(Anonymous) 2020-01-02 06:13 pm (UTC)(link)
I can't sum these. You'd specifically ban all portrayals where individual Nazis (defined as everyone in the armed forces) o

(Anonymous) 2020-01-02 06:17 pm (UTC)(link)
do things that aren't in support of the regime, unless it's for personal gain?

(Anonymous) 2020-01-02 06:21 pm (UTC)(link)
Clearly, everything that features somewhat nuanced three-dimensional portrayals of characters needs to be banned. No moral shades of grey ever.

(Anonymous) 2020-01-02 06:31 pm (UTC)(link)
Where's anyone arguing Desert Peach should be banned?

(Anonymous) 2020-01-02 06:39 pm (UTC)(link)
I don't have an opinion about Desert Peach. At this point, I would just like to know what coalie upthread would want to ban. Like, give us an example. And explain how it's sympathetic in ways things they just said were fine are not.

(Anonymous) 2020-01-02 07:07 pm (UTC)(link)
You are just so predictable.

(Anonymous) 2020-01-02 07:47 pm (UTC)(link)
There are some very fine people on both sides!

(Anonymous) 2020-01-02 06:31 pm (UTC)(link)
What? No, obviously you can be drafted into the Wehrmacht and never ideologically support the party or the regime. But that's not the position of someone like Rommel (or Schindler, for that matter).

If a Nazi is, say, war profiteering on the black market, he may be undermining the Third Reich but it's hardly an act of resistance. The same applies to protecting individual Jews for reasons of blatant self-interest. At the end of the war Himmler had some insane plan to convince the Allies he was a good guy by freeing everyone at Ravensbrück. If he'd gone through with it this would not have made him a heroic figure analogous to Schindler, and you could easily make a movie about that alternate history without it qualifying as a sympathetic portrayal.

(Anonymous) 2020-01-02 06:36 pm (UTC)(link)
I'm so confused. Which of these six are you banning?

(Anonymous) 2020-01-02 06:48 pm (UTC)(link)
Only the pro-Rommel media, eg. Desert Peach.