you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] 2 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago) (9 children)

fraktur was banned by the nazis. Its antique//antikva thats the nazi font

edit: this might not even be fraktur looks more like textura to me tbh

edit 2: its definitely way more a spin on textura style blackletters than gothic fraktur, notice the distinct 's' shape not being in the shape of the long s: ſ

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 9 child comments
  • [–] 4 points 1 day ago (2 children)

    I am sad that antikva is seen as the nazi font, i really like it and furthermore it has roots in Italy's story :(

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 4 points 1 day ago* (1 child)

    IMO nazis shouldnt be allowed to own any symbol. they cant come up with their own so they always coopt and ruin deep historical traditions instead.

    but if you're gonna call any font type out for being dog whistly, at least call out the correct one, was more my point :)

    im from scandinavia and have a few buddies who are active in revivalist norse religious movement, and despite MULTIPLE warning about nazis NOT being welcome, they still have to refuse a few chuds at the door every month or so. I definitely know of the struggle.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 2 points 1 day ago* (5 children)

    the entire blackletter style segment is sometimes referred to as "fraktur". and while hitler did indeed ban it, that wasn't until 1941. from 1933 until then it was "the german font".

    edit: interestingly, the reason given for banning it, was that the font they called fraktur was closer to textura (schwabacher), which was seen as a "jewish font" whatever the hell that means.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 5 child comments
  • [–] 1 point 1 day ago (3 children)

    right, so using fraktur/textura-blackletter style really shouldnt be giving off nazi alam bells, quite the opposite in fact

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [–] 1 point 1 day ago (2 children)

    if you know that hitler personally didn't like it, yeah. but the nazis in general did, so that's what people know.

    and again, a single symbol means very little. however when two seemingly unrelated symbols with a shared history are brought together, the effect is to allude to that shared history.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 3 points 1 day ago* (1 child)

    depends. If we surrender these aesthetics to the fascists then weve lost the battle in advance. Its huge hassle to eternally have to kick nazis out of the revivalist norse religious movements fx. The few friends i have that are active participants in suvh a community often share how exhausting it is to have to eternally kick off the chuds who just wanna LARP despite the many warnings that they are NOT welcome. This only happens because a lot of peoe accept the narrative that norse religious symbols = fascist, but if you actually speak with the people who are seriously invested in that mythology, that assumption is shown to near opposite of the truth.

    as always, the fucks are just tryna corrupt and coopt anything cool. And my way of combatting that is explicit pushback of their limp dicked attempts at it. It is on a deep level appaling to me that we as a society are comfortable signing off these deep pieces of history as just 'nazi shit'

    the hindu peace symbol might be tainted for good. fucking wish it werent.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 2 points 1 day ago

    maybe it's a difference of perspective, but when you grow up surrounded by runestones and old viking villages you learn to differentiate the larpers on sight. they've not coopted the symbol itself, only its use in a certain context. a bit like how the sauvastika is usually completely fine because it's the "wrong way round", but if you tilt it 45 degrees it's obvious what they were intending it to mean.

  • source
  • parent