We're Watching the Long Overdue Death of the Confederate Flag Happen Before Our Eyes

[Con T.]

Well, that really depends on where you live. Nazism had very little effect outside of Europe (including the Soviet Union in Europe for the sake of argument). It's entirely understandable that someone from an Eastern culture would be aware of the swastika's use by the Nazi regime, yet associate it more closely with either Hinduism or Buddhism.

For example, thumbs-up in America typically indicates approval. If you were to give a thumbs-up to an Italian, you might get punched. Nazism had a massive impact on Western history, but their influence in the East was very limited.

In the case of the Confederate Flag, the issue we're going through is that we have two groups who associate it with different things, and those groups live in close enough proximity to each other that there's reason to debate the meaning of the symbol. The hang-up we're having is that it was a symbol adopted specifically for a racist cause (opposition to the CRA), and over time the use of code words has muddled the meaning as people grew up around those code words and took them literally.

Fair, but most people with a knowledge of what happened during WW2 realize what the swastika stands for. I totally get what Navdeep is saying. What bothers me is the idea that the idea that the swastika, in no way, has any connotation to the Germans and Nazis.

In short, Smark Madden is dumb.

 

[Барбоса]

Well, that really depends on where you live. Nazism had very little effect outside of Europe (including the Soviet Union in Europe for the sake of argument). It's entirely understandable that someone from an Eastern culture would be aware of the swastika's use by the Nazi regime, yet associate it more closely with either Hinduism or Buddhism.

For example, thumbs-up in America typically indicates approval. If you were to give a thumbs-up to an Italian, you might get punched. Nazism had a massive impact on Western history, but their influence in the East was very limited.

Absolutely, but it would still be wilfully ignorant to ignore that alternative association or meaning, particularly when it comes to such an overwhelmingly negative association.

Both the swastika and Confederate flag suffer in a similar way. The former was for millennia used in various connotations, cultures and sciences either as a pattern or symbol but a lot of that gets washed away by the negative. It will be very difficult to reclaim it and it will probably never return to the largely unknown symbol it was in the West of 1920.

The latter is less forgivable as it was always associated with a rebellion interested in retaining slavery, even if there is the argument of states right and fighting tyranny.

 

[Navdeep]

Fair, but most people with a knowledge of what happened during WW2 realize what the swastika stands for. I totally get what Navdeep is saying. What bothers me is the idea that the idea that the swastika, in no way, has any connotation to the Germans and Nazis.

In short, Smark Madden is dumb.

Actually I was replying to a poster who was saying that it is a symbol of evil and hatred.
But in reality in Hinduism and Buddhism it is symbol of peace and good luck and I still remember when I was small my mother use to make swastika on doors and floor in big festivals and celebration.

 

[Rayne]

Actually I was replying to a poster who was saying that it is a symbol of evil and hatred.
But in reality in Hinduism and Buddhism it is symbol of peace and good luck and I still remember when I was small my mother use to make swastika on doors and floor in big festivals and celebration.

In reality, it's also a symbol of a regime that murdered millions of people for an ideology of racial superiority.

Both sides are right here. The major difference between the symbols of the swastika and the Confederate flag is that in the case of the former, there is a massive geographical and cultural separation between groups who disagree about it, and in the case of the latter, there's no geographical separation and the cultural separation is incredibly small, leading to conflict over the meaning of the symbol.

Navdeep, would you display your swastika bracelet while walking down 72nd Street in New York?

 

[Navdeep]

In reality, it's also a symbol of a regime that murdered millions of people for an ideology of racial superiority.

Both sides are right here. The major difference between the symbols of the swastika and the Confederate flag is that in the case of the former, there is a massive geographical and cultural separation between groups who disagree about it, and in the case of the latter, there's no geographical separation and the cultural separation is incredibly small, leading to conflict over the meaning of the symbol.

Navdeep, would you display your swastika bracelet while walking down 72nd Street in New York?

I live in India.
You are right but what I am trying to say that swastika is itself a Sanskrit word , a language which is used by Hindus meaning good luck or luck shines upon you, it has nothing to do with racial supremacy and what I don't understand how come Christian ideologies and Bible get pass which was used by Hitler but Swastika a Sanskrit language( If I am not wrong there is no English word for swastika ) word symbol don't.

 

[Барбоса]

The symbol that became known as the swastika has various origins, uses and names.

Indeed, it is far older than the Indus Valley civilisations, showing again how the use and interpretation of a symbol can change.

I don't know where Hitler got it from but as it has been used in Greek and particularly Roman design, where a lot of fascist symbolism came from, it is quite possible that he did not know it as an eastern symbol.

EDIT: Seems the swastika had become linked to the Aryan race even before Hitler appropriated it.

 

[Rayne]

I live in India.
You are right but what I am trying to say that swastika is itself a Sanskrit word , a language which is used by Hindus meaning good luck or luck shines upon you, it has nothing to do with racial supremacy and what I don't understand how come Christian ideologies and Bible get pass which was used by Hitler but Swastika a Sanskrit language( If I am not wrong there is no English word for swastika ) word symbol don't.

Wrong tense there. It had nothing to do with racial supremacy. Then a very powerful group adopted it as their symbol, and half of the world's population now associates it first with Nazism, and somewhere way down the line, its original meaning. Prior to the Nazi Party, appearances of the swastika in Western Civilization were very rare primarily associated with the Roman and Greek cultures of antiquity. Sorry, India, but you'll never convince a German that they should associate a swastika with Hinduism or Buddhism.

English has a word for swastika- it's called "swastika". English takes other languages and mugs them in dark alleys for their grammar.

The reason Christianity "gets a pass" is that it was already extremely dominant in Western culture- far more so than Nazism; and the symbol of the cross stayed predominantly associated with Christian churches.

 

[Navdeep]

The symbol that became known as the swastika has various origins, uses and names.

Indeed, it is far older than the Indus Valley civilisations, showing again how the use and interpretation of a symbol can change.

I don't know where Hitler got it from but as it has been used in Greek and particularly Roman design, where a lot of fascist symbolism came from, it is quite possible that he did not know it as an eastern symbol.

EDIT: Seems the swastika had become linked to the Aryan race even before Hitler appropriated it.

Yes swastika has been used by aryan and the word swastika come from language Sanskrit which was used by Aryans and most of the Hindus are descendent of Aryan race and in our Aryan and Hindu's tradition this symbol is simple good luck charm and its meaning is also lucky or good fortune.

 

[Барбоса]

Yes swastika has been used by aryan and the word swastika come from language Sanskrit which was used by Aryans and most of the Hindus are descendent of Aryan race and in our Aryan and Hindu's tradition this symbol is simple good luck charm and its meaning is also lucky or good fortune.

And the Aryans are also the predecessors/brethren of some of the peoples in Eastern Europe, where the oldest swastikas have been found so far.

 

[Reflection]

Just, you know, don't be shocked
when you wind up looking really
dumb.

...and I took it upon myself to
your idiocy, and make it short form.
But you really want the long form of
stupidity...

Or, is it more likely a case of
fucktruck over here clutching to his
insulated point of view, by grasping
at straws?

God damn it, I just let that moron
Smark Madden into the conversation,
didn't I?

You know... fitting into what is otherwise a completely garbage comment, a quick insult to your opponent (or towards someone that didn't even participate in the discussion), doesn't help at all in changing its quality. It still remains garbage.

In short, Smark Madden is dumb.

Hmmm... Maybe so, but it seems like you're not too far ahead either

Your feels for the confederate flag, essentially, mean jack squat.

And so does yours about the swastika.

Dude; I'm Jewish

That explains... a lot.
Listen my friend, you guys are not the only ones with a history of pain; we were pretty much enslaved by people representing, wielding, flaunting, and converting to the cross, for 200 years. Extremist groups with flags containing the shahada kill thousands each year... And yes, we have read stories of the misdoings of the Nazis and KKK.
However, we don't classify the swastika, cross or the shahada as hate symbols. We accept that the association of these symbols with hate groups are a misrepresentation. They cannot change what these symbols really stand for. Hitler and his group are finished. The darkness cannot outdo the light. You too should accept this and move on, and start looking at things with a more open mind.

We can have different interpretations of this symbol, but it does no good to pretend the other element of its history doesn't exist.

One one side, you have a good history representing goodness and auspiciousness that has existed for thousands of years for billions of people of multiple religions and multiple countries, and is still in practice. On the other end, you have a bad history representing mass murders (anti-semitism?) that lasted for less than 30 years over half a century ago... We are not ignoring the effect Nazism had on the perception of the Swastika, or the atrocities they committed; we just want you to practice what you preached and accept that there is a good history to it as well, and abandon the narrow viewpoint that it is a symbol of hate. It's not too difficult if you are willing to try.

 

[Reflection]

My browser tends to crash a lot, so I won't be able to quote the exact posts, but I noticed two interesting questions... one of them was actually a statement.
The first was something along the lines of "Sorry Indians, but you cannot convince a German to associate the Swastika with Hinduism or Buddhism."
We are not trying to do that. Or rather, I, I guess I should speak for myself. How many Germans are there in this thread anyway? 90% are Americans. 2 Indians, including myself, and maybe one or two guys from other countries.
I recall reading a note, or a memoir, if you will... written by an Indian lady living in USA. She was buying antiques with her daughter. They spotted a flower vase with a swastika drawn on it, and decided to buy that. As they were paying, they overheard fellow customers whispering about how they were probably supporters of Nazism and evil people. Instead of getting angry, the lady explained to them about what it originally meant and what it represents in our culture. Their response were we in the form of "Oh.. we did not know that, is that so?" and not "It doesn't matter. It's a hate symbol now and your ancient custom doesn't matter!" as is the case here in WZ Forums.
Reading about that incident led me to conclude that most of the negative perception about the swastika, stems from the lack of knowledge that there is another meaning to it. If explained, I'm sure the majority of people would choose the good history over the evil one, to base their present opinion of the symbol on. The children too should be taught the actual meaning of the symbols in school, so that they don't learn only the negative side of things.

The second interesting thing I noticed was the question whether Navdeep would walk in a particular street of New York City (?) wearing a pendant or symbol of the swastika...
I am not Navdeep, but if I had one such chain or bracelet, yes I would wear it wherever I go.. unless it was legally prohibited, or if I felt that the people of that area were both ignorant and aggressive. If a (normal) person questioned me about it in a grocery store or in the bus, I would try to explain to that person what it really represents, like the lady in the above story did. If the person is a Jew, I'd say the same thing that I said to the poster above- to accept that it has a good history too and move on, and express my sorrow for his community's history.

 

[Rayne]

Smark, you didn't read a damned word of the whole freakin' essay I wrote about the meaning and variance of symbology in different cultures. Go reload your browser and try this again.

 

[Con T.]

Smark, you didn't read a damned word of the whole freakin' essay I wrote about the meaning and variance of symbology in different cultures. Go reload your browser and try this again.

Allow me to point to an important element, please?

Wrong tense there. It had nothing to do with racial supremacy. Then a very powerful group adopted it as their symbol, and half of the world's population now associates it first with Nazism, and somewhere way down the line, its original meaning. Prior to the Nazi Party, appearances of the swastika in Western Civilization were very rare primarily associated with the Roman and Greek cultures of antiquity. Sorry, India, but you'll never convince a German that they should associate a swastika with Hinduism or Buddhism.

Right here, Smark. This is my problem with you. When you stated a few weeks ago that viewing the swastika as a symbol of mass murder (of mypeople, you twit) is ignorant, I realized that you were doing so from a place that doesn't understand the rest of the world's perspective, and was looking at it from a fairly myopic point of view. Yes, I recognize the swastika is a sign of peace. I'm sorry the symbol has been perverted the way it has been.

But to not recognize it as a defamatory sign (especially when the Anti-Defamation League does) is refusing to understand the atrocities that were committed under that symbol.

This isn't about comparing the symbols from two different cultures. I recognize your right to see it as a symbol of peace. However, based on this post of yours;

That same ignorance again. It still is a sacred symbol, and is widely used here. Nobody sees this as a symbol of hate, and nobody should. Only people with skewed and limited knowledge would see it that way. The KKK used the Christian cross in its flag. Numerous terrorist organisations use the Islamic shahada in their flags. It doesn't imply, at least to someone willing to learn beyond what they have been (incorrectly) taught, that the cross or the shahada are symbols of hate. The issue is not the population of Jews, but the population of ignorant people.

You seem incapable of seeing how I can view the symbol as one of an atrocity. Neither of our views are wrong. But you come off rather daft when you refuse to acknowledge the atrocities carried out under that symbol.

 

[Reflection]

Smark, you didn't read a damned word of the whole freakin' essay I wrote about the meaning and variance of symbology in different cultures. Go reload your browser and try this again.

The one where you made claims like the Swastika still being a symbol of racial supremacy, half of the world's population associating it with Nazism, or the appearances of the swastika being extremely rare in western civilization prior to Nazism, and finally ended with a pathetic and hypocritical reasoning for not viewing the Cross in the same light even though it was associated with the KKK (another group representing racial supremacy)?
I did, actually. And I'm regretful for actually heeding your advice and reading through it for a second time. See, if I wanted to read fiction, I would be browsing fanfiction.net, not the WZ Symposium.

First of all, Hitler is dead. Nazism is dead. The prevalence of the usage of swastika to denote racial "purification," is dead as well. The only purpose for which it is widely used in the present day is to denote good luck and positivity. Now if you still want to view it as a representation of something that died 70 years ago... then I there is nothing I can say.
Secondly, the total population of the world is 7.2 billion. The population of Asia alone is 4.4 billion. I'm not even considering the open-minded folk from the rest of the world, or the ones from Africa that have probably never heard of the swastika, and we have already crossed 61% which is much more than half. But realistically, there is no way of knowing exactly what percentage of the population of the world view it in a negative light, but it is silly to assume that half of them associate it with Nazism.

Thirdly, the wikipedia article on the Swastika tells me that it was used in Spain, Israel, Germany, England, France, Italy, Denmark, Ireland, Finland, Poland, Latvia, Norway, Bulgaria and Hungary (if they count), Panama, and even in Native American art and iconography, as well as sports teams and an infantry division in USA used the symbol. A town in Ontario, Canada was named after the Swastika. All these facts contradict the false claims in your "essay" that its appearances in western civilization, prior to the Nazi party, were very rare.

Finally, you are an educated person that knows about both the usage of the Swastika by the Nazi party, and the Cross by the KKK. Yet, you are selectively classifying one as a symbol of mass murder and racial superiority, but not the other. Why is the cross getting "a free pass" from you, but not the swastika? Isn't this... a "double standard?"

I'm sorry, Rayne. I'm disappointed; I really expected more from someone like you.

 

[Reflection]

Allow me to point to an important element, please?

Funny how your role has changed from that of the main activist to a cheerleader

Right here, Smark. This is my problem with you.

I hope I will be able to clear it up.

When you stated a few weeks ago that viewing the swastika as a symbol of mass murder (of mypeople, you twit) is ignorant, I realized that you were doing so from a place that doesn't understand the rest of the world's perspective, and was looking at it from a fairly myopic point of view.

No, actually, it was in response to this comment:

No, it was a symbol in Hinduism, Jainism and Buddhism. It's now a symbol of hate, until it isn't.

The above comment reeks of ignorance. If anything is myopic, it is this statement above. My fellow twit, may I request you to not quote my old statements out of context again?
Actually, I was doing so from a place where we are mature enough to understand that a person stealing and misusing an object doesn't change its original motive or significance. And yes, I still maintain that it should no longer be seen as a symbol of hate.

Yes, I recognize the swastika is a sign of peace. I'm sorry the symbol has been perverted the way it has been.

Thank you.

But to not recognize it as a defamatory sign (especially when the Anti-Defamation League does) is refusing to understand the atrocities that were committed under that symbol.

Their motto is "To stop the defamation of the Jewish people…" so its obvious that they would recognize and promote a belief that would appease their target audience.

I am not denying the atrocities committed by Hitler and his party. But they are dead now, and so is anti-semitism against Jews. They stole the symbol from us and misused it, not the other way round. Please understand these things, and accept the swastika for what it is- a good symbol that was misused. Hitler was evil; the symbol wasn't.

You seem incapable of seeing how I can view the symbol as one of an atrocity. Neither of our views are wrong. But you come off rather daft when you refuse to acknowledge the atrocities carried out under that symbol.

I can see why you feel that way. I just wish you could look at it with a more open mind. Forever calling the Swastika a symbol of hate, won't bring back the dead. Since we already know what it represented for 5000 years, it is best if we let this dark chapter exist only in the history books and not let it affect us (or the symbol) in the present. The people who died during that period would probably want us to do the same.

 

[Барбоса]

The suggestion that Nazism and anti-semitism is dead just because Hitler and his cronies were defeated is incredibly naive. Anti-semitism did not appear out o the blue in 1920. It has been around for centuries.

The reason we say that the swastika is still seen as a symbol of hate is that it is still used as such by neo-Nazis and other racists. Unfortunate for the symbol and its adherents but still true.

You also seem to think that it is very easy to simply forget and move on from the swatika's prominent association with the worst thing ever perpetrated by man; something that only happened a single lifetime ago.

You say that people need to be educated in the history of the symbol, which I agree with, but people also need to be educated on the dangers of ultra nationalism and what happened in 1920-1945 and what is front and centre in all that is perpetrated in the name of Nazism? The swastika. Detaching it from those crimes and ideologies, which it is still used in connection with today is far harder that just saying "forget about it" or pointing out its peaceful connotations.

As for the Cross getting a free pass or being able to be reclaimed, it is because it is associated with something very specific and has an institution behind it. The swastika does not in the west and even in the east it seems far more amorphous than the Christian icons.

 

[Rayne]

Finally, you are an educated person that knows about both the usage of the Swastika by the Nazi party, and the Cross by the KKK. Yet, you are selectively classifying one as a symbol of mass murder and racial superiority, but not the other. Why is the cross getting "a free pass" from you, but not the swastika? Isn't this... a "double standard?"

OK, I'm going to take the Star of David. Guess what- it's now a symbol representing free ice cream!

Now, why can't you go to a synagogue and get free ice cream today? Something else you overlooked that I addressed specifically and repeatedly- THE POWER DYNAMIC! As quick as you are to be condescending over shit you clearly didn't read or bother to comprehend, but skimmed and thought you hit the important points, you're totally ignoring the argument that ties those themes together; that a more powerful group can change the meaning of a symbol by adopting it as their own.

Christianity didn't "get a pass" from the KKK; the Christian Church has been drastically more influential than the KKK. The same goes for the swastika's representation in Western culture; Nazism had far more of an effect on Western society than areas of India and Nepal, whose influence on Western society throughout most recent history has been limited to tea shipments and misattributed Gandhi quotes on Facebook. Which is stuff I've said already, but instead of reading you're doing the whole "well I expected more" thing that precludes people from actually making a point.

I'm sure that if you go look on that Wikipedia, you can find evidence of the swastika in use prior to National Socialism, which isn't something I ever denied, but again, you aren't reading. What I said was:

Prior to the Nazi Party, appearances of the swastika in Western Civilization were very rare and primarily associated with the Roman and Greek cultures of antiquity.

That doesn't say "no one ever used the swastika before the Nazi Party". It says that relative to the symbol's explosion in use in the 1930's, it had been used very infrequently. But you aren't fucking reading.

First of all, Hitler is dead. Nazism is dead. The prevalence of the usage of swastika to denote racial "purification," is dead as well. The only purpose for which it is widely used in the present day is to denote good luck and positivity. Now if you still want to view it as a representation of something that died 70 years ago... then I there is nothing I can say.

The only purpose for which it is used widely in the present day, etc. etc.? OK, I can actually prove you wrong, empirically. Make a t-shirt that consists of a big, visible swastika, right in the center of your chest. Put it on, and walk from one end of 72nd Street in NYC to the other. I'll even donate $50 to this cause if you wear a GoPro while you do it. I'm sending you to one of the wealthier areas of the city, mostly because I don't want you to get stabbed over this. The reason why there's nothing you can say is because you know you just finished saying something extremely stupid. This is a natural reaction that people have when they just finished saying something extremely stupid, but realized that they've already said it.

The reason why I asked you to reload your browser and go read what I wrote again was because it was clear you hadn't. It's still clear you haven't, you just skimmed it and thought you got the point. You said yourself "you expected more from me"- that's on you. There was plenty more from me, you just shut your brain off at a certain point and thought you had things figured out.

So next time, instead of this "I expected more" and "I don't know what to say" pedantic bullshit, why not try making a point? Or fuck, making the effort to read other people's points before you address them?

 

[Akhilleus]

To add to that, while it is possible for a positive symbol to be turned into a negative symbol if used be a powerful and large group of people, it is very improbable for a negative symbol to be turned into a positive one the same way. So no, the Confederation Flag can not be changed if the South and the rest of us dominantly try to make it change. Purely because it is a majority mindset, and once the majority of people see that symbol as something negative it becomes very unlikely to go back. While the Swastika at one point was something positive, the Confederate Flag doesn't even have that going for it. It was and always will be a symbol of racism. Or more so the logo for people who support racism.

And the KKK probably use the Confederation Flag more than they do a cross anyway. That is the biggest thing that disgusts me though with the KKK and the West Borough Baptist Church and any of those other ridiculous groups. They use God as a cover and an excuse to do and say horrible things. That they're doing it through God's will. I don't understand that one at all.

Still. Comparing Nazism to the KKK is a little bit of a stretch. You're talking about a group that controlled an entire country and dominated others, compared to a group of rednecks from the South who run around wearing bedsheets. Both of them horrible groups in different ways. The Swastika though will always be considered.a symbol of hate. Adolf Hitler ruined it for youndude. Sorry, but that's how it is. And if you took a world wide pool asking people if their perception on the Swastika is positive or negative, I would bet money that at least more than three quarters say negative. At least...maybe even 90% in the United States. And that's not ever going to change, especially since White Supremacist groups continue to use it to spread their hate propaganda.

 

[Con T.]

Still. Comparing Nazism to the KKK is a little bit of a stretch. You're talking about a group that controlled an entire country and dominated others, compared to a group of rednecks from the South who run around wearing bedsheets.

Duuude; that's kind of minimalizing the damage done by the KKK. Sure, today they're kind of a punchline. But in the 1910s-1920s, they were considered a large political power. Known KKK members were voted into the House and Senate. Not just in southern states, but even in areas like Indiana and Oregon. The rumor flying around is that President Harding was a KKK member, and Harry Truman even joined the Klan at one time (albeit solely for political reasons). No, the KKK may not have the legacy that Nazis did, but they still wield an authority in American history.

 

[Rayne]

If no one is going to make the case that the KKK has been more influential than the Christian Church in Western society, we can safely abandon this line of argument as the ridiculous apples to skyscrapers comparison that it is.

 

[BestSportsEntertainer]

I have a suggestion. The South should invent a new flag that would represent the new South.

For the most part, racism no longer exists in the South. It will never be completely gone, but it's definitely dying.

A new flag should be invented that represents the South. Obviously, it would have no connection to racism.

 

[Rayne]

I have a suggestion. The South should invent a new flag that would represent the new South.

For the most part, racism no longer exists in the South. It will never be completely gone, but it's definitely dying.

A new flag should be invented that represents the South. Obviously, it would have no connection to racism.

That's the thing about symbols; you just can't make up a new one and have it stick. Otherwise, it'd be free ice cream whenever you saw a Star of David.

This is why the ongoing debate over the Confederate flag exists; one group of people believe it stands for one thing, and another group of people believe it stands for another. Neither group is "wrong", although one of them is deliberately shading the history of the Confederate flag for the benefit of their argument. Since there isn't currently a predominant group able to attach a firm meaning to the symbol, this debate will continue until people get bored with it and move onto the next thing.

 

[Reflection]

OK, I'm going to take the Star of David. Guess what- it's now a symbol representing free ice cream!

Not at all. Just because an Ice cream company uses a star as logo or to denote a particular offer, it doesn't mean that the Star of David has automatically become a symbol or representative of the said company or offer.

So I'm guessing that by your logic, the Sun now symbolizes biscuits, since a particular company has used it for as logo/mascot?

As quick as you are to be condescending over shit you clearly didn't read or bother to comprehend, but skimmed and thought you hit the important points, you're totally ignoring the argument that ties those themes together; that a more powerful group can change the meaning of a symbol by adopting it as their own.

Oh no no no no, sir, I comprehended your false claims just fine; they were as clear as day. Please don't give yourself extra credit by further claiming that they meant more than what I picked on.

Christianity didn't "get a pass" from the KKK;

My question was why does the cross get a free pass from YOU when the swastika doesn't, not the KKK. Seems like it is YOU that doesn't read properly before replying.

the Christian Church has been drastically more influential than the KKK. The same goes for the swastika's representation in Western culture; Nazism had far more of an effect on Western society than areas of India and Nepal...

So that's what it's about? Influence? You are viewing the Swastika in a negative light but not the Cross(not that I'm asking you to), just because the cross has had a bigger influence?

...India and Nepal, whose influence on Western society throughout most recent history has been limited to tea shipments and misattributed Gandhi quotes on Facebook.

And scientists and doctors too. 36% of the scientists at NASA are Indians, while 38% of doctors in the USA are Indians. The joke's on you. Enjoy!

Which is stuff I've said already, but instead of reading you're doing the whole "well I expected more" thing that precludes people from actually making a point.

Well no worries... after reading this post of yours, henceforth I shall remind myself of the guideline "Don't have high expectations, or you will be disappointed."

I'm sure that if you go look on that Wikipedia, you can find evidence of the swastika in use prior to National Socialism, which isn't something I ever denied, but again, you aren't reading. What I said was:

You said that appearances of the swastika in Western Civilization were very rare prior to the Nazi party. I provided evidence to show that it was not "very rare" at all, thus disproving your false claim. And as far as its usage being "primarily" associated with the Greek culture (a vague description in itself), the following aricle should show you its presence from Canada to America, Australia and Argentina:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Western_use_of_the_swastika_in_the_early_20th_century

But you aren't fucking reading.

Oh really? Current stats seem to prove otherwise.

The only purpose for which it is used widely in the present day, etc. etc.? OK, I can actually prove you wrong, empirically. Make a t-shirt that consists of a big, visible swastika, right in the center of your chest. Put it on, and walk from one end of 72nd Street in NYC to the other. I'll even donate $50 to this cause if you wear a GoPro while you do it.

That's your proof? That's not a proof, that's a challenge- like Truth or Dare. You have picked an area where people are likely sensitive of the symbol, due to ignorance of what else it can signify (like the other customers in that story that I told earlier). Here's a counter-"proof" for you then... Wear a T-shirt with the Cross "right in the center of your chest" and take a trip to ISIS-controlled Syria or Iraq. I'll pay your $50 back, plus another $9.99 to renew Your WWE Network subscription.

The reason why there's nothing you can say is because you know you just finished saying something extremely stupid. This is a natural reaction that people have when they just finished saying something extremely stupid, but realized that they've already said it.

You must be relating to that feeling all along. But hey, I don't consider you stupid, just angry and trapped inside your own pit.

The reason why I asked you to reload your browser and go read what I wrote again was because it was clear you hadn't. It's still clear you haven't, you just skimmed it and thought you got the point.

All I see is you trying to correct another poster by making factually incorrect and exaggerated claims yourself. Look, I didn't pick on that excuse of an "essay" first. You asked me to go through it a second time, I wished I hadn't, and I explained to you why. Gosh, you just made me go through that atrocious post again. You are a cruel man, Rayne.

You said yourself "you expected more from me"- that's on you.

Yes, totally. I take full responsibility for that.

There was plenty more from me, you just shut your brain off at a certain point and thought you had things figured out.

I just hope that you don't still have plenty more of your false statistics and "proofs," or I'll probably have to shut down my brain for real (somewhat like Arnold did in Terminator 3) because I can't cope up with much more of such nonsense.

So next time, instead of this "I expected more" and "I don't know what to say" pedantic bullshit, why not try making a point? Or fuck, making the effort to read other people's points before you address them?

Okay, let's do an assessment here... In the exchange of dialogue between the two of us, one person tried to explain why the swastika shouldn't be viewed as a symbol of hate, what it actually represented for thousands of years and still represents, why we should try to move on from the past, not forgetting our history, but taking the stigma away from the symbol, a true story about two people's experience, the importance of spreading knowledge and awareness about the symbol, and some corrections to the other poster's claims, and expressed regret over the latter's mistakes.

The other person, started off by making some fabricated claims, then kept asking the first person to read those claims again and again, as if to decode some hidden meaning, talked about Ice Cream, assured that the Star of David now symbolizes free Ice cream, issued a T-shirt challenge and called it proof, called the other person stupid (very typical), answered a question that wasn't even asked, while dodging the one that was actually asked, falsely claimed (not even surprising anymore) that Indian influence on Western society in recent history has been limited to tea shipments and mis-attributed quotes of Gandhi on Facebook, and finally signed off by asking the first poster to go through his pitiful comments again.

It's quite clear by now who is "making a point" and who is simply talking out of his a**. Cheers!

 

[Reflection]

The suggestion that Nazism and anti-semitism is dead just because Hitler and his cronies were defeated is incredibly naive. Anti-semitism did not appear out o the blue in 1920. It has been around for centuries.

What about the usage of the Swastika as a logo for that purpose? I think Hitler decided upon it sometime around the '30s or so (I could be wrong).

The reason we say that the swastika is still seen as a symbol of hate is that it is still used as such by neo-Nazis and other racists. Unfortunate for the symbol and its adherents but still true.

The Shahada is used by many terrorist outfits, yet we (rightfully) don't consider it a symbol of hate or terrorism. Problem is with the mindset.

You also seem to think that it is very easy to simply forget and move on from the swatika's prominent association with the worst thing ever perpetrated by man; something that only happened a single lifetime ago.

I'm not saying forget the people that died. I'm saying forget that the swastika was misused by Hitler and the Nazi party for 30 or so years, and move on from the one-sided view towards it. Continuing to hate the swastika won't bring the dead back or lessen your pain for them. Letting it go from that negative judgment might make your heart a little lighter.

You say that people need to be educated in the history of the symbol, which I agree with, but people also need to be educated on the dangers of ultra nationalism and what happened in 1920-1945 and what is front and centre in all that is perpetrated in the name of Nazism? The swastika.

From the swastika to the shahada, the crescent moon, the om- all these symbols are used by one extremist party or the other. Don't let the negative taint the positive. Educating our next generation about neo-nazism or anything of that sort, shouldn't include the teaching that "that symbol is evil" or "that symbol stands for that terrorist group." When coming to the topic of the swastika, the teaching should start with "The swastika is an ancient symbol from Asia, signifying goodness, auspiciousness..." and so on, before arriving to the fact that Hitler stole and tainted its reputation for a long time <-- these two terms should be made clear to the children as well, otherwise they will learn only half of the facts, which can be more dangerous than not knowing anything at all. At least that's how I feel.
By the way, did Hitler ever say something like "In the name of the Swastika, thou shalt be purified!" (in German, of course)? (Just a general question)

Detaching it from those crimes and ideologies, which it is still used in connection with today is far harder that just saying "forget about it" or pointing out its peaceful connotations.

We should detach it from the negative acts, rather than adding to that negative view, or simply not bothering. When you open a door to a dark room, the light enters that room, the darkness from that room doesn't enter the lighted one.

As for the Cross getting a free pass or being able to be reclaimed, it is because it is associated with something very specific and has an institution behind it. The swastika does not in the west and even in the east it seems far more amorphous than the Christian icons.

The swastika has specific and positive symbolisms too. It may not be as popular, but a person that knows both stories (You, Me or Rayne) shouldn't be saying that one is a symbol of hate, murder etc. and the other is not. This is not a popularity contest between the Cross, Swastika and other symbols. None of these should be viewed as symbols of negative things, because of the acts committed by evil people... especially when these symbols have much older and better meanings.

By the way, sorry for cluttering your inbox with another message, but it would seem like I was talking to the air if I hadn't quoted you. It's like our debate on LBW rules, except you are favouring the status quo and I am calling for a change.

 

[Барбоса]

Ignorance is a problem but when in your half of the world you are far more likely to see it used to represent support for racism, reclaiming an eastern symbol with an amorphous rather that structured meaning falls by the wayside in favour of challenging the racism is it used to represent. Just forgetting that association is not at all straightforward, especially when educating yourself about one side is largely detrimental to the other.

And educating people on the dangers and horrors of ultra nationalism is far more important than reclaiming the swastika as a symbol of peace.

I don't think Hitler ever looked to associate the swastika with anti-Semitism itself - he used it as a symbol of Aryanism, which it has already begun to be associated with in the early 20th century, but as the most infamous of Nazi policies it has come to be associated with anti-Semitism since.

I would say that plenty of ignorant people across the world associate the shahada with religious extremism and that number will continue to rise as the like of IS slaughter their way through various populations.

Again, we are not saying that the swastika should be seen as a symbol of hate, but it most definitely is seen that way. And again detaching it from two of the worst things ever to happen in human history, particularly when the swastika's original meaning is largely abstract, even decorative.

The sheer weight of horrors perpetrated under banners festooned with it (continue to be) was essentially washed away any original connotation of the swastika in the west. There is almost nothing to reclaim here.