  is that many of the people calling for the limiting of free speech to nazis are doing so exactly because they deem nazis to be inferior - morally and sometimes even racially and sexually (toxic white males) - and are quite open about using violence to shut them down. 

 

I advocate meeting nazis everywhere with immediate and forceful but completely non-violent opposition. I have no problem shaming them, shouting them down, blocking them at every turn etc. That's not because they are inferior (in fact I know people who were neo-nazis in their youth, who have since turned their live's around and are great people) but because I recognize their ideology as being detrimental to society.

 

 

And where do you draw the line - given that there is at least one major world religion whose texts explicitly call for violence and oppression against those whom it deems inferior. 

 

Yep, there are several religions that have insane texts like that. The worst offender is called Judaism, have you read the Torah? But it's really not about the texts, is it? It's all about how the adherents of a particular religion conduct themselves. Religious fanatics of all stripes are detrimental to a civilized society, whether they are born-again Christians oppressing minorities and undermining the education system in the US, radical Muslims blowing up market places in Iraq or fanatic Budhists performing a genocide against Muslims in Myanmar.  

 

 

 

As to speakers being free of criticism - I agree there should be no such entitlement, since criticism is an exercise of free speech, although shouting someone down is not criticism. The argument is often, however, put slightly differently (not by you in this case) - that speech may be free but that does not mean it has no consequences.  To me this is totalitarian weaseling: if someone is fired from their job for saying things that are entirely legal to express, then freedom of speech has certainly been curtailed; less severely than if the person is lynched by a mob, or assassinated by fanatics, but the effect is similar. People are disinclined to say things if they know they are likely to be punished.  It really does not matter whether the people doing the punishment are the state or other powerful institutions.

 

The state and other public institutions should absolutely refrain from doing things like this. It was practiced in West Germany against people from the left wing in the '70s (Berufsverbot). Private corporations are free to hire as they please (but are again not exempt from criticism - if you have racist/sexist/homophobic hiring practices, expect criticism) 

[216th_Lucas_From_Hell]

The witch hunt mentality is definitely stupid, because it got to a point where anyone you disagree with can be branded a nazi/commie/etc. and in the end people stop hanging out with peers who have different views on politics and some issues to an unhealthy point. I lost a friend once because I suggested CNN was putting too much coverage into the US police violence issue when things were getting really heavy in Syria and Iraq.

 

 

Also, personally I'm not a fan of 'free for all' freedom of speech because it leads to the situations we're seeing in the USA. Freedom of speech that doesn't infringe another's rights is more realistic to me and it should go both ways: you can't advocate that race A is better than race B, or that gender A trumps gender B, whichever these are. Applying that to the US example in my opinion doing those neo-nazi marches should land you in trouble, as should advocating men don't deserve an opinion because they're men (something I heard is happening on an institutional level at many higher education sites in the US, particularly regarding sexual assault).

Edited September 11, 2017 by 216th_Lucas_From_Hell

[CanadaOne]

Free speech is the tool by which we figure everything out. If it is curtailed, we make decisions based on less than all available information. How can we know who/what is bad and who/what is good if we cannot hear what people have to say?

 

I do not require or desire the state to protect me from words.

 

If some weepy snowflake requires that protection, they can hide in their mothers basement and watch Barney the Dinosaur on TV and eat government supplied oatmeal for the rest of their days.

[unreasonable]

<snip> I advocate meeting nazis everywhere with immediate and forceful but completely non-violent opposition. I have no problem shaming them, shouting them down, blocking them at every turn etc. ... <snip>  but because I recognize their ideology as being detrimental to society.

 

 

 

Not sure how non-violent opposition can be forceful, or how blocking or shouting someone down is not a form of violence. It certainly tends to escalate towards violence.  

 

But more importantly, do I also get to shame, block and shout down people whose ideology I "recognize" is detrimental to society? Including communists, for instance?  Who is to do the recognizing? Who decides what is "detrimental"?   What gives you the right to obstruct someone else's speech? 

 

Go this way and you get absurdities like Germaine Greer being no platformed for not agreeing that trannies are real women, or UK PM Ted Heath who fought actual nazis in WW2, being no platformed because, according to many idiot students, all tories are nazis. 

[coconut]

 

 

Free speech is the tool by which we figure everything out. If it is curtailed, we make decisions based on less than all available information. How can we know who/what is bad and who/what is good if we cannot hear what people have to say?

 

We figured out racism, fascism and nazi ideology were horrible things decades ago.

 

I wonder how proponents of free speech would look at ISIS demonstrating in the US.