Monday, November 14, 2011

'LET'S NOT BRING HITLER INTO IT'

Alan Wilson, Bishop of Buckingham in England, writes in the Guardian on Alan Craig's despicable article in the so-called Church of England newspaper asking readers to "confront the Gaystapo", and which the editor of the newspaper says he didn't bother to read before it was published.

The worst of Craig's rant is not quoted here, because I did not want his words on my blog. Did you know? Alan Craig is today's Churchill, the lone voice against the "Gaystopo".
Cometh the hour, cometh the man. For years Winston Churchill was a lone voice against the burgeoning darkness of Nazi ideology and intolerance. In the wilderness and with few public friends, he was marginalised and dismissed as belligerent and a war-monger. He was scorned as a political has-been, out of touch with the then-modern mainstream.
We can only hope that Craig will suffer the same fate as Winston Churchill and be "marginalised and dismissed" for his nastiness, but without Churchill's comeback to a position of power.

Back to Alan Wilson:
I would defend, even on the beaches, the right of eccentrics to hold and publish their views, though I'd prefer them to read them first. May I modestly propose, however, that real debate would be served far better by ditching inflammatory second world war references, certainly those whose relevance cannot be established.
....

If we must bring Hitler into the story of the growth of gay rights, anyone who knows anything of the reality behind Craig's cheap imagery will tell you gay people were prime targets of the Nazi regime, who suffered and died at the hands of its real troops. This shouldn't be forgotten at remembrance tide.

But let's not bring Hitler into it. In the 1990s there was a whole wild west out on the internet, with usenet chatrooms in which no flame war was too hot, or opinion sacred. A general principle emerged that eventually prevailed, pretty well, down the line. In any debate, whatever the subject, the first person to bring Hitler or the Nazis into it automatically lost. Good idea.
Yes, please. Whatever point is being argued, let's leave Hitler and the Gestapo out as an analogy unless there is equivalency involving mass torture and killing? Honest. There really are ways to talk about injustices other than comparing them to to the Nazis in the WWII era. If you throw "Nazi" and "Gestapo" around casually, you lose the argument, so far as I am concerned. I follow Godwin's Law.
Godwin has argued that overuse of Nazi and Hitler comparisons should be avoided, because it robs the valid comparisons of their impact.
Exactly. Thus endeth my mini-rant.

Thank you, Bishop Alan.

Image from Wikipedia.

29 comments:

  1. I saw you posted something earlier today on this and I searched everywhere (including The Guardian) and couldn´t find it...thanks for reentering into the atmosphere...I can digest my lunch.

    Abrazos,
    Leonardo

    ReplyDelete
  2. Tim, thanks. I'm trying for your favorite blogger list.

    Len, I hit 'publish' by mistake before I was finished. I hate when I do that, because the unfinished and unavailable post stays in Google Reader until I finally post the finished product.

    ReplyDelete
  3. I beg to disagree respectfully. I believe there are appropriate comparisons that can be made when we are confronted with neo-fascist behavior in current politics. To the extent that an individual wants to call the local school board a bunch of Nazi's - well, that IS hyperbole.

    One shouldn't throw the baby out with the bath water...

    Everything in moderation...

    However, neo-fascists don't have to reach the death camp stage before comparisons to Nazi's or Black Shirts are deemed appropriate. IMHO...

    ReplyDelete
  4. Renz, I will defend on the beaches your right to respectfully disagree, even as I stand by what I said.

    ReplyDelete
  5. Mimi, thanks for this rant! When I heard the comment about "pink jack boots" my skin began to crawl. The thought of all who died in camps wearing the pink triangle just because men and women who had never come to terms with their own sexuality whatever it was could be "comfortable makes me heartsick.

    I am also getting very tired of politicians using the backs of LGBTQ folk to get press time. But then again--the press is being manipulated to focus on LGBTQ folk so that the populus will not realize we are being stolen blind by the rich and powerful.

    ReplyDelete
  6. Yes, Muttha+...I am rather tired of being President Obama's "progressive beard"

    ReplyDelete
  7. Muthah, yes to all you say. The focus on the LGBTQ folks is no more than a diversionary maneuver to distract from the enormous problems facing us in this country.

    ReplyDelete
  8. In more ways than one, this administratioon like's to use the WAY overdue equality issues as a means of selling himself as a "progressive" - just ignore the tightening of Homeland Security, increased Presidential power and authority, significant deportations, etc. etc. etc. All the things that got us so mad under W. But we don't question, Mr. Obama, I mean COME ON, he ended Don't Ask Don't Tell... And don't get me started on how he invited the pharmaceutical industry and the insurance industry to write large portions of his health care "reform" plan...

    ReplyDelete
  9. Speaking of Homeland Security, I had a visit to my blog from their office. I wonder what that means.

    ReplyDelete
  10. They're coming to take you away, Mimi..

    ReplyDelete
  11. Tim, you may be right. Grandpère's always telling me to tone it down.

    ReplyDelete
  12. I'm sure it is because of your known association with Mad Priest...if they only knew...OY!

    ReplyDelete
  13. Renz, I doubt the visit has to do with MadPriest. I wondered if it was the mention of Hitler in the title of this post. Their notation does not allow me to see which page or pages they visited.

    ReplyDelete
  14. Then you must not have seen Jonathan's most recent post in which he threatens to blow up Radio City Music Hall and cites his inspiration as being you only like his music...so music must be punished. ;-)

    (For the record, Mr. G-Man, we ARE just kidding here...really.)

    ReplyDelete
  15. Renz, I WAS truly worried when Clumber did the photoshop of me wearing a bomb vest JUST BEFORE I LEFT TO GO TO ENGLAND.

    ReplyDelete
  16. Actually, Mimi, popular belief aside, Godwin's "Law" says nothing whatever about losing an argument if one throws Hitler or the Nazis into play. The original, cited at the link you give, reads “as a Usenet [talk about dated!] discussion grows longer, the probability of a comparison involving Nazis or Hitler approaches one” [Stylistically very badly worded, BTW.] It's a very silly "law" anyway - not a scientific law in any way and would disqualifty one for comparing Stalin, Mao or Pol Pot to Hitler. Renz is quite right.

    ReplyDelete
  17. Actually, Mimi, popular belief aside, Godwin's "Law" says nothing whatever about losing an argument if one throws Hitler or the Nazis into play.

    Lapin, I know. Bishop Alan and I made up that part. We find it useful. Godwin's law may be silly, but I like it.

    As I said to Renz, I will defend on the beaches your right to respectfully disagree, even as I stand by what I said

    ReplyDelete
  18. So if we compare Stalin to Hitler we DO lose?

    ReplyDelete
  19. You don't lose with Stalin. The deaths by starvation of the peasants plus the deaths in the Gulags probably surpass the Nazi numbers.

    ReplyDelete
  20. I am not even sure that comparisons to the Nazis should be made in the case of mass torture and killing. It can cheapen the scale and full horror of what the Nazis attempted. Just don't chuck the term Nazi around (unless you are aiming for comic effect, in which case that can be okay).

    ReplyDelete
  21. PS I think you have to be a Jewish person tho for the comedy effect to work, ie Seinfeld or Mel Brooks, or a member of Monty Python.

    ReplyDelete
  22. I will add that the fact that no one at the CofE newspaper spotted that the column was dodgy before it went to press despite the fact that numerous people must have worked on it, and that no one even drew the editor's attention to it, says everything about their professionalism as an outfit (or the lack of it). That column would have been rejected straight away at any Fleet Street paper - even the Mail wouldn't have run it, I don't think.

    Also, even if the editor didn't read it I don't buy that he would not have known the general thrust of it because they will have had an editorial meeting of one kind or another during the week (or month, or whatever it is) at which whoever commissioned it, or deals with the columns, will have said "Alan Craig is going to write on such-and-such".

    ReplyDelete
  23. Arrggh! My rather long comment disappeared. Let's see if I can reconstruct.

    At least in comparing Stalin to Hitler, you could have a serious discussion. Some people think everyone who opposes them is a Nazi. Remember the posters with Obama made to look like Hitler? Those folks have to be seriously ignorant in comparing a black man to Hitler, with his ideal of the blond, fair-complexioned Aryans as the master race.

    Some Nazi humor is funny, but I would not feel at all comfortable telling or posting a Nazi joke. I don't refer to anyone as a Nazi, who was not a real Nazi.


    The editor's response is laughable. The buck stops with him, whatever his excuses.

    ReplyDelete
  24. What about people who do legitimately behave like Nazis?

    Good Lord, keep us from having a mind so open our brains fall out!

    ReplyDelete
  25. The first time I was ever called a Nazi was by a commentator on 'Father Jake Stops the World'.

    It was certainly a disconcerting experience for a left-of-centre voter like me.

    ReplyDelete
  26. I don't believe that the use of German war language has anything to do with a genuine comparison of gay people with Nazis.

    Britons are fiercely independent, even when greater cooperation in Europe would be to their advantage and they are pitifully ignorant about what actually happens in Europe.

    That whole Nazi language is usually rolled out when the writer fears that some kind of imaginary independence is under attack.

    And I believe the language is still used because the second world war was the last time the country was so affected, linguistically, by an event that it still resonates.

    Not many have a clue what an Oberkommando is, but we know it's menacing, threatening, coming to get us. There are no other words that can cause this same collective emotional awareness of what the writer is driving at than Gestapo, Waffen-SS, Mein Führer.

    And, predictably, they are used time and time again for their emotional content when the subject at hand simply doesn't validate them.

    They're really nothing more than lazy writing by ageing writers aimed at an equally ageing target readership.
    My own kids can't make head nor tail of them because they were not brought up with the emotional connotations - and they can see very well that they don't make any actual sense in the context.

    That doesn't make the language acceptable, by no means!!
    But we're crediting our opponents with too much intelligence if we take those outbursts as genuine political statements about the status of gay people in our society.

    ReplyDelete
  27. I think the more accurate comparison for most of the far-right theocrats in the USA is with the Spanish Falange.

    I do not rule out Taliban comparisons either.

    The Nazis were too secular.

    ReplyDelete
  28. Mark, pardon me while I search for my missing brain parts. ;-)

    Erika, thank you.

    'The pink boot' is perhaps the most ridiculous of the analogies. I find that a good many people resort to Nazi and Gestapo language when their arguments are weak.

    Counterlight, I agree.

    Although I was a child during WWII, I remember it well. Perhaps that's part of the reason for my aversion to the Nazi analogies.

    ReplyDelete

Anonymous commenters, please sign a name, any name, to distinguish one anonymous commenter from another. Thank you.