[POLITICS] Extra Credits seems to have driven off a cliff

[stroopwafel]

Not making deliberate, unnecessary civilian casualties has nothing to do with being 'too meek'.

Define unnecessary. The Western Allied strategic bombing campaign was started as a means to weaken Germany's industrial capacity and thus, in extension, Germany's ability to conduct a war. It was thought of at a time when the Commonwealth had neither the physical possibility, nor the military strength, to conduct a land war against Germany. The ethical crux of the matter was that targeting industrial centers also meant very high civilian casualties as collateral damage, this because the CEP (dispersion from target) of strategic bombings at the time was in the realm of 2-3 km during day time and double that during night time. Such a large CEP in combination with the fact that industrial areas tend to be located in or adjacent to cities meant that civilian casualties were unavoidable.

Many of the bombings had no strategic value and would have been prosecuted if laws for aerial warfare existed. These were revenge attacks meant to disrupt and terrorize. That these indiscriminate bombings somehow supported the Soviets(which they already knew would be the next enemy) or that these remote towns would somehow convince Hitler to change resources from offensive capabilities to AA guns also sound unrealistic to me, espescially since he already had total disregard for the population by using them as cannon fodder for his invasion tactics even fighting wars on two fronts much to the bedazzlement of his military planners. Hitler never seemed particularly concerned about his 'own people'.

Really seems the crux is that you think the German people somehow 'deserved' to be incinerated b/c 'close to 50% voted for Hitler', but then, what about the other 50%? What about the incessant propaganda and brainwashing with no alternative news sources? What about a tyrant hijacking an entire state that abolished the rule of law and ended democracy and in which anyone even voicing any form of dissent would be immediately executed? Were they not victims as well?

Again, how much of the German public do you think supported the holocaust? Grouping all the complexity and internal divisions under one banner has always been a problem with the concept of nation states but holding somehow the population responsible for Hitler's atrocities is the only way you could ever justify revenge attacks.

 

[Casual Shinji]

I personally think that neither the Allies nor the USSR crossed the line into immorality or unjustified actions during WW2, because you've got a lot more leeway with doing dubious stuff when you do it to stop someone who's doing things that are much, much worse.

It's kind of impossible to discuss immorality during war. Just the fact that two sides are killing eachother is horribly immoral, even when one side is clearly the good guys and it's a necessary act to end the war.

And there have been plenty of unjustified action from the Allies during WW2, just on account of generals messing up and getting their own troups killed. The invasion to try and take France back from the germans was mired by a lot of screw ups from what I've heard. USSR troups also got rather rapey with german civilians it seems. I don't know if that's true (though considering Stalin ran the place and the russians had a major bone to pick with Germany it could very well be), but it was certainly enough to scare german women to try their damndest to stay out of the russian's hands.

Also, America had internment camps for japanese americans because of how pissed and scared they were of Japan.

 

[CaitSeith]

Unless of course you're being sarcastic and believe video games cause violence, which is the exact same argument as video games cause Nazis

An argument I never made. IF you are going to use false equivalences, at least use them against arguments I actually said (and I said normalize is very different to cause). It's almost like you rather twist other peoples words to... make Neo-Nazis look not so bad, I think? I don't even know what your end goal is here whenever you give them positive PR in your arguments (I can't even tell if the positive spotlight you give them is done by accident or not).

 

[CaitSeith]

I'll await the battles won and the causality costs of the American Neo-Nazi wars. It better be in the hundreds of millions for all this effort googling one thing has taken me!

Don't waste your breath. If they haven't gassed a whole ethnic group and militarily occupied half a continent, they aren't real Nazis...

Well, you didn't exactly prove him wrong, or even moderately hyperbolic.

Sorry. In the past 10 years the absurdity of socio-political environment have increased past satire itself (and this isn't Off-topic forums, so I'm restraining myself).

 

[Eacaraxe_v1legacy]

The Western Allied strategic bombing campaign was started as a means to weaken Germany's industrial capacity and thus, in extension, Germany's ability to conduct a war. It was thought of at a time when the Commonwealth had neither the physical possibility, nor the military strength, to conduct a land war against Germany. The ethical crux of the matter was that targeting industrial centers also meant very high civilian casualties as collateral damage, this because the CEP (dispersion from target) of strategic bombings at the time was in the realm of 2-3 km during day time and double that during night time. Such a large CEP in combination with the fact that industrial areas tend to be located in or adjacent to cities meant that civilian casualties were unavoidable.

The CSBS's average CEP was inside a kilometer, and by the time of the Mk.XIV's and Norden's introduction average CEP was down to 370m, by war's end it was down to 270m and the SABS's CEP was 110m. Average CEP as conducted in actual missions.

Your summation only holds water with regards to the findings of the Butt report, considering that by June 1943 the RAF was able to consistently put 50% (and greater) bombs within three miles (approx.) of target...in nighttime raids.

Taking into consideration the RAF was defining entire urban cores as targets, in pursuance of the Area Bombing Directive. You know, the declaration of unrestricted saturation bombing and designation of residential districts and urban cores as primary targets in accordance with dehousing, as opposed to industrial areas, to damage German civil morale?

And of course, this.

You see, here's the issue. Your argument is built on the premise Allied bombing was conducted to destroy German industrial capability, and civilian casualties were unavoidable collateral damage, thereby justifying saturation bombing in accordance with total war doctrine.

Except for the fact that's a blatant lie. Allied intention was to target civil infrastructure first and foremost, and even if that wasn't the case, Allied technology was absolutely up to the task of precision bombing of German manufacturing and transportation infrastructure.

 

[stroopwafel]

Damn, Eacaraxe, do you have like genius level IQ or something?

 

[CaitSeith]

Damn, Eacaraxe, do you have like genius level IQ or something?

It's funny how all their discussion misses the point that what made Nazis worst than the Allies wasn't what they did to their enemies in times of war; but what they did to their own citizens in times of peace.

 

[Samtemdo8_v1legacy]

It's almost as if they're more interested in clicks and ad revenue than a coherent, honest, consistent point about the way game designers approach the topic of Nazism in games about WWII.

E-FUCKING-XACTLY!!!!

Gaming and movie Youtube is filled with headline driven videos trying to make you click and get ad money doing it. Youtubing is not a hobby for people, its their job!!!

Often times its just people talking by themselves in a microphone alone without anyone to speak out against their claims.

 

[Silentpony_v1legacy]

SNIP

That's the thing about being right, I don't have to twist your words.
"Don't waste your breath. If they haven't gassed a whole ethnic group and militarily occupied half a continent, they aren't real Nazis..."
And your response
"Well, you didn't exactly prove him wrong, or even moderately hyperbolic."

Which I'm going to take is a response to my response:
"I'll await the battles won and the causality costs of the American Neo-Nazi wars. It better be in the hundreds of millions for all this effort googling one thing has taken me."

So you're all capable of realizing there is in fact a difference between Neo-Nazis, who have never constructed extermination camps that killed jews by the tens of thousands a day, and actual Nazis who did.
That however ill intended those Charlatsville white supremacists were, and I'll happily admit their ideology is at best hate speech and at worst criminal, did not conquer continental Europe or even a fucking Starbucks.

To get back on topic, Nazis in a WW2 game does not normalize or reinforce Nazi ideology any more than it does invading Normandy ideology. Real Nazism is over. Actual take over 1/4th of the landmass of the world and kill tens of millions of people with a unified army in the hundreds of millions is never going to happen again.
A few dozen 4chan trolls on Clash of Tanks saying the Panzer is better than the Sherman is not the new SS

 

[CaitSeith]

That however ill intended those Charlatsville white supremacists were, and I'll happily admit their ideology is at best hate speech and at worst criminal, did not conquer continental Europe or even a fucking Starbucks.

Conquering Europe wasn't what made German Nazis dangerous (or a German Nazi a Nazi). You speak like there were no Nazis before WWII started; that makes you wrong. Nazism existed long before the war started. Nazis existed even before Hitler joined their party. You tend to ignore all that without good reason, and that makes your "they aren't real Nazis if they haven't conquered half a continent and eradicated a whole ethnicity" wrong.

 

[Silentpony_v1legacy]

That however ill intended those Charlatsville white supremacists were, and I'll happily admit their ideology is at best hate speech and at worst criminal, did not conquer continental Europe or even a fucking Starbucks.

Conquering Europe wasn't what made German Nazis dangerous (or a German Nazi a Nazi). You speak like there were no Nazis before WWII started; that makes you wrong. Nazism existed long before the war started. Nazis existed even before Hitler joined their party. You tend to ignore all that without good reason, and that makes your "they aren't real Nazis if they haven't conquered half a continent and eradicated a whole ethnicity" wrong.

Nazis without an army are just assholes. The world is filled with assholes that believe this group sucks, and that other group is worse.
What made the Nazis notable was the army, and the war. Yes I am ignoring the fact Nazis existed before world war 2, because the war didn't exist! The war! You know, that thing that killed tens of millions of people? Who the fuck cares if some German farmers were anti-semetic if they didn't do anything about it? The entire world can be anti-semetic, including the Jews, so long as no one does anything about it. Don't discriminate, or say anything, and certainly don't kill anyone. Just keep quietly to yourself.

Forming a national government, an army, and going to war is more dangerous than playing a made up game and seeing an Iron Cross.

 

[Erttheking]

SNIP

That's the thing about being right, I don't have to twist your words.
"Don't waste your breath. If they haven't gassed a whole ethnic group and militarily occupied half a continent, they aren't real Nazis..."
And your response
"Well, you didn't exactly prove him wrong, or even moderately hyperbolic."

Which I'm going to take is a response to my response:
"I'll await the battles won and the causality costs of the American Neo-Nazi wars. It better be in the hundreds of millions for all this effort googling one thing has taken me."

So you're all capable of realizing there is in fact a difference between Neo-Nazis, who have never constructed extermination camps that killed jews by the tens of thousands a day, and actual Nazis who did.
That however ill intended those Charlatsville white supremacists were, and I'll happily admit their ideology is at best hate speech and at worst criminal, did not conquer continental Europe or even a fucking Starbucks.

To get back on topic, Nazis in a WW2 game does not normalize or reinforce Nazi ideology any more than it does invading Normandy ideology. Real Nazism is over. Actual take over 1/4th of the landmass of the world and kill tens of millions of people with a unified army in the hundreds of millions is never going to happen again.
A few dozen 4chan trolls on Clash of Tanks saying the Panzer is better than the Sherman is not the new SS

And you seem to have utterly missed the point that I was implying that you were being obtuse with this line of argument, not saying you were right. Yes Neo Nazis are not WW2 Nazis, but they?re still Nazis. They have different spots and far less power but they?re still the same animal. An unsuccessful asshole is still an asshole.

You also glanced over the advice of ?don?t waste your breath? implying that arguing with you wasn?t worth the effort. Another thing I?m starting to agree with.

 

[Silentpony_v1legacy]

SNIP

That's the thing about being right, I don't have to twist your words.
"Don't waste your breath. If they haven't gassed a whole ethnic group and militarily occupied half a continent, they aren't real Nazis..."
And your response
"Well, you didn't exactly prove him wrong, or even moderately hyperbolic."

Which I'm going to take is a response to my response:
"I'll await the battles won and the causality costs of the American Neo-Nazi wars. It better be in the hundreds of millions for all this effort googling one thing has taken me."

So you're all capable of realizing there is in fact a difference between Neo-Nazis, who have never constructed extermination camps that killed jews by the tens of thousands a day, and actual Nazis who did.
That however ill intended those Charlatsville white supremacists were, and I'll happily admit their ideology is at best hate speech and at worst criminal, did not conquer continental Europe or even a fucking Starbucks.

To get back on topic, Nazis in a WW2 game does not normalize or reinforce Nazi ideology any more than it does invading Normandy ideology. Real Nazism is over. Actual take over 1/4th of the landmass of the world and kill tens of millions of people with a unified army in the hundreds of millions is never going to happen again.
A few dozen 4chan trolls on Clash of Tanks saying the Panzer is better than the Sherman is not the new SS

And you seem to have utterly missed the point that I was implying that you were being obtuse with this line of argument, not saying you were right. Yes Neo Nazis are not WW2 Nazis, but they?re still Nazis. They have different spots and far less power but they?re still the same animal. An unsuccessful asshole is still an asshole.

You also glanced over the advice of ?don?t waste your breath? implying that arguing with you wasn?t worth the effort. Another thing I?m starting to agree with.

Yes arguing with me is pointless, I have reality on my side.
Playing video games does not cause someone to be more violent. Fact.
Playing video games does not cause someone to be more Nazi. Fact.
Nazis were bad. Fact
Neo-Nazis are bad. Fact.
Neo Nazis do not have a national Army and do not control Europe. Fact.
Nazis are worse than Neo-Nazis. Fact.
EC's video is clickbait nonsense. Fact, although to be fair 'nonsense' does imply it doesn't make sense, and their video does technically string together words in full and understandable sentences, so it does make sense, it just completely wrong in all its assertions.

 

[Erttheking]

SNIP

That's the thing about being right, I don't have to twist your words.
"Don't waste your breath. If they haven't gassed a whole ethnic group and militarily occupied half a continent, they aren't real Nazis..."
And your response
"Well, you didn't exactly prove him wrong, or even moderately hyperbolic."

Which I'm going to take is a response to my response:
"I'll await the battles won and the causality costs of the American Neo-Nazi wars. It better be in the hundreds of millions for all this effort googling one thing has taken me."

So you're all capable of realizing there is in fact a difference between Neo-Nazis, who have never constructed extermination camps that killed jews by the tens of thousands a day, and actual Nazis who did.
That however ill intended those Charlatsville white supremacists were, and I'll happily admit their ideology is at best hate speech and at worst criminal, did not conquer continental Europe or even a fucking Starbucks.

To get back on topic, Nazis in a WW2 game does not normalize or reinforce Nazi ideology any more than it does invading Normandy ideology. Real Nazism is over. Actual take over 1/4th of the landmass of the world and kill tens of millions of people with a unified army in the hundreds of millions is never going to happen again.
A few dozen 4chan trolls on Clash of Tanks saying the Panzer is better than the Sherman is not the new SS

And you seem to have utterly missed the point that I was implying that you were being obtuse with this line of argument, not saying you were right. Yes Neo Nazis are not WW2 Nazis, but they?re still Nazis. They have different spots and far less power but they?re still the same animal. An unsuccessful asshole is still an asshole.

You also glanced over the advice of ?don?t waste your breath? implying that arguing with you wasn?t worth the effort. Another thing I?m starting to agree with.

Yes arguing with me is pointless, I have reality on my side.
Playing video games does not cause someone to be more violent. Fact.
Playing video games does not cause someone to be more Nazi. Fact.
Nazis were bad. Fact
Neo-Nazis are bad. Fact.
Neo Nazis do not have a national Army and do not control Europe. Fact.
Nazis are worse than Neo-Nazis. Fact.
EC's video is clickbait nonsense. Fact, although to be fair 'nonsense' does imply it doesn't make sense, and their video does technically string together words in full and understandable sentences, so it does make sense, it just completely wrong in all its assertions.

Conclusion that arguing with you is pointless, true. But it?s more to do with a really lousy attitude and bad faith. I never trust anyone who openly celebrates how right they are. They never listen. Ever.

 

[Silentpony_v1legacy]

Conclusion that arguing with you is pointless, true. But it?s more to do with a really lousy attitude and bad faith. I never trust anyone who openly celebrates how right they are. They never listen. Ever.

Yes having facts on your side means you don't have to listen to the side that doesn't. Flat Earthers are not worth listening to. Birthers were wrong. That storks bring babies is not a legitimate medical theory.
Two sides of a debate don't necessarily have two equally compelling arguments. This isn't Team Edward vs Team Jacob.
And I'd be less worried about people who glorify they're right and more worried about people who willing choose to be wrong.

 

[CaitSeith]

Nazis without an army are just assholes.

True, German Nazis in the 20's were just assholes. The same Nazis in the 40's were the scourge of the Civilized World. At some point in between their own country became unable to stop them. It became a danger for other German citizens to live in the same country as these "assholes", as the it could no longer stop them from building concentration camps and putting thousands of its own citizens in them for years before the war. The long list of Nazi atrocities started years before WWII.

I think we both agree that "assholes" controlling the government are dangerous "assholes". But maybe we disagree in how seeing Neo-Nazis as mere assholes is dangerous too. When Germany gave Nazism an inch...

 

[Erttheking]

Conclusion that arguing with you is pointless, true. But it?s more to do with a really lousy attitude and bad faith. I never trust anyone who openly celebrates how right they are. They never listen. Ever.

Yes having facts on your side means you don't have to listen to the side that doesn't. Flat Earthers are not worth listening to. Birthers were wrong. That storks bring babies is not a legitimate medical theory.
Two sides of a debate don't necessarily have two equally compelling arguments. This isn't Team Edward vs Team Jacob.
And I'd be less worried about people who glorify they're right and more worried about people who willing choose to be wrong.

So you're actively comparing me to flat earthers and birthers.

Yeah, you'll forgive me if, in this example, your declaring how right you are was more an example of you screaming at me to go fuck myself.

 

[Silentpony_v1legacy]

I think we both agree that "assholes" controlling the government are dangerous "assholes". But maybe we disagree in how seeing Neo-Nazis as mere assholes is dangerous too. When Germany gave Nazism an inch...

I think my sticking point is that Nazis had never happened before back then, but they have now. People back then didn't know what a bad idea it was to give Nazis power, but we know now what happens. We know now not to elect Neo-Nazis to power because we know what happened last time.
and in most countries if being a Nazis isn't already illegal, proclaiming their ideas is. A candidate can't run for office on the platform of Exterminate the Jews. That's hate speech and they'd be brought up on charges. Even Neo-Nazis are smart enough to realize they can't go around calling for death and violence. They can say 'Jews will not replace us' but not 'Death to Jews'

I do view Neo-Nazis as just mere assholes until they act on their beliefs, then they're criminals. A dude can hate Jews all the live long day, just don't act on it.

 

[Eacaraxe_v1legacy]

It's funny how all their discussion misses the point that what made Nazis worst than the Allies wasn't what they did to their enemies in times of war; but what they did to their own citizens in times of peace.

Funny, considering I said no such thing. I just don't believe anything and everything Allies did during the war was justified, because of how evil Axis powers were. Especially when it comes to dingbat strategic decisions like unnecessarily prolonging the war, enabling the Holocaust and allowing Russians and others of Slavic descent to die by the millions, to humor masturbatory British colonial fantasy. Then deciding to invade Europe two full years after it was strategically ideal to do so, but only after the German war machine was broken in the Eastern Front and to prevent Soviet territorial gains in western Europe.

I just don't gobble up Cold War propaganda hook, line, and sinker. Least of all for the fact a large portion of it is dedicated towards whitewashing Nazism and German war crimes, revising the clear and present trend of fascism and Nazi sympathies in the US among post-war governmental figures and sociopolitical elites, manufacturing consent for cooperation and collaboration with former Nazis, and all to demonize and wage culture war against a former ally. In fact, in light of all this, I might wonder why you do.

 

[aegix drakan_v1legacy]

I think my sticking point is that Nazis had never happened before back then, but they have now. People back then didn't know what a bad idea it was to give Nazis power, but we know now what happens. We know now not to elect Neo-Nazis to power because we know what happened last time.

You have considerably more faith in humanity than I do. The US has elected people who are like 2 steps shy nazi ideology, and poland is trending strongly in that direction these days as well.

And that alone was already enough for the government to put literal children into what amount to concentration camps. So forgive my concerns, because they appear to be warranted.

Not to mention as you say here:

Even Neo-Nazis are smart enough to realize they can't go around calling for death and violence. They can say 'Jews will not replace us' but not 'Death to Jews'

So the ones who want to run for office or the local police department are going to try to be a little quieter about their beliefs and are not going to appear to be nazis at face value. They're smarter than that.

Those beliefs, BTW, are not just "meh meh meh, I dun like jewish people". What defines nasi-ism is the central concept of "If you're not like me, get out. If you can't/won't, then I will use any level of violence to get you out". It is quite literally an ideology with violence baked into its core.

So when news keeps coming out about cops, and Custom-and-border-protection, and ICE and other people with power being part of groups that are closely aligned with the neo-nazi ideology and agenda (white supremacists, etc), my instinct is "These guys and their allies are already trying to seize power. We need to make sure they don't, because the second they DO have an army, everyone else loses".

That being said I do agree with this:

Playing video games does not cause someone to be more violent. Fact.
Playing video games does not cause someone to be more Nazi. Fact.
Nazis were bad. Fact
Neo-Nazis are bad. Fact.
Neo Nazis do not have a national Army and do not control Europe. Fact.
Nazis are worse than Neo-Nazis. Fact.
EC's video is clickbait

I just think that neo-nazi level pricks have considerably more reach and power right now than you think they do, and I would much rather try to prevent them from ever getting that army long before they're in danger of getting it. Because if they DO get that army...How the hell do we stop them?

Like I said in my post like 2 pages back, I don't believe with EC's approach because I think it's too close to censoring art, and it won't even make a dent in the normalization problem. There are much more obvious ways those pricks are being normalized. Leave the damn video games alone, no one gets closer to being a nazi/terrorist because they randomly ended up on the "bad guys" team in a work of fiction in a game mode that's got nothing to actually say.