Rubio stages font coup: Times New Roman ousts Calibri

Leaders and typefaces:

In 1941 Adolf Hitler personally gave order to make the use of the Antiqua mandatory and forbade the use of Fraktur and Schwabacher typefaces.

https://ligaturix.de/bormann.htm

Fascism relies on politicisation of aesthetic

See V is for Vendetta, I would argue there is a sort of seduction in the Baudrillard sense involved.

If you read the article, Calibri usage was instituted during the Biden administration. So, there's probably a diversity of government styles that get involved with typefaces.

Forgive my ignorance but this seems to be one of the most neutral things Hitler did. He just didn't like the font so he ordered it to be changed. Equivalent to your boss ordering tabs be used instead of spaces. After the war was lost the arguments just continued. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Antiqua%E2%80%93Fraktur_disput...

I tend to agree with you, many people are passionate about typefaces, and dictators are no exception. [Passion about typeface] seems to be a low-signal detector for dictators. I'm passionate about lasagna, and I'll bet Mussolini was too -- but that probably doesn't mean I'm a fascist.

Yeah it was so the occupied peoples could read the edicts better. Sp perhaps not so neutral, after all.

How is that downvoted? You can’t seriously disagree?

Calibri is designed for screen use and Times New Roman for printing. As usually, there is a practical option and conservative option.

But stakes are quite low here. Some bureaucrats will have nearly undetectably harder time to read Trump speaches

Nope. That choice wasn't for aesthetic reasons.

“I want a new font so it’s easier to read” isn’t neutral?

Not when you are the aggressor in WW2?

I guess if Russia invaded Western Europe and Putin decided to switch from Cyrillic to Latin script so the subjugated peoples would more easily read and learn Russian, that would be neutral too?

It didn't happen in isolation though. There were a few changes that used aesthetics as a culture influence and what being properly German should mean. Another one which was more explicit was music https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Music_in_Nazi_Germany It was literally anti the idea of diversity and inclusion. Much like this change.

And just like with the font, that shaped preferences for years.

While you'll get no argument from me about the Biden government being fascist adjacent, no. The font was chosen by that government for accessibility reasons. The font has now been changed for purely aesthetic reasons, attaching the politics of anti-DEIA to a particular aesthetic (serifed fonts).

As for the politics of that government, a history lesson; In 1930s Germany, Liberals did nothing to abort the rise of NSDAP, seeing them as economic allies if not political allies. They sold out their country and turned a blind eye to genuine evil for profit and the reduction of the political influence of their workforce.

That's still using their other culture choices to manufacture a problem with producing consistency in typeface. It's a stretch. Any good (don't take this out of context, please) leader will settle these kinds of trivial internal disputes and move onto important problems.

That isn’t a genuine argument.

Font face != different language + different alphabet.

Font, still a bad argument but technically correct. Font face, nah.

As they say, "Hitler drank water."

Serif fonts are easier to read, so now I guess you have to invert your mind as to who is a fascist and who is a liberator?

I rather assumed so as well, but a big of digging turns up a whole history: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Antiqua%E2%80%93Fraktur_disput...

Surprisingly to me the Fraktur typeface was the traditional "German" typeface but was disliked by Hitler.

Fraktur actually does use a partially different alphabet. For example it uses the Long s: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Long_s and Half-r: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/R_rotunda

Ooh ya got me.

Not. The problem is not even about which font is actually more accessible. It's the self proclaimed reasoning. Rubio, by his own words, states that the change is about aesthetics and anti DEIA politics.

However, if you want to argue about actual accessibility, which is not what is happening in the Dept. of State, the US government's own accessibility guidelines contradict the idea that Serif fonts are more accessible; https://www.section508.gov/develop/fonts-typography/

Do you happen to know anyone with a reading disability at all? A dear friend of mine has dyslexia, and I've seen first hand how important this stuff is for his comprehension.

Should text be made less accessible to read for everybody else, in order to accommodate people with dyslexia? Because everybody who reads a lot prefers serif fonts, since they are easier to read. That's why books are printed in serifs.

Since it's all digital, this all shouldn't be a problem in 2025.

(We detached this comment from https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=46224867. It's fine and interesting, but the offtopicness of you-know-who is a bit too agitating at the top of the thread.)

About the "bad argument", I can't argue with you, because I'm not the one arguing. You'll have to take it up with the author of these lines:

"In a hundred years, our language will be the European language. The nations of the east, the north and the west will, to communicate with us, learn our language. The prerequisite for this: The script called Gothic is replaced by the script we have called Latin so far"

(Besides, what's so strange about transposing Cyrillic to Latin? It happens all the time even today when people don't want to or can't switch keyboard layouts.)

> He just didn't like the font so he ordered it to be changed.

There is your answer. He imposed his will - that's what dictators do. You have to be careful when the reason for any costly change is one individual's personal preferences. It's a bad omen.

> Equivalent to your boss ordering tabs be used instead of spaces.

That's not always equivalent, especially if it is to set a standard. Obviously, some people using spaces and the others using tabs is not ideal in situations you're referring to. It's also fine to change the standard, if they find a significant problem with the current convention. But if your boss wants it changed, and their only explanation is their dislike of the status-quo, then that's a red flag. The problem isn't very serious right now, but could grow into one in the future and you have to be on the watch.

I'm not sure why you mention consistency. The cable explicitly says it's a) for the decorum and b) anti dei. That's literally the same reason for the music restrictions - that's why I'm bringing it up.

But if you go around and tell everyone you meet that they're doing it wrong and that lasagna MUST be prepared exactly the way you do it, because it's the one and only right way, then you're a lasagna-nazi :)