11478Re: [MedievalSawdust] Re: 'Nazi' - Insulting in the extreme
- May 4, 2009::applauds, points with a sign saying, THATS WHAT IM TRYING TO SAY,
and sits down before the mod god smites me hard for continuing to post
on the topic::
On Mon, May 4, 2009 at 1:45 PM, <conradh@...> wrote:
> And 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 email@example.com, 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 >>