---

by Byron
Link stays as there's nothing blatently dodgy on there, but the view it paints of the blackshirts feels a little, well, light on critcism.

---

It is a site run by "the friends of Oswald mosley". The writers have presented Mosley's views in a sympathetic light by presenting them as they were presented at the time rather than slagging them off. A lot of them are actually weirdly reminiscent of modern politics in some ways - and, interestingly, a lot of them would have the modern versions of these scary people running for the hills (Mosely was in favour of something like the EU, for instance).

I don't see anything "revisionist" in the David Irving sense about that site. For example, they show weapons used by communists against the BUF. There were actual fights between the two sides, and such weapons were used. In some opinions, both sides are equally vile and equally guilty, but at the time both said that the others started it. This site seems to say much the same.

Also, because it was the British "Union" it included all manner of dodgy types, from those who were more interested in the policies to those who were loony anti-semites. Mosley was apparently not one of the latter, but adopted some of the rhetoric and policies to please members who he might otherwise have lost (which does not make him much better than them).

And surely, as an historian (and brief recipient of a flamewar ), you can see the documentary value of having the actual policies &c available to be critiqued, rather than just saying "it's bad because I say it is offensive"? and so forth...

But this is off topic...

---

by Bee
Daily Mail under Lord Rothermere supported the British Union of Fascists under Sir Oswald Moseley in the 20s/30s...

---

Ah, now I remember! (Studied it briefly in History of the Press) Ta for the reminder!

---

by Bee
[b]And surely, as an historian (and brief recipient of a flamewar ), you can see the documentary value of having the actual policies &c available to be critiqued, rather than just saying "it's bad because I say it is offensive"? and so forth...

---

Absolutely, but quoting his policies verbatim, or scanning period imagry, ain't the same as a stylised Moslite love fest. If the writers' intent is to give an idea of how Mosley appeared at the time, simply reproducing the original material would be more sucessful. The device isn't at all obvious: it's easily mistaken as another fascist website. Interesting idea, but don't think it worked.

Anyway, the link's there, people can decide for themselves.

Just a small point, how offended would people have been if Harry had come dressed as Napolean, or Phillip of Spain? The only real difference is a matter of time and considering we are closing in on the point where WWII will be officially consigned to the vaults of history and events such as memorial day will have no official recognition...

Perhaps it's time to let the past just be the past.

(Edited by Phoenix - Aeon 23/01/2005 04:17)

---

by Phoenix - Aeon
Just a small point, how offended would people have been if Harry had come dressed as Napolean, or Phillip of Spain? The only real difference is a matter of time and considering we are closing in on the point where WWII will be officially consigned to the vaults of history and events such as memorial day will have no official recognition...

Perhaps it's time to let the past just be the past.

---

I don't think they would have been offended but Napolean & Phillip of Spain aren't representations of a regime which killed millions of people based purely on their religious beliefs. The actions of Nazi Germany should always be remembered so that it can never happen again. This is one instance where we shouldn't "let the past just be the past"