the new war in the gulf

Status
Not open for further replies.

Phillip Tanaka

Swabbie
Banned
Heh. Tank Girl was awesome, so I'm sticking with it. Seriously, Tank Girl was quite a good film. Malcom McDowell was an utter loony in this one. In other words, he was just perfect.

By the way, did you hear about the riots in Sydney? Correct me if I'm wrong, but it sounded to me like they were chanting the Musilum calling for Jihad and Holy War. Now, they're protesting war, but they're chanting for war.

And it seems as if all of America's claims about Iraq are becoming true. First the World Massecring Devices, and now Al Qaeda camps. Whether or not they are actually linked to Saddam or not I'm not sure, but it gives new justification to the claims America have made.
 

Delance

Victory, you say?
This law would make usenet groups about ww2 basically useless.

Besides, the comments were pertinent. Nazis did advocate gun control. They also made propaganda movies twisting the reality while trying to brainwash people into their point of view, something Moore was accused of on this movie.
 

Wedge009

Rogue Leader
Originally posted by Phillip Tanaka
By the way, did you hear about the riots in Sydney?
That was crazy. Friends working in the city almost got dragged into it (unwillingly, I mean). Dad was saying how they might have had to lock down the building he works in (the Hong Kong Shanghai Bank building in Sydney - lots of different businesses in there).
 

Phillip Tanaka

Swabbie
Banned
Originally posted by Delance
This law would make usenet groups about ww2 basically useless.

Besides, the comments were pertinent. Nazis did advocate gun control. They also made propaganda movies twisting the reality while trying to brainwash people into their point of view, something Moore was accused of on this movie.
Michael Moore you mean? I heard about something like that? Can you give any specifics?
 

TC

SubCrid
Originally posted by Delance
This law would make usenet groups about ww2 basically useless.

Besides, the comments were pertinent. Nazis did advocate gun control. They also made propaganda movies twisting the reality while trying to brainwash people into their point of view, something Moore was accused of on this movie.
Groups about World War 2 would rarely try to enforce the conventions of Godwin's law.

It don't matter if a comparison is even slightly legitimate, it just ends up ending badly. Comparing someone or something to a Nazi will rarely, if ever, lead to constructive conversation. Hence the thread discussion ending convention. I could probably come up with a way to compare anything or anyone I want to Nazis, very few of these comparisons would increase the quality of the discussion.

Going and calling something a nazi propoganda film is stupid and basically amounts to flamebait. The negative connotations associated with propoganda are more than enough to get the point across.
 

Phillip Tanaka

Swabbie
Banned
Originally posted by Delance
It's all over the net. But you can start on this article.



You can read Moore's own words on this letter to Bush here
That's right, I remember now. It really says a lot about him when he takes something like Columbine and makes, at best, a docuementary with parts he's made up to fit his version to push on others, and at worst, a form of entertainment. Things like the Titanic, and how big the 1998 Titanic movie was, I feel that it is diffirent. This happened nearly a century ago, and I'm sure that at the time people would have reacted to this the way they reacted to Columbine. But the thing is a lot of people are genuinely fascinated by the Titanic. They want to know all the ins and outs of the Titanic. I don't think the same can be said for Colombine, or instances such as September 11 or the Bali bombings. There have been things such as movies and video games made of the Gulf War, certainly, but that was seen as a major victory and something to honor the forces that libirated Kuwait. Some of you may be wondering about things such as Task Force Dagger and Assault on Terror, which deal with the war on terrorism and Afghanistan. The people who made the Cat's Lair mod for Rogue Spear said that they approached a number of developers with the idea, but they wouldn't touch it. But these games may have been a way to spike sales with those who would want vengence. With the recent Raven Shield and Generals, certainly there may have been influences, but I highly doubt that the main selling point is to wage war against terrorism or against the Middle East.
 

Delance

Victory, you say?
Originally posted by TC

Going and calling something a nazi propoganda film is stupid and basically amounts to flamebait. The negative connotations associated with propoganda are more than enough to get the point across.
Godwin's law should apply when the "Nazi" comparison is there just to be offensive or because of the connotations. This isn't the case.

A movie that twists facts to advocate gun control is, therefore, not ordinary, generic propaganda. The classification was not gratuitous. Gun-Control was something the Nazi actually defended.

This is something people who are pro and against gun control generally don't know. You can find “ultraliberals” who think of themselves as anti-nazi actively defending a nazi policy. Sometimes, such persons won’t accept criticism and attack anyone who disagrees with them as nazis, what is particularly odd.
 

TC

SubCrid
Originally posted by Delance
Godwin's law should apply when the "Nazi" comparison is there just to be offensive or because of the connotations. This isn't the case.
That's not the point of it at all, though. When you bring Nazis into a discussion, it generally leads to badness. It doesn't need to be particularly offensive to do that. People end up talking about how the comparison fits or doesn't fit, and then it moves on to specifics about the Nazis and how what they did *blah* that's comparable to other stuff. Suddenly everyone's arguing about Nazis.

A movie that twists facts to advocate gun control is, therefore, not ordinary, generic propaganda. The classification was not gratuitous. Gun-Control was something the Nazi actually defended.
Because if there's one thing that made the Nazis evil, it was gun control! Calling it Nazi propoganda is just stupid sensationalism. Comparing anything to Nazis casts a bad light on anything. Hey, Canada has gun control. I could go and say "Canada has gun control! It's an evil Canadian Propoganda film!" (and actually, given the context surrounding the film, that would probably make much more sense)

This is something people who are pro and against gun control generally don't know. You can find “ultraliberals” who think of themselves as anti-nazi actively defending a nazi policy. Sometimes, such persons won’t accept criticism and attack anyone who disagrees with them as nazis, what is particularly odd.
Who fricking cares? Just because the Nazis did something doesn't make it necessarily evil. Hitler came up with the Volkswagon, it's evil!

This very post is proof that once you start to talk about Nazis, you're screwed.
 

LeHah

212 Squadron - "The Old Man's Eyes And Ears"
I wanted to say something in this thread, which would've probably sounded stupid, but Delance has outshone me like a star to a candlestick in this. I'll sit quietly over here with my hands folded.
 

Delance

Victory, you say?
I actually agree with you, TC.

However, it's not the same thing as the volkswagen. That’s a stupid comparison, but I don't think you'll take offense, since I think it was so by design.

You got your point across. No more nazi comments, even when it make sense.

Would be "Socialist propaganda movie" is less offensive? If this is unsatisfactory to the thought police, I could rephrase it further to "Movie that uses altered facts in a politically corrected fashion instead of factual reality with the purposes of meeting socially-correct agenda policies".

I repeat that I do agree with you that stupid and gratuitous nazi comparisons leads nowhere. I’ve been saying it for a long time on all those stupid “Is Tolwyn like Hitler” threads.

And just to make it clear, I don’t think mr. Moore is a national-socialist. It’s clear he’s more of the international kind. The kind that like to paint Hitler-mustaches on Bush and go on the street breaking windows, stoning mcdonnald's and attacking policemen “for peace”.

I suggest you go to such manifestations and scream “Godwin’s law! You lose!” if you want a nice adrenaline ride. :)
 

Delance

Victory, you say?
Originally posted by Lynx
Delance, have you actually seen the movie?
Have you ever seen any german propaganda movie from, say, 1936-1945? Not a small clip on a History Channel program, but a full-blown movie?

Weather I saw the movie or not is irrelevant, because I have no way to tell if the facts on the movie are truthful or not. I can't verify them. People who investigated the movie and the facts discovered that stuff have been messed with. Other investigations on Moore's previous movie came up with similar results. Follow the links I posted to learn more about it.

But the point I was defending wasn't even if the movie is or isn't propaganda, but the free speech of the cartoonist and people who criticized moore. Read back and you'll see that.
 

Phillip Tanaka

Swabbie
Banned
With Michael Moore (gee, you can tell how he got that name can't you?), I feel that there is a diffirence between editorial cartoons that show one's opinion and movies based on events like Columbine that are made up and marketed as a docuementary. By comparison, the only thing made up in Titanic was Rose, Jack, and one or two other central characters. None of the pressuring to have the ship go faster was left out, nor was the failure to avert the collision with the iceberg. Even 'The Unsinkable' Molly Brown's rallying to go back for survivors was included, and James Cameron did nothing to soften the number of lives lost either by drowning or freezing to death. In comparison, film reviewer James Berardinelli says of Bowling for Columbine that "there will always be a debate about the authenticity of Michael Moore's documentary techniques", how "some of his conclusions may be a little farfetched", and "not everything that appears on screen can be believed".
 

Phillip Tanaka

Swabbie
Banned
Okay, that was a bad joke, but you can see what I'm saying how his movies seem to be fictional accounts made to be actual events, right?
 

Quarto

Unknown Enemy
Originally posted by Delance
But the point I was defending wasn't even if the movie is or isn't propaganda, but the free speech of the cartoonist and people who criticized moore. Read back and you'll see that.
Well, see, that's what confuses me, because I don't understand how this was relevant to the discussion in the first place. After all, I didn't say the cartoonist should be shot for drawing that cartoon, I merely said that it was a stupid cartoon. Which it is.

On a sidenote, I don't think Moore's film is even remotely propaganda-like. Far from it. He is trying to present an argument, but there's certainly nothing wrong with that. Indeed, that article you mentioned completely misses the point. Moore *doesn't* claim to have the answer about gun control. Bowling For Columbine isn't even remotely pro-gun control. That's why he points out that Canadians have more guns per head than there are in the US, and still have less gun crimes. He is discussing the issue. Yes, he does present his own opinions, but only insofar as saying that there is something wrong in America - an opinion that he backs up with more than enough facts, it seems to me. This is not to say that his work is all factual. I'm sure he stretches the truth in some places, because anybody presenting an argument will do that. You're doing it too, and so am I. That's what debating is all about - presenting a convincing argument to support your views.

Similarly, I don't see what the big deal about his Academy speech is. He is, after all, merely stating the obvious - that the last election was deeply flawed, and that the president has blatantly ignored the will of the people by going to war. Moore does appear convinced that the war is exclusively a bad thing (a view I personally disagree with), but he's raising a very, very important question - why didn't Bush, try to get a declaration of war through? Something is wrong there. By pointing out the existence of the problem, Moore isn't spitting on America, as that cartoon stupidly claims. He's performing his duty as an American citizen, to fight for the preservation of American democracy.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top