Rebranding the Soup Nazi

When words are used irresponsibly, they lose their meaning, their power and any historical import they might carry

By VIC ALHADEFF
Soup Nazi Seinfeld521 (photo credit: Courtesy YouTube)
Soup Nazi Seinfeld521
(photo credit: Courtesy YouTube)
I’m a Seinfeld aficionado. I’ve watched each episode of the American TV series a ridiculous number of times and still find the humor brilliant.
But then there’s “The Soup Nazi” – about a surly delicatessen owner who refuses to serve customers who flout his rules of decorum. It’s witty and well scripted, but it commits a cardinal offense: It devalues and trivializes the meaning of what a Nazi is and in so doing degrades the language associated with those who devised and perpetrated the most grotesque genocide in history.
Recently, a high-rating Australian radio station decided, to its credit, to rebadge a feature, which it had dubbed “The Name Nazi.”
“Enough of the outlandish names being bestowed upon the children of Australia!” declared the promotional blurb. “Whether it is Dayvid or Natarsha, there is a man who can’t stand the letters parents are stringing together for their kids. The time has come to say no. The time has come for the Name Nazi. No longer can we sit idly by while people of Australia walk around with terrible spelling within their names. All hail the Name Nazi.”
The “Name Nazi” then cited “terribly spelt” names, which had been submitted by listeners – Jakxon (Jackson), Meiyah (Mia), Darrci (Darcy), Marcial (Marshal), Indyanah (Indiana), Tracee (Tracy), Taelah (Taylor), Danyil (Daniel).
Clearly, the segment was done in humor with no ill intent. But if a radio host whose most sinister activity is to poke fun at absurd spellings can be acceptably identified as a “Name Nazi,” what does that do to the integrity of public debate? How much more difficult is it then to educate a 14-year-old who is being exposed to the work of “the Nazis” for the first time that this and not that is the real Nazi, that this one is worth worrying about while that one is a harmless radio host? So how widespread is the issue? Some random examples: A sports commentator on an Australian radio station described the drubbing that a soccer team had received as “a holocaust,” a Jewish dietician is cheerfully dubbed “The Diet Nazi,” and university students casually acknowledge that “Grammar Nazi” is a phrase commonly used to describe pedantic acquaintances.
In the US, the Anti-Defamation League lashed Fox News host Glenn Beck for an “outrageous” linkage between the Nazis and Al Gore’s global warming campaign. On another occasion, Beck drew an analogy between those who use art for political messaging and Hitler’s propaganda minister Josef Goebbels. Shock jock Rush Limbaugh popularized the term “Femi-nazi” to denigrate women’s rights activists, while People For The Ethical Treatment of Animals ran a “Holocaust On Your Plate” campaign, placing photographs of animals in factory farms alongside depictions of Jews in Nazi camps, accompanied by such comments as “Six million Jews died in concentration camps, but six billion broiler chickens will die this year in slaughterhouses.” And former US House Speaker Newt Gingrich said Obama and the Democratic Party presented as serious a threat to the US as “Nazi Germany or the Soviet Union once did.”
In Israel, too, it is commonplace for Haredi Jews to call Israeli police or soldiers Nazis. And recently when Yesh Atid Deputy Finance Minister Mickey Levy described Haredim who don’t work and live off state handouts as “parasites,” Shas’s Eli Yishai was quick to accuse him of Nazi-speak.
This is neither about censorship nor about curtailing the right to humor. It is a concern about how we use language. Everything begins with words. That includes racist violence and genocide. When words are used irresponsibly, they lose their meaning, their power and any historical import they might carry. In the context of trite Nazi references they become cheapened, the experience is diluted and the words are offensive and hurtful.
Misuse of “Nazi” borders on blasphemy, yet it invariably falls safely within the ambit of free speech. No one owns the word, yet it connotes the most catastrophic regime of modern times. So it becomes a balance between rights and responsibilities and also a matter of awareness.
We need to do whatever we can to ensure that that a 14-year-old is able to tell the difference between a Nazi and a harmless radio presenter. 
Vic Alhadeff is chief executive officer of the New South Wales Jewish Board of Deputies in Sydney.