ASMarques wrote:...and some sort of central design under the message "TRUTH MATTERS"
I think we should in some way make use of the 1984
-quotation you [Halo] have mentioned above:»He who controls the past, controls the future. He who controls the present, controls the past.«
George Orwell, »1984«
because this is exactly
what it is all about.
The quotation in itself is great from the literary standpoint and indeed very accurate, but in our context it leaves an undertaste suggestive of a struggle for the same kind of power, i.e. as if we wished we -- not the other guys -- were the ones controlling the present in order to control the future through our version of the past etc.
In my humble opinion, more than a few modern-day NSists would go along with that. Though they will not clearly state as much, and possibly not even be conscious of it, it's a built-in feature of their much admired nationalistic brand of authoritarian socialism (i.e. collectivism driven from above, with patriotic fetishism as both a means and an end).
The message I prefer is the one that seems to me to best condensate the purpose of revisionism. I'm very used to hear the reply "what do I care whether the correct figure was 6 million or not." The reply one gets when one tries to make folks like, say, Justin Raimondo of Antiwar -- himself a very effective demolisher of the falsehood in traditional wisdom -- understand the aims of WW2 revisionism is something along these lines: "I'll never understand why revisionists make such a fuss over such trifles; since the Nazis are bad guys, what's the importance of the matter anyway?" (not a literal quote, but that's the gist of his argument).
So, my first choice for a slogan would be the reply to that question: "THE TRUTH MATTERS," period.
ASMarques wrote:...but an adequate face for the "Watching you" bill would be that of Rabbi Marvin Hier of the Wiesenthal Center, a regular inciter to persecution of revisionists. Of course, another photo where this guy wouldn't be smiling his silly Hollywood smile would be much better.
What about Szymon Wizenthal, aka Simon Wiesenthal?
Even better, but unfortunately he also seems to have spent most of his time smiling, with good reason, no doubt. An odd sort of incomplete smile, but not the sort of intimidating stance Big Brother would adopt.
I developed this weak spot for Rabbi Hier since I heard him claiming on TV that the Swiss (at the time being held up for money) had "large camps where they put the fugitive Jews with big dogs that ate them (sic)." I mean, he got so carried away that he actually said that, while white spots of saliva were forming at the corners of his mouth, and, if I'm not mistaken, even repeated it without correcting: the Swiss dogs did not not only bit, but actually ate
the Jews, in his opinion. Obviously the intoxicating odor of money was in the air and it was opening everybody's appetite. Since then, I couldn't let go of this mental image of Swiss St. Bernards feasting on Jews instead of giving them a drink.
Wiesenthal, of course, is equally ridiculous, but in a less obvious, nastier, way. And besides, he is no longer alive.
As for the pictures of revisionists, they look good to me. Preference should go to serious-looking ones, like Zündel's. If in 1984 context, the sort of thing Big Brother would put up should be aimed at. We're not yet there and most people will understand that our own ironic depictions of the miserable powerless vermin that still care for the truth are not far from what they are already being daily fed. I think Halo's depiction of Zündel is a very powerful one: it conveys both the injustice of a good man being deprived of his freedom and the sinister relationship between the powers that be and the ordinary passive citizen ignorant enough not even to be shamed or feel the evil of the situation. Even Zündel's expression is perfect, with a Christ-like look to it, something the Party might indeed be using since moral values are beyond its understanding.
I particulary like this [cartoon]:
[»Who has overthrown it?« »Faurisson!«]
Yes, so do I. And accurate it certainly is.