A candidate for public office is being criticized by his opposition for his membership in a World War II historical reenactment group.  Sounds harmless enough, right?  After all, historical reenactment groups are nothing particularly unusual.  There's a Civil War reenactment group not far from where we live.  People interested in various periods of history are sometimes led to take that interest and curiosity to a level that some others might find odd, but at the same time interesting and potentially educational.

What's the problem?  The candidate in question was part of a group who's identity was a WWII German SS division (click on the link labeled "Wiking Reenactment Unit - Who we are and what we do").  A photo of the Richard Iott in full SS garb has been raising hackles over the past several days.  

As a historian of sorts, I find this interesting. The complaint is not historical reenactment per se, but rather the particular reenactment of Nazi units.  The Atlantic article linked to above is quick to point out that this sort of reenactment is illegal in Germany and Austria.  There are plenty of things that are illegal there that are not illegal here (such as homeschooling in Germany).  I can certainly understand why the nations that bear the brunt of responsibility for the Nazi atrocities should be particularly keen not to encourage their citizens to reenact those periods.

But should it be questionable here?  I don't think I've ever heard a complaint before about historical reenactment in general (should we be offended that there are groups dedicated to vividly recreating the details of a Confederate division?).  I know people who participate in paint ball battles that are themed around WWII engagements, and they try to dress appropriately, and I'm fairly certain that they aren't closet Nazis.  

Both the web site for Iott's particular division (which he quit three years ago) as well as The World War II Historical Reenactment Society, Inc. (the larger organization Iott's group is a part of) very specifically indicate that ideology is not what is being practiced, pushed, or espoused here.  It's simply guys getting together to re-enact battles.  Granted, guys with some free time and the willingness and ability to accumulate the appropriate clothing, gear, and weapons for the group that they are part of.  Guys do strange things sometimes.  I wanted to join The Society for Creative Anachronisms when I was in college.  Unfortunately, there was the pesky matter of tuition to be paid, and so I ended up joining the working class instead.  C'est la vie.  

Are some things so horrific that even reenactment should be shunned?  Should historical reenactments be viewed as a breeding ground for the particular ideologies that the reenacted groups espoused?  Are Confederate re-enactors secretly wishing to divide the Union still?  Someone reenacting a Communist division is secretly a proponent of Marx and Lenin?  

Or is this an inappropriate overreaction to something being blown out of context and proportion?  Historical reenactment isn't my bag, but I wouldn't be suspicious of those who do find it enjoyable on that basis alone.  Perhaps other details will come to light that might indicate that Iott is more of a sympathizer with the Nazi cause than he appears to be at this point.  But perhaps this sort of publicity will be adequate to hamper his election bid without the necessity of culling his personal history.  Convenient, if indeed there wouldn't be anything incriminating found in that history.  This wouldn't be the first personal smear campaign in American political history.  But it just might be the most unusual one.