"Modern-Day Nazis" article - the "hidden" meaning

[Dreamcatcher21]

Hi everyone. I’ve been a long-time reader of Steve’s articles, but this is my first forum post.

I know there are a couple of existing threads on this article, “Modern-Day Nazis,” but I wanted to start a new thread that wouldn’t be about debating animal rights or the rights or wrongs of eating eggs. What I’m interested in are people’s thoughts about why Steve said he wrote the article in the first place. If I understand correctly, it wasn’t about getting people to stop eating eggs, but about getting people to examine their emotional reaction to the article (and video).

See this post:

Modern-Day Nazis, Post #87

And Steve's response:

Modern-Day Nazis, Post #90

After initially reading the article (I couldn’t bring myself to watch the video), I had the reaction that many people did – anger and defensiveness. With thoughts like, “who does he think he is to be judging me that way” and “he’s really gone off the deep end this time” and “wow, he’s becoming very arrogant” and “what a hypocrite he is speaking in his other articles about peace and love and then going on a rant like this spewing out all of this hatred and judgement.”

But then after reading what Steve said his real intent was in posting the article, I decided to go inward and ask myself (in a subjective reality kind of way), “If this article showed up in my reality for a reason, what might that reason be?”

And one thing I realized is that if I was truly secure in my egg-consuming activities, then this article wouldn’t have bothered me at all. I either would have immediately realized what the true purpose of the article was or perhaps reacted with concern for Steve, like, “This article is so uncharacteristic of him. I hope everything is okay. Maybe he’s just having a bad day.”

I may have also reacted with gratitude that Steve made me aware of something I didn’t know about. And I may have decided to take it a step further and do my own research into the egg industry to confirm what he said so I could start making more conscious choices about the foods I eat. But I would not have needed to be angry or defensive about it.

And I realized that it would be like someone coming up to me on the street and accusing me of being, say, a purple pumpkin. And because I believe with certainty the falseness of that statement, I wouldn’t feel the need to launch into some long emotional defense about how I’m not a purple pumpkin and how dare you accuse me of being a purple pumpkin and that I can get 50 other people to agree with me that I’m not a purple pumpkin and that anybody who would believe that I’m a purple pumpkin is a fool. No, I would simply look at them as if they were nuts (or feel very sorry for them in their delusion) and continue to go about my business.

Or, I could have even reacted with non-attachment to my own beliefs, having the attitude, “Hey, maybe I actually am a purple pumpkin. How do I really know that I’m perceiving my reality accurately anyway? And if it turns out I am a purple pumpkin, that’s okay.” Or, “Thank you for making me aware that I might just be a purple pumpkin. I don’t think I want to be a purple pumpkin, so I think I’ll work on changing that.” (I hope this analogy isn’t getting too weird-sounding.)

I noticed that many people on the article thread didn’t “get” the underlying intent of the article, in spite of the explanation Steve gave to the above poster. A few people did “get it,” and a couple of people “got it,” but either didn’t buy Steve’s explanation or didn’t believe that posting this article was a particularly effective method for helping people grow.

So what I’d like to know is who else out there got the “real” intent behind the article and did you gain any insight into yourself as a result?

Thanks for sharing (hope the post wan't too long).

[James81]

Originally Posted by Dreamcatcher21

And one thing I realized is that if I was truly secure in my egg-consuming activities, then this article wouldn’t have bothered me at all.

Wrong.

You are human. We are human. Emotional reactions are part of what MAKE us human. Personal development isn't about removing all emotional reactions from us. It's about examining our emotional reactions to test their validity and their congruence with our beliefs.

And I think that that is where this article came apart. This article was specifically designed to produce an emotional reaction within people, and, as such, it's not a very good litmus on how that emotional reaction resonates with us. As I said in the other thread, let's say that the the video alone was posted and THAT was what caused an emotional reaction. THEN Steve's point about examining emotional reactions would be valid because the emotional reaction would not have come from some outside source (i.e. Steve) swaying an emotional reaction. The reaction would have came from internal stimuli and, as such, would have deserved attention.

As the article stands, it's very hard to separate out what exactly is creating the emotional reaction because there are too many factors at play in the article that are intentionally designed to incite people. Inciteful language was used, as well as a "holier-than-thou" overall tone. All of which created a reaction in anybody who did not specifically agree with what Steve was saying. And as such, the article itself was manipulative and distasteful IMO. I mean no offense to Steve by that because I think that most of his other articles are jam-packed full of value, so it's completely ok if one of them doesn't really hit the mark.

The point is that you can't just say "Oh, I had an emotional reaction to this, it must mean something is wrong with me." Not it doesn't. You are human and you have emotions and you have NEGATIVE emotions and those emotions are perfectly legitimate pieces of who you are. I'd worry more if you DON'T react to things once in a while than if nothing you ever seen or heard ever had an effect on you. They have a term for that in psychology and it is called being a "sociopath" and it's an extreme disorder.

[Dreamcatcher21]

Originally Posted by James81

Wrong.

Thanks for your answer James81.

I skimmed all 600+ posts on the original thread for this article, reading several of your posts and therefore already had a pretty good idea of where you stand on this issue. And I really gave serious thought to what you said in your earlier posts and appreciate the thoroughness of your explanations.

And in the spirit of trying to not be too attached to my current beliefs, I will keep my mind open to the idea that you could be correct and Steve could be wrong, or that you could be wrong and Steve could be correct, or that we all could be wrong and there’s a different point of view here that we’re all missing.


Did anyone else out there agree with Steve’s stated intent and end up gaining some positive insight into themselves as a result?

[James81]

Originally Posted by Dreamcatcher21

And in the spirit of trying to not be too attached to my current beliefs, I will keep my mind open to the idea that you could be correct and Steve could be wrong, or that you could be wrong and Steve could be correct, or that we all could be wrong and there’s a different point of view here that we’re all missing.

The truth always lies somewhere in the middle.

[ssandra]

Originally Posted by Dreamcatcher21

And one thing I realized is that if I was truly secure in my egg-consuming activities, then this article wouldn’t have bothered me at all.

This is more or less how it worked for me. I mean.. besides the fact that I do not like to be compared with nazis, I file this article away under "completely not interesting for me".

Same way I would file those articles from people who are against vaccines at all costs and 100 reasons why muslims are evil. I disagree, yes. But it does not make me feel as if I should -defend- my point of view. This is just to far out there to be taken seriously (in my opinion).

If however, would it have been a positive article on the health benefits of not eating eggs, and how nice it would be for all the chickens to live long and happy lives I might react differently. I would still disagree, but I would not dismiss the article as it is.

[Dreamcatcher21]

Originally Posted by ssandra

This is more or less how it worked for me. I mean.. besides the fact that I do not like to be compared with nazis, I file this article away under "completely not interesting for me".

Same way I would file those articles from people who are against vaccines at all costs and 100 reasons why muslims are evil. I disagree, yes. But it does not make me feel as if I should -defend- my point of view. This is just to far out there to be taken seriously (in my opinion).

If however, would it have been a positive article on the health benefits of not eating eggs, and how nice it would be for all the chickens to live long and happy lives I might react differently. I would still disagree, but I would not dismiss the article as it is.

Thank you for sharing.

[nin64]

I seriously don't understand why many people go into some sort of defensive mode with this article. And now there are people thinking that there is a "hidden meaning"?

Why Steve post this in the first place? I dunno, probably because of his intuition or something. Hey, look at the way he write about this vegan stuffs in the rest of his articles and his book, this kind of article is bound to come up sooner or later.

But seriously, why do you need to have emotional reaction to those useless creature anyway? I mean, if they were to be suddenly freed and have complete freedom, what will they do? Nothing important, in fact, they might make the planet suffer. Might as well turn them into edible stuffs for the people who want to eat them.
Do I have the same view toward human? Exactly. I wish I have the power to take the lives of those useless human. So many rotten people that should leave this planet alone. Or at the very least, force them into some sort of labour or something. Nazis are kind of cool, but I think they target the wrong set of people.

[lasti]

Originally Posted by nin64

But seriously, why do you need to have emotional reaction to those useless creature anyway? I mean, if they were to be suddenly freed and have complete freedom, what will they do? Nothing important, in fact, they might make the planet suffer. Might as well turn them into edible stuffs for the people who want to eat them.
Do I have the same view toward human? Exactly. I wish I have the power to take the lives of those useless human. So many rotten people that should leave this planet alone. Or at the very least, force them into some sort of labour or something. Nazis are kind of cool, but I think they target the wrong set of people.

Lol, here you have it: The response of a nazi.

[lasti]

And one thing I realized is that if I was truly secure in my egg-consuming activities, then this article wouldn’t have bothered me at all.

Totally. I'm eating eggs (not really often but still) and the article didn't bother me at all.

At first I was even a bit dissappointed that it didn't bother me! That's because I know I want to become a vegan at some point (or at least do a 30-day-challenge) and this article didn't help me with that.

Then I realised that this article wasn't written for people like me. It was written for people who don't want to take responsibility for the suffering they inflict on the planet yet.
I know it's my responsibility. And I know I'm working on decreasing the suffering. Why should I become angry?

[nin64]

Originally Posted by lasti

Lol, here you have it: The response of a nazi.

Glad you enjoy it lol

[Eduardo César]

[QUOTE=Dreamcatcher21]
And one thing I realized is that if I was truly secure in my egg-consuming activities, then this article wouldn’t have bothered me at all.

"Live long and prosper" then. The emotional spectre has many nuances, tough.

[aggie]

eduardo i totally agree with you....that was the point i originally made in my post on the original thread.

if you truly aren't bothered, concerned at all, than you should react to the blog totally like a zombie...or nazi, if the boot fits

i have often stated, one can go about one's business in the world quite happily without every being aware of many atrocities going on.

and if you dare to make them aware...you can easily become the bad guy

i think those that are most defensive, perhaps missed the point.

the tactics may be a little extreme...but desperate times call for desperate measures....sometimes it is the things that make people squirm a little bit are the most productive.

but then it's like darn, i really didn't want to know that, you've gone and spoiled my day

[gloci]

Unlike most other people, after reading this article and watching the video, I thought he was completely right and justified in saying what he said and I really did not understand why it was getting such a big reaction from people.

[neotsu]

I understood the message. I just find that negativity, or more specifically, having somebody trying to induce negative emotions in me, (e.g., shame, guilt, anger, defensiveness) is not an awareness raising tactic that works for me, personally. I have known other people who find this method helpful, including several who have posted on it. If you find yourself reacting to being baited, finding out why, for yourself, is important. It may or may not have to do with your own egg consumption.

[Betrade]

Originally Posted by neotsu

I understood the message. I just find that negativity, or more specifically, having somebody trying to induce negative emotions.....

Imo, the accusation or link between egg eaters and Nazis is ludicrous for many reasons.

As to WHY the comparison was made, there could be several reasons. I'll start by giving the benefit of the doubt. It could be because Steve actually believes what he wrote; despite the fact that a huge majority would disagree and many would take offense. If he does; then I think he needs a bit more "conscious growth" because he has no clue what motivates those who eat eggs; where they get them, etc. It would be presumptuous to actually believe such an assertion IMO.

I don't take offense personally, but I do find it quite a stretch to make that connection. Maybe there's something else going on; I don't know for sure; and may not because he hasn't really said so if there is.



It may be for shock value; to spur web traffic and generate some clicks. Use of the term "Nazi" often creates an emotional; defensive response from people, which is a perfectly natural response to being insulted, or having judgments made about you from someone who doesn't even know you, what you believe or why you make the choices you do. Some find that akin to being nosy and getting into the business of others where it doesn't belong; especially when it's unsolicited.

It may be to vent some of his own anger or frustration about somehting, but if that's the case, it's unlikely that anyone will ever know.

I can't help but think about the separation thread and Steve's responses to people making judgments about him when they don't know, yet he's making judgments about those who eat a particular food. That's just inconsistent. It's looks like a classic "do as I say; not as I do" stance; despite the fact that everyone on this board was INVITED to share their views and opinions on the separation blog post by Steve himself.

The Nazi analogy is so overused these days, that it no longer even has the impact that it used to. Everyone's a Nazi these days for one reason or another it seems. I doubt that many even think the assertion through completely. They may think about Hitler for a moment or two and maybe picture a few images of the holocaust or maybe a concentration camp in their minds, but they probably don't think long and hard enough to put themselves in the shoes of the victims and try and imagine how they must have felt; being slaughtered because they didn't rate high enough in Hitler's twisted society.

As I posted in the actual "Egg Nazi" thread, to compare modern day egg production to the intentional, government sanctioned, racist/bigotry/prejudice/religious intolerance based, wholesale slaughter of innocent humans on a massive scale, all over Europe is ridiculous. Sure, you could say that chickens are rounded up and shipped off to be killed at some plant, but humans eat the products that are produced.

There is a purpose and an end product to egg production. It's called food. Food production isn't always pretty, but it's something that humans do in order to stay alive.

When we go to the store and buy packaged meats, we typically don't think about the blood and the guts that were removed and the death that occurred before it was packaged and put on display.

In Hitler's cruel world, humans weren't killed to provide nutrition or any real benefit to other humans or to ensure that others may stay alive. They were slaughtered as a result of Hitler's hatred of those who by birthright; were unfortunate enough to be born outside of the "super race".

I can't make a judgment call as to whether someone eating eggs is doing something bad, or wrong, but I can pose a question to make everyone think, and answer that question for themselves.

It boils down to whether or not humans are "better" than animals, plants, etc.

So , the question is; instead of having eggs for breakfast tomorrow or next year, who would choose to kill and eat their child, their spouse, their best friend instead?? If not; WHY not??

If we're no better or no worse than the other members of the animal and plant kingdoms, then killing and eating our family and/or friends should be no more difficult than eating an egg, a chicken or a tomato sandwich.

We could even make the question a bit less shocking and reduce that choice down to eating either eggs, or our dogs and cats, or hamsters or Guinea Pigs; or favorite pet, or even the horse down the road that we have no attachment to, but we know that someone else probably does. The analogy is still the same. Why do we choose one living thing over another?? It has to be because we place a higher value on one of the two, or three or a thousand. There is no other reason.

AS to the "why" of the original assertion and comparison in the original blog post, we can all speculate but only Steve can supply the final and true answer because it was his question based on his beliefs.

But, it ultimately seems to still boil down to one or two questions; "what is the value of human life as compared to other creatures and are we wrong, or is it truly unethical to produce and harvest our food the way we do"??

These are ethical and moral questions, and if; according to Steve's belief system that we live in a subjective universe that exists to ultimately serve us and our own growth and happiness; as well as our needs and/or desires, then morality HAS TO BE subjective as well along with everything else, or the whole subjective reality theory falls flat on it's face so no; this issue is neither right or wrong in a subjective universe or subjective version of reality according to Steve's own claims. There can be no true morality in such a world; only what we choose to be moral, immoral or amoral will fall into those categories, and each one of us can choose what is right or wrong to us.

The notion of "do no harm" also falls flat in a subjective world, because one man's harm is another's good deed, or benefit. Morality cannot exist in such a world; so killing chickens or eating eggs, or killing your son or daughter is of no consequence at all, because there is no right; and no wrong. I can't help but wonder if Hitler himself held a similar view of reality; because what most of us consider 'wrong" didn't seem to matter to him at all; which his actions have clearly shown.

I don't buy into that view personally because common sense shows me how bad such a model would be if it were true, but this Nazi/egg issue has caused me to ask some questions about a few different things during the course of trying to figure out the "why" of the post. That too could be the reason that the post was made and the questions posed; to make us think; but not necessarily about chickens, eggs and Nazis, but about bigger things; such as who we really are and the nature of reality.

If that was the original intent of the post; it definitely worked; and it also showed me personally that subjective reality is something I don't believe in (not that I did, but I'm even more convinced now that I don't and won't) and that SR is a model that I would definitely not want to live under. When it comes to morality and right and/or wrong, it just falls very short because it negates true morality and the concept of right and wrong.

In a subjective world, anything goes, which means that we can hurt anyone or anything with no worries about whether our actions are right or wrong. We all know better; that right and wrong in fact DO exist at some level; despite the fact that these concepts do differ at times and sometimes change over time; but there are certain things that almost everyone considers right or wrong, like murdering and torturing children and many other things so; thanks for the post Steve; it was mildly enlightening and made me really think about; and reject the concept of SR; even if I actually missed your original intent and motivation behind the original post.