von_geisterhand: (Default)
Im September sind wieder Abgeordnetenhauswahlen in Berlin. Das heißt, daß seit dem Wochenende mehr und mehr Laternenpfähle mit Wahlplakaten in verschiedenen Höhen dekoriert sind. Der übliche Prozess sieht vor, daß bald auch Plakatkritik vorgenommen werden wird. Frank Henkels Plakate z.B. werden in der Nähe der Rigaer Straße wohl nicht lange halten.
Mir fiel ein sehr buntes Plakat mit dem eigentlich gar nicht mal so doofen Slogan "Die Sicherheit muss besser organisiert sein als das Verbrechen" auf. Leider war es von der FDP, die inzwischen auch wieder ein Büro auf der Reinhardtstraße hat(welches sie seit der letzten Wahlschlappe vorübergehend los war). Deren Posteraktion ist zwar gut, aber nicht mal annähernd gut genug um mich zu überzeugen, ihnen in den nächsten Jahren meine Stimme zu geben. Dafür war ihre Politik in letzter Zeit in zu starkem Maße eine wachsende Bankrotterklärung.
Ein anderes Juwel der FDP-Slogankunst ist: "Berlin braucht Tegel". Man kann in diesen Satz viel Schönes reininterpretieren. Wer schonmal in Tegel war, weiß, daß es dort viel Schönes gibt, aber auch viel, was in anderen Ecken von Berlin auch schon en masse vorhanden ist, im Großen und Ganzen aber ach niemand vermissen würde, wenn es weg wäre. Leere Fußgämgerzonen z.B. Aber hier bezieht sich "Tegel" wohl auf den Flughafen, der ja trotz aller ursprünglichen Planung immer noch in Betrieb ist. Nun, ich mag den Flughafen Otto Lilienthal (wie er eigentlich heißt) und das Wahlversprechen "Tegel bleibt erhalten" wäre auf jeden Fall ein Punkt für einen Kandidaten, aber in dieser vagen "Braucht"-Formulierung, die nebenbei natürlich noch die These, daß Berlin Tegel hauptsächlich braucht, weil man mit den Bauarbeiten am BER einfach nicht zu Potte kommt, ist es mir dann doch etwas zu vage und, um ehrlich zu sein, doof.

Auch betrübt es mich etwas, daß das allererste AfD-Plakat, das ich in diesem Jahr gesehen habe, direkt vor meiner Haustür hängt. Insgesamt scheinen die Jungs und Mädels von der Nein-Nein-wir-sind-keine-rechte-Partei sich gute Chancen in diesem Viertel auszurechnen. Da hängt jetzt einiges. Eigentlich etwas erstaunlich, wenn man bedenkt, wieviele "ausländisch" aussehende Menschen mal hier auf der Straße sieht, von den Touristenströmen mal ganz zu schweigen.
Die AfD ist auch sehr groß mit den "Braucht"-Plakaten.
"Berlin braucht Regeln"
"Berlin braucht mehr Blau". Ich wünschte, daß wäre ein Bekenntnis dafür, das offizielle Alkoholverbot im ÖPNV abzuschaffen, aber leider ist es nur der typische Ruf nach mehr Polizei.
Und zum Schluss: "Berlin braucht Schnauze". Ich habe vergessen, was damit ausgedrückt werden sollte, aber frühmorgens im Halbdunkel liest man das gerne als "Berlin braucht einen auf die Schnauze". Womit wir wieder bei Frank Henkel wären.
von_geisterhand: (Default)
The conversation I wish would take place:

Me: I am so excited because I will see Death In June/Non/Sektion B/etc. next week.
Marc: Are you sure? They're Nazis, don't you know?
Me: They are? Why do you think that?
Marc: Well, they say (this) in their lyrics and worked with (them) in the past and what exactly is this talk about a European identity and a reverence for the past anyway? That's dodgy, innit?
Me: Well, I see what you mean about this and yes, that was dodgy but they have adressed that, said that it was just a folly of youth and that they're embarrassed about it. Of course you never know what the performers are actually thinking or saying when they're not in public but then, you never know that with other artists either.
I mean, Metallica are quite clearly more conservative than I would feel comfortable with if they were friends of mine but as far as buying the albums or going to concerts goes, I am happy to live with this conflict.
Marc: And you still want to go the concerts even though you feel uncertain about the artists?
Me: I do. As an assumed adult I made an adult decision and decided to go for it.
Marc: I will still stand in front of the venue and protest.
Me: Cool. I'll see you at the venue then.
Marc: Cool. See you then.

But no. It always turns personal and hearsay and sooner or later violence and disruption is threatened and acted upon. Oh, how I long for an informed and rational discussion.

What I am also missing in this whole discussion, whenever it comes up is a willingness/ability to not take shit at facevalue or rather see it in context. I, for example, always cringe when I see the graffito "Deutschland has gotta die" or "Deutschland muss sterben, damit wir leben können." ("Germany has got to die in order for us to live."), because I feel that this is an incredibly teen angst/rage slogan which (if taken seriously) aiming at the wrong golden calf, as well as assuming the author to fight the same righteous fight as the resistance in Nazi Germany and occupied areas, without actually facing the same risk.
Yet at the same time, I am more than happy to scream the slogan along with Atari Teenage Riot and really like the song. In popular music there is always this abstraction and the choice about how far you are willing to go along with it is yours alone.

At the same time, I have disovered a new pet peeve, which is: "They are so leftwing that they are already rightwing." No, they are not. There are no "lefty fascists". I admit that the difference whether you are being beaten up by somebody who thinks you unpatriotic or by somebody who finds you too patriotic is academic but that still does not mean that the theoretical background is the same, just like something totalitarian is not automatically fascist. You might consider this nitpicking but you'd be wrong. If you actually want to talk about something in a sensible and informed way, you should really try to avoid easy (and wrong) shortcuts.
von_geisterhand: (Default)
So, apparently there is going to be a new film version of Starship Troopers, and this time round it is going to be less violent and more faithful to the book, says producer Toby Jaffe. So instead of a hyperviolent black comedy parodying the Nazis (and showing parallels to some more recent war-mongering), we shall undoubtedly have a "Yay! Military!"-film with thrilling action but avoiding displaying too much of the potential danger of ending up wounded/maimed/dead.
Reading a conservative/reactionary intention into this or even suggesting that Goebbels' spiritual heirs are sitting in modern Hollywood making quite a living might come across as excessively cynical until you read that one sentence from Mr. Jaffe talking about Heinlein:

"Y'know, one man's fascism is another man's patriotism..."

Yes, indeed. That is sort of the point.

And then you get friends from the UK, who you otherwise think of as reasonably intelligent and levelheaded, share shit like this and my first thought is "You'd just have to translate this into German and adapt the silhouette and it would be prime Laibach material". But that sort of irony is normally lost, I guess.
von_geisterhand: Monika küsst Jörg. Sie liebt ihn. (kiss)
We went to an alternative culture place yesterday to listen to a lecture about Neofolk and its supposed inherent right-wing tendencies. In fact, let's just quote the entire text advertising the event here:

Thursday 07 June
EAG-Tresen Diesmal mit Infoveranstaltung ab 20.00 Uhr. Die „Schwarze Szene“, wie sich das Milieu der Gothics und „Gruftis“ selbst bezeichnet, wird wegen rechter Tendenzen immer wieder von Antifaschist_innen kritisiert – meistens völlig zu Recht. Besonders unangenehm fällt in diesem Zusammenhang die Stilrichtung „Neofolk“ auf, der unter anderem die bekannten rechten Musikprojekte „Death in June“ und „Von Thronstahl“ zuzurechnen sind. Der mit ein paar Bildern und Hörbeispielen garnierte Vortrag wird darüber informieren, was Neofolk eigentlich ist, woher die rechten Einflüsse kommen und was das Ganze überhaupt soll.
Danach noch ein bisschen düstere Musik und gruslige Cocktails wie „Zombie“, „Suicide“ und „Bloody Mary“ (angefragt).


For a start, the mentioned cocktails were not served and those that were, were lacking in quality. But that's besides the point now and in any case, beer was cheap.
Even if I had no particular feelings about Neofolk, I think I might have been enticed to attend on the strength of the first sentence. Allow me to translate: "The 'Black Scene', as the subculture of the goths calls itself, has repeatedly been criticised by anti-fascists due to its right-wing tendencies - mostly absolutely justifiedly."
That is quite an accusation to make, isn't it?

The lecture that followed did not live up to this level of vitriol, was rather half-arsed, not terribly well researched and preferred to suggest and insinutate rather than analyze any band or song in detail. In fairness, I have heard worse discourse on the subject but remain convinced that I could have made a better case accusing the bands of using images and ideas questionably while defending them than the speaker did just accusing them.
Where said speaker really let himself down, though, was when we corrected him on certain details and disagreed (politely*) with some of his suggestions. As he later told us, he had not expected to have somebody who already knew about the subject present and would have much preferred if we had not been there. Of course he would, it's much easier to "teach" people if they just unquestioningly accept all you tell them.
Will I have to write the final word on neofolk myself?

To cap it all off: You will have noticed that the lecture was held in the context of the "EAG"-group. That's short for "Emanzipative und Antifaschistische Gruppe", in other words: anti-fascist and anti-sexist. And ye verily, out beloved speaker did say at several points that he really wasn't all that interested in what artist said what when and why (after doing just that making his case) but that he was rather interested in equal rights and lack of prejudice.
At the same time, his girlfriend was spreading flyers advertising her events all over the place, which sported the picture of a woman cutting the throat of another, deep-clevaged female on the front. Lesbians as psychos, psycho females, the male gaze on the suffering female, the murder of the confident female, you take your pick.

*Okay, slightly less politely when he suggested that Current 93 are actually a Nazi band. Why? Because they have a song and an EP ("a whole album", in his words) called "Hitler as Kalki". What is that song about? He could not tell us.
You do not insult David Tibet lightly in my presence.
von_geisterhand: (It is to indifference that I say)
http://edition.cnn.com/2009/US/03/26/controversial.cartoon/index.html

(CNN) -- Two leading Jewish watchdog groups are denouncing a prominent cartoonist's illustration about Israel's offensive in Gaza, saying it uses anti-Semitic imagery.
The cartoon was published Wednesday in newspapers and on the Internet.

The Anti-Defamation League, which has been fighting anti-Semitism since it was founded in 1913, called the syndicated cartoon by Pulitzer Prize-winning Pat Oliphant "hideously anti-Semitic."

The Simon Wiesenthal Center, which, among other things, fights anti-Semitism and educates people about the Holocaust, said "the cartoon mimics the venomous anti-Semitic propaganda of the Nazi and Soviet eras."

Published Wednesday in newspapers and on the Internet, the cartoon shows the small figure of a woman, labeled Gaza, carrying a child. She is being pursued by a headless, jackbooted figure wielding a sword, marching in an apparent goose-step and pushing a fanged Jewish star on a wheel.

The Anti-Defamation League said the cartoon used "Nazi-like imagery" and a "hateful evocation of the Star of David."

Abraham H. Foxman, the ADL's national director, said the cartoon's "outlandish and offensive use of the Star of David in combination with Nazi-like imagery is hideously anti-Semitic."
[...]

magery and rhetoric comparing Israel to Nazis have been deployed by Israel's persistent critics, who decry the Jewish state's treatment of Palestinians as oppressive and brutal. Israel and its supporters defend the state as humane and say it has properly defended itself against attacks.

There has been sharp criticism of Israel's offensive against Hamas militants in Gaza who launched rockets into southern Israeli towns.

Human Rights Watch said Wednesday the Israeli military's firing of white phosphorus shells over densely populated areas during the offensive "was indiscriminate and is evidence of war crimes," a claim denied by Israel.

Profile

von_geisterhand: (Default)
von_geisterhand

June 2017

S M T W T F S
    123
45678 910
111213 14151617
181920 21222324
252627282930 

Syndicate

RSS Atom

Most Popular Tags

Style Credit

Expand Cut Tags

No cut tags
Page generated Oct. 24th, 2017 02:02 am
Powered by Dreamwidth Studios