arbre_rieur: (Default)
[personal profile] arbre_rieur posting in [community profile] scans_daily


Four pages from ACTION COMICS 1 (heh, feels weird to say that)...

The first page of the issue:



This Glenmorgan guy is described by the cops as "Mr. Metropolis," very, very rich and powerful. The police arrive to rescue him from Superman.





With Lex Luthor's help, the authorities manage to lure Superman into a trap.



Date: 2011-09-08 01:11 am (UTC)
crabby_lioness: (Default)
From: [personal profile] crabby_lioness
You're conflating Nazism with Anti-Semitism. That's a mistake. The Nazis found Anti-Semitism convenient to their purposes, but it was never their main motive for their actions. That mistake is one of the very reasons we need to talk about Nazis freely.

Saying that Nazism is always and only about Anti-Semitism stops people from seeing where the exact same techniques the Nazis developed are being used by other groups in other parts of the world to this day. That is a great wrong.

Date: 2011-09-08 01:27 am (UTC)
From: [identity profile] fredneil.livejournal.com
"Talking about nazis freely" and calling other people nazis aren't the same thing and arguing that anti-semitism wasn't a large part of the nazi ideology seems very tenuous. Their rise to power was based in a large part on antisemitism. One of the ways hitler got the support he did was by giving Germans an "other" to unify against and it's a simple matter of historical record that the nazis were responsible for numerous antisemitic laws and actions.

You actually sound like you're contradicting yourself. At one point, you say that one can call people "nazis" if they're doing something similar to what the nazis did, at another, you think that it's a mistake to call people nazis if it's based on antisemism, even though the nazis were inarguably antisemitc.

No one ever said nazism was only about anti-semitism. Right now, I'm very uncomfortable with this thread. Two people have made arguments that sound very close to the "Jews make the Holocaust all about themselves->the nazis persecuted other people but no one talks about them, just the Jews->there's nothing special about what happened to the Jews->the nazis weren't especially antisemitic" argument that I've heard in the past from Holocaust deniers. I'm hoping that it was unintentional on your part and that of the other poster.

Date: 2011-09-08 01:39 am (UTC)
crabby_lioness: (Default)
From: [personal profile] crabby_lioness
I said the Nazis were not only about Anti-Semitism. Anti-Semitism was a convenient prejudice that they played upon in their rise to power. They were not going to go out and invent a prejudice against a minority when there was such a handy one lying around.

However, in other parts of the world the same techniques the Nazis used have been used to rile up hatreds against other minorities when their wasn't a single Jew around. Forex, the Khmer Rouge used similar techniques in Cambodia against the ethnic Chinese and the Hmong. Are we forbidden to point out the similarities in the tactics used simply because Jews were not a major target in that instance? That is what makes me uncomfortable.

Date: 2011-09-12 05:41 am (UTC)
philippos42: placards (hate)
From: [personal profile] philippos42
As someone who's studied both, I consider Pol Pot to be more offensive than Hitler, albeit more contained. Hitler wanted to conquer and assimilate several nations, but he did seem to love Germany in his sick hopped-up-on-uppers way. Pol Pot tried to destroy his own society to rewrite history with himself at the beginning. I don't think there are too many of us familiar with Cambodia in the 1970's who would pretend he was somehow "less than" a Nazi.

Date: 2011-09-08 01:45 am (UTC)
salinea: (Default)
From: [personal profile] salinea
Two people have made arguments that sound very close to the "Jews make the Holocaust all about themselves->the nazis persecuted other people but no one talks about them, just the Jews->there's nothing special about what happened to the Jews->the nazis weren't especially antisemitic" argument that I've heard in the past from Holocaust deniers.
Can you point them out to me? I ask as a Mod of the community.

Date: 2011-09-08 02:16 am (UTC)
From: [identity profile] fredneil.livejournal.com
Since you're asking as a mod and I brought it up, ok, but I just want to clarify that what I said was my perception, I'm not accusing anyone of being antisemitic or taking what they said to antisemitic extremes that I'm talking about.

Right here, arguing that antisemitism was just a tool that the nazis used to gain power and wasn't a major part of their philosophy seems to play down the very real part that antisemitism played in what they did and, well, it wasn't just an appeal to prejudice that the nazis did, it was attempted genocide in a very literal sense. Elsewhere someone made a comment that although it isn't as well known as the deaths of millions of Jews, Communists were victims of nazis as well. That Communists were victims of the nazis is a valid statement, but adding the "although it isn't as well known" clause makes it problematic for me. Aside from anything else, it's not as though hardly anyone knows about Communists or other non-Jewish victims of the Holocaust.

I have no doubt that it's as much what I'm reading into the comments as what the posters said, but I think talking to a Jew about the nazis is like talking to an African-
American about slavery.What might seem like a simply historical point to the speaker is going to have an emotional resonance with the listener and make the listener wonder if the speaker is trying to play down some very real horrors of the subject because others have done just that.

Date: 2011-09-08 02:43 am (UTC)
salinea: (Default)
From: [personal profile] salinea
Thank you.

And yeah, I see what you mean, very much so. Here's how I see it : I definitely twitched a little at both those comments, for the reasons you say (more the one about Communists, which I remember reading several times, than the one by [personal profile] crabby_lioness mostly because I'm a little bit familiar with her and I don't believe that was her intent), but not to the point I felt it was moderation-worthy. However, since I'm Jewish myself, I may actually be more likely to dismiss it, if you feel it is actually that problematic (it doesn't have to be intentional, we also Mod for people saying problematic things out of ignorance, mostly as Notes reminding them to be more careful), I'll bring it up to the other mods for discussion. What do you think?

Date: 2011-09-08 03:10 am (UTC)
From: [identity profile] fredneil.livejournal.com
For this kind of comment, I'd say an informative note would be appropriate; something along the lines of "this can be taken as similar to Holocaust denial/antisemitic arguments and this is why..."

Date: 2011-09-08 04:02 am (UTC)
crabby_lioness: (Default)
From: [personal profile] crabby_lioness
I didn't say the Nazis did not attempt the genocide of the European Jews. I said the same tactics that the Nazis developed were later used by the Khmer Rouge to attempt the genocide of the ethnic Chinese. They were also used in Rwanda against the ethnic Tutsis.

Are we not to compare the later instances with the Nazis simply because Jews were not the primary target?

The Nazi Formula For Attaining Power (TM) involves vilifying at least one ethnic group, as well as vilifying labor unions, Communists, immigrants, foreigners, intellectuals, and uppity women. However, the ethnic group that gets vilified does not have to be Jews. It could just as easily be indigenous natives (common in South America and Southeast Asia) or ethnic immigrant groups (the ethnic Vietnamese and ethnic Chinese of Cambodia).

I'm not trying to downplay what happened to the Jews when I talk about what happened to the Tutsis. I want to point out the pattern so that the next time the Nazi Playbook gets used we'll be better prepared to stop it before it gets to the point of genocide.

but I think talking to a Jew about the nazis is like talking to an African-American about slavery.What might seem like a simply historical point to the speaker is going to have an emotional resonance with the listener and make the listener wonder if the speaker is trying to play down some very real horrors of the subject because others have done just that.

I live in Mississippi. I talk to African-Americans about slavery all the time. It's impossible to discuss any aspect of our common Southern culture without talking about how it either originated in or was transformed by slavery. Hell, it's impossible Nor am I alone in this. Mississippi Public Radio and Public Television has an large and diverse number of talk radio programs, and the subject gets mentioned all the time. Same with Mississippi Public Television.`

Date: 2011-09-08 04:15 am (UTC)
From: [identity profile] fredneil.livejournal.com
I didn't say the Nazis did not attempt the genocide of the European Jews. I said the same tactics that the Nazis developed were later used by the Khmer Rouge to attempt the genocide of the ethnic Chinese. They were also used in Rwanda against the ethnic Tutsis.

Are we not to compare the later instances with the Nazis simply because Jews were not the primary target?


Are you going to limit your use of nazi references to other attempted genocides or are you going to use them in any case where you think that a group is being vilified?

but I think talking to a Jew about the nazis is like talking to an African-American about slavery.What might seem like a simply historical point to the speaker is going to have an emotional resonance with the listener and make the listener wonder if the speaker is trying to play down some very real horrors of the subject because others have done just that.

I live in Mississippi. I talk to African-Americans about slavery all the time. It's impossible to discuss any aspect of our common Southern culture without talking about how it either originated in or was transformed by slavery. Hell, it's impossible Nor am I alone in this. Mississippi Public Radio and Public Television has an large and diverse number of talk radio programs, and the subject gets mentioned all the time. Same with Mississippi Public Television.`


Talking about slavery itself is not the same thing as talking about something else and saying it's just like slavery. The statement you're quoting wasn't just in reference to you. How do you think those conversations you have all the time would go if you made of point of saying that blacks weren't the only ones who were slaves, that there were black slaveowners, or that slavery wasn't primarily about racism? Unless the person you were speaking to knew you well, it seems likely to me that those statements would be met with some suspicions about your motives.

Date: 2011-09-08 04:28 am (UTC)
crabby_lioness: (Default)
From: [personal profile] crabby_lioness
Are you going to limit your use of nazi references to other attempted genocides or are you going to use them in any case where you think that a group is being vilified?

I don't limit my use of Nazi references simply to the vilification of groups. That's just one part of the Nazi Playbook.

How do you think those conversations you have all the time would go if you made of point of saying that blacks weren't the only ones who were slaves, that there were black slaveowners, or that slavery wasn't primarily about racism?

If you think I don't say those things, you don't know me very well. :) We have fascinating discussions about the subject. One of my black friends can drive you to the houses those black slaveowners lived in, whereas I can go on at length about how the original deciding factor for buying Sub-Saharan Africans from the slave castles of West Africa was linguistic, not racial. It only became racial later on.

Date: 2011-09-08 04:42 am (UTC)
From: [identity profile] fredneil.livejournal.com
Those are your black friends. I asked you about how you thought people who didn't know you would react.

I just got your other post, and I'd say that for the most part, I would object to it for reasons I've given elsewhere. I can't make a broad statement and say there's absolutely no situation in which such a comparison would be appropriate, but given who the nazis were and what they did, any such situation would have to include literal attempted genocide.

Anyway, I think I've talked about nazis for as long as I can stand tonight, so if you don't mind and there's nothing you want to cover, I'm going to bow out of this thread.

Date: 2011-09-08 01:06 pm (UTC)
crabby_lioness: (Default)
From: [personal profile] crabby_lioness
Those are your black friends. I asked you about how you thought people who didn't know you would react.

For the most part I talk to people who aren't my friends the same way I talk to my friends. That's how they become my friends. Race isn't the issue I hold back on.

More to the point, there's been a generational shift in the South with regards to race. For those of us who came of age after the Civil Rights Movement, race is no longer the monolithic issue of the South. It's still the largest issue of course, but it's gone from being 90-95% of the problem to being 60-70% of the problem. Make the mistake of talking to a younger person as if things were still like they used to be and you'll turn them off. I've seen many an older politician lose a local election that way and not understand why both the younger black voters and the younger white voters joined together to vote against him.

I can't make a broad statement and say there's absolutely no situation in which such a comparison would be appropriate, but given who the nazis were and what they did, any such situation would have to include literal attempted genocide.

I'd like to see if we could do something about a potential problem before it gets to the point of literal attempted genocide. I'd rather stop the dying before it starts than clean up the bloodshed later.

Date: 2011-09-09 12:58 am (UTC)
From: [identity profile] fredneil.livejournal.com
I can't make a broad statement and say there's absolutely no situation in which such a comparison would be appropriate, but given who the nazis were and what they did, any such situation would have to include literal attempted genocide.

I'd like to see if we could do something about a potential problem before it gets to the point of literal attempted genocide. I'd rather stop the dying before it starts than clean up the bloodshed later.


Most people would, but I doubt any plan for doing so that depends on bringing up nazis comparisons has much chance of succeeding.

Date: 2011-09-08 04:14 am (UTC)
crabby_lioness: (Default)
From: [personal profile] crabby_lioness
Sorry, baby hit the keyboard.

Likewise, it's really difficult to discuss the modern world without talking about Nazism. The topics one really can't discuss without bringing them up are as diverse as television, pop music, breast cancer screening, the Olympic torch, anti-Communism, the space program, Modern architecture, the Unitarian Church and it's symbols, blood law, the development of North African nations -- and that's just off the top of my head.

None of those discussions changes the fact that over six million Jews died in the Holocaust. But Nazism neither started nor stopped with that aspect of their story.

Date: 2011-09-08 04:22 am (UTC)
From: [identity profile] fredneil.livejournal.com
No one's saying it did, but you really can't discuss nazism without including that aspect of their story.

I think somehow what I was saying got lost. I never meant to imply that all discussion of nazism was to be avoided. My point was that nazi comparisons shouldn't be used when the subject isn't literally nazis.

Date: 2011-09-08 04:31 am (UTC)
crabby_lioness: (Default)
From: [personal profile] crabby_lioness
Are you saying that we shouldn't talk about how Party A is starting to use the same tactics the Nazis used in their attempted rise to power in Country X? Because that's what is coming across.

Date: 2011-09-08 01:48 am (UTC)
junipepper: (jumplines)
From: [personal profile] junipepper
I'd like to point out that the SIX MILLION Jews that were tortured and murdered during WWII by the nazis and their collaborators is a *very* sensitive topic for a lot of people. It's not something *I'd* particularly want to discuss on a comic books forum, but maybe that's just me.

Date: 2011-09-08 01:57 am (UTC)
crabby_lioness: (Default)
From: [personal profile] crabby_lioness
????????

I guess it's been a while since Brought to Light. I grew up seeing brutal politics discussed in comic books.

Date: 2011-09-08 02:07 am (UTC)
salinea: (Default)
From: [personal profile] salinea
I'm sorry you're finding this discussion uncomfortable. You're absolutely right it is a sensitive topic. At the same time, I don't see why this being a comic book forums makes it impossible to discuss. Comics as a medium can and has been used to talk about the Shoah, and they shouldn't be off topic for this community, many characters in mainstream comic books also have root in WW2 and everything that goes with it; and they also shouldn't be off topic for this community.

Perhaps we should treat it as something worthy of a trigger warning, in order for people who will be made uncomfortable by it to avoid threads on that topic? Would that work for you?

Date: 2011-09-08 02:58 am (UTC)
junipepper: (Juniper)
From: [personal profile] junipepper
I didn't say it was impossible. I didn't report it to mods, for example, and it's not particularly a trigger for me. I said I wouldn't want to engage in this discussion here. I'm aware of a number of politically charged, serious graphic novels; in fact, my husband and I have a bookshelf containing only serious-themed graphic novels. We weren't discussing one in this post.

I said it's a sensitive topic. I was referring, specifically, to debating whether or not anti-Semitism was a significant or primary factor in the policies of nazi Germany, which in my experience can set a lot of people off. I'm not sure why someone would think that statement rated eight question marks, but thanks -- at my age, it's rather charming to have people imply that I'm naive.

And I'm done with this topic.

Date: 2011-09-08 03:07 am (UTC)
salinea: (Default)
From: [personal profile] salinea
you seem to have me confused with [personal profile] crabby_lioness.

I was referring, specifically, to debating whether or not anti-Semitism was a significant or primary factor in the policies of nazi Germany,
That's a very fair point.

Date: 2011-09-08 03:41 am (UTC)
crabby_lioness: (Default)
From: [personal profile] crabby_lioness
Sorry. I'm used to talking with German history buffs about German history.

Mod Note

Date: 2011-09-11 04:10 pm (UTC)
salinea: Deadpool has a fucking horned hat on and is ready to kick gum and chew ass. Errr, moderate s_d. (mod hat)
From: [personal profile] salinea
This is a topic that people are very legitimately sensitive about. Next time, take more care with your choices of words , especially after people have already said they were feeling uncomfortable about it. In particular:

"That's hardly the only thing the Nazis did, for good or ill. They're a fascinating bunch really."

"That's a mistake. The Nazis found Anti-Semitism convenient to their purposes, but it was never their main motive for their actions."

Those are the sort of comments that can sometimes be used as anti-Semitic and holocaust denial dog whistles. We trust this wasn't your intent; but, please, be more careful with the way you discuss that sort of topic in the future.

Profile

scans_daily: (Default)
Scans Daily
Founded by girl geeks and members of the slash fandom, [community profile] scans_daily strives to provide an atmosphere which is LGBTQ-friendly, anti-racist, anti-ableist, woman-friendly and otherwise discrimination and harassment free.

Bottom line: If slash, feminism or anti-oppressive practice makes you react negatively, [community profile] scans_daily is probably not for you.

Please read the community ethos and rules before posting or commenting.

September 2014

S M T W T F S
  1 23456
78910111213
14151617181920
21222324252627
282930    

Most Popular Tags

Style Credit

Expand Cut Tags

No cut tags