No Holds Barred Thread - Post Anything That Is On Your Mind, Even the Politically Incorrect!

[Len Cnut]

Just now, Dazey said:

If we’re going to invoke ancient traditions and cultural norms I’m bringing back some Ancient Greek and I’m off out on the nonce. I’m sure that’ll stand up in court.  

Come on McLeod, surely you must get me, its not like something ancient that suddenly arrived in the today, they been using it and doing it before during and since the Nazi's, have you honestly seen it in the buddhist or Chinese context in England and been offended or thought it insensitive, really?

[downzy]

7 minutes ago, Len Cnut said:

Well there's a difference there because n!gger means n!gger in English or Hindi, whereas the swastika is a religious symbol that simply means something else and has meant something else since way beyond the Nazi's.  And honestly, I don't think the Hindu usage does make anyone else uncomfortable.  Never heard it mentioned before now, its not something the Simon Wiesenthal Centre or any Jewish group or committee has highlighted and why would they, because it simply doesn't mean the same thing.  See The Sex Pistols using it, THAT is offensive in the manner you are talking about because its being used in the context and form of the Nazi one, Hindu's simply aren't doing that.  And it was there's first.

Well, the n word example was a hypothetical.  Again, it's a matter of time and place.  I come from a place where the symbol and word is highly associated with hate and evil.  Even though I know it means something else to Indians, I'm still going to have a reflexive and visceral response to seeing it prominently displayed.  Judgement is reserved considering where I stood in various parts of India (though I didn't see it much, mostly in temple areas).  Again, it's why I think Jewish groups don't take issue with it in regions of the world where the symbol was not corrupted.  But again, we're not talking about India here.  We're talking about a country that has a strong association with the symbol.  If a small few want to hold onto a different association, then they're welcome to do so.  But the rest of us have the right to think of them as assholes who can't respect the fact that for the dominant majority its use and reference is highly offensive.  You can claim you hold a different association, but doing so ignores the stigma around the symbol for most people.

11 minutes ago, Len Cnut said:

it doesn't look exactly like the Nazi one, the Nazi one is turned on its side and inverted:

While in Goa I saw various forms of the symbol at shrines.  Some were tilted and while not inverted, the resemblance was strong enough.  

[soon]

In fact the Co-Op movements flag is a rainbow and the gays stole it from us. But no one cares.

 

EDIT: Also, I just walked by a Buddhist centre with swastikas on it while doing errands.

Edited September 26, 2020 by soon

[EvanG]

20 minutes ago, Len Cnut said:

 and think 'fuckin' Nazi's man, in our neighbourhood

Needless to say no one thinks they are Nazis, but I think some people aren't comfortable seeing a symbol that a group of people also used who are responsible for the worst genocide in recent history.

Edited September 26, 2020 by EvanG

[DieselDaisy]

48 minutes ago, Ace Nova said:

I've done some research on it as well and recently discovered that it's been primarily a Hindu symbol and has been used for thousands of years prior to Hitler taking it over.

The real question is (and I'm sure you can tell us) is why did Hitler (or the nazis) use that particular symbol?

 

Aryan myth hocus pocus. Seeing as the swastika has been found in ancient Europe also, the theory goes that it was a symbol used by the Aryan race who migrated across the continent. 

 

[Len Cnut]

1 minute ago, downzy said:

Well, the n word example was a hypothetical.  Again, it's a matter of time and place.  I come from a place where the symbol and word is highly associated with hate and evil.  Even though I know it means something else to Indians, I'm still going to have a reflexive and visceral response to seeing it prominently displayed.  Judgement is reserved considering where I stood in various parts of India (though I didn't see it much, mostly in temple areas).  Again, it's why I think Jewish groups don't take issue with it in regions of the world where the symbol was not corrupted.  But again, we're not talking about India here.  We're talking about a country that has a strong association with the symbol.  If a small few want to hold onto a different association, then they're welcome to do so.  But the rest of us have the right to think of them as assholes who can't respect the fact that for the dominant majority its use and reference is highly offensive.  You can claim you hold a different association, but doing so ignores the stigma around the symbol for most people.

While in Goa I saw various forms of the symbol at shrines.  Some were tilted and while not inverted, the resemblance was strong enough.  

I must just be some kinda slack jawed hippie liberal, I dunno.  All said I respect the fact that you find it offensive because The Shoah was about as obscene an aberration on the human conscience as I can imagine but when I see it, in a Hindu context, it simply doesn't evoke that response but if it does in you thats fair enough man.  And its not like I don't understand what you're saying, I got a tattoo in urdu on my arm, from a long time ago, it has the word 'Allah' in urdu on it, which is the same as it is in Arabic, which, again, is something on the ISIS flag and I gotta say, post 9/11 and ISIS etc I've been kinda sensitive about it because I don't want to offend/give people the wrong idea.  I shouldn't have to but then shouldn't is an abstraction isn't it, shouldn't is an imaginary world.  

But honestly, in the Hindu context, I just don't feel that way.  I would have to deliberately want to have a go at em for me to do that.  I don't feel that 1.2 billion Hindu's should have to be responsible for my cultural baggage anymore than I should have to be for any number of people who might find the sight of Allah written in Arabic on my arm inciteful, in the same way a Muslim shouldn't feel incited by the site of a hotdog stand or a Hindu at the fact that its their God that I'm eating in my Big Mac.

But as I say, reflexive visceral reactions, especially those to something that are related to a humanitarian tragedy such as the Shoah, are not things to be made light of so...yeah, if you feel that way in defence of something like that then I won't be the one to call you wrong for it, the essence is righteous even if the channel is, in my opinion, slightly misguided. 

I just think that logic should supersede knee-jerk emotion whenever possible.  

[DieselDaisy]

52 minutes ago, downzy said:

It doesn't matter when the town was named.  The symbol and term has been corrupted.  Almost everyone in North America and Western Europe feel this way. 

You do realize that Nazis still use the swastika, right?  It's not as if its association with Nazism ended in 1945.  

Maybe we should be better by not invoking the worst memories and moments in human history through the employment of the name and imagery of that time.  Your concern for the fairness of a symbol at the expense of the offence seems so perverse to me.  Why do you give a fuck what so many people see and feel when they see the symbol?  You're right it had a previous connotation, but that connotation died along with the 6 million Jews the Nazis killed.  

The Nazis would be happy with you that you so identify this ancient symbol with their movement. You are literally legitimizing Nazism in the year 2020 (and rather having a shit on the religio-culture and linguistics of Asia). Congratulations.

I do not see the swastika (emblem) as being corrupted. One can see it on stunning architecture today throughout the Far East. Why would anyone see it as corrupt? Only extreme ignorance and western myopia can lead one to believe that. 

It is malicious however if it is affixed to a Blutfahne and is carried by a bunch of nationalistic-racialist rednecks or skinheads, but then that is not what we are discussing. We are discussing a town whose naming commenced before the commencement of Nazism.

[downzy]

9 minutes ago, DieselDaisy said:

The Nazis would be happy with you that you so identify this ancient symbol with their movement. You are literally legitimizing Nazism in the year 2020 (and rather having a shit on the religio-culture and linguistics of Asia). Congratulations.

Right...  It's my fault that Nazis are legitimate because I object to a town keeping the name Swastika, despite the fact that almost every living person outside of the town identify and associate the name and symbol with the evil and hateful organizations that still to do this day use this symbol as their brand.

9 minutes ago, DieselDaisy said:

I do not see the swastika (emblem) as being corrupted. One can see it on stunning architecture today throughout the Far East. Why would anyone see it as corrupt? Only extreme ignorance and western myopia can lead one to believe that.

Most people from Western Europe or North America don't travel to the Far East to look at architecture.  Their only exposure to it is the repeated references in history books and continual usage of it by white supremacist and nazi organizations in contemporary times.

9 minutes ago, DieselDaisy said:

It is malicious however if it is affixed to a Blutfahne and is carried by a bunch of nationalistic-racialist rednecks or skinheads, but then that is not what we are discussing. We are discussing a town whose naming commenced before the commencement of Nazism.

So they can claim to want to keep the name if they want.  And myself and others can see them as self-righteous assholes blind to the fact that the name and symbol means something entirely different to nearly everyone else.   

[EvanG]

2 minutes ago, DieselDaisy said:

I do not see the swastika (emblem) as being corrupted. One can see it on stunning architecture today throughout the Far East. Why would anyone see it as corrupt? Only extreme ignorance and western myopia can lead one to believe that. 

I realize this is a hypothetical question, and maybe impossible to answer, but let's say almost your entire family was killed by the Nazis, would you feel comfortable looking at a building with a swastika that will without a doubt remind you of the Nazis?

[DieselDaisy]

19 minutes ago, EvanG said:

Needless to say no one thinks they are Nazis, but I think some people aren't comfortable seeing a symbol that a group of people also used who are responsible for the worst genocide in recent history.

I don't mean to sound harsh but that is rather their problem. Their ignorance of an image which, in the form used by Indians say, has nothing to do with a movement that occurred in Germany 1933-45 is leading them to this being offended. Do you expect Indians to remove their indigenous beliefs because of this stupidity?

[DieselDaisy]

2 minutes ago, EvanG said:

I realize this is a hypothetical question, and maybe impossible to answer, but let's say almost your entire family was killed by the Nazis, would you feel comfortable looking at a building with a swastika that will without a doubt remind you of the Nazis?

I probably wouldn't feel comfortable if I was not informed as to its origin and true purpose. If I was adequately informed then it would not make me feel uncomfortable.

[soon]

I think the swastika has a unique meaning in Falun Gong maybe?

In Falun Gong they are focused on generating an energy in their bodies, called Dafa (iirc).

They do this, in part, by practicing a seven-part tai chi like movement meditation.

The movements essentially gather the energy around them, wipes it over themselves, before finally being brought to their stomachs where the invisible energy is swirled over their stomach. And once the Dafa is in their system, flowing in a circular orbit they sit to meditate.

As far as I understand it, their use of the swastika is a depiction of the Dafa flowing in a circle with in them.

[downzy]

25 minutes ago, Len Cnut said:

I must just be some kinda slack jawed hippie liberal, I dunno.  All said I respect the fact that you find it offensive because The Shoah was about as obscene an aberration on the human conscience as I can imagine but when I see it, in a Hindu context, it simply doesn't evoke that response but if it does in you thats fair enough man.

Perhaps because your exposure to the symbol has less association with Nazism than most in western culture. 

It's the same way I felt about seeing caged dogs when I was in Hong Kong thirty years ago.  For me dogs are pets, so to see them being prepped for dinner was really unsettling.  But that was the way of life in Hong Kong so as much as it bothered me I didn't judge those who ate the animal.  The same applied to when I saw the amount of garbage that litters most Indian cities.  My western sensibilities were thrown off watching wondering cows chew through plastic bags.  But I also understood that if I only had a couple of bucks to live on I probably wouldn't give much thought to where my garbage ended up.  So when I saw the swastikas in Goa, it threw me back, but I also understood that they held different meanings since the association to Nazism wasn't present.

25 minutes ago, Len Cnut said:

I just think that logic should supersede knee-jerk emotion whenever possible.

I don't necessarily disagree.  But understand that in North America the only time you see a swastika is if it's being waved by some skinhead moron or in a cultural product or history book that stresses the association with Nazism.  It only means one thing here.  The people living in Swastika Ontario are free to claim all they want that it means something else to them, but the rest of us feel differently and see them as being selfish and self-righteous.  

[EvanG]

2 minutes ago, DieselDaisy said:

I don't mean to sound harsh but that is rather their problem. Their ignorance of an image which, in the form used by Indians say, has nothing to do with a movement that occurred in Germany 1933-45 is leading them to this being offended. Do you expect Indians to remove their indigenous beliefs because of this stupidity?

I wouldn't want to upset anyone by using something that has become so much associated with the holocaust, whether that is rightfully so or not, it is what it is.

4 minutes ago, DieselDaisy said:

I probably wouldn't feel comfortable if I was not informed as to its origin and true purpose. If I was adequately informed then it would not make me feel uncomfortable.

That's being very rational again. If I were in that situation, I don't know how that would make me feel, regardless of how well informed I was about the swastika. It's what I was saying earlier, emotion and rationality don't really go hand in hand.

[DieselDaisy]

5 minutes ago, downzy said:

Right...  It's my fault that Nazis are legitimate because I object to a town keeping the name Swastika, despite the fact that almost living outside of the town identify and associate the name and symbol with the evil and hateful organizations that still to do this day use this symbol as their brand.

I didn't say that. I said that you are choosing to continue the association that the Nazis established: that the Swastika is intrinsically linked to Nazism. The Nazis would be in firm agreement with you. They also were not especially concerned with the Eastern religious dimension. 

8 minutes ago, downzy said:

Most people from Western Europe or North America don't travel to the Far East to look at architecture.  Their only exposure to it is the repeated references in history books and continual usage of it by white supremacist and nazi organizations in contemporary times.

What utter nonsense. Too contemptible to warrant a reply.

9 minutes ago, downzy said:

So they can claim to want to keep the name if they want.  And myself and others can see them as righteous assholes blind to the fact that the name and symbol means something entirely different to nearly everyone else.   

And I and others can then accuse you in return of basing this accusation (''asshole'') on utter stupidity. Historic stupidity. Linguistic stupidity. Cultural-aesthetic stupidity. 

Returning to the linguistic dimension, what is your opinion on Führer being used today in German compounds? 

[downzy]

6 minutes ago, DieselDaisy said:

I didn't say that. I said that you are choosing to continue the association that the Nazis established: that the Swastika is intrinsically linked to Nazism. The Nazis would be in firm agreement with you. They also were not especially concerned with the Eastern religious dimension. 

It's not just me though.  Almost everyone in Western Europe and North America views the symbol as corrupted.  For myself and most others, there is not reviving the term and symbol.  One too many people died under that banner to ever bring back its original association for the vast majority of people who live in Europe and North America.

6 minutes ago, DieselDaisy said:

What utter nonsense. Too contemptible to warrant a reply.

Have you been to the US?  Most Americans and Canadians have never traveled to Asia and wouldn't be aware of other associations.  

6 minutes ago, DieselDaisy said:

And I and others can then accuse you in return of basing this accusation (''asshole'') on utter stupidity. Historic stupidity. Linguistic stupidity. Cultural-aesthetic stupidity. 

Fine.  If you want to be on record as calling anyone who views the term and symbol in the pejorative sense as stupid, so be it.  If this is the ground you want to make your stand on, far be it for me to deny your place.   

[DieselDaisy]

1 minute ago, EvanG said:

I wouldn't want to upset anyone by using something that has become so much associated with the holocaust, whether that is rightfully so or not, it is what it is.

That's being very rational again. If I were in that situation, I don't know how that would make me feel, regardless of how well informed I was about the swastika. It's what I was saying earlier, emotion and rationality don't really go hand in hand.

But surely it is equally offensive to imply to an Indian, whose culture has been using the good luck omen for thousands of years, that there is some sort of association with a load of Euro-centric nonsense that only appeared in 1919 (with antecedents)?

On the latter - if I had been informed - I would have clearly divided the Blutfahne from the oriental imagery. I would clearly be able to distinguish between a Buddha and a bunch of goose-stepping blondies. But I understand your point, the breaking down of rationality when faced with suffering - some people may find it difficult. There is no adequate solution - what do you propose? The debate actually didn't concern the emblem but the word, and that town was named before the NSDAP were even founded. 

[EvanG]

2 minutes ago, DieselDaisy said:

But surely it is equally offensive to imply to an Indian, whose culture has been using the good luck omen for thousands of years, that there is some sort of association with a load of Euro-centric nonsense that only appeared in 1919 (with antecedents)?

On the latter - if I had been informed - I would have clearly divided the Blutfahne from the oriental imagery. I would clearly be able to distinguish between a Buddha and a bunch of goose-stepping blondies. But I understand your point, the breaking down of rationality when faced with suffering - some people may find it difficult. There is no adequate solution - what do you propose? The debate actually didn't concern the emblem but the word, and that town was named before the NSDAP were even founded. 

I think it's a difficult discussion. I don't have a problem with the swastika either (as long as it's not the Nazi one obviously), but I can relate to certain people who are deeply affected by the war and who might have an issue with it. I'm not saying that in certain countries in the world they should remove the swastika. But as I've said before, I would think twice about using it in countries where the swastika is primarily associated with the horrors of the second world war.

[DieselDaisy]

1 minute ago, downzy said:

It's not just me though.  Almost everyone in Western Europe and North America viewed the symbol as corrupted.  For myself and most others, there is not reviving the term and symbol.  One too many people died under that banner to ever bring back its original association for the vast majority of people who live in Europe and North America.

Where are you obtaining this equation from? I hasten to bet that if many people saw the top-right and bottom-right, they would not immediately think it had been ''corrupted''. 

4 minutes ago, downzy said:

Have you been to the US?  Most Americans and Canadians have never traveled to Asia and wouldn't be aware of other associations.  

Well again, this is just ignorance and shouldn't be any kind of basis for a decision on the symbolism, usage and properties of imagery that has existed thousands of years. 

6 minutes ago, downzy said:

Fine.  If you want to be on record as calling anyone who views the term and symbol in the pejorative sense as stupid, so be it.  If this is the ground you want to make your stand on, far be it for me to deny your place.   

It is inherently stupid. As I said, you are literally arguing against ''good luck''. You are literally arguing against a term for its deemed association with the Nazis, that the Nazis didn't in fact use to begin with. Your whole argument is inherently based on fallacy.

People: Nazis called the emblem ,,das Hakenkreuz'', not ''swastika''. Why would they call it ''good luck'' in an Indian language? They were horrible and German nationalists afterall!

So what is your opinion on Führer compounds in modern German? Am I going to get a reply? 

[Len Cnut]

Quote

Perhaps because your exposure to the symbol has less association with Nazism than most. 

I was born and raised in England, entire life, only ever been back home for brief holidays, to a muslim country, my exposure has been almost entirely the Nazi type.  It used to be scraped into the desks in my school.  NF, Nazi signs, I have an up close and personal experience about how those people think and act, believe me.  But at the same time, you realise the world is bigger than your limited experiences.  I could have a visceral kneejerk response and hate all white people right?  Despite knowing otherwise, despite knowing that the vast majority of white people are cool and life is all about the good and the bad and every race has that.  Its convincing though, getting a good old fuckin' pasting inside a phone-booth at chucking out time   

Quote

I don't necessarily disagree.  But understand that in North America the only time you see a swastika is if it's being waved by some skinhead moron or in a cultural product or history book that stresses the association with Nazism.  It only means one thing here.  The people living in Swastika Ontario are free to claim all they want that it means something else to them, but the rest of us feel differently and see them as being selfish and self-righteous.  

Isn't that the whole reason behind travel though, to expand your knowledge and horizons and see beyond your understanding?  I realise that shit don't happen overnight.  I mean these places you've been to, the world you've seen, its certainly a shitload more than me, I've seen England, Paris and Pakistan.  What's the take home from all that?  You learn right?  

[DieselDaisy]

Guess where the following is from?

Israel!

(Byzantine). 

[downzy]

15 minutes ago, DieselDaisy said:

Well again, this is just ignorance and shouldn't be any kind of basis for a decision on the symbolism, usage and properties of imagery that has existed thousands of years. 

You're simply rationalizing your own arbitrary associations.  That's all we're talking about.  Yes, for a long time the word and symbol meant one thing.  And in the 20th century one group of people flew the symbol as their banner while attempting to eradicate millions of people.  The association for most changed.  

If you want to rehabilitate the word and symbol then you're welcome to it.  Most in North America won't want any part of it.  But feel free to keeping fighting what you feel is the necessary fight. 

[DieselDaisy]

1 minute ago, downzy said:

You're simply rationalizing your own arbitrary associations.  That's all we're talking about.  Yes, for a long time the word and symbol meant one thing.  And in the 20th century one group of people flew the symbol as their banner while attempting to eradicate millions of people.  The association for most changed.  

If you want to rehabilitate the word and symbol then you're welcome to it.  Most in North America won't want any part of it.  But feel free to keeping fighting what you feel is the necessary fight. 

You are literally ignoring how Asia feels about the swastika today, which is 59.69% of the world's population!

Asia? The place this thing actually came from? 

[downzy]

16 minutes ago, Len Cnut said:

But at the same time, you realise the world is bigger than your limited experiences.  I could have a visceral kneejerk response and hate all white people right?  Despite knowing otherwise, despite knowing that the vast majority of white people are cool and life is all about the good and the bad and every race has that.  Its convincing though, getting a good old fuckin' pasting inside a phone-booth at chucking out time   

Again, my exposure to it in India did not invoke judgment, just a pause and a feeling of discomfort considering my own personal associations with the imagery.  We all make associations and arbitrary evaluations all the time.  I think we're all a little more partial to matters of race and other issues than we all want to believe.  I totally get that the word and symbol means something else entirely for a different group of people in a region of the world few people from my region visit or have a chance to be familiar with.  But every culture has its own history and associations.  Meanings can and do change.  

20 minutes ago, Len Cnut said:

Isn't that the whole reason behind travel though, to expand your knowledge and horizons and see beyond your understanding?  I realise that shit don't happen overnight.  I mean these places you've been to, the world you've seen, its certainly a shitload more than me, I've seen England, Paris and Pakistan.  What's the take home from all that?  You learn right?  

Travel does open up one's eyes to how people in other parts of the world live and what they hold dear.  It's the one thing I wished more people would do.  You're right, you learn a lot. 

But you also get a better sense of your own life and the culture you're in.  As I mentioned above, each culture views things through its own collective experiences and shared values.  Symbols and words can take on different meanings.  I respect that a swastika can means something entirely different to someone who did not grow up with the associations I did.  But I would expect the same if that person came to where I lived.  Common courtesy.  The same could be said about a whole host of different cultural and historical relevancies.  

 

3 minutes ago, DieselDaisy said:

You are literally ignoring how Asia feels about the swastika today, which is 59.69% of the world's population!

Asia? The place this thing actually came from? 

No I'm not. 

They're free to have whatever affiliations and associations they want. 

People in Canada and other western countries can hold a different meaning in light of the atrocities that were carried out under the banner adorned with they symbol.  

[Len Cnut]

6 minutes ago, downzy said:

Again, my exposure to it in India did not invoke judgment, just a pause and a feeling of discomfort considering my own personal associations with the imagery.  We all make associations and arbitrary evaluations all the time.  I think we're all a little more partial to matters of race and other issues than we all want to believe.  I totally get that the word and symbol means something else entirely for a different group of people in a region of the world few people from my region visit or have a chance to be familiar with.  But every culture has its own history and associations.  Meanings can and do change.  

Travel does open up one's eyes to how people in other parts of the world live and what they hold dear.  It's the one thing I wished more people would do.  You're right, you learn a lot. 

But you also get a better sense of your own life and the culture you're in.  As I mentioned above, each culture views things through its own collective experiences and shared values.  Symbols and words can take on different meanings.  I respect that a swastika can means something entirely different to someone who did not grow up with the associations I did.  But I would expect the same if that person came to where I lived.  Common courtesy.  The same could be said about a whole host of different cultural and historical relevancies.  

 

I think there are a whole lot more people who, without prejudice, come from your cultural experience who react different though.