Demonizing those darn Nazis (Video-Games and other stuff)

Recommended Videos

Texas Joker 52

All hail the Pun Meister!
Jun 25, 2011
1,285
0
0
TheIronRuler said:
Ok, maybe saying the Soviets 'smelled better' afterward is a little (or way) too much. Though, I'm no expert on World War 2, and I have a very basic knowledge of the happenings of that war in the first place, so I won't say anything that I type here is cold hard fact. I'm just as fallible as the next guy.

Still, I would say that the Allies weren't completely unaware of the Nazi's goings-on. And by no means am I saying that the Allies were perfect compared to the Nazis. Hell no. No side in a war is going to be without glaring flaws of some kind, in ideology or motivation. I suppose you could say that the Allies were the 'lesser of two evils' as it were. Even though there was more than only two sides to said war.

But, you do have very valid points from what I've read. Nazi Soldiers, in general, are far too demonized. Most of the foot-soldiers were simply doing their jobs, and following their orders. If anything, the same can be said for some if not most soldiers in an official, organized military.
 

TotalerKrieger

New member
Nov 12, 2011
376
0
0
TheIronRuler said:
Wintermoot said:
the Nazi's are the only group that is 100% evil.
No other group systematically killed people as the Nazi's did.
.
I can pull out at least three examples out of the top of my head that are more "evil" than the Nazis-
Khmer Rogue
Soviet engineered Holodomor
Soviet "Great Purge"

err... look, I want to be nice here, but I don't think you should call the Nazi's "100% evil".

Oscar Schindler [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Oskar_Schindler] was a Nazi.
I admittedly do not know a great deal about the scale and motivations surrounding the Holodomor so I cannot really comment on it (if it was as bad as some say it was, I would say it is certainly comparable to the Holocaust), but their is no way that Stalin's Great Purge comes even close to the Holocaust in terms of atrocity or "evil". I fail to see how the genocide in Cambodia is somehow worse than the genocide conducted by Nazi Germany.

TheIronRuler said:
.
Were the soldiers of the time aware of the atrocities Germany at the time committed? Do note that the allies themselves did some very nasty stuff themselves. For the most part they were comfortable watching the USSR burn till they realized that the Soviets were pushing back.
The soldiers of the Waffen SS were very much aware of these atrocities as they were typically carrying them out. The Wehrmact rarely took an active role in such atrocities but their High Command was fully aware that they were being carried out. This passive role ranged from quiet disapproval to rounding up "undesirables" and handing them over to the SS to be murdered. I doubt that the average Wehrmact soldier knew the scale of the Holocaust but it seems highly unlikely that they would have no idea as to what was occuring, particularily if they served on the Eastern Front.

Yes, the Allies did regularily bomb civilian populations in Japan and Germany towards the end of the war. The Germans, Japanese and Italians had been bombing/gasing/executing civilian populations before the war had even started proper. These tactics worsened as the war dragged on and the Axis became more desperate. Even if one ignores the death count of the Holocaust, Germany had a lot more blood on its hands than the Allied nations combined. Many historians estimate that at least 6 million Soviet civilians and 2 million Soviet POWs were intentionally murdered by Germany.

No, the Allies were not content to watch the USSR burn early in the war. When Germany invaded the USSR in 1941, Great Britain and the Commonwealth were very happy to have an ally (if perhaps one of convience) to stand with them against Germany. The British Commonwealth sent large amounts of supplies to the Soviets well before the US Lend Lease was even considered. During these early days, the Brits even sent ships of Hawker Hurricanes and veterans pilots to Leningrad to equip and train Russian pilots in the region. Large numbers of Valentine tanks were also sent from Canada at this time. The British Campaign in North Africa was partially an attempt to take some pressure off the Soviets.

Alot of people took an active role in the Holocaust, it is not as though Hitler and Himmler killed 11 million people by themselves. It took a large force of German citzens who fully bought into the ideology to kill that many people. It took many more citzens to complacently allow such crimes to occur. The demonizing of the Nazis is well justified, and while Germany as a nation is not entirely guilty they bear a great deal of responsiblity for what happened.
 

clippen05

New member
Jul 10, 2012
529
0
0
ImSkeletor said:
Because WW2 was probably the most Black and White war ever fought. They killed millions apon millions of innocent people in the most cruel ways possible. If they were the villian of a novel and did not actually exist people would criticize the novel for having such one note unrealistically evil characters.
Except for the fact that the Soviets killed just as many if not more innocent people. Ever heard of pogroms? They were basically the Soviet version of the Holocaust, although they occurred before and after WW2. Don't forget about the Great Purge, where Stalin executed hundreds of his own officers and leaders out of fear of betrayal. Oh, and "Not One Step Backwards" is great too: Retreat, and be shot by your own commissar... real humane on the Soviets' part. Yep, the Nazi's were the only ones killing there own people; nice display of your 8th grade history right there. Just remember the last scene in Schindler's list. A Russian Soldier speaks with the liberated concentration camp. "You shouldn't go East, they hate you there, you probably shouldn't go West either."
 

Ryotknife

New member
Oct 15, 2011
1,687
0
0
clippen05 said:
ImSkeletor said:
Because WW2 was probably the most Black and White war ever fought. They killed millions apon millions of innocent people in the most cruel ways possible. If they were the villian of a novel and did not actually exist people would criticize the novel for having such one note unrealistically evil characters.
Except for the fact that the Soviets killed just as many if not more innocent people. Ever heard of pogroms? They were basically the Soviet version of the Holocaust. Don't forget about the Great Purge, where Stalin executed hundreds of his own officers and leaders out of fear of betrayal. Oh, and "Not One Step Backwards" is great too: Retreat, and be shot by your own commissar... real humane on the Soviets' part. Yep, the Nazi's were the only ones killing there own people; nice display of your 8th grade history right there.
to be fair, USSR didnt exactly get along very well with the rest of the allies. Especially towards the end of the war when they purposedly poked the allies in the eyes every chance they got.
 
Feb 22, 2009
715
0
0
Well they're a group defined by their actions more than they're defined by race or nationality or anything like that, so it's not seen as being as bad. The actions of the Nazis were indisputably evil to the point where people think you shouldn't feel bad killing them endlessly.

I don't think they should be treated as cannon fodder in this way though, dehumanising a group entirely is what allows what the Nazis did to happen - and it's not like people weren't conscripted into the German army so you can't invariably use the excuse 'but they're EVIL'.
 

saintdane05

New member
Aug 2, 2011
1,849
0
0
If I may, many of the "Nazis" we shoot are actually just German Soldiers. Many were drafted.

The Nazi Party only made up 10% of government officials.
 

TheIronRuler

New member
Mar 18, 2011
4,283
0
0
clippen05 said:
ImSkeletor said:
Because WW2 was probably the most Black and White war ever fought. They killed millions apon millions of innocent people in the most cruel ways possible. If they were the villian of a novel and did not actually exist people would criticize the novel for having such one note unrealistically evil characters.
Except for the fact that the Soviets killed just as many if not more innocent people. Ever heard of pogroms? They were basically the Soviet version of the Holocaust. Don't forget about the Great Purge, where Stalin executed hundreds of his own officers and leaders out of fear of betrayal. Oh, and "Not One Step Backwards" is great too: Retreat, and be shot by your own commissar... real humane on the Soviets' part. Yep, the Nazi's were the only ones killing there own people; nice display of your 8th grade history right there.
.
Hey, Pogroms weren't mandated by the government. I should know that, it was on the 8th grade history material in my class. Woo, Jewish history. We learn about how we got killed, massacred, discriminated against and thrown out of countries till the mid 1800s, and a hundred years later we get the Holocaust. Woo.
.
Texas Joker 52 said:
TheIronRuler said:
Ok, maybe saying the Soviets 'smelled better' afterward is a little (or way) too much. Though, I'm no expert on World War 2, and I have a very basic knowledge of the happenings of that war in the first place, so I won't say anything that I type here is cold hard fact. I'm just as fallible as the next guy.

Still, I would say that the Allies weren't completely unaware of the Nazi's goings-on. And by no means am I saying that the Allies were perfect compared to the Nazis. Hell no. No side in a war is going to be without glaring flaws of some kind, in ideology or motivation. I suppose you could say that the Allies were the 'lesser of two evils' as it were. Even though there was more than only two sides to said war.

But, you do have very valid points from what I've read. Nazi Soldiers, in general, are far too demonized. Most of the foot-soldiers were simply doing their jobs, and following their orders. If anything, the same can be said for some if not most soldiers in an official, organized military.
.
The allied commanders and leaders was aware, no doubt about it, but the public and the troops had no knowledge of the death camps and the magnitude of this program.
.
Higgs303 said:
TheIronRuler said:
Wintermoot said:
the Nazi's are the only group that is 100% evil.
No other group systematically killed people as the Nazi's did.
.
I can pull out at least three examples out of the top of my head that are more "evil" than the Nazis-
Khmer Rogue
Soviet engineered Holodomor
Soviet "Great Purge"

err... look, I want to be nice here, but I don't think you should call the Nazi's "100% evil".

Oscar Schindler [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Oskar_Schindler] was a Nazi.
I admittedly do not know a great deal about the scale and motivations surrounding the Holodomor so I cannot really comment on it (if it was as bad as some say it was, I would say it is certainly comparable to the Holocaust), but their is no way that Stalin's Great Purge comes even close to the Holocaust in terms of atrocity or "evil". I fail to see how the genocide in Cambodia is somehow worse than the genocide conducted by Nazi Germany.

TheIronRuler said:
.
Were the soldiers of the time aware of the atrocities Germany at the time committed? Do note that the allies themselves did some very nasty stuff themselves. For the most part they were comfortable watching the USSR burn till they realized that the Soviets were pushing back.
The soldiers of the Waffen SS were very much aware of these atrocities as they were typically carrying them out. The Wehrmact rarely took an active role in such atrocities but their High Command was fully aware that they were being carried out. This passive role ranged from quiet disapproval to rounding up "undesirables" and handing them over to the SS to be murdered. I doubt that the average Wehrmact soldier knew the scale of the Holocaust but it seems highly unlikely that they would have no idea as to what was occuring, particularily if they served on the Eastern Front.

Alot of people took an active role in the Holocaust, it is not as though Hitler and Himmler killed 11 million people by themselves. It took a large force of German citzens who fully bought into the ideology to kill that many people.

Yes, the Allies did regularily bomb civilian populations in Japan and Germany towards the end of the war. The Germans, Japanese and Italians had been bombing/gasing/executing civilian populations before the war had even started proper. These tactics worsened as the war dragged on and the Axis became more desparate. Even if one ignores the death count of the Holocaust, Germany had a lot more blood on its hands than any Allied nation. Many historians estimate that at least 6 million Soviet civilians and 2 million Soviet POWs were intentionally murdered by Germany.

No, the Allies were not content to watch the USSR burn early in the war. When Germany invaded the USSR in 1941, Great Britain and the Commonwealth were very happy to have an ally (if perhaps one of convience) to stand against Germany. The British Commonwealth sent large amounts of supplies to the Soviets well before the US Lend Lease was even considered. During these early days, the Brits even sent ships of Hawker Hurricanes and veterans pilots to Leningrad to equip and train Russian pilots in the region. Large numbers of Valentine tanks were also sent from Canada at this time. The British Campaign in North Africa was partily an attempt to take some pressure off the Soviets.
.
"I admittedly do not know a great deal about the scale and motivations surrounding the Holodomor so I cannot really comment on it (if it was as bad as some say it was, I would say it is certainly comparable to the Holocaust), but their is no way that Stalin's Great Purge comes even close to the Holocaust in terms of atrocity or "evil". I fail to see how the genocide in Cambodia is somehow worse than the genocide conducted by Nazi Germany. " - Genocide in Cambodia was responsible for the death of nearly a third of the local population. If you put it into perspective think of ~%30 of Germany's 70 Million dying. That's 21 Million.

"The soldiers of the Waffen SS were very much aware of these atrocities as they were typically carrying them out. The Wehrmact rarely took an active role in such atrocities but their High Command was fully aware that they were being carried out. This passive role ranged from quiet disapproval to rounding up "undesirables" and handing them over to the SS to be murdered. I doubt that the average Wehrmact soldier knew the scale of the Holocaust but it seems highly unlikely that they would have no idea as to what was occuring, particularily if they served on the Eastern Front." - Don't get me started on these special units. Their job was to clean up after the army, trailing behind it and doing the dirty work. Those who entered the units were picked and exit from said unit usually involved you getting shot.

"Yes, the Allies did regularily bomb civilian populations in Japan and Germany towards the end of the war. The Germans, Japanese and Italians had been bombing/gasing/executing civilian populations before the war had even started proper. These tactics worsened as the war dragged on and the Axis became more desparate. Even if one ignores the death count of the Holocaust, Germany had a lot more blood on its hands than any Allied nation. Many historians estimate that at least 6 million Soviet civilians and 2 million Soviet POWs were intentionally murdered by Germany. " - One can say that after the Soviets were pushed back during operation Barbarossa the locals were delighted to see their liberators, which would only treat them multiple times worse than their Soviet counterparts and cause more destruction and death. Is that Irony? I think it is. Oh, the Irony.

"No, the Allies were not content to watch the USSR burn early in the war. When Germany invaded the USSR in 1941, Great Britain and the Commonwealth were very happy to have an ally (if perhaps one of convience) to stand against Germany. The British Commonwealth sent large amounts of supplies to the Soviets well before the US Lend Lease was even considered. During these early days, the Brits even sent ships of Hawker Hurricanes and veterans pilots to Leningrad to equip and train Russian pilots in the region. Large numbers of Valentine tanks were also sent from Canada at this time. The British Campaign in North Africa was partily an attempt to take some pressure off the Soviets." - to be honest, the aid given to the Soviets was a tad more than minimal. Stalin asked for the help of Britain and France against Hitler before he signed the non-aggression pact with him in '39 (Hint - they refused him). He asked the allies to mount an invasion on Germany from the western front to alleviate the pressure that was caused by the '41 Barbarossa offensive the Germans mounted. Nope, nothing of that sort. The turning point in the war in the east was only due to the work of the Soviet. The operation in Africa was made firstly to try and protect the Suez Canal and British colonial interests. If Egypt is to fall, then India and the Pacific front would be effectively cut off from Europe. The disastrous allied invasion of Sicily didn't help the Soviets at all. Even though they succeeded at the end, the first landings were just a killing field for fresh young English speaking boys. It didn't bother the British and Americans to see the USSR boil in hot waters, but when the tide turned they had to jump into the fight so they could take their part of the New German Empire's cake.
 

Westaway

New member
Nov 9, 2009
1,084
0
0
It's funny, I was just watching Band of Brothers, and I too thought about why I didn't care if Nazis were killed. Like, I was actually kind of excited when a bunch of em would get blown to bits.
Then I remember The Final Solution, and I was even more okay with it.
 

Imperioratorex Caprae

Henchgoat Emperor
May 15, 2010
5,499
0
0
Nazis are the most recognized, and most talked about "evil empire" of contemporary history. Sure there may have been people in the Axis powers who were caught up in a war they knew little about, and some who were brainwashed by propaganda... In the end though as a whole, the Nazis weren't in any way shape or form good people.
And yes there were other genocidal groups of people (a lot of them socialists) in history. But I won't ever feel bad for digitally "demonizing" a group of people that more or less deserved that distinction, defined by the actions of the whole and not individual anomalies like Schindler.
 

Texas Joker 52

All hail the Pun Meister!
Jun 25, 2011
1,285
0
0
TheIronRuler said:
I can accept that. If anything, that ties into the 'soldiers only following orders' point I was bringing forward earlier.

On a semi-unrelated note, you do have to admit that, regardless of motivations, Nazi officers did have some very handsome uniforms. Very snappy dressers.

But, I say, this is a pretty interesting discussion on the Great War and the motivations of all parties involved, as well as whether or not the Nazi's were wholly demonized, my good chap.



Really, with the spoiler tags saying what they were, what other image were you expecting?
 

sextus the crazy

New member
Oct 15, 2011
2,348
0
0
saintdane05 said:
If I may, many of the "Nazis" we shoot are actually just German Soldiers. Many were drafted.

The Nazi Party only made up 10% of government officials.
Hell, the wehrmacht had a policy of political neutrality. Soldiers were expected not to join the nazi party, hence the creation of the Waffen-SS. IIRC, General Reichenau was looked down upon by his peers for joining the Nazi party, even when there was strong Hitler support in the Army.
 

emeraldrafael

New member
Jul 17, 2010
8,589
0
0
Wintermoot said:
the Nazi's are the only group that is 100% evil.
No other group systematically killed people as the Nazi's did.
you... dont know much about Stalin or Mao do you?

OT:I think it goes back to what yahtzee said in one episode where he said the US has a fascination with WW2 cause there was a clear bad guy (hitler and his forces) doing clearly evil things (the systemmatic rounding up of jews/gypsies/unwanted and putting them in death camps) and picking a fight with everyone they could to piss everyone off. Its hard to do something like this when you look at stalin's or maos political plans because it didnt affect anyone on the same scale outside those countries or wasnt as publicized like what the nazis did.

plus they're still a group around (neo nazis and such) that still do just, awful things for no really discernible reason. Its like the KKK and why there's still hate for them despite them being older than the nazis. They're till around around they're more than willing to say why they so strongly believe in ideals that no rational person should believe in and back up that claim.

So to me its justified. that time period nazis (The ones in the WW2 games) very much deserved the hate they get, and thats by and large the group portrayed. other then that, its just a game about war. Do red coat soldiers in AC3 deserved to be killed? Do any typical grunts that serve a higher force? by and large Im sure most of them if given a fleshed out personality, would sy they're their cause they were ordered there or they simply want to make life better for their family.
 

TotalerKrieger

New member
Nov 12, 2011
376
0
0
TheIronRuler said:
Genocide in Cambodia was responsible for the death of nearly a third of the local population. If you put it into perspective think of ~%30 of Germany's 70 Million dying. That's 21 Million.
How does this make the Cambodian genocide worse than the Holocaust? A human life is a human life. As I am sure you know large numbers of Holocaust victims were not citizens of Germany so national percentages seems rather irrelevant. Additionally, if the Holocaust was allowed to continue to its end, the death count would have greatly exceeded 21 million.

TheIronRuler said:
Don't get me started on these special units. Their job was to clean up after the army, trailing behind it and doing the dirty work. Those who entered the units were picked and exit from said unit usually involved you getting shot.
Who is talking about the units specifically tasked to murder? The frontline Waffen SS divsions got their hands plenty dirty. Aside from those who were pressed into the ranks against their will, every soldier who volunteered to join the SS was scum. The fact that the surviving SS members recieve veteran benefits is a great insult to all those murdered by the Nazis. They were brainwashed zealots and butchers as much as soldiers.

TheIronRuler said:
- One can say that after the Soviets were pushed back during operation Barbarossa the locals were delighted to see their liberators, which would only treat them multiple times worse than their Soviet counterparts and cause more destruction and death. Is that Irony? I think it is. Oh, the Irony.
Who? The cossacks, a bunch of fools trying to reclaim land and ideals long gone? Assholes with an axe to grind against their neigbours? I think the MASSIVE partisan groups in Eastern Europe proves that the vast majority did not see the Germans as liberators. The movie "Come and See" paints this picture quite well, made by Belorussians about the German occupation in Belorussia. Even the Ukrainians fought against the Nazis, better the devil you know I guess..


TheIronRuler said:
to be honest, the aid given to the Soviets was a tad more than minimal.
Any aid from a nation in such a dire situation clearly demonstrates that the UK had a vested interest in Soviets staying in the war. Although the RAF defeated the Luftwaffe in the BoB, one can infer that the opening of a second front must have been a pretty big deal to them.

TheIronRuler said:
Stalin asked for the help of Britain and France against Hitler before he signed the non-aggression pact with him in '39 (Hint - they refused him).
Source? Why would Britain and France aid the Soviets in 39' with Poland as an ally at the time? How would they know for sure that Stalin would get involved in the war or that Germany would later open a second front in the east? What guarantee was their that Stalin would not simply take any aid then go ahead and divide Poland with Hitler?

TheIronRuler said:
He asked the allies to mount an invasion on Germany from the western front to alleviate the pressure that was caused by the '41 Barbarossa offensive the Germans mounted. Nope, nothing of that sort.
Where were the men and supplies for this magical invasion going to come from? The US was just getting its feet wet at this point in the war. I have great respect for the British Tommy but D-Day could not have occured without the American troops and supplies.
 

Kopikatsu

New member
May 27, 2010
4,924
0
0
Extreme amounts of propaganda went into dehumanizing the Nazis. The Third Reich was basically the world's public enemy number 1 for quite some time, despite the fact that other regimes had done worse (even while the Nazis were still active). They were just chosen as the figurehead for the ultimate evil.

Seems kind of pointless, considering that some good came out of the Third Reich as well, but whatever. I personally don't have a problem with what I'm killing in any given video game, so long as it isn't robots. Robots (sans giant boss robots) generally don't feel very satisfying to kill, whereas turning a guy's head into chunky salsa with a shotgun feels great every time you do it, regardless of whether he's a Nazi or an American.
 

dyre

New member
Mar 30, 2011
2,178
0
0
What's the problem with hating Nazis? They were a pretty shitty group who represented some godawful things. So killing them in combat is perfectly fine.

I've yet to see a game where executing Nazi prisoners is encouraged, so it's not like we've dehumanized them. They're an enemy force that happens to be really, really bad. Though, they did have nice uniforms.

What I don't understand is why so many people on the internet like defending the Nazis (not you, OP, just something I've noticed in general).
 

sethisjimmy

New member
May 22, 2009
601
0
0
TheIronRuler said:
and Canada... well, Canada was kinda nice.
Actually... [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Japanese_Canadian_internment]

That's one of our more shameful moments historically.
 

Overusedname

Emcee: the videogame video guy
Jun 26, 2012
950
0
0
Unironically dehumanizing people is not something I encourage in general. That being said, though there might have been some just as bad, its hard to find a worse group of people.

6 million people, guys.

I also think we should never forget the things america did either. Ask George Takei about his time in an asian internment camp.
 

dyre

New member
Mar 30, 2011
2,178
0
0
TheIronRuler said:
Genocide in Cambodia was responsible for the death of nearly a third of the local population. If you put it into perspective think of ~%30 of Germany's 70 Million dying. That's 21 Million.
I don't want to get into any more history arguments on this site (for now), but I just want to say, I think that comparing genocides using strict math terms is just dumb. If I wiped out 35,000 people in Monaco, is that worse than the Holocaust? That's almost 100% of the local population...

Also, one annoying thing about the Nazis is that they weren't content to just commit genocide within their borders. They had to go about conquering other nations and spreading the mass murder :\
 

TheIronRuler

New member
Mar 18, 2011
4,283
0
0
dyre said:
TheIronRuler said:
Genocide in Cambodia was responsible for the death of nearly a third of the local population. If you put it into perspective think of ~%30 of Germany's 70 Million dying. That's 21 Million.
I don't want to get into any more history arguments on this site (for now), but I just want to say, I think that comparing genocides using strict math terms is just dumb. If I wiped out 35,000 people in Monaco, is that worse than the Holocaust? That's almost 100% of the local population...

Also, one annoying thing about the Nazis is that they weren't content to just commit genocide within their borders. They had to go about conquering other nations and spreading the mass murder :\
.
Genocide for everybody! ... bleh. I see your point.
 

Shraggler

New member
Jan 6, 2009
216
0
0
TheIronRuler said:
The only difference being is that they are either unknown to pop-culture or that's "politically incorrect".
The bold part there is pretty much why Nazis are so frequently depicted.

The Soviet "Great Purge", the Rwandan genocide, the Khmer Rouge, none of them have reached the popular mindset at the level the Nazis have. There are of course many reasons why this is the case, but for the sake of the original question, that's why Nazis are so frequently depicted in games/media as "ok to kill." Basically, I believe it comes down to the Nazi's activities being more widely covered and reported in the press, especially in the United States.