Thursday 2 July 2009

Nazi Wallpaper


I found this.  Nazi Wallpaper.



Begs the question, who would ever have this on their desktop.  

Probably Nazis I guess.

It's hard to figure out what exactly constitutes a Nazi is these days.  Hitler and Goebbels are hardly sitting in their houses, downloading their Nazi wallpapers and sending each other the latest updates on the BNP over Twitter, and yet the Nazi moniker, along with all its paraphenalia is alive and well.  In the merchandise section of resistance.com, a record label for "pro-white" music, you can buy these delightful swastika-soled jackboots, (http://tinyurl.com/lt6b83) presumably intended for stamping the emblem of the Third Reich into the faces of your non-white foes.  There's a very good article by Tanya Gold, (over at the reassuringly non-Nazi Guardian), on what she calls "Hitler Porn," or not to name-drop, obsession with Nazism, both in the sphere of comedy, as well as in much darker circles.  (Article is here http://tinyurl.com/cs6e7x)

Many far right groups indulge in some level of Nazi-fetishism; even Nick Griffin, whose party represents one of the more moderate forms of right-wing racial supremacism, has been known to throw a few Nazi salutes when he thinks nobody's watching, as well as forming links with parties harbouring openly 'Nazi' sympathies.  It's difficult to understand a viewpoint which supports the violent suppression of people on grounds of race, (although it is depressingly easy to understand the small-mindedness which leads to such views), but where exactly is the Nazi connection? What, for example, are skinhead gangs in Russia thinking; whose grandparents fought off the Nazis only 65 years ago, and yet who openly identify themselves as 'Neo-Nazis.'



The issue of Chechenya has obviously led some people in Russia, particularly among the poor, to take up some deeply unsavoury racist views, but Nazism?  Is it not possible to hold racist views without constantly name-dropping Hitler and getting inked up with storm-trooper tattoos, particularly when within living memory, your countrymen fought those same Nazis in the bitter killing-fields of Stalingrad for your freedom?  Why do racist views need what seems to be the legitimacy of carrying the Nazi cachet.  In all likelihood, Hitler himself would refute any connection between his own terrifyingly efficient realisation of supremacist principles, and the rag-tag bunch of angry, shaven-headed young men around the world who claim to continue his legacy.  It would seem that the only purpose that continuous reference to Nazism serves is to make such groups as unpalatable as possible.  Members of such groups and gangs see to provoke, to shock, and to appall.

Having a huge Nazi eagle tattooed across your throat is certainly one way of doing this.

But this is all counter productive.  Advertising works because it subtly influences our decisions.  The best advertising is so powerful that we buy products without ever realising we've been duped, (Addiction to Kinder Bueno being an obvious example).  If far-right groups really cared about making their deeply distasteful doctrine become any sort of reality (as Hitler did) then entire communities and nations need to be cleverly duped into believing gradually greater amounts of racist, far-right hype.  To do this the trust of these people must be slowly earned, their viewpoints carefully manipulated, and their anger gradually stoked.  Essentially far-right groups need to be people we feel we can trust, people we feel are like us.  Walking around in swastika jackboots with 'Aryan Honour' tattooed across your face is not going to do this, it is going to make people run away, and it is going to make many non-white people want to kill you.

And this I think is the answer.

The Nazi cachet is not about wanting to influence anything on any large scale, it is about standing out, about wanting to be an underdog.  It gives angry young men an opportunity to feel part of a brotherhood, to have an enemy, to fight, and to die.  A championship boxer is an intimidating proposition to look at, but his sphere of influence extends only to the man in front of him in the ring.  It is the CEOs and the Presidents who have the real influence.  It's the same with the skinheads.  If they really wanted to see the end of all other races except the 'Aryans,' they'd become CEOs, not boxers.

Fortunately, they haven't got the vision to see it.

2 comments: