Talk:Norsefire

Tests on prisoners in detention centres

"In the film, Norsefire had staged a plan that would sweep them into full control of the nation; after they had a firm grip on Parliament, they conducted horrific medical experiments on prisoners in the detention centers to perfect a deadly virus (as well as the cure for it) which they then used to stage a terrorist attack by foreign religious extremists."

This isn't logical because they would have to be already in power in order to be able to conduct those experiments on the prisoners. They came to power through elections because they promised law and order and security. The detention centres did not exist before Norsefire gained power. Therefore it is logically impossible for Norsefire to have first tested the biological weapon (the virus) on political prisoners and then gained power. Who had established these concentration camps ("detention centres") before the fascists took over? Is it really suggested in the film that a Labour/Conservative government established those camps? This isn't plausible. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 195.197.174.60 (talk) 20:49, 26 February 2009 (UTC)

This isn't really relevant to improving the article, so it's really off-topic for this talk page, but my understanding (and I'm a lot more familiar with the comic) is that they had control of Parliament (presumably through by-elections, etc). They could then influence the government. Incidentally, the UK has detention centres right now - conditions in them are constantly being criticised, but fortunately no one in Parliament has yet suggested biological experimentation on refugees (sorry, asylum seekers). Cheers, This flag once was red^propaganda_deeds 21:00, 26 February 2009 (UTC)

Secretary of Defense

The film briefly mentions that Adam Sutler was the Secretary of Defense before Norsefire was elected to Parliament. I suppose this explains how he gained so much political backing from the people, as his military and decisions helped to "calm the chaos".

—The preceding unsigned comment was added by 65.255.91.32 (talk) 16:43, 17 January 2007 (UTC).

Comic And Film

It is my belif that the comic's ideas should be more important than the films Slayerx675 17:01, 13 September 2006 (UTC)

It is my belif that the films ideas should be more important than the comic's ~ sumguy

It is my belif that both are of equal value. They tread along the same basic path and themes. And the word is "belief.

just as importantly. does anyone know the cooralation between the norsefire flag and the american lung assocication?

They both use the Cross of Lorraine? --Foot Dragoon 00:59, 19 November 2006 (UTC)

CoE

"They began to sink their influence into the Church of England, promoting and demoting members of the clergy as they saw fit." - The British Prime Minister already has some say over bishops. --MacRusgail 16:34, 11 November 2006 (UTC)

The Flag

It's probably worth pointing out that the Norsefire flag shown on this article is sideways when compared to every version of it (both in flag and symbol) in the film, and the concept art from V for Vendetta, from Script to Film --Jittery Joe 16:24, 6 January 2007 (UTC)

What is the significance of saying that the flag forms an H on its side? Robert 23:31, 7 November 2007 (UTC)

V for Vendetta Template

I'm removing this template from all its articles:

Which, I agree, is fairly provocative. However, I don't see how "V for Vendetta" deserves this on its own, or what useful information it provides. Surely the links in the articles are sufficient? If people want to revert my changes, that's fine by me. But please reply to this post so we can get a discussion started. At the moment I see no reason why the template should exist. Maccy69 13:47, 18 October 2007 (UTC)

I've reverted my previous edit and requested a template deletion instead, see below. Maccy69 17:34, 18 October 2007 (UTC)

TfD nomination of Template:V for Vendetta

Template:V for Vendetta has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the template's entry on the Templates for Deletion page. Thank you. — Maccy69 17:34, 18 October 2007 (UTC)

Merge this article, don't delete it. --75.159.2.59 (talk) 22:57, 7 November 2011 (UTC)

Fair use rationale for Image:Warrior19.jpg

Image:Warrior19.jpg is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If there is other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images lacking such an explanation can be deleted one week after being tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.

BetacommandBot (talk) 03:15, 12 February 2008 (UTC)

Fair use rationale for Image:Fbnfvv.png

Image:Fbnfvv.png is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If there is other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images lacking such an explanation can be deleted one week after being tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.

BetacommandBot (talk) 20:37, 13 February 2008 (UTC)

"Far Right"

Classifying this regime as "Far Right" is bias coming from the Left. Fascism is not essentially different from the other forms of Statism that are seen as Left-Wing: Socialism and Communism. They are all governments that oppress their citizens in the name of some greater good.

The common misconception that fuels the idea that Fascism is "Far Right" is a quote from Mussolini that states, “Fascism should more properly be called corporatism, since it is the merger of state and corporate power.” Under Fascism, a "Corporation" was not the limited liability companies that we know in the USA today.

"Under fascist corporatism, sectors of the economy were divided into corporate groups, whose activities and interactions were managed and coordinated by the government. The idea was to split the difference between socialism and laissez faire capitalism, letting the state control and direct the economy from the top-down without itself owning the means of production." "The bottom line is that corporate groups meant classes of people in the economy, which were allegedly represented through appointments to the Council. The system was not about welfare for private companies, but rather about totalitarian central planning of the whole economy through legislation and regulation. Corporatism meant formally “incorporating” divergent interests under the state, which would resolve their differences through regulatory mechanisms." http://blog.skepticallibertarian.com/2013/02/07/fake-quote-files-mussolini-on-fascism-and-corporatism/

Amaroq64 (talk) 08:58, 18 July 2013 (UTC)

Unsourced material / original research

Below information was tagged for needing sources or original research long-term. Feel free to reinsert with appropriate references. DonIago (talk) 15:07, 26 May 2015 (UTC)

Film portrayal

=== Film portrayal === Although Norsefire still bear their largely repressive policies in the movie adaptation of V for Vendetta, some differences are worthy of note. The openly fascist Norsefire comes to power in the film by winning a general election with 87% of the vote. The mechanism is elaborated in the film to a much greater extent than was ever discussed in the comic. However, much of the following explanation comes from Finch's speculation that the biological attacks were a Reichstag fire ploy. His fears are "confirmed" by a discussion with one of the agents involved, but it is later made clear that this was V impersonating the real agent, who has been dead for 20 years, manipulating Finch to get to Creedy. However, much of the plan is confirmed by other sources, especially V's own background. In place of the nuclear war of the novel version, biological weapons are used instead. Alan Moore later states in the foreword to the trade paperback edition of V for Vendetta that scientists now felt that even a "limited" nuclear war was not survivable. Thus biological weapons would today be considered more plausible. In the film, the men who later became Norsefire had staged a plan that would sweep them into full control of the nation; using detention centres, they conducted horrific medical experiments on prisoners to perfect a deadly virus (and the cure for it) which they then used to stage a terrorist attack they would blame on religious extremists. To maximise its effect, the virus was released in a water treatment plant called Three Waters, a London Underground station, and the St. Mary's Primary School. The "St. Mary's virus" quickly killed almost 100,000 people in the British Isles, and the British populace was gripped by fear. Several "terrorist" scapegoats were tried and executed. Norsefire then promised to bring back security against the new "terrorist threat". Party leaders had bought stock in the pharmaceutical companies that would later mass-produce the cure, becoming very rich in the process. Not long after the biological attack and their ascension to power, the public was informed that a cure was miraculously discovered and distributed throughout the country. Adam Sutler (the film version of Adam Susan) was then elected to the new office of High Chancellor. Norsefire still has the primary government divisions of the graphic novel, though these anatomical names are rarely used in the film: The Head (High Chancellor) The Hand with its agents, The Finger (the secret police), The Eye (the visual surveillance division), The Ear (the audio surveillance division), The Nose (the police department), and The Mouth (the propaganda division, which runs the BTN or British Television Network) The rest of the world is only passingly mentioned, although it is stated in several news reports that at least the United States (referred to as the "former United States," not unlike "the former Soviet Union") has fallen upon desperate times. According to BTN news broadcasts it is mentioned that the U.S. has become so desperate for medical supplies that it has sent Britain a tremendous amount of grain and tobacco in a bid for aid, and at least by the end of the movie has broken out into its second civil war. Norsefire's propaganda and the way Eric Finch is mocked by Creedy for having an Irish mother seem to suggest Nordic superiority (Storm Saxon, "England Prevails"). The name of the government party, Norsefire, is only used passingly in the film. It is stated in the film that Sutler originally came to power in the Conservative Party, but a chart of election results show that Sutler broke away and formed his own party ("Labour", "Conservative" and "Norsefire" are shown). The computer system "Fate", which played an important role in the graphic novel, is also absent. However, there is use of a computer network called the Interlink, presumably a form of national intranet, throughout the film. Sutler, portrayed by John Hurt, is also given visual similarities with Oswald Mosley and Adolf Hitler, having a similar hairstyle, figure and style of military uniform Mosley wore. However, Sutler is described as having broken away from the Conservative Party, while in real life, Oswald Mosley's New Party, which developed into the British Union of Fascists, was a breakaway from Labour. Adam Susan in comparison, however, is extremely different and shares more similarities with Benito Mussolini.

Ideology

I've never read the comics, but in the first few minutes of the movie a propaganda poster talks about faith and the chancellor says America was ruined because of "godlessness". Would this not suggest State Anglicanism or something like that? Shouldn't State/National/Political Anglicanism be added? — Preceding unsigned comment added by PromethiumElemental (talk • contribs) 17:11, 30 June 2016 (UTC)

yet another source discussing Norsefire

Poli Sci Fi: An Introduction to Political Science Through Science Fiction chapter 13 Democratic Breakdown in V for Vendetta, by Julie VanDusky-Allen edited by Michael A. Allen, Justin S. Vaughn

Scotland is independent...

In the book, while this subject goes unmentioned in the film. But if Scotland is independent, there is technically no UK. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 109.249.184.251 (talk) 00:24, 6 June 2020 (UTC)