The Nazis Wore Red: A Curious Case of Color-Correction in Contemporary Fascist Cinema

One does not typically expect to find oneself arguing with a film’s colour palette for Nazis. Yet here we are. A new Italian film isn’t making just a palette mistake, however, it’s systematically reconstructing fascism as its exact opposite.

Silvio Soldini’s Le assaggiatrici (2025) is based on Rosella Postorino’s bestselling 2018 Italian novel by the same name about Hitler’s food tasters at the Wolfsschanze. In German it’s titled Die Vorkosterinnen.

The book cover features a seductive red butterfly that obscures an Aryan model, as imposed red lipstick defines her identity. The red of Nazi ideology appears to be consuming her, in a book about forced consumption or death.

It has arrived to generally favourable notices. The performances are creditable. The tension is effectively sustained. The director has stated, in interviews with Deutsche Welle and elsewhere, that he prioritises “emotional truth” over historical precision, which seems like a defensible artistic position, and one that accounts for certain liberties taken with the source material.

What it does not account for is the film’s extraordinary disinformation decision to wash the entire Nazi apparatus in petrol (teal).

Chromatic History of National Socialism

Adolf Hitler was many things. Indifferent to visual propaganda definitely was not among them.

His very particular selection of red, white, and black for the visual identity of a Nazi was not accidental. Hitler addressed the question directly in Mein Kampf, explaining that Imperial German red was deliberately chosen for psychological impact. He wanted its association with revolution, its capacity to command attention, its physiological effect on the blood and nerves. The Nuremberg rallies were intentionally seas of red. The swastika banner was designed, by Hitler’s own account, to be impossible to ignore.

This was, one must acknowledge, a propaganda achievement from the lessons of WWI (e.g. Woodrow Wilson’s belief in spectacle as a weapon, leading to Edward Bernay’s publication of a propaganda bible). The Nazis understood from the last war, if not many before them, that militant power and rapid disruption comes not merely through argument but through aesthetic experience. The red was aggressive, confident, seductive. It promised antithesis, rupture, transformation. It stirred.

Historians have documented this extensively, leaving zero doubt. The visual architecture of fascism was Albert Speer’s Cathedral of Light, Leni Riefenstahl’s geometric masses of uniformed bodies, and most of all the omnipresent crimson banners.

1939 Nazi red banners contrasted sharply and covered everything, like the MAGA hat today. Source: Hugo Jaeger/Life Pictures/Shutterstock

The threat of burgundy covering Europe was not incidental to National Socialism but constitutive of it.

The Fiction of a Teal Reich

In Soldini’s film, none of this exists.

The SS uniforms, which on set were presumably some variant of field grey, have been colour-graded into a cold greenish blue. This is what Europeans might call petrol, or an American teal. The train carriages are teal. The Wolfsschanze shadows are teal. The very air of occupied Poland appears to have been filtered through Caribbean seawater.

Americans thinking of azure blue vacations of peace and tranquility will be shocked to find this movie painting SS officers in the wrong palette.

Meanwhile, the women who are the victims, unwilling food tasters conscripted into service under threat of death, are dressed almost uniformly in burgundy and brown.

Warm tones. The colour family of the swastika banner is applied to the victims, as if to invoke and rehydrate the Hitler propaganda of young beautiful Aryan women in danger. Even the protagonist’s name is Rose!

The shallow symbolic intention seems transparent: teal is meant to convey cold machinery of death versus flushed cheeks of red as a warm human vulnerability. Petroleum versus blood. It is the sort of colour theory one encounters in undergraduate film studies seminars, and it is executed competently enough.

The difficulty is that it ends up ironically being fascist propaganda because it is precisely backwards.

Hitler Was an Inversion Artist

Consider what the audience is being taught.

A viewer encountering this film, especially the younger viewer for whom the Second World War is ancient history, absorbs the following visual grammar: Fascism is cold. Fascism is teal and grey and clinical. Fascism looks like a hospital corridor, or a Baltic winter, or an industrial refrigeration unit.

Die Vorkosterinnen depicts Nazi uniforms and machinery only in hues of teal. The SA literally were called “Brownshirts” when they seized power and destroyed democracy along with black-clad SS. An earth grey (erdgrau) shift was later during war.

False.

This is not what fascism looked like. It rose, in fact, as the exact opposite.

Source: “Hitler and the Germans” exhibit at the German Historical Museum, Berlin.

Fascism in Germany was always meant by Hitler to be red hot. It was his vision of Imperial red, white and black for stirring reactions and emotive attachment. It was torchlight and drums and the intoxication of abrupt mass belonging and sudden purpose. It was institutional drug and drink abuse to dispense rapid highs.

The Nazis did not present themselves as slow and precise, bureaucrats of byzantine rules. That was how they aspired to operate, but not how they recruited or actually functioned. They presented themselves as easy vitality, as rapid revolution, as blood and fire and national resurrection.

They were the cheap promise and marketing of Red Bull, Monster drink, 5 hour energy shot, not bowls of slow cooked hearty soup and vegetables with cream. “Fanta” was the Nazi division of Coca Cola, marketed like a Genozid Fantasie in a bottle.

Fanta was created by Coca-Cola to profit from Nazi Germany, avoiding sanctions. It was industrial food byproducts (apple waste, milk waste), marketed as a health drink using a word short for “fantasy”, because it was all about swallowing lies.

The women, meanwhile, would not have dressed in coordinated burgundy. They were rural conscripts and Berlin refugees. They wore what they had. But even setting aside questions of costume accuracy, there is something perverse about rendering victims in the colour palette of the perpetrator’s own propaganda. Notably the women also are portrayed as the smoking, drinking and promiscuous ones, while the Nazis are falsely described as teetotalers.

This reversal is painful to see, as Nazis are played in the film as completely inverted to what makes Nazism so dangerous.

“Emotional Truth” and Its Discontents

Director Soldini has explained that historical precision matters less to him than achieving an emotional resonance. One sympathises with the artistic impulse to generate ticket sales. The film is definitely not a documentary, and accuracy is a burden that can produce its own distortions that don’t translate well to audience growth.

But “emotional truth” is not a free pass to rehydrate Nazism. If your emotional symbolism teaches audiences to look for the wrong visual signatures, if it trains them to associate fascism with cold clinical teal rather than seductive aggressive red, then your emotional truth is propagating a functional falsehood that is dangerous.

This disinformation risk matters far more today than it might have in 1995 or 2005. We are presently surrounded by political movements that borrow freely from the fascist playbook whilst their critics struggle to name what they are seeing. A large part of that struggle is visual.

People have been taught, through decades of erroneously toxic films like this one, that fascism is ugly, grey uniforms and clinical efficiency and cold industrial murder. It was not.

They have not been taught that it looks like rallies of red hats and the intoxication of belonging to something larger than oneself.

Every member of Huntington Beach City Council pose for a photo wearing red “Make Huntington Beach Great Again” hats at a swearing-in ceremony on 3 Dec 2024.

They have not been taught to recognise the aesthetic of hot, rapid seduction and “day one” promises of disruption.

Hollywood Teal

One must also note that Soldini is operating within a system. The teal-and-orange colour grade has become so pervasive in contemporary cinema that it functions as a kind of default reference.

He pulled the visual equivalent of scoring every emotional beat with swelling orchestra strings. Teal is what films lean on for tension, ignoring the fact that holiday posters for many people is a Caribbean dream like a typical Corona ad.

This creates a particular problem for historical cinema. When every thriller, every dystopia, every prestige drama reaches for the same cool teal palette to signal “this is danger,” the colour loses its actual meaning.

It becomes mere convention.

And when that convention is misleadingly applied to the Third Reich, it overwrites the actual chromatic signature of the period with a contemporary aesthetic that signifies nothing more than “this film is a color by number about bad things.”

The Nazis were not teal.

But teal is the reduced palette of what serious films dip into, so the Nazis get rehydrated as such. And viewers start embracing Nazism again while thinking the cool, calm drab good guys are the enemy (as targeted by hot headed rage lords).

White nationalist Nick Fuentes has said repeatedly the racist MAGA is the racist America First and that is exactly what he wants.

We Train Eyes to See the Train

One of the most annoying aspects of the film (SPOILER ALERT) is the director abruptly kills the Jew for trying to board the train of freedom. Of course in history the Nazi trains actually symbolize concentration camps, where anyone boarding faced almost certain death. Yet here’s a film that shows the inversion with trains as the freedom trail for the idealized Aryan woman working for Hitler, while the Jew was denied the ride.

The inspiration for the love story between Rosa and [SS leader] Ziegler stems from Woelk’s statement that an officer put her on a train to Berlin in 1944 to save her from the advancing Red Army, the armed forces of the Soviet Union. She later learned that all the other food tasters had been shot by Soviet soldiers.

That’s Nazi propaganda pulled forward, pure and unadulterated.

The love story in the film frames the SS leader as kind hearted savior, as he is shooting a Jew in the back so she couldn’t be liberated by approaching Allied soldiers, yet “saving” the Aryan girl by gifting her a rare spot on a Nazi train.

The film covers the protagonist’s hands in the blood of the Jewish woman murdered by her SS lover, blood she stares at on the train, perhaps to emphasize how the Swastika was believed to be a symbol of being lucky at birth. She lived to be 91 thanks to the SS, who made sure that a Jewish woman didn’t get a spot on that train, just a bullet in the back.

And just to be clear, a woman caught by the SS commiting the capital crime of Judenhilfe (hiding or even befriending a Jew) would be executed. The SS would not have ensured that the Jew’s guardian standing next to her would live while he unloaded his pistol. In the mind of the SS, especially in 1945, that would be like aiming only at the passenger in a criminal getaway car to avoid harming the driver.

There is a reason disinformation historians care about such visual culture. Political movements are recognised, and hidden, partly through their weaponization of aesthetics. The person who knows that fascism comes wrapped in red flags of instant vitality and promises of national greatness is better equipped to identify it than the person who has been taught to feel disgust for cool grey of law and order, to hate calm bureaucrats in clinical blue corridors.

Soldini’s film, whatever its other merits, trains eyes to see the exact wrong thing. The good guy palette in reality is flipped to evil, audiences are pushed to embrace the palette of Hitler’s violent hate.

  • Chromatic inversion (blueish Nazis, reddish victims)
  • Behavioral inversion (abstemious Nazis, hedonistic women)
  • Logical inversion (Murderous SS as loving saviors)

Soldini colour-corrects and codifies fascism into something unrecognisable, antithetical. In doing so, it makes the real thing far harder to recognize correctly today when it flashes itself all around us, signaling as it always has.

The Nazis wore red for a reason.

Red was how they poisoned power.

It would be useful if we remembered this.

The Spanish edition’s cover designer understood something Soldini didn’t. The RED APPLE is the focal point as the danger, the temptation, the poison risk. It sits against cool grey tones. The red is what threatens. The grey is the safety and institutional backdrop.

Israel Creates a New Country to Bomb Yemen, After Hegseth Fumbled and Failed

Someone must have noticed Hegseth’s seaborne operation against Yemen was an historic blunder.

Shooting down your own aircraft, colliding with merchant ships, losing jets to maintenance failures, a billion-dollar campaign that ended in a ceasefire that the Houthis called a victory and mercilessly mocked Trump.

America!

Seriously, Hegseth is unfit and an embarrassment to any military. The costly feckless operation, launched as deterrence to secure the Red Sea, not only failed to weaken Houthi power but also led to a ceasefire that exposed Trump’s diplomatic and military weakness.

Israel is therefore pivoting to strikes on Yemen from a military base in an unusual way, from a neighboring state it just unilaterally created. Well, more like from a contested territory it recognized.

The Somaliland government in 2017 accepted an Emirati bid to establish a military base in Berbera. Satellite imagery shows the naval base has been transformed into a near-completed facility, with advanced infrastructure including a modern military port, a deep-water dock and an airstrip with hangars and support facilities. The runway at Berbera is 4km long, allowing it to receive heavy transport aircraft and fighter jets. Israel has of course been monitoring the whole thing.

Once the UAE built the infrastructure, Israel bought access with a signature. In a very controversial move, Israel recognized the state of Somaliland. Recognition is traded for strategic partnerships. This is the second time Israel has traded recognition of contested territory for strategic access under the Abraham Accords banner. Morocco got Western Sahara recognition; now Somaliland gets independence recognition. The simple calculus is sovereignty as currency.

Berbera sits directly across the Gulf of Aden from Yemen, like maybe 150 miles. For context, that’s closer than Gaza to Tel Aviv. It’s the obvious new forward operating position for sustained attacks on Houthi operations without having to fly everything from Israel or from sea.

This presents a functional solution to the Red Sea problem that doesn’t require the US military under Hegseth to embarrass itself further. That could be the reason Netanyahu is off to meet with Trump three days after recognition… although it also could be a resettlement deal. Earlier this year, the US and Israel reportedly had contacted Somaliland about jets of forcibly displaced people landing in Berbera, such as Palestinians from Gaza.

The Somaliland president has of course only made statements about “regional peace and security”. That’s almost certainly code for “airstrikes on Yemen.”

Surveillance Salt: Scientists Release Swarm Robots Smaller Than a Grain

Back in 2014 I gave a talk about autonomous microscale surveillance including “smart dust” to an IoT audience. Last week, researchers at the University of Pennsylvania and University of Michigan published the technical specifications in Science Robotics.

Microscopic robots that sense, think, act, and compute

The press coverage I’ve seen emphasizes medicine. “Guardians of cellular health,” says ScienceAlert. Ok, ok, let’s get real. The actual paper describes something different: a general-purpose programmable computer, 200 by 300 micrometers, that can sense its environment, execute conditional logic, coordinate in swarms, and operate autonomously for months.

Tiny Computer

The device fits on the ridge of a fingerprint. It runs on 16 nanowatts harvested from ambient light. It carries a custom 11-bit processor with conditional branching, arithmetic operations, memory addressing, and loop control. It’s not a sensor that wiggles. It’s a Turing-complete microprocessor that happens to be smaller than a grain of salt.

Current constraints are a fluid-only operation (electrokinetic propulsion requires ions), optical-only programming (no RF—too power-hungry), and limited memory (a few hundred bits due to leakage current). The researchers are explicit that these are seen as generation-one limitations, and not fundamental barriers.

Follow the Money

The collaboration began at a DARPA presentation five years ago. Funding sources are listed in the paper:

  • National Science Foundation (lead billing)
  • Air Force Office of Scientific Research
  • Army Research Office
  • Fujitsu Semiconductors

NSF listed first is another way of saying defense money built the platform. The Michigan lab that built the onboard computer has received over $16 million through DARPA’s Electronics Resurgence Initiative. The same lab builds “injectable computers that can broadcast from inside the body.”

That’s defense money, doing defense research, for defense. So naturally the PR is about medicinal applications. Science is surveillance, but that doesn’t mean surveillance is science.

Tiny Countermeasure Problem

So let’s say you are worried about robots the size of dust, the salt of surveillance, being deployed soon by someone (defense).

We know high-power microwave weapons can fry microscale electronics. The U.S. military has stuff to talk about like CHAMP, THOR, and the overbuilt Epirus IFPC-HPM system. Detection and destruction of surveillance salt is a solved problem for those who can deploy sufficient microwaves.

For everyone else, the countermeasure architecture is… TBD.

No consumer detection equipment. No regulatory framework. No international treaty. No public discussion of deployment implications.

Robots now officially scale to university labs and penny-per-unit manufacturing. Defense against the inevitable abuse of these robots remains classified.

How We Got Here

My 2014 talk showed a slide listing Israeli surveillance exports that had been dismissed as regional paranoia: rock listening devices in Lebanon (confirmed real), Mossad-trained sharks in Egypt (ridiculous), tagged vultures in Saudi Arabia (a Tel Aviv University research bird, actually).

My slides from the 2014 Things Expo, NYC

The pattern I was warning about was exotic surveillance accusations get labeled conspiracy theory until the technology becomes undeniable.

Smart dust followed the same trajectory. DARPA funded the concept in 1997. Berkeley built early prototypes. Regional paranoids made accusations. Fact-checkers debunked. Meanwhile, the engineering continued and is now published and headed to production.

Science Robotics reports 17,768 downloads in two weeks. That’s not casual academic interest. That’s procurement offices pulling specifications.

What Next

The paper’s final line:

These results pave the way for general-purpose microrobots that can be programmed many times in a simple setup and can work together to carry out tasks without supervision in uncertain environments.

Unsupervised. Autonomous. Swarm-capable. Programmable. Invisible.

This microscopic technology will be deployed for invisible surveillance. The question is now whether you’ll know what to do when it happens.

Glenn Greenwald Was Always Suspect. Now He’s Clear.

Nick Fuentes is the man who in 2023 said this:

I think the Holocaust is exaggerated. I don’t hate Hitler. I think there’s a Jewish conspiracy. I believe in race realism.

And Fuentes celebrated the rising popularity of his message by proclaiming nearly half of the White House staff now are Nazis.

It’s important context for August 2025, when Glenn Greenwald called Nick Fuentes a “generational talent” with “really smart insights grounded not in sensationalism or blind ideology, but lots of reading, and thinking.”

Greenwald’s framing was erasure.

What he constructed for Fuentes was a martyrdom narrative of the Nazi persecuted for “questioning the power of the Jewish lobby.” The Hitler praise, the Holocaust denial, the stated desire for white nationalism was spun and reduced to “provocative rhetoric” and “rhetorical excess.”

This is known as fascist inversion: erase the ideology, present the aggressor as victim. Hitler didn’t run on “let’s murder your neighbor”; he ran on false victimhood. Greenwald runs this playbook for Fuentes.

Moreover, this is not defending someone’s right to speak. This is highly targeted, careful rehabilitation of Nazism to normalize it into power again.

Greenwald Covered Himself a Long Time

In 2017, after Charlottesville, Greenwald wrote an Intercept piece defending the ACLU’s representation of white supremacists.

He floated what appeared as a principled argument: odious speech can be defended as speech without endorsing it. He claimed state censorship backfires, so civil liberties must apply especially to those we despise.

He knew the distinction.

He articulated it explicitly.

Ten years prior in 2007, Greenwald wrote in Salon that he condemned use of “Nazi” and “Hitler” as political insults.

He claimed that calling out Nazism ran too much risk of error because it “trivializes Nazism and the Holocaust.” He had deployed a no true Scotsman fallacy: the label should require impossibly high proof to prevent application. A shred of doubt is all the Nazi would need to evade detection.

He knew that distinction too, and he weaponized it. He was gatekeeping the label to protect the people who should have been called out instead.

Same move with Fuentes.

The man says “I don’t hate Hitler” and “I believe in a Jewish conspiracy” and Greenwald says that’s not real Nazism, it’s just “provocative rhetoric” about “questioning the Jewish lobby.”

No true Nazi.

It’s the same operation, all the way from 2007 through Hale through Fuentes. Greenwald always has been in the business of trotting out impossibly high standards to prevent a Nazi getting labeled, while defending actual Nazis.

When he launders Nick Fuentes by erasing “I don’t hate Hitler” to create the narrative that he “questioned the Jewish lobby,” he does it again with full knowledge of what he’s doing and more openly than ever.

Early Fascism Warning

Quillette in 2015 published a piece titled “Glenn Greenwald: Fascism’s Fellow Traveller.” At the time, Greenwald was wrapping himself in ACLU-style camouflage. It was effective enough that calling him out for “fascist sympathy” was a tough sell to the liberal media embracing him.

Greenwald is never less than proud to acknowledge the considerable time he has spent as a litigator and writer defending the right of neo-Nazis to air their views.

Ten years later, however, that Quillette analysis reads like a job description.

The accusation that seemed shrill in 2015 became the clear endpoint by 2025. Not because someone was prophetic, but because terminal contrarianism has a logic of its own. When angry opposition to a certain “deep state” is your only fixed principle, you eventually find common cause with those inherently positioned against it.

Nazis hate intelligence, because it exposes the truth.

There’s also an even simpler explanation. Before the Snowden leaks, before the Guardian byline, before the civil liberties positioning, Greenwald spent five years as pro bono lawyer for white supremacist Matt Hale.

Five years.

Greenwald was a self-assigned defender of the leader of the World Church of the Creator, a militant hate organization with the stated goal of eliminating “mud races.” When one of Hale’s followers went on a shooting spree targeting minorities, Greenwald defended them and explained his motivation:

I find that the people behind these lawsuits are truly so odious and repugnant, that creates its own motivation for me.

The people behind those lawsuits, the people Greenwald wanted to fight, were the 1999 shooting victims and their families:

  • Ricky Byrdsong, Black former Northwestern basketball coach, shot dead in front of his children
  • Won-Joon Yoon, Korean graduate student, murdered
  • Two Orthodox Jewish teenagers shot in Rogers Park
  • Rev. Stephen Tracy Anderson, a Black pastor shot three times

A Nazi drove a light blue car through Chicago shooting at Blacks, Asians and Jews. Police said they weren’t sure the Skokie area shootings were a hate crime.

“At this point we’re not jumping to the conclusion that it’s a hate crime,” said Patrick T. Camden, a spokesman for the Chicago Police Department. “All of the elements appear to be there, but until we get the offender, we won’t know.”

No true Nazi.

Greenwald wasn’t just insulting the victims personally. He was actively opposing the right of these shooting victims to seek justice.

A single police officer in 1994 killed the AWB (Nazis) who had been driving around shooting at Black people. It was headline news at the time, because AWB promised civil war to forcibly remove all Blacks from government and instead ended up dead on the side of a road. By comparison, five years later a Nazi in a light blue car started shooting Blacks in Chicago. Glenn Greenwald defended the Nazi and attacked the shooting victims.

Greenwald even told the LA Times that civil rights groups suing white supremacist organizations into bankruptcy was “an abuse of the court system.”

How? Why? Isn’t that the whole point of the court system?

Matt Hale’s white supremacist gun violence to Nick Fuentes’ hate speech is the true and straight line. Everything in between appears as positioning.

Functioning Fascism

Whether Greenwald is a conscious operative, a useful mule, or simply someone whose authentic contrarianism was identified and cultivated, his output has been consistent in targeting: damage to US intelligence capabilities (Snowden), damage to US diplomatic relationships (the leaks that went far beyond domestic surveillance), and now damage to US-Israel alignment.

He seems to never criticize Russia for censorship, for example. Perhaps he hopes to retire there like Snowden.

The extreme American civil liberties framing confused many who saw activities that would otherwise be recognizable as proto-fascist. His appeal with a Guardian byline did work that a direct leak to the Russian media never could. And so in 2025 when it came time to rehabilitate and promote a Holocaust denier, Glenn was ready.

The Reveal

Greenwald didn’t change. He stopped hiding.

The cover pulled in an audience of mainstream liberals who needed civil liberties framing. That audience is gone now, or irrelevant to the Trump administration’s grip on the news. His current chase of viewers needs no pretense—Fuentes followers would be alienated by it anyway.

So the mask comes off.

A Holocaust denier becomes a martyred truth-teller. “I don’t hate Hitler” becomes “provocative rhetoric.” And the man who spent 2007 condemning the trivialization of Nazis by those trying to stop them, now trivializes actual Nazis to ensure they rise to power.

The 2015 Quillette profile turned out to be right.

Extreme right.

You don’t spend five years defending Nazis pro bono, call Nazi shooting victims “odious and repugnant,” fight to protect a Nazi whose follower murdered people in front of their children, and then twenty-five years later pivot to celebrate a Nazi and Holocaust denier as a “generational talent.” Greenwald is as he always was.