Photobucket apparently does not support contemporary social symbolic art.
Well, fuck them.
- Comment
- Reblog
-
Subscribe
Subscribed
Already have a WordPress.com account? Log in now.
Photobucket apparently does not support contemporary social symbolic art.
Well, fuck them.
raincoaster 
Sorry–I can’t agree. I worry about my government, and about the current bunch running the US. Also, though less so Britain. But there’s a line between comparing and contrasting these regimes with the Nazis and equating them.
Faced with a choice of life in George Number Two’s United States and Hitler’s Germany, I would choose the former. The line between may be pitifully thin at times, but at least there’s hope for another election.
The line is certainly not thin. How can you draw any comparision between modern Europe and Nazi Germany? I have freedom here in Britian, freedom to blog, freedom to say what I please. If I become disabled or mentally impaired I will receive free healthcare, not be sent to a death camp. If I decide to convert to Judism society will accept me. British society does not discriminate on the grounds of race or ethnicity. Britain does not try to take land from her European neighbours and subject their citizens to forced labour.
There is no comparision to make – go buy a GCSE history bok about Germany 1933 – 1939 and read it.
Guess who won Guido’s competition.
http://5thnovember.blogspot.com/2006/08/third-wing-competition-winner.html
PS Hope you get some grief about that ‘illustration’
Regards
Steve
Actually, Steven, I agree with you. I referred specifically to the US. Home of domestic espionage on a scale unseen since the dissolution of the Soviet Union …
[here I went into a rant that was really not needed–we all read the news here, right?]
The line between “lebensraum” and “WMD” [… no, no hang on … “links to terror” ….hahaha, hey try this: “spreading democracy” …] is painfully thin. And that’s only point 1. There are many, many others.
Notwithstanding which, the single major difference outweighs all the similarities, making the flag above rather too strong a statement.
Congrats, by-the-by, on the contest winner. Certainly reads like the best government bafflegab.
Actually Steven, I agree with you. I specified the US, where warrantless wiretapping of thousands of citizens at near-random has replaced habeas corpus. Where individuals may be held without the inconvenience of providing either evidence of wrongdoing or a trial, and where a president who vetoed stem cell research because of his “ethical” concerns about embryos–despite supporting both the death penalty and torture–has continually evaded and gutted his own constitutional rules in order to exercise power without restricton.
The line between “lebensraum” and “WMD” (or do I mean “links to terror”? “Spreading democracy”? … no matter) is pitifully thin. And anyone observing the US has noticed that that statement could easily be applied to many, many other areas.
George Number Two’s US, though, would still be my choice were I offered (and this is my point) a choice exclusively between the current POTUS’ US or ‘Appy ‘Adolph’s Germany.
Congratulations on winning the contest. Careful or there’ll be a civil service recruiter at your door.
Neither of you are getting the reference. Float your cursors over the picture and let them sit there until information manifests.
This is not an image of What Is. This is an image of What Could Be.
Everything I hate about the British, American, and Canadian governments is a result of fascist choices they’ve made (well okay, fascist or US-appeasnik choices). If people do not begin to resist their use of the terror threat to intimidate and control the people, even in peacetime, then this is what they’re headed for. Don’t forget that the Nazis were democratically elected, too.
Steven, the freedoms you enjoy are slightly more protected than they would be in the US, but it would be perfectly legal for the government to pick you up and detain you for a few weeks without charge. Of the more than four hundred people arrested under the new counterterrorism measures, over 300 have been released without charge. Think about that.
You want to talk about fascism? Metro, your comments were marked as spam for the Nazi references. I had to dig them out of the junk heap.
Steven, when you say “British society does not discriminate on the grounds of race or ethnicity” your own remarks stand against you. When you describe towns to me, your first term is a description of the racial balance, with particular reference to Indians and Pakistanis. How many times have you complained that they refuse to assimilate, and those who refuse to assimilate should be removed? Quite frankly, that sounds like you’re discriminating; you say people who act one (legal) way should be allowed to stay, but people who act a different (legal) way should act another. I know that your distinctions are cultural, rather than racial, but you along with so many others use race as a shorthand for culture. Be careful; you don’t want to be that person, do you?
And isn’t it interesting that neither of you have an issue with the unification of the UK and the US on that flag.
So that’s why they didn’t pop up! I thought it was a failure on this end. May I respectfully request that you remove one of the comments I posted–either one says, in essence, what I wanted to say. Given my choice I’d prefer to keep the first one, but whatever works, eh?
Re. the reference: My “V” references are all from the graphic novel. Enjoyed the film, but it suffered a severe loss of depth and a stunning blow to its integrity in the translation. I don’t recall the reference, I’m afraid.
As for the “unification” thing–the flag image is a statement. One I don’t especially agree with as I think I said, but why should I take issue with it any more than I would a written post?
The question is, do you think your government is becoming MORE or Less fascist?
I’m tempted to keep both comments, as a perfect illustration of the interference with free speech that we take for granted nowadays. Will go think it over.
The image is one of the protest posters in Evey’s boss’s hidaway shrine to free thought. It was satirical even then. As such, it’s original to the film.
How do you define fascism? Many communist governments, USSR, Chinam North Korea, have terrible human rights records and would have detained people without trial or administered summary justice on bogus grounds.
Hitler was National Socialist, like Iran is now but Iran does not actively discriminate on race grounds. If you go further to the right of our tories you end up like the US neo-cons. Fascism is defined on the 2d left – right political scale as far fight wing, however, you cannot really map Hitler using any normal political theories, what he did was unheard of and unthinkable. Nazism was not really like anything that had ever happened in a democracy before.
Our government is not becoming fascist in nay sense of the word, it may be becoming more totalitarian with it’s hunting ban etc. but when you analyse the nature of the totalitarianism (tax credits, positive discrimination) it is moving to the left also. So if anything the UK government is becoming more communist.
I define fascism very simply. It is the belief that people are the servants of their government, and that their rights are not inherent in their humanity or their citizenship, but rather in their servitude.
I’m not alone in this definition.
Merriam-Webster:
1 often capitalized : a political philosophy, movement, or regime (as that of the Fascisti) that exalts nation and often race above the individual and that stands for a centralized autocratic government headed by a dictatorial leader, severe economic and social regimentation, and forcible suppression of opposition
2 : a tendency toward or actual exercise of strong autocratic or dictatorial control
The Concise Encyclopedia of Economics:
Fascism
by Sheldon Richman
The best example of a fascist economy is the regime of Italian dictator Benito Mussolini. Holding that liberalism (by which he meant freedom and free markets) had “reached the end of its historical function,” Mussolini wrote: “To Fascism the world is not this material world, as it appears on the surface, where Man is an individual separated from all others and left to himself…. Fascism affirms the State as the true reality of the individual.”
This collectivism is captured in the word fascism, which comes from the Latin fasces, meaning a bundle of rods with an axe in it. In economics, fascism was seen as a third way between laissez-faire capitalism and communism. Fascist thought acknowledged the roles of private property and the profit motive as legitimate incentives for productivity—provided that they did not conflict with the interests of the state.
Fascism in Italy grew out of two other movements: syndicalism and nationalism. The syndicalists believed that economic life should be governed by groups representing the workers in various industries and crafts. The nationalists, angered by Italy’s treatment after World War I, combined the idea of class struggle with that of national struggle. Italy was a proletarian nation, they said, and to win a greater share of the world’s wealth, all of Italy’s classes must unite. Mussolini was a syndicalist who turned nationalist during World War I.
From 1922 to 1925, Mussolini’s regime pursued a laissez-faire economic policy under the liberal finance minister Alberto De Stefani. De Stefani reduced taxes, regulations, and trade restrictions and allowed businesses to compete with one another. But his opposition to protectionism and business subsidies alienated some industrial leaders, and De Stefani was eventually forced to resign. After Mussolini consolidated his dictatorship in 1925, Italy entered a new phase. Mussolini, like many leaders at this time, believed that economies did not operate constructively without supervision by the government. Foreshadowing events in Nazi Germany, and to some extent in New Deal America, Mussolini began a program of massive deficit spending, public works, and eventually, militarism.
Mussolini’s fascism took another step at this time with the advent of the Corporative State, a supposedly pragmatic arrangement under which economic decisions were made by councils composed of workers and employers who represented trades and industries. By this device the presumed economic rivalry between employers and employees was to be resolved, preventing the class struggle from undermining the national struggle. In the Corporative State, for example, strikes would be illegal and labor disputes would be mediated by a state agency.
Theoretically, the fascist economy was to be guided by a complex network of employer, worker, and jointly run organizations representing crafts and industries at the local, provincial, and national levels. At the summit of this network was the National Council of Corporations. But although syndicalism and corporativism had a place in fascist ideology and were critical to building a consensus in support of the regime, the council did little to steer the economy. The real decisions were made by state agencies such as the Institute for Industrial Reconstruction (Istituto per la Ricosstruzione Industriale, or IRI), mediating among interest groups.
Beginning in 1929, in preparation for achieving the “glories” of war, the Italian government used protectionist measures to turn the economy toward autarchy, or economic self-sufficiency. The autarchic policies were intensified in the following years because of both the depression and the economic sanctions that other countries imposed on Italy after it invaded Ethiopia. Mussolini decreed that government bureaus must buy only Italian products, and he increased tariffs on all imports in 1931. The sanctions following the invasion of Ethiopia spurred Italy in 1935 to increase tariffs again, stiffen import quotas, and toughen its embargo on industrial goods.
Mussolini also eliminated the ability of business to make independent decisions: the government controlled all prices and wages, and firms in any industry could be forced into a cartel when the majority voted for it. The well-connected heads of big business had a hand in making policy, but most smaller businessmen were effectively turned into state employees contending with corrupt bureaucracies. They acquiesced, hoping that the restrictions would be temporary. Land being fundamental to the nation, the fascist state regimented agriculture even more fully, dictating crops, breaking up farms, and threatening expropriation to enforce its commands.
Banking also came under extraordinary control. As Italy’s industrial and banking system sank under the weight of depression and regulation, and as unemployment rose, the government set up public works programs and took control over decisions about building and expanding factories. The government created the Istituto Mobiliare in 1931 to control credit, and the IRI later acquired all shares held by banks in industrial, agricultural, and real estate enterprises.
The image of a strong leader taking direct charge of an economy during hard times fascinated observers abroad. Italy was one of the places that Franklin Roosevelt looked to for ideas in 1933. Roosevelt’s National Recovery Act (NRA) attempted to cartelize the American economy just as Mussolini had cartelized Italy’s. Under the NRA Roosevelt established industry-wide boards with the power to set and enforce prices, wages, and other terms of employment, production, and distribution for all companies in an industry. Through the Agricultural Adjustment Act the government exercised similar control over farmers. Interestingly, Mussolini viewed Roosevelt’s New Deal as “boldly… interventionist in the field of economics.” Hitler’s nazism also shared many features with Italian fascism, including the syndicalist front. Nazism, too, featured complete government control of industry, agriculture, finance, and investment.
As World War II approached, the signs of fascism’s failure in Italy were palpable: per capita private consumption had dropped to below 1929 levels, and Italian industrial production between 1929 and 1939 had increased by only 15 percent, lower than the rates for other Western European countries. Labor productivity was low and production costs were uncompetitive. The fault lay in the shift of economic decision-making from entrepreneurs to government bureaucrats, and in the allocation of resources by decree rather than by free markets. Mussolini designed his system to cater to the needs of the state, not of consumers. In the end, it served neither.
Rense.com:
Fourteen Defining
Characteristics Of Fascism
By Dr. Lawrence Britt
Source Free Inquiry.co
5-28-3
Dr. Lawrence Britt has examined the fascist regimes of Hitler (Germany), Mussolini (Italy), Franco (Spain), Suharto (Indonesia) and several Latin American regimes. Britt found 14 defining characteristics common to each:
1. Powerful and Continuing Nationalism – Fascist regimes tend to make constant use of patriotic mottos, slogans, symbols, songs, and other paraphernalia. Flags are seen everywhere, as are flag symbols on clothing and in public displays.
2. Disdain for the Recognition of Human Rights – Because of fear of enemies and the need for security, the people in fascist regimes are persuaded that human rights can be ignored in certain cases because of “need.” The people tend to look the other way or even approve of torture, summary executions, assassinations, long incarcerations of prisoners, etc.
3. Identification of Enemies/Scapegoats as a Unifying Cause – The people are rallied into a unifying patriotic frenzy over the need to eliminate a perceived common threat or foe: racial , ethnic or religious minorities; liberals; communists; socialists, terrorists, etc.
4. Supremacy of the Military – Even when there are widespread
domestic problems, the military is given a disproportionate amount of government funding, and the domestic agenda is neglected. Soldiers and military service are glamorized.
5. Rampant Sexism – The governments of fascist nations tend to be almost exclusively male-dominated. Under fascist regimes, traditional gender roles are made more rigid. Divorce, abortion and homosexuality are suppressed and the state is represented as the ultimate guardian of the family institution.
6. Controlled Mass Media – Sometimes to media is directly controlled by the government, but in other cases, the media is indirectly controlled by government regulation, or sympathetic media spokespeople and executives. Censorship, especially in war time, is very common.
7. Obsession with National Security – Fear is used as a motivational tool by the government over the masses.
8. Religion and Government are Intertwined – Governments in fascist nations tend to use the most common religion in the nation as a tool to manipulate public opinion. Religious rhetoric and terminology is common from government leaders, even when the major tenets of the religion are diametrically opposed to the government’s policies or actions.
9. Corporate Power is Protected – The industrial and business aristocracy of a fascist nation often are the ones who put the government leaders into power, creating a mutually beneficial business/government relationship and power elite.
10. Labor Power is Suppressed – Because the organizing power of labor is the only real threat to a fascist government, labor unions are either eliminated entirely, or are severely suppressed.
11. Disdain for Intellectuals and the Arts – Fascist nations tend to promote and tolerate open hostility to higher education, and academia. It is not uncommon for professors and other academics to be censored or even arrested. Free expression in the arts and letters is openly attacked.
12. Obsession with Crime and Punishment – Under fascist regimes, the police are given almost limitless power to enforce laws. The people are often willing to overlook police abuses and even forego civil liberties in the name of patriotism. There is often a national police force with virtually unlimited power in fascist nations.
13. Rampant Cronyism and Corruption – Fascist regimes almost always are governed by groups of friends and associates who appoint each other to government positions and use governmental power and authority to protect their friends from accountability. It is not uncommon in fascist regimes for national resources and even treasures to be appropriated or even outright stolen by government leaders.
14. Fraudulent Elections – Sometimes elections in fascist nations are a complete sham. Other times elections are manipulated by smear campaigns against or even assassination of opposition candidates, use of legislation to control voting numbers or political district boundaries, and manipulation of the media. Fascist nations also typically use their judiciaries to manipulate or control elections.
From Liberty Forum
http://www.libertyforum.org/showflat.php?Cat=&Board=news_constitution&Number=642
109&page=&view=&sb=&o=&vc=1&t=-1
Also available at the Council for Secular Humanism:
http://www.secularhumanism.org/library/fi/britt_23_2.htm
Free Inquiry readers may pause to read the “Affirmations of Humanism: A Statement of Principles” on the inside cover of the magazine. To a secular humanist, these principles seem so logical, so right, so crucial. Yet, there is one archetypal political philosophy that is anathema to almost all of these principles. It is fascism. And fascism’s principles are wafting in the air today, surreptitiously masquerading as something else, challenging everything we stand for. The cliché that people and nations learn from history is not only overused, but also overestimated; often we fail to learn from history, or draw the wrong conclusions. Sadly, historical amnesia is the norm.
We are two-and-a-half generations removed from the horrors of Nazi Germany, although constant reminders jog the consciousness. German and Italian fascism form the historical models that define this twisted political worldview. Although they no longer exist, this worldview and the characteristics of these models have been imitated by protofascist1 regimes at various times in the twentieth century. Both the original German and Italian models and the later protofascist regimes show remarkably similar characteristics. Although many scholars question any direct connection among these regimes, few can dispute their visual similarities.
…
Does any of this ring alarm bells? Of course not. After all, this is America, officially a democracy with the rule of law, a constitution, a free press, honest elections, and a well-informed public constantly being put on guard against evils. Historical comparisons like these are just exercises in verbal gymnastics. Maybe, maybe not.
Here’s Mussollini’s definition, from the Modern History Sourcebook:
In 1932 Mussolini wrote (with the help of Giovanni Gentile) and entry for the Italian Encyclopedia on the definition of fascism.
Fascism, the more it considers and observes the future and the development of humanity quite apart from political considerations of the moment, believes neither in the possibility nor the utility of perpetual peace. It thus repudiates the doctrine of Pacifism — born of a renunciation of the struggle and an act of cowardice in the face of sacrifice. War alone brings up to its highest tension all human energy and puts the stamp of nobility upon the peoples who have courage to meet it. All other trials are substitutes, which never really put men into the position where they have to make the great decision — the alternative of life or death….
…The Fascist accepts life and loves it, knowing nothing of and despising suicide: he rather conceives of life as duty and struggle and conquest, but above all for others — those who are at hand and those who are far distant, contemporaries, and those who will come after…
…Fascism [is] the complete opposite of…Marxian Socialism, the materialist conception of history of human civilization can be explained simply through the conflict of interests among the various social groups and by the change and development in the means and instruments of production…. Fascism, now and always, believes in holiness and in heroism; that is to say, in actions influenced by no economic motive, direct or indirect. And if the economic conception of history be denied, according to which theory men are no more than puppets, carried to and fro by the waves of chance, while the real directing forces are quite out of their control, it follows that the existence of an unchangeable and unchanging class-war is also denied – the natural progeny of the economic conception of history. And above all Fascism denies that class-war can be the preponderant force in the transformation of society….
After Socialism, Fascism combats the whole complex system of democratic ideology, and repudiates it, whether in its theoretical premises or in its practical application. Fascism denies that the majority, by the simple fact that it is a majority, can direct human society; it denies that numbers alone can govern by means of a periodical consultation, and it affirms the immutable, beneficial, and fruitful inequality of mankind, which can never be permanently leveled through the mere operation of a mechanical process such as universal suffrage….
…Fascism denies, in democracy, the absur[d] conventional untruth of political equality dressed out in the garb of collective irresponsibility, and the myth of “happiness” and indefinite progress….
…iven that the nineteenth century was the century of Socialism, of Liberalism, and of Democracy, it does not necessarily follow that the twentieth century must also be a century of Socialism, Liberalism and Democracy: political doctrines pass, but humanity remains, and it may rather be expected that this will be a century of authority…a century of Fascism. For if the nineteenth century was a century of individualism it may be expected that this will be the century of collectivism and hence the century of the State….
The foundation of Fascism is the conception of the State, its character, its duty, and its aim. Fascism conceives of the State as an absolute, in comparison with which all individuals or groups are relative, only to be conceived of in their relation to the State. The conception of the Liberal State is not that of a directing force, guiding the play and development, both material and spiritual, of a collective body, but merely a force limited to the function of recording results: on the other hand, the Fascist State is itself conscious and has itself a will and a personality — thus it may be called the “ethic” State….
…The Fascist State organizes the nation, but leaves a sufficient margin of liberty to the individual; the latter is deprived of all useless and possibly harmful freedom, but retains what is essential; the deciding power in this question cannot be the individual, but the State alone….
…For Fascism, the growth of empire, that is to say the expansion of the nation, is an essential manifestation of vitality, and its opposite a sign of decadence. Peoples which are rising, or rising again after a period of decadence, are always imperialist; and renunciation is a sign of decay and of death. Fascism is the doctrine best adapted to represent the tendencies and the aspirations of a people, like the people of Italy, who are rising again after many centuries of abasement and foreign servitude. But empire demands discipline, the coordination of all forces and a deeply felt sense of duty and sacrifice: this fact explains many aspects of the practical working of the regime, the character of many forces in the State, and the necessarily severe measures which must be taken against those who would oppose this spontaneous and inevitable movement of Italy in the twentieth century, and would oppose it by recalling the outworn ideology of the nineteenth century – repudiated wheresoever there has been the courage to undertake great experiments of social and political transformation; for never before has the nation stood more in need of authority, of direction and order. If every age has its own characteristic doctrine, there are a thousand signs which point to Fascism as the characteristic doctrine of our time. For if a doctrine must be a living thing, this is proved by the fact that Fascism has created a living faith; and that this faith is very powerful in the minds of men is demonstrated by those who have suffered and died for it.
And, of course, Wikipedia:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fascism
Fascism is a radical totalitarian political philosophy that combines elements of corporatism, authoritarianism, extreme nationalism, militarism, anti-anarchism, anti-communism and anti-liberalism.
The original fascist (fascismo) movement ruled Italy from 1922 to 1943 under the leadership of Benito Mussolini. In time, the generic term fascism came to cover a class of authoritarian political ideologies, parties, and political systems, most notably Nazi Germany under Adolf Hitler but also Hungary’s Arrow Cross Party, Romania’s Iron Guard, Spain’s Falange and the French political movements led by former socialists Marcel Déat and Jacques Doriot and others.
“Fascism may be defined as a form of political behavior marked by obsessive preoccupation with community decline, humiliation, or victim-hood and by compensatory cults of unity, energy, and purity, in which a mass-based party of committed nationalist militants, working in uneasy but effective collaboration with traditional elites, abandons democratic liberties and pursues with redemptive violence and without ethical or legal restraints goals of internal cleansing and external expansion.”
I begin to think I really SHOULD apply for that damn job in Boris’ office. You got your glory from Guido…do you think a Tory would hire me?
Of course he would, I’m calling Tony Blair a fascist!
What about the new buzz word ‘Islamofascist’? What about national-socialism, how do you define that?
You’re stalling, Steven. You just don’t want to read it. When I begin to use those terms, or I find they have application to serious world issues, then I’ll look into them. I have no time to define the names other people are calling one another.
Reading your definitions there seems that analogy with Stalinism. Having worked in a loony left council I’ve met a few old trade unionist stalinists, seriously there are stilla few old codgers idolise ‘Uncle Joe’.
1. Powerful and Continuing Nationalism – ‘The Motherland’
2. Disdain for the Recognition of Human Rights – Look how he treated Catholic Ukranians
3. Identification of Enemies/Scapegoats as a Unifying Cause – The capitalists / the fascists
4. Supremacy of the Military – The Red Army
5 Rampant Sexism – this is a difference
6. Controlled Mass Media – Uncle Joe sure did
7. Obsession with National Security – Often referred to as ‘paranoid’
8. Religion and Government are Intertwined – I’m not an expert but he wasn’t keen of catholicism in Eastern Europe
9. Corporate Power is Protected – In stalinsim substitute ‘industrial’ for ‘corporate’
10. Labor Power is Suppressed – Eastern European grain farmers?
11. Disdain for Intellectuals and the Arts – were therr any great Russian composers of Stalin’s era?
12. Obsession with Crime and Punishment – death by shooting for over 25 different offences in the USSR
13. Rampant Cronyism and Corruption – in common with most governments allbeit to varying degrees
14. Fraudulent Elections – Both Hitler and Stalin didn’t believe in elections
Hmmm, so what was described as communism at the same time that the Nazi’s were described as fascists were not that different according to these 14 pointers?
I reckon you’d make a good ‘wonk’ raincoaster. But I reckon they’d make you drape yourself in the Union Jack, denounce Karl Marx and pledge your allegience to Her Majesty the Queen.
Seriously, you reckon I should apply see what happens? I got nothing to do today could bash of a couple of 500 word essays.
At least Boris asks for a CV. Honestly these personel departments, they won’t take CV’s anymore, they spend their time (or their budgets to be more precise) having expensive application forms designed that never have enough space for me to list the 20 or so crap jobs I’ve had.
I wrote the essays. I reckon I’d be too scared to turn up if I got an interview after all the twaddle I’ve written on his website though.
Steven, I’ve been saying Stalinism was a type of fascism for twenty years now. Catch up. And also realize that calling someone else a fascist doesn’t mean your own side isn’t slipping into that route as well; it has no bearing on that whatsoever. There are fascists on the right and on the left.
The reason it matters more here is that Britain was the birthplace of modern representative democracy, and the US is the flag carrier. If they repudiate those values to save their cheap skins, they have betrayed not only their founding principles and their people, but the entire world.
If you get the interview you HAVE to turn up. You’re not the one who boasted she’s steal the job out from Guido’s nose because she had better tits.
Like I said under my F22 post on your other post thingy my old employer wants me back and want to give me a £7k pay rise.
I think this terror war thing is basically that the USA wants to control the oil supply and we want to get out sticky paws on the F22, I mean we don’t give a shit about Arabs or Yanks to be honest. But the way the French behaved over the Eurofighter (i.e. fucking it up so they could sell their new Raphel thingy to the Saudis) getting the F22 would really piss them off!
What we really give a shit about is getting on up on the French!
Hi,
I’m wondering why the actual picture that I assume was being talked about on this page is no longer available (it says “This image or video violated our terms of service – photobucket”). I mean, I can obviously guess why it isn’t available, but I just saw V for Vendetta and wanted to find an e-version of this picture, and I can’t find it anywhere (Google’ing turns up this page, but not much else). Does anyone have a version of this picture I can get?
Sam.
It works on my PC what country are you in? China?
The pic is still there. Perhaps what you saw was a warning from your own service provider? Because I saw it at my friend’s place yesterday, and I can see it here now even though I emptied my cache.
I got it from Wikipedia, the entry for the film, not the book; it’s not in the book.
Yep, just checked by clicking on the pic and saving it to my hard drive, then using my graphic program to open it up. It’s still there.
Correction. I went to Photobucket and they took it down for “Term of Service Violations.” I have emailed them and will be reporting their response.
Now WordPress is hosting it. My position is, I don’t live in Germany. Photobucket (and WordPress) are not hosted or incorporated in Germany. So that this image is illegal in Germany is Germany’s problem and they just shouldn’t look.
MOST of the images on this blog are illegal in Saudi Arabia, but does that bother anyone for a microsecond? No, of course not.
The Saudis have just agreed to buy 72 Eurofighters off us, that’ll annoy the frogs.
Careful, boy. I was born in France. I fart in your general direction!
Congratulations on the job. I told my friends about the Boris job and they ALL decided I had no excuse not to apply, so I’m going for it. You should, too, though. You’d be much, MUCH happier working for Boris, wouldn’t you?
Although you would have to live in London.
I have to live in London for my other job. Why would I be happier working for Boris? I’d have to do stuff like take work home, and sit up researching stuff and writing reports all night before debates, trawl through heaps of crap labour legislation looking for botches, draft speeches and stuff only to have my English composition pulled apart in a barrage of verbs and adjectives.
I reckon it would be amusing working for Boris, from what I’ve heard he’s a genuinely nice chap, one of our few polticians who is interested in members of the public and he is funny, I doubt it would all be fun anand games though, I reckon you’d be looking at a 60 hour week at least to do the job justice.
In the job ive been offered I work 35 hours a week on flexitime, never take work home, can prat about if I want to, can say ‘I’m going out to do that visit’ and go to the pub, the only bad bit is I actually have to enforce crap labour and EU legislation and spend half my time dealing with crooks and the idiots that have been ripped off by the crooks
I emailed that mega rich guy I met on the train that knew Boris, I’m gonna see if I can get negotitations going with him again – he was thinking a bout giving me a job that actually pays more money than you can realistically spend in a month (given my modest studenty tastes) with the prospect to get into proper city work and get bonus’s and stuff (I’ve always wanted a proper sports car)
I might apply for the Boris job, it would be fun, and having him as a referee on your CV would be really good. I wrote those 2 essays when I was bored the other day and I have a CV, closing date isn’t for a while, I’ll think about it.
Mind you hundreds if not a thousand people will apply for that job and some of them will be bright people or have partiamentry experience.
I emailed Melissa yesterday, she put on the blog she is trying to get in touch, I think i’ve won something, I got her out of office reply. I sent her another email when I was drunk after watching the cricket and said ill settle for Boris buying me a drink on the proviso that if he does I’ll join the tory party
I still reckon I’d get embarrassed if Boris gave me a job interview in light of the amount of rants I’ve had on his website – I don’t always take his website that seriously so I dunno how seriously I’d be able to take him as an employer – I reckon I’d either go red or burst out laughing if he asked me a serious question in an interview situation (or just say something silly)
Anyway, I didn’t think you had a passport – are you allowed in the UK? I wouldn’t let you in if I were PM, damn commies
It’s not the PM’s decision–it’s Her Majesty’s. And she says Canadians can go anywhere we like, ‘cos she loves us best.
Are you seriously considering not shooting for the Boris job? ‘s far ‘s I can tell you’re doing most of the work already: researching crap, writing crap, getting torn apart in a ver-barrage … may as well get paid for it, no?
I wouldn’t worry too much about it. You’re not the one who told Guido that you were a shoo-in for the job because of your fabulous tits; I’m sure Melissa enjoyed reading that!
I don’t think Boris takes the website that seriously, either, but you must understand that, whether you agree with him or not, it’s commenters who make that website the centre that it is. If he just posted articles and didn’t allow comments, it wouldn’t be a place for people to go and really discuss the issues. That they do adds value to Boris’ reputation, so as a thought leader (if, forgive me, a sorely deluded one) you’ve substantially contributed to Boris’ success in the blogosphere. Do not sell yourself short.
But of course I will beat you anyway because I have better tits.
No, there’s a special issue with my passport. I posted about it at length before on this blog, so do a search and you’ll find it.
The reason it’s not a problem now is that several of my friends have grabbed me by the collar and told me they will personally do a “whip-round” to get the money to solve this problem. And they’re just determined enough to do it, whether I apply or not, and in that case the guilt would be absolutely debilitating. I don’t want to die of guilt.
Wouldn’t trying to get the tories elected go against the grain for you raincoaster? Aren’t you one of those people always vote red?
Not at all. You’re reacting from your preconceptions of lefties. Some of us are unpredictable (although you’d never know it from reading the Guardian!). I generally vote Liberal, which is a party between our lefties and our righties: it moves back and forth depending on who is leading it. Under John Turner it was virtually Tory, but under Pierre Trudeau it was something more like enlightened tyrrany.
I look at MPs as service providers and, every few years, as job hunters. I choose the one who will do the best job and the least evil. If Boris were the type to come out with unending twaddle like that “Israel’s not targeting civilians” thing every week, there’s no way I’d consider working for him, but he’s less predictable than that and he does appear to do things for reasons other than self-interest, and I look for that in a politician. Also, he’s towards the libertarian end of the scale, and libertarians and anarchal communists get along pretty well: we have more in common than we do in contrast.
Nice flag, have a ‘news’ story to go with it.
Thanks. Good post.
Wait fifteen minutes before somebody in the government just happens to suggest the prisons be privately run, by their old school roommate.
By-posted to Guido.
We could put all the terrorists in them
Don’t kid yourself. Seven hundred arrests, fourteen convictions? You’ll fill them with basically anyone the government can get its hands on. The US, for example, is not far from reinstating the draft. What happens to people who refuse the draft? Guess.
after seeing V for Vendetta and fruitlessly hunting for an image of the flag in Gordon’s (the Stephen Fry character) secret room, a friend found this and sent me over here.
THANK YOU. the second i saw the flag in the film, i thought it nicely summed up what’s going on over there.
ps, i’m American, happily living in England for the last two years and before that, Germany since right after 9/11. as well, i’m on firefox and nothing happens when i roll my cursor over–do the words ‘Coalition of the Willing to Power’ appear?
They used to, until Photobucket deleted the image (without explanation, without my permission, and even though it does NOT violate their terms of service). Now it says “Never Forget”.
Welcome to the blog.
oh, thank you. AND for your lovely ‘Photobucket apparently does not support contemporary social symbolic art.
Well, fuck them.
my kinda guy! :-)
Gal. But thanks!
Well, it seems the WordPress-hosted image is also down. Nice. If this isn’t a temporary technical glitch I’ll report back, of that you may be sure.
hey all, did you know that right before hitler became sole leader of germany and invaded poland, he passed a bill that said he could bypass the german parliament whenever he wants for total power. Hmm, this sounds awfully familiar. oh yeah, before bush invaded iraq, he sent a bill to a congress of his moronic friends saying he could use any means necessary to apparently defend the states. translation, HE CAN BYPASS CONGRESS WHEN HE FEELS LIKE KNOWING JUST WHAT THE HELL YOU’RE THINKING.
“People shouldnt be afraid of their governments, governments should be afraid of their people.” -Thomas Jefferson
He already bypassed congress. He declared war on Iraq without them; they had to vote after he’d already said what he was going to do, but by that point it was just going through the motions. I hope Bush wakes up in a cold sweat every night, worrying that the powers he’s given the presidency will be used against him.
Quote dating way back to 2006:
Sorry–I can’t agree. I worry about my government
I would really hate to brake this to you but your government would NEVER care for you, not you as an individual, but you as a part of this country. Anarchy is best suited really… They wouldn’t care now would they? They would just have their puts up high and safe from the revenge thirsty mobs. I m quite sure many would agree…
Saw this in V for Vendetta, thanks for the picture
You’re welcome. Grab a copy quick, before yet another censorious, defensive bunch seizes control and takes it down.
That’s an awesome piece of art. I’m glad I was able to find it. I absolutely loved it when I first saw it in V for Vendetta. Do you happen to know who the artist who made it is though?
I don’t, actually, but whoever it is they should be better-known. Maybe IMDB’s boards would have the answer?
“Fascism may be defined as a form of political behavior marked by obsessive preoccupation with community decline, humiliation, or victim-hood and by compensatory cults of unity, energy, and purity, in which a mass-based party of committed nationalist militants, working in uneasy but effective collaboration with traditional elites abandons democratic liberties and pursues with redemptive violence and without ethical or legal restraints goals of internal cleansing and external expansion.”
Anyone see an organic, biological immune response in this?
“…obsessive preoccupation with community decline, humiliation, or victim-hood and by compensatory cults of unity, energy, and purity…” *** The presence of pathogens triggering the mass-production of…
“…a mass-based party of committed nationalist militants, working in uneasy but effective collaboration with traditional elites…” *** …leukocytes and other immune factors.
“…pursues with redemptive violence and without ethical or legal restraints goals of internal cleansing and external expansion.” *** Antibodies, B- and T- cells, macrophages, and other agents of the immune system working to rid the body of toxins, pathogens, and damaged/dead tissues, so that the body may attain to a healthy state and continue growing and living.
Scary, but interesting.
I see it rather differently. That interpretation, after all, would hold that the Aryan Nation troglodytes are a good thing.
I see it more like an autoimmune disorder, where the body perceives a threat much greater than any which exists, and attacks it to the point of debilitating the body, sometimes to the point of death.
Does anyone know if it’s possible to buy or commission an artist for one of these flags such as the article from the film? That would be a pretty nifty collectable.
Why don’t you just call an art school and ask a student?
What exactly is the Swastika on the flag supposed to symbolize?
You’re easily confused, aren’t you?
Not at all.
An image from a comic book movie isn’t complex.
Just wondering why this “new” configuration would include a Swastika.
I think its the childish Vendettites who are confused as to what the Swastika is.
I don’t think anybody here is confused in the slightest. If you want to play dumb, go ahead: we’ve ample evidence that your grasp of reality is subjective in the extreme.
I see.
Guess this “blog” is no place for FACTS.
FACT: the Swastika has been used by the human race as a symbol of peace and spiritual worship for AT LEAST 9,000 years. Yet today’s society focuses on nothing beyond the last 90 years (1%) of misuse, The oh-so wise “99%” latching onto the 1%.
Carry on with your cherry-picking entertainment.
Guess what? I know that, you moron. Like I said, if you want to play dumb, you won’t find companionship here.
Play dumb? Nada.
Neither am I willingly ignorant such as the so-called 99% who choose to ignore 99% of the Swastika’s history and focus solely on the 1%. Way to go, chumps.
If it’s meant, so tritely, to represent fascism, then why no Spanish or Italian or Yugoslavian flag snippet? Perhaps it’s meant simply to appeal to basic blind emotion to drive the crowd.
I’ll take intelligence and factual basis elsewhere, they are obviously taboo on this…thing.
p.s. — thanks for the “name calling”, cunt.
Oh, bring it. You’re no Albanian.
Nobody here is focusing on the swastika except you, because you’ve run out of everything else to say.
Exellent!!! Now, 9 years later, the USA and Brit’s support real Nazi in Ukrain…And very demokratic nations keep their tongues (sorry) in their asses. Excellent!!!