11475Re: [MedievalSawdust] Re: 'Nazi' - Insulting in the extreme
- May 4, 2009And even setting current political jabs aside, long before the German Nazi
Party got around to truly notorious stuff like running murder factories
and starting World War II, it was already well known for being into
intolerance, sucking up to authority, abusing authority they happen to
have themselves, dress codes, elaborate rules and general bad boundaries.
The people (myself definitely included) who find the "Authenticity Nazi"
label appropriate for a certain sort of reinactor have these vices in
mind, not anti-Semitism or militarism.
The "bad boundaries" issue is central here. If you have high standards of
authenticity _for yourself_ there is nothing to criticize and much to
admire, IMHO. Whether this comes from perfectionism, artistic motives,
curiousity or serious experimental archaeology, it's all good.
Where the bad boundaries come in is when people forget that other people
have different motives. The person who really believes that "this really
upsets _me_, so _you_ have to stop doing it right now!" is being utterly
selfish in a way they usually don't even recognize as such.
There's nothing wrong with having your own standards. There's nothing
wrong with using those standards to judge other people, or artifacts,
either. But there's a million miles of difference between having
standards and thinking that having standards gives you the right to push
other people around.
On Sun, May 3, 2009 11:37 pm, leaking pen wrote:
> What? Both groups believe in a very strong moral code, with laws that
> match, and a heavily governed and controled social situation. I was not
> trying to be insulting, but merely give a modern comparison to that
> segment of the philosophy of the Nazi party. If we were talking about
> social welfare, I'd point out that the Nazi parties views on such were
> very similar to the current Democratic party, in that they believed in a
> "safety net" for those too old or infirm to work, and
> several minimums of standard including a minimum wage and profit caps on
> On Sun, May 3, 2009 at 11:29 PM, quailriver <quailriver@...> wrote:
>>> Other than being athiest in general, the Nazi party was very similar
>>> to the fundamentalist Christian arm of the Republican party in that
>> Wow, that remark is really sickly twisted!
>> --- In firstname.lastname@example.org, leaking pen <itsatrap@...>
>>> The Nazi party was a world wide fascist movement that favored strong
>>> govermental control of society, and a very stringent moral requirement
>>> that people follow. There was a very large Nazi party here in the
>>> us. Other than being athiest in general, the Nazi party was very
>>> similar to the fundamentalist Christian arm of the Republican party in
>>> that regard. ONE BRANCH of the Nazi Party, the one in Germany that
>>> elected Adolph Hitler as their party candidate to the German
>>> presidential election, which he then won, then went largely
>>> anti-semetic and went on a rampage throughout Europe, which pretty
>>> much killed the party, in name at least, else where in the world. But
>>> teh word Nazi was used to mean , for lack of a better term, anal about
>>> something, long before world war 2. it is NOT a comparison to Hitler
>>> or anti-semetism, but to FASCISM, which, in this case, isn't too far
>>> off. Very stringent rules, forced following of the most stringent
>>> application of the rules, no exceptions? sounds about right.
>>> On Sun, May 3, 2009 at 4:59 AM, Jeff Johnson <jljonsn@...> wrote:
>>>> I wish people would refrain from casually throwing out the term
>>>> "Authenticity Nazi". It's highly offensive for anyone to be compared
>>>> to mass-murdering fascists.
- << Previous post in topic Next post in topic >>