Zeig! Heil!

This post is about the demonised Hitler and his Nazi party.

I will not dispute that Hitler was a bad man. He was an awful artist, a racist, and a nationalist. But, because he is dead, and because he was the (often uninvolved) figurehead of the Nazi party, he is methodically demonised. This is extended to the Nazi party, too, and no one puts up any defence, and even happily swallows such inaccuracies.

Any written word on the subject of the Second World War will no be saturated with words with institutionally altered meanings. "Fascism", even as an ideology, has been perpetually altered by the European governments of the first half of the 20th century; you would be surprised how many people agree with authoritarian, socio-collectivistic policy until the word "Fascism" is mentioned. "National-Socialism" also holds these pejorative connotations, when the 25-Point Agenda tipped the balance heavily onto Nationalism, and in which Drexler was not in power of his created Nazi party.

Bearing the inevitable connotations in mind: Hitler is a symbol of all evil in the west. The Pink Swastika is a criticism of Nazism by calling Hitler and his cabinet gay, and investigating a link between Islam and the Nazis (then blaming homosexuality for all evil in the world). Evidently, they don't seem to see the irony. Most of the accusations of Hitler's sexual deviancy are based on biased evidence: That Hitler was a Urophile comes from Otto Strasser, a political opponent of Hitler; that Hitler was gay is taken from a convicted fraudster.

On the Subject, the Annotated Pink Swastika (http://www.geocities.com/Pentagon/Barracks/8706/) is a fantastic read if you'd like a laugh.

Take A.J.P. Taylor's Origins of the Second World War. While Hitler is not unaccountable for the war to the extent proposed, the lack of previous research (and the outcry following the book) shows how society can have a near-unanimous opinion on something they perceive as true, which is in fact either inaccurate or false.

The reason is the basis of the argument of "Reductio ad Hitlerum", or Godwin's law. You can't use analogy to the Nazis to "win", because it doesn't work like that. Think about what you know, and try to avoid sacrificing reason to the changeling of "public opinion", because it does not imply validity.

S/Cooke

I was supposed to be getting an early night tonight.

It is now 3am, and I have stayed up reading Oliver Sacks' "The Man Who Mistook His Wife For a Hat", and I literally forgot about the passage of time. It has been a long time since a book has done this to me, and the first time a work of non-fiction has.

The book consists of short case studies, each focusing on a patient and their illness; the Korsakoff's-inflicted Mariner, the disembodied woman who lost the feeling of her body, and the eponymous man who "forgot" how to recognise faces. It tries to pave a path towards the secrets of the human brain, but the roads are not connected to each other, or anything else. It has left me wanting to know.

But, the book is a fantastic read. Sacks can write very well indeed, and can evocate the cases of his patients with a kind empathy. I'm reading it for the Philosophy, however, and it's full of that, too.

I'll get back to musing on the subject of identity, then...

"Immanuel Kant issues the Prolegomena to any Future Metaphysics with a statement that outlines Metaphysics with a degree of poetic accuracy: “For the discovery of a science itself”. What follows is Kant’s attempt to qualify this statement with the establishment of his own theory, which garners threads from the philosophical schools of rationalism and empiricism, towards the tapestry that finishes as his Prolegomena."

I quite like Kant, and the above is very true.

S/Cooke

Misc.

"Baby Shoes. For Sale. Never Worn"

Six words that are so saturated with dark interpretation they're dripping.

Death's Halls

If anyone ever considers themselves an authority on videogames, they will have had to have played Planescape: Torment.

Most modern RPGs are similar to Oblivion, because Oblivion sold masses. Torment didn't, but it is in every way a better game. While Oblivion was shallow and generic, Torment is a sprawling warren of clever writing and fantastic storytelling. It was the polar opposite to Dungeons & Dragons, and all fantasy in general, which released it from the genre's clichés and inevitable outcome. It was new, and clever.

Planescape is as much a response to other games as it is something entirley original; the aim of the game is to die, as you play an immortal, which in itself is an interesting game mechanic, and promotes a intelligence-based approach instead of a violent one. The game is so devoid of things that characterise fantasy games: no knights, no dragons, no swords, no armor, no castles. In Oblivion the easiest enemy is a rat, whereas in Torment there is a super-colony of hive-mind rats who are impossible to kill. You can expect nothing and everything from this game.

And the "serious" parts of it as well: the nameless protagonist changes, but there is one thing which stays the same, and this is the Philosophical question at the heart of Torment: What is power What is Existence without death? What constitutes the self, and identity? What is the nature of power? And the central question: What is, and what changes, the nature of a man?

Torment is the most memorable game I have ever played. The game is designed to draw you deep into it, and rewards you more the further down you get. There is a brothel designed to cater for every intellectual sense; whores for arguments, for storytelling, for listening. There is a city which is alive to the extent it is "pregnant" and gives birth to an alleyway. The citizens speak in a medievil English dialect, all of these things add to the feel of the game, and there are many, many more things stitched up within the wonderful tapestry that is Torment.

It is everything a narrative should be, and it is probably the last great RPG ever

Edit: I've just realised my copy has doubled in value. £34 of Amazon, blimey!

The Video-Gaming Rut

For someone who loves games so much, I don't think I've been up to speed with them recently. Firstly, there's been a bit of a stagnation of Videogames for a while now, as they are becoming more and more mainstream and have collected into specific "genres"

For example, you have the shooter, with the gun, the health/ammo/ability-bars, and the enemies in front of you. It's been that way since Doom. There's not much you can do with gameplay apart from bolt extra gimmicks on, or streamline it for a purpose. Bullet time, for an example of a gimmick, is becoming more and more prevelant within the FPS release, while Halo started the trend of reductionism (or streamlining) to focus the player on the combat (the Recharging Shield instead of traditional health-pack foraging, only two weapons availble at a time). Despite these alterations, there is only so much you can do with the medium before you're remaking the same game over and over.

Every genre of game will inevitably imitate it's peers, and it won't be long before we see "Portal" clones popping up, I'd imagine. Apart from gimmicks, the only thing new about these kinds of games is plot.

So, where are all the new ideas? Why can't we have games where you play bats and navigate by sound, or construct viruses and guide them through bodies! There are hundreds of ideas that haven't been plumbed yet, such as strategy games involving Glaciers as they cut through mountains!

S/Cooke

Loom-Smashing for the 21st Century

Sometimes I wonder if the world is a good place because of technology, or in spite of it. The further we get to making ourselves lazier, the more we have to think about. The more thinking we do, the more we will tend towards changing things, creating things to perpetuate our laziness, or to change our lives "for the better" and removing the workload to machines, and electricity.

Want is the centre of the spiral, I'd imagine. Everything comes from wanting something, or from never being content with what you have. Is happiness, therefore, the carrot on the stick, to be offered, but never reached?

I think there should be some neo-luddism resurgence. The world outside of the televison and computer screens needs to be re-discovered, outside of speakers and books. If people are still bored when surrounded by all this, why do they need it?

S/Cooke