NationStates Jolt Archive

The swastika is an ancient symbol of peace, harmony, fertility and general good stuff. Its english name "swastika" comes from its hindi name, whose root is the hindi word "swasti" which means happy. It looks totally cool.

Given the above, and reams more (just google swastika and knock yourself out) isn't it time that right-thinking intelligent people like ourselves reabilitated this wonderful and powerful symbol of the good things in humanity, thus defusing the power of its association with Nazism?

I hate Nazis. I really want a swastika on my flag, because swastikas are top. Hippies, Buddhists and other peace-loveing peoples all over the world have used swastikas to symbolise how nice stuff can be for a few thousand years. Must we let 50 years of minority badness spoil it?

The swastika is an ancient symbol of peace, harmony, fertility and general good stuff. Its english name "swastika" comes from its hindi name, whose root is the hindi word "swasti" which means happy. It looks totally cool.

Given the above, and reams more (just google swastika and knock yourself out) isn't it time that right-thinking intelligent people like ourselves reabilitated this wonderful and powerful symbol of the good things in humanity, thus defusing the power of its association with Nazism?

I hate Nazis. I really want a swastika on my flag, because swastikas are top. Hippies, Buddhists and other peace-loveing peoples all over the world have used swastikas to symbolise how nice stuff can be for a few thousand years. Must we let 50 years of minority badness spoil it?

Yeah, I live in a Hindu family, every Diwali we get odd looks because we have a giant swastika outside our house ;-).

I can't wait till one year some wanker comes and starts shouting at my family.

I can hear it now - "you white supremacist indian bastard". good on you anyway.

so, since nobody is offended by swastikas, can i have one on my flag?

No, swastikas are a no-no. If you want a reason: Max said so, he doesn't like them and his word is law.


And aside of that, it's a symbol and symbols change their meaning. Especially when used by a notable and famous (Nazis are pretty damed famous) group within a society that didn't associate anything else with the symbol beforehand.

I'm quoting rotten.com on this, so shoot me:
"Imagine if the most popular guns and weapons had Hello Kitty etched on them; Hello Kitty would become the complete antithesis of what it was originally meant to represent (buying lots of meaningless Japanese crap)."

The cross used to be a symbol of torture, pain and punishment. Now it's the symbol of your Lord and Saviour. I mean, that's another pretty crass change.

So .. yeah. Until Eastern religions become way more popular and well-known than Hitler and company there's little chance of the swastika becoming socially acceptable.

I can hear it now - "you white supremacist indian bastard". good on you anyway.

Bizarrely enough, calling them an "Aryan whatever" would be appropriate.

No, swastikas are a no-no. If you want a reason: Max said so, he doesn't like them and his word is law.


of course. I wouldn't do it unless max said yes. it's his game. I'm hoping to gauge support for a personal question to max.


And aside of that, it's a symbol and symbols change their meaning. Especially when used by a notable and famous (Nazis are pretty damed famous) group within a society that didn't associate anything else with the symbol beforehand.


This is the precisely the issue - if we continue to use the swastika in the way it has been used for a few thousand years, just like millions (billions?) of asian people are doing right now, then we change the meaning of the symbol.


I'm quoting rotten.com on this, so shoot me:
"Imagine if the most popular guns and weapons had Hello Kitty etched on them; Hello Kitty would become the complete antithesis of what it was originally meant to represent (buying lots of meaningless Japanese crap)."


don't matter who you quote, it's the argument that counts. it's a good argument, which is why I want people to change the meaning of the symbol back to what it was. Which, by your argument, is entirely possible. And if we don't try and do it, then the Nazis have won something.


The cross used to be a symbol of torture, pain and punishment. Now it's the symbol of your Lord and Saviour. I mean, that's another pretty crass change.


i dont think the cross was ever a symbol of torture, it was a device of torture. Like a car isn't a symbol of transport, it's actually some transport. Still, I take your point entirely.


So .. yeah. Until Eastern religions become way more popular and well-known than Hitler and company there's little chance of the swastika becoming socially acceptable.


The thing is, eastern religions are way more popular than hitler. There are a few nazis in the world, but there are a few hundred million buddhists, hindus, and just random people who love swastikas. And this being the internet, and indeed the modern age of multicural communities, they're hereabouts, not confined to "eastern" parts. The process of education has to start somewhere.

A question is, what precisely is people's problem with the swastika?

Bizarrely enough, calling them an "Aryan whatever" would be appropriate.

yes it would wouldn't it? makes you wonder what hitler thought he was on about with his aryan thing doesn't it?

Bizarrely enough, calling them an "Aryan whatever" would be appropriate.What do Aryans have to do with white supremacists?

What do Aryans have to do with white supremacists?

kind of nothing, but kind of a lot.

My small understanding is that technically "Aryan" describes some kind of indo-european root nationality from which the peoples of many places sprang, and it is used to describe some of the peoples of current Indian subcontinent, and Hitler and modern day american and other nazis bang on about "the aryan master race" ie white supremacist morons.

Which looks to me like saying "The supreme white race is Indian, and pretty brown really, rather than blond".

What do Aryans have to do with white supremacists?

The term 'aryan' is used by many white supremacists to describe their racial stock, instead of terms like 'white' or 'caucasian' - witness groups such as 'Aryan Nation' and their ilk.

The word is used to describe all those who descend from the stock of the speakers of the semi-hypothetical Indo-European root tongue. It thus includes Europeans, some Middle-Easterners and Subcontinental peoples.

Have a look here for more details:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aryan

yeah, what (s)he said ;)

The thing is, eastern religions are way more popular than hitler. There are a few nazis in the world, but there are a few hundred million buddhists, hindus, and just random people who love swastikas. And this being the internet, and indeed the modern age of multicural communities, they're hereabouts, not confined to "eastern" parts. The process of education has to start somewhere.

A question is, what precisely is people's problem with the swastika?
Look. You want to use the thing, go find yourself a forum based in the Subcontinent and knock yourself out. But right now you are sounding very much like the sort of good ol' white boy who asks black people why they can say '******' and he can't.

You are NOT going to get approval using a swastika in the Americas or Europe. Not (at least) until everyone with a living memory of the Holocaust, and everyone who remembers their relatives lived through it or died in it, is dead.

If you yourself survive that long, more power to you.

look mate, theres absolutely nothing wrong with having a swastika as your flag, look at me, i've got a picture of the supreme leader of national socialism as my flag, what a class flag. I used to have the swastika in its glorious red black and white....go for it matey, show your nationalist colours

Look. You want to use the thing, go find yourself a forum based in the Subcontinent and knock yourself out. But right now you are sounding very much like the sort of good ol' white boy who asks black people why they can say '******' and he can't.


although I'm not in any way related to anyone or any organisation or historical, or cultural group that has ever approved of or in any way actively or otherwise supported nazism, and I am a keen anti-nazi?


You are NOT going to get approval using a swastika in the Americas or Europe. Not (at least) until everyone with a living memory of the Holocaust, and everyone who remembers their relatives lived through it or died in it, is dead.


You are telling me that people object to the symbol, not what it symbolises? Such that a swastika that means peace and love like the one described by fugee-la above, that decorates his house (which I'm assuming, perhaps incorrectly, is in the UK) during the hindu festival of lights is as offensive as the one on a nazi skinhead's tshirt? and more offensive than this dave hitler (see above) having a picture of hitler?

Bizarrely enough, calling them an "Aryan whatever" would be appropriate.

haha, you know there was a Germanic tribe called the Aryans and they moved to north-west India at some time. :D and they mixed themselves with the ppl over there.

haha, you know there was a Germanic tribe called the Aryans and they moved to north-west India at some time. :D and they mixed themselves with the ppl over there.The Aryans were a Germanic tribe? Who writes your history books?

look mate, theres absolutely nothing wrong with having a swastika as your flag, look at me, i've got a picture of the supreme leader of national socialism as my flag, what a class flag. I used to have the swastika in its glorious red black and white....go for it matey, show your nationalist colours

Yes look at you! You sad Nazi nobhead.

Hitler was talking about NORDIC Aryans. Not just Aryans in general...

Yes look at you! You sad Nazi nobhead.

so there's a difference between this clearly sad nazi nobhead (albeit i think his tongue is in his cheek) and other swastika users?

so, since nobody is offended by swastikas, can i have one on my flag?If you did this game would become illegal in Germany. So maybe we should err on the side of not getting the site banned.

Hitler was talking about NORDIC Aryans. Not just Aryans in general...

hitler was talking bollocks then. If he meant nordic aryans rather than indian or russian or german or greek aryans, he'd have been better off saying "nordic" wouldn't he? since "aryan" covers all the indo-european descendants of the (possibly theoretical) aryan tribe?

If you did this game would become illegal in Germany. So maybe we should err on the side of not getting the site banned.

I can see banning swastikas in Germany. What do German buddhists decorate their stuff with?

so there's a difference between this clearly sad nazi nobhead (albeit i think his tongue is in his cheek) and other swastika users?

Between those who use it for the original peaceful purposes without intent to cause offence, and those who are xenophobic dips, there is a difference yes.

Between those who use it for the original peaceful purposes without intent to cause offence, and those who are xenophobic dips, there is a difference yes.

I'm glad to hear you think so. Some people apparently don't.

I hate Nazis. I really want a swastika on my flag, because swastikas are top. Hippies, Buddhists and other peace-loveing peoples all over the world have used swastikas to symbolise how nice stuff can be for a few thousand years. Must we let 50 years of minority badness spoil it?

Er I take it then you will have the swastika rotating as the Hindus and other ancient tribes had it, which is towards the left, Hitler adopted the ancient symbol but reversed it for his Nazi party, if you want the old one and what it symbolises, then you will have to have it turning anti clockwise not clockwise or you will be supporting Nazism, and you dont really want to identify with that do you Homesteads?

[QUOTE=

I hate Nazis. I really want a swastika on my flag, because swastikas are top. Hippies, Buddhists and other peace-loveing peoples all over the world have used swastikas to symbolise how nice stuff can be for a few thousand years. Must we let 50 years of minority badness spoil it?[/QUOTE]

Damn Hilter for killing all those Jews and other innocent people. Now people can't draw swastikas on their pencil tins without feeling a bit guilty.
Regardless of what swastika stand for previously it now stands for hate and racism. It is not merely because Hitler and World War 2 that the swastika should never be used or seen. All over Europe, racist thugs use the swastika as a symbol of their hate for anyone who they do not think conforms to what they want society to be.
To try and reform the swastika as some lovely hippy pretty symbol would make these thugs think everyone agrees with them (unfortunely most of them tend not to be that bright).
But ingoring all that the swastika will always stand for Hitler and what he did to the world. Just because some idiot with hippy ideals wants to be able to draw the swastika all over their bags and make a t-shirt should we just forget about all that happened? I can't belive that this is a serious idea. Anyone who agress with the orginal poster really needs to examine their heads.
And if you really want a symbol I'm sure you can find a lot of hindu symbols which haven't been hijacked by hiter and far right groups.

look mate, theres absolutely nothing wrong with having a swastika as your flag...

Except for the fact that it makes you look like either:
a.) someone who can't read, or
b.) someone who has deliberately set out to break the site rules.

http://www.nationstates.net/cgi-bin/index.cgi/85368/page=upload_flag

"Images likely to cause widespread offense (e.g. nudity, swastikas) are prohibited, and your nation may be deleted if you post them."

Well, the swastika was a symbol that was used by those whose policy was hatred and carried out death on a large scale.

I do understand your frustration, but sadly, a thousand years of peace and love that comes with a symbol can often be wiped out by the use of the symbol in a smaller scale of years of large amounts of War and Hate.

It's not the symbol that counts though, it's the people who use it, and what their purpose is in using it.

of course. I wouldn't do it unless max said yes. it's his game. I'm hoping to gauge support for a personal question to max.

A question is, what precisely is people's problem with the swastika?

Further to my post just now hear is an idea. Why don't you look on google for support groups for people who fought in World War 2 and surviours of Nazi camps and then ask them exactly what is their problem with the swastika?
I fail to understand why with any number of millions or billions of symbols to pick from you insist on wanting to try and push one that means so much misery to so many innocent people.

Er I take it then you will have the swastika rotating as the Hindus and other ancient tribes had it, which is towards the left, Hitler adopted the ancient symbol but reversed it for his Nazi party, if you want the old one and what it symbolises, then you will have to have it turning anti clockwise not clockwise or you will be supporting Nazism, and you dont really want to identify with that do you Homesteads?

Actually it is a myth that the hindu/buddhist swastika pointed in a different direction from the nazi swastika. Hitler may well have reversed the direction of the sawstika from the one he saw (not in any asian art but in the cornicing of a building he painted once - the hakenkreuz has a long history in germanic culture, where it is a symbol of peace and fertility).

However swastikas pointing both ways are popular in eastern art. I have some Rudyard Kipling novels from 1906 with swastikas on the spine which face the same way as the swastika used by the nazis.

Further to my post just now hear is an idea. Why don't you look on google for support groups for people who fought in World War 2 and surviours of Nazi camps and then ask them exactly what is their problem with the swastika?

Do the opinions of the tens of thousands of hindus who fought in WW2 not count?

Hitler may well have reversed the direction of the sawstika from the one he saw (not in any asian art but in the cornicing of a building he painted once - the hakenkreuz has a long history in germanic culture, where it is a symbol of peace and fertility).

I am more familiar with the story of Hitler first encountering the Swastika symbol in the doorway of a Catholic church that was located close to his childhood home.

However swastikas pointing both ways are popular in eastern art. I have some Rudyard Kipling novels from 1906 with swastikas on the spine which face the same way as the swastika used by the nazis.

My dad has a set of those which I always found somewhat puzzling when I was much much younger than I am today.

Do the opinions of the tens of thousands of hindus who fought in WW2 not count?

They may well. Do we actually have any examples of their opinions on the matter other than our suppositions?

They may well. Do we actually have any examples of their opinions on the matter other than our suppositions?

er, no. but i'll be sure to ask them if i ever meet them.

I am more familiar with the story of Hitler first encountering the Swastika symbol in the doorway of a Catholic church that was located close to his childhood home.

I don't suppose hitler told anyone where he got his idea. There's an about.com history of the swastika that says the hakenkreuz was a symbol of german nationalism in the 19th century.

hitler was talking bollocks then.

Have you only just worked this out? The whole anti-semitism, purity of blood thing didn't put you off? ;)

Hmmp. You might as well bann crosses and Bibles as well then. Since these symbols are used by variouse groups such as the Ku Klux Klan.
And unless I'm mistaking the Swastika is also used in Judaism. With 3 black spots on every corner.

Well I may as well wade into this argument. Im an archaeologist, sorry to say I know very little about asian archaeology but I focus on the Greeks. The swastika has been around since roughly 700BC even a bit before and you see them everywhere on Greek Vase painting but mainly around warriors, horses, large fierce animals( http://www2.truman.edu/~capter/jins343/340.JPG look underneath the horses leg. best example i could find this late at night, !) Its meaning back then is guessed at.. but some believe that it represents speed and power. Have you ever seen the image of 3 legs all bent like an L and attached at the thigh.. It could have something to do with that which is also an ancient symbol.
As for Hitler he could of adopted the symbol from Greece, which would be appropriate considering how he decided to wage war(BlitzKrieg (spelling?)
But in the sense of the argument you have to think of it like this,
Just as I can proove to you that the swastika Originated and had meaning in Greece, people would equally come back at me and say it is buddist or hindu or whatever and has a different meaning there! Likewise you have to understand that the swastika took on another meaning when used in WW2, not just the Greek or Asian way. Thus although not offensive to you, there are billions of people who know that symbol as one of war, or of white power etc. Its all about imagery, what people think of when they see it, and sorry to say the greek or the buddist was is a major minority in this sense when compaired to the Nazi symbol. So dude think of other people, just cause it looks cool etc to you and has some meaning, it is terrible to others.
As they say "WON'T SOMEONE PLEASE THINK OF THE CHILDREN!"

People today don't know the original meaning of the swastika. So, for them, when they see the word or symbol of the swastika, they immediately think of the Nazis and Hitler.

I don't think it would be a good idea walking around with that on your clothing...

Hmmp. You might as well bann crosses and Bibles as well then. Since these symbols are used by variouse groups such as the Ku Klux Klan.
And unless I'm mistaking the Swastika is also used in Judaism. With 3 black spots on every corner.

Granted what they(kkk) do is wrong and everyone knows that, but once again like i said in my last post, its all about imagery. Most people see a cross and think of God and the church and good things related to it.
The KKK is a more stylized cross(equal lengths etc) not the same as the christian symbol, its like an extremely early vesion of the true cross, you see it in Roman sculpture etc... and if people saw that cross or the white hood then they would be angry!

But hey people get angry about everything these days. The changed dating from BC for example to BCE(Before common era) because people of different religions thought it wrong to describe time relating to christ! Which to me was a bit silly but hey i still understand where they are coming from.
But i think some things like the nazi swastika a symbol of an army that caused the death of over like 40 million people, are no go zones!

Have you ever seen the image of 3 legs all bent like an L and attached at the thigh.. It could have something to do with that which is also an ancient symbol.


I believe that 'triskelion' is the term you are avoiding using: appears on the Isle of Man flag, amongst other places.

But i think some things like the nazi swastika a symbol of an army that caused the death of over like 40 million people, are no go zones!
Explain that to a couple of hundred million Hindu's and all others who use Swastikas in their religion and culture. Tell them they can't use that ancient symbol cause Hitler was a naughty man.
Cause the same reasoning you use in defence of the cross can be applied to the swastika. I doubt Hindu's or Buddhists look at the swastika and think: Yeah. Sieg Heil Mein Führer.

Explain that to a couple of hundred million Hindu's and all others who use Swastikas in their religion and culture. Tell them they can't use that ancient symbol cause Hitler was a naughty man.

Who exactly is stopping them from using the Swastika?*





* Germany has official legislation, as does Sweden IIRC, and this site has its regulations, but aside from that I can think of no examples. Enlighten me.

Who exactly is stopping them from using the Swastika?

Brasida was suggesting that the swastika is a no-go zone

of course. I wouldn't do it unless max said yes. it's his game. I'm hoping to gauge support for a personal question to max.



This is the precisely the issue - if we continue to use the swastika in the way it has been used for a few thousand years, just like millions (billions?) of asian people are doing right now, then we change the meaning of the symbol.



don't matter who you quote, it's the argument that counts. it's a good argument, which is why I want people to change the meaning of the symbol back to what it was. Which, by your argument, is entirely possible. And if we don't try and do it, then the Nazis have won something.



i dont think the cross was ever a symbol of torture, it was a device of torture. Like a car isn't a symbol of transport, it's actually some transport. Still, I take your point entirely.



The thing is, eastern religions are way more popular than hitler. There are a few nazis in the world, but there are a few hundred million buddhists, hindus, and just random people who love swastikas. And this being the internet, and indeed the modern age of multicural communities, they're hereabouts, not confined to "eastern" parts. The process of education has to start somewhere.

A question is, what precisely is people's problem with the swastika?

Nice debating skills I like your idea. I am Jewish and I am by no means against the plan if that means anything. I believe that even racist symbols such as n word can become have become words of endearment. It may be a change in a few letters but its still basically the same word.
I would also like to point out that the Soviet flag flew over concentration camps and those are not banned. Though I agree with you if Max Barry doesn't want them then it is ultimately his choice and he has made it.

People today don't know the original meaning of the swastika. So, for them, when they see the word or symbol of the swastika, they immediately think of the Nazis and Hitler.


I think that a lot of the thrust of this argument is that by "People today" you actually mean "Some people today, in some places, and probably not the majority globally"

For instance, only a very small fraction of the admittedly self-selected group of people posting to this thread appear to not know a enough about the history of the swastika to understand that it isn't simply Hitler's corporate logo.

Brasida was suggesting that the swastika is a no go zone

Yes, but Brasida is hardly stopping other people from using the Swastika unless he has unexpected powers and influences of which we know nothing.

look mate, theres absolutely nothing wrong with having a swastika as your flag, look at me, i've got a picture of the supreme leader of national socialism as my flag, what a class flag. I used to have the swastika in its glorious red black and white....go for it matey, show your nationalist colours


Look Mate, you half-witted turnip-brained professional turd-sniffer, why don't you do your brain a favour and imagine spending a couple weeks in a Nazi consentration camp. You will then learn why the swastika is banned.

why don't you do your brain a favour and imagine spending a couple weeks in a Nazi consentration camp. You will then learn why the swastika is banned.

Why don't you imagine spending a couple of weeks in a buddhist monastery? You might then learn why the swastika is great.

I would also like to point out that the Soviet flag flew over concentration camps and those are not banned.

The UK flag also flew over concentration camps, in fact it was us British people that invented the concentration camp. The flag of the US probably flew over the internment camps in the states. The Japanese flag flew over the POW work camps on the Burma railway.

However, hideously unpleasent as concentration camps, internment camps, gulags and work camps are, they are somewhat different from the death camps, such as Birkenau, over which the Swastika was flown

Look Mate, you half-witted turnip-brained professional turd-sniffer...

Quit with the flaming. It ain't going to win you an argument.

I would also like to point out that the Soviet flag flew over concentration camps and those are not banned.

A good point well made. I don't know the exact figures, but I think that the hammer and sickle has flown over more death than the swastika, if you include the millions who starved in China during the great leap forward, and the Chinese and Russian gulags.

Why don't you imagine spending a couple of weeks in a buddhist monastery? You might then learn why the swastika is great.


You mean the one frequented by Pol Pot?

However, hideously unpleasent as concentration camps, internment camps, gulags and work camps are, they are somewhat different from the death camps, such as Birkenau, over which the Swastika was flown

Philosophically different, possibly, but for a lot of people the result was the same.

You mean the one frequented by Pol Pot?

no.

Why don't you imagine spending a couple of weeks in a buddhist monastery? You might then learn why the swastika is great.


Independent Homesteads, are you really that thick?

A good point well made. I don't know the exact figures, but I think that the hammer and sickle has flown over more death than the swastika, if you include the millions who starved in China during the great leap forward, and the Chinese and Russian gulags.

The Gulags were different from the extermination camps of the Nazis as there was the possibility of eventually having served your time and being released from them, whereas under the Nazis it was a one way ticket.

Independent Homesteads, are you really that thick?

Do you imagine that calling me thick is winning your argument for you? Or even making a point that anyone else can appreciate?

Quit with the flaming. It ain't going to win you an argument.

I don't take instructions or orders from either Nazis, or their supporters, so you can 'quit' telling me about 'flaming'. You can also try to use correct English next time you write to me, and not slang.

The Gulags were different from the extermination camps of the Nazis as there was the possibility of eventually having served your time and being released from them, whereas under the Nazis it was a one way ticket.

Philosophical difference already noted, but it seems that people on the whole aren't objecting that the swastika stands for nazi philosphy, but for nazi murder. The talk is of death camps, holocaust and people's relations dying. If it comes down to scores communist murder has touched more lives than nazi murder. Although again, not in western europe or america.

I don't take instructions or orders from either Nazis, or their supporters, so you can 'quit' telling me about 'flaming'. You can also try to use correct English next time you write to me, and not slang.

seriously? you only communicate with people who don't use slang? I expect you're going to refuse to respond to this post because it isn't correctly capitalised.

At least let the last holocaust survivors die...
I mean, fine, one might know the entire history of the Swastika, but if one was in Treblinka a Swastika would mean no joy to him.

The swastika is an ancient symbol of peace, harmony, fertility and general good stuff. Its english name "swastika" comes from its hindi name, whose root is the hindi word "swasti" which means happy. It looks totally cool.



Wow I didn't know that, you learn something new every day. Anyway with that said and even assuming its true sorry there were some pretty terrible things attributed to that symbol. Whatever it may have at one time symbolized, in todays day and age it has come to mean something else entirely.

I don't take instructions or orders from either Nazis, or their supporters, so you can 'quit' telling me about 'flaming'.

I fall into neither the camp of the Nazis, nor their supporters, so where does that leave me?


You can also try to use correct English next time you write to me, and not slang.


"Ain't" ain't slang, it's a colloquialism.

I really want a swastika on my flag.

And, you're never going to get it. It's been discussed, debated, and Max Barry has said "No, not here." Doesn't matter what it might have meant, once the Nazis got a hold of it, that was it.

Banning swastikas is giving in to Hitler. Bring it back, with all its good symbolism.

I really want a swastika on my flag.
And, you're never going to get it.

I believe it would be game-legal to have a flag which has "SWASTIKA" written on it...

For God's sakes, I have never in my life seen so many people argue about a prohibition about what symbol to put on a flag in a simulation game. Basically, the web administrators are running a website--a service. They can put whatever restrictions they wish.

Now most people associate swastikas with Nazi Germany and National Socialism (and I think I read some mythical historical revisionism about how National Socialism didn't originally consist primarily of chauvinism and anti-Semitism.) It is too bad that a historic symbol has been coopted as a symbol of destruction-- but you know, I don't think the Nationstates administators wish to take up this as a fight. If you want to promote a reframe of the swastika, I suggest building a website to promote it.

Maybe it seems inconsistent to not have Communist (here: Hammer and Sickle) or the Rising Sun be banned. There is a dilution of symbolic meaning since both symbols were used in times that were not completely destructive (periods of detante in USSR and Eastern Bloc, for example) and expansionist and hell-bent on genocide. Rather, it will be perceived as a symbol of a system that had many periods of extreme oppression rather than being intrinsically a system of destruction and one that promoted genocide-- and that's Nazism. It predated 1933 but was only nationally important with Hitler's assent to power.

But my overarching message is that people are using the logical fallacy of the slippery slope all too often, ie. making this ruling mean further censorship later; and using largely labored arguments to make their point. Accept it. Websites aren't democracies. (republics maybe ;) )

For God's sakes, I have never in my life seen so many people argue about a prohibition about what symbol to put on a flag in a simulation game.

This is nothing compared to some of the discussions that surround it here, I would hardly even describe this as a skirmish compared to some of the verbal wars that have been fought out over this issue.

A question is, what precisely is people's problem with the swastika?

The fact that it was the national symbol for a nation that comitted genocide.

I have no problem with adherents of eastern religions using the swastika. But I personally would feel greatly uncomfortable if I was to go to someone's house and see the swastika flying outside. Knowing that the people that murdered my family wore this symbol as a BADGE, knowing that this symbol was probably one of the last things my relatives saw before they were murdered... sorry, but no amount of intellectual "re-training" can overcome the emotional revulsion I feel when I see a swastika.

When will the swastika be re-habilitated? When two things happen:

A- More education about its original meaning and context

B- More "space" between the Nazi atrocities comitted in World War Two and the Holocaust and the "present-day".

I personally don't feel that 50 years is enough time. I feel that it will take at least another 50.

Heres something I don't get:

Why? There are plenty of other symbols you can use. You don't have to use one thats controversial. Just accept that some people are scarred by the memory of it what it stood for under Hitler, and leave it be.

For God's sakes, I have never in my life seen so many people argue about a prohibition about what symbol to put on a flag in a simulation game. Basically, the web administrators are running a website--a service. They can put whatever restrictions they wish... Accept it. Websites aren't democracies. (republics maybe ;) )

I know. About the second thing I posted was that it's max's game and I'm entirely sympathetic to and in agreement with his right to have whatever rules he pleases, and I'm fully playing by his rules. So there's no need for anyone to point this out. What I'm about here is the discussion.

once the Nazis got a hold of it, that was it.

But that wasn't it - once the nazis got hold of it, it continued to have a life. If you mean that was it as far as you are concerned, note the distinction between your feelings and the feelings of others.

The fact that it was the national symbol for a nation that comitted genocide... the people that murdered my family wore this symbol as a BADGE, knowing that this symbol was probably one of the last things my relatives saw before they were murdered...


It wasn't the nation that committed genocide, but point taken. Do you still see no difference between the symbol and what it symbolises? I haven't read anyone who is against me using a swastika's opinion on the differenc between the swastika and the way that it is used. Some people who don't mind it have said that they can see the difference between a swastika used by a nazi and a swastika used by a buddhist. Can you?



When will the swastika be re-habilitated? When two things happen:

A- More education about its original meaning and context

B- More "space" between the Nazi atrocities comitted in World War Two and the Holocaust and the "present-day".


A - is what I'm working on right now, although "original meaning" may not be that accurate a way of putting it, the swastika has been used in many ways by many cultures. Outside of nazism pretty much all of them positive mind you.

B - i think intellectual space is as important as time, and intellectual space is being created by A. Time passes of its own accord so I'll just let that take its course.

I believe it would be game-legal to have a flag which has "SWASTIKA" written on it...

very cute, but beside the point (see below)

Heres something I don't get:
Why? There are plenty of other symbols you can use.

Yes there are, but none of them is a swastika. None of them looks like a swastika. None of them has enjoyed such widespread use for such a long time. I even have a couple of alternative swastika-like symbols that I could use, but they are both ethnically specific. And ethnic specificity is something I'm not at all keen to symbolise.


Just accept that some people are scarred by the memory of it what it stood for under Hitler, and leave it be.

How many of them are left? They'd have to be, realistically, over 65. In 40 years, when they're all dead, will it be ok again? Some people have said as much.

I skipped every page apart from the first one, so this might have been said...

Hitler reversed the originial symbol to get the "Swastika" design. The originial was an cult symbol. Hence he wasn't Christian, but a Cultist!

Another interesting fact - the Eagle of America looked to the Left, while the Eagle of Germany looked to the Right...

Also, what is Max's view on the Iron Cross? I don't want it, but I thought I'd ask...

Some people who don't mind it have said that they can see the difference between a swastika used by a nazi and a swastika used by a buddhist. Can you?

The swastika used by the nazi's was part of a proganda machine invented to heighten national pride and give members a sense that they were a part of a group dedicated to protecting some kind of cultural identity. The nazi's were (if nothing else), brilliant propagandists, and understood quite well the power of symbolism in controlling the masses.

the swastika, seen in Buddism, is simply a symbol which represents well being and good fortune. It is often called the footprints of the Buddha. However, Buddism is about alleveating suffering, both in oneself, and in others, and if a mere symbol causes pain and suffering in others, then it is not one worth displaying. Other symbols can easily be made to represent the same thing. As an expample, one would have difficulty finding a single swastika in temples or sangha halls anywhere in North America, Europe or Japan, and it is becoming less popular in usage throughout Asia as well. Any Buddhist who "prays" to a symbol, or icon, has lost the meaning of what a being a Buddhist entails.

I can't speak for Hinduism, as I know very little about it.

I skipped every page apart from the first one, so this might have been said...

Hitler reversed the originial symbol to get the "Swastika" design. The originial was an cult symbol. Hence he wasn't Christian, but a Cultist!

Another interesting fact - the Eagle of America looked to the Left, while the Eagle of Germany looked to the Right...

Also, what is Max's view on the Iron Cross? I don't want it, but I thought I'd ask...
Iron crosses are allowed

Iron crosses are allowed
So that means the symbol of past racism and murder is banned while symbols of current racism and murder are allowed?

So that means the symbol of past racism and murder is banned while symbols of current racism and murder are allowed?

...can you please name a group of Racist that use the Iron Cross?

...can you please name a group of Racist that use the Iron Cross?I do not know the names of the respective groups, but whenever there are demonstrations of Neo-Nazis in (earstern) Germany they wave old imperial flags with the Iron Cross on them.

So that means the symbol of past racism and murder is banned while symbols of current racism and murder are allowed?
The Iron cross does not represent racism. It is a centuries old German symbol that is still used by modern day Germany and German people.

I do not know the names of the respective groups, but whenever there are demonstrations of Neo-Nazis in (earstern) Germany they wave old imperial flags with the Iron Cross on them.
Whereas the swastika is undisputably associated with racism the Iron Cross is a normal German symbol abused by a racist minority. Muslim terrorists wave flags with the Islamic statement of faith but you can't deny well intentioned muslims from their symbols.

The Iron cross does not represent racism. It is a centuries old German symbol that is still used by modern day Germany and German people.
It has a taint though.

It has a taint though.
The vast majority of national/ideological symbols in the world can be associated with instances of violence in history. But there are also millions of well meaning decent people who use those symbols. Do you purport to banning all the world's flags? Let's be reasonable here... it is ridiculous to compare the Iron Cross with the Nazi Swastika which explicitly symbolized genocide and destruction. The Nazi Swastika and German iron cross aren't in the same ballpark, they aren't even in the same league, they aren't even in the same sport (Pulp Fiction).

It wasn't the nation that committed genocide, but point taken. Do you still see no difference between the symbol and what it symbolises? I haven't read anyone who is against me using a swastika's opinion on the differenc between the swastika and the way that it is used. Some people who don't mind it have said that they can see the difference between a swastika used by a nazi and a swastika used by a buddhist. Can you?

I have already stated my opinion on this matter- that is, I can understand the argument and rationale for people using it, but it STILL makes ME personally uncomfortable. I don't feel that my comfort level should dictate what other people can and can't do, but I'm telling you that, regardless of however much I learn about the swastika as a sacred Buddhist symbol, when I see it, I think of Nazis, concentration camps, and my 40-plus murdered relatives.

As I said before, I feel any change will mostly be brought about by time and education- but lobbying for the right to use a symbol that you know makes a lot of people uncomfortable is NOT a bright way of advancing one's point. Far more productive, IMO, would be to have discussions on the swastika's history and meaning, etc., rather than trying to "shock" people into accepting it by making it more prominent.

I feel this should go at its own pace. It's one thing to try to hurry that pace along, though education, but it's a much different thing to try to just "jump" to some point in time where the swastika has no residual impact from the Holocaust and World War II.

I don't take instructions or orders from either Nazis, or their supporters, so you can 'quit' telling me about 'flaming'. You can also try to use correct English next time you write to me, and not slang.

Why don't you get off the damn boards?

You have no right to tell a person they can't use a symbol for whatever just because it reminds you of something. For him, he believes it to be the symbol it is in Buddhism. (Note: I agree with the flag thing, it is Max's game.)

Oh, and to the person who said the KKK cross is different, so is the original swastika from the Nazi one. Don't make pointless arguments.

Another interesting fact - the Eagle of America looked to the Left, while the Eagle of Germany looked to the Right...

Yes, while the two-headed eagle on the pre-revolutionary Russian coat of arms looked both left and right simultaneously. You point being?

[Swastikas are] a symbol and symbols change their meaning.

I'm quoting rotten.com on this, so shoot me:
"Imagine if the most popular guns and weapons had Hello Kitty etched on them; Hello Kitty would become the complete antithesis of what it was originally meant to represent (buying lots of meaningless Japanese crap)."

.

Since the meaning of symbols can be changed, then they could change back again to the original positive meaning. And also have you heard the true story of how a murderer, for years, hid the skull of his victim inside a stuffed Hello Kitty head?

It's interesting how swastika means it-is-good when literally translated from Sanskrit.

Well, I'm afraid that if we were inclined (and we are not, as far as I know) to allow a swastika at all to represent peace and love in the Buddhist faith, we could not then tell those who want to use it in its more horrific context they could not. It would be hypocritical.

You can decorate your home with it to your hearts' content, but I doubt the policy for NationStates will ever change.

The double meaning of the swastika is unfortunate, but I don't think it's going to go away anytime soon. And I don't think we're lacking for symbols of peace, harmony, and fertility. I can understand that folks wouldn't want to stop using the symbol on account of some genocidal loonies, but I don't see much point in encouraging people to use the symbol.

In North America and Europe, someone who displays the swastika is risking the viewers interpreting that as a support of naziism, and particularly as a support of anti-semitism. It is this support of naziism, intentional or otherwise, that I am very much against. If you don't want to support naziism, don't use the swastika in contexts where it could be mistaken as such support.

(and I think I read some mythical historical revisionism about how National Socialism didn't originally consist primarily of chauvinism and anti-Semitism.)
I don't know about National Socialism, but the original nazi party was quite different from the one it became.

...can you please name a group of Racist that use the Iron Cross?I can't name a group, but I have seen racists use the Iron Cross symbol.

Well, I'm afraid that if we were inclined (and we are not, as far as I know) to allow a swastika at all to represent peace and love in the Buddhist faith, we could not then tell those who want to use it in its more horrific context they could not. It would be hypocritical.
Eh? I don't get it. As a practical matter though, it's probably best that the moderators don't have to decide what each swastika represents.

P.S.
I'm baaack!

I skipped every page apart from the first one, so this might have been said...

Hitler reversed the originial symbol to get the "Swastika" design. The originial was an cult symbol. Hence he wasn't Christian, but a Cultist!


If you hadn't skipped, you'd have learnt that Hitler didn't in fact reverse the swastika. To describe the swastika as a cult symbol is to use a very broad brush on a complex subject. It has been used by many cultures in many ways, and I don't know of any other than the Nazi use that wasn't positive.

Whereas the swastika is undisputably associated with racism the Iron Cross is a normal German symbol abused by a racist minority. Muslim terrorists wave flags with the Islamic statement of faith but you can't deny well intentioned muslims from their symbols.

If the Iron Cross is a normal German symbol abused by a racist minority, then the swastika is a normal global symbol abused by a racist minority.

The swastika, as we have pointed out many times, has at least a 3000 year history of use a positive symbol throughout europe and asia. Much more association with other things than racism than the Iron Cross.

It's interesting how swastika means it-is-good when literally translated from Sanskrit.

I'd understood that swasti meant happy, but I'm willing to bow to the superior knowledge of anyone that knows what they're talking about.

Of course Hitler would never have used the word swastika. As a german speaker he would have called it hakenkreuz which I think means broken cross or crooked cross. The hakenkreuz has been used in Germanic culture for centuries.

I don't feel that my comfort level should dictate what other people can and can't do, but I'm telling you that, regardless of however much I learn about the swastika as a sacred Buddhist symbol, when I see it, I think of Nazis, concentration camps, and my 40-plus murdered relatives.


If you don't feel that your comfort level should dictate what I can't do, where's the beef? Just let me have my swastika.


As I said before, I feel any change will mostly be brought about by time and education- but lobbying for the right to use a symbol that you know makes a lot of people uncomfortable is NOT a bright way of advancing one's point. Far more productive, IMO, would be to have discussions on the swastika's history and meaning, etc., rather than trying to "shock" people into accepting it by making it more prominent.


Lobbying for the right to use a swastika is just my way in to educating people. We are discussing and learning here, and as I'm sure max doesn't give a potato what we say in here I'm equaly sure I won't get a swastika on my flag. But lots of people will have discussed, and some may have learned.

Not enough, since people are skipping instead of reading and still posting that Hitler reversed the swastika (which view only seems prevalent in North America, I don't come across Europeans who think this, I could be wrong).

Well, I'm afraid that if we were inclined (and we are not, as far as I know) to allow a swastika at all to represent peace and love in the Buddhist faith, we could not then tell those who want to use it in its more horrific context they could not. It would be hypocritical.

You can decorate your home with it to your hearts' content, but I doubt the policy for NationStates will ever change.

I feel somewhat obliged to repeat myself, as many still seem to be hammering on the use of the swastika by Buddhists. So once again, few modern Buddhists will display the swastika because of what it has come to represent. It is being abandoned, even in Asia, since it is associated with untold suffering, and causes pain and suffering in millions of people worldwide. Displaying it would be contrary to Buddhist thought.
There are no "sacred symbols" in Buddhism. All symbols and icons (including those of Buddha) are merely reminders of the middle path, and the causes and effects of suffering in the world. No more, no less. "Praying" to symbols or icons is contrary to the core of Buddhist belief. Buddhism is simply about following the 8 fold path, and recognizing the 4 noble truths, again, no more, no less.

I feel somewhat obliged to repeat myself, as many still seem to be hammering on the use of the swastika by Buddhists. So once again, few modern Buddhists will display the swastika because of what it has come to represent. It is being abandoned, even in Asia, since it is associated with untold suffering, and causes pain and suffering in millions of people worldwide. Displaying it would be contrary to Buddhist thought.
There are no "sacred symbols" in Buddhism. All symbols and icons (including those of Buddha) are merely reminders of the middle path, and the causes and effects of suffering in the world. No more, no less. "Praying" to symbols or icons is contrary to the core of Buddhist belief. Buddhism is simply about following the 8 fold path, and recognizing the 4 noble truths, again, no more, no less.

no more and no less to you maybe, but there a many kinds of buddhism, and for you to claim that other kinds than the one you like aren't true buddhism is only to say that what you mean by buddhism and what I mean by buddhism are different things. Maybe so, but the swastika is still a buddhist symbol. It adorns temples all over china, (the only place I have great experience of in this regard) and people come there and pray. They aren't necessarily praying to the icons any more than they are praying to the statues or any more than catholics are praying to statues when they have statues in their churches or any more than i confuse a picture of my son with my son.

A buddhist who knows that a symbol is a symbol can still use the symbol and not be praying to it. There are many kinds of buddhism and they have many sacred symbols. The Dalai Lama is the leader of tibetan yellow hat buddhism which includes the many armed buddha and the many eyed buddha among its sacred symbols. Mongolian/Tibetan red hat buddhism with which the yellow hat kind has had many wars doubtless has its own symbols. Which of the four noble truths is embodied in a saffron robe? Or is it that a saffron robe is sacred symbol? Maybe you don't call this true buddhism. I don't suppose the Dalai Lama gives a monkeys what you call his religion. Or the Panchen Lama come to think of it.

Anyway, I digress. This thread is about swastikas not buddhism. You've made your point, it just wasn't a very good point.

Sorry, I didn't take the time to read the entire thread, but I think I may have something to add it if hasn't been said. The REAL swastica has its arms going counter-clockwise, the perverted swastica which the Nazis used switched the rotation of the arms to go clockwise. Does this make sense? In essence, you could go ahead and use the true swastica, just not the perverted Nazi one.

Go to Japan, the (real) symbol is everywhere on shrines and temples, etc.

-Shig

I am sorry for those who disagree with me, but I am firmly against anyone who desires to freely fly overhead a flag with a swastika on it. My fiancee was born in raised in Germany and still lives there today. She cannot believe the horrors that went on with the Nazi party, and after visiting one she concentration camp cannot even enter some parts of her own country. Sadly although the word swastika holds peaceful meanings, it visual representation has forever been tainted throughout the world. Anyone who displays such a symbol would forever be my enemy and better watch their back. This statement sounds very hostile and self-defeating, but those are my words marked with my passion. Swastikas have been completely banned in Germany and should also be done throughout the world; that would be the only way that the swastika NAME could ever be preserved.

The swastika, as we have pointed out many times, has at least a 3000 year history of use a positive symbol throughout europe and asia. Much more association with other things than racism than the Iron Cross.

Yet peoples perceptions of it only relate to the last 60 years. Right or wrong people only care about what is happening to them and so meanings of symbols and other stuff changes.
The nursery ryhme "Ring Ring Roses" is about mass death of Black Death in England yet 3 year olds singing it and the teachers who teach them to sing it probably don't know or care about the real meaning of the song.
Very few people really care about the peaceful hindu meaning of the swastika and only remember Nazis and you can tell people all you want but all they are going to think about is Nazis.

no more and no less to you maybe, but there a many kinds of buddhism, and for you to claim that other kinds than the one you like aren't true buddhism is only to say that what you mean by buddhism and what I mean by buddhism are different things.

I will try to answer this, without the level of aggression that you seem to require in a debate. The recognition of the 4 noble truths and the 8 fold path comes directly from Gotam Siddhartha (Buddha) himself in his first Dharma talk. It would be difficult to consider oneself a Buddhist while living a life contrary to it.

Maybe so, but the swastika is still a buddhist symbol. It adorns temples all over china, (the only place I have great experience of in this regard)
They may adorn older temples all over China, but fewer and fewer artisans in China use the swastika in modern Buddhist artwork. It is becoming difficult, even in Asia, to find the swastika in a newly built built temples or sangha halls as it is recognized that the symbol causes suffering of others. Displaying it would be contrary to several of the different mindfulness trainings, which again comes directly from the Dharma talks of the Buddha himself.

and people come there and pray. They aren't necessarily praying to the icons any more than they are praying to the statues or any more than catholics are praying to statues when they have statues in their churches or any more than i confuse a picture of my son with my son.

Icons and statues in Buddism, in every form I've studied at least, have far less significance then (as an example), statues and icons in Catholicism. Trying to remove statues of jesus on the cross from Catholic churches would result very likely in wide scale violence. The statue of a Buddha in a temple or sangha hall however, is no different than the picture the Queen at the front of a school room used to be in Canada, or the picture of Morihei Ueshiba is at the front of an Aikido hall. "Praying" to Buddha, would again be explicitly contrary to the writings of the Buddha himself.

A buddhist who knows that a symbol is a symbol can still use the symbol and not be praying to it. There are many kinds of buddhism and they have many sacred symbols. The Dalai Lama is the leader of tibetan yellow hat buddhism which includes the many armed buddha and the many eyed buddha among its sacred symbols. Mongolian/Tibetan red hat buddhism with which the yellow hat kind has had many wars doubtless has its own symbols.

While it is very true that there are many forms of Buddism worldwide, one thing that binds them all, is that they follow the writings of the Buddha, who stated very explicitly that the central tenent of Buddism is the recognition of the 4 noble truths as being "True", and the dedication of ones life to living by the 8 fold path. The Buddha himself stated that anything else contrary to these "truths" is not Buddhism.

Which of the four noble truths is embodied in a saffron robe? Or is it that a saffron robe is sacred symbol?

The saffron robe is a symbol of humility, as white is a symbol of holiness. Wearing the robes, is an excercise in self-discipline. It should also be noted, that the color of the robe changes from place to place, as monks and nuns in Veitnam and parts of Tibet use Maroon, and parts of China use gray robes. The color of the robe, is significant to the branch of Buddism using it, but the color can be changed out of necessity, without breaking any tenets of Buddhism. (no where does the Buddha state in his writings that a monk or nun must wear saffron.). The Dalai Lama himself stated that the robes he wore, were to signal to the rest of the world that his was a Buddhist. The robe itself is not an embodiement of the 8 fold path (possibly one could argue I suppose that the robe adhered to the precept of Right Action, as one was being humble, but you don't require a saffron robe to adhere to that.


Maybe you don't call this true buddhism. I don't suppose the Dalai Lama gives a monkeys what you call his religion. Or the Panchen Lama come to think of it.

I don't call this "true buddhism", the Buddha himself does. And if you had ever spoken to the Dalai Lama, you find that he cares very much what people think, both positively and negatively, about his beliefs. A speak for Panchen Lama, as I've never spoken to him.

Anyway, I digress. This thread is about swastikas not buddhism. You've made your point, it just wasn't a very good point.

My point was that very few Buddist's would have difficulty with not displaying the swastika, as it was suggested (implicitly) that to do so would be some form of religious intolerance, which I believe is part of the point. Again, I can't speak for the importance of the symbol in Hindu culture as I know nothing about it.

I'm sorry you find that my argument is not "good" enough for you, and that you feel the need to attack verbally in order to debate a point. It somewhat weakens your own arguement.

Sorry for the novel, I hope it is at least some worth to someone.

If you hadn't skipped, you'd have learnt that Hitler didn't in fact reverse the swastika. To describe the swastika as a cult symbol is to use a very broad brush on a complex subject. It has been used by many cultures in many ways, and I don't know of any other than the Nazi use that wasn't positive.
Nationstates is mainly used by a western audience and the swastika carries an extremely strong connotation of hatred in the west so one could easily why Max Barry wouldn't want people putting up swastikas everywhere, especially since most of the nations who would have swastika flags here are going to be racist nations, not buddhist ones... I can also understand why you are trying to change people's mindsets, but the Holocaust and the raw evil that the Nazi swastika represented will not be so easily wiped out from westerners' minds. Just keep in mind that you probably won't change the administrators' stance on the issue.

If you don't feel that your comfort level should dictate what I can't do, where's the beef? Just let me have my swastika.Zie is "just" letting you have your swaskia. But it's a bit much to ask QahJoh not to be uncomfortable, or to not express that discomfort. Learn the difference between what you can do, and what you should do.

I will try to answer this, without the level of aggression that you seem to require in a debate.

What impressive serenity. You must meditate for hours.


The recognition of the 4 noble truths and the 8 fold path comes directly from Gotam Siddhartha (Buddha) himself in his first Dharma talk. It would be difficult to consider oneself a Buddhist while living a life contrary to it.


ok, so no less than the 8 fold path and the the 4 noble truths, as you may not be a buddhist without doing this, but clearly much much more, as you can believe in a great deal more than the 8 fold path and the 4 noble truths and still be a buddhist.


They may adorn older temples all over China, but fewer and fewer artisans in China use the swastika in modern Buddhist artwork. It is becoming difficult, even in Asia, to find the swastika in a newly built built temples or sangha halls as it is recognized that the symbol causes suffering of others. Displaying it would be contrary to several of the different mindfulness trainings, which again comes directly from the Dharma talks of the Buddha himself.

I wonder how hard you have tried to find a swastika in a nerwly built budhist temple in asia?


Icons and statues in Buddism, in every form I've studied at least, have far less significance then (as an example), statues and icons in Catholicism. Trying to remove statues of jesus on the cross from Catholic churches would result very likely in wide scale violence.
Trying to remove most stuff from most places would likely give the owners of those places cause to be upset. I'm not sure I can see that buddhists in Mongolia would be really comme-ci comme-ca about you removing their statues, while catholics in London would chase you down the road with ak47s.

The statue of a Buddha in a temple or sangha hall however, is no different than the picture the Queen at the front of a school room used to be in Canada, or the picture of Morihei Ueshiba is at the front of an Aikido hall.

It's a statue. Like other statues. OK.


"Praying" to Buddha, would again be explicitly contrary to the writings of the Buddha himself.

I know. Did I say anything contrary to this?


While it is very true that there are many forms of Buddism worldwide, one thing that binds them all, is that they follow the writings of the Buddha, who stated very explicitly that the central tenent of Buddism is the recognition of the 4 noble truths as being "True", and the dedication of ones life to living by the 8 fold path. The Buddha himself stated that anything else contrary to these "truths" is not Buddhism.


Again, if you believe this, you can call yourself a buddhist, and also believe other things besides, like for instance that a swastika is a symbol of your faith.


The saffron robe is a symbol of humility, as white is a symbol of holiness. Wearing the robes, is an excercise in self-discipline. It should also be noted, that the color of the robe changes from place to place, as monks and nuns in Veitnam and parts of Tibet use Maroon, and parts of China use gray robes. The color of the robe, is significant to the branch of Buddism using it, but the color can be changed out of necessity, without breaking any tenets of Buddhism. (no where does the Buddha state in his writings that a monk or nun must wear saffron.).

Did Gautama write down his teachings? Anyway even if he did, are they the only teachings in Buddhism? I think there are a lot more. Does it say in the teachings of Gautama that saffron is a symbol of humility or white is a symbol of holiness? I believe these things have grown out of tradition, like the use of the swastika. I also believe that while buddhism doesn't rely on symbols for its existence any more than any other major world religion, it admits to the power of symbols and uses symbols. Although in your previous post you said that buddhism has no sacred symbols, and here you are listing the symbolism of different coloured robes. If you want to debate the use of the word "sacred" you'll be having the argument on your own as you were the only one to talk about sacred symbols. I just said symbol. The swastika is a buddhist symbol.


The Dalai Lama himself stated that the robes he wore, were to signal to the rest of the world that his was a Buddhist. The robe itself is not an embodiement of the 8 fold path (possibly one could argue I suppose that the robe adhered to the precept of Right Action, as one was being humble, but you don't require a saffron robe to adhere to that.

So?


My point was that very few Buddist's would have difficulty with not displaying the swastika, as it was suggested (implicitly) that to do so would be some form of religious intolerance, which I believe is part of the point. Again, I can't speak for the importance of the symbol in Hindu culture as I know nothing about it.


Oh now we get to your point. I'm sure you're correct. I know very few buddhists, but they are either very committed converts, and therefore getting along well with detachment, or default cultural buddhists, and so not all that bothered.


I'm sorry you find that my argument is not "good" enough for you, and that you feel the need to attack verbally in order to debate a point. It somewhat weakens your own arguement.


I'm glad you're sorry. That's what buddhists do, be sorry about suffering and anger and stuff. It's healthy for the world that there are buddhists in it being sorry about things. I don't see how aggression weakens my argument though, I mean the truth is still the truth even when it comes from the barrel of a gun.

Sorry, I didn't take the time to read the entire thread, but I think I may have something to add it if hasn't been said. The REAL swastica has its arms going counter-clockwise, the perverted swastica which the Nazis used switched the rotation of the arms to go clockwise. Does this make sense? In essence, you could go ahead and use the true swastica, just not the perverted Nazi one.

Go to Japan, the (real) symbol is everywhere on shrines and temples, etc.

-Shig

For the gazillionth, and I expect not the last, time. Hitler may well have switched the direction of the swastika used by the Nazis from the specific ones he was influenced by.

HOWEVER swastikas facing in both directions have been used by many cultures including Germanic cultures for up to 3000 years.

Zie is "just" letting you have your swaskia. But it's a bit much to ask QahJoh not to be uncomfortable, or to not express that discomfort. Learn the difference between what you can do, and what you should do.

Who are you, the Pope? I know the difference between can and should. And I also know that "should" is entirely relative.

What about the "swastikas" meaning in ancient european pagan symbolics? What if I wish to wear a swastika symbolizing the sun in the european cultures, which is far closer to me than hinduism?

haha, you know there was a Germanic tribe called the Aryans and they moved to north-west India at some time. :D and they mixed themselves with the ppl over there.

actually the aryans were an indo-european group. Not a germanic tribe.

when i frist saw this symbol being used in a context of not being nazi related i was not offended in the least.
A hindu friend showed me the symbol, it seemed very different. it was reversed, had a dot in each hook and was very colour full. pinkish red with a gold trim.

It's also an Amerindian symbol.

In fact, New Mexico State University used "The Swastika" as the title to their Annual from 1907 to 1983. I think they may not have had an Annual before that. In 1984, it was renamed "The Phoenix." By 1992 (when I started there), The Phoenix was on its last legs, and soon disappeared. Maybe if they had continued to call it "The Swastika," they would still have an Annual at NMSU.

The meaning of the symbol is irrelevant. The emotions that the symbol inspires, this is what is important. And for now, and many years to come (by many, I mean the number of years that we won't live through) the swastika will inspire feelings of hate, fear, disgust and horror. It reminds people of Hitler, and nazis in general, and all the atrocities they have committed. Six million Jews dead, was the figure at the end? That's not a nice memory to evoke.

I'm not saying we forget history, for those who do not know history are doomed to repeat it. No. I'm saying you don't go around thrusting history in peoples' faces.

Let's look at it this way: to you, the swastika is a symbol of peace and love etc. If inspires happy, good feelings, yes? And not being able to use it on Nation States is causing you what harm, exactly? Does it upset you greatly? I doubt it. It is little more than a minor inconvenience.
To some people, however, the swastika is offensive because of the memories and feelings it brings up. Offence versus inconvenience... which should take priority?

If you follow the ideals of peace and love which you believe the swastika to stand for, you will not press this issue for the sake of those people who find it offensive, even if you believe it is an irrational reaction. Let's face it, emotions are rarely rational.

Who are you, the Pope?
Nope, I'm just pontificating.
I know the difference between can and should.
Ah good. See QahJoh is implying (I think) that you shouldn't make the swastika more prominent, but is explicitly stating his comfort should not dictate whether you can.
And I also know that "should" is entirely relative.It's context dependent, but that's not the same thing.

Nope, I'm just pontificating.
Ah good. See QahJoh is implying (I think) that you shouldn't make the swastika more prominent, but is explicitly stating his comfort should not dictate whether you can.
It's context dependent, but that's not the same thing.

My main issue is that other people's comfort levels shouldn't dictate one particular person's behavior, but that I personally feel that it is more or less incumbent on people when dealing with particularly volatile symbols like the swastika to try to be somewhat empathetic towards people that have very strong feelings against it.

Which is why I think it is better to try to get people to change how they FEEL about the swastika before trying to get them to be "ok" with someone flying it around.

It's simply a matter of caring about other people's sensibilities. I'm not saying one should be FORCED to care about other people; merely that I personally think that a "compassionate" person would want to avoid hurting others unecessarily (particularly given what the swastika is originally supposed to represent). And, IMO, flying a swastika has the potential to do that.

I disagree displaying it for the same reason I don't like people to argue that pot is a sacred herb.