NationStates Jolt Archive

The symbol that the Soviets had on their flag must be banned from use here! The Soviets did crap that was just as bad as the Nazis, so therefore, we MUST ban the flag.

I'm including a poll, so we can take this to Max and he can ban it!












NOTE: I could care less. I'm just being stupid because I feel like it and I want to show how stupid this thread is! (Solution to the Swatiska (http://forums2.jolt.co.uk/showthread.php?t=390403))

It's only fair to ban this symbol too, Lenin and Stalin's Russia was just as terrible as Hitler's Germany.

To be honest though I think that banning any symbol is a bit silly really, symbols don't hurt anybody.

It's only fair to ban this symbol too, Lenin and Stalin's Russia was just as terrible as Hitler's Germany.

To be honest though I think that banning any symbol is a bit silly really, symbols don't hurt anybody.
;) it does hurt! Think of all those poor and long dead Ukranians who were starved to death under Stalin's watch!


See my small print statement in my first post. This is a joke thread to make fun of the call to unban the swatiska

The Hammer and Sickle look much cooler, though.

teh teh teh teh teh teh

Yeah, and we should ban the cross because of the crusades!
[/sarcasm]

;) it does hurt! Think of all those poor and long dead Ukranians who were starved to death under Stalin's watch!

Well, they deserved to die for opposing the glory of the worker's revolution with their constant demands to pampered with one meal a day! ;)

teh teh teh teh teh teh
If you're just going to post gibberish, please make yourself useful in the threads rampant with ignorant religious right. ;)

i think it is stupid that any symbol is banned at all.

but if the swastica is banned then i think that the hammer and sickle should be as well since in my opinion they were worse than the nazi's.

It's only fair to ban this symbol too, Lenin and Stalin's Russia was just as terrible as Hitler's Germany.

To be honest though I think that banning any symbol is a bit silly really, symbols don't hurt anybody.

Socialists don't support institutionalised racism and genocide.

Socialists don't support institutionalised racism and genocide.
Stalinism did towards the end...

but if the swastica is banned then i think that the hammer and sickle should be as well since in my opinion they were worse than the nazi's.

I think i'd have to disagree with that statement, mainly because i don't have a fucked-up outlook on things.

i think it is stupid that any symbol is banned at all.

but if the swastica is banned then i think that the hammer and sickle should be as well since in my opinion they were worse than the nazi's.

I'm assuming you'd mean because more people died under Stalin than Hitler? Don't forget Hitler only had 12 years.

And on a more serious note, we should also ban the Pepsi logo as it's stupid!

Sod off they did good just didnt plan it out you can not bann the flag its part f history and will live for ever

yes, because more stalin killed more people.

granted stalin did have more time, but the fact still remains he killed more.

and i agree, lets ban all corperate logo's while were at banning the symbols that were happenend to be used for an extremist parties. i mean because all symbols used by extremists must be "evil"

haha, stupid pepsi, it should go first.

and stalin, i could argue that hitler also did good for his country, and that the swastica will live on forever, but it has no relavence just as your argument has none.

but if the swastica is banned then i think that the hammer and sickle should be as well since in my opinion they were worse than the nazi's.

The swastika isn't really a Nazi symbol. Yes, they did use it, but it was originally a religious symbol known as the sauvasatika (where the word "swastika" came from), or the manji in Japan. It's a Buddhist symbol, which is supposed to signify eternity (if memory serves). And no, I'm not making this up- I'm a Buddhist myself. :D

(I love it when people try and make me out to be a skinhead Nazi because I say this.)

And on a more serious note, we should also ban the Pepsi logo as it's stupid!

I think the Nestle logo should go first.

Let's ban everything! Everything is offensive to somebody! Breathing? Offensive to those on life support. Out it goes. Eating? Offensive to anorexics. No more of that. Sleeping? Offensive to insomniacs AND narceleptics. That's doubly not allowed.

Hell, let's just ban all human instinct.

We might as well add sex to the list - all those poor single people unable to get laid...

hammer and sickle is associated with socialism/communism, which are economic systems. the nazi swastika is associated with fascism/totalitarianism, a political system.

lenin, stalin, mao, and other leaders of oppressive "communist" nations were fascists/totalitarians, just like hitler. they were the oppressors, marxism was not. there have been many pseudo socialist nations, like sweden, who are not oppressive.

banning the hammer and sickle because the political system used in conjunction with it was "evil" would be comparable to banning a symbol of capitalism because you don't agree with democracy. they are independent of each other.

Wow, I never realised how many people on NS lakc a sense of humour, or have this complusion to avoid reading the fine print...

Wow, I never realised how many people on NS lakc a sense of humour, or have this complusion to avoid reading the fine print...

Actually, I think it's because you're not very funny. Sorry.

hammer and sickle is associated with socialism/communism, which are economic systems. the nazi swastika is associated with fascism/totalitarianism, a political system.

lenin, stalin, mao, and other leaders of oppressive "communist" nations were fascists/totalitarians, just like hitler. they were the oppressors, marxism was not. there have been many pseudo socialist nations, like sweden, who are not oppressive.

banning the hammer and sickle because the political system used in conjunction with it was "evil" would be comparable to banning a symbol of capitalism because you don't agree with democracy. they are independent of each other.
The point is that the Hammer and Sickle is associated with the USSR, but it's origins lie elsewhere. Namely the meaning of each hammer=industry, sickle=agriculture. Hell, it's on Austria's flag, right next to the broken chains symbolizing their liberation from communism.

The swastika was a symbol for eternity or brotherhood or something until it was associated with the Nazis.

Now I'm against banning both, but let's not be hypocritical.

Nyet.

alright look at my flag, no way that could be considered bad!

http://www.nationstates.net/cgi-bin/index.cgi/target=display_nation/nation=newtburg

To be honest though I think that banning any symbol is a bit silly really, symbols don't hurt anybody.
They do if they involve lasers and you look at the symbol directly and have vision damage.

Let's ban everything! Everything is offensive to somebody! Breathing? Offensive to those on life support. Out it goes. Eating? Offensive to anorexics. No more of that. Sleeping? Offensive to insomniacs AND narceleptics. That's doubly not allowed.


Captain Beatty would be proud! :)

Personally I see communism being not as bad (but still really terrible) as Nazism

Socialists don't support institutionalised racism and genocide.

Sure they do. I don't mean to talk back to a mod, but honestly, genocide on a ridiculous scale was a passtime of Stalin. And Lenin and Mao and whoever else. And yes, they were socialists. They seized control of private affairs in the interests of redistributing wealth.

Sure they do. I don't mean to talk back to a mod, but honestly, genocide on a ridiculous scale was a passtime of Stalin. And Lenin and Mao and whoever else. And yes, they were socialists. They seized control of private affairs in the interests of redistributing wealth.
And the blatantly racist attempts to kill jews during the later years of Stalin's life seem to quantify genocide as well...

Sure they do. I don't mean to talk back to a mod, but honestly, genocide on a ridiculous scale was a passtime of Stalin. And Lenin and Mao and whoever else. And yes, they were socialists. They seized control of private affairs in the interests of redistributing wealth.

Yeah, all socialists agree with stalin. Thank god the entire world is in black and white, huh?

the hammer/sicle combo is the flag for socialism in general. and socialist nationstates schould be able to distinguish themselves as so

the swastica was a german good luck symbol, and unless they have a very lucky country, the only reason to display one is if they are in fact Nazi's

Well, let's throw in the rising sun flag of Imperial Japan.

Many Koreans and Chinese suffered under that flag, not to mention POW's including some of my great uncles.

The flag shouldn't be banned, it's not only a part of our history but a lost hope towards a utopian society.

Might as well ban the cross. After all, people suffered under the Inquisition, Crusades, ect..

the hammer/sicle combo is the flag for socialism in general. and socialist nationstates schould be able to distinguish themselves as so

the swastica was a german good luck symbol, and unless they have a very lucky country, the only reason to display one is if they are in fact Nazi's
It was a Bhuddist symbol for eternity (not German), and a Sanskrit symbol for brotherhood (also not German.)

Yeah, all socialists agree with stalin. Thank god the entire world is in black and white, huh?
The point is the Hammer and Sickle are ASSOCIATED with Stalin and the USSR. We're using the ban the swastika logic here.

*PS I am against banning either symbol*

why would you ban something because it symbolizes something bad that happened in history. this is just an idea, but maybe when some people see that symbol, it could............................give remembrance towards those who died
i don't know
i'm also confused, is this 'thread' viciously religious?

The point is the Hammer and Sickle are ASSOCIATED with Stalin and the USSR. We're using the ban the swastika logic here.

The hammer and sickle is not strongly associated with an ideology - it's associated with a nation. They are very different things. The swastika evinces a much more emotional reaction than almost any other symbol in today's society.

If the cross were associated solely with the crusades and their ideology and slaughter, I would support banning it. It isn't, though.

Let's remember everyone, this thread is a parody of the ban the swastika thread. I have personally never advocated banning any symbol of any sort.


The hypocrisy of people who choose to ban stuff on a case-by-case basis is wrong. Either you allow all symbols or ban all symbols (and I'm not exactly for banning any symbols.)

The hypocrisy of people who choose to ban stuff on a case-by-case basis is wrong. Either you allow all symbols or ban all symbols (and I'm not exactly for banning any symbols.)

That's like saying you either allow all speech or ban all speech, but you can't make laws against racial vilification speech. Not surprisingly, I disagree with that as well.

Sure they do. I don't mean to talk back to a mod, but honestly, genocide on a ridiculous scale was a passtime of Stalin. And Lenin and Mao and whoever else. And yes, they were socialists. They seized control of private affairs in the interests of redistributing wealth.

Stalin and Mao were not socialists.

And Socialists do not support the actions of Stalin or Mao.

Stalin and Mao were not socialists.

And Socialists do not support the actions of Stalin or Mao.
*applauds*
Myrth wins here, and not because he's a mod.

Ummm maybe someone pointed this out before but banning the sickle is a really stupid idea as umm nations that exist right now have the sickle in flags symbols etc etc...

The nazi flag is a sign of evil, the sickle is a sign of commie. Not all commies are evil, even though Stalin sure as hell was. Nazis are the closest thing the world has ever come to PURE evil and as such should be banned...

The Emperor of Terra Zetegenia finds it amusing that every other symbol of Naziism and Fascism - the black eagle, the twin lightning bolt s, and even the bundle of sticks with the axe in it - are all perfectly acceptable, while the symbol with historical significance outside of tyranny is banned.

Anyway, the Emperor personally finds the Hammer and Sickle just as offensive as the Swastika - and since he does not believe the latter should be banned, has no desire to see the former vanish.

Stalin and Mao were not socialists.

And Socialists do not support the actions of Stalin or Mao.
The qualification for a socialist is government control of the means of production. And as such they both seem to fit this descriptor.

source: http://dictionary.reference.com/search?q=socialism

Now I will give you that not all, and in fact very few, socialists agree with either of them.

So, who else is against the banning of hateful or with-evil-associated symbols?

heh. to be philosphical, as i am pheeling.

a symbols power comes from the power given to it by the viewer. Thus, it has only as much power as the viewer allows it to have.

whats in a name? a rose by any other would smell as sweet.

Naive? yes. True? possibly.

i think we shud ban the nazi sawstika btw. the true swastika symbolized peace and prosperity - return it to its shattered glory i command u!
:headbang:
to leave u...

"There was a point to this story, but it has temporarily escaped thechronicler's mind."
- DA

Banning those symbols anywhere is a bad idea, as it infringes on civil liberties, and is thus morally wrong. However, banning it as a nation's official symbology is not a bad idea. Belarus and Angola still use it, and maybe a few others do.

The qualification for a socialist is government control of the means of production. And as such they both seem to fit this descriptor.

source: http://dictionary.reference.com/search?q=socialism

Now I will give you that not all, and in fact very few, socialists agree with either of them.

Not true, it's the workers controlling the means of production. In a true socialist system, the line would be blurred anyway because the government would be a government of the people. The Soviet Union under Stalin was very much a government unto the people.

Let's remember everyone, this thread is a parody of the ban the swastika thread. I have personally never advocated banning any symbol of any sort.

The hypocrisy of people who choose to ban stuff on a case-by-case basis is wrong. Either you allow all symbols or ban all symbols (and I'm not exactly for banning any symbols.)

The problem is still the same as it was in the Swastika thread. This site is owned and run by Max, and as all powerfull supreme being, he can do what he wants to do, regardless as to whether you, I or the whole rest of the community disagree. It is not hypocritical to ban something if it offends/disturbs you, when you have the power to do so. It is not democratic, but that is not the point.

Not true, it's the workers controlling the means of production. In a true socialist system, the line would be blurred anyway because the government would be a government of the people. The Soviet Union under Stalin was very much a government unto the people.
I'm going by the commonly accepted definition of socialism, and that is government control of the means of production. And the USSR under Stalin most certainly did that.

I mean, after all, using that arguement is like arguing for capitalism, but ignoring the robber barons.

The qualification for a socialist is government control of the means of production. And as such they both seem to fit this descriptor.

source: http://dictionary.reference.com/search?q=socialism

Now I will give you that not all, and in fact very few, socialists agree with either of them.

Sorry, but I feel obligated to give a bit of a history lesson from a resident Marxist-Lenninist.

Myrth wisely used the words "Socialist" with a capital "S", which denotes a specific type of "socialism" (lower case "s"). In the United States, the Socialist Party (capital "s") advocates the abolition of private property, etc., etc., but not through violence, but through democracy. That is what "Socialism" with a capital "S" is.

Lower case socialism is the broadest category of socialist beliefs, encompassing "utopian socialism" and "scientific socialism" (marxism).

Secondly, I would contend, as would many others, that Stalin and Mao corrupted Marxist-Lenninism. Whether or not that means they do not deserve to be called "socialist" is a matter for debate and perhaps a matter of semantics. I would say that the Great Purges and the autocratic nature are certainly practical reasons against this, but far more so, is the fact that Stalin and Mao created a national socialist system. When I say national socialist, I do not mean Nazi, but rather, they created a socialist economic system, but only created it nationally. Communism is an international movement, and its economic system can only be realized in an truly international economic system; however both Stalin and Mao adopted a national approach that according to Lenin and Trotsky, could never succeed. Does that make them not socialists? I would say so.

-snip-

I happen to see Myrth using the lower case form, or the mass descriptor. I am also not concerning myself with the movement of socialism, but with the system, be it national or international. I'm dealing with the concept of government control of the means of production.

Just because something doesn't fit your narrow preconception doesn't mean it isn't part of it.

So, who else is against the banning of hateful or with-evil-associated symbols?

To be honest I concur with you. Banning symbols case-by-case is impractical and pointless. Just what qualifies as a swastika, and what a sickle/hammer? You can have a four-pointed pattern which may or not be a swastika. You can have a sickle-shaped object which is not necessarily a sickle.

However, since this site is owned and run by a private individual, the banning or not of symbols is his jurisdiction. We can only appeal to him, not assert that he should do as we ask.

how can you people compare the soviets to Nazis let the red flag fly forever

Ok, so while we're at it (on banning flags with the same logic)

We'll ban flags similar or including the Stars and Stripes, because hey, that was a national flag when slavery was still widespread in the US. We'll ban the British flag for representing the same, and for blatant imperialism. We'll ban any middle-eastern style flags with crescents or crosses in, cause hell, there's been genocide by nations with each of those symbols representing them.

Nation States might be able to state what flags are and are not permissable, it their site, their rules. I might not agree with many of their policies, but I abide by them.

Eitherway, symbology (including that used in national flags) is a part of free speech and expression. To ban certain symbols such as the swastika is understandable, as the government and the attitude at the time which it was popularised was quite blatantly evil. Other symbols though, such as the hammer and sickle represent the USSR for periods in which its government was not committing genocide.

If you want to ban it, you're banning it as a symbol of communism, not as a symbol of genocide and evil.

OK poitn one

1) Lenin = not too bad,
Stalin = bad

DO NOT GET CONFUSED

Lenin hated Stalin (he insulted his wifes cooking), Lenin requested Stalin be replaced for someone

"whos qualities are entirely different" or some such thing, so please dont get them confused.

2) the soviets and the nazis were just as bad, once you reach a certain badness threshold it doesnt matter what more you do, you're damned. The red flag will not fly above another country (probably) the soviet movement is dead.

3) a symbol is a symbol if you ban it means that the people who produced it have won (in these cases)

4) the swastika is a symbol of peace love and inner reflection and the hammer and sckle one of freedom and empowerment of the worker, dont ban either, relase them from the bonds of history i say.

5) i love egg

i think it is stupid that any symbol is banned at all.

but if the swastica is banned then i think that the hammer and sickle should be as well since in my opinion they were worse than the nazi's.
But it was collective evil...which somehow makes it better... :rolleyes:

I'm going by the commonly accepted definition of socialism, and that is government control of the means of production.

So you're just ignoring the correct definition of socialism, even though it has been presented to you in a clear, honest manner? I took a look at your source (dictionary.com) and this turned up as a result of a search on "socialism":

socialism
n.
1. Any of various theories or systems of social organization in which the means of producing and distributing goods is owned collectively or by a centralized government that often plans and controls the economy.
2. The stage in Marxist-Leninist theory intermediate between capitalism and communism, in which collective ownership of the economy under the dictatorship of the proletariat has not yet been successfully achieved.
How's that for your "generally accepted" usage of the word? Then again, let's all pass judgement on an economic system that we learned about during the hayday of the Cold War.

And cry and whine as much as you want, Stalin wasn't a socialist. He sanctioned complete state, not worker, control of the means of production.

Read up on Lenin, Marx, Mao, and maybe a little bit of history before you open your big mouth over crap you know little to nothing about.

But it was collective evil...which somehow makes it better... :rolleyes:
No more collective than the Nazis, the two systems were very alike

1) Lenin = not too bad

If Lenin is not too bad, I would probably shudder at your description of a good person. Lenin killed many people, but I am unsure how many. A brief Google shows estimates from 12 million to 150,000.

If Lenin is not too bad, I would probably shudder at your description of a good person. Lenin killed many people, but I am unsure how many. A brief Google shows estimates from 12 million to 150,000.
Lenin was an interesting guy, not a nut job like Stalin, and not as violent, he believed what he said, although im still not sure why trotsky didnt get power.

oh so you can tell the future how do you know it will not fly one day Russia will turn back into the great nation it used to be

in case any one doesnt know im talking toThe Emperor Fenix

your right stalin was a nut job

NO, symbols should not be banned. Yeah, the Nazis and communist soviets did terrible things, but their symbols didn't do anything. If an athlete went on a killing spree, would the sport he played be banned?

You can look upon a symbol with distaste, and choose not to associate with those who display the symbol, but it should no be banned. Political Corectness is getting too out of hand.

we ban the Soviet symbol, next thing you know Some country with a star on there flag does something crazy, "OMG, everything with stars shall be burned."

Its sad to see us slowly moving into an age where personal liberties are lost to governments control and angry soccer moms, who really DON'T know whats best for mankind, as much as they think they do.

I'm assuming you'd mean because more people died under Stalin than Hitler? Don't forget Hitler only had 12 years.

And on a more serious note, we should also ban the Pepsi logo as it's stupid!

Let's ban the Coca Cola one too! It's cool and everything but there are those Coca Cola death squads in Venezuela....

So you're just ignoring the correct definition of socialism, even though it has been presented to you in a clear, honest manner? I took a look at your source (dictionary.com) and this turned up as a result of a search on "socialism":


How's that for your "generally accepted" usage of the word? Then again, let's all pass judgement on an economic system that we learned about during the hayday of the Cold War.

And cry and whine as much as you want, Stalin wasn't a socialist. He sanctioned complete state, not worker, control of the means of production.

Read up on Lenin, Marx, Mao, and maybe a little bit of history before you open your big mouth over crap you know little to nothing about.

Step One: I wasn't born until the last days of the cold war, 1985 to be precise.

Step Two: The commonly accepted use on this forum, as I've seen it, is government ownership of capital. And if you would also read what I've said previously THE MOST BROAD DEFINITION. Hence, the first one:
socialism
n.
1. Any of various theories or systems of social organization in which the means of producing and distributing goods is owned collectively or by a centralized government that often plans and controls the economy.

Step Three: Realize that people may have actually read the -edit- communists and despise their theories all the same. I have read the manifesto you -edit-. I'm tired of being told I'm ignorant because I oppose your "oh-so-perfect system." Maybe you ought to read it with a more critical eye. You seem to think that if you oppose communism it's a knee-jerk reaction. You are horrendously mistaken. I have read and rejected the theories, and I feel them to be wrong.

Lenin was an interesting guy, not a nut job like Stalin, and not as violent, he believed what he said, although im still not sure why trotsky didnt get power.

can we all say today's secret word..?
it's Ice Pick
now SCREAM REAL LOUD
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,runs away>>>>>>>....

When I see the swastika, I think of nazism and Hitler and the final solution. I think of all the hate that existed and still exists. When I see the hammer and sickle, I think of communism, nothing more. I don't think of Stalin and all of his horrors. Maybe it's just me, but the swastika, as it is remembered today, is a reminder of all the evil that exists in the world.

I might state, just for anyone who is randomly entering this thread later on: I am against the banning of any symbol, I'm just having a fairly voiciferous debate about the meaning of socialism with the people who disagree with me.

Let's ban the Coca Cola one too! It's cool and everything but there are those Coca Cola death squads in Venezuela....

Coca Cola death squads rule! (unless they're real)


Anyway, why don't we just ban all hammers and sickles? Why stop at just the symbols? Everytime I nail two pieces of lumber together I feel the urge to live in a socialist paradise!


Everytime I think of the FINAL SOLUTION! I think of a lard-ass professional wrestler with a poor workrate, though I am probably the only one.

Abdulmecit

Every thing you sensor brings you one step closer towards tyranny.
As the Americans learned so painfully in Earth's final century,
free flow of information is the only safeguard against tyranny.
The once-chained people whose leaders at last lose their grip on
information flow will soon burst with freedom and vitality, but
the free nation gradually constricting its grip on public discourse
has begun its rapid slide into despotism. Beware of he who would
deny you access to information, for in his heart he dreams himself
your master.
^
^ -- Commissioner Pravin Lal,
^ "U.N. Declaration of Rights"

organic superlube

I feel this incredible urge to fall to the floor and just twitch.

Wow, amazing - I don't believe how many people didn't read the fine print in the first post. I deliberately tried to sound serious, but in fine print I did state I was doing this because someone wanted to uban the swatiska and the idea was just silly.

Hell if you ban the hammer and sickle, you will have to ban the english flag as well. What about the millions of people the english have slaughtered through the centuries?

If you start banning things just because some people are offended by it, you will find that there wont be many flags or symbols feft.