1/26/2005: Hindu swastika

[mmmmbacon]

Originally Posted by Troubleshooter

But you see, that's where you're wrong. It never stopped being a symbol of peace and well-being. It now has two meanings.

(regarding Jews): Quite honestly that is their problem, not the problem of the millions of hindus around the world who feel quite differently about it.

Well, as you mentioned, it's probably had 5000 meanings in the past. What's important is, what does that symbol mean now, and to whom? Maybe you're right, that the millions of Hindus still use the swastika as a symbol of peace, even now. I honestly don't know. That would surprise the hell out of me though, if true.

But by wanting to squash the feelings of a people who have been using that symbol for longer than a number of the countries in this world have existed, just because someone is offended by it, then you are exactly that.

No, I'm objecting not because I'm afraid Jews will be offended by Hindus trying to reclaim this as a symbol of peace, but because to do so dishonors those who have died at the hands of a man wearing a swastika.

Actually, I'm objecting precisely because I want people to continue to be offended by the swastika. I want it to stand as a reminder of what we're all capable of if we allow ourselves, like the German people did, to become the tools of a tyrannical government in the service of slaughtering 'inferior' people. Genocide is happening right now, somewhere. Let people everywhere know what the swastika means - and it don't mean peace. Sorry, Hindus.

If anything, anyone who supports the Hindus here is more of a PC policeman than I am! You're more concerned with the cultural sensitivities of the Hindu and their symbol, than about a very important lesson in human history. Bottom line is, the swastika is about learning from our history and not condemning ourselves to repeat the mistakes of our past. Let's not lose that lesson just because Hindus say "it was our symbol first!" (besides, would anyone be surprised if they stole it from another culture?)

[mmmmbacon]

Originally Posted by Troubleshooter

Have you at least asked a jew?

Give me a break. Can't you find something better than that to pick on?

[Beestie]

Originally Posted by mmmmbacon

...But it's not theirs anymore. To try and change the meaning of that symbol does a disservice to all those that died in the shadow of the swastika....

What about the disservice that was done to the people that revered it? To say "its not theirs anymore" is awfully cavalier. If someone murdered 6M people under the sign of the cross, I don't think it would be fair to ask Christians to "find something else."

[mmmmbacon]

Originally Posted by Beestie

What about the disservice that was done to the people that revered it? To say "its not theirs anymore" is awfully cavalier. If someone murdered 6M people under the sign of the cross, I don't think it would be fair to ask Christians to "find something else."

I didn't say it was fair that the Nazis appropriated their symbol in their quest for world domination. What I'm saying is that it's more important, now, for the symbol to stand for that episode in human history, than it is to uphold some ambiguous cultural ownership policy about who owned what symbol first. To do so diminishes the power of the lesson that the swastika stands for now.

[YellowBolt]

There is a significant difference between the Nazi swastika and those used by the Asians.

But first, a little tidbit... the swastika, at least in Buddhist theology, is a symbol of purification and the state one reaches when enlightened. The Nazi's took that symbol and warped it into the genocide of all but their white/blonde/blue-eyed/etc super race. Quite unfortunate, really...

The biggest difference is that the Nazi swastika is rotated 45 degrees so that it looks kind of like a diamond. The traditional swastika is more square-like. You'll notice that the Canadian Swastika team uses the traditional alignment for the swastika.

[Troubleshooter]

Originally Posted by mmmmbacon

Give me a break. Can't you find something better than that to pick on?

The question serves to determine your qualification to judge who should be offended by it.

If you're not a jew, it's not up to you in my opinion.

[mmmmbacon]

Originally Posted by Troubleshooter

The question serves to determine your qualification to judge who should be offended by it.

If you're not a jew, it's not up to you in my opinion.

It's an educated guess. Is it really that much of a stretch to guess that Jews will be offended by a scene of people making a swastika out of candles and calling it a symbol of peace? I'm not Jewish, and I'm kind of offended by it, for reasons I've outlined in other comments in this thread.

Anyway, whether or not Jews (or anyone else) are offended by that image is only a minor point, as far as I'm concerned.

[footfootfoot]

Some Jews don't eat Bacon, can we get mmmmmbacon to change his user name to someting less treif? How about mmmmmtofu? or mmmmchicken? Or maybe just mmmm?

Why don't we just kowtow to everyone's personal sensitivity and then kill a bunch of palestinians to show how sensitive we are to people's feelings.

Oh yeah, I mean kill them after we just take their land. My bad.

[axlrosen]

Originally Posted by mmmmbacon

Maybe you're right, that the millions of Hindus still use the swastika as a symbol of peace, even now. I honestly don't know. That would surprise the hell out of me though, if true.

I believe it is true, I've actually heard this before.

So, suppose the Nazis had used a cross, or a star of David, or a flag with stars and stripes as their symbol? Would it be wrong for Christians, Jews, or Americans to keep using that symbol that means so much to them?

I think of it this way. The swastika has been a symbol used by Hindus for thousands of years, and they didn't stop when the Nazis came along. But there's probably a lot of misunderstanding when non-Hindus see this, so my thinking is that they're trying to tell the world, hey, we use this symbol as well, and when we use it, it doesn't mean we want to kill anybody. Just to help clear up any miscommunication.

I think people can understand context more than you give them credit for. When they see a swastika spray-painted on a tombstone in Georgia, they know it means something a lot different than when it's formed from thousands of candles in India. Just like people know the difference when they hear the "N word" in a rap song vs. me walking down the street yelling it at black people.

Do you think that without swastikas, people will forget about the Holocaust?

[busterb]

I'm thinking the Old Capitol museum in Jackson, MS. has a Swastika in the floor. Built around 1839.

[xoxoxoBruce]

Damn Rednecks.
I'm with axlrosen, don't underestimate the unwashed masses, they understand.
I don't think any of the gang bikers will be covering their swastika tattoos because the Hindus call for it's return as a symbol of good things.

[mmmmbacon]

Originally Posted by axlrosen

I believe it is true, I've actually heard this before.

So, suppose the Nazis had used a cross, or a star of David, or a flag with stars and stripes as their symbol? Would it be wrong for Christians, Jews, or Americans to keep using that symbol that means so much to them?

No, it wouldn't be wrong for them to keep using it. I have no problem with Hindus using the swastika for their own culturally relevant reasons. And if all this is is a campaign to clear up misunderstandings, I have no problem with that either, but that's not the way I read it.

In introducing this, Undertoad said:

I'm not sure I could be convinced that this is a symbol of luck and/or prosperity. I don't mind if the Hindus use it differently, but I don't expect them to change our culture's notion of what it is.

I agree. My objection is with the Hindus trying to change my notion of what the symbol means, if indeed that's what they're trying to do.

I think people can understand context more than you give them credit for. When they see a swastika spray-painted on a tombstone in Georgia, they know it means something a lot different than when it's formed from thousands of candles in India. Just like people know the difference when they hear the "N word" in a rap song vs. me walking down the street yelling it at black people.

Maybe I haven't made myself clear enough, but my issue here really isn't with how people will react to the Hindus, whether they are offended or whatever. It has to do with the symbol that the swastika has become, and the importance of the history it represents - a history that really transcends any one culture. The story of the Nazi swastika applies as much to Rwanda in the nineties or Manifest Destiny (as we cleared out those pesky Indians). If what the Hindus are trying to do is transform the swastika into a symbol of peace, I object to that because it renders impotent a powerful symbol of the kind of evil that propels common men and women to participate in the mass killing of a stigmatized group of people.

Do you think that without swastikas, people will forget about the Holocaust?

People will forget about the holocaust anyway, as the generations pass. It's human nature. That's why we need reminders. That's why we build museums and memorials, and teach this stuff to our kids, despite the difficulty of the questions they ask. My question to you (and I'm assuming you're not a Hindu) is, if you had to choose, would you want your kids to grow up thinking the swastika is a symbol of peace, or a symbol of genocide?

By the way, thank you for your thoughtful post.

[richlevy]

Originally Posted by mmmmbacon

To try and change the meaning of that symbol does a disservice to all those that died in the shadow of the swastika. I'm not Jewish, but I can't imagine too many Jews who would be willing to embrace the swastika as a symbol of peace. The only positive I see in this is that the world is reminded that the symbol had a history before Nazism, but I don't think it's got a future beyond that, nor should it, imo.

Well, I can't speak for the rest of the Jewish race, but if Hindu's had it for 2000 years before the Nazis used it, they have every right to have it back. You don't see Christians giving up the cross just because the Klan likes to burn them. Intent counts for a lot. If Prince Harry just happened to be wearing a robe with a Swastika on it given to him by the Dali Lama, I might be caught off guard, but would accept the circumstances.

The German Eagle was also a symbol of the Nazi party, yet we Americans use a very similar symbol in our goverment.

[mmmmbacon]

Originally Posted by richlevy

Well, I can't speak for the rest of the Jewish race, but if Hindu's had it for 2000 years before the Nazis used it, they have every right to have it back. You don't see Christians giving up the cross just because the Klan likes to burn them. Intent counts for a lot. If Prince Harry just happened to be wearing a robe with a Swastika on it given to him by the Dali Lama, I might be caught off guard, but would accept the circumstances.

The German Eagle was also a symbol of the Nazi party, yet we Americans use a very similar symbol in our goverment.

I'm beginning to wish I hadn't went out on that extremely shaky limb that Jews might be offended by a gorup of people wanting to change the popular conception of a swastika to a symbol of peace.

Isn't there anyone else here thinking "the swastika as a symbol of peace??? you're kidding, right?"

Yes, I get it. That's their old symbol. It just strikes me as horribly naive that they think the rest of the world will want to adopt their symbol over the much more significant meaning it has taken on since the thousands of years they've used it. Actually, there probably is a sizable portion of the world's population that would adopt it, if simply to make the badness go away. After all, that's what we do, repress repress repress!

[BrianR]

Yes, it IS a Brewster Buffalo. Thank you for asking.

Brian, plane buff