Re: The term 'Nazi'
#26
Posted 09 June 2003 - 08:41 PM
------------------
I am certified Grammar Nazi.
I dare you to come to the weboard of [url="http://"http://www.AmbrosiaSW.com/cgi-bin/ubb/forumdisplay.cgi?action=topics&forum=Ares+Trash+Talk&number=12&DaysPrune=2&LastLogin="]Trash Talk[/url]
The sig revolution died! Now it's time to move onto the self promotion revolution.
#27
Posted 10 June 2003 - 03:36 PM
Quote
I'm offended that you didn't spell my name right. Otherwise, no.
The connection is that someone posted a nazi image in my other topic, "What the hell?". I was just wondering why everyone considers the term 'Nazi' to be that offensive although the Nazis definitely were not the only people to commit atrocities. The scale of the Nazis may be larger, but the ideology is not more offensive than that of some other peoples.
Talon Karrde is right
THe Nazis are not the only people. I have been enlightened by Azeroth, who has told me that Stalin is the person who has killed the most people: roughly 10 million. It makes no sense why the US hates Nazis when Stalin was worse? This only shows how suseptable(pardon spelling)the US pop is to advertising. Had stalin said he was killing people would the US hate stalin more?
------------------
A CombatFerret
Brings funny images to
mind.
#28
Posted 10 June 2003 - 03:40 PM
Quote
THe Nazis are not the only people. I have been enlightened by Azeroth, who has told me that Stalin is the person who has killed the most people: roughly 10 million. It makes no sense why the US hates Nazis when Stalin was worse? This only shows how suseptable(pardon spelling)the US pop is to advertising. Had stalin said he was killing people would the US hate stalin more?
This post is only slightly more decipherable than your average GD post.
------------------
[INSERT ZEEKY BOGGY DOOG HERE]
[url="http://"http://albinoblacksheep.com/flash/demented.html"]- The Demented Cartoon Movie[/url] :: [url="http://"http://www.AmbrosiaSW.com/cgi-bin/ubb/forumdisplay.cgi?action=topics&forum=Ares+Trash+Talk&number=12&DaysPrune=2&LastLogin="]Hmm, what could this be?[/url]
My poorly dressed super prison boy sidekick: Azeroth
My cronies: Trah, Overrider720
Commander of the AAS and Supreme Ruler of ZAP.
"Bad Avatara."
-- from the topic closings of Sundered Angel, Official Lektorian and founder of SONAH.
#29
Posted 10 June 2003 - 03:54 PM
He's saying that 'Nazi' is an offensive term to people due to their atrocities. We seem to hate Hitler and the Nazis, but most people don't notice what Stalin did - which was far worse and on a larger scale.
Remember, Avatarian translations require a $29.43 transaction fee.
------------------
"What we do not know, we cannot begin to understand."
*Unless it's Avatara, of course."
-- From the memoirs of Sundered Angel
#30
Posted 10 June 2003 - 05:27 PM
Quote
Wrong.
Oscar Shindler.
TheRedeemer
In comparing Stalin to the Nazis you are slightly missing the point I think. The number of people killed is not really the issue, but the method in which they were killed and the ideology behind it.
Stalin was a thug. He killed off most of those he considered a threat to him, though not all. Molotov for example was spared and re-emerged after Stalin was gone. Stalin's motive was his own survival. He did not (to use the obvious example) deliberately set out to exterminate entire populations in the way that the Nazis attempted to do to the Jews and to the Gypsys of Europe. I am not aware of any death camps being run by the Russians under Stalin, correct me if I am wrong. The stated intention of the Nazi leadership was the total extermination of certain groups of peoples. The overriding offensiveness of the term Nazi to many people is I think due to this cold blooded and absolutist approach.
For a bloodbath comparison I think the Cultural Revolution in china is probably a good one. Estimates vary as to how many were killed, and usually they start at around 25 million.
In terms of ideology, Paul Pot's Khymer Rouge administration was probably the worst since that of the Nazis.
The Nazis also started the worst war in history, but that's a minor concern as war has always been an acceptaable form of foreign policy.
I dissagree that Schindler was a Nazi. His ideology does not appear to have been consistent with that of Nazism. He appears to have been initially, an opportunist businessman, who then stood up and made a difference in a hellish world.
------------------
Oh, so it is another bug hunt then...
#31
Posted 10 June 2003 - 07:59 PM
This post is only slightly more decipherable than your average GD post.
[/qoute]
It better be more decipherable or someones going to be really pissed.
------------------
I am certified Grammar Nazi.
I dare you to come to the weboard of [url="http://"http://www.AmbrosiaSW.com/cgi-bin/ubb/forumdisplay.cgi?action=topics&forum=Ares+Trash+Talk&number=12&DaysPrune=2&LastLogin="]Trash Talk[/url]
The sig revolution died! Now it's time to move onto the self promotion revolution.
#32
Posted 10 June 2003 - 10:15 PM
Quote
The Nazis also started the worst war in history, but that's a minor concern as war has always been an acceptable form of foreign policy.
Doesn't seem that way to the French.
------------------
"What we do not know, we cannot begin to understand."
*Unless it's Avatara, of course."
-- From the memoirs of Sundered Angel
#33
Posted 10 June 2003 - 10:43 PM
Quote
In comparing Stalin to the Nazis you are slightly missing the point I think. The number of people killed is not really the issue, but the method in which they were killed and the ideology behind it.
Stalin was a thug. He killed off most of those he considered a threat to him, though not all. Molotov for example was spared and re-emerged after Stalin was gone. Stalin's motive was his own survival. He did not (to use the obvious example) deliberately set out to exterminate entire populations in the way that the Nazis attempted to do to the Jews and to the Gypsys of Europe. I am not aware of any death camps being run by the Russians under Stalin, correct me if I am wrong. The stated intention of the Nazi leadership was the total extermination of certain groups of peoples. The overriding offensiveness of the term Nazi to many people is I think due to this cold blooded and absolutist approach.
<snip>
I agree. I have definetly explained to CombatFerret how several things killed more people, including Stalin and the Chinese agricultural initiative, but Nazism killed in a worse way and was going to kill more if it had been unchecked.
------------------
The first and most proud official poorly dressed prison boy sidekick of Zortrium. Hail fearless leader.
Please keep in mind that all rumors about aluminum squirrels are false. Do not make us call the police.
"Hey, I'm not the one who wanted Gay Sex to become a moderator." -Avatara
"I find that unaccountably disturbing."-Sundered Angel
</sig>
#34
Posted 11 June 2003 - 06:43 PM
Quote
Doesn't seem that way to the French.
No, the French appear to prefer assassination,
if the Greenpeace incident is anything to go by!
------------------
Oh, so it is another bug hunt then...
#35
Posted 11 June 2003 - 08:27 PM
That, and also we were never technically at war with the USSR, so it's quite likely that there wasn't as much anti-USSR propaganda as anti-Nazi propaganda, which was quite plentiful in many countries (including the USSR).
------------------
"Humans are hicks."
- Paff's Law
It explains so much...
#36
Posted 12 June 2003 - 08:15 AM
Quote
No, the French appear to prefer assassination,
if the Greenpeace incident is anything to go by!
You mean sabotage, don't you? The only person killed in the sinking of the Rainbow Warrior was a photographer who went back on board to fetch his camera. Or do the French make a habit of that kind of thing, and I'm thinking of the wrong one?
------------------
Sundered Angel,
The One and Only
Ares Webboard Moderator, and all-around Nice Guy
The One and Only
Ares Webboard Moderator, and all-around Nice Guy
#37
Posted 12 June 2003 - 10:49 PM
Also, we've seen footage and literature about the holocaust. We saw civilized human beings go from the pinnacles of scientific and philosophical thought to the pits of hatred and evil, killing their fellow man in hideous ways to fulfill the twisted psyche of their leaders. We've always thought of the Aztecs as savages, therefore their behavior is not quite as shocking.
------------------
Let's discuss this like men. With guns.
#38
Posted 13 June 2003 - 12:04 AM
Quote
That's strange. Didn't the Spanish nearly obliterate the Aztecs?
Though I suppose it's in line with white Australians claiming Aboriginal culture as their own.
Naa, the Spanish were obliterated by this guy
Got soul?
------------
"The path may come easily for women, but men live by iron codes of honor"
-Jet black
------------------
#39
Posted 13 June 2003 - 04:03 AM
Quote
Well, think about it. Not only did the Nazis kill people in a very systematic, impersonal way and target specific populations for termination, but they were motivated by hatred and racism. The Aztecs committed hideous acts of human sacrifice, but they did so in religious ceremonies, and they did so to appease their gods. It was fairly one on one (not that the sacrifice-ee had much of a choice), and it was personal.
I'm sorry - you see a difference between evil promoted by religion and evil promoted by idealogy? The two are one and the same.
------------------
Sundered Angel,
The One and Only
Ares Webboard Moderator, and all-around Nice Guy
The One and Only
Ares Webboard Moderator, and all-around Nice Guy