• When you click on links to various merchants on this site and make a purchase, this can result in this site earning a commission. Affiliate programs and affiliations include, but are not limited to, the eBay Partner Network.

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

Board member ARYAN

Started by Fedoraman,

450 posts in this topic

goldust40

goldust40

Posted
Posted

Last time I'm asking because it is seemingly not coming forward with plain language - why would you be offended by a screen name and not material depicting the same symbol/wording/imagery?

 

Because the screen name is an endorsement of an ideology, and could be perceived (rightly) as a desire to aggrandize one's status through one's race.

 

And the other, regardless of how contentious and exploitative it may seem to the onlooker, is not.

 

But the boardie explained their reason? And on the second, Timely et al publishers should have found another way to monetize their comic business. Sorry, I don't buy the argument that it was "the times" - depicting racial policy, ideology or insensitivity towards ethnic groups was all about making money.

 

No question it was a moneymaking exercise in propaganda (of a sort), but it wasn't Nazi propaganda.

 

By all means don't buy the argument about the times and the mores of the era. At the end of the day, the comics are still a product of that era, regardless of the publisher's cynicism. And I would disagree that the comics were depicting "racial policy or ideology" through the caricatures, but rather a tawdry, admittedly grim way of belittling an enemy who, lest we forget, were in the process of committing genocide.

 

Call it insensitivity to ethnic groups if you will. Provided the images shown regularly on the GA forum are kept within that historical context and observed as such with respect to any Asian or German boardies, that they are a historical artifact that is not equable with the industrial, incalculable slaughter invoked by the name Aryan (regardless of whether the boardie in question denies it) then that is fine.

 

It's the reason no-one here has a screen name like Hitler, or Final Solution.

 

Propaganda or not, making money off tragedy just rubs me the wrong way.

 

The take away from this is we are assuming this position of tolerance because we are entrenched in a hobby and conditioned in a way which (right or wrongly) maintains interest in this material.

 

Taking this material external to the boards and in a non-comic collector context, I'm pretty certain we would see a very similar reaction play out as the one we saw towards the boardie's screen name choice.

 

I have to disagree with all of this. For a start, the GA comics were not making money from "tragedy" but a desire to get back at despotism.

 

Nobody is "conditioned" regarding the material presented in this hobby if they are an adult collector. You are creating a strawman which equates the collecting of nazi-bashing war covers with something objectionable and evil, and ignoring the ironic detachment involved.

 

And if people outside of the hobby are made aware of the historical context, then they would not react in a similar manner. You make a broad and sweeping generalization based on that which is simply not provable. These comics are not nazi memorabilia nor are they emblematic of nazi-ism.

 

Right, back to the Kelly Brook pics. :insane:

Link to comment
Share on other sites
goldust40

goldust40

Posted
Posted
I have a typhoon going on outside and a typhoon going on here in this thread.

 

Also, if WWII era comics depicting Nazi antagonists promotes the ideals of the Nazi party, does that mean Captain America is Nazi propaganda? hm

 

Finally someone gets it. ^^

Link to comment
Share on other sites
The-Collector

The-Collector

Posted
Posted

Last time I'm asking because it is seemingly not coming forward with plain language - why would you be offended by a screen name and not material depicting the same symbol/wording/imagery?

 

Because the screen name is an endorsement of an ideology, and could be perceived (rightly) as a desire to aggrandize one's status through one's race.

 

And the other, regardless of how contentious and exploitative it may seem to the onlooker, is not.

 

But the boardie explained their reason? And on the second, Timely et al publishers should have found another way to monetize their comic business. Sorry, I don't buy the argument that it was "the times" - depicting racial policy, ideology or insensitivity towards ethnic groups was all about making money.

 

No question it was a moneymaking exercise in propaganda (of a sort), but it wasn't Nazi propaganda.

 

By all means don't buy the argument about the times and the mores of the era. At the end of the day, the comics are still a product of that era, regardless of the publisher's cynicism. And I would disagree that the comics were depicting "racial policy or ideology" through the caricatures, but rather a tawdry, admittedly grim way of belittling an enemy who, lest we forget, were in the process of committing genocide.

 

Call it insensitivity to ethnic groups if you will. Provided the images shown regularly on the GA forum are kept within that historical context and observed as such with respect to any Asian or German boardies, that they are a historical artifact that is not equable with the industrial, incalculable slaughter invoked by the name Aryan (regardless of whether the boardie in question denies it) then that is fine.

 

It's the reason no-one here has a screen name like Hitler, or Final Solution.

 

Propaganda or not, making money off tragedy just rubs me the wrong way.

 

The take away from this is we are assuming this position of tolerance because we are entrenched in a hobby and conditioned in a way which (right or wrongly) maintains interest in this material.

 

Taking this material external to the boards and in a non-comic collector context, I'm pretty certain we would see a very similar reaction play out as the one we saw towards the boardie's screen name choice.

 

I have to disagree with all of this. For a start, the GA comics were not making money from "tragedy" but a desire to get back at despotism.

 

Nobody is "conditioned" regarding the material presented in this hobby if they are an adult collector. You are equating the collecting of nazi-bashing war covers with something objectionable and evil, and ignoring the ironic detachment involved.

 

And if people outside of the hobby are aware of the historical context, then they would not react in a similar manner. You make a broad and sweeping generalization that is simply not provable.

 

 

The black and white moral absolutism with which these covers are imbued is such a juvenile treatment of a serious matter it is risible.

 

These comics are American propaganda... I find it /ironic that the allies are always punching extremely racist depictions of the japanese (the japanese later become the chinese during the cold war). These covers are strange artifacts of history and to me they show how dogmatic both sides in a conflict can be, and how ferverent nationalism and a lack of compassion from either side can result in atrocity. Don't forget the fire bombing of Dresden or the My Lai massacre. So I don't collect these nazi/communist war covers because I am in support of their causes, I collect them because they are excellent microcosoms of the immense stupidity and cruelty that man is capable of, and every time I look at one I am reminded not to take things too seriously and to try and understand how and why others have opinions different to me.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Ditch Fahrenheit

Ditch Fahrenheit

Posted
Posted
170 posts since yesterday. WTF happened here?*

 

 

 

 

 

 

*too lazy/disinterested to actually read it all.

 

 

Its all about this guy names Aaron...

 

wait,are you of those guys that actually sleeps ?

 

I'd laugh if his name was Andy Ryan and he just shortened it for his member name.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
Go to topic listing